The Huntington thesis of the clash of cultures and American foreign policy analysis are both aspects of the legacy of Carl Schmitt's distinction between friend and foe. This article explores Schmitt's political theology as the theoretical basis of modern politics in terms of the concepts of state sovereignty and the idea of a permanent emergency. Within this Schmittian framework, the analysis of Islam as presented by writers such as Huntington, Fukuyama and Barber is critically analysed. Their analysis of fundamentalism and (...) political Islam fails to grasp the complexity and diversity of modern Islam. The article concludes by examining a number of social and economic processes that make the political division between friend and foe untenable. (shrink)

The analogies between religious and secular juridical arguments interest political theorists because they suggest a hidden link between religion and politics. However, merely describing analogies does not show that the link is significant. Why are there such analogies? The question matters because answering is a prerequisite for determining whether there can be a neutral political background to religion. This paper argues that there are such analogies because arguments in theology and arguments in the juridical theory of the state share a (...) common structure. This structure is such that the meaning of some concepts in the theory of the state, like political order and sovereignty, cannot be fully understood without reference to theological concepts. This thesis – political theology – has become associated with Carl Schmitt, but the argument in this paper differs importantly from his. Unlike Schmitt, this paper claims that in the contemporary state political theology can be superseded. (shrink)

This essay proposes an examination of Carl Schmitt’s thought by placing at its core the influence from Juan Donoso Cortés. Donoso Cortés has been largely forgotten over the centuries, and his influence on Schmitt’s thought has been overlooked as well. This essay advocates a reevaluation of their intellectual relationship by focusing on the defence of dictatorship as counterrevolution by both Schmitt and Donoso Cortés. To achieve this, the essay first presents the counterrevolutionary philosophy of Donoso Cortés framing him as a (...) philosopher of counterrevolution. Second, it examines the concept of dictatorship in Schmitt’s thought as articulated in his Dictatorship. Finally, the essay presents evidence of the influence that Donoso Cortés’s thought has had on Schmitt’s ideas. Thus, the essay suggests, firstly, that Donoso Cortés’s impact on Schmitt should be reassessed considering more aspects of their thought and secondly, it argues that the concept of dictatorship as articulated and defended by both Donoso Cortés and Schmitt could also be viewed as counterrevolutionary. (shrink)

This article addresses Eric L. Santner’s claim that “there is more political theology in everyday life than we might have ever thought” by analyzing the “theologico-political problem” in the work of three prominent twentieth-century political thinkers—Carl Schmitt, Leo Strauss, and Hannah Arendt. Schmitt, Strauss, and Arendt share a preoccupation with the crisis of modern political liberalism and confront the theologico-political problem in a similar spirit: although their responses differ dramatically, their individual accounts dwell on the absence of incontestable principles in (...) modern society that can justify life-in-common and the persistence of the political order. Their writings thus engage with the question of the place of “the absolute” in the political realm. In particular, Arendt’s indirect approach to the theologico-political problem is crucial to understanding the radicality of a political world in which traditional certainties can no longer be re-established. The theoretical trajectory I present suggests that the dispersion of political theology in everyday life has a specific corollary: modern politics operates within the tragic and paradoxical nature of its unstable and common origins that cannot be incorporated in exceptionalist versions of the body politic. (shrink)