The Dictionary of Human Geography

Comp. by: LElumalai Stage : Revises1 ChapterID: 9781405132879_4_P Date:1/4/09
Time:15:20:50 Filepath:H:/00_Blackwell/00_3B2/Gregory-9781405132879/appln/3B2/re-
vises/9781405132879_4_P.3d

social relations, while approaches informed

bypost-colonialismpay attention to the geo-

graphically differentiated ongoing imprint of a

colonial past, and question norms of progress

and well-being associated with European capit-

alism (see alsopost-development). If there is

one thing shared across these different, at times

hotly debated, critical approaches to economic

geography, it is a resonance with Marx’s polit-

ical economic conception of capitalism. es

Suggested reading

Barnes (1996); Lee and Wills (1997); Sayer

(1995); Sheppard and Barnes (2000).

political geography A subdivision of

human geographyanalysing ways in which

politics and conflict createspacesandplaces

and, in turn, are themselves partially deter-

mined by the existence and nature of geo-

graphical entities. The division of human

geography into the broad spheres of economic,

socio-cultural and political geography topics

reflects the pre-eminence of disciplinary

boundaries in academia. However, contempor-

ary geography reflects criticism of disciplinary

constraints and, in turn, political geography

has become more eclectic and connected to

other spheres of human geography. To under-

stand the importance of this trend, a brief his-

tory of political geography is necessary.

At the outset of the development of modern

human geography, political geography played

a central role. Indeed, the term political geog-

raphy was applied in a general sense to human

aspects of geography and served as an adjunct

of history. The establishment of geography as

a university discipline created the initial sub-

disciplines of colonial geography,commercial

geographyand political geography; a reflec-

tion of the discipline’s role inimperialism.

The key text for the new sub-discipline was

Friedrich Ratzel’s (1897)Politische geographie,

which used an organic theory of thestateto

connect cultures with environments within

dynamic stateborders. Ratzel’s influential

text connected political geography to social

darwinistideas whereby a hierarchy of com-

petitive cultures was defined by their differen-

tial ability to utilize the environment, with the

most successfulculturehaving the right to

establish a state in a particularterritory.

The result was the concept oflebensraum,

or living space, which would later prescribe

Germany’s right to move its boundary east-

wards into territory populated by Slavs.

At about the same time, Sir Halford

Mackinder was both establishing political

geography in universities in Great Britain

and creating a political geography framework

to advocate British imperialism. Also, influ-

enced by social Darwinism and the organic

theory of the state (O ́ Tuathail, 1992),

Mackinder is best remembered for claiming

that political geography had a role in formu-

lating grand geo-strategic plans. His ‘geo-

graphical pivot of history’ article (1904),

later known as theheartlandtheory, defined

a historical geography of European continen-

tal powers in perpetual conflict with maritime

powers. In the context of Germany’s growing

challenge to Britain, Mackinder saw techno-

logical change facilitating German control of

Eurasia and subsequent global dominance.

His solution was a strong British Empire to

counter the threat. In the USA, Isaiah

Bowman promoted a political geography

to serve the needs of governments defining

an ever-increasing role in world politics

(Smith, N., 2003c).

Mackinder and Ratzel illustrate some

important features of the early political geog-

raphy with contemporary implications. First,

they utilized grand universal theories of dubi-

ous strength to offer academic authority to

state-specific foreign policy choices. Second,

they connected the establishment and vitality

of political geography to nationalsecurity

threats and the ability to offer ‘practical’

advice. Third, the analysis was state-centric,

identifying states as the only important actors.

Fourth, the theoreticians were socially privil-

eged, white males, but, and fifth, they still

claimed to ‘know’ the world and classify

large swathes ofterritoryas the venues for

particular behaviours or characteristics. In

Haraway’s (1988) phrase, they practised a

‘god’s eye-view’.

The relationship of political geography to

foreign policy was epitomized by portrayals of

General Karl Haushofer as the ‘evil genius’

behind Adolf Hitler’s Second World War

plans for world domination (O ́ Tuathail,

1996b). Greatly exaggerated by American

media, the end-result was a tarnished image

for political geography, as it became associ-

ated with German geopolitical expansion (cf.

geopolitik). The sub-discipline withered as a

research enterprise in universities on both

sides of the Atlantic, ironically at the same

time that the US government was expounding

geopolitical theories as it achieved the status

of superpower. Political geography was

pushed into the academic doldrums, although

it continued to be taught in many institutions,

albeit with somewhat ‘dated’ textbooks and

Gregory / The Dictionary of Human Geography 9781405132879_4_P Final Proof page 549 1.4.2009 3:20pm

POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY