ABSTRACT
This article explores the notion of a transnational state (TNS) as advanced by scholars working within Historical Materialism. In recent decades, Historical Materialist approaches to the Social Sciences have enjoyed a major intellectual renaissance. Fittingly, the reasons for this renaissance can be found in some major developments within contemporary capitalism. The first of these developments can be located in a renewed interest in the topic of imperialism as an interpretive category of geopolitics. The second development concerns the viability of the capitalist system itself following the global financial crisis of 2007/8. One major attempt to comprehend these issues has come through the postulation of an emergent TNS apparatus as part of a new global capital relation. This article explores this thesis but argues that it fails to adequately account for continued plurality, contingency and struggle at the nation-state scale which in turn provides the basis for potential conflict.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Adam David Morton and Ian Bruff for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this work as well as the two anonymous reviewers.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. One notable exception to this has been the work of Andreas Bieler (e.g., Citation2012, Citation2013) who has consistently engaged with the concrete practicalities of transnational resistance.
2. Various symposia have been dedicated to debating Robinson’s broader theses about contemporary capitalism. Word constraints prevent these debates being presented here, but see (Critical Sociology Citation2012; Theory & Society Citation2001).
3. This position is linked to CitationKautsky’s ([1914] 1970) view of ‘ultra imperialism’. This theory challenged Lenin’s thesis about the permanent likelihood of war among the great powers by stressing the possibilities for capitalist states colluding with one another.