FORMS OF STATE
Most of the human population has existed for millennia within a state system; however, for most of prehistory, people lived in stateless societies. The first forms of state emerged around 6,000 years ago, when governments acquired state capacities alongside the rapid growth of cities, the invention of writing, and the codification of new forms of religion. Over time, a variety of state forms developed, which used different justifications for their existence, such as divine right or social contract theory.
A state is a centralized political organization that imposes and enforces rules over a population within a territory. There is no academic consensus on the definition of a state. There is no universally accepted definition. The most commonly used definition is by Max Weber, who describes the state as a compulsory political organization for a people with a centralized government that maintains a monopoly on the legitimate use of force within a given territory.
Legal science often uses a concept, originally proposed by German jurist Georg Jellinek, centered on three constitutive elements: a territory with defined borders, a population settled in that territory, and a supreme authority capable of governing the people and territory. In social sciences and political anthropology, broader definitions are found, sometimes identifying the state with the political community in a general sense, that is, with those aspects of social and cultural organization concerning the regulation, even informal, of members’ behavior and the control over resource appropriation. In this broad sense, every social group possesses a state, and one could speak of a “state” even regarding an Amazonian tribe.
Historians, however, tend to narrow the concept of the state, considering it as the product of a gradual process of political power concentration in European societies from the 12th to the 15th century. As a result of this process, the state emerged as an impersonal institution that exercises supreme political power over a given territory, demands loyalty from its citizens, and carries out its functions for purely civil purposes. In this narrow sense, the state is characteristic of the modern age and coincides with the rise of large national monarchies in Europe, initially marked by a state religion such as Christianity, which helped to bind civil society together.
What is certain is that a “nation-state” cannot exist without these three elements:
- Territory
- People
- Rules
The word “state” and its equivalents in other European languages (“state” in English, “estado” in Spanish and Portuguese, “état” in French, “Staat” in German) ultimately derive from the Latin word status, meaning “condition, circumstances.” The Latin status comes from stare, “to stand,” or “to remain” or “to be permanent,” thus providing the sacred or magical connotation of the political entity.
With the revival of Roman law in 14th-century Europe, the term came to refer to the legal position of individuals (such as nobles, commoners, and clergy), and particularly the special status of the king. The higher social classes, generally those with the most wealth and social rank, held power. The word also had associations with Roman ideas (dating back to Cicero) about the status rei publicae, the “condition of public affairs.” Over time, the word lost its reference to particular social groups and became associated with the legal order of the entire civil society.
Machiavelli’s works of the early 16th century, particularly The Prince, played a central role in popularizing the modern use of the word “state.”
Machiavelli introduces the word “state” into the history of political terminology, as expressed in the opening line of the first chapter of The Prince: “All states, all dominions that have had or have power over men, are either republics or principalities.”
He calls political organizations “states,” a distinction that makes him the inventor of the word in its current, modern meaning—different from status as social class or condition—to indicate what the Greeks called polis and the Romans res publica. The North American colonies were already called “states” at the beginning of the 17th century. The expression l’État, c’est moi (“I am the state”), attributed to Louis XIV, though probably apocryphal, was recorded in the mid-18th century.
States can be classified by political philosophers as sovereign if they do not depend on or are subject to any other power or state. Other states are subject to external sovereignty or hegemony, where ultimate sovereignty resides in another state. Many states are federated, participating in a federal union. A federated state is a territorial and constitutional community forming part of a federation or confederation, such as Switzerland. These states differ from sovereign states because they have transferred part of their sovereign powers to a federal government.
States can also be classified according to their apparent composition or focus. The concept of the nation-state, theoretically or ideally coinciding with a “nation,” became popular in 20th-century Europe but occurred rarely elsewhere or at other times. Conversely, some states have emphasized their multiethnic or multinational character, such as Habsburg Austria-Hungary or the Soviet Union, highlighting unifying features like autocracy, monarchic legitimacy, or ideology. Some states, such as Nazi or fascist regimes, promoted racial superiority ideals. Others emphasize community and inclusivity, as in the ancient Roman res publica and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Rzeczpospolita), echoed in modern republics. Temple-centered states focused on religious sanctuaries appear in discussions of the ancient world.
Relatively small city-states, once common and often successful, have become rarer and relatively less important in modern times. Modern independent city-states include San Marino, Vatican City, Monaco, and Singapore. Following the scheme below, San Marino is a diarchic parliamentary republic, with two heads of state simultaneously. Vatican City, often incorrectly called the oldest monarchy, is in fact the oldest monocratic republic, as the Pope is elected by an assembly of representatives (the cardinals) and embodies both head of state and head of government. Monaco is a monocratic monarchy, and Singapore is a parliamentary republic.
Until now, there have been many examples of definitions of Forms of State and Forms of Government, starting with Aristotle, who defined forms of government as Monarchy (rule by one), Democracy (rule by many), and Aristocracy (rule by the best), with their degenerate forms being Tyranny, Demagogy, and Oligarchy. Machiavelli later defined the concept of “state,” refining it to the modern understanding and proposing a simple scheme where a state could be either a Principality or a Republic.
For this reason, I have proposed a scheme based on three forms of state, primarily considering the method of appointing the head of state, expanded as I see fit, clearly distinguishing forms of government in a novel scheme.
FORMS OF STATE
| FORM OF STATE | REPUBLIC | MONARCHY | DICTATORSHIP |
|---|---|---|---|
| SOVEREIGNTY | Belongs to the PEOPLE. | Held by the SOVEREIGN, who may retain it or delegate it to the people via a constitutional pact. | It is the prerogative of the DICTATOR. |
| APPOINTMENT OF HEAD OF STATE | The PEOPLE elect the president through free elections. | The SOVEREIGN KING is appointed by hereditary lineage. | The DICTATOR proclaims themselves via a coup d’état. |
| LEGITIMATION OF HEAD OF STATE | Presidential republic if elected directly by the people; parliamentary republic if elected by a representative body. | In a constitutional monarchy, the monarch formally renounces absolute sovereignty. A despot may attempt legitimation by force, e.g., appointment by the highest religious authority, who cannot refuse. | Legitimacy is attempted through force; all powers are centralized in the dictator. |
| FUNCTIONS OF HEAD OF STATE | The HEAD OF STATE guarantees institutions. In a presidential republic, also serves as head of government. In a parliamentary republic, appoints head of government chosen by the winning parties. | In a monocratic monarchy, all powers are concentrated in the sovereign, who personally appoints collaborators. In a constitutional monarchy, no executive power; appoints head of government (leader of winning party). | All powers are concentrated in the DICTATOR, who severely limits freedom, equality, and justice. |
| SEPARATION OF STATE POWERS | Separation, independence, and mutual control of the three state powers: executive, legislative, and judiciary. | Monocratic monarchy: all powers to the KING; constitutional monarchy: separation of powers. | Absolute power over people; state institutions subject to will of dictator. |
Current global status: 193 UN member states; total of 208 states, of which 195 are recognized as “sovereign,” and 13 are semi-sovereign or unrecognized.
FORMS OF GOVERNMENT
| FORM OF GOVERNMENT | MONOCRACY | DEMOCRACY | INFOCRACY |
|---|---|---|---|
| DEFINITION | Government by a single person. | Government by the people. | Government by information consensus. |
| APPOINTMENT OF GOVERNMENT | Monarchy: legitimacy from family lineage; Dictatorship: legitimacy by force. | Chosen by the people through free elections, organized via political parties determining the country’s policies. | Overcoming partisan ideologies. Head of government elected online by citizens based on presented programs. |
| COMPOSITION OF GOVERNMENT | Political power concentrated in head of state, who personally appoints ministers or state advisors. | Party leader of winning elections becomes head of government, choosing ministers based on majority party decisions. | Head of government freely chosen by universal suffrage, appoints ministers based on competence. |
| POLITICAL FREEDOM AND EQUALITY | Freedoms limited due to fear of losing support, including association, speech, and private property. Judiciary and legislature are subject to central power. | Law is above parties; guarantees justice and equality. Freedom of expression and entrepreneurship recognized. Opposition presents proposals for alternation of government. | New technologies expand democratic prerogatives, allowing citizens to participate over time via direct democracy tools (DDD). |
| DURATION OF GOVERNMENT | Determined by the monocratic authority at its discretion. | Determined by law, usually 4–5 years (legislature term). | Determined by constitution, ~4 years, aligned with legislature. |
DEGENERATE FORMS
| DEGENERATE FORM | TYRANNY | DEMAGOGY | INFOGOGY |
|---|---|---|---|
| DEFINITION | Absolute power in the hands of the Tyrant, who is both head of state and government. Total deprivation of freedom and justice; consent obtained through violence by eliminating opponents. | Normal political debate replaced with flattery-focused propaganda appealing to economic and social aspirations of the masses to maintain power. | Complete manipulation of public information by the government, acquiring opposing media to legitimize government actions and obtain absolute consent. |
EXAMPLES AND APPLICATIONS:
- The United Kingdom: Democratic Monarchy rather than purely constitutional monarchy.
- United States: Presidential Democratic Republic.
- Italy: Parliamentary Democratic Republic.
- German Democratic Republic (1948–1989): more accurately a Monocratic Republic due to elections controlled by central power and severe limitations on freedom.
BIPOLAR WORLD FOR LASTING PEACE
The proposal is to avoid the formation of three large military-allied blocs of countries, concentrating instead on only two opposing alliances. This is because, in a tripolar system, two blocs could suddenly ally, destabilizing the balance of power. If there are only two major international blocs, even if they confront each other with hostile intentions, the fear of mutually destructive conflict should discourage aggressive actions.
This approach is likely being implemented, more or less consciously, at the international level: two major strategic alliances with economic and military repercussions, to which other nations gradually align.
The hypothesis is that the United States is no longer the world’s policeman, but that two opposing blocs already exist:
- On one side, the economically strongest nation, recently surpassed and with high growth potential, China, allied with Russia, smaller states such as Turkey (despite NATO membership), and Syria.
- On the other side, the nation that held this position until a few years ago, the United States, allied with Western Europe, Japan, Canada, and Australia.
It remains to be seen which side large countries such as India and Brazil will join.
The argument is that two opposing and roughly equivalent global alliances serve as the primary deterrent to new world conflicts, similar to how the Cold War between liberal-democratic and communist blocs maintained relative peace for several decades.
PANGEANISM 