Th.H. Erikson quotes M.J. Schwartz as saying that "Politics feeds on different social conditions".1 In fact, politics by and for itself does not exist, but always appears in, through and for something else. M. Weber also expands his own political sociology through the sociology of dominance, two pillars of which are power and order (Disziplin).2 Those attempts, which limit the appearance of politics to government, restrict the field of political action very severely.3 The state is usually regarded as the immediate form of the exercise of political power, but it is very difficult to find common features between, say, the early Islamic corporate exercise of authority in Medina,4 the politeia – limited to full citizens5 – of the Greek city-states the decision-making of the Roman res publica, – combining monarchy, aristocracy and democracy6 – the Confucian Han-dynasty state that set up a rational administrative system and introduced a bureaucracy based on the mandarin system,7 the dictatorship of Stalin,8 or the (hopefully temporary) Hungarian political system of the 2010s, which, for the sake of the European Union, strung together in its own way a few tattered shreds of democracy, outmoded elements of the Horthy inter-war period, features of the one-party system and the nationalised state of the Kádár period, and the practice of the "Asian mode of production", which reduced the economy to a constantly growing pressure of taxation and the rewarding of faithful elements by redistribution, and as a precondition of that, the "mass production" of subjects incapable of critical thought, intimidated and broken-backed. In fact, one cannot deduce9 historical forms from the postulated invariable features of government/exercise of power, but vice versa, it is the latter that try to create the corresponding political forms (fortunately, in the long term generally without success).10 Through a state embodying the functions, useful to the given society, of "task performer" and/or "authority-validator"11 – and peculiar combinations of the two – there eventually came into being a genuine political exercise of power for the purpose of gaining and safeguarding what Marx terms a "social metabolism", in such a way that society should guarantee for a minority (engaged in exercising authority) special status and privileges. As is well known, when the original communities settled down during the "neolithic revolution" and no longer had to organise themselves on a basis of kinship, separate institutions had to be created which in time tried to become independent and reversed the original situation, that is, they took the view that the community existed for them and not vice versa. A typical product of this process is the state, which was always inclined to make the original function of "task-performer" into an "authority-validation" machinery. What is certain is that the state took shape along with the various other "achievements of civilisation", and their defence and employment were its original task.12