It is apposite that ‘After Nations, The Making and Unmaking of a World Order’ – written by English novelist turned historian Rana Dasgupta – should be published as Donald Trump is desperately seeking to extract America from an ill-judged and calamitous war in Iran.
‘After Nations’ is an analysis of the rise and fall of the modern nation state – which Dasgupta sees as a uniquely powerful, secular political entity that first emerged in Western Europe some 300 years ago. The nation state’s theological foundation was reformation Christianity, its political philosophy was enlightenment liberalism, and its economic base was the then emerging capitalist economy.
For Dasgupta, the modern Western nation state is an intrinsically exploitative and aggressive political organization, which derived its unprecedented power from capitalist exploitation of its own citizens, and an even more brutal domination of its colonial possessions.
He views Britain and America as having been the most powerful modern nation states. Britain was the first modern nation state, and was the dominant global power from the 18th century until World War I. Thereafter, America supplanted a declining Britain, becoming the domineering global hegemon after World War II – by means of establishing a new global economic and political world order.
That American-controlled world order is now collapsing, and contemporary America and other Western nation states find themselves beset by acute internal crises that, because of their intrinsically exploitative and aggressive nature, they are incapable of resolving.
In the concluding chapter of his book, Dasgupta suggests that the nation state as a generic political entity may itself be doomed to disappear, and be replaced by more ecologically friendly, less exploitative political structures.
He sees this coming about as a result of an ideological transformation engendered by digital technology and the big tech companies. This radical change will involve mankind embracing “a new universal faith” based upon a “planetary godhead”; creating “a universal digital citizenship”; adopting a “digital currency”; adopting “a new digitally based planetary law”; and radically “reforming our relationship with nature.”
The final chapter the book reads like an eco-technological fable, and Dasgupta’s belief in the eventual disappearance of the nation state reveals itself to be a frankly utopian philosophical assumption, rather than a reasoned conclusion that arises from his own otherwise acute historical analysis.
The notion that the nation state as a generic political entity might disappear is, in fact, inconsistent with the historical analysis at the heart of ‘After Nations’. As that analysis makes clear, the crisis of the nation state described in the book is confined to Western liberal democratic nation states and cannot be applied to powerful contemporary illiberal nation states like China and Russia.
In fact, Dasgupta himself characterizes contemporary China and Russia as unique “transnational political entities” that possess a greater degree of political stability and resilience than Western nation states. If his analysis of the irreversible decline of America and the West is correct, then surely China and Russia are destined to become even more powerful, even if only comparatively, in the future.
And if America and other liberal democratic nation states are becoming less liberal and less democratic, might not these states also survive indefinitely, albeit in a more authoritarian, illiberal and populist form?
It must also be said the tech giants – who Dasgupta views as successors to earlier rapacious capitalist corporations like the British East India company – make very strange agents for bringing about progressive revolutionary change.
Leaving aside the book’s flawed final chapter, ‘After Nations’ contains a comprehensive and acute analysis of the rise and decline Britain and America as global hegemonic states.
The last historian to produce a compelling analysis of world-wide political developments over the past 300 years was Barrington Moore Jr. in his ‘Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy’, published in 1966 – coincidentally as America was embroiled in yet another disastrous war in Vietnam. Barrington Moore Jr. viewed social democracies as being the product of unique social causes that could not be replicated – and for him, they were, therefore, political anomalies within a global world order made up of powerful illiberal nation states.
Barrington Moore Jr.’s book was written before America and the West’s decline had commenced, and ‘After Nations’ – written six decades later from a global economic perspective – is a worthy successor to it.
What, then, are the broad outlines of Dasgupta’s historical analysis, and what does the book tell us about America’s contemporary decline as a global power?
Britain, for Dasgupta, was the first modern nation state, and he shows that it was an authoritarian, elitist, capitalist enterprise from the very beginning – ruthlessly exploiting its own displaced peasants by transforming them into a much-needed industrial proletariat, whilst at the same time plundering its vast colonial empire.
Dasgupta argues that Britain’s industrial revolution was made possible by the immense wealth that the British nation state had brutally extracted from its foreign possessions – most notably by the British East India Company in India – over the previous two centuries.
The British working class was incorporated into the autocratic British nation state as a matter of economic necessity, and the benefits grudgingly conferred on workers by the late 19th century – compulsory education, public health measures, a degree of economic prosperity, and a limited form of democracy – were also paid for by Britain’s ongoing economic exploitation of its colonial empire. This process reached its apogee in the Atlee government’s creation of the modern welfare state after World War II.
Since the 1970s, however, when manufacturing industries in Britain, America, and the West began to be relocated to the Third World – and factory workers were no longer needed, except as docile consumers – the incorporation of the working class has been reversed, and the benefits previously conferred on workers have been systematically withdrawn. Dasgupta terms this process the “downsizing of social bargains.”
Full employment has been abandoned, jobs have been casualized, union membership has declined, and worker’s wages have remained stagnant for decades. And, amidst widespread corruption, vast disparities in wealth have emerged between the elites that control and benefit from the new technologically driven global economy and those ordinary citizens who have been pauperized by it.
Conservative politicians – Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan – initially presided over this elite-controlled process, but it intensified apace under elite-beholden Labour and Democrat politicians – most notably Tony Blair and Barack Obama.
This has led to mass economic displacement, intensifying cost of living pressures, widespread political disenchantment, and the rise of populist parties – all indicia of the internal crisis that has engulfed both Britain and America, and Western nation states generally, in recent decades. Western nation states, according to Dasgupta, are now “unable to deliver the … rights, freedoms and security” that they previously provided to their citizens.
Dasgupta sees both Britain and America as having recently become increasingly authoritarian and exploitative polities – controlled by large global economic organizations, most notably the tech giants – that have much in common with the frankly autocratic and undemocratic emerging nation states of the 18th and 19th centuries.
America became the world hegemonic power in the aftermath of World War II – by creating a new global economic system at Bretton Woods, and a new global political order based upon the United Nations and military alliances, the most important of which was NATO.
This new American world empire, unlike its British predecessor, was ideological rather than territorial, and it compelled weaker nation states to submit to its economic hegemony by means of military interventions – that replaced uncooperative political regimes with governments, for the most part dictatorial, that favored American economic interests.
Guatemala in 1954 was the first of these interventions – resulting in a left-wing president being deposed and replaced by a brutal pro-American dictator. America repeated this process of regime change dozens of times in the following decades – often with success, as in Chile in 1973, and sometimes unsuccessfully, as with the Bay of Pigs in 1961.
Alongside these targeted interventions, America also became involved in ‘forever wars’ in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan – all of which ended in embarrassing American defeats.
American hegemony reached its zenith after the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s – but, according to Dasgupta, the American empire entered a period of decline thereafter, as China and Russia began to re-emerge as powerful nation states at the beginning of the 21st century.
It was China, in particular, that posed the greatest threat to American hegemony – as the Chinese empire expanded across the globe. The Chinese empire was neither territorial nor ideological – rather it expanded by way of “focusing on infrastructure and resources” in those nation stares that signed up to its Belt and Road program. This led to the creation of new political models – like BRICS – that are not aligned with America.
And as America’s foreign policy disasters piled up globally, its internal economic and political crisis intensified – in part because American imperialism had “contaminated its own political soul” – culminating in Donald Trump’s election as president in 2016.
Dasgupta sees Trump’s rule as a more brutally aggressive and irrational version of America’s post-World War II global empire, now based upon “sheer gangsterism”. Gone is even the pretense of bringing freedom and democracy to those countries that it invades – and America’s foreign aggression now openly justifies itself in explicitly brutal and apocalyptic terms.
This was already apparent from Trump’s support for Israel’s war of destruction on Gaza – and Trump’s recent bellicose threat to “bomb Iran back to the stone age” simply confirms this change. Dasgupta reminds us that this phrase was first used by General Curtis LeMay in relation to Vietnam – but Le May was an extremist right-wing Cold War warrior, and President Lyndon Johnson would never have contemplated justifying America’s war in Vietnam in such explicitly violent and irrational terms.
Nor did previous presidents attempt to lay the Middle East to waste, dismantle NATO, destroy the global economic order that America itself had created, or threaten to invade Mexico and annex Canada and Greenland. Nor did Trump’s predecessors seek to systematically debauch and destroy liberal democratic institutions within America itself.
Dasgupta’s analysis of America’s decline is not only insightful – it is compelling.
‘After Nations’ was written before the current war in Iran commenced – and Trump’s attack on Iran was yet another archetypal American military intervention designed to bring about regime change in a country that refused to acknowledge American global hegemony.
It is now clear, however, that Trump’s attack on Iran has failed disastrously.
The resulting stalemate – which threatens to turn into another ‘forever war’ that a weakened America is militarily and politically incapable of waging – has intensified America’s internal crisis; created serious and ongoing global economic disruption; and generated tensions that threaten to break apart NATO.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently stated the obvious, namely that the war in Iran had become as “embarrassment” for America – and Trump responded by withdrawing 5,000 American troops from Germany, thereby further weakening the NATO alliance.
The war in Iran is also the first war that an American president has waged at the behest of another nation – namely Israel, which Dasgupta views as one of the most aggressive of modern nation states – in the face of near unanimous opposition from the CIA, the American military elite, and the president’s own cabinet. Not only does this highlight Trump’s irrationality, it also suggests that America no longer controls own its own foreign policy. In short, Donald Trump’s foolhardy war in Iran has made apparent America’s decline as world hegemonic power.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.