The European Idea has been diversely discussed in Political Philosophy. In this post, I present and discuss the utopian idea of a European Republic by German political scientist Ulrike Guérot. She is professor at Danube-University Krems and founder of the European Democracy Lab. Prior to this, she worked 20 years in the European think tank community and has taught at European and US American universities (European Democracy Lab e.V., 2020a). In 2014, her first book “Warum Europa eine Republik werden muss!” (Why Europe has to become a Republic) became very popular and was translated in various languages . It has started a debate about how to solve current crisis and structural democratic issues in Europe in a future political framework.

Guérot envisions a decentral, democratic and social European Republic that serves as a blueprint for all humanity – a global citizens society. She states that it is time to think about Europe anew. She argues that the EU lacks the characteristics of “res publica” – the common wealth. The current EU institutions including the trinity of the Council, the Commission and Parliament as well as member states do not work in the interest of the European Citizens but put them into a competition which eventually leads to a race to the bottom and multi-dimensional divides within societies. The author illustrates a European utopia in which all citizens have equal rights, are connected among their regions and participate in a strong parliamentary political system based on the division of powers (Guérot, 2016).

Based on this brief introductory overview of the author’s thought, in this post I elaborate upon the key thesis “Europe has to become a Republic”. First, the historical background and contextualization will be explained before key concepts will be introduced. Based on this theoretical foundation, the idea of a European Republic and a future political system will be portrayed in more detail. In addition, practical cases and examples will be given. Finally, the utopia will be critically assessed by the author before concluding with final summarizing thoughts.

Historical Background and Contextualization

“We created a monster” – this is how the French economist Thomas Picketty described the nature of the European Union in an interview in 2015 (Christoph Pauly, Julia Amalia Heyer, 2015). This quote summarizes the current state of affairs in the European Union quite well. In the following, this “monster” will be further analyzed and deconstructed.

First, the EU is faced by contemporary crises. These encompass the so-called refugee crisis as well as the ongoing financial crisis. The former shows the incapability of the EU to react in a joint and coordinated manner. The EU is neither able to sufficiently prevent Human Rights violations in the Mediterranean Sea nor does it have an appropriate asylum and migration system that could manage the influx of people. Having a closer look, when the situation became urgent the EU institutions including the new President of the Commission Juncker and President of the European Council Tusk were not able to demonstrate leadership which put the burden on a small group of member states. On the one hand, bordering countries were overwhelmed by the pure number of asylum-seekers and on the other hand, countries like Germany or Sweden disregarded the Dublin rules and welcomed refugees. Furthermore, the controversial so-called EU-Turkey deal was struck on the conditions that Turkey stopped asylum seekers from crossing, by sea, to Lesvos and the EU would transfer Turkey six billion euros in aid in return (Halpern, 2017). Up until today, member states were not able to establish a mechanism which could manage a similar future situation (Lehne, 2020).

Guérot sees the banking and the following financial crisis in the EU as an example of a betrayal of the idea of social Europe. She criticizes that banks were saved by national governments in order to save the international banking system. They had to facilitate enormous financial resources in order to cover the costs. These had to be refinanced by the citizens of some member states, e.g. Ireland, Spain or Greece. These were not responsible in the first place and had to suffer from drastic austerity measures and budget cuts. Eventually, gains of the financial system were privatized and the debt communitarized. This exemplifies the lack of political primacy of the EU. It has not been possible to adequately sanction the banks that were responsible. More importantly, the system has not been sufficiently reformed to prevent a future crisis. The author concludes that the EU common market follows the neo-liberal rationale but does not have the needed political oversight. Industries and capitalists benefit from the system and European citizens do not (Guérot, 2016).

These two cases also serve as examples for the fundamental structural crisis. The EU integration process has slowed down or arguably stopped after the failure of establishing a European Constitution in the 2000s. The “ever-closer Union” narrative was not sufficiently effective. Currently, the EU is “unfinished” and often described as “sui generis”. The economic and fiscal union has not been established. Guérot claims that without it, the Common market and the Euro were destined to turn into an economic dictatorship because economic actors enjoy transnational freedom without having to comply with adequate transnational regulations. Consequently, the European industries were put into a free-rider position and benefited from common currency which gave them stability without having to adjust to a fiscal and social union. This unlevel playing field of capital and labor lead to a race to the bottom of labor standards and social rights of EU citizens because member states rearranged tax systems and reduced labor costs to attract businesses in a European-wide competition. Regarding EU citizens, they participated in the common market without sufficient social protection. Having a closer look on the consequences of the lack of completion in the social sphere, the EU is faced by enormous social problems, such as unemployment, in different regions. The Urban-Rural Divide and the Center-Periphery Divide make for EU citizens even more unequal. The EU Cohesion Policy has not been able to level structural differences. For example, there are enormous economic differences between regions in Portugal or Bulgaria and Northern Italy or Southern Germany. In addition, in the field of foreign policy, the EU does not have the competencies to speak with one single voice. Instead individual member states uncoordinatedly take the lead in some matter and may actually contradict the strategy of another member state. For example, the member states are not able to form a union when it comes to the partnership with China. Whereas some want to prevent too much Chinese influence, others are openly engaging in the Belt and Road Initiative (Giuffrida, 2019). Moreover, Guérot addresses the issue of rising nationalism and populism in the EU which is often seen as an external threat to the European Union. However, she analyzes that populism does not endanger the EU, but that the EU produces European populism. Whenever it is stated that there is no alternative to the EU, it creates and strengthens system-adversaries. Furthermore, populists in multiple member states ranging from Hungary and Poland to Germany, France and Italy criticize the democratic deficit in the EU. And the so-called pro-Europeans do not have sufficient arguments to respond to them in a convincing matter. This brings us to the core of her analysis of the European Malaise which she describes as Post-Democracy.
The term “Post-Democracy” was introduced by Colin Crouch. He explores the deeper social and economic forces that account for the current crisis. He claims that

“the decline of those social classes which had made possible an active and critical mass politics has combined with the rise of global capitalism to produce a self-referential political class more concerned with forging links with wealthy business interests than with pursuing political programs which meet the concerns of ordinary people.” (Crouch, 2010)

This eventually puts citizens into the position in which they can formally vote in a democratic election but do not have a choice in which policies will be introduced. This can be applied to the democracy deficit in the EU structure. EU citizens have the right to vote for the European Parliament (EP). However, the EP does not have common parliamentary rights like national parliaments of member states. Acknowledging that the Lisbon Treaty gave EP more rights being involved in the co-decision procedure, it still does not have the right to initiate directives and regulations. Further, it does not have the power to fulfill its parliamentary control function by investigating actions of the executive branch. Parliamentarians also do not have full budgetary rights which are commonly given in national parliaments. When it comes to the representation of EU citizens, the EP is faced by a variety of deficits. First, the distribution of parliamentary seats is not proportional because seats are assigned according to a degressive proportionality calculation that limits the maximum number of seats for a Member State to 96 and the minimum to 6. This puts certain citizens of smaller member states in an advantageous position because they have relatively more representatives than more populous nations. Therefore, the fundamental democratic principle of One-Person-One-Vote is not applied. Further, national parliaments such as the Bundestag sometimes decide for the whole Europe but non-German EU citizens do not have the right to elect the German Parliament. This became especially visible in the financial crisis, in which members of the Bundestag practically decided about the faith of the whole EU. Second, the EP elections are not transnational. It is rather a coordination of different national elections that only have the time span in which they have to take place in common. Election laws vary from country to country. This can potentially worsen the situation of representational differences of EU citizens.

Third, European parties are rather weak and there are no transnational lists which would allow a citizen to vote for a party or a candidate in another member state. Apart from this, EU citizens do not enjoy the same rights. They have EU citizenship but they neither have to comply with the tax system nor they receive equal social security. These are crucial aspects in a democracy because it gives citizens similar opportunities to contribute to and participate in society.

Regarding the role of the European Commission, she embodies the technocratic center piece of the EU and combines executive as well as judicative powers. She initiates rules and regulation and at the same time, she is the guardian of the treaties which allows her to sanction wrongful behavior. This is incompatible with the principle of Division of Powers proclaimed by Montesquieu and makes the European Commission susceptible to misconduct and illegitimate influence of special interest groups (Montesquieu et al., 1989). This can weaken the trust in the institutions because of lack of transparency and illegitimate behavior.

However, Guérot identifies the role of nation states as the most crucial one. They partly contributed power to the supranational level but still influence the policies through the Council. The author argues that national governments too often use their power in the Council to block initiatives that are supported by a majority of Europeans but affect their special interests. For example, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with Canada was broadly opposed but still signed. She also refers to the German Hegemony using its leverage to out the procedures of a Data Protection Law on halt and practically decided whether Dublin regulations are binding or not in the refugee crisis.

Concluding Guérot´s analysis, the European Malaise can be traced back to structural democratic deficits in the institutional system of the EU, which are legal but not legitimate. The scholar Habermas points out that the will of the voters is knowingly disregarded by the European Executive (Habermas, 2015). Consequently, it can be argued that the EU is currently in a post-democratic state that does not represent the Volonté Générale, the will of the people, and sets populists and nationalists the stage to capitalize on these issues. As recent history has shown incremental change and the idea of functional spillovers contributing to further integration has stagnated or even turned into a des-integrational phase considering Brexit. Therefore, Guérot states that it is time for something new (Guérot, 2016).

Main Concepts

Having introduced the historical background and the context in which this utopian idea of a European Republic was developed, main theoretical concepts will be presented before illustrating the nature of a European Republic.

Before focusing on the term republic, it is worth defining the concept of a utopia. Eduardo Galeano, a Uruguayan journalist, writer and novelist, describes the utopia lying at the horizon. It contains the phenomenon that whenever one comes closer to it, it retreats by the same length of the approach. Consequently, no matter how far someone goes, the utopia remains unreachable. Questioning the purpose of it, Galeano responds that it gives one the cause to advance. In other words, a utopia is an idea that cannot be clearly pictured and is rather vague. It lies in the future and quite unrealistic to achieve but still it appears to be worth striving for.
When it comes to the utopian idea of a European Republic, a republic by itself is not a utopia. This organizational structure of society has a long history starting in Antiquity without philosophers and political thinkers like Cicero. It is not possible to portray the historical development and the discussion of the republican idea in all its length and complexity within the scope of this work. It will rather be focused on essential elements which show special importance to designing a European Republic.

Fundamentally, it can be stated that nomen est omen: the republic regards the res publica which translates into the common wealth. Guérot refers to two essential concepts. She sees the volonté générale and Social Contract as important characteristics. Both are associated with Jean-Jacque Rousseau. Volonté Générale describes the general will of the people. It is a crucial concept in modern republican thought. The general will can be distinguished from the particular and often contradictory wills of individuals and groups. In his publication on the Social Contract, Rosseau states freedom and authority do not contradict themselves if laws are legitimately based on the volonté générale of the people.

Consequently, citizens eventually obey themselves when they follow the laws of the political community. Rousseau bases this on the assumption that citizens are able to take moral standpoints and share the common good as their goal of action. If this is not the case and members of the community act against the general will, they would by this logic harm themselves. In other words, Rousseau states that citizens sometimes have to be “forced” to be free (Rousseau, 2019). With regard to the republic, citizens become aware of their individual role and interest that are expressed in the general will and shape the overall meaning of the republic. The volonté générale also legitimates governments as long as they are subordinated to popular sovereignty. This also implies the protection against despotism because governments become illegitimate as soon as they act only in their interests and abuse their power (André Munro, 2020). In other words, the volonté générale in relation to the social contract are essential to a republic.

Further, it needs to be further specified that Guérot considers modern Republicanism as a theoretical background. It is essential to distinguish it from Liberalism and clarify the aspect of liberty. Modern Liberalism focuses on the liberty from regulations. Whereas neo-Republicanism aims at providing a certain degree of social equality to allow people to have the liberty to act. The latter refers to the term Ius Aequum which sees the unity of liberty and equality as two sides of the same coin. This Equal Liberty is therefore central to modern Republicanism. A Republican system creates security as a foundation for liberty and secures legal and material conditions for liberty. Citizens have equal rights but are not absolutely equal. Some should not be as rich as they could buy other citizens. Republican Laws that express the common will are then the only ones that can limit liberty without compromising it. Recognizing the trinity of Liberté, égalité, fraternité in the French Revolution, the Republic is located in the center of the triangle. Liberty needs to be connected to social rights plus fraternization beyond nation states.

Summarizing, Guérot presents three steps to achieving a Republic. First, the principle of Ius Aequum needs to be established guaranteeing every citizen equal rights. Second, political rights need to be granted to all citizens allowing them to vote for a parliament in a system of Division of Powers. Third, citizens have the right to social participation which should be provided by social security mechanisms and education. This ensures that everybody can participate and legitimizes the democratic republic.

To approach the utopian idea of a European Republic, the author applies these three steps to Europe. This translates into, first, every European citizen needs to have equal sovereign rights. This is currently not the case in the EU because individual national citizenships have diverging legal systems. Second, equal political rights mean equal representation in democratic institutions. A European Parliament needs to become truly representational. Third, the right to social participation can be provided by allowing equal access to a European social security, that has the same standards when it comes to health insurance, unemployment benefits as well as pension payments.

Illustrating the European Republic in more detail, the future political system will be described in the following. A European Republic is a transnational, representative Democracy and is based on the volonté générale of sovereign people. Figure 1 shows the European citizens with equal rights as the fundament. They are represented in a bicameral system. A European House of Representatives and a European Senate establish a European Congress. The House of Representatives is strictly proportionate to the vote of the people guaranteeing that the principle of “one (wo)men, one vote” is respected. This includes that parliamentarians are appointed in one European-wide election with the same electoral laws. Moreover, this parliament has to have the right to initiate legislation and to control the budget. In addition, it needs to have the competencies to function as a parliamentary control organ. A European Senate encompasses two senators from every region. Regions will be administrative districts that are established in a post-national Europe. It follows the rationale that regions provide the framework for active political participation that is decentralized and closer to the people. Furthermore, people usually share identity and culture on a regional basis rather than within a nation. For example, a Bavarian and an Austrian person have probably more in common than a Bavarian and a Nordic German citizen. Projecting regions like Lombardia, Catalonia or South Tirol give them automatically more autonomy and may satisfy people engaging in the independence movements. Guérot projects that between 50 and 70 regions will define themselves and become part of the European Republic. Having two senators from every region ensures that also citizens in rural and peripheral regions are heard. This system of subsidiarity strengthens local, regional and European parliamentarism and benefits from decentralized decision-making. Completing the description of the figure, the roof of the European Republic is also built on the third pillar of a European President. Guérot does not specify the competencies of this position but states that the European President needs to be elected directly by the people which arguably strengthens the common understanding of a joint European Republican project. It remains to be agreed upon whether he or she has only representational tasks or is actively involved in the executive. Having dealt with the legislative and executive branch, Montesquieu´s division of power concept will be completed by a strong independent judicial body. The courts will be independent guardians of the law and the current mixture of executive and judicial competencies in the European Commission will be overcome. In addition, the European Republic needs to provide further characteristics: Strong European parties need to bring together people and interests beyond nations. They should channel individual preferences and ensure that the General will is represented in the legislative branch. A comprehensive European fiscal budget needs to enable the government to finance measures such as pan-European infrastructure projects or social security such as European unemployment insurance. Regions also need to have the right to insolvency to reduce the burden on individual citizens in a financial debt crisis. Concluding, the future political system of the European Republic is a transnational, democratic and has sufficient resources to ensure equal rights to all citizens (Guérot, 2016).

Argumentation to Defend the Thesis

In order to defend the thesis that Europe has to become a Republic, it is worth analyzing how it would respond to the Malaise that was described in the first chapter. Therefore, in the following the lack of democracy and subsequently the contemporary and structural crisis will be discussed within the framework of the utopia.

Guérot identified the state of Post-Democracy as a core problem. A European Republic would establish democratic structures within the political system. The current democracy deficit is tackled by truly representational European Congress which allows every (wo)men to vote and to actually have a choice because a republic has the capacity to do so. The immanent Ius Aequum principle guarantees every citizen the same rights. Every single person can cast their vote and make their voice heard. The new political framework strengthens the Parliament to fulfill its legislative tasks and its parliamentary control. Moreover, the disproportional power distribution among different nation states is levelled. The European executive has to respond to voters (Habermas, 2015).

Addressing the contemporary financial crisis and refugee crisis a European Republic would be able to introduce a fair burden sharing. With regard to the recent financial crisis, single regions could have gone bankrupt without devastating austerity politics for only their citizens. The coherence among all European regions would have been able to distribute the costs proportionately and the actors responsible for the crisis would have brought to justice. Similarly, a fair, balanced and coordinated distribution system of refugees could also not have been blocked by single member states.

Considering the structural issues such as the lack of a social union. Within a European Republic the competition among citizens resulting in a race to the bottom would be stopped. Equal social security standards and costs stop these harmful developments including wage dumping. Moreover, equal access to social security reduces tensions among current EU citizens and allows all citizens to become an active member of society. Comparing it to the current EU system, one could argue that the European Republic completes the Political Union. Furthermore, the structural divide among urban and rural areas as well as center and periphery the bicameral European Congress allows for the adequate representation of all regions. What is more, equal social rights reduce regional differences in economic status and the decentralized system allows for more participation bringing politics closer to the citizens. The applied principle of subsidiarity further promises more effective and suitable solutions for local and regional issues.

Finally, in a European Republic nationalist and populists would lose their justifications. Regional and also national identities are not in danger but will be preserved as well as enhanced in their status. The decentralized system gives a certain degree of autonomy for the citizens, but the fundamental framework is agreed upon by everybody following the volonté générale. In addition, Populists capitalizing on the democratic deficit and dysfunctional EU system will lose their arguments because post-democracy loses its prefix. Xenophobic claims will also be reduced because culture and identity are respected and valued. Concluding, a democratic European Republic solves contemporary and structural issues of a post-democratic EU and thereby removes the stage that nationalists and populists have been capitalizing on (Guérot, 2016).

Practical Examples

Since the publication of the book, there have been various projects spreading the utopian idea of a European Republic. For instance, within the context of the European Balcony Project artists and citizens proclaimed a European Republic from theatres, balconies and public spaces all over Europe. They discuss and work towards the emancipation of sovereign and equal citizens in a post-nation state Europe (European Democracy Lab e.V., 2020b). Another campaign was launched in Italy and is called ONEurope. It promotes a European network of associations and local administrations being engaged in transforming the European Union into a federal Republic based on the equality of rights and duties of all citizens (One Europe, 2020). Apart from these civil society initiatives, the idea of a European Republic can also be found in the manifesto of the German Green Party for the 2019 European Parliament elections (BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN, 2018).

Critique

Considering the arguments defending the thesis as well as the practical examples provided, this utopian idea deserves a critical discussion. This will be structured in three main points. It concerns the nature of a utopia, the role of the nation states as well as possible pitfalls. First, he may be criticized that Guérot´s utopia of a European Republic will remain a utopia because it seems unrealistic and unfeasible to reach to this form of governance under current circumstances. Responding to this claim, one could argue that by nature a utopia does not have the aim to become reality. However, in some parts the European Republic has already become reality. The practical examples show that only five years after initial publication the idea was included into the German Green party´s manifesto. In addition, grass-root initiatives and civil society projects, such as the European Democracy Lab work towards the increasing the support. Moreover, a central component of equal social rights in a European Republic have already been presented by Hungarian Commissioner for employment, social affairs and inclusion László Andor proposing a common European unemployment insurance in 2014. However, it was block be the nation states. This fact already introduces the second point of criticism. A European Republic can only be established if nation states are overcome. However, especially in current times of rising nationalism and disintegrational forces nation states remain to be desired form of community organization. Acknowledging this criticism, on the other hand, it could be argued that nation states are a rather modern concept and were constructed. Consequently, they can be deconstructed. In addition, in a globalized world many aspects of life such as economy, culture and personal relations have already become transnational. It is unrealistic to re-establish autonomous nation states which raises the need to find transnational alternatives. Finally, the support of the project by the people can be questioned. What is the guarantee that the volonté générale actually favors a European Republic? Why would current actors that benefit from the system including citizens in wealthy regions, industries and multi-dimensional elites give up their privileges? We can already witness the strong hegemonic power of Germany, the far-reaching influence of lobbying organizations and prominent regional independence movements of rich regions such as in Catalonia. With respect to this aspect, it may be pointed out that in the end Germany is dependent on a strong Europe economically and politically. If Europe struggles, Germany will do so in the medium term, too. Furthermore, in a European Republic all regions receive more independence and power in exchange for contributing to a European Republic. Finally, if elites comply with the volonté générale européenne they do not have to fear a European Republic.

In my opinion, I share Guérot’s assessment of the European Malaise including especially the nature of a Post-Democracy as well as the ambiguous role of nation states. Due to the scope of this post I was not able to represent all her thoughts on this topic, so read her book. To me, her ideas generally follow a logical progression of thought and her concept gives answers to the multiple issues in the current European project. Obviously, it is quite hard to assess whether Guérot´s answers to urgent questions would have worked in the past or would work in the future. Nonetheless, I believe that this utopia is worth to be further developed and it serves as a good horizon the European people should walk towards.

Conclusion

In this post, I presented the utopian idea of a European Republic by Ulrike Guérot. She draws a picture of a future Europe which is decentral, democratic and social as a response to the current European Malaise. She argues that it can be traced back to structural democratic deficits in the institutional system of the EU which turn it into a state of Post-Democracy. In order to solve these issues, she envisions a republic for all European citizens that guarantees legal, political as well as social rights to every individual. An adequate political framework would be based on a European Congress that is voted for by sovereign citizens. A bicameral system would allow a proportional representation of every person´s vote in a House of Representatives and a Senate would encompass senators from newly defined European regions that are formed beyond the nation state and consider regional identity, culture and traditions. The political system would be transnational, democratic and capable to ensure equal rights to all citizens. There have been practical examples such as the European Balcony Project or the incorporation of the European Republic into the manifesto of the German Green party in order to approximate this utopia. Criticism toward this encompasses doubts that a European Republic could ever be established, that nation states would be overcome and that current elites would be willing to give up their privileges. Finally, the utopian idea of a European Republic serves as a compass when trying to solve contemporary crisis and structural democratic deficits. Moreover, it is centered around sovereign citizens that enjoy equal legal, political and social rights and this ideal is something to strive for.

Thank you for investing your time in reading this post. If you have feedback, questions or concerns, feel free to reach out to me on twitter.

References

André Munro. (2020). General will | philosophy of Rousseau. https://www.britannica.com/topic/general-will

BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN (Ed.). (2018). Europas Versprechen erneuern: Europawahlprogramm 2019. https://cms.gruene.de/uploads/documents/B90GRUENE_Europawahlprogramm_2019_barrierefrei.pdf

Christoph Pauly, Julia Amalia Heyer. (2015). Thomas Piketty Interview About the European Financial Crisis - DER SPIEGEL - International. https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/thomas-piketty-interview-about-the-european-financial-crisis-a-1022629.html

Crouch, C. (2010). Post-democracy (Repr). Polity Press. European Democracy Lab e.V. (Ed.). (2020a). About us - European Democracy Lab. https://europeandemocracylab.org/en/about-us

European Democracy Lab e.V. (Ed.). (2020b). Home - European Balcony Project. https://europeanbalconyproject.eu/en/#about

European Democracy Lab e.V. (Ed.). (2020c). Homepage of The European Republic - The European Republic. https://european-republic.eu/en/

Giuffrida, A. (2019, March 20). Italy rattles US and EU with likely support for China’s Belt and Road. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/20/italy-rattles-us-and-eu-with-likely-support-for-chinas-belt-and-road

Guérot, U. (2016). Warum Europa eine Republik werden muss!: Eine politische Utopie. Dietz.

Habermas, J. (2015). The lure of technocracy ((C. P. Cronin, Trans.)). Polity Press. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&AN=1002465

Halpern, J. (2017, December 8). Europe’s Plan to End Its Migrant Crisis Is Failing. The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/europes-plan-to-end-its-migrant-crisis-is-failing

Lehne, S. (2020, April 23). How the Refugee Crisis Will Reshape the EU. Carnegie Europe - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieeurope.eu/2016/02/04/how-refugee-crisis-will-reshape-eu-pub-62650

Montesquieu, C. L. S. de, Cohler, A. M., Miller, B. C., & Stone, H. S. (Eds.). (1989). Cambridge texts in the history of political thought. The spirit of the laws. Cambrigde Univ. Press.

One Europe. (2020). http://onedemos.eu/

Rousseau, J.-J. (2019). Cambridge texts in the history of political thought. The social contract and other later political writings (V. Gourevitch, Ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Thank you for providing the cover photo Ulrike Guérot

• academia