04.06.2013 Views

Murray N. Rothbard vs. the Philosophers - Ludwig von Mises Institute

Murray N. Rothbard vs. the Philosophers - Ludwig von Mises Institute

Murray N. Rothbard vs. the Philosophers - Ludwig von Mises Institute

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

MURRAY N. ROTHBARD VS. THE PHILOSOPHERS: UNPUBLISHED WRITINGS<br />

8 ON HAYEK, MISES, STRAUSS, AND POLYANI<br />

that modern natural law is a degeneration of <strong>the</strong> classical<br />

natural law that is an expression of civic virtue. In Strauss’s<br />

view, <strong>the</strong> individualism of <strong>the</strong> Lockean tradition, with its<br />

<strong>the</strong>ory of property, breaks with <strong>the</strong> classical and Scholastic<br />

tradition and represents a decline from <strong>the</strong> values of <strong>the</strong><br />

past, placing <strong>the</strong> individual and his rights at <strong>the</strong> center of<br />

<strong>the</strong> universe with consequences such as “<strong>the</strong> solution of <strong>the</strong><br />

political problem through economic means,” of which he disapproves.<br />

4 Strauss writes that<br />

Locke’s teaching on property, and <strong>the</strong>rewith his<br />

whole political philosophy, are revolutionary not<br />

only with regard to <strong>the</strong> biblical tradition but with<br />

regard to <strong>the</strong> philosophic tradition as well.<br />

Through <strong>the</strong> shift of emphasis from natural duties<br />

or obligations to natural rights, <strong>the</strong> individual,<br />

<strong>the</strong> ego, had become <strong>the</strong> center and origin of <strong>the</strong><br />

moral world, since man—as distinguished from<br />

man’s end—had become that center or origin. 5<br />

Safeguarding <strong>the</strong> individual’s right to property becomes<br />

an aim of <strong>the</strong> kind of politics that had ceased to draw inspiration<br />

from a natural end, wisdom, and virtue.<br />

<strong>Rothbard</strong> sees Strauss as an icon of conservatism, pressing<br />

an invitation to return to <strong>the</strong> ancients, and as a critic of<br />

a modernity heralding <strong>the</strong> historicism and relativism that led<br />

to <strong>the</strong> impossibility of making judgments of binding value<br />

for <strong>the</strong> whole community. Affirming that values are subjective<br />

and, above all, can change with <strong>the</strong> times would make it<br />

4Leo Strauss, What Is Political Philosophy? And O<strong>the</strong>r Studies<br />

(Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press of Glencoe, 1959), p. 49. At <strong>the</strong> heart of<br />

Strauss’s idea is <strong>the</strong> critical reconstruction of modernity as a break<br />

with <strong>the</strong> ancient and medieval politico-philosophical tradition. See<br />

also Shadia B. Drury, The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss (New York:<br />

St. Martin’s Press, 1988); Raimondo Cubeddu, Leo Strauss e la<br />

filosofia politica moderna (Naples: ESI, 1983).<br />

5Leo Strauss, Natural Right and History (Chicago: University of<br />

Chicago Press, [1953] 1965), p. 248.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!