The State and Society: Peru in Comparative Perspective [Paperback]

Alfred C. Stepan (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: July 1978

This book has soft covers.Ex-library,With usual stamps and markings,In good all round condition.

Product Details

• Paperback: 348 pages
• Publisher: Princeton University Press (July 1978)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0691021791
• ISBN-13: 978-0691021799
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 5.9 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,808,314 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars The State Drives Society, September 4, 2007

By 

Matthew P. Arsenault (SW Michigan) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The State and Society: Peru in Comparative Perspective (Paperback)

Stepan argues that the state (IV) shapes society (DV). He begins by criticizing theories which argue the opposite, beginning with liberal pluralism. Additionally, Stepan argues that many political elites in Latin America, in response to "crises of modernization and control" have used the organic-statist model of state-society relations "to forge regimes with marked corporatist characteristics" (p. 40).

Liberal pluralism argues that society will operate most effectively with minimal state interference, i.e. individuals are fee to pursue their own self-interest. The "hidden hand" works better than the state. However, in reality society is not self-regulating. The "hidden hand" only works if "the state provides the indispensable neutral and impartial administrative, institutional, and physical infrastructure for capitalism to function" (p. 9). Additionally, it is imperative that the state regulate conflict between interest groups. Furthermore, interest groups don't float in a "primordial soup" according to their interest lines. Often interest groups are "chartered" by the state. Also, the state may impose regulation on the behaviors groups can pursue. Also, interest groups vie for representation in the policy process. The state plays a rather major role in deciding who sits at the table and who doesn't. Not all groups have the same "access capability."

Stepan also criticizes classical Marxism. Marxists argue that economic conditions drive the state, i.e. the state is a tool of the ruling class used to repress the proletariat. It is based on mode of production and class conflict. In reality, Stepan would argue, the state is actually able to take action independent of unified classes. He writes that the classes will, at times, balance each other out and then the state becomes the mediator. We cannot assume that there is one hegemonic class. Furthermore, there is a lot of conflict among the industrial elite which makes consolidation difficult. Lastly, as a state advances, the bureaucracy grows. It becomes more autonomous and everyone, regardless of class, relies on it.

Finally, Stepan discusses the organic-statist model. There is certain morality to the organic-statist paradigm. This model is based on two principles: (1) it is the role of the state to achieve the common good; (2) "although the state is the most perfect political community, all component parts (individual, family, private association) have a proper function of their own within the organic whole" and these should not be removed (p. 35). Although technically self-managing, it is the job of the state to structure society in such a way that all functional parts are integrated into the whole. The organic-statist state is interventionist and strong. It will take upon itself the initiative to make changes in the established order to "create a more just society" (p. 33). When there is justification for rapid social change in order to correct a societal problem, a strong state is needed to ensure that change occurs and changes rapidly. As such, this model often emerges out of crises in the pluralist system. When the elites perceive a problem with the liberal/pluralist mechanisms, they will step in and take control. The organic-statist system does not have to be democratic and can often be found in bureaucratic authoritarian regimes. Once the state gains power it tends to take more control over groups via more corporatist policies (especially labor) while encouraging entrepreneurialism and capitalist freedom. It is here that Stepan is in rather staunch agreement with Collier.

It is important to note that organic-statism is a normative model used to guide politics. No state is characterized by the organic-statist model. However, organic-statism is used as a guide and rationale in the pursuit of corporatist policies.

Corporatism can be defined as a system of interest representation in which the constituent units are organized into a limited number of singular, compulsory, noncompetitive, hierarchically ordered and functionally differentiated categories, recognized or licensed (if not created) by the state and granted a deliberate representational monopoly within their respective categories in exchange for observing certain controls on their selection of leaders and articulation of demands and supports (p. 66).

Stepan argues that the corporatist model usually emerges out of crises, particularly in cases of failures in the liberal system. The strong corporatist state can provide the stability attractive to multinationals, technocrats and the military. Stepan writes, "As a general theoretical points, I would argue that corporatist ideas of unity are not a function of unity or contiguity, but appeal to elites around the world precisely because there is a perceived threat of fragmentation" (particularly by interest groups). Elites see traditional modes of domination as falling apart. They reject liberalism and Marxism because they only increase conflict. Instead they embrace conflicting interest groups, and by incorporating them, actually demobilize them. The interest groups lose their power to make demands. As such, Stepan sees corporatism as a policy output rather than a societal reflection.