Using a model distinguishing local, national, inter-national, transnational and global interaction networks, I analyse four supposed 'threats' to nation-states-global capitalism, environmental danger, identity politics and post-nuclear geopolitics. All four actually impact differently on nationstates in different regions, contain both state-weakening and strengthening tendencies, and increase the significance of inter-national as well as transnational networks. Capitalist transformation is slightly weakening the nation-states of the north (most clearly so within the EU), yet economic development would strengthen southern nation-states. The decline of 'hard geopolitics' in a post-nuclear age weakens northern, but not most southern, states. Yet 'soft geopolitics' is everywhere bringing new state functions and maintaining the strength of inter-national networks. Identity politics, contrary to most views, probably strengthens nationally bound politics. These patterns are too varied to permit us to argue simply either that the nation-state and the nation-state system are strengthening or weakening. But the expansion of global networks seems to weaken local interaction networks more than national ones.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Michael Mann (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: