We must distinguish between the birth of democracy and the creation of the state. The state results from a division of political labour that does not take place in all societies. All societies, of course, experience a division of social labour, but only some experience that basic division of political labour that leads to state differentiation. Among Western countries, it is when they emerged from feudalism that such differentiation did or did not take place. To this first variable, state or no state, one must add a second, namely, democracy. Democracy first appears in its representative form and then blossoms all the more easily if it does not confront the obstacle of the state. Democratic representation and state development thus appear almost antithetical. In England, centralisation and representation seem particularly compatible, whereas in France, state development and representation seem almost incompatible. Later on, democracy expresses itself through universal suffrage. From this point of view, however, countries with states do not seem more opposed to the expansion of suffrage than countries with centralisation.

One might note that, historically, the revolutionary French state preceded English democracy. However, because of the many regimes that France experienced during the nineteenth century, expansion of suffrage remained threatened and chaotic. This multiplicity of regimes indicates how difficult it is to reconcile democracy, in all its forms, and the state, which pretends, by itself, to represent the general interest of the people.