Lance deHaven Smith's Conspiracy Theory in America

[Jim DiEugenio]

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.

[Anthony Thorne]

I've ordered this and am awaiting my copy. There are numerous books available (far too many) that snidely dismiss the notion of conspiracy theories, and a much smaller number that take the topic of conspiracies and cover-ups seriously. One of the few other books I can think of with a thoughtful approach similar to the dehaven Smith volume reviewed above is THE ROUGH GUIDE TO CONSPIRACY THEORIES, which was recently released in an updated third edition. I have an earlier edition and recommend it - (the only negative reviews on Amazon are from folks upset with its supposed 'left-wing bias', something hard to avoid when a majority of American conspriacies are tightly linked to the commercial / corporate wing of the Republican party).

http://www.amazon.com/Rough-Guide-Conspi...y+theories

[Jan Klimkowski]

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:

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.

[Jim DiEugenio]

That part of the book is really interesting intellectual history, which these days, is really kind of rare.

And Lance did a nice job on that topic.

Everyone, and I mean, everyone should see The Power of Nightmares.

One of the finest documentaries of recent years, maybe decades. Not just for what it says about Strauss and the origins of the neo con movement, but also as a beautiful piece of film making.

[Anthony Thorne]

I'm also a big fan of NIGHTMARES. The originally scheduled Australian broadcast of the series was bumped when the 7/7 bombings happened the same morning. Of course, when SBS TV finally found the balls to put the show back on, they had Australian 60 Minutes journalist George Negus come on right after the closing credits to herald an upcoming BBC documentary the following week that would 'refute' the Curtis documentary.

[Dawn Meredith]

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:

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.

Interesting Jan. I saw that powerful video several years ago. I even recall that I saved it. I will hunt around after work day today. Terrible if it can no longer be viewed. It connects a lot of important dots.

Dawn

[Richard Coleman]

Try here:

https://archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNi...oldOutside

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

[Richard Coleman]

Try here:

https://archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNi...oldOutside

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

Or scroll down. There are different file formats for download.

[R.K. Locke]

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.

What's most interesting is that he also traces the postmodernism of the left back to Bataille (and eventually de Sade), via Foucault. It is a complex and compelling argument that is difficult to summarise in a concise fashion, but I would be interested to know if anyone else here has read it and has any thoughts. I found it to be hugely enlightening.

[Magda Hassan]

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.

Thank you! excellent news. I'll put that on my must buy list.

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

There is a special ring of Dante's hell reserved for the Post Modernists. Right next to the Social Democrats.