The Incompatibility of Multipolarity with the Neoliberal Imagination

The Incompatibility of Multipolarity with the Neoliberal Imagination

For those firmly invested in the ideology of neoliberal capitalism and globalization, democracy is tolerated only insofar as it does not impede market imperatives and capital accumulation. Within such a paradigm, the notion of multipolarity—a world shaped by multiple centers of political, economic, and cultural power—becomes ideologically inconceivable.

“Rules-Based International Order”: A Legal Fiction or Alibi? The expression “rules-based international order” is frequently invoked as though it were a neutral framework of universal norms. In reality, it often functions as a legal fiction—an ideological alibi to legitimize Western unipolar dominance.

As noted on Reddit:

“Rules based order in short is – जियो और जीने दो... Might is right at the end of the day…the West…contains the richest and most powerful nations on the planet” .

This blunt admission exposes how these “rules” were crafted by and for the powerful, not as impartial constraints.

Legal scholars like John Dugard affirm this critique. Dugard argues that the “rules-based international order” often stems from tacit arrangements among Western states alone, and affords them a unilateral license—one not available to non-Western actors.

Critics from TWAIL (Third World Approaches to International Law) go further, contending:
“The regime of international law is illegitimate. … a predatory system that legitimizes, reproduces and sustains the plunder and subordination of the Third World by the West”.

TWAIL scholars view international law not as a neutral code of global governance, but as a colonial project serving Western interests.

Historically, Western interventions—such as in Kosovo, Iraq, and Libya—have flouted legal norms in the service of declared higher purposes, revealing a double standard.

Multipolarity as Epistemological and Political Challenge

Multipolarity fundamentally challenges the neoliberal frame. It does not merely redistribute geopolitical power—it redefines legitimacy, norms, and global discourse.

Amitav Acharya, a prominent advocate of plural global order, observes that:
“Emerging powers cannot be simply co-opted into the existing liberal international order…mutual accommodation” is required—meaning deep institutional reform, regional legitimacy, and normative pluralism.

He warns that many non-Western states see the existing order as “narrow, unilateral, and Western‑centric,” and therefore in need of radical transformation.

What Acharya terms a “multiplex world” is neither return to past multipolar systems nor simple Western hegemony. Rather, it is a decentered, heterogeneous global order shaped by multiple actors, layers of institutions, and historical legacies.

Reclaiming Democracy Beyond Market Logic

Reviving democracy in a meaningful way—beyond its current subordination to market forces and hegemonic legalism—requires two intellectual tasks:

Decolonizing global discourse: We must reject the conflation of Western unipolar dominance with universal legality. As Acharya and TWAIL scholars remind us, the current “rules-based order” is structured, framed, and sustained by a narrow bloc of Western powers.

Reimagining power as plural: Multiplexity involves accepting diverse normative orders as legitimate. This means democratizing global institutions, acknowledging civilizational pluralism, and embracing mutual accommodation—rather than enforced adoption—of norms and structures.

Conclusion

The invocation of a “rules‑based international order” as a universal norm is, upon closer scrutiny, a rhetorical alibi—designed to preserve Western unipolar dominance under the guise of legality. Multipolarity, or better yet multiplexity, represents not just a shift in power distribution but a challenge to the very terms of global legitimacy.

Only by confronting this ideological fiction, and by committing to a plural democracy not subordinated to market imperatives, can we begin to conceive of a world shaped by multiple equal centers of power, legitimacy, and possibility.

References:
Acharya, A. (2016). Interview – Amitav Acharya.E‑IR. Retrieved from …
Acharya, A. (2017). After Liberal Hegemony: The Advent of a Multiplex World Order. Ethics & International Affairs, 31(3), 271–285.
Acharya, A. (2025, April 13). US‑led world order is going through a big shift… The Times of India.
Dugard, J. (n.d.). Liberal international order [Wikipedia].
Nigam, S. (2025). Third World approaches to international law. Canadian Lawyer Magazine.
Reddit user. (2022, March 25). The Rules‑based order myth. r/IndianDefense. Retrieved from reddit.com
Third World Approaches to International Law. (2025). Wikipedia.