{"id":3003,"date":"2026-05-27T10:49:52","date_gmt":"2026-05-27T13:49:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wp.ufpel.edu.br\/labgrima\/?page_id=3003"},"modified":"2026-05-27T10:49:52","modified_gmt":"2026-05-27T13:49:52","slug":"world-systems-geopolitics","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/wp.ufpel.edu.br\/labgrima\/world-systems-geopolitics\/","title":{"rendered":"World\u2011Systems Geopolitics"},"content":{"rendered":"

This page presents the framework of\u00a0World\u2011Systems Geopolitics and Antisystemic State Action<\/strong>, developed by Charles Pennaforte within the LabGRIMA\/UFPel. The approach combines world\u2011systems analysis, classical geopolitics and critical geopolitics to interpret the crisis of U.S. hegemony, the strategic confrontation between the United States and China, and the role of the Global South \u2013 particularly Brazil and Latin America \u2013 in the contemporary international order.<\/p>\n

Starting from the hypothesis that the current order is\u00a0bifurcating<\/strong>, rather than merely \u201cmultipolar\u201d, the framework introduces two main contributions: (1) the notion of\u00a0antisystemic state action<\/strong>, which shifts the focus from \u201cbottom\u2011up\u201d social movements to state and interstate strategies of contestation; and (2) the distinction between\u00a0Proactive<\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0Active states<\/strong>\u00a0as different ways of responding to what is defined as an\u00a0antisystemic imperative<\/strong>\u00a0\u2013 the set of pressures generated by the intensive use of sanctions, financial exclusions, wars and narrative struggles by the hegemonic center.<\/p>\n

This section gathers a concise presentation of the core theses, bibliographical references, teaching materials (slides, handouts) and links to books and articles that develop World\u2011Systems Geopolitics and Antisystemic State Action, with particular emphasis on the implications for Brazil, Latin America and the Global South more broadly.<\/p>\n

Six Theses \u2013 World\u2011Systems Geopolitics and Antisystemic State Action<\/h4>\n

Thesis 1 \u2013 The order is bifurcating, not merely multipolar<\/strong>
\nThe twenty\u2011first\u2011century international order is not simply moving from U.S. unipolarity to a diffuse multipolarity. It is evolving towards a\u00a0bifurcating order<\/strong>, in which coalitions of states build rival financial, technological, security and narrative infrastructures \u2013 parallel payment systems, supply chains, military alliances and media ecosystems \u2013 that cannot be fully captured by traditional \u201cmultipolarity\u201d language.<\/p>\n

Thesis 2 \u2013 Antisystemic action is not only \u201cfrom below\u201d: there is antisystemic state action<\/strong>
\nDrawing on and revising Wallerstein\u2019s notion of\u00a0antisystemic movements<\/strong>, this approach distinguishes between \u201cfrom below\u201d resistance and\u00a0antisystemic state action<\/strong>. The latter refers to the strategies through which states and state coalitions contest the geopolitical and geoeconomic logic of the U.S.\u2011led system \u2013 in security, finance, trade and global governance \u2013 without necessarily abandoning capitalism or the interstate system.<\/p>\n

Thesis 3 \u2013 Proactive vs. Active states as a typology of contestation<\/strong>
\nThe framework develops a typology that differentiates between\u00a0Proactive<\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0Active states<\/strong>. Proactive states adopt openly confrontational strategies vis\u2011\u00e0\u2011vis the Washington\u2013Brussels axis, facing sanctions, diplomatic isolation and military pressure while investing in alternative military, financial, energy and technological capabilities \u2013 as in the cases of Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. Active states, such as Brazil, India, South Africa and segments of the Arab world, remain deeply integrated into Western institutions and markets, yet pursue calibrated forms of contestation and autonomy\u2011seeking, advocating multipolarity, multilateral reform and greater voice for the Global South.<\/p>\n

Thesis 4 \u2013 World\u2011Systems Geopolitics: space, cycles and infrastructures<\/strong>
\nWorld\u2011Systems Geopolitics<\/strong>\u00a0combines classical concerns with territory, sea lanes, buffer zones and access to resources with world\u2011systems analysis of long cycles of accumulation and core\u2013semiperiphery\u2013periphery hierarchies. It emphasizes the\u00a0material infrastructures of power<\/strong>\u00a0\u2013 financial networks, energy corridors, digital platforms and military basing \u2013 through which hegemonic centers organise the world\u2011system and through which antisystemic state action is articulated.<\/p>\n

Thesis 5 \u2013 Sanctions, wars and narratives as drivers of bifurcation<\/strong>
\nSanctions, proxy wars and narrative struggles are not mere \u201cepisodes\u201d, but central mechanisms of bifurcation in the contemporary world\u2011system. The extensive use of economic sanctions, financial exclusion and technological controls against actors such as Russia, Iran and Venezuela; the war in Ukraine; and the handling of crises like Gaza both reveal the crisis of U.S. hegemony and generate\u00a0antisystemic incentives<\/strong>\u00a0for Proactive and Active states. In parallel, narrative and cyber conflicts over how these crises are framed become key arenas in which legitimacy and leadership are contested.<\/p>\n

Thesis 6 \u2013 The Global South as a laboratory of the bifurcating order<\/strong>
\nRather than treating the\u00a0Global South<\/strong>\u00a0as a passive recipient of systemic dynamics, this approach places it at the centre as a\u00a0laboratory of the bifurcating order<\/strong>. BRICS and BRICS Plus, experiments in de\u2011dollarization and alternative payment mechanisms, South\u2013South cooperation and calls for the reform of multilateral institutions illustrate how Proactive and Active states from the Global South test new combinations of partnerships, currencies, institutions and narratives in response to the antisystemic imperative.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This page presents the framework of\u00a0World\u2011Systems Geopolitics and Antisystemic State Action, developed by Charles Pennaforte within the LabGRIMA\/UFPel. The approach combines world\u2011systems analysis, classical geopolitics and critical geopolitics to interpret the crisis of U.S. hegemony, the strategic confrontation between the United States and China, and the role of the Global South \u2013 particularly Brazil and … <\/p>\n

Continue lendo<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":636,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-3003","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry","nodate","item-wrap"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.ufpel.edu.br\/labgrima\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3003","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.ufpel.edu.br\/labgrima\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.ufpel.edu.br\/labgrima\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.ufpel.edu.br\/labgrima\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/636"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.ufpel.edu.br\/labgrima\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3003"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/wp.ufpel.edu.br\/labgrima\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3003\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3006,"href":"https:\/\/wp.ufpel.edu.br\/labgrima\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3003\/revisions\/3006"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.ufpel.edu.br\/labgrima\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3003"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}