Program Areas

Program Areas

Book review: The Universal Republic: A Realistic Utopia?

Photo: Shutterstock. Licensed for use on this website.

The idea of a democratic world state is often dismissed or carefully avoided in political science discussions, as many academics are quick to emphasize that they do not advocate for such a sweeping change. Against this backdrop, Mathias Koenig-Archibugi’s recent book The Universal Republic: A Realistic Utopia? is a bold endeavor, both thought-provoking and refreshing. The book examines in detail a fundamental question: Could a democratic world state actually be a practical and desirable solution to the challenges of a shared planet?

Koenig-Archibugi divides his argument into two main parts of roughly equal length: first, he explores whether such a world state is feasible (is it possible?), and second, he examines its desirability (is it something we should want?). This review provides a summary of the book’s core arguments and offers some critical remarks from an activist’s point of view.

A bold, thought-provoking and refreshing book

The Universal Republic: A Realistic Utopia?
By Mathias Koenig-Archibugi
Oxford University Press, 2024

The first part discusses the possibility of establishing a universal republic (UR) which is defined as a democratic, globally inclusive and federal state. Koenig-Archibugi assesses to what extent people and governments hold beliefs that could inhibit the UR’s creation. According to opinion surveys presented in the book, which are otherwise often overlooked or ignored in academic research, there is no overwhelming opposition against a world state’s formation. Further, since states have already transferred a significant amount of legal authority to international organizations, Koenig-Archibugi argues, a critical mass of states would be likely to succeed in transferring authority to a UR if they were to try.

Opinion surveys suggest there is no overwhelming opposition

The first part also discusses the question of viability: if a UR were established, could it be maintained as a democratic polity? Assuming the conditions that affect the survival of democracy within countries can provide imperfect but valuable information on the viability of an imagined democratic world state, the question is dealt with by domestic analogies and an analysis of existing empirical data. The main conclusion is that it seems far from inevitable that a world state would fall into tyranny, as is often claimed. On the contrary, the chances of its survival as a democratic polity look rather good.

The second part discusses the desirability of a UR. The question is not only one of human survival, for instance in view of climate change or nuclear weapons, but involves a broader goal of advancing and guaranteeing personal autonomy and equal respect for all at the global scale. From a range of empirical observations about global problems of harm, coercion and profound impact, the argument is made for the need of global democratic governance. Koenig-Archibugi also shows in what way a UR can address these problems of the present world in effective ways.

Another interesting topic in the second part concerns the question whether other institutional arrangements such as a confederation or polycentric governance would be better forms of global democracy.

One common argument against the idea of a federal world state, particularly from advocates of confederative models, is the fear that it could leave some people or groups in a permanent minority status that makes it impossible for them to ever influence key decisions. Koenig-Archibugi challenges this concern, illustrating that it lacks sufficient empirical evidence. In fact, he argues that a UR has greater potential to include and amplify minority voices. Unlike confederations, which primarily represent the executive branches of governments, a UR would include structures such as a global parliament that directly engage and represent citizens, allowing for broader and more equitable inclusion of diverse perspectives..

Regarding the different versions of polycentric democracy, Koenig-Archibugi points out a general problem of accountability in non-electoral forms of democratic representation. Further, the absence of an overarching governance framework implies that issues are dealt with in isolation from each other. The nonseparability of issues, it is argued, is a weakness of the polycentric models.

The book covers the empirical research on the topic

From an activist perspective, the work is very helpful since it covers what appears to be the main part of the empirical research in political science on the topic. Whereas political scientists tend to dismiss the idea of a world state without much arguments, Koenig-Archibugi manages to make a sober and persuasive case for the possibility and desirability of a world state. 

For a non-trained reader, some of the technical aspects of the book such as the statistical formulas, methods and models are difficult to assess. It will therefore be valuable to see how the work is received among political scientists. It certainly deserves strong attention.

One critical question concerns the term of a world state that is used throughout the book. As Koenig-Archibugi shows, in surveys it matters very strongly how exactly a question is being posed (see p76). If the question on a world state is framed in terms of “giving up national independence or sovereignty”, for instance, it receives much lower support compared to a framing referring to the assumption that “individual nations cannot solve problems alone”. 

For sure, Koenig-Archibugi’s federalist conceptualization of a UR makes it clear that powers can and will be “shared across multiple levels of governance” (p5) which suggests that nation-states will keep substantial political decision-making powers. Nonetheless, the term “world state” in the public is often understood to imply giving up national independence completely. From an activist’s perspective, it would be more wise to use other terms or approaches, such as emphasizing the goal of setting up a “global constitution”, as is done in the Theory of Change of Democracy Without Borders. Time will tell whether the term of a “universal republic” will find broader appeal.

As Koenig-Archibugi admits, the book does not make any claim regarding the likelihood of a UR coming about in the foreseeable future. Indeed, there is no guarantee of success. But then again, the book shows that there is no reason for believing it is impossible. And considering what is at stake, we have all the reasons to continue pursuing what Martin Luther King called the oneness of mankind.

Mathias Koenig-Archibugi is Associate Professor (Reader) of Global Politics in the Department of Government and the Department of International Relations of the London School of Economics and Political Science. He teaches courses on global politics, international institutions, and global public policy. His research focuses on the governance of global issues, especially in the area of health and labour rights, and on the possibility of democratizing global politics.

Hans Leander
Hans is a board member of Democracy Without Borders-Sweden