Infrastructural power

Last updated

Infrastructural power is the capacity of the state to enforce policy throughout its entire territory. [1]

Contents

The concept of infrastructural power was introduced by sociologist Michael Mann [2] in 1984.

Building infrastructural power

Mann [3] lays out four techniques by which the state gains infrastructural power. Together these factors aid in the state’s influence over society by increasing both the amount of contact residents have with the state and the benefits derived from this contact. To increase its infrastructural power, the state must:

Infrastructural and despotic power

The terms "infrastructural" and "despotic" have been used “to identify the two different ways in which a governmental apparatus acquires and uses centralized power.” [4]

The simplest differentiation between Mann's two types of state power is that despotic power is power over society, while infrastructural power is power through society. [5] Infrastructural power entails a cooperative relationship between citizens and their government, while despotic power requires only that an elite class can impose its will.

States do not utilize only infrastructural or only despotic power. The two types coexist within a state. In 1993 Mann clarified his definition of infrastructural power, indicating that despotic states rely on infrastructural power as they attempt to control their territory. [5] The goal of an authoritarian state is to combine despotic and infrastructural power in a way that allows it the maximum influence over social life. The two types of power exist in tension in weak states; infrastructural power requires a level of cooperation and compromise between institutions that generally undermines despotic power. [6]

A state whose power is primarily infrastructural can provide services throughout its entire extent, which decreases its likelihood of becoming a weak or failed state.[ clarification needed ] Conversely, a weak or collapsed state has little chance of providing the type of infrastructure needed to ensure infrastructural power. In such cases, a state may rely on despotic power, or the power of elites over society, to maintain control.

The modern territorial state

Infrastructural power has become more important since the time of the American and French Revolutions. As civil society gained political authority in Western states, despotic power became less accepted. As such, infrastructural power became considered a “positive” type of power; [5] it is a source of legitimacy derived directly from civil society and therefore, at least in theory, directly from the people. Infrastructural power is fortified by the state’s ability to perform the services its constituents demand.

Imperial states and feudal states, both low in infrastructural power, depend on the despotic rule of an elite class for societal order. Monarchs and emperors of the past could not extend their direct rule to every aspect of social life without the aid of modern technology. Beginning with the Industrial Revolution, the infrastructural power of developed states rose rapidly. [2] In the modern era, developed states became able to monitor their populations; provide employment, health care and welfare; impact all levels of the economy; and more. In this way, they obtained their infrastructural power.

The modern state system is more conducive to infrastructural power than past systems have been: states have bounded areas in which to provide services and the domestic sovereignty needed to provide these services without foreign intrusion. [7] Mann [2] argued that because states are territorially bounded and centrally organized, they have an advantage in power over other elements of society. As such, the autonomous powers of the state originate from its status as a bounded place.

According to Mann, [2] the two governmental systems highest in infrastructural power are bureaucratic states, such as the United States of America and authoritarian states, such as China.

Bureaucratic states

“When people in the West today complain of the growing power of the state, they cannot be referring sensibly to the despotic powers of the state elite itself, for if anything these are still declining. But the complaint is more justly leveled against the state’s infrastructural encroachments. These powers are now immense.” [8]

Nineteenth-century political scientist Max Weber outlined the characteristics of the bureaucratic state in his "Economy and Society." Weber emphasized the benefits of an even distribution of duties and power, the hiring of qualified officials, a hierarchy of authority and a written set of rules that can be universally learned and followed. [9] The methods by which a state builds infrastructural power mesh perfectly with the establishment of a bureaucracy: literacy allows for a widespread comprehension of the written rules; a standard set of measurements and efficient systems of transportation and communication allow for greater efficiency in the distribution of authority; and a division of labor ensures that qualified officials in each field can take full advantage of their expertise.

Mann claimed that in the modern bureaucratic state, the government can "assess and tax our income and wealth at source, without our consent…; it stores and can recall immediately a massive amount of information about all of us; it can enforce its will within the day almost anywhere in its domains; its influence on the overall economy is enormous; it even directly provides the subsistence of most of us (in state employment, in pensions, in family allowances, etc.).” [8] Without industrialization and the modern bureaucratic division of labor, the state would not be efficient enough to protect its own interests in these areas.

United States

“From Alaska to Florida, … there is no hiding place from the infrastructural reach of the modern state." [8]

The US is an example of a bureaucratic state in which infrastructural power outweighs despotic power. Mann attributes this fact to the US' status as a modern, industrialized state. As a capitalist democracy, it has the advantages of an active civil society and a system of taxation; each provide means for increasing infrastructural capacity.

The government provides services throughout the entire US territory. As a result, the state is more politically and economically stable. In general, citizens have more time to concentrate on political and social activities because they do not have to worry about daily subsistence. Thus, civil society has a strong presence in the United States and provides an arena through which the government can affect daily life.

Politicians obtain legitimacy from sources outside the government, such as voters, financial donors and interest groups. Politicians are required to operate within the law. With these guidelines in place, civil society has the ability to check the power of government officials. The government cannot make decisions without some form of consent from the public. This gives civil society over the bureaucracy. As Mann puts it, “The secret decisions of politicians and bureaucrats penetrate our everyday lives in an often infuriating way, deciding we are not eligible for this or that benefit, including, for some persons, citizenship itself. But their power to change the fundamental rules and overturn the distribution of power within civil society is feeble." [10]

Therefore, while the US and other modern bureaucratic systems employ some aspects of despotic power, such as sporadic corruption and opacity, a healthy economy and political participation greatly support the opposing infrastructural power.

Authoritarian states

Authoritarian states are high in both despotic power and infrastructural power because they can enforce despotic decisions using their bureaucratic infrastructure.

In an authoritarian state, just as in a bureaucratic state, infrastructural power exists through civil society. However, in the authoritarian state, the competing interest groups that compose this civil society often fight for complete control rather than simply to attain specific political goals.

As a politically repressive state with an active bureaucracy and a strong economy, China is an example of a state that employs both infrastructural and despotic power.

China

Throughout the region’s long history, the various forms of the Chinese nation have relied on despotic power. However, a growing state bureaucracy added to the infrastructural strength of the government over time. According to the US Department of State, successive Chinese dynasties created and developed, over thousands of years, “a system of bureaucratic control that gave the agrarian-based Chinese an advantage over neighboring nomadic and hill cultures. [11] While securing geopolitical strength in this manner, the Chinese bureaucracy also guaranteed a domestically powerful state. With the establishment of a statewide Confucian ideology and a common written language, the government further infiltrated social life.

The communist, autocratic People’s Republic of China emerged in 1949. The regime was high in despotic power, but as it became more involved in the lives of the people, it became infrastructurally powerful as well. The approach resembled that of the Soviet Union, another authoritarian state that prioritized infrastructural power. [11] The military, the Party and mass labor and women's organizations formed a strong civil society that provided infrastructural power in support of the state's despotic power. The government was thus inextricably tied to civil society, an illustration of Mann's comments on the infrastructural power of authoritarian regimes:

"Authoritarian is meant to suggest a more institutionalized form of state despotism, in which competing power groupings cannot evade the infrastructural reach of the state, nor are they structurally separate from the state (as they are in the bureaucratic type). All significant social power must go through the authoritative command structure of the state." [12]

After the Communist revolution, the state instituted strict control over social life, including a ban on religion and a law that limited families to one child, seizing control over more personal aspects of day-to-day life. These policies were declared despotic, but enforced only through a strong infrastructural presence.

In 1989, a protest in Tiananmen Square turned into a tragic manifestation of the combination of infrastructural and despotic power. The Chinese government sent in the military to end a protest of the oppressive nature of the regime. In this case, the government relied on its infrastructural power to protect its despotic power.

China later opened to the international community. Thereafter, economic growth supported infrastructural power. [13] As more development occurs, infrastructural power remained on the rise.

Notes

  1. ↑ Lai & Slater 2006, p. 115.
  2. 1 2 3 4 Mann 1984.
  3. ↑ Mann 1984, p. 192.
  4. ↑ Agnew 2005, p. 443.
  5. 1 2 3 Lucas 1998, p. 91.
  6. ↑ Lucas 1998, p. 92.
  7. ↑ Agnew 2004.
  8. 1 2 3 Mann 1984, p. 114.
  9. ↑ Weber 1922.
  10. ↑ Mann 1984, p. 114a [italics added]
  11. 1 2 U.S. Department of State, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs 2006.
  12. ↑ Mann 1984, p. 115-6.
  13. ↑ The World Bank 2006.

Related Research Articles

State capitalism is an economic system in which the state undertakes business and commercial economic activity and where the means of production are nationalized as state-owned enterprises. The definition can also include the state dominance of corporatized government agencies or of public companies such as publicly listed corporations in which the state has controlling shares.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Authority</span> Political power over others

In the fields of sociology and political science, authority is the legitimate power of a person or group over other people. In a civil state, authority is practiced in ways such a judicial branch or an executive branch of government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Warlord</span> Person who has both military and civil control and power

A warlord is a person who exercises military, economic, and political control over a region in a country without a strong national government; largely because of coercive control over the armed forces. Warlords have existed throughout much of history, albeit in a variety of different capacities within the political, economic, and social structure of states or ungoverned territories. The term is most often applied to China in the mid-19th century and the early 20th century. The term can also be used for any supreme military leader.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Civil society</span> Third sector of society, distinct from government and business

Civil society can be understood as the "third sector" of society, distinct from government and business, and including the family and the private sphere. By other authors, civil society is used in the sense of 1) the aggregate of non-governmental organizations and institutions that advance the interests and will of citizens or 2) individuals and organizations in a society which are independent of the government.

In political science, a political system means the type of political organization that can be recognized, observed or otherwise declared by a state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bureaucrat</span> Member of a bureaucracy

A bureaucrat is a member of a bureaucracy and can compose the administration of any organization of any size, although the term usually connotes someone within an institution of government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democratization</span> Trend towards democratic norms in a society

Democratization, or democratisation, is the transition to a more democratic political regime, including substantive political changes moving in a democratic direction. It may be a hybrid regime in transition from an authoritarian regime to a full democracy, a transition from an authoritarian political system to a semi-democracy or transition from a semi-authoritarian political system to a democratic political system.

A hydraulic empire, also known as a hydraulic despotism, hydraulic society, hydraulic civilization, or water monopoly empire, is a social or government structure which maintains power and control through exclusive control over access to water. It arises through the need for flood control and irrigation, which requires central coordination and a specialized bureaucracy.

Rational-legal authority is a form of leadership in which the authority of an organization or a ruling regime is largely tied to legal rationality, legal legitimacy and bureaucracy. The majority of the modern states of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries are rational-legal authorities, according to those who use this form of classification.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Civil service of Japan</span>

The Japanese civil service employs over three million employees, with the Japan Self-Defense Forces, with 247,000 personnel, being the biggest branch. In the post-war period, this figure has been even higher, but the privatization of a large number of public corporations since the 1980s, including NTT, Japanese National Railways, and Japan Post, already reduced the number.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">State-building</span> Term in social sciences and humanities

State-building as a specific term in social sciences and humanities, refers to political and historical processes of creation, institutional consolidation, stabilization and sustainable development of states, from the earliest emergence of statehood up to the modern times. Within historical and political sciences, there are several theoretical approaches to complex questions related to role of various contributing factors in state-building processes.

Neopatrimonialism is a system of social hierarchy where patrons use state resources to secure the loyalty of clients in the general population. It is an informal patron–client relationship that can reach from very high up in state structures down to individuals in small villages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Liberal democracy</span> Political ideology and form of government

Liberal democracy is the combination of a liberal political ideology that operates under a representative democratic form of government. It is characterized by elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, a market economy with private property, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties and political freedoms for all people. To define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either codified or uncodified, to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. After a period of expansion in the second half of the 20th century, liberal democracy became a prevalent political system in the world.

The term bureaucracy refers to a body of non-elected governing officials as well as to an administrative policy-making group. Historically, a bureaucracy was a government administration managed by departments staffed with non-elected officials. Today, bureaucracy is the administrative system governing any large institution, whether publicly owned or privately owned. The public administration in many jurisdictions and sub-jurisdictions exemplifies bureaucracy, but so does any centralized hierarchical structure of an institution, e.g. hospitals, academic entities, business firms, professional societies, social clubs, etc.

Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting. Political scientists have created many typologies describing variations of authoritarian forms of government. Authoritarian regimes may be either autocratic or oligarchic and may be based upon the rule of a party or the military. States that have a blurred boundary between democracy and authoritarianism have some times been characterized as "hybrid democracies", "hybrid regimes" or "competitive authoritarian" states.

Political class, or political elite is a concept in comparative political science, originally developed by Italian political theorist Gaetano Mosca (1858–1941). It refers to the relatively small group of activists that is highly aware and active in politics, and from whom the national leadership is largely drawn. As Max Weber noted, they not only live "for politics"—like the old notables used to—but make their careers "off politics" as policy specialists and experts on specific fields of public administration. Mosca approached the study of the political class by examining the mechanisms of reproduction and renewal of the ruling class; the characteristics of politicians; and the different forms of organisation developed in their wielding of power.

Authoritarian socialism, or socialism from above, is an economic and political system supporting some form of socialist economics while rejecting political liberalism. As a term, it represents a set of economic-political systems describing themselves as socialist and rejecting the liberal-democratic concepts of multi-party politics, freedom of assembly, habeas corpus and freedom of expression, either due to fear of the counter-revolution or as a means to socialist ends. Several countries, most notably the Soviet Union, China and their allies, have been described by journalists and scholars as authoritarian socialist states.

A socialist state, socialist republic, or socialist country, sometimes referred to as a workers' state or workers' republic, is a sovereign state constitutionally dedicated to the establishment of socialism. The term communist state is often used synonymously in the West specifically when referring to one-party socialist states governed by Marxist–Leninist communist parties, despite these countries being officially socialist states in the process of building socialism and progressing toward a communist society. These countries never describe themselves as communist nor as having implemented a communist society. Additionally, a number of countries that are multi-party capitalist states make references to socialism in their constitutions, in most cases alluding to the building of a socialist society, naming socialism, claiming to be a socialist state, or including the term people's republic or socialist republic in their country's full name, although this does not necessarily reflect the structure and development paths of these countries' political and economic systems. Currently, these countries include Algeria, Bangladesh, Guyana, India, Nepal, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka and Tanzania.

Following the Arab Spring, the military tightened its control of the Egyptian economy. Details of the military's role in the economy are unclear given that statistics regarding the economy are absent or known to be wildly inaccurate.

Authoritarian capitalism, or illiberal capitalism, is an economic system in which a capitalist market economy exists alongside an authoritarian government. Related to and overlapping with state capitalism, a system in which the state undertakes commercial activity, authoritarian capitalism combines private property and the functioning of market forces with repression of dissent, restrictions on freedom of speech and either a lack of elections or an electoral system with a single dominant political party.

References

U.S. Department of State, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs (April 2006). "Background Note: China".

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.