Post-colonial theory of State
Subtopic: Paper I · Post-colonial theory of the State
How to structure your answer
Define the overdeveloped state, give Alavi's argument and Bardhan's Indian variant, then limits.
Written within the word limit
162 words · target 150 words · 9 min
The post-colonial state is theorised as a state that does not fit the classical Marxist formula of an instrument of a single dominant class, because the colonial inheritance distorted the relation between state and society.
Hamza Alavi's overdeveloped state (1972) is the founding statement. The metropolitan bourgeoisie built a state apparatus strong enough to subordinate all indigenous classes. At independence this apparatus was inherited intact, so the state stands above three propertied classes — the metropolitan bourgeoisie, the indigenous bourgeoisie and the landed classes — mediating their competing claims rather than serving any one. The bureaucratic-military oligarchy therefore acquires relative autonomy.
Pranab Bardhan adapted this to India: a dominant coalition of industrial capitalists, rich farmers and the professional bureaucracy, whose competitive subsidy-seeking produces policy paralysis rather than accumulation.
Limits. Alavi generalised from Pakistan and Bangladesh, where the military did capture the state; India's electoral democracy produced a different trajectory. Critics also note that treating the state as autonomous understates the deepening capture by capital after 1991.
What an examiner expects to see
- The post-colonial state is theorised as a state that does not fit the classical Marxist formula of an instrument of a single dominant class, because the colonial inheritance distorted the relation between state and society.
- Hamza Alavi's overdeveloped state (1972) is the founding statement.
- Pranab Bardhan adapted this to India: a dominant coalition of industrial capitalists, rich farmers and the professional bureaucracy, whose competitive subsidy-seeking produces policy paralysis rather than accumulation.