Noble Lies and Perpetual War

From http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article-3-77-1542.jsp
Noble lies and perpetual war: Leo Strauss, the neo-cons, and Iraq
Danny Postel
16 - 10 - 2003

Are the ideas of the conservative political philosopher Leo Strauss a shaping influence on the Bush administration’s world outlook? Danny Postel interviews Shadia Drury – a leading scholarly critic of Strauss – and asks her about the connection between Plato’s dialogues, secrets and lies, and the United States-led war in Iraq.

My favorite exerpt.....

"Only perpetual war can overturn the modern project, with its emphasis on self-preservation and “creature comforts.” Life can be politicized once more, and man’s humanity can be restored. This terrifying vision fits perfectly well with the desire for honor and glory that the neo-conservative gentlemen covet.

It also fits very well with the religious sensibilities of gentlemen. The combination of religion and nationalism is the elixir that Strauss advocates as the way to turn natural, relaxed, hedonistic men into devout nationalists willing to fight and die for their God and country.

I never imagined when I wrote my first book on Strauss that the unscrupulous elite that he elevates would ever come so close to political power, nor that the ominous tyranny of the wise would ever come so close to being realized in the political life of a great nation like the United States. But fear is the greatest ally of tyranny."

In reviewing this interview, there are some interesting points....but I think it searches too deep for meaning. Reaganism is the simplistic true underlying sickness in thinking that led to the Iraq war....and which will inevitably lead to further irrational aggressive actions in the future.

The interesting thing about Reaganism is the way it looks center but truly appeals to the far right. It comes off as good 'ol hard work and get what you deserve, a natural humanistic approach which they believe deserves world wide appeal, but in truth.....it is runaway capitalism coupled with an out of control military scheme.

Reagan was not the first to bring forth the notion of US good vs. communist evil, but more people identified with this belief thinking Reagan was inherently righteous and responsible for the fall of the Iron Curtain. That solidity in thinking coupled with Reagan's movieland glorification of US military strength led to a true change in posture from one that should have evolved to one of more defensive (especially in view of the fall of the Soviet Union) to one that we see is quite offensive in nature and justified as being necessary and good.

Bush and the ones that really push his buttons are Reaganites at heart...it's that simple. They fundamentally think in the projection of strength because they believe it is good and well deserved. They are quite emotionally wrapped up in the notion that the rich deserve to get richer and richer. Their perverse religious interpretations coupled with an ideology of US righteousness has them thinking about US domination around the world (economically and militarily) in a matter of fact type of way that the average Joe might identify with the notion that a the best sport team deserves to win. If you're one of them, then you "get it"....you're part of the team....

But be very careful to note that they cannot articulate any rationale whatsoever for why anything they believe in bares any resemblance to righteousness.