Economics Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Parliamentary system: A parliamentary system is a system of government in which the executive branch (the government) is accountable to the legislative branch (the parliament). This means that the government must have the support of a majority of the parliament in order to stay in power. See also Democracy, State, Society, Government, Power, Legislation._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Rudolf Smend on Parliamentary System - Dictionary of Arguments
Brocker I 171 Parliamentarism/SmendVsSchmitt/Smend: Question: Is Carl Schmitt's criticism of parliamentarianism(1) descriptive and normative? Does the writing jump into party politics from the analytical observer's perspective? >C. Schmitt. SmendVsSchmitt: Rudolf Smend aptly spoke of "conceptual realism": the original ideology was "only a moment of integration"; the belief in the exclusive meaning of ideology was "rationalism or (as with Carl Schmitt) conceptual realism"(2). Smend meant by that a short circuit of word and thing. Hans Rothfels(3) and Otto Kirchheimer(4) immediately took up the critical dictum, and Schmitt's parliamentary paper is still regarded today as an idealistic short-circuit of idea and institution. An institution does not have to fall with its initial idea, as marriage does not with love. 1. Carl Schmitt, Die geistesgeschichtliche Lage des heutigen Parlamentarismus, in: Bonner Festgabe für Ernst Zitelmann zum fünfzigjährigen Doktorjubiläum, München/Leipzig 1923, 413-473. Separatveröffentlichung in der Reihe: Wissenschaftliche Abhandlungen und Reden zur Philosophie, Politik und Geistesgeschichte, Bd. 1, München/Leipzig 1923. Zweite, erweiterte Auflage 1926 2. Rudolf Smend,»Verfassung und Verfassungsrecht« (1928), in: ders., Staatsrechtliche Abhandlungen, Berlin 1955, 119-276. S. 153 3. Hans Rothfels, »Rezension von Carl Schmitt, Die geistesgeschichtliche Lage des heutigen Parlamentarismus (1926)«, in: Historische Zeitschrift 142, 1930, 316-319. S. 319 4. Otto Kirchheimer,(zus. mit Nathan Leites), »Bemerkungen zu Carl Schmitts ›Legalität und Legitimität‹« (1933), in: ders., Von der Weimarer Verfassung zum Faschismus, Frankfurt/M. 1976, 113-151. S. 113. Reinhard Mehring, Carl Schmitt, Die geistesgeschichtliche Lage des heutigen Parlamentarismus (1923), in: Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
PolSmend I Rudolf Smend Die politische Gewalt im Verfassungsstaat und das Problem der Staatsform Berlin 1955 Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
||
> Counter arguments against Smend
> Counter arguments in relation to Parliamentary System
