Why did states and empires emerge earlier in some parts of the world than in others? The question has long intrigued historians, who have wanted to understand the discrepancy, and policymakers, who have sought to exploit it. The exploiters had their heyday in the late nineteenth century when European imperialists carved Africa into parcels to suit their interests. Against the power of the European states, the political entities in Africa could muster little effective resistance. The imperialists rationalized their cupidity by asserting a civilizing mission in what they were doing: Because the Africans hadn’t been able to build states sufficient to ward off the intruders, the Europeans would do the state-building for them.
A fine summary of the political economy of stable states, or can in some cases produce empires that may not survive. Regardless they depend on the production of foodstuffs or have the means to get them for their citizens. This shows the fundamentals of a state reduced to the simplist form for all the complicated financial structures powerfull càpitalist states create.
In their book "Why Nations Fail" Acemoglu & Robinson argue that the colonial powers introduced extractive higher authorities and even when colonial powers left, the native powers that took over maintained extractive governance.
A fine summary of the political economy of stable states, or can in some cases produce empires that may not survive. Regardless they depend on the production of foodstuffs or have the means to get them for their citizens. This shows the fundamentals of a state reduced to the simplist form for all the complicated financial structures powerfull càpitalist states create.
In their book "Why Nations Fail" Acemoglu & Robinson argue that the colonial powers introduced extractive higher authorities and even when colonial powers left, the native powers that took over maintained extractive governance.