416 WORLD POLITICS could be more mistaken"(p.142).The market,like the state,according to Cohen,is a socially constructed system of authority.Thus,govern- ments have been replaced "not by anarchy but by the invisible hand of competition"(p.146).7 For scholars raised on a steady diet of IR theory,this will be the one awkward moment of the book.For while markets may be socially con- structed,once formed they do create an anarchic environment-that is, an environment that lacks central authority.In its purest form,while "the market"is the result of the sum of actions taken by individual ac- tors,those actions combine to create constraints on each one that no single actor can affect.It is this very market analogy and the appeal to anarchy that was the foundation of Kenneth Waltz's defense of sys- temic theorizing in international politics.Additionally,the implicit ap- peal to Adam Smith in this argument is also problematic,because Smith did not believe that all monetary matters should be left to the market.He supported,for example,regulations to control interest rates.9 Thus,despite Cohen's thoughtful ruminations on the nature of "gov- ernance,"it is hard to avoid the conclusion that as state power erodes, we are left increasingly to anarchic (though not necessarily chaotic) market forces.As noted,Cohen sees political consequences flowing from this change;such an arrangement,he states,faces a"crisis of le- gitimacy"(p.147).But ultimately,a basic faith in the market underpins Geograpby and that branch of the subfield which it ably represents. A MAD,MAD WORLD Susan Strange's Mad Money,like Cohen's volume,is a major statement that integrates the accumulated knowledge of a foremost scholar of the IPE of money.But beyond that,the similarities end.Even as Cohen re- fines themes and applies them in different contexts,Geograpby nonetheless reflects more continuity than change.Mad Money,by con- trast,completes a transition in Strange's work.Her early efforts,such 7In a parallel argument to his oligopoly metaphor,Cohen argues,with an appeal to Alfred Mar- shall,that governance that emerges from the market reflects the outcome of both demand and supply- side forces.But,following Marshall,it is the shape of the curves that is determinant.If the demand curve takes the shape of a flat line (is infinitely elastic),then supply has no voice in determining the equilibrium price. Waltz,Theory of International Politics(New York:Random House,1979).Interestingly,an out- standing application of systemic theorizing that illustrates the consequences of anarchy can be found in Benjamin Cohen,The Question of Imperialism(New York:Basic Books,1973). Smith,The Wealth of Nations(1776;Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1976),379-80.could be more mistaken” (p. 142). The market, like the state, according to Cohen, is a socially constructed system of authority. Thus, govern￾ments have been replaced “not by anarchy but by the invisible hand of competition” (p. 146).7 For scholars raised on a steady diet of IR theory, this will be the one awkward moment of the book. For while markets may be socially con￾structed, once formed they do create an anarchic environment—that is, an environment that lacks central authority. In its purest form, while “the market” is the result of the sum of actions taken by individual ac￾tors, those actions combine to create constraints on each one that no single actor can affect. It is this very market analogy and the appeal to anarchy that was the foundation of Kenneth Waltz’s defense of sys￾temic theorizing in international politics.8 Additionally, the implicit ap￾peal to Adam Smith in this argument is also problematic, because Smith did not believe that all monetary matters should be left to the market. He supported, for example, regulations to control interest rates.9 Thus, despite Cohen’s thoughtful ruminations on the nature of “gov￾ernance,” it is hard to avoid the conclusion that as state power erodes, we are left increasingly to anarchic (though not necessarily chaotic) market forces. As noted, Cohen sees political consequences flowing from this change; such an arrangement, he states, faces a “crisis of le￾gitimacy” (p. 147). But ultimately, a basic faith in the market underpins Geography and that branch of the subfield which it ably represents. A MAD, MAD WORLD Susan Strange’s Mad Money, like Cohen’s volume, is a major statement that integrates the accumulated knowledge of a foremost scholar of the IPE of money. But beyond that, the similarities end. Even as Cohen re- fines themes and applies them in different contexts, Geography nonetheless reflects more continuity than change. Mad Money, by con￾trast, completes a transition in Strange’s work. Her early efforts, such 416 WORLD POLITICS 7 In a parallel argument to his oligopoly metaphor, Cohen argues, with an appeal to Alfred Mar￾shall, that governance that emerges from the market reflects the outcome of both demand and supply￾side forces. But, following Marshall, it is the shape of the curves that is determinant. If the demand curve takes the shape of a flat line (is infinitely elastic), then supply has no voice in determining the equilibrium price. 8 Waltz, Theory of International Politics (New York: Random House, 1979). Interestingly, an out￾standing application of systemic theorizing that illustrates the consequences of anarchy can be found in Benjamin Cohen, The Question of Imperialism (New York: Basic Books, 1973). 9 Smith, The Wealth of Nations (1776; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976), 379–80