What do you think?
Rate this book
Anatomía de Gray: Textos esenciales
While justly acclaimed as the closest, most successful military partnership in history, the "special relationship" forged between the United States and Britain during World War II was anything but the inevitable alliance it appears to be in hindsight. As the countries of Western Europe fell one by one to Hitler, and Britain alone resisted him, aid from the U.S. was late, expensive, and reluctantly granted by an isolationist government that abhorred the idea of another world war.
Citizens of London is the behind-the-scenes story of the slow, difficult growth of the Anglo-American wartime alliance, told from the perspective of three key Americans in London who played vital roles in creating it and making it work. In her close-focus, character-driven narrative, Lynne Olson, former White House journalist and LA Times Book Prize finalist for her last book, Troublesome Young Men, sets the three Americans - Averell Harriman, Edward R. Murrow, and John Gilbert Winant - at the heart of her dramatic story.
Harriman was the rich, well-connected director of President Roosevelt's controversial Lend-Lease program in which the U.S., a still neutral country, "loaned" military equipment to the UK; Murrow, the handsome, innovative head of CBS News, was the first person to broadcast over live, on-location radio to the American public, and Winant, the least known but most crucial of the three, was the shy former New Hampshire governor who became the new U.S. ambassador to England after Joseph Kennedy quit the post and fled the country as bombs rained down around him.
Citizens of London opens in 1941 at the bleakest period of the war, when Britain withstood nine months of nightly bomb attacks and food and supplies were running out as German ships and U-boats had the island nation surrounded. Churchill was demanding and imploring FDR to help, but the U.S. did its best to ignore England's desperate plight. It was the work of these three key men, Olson argues, that eventually changed American attitudes. So above all this is a human story, focusing on the individuals who shaped this important piece of history. Key to the book is the extremely close relationship between Winston Churchill and the three Americans, and indeed, so intimate were their ties that all three men had love affairs with women in Churchill's family.
Set in the dangerous, vibrant world of wartorn London, Citizens of London is rich, highly readable, engrossing history, the story of three influential men and their immediate circle who shaped the world we live in.
From the Hardcover edition.
Citizens of London is the behind-the-scenes story of the slow, difficult growth of the Anglo-American wartime alliance, told from the perspective of three key Americans in London who played vital roles in creating it and making it work. In her close-focus, character-driven narrative, Lynne Olson, former White House journalist and LA Times Book Prize finalist for her last book, Troublesome Young Men, sets the three Americans - Averell Harriman, Edward R. Murrow, and John Gilbert Winant - at the heart of her dramatic story.
Harriman was the rich, well-connected director of President Roosevelt's controversial Lend-Lease program in which the U.S., a still neutral country, "loaned" military equipment to the UK; Murrow, the handsome, innovative head of CBS News, was the first person to broadcast over live, on-location radio to the American public, and Winant, the least known but most crucial of the three, was the shy former New Hampshire governor who became the new U.S. ambassador to England after Joseph Kennedy quit the post and fled the country as bombs rained down around him.
Citizens of London opens in 1941 at the bleakest period of the war, when Britain withstood nine months of nightly bomb attacks and food and supplies were running out as German ships and U-boats had the island nation surrounded. Churchill was demanding and imploring FDR to help, but the U.S. did its best to ignore England's desperate plight. It was the work of these three key men, Olson argues, that eventually changed American attitudes. So above all this is a human story, focusing on the individuals who shaped this important piece of history. Key to the book is the extremely close relationship between Winston Churchill and the three Americans, and indeed, so intimate were their ties that all three men had love affairs with women in Churchill's family.
Set in the dangerous, vibrant world of wartorn London, Citizens of London is rich, highly readable, engrossing history, the story of three influential men and their immediate circle who shaped the world we live in.
From the Hardcover edition.
576 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2009
40 people are currently reading
437 people want to read
About the author
John Gray
51 books906 followersJohn Nicholas Gray is a English political philosopher with interests in analytic philosophy and the history of ideas. He retired in 2008 as School Professor of European Thought at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Gray contributes regularly to The Guardian, The Times Literary Supplement and the New Statesman, where he is the lead book reviewer.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
January 25, 2014
John Gray is a seriously heavyweight thinker with a a consistent philosophical stance. He applies this vigorously to current and historical events. Not a fan of the Enlightenment, he sees belief in progress as the bastardised child of Christian salvation. But he is not readily pigeon-holed. His liberalism is carefully defined and constrained: it is a procedure for evaluating argument and counter-argument rather than a free-standing set of values. Happiness and fulfillment can take many forms; there is no single template. The good society is one that allows them to co-exist. He combines a conservative pessimism with the cool rationalism of the left. Politics he says is "a series of expedients, not a project of salvation". He ridicules "the malady of infinite aspiration" and political certainties, including the neo-liberal's unbounded faith in markets which hollows out traditional institutions: its creed of "permanent revolution" and globisation tend to destroy family and community. Hence the limp failure of the Big Society (anyone remember that?)He is witty: there were fewer Marxists in the USSR than the average western university; and insightful, arguing that whereas scientific knowledge is cumulative, in the humanities it is not. I didn't agree with everything but as a mercilessly clear and refreshing critique of the assumptions underlying much modern thinking, including Blairism and te neo-cons, it is a bit of an intellectual feast.
January 6, 2013
Do you ever feel that the current level of political debate is tired and misdirected no matter which sterotyped left/right direction it comes from? Well Gray jolts you out of this ennui. It is mental gymnastics but of the British sceptical tradition rather than the French crazy making kind. I would recommend him for those who like engaging with a mind that has other paths that you may disagree with but you can respect. Do not expect a soft landing from him no matter what politcs you may have.
He is not easy to pin down. He is a conservative. He is a quietist. He is green. He is pro nukes and pro population control. He is critical of the current order of things. He decrys the very notion of progress. He believes the vision of utopias has and still does cause the human race great misery. He often hits the nail on the head with his analysis. The book is almost worth reading just for his piece on Blair. On British politics generally there is a great insight.
You can dip in and out of this book as it is a collection of Grays essays. I flicked past maybe 40 pages or so of topics that did not interest me and felt satisfied with what I read.
While I disagreed with some of his opinions I found it thought provoking and think that there may be a kernal of something bigger in his thoughts.
He is not easy to pin down. He is a conservative. He is a quietist. He is green. He is pro nukes and pro population control. He is critical of the current order of things. He decrys the very notion of progress. He believes the vision of utopias has and still does cause the human race great misery. He often hits the nail on the head with his analysis. The book is almost worth reading just for his piece on Blair. On British politics generally there is a great insight.
You can dip in and out of this book as it is a collection of Grays essays. I flicked past maybe 40 pages or so of topics that did not interest me and felt satisfied with what I read.
While I disagreed with some of his opinions I found it thought provoking and think that there may be a kernal of something bigger in his thoughts.
March 25, 2024
John Gray, autor de mis amores. John Gray, filósofo que tiene un homónimo pésimo escritor (el de las mujeres son de venus y los hombres de marte). John Gray, que publica Anatomía de Gray pero nada tiene que ver ni con la serie, ni con el libro de anatomía: es una estrategia de márquetin.
Anatomía de Gray, publicada en 2009, explora temas que van desde la política hasta la religión, pasando por la ciencia y la ética, con su característico enfoque incisivo y perspicaz. Allí Gray para desentrañar y analizar las contradicciones inherentes a la condición humana y a las estructuras sociales que la rodean. A lo largo de sus páginas, como es habitual, desafía las concepciones convencionales sobre el progreso humano y cuestiona la viabilidad de las utopías políticas y sociales.
Gray argumenta que, lejos de avanzar hacia un futuro de prosperidad y armonía, la humanidad está atrapada en un ciclo interminable de conflicto y caos, impulsado por nuestras propias ambiciones y debilidades. Su análisis lúcido y provocativo ofrece una visión alternativa al optimismo desenfrenado que a menudo caracteriza el discurso contemporáneo sobre el desarrollo humano.
Además, la prosa de Gray es clara y concisa, lo que facilita la comprensión de ideas complejas y profundas. Su estilo directo y sin adornos permite que las ideas centrales del libro resplandezcan con claridad, lo que hace que Anatomía de Gray sea accesible para una amplia gama de lectores, desde académicos hasta personas interesadas en la reflexión sobre el mundo moderno. No obstante hay algunos capítulos de difícil lectura, de saboreo lento.
Para muchos, la visión pesimista de Gray puede resultar demasiado deprimente o desalentadora, y que su escepticismo hacia las aspiraciones humanas puede parecer excesivamente cínico en ocasiones. A ellos les digo: les falta calle.
En general encuentro cuatro grandes tópicos en esta obra:
Escepticismo respecto al progreso humano: Gray desafía la noción predominante de que la humanidad está en un camino inevitable hacia un futuro de mejora continua. En lugar de ello, argumenta que la historia está marcada por una serie de avances y retrocesos, y que no hay garantía de que el progreso tecnológico o social conduzca a una mayor felicidad o estabilidad. Esta visión crítica desafía las narrativas optimistas que a menudo dominan el discurso público. Este es un tópico habitual de su obra y, claramente, en Anatomía iba a aparecer.
Crítica de las utopías políticas: Gray examina críticamente los ideales utópicos que han impulsado movimientos políticos a lo largo de la historia. Desde el comunismo hasta el liberalismo, Gray argumenta que todas las ideologías políticas contienen elementos utópicos que ignoran las realidades humanas y socavan la libertad individual. Al destacar los peligros inherentes a la búsqueda de una utopía, Gray llama a la reflexión sobre las limitaciones de la política como una fuerza transformadora. Este es otro tópico habitual.
Relación entre la humanidad y la naturaleza: Gray aborda la tensa relación entre la humanidad y el mundo natural, argumentando que la idea de que la humanidad puede controlar o dominar la naturaleza es fundamentalmente errónea. En lugar de ello, sugiere que debemos aprender a vivir en armonía con la naturaleza y reconocer nuestra interdependencia con otros seres vivos. Esta perspectiva ecofílica desafía las actitudes antropocéntricas y destaca la importancia de la humildad y el respeto hacia nuestro entorno. Este tópico es habitual en su obra reciente.
La condición humana y la moralidad: Gray explora las complejidades de la moralidad humana, argumentando que nuestras acciones están influenciadas por una variedad de motivaciones egoístas y altruistas. Al cuestionar la idea de que existe una moralidad universal o absoluta, Gray sugiere que debemos aceptar la diversidad moral y reconocer la inevitabilidad del conflicto ético. Esta visión relativista desafía las concepciones tradicionales de la moralidad y plantea preguntas difíciles sobre la naturaleza de la ética humana. Este tópico permanece tanto en sus obras de filosofía política como en las de ecología profunda.
En fin, Anatomía de Gray es un compendio filosófico provocativa y estimulante que desafía las concepciones convencionales sobre el progreso humano y ofrece una visión alternativa y profundamente reflexiva sobre la condición humana y el mundo en el que vivimos. Con su aguda inteligencia y su prosa profunda, John Gray nos invita a cuestionar nuestras suposiciones y a explorar las complejidades y contradicciones que subyacen a nuestra experiencia colectiva.
Anatomía de Gray, publicada en 2009, explora temas que van desde la política hasta la religión, pasando por la ciencia y la ética, con su característico enfoque incisivo y perspicaz. Allí Gray para desentrañar y analizar las contradicciones inherentes a la condición humana y a las estructuras sociales que la rodean. A lo largo de sus páginas, como es habitual, desafía las concepciones convencionales sobre el progreso humano y cuestiona la viabilidad de las utopías políticas y sociales.
Gray argumenta que, lejos de avanzar hacia un futuro de prosperidad y armonía, la humanidad está atrapada en un ciclo interminable de conflicto y caos, impulsado por nuestras propias ambiciones y debilidades. Su análisis lúcido y provocativo ofrece una visión alternativa al optimismo desenfrenado que a menudo caracteriza el discurso contemporáneo sobre el desarrollo humano.
Además, la prosa de Gray es clara y concisa, lo que facilita la comprensión de ideas complejas y profundas. Su estilo directo y sin adornos permite que las ideas centrales del libro resplandezcan con claridad, lo que hace que Anatomía de Gray sea accesible para una amplia gama de lectores, desde académicos hasta personas interesadas en la reflexión sobre el mundo moderno. No obstante hay algunos capítulos de difícil lectura, de saboreo lento.
Para muchos, la visión pesimista de Gray puede resultar demasiado deprimente o desalentadora, y que su escepticismo hacia las aspiraciones humanas puede parecer excesivamente cínico en ocasiones. A ellos les digo: les falta calle.
En general encuentro cuatro grandes tópicos en esta obra:
Escepticismo respecto al progreso humano: Gray desafía la noción predominante de que la humanidad está en un camino inevitable hacia un futuro de mejora continua. En lugar de ello, argumenta que la historia está marcada por una serie de avances y retrocesos, y que no hay garantía de que el progreso tecnológico o social conduzca a una mayor felicidad o estabilidad. Esta visión crítica desafía las narrativas optimistas que a menudo dominan el discurso público. Este es un tópico habitual de su obra y, claramente, en Anatomía iba a aparecer.
Crítica de las utopías políticas: Gray examina críticamente los ideales utópicos que han impulsado movimientos políticos a lo largo de la historia. Desde el comunismo hasta el liberalismo, Gray argumenta que todas las ideologías políticas contienen elementos utópicos que ignoran las realidades humanas y socavan la libertad individual. Al destacar los peligros inherentes a la búsqueda de una utopía, Gray llama a la reflexión sobre las limitaciones de la política como una fuerza transformadora. Este es otro tópico habitual.
Relación entre la humanidad y la naturaleza: Gray aborda la tensa relación entre la humanidad y el mundo natural, argumentando que la idea de que la humanidad puede controlar o dominar la naturaleza es fundamentalmente errónea. En lugar de ello, sugiere que debemos aprender a vivir en armonía con la naturaleza y reconocer nuestra interdependencia con otros seres vivos. Esta perspectiva ecofílica desafía las actitudes antropocéntricas y destaca la importancia de la humildad y el respeto hacia nuestro entorno. Este tópico es habitual en su obra reciente.
La condición humana y la moralidad: Gray explora las complejidades de la moralidad humana, argumentando que nuestras acciones están influenciadas por una variedad de motivaciones egoístas y altruistas. Al cuestionar la idea de que existe una moralidad universal o absoluta, Gray sugiere que debemos aceptar la diversidad moral y reconocer la inevitabilidad del conflicto ético. Esta visión relativista desafía las concepciones tradicionales de la moralidad y plantea preguntas difíciles sobre la naturaleza de la ética humana. Este tópico permanece tanto en sus obras de filosofía política como en las de ecología profunda.
En fin, Anatomía de Gray es un compendio filosófico provocativa y estimulante que desafía las concepciones convencionales sobre el progreso humano y ofrece una visión alternativa y profundamente reflexiva sobre la condición humana y el mundo en el que vivimos. Con su aguda inteligencia y su prosa profunda, John Gray nos invita a cuestionar nuestras suposiciones y a explorar las complejidades y contradicciones que subyacen a nuestra experiencia colectiva.
December 15, 2025
In Isaiah Berlin's essay 'the Hedgehog and the Fox' the celebrated Historian of ideas differentiated between two sorts of thinker: The Hedgehog has one big idea, into which everything else fits, while the Fox knows a little about every topic but has no unifying thesis. Marx, Hegel or Freud would serve as useful examples of Hedgehogs, while Foxes might include figures such as Montaigne, Shakespeare or James Joyce. Berlin himself belonged firmly in the latter category, while his protégé John Gray, is most definitely a Hedgehog. Gray has one overarching theme which he has mined for many of his most famous books such as Straw Dogs, Black Mass, False Dawn, and this, a collection of his shorter essays. His contention is this: Progress is a myth: A fairy-tale cobbled together by well meaning people from discarded scraps of religious faith that no longer satisfies modern ideas of truth. In Gray's view Utopian societies like the USSR and Mao's China are obvious examples of this corrupted form of salvation. What began with the promise of a Communist paradise on earth ended with the Gulag and the deaths of millions of people. The road to hell is famously paved with good intentions, and the attempt to create heaven here and now often leads to chaos and destruction, as individual human lives are sacrificed on the altar of progress. 'Don't Immanentize the Eschaton' as reactionary thinkers are fond of saying. Even the Nazis were in this respect Utopians, though their vision of a racially pure Aryan nation built on war and slavery strikes most people today as evil incarnate.
According to Gray however, as misguided as these Utopias are, so too is the doctrine of Neo-liberalism, of unrestrained capitalism bringing in its wake salvation for all. Infinite economic growth on a finite planet and a teleological view of History as a one way street towards ever greater perfection are no less mad and may even destroy us more quickly, as the living world itself is destroyed in pursuit of private profit. The period after the Fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 which promised so much, came to an end with the Iraq war, which stemmed from a misguided and hubristic faith that all societies on earth would smoothly and easily adopt Western forms of government and economy. For Gray, History did not end, as Francis Fukuyama had claimed it had, in the 90's. Indeed it could not, because history is not an arrow aiming for a target or a march towards a fixed destination, but a series of moments unravelling according to the competing whims of human nature, with Gray claiming at one point "Looking for meaning in History is like looking for patterns in clouds." The whole thing is far more contingent, unpredictable and ultimately for believers in progress, unsatisfying.
Yes, Gray admits, improvements to existing conditions can be made, such as those in science which have made modern life so much more tolerable, but they can also just as easily be lost, and in time, likely will be. Regardless of material improvements, real ethical progress remains a mirage, according to Gray. Humans may become more adept at controlling and utilizing the natural world, but they will not be any more moral than they were in the past. Despite 100'000 years of evolution we remain essentially a Primate species with all the associated savagery that that entails. Our growing scientific understanding of the world has brought us planes, X-rays and antibiotics, but it has also helped us wipe out most of the animals we co-exist with and damaged the global ecosystem on which we depend, perhaps fatally imperilling the survival of our own species. As Karl Krauss, one of his favourite aphorists put it: "Progress celebrates Pyrrhic victories over nature."
This could be a rather bleak nihilistic view of things, and on its own, would surely not have made Gray such a bestseller. His solutions lead him, rather than back into the old certainties of faith, out and through the other side of progress and into another, older view of Humanity's place in the world. Taking his cue from often overlooked writers and philosophers, particularly Schopenhauer and Santayana but also Montaigne, Michael Oakeshott and Lao Tzu, he proposes that we try to take whatever solace we can in the lack of meaning, to enjoy our lives as best we should, and to live like the animals who do not build their hopes upon future dreams but live fully in the present. How possible it is to do this, Gray never discloses. Can humans really give up their dreams so easily? Most people, it seems likely, would rather maintain their illusions rather than interrogate or even discard them. Perhaps we are stuck with the idea of progress. Given the choice, very few will choose to live a life entirely free from the comforting myths of progress and salvation. Yet, in the ultimate paradox, that may be where our best chance of happiness truly lies. As Gray ends the book "Other animals do not need a purpose in life... can we not think of the aim of life as being simply to see?"
According to Gray however, as misguided as these Utopias are, so too is the doctrine of Neo-liberalism, of unrestrained capitalism bringing in its wake salvation for all. Infinite economic growth on a finite planet and a teleological view of History as a one way street towards ever greater perfection are no less mad and may even destroy us more quickly, as the living world itself is destroyed in pursuit of private profit. The period after the Fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 which promised so much, came to an end with the Iraq war, which stemmed from a misguided and hubristic faith that all societies on earth would smoothly and easily adopt Western forms of government and economy. For Gray, History did not end, as Francis Fukuyama had claimed it had, in the 90's. Indeed it could not, because history is not an arrow aiming for a target or a march towards a fixed destination, but a series of moments unravelling according to the competing whims of human nature, with Gray claiming at one point "Looking for meaning in History is like looking for patterns in clouds." The whole thing is far more contingent, unpredictable and ultimately for believers in progress, unsatisfying.
Yes, Gray admits, improvements to existing conditions can be made, such as those in science which have made modern life so much more tolerable, but they can also just as easily be lost, and in time, likely will be. Regardless of material improvements, real ethical progress remains a mirage, according to Gray. Humans may become more adept at controlling and utilizing the natural world, but they will not be any more moral than they were in the past. Despite 100'000 years of evolution we remain essentially a Primate species with all the associated savagery that that entails. Our growing scientific understanding of the world has brought us planes, X-rays and antibiotics, but it has also helped us wipe out most of the animals we co-exist with and damaged the global ecosystem on which we depend, perhaps fatally imperilling the survival of our own species. As Karl Krauss, one of his favourite aphorists put it: "Progress celebrates Pyrrhic victories over nature."
This could be a rather bleak nihilistic view of things, and on its own, would surely not have made Gray such a bestseller. His solutions lead him, rather than back into the old certainties of faith, out and through the other side of progress and into another, older view of Humanity's place in the world. Taking his cue from often overlooked writers and philosophers, particularly Schopenhauer and Santayana but also Montaigne, Michael Oakeshott and Lao Tzu, he proposes that we try to take whatever solace we can in the lack of meaning, to enjoy our lives as best we should, and to live like the animals who do not build their hopes upon future dreams but live fully in the present. How possible it is to do this, Gray never discloses. Can humans really give up their dreams so easily? Most people, it seems likely, would rather maintain their illusions rather than interrogate or even discard them. Perhaps we are stuck with the idea of progress. Given the choice, very few will choose to live a life entirely free from the comforting myths of progress and salvation. Yet, in the ultimate paradox, that may be where our best chance of happiness truly lies. As Gray ends the book "Other animals do not need a purpose in life... can we not think of the aim of life as being simply to see?"
April 9, 2022
I just decided I was done with this book. I spent a year or so reading some articles at some points (I’m big on lavatory reading). I didn’t read everything because I don’t care a single bit about “green conservatism” and how much there is to dislike about Ayn Rand and Steven Pinker. Mostly my rule of thumb is the good stuff is the articles Gray wrote before 2000. He argues the establishment of the liberal order undermines the principles on which it was built. He argues there are other ways of making people live together than giving them rights they can throw at each other’s face (that’s one of the “two faces of liberalism”, the tolerant Hobbesian tendency against the dogmatic Lockean tradition). All in all it made me more skeptical of liberalism. Which is probably a good thing. His pessimism is slightly edgy though.
April 27, 2009
We know that our civilisation is ending and this book explains that it doesnt matter. We had our fun. Our religious idea of Progress is false and the Enlightenment project to change human nature was quite futile. Only the intertwined Scientific Revolution has been something to enjoy. John Gray's philosophy refutes everything we in the West were brought up to believe in and although he doesnt realise how quickly climate change is coming to us he takes his place with James Lovelock as being the true chronicler of our age.
December 15, 2016
"I am shocked to find that I mostly agree with Gray, despite having some major issues with his Black Mass. I do not consider myself to be conservative, merely pragmatic/prudent (although I do have a slight tory streak), so I find it odd to be on the same page with a man who regularly ridicules liberalism (I call myself a liberal). Gray is clearly far more liberal than many of the torys he claims to follow. He is in an odd position: he seeks to differentiate "true" conservatism from neo-conservatism (admirable) while trying to pretend that toryism has always been about individual liberty (totally not true). But Gray is a true conservative in the sense that, although he doesn't say it outright, he seems to truly believe that it was better in the past (most apparent in his over-the-top critique of modern medicine). As with all other conservatives, in that he is wrong. The past is not better, nor worse: there may be aspects that are preferable to now but there are also aspects that would have been unbearable to us (as he does admit). I find Gray valuable for his fierce if fairly unoriginal critique of western ideologies as secular religions (it has been done better and more rigorously by others) and particularly for his critique of capitalism, which takes a position that is new to me. Where I cannot tolerate him is in his near-apocalyptic environmentalism (I may agree with many of his ideas but I don't agree with the Gaia "hypothesis" - nor do most reputable scientists - and I think that claiming environmental problems will lead to an apocalypse is falling prey to the same religious impulses he accuses ideologies of being subject to) and in his critique of modern medicine. It is one thing to say that we go to far in trying to preserve lives that no longer have quality of life. It is quite another to claim that modern medicine is dehumanizing. That is like saying that paying taxes is "wage slavery" (another conservative piece of baloney). I must say that when my life was saved by doctors at age 18, I was in no way dehumanized. Quite the contrary."
December 15, 2024
Had to include these lines about Oakeshott from here. ‘His response to the modern world was to cultivate an epicurean gaiety and independence…a highly developed aesthetic sensitivity with a tolerance of everyday routine…Oakeshott certainly seems to have done his best to live a life of radical moral individualism himself, though not, it must be said, without imposing considerable costs on some of those around him, particularly the women in his life…if he praised and defended conventional morality, one reason could have been that he enjoyed contemplating a world composed of people unlike himself’
January 5, 2025
A great tour of Gray's thinking. Speaks to the quality of his thought how most of what he pondered on from the early 90s to late 00s still rings true today. Definitely a treasure trove to come back to for wisdom, away from the many delusional modern thinkers of our age. Nobody else in British intellectualism has quite been able to elucidate British politics as clearly as Gray, and may not for quite some time.
"Other animals do not need a purpose in life. A contradiction to itself, the human animal cannot do without one. Can we not think of the aim of life as being simply to see?"
"Other animals do not need a purpose in life. A contradiction to itself, the human animal cannot do without one. Can we not think of the aim of life as being simply to see?"
October 2, 2024
I don't agree with everything Gray writes here, and I don't always understand him either but this book may have had more impact on my thinking and philosophy than any other. As one review here said, this book is "mental gymnastics" and it truly was, but the outcome is a thoroughly challenged and tested view of the world, life and politics. The essays on Blair and Thatcher were particularly brilliant.
September 30, 2013
Max Weber, way before WWII, had already predicted some of the problems that would assail modern industrial societies throughout last century: Instead of praising rationality as some kind of panacea, he realised it would create bureaucratic "iron cages" that would eventually stymie the pursuit of personal freedom to some extent; and charismatic leaders, far from being saviours, are just one different kind of leadership that people irrationally cling to, thus granting control over this bureaucratic machine. All this knowledge didn't stop Weber's own homeland from fostering Nazism. Rationality and science, rather than being the solution to all our woes, were unable to prevent humans from being human.
The message from John Gray's book is not altogether different from this one: The myth of progress (even through science or any foreseeable rational means) is nothing but a myth. Scientific knowledge may help us fight diseases, but it's useless when it comes to fighting our own human impulses. Contemporary societies can be affected by intolerance and slavery, among other threats to individual freedom, as ancient societies were. Progress in this sense is extremely fragile, and the belief in a better future can quite often be the one obstacle towards this goal.
The underlying message of this book is that we should come to terms with the fact reason can only go so far, and attempts to improve the human lot often lead to disastrous consequences. Although this may turn out to be a myth itself, John Gray's apparently sound empirical approach to history makes it a reliable one.
Ps.: The naked woman in the cover definitely made me get some funny looks on the street. It made the book all the more amusing.
The message from John Gray's book is not altogether different from this one: The myth of progress (even through science or any foreseeable rational means) is nothing but a myth. Scientific knowledge may help us fight diseases, but it's useless when it comes to fighting our own human impulses. Contemporary societies can be affected by intolerance and slavery, among other threats to individual freedom, as ancient societies were. Progress in this sense is extremely fragile, and the belief in a better future can quite often be the one obstacle towards this goal.
The underlying message of this book is that we should come to terms with the fact reason can only go so far, and attempts to improve the human lot often lead to disastrous consequences. Although this may turn out to be a myth itself, John Gray's apparently sound empirical approach to history makes it a reliable one.
Ps.: The naked woman in the cover definitely made me get some funny looks on the street. It made the book all the more amusing.
July 22, 2024
How does one begin to characterise the political thought of John Gray? Other reviewers here have highlighted how difficult Gray can be to pin down. One reviewer of his for another book called him the Lady Gaga of philosophy, in that just as Gaga had an album in many genres so too has Gray adopted many political positions in his long career. If I had to produce my own lists of labels for Gray based on these essays, it would be conservative, liberal, postliberal, green, pro-nuclear, neo-Malthusian, zero-growth, market radical, anti-humanist.
I think that the Lady Gaga comment is ultimately both fair and unfair. It's true that some of Gray's essays in this collection arguably act as refutations to some of the others. But then the essays are drawn from a long timespan. Probably more fair is that the same reviewer complained that Gray adopts each new position with a convert's zeal. This is perhaps surprising, given that one of the more consistent features of Gray's worldview is a disdain for what he labels secular religions. Perhaps he mistakes his own lack of faith in 'universal civilisation' (the belief in which is an attack he makes on many creeds, including liberalism, humanism, and communism, amongst others) for a lack of faith in general.
Over the course of his life, Gray has come to obtain a vast intellectual and cultural hinterland, and this is one the genuine pleasures of this collection of essays. He has drank deeply from both the liberal well and the conservative well, and offers fascinating commentaries on many thinkers. In two of the essays he gives provocative framings of Michael Oakeshott as a liberal and Hayek as a conservative (familiarity with their thought typically leads to the reverse conclusion for each). In another, he uses Borges' Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius as a tool for framing a critique of a book collecting contemporary philosophy as being divorced from reality. A particular favourite of mine was a review of the works of Theodore Powys of whom I had not heard before, but whose books now sit on my to-buy list.
Perhaps what draws me most to Gray's work is just how thoughtful he is capable of being. Unlike many other postliberal thinkers, Gray offers interesting and challenging perspectives on a wide range of topics and issues. His framing of Blair as a neocon stands out in my memory, as does his review of Charles Moore's biography on Thatcher. Like many on the left, I am well aware of how radically transformational Thatcher's policies were - I was much less aware that Thatcher's intention was to restore the British culture of the 1950s. As Gray points out, the cultural turn towards individualism under Thatcher is then an unintended consequence, rather than the goal of Thatcher's policies. More interesting still were some insights into Thatcher the person, particularly a frosty exchange Gray endured with her in an attempt to persuade her of the merits of the academic tenure system she abolished.
But Gray also has some deeply frustrating tendencies - even, I think, for those readers who unlike myself share his conservative political perspective. He often relies strongly on blanket assertion without evidence. In the longest essay in the book, Gray claims to reconcile green thought with conservative thought. For me, it was the least enjoyable read, being part neo-malthusian screed, part radical marketisation wish-list- all while claiming to be critical of the market instincts of neoliberals. Perhaps one of Gray's favourite assertions is the negative impact of a rising human population, and how foolish liberals are to ignore that this is necessarily a problem of finite resources. Of course, some resources (such as solar energy) while not physically infinite are as good as infinite from our human perspective.
Similarly, my understanding of the research is that institutions play a huge role in the size of the human population the planet is able to support, with the division of labour and supply chains in particular serving to increase that number. Consider a couple of responses to Mathusian star Thanos, here and here. Liberals (and others) who oppose zero-growth have good reason to do so. One might even go so far as to turn his critique of Terry Eagleton back on him: he "does not address these facts, for his view of the world is not founded in facts".
Another frustration is that in many of his critiques of both liberalism and humanism, he sometimes descends into a reliance on strawman arguments. This is a surprise, given how nuanced I have seen him be on liberalism in other settings (there are probably few who better understand liberal thought today). His definition of humanism as being essentially a secular religion tied to an ideal of 'universal civilisation' was perhaps much less convincing as I have recently finished Sarah Bakewell's Humanly Possible, where she defines humanism in opposition to ideologies and in line with the sceptical philosophical tradition Gray aligns himself to.
But there is much to like and to draw on in his thought, even for one who is inclined to the liberal disposition that is so often the target of his critiques. Another of the more consistent parts of his world view is a concern with modus vivendi, or value pluralism. Isaiah Berlin is of course the great defender of this perspective in the liberal tradition, but Gray nonetheless adds a great deal to it. He highlights that often in the West, value pluralism is not experienced in autonomous individuals but in coexisting ways of life. Likewise, he is a great critic of the idea that liberal democracy is either the culmination of social knowledge (as in Fukuyama's view) or even particularly likely to last. I don't know that I agree with his critique of the possibility of progress in the social world, but it is a critique that should not be ignored by those of us on the left.
At his best, Gray is less postliberal, more critic of liberalism from within (his Intelligence Squared debate with Fukuyama here is well worth watching, and shows Gray at his best). If his essays fall short of this, one suspects it is because Gray himself wrestles with different perspectives; and at the same time because Gray enjoys taking a contrarian perspective on many of Western society's pieties. Ultimately, this book made me think, and has forced me to question my own perspective - and I cannot give it higher praise than that.
I think that the Lady Gaga comment is ultimately both fair and unfair. It's true that some of Gray's essays in this collection arguably act as refutations to some of the others. But then the essays are drawn from a long timespan. Probably more fair is that the same reviewer complained that Gray adopts each new position with a convert's zeal. This is perhaps surprising, given that one of the more consistent features of Gray's worldview is a disdain for what he labels secular religions. Perhaps he mistakes his own lack of faith in 'universal civilisation' (the belief in which is an attack he makes on many creeds, including liberalism, humanism, and communism, amongst others) for a lack of faith in general.
Over the course of his life, Gray has come to obtain a vast intellectual and cultural hinterland, and this is one the genuine pleasures of this collection of essays. He has drank deeply from both the liberal well and the conservative well, and offers fascinating commentaries on many thinkers. In two of the essays he gives provocative framings of Michael Oakeshott as a liberal and Hayek as a conservative (familiarity with their thought typically leads to the reverse conclusion for each). In another, he uses Borges' Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius as a tool for framing a critique of a book collecting contemporary philosophy as being divorced from reality. A particular favourite of mine was a review of the works of Theodore Powys of whom I had not heard before, but whose books now sit on my to-buy list.
Perhaps what draws me most to Gray's work is just how thoughtful he is capable of being. Unlike many other postliberal thinkers, Gray offers interesting and challenging perspectives on a wide range of topics and issues. His framing of Blair as a neocon stands out in my memory, as does his review of Charles Moore's biography on Thatcher. Like many on the left, I am well aware of how radically transformational Thatcher's policies were - I was much less aware that Thatcher's intention was to restore the British culture of the 1950s. As Gray points out, the cultural turn towards individualism under Thatcher is then an unintended consequence, rather than the goal of Thatcher's policies. More interesting still were some insights into Thatcher the person, particularly a frosty exchange Gray endured with her in an attempt to persuade her of the merits of the academic tenure system she abolished.
But Gray also has some deeply frustrating tendencies - even, I think, for those readers who unlike myself share his conservative political perspective. He often relies strongly on blanket assertion without evidence. In the longest essay in the book, Gray claims to reconcile green thought with conservative thought. For me, it was the least enjoyable read, being part neo-malthusian screed, part radical marketisation wish-list- all while claiming to be critical of the market instincts of neoliberals. Perhaps one of Gray's favourite assertions is the negative impact of a rising human population, and how foolish liberals are to ignore that this is necessarily a problem of finite resources. Of course, some resources (such as solar energy) while not physically infinite are as good as infinite from our human perspective.
Similarly, my understanding of the research is that institutions play a huge role in the size of the human population the planet is able to support, with the division of labour and supply chains in particular serving to increase that number. Consider a couple of responses to Mathusian star Thanos, here and here. Liberals (and others) who oppose zero-growth have good reason to do so. One might even go so far as to turn his critique of Terry Eagleton back on him: he "does not address these facts, for his view of the world is not founded in facts".
Another frustration is that in many of his critiques of both liberalism and humanism, he sometimes descends into a reliance on strawman arguments. This is a surprise, given how nuanced I have seen him be on liberalism in other settings (there are probably few who better understand liberal thought today). His definition of humanism as being essentially a secular religion tied to an ideal of 'universal civilisation' was perhaps much less convincing as I have recently finished Sarah Bakewell's Humanly Possible, where she defines humanism in opposition to ideologies and in line with the sceptical philosophical tradition Gray aligns himself to.
But there is much to like and to draw on in his thought, even for one who is inclined to the liberal disposition that is so often the target of his critiques. Another of the more consistent parts of his world view is a concern with modus vivendi, or value pluralism. Isaiah Berlin is of course the great defender of this perspective in the liberal tradition, but Gray nonetheless adds a great deal to it. He highlights that often in the West, value pluralism is not experienced in autonomous individuals but in coexisting ways of life. Likewise, he is a great critic of the idea that liberal democracy is either the culmination of social knowledge (as in Fukuyama's view) or even particularly likely to last. I don't know that I agree with his critique of the possibility of progress in the social world, but it is a critique that should not be ignored by those of us on the left.
At his best, Gray is less postliberal, more critic of liberalism from within (his Intelligence Squared debate with Fukuyama here is well worth watching, and shows Gray at his best). If his essays fall short of this, one suspects it is because Gray himself wrestles with different perspectives; and at the same time because Gray enjoys taking a contrarian perspective on many of Western society's pieties. Ultimately, this book made me think, and has forced me to question my own perspective - and I cannot give it higher praise than that.
May 25, 2012
Collection of key writings by John Gray from 1970s onward. Demonstrates evolution of an intellectual conservative away from big-C conservatism. Gray follows his line of argument where it takes him. To me it demonstrates how conservatism cannot effectively function as a stand alone system of belief, rather than a corrective or a source of insights that require further development. Gray is scathing about Marxism, often with keen sarcasm and often appropriately. But in his critique of capitalism he lapses into a romantic pessimism, like many disillusioned right-wingers he largely ignores the insights of social democracy. The critiques of Gray's work by Paul Krugman (http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/gray.html) and Terry Eagleton (http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/...) largely hit the spot. Still a book whose failures teach us something and which demonstrates an impressive, if often misguided, intellectual honesty. Gray's comment on the 'war on terror' and the legitimation of torture are impressive.
August 24, 2018
Hard to read - not for his prose, which is luminous and droll, but because he disagrees with almost everything almost everyone holds dear (whether reason, science, or organised social movements are your tool for improving the world). Tory anti-speciesism, anti-Enlightenment anti-cruelty(??)
These span his career, satirising Marxists and Neocons, eulogising Santayana and explaining why communism sucks and doesn’t work, and why liberalism is cute but doesn’t work. (I paraphrase somewhat.) This leaves only Stoicism and resistance to dangerous meddlers as the ‘good’ life.
Lucid, unclassifiable, horrific.
These span his career, satirising Marxists and Neocons, eulogising Santayana and explaining why communism sucks and doesn’t work, and why liberalism is cute but doesn’t work. (I paraphrase somewhat.) This leaves only Stoicism and resistance to dangerous meddlers as the ‘good’ life.
Lucid, unclassifiable, horrific.
December 16, 2019
30 years of indepent thinking. I respect John Gray's thinking a lot. Clear, sharp, independent and very critical towards the belief in progress and that big failure called neo-liberalism. Not a very cheerful book though.
Want to read
May 6, 2010Reviewed by The Guardian
August 24, 2025
something something no progress something something
March 29, 2021
This selection of Gray's short writings was a joy to read. I have always looked forward to John Gray's essays and book reviews published in the New Statesman and New York Review of Books. This collection is the best of the best of his selected writings from before 2009. Many of the short writings within this collection are the genes from which subsequent books were to spring (notably Straw Dogs). Gray attacks the illusions of progress, enlightenment and universal humanity. He convincingly warns readers about the dangers of idealism; a difficult task given the seductive nature of some of these philosophies. Only John Gray can get away with attempting to convince right-wing people that caring about the environment should be adopted by them as a conservative cause. At the same time he presents a strong case for left-wing parties, in particular Greens, to adopt policies which focus on practical outcomes that are not utopian and quixotic. He is equally harsh with right-wing neo-cons.
I particularly enjoyed his book review "The World is Round" where he attacks the naivety of the pro-globalisation ideas proposed by Thomas L. Friedman in his book "The World is not Round". I also enjoyed rediscovering Joseph Conrad via "Conrad, our Contemporary". Like Conrad, Gray has ended up being prophetic (on globalisation, the post-Soviet world, disorderly capitalisms) and this anthology is written proof of this.
I particularly enjoyed his book review "The World is Round" where he attacks the naivety of the pro-globalisation ideas proposed by Thomas L. Friedman in his book "The World is not Round". I also enjoyed rediscovering Joseph Conrad via "Conrad, our Contemporary". Like Conrad, Gray has ended up being prophetic (on globalisation, the post-Soviet world, disorderly capitalisms) and this anthology is written proof of this.
April 25, 2020
A collection of political philosophy essays by a self-styled conservative thinker. The writer makes interesting critiques of classical liberal ideas and their current versions. He is particularly effective in unmasking hidden ideological tendencies. Other essays deal with thinkers like Hayek, Oakeshott, Santayana, and Berlin. All essays contain novel ideas and repay careful attention. The language is scholarly, but sometimes the sentence structure is over-complex to the detriment of clarity.
August 5, 2019
I read this book in my early 20's and to say that it informed my opinion on a myriade of topics would be understating the power of John Gray. This books sways from early Christianity influencing modern day secularism. Christianity inturn deformed by greek philosophy. Globalisation and political divide. This book gives a lens to view the world with reason and logic.
December 3, 2025
Collected writings of the renowned English philosopher John Gray. Really interesting and incisive. I especially enjoy his take on progress - Gray, unlike most of us, does not see human progress as linear or inevitable. As he notes, humans are not rational beings. We are what we are, despite our technological innovations.
May 27, 2020
Neat collection of essays. Some overlap with his other writings. If you're not yet bored with Senor Gray it probably means you have not read enough of his yet.
October 22, 2023
While this book contains chapters on different topics, the central themes throughout are on conservatism and liberalism.
Gray argues that neo-liberal ideals of progress are deluded, revolutions pointless etc. At a surface level his argument for a together society that looks inwardly rather than to the stars, and is non-materialist is appealing (to the layperson, anti-capitalist, social, psycholgical and ancient theory etc)... the kind of idealism that right wing politicians in the UK slap to the side of a bus. Gray pontificates on Hobbes, Mill and other philosophers but his arguments are political rather than philosophical/logical. They hijack social contract as a Conservative creation and therefore, anything less than conservatism becomes barbaric.
Gray's argument against neo-liberalism is politicised e.g. he argues America's policy of waterboarding terror suspects showed that the modern ideal of progressive ethics is deluded. However, the US's decision to torture wasn't done in any kind of liberal, democratic spirit; hence the backlash. His arguments against liberalism are misplaced.
"The most we can do is remove those artificial impediments to the vitality of our traditions" (pg130). So dismantling our legal apparatus? Gray loathes the welfare state, the enlightenment period and anything to do with progress; poverty and suffering remain (Gray remembers to clap the NHS for a few pages).
Gray's 'philosophy' has materialised in UK politics over the past 15 years and lead us to an unstable and intolerant society. Underneath his conjecture is deceit.
For me Gray gets 2/5 stars as his arguments are not as intelligent as they make out and are inherently right wing but have stimulated me to think more about conservatism and liberalism.
Gray argues that neo-liberal ideals of progress are deluded, revolutions pointless etc. At a surface level his argument for a together society that looks inwardly rather than to the stars, and is non-materialist is appealing (to the layperson, anti-capitalist, social, psycholgical and ancient theory etc)... the kind of idealism that right wing politicians in the UK slap to the side of a bus. Gray pontificates on Hobbes, Mill and other philosophers but his arguments are political rather than philosophical/logical. They hijack social contract as a Conservative creation and therefore, anything less than conservatism becomes barbaric.
Gray's argument against neo-liberalism is politicised e.g. he argues America's policy of waterboarding terror suspects showed that the modern ideal of progressive ethics is deluded. However, the US's decision to torture wasn't done in any kind of liberal, democratic spirit; hence the backlash. His arguments against liberalism are misplaced.
"The most we can do is remove those artificial impediments to the vitality of our traditions" (pg130). So dismantling our legal apparatus? Gray loathes the welfare state, the enlightenment period and anything to do with progress; poverty and suffering remain (Gray remembers to clap the NHS for a few pages).
Gray's 'philosophy' has materialised in UK politics over the past 15 years and lead us to an unstable and intolerant society. Underneath his conjecture is deceit.
For me Gray gets 2/5 stars as his arguments are not as intelligent as they make out and are inherently right wing but have stimulated me to think more about conservatism and liberalism.
June 1, 2020
Gray's Anatomy is neither a classic human anatomy textbook nor a popular medical drama, but rather is a collection of essays from the English political philosopher John Gray. These essays are loosely joined by the same sceptical questions: Why is progress a pernicious myth? Why do beliefs that humanity can be improved end in farce or horror? Is atheism a hangover from Christian faith? In a pessimistic but rigorous manner, Gray's essays try to provide some answers.
The essays are arranged chronologically, so we start with some slightly drier academic essays on liberalism and conservatism. Subsequently, the essays become a bit more accessible to the lay reader, covering topics such as communism and de-globalisation, neo-conservatism and the age of terror, before finally turning his commentary to the doctrines of progressivism and atheism.
Gray is a relentless critic without necessarily offering too much by the way of positive strategies forward, but it is difficult to disagree with the criticisms he makes. And where he does propose a clearer blueprint for action, his argument is compelling too. My favourite essay in the book was "An agenda for green conservatism", in which he puts forward the propositions that green values are inherently conservative in nature and that green outcomes can only be achieved through conservative policies. Relatedly, he is an unapologetic neo-Malthusian and argues that exponential population growth, at least partly a result of loose international borders, is the most dangerous threat to the future health of the planet.
Overall, I enjoyed this one far more than I expected to, and found the arguments to be in equal parts measured and convincing. 7/10
The essays are arranged chronologically, so we start with some slightly drier academic essays on liberalism and conservatism. Subsequently, the essays become a bit more accessible to the lay reader, covering topics such as communism and de-globalisation, neo-conservatism and the age of terror, before finally turning his commentary to the doctrines of progressivism and atheism.
Gray is a relentless critic without necessarily offering too much by the way of positive strategies forward, but it is difficult to disagree with the criticisms he makes. And where he does propose a clearer blueprint for action, his argument is compelling too. My favourite essay in the book was "An agenda for green conservatism", in which he puts forward the propositions that green values are inherently conservative in nature and that green outcomes can only be achieved through conservative policies. Relatedly, he is an unapologetic neo-Malthusian and argues that exponential population growth, at least partly a result of loose international borders, is the most dangerous threat to the future health of the planet.
Overall, I enjoyed this one far more than I expected to, and found the arguments to be in equal parts measured and convincing. 7/10
October 15, 2010
You don't have to agree with everything John Gray writes (and I don't) to appreciate his work - which is here represented in a selection of essays on everything from liberalism to conservatism taking in Swiftian satirical essays "defending" torture along the way. The nature of the book means that it can occasionally feel repetitive - especially with his main bugbear being that progress is illusory and the pursuit of it toward an end requires religious-like convictions. I'm also convinced that many of Gray's hardest hitting criticisms of progress can be applied to some of his own thinking.
I particularly liked his final essay which included the following section:
"Nothing is more alien to the present age than idleness. If we think of resting from our labours, it is only in order to return to them.
In thinking so highly of work we are aberrant. Few other cultures have ever done so. For nearly all of history and all prehistory, work was an indignity.
Among Christians, only Protestants have ever believed that work smacks of salvation...Progress condemns idleness. The work needed to deliver humanity is vast. Indeed it is limitless, since as one plateau of achievement is reached another looms up. Of course this is only a mirage; but the worst of progress is not that it is an illusion. It is that it is endless.
In Greek myth, Sisyphus struggles to roll a stone to the top of a hill so that it will then roll down the other side...For the ancients, unending labour was the mark of a slave. The labours of Sisyphus are a punishment. In working for progress we submit to labour no less servile."
I particularly liked his final essay which included the following section:
"Nothing is more alien to the present age than idleness. If we think of resting from our labours, it is only in order to return to them.
In thinking so highly of work we are aberrant. Few other cultures have ever done so. For nearly all of history and all prehistory, work was an indignity.
Among Christians, only Protestants have ever believed that work smacks of salvation...Progress condemns idleness. The work needed to deliver humanity is vast. Indeed it is limitless, since as one plateau of achievement is reached another looms up. Of course this is only a mirage; but the worst of progress is not that it is an illusion. It is that it is endless.
In Greek myth, Sisyphus struggles to roll a stone to the top of a hill so that it will then roll down the other side...For the ancients, unending labour was the mark of a slave. The labours of Sisyphus are a punishment. In working for progress we submit to labour no less servile."
September 17, 2012
When one of the most popular and convincing unconventional writers of our times refers to someone as 'the greatest living thinker', you can't help but have a look. So reading Nassim Taleb's online notepad got me to buy this collection of political and social writings by Prof. John Gray.
In this book, essays on liberalism, conservatism, former communist societies and the current range of topics like globalization, torture, environmental concerns etc. are deconstructed. The writings are rather bleak in their outlook with regard to the future of the human race and very critical of the notion of progress referring to it as a Christian idea which eventually leads to tyranny (Soviet Communism) and resource scarcity. The ideas are contrarian, pessimistic while being an amazing read for those willing to argue and/or have their beliefs and ideas overturned.
In this book, essays on liberalism, conservatism, former communist societies and the current range of topics like globalization, torture, environmental concerns etc. are deconstructed. The writings are rather bleak in their outlook with regard to the future of the human race and very critical of the notion of progress referring to it as a Christian idea which eventually leads to tyranny (Soviet Communism) and resource scarcity. The ideas are contrarian, pessimistic while being an amazing read for those willing to argue and/or have their beliefs and ideas overturned.
Read
June 24, 2013As a fan of Gray just enjoyed his perspectives and broad terms of reference
Read
December 31, 2018A perfect book with which to complete the year. Gray writes as a conservative who is repelled by the contemporary tendency to equate conservatism with neo-liberalism. (Gray's conservatism emphasizes 'community' over self-directing and selfish 'individualism'.) The essays on Tony Blair and, especially, Margaret Thatcher are truly insightful. I was also much impressed with his essay on contemporary atheism ('Evangelical atheism, secular Christianity' and the persuasive argument that he delivers in 'An agenda for Green conservatism'. (Gray's conservatism emphasizes 'community' over self-directing and selfish 'individualism'.)
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews