The most important question you can ask is “What is the best political philosophy?” Ignore the ideological wars between liberals and conservatives – they don’t exist. But what is the best philosophy for America? There are many answers to that question, but the main ones are Leo Strauss, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Thomas Hobbes, and others. Ultimately, you should use your own judgement, but here are a few points to think about.
While Strauss’s philosophy has received much praise, it is controversial. Many scholars have criticized his work, and scholarly debates are often polemical. Myles Burnyeat took exception to Strauss’s iconoclastic reading of the Platonic dialogues, and Strauss replied with counter-responses. Moreover, Strauss’s reading of Machiavelli, a classic author of political philosophy, was seen by some as an attempt to subvert this classic work.
While Strauss did not support the idea of a world state, he was generally suspicious of solutions to old problems. He frequently spoke of the perils of solving the traditionalism-rationalism debate. He warned against the rise of the world state and the tyranny it would create. In addition, he avoided the totalitarian movements of his century, but maintained a sympathetic interest for Zionism. However, he eventually disapproved of Zionism’s goals and criticized it as a “problematic” ideology.
Despite Strauss’s reputation for being an anti-democratic cult, Drury argues that his political philosophy is the best ever written. This is a book for the serious philosopher, but the title is misleading. This work is not about politics per se, but rather about philosophy in the public realm. While philosophers pay lip service to the views of many, they still believe in the existence of God, which is necessary for social stability. And philosophers, like Drury, also initiate those who are ready to receive their wisdom.
In the last century, Strauss’ influence has reached its heights. Many people in the Bush Administration have studied his ideas. Some of these people include Paul Wolfowitz, Stephen Cambone, and Abram Shulsky, the director of the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans. Some of these people are devoted Strauss students. The influence of his work continues to spread to new generations. You can read a full review of his work by clicking on the link below.
There is an argument to be made that Baruch Spinoza is the best political philosopher. Although his work has been overlooked for decades, Spinoza is a key influence on political philosophy. The philosophical method of Spinoza relies on the social contract as the source of legitimacy. But the concept of “clear and present danger” remains an issue. Hence, it’s important to understand how Spinoza’s ideas relate to the liberal tradition.
For newcomers to Spinoza, Behind the Geometrical Method: A Reading of Spinoza’s Ethics is a great resource. Although Curley focuses primarily on Spinoza’s TTP, he engages in a wide range of secondary sources to give a full picture of Spinoza’s philosophy. For more in-depth discussions of Spinoza’s ethics, there are two other books that will serve as good starting points.
According to Spinoza, right is action without impropriety. Cortes’ conquest of the Aztecs was right. Spinoza defined right as “action without impropriety.”
However, many modern philosophers believe that Hobbes is the best political philosopher because he rejects the notion of natural right. Similarly, Spinoza rejects the traditional conceptions of natural rights, such as freedom and equality. While he acknowledges the value of human freedom, his views are contrary to those of Hobbes. The most influential political philosophers have been influenced by Spinoza. The best political philosopher is always a logically superior intellectual.
In the 18th century, Rousseau argued that political life is unnatural and must be based on consent. He argued that political freedom must be based on consent, but that this cannot be achieved by human artifice. He argued that the best models for political consent are those of ancient Sparta and republican Rome. In the nineteenth century, his influence has continued to be felt among a range of political and social figures.
Rousseau argued that man is good by nature but corrupted by society. He won the prize for his essay on this subject in 1751, and became a star in French salons. He held discussions with artists and intellectuals. He argued that savages in nature were equal and free, and that inequality and war only came about when people claimed property or power.
The social contract is an example of a philosophical text. Rousseau sought to determine how government could administer civil order. He believed that the rule of law should be based on the will of its members, and that the spirit of the law should guide government decisions. The spirit of the law, in other words, should be the only determining factor. Nevertheless, the purpose of this philosophy is often misinterpreted.
Rousseau’s most famous book, “On Human Nature”, was published in the early nineteenth century. This is one of the few works by a French philosopher who claims to have influenced political thought. He states that nature is essentially good and that it has become corrupted by the artificiality of society and its increasing social interdependence. Interestingly, Rousseau is often attributed with the notion of a “noble savage” but never uses the term.
Thomas Hobbes, the English philosopher, sought to ground authority in a social contract. He was the first empiricist, and his political philosophy strongly reinforced this tradition. Hobbes argued that a sovereign’s monopoly on force should be limited and he did not see the dangers of an absolute sovereign. His most famous work, Leviathan, is a well-known work in political philosophy.
Besides his political philosophy, Hobbes also wrote works on religion, church history, and philosophy. He opposed the separation of church and state and was strongly opposed to the concept of self-knowledge. His history of philosophy is primarily concerned with metaphysics, which he believed was used to keep people under Roman Catholicism. His theory of law developed the theme of common law and multiple authoritative interpreters of the law.
Hobbes’s work is best known as the Leviathan. This work outlines the concept of the social contract. He also argues that it is possible to escape nature through the social contract. By living in peace with one another, people form a nation and establish a sovereign. The sovereign’s role is to create rules and enforce the contract. He also argues that nothing is naturally just. Hence, this book has a surprisingly deep and profound message.
Interestingly, Hobbes’ work is also relevant to modern politics. He was concerned that human beings are selfish, and he believed that a democracy would devolve into chaos and poor governance. In other words, a democratic society would become corrupt and ineffective, and it would lead to civil war. Thus, he was opposed to democracy, but he did support monarchies, benevolent dictators, and enlightened despots.
The first step to understanding Proudhon’s political philosophy is to examine his thinking on the state. Proudhon’s critique of governmentalism in Justice in the Revolution and the Church was first published in 1849, and his political theory grew throughout his later writings, such as War and Peace, The Theory of Property, and The Federative Principle.
A society can act independently to achieve certain goals and objectives. The work of the state is a common good, and the collective force possesses the means to perform these tasks. This means that a society must act as a sovereign state and acquiesce in its creation, inauguration, and installation. The work of the state is to identify collective problems and formulate collective solutions, but the implementation of those solutions is the responsibility of the individual.
Proudhon’s political philosophy was influenced by his experiences in the manufacturing industry. He was involved with an illegal workers’ union, and he saw this as a potential force for societal change. In this way, Proudhon argued against communism and advocated an anarchist society with small producers. However, he did not abandon his philosophical beliefs, which he regarded as “utopian” in nature.
Proudhon’s political philosophy is based on a fundamental concept: freedom. Proudhon claimed that property is a natural right and that the individual needs it in order to be independent. He rejected collectivism, which stripped individual freedom. He also attacked private property as a mechanism that creates hierarchies of power and maintains the power of the wealthy.