>>16176
> from all the crusty and cranky royalists about grovel at the feet of those impotent and cowardly houses
Typically, my breed of monarchist is stuffier about this, but like I said--they're either not really monarchies or they've been long overthrown anyways.
>What office is that, for how long?
Whoever is sovereign is ultimately that arbiter--that is the business of a king.
Bodin says the nature of sovereignty is perpetual -- or it is maintained as long as the sovereign state lives indefinitely.
In absolutist and corporatist ideology, the sovereignty is absolute, the estates are limited--in order to achieve a unitary state with autonomy and what is absolute is necessary to having any autonomy whatsoever.
Just as you need a point in geometry to draw the boundaries and definitions--so the relationship is with sovereignty.
Samuel Johnson:
>A COLONY is to the Mother-country as a member to the body, deriving its action and its strength from the general principle of vitality; receiving from the body, and communicating to it, all the benefits and evils of health and disease; liable in dangerous maladies to sharp applications, of which the body however must partake the pain; and exposed, if incurably tainted, to amputation, by which the body likewise will be mutilated.
>The Mother-country always considers the Colonies thus connected, as parts of itself; the prosperity or unhappiness of either is the prosperity or unhappiness of both; not perhaps of both in the same degree, for the body may subsist, though less commodiously, without a limb, but the limb must perish if it be parted from the body.
Plato Republic:
Plato State Corporatism / Unitary Policy:
State like an individual man (from Republic).
Plato
>And the city whose state is most like that of an individual man.
>“The same,” he said, “and, to return to your question, the best governed state most nearly resembles such an organism.”
>But we further agreed that this unity is the greatest blessing for a state, and we compared a well governed state to the human body in its relation to the pleasure and pain of its parts.”
Plato:
>That the other citizens too must be sent to the task for which their natures were fitted, one man to one work, in order that each of them fulfilling his own function may be not many men, but one, and so the entire city may come to be not a multiplicity but a unity.
Plato Laws:
>That all men are, so far as possible, unanimous in the praise and blame they bestow, rejoicing and grieving at the same things, and that they honor with all their heart those laws which render the State as unified as possible
State Corporatists (Fascists, Natsoc, Socialists/one party states) & Absolute Monarchists -- both have a unitary outlook of politics and the unity necessarily denotes this quality of an absolute sovereignty -- in other words, autonomy with the body politic.
Thomas Hobbes
>The error concerning mixed government [constitutionalism] has proceeded from want of understanding of what is meant by this word body politic, and how it signifies not the concord, but the union of many men.
And also from Hobbes: *asserting a state corporatist outlook like you find in Plato's Republic
>And in him consists the Essence of the Common-wealth; which (to define it,) is "One Person, of whose Acts a great Multitude, by mutual Covenants one with another, have made themselves every one the Author, to the end he may use the strength and means of them all, as he shall think expedient, for their Peace and Common Defence.”
Giovanni Gentile (a fascist)
>It is the State that possesses a concrete will & must be considered a person.
Giuseppe Bottai (a fascist)
>However, in speaking of the corporative State, it must not be understood as meaning only all that which pertains to the relations between employers and workers – relations based on a principle of collaboration rather than upon a struggle of classes. Fascism with its new arrangements aims at a more complex end.
>This, summed up in a few words, is "to reassert the sovereignty of the State over those syndicates,
>Which, whether of an economic or social kind, when left to themselves broke out at one time against the State, subjecting the will of the individual to their own arbitrary decision, almost musing the rise of judicial provisions alien to the legal order of the State, opposing their own right to the right of the State, subordinating to their own interests the defenceless classes, and even the general interest, of which the State is naturally the judge, champion and avenger."
Mario Palmieri: (a fascist)
>To make this discipline possible, and the sovereignty effective in practice as well as in theory, Fascism has devised the “Corporazione,” an instrument of social life destined to exercise the most far-reaching influence upon the economic development of Fascist States. (The Italian word “Corporazione” which is currently translated into English by the apparently analogous word “Corporation,” means, more exactly in the Italian language, what the word “Guild” means in English; that is: associations of persons engaged in kindred pursuits. We shall nevertheless follow the general usage to obviate the danger of misunderstandings.)
...
>Within the Corporations the interests of producers and consumers, employers and employees, individuals and associations are interlocked and integrated in a unique and univocal way, while all types of interests are brought under the aegis of the State.
Fausto Pitigliani (a fascist)
>That the Corporation has no legal independent personality but is an organ of the State Administration.
>To these organs, which take the name of Corporations and link the various productive activities of the country as members of one body
>The Corporations constitute the unitary organisation of the forces of production and represent all their interests.
>In virtue of this integral representation, and in view of the fact that the interests of production are the interests of the Nation, the law recognises the Corporations as State organs.
Mussolini (a fascist)
>For Fascism the State is absolute, the individuals & groups relative.
Giovanni Gentile: (a fascist)
>It must be a will that cannot allow others to limit it. It is, therefore, a sovereign & absolute will. The legitimate will of citizens is that will that corresponds to the will of the State, that organizes itself & manifests itself by the State's central organs
Giovanni Gentile: (a fascist)
>It is the State that possesses a concrete will & must be considered a person.
>The State, for us, has an absolute moral value–as that moral substance whose function it is to render all other functions valuable.
Giovanni Gentile: (a fascist)
>The Fascist State is a sovereign State. Sovereign in fact rather than words. A strong State, which allows no equal or limits, other than the limits it, like any other moral force, imposes on itself.
Giovanni Gentile: (a fascist)
>The Fascist State, in order to penetrate & direct the consciousness of its citizens, wishes to organize them in national unity; a unity possessed of a soul.
>That unity would manifest itself as a unitary being, possessed of powerful will, & conscious of its own ends.
Thomas Hobbes: (absolute monarchist)
>For the Sovereign, is the public Soul, giving Life and Motion to the Commonwealth [State].
>[The Sovereign] relation to the City is not that of the head, but of the soul to the body. For it is the soul by which a man has a will, that is, can either will, or nill.
>The other error in this his first argument is that he says the members of every Commonwealth, as of a natural body, depend one of another. It is true they cohere together, but they depend only on the sovereign, which is the soul of the Commonwealth
>The error concerning mixed government has proceeded from want of understanding of what is meant by this word body politic, and how it signifies not the concord, but the union of many men.
Jean Bodin (absolute monarchist)
>For that as of unity depends the union of all numbers, which have no power but from it: so also is one sovereign prince in every Commonweale necessary, from the power of whom all others orderly depend
>Wherefore what the unity is in numbers, the understanding in the powers of the soul, and the center in a circle: so likewise in this world that most mighty king, in unity simple, in nature indivisible, in purity most holy, exalted far above the Fabric of the celestial Spheres, joining this elementary world with the celestiall and intelligible heavens
>Now the sovereign prince is exalted above all his subjects, and exempt out of the rank of them: whose majesty suffers no more division than doth the unity itself, which is not set nor accounted among the numbers, howbeit that they all from it take both their force and power…. being indeed about to become much more happy if they had a sovereign prince, which with his authority and power might (as doth the understanding) reconcile all the parts, and so unite and bind them fast in happiness together.
For clarity, Hobbes Leviathan also takes this stance on the limitation of subordinate corporations and the sovereign relationship of the state corporation:
>Of Regular, some are Absolute, and Independent, subject to none but their own Representative: such are only Common-wealths [or States]; Of which I have spoken already in the 5. last preceding chapters. Others are Dependent; that is to say, Subordinate to some Soveraign Power, to which every one, as also their Representative is Subject.
>Of Systemes subordinate, some are Politicall, and some Private. Politicall (otherwise Called Bodies Politique, and Persons In Law,) are those, which are made by authority from the Soveraign Power of the Common-wealth. Private, are those, which are constituted by Subjects amongst themselves, or by authoritie from a stranger. For no authority derived from forraign power, within the Dominion of another, is Publique there, but Private.
>In All Bodies Politique [Any Corporation under the State] The Power of The Representative is Limited.
>In Bodies Politique, the power of the Representative is always Limited: And that which prescribes the limits thereof, is the Power Sovereign. For Power Unlimited, is absolute Sovereignty. And the Sovereign, in every Commonwealth, is the absolute Representative of all the Subjects.
Jean Bodin also adds.
>Provided that they [the family] are joined together by the legitimate and limited rule of the father.
>I have said "limited", since this fact chiefly distinguishes the Family from the State.
>That the latter [The State] has the final and public authority.
>The former [The Family or Household] limited and private rule.
...
All unitary or corporatist ideologies also have the same understanding, that there is autonomy over the body--as a corporatist organizes a state to be like one person and operates accordingly, but in order to do that it requires an appeal to sovereignty and necessarily absolute when it comes to autonomy.