Justification of the State

Many countries that recently experienced conflict and turmoil politically cannot be relied on to provide security for their citizens. One of the common problems in such states is that there are no sufficient manpower resources to offer effective service in the military, police and other such services. In fact, where units of such services exist, they are widely viewed as part of the problem afflicting the people. The reasons for the perceptions are broad.

They may be viewed as corrupt or supporting criminal gangs that operate counter to the wishes of the wider society. They may also be tools used by the existing regime to oppress the masses. Such units have a record of violating human rights. There have been many efforts to improve on public service delivery and governance through participation by the citizenry[footnoteRef:1]. [1: Derks, Maria.

"Improving security and justice through local/non-state actors." Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael (2012).4] In situations where instruments for providing public security by the government are weak, there are always parallel groups that protect sections of the community. Such entities are, therefore, commonly treated as strange and alien entities.

Such bodies may be seen to be intended to extend the hand of the rulers or earlier colonial power and or the international community[footnoteRef:2] [2: Ibid, 5] It has been cited that the alien public order and security provision units are allocated a huge chunk of public responsibility. The entities also happen to be viewed as more effective compared to those of the formal units set up to provide such services. The units may be cheaper to run and but more effective in delivering the public order and security agenda.

Such systems have a direct import on the lives of people. The security that they offer provides the fertile ground for economic growth and development in general[footnoteRef:3]. [3: Maria, Improving Security and Justice, 6.] Abuse of Power Abuse of power is a matter a lot of people have experienced across the globe. It is a debate that is not about to die soon. In the US constitution, the federal leadership has the authority in specified areas but with limited powers.

The states are responsible in running affairs that have been left out by the federal government. Therefore, the politics of the state are critical. The states are responsible for the protection of the populace in their jurisdictions. They are expected to provide healthcare services and security too. The responsibility bestowed on the states is the reason that 95% of all criminal proceedings are conducted by the states[footnoteRef:4]. [4: Gaylord, Scott. "State Politics vs. the Federal Government." The New York Times.

July 17, 2013.] Nevertheless, the country still has within in its ranks some state attorneys general who seem to pursue goals that are unpopular, though powerful. Often time, such individuals are citizens or officials whose conduct was clearly made up of what would be regarded as crime, bribery, murder, theft or extortion. The “Crusading Prosecutor” is a true rendition for TV shows, novels and movies. The storyline is extracted significantly from true life happenings. It is based on bravery, commitments to legal ideals and dedication.

However, sometimes, the prosecutor focuses on legal entities that appear to be regular enterprises in industries that are highly regulated such as financial services, insurance and healthcare[footnoteRef:5]. [5: Cass, "Power Failures: Prosecution, Power, and Problems," .27] Since such targets are subjects of intensive regulation, regularly, at the federal level, they become easily questionable by state prosecutors. The targets are by default popular political subjects since their mention stirs public concerns. The concerns are triggered from doubts about whether they can be trusted to conduct their operations without government regulation.

In addition, where the primary regulation is left to federal government to conduct, an official of the state is invited to shed light the poor execution of tasks by other government officials. Therefore, unsurprisingly, Crusader attorneys general come with high ratings from the public. After clearly conspicuous crusades, such attorneys soon find themselves in powerful political office[footnoteRef:6]. [6: Cass, "Power Failures: Prosecution, Power, and Problems," .27] States of the nations are inspired by a centralized bureaucracy but are governed evenly without differentiating between the periphery and the core.

They pursue principles tha promote such aspects as equality, and lead according to the agreed community priorities as opposed to some principle that is universal. The nation could be seen as multiethnic and even with a host of religions allowed to operate freely as in the case of India or Switzerland or as a monoreligious and monoethnic as the case in France[footnoteRef:7] [7: Wimmer, Andreas, and Brian Min.

"From Empire to Nation-State: Explaining Wars in the Modern World, 1816-2001." American Sociological Review,( 2006): 868] From the above viewpoint, the history of welfare in modern day seems not so much for shifting power balance between revolutionary conflict players but a struggle between projects that are competing for state building. Therefore, a lot of nationalist entities will experience of being resisted by imperial elites. They will resist because they have little chance of being incorporated into the new power game plan.

It is so because they are usually from a different ethnic belonging relative to the populations of the locals. Succession wars aimed and failing the imperial central powers lead to a second turning point of the institutions to statehood, once a territory has been launched for government based on nationalist ideals[footnoteRef:8]. [8: Ibid] The institutional rationale of the nation state offers more incentives for war when the turning point is reached within newly established states and between them.

Since the new state is led as a nation, the new elites have a tendency to subject people to preferential treatment. It means that justice and protection against violence arbitrarily, is only accessible by those from the elite class that is dominant. The demographic constitution and the ethnic patterns of the state and whether it has as significant number of minorities that are members that make up the majority in neighboring states offers an indicator that conflict can escalate to uncontainable scales.

It is so because ethnic kinships can lead governments to seek to protect co-ethnic communities across the border against possible violence that could be a direct outcome of the shifting power in the neighboring states[footnoteRef:9]. [9: Wimmer and Min. "From Empire to Nation-State: 870] Political Legitimacy Consent by the state is the traditional source of international legitimacy. International legitimacy is traditionally thought of in terms of state consent in international relations circles. It is recognized as a source of legitimacy in international law.

The legitimacy model of state consent, the global governance plans are genuine and legal. They are so because the states have accented to their existence. Therefore, the consent of the state creates legitimacy. It justifies the operations that such a state initiate and in such a way that the states are obligated to comply[footnoteRef:10]. [10: Westergren, Martin. "The Political Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions: A Justice-Based Account.". 2016.:166] Consent is a justification using procedure. Institutions can be built using the process.

It helps make such institutions remain secure and accepted. They also tend to be respectful of the will of their subjects. The legitimation by procedure is important for obligation but is also critical in the sense of justification. Procedures, often, embody and display respect to the ones subjected[footnoteRef:11]. [11: Westergren. "The Political Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions:167] The standard of functions of legitimacy, politically, isn’t to direct us at what we should focus on ultimately or the kind of world the ideal form of justice intends.

The basic purpose of political legitimacy is to inform us when the institutions that are in existence wield power in prima facie problematic forms and when it is justifiable to do the same. When the institutions have a right to rule under real conditions in the world, the global economic governance entities generate a complication about political legitimacy beyond the nation. The problem occurs because of prima facie forms of power problems vested and exercised by such institutions[footnoteRef:12].

[12: Ibid, 172] The US is exceptional as a result of its founding principles that are universal. The principles exemplify a belief that by nature, people are free and have rights that are inherent. How people use the rights at individual level will vary significantly. The outcomes of the choices will also differ. However, the choice is still ours. Freedom is intricately woven in leading our lives as we choose to do so. Such is a, truly, self governance example. The people must not defer to experts slavishly.

We can be entrusted with the responsibility to rule ourselves[footnoteRef:13]. [13: Wechsler, Herbert. "The political safeguards of federalism: The role of the states in the composition and selection of the national government." Columbia Law Review (1954): 548.] The most important role of the populace is to make sure that their.