Johannes Althusius (1563–1638) was a pioneer of early modern federalism. Opposing Jean Bodin’s theory of absolute sovereignty, his theory, centered on association and symbiosis, laid the groundwork for later concepts such as associationalism, consociationalism, and the principle of subsidiarity. While his ideas have been rediscovered and reinterpreted by scholars since the 20th century, systematic research on his federalist framework, especially contrasting it with rival theories of that time, remains insufficient. This article addresses this research gap by systematically exploring Althusius’s federalism. It argues that Althusius’s covenant-based, multi-level associational/federal framework provided a counter-theory to the concept of absolute sovereignty. Systematically studying his federalism not only helps to restore his federalist ideas to their rightful place in the history of federalist thought, but also provides insights for contemporary governance paradigms struggling with modern pluralism.

This article re-examines the history of the Mongol Empire’s rule over Tibet, analyzing the complex institutional and religious relationships between the Mongol Empire and Tibet from an innovative perspective. We find that, unlike its military conquests in other parts of the world, the Mongol Empire actually formed a kind of federation with Tibet based on Buddhism. The Mongol Empire embraced Tibetan Buddhism as its state religion and venerated the head of the Sakya school as a spiritual guide. Concurrently, the establishment of the Bureau of Buddhist and Tibetan Affairs in the Mongol capital served as a nominal governing body over Tibet, while in reality, it ensured a significant degree of autonomy for the region. Furthermore, the leaders of the Mongol Empire felt endowed with the legitimacy to conquer the world after being blessed by Tibetan Buddhism as Mahakala, the dark incarnation of Avalokiteshvara. In addition, the article also provides a detailed account of the prosperity of Buddhism within the Mongol Empire, in terms of its economic, artistic, and philosophical aspects. The discovery of this evidence is of great significance, since it not only supports reinterpretation of the historical evolution of the Mongol Empire and Tibet, but also allows us to observe the status of Tibetan Buddhism in the Mongol Empire from a new perspective, and to explore the unexpected institutional innovations of the federation reflected in the Mongol-Tibetan relationship.

This study first situates the discourse on Proudhon’s federalism and nationalism within the framework of his comprehensive economic, social, and philosophical system. Proudhon attempts to construct a federalism based on an associational and decentralized political structure that could accommodate plural groups and avoid the exclusive interpretation of sovereignty that prevailed in nationalism at the time. Such federalism is not only a design of political institutions but also a reflection of his economic mutualism and the idea of commutative justice. Then, this study proposes a relatively concise and intuitive dual critique framework to focus on how his federalism directly refutes nationalism. Proudhon’s federalism aims to protect the culture, language, and identity of minority groups from the oppression of the unitary nation-state internally, and advocates the establishment of an external confederation beyond national borders to eliminate national conflicts and achieve universal peace.

This study is intended to conduct a comprehensive review of federalism. This study starts from the institutional aspect and analyzes how federalism, as a compound structure, divides power between the central and local governments. Then, this study mentions that federalism also has its normative connotations, which are traceable to the theological concept of a covenant. We also elaborate on how the success of the United States’ federalism strengthened its institutional aspect while overshadowing the older covenant tradition. Next, this study presents a typological framework of federalism, introducing concepts such as coming-together federalism and holding-together federalism; dual federalism and cooperative federalism; decentralization and non-centralization; and asymmetrical federalism, non-territorial autonomy, and consociationalism, presidential and parliamentary federalism, as well as democratic federalism and authoritarian federalism/facade federalism. Next, this study compares monist federalism with multinational federalism. Then, this study examines the specific applications of federalism in fiscal, environmental, health-care, and social-welfare policies. By reviewing the history, theoretical origins, institutional development, and contemporary manifestations of federalism, this study provides a roadmap for scholars in the field of federal studies. Finally, this study also puts forward several testable hypotheses, aiming to provide operational research agendas for future studies.

Current federalism research is dominated by the successful American model, focusing on a territorialized, mono-national constitutional federalism, where individuals of different nations within a specific territorial scope are jointly subject to and protected by the state. However, this is not the only way federalism can address the coexistence of multiple nations. By reviewing historical figures and theoretical narratives, as well as incorporating contemporary federal theorists on plurality and multiracial coexistence, this study seeks to shed light on a non-territorialized alternative arrangement. Once, facing the complex national coexistence within the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Austrian Marxist Karl Renner proposed the personal principle and cultural autonomy, attempting to reshape the federal structure of the Austro-Hungarian Empire through a non-territorial arrangement. Renner reorganizes national communities as legal entities to act as intermediaries between individuals and the state, and to implement non-territorial economic, political, and cultural management for individuals of their own nations. This study also explores the model's non-territorial character, its treaty-based character, and its embodiment of federalism as norm. In Renner's view, this attempt could achieve a balance, avoiding both the oppression of minorities by the majority within territorial structures and the centrifugal tendencies of minority groups within specific territorial scopes. Although Renner's federalist reforms ultimately failed, they still provide valuable guidance for dealing with the political reality of multinational coexistence today, demonstrating the inherent potential of a non-territorial, pluralistic, treaty-based federalism.