Forget Schmitt! Political Theology Must Follow Agamben’s “Double Paradigm” of Sovereignty (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Future of Political Theology and the Legacy of Carl Schmitt
"Every power is transcendent; the Transcendent is power; every attempt to escape power is a way to seize power; every movement, which is directed to the prevention or limitation of power, is a seizure of power. It makes no sense and is very dangerous to oppose a political myth" (Schmitt, 1991, p. 180). Behind these cryptic words, dated July 19, 1948, lies the ‘mystery’ of Carl Schmitt’s political theology. A complex problematic that has sealed the intellectual and political fate of the German jurist, and around which he has laboured for more than half a century.
The Political Theology of Carl Schmitt
Carl Schmitt once defined himself as a theologian of jurisprudence. This chapter argues that his concept of political theology must be understood within the context of jurisprudence and not as a thesis concerning the use of religion within politics. In its earlier configuration, Schmitt's political theology is a multifaceted response to two juridical critiques of sovereignty: those of Hans Kelsen; and those of Otto von Gierke and the English pluralist school. In this early phase, Schmitt's political theology is centered on the juridical conception of representation and on the state as fictional personality, primarily as it is found in Thomas Hobbes. Through his extensive engagement with Hobbes's interpretation of the Trinity or persons of God, Schmitt shows howjurisprudence aids in the understanding of theology rather than the other way around. Schmitt's later work is a defense against Erik Peterson's critique of political theology, itself based on a juridical interpretation of Christology.
Carl Schmitt and the True German Origins of Political Theology
This deceptively simple proposition opens a highly stimulating and insightful examination of the relationship between sovereignty, law and the state. But what does Political Theology have to do with "political theology" as we understand that term today? I will argue that it has very little to do with political theology. In fact, I will argue that Schmitt had little to do with the emergence of political theology as a "discipline," "subject," or "discourse" (call it what you will) in English-language scholarship.
Theology without God. Carl Schmitt's profane concept of the political
Bijdragen: Tijdschrift voor Filosofie en Theologie, 2012
Carl Schmitt describes his work as an instance of political theology, but this does not mean he is a theologian in the strict sense of the word. Many theological readings of Schmitt underestimate the deeply profane thrust of his basic concepts, such as sovereignty, the political, or decision. This paper argues that Schmitt's starting point is not a theological position, but the attempt to think 'the political' against other 'types of spirit'. In theology, he finds the closest analogy to political thinking. The logic of the concept of the political itself, however, remains deeply profane.
The Theology of Carl Schmitt's Political Theology
Political Theology, vol. 17, n. 6, 2016, pp. 555–572.
The theological turn in studies of Carl Schmitt is pronounced. This paper does not challenge this turn, but questions what theology means for Schmitt. Specifically, it challenges the assumption that Schmitt’s political theology is grounded in divine revelation. By distinguishing between ‘‘theology in the sense of divine revelation’’ and ‘‘theology in the sense of epistemic faith,’’ it argues that Schmitt’s political theology is epistemic in origin. Schmitt’s political theology is not rooted in faith in divine revelation, but in the narrower notion that human cognition is, ultimately, rooted in faith not reason, revelation, or common sense.
Carl Schmitt's Political Theology - A reading from his debate with Hans Kelsen
Carl Schmitt's concept of political theology has been read from different points of view, usually reducing the importance of the author's debate with Hans Kelsen over the theories of sovereignty, the state and law. This article aims to underline this debate and propose a reading, according to which Political Theology's third chapter contains an epistemological thesis that opposes Kelsen's pure theory of law, a richer thesis than just a repetition of reactionary common places, as suggested by alternative readings. After justifying this reading, the article deals with the specific characteristics of Schmitt's concept of political theology.
Political Theology and Modernity. Is Carl Schmitt Useful for Post-Foundational Political Thought
2010
Despite his conservative roots and his personal engagement with the National Socialist Party, Carl Schmitt and his work have been recovered by democratic theory and post-foundational political thought as a possible source for thinking about politics in a radical way. Is Schmitt useful for a post-traditional thinking? In this paper I will argue that only through a critical review of the concept of political theology – and its relationship to modernity – is it possible to give an answer to that question. Political theology means, in Schmitt's thought, simultaneously the challenge of the modern search for political autonomy and the recognition of the radical break with tradition. In this regard, I will try to restore the ambiguous and controversial concept in order to delimit the possibilities of the appropriation of Schmitt’s work for a radical political thought.
Political Theology and the Nazi State: Carl Schmitt's Concept of the Institution
Modern Intellectual History, 2006
The fundamental importance of theology in the work of Carl Schmitt has been the subject of much recent literature on this controversial figure. However, there has been little consensus on the precise nature of Schmitt's own political theology-that is, on what links there are between his religious or metaphysical concepts and his ideas concerning the nature of political organization and action. This is especially the case with his works of the Nazi era, which are now being studied with the same kind of critical attention given to his more influential Weimar works. In this essay I focus on the important turn Schmitt made in the early years of the Third Reich, from "decisionism" to what he called "institutional thinking," in order to reveal the theological basis for his understanding of the new regime. I will then argue that Schmitt's institutional approach had in fact always been central to his earlier, better-known writings on law and the state. Schmitt's concept of the institution, which had roots in French legal theory, grounded a political theology that was in the end less a metaphysical approach to the state than one that drew on the concrete example of the legal institutional order of the Catholic Church.
Carl Schmitt once defined himself as a theologian of jurisprudence. This chapter argues that his concept of political theology must be understood within the context of jurisprudence and not as a thesis concerning the use of religion within politics. In its earlier configuration, Schmitt's political theology is a multifaceted response to two juridical critiques of sovereignty: those of Hans Kelsen; and those of Otto von Gierke and the English pluralist school. In this early phase, Schmitt's political theology is centered on the juridical conception of representation and on the state as fictional personality, primarily as it is found in Thomas Hobbes. Through his extensive engagement with Hobbes's interpretation of the Trinity or persons of God, Schmitt shows howjurisprudence aids in the understanding of theology rather than the other way around. Schmitt's later work is a defense against Erik Peterson's critique of political theology, itself based on a juridical interpretation of Christology.