Globalization theory overlooks that nation-states still serve their own capital

Evidence

In the context of the war on terror, the logic of economic liberalization is pushed still further, not simply in the “privatization” of security treated in Shamsie’s novel Burnt Shadows but also in arrangements for the postwar reconstruction of the national infrastructures of war-on-terror battlegrounds. As Sungur Savran remarks, “The sight of so many governments scrambling for a piece of the cake for their national companies in the so-called reconstruction of Iraq [and Afghanistan] should have reminded the theorists of globalization that nation-states still represent the interests of their own capital.” — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 441

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to how The Reluctant Fundamentalist frames US capital and war; also echoes the reader’s infrastructure article on reconstruction themes. — connects to: Capitalist states enable capital reproduction rather than serving it functionally — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1669; Globalization was a political move by capital, not a technological fate — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 525; Resisting capital requires a counter-globalization, not nation-state refusal — Chantal Mouffe, The Democratic Paradox, 528