Fortin 2
On the one hand, the results from the present study show that the links are clear
between a strong state that has been able to apply a definitive set of rules and build
channels for political support, and democratic institutions. On the other hand, where state
capacity was more limited after independence was gained, democracy was a less likely
outcome. Indeed, it is far from inevitable that rulers achieve predominance for the state
and many postcommunist countries seem like case-points. By trying to recentralize
power to compensate for the state’s administrative limitations, executive authorities also
had a parallel tendency to suppress liberties and freedoms. Since we know that a strong
state either could be the “guarantor of democracy” (Bunce, 2000) or an intervening
variable in explaining economic success (Johnson, 2003), this paper demonstrates that
when studying non-Western industrial countries the analytical point of departure needs to
be beyond constitutions and institutional features such as party systems and electoral
modes.
THEORY
The study of the “state” has spawned many debates concerning the appropriate
methodology to conceptualize it. Central to the literature of the state is a polemic over
the assumption of an analytical boundary separating state and society. Indeed, the state is
not one entity, but a composite of empirical and non empirical elements such as
normative factors (Levi, 2002). States cannot and should not be described as unitary or
intentional actors because they are composed of a complex web of sub organizations and
actors. While it is undeniable that the boundary between state and society is an analytical
construct that finds no empirical referent in most cases, I believe this separation remains
valuable for studying the capacity of state institutions as a whole. Besides, the postulates
underlying a theory should be judged on a criteria of usefulness rather than how close to
reality they come: otherwise, any theory of the state risks becoming too complicated to
allow comparison across cases. Thus in the present study, based on the assumption that
governments have sufficient autonomy to pursue their own goals, the state will be viewed
as an actor with the administrative capacity to extract, regulate, and penetrate society.
In communist countries the state is the main generator and distributor of
resources. Given the absence of a market economy during the Soviet era, the state is an
Convention