Can states be ruled in the same way as individuals? Has globalization made the analogy between men and states redundant? This book tackles such questions by analyzing the presuppositions of the domestic analogy and providing the tools to assess its validity using a variety of contexts and theories. What renders such a reasoning problematic is not that it relies on a mere analogy, but the fact that it surreptitiously transforms a historically situated model, that of the western sovereign state, into a universal paradigm.
By focusing on a crucial yet often neglected problem for both contemporary Political Theory and International Relations, Men and States argues that we need to overcome the domestic analogy if we are to develop a global political theory able to face the challenges of the new global age.

Can we rule states through the same means that have been used to rule individuals? Men and States tackles this issue by analyzing the presuppositions of the domestic analogy and provides the tools to assess its validity in different contexts and theories.