The Historical Constitution of the Political Forms of Capitalism

Abstract

This article provides a general overview and critique of approaches to state theory, from the Marxist “state derivation“ debate of the 1970s, through to regulation and world‐systems perspectives, to theories which encompass imperialism. It proposes that a theory of the political forms of capitalism should have three elements: it should be based on analysis of the different historical processes by which capitalist states have been and are constituted; it should elucidate the specificities of the various political forms of capitalism; and it should explain the continuing existence of a plurality of states and imperialist relations.

Adjudicating infrastructure: Treaties, territories, hydropolitics

“…While distinct, the couplet of territorial/capitalist imperatives do present a rigid binary either. Rather, these two forces are parts of a dialectic movement shaped by specific historical, geopolitical, and institutional contexts (Gerstenberger, 2011;Keshavarzian, 2010;Lee et al, 2018). It follows that these imperatives will also take specific form depending on socio-environmental context.…”

Elective affinity or comprehensive contradiction? Reflections on capitalism and democracy in the time of finance-dominated accumulation and austerity states

“…Third, as monopoly capitalism drives out liberal competitive capitalism and/or capital’s crisis-tendencies intensify, the state is pressured to intervene to renew accumulation, often at the cost of subaltern classes (cf. Holloway and Picciotto 1977 ; Mandel 1972 ; Gerstenberger 2011 ). Moreover, as Alexander Gerschenkron ( 1962 ) and others note, banks and the state had bigger roles in second-wave industrialization with the result that competitive capitalism was weaker, even where it existed, and political capitalism had a bigger role.…”