Thursday, September 30, 2010

Is this the article that got Rick Salutin fired from the Globe?


Stephen Harper – the last Straussian?

Rick Salutin
From Friday's Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Sep. 17, 2010 5:00AM EDT

I’m talking political philosophy here, not Viennese waltzes. People keep asking why Stephen Harper acts as he does, it looks so buttheaded. He seems to muck up his own prospects: firing decent people, lashing out, raising the partisan rhetoric, proroguing Parliament haughtily, binging on military toys, mauling the census – he’s a bright boy, it’s hard to figure.

I used to favour a theory of political Tourette’s, the kind portrayed by Robert Redford in 1972’s The Candidate. You suppress your political ideals for the sake of electability as long as you can; then the buildup leads to random outbursts. But there’s another explanation: Straussianism.

Leo Strauss was a German-Jewish thinker who escaped Hitler for the U.S. but despaired over the depravity that liberalism might lead to there as it had in Germany, after the liberal 1920s. He felt almost any means were valid to save Western civilization but, due to liberalism’s strength, the strategy had to be cautious, secretive, even duplicitous, with the truth confined to an elite. This rarefied vision became highly influential when it was spread by his students (and theirs) in government, think tanks and media during the Reagan and Bush years. It’s a prominent force at Mr. Harper’s intellectual home, the University of Calgary. What does it illuminate in his behaviour?

Secretiveness, an aura of manipulation and a sense of hidden agendas. From a Straussian view, these are good things as means to noble ends. When I studied in the U.S., Straussian students used to lurk, literally, around antiwar protests or demos. Some sneakiness is routine in politics but here it gets a high-minded intellectual justification. It’s almost romantic.

Religion. Leo Strauss felt most people will never do the right thing for rational reasons; they need to be motivated by the myths and emotionality of religion. So his neocon disciples, many of them Jewish, built strong links to the Christian right. Stephen Harper attends an evangelical church, yet he doesn’t seem much of a fit; he shows none of the passion there that he has for politics. Perhaps it just goes with the Straussian territory.

Nationalism. The PM may have shown his real feelings about Canada in 2000 when he called it “a second-tier socialistic country.” Still, for Straussians, nationalism ranks alongside religion as a way to motivate people to great things beyond the vapidity of liberalism. This may help explain the Harper Arctic sovereignty initiatives, or even his curious focus on hockey.

Populism and democracy. Leo Strauss (like his man, Plato) never liked democracy much but his disciples are ready to use it against the real villain, liberalism. To this end, they appeal to the “anti-liberal” impulses of ordinary folk against the “liberal elites,” via “wedge issues” like gun control, abortion or attacks on high art. (That one was especially self-destructive in Quebec.)

Contempt. There seem high levels of this, even for politics, among the Harperites (John Baird, Jason Kenney etc.). But Straussianism requires a strong sense of Us v. Them, to overcome the lassitude created through what it views as liberal notions such as tolerance and cultural relativism.

By way of comparison, take Preston Manning. His Christianity seems deeply felt, like his populism. They aren’t elements of strategy. He appears to believe he can actually persuade voters, not just fool and control them. He’s a conservative but he’s no Straussian (unless he’s a very devious one).

One can see the appeal of Canada to Straussians. The U.S. always had so much fevered religiosity, hypernationalism and paranoid individualism, you hardly needed to seed them there by stealth. Here, though, we still have liberals, Liberals, even social democrats. We may be Straussianism’s happy hunting ground.

588 Comments

15 comments:

Annie said...

The Globe is getting as bad as the Sun. Salutin is correct in a way..if a writer for a paper or such.. runs the PM down, they are toast..free speech Hah!

Anonymous said...

Brent---why would such a column have provoked such an extreme reaction?
After I read the column,I did some research on Strauss's philosophy (and
created a file of materials) and the question Salutin raises has some
basis.

Bill

Brent Fullard said...

Bill:

Yes the connection with the teachings of Strauss and Harper's bizarre actions and policies is not a new theory by any means. Just the first time (and last I guess?) that you will ever read about it in the Globe

Dr Mike said...

Just goes to show you that the truth hurts.

Harper heard the truth & Rick took the hurt.

Dr Mike

PS---say , what ever happened to my old buddy Greg Weston---last I heard he was mentioning something about a fake lake??

Anonymous said...

Sums up the 'Harplerian' mess we have now quite nicely. Seriously though, Salutin got fired?

m.

Brent Fullard said...

Yes. According to this source:

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2010/09/30/RickSalutinLastWords/

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the link... gosh, fired for telling the truth; we truly are in times of tyranny.

m.

Brent Fullard said...

m:

Funny you should mention that, as Strauss is infamous for being the guy behind the concept of “The Big Lie”

Annie said...

Greg Weston is with the Globe and Mail.

Fred from BC said...

You mean the article that YOU THINK got Rick Salutin fired, don't you? Because you have no proof of this at all, how is your statement not just an outright lie?

I suppose this means that the Globe and Mail is now a 'conservative' publication, is it? Controlled by Stephen Harper? Wow, you'd never know it by the columnists they employ and the letters and editorials they choose to print...

Fred from BC said...

Brent Fullard said...

Yes. According to this source:

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2010/09/30/RickSalutinLastWords/



That's not a 'source', Brent.

That's just another *opinion* like yours...masquerading as fact, but with nothing to back it up.

(and I'll try to be kind by not commenting at length on your use of The Tyee as some kind of reputable 'source'. That's hilarious..;)

Anonymous said...

Excellent opinion piece that is backed up. Not surprised Salutin was fired for this. More shocking that the Globe printed this or that Salutin dared to submit this in this day and age.

As for certain "truths" (i.e. full disclosure on a firing), you will never find it in a mainstream paper like the Globe. Duh, legal reasons ...
Most likely Rick was asked to sign some kind of confidential thing upon his termination. It is not in the Globe's interest to admit they fired him for a piece an editorial team approved and chose to print. Makes everyone look bad. Best for the Globe to invent another reason for the firing and Rick to keep his mouth shut if he received the standard "firing" payout.

As for the rest of us, we can make our own assessments on the content of this opinion piece, and look for the truth from whoever is brave enough to act as a whistle blower.

Income trust investors know "nobody likes a whistle blower". Or at least in my case I am not allowed to bring up the topic of "Manulie" or income trusts in general in many different public forums. LOL ...

Brent Fullard said...

Fred from BC:

Your points are valid.

Of course I have no idea what goes on inside the Globe and Mail.

Implicit in my comment is that my statement is pure speculation, since that's all that it is and would be under the best of circumstance.

However, to avoid any confusion for those who may think this is a statement of fact, I have changed the title of this blog posting to "Is this the article that got Rick Salutin fired from the Globe?"

Anonymous said...

Salute Salutin , Salve Salutin !

Everyone is getting pushed off the air in this Harper controlled media
world these days.

Hey Harper, read the paper
Canada wants you out as PM !

JC

Fred from BC said...

Brent Fullard said...

However, to avoid any confusion for those who may think this is a statement of fact, I have changed the title of this blog posting to "Is this the article that got Rick Salutin fired from the Globe?"


Fair enough...

(I personally don't think that's why they fired him, but it's a valid question)