狠狠撸

CONSTITUTONAL
REVOLUTIONS
David C. Williams
Center for Constitutional Democracy

1 . A R E R E V O L U T I O N S E V E R
J U S T I F I E D ?
2 . B U T A R E R E V O L U T I O N S
E V E R J U S T I F I E D I N A
C O N S T I T U T I O N A L R E P U B L I C ?
3 . B U T R E V O L U T I O N I S A L A S T
R E S O RT, S O S H O U L D N ’ T W E
T RY TO C H A N G E T H E
C O N S T I T U T I O N T H R O U G H T H E
N O R M A L P R O C E S S E S ?
4 . B U T C A N R E V O L U T I O N S B E
C O N S T I T U T I O N A L ?

1 . A R E R E V O L U T I O N S E V E R J U S T I F I E D ?
2 . B U T A R E R E V O L U T I O N S E V E R J U S T I F I E D I N A
C O N S T I T U T I O N A L R E P U B L I C ?
3 . B U T R E V O L U T I O N I S A L A S T R E S O RT, S O S H O U L D N ’ T
WE T RY TO C H A N G E T H E C O N S T I T U T I O N T H R O U G H T H E
N O R M A L P R O C E S S E S ?
4 . B U T C A N R E V O L U T I O N S B E C O N S T I T U T I O N A L ?

ARE REVOLUTIONS EVER
JUSTIFIED?

Are revolutions ever justified?
? Of course.
? People have the right to resist oppression, even by armed force is
necessary.
? But of course, armed revolution should be a course of last resort?
we take up arms only if nothing else will work.
? And it should pursue the common good and be made by the Body
of the People.

BUT ARE REVOLUTIONS EVER
JUSTIFIED IN A CONSTITUTIONAL
REPUBLIC?

If we have a constitution, why would we need a
revolution?
1. It might be a bad constitution:
? Meaning, the wrong constitution for the country.
? There is no such thing as a “well executed” constitution in the abstract.
? It is good only if it is good for the country.
? And most constitutions do not suit their country? that is why we have
turbulence, civil unrest, and sometimes revolution.

2. Even if the constitution is good for the country, the leaders might ignore it:
? So in that sense, it is a bad constitution, because it is not doing the work it
needs to do.
? Constitutions must be written not only to be just but also to be effectual?
so we need the right mechanisms.
? And, for example, an armed citizenry might be necessary to an effectual
constitution, because leaders are less likely to oppress an armed citizenry.

BUT REVOLUTION IS A LAST RESORT, SO
SHOULDN’T WE TRY TO CHANGE THE
CONSTITUTION THROUGH THE NORMAL
PROCESSES?

Yes, if
possible.
But it is not
always
possible.

Why not?
1. The constitution does not provide pathways for peaceful change.
2. At its start, the constitution did provide pathways for peaceful change, but
because the country has changed, the constitution is now having a different
effect.
3. Even if the constitution does provide pathways for peaceful change, the
leaders are ignoring it.

1. The constitution
does not provide
pathways for
peaceful change.

? Sometimes, the constitution blocks all peaceful mechanisms for realistic change.
? For example, gerrymandering:
?Suppose that the Republican Party wins an election.
?And so it gets control of the districting process.
?But then it has a scandal, so in the next election only 39% of the citizens vote for it,
?And the remaining 61% support the Democrats.
? So what do the Republicans do?

OK, 39R/61D, and the Republicans control the
districting because they won the last election
25D
? Democrat
13R/12D
? Republican
13R/12D
? Republican
13R/12D
? Republican

? So, although they are the majority, the Democrats do not control the
legislature.
? And though they are the minority, the Republicans still control the legislature.
? And as long as they control the legislature, they will continue to gerrymander.
? So the Democrats cannot make change by peaceful means.
? What choice do they have but revolution?

2. At its start, the constitution did
provide pathways for peaceful
change, but because the country
has changed, the constitution is
now having a different effect.

? Sometimes, constitutions at first permit avenues for peaceful change, but over
time change becomes impossible.
? And this closing off of peaceful avenues can occur even if the constitution itself
has not changed.
? Remember that a constitution must be adapted to the circumstances of a
country, so if the circumstances change, the constitution might become
maladapted.

For Example
? Suppose that a constitution uses majority voting? the winner takes all, both
at the district level and in the legislature.
?In a highly diverse and pluralistic society, this method is generally not a
problem:
?Though you may lose sometimes, you might also win sometimes,
?And persuading other people is always a realistic possibility.
? But in a segmented society, the constitution will have very different
consequences.

Segmented Societies
? In a segmented society, people belong to different identity groups.
? Those identity groups are comprehensive, so that members of a particular
group tend to share the same views on every issue? Blue and Red America.
? And often those identity groups are oppositional, so that members of one
group have nothing in common with members of a different group.
? So we have an entrenched division.

? Remember that the constitution uses majority voting,
? And if the society is pluralistic, that may not be a problem.
? But if the society is segmented into comprehensive, oppositional identity
groups, the situation will be very different:
? If there is a majority group (say, 55%) and a minority group (say, 45%), then the
minority group will lose every single vote on every single issue.

? For this minority, majority voting is more like prison than self-government.
? But the majority will probably never change the constitution to adopt a
different electoral system.
? So the minority has no ability to make change through peaceful channels.
? And so what choice do they have but armed revolution?

3. Even if the constitution
does provide pathways
for peaceful change, the
leaders are ignoring it.

Checks and Balances
? Sometimes, a constitution might provide pathways for peaceful change.
? But politicians always have a tendency to increase their own power and close off
those avenues.
? Elections often do not help because politicians manipulate elections and they
allow for popular control only at the moment of the election.
? So instead, we must rely on checks and balances.

? But unless the system of checks and balances is the right one for the country—
unless it deconcentrates power sufficiently—then it will not keep the leaders in
line.
? And frequently, when we have the wrong checks and balances, powerful leaders
tend to concentrate power in themselves, even against the constitution.
? Typically, this happens because the initial system of checks and balances was not
deconcentrated enough, and it gave powerful politicians the opportunity to pull
more power to themselves.

Presidents
? Most commonly, this growing over-concentration of power occurs when
directly elected presidents grab more and more power, even beyond the limits
of the constitution.
? The phenomenon is called hyper-presidentialism or super-presidentialism.
? Because they are directly elected, they feel entitled to grab power, as the
champion of the people elected to solve everyone’s problems.

The People
? And the people often want to give presidents a great deal of power, because
they are frightened and confused, and so they want a father figure to solve all
their problems.
? But down that path lies the death of checks and balances, individual rights, and
democracy itself.
? And it commonly leads to the subversion of the constitution and national
instability.

Once the constitution has been damaged enough—once
leaders have shown that they intend to ignore it—then the
constitutional pathways for peaceful change close off.
And the only option left is armed revolution.

BUT CAN REVOLUTIONS BE
CONSTITUTIONAL?

A CONTRADICTION?
? Constitutions create order; revolutions attack order?
? Constitutions establish governments; revolutions undo the very same
governments?
? Governments are the constituted order; by definition, revolutions seek to
overthrow governments?

? By definition, armed revolutions involve violence against the
government, maybe even an attempt to overthrow the government.
? But the government and the constitution are not the same thing.
? By resisting a lawless government, revolutions can actually be
serving the constitution.

When is peaceful change not possible under the
constitution?
1. The constitution does not provide pathways for peaceful change.
2. At its start, the constitution did provide pathways for peaceful change, but
because the country has changed, the constitution is now having a different
effect.
3.Even if the constitution does provide pathways for
peaceful change, the leaders are ignoring it.

Constitutions are Contracts
? A constitution is a contract between the people and the government, called the rectoral contract;
1. The people agree to be governed, but only within the terms of the contract.
2. The constitution alone authorizes a government; without it, the government has no mandate to
rule.
3. The constitution creates a government, structures it, and puts limits on it.
4. If the government materially violates the terms of the contract, then it is void.
? Cf. Burma February 1, 2021.

The State of War
? When the constitution is void, then the government and the people are in a state
of war.
1. That does not necessarily mean that they are actually fighting.
2. It does mean that there is no longer a contract between them, so no legal
basis for their relationship.
3. And the government has lost the warrant to rule by committing acts of
aggression against the constitution and the people.
4. And so the people are no longer under an obligation to obey the government.

Resistance and Revolution
? If the government tries to govern the people without the proper warrant, then it is
trying to dominate people without proper authorization, just as if a private individual
tried to do so.
? The people then have a right to resist the government, just as they would against
private domination. This right comes from the right of self-defense.
? And they have a right to make a revolution, coming from the right of self-government:
? To overthrow the government,
? To create a new government in a new constitution.

Abiding By the Constitution
During Armed Revolution
? So the people and the government are in a state of war.
? But the people are not necessarily in a state of war with each other.
?In fact, in resisting the government, the people are defending the constitution.
?Their goal is the restoration of a constitutional order.
?At the end of the revolution, they may adopt a new constitution or restore the old one.
?But in the meanwhile, during the revolution, they may consider that the old constitution still
governs them.

Lawless and Law-Bound Revolutions
? Some revolutionaries conceive that they have cast off all pre-existing legal
frameworks, so their only restraint is the good of the people—meaning, their
conception of the good of the people:
?Such revolutions are essentially lawless, and so they are dangerous.
?They tend to splinter, and they tend to give rise to atrocities.
? Cf. the French Revolution and the Bolshevik Revolution.

? But some revolutionaries consider that they are bound by a pre-existing
constitutional order:
?They are bound by constitutional norms;
?They must serve constitutional ends;
?To the extent possible, they must preserve constitutional institutions and forms.
? Such revolutions are more likely to stay unified and less likely to commit
atrocities.
? Cf. the American Revolution.

The Formal Constitution and the Organic
Constitution
? The formal constitution is the written document that creates ,
structures, and limits a government.
?To the extent possible, constitutional revolutions will structure their own
movements in the same way as the government, cf. the NUG/NUCC charter.
?But there will be limits on how far this can be done during revolutionary
times.

? But underlying the formal constitution is an organic constitution:
? A body of norms, values, and attitudes that brought and bring the people
together—the social contract,
? And that gave rise to the formal constitution.
? And in the right circumstances, this organic constitution can preserve a
revolutionary movement’s unity and decency.

狠狠撸

Constitutonal revolutions

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Constitutonal revolutions (14)

More from Oleksandr Zheleznyak (10)

Recently uploaded (20)

Constitutonal revolutions