In the approaches to political economy we have considered up to now, the state plays a subsidiary role.
In these approaches, political economy is energized by the economy, or more broadly by the system of private interests. Indeed, in these approaches, little exists that cannot be understood on the basis of private (essentially economic) interest.
To the extent that these approaches concern themselves with the state, they treat it as an instrument or institution employed by individuals or groups as a way of achieving private ends. Whatever important differences exist among these approaches, one similarity stands out. The state is not essentially an active agent; it serves as an instrument of forces originating among individuals or classes. As Wolin points out, this instrumental conception of the state goes back to Locke and the case against Hobbes.[P]olitical phenomena are best explained as the resultant of social factors, and hence political institutions and beliefs are best understood by a method which gets “behind” them to the “underlying” social processes which dictate the shape of things political. (1960:287)
This form of determination leaves the state in a derivative position. Deprived of its own logic, lacking a motivation and source of energy lying outside economy, the state is reduced to a dependent variable. First, a clear distinction is made between state and economy. Second, economy is accorded a primary place, with the wants and interests of individuals at the center. And third, the state is treated as a vehicle to satisfy wants when they cannot be satisfied privately.
In this chapter, we consider approaches to political economy centering on the idea of an active state whose agenda is not reducible to wants emerging within the private sphere. Those writers who have concerned themselves with interpreting relations between state and economy in this way often employ the term “state autonomy” to distinguish their approach. Broadly, the term state autonomy refers to the ability of the state to define and pursue an agenda not defined for it solely by private societal interests.
What we term here the state-centered approach to political economy identifies politics with the state or the agenda of the state and economics with the private sphere. In the relevant literature we often find the term “society” used to refer to the world of private interests whether of individuals or classes. This carries forward the classical idea of a distinction between state and civil society. While society, or civil society, includes more than economy narrowly defined, we will use the terms economy, society, and private sphere more or less interchangeably to refer to the system of private relations among private agents. We begin with a brief discussion of state autonomy, move to the difficulties of the society-centered approaches (including utilitarian and Marxian approaches), and subsequently take up state-centered approaches.