Constitutions pop up as a result of many different and complex factors and can be divided in many different types. The thing they have in common, however, is that they are a tool for the maximization of human freedom and they are a result of the historical development of constitutionalism. The US constitution was a product of the desire of the Founding Fathers to “secure the Blessings of Liberty”. The First European constitution (the one of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth of May 3rd 1791) was adopted to ensure the literal survival and freedom of the state from foreign invaders: “we do… for the establishment of liberty… ordain this Constitution”. The French constitution of 1791 “abolishes irrevocably the institutions which were injurious to liberty and equality of rights” and so on.
Now, constitutions are often perceived as a set of legal texts, which is the positivist point of view. Some legal scholars, however, argue that constitutionalism goes way beyond text and that it has visual, emotional, intuitive and symbolic-imaginary aspects (Belov, 2022). In that context, constitutionally relevant meaning is transmitted through constitutional imaginaries, which are manifested through art, architecture, media, etc. Through these imaginaries, people start to believe that the dominant normative ideology of the constitution is the right one and learn what is constitutionally acceptable behavior. After all, non-jurists rarely, if ever, read legal texts. In this context, the aim of the elite is to “master the hearts and minds” of the people (Belov, 2026).
This mastering essentially happens during the state of emergency, “the suspension of the entire existing order” (Schmitt, 2006), the “war of all against all”, the “constitutional moment” (Ackerman, 1991), when a new constitutional paradigm is being set. In such critical moments, history is split between two basic archetypes: the constitutionalism of light (the constitution as a guarantee of freedom) and the constitutionalism of darkness, in Belov’s words. Dark constitutionalism is a state of things, where key political and extrapolitical figures use constitutionally encoded negative emotions, fears, memories and forms through dark constitutional imaginaries in order to repress freedom, ensure hatred, division and submission, thus creating a constitutional Mordor (Belov, 2026).
Now, after outlining briefly Belov’s concept of dark constitutionalism, I will try to give some historical and contemporary examples of how this darkness has been and is being spread. The most obvious example is that of the rise of the Third Reich. German jurists, during the battle for the narrative, fiercely debated over the concept of the Rechsttaat (similar to the British rule of law), that is inherently an idea, grounded in liberalism and democracy. They used the fear of the decay and ultimate fall of the social order (the symbol of Armageddon, Ragnarök) to suppress liberal individualism (freedom). According to them the real Rechsttaat wasn’t the liberal one, that lead to the demise of social order, but the one, where the total state (Leviathan) had absolute control over human agency and the sole purpose of the individual was to serve the state. In order to “prevent” collapse, these negative emotions became the driving force of the dark constitutional Reich (Marcheva, 2021).
In 1917, when the Bolsheviks took power in Russia, chaos ensued. It literally transformed into a war of all against all, a civil war that would engulf the enormous state for almost 5 years. During that time the Bolsheviks developed the doctrine of revolutionary legality (Berman, 1948). Law in general was perceived as “withering away” and whatever was implemented was done so only until real communism (the Second Coming) was established. Cases were decided according to rapidly adopted ideologized decrees and revolutionary legal consciousness, i.e. against the kulaks, capitalists, imperialists (whoever these were). They were the boogeymen that divided society in classes and exploited humanity, the Bolshevik equivalent of the Nazi social collapse. Fear and hatred of these (imaginary) enemies were symbolically entrenched in the RSFSR constitution (Art. 3), again paving the way for the establishment of a regime of non-freedom and oppression.
Currently, we live in such transformative times. Multiple seemingly never-ending crises ravage the world (constitutional polycrisis as Belov, 2023, puts it), constitutions lose their regulating force (Constitutionalism 3.0 in the words of Somek, 2014) and different political and private actors battle for the narrative. In the EU the shadow of fascist and Nazi totalitarianism is used to induce fear over the possible return of a Sauron-like figure. Thus, Eurosceptic and national-conservative parties are automatically labeled as extremist, far-right, populist, neo-fascist, neo-nazi, etc. This framing seeks to delegitimize such parties and reinforce the pro-EU neoliberal narrative by activating traumatic European memories. This is most obvious in Germany, where German intelligence classified the AfD party as an extremist organization and placed it under surveillance in 2025 (before an administrative court ruled the authorities’ actions unjustified), although they came second (with 20% of the votes, having obvious democratic legitimacy) in the federal elections of February 2025. Thus, the fear of the supreme evil coming back leads to the restriction of a key liberal and constitutional principle – political pluralism.
In a structurally similar way, authorities in North Macedonia institutionally create hatred between Macedonians and Bulgarians, where the latter are perceived as a fundamental threat to Macedonian existence. This achieves two goals: first, overt discrimination against Bulgarians is not only allowed, but endorsed. A clear example is the adopted act, that retroactively proclaims organizations with controversial names – which are associated primarily with Bulgarian identity – illegal. Second, violence against Bulgarians is the norm and the authorities seem to be blind when it comes to criminal offences against Bulgarians. We obviously cannot speak of freedom and human rights in a state, where “the prosecution and the courts are used as a bat against people with prominent Bulgarian identity” (Bivol, 2025). The culmination of this process is the narrative battle and refusal of North-Macedonian authorities to include Bulgarians in the constitution of North Macedonia despite their international obligations to do so under the European Consensus of July 2022.
Another side in the battle for the narrative, for example, argues for the so-called Dark enlightenment. This is a neo-reactionary movement, that is based upon the assumption, that democracy is fundamentally broken and dysfunctional. Thus, we should establish an authoritarian regime, run by monarch-like figures in a way similar to a tech start-up. Once again, the fear of the uncertainty a broken system is used in order to install fear and control. This ideology has gained momentum among Silicon Valley billionaires and even in president Trump’s administration as Collins (2025) points out.
Constitutionalism has always had its dark side, containing fears, traumas and so on. That is not something out of the ordinary. They have been, however, and are still being used as effective tools for taking away human freedom and creating a Leviathan-like state. In practical terms, Belov’s concept is especially relevant in times of constitutional transformation. We need to be aware of the narratives, that elites try to impose, and to determine when a certain narrative’s sole aim is to destroy freedom. Otherwise, we just might end up being the slaves of Morgoth, who chant brainlessly:
“death to light, to law, to love
…May all in hatred be begun
and all in evil ended be,
in the moaning of the endless Sea!” …
(from Beren and Lúthien by J.R.R.Tolkien)
References:
Ackerman, B. We the People: Foundations. Harvard University Press, 1991
Belov, M. The Constitutional Imaginaries of Crisis and Emergency: Between Battle of Narratives and Entanglement in Quantum Constitutionalism. In: Belov, M. (eds) Constitutional Polycrisis and Emergency Constitutionalism. Federalism and Internal Conflicts. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. 2025, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-06516-2_4
Belov, M. “The Concept of Dark Constitutionalism” in Belov, M. (ed.) “Legal imaginaries of crisis and fear”. Routledge, 2026
Belov, M. “Rule of Law and Democracy in Times of Transitory Constitutionalism, Constitutional Polycrisis and Emergency Constitutionalism: Towards a Global Algorithmic Technocracy?” in Belov, M. (ed.) Rule of Law in Crisis: Constitutionalism in a State of Flux. Routledge, 2023
Berman, H. Far Eastern Section, The Spirit of Soviet Law, 23 Wash. L. Rev. & St. B.J. 152 (1948).
Collins, C. Anti-democratic ‘Dark Enlightenment’ ideas have spread from Silicon Valley to Washington. 20.05.2025: https://cascadeinstitute.org/dark-enlightenment/
Schmitt, C. Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty. University of Chicago Press, 2006
Somek, Alexander, The Cosmopolitan Constitution, Oxford Constitutional Theory (Oxford, 2014; online edn, Oxford Academic, 23 Oct. 2014), https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199651535.001.0001, accessed 13 May 2026.
Tolkien, J.R.R. Beren and Lúthien. London: Harper Collins Publishers, 2022
Белов, М. Конституционна семиотика. Концептуални основи на една теория и метатеория. София: Университетско издателство „Св. Климент Охридски“, 2022
Марчева, Д. Конституционният принцип в правовата държава. София: Нов български университет, 2021
Ognyan Pavlov