[lbo-talk] Ralph loves the nice plutocrats

[Chris Doss]

I don't know anything about Stroessner's Paraguay, but you are completely confusing strength with repressive power. Strength is the ability to get something done, to function, especially on a daily basis without constant input from outside. For instance, a law enforcement agency is not strong if it requires constant intervention from above for it to do its job. A strong law enforcement agency enforces whatever laws have been laid down. A weak one spends its time ignoring the laws and taking bribes. A strong law enforcement agency is one that applies the laws equally, that is, fulfills its function; a weak one is one that does not. A strong state can only be equated with a repressive state if you assume (in my view, totally falsely) that the function of the state is repression. The function of the state is ADMINISTRATION. 

Strength has nothing to do with repressive ability. The Stalin-era USSR has immense repressive ability, but a very weak central government (i.e., state). Regional corruption during Stalin was immense, which is probably one reason he turned to violence, that is "intervention from above." 

--- On Thu, 9/24/09, Marv Gandall <marvgandall at videotron.ca> wrote:
> ==================================

 We seem to be talking past each other.
> In the political
> tradition which I come from, "strong states" are defined,
> in effect, as
> dictatorships or autocracies where democratic rights are
> suppressed. You and
> perhaps Wojtek seem to believe they are linked to
> "efficiency". But strong
> states can be efficient, like Nazi Germany, or hopelessly
> inefficient, like
> Stroessner's Paraguay.
> 
>