Volume 6 Issue 22…Dedicated to the Dialogue on Race…June 6, 2003

Bit of History

Leo Strauss (1899-1973)

American philosopher Leo Strauss was born in Hesse, Germany. A student of philosophy, natural sciences and mathematics, he worked as a researcher for Jewish studies in Berlin. In 1932, Strauss fled Nazi Germany, eventually arriving in the United States. From 1938-1949, he taught at the new School for Social Research, then at the University of Chicago from 1949 to 1967, Claremont Men's College in 1968-69 and St. John's College until his death in 1973.

Strauss was the Robert Maynard Hutchins Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus in Political Science at the University of Chicago. According to his biographers, the fact that so many of his students followed him into the field of political philosophy is a testament to his extraordinary influence as a teacher. Known for his controversial interpretations of the great thinkers, among them Plato and Machiavelli, Strauss was especially critical of modern political philosophy. He argued it lacked the ability to render value judgements on even the worst political regimes. As a model for how political philosophy should proceed, Strauss held up the work of men like Plato and Xenophon (431-355 BC), the Greek soldier and author who admired the conservative militarism of Socrates.

Strauss authored fifteen books in which he interpreted a wide range of texts and authors in investigating the fundamental problems of political philosophy. His books include Spinoza's Critique of Religion (1930), The Political Philosophy of Hobbes (1936), On Tyranny: An Interpretation of Xenophon's Hiero (1948), Persecution and the Art of Writing (1952), Natural Right and History (1953) and Thoughts on Machiavelli (1958). Strauss also authored an introductory essay to Moses Maimonides' Guide of the Perplexed (1963). With Joseph Cropsey, he co-edited History of Political Philosophy (1963). After his death in 1973, three collections of essays and lectures and a series of correspondence between Strauss and Eric Voegelin (1934-1963) were published. (Sources: www.straussian.net/ and http://olincenter.uchicago.edu) History Homepage

Man to Man

On June 14, 2003, Sister Poets Embracing Altruistic Kinship (SPEAK) presents Man to Man: A Poetic Paradigm for Manhood. Chezon hosts this tribute to fathers and manhood. With guest appearances by I.B, Lavar, Sincere and Tommy Bottoms, the evening of spoken word features CoLaRum, Malik Salaam, Spinxx and Yohannes Sharriff. SPEAK invites you to treat your dad or special man to an evening to remember at the Apache Café. Located at 64 Third Street in downtown Atlanta, the Apache is behind the Varsity. Admissions is $10; space is limited. Doors open at 7:00 PM with open mic from 8:00 - 9:00 PM. For more information, call 404-247-1106 or email speakproductions@hotmail.com. Atlanta Vibe Homepage

Straussian Political Philosophy

Considered the father of US neo-conservative philosophy, Leo Strauss believed the greatest ancient thinkers wrote with a political purpose. For insights into his political philosophy, below are excerpts from Jim Lobe's Guiding Principles (May 2003). Lobe cites Seymour Hersh of New Yorker Magazine (May 2003) and a New York Times' Week in Review (May 8, 2003) article. A writer for Inter Press Service and Foreign Policy in Focus, his article quotes Shadia Drury, author of Leo Strauss and the American Right.

In identifying traits of an ideal state, Strauss cited the satire Gulliver's Travels (1726) by Jonathan Swift. Gulliver put out a fire in Lilliput by urinating over the city. He averted disaster, but his lack of respect incurred Lilliputian anger. The tale shows the superiority and isolation of a nation's leader and, presumably, the leading country vis-à-vis the rest of the world.

Like Plato, Strauss taught societies have leaders and followers. Unlike Plato, who saw leaders as people of high moral standards, Strauss believed those fit to rule know there is no morality and recognize only one natural right, the right of the superior to rule over the inferior. Yet, he saw moral law as indispensable in maintaining internal order. Because man is wicked, religion aids in restraining his aggression and manipulating the masses.

It is religion that binds society together. Karl Marx called this glue "the opiate of the people." Calling it "a pious fraud," Strauss saw it as strictly for followers. Rulers need not be bound by religion, since they know it is not based in reality; it would be absurd if they were. Strauss' followers eschew secular society, because it leads to individualism, liberalism and relativism, traits that may encourage dissent, which in turn could weaken a state's ability to meet external threats. Some neo-conservatives have argued that the US' founding fathers erred in separating church and state.

A stable political order can only be achieved if its people are united by an external threat. Like Machiavelli, if no threat exists, Strauss recommended manufacturing one. In such a state, war and deception of the masses are perpetual conditions necessitating an aggressive foreign policy. On the domestic front, strong leaders tell the masses what to think.

Neither a liberal nor a democrat, Strauss held liberal democracy in contempt. He blamed liberalism for the Nazi Holocaust against the Jews. Ironically, Straussian deception of the public by elites is not inconsistent with the Bush administration's resort to idealistic rhetoric in defense of its anti-terrorist campaign. As Drury explains, "They really have no use for liberalism and democracy, but they're conquering the world in the name of liberalism and democracy."

Some Straussians instrumental in developing US policy are alumni of the neo-conservative group Project for the New American Century (PNAC). They include Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. Obsessed with regime change in Iraq, as the first step in transforming the Arab Middle East, Wolfowitz is the chief architect of the post-9/11 US global strategy, including its preemptive war policy.

Other Straussians include Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard, Gary Schmitt, founder and director of PNAC and Kristol's father, Irving, who sits on the board of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). Another prominent hawk on the AEI board is former Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle. Abram Shulsky, who ran the special intelligence unit in Rumsfeld's office that re-interpreted evidence of Iraq's alleged links to Al Qaeda and its possession of weapons of mass destruction to support those in the administration determined to go to war with Baghdad is also a Straussian. Stephen Cambone, one of Rumsfeld's closest aides who heads the new post of Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, is likewise a student of Leo Strauss. Politics Y2K3 Homepage

Disgruntled says: Several members of Prime Minister Tony Blair's government have resigned over Britain's role in the Iraqi aggression. Parliament is investigating allegations of questionable intelligence on weapons of mass destruction. US Secretary of State Colin Powell figured prominently in the deception. Unapologetic, his lack of principles is the hallmark of Strauss' philosophy!

Disgruntled feels: Incredulous! A CNN-Gallup poll say few Americans care if no mass destruction weapons are found in Iraq. According to media pollsters, the US and its coalition allies did the right thing, so it does not matter that these governments lied to their citizens. This kind of incredulous propaganda underscores the dangers inherent in the Federal Communication Commission's deregulation of mass communication, which opens the door to media monopoly, an antithesis to democracy.

Disgruntled wants to know: The US is considered the premier advocate of human rights. Ironically, in issuing its annual report, Amnesty International cited the US war on terrorism for making the world more dangerous by curbing human rights. It laid the blame for the increased global hostility squarely on US policy. Beyond its negative impact on international human rights, there are domestic abuses. Surely, in the land of the free, the presence of more than two million men, women and children in prison is an anomaly? More Disgruntled Moments

Bush to World: "Drop Dead!"

By Mumia Abu-Jamal

"Why of course the people don't want war...But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they're being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." -- Hermann Goering (Gestapo/Nazi leader), Nuremberg, 1946

The world has witnessed the most massive anti-war demonstrations in global history, and the Bush Administration treated them as non-events. Incredible!

This administration has, from its earliest days, acted with barely concealed contempt for the wishes of the world. The evisceration of the ABM treaty was one measure. The rejection of the International Criminal Court. The insults against German leaders who don't bow sufficiently when Americans stride in the neighborhood. The rampant Francophobia. The negation of the will of the United Nations....

These are but variant strains of an underlying theme: The United States, the Great, Mighty bastion of democracy, could care less what the majority of the world wants, not to mention what the majority of Americans want. War is dictated by the military-industrial-complex, and... so be it.

When a million people turn out in the capital of the country of America's "closest ally" to oppose his policies, and the U.S. still loosens the reins of the mouth-foaming dogs of war, then 'ally' is just a synonym for 'servant', for surely, it cannot mean anything remotely like 'friend.' The beleaguered British Prime Minister, Tony Blair is facing an intra-party battle that threatens to topple its hold on power. What a queer duck this 'democracy' is! It allows those in power to virtually ignore what the majority of the people (that they supposedly 'represent') wants! Yet, Herr Bush, in truest dictatorial fashion, gives the nod to the army, and virtually promises to ignore whatever the UN does -- unless they genuflect before His Imperial Majesty, King George II (or is it III?).

The Turkish Parliament boldly votes against the U.S. Empire's wishes to use its land as a planning table for massacre and war, and the Americans insist that they vote again! (Again -- isn't this kind of, well, anti-democratic?)

"The Empire Strikes -- First!" -- and threatens to rip the world in half, unless all adore the Empire -- New Babylon -- and surrender before her all that she wishes.

We are all at the very brink of war, one which will not soon end. Truth be told, we are on the precipice of World War, if just a few small things go disastrously wrong. Hundreds of cities, on all six continents, from Kuala Lumpur to Ramallah, from Seoul to Seattle, from London to Leningrad, and beyond, the message went forth in a din that was deafening in its simplicity: "NO WAR!" But the White House is soundproof (except for the sound of coins jangling in the pockets of arms merchants or defense lobbyists) and the President of the United States is deaf.

The government that Lincoln once claimed, "of the people, by the people, and for the people," won't hear the people -- because they aren't saying what they want to hear. What will it take? What is clear is that it will take more than what has happened thus far. Demonstrations are powerful indicators of popular consciousness, but is it enough when the State is profoundly undemocratic, and driven by other forces? The answer may lie in that little-used social resource of union power. The recent statement of the AFL-CIO (a federation of trade unions in the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Panama and U.S. territories) against the war, while quite remarkable, was all but dismissed by the Bush Regime. What would happen, however, if a general strike were called among all member unions, against this imminent war?

It may take such measures to begin to put the dogs of war back in their cages, before, as Dr. Nelson Mandela suggested, a modern-day "holocaust" is unleashed upon the world. Hood Notes Homepage

To Tré: An Opened Mind

By John Burl Smith

Learning is the key to successfully adapting to life's demands. Humans have developed some very extensive and elaborate theories about how this process works. Learning theorists believe education is a building process that probably begins sometime before birth. Given the right experiences early, children are very willing and responsive students. Consequently, the first five years of live are a critical period for acquiring the rudiments of knowledge. If all children received the same experiences during this period, tests and other standardized measures would be reliable predictors of academic success. Therein lies the rub.

A case in point is my grandson Trévius, a.k.a. the Dark Knight-Batman/White Ninja/Zorro, who attends Clifton Elementary School in DeKalb, County Georgia. Although a very healthy and alert child, his first years of life were very unstable. Periodically, he did not receive the benefits of direct conversation nor did anyone read to him. Once he began public school (pre-K), his problems were magnified. By the time he entered the second grade, teachers and counselors said Trévius had serious deficits in several crucial areas. As Trévius finished the third grade, the prognosis for a successful academic career was bleak and special education and behavior modification (Ritalin) loomed as distinct possibilities.

A very precocious 3 year-old, Trévius loved putting together toys, like transformers and Lego building blocks, and playing video games. We were convinced he could perform better. At wits end, dealing with his mother and teachers, who were trying to correct Trévius' "deficits," Dot stepped in and took charge. Living with us on an extended basis, Dot established expectations for Trévius. To catch up, Trévius would have to work very hard, because he did not have a good foundation.

There were daily battles, tears and punishment (no TV). Many days ended with both frustrated and bewildered. Then came those days when Trévius began coming home, his face aglow and eyes sparkling, banishing great reports and excellent grades.

Talk of deficits, special Ed and behavior mod were replaced with complaints that Trévius was not performing up to his potential. The change in expectations was so subtle that it was as if no one recognized how far Trévius had come in just a few months. Closing out the fourth grade on the honor roll for the third time, Trévius won a "star student" medal.

Beaming smiles and brimming confidence after the awards ceremony, Trévius strutted about like a peacock. Thoroughly pleased with himself, now banished from memory, like monsters under the bed or things that go bump in the night, are his tear-drenched days and bad grades. However, the super hero in this real life saga is grandma, who deserves kudos for opening Trévius' mind to knowledge. Kudos Homepage More Essays by John Burl Smith

On a Non-Refundable Credit!

By Dot

To make the US public amendable to an $800 billion tax cut his first year in office, George Bush jawboned down the economy. In the ensuing downturn, millions lost jobs; most remain unemployed. In arguing for his second tax cut, which again favored the very rich, Bush claimed it would help families and small businesses. Again, those opposed were accused of class warfare.

Congress passed a $350 billion pared down version of Bush's $750 billion proposed tax package. Bush wanted to eliminate taxes on dividends; instead, Congress reduced the tax rate. Congress increased the federal debt ceiling by $984 billion to $7.4 trillion, which averages to about $110,000 of debt for every family.

While the public has been deceived into believing the latest tax cuts are family friendly, millions of poor families will not realize a penny. Increasing the child tax credit by $400 will not translate into checks for this amount for the poorest families with children, because the child tax credit is non-refundable.

A non-refundable credit can only offset taxes. If no taxes are due or the taxes owed are less than the credit, the unused credit goes to zero. For most poor families, especially those that qualify for the earned income credit (EIC) which is refundable, there will be no $400 check or one for any sum in the mailbox this summer. Ironically, cuts in social programs to fund this new round of tax cuts will be disproportionately borne by poor American families. Moreover, while these families pay no federal income taxes, their payroll or Social Security and Medicare taxes are part of the general revenues that fund the federal government. There is no lockbox! While the wealthy elite may argue that Bush tax cut policy is not class warfare, the working poor must feel something akin to the heat of battle. DISHing It Up Hot! Homepage

THINC  || 2003 Issues || The DISH