Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 5.djvu/373

 A SOCIOLOGICAL VIEW OF SOVEREIGNTY 359

defense of this classification has been generally accepted as sound. He holds that " the numbers and proportions are used simply to indicate how far the consciousness of the state has spread through the population, and to note the degree of inten- sity with which that consciousness is developed ; the principle is this : no part of the population in which the consciousness of the state is strongly developed can be kept out of the organiza- tion of the state, and, therefore, the number inspired with this consciousness, and participating in this organization, really does determine the organic character of the state."' Burgess, in making the important distinction between " state " and " gov- ernment," holds that Aristotle's classification applies only to the " state," and he proposes a different classification for govern- ments, based on administrative and structural peculiarities. This distinction is valid, and governments, being merely the machinery through which the states carry out their will, should be classified on the basis of the method of this organization. But, granting this distinction, have we really discovered any- thing more than a merely numerical basis of division in Aris- totle's classification of states? If "state consciousness" becomes diffused among the people as mere isolated units, then a mathe- matical basis of classification is adequate. But if the diffusion of "state consciousness" is itself an organic function of the state, then the basis of classification must be found in the very nature and purpose of the state. That this is the case can be plainly seen from a view of the way in which " state conscious- ness " has actually developed. The state is the coercive institu- tion of society. It is not an ideal entity, superimposed upon society, but is an accumulated series of compromises between social classes, each seeking to secure for itself control over the coercive elements which exist implicitly in society with the institution of private property. Every statute, legal decision, or executive ordinance newly enforced is a new differentiation and transference of coercion from its original private control to that of social organization, and every such fact is an increment in the growth of the state. Now, while this transference is

' Burgess, Political Science and Comparative Constitutional Law, Vol. I, p. 73.