Expanding state authority paradoxically erodes its de facto control and efficiency

Evidence

Relatedly, as states have increased their scope and range, their growth in institutional determination and (formal) authority over the lives of their inhabitants — both citizens and noncitizens, those in and out of the state alike - de facto control, efficiency, and effect have diminished (Comaroff calls this “the Minogue Paradox,” 1998:336). There is, one could say, a point of diminishing returns, a marginal effectivity of rule. The more repressive, the more likely resistant. And the more cemented, the more internally cracked. … This is especially exacerbated by racial terms, for race, while making institutionally visible the perpetrators, picks out the objects of violence in emphatically identifiable ways. — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1726

Categorization

• XREF: The Minogue Paradox echoes balance-of-power and legitimacy-loss dynamics the vault already tracks in legal-institutions literature; useful contrast to strong-state capacity claims elsewhere. — connects to: The nation-state’s regulatory monopoly eroded with supranational and subnational powers — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 826; State expansion paradoxically reduces effective control and increases reliance on violence — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1726; Highly despotic regimes cannot dominate too deeply and rely on indirect rule — Michael Omi, Howard Winant, Racial Formation in the United States, 163 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• State expansion paradoxically reduces effective control and increases reliance on violence #corroborates (0.97) — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1726
• Highly despotic regimes cannot dominate too deeply and rely on indirect rule #corroborates (0.72) — Michael Omi, Howard Winant, Racial Formation in the United States, 163