
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


This third episode of our new podcast continues our exploration of the thought of Carl Schmitt (1888–1985), the notorious German jurist and political theorist of the Nazi regime.
We discuss Carl Schmitt’s 1932 treatise The Concept of the Political and suggest that his definition of politics – as the existential distinction between “Friend and Enemy” – is highly relevant to the volatile polarization of modern Western politics. We examine how Schmitt criticized liberal democracy for trying to replace decisive sovereign power with endless parliamentary debate and economic administration, a process he viewed as “depoliticizing” and ultimately weak because it ignores the reality of conflict. We also apply this lens to current events, including the rise of right-wing populism and the recent “healthcare assassin” case to explore whether liberal democratic societies are reverting to a “Schmittian” state where political groups are once again defining themselves by who they are willing to fight and negate rather than with who they can find political compromise.
By Rolf Strom-Olsen & Reed van SchenkThis third episode of our new podcast continues our exploration of the thought of Carl Schmitt (1888–1985), the notorious German jurist and political theorist of the Nazi regime.
We discuss Carl Schmitt’s 1932 treatise The Concept of the Political and suggest that his definition of politics – as the existential distinction between “Friend and Enemy” – is highly relevant to the volatile polarization of modern Western politics. We examine how Schmitt criticized liberal democracy for trying to replace decisive sovereign power with endless parliamentary debate and economic administration, a process he viewed as “depoliticizing” and ultimately weak because it ignores the reality of conflict. We also apply this lens to current events, including the rise of right-wing populism and the recent “healthcare assassin” case to explore whether liberal democratic societies are reverting to a “Schmittian” state where political groups are once again defining themselves by who they are willing to fight and negate rather than with who they can find political compromise.