My own riffs on the Straussians begin at
http://www.davidbrin.com/neoromantics.html

What follows are snippet extracts:

In "A Classicist's Legacy: New Empire Builders" James
Atlas describes the impact of Professor Leo Strauss on
many leading neoconservatives, Bush administration
officials, journalists, and intellectuals, e.g. Paul
Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Irving Kristol, Bill
Kristol, Gary Schmitt, and Francis Fukuyama. A refugee
during WWII, Strauss subsequently taught classical
political theory in the uniquely faux-European
intellectual ambiance of the University of Chicago,
stressing the notion -- brought over from his festered
home continent -- that classical Greek and Roman
philosophy is the key to political wisdom for today as
much as in the past. His followers have since promoted
neo-platonism -- devotion to a paramount system of
well-ordered beliefs, in preference to gritty secular
pragmatism.

In March 2003, The New York Times Magazine published
"The Philosopher of Islamic Terror" by Paul Berman,
describing the writings of Sayyid Qutb, one of the
most influential philosophers behind modern Islamic
radicalism. Qutb's teachings call for political and
social movements that will create a new society,
defeating corrupt modernism, and especially dualism --
the division of the world between sacred and secular
realms. These teachings found fertile ground in a
network of Islamic schools founded under the aegis of
the Wahhabi sect, and lubricated with revenues from
the sale of Saudi Arabian oil.

What commonalities could I possibly see between
Islamic fundamentalism and today's American
neoconservative movement?

I suggest that these are two of the most vigorous and
driven essentialist or incantation-based ideological
movements of our time. Nostalgic, resentful, and
grounded upon unquestionable core liturgical
teachings, each is driven by a sense of destiny and
contempt for those who disagree. It is vital that we
pay attention to these common elements -- and many
others -- along with their implications.

Now of course American neoconservatism and Islamic
fundamentalism would -- at first sight -- appear to be
polar opposites. Indeed, that appearance is
deliberately promoted by both groups. Many
neoconservatives speak of struggle -- even war between
the Christian and Muslim worlds -- just as followers
of Qutb do. They call for a return to values-based
decision making in American society, with those values
clearly and explicitly rooted in core religious
traditions. While emphasizing cultural conflict with
liberals and humanists within Western Civilization,
they promote aggressive opposition to non-Western
cultural styles overseas.
...

Ironic? That tormented, dogma-wracked Europe should
dare -- right after WWII -- to preach at happy,
progressive, tolerant and pragmatic America? Yet,
Strauss's followers gobbled up a fervidly romantic
nationalism -- cosmetically americanized -- but
modelled on the same thought patterns that had turned
the Old World into a living hell while making Strauss
a homeless exile. (See books by by Norton and Mann,
cited below.)
----------------------------

TODAY AS MUCH AS IN THE PAST:
 
How can anyone, reading Thucydides, Plutarch or
Gibbon, imagine the Greeks, Hellenists or Romans had
anything to teach us about political wisdom, except as
cautionary warnings? Few figures in the annals, other
than Pericles -- and maybe Cincinnatus -- behaved with
the level of maturity we now demand from Cub Scouts.


WHat I find hilarious is that the Straussians tout
Thucidydes, claiming that no westerner is qualified to
make historical judgments without this background. 
AND I AGREE!  

But they are so ensnared by superficialities, the
realpolitik ruthlessness displayed by the
post-Periclean Athenians, for example.  And the
anti-democratic leanings of Thucidydes himself.

Alaso, I agree with the neocons on so many of their
superficial statements and rationalizations, like the
urgent mission of America right now... while
perceiving them to be utterly mad at deeper levels.

What they ignore is that Thucydides - despite himself
- portrays just one man who could be called a real
hero, as seen in modern eyes.  Pericles.  And Pericles
was the diametric opposite of the neocons' beloved
Plato, in every way, emphasizing truth and
accountability and openness and calm...

No the character they resemble is Alcibiades.  All the
arrogance.  All the evasion. All the recklessness and
ego.

Read Thucydides, and shiver.
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to