Abstract

In his struggle against Weimar, Geneva, and Versailles, Carl Schmitt enlisted a number of political thinkers as confederates—Machiavelli, Hobbes, Joseph de Maistre, Louis de Bonald, Juan Donoso Cortés, Benjamin Constant, and Hegel. The legitimacy of this claim has gone unchallenged except in the case of Hegel. Many have felt that his liberal credentials, most clearly manifested in his conception of civil society and his allegiance to the reformist policies espoused in Prussia by H.F.K. von Stein, K.A. von Hardenberg, and Wilhelm von Humboldt, were compromised by Schmitt, who appears to have opposed liberalism and contributed to the demise of the Weimar republic. Schmitt’s attempt to tie Hegel’s views to the political outlook of Hobbes and de Maistre also discredits his speculative stance. Jean-François Kervégan’s extraordinary book seeks to extricate Hegel from this troubling association and attempts both to defend Hegel’s liberalism and confirm the philosophical nature of his argument. Without diminishing Schmitt’s Hegelian debt, his exhaustive comparative study, supported by impeccable scholarship, attempts to show that Schmitt distorted Hegel’s liberalism by disregarding the dialectical intent of his philosophy. In the process, Kervégan aims to preserve the Hegelian legacy from any contamination that might accrue to it from association with Schmitt.