The Concept of “the State” in Modern Political Thought

2017 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry Hindess
Keyword(s):  
Political Thought ◽  
The State

Byzantine Traditions of the Sublime Porte: the Title qayṣar-i Rūm in the Ottoman Political Thought

Istoriya ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (5 (103)) ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
Dmitry Korobeynikov
Keyword(s):  
Sixteenth Century ◽  
Political Culture ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
The State ◽  
Great Power ◽  
The Sublime

The article is focused on the problem of the title qayṣar-i Rūm, “Caesar of Rome”, which was a traditional title of the Byzantine emperors in Arabic and Persian sources. It is believed that the title was accepted by Mehmed II Fatih after the conquest of Constantinople in 1453. It seems that the Ottoman chancery began to use the title only during the reign of Suleyman the Magnificent. The first evidence thereof was the famous inscription of Suleyman in the fortress of Bender (Bendery, in Moldavia/Moldova) in 1538—1539. The Ottomans recognized themselves as a new Rome only after they went into conflict with a great power in Persia, the state of the Aq-Qoyunlu and the Safawi Empire at the end of the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth century. They did so, however, in the categories of their Persianate political culture, and the title qayṣar-i Rūm was believed to have been an equivalent of the title padishah.

Leviathan on a Leash

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean Fleming
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Sovereign Debt ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Thomas Hobbes ◽  
The State ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Modern Politics ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The World

States are commonly blamed for wars, called on to apologize, held liable for debts and reparations, bound by treaties, and punished with sanctions. But what does it mean to hold a state responsible as opposed to a government, a nation, or an individual leader? Under what circumstances should we assign responsibility to states rather than individuals? This book demystifies the phenomenon of state responsibility and explains why it is a challenging yet indispensable part of modern politics. Taking Thomas Hobbes' theory of the state as a starting point, the book presents a theory of state responsibility that sheds new light on sovereign debt, historical reparations, treaty obligations, and economic sanctions. Along the way, it overturns longstanding interpretations of Hobbes' political thought, explores how new technologies will alter the practice of state responsibility as we know it, and develops new accounts of political authority, representation, and legitimacy. The book argues that Hobbes' idea of the state offers a far richer and more realistic conception of state responsibility than the theories prevalent today and demonstrates that Hobbes' Leviathan is much more than an anthropomorphic “artificial man.” The book is essential reading for political theorists, scholars of international relations, international lawyers, and philosophers. It recovers a forgotten understanding of state personality in Hobbes' thought and shows how to apply it to the world of imperfect states in which we live.

The Hostile Family and the Purpose of the “Natural Kingdom” in Hobbes's Political Thought

2015 ◽  
Vol 77 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-398
Author(s):  
Rita Koganzon
Keyword(s):  
Political Thought ◽  
The State ◽  
Parents And Children ◽  
The Family ◽  
Personal Rule

AbstractIn his political writings, Hobbes consistently distinguishes between “natural” and “artificial” commonwealths—those that arise from the family, and those created by mutual covenants. Although he insists that “both have the same right of government,” closer examination of Hobbes's accounts of the family reveals that it is a radically deficient model for the state, and that Hobbes was engaged in a polemic against both republicans and absolutists who claimed that parental power was natural, prior to, and even a model for the power of civil sovereigns. For Hobbes, a state based on parental rule is dangerously unstable, exacerbating the mutual fears of parents and children. The “office of the sovereign representative” defuses this conflict, and within the commonwealth, the family is denaturalized and reconstituted as an educative institution whose purpose is to reinforce the artificial sovereign by schooling both parents and children in the miseries of personal rule.

scholarly journals NEGARA DAN KEPEMIMPINAN DALAM PEMIKIRAN ALFARABI

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 283
Author(s):  
Imam Sukardi
Keyword(s):  
Political Thought ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Organism ◽  
Ideal State ◽  
Political Concept ◽  
The Social ◽  
Original Works ◽  
Universal Values ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Ideal

The political concept of Alfarabi is derivated from the concept of Platonic, Aristotelian, and Islam. The ideal state is the state which is elaborated the universal values of humanism, not just limited to certain ethnic and nation which is emphasizing its obedience just to God, not the something else. In this paper, the writer tried to interpret the original works of Alfarabi which is directly related to his political thought and the other thinkers who are studying his political thought. In his political thought, Alfarabi emphasized that the main purpose of the state is to make the social-welfare for its citizens. Based on the organic theory, Alfarabi stated that the government of the state is just look-like the human organism system. In which, each of the existing element functioned to strengthen each other to achieve one goal. The ideal state for Alfarabi is the state which is having the goals for its citizen welfare, and who become the prime leader is a philosopher, who is having the prophetic character, having the wider knowledge, and able to communicate with al 'aql al fa’al trough al ‘aql mustafad. 

Moderation and “Neutral Power”

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aurelian Craiutu
Keyword(s):  
Political Thought ◽  
The State ◽  
Representative Government ◽  
Individual Liberty ◽  
Middle Way ◽  
First Empire ◽  
Bourbon Restoration

This chapter examines political moderation in Benjamin Constant's political thought, with particular emphasis on his search for a “neutral power” that would function as a moderating device, keeping the ship of the state on an even keel. It begins with a commentary on Constant's enigmatic personality before turning to his lesser-known political writings from 1795 to 1799 as well as his better-known works written during the First Empire and the Bourbon Restoration. It then considers the rhetoric of an “extreme center” in the context of moderation as well as Constant's notion of the middle way during the Directory. It also explores Constant's ideas on limited sovereignty and individual liberty, along with his theory of representative government based on the concept of pouvoir modérateur.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document