Has globalization ended the rise and rise of the nation-state?

TLDR

I analyse four alleged threats to nation‑states—global capitalism, environmental danger, identity politics and post‑nuclear geopolitics—using a model that distinguishes local, national, inter‑national, trans‑national and global interaction networks. The analysis shows that these threats have region‑specific, mixed effects on nation‑states, sometimes weakening and sometimes strengthening them, while global networks tend to erode local interactions more than national ones.

Abstract

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.