Sullivan on Strauss
Andrew Sullivan has several recent posts (here, here, here, and here) about political philosopher Leo Strauss. Sullivan twice refers to a “paranoid left” that has “never bothered to read or engage Leo Strauss,” but I’m not sure to whom he is referring. When he quoted from a reader who opined that “the liberal attack on Strauss is a misguided, ignorant, and nasty campaign. I have not seen a single citation from a book by Strauss in one of these critiques,” I thought immediately of Shadia Drury and Anne Norton. Drury (The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss) and Norton (Leo Strauss and the Politics of American Empire) both quote liberally from Strauss, and they are the most prominent of his critics on the left (leaving out Daniel Flynn, who criticizes Strauss from the right). My own criticisms of Strauss (from the left, to be sure) stem directly from reading his books, as well as those of his protégé Allan Bloom. While paranoid and ill-informed liberal assessments of Strauss and Straussians have been written, such as the Lyndon LaRouche variety, it is disingenuous to claim that honest and informed criticism does not exist.
Having said all that, I nevertheless eagerly anticipate Sullivan’s treatment of this greatly revered (and greatly reviled) figure of American conservatism in his upcoming book.