Liberal internationalism is under the microscope as never before as it faces a world experiencing turbulence and anxiety. The specter of right-wing authoritarianism and even fascism haunt Western societies as struggles for recognition dominate domestic politics, while demands of (re)emerging states for international representation grow more compelling. Simultaneously, there is broader recognition of a growing legitimacy crisis of the American hegemon principally due to the mindsets and failures of its liberal hegemonic elites. Both developments are major advances in the understandings of how the West dominates “diversity regimes” and co-opts discourses universal in origin and character and of how the U.S. foreign policy establishment has brought the world to the current conjuncture. Yet, there are limitations still. Although central, the concepts of diversity, hierarchy, and elites need to be broadened out significantly, and rooted in corporate-class power, to fully comprehend the core crises of the international order today.

Gramsci's work continues to enjoy popularity amongst academics and activists. There is nonetheless a real question about the relevance of his central political ideas for the twenty-first century. This paper defends the thesis that Gramsci's humanism is part of a long tradition of political thought which dates back to Machiavelli, and that although this national-popular humanism is now outdated for reasons which are suggested in the writings and films of Pier Paolo Pasolini, there is also a sociological component to Gramsci's theorising that retains resonance today.