What Makes A State An Effective State?

People have been arguing for years about who should have more power, either the federal government or the state. People arguing that the states should have more power than the government because they care more about the people. Then other people will say that the federal should have majority of the power since they oversee everything the states do. I believe that the federal government and the state government should have shared power, but I think the federal government should have the powers such as declaring war and things to help the people as a whole. Then the states should have the power to do what they think is the best things for the people of their state.

Daniel Elazar’s three categories of state political cultures are moralistic, individualistic, and traditionalistic (Smith & Greenblatt , 2016). Moralistic culture is defined in the textbook, a political culture that views politics and government as the means to achieve the collective good (Smith & Greenblatt , 2016). Individualist culture is described as a political culture that views politics and government as just another way to achieve individual goals (Smith & Greenblatt , 2016). Traditionalistic culture is explained as a political culture that views politics and government as the means of maintaining the existing social order (Smith & Greenblatt , 2016). I believe the states can have mixed features of all three of Elazar’s types of

What makes a political authority legitimate? A legitimate political authority, in this essay, will be taken to mean that there is a justification for an individual or a body to have power over other people in determining such things as laws and protection of freedom. To consider this question, three theories shall be looked at – Hobbes’, Rousseau and finally Locke and determine which gives the most persuasive account of legitimate political authority. To begin with, their hypothetical starting point, the state of nature, shall be discussed to establish the foundations of their political authority. Secondly, the reasons that shall lead man to get out of the state of nature will be examined in order to see if these logically follow on from

The “state” is best understood in relation to a government’s power, influence and involvement with citizens’ rights in a given territory. The larger the state the more involved it is in the lives of its citizens.

Examples of these include countries such as Mexico and India. Mexico, a very unstable economy as it is, has a huge issue with the illegal drug market. The Black Market for drugs is so bad in Mexico that millions of people have tried flee the country due constant conflicts between mexican drug cartels. Often, outside of major mexican cities, lands are controlled by different cartels. The activity of these cartels is a huge reason why the United States claims to have an immigration problem with Mexico. As these black market drug cartels smuggle drugs into the United States, they use the profits to take strict control over the land of a disorganized Mexico. This makes people flee the country, leaving less hard working people in the country to produce for the economy. This results in Mexico having almost no way to bring balance their country and it’s

Following military acts of governmental authority or national warfare, a significant worry arises for nations. As stated in the powerpoint, especially when the state is large and diverse, it is much more likely that it is becomes fragile. The question of whether the nation will need national-building, or state-building has to be determined in the case of military acts. State collapse can be due to the failure of the nation to convey favorable diplomatic benefits to the nation. The collapse of a state can be due to a number of reasons, for example the vast amount of governmental goods. Also, the failure of a nation can be caused by the lack of providing protection and safety, a permissible organization that examines

We as the people should maintain the most crucial political power within our designated states. Let’s not allow one entity to govern all of us, when those representatives do not know what each state and those who live in it need. Our focus must remain on us. A strong National Government under the Constitution would give them too much power.

Throughout the years 1877-1981, minority groups employed activism in a variety of guises in the struggle to achieve civil rights. While leading activists could draw on international events to strengthen their cause and enjoyed greater success as the campaign persisted, it ultimately fell to the government to make advances: activists needed a sympathetic president and government to legally push through change, thus the progression of civil rights was arguably dictated more by the current political situation than by the work of activists. The influence of the federal government is further seen by the fact that it both hindered and accomplished change throughout this period.

A current conflict throughout our country is deciding who should have the majority of the power- state or federal government. The federal government has overstepped their boundaries that James Madison put into place in the Constitution. According to the Pew Research Center, public anger at the federal government is higher than it’s ever been- four out of ten conservative Republicans feel angry towards their government (Day 3, Source A). The state government should have power over their own state because state governments understand their own needs better than the federal government who is only thinking about the good of the country as a whole. Another reason the state government should be able to control their own laws and decisions is because

“The OEIG is responsible for ensuring and maintaining integrity in state government. Explain what integrity means to you and how your skills and / or experience will help this office achieve its mission”.

Some contemporary Scholars like Quentin Skinner define the state today as "a locus of power distinct from either the ruler or the body of the body of the people." (Skinner, Foundations of Modern Political Thought, II, p.355). Yet, others would argue that the potency of the word "state" derives from the fact that it means both ruler and people. In other words, the state is at the same time loved for its promise of order and stability for the whole community and feared for its threat of coercion by the power which does the ordering. Both schools of thought may be right for there is no universal definition of the concept. But no intellectual discussion about the concept of the state is complete without a review of the writings of St. Thomas

To begin with, an advantages that a ¨small¨ state government has is that it can ¨develop and enforce criminal codes, to administer health and safety rules and to regulate the family via marriage and divorce laws.¨ (Ginsberg 68) Another advantage is that the state can meet more of its citizen´s needs due to there being a smaller amount of citizen´s in a state rather than the whole nation´s citizens. A further advantage is that they have the authority to ¨regulate individuals livelihoods¨ this meant that the state secures the necessities of people (Ginsberg 68). For instance, if you want to have certain job such as a doctor or hairstylist the state must license you, this is done to ensure that you as a person know how to properly do your job (Ginsberg 68). A final advantage that a ¨small¨ state could have is the facilitation having more control over the police power, which is the state´s ¨authority to regulate health, safety, and morals of its citizens¨ (Ginsberg 68).

State is commonly referred to either the present condition of a system or entity, or to a governed entity, such as a nation or a province. The state itself consists of the society, government as well as the people living there. Before the Second World War, State is often seen as the main actor in international Relations as it can declare states of wars, control most of the economic influence within the region and larger states often dominant the role of international relations within the region or even in the globe. However, after the Second World War, the impacts on state influence as an actor has become less important than before, regarding to this point, there is

No global definition exists for states described as “fragile”, “failing”, or failed because they come in all shapes and sizes. Yet, countries that have failed at the basic responsibilities of governance and sovereign authority are generally lumped into this group. Fragile, failing, or failed states share similar characteristics including their inability to control their borders, loss of authority over insurgents, gangs, and warlords, and loss of legitimacy internally/internationally. Examples relevant today of countries that are fragile or failing, and on the path to failed status include Iraq and many of the Middle Eastern countries struggling to maintain their autonomy in the fight against ISIS. Other important indicators of failed states include:

The term developmental state has been widely utilised to describe any state experiencing a period of economic development and improvement in living standards (Pham, 2012). One of the most significant arguments in this scope is the performance of developmental state model. A number of scholars have attempted to investigate this issue and arguments can be divided into three categories. Proponents of state intervention indicate that the state plays an indispensable role in directing economic development and utilising the resources of the country to achieve development goals. On the contrary, those who oppose state-led model argue