Much of the research on Africa in the postcolonial period places the government in a central role-or as a cause- of many crises that have afflicted the continent since its independence. The State or government has been described in different ways: as severe and mild, authoritarian and underdeveloped, corrupt, patrimonial, or as a motor of development. While some warn of the drawbacks of an excessively interventionist State, others warn of the dangers that ‘failed States’ or collapsed States would bring. Despite the different approaches under which we study, the government is often associated with equally nebulous concepts such as civil society-is almost always the concept under which we examine the political culture of the African continent as a whole. This article questions the meanings of the term ‘State’ and asks if it is possible to separate the analysis of the State from the leaders of different parties in power, in specifc instances and at certain moments in time. This study is based in Mozambique and argues that, in many ways, with the exception of the symbolic, that the State collapsed in large parts of the country during the civil war (1977-1992). It describes the social formation of the elite that eventually led the Frelimo party, and demonstrates how these elite were able to maintain unity within the party and survive the challenges brought about by the post-independence period. However, the unity of the party’s social base is exclusive. It is therefore argued that instead of focusing on the types of African States, we must focus on the vision of statehood as a long and complex process of negotiation and confrontation between different social groups.