Putting the state in its place: The critique of state-centrism and its limits

Review of International Studies

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 521-541+463

  Lacher, Hannes ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 10744226047     PISSN: 02602105     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0260210503005217     Document Type: Review

References (88)

1. See, for example, David Held and Anthony McGrew, 'The End of the Old Order? Globalization and the Prospects for World Order', Review of International Studies, 24 (1998), pp. 219-43, esp. p. 232.
2. Colin Gray, 'Clausewitz Rules, OK? The Future is the Past-with GPS', Review of International Studies, 25 (1999), pp. 161-82.
3. Janice E. Thomson, 'State Sovereignty in International Relations: Bridging the Gap Between Theory and Empirical Research', International Studies Quarterly, 39 (1995), pp. 213-33.
4. For an incisive critique of the assumption of a 'great divide' between an international past and a global future, see Ian Clark, Globalization and International Relations Theory (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 39.
5. Jan Aart Scholte, 'Globalization: Prospects for a Paradigm Shift', in Martin Shaw (ed.), Politics and Globalization (London: Routledge, 1999), pp. 9-22, at p. 17.
6. As Fred Halliday poignantly notes, the traditional 'banishment' of globalisation as a historical tendency of modernity itself 'has given way to promiscuity', thereby obscuring the 'continued adaptation of the global and the particular', which persists today; Halliday, Rethinking International Relations (London: Macmillan, 1994), p. 2.
7. Modernity, of course is a complex category and may be in dire need of a more encompassing critique (see Lacher, forthcoming). Here, I will be satisfied if I can problematise the prevailing understanding modern spatiality, which is widely shared by otherwise distinct approaches to modernity. For a more systematic critique, see Hannes Lacher, The International Relations of Modernity: Capitalism, Territoriality and Globalization (London: Routledge, 2003).
8. Janice E. Thomson and Stephen D. Krasner, 'Global Transactions and the Consolidation of Sovereignty', in Ernst-Otto Czempiel and James N. Rosenau (eds.), Global Changes and Theoretical Challenges: Approaches to World Politics for the 1990s (Lexington, K.Y: Lexington Books, 1989), pp. 195-220, at 197ff. On the limits of sovereignty before the nineteenth century, see Stephen D. Krasner, Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999), ch. 1.
9. Cf. Krasner, 'State Power and the Structure of International Trade', World Politics, 28 (1976), pp. 317-43.
10. Thomson and Krasner, 'Global Transactions', p. 198.
11. Thomson, 'State Sovereignty', p. 225.
12. Ibid., p. 222; cf. Stephen D. Krasner, 'Sovereignty: An Institutional Perspective', Comparative Political Studies, 21 (1988), pp. 66-94, at p. 87.
13. Ibid., p. 222; cf. Stephen D. Krasner, 'Sovereignty: An Institutional Perspective', Comparative Political Studies, 21 (1988), pp. 66-94, at p. 87.
14. Thomson, 'State Sovereignty', p. 216-7
15. Ibid., p. 222.
16. Ibid., p. 218 (emphasis added)
17. Cf. Stephen Hobden, 'Theorising the International System: Perspectives from Historical Sociology', Review of International Studies, 25 (1999), pp. 257-71; John M. Hobson, 'The Historical Sociology of the State and the State of Historical Sociology in International Relations', Review of International Political Economy, 5 (1998), pp. 284-320.
18. Cf. Stephen Hobden, 'Theorising the International System: Perspectives from Historical Sociology', Review of International Studies, 25 (1999), pp. 257-71; John M. Hobson, 'The Historical Sociology of the State and the State of Historical Sociology in International Relations', Review of International Political Economy, 5 (1998), pp. 284-320.
19. Thomson, 'State Sovereignty', p. 221.
20. Cf. Peter J. Taylor, 'The State as Container: Territoriality in the Modern World-System', Progress in Human Geography, 18 (1994), pp. 151-62; compare John Agnew and Stuart Corbridge, Mastering Space: Hegemony, Territory and International Political Economy (London: Routledge, 1995), p. 92-4.
21. Cf. Peter J. Taylor, 'The State as Container: Territoriality in the Modern World-System', Progress in Human Geography, 18 (1994), pp. 151-62; compare John Agnew and Stuart Corbridge, Mastering Space: Hegemony, Territory and International Political Economy (London: Routledge, 1995), p. 92-4.
22. Neil Smith, Uneven Development: Nature, Capital and the Production of Space (Oxford: Blackwell, 1984), p. 61. Compare Anthony Giddens: 'from its inception, the world capitalist economy was never just a vast commodity market. It involved, and involves, the commodification of labour-power in different regional settings'; The Nation-State and Violence (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1985), p. 278.
23. Neil Smith, Uneven Development: Nature, Capital and the Production of Space (Oxford: Blackwell, 1984), p. 61. Compare Anthony Giddens: 'from its inception, the world capitalist economy was never just a vast commodity market. It involved, and involves, the commodification of labour-power in different regional settings'; The Nation-State and Violence (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1985), p. 278.
24. On 'Vergesellschaftung' (societalisation or socialisation), see Kees van der Pijl, Transnational Classes and International Relations (London: Routledge, 1998), ch. 1.
25. Thomson, 'State Sovereignty', p. 222.
26. On the distinction between formal and substantive concepts of the economy, see Karl Polanyi, 'The Economy as Instituted Process', in Karl Polanyi, et al. (eds.), Trade and Market in the Early Empires (New York: Free Press), pp. 243-69.
27. Cf. Ellen Meiksins Wood, 'Modernity, Postmodernity, or Capitalism?' Review of International Political Economy, 4 (1997), pp. 539-61.
28. Justin Rosenberg's concept of a transnational 'empire of civil society' and Kees van der Pijl's notion of an historically expanding 'Lockean heartland' integrated by transnational social forces reflect distinct but arguably complementary aspects of this global social system that transcends the international system of sovereign states. Justin Rosenberg, The Empire of Civil Society: A Critique of the Realist Theory of International Relations (London: Verso, 1994); Kees van der Pijl, Transnational Classes and International Relations (London: Routledge, 1998), pp. 64-97.
29. Justin Rosenberg's concept of a transnational 'empire of civil society' and Kees van der Pijl's notion of an historically expanding 'Lockean heartland' integrated by transnational social forces reflect distinct but arguably complementary aspects of this global social system that transcends the international system of sovereign states. Justin Rosenberg, The Empire of Civil Society: A Critique of the Realist Theory of International Relations (London: Verso, 1994); Kees van der Pijl, Transnational Classes and International Relations (London: Routledge, 1998), pp. 64-97.
30. 'If the fundamental problems of international politics and international political economy are enduring, so are the theoretical perspectives that we use to understand them'; Stephen D. Krasner, 'International Political Economy: Abiding Discord', Review of International Political Economy, 1 (1994), pp. 13-20; Krasner, 'International Political Economy', p. 13f.
31. 'If the fundamental problems of international politics and international political economy are enduring, so are the theoretical perspectives that we use to understand them'; Stephen D. Krasner, 'International Political Economy: Abiding Discord', Review of International Political Economy, 1 (1994), pp. 13-20; Krasner, 'International Political Economy', p. 13f.
32. Martin Shaw, Global Society and International Relations (Oxford: Polity Press, 1994), p. 129 (emphasis added).
33. Andrew Linklater and John Macmillan, 'Introduction: Boundaries in Question', in John Macmillan and Andrew Linklater (eds.), Boundaries in Question: New Directions in International Relations (London: Pinter Publishers, 1995), pp. 1-16, here p. 4 (emphases added).
34. Michael Mann, 'Has Globalization Ended the Rise and Rise of the Nation-State?', Review of International Political Economy, 4 (1997), pp. 472-96, at p. 476.
35. Agnew and Corbridge, Mastering Space, pp. 78ff.
36. Simon Bromley, 'Marxism and Globalisation', in Andrew Gamble, David Marsh and Tony Tant (eds), Marxism and Social Science (Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1999), pp. 280-301, especially p. 284. Also see Andrew Gamble, 'Marxism after Communism: Beyond Realism and Historicism', Review of International Studies, 25 (1999), pp. 127-144, at p. 134.
37. Simon Bromley, 'Marxism and Globalisation', in Andrew Gamble, David Marsh and Tony Tant (eds), Marxism and Social Science (Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1999), pp. 280-301, especially p. 284. Also see Andrew Gamble, 'Marxism after Communism: Beyond Realism and Historicism', Review of International Studies, 25 (1999), pp. 127-144, at p. 134.
38. Cf. Andrew Linklater, 'Marxism', in Scott Burchill and Andrew Linklater (eds.), Theories of International Relations (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1996), pp. 119-43, at p. 124.
39. Martin Albrow, The Global Age: State and Society Beyond Modernity (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997), P. 45.
40. Albrow, The Global Age, p. 45-6.
41. Cf. Derek Sayer, Capitalism and Modernity: An Excursus on Marx and Weber (London and New York: Routledge, 1991); Stephen P. Turner, 'Explaining Capitalism: Weber on and against Marx', in Robert Antonio and Ronald Glassman (eds.), A Marx-Weber Dialogue (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1985), pp. 167-88.
42. Cf. Derek Sayer, Capitalism and Modernity: An Excursus on Marx and Weber (London and New York: Routledge, 1991); Stephen P. Turner, 'Explaining Capitalism: Weber on and against Marx', in Robert Antonio and Ronald Glassman (eds.), A Marx-Weber Dialogue (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1985), pp. 167-88.
43. Albrow, The Global Age, p. 43.
44. Weber's self-description is quoted in Wolfgang J. Mommsen, 'Capitalism and Socialism: Weber's Dialogue with Marx', in Antonio and Glassman (eds.), A Marx-Weber Dialogue, pp. 234-61, at p. 235.
45. Quoted in Mommsen, 'Capitalism and Socialism', p. 235.
46. Using this monopoly these states did so rather frequently; it should not be forgotten that the instruments chosen were not just those of social policy. The nation-statist caging of society was intimately bound up with the more intimate 'caging' often experienced by the state's opponents (Antonio Gramsci among them): in prisons and graves.
47. Agnew and Corbridge, Mastering Space, p. 89.
48. Cf. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (London: Verso, 1991).
49. Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation: The Social and Economic Origins of Our Time (Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1957), p. 202.
50. The existence of a highly integrated capitalist world market in this period may not be apparent because tradition leads us to look at the indicators of integration among the leading political and economic powers in continental Europe. Trade and capital flows into and from these countries was clearly limited, but it is crucial to note that it was not these countries on which Britain's world economy was built, not least because they were, arguably, not capitalist. Instead, we should look to the colonies and semi-independent areas, in which British capital and emigrants recreated capitalist social relations with strong ties to the core; cf. van der Pijl, Transnational Classes, pp. 66-74.
51. Philip McMichael, 'State Formation and the Construction of the World Market', Political Power and Social Theory, 6 (1987), pp. 187-237, at p. 193-4.
52. McMichael, 'State Formation', p. 194; note that the 'era of British hegemony' here also includes the age of rival imperialisms and the elaboration of the nation-state.
53. Cf. Hirst and Thomson, Globalization in Question, ch. 1.
54. On 'territorial non-coincidence', see Robin Murray, 'The Internationalisation of Capital and the Nation State', New Left Review, 67 (1971), pp. 84-108.
55. This perspective is developed historically in Lacher: The International Relations of Modernity, ch. 8; also see Neil Brenner, 'Between Fixity and Motion: Accumulation, Territorial Organization and the Historical Geography of Spatial Scales', Society and Space, 16 (1998), pp. 459-81.
56. Halliday, Rethinking International Relations, p. 92.
57. Cf. Gamble, 'Marxism after Communism', p. 136.
58. Halliday, Rethinking International Relations, ch. 4; Linklater, 'Marxism'; cf. Giddens, The Nation-State and Violence, p. 26; Michael Mann, 'Capitalism and Militarism', in Michael Mann (ed.), States, War and Capitalism: Studies in Political Sociology (Oxford and New York: Blackwell, 1988), pp. 124-45, at p. 140.
59. Halliday, Rethinking International Relations, ch. 4; Linklater, 'Marxism'; cf. Giddens, The Nation-State and Violence, p. 26; Michael Mann, 'Capitalism and Militarism', in Michael Mann (ed.), States, War and Capitalism: Studies in Political Sociology (Oxford and New York: Blackwell, 1988), pp. 124-45, at p. 140.
60. Halliday, Rethinking International Relations, ch. 4; Linklater, 'Marxism'; cf. Giddens, The Nation-State and Violence, p. 26; Michael Mann, 'Capitalism and Militarism', in Michael Mann (ed.), States, War and Capitalism: Studies in Political Sociology (Oxford and New York: Blackwell, 1988), pp. 124-45, at p. 140.
61. Halliday, Rethinking International Relations, ch. 4; Linklater, 'Marxism'; cf. Giddens, The Nation-State and Violence, p. 26; Michael Mann, 'Capitalism and Militarism', in Michael Mann (ed.), States, War and Capitalism: Studies in Political Sociology (Oxford and New York: Blackwell, 1988), pp. 124-45, at p. 140.
62. Eric R. Wolf, Europe and the People Without History (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1982), p. 419. In time-honoured fashion, Wolf immediately goes on to suggest: 'We can now see, more clearly than was possible in the nineteenth century, that nations and nation-states may be but historical products, built up over time and perhaps withering away in the face of new, transnational processes'.
63. Linklater, 'Marxism', p. 139.
64. Peter Burnham, 'Open Marxism and Vulgar International Political Economy', Review of International Political Economy, 1 (1994), pp. 221-32. The substantial similarities between Burnham's premises and the starting points of other Marxist scholars of IR/IPE, like Mark Rupert, Justin Rosenberg, and Simon Bromley permit the application of the label 'open Marxism' to their theories. Note, however, that the term has also been used in reference to the rather different work of Robert W. Cox and other neo-Gramscian theorists; cf. André C. Drainville, 'International Political Economy in the Age of Open Marxism', Review of International Political Economy, 1 (1994), pp. 105-32.
65. Peter Burnham, 'Open Marxism and Vulgar International Political Economy', Review of International Political Economy, 1 (1994), pp. 221-32. The substantial similarities between Burnham's premises and the starting points of other Marxist scholars of IR/IPE, like Mark Rupert, Justin Rosenberg, and Simon Bromley permit the application of the label 'open Marxism' to their theories. Note, however, that the term has also been used in reference to the rather different work of Robert W. Cox and other neo-Gramscian theorists; cf. André C. Drainville, 'International Political Economy in the Age of Open Marxism', Review of International Political Economy, 1 (1994), pp. 105-32.
66. Cf. Rosenberg, Burnham, Rupert, Bromley.
67. Rosenberg, Empire of Civil Society, p. 129. Cf. Mark Rupert, 'Alienation, Capitalism and the Inter-State System: Towards a Marxian/Gramscian Critique', in Stephen Gill (ed.), Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), pp. 67-92.
68. Rosenberg, Empire of Civil Society, p. 129. Cf. Mark Rupert, 'Alienation, Capitalism and the Inter-State System: Towards a Marxian/Gramscian Critique', in Stephen Gill (ed.), Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), pp. 67-92.
69. Bromley, 'Marxism and Globalisation', p. 287.
70. Ibid., p. 300.
71. Peter Burnham, 'Open Marxism and Vulgar International Political Economy', Review of International Political Economy, 1 (1994), pp. 221-32.
72. Note the similarity of these arguments, which suggest that the nation-state will remain the form of organisation of capitalism's political space as long as capitalist modernity exists, to the conclusions of Krasner and Thomson. Neither perceives a fundamental tension between the spaces of accumulation and regulation, though they differ on the interpretation of the sources of this differentiated system.
73. Cf. Hannes Lacher: 'Making Sense of the Modern International System: The Promises and Pitfalls of Contempary Marxist Theories of International Relations', in Mark Rupert and Hazel Smith (eds.), Historical Materialism and Globalization (London: Routledge, 2002), pp. 154-67.
74. Burnham, 'Open Marxism', p. 224.
75. Rosenberg, Empire of Civil Society, p. 129. John Ruggie, conversely, takes this exclusive territoriality to be the defining aspect of international modernity, ignoring the crucial differences in the social relations of sovereignty that have existed since the fifteenth century; Ruggie, 'Territoriality and Beyond'. A viable conceptualisation of the international of modernity requires equal attention to both aspects.
76. Halliday, Rethinking International Relations, p. 91.
77. This argument, and its implications, are developed at length in Lacher, The International Relations of Modernity, ch. 6; the present summary, by necessity, raises more questions than it answers - but that is its purpose.
78. As this perspective is so dominant, it may suffice to cite John Ruggies's influential exposition of this perspective: Ruggie, 'Territoriality and Beyond'.
79. R.B.J. Walker critically notes that much of the understanding of 'the state' prevalent in IR is still shaped by an absolutist image of statehood: 'questions about political identity, and thus about the legitimation of various forms of inclusion and exclusions, are no longer adequately answered in the territorial terms we have inherited from early-modern Europe and reproduced so readily in the name of state and nation': Walker, Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), p. 21. It should be noted that Walker's critique of state-centrism does not suffer from most of the defects of the critique of state-centrism surveyed above, as his work, though influenced by the globalist rhetoric, does not assume that the modern state is fully comprehensible through its representations in the modern social sciences.
80. Perry Anderson, Lineages of the Absolutist State (London: Verso, 1974), p. 19.
81. William Beik, Absolutism and Society in Seventeenth-Century France (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985); David Parker, Class and State in Ancien Regime France: The Road to Modernity? (London: Routledge, 1996); Robert Brenner, 'Bourgeois Revolution and Transition to Capitalism', in A. L. Beier, et al., The First Modem Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 271-304.
82. William Beik, Absolutism and Society in Seventeenth-Century France (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985); David Parker, Class and State in Ancien Regime France: The Road to Modernity? (London: Routledge, 1996); Robert Brenner, 'Bourgeois Revolution and Transition to Capitalism', in A. L. Beier, et al., The First Modem Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 271-304.
83. William Beik, Absolutism and Society in Seventeenth-Century France (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985); David Parker, Class and State in Ancien Regime France: The Road to Modernity? (London: Routledge, 1996); Robert Brenner, 'Bourgeois Revolution and Transition to Capitalism', in A. L. Beier, et al., The First Modem Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 271-304.
84. Brenner, 'Bourgeois Revolution'; Wood, 'Modernity'.
85. Brenner, 'Bourgeois Revolution'; Wood, 'Modernity'.
86. Rosenberg, Empire of Civil Society, p. 130ff.
87. Cf. Mann, 'Globalization'.
88. Angus Cameron and Ronen Palan, 'The National Economy in the Contemporary Global System', in Martin Shaw (ed.), Politics and Globalisation: Knowledge, Ethics and Agency (London: Routledge, 1999), p. 53.