THE GEOPOLITICS OF SEPARATION
Response to Teschke’s ‘Decisions and Indecisions’
Assessments of the many first-rank European thinkers who sympathized or collaborated with fascism—Heidegger, De Man, Céline, Jünger, Gentile, Croce, Della Volpe, Pound—are inevitably problematic. In the case of Carl Schmitt, the difficulties are compounded by the apparent discontinuity of his political positions and his anomalous relationship to the intellectual traditions of the right. Coming to us from a disturbing place and time—and, for English readers, in the scrambled fragments of an ad hoc translation process—Schmitt’s writings do not fit within any grid of contemporary academic specialization.  I develop this discussion further in The Enemy: An Intellectual Portrait of Carl Schmitt, London and New York 2000. A sober evaluation requires both a careful diachronic contextualization and a critically informed interrogation of his work.
Subscribe for just £36 and get free access to the archive
Please login on the left to read more or buy the article for £3
- Andrei Platonov: On the First Socialist Tragedy Reflections from 1934 on man, technology and the dialectic of nature. Frailties and dangers of our advance within—and against—an unyielding environment.
- Benno Teschke: Fetish of Geopolitics Responding to Gopal Balakrishnan in NLR 68, Teschke underscores the problematic nature of Carl Schmitt’s accounts of colonial expansion and the inter-state system. Against these, a programme for a revised Marxist geopolitics.
- Benno Teschke: Decisions and Indecisions Where liberal thought has tried to quarantine the ‘dangerous mind’ of Carl Schmitt, recent revisions have found portents of contemporary imperial hubris in his analysis of victors’ justice. Warning against such 'rehabilitations', Benno Teschke detects a unifying set of preoccupations that render the thinker's transition from hyper-authoritarianism to fascism logical.