A Tale of two captures: two theses on state capture and their normative assumptions and implicationsThe literature on state capture in political science and political economy illustrates the “ethical embeddedness” of positive theories, revealing how normative assumptions influence their descriptive frameworks. This paper examines two distinct perspectives on state capture: the unequal responsiveness thesis, rooted in egalitarian principles, argues that economic inequality undermines democratic equality by amplifying the preferences of the affluent; and the rent-seeking thesis, aligned with classical liberalism or libertarianism, contends that government-granted privileges incentivize unproductive competition, distorting both markets and political fairness. These perspectives derive contrasting normative conclusions about economic inequality and its impact on democracy. The paper’s key objective and contribution is to demonstrate how theories of state capture intertwine empirical claims with normative assumptions, making their ethical embeddedness explicit, and to examine how disentangling these elements allows for clearer dialogue, critique, and theoretical integration. By doing so, it advances a deeper understanding of the interplay between positive and normative theories, between economic and political inequality, and between political science and political theory and philosophy.
Keywords:
state capture; unequal responsiveness; rent-seeking; political inequality