Global Fields and Imperial Forms: Field Theory and the British and American Empires* JULIAN

This article develops a global fields approach for conceptualizing the global arena. The approach builds upon existing approaches to the world system and world society while articulating them with the field theory of Bourdieu and organizational sociology. It highlights particular structural configurations (“spaces of relations”) and the specific cultural content (“rules of the game ” and “symbolic capital”) of global systems. The utility of the approach is demonstrated through an analysis of the different forms of the two hegemonic empires of the past centuries, Great Britain and the United States. The British state tended toward formal imperialism in the 19th century, characterized by direct territorial rule, while the United States since WWII has tended toward informal imperialism. The essay shows that the difference can be best explained by considering the different historical global fields in which the two empires operated. Much ink has been spilled recently on the complexities of the concepts “empire” and “imperialism. ” But decades of scholarship converge on at least two points rel-evant for thinking about modern imperial formations (Howe 2003a). First, empire, in the most basic sense, is a transnational political formation by which one state exerts political power and control over subordinate territory and peoples, and so imperialism is the process of extending or maintaining that control (Abernathy 2000