THE MARXIST THEORY OF STATE FORMATION

By; +Timoth Mugo 

It is noted that the Marxist state theory provides a powerful critical and analytical tool in the interpretation and interrogation of actually existing capitalism. In this it can contribute to the understanding of processes as seemingly diverse and as far from the gaze of Marxist orthodox as the reproduction of patriarchal relations in contemporary societies. The analysis of Marxist theory proceeding three stages which involve: considering why Marxist required a theory of the state and how Marxists have conceptualized the focus of their attention. Marxist theory of state was founded by founded by Karl Marx, Fredrick Engel’s, Lenin and Gramsci.

The Marxism theory of state states that the state emerged due to the internal warfare within the society. The theory further postulates that there was no government in the most primitive stage of social life as there was an egalitarian existence and hence no contending classes.

The modern state being an amorphous complex of agencies with ill defined boundaries performing a variety of not very distinctive functions. The prevalent concept of the state within the Marxist theory is that, a state is an instrument of the ruling class. There are various concepts that depict the understanding of a state in terms of its effects and in the role in maintaining unity and cohesion of social formation by concentrating and sanctioning class domination.

What is a State? Marx Webber captures the State, further, as “that authority which gives order to all but receive from none”. It is the State, therefore, that provides the structures through which people and resources in a society are organized and policy and priorities established (George-Genyi, 2005).

Marx and Engels jointly expressed in the “Manifesto of the Communist Party” that “the executive of the modern State is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie”, mostly at the expense of the poor (Marx and Engels, 1975:37).

Classical Marxist‟ View of the State therefore shows that it is an institution with established apparatuses purposely and directly meant to defend and maintain a class domination and class exploitation. Thus, the control of the State apparatuses by the ruling elites is for, and in the whole interest of the bourgeoisie (Abbass, 1990; Shaapera, 2009 and Abbass, 2010).

Marxists thus say the state originated in conflict situation and operates as a form of Instrument of domination.

This then divides the society into two major groups:

1. Bourgeoisie: 

According to Marxist vocabulary, this means management or those who control the means of production.

2. Proletariat: 

This is the industrial working class or those who provide wage labour.

This theory dwells on two main ideas;

1. Materialism
2. Class struggle.

Marx maintained that the forces of production in any given society constitute the basis of all social relationships while the State rests (or is founded) upon economic conditions. Thus, the mode of material production in social life preconditions the general character of socio-political and spiritual processes in the society (Mahajan, 2000).

Marxian Scholars thus believe that the development of the productive forces in the capitalist society produced surplus value, and thus the appropriation of property for private use that necessitated the constitution of the State. This state then becomes an instrument in the hands of the powerful dominant class for accumulation and exploitation of the dominated members of the society. According to Hembe (2003:38) and Fadahunsi (1988) this then turns to an organ of exploitation and is not capable of pursuing policies, or invariably politics, that would promote the interest of all.

Fadahunsi, A. et al. (1988). Issues on Development: Proceedings of a Seminar held in Zaria, 21-22 January.

Alavi (1979) further says that, because of the absence of a fully developed indigenous class, the State - mostly in under-developed economies- has largely remained an instrument of the ruling class in the promotion of capitalist accumulation under the pretext of national development. This in the long run sees the public policy thus determined by International Finance Capital, using the local bourgeoisie in its formulation and implementation in the national economy (George-Genyi, 2005).

Here the state sometimes enjoys relative autonomy and becomes “independent” from and becomes superior to all social classes as the dominant force in the society rather than instrument of the dominant class and function in the interest of all in the society.

The Marxist then envisages the state as withering away with the resolution of class antagonism when the proletariat seizes power.

MERITS

• Inequality is evident in many developing countries in the world. We see that there is a big gap between the rich and the poor where the rich struggle to maintain their status by ensuring they earn more and the poor since they have no say in the society, they continue to live in sheer poverty.
• In many developing countries, there are conflicts challenging those in power. This has been evident in Egypt where the former President Hosni Mubarak was evicted from power. There is also war still on in Syria wanting their President out of power.
• State is not just an instrument of class domination but sometimes enjoys some relative autonomy to function in the interest of all in the society. This is true as some states show interest for those in the state through public policy. This they do through having security forces to guard the state from invasion by enemies. Social systems like courts of law are also built so as to solve issues that might arise in the state.
• The state withers away with the resolution of class antagonism when the proletariat seizes power. This was evident in the case of Somalia where President Said Barre was overthrown from power in the year 1991 and Somali stayed without a government up to the year 2012.

DEMERITS

• This theory does not explain state formation through external conquests. The Marxist theory claims that the state if formed through internal warfare and thus does not capture the states that form through external warfare.
• This theory claims that there was no state in the most primitive stage of social life hence no classes. In other words it reflects real communists’ societies. Communists may have the best intentions in mind, as far as wanting to make sure we all have what we need, but the truth of the matter is that people individually value their personal freedoms and liberties over the wellbeing of others. A communist government therefore practices harsh enforcement of laws that are set up to make sure everything you say and do conform to the wishes of society.
• Marxist is very vulnerable to corruption. Marxism hands over all means of production to the state, the state have to have regulation to ensure that the citizen and groups are not conducting anything without the government. Since the owners of the means of production accumulated their capital through exploitation of workers, the state was developed internally to acquire some authority to protect their interest.

References

George-Genyi, M. (2005). “The State, Privatization and Consolidation of Democratic Governance in Nigeria”. A Paper presented at the National Political Science Association (NPSA) Annual Conference, held at BSU, Makurdi, Nigeria.

Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1975).“Manifesto of the Communist Party”, in Marx, K. and Engels, F. (Eds), Selected Works. Moscow: Progress Publishers.

Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1975).“Manifesto of the Communist Party”, in Marx, K. and Engels, F. (Eds), Selected Works. Moscow: Progress Publishers.

Alavi, H. (1979). “The State in Post-colonial Societies: Pakistan and Bangladesh”, in Politics and State in the Third World. Macmillan Ltd.

Hembe, G.N. (2003). “The State, the Economy and Mass Participation in the Current Democratic Experiment in Nigeria”, in Jibo, M. &Simbine, A.T. (eds), Contemporary issues in Nigerian Politics. Ibadan: Jodad Publishers.

Shaapera, S.A. (2008), “Jean Jacques Rousseau and the Social Contract Theory: An Analytical Perspective on the Origin and Purpose of the State”. M.Sc Seminar Paper presented in the Department of Political Science, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria – Nigeria. (2009), “The State and Economic Reforms in Nigeria: A Study of the Impact of NAPEP on Kwande Local Government Area of Benue” State (2001-2009). M.Sc Thesis, Department of Political Science, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria-Nigeria.

Mahajan, V.D. (2000). Political Theory. New Delhi: S. Chand and Company Limited.

Fadahunsi, A. et al. (1988). Issues on Development: Proceedings of a Seminar held in Zaria, 21-22 January.