Nationalist Politics and the Double Movement: The Problem of Legitimacy in Neoliberal States

This paper argues that the contemporary efficacy of nationalist politics is a strategic response to neoliberal conditions of state legitimation. Using the double movement as a theoretical framework, I argue that neoliberalism alters the policy alternatives available to state actors by reducing the viability of economic protectionist initiatives once dominant in the embedded liberal era. This policy capacity reduction inhibits some of the key means for state legitimation (e.g., public spending, regulatory protectionism), which exacerbate the negative effects of capitalist liberalization. As national populations view the state as unwilling or unable to mitigate economic adversities or provide traditional socio-economic services, significant potential exists for a delegitimation of state actors and institutions. In response, neoliberal state actors have gravitated toward an increasingly cultural rhetoric of nationalism as a means to maintain popular legitimacy. This shift goes beyond simple political power struggles - in accordance with the double movement framework, systemic global capitalism requires legitimate state authority to ensure both local stability and sustained capital accumulation. Neoliberal ideology, however, discourages traditional means of state legitimation. A Polanyian examination of this ironic condition offers a structural explanation for the increased efficacy of nationalist politics; however, it also raises serious questions about the sustainability of this legitimation strategy.