Limited ltd.

17. Juli 2012

His­to­ri­cal­ly, the nati­on sta­te has been clo­se­ly asso­cia­ted with eco­no­mic, social, and poli­ti­cal pro­gress. It cur­bed interne­ci­ne vio­lence, expan­ded net­works of soli­da­ri­ty bey­ond local com­mu­nities, spur­red mass mar­kets and indus­tria­liz­a­ti­on, enab­led the mobi­liz­a­ti­on of human and finan­cial resour­ces, and fos­te­r­ed the spread of repre­sen­ta­ti­ve poli­ti­cal insti­tu­ti­ons (Til­ly 1992, Gell­ner 1983, Pin­ker 2011, Kedou­rie 1993 [1960], Ander­son 2006). Civil wars and eco­no­mic decli­ne are the usu­al fate of today’s “fai­led sta­tes.” For resi­dents of sta­ble and pro­spe­rous coun­tries, it is easy to over­look the role that the con­struc­tion of the nati­on sta­te play­ed in over­co­m­ing such chal­len­ges. The nati­on state’s fall from intel­lec­tu­al grace is in part a con­se­quence of its achievements.

But has the nati­on sta­te, as a ter­ri­to­ri­al­ly con­fi­ned poli­ti­cal enti­ty, tru­ly beco­me a hin­dran­ce to the achie­ve­ment of desi­ra­ble eco­no­mic and social out­co­mes in view of the glo­ba­liz­a­ti­on revo­lu­ti­on? Or does the nati­on sta­te remain indis­pensable to the achie­ve­ment of tho­se goals? In other words, is it pos­si­ble to con­struct a more princi­pled defen­se of the nati­ons­ta­te, one that goes bey­ond sta­ting that it exists and that it hasn’t withe­red away?

Dani RodrikHar­vard Uni­ver­si­ty and CEPR


Hinterlasse eine Antwort