Tilly- War Making and State Making as Organized Crime Flashcards
What is a protection racket and how does Tilly use this in his argument?
An organised crime group creates a threat and then demands money to protect businesses from it. Tilly compares war-making and state-making to this. War makes states. The threats against which a given government protects its citizens are imaginary or are consequences of its activities.
What role did taxation play in war and state-making?
The tax was used to generate long-term income. This capital was used to gain an advantage over competitors and gain more power. It also helped with state-making.
How did the government create its monopoly?
The king would use outlaws early on, but this decreased as the army became more unified.
They began not letting lords hold retainers in Tudor, England.
Stopped relying on magnates and began introducing a police force in local communities.
Summarise Lane’s model of protection as business
It treats protection as a commercial service offered by state or criminal organizations. In this model, these entities act as rational actors who protect in exchange for payment, using coercion and violence to enforce contracts and maintain order, much like a private business operating within a market for security and enforcement. For example, a king offering protection can make a profit from taxes.
What are some restrictions of Lane’s model?
He assumes citizens are always willing customers- suffocated in a neoliberalism box.
Lane’s analysis of protection fails to differentiate between various uses of state-controlled violence. These include war-making (eliminating external rivals), state-making (neutralizing internal rivals), protection (defending clients from enemies), and extraction (gathering resources to support the other three activities).
How does organized violence lead to the creation of a state?
State’s use of organized violence—war making, state making, protection, and extraction—are interconnected and reinforce each other. War-making, for instance, can serve protection by defending the interests of certain classes, while state-making often reduces protection for rival groups. Each of these activities requires specific organizational structures: war-making leads to armies, state-making to surveillance systems, protection to legal institutions like courts, and extraction to fiscal systems. Ultimately, the monopolization of violence shaped the development and structure of European states, serving the interests of those in power.
Popular resistance to war-making and state-making led to concessions from authorities, such as rights and institutions, which constrained the state’s future actions. This resistance was more impactful when aligned with ruling class factions, as seen in the English Revolution.
Second, the balance between war-making, protection, extraction, and state-making shapes state organization. For example, states that emphasized war-making, like Spain, saw military dominance, while those focusing on protection, like Venice, were controlled by oligarchies. External factors such as loans, territorial competition, and coalitions further influenced the development of national states, especially after major European wars, which reduced the number of states and reshaped their structures.
Key argument
The text discusses the interplay between war-making, state-making, and economic development in Europe from 1400 to 1600, emphasizing the role of military organization and capital accumulation. It critiques Bean’s technological determinism, suggesting that while military innovations led to larger states, the historical evidence does not fully support his claims. Tilly highlights the importance of capital in supporting military expansion and state-building efforts, arguing that governments operated similarly to organized crime by providing protection in exchange for tribute. This relationship between state power and economic resources fostered a dynamic where state-building activities also created economic growth. Tilly illustrates how the monopolization of violence and protection evolved alongside economic changes.
Explain what does Tilly mean by saying that the states are essentially “protection rackets with the advantage of legitimacy”. Make use of the concepts “war making” ‘‘extraction’’ and ‘'’capital accumulation’
Hoe fors tillys approach to the state differ from webers? and where do you see similarities?
