Daniel Engster. Divine Sovereignty: The Origins of Modern State Power. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2001. x + 257 pp. index, bibl. $42. ISBN: 0-87580-275-3.

2003 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 501-502
Author(s):  
Markku Peltonen
Keyword(s):  
State Power ◽  
Modern State ◽  
Divine Sovereignty ◽  
Northern Illinois University

scholarly journals From a Confucian Literati to a Military General: Li Hung Chang’s Views of Western Technology (1885-1896)

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 155
Author(s):  
Haixia Wang
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Change ◽  
Political Power ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
State Power ◽  
Modern State ◽  
Western Science ◽  
Historical Time

<p class="1Body">This paper focuses on Li Hung Chang (1823-1901)’s visit to England and America in 1896, to rethink and revaluate the importat role Li played at that historical time. Li Hung Chang toured Europe and America in 1896 as an imperial envoy of the first rank. Although some aspects of Li’s career and evaluation have been given monographic treatment, there is yet little study on his comments on his attitudes toward Western science and technology. This paper augues that if modernization is a matter of modern state power as an army, navy, or diplomatic corps, then Li was certainly a modernizer. But if modernization is a deeper process of organizational and institutional change, Li was not a determined modernizer. In fact, Li relied heavily on patronage even when he could exercise legitimate political power, in order to adovocate Self-Strengthening Movement.</p>

The Archive as a “Collective Project”

2017 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 529-533
Author(s):  
Nilay Özok-Gündoğan
Keyword(s):  
19Th Century ◽  
State Government ◽  
State Power ◽  
The State ◽  
Modern State ◽  
Late 19Th Century ◽  
Governmental Body ◽  
National Memory ◽  
History Of ◽  
A Site

The history of the archive is the history of the state. Or so say conventional approaches to the archives. Until recently, the archive has been seen solely as a site, or rather a repository, of modern state power and governmentality, and a crucial medium for the making and preservation of national memory in the late 19th century. There is a truth to this state-centric perspective: the archive was conceived as a place where governments keep their records; they usually contain a term such as “state,” “government,” or “national” in their names; and they are often funded by and connected to a governmental body.

Denationalization

2017 ◽  
pp. 357-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Gibney
Keyword(s):  
Historical Development ◽  
State Power ◽  
Academic Work ◽  
Public Order ◽  
Modern State ◽  
Citizenship Status ◽  
The Way

Citizenship in the modern state is in many ways uniquely secure as a status. Yet states have always possessed some bases through which they may remove citizenship, including fraud, disloyalty, acquisition of another citizenship, marriage to a foreigner, and threat to public order. Indeed, denationalization powers have recently gained attention as many liberal states have created new laws to strip citizenship from individuals involved with terrorism. In this chapter, I explore the practice of denationalization. I first consider the definition, grounds, and historical development of denationalization power. I then draw from recent academic work to show how denationalization offers insights into questions of significance relating to the ethical limits of state power, the historical development of citizenship status, and the way restrictive immigration controls impact upon state members. I conclude with a discussion of some outstanding issues raised by the denationalization for scholars of citizenship.

A State Like Any Other? The Fourteenth-Century Papal Patrimony Through The Eyes of Roman Law Jurists

1991 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 245-260
Author(s):  
Joseph Canning
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Fourteenth Century ◽  
State Power ◽  
Uneven Development ◽  
The State ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Modern State ◽  
True Nature ◽  
Early Stages ◽  
Human Institution

In the fourteenth century, and notably under Cardinal Albornoz, the papal patrimony began its uneven development into a form of early modern state. As Paolo Prodi has pointed out, these early stages, although interrupted by retrogression caused by the Great Schism, served as the foundations for the construction of the state of the Renaissance papacy. In reality, the popes exercised sovereignty in a state whose origin and nature were essentially temporal: to this extent their regnum was no different from those of secular monarchs. There was, however, a problem impeding the perception of the true nature of the growth of papal state power: a certain ambiguity hung over the papal lands in that the papacy justified its rule both by hierocratic arguments and by reference to grants of jurisdiction from emperors and kings. The spiritual office of the popes could obscure the fact of the kind of state of which they were the sovereign. In the works of the fourteenth-century Commentators on the Roman law, however, there gradually emerged a clear recognition of the direction which the papacy was taking: that the Patrimony of St Peter was no more and no less than a state created by human institution.

scholarly journals The State in a Globalization: The Context of Transformation

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 84-90
Author(s):  
Balaklytskyi A.
Keyword(s):  
State Government ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
State Power ◽  
Specific Model ◽  
The State ◽  
Political Regime ◽  
The Political ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Modern State ◽  
Public Authorities

The article on the theoretical level explores the peculiarities of the transformation of the nation state in conditions of globalization in the context of contemporary realities. It is emphasized that globalization with varying strengths and intensities, that is, has uneven effects on the state and its components. In particular, if we take the form of the state, which includes the form of government, the form of state administrative-and-territorial system and political regime, then, given the empirical material of recent decades, we can conclude that globalization has a significant impact primarily on a political regime that is increasingly transformed towards the democratization and liberalization of public life. At the same time, globalization exerts less influence on such constituent forms of the state as the form of state government and the form of state administrative-and-territorial system, which is conditioned, among other things, by the specific nature of the latter. In particular, in the conditions of globalization, the form of state government of a modern state is transformed primarily in the context of the dynamics of the functioning of the system of higher power institutions in the state, and not in the context of a specific way of existence and expression of the system of supreme bodies of state power. At the same time, globalization affects on the development of democratic foundations of the organization and functioning of the system of public authorities, contributing to ensuring the practical implementation of the rule of law, regardless of the specific model of government (monarchy or republic), whose presence in the state is associated with a certain historical tradition of its development and level of its perception in the mass consciousness in society. Influencing on the form of state administrative-and-territorial system, globalization facilitates processes of regionalization as a complex process of redistribution of administrative powers between the state and its administrative-territorial units, as a result of which new governmental and institutional forms are gradually being formed, corresponding to the new role of regional state formations in the decision-making process at national and supranational levels. In addition, in the context of globalization, the democratic model of the political regime acquires special features related to the formation and functioning of supranational institutions and associations, within which the political domination of nation-states gradually moves to a new level, the ultimate stage of which is global governance. Also, globalization not only causes the corresponding transformations of the content of the traditional functions of the state, in particular, economic, political, social, etc., but also creates the appropriate prerequisites for the rapid development of new functions, the content of which previously had no independent meaning and was considered mainly as an integral part of some other function of the state (for example, the environmental and information functions of the modern state). Thus, it is concluded that the transformation of the state in the conditions of globalization is systemic and, at the same time, contradictory, because, on the one hand, it manifests itself both at the level of all its constituent elements of its form and at the level of the dynamics of its concrete activity within certain temporal and spatial limits (functions of the state), and on the other – it intensifies the multi-vector processes and even the tendencies of development of both individual constituents of the form of the state (for example, the form of the state administrative-and-territorial system) and the functions of the state, in particular, economic and social. Keywords: state, globalization, form of the state, functions of the state, political regime, democracy, state power

The King’s Two Bodies as Lamentation

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-35
Author(s):  
Karl Shoemaker
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
State Power ◽  
Imago Dei ◽  
Modern State ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Two Bodies ◽  
Made In

The King’s Two Bodies is, as has long been recognized, a genealogy of modern state power. But it is also something else less clearly recognized. The King’s Two Bodies is a lamentation. In Kantorowicz’s poignant eulogy, the sovereign that medieval lawyers had made in the imago dei, was revealed at last to be an idol. Profound reverence for the rule of law crumbled into absent-minded legality. The lawful sovereign became diabolical power, forever deciding exceptions but incapable of justice or grace. In The King’s Two Bodies, Kantorowicz mournfully shows how the death and tragic afterlife of a particular medieval concept of sovereignty helped to make possible the horrors of modern political absolutism and state idolatry.

Michael Oakeshott and the Postulates of Individuality

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 824-852 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Norris
Keyword(s):  
State Power ◽  
Modern State ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Michael Oakeshott ◽  
State Enterprises ◽  
Widespread View ◽  
Formal Rules

Michael Oakeshott provides the best articulation of the widespread view that the moral foundations of the modern state limit it to the defense and maintenance of a system of formal rules governing individuals and non-state enterprises. While this understanding of the proper relation between individual and state has been challenged by liberals of a more Rawlsian persuasion, these criticisms have persuaded few to change their minds, as they rest upon assumptions that are plainly incompatible with the view under consideration. I argue that, rightly understood, central and attractive features of Oakeshott’s own conception of understanding, philosophy, individuality, and education lead to significantly different conclusions than those embraced by Oakeshott himself. The “morality of individuality” upon which Oakeshott rests his strict restrictions on the use of state power requires that we be open to the use of that power to guarantee that all receive the education postulated by individuality.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document