/lit/ - Literature

>>21582536
Incorrect.

>>20520557
>Schmitt merely turns back the clock to the founding of modern liberalism, 17th century England, without offering a suitable alternative.

No, that's not what he does. He revives Hobbes by saying that the friend-enemy distinction can't be done away with no matter how much liberalism tries to depoliticize it. No matter how many times liberalism tries to transform the enemy into an economic competitor or a debate adversary under a defined set of universal rules, the existential battle between friend-enemy will always come back and wars will happen. It's inevitable.

Schmitt was a traditionalist Catholic, so the "suitable alternative" is implied in his beliefs; since he was a Hobbesian, and was religious, it's highly likely that he was an absolute monarchist like de Maistre, but had to settle for dictatorship because monarchism had been destroyed by WW1.