Leo Strauss's Counter-Revolutionary Platonic Elitism
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 лют 2025
- Who was Leo Strauss and what does he mean for today’s right? That’s a question we’re looking at today in our livestream article reading. The original article is at jacobin.com/20.... Enjoy!
-
BOOK A PRIVATE MASTERCLASS WITH MILLERMAN
millermanschoo...
MICHAEL'S NEWSLETTER
Read Michael's musings on politics, philosophy, mysticism, and other topics. Sign up: millermanschoo...
FREE INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY
Get my Guide to Great Thinkers at millermanschoo...
RELATED COURSES
millermanschoo...
millermanschoo...
millermanschoo...
millermanschoo...
FOLLOW ONLINE
Twitter/X: www.X.com/M_Mi...
LinkedIn: / michaelmillerman
Instagram: / michael_millerman
Personal Website: www.MichaelMil...
ABOUT ME
I teach politics and philosophy to professionals in law, education, finance, and tech through video courses and private tutoring at www.MillermanS....
Please like, share, and subscribe to support the channel. If you're really enjoying the content, I also welcome your donations.
THANK YOU!
Absolutely masterful as always.
Hi Michael
This is actually one of the most interesting streams I've watched from your channel. Most of my knowledge about Strauss and his ideas I have obtained from your channel - plus a few quotes and mentions of him in various online videoes or essays. I bought his "What is political philosophy? And other studies" a while back, after having watched a stream where you read from it. So far, I haven't actually read any of his books yet, but this stream made me want to start reading him.
All very interesting. I do enjoy these. Thank you
Glad you like them!
The author of this Jacobin article has a bad case of what Peter Minowitz calls Straussophobia in his book by that name. I found distortions and misrepresentations of Strauss in nearly every paragraph. But it's still useful to read, since it gives us a good picture of the caricature of Strauss that's making the rounds these days in certain circles.
That aside, thanks (again) for mentioning Lampert's Beijing Lectures on Strauss, Plato, and Nietzsche. It's not for the neophyte, but it's indispensable for anyone who wants to understand the full meaning of "political philosophy." I'm pretty sure that Ingar Solty, author of the Jacobin article, never bothered to read it,
I enjoy all Michael Millerman's talks. UA-cam's algorithm started sending them to me about six months ago, so I have some catching up to do. I can't know what the algorithm's reasoning or calculus is - but I do comment along these lines in a rather childish way on various channels and also in gmail, which youtube clearly reads. My comments are perhaps more "untutored" than childish. I don't think a child would have enough experience to make comments which - though a bit silly - do capture the flavour of the Ancients. Though it is true that a child can have stunning insights sometimes.
I think I was born with a yearning for the Ancients - and it was no surprise to myself when I decided to ditch Eng Lit at University and opt for Classical Arabic instead. Everyone in the Middle East Centre at Cambridge was fed up with the Modern World - though they did not say so openly - and thus had opted to study Chinese or Persian or whatever in the hope of finding some escape from the 20th century that would provide them with a job of some kind later on. I suppose the same was true in the Classics Department, though I never met any Classics scholars and am only just beginning to realize how crucial the Classics are to our Civilization. Sometimes I wish I had opted for Greek and Latin instead of Arabic, but you can't cry over spilt milk.
Two of my fellow Arabists went into the Diplomatic Service - I felt sorry for them as you have to be very Modern to be a Modern Diplomat. You have to go along with all sorts of rubbish in the service of your Government - one of the men had to endure the murder by ISIS of an English nurse married to an Iraqi whilst he was ambassador to Baghdad. I expect he still has PTSD. But men had to be Breadwinners in those days (still do), so only the women could afford to laze about in the sleepy arms of long-gone Eastern civilizations. In the end I had to become practical too, and opted for secretarial work as being the work that was most likely to enable me to "switch off" and "zone out", provided I did all the typing properly.
Nowadays I get the feeling a lot more people are just "treading water" in the employment market, and this would explain the absence of really high IQs from high-powered jobs (except for the handful of brilliant CEOs whose names we all know). I cannot think of any truly brilliant politicians alive now. The modern Church is also becoming repulsive to very clever men, for obvious reasons. Ditto University professorships - for the same reasons. Everyone has fled to youtube - both the brilliant and those who like to listen to them and question them.
Of course there is also a lot of idiocy on youtube - but the algorithm soons gets the message that you won't watch it, if you don't watch it. I don't think this article from Jacobin counts as idiocy, though it is clearly full of errors (mainly stemming from looking at things through the wrong end of the telescope).
Obviously it is Baby Steps for me on Leo Strauss and even on Plato - however I note that Strauss was pretty sold on Al Farabi and Maimonides, and whilst I don't know much about Al Farabi and Maimonides either, I am familiar with that transition period when the Islamic Empire started to relay Aristotle and Plato to the West with great intellgience and warmth. Sadly, latter-day Arabs and other Muslims are as estranged from their Ancients as we are from ours, in general (i.e. discounting Fundamentalists). Big hugs to Millerman, for trying to reconnect some of us with our Roots. There should be no need to espouse Fundamentalism in order to "send our Roots rain" - that "rain" should be standard fare, and was at one time.
Leo Strauss in Curtis documentary was in "Power of Nightmares" and about Bernays he has an older documentary "Century of the self".
Thank you
It's also worth noting that the last paragraph of this article misrepresents what Vance said in response to the charge that he was lying about Haitian immigrants in Springfield, OH. He did not confess to telling a "noble lie," as this article insinuates, since he insisted that he was only repeating what he had heard from his constituents. When he spoke of having "to create stories," he meant getting the press to treat what was happening in Springfield as a "news story." It's not a "story" as long as it's ignored, so Vance was creating a "story" by forcing the press to pay attention. If you listen to the interview in question, his meaning is clear. Solty is the one who's lying when he suggests that Vance fabricated these allegations out of whole cloth for political purposes.
😂
@@vt5625 What is that you find funny?
Except
Alot of The Accusations
Toward The Haitian Immigrants
Were Indeed True, Sir.
@@chrismclaughlin-gt7ix I still don't get why you find that funny, but oh well.
@GeorgeDunn399 so you
Live There?
Driven on Springfields' Roads
Have You?
Interesting point about complicated idiocy. I've long had the suspicion that the focus on very complicated topics was a strategy of people who know that they aren't terribly good at basic thinking, and that probably subconsciously as well as consciously. Like how can you be in denial about the most basic biological facts but become an expert in climate science. It's like if you are playing an action video game and you know you lose, if you increase the speed of the game enough the other player will not be able to keep up as well and it becomes random.
What a class!
..... and out goes Anne Applebaum. 😄😄😄
The spirit of Rousseau is alive.
The depreciation of pre-scientific knowledge. Like that phrase!
What do you think about Paul Gottfried's heavy criticism about Strauss and Straussians?
I read his book on Strauss a long time ago and I remember that he was more critical of Strauss's followers than of Strauss himself. But I also do not recall that I took away any highly significant insights from his book. Keep in mind it was a long time ago and I mean no disrespect to him as a scholar.
it must be noted that if there is a political mechanism whereby it is possible to denigrate and side line any part of a society that there is a next in line equally vulnerable to that mechanism and it is only a matter of time before there is a knock in due course on their door.
1:42:40 .. also .. i don't think the "noble lie" that they are talking about in the article, describing the justification of the war on iraq, is that blunt .. in the perpetrators' minds the motivation for telling these lies was, of course, that it will permit overthrowing a tyrannical government, spurning "international law" which does not permit that kind of blatant violent interference, and allowing the people of iraq to install a democratic liberal friendly system of government ... and then the oil profiteering would come naturally from that, it wasn't the main tacit aim, just a natural consequence.. because what kind of people wouldn't want to express their profound gratitude to their noble liberators by giving them control over their resources... in a neocon's mind liberal democracy and profiteering are the same thing .. that's kinda why there is _free_ in *free market* .. no ?..
What’s the best book / article to read for Strauss’s idea of the second cave? Thanks Michael for a very interesting read through
This is the relevant source: www.amazon.com/Reorientation-Strauss-Recovering-Political-Philosophy/dp/1137374233
is ther a good straussian response to Altmans book the german stranger?
The Strauss divided.
Where does Strauss engage in any extended analysis and dialogue with Popper? Indirectly, vis a vis, his discussion of positivism perhaps.
Jacobin is fake news, which is good to have pointed out, regardless of the distastefulness of that task. Good job. Pinochet was mentioned in passing. Any chance of a video on him? I've heard of a multi volume autobiography that is being suppressed.
a random jacobin article, indeed,...
Strauss 🌶️
The idea that Bloom’s work ostracizes homosexuals is hilarious.
More hilarious to say that Plato did: Stan Rosen has established that it is probable that Plato’s Symposium itself was part of Plato’s interest in reforming the way pederasty was practice, elevating the erotic impulse to some of its higher spiritual manifestations; but Strauss himself concentrates on Plato’s preserving in the writing, Strauss says “celebrating” or commemorating the mutilation of the Hermae. My view is that Rosen and Strauss do not agree on the meaning of Symposion for Platon?! But they agree also on much. This is an example of how a deeper view of the dialogues and the Peleponisian war illuminate and deepen our understanding of both. further I see Symposion as an extension of Socrates exposition in Regime on the Eugenical mystery of the mating rituals by which the City and Philosophers are produced.
Uh... Nope, not part of the "cult." Watching this as a critic or the channel, albeit acknowledging that Millerman does make a valiant attempt at a fair presentation of the issues.
I was just kidding around. Thanks for watching! It's important to me that people watch and appreciate this channel who do not necessarily share my views or those of the authors I typically discuss.
Keep that shallow water mirky.
I will keep the clear waters deep and the deep waters clear
My view of Strauss is he's elitist and not worthy of being the guide toward a better future. Learn from him sure but it's not necessarily wise to seek the depths from the wrong.
1:24:50 ... what a dark weird schizophrenic description of adam curtis' work... ahaha ...
... does he really think adam curtis is some obscure batty youtuber .. or is this just a way of throwing shade... i kinda think it's the latter cause lot of people have seen the documentaries but don't know the name of the person who made them ..
I meant no disrespect, I was just looking for some description that would help someone remember his name since I couldn't
@@millerman oh... hi michael.. well i don't believe you.. ahah.. let's call this _esoteric shading_ ...
...anyway .. i love your videos .. be well .. and greetings from bulgaria
LOL, characterizing Popper as a "positivist" (in the article) is just insane. He expressly rejected and fought against positivism, in his writings and otherwise. As to Strauss, he never figured out that the only political philosophy compatible with the Natural Law is Liberalism (properly understood, not the nonsense interpretation put forward by the so-called authoritarian, or anti-liberal, "Right"). The Founding Fathers got it, Strauss did not.
boo hiss
@@bxnjxmxn2942 Wow, I see the intellectuals are weighing in...
These are interesting points but are contrary to most people’s beliefs about Popper. Can you explain why Popper was not a positivist?
Popper critiqued narrow/academic logical positivism in favor of a genuinely scientific positivism, where what is posited must be falsifiable to have any claim upon truth (contra positions which are merely logically enjoined).
@@jackbeevor6594 Just read Popper. He expressly is fighting against positivism in ALL his books. He was overtly a proponent of evolutionary epistemology, which is as anti-positivist as you can get. Positivism states that only what can be justified (logically or empirically) is allowable as knowledge, Popper is opposed to this view. He did try to propose a criterion of demarcation between science and non-science, but he CERTAINLY did not hold the view that only scientific knowledge was valid. Quite the contrary.