Political sentiment, as appearance, must be distinguished from what people truly will.  What they at bottom will is the real cause, but they cling to particular interests and delight in the vain contemplation of improvements.  The conviction of the necessary stability of the State in which alone the particular interests can be realized, people indeed possess, but custom makes invisible that upon which our whole existence rests; it does not occur to any one, when he safely passes through the streets at night, that it could be otherwise.  The habit of safety has become a second nature, and we do not reflect that it is the result of the activity of special institutions.  It is through force this is frequently the superficial opinion-that the State coheres, but what alone holds it together is the fundamental sense of order, which is possessed by all.

The State is an organism or the development of the idea into its differences.  These different sides are the different powers of the State with their functions and activities, by means of which the universal is constantly and necessarily producing itself, and, being presupposed in its own productive function, it is thus always actively present.  This organism is the political constitution.  It eternally springs from the State, just as the State in turn maintains itself through the constitution.  If these two things fall asunder, if both different sides become independent of each other, then the unity which the constitution produces is no longer operative; the fable of the stomach and the other organs may be applied to it.  It is the nature of an organism that all its parts must constitute a certain unity; if one part asserts its independence the other parts must go to destruction.  No predicates, principles, and the like suffice to express the nature of the State; it must be comprehended as an organism.

The State is real, and its reality consists in the interest of the whole being realized in particular ends.  Actuality is always the unity of universality and particularity, and the differentiation of the universal into particular ends.  These particular ends seem independent, though they are borne and sustained by the whole only.  In so far as this unity is absent, no thing is real, though it may exist.  A bad State is one which merely exists.  A sick body also exists; but it has no true reality.  A hand, which is cut off, still looks like a hand and exists, but it has no reality.  True reality is necessity.  What is real is internally necessary.

To the complete State belongs, essentially, consciousness and thought.  The State knows thus what it wills, and it knows it under the form of thought.

The essential difference between the State and religion consists in that the commands of the State have the form of legal duty, irrespective of the feelings accompanying their performance; the sphere of religion, on the other hand, is in the inner life.  Just as the State, were it to frame its commands as religion does, would endanger the right of the inner life, so the church, if it acts as a State and imposes punishment, degenerates into a tyrannical religion.