Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Philosopher of Neoconservatives
The Boston Globe ^ | 5/11/2003 | Jeet Heer

Posted on 05/11/2003 6:43:44 AM PDT by A. Pole

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:09:46 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

The late Leo Strauss has emerged as the thinker of the moment in Washington, but his ideas remain mysterious. Was he an ardent opponent of tyranny, or an apologist for the abuse of power?

ODD AS THIS MAY SOUND, we live in a world increasingly shaped by Leo Strauss, a controversial philosopher who died in 1973. Although generally unknown to the wider population, Strauss has been one of the two or three most important intellectual influences on the conservative worldview now ascendant in George W. Bush's Washington. Eager to get the lowdown on White House thinking, editors at the New York Times and Le Monde have had journalists pore over Strauss's work and trace his disciples' affiliations. The New Yorker has even found a contingent of Straussians doing intelligence work for the Pentagon.


(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: chicago; conservatism; culture; government; leostrauss; neocon; neocons; philosophy; strauss
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-118 next last
To: AndyJackson
Lets gang up on Cornell West who studied under Walter Kaufman at Princeton. What a pathetic heir to Kaufman who was an heir to Nietzsche. Such is the state of Ivy League philosophy.
61 posted on 05/11/2003 12:46:52 PM PDT by Helms (Kulture Wars Redux)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Helms
Heidder is still alive in France and German intellctual thought. Apparently a "meme" which dies hard.

He is alive everywhere including America. One of the main pilosophers whether we like it or not.

62 posted on 05/11/2003 12:49:49 PM PDT by A. Pole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Helms
You should also read Heidegger on Karl Schmitt, there is an essay in Habermas' "The New Conservativsm" but the name of the essay escapes me, I am away from my library.

Also, read some Husserl: The Crisis of the European Sciences is a good start. Husserl converted, I think.

Heidegger as a human being is disgusting. His philosophical work is important, however. Victor Farias' book on Heidegger and Nazism interesting as well. Once of the best seminars I took was on Heidegger, Schmitt and Nazism.
63 posted on 05/11/2003 12:50:17 PM PDT by diotima (FR/FRN SUPPORTS OUR TROOPS!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: diotima
If he clearly sees the Democrats for who and what they are, and he still supports them, then he must not hold as important half the things he says he does, such as the danger of relativism and subjectivism, and he must not mind sophistry nearly as much as he claims.
64 posted on 05/11/2003 1:08:36 PM PDT by William McKinley (Our disagreements are politics. Our agreements are principles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Mihalis
Strauss knew what that inferiority meant for Socrates, for Plato, and for Aristotle (different for each).
65 posted on 05/11/2003 1:10:32 PM PDT by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: cornelis; diotima
When a reasonably good existing regime is threatened by one that manifestly isn't at all good, one ought to defend it, if only to defend one's "the good," which is possible under the good regime and impossible under the bad. But the question is how far one should go in defending it and how much of one's own detachment and philosophical freedom one should contribute to that defense. I suppose it matters how one sees oneself: as a Socratic philosopher (which seems to imply a skeptic), as a doctrinal philosopher (who tries to find foundations for what a society believes or knows to be true, good and just) or as a statesman (concerned with political action in the world).

There's much to be said for Jaffa's concern for our society and its beliefs. He sees the abyss and seeks a way to escape it, but I have to wonder whether some of the Straussians' dogmatic arrogance can't be traced back to the urgent necessity of escaping the nihilism that haunts Strauss's own teaching. Once you make the Declaration of Independence the sole alternative to catastrophe, you exclude a lot of other worthy ideas. The founders themselves clearly believed in the documents they created, but I don't think the question of nihilism occupied them as much as it did twentieth century thinkers. For the most part, they were more inclined to let their experiment prove itself than to demonstrate its universal validity and urgent necessity or to impose it on others.

Another link here. The Strauss list is also a good place to resolve perpetuate confusions about Strauss.

66 posted on 05/11/2003 1:26:17 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Tarsk
Robert is Straussian with paleocon and even Tory tendancies. That is what I like about him.
His article on Strauss somewhat subjective.
67 posted on 05/11/2003 4:41:56 PM PDT by rmlew ("Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
Did Strauss write any major books? Can you recommend one or two?
68 posted on 05/11/2003 5:04:03 PM PDT by Mihalis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
This is neo-conservatism and that is the real
point that needs to understood,
what the masses consider conservatism
and what the small group of neo-conservatist
elites consider conservatism are very different
things. What average person describes
himself as a neo-conservative?

Its a group of elites who are not conservatives
but who think using and abusing conservatives
is a great idea.
Hench Bennett is great neo-conservative,
a phony who got rich using conservatives.
69 posted on 05/11/2003 5:19:59 PM PDT by Princeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

Comment #70 Removed by Moderator

To: Princeliberty
I confess to no idea of what neoconservatism means in the here and now. It does seem, though, to have an anti-semitic sidecar whenever it appears, with scapegoat-du-jour scowling through the windscreen.
71 posted on 05/11/2003 5:34:27 PM PDT by gcruse (Vice is nice, but virtue can hurt you. --Bill Bennett)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
Thanks for the ping. Good time to expand my consciousness.

Before I wade into some reading, just give me one crib note. What is historicism?

72 posted on 05/11/2003 5:56:32 PM PDT by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
Before I wade into some reading, just give me one crib note. What is historicism?

Do not blame me.

OK, http://www.wordreference.com/English/definition.asp?en=historicism:

Source: The Collins English Dictionary © 2000 HarperCollins
Publishers:

historicism
noun
1  
   the belief that natural laws govern historical events
   which in turn determine social and cultural
   phenomena

2  
   the doctrine that each period of history has its own
   beliefs and values inapplicable to any other, so that
   nothing can be understood independently of its
   historical context

3  
   the conduct of any enquiry in accordance with these
   views

4  
   excessive emphasis on history, historicism, past
   styles, etc.
   his'toricist noun, adjective

73 posted on 05/11/2003 6:04:55 PM PDT by A. Pole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Mihalis
Check post #40. It depends on what you are interested in or where you're at.

If its for starters, I suggest his lectures On Plato's Symposium:

Read that with this edition of the Symposium translated by Bernadete:

Then, I suppose City and Man. The chapter on Thucydides in City and Man is very good. I won't recommend Persecution and the Art of Writing for starters.

The introduction to his edition (with Cropsey) on the History of Political Philosophy is an excellent essay and makes the distinction between nomos (law) and physis (convention) very clear. Otherwise, Liberalism, Ancient and Modern and Natural Right and History.

74 posted on 05/11/2003 6:09:46 PM PDT by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
Well, there is some truth to historicism then; but the exceptions mean there is a deeper truth of which historicism is but a part.

Thanks. Maybe after a couple years of reading I will be able to join this discussion.

75 posted on 05/11/2003 6:29:42 PM PDT by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: William McKinley
The part that confuses me is who was going to kill Strauss if he didn't talk in code?

The suggestion in the article seemed to be that Strauss himself felt that his ideas were too dangerous or esoteric for the common man so he wrote in code to let that common man think he understood but did not.

76 posted on 05/11/2003 7:13:33 PM PDT by arthurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: William McKinley
The elites he would have been writing to are the like minded philosophers within academe. The "Liberal Elite" he would not have regarded as any elite at all, the term having intelligence and philosophical connotations for Mr. Strauss.
77 posted on 05/11/2003 7:16:05 PM PDT by arthurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Princeliberty
I would certainly agree that neoconservatism is an elitist ideology. It takes an intelligent educated person to truly ascribe to any intellectual ideology whether it is clasical liberalism, traditional conservatism, fusion conservatism, or paleo-conservatism (the newest).

Its a group of elites who are not conservatives but who think using and abusing conservatives is a great idea.
Do you really want me to list the deviences of the post 9-11 Paleo-movement?

Hench Bennett is great neo-conservative, a phony who got rich using conservatives.

The same could be said for Pat Buchanan or Justin Raimondo.

78 posted on 05/11/2003 11:26:04 PM PDT by rmlew ("Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Read like a hit piece to me. A nice bit of propoganda at best.
79 posted on 05/11/2003 11:51:51 PM PDT by Cathryn Crawford (Bush helps those who help themselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: rmlew
I am not on board with Pat either.
The issue at hand was the Neos.

Beware anyone who makes an idol of
any "ism"
80 posted on 05/12/2003 3:31:00 AM PDT by Princeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-118 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson