Customer Reviews

The New Science of Politics (Walgreen Foundation Lectures)

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Eric Voegelin, who died in 1985, is one of the giants of intellectual history and political philosophy. Unfortunately, he is far less well-recognized outside of a small scholarly community than some of the poseurs who foist quack theories on the public under the guise of "political philosophy." The New Science of Politics, based on Voegelin's Walgreen Lectures, can be read as a theoretical companion to his magisterial Order and History, a five-volume elaboration of the theories presented here. Voegelin provides an examination of political community and its representations through symbolic appropriation and the underlying basis of political order throughout history. Equally, Voegelin deals with misappropriation of symbols in the form of Gnosticism, which emerged at the dawn of the middle ages. His diagnostic exercise leads to an examination of modernity, which is characterized by advance and decline, the nature of of our own times. Modernist movements such as Nazism and Communism embody gnostic misappropriation of the symbolization of order. Writing in the immediate postwar period as an Austrian refugee from Hitler, with a command of ancient and modern philosophy and history and access to documentation in a dozen languages, Voegelin both lays the foundation for a return to the Aristotelean tradition of political philosophy and analysis and provides the personal witness of a research physician who has examined the patient at close hand. There is no better short book in our times for accomplishing Dr. Johnson's admonition to clear your mind of cant, or providing a sound basis for recognizing the corruption of intellectual and personal standards in current politics and scholarship, or the infection of scholarship by extremist politics. Voegelin has a number of brilliant students carrying on his work. However, unlike acolytes of Leo Strauss and Allan Bloom and their neo-conservative entourage, who represent a very different and self-referential strain in modern political analysis, Voegelin's students have not populated the high offices of government. Given the power of Voegelin's model presented in The New Science of Politics, I expect and hope that his long-term influence will weigh decisively in the war on modernity and its pernicious supporting social science-based infrastructure. To understand the contours of the problem, The New Science of Politics is an indispensible guide and a model of elegant anlysis and writing.

This was the first of Voegelin's works that I ever read, and I think it is a great intro to his thought. First of all, "The New Science of Politics" is one of his more important works. His construction of modern gnosticism within this piece is a very significant challenge to the foundation values that are the hallmark of modernity.

If this is the first of Voegelin's works that you will be reading, and if you're anything like me, this will be a very hard book to get through. The writing is very hard, and that is compounded by the fact that the concepts being discussed are so profound. If you get a vague idea of what Voegelin is trying to say after reading this book then you are doing just fine. I read this book first, and then read Modernity Without Restraint: The Political Religions, The New Science of Politics, and Science, Politics, and Gnosticism (Collected Works of Eric Voegelin, Volume 5), which includes this book along with two others related to modern gnosticism. I learned a lot more and understood Voegelin a lot more clearly the second time I read this work; so if you find yourself confused, keep on going and you'll get there...

A couple other of Voegelin's collected works that deal with the topic of modern gnosticism are: Published Essays: 1940-1952 (Collected Works of Eric Voegelin, Volume 10); Published Essays: 1953-1965 (The Collected Works of Eric Voegelin, Volume 11); and Published Essays: 1966-1985 (The Collected Works of Eric Voegelin, Volume 12). The last of those three deals with modern gnosticism the least, so start with the first two if you're looking for addition material.

Voegelin is a great thinker and his work is very challenging. Yet I think his ideas contain profound truths that moderns like us would do well to consider. Five stars for a classic piece of conservative political philosophy.

"The New Science of Politics" is the best short work in the oeurve of the great philosopher and political scientist Eric Voegelin. In it he describes, among other things, an effective methodology for studying the political experiences of peoples; the philosophical errors at the roots of scientism and positive social sciences, which seek to apply an irrelevant mathematical method to human behavior, which can only be comprehended on it's own terms; the existential underpinnings of virutally every revolutionary ideology the West has ever known in a spiritual revolt against the nature of human existence; and the dynamics of the kinds of political movements that arise from such experiences. This is nothing less that an attempt to ground human political life in an existential philosophy and to contruct from that understanding a method for rigourously and accurately studying those patterns of life. Voegelin's book is a milestone in human thought and a light in the abyssal darkness of Modernity.

Still, it is not without it's flaws. Voegelin persistently and completely misread Nietzsche, taking him to be an enemy of reality, when in fact Nietzsche rejected so mush of the Western tradition because he found in it a nihilist hatred for reality and existence that Voegelin also opposes. Likewise, Voegelin seems to take Christianity as either a sui generis phenomenon or a development out of Greek philosophy, when in fact it is neither. Christianity is the product of an evolution within the boundaries (and thus the experiences) of ancient Judaism. In order to understand Christianity as itself, it must be taken for the organic outgrowth from that background that it was. Voegelin thus persistently misunderstands the essence of Christianity, which he seems to confuse with semi-Platonic Augustinianism. Finally, Voegelin never seeks to analyze the metaphysical truthfulness of the existential experiences that he finds undergirding political life. He just takes it for granted that the quasi-Platonic cosmology that he adheres to is the true order of reality. This leaves him open to metaphysical criticism.

Nonetheless, this is a brilliant introduction to Voegelin's work and to the demented nature of modern ideology and it's roots in spiritual revolt.

Eric Voegelin New Science of Politics is a masterpiece of classical political theory. His analysis rested upon the idea that the modern political theorist have distorted the classical tradition in order to create a new manufactured political Enlightenment theory. The breakdown of philosophy into a series of political ideologies has created the modern tragedy of bizarre collection of distorted views of human nature. Essentially, Voegelin used the title New Science of Politics to rediscover the essential foundations of politics based on a theory of human rationalism. The current political theorist tend to view the political nature of representation based on a deformed psychological conception of modern man, i.e. Shelley's Frankenstein. The book gives new insights and sources to the essential characteristics of the good society. The book integrates the classical political theories of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle to create a philosophical context to analyze the intellectual "second reality" of the modern period. The idea of another "Heaven's Gate" in the post-modern era is contained within the political dialogue of modern nihilism.

I came to this book out of a desire to more clearly understand Liberalism. I appreciate Rush and the other conservative commentators but their analysis did not answer all of my questions. I wanted to understand its historical development. In an intuitive way, I knew that it was bad. I saw the contradiction in proclaiming a commitment to civil rights on one hand and promoting abortion and racial quotas on the other. I also saw that liberal elites lack a commitment to human freedom, that they seek to control rather than liberate the common people. I began a research project and found Voegelin. His work provided the conceptual framework that I was looking for. He identifies Liberalism as a malign political religion and places it within the context of other 'isms' and the larger problem of the decline of civilization.

Simply stated, the problem is that the civilizing force of Christianity and the classic Greek philosophers has been discredited by various activist ideologies, including, among others, Marxism, Nazism, Positivism, Militant Atheism, Feminism, Environmentalism and Liberalism, all of which derive from a modern form of Gnosticism, an ancient religious tradition that sees the material world as unbearably flawed. The principle gnostic trait that they all share is the idea that these flaws can be systematically remedied by placing into the hands of an altruistic and wise elite a mandate to redesign and replace, through the use of political power, all offending social structures. (Voegelin refers to this as 'immanentizing the eschaton' -- trying to bring perfect order into history through human action.) Because that idea proposes an end to our normal, perpetually troubled state of affairs, the gnostic sect in question lays claim to political power. Once it attains power, it requires the common people to act and think in a way that supports it's vision of the perfectly ordered society. But when the plans go awry, the gnostic elite passes the responsibility for it's failures on to the people and intensifies it's demands just as the cruel teamsters of old would simply whip their horses all the more when the burden of the cargo grew too much. Thus, the history of gnostic programs to create perfect social order is written in blood: judicial murder, forced indoctrination, death camps, war, planned starvation, slavery, profound spiritual and social alienation.

OBSERVATIONS:

*I am going to list some touchpoints where I think Voegelin's work connects to observed reality today. Reading this over, I can see that I use the words 'liberal' and 'gnostic' seemingly to refer to the same thing and I apologize for the confusion. In Voegelin's view, each of the 'isms' share the same general gnostic traits in common (e.g.: the claim of 'special knowledge') but contain particular traits (e.g.: liberal devotion to egalitarianism, feminist belief in the institutionalized victimhood of women, environmentalist end-of-the-worldism, etc.) not shared with the other isms. So whether I criticize liberals in particular or Gnosticism in general, I am criticizing both: Liberalism for its particular faults and Gnosticism for its role in providing the general template common to all isms. I also hope you will not be put off by the obvious nature of my observations. I'm trying, in my own way, to connect the obvious to Voegelin's argument not simply state the obvious. Finally, I lay no claim to any deep understanding of Voegelin. To really run him to ground, you need a very strong grip on the entire thread of western philosophy and religion which I do not have. But I do think that he has much to say to the reasonably educated layman.

1.) The counter-culture of the 1960's was based on a gnostic concept of a perfect world and the attendant political activism was a gnostic uprising. That uprising has succeeded and we now live in a world where declarations of common purpose toward an impossibly idealized future receive routine approval. Witness the passive acceptance, by the general public, of Obama's blatantly gnostic declaration: 'We will re-make the world'.

2.) The victory over the Nazis constituted the destruction of the power of one branch of Gnosticism but did no harm to the root. Indeed, contemporary gnostic activists have cleverly innoculated themselves against criticism by loudly proclaiming their antipathy to Nazism all the while pursuing the same gnostic agenda against civilized order and human rights. They have also learned from the impetuousness of their Nazi cousins and patiently consolidate conquered ground.

3.) The stated goals of Liberalism (racial harmony, etc.) are conceived in terms of a gnostic dreamworld and can never be achieved. Therefore the demands that liberal elites place on the common people to achieve these goals will never cease.

4.) From its origins in antiquity, gnostic sects have claimed to possess special knowledge unavailable to common people. For example, if a liberal makes the double claim that, on one hand, his movement is a promoter of civil rights but, on the other, that the rights of unborn children must not be recognized, he is expressing a claimed paradoxical truth that only members of his sect can understand. You cannot successfully reason with him over such a matter because you cannot address the 'special knowledge' component of his position. It is a religious, not a political conviction.

5.) The gnostic claim to special knowledge is an intellectual conceit. To the extent that an individual's personality is influenced by Gnosticism, he will tend to reject a direct explanation of reality in favor of one filled with indirection, complexity, paradox and irony. He will regard anyone who does accept reality at face value as a simpleton and will respond with mockery and dismissiveness rather than reasoned argument if such a person (e.g.: George W. Bush or Sarah Palin) were to press his or her view in the public forum.

6.) The gnostic claim to special knowledge is at work when liberals 'teach' the common people things that the common people have known all along. Knowledge held by the common people such as tradition is suspect to a gnostic elite but the same knowledge, once 'discovered' by them, becomes their knowledge and is disseminated as though it is new.

7.) If, as Voegelin claims, the gnostic sects are really political religions, then one would expect them to offer a utilitarian morality and they do. All of the gnostics sects recognize the attainment of the earthly dreamworld as the highest good and any actions that advance it are justified. Peasants are starved to death in the Ukraine for the good of society and favored groups in the US are given preferential treatment in the name of fairness.

8.) Since gnostic morality is political, it has no concept of honor. Privledged college students protest the raising of war memorials because recognizing the sacrifice of the fallen hurts their political agenda. They cannot understand that personal honor rises above politics. To a gnostic activist, nothing rises above politics.

9.) I have always assumed that the application of the word 'hope' to the liberal political agenda was really propaganda and, in large part, it is. However, after reading Voegelin, I am now convinced that the use of the term also parallels, in every way, the meaning of the word as it is understood by Christians: that it applies to something without which life would cease to have meaning.

10.) Since gnostic true believers place all hope in politics, it follows that they would interpret opposition not as part of the normal give and take of life but as a threat to everything they hold dear and therefore respond with hatred and violence.

11.) Although the implemented gnostic agenda results in widespread misery, gnostic elites themselves usually prosper. They also exempt themselves from the constraints that they impose on the common people. Here in America, liberal politicians like to enjoy a good smoke and swap jokes that ridicule gays and women. It is their way of asserting their status as multi-dimensional, heroically flawed human beings full of pathos and contradiction -- a status that lies in contrast to their view of the common people whose lives they regard as cardboard cutout projections of their own imagination, much as a child might regard a doll.

12.) Voegelin states that the penultimate stage (the last stage being economic and social collapse) of unchecked gnostic activism is always totalitarianism and the trend toward totalitarianism is plainly evident on most college and university campuses where those in power simply suppress dissent -- insofar as they can buck the forces of democracy and free expression that intrude from society at large.

13.) The gnostic trait of constructing systems is so ingrained in western thinking that those who oppose the gnostic sects almost always do so by offering alternative 'isms' such as Conservatism, Libertarianism or Objectivism. But Voegelin points out that ideology, even good ideology, cannot be the foundation of civilization. This has helped me to properly understand my own Conservatism as being an indispensible means of resistance and yet not the ultimate basis for the restoration of order. If real civilized order itself is to be restored, it must be on the basis of a deep understanding of what is good, true and beautiful (Voegelin names the Church and philosophy as the two sources of this understanding) and not simply a better ideology. I would argue that the failure to understand this is one of the reasons why Western Europe (which swapped Fascism for 'humane' Socialism) did not make a spiritual recovery after WWII.

14.) With Voegelin, I think that bloody conflict and/or totalitarianism can be avoided, if indeed they are avoided, only through a religious revival (an 'opening of the soul' in Voegelinian terms) that completely discredits the Left in the hearts of the people. A sudden mass understanding of the true meaning of abortion, most likely brought about by a courageous and talented leader, might be the basis of such an opening of the soul. However, I cannot see how civilized order can be restored without also bringing to justice those who are responsible for the murders of unborn children.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.) This is a short, six-chapter book but it is quite dense. If you get bogged down, get some traction by skipping to the last chapter and then come back to the beginning. Skim over the hard parts -- it is possible to wrap your brain around his thinking without nailing down everything.

2.) Get 'Eric Voegelin' by Michael Federici. Not only is it a good introduction to the man but it contains a glossary of Voegelinian terms which will help immensely while you are reading this book. I also recommend 'Revolt Against Modernity: Leo Strauss, Eric Voegelin & the Search for a Postliberal Order' by Ted V. McAllister.

3.) There is an excellent website (maintained by Bill McClain) called the 'Eric Voegelin Study Page' that cotains outlines of many of his works that you should find very helpful.

CONCLUSION:

Back in the Clinton years someone said that Reagan was a fireman who did the best he could. He poured all the water he had on the fire but it was simply not enough. Surveying the landscape, I'm afraid whoever said that was correct. However, it is also true that nobody can take your soul without your consent and, in the final analysis, the state of your soul and that of your loved ones is all that matters. I pray to God to keep my soul and pardon my sins, and I look to the next world for perfect justice. As far as future generations are concerned, there will be a great need for courage and faith but at some time down the road the eternal virtues (things like humility and modesty) will find their way back into the center of civilized order.

The New Science of Politics (NSP henceforth) is packed and packed with information, but unlike most philosophers, Voegelin keeps the length of the book short. This isn't to say the NSP lacks nuance, however. Voegelin's ideas are provocative, full of substance, and not your average every-day take on the political. Despite having read the book twice, I am still trying to get my mind around some of the theories and implications of said theories presented in NSP.

The amount of material and ideas that Voegelin interacts with in NSP is astounding, and is characteristic of his work. He draws from a multitude of different sources, theories, examples, etc.

However, I do have a word of warning. Voegelin comes from the continental tradition of philosophy and English is not his forst language. This means that the book will not be easy reading for us analytic Americans. I had to start over halfway through the book, but once I did, it was a much smoother and more enjoyable ride.

All in all, this book is worth the money if you are in to political theory.

Eric Voegelin's New Science of Politics is a masterpiece of classical political theory. His analysis rested upon the idea that the modern political theorist have distorted the classical tradition in order to create a new manufactured political Enlightenment theory. The breakdown of philosophy into a series of political ideologies has created the modern tragedy of a bizarre collection of distorted views of human nature. Essenitally, Voegelin used the title New Science of Politics to rediscover the essential foundations of politics based on a theory of human rationalism. The current political theorist tend to view the political nature of representation- which is based on a deformed psychological model of modern man, i.e. Shelley's Frankenstein. The book gives new insights and sources to the essential characteristics of the good society. The book integrates the classical political theories of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle to create a philosophical context to analyze the intellectual "second reality" of the modern period. The idea of another "Heaven Gate" and "Killing Fields" in the post-modern era is contained within the political dialogue of modern political nihilism.

Voegelin's thinking is important for our thinking more accurately, more effectively in our evolving the human story in the political dimensions of our life as well as the other dimensions. His thinking in many ways is parallel to and complementary to the important thought of Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy, whose works Amazon also carries. (Review by Robert Pollard).

Eric Voegelin was one of the most learned scholars of the 20th century. This work, which goes beyond what might be considered a "science of politics," is a fairly complete exposition of some of the central themes of philosophy, particularly how they relate to politics. Voegelin's thesis is (in part) roughly as follows: Christianity, particularly in its Augustinian version, dedivinzed the universe. In this process, man saw his limited, creaturely role. However, various revolutionary movements arose which sought to redivinize man and society. These movements were largely "gnostic" in orientation. This gnosticism can be seen in the revolutionary philosophies of our time, such as Comteianism, Marxism, and Nazism. "These Gnostic experiences . . . are the core of the redivinization of society, for the men who fall into these experiences divinize themselves by substituting more massive modes of participation in divinity for faith in the Christian sense." [p. 124.] One gnostic phenomenon Voegelin calls "immanitizing the eschaton" in which revolutionaries attempt to create utopia on earth. They often follow a version of Joachim's "three ages" scheme: for example, Comte's approach to history (theological, metaphysical, and scientific phases); the Marxian three stages of society (primitive, class-based, and communistic); and Nazism with its "Third Reich." [pps. 112-13.]

Voegelin's learning is nothing short of astounding. He is at ease discussing topics as diverse as ancient philosophy, the inscriptions of King Darius I, the Mongol Orders of Submission, and various Puritan literature.

There are a couple problems with this work. First, Voegelin has a rather freewheeling use of the term "gnosticism" which he seems to apply to just about everything he doesn't like. For example, the Protestant Reformation was "the successful invasion of Western institutions by Gnostic movements." [p. 134.] While gnosticism may be an appropriate way to describe various movements that sprung up at the time of the Reformation, this is an unfair characterization of Protestantism as a whole. [See Murray Rothbard's essay "Karl Marx as Religious Eschatologist" in The Logic of Action II.] In fact, Voegelin goes so far as to call Calvin's Institutes a "Gnostic Koran"! [p. 139.] He also sees gnostic elements in Paul and Isaiah, among others. Second, it's kind of hard to determine exactly what Voegelin's own views are. Although he has been praised by many Christian writers, he apparently wasn't a Christian in the traditional sense. He called himself a "mystic." [Michael Franz, Eric Voegelin and the Politics of Spiritual Revolt, p. 70 n. 11.] In fact, David Gordon, echoing R.J. Rushdoony, recently stated that Voegelin was himself a gnostic! [David Gordon, Mises Review, Fall 2000.]

Eric Voegelin's New Science of Politics is a masterpiece of classical political theory. His analysis rested upon the idea that the modern political theorist have distorted the classical tradition in order to create a new manufactured political Enlightenment theory. The breakdown of philosophy into a series of political ideologies has created the modern tragedy of a bizarre collection of distorted views of human nature. Essenitally, Voegelin used the title New Science of Politics to rediscover the essential foundations of politics based on a theory of human rationalism. The current political theorist tend to view the political nature of representation- which is based on a deformed psychological model of modern man, i.e. Shelley's Frankenstein. The book gives new insights and sources to the essential characteristics of the good society. The book integrates the classical political theories of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle to create a philosophical context to analyze the intellectual "second reality" of the modern period. The idea of another "Heaven's Gate" and "Killing Fields" in the post-modern era is contained within the political dialogue of modern political nihilism.