Jim DiEugenio Wrote:http://www.ctka.net/reviews/cta.html

A flawed but interesting book.

I especially liked the section on the history between Beard vs Popper and Strauss. And how that paved the way for the neocons and neolibs who avlued the state above all. ANd once in power, they did their best to discredit any kind of Beardian critical historiography.

It helped explain why both those groups have spend a real effort on discrediting any kind of critical movements.

Quote:As most people who study histiography know, after Beard's death in 1948, the influence of Strauss, Popper, and especially Hofstadter, did much to deflate his reputation. Popper and Strauss, although different in their approaches, both advocated the limiting of liberal tendencies. Because both men believed that liberalism contained an inherent strain towards nihilism because of its extreme form of moral relativism. There was a nihilism of two types. One which tended towards the totalitarian rule of Nazism and Marxism; and one which was more gentle, which featured a permissiveness which bordered on hedonism which would sap the energy of society. (p. 79) Under the considerable influence of these two men, plus Hofstadter, academic studies of government now became more quantitative and behavioral in their approach. Beard's work, which was much more pragmatic and value oriented, fell into eclipse. Under deHaven-Smith's intellectual analysis, he maps out how Popper's teachings led to neoliberalism and those of Strauss led to neoconservatism. It should be added here that in his brilliant film, The Power of Nightmares, director Adam Curtis came to the same conclusion: namely that the work of Strauss, and its critique of liberal permissiveness, helped turn people like Irving Kristol and Paul Wolfowitz against the "permissive society" of Kennedy and Johnson. And helped convince them that to revitalize national unity, one had to have an international enemy. This was first the Soviet Union, and then the threat of Moslem terror. The author adds that Popper was probably the first person to use the term "conspiracy theory' as a pejorative. This was in his two volume work The Open Society and its Enemies. And Strauss wrote about, the "noble lies" which must be maintained in order to preserve society. (p. 100) There is little doubt that these two men had an impact in academia; and an even larger impact outside it.

Jan Klimkowski Wrote:

Jim DiEugenio Wrote:http://www.ctka.net/reviews/cta.html

A flawed but interesting book.

I especially liked the section on the history between Beard vs Popper and Strauss. And how that paved the way for the neocons and neolibs who avlued the state above all. ANd once in power, they did their best to discredit any kind of Beardian critical historiography.

It helped explain why both those groups have spend a real effort on discrediting any kind of critical movements.

From the review:

Quote:As most people who study histiography know, after Beard's death in 1948, the influence of Strauss, Popper, and especially Hofstadter, did much to deflate his reputation. Popper and Strauss, although different in their approaches, both advocated the limiting of liberal tendencies. Because both men believed that liberalism contained an inherent strain towards nihilism because of its extreme form of moral relativism. There was a nihilism of two types. One which tended towards the totalitarian rule of Nazism and Marxism; and one which was more gentle, which featured a permissiveness which bordered on hedonism which would sap the energy of society. (p. 79) Under the considerable influence of these two men, plus Hofstadter, academic studies of government now became more quantitative and behavioral in their approach. Beard's work, which was much more pragmatic and value oriented, fell into eclipse. Under deHaven-Smith's intellectual analysis, he maps out how Popper's teachings led to neoliberalism and those of Strauss led to neoconservatism. It should be added here that in his brilliant film, The Power of Nightmares, director Adam Curtis came to the same conclusion: namely that the work of Strauss, and its critique of liberal permissiveness, helped turn people like Irving Kristol and Paul Wolfowitz against the "permissive society" of Kennedy and Johnson. And helped convince them that to revitalize national unity, one had to have an international enemy. This was first the Soviet Union, and then the threat of Moslem terror. The author adds that Popper was probably the first person to use the term "conspiracy theory' as a pejorative. This was in his two volume work The Open Society and its Enemies. And Strauss wrote about, the "noble lies" which must be maintained in order to preserve society. (p. 100) There is little doubt that these two men had an impact in academia; and an even larger impact outside it.

Karl Popper links directly to George Soros and his Open Society front.

"Trader" Soros made his money by "breaking the Bank of England", and now funds "Orange revolutions".

I went hunting for Adam Curtis' fabulous Power of Nightmares online, and found endless "BBC Worldwide has blocked this video on copyright grounds" notices.

If you can find it online, it's time very well spent.

Richard Coleman Wrote:Try here:

https://archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares-Episode1BabyItsColdOutside

No guarantees. You might have to fool around with settings. Click on the Prefer question under the screen.

R.K. Locke Wrote:Guido Preparata's book The Ideology of Tyranny, which I cannot recommend highly enough, discusses some of these issues in a most interesting way. Preparata argues that Strauss' reputation as "The father of Neoconservatism" is somewhat overstated, and traces the philosophical lineage of the Neocons back to Bataille and Hegel via Alexandre Kojève.

R.K. Locke Wrote:What's most interesting is that he also traces the postmodernism of the left back to Bataille (and eventually de Sade), via Foucault.