Its supporters define society and the state as the sum of the mental interactions of people and their various associations. The essence of this theory is the assertion of the psychological need of a person to live within an organized community, as well as a sense of the need for collective interaction. Speaking about the natural needs of society in a certain organization, representatives of the psychological theory believe that society and the state are a consequence of the psychological laws of human development. In reality, it is hardly possible to explain the causes of the emergence and functioning of the state only from a psychological point of view. It is clear that all social phenomena are resolved on the basis of people's mental acts, and outside of them there is nothing social. In this sense, psychological theory explains many issues of social life that escape the attention of economic, contractual, and organic theories. However, the attempt to reduce all social life to the psychological interaction of people, to explain the life of society and the state by the general laws of psychology, is just as much an exaggeration as all other ideas about society and the state. The state is an extremely multifaceted phenomenon.

The reasons for its occurrence are explained by many objective factors: biological, psychological, economic, social, religious, national and others. Their general scientific understanding is hardly possible within the framework of any one universal theory, although such attempts have been made in the history of human thought, and quite successfully (Plato, Aristotle, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Plekhanov, Lenin, Berdyaev). The experience of historical development shows that the reasons for the origin of society and the state should be sought in the totality of patterns that give rise to the individual and social life of a person. And here the main task is not to deny the diversity of scientific approaches to the subject of research, but to be able to integrate their objective conclusions into a general theory that explains the essence of the phenomenon not one-sidedly, but in all the diversity of its manifestations in real life. In this regard, both organic and psychological theories of the origin of the state have every right to exist, since they study the biological and psychological characteristics of a person as a member of society and a citizen of the state, and society and the state as a system of interacting biological species endowed with will and consciousness.

Trubetskoy, referring to Spencer, writes that “there is a physical connection between the parts of a biological organism; on the contrary, between people - parts of a social organism - there is a psychic connection. From the standpoint of the contractual and economic theories of the origin of the state, these views are untenable. Nevertheless, an agreement on the establishment of a public education can be concluded by biological individuals with a normal human psyche. The development of society and the formation of the state, for economic reasons, is also impossible without the participation of the human psyche and his physical efforts.

Thus, the main essence of psychological theory is that a person has a psychological need to live within an organized community, as well as a sense of collective interaction. The human psyche, its impulses and emotions play a major role not only in adapting a person to changing conditions, but also in the formation of the state and law.

However, people are not equal in their psychological qualities. Just as physical strength distinguishes between the weak and the strong, psychological qualities are also different. Some people tend to subordinate their actions to authority. They have a need to imitate. Consciousness of dependence on the elite of primitive society, awareness of the justice of certain options for actions and relationships, and so on brings peace to their soul and gives a state of stability, confidence in their behavior. Other people, on the contrary, are distinguished by their desire to command and subordinate others to their will. It is they who become leaders in society, and then representatives of public authorities, employees of the state apparatus. The main representative of the psychological theory is L.I. Petrazhitsky.

State Psychological School Petrazhitsky

|Theological - God created the state |?---+

| (Aquinas, Maritain, Mercier, etc.). | |

|Patriarchal - the state is a product of family development |?---+

| (Aristotle, Filmer, Mikhailovsky, etc.) | |

|Contractual - the state - the product of an agreement between people |?---+

| (Hobbes, Rousseau, Radishchev and others) | |

| Theory of violence - the state arose due to the military-political | | |

|factors |?---+

| (Gumplovich, Dühring, Kautsky and others) | |

| Organic theory - the state - a specific species | | |

| biological organism |?--+

| (Spencer, Worms, Preis, etc.) | |

| Materialist theory - the state - the product of social | | |

| economic development |?--+

| (Marx, Engels, Lenin, etc.) | | |

| Psychological theory - the state arose due to features | | |

| human psyche |? - +

| (Petrazhitsky, Freud, Fromm, etc.) |

Thomas Aquinas - 13th century. The official doctrine (system of views, views) of the Vatican.

Right - expresses God's will. The art of goodness and justice - in the theological theory of law.

Patriarchal - the monarch is the father of all. There are no supporting facts. The family is the smallest particle of society.

Patrimonal - state-va from the ownership of the land. The owner of the land is the sovereign.

Violence is only a condition, not the cause of the formation of a state.

Biologization of assessments of social life.

Two approaches - classes + mechanism for the distribution of surplus product => state-in.

Irrigation theory (Dr. Egypt) - those who were engaged in irrigation and formed a state.

Racial theory - the division of society on a racial basis. State - the dominance of some over others

There are many theories in the world that reveal the process of the emergence and development of the state. This is quite understandable, since each of them is based on the views and judgments of various groups, strata, classes, nations and other social communities, which, in turn, relying on a variety of economic, political, financial and other interests, have a direct or indirect influence on the process of emergence, formation and development of the state.

The most famous theories include the following.

1. Theological theory is one of the earliest. Even in ancient Egypt, Babylon and Judea, the ideas of the divine origin of the state were put forward. So, in the laws of King Hammurabi (Ancient Babylon) it was said about the divine origin of the power of the king: >. It is impossible to penetrate the secret of the divine plan, and therefore to comprehend the nature of the state, therefore the people must believe and unquestioningly obey all the dictates of the state will as a continuation of the divine will.

2. Patriarchal theory considers the emergence of a state from an overgrown family, in which the power of the monarch is a continuation of the power of the father over the members of his family. The monarch must take care of his subjects, and they are obliged to obey the ruler. This theory was substantiated in the works of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle (4th century BC) and was developed by the English thinker of the 18th century. R. Filmer, Russian sociologist N. K. Mikhailovsky and others. Representatives of the patriarchal theory believed that the state arises as a result of the union of clans into tribes, then unions of tribes and, finally, into the state. The power of the father as a result of the unification of the family into the state becomes state.

The patriarchal concept, to a certain extent, reflected the most important moments in the transition of mankind from socially organized life in a primitive society to state forms in an early class society. In particular, in city-states, the unification of families was decisive in the emergence of the state. However, this theory exaggerated their role, which was wrong historically and theoretically. She idealistically interpreted the relationship between the ruling and the subjects, denied the qualitative difference between the state and state power from the family and paternal power. The disadvantages of patriarchal theory also include the archaic nature of ideas about state power, which can be used to justify various forms of despotic and tyrannical power.

3. Contract theory The origin of the state appeared in the 17th-18th centuries, although some of its aspects were developed by the thinkers of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. The authors of the theory of the contractual origin of the state were G. Grotius, T. Hobbes, J. Locke, D. Diderot, J.-J. Rousseau, A. Radishchev and others.

According to this theory, the state arises as a result of a contract entered into by people who were previously in the state of nature. T. Hobbes also portrayed the state of nature as >, where there is no common power, law and justice. J.-J. Rousseau, on the contrary, called it >, arguing that in the state of nature people have innate rights and freedoms. The social contract that creates the state was understood as an agreement between previously isolated individuals to unite, form a state in order to reliably ensure their natural rights and freedoms, peace and prosperity. In accordance with the agreement, people transfer part of their rights, inherent in them from birth, to the state, which, in turn, represents the common interests and undertakes to ensure human rights and freedoms. In case of violation of the terms of the social contract, the people had the right to overthrow the government by making a revolution.

The theory of the contractual origin of the state is distinguished by the abstractness of ideas about primitive society, his condition, about a person as an isolated subject of the process of creating a state, as well as anti-historicism in questions about the time and place of the emergence of the state, about its essence as a spokesman for the interests of all members of society - both the poor and the rich, and those invested with power, and those who do not have it.

The contractual theory was a significant step forward in understanding the essence and purpose of the state.

· Firstly, she broke with religious ideas about the origin of the state and state power and considered the state as the result of conscious and purposeful activities of people.

· Secondly, this theory raised the question of the social purpose of the state - a person was guaranteed his rights and freedoms.

· Thirdly, the theory traces the idea that the state, as the first socio-political institution created by people, can be improved and adapted to changing conditions.

· Fourthly, the contractual theory substantiated the natural right of the people to overthrow the objectionable government through a revolutionary uprising.

· Fifthly, it laid the foundation for the doctrine of popular sovereignty, of the control of state power structures by the people.

4. Marxist concept The origin of the state (19th century) is based on the historical-materialist doctrine of society and social development, on the class interpretation of the state. The main provisions of this theory are expounded in the works of K. Marx, F. Engels, G. V. Plekhanov, V. I. Lenin and other Marxists.

K. Marx and F. Engels linked the origin and existence of the state with the emergence and existence of classes. In > F. Engels wrote that at a certain stage in the development of mankind as a result of the division of labor, the emergence of surplus product and private property, society is split into classes with opposing economic interests. To resolve these contradictions, a new force is needed - the state. The state became a necessity precisely as a result of this split. The economically dominant class creates the state in order to subjugate the poor. VI Lenin considered the state as > as >.

The state is inherent only in a class society, therefore, with the destruction of classes, the state withers away. Thus, Marxist theory focuses on the class nature of the state, its ability to act as an apparatus, an instrument of violence and subjugation in the hands of the economically dominant class, which, with the help of the state, becomes the politically dominant class. Such an absolutization of the role of classes and the economic factor in the process of the emergence of the state is erroneous, since in a number of regions of the world the state was born and formed before the emergence of classes and under the influence of a variety of factors.

However, this does not in any way detract from the significance of Marxist theory, which is distinguished by its clarity and clarity of its starting points and which played a significant role in understanding the origin of the state.

5. Theory of Violence (Conquest) was one of the most common in the West in the late XIX - early XX century. Its supporters were E. Dühring, L. Gumplovich, K. Kautsky. They argued that the cause of the emergence of the state was internal and external violence. At the same time, E. Dühring developed the idea that the internal violence of one part of primitive society over another leads to the emergence of the state, property and classes, the state becomes the governing body of the defeated.

L. Gumplovich and K. Kautsky were the authors of the theory of external violence. They noted that war and conquest are the mother of the state. According to Gumplovich, the state arises as a result of the enslavement by a stronger alien tribe of a weaker, already settled population.

K. Kautsky believed that the state appears as an apparatus for coercion of the victorious tribe over the vanquished. From the victorious tribe, the ruling class is formed, and from the defeated one, the class of the exploited. Now the state can protect the conquered tribes from possible encroachments from other strong tribes. In the course of social development, the forms and methods of ruling are softened, and the state, as the authors of the theory of external violence believed, turns into an organ for protecting the entire population and ensuring the common good.

In general, the theory of violence is abstract. It does not reveal the main reasons for the origin of the state, but, identifying its separate, secondary forms, gives them a universal character. At the same time, violence, conquest, not being the root cause of the formation of the state, had a significant impact on the process of its emergence.

6. Representatives psychological theory(G. Tarde, N.M. Korkunov, L.I. Petrazhitsky) saw the reason for the emergence of the state in the human psyche, in the need of the individual to communicate, live in a team, the desire to command and obey. They argued that as a result of the psychological interactions of people, a perfect form of emotional communication arises - the state. It contributes to a more rapid adaptation of people to changes in the environment. Although the theory explains many problems, what you can't do for example, contractual or Marxist theory, however, it is absolutely wrong to explain the causes of the emergence of the state only by psychological factors.

7. Author race theory The origin of the state was the French writer J. Gobineau (XIX century). He divided all human races into >, called to dominate, and > who are obliged to obey > races. At the basis of such a distinction are physical, mental, mental and other differences between races. The state acts as an instrument of domination > races over the vast masses. At the time of its creation, this theory justified and substantiated the colonial wars that led to the capture by the developed states of the backward peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America.

There are also:

Ø patrimonial theory, according to which the state originated from the right of the owner to the land (patrimonium);

Ø incest (sexual) theory, the essence of which was the introduction of a ban on incest, i.e. incest. This required the presence of a special group of people who specialized in maintaining the ban, and later performed other public functions, which led to the emergence of the state;

Ø irrigation theory, explaining the origin of the state by the need to build giant irrigation facilities. Such large-scale works required rigid, centralized management, distribution, control, subordination, etc. Only a large class of bureaucratic managers could do this;

Ø theory of solidarity representing the state as a system of interdependence that connects all individuals into society.

Such a variety of theories of the origin of the state helps to explain the essence of the phenomenon not one-sidedly, but in all the variety of its manifestations in real life.

In the history of the development of legal thought, there were different points of view on the origin of law.

One of the first theories of the origin of law was theological, that is, divine (for the first time systematically stated by Joain Chrysostom, Aurelius Augustine, Thomas Aquinas). Law, according to this theory, is given by God, expresses His will and is eternal. The supporter of this theory also believed that the right is a God-given understanding of the good of decency. Therefore, law brings people feelings of honesty, decency, equality, love for one's neighbor.

According to natural law theory(set out for the first time in the works of Grotius, T Hobbes, J. Locke, J.-J. Rousseau), each person is endowed with a certain set of rights from birth. Thus, the appearance of man means the appearance of law. Natural law is not created by people, it is cognized by them internally as a kind of ideal, a standard of universal justice.

Patriarchal theory(in the writings of Filmer, Mikhailovsky) saw the source of law in the rules established by the patriarch, that is, the elder, the ancestor. Commanding his fellow tribesmen, he prescribed them the rules of behavior and relationships with each other.

Supporters historical school(Hugo, F.K. Savigny, GFLukhga) of law believed that the law is formed by the people themselves, and not created by legislators. It is the result of popular national consciousness. Law, like language, is created by the people in the process of its historical development.

Normativist theory derived law from law itself. Normativism calls for the study of law in its “pure form”, as a special normative social phenomenon, independent of economic, political and other social conditions. Its author, G. Kelsen, argued that law is not subject to the principle of causality and draws strength and effectiveness from itself.

Founder psychological theory Law L. Petrazhitsky recognized the psyche of people, their “imperative-attributive legal experiences”, a special kind of complex emotional and intellectual mental processes that take place in the human psyche, as the cause of the origin of law. Psychological theory considers law as a product of various kinds of psychological phenomena - instincts, psychological attitudes, emotions.

Class (Marxist) theory(K. Marx, F. Engels, V.I. Lenin) associated the emergence of law with the division of society into ruling and oppressed classes. The ruling class created the rules of law and prescribed their implementation by other members of society through coercion. Law, in their opinion, represents the will of the ruling class erected into law, the will, the content of which is determined by the material, primarily economic conditions of its life.

Some scientists (G Berman, E. Ainers) created conciliatory theory origin of law. Its essence boils down to the fact that law arose as a means of peaceful resolution of disputes and conflicts.

The formation of law took place over many centuries. This is a natural process caused by:

Ø complication of the economic and social organization of pre-state society;

Ø property stratification of society, the allocation of various groups, layers with opposing group and private interests;

Ø deepening and aggravation of social contradictions and conflicts;

Ø the need to streamline economic activity, regulate the distribution and redistribution of labor products;

Ø the need to stabilize existing social relations, protect them from destruction and establish social order;

Ø the desire of the emerging class of the propertied to consolidate their dominance, to express their private interests and property rights, etc.

It was law, based on state coercion, that was the most powerful social regulatory tool capable of stabilizing, streamlining and protecting social relations. The formation of law and the state proceeded in parallel, interdependently, therefore the causes and conditions for the emergence of law and the state are largely similar. In general, the law, like the state, grew out of the needs of the producing economy.

Conditionally allocate features of the emergence of law in the East and West.

In the East, the transition to a productive economy led to the division of the population of communities into rulers and ruled. Managers simultaneously acted as organizers of production, controllers and distributors of the manufactured product. In order to organize and regulate the production process in difficult conditions of irrigated farming, special rules and norms were needed. At a certain stage in the formation of an early class society, these rules are fixed in agricultural calendars, becoming the basis of the industrial, social and personal life of the early agricultural community. They indicate what must be done (>), what is allowed to do (>), what is forbidden to do (>) and what is indifferent to society, that is: you can act at your own discretion. It was with agricultural calendars that the formation of law proper began in the early agricultural societies of Mesopotamia, Egypt, and India around the 4th-3rd millennium BC. e.

Law organically followed from the norms of religion and morality, played an auxiliary role in relation to them. Therefore, the offense was at the same time a violation of the norms of religion and morality. The main sources of law were religious provisions (teachings) - the Laws of Manu in India, the Koran in Muslim countries, etc.

Thus, in the East, law was supposed, firstly, to provide a new type of labor activity, to support a new state of society and, secondly, to consolidate the existing inequality, to serve as an instrument of domination of the ruling elite over the rest of the population.

In the West, as a result of the transition to a productive economy, a social division of labor took place, which, in turn, contributed to an increase in the productivity of individual labor, made it possible for individual families to exist independently of the community, and changed the position of a person in society. He became free (relatively) thanks to the ability to satisfy his needs by personal labor. That is, it became necessary to protect the interests of individual producers from possible arbitrariness and deception by other persons with the help of the rule of law.

The surplus product, which appeared as a result of the growth of labor productivity, the improvement of the culture of production, influenced the emergence of opportunities for barter and appropriation of the results of other people's labor, the emergence of private property and property inequality, the intensification of conflicts and contradictions between the poor and the rich. Traditions, customs, religious and moral standards can no longer provide order in society, a stable way to resolve conflicts. As a result, there is an urgent need for law as such a social regulator that would establish and consolidate the dominance of the propertied classes with the help of rules binding on all.

So, law in the West appears, on the one hand, as a measure of the social and individual freedom of the producer-owner, and on the other, as a factor in reconciling the various, conflicting interests of people. In Western countries, law developed from custom to legal custom, that is, the state sanctioned customs that contributed to the protection and implementation of state interests. Further development went from legal customs to laws, judicial and administrative precedents, contracts.

Theological theory of the origin of the state

Theological theory the origin of the state became widespread in the Middle Ages in the writings of F. Aquinas; in modern conditions, it was developed by the ideologists of the Islamic religion, the Catholic Church (J. Maritain, D. Mercier, and others).

According to the representatives of this doctrine, the state is a product of divine will, due to which state power is eternal and unshakable, dependent mainly on religious organizations and figures. Hence, everyone is obliged to obey the sovereign in everything. The existing socio-economic and legal inequality of people is predetermined by the same divine will, with which it is necessary to reconcile and not resist the successor of the power of God on earth. Therefore, disobedience to state power can be regarded as disobedience to the Almighty.

The founders of this theory, expressing the previously widespread religious consciousness, argued that the state was created and exists by the will of God. In this regard, ecclesiastical authority takes precedence over secular authority. That is why the accession of any monarch to the throne must be consecrated by the church. This action gives secular power special strength and authority, turns the monarch into a representative of God on earth. This theory was widely used to substantiate and justify an unlimited monarchy, as well as to promote the humility of subjects before state power.

Giving the state and sovereigns (as representatives and spokesmen of divine decrees) an aura of holiness, the ideologists of this theory have raised and are raising their prestige, have contributed and continue to promote the establishment of order, harmony, and spirituality in society. Particular attention is paid here to the "intermediaries" between God and state power - the church and religious organizations.

At the same time, this doctrine diminishes the influence of socio-economic and other relations on the state and does not allow determining how to improve the form of the state, how to improve the state structure. In addition, theological theory is in principle unprovable, because it is built mainly on faith.

Patriarchal theory of the origin of the state

To the most famous representatives patriarchal theory The origin of the state can be attributed to Aristotle, R. Filmer, N.K. Mikhailovsky and others.

They proceed from the fact that people are collective beings, striving for mutual communication, leading to the emergence of a family. Subsequently, the development and growth of the family as a result of the unification of people and the increase in the number of these families ultimately leads to the formation of the state.

The state is the result of the historical development of the family (the extended family). The head of state (monarch) is a father (patriarch) in relation to his subjects, who must treat him with respect and obey strictly.

Hence the power of the sovereign is the continuation of the power of the father (patriarch) in the family, which acts as unlimited. Since the initially divine origin of the power of the “patriarch” is recognized, subjects are asked to obediently obey the sovereign. Any resistance to such power is unacceptable. Only the paternal care of the king (king, etc.) is able to provide the necessary living conditions for a person. In turn, the head of state and older children should (as is customary in the family) take care of the younger ones.

As in the family the father, so in the state the monarch is not chosen, appointed and mixed by his subjects, for the latter are his children.

Of course, the well-known analogy between the state and the family is possible, since the structure of statehood did not arise immediately, but developed from the simplest forms, which, indeed, could well be comparable with the structure of a primitive family. In addition, this theory creates an aura of holiness, respect for the state power, "kinship" of all in a single country. In modern conditions, this theory is reflected in the idea of ​​state paternalism (state care for the sick, the disabled, the elderly, large families, etc.).

At the same time, representatives of this doctrine simplify the process of the origin of the state, in fact, extrapolate the concept of "family" to the concept of "state", and such categories as "father", "family members" are unreasonably identified, respectively, with the categories "sovereign", " subjects." In addition, according to historians, the family (as a social institution) arose almost simultaneously with the emergence of the state in the process of decomposition of the primitive communal system.

Contractual theory of the origin of the state

contract theory origin of the state was developed in the XVII-XVIII centuries. in the works of G. Grotius, J. J. Rousseau, A. N. Radishchev and others.

According to the representatives of the contractual theory, the state arises as a product of conscious creativity, as a result of an agreement entered into by people who were previously in a “natural”, primitive state. The state is not a manifestation of the divine will, but a product of the human mind. Before the creation of the state, there was a “golden age of mankind” (J. J. Rousseau), which ended with the emergence of private property, which stratified society into the poor and the rich, leading to a “war of all against all” (T. Hobbes).

According to this theory, the only source of state power is the people, and all civil servants, as servants of society, are obliged to report to them for the use of power. The rights and freedoms of every person are not a "gift" of the state. They arise at the moment of birth and equally in every person. Therefore, all people are by nature equal.

The state is a rational association of people on the basis of an agreement between them, by virtue of which they transfer part of their freedom, their power to the state. Individuals, isolated before the origin of the state, turn into a single people. As a result, the rulers and society have a complex of mutual rights and obligations, and consequently, responsibility for failure to fulfill the latter.

So, the state has the right to make laws, collect taxes, punish criminals, etc., but is obliged to protect its territory, the rights of citizens, their property, etc. Citizens are obliged to comply with laws, pay taxes, etc., in turn, they have the right to the protection of freedom and property, and in case of abuse of power by the rulers, to terminate the contract with them, even by overthrow.

On the one hand, the contract theory was a major step forward in the knowledge of the state, because it broke with religious ideas about the origin of statehood and political power. This concept also has a deep democratic content, justifying the natural right of the people to revolt against the power of a worthless ruler and overthrow him.

On the other hand, the weak link of this theory is a schematic, idealized and abstract idea of ​​a primitive society, which supposedly at a certain stage of its development realizes the need for an agreement between the people and the rulers. The underestimation of objective (primarily socio-economic, military-political, etc.) factors in the origin of statehood and the exaggeration of subjective factors in this process are obvious.

Theory of Violence

Theory of Violence became popular in the 19th century. and was presented in the most complete form in the works of E. Dühring, L. Gumplovich, K. Kautsky and others.

They saw the reason for the origin of statehood not in economic relations, divine providence and social contract, but in military-political factors - violence, the enslavement of some tribes by others. To manage the conquered peoples and territories, an apparatus of coercion is needed, which the state has become.

According to the representatives of this doctrine, the state is “naturally” (that is, through violence) the emerging organization of the rule of one tribe over another. Violence and subjugation of the ruled by the ruled is the basis for the emergence of economic domination. As a result of wars, tribes were reborn into castes, estates and classes. The conquerors turned the conquered into slaves.

Consequently, the state is not the result of the internal development of society, but a force imposed on it from outside.

On the one hand, military-political factors in the formation of statehood cannot be completely rejected. Historical experience confirms that elements of violence accompanied the emergence of many states (for example, ancient Germanic, ancient Hungarian).

On the other hand, it is important to remember that the degree to which violence was used in this process varied. Therefore, violence should be considered as one of the reasons for the emergence of the state, along with others. In addition, military-political factors in a number of regions played mainly secondary roles, yielding primacy to socio-economic ones.

organic theory

organic theory origin of the state became widespread in the second half of the XIX century. in the works of G. Spencer, R. Worms, G. Preuss, and others. It was during this era that science, including the humanities, was powerfully influenced by the idea of ​​natural selection expressed by Charles Darwin.

According to the representatives of this doctrine, the state is an organism, the constant relations between the parts of which are similar to the constant relations between the parts of a living being. That is, the state is a product of social evolution, which in this connection is only a kind of biological evolution.

The state, being a kind of biological organism, has a brain (rulers) and means of carrying out its decisions (subjects).

Just as among biological organisms, as a result of natural selection, the fittest survive, so in social organisms, in the process of struggle and wars (also natural selection), specific states are formed, governments are formed, and the management structure is improved. Thus, the state is practically equated with a biological organism.

It would be wrong to deny the influence of biological factors on the process of the origin of statehood, because people are not only social, but also biological organisms.

At the same time, it is impossible to mechanically extend all the regularities inherent only in biological evolution to social organisms, it is impossible to completely reduce social problems to biological problems. These are, although interconnected, but different levels of life, subject to different laws and having different causes of occurrence in their basis.

Materialistic theory of the origin of the state

Representatives materialistic theory The origins of the state are K. Marx, F. Engels, V. I. Lenin, who explain the emergence of statehood primarily by socio-economic reasons.

Three major divisions of labor were of paramount importance for the development of the economy, and, consequently, for the emergence of statehood (cattle breeding and handicrafts separated from agriculture, a class of people engaged only in exchange became isolated). Such a division of labor and the improvement of the instruments of labor associated with it gave impetus to the growth of its productivity. A surplus product arose, which ultimately led to the emergence of private property, as a result of which society split into possessing and non-possessing classes, into exploiters and exploited.

The most important consequence of the emergence of private property is the allocation of public power, which no longer coincides with society and does not express the interests of all its members. The power role is shifting to rich people who are turning into the category of managers. To protect their economic interests, they create a new political structure - the state, which primarily acts as an instrument for carrying out the will of the possessors.

Thus, the state arose mainly in order to preserve and support the dominance of one class over another, as well as to ensure the existence and functioning of society as an integral organism.

This theory is characterized by a fascination with economic determinism and class antagonism, while simultaneously underestimating national, religious, psychological, military-political and other reasons that affect the process of the origin of statehood.

Psychological theory

Among the most famous representatives psychological theory The origin of the state can be distinguished by L. I. Petrazhytsky, G. Tarde, Z. Freud and others. They associate the emergence of statehood with the special properties of the human psyche: people's need for power over other people, the desire to obey, imitate.

The reasons for the origin of the state lie in those abilities that primitive man attributed to tribal leaders, priests, shamans, sorcerers, etc. Their magical power, psychic energy (they made hunting successful, fought diseases, predicted events, etc.) created conditions for the dependence of the consciousness of members of primitive society on the above-named elite. It is from the power attributed to this elite that state power arises.

At the same time, there are always people who do not agree with the authorities, show TS or other aggressive aspirations, instincts. To keep in check such mental principles of the individual, the state arises.

Consequently, the state is necessary both to satisfy the needs of the majority in submission, obedience, obedience to certain individuals in society, and to suppress the aggressive drives of some individuals. Hence the nature of the state is psychological, rooted in the laws of human consciousness. The state, according to representatives of this theory, is a product of resolving psychological contradictions between initiative (active) individuals capable of making responsible decisions, and a passive mass, capable only of imitative actions that carry out these decisions.

Undoubtedly, the psychological patterns by which human activity is carried out is an important factor influencing all social institutions, which should by no means be ignored. Take, for example, only the problem of charisma to see this.

At the same time, one should not exaggerate the role of the psychological properties of the individual (irrational principles) in the process of the origin of the state. They do not always act as decisive causes and should be considered only as moments of state formation, because the human psyche itself is formed under the influence of relevant socio-economic, military-political and other external conditions.

Patrimonial theory

The most prominent representative patrimonial theory the origin of the state was K. Haller.

The state, in his opinion, like the land, is the private property of the ruler, that is, the patrimonial theory explains the origin of the state from landed property. Such rulers dominate the territory by virtue of their "original" right to property. In such a situation, the people are represented as tenants of the owner's land, and officials as clerks of the rulers.

In the relationship between the concepts of "power - property", representatives of this theory give priority to the right of ownership. The possession of this property subsequently extends to the possession of the territory, which underlies the emergence of the state. Thus, the right to own land is the fundamental principle of domination over the territory.

Indeed, the state can be considered the property of a certain ruler, because he to some extent owns, uses and disposes (especially in the era of absolutism) almost everything that is located on the territory of this particular country, including the state apparatus, which has power properties. In addition, in the era of the formation of a state, its territory was largely determined by the space in which the leader, military leader and other head of the clan, tribe dominated. The state economy, finances, etc., are gradually formed from the private economy of the sovereign, the prince.

However, in the period of their formation, state institutions are not always really at the full disposal of the ruler. In addition, in that era there was not so much the right of private property as the forcible possession of land. Within the framework of this theory, in the process of the origin of statehood, the role of private ownership of land is exaggerated and, at the same time, the influence of military-political, national, religious and other factors on it is underestimated.

Irrigation theory

The most prominent representative irrigation (hydraulic) theory The origin of the state is K. Wittfogel.

He connects the process of the emergence of statehood with the need to build irrigation facilities in eastern agrarian societies. This process is accompanied by a great growth of bureaucracy, sovereign people, ensuring the effective use of these facilities and exploiting the rest of the citizens, the non-ruling strata.

The state, forced to pursue a rigidly centralized policy in such conditions, acts as the sole owner and at the same time the exploiter. It manages by distributing, considering, subordinating, etc.

Irrigation problems, according to Wittfogel, inevitably lead to the formation of a "management-bureaucratic class" that enslaves society, to the formation of an "agro-management" civilization.

Indeed, the processes of creating and maintaining powerful irrigation systems took place in the regions where the primary city-states were formed, in Mesopotamia, Egypt, India, China, and other areas. Also obvious are the connections of these processes with the formation of a large class of managers-officials, services that protect canals from silting, ensure navigation through them, etc. (A. B. Vengerov).

In addition, the fact of the influence of geographical and climatic (soil) conditions on the course of the origin of statehood can be considered practically indisputable. In some of the most unfavorable regions for agriculture, such factors catalyzed this process, "brought" the regime of a particular state to extreme despotic forms.

However, within the framework of this theory, separate fragments of the process of state formation are unnecessarily categorically singled out as basic ones. Meanwhile, irrigation reasons were characteristic mainly only for some regions of the East. Consequently, representatives of this doctrine underestimate the socio-economic, military-political, psychological and other factors that also have a very tangible effect on the course of the emergence of statehood.

psychological theory. This theory is that the emergence of the state is associated with the special properties of the human psyche, namely, with the craving for power of some over others and the need for some to obey others. Proponents of psychological theory: L.I. Petrazhitsky, D. Fraser, 3. Freud and Among the most famous representatives of the psychological theory of the origin of the state, one can single out L.I. Petrazhitsky, G. Tarde, Z. Freud and others. They associate the emergence of statehood with the special properties of the human psyche:

people's need for power over other people, the desire to obey, imitate.

The reasons for the origin of the state lie in those abilities that primitive man attributed to tribal leaders, priests, shamans, sorcerers, etc. Their magical power, psychic energy (they made hunting successful, fought diseases, predicted events, etc.) created conditions for the dependence of the consciousness of members of primitive society on the above-named elite. It is from the power attributed to this elite that state power arises.

At the same time, there have always been and still are people who do not agree with the authorities, who show certain aggressive aspirations and instincts. To keep such mental qualities of a person in a "bridle", a state arises. Consequently, the state is necessary both to satisfy the needs of the majority of people in submission, obedience, obedience to certain persons in society, and to suppress the aggressive drives of some individuals. Hence the nature of the state is psychological, rooted in the laws of human consciousness. The state, according to representatives of this theory, is a product of resolving psychological contradictions between initiative (active) individuals capable of making responsible decisions, and a passive mass, capable only of imitative actions that carry out these decisions.

Undoubtedly, the psychological patterns by which human activity is carried out is an important factor that influences all social institutions and which should by no means be ignored. Take, for example, the problem of charisma to see this (Greek charisma - divine gift, divine grace). It is possessed by a person endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least especially exceptional abilities or qualities (heroes, prophets, leaders, etc.) - a charismatic person.

However, the role of the psychological properties of the individual (irrational principles) should not be exaggerated in the process of the origin of the state. They do not act as decisive causes and should be considered precisely as moments of state formation, because the psyche of people is formed under the influence of relevant socio-economic, military-political and other external conditions.

Irrigation theory of the origin of state and law.

Irrigation theory (modern German scientist K. Wittfogel) pays special attention to the fact that in some regions of the world agriculture was impossible without artificial irrigation (for example, in Ancient Egypt), therefore, it became necessary to organize large-scale public works for the construction of irrigation facilities ( dams, canals, etc.). For this, a special apparatus was created - the state. Wittfogel. Irrigation (water, hydraulic) theory of the emergence of the state was put forward by many thinkers of the Ancient East (China, Mesopotamia, Egypt), partly by K. Marx ("Asian mode of production"). Its essence is that the state arose for the purpose of collective farming in the valleys of large rivers through the efficient use of their waters (irrigation). Peasant-

the individualist could not independently use the resources of large rivers. For this, it was necessary to mobilize the efforts of all people living along the river. As a result of this, the first states arose - Ancient Egypt, Ancient China, Babylon. This theory is supported by the fact that the first states arose in the valleys of large rivers (Egypt - in the Nile Valley, China - in the Huang He and Yangtze valleys) and had an irrigation basis in their appearance.

The theory is opposed by the fact that it does not explain the reason for the emergence of states located not in river valleys (for example: mountainous, steppe, etc.).

18.Organic theory of the emergence of the state

Supporters of the organic theory believed that the state appeared and developed further as a biological organism. Representatives of the organic theory: G. Spencer, A.E. Worms and others.

The organic theory of the origin of the state became widespread in the second half of the 19th century. in the works of H. Spencer, Worms, Preis, and others. It was during this era that science, including the humanities, was powerfully influenced by the idea of ​​natural selection, expressed by Charles Darwin.

According to the representatives of this doctrine, the state is an organism, the constant relations between the parts of which are similar to the constant relations between the parts of a living being. The state is a product of social evolution, which is only a kind of biological evolution.

The state, being a kind of biological organism, has a brain (rulers) and means of carrying out its decisions (subjects).

Just as among biological organisms, as a result of natural selection, the fittest survive, so in social organisms, in the process of struggle and wars (also natural selection), specific states are formed, governments are formed, and the management structure is improved. Thus, the state is practically "equated" with a biological organism. It would be wrong to deny the influence of biological factors on the process of the origin of statehood, because people are not only social, but also biological beings.

However, one cannot mechanically extend the regularities inherent in biological evolution to social organisms, one cannot completely reduce social problems to biological problems. These are, although interconnected, but completely different levels of life, subject to various laws and having various causes of occurrence in their basis.

The concept and features of the state

The state is an organization of political sovereign power that manages the social, economic, political, spiritual processes of society.

Territory regions of the edge of the republic and spatial limits as borders.

Population

public authority as a feature, it reveals the state, first of all, as an institutional system, a set of institutions of power, the state apparatus, state authorities, law enforcement system, a system of military bodies, punitive, repressive bodies. Public authority also includes a special layer of people, i.e. civil servants, officials who, on a material and financial basis, carry out professionally imperious, managerial, law-making, judicial, military, diplomatic and other activities.

Sovereignty

Having a right

Administrative-territorial the organization of the population as a sign of the state, first of all, reveals the relationship of such concepts and realities as power, population (society), territory.

Sovereignty as a sign of the state means the supremacy and independence of the state, state power inside and outside society, on the territory on which the state arose, exists and operates, and in relation to other foreign states. As a political and legal phenomenon, sovereignty is inherent in the state as a whole, but not in its individual institutions, officials, representatives, for example, the monarch, president, government, head of government, parliament, parliamentarian, judge.

Variety of resources used- the state accumulates the main power resources (economic, social,

exercising their powers;

The desire to represent the interests of the whole society - the state acts on behalf of the whole society, and not of individuals or social groups;

Monopoly on legitimate violence- the state has the right to use force to ensure the implementation of laws and punish their violators;

The right to collect taxes- the state establishes and collects various taxes and fees from the population, which are directed to finance state bodies and solve various management tasks;

The public nature of power- The state ensures the protection of public interests, not private ones. In the implementation of public policy, there is usually no personal relationship between government and citizens;

The presence of symbols- the state has its own signs of statehood - a flag, coat of arms, anthem, special symbols and attributes of power (for example, a crown, scepter and orb in some monarchies), etc.

In a number of contexts, the concept of "state" is perceived as close in meaning to the concepts of "country", "society", "government", but this is not so.

Country- the concept is primarily cultural and geographical. This term is usually used when talking about area, climate, natural areas, population, nationalities, religions, etc. The state is a political concept and denotes the political organization of that other country - the form of its government and structure, political regime, etc.

State- this is a special political structure of power of a special kind that arose at a certain stage of social development.

This is a special organization of political, sovereign power that promotes the implementation of specific interests (class, universal, religious, national, etc.).

State characterize the following features that distinguish it from both pre-state and non-state organizations:

The presence of public authority, isolated from society and not coinciding with the population of the country (the state necessarily has an apparatus of management, coercion, justice, because public authorities are officials, the army, police, courts, as well as prisons and other institutions);

The system of taxes, taxes, loans ( acting as the main revenue part of the budget of any state, they are necessary for the implementation of certain policies and the maintenance of the state apparatus, people who do not produce material values ​​and are engaged only in administrative activities);

Territorial division of the population(the state unites by its power and protection all the people inhabiting its territory, regardless of belonging to any kind, tribe, institution; in the process of the formation of the first states, the territorial division of the population, which began in the process of social division of labor, turns into administrative-territorial; on this background, a new social institution arises - citizenship or citizenship);

Right(the state cannot exist without law, since the latter legally formalizes state power and thereby makes it legitimate, determines the legal framework and forms of implementation of functions

states, etc.);

Monopoly on law-making (issues laws, by-laws, creates legal precedents, authorizes customs, transforming them into legal rules of conduct); monopoly on the legal use of force, physical coercion (the ability to deprive citizens of the highest values, which are life and freedom, determines the special effectiveness of state power);

Sustainable legal ties with the population living on its territory (citizenship, nationality); possession of certain material means for carrying out one's policy

(State property, budget, currency, etc.);

Monopoly on the official representation of the entire society wa (no other entity has the right to represent the entire country);

Sovereignty(supremacy inherent in the state on its territory and independence in international relations). In society, power can exist in different forms: party, family, religious, etc. However, only the state, which exercises its supreme power within its own borders, has the power, the decisions of which are binding on all citizens, organizations and institutions. Supremacy of state power means: a) its unconditional distribution to the population and all social structures of society; b) the monopoly ability to use such means of influence (coercion, force methods, up to the death penalty), which other subjects of politics do not have; c) the exercise of power in specific forms, primarily legal (law-making, law enforcement and law enforcement); d) the prerogative of the state to cancel, to recognize as legally null acts of other political subjects, if they do not comply with the state's regulations. State sovereignty includes such fundamental principles as the unity and indivisibility of territory, the inviolability of territorial borders and non-interference in internal affairs. If any foreign state or external force violates the borders of this state or forces it to take this or that decision that does not meet the national interests of its people, then they speak of a violation of its sovereignty. And this is a clear sign of the weakness of this state and its inability to ensure its own sovereignty and national state interests. concept "sovereignty"has the same meaning for the state as the concept of "rights and freedoms" for a person; the presence of state symbols - the coat of arms, the flag, the anthem. The symbols of the state are designed to indicate the bearers of state power, the belonging of something to the state. The coats of arms of the state are placed on buildings, where state bodies are located, on border posts, on uniforms of civil servants (military personnel, etc.) Flags are hung on the same buildings, as well as in places where international conferences are held, symbolizing the presence of official representatives of the corresponding state, etc. .

The psychological theory of the origin of the state arose in the middle of the 19th century. It became widespread at the end of the 19th - the first half of the 20th century. Its most prominent representative is the Russian statesman and jurist L. Petrazhitsky (1867 - 1931).

Its supporters define society and the state as the sum of the mental interactions of people and their various associations. The essence of this theory is the assertion of the psychological need of a person to live within an organized community, as well as a sense of the need for collective interaction. Speaking about the natural needs of society in a certain organization, representatives of the psychological theory believe that society and the state are a consequence of the psychological laws of human development.

In reality, it is hardly possible to explain the causes of the emergence and functioning of the state only from a psychological point of view. It is clear that all social phenomena are resolved on the basis of people's mental acts, and outside of them there is nothing social. In this sense, psychological theory explains many issues of social life that escape the attention of economic, contractual, and organic theories. However, the attempt to reduce all social life to the psychological interaction of people, to explain the life of society and the state by the general laws of psychology, is the same exaggeration as all other ideas about society and the state.

The state is an extremely multifaceted phenomenon. The reasons for its occurrence are explained by many objective factors: biological, psychological, economic, social, religious, national and others. Their general scientific understanding is hardly possible within the framework of any one universal theory, although such attempts have been made in the history of human thought, and quite successfully (Plato, Aristotle, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, Marquet, Plekhanov, Berdlyaev).

The essence of psychological theory lies in the fact that it tries to explain the emergence of state-legal phenomena and power by special psychological experiences and needs of people.

What are these experiences and needs? This is the need for dominance in some and the need for subjugation in others. This is an awareness of the need for the need for obedience, obedience to certain individuals in society. The need to follow their directions.

The psychological theory of state and law considered the people as a passive inert mass seeking submission.

In his works on the theory of state and law, Petrazhitsky divides law into autonomous (or intuitive) and positive (heteronomous). Autonomous law forms experiences that are fulfilled at the call of the inner “voice” of conscience. A positive legal representation takes place when it is based on someone else's authority, on an external normative act.

According to Petrazhitsky, law performs distributive and organizational social functions. The content of the distributive function is expressed in the fact that the legal psyche endows citizens with material and ideal benefits: personal inviolability, freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, and others. The organizational function of law is to empower subjects with powers.

Despite the well-known theoretical complexity and “isolation” on the psychological side of the legal phenomena of social life, many of the fundamental provisions of the theory of Petrazhytsky, including the conceptual apparatus he created, are accepted and quite widely used by the modern theory of state and law.

But, as they say, psychological theory is not without sin.

First, pointing to the role of psychological qualities in the process of state formation, representatives of psychological theory from the standpoint of the development of psychological science at that time could not give a detailed doctrine of the role of the psyche in state formation. Calling all the psychological qualities of people "impulses", "emotions" and "experiences", they did not see the difference between them. Meanwhile, the psyche of people is divided into emotional, volitional, mental spheres. In relationships between people, volitional qualities are very important. On their basis, psychological subordination between people and a social “pyramid” are established, a kind of which is the state. Strong willpower makes people natural leaders. It is these people, as a rule, who become at the "helm" of the tribe, the union of tribes, and then the state.

Secondly, speaking of psychological qualities, supporters of psychological theory emphasize that the desire for solidarity is inherent in people almost from birth. But what do we really see? Since the beginning of their existence on earth, people have been constantly at war with each other, and war in ancient times was the rule, not the exception. It turned out to be not entirely within the power of even contemporaries to curb it. Recall that in the center of the European continent, where the most developed countries are located, the war in Yugoslavia raged for about 5 years and it was difficult to stop it. So is a sense of solidarity a fundamental factor in human development?

Thirdly, while welcoming the desire of the authors of psychological theory to moderate economic determinism, it should be noted that they fall into the other extreme: they attach decisive importance to psychological factors in the process of state formation, i.e. essentially make the same mistake. Of course, psychological factors do not have a decisive influence on this process, but discounting them is an even worse mistake than underestimating them.

And, finally, it should be pointed out that the mental and psychological qualities of people are formed under the influence of economic, political, social, military, religious, and spiritual factors.

It should also be noted that the attempts of its supporters to find a universal reason that explains the process of state formation deserve a positive assessment. However, it appears that they have not completed this task.

88. Psychological theory of law

There are many versions, theories that are related to the issue of the origin of law. As one of the most common, along with natural law, historical, sociological, one can single out the psychological theory of law.

Psychological theory of law was developed by the Russian scientist Lev Iosifovich Petrazhitsky at the beginning of the 20th century. Its essence is set forth in his work "The Theory of Law and the State in Connection with the Theory of Morality". Among the adherents, followers of this theory: A. Ross, G. Gurvich, M.A. Reisner. Psychological theory has had a great influence on the development of legal studies, including modern American legal theory. L.I. Petrazhitsky directed his attention to the psychological side of the formation of legal behavior, taking it even beyond the intellectual side. He believed that the special nature of the phenomena of law is in the realm of the emotional, in the realm of experiences, but not in the realm of the mind. He called this right intuitive, distinguishing it from positive right. To the latter, he attributed the norms, decrees, prohibitions, which were directed to persons who are in a subordinate relationship to law and legal relations. Intuitive law, according to Petrazhitsky, determines the psychological attitude of the addressee to objective, official (positive) law.

Thus, it is possible to single out the main provisions of the psychological theory of law, namely:

1) the psychological theory of law, which distinguishes between positive law, officially operating in the state, and intuitive law, the origins of which are rooted in the psyche of people and are made up of what they, their groups and associations experience as law;

2) and on unrelated law, the "world of due", which is a pyramid, at the base of which are individual acts, and at the top - the "basic norm".

The main representatives of the normative school of law are G. Kelsen, R. Stammler, P.I. Novgorodtsev.

In the broad sense of the word, in modern legal literature, normativists include all those jurists who believe that the science of law should primarily deal with the analysis and classification of existing legal norms, the construction of legal concepts and schemes, without touching on issues of sociology and psychology, but mainly politics. .

Law representatives of this school defined it as a certain set of norms, as something closed in itself. They also try to explain them not by social production relations and not by the prevailing international conditions, but only on the basis of the norms themselves.

State normativists consider it as "the unity of the internal meaning of legal provisions", as well as a manifestation of complete "social solidarity". They criticize the position that law is a manifestation of the will of the classes ruling in society, they do not recognize that legal laws take the basis for their content in certain economic and production conditions that dominate in the corresponding society.

Normativists have their own approach to methods of studying law. Normativism and its adherents regard law as a realm of pure obligation and, as a result, regard it as independent of how, if ever, its prescriptions are applied in the existing world. Therefore, normativists argue that it is absolutely impossible to apply to law such a method by which phenomena of reality are studied. Thus the method promoted by Kelsen and his supporters is nothing but the traditional legal method of the dogmatists. Its main difference is that it is “justified” by philosophical argumentation, which was borrowed by the normativists from the neo-Kantians, as well as from other modern philosophical movements (in particular, from the Machists). According to the theorist of the normative school of Kelsen, the science that studies law must be something like the algebra of law or the logic of law, namely, a system of abstract formulas.

Modern supporters of the normativist school also support the concept of the primacy of international law over domestic law and the idea of ​​the possibility of creating a "world state" and "world government".

Psychological theory of the emergence of the state

Psychological theory of state formation

Origin, representatives: The founder is the Polish sociologist and jurist Leo Petrazhitsky, Tarde, Freud.

The essence of the psychological theory of the emergence of the state: 2 sides

A) The state is the collective experiences of people. Law is also emotions. Power is based on intuitive right (Patrezhitsky)

B) Decision making is a burden, a psychological burden. Decision making is shifted to a group of people. The state is the desire to relieve psychological stress (Freud)

Positive aspects of the psychological theory of the emergence of the state: Theory predetermines the laws of social life by natural laws. The progressive process of development of the state theory explains the natural needs of man.

Cons of the psychological theory of the emergence of the state: The theory does not explain the mechanism of state formation.

Psychological theory of law: pluses and minuses. Psychological theory of the origin of the state

012. Psychological theory of the origin of the state

These concepts are based on ideas about the emergence of the state in connection with the properties of the human psyche, the need of the individual to live in a team, his desire to search for authority, the instructions of which could be guided in everyday life, the desire to command and obey. State according to these concepts, a product of resolving psychological contradictions between initiative(active) personalities, capable of making responsible decisions, and a passive mass, capable only of imitative actions that carry out these decisions.

pros This concept lies in the fact that psychological patterns are an important factor that certainly has an impact on social institutions. Minuses in the fact that the psychological properties of the individual cannot be the only reasons for the formation of the state, since the human psyche is also formed under the influence of external (socio-economic) factors, etc.

Theory of T. D. Bashtim
The entire history of mankind, including the transition from the primitive state to the state and the further development of social and political and legal institutions, is determined by such primary factors as discovery (invention) and imitation. At the same time, the essence of any discovery and invention in the social, political and legal life of people is adaptation as a way to resolve social contradictions. The initial individual discoveries in the conditions of primitive society were of an incoherent nature, then they are gradually systematized and harmonized. As a result of this process of harmonization, in addition to grammar, religion, morality, art, there was also a system of laws and government.

Theory of Nikolai Korkunov
The basis of all law is individual consciousness, therefore law as a delimitation of interests and social order expresses not the objectively given subordination of the individual to society, but the subjective idea of ​​the individual himself about the proper order of social relations. Also, state power is not someone's will, but a force arising from the mental representations of citizens about their dependence on the state. That is, power is a force conditioned not by the will of the ruler, but by the consciousness of the dependence of the subject.

The essence of the theory is that the state is the result of the conquest of one tribe by another.

Advantages of the theory:

  • 1) Based on many historical facts;
  • 2) The result of the conquest is reflected in all aspects of the life of the newly emerged society;
  • 3) The state apparatus consists of conquerors.

Minuses:

  • 1) Cannot explain the emergence of the state in all regions of the world;
  • 2) In relation to the process of the origin of the state, conquests are secondary;
  • 3) There are examples in history when not the conquest itself, but the threat of conquest served as the emergence of the state;
  • 4) In addition to the violent way of arising, there is a peaceful way.

Founder of the theory of internal violence: Dühring.

The essence of the theory: the state is the result of the violence of one part of society over another.