After scientific thought began to distinguish between such concepts as society and the state, the problem of their relationship arose. This problem is quite complex and very relevant. For example, V.M. Korelsky even believes that this is the main issue in the theory of state and law. In this article we will try to understand this problem. You will learn what is the ratio of state and society in various historical periods, as well as in the modern world.
The concepts of "society" and "state"
Society is the interaction of people who pursue private interests. These interests are very diverse, sometimes opposite, so they often collide with each other. Society as a complex system inevitably leads to the creation of a state. The fact is that there is a need to coordinate group and private interests and express on their basis the interest of the general. The characteristic of the state is as follows: it is a political organization of society that does not directly coincide with the population. It consists of the administrative apparatus (that is, officials), a system of various public authorities, as well as coercive institutions (court, police, armed forces, punitive bodies). Therefore, the state is a political form of existence of this or that society. And the content of this form is determined directly by society. However, throughout human history, the nature of the interaction between them has been difficult. We propose to consider in detail the ratio of state and society. Let's start from ancient times.
State for the common good
The state in ancient times was created by people with the goal of the common good. It was necessary to curb animal fear and selfishness, protect against various external enemies, organize production activities, ensure personal security and order. Thus, the correlation of state and society is marked during this period by the supremacy of the latter. However, gradually the bureaucratic apparatus begins to use power to satisfy not public, but group interests. Because of this, the ratio of state and society is changing. New trends are emerging, which we will now talk about.
Features of a traditional society, police state
Everything has changed with the development of caste or estate traditional society. It could be streamlined and organized using the system of violence that the state is developing. The latter is identified at this time with an organized minority of managers (in the East) or owners (in the West), the overwhelming majority without rights. At the same time, the narrow-class interest of officials was presented as universal, and the goal of developing society proclaimed the good of the state. At this time, there were various varieties of it. However, the most stable was the police state. This type of it is historically the first. For a long time it existed in the states of Western Europe and in the countries of the East. Eastern despots and European monarchies are classic examples of it. What is the characteristic of a policeman state? Let's figure it out.
The role of the monarch in the police state
In this case, the state represented by the emperor, the monarch, was a lord who conferred upon citizens some freedoms and rights. The omnipotence of his power rested on its supposedly divine origin. Society management was provided by a developed bureaucratic apparatus. He provided control over people. The system of punitive organs could suppress any disobedience to power. That was the structure of the state policeman.
The state as a social contract
The veil of sanctity from the monarch was removed in the period from the 17th to the 18th century, when there was a transition of consciousness from religious to secular. At this time, the state was no longer viewed as the result of divine providence. They began to understand him as an agreement concluded by free citizens to satisfy their generally significant needs. The structure of the state now had to be such that it could serve society. Its main goal is now declared is a completely different task. A person should be granted natural rights: to life, property, freedom, the pursuit of happiness. All these rights belong to each individual simply by virtue of his birth. The role of the state in society is to ensure them. Awareness of this led to new changes in the social structure.
Transition to the rule of law
The bourgeois revolutions that took place in the 17-18 centuries in France, the USA, and England led to the realization of this idea. The result of these changes was the transition to the rule of law (the second type) from the obsolete absolutist.
The rule of law was proclaimed in various areas of public life. Citizens and the state are equally subordinate to the constitution. The way the relationship of the individual, society and the state is law. The establishment of the separation of powers, as well as guarantees of the rights of the individual, inalienable from it, and the conditions for the free development of each individual belong to this time. Mutual responsibility before the law of the individual and the state for their actions is being proclaimed.
The emergence of civil society
However, only the emergence of a mature civil society (that is, a community of individuals who are able, independently, without government intervention, to adhere to reasonable forms of dormitory without prejudice to individuality) can make the state in practice a means of satisfying the interests of society as a whole. Social progress currently depends on its creation. There should be a developed civil society that protects and extends the freedom of each individual. Only it can prevent an excessive increase in state power. The government should be made a servant, not a master of the people. And for this you need to rethink the role of the state in society. In addition, people must recognize the need for respect for each individual. Only after this can we talk about the existence of civil society.
The correlation of civil society and the state
First of all, the former is the basis of the latter. One of the manifestations of the secondary state and the primacy of society is the priority of the values and interests of the population in relation to the values and interests of the state. This is reflected in the Constitution (in our country, for example, in Article 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation), which states that a person, his freedoms and rights are the highest value. And the state is obliged to observe and protect them.
Secondly, this correlation also manifests itself in the unity of the rule of law and civil society as a “social whole”. This whole is based on the common goals pursued by them (political, economic and others). This unity is based on the thesis of the inconceivability of the state and society without each other. Moreover, relations between them are socio-political. This means that the state is socially determined, and society is political in nature. Thus, they cannot develop and even simply exist without each other. The state and society must certainly interact with each other. Therefore, between them there is a mutual dependence in the form of mutual conditionality. The results of their functioning are intertwined in an intricate manner and affect directly each of them. Thus, both the rule of law and civil society are necessary aspects of society.
On the other hand, despite the existence of common goals, conflicts and contradictions between them are inevitable. But not only between them, but even within civil society itself. This is due to the mismatch of public and private interests. The state, for example, is not always guided in its actions by the priority of the values and interests of society. Sometimes it prefers its own geopolitical.
And sometimes supranational interests can lead his actions. For example, the accession of European countries to political and economic restrictive measures against the Russian Federation subsequently led to a reduction in production, the ruin of farms and an increase in the number of unemployed in Europe itself. We give one more example. A corrupt state apparatus sometimes neglects the interests of society. He can use his power to satisfy corporate or personal interests or the interests of some particular social groups.
In addition, the rule of law and civil society are constraining factors for each other. Lack of mutual control, as well as legal liability for decisions made and actions taken pose a great danger. Therefore, in a legal state, civil society is monitored in the forms prescribed by law. This ensures the rule of law and legitimacy. Also, in appropriate forms, civil society controls the activities of the state.
Why the rule of law did not live up to the hopes associated with it?
The proclamation of the principles of equality before the law, individual freedom in legal states did not live up to expectations. It did not stop the growth of conflict and poverty in society, and it is still far from universal prosperity. The hopes that in the conditions of a market economy these principles did not automatically lead humanity to prosperity did not come true. Why are the problems of correlation of society and state still relevant?
First of all, because the rule of law began to perform the functions of a “night watchman,” that is, it assumed responsibility for ensuring law and order, physical security and individual freedom, but did not intervene in the social and economic sphere. However, the market in which free competition was established led to the fact that wealth and resources became concentrated among the propertied classes. And for most of society, decent living conditions have not been created.
This necessitated the smoothing of inequalities through active social policies. Once again, the correlation of state, society and law was rethought. New changes followed. A social state has appeared.
Features of the social state
It meant a transition from the declarative nature of freedoms and rights to their practical guarantee. The peculiarity of the social state is that it is aimed at providing each individual with decent living conditions through the redistribution of various benefits. In this distribution, the principles of social justice are respected . The state in this case assumes responsibility for the development of society and care for it. It encourages individual responsibility, increasing production efficiency, competition, and private property. In conclusion, we note that decent conditions for human existence, as well as equal opportunities for everyone to participate in production management only in the 60s of the 20th century could really be guaranteed by the state, and even then only in developed countries.
Relevance of the problem
Society as a complex system and the state as its political organization are of great interest to many researchers. And their ratio is an important problem, the future of each of us depends on the solution of which. Therefore, many researchers are studying the question of the relationship between the state and society. The nature of their relationship is a topic that is not only of great theoretical importance, but also practical. The theory of state and law deals with these and other related issues.