Search results

The question of whether Schmitt's occupation during the first years of National Socialism is rooted in his thought patterns during the Weimar era is evaluated in comparison to the example of Estonian Kliimann. Jurists in several countries under communistic rule or occupation experienced a comparable shift from parliamentarian to dictatorship, standing before similar ethical dilemmas & political perspectives. Kliimann was a strong proponent throughout Estonia's independence & development, saw positive aspects in the ideological battle between dictatorship & modern democracy, & criticized Schmitt's theories in 1939, at a time when such criticism was not the norm & in spite of their connection through his teacher Kelsen. Yet he radically altered his positions in his published works after the USSR occupied Estonia & he was promoted at the university. While this may have been self-serving or self-preservation, unlike Schmitt, there is no apparent continuity with his previous positions. L. Kehl