Leo Strauss

A very short introduction to Leo Strauss from Adam Curtis' documentary, "The Power of Nightmares".

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Neocon

[scotty123123]

This television program is joke. Read his books instead!

[eugdog106]

did the maker of this documentary ever read natural right and history?

[metatronius]

Read the writings of Leo Strauss for yourself instead of watching conspiracy theory junk films that quote him third hand. I guarantee you that the maker of this documentary has never read any Leo Strauss work in its entirety.

[hegemoniuspiper]

@thinkbeforeyouleap to conclude, i dont get confused about what's interesting in any research, as Strauss'. I know his critic and analysys of historicism is articulated, as i know historicism is nothing but one of the idelogical orientation the political research took in the last century. But i look at Strauss view fundations and outcomings, to grasp what it actually means, politically, philosophycally, scientifically and historically

Let me know in case what u think and know

[hegemoniuspiper]

@thinkbeforeyouleap add He refused historicism mainly to reject any ethical analysys and broad evaluation of real socio economic conditions, and did so in the name of a specific ideology which believe in the sole legittimacy of an elite and its self sufficient power as the ultimate goal. That's what made him a conservative ideologist, and to me also an uncomplete, very debatable researcher. Making ideology, he disregarded much else of what political research is about

[hegemoniuspiper]

@thinkbeforeyouleap and that's no saying i approve his philosophy. Part of his works, in mypoint of view, consist mostly of a rethoric display of moral principles he doesnt dare to doubt or discuss, and that may be interesting as any confession can be, when talking about the exoteric side of philosophical writing as about historicism, in a way that ends up in paradoxes.Doesnt history exist? Can just myths really exist? ...

If u have clues u r interested about post me

[hegemoniuspiper]

@thinkbeforeyouleap so, if u consider it with attention, u may well say leo strauss conception go extraordinarily well toghether with ideas such the manipulation of public opinion, for instance, and the building up of an institutional fachade, may it be democratic, behind which the real power core, hidden away, moves the wires of control for its own interest and conservation. Strauss conception can well have inspired dirty intelligence products as the 9/11 appears to be

[hegemoniuspiper]

@thinkbeforeyouleap In this conception, force appear to be the only real principle in politics, the only realthing politcs need to know and study in each of its aspects.This is a very reductive view of what politcs in fact is, it subestimate other important factors responsible for the development of human society and institutions, more important then the mere administration of the means of power and force.But he believed the mass deserved protection and beautiful lies...

[hegemoniuspiper]

@thinkbeforeyouleap so he was more concerned about the policy process then the actual underlaying politics' issues.He was one of these so called "realists" who had always been proven to be in fact defending a very specific conception of human relationship and society: we would live under the constant threat of chaos, anarchy, revolution and there's a neverending struggle for power between everyone whose sole object is the power itself, which then legittimate itself

[hegemoniuspiper]

@thinkbeforeyouleap i know u may find it difficult to follow my observations,but just if you took them in a very scholastic way.U may be a Strauss filologist, but u could be missing some of the point.It is obvious he had a pessimist conception of the human world, his admiration for Machiavelli says it all.To put it short, he believed his task was to provide the legittimate elite in power a series of ideological tools to keep the mass under control, because human nature is bad

[thinkbeforeyouleap]

@hegemoniuspiper

Strauss refuted historicism as a movement and was all too concerned with decision making which was why he thought modernity had gotten out of control. Again, you are difficult to follow as you seem to amalgamate things sporadically together and then disclude them. If you have some footnotes it would be easier to see what you are getting out with some examples or some of Strauss' scholastic works as a reference.

[thinkbeforeyouleap]

@hegemoniuspiper

Actually, your off by a mile, his first book was on Hobbes where he then recanted it and later said Machiavelli was the founder of Modern political thought. Strauss was never a pessimist, he thought reason could solve all if we devoted ourselves to it in the classical tradition as "the city in speech". Your thoughts are so scattered that I can't follow your premises so if you maybe quote some of his works with footnotes I might get an idea of what you going.