What this covers
Reading and commenting on Peter Thiel's famous essay, which aims to rethink the foundations of modern politics in light of the Islamic terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001. The essay is available here: https://gwern.net/doc/politics/2007-thiel.pdf
The Millerman School teaches several of the thinkers Thiel refers to in his article, including Leo Strauss and Carl Schmitt. Visit https://www.MillermanSchool.com for more information. And if you enjoy this video, be sure to like, share, comment, and subscribe.
Thanks for watching.
MM.
NEW: My essay on "The End of the Straussian Moment?" -- https://www.academia.edu/112826498/The_End_of_the_Straussian_Moment
— 🤖 AI trained on a decade of philosophy lectures & courses: https://ai.millermanschool.com 📬 Newsletter: https://millermanschool.substack.com 🗓️ Advisory: https://michaelmillerman.com
Source description (no synthesized summary yet).
Peter Thiel argues that September 11th exposed the failure of Enlightenment political thought to account for non-economic human motivations like religious zealotry, and that a synthesis between Lockean liberalism, Schmittian political realism, and Straussian esotericism—grounded in Girardian insights about mimetic violence—offers the only viable path for the Christian statesman in a post-modern world facing apocalyptic risks.
- September 11th refuted the Enlightenment consensus that economic incentives can contain violence, since Bin Laden was wealthy yet religiously motivated
- Lockean liberalism's reduction of human nature to an unknowable X stripped politics of its ability to address fundamental questions of virtue and meaning, leaving the West vulnerable
- Girard's scapegoat mechanism reveals that all human culture rests on founding violence concealed by myth—a truth whose revelation destabilizes the political order but cannot be permanently suppressed
This asset isn't compiled yet
You're seeing its claims, ranked. Compile it to build the argument threads, weight them, and check each claim against your library — the full view.
Because mimetic ability is more advanced in humans than in other animals, humans lack the instinctual breaks that would naturally limit the scope of mimetic rivalry, creating a permanent mystery about how humans ever transcended unlimited mimetic violence.
“and finally because the mimetic ability is more advanced in humans than in other animals there exists in us no instinctual breaks that are strong enough to limit the scope of such rivalry thus at the core of the mimetic account there exists a mystery what exactly happened in the distant past when all the Apes were reaching for the same object when the Rivalry between mimetic doubles threatened to escalate into unlimited violence”
The perpetrators of September 11th attacks were upper-middle-class Saudi Arabians often with college degrees and great expectations, with Osama Bin Laden having inherited a fortune worth approximately $250 million made during the Saudi oil boom of the 1970s, thereby refuting the thesis that economic desperation drives terrorism.
“The perpetrators were upper middle class Saudi Arabians often with college degrees and with Great Expectations their Mastermind Osama Bin Laden had inherited a fortune now worth an estimating $250 million mostly made during the Saudi oil boom of the 1970s had he been born in America Bin Laden could have been a Rockefeller”
The Islamic world did not share the Enlightenment presuppositions and in 2001 the greatest fear for Muslims was not painful death but fear of what would happen in the afterlife—a commitment to transcendent judgment that fundamentally differs from the Hobbesian-Lockean focus on self-preservation.
“In that world outside the West questions of religion and the purpose of humanity remained Central even in 2001 the greatest fear was not the fear of a painful death like it might be for Hobson lock but fear of what would happen to one in the life after that death okay so the non-western world did not share the basic Enlightenment presuppositions”
The Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928, which outlawed all war, represents a naive attempt to escape politics altogether; Schmidt argues that this represents supreme self-delusion, as those who declare they no longer recognize enemies often end up supporting the enemy through their neutrality.
“these include the signatories of the Kellog pact of 1928 which outlawed all war indeed it is even worse quote if a part of the population declares it no longer recognizes enemies then depending on the circumstance it joins their side and AIDS them”
Modern political philosophy from the Enlightenment onward abandoned fundamental questions that earlier ages deemed central—namely: what is a well-lived life, what does it mean to be human, what is the nature of the city and humanity, and how does culture and religion fit into all this.
“From the enlightenment on he writes modern political philosophy has been characterized by the abandonment of a set of questions that an earlier age had deemed Central okay from the enlightenment on Modern political philosophy characterized by the abandonment of a set of questions that in earlier age had deemed not just somewhat interesting not just kind of important but Central what is a well-lived life what does it mean to be human what is the nature of the city and Humanity how does culture and religion fit into all this”
An account of politics that speaks only of the smooth functioning of governmental machinery is incomplete; one must also consider the circumstances in which this machinery is built and created, and where it might be threatened or reconstructed.
“Even if one does not take one's bearings entirely from the exceptional case as doakan Schmidt it is a case that must not be forgotten an account of politics that speaks only of the smooth functioning of the Machinery of government is incomplete and one also must consider the circumstances in which this Machinery is built or created in the first place”
Even at the end of history there will remain a choice between Jerusalem (faith, transcendence, the theological) and Athens (reason, philosophy, the rational), exemplified in the contrast between Thomas More who found no examples of Christ laughing and Socrates who left examples of laughter but no weeping.
“We have Sir Thomas Moore a Christian Saint as a helper in making that choice in his dialogue of comfort against tribulation Moore declares quote to prove that this life is no laughing time...our savior himself wept twice or Thrice but never find we that he laughed...but on the other side he left us example of weeping unquote the Saint knew that the opposite had been true of Socrates who left us no example of weeping but left us example of laughter”
The Peace of Westphalia (1648) marked the birth of the modern era by formalizing the decision that questions of virtue and true religion would henceforth be decided by each sovereign state independently, with individuals learning not to discuss such matters publicly lest they provoke unproductive conflict.
“This failure was formalized in the piece of West phalia so that 1648 can be fixed as the single year that dates the birth of the modern era questions of virtue and the True Religion henceforth would be decided by each Sovereign the sovereigns would agree to disagree inexorably questions of virtue and religion became private questions polite and respectable individuals learned not to talk about them much because they could lead to nothing but unproductive conflict”
Leo Strauss attempted to solve the central paradox of the post-modern world by recovering how pre-modern philosophers wrote esoterically to protect themselves and their readers from persecution, using hidden meanings and indirect communication comprehensible only to the intelligent and trustworthy.
“The political philosopher Leo stros attempted to solve this Central Paradox of the postmodern world...the difficulty of strauss's own writings which are prohibitively obscurantist to the uninitiated...Strauss is convinced that...great writers and philosophers of the past also had known of these matters but in order to protect themselves from persecution these thinkers used an esoteric mode of writing”
There is a universally valid hierarchy of ends (what humans ought to aim at) but there are no universally valid rules of action, meaning that the means employed to achieve legitimate ends can vary and cannot be predetermined in advance.
“There's a universally valid hierarchy of ends but there are no universally valid rules of action so he says here there's a similarity between Schmidt and Strauss but also a difference okay Strauss...because he's not a political Theologian...can go between relativism and absolutism”
Unlike Hobbes, Locke, or Rousseau, who wanted to end religious conflict through rational agreement, Strauss views the permanent problems of politics (Athens vs. Jerusalem, philosophy vs. politics, the problem of origins and violence) as permanent and unsolvable, requiring elite management rather than solution.
“the question of the city and Humanity the issues of founding and Origins and the relation between religion and the best regime to generalize a bit more even if one does not take one's bearings entirely from the exceptional case as doakan Schmidt it is a case that must not be forgotten an account of politics that speaks only of the smooth functioning of the Machinery of government is incomplete and one also must consider the circumstances in which this Machinery is built or created in the first place”
John Locke was the most important proponent of the new science of economics and capitalism, and he is so central to the American founding that one only slightly exaggerates in describing him as America's definitive founder.
“The new science of economics and the practice of capitalism filled the vacuum created by the abandonment of the old uh older tradition that new science found its most important proponent in John Lock and its greatest practical success in the United States a nation whose conception owed so much to lock that one exaggerates only slightly to describe him as its definitive founder”
The early modern period (16th-17th centuries) was characterized by disintegration of the Athens/Jerusalem synthesis and increasingly desperate attempts to force unity through force, escalating from Reformation/Counter-Reformation conflicts to a paroxysm in which over half the European population was eradicated.
“The early modern era of the West the 16th and 17th centuries was characterized by the disintegration of these two older traditions and by ever more desperate attempts to force everything back together into some functioning whole where agreement over questions of virtue The Good Life and the true religion was unraveling the immediate attempt involved forging such an agreement through Force this Force escalated in the periods of the reformation and Counter Reformation and culminated in the paroxismo of the conflict well over half the population was eradicated”
Alexandre Kojève argues that the end of history would be marked by the definitive abandonment of all hard questions, with humanity disappearing in its properly human sense while human beings continue to exist as animals engaged in purely natural activities.
“The heelan Alexander Kev believed that the end of History would be marked by the definitive abandonment of all the hard questions Humanity itself would disappear but there would no longer be any conflict”
Even in the most liberal regime in history (America), there remain politically incorrect taboos—truths that cannot be spoken without social penalty—demonstrating that esotericism and the concealment of certain truths are universal features of political order.
“Even in America the most liberal regime in history there remain Politically Incorrect taboos in reminding us of the permanent problems the political philosopher agrees with the political Theologian exhortation to seriousness”
Envy is the moral sin closest to mimetic rivalry and remains a cultural taboo even in avantgarde circles, indicating that societies systematically repress awareness of the mimetic violence at their core.
“Of all the Mortal sins of medieval Catholicism Envy is the one closest to mimic rivalry and it is the one mortal sin that Still Remains a cultural taboo even in the most avangard postmodern circles”
Capitalism is not a regime that must be consciously chosen or defended; rather, as Milton Friedman noted, capitalism is simply 'what humans do when they're left alone'—it emerges naturally from human freedom when other constraints are removed.
“capitalism concludes Noble laurat Milton Freedman is simply what humans do when they're left alone”
The oil industry represents one of the most glaring failures of Locke's claim that most value is added by human labor, because oil value exists primarily in nature, with human extraction and refining adding proportionally small value, yet oil wealth built approximately half of the great fortunes of the 20th century.
“The oil industry the source of Bin Laden's wealth presents one of the most glaring examples that run counter to Lock's phic IST generalizations for most of the value of oil exists simply in nature so that the quote unquote labor that humans add by extracting and refining this oil is proportionally quite small...the original expropriation of that oil built as many as half of the great fortunes of the 20th century”
September 11th attacks inaugurated the 21st century by calling into question the entire political and military framework of the 19th and 20th centuries, which had emphasized deterrent armies, rational nation states, public debates, and international diplomacy.
“The 21st century started with a bang on September 11th 2001 in those shocking hours the entire political and Military framework of the 19th and 20th centuries and indeed of the Modern Age with its emphasis on deterrent armies rational nation states public debates and international diplomacy was called into question”
The Declaration of Independence's assertion of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness represented a novel and deliberately modern standard that would have been viewed as inferior to and much more subjective than the virtue-focused ethic of the older philosophical tradition.
“Revolutionary America was haunted by the fear of religious War and the fanatical imposition of virtue on the entire State the Declaration of independence's evocation of the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness had a CounterPoint in the older tradition in which the first two had not existed okay right to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness would have seemed inferior to and certainly much more subjective Than The Virtuous life”
The founding murder is the secret origin of all religious and political institutions, remembered and transfigured in the form of myth, with the violence both concealed (because societies need to believe they are just) and repeated (through sacrifice rituals).
“That murder is the secret origin of all religious and political institutions and is remembered and transfigured in the form of myth the scapegoat perceived as the Primal source of conflict and disorder had to die for there to Be Peace by violence violence was brought to an end and Society was born but because Society rests on the belief in its own order and Justice the founding act of violence must be concealed”
Locke dismisses the question of whether property was acquired justly in the first place as unimportant, arguing that since the state of nature produces little value and most value is added by human labor, we should focus on future wealth creation through property rights rather than investigating the violent origins of past property acquisition.
“Even though we should not interfere with people disposing of their property as they see fit how do we know that the property was acquired justly in the first place...Most value has been added by human work or intellect as a result we need not reflect on the past and can focus on the future most New Wealth will be created by the strong enforcement of property rights going forward...Lo would dismiss out of hand Balzac's sweeping and subversive notion that behind every great Fortune there lies a crime”
The economically motivated political thought dominating the modern West from Adam Smith to Marx and Hegel presumes that violence can be contained through economic incentives and wealth transfers, but this framework collapsed because it has no conceptual resources to account for those who seek glory in the name of God or country.
“From The Wealth of Nations on the right to das capital on the left okay so from Adam Smith to Marx and to Hegel and con and their many followers somewhere in between the brute facts of September 11th demand a reexamination of the foundations of modern Politics”
Locke employs a delicate rhetorical strategy in 'The Reasonableness of Christianity' wherein he reinterprets Christian doctrine to be compatible with liberalism and capitalism, redefining Christian virtues in economic terms and emptying them of transcendent content while maintaining Christian appearances.
“Lock teaches us that the command for children to honor their parents does not apply If the parents have been unnaturally careless marriage remains an important compact but the wife has in many cases a liberty to separate from the husband and the first and strongest desire God planted in men is not love of God or others but a healthy concern with one's self-preservation...the stretch to capitalist Basics is modest avarice is no longer a mortal sin”
Girard identifies imitation or mimesis as the fundamental human capacity that differentiates humans from other animals in degree (not just kind)—both a continuous evolution from animal imitation and a basis for all human cultural institutions including language acquisition.
“According to Gerard all cultural institutions beginning with the acquisition of language by children from their parents require this sort of mimetic activity and so it is not overly reductionist to describe human brains as gantic imitation machines because Humanity would not exist without imitation”
Human imitation is not inherently problematic, but human brains are giant imitation machines, so imitation can drift into rivalry through mimetic escalation where people emulate the desires of others in 'keeping up with the Joneses,' leading to escalating conflict.
“One cannot say there's something wrong with imitation per se...the necessity of mimesis does not render it un unpro so it's necessary but a problem...nothing prevents mimesis from ending into the inquisitive realm or stops people from emulating the desires of others in the process of keeping up with the Joneses mimesis pushes people into escalating rivalry”
The unveiling of the mythical past through understanding the scapegoat mechanism opens toward a future where archaic myths are deconstructed and discredited, but unlike Hegel's synthesis, this unveiling does not automatically bring about a glorious resolution.
“As in Hegel the owl of manura spreads its wings only at dusk the unveiling of the mythical past opens toward a future in which we no longer believe in any of the myths in a dramatic rupture with the past they will have been deconstructed and thereby discredited but unlike Hegel our knowledge of our hidden history...does not automatically bring about a glorious final synthesis”
Mimetic prestige confers desire for nuclear weapons, creating an escalatory dynamic where mimesis drives nations to acquire the same weapons not for rational deterrence but for the status weapons confer.
“What if mimesis drives others to try and acquire these same weapons for the mtic prestige they confer so that the technological situation is never static but instead contains a powerful escalatory Dynamic”
The present risks a terrible synthesis of the blind spots in liberal and conservative thinking: a combination of violence and globalization in which all boundaries on violence are abolished—geographic, professional (civilian vs combatant), and demographic (children).
“The present risks a terrible synthesis of the blind spots in that doctrinaire thinking a synthesis of violence and globalization in which all the boundaries on violence are abolished be they Geographic professional for example civilian non-combatants or demographic for example children at the extremes even the distinction between violence and Ed on oneself and violence inflicted on other people is in the process of evaporating in the disturbing new phenomenon of suicide murders”
President Bush's post-9/11 statement that 'our war is not against Islam' represents the Western inability to perceive the genuine civilizational and religious character of the conflict; in contrast, Bin Laden explicitly emphasized the incompatibility between pure Islam and the decadent West.
“President Bush who Styles himself a religious conservative cannot bring himself to believe that it is religion that really matters quoting Bush this great nation of many religions understands our war is not against Islam or against the faith practiced by Muslim people unquote where Bush downplays the differences Bin Laden emphasizes them contrasting the world of pure Islam and the world of the decadent West in the most extreme way imaginable”
Mere self-preservation forces all of us to look at the world in new ways and to think strange new thoughts, thereby awakening from the long and profitable period of intellectual slumber and amnesia called the Enlightenment.
“Today mere self-preservation forces all of us to look at the world in New to think strange new thoughts and thereby to awaken from that very long and profitable period of intellectual Slumber and Amnesia that is so misleadingly called the enlightenment”
There cannot be a world state that unites all humanity in the sense that politics would cease, because so long as different states, religions, and groupings exist, conflict is logically inevitable and the friend-enemy distinction will persist.
“Absent and Invasion by aliens from outer space there never can be a world state that politically unites all of humanity it's a logical impossibility...so long as you have humans you're going to have friends and enemies you're going to have dispute and you're going to have several players not just one player”
Strauss believes that cultural relativism and intellectual nihilism are not the final word, and that there exists a truth about human nature that can in principle be known, with great writers of the past showing far more agreement about this truth than their apparent disagreements would suggest.
“Cultural relativism and intellectual nihilism are not the final word Strauss believes there exists a truth about human nature and that this truth can in principle be known to humanity indeed the great writers of the past are in Far More agreement about this truth than their exoteric disagreements would lead The Superficial reader to believe”
The two incompatible streams of Western tradition—Athens (the political and military concerns of the citizen) and Jerusalem (the spiritual and moral concerns of the Christian)—wore each other down through the Middle Ages and Reformation, each trying to return to its original truth but each inadvertently discrediting the other.
“for a long time in the Middle Ages and thereafter the West tried to gloss over these conflicts and instead to build on the many things these Traditions had in common but in the long term like two giant millstones grinding against one another city and church wore each other down as they went from conflicts to conciliations each one's efforts to return to its original truth had strangely rought its own defeat neither side ever could win decisively but in the long term each side could decisively discredit the other”
Modern political theorists like Hobbes and Locke celebrated a world of peace, commerce, and reduced public debate over virtue, while figures like Augustine and Aquinas (and the older classical tradition more broadly) maintained that humans are potentially evil or dangerous and that vigilance about human nature is necessary for political philosophy.
“there is though of course in contrast I add here to the um to the modern tradition there is an older Western tradition teal continues a tradition that offered a less dogmatically economic view of human nature that older account realized that not all people are so modest and lacking in ambition that they will content themselves like volaras candid with cultivating their Gardens instead it recognized that humans are potentially evil or at least dangerous beings and while there are vast differences between the Christian Virtues Of Augustine and the Pagan Virtues Of makavelli neither thinker would have dared lose sight of the problematic nature of humanity”
A post-political world of universal entertainment and economic organization requires a 'religion of technicity' with faith in unlimited technological power over nature, but Schmitt fears this artificial unity will be brought about only by the Antichrist, who seduces humanity with promises of peace and security while covertly ruling the entire world.
“Such an artificial World requires a religion of technicity that has faith in the unlimited power and dominion over nature and in the unlimited potential for Change and for happiness in the natural this worldly existence of man for Schmidt the political Theologian this Babylonian Unity represents a brief Harmony that prefigures the final catastrophy of the Apocalypse...this artificial Unity can be brought about only by the shadowy figure of the Antichrist”
The unraveling of founding myths deprives humanity of the efficacious functioning of limited and sacred violence that it needed to protect itself from unlimited and desacralized violence.
“These founding myths also served the critical role of distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate violence their unraveling May deprive Humanity of the efficacious functioning of The Limited and sacred violence it needed to protect itself from unlimited and desacralized violence”
The post-modern world could develop in a way much better or much worse than the modern age—either the unlimited violence of runaway mimesis or the peace of the kingdom of God.
“For that world could differ from the modern world in a way that is much worse or much better the Limitless violence of runaway mimesis or the Peace of the kingdom of God that is the end of Peter Teal's straussian moment”
The post-WWII consensus on using wealth transfers through the World Bank and IMF to contain violence through economic development was naive and failed; even the money that was transferred largely circulated back to the West through corruption or Swiss bank accounts held by Third World dictators.
“but after the fact one wonders how policy makers could have been so naive let us set aside the inconvenient fact that the wealth transfer apparatus never worked as advertised so that the West's wealth was largely squandered on white elephant projects no real Economic Development took place and even in the best of cases the money supply circulated simply back to the West ending up in Swiss bank accounts held by Third World dictators”
There can be no return to the archaic world or to Carl Schmitt's robust conception of politics, and there can be no real accommodation with the Enlightenment since many of its bromides have become deadly falsehoods.
“There can be no return to the aric world or even to the robust conception of the political envisioned by Carl Schmidt there can be no real accommodation with the enlightenment since so many of its easy bromides have become deadly falsehoods in our time”
The Rockefellers and other Western elites who crafted the post-World War II centrist economic policy consensus of wealth transfers to developing nations had forgotten their own family history of crime in accumulating their fortunes through oil extraction.
“The Rockefellers had forgotten their own family history of course...the development the development of the oil industry presided over by autocrats and despots from Asia to the Middle East and Africa is the not so hidden story of crime on a scale so Grand that the proceeds of that crime suffice to purchase respectability and almost everything else and helping to craft the post World War II Centrist Economic Policy consensus”
One cannot decide to avoid all decisions and retreat into studying the Bible in anticipation of the second coming, because doing so means ceasing to be a Christian statesman or stateswoman.
“But also there cannot be a decision to avoid all decisions and to retreat into studying the Bible in anticipation of the second coming for then one will have ceased to be a Statesman or stateswoman”
There is a surprising convergence between the Roman myth of the founding of Rome (Romulus murdering Remus) and the Biblical account of the founding of the first city (in Genesis), suggesting that violence and even fratricide may be essential to the founding of great cities.
“On the problematic question of Origins for instance stros notes the surprising convergence at least on the level of factual detail in the Roman myth of the founding of the greatest city of the ancient world and in what the Book of Genesis says about the founding of the first city in the history of the world”
In extreme situations where the very existence or independence of a society is at stake, such as during war, there are no limits which can be defined in advance to what might become just reprisals—the proper rules of conduct are situationally determined.
“There are no limits which can be defined in advance there are no assignable limits to what might become just reprisals in other words it's valid end to want to win the war but you can't limit the means that you're going to use in all cases forever absolutely ultimately and without any possibility of modification or repudiation okay”
These sad exigencies of state necessity—the measures that may be required to preserve a nation—should remain covered with a veil, not publicly discussed or celebrated, suggesting that statecraft involves necessary evils that should be handled covertly.
“The philos for meaning here stuss ends with the plea to leave these sad exigencies covered with the veil with which they are justly covered in other words it's somehow indecent and inappropriate to talk about”
René Girard identifies a fundamental truth about human nature that has been whitewashed by the Enlightenment: the question of human violence and its role in the origins of culture and society.
“As with schmi and stros Shard also believes there exists the disturbing truth about the city and humanity and that the whole issue of human violence has been whitewashed away by the enlightenment okay so we have here a commonality between Schmidt stuss and Gerard”
The Enlightenment social contract theory (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau) is preposterous because it claims that rational recognition of the absurdity of war leads to deliberate agreement on a contract—but no such contract was actually signed, making it the fundamental lie of the Enlightenment.
“Because Gerard rightly views this account as Preposterous he considers the social contract to be the fundamental lie of the Enlightenment a lies so Brazen that none of the Advocates of the social contract theory from Hobbs to Russo themselves believed it to be the case that an actual contract had ever been signed”
Schmitt illustrates that belief in human natural goodness is historically dangerous by pointing to pre-revolutionary France and Russia, where privileged classes sentimentalized the masses until violent revolution destroyed them.
“In Russia before the Revolution the doomed classes romanticized the Russian peasant as a good Brave and Christian mik the aristocratic Society of France before the Revolution of 1789 sentimentalized the man who is by nature good...nobody sented the revolution it is incredible to see the security and unsuspicious with which those...privileged spoke of the goodness mildness and innocence of the people when 1793 was already upon them”
America appears to be an exception to the rule that great cities require founding violence, as Thomas Paine argued that American independence was accomplished through moral principles and universal peace rather than the sword—but Strauss suggests even this patriotic account may not be the whole truth.
“At first he seems to suggest that America is the one exception in all of history to this rule quoting with approval of the Patriotic Thomas Payne the independence of America was accompanied by a revolution in the principles and practice of governments...but within a few pages we find that even in the case of the American founding this patriotic account is not necessarily the whole truth”
Schmitt's solution to the confrontation with Islam would be to declare a new Crusade in which the West clearly identifies Islam as the providential enemy and responds with ferocity, but this Pyrrhic victory would require the West to abandon everything that distinguishes it from Islam.
“Schmidt's solution to this impending defeat demands an affirmation of the political in the west okay an affirmation of the political an affirmation of friends and enemies...if it is possible...to set aside our uncertainties that we can return to the faith of Cromwell and urban and the second that we understand Islam as the providential enemy of the West and that we can respond to Islam with the same ferocity with which it is now attacking the West this would be to rights a pyic victory for it would come at the price of doing away with everything that fundamentally distinguishes the modern West from Islam”
Carl Schmitt argues that politics is fundamentally about the friend-enemy distinction and that humans are forced to choose sides on the deepest questions, making the claim that one can remain neutral or avoid politics a dangerous self-delusion.
“Politics is the field of battle in which that division takes place in which humans are forced to choose between friends and enemies the high points of politics declares Schmidt are the moments in which the enemy is in concrete Clarity recognized as the enemy...those who attempt to do so are suffering from the moments of supreme self- delusion”
There is an alternative possibility hinted at in the margins of Schmitt's own writings: everyone could simultaneously abandon politics and reject the friend-enemy distinction, making possible a worldwide abandonment of political life.
“But for the sake of completeness we must also consider the inverse possibility indirectly hinted at in the margins of Schmid own writings for while it may well be that the political guarantee is the seriousness of life...there's no guarantee that the political itself will survive...there's a possibility of a worldwide aband abandonment of Politics”
Instead of relying on ineffective institutions like the United Nations, filled with inconclusive parliamentary debate, the decisive path to a Global Pax Americana is through Echelon—the secret coordination of the world's intelligence services.
“Instead of the United Nations filled with interminable and inconclusive parli mentary debates that resemble Shakespearean Tales told by idiots we should consider Echelon the secret coordination of the world's intelligence Services as the decisive path to a truly Global Pax Americana”
In Girard's alternative account, the war of all against all culminates not in a rational social contract but in a war of all against one, where mimetic forces drive the combatants to gang up on a single person (the scapegoat) whose death brings about a limited peace.
“In Gerard's alternative account of these matters the war of all against all culminates not in a social contract but in a war of all against one as the same mimetic forces gradually Drive the combatants to gang up on one particular person the war continues to escalate and there's no rational stopping point at least not until this person becomes the scapegoat whose death helps to unite the community and bring about a limited peace”
The current political debates are systematically inadequate to the contemporary situation because across the political spectrum there remains a denial of the founding role of violence caused by human mimesis, leading to systematic underestimation of apocalyptic violence.
“From a girardian perspective the current political debates remain inadequate to the Contemporary World situation to the extent that across the Spectrum there remains a denial of the founding role of the violence caused by human mimesis imitation and therefore a systematic underestimation of the scope of apocalyptic violence”
Strauss's insistence on the permanent problems of politics and the problematic nature of the city paradoxically makes unreflective defense of the city impossible, thereby creating philosophical weakness at the moment when political strength is most needed.
“the awareness of the problematic nature of the city makes the unreflective defense of the city impossible I'll comment on that in a second in this way strauss's recovery of the permanent problems paradoxically might make their resolution all the more difficult”
Locke's political strategy involves delegitimizing the question of human nature itself by claiming it is impossible to know the true nature of things, only their secondary effects and powers, thereby making questions about human substance meaningless and comparable to debates about which fruit has the best taste.
“He does not directly tell us that human nature does not exist or that the older tradition of Aristotle andinus is definitively wrong he does not seek that clear a break with the past but he undermines the older tradition relentlessly for when we observe things and these things include other people we can see only their secondary effects as manifested by their various Powers we cannot know anything about their true Natures or substances...to ask a question about human substance or the Theology of Humanity's power leads to debates as meaningless as whether the best relish were to be found in apples plums or nuts”
The modern individual defines himself by rejecting both the sacrifices demanded by the city and the sacrifices demanded by the church, creating a person who rejects all forms of sacrifice and private benefit.
“thus giving rise to the modern quot quote unquote individual who defines himself or herself by rejecting all forms of sacrifice since the city and the church reproach one another with the vanity of their sacrifice the individual is the man who rejects each form of sacrifice and defines himself by this refusal”
Lock's treatment of human nature as an unknowable X provides the paradoxical foundation for liberal rights: the very unknowability of human essence generates strong assertions of freedom (speech, religion, property), because we cannot authoritatively determine what people truly are or should become.
“In a somewhat paradoxical manner the unknowability of X okay the human ex leads to Classic liberalism and the very strong assertion of the different rights that belong to that unknowable ex the the freedom of religion for we cannot ever know what people are truly thinking in the temple of their minds the freedom of speech for we cannot irrefutably criticize the way people Express themselves the right to property and commerce for we cannot second guess what people will do with the things they possess”
No representation of reality is ever the same as reality itself, and the price of abandoning oneself to representations (like the representation of a perfectly administered world) is always too high because avoiding decisions means avoiding the most important questions, and by making people forget that they have souls, the Antichrist succeeds in swindling people out of them.
“No representation of reality teal continues ever is the same as reality and one must never lose sight of the larger framework within which the representation exists the price of abandoning oneself to such an artificial representation is always too high because the decisions that are avoided are always too important by making people forget that they have souls the Antichrist will succeed in swindling people out of them”
The centrality of sacrifice in archaic culture explains monarchy: those who managed to defer or avoid execution became objects of veneration, and every king is a sort of living god because the king embodies the possibility of being both the victim and the escape from violence.
“The centrality of sacrifice was so great that those who managed to defer or avoid execution became the objects of veneration every King is a sort of living God and therein lies the true origin of monarchy”
We now live in a world where the scapegoat mechanism has been revealed—we know that the scapegoat is not guilty as the persecuting community claimed—and this revelation breaks the mechanism because the smooth functioning of human culture depended on ignorance of the mechanism itself.
“But now teal continues we live in a world where the cat is out of the bag at least to the extent that we know that the scapegoat really is not as guilty as the persecuting Community claims so again before we didn't know we thought that the scapegoat was guilty but but now we do know that the scapegoat is not guilty or at least not as guilty so the scapegoat mechanism has been revealed because the smooth functioning of human culture depended on a lack of understanding of this truth”
Girard counters Manent's objection by arguing that the revelation of the scapegoat mechanism is not chosen but inevitable—driven by the historical working of Judeo-Christian revelation—and therefore the decision to speak or remain silent about this truth is not really a choice.
“I do think it is necessary for us to engage in the discourse we have been pursuing here Gerard writes but if we had chosen otherwise others would have taken up this discourse and there will be others in any case who will repeat what we are in the process of saying...the revelation of this truth is driven by the historical working of the judeo western Revelation the Revelation may be slow because it contains a message that humans do not wish to hear but it is not reversible”
There are more domains of action available to statesmen than those explicitly enumerated in the formal legal and juridical system; operating in domains not yet addressed by law, one can move faster than legislation and thereby exercise power outside the boundaries of constitutional checks and balances.
“there are more possibilities for action than first appear precisely because there are more domains than those enumerated by the conventional legal orical system uh that just reminds me I saw an interview I think it was with I think it was with teal once about his time at PayPal when he said that what PayPal was doing was um ahead of where the legislation was so it's not that what they were doing at some point something like this okay this isn't perfectly the case but it's enough to make the point here it's not that what they were doing was illegal because it wasn't addressed by the law yet it was somehow extra legal”
Hobbes was the first truly modern philosopher partly because he deserted and fled from religious war, preferring a cowardly life to a heroic but meaningless death, and this cowardice became the foundation of modern philosophy's rejection of traditional virtues.
“Hobbs the first truly modern philosopher boasted of how he deserted and ran away from fighting in a religious War a cowardly life had become preferable to a heroic but meaningless death um it is sweet and fine to die for one's country had been an important part of the old tradition henceforth it would be seen as nothing more than an old lie”
Roberto Calasso notes that post-1945 history could be written as two parallel narratives: the official history of masses, parties, and negotiations, and the hidden history of murders, traps, assassinations, and weapons shipments, and that neither account is sufficient alone.
“Roberto colasso reminds us of the alternative thread in the ruin of cash uh quote the period between 1945 and the present could conceivably be rendered in two parallel histories that of the historians with its elaborate apparatus of parameters discussing figures masses parties movements negotiations Productions and that of the secret Services telling of murders traps betrayals assassinations coverups and weapons shipments we know that both accounts are insufficient that both claim to be sufficient that one could never be translated into the other and that they will continue their parallel lives”
By 1990s America, the original Lockean founding had been forgotten; Americans could no longer recognize the originality and strangeness of the American founding because the regime had proved so successful at shaping the modern world.
“when one fast forwards to the America of the 1990s the larger context of the founding had been forgotten America had proved so successful in shaping the modern world that most Americans could no longer recognize the originality and strangeness of its founding conception”
In Lockean political philosophy, all human complexity is reduced to a single drive—the desire for power, which manifests in desires for riches, knowledge, and honor—and furthermore, human understanding itself is redefined as merely the power to prefer one action over another, stripping away anything distinctively human about human nature.
“thus in Hobbs all human complexity is reduced to the desire for power quoting Hobbs the passions that most of all cause the difference of wit are principally the more or less desire of power of rich Riches of knowledge and of Honor all of which may be may be reduced to the first that is desire of power for riches knowledge and honor are but several sorts of power”
If American liberalism is decisively incomplete (as Strauss suggests), then liberal critics' objections to frameworks operating outside checks and balances lose some of their force, since the critique presumes the completeness of liberal frameworks.
“But if American liberalism is decisively incomplete then its critique is no longer quite so decisive um hold on I want to say something here I just want to make say something so you have two things you have the need for esotericism in the communication of wisdom...and the parallel in the political sphere is this secret State activity”
According to Strauss and Nietzsche, the truth about human mimesis and the founding murder is so shocking that it cannot and should not be widely known, because popularizing such knowledge would destroy society's foundations; the truth must remain esoteric, known only to a philosophical elite.
“for Strauss as for n the truth of mimesis and of the founding murder is so shocking that most people in all times and places simply will not believe it you know I interject here it's kind of like the guy in Plato's Cave allegory in the Republic if you know it who the first time he's liberated from the Shadows he runs back down okay eventually obviously also the Liberator is killed but people have a tendency not to want to believe a truth that they regard as shocking the world of the Enlightenment may have been based on certain misconceptions about the nature of humanity but the full knowledge of these misconceptions can remain the province of a philosophical Elite the successful popularization of such knowledge would be the only thing to fear”
Schmidt shares Kojève's concern about the end of history but sees a unified post-political world containing neither politics nor the state, but only culture, civilization, economics, morality, law, art, and entertainment where politics is definitively over.
“In such a unified world what remains is neither politics nor state but culture civilization economics morality law art entertainment Etc so at the end of History in this world after man's um historical action things still happen okay you could still go to the casino you could still flip on the TV”
A liberal is defined as someone who knows nothing of the past and the history of violence yet still holds to the Enlightenment view of natural human goodness, while a conservative knows nothing of the future and therefore still believes nation-states can contain unlimited human violence.
“One may Define a liberal as someone who knows nothing of the past and of this History of Violence and still holds to the enlightenment view of the natural goodness of humanity and one may Define a conservative as someone who knows nothing of the future and of the global world that is destined to be and still therefore believes that the nation state or other instit tions rooted in sacred violence can contain unlimited human violence”
There is no formula to answer the critical question of what constitutes a close case—it must be decided in every specific instance, and the cumulative decisions made in close cases may determine the destiny of the post-modern world.
“There's no formula to answer the critical question of what constitutes a close case that must be decided in every specific instance it may well be that the cumulative decisions made in all those close instances will determine the destiny of the postmodern world”
Oswald Spengler's call for action at the dramatic finale of the decline of the West, and Strauss's response to it, suggests some agreement between the Straussian and the Spenglerian about the necessity of action in times of civilizational decline.
“for the straussian teal writes there can be no fundamental disagreement with Oswald spangler's call for Action at the dramatic finale of um the decline of the West”
The American constitutional system, with its elaborate checks and balances and separation of powers, prevents any single ambitious person from reconstructing the political order, thereby creating political paralysis that matches the intellectual paralysis created by Straussian self-knowledge.
“moreover a direct path forward is prevented by America's constitutional Machinery by setting ambition against ambition with an elaborate system of checks and balances it prevents any single ambitious person from reconstructing the Old Republic America's Founders enjoyed a freedom of action far surpassing that of America's subsequent politicians eventually ambitious people would come to learn there's little one can do in politics and that all merely political careers and in Failure the intellectual paralysis of self- knowledge has its CounterPoint in the political paralysis embedded in our open system of government”
One must never forget that one day all will be revealed, all injustices will be exposed, and those who perpetrated them will be held to account, which should inform the Christian statesman's decisions in close cases—leaning toward peace when the answer is ambiguous.
“One must never forget that one day all will be revealed that all injustices will be exposed and that those who perpetrated them will be held to account and so in determining the correct mixture of violence and peace the Christian Statesman or stateswoman would be wise in every close case to side with peace”
Alfred Lord Tennyson's poem at the opening of Thiel's essay (referenced but not fully analyzed by the narrator) carries significance that should be understood only after reading the essay in full, suggesting the poem encodes meanings that become visible through the lens of the essay's arguments.
“you see that it begins with an excerpt from Alfred Lord tenus Lock Lee Hall and we'll actually leave that for later reading the rest of the essay first and then in fact I'll leave it for you to return to that poem once we've gone through the essay to see what sense of it you can make”