I'm very skeptical of geopolitics as a valid means of analysis. Yeah, let's just assume nation-states are rational actors who will pursue some arbritrary interests and come up with 10d chess strategies in order to achieve their aims. Class conflict? Is that a country or something? Never heard of it before.
You can discard it if you want to, but your analysis will suffer. Understanding that states have security interests doesn't conflict with a Marxist perspective.
so many analysis are solely concerned with this one perspective and a lot of seems like bullshit to me
Thats just what Capitalism those to academia, most of them just specialize in one field and tries to find the eternal immutable laws governing it. And those who get an audience are placed there less because of their skill and more because they serve the status quo. Now this is not to say you should discard their work entirely, just build on it.
I'm very skeptical of geopolitics as a valid means of analysis. Yeah, let's just assume nation-states are rational actors who will pursue some arbritrary interests and come up with 10d chess strategies in order to achieve their aims. Class conflict? Is that a country or something? Never heard of it before.
You can discard it if you want to, but your analysis will suffer. Understanding that states have security interests doesn't conflict with a Marxist perspective.
of course im not gonna deny states exist, but so many analysis are solely concerned with this one perspective and a lot of seems like bullshit to me
Thats just what Capitalism those to academia, most of them just specialize in one field and tries to find the eternal immutable laws governing it. And those who get an audience are placed there less because of their skill and more because they serve the status quo. Now this is not to say you should discard their work entirely, just build on it.