Compare and Contrast Hegel, Marx, List and Benedict Anderson - Essay Example

Four theories of Affiliation Hegel’s theory of state Hegel (194) outlines that every state has its own standards and individuals are expected to act in accordance to the ethics of their respective states. Authority of the state is determined by what is considered to be right and this explains why different states have different methods of governance. Hegel (267) refers to the state as a political community where all rules and regulations that govern a state have direct political relations. State leaders are very influential and all decisions pertaining to the state should be made with the consent of its citizens. Hegel (258) emphasizes on the concept of freedom were a state should allow its citizens to enjoy their rights and freedom. Human beings have the freedom and free will to make their own independent decisions. However, human slavery interfered with that freedom as it subjected human beings to inhumane treatment. Hegel (284) outlines that traditions, customs, recognized institutes and by-laws have no significant effect unless citizens of that particular state have accepted these customs willingly. The State must consult its citizens before making any decisions such as signing treaties with other countries among others. Hegel disagrees on the philosophies of Plato on personal liberty stating that individuals have a right to make their own decisions. He quotes “The lack of subjectivity is the defect of the Greek ethical idea. Plato has not recognized knowledge, wishes, and resolutions of the person, nor his self-reliance, and has not succeeded in combining them with his view, but justice demands its rights for this just as much as it requires the higher elucidation of the same, and its harmony with the universal. The opposite of Platos principle is the principle of the conscious free will of individuals that in later times was more especially by Rousseau raised to prominence: the necessity of the arbitrary choice of the individual, as individual, the outward expression of the individual” (Ph,II,,Pg114, 115). Hegel (193) emphasizes on his theory of the political community where states exchange political ideas so as to come with better ways of governance. In the modern days, states have become interdependent and this is mainly because of trade and exchange of expertise. Hegel (206) states that the constitution is what defines a state as it shows the collective spirit of a nation. The constitution provides a nation some sense of direction and makes citizens understand their rights and obligation. Every nation has its own constitution that outlines the role of every arm of government and this prevents conflicts from arising as roles of all state officials are well defined. Hegel (233) outlines that God himself honors the unity of the nation and anyone who attempts to bring down the spirit of a nation should be punished. Hegel (264) states that the religion has a great role to play in the governance of the state as it lays the foundation for the state. A state that respects the freedom of its citizens recognizes individuality where people’s beliefs may differ. Religion influences the lives of people e in all manner of ways and state should, therefore, not interfere with the religious beliefs of individuals. The role of the state is to ensure that despite the existence of different religions, peaceful co-existence should by all means prevail. Religion creates some solace sand obedience to the law is considered as a religious act. Hegel (105) outlines that the ethical freedom should be upheld in the state as morality is determined by an individual’s consciousness. People have different intentions and make different judgments depending on what they consider to be ethical. A state should, therefore, respect the fact that people have different principles that the guide and all that is required of a citizen by the law is to abide by the set laws. Friedrich List theory of the state According to Friedrich (398), the productive powers of a nation are dependent on the manner of governance. In a state where individualism is practiced the state is unlikely to achieve equality as only a few individuals will get access to the resource and this in the long run widens the gap between the rich and the poor. A state with an individualism kind of society ignores the importance of social labor and cooperation. Individuals work for themselves rather than for the state and this hinders the overall growth of the state. On the other hand, states that practice communism experience economic growth as people work towards improving the economy of the state. Communism also leads to civilization as it enables interaction with other nations and promotes the exchange of ideas and technology. Friedrich (143) outlines that a state must protect its resources to ensure that their sources of income are stable. He states that a nation must also control its own population to ensure that the available resources can sustain the community. Friedrich (148) outlines that a state must also ensure that its security is heightened and that its borders are all secure. A nation not surrounded by oceans and mountains is prone to surprise attacks and such a country should be extremely alert. Any conflicts that arise within and outside the state must be dealt with and states should also form alliances with neighboring countries to ensure that all borders are secured. In relation to the economy of a nation, nations have to pass through various stages of economic development. The first stage is unusual cruelty where the nation faces cruelty from other nations especially when it is making attempts to expand globally. This process is important as it gives a nation better understanding of the outside markets and it enables them identify the areas to improve on. At this stage, a nation supports local producers and helps them establish themselves in international markets. The second stage of economic development is the Agricultural- manufacturing stage where the state now has knowledge about the trends of the international markets and is, therefore, able to develop this will enable them compete globally. The third and final stage is the agricultural-manufacturing-commercial stage where the state has fully established itself. This is an extremely sensitive stage as the state has to come up strategies on how they can survive in the market (Friedrich, 65). Benedict’s theory of state Benedict (23) outlines that the nationalism differs in every country depending on their values, beliefs and way of life. For instance in the Middle East countries, religion is dominant and it is the main unifying factor. Other religions are restricted in such countries and foreign investors are required to abide by the Sharia laws. Besides religion, language is also another element that promoted nationalism in these countries. Communities in these countries are interconnected by sacred languages and they have their own distinct characteristics. Every nation has its own unifying element and nationalism mainly depends on the bonds that exist between communities in a particular state. Benedict (38) outlines that the spirit of nationalism has increased the bonds between communities and these communities have replaced succession communities. There has been a great decline in sacred communities due to the westernization and technological development. Benedict (47) outlines that African countries are the ones that have been greatly affected by technology. Cultural values have been replaced with the culture of the west and their political systems have been affected, as well. Most African countries have adopted the constitution of their colonizers and making amendments to this constitution have proved difficult. Benedict (2000) defines a nation as a setting that is socially-constructed, or assumed to be socially connected. Communities are mainly distinguished from others not only by their uniqueness but by the manner in which they relate towards. This approach mainly lays much emphases on the part of innovative imagery. Traditions are invented in a nation and these traditions are passed on from one generation to another. This approach to the nation has created many myths about nationalism and the essence of a nation (Benedict, 256). According to Benedict (233), the term nation is an imaginary term that only came up historically. There is also a belief that the society is naturally organized rather than set up and that the bonds that are formed between members in a society cannot be easily broken. Every society inclusive of the primitive ones have a defined system of government. Benedict (288) agrees with the notion that the nationalism that exist in third world countries is a pure imitation of the nationalism in Europe and America. Benedict (356) justifies his reason for describing a nation as imagined political Communities, stating that even small nations may never know their immediate neighbors but back in their minds they assume that a communion exist. For a political community to physically exist the bonds between the community members should be created. He outlines that the nationalism comes before the nation as it awakens nations to self- consciousness. Benedict (405) emphasizes on the notion of print capitalism stating that the deterioration of articulate religious communities, the weakening of families, may have led to the development of nationalism. The rapid growth of print-capitalism is what has nurtured nationalism and in the long run lead to nationalist consciousness. The early stages of modernization led to the publishing of books in different languages. These new print-languages created unity in various nations as it enabled the exchange of knowledge and information which in the long run has led to the formation of newly imagined communities. Marx’s understanding of the state Marx (321) stresses on the importance of political leadership in a state outlining that a nation is defined by the competence of its leaders. Great leaders should act in the best interest of the state to ensure prosperity is achieved. Marx (338) outlines that, in most cases, citizens are torn between being loyal to the state through abiding by the set rules and meeting their own individual needs that may not necessarily be in line with the set rules. Leaders also should seek to promote national cohesion and integration. A nation comprises of different communities whose cultures differ and it is the role of state leaders to ensure that conflicts do not arise and that and these communities peacefully co- exist. Marx (423) also emphasizes on the importance of a constitution to the state outlining that a constitution is what holds a nation together. Nations that lack a written constitution face many challenges when dealing with legal issues. Marx (452) encourages nations to adopt the communist system outlining that it promotes nationalism. In a Communist society politics is viewed as leadership rather than power as leaders are expected to deliver. In such a society citizens are given the will to choose their own leaders who upon appointment, are expected to fulfill their obligations without fail. Marx (463) outlines that political unrest is commonly caused by leaders who view leadership as a power struggle and instead of performing their duties as required, they spend time trying to outdo other political leaders. Marx (574) outlines that the leadership of the state is very crucial as it determines the stability of the state and its economic performance as a whole. Existing Comparisons of the authors Hegel and Marx both outline on the role of the political community outlining that politics makes up the state. Both authors agree that states must give their citizens political freedom to choose their leaders by involving them in the voting exercise. According to Hegel (67) political leadership, lays the foundation for the state and ensures that that all state operations run smoothly. Marx (147) outlines that even primitive societies in the ancient days had a system of government where leaders were chosen to lead head the society. Friedrich (69) also lays emphasis on the importance of good governance stating that only nations with good governance are the ones that are likely to enjoy prosperity. Friedrich and Marx also agree that communism should be adopted by all state as it leads to national cohesion. Friedrich (92) states that countries that practice communism have achieved a lot as they are in a position to form partnerships. Communism also encourages national cohesion as people join forces to build their nation. Nation building requires cooperation from both the leadership and the citizens. The state leadership should also encourage citizens to participate in nation building and all activities should be geared towards achieving this common goal. All the four authors also agree that the state is categorized by so many elements among their religion, beliefs, values and ethics. Despite the difference in their views on the state, they all agree that leadership and attitude of the citizens makes up the state. The authors show the developments that have taken place over the years and the effect of the colonial period on the various countries especially the third world countries. These authors give a better understanding of the state as their definitions of the state differ. Existing differences among the Author Among all the writers, Benedict is the one that whose views on the nation differ and he believes that there only exist imaginary political communities. Unlike the rest of the authors who believe that communities naturally make a nation, Benedict (288) outlines that a nation is an imagery word that is used interchangeably people without people’s knowledge. A Nation must comprise of communities that have good knowledge of each other. However, in most cases, people within the same geographical area live independently and years pass by without them ever knowing their own neighbors. Such a setting cannot be referred to as a nation because there are no bonds that exist between apart from the fact that they share the same geographical location. Hegel (266) suggests that the authoritarian political system be the best way to govern a nation. In such a political system, the leader is the one who makes all decisions pertaining to the state and the citizens are only viewed as subjects. However, Marx (429) strongly disagrees with Hegel outlining that, in the modern society; citizens must be involved in the governance of a nation. Citizens should, therefore, be given a chance to exercise their political freedom and this includes given a chance to vote for their leaders. In conclusion, the four authors outline that a nation must have a clear political system that is well understood and one that defines the roles of all leaders. For a state to run it must have all arms of government and their roles clearly stated. The authors have put much emphases on the justice system stating that it should comprise of individuals who are willing to uphold justice without compromise. The different views of the authors concerning the state give a better understanding on the developments of literature as people keep improving on the existing ideas and coming up with theories that suite the modern world. Work cited: Benedict, Anderson. Imagined Communities: Reflection on The Origin and Spread ofNationalism, New York: Varick street Publishers, 1983. Friedrich, List. National System of Political Economy, London: Longman publishers, 1909. Hegel, Greifen. Philosophy of Right, Canada: Batoche Books Limited,2001. Robert, Tucker, the Marx-Engels Reader, London, Norton Publishers 1971. Read More