To understand the problem of natural right, one must start, not from the "scientific" understanding of political things but from their "natural" understanding, i.e., from the way in which they present themselves in political life, in action, when they are our business, when we have to make decisions. This does not mean that political life necessarily knows of natural right. Natural right had to be discovered, and there was political life prior to that discovery. It means merely that political life in all its forms necessarily points toward natural right as an inevitable problem. Awareness of this problem is not older than political science but coeval with it. Hence a political life that does not know of the idea of natural is necessarily unaware of the possibility of political science and, indeed, of the possibility of science as such, just as a political life that is aware of the the possibility of sicence necessarily knows natural right as a problem.

Leo Strauss, Natural Right and History

Syndicate

Syndicate content

User login

Navigation

wah wah wah

Tip o'teh hat to Andrew Sullivan.

So where to begin? Bill O thinks that Democrats and the left are hateful and that they demonise their enemies. We're apparently so mean spirited and awful.

I'm not really going to bother to engage this other than showing the perfect rebuttal. Sully points out that Rush Limbaugh had this graphic the other day:

Q.E.D.

UPDATE Stephen Colbert has a good discussion on this:

-dx