Session 4: The State

The leviathan state approach breathes a life into state by saying that it follows its own interests as opposed to the interest of society. I find that hard to understand because even if it is argued that the state is impartial and stands on its own apart from the government or the people, the state is not still a separate organism with its own wishes. It is comprised of people, who will usually be part of a state segment and so will represent the interests of that that particular state segment, because every element in the bureaucracy will rise from a certain social strata. Thus it is hard to say that the interests of the leviathan and the people are not separate, because the Leviathan will ultimately come from the people. And usually, as is certainly the case in our country, the bureaucracy representing the Leviathan will rise from a one certain social background as opposed to being an amalgam of many, constituting, perhaps, somewhat of a democratic meritocracy.

Another point I found interesting was that, where most former colonial powers in Europe have made a firm move towards an egalitarian state, England has not made as strong a move towards such a state despite relinquishing monarchy and adopting democracy. As insinuated in the reading, it maybe so due to the image of the state, which is generally positive in England because the state is the dependent of and guardian of democracy.