Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Cristhian Ucedo's avatar

In most post-colonial countries, nonruling economic elites usually got their properties from the previous imperial state. Or in the cases of Europe and China, they could have got them during the feudal era, previously to liberal or socialist revolutions.

Expand full comment
Richard Anderson's avatar

This is the problem with HPE (“Historical Political Economy”). To conceptualize the origins of state capacity, an HPE specialist uses a study of state capacity where it already exists: “Francisco Garfias studying Mexico finds that bureaucratic capacity is often dependent on the willingness of nonruling economic elites to cooperate with rulers. When nonruling economic elites threaten to seize power, rulers can be deterred from investing in state capacity essential for a range of functions including public goods and development. But when economic elites find themselves on the back foot, rulers can press their momentary advantage to invest in state capacity to expropriate in the present and to secure extraction in the future.” But what, pray tell, is a “non-ruling economic elite”? Any economic elite owns property, by definition, although the “ownership” may be cryptic. Property is established by the state. It’s assigned; property, despite the coincidence of its name, is not a property of its owner. To assign property, a state must already have at least the capacity to assign it. The whole argument of HPE is purely circular.

Expand full comment

No posts