The Man on Horseback: The Role of the Military in Polit…

Read 10 reviews from the world’s largest community for readers. The role of the military in a society raises a number of How much separation should there …

Page content (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2567381-the-man-on-horseback)

Home My Books Browse ▾ Recommendations Choice Awards Genres Giveaways New Releases Lists Explore News & Interviews Loading... Community ▾ Groups Quotes Ask the Author People Sign in Join Jump to ratings and reviews Want to Read Rate this book The Man on Horseback: The Role of the Military in Politics Samuel E. Finer 3.98 61 ratings 12 reviews Want to Read Rate this book The role of the military in a society raises a number of How much separation should there be between a civil government and its army? Should the military be totally subordinate to the polity? Or should the armed forces be allowed autonomy in order to provide national security? Recently, the dangers of military dictatorships-as have existed in countries like Panama, Chile, and Argentina-have become evident. However, developing countries often lack the administrative ability and societal unity to keep the state functioning in an orderly and economically feasible manner without military intervention.Societies, of course, have dealt with the realities of these problems throughout their histories, and the action they have taken at any particular point in time has depended on numerous factors. In the "first world" of democratic countries, the civil-military relationship has been thoroughly integrated, and indeed by most modern standards this is seen as essential. However, several influential Western thinkers have developed theories arguing for the separation of the military from any political or social role. Samuel Huntington, emphasized that professionalism would presuppose that the military should intervene as little as possible in the political sphere. Samuel E. Finer, in contrast, emphasizes that a government can be efficient enough way to keep the civil-military relationship in check, ensuring that the need for intervention by the armed forces in society would be minimal. At the time of the book's original publication, perhaps as a consequence of a post-World War II Cold War atmosphere, this was by no means a universally accepted position. Some considered the military to be a legitimate threat to a free society. Today's post-Cold War environment is an appropriate time to reconsider Finer's classic argument.The Man on Horseback continues to be an important contribution to the study of the military's role in the realm of politics, and will be of interest to students of political science, government, and the military. Genres Politics History Military Fiction Nonfiction War Political Science International Relations 294 pages, Paperback First published January 1, 1962 Book details & editions Loading... Loading... About the author Samuel E. Finer 19 books 5 followers Follow Follow Ratings & Reviews What do you think? Rate this book Write a Review Friends & Following Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book! Community Reviews 3.98 61 ratings 12 reviews 5 stars 20 (32%) 4 stars 24 (39%) 3 stars 14 (22%) 2 stars 2 (3%) 1 star 1 (1%) Search review text Filters Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews Ali Hassan 448 reviews 26 followers Follow Follow May 17, 2022 Reading this was much needed to comprehend the mosaic of statehood and the role of the military in it. More than 90 countries around the world have experienced coups d'etat by their military generals in the previous century, and Pakistan is one of them. The wondering question, however, wasn't to know why a general takeover the government of a country, but to know why should he be subordinated to the civilian government of his country? To my astonishment, there has never been a single coup in a country wherein liberal democracy was intact. Then questions arise - what kind of political setup does appeal to a general to hold the reins of a country and what are the instrumental methods he uses to intervene in the politics of his country? This book tries to explore such questions and the three main levels that are used by a general to intervene in politics. 2 likes Like Comment Timothy 154 reviews 2 followers Follow Follow February 1, 2016 The book is very much a product of its time period, but some (but limited) applications to today's information age. Much of the book consists of definitions to terms that Samuel uses in later passages. The irony is that Samuel doesn't seem to incorporate some of the principles regarding the disposition of the military to intervene into the actual interventions examined. He emphasizes the political culture of a country and dispositions seem to be an afterthought - despite spending a good deal of time discussing them. One key idea he presents, that I believe has much applicability today, is the mobility of ideas within a society being a reflection of the level of political culture. In today's information age, ideas can have a huge amount of mobility. The other part of the book that's difficult is the lack of context Samuel provides regarding many of his examples - he's a smart guy and has a breadth and depth of understanding much deeper than mine, so it was hard to understand what he was talking about at time. That all said, the text provided an interesting take on the analysis and circumstances of military interventions and a legitimate critique of Huntington's work. That said...it addressed military intervention...not necessarily the role of the military in politics or civil-military relations... 1 like Like Comment Sami 25 reviews 8 followers Follow Follow August 7, 2024 Clearly, Finer was a brilliant scholar of his time, a passionate political scientist, yet somewhat underrated. This book provides a systematic approach to understanding why militaries intervene and how such interventions are sustained. It is a book all about military coups and military dictatorships. By analyzing 20th-century coups and the spread of military regimes, where the military dominated the civil and political machinery of the state, Finer has deduced systemic key similarities and categorized those nations accordingly post-independence. The core of the book lies in the conclusion that where political culture is weak, education standard is low, while creative minority are lacking behind in dynamic, diverse, and intersectional analysis, military intervenes in the politics. (last one factor is my interjection) The historical observations at the very start were illuminating: 1. From 1917 to 1940, 13 countries gained independence; however, 6 descended into dictatorships or military regimes. 2. From 1947 to 1962, 15 countries gained independence as democratic states. Out of these 15 countries, 9 fell into a vicious trap of military coups and dictatorships. All these countries lay in particular geographies such as the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and Latin America, where military interventions are numerous. In all these countries, where military interventions occurred in the last 100 years, the historical context was not fully democratic; either they were colonial oligarchies or ruled by a narrow elite. No democratic culture existed there. After independence, they followed the same patterns, and the narrow elite became more powerful. Countries with strengthened democracies are more difficult targets for military rulers to capture. The book highlights that historically, countries in the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and Latin America have been particularly susceptible to military rule due to their lack of entrenched democratic practices and ongoing power imbalances post-independence. These regions were characterized by colonial oligarchies or narrow elite rule, which left little room for democratic culture to take root. Post-independence, these nations perpetuated existing power structures, leading to the narrow elite gaining even more control. Conversely, countries that developed robust democratic institutions have proven more resistant to military coups. Finer has succinctly analyzed Pakistan, Argentina, Libya, Egypt, and other nations that were dictatorial at the time of writing this book. This is a great book for understanding the dynamics of the 20th century. The book outlines key factors that enable military interventions, including centralized command, hierarchical discipline, advanced communication, and societal isolation. However, military regimes often struggle with technical governance issues and lack legitimacy. According to Finer, this leads to eventual democratic restoration. The book categorizes military interventions into four levels: 1. Influence, 2. Pressure tactics, 3. Displacement, 4. Direct overthrow. Finer noted that the intensity of intervention often depended on the country's political maturity: 1. If a country is educated, and the youth is mobilized and aware, the military can only advance to Level 1, i.e., influence. 2. In countries with a weak political culture, the military progresses through Levels 1, 2, and 3. 3. In countries with minimal political culture, a direct military coup occurs or has occurred. 3 likes Like Comment Jl5841 67 reviews 1 follower Follow Follow June 7, 2022 Amongst rapid decolonization by European powers, Finer sought to answer why so many new nations were falling to their military's whims. His answer to this question is Socratic, for 'instead of asking why the military engage politics, we ought surely ask why they would ever do otherwise.' Finer elaborates the realist logic of civil-military relations, and is an important starting point for anyone interested in the subject or that of regime change, coups, and perhaps revolution. That said, it is dated. Nearly 80 years have passed since its publication, but the fact that it is still cited today puts it right up their with "Arms and Influence" and "The Soldier and the State." Like Comment Gift 799 reviews Follow Follow May 28, 2023 This sounds a little bit like Huntington but it is not. One of the reviewers on Goodreads wrote that this book is a product of its time and I completely agree. I cannot say a lot about the empirical part that I did not read (again) but I found a lot of useful information in the theoretical one. It is fascinating to see how this field of study flourished in the second half of the 20th century. I still don’t get the title but I appreciated a lot of Finer´s arguments. 3.5* study Like Comment Dale 1,222 reviews Follow Follow January 5, 2022 I was doing some research on the Turkish military and this book was referenced in one of the readings. I have heard of Huntington and Elliott but had missed this writer about the political - military relationship. Good book that lays out the relationships by country and talks about military to political transitions after rebellions and such. Very interesting if not a bit dated. Like Comment David 394 reviews 2 followers Follow Follow March 29, 2019 I had a hard time getting through this book. Perhaps its too specialized for my taste.... Like Comment Aftab Kayani 6 reviews Follow Follow December 9, 2024 for thorough understanding of situation we confront Like Comment Çağrı Koşak 2 reviews Follow Follow Read February 13, 2017 Good Like Comment Amanullah 34 reviews 2 followers Follow Follow September 29, 2008 Lays out a basic framework. Critical question: why don't military coups happen more often than they actually do?! Like Comment Marwan Asmar 126 reviews 50 followers Follow Follow Read June 4, 2010 An excellent book on the role of military in politics all over the world. An academic textbook, it is well-developed and written in a style that is easy to read and enjoyable Like Comment Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews Join the discussion Add a quote Start a discussion Ask a question Company About us Careers Terms Privacy Interest Based Ads Ad Preferences Help Work With Us Authors Advertise Authors & ads blog Connect © 2026 Goodreads LLC