A typology of state and law can be carried out according to various criteria in accordance with one direction or another. Until recently, the only one in the educational and scientific literature was the class-formation direction. In accordance with it, the typology of the state was carried out taking into account the economic system in a class society, the nature of relations (exploitative or non-exploitative). It was, therefore, about the totality of the most significant features that are characteristic of systems in one socio-economic formation.
With the development of world political and legal thought, other criteria have also been developed by which the typology of the state is carried out. So, for example, Jellinek believed that, despite the continuous transformation and development, it is possible to establish certain causative signs. They will impart to a particular state (or group) throughout its history traits that relate it to a particular type. Jellinek divided the systems into ideal and empirical.
The German lawyer considered the ideal type an imaginable state that did not exist in reality. The empirical was opposed to this system. The typology of the state in accordance with the empirical approach provides for the consideration of the system in accordance with the nature of the state union, as well as the position that the individual occupies in this system. Jellinek distinguishes between modern, medieval, Roman, Greek and ancient Eastern systems.
The above direction is considered today the most common. Based on the concept of "civilization", it represents a civilizational approach to the typology of the state. Toynbee (English historian) specified and further developed the basic concept. He understood by civilization the state of society is relatively closed and local, characterized by a common geographical, economic, cultural, psychological, religious and other factors.
Recent studies of the history of mankind have shown the one-dimensionality (single-linearity) of the formation explanation of the development and functioning of society. In this regard, such a typology of the state is not distinguished by an exhaustive, global character. Outside of this direction, there are many historical phenomena that make up the deep essence and characteristics of society.
First of all, the analysis of economic fundamentals does not take into account the multistructure that accompanies almost the entire social history since the transition of society to a civilized state. Given this fundamental fact, traditional ideas change significantly.
When using the formation approach, there is a significant narrowing of the structure of class layers and their social composition. This is because mainly antagonist classes are taken into account. Other sections of society are moved beyond the scope of study, not fitting into the traditional model.
Formational approach significantly limits the analysis of the cultural and spiritual life of society, enclosing them in the circle of those ideas, values and ideas that are aimed at reflecting the interests of the main antagonist classes.
The civilizational approach is broader and richer, making it possible to distinguish not only class opposition, but also the scope of their relationship on the basis of universal values. It becomes possible to study not only contradictions, but also the community of spiritual principles, reflected in the behavior of people in different fields of activity.
Thus, the civilizational approach allows us to represent the state not only as an instrument of political domination of the exploiting class over the exploited class. In the political system, power, among other things, is the most important factor in the social, economic, spiritual development of society, the satisfaction of various human needs, and the consolidation of people.