¿Qué diferencia hace el poder soberano?

VENEZIA, LUCIANO

Temuco

Seminario; Coloquio de Investigación del Centro de Investigación sobre Desafíos Internacionales; 2016

Centro de Investigación sobre Desafíos Internacionales, Universidad de la Frontera

The introduction of the sovereign into the commonwealth has several implications and effects. For instance, it permits stable peace to be brought about and makes it possible for property rights and justice to be established. It also makes a difference in terms of the subjects? practical reasoning. Yet there seem to be two different ways to construe this difference introduced by sovereign power. According to the non-normative view, the sovereign?s key feature is his causal or empirical capacity to force the subjects to follow the laws of nature and so act in ways that are already reasonable. In this sense, the sovereign and his main instrument ? law ? merely make an empirical difference to the subjects? practical reasoning. For its part, the normative view states that the sovereign?s main characteristic is his normative power to impose morally binding obligations on the subjects, which do not as such have a direct link to the natural duties imposed by natural laws. In this interpretation, the difference introduced by legal directives is normative rather than causal or empirical.The main passage where Hobbes explicitly analyzes the characteristic inequality of the commonwealth can be plausibly interpreted in either non-normative or normative ways. Even so, there are strong considerations in favor of the normative reading. In particular, Hobbes?s analysis of the normativity of contractual obligations grounds the idea that there are normative differences between the sovereign and his subjects. And there are also additional considerations for preferring this interpretation. First, Hobbes?s command theory of law supports the normative view. Next, the theory which states that there are only causal or empirical differences between the sovereign and his subjects is poorly related to a genuine contractarian theory of political obligation and does not even provide the beginnings of such a theory. Finally, the way sanctions for non-compliance affect practical reasoning give further reasons in favor of the normative interpretation.