„Autoritäre“ und demokratische Rechts- und Rechtswissenschaftsverständnisse – Die „Reine Rechtslehre“ als Grundlage für eine demokratische Rechtspolitik

Abstract

In this paper I compare the understanding of jurisprudence by Hans Kelsen and Carl Schmitt. By establishing the primacy of politics and rejecting the prescriptive function of jurisprudence, Hans Kelsen enabled a democratic understanding of law (and of jurisprudence), and at the same time a critical approach. Kelsen defines the law from a dynamic perspective, which justifies the constant changeability of the law - and in this respect the primacy of democracy over dogmatic jurisprudence. The basis for Kelsen's understanding of jurisprudence is his relativism, which at the same time - as mentioned at the end of the paper - is based on a moral position on the autonomy of the individual. Keywords: Carl Schmitt - critical law studies - democracy - dynamic of law - Hans Kelsen - jurisprudence - theory of law