The study of British politics has focused on the nation state as a self-contained entity. The globalisation thesis challenges this perspective. Nation states are seen as weak and irrelevant in the face of the power of footloose finance capital. This article explores the relevance of the globalisation thesis for the student of British politics. It argues that the frame of reference does need to embrace the impact of external constraints. But it is critical of the structuralism integral to the globalisation thesis because it robs politicians of control and responsibility at the same time as it minimises the importance of the domestic story.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbertA. (1992), Capitalism Against Capitalism, London: Whurr.
2.
AlmondG. (1989), ‘Review Article: The International–National Connection’, British Journal of Political Science19, pp. 237–259.
3.
AndrewsD.M. (1994), ‘Capital Mobility and State Autonomy: Toward a Structural Theory of International Monetary Relations’, International Studies Quarterly38, pp. 193–218.
4.
BergerS.DoreR. (eds.) (1996), National Diversity & Global Capitalism, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
5.
BlackabyF.T. (ed.) (1979), British Economic Policy 1960–74, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6.
BlairT. (1998), Today Programme, BBC Radio4, 30 September, quoted in HeldD., ‘Globalization: The Timid Tendency’, Marxism Today, Nov/Dec, pp. 24–27, p. 26.
7.
CernyP. (1996), ‘International Finance and the Erosion of State Policy Capacity’ in GummettP. (ed.), Globalization and Public Policy, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 83–104.
8.
ChangH.J.RowthornR. (eds.) (1995), The Role of the State in Economic Change, Oxford: Clarendon.
9.
ClarkI. (1998), ‘Beyond the Great Divide: Globalisation and the Theory of International Relations’, Review of International Studies24, pp. 479–498.
10.
CoxR. (1997), ‘Democracy in Hard Times: Economic Globalisation and the Limits to Liberal Democracy’ in McGrewA.G. (ed.), The Transformation of Democracy, Cambridge: Polity, pp. 49–72.
11.
DowJ.C.R. (1970), The Management of the British Economy 1945–60, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12.
The Economist (1995), ‘The Myth of the Powerless State’, and ‘The World Economy’, 7 October.
13.
Esping-AndersenG. (ed.) (1996), Welfare States in Transition: National Adaptations in Global Economies, London: Sage.
14.
EpsteinG. (1996), ‘International Capital Mobility and the Scope for National Economic Management’ in BoyerR.DracheD. (eds.), States Against Markets, London: Routledge, pp. 211–224.
15.
FriedenJ.A. (1991), ‘Invested Interests: The Politics of National Economic Policies in a World of Global Finance’, International Organization45, pp. 425–451.
16.
GarrettG. (1998), Partisan Politics in the Golden Age, London: Cambridge University Press.
17.
GarrettG.LangeP. (1991), ‘Political Responses to Interdependence: What's “Left” for the Left?’, International Organisation45(4), pp. 539–564.
18.
GillS.R.LawD. (1989), ‘Global Hegemony and the Structural Power of Capital’, International Studies Quarterly33, pp. 475–499.
19.
GourevichP. (1978), ‘The Second Image Reversed: The International Sources of Domestic Politics’, International Organisation32, pp. 881–912.
20.
GourevichP. (1986), Politics in Hard Times, New York: Cornell University Press.
21.
HartJ.A. (1992), Rival Capitalisms, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
22.
HayC. (1994), ‘Labour's Thatcherite Revisionism: Playing the “Politics of Catch-up”’, Political Studies42, pp. 700–707.
23.
HayC. (1997), ‘Anticipating Accommodations, Accommodating Anticipations: The Appeasement of Capital and the “Modernisation” of the British Labour Party, 1987–92’, Politics and Society25(2), pp. 234–256.
24.
HeldD.McGrewA.G. (1993), ‘Globalisation and the Liberal Democratic State’, Government and Opposition28, pp. 261–288.
25.
HirstP.ThompsonG. (1996), Globalisation in Question, Cambridge: Polity.
26.
HollowayJ. (1994), ‘Global Capital and the National State’, Capital and Class52, pp. 23–49.
27.
HoodC. (1994), Explaining Economic Policy Reversals, Buckingham: Open University Press.
28.
HuttonW. (1995), The State We're In, London: Cape.
29.
KriegerJ. (1999), British Politics in the Global Age: Can Social Democracy Survive?, Cambridge: Polity.
30.
LindblomC.E. (1977), Politics and Markets, New York: Basic Books.
31.
MarglinS.A.SchorJ.B. (eds.) (1990), The Golden Age of Capitalism: Re-interpreting the Post-war Experience, Oxford: Clarendon.
32.
McGrewA.G. (1998), ‘Globalisation: Conceptualising a Moving Target’ in EatwellJ., Understanding Globalisation, Stockholm: Almqvist and Wicksell, pp. 7–30.
33.
McKenzieR.LeeD. (1991), Quicksilver Capital: How the Rapid Movement of Wealth has Changed the World, New York: Free Press.
34.
MilibandR.PanitchL. (eds.) (1994), Socialist Register 1994: Between Globalism and Nationalism, London: Merlin.
35.
MilnerH. (1992), ‘International Theories of Cooperation Among Nations: Strengths and Weaknesses’, World Politics44, pp. 466–496.
36.
MilnerH. (1997), Interests, Institutions and Information: Domestic Politics and International Relations, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
37.
MosesJ.W. (1994), ‘Abdication from National Policy Autonomy: What's Left to Leave?’, Politics and Society22, pp. 125–148.
38.
NotermansT. (1993), ‘The Abdication of National Policy Autonomy: Why the Macroeconomic Policy Regime has Become so Unfavourable to Labour’, Politics and Society21, pp. 133–167.
39.
NotermansT. (1997), ‘Social Democracy and External Constraints’ in CoxK.R. (ed.), Spaces of Globalisation, London: Guildford Press, pp. 201–239.
40.
PanitchL.LeysC. (1997), The End of Parliamentary Socialism: From New Left to New Labour, London: Verso.
41.
PorterM.E. (1998), The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
42.
PrzeworskiA.WallersteinM. (1988), ‘Structural Dependence of the State on Capital’, American Political Science Review82(1), pp. 11–29.
43.
RosenauJ. (1997), Along the Domestic–Foreign Frontier, London: Cambridge University Press.
44.
SmithM.J. (1994), ‘Understanding the “Politics of Catch-up”: The Modernisation of the Labour Party’, Political Studies42, pp. 708–715.
45.
SwankD. (1992), ‘Politics and the Structural Dependence of the State in Democratic Capitalist Nations’American Political Science Review86(1), pp. 38–54.
46.
SwankD. (1998), ‘Funding the Welfare State: Globalisation and the Taxation of Business in Advanced Market Economies’, Political Studies46, pp. 671–692.
47.
WadeR. (1990), Governing the Market, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
48.
WallaceH.WallaceW. (1996), Policy-making in the European Union, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
49.
WaltersR.BlakeD. (1992), The Politics of Global Economic Relations, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
50.
WatsonM. (1999), ‘Globalisation and the Development of the British Political Economy’ in MarshD. (eds.), Post-war British Politics in Perspective, Cambridge: Polity, pp. 125–143.
51.
WebbM.C. (1991), ‘International Economic Structures, Government Interests, and International Coordination of Macroeconomic Adjustment Policies’, International Organization45(3), pp. 309–342.
52.
WeissL. (1998), The Myth of the Powerless State, Cambridge: Polity.
53.
WhitleyR. (ed.) (1992), European Business Systems, London: Sage.
54.
Wickham-JonesM. (1995a), ‘Anticipating Social Democracy, Pre-empting Anticipations: Economic Policy-making in the British Labour Party, 1987–92’, Politics and Society23(4), pp. 465–494.
55.
Wickham-JonesM. (1995b), ‘Recasting Social Democracy: A Comment on Hay and Smith’, Political Studies43, pp. 698–702.
56.
Wickham-JonesM. (1997), ‘Social Democracy and Structural Dependency: The British Case. A Note on Hay’, Politics and Society25(2), pp. 257–265.
57.
YoungH. (1998), This Blessed Plot: Britain and Europe from Churchill to Blair, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
