Or so it appeared to me, given that I was reading Chantal Mouffe at the time. Her two most recent books Agonistics: Thinking the World Politically Verso, and The Democratic Paradox Verso, provide a useful perspective, although perhaps a limited one.
Noble lies and perpetual war: It is widely recognised that the Bush administration was not honest about the reasons it gave for invading Iraq.
By contrast, Shadia Druryprofessor of political theory at the University of Regina in Saskatchewan, argues that the use of deception and manipulation in current US policy flow directly from the doctrines of the political philosopher Leo Strauss His Intellectual hegemony include Paul Wolfowitz and other neo-conservatives who have driven much of the political agenda of the Bush administration.
In the UK, a public Intellectual hegemony is currently underway into the death of the biological weapons expert David Kelly. A central theme is also whether the government deceived the public, as a BBC reporter suggested. Christopher Hitchens, an ardent advocate of the war, wrote unashamedly in November in an article felicitously titled Machiavelli in Mesopotamia that: She argues that the central claims of Straussian thought wield a crucial influence on men of power in the contemporary United States.
She elaborates her argument in this interview. A natural order of inequality Danny Postel: What is that connection? Leo Strauss was a great believer in the efficacy and usefulness of lies in politics.
Now that the lies have been exposed, Paul Wolfowitz and others in the war party are denying that these were the real reasons for the war. So what were the real reasons? Reorganising the balance of power in the Middle East in favour of Israel?
Expanding American hegemony in the Arab world? But these reasons would not have been sufficient in themselves to mobilise American support for the war. And the Straussian cabal in the administration realised that.
The neo-conservative vision is commonly taken to be about spreading democracy and liberal values globally. And when Strauss is mentioned in the press, he is typically described as a great defender of liberal democracy against totalitarian tyranny.
40 (Volume 20, No. 1) March, Introduction by The Editors. SOCIALISM AND DEMOCRACY AT Frank Rosengarten – Looking Back in Order to Look Ahead: Twenty Years of Research and Publishing by the Research Group on Socialism and Democracy Victor Wallis – Socialism and Democracy During the First 20 Years of Socialism and Democracy. A NEW WORLD ORDER?. After reading Antonio Santucci’s short political biography on Gramsci and after re-reading some of the Prison Notebooks (edited and translated by J. Buttigieg), I want to offer a reading of the relation and significance of “hegemony” within what Gramsci conceives of as a “philosophy of praxis”—his name for Marxism. (But I think this was more than a code name to confuse his prison. Foreword Among the numerous casualties of Iran’s tainted presidential elections was the legitimacy of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. While for two decades Khamenei had attempted to cultivate an image of an impartial and magnanimous guide.
The idea that Strauss was a great defender of liberal democracy is laughable. Yet many in the media have been gullible enough to believe it.
How could an admirer of Plato and Nietzsche be a liberal democrat? The ancient philosophers whom Strauss most cherished believed that the unwashed masses were not fit for either truth or liberty, and that giving them these sublime treasures would be like throwing pearls before swine.
In contrast to modern political thinkers, the ancients denied that there is any natural right to liberty. Human beings are born neither free nor equal. The cover of the book sports the American Declaration of Independence.
The necessity of lies Danny Postel: Strauss rarely spoke in his own name. He wrote as a commentator on the classical texts of political theory. But he was an extremely opinionated and dualistic commentator.Tove Skutnabb-Kangas - ashio-midori.com University of Roskilde, Denmark; retired; associate professor, Åbo Akademi University Vasa, Finland.
Fields of interest: Linguistic human rights, minority education, language and power, links between biodiversity and linguistic diversity, multilingualism, language policy, global (subtractive) spread of English, integration, ethnicity, racisms (including. There are good reasons for any good progressive to bemoan the presence of the childish, racist, sexist and ecocidal, right-wing plutocrat Donald Trump in the White House.
Watching the American Presidential Primaries and now the ‘Brexit’ vote in the UK on leaving the European Union, I am struck by how apt the political theory of Chantal Mouffe is to both situations. Both in the US and the UK, there was a contest as to whether liberal democracy would be liberal or.
Ancient Rome - Intellectual life of the Late Republic: The late Roman Republic, despite its turmoil, was a period of remarkable intellectual ferment. Many of the leading political figures were men of serious intellectual interests and literary achievement; foremost among them were Cicero, Caesar, Cato, Pompey, and Varro, all of them senators.
More information about Canada is available on the Canada Page and from other Department of State publications and other sources listed at the end of this fact sheet.. U.S.-CANADA RELATIONS.
The United States and Canada share the longest international border on the planet and our bilateral relationship is one of the closest and most extensive in the world. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy (Princeton Classic Editions) [Robert O.
Keohane] on ashio-midori.com *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. This book is a comprehensive study of cooperation among the advanced capitalist countries. Can cooperation persist without the dominance of a single power.