Comparing Apples and Mangoes: The Overpoliticized State in Developing Countries

348 Pages·2007·1.78 MB·English

by  S. N. Sangmpam

Comparing Apples
Mangoes
and
The Overpoliticized State in Developing Countries
S.N. Sangmpam
Comparing Apples and
Mangoes

Comparing Apples
and Mangoes
The Overpoliticized State in Developing Countries
S. N. Sangmpam
S U N Y P
TATE NIVERSITY OF EW ORK RESS
Published by
State University of New York Press, Albany
© 2007 State University of New York
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner
whatsoever without written permission. No part of this book may be stored
in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means including
electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording,
or otherwise without the prior permission in writing of the publisher.
For information, contact State University of New York Press, Albany, NY
www.sunypress.edu
Production by Diane Ganeles
Marketing by Anne M. Valentine
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Sangmpam, S. N.
Comparing apples and mangoes : the overpoliticized state in developing
countries / S. N. Sangmpam.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN-13: 978-0-7914-7113-5 (alk. paper)
1. Developing countries—Politics and government. 2. Developing countries—
Economic conditions. 3. Developed countries—Economic conditions.
4. Developed countries—Politics and government. I. Title.
JF60.S26 2007
320.9172'4—dc22 2006021970
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Contents
List of Illustrations vii
Acknowledgments ix
Introduction 1
Chapter 1. Comparing Apples and Mangoes 15
The Mischaracterization of Third World Experiences 15
Setting the Framework: Comparing Apples and Mangoes 23
Politics and Overpoliticization 30
Chapter 2. Sins of Universalism and Particularism 51
From the Behavioral Revolution to Modernization Theory 51
Democratization by Institutional Fiat 59
Universalism from the Left 72
Particularism and Anti–Third Worldism 76
Particularism in South America, Asia, and Africa 79
Conclusion 92
Chapter 3. Overpoliticization: Empirical and Historical Evidence 95
Overpoliticized Behaviors in Democratic Regimes 95
Overpoliticized Behaviors in Authoritarian Regimes 113
Overpoliticized Behaviors Common to Democratic and
Authoritarian Regimes 129
Overpoliticized Behaviors in Western Countries 158
Conclusion: Differences and Similarities 166
Chapter 4. Overpoliticization: Quantitative Evidence 173
Data and Procedure 173
Results and Interpretation 175
Conclusion: Differences and Similarities 192
vi Contents
Chapter 5. Understanding the Overpoliticized State 195
Political Institutions and the State as Effects of Politics 196
Compromise-Resistant Politics and the Overpoliticized State 201
The Liberal Democratic State as the Conceptual Contrast 215
Chapter 6. Basic Hypotheses About the Overpoliticized State 227
What Explains Liberal Compromise? 228
What Explains Overpoliticization? 238
Conclusion 256
Appendixes 259
Notes 269
Selected Bibliography 295
Index 317
Illustrations
FIGURES
1.1 An Analogic Representation of Overpoliticization
Versus Liberal Compromise 31
TABLES
1.1. Overpoliticized Behaviors in Electoralist Regimes 45
1.2. Overpoliticized Behaviors in Authoritarian Regimes 46
1.3. Overpoliticized Behaviors in both Electoralist and
Authoritarian Regimes 47
3.1. Violent Opposition, 1948–96 153
3.2. Violent Opposition in South America, Asia, and Africa,
1948–66, 1967–89, 1990–96 (in percentages) 153
4.1. Presence of Overpoliticized Behaviors in South America,
Asia, and Africa, 1948–66, 1967–89, 1990–96
(in percentages) 176
4.2. Presence of Overpoliticized Behaviors in Western Countries
and Japan, 1948–66, 1967–89, 1990–96 (in percentages) 176
4.3. Presence of Overpoliticized Behaviors in Continental
South America and the Caribbean, 1967–89, 1990–96
(in percentages) 178
4.4. Lack of Civil Liberties and Political Rights, 1967–89
(Means and Variations) 180
4.5. Frequency of Overpoliticized Behaviors, 1948–66, 1967–89,
1990–96 183
4.6. Pervasive Overpoliticized Behaviors, 1948–66, 1967–89,
1990–96 186
4.7. Frequency of Overpoliticized Behaviors and Their Variations 187
4.8. Frequency of Overpoliticized Behaviors: Analysis of Variance 188
4.9. Benferroni Test: Multiple Comparisons 189
vii

Acknowledgments
A while ago I published an essay critical of, among others, Guillermo
O’Donnell’s theory of the state in Latin America. As one of the reviewers of
the essay, O’Donnell, while in agreement with the substance of my argument,
warned that to meet the kind of requirements I had set for a better understand-
ing of the state in developing countries would take a lifelong project. This
book is part of this lifelong project. Because in pursuing the argument I have
had to clear first the undergrowth by taking a critical stand vis-à-vis other
scholars’ works, my first words of acknowledgment are addressed to this
group of scholars, including O’Donnell. Their works served as an intellectual
stimulus for mine. And there is no better way of saying it than by paraphras-
ing Charles Lindblom’s words to his critics in the preface to Inquiry and
Change. Speaking of the price society pays for consensus and stability, he
remarks that rather than know the price or discuss it, the critics wish to turn
their attention and his [Lindblom’s] back to recounting the benefits them-
selves. Paraphrasing him, I am aware of the contributions made by all the
works discussed in this study. Rather than recount their contributions, I focus
on those aspects of the works that, when subjected to criticism, are likely to
advance the debate. Beyond this, my words of gratitude go to (the late) John
Nagle and Mehrzad Boroujerdi of Syracuse University and Chris Anderson
and Peter Katzenstein of Cornell University for their comments on selected
parts of the earlier draft; to David Ost of Hobart College, who read the entire
manuscript and forced me to rethink some of the issues; to Bob Mupier of
Prairie View A&M University and Freedom King of Cornell University for
long discussions on the quantitative portion of the study; to Joe Hotchkasst
of Cornell University, whose expertise in fruits helped put my fruit analogy
on firmer grounds; to Andrea Burke for designing the diagram for the anal-
ogy; to my students in the graduate seminar on Comparative State-Society
Relations at Syracuse University for their insight and skeptical questions; and
to the Press’s anonymous reviewers for their perceptive comments. I also
want to thank Michael Rinella, an acquisitions editor at SUNY Press, who
maintained his interest in the book. Needless to say, I alone bear the respon-
sibility for any error of conceptualization and interpretation.
ix