class 2

Question 1

modern state definition

Answer 1

= a polity (way of organizing government) characterized by:

• complex set of institutions
• territorially bound
• which enjoys authoritative rule-making authority = sovereignty (no higher authority than the state that rules over the territory and the people)
• backed up by a monopoly of the means of violence

(Max Webber, Theda Skocpol, Charles Tilly)

! almost all territories are states, historically this hasn’t been the case !

Question 2

(non-state polities)

Answer 2

• city-state (e.g. city-state of Venice)
• empires (e.g. Aztec empire: lose allignment 3 city-states (now Mexico) and Komanchi empire (tribal society native americans))

Question 3

modern state key features
3

Answer 3

• territory
• sovereignty (internal and external)
• monopoly of the means of violence

Question 4

positions controversy of the dominance of states

is the state desirable?

Answer 4

• Hobbes: life before the modern-state was short and brutish (he associates the state with modernization, peace and prosperity)
• David Graeber and David Wengrow: many polities before the states arrived where sometimes even more democratic than the states we now know

Question 5

controversy: is the state still meaningful?

Answer 5

contemporary states are hollowed out by:

• globalization: undermines domestic capacity
• market forces
• localism or regionalism

Question 6

internal vs external sovereignty

+ quasi-states

Answer 6

internal = state should be independent of any kind of internal powers

external = state is recognized by other states

difference is useful: gives a handle of some empirical difference between established states

Quasi states = lack one (or two) of the types of sovereignty = e.g. Somalia (lacks internal sovereignty: challenged by Somaliland) + Somaliland (lacks external sovereignty)

Question 7

why and how did states emerge?

• state formation processes

Answer 7

patterns of state emergence / state formation processes

• transformation = gradual change of an independent (usually monarchic) into a state (this is roughly what Tilly refers to)
  e.g. Britain and France
• unification = territory with independent units that unite (often through war) -> emergence state
  e.g. Italy
• secession = breakup of empires or federal states
  e.g. Tsjecho-slowakije + Tsjechie en Slowakije
• decolonisation (most states)
  e.g. Libya, Ghana, Surinam

European state formation: first modern states emerge in the medieval time (+ starting point = Westphalia)

• theory of European state formation = Tilly: war made the state and the state made war (rulers waged war and this made states (dominant))

global South: ‘‘weak states’’ : some scholars argue that there were no wars, making these states weaker

Question 8

Tilly - war and state

Answer 8

medieval = military efforts became expensive: gunpowder + armies
requires:
-> taxation + soldiers
requires
-> registration (way of organizing populion)
requires
-> organization = state
-> legitimization = state (nation-building)

Question 9

Michael Mann 1984

how powerful are modern states?

!!not in the book, book basically talks about one of these dimensions!!

Answer 9

state power has two dimensions:

1. despotic power: actions the state can take without consulting society (fluctuates a lot, but over a lot of time there is a decline (lecturer argues))
   = constrained by institutions
2. infrastructural power: capacity of the state to impart/implement decisions on society (lecturer argues that this has been rising over long period of time)
   = implementing policies, is impacted by (quality) bureaucracy

Question 10

types of states

Michael Mann

Answer 10

Despotic power = D
Infrasturctural power = I

D low + I low = Feudal (not much control beyond castle walls)
D high + I low = Imperial
D low + I high = Democracy
D high + I high = single-party

Question 11

representative democracy

definition (representative) democracy

Answer 11

1. rulers are chosen in competitive, free and fair elections (Robert Dahl)
2. people (demos) rule indirectly, by electing their representatives, and holding them accountable during next elections

Question 12

nondemocratic regimes

Answer 12

have been the norm historically speaking

representative democracy is rather unique

Question 13

different democr regimes types

Answer 13

democratic regimes

• liberal (full) democracy
• electoral (flawed) democracy
• representative democracy
• direct/deliberal democracy

Question 14

two dimensions of democracy

Answer 14

Robert Dahl

• contestation = the extent to which citizens in a democracy have unconstrained opportunities to formulate and express their political preferences (individually (voting) or collectively (joining party e.g.))
• inclusiveness = proportion of population that is entitled formally and informally to participate in political processes

*hybrid regimes often try to attack contestation dimension

2 points Dahl tries to make (according to lecturer, Dahl didn’t say it himself):

• contestation: you don’t need to have only elections for democracy to exist: you also need extensive set of rights (eg. acces to information, freedom of speech) to make elections meaningful
  inclusiveness: a certain amount of people should be able to participate
• perfect democracies don’t exist

!!Dahl prefered to use the term polyarchy: he said democracy in practice doesn’t reallly exist

Question 15

Dahl applied to Apartheid

Answer 15

• contestation: eligible as democracy
• inclusiveness: only small part of population could participate

South AFrica under apartheid a democracy?
most likely not

Question 16

representative democracy qualifications

4

Answer 16

1. they can be of varying quality
2. they have democratic alternatives
3. they come in waves
4. they have non-democratic alternatives

Question 17

varying quality of RD

Answer 17

• liberal/full (more towards ideal type) =
• electoral/flawed =
  e.g. France? (textbook, he doesn’t get why)
  e.g. US: garrymandering +

more or less perfect on principles of contestation and/or inclusiveness (Dahl)

Question 18

RD have democratic alternatives

Answer 18

Direct = all members of the community directly take part in making all decisions that are related to the community

• ! Ancient Athens : according to him not direct: it was very exclusive + direct involvement/voting was only small part of the process of making decisions (most were taken by representatives that were selected by a lottery)

Deliberative democracy = selected group of citizens make consensus decisions about certain topics (not voted?)

*now: often we see deliberative + direct democracy features as improving democratic systems

Question 19

RD come in waves
(!! also in the book)

Answer 19

Samuel Huntington (1991)

first wave 1828-1926

• e.g. NL
• mainly EU (+ new world colonies)
• graduate process (graduate expansion inclusiveness and contestation)

second wave 1943-1964

• e.g. Germany, Italy, Ghana, Japan
• post-war rebuilding + decolonization

third wave 1974 onward

• e.g. Spain, Portugal, Hungary, South-Africa
• global wave: affects almost all parts of the world (led to optimism)
• not a specific process

in these waves there are more countries transitioning towards democracy than transitioning in opposite waves

!! between the waves are reverse waves

Question 20

(Freedom House + Fukuyama)

Answer 20

until 2017: free democracies increasing + not free democracies decreasing

after 2007: free decreasing + not free increasing + partly free decreasing

Fukuyama: democracy has won

EXAMPLES OPTIMISM ABOUT THE DEMOCRATIC WORLD

Question 21

conclusions

Answer 21

1. states differ significantly (e.g. in terms of their despotic and infrastructural power)
2. representative democracy not self-evident