Abstract

The paper wants to deal with the relationship between Constitutions, historical processes of extractivism and the construction of juridical subjectivity with respect to the use of natural resources. In particular, it intends to answer - in a concise and simple way - the following questions: what is the historical connection between Constitutionalism and the configuration of the «Enemy»? When, where and why does an «Enemy» configuration arise connected to the use of natural resources? Which vectors have spread this configuration around the world? Why now is this configuration increasingly widespread in Europe (including Italy and Salento)? What are the constitutional modalities that legitimize it? How to distinguish resistance to extractivism? It is correct to premise that the theoretical basis used to discuss these questions is not the criticism of Carl Schmitt's thought. In fact, paradoxically, regarding precisely the theme of natural resources, Schmitt has provided indispensable contributions to the desecration of the hypocrisies of Constitutionalism in the juridical construction of the subject. The paper rethinks the lines of analysis that observe the «normality» of the practices of the «Enemy» in the «fossil» age of constitutional law.