The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Ep. 176
The Nazi State was a totalitarian state. This, nobody denies. While Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Party associates obviously intended to organize the Nazi State in that way, a thoroughgoing justification was provided by the so-called “Crown Jurist of the Third Reich,” Carl Schmitt, who has become popular on the so-called “New Right” (Woke Right). Schmitt resisted the idea of the Nazi movement, despite his political and judicial theories that went on to justify it, but only until Hitler took the Chancellorship in January 1933. Then Schmitt joined and soon after penned an essay, “The Legal Basis for the Total State,” to justify Nazi totalitarianism and the Führerprinzip in the “miracle” of legal decisionism (the dictatorial executive making decisions on top of rule of law). In this groundbreaking episode of the New Discourses Podcast, not only does host James Lindsay continue his sprawling series on the “Nazi Experiment,” but he also presents this Schmittian essay in English for the first time. Join him for an introduction to Carl Schmitt and to hear “The Legal Basis for the Total State.”
Subscribe to the New Discourses Podcast on SoundCloud, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, Rumble, Odysee, or by RSS.
Additional episodes of the New Discourses Podcast are available here.
4 comments
The people of Romania solved the problem of their country’s co-dictators, Nicolae and Elena Ceausescu by withdrawing their consent to be tyrannized, bringing them to trial, then executing them.
I’m only about 1/3rd of the way in on this (the podcast) – and perhaps James or Schmitt covers this issue later, but does no one, including the Woke Right not address the need for other powers that would take out an unbound executive if he was psycho? if he, like Biden, is clearly demented, or if he like many other presidents is corrupt and tyrannical (e.g. Lincoln, FDR, GWB, Biden admin)? This alone should be enough to show that the unbound executive/ultimate sovereignty is a PROBLEM and just an excuse for dictatorial power. Not saying this is profound, I assume someone else has brought it up, but this clearly shows how stupid this idea would be in practice. Granted the notion whether from Schmitt or Yarvin or Auron is just an excuse for seizing “absolute power” but the problem of necessary removal of a deficient “unbound executive” should be the first critique.
and sorry for another post, but I forgot to say – the guy you retweeted the other day (dated Sep 19), Robert Sepehr is a pied piper for the Woke Right. It was a tweet reply of Sepehr to Peter Sweden regarding the history of Antifa. Look at Sepehr’s youtube channel – the whole purpose of his channel is to get young white men to question the Out of Africa migration (“whites didn’t come from blacks” – Sepehr claims he’s some kind of anthropologist, while there are videos on YT debunking the accuracy of Sepehr’s anthro vids), he mystifies with occult mumbo jumbo (various vids on Blavatsky, Nazi occultism, Vril Society, satanism, etc.), “no fap,” and other goofy stuff. His background and ethnicity makes this project all the more bizarre, check the IMDb for his father, Ben-Hur Sepehr (so why is Robert pushing this neo-nazi crap?)
James, be more careful who you retweet. If only to avoid Woke Right dorks making fun of you for retweeting one of them in an ostensibly positive or affirmative way.
The people of Romania resolved the problem of their country’s co-dictators, Nicolae and Elena Ceausescu, by withdrawing their consent to be tyrannized, holding a trial, and executing them.
Sic semper tyrannis.