• Read KRMH, Chapter 7

Not a broad definition, since it excludes the personal (as in, "The personal is political").  But ...

... different from economic development or HDI.

State-centered definitions are usual in political development definitions.  (Note that mine is culture-centered.)

The State:  has a monopoly of legitimate force over all the territory it claims as its own.  The State is different from the regime (the particular pattern through which control is exercised, e.g., democratic liberalism) and from the government (the particular people and/or party occupying the positions in the regime). This is a confusing usage but a necessary distinction.

The State-centered definition of political development ignores external forces and international patterns of power:  debt (e.g., Brazil), dependency (Ghana), fear (Syria).

Failed states:

• Can be simply illegitimate (relying on force only)
• Can fail to eliminate competitors (e.g., rebelling forces)

[Does Tweedistan have any rebelling forces?  Would it then be considered a failed state?  At what size and/or duration does a rebellion create a "failed state"?]

Legitimacy is slippery.  For example, it is culturally relative.  For another example, it is unclear what relative levels of agreement, acquiescence, compulsion, and outright opposition constitute legitimacy.

Three levels:

• Parochials -- government the same as bandits.
• Subjects -- rule of law
  • mobilization
  • institutionalization
• Participants -- prior-to-law perspective;  civil society;  training at smaller scales;  rights;  human rights;  democracy;  good governance & rational decision-making;  no corruption.

The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer.
Copyright © 2005 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All rights reserved.