Carl Schmitt's thought serves as a warning against the dangers of complacency entailed by triumphant liberalism. His conception of politics is a sharp challenge to those who believe that there is a third way between the left and right and that the increasing moralization of political discourse constitutes a great advance for democracy. Schmitt reminds us forcefully that the essence of politics is struggle and that the distinction between friend and enemy cannot be abolished. Contributions: Gregoris Ananiadis, Agostino Carrino, Catherine Colliot-Thélène, Jorge Dotti, David Dyzenhaus, Paul Hirst, Jean-François Kervégan, Chantal Mouffe, Ulrich Preuss, Slavoj Zizek and an important essay by Carl Schmitt available in English for the first time.

Can a constitutional democracy commit suicide? Can an illiberal antidemocratic party legitimately obtain power through democratic elections and amend liberalism and democracy out of the constitution entirely? In Weimar Germany, these theoretical questions were both practically and existentially relevant. By 1932, the Nazi and Communist parties combined held a majority of seats in parliament. Neither accepted the legitimacy of liberal democracy. Their only reason for participating democratically was to amend the constitution out of existence. This book analyses Carl Schmitt's state and constitutional theory and shows how it was conceived in response to the Weimar crisis. Right-wing and left-wing political extremists recognized that a path to legal revolution lay in the Weimar constitution's combination of democratic procedures, total neutrality toward political goals, and positive law. Schmitt's writings sought to address the unique problems posed by mass democracy. Schmitt's thought anticipated 'constrained' or 'militant' democracy, a type of constitution that guards against subversive expressions of popular sovereignty and whose mechanisms include the entrenchment of basic constitutional commitments and party bans. Schmitt's state and constitutional theory remains important: the problems he identified continue to exist within liberal democratic states. Schmitt offers democrats today a novel way to understand the legitimacy of liberal democracy and the limits of constitutional change.

Presenting the first critical analysis of Carl Schmitt's The Nomos of the Earth and how it relates to the epochal changes in the international system that have risen from the collapse of the ‘Westphalian’ international order. There is an emerging recognition in political theory circles that core issues, such as order, social justice, rights, need to be studied in their global context. Schmitt’s international political thought provides a stepping stone in these related paths, offering an alternative history of international relations, of the genesis, achievements and demise of the ‘Westphalian system.’ Writing at a time when he believed that the spatial, political and legal order—the nomos of the earth—had collapsed, he highlighted the advent of the modern state as the vehicle of secularization, tracing how this interstate order was able to limit and ‘rationalize and humanize’ war. Providing a large number of case studies including: global terrorism, humanitarian intervention and US hegemony, this book will give further impetus to, and expand, the nascent debate on the significance of Schmitt’s legal and political thought for international politics. The International Political Thought of Carl Schmitt will be of interest to students and scholars of international relations, law and history.

Offers an ambitious, novel view of Carl Schmitt, providing a comprehensive, unified account of his legal and political thinking.

This volume seeks to explore the relationship between violence (its quantity, its varied forms, and its daunting consequences) in the post-9/11-War on Terror era and the contemporary status of critical political theorizing.

Analyses the twentieth century international order through the ideas of German political theorist and Nazi sympathiser Carl Schmitt.

Together these two companion volumes develop an innovative theory of world politics, grounded in the reinterpretation of the concepts of ‘world’ and ‘politics’ from an ontological perspective. Ontology and World Politics presents a new approach to political universalism, grounded in the reinterpretation of world politics from an ontological perspective. In the discipline of International Relations the concept of world politics remains ambivalent, functioning both as a synonym of international relations and their antonym, denoting the aspirations for the overcoming of interstate pluralism in favour of a universalist politics of the global community or the world state. Rather than distinguish ‘world politics’ from ‘international politics’ by its site, level or issues, Prozorov interprets it as another kind of politics. Drawing on Martin Heidegger’s account of world disclosure and Alain Badiou’s phenomenology of worlds, this book posits world politics as a practice of the affirmation of universal axioms across an infinite plurality of limited and particular situations or ‘worlds’. Prozorov reinterprets the familiar principles of community, equality and freedom in ontological terms as attributes of pure being, subtracted from all positive determinations, and presents them as axioms of universalist politics valid in any world whatsoever. This approach to world politics serves as the groundwork for a comprehensive reconsideration of the central themes of political and international relations theory. Systematic and accessible, these works will be key reading for all students and scholars of political science and international relations.

Chantal Mouffe has transformed the contemporary understanding of politics through her re-reading of political theory inspired by anti-foundationalist philosophy-based on Saussure's linguistics, Freud's psychoanalysis and Derrida's deconstruction. Her writings have challenged the centrist, post-political ideology of the 1990s and presciently diagnosed the emergence of right-wing populism seen today with Trump and Brexit. For Mouffe, such populism is the result of the failed centrist conception of politics reduced to technical management. She has called for a “return to politics” on the view that social antagonisms cannot be reconciled but must be channeled into an agonistic form of institutionally stabilized struggle. This book brings Chantal Mouffe's agonistic model of politics into direct dialogue with architecture and inquiries into the role that architecture plays constructing the political order of society, either by concealing or revealing its antagonisms and ideological conflicts. In doing so, it asks in what ways architecture operates politically; whether institutionally, in terms of its spaces and its part in forming cities, or as an aesthetic object with mediatic agency. Through this detailed exchange between Mouffe and four of the world's leading architectural thinkers; Reinhold Martin, Ines Weizman, Pier Vittorio Aureli and Sarah Whiting, a debate unfolds within the book that tests the implications of Mouffe's agonistic model of politics for architectural practice today. Through this, Bedford explores how architectural history, architectural drawing, the making of spectacular monuments, the design and policies behind housing, and the making of public and private space, all potentially contribute to the formulation of the channeling of social conflict into an agonistic form.

Whom a prime minister or president will not shake hands with is still more noticed than with whom they will. Public identity can afford to be ambiguous about friends, but not about enemies. Barker examines the accounts of how enmity functions in the cultivation of identity, how essential or avoidable it is, and what the global consequences are.