Help


from Brown Corpus
« »  
To appreciate this development, we must relate it to other aspects of nineteenth-century philosophy.
First, and most obvious, was the growing nationalism and the tendency to regard the state, and the individual's identification with the state, as transcending other ties of social solidarity.
National identification was not new, but it was accelerating in intensity and scope throughout Europe as new unifications occurred.
It reached its ultimate philosophical statement in notions of `` state will '' put forward by the Germans, especially by Hegel, although political philosophers will recognize its origins in the rejected doctrines of Hobbes.
National identification was reflected jurisprudentially in law theories which incorporated this Hegelian abstraction and saw law, domestic and international, simply as its formal reflection.
In the international community this reduced law to Jellinek's auto-limitation.
A state, the highest form of human organization in fact and theory, could be subjected to Law only by a manifestation of self-will, or consent.
According to the new theories, the nineteenth century corporate sovereign was `` sovereign '' in a quite new and different sense from his historical predecessors.
He no longer sought to find the law ; ;
he made it ; ;
he could be subjected to law only because he agreed to be.
There was no law, domestic or international, except that willed by, acknowledged by, or consented to by states.

1.815 seconds.