Political Power and the State PDF

Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein Political power and the State In modern societies, political power tends to become institutionalized in State structures → The State can impose obli...

Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein Political power and the State In modern societies, political power tends to become institutionalized in State structures → The State can impose obligations and implement sanctions → State sanctions are decided by political institutions and applied by judicial and administrative institutions; they are “institutionalized” = considered as legitimate → The State is the embodiment of political power (executive, legislative and judiciary) representation c. Conclusion: a gendered perspective on power The end of the separation between the public and the private sphere The “personal is political”, implications: → Political power and the forms of domination which follow from it are also deployed in the private sphere → Reveal the political character (i.e. the social relations of power and domination) of places, behaviours, and facts commonly perceived as personal matters, and to transform these personal questions into political problems → Conceptualization of “patriarchy” → New questions are considered as legitimate fields of study for political science: not only political parties, voters, public policies, but also family, sexuality... classical Classic question in a new light Politics are not only structures, functions, and activities but also relations of power : o Question of the consent to domination (self-discipline) o Analysis of techniques of domination : o Naturalisation (women “naturally” unfit for the exercise of political power) o The male “universal” 3. A portrait of the State revoir, pas trop compris Introduction The State is the dominant form of political organization = very important part of our social realities → Nearly 200 states → The most fundamental aspects of our lives are determined by State decisions o Time changes o Holliday o Age of marriage o Administration o Education o …. But they are so self-evident that we don’t even realize their importance, it seems natural to follow these decisions because we are used to it → Pierre Bourdieu: an internalization of a “spirit of the State” The State is everywhere, but it is a problematic concept in the social sciences = very difficult to define. → What exactly is a State? Where do State come from? How to characterize them? 6  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein a. What is a state The theory of the three criteria We are going to start with the definition of the state following legal criteria, since → its conceptualization started with French and German legal scholars: JELLINEK, LABAND and CARRÉ DE MALBERG) → they first elaborated both a theory and a definition of it (19th -20th). → Put briefly, they converged to say that “there is a state when, on the territory where a population resides, a legally organized power is exercised” → Three criteria must be fulfilled: territory, population, and legally organized power. |1| A legally organized injunction power: → State has the capacity to impose unilateral acts/norms o whose validity doesn't rely on the consent of those who have to obey the norm, it applies whether they want to be subject to it or not → All the rules of law derive from the state, directly or indirectly → The State alone guarantees the effectiveness of the rules o it may impose sanctions and enforcement in the service of power if these rules are not followed Although the state produces the law, it is also supposed to submit to the law: it cannot violate the rules it has enacted itself. → It may seem contradictory, but it's both the source of and subject to the law. TODAY: this criterion is more or less in decline and of course, the state is no longer the only one to whom this criterion &applies: → there are other sources of political power who can decide about rules and ensure their implementation → ex: European court of justice, world trade organization, … |2| A territory: To be a State, there has to be a territory → Importance of the borders (make it possible to separate 2 areas of application of legal norms) → The state is the domain of spatial validity of the norms (Hans Kelsen) Territory (in law) = 3-dimensional space where the legal rules laid down by the rulers apply → To notion of territory induces that there are borders → Ex : it can go from a border being the size of a continent or delimitating a urban community like in Singapore But the state is rarely a natural geographical space delimitated by the see/mountains such as Australia, → it's rather defined by treaty-based limits. → At the end of the day, what matters is that borders make it possible to clearly separate two areas where ≠ legal norms apply → Ex: the Schengen Agreement and the disappearance of internal border for some countries since the early '90s. TODAY: It really became meaningful with the emergence of sovereign states (18th century) but the notion of legal space and the importance of borders tend to decline and it's less adapted to socio-cultural realities. → Let's also remind that the notion of very rigid territorial limits is European centered. 7  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein |3| A population: Population = The individuals who are under the jurisdiction of the State are those who are legally subject of it → People who are legally unde the legislation of the state → “the state is the domain of personal validity of the State legal order” (Hans Kelsen) → 2 categories: the nationals (stable) + the foreigners (unstable) But a population cannot only be defined in a passive way: you are not only subject of a legal order but also actors, understood as the source of all constitutional legitimacy → Ex: right to vote, elections etc → the rights conferred are the active side of citizenship, so → citizenship is also a means of transcending all the factors of disparity among a population in order to stimulate belongingness to the large group. Today, this feature seems also somewhat eroded: → European citizenship, immigrants’ right to vote, multiple allegiances among individuals This questions the link between the national community and the state, which was at the basis of the legal definition of a population The State as monopolistic Institution Other way to try to define what constitute a state: what are its characteristics State was formed in Western societies thanks to the establishment of a certain number of monopolies (activities that the state only can perform) : → Legal to which everyone must submit producing the laws and rules to which the population must comply → Fiscal: which allows to finance all other monopolistic activities of the State demanding a financial contribution from the population without immediate counterpart Taxes are extremely important because they are at the basis of the one monopoly that allows to finance all the other monopolistic activities of the state → Economic The most essential monopoly is the right to mint coins (to produce money) → Judicial: only the State has the power to judge and punish → Collective representation: only the State can make decisions that engage the community as a whole Ex: signing treaties or declaring war on other states → Monopoly of legitimate physical violence: the most essential State monopoly (and the only one that has not been called into question) Weber’s definition: A State is “a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly All power rests on of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory” the mixture of be legitimacy and use = To be legitimate (especially in a democracy), physical constraint must me carried out with compliance with the rule of law of constraint 8  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein → Process of civilization (Norbert Elias, The Civilizing Process, 1939) : development of self-restraint and pacification of societies = individuals incorporate rules and have increased control over their emotions, impulse and aggressiveness, leading to the pacification of societies and a decrease in the use of physical constraint by the state It's the most important monopoly and the only one that hasn't been challenged over time and as for WEBER, it's the most important characteristic whatever the form of the state → Today, although physical violence is not the only means of action of those who govern, not even the most usual means of action (at least in a democracy), it's still a very specific one From the authority of the State to its sovereignty Essential link between the State and sovereignty: the State is the highest form of authority in a society and in a particular territory Concept of sovereignty: Jean Bodin (16th c.), William Blackstone (18th c.) : = Internal AND external sovereignty (no internal higher authority + no external challenge to this authority) → The State can be distinguished from the government → The State can be distinguished from civil society − the range of private institutions existing between the individual and the State (business, trade unions, religious groups, charities, etc.) → Difference between constitutional theory and reality, between de jure and de facto sovereignty = “Sovereignty has been an important and useful concept for legal analysis, but it can be a misleading notion if applied uncritically as a political idea” (Held). See the example of “failed States”, unable to perform the functions of sovereignty particularly the European union: they did not lose their sovereignty. They choose to pass it on to the international organisation Ukraine lacks a several part of sovereignty b. Why the State? The process of State construction and development How did the State appear? How has it evolved? Reminder: There may never have been states, states are not functional or historical necessities. Nevertheless, there is diversity in how state have emerged in different parts of world. = We focus on the western development of the state, a form of exercise of power among others Nevertheless, a number of common processes can be identified: we went from hundreds of princely houses to a few dozen States in only a few centuries 9  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein Socio-genesis of the State in the Western world : the factors of State construction We will try and differentiate the factors of state development, which is linked to the socio-genesis of the state. Understanding how the state emerged implies understanding the situation before its creation. Before, it was a feudal system, characterized by: → very weak institutionalization of political power: there are only direct relations between individuals and a strong patrimonialization of power. − It means that power is a patrimony, a private good that you own and can pass on to other generations and inherit → Important fragmentation of power: you have hundreds of princely houses, independent signories: competing political units → low stability of political units: boundaries were constantly moving because of marriages, wars etc. → No sovereign : the authority was shared between the aristocracy and the church Of course, the modern state is opposed to all these characteristics. → It's a very long and complex historical concept. There have been 3 sets of factors put forward to explain the emergence of to the modern state: economic, religious & cultural and political & military: ECONOMIC FACTORS: → The development of the state as such is parallel to market capitalism and starts in the mid-15th century. The state, acting as a centralized and powerful organization of power, starts to emerge in countries were industrial capitalism was developed. → Importance of the bourgeoisie, which supported the creation of a centralized power → Ensuring the protection of trade, the security in cities RELIGIOUS AND CULTURAL IN EUROPE: → Two main religions contributed in their way to the emergence of the state; on the catholic state, the popes promote the theory of the two legitimacies o Political vs religious power/temporal vs spiritual power. o The Christian doctrine evolves, and this has contributed to legitimize the constitution of a distinct power which will become the state. o It's a step that will help in this process. → On the reformation side, another kind of process is in action: in the countries where it occurred, there has been contribution of religion to the formation of the state. o Stein Rokkan and Seymour Lipset showed that there is a North side axis in Europe which is of religious nature and it led to the emergence of religious state: there was no competition between the allegiance to one or another power. o Also, in these countries, there was the effect of cultural uniformity that also helped legitimize state power and contributed to the emergence of state. POLITICAL AND MILITARY FACTORS → We come back to Norbert Elias, according to whom there is a competitive dynamic between the emergence of the modern state, which began in the 12th and 13th centuries. o He puts forward the fact that what he calls the “great engines of state building” was a war between many rival laws, but also internal wars and with foreign powers and these military conflicts were unseen in Europe o As a result, the state had to establish a bureaucracy to coordinate military activity, which mobilizes more and more men, to create a state administration. 10  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein o War makes it possible to legitimize taxes, because first it makes it possible to finance the armed force and thus the security and it's in the exercise of power by an institution, not an individual. o The state gradually becomes a specific institution, differentiated from society according to its own rules: public/private, no patrimonialization of power as seen before etc and we see the fiscal and monetary monopoly of the state. → From a historical point of view, there is a close link between war, the emergence of taxes, the legitimization of a central power, the development of the administration and the institutionalization of the state. Institutionalization and bureaucratization: the process of State development Weber considers that the processes that accompanied the emergence of the state are of two kinds : institutionalization and bureaucratization. – INSTITUTIONALIZATION: refers to the process by which an organization is constituted in a structure differentiated from the rest of society and not reduced to the individuals who animate it at some historical period BUREAUCRATIZATION: organization of a structure according to a certain number of formalized and rationalized rules → Ex: hierarchy, dissociation between the function and its holder, recruitment based on the competence etc. → Previously, with the feudal system : power was a patrimony/a private good owned by the person who exercised it. The emergence of the Nation-State Another dimension of the genesis of the State is the emergence of the Nation-State Nation-State= a form of political and social system in which the institutional system coincides with the nation, which is a community of adherence to this system. At its peak in the 19th c. A distinction between a State and a nation, which is based on a feeling of belonging − A nation can precede a State (i.e. Italy) − A State can precede a nation (States with colonies) − A State can exist without a nation − A State can contain several nations (Kurdish State) − A State can contain movements that seek to create new States (Cataonia) Ernest Gellner (1983): he insisted on this emergence of the nation-state especially in the 19th and once again in western Europe. → He showed how the state and the nation intermingled: the state encourages the creation of a united nation, done through schooling (“one of the factories of the nation where you learn you are part of a specific nation”), army, church → The state develops a lot of national symbolic policies that are important for the socialization of individuals o Ex: flag, national anthems, … → and public policies that have some nationalization effect o Ex: beginning of social policies, all types of policies that increased communication, road construction, transportation system etc 11  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein Benedict Anderson (1983): the nation as “an imagined community” that mentally unites individuals who will never know each other Of course, the process of national identity building is not without conflict and contestation A nation is a conjunction of: → a set of institutions → a sense of belonging to a common group (cultural homogenization) → a territorial reality It is a never-ending construction c. The transformation of the State: a contemporary decline? For around two centuries, the nation-state – and the following forms of State – has been the political system of reference, with political power first and foremost situated at the State level (closed space, homogenous space, self-centered space) → There has been a lot of political, economic, and social transformations over the last 4 decades and they have led this configuration to be called into question → Jessop: thesis of the “hollowing out” of the State = erosion of State’s power and sovereignty A deterritorialization of power → Reduction of the borders − Shanghai area → Loss of centrality of the State in the process of political socialization → Shift of the focus of politics and activism − The state is not anymore, the only place of the public debate − They are local bureaucracy, different movement, international meetings → Decoupling between policy and politics A decentralization of power The State is no longer the only reference, it must compose in 2 directions: At the supra-state level: → an increasing number of interventions in the internal affairs of States → regionalization phenomena → special case of the EU (strong delegation of sovereignty and competence) At the sub-state level: → emergence of new levels of power with a new division of powers (decentralization and regionalization throughout Europe); → emergence and development of secessionist and communitarian movements that challenge the power of the State 12  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein A questioning of the “hollowing out” thesis Some authors have argued that the “hollowing out” thesis exaggerates the reality and that sovereign States still have a great deal of autonomy Factors that support this re-assertion of the central role of the State: → Need to deal with terrorism → Management of the 2008 economic and financial crisis → Management of the COVID-19 crisis States must nevertheless cope with the existence of other centres of power Notion of “governance” = States in partnership with a wide range of social and economic institutions at different levels of power, overlapping system of governance → Even if this “hollowing out of the State” can be questioned, governance is a reality of the functioning of contemporary States No more governance of the state, but governance of multi actors d. Conclusion: a gender perspective on the State Feminist theorists were initially rather sceptical about it and little interested in it. → At the outset, they focused on the relationship of power in the private sphere → It was not until later that the State emerged in gender studies in political science 1970s, 1980s : little interest or negative vision → The State as a patriarchal tool → Main reference : Carol Pateman (1988), The Sexual Contract. o The liberal social contract relies upon a unstated, but essential, sexual contract in which women accept the dominant position of men in return for being protected and cared for. o Therefore, men have the power to act on behalf of women in the public sphere. o Only when this inequality in the private sphere is tackled, can equality as seen by Hobbes or Locke can be realized Starting from the 1990s : a “renaissance” of the concept of State in gender studies, a more positive view → Importance of the Welfare State → Role of “femocrats” (women that work within the States) 13