Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

The Limits of the State: Beyond Statist Approaches and their Critics

  • Timothy Mitchell (a1)

Abstract

The state has always been difficult to define. Its boundary with society appears elusive, porous, and mobile. I argue that this elusiveness should not be overcome by sharper definitions, but explored as a clue to the state's nature. Analysis of the literature shows that neither rejecting the state in favor of such concepts as the political system, nor “bringing it back in,” has dealt with this boundary problem. The former approach founders on it, the latter avoids it by a narrow idealism that construes the state-society distinction as an external relation between subjective and objective entities. A third approach, presented here, can account for both the salience of the state and its elusiveness. Reanalyzing evidence presented by recent theorists, state-society boundaries are shown to be distinctions erected internally, as an aspect of more complex power relations. Their appearance can be historically traced to technical innovations of the modern social order, whereby methods of organization and control internal to the social processes they govern create the effect of a state structure external to those processes.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Almond, Gabriel A. 1954. The Appeals of Communism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Almond, Gabriel A. 1960. “A Functional Approach to Comparative Politics.” In The Politics of the Developing Areas, eds. Almond, Gabriel A. and Coleman, James S.. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Almond, Gabriel A. 1987. “The Development of Political Development.” In Understanding Political Development, eds. Weiner, Myron and Huntington, Samuel. Boston: Little Brown.
Almond, Gabriel A. 1988. “The Return to the State.” American Political Science Review 82:853–74.
Almond, Gabriel A., Cole, Taylor, and Macridis, Roy C.. 1955. “A Suggested Research Strategy in Western European Government and Politics.” American Political Science Review 49:1042–44.
Almond, Gabriel A., and Coleman, James S.. 1960. The Politics of the Developing Areas. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Almond, Gabriel A., and Verba, Sidney. 1963. The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Anderson, Benedict. 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.
Anderson, Irving H. 1981. Aramco, the United States, and Saudi Arabia: A Study of the Dynamics of Foreign Oil Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Blair, John M. 1976. The Control of Oil. New York: Pantheon.
Easton, David. 1953. The Political System: An Inquiry into the State of Political Science. New York: Knopf.
Easton, David. 1957. “An Approach to the Analysis of Political Systems.” World Politics 9:383400.
Easton, David. 1981. “The Political System Besieged by the State.” Political Theory 9:303–25.
Evans, Peter, Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, and Skocpol, Theda, eds. 1985. Bringing the State Back In. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Foucault, Michel. 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon.
Fuller, J. F. C. 1955. The Decisive Battles of the Western World and Their Influence Upon History, 3 vols. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode.
Gasiorowski, Mark. 1987. “The 1953 Coup d'Etat in Iran.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 19:261–79.
Krasner, Stephen D. 1978. Defending the National Interest: Raw Materials Investments and U.S. Foreign Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Loewenstein, Karl. 1944. “Report on the Research Panel on Comparative Government.” American Political Science Review 38:540–48.
Miller, Aaron David. 1980. Search for Security: Saudi Arabian Oil and American Foreign Policy, 1939-1949. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Mitchell, Timothy. 1988. Colonising Egypt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mitchell, Timothy. 1990. “Everyday Metaphors of Power.” Theory and Society 19:545–77.
Mitchell, Timothy. N.d. “The Effect of the State.” Journal of Historical Sociology. Forthcoming.
Netti, J. P. 1968. “The State as a Conceptual Variable.” World Politics 20:559–92.
Nordlinger, Eric. 1981. On the Autonomy of the Democratic State. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Nordlinger, Eric. 1987. “Taking the State Seriously.” In Understanding Political Development, eds. Weiner, Myron and Huntington, Samuel. Boston: Little Brown.
Nordlinger, Eric. 1988. “The Return to the State: Critiques.” American Political Science Review 82:875–85.
Poulantzas, Nicos. 1974. Political Power and Social Classes. London: New Left Books.
Poulantzas, Nicos. 1978. State, Power, Socialism. London: New Left Books.
Pye, Lucian. 1956. Guerrilla Communism in Malaya: Its Social and Political Meaning. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Sabine, George. 1934. “The State.” Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. New York: Macmillan.
Schmitter, Philippe. 1985. “Neo Corporatism and the State.” In The Political Economy of Corporatism, ed. Grant, Wyn. New York: St. Martin's.
Skocpol, Theda. 1979. States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Skocpol, Theda, 1981. “Political Response to Capitalist Crisis: Neo Marxist Theories of the State and the Case of the New Deal.” Politics and Society 10:155201.
Skocpol, Theda. 1985. “Bringing the State Back In.” In Bringing the State Back In, eds. Evans, Peter, Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, and Skocpol, Theda. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

The Limits of the State: Beyond Statist Approaches and their Critics

  • Timothy Mitchell (a1)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed