Is it possible to examine changes in the state without examining changes in elite patterns and displacements between various dominating fields? How has the state and elites developed in relation to a broader field of power? Which impact does transnational circulation of both knowledge about the state and transnational elites have on national fields of power? How are changes in national fields of power related to constructions of international institutions and elites? Changes in the state and displacements between various elites can be illustrated by institutional analyses, by studies of changes in policy fields like education, labor market, criminal resocialisation, etc. as well as by studies of the political field or of the construction of transnational institutions more generally. The session is open for papers that examine and discuss how it is possible to study fields in which the state and elites historically and presently takes part, nationally and internationally, papers based on concrete studies of states and elites with inspiration in a field analytical sociology and also theoretical discussions of field analytical approaches to elites and the state.

The papers aim is contribute to ‘bringing elites back in’ to the study of the European Union by drawing inspiration form the sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. It does so in two steps. First it outlines Bourdieu´s sociology and its relation to classical elite studies, arguing that his approach has a lot to offer. It is argued that the field approach contributes to bridging the gap between ‘positional’ approaches, studying the social properties of people in positions of power, and the ‘decision making’ approach, studying the engagement of elites in the exercise of power. Secondly, the article reviews two strands of empirical research on the European Union that both draw inspiration from Bourdieu´s sociology. The merits and problems of these two approaches are assessed and discussed.

On July 23, 1972, a group of influential citizens from the US, Western Europe and Japan met at the Rockefeller family estate in Pocantico Hills, half an hour's drive north of New York City. Here they agreed to form the Trilateral Commission, a private elite network composed of distinguished citizens – in business, politics, academia and the media – from all three continents. The Commission soon came to be seen, by many, as an extremely powerful ”rich man’s club”, influencing even the outcome of presidential elections in the US. And lately, with the appointment of Mario Monty (European Chairman of the Trilateral Commission) as Prime Minister of Italy, the Commission has shown new evidence of its capacity as kingmaker at the highest level of international politics.

In this paper, I explore the more precise reasons for establishing the TRICOM, including the thinking that lay behind it, how it was formed, how its main aims were defined and how its leadership was decided. Also, I analyze the crucial role of the Commission’s two main architects, David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski, in this process.

As the first researcher I have been granted access to the Trilateral Commission’s central archive at the Rockefeller Archive Center. This paper is based on source material from this archive and is part of my overall PhD research project on the Commission’s history (1973-1983), which takes place at the Saxo Institute at the University of Copenhagen.

TBA

Against the backdrop of an empirical study about how leading American and European lawyers competed in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Communist regimes, this paper discusses how Western lawyers were involved in the reorganisation of the fields of power in Eastern Europe. With the invention of different legal assistance programs involving the rule of law, human rights and commercial laws American and European lawyers and state crafters managed to export different forms of legal expertise and state models. Using their legal expertise, law and apparently neutral discourses related to law these entrepreneurial lawyers took part in a larger battle of the organisation of the post-communist fields of power. Through their investments in state building they expanded the market for legal expertise.