The Intellectual Adventures of a Russian Anti-Federalist: Radishchev, Condorcet, and the American Constitution

This article suggests a new understanding of a shift in Radishchev’s perception of American democracy from the early version of Ode to Liberty to the final text of A Journey from St Petersburg to Moscow. The historical and political theories present in Ode to Liberty are interpreted not as an abstract social utopia but as a reaction to the revolution in British colonies and an attempt at establishing a new society based on the ideals of equality and freedom. The adoption of the American constitution was the main reason for Radishchev’s disappointment in the USA. The evolution of Radishchev’s views is analysed within the context of the American debate between the Federalists and the Antifederalists and the discussions about the New World in France, especially the political philosophy of Nicola Condorcet and the debates on the representation of the slave-owning colony of Santo Domingo in the Assemblée nationale. The article studies the key sources of information that may have influenced Radishchev’s opinion and analyses the common features of Radishchev’s ideas about the US Constitution and his critical approach to the “abolitionist” wing of the Antifederalists. His disappointment in the American experience had a decisive impact on Radishchev’s political philosophy: the adoption of a federalist constitution and the preservation of slavery meant for him the collapse of all hopes for reshaping society on more humane and just grounds. This led to the adoption of apocalyptic tones in the final version of Ode to Liberty, as the author’s hopes for a better future now depended not upon any political activity, but upon the intervention of providential forces.

Scrutiny or Complacency? Banking Union in the Bundestag and the Assemblée Nationale

The financial and eurozone crises highlighted the inadequacy of the original governance structures of the eurozone. In response, a range of reforms were launched, including the creation of a European banking union. In practice, some elements of the banking union were delayed by division among member states and the breakdown of the Franco-German motor, such as the question of the operationalization of the single resolution mechanism and fund or the deposit insurance scheme. In addition, eurozone governance—which would once have been regarded as a technocratic issue—became increasingly politicized. The aim of this article is to study the extent to which the banking union was scrutinized by parliament and to what degree this reflects material interests and ideas. For this purpose, it focuses on salience (i.e., how much attention the issue received) and polarization (i.e., the divergence of positions). The analysis of the resolutions and debates of the German Bundestag and French Assemblée Nationale, i.e., the parliaments of two key states in EU decision-making on banking union, finds that the German government was indeed closely scrutinized, whereas the French government was relatively unconstrained.

A Parliamentary Perspective on the Implementation of the Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

As a member of the Assemblée nationale, the lower house of the French Parliament, from 2012 to 2017, the author was part of the French delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), where he was entrusted with preparing, as a rapporteur for the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, a report on the implementation of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. This practice note underscores that it is the responsibility of PACE as an institution, and of its members individually, to follow closely the issue of the implementation of European Court judgments, even if the primary responsibility for supervising implementation, or ‘execution’, lies with the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. PACE can provide useful solutions where the implementation of judgments pertaining to long-standing or systemic problems is stalled or protracted, notably through field missions carried out by members and in particular by its rapporteur, which can complement the efforts deployed by the Committee of Ministers.

Assemblée Nationale, Bundestag and the European Union

The growing importance of national parliaments is one feature of the stronger differentiation within the EU. Habermasian expectations of an increasing consensus on political norms seem to be invalidated by current events. In her book, in which she draws on her award-winning PhD thesis, Anja Thomas makes an important theoretical and empirical contribution to our understanding of the social causes of this development. Analysing EU affairs in the Assemblée nationale and Bundestag since 1979, she uncovers a paradox: increasing experience with the EU leads to national institutions growing in importance for MPs’ discourse on the role of parliaments in the EU. Revisiting social theory, in particular Max Weber’s ‘old’ institutionalism, the author presents a new model that explains this phenomenon. This book should be read by students of both parliaments in the EU and European integration processes. This work was distinguished with the Prix Pflimlin 2017.

“Must the Arts Suffer from the Progress of Reason?” Four Slave Statues, the 1790 Place des Victoires Debate, and the Urban Monument in Early Revolutionary France

In June 1790, the Assemblée nationale decided that the statues of slaves surrounding the monument to Louis XIV on the Place des Victoires were offensive to the inhabitants of some French provinces, and should be removed. This triggered a wide-ranging debate in the Parisian press, with calls for the conservation of the monument or for the use of the statues in a new setting. The discussion dealt with the monument’s iconography, but also with its aesthetic and historical significance, and reflected wider debates on slavery and on the (un)popularity of the monarchy. The article analyses these arguments, points out the importance of public monuments in Parisians’ relation to their city, and shows how the removal of these statues was part of a climate of construction, rather than destruction.