Tilly 1985: Difference between revisions
Allendmata (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Allendmata (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Main Argument: | ===Main Argument:=== | ||
Charles Tilly contends that the coercive and self-serving behaviors inherent in war making and state making, coupled with their reliance on violence and exploitation, closely resemble the traits associated with organized crime. This perspective challenges the traditional perception of these activities as legitimate forms of governance, highlighting their parallels with illicit practices typically associated with criminal enterprises. | Charles Tilly contends that the coercive and self-serving behaviors inherent in war making and state making, coupled with their reliance on violence and exploitation, closely resemble the traits associated with organized crime. This perspective challenges the traditional perception of these activities as legitimate forms of governance, highlighting their parallels with illicit practices typically associated with criminal enterprises. | ||
Warning | ====Warning==== | ||
Double-Edged Protection | ====Double-Edged Protection==== | ||
Violence and Government | ====Violence and Government==== | ||
Protection as Business | ====Protection as Business==== | ||
* The pacification or elimination of rivals, especially rivals with significantly large populations or competitive resources, by the sovereign is portrayed as a strategic move to establish a monopoly on protection. | |||
* Governments, similar to businesses, ironically provide protection services to their citizens regardless of individual preferences. This means that even if individuals may not actively seek or want this protection, governments impose it as part of their role in maintaining order and security within society. | |||
** As a result, it is quite difficult to analyze how necessarily 'good' is this layer of governmental protection, especially in large scale imperialist powers like the United States. | |||
Revision as of 09:02, 23 February 2024
Main Argument:
Charles Tilly contends that the coercive and self-serving behaviors inherent in war making and state making, coupled with their reliance on violence and exploitation, closely resemble the traits associated with organized crime. This perspective challenges the traditional perception of these activities as legitimate forms of governance, highlighting their parallels with illicit practices typically associated with criminal enterprises.
Warning
Double-Edged Protection
Violence and Government
Protection as Business
- The pacification or elimination of rivals, especially rivals with significantly large populations or competitive resources, by the sovereign is portrayed as a strategic move to establish a monopoly on protection.
- Governments, similar to businesses, ironically provide protection services to their citizens regardless of individual preferences. This means that even if individuals may not actively seek or want this protection, governments impose it as part of their role in maintaining order and security within society.
- As a result, it is quite difficult to analyze how necessarily 'good' is this layer of governmental protection, especially in large scale imperialist powers like the United States.