Stages of Capitalist Development

type, even at this level we can only determine state structures and policies insofar as they are necessitated by the dominant mode of accumulation. Thus, to a large extent, the content of the theory of the state must be developed at the historical level of analysis. A purely capitalist society is conceived of as a global society without external relations, but this is a high level of abstraction that can never exist in history. In history, capitalism does not descend like a great flood that engulfs the entire globe at once. Rather, it gains a foothold first in one region and then in another; and when' one region is compared to another, we find capitalism grows very unevenly. At the level of stage theory, it is necessary to consider the issue of territory. The legal state, discussed at the level of pure capitalism, now becomes a territorial state with definite boundaries separating the domestic economy from the rest of the world. The territorial state exists as one state amongst many as one legal subject writ large amongst many. The category, "legal subject", requires not only that there be clear boundaries separating my property from yours, but also that any movement of property across boundaries occur only through the mutual consent of the respective property owners. Since the territorial state is, internationally, one legal subject amongst many, it must also guarantee that legal subjects from foreign territories will not use force to invade the property of its own legal subjects. Since there is no international state to guarantee the status of the state as legal subject, this status is (from an international point of view)somewhat tenuous, and is based only on mutual recognition. Stage theory brings out the extreme importance of the nation-state and nationalist ideology to capitalism. Nationalism converts a passive shell of a state into a real power. A marketgoverned society is an atomized society, and a state based only on legal subjects can have no real power. Although the market orders society, it does not create community and, indeed, tends to dissolve traditional communities. Nationalism is a way of building a common identity in a market society, without undermining the atomization required by the market. It creates a common identity that can be mobilized as a force, but it does not create real political community. It picks up on any trait that the people in a territory have in common which dif-