German Romanticism, English Liberalism, and political thought
By Riccardo Piroddi
Abstract: Il panorama politico-filosofico tedesco dell’Ottocento era complesso e articolato, con posizioni liberali e conservatrici. Johann Gottfried Herder, critico di Kant e teorico del nazionalismo, esaltò lingua, cultura e storia come elementi costitutivi dell’identità di un popolo, influenzando il Frühromantik, che poetizzò la politica e celebrò il Medioevo e l’unità spirituale della società. Friedrich Schlegel e Novalis ripresero questa visione, proponendo una rinascita cristiana come fondamento dell’ordine europeo. Wilhelm von Humboldt, invece, cercò di conciliare libertà individuale e interesse collettivo, delineando uno Stato costituzionale monarchico, capace di guidare lo sviluppo razionale della società senza sopprimere l’autonomia personale. In Inghilterra, il liberalismo, radicato nell’Illuminismo, fu sviluppato da Jeremy Bentham e James Mill. Bentham, fondatore dell’utilitarismo, definì la politica come ricerca della massima felicità per il maggior numero, proponendo democrazia rappresentativa, suffragio universale e riforma legislativa. Mill ampliò queste idee, sostenendo l’estensione della rappresentanza e l’importanza dell’educazione per la partecipazione civica. Le loro teorie influenzarono la Reform Bill del 1832, che pur limitata nell’estensione del suffragio, eliminò i “rotten boroughs” e segnò un passo decisivo nell’emancipazione politica della borghesia britannica.
German Romanticism and political thought
The German philosophical-political overview is very complex and characterized by contrasting positions.
Alongside Kantian criticism and the Hegelian and Fichtian dialectics, other tendencies of a conservative nature developed.
Johann Gottfried Herder
Johann Gottfried Herder (1744–1803), a critic of Kantian philosophy and the originator of the term nationalism, played a pivotal role in the rediscovery of Germanic traditions and culture. His work, along with a strong reappraisal of the Middle Ages, became a cornerstone of German Romanticism. Herder placed great emphasis on language, which he regarded as one of the defining features of human nature, and on history, which he believed unfolded according to a teleological plan driven by Divine Providence. In this view, both individuals and entire peoples fulfill a divine purpose, with Christianity embodying the religion of humanity and giving meaning to history’s progression.
Herder also highlighted the significance of education, particularly in the context of the intertwined development of nature and history. He saw language not only as a tool for communication but also as a powerful associative and social force. His work Ideas on the Philosophy of the History of Mankind (1784–91) became a foundational text for German philosophy, bridging the late 18th and early 19th centuries and influencing subsequent intellectual movements. Herder’s notion of the subject focused on the concrete ability to appreciate the uniqueness of individuals, particularly their cultural and historical particularities.
The early phase of German Romanticism, or Frühromantik, built on Herder’s ideas by embracing an aestheticization and poetization of politics. This Romantic movement celebrated individuality and the emotional and artistic dimensions of human experience but remained largely disengaged from the central debates surrounding the institutional organization of political life. Instead of focusing on forms of governance or political systems, Frühromantik concentrated on the beauty of personal expression and the cultural dimensions of national identity, echoing Herder’s emphasis on the unique spirit of each people as manifested through their language and traditions.
Friedrich Schlegel and Novalis
Friedrich Schlegel (1772–1829) and Novalis (Friedrich von Hardenberg, 1772–1801) further developed the Romantic notion of the “poetization of politics” through their idealization of the Middle Ages and its organic conception of society. For them, the medieval period represented a harmonious social order, characterized by unity between different aspects of life—political, religious, and cultural. This re-evaluation of the Middle Ages extended to a renewed emphasis on the central role of Christianity in society, which they believed could serve as a foundation for rebuilding European cultural and political life.
Both Schlegel and Novalis envisioned the creation of a new, visible Church that would reintegrate Christianity into the heart of European society. This vision, while influenced by the Kantian framework of reason and moral autonomy, consciously moved away from Kant’s emphasis on transcendental ideals, favouring instead a more tangible, socially rooted Christianity. They sought to revitalize the Christian heritage of Europe, not in a purely metaphysical sense, but as a living cultural and moral force capable of uniting people.
Schlegel and Novalis’s vision proposed that this reformed Christianity, while shedding some of its transcendental aspects, would serve as a unifying force, much like it had during the Middle Ages. By enhancing the Christian roots of Europe and blending them with Romantic ideals, they hoped to counter the fragmentation of modern life and politics, which they saw as overly rationalistic and disconnected from deeper spiritual and communal values. Their ideas reflected a broader Romantic movement that looked to the past—not as a period to be restored exactly as it was, but as a source of inspiration for a new organic social order grounded in shared faith and culture.
Wilhelm von Humboldt
Following the Napoleonic domination, Germany experienced a transformative period of reforms between 1807 and 1819, during which cultural and educational advancements were intertwined with political and institutional changes. Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767–1835) emerged as the central figure of this era. As both an inheritor and critic of revolutionary ideals, Humboldt’s thought was shaped by Kantian philosophy and a broader vision of humanity centered on personal, individual freedom. However, he also recognized that collective or multilateral freedom resided within the State, viewed as a system that necessarily limits individual actions.
Humboldt’s reflections began by comparing modern freedom with that of antiquity and pre-revolutionary despotism. He believed that politics should reconcile the freedom of the ancients, where the individual’s inner self was already embodied in the State, with the paternalistic freedom of modern states, in which the individual’s liberty was often subsumed under the State’s overarching ideals. This synthesis, according to Humboldt, was emblematic of the intellectual climate of the time, balancing the affirmation of individual freedom with its necessary limitation by the State.
Importantly, Humboldt did not see this limitation as a suppression of individual liberty. Rather, he argued that channeling individual freedoms toward the common good elevated politics beyond utilitarian concerns. His liberal conception of the State emphasized the harmonization of personal autonomy with public interest, ensuring that both could coexist for the benefit of society.
Humboldt’s political model, grounded in constitutional principles, rejected direct democracy but allowed for State intervention in certain areas. The State’s role, according to Humboldt, was to create conditions conducive to the development of rational thought and to facilitate individuals’ participation in public life. His vision was of a “State of people and reason,” structured as a constitutional monarchy with both class-based (cetual) and national representation. The government would consist of two chambers—one hereditary and the other elective—positioning it between the absolute monarchies of the Ancien Régime and a fully democratic state with popular representation.
In this model, the State was not an oppressive force but a mechanism that guided individual energies for the collective good, fostering a rational, balanced approach to governance that upheld both individual freedom and societal stability.
English Liberalism
English liberalism, closely aligned with Enlightenment ideals and the Anglo-Saxon philosophical tradition, developed significantly through the contributions of Jeremy Bentham and James Mill. Jeremy Bentham, a philanthropist and political theorist, is most recognized as the founder of Utilitarianism. In political terms, Bentham’s Utilitarianism emphasized the pursuit of the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people, reflecting the idea that the ultimate goal of politics is to maximize societal well-being.
Bentham conceptualized moral science as a hard science, governed by a “moral arithmetic” that could quantify pleasure and pain. His view of society was deeply individualistic, seeing it as the aggregate of individuals and their interests. Politics, he argued, should operate on a utilitarian basis, where laws and rights are judged solely by their social utility. In this framework, a right is legitimate only insofar as it serves the collective good, and laws are always subject to revision based on their efficacy in promoting the common benefit.
Bentham’s political theory rested on a realistic and measurable understanding of human nature. Since politics should prioritize the greatest common benefit, he argued that the best form of government would be one that represents the interests of the largest number of people: a representative democracy with universal suffrage and secret ballots. He believed this system would balance the rights of individuals with those of the community, ensuring fairness and justice for all. Interestingly, Bentham rejected the traditional liberal principle of the separation of powers, advocating instead for the indivisibility of democratic power under a single, unified popular sovereignty.
Bentham’s reformist zeal extended to legal theory as well, particularly in his push for a rational overhaul of the penal code. He envisioned laws grounded in utilitarian principles of collective profit and advocated for redistributive policies aimed at balancing social security and individual well-being. Additionally, he critiqued the concept of natural rights, arguing that such rights, as historically conceived, were metaphysical and lacked practical, utilitarian value.
James Mill (1773–1836) expanded on Bentham’s ideas, particularly regarding political representation. He advocated for extending political representation to all citizens to fully realize the utilitarian goal of maximizing collective benefit. Mill also emphasized the temporary nature of public offices, drawing on the example of the Roman Republic, where consuls served for one year, and dictators for six months. He argued that limiting the duration of public office would mitigate the potential dangers of representative democracy, specifically the disconnect between representatives and those they represent.
Mill was also a proponent of extending suffrage, believing that broader political participation would enhance individuals’ awareness of their rights and responsibilities. Furthermore, he strongly believed in the transformative power of education, viewing it as essential to fostering a sense of civic duty and strengthening democracy for future generations.
The principles championed by Bentham and Mill found concrete expression in the Reform Bill of 1832. Although the bill only extended suffrage to 5% of the population, it was significant in eliminating the “rotten boroughs”—electoral districts that had been easily manipulated by politicians due to their tiny populations. The Reform Bill also marked a crucial step in the political emancipation of Britain’s bourgeoisie and middle classes, advancing the liberal agenda of the time.
