Summary Politics: Africa Midterm Exam Revision Notes
25 vues 1 achat
Cours
Politics: Africa
Établissement
Universiteit Leiden (UL)
This document has all the lecture notes included, with side notes by the lecturer, all the readings summarized, including an optional reading summary, and an exam questions revision section. The reading's summaries are extremely helpful if you've never read the readings because it is just a shorte...
Week Two Notes: Evolution of African States 16
Reading Notes 16
Reading One: The Evolution of African States 16
Lecture Two Notes: The Evolution of African States 34
Week Three Notes: Citizenship, Nationalism, & Political Independence in Africa 39
Reading Notes 39
Reading One: Nationalism and Political Independence in Africa 39
Lecture Three Notes: Citizenship, Nationalism, and Independence in Contemporary Africa 46
Week Four Notes: Civil-Military Relations 49
Reading Notes 49
Reading One: Civil-Military Relations in Africa 49
Optional Reading Notes: Theories of Military in African Politics 54
Lecture Four notes: Civil-Military Relations 59
Week Five Notes: Elites and Hegemony 65
Reading Notes 65
Reading One: Money and Land 67
Reading Two: How to be a Hegemon 74
Lecture Five notes: Elites and Hegemony in African Politics 77
Exam Review Questions 82
, 1
Week One Notes: Why African Politics Matter
______________________________________________________
Reading Notes
Reading One: W(h)ither the State?
SOURCE: Engelbert, Pierre and Dunn, Kevin Inside African Politics, (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner
Publishers, 2013) Chapter 1
SUMMARY: summarized 13 pages of paragraphs to 7 pages covering everything, with a lot of spaces,
bullet points, etc.
Introduction
It often seems that analysts are more concerned with confirming their own theoretical or conceptual
preferences rather than understanding the realities of the structure of political power in post-colonial
African societies.
Multiple paradigms on the institutionalization of power fail to convincingly account for the role of the
state in contemporary Africa.
Our starting point is the Weberian approach to the formation of the modern state
➔ Why the overcoming of patrimonialism is a prerequisite to the successful emergence of the state.
Our own argument is that the state in Africa was never properly institutionalized because it was never
significantly emancipated from society. Partly as a result of historical factors linked to the specific
development of the colonial state - a state both arbitrary and poorly bureaucratized - and partly with
important cultural considerations.
The Non-Emancipated State
Below are three of the most predominant interpretations of the state that tend to either remain excessively
teleological or neglect relevant cultural considerations.
1. The first approach assumes that any relatively centralized political structure presiding over the
destiny of the peoples of a given geographical area can be assimilated into a state.
However,
- The state is not merely the ‘inevitable’ result of the evolution of a system for the
regulation of power within the social order.
- Depends above all on the gradual emancipation of established political structures from
society.
2. The second, (Marxist or neo-Marxist perspective), is that the state is simply the instrument of
accumulation and violence wielded by a dominant social class - “the superstructure”.
However,
, 2
- It is difficult to establish (ideologically), whether in Africa there are identifiable social
classes with discrete and coherent political ambitions.
- It is self-evidently the case that the modern state (whether in the West or in Asia) has
been instrumental in fostering and co-ordinating economic growth for the benefit of a
large array of social classes - and not just of the political elites
3. The third, on the origins of African polities, tends to confuse appearance with reality.
However,
- The fact that all post-colonial states have been formally constituted on the model of the
modern Western state is not in itself evidence of the degree of their institutionalization.
- The public display of the attributes of the modern state could also be deceptive
For our part, we approach the question from the perspective of the Weberian tradition, a sociological
approach.
● From this viewpoint, the modern state is the outcome of a process by which the realm of politics
is gradually emancipated from society and constituted into increasingly autonomous
political institutions.
- the successful establishment of a truly independent bureaucracy.
- the emancipation of the state rests on the establishment and operation of a civil service
unconstrained by the dynamics of social pressures.
The implication of such an analysis is that the emergence of the modern state means the end of
patrimonialism. By contrast, the patrimonial model implies an instrumentally profitable lack of
distinction between the civic and personal spheres.
● The ruler allocates political office to his clients on the basis of patronage, rather than according to
the criteria of professionalism and competence which characterize the civil service.
● On these grounds alone, it would be fair to say that there is no such civil service on the continent.
The state in Africa is thus not institutionalized.
The overriding criterion for selection is kin, communal or other types of loyalty to the ruling elites rather
than qualification or competence. It is clear that the practice of appointment to state employment on
ascriptive or personalized grounds is the norm on the continent.
➔ There appears to be a sense of resigned fatalism: it is expected that civil servants will abuse their
power.
On the continent, no country has a functioning system of personal taxation.
● In a situation where the most basic rules of bureaucratic accountability are disregarded at will,
there cannot be the most elementary institutional infrastructure which would make it possible
to sustain the modern state (as it is defined in the West).
- Note: there are significant differences in respect of the norms of bureaucratic efficiency
between African countries.
- It serves no purpose to generalize excessively and to reduce all African political systems
to their lowest common denominator, however, some generalization is possible.
, 3
● Most particularly, it reveals that forty years after the first independence, Africa lacks the degree of
political institutionalization necessary for the emergence of the modern state, as defined above.
● On the contrary, the empirical evidence seems to suggest that the political realm is becoming
ever more informalized.
Instrumentalization and the undifferentiated state
There is little consensus on the nature of the state in Africa, even on the fact that it is both poorly
emancipated and very largely patrimonial.
Three most common analytical interpretations of the post-colonial state on the continent.
1. The neo-patrimonial model, derived from Weberian sociology.
2. The hybrid state perspective
3. The paradigm of the transplanted state
2 and 3 both derive from a biological analogy.
1: The neo-patrimonial model
The neo-patrimonial approach: seeks to make sense of the contradictions to be found in the state in
sub-Saharan Africa; the state is simultaneously illusory and a chief instrument of patrimonialism.
● The state is thus both strong and powerless → overdeveloped in size and underdeveloped in
functional terms.
● The character of the state is determined by the degree to which the existing political order is
institutionalized.
The merit of the neo-patrimonial model is twofold:
1. It makes it possible to account for the undeniable fact that the public and the private spheres
largely overlap.
2. It helps to explain in which ways the operation of a political system is no longer entirely
‘traditional’ hence ‘neo’.
In the postcolonial context, political legitimacy derives from a creatively imprecise interaction between
what might be termed ‘ancestral’ norms and the logic of the ‘modern’ state. The structure conforms to the
Western template while the workings derive from the patrimonial dynamics.
Within a neo-patrimonial system, the much-trumpeted ‘public’ sector is in reality appropriated by private
interests. The consequence is double:
➔ On the one hand, public service remains personalized by way of clientelism and nepotism.
- Basically, the services carried out are prioritized for clientelistic purposes, as opposed to
actually carrying out public services for the sake of the public.
➔ On the other, access to the public institutions of the state is seen as the main means of personal
enrichment - even if the fruits of such labor are thereafter to be redistributed or even reinvested.
- Basically, the job itself is desired by patrons as they know it's a way to enrich themselves
and their networks.
Les avantages d'acheter des résumés chez Stuvia:
Qualité garantie par les avis des clients
Les clients de Stuvia ont évalués plus de 700 000 résumés. C'est comme ça que vous savez que vous achetez les meilleurs documents.
L’achat facile et rapide
Vous pouvez payer rapidement avec iDeal, carte de crédit ou Stuvia-crédit pour les résumés. Il n'y a pas d'adhésion nécessaire.
Focus sur l’essentiel
Vos camarades écrivent eux-mêmes les notes d’étude, c’est pourquoi les documents sont toujours fiables et à jour. Cela garantit que vous arrivez rapidement au coeur du matériel.
Foire aux questions
Qu'est-ce que j'obtiens en achetant ce document ?
Vous obtenez un PDF, disponible immédiatement après votre achat. Le document acheté est accessible à tout moment, n'importe où et indéfiniment via votre profil.
Garantie de remboursement : comment ça marche ?
Notre garantie de satisfaction garantit que vous trouverez toujours un document d'étude qui vous convient. Vous remplissez un formulaire et notre équipe du service client s'occupe du reste.
Auprès de qui est-ce que j'achète ce résumé ?
Stuvia est une place de marché. Alors, vous n'achetez donc pas ce document chez nous, mais auprès du vendeur thatovanderjagt. Stuvia facilite les paiements au vendeur.
Est-ce que j'aurai un abonnement?
Non, vous n'achetez ce résumé que pour €11,99. Vous n'êtes lié à rien après votre achat.
