Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-05T00:22:29.340Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

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

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Timothy Mitchell
Timothy Mitchell*
Affiliation:
New York University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 85 , Issue 1 , March 1991 , pp. 77 - 96
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1991 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Almond, Gabriel A. 1954. The Appeals of Communism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Almond, Gabriel A. 1987. “The Development of Political Development.” In Understanding Political Development, eds. Weiner, Myron and Huntington, Samuel. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
Almond, Gabriel A. 1988. “The Return to the State.” American Political Science Review 82:853–74.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Almond, Gabriel A., and Coleman, James S.. 1960. The Politics of the Developing Areas. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Almond, Gabriel A., and Verba, Sidney. 1963. The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, Benedict. 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Anderson, Irving H. 1981. Aramco, the United States, and Saudi Arabia: A Study of the Dynamics of Foreign Oil Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Blair, John M. 1976. The Control of Oil. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1953. The Political System: An Inquiry into the State of Political Science. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1957. “An Approach to the Analysis of Political Systems.” World Politics 9:383–400.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1981. “The Political System Besieged by the State.” Political Theory 9:303–25.Google Scholar
Evans, Peter, Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, and Skocpol, Theda, eds. 1985. Bringing the State Back In. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Fuller, J. F. C. 1955. The Decisive Battles of the Western World and Their Influence Upon History, 3 vols. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode.Google Scholar
Gasiorowski, Mark. 1987. “The 1953 Coup d'Etat in Iran.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 19:261–79.Google Scholar
Krasner, Stephen D. 1978. Defending the National Interest: Raw Materials Investments and U.S. Foreign Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, Karl. 1944. “Report on the Research Panel on Comparative Government.” American Political Science Review 38:540–48.Google Scholar
Miller, Aaron David. 1980. Search for Security: Saudi Arabian Oil and American Foreign Policy, 1939-1949. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Timothy. 1988. Colonising Egypt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Timothy. 1990. “Everyday Metaphors of Power.” Theory and Society 19:545–77.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Timothy. N.d. “The Effect of the State.” Journal of Historical Sociology. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Netti, J. P. 1968. “The State as a Conceptual Variable.” World Politics 20:559–92.Google Scholar
Nordlinger, Eric. 1981. On the Autonomy of the Democratic State. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nordlinger, Eric. 1987. “Taking the State Seriously.” In Understanding Political Development, eds. Weiner, Myron and Huntington, Samuel. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
Nordlinger, Eric. 1988. “The Return to the State: Critiques.” American Political Science Review 82:875–85.Google Scholar
Poulantzas, Nicos. 1974. Political Power and Social Classes. London: New Left Books.Google Scholar
Poulantzas, Nicos. 1978. State, Power, Socialism. London: New Left Books.Google Scholar
Pye, Lucian. 1956. Guerrilla Communism in Malaya: Its Social and Political Meaning. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sabine, George. 1934. “The State.” Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Schmitter, Philippe. 1985. “Neo Corporatism and the State.” In The Political Economy of Corporatism, ed. Grant, Wyn. New York: St. Martin's.Google Scholar
Skocpol, Theda. 1979. States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Skocpol, Theda, 1981. “Political Response to Capitalist Crisis: Neo Marxist Theories of the State and the Case of the New Deal.” Politics and Society 10:155–201.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.