바이마르 의회주의의 위기와 보수주의의 헌법정책적 대응

The collapse of the Weimar Republic was never a constrained process of historically predominated. As a consequence of world economic crisis since 1929 increased the hardship of the democratic parliamentarian system, and the nomination Hitlers to the German Chanceler had been underway behind the process of deparliamentarisation. It was not sudden, but a gradual transformation. These years are the grounds for the collapse of republic and the political alternative to Hitlers designation discussed anew. In this center of alternative-discussion stand the constitutional problem. The fate of Weimar was combined closely with the Weimar constitution and especially with the emergencystate of article 48. Through this article could change the republic to the authoritarian state. Carl Schmitt (1888~1985), one the most controversial juristprudence and powerful protagonist in Germany, has analysed the decay of Weimar liberal democracy and its anti-liberal concept. He concretized his political ideas with friend-foe principle. He criticized the pluralistic principle and the coalitionstactic of Weimar party-system and proposed as an alternative a ‘total state’ under the autority of the republics president. With the deprive of parliamentarian power will he build up a autoritarian presidential system. Hindenburg, Schleicher and the industrial right wing wanted a more despotic mode of governing than the fragile multi-party ststem. For that Carl Schmitt saw the last chance to reserve the republic and the only way out from the state crisis. For him was to infringe the part of constitution a smaller evil than their total elimination after all.