Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

What book relating to Politics are you reading currently? Watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Time Tourist)
    I have a copy if this, but never got round to reading it, worth reading?
    Yes, I certainly found it worth reading.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    I haven't read much anarchist stuff up to now, because my theory is that you should come to your conclusions through your own thought rather than being convinced by the authority of some old dead bloke.
    Yea, obviously we can disregard with impunity all the work of the greatest thinkers - in fact we should do away with University and education all together.

    Oh wait actually the greatest thinkers read and studied the work of their predecessors and built on what they knew.

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on ye shoulders of Giants"
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littleshambles)
    I haven't read much anarchist stuff up to now, because my theory is that you should come to your conclusions through your own thought rather than being convinced by the authority of some old dead bloke. It's interesting how much what it says reflects my thought though. jacketpotato is right on this front; I was going to get round to reading something by that horror of horrors Ayn Rand, but I saw the thickness of Atlas Shrugged in the shop and thought, "**** that." I've still got Crime and Punishment to get through.
    No matter how clever you are, you can't think of every possible idea. Other people will always come up with new ideas and challenges to old ideas that you didn't think of
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I have just finished reading Simon Jenkins book on Thatcherism which was quite interesting.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Time Tourist)
    Yea, obviously we can disregard with impunity all the work of the greatest thinkers - in fact we should do away with University and education all together.

    Oh wait actually the greatest thinkers read and studied the work of their predecessors and built on what they knew.

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on ye shoulders of Giants"
    Yeah, because that's exactly what I said.

    OH WAIT actually no it ******* well isn't. If it was I wouldn't bother reading anything, would I? By the way, that sort of frivolous quoting of other people's rhetoric to augment your point is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about.

    (Original post by jacketpotato)
    No matter how clever you are, you can't think of every possible idea. Other people will always come up with new ideas and challenges to old ideas that you didn't think of
    Of course. But what I mean is that you shouldn't rely on other thinkers to come up with ideas for you. It would be very easy to read lots of books and let them come up with the arguments and simply assimilate them into your mind and then regurgitate them later.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littleshambles)
    Of course. But what I mean is that you shouldn't rely on other thinkers to come up with ideas for you. It would be very easy to read lots of books and let them come up with the arguments and simply assimilate them into your mind and then regurgitate them later.
    Like at school :yucky:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by necessarily benevolent)
    Like at school :yucky:
    Precisely :dry:
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    I haven't read much anarchist stuff up to now, because my theory is that you should come to your conclusions through your own thought rather than being convinced by the authority of some old dead bloke.
    Well your original remark seems to be saying - I don't read (books on anarchy) because I want to be an original thinker and come up with my own ideas - fine original thought is obviously essential if your going to have anything worthwhile to say at all. But since when was self imposed ignorance a pre-requisite for original thought? Or since when was studying a hindrance to it?

    The argument that they do seems to be embraced because if removes you from the burden of studying the work of 'dead old men' (note the contempt there)

    Then again like you said you do read...

    I quoted Newton because its rather nice maxim that expresses the truth of my point, not because I was trying to be stunningly original.
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by PolicyStory)
    I've just finished 'An appeal to reason - A cool look at Global Warming' by Nigel Lawson which I thought was excellent. It's short at only 100 pages but deals a great blow to those who think that government intervention is the best way to solve climate change, and deals damage to the credibility of man made global warming at all.
    Erm, isn't he a politician rather than a scientist? :lolwut:

    Regarding books: I'm reading Terror and Consent by Philip Bobbit.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kolya)
    Erm, isn't he a politician rather than a scientist? :lolwut:

    Regarding books: I'm reading Terror and Consent by Philip Bobbit.
    He was. :o: He certainly has some expertise in the area being an ex energy minister, I think he's done a good job at evaluating the arguements.

    As well as mentioning flaws in the science, he spends a section on the book presuming what is claimed by some scientists to be true, then comes to the conclusion that government interference will be ineffective, but also that the amount of poverty it will cause is much more devastating blow than climate change.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy the Anarchist)
    Is Audacity of Hope any good?

    I remember a tonne of people reading it at interview, but I haven't got through it yet.

    I'm not much of an Obama fan personally, I think he's overhyped to hell by certain sectors.

    I'm reading On Liberty (Again) by Mill

    The Threat to Reason by Dan Hind

    Government in the future by Noam Chomsky
    Chomsky ftw. :awesome:

    I liked Audacity of Hope very much. I found it refreshingly idealistic, more so because he actually wrote it himself.

    I'm an Obama fan. Sure, he's overhyped, but he's a mile better than Hillary would have been and tbh, I'm just glad to see a Democrat back in the White House.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laurah5498)
    Nothing atm.
    I'm not reading any politics/IR related books until the 21st August. Don't want to tempt fate xD
    Haha I love the good intentions of A-Level finishers about university reading, it doesn't ever happen...
    Seriously, two years into the degree and my books get used as doorstops more than they do as educational materials. Not that I mind really, reading International Relations stuff is like learning a foreign language- and all of it's absolute *****...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kolya)
    Erm, isn't he a politician rather than a scientist? :lolwut:

    Regarding books: I'm reading Terror and Consent by Philip Bobbit.
    Politics is a science...

    (Or so we're told week in week out in lectures...)
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I've got Hutchison's Scottish Politics in the 20th Century on my bedside table, although it's being juggled with two other (fiction) books. I bought it for 40p.

    I'm debating whether to shell out and get a copy of Daniel Hannan's Rebuilding Britain thing. When it comes to buying books, I'm quite cheap though: £10 is pretty steep by my standards.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littleshambles)
    Precisely :dry:
    Children shouldn't be taught anything then, and simply should be allowed to find the ideas for themselves. It worked before right?

    I'm reading Plato's Republic at the mo. It's not wholly politics based I suppose, but the other recent reads have been Audacity of Hope, Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto (Ironically the most irritating out of the lot!)
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Georgecopter)
    Children shouldn't be taught anything then, and simply should be allowed to find the ideas for themselves. It worked before right?
    Read my later posts and quit misrepresenting what I'm saying for ****'s sake. Who said anything about children? Or about education? In fact who said anything about this applying to anyone beyond me? Everyone else can do whatever they wish; I personally have had a tendency to end up believing, for a short while until I sort myself out, whatever arguments I've been reading at the time (not anymore, but I put down Utilitarianism a utilitarian, On Liberty a liberal, Exisentialism and Humanism an existentialist, the Rebel a rebel, etc etc. Although I didn't put down the Republic agreeing with any of it, thank God)

    As for children's education, children should at most be guided in exploration of ideas rather than "educated" or "taught", notions which are very disciplinarian and restrictive.

    (Original post by Time Tourist)
    Well your original remark seems to be saying - I don't read (books on anarchy) because I want to be an original thinker and come up with my own ideas - fine original thought is obviously essential if your going to have anything worthwhile to say at all. But since when was self imposed ignorance a pre-requisite for original thought? Or since when was studying a hindrance to it?
    Not self-imposed ignorance. Some ideas need to follow on from other intuitive principles to seem "right". It's not like I don't feel the need to ever read anything about anything. And it's not about "being an original thinker", it's just that if one is simply inclined to certain beliefs and then reads a lot of what other people have believed about them then one is in danger of arriving at those beliefs without proper examination and without use of one's own faculties.

    Of course you can argue that you can still use your own faculties to engage in consideration and analysis of others' work and I don't disagree. But AFAIC there's something very personal and to a degree intuitive about political persuasions, particularly since they derive directly from moral ones. I'm not arguing that you should never read anything, and I have every intention of reading a great deal about anarchism. I just think that at first you have to consider yourself, your thoughts and your relation to the world on a basic level and reading theoretical works can take you away from the reality of your own situation and your own thoughts.

    The argument that they do seems to be embraced because if removes you from the burden of studying the work of 'dead old men' (note the contempt there)
    Er, no. :indiff: That's what you'd like to think, but that actually has nothing to do with the validity of my position. I read a lot of political philosophy, most of which I disagree with, and the more I know why I disagree with it the more I know what it is I actually believe (that is it's probably more useful to read stuff you disagree with than stuff you agree with).

    Please quote me if you want a reply.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jacketpotato)
    Interestingly, most people ITT read books that have a similar political viewpoint to their own. Read something from the other side of the political spectrum - be challenged!
    Cognitive dissonance ftw.

    Looking for holiday-books. I'm not sure I could handle the Communist Manifesto, but Das Kapital is a possibility.

    David Friedman's "Machinery of Freedom", or Heinlein's "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress", or possibly "A Splendid Exchange"

    Any suggestions?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sconzey)
    Cognitive dissonance ftw.

    Looking for holiday-books. I'm not sure I could handle the Communist Manifesto, but Das Kapital is a possibility.

    David Friedman's "Machinery of Freedom", or Heinlein's "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress", or possibly "A Splendid Exchange"

    Any suggestions?


    The Communist Manifesto is a lot easier to read than Das Kapital, and shorter. :o:

    Books like The Armchair economist I've found, while not very challenging, have some interesting and funny observations.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The Communist Manifesto isn't really a good introduction into Communism - it's merely a propaganda leaflet.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PoliceStory)
    Books like The Armchair economist I've found, while not very challenging, have some interesting and funny observations.
    Definitely, I've read it -- and More Sex is Safer Sex, and both of Harford's: The Logic of Life and The Undercover Economist, as well as Freakonomics. :P

    My girlfriend has Thomas L Friedman's "The World is Flat" on her bookshelf, thinking of stealing that.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Have you ever participated in a Secret Santa?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.