{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023681377825618945, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004305705059203444, 'mean_word_length': 5.690647482014389, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Globalization theory and state theory: the false antinomy

Abstract Since the 1990s, globalization theorists have published a never-ending litany of books and articles about the crisis of the nation-state, the eclipse of the state, the retreat of the state, and even the end of the nation-state. Globalization theory has, on a regular basis, dismissed the nation-state as irrelevant to understanding contemporary political and economic development. However, this paper reexamines the relationship between globalization theory and state theory to argue that nation-states are the principal agents of globalization, as well as the guarantors of the political and material conditions necessary for global capital accumulation. Globalization theorists have constructed a false antinomy that rests largely on having misconstrued international relations (IR) theory, while ignoring significant developments in neo-Marxist state theory.