Visions of the Past, Courtesy of Schmitt

Probably more like Visions of the Present, but again, that darn theme. So, Schmitt. It was kind of hard to get into this one, maybe because of all the preface stuff in the foreword and the introduction and maybe because of the style of the writing. I thought it was interesting how much time was devoted to explaining Schmitt's allegiance to the Nazis. Sort of plays into his friends and enemies discussion though of course the Nazis were horrid and no sane person could follow them.
Okay, so I think I'll focus on the friends and enemies discussion, since it seems to be pretty important. Especially the line on 28: "rationally speaking, it cannot be denied that nations continue to group themselves according to the friend and enemy antithesis, that the distinction still remains actual today, and that this is an ever present possibility for every people existing in the political sphere." Hmm. Let's see...we do that in wars, Allies vs. Axis, US and other freedom loving countries vs. the Communists, and currently, us vs. the Axis of Evil or the Terrorists. It is also interesting that he notes that "all political concepts, images, and terms have a polemical meaning...focused on a specific conflict and are bound to a concrete situation; the result is a friend-enemy grouping and they turn into empty and ghostlike abstractions when this situation disappears" (30). This too makes sense, even in social situations. We often classify people as enemies based on event alone and when it's done, we can't quite account for why we dislike someone, "we just do".
His point on pg. 32 about party politics being seen as equal to the political is also interesting, because every country with a party system seems to do that to some extent. We do it worse than all the others, of course. Independents are weird for us, we don't quite know what to do with them except have candidates appeal to some basic detail of their lives which would connect them to a party. Once that is done we consider them part of the party, as if they could be anything but. Campaigns are snipe attacks against the other party instead of serious discussion on different ways of looking at issues and working to make the country better.
Anyway, that's it for me this time. I'm sure I'll have more to talk about in my reflection, but these are my points for right now. I do wonder though if we should try to get out of this system that Schmitt is talking about. There's a quote from West Wing discussing how partisan politics is a good thing: "And I don't think Americans are tired of partisan politics; I think they're tired of hearing career politicians diss partisan politics to get a gig. I've tried it before. They ain't buying it. That's okay, though; that's okay, though, 'cause partisan politics is good. Partisan politics is what the founders had in mind. It guarantees that the minority opinion is heard, and as a lifelong possessor of minority opinions, I appreciate it. " (4x05, 'Game On'). So, perhaps party politics is good, just not the way we formulate it.