/lit/ - Literature

carl schmitt

>>1839165

What form of politics? Political theory? World politics? American? European?

Gore Vidal: United States Essays 1952-1992
Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers
Lost Rights (Bovard)
Postwar (Judt)

The Prince - Machiavelli
A Modest Proposal - Jonathan Swift
Arguing with Idiots - Glenn Beck
How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must) - Ann Coulter
Atlas Shrugged - Ayn Rand
Going Rogue - Sarah Palin

>>1839172
yeah this

"politics" is such a broad topic

>>1839174

>>1839174
one of these is a good book to read

well okay ann coulter is pretty entertaining but only machiavelli is actually wortwhile

>>1839174
In case you can't tell, I'm laughing in here

>>1839174
+1 for Machiavelli
-9000 for neo-conservative tripe

>>1839174
dude, you forgot Mein Kampf

>>1839174
Jesus Christ that is a horrible reading recommendation.

They may appeal to the most idiotic and populist of the bunch though. Including The Prince.

Anyways, read:

Manufacturing Consent
Anything Noam Chomsky
Murray Rothbard books
Zbiegnew Brzenski

You got the leftist/anti imperialist opinion, the right pro capitalist side and the evil imperialist side.

If you can, you can try reading Das Kapital or Wealth of Nations. Both insanely old but you can spot some common themes and elements that persist.

Take it back to the basics OP and then you can take one of the paths offered in this thread.

The Republic.

Read it closely

History is pretty important to politics, so I'd recommend
The Wealth and Poverty of Nations
Utopia in Power
Guns, Germs, and Steel
The Growth of European Civilization
The Harper Encyclopedia of Military Biography

>>1839186
>They may appeal to the most idiotic and populist of the bunch though. Including The Prince.

sorry the prince is awesome and machiavelli is awesome

Plato - The Republic
Machiavelli - The Prince
Thomas Paine - The Rights of Man
Thomas Hobbes - Leviathan
The Communist Manifesto - Marx and Engels
Anything by Mao, Guevara
Anything by William E. Connolly

>>1839192

This but maybe cool down after reading Leviathan.

Richard Hofstadter, The Paranoid Style in American Politics
George Lakoff, Moral Politics
Joe Bageant, Deer Hunting With Jesus
Hannah Arendt, On Revolution
Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition
Carl Schmitt, Political Theology
Raymond Aron, L'Opium des intellectuels
Thomas Schelling, Arms and Influence
Isaiah Berlin, The Proper Study of Man

Also, in general, the liberal/conservative political theory corpus - Hobbes/Locke/Burke/Mill/Paine - and the great classics - Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Thucydides, Machiavelli - will stand you in good stead. And reading Marx is probably a good idea at some point. Also John Rawls. My recommendations, by the way, are biased by my basically liberal viewpoint. But this should stand you in pretty good stead.

>>1839186
This. I admit The Prince is outdated. Still earns its space in my shelf.

Start with pic related for macro view.

Welp, the reputation holds true.
Thank you, /lit/. I'll get crackin'.

>>1839202

OP so casually accepts the burden of 30+ texts that would take any intelligent fellow 20 years to understand and apply. He might have been the most intelligent man to stroll through these parts.

>>1839205
Verily; today we have witnessed the casual reading habits of a god.

We delivered. Now I want to see OP's nostalgia folder - /lit/ edition.

WER NOSTALGIA PRESIUS

>>1839188

Will you stop recommending this to unsuspecting innocents?

What is it with you and that proto-fascist?

Read some Badiou if you want to get a Marxist view, read Metapolitics in particular.

Some Kant, Strauss, some Parenti wouldn't be bad either.

>>1839205

I can only assume OP looks similar to this.

>>1839227
>Will you stop recommending this to unsuspecting innocents? What is it with you and that proto-fascist?

lol. whatever your opinion of it, Republic is a tremendously important work in political philosophy, stop being an ass

also, which strauss are you recommending here?

>>1839234

So is Pat Buchanan's personal diary.

I was referring to Leo Strauss.

>>1839240
>I was referring to Leo Strauss.

ahahahahahahahahaha

listen, i have mad respect for strauss and i think he's super important. but (1) to diss on plato but then recommend strauss is almost perverse (2) to call plato a psuedo-fascist and then recommend leo strauss beggars belief

>>1839240

I would of recommended Leo Strauss after he reads the Republic.

>>1839245
yeah i was thinking of recommending strauss (probably natural right and history) but dude is mad complex and subtle, and really only relevant if you're very into political theory

my roommate is actually doing a BA on strauss

>>1839243

How is it perverse?

inb4 Strauss was a fascist nazi hue hue

>>1839245

Stradlater have you signed up for that cat magazine I recommended you? :)

>>1839250

I prefer dogs actually. But thank you.

>>1839250
Because Plato was incredibly influential on the thought of Strauss, incredibly important to it, and I very strongly doubt whether Strauss himself would have advocated not reading Republic.

And I don't think Strauss is a fascist nazi. But I think if you're going to call Plato a pseudo-fascist, it's strange to not think that about Strauss. he's open to the same sorts of arguments by which you can call Plato a pseudo-fascist. And certainly he's been accused of being a pseudo-fascist by many people.

>>1839199

A CHALLENGER APPEARS

>>1839258

> I very strongly doubt whether Strauss himself would have advocated not reading Republic.

I'm not Strauss am I?

>if you're going to call Plato a pseudo-fascist, it's strange to not think that about Strauss.

This is just illogical. And I called him a proto-fascist, Not a Pseudo-Fascist.

Stradlater you should get a cat. Name him Plato.

>>1839264
>I'm not Strauss am I?

no but your position is still dumb though

plato is important to the thought of strauss. it will be difficult to understand what strauss is doing and why he's doing it without an adequate understanding of plato's thought. further, the fact that plato is a 'proto-fascist' isn't a good argument against him not being read. finally, the things which (i presume) lead you to call plato a proto-fascist are similar to the kinds of things which lead strauss to be accused of crypto-fascism.

why should plato not be read, seriously

I think it depends on how you read Plato. I would not consider him a proto-fascist. You have to look beyond his solutions for education and the operation of society. His understanding of being and knowledge provide a good starting point. Coupled with the symposium, the text gains a very good reputation for informing the uninformed. Then that person can move onto Strauss if it makes sense for them.

>>1839269

>no but your position is still dumb though

Sure thing.

> the fact that plato is a 'proto-fascist' isn't a good argument against him not being read

I've never said he shouldn't be read. but if you are to read his political or ethical philosophy then a critical eye would be smart.

>>1839286

That is a very good argument. I am glad we agree.