Conclusion: Constitutionalism and the Left: A Hindrance or an Opportunity?

In the years between 1848 and 1949 the leftist leaders were expressing the urge to modify a social structure felt as deeply unjust through radical governmental intervention. In that sense, Hilferding defined majoritarian democracy as none other than a dictatorship of proletariat. As for constitutional democracy, it didn’t receive adequate elaboration before Hermann Heller developed the notion of a social Rechtsstaat. Even then, the search for appropriate means to limit the majoritarian democracy did not open to the liberal idea of the Rechtsstaat enforced by an autonomous judiciary. Rather, both during the Weimar years and in post-World War II East Berlin, leftist constitutionalists have tried to elaborate further Kautsky’s suggestion about the popular—rather than judicial—control over the state apparatus. But, to control the government formed by the majority party, the citizens need to be well-informed and organized on a steady basis. The paradox is that the leftist constitutional thinking entrusted the task of organizing the popular control to the very same party leaders that should be watched over. Nevertheless, constitutionalism can represent an opportunity for the left. By redefining the agency entitled to promote the rights discourse, leftist constitutionalism can challenge the limits of the existing order and question permanently its emancipatory potential.