Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
Understanding how states form isn't just about memorizing philosopher names—it's about grasping the fundamental question that underlies all of political philosophy: where does legitimate authority come from? Every theory of state formation offers a different answer, and those answers have shaped revolutions, justified empires, and continue to influence debates about government power today. You're being tested on your ability to distinguish between consent-based, force-based, and organic explanations for political authority.
These theories don't exist in isolation. They respond to each other, critique each other, and often emerge from specific historical moments. When you encounter an FRQ asking about legitimacy, sovereignty, or the relationship between individuals and the state, you'll need to draw on these foundational ideas. Don't just memorize which philosopher said what—know what problem each theory solves and what assumptions it makes about human nature.
These theories share a core premise: legitimate authority requires some form of agreement from those being governed. They reject the idea that power can simply be imposed or inherited—instead, government must be justified to the people it rules.
Compare: Social Contract Theory vs. Marxist Theory—both critique traditional authority, but social contract theorists see the state as potentially legitimate through consent, while Marx views all states under capitalism as inherently oppressive regardless of their democratic forms. If an FRQ asks about critiques of liberal democracy, Marx is your go-to contrast.
These theories locate the source of political authority outside the governed population. Power flows downward—from God, tradition, or inherent superiority—rather than upward from popular consent.
Compare: Divine Right vs. Patriarchal Theory—both justify hierarchical authority through appeals to tradition and nature, but divine right emphasizes religious sanction while patriarchal theory emphasizes family structure as the model for governance. Both were used to resist democratic reforms.
These theories take a harder look at political reality: states often emerge through violence, conquest, and domination. They raise uncomfortable questions about whether might makes right—and whether any state founded on force can ever become truly legitimate.
Compare: Force Theory vs. Conquest Theory—these overlap significantly, but force theory is broader (including internal coercion), while conquest theory specifically emphasizes external military expansion and subjugation of other groups. Both challenge consent-based theories by describing how states actually form versus how they should form.
Rather than a single founding moment—whether contract, conquest, or divine appointment—these theories see the state as gradually emerging from simpler social structures. Authority evolves naturally as societies grow more complex.
Compare: Evolutionary Theory vs. Social Contract Theory—evolutionary theory sees the state as emerging gradually and unconsciously through social development, while social contract theory imagines a deliberate founding moment where individuals agree to form government. This distinction matters for questions about whether we can meaningfully "consent" to institutions we're born into.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Consent as legitimacy source | Social Contract Theory (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau) |
| Religious/traditional authority | Divine Right Theory, Patriarchal Theory |
| Force and coercion | Force Theory, Conquest Theory |
| Economic foundations of power | Marxist Theory |
| Gradual social development | Evolutionary Theory |
| Critiques of existing states | Marxist Theory, Force Theory |
| Justifications for monarchy | Divine Right Theory, Patriarchal Theory |
| Foundations of democratic thought | Social Contract Theory |
Which two theories both explain state formation through violence, and how do they differ in scope?
A philosopher argues that government is only legitimate when citizens have agreed to its authority. Which theory does this represent, and which theory would most directly challenge this claim?
Compare and contrast Divine Right Theory and Patriarchal Theory: what source of authority do they share, and what distinguishes their justifications for rule?
If an FRQ asks you to evaluate whether states founded through conquest can ever achieve legitimacy, which theories would you use to argue for and against that possibility?
Marxist Theory and Social Contract Theory both emerged as critiques of existing power structures. What fundamental assumption about the state separates them?