tl\r.8"*A* 5 THE $TATil.

5:

'-i'$'-{
E.i $l A {"h1: /'\iN {.}VHE?Vf, $tVV
assume neither i'"r:ii:t:
Although we'take for granted the division of the world into states, we should
nor that it always The legal and
that the st.te always was the dominant principle of political organization,
point out, political authority
wiil be. There was a world before states and, ,, ,drro.rt", of globalization like to

Before the modern state, government and politics was mainly associated
with kingdoms' p.prf.ii"".
empires, and cities. These were often governed in a personal
and highly decentralized fashion, marked by ""a
the sovereign authority borders'
iacking many of the structured and formal features of states, most notably
had many po-
to .rr1. che population of a specific territory.And while those earlier formations
horizons, being influenced oniy by thei. near
litical a.d economic Links amor-rg them, they functioned within limited
further afield'
neigirbours, and rarely being exfosed to ideas about government fionr
the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries' the use of the
The modern idea of the state emerged in Europe between
of this period. (It stems from the Ltttn statr'rs'
word sfale as a political term coming into commo, ur. to*..ds the end
,reaning.condition,or'manner of standing'. It is aiso quite different, as we
will see, fi'om the idea of a nation' with
only 19 in existence jn 1800 (most of therl
which it is often confuseci.) The number of stares g..* ,1o*1y, there
were
(mostly in Europe and the Aurericas)
in Europe and Asia), and barely 30 more had been- established by 1900
'

II decolonization saw the end

At a global level, the most active period of state formation began afterWoddWar
as
achieved independence in the 1960s and 1970s' more
of European empires: nearly 70 marnlyAfrican andAsian states
the balance of globai power changed witl'r
new states emerged with the break-up of the Soviet lJ-;ion in 1991, and
1990s.A1ong the way, debates about sovereignty'
the rise of emerging powers such as china, India, and Brazil in the
,Fd, and political systems - even if they had many core features
authoriry and self-deterrnination broadened and deepenec.,
in conrmon -a gl'eater variery'
took on
to use the preposition aboutwhen discuss-
efly The world today has about 1g0 states (Focus 4.1 explains rvhy we need
relationship with one another than they
ged ing the number of states), and they have a quite different;.i;d more complex
and economic calculations, questions are
ls at did even two generations ago.Their interactions influence domestic political
lan globalization we have seen an intensified debate
trequently raised about therr true independence, and in the rvake of
strong as they ever were, or are they sin-rply chang-
under way about their future: are states becoming weaker, are they as
'the ing in the wake of new demands and pressures?
and politics all over the world'There
)ng- whatever the answer, the state remains the basis for understanding government
ring are sub-national u'its of government, to be sure (as rve will see
in Chapter 11), and signs of governance at the global
ieve1, but almost .u.ryorr. i, a citizenof one state or another,
and when we think of government we also think of states'
are rnainly associated with states, and evetr
The institutions and processes that will be covered in the rest of this book
referring back to the governurents of
ilrve srudy what happens below the level of the state, we will still find ourselves
also in the relations betweetr a,d
states; drive a,d determine what can be done not just within their borders,but
they
; ;rmong states, both regionally and globally'

,1 "'''; l/\f,' Hli /\ I:, ['A"it'l:'r]

:ial I
concepts are more central to understanding government and
politics than the- state' and yet few concepts are
Fer,v
also so contested. It is nearly irnpossible to *""iligfully study
government and politics without at ieast a r'vorkilr''
dominant form of politicai organization' and
I

undersranding of what the state looks like, b...,rrl itis the world's 'we
'"0 systeln' experience the state when we pay taxes'
.rares collectiveiy form the building blocks of the international
borders, and take palt in choosins
1

:re subject to state 1aw, must carry a state passport in order to travel across
,r-ra the state, though, the harder it is to pir'
governnlents. The further we move ,*"y d'o- these practical signs of
I

iown.
offered by the German sociologist -\1:i:
,ral The usual benchrnark for understanding the state is the classic definition
ilreber:, who described it as .a human communiry that (successfully) claims the nronopoly
of the legitirlate Lrse oipL" '-
___l
:--al force within a given territory'(quoted in Gerth and Mills,
1948).There is more to the state than phYsical ti:'-='
context, where it is best defined as a 1ee:l '' :
:rough, and it needs to be understood rlore particuiariy in its modern
territory, and sovereigrn' (se e Fig'rr: -
:clitical entity with five main features: , gou.r.rrrr.rrt, population, legitimacy,
rvould be part of one state or a'othe r" B': :::':'
If all rvas neat and tidy, then every square rnetre of land in the world
.re rlLlilie.ous parcels of territory around the world that iack one
or more of these qualities' and catrtlor be c'-::':-1':' -
palestine, Puerto Rico,Taiwan, and'Western Sahara' Furthertnore' lirtit ':'
:'
,:rres: examples inciude Hong Kong,