Robert Kagan is not a Straussian
Posted by Joseph Knippenberg
Contrary to what a lot of people say, including the execrable Anne Norton, who should know better, Robert Kagan persuasively affirms that he is not a Straussian. I still like his writing and many of his opinions, which seem to me more incisive and better informed than his opinions about Leo Strauss, Allan Bloom, and Straussianism.
Hat tip: Scott Johnson at Power Line.
9:45 AM / January 28, 2006
: include(/srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/sd/nlt-blog/_includes/promo-main.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in
: include(): Failed opening '/srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/sd/nlt-blog/_includes/promo-main.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/opt/sp/php7.2/lib/php') in
"Execrable" is indeed the right adjective. When looking through reviews of this book, I was stunned to find many that were positive. Here are some others that get the essential badness of this Nortons right:
Peter Berkowitz, "Tabloid Scholarship"
https://www.peterberkowitz.com/tabloidscholarship.htm
There are two in the Summer issue of "Interpretation," "The Lion and the Ass," and "Anne Norton and the Straussian Cabal."
https://www.interpretationjournal.com