POLITICAL SCIENCE

ASSIGNMENT
TOPIC- THEORIES OF STATE

SESSION- 2020-21

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

Dr. Sneh Lata, Kavyanjali Singh

Guest Faculty, B.A. LL.B. (Hons.)

Faculty of Law Semester 1, Section: B

Lucknow University, Roll number: 200013015089

,
INDEX
1
S.NO. TOPIC NAME PAGE NUMBER
1. Cover page. 1
2. Index. 2
3. Acknowledgement. 3
4. Introduction: What is a State 4
5. Elements of State 5
6. Theories of State 6
7. Divine Theory 7
8. Social Contract Theory 7
9. Force Theory 8
10. Development of Force theory 10
11. Force Theory in Modern Times 10
12. Criticism of Force Theory 12
13. Importance of Force Theory 14
14. Bibliography 15

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The success and final outcome of this project required a lot of guidance and
assistance from many people and I am extremely privileged to have got this all
along the completion of my project. All that I have done is only due to such
supervision and assistance and I would not forget to thank them. This work would
not have been possible without the support and constant help of Dr. Sneh Lata,
Guest Faculty, Faculty of Law, University of Lucknow.

I am especially indebted to, Prof. C.P.Singh, Honorable Dean of Law Faculty,

University of Lucknow, who have been supportive of my career goals and who
worked actively to provide me with the protected academic time to pursue those
goals. I am grateful to all of those with whom I have had the pleasure to work
during this. I am thankful to and fortunate enough to get constant encouragement,
support and guidance from all my friends who helped me in successfully
completing this project work. Also, I would like to extend my sincere esteems to
all family members for their timely support.

3
 THEORIES OF STATE
INTRODUCTION

WHAT IS A STATE? State is a political organization of society, or the body

politic, or, more narrowly, the institutions of government. The state is a form of
human association distinguished from other social groups by its purpose,
the establishment of order and security; its methods, the laws and their
enforcement; its territory, the area of jurisdiction or geographic boundaries; and
finally by its sovereignty. A state is a polity under a system of governance. A
widely used definition from the German sociologist “Max Weber” is that a
"STATE" is a polity that maintains a monopoly on the legitimate use of
violence, although other definitions are not uncommon.

Some states are sovereign (known as sovereign states), while others are subject to

external sovereignty or hegemony, wherein supreme authority lies in another state.

In a federal union, the term "state" is sometimes used to refer to the federated

polities that make up the federation. (Other terms that are used in such federal
systems may include “province”, “region” or other terms.) In international law,
such entities are not considered states, it is a term that relates only to the national
entity, commonly referred to as the country or nation.

Most of the human population has existed within a state system for millennia;
however, for most of prehistory people lived in stateless societies. The first states
arose about 5,500 years ago in conjunction with rapid growth of cities, invention

4
of writing and codification of new forms of religion. Over time, a variety of
different forms developed, employing a variety of justifications for their existence
(such as divine right, the theory of the social contract, etc.). Today, the
modern nation state is the predominant form of state to which people are subject.

ELEMENTS OF THE STATE: There are four elements of State, they are as
follows-

1. Population: A considerable group of human beings.

2. Territory: A definite area of earth’s surface upon which the population

permanently resides.

3. Government: A political organization through which the will or law of the state
is expressed and administrated.

4. Sovereignty: the supremacy of the state over all individuals and associations
within it and the independence of the state from external control.

5
THEORIES OF ORIGION OF STATE: Political thinkers have attempted to
explain the origin of the state in various ways. When, where and how the state
came into existence have not been recorded anywhere in history. Therefore, the
political thinkers were compelled to adopt various hypotheses, many of which are
now discredited in the light of modern knowledge. Among the many theories
which are concerned with the origin of the state the following are explained in this
chapter. There have been various attempts to explain state by various philosophers
and they have explained it in different ways. Some famous and prominent theories
of origin of State are-

1. The Theory of Divine origin

2.  Social Contract Theory

3.  Matriarchal and Patriarchal Theory

4.  Force Theory

5.  Evolutionary Theory

6
THEORY OF DIVINE ORIGIN: This is the oldest theory concerned in the
origin of state. According to this theory, state is established and governed by God
himself by agent or vicegerent or vicar of God. The chief exponents of this theory
in early times were the Jews and supporters were the early church father. It
believes that “Kings are he breathing images of God upon the earth,” People have
no right to rebel against the King, if so it is against the God himself.

→the Divine Theory believed that King was

the representation of God.

SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY: In moral and political philosophy, the social

contract is a theory or model, originating during the age of enlightenment, typically
addresses the questions of the origin of society and the legitimacy of the authority
of the state over the individual. Social contract arguments typically hypothesize
that, individuals have consented, either openly or tacitly, to surrender some of their
freedoms and submit to the authority of the ruler or magistrate, in exchange for
protection of their remaining rights. The question of the relation between natural
and legal rights, therefore, is often an aspect of social contract theory. According to
this theory, state is the result of a deliberate and voluntary contract of primitive
man emerging from a state of nature. Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau are the main
supporters of this theory. State of nature was even pre-social. According to

7
Hobbes, it was solitary, nasty and brutish. State came into being by the social
contract with the surrender of power to absolute monarchy.

→Social Contract Theory

FORCE THEORY: According to this theory, state is the result of the

superior physical force and subjugation of the weaker section by the stronger.
Physical strength was able to overcome fellow men and to exercise authority over
them. Some superior tribes and clans also did so. Then state came into being
through physical coercion and compulsion, according to this theory.

As per this theory, “war begets the state”. The same view is expressed by Hume,
Oppenheim, Jenks-Bernhardy and Trietschke are the exponents of force theory.
This theory only emphasizes force and accepts that state is the product of coercion
and force only. But force must have been an important factor in the evolution of
state but to think it as an only one factor is a mistake. Several other factors, such
as, voluntary amalgamation as by force and conquest, as a result of conciliation

8
and agreement, by one another’s cooperation and other peaceful agencies and
efforts, etc.

According to Leacock " The beginning of the state are to be sought in the capture
and enslavement of man by man, in the conquest and subjugation of weaker tribes
and generally in the self-seeking domination acquired by superior physical force "

Openheimer defines State as- “The state is a class organization, born by war”.
According to Maotse tung- “The power comes out of the barrel of the gun”

→Force theory believes in war and dominance as the root cause of

start of State.

Force is an important element for both internal and external security of the state
but it is not only the cause for the origination of the state. Might only cannot go
ahead permanently. It should follow its path with a positive weapon of right. Force
is a physical power while right is a mental power, both should go together in the
origination of the state, of course there was strong arms but only with the support
of other elements according to MacIver. In the words of MacIver, “Force along
never holds a group together.” So force is one of the components for the state
origination but not whole sole cause.

9
→Greeks fighting to establish power

Development of Force Theory:  Sophist thinkers of ancient Greece supported

the force theory. They asserted that, ‘Justice is nothing but benefit of the powerful’.
Struggle between church and state in medieval Europe proves the fact that state
was originated by brutal force, whereas church is the best source of spiritual
power. According to Individualists also, the basis of state is Force. Anarchists
consider state as an unnecessary vice and consider force as its base. According to
Karl Marx, state is based on force. Rousseau also accepted that state is originated
through war. According to Aietreya Brahaman scripture, king originated from war
between Gods and demons. Alexander expanded his state only through force.
Presently, making of power groups in the world on the basis of economic,
materialistic and military powers, monopoly of U.S.A., all these are examples of
force. Supporters of force theory in the present times include Plow-in, Jacques,
Ward, Oppenheimer and Ratzel, etc.

Modern Times: In modern times the Individualists owned the theory to protect
individual liberty against government encroachment. They characteristic the State
as a necessary evil and argued that the State should leave the individual alone,
laissez-faire, and should not interfere in what he does, except for the maintenance
of internal peace and external security. The Individualists base their arguments on
10
the principle of survival of the fittest and prove that only the strong who survive
and the weak go to the wall. On the other hand, the Socialists hold that the State is
the outcome of aggressive exploitation of the weaker by, the stronger, the latter
constituting the propertied class who had ever staffed administration and directed
the government’s machinery to their own benefit. The existing industrial
organization system, it is maintained, hinges upon force because a part of the
community has succeeded in defrauding their fellows of the just reward of their
labor. They further argue that force is the origin of civil society. The government
represents merely the coercive organization that tends to curb and exploit the
working class to maintain the propertied class’s privileged position. Socialism’s
theory is a revolt against the State, as it is the product of force and power is its
justification. Karl Marx, accordingly, concluded that the State must ultimately
‘wither away.’

During recent times the theory of Force was a favorite theme of political
philosophy with German writers. Imbued with the desire to make their country a
Greater Germany, and at the peak of its glory, they lavished praise on force and
considered its indiscriminate use as the most important factor for the nation’s
solidarity. Treitschke said that “the State is the public power of offense and
defense, the first task of which is the making of war and the administration of
justice,” War, he said, consolidates a people, reveals to each individual his relative
unimportant, causes factional hostilities to disappear, and intensifies patriotism and
national idealism. “The grandeur of history,” he further maintained, “lies in the
perpetual conflict of nations” and “the appeal to am will be valid until the end of
history.” General Von Bernhardt held might as “the supreme right, and the
arbitrament of war decides the dispute as to what is right. War gives a biologically
just decision since the decision rests on the very nature of things.” Nietzsche

11
preached the doctrine of the will to power and the superman. The individual who
can command the highest admiration, according to this doctrine, is the strong man
who compels other men to act in fulfillment of his will. While glorifying man’s
masterly virtues, Nietzsche says that a truly moral person has no place for the
vulgar and slavish virtue of humility, self-sacrifice, pity, gentleness. Hitler and
Mussolini put into real practice the doctrines of these writers. They regarded force
as the normal means for maintaining a nation’s prestige, cultural influence,
commercial supremacy in the world, and holding the allegiance of citizens at
home. This general doctrine of political authoritarianism, both with Hitler and
Mussolini, became a creed of dominance by intimidation militancy in international
relations, and forcible suppression of political dissent in domestic government.
Hitler and Mussolini pushed humanity into another World War, causing
unprecedented misery, havoc, and destruction. The United Nations Organization
was established after the War to save the succeeding generations from the scourge
of war. Yet, there is no end to the war. There is a show of might everywhere and a
never-ending race between all powers, big and small, to invent and manufacture
deadly weapons of warfare, some to defend, others to offend.

CRITICISM OF FORCE THEORY: Force theory has been criticized on

the following basis:

1. Force is helping element in making of state, not the deciding element. Apart
from force, blood relations, religion, and political awareness also contributed to the
development and origin of state. 

2. This theory accepts that state developed only through force. Establishment of
Federal system in many countries proves that state can be expanded and developed
through co–operation.

12
3. Basis of state had not been brutal force only. Wherever this force had an upper
hand, there the kings were destroyed. Basis of states of Hitler and Mussolini was
brutal force only, thus they were destroyed soon.

4. Real and permanent basis of state is moral force, not brutal force, because states
came into existence for the welfare of people.

5. This theory believes in war and revolutions, thus, it is against democracy.

6. This theory promotes extreme nationalism and colonialism.

7. This has been rightly pointed out by Stephen Butler Leacock- “The theory errs
in magnifying what has been only one factor in the evolution of society into the
sole controlling force.” A state may be created by force temporarily. But to
perpetuate it something more is essential. The theory of force runs counters 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. The theory of force is inconsistent
with individual liberty. The moment one accepts that the basis of a state is force,
how can one expect liberty there? The theory of force may be temporarily the order
of the day in despotism as against democracy. 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 human world. If force was the
determining factor, how could Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violence triumph over the
brute force of the British Imperialists?

Lastly, the force theory is to be discarded because political consciousness rather

than force is the origin of the state. Without political consciousness of the people
the state cannot be created. This is so because man is by nature a political animal.
It is that political conscience that lay deep in the foundation of the state. We may
13
conclude with the words of R. N. Gilchrist- “The state, government and indeed all
institutions are the result of man’s consciousness, the creation of which have
arisen from his appreciation of a moral end.”

IMPORTANCE OF FORCE THEORY:  Force theory has its own

importance despite having many shortcomings. This theory has explained in detail
the contribution of force in the development of state. Police is compulsory as a
symbol of force to maintain internal peace and harmony. State cannot be protected
from foreign attacks without armed military forces. Aforesaid analysis makes it
clear that force theory contributed a lot in the origin of state. The supporters of the
theory defend the use of force on the doctrine of survival of the fittest. It means
that might is right and those who are physically weak should go to the wall. It is
clearly a wrong application of the theory. It should be used to explain the evolution
of animal life. Its use to explain the existence and end of the state is evidently
unscientific and irrational.

14
 BIB
LIOGRAPHY
1. Heywood, Andrew (2007). Politics, Third edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan. Hoffman, John and Paul Graham (2009).
2. Introduction to Political Theory. 2nd edition. Edinburgh: Pearson Education
Ltd.
3. The Polis-State Definition and Origin: M. B. Sakellariou
4. Introduction to Political Theory: O.P. Gauba
5. https://www.iilsindia.com/
6. https://www.politicalscienceview.com/
7. www.wikipedia.org

15