HEARTSTONE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE
SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES
NAME: MARTIN SICHEMBE
STUDENT NO: HTS20250001/PA
COURSE: POLITICAL SCIENCE
PROGRAMME: BACHELOR OF ARTS IN PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION
LECTURER: MR NKHOMA
ASSIGNEMNT: TWO
DUE DATE: 28TH MARCH, 2025
Introduction
The concepts of a polity or state have remained central to the study of political science, evolving
over centuries through various interpretations by scholars and philosophers. The assertion that
the principles and fundamentals underlying the concept of a polity or state in political science are
fluid but very conspicuous suggests that while definitions and understandings of the state or
polity may change over time, their presence in political discourse remains undeniable. This essay
explores this assertion by examining the views of two prominent scholars, Aristotle and Max
Weber, and how their perspectives contribute to our understanding of the state. Additionally, it
incorporates practical examples and explanations to illustrate the dynamic yet evident nature of
these political concepts.
Defining the Polity and the State
A polity refers to an organized political entity that embodies governance, decision-making
structures, and laws within a given society. Aristotle, in his seminal work Politics, defines a
polity as a mixed form of government that balances elements of democracy and oligarchy,
aiming to achieve stability and justice (Lane, 2020). The term "state," on the other hand, has
been subject to various definitions over time. One of the most enduring definitions comes from
Max Weber, who defines the state as "a human community that successfully claims the
monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory" (Politics as a Vocation,
1919) (Dunning, 2021). These definitions highlight the evolving yet central role of polities and
states in shaping political order and governance.
Aristotle’s Perspective: The Polity as a Balanced Governance Model
Aristotle, one of the earliest political philosophers, analyzed different government systems and
classified them into three main categories: monarchy, aristocracy, and polity (or mixed
government). According to Aristotle, a polity is the ideal form of governance because it balances
democracy and oligarchy, ensuring that no single group dominates political power. He believed
1|Page
that a polity promotes civic virtue and prevents the excesses associated with pure democracy
(mob rule) and oligarchy (rule by a select few) (Miller, 2022).
In Politics, Aristotle argues that the best government is one that serves the common interest
rather than individual ambitions. He uses the example of the city-state (polis) in ancient Greece,
where governance was structured in a way that encouraged citizen participation while
maintaining order. This interpretation aligns with modern democratic systems that strive to
balance popular participation and institutional stability, as seen in constitutional democracies
worldwide (Smith, 2023).
The fluidity of the concept of polity is evident in how modern states have adapted its principles
to different political contexts. For instance, the United States operates as a constitutional
republic, blending democratic representation with structured checks and balances. Similarly, the
United Kingdom functions as a constitutional monarchy with democratic governance. These
examples show that while the foundational principles of polity remain, their application varies
based on historical, social, and economic contexts (Jones, 2022).
Max Weber’s Perspective: The State as a Monopoly of Legitimate Violence
Max Weber’s contribution to political science provides another crucial perspective on the nature
of the state. Weber defines the state as an entity that maintains the monopoly on the legitimate
use of force within a given territory. This definition highlights the state’s role in maintaining
order, enforcing laws, and regulating social relations (Pateman, 2023).
Weber’s concept of the state underscores its fluidity in that different historical periods and
political systems have interpreted and exercised this monopoly differently. For example,
absolutist monarchies in Europe during the 17th and 18th centuries maintained strict control over
their subjects through centralized authority and military force. In contrast, modern democratic
states delegate authority to various institutions, such as the police, judiciary, and military, to
uphold law and order within a legal framework (Taylor, 2021).
The conspicuous nature of the state, despite its evolving functions, can be observed in how
contemporary nations operate. For example, the state remains the primary entity responsible for
2|Page
governance in liberal democracies, socialist states, and even autocratic regimes. Countries like
China, the United States, and Russia, despite having different political structures, all retain the
fundamental characteristic of statehood as defined by Weber’s theory. This demonstrates that
while states may differ in form, their presence as political entities remains a constant feature of
governance (Clark, 2022).
The Evolution of Statehood: Fluidity and Conspicuousness
Feudal States to Modern Nation-States: During the medieval period, governance was largely
decentralized, with power concentrated in feudal lords who controlled specific territories. The
emergence of modern nation-states in the 17th century, particularly after the Treaty of
Westphalia in 1648, marked a shift towards centralized political authority and territorial
sovereignty (Bennett, 2023). Colonial States to Post-Colonial Nations: The 19th and 20th
centuries witnessed the expansion of colonial empires, where European powers established state
structures in colonized territories. The decolonization period that followed led to the creation of
independent states, many of which adopted constitutional frameworks that combined traditional
governance systems with modern political institutions (Young, 2021). Liberal Democracies and
Authoritarian States: Today, states exist in different forms, ranging from liberal democracies like
Canada and Sweden to authoritarian regimes like North Korea. While these states operate under
different governance models, their role in maintaining order, regulating the economy, and
shaping public policy remains unchanged (Evans, 2023).
Case Studies: United States and China
United States operates as a federal constitutional republic, blending democratic governance with
institutional mechanisms that prevent power concentration. Aristotle's notion of polity—where a
state combines elements of democracy and oligarchy to ensure stability and fairness—is evident
in the U.S. system. The separation of powers among the executive, legislative, and judicial
branches ensures a system of checks and balances, preventing authoritarian rule (Huntington,
2022). This structure fosters democratic representation by allowing citizens to elect leaders,
while constitutional constraints and judicial oversight safeguard the rule of law. Additionally,
3|Page
federalism in the U.S. grants individual states significant autonomy, demonstrating decentralized
governance within a unified national framework. Over time, policy shifts such as civil rights
reforms and economic regulations reflect the adaptive yet consistent nature of U.S. governance.
Despite political polarization and evolving ideological debates, the core principles of democratic
participation, judicial independence, and constitutional integrity remain intact (Huntington,
2022). China’s governance model operates under a one-party socialist framework, where the
Communist Party of China (CPC) wields centralized authority over political and economic
affairs.
This structure aligns with Max Weber’s concept of the state, which asserts that a legitimate
government maintains authority through a combination of coercion and societal acceptance
(Zhao, 2023). Unlike the pluralistic U.S. system, China’s leadership is rooted in hierarchical
decision-making, ensuring political continuity and economic control. Although lacking electoral
democracy, China maintains bureaucratic efficiency and long-term policy planning, allowing
rapid economic growth and infrastructure development. However, its centralized structure also
raises concerns regarding individual freedoms, press restrictions, and human rights issues (Zhao,
2023). Nevertheless, China's governance reflects a different but effective model of state control,
where legitimacy is derived from economic performance and social stability rather than electoral
processes.
4|Page
Conclusion
The assertion that "the principles and fundamentals underlying the concept of a polity or state in
political science are fluid but very conspicuous" is well supported by historical and
contemporary evidence. Aristotle’s theory of polity highlights the balance between democratic
participation and institutional stability, while Weber’s definition of the state underscores its role
in maintaining legitimate authority. The evolution of political entities from feudal systems to
modern nation-states, as well as the variations in governance models worldwide, further
demonstrate the dynamic yet undeniable nature of polities and states. Ultimately, while the
structures and functions of these entities may change over time, their presence as essential
components of political life remains unchallenged.
5|Page
References
1. Bennett, J. (2023). The Evolution of Statehood: From Feudalism to the Modern Nation-
State. Cambridge University Press.
2. Clark, P. (2022). Comparative Politics and State Formation. Oxford University Press.
3. Dunning, J. (2021). Max Weber and the State: A Sociological Perspective. Routledge.
4. Evans, M. (2023). Political Systems and Governance in the 21st Century. Palgrave
Macmillan.
5. Jones, R. (2022). Constitutional Democracies and Political Stability. Harvard University
Press.
6. Lane, D. (2020). Aristotle’s Political Thought and Its Modern Relevance. Princeton
University Press.
7. Miller, F. (2022). Aristotle on Government and Citizenship. Stanford University Press.
6|Page
