| Summary: | With the general elections of November 2010, state rule in Myanmar entered a process widely seen as a transition—if stalled—to democracy and rule of law. Such transition narratives have posited normative rule of law and arbitrary rule outside law as opposing logics, and opposing practices. A similar dichotomy is found in studies of labour informalisation in the global South, where informal labour is understood as antithetical to legally protected employment. Arguing otherwise, this article employs interview and ethnographic data to pursue an anthropology of state formation as a means of reading formality and informality as complementary, rather than conflicting, logics of state practice. Drawing on Gavin Smith's notion of selective hegemony, I hold that state actors in Myanmar have pursued varied projects of rule over a heterogeneous landscape of labour relations. In this respect, rule of law is always selective, and informality exhibits not so much an absence of state rule as an indirect modality of rule.
|
|---|