Open Daily: 10am - 10pm | Alley door pickup 10am - 7pm 3038 Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN
612-822-4611

  • Open Daily: 10am - 10pm
    Alley-side Pickup: 10am - 7pm

    3038 Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN
    612-822-4611

Open Daily: 10am - 10pm | Alley-side Pickup: 10am - 7pm
3038 Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN
612-822-4611
Die Autoritäre Grammatik Des Föderalismus: Ein Vergleich Zwischen Brasilien Und Südafrika

Die Autoritäre Grammatik Des Föderalismus: Ein Vergleich Zwischen Brasilien Und Südafrika

Paperback

Series: Rechtsvergleichung Und Rechtsvereinheitlichung

General Law

Currently unavailable to order

ISBN10: 3162007836
ISBN13: 9783162007834
Publisher: Mohr Siebeck
Pages: 270
Language: German

In the German- and English-language canon of constitutional theory and federalism studies, federalism is generally understood as being coextensive with democracy and liberty. The prevailing view holds that these three concepts exist in a more or less symbiotic relationship. This consensus, however, has far-reaching consequences: it leaves little analytical room for examining the relationship between federalism and authoritarianism-a concept categorically opposed to democracy and liberty. As a result, empirically observable overlaps between federal territorial structures and authoritarian modes of governance have received little attention in the scholarly literature.
Against this backdrop, Thilo Herbert pursues two objectives. First, he examines the assumptions underlying the association of federalism with democracy and liberty-and asks whether these assumptions are in fact valid. This constitutes the first focus of the study. Second, he investigates the functions performed by federal structures within the authoritarian-constitutional systems of Brazil and South Africa. These empirical questions form the subject of the second part of the book.
The study advances two central theses. First, while federalism may foster democracy and liberty, it does not reliably produce either. Federalism is a politically neutral system of governance that can serve a variety of political orders and forms of rule. Second, authoritarianism is not inherently non-federal. As a comparison of the constitutional histories of Brazil and South Africa demonstrates, functional connections exist between federalism and authoritarianism. Analyzing these connections helps to sharpen our understanding of the interplay among territory, authoritarian constitutionalism, and vertically integrated political structures.

Also in

General Law

View All