Luhmann

Autopoietic theory is increasingly seen as a candidate for a radical
theory of law, both in relation to its theoretical credentials and its relevance in terms of new and emerging forms of law. An aspect of the theory that has remained less developed, however, is its material side, and more concretely the theory’s accommodation of bodies, space, objects and their claim to legal agency. The present
article reads Luhmann’s theory of autopoietic systems in a radical and material manner, linking it on the one hand to current post-structural theorisations of law and society, and on the other hand extending its ambit to accommodate the influx of material considerations that have been working their way through various other disciplines. The latter comprises both a materialisation of the theory itself and ways
of conceptualising the legal system as material through and through. This I do by further developing what I have called Critical Autopoiesis, namely an acentric, topological, post-ecological and posthuman understanding of Luhmann’s theory, that draws on Deleuzian thought, feminist theory, geography, non-representational
theory, and new material and object-oriented ontologies. These are combined with some well-rehearsed autopoietic concepts, such as distinction, environment and boundaries; Luhmann’s earlier work on materiality continuum; more recent work on bodies and space; as well as his work on form and medium in relation to art. The article concludes with five suggestions for an understanding of what critical autopoietic materiality might mean for law.

"This book develops a sociologically informed theory of constitutionalism in the global realm, addressing both national and transnational forms of constitutional ordering. The book begins with the argument that current approaches to constitutionalism remain tied to a state-based conception of constitutions, and overlooks underlying structural transformations that trigger the emergence of constitutional forms of ordering. Poul F. Kjaer aims to address this shortcoming by offering a sociological and historically informed analysis of the evolution of constitutionalism in the face of globalisation. The analysis contextualises on-going constitutional developments through the use of a long-term historical perspective, which is capable of highlighting the impact of deeper structural transformations unfolding within society.
The book looks at the ways in which national and transnational legal forms have evolved alongside one another. It demonstrates that the formation of global constitutions has not resulted in a corresponding decrease in the power of nation states, but instead, legal and political aspects of both the nation state and the transnational have been reconfigured and intensified in a mutually supportive manner.
In combining insights from a range of fields, this interdisciplinary book will be of great interest to students and scholars of constitutional law, sociology, global governance studies, and legal, social and political theory.

List of Content
Introduction: The Metamorphosis of Constitutionalism
Part 1: Structural Transformations
2. The Implosion of the Euro-Centric World
3. The Multiplicity of Normative Orders in World Society
Part 2: Re-configurations of Law and the Political
4. The Law within and in-between Normative Orders
5. The Political within and in-between Normative Orders
Part 3: Constitutional Stabilisation
6. The Breakdown of Constitutional Ordering through Globalisation-induced Crises
7.The Transmutation of Constitutional Ordering
8.Re-calibrating the Constitutional Concept
9. Conclusion

"

The world is all that there is. In the world, ontology and epistemology coincide. The thing and the perspective is part of it, scale is ingested in its multiplicity, communication stops at the World’s edge. By reading together Deleuze and Guattari’s plane of immanence and Niklas Luhmann’s proto-global concept of Weltgesellschaft (“world society”), I suggest a conceptualisation of the world as the materiality of the multiple spaces of creation in an insular, all-inclusive immanence. Deprived of an outside, the World pushes its own understanding of circumference through, first, the expansion of its own limits through the process of worlding, and second, the multiplication of modes of material (self-) production through its process of othering. Thus, the world swells up from the inside and expands on both the material and the semantic level, producing a multiplicity of fractal microcosms. Issues of responsibility and justice arise that are intricately linked to the materiality of the world and take place in and between the various bodies and spaces of the world but without an overarching hierarchy or principle. This approach is a way of counter-acting the all-pervasive Hegelian understanding of synthesis, arguing instead for a plenitude that brims with positivity and that can never become fully complete. The world remains its own infinite process of worlding.

most important social theorists of the past century. Frequently quoted (at least in German-speaking countries), often misunderstood, the influence of Luhmann's Theory of Social Systems has been limited in international discourse. This is no doubt due in part to his esoteric terminology and highly abstract mode of thought; partially, the problem might be that Luhmann's theory, though highly inspiring on its own level, is not particularly open to grounding in empirical projects. This paper attempts to demonstrate the theoretical attractiveness of some of Luhmann's basic concepts, trying to use as few esoteric terms and as many examples as possible. Especially I try to argue that Luhmann's definition of communication - for him, the basic element of society - opens rich possibilities to clear up the muddled and confused discussions of the last decades about what constitutes music, a musical work, the "autonomy" of music, intra- and extra-musical spheres and so on. Questions discussed include: Should we speak of "music" or of "musics"? What is the meaning of "musical meaning"? What do we mean by talking about "musical media"? Is there any correlation between societal differentiation and the use of media?

Partizipation ist ein schillernder Begriff, der wie kaum ein zweiter die Moderne charakerisiert. So laut der Ruf danach, und vor allem nach mehr davon auch ist, so ambivalent sind die bisher erzielten Ergebnisse. Dies gilt insbesondere, wenn es sich um Partizipation in organisationalen Kontexten handelt. Der Text unternimmt eine systemtheoretisch geführte Erkundung der Hintergründer der Popolarität des Begriffes und der Formen, in denen Partizipation in Organisationen zur Geltung kommt.

No weakening, but rather an expansion, of statehood can be observed in the contemporary world. This does not, on the other hand, imply that extensive forms of constitutional ordering do not exist outside the realm of states. Instead, the evolution of world society has been characterized by a protracted dual movement where the expansion and densification of statehood and autonomous forms of transnational ordering gradually emerged in a mutually constitutive fashion. One implication of this is that neither the concept of the state nor the concept of nonstate transnational entities is adequately capable of delineating the object of constitutional analysis. Instead, the concept of normative orders has been introduced as an overarching category capable of identifying the contexts within which constitutional ordering emerges.
Subsequently, a distinction between the internal and external dimensions of the law of normative orders has been introduced, specifying them as respectively oriented towards establishing internal condensation of a given normative order and external compatibility between different normative orders. With this background, a framework for the analysis of constitutional frameworks of normative orders is developed. The central element is a distinction among three dimensions: First, a constitution implies a coupling between a constitutional object, in the form of a hierarchical organization of a given normative order capable of reproducing an autonomous source of authority, and a concordant legal framework. Second, constitutionalization implies a coupling between an internal reconstruction of an external constitutional subject within the constitutional object, and the register of legal rights, establishing a framework for exchanges between the constitutional object and the wider world as represented by the constitutional subject. Third, constitutionalism denotes the institutionalization of a double function, in the form of a principle-based and legally fortified striving toward universal inclusion, providing a sense of direction in time through an articulated form of constitutional consciousness.
The insights developed are briefly illustrated by the case of the global Fairtrade Certification System.

The theory of autopoiesis has been traditionally read as abstract and distant from material considerations. Indeed, Luhmann’s main assertion that humans are excluded from society, except for being perhaps the thorniest issue of the theory, it also blocks any consideration of materiality from entering the autopoietic boundary. Along with humans, autopoiesis turns its back to nature, buildings, space, bodies. But perhaps it does not, and this is just the received reading. Luhmann himself has insinuated the relevance of bodies and space in his later works, and indeed previously although in non-explicit terms. It is, however, the starting point of this chapter that if autopoiesis is to remain relevant to social and general theoretical observations, it has to discover  its materiality. The main contribution of this chapter, therefore, is to unearth the material dimension in Luhmann. I do this, not so much by delving into the texts and trying to extract potential indications of materiality, but rather by bringing Luhmann’s writings in a productive conflict with those of Deleuze and Guattari. This is a dynamic reading of the two strands of thought that produces a radical confluence of ontology and epistemology, a reconsideration of immanence and openness, and a post-ecological, post-feminist reading of the Luhmannian concept of boundary as a process of Deleuzian folding. The end result is a Luhmannian affect that operates on the same level as communication and as such allows corporeal, material and affective considerations to inform autopoiesis in a way that is both close to the basic autopoietic tenets and removed from its classic biological origins. The chapter draws from applied examples in the fields of ecology, law, political theory and geography and will generate some novel autopoietic theses, which revolve around the potential of autopoietic theory to address issues such as corporeality, post-humanist non-anthropocentric constructions of the world, and ontological meaning.

Niklas Luhmann’s (1927–1998) theory of social systems is notorious for its degree of complexity and abstraction. It has been regularly misread as conservative, overly structural, positivist and disconnected from other contemporary theories; especially the ones influenced by post-structuralism, gender theory, postcolonialism, and spatial and embodied understandings of society. Such misunderstandings help to explain why, particularly in the English-speaking world, reception of Luhmann’s work has been reluctant and uneven. While there is no paucity of introductions, general discussions and handbooks on Luhmann’s work, some of the misattributions and ossified readings persist. Part of the problem is the lack of fruitful critical dialogues between Luhmann’s theory and other theoretical perspectives that would manage to set Luhmann in a new light, away from received readings and originary orthodoxies, and in line with contemporary theoretical developments.  The present anthology is an attempt to establish precisely such connections by critically relating Luhmann’s work to a set of other authors and theoretical perspectives – from Jacque Lacan to Jacque Derrida, from Gilles Deleuze to Umberto Eco, and from gender studies to actor-network theory to spatiality – all of which consist of radically new yet relevant areas of research to which Luhmann’s theory has a great deal to contribute.

‘Theory is, or should be, the servant and facilitator of empirical inquiry, which cannot take place without it. In this book, Mik-Meyer and Villadsen offer a sustained and disciplined example of that approach to theory. Power and Welfare is clear and accessible … and will still be read when many fashionable theory texts have vanished from view.’ – Richard Jenkins, Professor, Department of Sociological Studies, The University of Sheffield, England.

‘This book is not only an examination of highly relevant and applicable theoretical approaches to power and welfare. It also shows the multiple forms and aspects of the play of power in the encounters between the citizen and the professional within the highly ambiguous context of contemporary liberalism. In both these respects, it is a leading example of what is emerging as a distinctive Copenhagen approach to public policy and governance.’ – Mitchell Dean, Professor, University of Newcastle, Australia, and Copenhagen Business School, Denmark.