Pill Pod 183 - Carl Schmitt on the Friend/Enemy Distinction (Patreon Exclusive)
Added 2024-09-20 14:00:12 +0000 UTCWe face the fact that only a Nazi could properly explain American politics. Here's a link to Schmitt's "Concept of the Political".
Comments
Just relistening Feb 16, 2025. OMG this is one of the best of your podcasts, you’re all crushing it. Can’t repress that ol’ death drive/aggressivity. Might as well do Hegelian negativity…‘antagon- agon’ can’t entertain violence. Maybe why Zizek sticks w Hegel. Certainly seems Schmidt keeps the Master Slave stakes in tact. I think k the question of violence and the political is important here.
Zachary Manenti
2025-02-16 23:15:53 +0000 UTCHere's my Spaghetti for the after-party If friend and enemy are virtues, people's lives gravitate towards the middle. Carl Schmitt's distinction would be a rare extremity which cannot hold its premise, as it would dissolve without basis to define first a friend, then an enemy. He has only two-piece 'language salad'- Broccoli, and not-broccoli. It is possible to some extent to have such distinction in war-time, but what good war would lead to another war, if not just another excuse for another war? Was it never in the war, nor in Carl Schmitt's proposed distinction? "Political" here, seems more like throwing a veil on a Cartesian-quest and trying to sell a bunch of ammo in the name of having found 'the higher and pure-er' of two kinds (a Nietzschean Lol implied. Imagine ‘ol-man with a smirk!). Carl Schmitt’s articulation is impressive, though sometimes he sounds more like a desperate mystic who eventually would find himself to be his only friend and only enemy (America thrived on manufacturing enemies until it brought the war home, to their own). Or maybe his Hegelian ways create anticipation for a serious metaphysics, yet only in first appearance, “until the whole thing gets lost in 'the sacred space-war'.” Yes, good text if read through Phenomenology or meta lens, then what does not? if one’s got shades, why not find new ways of seeing*(John Berger)? Often it reads like a pre-war manual (I'm still halfway through the pdf) with a few convincing arguments ‘to not-consider’ the liberal project. And with that said, I cannot not take-part in the liberal bashing. Libs got too many chinks in their hypothesis of 'moving forward’ to a future where "Différance" is defeated. What naïve nihilistic idea; to equalize by rights, until there is no need of such rights. They clearly cannot validate antagonism, yet credit themselves for liberating the ‘choice to choose’. End of the day, It will be liberals who beat Carl Schmitt for having invented nothing but enemies of two kinds. A non-liberal state, (in Carl’s enemy, the other is a compound- a group, not one enemy-person in human flesh). The other his own, the heterogeneous mass (despite their Utopian dream of total consensus). Libs probably understand their existential crisis as they denied Canadian ‘fringe-minority’ (their own) during Covid, then a sea of people in Gaza (the external), regardless of their age, creed and ideology- an absolutely horrendous killing spree. One thing Carl Schmitt offers and I admire his clarity on that- his position in the field of politics. While Libs build their Disneyland on foundation of democracy- An equitable ‘lottery-ticket’ one for each, yet some win some lose. In Bhagavad Geeta (a Hindu scripture), both the sacred and the profane have a ‘human nuance’ in spite of their shared murderous intent. Hegel attracts dialecticians of all sorts for their particular need and use. It would be unfair to blame Hegel’s ways, considering the limited scope of Philosophy in day-to-day chores. Though ‘to reflect’ is to be human, WYSIWYG comes first, then the refection. Carl Schmitt’s distinction works fine; if a priori (priori as an undeterminable condition). It claims a 'group of minimum two', yet never provides information about its constituents. Minimum two people- arranged opposite to each other for distinction. Oh this "an empty-ever full of itself Russian doll" game. A war of flagships with no one holding those flags. This army is likely to run into recruitment issues, as it has been the case with religion lately. Here’s a quote from Bhagvad Geeta, to get the gist of Carl Schmitt's imagined ‘ancient-future’. It stands good for most 'political' if not all, regardless of where one claims to be on the horse-shoe. "Nobody is nobody's friend, nobody is nobody's enemy. But it is only the behavior by which one can understand who is his friend and who is his enemy." - Bhagavad Geeta | ...and now Carl Schmitt. Yum-yum!
Mrityunjay Awasthy
2024-10-06 18:35:57 +0000 UTCThey're not trying to kill me, that means they must like me
Alex B
2024-10-01 20:23:20 +0000 UTChttps://www.jstor.org/stable/465262 May be of interest, sorry I could not get it to u for free, but I am sure u have a way.
Zachary Manenti
2024-09-28 16:23:29 +0000 UTCIf you haven't listend to the Cushvlog. Please do. Matt Christman talks about these weird hybrids that ultimately are just more reactionary politics. A complete removal from class politics creates this.
Khemith
2024-09-28 00:45:15 +0000 UTCOn the topic of online Duginites and MAGA Communism, I just listened to a "debate" between Daniel Tutt (American Marxist scholar) and Haz al-Din (the MAGA Communism kid). This is an actual conversation that happened and which I found here: https://youtu.be/sywGCoGVL0E?si=UwUPnmodCQog2lpR My impression is that the MAGA Communists are basically reactionary and basically stupid. I'd be interested in a pill pod about it!
Phil
2024-09-25 18:54:51 +0000 UTCJust here to appreciate the dropping of the 4th positional derivative of "jerk." Funny story, my work is motion control, and our in house motion controller has had a "jerk" command limiter feature that has remained in the GUI but has never been implemented. In electrical engineering terms, that'd be di/dt imposed by inductance on the rate of current change, which in turns acts as a slope limit on acceleration capability. Just appreciating that in our technologically advanced state, that the flow of electrons still places a limit on our ability to accelerate, metaphorically in society, literally in power electronics utilized for motion. 💡.... Accelerationists --> Jerkists lmaooooo
ageOfBumFires
2024-09-21 13:41:33 +0000 UTCAre you referencing Colleen McCullough or ...? Sry, trying to understand what reference you intended 🙏
ageOfBumFires
2024-09-21 13:26:43 +0000 UTCno you are right on the money Pills, how it is a vibe based theory where the limit is only when their are moments of confrontation. Like a fight to the death, or I instill a negative tax on a person I do not like “to waste their time” and being a pain in order to encourage pro social behavior aka a simulation in the future. You were a jerk so I become a jerk back and hopefully we do not fight and we realize we can enter a more friendly exchange instead of continuous escalation. It is phenomenological / appearance based logic where only the 3rd derivatives of position in regards to time (math term, switching to everyday) the “jerk” function in physics … where only something that goes against prior flows, different than prior perceptions, is considered to be real for their is a jerk / lurch / against the prior data set, an event. The limits of empiricism and how we use intuition / simulation to fill the gaps.
Matthew Theisen
2024-09-20 23:50:58 +0000 UTCTo victor talking about Springfield landing jobs and not having a labor force so attracting immigrants. Yes of course I notice it’s Capital and labor and labor going where Capital is. Therefore borders to enforce flow of labor. It’s interesting to me it’s so different than what I’ve been thinking about how even if we did get more manufactures that automation is so advanced it would only need 50-300 employees. Nothing like our old mill!!
Jack
2024-09-20 22:52:13 +0000 UTCI think Bataille's essay the psychological structure of fascism would fit this discussion, to address a similair kind of framework through the analysis of the psychologica/sociologicall structure and how the political "works". The political follows a different interpretation and it is more a interplay and constituting of homogeneity and heterogeneity elements in "society".
Christos
2024-09-20 19:04:54 +0000 UTCThe Song of Troy did not replace ?
Matthew Theisen
2024-09-20 18:44:17 +0000 UTC33:30 The Iliad War Did Not Take Place - Jean Baudrillard "Until you're committed to die for XYZ" I think is right on the nose as the tell tale sign that we've arrived at actual lived politics vs simulated, media consumed politics. I wouldn't mind if that line of thought got teased out a little more, connected with other writings, philosophers, etc. And I think "willing to die" is the right term vs "ready to kill," it's a bigger tent that includes pacifists and acts of self immolation, mass suicide, acts meant to shock people beyond the point of reconsolidating their previous world view. Theres obviously more at stake in a willing to die vs a willing to kill, especially for those under the delusion that you can do the latter without increasing the likelihood of the former. Willing to die implies the greatest *sacrifice* a person can make. It's almost universally glorified (under sanctioned conditions, of course). The average American clamoring for political violence is only there rhetorically, even after the little cosplay of Jan 6th, even after all of Trump rhetoric of blood baths and blood and soil and dogs and cats. That'll produce the isolated acts of violence, the spurts of confused, loosely political in name violence, but you're not gonna find average Joe Suburbia American willing to disrupt their nice little 1st world routine of driving the kids to practice, grilling up some hotdogs, cracking open a cold beer, playing golf and watching some football. Materially their lives aren't desperate enough to die for something with urgency and to disrupt their routine.
ageOfBumFires
2024-09-20 16:24:38 +0000 UTCNot first
Kainoa Written
2024-09-20 15:02:39 +0000 UTCIwa as saints and angels- most angels in Catholicism have Saintly transference (St. Michael = Archangel Michael) and in the Jesus Christ = Iusus Cristo = Arrius Piso reading of the New Testament traces a clear line from Egyptian Gods to Olympic Gods to Angels as the representative Roman gods that were raised in temples in place of destroyed Jewish temples during the war with the Jews in the 70s CE.
James Aydelotte
2024-09-20 14:31:57 +0000 UTC
