Leo Strauss's (Neocon Philosopher) Strategy of Deception

[AnnInLa]

Just a reminder here of the Neocon Philosophy, and why we need to use the term "Neocon" in the right way, and not use it to apply to all repukes. IMHO


http://www.alternet.org/story/15935

Strauss is a popular figure among the neoconservatives. Adherents of his ideas include prominent figures both within and outside the administration. They include 'Weekly Standard' editor William Kristol; his father and indeed the godfather of the neoconservative movement, Irving Kristol; the new Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, Stephen Cambone, a number of senior fellows at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) (home to former Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle and Lynne Cheney), and Gary Schmitt, the director of the influential Project for the New American Century (PNAC), which is chaired by Kristol the Younger.

Rule One: Deception

It's hardly surprising then why Strauss is so popular in an administration obsessed with secrecy, especially when it comes to matters of foreign policy. Not only did Strauss have few qualms about using deception in politics, he saw it as a necessity. While professing deep respect for American democracy, Strauss believed that societies should be hierarchical – divided between an elite who should lead, and the masses who should follow. But unlike fellow elitists like Plato, he was less concerned with the moral character of these leaders. According to Shadia Drury, who teaches politics at the University of Calgary, Strauss believed that "those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right – the right of the superior to rule over the inferior."

This dichotomy requires "perpetual deception" between the rulers and the ruled, according to Drury. Robert Locke, another Strauss analyst says,"The people are told what they need to know and no more." While the elite few are capable of absorbing the absence of any moral truth, Strauss thought, the masses could not cope. If exposed to the absence of absolute truth, they would quickly fall into nihilism or anarchy, according to Drury, author of 'Leo Strauss and the American Right' (St. Martin's 1999).

Second Principle: Power of Religion

According to Drury, Strauss had a "huge contempt" for secular democracy. Nazism, he believed, was a nihilistic reaction to the irreligious and liberal nature of the Weimar Republic. Among other neoconservatives, Irving Kristol has long argued for a much greater role for religion in the public sphere, even suggesting that the Founding Fathers of the American Republic made a major mistake by insisting on the separation of church and state. And why? Because Strauss viewed religion as absolutely essential in order to impose moral law on the masses who otherwise would be out of control.

At the same time, he stressed that religion was for the masses alone; the rulers need not be bound by it. Indeed, it would be absurd if they were, since the truths proclaimed by religion were "a pious fraud." As Ronald Bailey, science correspondent for Reason magazine points out, "Neoconservatives are pro-religion even though they themselves may not be believers."

For Agressive Nationalism.....go to

http://www.alternet.org/story/15935

[madmusic]

1. K&R

[xchrom]

2. k&r -- i wish we had a strauss forum.

too many people don't understand the history of conservative politics -- the whole creating a permanent republick party majority.

none of those things have gone away.

the more who know and study strauss the better --

not mention the melding of randian thought with straussian -- i.e. gingrich, the former fed chairman, the ''futurists'', and the list goes on.

but we have to know the history.

[Finder]

15. Strauss, Bloom, etc...

are essential reading in order to understand what is happening today. Ironically, the philosophy is not even close to being conservative in the paleo sense.

I would love to see a political philosophy forum at DU to discuss the various schools of thought in play today. Unfortunately many here still see neocons as sharing fundy beliefs(which they do not).

Rand, Strauss, Bloom and others are taught in our public schools(economics, biz classes)today and the next few decades will be interesting...

If we can get 10 people interested in a political philosophy forum Skinner may set it up.

[WiseButAngrySara]

24. Sign me up! I would LOVE a political philosophy forum. ....n/t

[Fovea]

28. I am

interested in political philosophies.
Also comparative systems.

[MethuenProgressive]

3. "Lie to the pigs, and then do what you want to them." -Strauss

Old news to most of us, but thanks for bringing it up again.
Hey, you DUers who sneak around Freep - post it covertly over there! :D

[madmusic]

7. But the freepers think they are the elite!

And not puppets just like us. That's the beauty of Strauss.

[Quantess]

21. But at FR, knowing how they are,

they'd probably say these are liberal concepts.

[oblivious]

4. They are in power in Canada now too.

Graduates of the Calgary School -- followers of the taechings of Strauss.

PM Harper, Ian Brodie, his chief of staff, Tom Flanagan, another right-hand man, and others close to him.

[mcg]

10. Straussians in Canada...

I was not aware of this. More on this...

Harper, Bush Share Roots in Controversial Philosophy
http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2005/11/29/HarperBush/

(some of this article I don't agree with, like his take on Miller)

Cuts targeted to keep the neo-cons on top
http://www.rabble.ca/politics.shtml?x=53175

[Maat]

5. Thanks for the reminder!

I've been aware of this for awhile, but it is always good to keep it in mind when planning on how to deal with the remnants of the NeoCon Administration.

[OneBlueSky]

6. in the 21st century, it's become far more sinister than mere deception . . .

Wealth and Power long ago agreed to keep the middle and lower classes fighting amongst themselves by exploiting every human difference they can think of -- sex, age, race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, etc -- and manipulating the public into civil war, one against the other . . . they figure that as long as we're fighting with one another, around issues great and trivial, then we won't be going after THEM . . .

when those of us without wealth and power finally recognize that our common humanity and our similarities are FAR more important than our differences, we'll stop fighting with each other long enough to direct our considerable anger where it really belongs -- at YOU, the privileged class, the ones who make all the money, take all the resources, do none of the work and pay none of the taxes . . .

damn right, it's class warfare -- and YOU started it! . . .

[madmusic]

8. What do we have in common?

Our quest for liberty in the liberal sense.

What divides us?

Our neocon fed desire to punish in the conservative sense.

Que Olbermann's http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240/">Twilight Zone reference.

[Odin2005]

9. Straussianism is the disgusting endpoint of Postmodernist thinking

[ComerPerro]

11. no point in separating out the two. NeoCons and "paleocons" are the same

and their only real differences are in the rhetoric they use to con people, since they all practice the same hypocritical bullshit.

All that you accomplish when you carefully lay out differences between supposed "neocons" and "true conservatives" is make people, even liberals, pine for Conservatives.

But guess what? It doesn't matter whether they are conservative or neo-conservative, because once they are in power they all do the same thing.

[Finder]

16. They are not the same...n/t

[ComerPerro]

18. they govern the exact same way

[mcg]

12. Götterdämmerung Now

From the article Götterdämmerung Now

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/goetterdaemmerung.htm

THE NEOCONS AND MACHIAVELLI
The current US leaders' actions are so clearly sabotaging the very system that sustains them that an explanation is in order. What motivates these people? Is it mere thirst for wealth and power? Perhaps we can gain some insight by examining the philosophies they espouse. Neoconservatism, the political movement to which most of the current administration belongs, is widely attributed to be the intellectual offspring of Leo Strauss (1899-1973), a Jewish scholar who fled Hitler's Germany and taught political science at the University of Chicago. According to Shadia Drury in Leo Strauss and the American Right (Griffin, 1999) Strauss advocated an essentially Machiavellian approach to governance. He believed that:

* a leader must perpetually deceive those being ruled;
* those who lead are accountable to no overarching system of morals, only to the right of the superior to rule the inferior;
* religion is the force that binds society together, and is therefore the tool by which the ruler can manipulate the masses (any religion will do);
* secularism in society is to be suppressed, because it leads to critical thinking and dissent;
* a political system can be stable only if it is united against an external threat, and that if no real threat exists, one should be manufactured.

Drury writes that, "in Stauss's view, the trouble with liberal society is that it dispenses with noble lies and pious frauds. It tries to found society on secular rational foundations."

Among Strauss's students was Paul Wolfowitz, one of the leading hawks in the Defense Department who urged the invasion of Iraq; more distant followers include Newt Gingrich, Clarence Thomas, Irving Kristol, William Bennett, John Ashcroft, and Michael Ledeen. ...

[Joanne98]

13. Leo Strauss and the American Right

http://www.amazon.com/Strauss-American-Right-Shadia-Drury/dp/0312217838

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly
After the Republican Party drafted its Contract With America in 1994, the New York Times traced the document's neoconservative ideology to the late Leo Strauss (1899-1973), a German Jewish emigre and professor of philosophy at the University of Chicago during the 1950s and '60s. Dubbed by the media as the "godfather of the conservative revolution," Strauss, according to Drury, was considered to be the shadowy force behind the Republican Party, as his teachings were being spread by former students and admirers like Allan Bloom, Clarence Thomas, William Bennett and Irving Kristol. Although Drury's (The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss) prose is occasionally dry and academic, her evidence is persuasive, and her research is impeccable. Beginning with an account of Straussians in Washington, she works back to the professor's dominant ideas and how they affected the current political climate. She investigates how Strauss formed his ideology and what events, such as the Holocaust, may have shaped his views. Her own opinions on the matter of conservatives vs. liberals (she sides with the latter) are clearly stated yet remain incidental because her interest seems to lie in exploration rather than conversion. For students of political theory, Drury is an expert guide.

Copyright 1997 Cahners Business Information, Inc.

--This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Library Journal
Drury (political science, Univ. of Calgary) has expanded an earlier work, The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss (St. Martin's, 1988), to examine the influence of reclusive political philosopher Leo Strauss (1899-1973) on the American neoconservative movement. Drury rejects Strauss's philosophy for its attacks on liberalism and call to institute strong moral leadership in the United States. She largely reviews Strauss's political philosophy and spends considerable time on his views of Judaic and German philosophers. Drury points out Strauss's influence on many in the neoconservative movement, including Allan Bloom and Irving Kristol, and on the Republican Party's Contract with America. But she spends far more time on Strauss's philosophical views than on how these views manifested themselves in others' writings. Her book also requires not only an understanding of Strauss, which is tedious enough, but of the philosophies of Plato, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Schmitt, and others. The work's appeal is limited to advanced graduate-level students in political philosophy.?Patricia Hatch, Insurance Inst. for Property Loss Reduction, Boston
Copyright 1997 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

[Senator]

14. Fascism -- Authoritarianism -- Monarchism -- Theocracy -- (Dittoheadism) -- it's all the same thing.

Fascism -- Authoritarianism -- Monarchism -- Theocracy -- (Dittoheadism) -- it's all the same thing.

A belief that some minority has the right to rule the majority. It matters little if it's the true believers, a master race, a family dynasty, the chosen people, a ruling class, or the current DC/Euphemedia Analstocracy.

It's all anti-democratic, thus Anti-American*.

This nation now lives under an appointed ruler (not an elected leader) who rules by signing statement. You can call it "technical" or "virtual" or "Urinary Authoritarian Executive"** -- but it's still fascism.

This is what the stolen election of 2000 was all about (THE watershed event). There was zero attention paid to the Will of the People of Florida and the nation. The result of the vote (not the vote count***) was well known shortly after the election when the uncounted ballots were extrapolated by precinct, and Gore won FL by tens of thousands. Any ethical, moral, real American would have conceded to Gore at that point.

Thus, the contract generally known as the US Constitution was put into breach on January 6th, 2001. This is the "original sin" that must be remedied. It is the essence of our ongoing nightmare. It was this deliberate overruling of the Will of the American People that left us open to the 9-11 attack, which was a far less important event compared with the election theft. It simply allowed the 21st Century Neo-Fascists to have their "Reichstag fire" to consolitdate (hopefully temporary) control.

The more important part was that the only global force for good in the past several decades -- the public opinion of the American People -- was taken out of the global, moral equation. Which is why prior to the election theft we could stop plane-crashing over the Pacific at the Millenium with help from Jordanian Intelligence, and after... well, not so much. We had lost our moral ascendency, our place as the court of last resort. And global violence has metastacized, as a result of the world losing its most effective "honest broker" for peace.

Certainly this is a "kinder, gentler" fascism. But did you expect goose-stepping, tanks in the streets and racial hate speech? It's much more efficient to simply scream "Mushroom clouds in 45 minutes!!" through every Euphemedia outlet in order to terrorize a population into compliance (20 guys with boxcutters pales in comparision, doesn't it?).

But make no mistake, it is fascism pure and simple.

It demands active opposition. Unlike their agents in congress, the American People are not impotent. We can still refuse to be complicit with the atrocities committed in our name. We must demand impeachment. But we must do so loudly -- at every opportunity, in large and small ways -- and in ways that make others uncomfortable.

We need impeachment to Redeem Our National Soul.

It is our ONLY moral, patriotic option.

How do we get it? "Violence" is the answer.

_________
*"After Socialism, Fascism combats the whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it, whether in its theoretical premises or in its practical application. Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it is a majority, can direct human society" - Benito Mussolini 1932

**Based on the newly-discovered, "inherent" (i.e., faith-based) Constitutional Authority for an appointed ruler (as opposed to elected leader) to piss down the back of the American People and tell them it's raining.

***"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decided everything." -- Josef Stalin (echoed by Pol Pot, Bushes, Scalia, Rehnquist, Baker, Rove, Harris, Blackwell, etc...)

-----

[Rockstone]

17. Why I have a tough time believing this

My elder friend was a student of Strauss. What Strauss commented on was relative to Plato's and the idea of the Ideal City. So I wonder if it was meant as pure philosophical discussion and not applied politics.

If Plato argued the original ideas, why is he not vilified?

I have heard tha Nietzche was misappropriated by the Nazis. I heard his last book was revised from Nietzche's ideas by his sister who was a Nazi sympathizer, so I wonder if Strauss was essentially misappropriated and distorted for the political purposes of the neocons.

These are just some brainstorm thoughts and obviously are submitted for criticism. No intent to support the Neocons just to explore some contrary ideas.

This discussion of Strauss paints a picture that I believe is different that what is commonly held these days.
http://college.holycross.edu/diotima/n1v2/rosen.htm

Reading this, it seems strauss was more of a scared man than anything.

[Finder]

19. I don't see his philosophy as being bad...

or incorrect in many aspects. It is how it has been applied. Just as Marx was by the soviets.

[tbyg52]

20. I've never been crazy about Plato either,

and whether Strauss meant to or not, whether he was scared or not, he he's one of the architects of the mess we're in.

[pscot]

22. There are many things to admire in Plato

but he was no democrat. He believed only a select few were qualified to rule. It's not such a leap from there to Neitsche's idea of the superman. Embracing Nietsche's principles as a guide to governance is bound to produce a bad result. The man was nuts.

[xchrom]

26. strauss is a student of plato if reduced by

machiavelli.

plato is less commited to his musings than strauss ever was -- and strauss really attempts to correct the weak points of nationalist socialism -- i.e. the nazis.

plato and strauss would have severe disagreements over what a benign dictator is -- machiavelli and strauss less so.

goebbels and strauss less yet.

[Odin2005]

27. What I kinow of Strauss is that he thought Liberal Democracy lead to Nihilism

All of the crap he spewed was based on the belief that an elite must deceive the masses with "useful myths" in order to prevent Nihilism.

[madmusic]

29. Couple this with Bernays though...

http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/2006/09sep/ebernays.html">How to brainwash a nation.

A thread on that...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2754924&mesg_id=2754924

Most interesting to me was the comparison of his propaganda with Newt's.

[conscious evolution]

23. Strauss and PNAC are two

things that I urge everyone to read.If have gotten more than one fence sitter to see the light after reading them.

[WiseButAngrySara]

25. K & R and let's start a political philosophy forum. ....n/t