Unformatted text preview: Internal Factors: State
PLT/SCL 206: Rich World Poor World Monday 29th October 2007 Dr Michael Keating Weber Sociologist in the German Tradition Alternate to Marxist theories of the state LegalRational Governmental Systems Marx sees the state as the consequence of capitalism; Weber sees the state as much as a condition of capitalist development States as function and agency of capitalist development Patrimonial Governing Arrangements Both hinge on subjective notions of legitimacy This is the `modern state' Defined by `territoriality' Central to modern Western political thought and liberaldemocratic practice Weber Rationality as underpinning both capitalism (Marx) and the state Weber "The fate of our times is characterized by rationalization and intellectualization and, above all, the disenchantment of the world" "The Iron cage of polar winds and icy darkness" Weber's Theories of the State LegalRational Systems of Government Intended structures of legitimacy and of government for postcolonial African states Government based on social contract Citizens obey the state because it serves their interests Government rules on citizens behalf State officials impersonally implementing the law Bureaucratic culture of public service Weber's Theories of the State LegalRational Bureaucracies All parties follow clearly set out laws and practices in administration Institutional norms overrule personal whim Clear distinction between public and private roles Illegal and immoral for private interests of officials to interfere in public duties Public interests is paramount See Leftwich pg. 77 Weber's Theories of the State Traditional Authority Based on historically embedded social and cultural practices
Medieval `divine right of kings' Religious justification for existing order Charismatic Leadership
Warlords Religious Gurus Individuals choosing to follow a leader based on cult of personality or ideals Weber's Theories of the State Patrimonialism Power concentrated in personal authority of individual ruler Hierarchical patrimonial power structures Traditional constraints may apply but not legalrational ones Leader is above the law and may rule by decree All political and administrative concerns are personal affairs of the leader State is private property and rule of the state effectively arbitrary Lesser government officials demonstrate personal loyalties to the leader in return can empirebuild Patronclient relations (clientelism) throughout entire political structure of the state and society Post-Colonial Africa LegalRational Governmental systems not thriving in subSaharan Africa Institutions in Africa seem familiar (Presidents, Parliaments, Ministries) but very different from Weberian expectations A faade of legalrational authority over a very different kind of state `personal rule' Power in African States becoming highly centralized Modern states adapted to become functional for centralized control in an African context Reflecting the lack of statebuilding processes? Post-Colonial Africa Africa's State Structures: Rule of law not guaranteed Corruption commonplace Suppression of political opposition Rise of oneparty states Rise of personal rule and patrimonialism within these states Return to colonial mode of centralised and hierarchical bureaucraticauthoritarian government Rise of clientelism to retain legitimacy in these state structures Post-Colonial Africa Without legalrational systems of representation and communication alternative systems are needed and develop Distribution of state resources by centralized political elites Patronage main link between governors and governed in postcolonial African states `Patrimonialisation' of African states by the new bureaucratic elites Neo-Patrimonial States African states therefore closer to Weber's patrimonial state than his legalrational authority Hence African states as `neopatrimonial' But legalrational institutions still functioning in post Colonial Africa Synthesis of Weber's `ideal types' Personal interests pursued using many of the tools and institutions of the modern state Personal rule authoritarian and inefficient and resulting in state fragility despite apparent regime stability of `presidentmonarchs' Still functioning to promote capitalist development Neo-Patrimonial States Ostentation Factionalization of Politics Massive expenditure on nondevelopmental but statusbuilding projects (see Thomson pg. 117) Presidential underlings empirebuilding Many different polices and militaries Possibilities for schisms, purges, coups Competition breaking down into civil war Yet competition with each other in Presidential interest Neo-Patrimonial States Legitimacy? Coercion Charismatic leadership But violence enjoys diminishing returns Military coercion risky and expensive Africa's `Big Men' preaching nationalism Most important factor is provision of resources (or public office) by the state Legitimacy `bought' through these systems `A relation of exchange between unequals' Chains of clientpatron relations pervade society `Vertical threads' of clientelism bind society together ensuring stability and order Creates political channels between states and society Clientelism Theories of the State The `Soft State' Societycentred approach (social indiscipline) Inability of the state to properly enforce the rule of law and administrative arrangements Myrdal in India and Hyden in Africa Collusion and corruption of public officials Resistance of all strata of society `Erosion of fundamental organizational rules' facilitating clientelism and undermining managerial authority of African officials Resulting from inability of any class to control the means of production for economic gains The `Overdeveloped State' (Alavi) Theories of the State Colonial historical contingencies creating state structures Institutional and statecentred approach Not organic reflection of domestic society Instead reflecting economic needs of colonial powers (and their economic structures) Hence superstructure is `overdeveloped' relative to the economic base of society Core of this state, the colonial bureaucraticmilitary apparatus, inherited by the postcolonial state Neither autonomous nor controlled by a single class able to maintain itself but not an agent of capitalist transformation Neither a personalized bureaucracy nor characteristics of a modern state Theories of the State Weak States (Migdal) StateSociety relations approach Weak states unable to penetrate society Can't regulate social relations or control social actors or organizations Such actors successfully resist state control Can't extract resources or use resources in appropriate ways Similar to the nonhegemonic state model in terms of state inability to legitimately rule supreme over society and social groups Power, authority, loyalty, and patronclient relations existing outside of state structures Theories of the State `Fictitious States' `Collapsed States' The legal substance of the state and its authority don't meet with substantive reality States run by `big men' effectively without the benefit of functioning state structures Where locallevel warlords, or groups with an ethnic/clan/religious/nationalist basis openly compete to take control of any vestige institutions Theories of the State `Vampire States' & `Predatory States' Spoilation and plunder citizens as prey Routinely engaged in rentseeking behaviour & appropriation of goods through coercive, administrative, financial, and illegal means Large surpluses accumulated but not spent on collective goods Pervasive corruption Extensive systems of patronage Attempts to exploit resources and people for individual gain through/with state structures Theories of the State Authoritarian States Soviet and ExSoviet Countries Latin American Dictatorship Lack of political economic freedom Associated with harsh repression and economic failures Topdown industrialization and centralised command economies Populism and death squads Inequality peasantry and landowning elites Economic stagnation Theories of the State Developmental States Japan, Germany East and Southeast Asia Late industrialisation on the Rim Copying Japanese model Highly bureaucratic Managed capitalism High levels of education and savings State support for exportoriented development Suppression of political opposition (control of labour and capital) What's the Point? A Very Good Question. 1) We can't understand the politics of development without understanding the nature of the state 2) We can't as Political Scientists just refer to the state all the time without interrogating its meaning 3) The Sociologists (Marx and Weber) are useful but they don't apply everywhere... This is to be expected with generalised theories of the state Not necessarily a bad thing brings us back to context History, culture, colonial legacies, international relations, regional relations, statesociety relation, domestic political economy (economic resources and social coalitions) ...
View Full Document