3
The purpose of this article, therefore, is to demonstrate 1) how IR theory has
matched its pattern of development to that of modern political philosophy, noting the
striking similarities between the successive theoretical moves made in each discourse,
and 2) then to consider the significance of this similarity for current IR scholarship. If,
after all, one views the modern philosophical project as arriving at a particular theoretical
destination, and IR theory is moving swiftly and somewhat unwittingly toward a similar
epistemological rendezvous, then an understanding of these parallel trajectories is
essential for IR theorists to understand.
In order to make the comparison of discourses, this article considers the progress
of modern political thought from a particular point of view, namely one that is informed
by the work of Leo Strauss. The usefulness of Strauss in this regard is two-fold. First,
because Strauss views the project of modern political philosophy as fundamentally
flawed – based as it is on the rejection of teleological considerations – this present
analysis can serve not only to note the similarities between modern political philosophy
and IR theory, but, because of those similarities, it can also serve as a critique of IR
theory generally, from a Straussian perspective. At the same time, using Strauss in this
manner is an interesting way to begin to familiarize IR scholars with Strauss’ work. The
importance of such familiarity has recently been made plain, due to an array of news
articles suggesting a connection between Strauss’ thought and the grand designs of
President Bush’s neo-conservative foreign policy team. Thanks to these reports, IR
scholars have come to realize that Strauss is relevant to their work, yet little has been
written to give them a better sense of what Strauss is about and how his work might be
applied to IR scholarship. Thus, while the use of Strauss here should not be taken as a
Convention