Augustine, Schmitt, and Political Theology (w/Raeffe Gibson)
Nov 15, 2019
auto_awesome
Political science expert Raeffe Gibson joins Benjamin and Edmund to discuss the concept of unity in political thought, exploring the connection between Augustine and Schmitt in political theology. They explore Schmitt's view on state action and ethics in politics, the significance of divine kingship in achieving legitimacy, and the debate between Cicero and Augustine on justice and the pursuit of the good.
States in the Middle Ages were organized and legitimized based on religious unity, but this broke down during the Reformation and early modernity.
Political unity can be constructed by citizens without requiring religious agreement, as argued by Karl Schmidt.
The tension between the desire for unity and the demand for thick legitimation stories poses challenges for creating stable and inclusive political structures.
Deep dives
Augustine and the Unity of a Christian Commonwealth
Augustine argues that the ideal unity of a state is unity around a Christian commonwealth, which is a kind of religious unity that comes from God and transcends the political. This concept of religious agreement becomes a defining part of how states are organized and legitimized, particularly in the Middle Ages. However, with the breakdown of religious agreement during the Reformation and early modernity, this unity breaks down as well. Nonetheless, there are still modern political theorists like Karl Schmidt who advocate for a state based on some kind of pre-political unity, even if it is based on criteria that may seem arbitrary or unorthodox.
Karl Schmidt and the Construction of Political Unity
Karl Schmidt, a German legal theorist, believes that political unity can be constructed by citizens and does not necessarily require religious agreement. Schmidt argues that the state's unity can be based on drawing lines between friends and enemies, with friends being united by different criteria of significance. This conception of the political goes against earlier Greek and Roman notions and allows for the building of states on various criteria, such as nationality or other forms of identity. However, Schmidt's focus on the creation of friend-enemy distinctions raises concerns about the potential dangers and problems associated with his concept of political unity.
The Evolution of Legitimation Stories
The thickening of legitimation stories can be traced back to the crisis of the third century in the Roman Empire. Constantine's adoption of Christianity as the official religion played a role in this process, but it was not the sole factor. In the Western Roman Empire, the collapse of the empire and the rise of barbarian kings led to the establishment of legitimacy through deals with the Pope. These kings sought papal recognition and support in exchange for supporting the Church and presenting themselves as chosen by God. This shift in legitimization was driven by the weakened state institutions and the need to establish authority over Christian populations.
The Need for the State to Crush Its Enemies
According to the podcast, the Weimar Republic in Germany was criticized for not taking decisive action against extremist parties and movements that posed a threat. The Weimar Republic hesitated to crack down on parties like the Nazi Party and left-wing factions, which led to the perception that it tolerated its enemies rather than crushing them. This lack of action created a sense of illegitimacy and undermined the stability of the Weimar Republic.
The Tension Between Unity and Thick Legitimation Stories
The podcast explores the tension between the desire for unity and the demand for thick legitimation stories in modern politics. It notes that people today have increasingly thick legitimation demands from the state, wanting their beliefs and values to be reflected in a deep and meaningful way. However, the podcast highlights the contradiction that people also no longer believe in objective morality or unity, making it difficult to achieve both. This tension between thickness and thinness of legitimation stories poses challenges for creating stable and inclusive political structures.