というNBER論文でアセモグル=ロビンソンが、経済発展が民主主義につながるという近代化論(modernization theory)が何を見誤っていたか、について論じているungated版)。原題は「Non-Modernization: Power-Culture Trajectories and the Dynamics of Political Institutions」で、著者はDaron Acemoglu(MIT)、James A. Robinson(シカゴ大)。

Modernization theory is a cornerstone of much of political science, despite the mounting evidence against its predictions. In this paper, we argue that the theory's failings are rooted in predictions that are not conditioned on history and cultural configurations. We outline a theory in which the interplay of the distribution of political power and cultural configurations lead to three distinct self-reinforcing paths of political development, with very different state-society relations, institutions, and economic structures. These are paths to Despotic, Absent and Shackled leviathans. The role of cultural configurations, made up of attributes in a society's culture set, is critical in legitimizing the social arrangements in each path. For example, a Despotic Leviathan, as in China, cannot be understood without appreciating how Confucian culture has been used to bolster a worldview in which rulers are supposed to be virtuous and regular people are discouraged from political participation. We argued that this interpretation is not inherent to Confucian thought, but has to be understood as an endogenous outcome along the trajectory to the Despotic Leviathan. None of the three different paths we highlight support modernization theory. Under the Absent Leviathan, there is no economic modernization. Under the Despotic Leviathan, economic growth bolsters the existing regime and its supporting cultural configuration, with no tendency towards democracy or associate political changes. Under the Shackled Leviathan, there are dynamics leading to economic growth and political changes with greater bottom-up participation. Nevertheless, the causation does not go from the former to the latter, and these changes are critically dependent on cultural and political entrepreneurship in order to formulate and popularize new cultural configurations and institutionalize political changes.


“The rule of Virtue may be compared to the Pole Star, which stays in its place while the myriad stars pay it homage” Xi Jinping speaking to Communist Party members, 2017. President Xi was quoting Confucius as a justification for his continued rule at the helm of the Communist Party. His notion of Virtue leaves no room for civil society or democratic participation, something already limited in China and becoming much more constricted during his rule. To many political scientists this is a challenge. Modernization theory, most influentially articulated by Lipset (1959), is one of the cornerstones of modern political science and predicts that as societies become richer, more educated and economically more modernized, they should also experience a particular path of political institutions — become more democratic, respect civil and human rights more, and develop several other societal features we commonly associate with Western democracies.
Is China’s stubborn authoritarian rule the nail in the coffin of modernization theory? Not necessarily to its defenders.
「政を為すに徳を以てすれば 例えば北辰のその所に居て 衆星のこれに巡るが如し*1」と習近平は2017年に共産党員に演説した*2。習国家主席は、自らが共産党トップとして支配を継続するのを正当化するために孔子を引用したのである。彼の徳の概念においては、市民社会や民主的参加の余地は無い。それらは中国では以前から制限されており、彼の支配下でますます押さえつけられるようになった。多くの政治学者にとって、これは難問である。リプセット(1959*3)によって最も影響力ある形で明確化された近代化論は、現代の政治学の基礎の一つであるが、社会が裕福になり、教育程度が高くなり、経済的に近代化すれば、政治制度の特定の経路を辿るはず、と予言している。即ち、より民主的になり、市民の権利と人権をより尊重し、我々が西洋民主主義と一般に結び付けているその他の社会的特徴を発展させるはずなのである*4
中国の頑強な専制支配は近代化論の棺桶の釘となるのだろうか? 同理論の擁護者にとっては必ずしもそうではない。


  1. 中国は規則を証明する例外である
  2. 中国の真の近代化は、文化大革命儒教文化、共産主義の残滓といった各種の歴史的要因により遅れている



In the first (Absent Leviathan), the state is weak and societal collective action and various norms are strong and constrain political hierarchy. In the second (Despotic Leviathan), the state is strong and crushes and further impairs an already-weak society. In the third (Shackled Leviathan), there is a balance between state and society’s capacities, and this enables their co-evolution towards greater strength for each and also undergirds a very different type of state — simultaneously powerful and still accountable and responsive to society. Economic modernization is almost impossible under the Absent Leviathan. It is possible under the Despotic Leviathan, and under some circumstances it can proceed rather rapidly. But it will not bring democracy or accountable behavior by rulers and bureaucrats. The positive feedback between political institutions and economic development is only a feature of the Shackled Leviathan. As a result, the same economic changes in, say, South Korea will have fundamentally different implications than when they happen in China.

この3類型についてアセモグル=ロビンソンは、マキャベリ君主論で、支配されたくない人々と支配しようとする貴族のせめぎあいから生じるとした3つの帰結「a principality, a free city, or anarchy(王政、自由都市、もしくは無政府状態)」に対応するもの、としている。



*3:cf. これ

*4:原注:Other important works on modernization theory include Apter (1967), Huntington (1968) and Rostow (1971).
cf. amazonのサイト:

*5:cf. これ