Pacem in Terris and the Principle of Subsidiarity: Beyond the Misunderstandings

The paper aims at developing a critique of the functional(ist) readings of the principle of subsidiarity, moving from Pacem in Terris. The argument is that peace at the international level, as well as at lower levels, does not coincide with an adjustment within and between political and economic powers, but – on the contrary - with the enforcement of a civil society able to produce relational goods. Neither a political international super-government nor a regulated market working through utilitarian exchanges can bring about peaceful relations between peoples. Peace is the emergent effect of peoples’ capabilities to generate supra-functional relations between them at the social, cultural and economic levels. States and political systems should be conceived as instruments for accomplishing this task. The principle of subsidiarity can be a pillar in the pursue of a peaceful society if it means to devise new civil institutions stemming from a social networking governance. In order to achieve this goal, the traditional divisions of labour between political, economic and cultural institutions are called into question. The principles of attribution (conferral), subsidiarity and proportionality are now interacting in such a way that it becomes possible to build a new societal order at the international as well as national levels. To this end, it becomes crucial to connect the principle of subsidiarity with the processes of constitutionalization of human rights (‘civil constitutions’), well beyond the political constitutions which have characterised the origin of the modern nation-States and the international political organizations so far.