2.

BOROBIO BENNETT, Steven

Politics in the Global Order:

A Manifestation of the Evolution of Human Consciousness
Making Sense of the International System Through its Theoretical
Approaches

The global order in the international system is based on principles of economic trade,
universal morality and survival of the state. It can be argued that these principles ensure
a prosperous global order for all its participants, although the international system is
2. BOROBIO BENNETT, Steven

continually subjected to criticism especially from thought leaders in critical theory.

Realist academic and intellectual leaders view the international system as anarchic with
states functioning as central actors that ultimately pursue their own interests and are
concerned with securing their own survival by obtaining more power (Goodison, pp.
133, 2010). It seems as though this dominant problem solving school of thought
provides a rational analysis of the current state of the global order, and the issues that
occur within it. However, there is no attempt to explain the underlying structure that
allows for these issues to exist. Scholars like Marx were more concerned with
interrogating the power structure that creates all these issues within the international
system at a fundamental level. Critical thought provides a unique insight into the nature
and origins of the structure of the international system rather than solely provide an
explanation of its observed components and characteristics (Buecker, pp. 49, 2003). It
is necessary to understand how the critical perspective confronts the current order at a
fundamental level, if one is to argue for its validity as a theory that accurately describes
its conditions and potential implications.

The capitalist world is based on the privatisation of the economic means of production
within a society (Zimbalist, pp. 6, 1988). From a realist perspective, the role of the state
within this order is to pursue its own self-interests in order to secure survival (Goodison,
pp. 133, 2010). Therefore, Realism or problem-solving theory can be viewed as the
study of the nature and behaviour the current order which is dominated by private
ownership of the means of production and state competition for survival (Cox, pp. 129,
1981). As an important school of thought, problem-solving theory makes no attempt to
de-synthesize the state from the current system of capitalism, thereby assuming that the
basic principles of this order are characteristics of an underlying absolute truth to the
paradigm of global politics.
According to Rowlandson, it is a result of the human condition that we create these
structures to ensure survival, only we find ourselves in a situation where we have
created this modern structure yet we cannot truly appreciate it’s contingent substance
(pp. 47, 2012). The scope of focus which can be rationally applied to an observation or
analysis of the international system, is therefore limited to the confines of a
2. BOROBIO BENNETT, Steven

predetermined order within problem solving thought. It is important to recognise this

observation of thought as it highlights its lack of capacity to fundamentally address
many major issues within the international system.

Another perspective which provides a rational analysis of the current order, is the world
systems theory which basically suggests the main issues in the world system stems
from a fundamentally flawed method of thinking about the current order. World systems
theory provides an idea which can be used as an explanation to support this. According
to this theory, a world system can be defined as a phenomenon that has the
characteristics of an organism. It is subject to a life-cycle where it’s characteristics
change in some areas and remain stable in other areas. It is subject to growth and
decay, it is dependent on an internal structure for its own existence, and it behaves
according to various components which form an internal logic. In this idea, politics can
be said to function like the brain of the system with 3 possible states which are the
emotional/creative state, the rational/conservative state, or a balance of both states.
One can conclude that world systems theory provides an analysis of the world system
which aims at predicting how it will behave over time, and what fundamentally
influences it by comparing it to any other manifestation of the natural world (Wallerstein,
pp. 1-3, 1976). Destruction can be seen as a natural part of this kind of system, as it is
subject to its own internal logic which is constantly fluctuating and divided into separate
parts.

If one chooses to adopt this idea of the world system as organism-like by nature, then
one must also translate this into the context of the current international system. World
Systems theory suggests the current world system is essentially an economic-material
entity which is comprised of smaller tribes, communities and social orders defined by
the division of labour and cultural ideologies. States are ultimately sorted into categories
defined by labour, these are the core states, peripheral states and semi-peripheral
states, or in other words, the internal logic of the organism-like system (Wallerstein, pp.
230, 1976). Wallerstein’s analysis of the nature of the world system and the state
functions within it, explains how the current order functions and may behave, rather than
2. BOROBIO BENNETT, Steven

accept the order as a fundamental truth to global politics. However, the difference
between this theory and Marxism is that the latter is more concerned with the evolution
of the international system from an anthropological perspective, and its ramifications for
the means of production and social forces. In a sense, world systems theory assumes
the global order as a fixated situation subject to various conceptualisations of a world
system (Pieterse, pp. 3-7, 1988). Therefore, one can conclude this theory does well to
explain the world system in its current form, but much like problem solving theory, it
does not explain how the underlying structure came into being and subsequently what
fundamentally drives it.

Critical theory emerged as a theory which predominantly aimed to address recurring

issues in the international system by transcending the confines of the current order, and
questioning the system which allows for these issues to exist in the first place. One key
area of observation in Marxist thought is the role and origin of the state. According to
Marxist thought, the state is a kind of dictatorship by nature which imposes itself through
moral and legal force. However, Marxist thought defines the state as being ruled by
class and not a dictator, hence Marx’s reference to the state as being a “type” of
dictatorship (Barnes, pp. 1, 2014). According to this perspective, the state is influenced
by an elite class and would therefore function as a mechanism to advance their interest.
It is important to understand this analysis of the state as it is the basis for the Marxist
idea of historical materialism, which transcends the current order and absolute
paradigm of global politics. It also provides an understanding as to why assuming the
position of the state and the global order as absolute, is fundamentally the root cause of
many of its issues.

Throughout history the ruling class has used the state as a means to impose its own
agenda into the global order. This is done so as to preserve elite interests and to secure
the means of generating the material requirements for human existence over
generations. In Marxist theory, this idea is known as historical materialism, and it argues
that social relations concerning the means of production was inevitable the moment the
means of production was centered as the means to obtaining economic power. As a
2. BOROBIO BENNETT, Steven

result, the elite class will seek to preserve these social relations throughout time
(Fromm, pp. 21-25, 2003). Historical materialism is an example of one of the major
critiques of the current order highlighting how it creates mass inequality. Therefore, one
can conclude that this perspective provides a fundamental reasoning which analyses
the issue of mass inequality at its core, transcendent of the boundaries of time. This is
crucial to understand as it provides an insight into the true nature of the issue of
inequality, something which cannot be addressed at a fundamental level within the
problem-solving method of thinking.

Marxist thought views the state in its essence, as an extension of human consciousness
which evolved according to certain environmental conditions and mankind's constant
and relative drives over time. The fundamental Marxist philosophy views matter as
preceding spirit. State exists only in the realm of ideology or mind, therefore making it
intangible like spirit. This is the great problem faced in this world according to dialectical
materialism (Nunes, pp. 4, 2010). Logically one can then conclude that from a Marxist
perspective, mankind which is matter, preceded the state which is spirit. However,
somehow the state is not only influenced by mankind, but also influences mankind in
return. There is an exaggeration of the matter over spirit ideology which one can argue
is a product of this cycle of influence.
According to Marxist thought man historically and presently is a “being of praxis”, one
that shapes and adapts to the environment (Buecker, pp. 49-50, 2003). This perspective
suggests that the current international order can be defined as a condition of the
organism-environment. That is to say, the relationship between man and the
environment is what defines the experience which can be referred to as human
consciousness, and the situation in which this conscious being finds itself in. Therefore,
one can rationally conclude from a critical perspective that the current order is in some
sense a manifestation of human consciousness rather than an absolute truth to which
we are bound and experience consciousness within, rendering any approach that
assumes the latter perspective as fundamentally flawed.
2. BOROBIO BENNETT, Steven

In the study of social psychology, the organism is observed to always behave in

accordance with the environment. The two are inseparable from one another and
cannot be defined unless they are defined in relation to each other. According to
Jarvilehto, “behavior is never something that belongs to the organism only but always
involves also the environment and especially the social relations and context in which
the action is carried out. This means that the human mind is not located in the head of
the individual but in the social system that determines the content of the mind” (pp. 114,
2009). If we apply this logic to the Marxist praxis rationale from a historical materialist
perspective, it can be said that the state is like an extension of the human mind, which
is determined by the social system in which it resides but also influences. In turn, this
creates the order which ultimately influences the mind of the individual through social
relations which promote specific ideas such as consumerism, tribalism, and
commodification of life for the benefit of the state interests within the capitalist order.

In contrast to Marxism’s profound thought concerning the origins of the state, problem-
solving theory assumes the position of the state in relation to the capitalist environment,
as a pre-determined order in the international system. It can be thought of in realist
terms, as the manifestation of a particular field of events which are inseparable from the
reality of human existence within the global society. Conflict and destruction arises
because there is no universal principle of morality within this system, and every state
defines the probability of war by deciding whether or not to use force in the pursual of
power (Korab-Karpowicz, 2017). Critical thought rejects this idea of the current order as
being an absolute truth which is inseparable from human existence. By transcending the
current order and humanity’s current position in space-time, more emphasis is placed
on the evolution of the order throughout the past, connecting it to the structure observed
in the present (Osborne, pp: 1-2, 2008). By way of conceptualising the state as an entity
married into a pre-determined system, problem solving theory inadvertently suggests
that the order, which is the behaviour of states and the system in which it resides, is in
itself a core mechanism of reality that exists independently of the experience of human
consciousness but somehow defines it. This is typically the type of order where
problem-solving theory draws most of its observations from. It focuses on the anarchic
2. BOROBIO BENNETT, Steven

nature observed in humans in a particular order without taking into account their
evolutionary relationship with this order throughout history.

Problem-solving theory is in essence, an approach that describes various components

of this predetermined order where the interdependent relationship between human
consciousness and environmental conditions is limited. In this school of thought, human
nature is defined as ego-centric, competitive and self-centered, and this is the
explanation for most destruction, war and inequality within the current order. If we are to
apply the Marxist rationale to this realist idea of human nature, it seems as though the
state, as an extension of human consciousness, also functions according to the realist
idea of human nature. That is to say, states are self centered, compete for survival, and
are egocentric in terms of economic and militaristic power (Clarke, pp. 1-2, 1995).
Problem solving theory provides a useful insight into the nature of the current system
and direct observations drawn from the behaviour and interactions of its components. It
is useful as a theory to understand the motivations for action within this order. However,
the deep evolutionary roots to the motivations are not at all addressed and this is what
makes critical theory more useful in its capacity to fundamentally deconstruct issues
within the order. From a realist perspective, human nature is attributed with various
underlying characteristics which give the impression of human consciousness as
something that is static rather than dynamic and evolving. Therefore, one can logically
conclude that these types of theories not only assume an inherently predetermined
state of order in the international system, but also in human nature. In such a theory,
outcomes such as destruction are inevitable as a result of the separation of human
nature from the system in which it resides.

As a consequence of this logic, the state fills the void left behind in this process of
disconnection by convincing the individual they must contribute to its prosperity within
the system, and so individuals live their lives striving to become a crucial component of
it. This great paradox is what creates phenomena such as chauvinism, excessive
individualism, consumerism and tribalism. The reality according to Marxism, is that both
state and the system exist as a result of the process of being (Buekner, pp. 45-48,
2. BOROBIO BENNETT, Steven

2003). Haidt argues that this condition may also have deep social psychological roots.
He argues that the righteous human mind binds itself into groups with others based on
shared principles of universal morality and general like-mindedness. The formation of
these groups ultimately hinders mankind’s ability to accept perspectives other than their
own, thus creating a supergroup which possesses an us versus them mentality
(Shermer, 2012). It is plausible that the order in which humans exist in today, may be
the result of complex social and evolutionary psychological behavioural patterns and
tendencies. Therefore, one could logically argue that Marxist theory serves as a rational
anthropological analysis of the current order and it’s evolution into the state we observe
today.

As a theory that provides a more concise understanding in regards to the workings of

the superstructure and the economic base that underlie the current order, critical theory
can be understood as a perspective that is fundamentally more accurate in its analysis
of the order. However, Marxism and Lenin thought propose a solution which can be
somewhat paradoxical. The original idea of humans evolving relative to their
environment seems to provide an explanation of the nature of human behaviour and the
origins of the international order in the context of the modern world. However, the
solution put forth by these theorists is one of the abolishment of the state, and equal
distribution of wealth and control of the means of production. It can be argued that such
a drastic transformation cannot be achieved due to the conditioned state of human
nature as a result of generations of evolution within a specific order. This proposed
solution is utopian in its nature and assumes that humans will naturally adapt to the new
system, disregarding the mindset which has evolved due to the relationship of the
individual with class, the means of production and the state (Gregory, P, pp. 178-181).
Therefore, one can logically argue that this theory does well at deconstructing the
current order, but the solutions it proposes contradicts the basis of its own argument.
The system is a result of human consciousness, so to change the system it is
necessary to also change human consciousness. Therefore, any proposed solution
must be within the confines of the reality of the current situation of global politics, and
2. BOROBIO BENNETT, Steven

gradually evolve to a form of order that can be translated into politics at a later point in
time.

Problem seeking theory tends to favour a static idea of human nature and
consciousness, and the current order translates this idea into global politics which can
be observed by the behaviour of states, and the subsequent social relations which
cause catastrophic wars throughout history. In contrast, dialectical materialism views
the world as dynamic, evolving, interdependent and subject to constant change
(Adoratsky, pp. 13-16, 1934). One can rationally argue that mankind in problem solving
theories suffers from a mass delusion whereby consciousness is perceived to be a
phenomenon that is separate from the state-environment (a term which describes the
international system, the state, and it’s components), which is essentially just an
extension of human consciousness in the first place as according dialectical
materialism. It is plausible from this perspective to view mankind as a prisoner of it’s
own method of thinking, trapped in a vicious cycle of influencing events and being
influenced by them within the international order, while thinking that the two processes
on influence are separate when they are indeed two relative points of polarity that exist
in relation to one another. This cycle is also the catalyst for many of the problems within
the international system mankind seeks to find a solution for, but alas are never able to
resolve, and the reason why problem-solving and realist perspectives seem to be the
most dominant approaches to analysing the problems in the present order.
2. BOROBIO BENNETT, Steven

References

Adoratsky, V. (1934). Dialectical Materialism: The Theoretical Foundation of Marxism-

Leninism. Red Star Publishers. pp. 10-24.
Barnes, G. (2014). Marx's Theory of the State. Published in the Policy of Truth. pp 1-2.
Buecker, R. (2003). Karl Marx’s Conception of the International Relations. pp. 43-60.
Clarke, A. (1995). Hobbes's Theory of Human Nature: A Warning to Libertarians.
Published in the Libertarian Alliance. pp. 1-2
Cox, R. (1981). Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations
Theory. Millennium: Journal of International Studies Vol. 10, No. 2. pp: 126 - 133.
Fromm, E. (2003). Marx's Concept of Man. Including Economic and Philosophical
Manuscripts. Bloomsbury. pp. 20-27.
Goodin, R. (2010). The Oxford Handbook of International Relations. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. pp. 133.
Gregory, P. & Stuart, R. (2013). Marxism and Communism: The Global Economy and
its Economic Systems. Cengage Learning. Pp. 170-189.
2. BOROBIO BENNETT, Steven

Korab-Karpowicz, W. (2017). "Political Realism in International Relations", The Stanford

Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2017 Edition), URL:
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/realism-intl-relations
Jarvilehto, T. (2009). The Theory of the Organism-Environment System as a Basis of
Experimental Work in Psychology. Kajaani University of Applied Sciences. pp: 112-120.
Nunes, R. (2010). Dialectical Materialism. Published by Marxists.org. pp: 1-12.
Osborne, P. (2008). Marx and the Philosophy of Time. Radical Philosophy. pp: 1-7.
Pieterse, J. (1988). A Critique of World System Theory. International Sociology.
International Sociological Association. pp. 1-7.
Rowlandson, W. (2012). Paranthropology: Journal of Anthropological Approaches to the
Paranormal. Nourished by Dreams, Visions and William James: The Radical
Philosophies of Borges and Terence McKenna. pp: 46-49.
Shermer, M. (2012). Evolution Explains Why Politics is So Tribal. Scientific American.
URL: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/evolution-explains-why-politics-tribal/
Wallerstein, I. (1976). The Modern World-System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins
of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press,
pp. 229-233.
Zimbalist, S. (1988) Comparing Economic Systems: A Political-Economic Approach.
Harcourt College Pub. pp. 6–7.