Page 50 - Contemporary Political Sociology Globalization Politics and Power

36 Changing Definitions of Politics and Power

relationship of violence rather than of power, and he suggested it was
becoming less relevant as societies became more concerned with fostering
disciplinary power over populations rather than with controlling and
eliminating those who seemed to pose a threat to sovereign state power.
For Castells, it is important to understand that the state is the ultimate

guarantor of micro - powers exercised across the social field, a position it
maintains because of its privileges with regard to the legitimate use of
force – even if these privileges are relatively rarely exercised (Castells,
2009 : 15). As the ultimate guarantor of micro - powers because of its
special privileges with regard to force, action “ in the name of the state ”
– the state itself is not unified, and “ it ” cannot act – does have particular

importance in contemporary societies. It is not that force trumps in the
exercise of power. On the contrary, state violence, the regulation of civil
society, and the collection and distribution of wealth are all shaped, ratio-
nalized, and legitimated by the meanings such actions are given in ongoing
practices of state formation and reproduction. The crucial point here is

that the state is itself an especially significant site of cultural politics.
In this respect, it is also important to note how power and force both
contribute to the economic importance of states. There are two main
dimensions to the threat of state force with regard to markets. Firstly, the
state is involved in the regulation and de - regulation of economic exchanges
and contracts. For example, state actors have the final authority over the

conditions under which multinational corporations operate within their
territory. Even if communications and transport infrastructures now make
it much easier than ever before to send labor, ideas for research, design
and advertising, money, components and final products across borders,

ultimately states still retain the authority to regulate cross - border fl ows.
Whether or not national economies are “ open ” or “ protected ” remains
a matter for political decision. Secondly, the state itself exercises signifi -
cant economic power. In wealthy liberal - democracies, large amounts of
money are collected as taxes and distributed to state employees employed
in bureaucracy, education, healthcare, and so on, as well as in welfare to
those most in need. When support for Keynesian managed capitalism was
more or less hegemonic in the mid - twentieth century, state legitimacy
depended on its capacity to ameliorate the effects of markets on citizens.
Welfare rights are just as important as ever to many citizens, as neo -
liberalizing economies are increasingly oriented towards providing low
wage and insecure employment (in the US and UK, for example), while,
where neo - liberalism has been strongly resisted, rates of structural unem-
ployment tend to be high (as in, for example, France and Germany).
Because money is the means by which the necessities of life – shelter,