In the article the view on the institutional essence of the state in the context of the dialectic of its relationship with society in the main ideological and political directions of world political opinion – liberalism, conservatism, nationalism, and socialism is investigated.
System-structured, comparative and historical methods of research were used here.
The purpose of this study is to carry out a comparative analysis of the specifics of views on the institutional essence of the state and its social purpose in the main directions of world political opinion: liberalism, conservatism, nationalism, and socialism.
It is established that views on the institutional essence of the state and its social functions in the world political thought are rather variegated. Thus, liberal political thought treats the institution of the state as a “service staff” of the interests of society and a guarantor for the observance and protection of human rights and freedoms. The method of “institution” of the state is a social contract. Conservative political thought emphasizes the self-sufficiency and importance of the institution of the state as a protector of the traditional socio-political order and the guarantor of evolutionary social progress. The method of “institutionalization” of the state is God’s will or tradition. The ideology of nationalism views the state institution as an instrument of consolidation and protection of the interests of the nation. The method of “institutionalization” of the state is the political self-realization of the nation. Eventually, the ideology of socialism (social democracy) considers the institution of the state as an instrument of active protection of the interests of various social strata. The method of “institutionalization” of the state is the political self-organization of social groups and layers of the population.
Acton, L. (2000). Nationality. In O. Protsenko, &
V. Lisovyi (Compilers), Nationalism: Anthology (pp. 84–107). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Smoloskyp.D.
Alter, P. (2000). Nationalism: the Problem of Definition. In O. Protsenko, & V. Lisovyi (Compilers), Nationalism: Anthology (pp. 211–220). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Smoloskyp.
Bostan, S.K. (2005). Form of Government of the Modern State: the Problems of History, Theory, and Practice. [In Ukrainian]. Zaporizhia: Institute of Law.
Burke, E. (2008). Social Contract, Obligations and Human Rights. In O. Protsenko, & V. Lisovyi (Compilers), Conservatism: Anthology (pp. 215–221). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Smoloskyp.
Coleridge S. (2008). Continuous Social Contract. In
O. Protsenko, & V. Lisovyi (Compiler), Conservatism: Anthology (pp. 222–227). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Smoloskyp.
Khoma, N. (ed.). (2017a) The History of Political Thought: Textbook in 2 v. Vol.1.: From the Formation to the Beginning of the twentieth century. [In Ukrainian]. Lviv: New World-2000.
Khoma, N. (ed.). (2014). The History of Political Thought: Encyclopedic Dictionary. [In Ukrainian]. Lviv: New World-2000.
Khoma, N. (ed.). (2017b). The History of Political Thought: Textbook in 2 v. Vol. 2: XX – beg. XXI century. [In Ukrainian]. Lviv: New World-2000.
Kukhta, B. (2008). Essays on the history of European political thought. [In Ukrainian]. Lviv: without title of publishing house.
Locke, J. (2009). Goals of Political Society and Governance. In O. Protsenko, & V. Lisovyi (Compilers), Liberalism: Anthology (pp. 639–644). [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Smoloskyp.
Lutsyshyn, H. (2012). National Consolidation of Ukraine in the Conditions of the Modern Political Process. [In Ukrainian]. Lviv: Publishing House of Lviv Polytechnic University.
Picha, V. (Compiler). (2014). Political Science: the Modern Terms and Concepts. A Short Dictionary. [In Ukrainian]. Lviv: New World-2000.
Sebain, D., Torson, T. (1997). The History of Political Thought. Kyiv: Foundations.
Shulzhenko, F. (2007). Socio-Legal State in Ukraine: the Problems of Formation and Modernization. [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: KNEU.