Gov 20 Key Terms

Parliamentary Sovereignty

Ability of a representative body that checks the power of the crown of the king. When early European monarchs exercised absolute power, they needed money to fight wars. Taxing wealthy landowners --> landowners resisting violently and creating proto parliaments (in some countries they successfully negotiated a power sharing arrangement with the king) King would need to seek approval of parliament for taxes and laws was not democratic at first but it was a necessary step towards constraining executive power --> democracy

Oliver Cromwell and the 1640-1660 Puritan Revolution

After Charles I was executed, under the commonwealth of England, Cromwell took over, called himself the Lord Protector. When he died and son took over, the commonwealth collapsed.

Laurent Kabila and Joseph Kabila

Laurent Kabila led army to topple Mobutu. Kabila was a warlord, seized power and renamed his small part of Zaire, Democratic Republic of Congo. He was assassinated by his bodyguards, and his son Joseph Kabila. Like his father, Kabila does not control a large chunk of the Congo --- for example, there are 40 different rebel groups operating in Eastern Congo alone. Total brown area. Today, has no real state. West continues to be relatively uninterested - it would cost too much to develop/democratize

Mao Zedong

Leader of the Communist Party in China that overthrew Jiang Jieshi and the Nationalists. Established China as the People's Republic of China and ruled from 1949 until 1976. Founding leader of Chinese regime and Chinese communism party. Under Mao the communist party was in state of chaos, and his death caused major succession crisis.

Dynastic monarchy

1/2 regimes good at preventing internal conflict. Single extended family owns the state, ruling family is ruling institution (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates). It is clear who is in line. Help authoritarian regimes survive over many successions. Proven to be unusually durable regime type, because of institutionalized methods of succession. a type of monarchy in which the monarch is selected by leading members of the royal family and is accountable to them dynastic monarchies have resolved the the internal conflict problem better than most regimes and a very durable

Tories (Conservative Party)

Barrington Moore, Boix- landowners have a lot to loose under democracy. But if the rich landowners can actually win elections, if they can keep a presence in parliament then they have less to fear. Ziblatt- Tories (conservative parties) are strong then landowners have less to fear from democracy. Dahl's cost of toleration goes down. Because British Tories could win elections with a sector of the lower income electorate (appealing to nationalism and religion), then democracy is less scary to elites. Continued to win elections even as suffrage expanded.

Shari'a

Body of Islamic law that includes interpretation of the Quran and applies Islamic principles to everyday life Islamic law; makes Islam incompatible with democracy, because fundamentally at odds with law. Theoretically they do have many Islamic elements that would benefit democracy.

Total versus limited war

Centeno's ideas. In the 1900's norms of international sovereignty made it difficult for new colonial states to experience the right kind of war. Total War: Wars to the death. The very nation, if it loses, structure threatened. Existential threat to the entire society. Wars that empty out treasuries, spill huge amounts of blood. Force governments to tax their societies. WWI, WW2, U.S. Civil War. Requires military conscription (the draft). If states do not draft and tax, they will lose and be destroyed as nations. Limited War. Latin America and wars in the world over the last century. Do not pose existential threat, fought by professional armies, didn't involve mobilizing the entire society. Didn't touch all families in country. Do not foster state building the same way total wars do - because they don't require the state to have the ability to force taxation and conscription.

Otto von Bismarck

Chancellor of Prussia from 1862 until 1871, when he became chancellor of Germany. Germans created parliament with basic universal suffrage- but chancellor had a ton of power, and was chosen by King, so elected parliament was just a side show to the chancellor. Bismark ran the show- could only be removed by King. Also the richer you were the more your vote counted. And civil liberties were not protected - could not spread socialist ideas around. Pushed through anti-socialist laws, which banned any meetings or organizations aimed at spreading central left principles. Banned socialist unions, permitted closure of any newspaper deemed socialist. Not democratic. A conservative nationalist, he led Prussia to victory against Austria (1866) and France (1870) and was responsible for the creation of the German Empire.

Weimar Republic

German republic founded after the WWI and the downfall of the German Empire's monarchy. WWI wiped out old regime completed, after Russian Revolution, it seemed like Germany was about to have a Bolshevik revolution. Kaiser fled, and Weimar Republic formed. Not stable, not robust. This republic inherited a collapsed economy and a highly polarized society. Still tension between conservatives and revolutionaries. It would overwhelm republic. Begrudgingly accepted because democracy seemed to be the only alternative to a socialist revolution-->much less stable than British democracy Pzeworski and Limongi say that new democracies are better off/stable when their economies are growing - Germany had terrible economic situation, intensely polarized on the right

"Taylorland"

Greater Liberia, run by Charles Taylor. Had its own currency, port, television station, newspaper. Economy was one huge black market. Taylor exported diamonds, rubber, gold, and timber. Allowed foreign firms to continue doing business, but they paid taxes to him rather than to the Liberian state.

The National Party and P.W. Botha/F.W. De Klerk

National Party: The party that represented Afrikaners. This party enacted a serious of laws that institutionalized white supremacy in South Africa. Botha president of South Africa- tried to do a partial reform, but only encouraged more movements for more reforms. Next President, F.W. de Klerk: realized Apartheid was unsustainable, did the unthinkable, released Nelson Mandela and other leaders from prison. Began negotiating democracy, forged democracy with Mandela.

The Chartist Movement

When democracy really started picking up- with this working class movement. They were very civil and presented petitions in Parliament demanding right to vote, and they were refused and heavily repressed, leader John Frost was exiled. Failed- but more movement rose to take its place from middle class like Reform Union 1830s-1840s movement that was heavily repressed

Conditionality (positive and negative)

Levitsky and Way. Western democracy promotion. Making Western aid conditional on democratic behavior. Posititivity: If you wanna join EU, you have to be a democracy. Anticipatory conditionality. EU membership was a big deal then- meant more markets, and generous economic aid for poorer countries. Democracy for access. Negativity: More reactive. Punative action to human rights violations, coups, government steal election, Western governments may impose sanctions or suspend aid. 1993- Guatemala when President cut off Congress, US reversed aid, and 3 days later he changed his mind.

Lib-Lab Coalition

Liberal party (late 1800s) began protesting for expansion of suffrage in more organized fashion. Then Labour party emerged from labour movement, after huge growth of working class and union membership. These two parties aligned in loose coalition to spearhead movement to democratic reform. They were successful, as Britain inched forward. Secret ballot introduced, stable residences in countryside joined groups that could vote. Liberals won parliament majority in 1906- but blocked by un-elected House of Lords.

Oligarchs

Russian people noted for their control of large amounts of the Russian economy (including the media), their close ties to the government, and the accusations of corruption surrounding their rise to power. They became new billionaires. People who ran companies under communism acquired them when privatized. Economic power was concentrated in relatively few hands, those few hands had ties to state, so resources were not being dispersed, they were staying close to the state. That means they are unwilling to financially support opposition forces opposing the state.

Structuralist vs Voluntarist approaches

Structuralism stresses the importance of deeply entrenched social conditions and puts less importance on individual leaders. Modernization theorists, like Lipset, and cultural theorists, like Huntington, would be examples of structuralists. Voluntarism believes that the decisions and abilities of individual leaders deeply shape political outcomes, pointing to Washington and Mandela as decisive figures in history. Di Palma is a major advocate of voluntarism, believing that Washington's choices like his decision not seek a third term were crucial the survival of the US.

Tianemen Square Massacre

Students protested corruption and lack of opportunities, and marched. 300,000 to a million is square. Some called for end of communism, some began hunger strike. Government declared martial law, but Beijing residents protected protesters for 2 weeks. Regime seemed to teeter on brink of collapse, but then they crushed protesters. Never been anything like it again. Most likely regime won't fail- because born from revolution. Encouraged government to open up to private growth - caused intense and rapid growth.

Syngman Rhee and Park Chung-hee in South Korea

Dirt poor at the end of WW2 and suffered Korean War But still possessed some conditions that were favorable to emergence of developmental state Experienced early state building under Japanese rule Created a well-trained bureaucracy, large and effective police force, effective tax system Born of military conflict from Korean War Lived in permanent fear of NK Enhanced cohesion and espíritu de corps of state officials/bureaucrats State autonomy enhanced by land reform Land reform in 1950s basically wiped out landowning class Econ elite weak in 1960s —> state could call the shots Massive U.S. econ and military aid and access to U.S. markets U.S. viewed SK as Cold War ally Received support in military and econ aid In 1950s, led by corrupt autocracy under Syngman Rhee—> early 60s, Park Chung-he seized power in a military coup SK built a developmental state Purged corrupt officials from the state nad brought skilled professionals into bureaucracy Could do this bc Japanese investment in education and development of strained civil service Large pool of professionals who fled NK for SK Like Taiwan, cohesion and discipline was reinforced by military threat coming from NK SK became a militarized society under a constant threat of war that enhanced strength in the autonomy of the state K regime was authoritarian, elections unfair, labor no the left were repressed Park was a strong anti-communist Created KCIA, keeping close watch on unions, journalists, left wing politicians, and university students Justified undemocratic conditions because of NK threat and economic progress Park believed state should be active in econ development Against U.S. advice, created an econ development board to oversee 5 year industrialization plans Nationalized the banking system, used loan subsidies and protective tariffs, and control over business licenses to steer firms towards heavy industry Created multiple paths of development Steel industry (state owned) Invested billions of dollars into POSCO, provided it with cheap loans, subsidized gas, electricity and water, access to habrors, and access to Japanese tech Lay foundation for other heavy industries like shipbuilding and automobiles Auto industry (privately owned but protected and subsidized by the state) Government organized the auto industry into 3 major producers and closely supervised their production Used loans and subsidies to promote auto exports while at the same time protecting the domestic market for Korean firms Paid off by the 1980s Electronics industry Government invested in state sponsored R&D center for high tech electronics, protecting domestic companies from foreign competitors By 1980s, Korea was leading exporter of televisions and other electronic goods By 1990s, SK was exporting computers, semi-conductors, and memory chips Not market-led growth alone, SK successful bc of state-led development from authoritarian regimes with developmental states Government protected infant industries that enabled those industries to get a foothold in the domestic market before they turned to exports In key sectors like steel, electronics, automobiles, domestic firms were protected by tariffs and other nontariff trade barriers Korean government used a variety of state inducements as carrots and sticks in promoting exports Used export markets and companies that met those targets got access to loan subsidies and other benefits, and those that didn't meet them were largely cut off Benefited from massive state spending Initially came from USA Effective tax capacity Spent little on social spendingSouth Korea. 1950's South Korea governed by a corrupt autocrat- Syngman Rhee. Economic growth was pretty mediocre during this period- only grew 4 percent a year. 1961- Park Chung-hee seized power in a military coup- purged bureaucracy of corrupt officials, brought in skilled professionals into bureaucracy. More professionalized then previous regime. Maintained cohesion due to constant military threat of war from North Korea. KCIA- Korean Central Intelligence Agency monitored every so it was a fairly oppressive regime under Park Chung-hee. Development first- democracy later said Park. He believed in a big state, actively deployed in the service of economic development. Park ignored advice to follow comparative advantage- launched state owned Po-Hang Iron and Steel Company (POSCO). Park- Steel equals national power. Also launched automobile and electronic industry that was privately owned but protected and subsidized by the state. Very little relative money spent on social spending.

The Sharpeville Massacre (1960) and Soweto Rebellion (1976)

1960, demonstrators marched on the local police station. Police fired on the crown and killed 69 un-armed people. Triggered riots and protest across South Africa, which the government brutally repressed, 18,000 arrested. ANC was banned, and Mandela was imprisoned for life.Soweto Rebellion: School children protested against making Afrikaans the official language in black schools. Police opened fire on these kids, killing two of them. Triggered more uprising, and then more repression. But this time the repression failed to stop the movement. This rebellion gave new life. International situation was different- transformed South Africa into international pariah.

Charles Taylor and the National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL)

1990 rebel group led by Charles Taylor and participated in civil wars as groups vied for power Largest insurgency during Liberian state collapse, led and created by Charles Taylor. They launched an armed rebellion, putting the country into a three way civil war. Controlled a large portion of Liberian land. International peace keepers keep him from seizing national power. Civil War continue for a decade. Created a shadow state "greater Liberia" or "Taylorland" Taylor was elected President eventually. Governed like warlord, so country continued in Civil War.

Capital Mobility

2nd factor of Boix (other than inequality) leading to propensity to accept democracy. Means the ease to which capitalists can move their money out of country to escape taxation or redistribution. Least mobile capital is land. Financial capital, stocks, bonds is the most mobile. Gives capitalists an escape hatch- so they will be more likely to accept democracy. Low capital mobility associated with underdevelopment, so in underdeveloped nations, rich don't have an escape hatch, so they will be more likely to be authoritarian. Boix argues that the rich are more likely to tolerate democracy where capital is mobile, because if a government tries to redistribute wealth, if the poor elect a government that does that tries to redistribute wealth, capitalists where capital mobility is high can always move their money abroad. They've got an escape hatch. Where capital is fixed or where capitals in the form of land, the rich have nowhere to go and that makes them much less willing to accept democracy. So for Boix to get the rest to accept democracy, you need relatively low levels of inequality and you need relatively high levels of capital mobility.

German Social Democratic Party

A German working-class political party founded in the 1870s, the SPD championed Marxism but in practice turned away from Marxist revolution and worked instead for social and workplace reforms in the German parliament. Industrialized, so working class grew dramatically- started labor party- this German social democratic party. Biggest German party. Bismarkian regime remained intact, but showed that underlying power in society was shifting. Pro-democratic. Part of stalemate against Junkers. Won overwhelming majority in 1912, but Chancellor just ignored them. Parliament voted to get rid of chancellor, but he ignored it. Constitutional Crisis. From the wealthy in Germany, Dahl's perceived cost of toleration was higher --> remained hostile towards democracy and the SPD and cost of repression high --> opposition was well organized

Constitutional Monarchy

A King or Queen is the official head of state but power is limited by a constitution. Rough balance of power between wealthy landowners and the Crown that gave rise to parliamentary sovereignty. Power is shared between crown and elected parliament. Emergence of a strong parliament, competitive elections, rule of law with independent judiciary. Far from democratic still but an important foundation for democracy.

Import Substituting Industrialization (ISI)

A set of policies, pursued by most developing countries from the 1930s through the 1980s, to reduce imports and encourage domestic manufacturing, often through trade barriers, subsidies to manufacturing, and state ownership of basic industries. Government policies that attempt to replace imported goods with similar goods produced by domestic companies. Examples of such policies include putting very high taxes on certain imported goods or barring them altogether. ISI was a strategy used by many poor and moderate-income developing countries in the twentieth century in an attempt to foster domestic economic growth. Predominant model of state led industrialization in post WW2 era Goal was industrial self-sufficiency, to produce at home manufactured goods that used to be imported from the West States use subsidies, cheap loans, protectionist tariffs to support domestic industry and shield domestic firms from international competition ISI ran directly counter to neoclassical theory rather than exporting raw materials, commodities like sugar and coffee where they had a comparative advantage Governments sought to industrialize to break their dependence on the West Protectionist trade policies to shelter domestic industry from foreign competition

Developmental state

A state that seeks to create national strength by taking an active and conscious role in the development of specific sectors of the economy One of the key components of state led model Three key characteristics Autonomy (impose its will on powerful groups) Able to formulate goals independently of social classes, interest groups, and other groups in society,powerful groups don't exert a lot of influence over government policy,policies are implemented by state officials who are at least relatively insulated from the pressure of powerful lobbyists Interventionist Developmental state plays a big role in the economy,controls banking system, owns major industries, regulates trade and foreign investment (using tariffs to protect and promote key industry) Business friendly Interventionist on behalf of businesses — trying to create a more business friendly atmosphere Includes providing businesses easy access to credit, sponsoring research and development, cracking down on unions

Dependency Theory

A structuralist theory that offers a critique of the modernization model of development. Based on the idea that certain types of political and economic relations (especially colonialism) between countries and regions of the world have created arrangements that both control and limit the extent to which regions can develop. New group of scholars emerged in the 60s and 70s that began to focus primarily on the disadvantages of late development — dependency theory Emerged out of developing world itself, particularly Latin America Shifted focus from individual societies to international system/context Argue capitalism was not a national phenomena, it was an international system and no country's development could be understood outside that system Need to understand how each county fits into the global econ system Turned modernization theory on its head Instead of viewing the development of the West as a model for Third World Development, dependency theorists view development/industrialization of the West as one of the main causes of the Third World underdevelopment Think core, periphery, and semi-periphery Another subset (crude dependency theory) says poor countries cannot develop unless their international context is good Brazil rapidly industrialized in the 1960s and 70s, but inequality skyrocketed — trade offs include bad working conditions and exploitation Late Development is very likely to be shaped by international forces/environment Dependent development would be heavily constrained by the international system Criticism: Handful of peripheral states did manage to totally escape the periphery (SK, Taiwan, Singapore 1960s-70s Dependency theorists said they should close themselves off from the global economy, but they did not do this embraced the global economy instead

Relative backwardness

A term coined by Gershenkron (structuralist), relative backwardness compares the various stages of development of nations in a given time period/how backwards you are compared to your neighbors. When one nation modernizes, its neighbors feel the necessity to modernize quicker, in order to catch up to the level of advancement achieved by the former nation. Gershenkron studied the effects of relative backwardness as it applied to the development of England, Germany, and Russia. England, the first nation to modernize took a market-led approach, which was a slow process over the course of several centuries, to develop. Germany, with its plethora of banks, followed a bank-led approach. Russia began industrialization even later than Germany followed still a third path to industrialization because it could not use the slow capitalist path and it did not have the banking system already in place in Germany. Its state-led approach involved the heavy centralized guidance of the state in directing the nation in a direct path towards development, and this method achieved its goal very quickly because by 1950, Russia was a modern military power with a strong industrial base. Both Germany and Russia had the advantage of following England in that it could borrow England's technology in order to speed up the industrialization process, but there were a number of disadvantages that resulted from their relative backwardness as well. Since both Germany and Russia incorporate more state-driven methods, both nations had stronger authoritarian influences. Late Developers Face Different Opportunities and Constraints Greater Pressure to Develop Quickly Neighbor is getting richer and militarily more powerful creates pressure to industrialize quickly —> jump ahead in latest technology and most powerful forms of industry Geopolitical military pressure —> not being able to keep up with neighbors could destroy you Stalin: "Those who fall behind get beaten. One feature of the history of old Russia was the continual beating she suffered because of her backwardness. She was beaten by the Turkish base. She was beaten by the Swedish feudal lords. She was beaten by the Polish and Lithuanian gentry. She was beaten by the French and British capitalists. She was beaten by the Japanese barons. All beat her because of her backwardness, military backwardness, cultural backwardness, political backwardness, industrial backwardness, agricultural backwardness. They beat her because to do so was profitable and could be done with impunity, such as the law of the exploiters to beat the backward and weak. It is the jungle law of capitalism. That is why we must no longer lag behind... We are 50 or 100 years behind the advanced countries. We must make up this distance in 10 years, either we do it or we will be crushed" — 10 years later, Soviet Union was invaded by Nazi Germany England never faced this kind of pressure Ability to Borrow Technologies from Early Developers (advantage!) Did not have to reinvent the wheel with new technologies Could learn how to do things by borrowing from abroad/England Industrializers could simply borrow many of the ideas and technologies that made it possible to industrialize more quickly ***For Gerschenkron, relative backwardness had both advantages and disadvantages, posed challenges but also created opportunities It was clear that later industrialization would look a lot different than it did in England — faster, follow a different sequence, require different kinds of economic and political institutions

Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao, and Xi Jinping

After the institution of term limits and institutionalized mechanisms of succession, Jian replaced Deng. Hu Jintao replaced Jiang Zemin is first institutionalized succession ever. Xi Jinping replaced Jintao. Xi Jinping may be undoing everything, taking a ton of power. Communist party eliminated term limits recently - may cause future succession crisis. Not a democracy but there are ways that public can help reform the government.

Joseph Mobutu

Almost immediately after independence, state collapses and Mobutu seizes power in U.S. sponsored coup, overthrowing the elected leader (who was leftist). Anti-communist, renamed country Zaire. Resided over what may be world's most corrupt dictatorship. Wealth of country ended up in Mobutu's pocket. Developed personalistic regime. Even though corrupt, during Cold War he could rely on foreign aid, but after that ended they got sick of him and cut him off. State went bankrupt and social spending stopped. State collapsed and he lived on yacht in Zaire river, but clung to power for 5 years until coup finally managed to topple him - led by Kabila

Washington Consensus

An array of policy recommendations generally advocated by developed-country economists and policy makers starting in the 1980s, including trade liberalization, privatization, openness to foreign investment, and restrictive monetary and fiscal policies. label used to refer to the following fundamental principles of free trade: 1)that free trade raises the well-being of all countries by inducing them to devote their resources to production of those goods they produce relatively most efficiently; and 2) that competition through trade raises a country's long-term growth rate by expanding access to global technologies and promoting innovation Background: In the 1990s, state-led development models fell out of fashion and a new consensus among elites emerged around the neoclassical model In Latin America, this consensus around free market models of development = Washington Consensus Elements of free market model: Free markets State would no longer intervene heavily in the economy Governments would not decide which sectors of the economy would be promoted, which businesses should get loans and shouldn't Decisions left overwhelmingly to the market Economies would have to be deregulated, industrial policies, price controls, regulations Limited State State would get out of the business of owning and financing industry Banks and industries privatized and the state would return to a more limited role in providing law and order and a few basic services Role in the economy would be dramatically scaled back Free trade Tariffs would come down, trade barriers reduced, domestic companies would have to face foreign competition, companies would shift back and focus on their comparative advantage Often meant abandoning industry, which had been promoted for decades in favor of agriculture and other commodities Countries like Argentina, Chile, Uruguay literally de industrialize de in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s Foreign investment Embraced foreign investment because development required access to capital and tech Even if multinational companies came in and gobbled up domestic companies Rather than protecting local industries, forcing them to compete internationally **Exports would now be the engine of growth and markets, rather than state bureaucrats would determine the composition of those exports (market led development model) Kind of like modernization theory where there was a single path to development that looked like the U.S. path

The Kuomintang (KMT) and Chiang Kai-Shek in Taiwan

Background: Back in 1930s and 40s, Taiwan was a poor rural island under Japanese colonial rule Japan left the island after WW2 But in 1949, the island was soon occupied by another foreign power China's communist revolution forced the old nationalist government/old mainland government to flee China with its army to Taiwan Soldiers, civilians, professionalized elites moved to Taiwan and nationalists created an entirely new state and political regime Nationalists/New ruling party came to be known as the KMT Established a dictatorship under General Chiang Kai-Shek He imposed martial law in the late 1940s, banned all opposition, banned all independent trade unions, and established a repressive dictatorship that would endure in Taiwan for nearly half a century KMT was able to consolidate his power with the help of massive U.S. assistance Late 1940s and early 1950s (Cold War) U.S. supported Taiwan to fight back against communist China Even though Taiwan was a poor peripheral state in the 1940s, it had some of the basic building blocks of a developmental state Japanese built a relatively strong colonial admin that the KMT was able to build upon (would be very highly autonomous) No ties to Taiwanese society, strong martial law, new state bureaucracy highly cohesive, constant threat from China Authoritarian regime with a strong state occupied by a cohesive group of skilled professionals = developmental state Impact: With land reform, no powerful groups in society, industrial sector just born, working class repressed —> state was the dominant player in Taiwan in the 1950s State led industrialization effort because private sector was tiny State took over all Japanese industries, all Taiwanese banks, becoming a leading force in the textile, mining and chemical industries Used 4 year plans to create state owned companies and target certain industries for development (protected by tariffs) Gave up on ISI and encouraged foreign corporations to come in and set up factories at low cost Heavily regulated foreign investment as key sectors of the economy (like steel, oil shipbuilding, and most of the banking sector) was roped off limits to foreign capital All the way into the 60s, 70s, and 1980s, the state remained a major player in the economy, which allowed it to lead the shift into heavy industry and high tech and emerged as an industrial power (successful econ expansion and transition) 4 year plans from bureaucrats called for state to launch several industries, particularly steel and shipbuilding Created a giant state owned steel company and shipbuilding company In other sectors like electronics, the state used more cheap credit subsidies and tariff protection to lure private sector individuals into electronics Also established R&D centers developing cutting edge computer tech and getting local firms access By 1990s, Taiwan was on the cusp of the First World Today, Taiwan has a thriving private sector economyTaiwan. Old nationalist Chinese nationalist government took over the state- established their own government and everything- with a new ruling party: the KMT. Under Chiang Kai-Shek, the KMT was a harsh authoritarian regime. KMT built upon Japanese strucutures left over from colonization. KMT had very few ties to Taiwanese society- enhanced state autonomy. KMT had large pool of skilled professionals that had fled China. KMT carried out massive land reform (today still egalitarian), crushed landed elite so state was most powerful group in country. KMT used big state to target industrialization from above.

Kings Charles I, Charles II, and James II

Charles I: part of kings trying to circumvent the parliament. doing whatever he wants, stealing property and refuse to pay back loans. He rejected parliamentary sovereignty, insisting he had a divine right to rule, and shut down parliament for 11 years. but there was a weakness where the crown lacked a standing army. In 1642, that created a rebellion, parliament created its own army, and England plunged into Civil War. Parliamentary forces backed by emerging bourgeoisie capitalists and puritans- executed Charles I and established commonwealth of England. Charles II: Invited back to rule England after commonwealth collapsed in Restoration, son of Charles I. James II: Son of Charles II, got into another conflict with parliament believing in divine rule. William of Orange and Mary invaded from Holland, backed by protestants. James II fled the country- this is the glorious revolution.

Augusto Pinochet

Chilean military leader who in a coup deposed Salvador Allende - communist, elected leader - created one party rule dictatorship - ruled w/ iron fist - human rights abuses Background: 1970 president Salvador Allende Marxist/Democratic Socialist president was overthrown in a U.S. backed military coup led by General Augusto Pinochet in 1973 Established a brutal military dictatorship that killed and tortured Unions violently repressed and strikes declined Transformed Chilean state Filled top state positions with skilled technocrats Brought in UChicago economists free market zealots (cohesive, ideologically committed group) Even after Chile democratized in 1989, elected governments maintained Pinochet's free market policies Chile changed by increasing social spending but they still have a model based on small state, openness to foreign investment, free trade, and exports

Deng Xiaoping

Communist Party leader who seen as responsible for Chinese economic reforms after the death of Mao Zedong in 1976. Told army to repress Tienanmen square massacre, a party elder who marched in revolution, so army listened.

J-curve

Davies and his relative deprivation theory. Under what collective psychological state does mass rebellion happen? Occurs in frustrated expectations. Those who expect a lot get hurt. Where things have been steadily improving over time, getting better and better, and then those expectations get dashed. Important is gap between expectations and actual living conditions. Russia as an example. Don't expect revolution in places that have always been poor.

"Brown areas" (Guillermo O'Donnell)

Definition: areas w/in an otherwise strong state where the government's institutional capacity is weak/nonexistent Example: Flint, MI Significance: explaining subnational variation in state strength Areas within an otherwise strong state where the government's institutional capacity is weak or non-existent (developed by Guillermo O'Donnell) Argentinian political scientist Guillermo O'Donnell describes areas in which the state effectively disappears and there is democracy in name only. Widespread in Africa, Central and South America/Asia, third world countries/almost completely stateless areas Democracy cannot function well where there are large brown areas (means unpaid taxes on paved roads, non-existent social policies, corrupt police forces and judges, unequal treatment before the law, ineffective citizen rights, violence (no rule of law) Constitutions includes a wide range of progressive citizenship rights but those rights are not enforced because governments lack capacity to

Che Guevara

Demonstration of the importance of leaders (voluntarist approach) in revolutions. Worked with Fidel Castro in Cuba, to overthrow Batista. Wrote the manual for revolutionaries in LA. Part of origin of the Foco system. Made manifest the limitations of the voluntarist system. Walked the walk, launched Foco in Bolivian countryside, but Bolivian peasants failed to respond, too conservative, and turned him in to authorities. Limitations shown there- the importance of context of revolutionary actions

Unequal exchange/declining terms of trade

Development of the core = Underdevelopment of the periphery ◦ Core countries exploit resources of periphery - processed more valuable than raw dependency theory, Gunder Frank; claim that over the long haul, commercial manufactured goods which poor countries import increase in value while raw material value decreases - Western development would then potentially leave periphery further and further behind - challengescomparative advantage theories of economists - this system is kept in place through military power of core countries Background: poor countries are supposed to benefit from comparative advantage Not able to produce computers and automobiles as well as the West, but can produce raw materials more cheaply Such as sugar, coffee, tea, rubber, cotton, etc If countries focus on their competitive advantage, poor countries should benefit from global trade and from embracing and participating in the global economy (dependency theorists rejected these ideas) Unequal and exploitative relationship began with colonialism Core countries stole cheap labor and raw materials (minerals like gold, silver, and diamonds and raw materials like sugar, rubber, tea, and coffee) + (labor from African slaves to Latin American indigenous people) Human labor stolen from Africa was used to develop the cotton and textile industries (basis of capitalism in the U.S.) Cheap sugar, tea, coffee, and other goods from Africa and Latin America helped feed workers as England industrialized Gold and silver extracted from Peru and Mexico supported Spanish monarchy Core's exploitation of periphery did not end with colonialism, continued and expanded after independence Declining terms of trade = Dependency theorists argued that over time, the value of the manufactured goods that poor countries imported from the West —> increase relative to the value of the raw materials that they exported to the West Sugar, cotton, coffee, and rubber tend to be worth less than automobiles, computers, iPhones, and other high priced consumer goods Trade with West could set peripheral states back In crudest form, dependency theory treated the international economy as a zero sum game in which trade between the core and periphery systematically underdeveloped the periphery

Dependent development/Fernando Henrique Cardoso

Dropped most extreme claims of crude dependency theory- they recognized that poor states could industrialize. But it would differ from development in the core- it would be more fragile, unequal, and authoritarian. Peripheral states lack technology to industrialize on their own, no choice but to rely on foreign investment. Problem is that it isn't reinvested in country- so more instable. Example- Brazil was growing rapidly, but had highest level of income inequality in the world.

Competitive authoritarianism

End of cold war brought a wave of these regimes. Have all the trappings of democracy, they have multi-party elections, they have legislatures, and constitutions. They are not democracies, because the playing field is heavily tilted against the opposition. They don't just eliminate opponents or eliminate elections, because of the international repercussions. Instead, abuse takes a more subtle form. Bully into cooperating with the government. There is a degree of competition, but it is unfair. Governments massively abuse state resources for their re-election campaigns. They tax them and use state institutions like the police etc and use those institutions against their political institutions. this system developed because of international pressures of linkage and leverage.

Foco Strategy

Espoused by Che Guevara, Foco strategy is the idea that if one takes the intellectual vanguard and puts them in the environments which feature harsh class structures, one can arouse the masses and start revolutions. Che's movement overwhelmingly failed, however, as he underestimated the conservative nature of peasant villages in Latin America and in fact was turned in by peasants in Bolivia and executed. Worked in Cuba. Young revolutionaries take to the mountains - where they make a foco- a focal point- where they dedicate themselves for months and years to raising peasants' consciousness to their own exploitation. Once peasant consciousness is raised, the revolutionaries can go about their business of leading a mass peasant based insurrection. Every Foco failed- they underestimated how much it would take- you have to completely smash the state.

Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) (Japan)

Ex of export-led growth led by the state: Johnson - Japan's Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) critical to Japan's state led development particularly in the 1930s Used government loans, subsidies, tariffs to guide Japanese industries as they developed into global powerhouses

Magna Carta (1215)

First document to limit the powers of the king - signed in 1215. King John tried to end the rebellions of the Barons by drawing this peace treaty up, which promised he would consult them before he taxed them. He would call together a grand council of noble men whenever the King wanted to raise revenue. Late 13th century, that grand council became parliament and it got stronger even with kings pushing back. later became a system representing everyone in English society, not just landowning elites.

Import-substituting Industrialization (ISI) versus Export-Oriented Industrialization (EOI)

ISI - tried to produce at home the manufactured goods they used to import from abroad EOI - exports are the engine of economic growth (SK and Taiwan in the 1960s-1980s) Were initially exporting cheap manufacture goods like textiles and cheap plastic toys Within a decade or two, 10-15 years, they had shifted into heavy industry and high tech electronic goods By 1980s, exporting things like cars and computers

The Chicago Boys

Implemented by Pinochet regime in 1973. Radically changed economy, moved towards realistic exchange rates, returned land holdings. Banned liberties, unions, outlawed some parties, Universities purged. 1k-3k killed UChicago economists that were free market zealots Cohesive and ideologically committed group Pinochet with repression, insulated the Chicago boys from the pressures of day to day politics Cancelled elections, repressed oppositions, especially day to day political pressure With insulation, the Chicago boys transformed the Chilean economy Instead of industrializing like Korea and Taiwan, they liberalized the economy Created one of the most radical free market economies that the world had ever seen Slashed government spending, wiped out worker protections, pushed wages down In the first 3 years of Pinochet's government, wages and social spending fell by nearly 50% so the cost of production went way down Dramatically shrank Chilean state Privatized nearly all of Chile's state owned companies and banks, slashed the public bureaucracy Dramatically opened up economy Eliminating restrictions on foreign capital and reducing tariffs to levels below the United States Meant that domestic industries suddenly had to face foreign competition Disappearance of large number of industries —> deindustrialization of Chile At the same time, other sectors of the economy boomed, particularly modern agricultural exports Chile became a leading exporter of fruits, vegetables, and wine In the 1980s, Chicago boys extended their free market ideas into areas like education, health, labor, and social policy Transformed Chile into a free market society that was unimaginable before Privatized Social Security, created a market-like school voucher system *** Relatively successful in macroeconomic terms, but shift to radical free market model had serious social costs in the late 1980s with real wages and social spending lower

Extractive political and economic institutions (authoritarianism) (Acemoglu and Robinson)

Institutions that allow a small elite to enrich itself at the expense of the rest of society include things like colonialism, slavery, serfdom, Jim Crow. also include any system that grants certain groups in society privileged access to property privilege, access to the legal system, to the financial system or other economic institutions, any system where the rich and the powerful can use their wealth, their status, their power to rig the system against the rest of society. Extractive economic institutions do not create incentives and opportunities necessary to harness... For instance, the rules that governed access to land in ejidos were extractive because they meant that farmers did not have security of property rights. This reduced their incentives to invest in the land and also to adopt better technology that could have boosted productivity. The fact that they could not sell the land also gave them less incentive to give up farming and move to a job that they were better suited for.

Inclusive political and economic institutions (Acemoglu and Robinson)

Inclusive economic institutions create the incentives and opportunities necessary to harness the energy, creativity and entrepreneurship in society. Poor countries on average have extractive economic institutions while rich ones have inclusive ones. As opposed to extractive economic institutions, inclusive ones give people incentives and opportunities. For example, in the 19th century the United States became the world's most innovative economy. At the heart of this was the patent system that gave anyone the opportunity to take out a patent to protect intellectual property rights. These rights could be defended in the legal system and created the incentives to innovate.

Independent vs dependent variables

Independentvariable=cause,dependentvarable=effectthinkofexamples

Jawaharlal Nehru

India's first Prime Minister. Enormous power, used prestige to strengthen democratic institutions. Could have been a dictator, wasn't! Underutilized power to strengthens democratic institutions. Respected ruling of the courts- played by the rules, and enhanced legitimacy of constitution. Under him, society was deferential to the government (people did not make many demands of the government). Over time, the legitimization of democracy led to independent courts, electoral processes, less caste based legal discrimination.

Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)

Indian politics changed a lot in 1980s onward. Congress party hegemony ended with the increase in the amount of new parties. Rise of Hindu nationalism. Largest party today is Hindu nationalist party- BJP, fear that current government under Narendra Modi is becoming increasingly authoritarian.

Indira Gandhi and the Emergency

Indira daughter of Nehru, took over when he died. People were protesting and organizing/making demands by early 70s, deference to the government disappeared. She was more populist and more of an autocrat. Decided to crack down on the rising protests and chaos. Citing conspiracies from within and outside of India, she declared a state of emergency. The government jailed opposition leaders, stripped away civil liberties, arrested thousands of protesters, and censored or closed down dozens of newspapers. "Brought democracy to grinding halt" For about about a year and a half, it looked like democracy would fail. Gandhi then called new elections and was trounced. Congress party lost power in government. New leadership amended constitution to avoid anything like that happening again. Returned to power in 1980, and governed democratically.

Institutions and Institutionalism

Institutions - set of rules of the political game (think Constitution, property laws, electoral system) shapes who can play and who can't, who wins and loses, how people play the game by encouraging/discouraging certain strategies, may even shape our identities Institutionalism - An approach to comparative politics that focuses on how institutions shape political and economic outcomes (structuralist and voluntarist theorists undermine), more relevant and important after the 1990s where post-Communist world and tumbling of dictatorships in LA, Africa, and Asia designing new judicial systems, electoral system, taxing, etc. middleground between voluntarism and structuralism because they are malleable structures that are created by humans

Gazprom

Is the state-owned energy company in Russia that is the tenth-largest oil and gas entity in the world

Muslim versus Arab

Islam = main religion. Cultural theorists find the negative aspects of Islam, saying that it does not recognize the difference between church and state and incompatible with democracy. But the positives>>negatives because Islam is largely individualistic and egalitarian, making it very ripe for liberal democracy. Many non-Arab Muslim countries like Indonesia and Pakistan are overachieving democracies. Arab speaking countries in the Middle East. Largely authoritarian. Stepan and Robertson- Authoritarian is an Arab problem more than an Islam problem. Proven wrong however. Fear of Islam domination (because in a democracy Islamic political parties would win) lead many countries to advocate for military dictatorships and that leads middle class urban secularists to back it.

Afrikaners

Largest group of original Dutch settlers- White Dutch settlers. Later White Brits came, and they were the other part of white settlers. Afrikaners and other whites took most of the land in South Africa, settled down there, and wanted it protected. To protect their property, they created an effective system of self government and rule of law. Excluded native africans.

Apartheid

Means separateness. A racial oligarchy. A settler state. British style parliamentary system, free elections, civil liberties only for white people. Property rights for whites, blacks couldn't buy land. Really took hold when National Party won the majority in Parliament.Apartheid system: institutionalized racism set up by National Party. Restricted political participation to whites. Physically separated blacks and whites, ban on mixed marriages, and bans on blacks living in cities/other areas where whites lived. Rapidly industrialized in late 1900s, sowed seeds for own destruction. Increasingly urbanized, growth of working class, and black union membership in society, threatening to Apartheid regime.

Junkers

Members of the Prussian landed aristocracy, a class formerly associated with political reaction and militarism. They tied people to the land even more than Britain did. Power relied on brutal repression of peasants. They controlled the state, used it to benefit their own way of life. They had no conservative party to protect them- so more fearful of democratic reforms.

Rentier State

Michael Ross. Oil revenue and oil money makes an authoritarian regime more likely to survive. Oil suffocates civil society- state with that much money gives it all consuming power over citizens' lives. Citizens rely on state for everything- so they won't support anything against the state. Oil goes against Robert Dahl's dream for dispersion of resources. States that derive a significant portion of their revenues from rent (such as renting land to oil companies)

Mohandas Gandhi

Mohandas Gandhi was the leader of the Indian nationalist movementagainst British rule, known for nonviolent civil disobedience. Gandhi is credited for usinghis popularity to help the initially elitist Congress party in building a mass base amonglower castes. From the voluntarist perspective, Gandhi's leadership was crucial foradvancing Indian democracy under otherwise unfavorable conditions of poverty,inequality, and religious pluralism.

Informal Institution

Most studies focus on formal institutions. Rules of the games in politics and life are not codified or enforced, but they are still known and respected. Term limits in the United States- unwise and wrought with peril said an unbinding resolution by the House during Grant's term. Mexico- dedazo system. Post-war Italy people knew to get things done in the state bureaucracy, they had to pay for it, it was simply accepted. Patronage, Corruption, Clientalism all types of informal institutions. If institution is gonna be informal- it has to be strong! Can't be weak.

Warlords

National army splits apart after collapse of state --> take troops, carve out a territory with precious commodity--> demand foreign company pay these warlords for protection rackets, creating shadow states Soldiers don't get paid because the Soviet Union and the United States as patrons lost interest in their client states Person who exercise control over a country in place of a stable state through control of armed forces. Often take over when state in anarchy central state disappeared, no police or courts to uphold rule of law --> chaos and violence some warlords provided villagers a sense of security others plundered, some faced competing warlords or were completely abandoned, variety of fates for territories (Ex: Liberia and Congo)

Political pacts

Part of Voluntarist/leadership centered theory. importance of human agency. Ensuring no one is tempted to ruin the game, lower cost of toleration. Guarantee players share of power- assure that even if they loose, their most vital interests will still be protected. Negotiated rules of the game that give incentives to everyone involved. Protecting the vital interests of your enemies may require making some concessions that are really hard to swallow It guaranteed that military officials who committed terrible human rights violations would walk the streets free in post apartheid South Africa. The founding pact assured whites that their economic power would remain intact. These are basically deals with the devil. But if the devil's got the power to knock over the board, then sometimes you've got to make a deal with the devil or at least negotiate. Don't give someone a reason to knock the board over Ex: Nelson Mandela making political pacts with those who enforced apartheid

Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf

President of Liberia. Won internationally sponsored elections in 2005. Massive international forces and aid allowed Sirleaf government to form minimal state operations. Relies on UN peacekeepers and foreign aid to work. Remains to be seen if state would survive without foreign aid- but it is being taken away slowly so we shall see.

Mancur Olson and the Logic of Collective Action

Problem with Marx and other theorists- make the jump too quickly from individual misery and protest to collective protest. Collective action can't be taken for granted. Laid out an argument for why individual attitudes do not translate well into collective action. Individual participation in nay collective entire has a cost, in minimal it costs you time and effort. In mass rebellion it will cost a bit more. The average peasant or worker may support the idea of revolution, but each one of them has to individually decide if she or he wants to participate in making the revolution happen. From the indivdiual peasant's standpoint, the cost benefit calculations - effect of one person's contribution is not significant, but the individual cost is pretty high (free rider program)

Institutionalization (Huntington)

Samuel Huntington created- Process by which rules or organizations become widely known, accepted, and valued. Viewed as permanent fixtures in society. Example- electoral college is institutionalized structure. Countries vary a lot on how strong or weak their institutions are. Latin America, Former Soviet Union nations people ignore institutions regularly. Change in an institutionalized system are slow. You have to know what to expect from government! Rules can't be constantly changing- results in uncertainty and law of the jungle. People have to be able to think about future. The strength of the institutions is at least as important as the form that it takes. What matters is not which institutions get chosen, what really matters is if those institutions really take root.

Samuel Doe

Seized control of Liberia in coup, aided by US during Cold War. Government officially taken over by Charles Taylor. Called Chairman Moe by Ronald Reagan, sort of a mix between Chairman Mao and Dr. Doe With end of Cold War, U.S. abandoned Liberia. As external assistance dried up, Liberian state lacked resources and faced collapse ---> military insurgencies

Social Revolution

Skocpol's definition: A rapid fundamental and often violent transformation of a country's state structure, class structures, and dominant ideology, which is accompanied by and in part caused by mass based revolts from below. Old bureaucracy had everything destroyed. Who owns what is radically altered. Wipe out pre-existing culture to create and impose a new one. For this to happen 3 things have to happen: 1) the pre-existing regime must be toppled by a mass based rebellion, not a coup 2) regime change has to be accompanied by a collapse of the state, the disintegration or at least partial disintegration of the police and the army 3) a new elite must build a new state and launch some sort of transformation of the pre-existing economic system, class system, and dominant ideology. France, Mexico, Russia, China 1949, Vietnam, Iran, and Nicaragua in 1979. 5 reasons why revolutions important

Newly Industrialized Countries (NICs)/East Asian "Tigers"

South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore industrialize rapidly in the 1960s and 70s, jumping from the periphery to the core in a single generation Challenged core assumptions of neoclassical/free market developmental theories (because it was led by state) NICs follow the neoclassical model by embracing the global economy and bet heavily on trade, exports BUT they broke with neoclassical model in fundamental ways Did not stick to their comparative advantage, jumping quickly into heavy industry State played a major role in promoting industrialization Gov officials selected industries that they believed were critical to development, using state policies to build those industries up Export led growth led by the state Success of NICS, first Japan, then Singapore, Taiwan, and SK gave rise to a new developmental/state led model (described by Johnson and Amsden) Raises questions about what made the East Asian NICs so different from the rest of the periphery? + examine a theory of development that focuses on the role of the state in promoting industrialization

state vs. regime vs. government

State: A set of permanent administrative, legal, and coercive systems, with a monopoly over the legitimate use of force in a territory. It encompasses the rule of law and the bodies that enforce it. has monopoly over post office, tax collection. Changes least frequently. Regime: The set of political structures that make up the state. political system - monarchy v. democracy, etc. the type of government--authoritarian, sultanistic, democratic (rule by majority)--way power is allocated Changes second-least frequently. Government: The group of people who occupy top positions in the state. The group of people in charge - e.g. Bush administration v. Obama administration. Changes most frequently.

Labor repressive agriculture

System of the landed elite, peasants work the land because they had to not because there is a contract. They could not quit if they didn't like it, peasants were tied to land due to tradition, law, and by force. Deprive peasants of all basic rights, powerful coercive apparatus (a repressive state, to crack heads when peasants rebel) state institutions fundamentally at odds with democracy. This system has to be wiped out to establish democracy. According to Moore, to wipe out the landed elites, a strong bourgeoisie class or capitalist class (they want a system of markets and wage labor, not feudalism, factories and workers) to get peasants to enter contracts in urban factories "no bourgeois, no democracy" OR violence to transition from feudalism to capitalism (like the Civil War in the U.S.) terrible result ex: Japan and Germany where bourgeoisie formed an alliance with landed elite --> industrialized but fascism instead of democracy

State capacity

The knowledge, personnel, and institutions that the government requires to effectively implement policies. the ability of the state to achieve its objectives, especially the abilities to control violence, effectively tax the population, and maintain well-functioning institutions and the rule of lawInefficiency and corruption undermine. If industrialization was going to happen in the 1950s, 60s, 70s, in countries like Algeria, Zambia, Peru, Philippines, it had to be led by the state - state was the only one with capacity to even try The ability of state officials to successfully carry out the tasks they set for themselves The degree to which laws and policies actually get implemented as designed in practice In the U.S., we took state capacity for granted Taxes get collected, contracts get enforced, mill gets delivered No economy on earth can function without a minimum of state capacity NICS had high state capacity in the 1960s-70s but in Latin America and Africa, state capacity was bit lower —> no guarantee that good econ policies would get carried out on the ground bc of lack of state autonomy

Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress

The opposition to Apartheid. Took off in 50s when Mandela took over leadership. Demand: multi-racial democracy, one man, one vote. Peaceful protests, but not successful. After Sharpeville Massacre, jailed, and ANC banned. Reasons why failed: Apartheid regime enjoyed Western support because of the Cold War, no civil society.

The landed elite/aristocracy

The people that control the power and resources. Part of Barrington Moore (views democracy as product of class conflict). A feudal, pre-capitalist social class, it did not produce for the market or use wage labor relying on coercion (like slavery or serfdom) to produce labor from peasants. In democratization, landed elite is the bad guys, way of life incompatible with democracy. Way of life depended on keeping peasants tied to land they owned- depend on labor repressive agriculture. They have to be physically and violently wiped out by bourgeoisie (who needs factory workers so they want peasants released, and they have resources to take on and defeat landed elite). Bourgeoisie is the good guy to the landed elite's bad guys. Existed in Japan and Germany for a long time. For Moore, the driving force behind democratization in England and France, the United States was not liberalism. It was not industrialization. It was the destruction of the landed elite

Civil Society

The realm of organized citizen activity that is independent of the state. NGO's, Interest groups, etc. Lipset touches upon that industrialization strengthens this in his modernization theory. A strong Civil Society provides society with the organizational muscle it needs to overthrow dictators or prevent governments from abusing powers. Most successful democracy movements like the one that we'll see next week in South Africa do not just emerge spontaneously, they don't just emerge out of thin air. They are organized--- organizations, particularly durable organizations, require resources, they require people, they require money, they require offices. Civil society provides those things, provides those resources. Civic associations, whether it's unions or chambers of commerce or churches, have offices, memberships, activist networks. With capitalist development, with industrialization, resources become much more dispersed, small businesses emerge, factories spring up, and with the rise of the middle class, you have more people, many more people who have the time and the money to invest in civic activities. Most sustained democracy movement are organized, organizations requires resources, money, offices all things provided by civil society. Society with civic organizations are much more likely to sustain a democracy movement. Comes with expansion of middle class that has time to dedicate towards civil society.

William (of Orange) and Mary and the Glorious Revolution of 1688

Under King James the second another rebellion broke out led by these people. Backed by a bunch of groups, included protestants, they were crowned the new rulers of England. Second armed rebellion against monarch that was abusing power. Established parliamentary sovereignty permanently. Parliament could no longer be shut down by King, gained right to approve all taxes, audit King's finances, approve raising of army, oversee and remove Judges. Unprecedented degree of judicial independence from the King. After this, Parliament a permanent check on King's power.

Constitutional Oligarchy

Until 1932 England was this. Strong parliament, strong rule of law, independent judiciary, and competitive elections. People are excluded, but Britsh elites play the political game, where they learn to accept defeat and tolerate practices of democracy. Might be why British elites more open for political inclusion later on. Or, as Barrington Moore argues, 1) England didn't have labor repressive agriculture like Germany to keep peasants in line, and 2) British represented by Tories.

The Indian National Congress (congress party)

Vital to role of democratization. Leadership of independence struggle. Contributed to democratic India in two ways: 1) Party integrated rich and Indian masses into the system. Founded by upper caste elites, party provided home for elite (not threatening) Congress played role that Ziblatt assigns under democracy. Built mass base organization among peasants. Lower class Indians represented by modern secular party- left them unavailable for appeals by leftists or religious nationalists. 2) Its power allowed it to forge the Indian identity, they didn't appeal along Hindu lines, they appealed to everyone. Congress party brought together Indians of all religions and pasts, and forged an Indian identity, one that was mostly liberal and secular. Absolutely dominant, leaders had all the power, wrote a liberal democratic constitution granted universal suffrage and free press and outlawed caste based discrimination.

Arab Spring

Wave of anti-authoritarian protest spread across middle east. US had hope but... Dictatorships fell in 4 countries- only one democratized. demonstrated stability of Gulf monarchies- they have a ton of money and oil, and still had strong Western support.

Pluralism by default

Way coined this. Looks like democratic pluralism, you have a lot of opposition and competition, but it isn't by design. You have a free elections because government lacks ability to attempt electoral fraud- they have no capacity left (Russian state in chaos).

The collective action or free rider problem

We would all be better off if a task is carried out - everyone decides to let everyone else do the work, and then the task isn't done.

International Demonstration Effect

When the International context of countries sets higher expectations for underdeveloped countries to develop and essentially catch up with the rest of the world. This occurs when countries through development of communcations realize that more developed countries are more advanced industries, technologies, or government. These higher expectations created by the outside world lead underdeveloped countries' demands of consumption or order of government. The international context can also put more pressure on a country's current economic situation (ex. CNN) - implying that modernization will never have a slow pace that England and America originally had When democratization and development succeed in one country, other countries in the region may be more likely to democratize and industrialize. Associated with Huntington's Third Wave of Democracy. poorer countries want the same living conditions as richer countries (Huntington's 3rd Wave: domino effect) International demonstration effect Has to do with expectations that are created by the outside world Lack of awareness and invention (no idea what people in other countries were doing and lack of mass media/communication) —> expectations in 17th/18th century England were pretty low and peasant workers didn't want much Absence of international development effect meant people did not demand much (ex: living conditions) Terrible for workers at the time, but allowed capitalism to develop slowly, gradually Because government and factory owners did not have to meet many demands for better living conditions Fast forward to today Ex: Bolivia — expectations in 21st century Bolivia are higher than 18th century England People are less willing to work all day for nothing Not willing to be brutally exploited the way English peasants were Less willing to be patient, they know what fruits of industrialization look like and don't want to wait too long Implications that carry from the expectations Consumption patterns change in ways that may not always be productive Stupid purchases instead of saving and investing Demands of government change Governments all over the world are under pressure to deliver public goods Have to provide pensions, public transportation, infrastructure, schools that may drain resources away from productive investment Governments (powerful pressure) of poor countries purchase latest and most expensive military technology Spend hundreds of millions of dollars on high tech military equipment Ex: India, Pakistan, NK invested in nuclear weapons when their people were hungry.

Settler colonies

While many colonial states were created with the purpose of extraction, settler states is where they come to stay - generally states that are poor in natural minerals and resources. Colonies where Europeans came not to plunder, but to live. Large number of European settlers came in and built roots, they brought their families, they claimed land, they set up farms, and invested their life savings there. They weren't there to get out, so they needed a real state. They needed infrastructure, protections from natives, so therefore they need revenue from taxes. This puts very different demands on the state than in colonies intended for plundering. State institutions were constructed by and for the settlers. Therefore, when independence happened, the settlers couldn't just pick up the state and leave. (South Africa, Israel, U.S., and Canada). Aside from these states, all other colonial states are born weak. Colonies in which the colonizing people settled in large numbers, rather than simply spending relatively small numbers to exploit the region; particularly noteworthy in the case of the British colonies in North America.

Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin

Yeltsin- first elected leader. Initially lots of opposition parties and free press. What looked like a democracy was only because of Yeltsin's weakness. Very weak, no effective state. Low approval rating. Russian state was in state of chaos. 1996 election, only won because competitive authoritarian. Resigns, and hands over to prime minister- Putin. Valdimir Putin: Far more energetic and effective leader then Yeltsin. Also as his Presidency began, Russian state was getting its act together. Russian economy also improved- 7% year growth. Gave him better resources to buy off opponents. Put an end to pluralism by default. Overflowing with oil and gas wealth. Forced all the oligarchs to stay out of politics, so they wouldn't finance opposition. Opposition parties had no chance, no funds and no media.

Protection Pact (Slater)

You only get state building where the government can convince the rich to fork over money for taxes. The best way to get them to pay taxes - fear of losing everything, existential threat, usually fear of communist insurgency. Economic elites agree to delegate authority to an authoritarian government and provide it with tax revenue, and then the autocrat would then use that tax revenue to wage a successful counter insurgency against the left, and eventually build a strong state. In exchange for taxes and political support, autocrats build a state that protects economic elites from radical leftists. Slater: protection pacts serve as the basis for relatively effective state building in Singapore, Malaysia, and Indonesia (maybe South Africa).

Neoclassical economics and comparative advantage

a formal attempt to explain the workings of capitalist enterprise, with particular attention to distribution Basic premise (David Ricardo and Adam Smith) is that the allocation of goods and services in the economy should be driven by the market/competition Market should determine who produces and sells what to whom and for how much State should not promote industry, what a country produces, exports, or imports Developing countries should open up their economies to international trade and investment to the international market Trade should be based on comparative advantage If you are a poor country, you should not try to produce high tech manufactured goods, you should use your comparative advantage in cheap labor to export raw materials and low cost manufactured goods, like textiles and cheap plastic items

Liberalism

classical liberalism- Western philosophy, champions of the individual and its rights over rights of society, the state, and religious authorities. Took over during enlightenment. Ultimate authority rests in individual. Mistrust anyone/anything with power to take away rights. Liberalists design institutions to check the power of their leaders. Egalitarian: all people born with same basic rights, all equal before the law. Competition: View world as marketplace. People have right to choose products and candidates they want. This produces the best politicians and products. Modern democracy can only thrive with individualism, equality, and competition. Found mostly is protestant west according to cultural theorists. A condition that contributed to the rise of democracy in the West. Part of several conditions of classical liberalism have been linked by cultural theorists to modern democracy. trace roots of modern democracy to certain characteristics of Western culture, particularly liberalism

Newly industrialized countries (NICs)

countries that have undergone rapid and successful industrialization since the 1960s Singapore, SK, Taiwan In 1962, were all solidly in the global periphery Singapore per-capita GDP = $146 = Kenya and Ghana Taiwan per-capita GDP = $224 = lower than every country in Latin America SK per-capita GDP = $146 = one of the poorest countries, poorer than Sudan Between 1960 and 1985, they grew at an average rate of more than 8% a year (3* faster than the United States) By the year 2000, SK per capita GDP was more than $10k, nearly 100x what it had been in the early 1960s Taiwan's per capita GDP was $13k, more than 50x what it had been in the early 60s Singapore's per capita GDP was $21k, surpassing Israel, Spain, and New Zealand East Asian NICS in 2000 grew 40-50x richer than they had been in 1960, joining the First World Korea and Taiwan became industrialized economies that produced automobiles, computer software, top of the line electronics Life expectancy is higher than the U.S. average Posed a huge challenge to dependency theory Totally escaped the periphery Did it in a way that dependency theorists said was impossible - inserting themselves into the global economy Also challenged some core assumptions of neoclassical/free market development theories Taiwanese and SK industrialization driven significantly by the state, not free market

Voluntarism

emphasizes the importance of individual actors in determining the outcomes of particular states. Voluntarists subscribe to the idea that the leadership and personal characteristics of national figures greatly affect the direction in which a state moves more than the structural characteristics of that particular state. Voluntarists are less deterministic than structuralists, as they believe human agency is far less predictable

Structuralism

focuses on deeply rooted social, economic, and political conditions to determine the ability for a state to develop economically or democratically. Structuralists also look at these factors to explain a state's susceptibility to revolution or ethnic conflict. Structuralists minimize the influence of individual actors and their role in the outcomes in these areas, believing that with similar conditions and an absence of these particular people, similar outcomes would result.

State autonomy

the ability of the state to define goals that are independent of social groups, classes, and societies Helps to have... Professionalized bureaucrats who can make policy on their own Have to know something about what they are doing Upper ranks, top tier of state bureaucracy has to be filled by relatively well educated and skilled professionals like economists, engineers, and people with college degrees Helps when autonomous states are cohesive, when there's a degree of cohesion among state bureaucrats Something that binds them together like a shared ideology or higher calling *** Cohesive, professionalized, relatively free of interest group influence —> economic policies made by state bureaucrats who are somewhat insulated from political pressure

core / periphery / semi-periphery

the core-periphery idea that the core houses the main economic power of the region and the outlying region and that the periphery houses the lesser economic ties with the semi-periphery in-between the two World is broadly divided into three camps Core (poor, non-industrialized countries) Mostly post-colonial like Africa, Asia, Middle East, Latin America Semi-periphery (middle class of the international econ system) Group of countries that fell in the middle like Brazil, Mexico, Turkey, Malaysia Development of core and underdevelopment of periphery are two sides of the same coin Core produces high profit consumption goods for periphery and semi-periphery while periphery offers cheap labor and raw materials for the core (exploitation)

Industrial policy

the view that government - using taxes, subsidies, and regulations - should nurture the industries and technologies of the future, thereby giving these domestic industries an advantage over foreign competition Breaks openly with the law of comparative advantage Instead of letting the market determine which sectors of the economy thrive and take off, the government chooses industries it wants to promote and intervene actively in the economy to promote and protect those industries Usually sectors that the government views as essential to development and maybe strategically, militarily important to the government Like steel, high tech, heavy manufactured goods like automobiles Government chooses sectors based on either developmental, strategic, or military goals State needs to induce businesses to jump into heavy industry = good for long term growth of the economy Several key components (state officials have to decide which sectors and businesses to support) State autonomy Not corrupt and can make their own decisions State controls banking system no channels loans to firms that it wants to promote Subsidizing things that go into the cost of production like cheap after, gas, electricity Trade protection (use of tariffs no other import restrictions to protect domestic industries from foreign competition) which is critical to the survival of emerging industries Support for R&D Discipline Rewarding firms that meet state's goals and punishing those that do not Ex: Taiwan and SK set export targets that they expected, firms that reached goals were rewarded with additional loans, subsidies, trade protection and those that didn't were cut off, meaning they went under Have to have autonomy to determine which firms are failing or succeeding and cannot be swayed by personal connections, politics, lobbies, or bribes to correctly reward businesses

Lee Kwan Yew and "Asian Values"

• Lee was Singapore Prime Minister who believed social harmony is most important • Confucian ideology influences political and economic institutions - values group over individual, and authority over freedom Example of cultural approach. Confucious thought was dominant east asian thought. Emphasize group over the individual, authority over liberty, responsibility over rights. Benign Dictatorship- one leader works better. Asian values more comparable with dictatorship. Singapore former dictator- Lee Kwan Yew, along with other leaders, claims "asian values" justify dictatorship. this was a justification/legitimization of his rule