What three books on political philosophy should I read?

What if I want to read political theory that talks about how public discourse has been subverted for the sake of maintaining control, or political theory that talks about the growth of corporate-political complexes? i.e., things like Orwell's Politics and the English Language and Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent. I'm tired of reading shit about what is ideal when nobody talks about what is real, which is subversion of every idealized system.

can't read theory of justice without reading anarchy, state and utopia

reminder that this is an anti-politics board

nicomachean ethics
the human condition
after virtue

this

Anything from Norberto Bobbio

Presuming you will read more than three, the next big three it would make most sense to read would be Locke's Second Treatise (First is skippable unless you're an academic), Rousseau's Discourses, and Kant's Groundwork (not especially political, but necessary for Hegel and Marx and most that follow them).

Let me more clear:
>Left and Right
>General Theory of Politics

Both from Bobbio.

Essay on the Generative Principle of Political Constitutions by Joseph de Maistre

What is so special about Bobbio? I see his name being floated a lot more around here lately.

forget all of this, and just read Theory of Justice, and then right afterward read Anarchy, State, and Utopia

They are/were the cutting edge of mainstream political philosophy.

Based on what you are missing, the most important books I would recommend are:

The Social Contract by Rousseau
Reflections on the Revolution in France by Burke
The Marx-Engels Reader

However, I would suggest that you have much more to read after that.

I think you have that backwards user.

He is perfect, that is all...

No. That is not all. Either make a case for him or I will not bother with his works.

David Icke liked my OKCupid profile. Have had a soft spot for him ever since.

History of the Peloponnesian War

Which translation?

i always sincerely doubt that the people who make these images have read all the books in them. Its such a weird selection if you actually care for the subject, but theyre kind of the best know book of each century up until now.

the art of the deal

MacIntyre fucked them in the garage. Directly under the statue of Aristotle.

Another way to tell is that these images always include Plato, but never include Plato's Laws

ignore this it's absolute trash typical of a dilettante who browses Veeky Forums i fact you may as well ignore the rest of the thread too

read Hobbes again

did schmitt understand hobbes?

Proudhon: What is Property?
Engels - Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
Engels - Origin of the family, private property and the state
Marx - Contribution to the Critique of political economy
Marx - Das Kapital vol. 1 & 2
Luxemburg - Accumulation of Capital
Lenin - State and Revolution
Kropotkin - Conquest of Bread
Gilles Dauve - Eclipse and Re-emergence of the communist movement

Marx, Foucault, Wittgenstein, Lyotard, Rorty

Eclipse and Re-emergence is a really good book. I don't see the point of reading Accumulation of Capital and Capital Vol 1, since Capital covers most of the things there.

user...easy on the lefty/pol/

Read bookchin

Bookchin is respectable and I have been considering reading him for some time.

Well, what would you recommend instead?

God Stalin was such a memer

The Hackett Lattimore edition I believe has a better translation where as the Landmark one has better maps and notes. Most people on here choose the Landmark but I don't believe the Crawley translation is respected.

What the hell kind of question is that? Schmitt was a genius, one of the most significant contributors to political thought in his century.

Thanks. What do you think of the Hobbes translation? I think it would be interesting to examine for its perspective through the translation.

this list should read as a primer of which over-exaggerated books you never need to touch in order to understand contemporary politics

did he understand hobbes?

Of course he understood Hobbes you idiot.

>Of course he understood
ok but do you understand hobbes and schmitt both to make this statement

Bertrand de Jouvenel - On Power
Vilfredo Pareto - The Mind and Society
Gaetano Mosca - The Ruling Class
Robert Michels - Political Parties

This is the basic literature for you to start seeing politics as it is instead of how writers want it to be.

Google Murray Bookchin

This list will actually give you a surprisingly decent background on western political theory. It's (perhaps too) heavily weighted towards Enlightenment thought, but it's a pretty solid list.

Ignore and - they are wrong.

There are better translations of every Landmark edition text (Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, Arrian), but for the most part the translations in the Landmark editions are *good enough*, and the maps, side-notes, and ancillary information they provide more than compensate for not using a really first-rate translation.

They aren't really wrong though.

The century of the self (documentary)

What the fuck are you on about idiot? This is basically the reading list for a History of Political Though class I had. Bacon(New Atlantis) is the only thing missing and we skipped foucault.

First, read Hume's disemboweling of all political philosophy to understand why everything written before Hume is worthless.

Then, read Rawls to understand why only things written from Rawls onwards is worth reading.

Basically everything else is useless outside of its historic value. If you're reading for an understanding of philosophical history, ignore this. If you're reading to understand political philosophy itself, then as I said, Hume and Rawls.

As an aside, a lot of old Stoicism, Confucianism, and Sun Tzu/Miyamoto Musashi style philosophy touches on politics and provide refreshing new angles to view it from.

Basically any book considered "a mirror for princes" is useful for finding new political perspectives: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirrors_for_princes

tell me more

>reading unironically

Haha keep telling yourself that.

Spooky spookman is unironically the only political philosopher you need to read.

You're a total idiot

What do you mean by this? Also, what are your political beliefs in a nutshell?

You're trying to discuss political science without Hobbes. Would you like some help with that?

Political Philosophy*

(Though Hobbes is a foundational thinker for Political Science's context and offers one of the best discussions of the reasons for existence of the state)

Unironic agreement. Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy is necessary reading for anyone who wants a more informed idea of Democracy, Liberalism, or Populism/Fascism.

Recommend reading it alongside Sorrel's Reflections on Violence.

Not like he gave bad suggestions for the field. This is a reasonable annex to a more politically neutral foundation of political theory.

Only thing that really irks me is that it should be paired with some post-Marxist thought that critiques it. (I.E. Sorrel), or should include more of a focus on the problems of Marxist economics. (Consider Smith's Wealth of Nations, a book that still rewards reading even today - and implicitly supports some Marxist conclusions; as well as Braverman's Labor and Monopoly Capital which argues that alienation is more likely to be found in the organization of capital, rather than 'who owns it'.)

Good suggestions, second on Foucault in particular. Would suggest adding Issiah Berlin's "Two Kinds of Liberty" and "Political Ideas in the Twentieth Century". The latter essay is linked below and I cannot recommend it enough if an user has a mixed interest in contemporary history, political philosophy, and sociology.

foreignaffairs.com/articles/1950-04-01/political-ideas-twentieth-century

fuck, just realized it was paywalled. Anyway, just search the title and filetype:pdf in google if anyone is interested

Absolutely. The Biggest Secret is great shit. This was from back when he openly theorized about the Reptilian Agenda and wasn't holding back at all.

Nowadays he seems to play to his audience, downplaying the reptilian stuff cause most people can't handle that shit. Its a shame, I really miss balls-to-the-wall David Icke.

bump

Anyone find it yet/

Who is this cute?

Locke, Rousseau and Marx.

2/3 right ain't bad.

bump

it's fucking beautiful tbqh

wow that's an impressive education you've got user! did you teach yourself?

Believe me it shows.

yeah that makes sense. I should be able to understand 4000 years of thought in political philosophy by reading a handful of discredited jews.

I suggest Derrida Specters of Marx. I found it interesting and engaging.
Uhh why did I use those words? I am ashamed.
It was totes interesting and engaging though.

Murray Bookchin is pretty good even if he has become a meme.

Why does this post make me chuckle so? I feel like his thought needs some more serious exploration and study by contemporary philosophers.

Why is he a meme exactly?

Of course I understand both Hobbes and Schmitt in order to make this statement.

'political philosophy' is hot bullshit. Foremost, most of what you will be suggested is just ideological reinforcement.

Not entirely sure how to take this, but I presume that it's dripping with irony.

Is it a difficult book?

I would like to party with her for an evening or more. She seems to know where the fun is.

Come to Voronezh.

What's it like there? I'm intrigued.

Who is she? Source?

Is it even possible to jump into Kant and Hegel like that? Kant without the rationalists and Hegel without a good understanding of Kant and and his prior works?

Why it is important to read Hobbes and the rest of the ancient dudes first-hand? Surely it's possible to learn all the same ideas from modern, more concise secondary sources.

Beceause Hobbes provides the framework of political terminology with in the modern state.

Kant
Hobbes
Schmitt

>first-hand

its not.

>Surely it's possible to learn all the same ideas from modern, more concise secondary sources.

yup.

leviathan is 400 pages long . 75% is obtuse gibberish that's irrelevant to my interests.
I have a day job.

You need to go back.

lol
when i read Hobbes for the first time, i thought the same thing

Thank you for reminding me about Berlin's more concise "Two Concepts of Liberty." I've read most if yhe suggestions in this thread, and honestly I'd say Berlin recaps modern/enlightenment develooments better than anyone (which I find to be more relevant than the start with the greeks memes because the greeks were either busy critiquing specific regimes which are virtually irrelevant now or laying the groundwork for thei shitty metaphysics). On that note, I'm interested in finding the strongest possible conservative arguments for things such as freedom and equality. Anyone got any recs?

For my two cents, I'll just recommend the basic bitch poli sci syllabus i followed (with some amendments):
The Politics
The Republic
Political Selections from City of God
Political Selections from the Summa
The Social Contract
Leviathan
Two Treatises on Government
Democracy in America
The German Ideology
Then recap with the Isaiah Berlin piece. This will get you going for Western political thought to the point you can pick up more concept specific authors like Mill, Arendt, and Rawls.

>I have a day job.
Me too. I guess the real reason is that reading Hobbes is an act of conspicuous consumption that wagecucks like us can't afford.

>The German Ideology
>unironically recommending Marx's nerdrage against Stirner
Yeah this is for basic bitches.