What is the difference between marxist and hegemonic theory?

Question

Particularly in regards to mass media.

Cheers.

Answer 1

Hegemonic Stability Theory

Baseline condition of states system: anarchy

system of multiple sovereign states ð security dilemma

security dilemma ð emphasis on relative wealth and power ð world politics resembles zero-sum game

given operation of security dilemma, cooperation for mutual benefit unlikely

Under extraordinary circumstances, the effects of anarchy and the security dilemma may be moderated so that cooperation and order become possible (for a time, at least)

Uneven economic development can generate within the territory of one state an extraordinary cluster of dynamic & innovative "leading sectors" of industry.

When this occurs, it may reshape the incentive structure facing that single state, so that it acts in extraordinary ways by attempting to reshape the international environment (rather than focusing exclusively on its own national wealth, power and security, as ordinary states generally do).

This "hegemonic" state may be both willing and able to transform the international system by constructing a liberal system of order:

MEANS: hegemonic state controls extraordinary power and wealth due to its technological and industrial advantages: can grant ior deny access to markets, capital, technology.

ENDS: hegemonic state may come to believe that a liberal system of order, while offering the benefit of absolute gains to every participant, will create relatively more benefits for the hegemonic state.

Since its industries are the most innovative, efficient and competitive, firms based in the hegemonic state will be able to out-compete other nations' firms in any market to which the hegemon can gain access;

Therefore, liberalism may appear to be in the interest of the hegemon insofar as liberalism promises to open up the world's markets.

To enjoy disproportionate benefits of liberalism, the hegemonic state must take the lead, and pay most of the costs, of creating the institutional infrastructure of liberal order.

Trade regime: reduce barriers to flow of goods

Monetary regime: provide stable international currency to facilitate international trade & investment.

In the process of creating the institutional infrastructure of liberal order, the hegemonic state will institutionalize its own extraordinary power and influence, creating a favorable political climate for itself and its interests even as it creates a more cooperative and less threatening environment for other states in the system.

According to HST, Hegemonic power is necessary, but not sufficient, condition for liberal economic order. In addition to existence of hegemonic power:

Hegemonic state must be committed to liberal goals

Other major states must have liberal goals and common interests

Hegemonic leadership depends on relatively more consent, less coercion.

Although all participants may benefit from participation in liberal hegemonic order, in the short-to-medium term, the hegemonic state may benefit disproportionately; over the long-term, however, liberal order diffuses the advantages formerly enjoyed by the hegemonic state, leading to more uneven development as non-hegemonic states begin to catch-up.

  

Hegemonies don’t last forever

Uneven development ð relative decline of formerly hegemonic state, political challenges from rising rivals, and wavering commitment of domestic political groups to goals of liberal world order.

Hegemonic decline ð renewed difficulty sustaining cooperative order

Regression toward baseline condition of anarchy and security dilemma???

Contraction of world economy, increasing conflict, heightened risk of major war???

jd