Women and Minorities: The Impact of War Time Mobilization on Political Rights 1 August 1999 David L. Rousseau Department of Political Science 235 Stiteler Hall University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA 19104 E-mail: rousseau@sas.upenn.edu Phone: (215) 898-6187 Fax: (215) 573-2073 and Bruce Newsome Department of Political Science 228 Stiteler Hall University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA 19104 E-mail: brucen@sas.upenn.edu Phone: (215) 898-5289 ABSTRACT Tilly (1975) has convincingly argued that warfare in Europe contributed to the development of the modern state. But just what form of strong state is likely to develop in the face of a persistent external threat? Hintze (1906) and Lasswell (1941) propose the "garrison state" hypothesis: states facing a severe security threat are likely to develop autocratic institutions in order to minimize domestic opposition and maximize mobilization potential. A competing argument, which has been proposed by the “extraction” school of thought, argues that warfare can indirectly promote rather than inhibit the development of democratic institutions (Downing 1992). We examine these competing hypotheses by tracing the ebb and flow of political rights of majority males, females, and minority males using a cross-sectional time series of European states (1900-1955). We find that while wars lead to a reduction in rights in the short run, if large-scale mobilization occurs in response to the threat then political rights tend to expand in the long run. Prepared for the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Atlanta GA, September 2- 5, 1999.