Introduction
This article analyzes Marcin Matczak’s "Empire of the Text," deconstructing his attempt to create a coherent theory of legal interpretation. Matczak blends elements of positivism, natural law, and discourse theory, rejecting Luhmann’s systemic vision. This project is an intellectual hybrid that strives for rationality but, in practice, leads to the imperialization of hermeneutics, placing power in the hands of legal elites. Discover how this model affects trust in the law and whether it distances it from society's real needs.
Interpretive Holism: Between Positivism and Natural Law
Matczak’s interpretive holism is a method where the text is the starting point, but not the destination. The author goes beyond Hart’s classical positivism; where others see only rules, he introduces filters of language, system, and purpose. Unlike Radbruch’s natural law, Matczak does not reject unjust statutes but proposes a hermeneutic correction.
In comparison with Habermas’s discourse theory, Matczak shifts the focus from procedure to the axiological soundness of the outcome. The sharpest contrast appears against Luhmann’s systems theory. While Luhmann builds a wall separating law from morality, Matczak opens the gates, integrating the system with community values and the constitution.
Hate Speech and Taxes: The Postulated World in Practice
Matczak’s method is applied in difficult cases. In hate speech cases, the interpreter "infuses" the statute with constitutional values, allowing for the prohibition of demonstrations that violate dignity, even if the literal text only mentions safety. Similarly, regarding digital taxes: holism allows for taxing giants by prioritizing the statute's purpose over the physical location of servers.
The concept of the postulated world also revolutionizes family law. When interpreting marriage provisions, Matczak suggests that if literalism leads to discrimination, one must turn to overarching equality. This turns the text into a flexible tool rather than a dead letter, though at the expense of predictability in rulings.
Gadamer, Ricoeur, and the Risk of Hermeneutic Imperialization
Matczak’s project draws from the hermeneutics of Gadamer and Ricoeur, treating the text as a blueprint for reality. Another inspiration is the rabbinic tradition, where interpretation is an infinite dialogue. However, critics see axiological pride here. The title "Empire" suggests dominance rather than humility toward the text, which authors label hermeneutic kitsch.
History teaches that a monopoly on interpretation—from Rome to absolutism—has always served power. Shifting authority to the judge-hermeneutic creates a risk of arbitrariness. When interpretation becomes a tool for elite rule, the law loses its communal character, resembling the imperial decrees of the past.
Citizen Alienation: The Erosion of Trust in Law
Matczak’s model may lead to citizen alienation. When the law offers convoluted axiological arguments instead of clear rules, the average person feels excluded. This creates a learned helplessness effect—citizens treat the legal process like a game of roulette, which kills democratic energy. Symbolic capital is seized by a "legal caste."
Matczak sought to create an empire of rationality, but in the pursuit of coherence, did he build a Tower of Babel? The true strength of law may lie not in its imperial unity, but in rabbinic polyphony and real dialogue. Without the public's voluntary acceptance of norms, even the most brilliant interpretation remains mere empty triumphalism.
📄 Full analysis available in PDF