MODULE 2

ORIGIN NATURE AND FUNCTIONS OF THE STATE

1. A brief survey of Divine theory, Force theory, Social contract theory,

Evolutionary theory
2. Sovereignty : Attributes, Monism, Pluralism
3. State and the Civil society
4. Changing nature of state, State in the Global era

MEANING OF STATE

The word state is derived from the latin word ‘status’ meaning to stand or
remain permanent. The word was first used by Nicolo Machiavelli in his
seminal work “ The Prince''. Bourbon King Louis XIV proclaimed “I am the
state” to reassert his absolutism. The state is defined by various political
theorists as follows:

DEFINITIONS OF THE STATE

Aristotle : “State is a union of families and villages having for its end a
perfect and self sufficing life”

Holland :- “State is a Politically organised people of a definite territory”

Max Weber : “ The state is a human community that claims the monopoly of
the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.”

ELEMENTS OF A STATE

The state has four main elements. They are territory, population, government
and sovereignty

TERRITORY

A state must have a defined piece of land to be called a state. The state shall
have absolute rights over its territory including the airspace, territorial waters
and resources provided by the land. The territory a state occupies can even be
a reason for its national power. For example, Russia's large size and
inhospitable climate make it difficult for a country to invade it.

POPULATION

A state must have a group of people inhabiting the area under its control. A
large population can provide a state with valuable human resources with
which development can be pursued. Conversely, an undereducated
impoverished populace can be a liability to a state, contributing to its
weakness.

GOVERNMENT

Without a government , a group of people occupying a given area is only a

tribe. An organised form of government is what makes a tribe a state.
Whether the government is a democracy or a monarchy, it will have the
monopoly over legitimate use of force. This is how the government ensures
law and order and protection of rights of its citizens.

SOVEREIGNTY

Sovereignty is the quality of being the absolute power in the internal sphere
and a completely independent power in the external sphere.for example, India
under colonial rule was not a sovereign power as domestic control and
foreign affairs controlled by the british. Whereas post 1947, India is a
sovereign nation ruled by a government elected by the people themselves.
There can only be one sovereign in a state. More than one sovereign implies
the existence of a civil war.

THEORIES OF ORIGIN OF STATE

Many thinkers have postulated the reasons for the formation of the state. In
hindu political traditions, the state originated because of “Matsyanyaya” or
the law of the fishes. Just as the bigger fish eats the smaller fish in the ocean,
in the absence of the state, the strong will overpower the weak. Thus the state
becomes necessary to protect the interests of the weak.

Certain western theories regarding the origin of the state are as follows:-

DIVINE THEORY OF ORIGIN

According to this theory, the State came into being due to the will of God.
God created the King to rule as his representative on earth. As such the
authority of the king shall be absolute. The subjects do not have the power to
disobey the king as that would be akin to disobeying god himself. A despotic
king was regarded as punishment for the sins of people.

The theory was used by absolute monarchs to justify their despotism. The
pharaohs of Egypt called themselves gods. James I of England and Louis
XIV of France used this theory to justify their rule. Moreover the theory was
against the interests of the common people.

The theory lost its significance with the growth of social contract theory. John
Locke in his “two treatise of government” directly attacked Robert Filmer's
“Patriarcha” which advocated the divine theory of origin of state. Moreover
with the advent of democracy the theory has lost its relevance.
FORCE THEORY OF ORIGIN OF STATE

The force theory of origin postulates that the state came into being as a result
of application of force. The strong fights and subjugates the weak and
establishes their authority over them. “War begets the king”, as the saying
goes. The victorious king/ chieftain gains new territories and establishes their
power over the defeated kingdom/tribe. This theory is supported by
Bluntschli who stated that, “force is an indispensable element of the
organisation of the state”

Certain criticisms are levelled against the theory of force. They are:-

1. the element of force is not the only factor in the origin of the state;
religion, politics, family and process of evolution are behind the
foundation of the state

2. The theory of force runs counter to the universally accepted maxim of

Thomas Hill Green- “Will, not force, is the basis of the state.” No state
can be permanent by bayonets and daggers. It must have the general
voluntary acceptance by the people.

3. The doctrine of survival of the fittest which is relied upon by the

champions of the force theory has erroneously applied a system that is
applicable to the animal world to the human world. If force was the
 only determining factor, Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violence couldn't
have triumphed over the brute force of the British Imperialists.

SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

According to the social contract theory, the state came into being as a result
of a contract between the people and the ruler. According to the theory,
before the advent of the state, there existed a condition called the state of
nature. Due to the issues that men faced in the state of nature, the people
entered into a contract amongst themselves, as a result of which the state
came into existence.

The main proponents of the theory are thomas hobbes, john locke and jean
jacques rousseau. These scholars had different views on the state of nature
and the social contract.

HOBBES’ CONTRACT

Thomas Hobbes was a renowned English political philosopher best known

for his work, the “leviathan”. Hobbes' philosophy is influenced by his
experience of the English civil war which resulted in anarchy in england.
Thus Hobbes argues for an all powerful sovereign to protect the natural rights
of the people.
According to hobbes, the state of nature was a state of constant war, due to
the unencumbered freedoms that people enjoyed due to their natural rights. In
such a situation each man tries to protect his best interests resulting in a
situation where “there is constant warring of every man against every man.”
as such where the life of people is solitary, poor , nasty , brutish and short.

Inorder to escape the anarchy of the state of nature, the people enter into a
contract. They decide to surrender their natural rights to the absolute
sovereign who shall in turn protect them from the anarchy of the state of
nature. The sovereign thus formed is absolute and unlimited, and the people
are bound to obey the sovereign.

The contract shall be voided only on one ground, if the sovereign fails to
protect the right to life of the subjects. When that happens the original
purpose of creation of the sovereign has been defeated and thus the contract
shall cease to exist.

Hobbes theory is criticised on many counts. In his pursuit to create stability,

he created an absolute sovereign, which is inimical individual freedom.
Although he justified absolute authority as being risen from the will of the
people, rather than on the will of god, hobbes began as an individualist and
ended as an absolutist

LOCKE’S CONTRACT
John Locke is widely regarded as the father of liberalism. In his seminal
work, the “two treatises of government”, Locke had elaborated his theory of
social contract.

According to Locke, the state of nature is a state of perfect cooperation.

However, when disputes arose, every man could not be the best judge of their
own circumstances. Thus there arose a need for an impartial authority, for
which a social contract was entered into

First, the people entered into a contract with themselves to form the civil
society. Then the civil society enters into a second contract to form the
sovereign. The civil society surrenders all rights except the natural rights of
life, liberty and property.

When the sovereign fails to perform his duties, the contract signed between
the civil society and the sovereign ceases to exist. The power reverts back to
the civil society who again makes a contract to form the new sovereign.

Locke, through the theory of social contract, championed the cause of

liberalism. He puts the freedom of the individual at the forefront of his
theory. He attacked filmers theory of divine origin of kingship and placed the
individual at the foremost position. For this reason, locke is regarded as the
father od liberal individualism

ROUSSEAU'S CONTRACT
Rousseau is one of the foremost thinkers of political philosophy through his
wide ranging world such as emilie and the social contract. Rousseau's idea of
the social contract differs from hobbes’ and lockes’ social contract.

According to Rousseau, in the state of nature , man was a noble savage.

However, conflicts in society arose with the beginning of institutions of
family and property. Thus the harmony of state of nature was ruined
necessitating a social contract

According to Rousseau, people entered into a contract amongst themselves

and agreed to surrender their natural rights to society as a whole. Then the
society will rule themselves in accordance with the general will.

The general will is the sum total of the real wills of all individuals in a
community. The real will of the individual will be what is in his best
interests. An individual will have particular wills as well, which may be
harmful to him in the long run. The sum total of individual will is called
actual will. When we compare real will and actual will, we see that actual
will is transient, unstable and inconsistent whil;e really will is stable,
constant, consistent and determinate.

Sometimes, a man pursuing his selfish interests may violate the general will
of the community. In such cases, the society as a whole can punish the erring
man and “he will be forced to be free”.
Rousseau in his social contract laid the framework for popular sovereignty.
Popular sovereignty refers to a system where authority is vested with the
people themselves. Rousseau did not believe in a system where one delegated
one's authority to a representative who would then rule in one's stead. Instead
Rousseau believed that true freedom lies when man could rule himself
directly. Thus Rousseau was an exponent of direct democracy.

LIMITATIONS OF THE SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

1. The hypothetical state of nature and social contracts are fragments of

speculation by the contractualists.
2. It is widely accepted that the state came into being as a result of
evolutionary processes rather than contracts.
3. Locke's idea of private property and individual liberty is used by the
capitalist class to rationalise inequalities
4. Rousseau's idea of sovereignty of the general will need not be
beneficial to all. In India varna dharma was part of the general will that
subjugated the shudras.
5. Jeremy Bentham stated that natural rights are fallacies. Rights emanate
from laws made by a sovereign body alone.

UTILITY OF THE THEORY

 1. It challenged the divine theory of origin of states.
2. It provided man with certain immutable rights by virtue of his humanity
3. It placed the individual at the focus rather than society or state

EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF STATE

The historic/evolutionary theory of the origin of the state, is also known as

the liberal theory of the origin of the state. This theory is regarded as the
correct explanation as to how the state originated.

According to it, the state is a product of historical growth or gradual

evolution.Garner argued: "The state is neither the handiwork of God, nor the
result of superior physical force, nor the creation of the compact, or a mere
expansion of the families. It is a gradual process of social development out of
grossly imperfect beginnings.'

Factors aiding the Evolution of the State

1. Kinship

It is said that families joined together to form clans, clans joined to form
tribes and tribes united to form the state. When they occupied a piece of land
and formed a government to rule themselves, the state came into being

2. Religion
Religion plays a key role in uniting people by giving them a common
identity. Prophet muhammad united warring tribes of arabian peninsula to
form a nation under the flag of islam

3. Property

When man began sedentary life, social inequalities arose through differences
in distribution of resources. Some men owned more property than others and
to protect the same, the state came into existence.

4. Political Consciousness

Political consciousness refers to the feeling of a populace that they form a

unified political community. This can be a powerful way of attaining
nationhood. Indians developed a political consciousness regarding the true
nature of the British rule which paved the way to Indian nationhood.

STAGES OF EVOLUTION OF STATE.

Sociologists have generally identifies the following forms of state in the

course of its historical evolution

● The tribal state

The earliest form of state was the tribe. The tribal leader led them to war,
collected and distributed the plunder and enforced laws amongst his fellow
tribe members. The mahajanapadas of ancient India are an example of the
tribal state.
 ● The oriental empire

The oriental empire refers to the great empires that sprung up in the river
valleys of the Orient. The Indus valley civilisation, Sumerian civilisation,
Mesopotamian civilisation ets are examples. These civilisations had
centralised governance structures and taxation systems which made them a
precursor of the modern state.

● Greek city state

The Greek city state refers to the small self-sufficient territories in the
classical Hellenic civilization. These city states had different systems of
governments and different cultures. It is in the city state of Athens that
modern democracy originated

● Roman Empire

The Roman Empire was an extensive civilization stretching from western

Europe to Africa. They had sophisticated systems of governments where
every section of society was represented. There was the Caesar that had
absolute power, the senate acted as Checks and balances to the caesar and the
senate itself was represented by both patricians (aristocracy) and plebeians (
common people)

● Feudal state

The feudal state came into existence with the dark ages. Power was organised
according to patterns of land ownership. The power of the King waned and
the clergy gained a lot of influence amongst the common people. The
decentralised polity that resulted is known as the feudal state.

● Modern nation state

The modern nation state came into being with the treaty of westphalia.
Absolutist monarchs such as Henry VIII of England and Louis XIV of France
resulted in the increasing power of nations. The power of the church
decreased and the inviolable nature of national borders were agreed on. All
this resulted in the formation of the modern nation state.

STATE AND CIVIL SOCIETY

Civil society was first used by Roman thinker Cicero. The civil society is a
group of people organised on a voluntary basis occupying the space between
the state and the market. The civil society has a diverse role in the
functioning of a state.

ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY

1. It acts as a guardian of citizens rights. For example the MKSS in
Rajasthan was instrumental in passing the right to information act.

2. It acts as a bulwark against corruption. The Lokpal act was pushed by a

civil society organisation called India against corruption

3. It acts where the state cannot adequately provide assistance. The baba
amte foundation in maharashtra aids leprosy patients

4. It supplements state resources. The Kerala sastra sahitya Parishad was

instrumental in supporting the government in achieving 100 percent
literacy in Kerala.

5. It often can be a catalyst for constitutional change. The solidarity

movement in Poland against the communist government is an example
of the same.
 6. Civil society can act as agents of social change. The bhumata brigade is
engaged in erasing taboos of menstruation women and advocates for
their entry into temples.

DRAWBACKS OF CIVIL SOCIETY

1. The state can easily oppress civil society. In india misuse of sedition is
done to muzzle civil society organisations

2. Sometimes civil society organisations are engaged in illegal activities.

In india many ngos are used as fronts for money laundering

3. Civil society organisations can often cause communal disharmony. In

india compassion international engaged in forcible conversions
upsetting social fabric

4. Civil society can sometimes be unjust due to established injustices. The

caste system in India is largely accepted by the civil society in india.
The system abuses the human rights of oppressed individuals.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN STATE AND CIVIL SOCIETY

State Civil society

Highest form of political association Civil society occupies a position

subordinate to the state.

Has the sole authority in exercising Civil society has no right to exercise
physical force. physical force on its members

There is an element of payment for Membership in a civil society

membership through taxation organisation is usually free

There can only be one state There can be many types of civil
commanding authority amongst a society organisations within a given
given group of people. territory

It is compulsory to be a member of Membership in a civil society

the state. Aristotle said that man is a organisation is voluntary.
political animal, he who is not a
member of the polis is either above
humanity or below it.

CHANGING NATURE OF STATE

The state has often been the foremost association in human history. However
recent changes has changed the nature of the state through developments such
as globalisation

STATE IN THE GLOBAL ERA

The state is undergoing several changes due to globalisation. Globalisation is

the process by which there exists a time- space compression due to
revolutions in information and communication technologies. There are
arguments that the power of the state is declining. These arguments are given
below.

STATE AS A DECLINING POWER

1. Mncs and big data companies are often times more powerful than
nation states
 2. Rise of global issues such as climate change is challenging national
sovereignty
3. International terrorist organisations are able to inflict damage on
powerful nations. The 9/11 attack on the USA is an example.
4. In the era of globalisation, national boundaries are diminishing due to
transport and communication revolution
5. Also, economic globalisation has resulted in the Triumph of the
economic over the political.

STATE AS A CONTINUING POWER

● There is a pushback against free movement as seen by usa attempting

to build a wall over Mexico
● The visa and passport regime further restrict the movement of people
based on nationalities.
● In international organisations like the Uno, veto power is held by
powerful nations further adding to their authority
● In the WTO, interests of nation states often supersede the need for free
trade. Opposition to subsidies in fisheries are an example of this.
● There is an increasing tendency towards mercantilism from free trade
globalisation as seen by policies of America such as currency war.

Thus the nation state is still a powerful entity in the global era although the
nature of its power has changed
SOVEREIGNTY

The word sovereignty is derived from the Latin word superanus meaning
supreme. It is the quality of a nation being completely supreme in the internal
sphere and completely independent in the external sphere. India when it was
under colonial rule was not a sovereign nation as its domestic and foreign
policies were determined by the British.

The idea was first developed first by Jean Bodin who defined sovereignty as
thus:-

"Sovereignty is the supreme power of the state over citizens unrestrained by

law".

ATTRIBUTES OF SOVEREIGNTY

● Absoluteness

Sovereignty is absolute. It is the highest power in a land , taking precedence

over other associations.

● Permanence

Sovereignty is permanent. It does not die with the death of the sovereign.
Hence the saying "the king is dead. Long live the king"
 ● Universality

Sovereignty is universal. It applies to everyone in a state equally. No

individual is above the sovereign.

● Inalienability

Sovereignty cannot be separated from the sovereign.

● Indivisibility

There can only be one sovereign in a state. If there is more than one
Sovereign, then there exists a civil war in that state.

TYPES OF SOVEREIGNTY

● De jure Sovereignty

The word de jure is derived from the Latin word from law. De Jure sovereign
is the person who has supreme power according to law. However real power
would be exercised by another person under his name. Thus De jure
Sovereign is sovereign only in name. He is the supreme power in a land, but
he doesn't exercise direct power. In India, the president has supreme Power
by law but power is exercised by the prime minister under his name. De jure
Sovereignty is also called nominal sovereignty.
 ● De facto sovereignty

De facto is derived from the Latin word in fact. He is the entity who exercises
real authority. Thus De facto sovereign is also known as real sovereign. Here
even though he is not the sovereign by law, power is exercised by him. In
India the prime minister is the one who exercises real power making him the
de facto sovereign.

● Popular sovereignty

The concept of popular sovereignty was popularised by Rousseau. It implies

a situation where the supreme power lies in the hands of the people. In India
the preamble of the constitution proclaims the people of India to be
sovereign.

Monistic Theory

The monistic theory of sovereignty was introduced by John Austin. He

defined monistic theory as thus.

" If a determinate human superior not in the habit of obedience to a like

superior receives habitual obedience from the bulk of a given society that
superior is sovereign and that society (including the superior) is a society
political and independent"
CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE MONISTIC THEORY OF
SOVEREIGNTY

Some of the criticisms are given below:

1) The monistic theory is criticised for asserting that the sovereign is absolute
and no limitations exist on its authority. In fact, the sovereign authority is
restrained both by internal as well as external limitations. Customary and
religious laws are big limitations.

2) Austin has defined law as a command made by the political superior. But
the critics are of the view that all laws are not necessarily in the nature of
commands and all commands cannot be considered as law. For example, the
law that gives people the right to vote is not a command.

3) The monistic theory defines sovereignty as indivisible. But in every state,

whether it is democratic or not, we see division of functions among various
organs of government to ensure efficiency of administration.
4) Austin is of the view that the sovereign is the supreme law maker and
whatever he commands becomes law. But all laws do not emanate from
determinate superior. There are some customary laws that are not derived
from the command of the sovereign, but have been evolved over a long
period of time.

5) Pluralists criticise this theory on the ground that society is federal and
plural rather than monistic. State is only one out of many associations in
society. There are numerous associations and groups in society established
independently of the state.

6) It is not only impossible to exercise unlimited powers, but also

undesirable to confer unlimited powers to anybody.

7) This theory does not stand the test of practical reality.

Pluralist theory of sovereignty

The pluralists are of the view that there many associations in the society and
some of them like family and church have been in existence prior to the
origin of the state itself. All these associations are equally important for the
well-being of human beings.

Pluralist ideas can be traced back to early liberal political philosophy, and
notably to the ideas of John Locke and Montesquieu. Whereas the monistic
theory is associated with the legal aspects of sovereignty, the pluralist theory
emphasises on the sociological character of the state.

Harold Laski, in his grammar of politics, had argued for a pluralist theory of
sovereignty. Ronald dahls' concept of polyarchy is an example of pluralist
theory of sovereignty.

MAIN POINTS OF THE PLURALISTIC THEORY OF SOVEREIGNTY

● There exists many associations in a society

● These associations often predate the state.
● People have split loyalties to all these associations
● No association is more important than another.
● Pluralists abhor the over-concentration of power in the hands of the
state citing that It is harmful.

CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE PLURALISTIC THEORY OF

SOVEREIGNTY

Some of the criticisms are given below:

1. It is said that the logical conclusion of the theory of pluralism is anarchism.

2. The pluralists forget that the state is a unifying force, which cannot be
challenged by others. In order to avoid social conflict, unified power must be
given to the state.

3. The pluralistic theory of sovereignty implies superiority of the interests of

the dominant group over those of the vulnerable groups/sections of the
society.

4. This theory equates power of the state with other associations and puts
them in the same category. But the reality is that it is in the interest of
associations that more power is vested in the state.

5. Division of sovereignty among different associations is not only

impossible but also improper. Division of sovereignty in fact leads to
destruction of sovereignty.
 EXERCISES

ANSWER IN ONE OR TWO SENTENCES

1. Define state
2. What are the elements of a state
3. Divine theory of origin of state
4. Force theory of origin of state
5. Social contract theory of origin of state
6. Evolutionary theory of origin of state
7. Survival of the fittest
8. State of Nature of Hobbes
9. State of nature of Locke
10. State of nature of Rousseau
11. Leviathan
12. Two treatise of government
13. Social contract
14. Terms of contract of Thomas Hobbes
15. Terms of contract of Locke
16. Terms of contract of Rousseau
17. Feudalism
18. Monarchy
19. Oligarchy
20. Democracy
21. City states
22. Oriental empire
23. Roman Empire
24. Treaty of westphalia
25. "Social contract"
26. Noble Savage
27. Popular Sovereignty
28. Absolute sovereign of Hobbes
29. Defacto and dejure sovereignty
30. General Will
31. Real will
32. Actual will
33. Particular will
34. Kinship
35. Religion
36. Population
37. Territory
38. Government
39. Sovereignty
40. John Austin
41. Monism
42. Harold laski
43. A Grammar of Politics
44. Pluralism
45. Structures of Legitimation
46. Structures of coercion
 47. voluntary association
48. Civil society
49. NGO's
50. Social Capital
51. Economic capital
52. New Social Movements
53. Migration
54. Globalisation
55. Global village

ANSWER IN ONE PAGE

1. Give an account of divine theory of kingship

2. Give an account of state of nature of Hobbes
3. Give an account of state of nature of Locke
4. Give an account of state of nature of Rousseau
5. What are Thomas Hobbes' terms of contract. ?
6. What are the terms of Locke's contract?
7. What are the terms of Rousseau's contract?
8. Explain Popular Sovereignty?
9. Explain general will.
10. Narrate the evolutionary theory of state?
11. Explain the force theory of state.
 12. What is a state? What are its elements?
13. How the elements of state constitute a state?
14. Explain John Austin's theory of sovereignty?
15. What is the pluralist theory of sovereignty?
16. What is sovereignty? What are the different types of sovereignty?
17. What are the characteristics of sovereignty
18. What is a civil society? What are the characteristics of a successful
civil society?
19. What is the relationship between state and civil society? What are its
differences?
20. Discuss the current crisis of nation state in the global era?

ANSWER IN FOUR PAGES

1. Analyse the stages of evolution of the State.

2. Describe State and its elements?
3. Trace out the Social Contract Theory as elucidated by Hobbes in the
Leviathan?
4. Why is John Locke known as the father of liberalism?
5. Explain the correlation between general will and democracy?
6. What is the role of civil society in the progress of a state? What are its
limitations?