This essay argues that one can distinguish various generative explanations of the state and the international system. By discussing Benno Teschke's work it examines, and questions, whether the mode of production can be treated as ontologically primary to other domains - the political, military, or ideological spheres. The behavior ascribed to capitalist states as England does not comport with the empirical evidence. Instead this essay suggests that hybrid theories, which privilege no single category of causal variables, can provide more accurate insights. The argument that territorial acquisition and capitalism are antithetical applies more accurately to the advent of the international order of the post-World War II period.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||8|
|State||Published - Nov 1 2006|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Geography, Planning and Development
- Political Science and International Relations