The Modern Political Tradition: Hobbes to Habermas

by Lawrence E. Cahoone

Publisher's Summary

Without even realizing it, we all use the fruits of political philosophy. From liberty to democracy to community, the terms and concepts originated by political philosophers are ingrained in our global consciousness. Yet many of us have an incomplete picture of how these ideas developed and, quite possibly, a skewed perception of their intentions and implications.

This highly relevant course sheds light on the labyrinth of Western political and social theory, as well as its influence on modern history. Guided by an award-winning professor of philosophy and author, these eye-opening lectures reveal how political philosophers, in responding to the societal problems and changing conditions of their day in revolutionary ways, created virtual blueprints of action for leaders. You'll gain not only the tools to comprehend the omnipresent language of politics, but a thorough understanding of the wellspring of thought that has emerged over centuries of political philosophy and the intellectual origins of major historical movements and events.

Throughout, questions of democracy, freedom, and distributive justice are addressed, and revolutionary figures who have left an indelible mark on history - from Niccolo Machiavelli to Ayn Rand - are encountered.

By the conclusion of lecture 36, you will have the context necessary to appreciate the evolution of a myriad of political ideas, including hot-button topics of today such as libertarianism, neoconservatism, feminism, and environmentalism.

Genres: Philosophy, Politics, History, Nonfiction, Audiobook, History and Politics, Social Science

691 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2014

Reviews

[Pat Rolston · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a lecture series that is extremely well executed by the professor and he introduces political philosophy in a masterful manner. He speaks to the subject so one can appreciate the basic as well as challenging concepts while never feeling compromised by condescension. There are very few professors who bridge the gap between the elementary to the very elevated ideas in any subject area with such expertise. I believe most anyone with rudimentary knowledge to the more well informed student of political theory, philosophy, or political science will throughly enjoy and benefit from this wonderful lecture series.

[William Adam Reed · Rating 4 out of 5]

This 36 lecture course is very good and fairly deep. Professor Cahoone is an excellent speaker and is very engaging on political philosophy and its history. This is the first course I've listened to by this professor, but I will soon be listening to the other course he does for the Great Courses. I enjoyed his presentation style very much.

Starting with a few background lectures, Cahoone jumps in not with Thomas Hobbes as the course title implies, but with Niccolo Machiavelli and the lessons that grew out of "The Prince". Cahoone leads us down the usual players from early modern philosophy, including Locke, Kant, and Rousseau, but also making connections to the political movements that were occurring at this time, such as the French Revolution, and the rise of the Industrial Revolution. At times, this course can get fairly deep. I listened in the car, or while walking. There were times that I got distracted and may have missed some points that Cahoone was making. That's on me though, these lectures are something that I will be returning to in the future.

The course wraps up with several lectures on events that are still playing out in the current world. Issues like multiculturalism, feminism, and environmental impacts each receive a lecture. As does Just War Theory, and the importance of democracy's place in the future progress of political systems. The course guidebook is better than most guidebooks that the Great Courses does. Highly recommended!

[Jenny Webb · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent lectures, and the resource book is very well done. Cahoone does a wonderful job breaking down complex concepts, and his grasp of intellectual history allows him make useful connections though out that really show the evolution of political thought.

[Titus Hjelm · Rating 4 out of 5]

A solid survey of key thinkers, with bonus points for covering several key sociologists, too. An unfortunate slip is Cahoone’s insistence that the Soviet Union and its satellites and imitators were ’Marxist’, or perhaps it’s just the Cold War talking. This is one of the more challenging courses if you’re new to the topic, for sure, but worth it. Btw, this course once again proves my contention that all American professors sound exactly the same. Also, points to the producers for changing the baroque dingle and faux claps between lectures.

[Aaron Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

*1. Origins and Conflicts of Modern Politics

Politics are normative (what ought to be, not only what is), not descriptive (the way things are).
democracy (majority rule, direct democracy)
republicanism (system of rule by the people)
classical liberalism (limits the amount of power anyone can have, including any government over the people)

Politics relationship to ethics/morality...
moral realism vs. moral relativism

Modern Republicanism - 5 basic values (VALUES CONFLICT!)
1. popular self-governance (republicanism, democracy)(emphasize: civic republican, populists, participatory democrat)
2. individual liberties and rights (classical liberalism)(emphasize: libertarian, neo-liberal, natural rights theorist)
3. equality (emphasize: progressive, social democrat, socialist)
4. communal or national preservation (emphasize: conservative)
5. economic or material modernization/progress (rising living standards)(emphasize: ethical utilitarian-politics aim is to enhance general happiness)


2. Ancient Republics, Empires, Fiefdoms

Plato—The Republic
What is necessary for a just society?
Hated democracy - democracy killed Socrates!
Philosopher-ruler: the highest parts should rule the lower parts
1. aristocracy 2. timocracy 3. oligarchy 4. democracy 5.tyranny

Aristotle—Politics
Man is a political animal. Outside of the polis man is just a beast.

Feudal society - run by the nobility, government of the local lords, king is the first among equals of nobility


3. Machiavelli’s New Order

Nicollo Machiavelli - arguably the first modern political philosopher.

The Prince
Political realism: we do not use civic moral norms in the political realm. Politics is a dirty job.
Real, not imaginary or theoretical, politics
Ends justify the means
Government of the Populace>Government by the Prince


4. Hobbes and the Social Contract

Thomas Hobbes Leviathan
Bases his view on moral relativism and a pessimistic state of nature (war of all against all).
Political authority is based on a social contract between rational, self-interested individuals for the sake of personal security.
No limits on state power because... FEAR OF ONE ALL-POWERFUL SOVEREIGN IS BETTER THAN FEAR OF ALL ONES NEIGHBORS. Giving up natural rights for security.


5. Locke on Limited Government and Toleration

Second treatise on government
Relationship between political leaders and the people is unique (leaders are not our saviors).
NATURAL LAW is from God and is self-evident and rational.
State of nature is much more optimistic than Hobbes.
Emphasis on preservation of property.
Political power is limited.

Letter on toleration
Political ends are different than spiritual ends.


6. Rousseau’s Republican Community

Radical democracy, power to the majority
Focus on humanity’s “primitive state”
Greatest Evils: private property and inequality
Common self, general will
Rejects representative government
The people will make the best decisions
NO LIMITS ON POWER
Freedom!! Self-determination vs. absence of obstacle (Anglo-American)


7. Kant’s Ethics of Duty and Natural Rights

Moral law based on reason alone.
Lying is wrong no matter what the consequences.
You are free only when you act morally.


8. Smith and the Market Revolution

9. Montesquieu and the American Founding

SEPARATION OF POWERS


10. Debating the French Revolution

11. Legacies of the Revolution—Right to Left

12. Nationalism and a People’s War

13. Civil Society—Constant, Hegel, Tocqueville

14. Mill on Liberty and Utility

15. Marx’s Critique of Capitalism

16. Modern vs. Traditional Society

17. Progressivism and New Liberalism

18. Fleeing Liberalism—Varieties of Socialism

19. Fleeing Liberalism—Fascism and Carl Schmitt

20. Totalitarianism and Total War

*21. Conservative or Neoliberal—Oakeshott, Hayek

Traditional Conservatism: rejection of political rationalism (the attempt to reform or remake society on the basis of principles derived from theoretical reason), as opposed to the attempt to maintain a historical society as it is in the face of novel circumstances and problems.

Totalitarianism: utterly remaking society according to an ideology of the ruling party, leaving no area of social life to its own devices and traditional mores.

Progressivism: executive power should be increased as to remake society.


Hayek (free-market liberal, classic liberal, libertarian, neoliberal)

Anti-rationalist (knowledge is always limited; society is too complex to be knowable in detail from a distance; the knowledge required to make good decisions is always local; progress in civilization depends on allowing huge numbers of persons to deploy their local knowledge as they see fit; central planning can never be as intelligent or produce as much social evolution as local freedom).

Economic Conservatism (neoliberalism)—no central planner can outdo the liberal free market.

Free market must be governed by rules/laws.

PATIENCE! Allow the market to work and raise living standards.

To control economics interferes with all freedom. Equality before the law is incompatible with outcome equality. Law must not dictate ends, but how you pursue your ends.

Liberal/capitalistic society is not a meritocracy.

Why I am not a Conservative
1. It’s mystical as opposed to skeptical attitude.
2. It’s fear of spontaneous change.
3. It’s love of authority and elites.
4. Seems to have an antipathy to new knowledge.


Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom

The government’s job is security, courts and printing money. All else is to be done by free contract.

Government monopoly of a service is the worst. Government non-monopoly provision may be acceptable (e.g. allowing private schools as an alternative to public).

Welfare… better to give the poor cash (negative income tax) than housing because that destroys competition.


Conservatives are not liberals!
Classical liberals and traditional conservatives share an enemy—expansive and intrusive progressive government. The enemy of my enemy is my friend!

Traditional conservatives (paleo-liberal) are not libertarians who want as close to zero control of individual liberty as possible. They admire capitalism because they believe it’s more compatible with traditional communal arrangements than socialism would be.


22. Reviving the Public Realm—Hannah Arendt

23. Philosophy vs. Politics—Strauss and Friends

*24. Marcuse and the New Left

Eros and Civilization
The system of capitalism is repressive, alienating to the self and anti-nature (Marxian). Represses human instinctual nature (Freudian). Repression is a historic, economic phenomenon that can be overcome (Marxian). The reason for psychologically repressive society is social and economic, not psychological (Marx, not Freud).

Human reason must cease to be a repression of the sensuous, it will find its expression in sensuousness.

Create a non-repressive society!! Liberation in the classless society will mean an end to repression and a healing of the wounded bifurcated psychological nature of the human being.

One Dimensional Man
The new culture of advanced capitalism rids itself of any element of antagonism. No hope outside the system.

Aims of the new left: racial equality, a libertarian individual liberty, opposition to the Vietnam War. Promote socialism (capitalism is the enemy), rejects the warfare state and racism, and acts for the liberation of poverty. Influenced heavily by the Civil Rights Movement.

So….. The solution is socialism, but is also anti-authoritarian, anti-technological, pro-imagination, pro-eroticism, pro-individualism. So, utterly non-Leninist. The “old left” also suffered from Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago, which destroyed whatever remnants of sympathy were left.


25. Rawls’s A Theory of Justice

Uses rights to promote welfare/progressivism. A new social contract.


26. Ayn Rand, Robert Nozick, Libertarianism

Ayn Rand
Nietzschean critique of altruistic Christian ethics in favor of a rational egoism. Life survival is the standard of value.


27. What about Community?

Sandel vs. Rawls
Concept of desert is destroyed.
Rawls says the community deserves what no individual deserves.


28. Walzer on Everything Money Shouldn’t Buy

29. Identity Politics—Feminism

30. Identity Politics—Multiculturalism

Many times the liberty of groups and the liberty of individuals conflict!


31. The Politics of Nature—Environmentalism

32. Postmodernism, Truth, and Power

33. Habermas—Democracy as Communication

34. The End of History? Clash of Civilizations?

35. Just Wars? The Problem of Dirty Hands

36. Why Political Philosophy Matters

[عدنان العبار · Rating 3 out of 5]

Unlike many books that treat many ideas on an equal footing, this book cannot (and should not) be judged by those standards since it aims to expose the readers to many competing ideas of political philosophy without siding with any one group. But a fair criticism of such books is to look at their omissions and what exactly they pay keen observation to.

It is quite rare for books on political philosophy to consider the ideas of Ayn Rand and Murray Rothbard, but this book does -- if only to discuss Robert Nozick and Friedrich Hayek's contributions to political philosophy. That is totally excusable, but in such a book, it becomes less excusable once the reader (or listener) sees that both Michael Sandel and John Rawls had separate lectures. If those two philosophers who really don't differ as much from each other as Nozick and Rothbard do get two distinct lectures, I was a bit disappointed that not much was said about Rothbard and Ayn Rand. Even Hayek's contribution was given hurriedly. Mises mentioned to pave the way for Hayek, and so on. Moreover, as important as Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, and Gary Becker were to political philosophy, they were barely mentioned, Sowell not at all. Though, I think the lecturer is justified since the aim was to expose the most important thinkers who had the greatest influence, and not just all the ideas.

The author pays so much attention to Hannah Arendt, devoting almost three lectures to her works. The chapters on Leo Strauss and Carl Schmitt were also of fundamental importance since I never got to read their works and now I am very interested in them. Ultimately, there is much to be found here and the book is a treasure chest of resources. I loved that the book at least gave libertarianism an exposition. Though there is very little that the book offers for people who are interested in the right and left of America today. Perhaps the author can include a chapter on Thomas Sowell's A Conflict of Visions, it being perhaps the best book that analyzes that issue from an intellectual point of view, especially as to how they consider what a human being essentially is.

[Vlad Ardelean · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the most interesting and comprehensive courses from the great courses plus series that I took!

Though this definitely is a course in western political traditions, and one with the US in the center of the stage, it still is a very good introduction to political philosophy.

I asked a friend which studied political sciences in the university about this course. He said that the course sums up all he studied - so for people without education on the field, this gets you very close to what's being thought at universities - in case you care :p

I won't sum up all the topics presented, as 36 lectures is a lot. Definitely 5/5 though. I might listen to the course again, but probably not...too many things in the reading backlog. Speaking of reading, I marked as "want to read" a lot of books presented in the course.

I can't conclude the review without commenting specifically about parts of the content that stuck with me:
* Socialism - there seem to have been a lot of versions of left-wing thinkers, among which, anarchists and many other kinds of socialists (I forgot how those saw the world). In any case, at some point, communism became the main left-wing representative...until 1989.
* There were a lot of people trying to justify a certain kind of social order by: pure reason, religious views, social contracts, utility, history, science. I get that they all succeeded in part but also failed in part. The professor says we can't justify liberal democracy, and we should be satisfied with its effects. Well, other kinds of government were more messy it seams, so maybe it's fine.
* There was some guy whose name I forgot (edit: Edmund Burke) who refuted the attempts of "pure-reason" philosophers to justify rights. I like that guy! XD He said that society is too complex for us to be able to achieve much starting from pure reason, and that society's justiffication lays in its history. While I don't necessarily agree with 100% of that, I do like it a lot, and like the fact that someone criticised ivory-tower philosophers. Thinking is good if it leads to a better world. Thinking shouldn't be a target, but a tool, so I tend to disagree with any pure-reason theory, and that was the first philosopher I was able to relate to. The first part of the course kept pissing me of because all the philosophers seemed to be far too disinterested in reality, and too interested in them trying to come up with a prescriptive model for society, while not posessing too much data about it.
* All political systems in the world (at least those analysed) seem to have moved to the center. China is more capitalist, the US is more socialist, and probably that's fine!

[Haoyan Do · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the best among the "Great Courses" series that I've listened to in the past several years, although I didn't really get the audible book for this one, but rather the Amazon video. Professor Cahoone has made distinctive efforts to make things clear. Due to the scope of it, it is very difficult to elaborate on one philosopher or one particular concept, but he tries to clarify as much as possible through repeat assertions, comparisons between old and modern figures, philosophers and rival philosophers. The progress of the idea of "Social Contract" from Hobbes, Locke, to Rousseau is crystal clear; the conservative Burke and the enlightened people who attacked him are dwelled on with relish. Through his tireless explanations, I can almost understand the conflicts between Hamilton and Jefferson, Hamilton and Burr--he didn't actually mention Burr but I thought he would, American and English political system. He didn't elaborate on how the hybrid political system, like what the French has, works and it will be interesting to know.

When the lecture veers towards WWI, WWII, and post WWII, I begin to get more confused. Since I have experienced different political systems and have personal observations to rely on to make sense of the lectures. I begin to feel that a lot of concepts are not really dig up and dissect fully. For example, socialism and socialists become blanket terms to cover all the countries and all the people who claim to be socialists. Actually many so called socialism are not really socialism at all. Mussolini and other Nazi called themselves socialists, but that's just a title they assumed. They couldn't call themselves dictators, could they? In addition, it's very hard for me to imagine Theodore Roosevelt being a liberal democrat. He's the one who tacitly and skillfully agreed that Japan took Korea as a colony. His imperialism is very much at odds with the principle of being a liberal and a democrat.

[Light · Rating 5 out of 5]

It was an amazing experience to get through this audio book. The Professor has done a fantastic job at covering briefly the ideas of major political thinkers of western tradition. The best part of the book is the fact that Professor has clearly expressed the context and the ideas itself without much bias.
For example Adam smith has always been presented as the apostle of capitalism. However in depth examination of his views presents his appreciation for early Capitalism's revolutionary role in denouncing feudal hierarchies and its ability to create opportunity for many to rise up the ladder and break these hierarchies.Though very brief these kind of nuanced views were presented very well.
Although not underscored in these lectures this nuance has deep implications for the present. Modern capitalism - characterized by huge inequalities , wage slavery, Profit over people and environment etc perhaps would have appalled A smith[who is primarily an enlightenment philosopher].
Similarly complex ideas or Tinkers are expressed lucidly. very political philosophies - their evolution and interrelation with other philosophies were also well covered over the course of 36 lectures. I never realized the significance of Micheal Walzer , Habermas until this very clearly.
Definitely a must read[or listen] book for any enthusiast or student of western political philosophy.

[Kristi Richardson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a wonky class and I only understood half of it. The different words used here will make me have to take it again at a later time.
Classical Liberalism is more of a libertarian ideology than being a liberal means to me. There is even a Liberal Conservatism. Now you can see why I have to take it again. My brain feels jumbled.
I liked the professor and will enjoy taking this class again.
I did learn about the different political philosophies, more than I even knew existed. This is a comprehensive class on ancient political theory up to the present day.
I checked this course out at my local library.

[eli · Rating 5 out of 5]

The lecturer is very well spoken and clearly enjoys this topic. He does a great job covering all of the major topics and thinkers of political philosophy and does not shy away from talking about the sophisticated concepts that perhaps other introductory courses would either leave out or simplify too much. Very informative course!

[Jason Friedlander · Rating 5 out of 5]

Lawrence Cahoone delivers with another of one of my favorite lectures with The Great Courses. I’ll probably need to listen to this again sometime in the future but it’s definitely an essential listen for anyone interested in the development of different political philosophies over the past few hundred years.

[Saurabh · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sweeping and insightful survey of political philosophy from the ancients to the post-modernists and beyond. The narrator does a stellar job of explaining and making accessible key concepts from Kantian deontology to Mills' utilitarianism to post-structuralism to Habermas' democracy as communication. A must read in these times of crisis.

[Ben Belcher · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you want to talk politics, I recommend educating yourself with a background in the great thinkers of the last few centuries. It’s amazing that this 18 hour lecture series did more for me in terms of bedrock political philosophy than several related college courses. Would give this 6 stars if I could, and wish more people would learn their roots.

[Bryan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent, very informative, and expansive. I enjoyed every minute of this course and I'm sad that it's over. I'm happy that it went all the way up to the present day and that I was able to get a good refresher on some college courses and personalities taught about in my major. I highly recommend this course, definitely one of the best ones I have gotten through.

[Bill Dauster · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this ambitious effort to catalog political thought, some readers may feel that Cahoone has bitten off more than the reader can chew. Rather than focus on a small number of the most influential thinkers, Cahoone surveys broadly, engaging in discussions of larger political history and the listing of arguably too many names of different thinkers.

[Timo · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very well presented lecture series. Perhaps one of the best I've ever heard from The Great Courses. The professor was lucid and engaging, doing deep dives where needed, but remaining approachable. I'll listen to this series over and over again.

[Colleen · Rating 4 out of 5]

An extensive survey of political and economic thought and philosophy. It became difficult to keep all the theories and thinkers straight, in spite of the professor's logical presentation. But, I now have ideas for further reading.

[Ben Mon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Loved it! If you've ever wondered how we got from "Long live the king" to the mess we (western culture) have today, Cahoone presents this intersection of history, philosophy and political thought in very understandable lay terms.

[Bernardo Vailati]

3.5 rounded 4

very well structured and balanced up to a point, but still a very clearly north-american take on certain things (like what's the "center" politically, what's a radical, the dangers of communism, etc)

[Matias · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the best walkthroughs of the long list of thinkers that have formed our current political thought and presented new issues to still think and solve.

[Scott Thompson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Could also be the modern philosophical tradition. Either way excellent book. I couldn't stop listening. a few dry moments but just a ton of really insightful knowledge.

[Sam(antha) · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fantastic course that covers the material in an engaging manner. The title is something of a misnomer, however, as it covers the pre-Socratics through to Walter’s revised Just War Theory.

[Maxime Ouellet-payeur · Rating 5 out of 5]

Insightful and well-explained. It remains a cold, short, presentation of modern political philosophies, and links them together.

[Ishfaaq Peerally · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good introduction to recent political theory

[Carter Blair · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fantastic introduction. Each chapter flowed from the chapters before it and almost felt inevitable. I do worry that I’ve been duped into believing in a progression of political philosophy that is cleaner and more linear than it was in reality. Yet, this is likely a great way to be introduced to the field and to begin to make connections between various ideas and periods. It definitely was for me!

[Seeking Sophie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very levelheaded overview of western political philosophy, and a wonderful introduction to someone new to the field.