What does /lit/ think of youtuber Kraut's interpretation of Carl Schmitt?

[Anonymous No.21199176]

Kraut makes the case that Schmitt has influenced Putin's Russia who was also a rabid anti-semitic Nazi and have been credit with creating the legal framework of the Nazi regime. That he is unwelcome ghost to the study of law, and an enemy to the liberal world order through far-right and even far-left interpretations of his ideas. What is important to point out is Schmitt's takes on geopolitics which Kraut of course would bring up. So in basic terms: Great Power x and their spheres has the aboslute right to make out the very system ideology culture of the countries under x's sphere which obviously rebukes the liberal idea of countries get to choose (like Ukraine wants to join NATO...but in Schmitt's ideas Russia has the right to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO despite the fact ther are supposed "international rules" which Ukraine can use to join NATO)...and yadi yadi ya.

watch the video: https://youtu.be/sdFtqa54TuM?t=1946

[Anonymous No.21199180]

>>21199176
The enemy of my enemy is my friend
Schmittians can't refute this

[Anonymous No.21199205]

>>21199180
go away fucking frogposter

[Anonymous No.21199233]

>>21199176
Kraut is a fucking pseud. You're not him, are you?

If not, and you're just a brainlet: Kraut's the European continent's version of the empty-headed, over-moralistic Dem.

Also, there was nothing "rabid" about Schmitt. Read him, he's interesting, far more than this fucking pseud.

[Anonymous No.21199237]

>>21199233
Also love (read: fucking hate) how he's always talking down to Anglo-Americans on European issues, as if he's some gatekeeper. And yet, forces that ridiculous plummy English accent. What a joke.

[Anonymous No.21199242]

>>21199176
>retard leader is a retard
>"OH wow this is clearly an influence of an x philosopher!
Putin is literally just a gang leader, there is no ideology, no philosophers behind him.

[Anonymous No.21199243]

>>21199233
>You're not him, are you?
No.
>you're just a brainlet
No, this thread was created with intention to let people like you who are smart and brilliant to shit on midwits like Kraut himself.
Plus...you are right about not being rabid, that's what Kraut said but in different words...Carl Schmitt was in no way a die-hard National Socialist.
>Verification not required.

[Anonymous No.21199278]

>>21199176
>muh friend and enemy distinction
Gay. Schmitt has influenced everyone from communists to chinks but it shouldn't take a kraut to tell you that. Center right movements in various countries have actually been slower to pick up on Schmitt for the exact reasons Schmitt outlines (ie. they're liberal and want to diffuse political power).

[Anonymous No.21199391]

>>21199176
>I’m here to promote eceleb with fake accent

[Anonymous No.21199397]

>>21199176
He spent money his parents gave him as a gift to buy sex toys, dildos and vibrating nipple clamps. Degenerates are always retroactively refuted.

[Anonymous No.21199451]

I watched most of the video. For one, he clearly hasn't read the source material with regards Schmitt, and probably the same with other two. And did you notice how he just described CS's description of the international order in a dismissive voice, rather than actually countering any of it?
>international law is often employed as a veil to obscure the self-interested motives of great powers...yeah right!

Kraut is not a serious person. He's too young to be this undeservedly condescending and too non-Anglo to pull off Plummy Englishman. I tell ya, he really grinds my gears!

[Anonymous No.21199462]

>>21199176
>those philosopher don't adhere to my democratic neoliberal view of the world and therefore they must be cooky, crazy and completely irrational

[Anonymous No.21199508]

>>21199451
>did you notice how he just described CS's description of the international order in a dismissive voice
Yeah, I did. There is not much to say more about that. It do be like that.

[Anonymous No.21199724]

>>21199180
go away fucking frogposter

[Anonymous No.21199961]

>>21199176
Kraut is retarded and so is anyone that takes him seriously. This is a bad thread.

[Anonymous No.21200029]

>>21199180
True, in a sense

>>21199205
U mad, brah?

[Anonymous No.21200034]

>>21199237
Agreed. Br*tish people should choke on a fucking dick

[Anonymous No.21200080]

>>21200034
No he's a German - a fucking Kraut - and he puts on an English accent. Nowt is sacred any more. My people, the poor white upper lower middle class Englishman, are having everything taken from us. It's not cricket.

[Anonymous No.21200102]

>>21199961
not OP but Kraut's video should be treated as a point of entry for a discussion on Fascism as an influence on the current Russian government rather than a discussion of Kraut's POV

[Anonymous No.21200115]

>>21200102
His evidence for Schmitt's influence is "trust me bro"

[Anonymous No.21200128]

>>21199176
Kraut is probably overstating the case for Schmitt's influence because he's a German lib so insanely biased. Also

[Anonymous No.21200163]

I think alt-media takes are frequently worse than trad media takes. Putin is, in all likelihood, a competent and practical man who doesn't subscribe wholesale to this or that writer, though the post-war consensus might think it interesting to suspect otherwise.

[Anonymous No.21200171]

>>21200080
Whatever he is, he has aids and should go die in the Congo

[Anonymous No.21200176]

>>21200163
Libs love grand narratives, where everything fits neatly into place like a cheap fantasy paperback. They appeal constantly to nuance and complexity and not rushing to judge, but they just want a good old fashioned Good v Evil story to tell Tarquin, Africa and CB-218 as they tuck them in.

[Anonymous No.21200195]

>>21200163
I think it makes sense that certain thinkers, while maybe not all agreeing with each other, had influence on his thought process. Ilyn for example, even people in Russia think of Ilyn as a philosophical "father" of the current state ideology

[Anonymous No.21200435]

>>21200195
I just don't buy that. I firmly believe that Vladimir Putin is a competent and practical man. I don't believe that he is ideological. In so far as "thinkers" have an influence on his acceptance of their writing as factual, not as some ideology or paradigm to be wholesale accepted or rejected. This idea that we collect from books a framework for approaching things might be true, or it might not be, or it might be true but only for us.

[Anonymous No.21200496]

>>21199176
Probably. Carl Schmitt influences most of non-liberal governments. Reminder that west imposes liberalism on unwilling nations for their resources, and gives the wealth to globalists. Doesn't take academic response to know that. And Kraut can't resist illiberal order without betraying liberalism, proving its critic right.

[Anonymous No.21201340]

I tried to watch a Kraut video once and he was just paraphrasing Acemoglu and Robinson

[Anonymous No.21201383]

>>21199176
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=InEGAWNNtWU
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CXVUuAN5dlg
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7IsOQSeLQxA
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X6wQmj9OMrw

[Anonymous No.21201397]

>>21201383
man this series brings back so many good memories

[Anonymous No.21201427]

>>21200163
You don't subscribe to ideologies.
You use them as shorthand to explore what could be.

The entire point Schmitt presents is that tradition and thereby law is a illusion we feed ourselves, for purposes.
Schmitt therefore explores the collapse possible by viewing the existing framework as a spook.
Kraut's flaw is not point this out by skimming material, but failing to discuss the problems resulting of a flatter and flatter power structure as the glue of tradition collapses.

Sphere theory is similarly something you can't refute. But the point of discussing it is to discuss WHEN a nation or a region is powerful enough to actually create a sphere of power. Not that it happens.
Post USSR has so far been that the various regions called Moscows bluff and stopped paying taxes there, and we are in in the stage where it turns out Russia can't even fucking invade another country without using its army as a meatgrinder in the wrong direction.
So Kraut made a 50 minute video where the core failure isn't the ideology summary, but talking about how using ideologies has basically eroded Putins power base by making Russia unable to just invade and take over Ukraine.
At the least he understood Schmitt's material enough to at the least try and talk about "walking the talk", and why appeasement is never a option.

[Anonymous No.21201495]

Metokur's videos are out there for anyone wanting a quick (pretty long actually) rundown on this faggot
https://youtu.be/mDNPNzYpXUE

[Anonymous No.21202980]

>>21201383
>>21201397
Funniest Christmas in years.

[Anonymous No.21203132]

Bump

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.21203182]

every single liberal, bar none, literally every single one carries a pseud wikipedia skimmer reading of schmitt. all of them. no exceptions. this usually applies to all "thinkers" they routinely namedrop (a narrow spectrum of american-centric retards) like for instance karl popper. im not watchign this faggot. i refuse to watch him, but i guarantee if i were to visit his channel, there would bea video about karl popper and his ebin hegemonic chauvinism that never mentions the fact that he was a state department asset and a mont pelerin fascist. same deal with schmitt, its always the same twitter tier 140 char max reductivist sparknotes takes like "he was illiberal and therefore LE BAD" while either willingly or unwillingly refusing to acknowledge his influence on AMEIRCAN politics in particular, namely neoconservatism - which, for whatever reason, always gets put on leo strauss instead. again, wikipedia-brain wheelchair nigger retard takes that im tired of reading and hearing. schmitt literally invented neoconservatism, not strauss. of course the real problem here is they're all g*rman, additionally modern russian politics is just eurasian neoconservatism and literally identical to american foreign policy. what liberal chauvinists refuse to realize is that russia and america are practically identical nations, i would say no two nations on earth are as alike, hence the bitter rivalry, its just dialectics. do you understand? all this pop-philosophy talk is pointless pablum, its window dressing, its literally just nationalist retardation namedropping 20th century charlatans to appear as more grounded than "america first" gorilla chest thumping. i want nobody to discuss this topic further unless they are willign to agree that every single neoconservative should be executed

[Anonymous No.21203221]

>>21199176
And forcing ideology through war and propaganda is of course not what America has done and is doing to their sphere of influence. If that is the standart to which you hold to prove Putin was influenced (which he really isn't) I guess that would make all US presidents starting with Roosevelt influenced by Schmitt.

[Anonymous No.21203223]

>>21203182
>i want nobody to discuss this topic further unless they are willign to agree that every single neoconservative should be executed
How can you be so based?

[Anonymous No.21203534]

>>21203182
>>21203223
yeah i agree fuck em neocons they be dead to me

[Anonymous No.21203727]

>>21203182
based and true

[Anonymous No.21204965]

>>21203182
>what liberal chauvinists refuse to realize is that russia and america are practically identical nations
One of them still has a functional ladder for replacing leadership, the other don't. One of them has a functional sphere projection, and the other don't.

Neocons wanting to destroy that ladder, without understanding the problems that bring is a entirely different issue.
But relevant
And it might be why populists make videos, because the core pillars don't really exist as anything but figments of imaginations, but they can be replicated as textbooks.

[Anonymous No.21204972]

>>21199176
I have legit not thought about this man in 4 years.
The last time was the debacle with him running a discord doxxing server, and falsifying shit.
Metokur and co revealed his personal life as a highschool dropout and a liberal loser wannabe intellectual, and I just stopped paying attention as he turned leftist to get revenge against "the mean alt righters that bullied me."
The debate has moved so far beyond these 2016 culture war people, that they're just no longer even a spec on the horizon. They've been left behind.

[Anonymous No.21204988]

>>21204972
Kantbot and LogoDaedalus are more relevant than Kraut and Tea.

[Anonymous No.21204989]

>>21204965
>One of them still has a functional ladder for replacing leadership
The one in which a handful of colonels could in an afternoon change the entire leadership and direction of nation, or the one in which a national security state/Deep State long ago formalised to determine the nation's agenda regardless of whether blue tie or red tie is "in command"? Genuinely unsure which you mean.

[Anonymous No.21204990]

>>21199176
>youtuber

[Anonymous No.21204995]

>>21204972
>he turned leftist to get revenge against "the mean alt righters that bullied me.

What? How? He's the most pretentious centrist on the platform.

[Anonymous No.21205022]

>>21204972
Kraut is doing better than anybody who ever shat on him, which is pretty funny to see.

[Anonymous No.21205155]

>>21199176
Sounds like a stupid and ironic reading of Schmitt. Especially given that Schmittian political theology also encompasses liberalism, in the sense that while Schmitt himself critiqued Weimar for not being sufficiently political to survive (and of course it did collapse), other liberal democracies do have a sense of the political that they just repress by outwardly expressing their denial of political violence etc. which is mainly that the liberal democracies identify themselves as being legitimated by their defense of victims to political violence. The "state of exception" for the major liberal democracies is basically what they perceive as "political violence", which is generally identified by the suffering of the victims. The displays of suffering in Congress leading into the Gulf War and such are examples. People generally know this of course, but the USA and its allies legitimate themselves as global humanitarian peace keepers. The victims produced by humanitarian peace keeping are expressions of the state of exception, because when the US and its allies decide that there are victims to be saved, they exclude the suffering of the people they kill in the process. Those were "necessary" for the project of humanitarian peace keeping, their victimization was legimitated by the emergency even though it looks very similar to the victimization that legitimated the declaration of the emergency itself.

And of course this is even more ironic in reference to Ukraine, where we have now had a public discourse for a couple of months about whether we would be willing to risk nuclear war to "save Ukraine". The level of violence that liberal democrats are willing to conceive of has ballooned to nuclear annihilation.

[Anonymous No.21205198]

>>21205155
I wanna hear more from this anon. Y'all are all pseuds in comparison

[Anonymous No.21205206]

>>21204989
Yes, at first glance.
At second glance neither the army nor the oligarches have replacements in their upper echelons, just a line of succession. That will eventually crash as organization age leads to a flat level in the ages of the line of succession.
This is also mirror in the economy, as you get your uni diploma, get your first real job, and realize that you have no actual future in the Russian sphere as they don't actually produce tech or weapons of war. So you have the option of lying to yourself, or let the Russian sphere suffer brain drain. This applies to everywhere else as well, and even to how the oligarches invest.
Which means
You get a damn coup, and then.... the economy collapses. Then you get another coup in a few decades, or another round of military junta.
Its a fucking bad idea.


Meanwhile NSS and Deep State is a spook of assuming organizations which can not directly interfere do interfere directly.
Maybe they do
Maybe they don't.
But at a fundamental level they are not interfering with succession, merely with structure. Often being used as a spook instead of a deterrent. Usually paired with how the legal system in most of the west is extremely weak the moment you can't document.

[Anonymous No.21205332]

>>21199176
I remember this guy, he thought fish could get pregnant!

[Anonymous No.21205931]

>>21203182
>butterfly
kys, but your points on this post are solid, however your way of expression is still as cuntish as always, you should change to be less condescending

[Anonymous No.21205992]

i personally liked the video up until he started talking about schmitt. i think kraut had the issue of conflating liberalism with democracy, schmitt is most certainly anti-liberal, but anti-democracy? likewise, kraut conflated the concept of commissarial and sovereign dictatorship.

[Anonymous No.21206684]

>>21199397
Not to mention his vengeful rage that always backfired on his gay-ops