Theories of the State

Rob Kevlihan

Presented at Bilim / Central Asian Resource Center training seminar, Almaty, April 2005
Theories of the State
 Introduction: Defining the State
 State formation
 Different conceptions of the state
 Nationalism and the state
 International Relations & Globalization
 Implications for analysis in Central Asia
 Conclusion: Wrap up and discussion
Introduction: Defining the State

When we enquire into what corresponds to the idea of the “state” in empirical
reality, we find an infinity of diffuse and discrete human actions, both active
& passive, factually and legally regulated relationships, partly unique and
partly recurrent in character, all bound together by an idea, namely the belief
in the actual or normative validity of rules and of the authoritarian
relationships of some human beings towards others. This belief is in part
consciously, and in part dimly felt, and in part passively accepted by persons
who, should they think about the “idea” in a really clearly defined manner,
would not first need a “general theory of the state” which aims to articulate
the idea.. [1]

[1] Weber, Max, 1949. “ „Objectivity‟ in Social Science and Social Policy” , in Max Weber on the Methodology
of the Social Sciences, ed. Edwards A. Shils and Henry Finch (Glencoe, IL: Free Press), p 99.
Introduction: Defining the State
 Statist versus sociological approaches
 Hinges on the degree of
 autonomy the state is perceived to have from
society and
 on the nature of state / society relationships
 Various approaches often focus on particular
functionalities of states; these functionalities
often have normative underpinning
Introduction: Defining the State
 Classic definitions
 Hobbes
 Smith
 Weber
 Marx
 Gramsci
 Other interesting contributions
 Geertz
 Chandhoke
Introduction: Defining the State
 Thomas Hobbes
 Statist approach
 Dark view of human nature
 Without the imposition of order, the life of man
would be „solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and
short‟
 The state is the „leviathon‟ that provides this
order
Introduction: Defining the State
 Adam Smith
 The state as „night watchman‟
 Statist in orientation, with concentration on
particular functions the state performs
 Provides basic framework to allow markets to
function including:
 External security
 Secure property rights

 Rule of law etc.

Introduction: Defining the State
 Max Weber
 A state is a human community which (successfully)
claims a monopoly of the legitimate use of physical
force within a given territory
 “Claims” is not the same as exercises
 Q: What is “Legitimate”? What is the source of claim
to govern? – Weber: Traditional, charismatic and
legal / functional
 Classic definition – statist in orientation, despite
Weber‟s status as a sociologist
Introduction: Defining the State
 Karl Marx
 The state defined as the executive committee of the
bourgeoise
 Essentially derivative and a function of underlying
relations of production
 Materialist, with an emphasis on coercion
 Sociological, in the sense that the state derives from
underlying social realities connected to control of the
means of production – land, labor and capital
Introduction: Defining the State
 Marxist variation
 Some neo-Marxists allow for the possibility
that the state will play capitalist interests off
against each other, allowing for the possibility
of some autonomy
 e.g. Theda Skocpol – justification for the „New
Deal‟ in the US
 As a consequence, this leans more towards a
statist approach
Introduction: Defining the State
 Antonio Gramsci
 State capture by political forces
 Emphasizes hegemonic power of the state
 Civil society seen as a sphere of contestation within
which the state strives to impose a subtle hegemony
that legitimizes its existence and power
 Penetration of civil society by the state
 Hybrid – elements of statist and sociological
approaches
Introduction: Defining the State
 Other interesting contributions
 Clifford Geertz (Anthropology): State as theatre: role
of symbolism and symbolic action
 Chandhoke: Emphasis on the dialectical relationship
between the state and (true) civil society. Careful to
define civil society exclusive of non-governmental
elements that deny the on-going need for the
existence of civil society itself.
State formation
 Early state formation & state formation in
Western Europe
 Colonial experiences
 State formation in the USSR
State formation
 Early state formation
 Much of the literature is Euro-centric and teleological
– often subtly reflecting „stage‟ theories of
development and frequently ignoring Europe‟s
relationship to the rest of the world and the impact
that had on state formation inside and outside
western Europe.
 Will consider the work of Tilly, Hall & Ikenberry and
North & Thomas and a critique of this approach by
Wallerstein
State formation
 Charles Tilly
 States as protection rackets
 In Western Europe this resulted in a Darwinian
process of state consolidation
 The differential success of what were to become
great powers in external power struggles established
ever greater areas of internal arenas for the use of
force e.g. development of the United Kingdom,
“Manifest Destiny” in the US and eastward expansion
of Imperial Russia
State formation
 Hall & Ikenberry
 Puny leviathons (irrigation agriculture & religion)
 Capstone states – e.g. Imperial China – strongly
despotic but weak infrastructural powers, with ability
to govern but inability to grow
 Custodial states – e.g. Pre-colonial India – control in
the hands of Brahmins; purely defensive
 Predatory states: (from Ibn Khaldun): cyclical
relationships between nomads and cities that resulted
in transitionary and predatory regimes
State Formation
 Hall & Ikenberry / contd.
 Organic state: It was only in Western Europe that
political fragmentation and the ability of capital to
relocate resulted in a competitive aspect between
states that limited arbitrariness and allowed for ever
increasing infra-structural penetration by the state.
 The development of “liberties” allowed for the
development of civil society which in turn created the
modern western, capitalist, liberal democracy.
State formation
 Douglass North & Robert Thomas
 Capitalism supported state development
 “Institutions matter”, especially property rights
 England's comparative success explained by
establishment of firm property rights, removal
of hindrances in both factor and product
markets, and beginning of protection of
private property in knowledge through patent
law.
State formation
 Immanuel Wallerstein
 World Systems Theory: Centre vs Periphery
 World economy develops a pattern where state
structures are relatively strong at the core and
relatively weak in the periphery
 Strong structures include both de facto and de jure
sovereignty
 The state is a partially autonomous entity with a
margin of action reflecting compromises of multiple
interests; this autonomy serves the interests of state
managers and the bureaucracy
State formation
 Colonial Experiences
 Competition for territory: “The Scramble for Africa”
and “The Great Game” and arbitrary delineation of
territories
 Extractive economies developed often based on
extraction of raw materials, restrictive trade practices,
mono-agriculture and cash crops – cotton, coffee, tea
etc.
 Systems in indirect rule often instituted that reinforced
the power of local leaders, and (combined with
missionary activities) often deified ethnic divisions
 Independence with little prior preparation
State formation
 Colonial experiences
 Application of Tilly to African states by Herbst
 Noted absence of Darwinian process of inter state
war led to weak states
 Continuity with pre-colonial Africa because of
differentiated zones of control, with greatest control
concentrated around power centers
 Geography as determining factor in state capacity
though not deterministic – African states have largely
failed to overcome the challenge posed by
geography
State formation
 State formation in the USSR
 Some parallel‟s to colonial experience, especially in
Central Asia – mono-agriculture, arbitrary borders
based on titular nationalities, use of coercion to
maintain control, independence largely unexpected
and sudden
 But – relationship between core and periphery more
complex; investment in infrastructure, education and
services, opportunities for local control of
administrative structures (especially from 1950s
onwards)
State formation
 Sovietism: Combination of bureaucracy, patronage
relationships, localism and centralization…..a divide between
two different spheres of concern - one relating to strategy,
security, military and state ideology that was controlled by
Moscow and another relating to appointments of local cadres,
distribution of power and economic perks that was controlled
by indigenous leaders......the local society was able with the
complicity of its leaders to largely resist deep Russification
and state control, while also adopting sovietism and granting
lip service to the Russian big brother.

From Oliver Roy, 2002, “Soviet Legacies and Western Aid Imperatives in the New
Central Asia” in Sajoo (ed.) Civil Society in the Muslim World, Contemporary
Perspectives, IB Taurus, London, p129.
State formation
 Empirical statehood: Differing historical
experiences have left states with differing levels
of state capacity and distinctive relations with
the societies which they govern
 But, doctrine of state sovereignty gives all
internationally recognized states the same legal
standing internationally, regardless of state
capacity
 Erosion of state sovereignty?
Different conceptions of the state
 Many different state types e.g. „strong Vs weak
states‟; „failed states‟; „pluralist states vs
corporatist states‟; „welfare states‟; „predatory
states‟ etc.
 Tend to focus on empirical statehood, rather
than on question of sovereignty
 Taking Tilly‟s definition of states as protection
rackets, can include de facto governing
authorities even when not internationally
recognized
Different conceptions of the state
 Developed countries
 Debate is largely over the appropriate extent of the
state / how much the state should intervene in market
mechanisms
 Neo-liberals (in the economic, not political science
sense) argue for a minimalist conception of the state
as „night watchman‟ / Keynesians argued for a
greater degree of state intervention
 Market based approach often ignores market in-
efficiencies and power relations
 Impact of globalization in eroding post war welfare
states because of inter state competition and the
mobility of capital
Different conceptions of the state
 Underdeveloped countries
 Weak states and failed states
 Terms themselves indicate a normative
position – that these states should be doing
more / should have greater capacity
 But, closer inspection indicates that such
states frequently serve the purposes of at
least some groups
Different conceptions of the state
 Underdeveloped countries
 Francois Bayart in “The Politics of the Belly”
 Rhizome state – beneath the façade of the sovereign
state lies the rhizome state, comprised of patrimonial
networks of distribution; form vs substances
 Christopher Clapham – idea of the “shadow state”
similar
 State largely undifferentiated from society – or at
least embedded in / captured by particular social
networks
Different conceptions of the state
 State structures and idea of „sufficiency‟
 States could be re-characterized as „sufficient states‟
i.e. sufficient given the balance of internal and
external forces that define what the state is and what
functions it serves
 In this conception the nature and extent of the state
represents an equilibrium – the degree of stability in
the form of the state at equilibrium depends on
circumstances, and may be disrupted suddenly
through contentious politics or reformed gradually
through normal politics (or changed over time through
a combination of both).
Nationalism and the state
 Theories of nationalism
 Primordialism – a people have always existed
in a particular place and after many years of
struggle have established / will establish an
independent state; largely viewed as a „straw
man‟ in the literature
 Smith – idea of ethnie - historical continuities
in ethnic groups and nations
Nationalism and the state
 Theories of nationalism
 Gellner – nationalism a modern phenomenon –
expansion of state educational systems, the industrial
revolution and coercive power of the state
 Anderson – nationalism developed in different ways
in different places (linguistic, official and creole
nationalisms), but largely a socially constructed and
modern phenomenon – „imagined communities‟
 Brubaker – relational approach – triangle between
governing state, alternative nationalism of minority
within that state and nationalism of neighboring state
that has affinity with the minority
Nationalism and the state
 Relationship between nationalism and the state
largely depends on theoretical approach
adopted towards nationalism itself and
conceptualization of state / society relations
 Primordialist approach emphasizes the inherent
coherency of a particular society - the state
derives itself from that coherency
 Smith – more nuanced, but essentially the
presence of an ethnie lends itself to state
formation
Nationalism and the state
 Gellner – statist approach – it is the state itself
that uses nationalism to create societal
coherency. Joel Migdal – nationalism a means
of binding society to the state
 Anderson – nationalism largely elite driven.
Whether it contributes to state coherency or not
depends on the personal experiences
(pilgrimages) and imaginings of elites in the first
instance, and ultimately on collective imaginings
at the societal level.
 International Relations, Globalization &
the State

 Why consider globalization & IR when

theorizing about the state?
 International politics and economics play
key roles in state formation – both with
respect to sovereignty and with respect to
state capacity
 International Relations, Globalization &
the State

 International Relations Theory

 Realist theories largely view states as a „black box‟ –
differences in state power define nature of
international relations
 Institutionalists treat states in the same way – their
argument is that international institutions matter –
despite underlying power relations
 Neo-liberalists (in political science sense) disagree
and argue that the nature of state level governance
arrangements strongly influence how states behave
internationally – e.g. the democratic peace argument
 Constructivists point to the socially constructed nature
of states and international society in general
International Relations, Globalization &
the State

 What difference does this make?

 Degree to which membership of international
organizations protects the continued de jure
existence of state
 Impact that particular theories (e.g. democratic peace
theory) may have on foreign policies of states and on
state formation in other states
 Extent to which the manner in which the international
community is organized largely defines the form in
which states manifest themselves
International Relations, Globalization &
the State

 Globalization and the state

 Debate on globalization often revolves around the
continued salience of the state and the ability of
states to continue to govern
 Realist accounts (Robert Gilpin, early Susan Strange)
– system of international trade and finance largely a
creature of powerful states – what states made they
can unmake
 Alternative accounts – (later Strange) – global system
of capitalism is too powerful for this to change.
Political systems in powerful states largely captured
by those with continued interest in current system.
 International Relations, Globalization &
the State

 Globalization and the state

 Mittelman – Polanyian „double movement‟ –
relationships between state, society and market. First
movement – freeing of market – second movement –
societal response to ensure the market services
societal needs, rather than vice versa.
 Consequence- first movement in globalization has
been the freeing of the global market. Second
movement will require a global society response to
allow the market to serve global social needs
 Cosmopolitan view? Moving towards global systems
of governance or at least a global governance
architecture
 International Relations, Globalization &
the State

 Implications for the state

 Impact of globalization on states varies depending on
relative ability to compete in global market place
 For those with comparative advantage or able to
develop comparative advantage, global trade can
result in prosperity and a relatively stronger states;
 State autonomy constrained by continued need to
compete in international system and retain / develop
competitive advantage
 International Relations, Globalization &
the State

 Implications for the state

 However, for those with lower capacities to
compete / develop competitive advantage, the
world market, in the absence of global safety
nets, is a difficult place in which to thrive
 Consequence – weak states, dependent on
external aid and financially constrained by
economic and political conditionality applied
to loans and aid
 Implications for analysis in
Central Asia
 While legacy of USSR has resulted in
considerable parallels and commonalities in the
experiences of Central Asian states, there are
still differences, and there will be increased
divergence over time
 Specificity in the experiences and relative
situation of each state because of particular
geographic and social conditions and historical
experiences needs to be considered
 Implications for analysis in
Central Asia
 Empirical statehood, state capacity and legitimacy
 The relevance of the concept of rhizome states and
the particular ways in which patrimonialist networks
manifest themselves and impact on state formation
 State building projects – the different types of
nationalism and whether / how they apply to state /
society relations in each case
 Nature of insertion into international system from
political and economic perspectives and the impact
this insertion has on the nature of the state
 The relative (un)importance of Darwinism in state
formation in Central Asia and steps states take to
overcome structural challenges to state coherency
and capacity
Conclusions
 Theories provide platforms for greater
understanding of empirical reality
 Theories represent „ideal types‟
 All facts are theoretically informed
 Different theories will highlight different aspects
of a complex reality
 Useful to think in terms of different theories in
order to gain new insights and better describe
complex realities