Forms of participation Social Capital and Patron-client relations: What difference do they make?

Social capital and civil society: “Social capital” refers to features of social organization such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit” Robert Putnam, Bowling Alone Civil society: – sometimes used as a surrogate for society –Defined as a society capable of self organization -- thus capable of organizing itself

Where does social capital come from? Wealth? Education? Organizations and situations which stimulate trust?

Patron-Client Relations An exchange relationship in which participation in politics is mediated through one or more intermediaries or patrons (clientelism)

How patron-client relations work Clients, at the base, give support to patrons in exchange for specific benefits – e.g. jobs, favours, preferential treatment Lower-level patrons provide support to higher level patrons in exchange for benefits or resources Politicians and/or bureaucrats use their control of government to generate resources for intermediaries (patronage)

National Leader Regional Intermediary Local headman Regional Intermediary Local Boss

Where do resources for patron-client relations come from? Control of government, resulting in Colonization of the state: supporters & sympathizers placed in patronage appointments Rules & procedures waived in exchange for kickbacks, bribes Rake-offs taken on all contracts, licenses Resources, benefits allocated only in exchange for past or future support

Clientelism more likely in: Places in which the population is dependent on government largesse for its economic survival (e.g peripheral or less developed regions) Populations unable to fend for themselves (e.g., peasants, immigrants) Transitional or less developed societies Countries with complex and cumbersome regulations

What difference does it make? Impact of clientelism on political culture? How well does clientelism mesh with –Ideological politics? –Post-materialism? Are patron-client relationships compatible with a civil society? –Does clientelism create or destroy social capital?

Some questions: Are social capital and civil society prerequisites of liberal democracy? What kinds of participation generate social capital? –Direct face-to-face participation? –Participation in `credit card’ organizations? Is social capital declining? (Robert Putnam’s argument in “Bowling Alone”)

Problem: Do post-materialism & the `more the more’ hypothesis address the same question? Does one tell you more about who participates and the other more about the values of those who participate? What difference does post-materialism make? –Can the power of numbers counter the advantages of access and skill?

Who gets what, when, and how? ( Harold Lasswell) Do the phenomena of post- materialism and the `more the more’ hypothesis mean that the demands of the poor and the working classes are always neglected?