PADM 5115 INTRODUCTION TO STATE AND SOCIETY

School of Public Policy and Administration PADM 5115 INTRODUCTION TO STATE AND SOCIETY Fall 2009 Thursday 11:30 2:30 Room 1111A DT Professor Donald Swartz 1004 Dunton Tower Email: Donald_swartz@carleton.ca Tel. 520 2634 Office Hours: Monday: 1:30-4:00 Tuesday: 3:00 5:0 0 Course Overview The course is concerned to explore the relationship between the state and society with particular emphasis on how this has evolved over the post WW II period. After setting out some of the contemporary challenges facing societies, it begins by considering the main 19 th & early 20 th century theorists who addressed this relationship, Marx, Weber and Polanyi, whose ideas and arguments continue to influence contemporary social theorists. It then goes on to critically examine various perspectives on the development of the state, democracy, individual rights and the rise & fall of the Keynesian welfare state in the West. The last section of the course takes up debates on the contemporary relationship between the state and society. Particular emphasis is given to debates regarding the changes in the nature of the global economy, the role and capacities of the nation-state and relations between states as these pertain to the prospects for addressing contemporary challenges. Readings All required readings are available electronically. In some cases, a URL is provided. The rest are either on the WebCT for this course or accessible on-line through the Library. Course Requirements 1. The course will be run as a seminar. Students are expected to have carefully read all the required readings for each class, and to come prepared to discuss them. The weekly questions provided will be used to structure some of the discussion and so you should also give some thought to how you would answer them. While the required reading is sometimes substantial, no additional reading is required to satisfy the course requirements.

2. Students will be asked to give 2-3 short presentations (10-15 minutes) in class. In some cases this will involve overviewing a particular reading and initiating a discussion of some aspect of it. In others this will involve presenting the beginnings of an answer to one of the weekly questions. 3. You are required to write 3 short papers (1500-2000 words). One paper must be based on a reading or question arising from Part I of the course; one must be based on one from Part II of the course, and one must be based on one from Part III. See Guide to Short Essays (below) for details. Paper Due Dates: 1 st Paper Friday, Oct.16 @ 4:00p.m 2 nd Paper Friday, Nov. 6 @ 4:00 p.m. 3 rd Paper Friday, Dec.11 @ 4:00 p.m. Hard copies of papers must be submitted. Assessment & Grading - 30% for each paper - 10% for participation Guide to Short Essays Each essay should be an answer to a clearly stated question. This will normally be a refined, focused version of one of the weekly Discussion/Essay questions. However, you are welcome to make up your own question with my approval at least 1 week prior to the deadline is required. Basically, each essay should focus on one reading/author. After indicating what you will cover, you should concisely overview the answer offered to question you ve posed, and then go on to provide a critical assessment using your own ideas. No additional reading is required! Please note that critical does not mean negative; it means a reasoned assessment of the reading s strengths as well as weaknesses (insights & blindspots if you prefer), although these don t have to be equally balanced. In so doing, you must include some brief reference to one other required reading/author. The second author may be used as a point of comparison to bring out the distinctiveness of the author whose work is being assessed - or in developing your assessment of the primary author in question. You may, of course, draw upon any other work/authors that you have read in developing your assessment, but this is not necessary. However, when you do, this must be acknowledged. Generally, in this sort of exercise it is appropriate to include 1-2 key quotes to substantiate your understanding of the author in question. Where you are quoting, or using, required course material, simple in text citations are sufficient (i.e. Marx, p.x). All other material should be fully referenced.

COURSE OUTLINE Required readings are indicated by an *. Week 1 (Sept. 10) Introduction Week 2(Sept. 17) Some Contemporary Challenges *Mike Davis, Planet of Slums: Urban Involution and the Informal Proletariat New Left Review(NLR) 26 March/April 2004, pp.5-34 (on-line) * Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007 Summaries of Working Groups I, II & III [on-line http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/assessmentsreports.htm] *B Ehrenreich & A. Russel Hochchild (eds), Global Woman, Introduction, pp.1-13 (WebCT) * M. Wolf, After the Storm Comes a Hard Climb Financial Times, 14 July, 2009 http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1f7ab9d4-70aa-11de-9717-00144feabdc0.html Canadian Consortium on Human Security, Human Security for an Urban Century, 2007, esp. chaps 2 & 3 Jonathon Porrit, Capitalism as if the World Matters, (Earthscan, 2005), chap.1 1. What do these authors tells us about the current challenges confronting us, the magnitude of those challenges and the prospects of meaningful redress by policy makers? Part I Week 3 (Sept.24) Marx * K. Marx/F. Engels (WebCT) a) Preface to a Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy b) Capital Vol.1, chap. xxxii Historical Tendency of Capital Accumulation c) Excerpt from The Origin of the Family (Engels) d) Wage Labour & Capital, in R. Tucker (ed) The Marx-Engels Reader (W. Norton, 1972, pp. 167, 170-171 & 179-189. * A.Giddens & D. Held (eds) Classes. Power & Conflict (Univ. of Cal. Press, 1982), chap.1 Karl Marx, pp. 12-28 only.(webct) * A. Giddens, Capitalism and Modern Social Theory (Cambridge, 1971), chap. 2 & 4(WebCT) * L. Panitch, Thoroughly Modern Marx Foreign Policy, May/June 2009 http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4856 1. How does Marx understand the relationship between individual interests and the public good: How does he understand the state and its relation to society? 2. For Marx, the social relations of production which characterize a particular mode of production are central to understanding the nature of a society and how it changes. Discuss.

3. Is Marx as thoroughly modern as Panitch suggests? Week 4 (October 1) From Marx to Weber * A Giddens, Capitalism and Modern Social Theory (op. cit.) Chap. 11, 12 (pp. 178-184 only) & 13(pp.190-98 only) (WebCT) * M. Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (NY C. Scribner s 1958) pp.13-26 & 155-83(WebCT) * A. Giddens & D. Held (eds) op. cit., chap. 3 Max Weber (selections), pp. 60-69 (WebCT) * H. Gerth & C. W. Mills, From Max Weber (Oxford, 1946), pp. 46-50 & 66-68.(WebCT) 1. Does Weber mark an advance, relative to Marx, in our understanding of the modern world? In answering this question you should address at least two of the following themes: a) class & status, b) the nature of capitalism and its development, c) state & society, d) alienation & e) the role of ideas in society. 2. Do you think that the generally pessimistic views that Weber held regarding the impact of capitalist development on culture were well founded? Week 5 (Oct.8) Society Confronts the Market * K. Polanyi, The Great Transformation (Boston, Beacon 1957) chap. 6, 12 & 21(WebCT) * T.H. Marshall, Citizenship and Social Class, from Citizenship and Social Class and Other Essays (Cambridge 1950) (WebCT) * M. Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom (U of Chicago Press 1962) chap.1 & 2 (WebCT) E. Hobsbawm, Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century 1914-1991(London 1994), chap. 3, Q. Skinner, A Third Concept of Liberty, Proceedings of the British Academy vol. 117 (Oxford, 2003). 1. Polanyi & Marshall acknowledge the threats that capitalism poses to society, but argue that these can be contained. Discuss 2. For Friedman, it is not capitalism but the regulatory welfare state that threatens society. Discuss Part II Week 6 (Oct. 15) Democracy * G. Therborn, The Rule of Capital and the Rise of Democracy New Left Review [NLR] # 103 (on-line) * S. Bowles & H. Gintis, Democracy and Capitalism (NY Basic books 1986) chap.5 (WebCT) * C.B. MacPherson, The Life and Times of Liberal Democracy (Oxford 1976) chap.4(webct) I Shapiro, The State of Democratic Theory (Oxford 2003), chap 4 Getting & Keeping Democracy A. Phillips, Engendering Democracy, (Polity 1991) chap.6

1. While Therborn would agree with Friedman that capitalism is a necessary condition for liberal democracy, he views the relationship between the two as much more complex and tenuous. Discuss 2. Both Macpherson and Bowles & Gintis are concerned with the limits of libral democracy but develop their arguments somewhat differently. Discuss Week 7 (Oct. 22) The Autonomy of the State * N. Poulantzas, State, Power, Socialism (NLB 1978), pp. 14-25 & 35-46 (WebCT) * R. Mahon, Canadian Public Policy: the Unequal Structure of Representation, in L. Panitch (ed) The Canadian State (U of T Press 1977), pp. 165-198 (WebCT) * L. Pal, Relative Autonomy Revisited (and exchange with C. Cuneo) Canadian Journal of Political Science 1986, XIX:1 (on-line) * J. Jenson, Babies and the State Studies in Political Economy, #20, 1986 (WebCT) M. Carnoy, The State and Political Theory, (Princeton U. Press, 1984, chap.1, (pp.10-33). L. Panitch, The Role & Nature of the Canadian State in L. Panitch (ed) The Canadian State (U of Toronto Press 1976) J. Ursell, The State and the Maintainance of Patriarchy in J. Dickinson & B. Russell (eds) Family, Economy and State (Garamond 1986). 1.Poulantzas and Mahon are concerned to develop a Marxian approach to the state while Pal seeks to advance a Weberian one. Which do you think is more insightful? 2. While Pal acknowledges the insights of developments in Marxian theories of the state, he contends that they are limited by an overly narrow understanding of the relative autonomy of the state. Discuss 2. Jenson argues that efforts of Marxian feminists to account for the role of the state in reproducing gender inequality have been limited by a variant of economism denying the state any meaningful autonomy from economic forces (p.10). Discuss Week 8 (Oct. 29) The Keynesian Welfare State: Rise & Demise *E. Helleiner, States and the Reemergence of Global Finance (Cornell 1994), chap 1 (WebCT) * H. Lacher, Embedded Liberalism, Disembedded Markets: Reconceptualizing the Pax Americana, New Political Economy, 4:1, 1999, pp.343-360 (on-line) *R. Skidelsky, The Decline of Keynesian Politics, in C. Crouch (ed), State & Economy in Contemporary Capitalism, (Helm 1979), pp.55-87(webct) * A. Sassoon, Women s New Role: Contradictions of the Welfare State in idem. Women and the State (London: Hutchinson 1987) (WebCT) M. Kalecki, Political Aspects of Full Employment, Political Quarterly, 14:4 1943, pp.322-30 I. Gough, The Political Economy of the Welfare State, (MacMillan 1979) chap. 4 G. Gilder, Wealth and Poverty, ( Basic Books 1980) J. Myles, Decline or Impasse? The Current State of the Welfare State, SPE #26 1988 1. How well do these theorists explain the rise and/or demise of full employment capitalism? 2. Sassoon is concerned with the limits/shortcomings of the welfare state particularly for women. However, she questions whether these limits can be addressed simply by expanding the welfare state/filling in existing gaps. Discuss.

Week 9 ( Nov 5) Post Modern State *M. Foucault, Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews & Other Writings (N.Y. 1980), chap 5 & 6 (WebCT) *N. Rose & P. Miller, Political Power Beyond the State, British Journal of Sociology Vol. 43:2 June 1992, pp. 173-205 (on-line) * A Kalyvas, The Stateless Theory: Poulantzas s Challenge to Postmodernism in S Aronowitz & P. Bratsis (eds), Paradigm Lost: State Theory Reconsidered (Minneapolis 2002) pp.108-120 only (WebCT) B. Epstein, Radical Democracy and Cultural Politics, in D. Trend (ed) Radical Democracy, Identity, Citizenship and the State (Routledge 1996) 1. How do post-modern theorists like Foucault conceptualize power and its relation to knowledge? How is this different from earlier theorists (i.e Marx, Friedman) and how helpful is their approach. 2. How do Foucault or Rose & Miller understand the state? How useful is their approach? Part III Week 10 (Nov 12) Globalization and the Nation State *B. Jessop, Towards a Schumpeterian Workfare State? Preliminary Remarks on Post-Fordist Political Economy Studies in Political Economy (SPE) 40, 1993, pp.7-39 (WebCT) * C. Tsoukalas, Relative Autonomy and its Changing Forms, in S. Aronowitz & P. Bratsis, op. cit., pp, 221-244 (WebCT) * J. Habermas, The Post-National Constellation, (MIT 2001), chap.4(webct) W. Walters, Some Critical Notes on Governance, SPE 73, Spring 2004, pp.27-46 D. Harvey, A Brief History of Neoliberalism, (Oxford 2005), Intro, Chap 1 & 3 E. Helleiner, States and the Reemergence of Global Finance, op. cit. L. Panitch, Globalization and the State, Socialist Register 1994 L. Weiss, The Myth of the Powerless State NLR # 225 Sept/Oct 1997 1. Have nation states lost power due to globalization as Jessop/ Habermas suggests? 2. Tsoukalas and Jessop offer overlapping yet distinct accounts of the restructuring of the state and its relation to society since the rise of globalization. Which do you think is more insightful? Week 11 (Nov.19) The Global Economy: Development & Inequality

* J. Bhagwati, In Defense of Globalization (Oxford 2004), chap.1 (pp.3-13 only), 5 & 15 (WebCT) * R. Wade, What Strategies are Viable for Developing Countries Today, Review of International Political Economy, 10:4 Nov 2003, pp. 621-44(on-line) * P. Graefe, The High Value-Added, Low Wage model: Progressive Competitiveness in Quebec from Bourassa to Bouchard SPE 61 Spring 2000, pp. 5-30 (on-line) * D. Porter & D. Craig, The Third Way & the Third World: Poverty Reduction and Social Inclusion in the rise of inclusive Liberalism, Review of International Political Economy 2004, vol11:2, pp. 387-423 (on-line) J. Jenson & D. Saint-Martin, New Routes to Social Cohesion: Citizenship and the Social Investment State, Canadian Journal of Sociology, 2003, vol.28:1, pp.77-99 (on-line) G. Albo, Competitive Austerity: The Impasse of Capitalist Employment Policy, Socialist Register 1994 J. Stiglitz, Globalization and its Discontents, (Norton 2002), V. Chibber, Reviving the Developmental State: The Myth of the National Bourgeoise, Socialist Register 2005, pp. 144-165 C. Leys, The Rise and Fall of Development Theory, (Indiana Press 1996) 1. Wade questions Bhagwati s contention that free trade even with limits on short term capital flows and good governance is the key to development and poverty reduction. 2. Graefe as well as Porter & Craig question those who claim that the more interventionist policies currently espoused by more social democratically oriented governments & parties can provide a progressive model of development. Discuss Week 12 (Nov.26) Imperialism * S Strange, Towards a Theory of Transnational Empire in E. Hempel & J. Roseneau (eds), Global Changes and Theoretical Challenges (Lexington, 1989) (WebCT) * L. Panitch, The New Imperial State, NLR #2, Mar/April 2000 (on-line) * D. Harvey, The New Imperialism (Oxford 2003), pp. 1-8 & 26 42 (webct) * A. Bartholomew & J. Breakspear, Human Rights as Swords of Empire, Socialist Register 2004 (WebCT) Edward S. Herman and David Peterson, The Responsibility to Protect, the International Criminal Court, and Foreign Policy in Focus: Subverting the UN Charter in the Name of Human Rights MRZine 24.08.09 http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/hp240809.html M. Ignatieff, The Burden (of American Empire), NY Times Magazine, Jan. 5, 2003. Monthly Review (vol. 55, #3, July/August 2003). This issue is devoted to imperialism and contains several excellent short articles. A number (especially those by Gowan, Wallerstein and Klare) take issue with aspects of Panitch and would help students writing on Question 1. Those by Epstein, Fletcher, and Gindin, would help students writing on Question 2. L. Panitch & S. Gindin, Global Capitalism and American Empire Socialist Register, 2004 1. While Strange, Harvey and Panitch all contend that imperialism characterizes the current world order much better than globalization, they conceptualize imperialism somewhat differently. Which do you think is the most insightful?.

2. Whither democracy and human rights? Are these best served by working within the American imperial order as Strange implies? Week 13 (Dec 3) Financial Crisis and Beyond *L. Panitch & S. Gindin, The Current Crisis: A Socialist Perspective, Studies in Political Economy # 83, Spring 2009, pp. 7-32 (on-line) * R. Wade, Financial Regime Change?, New Left Review # 53, Sept/Oct. 2008, pp.5-22 (online) * Paul Krugman, What to Do, NYTimes Review of Books, 55:10, Dec. 18, 2008(WebCT) * W. Bello, A Man for this Season? Keynes, Business Mirror Online, July 9, 2009 http://businessmirror.com.ph/home/perspective/12915-a-man-for-this-season-keynes.html A. Hanieh, Hierarchies of a Global Market: The South and the Economic Crisis, Studies in Political Economy #83, Spring 2009, pp. 61-84 P. Gowan, Crisis in the Heartland, New Left Review #55, Jan/Feb 2009, pp. 5-30 (Gowan) 1. Wade suggests (cautiously) that the financial crisis will lead to a third regime change. Do you agree? 2. Panitch & Gindin suggest that the turn to Keynes by analysts such as Krugman is an example of the sort of thinking inside the box that has been so debilitating for the prospects of progressive social change. Discuss