Constitutional Patriotism

Abstract

Constitutional patriotism is a political theory that seeks to provide an explanation for the sense of ownership that most individuals have towards their national constitutional system. Specifically, constitutional patriotism assumes that free-thinking individuals involved in a discussion over the common good will reach an agreement that is perceived, at least by those involved in the debate, as having normative value. The awareness that such a deliberative process has historically been a part of the constitutional system also induces a sense of ownership of past historical accommodations of constitutional principles. The shared perception of being part of historically grounded institutions within a deliberative democracy is sometimes called the 'normative surplus effect' or 'normative spill-over effect' of the deliberative process. The theory, in its current form, was proposed by Jürgen Habermas and Jean-Werner Müller.Debates over the common good might take place informally or within the state's institutions. Pell-mell informal debates, with few exceptions, have a limited effect on amending constitutional norms. Yet, the prerogative to openly discuss laws and policies legitimised by constitutional norms is normally sufficient to develop an inner sense of belonging to a constitutional system. Deliberative debates within public institutions (e.g. parliaments and courts) are more likely to change the functioning of a constitutional system, but they are, by way of comparison to

Increase in patriotic entrepreneurship in Ukraine and Poland as a result of Russian invasion in 2022

“…Proponents of patriotic ideas, however, point to different shades of patriotism. Thus, one may encounter conservative or liberal patriotism, cosmopolitan patriotism, moderate patriotism, critical patriotism, or constitutive patriotism (Thurairaj et al 2018;Horvat 2020;Breda 2020;Soutphommasane 2020;Nathanson 2020;Merry 2020).…”