THE POLITICAL IDEAS OF LEO STRAUSS

THE POLITICAL IDEAS OF LEO STRAUSS

The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss Shadia B. Drury Associate Professor of Political Science University of Calgary, Alberta M MACMILLAN PRESS

Shadia B. Drury 1988 Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1988 978-0-333-41256-5 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No paragraph of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1956 (as amended). Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. First published 1988 Published by THE MACMILLAN PRESS LTD Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 2XS and London Companies and representatives throughout the world Typeset by Wessex Typesetters (Division of The Eastern Press Ltd) Frome, Somerset British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Drury, Shadia B. The political ideas of Leo Strauss. 1. Strauss, Leo 2. Political science - Germany I. Title 320.5'092'4 JC263.S8 ISBN 978-1-349-19130-7 ISBN 978-1-349-19128-4 (ebook) DOI 10.1007/978-1-349-19128-4

To Dennis

Contents Preface ix 1 Leo Strauss: Teacher and Philosopher 1 2 Esoteric Philosophy and Ancient Wisdom 18 3 Philosophy's Hidden Revolt against God 37 4 Socrates and the Drama of Western Civilization 61 5 Classic Natural Right or the Teaching on Tyranny 90 6 Machiavelli's Subversion of Esotericism 114 7 Hobbes and the Character of Modernity 133 8 The Crisis of Modernity 151 9 Post-Modernity: Plato or Nietzsche? 170 10 Esotericism Betrayed 182 11 The Wise and the Vulgar: A Criticism of Leo Strauss 193 Notes 203 Select Bibliography 243 Index 253 vii

Pref ace Leo Strauss is generally regarded as an historian of ideas, albeit a very unusual one. He has written many commentaries on the major figures in the history of political thought; among these are books on Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Xenophon, Machiavelli, Spinoza and Hobbes. What is unusual about these works is that their author insists that all great political philosophers conceal their true thoughts or leave them unsaid. What the philosophers wrote clearly and explicitly was their exoteric philosophy, hiding behind which is their real and more complete esoteric philosophy. Strauss therefore introduced a hermeneutic (i.e. a method of interpretation) intended to unearth the hidden thoughts of the philosophers. The method he used seemed unusual: he attributed great significance to the numbers of chapters or paragraphs in a work, he focused on what was literally in the middle of a book to shed light on the heart of the matter, and he drew important conclusions from the silences of philosophers. It is not surprising that he has come to be regarded as a most enigmatic figure among scholars. What is most baffling of all is the number of young scholars eager to follow in his footsteps. In this book I shall ignore altogether Strauss' s contribution to the study of the history of ideas. I shall argue that Strauss is a philosopher with a unique and disturbing set of ideas that he is reluctant to state clearly and unambiguously. Instead, he hides his views behind a veil of scholarship. I believe that Strauss himself wrote esoterically. The intention of this work is to uncover his esoteric philosophy. In my attempt to uncover the hidden philosophy, I will not apply Strauss's method to his work. I will not attribute great significance to his silences. I will not draw any conclusions from the number of chapters in a book, or from the number of paragraphs in a chapter. Nor will I assume that what is in the center of a work is necessarily the heart of the matter. I will under no circumstances reverse what Strauss actually says or maintain that he believes the opposite of what he has actually written. I will not look behind the surface. Everything I will attribute to Strauss is directly there, not between the lines or behind the lines, but in the lines. ix

x Preface The reader is entitled to wonder: if Strauss' s own political ideas can be found 'in the lines', how can they be said to be hidden or esoteric? I believe that Strauss' s philosophy is esoteric in the following senses. First, it is hidden behind a veil of scholarship or dispersed in the course of detailed and sometimes tedious commentaries. It is expressed in the most unsystematic fashion - reflections on religious matters appearing in the context of discussions of social science methodology, insights about the crisis of modern times in the midst of interpretations of the plays of Aristophanes, and criticism of Aquinas in the context of an exposition on Marsilius of Padua. It is therefore important for one who would understand Strauss to study all of his work as a unity and not as isolated texts. Reviewers of his books who have tried to make sense of one book in isolation from the others have generally admitted to being puzzled and perplexed. The second sense in which Strauss' s writing is esoteric is that his intention does not readily disclose itself. What Strauss appears to say clearly, explicitly and repeatedly is not the whole truth: it hides the full complexity of what he really thinks. I am not suggesting that Strauss believes the opposite of what he writes explicitly. I have no intention of dismissing what he says repeatedly and in the most obvious places as expressions of salutary myths that have no bearing on his real thought. I intend to take seriously everything that Strauss says. I do not regard, nor do I think that Strauss ever believed, that those who write esoterically are liars. Strauss says a great deal about noble lies and pious frauds, and he certainly regards these to be the essence of every genuine political philosophy. But these noble lies contain part of the truth and sometimes the whole truth. Strauss himself illustrates how the truth is contained in the lie by the story of the pious ascetic which Al Farabi uses to illustrate the secretive nature of Plato's writings (Strauss, What Is Political Philosophy?, p. 135). The pious ascetic was well known in his city for his abstinence, abasement and mortification, for his probity, propriety and devotion. But for some reason he aroused the hostility of the ruler of his city. The latter ordered his arrest, and to make sure he did not flee, he placed the guards of the city gates on alert. In spite of this, the ascetic managed to escape from the city. Dressed as a drunk and singing a tune to cymbals, he approached the city gates. When the guard asked him who he was, he replied that he

Preface xi was the pious ascetic that everyone was looking for. The guard did not believe him, and let him go. The pious ascetic is the symbol of the esoteric writer. He lies in deed or manner or style of expression, but does not lie in speech. It is my contention that Strauss is like the pious ascetic: if we are to understand him, we must learn to take him literally. Strauss' s own noble lies, like the lie of the pious ascetic, are not simple falsehoods. They are misleading not so much because of what they say, but because of the pious manner that Strauss generally adopts when he makes his most radical statements. Moreover, what Strauss actually says seems so contrary to his reputation that we are inclined not to believe him. The third sense in which Strauss' s thought is esoteric has to do with the fact that Strauss' s ideas are camouflaged by his dual use of key words like virtue, justice, nobility and gentlemanliness. The dual meanings assigned to these words is explicitly revealed only in certain contexts, but taken for granted throughout his writings. We cannot read him literally unless we understand the meanings of the words he uses. What Strauss means by virtue, justice, nobility and gentlemanliness depends on whose virtue, justice and nobility or gentlemanliness is at issue. Strauss does not believe that the same standards are applicable to all people. Many an apparent contradiction in Strauss' s writings can be resolved simply by paying attention to the meanings of words. Strauss often avails himself of imagery and metaphors borrowed from Plato, Xenophon, Heraclitus, Aristophanes, the Sophists and others. For those unfamiliar with such imagery, his language may seem peculiar, but on the whole the use of such imagery generally gives his writing more color than it might otherwise possess. For example, Strauss borrows the images of 'The Just' and 'The Unjust Speech' from Aristophanes's Clouds. The 'Just' and 'Unjust Speech' are personifications of Justice and Injustice, or Right and Wrong who are depicted on stage in a competition to possess the soul of a certain young man by their speeches. Strauss often uses the expression the 'Just Speech' even when Aristophanes is not part of the context. It will become apparent in the course of this study that this image is appealing to Strauss because justice and injustice are for him primarily a matter of speech or a way of thinking that is unsupported by any universal reality independent of man.

xii Preface Strauss borrows the idea of the 'real man' from Callicles in Plato's Gorgias and contrasts it to the concept of the 'gentleman' drawn from Xenophon. As we shall see, the difference between the 'gentleman' and the 'real man' is the key to understanding what Strauss means by insisting that the political solution par excellence is the rule of 'gentlemen'. Another example of a borrowed metaphor is that of the 'wave'. Strauss's essay 'The Three Waves of Modernity' is a play on the 'wave' metaphor in Book v of Plato's Republic. Plato refers to the three 'waves' which prevent the actualization of the ideal rule of the philosophers. The 'waves' are obstacles to the realization of the 'city in speech' as well as waves of laughter that Socrates expects to encounter when he suggests that philosophers should be kings or that the family should be abolished or that women should exercise in the nude with men. In the same spirit, Strauss's three 'waves' of modernity are obstacles to the realization of the regime according to nature, since modernity is a conscious revolt against nature. The waves could also be waves of laughter from those wise enough to realize the impossibility of the 'modem project'. Strauss uses other metaphors such as the 'stargazer', which he borrows from Plato's parable of the ship where the drunken sailors are said to throw the helmsman overboard because he is a stargazer; apparently they did not know that he relied on the stars for navigation. The result is that the ship flounders aimlessly or is lost at sea. Strauss often uses the metaphor of the cave and of darkness to refer to political society and its beliefs and opinions, whereas light and sunshine refer to the truth, knowledge and the philosophical quest. In contrast to the free flight of the philosopher, the citizen is the captive of the beliefs and opinions of his society. Closely related to the symbols of light and darkness are Heraclitus's imagery of sleep and wakefulness to which Strauss sometimes resorts. According to Heraclitus, most men live their lives in a drunken stupor, they are like sleepers oblivious to the truth. To know and to see the truth is to be awake. I suspect that Heraclitus wants to deliver mankind from their habitual oblivion. But as I will show, Strauss believes that men must be kept in the darkness of the cave, for nothing is to be gained by liberating them from their chains. By way of abuse, Strauss's work is sometimes described as

Preface xiii kabbalistic. This is meant to emphasize its mysterious and obscurantist nature. But there is to my mind a more profound similarity between Strauss and the Kabbalists. The latter were Jewish mystics who sought to uncover the truth about the Godhead that is hidden in the Torah. The Kabbalists believed that the Torah was a perfect edifice, that every word, every letter was there for a purpose. Even the white around the letters was believed to contain symbols for those who could read them. The Torah was compared to a hard shell protecting a soft inner kernel of truth. It was also compared to a beautiful damsel hiding herself in a secret chamber of her palace, but revealing herself ever so slightly to her lover who haunted the palace. The lover was the student of the Torah who studied her every present and absent letter with monastic dedication. But his efforts alone could not secure his success. The damsel revealed herself to him only whenever she chose. Her beauty was not for all to see, nor was it equally harmless to all. The famous story in the Talmud about the four great rabbis illustrates just how dangerous the truth is to all but the very few. The rabbis engaged in esoteric studies and were said to have 'entered paradise'. There, on beholding the truth, the first died instantly, the second lost his reason, the third became an apostate and seduced the young; only the fourth entered and emerged in peace. Although not religious, Strauss's own conception of the truth bears striking similarities to the Kabbalists, for he also believed that the truth is dangerous: this is why it must be hidden. As I understand him, Strauss regards political philosophy as the hard outer shell that hides a soft kernel at its center. The soft kernel is philosophy, for which only the few are fit, whereas the many are harmed by it. Political philosophy is the public face of philosophy that hides the truth, not so much to avoid persecution, but in order not to wreak havoc on society, any society. The title of this book is the political ideas and not the political philosophy of Leo Strauss because it is an attempt to uncover the inner kernel hidden by the hard outer shell; it is not another shell. My purpose is to reveal the truth that is hidden in the midst of Strauss's commentaries. This means that I will disregard his desire for secrecy, not because I wish to threaten society, but because I believe that the raison d'etre of esotericism will disappear if the truth does not turn out to be as terrible or as devastating as Strauss claims. Moreover, 'truths' that are taken for granted and

xiv Preface silently transmitted from one generation to the next are far more dangerous than 'truths' which are exposed and made the subject of philosophical debate. It is time to bring Strauss's truths to the test, for only then can they become the subjects of philosophical debate, rather than articles of faith for the initiated. In the course of this study, I propose to show that Strauss's writings contain a philosophy that is clear, consistent and comprehensive. My intention is not to heap abuse on Strauss, but to uncover the fact that he is a thinker with a set of ideas that is novel, unexpected and imaginative, even if they are somewhat perverse. Those who harbor contempt for Strauss will no doubt think that he does not deserve to be regarded as a serious thinker. But it seems to me that this judgement can only be made after the fact. Besides, the fact that his ideas have become so fashionable is sufficient reason to acknowledge that it is about time to study him carefully and take him seriously. Moreover, unless we understand Strauss, we will be unable to explain why so many have found his ideas compelling. The first chapter is about Strauss's influence, his esoteric style of writing, his method and the method I will use to study his work. Chapter 2 deals with the philosophical assumptions underlying the esoteric style of writing, the influence of Al Farabi on Strauss's thought, and the meaning of political philosophy. I argue that, for Strauss, political philosophy is practical and that the ideal city or 'the city in speech' is not out of reach. Chapter 3 reveals the extent to which philosophy emerges as a revolt against God; it deals with Strauss's interpretation of Genesis. It also includes a dialogue between Strauss and Freud on the theologicopolitical problem. Parts of this chapter and the previous one form the basis of 'The Esoteric Philosophy of Leo Strauss', published in Political Theory (August 1985). Chapter 4 shows the extent to which Strauss shares the ideas of the Epicurians. It also exposes the radically unorthodox nature of Strauss' s understanding of Socrates as revealed in the works of Aristophanes, Plato and Xenophon. Chapter 5 analyzes Strauss's conception of classic natural right and explains why it is quite antithetical to the traditions of natural law and natural rights. Chapter 6 deals with Strauss's interpretation of Machiavelli. I argue that Strauss's most significant complaint about Machiavelli is that he says in his own name the terrible but irrevocable truths that the ancients only dared to put in the mouths of madmen, slaves and sophists. A

Preface xv shorter version of this chapter was previously published as 'The Hidden Meaning of Strauss' s Thought on Machiavelli', in History of Political Thought (Winter 1985). Chapter 7 describes Strauss's vision of modernity. Hobbes is at the center of this narrative, since Strauss regards him as the quintessentially modem philosopher. Chapter 8 is an account of the 'crisis' of modernity, and the role of historicism, relativism and nihilism in the process of the decline of Western civilization. Strauss has some sobering insights into the limits of politics which are intended to moderate our expectations. If we find him excessively pessimistic, we should remember that the specter of Nazi Germany is always in the back of his mind. In Chapter 9 I argue that, having understood Strauss, we cannot but conclude that his greatest intellectual debt is to Nietzsche. Strauss and Nietzsche are not strictly speaking modem, but post-modem. Chapter 10 explains the status of my interpretation of Strauss in the light of the debates among his students, and the final chapter includes the beginnings of a critique of Strauss' s philosopher-superman. I am indebted to several people: first and foremost, John W. Yolton, who has been a constant source of encouragement and inspiration. I owe a great deal to Harry V. Jaffa's long and untiring but always fascinating and open-minded correspondence. I should particularly like to thank my colleague Shiraz Dossa for carefully reading the whole manuscript, and for his impeccable literary taste that saved me from many infelicities of style, and for numerous discussions. I should also like to thank Lori Williams for proof-reading, and David Bershad for his advice on the cover. My greatest debt is to Dennis Drury for his unfailing support without which I would not have had the leisure necessary to write this book, and for his keen sense of humor which always serves to remind me that scholars ought not to take themselves or their work too seriously. Finally, I am very grateful for the assistance of the Resident Killam Fellowship of the University of Calgary for relieving me of my usual teaching duties and thus enabling me to complete the manuscript much sooner than would have been otherwise possible. S.B.D.