Federalism is full of good intentions

This article is devoted to substantiating the controversial thesis that federalism is not an autonomous type of political structure. Federations are interpreted as a set of specific failures that arise from various origins in following the basic modern scenario of the formation of a unitary nation-state with a consolidated (civil) political identity. The article proceeds from the actor approach, which interprets the political form of the federation as a derivative result of a conflict pact between central and peripheral elites. From this methodological perspective, the history of the concept of federalism is examined here and a comparative historical analysis of the world federal experience is carried out. The results are a series of interrelated conclusions.
First, we show that the original Kantian project of a world federation of states has little in common with federalism, which has to do with the description of the internal structure of individual societies. Second, we validate the conclusion that in the modern theory of federalism a harmful mainstream tradition has developed, which holds up the centralizing federalism in the United States as a successful norm.
Third, we identify and analyze the cultural and historical features of the formation of two families of federations. One of them is associated with the acquisition of independence by offshoots of the West, and the other was formed by the later processes of the collapse of the colonial empires of the West and the liberation of colonies in Africa and Eurasia.
Fourth, we argue that the federal political structure, from the theoretical point of view, was to reconcile, at the basis of the political project of Modernity, the liberal utopia of a universal and culturally homogeneous civil nation and the actual cultural diversity of modern states, which is a permanent source of erosion of political sovereignty and differentiation of collective identities.
Fifth, we furnish proof that all the derivative political, legal, economic and other features of federalism stem from one initial problem – the legitimization and subsequent institutionalization of the conflict between the central elite and regional elites, challenging the indivisibility of political sovereignty and demanding political autonomy.
Sixth, federalism as a changeable pact of elites in specific historical societies does not provide convincing grounds for its qualification as an autonomous political form compared to a unitary nation-state. The final conclusion is that the political format of federalism in most states is a longterm way of formalizing the political divorce of cultural communities that failed to create a single political nation.

*This article was supported by the Russian Science Foundation, Grant No. 23-18-00427