Srl | Item |
1 |
ID:
172887
|
|
|
Summary/Abstract |
The dominant interpretation of the Glorious Revolution portrays it as an innovative compromise that used clever institutional design to solve a coordination problem between rival elites. In contrast, I argue that it was neither innovative nor a compromise and that it was the product of structural change rather than institutional design. Following Barrington Moore, I focus on the rise of agrarian capitalism and economically autonomous elites, who, in contrast to rent-seeking elites, do not depend on favor from the state for their income. They have an interest in the creation of a political system that ensures their equal rights under the law, open access to markets, and opportunities to form broad coalitions against rent-seeking. This makes them a critical constituency for representative government. I test this argument through an analysis of patterns of allegiance for Crown and Parliament at the outset of the English Civil War and address its relevance to the Glorious Revolution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
ID:
045419
|
|
|
Publication |
London, Pall Mall Press, 1971.
|
Description |
149p.
|
Series |
Key concepts in political science
|
Standard Number |
0269026940
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
008258 | 320/BIR 008258 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|