The Ethical State and the Poietic State
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
This article addresses the internal division within the Democratic Rechtsstaat by analyzing the opposition between the Ethical State, grounded in the rational legitimation of power by its origin, legality, and finality, and the Poietic State, defined by the technocratic instrumentalization of politics in the name of economics. Within the framework of the contemporary State, popular sovereignty is displaced by a bureau-technocratic apparatus that holds political decision-making without democratic legitimacy. Through a legal-philosophical inquiry grounded in the dialectic between freedom and power, the article reflects on how the Mediated Ethical State has been subdued by poietic rationality, which privileges the system of needs already identified by Hegel. The central argument demonstrates that the loss of the ethical dimension of power and its subjugation by the logic of economic production generate an illegitimate, alienated, and potentially autocratic form of power. From this perspective, the text seeks to denounce the emptying of the democratic principle of political participation and, consequently, the erosion of the Democratic Rechtsstaat as an order of objectified freedoms. In conclusion, while technique is necessary, it cannot usurp the sovereign exercise of political power, which must be guided by the universality of the common good or, more precisely, by ethics.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
(c) Joaquim Carlos Salgado, 2025
Copyright
All content published in Astrolabio is published in open access under the CC BY license, and the authors retain copyright while granting the journal the right of first publication. This policy applies to all issues from issue 15 (2013) onwards, except for issue 28, which was published under a CC BY NC license.
Joaquim Carlos Salgado, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
Profesor Catedrático de Teoría y Filosofía del Derecho de la Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brasil.
Aristóteles. (1977). Ética a Nicômaco (F. de P. Samarandi, Trad.). Madri: Aguilar.
Aristóteles. (2002). Metafísica (G. Reale & M. Perine, Trad.; Vol. II). São Paulo: Edições Loyola.
Baracho, J. A. O. (1985). Legitimidade do poder. Revista de Direito Público, 70.
Barretto, V. P. (1980). Poder e autoridade. Documentação e Atualidade Política, (11).
Bastos, C. R. (1994). Curso de Direito Constitucional. São Paulo: Saraiva.
Bonfante, P. (1944). Historia del Derecho Romano (J. S. T. Teijeiro, Trad.). Madrid: Revista de Derecho Privado.
Delgado, M. G. (1996). Natureza jurídica do poder. Belo Horizonte: Del Rey.
Dobrowolski, S. (1980, out.–dez.). Grupos sociais e poder. Revista de Informação Legislativa, (88), 99.
Ferreira Filho, M. G. (1984). O poder e seu controle. Revista da Faculdade de Direito da USP, (79), 113–139.
Foucault, M. (1997). Resumo dos Cursos do Collège de France (1970 1982) (A. Daher, Trad.). Rio de Janeiro: Zahar.
Hauriou, M. (1968). La Teoria de la Institución y de la Fundación (A. H. Sampay, Trad.). Buenos Aires: Perrot.
Mommsen, T. (1973). Disegno del Diritto Pubblico Romano. Milano: CELUC.
Oliveira, J. H. F. (1984). O poder. Revista de Direito Constitucional e Política, 2(3), 313–335.
Salgado, J. C. (1986). A idéia de justiça em Kant. Belo Horizonte: Editora da UFMG.