Federal Idea Research Articles

In Search of European Federalism

The article deals with the historical development of European federalism, and its role in the development of international law and the emergence of European law. It looks at how the most important European representatives of the idea of peaceful world federation opposed the belligerent and expansionist power policies pursued by the European sovereign countries during history. The article concentrates on the federalist ideas that were proposed with the aim of transcending the dogma of sovereign state, which made it impossible to establish peaceful relationships and democracy among states. It presents those federalist ideas and principles that became part of European law, and shows the differences between the two main oppositional political currents of European policy, the federalists and the intergovernmentalists.

United in Diversity? Asymmetry in Indian Federalism

Many studies highlight constitutional asymmetry as a desirable feature of federal systems in multinational countries. This article looks at India which, mainly because of the special provisions for Kashmir in the 1950 constitution and the status of newer small states in the north-east, is generally described as asymmetrically federal. I show that, while India exhibits considerable de facto asymmetry, asymmetry in the constitutional powers granted to individual states has (i) not been important for India's ability to ‘hold together’ as often assumed and (ii) not entailed special protection of cultural or national minorities. I thus cast doubt on the normative political philosophy, particularly informed by Canadian and Spanish debates, that advances the idea of asymmetrical federalism as a model of governance in potentially divided societies.

Subsidiarity, Federalism and the Best Constitution: Thomas Aquinas on City, Province and Empire

This article closely examines the way in which Thomas Aquinas understood the relationship between the various forms of human community. The article focuses on Aquinas's theory of law and politics and, in particular, on his use of political categories, such as city, province and empire, together with the associated concepts of kingdom and nation, as well as various social groupings, such as household, clan and village, alongside of the distinctly ecclesiastical categories of parish, diocese and universal church. The analysis of these categories is used in the article to help explain Aquinas's role in the development of theories about subsidiarity, federalism and mixed constitutionalism. In the first place, it is argued that a close inquiry into Aquinas's discussion of the many and various forms of human community sheds light on the origins and development of the idea of subsidiarity within Catholic social teaching. Second, while Aquinas certainly did not advance a theory of federalism as that idea is presently understood, it is argued that recovering what Aquinas had to say about the categories of human community helps us to understand the origin and later development of federal ideas. Finally, it is argued that far from endorsing a system of absolute monarchy as is sometimes alleged, when understood in this way, Aquinas supported a particular kind of mixed constitution in which monarchy is tempered by a variety of constitutional constraints founded upon a conception of the body politic as itself constructed out of a plurality of smaller, intermediate corporations and communities of a political, ecclesiastical and social character.

Intellectual Constructs and Political Issues

essays in this section introduce us to three authors of liberal persuasion whose works touch on Russia's political development and, at least by implication, on meaning of citizenship in Politics, however, was not their central concern: for Vladimir Gessen, it was law and legal theory; for Evgenii Trubetskoi, spiritual renewal; and for Boris Nolde, law and functioning and history of Russian state. One is struck by diversity of their interests, subject matter, and temperament. Indeed, on basis of these articles, it seems as if they are inhabiting different countries and intellectual worlds. question of citizenship is central only to writings of Gessen. It is peripheral to major themes elaborated by Trubetskoi and Nolde. Randall Poole's analysis of thought of Evgenii Trubetskoi contains only one mention of word citizen, toward end (233), where it has somewhat pejorative connotations. evolution of Boris Nolde's political ideas, traced by Peter Holquist, reveals no special interest in subject, though Holquist discusses implications for citizenship of Nolde's ideas of human and federalism. Nonetheless, all three articles reflect on question of citizenship, if only by omission. Trubetskoi's progressive theology and Nolde's progressive statism overshadow question of citizenship. They envision transformations in Russian institutions and political culture that might enable liberal norms to prevail, but questions of individual do not detain them. Both Gessen and Trubetskoi suggest a utopianism and reliance on philosophical schemes characteristic of Russian intelligentsia, though both reject violent solutions and positivism characteristic of intelligentsia. Nolde advances idealized conception of an enlightened bureaucracy that had motivated Russian reformers since reign of Nicholas I (1825-55). All three viewpoints find grounds for hope in intellectual constructs that have little basis in institutional realities of early 20th-century Russia, and it is this absence in writings of thinkers of extraordinary intelligence and erudition that lends their thought both an evocative power and an air of pathos. This pathos comes out with special force in Eric Lohr's article, The Ideal Citizen and Real Subject in Late Imperial Russia. Lohr begins by providing an astute and helpful discussion of principal concepts of citizenship in recent historical writings on prerevolutionary first of these--elaborated by Dov Iaroshevski, Mikhail Dolbilov, and Yanni Kotsonis--bases citizenship primarily on obligations citizen owes to and is expressed by term grazhdanstvennost'. Liberals, in contrast, entertained a vision of citizenship as universalized and extended and immunities from state (177), and this was conception that Vladimir Gessen formulated in his work of 1909. But Gessen did not reject existing laws or institutions. He was torn ... between seemingly antagonistic aims: promotion of rule of existing law, and promotion of his idealistic variant of citizenship rights (183). Gessen's respect for existing law derived from works of positivist jurists, especially N. M. Korkunov, and their promotion of the consistency of law and acceptance of legal order by subjects of state (183). Russian had evolved as a legal entity encouraging respect for law, a view set forth in Gessen's Administrativnoe pravo, published in 1903. But Gessen and other liberals also criticized Korkunov's theory for its validation of power of autocrat over his subjects. He sought basis for a critical legal posture in Kant's conception of universal and transcendent grounds of natural rights. From works of Leon Petrazycki, he derived notion that citizens would develop an internal consciousness of natural right. …

La lutte pour la supranationalité en Europe: un combat contre des chimères? L'engagement de l'Union européenne des Fédéralistes pour la Communauté Politique européenne (1952–1954)

Militant federalism in postwar Europe contrasted with moderate Europeanism by asking for an integrated European society. Its main organ, l'Union européenne des Fédéralistes (created in December 1946), was immediately on the defensive against better organised European movements. Persevering, the UEF maintained its vanguard role and became increasingly heard as European integration progressed after the CED project and Schuman plan. The federalist influence became more prominent through political discourses and events that seemed to favour its integrationist logic. This hope was crushed by the 20 August crime which pushed the federal idea aside as Utopian. Yet federalists undoubtedly broadened their activities and evolved from being advisers to actually influencing the treatise of the Communauté politique européenne (article 38). External events undoubtedly played a role, as did the cold war; by making the European project a more viable solution, the federalists used this opportunity but their relative successes could not hide a weak coalition that would not resist the difficult political climate of the period. résumé Le fédéralisme militant, tel qu'il apparaît dès l'après-guerre, ne peut que trancher par rapport à un européisme majoritairement modéré, dans la mesure où il réclame d'emblée la constitution d'une société véritablement intégrée au niveau européen: son principal représentant, l'Union européenne des Fédéralistes (créée en décembre 1946), entre tout de suite ‘en résistance’ face à des groupes plus prestigieux, qui vont être à la base de la création du Mouvement Européen. L'UEF doit alors défendre son originalité dans une période qui ne semble pas propice aux succès de ses idées. Cette persévérance a permis au mouvement fédéraliste de devenir le mouvement le plus à la pointe du combat européen et le plus écouté de ses pairs, à partir du moment où l'idée d'intégration n'est plus aussi marginale, avec le Plan Schuman puis le projet de CED, auquel vient s'ajouter très vite celui de CPE. L'influence fédéraliste se fait alors sentir à travers des débats, des discours, des faits qui semblent donner raison à la logique intégratrice. La désillusion n'en sera que plus forte lorsque sera perpétré le ‘crime du 30 août’, qui relègue toutes ces hautes priorités au rayon des utopies. Le mouvement a-t-il réellement été entendu des gouvernements, les seuls à même de transformer l'idée en réalité ? On peut remarquer, dans notre courte période, un élargissement de sa sphère d'influence. Cette fonction de ‘conseillers’, dans laquelle les fédéralistes excellent de plus en plus, évolue elle-même avec le temps, de la simple préparation psychologique à l'idée européenne, à laquelle l'UEF n'est pas seule partie prenante, à la fonction d'‘éminence grise’, qui permet au mouvement de contribuer à changer l'esprit du traité politique européen le plus audacieux, celui de la Communauté politique européenne (article 38). Il convient de s'interroger sur le rôle de la conjoncture internationale dans cette évolution. Celle-ci est en effet consubstantielle à l'histoire de l'UEF, comme elle l'est à l'idée d'Europe dans l'après-guerre: c'est la Guerre froide qui rétrécit l'espace européen susceptible de s'unir, mais qui l'érige en espoir. Les fédéralistes, surpris de cette aubaine, sauront en profiter et trouver les bons interlocuteurs. L'impression dominante est cependant que l'action fédéraliste, qui va effectivement profiter des grands débats européens qui émaillent la première moitié des années cinquante, ne repose pas sur des bases bien stables. Peut-être est-ce du à l'hétérogénéité trop importante du Fédéralisme, dont le ‘front commun’ ne pouvait pas sérieusement résister aux aléas et aux révisions constantes entraînés par un contexte dramatique qui échappe aux Européens eux-mêmes.

The Impact of Global and Regional Integration on Federal Systems: A Comparative Analysis

THE IMPACT OF GLOBAL AND REGIONAL INTEGRATION ON FEDERAL SYSTEMS A Comparative Analysis Edited by Harvey Lazar, Hamish Telford, and Ronald L. Watts Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queeris University Press, 2003. viii, 378pp, $65.00 cloth (ISBN 1-55339-003-2), $29.95 paper (ISBN 1-55339-002-4)Generally, until the last third of the 2oth century, analysts of federations predicted their inevitable unitary destinations, in function if not in form. The evolution of federations was driven by the requirements of mixedeconomies and welfare states for central governments to have primary, if not unchallenged, roles. Over time, function would structure form.Since the 19705, the federal idea has enjoyed considerable revitalization. No longer do federalist arrangements seem to be half-way houses on the road to unitary governance. Contrary to functionalist models, wellestablished unitary systems have taken on federal forms and processes. However, two features of modern politics-globalization and regional integration (GARI)-make the future of federations uncertain. Will they be strengthened, weakened, or extinguished?The future of federations is this volume's organizing framework. It consists of eight case-study essays (revised following a 2000 conference) on federal and federal-like entities (Australia, Canada, Germany, India, South Africa, Switzerland, the United States, and the European Union) and an introductory interpretative chapter.Three summary points are made. First, generally-with Europe the exception-system adaptation has occurred without institution transformation. Second-again generally but for Europe-new transnational identities are not being formed. Third, and perhaps most importantly, the causal impact of GARI is not unidirectional; rather, some systems are decentralizing, others are centralizing, and their different trajectories reflect established patterns. Overall, the editors conclude that the examined systems have adapted to GARI pressures without undermining the federal bargains that are fundamental to their stability (2). Inclusion of the United States-the hegemon of globalization and regional integration processeswithin the set of analyzed federations may skew their understanding of GARI effects.The Canadian-American nexus is particularly problematic. Propinquity and trade (deepened by the FTA and NAFTA), coupled with recent pressures for shared defence and security arrangements, would seem to make Canada especially vulnerable to GARI effects. Does its decentralized federation have the muscle memory to allow Ottawa to resist on a sustained basis the heavy pressures from the United States? (At times I think that my Canadian politics class should be retitled preAmerican politics.)Richard Simeon's essay on Canada speaks cogently to the issue's uncertainty. …

One continent, two federalisms: rediscovering the original meanings of Australian federal ideas

Federalism is usually described in political science as a single body of ideas—in Australia's case arriving in the 1840s–50s and moving to constitutional reality in the 1890s. This article re‐examines the origins and diversity of federal ideas in Australia. It suggests that federal thought began influencing Australia's constitutional development significantly earlier than previously described. This first Australian federalism had a previously unappreciated level of support in British colonial policy and drew on Benjamin Franklin's American model of territorial change as a ‘commonwealth for increase’. The revised picture entrenches the notion of federalism's logic but also reveals a dynamic, decentralist style of federalism quite different from Australia's orthodox ‘classic’ or compact federal theory. In fact, Australian political thought contains two often‐conflicting ideas of federalism. The presence of these approaches helps explain longstanding dissent over the regional foundations of Australian constitutionalism.

Federalization and Constitution-Making as an Instrument of Conflict Resolution

Throughout the past decade, there have been numerous proposals advanced to end the frozen conflict between Moldova and the breakaway region of Transnistria. Since the short but intense civil war in the summer of 1992, Transnistria has retained independence from Moldovan central authorities and functioned as a de facto state. Similar to situations in other former Soviet areas such as Abkazia and South Ossetia, the Transnistrian leadership has been able to function because of Russian economic, political, and military support. Although the Moldovan leadership has changed over the years, those Transnistrian individuals that were most directly involved with the civil war have been able to maintain their positions. This may promote continuity in discussions, but it also makes it very difficult to change negotiation positions and inject new ideas into the process. Indeed, what is striking about the current debate over the federalization of Moldova is how little new ground it covers. In July 2002, ambassadors from Russia, Ukraine, and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) officially submitted to Moldova and Transnistria a project to federalize Moldova under joint mediation and guarantees by all three parties. President Voronin issued a draft plan for Moldova in February 2003 calling for a new constitution to be formed by Moldova, Transnistria, Russia, Ukraine, and the OSCE, transforming Moldova into a federation. Although the specifics of the debate have changed, the nature of the debate between the parties, such as whether the plan should be conceived as a federal or confederal solution, has remained the same. For the European Union (EU), the settling of the dispute between Moldova and Transnistria has become an important foreign policy issue, as the border of the EU will extend to Romania by 2007. (1) Transnistria is often cited as an area in which arms, drugs, and human smuggling are conducted with the help of government resources. In addition, many in Russia view the federalization plan for Moldova as a template for use in other former Soviet republics, such as Georgia and Azerbaijan. Therefore, the solution to this frozen conflict has wider implications for Europe and elsewhere. Since the federalization plan was first proposed in July 2002, there has been any significant change in the negotiating position of the Transnistrians and very little input from Moldovan civil society. This is why the federalization plan for Moldova has elicited such a strong negative response, both from Moldovan opposition parties and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). For many Moldovan opposition groups, any compromise with the Transnistrian leadership is viewed as a defeat and a capitulation to Russian interests. Therefore, the federalization process is both an important domestic and foreign policy issue for the Moldovan government. This article briefly examines some common concepts of federalism and then examines the federalization proposal and its domestic and foreign consequences for Moldova. The Idea of Federalism One of the reasons why the federalization plan for Moldova has been so problematic is that there is widespread disagreement among scholars and governmental participants as to the nature and conceptualization of federalism and even what a federal state should look like. Brzinski, Lancaster, and Tuschloff (1999) argue that there are three perceptions of federalism. One view is that federalism is a sociological process based on a group governance in which groups agree to power sharing and certain rules of the game. For example, Elazar (1994) argues that federalism is not to be found in a particular kind of structure but a particular set of relationships among the participants in a political system (15). Moreno (2001) argues that the federalization of Spain and the gradual devolution of powers to the autonomous communities were brought about by the agreed political will of these communities rather than by any institutional feature. …

Ethno-Territorial Federalism and A. D. Sakharov’s Constitutional Draft

387 Ab Imperio, 4/2004 There are some other provisions where ambiguities can be noticed. Such is the case of Paragraph 20, where despite Sakharov’s commitment to peace he proposed, at the level of each republic, the establishment of military forces and other armed services. Or, in another instance, certain contradictions emerged when on the one hand he states that foreign policy will be the prerogative of the central level (Paragraph 19), and yet each republic will be able to establish direct international economic contacts (Paragraph 22). By opening access to international and global markets, republics will directly engage in shaping the context and application on the ground, in fact at the local level, of economic foreign policies and they will become agents of foreign policies. Despite these points of contestation, Sakharovs’ constitution is a visionary and formidable document committed to the rule of law, social justice, equality among all, and respect for human rights and basic freedoms. It is also a document that not only illustrates the density of Sakharov’s thought and the search for a democratic and humanistic future for the entire world but also reflects late Soviet dissidents’ worldview. In that sense, the document is a memorial to the great historical moment of social and political transformations of the late 20th century that Sakharov so much helped to spearhead. It is often difficult for contemporaries to understand what is going on in front of them. This is also true for the foreign observers of an event. When Gorbachev’s economic reforms and their painful consequences were attracting worldwide attention, both the citizens of the USSR and foreign observers Kimitaka MATSUZATO ETHNO-TERRITORIAL FEDERALISM AND A. D. SAKHAROV’S CONSTITUTIONAL DRAFT 388 Вспоминая конституционный проект А. Д. Сахарова... thought that the idea of reform was good, but that Gorbachev lacked the strong will to realize it in full or that he was encountering resistance by the nomenklatura. Several years after the collapse of the USSR, scholars began to argue convincingly that Gorbachev’s reforms themselves were destructive by their intention (to create a market economy without imposing adequate risks on enterprises) and implementation (voluntarism and leapfrogging changes in policies).1 In contrast to Gorbachev’s hyper-reformism, Sakharov’s constitutional draft (for the expected Union of Republics of Europe and Asia) impresses us by its conservatism, if we read it as a guideline for state building. Yet it is another example of how difficult it is for contemporaries to understand the real reasons for the crises they face. The draft confirms the traditional idea of ethno-territorial federalism, which premises the coincidence of federal constituents (union republics and other administrative territorial units) and the spatial distribution of ethnicities (Paragraphs 17 and others). According to this approach, each federal constituent has its titular nation, the members of which are more or less privileged in “their” republic.2 Remember that almost all the republics in the USSR, both union and autonomous, were named for some titular nation.3 The Russian Empire was built on a purely territorial principle. To be more precise, the Russian empire tried hard to avoid overlapping the administrative territorial boundaries with the ethnic distribution of the population. Imperial officials thought that ethnically homogeneous regions would provoke separatism among the population and make inter-ethnic relations more complex (a compromise between a population distribution of 90 percent and 10 percent is often more difficult to achieve than that between 60 percent and 40 percent). There were few exceptions to this principle: for example, the introduction of Kovno (Kaunas) Province in the 1840s and the Steppe Governor-Generalship in the 1880s. However, both of them had limited, concrete purposes: the former was planned to sever Lowland Lithuanians 1 Michael Ellman and Vladimir Kontorovich (Eds.). The Destruction of the Soviet Economic System. An Insiders’ History. Armonk, NY, 1998. 2 Therefore, the fact that in present-day Tatarstan ethnic Tatars, who compose only half of the population but make up 80 percent of the political elites, is a result of the realization (not distortion) of ethno-territorial federalism. 3 The only examples named after the place name were Crimea and Dagestan. But Crimea had its title nation (Crimean Tatars) and multiethnic Dagestan had and...

Renovatio imperii Romani: The aspect of Christian wored outlook

There have not been any researches on the Medieval Christian world outlook done in Lithuania at all. A bit more attention was given to such problems as interaction of ancient Balts with Christian culture, Baltic view at Christianity. Usually, those topics are squeezed into the XIII-XIV century frame, which is more actual. Recently, scholars succeeded in grounding the conceptuality of 1009 in historiography. In this context, renovatio conception was determined, however mostly meaning its political expression. But also not less important is the portend of Christian world outlook in renovatio policy, beginning with Charlemagne and ending with the most significant person in this policy—Otto III. The political expression and dimension of Otto's renovatio conception are clear enough: the emperor is christomimetes on the earth, his power comes out of Dei gratia, and he rules all over the Christian world. The emperor appoints popes and bishops, organizes missions (this is connected or bounded up with conditionally weak, if compared to emperor's, papal power in the VIII-XI centuries). Another one of the most important goals of renovatio is to make conditions for old and newly-risen countries of Central and Eastern Europe (firstly Hungary and Poland) to become a part of the federation created by Otto. They were supposed to become rulers of certain federal subjects, allies of the emperor, who could help in the restoration of the whole empire, who could expand and praise it. The Christian world outlook is also very important. It let Otto settle himself into the existence of christomimetes, by using this to declare the emperor's responsibility to expand Christianity in pagan lands, and responsibility for the salvation of every Christian soul. Those facts explain such missions to Baltic lands as the mission of St. Adalbert-Wojciech, St. Bruno of Querfurt, and the mission of 5 Benedictine monks. All of them were organized by Otto (until Dictatus papae). Renovatio policy served as a tool for Otto to get the whole world under his crown (including the Byzantine emperor and Kiev Russia). Inversely, Otto shows that his empire is not civitas terrena or civitas diaboli—according to St. Augustine, who thought that the fight for the salvation of souls was going on the earth and in "another" world as eschatology minor. The emperor identified himself with christomimetes, which meant that his country couldn't be identified with civitas diaboli any more. Civitas terrena was a temporary shelter for a man. The same temporality is waiting for a soul in the "another world" until the day of the Last Judgment. Only after the Last Judgment will it become clear where which soul will be going—to hell or paradise. Only good behavior and good works dedicated to soul and body helped people to achieve eternal life. The formation of such behavior was one of the main tasks and functions of the emperor. In conclusion, the idea of federation, as much as the Christian view, formed conditions for peaceful missions in Eastern Europe. Military actions began much later. They are connected with changes in the Church's life after the announcing of Dictatus papae, also with changes in the world outlook and events in the Holy Land, which led to the beginning of the Crusades.

Handbook of federal countries, 2002

For more than two centuries federalism has provided an example of how people can live together even as they maintain their diversity. The Handbook of Federal Countries, 2005 continues the tradition started by the 2002 edition, updating and building on the work of Ronald Watts and Daniel Elazar in providing a comparative examination of countries with federal tendencies. Unique in its timely scope and depth, this volume begins with a foreword by Forum President Bob Rae that reflects on the importance of the federal idea in the contemporary world and provides an excellent introduction to federalism. New comparative chapters examine the recent draft constitutional treaty in Europe and the possibility of federalism being adopted in two countries with longstanding violent conflicts - Sri Lanka and Sudan. As a project of the Forum of Federations, an international network seeking to strengthen democratic governance through federal values, practices, and principles, the 2005 handbook is an essential sourcebook of information with maps and statistical tables in each chapter. The international authors examine a wide range of themes including the development of federalism in the country, the constitutional provisions relating to federalism, and the country's current political dynamics. The authors also include sources readers can consult for more information. Contributors include Dirk Anthony Ballendorf (University of Guam), Kaiser Bengali (Social Policy and Development Centre, Pakistan), Allan Brewer-Carias (Columbia University), David Cameron (University of Toronto),Valeriano Mendes Ferreira Costa (Sao Paulo - Brasil), Mihailo Crnobrnja (special advisor, Government of Serbia), Rohan Edrisinha (University of Colombo), Ann Griffiths (Dalhousie University), Siobhan Harty (Department of Social Development, Ottawa), Rudolf Hrbek (University of Tuebingen, Germany), Paul King (Management Systems International, Nigeria), Andre Lecours (Concordia University), George Mathew (Institute for Social Sciences, India), Gordon Means (emeritus, McMaster University), Yemile Mizrahi (Washington, DC), Viviana Patroni (York University), Tom Patz (Gesellschaft fur technische Zusammenarbeit), Cesare Pinelli (University of Macerata), Cheryl Saunders (University of Melbourne), Sanford Schram (Bryn Mawr College), Lee Seymour (Northwestern University), Julie Simmons (University of Guelph), Thomas Stauffer (University of Fribourg), Roland Sturm (University of Erlangen-Nurnberg), Janis van der Westhuizen (Stellenbosch University), Gary Wilson (University of Northern British Columbia), and Marie-Joelle Zahar (Universite de Montreal).

Religious diversity and federalism

The idea of federalism was initially a religious one, applying the idea of a covenant to political organisation. It was from this religious understanding that the modern political understanding of federalism emerged. Some of the critical decisions of the founders of the United States of America were those dealing with the question of religious diversity: in addition to religious ideas of governing by covenant, there was a strong element of separation of church and state, so that no denomination would be favoured over another. In other federal systems, federalism has been used to protect religious diversity in a variety of ways. The period since World War II has been marked by the emergence of new forms of federalism, such as the post‐modern confederation. In many cases the constituent states of these confederal arrangements have had dominant or even established religions of their own differing from those of their associates co‐existing under the religiously neutral framework of the confederation. As the relationship between religion and state continues to undergo re‐evaluation, federalism adds to the range of possibilities for accommodating

Federal Britain: A History

The United Kingdom faces with two major federal constitutional debates. The first is about the nations which comprise the British state and hence the division of power between Westminster and regional parliaments of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The second surrounds the United Kingdom and the European Union. This text explores the British engagement with the federal idea from the early 1600s onwards, and sets contemporary discussions in context. In the past four centuries, the British have often looked to the federal idea as a possible solution to problems of the unity of the United Kingdom and of the British Empire. This period has also seen successful adoption of federalism by many countries, including Britain's former colonial possessions. John Kendle examines the break-up of the first British empire and the development of modern federalism. As well as discussing the Anglo-Irish relationship and the United Kingdom's relationship to Europe, the author focuses on other contemporary issues such as the world order, imperial federation and decolonization.

Rousseau e o federalista: pontos de aproximação

É comum que se ressaltem as divergências entre Rousseau e os federalistas norte-americanos, em especial as avaliações contrastantes do potencial democrático de unidades políticas pequenas e homogêneas. Mas também há um importante terreno comum entre o primeiro e os últimos que costuma ser subestimado: as idéias de soberania imanente, república e federalismo. O artigo argumenta que esse terreno comum pode nos ajudar a pensar os impasses da democracia contemporânea.

Europe’s ‘Democratic Deficit’: The Question of Standards

Arguments about Europe’s democratic deficit are really arguments about the nature and ultimate goals of the integration process. Those who assume that economic integration must lead to political integration tend to apply to European institutions standards of legitimacy derived from the theory and practice of parliamentary democracies. We argue that such standards are largely irrelevant at present. As long as the majority of voters and their elected representatives oppose the idea of a European federation, while supporting far‐reaching economic integration, we cannot expect parliamentary democracy to flourish in the Union. Economic integration without political integration is possible only if politics and economics are kept as separate as possible. The depoliticisation of European policy‐making is the price we pay in order to preserve national sovereignty largely intact. These being the preferences of the voters, we conclude that Europe’s ‘democratic deficit’ is democratically justified.The expression ‘democratic deficit,’ however, is also used to refer to the legitimacy problems of non‐majoritarian institutions, and this second meaning is much more relevant to a system of limited competences such as the EC. Now the key issues for democratic theory are about the tasks which may be legitimately delegated to institutions insulated from the political process, and how to design such institutions so as to make independence and accountability complementary and mutually supporting, rather than antithetical. If one accepts the ‘regulatory model’ of the EC, then, as long as the tasks delegated to the European level are precisely and narrowly defined, non‐majoritarian standards of legitimacy should be sufficient to justify the delegation of the necessary powers.

Refederalizing Russia: Debates on the Idea of Federalism in Russia

Russia has been struggling to come to terms with the ethno-federal structure it inherited from the USSR Central and regional political actors have sought to restructure relations in a way that marks a break from the pseudo-federalism of the past, and both the 1992 Federation Treaty and the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation declared the establishment of a federal democracy. This article investigates the process of refederalization by examining debates over the idea of federalism in Russia. Despite an initial wide-ranging discussion, federalism is increasingly seen in strategic terms by political elites. The system is asymmetrical and bureaucratic, and it is based on a series of treaties between the center and constituent units, rather than on an effective constitution that binds the center and regions together.

Refederalizing Russia: Debates on the Idea of Federalism in Russia

Refederalizing Russia: Debates on the Idea of Federalism in Russia

Introduction: Federalism and Building the European Union

The Treaty on European Union ratified in 1993 was another major step toward afederal-like European union. Although the European Union is not a federation in the classical sense, it has a number of federal-like attributes and dynamics. In addition, federal ideas, however controversial in parts of Europe, have contributed both to the legal, political, and constitutional evolution of the European Community and to the creation of the European Union at Maastricht. A centerpiece of the new European Union is to be the European Monetary Union, which will, if realized, move the European Union in a more decidedly federal direction.

Spinoza and The Federal Polity

In his Political Treatise, Benedict de Spinoza (1632-1677) describes a frame of government for a federal polity whose members are neither confederated nor united but are mutually associated and united. Spinoza regards thefederal polity as the preferred mode of republican government. His Political Treatise marks the turn in political science from the classic polis to the extended republic of modern times. His argument converges with and illuminates that of The Federalist in several respects. This article discusses Spinoza's contributions to the federal idea, and shows the importance of federalism for understanding Spinoza.

Prescriptions for a New National Democracy

Americans tend to think of their history as one of unbroken continuity. The United States has been governed under the same federal constitution since the eighteenth century, and its borders have remained unchanged since the nineteenth century (with the exception of the admission to statehood of Alaska and Hawaii). This superficial continuity disguises the discontinuities between three successive American regimes or republics, each separated from its predecessor by a violent upheaval, each marked by a distinctive set of rules governing citizenship, race, and immigration. The First Republic of the United States, Anglo-America, lasted from the adoption of the U.S. Constitution in 1787-1789 until the Civil War. Its successor, Euro-America, coalesced in the aftermath of the Civil War and lasted until the Civil Rights Revolution of the 1950s and 1960s. The present American regime, Multicultural America, was assembled in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Each republic of the United States to date has had its own political creed. The political creed of Anglo-America was federal republicanism; even before the Civil War inaugurated the Euro-American republic, this was giving way to federal democracy, as class-based restrictions on suffrage (at least among white men) were abolished. In Multicultural America, federal centralization has been combined with a cooptive system of racial preferences; in effect, territorial federalism has been overlaid by racial federalism. The idea of racial federalism is democracy within races, not democracy across races; its symbol is the racially gerrymandered majority-minority district. The philosophy of liberal nationalism offers an alternative to the multicultural conception of American society. Liberal nationalists reject the multicultural idea of the United States as a federation of half a dozen biologically-defined ethnocultural groups in favor of a conception of the American community as a concrete