Political sovereignty and the foundation of an autonomous civil society

Avatar photo
Daohe · Jun 3, 2025
Without citizen sovereignty, there can be no true citizen state. 1. What is a state? What is a citizen? A state is not merely a set of borders, institutions, regimes, or ruling authorities. In its modern form, a state is a political community voluntarily formed by a group of social citizens, organized around shared interests, […]

Without citizen sovereignty, there can be no true citizen state.

1. What is a state? What is a citizen?

A state is not merely a set of borders, institutions, regimes, or ruling authorities. In its modern form, a state is a political community voluntarily formed by a group of social citizens, organized around shared interests, common security, and collective visions for the future. Citizens are the foundation and core of the state. Without genuine citizens, a state loses its legitimacy as a political community and degenerates into a mere instrument of rule and coercion.

True citizenship is not defined solely by residence or possession of national identity documents. It is defined by the exercise of political sovereignty.

Only when individuals possess political sovereignty can they become true agents within the national community—able to decide, monitor, participate in, and place checks on the operation of state power. Only then does the state become “our state,” rather than a tool monopolized by a privileged few.

2. Historical depth: the evolution of the state and sovereignty

Looking back through human political history, the earliest forms of the state emerged from tribal alliances, military conquest, and territorial rule. These early “states” were held together by force and bloodline, with individuals stripped of rights and subjects possessing no sovereignty of their own.
In the age of feudal empires and theocratic regimes, political sovereignty was concentrated entirely in the hands of monarchs, popes, nobles, and clergy. The people were treated as livestock—powerless, disposable, and voiceless.

It was not until the rise of the modern nation-state—through the Enlightenment, bourgeois revolutions, and the creation of constitutional governments—that the idea of popular sovereignty and citizen political participation began to enter state structures. The French Revolution declared that “sovereignty belongs to the people.” The U.S. Constitution established a “government of the people” and a popularly elected legislature. From this point onward, the political legitimacy of modern states began to rest on the principle of citizen sovereignty.

Yet even today, truly citizen-sovereign states remain rare. In most countries, the idea of “rule by the people” exists only in name. In practice, power is still concentrated in the hands of a few, while citizens remain passive, subordinate, and politically excluded.

Where citizens are absent, sovereignty is hollow. Where sovereignty is hollow, the state decays—and with it, civilization stalls.

3. The true meaning of political sovereignty

Political sovereignty is not a symbolic clause in the constitution, nor is it limited to occasional elections. It is the genuine right of citizens to participate meaningfully in the operation of state power, the making of public decisions, the allocation of public resources, and the design of governance structures.

This system includes:

  • Decision-making power: Citizens have the right to express opinions, propose ideas, and take part in decisions on major national issues—not merely to passively accept outcomes made by others.
  • Oversight power: Citizens have the right to monitor the actions of the government, judiciary, military, and public institutions, holding them accountable and preventing abuse of power.
  • Recall power: Citizens have the right to remove officials who violate public interests or harm citizens’ rights.
  • Participation rights: Citizens should be able to engage widely in national affairs—whether through parliaments, civic organizations, public forums, or digital platforms—across domains such as law, economy, education, welfare, and environmental policy.

If a state allows only formalistic voting but denies citizens substantive political sovereignty, then the people become mere numbers, and the state becomes an oligarchy.

4. Without sovereignty, citizenship is just a lie

In today’s world, many countries claim to be “citizen-based,” but in reality, citizenship often exists only in name. Citizens are given legal identity, but not real power. They have no sovereignty and no true role in governing the country.

They carry obligations and pay the price, but are left out of the decision-making process, becoming mere subordinates of the state.

This means:

  • Public resources are neither fairly nor transparently distributed, and decisions are made behind closed doors, allowing a small elite to monopolize the benefits meant for all.
  • The legal system does not always protect equality. Some people enjoy privileges, while basic rights for the majority are often ignored.
  • Policies are shaped by powerful interest groups. There is no strong system to protect public interest.
  • Public opinion is manipulated and citizens have no real way to speak their minds.

This creates a troubling social structure: the state promises to put citizens first, but fails to treat them as true participants in public affairs.

When sovereignty slips from the hands of the people, the state loses its power to unite hearts and minds. Social trust begins to crumble, and the foundation of civilization starts to shake. In the end, such a nation no longer belongs to all its people—it becomes the private property of a privileged few, and its decline becomes irreversible.

5. The impact of lost sovereignty on a nation’s fate

History and reality both repeatedly prove this: any nation that strips its citizens of sovereignty will eventually fall into four major crises:

  1. Social fragmentation: When political power is overly concentrated and the public lacks channels for participation and oversight, social classes become rigid, and tensions between different groups cannot be resolved through institutional means. This may ultimately lead to deep division or even national disintegration.
  2. Crisis of legitimacy: A government’s legitimacy depends on citizens’ trust and sense of belonging. Once people are politically marginalized, collective identity weakens, and public trust in government declines. The regime is then forced to rely on coercion to maintain order, pushing the state into a crisis of rule.
  3. Collapse of public morality: When governance revolves solely around power and profit—rather than responsibility and the common good—public morality begins to erode. Core values like justice, fairness, trust, and accountability lose institutional support, leading to moral decline and social decay.
  4. National decline and collapse: History shows that whether empires or modern states, once they lose the support of the people, their systems of governance break down, and their social structures weaken, they become unable to respond to internal and external challenges—ultimately falling into irreversible decline or complete collapse.

6. The only path to a civilized future

If human civilization is to continue progressing, there is only one viable path: the full establishment of a modern state system based on citizen political sovereignty. This means:

  • All state power must belong to the citizens, and political authority must be derived from their consent.
  • Citizens must enjoy equal, open, and ongoing rights to political participation.
  • A strict system of checks, balances, and accountability must be in place to prevent the privatization of power and the formation of political oligarchies.
  • Public affairs must be transparent and open, allowing citizens to express their views in real time and receive meaningful responses and feedbacks.
  • A citizen-led society must be built, advancing mechanisms for local governance, industry self-regulation, and community-level consultation.

Only through such a system can a nation truly become a citizen-based state—one that is stable, just, and prosperous. Only then can civilization continue to evolve.

Conclusion

Without citizen sovereignty, there can be no true citizen state.

A nation without the political sovereignty of its citizens becomes nothing more than a regime of elites and a machine of coercion.

A society without citizen sovereignty becomes a stage of oppression, exploitation, and hollow performances.

A civilization without citizen sovereignty is destined to fall into darkness, corruption, and collapse.

The true owners of a country can only be its civic citizens—those who hold political sovereignty in their own hands. The future belongs to the citizens: those who have the courage to awaken, to participate, to claim, and to defend their sovereignty.

This is the bottom line for the existence of any nation, and the final safeguard for the future of civilization.

 

Share this article:
LEARN MORE

Continue Reading

Life’s Three Levels and Three Mindsets

Daohe · Oct 23, 2024

  On the journey of life, everyone faces different choices and pursuits, which often reflect their mindset and level of existence. People can be categorized into three different types based on the way they think. There are three different mindsets among people: the Grassroot Mindset, the Elite Mindset, and the Extraordinary Mindset. Each mindset has […]

人生的三种层次与三种思维

人生的三种层次与三种思维

Daohe · Oct 23, 2024

在生活的道路上,每个人都会面对不同的选择和追求,而这些选择往往体现了他们的思维方式和人生层次。可以将人生的层次以三种不同的思维来划分:草根思维、精英思维和强者思维。每一种思维都有其独特的逻辑和价值取向,塑造着人们对待生活的态度和方式。 第一层次:草根思维 草根思维的底层逻辑是大众思维。对于这种思维方式的人来说,人生没有明确的目标,一切的努力和进取只是为了更好地享受当下。他们追求的可能是日常的安逸、短期的快乐或是简单的满足,重视当下的享受胜过长远的规划。因此,在生活中他们更容易随波逐流,缺乏长远的愿景和深刻的思考。 草根思维往往在社会的底层较为普遍,因为这种思维与追求眼前利益和安全感的心态紧密相关。在生活的压力下,许多人会选择这种思维方式,因为它简单、直接,并能在短期内提供满足感。然而,草根思维的局限在于,它容易使人沉溺于现状而缺乏进取精神,难以突破现有的生活圈子和自我认知。 草根思维并不只是存在于社会底层中,有不少人拥有社会资源,却不懂得如何合理规划,长远打算。一个典型的例子是古罗马的皇帝尼禄,他以奢华、享乐和荒淫无度而著称。他的执政并没有明确的政治目标或长远的国家规划,更多的是追求个人的享受和奢侈的生活。他热衷于音乐和艺术,甚至亲自上台表演,对国家事务漠不关心。在罗马大火期间,他被传言在纵火后的夜晚弹琴吟诗,尽管有争议,但这种形象反映了他对民生和治理的轻视。 尼禄的行为代表了草根思维中的短视和自我中心,他缺乏更高的理想或社会责任感,专注于个人的感官享受,最终导致了民众的反抗和自己的覆灭。他的统治也因奢靡和残暴而被认为是罗马帝国衰落的一个重要原因,可见草根思维如果出现在掌权者身上,危害更大,如果缺乏远见和责任,最终可能会导致个人和社会的双重失败。 第二层次:精英思维 精英思维以“什么是最好、最优秀”为底层逻辑,人生的目标不再是简单的享受,而是追求金钱、权力或社会地位的高度。这种思维方式认为,只有通过不断的努力和奋斗,才能获得自己想要的一切。因此,精英思维者往往拥有明确的目标,并以此为驱动力,不断提升自我,实现个人的成功和价值。 这种思维方式常见于那些拥有物质优势或出身较好的群体,但也存在于一些自我奋斗的草根人士当中。精英思维激励着人们去突破自我,追求更高的成就和社会地位。然而,有精英思维的人往往将物质上的成就和社会的认可看得过重,而忽略了内心的真正需求以及生活的深层意义,忽略了对他人与社会的爱与关怀,从而变得冷漠,无法与自我和他人真正链接。 拿破仑·波拿巴是典型的精英思维的代表人物。他出身普通,但凭借着不懈的努力和卓越的军事才能,最终成为了法兰西第一帝国的皇帝。拿破仑的目标明确,就是要通过不断的征战和扩张来建立一个强大的帝国,实现个人的雄心壮志。他的整个生涯充满了挑战和野心,从一个普通的军官到掌控欧洲的皇帝,他始终在追求权力的巅峰。 拿破仑的精英思维体现在他对权力的渴望和对成就的不断追求,他通过个人的努力和领导才能获得了广泛的社会地位和历史影响力,但他的失败也提醒人们,精英思维过度追求物质和权力时,可能会忽略其他重要的价值。 第三层次:强者思维  强者思维的底层逻辑是“爱与慈悲”。在这种思维方式中,人生同样没有特定的目标,但因为对人间疾苦的深刻感知,他们常常心生悲悯之情,愿意为他人排忧解难。强者思维者的内心深处确立了一个为他人服务、化解痛苦的人生目标和态度,这种目标并不是外在强加的,而是源于对人类苦难的深刻理解和内心的无私关怀。 有趣的是,很多强者思维的人往往并非出身优越,而是来自底层。他们通过自己的人生经历,对生活的艰辛有着深刻的感受,这种感受使他们在面对他人的痛苦时,选择主动承担责任,而不是仅仅追求个人的利益。这种思维方式不仅赋予了他们强大的内在力量,也使他们具备了更广阔的心胸和更高的精神境界。 圣雄甘地是强者思维的典型代表。甘地出身于印度的一个普通家庭,虽然他后来成为一名律师并有机会过上相对优越的生活,但他选择了带领印度民众争取独立的道路。他倡导“非暴力不合作”的原则,为了民众的福祉和社会的正义,他多次绝食抗议,甘愿承受身体上的痛苦。他的目标并不是个人的荣誉或财富,而是通过自己的行动来改变整个社会,帮助人民摆脱殖民统治的压迫。 甘地的强者思维体现为他超越了个人利益,将爱与慈悲作为行动的核心,立志为人类服务,解决社会的不公和痛苦。他的思想和行为影响深远,不仅在印度,也为世界范围内的和平运动提供了宝贵的精神财富。 通过这些历史人物的故事,我们可以看到不同的人生态度和追求方向,同时也看到了不同的思维方式如何塑造了他们的人生轨迹和成就。草根思维如尼禄是古罗马的皇帝,注重眼前的生活乐趣;精英思维如拿破仑,追求权力和成就的巅峰;而强者思维如甘地,则超越了个人的追求,以慈悲和爱为动力,为他人和社会做出了巨大贡献。不同的思维方式不仅影响个人的生活方式,也在历史长河中留下了不同的印记。

read more

Related Content

Inside the “cage trap”: how authoritarian governments maintain control
Avatar photo
Yicheng · Dec 19, 2024
If a regime or government adopts the “Cage Trap” policy, it essentially acts as an extreme mechanism to safeguard privilege and protect class interests. This article offers a multidimensional exploration of this concept. The “Cage Trap” refers to government policies that impose strict controls on citizens’ freedoms, often justified in the name of national security […]
4 Why’s Diversity is Key for Better Global Democracies
Avatar photo
Kishou · Dec 24, 2024
After witnessing the horrors of totalitarian regimes in the 20th century and the deep critiques of capitalist systems in the 21st, post-2024 democratic governments will inevitably take on a new form. They will no longer replicate the military or social autocracies of the past, nor will they serve as mere instruments of economic and financial […]
Three keys to civil society: power, responsibilities, and protection
Three keys to civil society: power, responsibilities, and protection
Avatar photo
Yicheng · Apr 3, 2025
One of the greatest advancements of civilization today is not just the height of technology or the prosperity of cities, but the fact that people are finally being seen as an end rather than a means. When individuals transition from being ruled and managed to becoming thinking, vocal, and responsible members of society, we step […]
View All Content