256.1 Significance of Luhmann's theory of symbolically generalized media in understanding problem of political power and rule of law

Thursday, August 2, 2012: 10:45 AM
Faculty of Economics, TBA
Satoshi IGUCHI , Department of Literature, Kyoto University , Kyoto, Japan
The author gives a theoretical contribution to the understanding of relationship between political power & law, & function of rule of law. In sociology of law & political sociology, adequate attention to connection between political power & law tends to weaken with the increasing studies based on Foucault's asserting that the main form of political power has transited from legal sovereign power to disciplinary power & bio-politics. However, law is still important condition for formation & augmentation of political power. The aim of this paper is to explore new way of thinking about mechanism of formation & augmentation of political power, & function of law in its mechanism in the light of Luhmann’s theory of power led by his theory of symbolically generalized media (1975, 1993, 2000). In order to do so, the author identifies core ideas of “symbolical generalization” of power media as well as “second coding of political power by law” in Luhmann’s theory. According to Luhmann, political power needs not only to organize physical violence but also to consolidate its own code to control application of power, & to ensure generality & consistency of application of power in order to augment its capacity. Legal system contributes formation of such code in political power. Subsequently, the author compares this Luhmann’s explanation with traditional view about relationship between law & political power. Firstly, Luhmann’s explanation is different from Weber’s explanation based on concept of legitimacy. Secondly, it is also different from view of classical liberal constitutionalism (Ashenden 2006). Because, in Luhamnn’s explanation, law is something to contribute generalization of power, enlargement of sphere of influence of political power, & enhancement its mobilization capacity rather than reduction of it. The paper concludes with the suggestion for a new way of thinking about contemporary rule of law.