Such a long title for such a little book about the development of political theory that shaped Western Civilization! But your authors have much to say, and we have chosen the format of an online Website to introduce you to a subject that has been our life’s work.

The Development of Political Theory: A Critical Analysis was first privately published by Dr. Richard Bishirjian in 1978 to serve as a supplement to assigned readings in a history of political theory course that he taught at the College of New Rochelle from 1972 to 1980. As such, this little book was intended as a companion to the original texts assigned in a course that was required of Political Science majors at CNR. That course was based on a course on the same subject taught by Professor Gerhart Niemeyer at the University of Notre Dame, where for two years Dr. Bishirjian was Niemeyer’s Teaching Assistant.

In the thirty years since much has been written on each of the individual subjects of the original work, and Dr. Cheek and Dr. Bishirjian want to incorporate much that is worthwhile in ‘recent’ scholarship so that this book might once again be of assistance to students of Political Science. We have only begun, so postings to this site represent a work in progress. Still the foundations of the original book were basically sound, and we feel confident that this new home will attract the comments of our professional colleagues, and give our students greater insight into the central ideas that shaped Western Civilization.

The insight of Eric Voegelin is evident in our approach, and in this new edition especially we take account of Voegelin’s argument that magical speculation was a strong coterminous current in modern political thought. That will influence our discussion of modern political religions, and include research that has been done on Renaissance Hermeticism since the first seminal work on that subject by Francis Yates. And we want to return to the concept of Philosophical Anthropology that Voegelin explored to ‘place’ modern political theory, as it is attempted by Voegelin’s students, in its proper context.

That context assumes that politics is neither solely governed by economic interests, nor shaped entirely by historical causes beyond the control of participants in political life. The political ideas and opinions held by citizens actively shape a society's consciousness of what its economic interests are, and what forces may be beyond its control. Our ideas determine what we believe to be significant, possible, and right in politics. Students of political science properly hunger, therefore, for comprehensive approaches to political theory which place in theoretical perspective the major ideas which govern the world today.

Sixty years ago this desire was largely filled by the undergraduate liberal arts curriculum which gave to students a grounding in intellectual and cultural history. But today a college education no longer provides grounding in history or philosophy. The educational "reforms" that began in the 1960s have created an intellectual elite which is ignorant of most of what previously was the mark of an educated man. It is especially worrisome that at a time when politics has become more important in our daily lives, and the state more intrusive, we are less knowledgeable of the ideas which give it direction and shape. This work, written in response to what in effect is an intellectual vacuum, attempts to provide the essential background necessary for an intelligent view of contemporary intellectual culture. As such, however, we have felt it necessary to reject some assumptions traditionally held by authors of political theory texts.

Since the end of World War II, for example, several great scholars in Egyptology, Comparative Religions, and Old Testament studies have given political theorists an expanded and substantively improved understanding of the context within which political theory originated. Discoveries in neolithic Anatolia indicate that human communities thrived, and developed artifacts interpreting their order almost 40,000 years ago. A study of the development of political theory today, therefore, cannot simply begin with the Homer, the Presocratics, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Political theory, Eric Voegelin and others have argued, emerged in reaction against a more ancient mythic perspective of order which was prevalent throughout the ancient world. The nature of that revolution in thought must be comprehended if political theory itself is to be understood. For that reason, Chapter One begins with analysis of ancient, mythic concepts of political order.

More importantly, most traditional political theory texts are afflicted by the "historicist" approach of their authors. "Historicism" assumes that political ideas have validity only for the historical moment in which those ideas were created and that political theory does not have universal value, only individual psychological value for the creators of those ideas and those persons and communities which accept or live by them. A view such as this, of course, negates the critique of moral relativism in which political theory originated as the science of valid knowledge of political order. Works on political theory as they are written traditionally, with the exception of Eric Voegelin and Leo Strauss and their students, do not philosophically distinguish between higher and lower modes of theoretical discourse. We believe, on the contrary, that the history of political theory reveals a hierarchy of concepts of political order, some higher, others lower.

Following the work of Eric Voegelin, Dr. Cheek and Dr. Bishirjian attempt to show how political theory originates in, and is an expression of, experience of reality. Indeed, comprehending political theory as a discipline requires recovery of the philosophic mode by which reality is experienced, and interpreted. As a consequence, we reject the conventional assumption that political theory is an endeavor by which the philosopher expresses his private "vision" and attempts to prove it, or that the history of ideas is about the opinions of great thinkers. Political theory is not the making of logical fancies. In its original meaning it is the reflective act by which representative men articulate their experience of the constitution of being from the perspective of the participation of their souls, understood as a constituent aspect of reality. The political philosopher is therefore open to the reality of being of which he is a part and political theory is the act by which theorists give meaning to political reality from within. The "ideas" of a political theorist are, more accurately, "symbols" by which they articulate a common experience of reality, or truth. That is what the Declaration of Independence means by “self evident” truth. Unfortunately, much has been lost since 1776, and formalistic presentations of the "doctrines" of such ontologically oriented political theorists, as taught in most colleges and universities, distort our understanding of the activity of political theory. The political philosophy of Plato cannot be explained, for example, by reference to his "doctrines," but can be understood by coming to know the philosophic mode by which he sought the truth. That is the purpose of our examination, in Chapter Two, of Plato's symbols of political dialogue.

In Part Two, we attempt to show how the radical scepticism of Modern political theory led to the development of political doctrines from which the theological truths of Classical Greek-Christian political theory have been eliminated. We view this as a quali­tative decline in the development of political theory, and suggest the grounds on which this judgment can be substantiated. The concepts of the modern politi­cal theorists, to be sure, are continuations of the Western tradition of political theory, but they also represent a repudiation of the ontological orientation of their philosophic predecessors who created this discipline. By an examination of the consequences of this development, we show how modern political theorists reconstituted political order on new, desacralized, and thus secular ground. The con­scious attempt by Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau to replace the civil theology of the Christian West with a new view of order manifest in civil religions of their own creation, and composed of instruments expressive of a view of order autono­mous of any higher order or sanction, is a principal aspect of this development. And the political and social consequences of this shift in orientation can be seen in these uniquely modern aspects of contemporary life: the decline of authority; the concentration of power in a centralized, bureaucratically administered state; the experience of alienation and anomie, of rootlessness; and the decline of intermediate institutions which traditionally serve to retard the power of the state.

Lastly, in Part Three, we examine in detail the concepts and materials by which specialists in modern ideologies have argued that many modern political movements are uniquely religious. So far as we can determine, this is the first political theory text which incorporates this development in modern political science. The critical distinctions between political theory and political religions which we attempt to make in this section, and also our assessment that Modern political theory represents a decline in the development of political theory in the West, specify the meaning of the concept "critical" in the title of this study.

In order to maintain the scale of this study within restricted space, it was necessary to omit discussion of many political theorists covered in works three or four times the size of this. This limitation, however, is not without advantages. At the cost of omitting some individual political theorists, we have been forced to concentrate upon the unity of Classical-Christian political theory, the development of modern political religions, the nature of the conflict between cosmological myth and political theory, and the crisis of behaviorism, themes not treated in the standard histories of political theory.

This book was designed to supplement the undergraduate student's readings in the works of primary authors. It will be especially helpful to the graduate student in political theory or philosophy who wishes to supplement his readings by reference to a political theory "primer" in the best sense of the term: that is, a "primer" which deals with beginnings, the beginnings or elements of political theory. Our judgments about what these beginnings or elements may have been, however, are not intended to supplant the ideas of the student. They are made to assist and supplement his understanding. The conscientious student will always read the primary sources before reading the secondary ones. At the conclusion of each chapter a number of readings are suggested for those who wish to read further. Thus this work was conceived and written not for the lazy or unconscientious, but for those students and teachers alike who want to compare notes with someone who is traveling the same arduous but thoroughly enjoyable road.

With few exceptions, no claim to originality in the following pages can be made. Instead, an immense debt must be acknowledged to those masters of political theory, living and dead, who make it possible for us to engage in political philosophy, admittedly, like pygmies on the shoulders of giants.