Has anyone read "Ravelstein," the book about Strauss student Bloom and

[WiseButAngrySara]

authored by Saul Bellows? I am fascinated by Strauss and the neo-con connection, and I just checked out this biographical 'fiction' at the library. Years ago in college, I read Bloom's translation of Plato's The Republic, and I also read parts of Strauss's Book on Political Philosophy. I have always loved political philosophy, and first became educated about Strauss and his neocon connection here at DU. I read Humboldt's Gift by Bellows years ago also, but I'm ashamed to say I hardly remember what it's about.

A recent link on Strauss here led me to Drury's (sp?) links on Strauss and from her links to several LaRouche articles on Strauss and the neocons. It has me quite upset in a way; I thought that to discuss 'noble ideas' one had to be 'noble' themselves, but I'm wondering if these teachers of 'virtue' are all like Bill Bennetts, and that makes me doubt (not really) even the intent of some of the original classical authors.

[salvorhardin]

1. You might try reading Strauss or Fukuyama

Rather than reading second and third hand accounts and interpretations. Not very much of what they have to say is very controversial and would likely be accepted by the majority of Americans.

I recommend The Rebirth of Classical Political Rationalism for Strauss and of course The End of History for Fukuyama.

On edit: And please don't take this to mean that I advocate neo-conservative principles. I don't. However, both Strauss and Fukuyama were/are highly influential and deserve to be read.

Second edit: Forgot to mention that you might also want to read Strauss' Liberalism Ancient & Modern.

[Wrinkle_In_Time]

2. I haven't read Strauss in his own words, but found the

documentary "The Power of Nightmares" to be an interesting and frightening depiction of Strauss' history, his acolytes and their application of his doctrine, especially when compared against the equivalent from Sayyed Kotb.

Have you seen "The Power of Nightmares" and if so, what is your opinion on it, having read (I assume) Strauss' books? I would appreciate your insight, Mayor of Terminus.

[salvorhardin]

4. I saw Power of Nightmares and liked it very much

Two criticisms though:
1) The film totally ignores the degree to which business interests have shaped U.S. policy. Media Lens made that criticism, and it's one even Curtis agrees with. However, Curtis argues he started out to make a film about the neoconservative influence on modern politics and to stray from that topic would have made PoN a different film. I agree with Curtis, but we must not fall prey to a monopole interpretation of history.
http://www.medialens.org/alerts/04/041207_Curtis_Response.html

2) Clive Davis at The National Review believes that the neoconservatives were misrepresented (they were to an extent) and that it portrayed Strauss as an "evil genius", that Strauss' influence is exaggerated (yes also to an extent) and that the film portrayed Strauss as an "evil genius" and not Osama bin Laden. I think this last criticism is the most salient. Neither man is an evil genius, but Strauss I do feel was unfairly characterized. The man was an academic whose ideas happened to be taken the wrong way by some very disagreeable people. I rather think if Strauss were alive he'd be aghast at what has been done in the name of his philosophical and political ideas.
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/davis200410211043.asp

But overall I really did like Power of Nightmares. Parts of it were absolutely surreal and I don't know if they're historical fact. Was the stuff about the 'Team B' entirely accurate? Believe it or not, that's the part of the film I found most disturbing. I guess I really should do some reading on that sometime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_B

[Wrinkle_In_Time]

10. Ah yes: 'Team B'.

Fatally wrong strategists. It was the anecdote about the Soviet submarines that could avoid acoustic detection that illustrated for me their faulty thinking. Here's another reference:

The contents of the Team B reports are alarming, both for the threats they described, and for the methodologies they used. They projected that by 1984 the Soviet Union would deploy about 500 Backfire bombers--more than twice as many as were actually deployed that year. They claimed that the Soviet Union was working on an anti-acoustic submarine and, failing to find any evidence of one, stated that it may already have been deployed since it appeared to have evaded detection!

Therefore the Soviets may have deployed unicorns too.

The excerpt above was taken from the article http://www.thebulletin.org/article.php?art_ofn=nd03husain">Neocons: The men behind the curtain by Khurram Husain, published in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists November/December 2003. The article is a fascinating summary of the key players and events that shaped U.S. military strategy post-WWII. It has a long list of bibliographical references too.

Thanks for the response regarding PoN. Your criticisms are well taken. I too found parts of it surreal and ironically the stuff of nightmares.

[WiseButAngrySara]

11. Thanks Tesseract (sp?) for your thoughtful comments and links.

I will definitely check out the PoN. I had never heard of it until I posted this. I purchased Bloom's {u]The Closing of the American Mind years ago (1988), but haven't read it in toto. Maybe now is the time to do so. The preface was written by his 'friend' Saul Bellows, who had encouraged him to write it, apparently got Bloom out of debt and made him an overnight millionnaire! This is all documented in the book I mentioned in the original OP. Funny these teachers of 'virtue' ... Bloom was a homosexual who died of AIDS in 1992, Bennett a gambling, drinking, smoking, anti-drug czar and probably profitted by the very selling of drugs by his neo-con friends, and had the audacity to also write a book about 'virtue.' Makes me want to gag!

[salvorhardin]

12. And how about those social networks!?

Historian Richard Pipes was on the original Team B with George H.W. Bush, and then Richard Pipes son Daniel Pipes is appointed to the U.S. Institute of Peace by George W. Bush.

[Wrinkle_In_Time]

13. More like anti-social networks or sociopathic networks.

Singing: ♫ It's a small world-that-we-are-trying-to-rule after all. ♪

Please forgive me, but when I read your statement: ...and then Richard Pipes son Daniel Pipes is appointed to the U.S. Institute of Peace by George W. Bush. all I could think of was "Peace Pipes" and I had to laugh with the irony.

I must mock these horrible people.

On rare occasions, our leading Canadian national newspaper (The Globe and Mail, which is otherwise quite reasonable) runs Op Ed pieces by Daniel Pipes. Thank goodness they use absorbent newsprint. It does wonders for the bile.

[BrklynLiberal]

5. Just saw "The Power of Nightmares" last night. It was amazing.

It contains an incredible amount of information!! I learned so much I did not know before.
So many people and events are tied together.
So much was happening in which the US/CIA was involved, that was horrifying.
It makes the hypocrisy of the neocons even more disgusting.

Everyone should see 'The Power of Nightmares"

[WiseButAngrySara]

3. Thank you very much for the suggestions! I've ordered Strauss'

Liberalism Ancient and Modern. I will also check out the others. So many 'Straussians' who are not necessarily neocons, argue that Strauss would have been totally opposed to the Iraq War. My impression of him was that war is sometimes necessary, but something to be avoided, not pre-empted. He was fond of writing about the esoteric, but what great author is not esoteric? I think that he merely wrote about these 'hidden' truths, but did not comprehend them himself. If he truly understood Plato's Reality, he would not be an advocate for war. This is part of my major confusion and fascination with Strauss.

[salvorhardin]

6. The impression I got

Was that Strauss was arguing for the role of the academic in politics to be central and powerful. The old idea of the "philosopher kings" brought into modern times. How about you?

On edit: Oops. I totally avoided your question. Sorry. I don't know. I would like to think that Strauss would have believed the first Gulf War was just and necessary but that it should have been finished. I also think he would have approved of the elder Bush using the "liberating Kuwait" meme as a necessary lie to motivate the country to war. Further, I'd like to believe that Strauss would have been opposed to this war from the start.

BTW: Thanks for making the point that not all Straussians are neo-conservatives.

[WiseButAngrySara]

7. Thanks so much for your post! I would substitute 'role of the

academic in politics' to 'role of the enlightened in politics', but other than that I agree with you. "And so, Glaucon until philosophers rule as kings, or kings and priest philosophize, there will be no end for problems of mankind..."

The problem is, historically, they have always been put to death!

Socrates, Christ, Kennedy, and so many others! And Socrates was put to death by a Democracy, who thought that he had worshipped false gods, and had perverted the youth. Of course it is elitist to believe that the few philosopher-kings should rule rather than the many, but presumably enlightened individuals have no real desire for power and wealth anyway, and Plato wanted their education to be such that they were raised communally, sharing all property, so they would not be influenced by wealth. Actually, anyone who believes that enlightenment is possible, but by nature uncommon, is elitist!

I don't know whether or not Strauss was enlightened, but I thought that he was a 'good guy' until I read about his neo-con clan. I hope that he was just misinterpreted, but I had no idea until recently that he has become so reviled. It's sad to me.

I loved political philosophy, but was completely apathetic until the selection of 'His Highness' by SCOTUS in 2000. The Diebold won election of 2004 has only enhanced my anger at these thugs who are subverting our government, established for the ultimate good of mankind, into self interest and short term profit with total lack of regard for human life and personal rights!

[salvorhardin]

8. Well, in an ideal society

The many would all be enlightened philosopher-kings, but that would be utopia and probably not going to happen. Not everyone has the mental ability, not everyone has the interest. And it's at this point we wrap back around to points I was making in a conversation in the dungeon, which in turn plays off comments I made in Election Reform.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=95763&mesg_id=95775

Feel free to join in, but I'm hitting the sack for tonight. Nice chatting with ya.

[WiseButAngrySara]

9. Nice chatting with you too, and have a good night's sleep! I'll check

out your link in the dungeon?! And thanks so much for your insight.