-Caveat Lector- www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- Begin Message ---
-Caveat Lector-

American power & the world
--------------------------

Noble lies and perpetual war: Leo Strauss, the neo-cons, and Iraq
==============

Danny Postel
16 - 10 - 2003
OpenDemocracy.com
-----------------
Are the ideas of the conservative political philosopher
Leo Strauss a shaping influence on the Bush
administration’s world outlook? Danny Postel interviews
Shadia Drury -- a leading scholarly critic of Strauss
-- and asks her about the connection between Plato’s
dialogues, secrets and lies, and the United States-led
war in Iraq.
---------------


What was initially an anti-war argument is now a matter
of public record. It is widely recognised that the Bush
administration was not honest about the reasons it gave
for invading Iraq.

Paul Wolfowitz, the influential United States deputy
secretary of defense, has acknowledged that the
evidence used to justify the war was 'murky' and now
says that weapons of mass destruction weren’t the
crucial issue anyway (see the book by Sheldon Rampton
and John Stauber, Weapons of Mass Deception: the uses
of propaganda in Bush’s war on Iraq (2003.)


By contrast, Shadia Drury, professor of political
theory at the University of Regina in Saskatchewan,
argues that the use of deception and manipulation in
current US policy flow directly from the doctrines of
the political philosopher Leo Strauss (1899-1973). His
disciples include Paul Wolfowitz and other neo-
conservatives who have driven much of the political
agenda of the Bush administration.

If Shadia Drury is right, then American policy-makers
exercise deception with greater coherence than their
British allies in Tony Blair’s 10 Downing Street. In
the UK, a public inquiry is currently underway into the
death of the biological weapons expert David Kelly. A
central theme is also whether the government deceived
the public, as a BBC reporter suggested.

The inquiry has documented at least some of the ways
the prime minister’s entourage ‘sexed up’ the
presentation of intelligence on the Iraqi threat. But
few doubt that in terms of their philosophy, if they
have one, members of Blair’s staff believe they must be
trusted as honest. Any apparent deceptions they may be
involved in are for them matters of presentation or
‘spin’: attempts to project an honest gloss when
surrounded by a dishonest media.

The deep influence of Leo Strauss’s ideas on the
current architects of US foreign policy has been
referred to, if sporadically, in the press (hence an
insider witticism about the influence of 'Leo-cons').
Christopher Hitchens, an ardent advocate of the war,
wrote unashamedly in November 2002 (in an article
felicitously titled Machiavelli in Mesopotamia) that:

'[p]art of the charm of the regime-change argument
(from the point of view of its supporters) is that it
depends on premises and objectives that cannot, at
least by the administration, be publicly avowed. Since
Paul Wolfowitz is from the intellectual school of Leo
Strauss -- and appears in fictional guise as such in
Saul Bellow’s novel Ravelstein -- one may even suppose
that he enjoys this arcane and occluded aspect of the
debate.'
Perhaps no scholar has done as much to illuminate the
Strauss phenomenon as Shadia Drury. For fifteen years
she has been shining a heat lamp on the Straussians
with such books as The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss
(1988) and Leo Strauss and the American Right (1997).
She is also the author of Alexandre Kojève: the Roots
of Postmodern Politics (1994) and Terror and
Civilization (forthcoming).
She argues that the central claims of Straussian
thought wield a crucial influence on men of power in
the contemporary United States. She elaborates her
argument in this interview.

A natural order of inequality


Danny Postel: You’ve argued that there is an important
connection between the teachings of Leo Strauss and the
Bush administration’s selling of the Iraq war. What is
that connection?


Shadia Drury: Leo Strauss was a great believer in the
efficacy and usefulness of lies in politics. Public
support for the Iraq war rested on lies about Iraq
posing an imminent threat to the United States -- the
business about weapons of mass destruction and a
fictitious alliance between al-Qaida and the Iraqi
regime. Now that the lies have been exposed, Paul
Wolfowitz and others in the war party are denying that
these were the real reasons for the war.

So what were the real reasons? Reorganising the balance
of power in the Middle East in favour of Israel?
Expanding American hegemony in the Arab world?
Possibly. But these reasons would not have been
sufficient in themselves to mobilise American support
for the war. And the Straussian cabal in the
administration realised that.



Danny Postel: The neo-conservative vision is commonly
taken to be about spreading democracy and liberal
values globally. And when Strauss is mentioned in the
press, he is typically described as a great defender of
liberal democracy against totalitarian tyranny. You’ve
written, however, that Strauss had a 'profound
antipathy to both liberalism and democracy.'


Shadia Drury: The idea that Strauss was a great
defender of liberal democracy is laughable. I suppose
that Strauss’s disciples consider it a noble lie. Yet
many in the media have been gullible enough to believe
it.

How could an admirer of Plato and Nietzsche be a
liberal democrat? The ancient philosophers whom Strauss
most cherished believed that the unwashed masses were
not fit for either truth or liberty, and that giving
them these sublime treasures would be like throwing
pearls before swine. In contrast to modern political
thinkers, the ancients denied that there is any natural
right to liberty. Human beings are born neither free
nor equal. The natural human condition, they held, is
not one of freedom, but of subordination -- and in
Strauss’s estimation they were right in thinking so.

Praising the wisdom of the ancients and condemning the
folly of the moderns was the whole point of Strauss’s
most famous book, Natural Right and History. The cover
of the book sports the American Declaration of
Independence. But the book is a celebration of nature
-- not the natural rights of man (as the appearance of
the book would lead one to believe) but the natural
order of domination and subordination.



The necessity of lies


Danny Postel: What is the relevance of Strauss’s
interpretation of Plato’s notion of the noble lie?


Shadia Drury: Strauss rarely spoke in his own name. He
wrote as a commentator on the classical texts of
political theory. But he was an extremely opinionated
and dualistic commentator. The fundamental distinction
that pervades and informs all of his work is that
between the ancients and the moderns. Strauss divided
the history of political thought into two camps: the
ancients (like Plato) are wise and wily, whereas the
moderns (like Locke and other liberals) are vulgar and
foolish. Now, it seems to me eminently fair and
reasonable to attribute to Strauss the ideas he
attributes to his beloved ancients.

In Plato’s dialogues, everyone assumes that Socrates is
Plato’s mouthpiece. But Strauss argues in his book The
City and Man (pp. 74-5, 77, 83-4, 97, 100, 111) that
Thrasymachus is Plato’s real mouthpiece (on this point,
see also M.F. Burnyeat, 'Sphinx without a Secret', New
York Review of Books, 30 May 1985 [paid-for only]). So,
we must surmise that Strauss shares the insights of the
wise Plato (alias Thrasymachus) that justice is merely
the interest of the stronger; that those in power make
the rules in their own interests and call it justice.


for the rest of this interview, go to

http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article-3-77-1542.jsp





__________________________________________________________________
McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network.
Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today!
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397

Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge.  Download Now!
http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455


portside (the left side in nautical parlance) is a
news, discussion and debate service of the Committees
of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism. It
aims to provide varied material of interest to people
on the left.

Post            : mail to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subscribe       : mail to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Unsubscribe     : mail to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Faq             : http://www.portside.org
List owner      : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web address     : <http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/portside>
Digest mode     : visit Web site


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!   These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- End Message ---

Reply via email to