Main dynamics driving the development of the modern state - Coursework Example

? Main dynamics driving the development of the modern In the 21st century world, observations reveal that some of the modern s are ed to collective dynamics that bring them together within the realms of larger regional groups, while on the other hand there are states that are subjected to strong centrifugal forces that break them apart. In the current context of globalisation, the concept of State autonomy has been subjected to scrutiny, as regards financial and commercial activities (Cudworth, Hall and McGovern, 2008). Owing to these issues, scholars have started analysing the dynamics behind development and origins of the modern state, in order to comprehend the underlying processes and its future shape. This essay review the various dynamics that played a major role during development of the modern state, including the institutionalist, economic and security approaches, and connects these varied approaches to developing an understanding on the concept of modern statehood. Recent studies have emphasised the necessity of analysing the origin and subsequent development of a modern state, primarily owing to the hypothesis that a contemporary State has reached its peak and hence would start declining henceforth. Increasing powers of multinational organisations like World Trade Organization and supranational bodies such as European Union indicate an end to the nations-state’s authoritative power (Pierson, 2012). From this viewpoint, state sovereignty is shifting to supranational and multilateral levels of authority (Rosenau and Czempiel, 1992). At the same time, there are reports of states breaking apart into small and fragmented entities. A number of states that appeared as logical territorial bodies, have rapidly fallen apart and the centrifugal forces have not remained restricted only to developing nations, where there might be suppositions that ethnic unrest would arise naturally within the arti?cially imposed borders created by their former colonial rulers and post-independence weak economic conditions. However, developed socialist and capitalist states have also fallen prey to the centrifugal forces and broken apart, such as Soviet Union and Canada (where Quebecois lost a mandate or else territorial integrity of the country would have faced a serious challenges). In the post-Cold War era, there seem to be an uneasy co-existence of centrifugal forces and collective dynamics, and it is essential to examine the methods of historical transitions that help one to draw insights into the modern state and its current form. Development of modern state through warfare: an important dynamics that played a major role in development of modern state is the impact of warfare on the capacity of a state. During the fourteenth century, military technology started changing remarkably, where heavy and mounted cavalry (archetype of feudal warfare) were slowly removed, which led to the decline in the superiority of the mounted knight (Contamine, 1984). The widening scope of war also led to the formation of standing armies and various mercenary contingents, which forced the rulers to raise greater taxes for funding such armies. This transformation greatly helped royal administration to expand while causing a sharp rise in taxes levied on the common people (Ames and Rapp, 1977). The French Revolution brought in further changes where the government, instead of depending on large mercenary forces, looked at mobilising an entire national population to rise and revolt against ruling authority. Soon, other states such as, Britain, Russia, Austria and Prussia, after observing transformations in France, changed their army framework and the Ratchet effects swept all over Europe. The scholars that stress on warfare transformation as a major reason for emergence of modern state primarily focus on the dynamics at macro levels that put pressure at systemic levels (Webber and Wildavsky 1986). Recently, scholars have also analysed this cause at a micro-level, where it was derived that military contexts brought forth new scopes for changing shape of the functioning political order. As for example, Tilly stated that States, which failed to carry on with modern warfare, were rooted out from the global order (Tilly 1990). The increasing power of central authority increased the nation’s capacity to carry on with external form of warfare and such con?icts at a global level then helped to raise demands of rulers on their respective societies. Economic reasons for the development of modern state: Like transformations in warfare, economic reasons for development of the modern state tend to function at different levels. Neo-Marxism focused on the basic weaknesses that are found within an economic system, which needs changes at a macro level. Rulers that are not successful in developing states that promote liberal trade and commercial activities tend to lose out to states that have facilities for open trade and economy. At a macro level, neo-Marxism highlighted the relationship that existed between advent of capitalism and development of modern states (Anderson 1974). Wallerstein (1974) in his researches also claimed that capitalism came into existence along with development of powerful European states, which in turn brought in other peripheral or smaller (economically weaker) states within realms of the capitalist form of global economic order. At a macro-level, there also exists close links between advent of capitalist form of economy and the development of a modern military state. Institutionalist View of the Modern State: this perspective views institution as a way to resolve issues related to cooperation and cooperation (Moe 1984). Based on the theory of rational choice and its emphasis on individual choices, new institutionalism analyses principal-agent problems, information asymmetries and transaction costs, to elucidate the choice of specific institutional order. From this perspective, institutions become dependent variables within the various dynamics that are at play in the development of a modern state (Steinmo, 2010). The preference for territorial sovereignty has thus roots in micro-level dynamics, and when viewed from the perspective of new institutionalism, a modern state offers better solutions for issues related to co-ordination and collaboration, than all previous forms of State that are seen in history. Institutions in a sovereign state delineated relations between rulers and the citizens and between citizens themselves. Sovereignty brought in stability and homogeneity within governance and social relationships, by providing collective public goods (as in, creating effective legal, defence frameworks for the nation), hence proving to be more effective than a feudal state (Spruyt, 1994). Recent studies have emphasized the necessity to mix comparative hypotheses and perspectives within international relations, so that there is a better understanding of the processes and dynamics that occur during development of the modern state (Zolberg, 1980). Even though in the current context of globalisation and interdependence, the autonomous power of state governments have greatly decreased, the basic notion that states having democratic governments hold supreme power within their borders, and global relations take place between polemical equals, form to be the main characteristics of international relations and a 21st century modern state. References Ames, E., & Rapp R., 1977. The birth and death of taxes: a hypothesis. J. Econ. Hist. 37, 161–78. Anderson, P., 1974. Lineages of the Absolutist State. London: Verso. Contamine, P., 1984. War in the Middle Ages. New York: Blackwell. Cudworth, E., Hall, T., & McGovern, J., 2008. The Modern State: Theories and Ideologies. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Moe, T., 1984. The new economics of organization. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 28, 739–77. Pierson, C., 2012. The Modern State. NY: Routledge. Rosenau, J., & Czempiel, E., (eds.) 1992. Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press. Spruyt, H., 1994. The Sovereign State and Its Competitors. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press. Steinmo, S., 2010. The Evolution of Modern States: Sweden, Japan, and the United States. NY: CUP. Tilly, C., 1990. Coercion, Capital and European States, AD 990–1990. Cambridge, UK: Blackwell. Wallerstein, I., 1974. The Modern World System (Vol 1). Orlando, FL: Academic. Webber, C., & Wildavsky, A., 1986. A History of Taxation and Expenditure in the Western World. New York: Simon & Schuster. Read More