Book Titles Needed For Historical-Philosophical-Economics Project I Am Working On.
Troy Earl Camplin
I am beginning a project that will deal with the history of freedom, and
I would appreciate any suggestions from everybody who wishes to put in
their 2 cents worth regarding books that I should read to get a good
overall view of freedom as seen by many points of views by different
peoples and cultures and countries. Overall, I will be needing books on
economics, philosophy, and history, preferably primary sources when
possible, though secondrary interpretive sources will be useful in seeing
how others have seen certain things occur in history. Even if I
disagree, it will help me to know what arguments and points to make to
refute certain views. So if you would not mind taking a few minutes to
make book suggestions for me, I would appreciate them. Thanks.
Troy Camplin
John M Hall
In article <4ot0it$i...@news.wko.com> Troy Earl Camplin <tro...@mailhost.wko.com> writes:
>I am beginning a project that will deal with the history of freedom, and
>I would appreciate any suggestions from everybody who wishes to put in
You might find Albert Hirschman's _The Passions and the
Interests: Political Arguments for Capitalism before
its Triumph_ of some interest.
JMH
Al Doogie
>JMH
For crying out loud, the list could be endless.
Authors I would suggest: Plato, Paine, Rouseeau, Locke, Hobbes, Burke, Marx, Bakunin, Lenin, Nietzche, Keyes, Friedman.
Chuck Lipsig
Troy Earl Camplin <tro...@mailhost.wko.com> wrote:
>I am beginning a project that will deal with the history of freedom, and
>I would appreciate any suggestions from everybody who wishes to put in
>their 2 cents worth regarding books that I should read to get a good
>overall view of freedom as seen by many points of views by different
>peoples and cultures and countries. Overall, I will be needing books on
>economics, philosophy, and history, preferably primary sources when
>possible, though secondrary interpretive sources will be useful in seeing
>how others have seen certain things occur in history. Even if I
>disagree, it will help me to know what arguments and points to make to
>refute certain views. So if you would not mind taking a few minutes to
>make book suggestions for me, I would appreciate them. Thanks.
Charles Adams: _For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on The Course of
Civilization_.
Excellent book. As little time as I have for reading, this is one I've felt
like rereading for a while now.
Chuck Lipsig lip...@atlantic.net Gainesville, FL
Living the weird life since 1966.
Daniel Hugh Nexon
In article <4p5n80$s...@news.atlantic.net>,
Chuck Lipsig <lip...@atlantic.net> wrote:
>Troy Earl Camplin <tro...@mailhost.wko.com> wrote:
>
>>I am beginning a project that will deal with the history of freedom, and
>>I would appreciate any suggestions from everybody who wishes to put in
>>their 2 cents worth regarding books that I should read to get a good
>>overall view of freedom as seen by many points of views by different
>>peoples and cultures and countries. Overall, I will be needing books on
>>economics, philosophy, and history, preferably primary sources when
>>possible, though secondrary interpretive sources will be useful in seeing
>>how others have seen certain things occur in history. Even if I
>>disagree, it will help me to know what arguments and points to make to
>>refute certain views. So if you would not mind taking a few minutes to
>>make book suggestions for me, I would appreciate them. Thanks.
>
> Charles Adams: _For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on The Course of
>Civilization_.
While I'm sure Chuck's suggestion is a good one, if you really want to learn
about the history of freedom I would ignore most debates that deal with
the concept in regards to the modern nation-state until rather late. They tend
to work on flawed assumptions when it comes to the history of the concept.
Obviously, you need to start with Greek philosophy - particularly Aristotle
and Plato. I would limit your reading to these two (_Politics_ and _The
Republic), in order to keep your list from getting too big.
Immediately afterwards, read M. I. Finley's "The Freedom of the Citizen in the
Greek World" in _Economy and Society in Ancient Greece. He spells out in
historical context why freedom was operationalized and defined the way it was.
However, he also wants to situate Greek freedom on a larger debate about
whether freedom is a relational concept between groups of people; he may be
wrong about this but is almost certainly right about Ancient Greek thinking
on the subject.
I'm not sure how to partitition the rest of this reading list, but I'll
try to give some context where appropriate.
Machiavelli's _Discourses_
Hobbes' _Leviathan_ (spec. ch 21 and 26)
Locke, _Letter Concerning Toleration_ and _Second Treatise on Government_
Rousseau, _Discourse on Inequality_; _On the Social Contract_; "Letter to
D'Alembert on the Theatre." (the last is optional, but may clarify just how
little he thinks of 'liberal' rights)
John Stuart Mill _On Liberty_
Now I would break and read some historical analysis. Mainly, Quentin Skinner's
"The Idea of Negative Liberty: Philosophical and Historical Perspectives" in
_Philosophy in History_ ed. Rorty, Schneewind, and Skinner; Skinner, "The
State" in _Political Innovation and Conceptual Change_ ed. Ball, Farr, and
Hanson; also, you may want some historical background on the development of
the modern state. Try Gianfranco Poggi _The Development of the Modern State_;
Anthony Giddens _The Nation-State and Violence: vol. II of a Critique of
Historical Materialism_; an if you don't mind confusing works, try Michael
Mann _States, War and Capitalism_ or _The Sources of Social Power, vol. II_.
The Poggi reading is short and a classic of sorts - it will provide some
historical background for what Skinner is talking about. (The reason why
reading about the state is essential is that the modern conception of
freedom is tied to various developments in the evolution of states).
You also should look at some brief selections from the negative liberty
debates:
Isiaah Berlin, "Two Concepts of Liberty" in _Four Essays on Liberty_ which
follows the distinctions made much earlier by Benjamin Constant in "The
Liberty of the Ancients Compared with that of the Moderns_." The latter is
a *must* read, since it has one of the best concise statements of classical
liberalism. *However*, it is mostly WRONG, as you will notice having
already read Aristotle, Plate, and M. I. Finley. Constant follows the
romanticized conception of the Polis laid out by Rousseau (this will also
impact Hegel's writings). Anyway,
Gerald MacCallum, "Negative and Positive Freedom," in _Philosophy, Politics
and Society_, Fourth Series.
Also check out some arguments about the development of citizenship:
T.H. Marshall, _Citizenship and Social Class_
[Damn. I can't find the full cites for the critics of Marhsall you should
read, but check out a woman named Peggy Summers]
[So far, these readings have been oriented to understanding differences in
concepts of liberty, and the historical context of these differences, now
we shift gears]
- - - -
Kant, "Political Writings" (Cambridge U.P. series). I'm never sure what to
suggest, so stick with Kant-lite. Read "Perpetual Peace," "What is
Enlightenment?" and the selections under "Metaphysics of Morals."
Hegel, _Natural Law_ (trans. by T.M. Knox. Oxofrd, Clarendon Press, 1967. This
is almost impossible to find, but important. If you can't find it you can
stick to the secondary sources. Don't be concerned with the fact that his
language is obtuse and difficult, he was a young guy trying to differentiate
himself), _Philosophy of Right_. Secondary Sources, _Hegel's Critique of
Liberalism_, spec. chapters 1-6. Smith gets some applications wrong,
particularly he seems to misunderstand the relationship between Rawls and
Hegel, but his summary of "Natural Law" is excellent. Also, Charles
Taylor, _Hegel_ (Definative and BIG. Only if you really want to know about
Hegel), and Shlomo Avineri _Hegel's Theory of the Modern State_. Read Hegel
with an eye towards his critique of liberalism and his adoption of liberal
rights but more importantly, the way he theorizes *civil society*.
Marx, just about everything in the _Marx-Engels Reader_: but for short:
"On the Jewish Question," "Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844,"
"Alienation and Social Class," "The German Ideology." The rest is interesting,
and a must read, but not essential, I suppose.
Now, read Mill's _On Representative Government_, Toqueville's _Democracy
in America_ (I have no specific suggestions) and try to get a hold of Mill's
review of _Democracy in America_. In Mill and Toqueville we get a liberal
attempt to deal with the critiques of thinkers like Rousseau, Hegel (notice
the non-statist way Mill's arguments parallel Hegel's?) and Burke --
oh yeah, read _Reflections on the Revolution in France_ in tandem with
Bentham's essay "Principles of Legislation" (the latter is optional,
but amusing.) Also read James Fitzjames Steven's _Liberty, Equality and
Fraternity_, in which he doesn't seem to support any -- this, along with
Burke, gives critical arguments underlying what we might call "American
Conservativism" (since Steven considered himself a liberal, the fact that
his arguments are the baseline for American Conservatives speaks volumes about
the relative weakness of our "conservative" alternative to small-l liberalism).
There are a couple of directions to head from here. You could expand the
liberty and civil society concept and read Smith's _Wealth of Nations_ *and*
_A Theory of Moral Sentiments. Then read Hayek's _Road to Serfdom_. See how
Hayek both expands on the Smithian project and also arguably misunderstands
it. At the same time, read Karl Polanyi's _The Great Transformation_ (he's
a libertarian. . . no, he's a Marxist. . . no, he's an Owenist.) Even if
you decide not to reread Hayek (I assume you've already done so), read
Polanyi - he provides a critical introduction to non-Marxist critiques of
capitalism which *don't* think you can "circumvent" the market (okay, so
he's one of my major influences. . . ;)). After this, read Nozzick's
_Anarchy, State and Utopia_ and Rawls' _Theory of Justice_. Read, also
"The Basic Structure as Subject" reprinted in _Political Liberalism_ (this
essay is *very* important for understanding why Rawls' rejects
libertarianism). You might want to peruse Jan Elster's works on utilitarianism
as well as Sen's _Poverty and Famines_.
Or, you can go the critical route:
Of course, read Nietzsche's _The Birth of Tragedy_ and _The Genealogy of
Morals_. Secondary Sources: Alexander Nehamas, _Nietzsche: Life as Literature_;
Walter Kaufmann, _Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist_.
Then, Freud, _Civilization and Its Discontents_ (see Freud lift from
Nietzsche!). Finally, for fun, read Max Weber's essays on objectivity
and social science. Notice that modern social science, to a large, extent,
is an outcome of an attempt to cope with Nietasche's arguments!
Peruse the works of the Frankfurt School (there's a decent reader available)
including Adorno, Benjamin, Fromm, Marcuse, and company. Read Gramsci's
theory of hegemony (either in Gramsci or just someone describing it. If
you've already read Michael Mann, there's a quick and dirty description).
Hmmm, maybe Foucault's _Discipline and Punish_ (probably the most accessible
of his work besides the essay "Governmentality"). Revisit the concept of
power in Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau and Marx. Read Steven Luke's _The Three
Faces of Power_ (that way you can skip the Dahl, Weber, etc.)
This might be a good place to stop for now. The concept of power is
clearly important to freedom (we have to know what coercion is!). But the
next people on the list are more disconnected from a strict "history
of freedom." Still, they might provide a decent introduction to some
of the issues of "postmodernity."
- - -
Do some late and post-Marxists: anything by Jameson is good (perhaps
the non-literary part of _The Political Unconscious_ or _Postmodernism_) and
Harvey's _The Conditions of Postmodernity_. Terry Eagleton is extremely
accessible. Zyzek edited a volume called _Mapping Ideology_, but it is kind
of erratic.
Also, for the people trying to salvage modernism: Habermas (take your pick,
probably the _Theory of Communicative Action_) and Slavoj Zizek (well, sort
of. He wants to return to Kant's and Hegel's idealism.)
- - -
More than you ever wanted to know.
Regards,
Dan Columbia University, Political Science Grad Student
"When will parents learn to keep uranium out of their children's reach?"
-Daffy Duck, "Space Patrol."
Troy Earl Camplin
pra...@netside.net (Al Doogie) wrote:
>jh...@osf1.gmu.edu (John M Hall) wrote:
>
>>In article <4ot0it$i...@news.wko.com> Troy Earl Camplin <tro...@mailhost.wko.com> writes:
>>>I would appreciate any suggestions from everybody who wishes to put in
>
>>Interests: Political Arguments for Capitalism before
>>its Triumph_ of some interest.
>
>>JMH
>
>For crying out loud, the list could be endless.
>Authors I would suggest: Plato, Paine, Rouseeau, Locke, Hobbes, Burke, Marx, Bakunin, Lenin, Nietzche, Keyes, Friedman.
Have books by all of them but Burke, Bakunin, and Keyes. But thanks for
the suggestions.
And yes, I know the list could be endless, but an individual's reading
list is hardly endless. Mine is long, but not endless. That is why I
ask for people's reading lists. If you have anything you think I should
read, please suggest it. Even and especially those of you who disagree
with me. I would especially like to know what you are reading and get
your perspective on things for this project. Thank you.
Troy Camplin
Troy Earl Camplin
>> Charles Adams: _For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on The Course of
>>Civilization_.
>
>While I'm sure Chuck's suggestion is a good one, if you really want to learn
>about the history of freedom I would ignore most debates that deal with
>the concept in regards to the modern nation-state until rather late. They tend
>to work on flawed assumptions when it comes to the history of the concept.
>
>Obviously, you need to start with Greek philosophy - particularly Aristotle
>and Plato. I would limit your reading to these two (_Politics_ and _The
>Republic), in order to keep your list from getting too big.
I've already read both of these. In fact, I plan to start this project
as far back as possible, including even what we know about prehistorical
peoples. I'm then going to work my way up chronologically, showing how
each thing builds on another, showing the importance not only of
political advancement, but how philosophy and economics and advances in
human knowledge and technology in general have resulted in greater
freedom and how it affected political and other freedoms.
<Delete a wonderfully long list>
>- - -
>More than you ever wanted to know.
More like exactly what I wanted to know. Thanks Dan! :-)
Troy Camplin
Al Doogie
Troy Earl Camplin <tro...@mailhost.wko.com> wrote:
>pra...@netside.net (Al Doogie) wrote:
>>jh...@osf1.gmu.edu (John M Hall) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <4ot0it$i...@news.wko.com> Troy Earl Camplin <tro...@mailhost.wko.com> writes:
>>>>I am beginning a project that will deal with the history of freedom, and
>>>>I would appreciate any suggestions from everybody who wishes to put in
>>
>>For crying out loud, the list could be endless.
>>Authors I would suggest: Plato, Paine, Rouseeau, Locke, Hobbes, Burke, Marx, Bakunin, Lenin, Nietzche, Keyes, Friedman.
>Have books by all of them but Burke, Bakunin, and Keyes. But thanks for
>the suggestions.
>And yes, I know the list could be endless, but an individual's reading
>list is hardly endless. Mine is long, but not endless. That is why I
>ask for people's reading lists. If you have anything you think I should
>read, please suggest it. Even and especially those of you who disagree
>with me. I would especially like to know what you are reading and get
>your perspective on things for this project. Thank you.
>Troy Camplin
AS for the one's you dont have, I would suggest finding (most importantly) is
Sir Edmund Burke's "Relfections on the Revolution in France" in where he is
among the first to critisize the liberal worldview of freedom and property that
came out of the revolution in france, from a traditionalist conservative point
of view (dont confuse this with conpemporary conservatism).
Al Hambidge, Jr.
In article <4p7rd1$8...@news.wko.com>, Troy Earl Camplin <tro...@mailhost.wko.com> writes:
>>For crying out loud, the list could be endless.
>>Authors I would suggest: Plato, Paine, Rouseeau, Locke, Hobbes,
>>Burke, Marx, Bakunin, Lenin, Nietzche, Keyes, Friedman.
>Have books by all of them but Burke, Bakunin, and Keyes. But thanks for
>the suggestions.
How about Hayek: _The Road to Serfdom_, _The
Constitution of Liberty_.
And of course, Bastiat: _The Law_.
Al Hambidge, Jr. Standard disclaimers apply.
"The right of self-defense is the first law of nature . . . and when the right
of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever,
prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of
destruction." - St. George Tucker, in his edition of Blackstone's _Commentaries_
Billy Beck
Troy,
Not knowing how the following might fit your plan, I would suggest:
"The Authority of the State"
Leslie Green, Clarendon Press - Oxford, 1990, ISBN 0-19-827313-4, 267
pages (paperback).
Green examines the nature of authority, the character of state, and
relationships between the two. Includes a refreshingly level-headed,
if brief, discussion of "The Prisoner's Dilemma".
"Conflicts of Law and Morality"
Kent Greenawalt, Clarendon Press - Oxford, 1987, 0-19-504110-0, 376
pages (hardcover).
From the preface:"This book aims to bring an understanding of modern
legal systems to bear on classic problems of political and moral
philosophy, in a way that illuminates choices about obedience to law
made by ordinary citizens and officials." Greenawalt studied under
(among others) H.L.A. Hart at Oxford. The book is fairly successful
in its "aim", and serves a comprehensive view of practical
implications of the development of legal theory from ethical and
political premises.
I disagreed with Greenawalt often.
Also: I don't know if anyone has recommended Hannah Arendt yet, but I
certainly do. Her "Eichmann In Jersualem - The Banality of Evil"
began life as a bit of journalism (contracted to The New Yorker
Magazine, I believe), and became a sensation for certain of its
implications in re: the relations between killer and victim in the
context of the Holocaust. It's been said that the book was "an act of
courage". This is because Arendt, a Jew, was accused of anti-semitism
and attempting to exculpate Eichmann. If true, it was the "courage"
of innocence: never attempted that at all. Her aim was true, her hand
steady, and the resulting furor demonstrates how penetrating she was
in the sub-title of the book.
My copy appears to be missing, so's I can't offer publishing data.
Arendt's "Totalitarianism" (177 pages, third of three volumes, "The
Origins of Totalitarianism" - 1951, 1958, 1966, 1968. Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich, ISBN 0-15-690650) is a meaty and satisfying examination of
"the philosophical origins of the totalitarian mind". Here, Arendt
focuses on the two pre-eminent manifestations of modern dictatorship -
Bolshevism and National Socialism - in a well-documented discussion of
the techniques of totalitarianism amid the fundamental premises on
which it thrived.
As always, I would recommend Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's "The Gulag
Archipelago: An Experiment in Literary Investigation" (Harper & Row,
1973). At 1922 pages (paperback, including notes & indexes), the
three-volume set is nonetheless indispensible for its epic record of
what was arguably the very most destructive episode in human history.
This is a masterpiece of dedication to the task of recording that sad
tale, filled with sparkling, shattering, insights into the oppressor
and the oppressed, and rendered in a style which appears as the
virtual culmination of that strain of tragedy endemic to much of the
history of Russian literature.
A personal note: I gained an entirely new understanding of the
essential *passion* of Rand's work after reading "Gulag".
Finally (this evening) -
"Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives"
Alan Bullock, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1992, ISBN 0-394-58601-0, 1025
pages (hardcover).
A marvelous writer and truly comprehensive historian, Bullock produced
a requisite comparison of two sensationally demented human beings, the
machines they built, and how they ran them. His research is
exhaustive and the result authoritative. Alec Campbell of the London
Daily Mail wrote: "If you knew nothing of the twentieth century and
were allowed one book to bone up on it, this would have to be it."
In 1996, I think that's over the top, but not by very much at all.
Carry on, mate.
Billy
http://www.mindspring.com/~wjb3/free/free.html
"Rant" updated 4/16/96
Tom Asquith
In article <4p9l84$h...@news.wko.com>, tro...@mailhost.wko.com says...
>I've already read both of these. In fact, I plan to start this project
>as far back as possible, including even what we know about prehistorical
>peoples. I'm then going to work my way up chronologically, showing how
>each thing builds on another, showing the importance not only of
>political advancement, but how philosophy and economics and advances in
>human knowledge and technology in general have resulted in greater
>freedom and how it affected political and other freedoms.
Dan's list is pretty comprehensive and includes many of the books that
I would recommend, so let me keep my list short:
William Godwin's Enquiry Concerning Political Justice and Robert Owen's
A New View of Society would give you background into the ideas of freedom
that are typical of socialist and anarchist positions (in fact, a mis-reading
of Owen is blamed for the Luddite uprising). Also worthy of consideration
are writings by Saint-Simon and Condorcet. Marx and Engels were familiar
with all of the above and were useful in the formation of their thoughts
(plus the development of the more paternalistic socialists such as the
Fabian Society).
Speaking of the Fabians, take a look at the writings of HG Wells, especially
his Outline of World History (he has a slight socialist bent which produces
an interesting interpretation of the Industrial Revolution).
If you are going to read Adam Smith, take a look at his moral writings as
well as his Wealth of Nations--the assumptions of human nature are vital
to an understanding of where he was coming from.
Further ideas on freewill versus determinism could be traced from Owens
to B.F.Skinner (thus maybe his Notebooks or Beyond Freedom and Dignity
could be worthy of a gander).
There are many others--but you only have so much time...
--
Tom Asquith
E-mail: tasq...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca
-----------------------------------------------------
"Histories make men wise; poets, witty;
the mathematics, subtle; natural
philosophy, deep; moral, grave; logic
and rhetoric, able to contend."
--Sir Francis Bacon 1561-1626
(from his Essays: "Of Studies")
Daniel Hugh Nexon
In article <4p9l84$h...@news.wko.com>,
Troy Earl Camplin <tro...@mailhost.wko.com> wrote:
>>
>>Obviously, you need to start with Greek philosophy - particularly Aristotle
>>and Plato. I would limit your reading to these two (_Politics_ and _The
>>Republic), in order to keep your list from getting too big.
>I've already read both of these.
Cool. I would strongly urge you read the Finley and the Constant, because
the first clarifies how Plato and Aristotle can be read anachronistically
and because the latter is a perfect example of how a misreading of Greek
"freedom" came to underpin a lost of modern political theory.
>In fact, I plan to start this project
>as far back as possible, including even what we know about prehistorical
>peoples.
From what I've read, you won't find any conceptual discussion of "freedom"
or "liberty" before the Greeks. I would also be *extremely* careful about
what you read re: prehistoric civilizations when it comes to people talking
about the development of "liberty" (there's a lot of pretty awful work
out there, I don't think any serious social scientist would be willing
to make any claims on this subject). Oddly, the best general works for
the development of social *power* (about the closest you'll get) I've
alredy cited: namely, Anthony Giddens, Michael Mann (but add _The
Sources of Social Power, vol. I). For later periods you might want to
read _The Three Orders_ by George Duby his economic history of the middle
ages. For later periods, read Norbert Elias _The Civilizing Proccess_
(a seminal work under-read in America) and Bernard Silberman's _The Cages
of Reason_ (probably the best rational-choice explanation for the development
of the modern bureaucratic state).
I'm then going to work my way up chronologically, showing how
>each thing builds on another, showing the importance not only of
>political advancement, but how philosophy and economics and advances in
>human knowledge and technology in general have resulted in greater
>freedom and how it affected political and other freedoms.
This distresses me. If your project is so teleological, you might not want
to actually bother to do all this work, since historical and genealogical
analysis of things like freedom, when done correctly, are never teleological.
Certain contingent innovations in the conceptual and material lifeworld of
humans have brought about the modern conception of freedom, but there's been
no general progress towards such freedom (it only appears so if we look
retrospectively).
Although Tim Burke may disagree with me, a good introduction to these issues
is Reinhardt Koselleck's _Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time_
(Cambridge, MIT Press, 1985). It is a little jargony, but if you read it in
order most of the German is translated the first time its used. Giddens
also discusses how teleological reasoning is (a) flawed and (b) a conseqence
of a particular set of paradigmatic shifts.
>More like exactly what I wanted to know. Thanks Dan! :-)
You're welcome. Given I'm supposed to be a political theory minor with a
focus on liberal rights theory, I hope I can contribute *something*.
Bernard
> >>jh...@osf1.gmu.edu (John M Hall) wrote:
> >>
> >>>In article <4ot0it$i...@news.wko.com> Troy Earl Camplin <tro...@mailhost.wko.com> writes:
> >>>>I am beginning a project that will deal with the history of freedom, and
> >>>>I would appreciate any suggestions from everybody who wishes to put in
> >>
> >>Authors I would suggest: Plato, Paine, Rouseeau, Locke, Hobbes, Burke, Marx, Bakunin, Lenin, Nietzche, Keyes, Friedman.
>
> >Have books by all of them but Burke, Bakunin, and Keyes. But thanks for
> >the suggestions.
>
> >list is hardly endless. Mine is long, but not endless. That is why I
> >ask for people's reading lists. If you have anything you think I should
> >read, please suggest it. Even and especially those of you who disagree
> >with me. I would especially like to know what you are reading and get
> >your perspective on things for this project. Thank you.
>
> >Troy Camplin
>
> AS for the one's you dont have, I would suggest finding (most importantly) is
> Sir Edmund Burke's "Relfections on the Revolution in France" in where he is
> among the first to critisize the liberal worldview of freedom and property that
> came out of the revolution in france, from a traditionalist conservative point
> of view (dont confuse this with conpemporary conservatism).
>
many many interesting footnotes that lead to author books)
A must is: his :Liberty or Equality: Christendom Press:1993
and his Leftism.Revisited.Arlington House New Rochelle
(1989 i think;)
Also a classic like Friedrich von Hayek`s
:Road to Surfdom.
Greetings from Germany
Robert
Rick Elbers
Troy Earl Camplin <tro...@mailhost.wko.com> wrote:
>pra...@netside.net (Al Doogie) wrote:
>>jh...@osf1.gmu.edu (John M Hall) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <4ot0it$i...@news.wko.com> Troy Earl Camplin <tro...@mailhost.wko.com> writes:
>>>>I am beginning a project that will deal with the history of freedom, and
>>>>I would appreciate any suggestions from everybody who wishes to put in
>>
>>>You might find Albert Hirschman's _The Passions and the
>>>Interests: Political Arguments for Capitalism before
>>>its Triumph_ of some interest.
>>
>>>JMH
>>
>>For crying out loud, the list could be endless.
>>Authors I would suggest: Plato, Paine, Rouseeau, Locke, Hobbes, Burke, Marx, Bakunin, Lenin, Nietzche, Keyes, Friedman.
>Have books by all of them but Burke, Bakunin, and Keyes. But thanks for
>the suggestions.
>And yes, I know the list could be endless, but an individual's reading
>list is hardly endless. Mine is long, but not endless. That is why I
>ask for people's reading lists. If you have anything you think I should
>read, please suggest it. Even and especially those of you who disagree
>with me. I would especially like to know what you are reading and get
>your perspective on things for this project. Thank you.
>Troy Camplin
Are u adressing freedom from the matarialistic point of view or from
the ideological point of view?
Are u thinking of freedom as a abscence of something( like
independance) or as an
positive entity (like choice)?
This q' s would be likely to reduce your reading list a bit
Rick Elbers
Eddie Siefker
On Mon, 17 Jun 1996 13:33:58 GMT, rick....@tip.nl (Rick Elbers)
wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <4ot0it$i...@news.wko.com> Troy Earl Camplin <tro...@mailhost.wko.com> writes:
>>>>>I am beginning a project that will deal with the history of freedom, and
>>>>>I would appreciate any suggestions from everybody who wishes to put in
>>>
>>>For crying out loud, the list could be endless.
>>>Authors I would suggest: Plato, Paine, Rouseeau, Locke, Hobbes, Burke, Marx, Bakunin, Lenin, Nietzche, Keyes, Friedman.
>
>>Have books by all of them but Burke, Bakunin, and Keyes. But thanks for
>>the suggestions.
Also try Kropotkin, Proudhon, Godwin, Berkman, and Goldman.
Obviously writing from an anarchist standpoint...
-Eddie