The thesis of Charles Angelino. The involvement of lawyers in the German Nazi regime was, says the researcher, resulting in a landing path of his thought. An illuminating essay. It is titled "Science in the German legal fight against the Jewish spirit," was written in 1936 and the public, with two other texts, the Melangolo
Mark Pacioni, from "Il Manifesto", Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Mark Pacioni, from "Il Manifesto", Wednesday, May 23, 2007
If
that of "enemy" is a fundamental category in the mitogenesis of Nazism - as they say Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe and Jean-Luc Nancy in their book The Nazi myth (the melangolo, 1992) - and if it was given so much importance in identifying the essence of "political" means the reception of Carl Schmitt, who has long pushed for most of his career as a jurist, it may be interesting to see the particular use that the same Schmitt makes some writings published under the title by Charles Angelino supreme jurist Carl Schmitt the Fuhrer. Anti-Semitic texts (1933-1936) also of melangolo (pp. 40, € 11.00). Have long been committed to treating texts and Schmitt concerning the Nazi era (among whom it is important to Yves Charles Zarka, A Nazi detail in Schmitt's thought, the melangolo, 2005) Angelina has completed a thesis in accordance with the precise which the involvement of lawyers in the Hitler regime was, and continued in part to be, a requirement following the path of his thinking. Along this proposed interpretation, the third of three writings that are presented to the Italian, German legal science in the fight against the Jewish spirit of 1936 (the other two are: German intellectuals of 1933, the Führer guardian of the law of 1934) plays an important role to understand the degree of involvement of Schmitt's thought in Nazism. First, because the enemy is referred to in these pages goes beyond the known dichotomy of friend / enemy applicable to many different situations and instead take on specific attributes. At issue are the Jews, with an unidentifiable "enemy within" any, relating to any historical moment, but the facts coincide with an enemy not to relativize, that can never be viewed without hostility, even if circumstances change. Schmitt writes: "we have no access to the most intimate essence of the Jews. We just know their relationship to negative and disproportionate to us. People who understood this truth once and for all know what a race. " More than a political connotation, in this paper assumes that the jew Zarka has defined "enemy substantial` configure a new type, different from that on the very concept of relativist exposed in his famous essay of 1932 the concept of politics, in which Schmitt wrote, "the friend-enemy distinction does not mean that people should be the eternal enemy of another, or that neutrality is not possible. " Written in 1936, assumes the aspect of Jewishness that enmity does not need to define its opposite: it is an exceptional category, the subject of racial science and law. It is a fact, Schmitt continues, "decisive for the Doctrine of the race (that) can be placed at the base of the wider work of legal science." The exceptional - another fundamental category for Schmitt - lies in 'strange polarity of Hebrew and Jewish legal chaos, nihilism and anarchic normativism positivism, crude materialism of sensualist and abstract morality. " Schmitt emerges from the description of the concern about the ability to mediate the Jews and the risk of invalidating the polarity as friend / enemy which underlies much of his theory. Place in relation to the other two preceding it, the very anti-Semitic graffiti Schmitt reveals another way of looking at the relationship of friend / enemy, and in general also says a lot orientation, based on antithesis, by which the formulas of Schmitt enucleates Schmitt in his pensiero.A well see the antithesis is not a dichotomy ready to remain so and so, therefore, to serve as the foundation itself - let alone reach the midpoint of a brief, but instead is likely to become extinct in same time it is detected. The notes which pairs friend / enemy, legal / political and legal / legitimate not identify further irreducible dichotomies, but serve to give identity to one and only one of two terms, through the other, so that the latter then not trace remains. If this is true, then one understands that Schmitt is not so much interested in what is proper to single out the 'political', the practice and theory of conflict, but bring it into an absolute size, in a sort of totalitarian legal system in which the contrast does not exist any more, and immediately fell under the exception. It is no coincidence that totalitarian conception already clearly apparent in the Political Theology of 1922 when Schmitt argues that "all the crucial concepts of modern doctrine of the state are secularized theological concepts." The exception and the consequent doctrine of the Jewish race can be interpreted as a further step in transforming the secular theology totalitarianism legal. The Führer guardian of the right's dream of a state that Schmitt has more exceptions and in which there is more separation between politics and law is clearly expressed when describing the führeprinzip: "The action of the Führer is a genuine act of jurisdiction. It is not the action of a dictator, a Republican, in a moment of absence law, while the law closes his eyes for a moment, create a fait accompli. " Next to the category of biopolitics, modern scholars often mentioned when referring to Schmitt (icon corresponds to an example in Italy by Giorgio Agamben), maybe we should ask also that of "bio-right ': singular but significant reversal of the right to life, as such, seems to draw meaning from death. If you read Schmitt following this route, you would see that many of his qualities as a jurist capable of classifications essential part apply to photograph the current situation, are resolved simultaneously an indictment of the theory of National Socialism. It follows that no disturbing is much more affinity Schmitt to Nazism, but, as Agamben has shown, the evidence that even under the guise of modern democracy and the rule of law Nietzschean totalitarian germs.
that of "enemy" is a fundamental category in the mitogenesis of Nazism - as they say Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe and Jean-Luc Nancy in their book The Nazi myth (the melangolo, 1992) - and if it was given so much importance in identifying the essence of "political" means the reception of Carl Schmitt, who has long pushed for most of his career as a jurist, it may be interesting to see the particular use that the same Schmitt makes some writings published under the title by Charles Angelino supreme jurist Carl Schmitt the Fuhrer. Anti-Semitic texts (1933-1936) also of melangolo (pp. 40, € 11.00). Have long been committed to treating texts and Schmitt concerning the Nazi era (among whom it is important to Yves Charles Zarka, A Nazi detail in Schmitt's thought, the melangolo, 2005) Angelina has completed a thesis in accordance with the precise which the involvement of lawyers in the Hitler regime was, and continued in part to be, a requirement following the path of his thinking. Along this proposed interpretation, the third of three writings that are presented to the Italian, German legal science in the fight against the Jewish spirit of 1936 (the other two are: German intellectuals of 1933, the Führer guardian of the law of 1934) plays an important role to understand the degree of involvement of Schmitt's thought in Nazism. First, because the enemy is referred to in these pages goes beyond the known dichotomy of friend / enemy applicable to many different situations and instead take on specific attributes. At issue are the Jews, with an unidentifiable "enemy within" any, relating to any historical moment, but the facts coincide with an enemy not to relativize, that can never be viewed without hostility, even if circumstances change. Schmitt writes: "we have no access to the most intimate essence of the Jews. We just know their relationship to negative and disproportionate to us. People who understood this truth once and for all know what a race. " More than a political connotation, in this paper assumes that the jew Zarka has defined "enemy substantial` configure a new type, different from that on the very concept of relativist exposed in his famous essay of 1932 the concept of politics, in which Schmitt wrote, "the friend-enemy distinction does not mean that people should be the eternal enemy of another, or that neutrality is not possible. " Written in 1936, assumes the aspect of Jewishness that enmity does not need to define its opposite: it is an exceptional category, the subject of racial science and law. It is a fact, Schmitt continues, "decisive for the Doctrine of the race (that) can be placed at the base of the wider work of legal science." The exceptional - another fundamental category for Schmitt - lies in 'strange polarity of Hebrew and Jewish legal chaos, nihilism and anarchic normativism positivism, crude materialism of sensualist and abstract morality. " Schmitt emerges from the description of the concern about the ability to mediate the Jews and the risk of invalidating the polarity as friend / enemy which underlies much of his theory. Place in relation to the other two preceding it, the very anti-Semitic graffiti Schmitt reveals another way of looking at the relationship of friend / enemy, and in general also says a lot orientation, based on antithesis, by which the formulas of Schmitt enucleates Schmitt in his pensiero.A well see the antithesis is not a dichotomy ready to remain so and so, therefore, to serve as the foundation itself - let alone reach the midpoint of a brief, but instead is likely to become extinct in same time it is detected. The notes which pairs friend / enemy, legal / political and legal / legitimate not identify further irreducible dichotomies, but serve to give identity to one and only one of two terms, through the other, so that the latter then not trace remains. If this is true, then one understands that Schmitt is not so much interested in what is proper to single out the 'political', the practice and theory of conflict, but bring it into an absolute size, in a sort of totalitarian legal system in which the contrast does not exist any more, and immediately fell under the exception. It is no coincidence that totalitarian conception already clearly apparent in the Political Theology of 1922 when Schmitt argues that "all the crucial concepts of modern doctrine of the state are secularized theological concepts." The exception and the consequent doctrine of the Jewish race can be interpreted as a further step in transforming the secular theology totalitarianism legal. The Führer guardian of the right's dream of a state that Schmitt has more exceptions and in which there is more separation between politics and law is clearly expressed when describing the führeprinzip: "The action of the Führer is a genuine act of jurisdiction. It is not the action of a dictator, a Republican, in a moment of absence law, while the law closes his eyes for a moment, create a fait accompli. " Next to the category of biopolitics, modern scholars often mentioned when referring to Schmitt (icon corresponds to an example in Italy by Giorgio Agamben), maybe we should ask also that of "bio-right ': singular but significant reversal of the right to life, as such, seems to draw meaning from death. If you read Schmitt following this route, you would see that many of his qualities as a jurist capable of classifications essential part apply to photograph the current situation, are resolved simultaneously an indictment of the theory of National Socialism. It follows that no disturbing is much more affinity Schmitt to Nazism, but, as Agamben has shown, the evidence that even under the guise of modern democracy and the rule of law Nietzschean totalitarian germs.
![[Valid Atom 1.0]](valid-atom.png "Validate my Atom 1.0 feed")
