Lex Pluriversalis - foundation for next world order

Leonid Savin

 

Ex: http://www.katehon.com

Presently there is a situation when mutually exclusive phenomena, such as the erosion of statehood through the reduction or disappearance of sovereignty, and the attempt to develop new rules for international relations, impose one on the other. 
 
The paradox is that international law is based on the concept of sovereignty, and if someone tries to introduce new definitions or concepts, it simply means that the sovereignty of one or some actors dominates over the others. Therefore, this is what the United States is doing in trying to introduce the matrix of Anglo-Saxon law at the international level. However, all legal systems in the world, as well as the 'sense of justice', are rooted in national traditions, and they react differently to the existing reality. If Colin Gray said that the military strategy depends on the culture of the people, although it is not that obvious, in this case the situation is the same: religion, history, and philosophy of the people forms the 'sense of justice' that influences collective behavior, including those relating to the interaction with other peoples.
 
Now we have a situation where peoples' 'sense of justice' is different from the enforcement, in other words, the implementation of the legal regulations that often do not correspond to their material and spiritual needs. The European Union is a typical example.
 
Traditionally, Europe has Continental law, based largely in Roman legislation. Carl Schmitt and other classical theorists wrote numerous works on the subject. The second major legal system is Anglo-Saxon Common Law. This is not based in the right of principles, rather it is based in the right of precedent, and legal experts; which comes from England and then took root in the United States, and from there spread to the countries of the English-speaking world; now we have the attempt to make this become universal.
 
It is assumed that the roots of the differences between these systems are in a different understanding of justice and values. Although Max Weber noted the Protestant influence on modern capitalism (opposed to the Catholic tradition), there are more profound differences between the two legal systems.
 
Looking at the roots of differences will naturally raise the question about the influences of the traditions from other regions traditions such as Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, polytheism, Taoism, African cults and pre-Columbian traditions of Latin America.
Islamic law is not connected only with notorious Sharia law and Madhhab, but also with local traditions that differ in the North Caucasus, North Africa, Indonesia and Iran.
 
However, even with the “emasculation” of religions of the modern era, we can find rudiments of Roman law that were broken under the influence of regional cultures and eras. While in the US you can constantly hear the appeal to God and Christianity, the moral and ethical complex in that country is significantly different from similar ones in Latin America that had the same rudiments of Roman law, but combined with the influence of Catholicism.
 
Now, the expansion of Common Law continues at the global level, so-called Common Space: the air, the sea, the space, the cyberspace.
It seems a little bit strange that the initiative to establish control over the spheres comes from a country that has not signed a number of important documents on sailing, on space (the US denied the initiative of Russia and other countries to ban the use of weapons in outer space), as well as on new artificial space, cyberspace.
 
On the other hand, we see an attempt to preserve sovereignty with compulsory control over the mentioned spaces, if they are under state jurisdiction.
 
However, these efforts, taking into account the influence of the globalization process, can be wasted or even destructive for the countries themselves.
 
The only way out of the situation is a civilizational approach, based on alliances of culturally close countries of a certain region. Such unions should be formed on the principle of voluntariness (Bona fides), and understanding the necessity of long-term cooperation.
 
The current economic and political partnerships are likely to be transformed due to the specifics of transitivity.
 
Famous scholar Roland Benedikter warns that a seven-dimensional global systemic shift is underway, which is related to the three epoch-making ends:
– New World Order (changes in the politics of the US unipolar hegemony creating multipolarity, backed by Russia, China, India and others actors);
– Neoliberalism (in the economy, which is characterized by the 2008 global financial crisis);
– Postmodernism (in culture).
The three ends are directly connected with 4) global Renaissance of Religion (which becomes politicized), 5) Technology and 6) Demography that is shown by the global migration flows.
 
As the result, we have a seventh point: changes in the order structure of the entire social system.
 
To make these changes with as few problems as possible, it is necessary to implement new approaches to international law, as soon as possible, to limit the spread of the Anglo-Saxon legal model which claims to be global and universal.
 
Proposed alternative must be on pluriversal basis that respect local traditions and may be implemented on the planetary level too.