So I’ve gotten a lot of comments on my previous post and the fine article by John Miller on Harry Jaffa. One, from a prominent “traditional conservative” that said I was generous to Jaffa and would be attacked by his students as a result. I didn’t mean to be either generous or mean, but just to lay out some points for conversation. Harry, of course, gives us a huge number of those. And every comment from one of his students has been a contribution to real, friendly conversation. Here’s one from that quirky and thoughtful student of political philosophy Cliff Bates:
I still find myself more in agreement with Willmoore than Harry. Even if I find myself more in agreement with Harry rather than the Bloom students on the theological-political and natural right issues of classical political thought. Yet again, I find Jaffa and his students recent attempts to create a Lockistotle a silly project that betrays some of the core hermeneutic teaching that emerges from Harry’s teacher Strauss. Thus I am in agreement with Harvey Mansfield’s protest and critique of Jaffa et al’s attempt to create this Lockeostotle. Pierre Manent in his City of Man makes very clear why Locke cannot be cut off from Hobbes—especially given the fundamental agreement regarding epistemology they (Hobbes-Locke) ultimately share.
