Strauss, Schmitt, Bush, God and the Occult

[coughymachine]

I’ve been reading about two philosophers who are said to been influential in shaping the views of the so-called Neo-cons. Their names are Carl Schmitt and Leo Strauss.

Despite Schmitt being pro-Nazi, and Strauss a Jew, the two had some common ground. In his book, ‘In The Concept of the Political’, Schmitt wrote about the duality of human endeavour. He saw morality as a battle between right and wrong; aesthetics as the battle between beauty and ugliness; and economics as the battle between profit and loss. Politics, however, had a different dynamic; it was the battle between friend and enemy. Whereas other forms of endeavour revolved around competition, politics demanded annihilation.

In the book, Schmitt writes:

The political is the most intense and extreme antagonism. War is the most violent form that politics takes, but, even short of war, politics still requires that you treat your opposition as antagonistic to everything in which you believe. It's not personal; you don't have to hate your enemy. But you do have to be prepared to vanquish him if necessary.

In a letter to Schmitt, Strauss shows he agrees.

The ultimate foundation of the Right is the principle of the natural evil of man; because man is by nature evil, he therefore needs dominion. But dominion can be established, that is, men can be unified, only in a unity against - against other men. Every association of men is necessarily a separation from other men. The tendency to separate (and therewith the grouping of humanity into friends and enemies) is given with human nature; it is in this sense destiny, period.

Strauss himself was well known for his views on Esotericism. Esoteric knowledge is either specialist in nature, or should be known only to those in a select group or enlightened inner circle. Esotericism, as a philosophy, is more often associated with the latter, where initiates into the inner circle are tested before having the higher truths revealed to them. The ‘Straussian Text’ is one manifestation of esotericism.

Strauss believed that America’s increasingly Liberal attitude was decadent and tended towards societal nihilism. He argued in favour of classical political philosophies, such as those outlined by Plato in ‘The Republic’, but feared that society was incapable of accepting the ‘ugly truths’ inherent in such a system. He nonetheless thought it was incumbent upon "wise men" to promote such a system and that, in order to avoid revealing their agenda, they were morally obligated to tell ‘noble lies’ to protect themselves and their policies. To that end, Strauss advocated the writing of political texts that were “deliberately written so that the average reader will understand it as saying one ("exoteric") thing but the special few for whom it is intended will grasp its real ("esoteric") meaning.”

After reading George Bush’s January 10th Address to the nation, I couldn’t help wondering whether I was reading a Straussian text. The quote that first got my attention was this:

“We go forward with trust that the Author of Liberty will guide us through these trying hours.”

This is the second time Bush has used this term. In his 2nd inauguration speech in 2005, he said:

“History has an ebb and flow of justice, but history also has a visible direction, set by liberty and the Author of Liberty.”

Bush's speeches are littered with biblical references. They appear at first glance to position him as a born again Christian.

BUSH: “Freedom is the permanent hope of mankind, the hunger in dark places, the longing of the soul.”

BIBLE: Psalm 107. “He satisfieth the longing soul and filleth the hungry soul with goodness. Such as sit in darkness.”

BUSH: "When we see that wounded traveler on the road to Jericho, we will not pass to the other side."

BIBLE: Luke 10:31 “And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.”

BUSH: “Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation’s security and the calling of our time.”

BIBLE: Philippians 3:14 “… the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.”

BUSH: “Americans move forward in every generation by reaffirming all that is good and true that came before: ideals of justice and conduct that are the same yesterday, today and forever.”

BIBLE: Hebrews 13: 8 “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and today, and forever.”

BUSH: “America, in this young century, proclaims liberty throughout all the world and to all the inhabitants thereof.”

BIBLE: Leviticus 25:10 “And ye shall…proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof…”

There are plenty more where that came from. Taken collectively, it seems that Bush is couching the civic values of freedom, liberty and justice in distinctly Christian terms. For example, where Bush speaks about freedom being the hope of mankind, he is echoing the bible’s assertion that Jesus is the hope of mankind. This challenge to the secular nature of the United States appears to be a Bush family trait.

George Bush Sr. had the following exchange in an interview with reporter Robert Sherman in the late 1980’s.

SHERMAN: “What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are atheists?”

BUSH SR: “I guess I'm pretty weak in the atheist community. Faith in god is important to me.”

SHERMAN: “Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists?”

BUSH SR: “No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.”

Yikes!

Anyway, back to Bush Jnr. The one term I couldn’t find a biblical reference for was the one that first got my attention: ‘Author of Liberty’. And that’s because it’s not biblical. It turns out that the term is, or at least was, unique to a religious right textbook for home schooled children, entitled ‘America’s Providential History’, which was published in 1989. In it, the authors advocate reforming the US government into a one party theocracy, with political power to be held only by dominionist Christians, which flies directly in the face of the US Constitution. In that context, it appears Bush’s Straussian use of the term in his speech is designed to reach out to the religious adherents of dominionism.

From the book:

It must be added here that Christians need to be involved in both of the major political parties. The ultimate goal should be for enough Christians to become involved in both major parties so that eventually the candidates on the ballot in November are both of the type that fit into Biblical qualifications.

If Christians in every locality became a controlling influence in a political party after two years of serving there consistently, then every godly representative in the state legislatures and the Congress could be replaced within six years to work with a godly president.

If we work for more godly representatives in 2/3 of the state legislatures then we can bypass Congress and call a new Constitutional Convention to clean up all of the mess we have made of it in the past 200 years! Then with godly state legislatures, the odds are good that delegates appointed by them to a new Convention will be godly and wise as well.

And perhaps more worryingly:

Even if Christians manage to outnumber others on an issue and we sway our Congressman by sheer numbers, we end up in the dangerous promotion of democracy. We really do not want representatives who are swayed by majorities, but rather by correct principles.

So, is there any evidence is there that Bush (or his scriptwriters) are familiar with this textbook? Consider the following:

BOOK: “God’s plan for the nations has been unfolding in a specific geographic direction. This geographical march of history is called the Chain of Christianity or the Chain of Liberty.”

BOOK: “Scripture defines God as the source of life...He is the author of liberty as well.”

BUSH: “History has an ebb and flow of justice, but history also has a visible direction, set by liberty and the Author of Liberty.”

Bush’s speeches are a bit of a catchall. One moment he’s speaking directly to Christian fundamentalists, the next to dominionists. At other times he’s reaching out to anyone who abides by some form of religious belief system. In so doing, Bush leaves his own religious beliefs a little unclear. What’s certain, however, is that Bush has (or at least, did have) a penchant for Occultism. This study of hidden wisdom or ‘Truth’ is where we once again find parallels with Strauss’ esotericism.

Yale University’s secret society, ‘The Order of the Skull and Bones’, was founded in 1832 by William Huntington Russell and Alphonso Taft. It was inspired by a society into which Russell had been initiated whilst studying in Germany. This super-elite, but not so secret, society has played host to some of America’s most prominent families who have since reached out into every corner of American society. These families are encouraged to intermarry in order to consolidate their influence.

New initiates are taken to the “tomb”, where they are sworn to silence. The initiation ceremony itself is said to involve ritualistic psychological conditioning and mud-wrestling. They are physically beaten in a process that symbolises their ‘death’ in the old world. They then lie naked in a coffin and m********e whilst revealing their deepest sexual fantasies. After this ‘cleansing’ they are given robes and are anointed, an act that represent their re-birth. During initiation, they are also permitted to see the artefacts in the ‘tomb’. This includes Nazi memorabilia.

A rival society (The Order of File and Claw) broke into the ‘tomb’ on 29th September 1876. They found one of the lodge-rooms "fitted up in black velvet, even the walls being covered with the material." Upstairs, in lodge-room 322 (a number that is sacred to Bonesmen), "the 'sanctum sanctorium' of the temple [was] furnished in red velvet". There was also a pentagram on the wall. In the hall, they found "pictures of the founders of Bones at Yale, and of members of the Society in Germany, when the chapter was established here in 1832."

And...

On the west wall [of the parlour], hung among other pictures, an old engraving representing an open burial vault, in which, on a stone slab, rest four human skulls, grouped about a fools cap and bells, an open book, several mathematical instruments, a beggar's scrip, and a royal crown. On the arched wall above the vault are the explanatory words, in Roman letters, 'We War Der Thor, Wer Weiser, Wer Bettler Oder, Kaiser?' (Who was the fool, who the wise man, beggar or king?) and below the vault is engraved, in German characters, the sentence; 'Ob Arm, Ob Beich, im Tode gleich' (Whether poor or rich, all's the same in death).

Initiates spend a year in this ‘tomb’ and develop an unwavering sense of loyalty to the Order and its agenda. This supersedes all other loyalties, whether to family, friends, country of God. Their purpose is to attain a prominent position in the world so that they might protect the Order’s status and ensure that, at any moment, Bonesmen may be called upon to do whatever needs to be done.

That Bush was a Bonesman is not in doubt: he said so in a February 2004 interview with Tim Russert.

RUSSERT: “You were both [referring to John Kerry] in Skull and Bones, the secret society.”

BUSH: “It's so secret we can't talk about it.”

I’ll leave you to contemplate Russert’s reply.

"What does that mean for America?"

[IronGhost]

Both Schmitt and Strauss's views are dead wrong and simplistic.

They see the world as simplistic duality -- the battle between right and wrong, the battle between good and evil, the paramount importance of competition -- these are all wrong-headed views of the world, and is why the Neo-Cons have gotten us all into so much trouble since they got the chance to start playing with their stupid ideas.

The world is not a battle between good and evil -- it is a tension driven by the dichotomies between ignorance and intelligence.

Competition is not a dominant force -- cooperation is. When you look at nature and human activity, you find competition, yes, but you find even more cooperation.

Economies are not a battle between profit and loss -- there are endless permutations to the ebb and flow of wealth through a vast interconnected system that is made up of millions of variables that are almost infinitely complex.

In short, the ideas of Schmitt and Strauss are fantastically simplistic, which is why they probably appeal to one-dimensional, and religious fundamentalist "thinkers" like George W.

[Unlimited]

Bush speaks directly with God from what i read?..he's like the messiah...he told bush all about the WMDs..the drones that could spray you etc...i'd take what bush says with a grain of salt..In most cases they medicate and lock people like him up.

[Reincarnated]

Bush just acts like he is religious for support.

[Caesar]

Bush speaks directly with God from what i read?...

Do you have any links so that I may examine this information?

he's like the messiah...he told bush all about the WMDs..the drones that could spray you etc...i'd take what bush says with a grain of salt..In most cases they medicate and lock people like him up.

Looking at your post you should take your information with a grain of salt.

[IronGhost]

Do you have any links so that I may examine this information?

Looking at your post you should take your information with a grain of salt.

That Bush thinks that God told him to invade Iraq is not disputed by anyone. Bush told Bob Woodward in an interview that he asked "the Higher Father for advice" on invading Iraq. Woodward asked George W. is he had consulted with his own father on the Iraq invasion, and W. said "no, I consulted the Higher Father."

Woodward was completely amazed that W. would not ask his own dad -- who handled the first Gulf War -- about the invasion. I mean, who would have more insight on Iraq policy that Bush Sr. He would have been one of the best possible resources for advice -- yet W. bypassed him -- and prayed to "God" instead -- then invaded Iraq.

[Caesar]

That Bush thinks that God told him to invade Iraq is not disputed by anyone. Bush told Bob Woodward in an interview that he asked "the Higher Father for advice" on invading Iraq. Woodward asked George W. is he had consulted with his own father on the Iraq invasion, and W. said "no, I consulted the Higher Father."

Woodward was completely amazed that W. would not ask his own dad -- who handled the first Gulf War -- about the invasion. I mean, who would have more insight on Iraq policy that Bush Sr. He would have been one of the best possible resources for advice -- yet W. bypassed him -- and prayed to "God" instead -- then invaded Iraq.

And God said fire-away? it seems more like a prayer to me, probly for guidance and wisdom. I'm not religous, but thats my take on this. I'm sure he did talk to his father about this matter.

[explorer]

No, Bush said fire away, because that is what the annointed scriptwriters, supplied by the chosen advisors, wrote. I mean, can anyone name an original thought by P. Bush, who is making the US look stupid, backward and at best greedy. If God bothered speaking to a figurehead like Bush then God doesn't deserve a capital G, or a bible.

But then all the smoke about defending America is a blanket under which we can barely see an economic urge for domination. Economics is the real religion. Appeals to spiritual religion are simply flattering the moral delusions of the voting mass.