"The State" as Context

The State & Violence

"The State" implies continuous sovereignty over a population within a defined territory.

  • Sufficient resources to support a population beyond subsistence.
  • Sufficient population to expand beyond kin and to permit emergence of ruling elites
  • Willingness of people and tribes to lose freedom and submit to the authority of rulers.
  • Lack of incentive or ability for sections to secede or for families to disconnect and drift off.

The notion of the State comes into its own when the interaction of societies globally is considered. This interaction is not political (in the sense used here), but based on violence or the threat of violence. All States therefore require standing armies and administrative bureaucracies to levy taxes and manage the population.

The State is never more itself than when it is at war because "war is the health of the State." In a real sense, it is eternally at war. As Bourne went on to say: The State represents all the autocratic, arbitrary, coercive, belligerent forces within a social group.

Politics as an extension of ethics within a State operates effectively when the State is stable and at peace. Because many writers refer to the State as relevant to politics, it is necessary to clarify that in this investigation of politics in society, the State is taken for granted as the necessary context.

Distinctions between the Society, the Government and the State are examined further here.

The State is in Control

The State is something distinct and sui generis: it is the stable embodiment of the unity inherent in a Society and its Government. To ensure permanence, peace and stability, the State is a violence-based institution that is required to be:

outward-looking: towards violence from other States, for legitimation by other States; and to manipulate other States for its own benefit;
&
inward-looking: so as to ensure that all in Society are sufficiently supportive of the State, and the Government is under its control.
ClosedMore

The outward-looking capability depends on a diplomatic service and a military system.

The inward-looking capacity depends on a bureaucracy, ideally operating in a politically impartial fashion and staffed on a meritocratic basis (cf. Weber).

While Governments come and go, the military and bureaucracy should be mostly permanent.

The State is always empowered (or empowers itself) to take full control in an emergency and suspend the rule of law and all political activity. Government then becomes wholly subservient and societal-political processes are repressed by threats and violence if need be.

The State may change as regimes and ideologies evolve in response to crises, civil war, social movements or innovations offering strategic benefits.
ClosedMore

Revolution vs Civil War:  Revolution is an attack on the Government. If successful, the State remains but the regime or elites enjoying power changes. Civil war is a direct attack on the State because it may lead to partition or secession.

Societal (i.e. political) control of the State is difficult if not impossible. The State will simply pick off any and all leaders (by foul means) as well as mobilizing sentiment against associates and organisations involved.

Originally posted: 13-Dec-2023.