R. M. MacIver is a sociologist who looked at the State from the sociological point of view. He differentiates between society and the State as representing two different spheres of human activities. Society is given primacy both in terms of its priority and sphere of human interests that it contains—cultural, economic, emotional, political, religious, social, etc. Since all these interests require different sets of affiliations or associations/agencies in society, the political sphere is only one of them. On this basis, he advances the pluralist view where the State is one of the associations and as such is limited.
The Web of Government and The Rampart of Democracy, deal with issues of role of the State and its relationship with society. MacIver treats the State primarily as an agency that deals with social order. His understanding of the State as an association that maintains the universal external condition of social order is a point in case.63 MacIver seeks to limit the functions of the State, as ‘the organization of the State is not all social organization.64 Authority of the State is limited to the service it provides. However, this limitation is not in favour of the individual, but it is in accord with the individual organized as groups, as corporate personalities—family, club, church, union, etc. MacIver maintains that the State is not within its right to interfere in the internal affairs of other associations and the purpose they pursue. It will be justified in interfering when interests of other associations are affected, i.e., only when there are differences and conflict between associations. It may resolve the conflicting claim of different associations but the state cannot and should not impose its own will in the name of ‘common interest’. His understanding is that certain functions the State should not do, as it is unsuitable for the task—’we do not sharpen pencil with an axe. The State should not control public opinion, morality and religion, fashion, customs and traditions.
MacIver’s position on the role of the State has two implications. Firstly, the negative functions or non-interference of the State is based on social and groups’ perspective than the perspective of the ‘individual’ that the classical liberal approach advocated. Secondly, the State must justify its authority for demanding obligation by providing the corresponding service. In MacIver’s words, ‘the State commands … because it serves, it owns only because it owes.’65 However, looking at the importance the State occupies, MacIver, concedes that ‘whatever else a man may be, he must be a member of, or at least a subject of the State’. But then the form of the State he looks for is democratic state, which alone is seen as performing a unifying function in society. He says, ‘the State can act. as a unifying agent, but only in so far as it has itself undergone evolution towards democracy.’ Up to this point, MacIver has come to propose a limited state. However, he also argues for an intervening state, at least in the filed of economy.
In his The Web of Government (1965) he ‘makes a distinction between two types of organiza-tions—those which serve the emotional and cultural interests of men and cannot be regulated by the State; and those which serve the economic interests of different groups, and have to be regulated to serve the common interests.’ MacIver feels that given the uniqueness and requirements of differences in cultural and religious expressions, the State should not coordinate, as this would destroy their characteristics qualities. However, he gives regulating space to the State with respect to associations formed to serve economic interests. He says, ‘economic activities cannot be left to the free arbitrament of individuals and groups without serious interference with public order.’66 He cites the requirements for ensuring minimum wages to employees, reasonable hours of labour, prudent use of one’s property so that source of livelihood of others is not harmed, as some of the important considerations to regulate economic activities and associations in society.
In addition to maintenance of social order, MacIver gives ample chance to the State to interfere in the economic aspects. He suggests that the State should perform three categories of functions67—(i) order relating to rights and obligations; communication; frontiers of political authority and spheres of authority; statistics, measurement and computation; (ii) protection against monopoly and unfair competitions, minimum standards of decent living and protection of weaker sections of society with respect to wage rates, employment, upbringing of child, care and prevention of social wreckage, police functions, maintenance and enforcement of rights and obligations politically determined, protection of community against encroachment of specific associations, etc.; and (iii) conservation and development includes promotion and regulation of physical conditions like hygiene, housing, occupational and recreational conditions of health, conservation and utilization of natural resources, urban and rural planning and development, education, industrial, agricultural, commercial and financial development and inquiry into the social problems of general significance.
A glance at the functions assigned by MacIver to the State such as: (i) general provision by the State for social welfare, (ii) intervention of the State in economic affairs, and (iii) administrative and political functions point towards his support for a welfare state.
Leave a Reply