"이 시점에서 우리는 정말 중요한 질문을 할 수 있다: 세계화와 그 자유민주주의적 자본주의와 근대주의적(포스트-모더니스트적) 원리에 대한 우리의 반대에 어떤 이데올로기가 쓰일 수 있을 것인가? 나는 모든 반자유주의적 이데올로기들(공산주의, 사회주의는 물론 파시즘)이 더이상 적절하지 않다고 생각한다. 그들은 자유주의적 자본주의와 싸우려 했으나 패배했다. 부분적으로는 끝에 가서 이기는 것은 본디 악이기 때문이고, 또 부분적으로는 그들 내부의 모순과 한계 때문이다.  

이제 우리는 우리를 둘러싼 (정치적) 세계를 올바르게 해석하고 그것을 있는 그대로 다룰 수 있도록 만반의 준비를 갖췄다. 제4의 정치 이론(Forth Political Theory, 이하 4PT)이 무엇인지 이해하는 가장 쉬운 방법은 다음 일련의 그림들에 주의 깊게 집중하는 것이다.

Although the concept of hegemony in Critical Theory is based on Antonio Gramsci’s theory, it is necessary to distinguish this concept’s position on Gramscianism and neo-Gramscianism from how it is understood in the realist and neo-realist schools of IR.

The classical realists use the term “hegemony” in a relative sense and understand it as the “actual and substantial superiority of the potential power of any state over the potential of another one, often neighboring countries.” Hegemony might be understood as a regional phenomenon, as the determination of whether one or another political entity is considered a “hegemon” depends on scale. Thucydides introduced the term itself when he spoke of Athens and Sparta as the hegemons of the Peloponnesian War, and classical realism employs this term in the same way to this day. Such an understanding of hegemony can be described as “strategic” or “relative.”

In neo-realism, “hegemony” is understood in a global (structural) context. The main difference from classical realism lies in that “hegemony” cannot be regarded as a regional phenomenon. It is always a global one. The neorealism of K. Waltz, for example, insists that the balance of two hegemons (in a bipolar world) is the optimal structure of power balance on a world scale[ii]. R. Gilpin believes that hegemony can be combined only with unipolarity, i.e., it is possible for only a single hegemon to exist, this function today being played by the USA.

In both cases, the realists comprehend hegemony as a means of potential correlation between the potentials of different state powers. 

Gramsci's understanding of hegemony is completely different and finds itself in a completely opposite theoretical field. To avoid the misuse of this term in IR, and especially in the TMW, it is necessary to pay attention to Gramsci’s political theory, the context of which is regarded as a major priority in Critical Theory and TMW. Moreover, such an analysis will allows us to more clearly see the conceptual gap between Critical Theory and TMW.