Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T18:19:14.575Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Barrington Moore and the Preconditions for Democracy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2009

Joseph V. Femia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Anxiety about the conditions that promote stable, democratic political relations in the developing countries has been a major preoccupation of both politicians and academics for over a generation now. One manifestation of this concern is the emergence of a new field of inquiry — the study of development — in the social sciences. The conditions most often put forward for political democracy fall into two general and by no means unrelated categories — cultural institutions, or values, and economic development. Political sociologists generally focus on one category or the other. Some, like Harry Eckstein and S. M. Lipset, concentrate mainly on cultural variables, the ‘patterns of integration’ supposedly conducive to the development and maintenance of democratic or authoritarian polities. Those who focus upon economic growth seem to fall into two groups. One school of thought, well represented by Daniel Lerner, emphasizes that democracy, as we understand it, is the end product of the modernization process; and the implicit assumption is that it is the inevitable end product of this process. The other trend in modernization thought, represented most notably by Professor Barrington Moore, argues that political democracy is the result of only a certain type of modernization — namely, the Anglo-American bourgeois variety.

Type
Articles
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , January 1972 , pp. 21 - 46
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Harmondsworth: The Penguin Press, 1967. Further references to Social Origins will appear in parentheses in the body of the text.

2 The most comprehensive and suggestive reviews are: Stone, Lawrence, ‘News from Everywhere’, The New York Review of Books, IX (24 08 1967), 31–5;Google ScholarDore, Ronald P., ‘Making Sense of History’, Archives Europeennes De Sociologie, X (1969), 295–305;CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Rothman, Stanley, ‘Barrington Moore and the Dialectics of Revolution’, The American Political Science Review, LXIV (1970), 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Although I am indebted to all of these articles, I have found the references provided in Professor Rothman’s piece to be particularly helpful.

3 Important works in this field include Chambers, J. D. and Mingay, G. E., The Agricultural Revolution, 1750–1880 (London: B. T. Batsford Ltd., 1966)Google Scholar; Jones, E. L. and Mingay, G. E., eds., Land, Labour, and population in the Industrial Revolution (London: Edward Arnold, 1967)Google Scholar; and Thompson, F. M. L., ‘The Social Distribution of Landed Property in England Since the Sixteenth Century’, Economic History Review, XIX (1966), 505–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4 Stone, , ‘News from Everywhere’, p. 33.Google Scholar

5 Chambers, and Mingay, , The Agricultural Revolution, p. 93Google Scholar.

6 Of course, this could not distinguish the states of affairs in France during the reign of Napoleon III and the Vichy regime from the situation in Japan. Other explanations, such as duration of the authoritarian situation and historical cataclysm, could be useful in this respect, but Moore takes no theoretical cognizance of either factor.

7 London: Macmillan, 1967, pp. 60–2.

8 Tate, W. E., The English Village Community and the Enclosure Movement (London: Victor Gollancz, 1967), pp. 126–7.Google Scholar

9 Wilson, Charles, England's Apprenticeship, 1603–1763 (London: Longmans, Green, 1965), pp. 141–2.Google Scholar

10 Wilson, , England's Apprenticeship, pp. 114–15, 126–9Google Scholar; Roots, Ivan, The Great Rebellion, 1642–1660 (London: B. T. Batsford, 1966), pp. 64–5Google Scholar; and Woolrych, Austin, ‘The English Revolution: an Introduction’ in Ives, E. W., ed., The English Revolution, 1600–1660 (London: Edward Arnold, 1968), p. 20.Google Scholar

11 Wilson, , England's Apprenticeship, pp. 141–2.Google Scholar

12 Chambers, and Mingay, , The Agricultural Revolution, p. 104.Google Scholar

13 Wilson, , England's Apprenticeship, pp. 133–8;Google ScholarSupple, Barry, ‘Class and Social tension: the case of the merchant’, in Ives, , ed., The English Revolution, pp. 142–3;Google Scholar and Ashton, Robert, ‘The Civil War and the Class Struggle’, in Parry, R. H., ed., The English Civil War and After, 1642–1658 (London: Macmillan, 1970), p. 101.Google Scholar

14 Ashton, , ‘The Civil War and the Class Struggle’, p. 101.Google Scholar

15 Nevins, Allan, Ordeal of the Union, Vol. I (New York: Charles Scribner, 1947), pp. 462 476–9.Google Scholar

16 See, for example, Stampp, Kenneth, The Peculiar Institution (New York: Knopf, 1956), pp. 425–9.Google Scholar On page 427, Stampp notes that white mechanics, fearing the economic consequences of competition with slave labour, ‘repeatedly demanded the passage of laws excluding slaves from their trades’. Other studies which argue that slavery was detrimental to the financial interests of non-slave owning whites include Nevins, , Ordeal of the Union, p. 490Google Scholar; and Jones, Peter D'a., An Economic History of the United States Since 1783 (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1956), p. 22.Google Scholar

17 Jones, , An Economic History, pp. 81–3.Google Scholar

18 Cobban, Alfred, The Social Interpretation of the French Revolution (London: Cambridge University Press, 1968), pp. 52, 164.Google Scholar

19 De Tocqueville, Alexis, The Old Regime and the French Revolution, Gilbert, Stuart, trans. (New York: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1955), p. 20.Google Scholar

20 Cobban, , The Social Interpretation, pp. 84–90.Google Scholar

21 Cobban, , The Social Interpretation, pp. 162–73.Google Scholar

22 Cobban, , The Social Interpretation, p. 172.Google Scholar

23 Crouzet, Francois, ‘War, Blockade, and Economic Change in Europe, 1792–1815’, The Journal of Economic History, XXIV (1964), 567–88, p. 585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24 Crouzet, , ‘War, Blockade, and Economic Change’, pp. 571–3.Google Scholar

25 Cobban, , The Social Interpretation, pp. 78–80.Google Scholar

26 Dore, , ‘Making Sense of History’, pp. 298–9.Google Scholar

27 Dore, , ‘Making Sense of History’, p. 301Google Scholar; and Almond, Gabriel in his brief review of Social Origins in The American Political Science Review, LXI (1967), 768–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28 For concise and perceptive statements of this position on the relationship between values and economic interests, see Plamenatz, John, Man and Society, Vol. II (London: Longmans, Green, 1963), pp. 283–90, 311–15Google Scholar; and Lockwood, David, ‘Some Remarks on “The Social System’”, British Journal of Sociology, VII (1956), 134–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29 Blalock, Hubert M. Jnr, ‘Theory Building and Causal Interference’, in Blalock, Hubert M. Jnr. and Blalock, Anna B., eds., Methodology in Social Research (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968), p. 163.Google Scholar [Reference taken from Barry, Brian, Sociologists, Economists and Democracy (London: Collier-Macmillan, 1970), p. 95.Google Scholar] For a more detailed discussion of this problem, see Blalock, Hubert M. Jnr, ‘Evaluating the Relative Importance of Variables’, American Sociological Review, XXVI (1961), 866–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar