Description
IR scholars highlighted the affinity between E. H. Carr and Mitrany’s visions of the post-war order. In particular, Carr endorsed aspects of Mitrany’s functionalist theory, particularly the emphasis on cross border institutions oriented towards socio-economic purposes, such as full employment, as a bulwark against nationalism. There is, however, a psychosocial aspect in Carr’s analysis of the post-war order that is under-theorised in the literature on Carr. Functional institutions, to Carr, did not only serve a socio-economic purpose, but also a psychosocial one. For instance, the ‘European Reconstruction and Public Works Corporation’ and the ‘European Planning Authority’ did not only ‘remedy unemployment’ but also ‘promote[d] practical international cooperation as a psychological substitute for war’ (Carr 1943, 252). This aspect in Carr’s work is crucial because, on one hand, it shows that Carr rejected the economically reductionist explanations of nationalism and war. On the other hand, it shows that Carr located what is presently known as the ‘cultural backlash’ thesis against globalisation in the historical context of laissez faire that failed to address the psychosocial needs of the individual. This paper argues that Carr’s insight on the psychosocial function of nationalism and war is relevant today, as it helps explain the recent backlash against neo-liberal globalisation by reactionary forces such as Trumpism and the ‘New Right’. The paper concludes that IR theory today needs to address this aspect in Carr’s work, by presenting an alternative narrative to these forces.
