Alien Rule and Its Discontents

Abstract

It is commonplace to explain nationalist movements by adverting to the demand for national self-determination. Indeed, nationalism is frequently defined in precisely these terms. Discontent with alien rule—the obverse of national self-determination—is often assumed to be pervasive, if not universal, thus accounting for the absence of an international market in governance services. There is no shortage of explanations of the antipathy to alien rule and a great deal of corroborative evidence. Many believe that people seem to prefer to be badly ruled by their own kind than better ruled by aliens. Yet if this is true, then identity trumps competence in the assessment of rule, implying that we are all liable to suffer from suboptimal governance. In contrast, this article argues that the evidence for the pervasiveness of antipathy to alien rule is overdrawn. To that end, it distinguishes between two different types of alien rule, elected and imposed; provides a brief portrait of each; and suggests that when aliens are confronted with incentives to rule fairly and efficiently, they can gain legitimacy even when they have been imposed. This conclusion has implications for the prospects of an international market in governance services.

Legitimating beliefs: Sources and indicators

“…Those whose voices are not heard or opinions not cultivated in the establishment of the tax system may feel that they are paying tribute rather than taxes. The result may be the perception of what Hechter labels “alien rule” (2009). The under‐representation of a group in the legislature or the assignment of permanent minority status may reduce the group members' sense of ownership, increase their sense of injustice and partiality in the determination of policy, and dampen their quasi‐voluntary compliance.…”

Resistance to alien rule in Taiwan and Korea†

“…The effects of alien rule on native populations are far from universal. Whereas often these effects are malign, in other cases they are beneficent (Hechter in press a, in press b). The history of Japanese colonial rule in Taiwan and Korea reveals both kinds of effects.…”

“…To the extent that a regime is legitimate, it reaps compliance without resort to repression. Recent attempts to devise a positive theory of legitimacy (Jennings and Van Deth 1990; Levi and Sacks 2006; Tyler 2006; Lake 2007; Hechter in press b) conclude that the legitimacy of any regime – whether native or alien – is enhanced by governance that is fair, characterised by procedural justice and due process, and that effectively produces an appropriate basket of public goods. Our article explores the economic, cultural and political consequences of Japanese rule in Taiwan and Korea and suggests the motives for collective action against the alien ruler.…”

Identity Politics and Right-Wing Populism in Estonia: The Case of EKRE

“…Alien rule: Central features and the Baltic/Estonian context In accordance with Michael Hechter, "at the most basic level, alien rule exists whenever one or more culturally distinct groups are governed by individuals of a different cultural group … this encompasses the legally distinct situations of colonialism, foreign occupation and multiethnic states composed of some nations whose members consider their rulers to be alien." 21 Alien rule contains an intrinsic controversy between governance and cultural distinctiveness that started becoming increasingly relevant after the emergence of the norm of national self-determination. 22 According to the same author, cultural distinctiveness renders the acquisition of legitimacy, by the alien rulers over the ruled, a particularly hard task especially on occasions when the subordinate societies are culturally homogeneous.…”