Hermann Heller and the Problem of Political Unity

During the instability that characterized the Weimar Republic, the problem of political unity became a question of utmost concern. Unlike its English language equivalent, the German term politische Einheit signifies both the concrete unity and the bearer of that unity, the state. The three most important theorist of political unity in the Weimar Republic were Carl Schmitt, Hans Kelsen, and Hermann Heller. Whereas Schmitt’s and Kelsen’s theses have been the subject of extensive scholarly debate in the anglophone world, Heller’s approach to the problem of political unity has received relatively less scholarly treatment. Given this relative neglect of Hermann Heller in the history of political thought, this dissertation seeks to recover the core concept of Heller’s work on the problem of political unity, namely, the state.

As a result, the central question of the dissertation is: What is Hermann Heller’s concept of the state? Against recent interpreters who see Heller’s conception of the state as Hobbesian or Weberian, this dissertation argues for a left Hegelian reading of Heller’s theory. For Heller, the state is a unitarily effective but essentially pluralistic organization that can be distinguished from other kinds of organization by its sovereignty and territoriality. It exists only insofar as it successfully unites the dialectical moments of power, law, and ethics. Because of its dialectical constitution, Heller concludes that statehood is not a binary but a continuum. This enables him to bridge the gap between descriptive and normative political theory to defend parliamentary democracy and reformist socialism as the best practicable solution to the problem of political unity in the early twentieth century. Whereas some scholars identify a fundamental break in Heller’s thought, the interpretation defended here identifies fundamental continuities between Heller’s early work on Hegel and his later work in legal theory and political science.

在魏玛共和国（Weimar Republic）动荡不安的时期，政治统一（political unity）问题成为最受关注的核心议题。与英文对应概念不同，德语术语“politische Einheit”既指具体的统一状态，也指该统一的承载者——国家。魏玛共和国时期研究政治统一问题的三位最重要理论家是卡尔·施米特（Carl Schmitt）、汉斯·凯尔森（Hans Kelsen）与赫尔曼·海勒（Hermann Heller）。施米特与凯尔森的理论已在英语世界引发广泛学术争论，但海勒对政治统一问题的研究却相对缺乏学术关注。鉴于赫尔曼·海勒在政治思想史中这一相对被忽视的状况，本论文旨在还原其关于政治统一问题的核心概念——国家。

本论文的核心问题是：赫尔曼·海勒的国家概念是什么？针对近期将海勒的国家概念解读为霍布斯式（Hobbesian）或韦伯式（Weberian）的观点，本论文主张对其理论进行左翼黑格尔主义（Left Hegelian）解读。在海勒看来，国家是具有单一效力但本质多元的组织，凭借其主权（sovereignty）与领土性（territoriality）区别于其他类型的组织。唯有成功统合权力、法律与伦理的辩证时刻（dialectical moments），国家才得以存在。由于其辩证构成，国家性并非二元对立，而是一个连续体（continuum）。这一洞见使海勒能够弥合描述性与规范性政治理论之间的鸿沟，为议会民主与改良社会主义辩护，将二者视为20世纪初解决政治统一问题的最佳可行方案。尽管部分学者认为海勒思想中存在根本断裂，但本文所捍卫的解读却揭示出：其早期黑格尔研究与后期法理学及政治学著作之间存在根本的连续性。