Empire and Libertas Today – How the Project Can Help

When speaking of “phantom pains” today, one doesn’t only refer to individual experiences but also collective ones: Russia suffers from the loss of its imperial role; parts of the USA yearn for a mythical past when they were “great.” “Make America Great Again” is just as much a symptom as the imperial rhetoric of Putin. Both reveal a profound identity crisis: We are no longer who we were. Or worse: We no longer know who we want to be.

Philosopher and constitutional law scholar Georg Jellinek prophetically stated in 1895: “The eternal struggle between Empire and Libertas will also be fought in the democratic societies of the coming centuries.” This is precisely what we are witnessing today. Empire stands for dominance, expansion, and historical power; Libertas represents self-determination, plurality, openness. The temptation of the former is great when the latter generates uncertainty.

The project, as a philosophy of humanity in its interconnectedness, offers a stance—not an ideology. It says: Greatness does not lie in power over others but in the ability to enable others. Homeland is not ownership but lived relationships. The past is not a goal but an origin. Those who cling to what was become blind to what can be.

The individual, within the project, acknowledges: Yes, phantom pain is real. Loss of identity hurts. But it cannot be healed through violence; rather, through maturity, relationships, and new forms of community within an open society. The strength of the future lies not in reverting to old orders but in building new connections.

What is needed today is not a new bloc, not a new empire, not a new dogma—but a new attitude: human, awake, ready for dialogue. The true greatness of a nation is not shown in its power projection but in its power to connect.

The project is not a geopolitical program but a guide: It focuses on language instead of threats, resonance instead of confrontation, mutual recognition instead of collective retribution. It does not ask, “How do we win?” but “How do we remain human?”

Perhaps that is the most radical idea today: Not to want to rule the world—but to inhabit it with others.