Correlation of the state and society. Theory of Government and Rights

After scientific thought began to distinguish between concepts such as society and the state, the problem of their correlation arose. This problem is rather complicated 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 find out what is the correlation of the state and society in different 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 they are opposite, therefore they often collide with each other. Society as a complex system inevitably leads to the creation of the state. The fact is that there is a need to harmonize group and private interests and express, on their basis, the interest of the universal. The characteristic of the state is the following: it is a political organization of a society that does not coincide directly with the population. It consists of the administrative apparatus (that is, officials), the system of various institutions of state power, as well as compulsory institutions (court, police, armed forces, punitive organs). Consequently, the state is the political form of the existence of a particular society. And the content of this form is determined directly by the society. However, throughout the human history, the nature of the interaction between them was not easy. We propose to consider in detail the relationship between the state and society. Let's start with ancient times.

The state for the common good

The state in ancient times was created by people for the common good. It was necessary to curb animal fear and selfishness, protect against various external enemies, organize production activities, ensure personal safety and order. Thus, the ratio of the state and society was noted during this period as the predominance of the latter. However, gradually the bureaucratic apparatus begins to use power to satisfy not public, but group interests. Because of this, the relationship between the state and society is changing. There are new trends, which we will now talk about.

Features of traditional society, police state

Everything has changed with the development of a caste or class traditional society. It could be organized and organized through a system of violence that the state is developing. The latter is identified at this time with an organized minority of governors (in the East) or owners (in the West), overwhelming the disenfranchised majority. At the same time, the narrow class interest of bureaucrats turned out to be universal, and the goal of the development of society was proclaimed the good of the state. At that time, there were various varieties of it. However, the most stable was the state police. This type is historically the first. For a long time it existed in the states of Western Europe and the countries of the East. Eastern despots and European monarchies are his classic examples. What is the characteristic of the police state? Let's figure it out.

The role of the monarch in the police state

In this case, the state in the person of the emperor, the monarch was the master who gives citizens some freedoms and rights. The omnipotence of his authority was based on the supposedly divine origin. The management of society was provided by a developed bureaucratic apparatus. He provided control over people. The system of punitive organs could suppress any disobedience of the authorities. Such was the structure of the state of the policeman.

The state as a social contract

The cover of holiness from the monarch was removed in the period from the 17th to the 18th century, when the transition of consciousness from religious to secular was observed. At that time, the state was no longer looked at as the result of divine providence. They began to understand it as a contract concluded by free citizens to meet their general needs. The structure of the state now had to be such that it could serve society. Its main goal is now declared 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 the life of society is to provide them. The realization of this led to new changes in the social order.

Transition to the rule of law

The bourgeois revolutions that took place in the 17th and 18th centuries in France, the USA, and England led to the realization of this idea. The result of these changes was the transition to a law-governed state (the second type) from an obsolete absolutist one.

The rule of law was proclaimed in various spheres of public life. Citizens and the state are subject to the same constitution. The way of interrelation between the individual, society and the state is law. By this time, the establishment of the separation of powers, as well as the guarantees of the rights of the individual, are inalienable from it, and the conditions for the free development of each individual. It now proclaims mutual responsibility before the law of the individual and the state for their actions.

The emergence of civil society

However, only the emergence of a mature civil society (that is, a community of individuals who are able to adhere to reasonable forms of a hostel that do not infringe upon individuality independently) can make the state in practice a means of satisfying the interests of society as a whole. Social progress now depends on its creation. There must be a developed civil society that protects and enhances the freedom of each individual. Only it can prevent an excessive increase in state power. It should be done so that the government is a servant, not the master of the people. And for this it is necessary to rethink the role of the state in the life of society. In addition, people must realize the need for respect for each individual person. Only then can we talk about the existence of civil society.

Correlation of civil society and state

First of all, the first is the basis of the latter. One of the manifestations of the secondary nature of the 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), where it is said 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". At the heart of this whole lie the common goals they pursue (political, economic, and others). This unity is based on the thesis of the inconceivability of the state and society without each other. At the same time, the relationship between them is socio-political. This means that the state is socially conditioned, and society is of a political nature. Thus, they can not develop and even simply exist without each other. The state and society must necessarily interact with each other. Consequently, there is a mutual dependence between them in the form of mutual conditioning. The results of their functioning are intertwined in the most intimate way and directly affect each of them. Thus, both the rule of law and civil society are necessary parts of the 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 the civil society itself. This is due to the discrepancy between 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 his actions can be guided by suprastate interests. For example, the accession of European states 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. Let us 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 deterrents to each other. The lack of mutual control, as well as legal responsibility for decisions and actions taken, creates a great danger. Therefore, in the state of law, civil society is controlled in the forms provided for by law. This ensures law and order. Also, in appropriate forms, civil society controls the activities of the state.

Why did the rule of law not justify the hopes associated with it?

The proclamation of the principles of equality before the law, individual freedom in the legal states did not justify the hopes. It did not stop the growth of conflict and poverty in society, and to the general welfare is still far away. Hopes have not come true that in the conditions of a market economy these principles will automatically lead humanity to prosperity. Why are the problems of the correlation between society and the state still relevant?

First of all, because the rule of law became the "night watchman", that is, it assumed responsibility for law and order, physical security and individual freedom, but did not interfere in the social and economic spheres. However, the market in which free competition was established led to the fact that wealth and resources became concentrated in the propertied classes. And for a large part of society decent living conditions have not been created.

This necessitated the smoothing of inequality by means of an active social policy. Again, the relationship between the state, society and law was rethought. New changes followed. There was a social state.

Features of the social state

It meant a transition from the declarativeness of freedoms and rights to their practical assurance. The peculiarity of the social state is that it is aimed at providing each individual with decent living conditions through the redistribution of various goods. With this distribution, the principles of social justice are observed . The state in this case takes responsibility for the development of society and care for it. It encourages individual responsibility, increased production efficiency, competition, private property. In conclusion, we can note that the state, and even then only in the developed countries, could really guarantee decent human conditions, as well as equal opportunities for participation in production management only in the 1960s.

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 correlation is an important problem, from the decision of which the future of each of us depends. Therefore, many researchers are studying the question of the relationship between the state and society. The nature of their relationship is a topic that has not only great theoretical significance, but also practical. This and other related issues are concerned with the theory of state and law.