Yale Open Course <Power and Politics in Today's World>
Lecture 5: The Resurgent Right in the West
Notes
Privatizing gov functions in the US
Bill Clinton Dec 1994 - “stop making govts do what they are not good at”
Starts in the 1980s and continues throughout the 1990s (Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II)
1993 National Performance Review - “aggressive outsourcing of govt work” → 426K federal jobs eliminated
By 2001, more contract workforce than civilian employees in the Pentagon
Privatizing the military
Private contractors have always participated in wars in the past
Iraq war - almost the same number of contractors & military troops
Afghanistan war = contractors > troops
Private contractors do all functions except for front-line/offensive fighting
G4S: 625K employees; routine security, heavily-armed security, etc
Erinys: mostly in Africa & Iraq; protect energy assets
Asia Security Group: Kabul HQ protecting officials
DynCorp: policing missions
Academi: notoriously aggressive tactics; incidents of uncontrollable contractors
Montreaux document: agreement on good military practices for countries employing private contractors
Afghanistan - heavy reliance on local populations for employees
Host Nation Trucking in Afghanistan
US in 2001 in Afghanistan to support Northern Alliance (the losing side) in the civil war
But the losing side had no good prospect for governing
seen as an American puppet government; no real control over the country
How to move around the personnel & supplies in an unsecure regions?
Used increasingly more contractors than troops → didn't want a lot of American casualties (political costs)
For guarding convoys, the locals know the terrain better but also know how to take advantage of their situation
Paid the people (the Taliban) who would’ve attacked the convoys
Funding the guerilla movement that the US was fighting
Consequences of increased reliance on PMCs (private military contractors)?
Assuming efficiency gains, it saves money
Can fight otherwise unpopular wars → good or bad?
Undemocratic; gives incentives to fight more wars
Republican Theory of the US founders
should have standing/professional armies (they encourage wars)? wars only if really necessary
if you can’t mobilize citizenry, maybe the war shouldn’t be fought
Democratic peace theory
Democratic countries tend not to fight each other
and only fight wars they are going to win
difficult to get people to fight without a winning prospect
If it’s easier to start a war with PMCs and pay the war with debt → democratic peace theory might no longer apply
The US prison industry
the US a huge outlier: highest incarceration rate; accelerated rate starting in the 1980s especially for non-white males
60s, 70s - advances in treatment of psychiatric disorders
patients released from mental hospitals
Also coincides with govt fiscal crises
states saved money by de-institutionalizing mental health patients
Many of the released patients ended up in the criminal population
what drove the increase in incarceration?
war on drugs
1980s mandatory sentencing shifting power from judges to prosecutors (3 strikes law)
more punitive sentencing
minorities disproportionally incarcerated
political implication - felon disenfranchisement laws
ex. KY, VA - permanently disenfranchised if had felony conviction
Disenfranchisement of the black voting population
Paradox: violent crime has been falling
why lock up more people when violent crimes are coming down?
Locking up people for non-violent crimes
Demography?
As the baby boom bulge ages, fewer people to commit crimes
Roe vs. Wade?
Those likely to commit crime are not being born → controversial hypothesis
Education of women?
Education/labor force participation of women increase → decrease in violent crime
no consensus on the cause
People are not aware that violent crime is actually decreasing
being tough on crime - cheap talk for politicians
Decline of incarceration
due to cost
BUT private sector prison imprisonment increasing
Weber’s definition of state: monopoly on the legitimate use of force in a given territory
Military / prison - contracting out government monopoly
Creates ‘principle-agent problem’
Principle contracts out to the agent, the agent has more information that the principal needs
nested principle agent problem
solution: increase competition; prison industry low competition, currently huge cost to entry
military somewhat more competitive; but govts not going to switch contractors
Better alignment of interests of the agents with the state?
Difficult to do that; industries have very different incentives
Ex. need inmates to run prisons
increasing prison lobbying for:
lockup quotas
stiffer penalties
immigration enforcement
Ex. better for military industry to have long wars
monitoring?
difficult to do with no visibility and control over the doings of the contractors/subcontractors
Comments