99% of those who call themselves “Nazis” on Anon Babble don't know who the man in the suit is. You are nothing but mindless violent Nazi larpers, and the 0.8% of you who do know who he is, have not read any of his books. You call yourselves Nazis and the most complex book you have read is Mein Kampf.
Any liberal would beat you up in a debate, you don't know shit.
this dandy bookworm who has achieved nothing of consequence outside of his narrow theoretic field and has conformist tendencies... is absolutely essential for nationalist resistance
Ok
Nazism is cringe LARP shit
achieved nothing
The man who articulated for the Reich its legal doctrine is unimportant, the man who laid out the most devastating critique against liberal democracies is unimportant, the man whom his enemies could neither cancel nor forget because of his contributions achieved nothing.
Thanks for proving my point
Not even Hitler knew his name
Who gives a fuck? All I need to know was that Hitler was right. Führerprinzip.
Of course it is. The kikels want you in that box because they've spent 80 years building traps around it.
Hitler did not know one of Nazism's most influential idelogues, nor the editor-in-chief of his party's legal journal.
Please continue
Btw
most devastating critique against liberal democracies
he pointed out that they are better at totalitarianism than openly totalitarian regimes. then he condemned political romanticism, basically he was antifascist but too conformist to draw practical conclusions during Nazi era.
bruh, nobody knew who he was except other jurists who happened to read his opinions in expert magazines. Also his diaries and letters are full of admiration for various jews like kafka.
absolute waste of time and ultimate demoralization tool for CIA black propaganda ops.
X was antifascist
Things get better with every comment
Who gives a fuck?
Who cares to understand what you support and why, bro just look at this epic Hitler edit!
Nobody knew who was the most important jurist and political philosopher of his time.
If you want to convince yourself of this so as not to feel bad, that's fine.
well, thats the OP's premise anyway
Right is Carl Schmitt
Left
Judging by the Pour le Merite medal I’m going with Ernst Jünger
Embarrassing and low IQ shitheel
the guy who unironically befriended gershom scholem in school, remained his lifelong correspondence partner, and whose son was executed by nazis... is absolutely essential reading for right wing, because he got a meddl in ww1.
ok
you guys aren't real nazis
here's how you can level up
we can only beat you with words, to win you must take action.
t. Self loathing lib
Thanks for inspiring us to be better OP
nigga why would i call myself after a slur invented by jews?
You are not a real nazi!!
Ok so? Is the right supposed to take critique from leftist kikes in good faith now?
I don't believe that you are worried about people here not being sufficiently nazis. I think that you are worried about them even wanting to be nazis.
You see people saying heil hitler and hating jews and it makes you feel scared. You are scared. So you come here to try and demoralize people and stir trouble.
I have news for you: nobody needs to read any book in order to hate Jews. And it's not gonna stop.
Inb4 flag.
Meant to post this
flag
b-b-but I said inb4!!!
Perhaps you could identify some of the man's key ideas or theories and their political implications for the modern landscape in which we live instead of us talking all that shit. Perhaps organize what you learned and share instead of being a pretentious cunt.
This jew raped kids.
Kissinger? Out kissinger? But he otherwise seems so innocent and kind hearted
He killed millions dude he's one of the people who's child rape is not even his #1 crime
bad faith, disingenuous pilpul
and at least one outright lie
This little dog is kike-trained.
OP is a monstrous faggot. Carl Schmitt (guy on the right) is who China reads and why they’ll probably win.
i'm just a humble jünger collected works reader and i don't want any other healthy nazis to waste time with that schizo garbage.
What even are these people? Did he have a dybbuk too?
you call yourself nazis
nazis
NIGGA HEIL HITLER
no, we call ourself Aryan, jews call us "nazi"
dumb fuck
Idk dude if there is dibbuk they all have it
You can see it rn with how much they're salivating over starving people to death
those who call themselves “Nazis” on Anon Babble
Haven't ever seen this.
Link?
We need a solution for this. It's unacceptable to be ruled over by demons.
Who is the next kissenger, wexner etc?
I have extensively read Schmitt and written about him. I think his ideas are worthwhile even today. Ask me anything on the matter, Anon Babble
Jews in the state dept and AIPAC handlers who else. Does it even matter
When I see kissinger I don't even think "kissinger" anymore I just think "Jeeeew"
Jews and OP obliterated
Qrd on why his ideas mattered in his time and why they are applicable today? Thx.
Schmidt is normie level tho. He’s from 2024 twitter.
Nuland gives the same energy.
Are you jewish?
I guess that technically I am yeah. Not a palestinian with an israeli flag if that's the question.
Nuland
I don't respect women enough to think that, but maybe. Issue with kissinger was he was good at his job and that's a guy thing
Most footsoldiers don't need to know all the intricate politics of their side, they simply need to be identified who to fight and kill.
I know the one in the right but not the one on the left.
99% of those who call themselves “Nazis” on Anon Babble don't know who the man in the suit is.
99% of them also look like this
Im gonna guess Eichmann or Manstein just by face but im probably wrong.
he was by profession a jurist, and participated extensively in the legal discussion of Weimar Republic (his work before Weimar wasn't that notable or extensive yet)
as you must be aware, the Republic was in a great legitimation crisis, with major problems both outside and inside its borders and the new fledgling parliamentary-republican government trying to maintain control
Schmitt thought that the spirit of the Weimar constitution laid in its presidential, ie. executive power provisions, and not in the parliamentary system, which he deemed inadequate to produce real decision (de facto correct). Schmitt made an interesting distinction here between democracy and liberalism, two very different things, and parliamentarism belonging to the intellectual world of liberalism, not democracy
His intellectual enemies at the time were mostly other jurists, more specifically the legal positivist tradition exemplified by Hans Kelsen. Simplifying here, Kelsen argued that every legal norm is based on another legal norm. This leads to a self-fulfilling circle with no explanation to how the constitution first comes into power or why it has to be followed. Kelsen thought that legal theory had to be purified of extra-legal matter, such as psychology and the political.
Schmitt's notable contribution here was to point out that since norms cannot choose to apply themselves, we have to consider extra-legal matters, ergo the person or other agent who decides whether or not a law is in force or not. The height of this decision, for Schmitt, is the capability to decide on the exception, ergo an emergency situation which the political community must confront, and in which the whole constitution might be withheld. The person who is capable of making this decision is the sovereign in any given situation. So: Schmitt's major contribution is in the discussion surrounding emergency powers, which in the last years have been very relevant because of COVID-19 or e.g. South Korea
Agree Nuland is not on kissenger's level but both look like cannibals.if you could give a general idea of the breakdown amoungst your tribe/country, what percentage roughly are aware of these evil Jews actions and are against them?
The really, really important people are always forgotten.
From Chat Gpt:
This image is often associated with Carl Schmitt and Claus von Stauffenberg, who was a key figure in the July 20 plot to assassinate Hitler. The man on the left does resemble Stauffenberg based on known historical photos.
Wouldnt guess that in a million years since im not that deep into WW2 lore and i didnt know this literal who.
cont. (sorry, I am unable to write "quick" rundowns)
His work Verfassungslehre (1928) (Constitutional Theory) on the Weimar constitution was a well-regarded work on the subject
During the late 1920s, he started to be noted by the-powers-that-be, and in 1932 was employed by the Weimar government as a legal representative, in a case which the Reich government won ("Preußenschlag")
he also was an advisor for the Reich government (chancellors von Papen and von Schleicher), who used his theories surrounding emergency powers to justify said actions
he advocated for the dissolution of the NSDAP and the KPD, and argued that even a democratic regime had no obligation to equally entertain parties that want to fundamentally relinquish the constitution; this can be seen playing out still in today's Germany in regards to the campaign against AfD and the slogans of "militant democracy" or "Verfassungsschutz"
I have read that Schmittian thought had an influence on the BDR constitution, but on that matter I am not enlightened enough to elaborate
It would seem our modern masonic political leadership has declared themselves sovereign and all else subjects. But now the exception is never ending.
Posters like this are why I still come to this shit hole website.
NYPA!
cont.
Schmitt's definition for the political (Der Begriff des Politischen, 1932) is another one of his more influential and worth considering ones. His definition for the political is the friend/enemy -distinction, an existential grouping between two fighting collectives of humans, in- and out-group, friend and enemy. To exist in the political plane is to be able to make this distinction with lucidity. Violence is not necessary between friend and enemy, but it is a possibility. As long as there are friends and enemies, there are politics, and there are states.
Schmitt accuses liberalism of the inability to make this distinction. The liberal thinks that every real political (in the Schmittian sense) problem can be neutralized in the parliament, in an open discussion, that by deliberation and tehnic-rational thinking we can solve everything. Schmitt thinks this is naive, ignorant and dangerous, because we are forced to exist in a world where this distinction is very real, where entities such as the NSDAP or KPD or different nations will want to impose THEIR will on you or even kill you
In regards to this concept, Schmitt actually poses that every major political-juridical concept contains this friend/enemy -distinction; that is, every concept we use holds a concrete and either a contemporary or an ossified political struggle. Think of it like this: the word "class" is a political concept. Its history is obscure if we do not understand the history of industrial revolution, of opposition between the proletariat and the owning class, and the at time very violent opposition at that. "Democracy" exists, as a concept, because there are other options that are not democracy (i.e. aristocracy). Political words are fighting words
Last one
Personally I find the friend/enemy-distinction very interesting, especially regards to conceptual history. And I think we can see that political concepts are indeed fighting words, they contain a concrete contemporary or historical struggle. Most political fights we have today are concerned with the ownership of concepts: "democracy" or "political" being the strongest examples of this. Everyone wants to claim that what they are doing is democratic. But we are not talking about absolute, universal definitions, but rather pluralistic ones, with every agent applying their own meaning to concepts, and using them as weapons in a political struggle. This is what Schmitt attempted to bring out, and I think this is what you have to internalize if you want to win any political battle
Hopefully this answered your original question adequately. There is of course much yet that I could write about this Nazi years or post-WW2 influence, but I think I brought up the point already.
"Kai nomon egnÅ"
Thank you. And with regards to "But now the exception is never ending", that is not the lense through which Schmitt looked at things, but if you are interested, I can point you out to another writer who expands on the subject. Giorgio Agamben, an Italian philosopher who is still alive, discusses Schmitt extensively in his books "Homo sacer"and "The State of Exception". He argues that the state of exception is a tool of government to extend its reach and reduce people to bare political subjects, and said tool has become exceedingly common place in the last decades. Agamben criticized COVID-19 measures as being an example of this.
A nation should be comprised only of friends otherwise it devours itself. Our multicultural democracies are really just a collection of enemies. Jews jewing Jews to see will be the top jew on their gay ass pyramid.
I love Carl Schmitt.
Fun fact, the CCP considers him mandatory reading for all party officials.
It's why I find the idea of people calling china communist ludicrous
If he had made a serious thread about his ideas he would not have gotten even 10 responses, a provocative thread has helped more to make him known and I hope that those here will be interested and read at least some summary of his ideas out there. My goal is accomplished
Nobody cares nigger, nigger heil hitler!
OP might have a point. Never too late to learn though.
The coolest part is, all of Carl Schmitt's books are mandatory reading when training to be a CCP party official
And that's why Finns are the best posters here
this picture is ai generated