The Colony in a Nation

I was interested to read a fascinating 2003 paper by MIT economist Daron Acemoglu discussing the relative effect of geography vs. institutions on economic prosperity. Looking at the natural experiment of colonization, where once-rich societies were reduced to impoverished ones when colonial powers imposed extractive institutions, and once-poor regions became very wealthy for the benefit of European settlers, Acemoglu finds that institutions, rather than geography, are the key forces shaping the prosperity of a society. Colonists set up good institutions when it benefited them (when they would be living under them), and extractive institutions (that did not apply to themselves) when they wanted to extract resources from the inhabitants.

Acemoglu further finds that once extractive institutions are in place, there is no natural gravitation towards good institutions, because elites will work to protect them and resist change in order to maintain their wealth and privilege. As such, the persistent extractive institutions begin to mark certain geographies, making bad practices seem like a natural product of the land, even though they were shaped by history and could be changed. How could such change be brought about? Acemoglu writes:

“Institutional change will happen either when groups that favor change become powerful enough to impose it on the potential losers, or when societies can strike a bargain with potential losers so as to credibly compensate them after the change takes place or, perhaps, shield them from the most adverse consequences of these changes.” 

Looking at incarceration in the U.S. through the lens of geography makes strikingly clear the persistent effects of our most extractive institution: slavery. Note below the heat map of incarceration rates U.S., which are highest in former slave states (Louisiana) and lowest in non former slave states with low Black populations (Maine) (source):   

To be clear, incarceration is a big problem everywhere in this country, where incarceration rates in every single state far exceed what we see in most or all other countries. This is not a “Southern problem,” but the problem there is deeply marked in a way that Acemoglu’s thesis can help us understand. The practice of over criminalizing and over incarcerating people is woven through the political economy of places, echoing prior socio-political arrangements including slavery. If you want to learn more about this history, there are many books to read, such as the classic Slavery By Another Name, by Douglas Blackmon. William Stuntz’s The Collapse of American Criminal Justice has a really interesting comparative analysis of the development of Northern and Southern justice systems. And I’ve just ordered Vengeance and Justice, by Edward Ayers, focused on Southern justice in the 19th century.

Before you get depressed, we do have ways out of this. Drawing again from Acemoglu, we can see two key strategies to address this (1) increase the political power of Black people most affected by incarceration so they can create different rules, along Acemoglu’s lines, which we are seeing in places like New Orleans and St. Louis; (2) draw from the environmental movement’s just transition framework to bargain with some who stand to lose from the change and make them allies. In other words, organize workers who are benefitting from this system but also suffering a lot from it. It’s a complicated and hard piece of work, but the alternative is unacceptable — we cannot allow the continuation of this “colony in a nation.”