English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this article, I explore the liberal–conservative reception of Carl Schmitt’s political theology in post-war West-Germany. By focusing on the work of prominent members of the Ritter School – Hermann Lübbe, Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, and Odo Marquard – and on the contributions of Hans Blumenberg, I will demonstrate how Schmitt’s thought was appropriated and critically inverted, in order to provide theoretical support to liberalism. This project of liberalizing Schmitt involved developing a “weak decisionism,” which  avoids  the state of exception, providing a liberalist reading of Schmitt’s Hobbes-inspired narrative on the origin of the modern state and even formulating a “political polytheology.” Finally, this article offers a reflection on “political theology” as a conceptual field. I argue that the liberal–conservative, “neutralizing” reading of Schmitt is to some extent already available as an option within this framework, and I conclude that this finding problematizes Schmitt’s own dualistic antagonism.

Weak Decisionism and Political Polytheology: The Neutralization of Carl Schmitt’s Political Theology by Hans Blumenberg and the Ritter School