Crafts and trades (english): Comment on T. Shanin

Eric Hobsbawm's outline of the concept of social banditry suggest certain conditions of existence for that mode of primitive rebellion. Primary among these conditions are the presence of a ‘traditional peasant environment and the absence of ‘industrial capitalism’. This paper presents a critique of Hobsbawm's specifications, and suggest two alternative conditions: the presence of class conflict which unites direct producers, and the absence of effective, institutionalised political organisation of producers’ interests. This reformulation is illustrated by reference to the Kelly Outbreak in late nineteenth century Australia.     

Legislative Transparency and Credit Risk

Open governance requirements are designed to improve accountability, which implies that transparent governments are more trustworthy stewards of their publicly invested power. However, transparency may also reduce institutional effectiveness and inhibit political compromise, diminishing the capacity to manage resources responsibly. We assess empirical support for these competing perspectives in the context of American state legislatures, many of which have become exempt from state sunshine laws in recent decades. We leverage variation in the timing of these legislative exemptions to identify the effect of removing transparency in a crucial governing institution on investors’ risk perceptions of states’ general obligation bonds. Our analysis of these data during the period 1995–2010 suggests that removing legislative transparency reduces state credit risk. We conclude that while openness in government may be normatively desirable, shielding legislative proceedings from public view may actually be better for states’ debt repayment capacity, improving their overall fiscal health.     

A tale of two ex-dominions: why the procedures for changing the rules of succession are so different in Canada and Australia

In 2011, the leaders of the nations that share Queen Elizabeth as their head of state agreed to change the rules governing the inheritance of the throne. The federal nature of the Canadian and Australian Crowns raises the question of whether Canadian provinces and Australian states should be involved in the process for modifying the rules of succession. Australia's federal government has decided to include its states in the process, whereas Canada's did not. This article will assess what the differences between these two approaches reveal about the political cultures and leaders of these nations. The issues discussed include relations between the civil service and elected politicians, the contested social memory of the British Empire, and the relationship between neoliberalism and cooperative federalism.