Main Concept: A society fragmented in social control affects the character of the state, which in turn reinforces the fragmentation of society

Summary of Concepts: In Migdal’s analysis of the state-society interaction, he looks at a kind of politics that does not take place within the framework of the sovereign state. Social control by a state relies on the organizational ability to deliver key components to an individuals’ strategies for survival (p. 27). In Migdal’s analysis he discusses two main concepts: the “Politics of Survival” and the “Triangle of Accommodation”.

In the “Politics of Survival”, leaders attempt to stay in power with states that have weak social control. There is a need by leaders to mobilize support from the population so that the state agencies will not themselves threaten the survival of the state leaders and they need to induce mobilization through a viable mix of rewards, sanctions, and symbols. Leaders do this by 1. The removal of officials to prevent potentially strong agencies from challenging their authority 2. The appointment of people to positions for cooperation of the leader’s goals and policies 3. “ethnic bargaining” which is to stem cooperation based on ethnicity to divide potentially threatening concentrations of power. State leaders can seek sustained political mobilization only when they have proffered viable strategies of survival.

In the “Triangle of Accommodation”, Migdal believes that state leaders accommodate in three distinctive ways to stay in power. 1. State leaders themselves acquiesce 2. Local and regional leaders accommodate 3. Intrastate and party-state bargaining also occurs between implementers and other state officials. In strong states, implementation of polices can bend with bargaining, but their distortion is small due to scrutiny from above and people who may lose from improper policy adaptation. In weak states, the bargaining is more severe, and the distortion is large. The more scrutiny from above, the less parameters local leaders have to change their behaviors; state leaders are limited by their prescription of the law, and local leaders are constrained by the resources given from above.

Conclusion: Societies with weak states and conflict possess fragmented social control, which is embedded in the non-state organizations of its society.