Unquestioned Answers/Unanswered Questions in IPE: A Rejoinder to ‘Non-Marxist’ Historical Materialism
| Published date | 01 June 2007 |
| Date | 01 June 2007 |
| Author | Adam David Morton |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1467-9256.2007.00291.x |
| Subject Matter | Debate |
Debate
Unquestioned Answers/Unanswered
Questions in IPE: A Rejoinder to
‘Non-Marxist’ Historical Materialism
Adam David Morton
University of Nottingham
This rejoinder to Randall Germain’s promotion of a ‘non-Marxist’ historical materialism focuses on
a number of weaknesses revealed by his ‘resistance’ to the recovery of the concept of class in
international political economy. Most notable is the binary line he draws throughout his argument
between class identity, on the one hand, and the formation of collective subjectivities on the other,
which results in the very effacing of class in IPE that was so central to my original concerns. Flowing
from this, my rejoinder reveals a series of unquestioned answers he provides from his philosophically
idealist posture as well as a series of unanswered questions that are left hanging for future debate.
‘Once upon a time a valiant fellow had the idea that men were drowned in water
only because they were possessed with the idea of gravity. If they were to knock
this notion out of their heads, say by stating it to be a superstition, a religious
concept, they would be sublimely proof against any danger from water. His whole
life long he fought against the illusion of gravity, of whose harmful results all
statistic brought him new and manifold evidence’. (Marx and Engels, 1976,
pp. 1845–1846 emphasis in original)
Randall Germain’s (2007) response to my overview of the state of debate in
international political economy (IPE) (Morton, 2006) provides me with an oppor-
tunity to further my argument in two principal ways: first, in terms of my central
claims related to the effacing of class struggle within ‘critical’ perspectives in IPE;
and second, in relation to the fundamental misconceptions and/or wilful misrep-
resentations of historical materialist theory evident within Germain’s reply. My aim
is to raise such circumspection based on a two-pronged line of reasoning linked to
a series of reservations about the unquestioned answers evident within Germain’s
response and his problematic articulation of a ‘non-Marxist’ historical materialism.
This will then lead me to reflect in conclusion on a further series of unanswered
questions prompted by his reproach.
The main section, to follow, on unquestioned answers will probe the merits of
Germain’s casting of the relationship between subjectivity and class identity; the
focus on social being and social consciousness evident in the scholarship of Robert
Cox; and wider issues of state theory. Far from a ‘monological Marxism’, it should be
clear that my earlier argument draws from an array of thinkers broadly shaped by the
varied canon of historical materialism: Antonio Gramsci, Theodor Adorno, Louis
© 2007 The Author. Journal compilation © 2007 Political Studies Association
Q U E S T I O N S O F C L A S S S T R U G G L E
133
Althusser, E.P. Thompson, Eric Hobsbawm, Nicos Poulantzas, Robert Cox and Bob
Jessop. Exploring this agenda further will lead me to conclude that there exists a set
of unanswered questions within ‘non-Marxist’ historical materialism based on unex-
plored and under-theorised notions. Overall, it is argued that Germain collapses into
a position of philosophical idealism, meaning a subjective account of history...
To continue reading
Request your trial