International Yoga Day 2024: History, significance, theme of the day

A state is a politically organised and sovereign entity that exercises authority over a defined territory and its population. It is a fundamental unit of governance and represents a centralised system of power and control. States have the ability to create and enforce laws, maintain order, provide public services, and engage in relationships with other states. They typically have a government that has the authority to make decisions on behalf of the state and its citizens. The concept of a state encompasses the elements of a defined territory, a permanent population, a government, and the ability to engage in international relations. States play a crucial role in shaping the political, social, and economic landscapes of societies around the world.

 

Understanding the State: Concepts and Definitions

The Varied Meanings of "State"

The term "state" holds different meanings in various contexts. In Hindi, the word "Rajya" is used to refer to countries like France, Britain, the United States of America, China, India, etc. Additionally, provinces within countries, such as New York and California in the United States of America, are also referred to as "states." According to the constitution of independent India, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Bengal, Kashmir, etc. are recognised as states. Furthermore, many landowners, known as zamindars and talukdars, refer to their properties as "Rajya" and "Raj." For instance, Balrampur and Mahmudabad, although zamindaris, were referred to as states, with their lords identifying themselves as Maharajas and Rajas.

Historical Context: Feudal Systems and British Rule

During the feudal system of the medieval period, not only the territories governed by Rajadhirajas were called states, but also the territories occupied by feudal kings and thakurs were referred to as states. Even during British rule, places like Jaipur and Jodhpur were considered states under Rajputana. The territories of various Ravrajas under the Maharaja of Jaipur were also considered states. This diverse usage of the term "state" was not only present in Hindi but also in English.

Understanding the State in Political Science

Political science uses the term "state" or "statehood" to refer to a specific concept. According to political science, a state must possess sovereignty and supremacy. It cannot be under the control of external authorities, and it must exercise complete dominion over its territory. While New York, Kashmir, Bihar, etc. are commonly referred to as "states," the political science perspective differentiates the concept of the state from these examples. Political science recognises countries like France, China, and India as true "states" because they exhibit sovereignty.

The Importance of Studying the Concept of the State

In the previous article, you learned about the nature and scope of political science as a subject. Political science systematically examines the state along with other related issues. While attempts have been made to expand the study of the state into a comprehensive function known as the political system, it is crucial to emphasise the study of the concept of the state and its associations as the fundamental subject matter.

The concept of a state encompasses a sovereign political entity with specific characteristics and functions. It distinguishes itself from other social groups through its purpose of establishing order and security, the methods it employs, such as laws and enforcement, its territorial jurisdiction, and its sovereignty.

At its core, the state relies on the agreement among individuals regarding the resolution of disputes through the enactment and enforcement of laws. In some cases, the term "state" is also used to refer to political units within a larger sovereign entity, such as federal unions in countries like the United States, Australia, Nigeria, Mexico, and Brazil.

 

Understanding the State: Definition and Importance

The quest for the definition of state

Political science revolves around the study of the state, aiming to explore all aspects related to it. The state represents the highest political unit in the modern era. However, the question arises: What exactly is a state? How do we define and understand it?

Various scholars have provided definitions of the state, but there is no universal consensus on its precise definition. Different approaches have been taken to determine the nature of the state, including word derivation, elemental analysis, legal perspectives, objectives and functions, perception of power, multi-community considerations, and origin.

Defining the State in Political Science

Political science primarily focuses on the study of the state and its origins. While the term "state" is used in multiple senses, political science employs it accurately based on four essential elements: territory, population, government, and sovereignty. Countries like India, China, the Soviet Union, America, and England are examples of states.

Machiavelli and the Emergence of the State Concept

Niccolo Machiavelli was among the first to introduce the idea of the state. According to Machiavelli, "all powers that hold authority over the public, be it a monarchy or a democratic state," Many scholars have since expressed their own perspectives on the state, resulting in diverse definitions. Schulze aptly remarked, "There are as many definitions of the term state as there are writers of political science."

The central role of the state in political science

The state occupies a crucial and central position in the study of political science. When exploring the principles of political science, it becomes evident that they revolve around two foundational pillars: the individual and the state. Garner stated that political science begins and ends with the state itself.

Recognising the Importance of the State

The state is considered the initial step towards achieving an organised society and its objectives. Numerous political thinkers have emphasised the significance of the state, viewing it as the foundation at various levels. Aristotle believed that man is not only a social being but also a political being, necessitating living within society and the state due to the vital connection between basic human needs and the state. Indian political thinker Manu regarded the state as the cornerstone of an orderly society, created by God to alleviate anarchy, unrest, injustice, and disorder. Aristotle stated, "The state exists for the sake of a good life and will be dissolved when it ceases to be needed."

Various Perspectives on the Definition of the State

Scholars in the field of political science hold different views on the nature of the state, leading to diverse definitions. Each thinker approaches the concept of the state based on their own beliefs, resulting in varying interpretations. Consequently, no universal or eternal definition of the state exists. Schulze rightly remarked that the term "state" has as many definitions as there are writers in the field of politics. Let's explore the definitions of the state provided by various scholars:

Aristotle: According to Aristotle, the state is an association of families and villages whose purpose is to achieve a full, self-sufficient life, encompassing happiness and human dignity.

Holland: Holland defines the state as a group or community of human beings generally settled on a territory where the will of a specific category or majority leads to action compared to others.

Cicero: Cicero views the state as a society where individuals are bound together for mutual benefit based on a common sense of goodness.

Laxey: Laxey describes the state as a territorial society divided into rulers and the ruled, claiming sovereignty over other institutions within its specific geographical area.

Phillimore: According to Phillimore, the state is a community of people possessing a definite territory, bound by common laws, habits, and customs. It exercises independent control over all individuals and things within its limits through an organised government. The state exercises sovereignty, has the right to engage in war and treaties with other nations, and establishes international relations.

Garner: Garner defines the state as an organisation of individuals, more or less in number, permanently residing in a certain territory. It is completely or almost completely independent from external control and has an organised government. Its ideals are naturally followed by a vast community of citizens.

Gilchrist states that the term "state refers to a certain territory where people are organised under one government. This government expresses the sovereignty of its people in internal affairs and maintains independence from other governments in external affairs.

Willoughby: Willoughby defines the state as a legal person or form that possesses the right to make laws.

Wilson: According to Wilson, the state is a community of people organised under specific rules or laws within a defined territory.

Plato: Plato considers the state to be the universal form of man.

Karl Marx: Karl Marx sees the state as a mere machine through which one class exploits another.

Engels: Engels describes the state as simply a committee of the bourgeoisie.

Treitske: According to Treitske, the state is a force that should be revered.

Beteille: Beteille defines the state as a form of human society or political institution that seeks the common good through the combined exercise of its powers.

Gandhiji: Gandhiji states that the state is the representative of violence in a centrally organised form.

Bodan: Bodan views the state as a community of families and objects, collectively governed by the best power and reason.

McIver: McIver defines the state as a community that acts according to the laws established by its government. It is allowed to use force and maintain social order within a defined territory, considering generally accepted external conditions.

These diverse definitions reflect the complexity and multifaceted nature of the state within the field of political science. 

Historical Conceptions: Greek and Roman precedents

The origins of the Western state can be traced back to ancient Greece. Philosophers like Plato and Aristotle envisioned the polis, or city-state, as an ideal form of association where the religious, cultural, political, and economic needs of the entire community could be met. Aristotle saw the city-state, characterised by self-sufficiency, as instrumental in fostering moral development in individuals.

The Greek idea aligns more closely with the modern concept of a nation, where a population residing in a defined territory shares a common language, culture, and history. On the other hand, the Roman res publica, or commonwealth, bears resemblance to the modern understanding of a state. It was a legal system governing all Roman citizens, safeguarding their rights, and defining their responsibilities. Following the decline of the Roman system, Europe witnessed a prolonged struggle among feudal lords for authority, order, and security.

Machiavelli and Bodin: The Concept of the Modern State

Machiavelli and Bodin

In the 16th century, the modern concept of the state began to take shape through the influential works of Niccol Machiavelli of Italy and Jean Bodin of France.

Machiavelli, in his book "The Prince," emphasised the paramount importance of a stable government, disregarding moral considerations and instead focusing on the ruler's strength, vitality, courage, and independence.

Meanwhile, Bodin believed that power alone was insufficient to establish sovereignty; rulers must rule ethically to ensure permanence, and there must be a mechanism for succession. Bodin's ideas laid the groundwork for the 17th-century doctrine known as the Divine Right of Kings, which propelled monarchy to prominence in Europe.

These views set the stage for later thinkers such as John Locke in England and Jean-Jacques Rousseau in France to question and re-evaluate the origins and purposes of the state.

Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau: Human Nature and the State

Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau explored the relationship between human nature and the state, expanding on the ideas of their predecessors.

Hobbes argued that the "natural state" of humanity is characterised by self-interest and competition, necessitating the establishment of a state to avoid the destructive consequences of interaction.

Locke, on the other hand, presented a more optimistic view, suggesting that the state arises from the need to protect vested rights. According to Locke, individuals enter into a social contract where they agree not to violate each other's natural rights in return for securing their freedom within a specified area.

Rousseau's approach was even more positive, viewing the state as an expression of the general will of the governed. He proposed that the authority of the state emanates from the nation itself and that law is an expression of the collective will of the people. Influenced by Plato, Rousseau saw the state as the platform for the moral development of humanity. Despite the corrupting influences of civilization, Rousseau believed that man had innate goodness and could strive for the common good. According to him, a healthy state exists when the pursuit of individual interests gives way to the recognition of general welfare as the ultimate goal.

Hegel: The State as the Culmination of Moral Action

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, a prominent 19th-century German philosopher, viewed the state in a unique light. He saw freedom not merely as an individual's right but as a product of human reason. According to Hegel, freedom was not the ability to do as one pleased but the alignment with a universal will towards the well-being of all. When individuals acted morally, conflicts ceased and their goals aligned.

By subordinating themselves to the state, individuals could achieve a synthesis of family values and economic needs. For Hegel, the state represented the pinnacle of moral action, where freedom of choice resulted in the unity of rational will and all segments of society thrived within the overall health of the whole. However, Hegel maintained a fascination with the power of national aspirations and did not share Immanuel Kant's vision of a league of nations for perpetual peace.

 

Bentham and Marx: The State as a Mechanism and Apparatus

In the 19th century, English utilitarians like Jeremy Bentham viewed the state as an artificial means to create unity of interest and maintain stability. Their benign yet mechanistic perspective set the stage for early communist thinkers like Karl Marx, who considered the state an "apparatus of oppression" controlled by a ruling class seeking to uphold economic supremacy.

Marx and Friedrich Engels proposed in The Communist Manifesto that true freedom and contentment could only be achieved by replacing the government with a "dictatorship of the proletariat," leading to the eventual "withering away of the state" and the establishment of a classless society based on equitable distribution of goods and property.

Contemporary Views: From Anarchy to the Welfare State

In the 20th and early 21st centuries, the concept of the state encompassed a range of ideas. Anarchism argued that the state was unnecessary and even harmful due to its reliance on coercion. On the other hand, the welfare state held the belief that the government was responsible for ensuring the well-being and survival of its citizens, guaranteeing subsistence for those in need.

Post-World War Perspectives: Internationalism and Unification

In the aftermath of the devastating world wars, theories of internationalism emerged. Thinkers like Hans Kelsen and Oscar Ichazo proposed alternative views of the state. Kelsen viewed the state as a centralised legal order, not inherently sovereign but rather defined by its interaction with the wider world. Ichazo envisioned a new kind of state where the universal qualities shared by all individuals formed the basis for unification, with society functioning as a cohesive organism.

Essential elements of the state

Scholars have put forth various perspectives regarding the essential elements of the state. Different thinkers have expressed diverse views on this matter. Sijwick identified three essential elements: people, territory, and government. Bluntsley expanded this to include territory, people, unity, and organisation. Gettil also emphasised four elements: people, state government, territory, and sovereignty. Among these perspectives, Garner's views have gained significant recognition. According to Garner, the state consists of the following four essential elements:

1-Population - A state must have a population. It is inconceivable to have a state without people. Therefore, a state can only be recognised as such when it has a certain number of inhabitants. The ideal population of a state has been a subject of debate. Plato suggested a population of 5040 in his work "Republic," while Aristotle emphasised that the population should neither be too large nor too small. The population should be manageable and allow for the state's maintenance and protection.

3-Defined Territory: A definite territory is essential for the existence of a state. Like a population, a state cannot be imagined without a specific territory. As Bluntschli noted, "The basis of the power of the state is the population; its physical basis is the land." A state requires a fixed territory or area. Without a definite plot of land, a state cannot exist. The boundaries of the state must be established. The importance of land goes beyond the physical aspect; it also nurtures feelings of patriotism, unity, and brotherhood among the people.

3-Well-Organised Government -The presence of a well-organised government is the third crucial element of the state. The government is often referred to as the soul of the state. A group of people residing in a particular territory cannot be considered a state unless there is a functioning government. The government serves as an institution that issues orders that every individual must obey. It represents the will and sentiments of the state. The government exercises the powers and functions of the state, such as making and enforcing laws and administering punishment to violators.

Gettil argued that in the absence of a well-organised government, the population would become an uncontrollable, anarchic mass, rendering collective work impossible.

4-Sovereignty -Sovereignty is the defining characteristic of a state. Even if the other three elements are present in a society, without sovereignty, it cannot be recognised as a state. While there may be agencies responsible for enforcing rules, sovereignty is unique to the state and an essential component of it. Prior to gaining independence, India had a population, a defined territory, and a government, but due to its lack of sovereignty, it was not considered a state.

Sovereignty refers to the state's complete internal and external autonomy. Internally, there should be no individuals or communities within the state that do not obey its commands. Externally, the state possesses the authority to determine its foreign relations and maintain complete independence. However, if a state voluntarily accepts any restrictions, its sovereignty is not compromised.

While scholars such as Hobbes, Bentham, Austin, and Hegel have emphasised the significance of state sovereignty, pluralistic thinkers like Laski and Cole have challenged the notion. Laski argued that the state has never been, is not, and will never be sovereign in the true sense. He considered the state an institution among others, questioning its supreme authority.

Conclusion

According to the field of political science, the state must possess the aforementioned four elements. In the absence of these elements, an entity cannot be recognised as a state. When considering the elements of a state, two questions often arise:

1. What is the ideal population size for a state?
2. How should the state exercise its sovereignty? 

These questions highlight ongoing debates and considerations within the study of political science. The ideal population size of a state depends on various factors, including the size and conditions of the country as well as its ability to sustain and govern its population effectively.

Regarding sovereignty, the concept remains a subject of discussion among scholars. While some view sovereignty as a vital aspect and the soul of the state, others challenge its absolute nature, emphasising the influence of external factors and international relations on state sovereignty. These debates contribute to a deeper understanding of the complex dynamics and evolving nature of the state. 

In conclusion, the essential elements of the state, including population, defined territory, well-organised government, and sovereignty, provide a framework for analysing and conceptualising the nature of the state. However, it is important to recognise that these elements are subject to ongoing interpretations, discussions, and revisions as scholars continue to explore and analyse the complexities of political systems and governance.

Are the units of the Union the States? 

The Units of the Union: States within a Federal System

In federal systems of government, such as India and the United States of America, the Union is composed of its constituent units. In the Indian Constitution, the term "state" is used to refer to the units of the Indian Union, such as Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, and others. Similarly, under the Constitution of the United States of America, the units of the federation possess certain elements that define a state, including territory, population, and government. However, these units lack sovereign power and are subject to the control of the central government. They do not possess the authority to engage in external relations. Therefore, due to the absence of sovereign power, they cannot be referred to as states.

Is the United Nations a state? 

The United Nations: A Global Legal Body

The question often arises whether the United Nations can be considered a state. According to Aupenhein, the United Nations is a legal entity representing the international community. It possesses a distinct legal personality separate from its member states. Just as individual states perform various functions under their own names, organisations and agencies operate under the auspices of the United Nations. Diplomatic representatives of the United Nations enjoy certain immunities and privileges in member countries, similar to those afforded to state representatives. Additionally, the United Nations has its own unique flag, further reinforcing its distinct identity.

 Analysing the decisive elements of a state, Oppenheim suggests that, to some extent, the United Nations encompasses these elements. The United Nations works for the betterment of all people worldwide, and its member nations' territories can be considered its operational space. The administrative structure of the United Nations can be seen as its form of governance.

However, it is important to acknowledge that the recommendations issued by the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council, for example, do not hold the same weight as sovereign orders for states. It is common for various states to disregard or disobey these recommendations. Therefore, the United Nations cannot be classified as a state.

Differences between state and society

State and Society: Distinguishing Political and Social Systems

The state is a political system, while society is a social system. Society encompasses individuals who live in mutual social bonds, whereas the state functions as an instrument of society to establish peace and order within it.

Sovereignty and Penalties: The State's Authority 

Sovereignty resides within the state rather than society. The state possesses the power to impose penalties for violations of its laws.

Chronology of Formation: Society and State 

Society precedes the state in terms of historical development. Even before organised civilization, when humans lived as nomads and in tribes, societies existed. The concept of the state emerged later, as humans learned to live in a civilised and organised manner.

Political and Moral Aspects: State and Society 

The state is concerned with the political aspect of human life, while society encompasses the moral aspect.

Scope: State and Society 

The state is a necessary entity, whereas society can be local or international in scope.

State and government

Understanding the Relationship Between State and Government

In everyday conversation, the terms "state" and "government" are often used interchangeably. An interesting anecdote involving a French farmer illustrates this tendency. When the farmer wanted to enter the Lok Sabha building, he expressed his desire to meet the "state." This inclination to perceive the state and government as synonymous extends beyond the general public and can be observed among many political thinkers as well. For instance, Croce argues that, from a political perspective, the state and government are one and the same. 

Similarly, G. D. H. Cole, G. Sumner, H. G. Keller, and Laski share the view that the state is merely a system of governance for a community. Laski even suggests that the theoretical distinction between the state and government is of little practical significance, although it may be of academic interest. The functions typically associated with the state are essentially functions of governance. Despite this tendency to equate the state with government, it is important to grasp their academic distinction. 

Differences between state and government

Nature: Abstract vs. Concrete 

The state is an intangible concept, whereas the government is a tangible and concrete apparatus comprising a specific number of individuals.

Agent and Will: The State's Expression through Government 

The government acts as the agent of the state through which the state's will is expressed. The government works towards achieving the goals of the state and derives its powers from the state, primarily from the public.

Relationship: Part and Whole 

The government is a component of the state. It is one of the four essential elements of the state, while the state itself is a comprehensive concept.

Royal Power: The State's Authority

The state possesses royal power, whereas the government does not. Royal power is a vital aspect of the state, but in a democracy, the source of government power is considered to be the public.

Changeability: Government vs. State

Governments can change, while the state remains permanent and constant. The state comes into existence when all four essential elements are present, but governments can undergo various forms of change through elections, military revolutions, rebellions, invasions, and other factors. However, even with changes in government, the state's existence remains unaffected.

It is crucial to recognise the distinction between the state and government, as they represent different aspects of governance and political organisation. While the state embodies the broader concept of a political entity, government refers to the specific institutions and individuals responsible for carrying out governance functions on behalf of the state.

Authority and Relations in the State: The Relationship Between Rights and the State

Theories of Rights: Natural and Legal Perspectives

The relationship between rights and the state can be understood through two contrasting theories. The theory of natural rights suggests that rights exist prior to the state, originating from nature itself. In this view, rights are inherent and innate to humans. On the other hand, the legal theory of rights posits that rights are created by the state. According to this perspective, citizens can only enjoy rights granted to them by the state. Actions or behaviours not permitted by state law cannot be considered rights.

The Complex Reality: Rights and the State

While there is merit in the theory of natural rights, it cannot be universally accepted. It is true that not all rights are created by the state. However, it is also incorrect to assume that rights exist independently of the state or beyond the state's control. Rights can only be realised within a civilised society, as there is no separate entity called rights detached from society. In primitive societies, individuals had powers rather than rights, with physical force as the basis for those powers. Similarly, animals in the wild possess powers, not rights.

Consider the right to life as an example. Individuals can exercise this right because they have the backing of the state's power. Without the state's authority, there is a risk that some individuals may violate this right. In a civilised society, if someone violates this right, the state intervenes and punishes the offender. Therefore, we cannot claim that the state is the sole creator of all rights. 

However, we can assert that the state plays a crucial role in protecting rights. As Wilde stated, "Laws do not create rights but accept and protect them." This emphasises that the observation and enforcement of rights are only possible within the legal framework established by the state.

 

People are also asking

Q-What is the definition and meaning of a state?

Answer: A state can be defined as a politically organised territorial entity that exercises sovereignty over a defined geographic area and its population. It is a centralised authority that possesses the power to make and enforce laws, maintain order, and represent the interests of its citizens in domestic and international affairs. States are characterised by having a government, a territory with recognised borders, a permanent population, and the ability to engage in relations with other states.

Question: What are the four types of states?

Answer: The four types of states are as follows: 

1-Unitary State: In a unitary state, political power is concentrated at the central government level, and local or regional governments derive their authority from the central government. Examples of unitary states include France, Japan, and Italy.
 

2-Federal State: A federal state is characterized by the division of power between the central government and regional or state governments. Both levels of government possess independent authority in their respective spheres. Examples of federal states include the United States, Canada, and Germany.

3-Confederal State: A confederal state is a union of independent states or regions that come together voluntarily to address common issues while maintaining a significant degree of sovereignty. The central authority in a confederal state is usually weak, with most power retained by the constituent states. The European Union (EU) is an example of a confederal arrangement.

4-Devolved State: A devolved state is one where the central government grants certain powers and responsibilities to subnational entities, such as regions or provinces while retaining overall sovereignty. The United Kingdom, with its devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, is an example of a devolved state.

Question: Can you provide an example of a state?

Answer: One example of a state is the United States of America. The United States is a federal state where political power is shared between the federal government and individual states. It has a central government based in Washington, D.C., which handles national issues such as defense and foreign policy, while individual states, such as California, Texas, and New York, have their own governments that manage local affairs like education and transportation. The United States is characterized by a system of checks and balances between the federal government and the states, ensuring a division of powers and responsibilities.