Open AccessCarl Schmitt's attitude towards total war and total enemy on the eve of the outbreak of WWII
Author(s) -
Aleksandar Molnar
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
filozofija i društvo
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.116
H-Index - 1
eISSN - 2334-8577
pISSN - 0353-5738
DOI - 10.2298/fid1001031m
Subject(s) - nazism , total war , adversary , world war ii , temptation , nazi germany , german , state (computer science) , law , spanish civil war , political science , economic history , sociology , politics , history , philosophy , theology , statistics , mathematics , archaeology , algorithm , computer science
Carl Schmitt is usually perceived as the theorist of total state, total war and total hostility. In the article, the author however tries to show that, from 1937 to 1944, Schmitt was arguing that total war and total hostility were dangerous for Germany (as well as for the rest of Europe) and warned against perpetuation of all efforts to totalize enemy that started in 1914. In his theoretical endeavors in this period there was place for the total state only – and especially for the total state strong enough to resist temptation of declaring total war on total enemy. The total state he recommended Hitler and his Nazi comrades was German Reich, as a part of Europe ordered and divided in the huge spaces (Großraumordnung). Positioned in the centre of Europe, between the rest of the powers (France, Italy, USSR, as well as the Scandinavian states), Germany should be careful enough to wage war only against its Eastern\udenemies (Poland and maybe USSR) and only in order to achieve „just“ borders. Occupying in this way its huge space, Germany should devote itself to the task of exploatation of various peoples, such as Poles, Chechs and Slovaks, which were perceived as uncapable of having their states and doomed to serve the master race – the Germans