Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
The Partisan Theory, which appeared in 1963, cannot be described as a completely new or pivotal text in Karl Schmitt's theory. This is a later work, which develops a number of theses and propositions voiced in the “Concept of the Political”, “Nomos of the Earth” and other works of the German political theorist. Schmitt addresses the theme of the transformation of war caused, as he calls it, by discrimination of war. Schmitt had previously addressed the concept of war discrimination in several works, including Die Wendung zum diskriminierenden Kriegsbegriff and Nomos. In short, discrimination means a perversion of the original purely political meaning that was attached to war in the “golden era of European statehood”, during the period of the jus publicum Europaeum, i.e. in the 17th-early 20th centuries. 20th century. In the Theory of the Partisan, Schmitt focuses on one of the ways to discriminate against war – to give it an irregular status. A partisan enters the world political arena, destroying the traditional political-the ability to clearly distinguish between friends and enemies. Schmitt's four criteria for a partisan include irregularity, mobility, increased political involvement, and telluric character (attachment to the territory in which he fights). Irregularity becomes a new political space in which the partisan fights. Such a war is dangerous, according to Schmitt, because it provokes boundless cruelty – the irregular nature of the partisan does not allow making peace with him, on the other hand, the partisan himself also does not seek peace, his victory lies in the complete destruction of the enemy who occupied his territory. In such a war, there is no place for the right of war-jus in bello, there are no restrictions and principles. The 20th century is changing the nature of guerrilla warfare. Leftist revolutionaries in Russia, China, and Cuba have changed the meaning of the guerrilla, calling him to fight not for territory, but for political ideals against the “absolute enemy,” which in turn further radicalizes modern warfare.
If we talk about the novelty and interest in this work, they are connected precisely with the forecast of the transition of world politics to a state of permanent “world civil war of revolutionary class hostility”, which Schmitt gives. The emergence and development of modern terrorism contributes to maintaining interest in the “Partisan Theory”. In particular, the question of whether a terrorist can be considered a partisan is actively discussed.