Partizanų diktatūra

LTNors žinomas politikos filosofas Carlas Schmittas partizanų karui paskyrė atskirą veikalą, jis nesusiejo savo „Partizano teorijos“ su suvereniteto koncepcija. Pasak C. Schmitto, suvereniteto esmę sudaro sprendimas dėl išimties. Jei partizanų karas suvokiamas kaip konkretus išimtinės padėties atvejis, jį galima interpretuoti kaip tiesioginį tautos suvereniteto įgyvendinimą (šios išvados C. Schmittas nepadarė). Panašus istorinis precedentas buvo pagal senovės Romos teisę skelbiama išimtinė padėtis (iustitium), kurios metu piliečiai įgydavo teisę tiesiogiai įgyvendinti valstybės valdžią. Tačiau istorinė šiuolaikinių partizanų karų analizė rodo, kad jiems būdingas ne tik ginti esamą valstybės santvarką, bet ir siekti ją pakeisti ar patobulinti. Todėl iškyla pačių partizanų statuso ir jų laikinos tvarkos apibūdinimo klausimas. Į jį atsako suverenios diktatūros koncepcija, taip pat sukurta C. Schmitto. Jos esmė – diktatorius veikia taip, tarsi jam priklausytų suvereni valstybės valdžia (taigi, ir galia keisti valstybės santvarką), tačiau kartu jis yra saistomas numanomos tautos valios. Kaip tokia diktatūra pasireiškia partizanų karo metu, atskleidžia 1944–1953 m. partizanų karo Lietuvoje analizė. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Carl Schmitt; Diktatūra; Išimtinė padėtis; Lietuvos partizanų kovos; Nacionalinis suverenitetas; Partizanai; Partizanų diktatūra; Politinė teorija; Suverineto koncepcija; Tauta; Tautos suverenitetas; Tėvynė; Valdžios galia; Valstybė; Carl Schmitt; Concept of sovereignt; Dictatorship; Governmental pover; Guerilla; Guerilla dictatorship; Lithuanian guerilla fighting; Nation; Partisan; Political theory; Sovereignty of nation; State of exception; State, national sovereignty.

ENIf the guerrilla war is interpreted according to the concept of Carl Schmitt, its relation to the political nation becomes apparent. It takes little effort to see in "the defensive-autochthonous defender of home" the modern citizen par excelence – the one who is ready to take up arms in defense of his fatherland. However this interconnection escaped the attention of C. Schmitt himself. Therefore "The Theory of Partisan" was left independent of the C. Schmitt’s concept of the sovereignty ("Sovereign is he who decides on the exception"). But if the guerrilla war is considered as itself the state of exception, it opens the way for the qualitatively new theory. The most visible and practical appearance of the European national sovereignty was the revised concept of the citizenship. It became some kind of political kinship. The state (political nation) guaranteed the rights of the citizen, but on the other hand the mere existence of the state itself depended of the patriotic stance of the citizen. The only known earlier model of such political community was the ancient republic of Rome. Therefore quite unsurprisingly the new European nomos of the 19th and the 20th centuries had many Roman features. The Roman precedent of the guerrilla war was known as iustitium – the ancientconcept of the state of exception, recently revised and reconsidered by Giorgio Agamben. Although it could acquire different military forms, politically it always meant the same phenomenon – the direct exercise of the governmental power (imperium) by the ordinary citizens.In turbulent times they were empowered to take any steps necessary for the salvation of the republic. The same practical enactment of the national sovereignty forms the essence of the modern guerrilla war. However, the partisan is not only the "autochthonous defender", but also a political figure. In modern times (as opposed to the ancient Rome) he does not identify with the established political order. The historical analysis provides that the partisan of the 19th and the 20th centuries not only defended his homeland, but also sought the renewal of the political regime. Therefore he embodied the creative as well as the conservative aspect of the sovereign power belonging to the political nation. This conclusion leads to the problem of evaluating the transitional political order that evolves during the guerrilla war. The C. Schmitt’s concept of the sovereign dictatorship seems to answer the question. Being the sovereign dictators the partisans act as if they were actual sovereigns – they do not consider themselves bounded by any previous law. On the other hand as the representatives of the political nation they are only empowered to seek the objectives compatible with the general will of that nation. [From the publication]

• Politikos mokslai / Political sciences
• Istorija / History