Charles Tilly – War Making and State Making as Organized Crime

War making and state making are interdependentAnalogous to organised crime

Differentiate protection and racketeeringUsed as a justification for govt- protection from local and external violence

- create a threat and then charges for its reduction- threats imaginary or a consequence of govt activities

makes no differenceStinchcombe: legitimacy id the probability that other authorities will act to confirm the decisions of a given authoritymore likely to be confirmed where the govt controls a substantial forcedistinction arose slowly- see govt involvement in piracy

pursuit of war involved power holders in the extraction of resources from populations and in the promotion of capital accumulationwar making, extraction and capital accumulation interacted to shape European state makingdid not foresee the emergence of national states

Acquired by conquest, by selling assets, by coercion or by dispossession

State changes resulted from- difficulty of collecting taxes- expense of armed force- total war making required to hold off competitors

TudorsRichelieu/Louis XIII

a. extending govt officialdom to the local communityb. encouraging the creation of police forces subordinate to the govtmixed strategies - cajoling, subjugating, dividing, buying- tax exemptionshonorifics

1. war making2. state making3.

protection4. extractional dependent on the state's tendency to monopolise the concentrated means of coercion

from plunder to tribute to taxation

War making >>> territorial dominanceIncreased extractionIncreased capacity to extractextraction >>> neutralisation or elimination of rivals>>> organisation of agencies >>> state makingWar making >>> state making through the expansion of military organisationalliances formed with specific social classes>>> who then loaned resources and provided support, ensuring society's compliance in return for a measure of protectionBecame a distinctive state apparatus

1. popular resistance to war making and state making made a difference- resistance led to concessions > rights, representative institutions, courts of appeal- concessions constrained later state and war making2. relative balance between 4 elements significantly affected the organisation of the state which emerged- WM prevalence >>> military play a larger part- P prevalence - oligarchies of protected classes- SM prevalence - policing and surveillance emphasisPre 20th Century - WM unlikely to disappear>>> lending/buying war making

1.

Flow of resources: loans and supplies- especially those devoted to WM2. competition for hegemony in disputed territories- stimulated WM3. intermittent coalitions- forcing states into certain forms and positions

larger scale logic of aggrandisement a. differential success in external struggles establishes the difference between internal and external arenas for the deployment of forceb. external competition generates internal state makingc. external alliances influence form of states even more powerfully- LoN extended Euro process to the world

differences in military organisationEurope: military apparatus build through struggles with citizens and through selective external engagementRest: decolonisation- military organisation acquired from outside the state, without forging of mutual constraints- powerful, unconstrained organisationsadvantages of military power become larger- incentives to seize power over the state are very strong- disproportion between military and other forms of organisation