Human rights violation in Palestine: a serious concern

0


[ad_1]

For decades, scholars of international relations have confused the term “New world order” in social, political or economic spheres. Even today, few academics confuse the term with the information age, the Internet, universalism, globalization, and US imperialism. Unlike the complex categorization of the New World Order, the concept of the Old World Order was purely a legal phenomenon. However, from the perspective of modernity, the term New World Order is a purely ideological and political phenomenon, which embodies various manifestations such as liberal democracy, financial capitalism and technological imperialism.

In his Magnus Opus “The concept of politics”Carl Schmitt welcomed a harsh criticism of liberal ideology and favored competitive decisionism over it. This is why according to Schmitt’s critics; all text in “The notion of politics”Is filled with authoritarian overtones. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that it was Carl Schmitt’s radical political philosophy that paved the way for the conservative revolution in Europe. Even today, his writings are considered one of the major contributions to the field of political philosophy of the 20e century.

In his major works such as “Nomos de la terre”, “The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy”, “The Concept of Politics” and “The Dictatorship” Carl Schmitt frequently uses simple terms such as “real”, “concrete” , “” Real “, and” specific “to assess his political ideas. However, he advances most of the fundamental political ideas using the metaphysical framework. For example, in the broader political realm, Carl Schmitt anticipated the existential dimension of “real politics” in the world today.

On the contrary, in his famous work “The concept of politics”Readers encounter the interplay between the abstract and the ideal and the concrete and real aspects of politics the most. Perhaps an understanding of Schmitt’s discursive distinctions is necessary when it comes to deconstructing the intellectual discourse promoted by liberals. However, it should be borne in mind that for Schmitt the concept of politics does not necessarily refer to a concrete subject such as “State” or “sovereignty”. In this regard, his conception of politics simply refers to the dialectic or the friend-foe distinction. To be more precise, the categorization of the term “Politics”Defines the degree of intensity of an association and a dissociation.

Moreover, the famous friend-enemy dialectic is also the central theme of his famous book “The concept of politics”. Likewise, the famous friend-foe distinction in Schmitt’s famous work has both concrete and existential significance. Here the word “enemy”Refers to the fight against ‘human totalityWhich depends on the circumstances. In this respect, throughout his work, one of the major axes of Carl Schmitt has been the theme of “real politics”. According to Schmitt, friend, foe, and battle have real meaning. This is why, throughout his many works; Carl Schmitt remained very concerned with the theory of the state and sovereignty. As Schmitt writes;

I am not saying the general theory of the state; for the category, the general theory of the state… is a typical preoccupation of the liberal nineteenth century. This category arises from the normative effort to dissolve the concrete state and the concrete Volk in generalities (general education, general theory of law, and finally general theory of knowledge; and thus destroy their political order.”.[1]

In fact, for Schmitt, real politics ends with battle, as he puts it, “The normal proves nothing, but the exception proves everything”. Here Schmitt uses the concept of “exceptionality” to overcome the pragmatism of liberalism. Although in his later writings Carl Schmitt attempted to dissociate the concept of “Politics”Of the spheres of control and limitation, but he deliberately failed. One of the main reasons behind Schmitt’s isolation from the concept of politics is that he wanted to limit the categorization of the friend-foe distinction. Another major goal of Schmitt was to purify the concept of “PoliticsWas by dissociating it from the subject-object duality. According to Schmitt, the concept of politics was not a subject and has no limits. Perhaps this is why Schmitt advocated looking beyond the ordinary conception and definition of politics in textbooks.

For Schmitt, it was liberalism that introduced the absolutist conception of politics by destroying its real meaning. In this regard, he developed his very idea of ​​“Politics“in the context of”human totality“(Gesamtheit von Menschen). Europe today should remember the bloody revolutionary year of 1848 because the so-called economic prosperity, technological progress and assured positivism of the last century came together to produce a long and deep amnesia. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that the revolutionary events of 1848 brought deep anxiety and fear to ordinary Europeans. For example, the famous phrase from the year 1848 reads;

For this reason, fear takes hold of the genius at a different time than normal people. the latter recognizes the danger at the moment of the danger; until then they are not safe, and if the danger has passed, then they are safe. The genius is the strongest precisely at the moment of danger ”.

Unfortunately, it was the intellectual situation on the European scene in 1848 that caused revolutionary anxiety and distress among ordinary Europeans. Today, ordinary Europeans face similar situations in the social, political and ideological spheres. The growing concerns of European public consciousness cannot be tackled without taking into account Carl Schmitt’s critique of liberal democracy. A century and a half ago, by embracing liberal democracy under the auspices of free market capitalism, Europeans played a central role in the self-destruction of the European spirit.

The vicious technological push under liberal capitalism has driven European civilization towards crony centralism, industrialism, mechanization and above all singularity. Today, neoliberal capitalism has turned the world into a mechanized consumer factory in which humanity appears as the by-product of its own artificial creation. The unstructured mechanization of humanity in the last century has brought human civilization to a technological crossroads. Therefore, the technological push under liberal democratic capitalism presents a huge threat to human civilizational identity.


[1] Wolin, Richard, Carl Schmitt, Political existentialism and the total state, Theory and Society, volume n. 19, no. 4, 1990 (pp. 389-416). Schmitt saw the friend-enemy dialectic as the cornerstone of his critique of liberalism and universalism.

[ad_2]

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.