Texas is Gods country! - SFTS
SFTS = The rest =
Certainly, you are right on all counts, but I don't know if in practice these issues are more of a handicap than a death knell.
For example, who would have thought in the 1970s that Spain's democracy would stick after 40 years of dictatorship?
Paul Collier's analysis of democracies in developping countries is interesting, even if his recomendations are a bit fruity, not to mention interventionalist!
Last edited by al Roumi; 01-10-2011 at 17:13.
You have to compare countries with similar economic situations to even approach a reasonable comparison. I thought that was so obvious I didn't need to stipulate.
"The republicans will draft your kids, poison the air and water, take away your social security and burn down black churches if elected." Gawain of Orkney
"The republicans will draft your kids, poison the air and water, take away your social security and burn down black churches if elected." Gawain of Orkney
"The republicans will draft your kids, poison the air and water, take away your social security and burn down black churches if elected." Gawain of Orkney
I'm not sure about that tbh. I'm aware of evidence that democracies (on average) promote an extra percentage point or so of growth but I'm not convinced you can be so cock-sure of the particular causality of a country's economy on its political structure. Could you explain what you are getting at?
"The republicans will draft your kids, poison the air and water, take away your social security and burn down black churches if elected." Gawain of Orkney
"The republicans will draft your kids, poison the air and water, take away your social security and burn down black churches if elected." Gawain of Orkney
Indulge me then. How does a "country's economic mode define its political superstructure", or point me in the irection of a handy reference. From what I see of the world, the focus on economy (barring possible meanings of economic mode) and nothing else seems utterly incomplete.
Edit: (I'm an Engineer by the way so don't be surprised that I've not studied basic political theory)
Last edited by al Roumi; 01-11-2011 at 13:37.
Political power is wielded by those who demand it and cannot be turned away.
In an agrarian economy, it is the land owners who hold power. They defend their interests against a monarch through titles, and confer these titles within their families. Political modes: feudalism, colonial slave/plantation systems.
In an early industrial economy, the land owners and factory owners hold power. Rule of law is important for stable investments and contracts. Political modes: constitutional monarchy, mercantile capitalism, limited franchise democracy.
Middle industrial economy creates a booming middle class. This in turn demands political power to match rising economic power - franchise gets extended. You know what a late industrial economy looks like, and it's political mode.
In addition to this you get other types of economies such as the primary industry economies in the developing world and the middle east. They have vast mineral wealth, but it's controlled by a small political elite and only needs a fraction of the population to extract it. These have very similar political and economic structures to the agrarian economies - essentially fuedal.
This is a good introduction:
Barrington Moore - Origins of Democracy and Dictatorship
Last edited by Idaho; 01-11-2011 at 14:02.
"The republicans will draft your kids, poison the air and water, take away your social security and burn down black churches if elected." Gawain of Orkney
Thanks! My only problem with that (and i accept that it's necessarily brief) -and i'm sure you are expecting this, is China. Or is there a bubble for (mid) industrial economies where dictatorship/one party rule exists?
Edit:
Ok, Barrington Moore's wiki page gives a bit more on his theories so consider my question answered.
It does pose another however, how do non-democratic "modern" societies transfer to democracy? You seem to see that still as part of an evolution, albeit an ironic reversion of marxist evolutionary economics .
Last edited by al Roumi; 01-11-2011 at 14:40.
Idaho you are going to hate this, but relevant for thread imho
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/morg6.htm
#2
Last edited by Fragony; 01-11-2011 at 15:10.
"The republicans will draft your kids, poison the air and water, take away your social security and burn down black churches if elected." Gawain of Orkney
I don't think it is a reversion as such. The Marxist principle of political change mirroring economic change is still the only analytical model out there. What Marx then went on to assume based on that model is another matter, and one that I don't think you need subscribe to (I don't).
"The republicans will draft your kids, poison the air and water, take away your social security and burn down black churches if elected." Gawain of Orkney
Bookmarks