This volume collects and revises the key essays of Gunther Teubner, one of the world’s leading sociologists of law. Written over the past twenty years, these essays examine the ‘dark side’ of functional differentiation and the prospects of societal constitutionalism as a possible remedy. Teubner’s claim is that critical accounts of law and society require reformulation in the light of the sophisticated diagnoses of late modernity in the writings of Niklas Luhmann, Jacques Derrida and select examples of modernist literature. Autopoiesis, deconstruction and other post-foundational epistemological and political realities compel us to confront the fact that fundamental democratic concepts such as law and justice can no longer be based on theories of stringent argumentation or analytical philosophy. We must now approach law in terms of contingency and self-subversion rather than in terms of logical consistency and rational coherence.
The vain search for legal unity in the fragmentation of global law
Andreas Fischer-Lescano and Gunther Teubner
Global legal pluralism, however, is not simply a result of political pluralism, but instead the expression of deep contradictions between colliding sectors of a global society. At its core, the fragmentation of global law is not simply about legal norm collisions or policy conflicts. Its origin lies in contradictions between society-wide institutionalised rationalities, which law cannot solve, but which
conflicts do emerge, such a form of democracy requires that all citizens should have equal standing and influence in any deliberation about their resolution. In the circumstances of wide pluralism (that is, of pluralism along a number of dimensions), toleration would seem to be both part of the ideal of public reason and an important virtue for citizens to exercise in their deliberative institutions. Yet deliberation also demands more of citizens than silent toleration regarding the reasons of those with whom they disagree, especially if they accept that an important goal
Sovereignty’s power in the case of Delgamuukw v. The Queen 1997
of the colonizers who failed to respect the distinctive cultures of pre-existing aboriginal societies’. 3 This danger flows from the case despite its extraordinarily progressive attempt to recognize and facilitate indigenous legal pluralism within Canada. Despite its positive features, there are many ways the case’s treatment of sovereignty negatively influences indigenous
3 Citizenship of the European Union The legal position and its development Since the 1970s, the view that popular legitimacy would be a precondition for development of the EU as a unitary and purposive actor in international affairs has prevailed among EU political elites. The influential 1975 Report by Leo Tindemans, a former Belgian Prime Minister, in its call for a more distinctive EU ‘identity’ on the international stage, hinted at later ideas of both Union citizenship1 and attempts to create a European anthropos contained in the recommendations of the
Legal pluralism in the world society
no longer merely rudimentary and that have emerged independently both of national legal orders and of traditional jus gentium . With regard to these kinds of global legal order, I would like to put forward three arguments: Global law can only be adequately explained by a theory of legal pluralism and a corresponding, pluralistically oriented doctrine of the sources of law. The theory of legal
The milestones of Teubner’s neo-pluralism
characterised by the increasing significance of social norms external to the state? The result is a complex socio-legal theory that Teubner has gradually developed through mutually connected models of law able to represent different kinds of pluralism in different cultural situations. Five models of law 1 Autonomous law In his very first writings, Teubner set out to contribute to a pluralistic
Social and cultural modernity beyond the nation-state
Habermas and European integration examines the attitudes of German philosopher Jürgen Harbermas towards the European Union and the proposed European Constitution of 2004. Habermas wrote in support of this Constitution which ultimately remained unratified after referendums in 2005. This book combines an exploration of both Habermas’s ideas and of the crises on the European Union; these are both currently topical subjects. The book is divided into two main parts. The first section addresses the concept of ‘social modernity’ at EU level whilst exploring Habermas’s notion of juridification and its affinities with integration theories. The second section considers ‘cultural modernity’ in Europe and focuses on the impact of ‘Europessimism’ which grew in the late twentieth century and intensified in the years following 9/11. There is also a final third section which looks at the conceptual landscape of the Constitutional Convention using empirical research. With an interdisciplinary approach, the book engages with EU studies, critical and political theory, international relations, intellectual history, comparative literature and philosophy. Habermas and European integration was originally published in 2012 with this second edition being published in paperback with a new preface to coincide with Habermas’s ninetieth birthday. This republication follows several developments in European politics which are explored in the revised preface; the original text is maintained with annotations supplied for correction. The book appeals to multiple readerships including students and scholars as well as broader readers who might be interested in European affairs especially considering the ongoing political crises.
A conceptual history 1200–1900
Edited by: Patrick McDonagh, C.F. Goodey, and Tim Stainton
This collection explores how concepts of intellectual or learning disability evolved from a range of influences, gradually developing from earlier and decidedly distinct concepts, including ‘idiocy’ and ‘folly’, which were themselves generated by very specific social and intellectual environments. With essays extending across legal, educational, literary, religious, philosophical, and psychiatric histories, this collection maintains a rigorous distinction between historical and contemporary concepts in demonstrating how intellectual disability and related notions were products of the prevailing social, cultural, and intellectual environments in which they took form, and themselves performed important functions within these environments. Focusing on British and European material from the middle ages to the late nineteenth century, this collection asks ‘How and why did these concepts form?’ ‘How did they connect with one another?’ and ‘What historical circumstances contributed to building these connections?’ While the emphasis is on conceptual history or a history of ideas, these essays also address the consequences of these defining forces for the people who found themselves enclosed by the shifting definitional field.
Andreas Fischer- Lescano
questions of global legal pluralism. This may be a species-appropriate stance for the owl of Minerva. But a philosophy 174 174 Responses of law that remains in touch with the legal-political problems of world society should query the nexus binding the law to “political communities.” Both components of this conceptual conjunction are questionable: what is communal, and what is political, about the “political communities” of the transnational constellation in which the “rule of political union” over the individual is supposedly realized? Although world society lacks