A state does not allow forces inimical to it, or those that limit or divide it, to develop within its interior. It does not contemplate surrendering new powers of coercion to its own enemies and destroyers, thus burying its power under such formulae as liberalism, rule of law, etc. It can discern between friends and enemies. In this sense, as has been said, every true state is, and always has been, a total state.
(Schmitt, Carl, «Strong State and Sound Economy: An Address to Business Leaders», in Carl Schmitt and Authoritarian Liberalism, Cardiff, University of Wales Press, 1998, p. 217.)
Explain the arguments of both Schmitt and of Lenin against liberal democracy of the late 19th Century.
During the late 19th Century, liberal democracy was established in the societies. This form of government implies to fair, free and competitive elections between distinct political parties. It is based under the principals of liberalism which the main ideas are the equality and liberty of the human beings. Also, the main concept of liberal democracy is the individualism of this self-government who defends the separation of powers into different branches of government and follows the principal of the rule of law as part of an open society. However, this system has been objected since the late of the 19th Century by different influenced political philosophers as Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (1870-1924) who was a Russian communist revolutionary, politician and political theorist who served as the leader of the Russian SFSR from 1917,and then as Premier of the Soviet Union from 1922 to 1924; and Carl Schmitt (1888-1985) who was a German jurist, philosopher, political theorist and professor of law. He was tied to the Nazis and he developed the concepts of the Friend/Enemy Distinction and the State of exception. From opposite sides, these two authors criticized the liberal democracy exposing arguments claiming that this “certainty and stability” that...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document