In such a case, the rule by the people emerges largely as a symbolic sideshow whereas the actual exercise of political power happens behind the scenes. Carl Schmitt offers a suitable platform of analyzing the validity of democracy especially in his book the concept of politics.
Many describe Schmitt as having attempted to drive a thick wedge between liberalism and democracy. They see Schmitt effort as trying to undercut the assumption that the rational discourse and the legal formalism would be the basis of legitimacy. Schmitt’s contribution to the political theory characterizes the advancing view that genuine politics was irreducible to the view of socio-economic conflicts and thus unconstrained by people’s normative considerations. The view of Schmitt is that the essence of politics is indeed a battle to grave between a friend and an enemy. Many of the analysts of Schmitt works during his era saw them as an opportunistic embrace of the Nazism, that if embraced in the current world setting then everybody would kill each other (Schmitt, 2008).
The Schmitt’s notion of the political ground tends to dissociate democracy from liberalism thus more controversy arises from the constituted, parliamentary legislation, and rule destined practices of general elections that mostly characterize the modern democracy ordinary workings. In this perception, the major question stems on Schmitt radical perspective of the world constituted the democratic politics in the Weimer Republic. Schmitt took democratic ruling as the self-rule of the people thus the decisions that rulers make represents and articulates the will of the people (Schmitt, 2008). However, his view of the principle of democracy opens to different competing interpretations.
What many people need to understand that the political practice forms an identity of the sovereign will of the citizen and is not a