Abstract
In his Politica: Politics Methodically set Forth and Illustrated with Sacred and Profane Examples published in 1603 Johannes Althusius' sets out his grand scheme of republican federalism. Soon, however, the final establishment of the territorial state and the paradigm of statism relegated grand federalism to the distant margins of constitutional theory.
 Statism as concisely enunciated in this article, recognises only two entities namely the state as a centralised power apparatus and the abstract individual on whom a statist identity in the image of the state is enforced. Statism dispenses with communities.
 Statism has been playing out on a continuum, with the statist-individualism on the one and statist-collectivism on the opposite extreme. Statist-individualism seeks to fend off the risks of supreme political power with strategies for the protection of individual rights. In contrast, statist-collectivism dispenses with the subtleties of statist-individualism and is distinctively more blatant in forging a homogeneous statist nation.
 In the face of the rise of claims of communities, the emergence of communitarian thinking and increased evidence of the receding territorial state, new - post statist - constitutional thinking is gathering strength. This has unleashed considerable interest in alternative thinking such as that of Althusius.
 Althusius’ grand federalism should be viewed, however, within the context of his broader constitutional thinking, which on close analysis, is constituted by four interlinked aspects namely: piety, justice and community; covenant (or contract); supremacy of the commonwealth and of the law; and political authority and public office. These tenets are the main focus of the present discussion.
 There is no room for a blanket transplantation of Althusian thinking into modern constitutional theory. However, it does provide a valuable source of communitarian theory for contemporary constitutional law. It brings to light that (individual) identity, morality, and a happy life and individual rights can only be conceived of within the framework of communities. Moreover, Althusius’ convictions on (shared) popular sovereignty, in contrast to undivided (statist) sovereignty and his views on public office provided the framework for constitutionalism and limited government which could arguably improve on that of contemporary statist constitutionalism.
 
Highlights
Statism and AlthusiusJohannes Althusius' Politica: Politics Methodically Set Forth and Illustrated with Sacred and Profane Examples[1] was published in 1603
In dealing with Althusius' thinking one might distinguish between the general tenets of his constitutionalism and his grand scheme of republican federalism
What is referred to here as Althusius' constitutional thinking could aptly be termed political thinking since political and constitutional thinking in many respects overlap to such an extent that it is well-nigh impossible to distinguish between the two
Summary
Johannes Althusius' Politica: Politics Methodically Set Forth and Illustrated with Sacred and Profane Examples[1] was published in 1603. The two elements of statism – the abstract individual with his statist identity and the centralised power apparatus of the territorial state – determine the way in which all matters of public life, including crucial concepts such as the constitution, constitutionalism, rule of law and the Rechtstaat, sovereignty, citizenship, democracy, rights, and power are conceptualised. On reading the Politica the following five primary themes, comprising his constitutional thinking, come to the fore: a) piety, justice and community; b) covenant (or contract); c) supremacy of the commonwealth and of the law; d) political authority and public office; and e) Althusius's scheme of federalism. The first four: piety, justice and community; covenant (or contract); supremacy of the commonwealth and of the law; political authority and public office, are the general tenets of Althusius' constitutionalism, that is, the ideal elements. Even almighty God is said not to be able to do what is evil and contrary to nature.[101]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
