Sam Tanenhaus: Rise of the Reactionary – The New Yorker

One of the strangest developments in the 2016 election has been the spectacle of West Coast Straussians who champion Trump—and lustily denounce his critics—in various forums, including the Claremont Review of Books, a well-written quarterly edited by Charles Kesler, and on Web sites like the Journal of American Greatness, billed as the “first scholarly journal… Continue reading Sam Tanenhaus: Rise of the Reactionary – The New Yorker

  1. “Liberal democracy depends on empire, but there are strict limits to what empire can achieve” @ToryAnarchist‘s essay deserves a careful read 10:19:07, 2014-07-17
  2. #pt Schmitt (of ’36!)1 v Hegel-Kojève-Fukuyama, Strauss hovering benignly, neo-cons, isolationists, leftists shunted aside.. @toryanarchist 10:39:20, 2014-07-17
  3. realize I didn’t link @toryanarchist‘s essay earlier discussed: http://t.co/fOw9wy7sx6 11:39:19, 2014-07-17

Notes:

  1. actually ’38, in The Leviathan in the State Theory of Thomas Hobbes – a book taken by Schmittians to mark failure of Schmitt’s Nazi project and retreat from practical politics. []

2nd Comment on “David Brooks: Better in the original German” (Schmitt and the neo-imperial moment)

(proofread version of comment at Crooked Timber) Mr. Timberman @125 [Italics in original comment], “converting freedom into political [or any kind of] obligation” appears to translate as “converting freedom into its opposite.” If I’m obligated to you and yours at all – to put on a uniform and take up arms if war is declared… Continue reading 2nd Comment on “David Brooks: Better in the original German” (Schmitt and the neo-imperial moment)

the included, the excluded, and the difference

Any opinion we form on the exception is an opinion we form about and for ourselves, of and in our own interest. Non-dialectical political science is purely pseudo-science on this matter that would be most important to it, if only it could ever remove itself from the inquiry, but every attempted movement away from the center of discussion converts necessarily and immediately into a new problem for the selfsame discussion, a new proposition of the included, the excluded, and the difference. The discussion is the tracking of this motion: We continue it for the sake of putting our prejudices to tests for them to fail. Suspicion or resistance on the part of the reader must also vary with his or her own also inextricably compromised position.