« Assorted links | Main | What's actually in the health care bill »
*The Art of Not Being Governed*
The subtitle is An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia and the author is James C. Scott of Yale University. Here is a summary from the Preface:
...I argue that the [Southeast Asian] hill peoples are best understood as runaway, fugitive, maroon communities who have, over the course of two millennia, been fleeing the oppressions of state-making projects in the valleys -- slavery, conscription taxes, corvée labor, epidemics, and warfare. Most of the areas in which they reside may be aptly called shatter zones or zones of refuge.
Virtually everything about these people's livelihoods, social organizations, ideologies, and (more controversially) even their largely oral cultures, can be read as strategic positionings designed to keep the state at arm's length. Their physical dispersion in rugged terrain, their mobility, their cropping practices, their kinship structure, their pliable ethnic identities, and their devotion to prophetic, millenarian leaders effectively serve to avoid incorporations into states and to prevent states from springing up among them. The particular state that most of them have been evading has been the precocious Han-Chinese state.
Highly recommended, this is a book Gordon Tullock would love. So far it has received surprisingly little publicity but it strikes me as essential reading about Afghanistan as well. Here is a much earlier Crooked Timber post on Scott.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on November 7, 2009 at 01:25 PM in Books, History | Permalink
Comments
I think we've found out who John Galt is!
Posted by: capitalistimperialistpig at Nov 7, 2009 2:15:47 PM
But do they reject the instruments wrought by slaves used by the slavers to enslave: the Internet over spread spectrum wireless?
just two of the slaver state technologies funded by turning its subjects into slaves laboring half their lives for the slave state in its mission to expand its slave control to the distant expanses of the globe.... Of course, this slave state is the one that glories in the liberty wrought from its land redistribution from the hereditary landowners to greedy immigrants flooding to grab the land of others dismissed as worthy of their own land....
In other words, if Afghanistan is the ideal stateless society where men can freely thrive and build great things as Ayn Rand forecasts, why aren't we purchasing something more than black tar from them?
Posted by: mulp at Nov 7, 2009 2:34:21 PM
I have a post about an interview he did on this idea here.
I'm reading his "Seeing Like a State" now, good stuff.
Posted by: TGGP at Nov 7, 2009 2:44:38 PM
Because Ayn Rand understood resentment but not economics or anthropology?
Posted by: capitalistimperialistpig at Nov 7, 2009 2:46:33 PM
The Swiss could fall into this category with the Hmongs and Pashtuns as hillbillies who resist domination by large lowland states. Still, there are certain differences amongst them in say, pharmaceutical innovativeness.
Posted by: Steve Sailer at Nov 7, 2009 3:24:23 PM
"Afghanistan is the ideal stateless society where men can freely thrive and build great things as Ayn Rand forecasts"
Because Ayn Rand still believed in an unstateless society?
being enslaved by state largess is not freedom
Posted by: Putz at Nov 7, 2009 3:42:55 PM
In other words, if Afghanistan is the ideal stateless society where men can freely thrive and build great things as Ayn Rand forecasts, why aren't we purchasing something more than black tar from them?
Because Afghanistan is not a stateless society. Afghanistan is a society with *MANY* states, all competing for authority. Shariah law is ruthlessly enforced, the local warlord takes much higher taxes than anything in the west, and in many ways life in Afghanistan is more rigidly controlled than any Soviet command economy. Afghanistan is also the location of generations of state-sponsored warfare funded by billions of tax dollars.
An example of a modern stateless society would probably be something like Christiania, or perhaps Burning Man. Not what Ayn Rand predicted, for sure... but certainly not the disaster that government-worshipers such as yourself would predict either.
Posted by: Vehical Driver at Nov 7, 2009 3:51:55 PM
Also, avoiding state control is a very expensive/resource intensive endeavor. AKA, freedom ain't free.
Posted by: Nate at Nov 7, 2009 4:30:53 PM
Mulp,
It may be that there is more than a single variable involved. It may also be the same things that make a geography tame-able by markets make them harness-able by governments.
They do a pretty good job supplying us with opium I believe, but you might have me on that one as governments make this possible.
Posted by: Andrew at Nov 7, 2009 4:44:19 PM
I would love to see some data on the take by local warlords in Afghanistan compared to the third to half of GDP that government takes in the advanced world.
Posted by: spencer at Nov 7, 2009 5:27:33 PM
What is stateless about Christiania or Burning Man? They may have incredible amounts of autonomy, but they very clearly exist within a state that chooses to tolerate them.
Government-worshipper? Now there's a strange pejorative.
Posted by: Dan at Nov 7, 2009 5:32:06 PM
Hmong, hippies, militia, South American primitives or Alaskan back country hermits, they are all on the run from the state and civilization. There is a kind of primitive, temporary freedom sometimes to be found on the margins of civilization - until civilzation decides that land might be useful.
Rand imagined a fantasy world in which the fugitives from civilization might be its builders, but that's not how the world works. The fugitives are just fugitives, and they scrape out an existence based partly on the scraps that fall from civilizations table. Civilization isn't free either - it costs you a bit of your freedom - but if your lucky you escape the existence of bare subsistence.
Posted by: capitalistimperialistpig at Nov 7, 2009 6:31:14 PM
spencer - my thoughts exactly.
Even warlords must have trouble extracting that amount of a well-armed people's income - hence the opium trade I suppose. Good on them for producing it - frankly I need a bit of puff to alleviate state-propagated pain of every sort
Posted by: J Cuttance at Nov 7, 2009 6:47:34 PM
@ spencer- i think volatility is more the issue in taxation that percentage. If you have a fixed percentage, you can dela with it (forward pricing inventory, adequate capitalization etc). A warlord who one day charges "x" and another day charges 10"x", even if less than 1rst world taxation, is more difficult to maneouvre through
Posted by: farmer at Nov 7, 2009 6:55:28 PM
It is not the tyranny of the state, but the tyranny of the elders that controls these peoples lives. Talk to some Hmong and you will see that living in a moving village is like living in a small town...everyone knows your name, and social control is very high. As are customs.
Posted by: Bill at Nov 7, 2009 8:15:02 PM
I google Zomia and found this lecture by Professor Scott:
http://www.forcedmigration.org/podcasts/colson-lecture/2008/
Posted by: michael at Nov 7, 2009 10:41:02 PM
*googled
Posted by: michael at Nov 7, 2009 10:41:30 PM
Bill - ...social control is very high
Sounds a bit like being part of Rand's inner circle.
Posted by: capitalistimperialistpig at Nov 8, 2009 12:14:48 AM
Even warlords must have trouble extracting that amount of a well-armed people's income - hence the opium trade I suppose. Good on them for producing it - frankly I need a bit of puff to alleviate state-propagated pain of every sort
Farmer is right. Nobody is going to produce or build anything when it can arbitrarily be stolen by thugs with weapons. This is the history of most of civilization before 1800. In modern states, you at least have a legal right to your property minus a predetermined percentage to be taken by the government. The system works which is one of the reasons Afghanistan is dirt-poor compared to the rest of the world.
I'm surprised nobody ever brings up Kowloon Walled City in these discussions of stateless societies. Kowloon Walled City existed as an essentially anarchic enclave within British-ruled Hong Kong until it was demolished in the 1990s. It came to be dominated by Tong crime families who seem to have supplied day-to-day law enforcement services. When there was a murder there, the Hong Kong police under the British were more or less forced to investigate but that was about the extent of government involvement in the enclave.
Posted by: Ricardo at Nov 8, 2009 2:38:13 AM
Tyler,
Thought you might appreciate this, but we (RAE) are already arranging a symposium on the book. Chris and I are editing the symposium. As you know, his Seeing Like a State was an important book for the way many of us in the GPI project thought about the problems with development assistance.
It is interesting that you point out that Gordon Tullock would love the book because Pete Leeson does not like it, and I suspect it would be for the same reasons but different judgments on the normative weight of those reasons.
Posted by: Peter Boettke at Nov 8, 2009 7:47:20 AM
Damn. I probably have to read this. Seeing like a State is one of the books that changed the way I see the world (and I was *already* libertarian!!)
Posted by: David Zetland at Nov 8, 2009 11:05:35 AM
Mulp, Afstan development problems are plentiful and cannot be ascribed to one fundamental factor; at least the following factors are easy to be seen:
- a huge degree of isolation of the villages. Hindu Kush is much higher and much less travelable than the Alps. You can't produce anything more sophisticated than agricultural products and rugs in isolated communities of 50-500 people,
- rigid interpretation of Islam blocks half of the population (women) from working outside home (purdah system), and also places less competition pressure on men,
- in some areas, illiteracy is over 90 per cent; and illiterate people in isolated villages will not try to seek education for their children, why should they anyway? Try producing something useful without knowing how to read and write; this kind of backwardness produces either subsistence farmers, or warriors, or bandits,
- the educated elites from the cities have been largely driven to emigration by constant violence of the last 40 years. Infrastructure minus maintenance = regression. In 1975, Kabul had functioning network of Czech-made trolleybus lines for public transport. Today, it can't even dream about such thing, as it has problem with just getting some reliable electricity.
Posted by: Marian Kechlibar at Nov 8, 2009 1:38:45 PM
Afghanistan disproves free markets. We know this because large governments and militaries have left them completely alone.
Posted by: Andrew at Nov 8, 2009 4:33:52 PM
ricardo & farmer,
I concede the point, grudgingly tho as I am doing my tax return
Posted by: J Cuttance at Nov 8, 2009 8:38:54 PM
Andrew hit it on the head. Ha.
Posted by: Jason at Nov 9, 2009 9:10:24 AM