"In order to have rights, Arendt reasoned, individuals must be more than mere human beings."

憲法第1条の「国民主権」はどうするのかというツッコミがあるだろうが、なくしてもかまわない。合衆国憲法には主権という言葉はない。法を超える主権者を廃止し、権力が法によって制限されることが合衆国憲法のコアだとアーレントは考えた。https://t.co/GVyu07tz72

— 池田信夫 (@ikedanob) February 1, 2022

 Banishing the Sovereign? Internal and External

Sovereignty in Arendt

Andrew Arato and Jean Cohen

Sovereignty is thus also antithetical to the rule of law, the existence of counter-powers, equal citizenship, and ultimately constitutionalism itself. Accordingly, sovereignty at least in internal matters is unbridled discretion, tyranny (today we would say dictatorship).

Arendt in addition understood sovereignty as linked irrevocably to an embodiment model of representation and thus locatable in one single political instance. It makes no difference whether sovereignty is asserted by the king, a parliament or in the name of the people. 

 With respect to the world of states, Arendt was right; we do indeed need to abandon once　and for all two dangerous myths: the myth of a homogeneous nation state, and the myth of　absolute, legally unlimited sovereignty as prerogative, discretion and unbridled will. But we　also should resist as she rightly argued, the cosmopolitan utopia of a unitary global legal and　political order, centralized or federal, that replaces the principle of the sovereign equality of a plurality of autonomous polities with justice to persons and human rights.　

Her critique of the absolute conception of sovereignty is right on the mark. But the　concept of sovereignty need not be absolute or interpreted in the one sided way we find in　her work. Arendt’s dichotomous conception of sovereignty and politics and of　sovereignty　and law, her identification of sovereignty with the will, with rule, with substantive unity, with　homogeneity, with arbitrariness and ultimately with lawlessness, prevented her from seeing　the complexity of the concept

アーレントの「主権」概念は独特のようなだね。

Chapter 5 - Arendt and the French Revolution

Hannah Arendt disapproved of all conceptualisations of popular power in terms of sovereignty. This abolished human plurality by prioritising the need to represent the people as a unitary body having a unitary will. By contrast, politics for Arendt had to be structured around a radically different conceptualisation of popular power, and constituent power served precisely that purpose. Arendt thus aimed to rescue the democratic principle of popular authority by presenting constituent power as a radical alternative to the notion of sovereignty. The former was not a conceptualisation of popular power but its practical instantiation. It did not find its origins in the canon of Western philosophy but in the historical practice of people promising and acting together in the public space.　 By showcasing the plurality inherent to politics, constituent power testified that popular power does not have to disappear once the political order is created, but must be continuously exercised through the state’s institutional structure. 

ただし、憲法制定権力の概念は放棄しておらず、憲法制定権力は、憲法制定後も多元な価値観を政治のなかで反映されていかねばならない、と。

　日本の憲法の国民主権についてもいろいろ議論があるところで、それを人民の権力というか、国民主権というかは別にして、権力の究極的根拠は多様な価値観を有する国民の側にある、ということは示しておくべきだろうね。

ちなみに、アーレントは

Hannah Arendt and the Stateless

What does Hannah Arendt say about human rights?

In order to have rights, Arendt reasoned, individuals must be more than mere human beings. They must be members of a political community. ... Since the right to be a citizen is the one right that makes enjoyment of all specific rights possible, Arendt calls this right the “right to have rights.”

国家の裏付けのない人権には懐疑的だったんだね。