English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this article we focus on the true nature of a disparity asserted in Leo Strauss’s discussion of Machiavelli to amount to a virtue battle of sorts between Athens and Jerusalem. To convey this conflict Strauss is drawing both on his once Talmudic scholarship and his expertise in the history of political philosophy. We explore the stunning distortions, both theological and philosophical, in Strauss’s discussion that appears aimed to support a conservative position on leadership, which calls for the magnanimous few to exercise power over the many (the lowborn, the poor and the vulgar). Not only does Strauss distort the interpretation of the Torah with respect to Isaiah, but he also does the same for the whole sequence of important figures in the history of philosophy: Kant, Marx, Spinoza, the Sophists, and Socrates. In the end we put in question whether there really is a meaningful contrast to be drawn between Athens and Jerusalem, and we suggest that the entire exercise by Strauss in his essay on Machiavelli is mostly an opportunity to espouse some extremist, or hard line Nietzschean views.

Leo Strauss on Machiavelli: Athens vs. Jerusalem or ontological assumptions about human nature and power