⇱ Index page

The Internationalist Archive

David Harvey (born 31 October 1935) is a British-American academic best known for Marxist analyses that focus on urban geography as well as the economy more broadly. He is a Distinguished Professor of anthropology and geography at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY).

Issue 172 of The Internationalist, excerpts from his latest book, The Story of Capital. In this excerpt, Harvey looks at the three distinct but interconnected forces, class, clan and caste, and how they shape capital's mode of production and its geopolitical formations.

Investigating the geopolitics of capital entails opening up the interplay of three critical forces – class, clan and caste – in shaping capital’s mode of production and its socio-political formations. Each force represents a distinct but interconnected dimension of how capital operates and evolves, influencing geopolitical struggles, cultural expressions and territorial dynamics.

The class dimension originates with the collision of alienated capital and alienated labour, which drives the accumulation of surplus value and the transformation of economic and social structures. From this ‘big bang’ interaction arises a spiralling process that reshapes the world through the production of spaces and places, fixed capital and consumption fund formation, the circulation of interest-bearing capital and the interventions of state-finance nexuses.

The lenses of class alone cannot account for the persistence and influence of clan and caste forces. Clan forces operate autonomously yet intersect with class to shape the totality of capital’s social formations. Clans, rooted in kinship, locality and tradition, have been a critical force in the evolution of nation-states and nationalism. Caste, by contrast, enforces rigid hierarchies of value and exclusion, often aligning with class and clan dynamics to perpetuate structural inequalities in the distribution of wealth and power within the interstate system.

Class relations are central to understanding capital’s laws of motion. The relationship between capital and labour is not merely transactional but foundational to the processes of surplus extraction and accumulation. Marx’s analysis of alienated labour reveals how capital’s expansion transforms material and social geographies, creating contradictions that manifest in uneven geographical development and spiralling capital accumulation. Capital’s need for endless accumulation drives the production of space. Urbanization, infrastructure development and the commodification of daily life are all mechanisms through which capital seeks to overcome its inherent crisis tendencies. For example, the rapid growth of industrial cities during the nineteenth century reflects how capital reshaped physical landscapes to maximize surplus extraction. Manchester and Birmingham became sites of intense class conflict as workers organized against exploitative conditions in order to stay alive, highlighting the centrality of class struggle in capital’s expansion. Capital also relies on financial mechanisms to sustain accumulation. The expansion of the circulation of interest-bearing capital, from colonial ventures to modern financial markets, reveals how surplus value is extracted not only from labour but also through the manipulation of debt and speculation. This process intensifies inequalities, as financial capital consolidates its own class power in the hands of a few, often at the expense of workers and marginalized populations.

While class provides the backbone to capital’s dynamics, the logic of clan remains a powerful force in structuring capital’s social formation. Clan, as defined by Marx, includes associations based on family, kinship, locality and shared traditions. These affiliations have not disappeared in the transition to the hegemony of capital but have been transformed to serve new purposes. Nation-states are a product of territorialization rooted in clan logics. The Westphalian settlement of 1648 formalized the sovereignty of nation-states, embedding clan-based loyalties into the political and economic structures of an interstate system. Nationalism, often viewed as a modern phenomenon, draws heavily on a history of clan affiliations, whether through shared histories, cultural symbols or territorial claims. Nationalism illustrates how clan logics intersect with capital’s drive for accumulation. Nation-states compete to attract capital and protect their economic interests, often resorting to nationalist rhetoric to justify policies. However, these dynamics also create contradictions. For instance, the rise of protectionism in the twenty-first century reflects a tension between global capital’s need for geographical mobility and the territorial imperatives of nation-states.

The Olympic Games serve as a vivid example of how clan-based nationalism and capitalist accumulation intersect. Originally conceived as a celebration of clan-based national pride, the Olympics have evolved into spectacles of global capital. Cities invest heavily in infrastructure and marketing, often incurring significant debt to host the event. Urban developers and corporations profit from these investments, while local communities bear the long-term economic and social cost.[1] The Olympics demonstrates how clan loyalties are commodified within capitalism’s broader logic.

Caste, described by Marx as the ‘strictest form’ of human association, introduces a hierarchical rigidity that often complements and reinforces capitalist and clan structures. While caste systems may seem antithetical to modernity, they persist in various forms, shaping how power, privilege and exclusion operate within capitalist societies. In the United States, racial hierarchies function as a caste-like system, structuring access to resources, opportunities, and political power on a seemingly rock-solid basis. The legacy of slavery, Jim Crow laws and the current forms of systemic racism underscore how caste dynamics are embedded in capitalist social formations. For instance, the racial wealth gap illustrates how economic inequalities are perpetuated across generations, aligning with caste-like exclusions. Caste-like systems intersect with class to create complex hierarchies of privilege and oppression within institutions (such as the law and academia, which is an excellent example of a modern caste system). In South Asia, caste remains a defining feature of social and economic life, dictating access to education, employment and political representation. These dynamics are further exacerbated in global labour markets, where caste-based discrimination shapes the experiences of migrant workers and diasporic communities. Patriarchy likewise operates as another dimension of caste-like exclusion. Gendered hierarchies, reinforced through cultural norms and institutional structures, limit women’s access to economic and political power. These exclusions are not incidental but integral to capitalism’s functioning, as they provide a reserve army of labour while perpetuating unpaid care work.

Class, clan and caste are not isolated forces but intersect in complex and often contradictory ways. This intersectionality shapes the totality of capital’s social formations, influencing how power is distributed and contested. Class and clan frequently intersect to shape the geopolitical landscape. For instance, the competition between nation-states to attract capital often aligns with the interests of the capitalist class, creating synergies that drive economic and territorial expansion. However, these alignments are not without conflict. Nationalist policies, such as protectionism or anti-immigration measures, can disrupt global capital flows, highlighting the tensions between class and clan logics.

While caste intersects with class and clan, it also operates autonomously, enforcing rigid hierarchies that often transcend economic structures. For example, the persistence of racial discrimination in the United States or the caste system in India reflects rigidities that resist assimilation into purely class-based or clan-based analyses. These dynamics underscore the need for a more nuanced understanding of how caste operates within the context of capital’s mode of production. The Heideggerian and Aristotelian perspectives on placemaking as the ‘first among all things’ incorporate caste principles of rootedness, permanence and ‘dwelling’. The anticapitalist answer is not to ignore placemaking but rather to mobilize it, as does Lefebvre, towards the construction of that ‘good life’ that Aristotle envisaged.

The dynamics of class, clan and caste are integral to understanding capital’s evolution and its geopolitical implications. While class remains central, the persistence of clan and caste introduces additional layers of complexity. These forces shape how capital operates across different contexts, influencing everything from urban development to policies and racial hierarchies within major political and cultural institutions. This triad of caste, clan and class not only provides a framework for analysing capital’s historical trajectory but also raising critical questions about its future. As capital continues to adapt and expand, the interplay of class, clan and caste will remain a defining feature within its social formations.

[1] Jules Boykoff, Power Games: A Political History of the Olympics (London: Verso, 2016).

Excerpted with permission from The Story of Capital by David Harvey. Published by Verso Books in 2026.

The Internationalist Archive