Bài tập Lý luận quan hệ quốc tế | Học viện Báo chí và Tuyên truyền

Full name: Doãn Ngọc Quỳnh Như - QHQT51C11414 Class: LLQHQT_51.3
Marxist - Leninist philosophy arguments in IR:
Marxist–Leninist thought offers a materialist and revolutionary critique of
traditional international relations theories. Unlike realism or liberalism, which view
states as autonomous actors motivated by security or cooperation, Marxist–Leninist
theory interprets world politics through the dynamics of class struggle and
economic exploitation. It argues that international relations reflect the global
extension of domestic class relations under capitalism.
At the core of this philosophy is the principle of historical materialism, which
holds that economic structures determine political and ideological systems.
Accordingly, states are not neutral entities but instruments of class power. In
capitalist societies, governments serve the interests of the bourgeoisie, using
foreign policy and international institutions to secure profits and preserve global
dominance. Thus, what appears as inter-state competition is, in fact, a struggle
among ruling classes for economic control.
Marxist–Leninist theory also divides the world into two opposing camps: the
capitalist-imperialist powers and the socialist or anti-imperialist forces. The tension
between them represents a global class struggle. While peaceful coexistence may
occur temporarily, true harmony is impossible so long as capitalism exists. The
theory emphasizes proletarian internationalism—the solidarity of workers and
oppressed nations against imperialism—and supports national liberation
movements as part of the global revolutionary process. Lenin and later Marxist
thinkers saw decolonization not merely as political independence but as a
necessary step toward dismantling the capitalist world system.
In conclusion, Marxist–Leninist thought views international relations as a product
of global capitalism and class conflict rather than state sovereignty or moral ideals.
Its key arguments—imperialism as the final stage of capitalism, the global division
between exploiters and the oppressed, and the link between peace and
socialism—offer a radical critique of the existing world order and continue to
influence modern analyses of inequality and global power.
Similarities and Differences between Marxism - Leninism and other two
theories (Realism and Liberalism)
The similarities between Marxism - Leninism and other two theories Realism and
Liberalism is that Each seeks to explain international relations through material
interests, structural constraints, and patterns of power rather than purely moral or idealistic reasoning.
Marxism–Leninism, Realism, and Liberalism differ fundamentally in their
assumptions about the nature of international relations, the main actors, and the
sources of conflict and change. Realism views the international system as anarchic,
where sovereign states compete for power and survival in a world driven by
self-interest. It emphasizes military strength, national interest, and the inevitability
of conflict. Liberalism, in contrast, adopts a more optimistic outlook, arguing that
cooperation, democracy, and international institutions can mitigate anarchy and
promote peace. It sees progress as achievable through interdependence, trade, and
shared norms. Marxism–Leninism, however, rejects both state-centric and idealist
explanations, interpreting global politics through the lens of class struggle and
economic exploitation. It views states as instruments of class power, international
conflict as a product of capitalism and imperialism, and genuine peace as possible
only after the abolition of capitalist structures. Whereas Realism and Liberalism
accept the state system as permanent, Marxism–Leninism envisions its
revolutionary transformation toward socialism. Thus, while all three acknowledge
power and material interests as central to world politics, they diverge sharply in
explaining their origins, purposes, and possible resolutions.