Leo Strauss y la redención clásica del mundo moderno

Otros responsables
Fecha
01/2012
Editorial
Universidad Central de Venezuela
Revista
Politeia
Título del libro
Nombre del evento
Fecha del evento
Institución organizadora
ISSN
0303-9757
eISSN
ISBN
Idioma
Español
Tipo del evento
Clasificación temática
Palabras clave
Resumen
El objetivo de este trabajo es repasar brevemente la polémica sobre supuesta adscripción de Leo Strauss a la extrema derecha conservadora y ofrecer un balance mesurado sobre ella. Concretamente, se intenta argumentar que, aun cuando ciertas visiones que buscan mostrar la paternidad straussiana del neoconservadurismo tienen serios errores, hay elementos profundamente antidemocráticos en la perspectiva de Strauss. Estos elementos no están relacionados con una perspectiva "posmoderna", "machista" o "imperialista" de la sociedad contemporánea, como han señalado algunos críticos, sino que se encuadran en un entramado muy rico y complejo, vinculado con lo que podríamos llamar una redención del mundo moderno a través de la filosofía clásica. Esta redención, se tratará de mostrar, es elitista no porque sea exclusiva de unos pocos, sino porque sólo unos pocos pueden llevarla adelante. En este sentido, este ensayo defiende la idea de que Strauss presenta una defensa calificada de la democracia, siempre y cuando no se entienda a la democracia en el sentido clásico sino en su acepción moderna, vinculada a la competencia entre élites dirigentes.
This work aims to briefly review the controversy over the right-wing tendency of Leo Strauss and offer a moderate balance of his thought. In particular, it attempts to argue that, even though certain visions intending to show Strauss’s paternity over neo-conservatism have serious errors, there are deeply anti-democratic elements in Strauss’ perspective. It is argued that these elements are not associated with a “postmodernist,” “malechauvinist” or “imperialist” perspective of contemporary society, as pointed out by some critics, but held in a very rich and complex framework linked to what we might call redemption of the modern world through classical philosophy. This essay will attempt to demonstrate that this redemption is elitist, not because it is exclusive of a few, but because only a few can take it forward. In this sense, this essay defends the idea that Strauss presents a “qualified defense” of democracy, only if democracy is not viewed in the classical sense, but from a modern perspective, linked to competition among the leading elites.
This work aims to briefly review the controversy over the right-wing tendency of Leo Strauss and offer a moderate balance of his thought. In particular, it attempts to argue that, even though certain visions intending to show Strauss’s paternity over neo-conservatism have serious errors, there are deeply anti-democratic elements in Strauss’ perspective. It is argued that these elements are not associated with a “postmodernist,” “malechauvinist” or “imperialist” perspective of contemporary society, as pointed out by some critics, but held in a very rich and complex framework linked to what we might call redemption of the modern world through classical philosophy. This essay will attempt to demonstrate that this redemption is elitist, not because it is exclusive of a few, but because only a few can take it forward. In this sense, this essay defends the idea that Strauss presents a “qualified defense” of democracy, only if democracy is not viewed in the classical sense, but from a modern perspective, linked to competition among the leading elites.
Colecciones
Aprobación
Revisión
Complementado por
Referenciado por
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto donde se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este ítem se describe como by-nc-sa
