Historically geopolitics has been understood as an aid to the ‘art of statecraft’ and as a science that gives ‘advice to the prince’. Critical interventions such as Agnew’s “The Territorial Trap” have shackled the instrumental reasoning underpinning classical geopolitics and engaged in a reevaluation of its state centric ontology. By means of phasing in a new reading of sovereignty into the discourse the paper intents to take the already advanced criticism a step further. Departing from Hard & Negri’s postmodern interpretation of sovereignty as immanence it is asked how our notion of what is ‘geopolitical’ transforms if one removes the binary oppositions upon which the modern, Manichean concept of the sovereign rests. In order to theorize such ‘porous sovereignties’ the paper mobilizes the works of P.J Proudhon and G. Landauer and suggests that an anarchist analysis of power-clusters is suited best for comprehending the geopolitical dynamics of the multitude.
