Political decay

Last updated

Political decay is a political theory, originally described in 1965 by Samuel P. Huntington, [1] [2] which describes how chaos and disorder can arise from social modernization increasing more rapidly than political and institutional modernization. Huntington provides different definitions for political development and describes the forms of political decay according to the various definitions. Huntington focuses primarily on political development as modernization and institutionalization. However, he points to the different definitions of political development as being arbitrary ways to understanding the rise of political systems and the relationship between the political systems of different nations.

Contents

Political decay is a widespread ailment that affects every society. As Aristotle once noted, humans are inherently political beings (zoon politikon), but it is rare to find individuals who are truly honest in their political endeavors. [3]

Political development

Huntington identifies two characteristics of political development. The first is that development is synonymous with modernization, thus political development can be defined as political modernization. The second is that there are many criteria to measure political development because modernization and development are such broad topics, covering many areas. There are four generally agreed-upon criteria to determine the first is rationalization, which involves the movement from particularism to universalism, or, from a political standpoint, a focus on functional differentiation and achievement criteria. The second criterion is nationalism, and national integration. This emphasizes nation-states and nation-building as a key aspect of political development. The third criterion is a focus on democratization, which is in essence a focus on competition and equalization of power. The final criterion is mobilization, which is a focus on political participation. The greater the development, the greater the modernization, the greater the mobilization, and therefore the greater the political participation. Ultimately, political development can be defined as an increase in national political unity and an increase in political participation.

Modernization

According to Huntington's definition of political development as modernization, political decay is the opposite of the linear idea of social progress—although, within the model of modernization, social regression is not possible. Instead, political decay takes place because "modern and modernizing states can change by losing capabilities as well as by gaining them. In addition, a gain in any one capability usually involves costs in others." [1] :393 The model of modernization was used to compare the political systems of different countries with social development reflecting the linear progression of political institutions. [1] :391 However, research into the relationship between development of political institutions and modernization has pointed to inconsistent development. In some political systems, such as certain Latin American regions, governments have been influenced by military intervention as a result of the government's inability to cope with the strains of modernization. [4]

Institutional

Under the framework of political development as institutional development, political decay occurs when institutions fail to change or adapt when they become unnecessary due to social or economic changes. Dan Halvorson challenges the idea of political decay as an institutional failure by claiming that the idea of political decay is tied to a Western ideal of political institution without taking into account widely-varying cultural institutions and the inability of post-colonial states to adapt to Western ideals. [5] Francis Fukuyama refers to political decay as the social and economic forces that upset the equilibrium of established political order. [6] Institutions of the Roman Empire government failed to meet the moral and economic needs of the citizens, resulting in the conditions that would facilitate political decay and the fall of the Roman state. [7] Under the institutional model, political decay can be observed as a decrease in competence, credibility and establishment of institutional corruption over a period of time. [8]

Instability

Different social and economic factors contribute to both the political development as well as the political decay of nations. Outside forces such as foreign governments affect the stability of established governments due to contrasting social institutions or economic interests. In order to be considered stable, government procedures and institutions must maintain autonomy and be resistant to outside agents. [1] :402 The social and economic forces that established political stability could change or disappear, leading to internal instability. [6] Economic development, such as shifts from agriculture-based economy to manufacturing-based economy, as well as economic collapse, can also lead to political instability. Social developments, such as the proliferation of literacy, lead to the rise and spread of new ideas.[ citation needed ]

Political instability

Political instability occurs when one faction in a state's government is in opposition with another faction or with another institution in the government. Political instability occurred during the late 18th century in France and other parts of Europe during the 19th century. Political development in France, such as the development of the bureaucracy and other institutions, led to a greater demand for meritocracy and greater political conflict among the ruling class. [9] Sri Lanka saw a period of political instability following elections in 1994 caused by the ambitions of political leaders. The elected President Chandrika Kumaratunga attempted to change the constitution and dissolve the parliament in order to remain in power, leading to sudden changes in the structure of the law-making body. [10]

In some cases, a political breakdown can occur within the framework of a state's constitution. India has provisions in its constitution which grant leaders the power to breach or oppose the constitution in cases of emergency. These breaches of the state law from within the political system can lead to political decay. [11]

Social developments

Huntington's model of political development and decay describes elements such as industrialization, urbanization, education and literacy as social developments that create instability. The presence of violent conflict is not always indicative of social decay. Due to the complex character of state-building and shifts in political systems, violence is not a reliable indicator of political decay or development. [12] The socialization of law is a process by which legislation is changed in order to adapt to economic and social changes. Socialization of law is one of the forces that opposes political decay within Huntington's structure of modernization, by ensuring that the political institutions in place are resistant to social instability. [13]

Updated by Fukuyama

Huntington's former student, Francis Fukuyama, has developed the theory of political decay by analysing the sclerosis of democratic institutions in the United States and elsewhere. Here he argues that political institutions have been too slow to keep up with the country's changing circumstances due to their institutional inertia behind a status quo. For example, in the United States, the emerging financial oligarchy is entrenching income and wealth inequality and reducing social mobility which is leading to a breakdown in society, the social contract and confidence in the government. [14] The second of Fukuyama's two volumes on political order, Political Order and Political Decay (2014), echoes the title of Huntington's seminal 1965 essay. Fukuyama focuses on the concept of political decay in the framework of a history of the rise and fall of Chinese dynasties and the causes of political and social stability during each dynasty as well as in Russian and Islamic governments.[ citation needed ]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Francis Fukuyama</span> American political scientist, political economist, and author

Francis Yoshihiro Fukuyama is an American political scientist, political economist, international relations scholar and writer.

In political science, a revolution is a rapid, fundamental transformation of a society's state, class, ethnic or religious structures. A revolution involves the attempted change in political regimes, substantial mass mobilization, and efforts to force change through non-institutionalized means.

A state is a political entity that regulates society and the population within a territory. Government is considered to form the fundamental apparatus of contemporary states.

<i>The End of History and the Last Man</i> 1992 book by Francis Fukuyama

The End of History and the Last Man is a 1992 book of political philosophy by American political scientist Francis Fukuyama which argues that with the ascendancy of Western liberal democracy—which occurred after the Cold War (1945–1991) and the dissolution of the Soviet Union (1991)—humanity has reached "not just ... the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: That is, the end-point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Samuel P. Huntington</span> American political scientist and academic (1927–2008)

Samuel Phillips Huntington was an American political scientist, adviser, and academic. He spent more than half a century at Harvard University, where he was director of Harvard's Center for International Affairs and the Albert J. Weatherhead III University Professor.

Good governance is the process of measuring how public institutions conduct public affairs and manage public resources and guarantee the realization of human rights in a manner essentially free of abuse and corruption and with due regard for the rule of law. Governance is "the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented ". Governance in this context can apply to corporate, international, national, or local governance as well as the interactions between other sectors of society.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Institution</span> Structure or mechanism of social order

An institution is a humanly devised structure of rules and norms that shape and constrain individual behavior. All definitions of institutions generally entail that there is a level of persistence and continuity. Laws, rules, social conventions and norms are all examples of institutions. Institutions vary in their level of formality and informality.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democratization</span> Society becoming more democratic

Democratization, or democratisation, is the structural government transition from an authoritarian government to a more democratic political regime, including substantive political changes moving in a democratic direction.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Insurgency</span> Revolt or uprising by irregular forces, especially one that is prolonged

An insurgency is a violent, armed rebellion by small, lightly armed bands who practice guerrilla warfare from primarily rural base areas against a larger authority. The key descriptive feature of insurgency is its asymmetric nature: small irregular forces face a large, well-equipped, regular military force state adversary. Due to this asymmetry, insurgents avoid large-scale direct battles, opting instead to blend in with the civilian population where they gradually expand territorial control and military forces. Insurgency frequently hinges on control of and collaboration with local populations.

How Democratic is the American Constitution? is a book by political scientist Robert A. Dahl that discusses seven "undemocratic" elements of the United States Constitution.

Modernization theory holds that as societies become more economically modernized, wealthier and more educated, their political institutions become increasingly liberal democratic. The "classical" theories of modernization of the 1950s and 1960s, most influentially articulated by Seymour Lipset, drew on sociological analyses of Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, Max Weber, and Talcott Parsons. Modernization theory was a dominant paradigm in the social sciences in the 1950s and 1960s, and saw a resurgence after 1991, when Francis Fukuyama wrote about the end of the Cold War as confirmation on modernization theory.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Political culture</span> Set of attitudes and beliefs that give order and meaning to a political process

Political culture describes how culture impacts politics. Every political system is embedded in a particular political culture.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Development theory</span> Theories about how desirable change in society is best achieved

Development theory is a collection of theories about how desirable change in society is best achieved. Such theories draw on a variety of social science disciplines and approaches. In this article, multiple theories are discussed, as are recent developments with regard to these theories. Depending on which theory that is being looked at, there are different explanations to the process of development and their inequalities.

A fragile state or weak state is a country characterized by weak state capacity or weak state legitimacy leaving citizens vulnerable to a range of shocks. The World Bank, for example, deems a country to be ‘fragile’ if it (a) is eligible for assistance from the International Development Association (IDA), (b) has had a UN peacekeeping mission in the last three years, and (c) has received a ‘governance’ score of less than 3.2. A more cohesive definition of the fragile state might also note a state's growing inability to maintain a monopoly on force in its declared territory. While a fragile state might still occasionally exercise military authority or sovereignty over its declared territory, its claim grows weaker as the logistical mechanisms through which it exercises power grow weaker.

America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy is a 2006 book written by Francis Fukuyama.

<i>Political Order in Changing Societies</i>

With his famous book Political Order in Changing Societies, published in 1968, the American political scientist and Harvard professor Samuel P. Huntington is considered to be one of the ”Founding Fathers” of neo-institutionalism, the historical institutionalism. The book is dealing with the role of political institutions in changing political systems. Huntington stated that ”the most important political distinction among countries concerns not their form of government but their degree of government”. As stated by Francis Fukuyama, Huntington argued that political decay was "at least as likely as political development", and that neither "economic nor social development" could proceed without political order, the actual experience of newly independent countries being "one of increasing social and political disorder".

The anthropology of development is a term applied to a body of anthropological work which views development from a critical perspective. The kind of issues addressed, and implications for the approach typically adopted can be gleaned from a list questions posed by Gow (1996). These questions involve anthropologists asking why, if a key development goal is to alleviate poverty, is poverty increasing? Why is there such a gap between plans and outcomes? Why are those working in development so willing to disregard history and the lessons it might offer? Why is development so externally driven rather than having an internal basis? In short, why is there such a lack of planned development?

<i>The Origins of Political Order</i> 2011 book by Francis Fukuyama

The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman times to the French Revolution is a 2011 book by political economist Francis Fukuyama. The main thesis of the book covers three main components that gives rise to a stable political order in a state: the state needs to be modern and strong, to obey the rule of law governing the state and be accountable. This theory is argued by applying comparative political history to develop a theory of the stability of a political system. The book covers several regions, and uses case studies of political developments from these regions, the scope is wide and consists of ancient history to the early modern period. Fukuyama refers to Amartya Sen's view that democracy remains the default political condition. Though not universally accepted as a form of government, even autocratic leaders have maintained semblance of democracy for legitimisation of their rule and use of media for their projection as democratic leaders. However, the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan challenges the assumption as there is no default reset to democracy once the sitting governments or leaders are removed.

<i>Why Nations Fail</i> 2012 book by Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson

Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty, first published in 2012, is a book by economists Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson. The book applies insights from institutional economics, development economics and economic history to understand why nations develop differently, with some succeeding in the accumulation of power and prosperity and others failing, via a wide range of historical case studies.

<i>Political Order and Political Decay</i> 2014 book by Francis Fukuyama

Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalisation of Democracy is a 2014 book by American political scientist Francis Fukuyama. The book follows Fukuyama's 2011 book, The Origins of Political Order, written to shed light on political institutions and their development in different regions.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Huntington, Samuel P. (1965). "Political Development and Political Decay". World Politics. 17 (3): 386–430. doi:10.2307/2009286. JSTOR   2009286. S2CID   154009538.
  2. "Samuel P. Huntington (1927–2008)". Journal of Democracy. Retrieved 2023-08-02.
  3. Vallianatos, Evaggelos (2012-01-22). "Political Decay". Truthout. Retrieved 2023-08-02.
  4. Geller, Daniel S. "Economic Modernization and Political Instability: A Casual Analysis of Bureaucratic-Authoritarianism" The Western Political Quarterly 35, no. 1 (March 1982): 45
  5. Halvorson, Dan. States of Disorder: Understanding State Failure and Intervention in the Periphery. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2013. 19
  6. 1 2 Fukuyama, Francis (2011). The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. p. 139. ISBN   0374533229.
  7. Boyd, James Harrington (July 1924). "Permanence of the American Democracy". American Journal of Sociology. 30 (1): 3.
  8. Young, Crawford (1984). "Zaire: Is There a State?". Canadian Journal of African Studies. 18 (2): 80–82.
  9. Gillis, John R. "Political Decay and the European Revolutions, 1789-1848." World Politics 22, no. 3 (April 1970): 344-370.
  10. DeVotta, Niel. "Sri Lanka in 2004: Enduring Political Decay and a Failing Peace Process." Asian Survey 15, no. 1 (January/February 2005: 98-104
  11. Hart, Henry C. "The Indian Constitution: Political Development and Decay." Asian Survey 20, no. 4 (April 1980): 428-451
  12. Cohen, Youssef, Brown, Brian R., Orgnaski, A.F.K. "The Paradoxical Nature of State Making: The Violent Creation of Order." The American Political Science Review 75, no. 4 (December 1981): 901-910
  13. Boyd, James Harrington. "Permanence of the American Democracy." American Journal of Sociology 30, no. 1 (July 1924): 1-21
  14. Fukuyama, 2011 The origins of political order: from prehuman times to the French Revolution