2011•Unpublished venueRequires access

Contemporary Global Politics

Fulvio Attinà

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

It is common, but improper, to classify the Cold War world system as a bipolar system rather than as a hegemonic system. Both the United States and the Soviet Union had more important roles than the other states, but only the United States exerted the role of leader of the governmental structure since most states conformed to the rules and the policies of the economic and security institutions created under US leadership. The Soviet challenge to the US role was in the military and ideological-political sphere, and not in the economic. Military strength and, in particular, nuclear equality allowed the Soviet Union to contain some of the goals of the United States by using the framework of rules of the game, as we shall see later. The ideological conflict was supposed to undermine the capitalist market and put an end to US hegemony thanks to societal change, as a growing number of states moved from a free market and pluralist society to a planned economy and the dictatorship of the communist party. However, the number of such socialist states remained low, and the expected change of the domestic regime in other states never materialized. Nevertheless, cooperation with states governed by communist or other friendly parties gave the Soviet Union the opportunity of creating a fairly cohesive anti-US coalition.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

It is common, but improper, to classify the Cold War world system as a bipolar system rather than as a hegemonic system. Both the United States and the Soviet Union had more important roles than the other states, but only the United States exerted the role of leader of the governmental structure since most states conformed to the rules and the policies of the economic and security institutions created under US leadership. The Soviet challenge to the US role was in the military and ideological-political sphere, and not in the economic. Military strength and, in particular, nuclear equality allowed the Soviet Union to contain some of the goals of the United States by using the framework of rules of the game, as we shall see later. The ideological conflict was supposed to undermine the capitalist market and put an end to US hegemony thanks to societal change, as a growing number of states moved from a free market and pluralist society to a planned economy and the dictatorship of the communist party. However, the number of such socialist states remained low, and the expected change of the domestic regime in other states never materialized. Nevertheless, cooperation with states governed by communist or other friendly parties gave the Soviet Union the opportunity of creating a fairly cohesive anti-US coalition.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

It is common, but improper, to classify the Cold War world system as a bipolar system rather than as a hegemonic system. Both the United States and the Soviet Union had more important roles than the other states, but only the United States exerted the role of leader of the governmental structure since most states conformed to the rules and the policies of the economic and security institutions created under US leadership. The Soviet challenge to the US role was in the military and ideological-political sphere, and not in the economic. Military strength and, in particular, nuclear equality allowed the Soviet Union to contain some of the goals of the United States by using the framework of rules of the game, as we shall see later. The ideological conflict was supposed to undermine the capitalist market and put an end to US hegemony thanks to societal change, as a growing number of states moved from a free market and pluralist society to a planned economy and the dictatorship of the communist party. However, the number of such socialist states remained low, and the expected change of the domestic regime in other states never materialized. Nevertheless, cooperation with states governed by communist or other friendly parties gave the Soviet Union the opportunity of creating a fairly cohesive anti-US coalition.

Key concepts: Hegemony, Communism, Political science, Ideology, Political economy, Dictatorship, Politics, Economic system

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Contemporary Global Politics — Research Paper | ScholarLens