Letters to the Editor
-
Correction regarding Aristotle
Note regarding the following sentence: 'I think from Aristotle's politics and particularly his rhetoric you can learn more about the day-to-day conduct of argument and politics than you probably do from Plato.'
Aristotle's 'Politics' and 'Rhetoric' are his two major works, respectively, of political philosophy and rhetorical theory; they should be capitalized accordingly. Both the 'Politics' and 'Rhetoric' respond directly to Plato's 'Republic' and 'Laws', the latter of which is Plato's longest and final work, on which Leo Strauss also wrote extensively, perhaps more so than on the 'Republic'.
-
Plato's Republic Was Never on the Table
I don't think our founding fathers really saw Plato as anything but a dilettante playing with the notion of the republic as an elite-driven utopia. Of course the crazy little fantasy Plato outlined would appeal to neocons - and to aging far-left liberals as well. But there is a huge difference between an elite group and the practice of elitism. In fact, the true elite would never practice elitism. What they would do, however, is what our founding fathers did, which was to create a republic which serves as a baffle for the squirrels, who then could be contented with living in a communitarian, agrarian socialist paradise of meaningful work and relative self-reliance, with guidance from the elite and from Providence itself. (I realize that sounds like I am rehashing what Blackburn - and Plato - said at one point, but it is not my intent).
What Strauss construed out of a silly intellectual exercise was a monstrosity which has been sucked up like the finest flake, by neocons now (and certain liberals earlier - FDR comes to mind) and turned into a form of tyranny so unappetizing that in the end even its simpering catamites and cheap hangers-on will have abandoned it and even, ultimately, will have turned on it a la Ars Quatuor Coronatum.
Blackburn does us all a favor by demythologizing The Republic, although he does so at the expense, somewhat, of Socrates, a man who ought to be more a patron saint of what we started with here, and certainly not be locked in a room with the contemptible Aristotle, man of no vision nor faith.
Our current Republic was founded on vision and faith: Faith in the vision, faith as a character trait, and faith in Providence itself. Plato left behind a goofy, cartoonish vision which would, eventually and inevitably, be subsumed by megalomaniacs who, like Aristotle, have no vision and are essentially faithless.
A truly elite society would not draw and quarter the President, but it might well use wild horses to pull down the current administration ahead of schedule. There is no remedy in Plato for that sort of eventuality. There is, however, in our Constitution.
-
Plato & Conservatism
When I last read a book on Plato I was struck by the arguments which Prof. Blackburn points out. In Plato there is also an concept of that, to paraphrase Pater, the eternal form of the state finds itself by the way of simplification, of a rigorous limitation of all things, of art and life, of souls and men's bodies. You can see this kind of power struggle in the uniformity of policies and stances on issues concerning such matters. A modern version of the differnce might be found in the conflict of theology and darwinism; even in theories of causation in film and story; or in a masculine / feminine dialectic. The question is, on what level and to what degree are our "elite" cognizant of this? In public most of them seem too stupid, like George, but perhaps that is the point?
Anyway, they don't need Plato. After 9 years of being a Manichean, St. Augustine found Plato, and forever mixed his Manichean Platonism into Christianity: and thereafter the individual, accidental, and corporeal has been under assault. Their influence is probably mostly through that strain of thinking.
To make a side point. Yes, people aren't all brilliant. But, our information is filtered through the media and its minds and in a way (to set aside the issue of how well this is beingdone) the media interprets this information and isolates what is significant. It is usually put to us in terms we can understand; and from that we choose.
-
Playdough is silly putty in the neocons' hands
Neither Plato nor his contemporaries had anything like talk radio, cable television, and the Internet. It becomes a kind of fundamentalism after a point to try to map these important inquiries from the world these people lived in to the one we live in today. Note please that I say to a point. It's certainly important to try always to peer back at the basic philosophies on which our system was founded, but it's mind-bendingly futile if you try to go too far with the comparison.
Remember that those who invented democracy also said that it required a well-informed electorate, there's the rub. They didn't have corporate news media to contend with, which is a recent phenomenon and is basically ruining the country. Heck, even Trent Lott says so now.
-
On the other hand...
I always have read Plato's dialogues as that: explorations of the dialectic; a dialogue, after all, which is related to drama, which the Greeks did rather well, and in which each absolutist "position" is an emanation of one character or another. I'm sorry, I have always seen the humor, the irony and the quality of late-night bull session in every dialogue. The Republic, it seems to me, is the Western World's discovery of the Ideal Government, a concept which has caused a great deal of progress and a great deal of spilled blood.
Another thing is, Plato wrote the dialogues. Socrates is a character in a great literary work.
-
Cult of brutality today
If Plato were alive today and stated his staunch opposition to the glorification of brutality, he would be overwhelmingly slammed as "politically correct." And not just by neo-conservatives either.
-
cherry-picking
Sounds like the Neo-Cons treat Plato with the same high level of respect they accord the Bible.
Chosen few, destined to rule? Yep, that's me! Supposed to be a guardian of the others? Must have slept through class that day.
Homosexuality an offense to God? Terribly important, don't dare allow any leeway on the interpretation of those verses. Give all you have to the poor and follow Me? Not so much.