Why Civic Republicanism Remains a Statist Theory

Abstract Over the past decade, there has been much debate on whether republican theory lends support to maintaining the state system, or to creating stronger global political integration instead. In this paper, I argue that parties to the debate put too much emphasis on the implications of the key republican ideal, non-domination, and grossly underappreciate the inherent status quo bias of republican thought, taken more holistically. Republicans have traditionally believed—and many continue to believe—that the sustainability of free institutions depends on how virtuous and patriotic citizens are. The idea produces (unconsidered) status quo bias for three reasons. First, it necessitates a preference for institutions that fare well at virtue cultivation over others that have no such pedigree yet. Secondly, it necessitates a preference for the locally dominant form of community solidarity in the given historical context. Traditionally, it was believed that the only form of community solidarity that lives up to republican criteria is allegiance to cities; I submit that today, it is allegiance to states. Thirdly, the idea has the further effect of making republicanism a poor theory for cosmopolitan transition. Republicans need cosmopolitan identification to at least begin to outweigh allegiance to states before they can coherently support stronger global political integration.