|
|
|
Fall 1996
Giulio Gallarotti
Friday 2-4
Office Hours:
CSS Library
T, Th 1:15-2:30
Office: 309 PAC
Ext. 2496
Emaill: ggallarotti@
wesleyan.edu
I. Course Description
This course will analyze the principal movements and processes
which have led to the rise of the modern nation-state. The theoretical
focus will be oriented around the main factors which account for the rise
and legitimation of the state, while the historical focus will be on the
political evolution across differing systems of governance from feudalism
up to the modern period and beyond. We begin with an analysis of the foundations
of the theory of the state. Here we will compare and evaluate differing
theories of the rise, consolidation, and legitimation of political communities.
This will be followed by a theoretical and historical assessment of the
rise and fall of differing systems of governance across time. This evolution
will be considered within an interdisciplinary framework which is oriented
around the political adaptation to social and economic modernization. We
the emergence of feudalism from the ashes of the Roman Empire, and then
the political transition toward the absolutist state. We analyze the democratic
challenge to the absolutist state, and then consider the 20th century political
movements embodied in Fascism and Communism. We go on to consider
present-day challenges to the modern nation-state, and then speculate on
possible forms of political organization beyond the nation-state.
II. Topics
1. The Rise of the State: The Social Contract and Escape From Anarchy
2. Legitimation Crisis of the State
3. Feudalism and the Political Tradition of the West
4. The Emergence of the Democratic State and Differing Routes to Democracy
5. Democratic Culture and Institutions
6. Communism and the Revolution From Below
7. “Il Fascismo” and the Revolution From Above
8. Challenges to the Nation-State: Interdependence and Globalization
9. Beyond the Nation-State
III. Requirements
Assignments will consist of weekly essays of five double-spaced pages. Essays will be written on problems posed in sections entitled “Essay Topic.” Readings are accompanied by questions and suggestions which will underscore important topics in the readings. These topics will serve as a focus both for discussion and the essays. All of the weekly readings listed are required and have been placed on reserve both in the Olin Reserve Room and in the CSS Library (CSS Library will carry just the xeroxes, while Olin will carry both xeroxes and books recommended for purchase). I have recommended for purchase those books which will be most extensively used, hence it would be convenient to own these books. These books can be purchased at Atticus, they are:
Gianfranco Poggi, The Development of the Modern State
Sam Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies
Barrington Moore, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy
Vladimir Lenin, What Is To Be Done
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
F.L. Ganshof, Feudalism
Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince
IV. Course Sections
1. The Rise of the State: The Social Contract and Escape From Anarchy
How did the state come about? Locke, Rousseau, and Hobbes talk about the emergence of the state from anarchy. Each sees a specific set of conditions that lead individuals to create political communities (“social contracts”). These communities require individuals to give up the right to pursue their desires in an uncontrained manner (i.e., giving up the natural freedom they had under anarchy). Compare and contrast their accounts of anarchy and the process whereby individuals escape anarchy through the creation of the contract. In a less idealized context, Herz, Deutsch, and Poggi account for the origins of the state. What are these explanations, and how do they relate to the views marshaled by Locke, Rousseau, and Hobbes?
Readings:
Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, Chapters 13, 17
Jean Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract, Book I
John Locke, Second Treatise on Civil Government, Chapters 2, 8, 9
Gianfranco Poggi, The Development of the Modern State, Chapter 1
John Herz, “The Rise and Demise of the Territorial State”
Karl Deutsch, “The Growth of Nations”
Essay Topic:
Compare and contrast the state of nature (anarchy) in Locke, Rousseau,
and Hobbes. Compare and contrast also their accounts of how individuals
enter into political communities (i.e., escape anarchy through the creation
of the state). How do the arguments made by Poggi, Herz and Deutsch about
the rise and integration of the nation-state relate to the above arguments
about the origins of the state?
2. Legitimation Crisis of the State
Once states form and are consolidated, they invariably face (to a greater or lesser extent) a legitimation crisis (i.e., challenges to their political authority). The sources of this crisis can be numerous and varied. What are these sources, and what can states do to preserve their authority? These questions touch upon central issues involed with the study of the theory of the state. De Jasay talks about the endemic legitimation problems caused by the “adversary state.” What is the adversary state and what special problems does it create? Huntington talks about the legitimation problems created by the “political gap”: what is this gap and how does it threaten the state? What special legitimation problems does Nisbet see in the modern western world? What prescriptions for confronting the legitimation crisis can be derived from Machiavelli and Gallarotti?
Readings:
Anthony de Jasay, The State, Chapter 2
Robert Nisbet, The Twilight of Authority, Chapter 1
Giulio Gallarotti, “Legitimacy as a Capital Asset of the State”
Sam Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies, Chapter 1
Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince
Essay Topic:
What common agruments emerge from the readings about challenges
to the authority of the state (i.e., can you construct a theory about the
essence of the legitimation crisis)? Based on the readings, try to construct
an effective strategy for confronting the legitimation crisis.
3. Feudalism and the Political Tradition of the West
Feudalism represented a system of political organization that emerged from the ashes of the Roman Empire. It is difficult to understand the origins of modern democratic state without understanding the specific institutions of governance introduced by feudalism. At the most general level, feudalism was founded on pluralism and constitutionalism. The contract between government and governed, which is at the heart of liberal democracy, is a manifestation of the reciprocal rights and duties between free persons under feudalism. What are the main factors accounting for the rise of feudalism? In terms of political organization, was it an optimal response to the turbulent conditions created by the disintegration of the Roman Empire? What were the major problems which feudalism came to face? How did feudalism create the seeds of its own destruction? How did feudalism contribute to the character of the modern democratic state?
Readings:
F.L. Ganshof, Feudalism
Gianfranco Poggi, The Development of the Modern State, Chapter 2
A.D. Lindsay, The Modern Democratic State, Chapter 2
Otto Hintze, The Historical Essays of Otto Hintze, Chapter 8
Essay Topic:
Link the rise of feudalism to the political turbulence caused
by the downfall of the Roman Empire. In terms of being a system of
political organization, what would you say were the major strengths and
weaknesses of feudalism?
4. The Emergence of the Democratic State and Differing Routes to Democracy
The political orgaization of feudalism was replaced by the nation-state.
With the territorial consolidation of the nation-state came wide-ranging
attempts at absolutist governance: monarchs claiming authority
over large sovereign territories. Absolutism in turn came to face
a democratic challenge as elements emerged from society to
demand greater political voice. The success of the political challenge
to the absolutist state formed the modern democratic state. While this
transition occured across various nations, it differed in terms of style
and timing (i.e., differeing routes to democracy). How do you account
for the transition from feudalism to absolutism? How, in turn, did
absolutism give way to democracy? What were the differing routes to democracy
taken by France, the U.S., Germany, and England.?
Readings:
Gianfranco Poggi, The Development of the Modern State, Chapter 4
Sam Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies, Chapter 2
Barrington Moore, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, Chapters 1, 2
Otto Hintze, The Historical Essays of Otto Hintze, Chapters 1,
4
Essay Topic:
Account for the transition from feudalism to absolutism, and then
from absolutism to democracy.
5. Democratic Culture and Institutions
Scholars who have studied political transition in the early-modern
period argue that with the advent of democracy came a democratic mind-set:
unique ways of thinking that characterize democratic societies. Individualism
and a belief in equality, for example, are two of the principal elements
in this mind-set. This mind-set was a necessary precursor to
the institutional changes that led from feudalism to democracy. Barbu
locates the roots of the mind-set in the dissolution of feudalism and the
transition to a less rigid social, political, and economic structure. Lindsay
sees its roots in the emerging intellectual traditions of the early modern
period, as well in the economic and scientific transformation of
that period. De Tocqueville identifies a unique American mind-set and traces
it to the particular forces shaping institutional and demographic patterns
in colonial America. What are the components of this democratic mind-set?
Are these components as unique to democratic nations as many believe? What
are the origins of this mind-set?
Readings:
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America,
Volume I, Chapters 2-4, 8-10, 13, 17
Volume II, Book I, Chapters 1-10
Book II, Chapters 1-14
Book III, Chapters 1-4, 13, 22
Book IV, Chapters 1, 2, 6
A.D. Lindsay, The Modern Democratic State, Chapters 3-5
Zevedei Barbu, Problems of Historical Psychology, pps. 140-144,
Chapters 5, 6
Essay topic: What are the principal components of the democratic mind-set?
What are their origins?
6. Communism and the Revolution From Below
Huntington defines a revolution as not only a transformation of
political institutions, but of political ideologies as well. Such pervasive
political changes within nations are rare. While political change through
insurrections, revolts and coups has been common in history, many
fewer instances of political revolution have occured. Communist revolutions
have effected pervasive changes within various nations in the 20th century.
For Huntington, these leftist transformations would not have been possible
without Lenin’s theory of revolution. Lenin took the a-political ideology
of Marxism and infused it with a practical political orientation (i.e.,
revolutionary organization through the Party). How would you describe Lenin’s
theory of revolution, and what special role does the Party play? What are
the major strengths and weaknesses of this theory? In terms of weaknesses,
what elements of the theory encouraged totalitarian regimes?
Why, according to Huntington, do revolutions occur? Huntington talks about
two styles of revolution: East and West. What are they, and how do they
differ? According to Huntington, what are the pre-conditions for a successful
revolution?
Readings:
Vladimir Lenin, What Is To Be Done
Sam Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies, Chapter 5
Barrington Moore, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, Chapters
4, 9, and Epilogue
Essay Topic:
Discuss Lenin’s theory of revolution. What special role does the
Party play in this theory? What are the major strengths and weaknesses
of his theory?
7. “Il Fascismo” and the Revolution From Above
Fascism (il fascismo) was originally an Italian political
movement. The term comes from the verb “fasciare” which means “to bind
together.” In its general manifestations this movement (which has been
referred to as an elite revolution--”revolution from above”) represented
the old power elite aligning with peasants to maintain traditional social
structures through a powerful state bureaucracy. This was a reaction to
capitalistic modernization which was shaking the old political order by
bringing new groups into the political nexus and adversely affecting old
groups. What specific factors led to the rise of Fascism in Italy, Germany,
and Japan? How would you describe the Fascist system of governance? What
is the Fascist ideology? What is the role of the state in the Fascist doctrine?
As a system of governance, what do you think are the major strengths and
weaknesses of Fascism?
Readings:
Benito Mussolini, “The Doctrine of Fascism”
Alfredo Rocco, “The Political Doctrine of Fascism”
Barrington Moore, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, Chapter
8
Essay Topic:
Describe the Fascist system of governance. What are its
major strengths and weaknesses?
8. Challenges to the Nation-State: Interdependence and Globalization
One overwhelming trend in history is the extension of political
juristiction over ever increasing areas: scattered settlements to farming
communities to city-states to nation-states. Each transition was
fueled by conditions which challenged the territorial boundaries of the
former jurisdictions. Is the nation-state undergoing such a challenge today?
For Reich, Huntington, Keohane, Nye, Cooper, and Vernon, globalization
and interpenetration in the world economy are rendering national boundaries
less meaningful. Indeed, they assert that national power as well as national
identity are becoming suspect. One major implication of this globalization
argument is that as contacts and mutual dependence increase, people are
better served by political jurisdictions that go beyond the nation-state
(i.e., regional unions, global federation). Kapstein, in the finest
tradition of early mercantilists like Mun, argues that rumors about the
demise of the nation-state are greatly exaggerated. More than ever, Kapstein
asserts, the nation-state is a powerful fixture in the world economy. Is
the nation state whithering away?
Readings:
Sam Huntington, “Transnational Organizations in World Politics”
Raymond Vernon, Sovereignty at Bay, Chapters 1, 7, 8 (skim)
Richard Cooper, The Economics of Interdependence, Chapters 1, 3-6 (skim)
Robert Reich, “Who Is Us?”
Ethan Kapstein, “We Are Us”
Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye, Power and Interdependence, Chapters 1, 2
T. Mun, “England’s Treasure by Foreign Trade”
John Herz, “The Rise and Demise of the Territorial State”
Essay Topic:
Is the nation-state whithering away?
9. Beyond the Nation-State
What lies beyond the nation-state? Futuristic speculation about
the evolution of global politics beyond the traditional phenomenon of
the sovereign state has presented a variety of models. Keohane has suggested
the importance of rules and norms in regulating international relations
in a changing world. Mitrany sees technical self-determination creating
the need for a global technocracy. Russett discusses the importance of
regional associations as a first step beyond the nation-state. Cox suggests
that whatever lies beyond our present political organization, it will neither
be equitable nor democratic. What are the major theories of political organization
beyond the nation-state? Which appear especially pursuasive, and which
appear especially flawed?
Readings:
Robert Keohane, After Hegemony, Chapter 4
Robert Cox, “The Crisis of World Order”
David Mitrany, “The Functional Alternative”
Inis Claude, Swords Into Plowshares, Chapter 18
Bruce Russett, “Regions and the Future of the Global System”
Harold Jacobson, Networks of Interdependence, Chapters 1, 4
Essay Topic:
What lies beyond the nation-state?