Skip to main content
Log in

The state of exception theory of Carl Schmitt and the ambivalent criticism of liberalism

Carl Schmitts Theorie des Ausnahmezustandes und die ambivalente Kritik des Liberalismus

  • Aufsatz
  • Published:
Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Against the classical approach of the state of exception—which tends to assume that the state of exception is the correlate of every constitutional State—this paper argues that this concept has to be apprehended in its contemporary specificity. It first emerged during the interwar period in legal doctrines concerning emergency powers, in the context of a crisis of the parliamentary system. But the theory of the state of exception itself, authored by Carl Schmitt, is linked to a broader critique: that of liberalism, understood as a general idea of order based on strategies of de-politicization of the state. This critical analysis aids an understanding of the scope of Schmitt’s theory of the state of exception and its ambiguity: on the one hand, it may be understood as a reaction against liberal rationalism and its depoliticized conception of order, while on the other, it also offers a solution to this order.

Zusammenfassung

Entgegen dem klassischen Verständnis des Ausnahmezustandes – welches annimmt, dass der Ausnahmezustand ein Bestandteil jeder modernen Form von Verfassungsstaatlichkeit ist – argumentiert der vorliegende Beitrag, dass dieses Konzept in seiner zeitgenössischen Ausprägung betrachtet werden muss. Es erlebte einen ersten Höhepunkt in juristischen Theorien zu Ausnahmekompetenzen während der Zwischenkriegszeit, insbesondere im Zusammenhang mit der Feststellung einer Krise demokratischen Regierens. Aber die Theorie der Ausnahmekompetenzen, wie sie insbesondere von Carl Schmitt formuliert wurde, gründet auf einer breiteren Kritik: nämlich auf einer Kritik des Liberalismus, den er als eine Ordnungsvorstellung, basierend auf Strategien zur Entpolitisierung des Staates, begriff. Diese kritische Analyse fördert ein besseres Verständnis der Tiefe von Schmitts Theorie des Ausnahmezustandes und ihrer Ambivalenz: auf der einen Seite kann diese nämlich als Reaktion gegen den liberalen Rationalismus und seine entpolitisierte Ordnungsvorstellung verstanden werden; auf der anderen Seite eröffnet sie aber auch eine Alternative zu dieser Ordnung.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. With The Law to Remedy the Distress of the People and the Reich (Gesetz zur Behebung der Not von Volk und Reich vom 24 März 1933), the Parliament allowed the Chancellor to enact Laws, including Laws that could infringe the Constitution.

  2. On the strategic dimensions of Schmitt’s theory, see Olivier Beaud “L’art d’écrire chez un juriste: Carl Schmitt”.

  3. This growing movement against positivism resulted in what is called the Methoden und Richtungsstreit, 1924–1928. On this movement, see Michael Stolleis, Der Methodenstreit der Weimarer Staatsrechtslehre—ein abgeschlossenes Kapitel der Wissenschaftsgeschichte?.

  4. This point remains minor in Schmitt’s analysis, but is better developed in The concept of the political.

  5. At the same epoch, on the basis of a reinterpretation of Max Weber’s theory, Georg Lukács develops in History and class consciousness a coherent theory on the link between rationalization and autonomy of activities.

  6. To expose the catastrophic consequences of neutrality and technicity of Law in a situation of crisis is one the main objectives of Legality and Legitimacy.

  7. Later, this point will become more controversial in other papers dealing with the Total State (Schmitt 1958). On this point, see Beaud 1997, pp. 59–72 and Kervégan 1992, pp. 95–101.

  8. In The Great Transformation, Karl Polanyi argues that the creation of a free market and the politics developed to produce the autonomy of the economic field at the end of the 19th century are responsible for the Great Depression of 1929. More deeply, Polanyi shows how this autonomy of the economic field has to provoke some crises, which are partly structural and partly the consequence of social reactions against the violent depolitization of the economic field and its social consequences (See Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, p. 130). If we consider that the liberal order is not only grounded in the autonomy of economy from politics, but also on the relative autonomy of all rational orders, we may extend Polanyi’s hypothesis. An order intrinsically structured around the rationalization and autonomy of social domains should provoke violent social reactions against a form of domination which becomes increasingly impersonal and brutal because of this mechanical impersonality.

References

Cited Literature

  • Anschütz, Gerhard. 1921. Die Verfassung des Deutschen Reichs vom 11 August 1919. Vol. 1. Berlin: Georg Stilke.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baume, Sandrine. 2008. Carl Schmitt, penseur de l’Etat. Paris: Presses de la fondation nationale des sciences politiques.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumert, Renaud. 2008. Carl Schmitt contre le parlementarisme weimarien. Quatorze ans de rhétorique réactionnaire. Revue française de science politique 58:5–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaud, Olivier. 1997. Les derniers jours de Weimar. Carl Schmitt face à l’avènement du nazisme. Paris: Descartes et Cie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brahami, Frédéric. 2009. L’empire divin des préjugés. Joseph de Maistre contre l’esprit éclairé. Esprit https://doi.org/10.3917/espri.0908.0136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, Peter C. 1997. Popular sovereignty and the crisis of the German constitutional law: the theory and practice of Weimar Constitutionalism. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camus, Geneviève. 1965. L’état de nécessité en démocratie. Paris: Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence R. Pichon and R. Durand-Auzias.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrino, Agostino. 1995. Max Weber et Hans Kelsen. In Le droit, le politique, autour de Max Weber, Hans Kelsen, Carl Schmitt, ed. Carlos-Miguel Herrera, 185–203. Paris: L’Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colliot-Thélène, Catherine. 1995. Carl Schmitt contre Max Weber: rationalité juridique et rationalité économique. In Le droit, le politique, autour de Max Weber, Hans Kelsen, Carl Schmitt, ed. Carlos Miguel Herrera, 205–227. Paris: L’Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colliot-Thélène, Catherine. 2001. De l’autonomie de la sociologie du droit. La norme et la règle. In Etudes wébériennes: Rationalités, histoires, droits, 195–217. Paris: PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cortès, Donoso. 1859. Essai sur le catholicisme, le libéralisme et le socialisme considérés dans leurs principes fondamentaux. In Œuvres de Donoso Cortès, Vol. 3 Paris: Librairie d’Auguste Vaton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coutu, Michel. 1995. Max Weber et les rationalités du droit. Paris, Laval: L.G.D.J, Presses universitaires de Laval.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cristi, Renato. 1998. Carl Schmitt and authoritarian liberalism: strong state, free economy. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyzenhaus, David. 1997. Legality and legitimacy: Carl Schmitt, Hans Kelsen and Herman Heller in Weimar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finn, John E. 1991. Constitutions in crisis: political violence and the rule of law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Förster, Annette, and Matthias Lemke. 2018. Notwehr als Legitimationsquelle staatlichen Handelns? Eine Sondierung. In Die Grenzen der Verfassung. Sonderband der Zeitschrift für Politik (ZfP), ed. Michael Hein, Silvia von Steinsdorff, and Felix Petersen, 171–184. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gauchet, Marcel. 2007. L’avènement de la démocratie. La crise du libéralisme (1880–1914). Paris: Gallimard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goupy, Marie. 2013. Les enjeux politiques de la critique du formalisme positiviste: retour sur le rôle de l’interprétation doctrinale des lois d’habilitation dans l’avènement d’une potentielle “dictature légale” sous la République de Weimar. Droits 57:211–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goupy, Marie. 2016. L’état d’exception ou l’impuissance autoritaire de l’Etat à l’époque du libéralisme. Paris: Editions du CNRS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grau, Richard. 1927. Diktaturgewalt und Reichsverfassung, Gedächtnisschrift für Emil Seckel, Berlin., 430–494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, Oren, and Fionnuala Ní Aoláin. 2007. Law in time of crisis: emergency powers in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gusy, Christoph. 1994. La dissolution de la constitution de Weimar. In Weimar ou de la démocratie en Allemagne, ed. Gilbert Krebs, Gérard Schneilin, 265–292. La Baule: Pia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heller, Hermann. 1933. Autoritärer Liberalismus? Die Neue Rundschau 44:289–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hummel, Jacky. 2005. Carl Schmitt, L’irréductible réalité du politique. Paris: Editions Michalon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, Alan. 1978. The Sociological Movement in Law. London: Macmillan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jakab, András. 2005. German constitutional law and doctrine on state of emergency: paradigms and dilemmas of a traditional (continental) discourse. German Law Journal 07(5):453–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jouin, Céline. 2017. La Grande guerre et la constitution du social. Autour d’Otto von Gierke. Ethique, Politique Et Religions 9:93–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelsen, Hans. 1992. Introduction to the problems of legal theory. Gloucestershire: Clarendon. First published in 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kervégan, Jean-François. 1992. Hegel, Carl Schmitt, Le politique entre spéculation et positivité. Paris: Léviathan-PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kervégan, Jean-François. 1995. La critique schmittienne du normativisme kelsénien. In Le droit, le politique, autour de Max Weber, Hans Kelsen, Carl Schmitt, ed. Carlos Miguel Herrera, 229–241. Paris: L’Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kervégan, Jean-François. 2003. Etat d’exception. In Dictionnaire de philosophie politique, ed. Philippe Raynaud, Stéphane Rials, 252–255. Paris: PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchheimer, Otto. 1969. Politics, law, and social change. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laurens, Henry. 2010. Le terrorisme comme personnage historique. In Terrorismes. Histoire et droit, ed. H. Laurens and M. Delmas-Marty, 9–66. Paris: CNRS Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löwith, Karl. 1991. Le décisionnisme (occasionnel) de Carl Schmitt. Les temps Modernes 544:15–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manin, Bernard. 2008. The emergency paradigm and the new terrorism. What if the end of terrorism was not in sight? In Les usages de la séparation des pouvoirs, ed. Sandrine Baume, Biancamaria Fontana, 136–171. Paris: Michel Houdiard.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, John. 1997. Carl Schmitt’s critique of liberalism: against politics as technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Monod, Jean-Claude. 2007. Penser l’ennemi, affronter l’exception: Réflexions sur l’actualité de Carl Schmitt. Paris: La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouffe, Chantal. 1999. Carl Schmitt and the paradox of liberal democracy. In The challenge of Carl Schmitt, ed. Chantal Mouffe. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redor, Marie-Joëlle. 1992. De l’Etat légal à l’Etat de droit: L’évolution des conceptions de la doctrine publiciste française, 1879–1914. Paris: Economica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiter, Clinton. 2009. Constitutional dictatorship: crisis government in the modern democracies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saint-Bonnet, François. 2001. L’état d’exception. Paris: PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, Carl. 1958. Weiterentwicklung des totalen Staates in Deutschland. In Verfassungsrechtliche Aufsätze aus den Jahren 1924–1954, ed. C. Schmitt, Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, Carl. 1985. Political theology. Cambridge: MIT Press. First published in 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simard, Augustin. 2009. La loi désarmée: Carl Schmitt et la controverse légalité/légitimité sous Weimar. Paris: Laval.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, Léo. 1988. Remarques sur ’La notion de politique’ de Carl Schmitt. In Parlementarisme et démocratie, ed. Carl Schmitt, 188–214. Paris: Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tingstén, Herbert. 1934. Les pleins pouvoirs: L’expansion des pouvoirs gouvernementaux pendant et après la Grande Guerre. Paris: Stock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Troper, Michel. 2007. L’état d’exception n’a rien d’exceptionnel. In L’exception dans tous ses états, ed. S. Théodorou, 163–175. Marseille: Editions Parenthèses.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, Frederick M. 1939. The failure of constitutional emergency power under the German republic. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max. 2007. Sociologie du droit. Paris: PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilde, Marc. 2010. The state of emergency in the Weimar republic: legal disputes over article 48 of the Weimar constitution. The Legal History Review 78(11):135–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Further Reading

  • Balakrishnan, Gopal. 2000. The enemy: an intellectual portrait of Carl Schmitt. London, New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaud, Olivier. 1995. L’art d’écrire chez un juriste: Carl Schmitt. In Le droit, le politique, autour de Max Weber, Hans Kelsen, Carl Schmitt, ed. Carlos-Miguel Herrera, 15–36. Paris: L’Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lukács, Georg. 1967. History and class consciousness. London: Merlin. First published in 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redor, Marie-Joëlle. 1995. ‘C’est la faute à Rousseau…’: Les juristes contre les parlementaires sous la Troisième République. Politix 32:89–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, Carl. 2007. The concept of the political. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. First published in 1932.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, Carl. 2014. Dictatorship: from the origin of the modern concept of sovereignty to proletarian class struggle. Cambridge: Polity. First published in 1921.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stolleis, Michael. 2001. Der Methodenstreit der Weimarer Staatsrechtslehre – ein abgeschlossenes Kapitel der Wissenschaftsgeschichte? Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marie Goupy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Goupy, M. The state of exception theory of Carl Schmitt and the ambivalent criticism of liberalism. Z Politikwiss 28, 395–408 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41358-018-0142-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41358-018-0142-3

Navigation