Multiple critical theories in International Relations prove themselves useful in gaining a better understanding of global events. The shifting dynamics caused by globalization and interdependency, amongst other developments, has created new sets of actors and mechanisms of exercising power that are not encompassed within the traditional, mainstream theories of International Relations. To account for these deficiencies in traditional IR theories, it is clear that the application of non-traditional theoretical frameworks is necessary. Neo-Gramscianism offers an excellent example to portray the shortcomings of mainstream theoretical approaches; the nature of hegemony, the centrality of the state, and development of a transnational class of elites all prove the utility of neo-Gramscianism to the field of International Relations. Despite the fact that Antonio Gramsci rarely discussed International Relations directly, his intellectual framework has inspired many critical theorists in the discipline.1 The little that Gramsci did mention regarded his perception of International Relations as a direct subset of social relations, and so any developments in social…show more content… Whereas the latter two attribute hegemony solely to military and economic dominance,4 neo-Gramscianism espouses a more nuanced perception of hegemony, consisting of a dual mechanism of both coercion and consent where the latter takes precedence.5 Particularly in a modern society, Gramsci notes that ideational influences can be far more effective at maintaining a hegemonic system than coercion. This places it in direct opposition to structural realism and other similar theoretical approaches, as it posits that material factors are actually secondary measures of hegemonic