Grace Tosi
PHL 232-201
Professor Pepe
First Short Essay Assignment Analysis of The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy In the first two chapters of Carl Schmitt’s “The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy”, Carl Schmitt shares a lot of information on his views of democracy and parliamentarism (liberal) by comparing them and also showing their differences. Schmitt states that since the early 1800’s individuals believed that in order for Europe to function, the country has to become democratic (Nyierra Golden) and then goes on to explain the essential characteristics of a system that guarantees the rule of law. Schmitt follows these statements out by discussing the different nations and socio economic groups that have practiced democracy and what the outcome of that …show more content…
Schmitt then goes on to say how if democracy is going to work, then all the fake democracy talks to needs to vanish. He then says how “universal suffrage is a liberal idea and not a democratic one” (Nyierra Golden). This is interesting because with hearing that idea and comparing it to present day, liberals are the last people that would want universal suffrage. He also says how liberal politics can’t exist which is also interesting because they exist today. Carl Schmitt also states that democracy is a string of identities (Schmitt, 25) and that it is not made up of only one person. Schmitt is so focused of the democracy in this chapter that I do not think he realizes that it is impossible to achieve democracy to its full extent. Democracy, that is “for the people”, can never really be for all of the people when the voting system works in a majority win way. If one side has 48% and the other has 47% making the 48% side the majority, are all the people really getting what they want? And are all the people’s voices really being heard? Carl Schmitt talks about The democracy seeming to have an appeal to individuals who wanted to have self-control rather than dictatorship (Nyierra Golden), but if their
PHL 232-201
Professor Pepe
First Short Essay Assignment Analysis of The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy In the first two chapters of Carl Schmitt’s “The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy”, Carl Schmitt shares a lot of information on his views of democracy and parliamentarism (liberal) by comparing them and also showing their differences. Schmitt states that since the early 1800’s individuals believed that in order for Europe to function, the country has to become democratic (Nyierra Golden) and then goes on to explain the essential characteristics of a system that guarantees the rule of law. Schmitt follows these statements out by discussing the different nations and socio economic groups that have practiced democracy and what the outcome of that …show more content…
Schmitt then goes on to say how if democracy is going to work, then all the fake democracy talks to needs to vanish. He then says how “universal suffrage is a liberal idea and not a democratic one” (Nyierra Golden). This is interesting because with hearing that idea and comparing it to present day, liberals are the last people that would want universal suffrage. He also says how liberal politics can’t exist which is also interesting because they exist today. Carl Schmitt also states that democracy is a string of identities (Schmitt, 25) and that it is not made up of only one person. Schmitt is so focused of the democracy in this chapter that I do not think he realizes that it is impossible to achieve democracy to its full extent. Democracy, that is “for the people”, can never really be for all of the people when the voting system works in a majority win way. If one side has 48% and the other has 47% making the 48% side the majority, are all the people really getting what they want? And are all the people’s voices really being heard? Carl Schmitt talks about The democracy seeming to have an appeal to individuals who wanted to have self-control rather than dictatorship (Nyierra Golden), but if their