Karl Schmitt's Criticism Of Liberalism

Karl Schmitt(1888-1985), wrote the significance of works on his political philosophy in the Weimar Republic era. This article focuses on two of his thesis: the thesis of the sovereign decisions and the thesis of the hostis and friend on politics.Schmitt thought that the national sovereignty is decided the exception. Once an exception, then the rapid decision-making is essential, and in accordance with the procedures will delay the decision-making to make. This shows that the rulers need to make decisions quickly. Therefore, in exceptional circumstances, the dictator can enjoy the power of unrestricted sovereignty, and all the orders have established on the basis of the decision. Then Schmitt revealed his views about the relations of country and the laws, decisions and cultural, the decision and theology. Schmitt's concept of sovereignty is a personification of the sovereignty, the thesis is established on mentality of the culture of despair, and its produce is a historical necessity.Schmitt thought, in the first, politics should district the hostis and friend, and the strict sense of resentment is not the enemy of the private, but the enemy without rancor is the true hostis because of the dissidents can not be overcome by the formation of the public enemy. Countries exist by divising its hostis and friend with its tremendous power. Schmitt's thesis of the hostis and friend on politics is starting from the people, because people are evil, are dangerous, in order to out of danger, friends unite to confront the enemy and so on political and state emerged. The premise of the struggle between the national states is the division of friends and hostis. Only in this way can reveal the existence of political characteristics. The people who know politics will certainly know the distinction between their friends and hostis, in order to seek survival in the world. The fundamental criterion for division of hostis and friends is faith, the struggle between the conflicts in fundamental conflict stems from the belief, therefore, politics and theology are inseparable.Schmitt's two thesis on the content have their continuity, the thesis of the hostis and friend on politics is burying the hint for the "state of exception" and "war-political concept of sovereign decision. Schmitt was considered the number one enemy of liberalism, he considered that political liberalism do not pay much attention to the exception, obscured the issue of sovereignty, denied the constitutional significance of the political decision, and political liberalism is dogmatic and formalism. The accusations of representative democracy of Schmitt is a certain reasonable on technically. He saw the weak and slack of the early Western representative democracy, and do contribution to the perfection of the post-war democratic on objective. Such accusations have been able to be accepted by modern democracy. But Schmitt's critique of liberalism is not in order to save liberalism, but to replace liberalism. Liberalism is the necessity and a correct trend of the development of political civilization of mankind. Schmitt's the thesis of the sovereign decisions and the thesis of the hostis and friend on politics, is reactionary retrogression, modern democratic does not allow the existence of hero and Superman. the rules of so-called nonentity political supremacy is precisely the political progress. Hitler and Bush's consequences of external aggression precisely prove the absurdity of the doctrine of Schmitt. Why did Schmitt criticize liberalism? The main reason is that the era in which he lived: Germany was defeated in World War I and signed the Treaty of Versailles, Nazi Party and the Communist Party of German threated the liberal and democracy of the fragile Weimar from the right and the left side. Secondly, because of Schmitt's personal experience.