Abstract
Some famous conservative philosophers as Michael Oakeshott define the origins of states by distinguishing two basic types of government: the nomocratic and the teleocratic state. Their conception about the role of state and how it should rule the citizen's life is completely opposed. Indeed, a nomocratic state as its etymology refers to (nomos means law), is built under the idea on a rule-based government. Why? According to Hayek, coercion is a continual threat which cannot be completely abolished, and that is why this is the job of the state to own the monopole of coercion in order to dissuade people from using it. However, who is controlling the state? The answer is Law. So a nomocratic state could be roughly defined as a non-interventionist state, not governed by moral definition and values but only by an agreed set of rules. By contrast, a teleocratic state found its meaning on the pursuit of an ending goal, a common objective which drives the members of society to its realization. Consequently, it follows recognition of common values shared by all, determining the achievement of specific ends such as abolishing Poverty or struggle against an enemy for example. Considering that a citizen is supposed to have rights and duties, the issue at stake here is to establish how he could be obviously differently affected by these two opposite thought of state.
Hence, the purpose of this essay is not to assert that one form is better than another, this is not what we should focus on. Our target consists in trying to offer an overview not only on the role traditionally taken by a citizen but also what consequences on his life and his feelings are implied by the form of the state. Are there really such differences between being a citizen in a teleocratic and nomocratic state? The questioning is not really there. We will rather try to develop an examination on the following interrogations: what could be the major ones? To what extent? What are their concrete implications for a citizen? I shall discuss in a first part the differences between state's reactions is based on the perception of injustice or what is considered as injustice, which causally imply different consequences for the citizen. Then, I shall deliberate on the problematical case of autonomy, dealing with freedom access and citizen's responsibilities.
