Nikolo Makiavelli

All states, all powers possessing or possessing the power over people, were also an essence or republics, or the states operated autocratically.

THE STATE AS POLITICAL INSTITUTE

Reduction of borders of the power of political leadership at the expense of perfection of system of division of the authorities and expansion of borders of a civil society.

The state is the central political institute integrating a society. It concentrates in itself and realises imperious powers, possesses ability to operate and purposefully to regulate social processes. The state is an institute, organising joint life of the population in certain territory and a due social order providing there, maintenance of corresponding norms and rules of a human hostel.Long time it was identified with a society, its social organisation. And only in XVI century, thanks to N.Makiavelli's works in which the term stati (from Latin status for the first time was used - position) for a designation the term "state" has appeared the person who is distinct from a society of structure of the power, also. Political scientists thus recognise that development of the state and historically, and for a number of societies of the present passes some stages.“ Than the state is more developed, especially it is separated from a society finding during New time quality "civil" in a counterbalance “to a society political”, that is actually to the state, - the Russian scientist V.B.Pastuhov confirms. - the state mediates movement of the basic contradiction of human activity - between its public character and the individual form of realisation … Developing, the state, as well as any other social phenomenon, passes a formation stage, and then consistently acts as the phenomenon “in itself","for itself","for others”. To three last stages there correspond three basic phases of development of statehood: the state-class, the state-bureaucracy, the state-nation ”.

At the same time only classical treatments of the state are so numerous that there is a serious doubt in possibility to express all its basic signs, and also historical forms in one definition. Конфуций Platon - “fair human space” saw in the state “the big family”, and. The state named simple set of citizens (Aristotle), the union of free people for observance of the right and the general advantage (Гроций), the Supreme power concentrated in one person (or meeting) and reducing all воления citizens in a single will (Gobbs), car for suppression of one class by another (Marx), земнобожественным (Gegel) etc. Development of the scientific maintenance of a category of the state is traced by a being about XIV century, and its formation in present understanding - as sets of the institutes providing functioning of a control system by a society - has occurred only in XVIII century Some representation about available approaches to judgement of essence of the state gives them типологизация in British “to the Encyclopedia of management and a policy” (1992):

- The legal approach reduces the state to the system of the right which is based on the sovereignty of the public power (Hans Kelzen [1881-1973]);

- The historical direction investigates the state as evolution of its bodies and forms from an epoch by an epoch, considers its qualities occurring at different times through a prism of change of statuses-conditions;

- The socially-anthropological approach suggests to comprehend the state as type of the social organisation in a context of all society (Marx, Djurkgejm, Leon Djugi, Max Veber);

- The philosophical method of knowledge the state reflects special representations about this institute realised as a certain fair order of association of citizens;

- The politological approach breaks up to a considerable quantity of private concepts: pluralists (Robert Dal, David Truman) for the state consider as the main thing balance search between competing groups, the organisation of their interaction what needs high-grade division of the authorities, the strict account of roles of various social movements; корпорационисты (Phillip Shmitter) consider the state as a unit where, despite presence of the differentiated interests between large public groups and associations (corporations), the strong and centralised state keeps solving levers of the power; at неомарксистов the points of view it is separated: for Ralfa Milibanda it continues to express interests economically a ruling class and only in force majeure (for example, during war) can operate irrespective of class interests; at Nikosa Pulanzasa (1936-1979) state more is not the domination tool over a society. From its point of view, that it protects durability of capitalist manufacture even then when enters into the conflict to some segments of a class of capitalists is much more important; the opinion of Klausa Offe is reduced to that the modern state is excluded from process of accumulation and only carries out the necessary functions with use of redistribution of means

II. Signs, structure and state functions developed, since IV millenium to River Х, in process of development родоплеменных relations and isolation of separate groups of persons which gradually concentrated administrative functions in the hands, fixing them in the form of the steady imperious organisations. Depending on features of evolution of various civilisations, these universal processes of formation of the state possessed known specificity. For example, in the West features of development of material and spiritual life have connected formation of this political institute with formation of class representation of citizens, occurrence of institute of private law, gradual restriction of the power of governors by the law and the right that imposed certain restrictions on state intervention in economic activities of people and natural human rights. In the east formation of the state structures occurred against practical omnipotence of tops over a society and rigidity of forms of social consolidation of the last in the form of domination of clans, castes, communities. Such historical conditions, interfering with development of a private property and critical consciousness of societies of the given type, have essentially limited possibilities of legal regulators and potential of civil activity of the population in state formation. As a whole the state was generated as institute of the organisation of joint life. In these purposes it forms and supports norms and rules of a social hostel, supervises their performance by the power and citizens, limits influence of group and corporate structures.

The basic signs of the modern state are:

- Presence of the public power allocated from a society, materialised in specific compulsory establishments and extending on all territory of the country and people living on it;

- Compulsion of membership in the state. The person receives citizenship from the moment of a birth;

- System of taxes, taxes, the loans necessary for material maintenance of a state policy, for the maintenance of machinery of state;

- Territorial division of the population (the state unites the power and protection of all people occupying its territory);

- The sovereignty (leadership inherent in the state in the territory and independence in the international relations);

- The right (the state cannot exist without the right as the last legally makes out the government and does its legal);

- Monopoly for legal application of force, compulsion (possibility to deprive citizens of supreme values whom life and freedom is);

- Claims for society representation as whole and protection of the general interests and general welfare.

III. Display of specific properties and state functions actually always depends on the form of the organisation of the power and character of interrelations of the higher state structures with the population. The state form - the difficult public phenomenon which includes three interconnected elements: the state system form, the form of government and the form of the state mode. From the point of view of the administrative device of the state are subdivided on unitary, federal and confederative:

- In the unitary state all administrative units represent single whole parts, and state structures - parts to the uniform political system functioning on the basis of the uniform constitution and within the limits of a homogeneous right field. It is characterised by following signs: assumes existence of uniform higher executive, representative and judicial bodies; in its territory one constitution, uniform system of the legislation, one citizenship operate; components of such state do not possess the sovereignty; all external interstate relations carry out the central bodies which officially represent the country on international scene; has uniform armed forces, a management with which it is carried out by the central public authorities;

The federative state is free association of the separate states (regions, areas, the earths), each of which possesses a certain autonomy and has special relations with the centre. Now about 2 billion persons lives in 23 federations made approximately from 500 subjects, each of which can be compared to 191st politically sovereign state. Federations differ following signs:

- Presence of two levels of the management possessing the different competence of questions of representation of interests of citizens;

- The constitutional distribution executive and legislative powers of the centre and subjects of federation;

- Maintenance of representation of regional interests at federal level;

- Leadership of the federal constitution which cannot change односторонне and demands the consent of the majority of federated members;

- Presence of the arbitration (independent) court, different level resolving disputes the authorities;

- Presence of institute of the intergovernmental cooperation regulating problems, entering into joint conducting the parties.

Federations are under construction to territorial or national signs that substantially define character, the maintenance, state system structure. Territorial federations are characterised by considerable restriction of the state sovereignty of subjects of federation while national federations are characterised by more difficult state system. The basic distinction between them consists in various degree of the sovereignty of their subjects;

- The confederation represents the union of the independent states which temporarily transfer a part of the powers for realisation of the joint purposes to allied bodies. Confederates almost completely keep the internal and external sovereignty, possessing the right of free unilateral secession of the union. In confederation there is no uniform citizenship. The general governing bodies have no right of the direct taxation of citizens of the countries-participants. Versions of the state associations of confederative type concern:

- кондоминимумы, the representing political unions exercising the general administration two or great number of external territories but in such a manner that the population of these states (Andorra) has the big freedom of self-management;

- ассоциированные the states functioning on the basis of the contractual unions which can be suspended on in advance stipulated conditions (Cook islands and New Zealand, Marshall Islands and the USA);

- The contractual unions representing a political system at which the big state operates smaller, not having almost any return influence on it (Butane and India).

IV. According to the forms of government by which mean certain structure and a legal status of the supreme bodies of the government, in a political science it is accepted to allocate monarchy and republics. Monarchy (from греч. monarchia -autocracy) represent such form of a state system a source and simultaneously the higher expression of the power in which is one person inheriting conferred powers and consequently not dependent on choice of the population. They happen absolute where the higher executive and legislative functions entirely belong to individual heads of the state (Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar), and also constitutional where the power of the governor, the real mechanism of the power operates within the limits of the constitutional norms limiting powers of monarchs by functions of other authorities. Constitutional monarchies, in turn, share on дуалистические where the monarch is allocated basically executive and partially by legislative functions (Jordan, Kuwait, Bahrain, Morocco) and parliamentary where monarchs basically possess representation functions (Great Britain, Spain, Sweden).

Development in a direction of creation originally democratic, a lawful state acts as a leading world tendency which characterises life of many modern states, especially European. It has found the reflexion and in the Constitution of the Russian Federation accepted on December, 12th, 1993. The organic law has proclaimed our country democratic, legal, social and a federative state with the republican form of government. One more global tendency can be formulated as democratic self-restriction of the sovereignty of the states. The third of them finds out itself in government decentralisation, the fourth - looks through in integration of the economic and political life which are especially visually shown by the European union.