The fall of sovereignties: the reverse perspective. Part 1

The article analyzes the problem that has always remained relevant in the legal science -namely, the problem of sovereignty. The author compares this concept with the concept of state independence, and in the process of dialectical comparison the author makes an attempt to elicit their common features and fundamental differences. The sovereign as the subject of sovereignty may take both personal and anonymous form, and both individual and collective implementation. The article highlights the fictitious nature of sovereign subjectivity inherent in the era of modern when the sovereignty substantially changes its content and essence. This process of transformation was marked by such thinkers as Fyodor Dostoevsky, Vladimir Soloviev, Friedrich Nietzsche, and others. A fictitious or imaginary sovereign, even if he has supremacy and power, is deprived of true legitimacy that cannot be restored by either public opinion or direct violence. Both mimicry and manipulation are of no use under such circumstances. «Two bodies» of the king fall in two and never conjoin again. A fictitious sovereign rules a fictitious, «phantom» state. The substrate of such a state is not the people, but the "masses" as a specific formation conjoined by the staples of external power, violence and ideology. Independence associated with the freedom of existence is absorbed by the force of power, with which it turns out to be incompatible. An external law plays a much more important role than internal truth on which traditionally justice was based. The very justice is replaced by its own metaphor, which is the law. Depersonalized force of law that was expressed in the rule of thumb not only limits sovereignty, but supersedes it. Sovereignty as the status radiates independence as its movement and dynamics. Illusories that are typical for the era of modern result in making "unjust laws" that neglect both the truth and justice and focus only on feasibility and effect. Metaphysical and transcendental provisions disappear from the sphere of law that used to connect law with the other upper extralegal authorities. Normativizm becomes the dominant ideology of the era of modern and modernity, giving the law and the sovereignty a brand new look and creating unintended consequences for the life of the rule of law state

sovereignty, independence, authority, legitimacy, lawfulness, subject, personality, state, legal form, rule of law, justice, truth, legality

1. Агамбен Д. Средства без цели. - М., 2015.

2. Батлер Дж. Психика власти. - СПб., 2002.

3. Гвардини Р. Конец Нового времени // Феномен человека. - М., 1993.

4. Гегель В. Ф. Конституция Германии // Политические произведения. - М., 1978.

5. Губрехт Х. У. В 1926 году : На острие времени. - М., 2005.

6. Гурвич Г. Социология права // Философия и социология права. - СПб., 2004.

7. Делез Ж. Ницше. - СПб., 1997.

8. Касториадис К. Воображаемое установление общества. - М., 2003.

9. Кожев А. Введение в чтение Гегеля. - СПб., 2003.

10. Кожев А. Очерк феноменологии права // Атеизм. - М., 2007.

11. Кьеркегор С. Страх и трепет. - М., 1993.

12. Лурман Н. Власть. - М., 2001.

13. Манн Т. Философия Ницше в свете нашего времени // Собрание сочинений. - М., 1961. - Т. 10.

14. Ницше Ф. По ту сторону добра и зла // Сочинения. - М., 1990. - Т. 2.

15. Слотердайк П. Критика цинического разума. - Екатеринбург, 2001.

16. Флоренский П. Предполагаемое государственное устройство в будущем // Сочинения. М., 1996. Т. 2.

17. Франк С. Крушение кумиров // Сочинения. - М., 1990

18. Шмитт К. Диктатура. - СПб., 2005