Ferdinand Lassalle’s 1862 treatise, What Is A Constitution?, remains a foundational text for understanding the practical realities of constitutional power, arguing that a constitution is not merely a written document but a reflection of the actual power relations within a society. Lassalle sharply distinguishes between the "written constitution" – the formal legal text – and the "real constitution," which he asserts is determined by the interplay of actual power factors: the monarch, the aristocracy, the industrial bourgeoisie, and the working classes. This essay will analyze Lassalle’s core argument, exploring his concept of the real constitution, the role of power in shaping it, and the implications of his analysis for understanding constitutionalism both in his time and today.
Lassalle’s central thesis is that a constitution is only effective and enduring when it accurately represents the existing power dynamics of a nation. He illustrates this through a series of lectures delivered in Berlin, where he systematically dismantled the prevailing liberal notion of a constitution as a sovereign act of popular will enshrined in a legal document. Instead, he posited that the written constitution is a mere "sheet of paper" if it does not align with the "real" forces holding sway. These forces, he identified as the fundamental pillars of power that truly govern the state. For instance, he argued that if a king, a nobility, or a powerful class of industrialists held significant, unwritten power, any written clauses designed to limit them would be rendered impotent. The true constitution, therefore, is the sum of these actual power factors, their interactions, and their relative strengths.
He meticulously breaks down the sources of power in 19th-century Prussia. The "King" represents the executive and military might. The "aristocracy" (or nobility) embodies the old landed gentry and their historical influence. The "industrial bourgeoisie" signifies the rising class of manufacturers, financiers, and merchants, wielding economic power. Finally, the "working classes" – the factory laborers and artisans – represent the potential for collective action and social change, a force Lassalle himself sought to mobilize. He contended that a constitution could only truly function if it adequately incorporated or acknowledged the influence of these groups. If the written word proclaimed universal suffrage but the aristocracy retained veto power or the king controlled the army, the written constitution would be a fiction. The real constitution, in Lassalle’s view, was the operational reality of governance dictated by who actually held and exercised power.
The practical implications of Lassalle’s analysis are profound. He argued that constitutional reform should not focus on drafting abstract legal principles but on understanding and potentially altering the underlying power structure. For example, if the industrial bourgeoisie were the dominant force, a constitution that did not reflect their interests would likely be ignored or subverted. Conversely, if the working classes, through organization and political pressure, became a significant power factor, the constitution would eventually need to adapt to their demands, or risk being overthrown. This perspective offers a powerful critique of legalistic constitutionalism, suggesting that true constitutionalism requires a deep engagement with the social and political forces at play. It highlights the dynamic and often unacknowledged interplay between law and power, arguing that law is not an autonomous entity but is shaped by, and in turn shapes, the distribution of power.
In conclusion, Ferdinand Lassalle’s What Is A Constitution? provides a compelling and enduring framework for analyzing constitutionalism. By prioritizing the "real constitution" – the actual distribution of power – over the "written constitution," Lassalle offers a pragmatic and insightful lens through which to understand the efficacy and limitations of formal legal documents. His work compels us to look beyond the parchment and examine the underlying social, economic, and political forces that truly govern a state, a lesson that remains remarkably relevant in contemporary discussions about governance and political legitimacy.