According to Schmitt's theory, the notion of political is centred on the state, not as an institution, but as the result of the interaction between various components of society. Men constitute a governmental association and the state is the factor of unity of this association. This is the meaning that we will keep for the phrase “condition of the political”.
However, using the enemy as a political construction means instrumentalising an antagonism to defend a selfish interest.
In other words, would the enemy – a negative concept – be a mere construction based on the defence of interests, the necessity to create a line between opponents and defendants? Or could it be a notion compatible with the construction of a political society, with the creation of a strong link to allow for the existence of a 'governmental association'?
I will show that the enemy is a construction that gives a structure to a society. From there, these components can interact and form the political in a broader sense. In other words, the enemy is a political construction, which is the condition for the components of society to interact but also for the state to exist
[...] The enemy is a creation structuring a society A. The speech act: the creation of the enemy An enemy does not exist until it is mentioned - The concept of enemy does not reflect objectivity An enemy can be denounced as such although its influence can be beneficial and in the same manner, a friend can be totally harmful. In other words the declaration of enemy is a choice that is not based on objectivity towards the enemy. Instead, it is the result of an assessment taking into account a broader situation, where it may be beneficial to designate something as an enemy (Schmitt) - Discourse can create a situation which denounces an enemy This introduces the concept of speech act, as it was theoretized by Ole Waever. [...]
[...] The enemy is a construction that is a condition of the political, in its regularity aspect, but also to prevent its disintegration. Schmitt's conclusion is particularly meaningful: a people who do not have an enemy means the end of the political and thus, the end of this people. Conclusion The enemy is a construction that serves the political, and the state is the aggregation of its various components, which are all competing for power. Therefore, the notion of enemy as designated by the state is nothing but the notion shared by part of a state such as a majority, or specific ideological, religious, economic groups. [...]
[...] Schmitt mentions that without the notion of enemy, not only would not there be a state, but there would not even be a culture, arts, literature, economy, human interaction because all these dynamisms lie on the very central notion of attraction / repulsion towards values. In that sense, we can better understand the notion of political. Bureaucracy in fighting's The concept of enemy also has bureaucratic extensions. Indeed, the designation of the enemy also leads to bureaucratic choices concerning those who are going to monitor the enemy. Therefore, as Didier Bigo showed, security related bureaucracies are competing against each other to gain legitimacy. [...]
[...] In this sense, it is a political construction. Once the enemy has been denounced, society is committed to variety of commitments and loyalists towards the authority that denounced something as the enemy. The reaction of this society towards the threat (support / no support of the denunciator) is an act of allegiance / rebellion of power. The enemy is a structural notion that leaves no room for neutrality, which is why it is a political construction; it is the condition of the political taken as the interactions between all the components of a state. [...]
[...] The handover duplicates the fear of assimilation with mainland China. Various strategies are put into place to differentiate Hong Congers from Mainland Chinese: economic threat caused by the invasion of poor Mainland Chinese on the rich city, the necessity to maintain the border between the Special Administrative Region and the Mainland, the threat caused by the “agents of the in Hong Kong plotting against the SAR government . - Association of threats in a political discourse Didier Bigo shows that the political discourse proceeds by association and gradually directs the attention towards a danger that did not exist before being mentioned by gradually linking up notions. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
