Difference between revisions of "Carl Schmitt"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | <blockquote> | ||
| + | </blockquote> | ||
| + | <ref>Zizek. The Ticklish Subject. p. 113-116</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
In ''The Concept of the Political'' (1932), Carl Schmitt writes: "the specific political distinction to which political actions and motives can be reduced is that between friend and enemy."<ref>Carl Schmitt. ''The Concept of the Political'', trans. Geroge Schwab. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), 26.</ref> | In ''The Concept of the Political'' (1932), Carl Schmitt writes: "the specific political distinction to which political actions and motives can be reduced is that between friend and enemy."<ref>Carl Schmitt. ''The Concept of the Political'', trans. Geroge Schwab. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), 26.</ref> | ||
Revision as of 16:07, 14 May 2006
In The Concept of the Political (1932), Carl Schmitt writes: "the specific political distinction to which political actions and motives can be reduced is that between friend and enemy."[2]
In his book Political Theology (1922), Schmitt presented a quite different, even contradictory logic of the political.
There the structural function of the exception - the sovereign's Godlike ability to declare a state of emergency and act outside the law - implies that the border between the law and lawlessness is permeable and, by extension, that hte realtionship of interiority and exteriority is unstable.
