What does this research mean for the field?

Post-socialist and post-Marxist states use constitutional law not merely for political transition, but as a deliberate instrument of collective memory-making through four distinct approaches: continuity, progressive separation, radical break, or silence. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.INCREMENTAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

This paper examines how post-socialist and post-Marxist states utilize constitutional law to interpret their socialist legacies.

June 7, 2026

Denying or relying on the Marxist past

Key Points

This paper examines how post-socialist and post-Marxist states utilize constitutional law to interpret their socialist legacies.
Comparative analysis of constitutional approaches in Central Europe and Africa
Identifies four constitutional strategies: continuity, progressive separation, radical break, and silence
Framework based on constitutional legitimation and state identity narratives
Four main constitutional approaches identified: continuity, progressive separation, radical break, and silence
Each approach reflects a distinct stance on acknowledging or rejecting the socialist past
Constitutional treatment of history serves as a key factor in political transition and collective memory.

Abstract

This paper explores how post-socialist and post-Marxist states in Central Europe and Africa have used constitutional law to interpret, confront, or silence their socialist pasts. It builds on the theoretical framework of constitutional legitimation and the role of constitutions as both legal and narrative instruments of state identity. Through a comparative analysis, the study identifies four possible constitutional approaches to the former socialist order: continuity, which acknowledges positive legacies of the past; progressive separation, maintaining legal continuity while discarding ideological remnants; radical break, which openly denounces and delegitimizes the prior regime; and silence, where the constitution refrains entirely from referencing past systems. These findings show that the constitutional treatment of the past is not only a matter of political transition but also a deliberate act of collective memory-making.

Mark Helpful

Bookmark

Relay