Politics – I don’t get it.

All I know about politics is this…Labour aren’t doing a very good job, the Conservatives point this out all the time but don’t seem to offer any solutions, and the Lib Dems lack the confidence to kick the other 2 out of the way and have their turn.

As you may have guessed I don’t really know a lot about politics but I do want to understand it a bit better. Anyone know of any well-written and accessible books on the subject that will enlighten me (with out being 500 pages long, I have other things to do!)?

Cheers,
jon

interstingly (or not) the wikipedia definition of politics is:

“Politics is the process by which groups of people make decisions”

now i thought when i was watching Cameron and Clegg on the news last night that it was a process that satisfied the crave of an individual for power irrespective of policy

You know can edit wikipedia, right? 😉

All I know about politics is this…Labour aren’t doing a very good job, the Conservatives point this out all the time but don’t seem to offer any solutions, and the Lib Dems lack the confidence to kick the other 2 out of the way and have their turn.

Think thats Politics in a nutshell – only you forgot to mention they have the ability to vote their own pay rises through and not to have to answer to their peers who put them in the postition in the first place.

You know can edit wikipedia

Wikipedia is probably a parallel to politics – those that can be arsed redefine the world

Watch The Wire

Labour aren’t doing a very good job, the Conservatives point this out all the time but don’t seem to offer any solutions, and the Lib Dems lack the confidence to kick the other 2 out of the way and have their turn.

That really does sum it all up imo.

Want to know more ? Then the best way imo, is to read a serious paper everyday – and I don’t mean the Express or the Daily Mail. Reading books is generally a waste of time imo, and by definition, unlikely to offer much in the way of current affairs.

Reading books is generally a waste of time imo

now, now. Just because you abhor them….

Suffice to say I completely disagree with you there GG. Books are fantastic things, and politics isnt just about current affairs. A book is often by far and away the best place to discover more about the political world and its historical context, where there is space to expand on arguments and give political stories their full vista.

A range of papers is useful as well. Its very interesting to see how the same story is presented in the Guardian and the Express

not to mention what might be a big story in one wont be in another regardless of it’s national relevance if it’s political expedient to ignore the issue.

If you are preparing a presentation at college on a certain subject and you have what you believe to be a quality item that everyone will be impressed with,do you
a.keep it to yourself and impress everyone on the day of the presentation ..or
b.Tell everyone about the content of your piece and have everyone in your class copy your best bits to replace there own crap !?

David Cameron is choosing the former option.

A book is often by far and away the best place to discover more about the political world and its historical context

Well come on then Stoner – the man says he wants punters to recommend him books on politics.

What would you recommend he wastes his time reading ? 🙄

What would you recommend he wastes his time reading ?

Would you consider The Road to Wigan Pier a waste of time ?
Condemning all books seems a little nonsensical.

There’s probably 150-200 books on politics in here, another 100-150 on finance and economics. The political ones cover everything from “The Transition from Socialism – State and Civil Society in Gorbachevs USSR” and “What went wrtong with Perestroika” to Mandela’s “The Long Walk to Freedom” and Thatcher’s “The Downing Street Years”, naturally 😉

TBH one mans collection of politics/economics books is never going to be like anothers. IF you were a book man, Gus, we would surely have very different libraries. I cant recommend a “book on politics” – if I could do I would have posted at the start of the thread. Im not even sure there is such a book, politics being such a large subject with a place in a long timeline as well as global micro-political subjects.

If you like, one of my favourite political books is “Freedom, the Individual and the Law” – although obviously its a bit more of a “law” book, but it’s written in the context of constitutional history, which ultimately is a political creation.

EDIT: I enjoyed the Road to Wigan pier. Superb middle class guilt trip :). ALthough his “Down and out in Paris and London” is a real favourite of mine.

Superb middle class guilt trip :).

Maybe, but that doesn’t detract from its authenticity as a piece of social commentary.

I dont deny that it’s substantially authentic, but then he was very much out to paint the picture he wanted. Political writing is rarely pure fact, there’s always going to be a natural bias depending on the motives/allegiances/experiences of the writer.

Agreed. I think we maybe straying from the original point, that I think we both agree on, that there is value in political writings in book form.

Animal Farm?!

A truly impressive library there Stoner 8)

And just for the record, I do not of course think that there’s anything wrong with ‘reading’, it’s just not for me.

And whilst undoubtedly very enjoyable for many people, I tend to consider it somewhat unproductive. Although I have to confess to having an insatiable hunger for information, hence my apparent addiction to news and current affairs.

BTW, all this reminds me of an incident many years ago when I was engaged in a heated ‘discussion’ with a ranting member of the Socialist Workers Party. Exsasperated by his attempts to preach revolution to me, and wanting to have a snidey dig at his ‘middle-classness’, I informed that I had learnt my politics not by going to the library and ‘reading books’, but had instead learnt my politics by ‘reading my pay-slips’.

To be fair to the trot, he did see the funny side of my dig and in fact laughed admitting that he thought that it was an excellent statement. Although in essence my comment was true.

It’s hard to see the wood for the trees if you stick to newspapers and current affairs, books are much better for big picture insights.

Recommended: the Hitler biography by Kershaw, for example.

Party politics in this country, together with the way politics is covered by the media, makes me despair. Most politicians are more concerned about what the other lot are doing than actually doing something constructive.

The only interesting part of my undergrad degree in European Studies was a module on European Party politics, which boiled down to a softening of traditional socio-political cleavages and the rise of populistic politics. ie, politicians say whatever people want to hear regardless of their ideological foundations as a political party. Thats the way I see it – maybe as I haven’t paid attention to traditional ideologies and how they translate into policy – but Cameron’s in that situation now, slating GB for the mess we’re in and the layperson at least will jump on board.

Its all playground stuff.

GG – since I’m “middle class” but interested in politics I have to rely upon reading to learn about the working class as I have no direct life experience of it. You, conversely, can learn about the middle classes by coming on here instead 😉

IMO newspapers have become very poor at reporting political current affairs – especially when one hears just how subservient the lobby hacks have been now that the McBride affair has come out into the open.

clicky – a book on it. Although not one I wholly agree with by any means:

Ive veen following politcal blogs (yes of course they’re partisan/liberal/anti-establishment) to try and get alternative views of what goes on in westminster.

I admit, most of them are centre-right, which is a pity at least in terms of balance, but the whole Draper debacle was a case of extraordinary stupidity from the left thinking they could engineer a centre-left blog from the top down in the same style as successful “bottom-up” blogs like Ian Dale or Guido.

As much as i totally disagree with people like gorgeous George and other old labour kinds,the one thing that has made me respect them,is the way they stick to there political principles.

jimmy – arguably that’s how things should be in a stable politco-economic modern democarcy such as ours. Firebrand politics should be reserved for the developing nations IMO. There’s no room for freedom of the individual in domineering ideological politics on either side of the centreline. In some countries that might (might) be the price worth paying for cleaning up stumbling democracies, but it certainly isnt in a mature one such as ours.

sounds to me like the OP gets politics perfectly well…

On this subject on of media/politics on Booker’s Newswipe, Peter Oborne, 14 minutes in
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00k3687/Newswipe_Episode_6/

My father writes books on politics and has read one or two as well but I don’t think he’d recommend you read any given book or any given handful of books. You have to read lots to get your head round a subject as big and as varied as that – and I haven’t. Or at least I haven’t read a lot of books on politics. So I’m going to stop typing now. I use to need a drink to write this kind of drivel you know.

If we were getting waffley, we might say that “politics” as the OP conceives it is not a fixed state in which everything is pointless and no-one cares. It is (arguably) that way in this country because of a lot of disengagement and wilful ignorance. Learning and engaging with it alters it. Just possibly, if more of us bothered it wouldn’t be so utterly depressing. Although lots of people somehow cared about Obama in the US, and there are few signs they got anything other than business as usual.

Oh, and another vote for attempting to gain knowledge and understanding from something more considered than tomorrow’s fish wrapping. Gus is (I think) lucky to retain as much as he does without revising. 🙂

You have to read lots to get your head round a subject as big and as varied as that

You best get reading guitarmanjon, as the next general election is no more than 12 months away.

Jimmy has a valid point.

Ideally – a politician would tell you what he believes in, and he’d be voted in – or not in – on that.

In reality – they’ll do and say whatever keeps them in power; there’s not even a pretence about it.

GG – politics as a subject to “get your head around” is not the same as the poltics of a formed opinion.

I think of it as a bit like religion. Theology is a respected academic study of religions and their formation and histories. Religion is ************************.

You dont need to study theology to have faith, and you dont need to be well read in politics to vote with conviction.

Are you suggesting that Grizzlygus isn’t on the fence Stoner?

😉

I reckon he’s going to back UKIP 🙂

Clearly not on the fence then.

😉

you dont need to be well read in politics to vote with conviction.

Thank you Stoner for reinforcing my opinion that ‘reading books’ is an unproductive waste of time.

How much more important it is to use that time to gather useful information.

I read no books today, but did buy The Times and The Telegraph. Bought The Guardian and the Independent yesterday ………. go figure 😯

(actually it was about availability)

gather useful information.

The Telegraph.

[/b]

FAIL.

🙂

but the academic or even curious study of a subject for it’s own merit isnt “unproductive” if it’s your interest.

I dread to imagine what “productive” means in this context.

My current book is Levy and Scott-Clark on Pakistan and nuclear proliferation. The vast majority of what I have learnt in it is/was not in the newspapers, and appears to be very important to understanding US policy towards Afghanistan and Pakistan since the 1970s. I do not regard this as a waste of time.

😉 @ Stoner & BD the term ‘unproductive’ was chosen partly as a little dig.