He's an incredibly brilliant dude whose books inspired and shook legal theorists at the highest levels, and he's also put his money where his mouth is, having spent, I believe, years trying to organize new kinds of democratic initiatives in Latin America. So, I have a lot of respect for him. I don't exclude the possibility, however, that he's nuttier than Lamar at this point, or, if not nutty, that he's been driven to the equivalent of it by the same frustration he's identified and sought to fight at every phase of a long career approaching its end, the same thing that everyone breaks his or her teeth on who ventures a bite, of bringing an excruciatingly clear understanding of what's wrong and what would be right into proximity with what actually can be done. It is very much the problem that Kojève and Strauss were addressing in their dialogue, and that kind of drove Kojève a little or a lot crazy, too, despite his having delineated a much more reasonable way of conceiving it.
Any qualified doctor so deaf to the voice of democratic prophecy that he or she refuses to operate on basil cell skin cancer thingies, or any other thingies, for whatever the patient or the party of democratic prophecy deems appropriate payment, in cash or in kind, can be taken out and shot, his or her body hung by the Achilles from a streetlight, for exemplary purposes, to the joyous gratification of the People.
So we got you covered.