In this article I critically assess the globalist position which claims that the forces of globalization have fundamentally debilitated nation–states, and that the fate of progressive politics and social movements now depends on the degree and extent of international solidarity and the shaping of a transnational civil society (for example, Beck, 2000; Bronner, 1999; Brysk, 2000; Strange, 1996). Against this globalist, internationalist or cosmopolitan position, I argue that the nation–state continues to be a critical sphere for the imposition of ruling capitalist interests. Likewise, any substantial modification in the economic, political and cultural conditions of subordinate groups, communities and classes will have to be fought and won at this level. While international solidarity will always be welcome, the internationalization of politics, by itself, will not have a substantial impact on the domestic balance of forces. In fact, the main locus of politics should remain local if significant changes in the life chances of subordinate groups, communities and classes are the goal. These subordinate groups will be able to affect domestic state interventions in their favour only to the extent that they constitute themselves politically at the local level. In order to do so, their main challenge may be posited as follows: How can they extract concessions from the state without at the same time being co–opted? Facing this challenge successfully continues to require the construction of democratic organizations for struggle, an accountable leadership and grassroots participation in decision–making.