Hegemony and Imperialism - Assignment Example

Hegemony and Imperialism Name Institution Date Соmраrе and соntrаst the mеаnings of the соnсерts of ‘hеgеmоny’ and ‘imреriаlism and justify which term сарturеs соntеmроrаry world роlitiсs best. Introduction Imperialism and hegemony are two forms of powers that are used by one state to govern or rule another state(s). This essay is aimed at comparing and contrasting the meanings of the concepts of hegemony and imperialism. It will also make a justification of which of the two terms captures contemporary world politics best. Imperialism is usually involved with the use of direct power while hegemony is involved with the use of indirect power (Horowitz 1969, p.2). Specifically, imperialism means the exercise of authority which is final as well as the power of making decision by one government over another or a community which is foreign to itself. Imperialism is practiced through the use of local authorities who are co-opted by the imperial regime. Imperialism was majorly experienced in Cuba, Philippines and Panama. The rationale behind imperialism is social Darwinism, white man’s burden and markets. At the end, a state occupies another; there is building of the military and subjugation of natives (Sutcliffe 2002, p.7). On the other hand, hegemony is specifically referred to as leadership with the use of military and political power in leading the world. It does not establish direct power over another nation. A state exercises the principle of self-determination which coincides with indirect empire. Hegemony was highly evident to happen in Latin America, China, African and Middle East. The rationale for hegemony is to achieve economic stability and security. Some of the policies of powers used in hegemony include; open door policy, dollar diplomacy, moral diplomacy and good neighbour policy. The outcome is characterized by banana republics and dictatorships. The concept of imperialism is highly associated with a policy that is used in extending the power and influence of one country through the use of the military and colonisation among other means of power (Wolfe 1997, p.392). A country can use two types of imperialism to practice power over another nation including; regressive imperialism and progressive imperialism. Regressive imperialism is identified as the use of pure conquest, reductions of people who are undesired and unequivocal exploitation as well as the settlement of people who are desired in such territories. Progressive imperialism is identified as spreading civilization to societies that are left behind for the purpose of elevating their living standards as well as culture in the conquered societies. Progressive imperialism was evident in the British Empire which gave their subjects many benefits. Generally, imperialism can be described as any system which is organised that dominates and subordinates with a central imperial and a periphery (Kiernan 1974, p.3). According to Ross (1994, p.23) the concept of hegemony involves the use of a leadership rule which can be political, military or economically predominant by a state for the purpose of controlling other states. It involves either politico-military dominance and social or cultural predominance. Politico-military dominance involves the dominance of a city over other city states with the dominating state referred to as hegemon. Social or Cultural predominance involves the predominance by one group in a society or a regime that exerts influence which is undue in a society (p.24). It is also the geopolitical as well as the cultural predominance of one country over other countries known as hegemonism. Hegemonism was practised by the use of Great powers by Europe to the continent of Asia and Africa. Both forms of power are described by Marxist theory. From the perspective of Marxist theory, imperialism is considered as a natural feature of a capitalist nation state which is developed since it matures to monopoly capitalism. As described by Lenin (1939, p.3), in the Marxist theory of imperialism, imperialism is described as the highest stage of capitalism. According to Lenin, with the maturity of capitalism within the Western World, there was a shift in economies that moved from manufacturing to banking, finance as well as capital markets. Production was being outsourced from the colonies of the empires. There existed competition between empires that were aimed at maximising profit and this led to wars between the empires. This was evident in the contemporary First World War and the military interventions and occupations that continued to the future (Wolfgang 1980, p.59). This led to the establishment, expansion and exploitation of markets that were less developed by the corporations of the empires that were monopolistic. The theory of cultural imperialism describes that, the leading state dictates the internal conflicts as well as the societal character of the subordinate states that are influenced by the hegemonic sphere by a government which is sponsored internally or externally. The Marxist theory of hegemony asserts that cultural hegemony of a ruling class exists to dominate a society which is culturally diverse. The ruling class manipulates the culture of the other society including; their beliefs, perceptions, values and explanations. The world view of the dominating ruling class becomes an imposed worldview which is accepted by the other society as their cultural norm (Bullock & Trombley 1999, p.394.). Such a cultural norm is considered to be a universal dominant ideology which is valid and justifies the social, economic as well as political status quo of being natural, perpetual, beneficial and inevitable for all people, rather than being a social construct which is artificial and made to benefit the ruling class only. Gramsci was one of the intellectuals who contribute to the understanding if cultural hegemony. Antonio Gramsci provided clearly the difference between the class intellectuals of bourgeois and the class of intellectuals who were working by defining the normative culture that was imposed that led to the societal status quo. The contribution of Gramsci on cultural hegemony highly influences political activists of socially liberal and as well as progressive politicians (Cox 1983, p.163). The analysis of cultural hegemony is important in researching and synthesising political science that helps in identifying and resolving the root causes of political discontent. The theory of cultural hegemony by Marxist explains the idea that the ruling class have the capacity of manipulating the system of values in the society for the purpose of making the views become the world view. Bromley (2003, p.27) describe that, the power of imperialism involves a concept which is elusive with relationships that are formal or informal whereby one state takes control over the effective political sovereignty of another political society. One or more regions of a state become a living memory of being part of an autonomous polity which is different and was brought under the currently ruling imperial power. This results to a unitary state that raises the risk of over privileging political power over differences in culture. The persistence of these privileges leads to the division of imperial entity (Balakrishnan 2003, p.27). It is evident that imperialism has little diversity that can be used to define an empire in terms of language, religion as well as culture. The creation of empires has diminished with time historically since empires are usually short lived or they are found to lose core value in politics. Additionally, the core periphery relationships between states usually disappear fast leading to the emergence of territorial states. Imperialism in the contemporary politics can only be understood as being a particular form of political entity and only a stage of state formation (Warren 1980, p.19). David & Grondin (2006, p.21) argue that, the concept of hegemony is a form of political dominance that controls states externally and not internally and acknowledges leadership in a community of units that does not depend on a single authority. Regardless of differences in power, states accommodated under hegemony usually enjoy equality in terms of sovereignty, rights, status as well as international obligations. Hegemony embraces the use of leadership of coalition (Bromley 2003, p.38). It is true that, the recent political theory has been generalized form the security benefits to a broader public good which is conferred by exercising hegemonic power. Today’s political power is defined as the persistent as well as consistent actions that are taken by single state which is dominant, for the purpose of pursuing its own national self- interest and provides public goods for the whole international system. Contemporary politics is concerned with issues that benefit people within the society such as; economic growth, social mobility, development, industrialisation, disease eradication and commitment to improving the well-being of communities (Atina 2003, p.2). Contemporary politics provides a new forum for new intellectual agendas to be explored and developed. It can be defined broadly as including; social, developmental, gender, culture, sexual, race, economics, philosophy, religion as well as environmental issues in the contemporary world. Conclusion Referring to the similarities and differences discussed in this essay, and the description of contemporary politics, it is true that, the contemporary politics is best described and captured by the concept of hegemony. The reason is that, hegemony does not need to use any force in ruling other states but only need to maintain a semblance of order as well as the use of power and persuasion for the purpose of imposing rules that are flexibly enforced up a system of international relations. A state has the capability of imposing its set of rules over the interstate system and as a result creating a new political order. The state is able to enjoy many advantages for the enterprises that are located within it or that are protected by it. Such kind of advantages cannot be accorded by the market as in the case for imperialism but can only be obtained through political pressure. The notion for states adopting the ideological dimension of hegemony has been emphasised by the need for consensual domination and the fact that hegemonic powers are found to stand out qualitatively from other types of powers such as imperialism, with a power that is conclusively economic, cultural as well as political. The concept of imperialism is left out in the description of contemporary politics because empires are short lived or may lose prominence with time. Basing the meaning of contemporary politics on imperialism means that continuous changing of political definition will be required every now and then. It is also clear that, states are no longer using force or the military to dominate others. Therefore, imperialism does not best capture contemporary world politics. References Atina, F, 2003, International Relations and Contemporary World Issues, Journal of International Relations, Vol.2. Balakrishnan, G, 2003, (ed.), Debating Empire, London: Verso. Ross, H, 1994, Mexico and the Spanish Conquest, pp. 23–24. Bromley, S, 2003, Reflections on Empire, Imperialism and United States Hegemony, Historical Materialism, Vol.11, Iss.3, pp. 17-68 Bullock, A & Trombley, S, 1999, (eds), The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought, 3rd Edition, pp. 387–88. David, C, & Grondin, D, 2006, Hegemony or Empire? The Redefinition of US Power under George W. Bush, Ashgate Publishing Limited. Horowitz, D, 1969, Imperialism and Revolution, Allen Lane: London. Kiernan, V, 1974, Marxism and Imperialism, Edward Arnold, London. Lenin, V, 1939, Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism, New York: International Publishers. Sutcliffe, B, 2002, How many Capitalisms? Historical Materialism in the Debates about Imperialism and Globalization, in Rupert, M & Smith, H, (eds.), Chapter 2: Historical Materialism and Globalisation, London: Routledge. Warren, B, 1980, Imperialism: Pioneer of Capitalism, London: New Left Book. Wolfe, P, 1997, History and Imperialism: A Century of Theory, from Marx to Postcolonialism’, American Historical Review, Vol.102, Iss.2, pp. 388-420. Wolfgang, M, 1980, Theories of Imperialism, Weidenfeld and Nicolson: London, pp.29-58. Cox, R, 1983, Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay in Method’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 12, Iss.2, pp. 162-175.  Read More