National sovereignty

It appears at the 17th century and 18th century with John Locke and Montesquieu, which introduced the principle of Séparation of the capacities, leading to systems of representation.

Here, sovereignty belongs to the Nation, an abstract and single entity. This unit is fictitious since it is not limited to the only citizens present, but includes the Citoyen S last and future; it is higher than the sums (individuals) which compose it.

In the classical theory, national sovereignty results in a representative Régime, since the Nation cannot control directly (the simple majority of the people is not the will of the nation, since it is higher than the sums which compose it).

National sovereignty thus implies the recourse to agents, holders of a representative mandate: representatives. They work in the interest of the Nation and each one entirely represents it (and not their only voters). One will be able to never reproach them a decision because the whole of the current citizens does not represent all the Nation (ex: a big rise in the price of the gasoline can be in the interest of the future citizens, when well even the citizens present would be opposite there). The Nation cannot, either, control its representatives since it is only one fictitious unit. To prevent that they do not misuse to be able to them, it is necessary to set up countervailing powers. national sovereignty thus implies the representative mode which requires, for its control, the separation of the capacities (Executive power, legislative and legal).

National sovereignty also goes in the direction of a Suffrage censitaire. Indeed, even while making vote the whole of the citizens of a country, only a negligible part of the Nation could vote. one can thus limit the vote very well to a number a little more limited citizens, by privileging those considered as able (capacity to read and write, include/understand the political life, to have time and independence necessary, from where the criterion of the richness). Even if the vote for all is not contrary, it does not go from oneself (in the Anglo-Saxon countries, the vote, in the beginning very limited, was wide little by little).

National sovereignty involves an exclusion of the direct democracy and the vote is of advantage a function that a right.

The Anglo-Saxon countries (in particular the the United States) based their institutional modes on this theory. The French application of national sovereignty is often allotted to the abbot Sieyès. It makes coexist a mode representative with procedures of direct democracy.

National sovereignty is opposed to the Popular sovereignty.

Random links: