1. Justifying the State Introduction to the subject

2.  Do we have a moral duty to obey the state?  What makes you to follow the state laws and regulations?  Following Locke’s notion that all human beings are naturally free, independent and equal, then we can say that naturally humans are not bound with any authority…So, existance of the state is not natural then…  How about giving consent to others or any authority to claim power over you or act on behalf of you?  Locke finds it legitimate … if individual accepts it then no issue… Voluntarily accepting a sovereign over you.. will give legitimacy.

3.  For Locke to give a state legitimacy and justifying the existance of a state over individual freedom and rights is to show if the state can reconcile its power with the natural autonomy of individuals.  This is tested through indvidual consent and social contract.  How is this conducted in today’s political systems?  How do you give your consent to those who govern you and have authority over you?

4.  How about the counter-idea that put forward by utilitarian theorits Jeremy Bentham?  The primary value in existance of a state is not question of autonomy, but the happiness.  If government or any other authority produces more happiness than any other alternative then it is justified.  Whether we give consent to a sovereign power or not is irrelevant.

5. The State  What is the state?  How does John Locke define it?  How does Max Weber define it?

6.  State is; a body politic, or society of men, united together for the purpose of promoting their mutual safety and advantage, by the joint efforts of their combined strength on a certain territory.  The state is an institution through which individuals and groups seek to exercise power (though it is not the only such institution); but it is also an institution that exercises power over individuals and groups.  A state is not a nation, or a people, though it may contain a single nation, parts of different nations, or a number of entire nations.  A state arises out of society, but it does not contain or subsume society. A state will have a government, but the state is not simply a government, for there exist many more governments than there are states.

7.  The state is a modern political construction that emerged in early modern Europe, but has been replicated in all other parts of the world.  The most important aspect of the state that makes it a distinctive and new form of political association is its most abstract quality: it is a corporate entity.  John Locke defines political power as the right to make laws, and to punish those who fail to obey the laws. Government represents political power.  Max Weber approaches the issue in a different perspective. States possess a monopoly of legitimate violence.  All legitimate violence or coercion is undertaken by the state.

8. The Goal of Justification  Sense of obligation … Moral duty…  How laws are created is important.  People’s consent and voluntary acts.  Need for a state does not make it legitimate, but the consent and voluntarily acting make it legitimate.  Based on this notion, what makes a state illegitimate?

9. What is social contract theory?  Social contract theory is based on the idea of a contractual agreement between the individual and the state, under which the power of the sovereign is justified by a hypothetical social contract in which the people agree to obey in all matters in return for a guarantee of peace and security, which they lack in the warlike “state of nature” posited to exist before the contract is made.  How do individuals do contract or give consent to states in today’s regimes?  Social contract is a solution to the legitimicy of the state.  Through it, individuals give consent to the state.

10.  Have you ever been asked to pledge your support to laws or to government policies?  How about the ballot-box?  Don’t you give your consent to law makers and subsequently to government by voting?  If not representative democracy, then direct democracy… Here comes state of California…  Is that a good example of direct democracy?

11. How about tacit consent?  Don’t we all benefit from government in many ways? Health benefits, education benefits, retirement benefits, safety, security benefits and many more…  When you benefit and accept all goodies, then you tacitly consent the government.  If you give your tacit consent, then do you think the existance of state is justified?  Hume objects this notion… Tacit consent is not enough for justifying the state…  He says you cannot leave your country even without taking your state’s permission to leave…

12. Hypothetical Consent  This theory agrues that any rational person would bring about the state if s/he lived in a state of nature.  There is a need for an authority.  Authority will bring power and the state that every rational human being needs it.  This is free will and consent for the existance of the state.

13.  In this assumption or theory, there is no need for voluntary action or consent of individuals.  Justification comes from benefits that the state provides.  This idea is very close to the utilitarian theory of the state.  Political obligation is above consent and voluntarism.

14. Anarchism Revisited  Anarchism is the idea that government (the state) is unnecessary and harmful.  Anarchy is society without government.  Anarchists are people who believe in anarchism and desire to live in anarchy as all human kind once did.  They do not like hierarchy.  A society without social classes, without superiors or subordinates.  Authority brings class. Class is not for the benefit of natural – given liberties.

15.  If we cannot justify the state by social contract theory, by giving consent and voluntarism then state of anarchy is the last resort for us.  Has anyone asked you if you need a state or the police has right to use weapon?  If they have not, then the state and the police department acts illegitimately.  Laws stem from morality.  If a law does not, then citizens do not need to obey the law.  Good is done for sake of being good; not because the state asks you to do.