The Nihilism Nexus: Connecting Leo Strauss to Modern American Political Dynamics
Exploring the Shadows of Ideology: From Weimar's Despair to America's Divisions
On February 26th, 1941, German political philosopher Leo Strauss delivered a lecture at the New School for Social Research in New York titled "German Nihilism". In this lecture, Strauss not only dissected the specific malaise of nihilism during Germany's interwar period but also presciently anticipated the emergence of similar ideological trends in various contexts. His exploration into the origins and consequences of nihilism digs deep into the socio-political fabric of pre-World War II Germany, yet resonates strikingly with the left and right wings of today’s political spectrum. In this analysis, I aim to delve into Strauss’s lecture to demonstrate how this same nihilistic spirit that once gripped Germany now pervasively comes to possess the contemporary West.
Nihilism Through Strauss’s Lens
Leo Strauss's examination of nihilism is not merely a historical recounting but a philosophical deep dive into the moral and existential anxieties that characterized Germany between the two world wars. Nihilism, as Strauss articulates, is not an all-encompassing destruction but a targeted rejection of modern civilization's moral and ethical frameworks. This is a critical distinction that sets the stage for understanding the specific nature of German nihilism:
"German nihilism is not absolute nihilism, desire for the destruction of everything including oneself, but a desire for the destruction of something specific: of modern civilization." — Leo Strauss, German Nihilism (1941)
This definition and form of nihilism, according to and given by Strauss, stems not from a desire to eradicate all existence, but dawns from a profound moral dissatisfaction with the prevailing order, which is seen as decadent, morally corrupt, and spiritually bankrupt. A critique which feels eerily similar to today.
On the Left, there is a burgeoning disenchantment with liberal democracy, economic inequality, and the pervasive influence of corporatism. This has led to a rejection of traditional American ideals — ones which derive from the era of the Founding Fathers and the post-World War II era — viewing them as relative; thus, each person becomes his own arbiter of truth and morality; thus, every man is his own Priest.
On the Right, we observe the opposite phenomenon. While the contemporary Left maintains a tighter grip on the socio-political moment, it is not only they who are dissatisfied with the current moment, but too the Right. The Right’s dissatisfaction with Liberalism is not too dissimilar to that of the young German Nihilist. Safety, security, comfortable self-preservation, at the expense of all else. A subjugation to political and corporate oligarchy, and a lack of identity and moral and cultural unity. On one hand you could say they themselves are the young German Nihilist — Fascist —but on the other hand you could say they were something else entirely; American Nihilist.
But this analysis leaves room for a third party; that of Donald Trump and the rising American Populist; Absolute American Centrism. Where the American Populist situate themselves is as a ring encircling the status-quo of American political oligarchy and corporatism. From one particular point of view, they are American Nationalists — America First — but from another point of view, internationalists. They tow the nuanced line of both traditional Democratic and Republican values; in this sense they are rather Pragmatic. Immigration is bad because it hurts the American, but we shouldn’t be complete isolationist, rather immigration ought to be controlled.
The critiques and criticism posited by the Left, the Right, and American Centrist leave them open to the possibility of being classed as American Nihilist. The brief summary only merely touches the surface to their critiques and criticisms of the contemporary moment, not taking in to consideration their dissatisfactions with the moral and ethical decay of culture.
The Absence of Great Duty
The most profound point of examination on German Nihilism by Leo Strauss in my estimation is his analysis on the role of education and the intellectual environment at the time. One which he argues failed the German youth by not engaging seriously enough with their deep seated moral and existential concerns. Educators and opponents of nihilism inadvertently pushed these young minds towards and to seek more radical ideologies which could remedy their agony and existential horrors.
"Unfortunately, the belief in old-fashioned teaching declined considerably in post-war Germany... The adolescence I am speaking of were in need of teachers who could explain to them in articulate language the positive, and not merely destructive, meaning of their aspirations." — Leo Strauss, German Nihilism (1941)
Strauss moved on to emphasize the necessity of an educational approach; one that not only confronts, but earnestly engages with the philosophical underpinnings of student discontents. But where is this to be drawn in correlation to our contemporary moment? Everywhere within our youth.
It can be seen extensively across the spectrum of social media the contempt to which older generations have of and do not understand the existential angst and the absence of identity or purposeful meaning in Millennials, Zoomers, and Alphas.
Rather than engaging earnestly with the young American Nihilist, the American elders demean them and shrug off their grievances with contemporary culture and politics with empty bromides and platitudes; equating it with their youth and snowflakism.
“Young people don’t want to work hard, or they don’t work hard enough,” “Young people are too soft,” “Young people are too entitled; they want everything handed to them,” and a host of other running issues pertaining to cultural and political developed and developing LGBTQIA+, abortion, geopolitics, racial justice, workers’ rights, etc.
This of course reflects what Strauss himself alleged in his lecture on German Nihilism.
It is fitting and natural that the young right-wing anti-liberals want action. It would be dereliction of duty and a sign of incompetence for their elders not to understand that and instead to offer them pathetic bromides that reinforce among the youth the impression that the old and ugly elders are hopelessly out of touch. At least, that’s what Strauss argued in 1941 when he said that the worst and most dangerous thing for the young German nihilists, those that rejected civilization and hated the leftist version of the future, was progressive teachers who didn’t understand the positive significance of their youthful “no” unaccompanied by a coherent “yes.” Old-fashioned teachers undogmatic enough to comprehend what the young people wanted, and why, could have helped them see that the alternative to the bourgeois life and the communist vision need not be the destruction of civilization. But there were no such teachers, and the students were further radicalized by clueless progressives. — Michael Millerman, The Virtues of Right-Wing Anti-Liberalism
The chasm between the perspectives of American elders and the existential realities faced by the younger generations is stark. Millennials and Gen Z are often castigated by their seniors as aloof or fragile, their discontent dismissed as youthful naïveté. Yet beneath these accusations lies a palpable sense of existential dread—a fear of entrapment within an unfulfilling system, a crisis of identity, and a yearning for a sense of higher purpose that seems elusive in the modern world. This is not mere youthful rebellion; it's a genuine quest for meaning in a world that seems increasingly devoid of it.
Millerman's insights ring true: in the absence of guides who can traverse the chasm of understanding, the young find themselves pushed to the ideological edges. Some drift towards a utopian vision of communism, seeking solace in collective identity and a promise of purpose. Others veer right, towards a vision of fascism, seduced by the siren song of order and a return to perceived traditional values. In both cases, they are propelled by educators and ideologies of the past—echoes of an old world grappling to find resonance in the new.
As we witness this fragmentation of generational understanding, the need for a new kind of mentorship becomes clear—one that acknowledges the validity of the youth's dread without consigning them to the paths of extremism. We must seek educators and leaders who can recognize the youth's quest for identity and meaning as legitimate and who can offer constructive avenues for addressing these existential concerns. Only then might we hope to heal the rift and guide all towards a future where the specter of nihilism is dispelled not by radicalization but by renewed purpose and a shared vision for the common good.
Moral Protest and the Contemporary Moment
In today’s discourse, we observe a palpable parallel to the German nihilism that Leo Strauss analyzed. Like the nihilists of Weimar Germany who rejected the decaying order without a cohesive vision for the future, both the contemporary American Left and Right exhibit nihilistic tendencies. These groups challenge the existing political and cultural paradigms but often without a clear alternative or constructive path forward, echoing the existential and moral frustrations that fueled the young German nihilists.
This modern "city of pigs"—a term borrowed from Plato and utilized by Strauss to critique a society excessively focused on material comfort and hedonistic pursuits—manifests vividly in today's culture. On social media, life’s complexities are often glossed over for the sake of 'shareability,' reducing profound experiences to mere transactions for likes and retweets. This substitution of depth for superficiality breeds a spiritual malaise, visible in the rising mental health crises and the pervasive search for or creation of identity in an overwhelmingly digital existence.
"What they hated was the very prospect of a world in which everyone would be happy and satisfied, in which everyone would have his little pleasure by day and his little pleasure by night, a world in which no great heart could beat and no great soul could breathe." — Leo Strauss, German Nihilism (1941)
In Strauss's analysis, nihilism is not merely the destruction of the old for its own sake, but a profound reaction to perceived decay and a lack of meaningful alternatives. Today, we see similar threads of dissatisfaction and disillusionment weaving through the fabric of American political discourse, both on the Left and the Right.
On the Left, there is a vehement critique of traditional structures and values, which is often perceived as a push toward an undefined, radically different order. This drive can manifest in the pursuit of dismantling existing social norms and institutions without a clear blueprint for the future, mirroring the nihilistic impulse to reject the present without a definitive plan for what should follow.
Conversely, on the Right, there is a nostalgic longing for a return to a past ideal—a rejection of modern complexities and ambiguities for a simpler, more decisive framework of governance and society. This too can be seen as a form of nihilism, in the sense that it seeks to obliterate the current state of affairs in favor of an idealized, often unattainable past.
Both these perspectives, while ostensibly opposite, share a common nihilistic foundation—they are reactions against the current state of affairs, rooted in a deep-seated dissatisfaction, but without a coherent or constructive vision. This is where Strauss's insights into German nihilism become particularly salient. Just as the young Germans of the Weimar Republic felt unmoored by a society they saw as morally and spiritually bankrupt, so too do many contemporary Americans feel alienated by a political landscape that seems increasingly incapable of addressing existential concerns.
"Nihilism, understood in our sense, is a judgment that the modern world, including all existing alternatives to it, is worthless." — Leo Strauss, German Nihilism (1941)
As we delve deeper into these parallels, it becomes apparent that the challenge is not merely to identify these nihilistic trends but to understand their origins and implications. By tracing these threads back to their philosophical and existential roots, we can begin to comprehend the broader societal disillusionment that fuels such radical sentiments.
Beyond Nihilism: A Call to Rediscover Our Philosophical Roots
In addressing the nihilistic trends evident in contemporary American discourse, we must recognize that the solutions may lie well beyond the political frameworks of Liberalism or even the emerging theories like Alexander Dugin's Fourth Political Theory. To truly navigate the existential crises of our times, a profound reengagement with the philosophical foundations of both Western and Eastern thought is imperative. This journey must extend back to the thinkers of Antiquity, the Medieval, and the Renaissance periods—philosophers who shaped our understanding before the dominance of Hobbesian political philosophy.
The critique of Liberalism and the ability to move beyond the Six Political theories requires us to revisit and acutely engage with the vast spectrum of thought offered by the Romantics, Nietzsche, Traditionalists, and even figures often viewed with scorn, such as Karl Marx. Moreover, we must wrestle with Martin Heidegger's inquiries into the meaning of Being which in many ways can open new avenues to understanding our existential and national identity crises. What does it mean to 'Be', and specifically, what does it mean to 'Be American' in today’s context?
Equally, exploring Eastern philosophies and traditions provides a rich vein of wisdom that can offer alternative perspectives on community, identity, and the nature of existence—areas where the West has often sought material solutions to deeply spiritual problems. Engaging with concepts from Buddhism, Taoism, or Hindu philosophies about balance, harmony, and the interconnectedness of life could provide vital insights into addressing the spiritual malaise of our times.
Our nation, founded by and on the radical Liberal Protestant ethos of Anglo-Saxon and Germanic settlers, must revisit these roots to understand the currents that have shaped its political, cultural, and philosophical landscape. By engaging with these foundational ideas, and integrating Eastern philosophical insights, we can begin to construct a framework that not only critiques the present but also offers a substantive vision for the future. Additionally, we must consider the beginnings of this nation's founding and reengage on a deep philosophical level with the Anti-Federalists—not just the Federalists—to fully grasp the range of foundational perspectives that have influenced American political thought.
As Strauss’s reflections on German nihilism remind us, confronting the moral and spiritual dimensions of human life is crucial to avoiding a descent into a vacuous existence marked by fragmentation and radicalization. This task requires us to integrate insights from both ancient philosophy and critiques of modernity, thereby fostering a society resilient in its depth and committed to a rejuvenated sense of the common good.
This engagement is not merely a return to the past but an active dialogue with it, aimed at informing and elevating our present discussions. Thus the question arises: How do we reconcile all these differences and disputes? Is violent conflict an inevitability? Should the U.S. reconvene into a Confederacy, or should it fragment into nation-states or conglomerated unions akin to Eastern and Western Rome, or Prussia? What role does Absolute American Centrism and the American Populists play in this scenario? Are they the true inheritors of the American spirit?
Yet, if through self-reflection we cannot determine what it means to be American, must we move beyond the existing paradigms of political theory—beyond Liberalism, Communism, Fascism, Libertarianism, Anarchism, and even the Fourth Political Theory. Where do we go from here? These are the questions we will explore in the next installment of this discussion.