cortempond said:
Strauss created the ultra-conservative, right-wing government in control of the U.S. right now.
this is a ridiculous myth that is repeated over and over throughout the media -- mainstream and left media, but also the right media b/c the likes of kristol require the pedigree and revel in the glamour
first, people like cheney and rumsfeld are in no way connected to leo strauss
second, the most prominent person connected is wolfowitz -- and he by way of allan bloom, the most infamous but not the most serious or accomplished student of strauss
and yes, there are quite a few others in upper echelons of govt w/ some connection to strauss via some student of strauss -- but this of itself is not that curious b/c strauss was a highly regarded thinker whose best students got plum positions at leading u.s. universities (i.e., this is how academia works -- reward the student for his teacher's insights) -- and is it not everywhere the case that the students who go to the best schools get high positions in govt if they so choose and work hard -- certainly this is what harvard has always done, churning out the corporate and government elite year in and year out -- what is curious, however, is that in the 1970s many second-generation straussians began to network among themselves, their loyalty attached not to an institution (the harvard man helps the harvard man, the yale man the yale man), but to some ideological notion of "straussianism"
third, many others on the political right began to call themselves "straussians" or would cite strauss as a key influence on their thinking, despite never having been taught by strauss or by a student of strauss -- i.e., they simply appropriated strauss' name for their own purposes
(i don't claim to have strauss figured out -- not by a long shot -- and it's been several years since i last read one of his books -- but i seem to be more familiar w/ strauss than others here -- and as i noted upthread i address the subject of leo strauss over on the "power of nightmares" thread in the politics forum --
here's the link --
and here's more)
if you want an account of the differences b/w strauss, his various kinds of students and the so-called straussians -- or if you simply want the gossip (and the gossip is pretty damn juicy) -- then you should read anne norton's "leo strauss and the politics of american empire" --
here's the amazon.com link -- and here's an
old-time american conservative's review of the norton book -- and here's
a review by a student of bloom
yeah the book could have profited from tighter editing, lacks footnotes, etc -- and doesn't even attempt to get to the heart of leo strauss' thought -- but i think it makes some very well-needed points and the gossip is delicious (rather than buy the book, i simply read it at the union square barnes & noble -- too ashamed to buy the gossip but had to know the gossip!)
norton goes to some pains to separate the more austere and high-minded students of strauss -- people like joseph cropsey -- from the so-called straussians and the figure of allan bloom
i.e., norton makes clear that the best students of strauss (and their students) were dismissive of bloom and thought his "closing of the american mind" an embarrassment
this is why bloom was not made a professor in the political science department at chicago -- i.e., even in the late 70s -- when he left cornell for chicago -- but well before the publication of "the closing" -- bloom was regarded as a person who had neglected his talents and forsaken serious scholarship in favor of hedonism
of course this is all relative -- compared w/ other academics bloom's career was perfectly decent and respectable, i.e., in terms of the translations and articles he turned out -- but when viewed from the peaks of the hyde park world bloom was a sorry joke -- a once promising talent gone wrong
however, b/c of the success of "the closing," the prodigal son bloom was able to cast himself as strauss' advance agent -- his mouthpiece -- and certainly this is how bloom's students have portrayed bloom -- bloom "bonded" very tightly with many of his students, and they remain loyal to him to this day
wolfowitz was a student of bloom's at cornell -- and bloom then sent wolfowitz on to chicago for grad school -- but by this point, the late 60s, strauss was well past his intellectual prime, and wolfowitz only took one seminar w/ strauss anyway -- same is true of william kristol -- i.e., these people studied under bloom, not strauss
(though it's worth noting that not even bloom was a simple movement conservative a la kristol -- bloom seems, rather, to have exploited the movement for his own ends)
this is not to say that bloom was the only student of strauss w/ unsavory character traits and political zeal -- there's also people like harry jaffa and quite a few others
and then there's also the troubling issue of how some straussians apparently try to practice esoteric writing and speech -- norton gives the example of the prominent figure thomas pangle, who in his book on Abraham and Kierkegaard makes but one elliptical reference to Derrida's work on the subject -- but whatever the motives of these men, their motives have nothing in common with strauss' project b/c strauss sought to REVEAL how earlier philosophers wrote -- namely, that they wrote in such a way as to transmit wisdom to discerning readers while skirting such content from political authorities, i.e., esoteric writing served to promote, not subvert, enlightenment -- whereas all too many so-called straussians seem intent on using speech to skirt not the eyes of political authority but of the public -- and somebody like pangle, to again use norton's example, is utterly perverse in his failure to address derrida directly
but again -- since when is it permissible to judge a thinker based upon the actions of his most foolish and contemptible epigones?
to hold strauss responsible for the current u.s. govt is no different than holding nietzsche responsible for nazi germany (except that strauss worked w/in academic institutions and had real students)
to assess strauss properly you have to read peak-period strauss -- 1930s through 1950s
and to assess his legacy, you have to read his best students -- josephy cropsey, stanley rosen, seth bernadette and the like
is there a leo strauss influence on the current govt? -- yes -- but it's very indirect and not a work of nefarious design -- as though strauss were somehow the evil master pulling the strings -- it's much more the story of politically ambitious students using strauss' name as badge of honor and perhaps one or two of his ideas, subtracted from the rest of his thought, for ideological charge