Thirdly, there is a controversy about whether the forces of globalization
have rendered the state obsolete or at least transformed state power. This
forms the latest stage in a long debate about whether states in the Third
World are capable of governing, why some have been so much more suc-
cessful than others in bringing about development, and why seemingly
strong state structures frequently fail to implement policies and pro-
grammes (Migdal, 1987).
Fourthly, Third World states have generally presented a picture of acute
political instability, with frequent violations of the rules of the political
game in the replacement of governments, the transformation of regimes and
the behaviour of individual actors, whether they be corrupt public officials
or unconstitutional political movements. Theoretical explanations of politi-
cal instability in the Third World deserve and must await a separate chapter.
The pluralist political system
We have seen that political developmentalists preferred the language of the
political system to that of the state, encouraging us to think of the institutions
and processes at the centre of government in politically neutral terms. We are
presented with an image of what other political theorists refer to as the state
which is central to a pluralistic interpretation of politics. Following the ideas
of the German sociologist Max Weber many schools of social science, includ-
ing the functionalist, have seen the state or the political system as a set of
social relationships for converting, through the use of legitimate physical
compulsion, demands and supports into outputs – decisions, statutes, laws,
regulations, investments and so on (Almond, 1960, 1965, p. 193; Almond and
Powell, 1966, ch. 2). The ‘authoritative structures of government’ (Pye, 1965,
pp. 7–8) are a neutral set of arrangements consisting of political institutions
and recognized procedures for interpreting political demands, resolving polit-
ical conflicts and converting them into outputs that satisfy those demands.
From this perspective the state is perceived as an arena in which conflict-
ing interests compete for scarce resources. It is a means of managing com-
petition, so that the state is recognized as a legitimate way to settle such
disputes. The pluralist view of the political system sees its governmental
functions as neutral in relation to the interests of different groups in society.
It may be likened to an umpire, administering impartially the rules of the
game without bias in favour of any particular player. The pluralist view of the
state sees modern society as divided into competing elements which never-
theless find a kind of equilibrium. None is persistently more dominant than
The State in the Third World 109