The Inequality Of The State And Society Complex

1644 WordsJun 3, 20157 Pages
The ABSM performs political analysis void of the wider historical and societal processes, assuming that bias would be accounted in the deliberation process between stakeholders. This indicates the centrality of the state and society complex. Yet it also fails to account for the extension beyond state and society, as Gill and Law point out “political rule is circumscribed by the problems of legitimation, mobilization, and communication in political time and space. Thus, capital as a social relation depends on the power of the state to define, shape and participate in a regime of accumulation” (Gill and Law: 480). In saying this, Gill and Law indicate the centrality of the global reach of economic activity within the socially territorially specific aspects of political rule, but more importantly introduce capital as a social relation to indicate the stark contrast between those with privileged ownership or control of capital in contrast to the remainder of society (Gill and Law: 1989). If capital is a social relation depends on the power of the state to define its participation in a regime, this illustrates an inherent contradiction in the democratic process. Then, the ABSM fails to account for the inner and outer functioning of a complex whole – it fails to understand Oscar Wilde’s observation – ‘the pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple’ (Wilde: 1989). Figure 3: Frameworks for Action: Historical Structures Source: Social Forces, States and World Orders
Open Document