[p. 344]
|344| distinction of the estates is established, it is directed towards preserving it; it is thus to that extent negative in its doing, for the preserving of something living is negative; it is government, therefore, opposed to the particular; the absolute positive soul of the living is in the whole of the people itself; insofar as it is government, it is in opposition, and appearance; it can therefore as such only be negative. But this absolute negation of everything which could conflict with the absolute relation of the absolute Idea and would mix the distinction of the estates must have the supreme oversight over the manner in which any potency determines itself; absolutely no ordinance of any of them is withdrawn from it, neither insofar as a potency establishes itself, nor insofar as it wants to assert itself where it is limited by the movement of a higher potency, either in general, so that it would still remain subsisting, or so that it would be entirely sublated for a time. Whatever could have an influence on a disturbance of the relation, or on the hindering of the freer movement of a higher potency, is organic in the absolute sense, and within the competence of the highest government. Its negative business, however, is not to be understood in appearance as if it conducted itself merely by supervising and negatively by prohibiting, through a veto; rather, its negativity is its essence, but it is an activity of a government, and its relation to the particular, or its appearance, is a positive one, precisely insofar as it steps forth against the particular; it is therefore legislative, ordaining, where a relation develops which wanted to organise itself for itself, or where a formerly insignificant side gradually develops in its previous unlimitedness and begins to become powerful. Above all it has to decide in all cases [in which] different rights of systems come into collision and the present makes them impossible in their positive subsistence.
A formal thought of absolute government is to be met with in all systems of theory, as also of actuality, namely an organic central power, and indeed one which preserves the constitution; but α) such a thought, like the Fichtean ephorate, is in its negative stance wholly formal, and empty, β and then all possible oversight over governing in everything singular is ascribed to it, thus a crude mixing of the universal and the singular in it; it is to be a power over everything, thus to act commandingly, with superior might; and at the same time as power
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.