Taking the State Seriously Nordlinger

Taking State Seriously Counter the sociological 60s Actions & Policies –distribute valued political, ideological, social, economic goods & opportunities Even states without high extractive/regulatory capacity

Research Questions 1. Do public officials act on own preferences 2. Is autonomy best explained by internal or external factors

Approaches Society-centred view –state as arena State centred view –independent actor and variable

Three factors ComplexityCoherence Institutionalization

Parallel with neo-Marxism Relative autonomy Not instrument of dominant class IF –capitalists divided –legitimacy declining –social peace decaying –intensified contradictions

Skocpol, Stepan etc. Autonomy affected by: –capacity for intervention –social contours (shaped by states)

Limits of state-centric model Autonomy ill-defined Findings not generalized Society-centric factors remain State-soc hypotheses not questioned

Taking state seriously 1. Find outer limits of autonomy 2. Raise deep questions on society centred claims –state institutional contours -> policy –inst patterns cue officials –insts let officials alter social opposition –insts “pattern” social preferences

Taking state seriously 3. Find subjective factors 4. Delineate problematique –what is the state interest? –What is the state!!

Concepts Autonomy State preferences Support

Typology

MIRV M - Malleability: susceptibility to expression of social interests I - Insulation: Belief in ability to overcome social opposition R - Resilience: Expectation that policy will produce outcomes V - Vulnerability: importance attached to social support

MIRV (!!) Structural features –Party system –Differentiation –Centralization –Bureaucracy –Socialization –Economic Links –Cohesiveness Autonomous Acts –Diverge from soc pref –Alter Soc Pref –Converge with soc pref Malleability Insulation Resilience Vulnerability

Corporatism: Schmitter “a system of interest representation in which constituent units are organized into a limited number of single, compulsory, non-competitive, hierarchically ordered and functionally differentiated categories, recognised or licensed by the state and granted a deliberate representational monopoly within their respective categories in exchange for observing certain controls on the selection of leaders and articulation of demands and supports”