Watching Kerry on the Newshour, the lightbulb goes on re Leo Strauss

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

"...huh? "you may say.


Well. seeing Kerrys foreign policy speech it makes too much sense. If we are serious about terrorism and terrorists getting control of WMDs, Kerry has pretty much laid out the policy agenda and what we would need to do on a global basis.

Then, after reading the links posted here to the thinking of Leo Strauss, supposedly the intellectual godfather of the neocon policy advisors, I can see this is something you would NOT want to do.

If I read Strauss right,, or read the interpretations right, he sees a state of constant warfare as beneficial and as a way to keep democracies from "going soft" or becoming decedent. War and the martial spirit would, somehow, keep democracys tough, lean and mean (not sure if I understand this right).

So, if thats the case, the neocons wouldnt be too adverse to an occasion terror attack to whip up the war-spirit in the country. This isnt really LIHOP or MIHOP, just the concept that while we are fighting terrorists, they are sort of a "necessary enemy", similar to what the USSR and Communism used to be, but maybe alot more "real" because they do after all attack and cause mass casualties, as we have seen.

So, while you will see the neocons givining lip service to the GWOT and such, I dont think you will see them as being all that pro-active or alliance-based the way Kerry or perhaps other more "humanist" foreign policy advisors would be.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

1. Thanks for providing a nice counter to that other thread

y'know, the one that says Kerry is just PNAC lite.
This is all true. Bread and circuses will do the Romans just fine.
A little war is good for 'em.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

2. There is nothing PNAC about that speech I saw.

I really think theres a bit of a good proactive vision going on there, with Kerry, when it comes to the nuclear threat (and yes this genii is out of the bottle, and we will always have the nuclear threat).....

....Kerry was coming from a collective security/golbal partnership position, which is the antithesis of what PNAC is about.

[Sterling]

3. I dont see it that way at all.

Kerry is PNACs good cop to the Neo Cons bad cop. Sometimes we need the lighter side of the plan and sometimes we need the bad guy to come in and do the dirty work.


It really is like the WWF (pro wrestling). The PNAC plan is over the next one hundred years. Their will be cycle of conquest and consolidation. Kerry and the DLC Dems seem to serve the purpose of consolidation (smothing ruffled feathers) while the NeoCons will be used to break standing norms and push the limits of the international community. It's as American as apple pie this two party system we have.