The Political and Political Philosophy

 The Political and Political Philosophy 

Peter Schultz

 

The question is how should we understand politics or the political.

When one views politics much failure is visible. American

presidential politics is characterized by failures. For example, lIke's

Crusade for Peace, the Bay of Pigs invasion, the Vietnam War, the

Korean War, the Iranian hostage crisis, Iran-Contra, George Bush's

Iraq invasion, etc., etc., etc.

 

The question is: Should we view these failures melodramatically or

in a more banal way? Were they the result of conspiratorial politics

or of ignorance and incompetence?

 

One result of asking this question is illustrating that viewing politics

conspiratorially is a way of redeeming politics and politicians from

charges of being impotent, incompetent, or ignorant. Thus,

Machiavelli's conspiratorial view of the political is a way of affirming

the political and doing so in a way or to a degree that Plato and

Aristotle did not. Thus, it is not surprising that Machiavelli's political

philosophy culminates in a call to action, that is, in his call for the

unification of Italy and its redemption from the "barbarians.'

 

Whereas it might be said that Plato's and Aristotle's political

philosophy culminates in a call for contemplation; that is, in a call for

the contemplation of the political. And this call for contemplation

implicitly subverts calls for political actions, including and especially

calls for visionary political actions, such as creating "new modes and

orders," ala' Machiavelli.

 

The contemplation of the political leads to the clarification of the

limits of politics and of the political. Let me say: Machiavelli was

correct about the conspiratorial character of politics. But he was

wrong about the results of such conspiracies. By affirming the

political, Machiavelli pointed humanity toward a road ultimately

leading to ruin and failure, a destiny that "Machiavellians," but not

Machiavelli, ignore.