I feel like this has been a concept for a long time within imperialist studies, but I can’t find it. Surely it’s a thing. What would you call it?

EDIT: thanks for all the brilliant responses

  • Wertheimer [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I feel your pain. Don’t tell anyone, but Leo Strauss and his crowd were a major influence on the way I’ve approached Greek texts, and when they let their mask slip it’s a serious buzzkill. In his lectures on the Symposium Strauss discusses the atmosphere in Athens after the mutilation of the Herms and says something like “It was a lot worse than McCarthyism, because McCarthy did nothing wrong.”

    Hanson has a hilarious essay in which he insists that the Iraq invasion wasn’t going to be the U.S.’s Sicilian Expedition, because it was a reasonable response to September 11.

    Donald Kagan was a huge neo-con but was probably the most influential American classicist of recent vintage who made a special study of Thucydides. I don’t know of any reason to distrust his military analysis but on matters of political interpretation I’d default more to Croix, de Romilly, or scholars who prioritized legal and literary texts, like Douglas Macdowell or Nicole Loraux, the latter of whom had wonderful books on amnesty and an account of the funeral oration as a genre. Finally, it’s not composed entirely of winners, but the Brill Companion to Thucydides has some very helpful essays providing both contemporary context as well as Thucydidean exegesis.

    Perhaps also of interest - Page duBois’s Trojan Horses: Saving Classics From Conservatives, which discusses Hanson specifically.