Sheryl Mcintosh's Blog: Anti-Liberalism: A Short Weekend Read

On several occasions we've discussed on C@W how Dilbert author Scott Adams has an impressive line in predicting Trump's actions, based squarely on a coherent thesis about human beings in general (always an advantage). Here, for weekend perusal, is a very short article on another thesis which may also hold useful explanatory value - at least, for "anti-liberals" ...

It's on the work of a German legal philosopher Carl Schmitt. It's obligatory to start with this quotation from the article: "although Schmitt is notorious for joining the Nazi Party in 1933, it would be a mistake to dismiss him for that reason alone. Among scholars today, on both the left and right, Schmitt is known for his incisive critique of modern liberalism".

The ante-diluvian Theresa May (in her better, "citizen of everywhere = citizen of nowhere" moments) might like this.

At the heart of Schmitt’s critique is his disdain for liberalism’s universal aspirations ... Because the liberal conception of “the people” is non-exclusive, it is also indistinct. Who are we if “we” can include anyone? Schmitt believed that this way of thinking makes liberal states vulnerable to capture by private interest groups from within and by foreigners from without... As defenders of a non-exclusive, rights-based creed, liberals are compelled to meddle in the affairs of other countries whose policies don’t accord with liberal values. And when liberals engage in international military conflict, their worldview is a recipe for total and perpetual war, because their commitment to abstract norms encourages them to view their opponents not merely as competitors but rather as “absolute enemies.

For Schmitt, a political community forms when a group of people recognizes that they share some distinctive cultural trait that they believe is worth defending with their lives ...