The objective of this thesis is to determine the possibility of developing a theory of International Relations based on the Marxist concept of the State. Marxism has long remained on the sidelines of theory of International Relations, with most of the approaches stemming from a proliferation of various interpretations of Marxism. Meanwhile, the most prominent approaches are derived from isolation of products from workers, as illustrated by Dependency Theory and World Systems Theory. By comparison this study attempts to assess the possibility of maintaining the conditions of the class struggle and its relation to the state in understanding the international environment. In order to do so I initially decide that the most effective manner to determine this is through evaluating whether the basic premises of class and state in Marxism are compatible with international analysis. This involves two operations: 1) Deconstructing class and state, as well as their relation, to the simplest Marxist interpretation. 2) Employing the terms in an analysis of an actual state, in order to determine if the resulting Marxist state interpretation can be operationalized as an actor in inter-state relations.
In terms of the former I hinge the basic relationship between state and class on the Marxist thesis stating that the organization of the state is a crystallization of the class rule of the society in which the state is embedded. Conjunctively I attempt to separate normative concepts inscribed in class and state, effectively aligning it with a Marxist model of state-analysis developed by Göran Therborn. I designate the Chinese state as the target of analysis on the basis of its sui generis nature. During the course of the analysis I find that the Chinese state harbors many ideals and employs a proliferation of political technology, which is only partially explained through the relationship between class and state. On the basis of these findings, I denounce the possibility of erecting a theory of International Relations on the basis of the Marxist concept of the state. I conclusively attribute this to three features: problems haunting patchwork approaches, theoreticism in Marxism, and cluttering of structures and relations. These findings lend credence to a narrow strand of Marxism which assesses that there can be no Marxist theory of the state in general, since the Marxist definitions of class and state are inherently intertwined with the capitalist mode of production.