/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20890448]

What are some good modern political science books?

[Anonymous No.20890462]

>>20890448
Political science is the ultimate midwit-core. Don't waste your time on it.

[Anonymous No.20890464]

Polsci pretty much ended with Theda Skocpol

[Anonymous No.20890474]

>>20890448
I like Mearsheimer. The two dopes above will come back to warn you away from discovering some facts

[Anonymous No.20890476]

>>20890462
I know but I'm going through a phase. I'm interested.

>>20890464
Why do you day that?

[Anonymous No.20890492]

>>20890476
>I know but I'm going through a phase. I'm interested.
Read Diplomacy. Less then half way through,you're realize Hank is a complete wacko.

[Anonymous No.20890524]

>>20890492
Why? Pic related in my op sometimes sounds like a wacko but then comes across as a complete genius...

[Anonymous No.20890744]

>>20890474
Any particular publications I should look into?

[Anonymous No.20890758]

>>20890744
just watch that 2015 talk he gave on youtube that says if nato keeps making putin upset he will invade ukraine. that's basically his claim to fame.

[Anonymous No.20890965]

>>20890744
How about this one. He also did one on the Israel lobby.

>>20890758
His recent claim to infamy you mean. They want this guy canceled

[Anonymous No.20891640]

Bump

[Anonymous No.20892281]

>>20890448
Had this one recommended to me on lit. It has a great opening which uses Dante as a foil to introduce the premise of the book.

[Anonymous No.20892778]

>>20890965
I'll check it out.

>>20892281
Wouldn't say it's modern but worth a look into.

[Anonymous No.20893149]

>>20890448
>I certainly won't deny that Brzezinski has very accurately brought out new features of society in its present or imminent phase, but I don't see the need for coining a new term. "Technetronic" is a portmanteau word combining "technical" and "electronic.” Come now! Isn't electronics technological? Does the word add anything to the early definitions of technology? Once again, technology equals the machine plus industry. Fine, then there is something new–according to the famous definition: In a machine, there are material parts that move. Electronics operate with no moving material parts. Granted. But if the computer is not a machine in the normal sense, then in what way is it not the product of a certain number of technologies? In what way is it not integrated in a technological system? There is no reason to distinguish between technology and electronics. The latter is merely part of the former. The traits that Brzezinski discerns in his technetronic society are actually the traits of a technological society. And much as I like his honest book, I am forced to admit that he simply went along with the fad of making up a seemingly esoteric vocabulary in order to give the impression of coming up with something new. What he says (in the first two sections of his book) is quite standard in regard to technological society. And all that is new here is the word "technetronic," which is unjustified. "Technology" amply suffices for everything he discusses.

[Anonymous No.20893207]

>>20890448
>What are some good modern political science books?

What are you interested in? Political science is pretty broad.

[Anonymous No.20893468]

My belief is that money rules, so, quoting Mises, "Economic knowledge necessarily leads to libertarianism".
I recommend "Economics for real people" by Gene Callahan; "The Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith; "What Has Government Done to Our Money" by Murray Rothbard and maybe "The road to serfdom" if you are leaning to the left.

[Anonymous No.20893729]

>>20893149
What's the guy trying to say? Didn't Brzezinski explain that a technocratic era is the weaving of evoling technology, electronics and engineers and what not running the show? Which is the definition of a technocracy...

[Anonymous No.20893739]

[Anonymous No.20893779]

>>20893739
Inventing reality by micheal parenti is better, and was before chomsky!

[Anonymous No.20894966]

>>20893739
Chomsky should stick to linguistics

[Anonymous No.20895771]

>>20893468
Lolbertarians

[Anonymous No.20896038]

>>20890448
picrel

[Anonymous No.20896047]

>>20896038
Seconding his complete works. Also look up his dissertation.

[Anonymous No.20896621]

>>20896038
Kissinger, Soros and Schwab are good buddies. You’re sure to get let in on the all their globalist plans

[Anonymous No.20897137]

[Anonymous No.20897567]

>>20890462
Why do you say that?

[Anonymous No.20898450]

>>20897567
He wants to discourage people from finding out what’s going on

[Pneumatike No.20898986]

>>20893729
Ellul has a 2-way view of technology:
>1. after the death of god, technology shouldn't replace him, technology should remain just a tool on the process of self-liberation, that is, without dehumanization, without erasing human values. he was a christian anarchist. he proposed that there is a way to imagine a society that is not subdued by technology, but the opposite.
>2. continuing from 1., Ellul is paranoid about the way Power will inevitably gain from technology and use it to dominate everyone else, in the end it turns out that looking beyond the platonic republic, in a World-System, Technique itself is Power and there is 0 difference between power centers and technological centers. This is the old post-modernist "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" issue

[Anonymous No.20899364]

>>20897137
Oh fuck off.

[Hydraulike No.20899373]

>>20898986
Shut up faggot.

[Anonymous No.20900325]

>>20890448
Try any undergraduate level textbooks. What are you specifically interested in as well?

[Anonymous No.20901575]

>>20899373
Elull is amazing though. Listen to your own advice

[Anonymous No.20902242]

>>20890448
Imagined communities by Benedict Anderson

[Anonymous No.20904181]

since everyone is recommending geopolitical books instead of political science, might as well join the trend

[Anonymous No.20904722]

>>20904181
Isn't geopolitics, political science?

[Anonymous No.20904979]

This is like a modern version of "The Prince" by Machiavelli, but must more practical and useful.
There's even a ~20 minute YouTube video that covers the basics:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs

[Anonymous No.20906111]

>>20904722
political science is related to political theory

[Anonymous No.20907482]

>>20890448
My diary desu

[Anonymous No.20907489]

>>20890448
Some I've personally enjoyed:
>Seeing like a State - Scott
>The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere - Habermas
>The Sovereign State and It's Competitors - Spruyt
>States and Social Revolution - Skocpol
>Coercion, Capital, and European States - Tilly
>Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy - Moore
>The Calculus of Consent - Buchanan & Tullock
>Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy - Schumpeter
>The Great Transformation - Polanyi
>Who Governs? - Dahl
>Politics Among Nations - Morgenthau
>The Logic of Collective Action - Olson
>The Sources of Social Power - Mann
>Corruption and Government - Rose-Ackerman
>Political Order - Fukuyama
>Ruling Oneself Out - Ermakoff
>Diplomacy - Kissinger

[Anonymous No.20907596]

>>20907489
Excellent post. I can really stand behind this one

[Anonymous No.20907996]

>>20907489
Great taste

[Anonymous No.20908011]

>>20907489
assquisite post

[Anonymous No.20908106]

test

[Anonymous No.20908225]

Since Mods are prudes
>Seeing like a State - Scott
>The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere - Habermas
>The Sovereign State and It's Competitors - Spruyt
>States and Social Revolution - Skocpol
>Coercion, Capital, and European States - Tilly
>Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy - Moore
>The Calculus of Consent - Buchanan & Tullock
>Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy - Schumpeter
>The Great Transformation - Polanyi
>Who Governs? - Dahl
>Of Rule and Revenue - Levi
>Politics Among Nations - Morgenthau
>The Logic of Collective Action - Olson
>The Sources of Social Power - Mann
>Corruption and Government - Rose-Ackerman
>Political Order - Fukuyama
>Ruling Oneself Out - Ermakoff
>Society Must Be Defended - Foucault
>Diplomacy - Kissinger
>People, States and Fear - Buzan
And OP, don't let pseuds on /lit/ repeating received opinions of anons-past dissuade you, Political Science is a fine discipline. Like anything else, it is mostly mediocre (or at least highly temporal) affairs passing through the pulp mills, but it has it's fair share of classics. Not to mention a canon of political writers stretching back to antiquity. If you have an interest in something—embrace it. Don't degrade yourself into calling it a phase for the approbation of some losers on 4chan. Life is both too long and too short to deny yourself.

[Anonymous No.20908419]

>>20890448
More like political basedience lmao

[Anonymous No.20908469]

>>20890448
Does it say america's role is founding the taliban to fight the USSR? Look up the real accomplishments of a political theorist before you read them

[Anonymous No.20908599]

>>20908469
Huh?

[Anonymous No.20909113]

>>20908599
Brzezinski, then national security advisor to Carter, has an interview where he admitted that the US had been funding the mujahadeen before the soviets invaded (the goal was to force the ussr's hand). he then says something along the lines of the goal being to "make the soviets bleed to death."

Brzezinski created the Trilateral Commission with Mr. Rockefeller. In other words, Brzezinski is a, uh, how should we say it, an internationalist seeking a central global government.

That said, so long as the reader understands that authors like Brzenski or Kissinger have an agenda which is party to major think tanks such as the Council on Foreign Relations, Business Roundtable, Bilderberg etcetera; then there is much to learn. The reader is able to gleam between the lines so long as his civics is in tact, so long as he understands the motives behind the people writing these texts.

[Anonymous No.20909155]

>>20908599
mind, the mujaheddin later turned into Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda was used as the excuse for the forever war on terror which is still in effect today in america 20 years later {see "Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks"}

[Anonymous No.20909159]

>>20908225
I enjoyed it and screencaped it.
Good luck seizing your regions

[Anonymous No.20909805]

>>20909113
I knew most of that. Which is why I got the book. The Rockefeller thing tho isn't really truth tho. Did you happen to hear that in an interview from Denmark by any chance? The book didn't really push much of an agenda really.

Although it did have some eerie similarities to schwabs covid 19 great reset book and almost marxist in nature through world historical analysis.

[Anonymous No.20909886]

>>20909805
>the book didn't really push much of an agenda
what? how did you come to that conclusion? agenda is defined by cambridge (noun) as "a list of aims or possible future achievements"
with respect to zbig co-founding the trillateral, what made you think it untrue? its literally published in david's memoirs
https://archive.org/details/DavidRockefellerMemoirs2003RandomHouse/page/n495/mode/2up?q=%22meeting+with+Zbig%22

[Anonymous No.20909973]

>>20909886
He helped design the trilateral comission to better the ties between China, Japan, and s. Korea, since his area was communist affairs.

And in the beginning of the book it's openly admitted his ideas are just conjecture pretty much.

[Anonymous No.20909997]

>>20909973
uhhh okay good luck with that

[Anonymous No.20910439]

>>20893149
This sperg's still here?

[Anonymous No.20910955]

>>20909973
If he is the one making the decisions conjecture is as good as fact.

[Anonymous No.20910960]

>>20909997
Good luck with what?

Rockefeller read his book and saw that his vision of the future was a most plausible case for the future.
And since he had close ties to politics he was a prime candidate. Remember around the same time the trilateral comission was founded that brought Japan and s. Korea closer to "weatern" standards, nixon went to China and completed the Asian deal.

What I'm going to ask is, do you view the trilateral comission as a bad thing?

[Anonymous No.20911659]

>>20890462
What have you read to reach that conclusion?

[Anonymous No.20911683]

>>20890448
Personal favorites
> philosophy in a time of terror
> 1844 manuscripts
> road to serfdom
> open society and its enemies vol 1
> debt (graeber)
> anti-oedipus
> euthyphro apology crito meno phaedo republic
> nicomachean ethics
> crash (Ballard)

[Anonymous No.20911686]

>>20904979
This is very good

OP, if you're not already familiar with Mencius Moldbug / Curtis Yarvin, you should become so.

https://graymirror.substack.com/p/1-a-general-theory-of-collaboration

[Anonymous No.20912401]

>>20890448
my dairy desu

[Anonymous No.20912453]

>>20910960
my response was to the perspective you shared on the trilateral commission being anything but big business capture of elected governments and with undue respect, that to me is pure naivety.
this social reform dressed in a desire to bring the asiatic closer to "western standards" whilst traipsing into anglican grounds is precisely the subtle nuances required to subvert institutions and governments. why is this so hard to comprehend? non-governmental organizations also spin their public relations towards "the benefit of mankind." its an advert-isement for an imperialist enterprise.
besides, the T Commission is just quite another branch of the CFR. everyone of those names mentioned on that page I linked, with the exception of Kiichi Miyazawa, were members of the CFR. which I have no doubt you also believe to be a benefactor of mankind.

Nixon didn't go to China to complete the Asian deal. that was a publicity stunt. Kissinger completed the deal in his secret trip to China in 1971.

[Anonymous No.20912497]

>>20912453
Nixon was there as well...

Also, do you honestly believe that nation states are going to cling onto power much longer? The world is run by corporations now, borders are almost meaningless.

[Anonymous No.20912501]

>>20912497
THANKS IN LARGE PART TO THINK TANKS AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL INSTITUTIONS SUCH AS THE TRILATERAL COMMISION.

whats your fucking problem

[Anonymous No.20912516]

this culture of revolt and uprising is fed by the humanists, ie the atheist ruling class (ie oligarchs, bureaucrats, academia, entertainers, journalists), since now that 99% of the whole world is humanist with democracy this and republics that, their big idea was to do a revolution on the republic, but with the republic already being the revolution on the monarchy, this doesnt work. This is called marxism. the humanists are still hyping revolution to stay in power and intellectually being omnipresent on the political field, and entertain the plebeians of some ''change'' and doing another revolution (which again doesnt make sense, even intellectually since it is the atheists who have been in power since 1789) but this time ''the real revolution will happen'' and this time ''the people will have a voice'' and so on

You have to understand that this humanism is a religion, just like any other. It has dogmas, it has symbols, it has oppression and it has lots of hypocrisy.

So the atheist baptism is to actually revolt on the bureaucrats and their atheist cops that they sent. For the generic champagne leftist, it is really an atheist ritual to fight at least once the cops in the street of paris. For the middle class it is just venting out and breaking public shit. Again it is really fucked up because both the bureaucrats and the peasants are the same people saying the republics is awesome and there should be more bureaucrats telling people what to do and giving money to the plebs.
Humanism is just utterly fucked up.
On the cop side, the cops are eager to fuck the peasants up. They say explicit they cant wait to beat up the protestors.
Plus bureaucrats are shit at managing anything, especially a city, a country, really anything, even their bureaucracy. So lots of outcry from the roasties and twitter tards, and tactical mistakes from the cops

humanists are bored since the day they killed monarchy for good, and now they turn inward, so they hate themselves lol

[Anonymous No.20912543]

>>20912501
What's yours? Last time I checked all the largest corporations aren't working for these economic entities they're working for their own profit and shareholder interests.

The trilateral comission, wef, etc, etc, are a result of global capitalism and the reach for gdp growth.

[Anonymous No.20912556]

>>20912543
>>20909997

[Anonymous No.20912636]

>>20912556
I'm just trying to figure out if you think it's a bad thing that corporations are organizing around thr world to make economic structures more sound and rub trade smoothly... the trilateral comission was mostly founded to boost American interests in a globalized world.

[Anonymous No.20912831]

>>20912636
>I'm just trying to figure out if you think it's a bad thing that corporations are organizing around the world to make economic structures more sound and rub trade smoothly
wow its like i'm speaking with a salesman. theres no point to have our conversation.

[Anonymous No.20912878]

>>20912831
No. You've just encountered someone who is asking you simple questions that's all.

You're regurgitating book smart stuff and historical facts, sure, but what's your opinion on it. You're not a robot anon, use your big boy brain.

[Anonymous No.20912899]

>>20912878
You have a long journey, if it ever starts. Good luck.

[Anonymous No.20913505]

>>20912453
Who is this?

[Anonymous No.20913518]

Lot's of people seem to get really confused about what constitutes "left-wing" and "right wing". I've lost count of how often I've seen people having impassioned arguments about politics despite not knowing what each other meant about foundational political concepts.
Anyhoo, Doens't matter what your preference is, pic related is a good book on the subject.

[Anonymous No.20913533]

[Anonymous No.20914169]

>>20890448
Dugin’s Political Platonism

[Anonymous No.20914539]

Dugin isn't worth reading, it's schizobabble

[Anonymous No.20914548]

>>20913518
>impassioned arguments about politics despite not knowing what each other meant
That's so-called public political discourse for its entire existence

Also, if people have been using left and right essentially meaninglessly since their inception, as teams and aesthetics, with an endless range of sentiments, goals, and associations varying across place and time, then nothing constitutes leftwing and rightwing except that. It's just a regressive trick to talk about 'politics' while saying nothing.

[Anonymous No.20914563]

>>20911659
What the OP wrote

[Anonymous No.20914678]

>>20913518
>>20914548
I always thought left, right was just something that happened during the French revolution and was adopted from there to describe conservative, right of lady liberty, and progressive, left of Lady liberty.

One to preserve the monarch, the other to progress beyond it.

[Anonymous No.20915739]

>>20912453
sauce?

[Anonymous No.20916199]

>>20890448

[Anonymous No.20916202]

>>20890448
this one too