Constitutional Patriotism

EVR201F, EUROPEAN INTEGRATION AND THE FUTURE OF DEMOCRACY, Davis Vilcans 1

European Integration and the Future of Democracy

The future of democracy might seem as a particularly philosophical topic however the

importance of political philosophy should not be underestimated – it was political philosophy that

contributed to the emergence of highly oppressive and radical political regimes during the Interwar

period. The emphasis in this paper will be put on exploring the concept of constitutional patriotism

while also relating to ideas about post-nationalism, deliberative democracy and communicative action,

furthermore these ideas will be discussed in the context of European integration.

Constitutional Patriotism

The concept of constitutional patriotism was originally coined by German philosophers Karl

Jasper and his scholar Dolf Sternberger in the post-war period and later adopted by Jurgen Habermas,

as an attempt to substitute “conventional patriotism” – in which, probably, the most crucial element is

national identity. Constitutional patriotism served as a conceptual basis for constructing a German

national identity, which was a rather complicated task after the events of the Second World War.

In the light of constitutional patriotism the sense of belonging to a community must emerge not

based on ethnic principles or common history but on common values and norms. A prime example of

constitutional patriotism (as pointed out by Habermas and later used by Muller) was the Federal

Republic of Germany, “a form of patriotism focused not so much on historical identities as on rights

and democratic procedures” (Muller, 2006, p. 288). Constitutional patriotism combines elements of

cosmopolitanism and communitarianism – from communitarianism the emotional attachment is seen as

a key resource in democratic politics however communitarianism's exclusionary characteristics are

being strongly rejected – community is seen as a crucial resource but only as long as it is not

exclusionary. From cosmopolitanism however the idea, that democratic procedures bridge the deficits

in social integration is borrowed. Constitutional patriotism can be seen as a crucial element of post-

national democratic constellations because of its inclusive character, this however will be more

discussed in the context of transnationalist critique of constitutional patriotism.


Constitutional Patriotism and Deliberative Democracy

Unlike the early Dolf Sternberg, who in the context of constitutional patriotism emphasized the

need for democracy to have self-defensive capabilities (to defend itself from the emergence of any form

of radicalism) thus coining the term “wehrhafte demokratie” – militant democracy, or as translated

more directly – defensive democracy, Habermas focused more on the public sphere seeing it as a place

for public reasoning. As described by Muller (2006), Habermas saw, “civic solidarity as an outcome of

unconstrained discourse leading to mutual civic recognition” (p. 288). Muller (2006) also notes that the

concept of constitutional patriotism, “would not allow a relentless and unconstrained persecution of

‘enemies of democracy’” (p. 295), however at the same time Muller (2006) believes that this question

is not peculiar to constitutional patriotism as an ideal. Habermas believes that discourse is the key to

democracy and the importance lies within the strength of the argument not within the authority of the

individual who comes up with the argument – this is one of the cornerstones of deliberative democracy.

In contrast to representative democracy deliberative democracy seeks to bridge the gap between the

rulers and the ruled, to bring the political process closer to the people, however the need for political

institutions in this context is not being questioned but the role of the institutions is seen in a rather

different light – political system deals with the problems identified by the civil society. It should be

noted that the role of the civil society is not only to identify particular problems but also to make sure

that they reach the legislative agenda. What is of particular importance in the context of deliberative

democracy is the belief that in order for public deliberation to take place, there do not have to be shared

norms and values within the community – the communal norms and values, which are particularly

relevant within the context of constitutional patriotism, are seen as a product of deliberation. It is

believed that all human beings have a capacity for reason, whereas public deliberation also involves

reasoning – at this point it is worth discussing the theory of communicative action as proposed by

Habermas.

Theory of Communicative Action

The Theory of Communicative action states that language and communication have a

particularly important role in integrating society, in this context two notions of rationality are

distinguished – instrumental rationality (cost and benefit analysis) which applies to what is described as


system and communicative rationality which emphasizes the search for common good (what's good for

everybody) and applied to what is described as lifeworld. The concept of lifeworld itself is very

sophisticated but in a very broad sense it could be explained as individual and at the same time

communal perception of the world based on subjective everyday life experiences. According to

Habermas, applying instrumental rationality to the lifeworld is threatening and can lead to social

disintegration. In other words the cost and benefit analysis which is so fundamental to instrumental

rationality cannot be properly applied to the lifeworld because society is more than a set of systems.

Through public deliberation rationality is being questioned – the understanding of what is rational and

what is not is seen as an outcome of this communication. Having outlined some conceptual basis it is

possible now to move on and discuss these ideas in the context of European Union.

The Future of Democracy in the Context of European Integration

It is believed that the EU is suffering from democratic deficit, there have been various

propositions on how to approach this issue – a European constitutional culture is one of them. Then

again – some might say that the possibility of establishing a European constitutional culture seems

unlikely just by taking into account the fact that not so long ago the EU failed to implement a

constitution – and what is notable, that the Constitutional Treaty was rejected in French and Dutch

national referendums, it was the society which opposed having a European constitution. Muller (2008)

believes that a supranational constitutional patriotism is far more demanding than a domestic one and,

“not that an introduction of what a critic has called an “aprioristic constitutional system” then

automatically would call or let alone ensure the emergence of European constitutional patriotism” (p.

549). In this light Muller (2008) believes that the rejection of the Constitutional Treaty can be also

viewed positively because it could promote dialogue on the issue, new voices would emerge and the

old voices might have a different “volume”. Muller seems to sympathize with the idea of deliberative

democracy (hearing more voices), however in this context a question arises – if EU-wide deliberation

on moral norms and values is to take place what is the role of language? To illustrate this argument it is

worth taking a look at the Eurobarometer survey on the language knowledge of Europeans, which was

conducted in 2006, the results of the survey showed that 53% of the respondents could speak an

additional language to their mother tongue, however in six memberstates majority were mono-linguists

(European Commission). The notion of an EU-wide public debate is not so simple as it may seem – as


believed by some a shared public sphere is impossible to imagine without a shared language – an

implementation of some sort of a common European language policy however would lead to the

pooling of sovereignty which is a particularly sensitive issue. Language however can also be

approached as a “value”, after all national identities are sets of values and norms and probably the most

characteristic feature of every national identity is the language. If deliberation within a community can

lead to emergence of communal norms and values, as stated before, it could also solve the language

issue.

Lacroix (2002) points out some strong criticism on the applicability of constitutional patriotism

in context of the EU:

“Constitutional patriotism makes a good sense only in the German context where it can be seen

as a way of shifting German national identity away from its earlier ethnic/racial forms towards a

commitment to a shared body of principles enshrined in the post-war constitution.” (p. 951).

Lacroix though appeals to constitutional patriotism and presents a counter argument stating that other

countries have some “skeletons in their closets” to come to terms with as well, like the case of British

colonialism and France using torture in Algeria. In this context it is worth pointing out the

transnationalist critique of the post-national democratic model – transnationalists believe that

constitutional patriotism while trying to create a European demos would also imply a risk that national

demoi would be subordinated, “cosmopolitan law demands the subordination of regional, national and

local sovereignties to an overarching legal framework” (Held, as cited in Bohman, 2007, p. 13). The

concept of constitutional patriotism in its sense implies the notion of constitution – which can be

viewed as the legal framework that transnationalists find as subordinating but at the same time if we

assume that this legal framework is the legislative result of a bottom-up political process the likelihood

of the subordination could be reduced to minimum, though it cannot be assumed that it would be

eradicated.

Another major criticism of constitutional patriotism as pointed out by Lacroix is that,

“constitutional patriotism has no real existence outside the philosophers mind because people do not

identify themselves with abstract principles alone” (p. 949). The refutation that Lacroix proposes is

very abstract and debatable, “if constitutional patriotism did not exist being too abstract and too cold it

would mean that love of political justice does not exist either nor that of freedom” (p. 949). The idea

behind constitutional patriotism is not objectionable – the desire to reduce the influence of

“conventional patriotism” to prevent any type of radicalism from emerging, but an idea that came forth


during one of the group discussions was that the choice of words in defining the concept of

constitutional patriotism may not have been very successful in a sense that the term “patriotism” within

itself carries a sort of a historically and culturally embedded meaning and while the Lacroix's argument

may retort the critique of constitutional patriotism being abstract and in a sense cold, the people may

still not want to identify themselves with this concept because the historical and cultural background

that it implies may not seem appealing to them.

When addressing European integration Etzioni's (2007) views on the current state of the

integration are of great relevance. Etzioni points out the presence of conflict between

intergovernmental and supranational elements – the volume and scope of integrated activities, as

Etzioni believes, has taken a more supranational character while the political architecture is still stuck

in a sort of an intergovernmental phase – a community deficit. Etzioni believes that citizens of the EU

have to be ready to take sacrifices for common good in order for the Union to function successfully, the

citizens of the EU have to constitute a “community of values”, normative-affective community building

has to take place. Etzioni's proposition on creating the normative-affective community might be seen as

stemming from the ideas proposed by discourse theorists – normative-affective community can be built

through 'moral dialogues' – public discussions that engage values over interests. What distinguishes

Etzioni from discourse theorists is the “sacrifice” that certain groups of the community would have to

be ready to take – discourse theorists believe that political process has to produce much more than just

a compromise. The normative-affective community building process ('moral dialogues') as proposed by

Etzioni seems to be compatible with the idea of constitutional patriotism – building communal norms,

values and promoting solidarity, however the outcome that Etzioni desires does not – the community

that Etzioni has envisioned seems clearly communitarian and has some exclusionary characteristics that

appear when the migration issues are addressed.

As a brief conclusion it can be said that the concept of constitutional patriotism alone as it is in

its current state cannot work as a cornerstone in discussing the desirable future of the democracy in the

EU, even when bearing in mind that the object of affection does not necessarily have to be constitution

in a material sense – as a piece of paper but as well as mutual justification of political rule between the

citizens. What makes the concept of constitutional patriotism so distant from the democracy and

everything it should stand for, is the cultural and historical implications that haunt the very notion of

'patriotism' – the willingness to die for ones country, which is something that democratic societies

should try to eliminate from the lifeworld.


References

Bohman, J. (2007). Democratizing the Transnational Polity. The European Union and the

Presuppositions of Democracy, RECON Online Working Paper 2007/02, accessed on 10 April

2012, <http://www.reconproject.eu/main.php/RECON_wp_0702.pdf?fileitem=5456958>.

Etzioni, A. (2007). The Community Deficit, JCMS, 45, 23-42.

European Commission, n.d., Eurobarometer Survey, European Commission, accessed on 10 April

2012, <http://ec.europa.eu/languages/languages-of-europe/eurobarometer-survey_en.htm>

Lacroix, J. (2002). For a European Constitutional Patriotism, Political Studies Association, 50, 944-

988.

Muller, J.,W. (2008). A European Constitutional Patriotism? The Case Restated, European Law

Journal, 14, 542-557.

Muller, J.,W. (2006). On the Origins of Constitutional Patriotism, Contemporary Political Theory, 5,

278-296.

Documents

Constitutional Patriotism