World History, the Social Sciences, and the Dynamics of Contemporary Global Politics

This article argues that the discipline of world history, with its interdisciplinary ties to the social sciences and its incorporation of the cultural insights of recent historiography, makes an ideal tool for conveying the complexities of the contemporary world in a “user-friendly” way. It argues further that one particular global structural analysis, from the author’s world history textbook Frameworks of World History, exposes a deep pattern that helps explain many of the central conflicts in contemporary global politics. By highlighting the tension that has existed between individual communities, or hierarchies, and the networks that connected those communities, a tension going back as far as the modern human species, the article exposes the deep roots of the central conflict between today’s global network and its cultural value of capitalism on the one hand, and modern hierarchies and their central value of nationalism on the other. The cultural aspect of this analysis offers a possible route forward from the problems and repressive politics that flow from this central conflict

Different paths to the modern state in Europe: the interaction between domestic political economy and interstate competition

Theoretical work on state formation and capacity has focused mostly on early modern Europe and on the experience of western European states during this period. While a number of European states monopolized domestic tax collection and achieved gains in state capacity during the early modern era, for others revenues stagnated or even declined, and these variations motivated alternative hypotheses for determinants of fiscal and state capacity. In this study we test the basic hypotheses in the existing literature making use of the large date set we have compiled for all of the leading states across the continent. We find strong empirical support for two prevailing threads in the literature, arguing respectively that interstate wars and changes in economic structure towards an urbanized economy had positive fiscal impact. Regarding the main point of contention in the theoretical literature, whether it was representative or authoritarian political regimes that facilitated the gains in fiscal capacity, we do not find conclusive evidence that one performed better than the other. Instead, the empirical evidence we have gathered lends supports to the hypothesis that when under pressure of war, the fiscal performance of representative regimes was better in the more urbanized-commercial economies and the fiscal performance of authoritarian regimes was better in rural-agrarian economie