-
On Ukraine as a possible example of ongoing mass mobilization alongside the state being more effective in both peacetime and war at resisting manipulation by the powerful. @sasha_weirdsley/1558713301533659139
-
States are a regarded by many as a symbol of strength, but their pyramidal structure leaves a handful at the top who can be more easily corrupted, coöpted, or intoxicated with power.
-
Inside such structures, obedience can multiply force, but persuasion and public coordination of a decentralized set of actors forces those in leadership to be more democratic and morally centered.
-
In a politically different and far less militarized context, the Bolivian process of change survived a major challenge from 2006-09 as an alliance between mass mobilizations and an recently elected state.
-
I argue that the weakness of the Bolivian state relative to social movements during this period, and their relative autonomy, was actually positive.
-
For one, the Morales government's dependence on mass movements to sustain its political project forced it to advance their demands.
-
Secondly, Bolivian officials had a stronger hand to justify progressive policy changes to skeptical international powers because still-mobilized movements had demanded them.
-
Ironically, as the Bolivian government tightened the integration of some social movements and alienated others beginning in 2011, it was more vulnerable to abandonment of progressive policies, personalization of power, and ultimately unable to outflank the domestic opposition.
-
I'm unfamiliar with the details of aristocratic rebel George Washington's argument against standing armies. But his crushing of the Whiskey Rebellion is a textbook case of how consolidation of a centralized state weakens popular power.