|Cosmopolitanism||Populism||Krastev I 65
Cosmopolitanism/Populism/Krastev: PopulismVsCosmopolitanism: From the populist perspective, cosmopolitan distrust of ethnic bonds makes members of the vast ethnic majority in Hungary feel like foreigners in their own country. This is how universalism destroys solidarity. If everybody is your brother, then you are an only child. That is why Hungary’s reactionary nativists claim that no principled liberal can take a genuine interest in the fate of Hungarians living outside the country. Krastev: This is how all anti-liberals talk. But Orbán’s recitation of the anti-liberal catechism also reflects some region-specific concerns. >Liberalism/Policy of Hungary.
The Light that Failed: A Reckoning London 2019
|Liberalism||Policy of Hungary||Krastev I 65
Liberalism/policy of Hungary/Krastev: To rally his supporters, Orbán harps single-mindedly on the standard list of liberalism’s sins perpetrated, he claims, by the servile imitators of liberal democracy who misgoverned Hungary for two decades after 1989. First, the liberal picture of society as a spiritually empty network of producers and consumers cannot capture the moral depth and emotional solidarity of the Hungarian nation. Liberals are basically indifferent to the history and fate of the nation.
In Orbán’s boilerplate anti-liberal rhetoric, liberalism’s language of human rights, civil society and legal procedures is described as cold, generic and ahistorical. Liberals are so blasé about immigration because they divorce citizenship from ethnic descent and replace the ideals of substantive justice and the public good with bland and abstract notions of procedural justice, the rule of law and individual utility.
PopulismVsCosmopolitanism: From the populist perspective, cosmopolitan distrust of ethnic bonds makes members of the vast ethnic majority in Hungary feel like foreigners in their own country. This is how universalism destroys solidarity. If everybody is your brother, then you are an only child. That is why Hungary’s reactionary nativists claim that no principled liberal can take a genuine interest in the fate of Hungarians living outside the country.
Krastev: This is how all anti-liberals talk. But Orbán’s recitation of the anti-liberal catechism also reflects some region-specific concerns.
The Light that Failed: A Reckoning London 2019
|Politics||Schmitt||Höffe I 386
Politics/Carl Schmitt/Höffe: (...) Schmitt(1) [relativizes] the rank of the state by declaring "the political" a prerequisite and denying the state a monopoly in this area. Friend/Foe-Dichotomy: This formula, which caused a sensation at the time and is still provocative today, is intended to represent the decisive alternative for the political world in analogy to basic distinctions in other areas of life, such as good and evil in morality, beautiful and ugly in aesthetics, and profitable and unprofitable in the economy. Schmitt's use of the term "enemy" emphasizes the distinction between the political concept, the public enemy (hostis), and the private enemy (inimicus). Therefore there is no objection in the Christian commandment to love one's enemies. According to Schmitt's "anthropological creed", the human is "evil," because he/she is sinful and dangerous. Höffe: Schmitt's political thinking (...) rejects the idea of a world state that guarantees eternal peace. And it criticizes liberalism, in which, depending on the variety, the political degenerates into spirit, education, business, or property, the state into society or humanity, and domination into control and propaganda. (SchmittVsCosmopolitanism, SchmittVsLiberalism).
1. C. Schmitt, der Begriff des Politischen. 1927/1932.
Gaus I 397
Politics/state/Schmitt/Bellamy/Jennings/Lassman: (...) in his The Concept of the Political(1) first published in 1927 Schmitt's starting point is a rejection of the unsatisfactory circularity of the conventional depiction of the conceptual relationship between the state and politics (Schmitt, 1985(2); 1996(3)). For Schmitt, before we can talk about politics we require an understanding of the defining characteristic of 'the political'. This is to be found in the antithesis between friend and enemy. Any genuine politics presupposes an understanding of 'the political' in this sense. 'The political' refers to the most extreme and intense antagonism in human relations. Who counts as 'the enemy' at any particular moment is based upon a decision made by a political state. Clearly,
Gaus I 398
for Schmitt and other like-minded thinkers of the Conservative Revolution, this vision of 'the political' must be intensely hostile to liberalism in all of its forms. Liberalism is taken to be a clear example of the 'neutralizing' and 'depoliticizing' tendencies of the modern age. Furthermore, Schmitt (1996)(3) argues that the political state, as 'friend', must express the political unity of a people.
1. Schmitt, C. (1963) Der Begriff des Politischen: Text von 1932 mit einem Vorwort und drei Corollarien. Berlin: Duncker und Humblot.
2. Schmitt, C. (1985) The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy (1923). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Schmitt, C. (1996) The Concept of the Political. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bellamy, Richard, Jennings, Jeremy and Lassman, Peter 2004. „Political Thought in Continental Europe during the Twentieth Century“. In: Gaus, Gerald F. & Kukathas, Chandran 2004. Handbook of Political Theory. SAGE Publications
Der Hüter der Verfassung Tübingen 1931
Geschichte des politischen Denkens München 2016
Gerald F. Gaus
Handbook of Political Theory London 2004