MONTENEGRIN STATE IDEA AT THE BEGINNING OF THE TWENTY FIRST CENTURY
MONTENEGRIN STATE IDEA AT THE BEGINNING OF THE TWENTY FIRST CENTURY

MONTENEGRIN STATE IDEA AT THE BEGINNING OF THE TWENTY FIRST CENTURY

Summary/Abstract: In every society exists a state idea that expresses the meaning and purpose of the state in which it lives or through which is stated for what and to whom their state serves. Thus, the idea of the state contains reasons through which is explained the meaning and purpose of its existence. In societies that are to a high degree nationally or religiously homogenous, often exists one dominant state idea. Such societies understand the state as a safety system in service of the dominant identity that serves to its defence and sustainability. Mostly, these are societies in which exists a dominant nation that thinks it has created the state, or that in fact created the state in which it presents absolute majority. Due to that, these societies have one, almost absolutely accepted state idea. Certainly, there are, but in significantly lower number, nationally and confessionally heterogenic societies in which exists a dominant state idea, even if these are not societies that primarily function as sum of national or religious identities, neither societies in which it is possible to establish hierarchy of these identities. Majority of these identities consider state identity for their primary characteristic i.e. belonging to the state, so that it happens that few national identities within state have one joint national (state) identity. In accordance to that, it is possible that different national identities have the same state idea. Indeed, in societies like this, the state is not understood as protector of this or that identity, as it is case in majority of societies with dominant nation, but as the guarantee of security and development for all. The best example of a society with this type of the state idea is the USA. Finally, there are multinational societies in which the most numerous national group does not have absolute majority and due to that neither it has the strength to make its idea of the state as dominant.

• Details
• Contents