
[Middle English, from Old French estat, from Latin status.]
statable stat'a·ble or state'a·ble adj.SYNONYMS state, condition, situation, status. These nouns denote the mode of being or form of existence of a person or thing: an old factory in a state of disrepair; a jogger in healthy condition; a police officer responding to a dangerous situation; the uncertain status of the peace negotiations.
| standard English, stand verb, stalactite, stalagmite | |
| stately, stationary, stationery, statistics noun |
For more information on state, visit Britannica.com.
In the language of direct marketing, one of the 50 geographic and governmental units of the United States (i.e., the 50 states), as well as Washington, D.C., and all U.S. Territories. Every state has its own laws regarding various aspects of marketing. For some products and in some states, direct-mail marketers are required to collect sales tax on purchases made by residents of those states. Some mailing list selections are made by state; however, zip selects are more common and more accurately targeted. For example, you might exclude Sunbelt states from a promotion for snowblowers or select tobacco growing states for a fund-raising effort to lobby against cigarette legislation.
noun
verb
Idioms beginning with state:
state of the art
In addition to the idiom beginning with state, also see in a lather (state); in state; ship of state.
1. Condition, situation. “What's the state of your latest hack?” “It's winning away.” “The system tried to read and write the disk simultaneously and got into a totally wedged state.” The standard question “What's your state?” means “What are you doing?” or “What are you about to do?” Typical answers are “about to gronk out”, or “hungry”. Another standard question is “What's the state of the world?”, meaning “What's new?” or “What's going on?”. The more terse and humorous way of asking these questions would be “State-p?”. Another way of phrasing the first question under sense 1 would be “state-p latest hack?”.
2. Information being maintained in non-permanent memory (electronic or human).
A territorial unit with clearly defined and internationally accepted boundaries, having an independent existence and being responsible for its own legal system. The state may be seen as a supplier of public services (education and health, for example), as a regulator of the economy (fixing interest rates, and so on), as a social engineer (education is, after all, a form of social engineering), and acting as a referee between conflicting groups in society (See pluralism). The theory of the state looks at the state as a set of institutions: armed forces, government, judicial system, and so on, and asks why societies find it necessary to form the separate instrument we call the state.
State capitalism is an economic system where the government owns and directs large parts of the economy in competition with the private sector. See capitalist state. State socialism is the ownership, management, and planning of virtually all of the economy by the state.
A distinct set of political institutions whose specific concern is with the organization of domination, in the name of the common interest, within a delimited territory. The state is arguably the most central concept in the study of politics and its definition is therefore the object of intense scholarly contestation. Marxists, political sociologists, and political anthropologists usually favour a broad definition which draws attention to the role of coercion-wielding organizations who exercise clear priority in decision-making and claim paramountcy in the application of naked force to social problems within territorial boundaries. By this standard, archaeological remains signal the existence of states from 6000 bc, with written or pictorial records testifying to their presence from 4000 bc.
Within Western Europe a number of state forms can be identified corresponding to historical epochs. In the slave-economies of antiquity, the state—in this context the instrument of the collective property-owners—existed either in the shape of a Hellenistic king and his henchmen or a Roman emperor and the imperial aristocracy. The high period of the Greek city-states can be dated from 800 to 320 bc. Within these states, once the rule of the ‘tyrants’ had been overthrown, free members of society were granted citizenship rights. However, the democracy of the city-states was increasingly undermined by territorial colonization and conquest, leading to rule by royal succession by the time of Alexander the Great. In contrast, Rome did not introduce direct democracy but developed from a monarchy into a republic (Latin res publica, ‘the things pertaining to the public realm’), governed by a senate dominated by the Roman aristocracy. The Greek city-states bequeathed direct democracy whilst Rome's contribution to the development of the modern state lies in Roman law, and its clear distinction between the public and the private.
The dissolution of the Roman empire saw the fragmentation of the imperial state into the hands of private lords whose political, juridical, and military roles were at the same time the instruments of private appropriation and the organization of production. In early medieval Western Europe state power was not only divided up but also privatized, through local private proprietors whose property—gained from oaths of fealty, and which served as the basic economic unit of society—simultaneously endowed them with political authority. In these conditions, as Marx puts it tersely, their estate was their state. The feudal ‘state-system’ was an unstable amalgam of suzerains and anointed kings. A monarch, formally at the head of a hierarchy of sovereignties, could not impose decrees at will. Relations between lords and monarch are best seen in terms of mutual dependence, with the monarch an orchestrator rather than an absolute power. The lapse of universal taxation (central to the Roman empire) ensured that each ruler needed to obtain the ‘consent’ of each estate of the realm. The legal assumptions underpinning the feudal organization of society, and the Church's claim to act as a law-making power coeval with rather than subordinate to the secular authorities (see medieval political theory), show that a modern conception of the state is inappropriate as a basis for understanding politics in medieval feudalism.
The development of the modern form of the state, as a public power separate from the monarch and the ruled, and constituting the supreme political authority within a defined territory, is associated with the slow institutional differentiation of the ‘political’ and the ‘economic’ related to the growth of the centralized absolutist state and the spread of commodity production. Absolutist states arose in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in Western Europe under the Tudors in England, the Habsburgs in Spain, and the Bourbons in France. These European dynastic states exhibited many of the institutional features which characterize modern states. The introduction of a standing army, a centralized bureaucracy, a central taxation system, diplomatic relations with permanent embassies, and the development of the economic doctrine of mercantilism informing state trade policy, all date from this period. It is at this point that the term ‘the state’ is first introduced into political discourse. Although its derivation is disputed, Machiavelli is often credited with first using the concept of state to refer to a territorial sovereign government in the widely circulated manuscript of the ‘Prince’ completed in 1513 and published in 1532. It is not, however, until the time of Bodin and Sir Thomas Smith that a full account of the ‘marks of sovereignty’ is produced, and later modified by Sir Walter Raleigh, Hobbes, and Locke.
The most influential definition of the modern state is that provided by Weber in Politics as a Vocation. Weber emphasizes three aspects of the modern state: its territoriality; its monopoly of the means of physical violence; and its legitimacy. Without social institutions claiming a monopoly of the legitimate use of force within a given territory, Weber argues, a condition of anarchy would quickly ensue. In raising the question of why the dominated obey, Weber draws our attention to a fundamental activity of the state, the attempt to legitimate the structure of domination. Whilst he supplied the categories of ‘traditional’, ‘charismatic’, and ‘legal’ pure types of legitimation of obedience, historical sociologists have recently drawn on Durkheim and Foucault to extend our understanding of legitimacy as state power which ‘works within us’. An emphasis is thus placed upon the violent establishment and continuous regulation of ‘consent’ orchestrated by that organization which has abrogated to itself the ‘right’ to use physical force (and to determine the conditions under which other institutions/individuals have that right) in society. Whilst, for Foucault, the state is the form in which the bourgeoisie organizes its social power, that power does not simply reside in the external repression meted out by ‘special bodies of armed men having prisons, etc., at their command’ (Lenin, State and Revolution). Rather, state forms must also be understood as cultural forms, as cultural revolution and imagery continually and extensively state-regulated. Attention is thereby broadened beyond the usual focus on what the state does (defence of property rights, regulation of monopolies), to the equally important question of how the state acts, how it projects certain forms of organization on our daily activity. Studies of the administration of welfare emphasize this point showing how although claimants receive ‘benefits’ this is always bound up with submission to supervision and control.
There are three main traditions within political science which inform ‘theories of the state’: the pluralist, the Marxist, and the statist traditions. Robert Dahl and Nelson Polsby within the pluralist framework see the state as either a neutral arena for contending interests or its agencies as simply another set of interest groups. With power competitively arranged in society, state policy is the product of recurrent bargaining and although Dahl recognizes the existence of inequality, he maintains that in principle all groups have an opportunity to pressure the state. The pluralist approach to economic policy suggests that the state's actions are the result of pressures applied from both ‘polyarchy’ and organized interests. A series of pressure groups compete and state policy reflects the ascendancy of a particularly well-articulated interest. This approach is often criticized for its overt empiricism. It is argued that the attempt to explain state policy in terms of the ascendancy of pressure group interests introduces a pattern of circular reasoning.
Modern Marxist accounts begin with Miliband (The State in Capitalist Society), who offers an instrumentalist view of the state. Miliband attempts a literal interpretation of Marx's infamous statement that the executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie (The Communist Manifesto). Instrumentalists argue that the ruling class uses the state as its instrument to dominate society by virtue of the interpersonal ties between, and social composition of, state officials and economic elites. In an equally famous reply, Nicos Poulantzas isolated the main defects of this approach, in particular its subjectivist view of the state and its unintended reliance on pluralist elite theory. The instrumentalist position has also been criticized empirically by case studies of the New Deal and industrial politics in the United States and by studies of nationalization and the labour process in Britain. For Poulantzas, the state is a regional sector of the capitalist structure, and is understood to have a relative autonomy from capital: ‘the capitalist state best serves the interests of the capitalist class only when the . . . ruling class is not the politically governing class’ (Political Power and Social Classes). In addition to the problems of structural functionalism introduced by Poulantzas, the concept of relative autonomy is often criticized as a hopeless catch-all which is used in a circular fashion to explain apparent dysfunctions in state activity after the event.
The realization that the internal structures of states differ has been the dynamic behind the development of post-Marxist approaches to state theory. Whereas there is no uniform agreement on what constitutes Marxian orthodoxy, post-Marxism argues against derivationism and essentialism (the state is not an instrument and does not ‘function’ unambiguously or relatively autonomously in the interests of a single class). This has led many Gramscian approaches to stress the importance of interposing civil society between the economy and the state to explain variation in state forms.
Empirical studies of the role of the state in foreign economic policy-making, and the theoretical critiques developed by post-Marxists, have led to the development of statist theories which conclude that states pursue goals which cannot be derived from interest group bargaining or from the class structure of capitalist societies. A focus has emerged on states as distinctive structures with their own specific histories, operating in a sphere of real autonomy. Writers influenced by this tradition (which claims allegiance to Weber and Otto Hintze) often utilize the distinction between ‘strong states’ and ‘weak states’, claiming that the degree of effective autonomy from societal demands determines the power of a state. This position has found favour in international political economy. Recently, radical feminist writers, and those whose work is rooted in the analysis of racism, have questioned the assumptions of the pluralist, Marxist, and statist approaches arguing that the modern Western state has institutionalized and legitimized patriarchy and racism.
All states embedded in an international system face internal and external security and legitimation dilemmas. International relations theorists have traditionally posited the existence of an international system, where states take into account the behaviour of other ‘like-units’ when making their own calculations. Recently the notion of international society (a society of states) has been developed to refer to a group of states who by dialogue and common consent have established rules, procedures, and institutions for the conduct of their relations. In this way the foundation has been laid for international law, diplomacy, regimes, and organizations. Since the absolutist period, states have predominantly been organized on a national basis. The concept of national state is not, however, synonymous with nation-state. Even in the most ethnically ‘homogeneous’ societies there is necessarily a mismatch between the state and the nation—hence the active role undertaken by the state to create national identity (nationalism) through an emphasis on shared symbols and representations of reality.
— Peter Burnham
As a noun, a people permanently occupying a fixed territory bound together by common habits and custom into one body politic exercising, through the medium of an organized government, independent sovereignty and control over all persons and things within its boundaries, capable of making war and peace and of entering into international relations with other states. The section of territory occupied by one of the United States. The people of a state, in their collective capacity, considered as the party wronged by a criminal deed; the public; as in the title of a case, "The State v. A. B." The circumstances or condition of a being or thing at a given time.
As a verb, to express the particulars of a thing in writing or in words; to set down or set forth in detail; to aver, allege, or declare. To set down in gross; to mention in general terms, or by way of reference; to refer.
The Bill of Rights is stated in 463 words
— unknown, Source: an Atlanta newspaper
LearnThatWord.com is a free vocabulary and spelling program where you only pay for results!
Quotes:
"If nationality is consent, the state is compulsion."
- Henri Frederic Amiel
"In the twentieth century one of the most personal relationships to have developed is that of the person and the state. It's become a fact of life that governments have become very intimate with people, most always to their detriment."
- E. L. Doctorow
"The State has but one face for me: that of the police. To my eyes, all of the State's ministries have this single face, and I cannot imagine the ministry of culture other than as the police of culture, with its prefect and commissioners."
- Jean Dubuffet
"While the State becomes inflated and hypertrophied in order to obtain a firm enough grip upon individuals, but without succeeding, the latter, without mutual relationships, tumble over one another like so many liquid molecules, encountering no central energy to retain, fix and organize them."
- Emile Durkheim
"The State must follow, and not lead, the character and progress of the citizen."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
"The State is the altar of political freedom and, like the religious altar, it is maintained for the purpose of human sacrifice."
- Emma Goldman
See more famous quotes about State
State commonly refers to either the present condition of a system or entity, or to a governed entity (such as a country) or sub-entity (such as a province or region).
| Look up state in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. |
|
| This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the same title. If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article. |
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
Dansk (Danish)
n. - tilstand, stand, rang, stilling, pragt, stat
adj. - stats-, stads-, galla-
v. tr. - oplyse, meddele, angive, opgive, forklare, fastslå, konstatere, erklære, fremstille, udtale
idioms:
Nederlands (Dutch)
staat, toestand, stand, deelstaat, ceremonieel, verklaren, bepalen
Français (French)
n. - état, condition, situation, (Pol) État, (Admin, Géog) État, pompe, apparat, rang
adj. - public, officiel, de gala, d'apparat, d'État, de l'État, national
v. tr. - exposer, indiquer, spécifier, déclarer, exprimer
idioms:
Deutsch (German)
n. - Staat, Stadium, Zustand, Stand
v. - darlegen, festlegen, erklären
adj. - staatlich, Staats-
idioms:
Ελληνική (Greek)
n. - κατάσταση (πραγμάτων), (συντεταγμένη) πολιτεία, κράτος, δημόσιο, κρατικός μηχανισμός, επισημότητα, μεγαλοπρέπεια, χλιδή, πολυτελής βίος, (καθομ.) ακαταστασία, σύγχυση, εκνευρισμός, αναβρασμός
v. - δηλώνω, ανακοινώνω, διακηρύσσω, εκθέτω, παραθέτω, διατυπώνω, καθορίζω
adj. - κρατικός, δημόσιος, πολιτειακός, κυβερνητικός, επίσημος, τελετουργικός
idioms:
Italiano (Italian)
dichiarare, stato, condizione, stato civile, stato confederato, statale
idioms:
Português (Portuguese)
n. - estado (m)
v. - declarar
adj. - estatal
idioms:
Русский (Russian)
состояние, положение, строение, общественное положение, пышность, парадность, напряженное или возбужденное состояние, излагать, формулировать, утверждать, точно определять, государство, государственный аппарат, государственная власть, штат, государственный, относящийся к штату
idioms:
Español (Spanish)
n. - estado, condición, naturaleza, clase social, rango, pompa, ceremonia, provincia, cantón, administración
adj. - estatal, público, político, solemne
v. tr. - declarar, afirmar, expresar
idioms:
Svenska (Swedish)
n. - stat, tillstånd, ställning, stånd, rang, prakt
v. - uppge, förklara, anföra säga, berätta, upplysa om, konstatera, fastslå, redogöra för
adj. - stats-
中文(简体)(Chinese (Simplified))
状况, 状态, 形势, 情况, 形态, 正式的, 官方的, 国事的, 国家的, 政府的, 说明, 规定, 陈述
idioms:
中文(繁體)(Chinese (Traditional))
n. - 狀況, 狀態, 形勢, 情況, 形態
adj. - 正式的, 官方的, 國事的, 國家的, 政府的
v. tr. - 說明, 規定, 陳述
idioms:
한국어 (Korean)
n. - 상태, (주권을 가지는) 국가, 지위
adj. - 국가의, (연방을 구성하는) 주의, 공식의
v. tr. - 분명히 말하다, 지정하다, 식으로 나타내다
idioms:
日本語 (Japanese)
n. - 状態, 精神状態, 興奮状態, 州, 州立の, 国家, 国立の, 地位, 階層, 儀式, 形勢, 階級
v. - 述べる, 指定する, 前もって決める
idioms:
العربيه (Arabic)
(الاسم) حاله, وضع, دوله (فعل) أعلن, نص على, قرر, عرض (صفه) رسمي, حكومي
עברית (Hebrew)
n. - מצב, מעמד, תנאים, מדינה, פאר, הדר, בילבול, בלגן
adj. - ממלכתי, של המדינה, מדיני, טקסי, רשמי
v. tr. - אמר, הביע, ביטא, הצהיר, קבע, ציין
If you are unable to view some languages clearly, click here.