APA 6th Edition Lalović, D. (2005). Suverena država – temeljni pravnopolitički projekt moderne (2). Politička misao, 42 (3), 27-38. Preuzeto s https://hrcak.srce.hr/20936
MLA 8th Edition Lalović, Dragutin. "Suverena država – temeljni pravnopolitički projekt moderne (2)." Politička misao, vol. 42, br. 3, 2005, str. 27-38. https://hrcak.srce.hr/20936. Citirano 08.12.2019.
Chicago 17th Edition Lalović, Dragutin. "Suverena država – temeljni pravnopolitički projekt moderne (2)." Politička misao 42, br. 3 (2005): 27-38. https://hrcak.srce.hr/20936
Harvard Lalović, D. (2005). 'Suverena država – temeljni pravnopolitički projekt moderne (2)', Politička misao, 42(3), str. 27-38. Preuzeto s: https://hrcak.srce.hr/20936 (Datum pristupa: 08.12.2019.)
Vancouver Lalović D. Suverena država – temeljni pravnopolitički projekt moderne (2). Politička misao [Internet]. 2005 [pristupljeno 08.12.2019.];42(3):27-38. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/20936
IEEE D. Lalović, "Suverena država – temeljni pravnopolitički projekt moderne (2)", Politička misao, vol.42, br. 3, str. 27-38, 2005. [Online]. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/20936. [Citirano: 08.12.2019.]
Sažetak In the first part of the paper the conceptual framework of the political
science approach to the state is outlined using some key insights
of the contemporary political theory of the state. The second part of the paper contains a critical discussion about the scope and the
purpose of those insights and puts forward a possible partial reconstruction of the main types of the state as methodological grounds for the developmental and comparative research of the process of the socalled transition. As the methodological basis for a contemporary reconstruction of the theory of the state, the set of basic terms (power, government, authority) – as identified by A. Passerin d’Entrèves – can be used. A productive elaboration of these basic terms can be carried out by critically looking into the possibilities of combining the systematic approach by Passerin d’Entrevès, the genealogical approach by Barret-Kriegel and the historico-political one by Q. Skinner.
Also, the author points out how a full reconstruction of the concept
of the state is not possible without a parallel reconstruction of the concept of society. The state as the fundamental legal/political project of modernism is possible only as a complementary process to the creation of the civic society as the fundamental politico-economic
project of modernism. The state (sovereign) and the society (civic)
are modern creations whose raison d’être is the legal, economic and
political subjectivization of the individual. The co-constitutive link
between the state and the society – the precondition for the possibility
of the genuine process of the individual’s emancipation in modernism
– is methodologically the central assumption for understanding the
state and the logic of sovereignty. This reconstructed comprehensive
understanding of the state enables a valid differentiation of the types
of states in comparative research. The working hypothesis of this paper is to distinguish two pure types of the (modern) state: the power state (Machtstaat) and the legal state (Rechtsstaat). The reconstruction of the modern concept of the state and its major forms offers the final opportunity to identify the methodological injunction for looking into the logic of transition as the transition in the direction of the sovereign legal state in the fullness of its contemporary definition.