The main idea of the article is to define the role of imagination, violence and institutions in the formation of the modern state as well as to show that the important dimension of the state building is the image of the self, creative capacity of the individual to symbolic self-made activity and self-made reproduction. The symbolic world of the imaginary state is the product of the communities united symbolically, contingency and simultaneously the part of the social orders. The Nort conception of the social orders as the structures that limit and control the violence takes the privilege place in the article. The first model of the social organization is defined as the “order of limited access”, and the second one as the “order of free access”. Thus the different state establishments are formed: “the natural state” that is formed in the natural way according to the violence restrain logic by means of limited access, and “the artificial state” by means of free access to the political and economic resources. In particular the impossibility of the automatic transition from the self-sufficient type of the natural state to the modern democratic state is emphasized. Nort conception is extrapolated on the experience of the Ukrainian independent state state-building after the abortive coup d’etat in 1991. The authors develop the tenet about the conservation of the institutional matrix of the soviet empire in the post-communist Ukraine. It deals with the institutional features: such as the authoritarian management, the secondary role of the law regulations, the supervisory instance uncontrolled by society. The transformation crises, accordingly to the authors approach, determined the conditions and the price of transitional countries entering not only the civilizational space of the contemporary Europe but also the system of global economic, political and social interrelations. This crises conditioned also the changes in the network of the international institutions. It determined the distinctive features of the national identity formation, legitimation strategies in the contemporary Nation-State, and primarily in the newest Ukrainian state-building.
Rorty, R. (1999). Contingency, Irony and Solidarity. Cambridge.
Castoriadis, C. (1975). L’Institution imaginaire de la société. Paris.
James, W. (1927). The Will to Believe and The other essays: in Popular Phi-losophy. New York, London, Toronto, Bombey, Calcutta and Madras.
Ortega y Gasset, J. (2003). The Sportive Originof the State. History as a System and Other Essays. Toward a Philosophy of History. NewYork.
Olivier, Zunz. (1990). The View on the own Identity. Courrier UNESCO, June [In Ukrainian].
North, D., Wallis, J. & Weingast, В. (2011). Violence and Social Orders. Mos-cоw. [In Russian].
Acemoglu, D., Robinson, J. (2013). Why Nations Fail. The Origin of Power, Prosperity and Poverty. London, Profile Books Ltd.
Stiglitz, J. (2003). Globalization and its Discontents. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.