Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Schmitz, Heinz-Gerd

Titel

Kants Lehre vom hostis iniustus und Carl Schmitts Kritik dieser Konzeption

Ist Teil von

• Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, 2003-01, Vol.89 (3), p.399-417

Ort / Verlag

Franz Steiner Verlag

Erscheinungsjahr

2003

Quelle

Alma/SFX Local Collection

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Discussing international law Kant condemns any war waged to punish another state, because sovereign nations exist in a state of nature, i.e. without a common judge. Nevertheless, he introduces the concept of an ‚unjust enemy‘ (hostis iniustus). The term indicates a country whose public declarations show the intention to perpetuate the state of nature. Carl Schmitt — in his book Der Nomos der Erde — accuses Kant not only of inconsistency. He also argues that Kant's concept of an unjust enemy challenges the jus publicum Europaeum which, from the 16th century until World War One, has humanized warfare by rejecting the traditional idea of an unjust war. The paper attempts to show that Kant's philosophy of international relations does not develop inconsistent approaches to war and hostility. Schmitt's remonstrance follows as a consequence form his political theory, which declares militancy to be the conditio sine qua non of any political entity. Kant, on the contrary, postulates a congress of independent states, which, step by step, has to transform the original international state of nature into peaceful interaction. Therefore, he takes into account an opponent whose activities could destroy the desired development.