Hegemonyanın Düşüşünü Kuramsallaştırmak: Neo-Gramscici Bir Perspektif

Year 2023, Volume: 12 Issue: 2, 745 - 758, 27.04.2023

Ejazul Haq Ateed , Merve Suna Özel Özcan

https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.1256164

Abstract

Tarihsel olarak hegemonya, siyasi birimlerin ve uluslararası sistemlerin hayati bir amacı ve özelliği olmuştur. Hegemonya arayışı, hayatta kalmanın ve ardından tahakkümün başarılması için çok önemlidir. Uluslararası ilişkiler bağlamında hegemonya, belirli bir devletin veya devletler grubunun küresel sistemdeki hâkim konumunu ifade etmektedir. Devletlerin, hegemon devletle ilişkileri, güçleri oranında değişmiştir. Bu nedenle uluslararası sistemin geçmişte var olan konjonktürel ve aktör davranışları ile mevcut yapısı hegemonya açısından benzer ve farklı yönler içermektedir. Bu çalışma öncelikle hegemonya ve hegemonyanın çöküşüne ilişkin kavramsal çerçeveyi tartışmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu tartışma hegemonyanın düşüşünü neo-Gramscici bir bakış açısıyla incelemektedir. Çalışma kapsmaında hegemonyanın ortaya çıkmasında, devamlılığında ve gerilemesinde sadece maddi unsurların değil, maddi olmayan unsurların da önemli rol oynadığı varsayılmaktadır. Bu bağlamda liberal hegemonyanın düşüşü üç açıdan incelenmektedir: i) hegemonun ideolojisinin zayıflığı, iii) hegemonun müttefikleri arasındaki ayrılık ve iii) maddi ve manevi savaş. Sonuç olarak, hegemonyanın düşüşü, gücün maddi ve kavramsal boyutlarını anlamanın önemini ve küresel sistemdeki çatışma ve işbirliği dinamiklerini analiz etme ihtiyacını ortaya koyar.

Keywords

Hegemonya, Güç, Uluslararası Sistem, Savaş, İdeoloji

Theorizing the Fall of Hegemony: A Neo-Gramscian Perspective

Abstract

Historically, hegemony has been a vital aim and feature of political units and international systems. The search for hegemony is crucial for the achievement of survival and then domination. In the context of international relations, hegemony refers to the dominant position of a particular state or group of states in the global system. The relationship between subaltern states and the hegemon has changed in proportion to their power. For this reason, the cyclical and actor behaviors of the international system that existed in the past and the current structure also contain similar and different aspects in terms of hegemony. This study aims to firstly discuss the conceptual framework concerning hegemony and the decline of hegemony. This discussion will study the fall of hegemony from a neo-Gramscian perspective. In this research work, we assume that hegemony's emergence, survival, and decline are not only based on material elements, but non-material components also play a prominent role. In this sense, we analyze the fall of liberal hegemony from three aspects: i)the weakness of the hegemon's ideology, iii) divergence among the hegemon's allies, and iii) material and non-material warfare. In conclusion, the fall of hegemony can highlight the importance of understanding the material and conceptual dimensions of power and the need to analyze the dynamics of conflict and cooperation in the global system.

Keywords

Hegemony, Power, International system, War, Ideology

References

• Adamson, W. L. (1983). Hegemony and revolution: A study of Antonio Gramsci's political and cultural theory. California: University of California Press.
• Agnew, J. (2005). Hegemony: The new shape of global power. Pheladelphia: Temple University Press.
• Althusser, L. (2020). On ıdeology. London: Verso Books.
• Ashraf, N. (2020, March). Revisiting ınternational relations legacy on hegemony: The decline of American hegemony from camparative perspectives. Review of Economics and Political Science.
• Bieler, A., & Morton, A. (2004). A critical theory route to hegemony, world order and historical change: neo- gramscian perspectives in ınternational relations. Capital and Class, 28(1), 85-113.
• Bieler, A., & Morton, A.. (2001). Social forces in the making of the new europe the restructuring of European social relations in the global political economy. New York: Palgrave Publishers.
• Buci-Glucksmann, C. (1980). Gramsci and the state. London: Lawrence and Wishart.
• Burnham, P. (2006, Autumn). Neo-Gramscian Hegemony and the International Order. In A. Bieler, W. Bonefeld, P. Burnham, & A. D. Morton, Global restructuring, state, capital and labour: Contesting neo-Gramscian perspectives (Vol. 15, pp. 28-44). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Buzan, B. (2004). From ınternational to world society?: English school theory and the social structure of globalisation. London: Cambridge University Press.
• Callinicos, A. (2010). The limits of passive revolution. Capital and Class, 34(3), 491-507.
• Clark, I. (2011). Hegemony in ınternational society. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Cox, R. (1981, June). Social forces, states and world orders: beyond ınternational relations theory. Millennium, 10(2), 126-155.
• Cox, R. (1983). Gramsci, hegemony and ınternational relations: an essay in method. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 12(2), 162-175.
• Cox, R. (1987). Production, power, and world order: social forces in the making of history. New York: Colombia University Press.
• Cox, R. W., & Sinclair, T. J. (1996). Approaches to world order. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Femia, J. (1981). Gramsci's political thought: hegemony, consciousness, and the revolutionary process. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Fiori, G. (1970). Antonio Gramsci: Life of a Revolutionary. New York: Schocken Books.
• Gill, S. (1990). American hegemony and the trilateral commission. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Gill, S. (2008). Power and resistance in the new world order (2 ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Gill, S. R., & Law, D. (1989). Global hegemony and the structural power of capital. International Studies Quarterly, 33(4), 475-499.
• Gilpin, R. (1981). War and change in world politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (5 ed.). (Q. Hoare, G. Nowell-Smith, Eds., & G. Nowell-Smith, Trans.) London: Lawrence and Wishart.
• Gramsci, A. (1991). Gramsci's political thought an ıntroduction (Revised ed.). (R. Simon, Ed.) London: Lawrence & Wishart.
• Gramsci, A. (2000). The Gramsci reader: selected writings, 1916-1935. (D. Forgacs, Ed.) New York: New York University Press.
• Herkenrath, M. (2007). Civil society: Local and regional responses to global challenges. Münster: LIT Verlag Münster.
• Heywood, A. (2012). Political ıdeologies: An ıntroduction (5th ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Hoare, G., & Sperber, N. (2016). An ıntroduction to Antonio Gramsci: his life, thought and legacy. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
• Hoffman, J. (1984). The Gramscian challange: coercion and consent in marxist political theory. New York: Basil Blackwell.
• Ikenberry, G. J., & Kupchan, A. C. (1990). Socialization and hegemonic power. International Organization, 44(3), 283-315.
• Nye, J. (2006). Marxism and social theory. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Kennedy, E. (1979, July). "Ideology" from Destutt De Tracy to Marx. Journal of the History of Ideas, 40(3), 353- 368.
• Keohane, R. (1984). After hegemony: cooperation and discord in the world. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Kim, T.-Y., & Kim, D. (2017). The secrets of hegemony. Berlin: Springer Nature.
• Kindleberger, C. (1973). The world in depression, 1929-1939. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Lake, D. A. (1993, December). Leadership, hegemony, and the ınternational economy: naked emperor or tattered Monarch with Potential? International Studies Quarterly, 37(4), 459-489.
• Lentner, H. H. (2005, December). Hegemony and autonomy. Political Studies, 53(4), 735-752.
• Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1970). The German Ideology. (C. Arthur, Ed.) New York: International Publishers.
• Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. New York: W. W. Nonon & Company Ltd.
• Mearsheimer, J. J. (2004). “Power and Fear in Great Power Politics”, Ed. G. O. Mazur, One Hundred Year Commemoration to the Life of Hans Morgenthau (1904-2004), New York: Semenenko Foundation.
• Modelski, G. (1987). Long cycles in world politics. New York: Springer.
• Morton, A. D. (2007). Unravelling Gramsci: hegemony and passive revolution in the global political economy. London: Pluto Press.
• Özel Özcan, M. S. (2021). İmparatorluklar geçmişten bugüne büyük güçler ve Rusya örneği. Ankara: Orion Kitabevi.
• Özekin, M. K. (2014). Restructuring ‘hegemony’ in the age of neo-liberal globalization. Eskişehir Osmangazi University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 9(1), 91-112.
• Posen, B. (2014). Restraint a new foundation for U.S. grand strategy. London: Cornell University Press.
• Robinson, W. (2005, December). Gramsci and globalization: from nation-state to transnational hegemony. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 8(4), 559-574.
• Rupert, M. (1995). Producing hegemony. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Sassoon, A. S. (2019). Gramsci's politics (2 ed.). London: Routledge.
• Schmidt, M. W. (2017). A Greek-English reference manual to the vocabulary of the greek new testament. Based on Tischendorf’s Greek New Testament Text and on Strong’s Greek Lexicon With Some Additions and Amendments (illustrated ed.). Hamburg: disserta Verlag.
• Snidal, D. (1985). The limits of hegemonic stability theory. International Organization, 39(4), 579-614.