DOCSLIB.ORG

A Democratic Peace Revisited

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Democratic Peace Revisited A Democratic Peace Revisited Measuring Democracy in International Relations Lars Wilhelmsen Cand. polit. thesis Department of Political Science UNIVERSITY OF OSLO April 2006 3 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................................3 FIGURES AND TABLES ...............................................................................................................................4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................................................5 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................7 2. THE CONCEPT OF DEMOCRACY...........................................................................................17 2.1 DEFINING DEMOCRACY ................................................................................................................18 2.1.1 Democracy in history and philosophy ..............................................................................18 2.1.2 Democracy in political science and international relations .............................................22 2.2 MEASURING DEMOCRACY ............................................................................................................26 2.2.1 The Polity dataset .............................................................................................................26 2.2.2 Freedom House.................................................................................................................30 2.2.3 The Polyarchy dataset.......................................................................................................35 2.2.4 Other contributions...........................................................................................................40 2.2.5 Summary ...........................................................................................................................42 3. THE DEMOCRATIC PEACE ......................................................................................................45 3.1 LEVEL OF ANALYSIS AND TYPE OF CONFLICT ................................................................................45 3.2 DEMOCRATIC PEACE IN HISTORY ..................................................................................................46 3.3 EXPLAINING THE DEMOCRATIC PEACE ..........................................................................................48 3.4 DEMOCRACY AND THE DEMOCRATIC PEACE .................................................................................56 4. APPLYING POLYARCHY TO INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS ANALYSES...................59 4.1 ADVANTAGES TO THE POLYARCHY DATASET ...............................................................................59 4.1.1 A parsimonious measure of democracy ............................................................................59 4.1.2 An objective measure of democracy..................................................................................60 4.1.3 Transparency ....................................................................................................................61 4.1.4 Ease of maintainability .....................................................................................................62 4.1.5 Flexibility of application...................................................................................................62 4.1.6 A continuous measure of democracy ................................................................................63 4.2 POSSIBLE PROBLEMS AND DISCUSSION .........................................................................................67 4.3 THE CODING PROCESS FOR THE POLYARCHY DATA SET ................................................................71 5. THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS AND RESEARCH DESIGN.............................................75 5.1 EXPECTATIONS BASED ON THE LITERATURE .................................................................................75 5.2 RESEARCH DESIGN .......................................................................................................................79 4 5.2.1 Qualitative versus qantitative methods ............................................................................ 79 5.2.2 Replication ....................................................................................................................... 81 5.3 CHOICE OF STUDIES ..................................................................................................................... 82 5.3.1 Peace and democracy 1946–2002 ................................................................................... 82 5.3.2 Dangerous dyads revisited – again.................................................................................. 89 6. EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS............................................................................................................. 97 6.1 BIVARIATE RESULTS : PEACE AND DEMOCRACY 1946-2002......................................................... 97 6.2 MULTIVARIATE RESULTS : DANGEROUS DYADS REVISITED – AGAIN ........................................... 104 7. CONCLUTIONS.......................................................................................................................... 111 7.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ............................................................................................................. 111 7.2 IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ...................................................................................... 113 REFERENCES....................................................................................................................................... 117 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................................ 127 APPENDIX A: SAMPLE POLYARCHY COUNTRY CODING SHEET ............................................................. 127 APPENDIX B: ALTERNATE STATISTICAL MODELS ................................................................................. 129 Figures and tables FIGURE 1.1 AVERAGE POLYARCHY SCORE 1810–2002 .............................................................................. 14 FIGURE 2.1 FREEDOM HOUSE ELECTORAL DEMOCRACIES 2005................................................................. 33 FIGURE 2.2 SHARE OF DEMOCRACIES IN THE WORLD 1816–2002................................................................ 38 FIGURE 4.1 OVERVIEW OF POLITY IV SCORES , 1810–2002......................................................................... 65 FIGURE 4.2 SPREAD OF POLYARCHY : COMPETITION AND PARTICIPATION VALUES , 2002............................ 66 FIGURE 4.3 POLITY AND POLYARCHY DISTRIBUTION OF OBSERVATIONS , 2002 ........................................... 66 FIGURE 6.1 SHARE OF DEMOCRACIES AND INTERNATIONAL CONFLICT , 1946–2002 .................................... 99 FIGURE 7.1 SPREAD OF NORMALIZED POLITY AND POLYARCHY VALUES , 2002......................................... 114 TABLE 2.1 DEFINITIONAL AND CONCEPTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS IN RESEARCH ON DEMOCRATIZATION .......... 25 TABLE 2.2 OVERVIEW OF THE POLITY IV COMPONENT VARIABLE MATRIX ................................................. 28 TABLE 4.1 VARIABLES INCLUDED IN THE MAIN POLYARCHY INDEX (ID) TABLE ......................................... 73 TABLE 6.1 MONADIC DEMOCRACY AND INCIDENCE OF ARMED CONFLICT ................................................... 97 TABLE 6.2 DYADIC DEMOCRACY AND INCIDENCE OF ARMED CONFLICT , 1946–2002................................ 100 TABLE 6.3 DYADIC DEMOCRACY AND INCIDENCE OF ARMED CONFLICT , 1989–2002................................ 101 TABLE 6.4 INCIDENCE OF ARMED CONFLICT BETWEEN DEMOCRACIES , 1946–2002 .................................. 102 TABLE 6.5 DYADIC WAR ONSET 1816–1993: POLYARCHY AND COMPETITION ........................................ 105 TABLE 6.6 DYADIC WAR ONSET , 1816–1993: POLITY 4 AND PARTICIPATION .......................................... 106 TABLE 6.7 DYADIC WAR ONSET , 1816–1993: POLITY 4 AND POLYARCHY (ONLY SHARED OBS .)............. 109 5 Acknowledgements First and foremost I would wish to thank my advisor Nils Petter Gleditsch, who provided me with the opportunity to start writing this thesis under his supervision in an excellent research environment at The International Peace Research Institute, Oslo (PRIO). He also deserves special thanks for taking me back on and making himself available again after I took a prolonged ‘absence without leave’, failing to show any sign of progress. His comments, insights and positive reinforcement have proven invaluable to me. Similar thanks go to my also-advisor and former colleague at PRIO, Håvard Strand, for taking the time from his busy schedule during his interlude in Oxford along with impending fatherhood to provide constructive advice and critique. Halvard Buhaug also deserves mention for making his data available and for providing topical comments and assistance. Likewise, I would like to express my thanks to my friend and former PRIO colleague Jonas Uchermann for relentlessly nagging me about finishing this thesis. These thanks also extend to his better half, Anette, for assisting him in doing so. Jonas also deserves thanks for proofreading a late draft. Henrik Urdal and other former colleagues at PRIO also provided feedback and suggestions at an early stage
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Tradition of Ancient Greek Democracy and Its Importance for Modem Democracy
    DEMOCRAC AHMOKPATI The Tradition of Ancient Greek Democracy and its Importance for Modern Democracy Mogens Herman Hansen The Tradition of Ancient Greek Democracy and its Importance for Modem Democracy B y M ogens H erman H ansen Historisk-filosofiske Meddelelser 93 Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab The Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters Copenhagen 2005 Abstract The two studies printed here investigate to what extent there is a con­ nection between ancient and modem democracy. The first study treats the tradition of ancient Greek democracy, especially the tradition of Athenian democracy from ca. 1750 to the present day. It is argued that in ideology there is a remarkable resemblance between the Athenian democracy in the Classical period and the modem liberal democracy in the 19th and 20th centuries. On the other hand no direct tradition con­ nects modem liberal democracy with its ancient ancestor. Not one single Athenian institution has been copied by a modem democracy, and it is only from ca. 1850 onwards that the ideals cherished by the Athenian democrats were referred to approvingly by modem cham­ pions of democracy. It is in fact the IT technology and its potential for a return to a more direct form of democracy which has given rise to a hitherto unmatched interest in the Athenian democratic institutions. This is the topic of the second study in which it is argued that the focus of the contemporary interest is on the Athenian system of sortition and rotation rather than on the popular assembly. Contents The Tradition of Democracy from Antiquity to the Present Time .................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Dahl and Charles E
    PLEASE READ BEFORE PRINTING! PRINTING AND VIEWING ELECTRONIC RESERVES Printing tips: ▪ To reduce printing errors, check the “Print as Image” box, under the “Advanced” printing options. ▪ To print, select the “printer” button on the Acrobat Reader toolbar. DO NOT print using “File>Print…” in the browser menu. ▪ If an article has multiple parts, print out only one part at a time. ▪ If you experience difficulty printing, come to the Reserve desk at the Main or Science Library. Please provide the location, the course and document being accessed, the time, and a description of the problem or error message. ▪ For patrons off campus, please email or call with the information above: Main Library: [email protected] or 706-542-3256 Science Library: [email protected] or 706-542-4535 Viewing tips: ▪ The image may take a moment to load. Please scroll down or use the page down arrow keys to begin viewing this document. ▪ Use the “zoom” function to increase the size and legibility of the document on the screen. The “zoom” function is accessed by selecting the “magnifying glass” button on the Acrobat Reader toolbar. NOTICE CONCERNING COPYRIGHT The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproduction of copyrighted material. Section 107, the “Fair Use” clause of this law, states that under certain conditions one may reproduce copyrighted material for criticism, comment, teaching and classroom use, scholarship, or research without violating the copyright of this material. Such use must be non-commercial in nature and must not impact the market for or value of the copyrighted work.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Models of Conflict and Cooperation
    PSC/IR 106: The Democratic Peace Theory William Spaniel williamspaniel.com/pscir-106 Data Project #1 • Questions? Problem Set #1 • Grades were good • Returned already or in recitation this week Robert Axelrod Robert Axelrod Outline • Brief History of IR Theory • The Democratic Peace • Explanations for the Democratic Peace? • Correlation Does Not Imply Causation • The McDonald’s Peace Theory • The Capitalist Peace • The Rise of China Outline • Brief History of IR Theory • The Democratic Peace • Explanations for the Democratic Peace? • Correlation Does Not Imply Causation • The McDonald’s Peace Theory • The Capitalist Peace • The Rise of China Roadmap • Before: Unitary actor assumption • Now: Perhaps type of government matters • Next week: Perhaps leaders matter Intellectual History • For the majority of IR’s history, scholars assumed that states were identical except for in relative power (Realists) • Other scholars challenged this assumption in the 1980s – Evidence overwhelmingly supports the second group Outline • Brief History of IR Theory • The Democratic Peace • Explanations for the Democratic Peace? • Correlation Does Not Imply Causation • The McDonald’s Peace Theory • The Capitalist Peace • The Rise of China The Democratic Peace Theory Democracies tend not to fight other democracies. Ultimately, the best strategy to ensure our security and to build a durable peace is to support the advance of democracy elsewhere. Democracies don't attack each other. (1994 State of the Union) Democracies don't go to war with each other. And the reason why is the people of most societies don't like war, and they understand what war means.... I've got great faith in democracies to promote peace.
    [Show full text]
  • The Democratic Peace Theory: Validity in Relation to the European Union and 'Peaceful' Cooperation Between United States and China
    Vol.7(2), pp. 15-17, May 2016 DOI: 10.5897/IJPDS2015.0234 Article Number: 1BC2EFE58946 International Journal of Peace and ISSN 2141–6621 Copyright © 2016 Development Studies Author(s) retain the copyright of this article http://www.academicjournals.org/IJPDS Short Communication The democratic peace theory: Validity in relation to the European Union and 'Peaceful' cooperation between United States and China Nibal Attia Department of political Science, Misr University for Science and Technology, Egypt. Recieved 20 April, 2015; Accepted 31 March, 2016 According to the democratic peace theory, democratic states are less likely to go to war with other democratic states. Consequently, the ultimate goal of the theory is to create a world of democracies that is, a world without war. However, from the realist perspective in some cases democracies go to war with other democracies to influence their power. This paper will critically analyze the validity of democratic peace theory in its assumption that democracies rarely fight each other, by providing the example of the establishment of the European Union, in which democracies are co-operating with each other to achieve their common good. The paper is divided into three parts; the first one will provide an explanation of the Peace Democratic theory and its main assumptions. The second one will evaluate to what extent these assumptions are practical ones through the application of the case studies. Then a counter-argument for one of its assumption will be included questioning the core claim of the democratic peace theory from the commercial peace theory perspective. Key words: Democracy, peace theory, war, co-operation.
    [Show full text]
  • EU POLICY in the SOUTH CAUCASUS Sascha Tamm
    WEAKNESS AS AN OPPORTUNITY: EU POLICY IN THE SOUTH CAUCASUS With the European Neighborhood Policy, the EU’s relationship with the countries of the South Caucasus has achieved a new quality. These countries now have a concrete legal foundation on which to stand in their relationship with the EU. However, up until now the EU has not been taking adequate advantage of its opportunity. The EU is not a geo- strategic player with military power, that will destroy itself in the struggle over a “sphere of influence”. However its principles and institutions, which are based upon liberal ideas, are a shining example for the three countries. On this basis, the EU is able to and has to play its part in the development of long-term peace and prosperity in the South Caucasus. * Sascha Tamm * The author is Head of the Central, Southeast and Eastern Europe Department of the Friedrich-Naumann- Foundation for Liberty, Germany In 2006, all three countries of the South Caucasus–Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan– were admitted into the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP). This was an important step, but one which came much too late. Until 2006, Europe could not be characterized as having a coherent strategy in this region. Today still there is not an acceptable and transparent solution to the problems that burden the future of the region and its relationship with the European Union. The EU neither has a master plan nor the geo- strategic weight to enforce its plans against the will of individual countries or political groups. This can and should not be its objective, at least not in the region being discussed here.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Polyarchy Across the Globe, 1900–2017
    St Comp Int Dev https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-018-9268-z Measuring Polyarchy Across the Globe, 1900–2017 Jan Teorell1 & Michael Coppedge2 & Staffan Lindberg3 & Svend-Erik Skaaning 4 # The Author(s) 2018 Abstract This paper presents a new measure polyarchy for a global sample of 182 countries from 1900 to 2017 based on the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) data, deriving from an expert survey of more than 3000 country experts from around the world, with on average 5 experts rating each indicator. By measuring the five compo- nents of Elected Officials, Clean Elections, Associational Autonomy, Inclusive Citi- zenship, and Freedom of Expression and Alternative Sources of Information separately, we anchor this new index directly in Dahl’s(1971) extremely influential theoretical framework. The paper describes how the five polyarchy components were measured and provides the rationale for how to aggregate them to the polyarchy scale. We find Previous versions of this paper were presented at the APSA Annual Meeting in Washington, DC, August 28- 31, 2014, at the Carlos III-Juan March Institute of Social Sciences, Madrid, November 28, 2014, and at the European University Institute, Fiesole, January 20, 2016. Any remaining omissions are the sole responsibility of the authors. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-018- 9268-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. * Jan Teorell [email protected] Michael Coppedge [email protected] Staffan Lindberg [email protected]
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Populism: Peak Democracy, Liquid Identity and The
    European Journal of Social Theory 1–21 ª The Author(s) 2018 Rethinking Populism: Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav Peak democracy, liquid DOI: 10.1177/1368431017754057 identity and the performance journals.sagepub.com/home/est of sovereignty Ingolfur Blu¨hdorn WU Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria Felix Butzlaff WU Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria Abstract Despite the burgeoning literature on right-wing populism, there is still considerable uncertainty about its causes, its impact on liberal democracies and about promising counter-strategies. Inspired by recent suggestions that (1) the emancipatory left has made a significant contribution to the proliferation of the populist right; and (2) populist movements, rather than challenging the established socio-political order, in fact stabilize and further entrench its logic, this article argues that an adequate understanding of the populist phenomenon necessitates a radical shift of perspective: beyond the democratic and emancipatory norms, which still govern most of the relevant literature. Approaching its subject matter via democratic theory and modernization theory, it undertakes a reassessment of the triangular relationship between modernity, democracy and popu- lism. It finds that the latter is not helpfully conceptualized as anti-modernist or anti- democratic but should, instead, be regarded as a predictable feature of the form of politics distinctive of today’s third modernity. Keywords liquid identity, peak democracy, politics of exclusion, second-order emancipation, simulative politics, third modernity Corresponding author: Ingolfur Blu¨hdorn, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business, Welthandelsplatz 1, Vienna 1020, Austria. Email: [email protected] 2 European Journal of Social Theory XX(X) Towards a shift of perspective The ongoing tide of right-wing populism rapidly and profoundly is remoulding the political culture of Western liberal democracies.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Populism: Peak Democracy, Liquid
    Article European Journal of Social Theory 2019, Vol. 22(2) 191–211 Rethinking Populism: ª The Author(s) 2018 Peak democracy, liquid Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/1368431017754057 identity and the performance journals.sagepub.com/home/est of sovereignty Ingolfur Blu¨hdorn WU Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria Felix Butzlaff WU Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria Abstract Despite the burgeoning literature on right-wing populism, there is still considerable uncertainty about its causes, its impact on liberal democracies and about promising counter-strategies. Inspired by recent suggestions that (1) the emancipatory left has made a significant contribution to the proliferation of the populist right; and (2) populist movements, rather than challenging the established socio-political order, in fact stabilize and further entrench its logic, this article argues that an adequate understanding of the populist phenomenon necessitates a radical shift of perspective: beyond the democratic and emancipatory norms, which still govern most of the relevant literature. Approaching its subject matter via democratic theory and modernization theory, it undertakes a reassessment of the triangular relationship between modernity, democracy and popu- lism. It finds that the latter is not helpfully conceptualized as anti-modernist or anti- democratic but should, instead, be regarded as a predictable feature of the form of politics distinctive of today’s third modernity. Keywords liquid identity, peak democracy, politics of exclusion, second-order emancipation, simulative politics, third modernity Corresponding author: Ingolfur Blu¨hdorn, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business, Welthandelsplatz 1, Vienna 1020, Austria. Email: [email protected] 192 European Journal of Social Theory 22(2) Towards a shift of perspective The ongoing tide of right-wing populism rapidly and profoundly is remoulding the political culture of Western liberal democracies.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of the Social Science Literature on the Causes of Conflict
    Research Report Understanding Conflict Trends A Review of the Social Science Literature on the Causes of Conflict Stephen Watts, Jennifer Kavanagh, Bryan Frederick, Tova C. Norlen, Angela O’Mahony, Phoenix Voorhies, Thomas S. Szayna Prepared for the United States Army Approved for public release; distribution unlimited ARROYO CENTER For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/rr1063z1 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2017 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.html. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface The recent spike in violence in places like Syria, Ukraine, and Yemen notwithstanding, the number of conflicts worldwide has fallen since the end of the Cold War, and few of those that remain are clashes between states.
    [Show full text]
  • Autocracy and Anocracy.*
    Autocracy and Anocracy. Norman Scho…eldyand Maria Gallegoz Center in Political Economy, Washington University, 1 Brookings Drive,Saint Louis, MO 63130. September 7, 2011 1 Institutions and Democratization Recent events have focussed the world’s attention on how autocrats have sur- vived for so long in countries like Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, and what triggers popular revolt. The literature on transitions to democracy has been partly historical, building on the seminal work of Douglass North on the role of insti- tutions, and partly empirical and theoretical, using aspects of game theory to model the calculations of autocrats as they …ght to maintain power. In the historical mode, there has been discussions about why North America was able to follow Britain in a path of economic development, but Latin Amer- ica and the Caribbean islands, though generally far richer initially, fell behind in the nineteenth century. In their discussion of Latin American economic de- velopment, Sokolo¤ and Engerman (2000) have emphasized the di¤erent factor endowments of North and South America.1 In addition they have suggested that slavery in the New World resulted in institutions that were not conducive to economic growth.2 In contrast, Przeworski and Curvale (2006) argue that while economic in- equality tended to persist and has been related to the degree of political inequal- ity, many aspects of the developmental path appear highly contingent. Indeed, whether Latin American economies grew, and the extent to which they pro- tected the factors of capital, land and labor, seems to be dependent on shifting This chapter is based on work supported by NSF grant 0715929 and a Weidenbaum Center grant.
    [Show full text]
  • What Kant Preaches to the UN: Democratic Peace Theory and “Preventing the Scourge of War”
    EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVES − INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL ON EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVES VOLUME 9, NUMBER 1 (16), PP 65-84, OCTOBER 2018 What Kant preaches to the UN: democratic peace theory and “preventing the scourge of war” Bekim Sejdiu1 ABSTRACT This paper exploits academic parameters of the democratic peace theory to analyze the UN’s principal mission of preserving the world peace. It inquires into the intellectual horizons of the democratic peace theory – which originated from the Kant’s “perpetual peace” – with the aim of prescribing an ideological recipe for establishing solid foundation for peace among states. The paper argues that by promoting democracy and supporting democratization, the UN primarily works to achieve its fundamental mission of preventing the scourge of war. It explores practical activities that the UN undertakes to support democracy, as well as the political and normative aspects of such an enterprise, is beyond the reach of this analysis. Rather, the focus of the analy- sis is on the democratic peace theory. The confirmation of the scientific credibility of this theory is taken as a sufficient argument to claim that by supporting democracy the UN would advance one of its major purposes, namely the goal of peace. KEY WORDS: democracy, peace, Kant, UN POVZETEK Prispevek na osnovi teorije demokratičnega miru analizira temeljno misijo OZN, to je ohranitev svetovnega miru. Poglablja se v intelektualna obzorja teorije demokratičnega miru – ki izhaja iz Kantovega “večnega miru” – s ciljem začrtati ideološki recept za vzpostavitev čvrstih teme- ljev za mir med državami. Prispevek zagovarja hipotezo, da OZN s promoviranjem demokracije in z njenim podpiranjem predvsem prispeva k izpolnitvi svojega temeljnega poslanstva, to je preprečevati izbruh vojn.
    [Show full text]
  • Capitalism at War
    Capitalism at War Mark Harrison* Department of Economics and CAGE, University of Warwick Centre for Russian and East European Studies, University of Birmingham Hoover Institution on War, Revolution, and Peace, Stanford University Abstract The nineteenth century witnessed the triumph of capitalism; the twentieth century saw the bloodiest wars in history. Is there a connection? The paper reviews the literature and evidence. It considers first whether capitalism has lowered the cost of war; then, whether capitalism has shown a preference for war. Both questions are considered comparatively. Neither question receives a clear cut answer, but to simplify: Yes; No. Keywords: Capitalism, Corporate Political Action, Keynesianism, Public Finance, State Capacity, Trade, War. JEL Codes: N4, P1. * Mail: Department of Economics, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom. Email: [email protected]. This paperis in preparation for The Cambridge History of Capitalism, edited by Larry Neal and Jeff Williamson. Earlier versions were presented at the German Historical Institute in Moscow as one of “Ten Lectures about the War,” June 17 and 18, 2011, the XVI World Economic History Congress, Stellenbosch University, South Africa, July 9 to 13, 2012, and a conference on the Economic History of Capitalism, BBVA, Madrid, November 14 to 16, 2012. I thank Hein Klemann, Sergei Kudriashov, Andrei Markevich, Richard Overy, Leandro Prados de la Escosura, James Robinson, and other participants for discussion; Sascha O. Becker, Michael S. Bernstam, Nick Crafts, Erik Gartzke, and Vasily Zatsepin for comments and advice; Jari Eloranta for access to data; Larry Neal and Jeff Williamson for inspiration and guidance; the University of Warwick for research leave and financial support; and the Hoover Institution for generous hospitality.
    [Show full text]