Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-xxrs7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T09:03:54.199Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - The Popular Constituent Sovereign and the Pure Theory of Democratic Legitimacy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2010

Andreas Kalyvas
Affiliation:
New School for Social Research, New York
Get access

Summary

Schmitt's reflections on modern mass democracy start with an examination of the political consequences following the postmedieval transition from the sovereignty of the king to the sovereignty of the people, from the unitary, physical body of the monarch to the fragmented, dispersed body of the multitude. He explored the political implications of the rise of popular sovereignty and particularly the fact that “the decisionistic and personalistic element in the concept of sovereignty was lost…[because] the unity that a people represents does not possess this decisionistic character.” In other words, he not only directly addressed the problem of agency and action of a sovereign that is transformed into an impersonal, unorganized multitude. He also sought to illuminate the democratic origins of political power, to rethink the category of sovereignty in a democratic age, and to develop a systematic theory of democratic legitimacy. Pasquale Pasquino has nicely captured this dimension of Schmitt's work, noting that it should also be read as an attempt to “think the democratic form of authority.”

Sovereignty and Dictatorship

Schmitt pursued his aim by combining Thomas Hobbes's absolutist concept of sovereignty and Emmanuel Sieyès's notion of le pouvoir constituent, that is, the power of a political subject to create a new constitution. In my effort to clarify Schmitt's understanding of extraordinary politics and to reach into his singular insights on popular sovereignty, I bracket for a moment his famous definition, in the opening sentence of Political Theology, according to which the “Sovereign is he who decides on the exception.”

Type
Chapter
Information
Democracy and the Politics of the Extraordinary
Max Weber, Carl Schmitt, and Hannah Arendt
, pp. 88 - 126
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Franklin's, Julian still unsurpassed study, John Locke and the Theory of Sovereignty: Mixed Monarchy and the Right of Resistance in the Political Thought of the English Revolution, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Elliot's, JonathanDebates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution as Recommended by the General Convention at Philadelphia in 1787, ed. McClellan, James and Bradford, M. E., Cumberland, Va.: J. River Press, 1989, 2:432.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Ellen, Constitutional Failure: Carl Schmitt in Weimar, Durham: Duke University Press, 2004, pp. 125–128, 130–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal, “Penser la démocratie moderne avec, et contre, Carl Schmitt,” Revue française de science politique, 42:1 (1992)Google Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal, “Pluralism and Modern Democracy: Around Carl Schmitt,” in The Return of the Political, London: Verso, 1993, pp. 129–130Google Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal, “Carl Schmitt and the Paradox of Liberal Democracy,” in The Challenge of Carl Schmitt, ed. Mouffe, Chantal, London: Verso, 1999, pp. 38–53Google Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal, The Democratic Paradox, London: Verso, 2000.Google Scholar
The Spiritual Situation of the Age,” ed. Habermas, Jürgen, trans. McCarthy, Thomas, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1985, p. 24
Herf, Jeffrey, Reactionary Modernism: Technology, Culture, and Politics in Weimar and the Third Reich, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984Google Scholar
Muller, Jerry Z., “Carl Schmitt, Hans Freyer, and the Radical Conservative Critique of Liberal Democracy in the Weimar Republic,” History of Political Thought, 12:4 (1991), pp. 696–715.Google Scholar
Piccone, Paul and Ulmen, Garry L., “Introduction to Carl Schmitt,” Telos, 72 (1987), pp. 3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwab, George, “Progress of the Schmitt Studies in the English-Speaking World,” in Complexio Oppositorum. Über Carl Schmitt, ed. Quaritsch, Helmut, Berlin: Duncker und Humblot, 1988, pp. 447–459Google Scholar
Schlink, Bernhard, “Why Carl Schmitt?Constellations, 2:3 (1996), pp. 429–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Böckenforde, Ernst-Wolfgang, “Schmitt Revised,” Telos, 109 (1996), pp. 81–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cristi, Renato, Carl Schmitt and Authoritarian Liberalism, Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1998, p. 17.Google Scholar
Holmes, Stephen, “Schmitt: The Debility of Liberalism,” in The Anatomy of Anti-Liberalism, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1993, pp. 50, 49.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Carl, “Der bürgerliche Rechstaat,” in Staat, Grossraum, Nomos. Arbeiten aus den Jahren 1916–1969, Berlin: Duncker und Humblot, 1995, p. 47.Google Scholar
Scheuerman, William, “The Unholy Alliance of Carl Schmitt and Friedrich Hayek,” Constellations, 4:2 (1997), p. 176Google Scholar
McCormick, John, “The Dilemmas of Dictatorship: Carl Schmitt and Constitutional Emergency Powers,” Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence, 10:1 (1997), p. 175Google Scholar
Bobbio, Norberto, Democracy and Dictatorship: The Nature and Limits of State Power, trans. Kennealy, Peter, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989, pp. 159–166.Google Scholar
Scheuerman, William, “Carl Schmitt and the Nazis,” German Politics and Society, 23 (1991), pp. 71–79Google Scholar
Scheuerman, William, “The Fascism of Carl Schmitt: A Reply to George Schwab,” German Politics and Society, 29 (1993), pp. 194–211.Google Scholar
Scheuerman, William, Between the Norm and the Exception: The Frankfurt School and the Rule of Law, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1994, p. 39Google Scholar
Scheuerman, William, Carl Schmit: The End of Law, Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999, p. 9Google Scholar
McCormick, John, Carl Schmitt's Critique of Liberalism: Against Politics as Technology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997, p. 300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neokleous, Mark, “Friend or Enemy? Reading Schmitt Politically,” Radical Philosophy, 79 (1996), pp. 13–23Google Scholar
Malgieri, Gennaro, “La recezione di Carl Schmitt in Italia,” Revue Europeenne des sciences sociales-Cahiers Vilfredo Pareto, 16 (1978), pp. 181–186Google Scholar
Kennedy, Ellen, “Carl Schmitt and the Frankfurt School,” Telos, 73 (1987), p. 39Google Scholar
Jay, Martin, “Reconciling the Irreconcilable? Rejoinder to Kennedy,” Telos, 71 (1987), pp. 67–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sollner, A., “Beyond Carl Schmitt: Political Theory in the Frankfurt School,” Telos, 71 (1987), pp. 81–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preuss, Ulrich, “The Critique of German Liberalism: Reply to Kennedy,” Telos, 71 (1987), pp. 97–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balakrishnan, Gopal, The Enemy: An Intellectual Portrait of Carl Schmitt, London: Verso, 2000, pp. 260–268Google Scholar
Müller, Jan-Werner, A Dangerous Mind: Carl Schmitt in Post-War European Thought, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003, pp. 169–180Google Scholar
Kalyvas, Andreas, “Hegemonic Sovereignty: Antonio Gramsci, Carl Schmitt, and the Constituent Prince,” Journal of Political Ideologies, 5:3 (2000), pp. 343–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalyvas, Andreas, “Carl Schmitt and the Three Moments of Democracy,” Cardozo Law Review, 21:5–6 (2000), pp. 1525–1565.Google Scholar
Ackerman, Bruce, “Constitutional Politics/Constitutional Law,” Yale Law Journal, 99 (1989), pp. 453–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urbinati, Nadia, “Schmitt's Critique of Liberalism,” Cardozo Law Review, 21:5–6 (May 2000), pp. 1646–1647.Google Scholar
Beaud, Olivier, La puissance de l' état, Paris: PUF, 1994, p. 207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neumann, Franz L., “The Concept of Political Freedom,” in The Rule of Law under Siege: Selected Essays of Franz L. Neumann and Otto Kirchheimer, ed. Scheuerman, William E., Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996, p. 229n87.Google Scholar
Pasquino, Pasquale, preface to Carl Schmitt's Parliementarisme et démocratie, Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1988, pp. 14, 24nGoogle Scholar
Pasquino, Pasquale, “Die Lehre vom ‘Pouvoir Constituant’ bei Emmanuel Sieyès und Carl Schmitt,” in Complexio Oppositorum. Über Carl Schmitt, ed. Quaritsch, Helmut, Berlin: Duncker und Humblot, 1988, pp. 371–385.Google Scholar
Rossiter, Clinton L., Constitutional Dictatorship in the Modern Democracies, Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1948.Google Scholar
Hauriou, Maurice, Précis de droit constitutionnel (2nd ed.), Paris: Sirey, 1929, p. 246.Google Scholar
Groethuysen, Bernard, Philosophie de la révolution française, Paris: Gallimard, 1992, pp. 262–268.Google Scholar
Benjamin, Walter, “Theses on the Philosophy of History,” in Illuminations: Essays and Reflections, ed. Arendt, Hannah, New York: Schocken Books, 1968, pp. 253–264Google Scholar
Agamben, Giorgio, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, trans. Heller-Roazen, Daniel, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998Google Scholar
Agamben, Giorgio, State of Exception, trans. Attell, Kevin, Chicago: University of Chicago, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolin, Richard, “Carl Schmitt, Political Existentialism, and the Total State,” Theory and Society, 19:4 (1990), p. 409Google Scholar
Holmes, Stephen, “Carl Schmitt: Theorist of the Reich,” American Political Science Review, 77:4 (1983), pp. 1066–1067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larmore, Charles, “Carl Schmitt's Critique of Liberal Democracy,” in The Morals of Modernity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lilla, Mark, “The Enemy of Liberalism,” New York Review of Books, 44:8, May 15, 1997.Google Scholar
Wolin, Richard, “Carl Schmitt, the Conservative Revolutionary Habitus and the Aesthetics of Horror,” Political Theory, 20:3 (1992), pp. 438–444Google Scholar
Dyzenhaus, David, Legality and Legitimacy: Carl Schmitt, Hans Kelsen, and Hermann Heller in Weimar, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997Google Scholar
Hirst, Paul, “Carl Schmitt: Political Decisionism and Romanticism,” in Representative Democracy and Its Limits, Cambridge: Polity Press, 1990, pp. 128–137Google Scholar
Böckenforde, Ernst Wolfgang, “Die verfassungsggebende Gewalt des Volkes-Ein Grenzbegriff des Verfassungsrechts,” in Staat, Verfassung, Democratie. Studien zur Verfassungstheorie und zum Verfassungsrecht, Frankfurt-am-Main: Suhrkamp, 1991, pp. 90–114Google Scholar
Klein, Claude, Théorie et pratique du pouvoir constituant, Paris: PUF, 1996Google Scholar
Kalyvas, Andreas, “Popular Sovereignty, the Constituent Power, and Democracy,” Constellations, 12:2 (2005).Google Scholar
Palaver's, Wolfgang idiosyncratic reading of Schmitt in his “A Girardian Reading of Schmitt's Political Theology,” Telos, 93 (1992), p. 55.Google Scholar
Laclau, Ernesto, “Deconstruction, Pragmatism, Hegemony,” in Deconstruction and Pragmatism, ed. Mouffe, Chantal, London: Verso, 1996, pp. 54–55Google Scholar
Laclau, Ernesto, New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time, London: Verso, 1990, pp. 30, 194.Google Scholar
Michelman, Frank, Brennan and Democracy, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999, p. 48.Google Scholar
Piccone, Paul and Ulmen, Gary L., “Introduction to Carl Schmitt,” Telos, 72 (1987), p. 7Google Scholar
Sieyès, Emmanuel, Qu'est-ce que le Tiers état?Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1970, p. 182.Google Scholar
Sieyès, Emmanuel, “Reconnaissance et exposition raisonnée des droits de l'homme et du citoyen,” in Orateurs de la Révolution française: I. Les Constituants, ed. Furet, François and Halévi, Ran, Paris: Gallimard, 1989, p. 1013.Google Scholar
Madison, James, The Federalist: A Commentary on the Constitution of the United States, ed. Earle, Edward Mead, New York: Modern Library, 1937, no. 40, pp. 257, 258.Google Scholar
Arato, Andrew, “Dilemmas Arising from the Power to Create Constitutions in Eastern Europe,” Cardozo Law Review, 14:3–4 (1993), p. 674.Google Scholar
Böckenforde, Ernst-Wolfgang, “Die Verfassungsggebende Gewalt des Volkes-Ein Grenzbegriff des Verfassungsrechts,” in Staat, Verfassung, Demokratie. Studien zur Verfassungstheorie und zum Verfassungsreght, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1992, pp. 11–12 (emphasis added)Google Scholar
Friedrich, Carl J., Constitutional Government and Democracy: Theory and Practice in Europe and America, Boston: Ginn, 1950, p. 128Google Scholar
Arato, , “Forms of Constitution Making and Theories of Democracy,” Cardozo Law Review, 17:2 (1995), pp. 202–205Google Scholar
Kervégan, Jean-François, “La critique schmittienne du normativisme kelsénien,” in Le droit, le politique autour de Max Weber, Hans Kelsen, Carl Schmitt, ed. Herrera, Carlos Miguel, Paris: Éditions L'Harmattan, 1995, pp. 229–241Google Scholar
Hans Kelsen and Carl Schmitt: A Juxtaposition, ed. Diner, Dan and Stolleis, Michael, Tel Aviv: Bleicher Verlag, 1999.
Kelsen, , Introduction to the Problems of Legal Theory, trans. Paulson, Bonnie Litschewski and Paulson, Stanley, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992, p. 124Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans, Pure Theory of Law, trans. Knight, Max, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967, pp. 6–8, 68.Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans, “Foundations of Democracy,” Ethics, 66:1 (1955), p. 3Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans, “Science and Politics,” in What Is Justice? Justice, Law and Politics in the Mirror of Science, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1957, p. 365.Google Scholar
Raz, Joseph, “The Purity of the Pure Theory of Law,” in Essays on Kelsen, ed. Tur, Richard and Twining, William, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986, pp. 79–97.Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans, Allgemeine Staatslehre, Vienna: Nachdruck, 1993, pp. 99, 104, 338Google Scholar
Paulson's, Stanley “On the Early Development of the Grundnorm,” in Law, Life, and the Image of Man: Modes of Thought in Modern Legal Theory; Festschrift for Jan M. Broekman, ed. Fleerackers, Frank, Leeuwen, Evert, and Roermund, Bert, Berlin: Duncker und Humblot, 1997, pp. 217–230.Google Scholar
Kelsen, , “On the Basic Norm,” California Law Review, 47:1 (1959), p. 109.Google Scholar
Kalyvas, Andreas, “The Basic Norm and Democracy in Hans Kelsen's Legal and Political Theory,” Philosophy and Social Criticism, 32:5 (2006), pp. 572–599.Google Scholar
Kelsen, , quoted by Peter Caldwell in Popular Sovereignty and the Crisis of German Constitutional Law: The Theory and Practice of Weimar Constitutionalism, Durham: Duke University Press, 1997, p. 50.Google Scholar
Raz, Joseph, “Kelsen's Theory of the Basic Norm,” in The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979, pp. 122–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, Carl, The Nomos of the Earth, trans. Ulmen, Gary, New York: Telos Press, 2003, p. 82.Google Scholar
Heller, Herman, “Die Krise der Staatslehre,” in Gesammelte Schrifften, ed. Borinski, Fritz, Drath, Martin, Niemeyer, Gerhart, and Stammer, Otto, Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1992, pp. 23–24Google Scholar
Bobbio, , Essais de théorie du droit, Paris: Bruylant L.G.D.J, 1998, pp. 185–206.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. A., Law, Legislation and Liberty: A New Restatement of the Liberal Principles of Justice and Political Economy, Vol. II: The Mirage of Social Justice, London: Routledge, 1998, pp. 49, 52.Google Scholar
Herrera, Carlos Miguel, “La souveraineté du dogme à l'hypothèse,” in Théorie juridique et politique chez Hans Kelsen, Paris: Éditions KIMÉ, 1997, pp. 115–118.Google Scholar
Paulsen, Stanley L., introduction to Théorie générale du droit et de l'État, Paris: Bruylant L.G.D.J, 1997, p. 7.Google Scholar
Hughes, Graham, “Validity and the Basic Norm,” in Essays in Honor of Hans Kelsen, ed. California Law Review, with an introduction by Albert A. Ehrenzweig, South Hackensack, N.J.: Fred B. Rothman, 1971, p. 703Google Scholar
Troper, Michel, “Y-a-t-il un État nazi?” in Pour une théorie juridique de l'état, Paris: PUF, 1994, pp. 177–182.Google Scholar
Neumann, Franz, Behemoth: The Structure and Practice of National-Socialism, 1933–1944, New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1944, pp. 46–47Google Scholar
Hayek, Friedrich A., The Constitution of Liberty, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960, p. 238Google Scholar
Fuller, Lon L., “Positivism and Fidelity to Law – A Reply to Professor Hart,” Harvard Law Review, 71:4 (1958), pp. 658–661Google Scholar
Bobbio, Norberto, “Kelsen et les sources du droit,” Archives de philosophie du droit, 27 (1982), pp. 135–145Google Scholar
Paulson, Stanley L., “Lon Fuller, Gustav, Radbruch, and the ‘Positivist Thesis,’” Law and Philosophy, 13 (1994), pp. 313–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwab, George, The Challenge of Exception: An Introduction to the Political Ideas of Carl Schmitt between 1921 and 1936, Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1989Google Scholar
Bendersky, Joseph, “Carl Schmitt in the Summer of 1932: A Reexamination,” Cahiers Vilfredo Pareto, 16:44 (1978), pp. 39–54Google Scholar
Bendersky, Joseph, “The Expendable Kronjurist: Carl Schmitt and National Socialism, 1933–1936,” Journal of Contemporary History, 14:2 (1979)Google Scholar
Schmitt, Carl, “Das Gesetz zur der Not von Volk und Reich,” Deutsche Juristen-Zeitung, 38:1 (April 1933), pp. 455–458Google Scholar
Schmitt, Carl, “Das gute Recht der deutschen Revolution,” Westdeutscher Beobacthen, 12:108 (May 1933), pp. 1–2.Google Scholar
Elster, Jon, “Constitutional Bootstrapping in Philadelphia and Paris,” Cardozo Law Review, 14:3–4 (1993), p. 549.Google Scholar
Rawls, John, “The Idea of Public Reason,” in Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia University Press, 1993, p. 231.Google Scholar
Elster, Jon, “Forces and Mechanisms in the Constitution-Making Process,” Duke Law Journal, 45:2 (November 1995), p. 370.Google Scholar
Habermas, , The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory, ed. Cronin, Ciaran and Greiff, Pablo, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1998, p. 135.Google Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal, On the Political, London: Routledge, 2005, pp. 14–16.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×