"Political theory is the study of how we should live together in

society. Given that there are many aspects to social life and social
cooperation, there are many dimensions to political theory. Broadly,
there are two overlapping sites of enquiry: relations between people
and institutions within state boundaries, and relations between
states on the international stage.
Starting with political and social relations within state boundaries, a
long-standing and foundational line of enquiry focuses on why
individuals should accept the political authority of the state, what its
limits are, and how those who wield the power of the state should
come to do so. Have we all consented to have this power exercised
over us? If so, when, and how, was it given? If we have not
consented to it, is the state illegitimate and may we reject its edicts?
Must we be bound by a constitution enacted before we were born?
If we should, and do, accept the state, what are its limits? May the
state monitor our movements, communications, and interactions
with others without our knowledge? May it require us to serve-
militarily or otherwise, in times of war or peace-on pain of
punishment? On what authority does the state inflict punishment on
members who perform crimes, and what form may punishment
take? And what is the best way in which to choose the group that
has its hands on this immense power? Most people in democracies
now reject the principle of hereditary rule--but why is democracy
preferable? Why not benign dictatorship instead? And what makes a
state democratic?
State institutions provide the basic framework within which people
live: these institutions set the terms of social interaction by in some
respects limiting, and in other respects expanding, the possibilities
for people acting on and with one another. A further function of
these institutions is to divide up the benefits and burdens of
cooperative activity; who should get the spoils and who should pay
the costs? We also need to know when and how we may defend
ourselves against one another: what limits should be placed on how
people may treat one another and what penalties can be imposed on
members of society who transgress these limits? Further, how
should people relate to one another within these limits? May those
different from us in beliefs and practices be condemned and
shunned? And how should those among us who are dependent- the
infirm, the ill, the old, and children--be treated? Who is responsible
for their care and what form should that take? And what do we owe
as a matter of justice to people in the future, and in the past? Still
further, we need to know how we should organize ourselves in the
smaller groupings of society to which we all belong at some point in
our lives. How should families operate? What obligations do
employers have to their employees? Should classes and castes be
abolished? And how, if at all, do voluntary groupings--religions,
pressure groups, trade unions, etc. -help us to live together well?
Beyond what goes on within states are a set of questions related to
how states ought to relate to one another. Ought any principles of
social cooperation and justice that are justified within state borders
be extended to apply to all states everywhere? Are there minimum
standards- perhaps related to human rights--which morally bind all
states, regardless of their differences? What are the responsibilities,
if any, of the developed to developing states? How may a state act,
unilaterally or multilaterally, towards any state that threatens it?
What are the conditions under which war is just? And, in the age of
globalization and looming dangerous climate change, how ought
states to mobilize in order to tackle, collectively, serious threats that
no one state can tackle on its own.
These categories of enquiry are loosely demarcated: answers given
to questions in one category very often affect answers to questions
in another. For example, if we believe that all people are equal in
virtue only of their humanity and that, as such, each deserves an
equal distribution of the benefits and burdens of social cooperation,
then we will have to work hard to assert that the mere fact that a
person is a citizen of a rich country makes him or her more deserving
of the benefits that attach to that membership than someone
unfortunate in being born in a poor country Furthermore, many
political theorists argue that the way in which intra- and inter-state
questions have been addressed in the history of political theory has
failed to take proper account of features of the human condition that
are fundamental to an accurate understanding of what it is that
political institutions have to respond to. The following four facts in
particular have salience, First, that human beings live on a bounded
planet containing limited resources, and have nowhere else to go:
this truth raises questions of how human beings and their political
institutions ought to relate to the environment. Second, that human
beings are divided into two sexes: this makes questions of how the
sexes relate to one another in particular, questions about the power
that men wield over women foundational in political theory. Third,
that human beings, at any point in time, are part of a chain of
generations stretching backwards and forwards in time, and that all
future generations are entirely vulnerable to any present generation:
this makes the temporal legacy of political institutions central to
thinking about their character and justification, And finally, the
inequalities and effects of power on human social and political
relations, and an understanding of how power can be exercised over
people in subtle and multifarious wars should inform assessment of
political institations and social relations in domestic and global
contexts