How has the political evolution of the state influenced the role of the armed forces?

Political evolution of human societies gradually led to the emergence of states. The first states were necessarily agrarian, and according to Mann (1993), agrarian states used at least ¾ of their revenue to fund wars. So, as a result, their military personnel greatly outnumbered their civilian officials and made state-societies look like war-making machines.

Mann’s (1986) analysis of power suggests that the emergence of what he classifies as authoritative, intensive form of power (i.e. concentrated, coercive, and highly mobilized) in the armed forces (where such form of power was clearly very useful) likely led to its widespread adoption by the states; in no small measure because the armies which were ruled by this form of power proved to be superior to others, and thus strengthened their parent states. Thus, it can be argued, based on Mann’s (1986) analysis, that the evolution of armed forces influenced the political role and functions of the state, not just the other way around. In addition, according to Mann (1993), many radical changes in the political structure and role of the state (i.e. revolutions) would not have taken place without the assistance of military factions, whose vision of their role in society, it can be argued, has, at that time, changed toward a more radical position.

According to Mann (1993), the emergence of modern states led to the formal monopolization of military violence by these states. But instead of ending the autonomy of military power, this change led to the redirection of military power through state’s formal organizations.  Thus, rapid political evolution of European states during early modern period led, by the 18^th century, to the centralization of the military under a high command, which in turn, fell under the formal control of the state’s chief executive. Also, the start of the Second Industrial Revolution in the second half of the 19^th century turned militaries into customers of industrial capitalism (Mann, 1993). At the same time, these developments can be linked to Mann’s (1993) observation of those militaries developing technocratic self-confidence, and to their skills becoming removed from everyday controls and social practices. All of this, in turn, may have led to what Mann (1993) describes as militaries becoming insulated, caste-like, within the state, developing segmental discipline over their mass armies, and starting to recruit their lower ranks from lower social classes (Mann, 1993).

It can be argued, based on Mann’s (1993) analysis, that the political evolution of the state gradually led to the near autonomy in actual function (despite formal integration) of various branches of the modern state. Given this, it should not be surprising that during the later years of the Cold War, the military could act autonomously and terminate the state and even the world, as Mann (1993) argues it could.

References

Mann, M. (1986). “Societies as organized power networks.” In: M. Mann, The Sources of Social Power: Volume I: A history of power from the beginning to A.D. 1760 (pp.1-33). Cambridge: CUP. Available at http://bit.ly/1kwZELI.

Mann, M. (1993). “A theory of the modern state.” In: M. Mann, The Sources of Social Power: Volume II: The rise of classes and nation-states, 1760-1914 (pp. 44-91). Cambridge: CUP. Available at http://bit.ly/1mbDKh7.