Cycles of American Political Thought

by Joseph F. Kobylka

18 Cassettes and 3 Guide books in 3 original clamshell cases

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, Audiobook, Philosophy, The Americas, Political Science

Audio Cassette

First published January 1, 2006

Reviews

[William Adam Reed · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5 stars rounded up. This 36 lecture course by Professor Joseph Kobylka is a pretty interesting overview of the political ideas that have shaped American political history. Professor Kobylka is a clear lecturer, with no distracting speech patterns. At times, he can be a little tedious to listen to. But hang in there, some good thoughts are on the way. Kobylka starts with some background lectures then goes into the Puritans. From there he spends a lot of time on the Revolutionary thinkers and then a series of lectures on the American Constitution. Of course, this is to be expected as it is a foundational document for political thought. I'm not sure Kobylka is bringing anything new to the discussions, but rather taking the time to emphasize the important ideas.

For myself, I think the strength of this course, comes after the lectures have gotten past the initial foundation of American government. The lecture on Crevecoeur was pretty interesting, then his lectures on Frederick Douglass, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Orestes Brownson, and Edward Bellamy brought some fresh insights to how these thinkers played a key role in the development of American political theory. Towards the end of the course, he spends a lot of time discussing how the Supreme Court has shaped political thought in the country. The lectures end kind of weakly on a wrap up lecture that was mostly useless. Nothing past the Reagan era is covered in this course though, so it is dated. This course is very similar to another Great Course called the American Mind. I think I preferred that one slightly more because Professor Guelzo may be more adapt at weaving a comprehensive narrative whereas this one felt more tied down to individual notes. Still, I learned a lot and there are sections which are quite profound. Worth checking out!

[Tanya · Rating 4 out of 5]

It took me forever to get through all 36 lectures of this course, but it's not because they weren't worthwhile. They just delved deeply into the writings of many American political thinkers, requiring a great deal of concentration and effort. Other courses I have listened to in pieces in my car. This one demanded more focus.
My favorite lectures were those that dealt with Puritan thinkers, the Constitution,race, and the women's movement. Kobylka is thorough in his analysis, and draws interesting parallels between writers I would have never thought to compare. Overall, I would recommend this course to anyone with a good background in American history who desires to push themselves to a higher level of understanding.

[Amy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Cycles of American Political Thought is a fascinating and informative lecture series about how liberalism (as defined by the primacy of the average individual - as opposed to the collective, as was the case in the Puritan colony and other early American forms of governance - in political thought and concern) tends to cycle between active state liberalism (the idea that the government should actively intervene to improve actual conditions for the average individual, such as with medicare) and a more laissez-faire liberalism (the idea that the government should intervene as little as possible so the best individuals can make themselves known, such as with laissez-faire economics). The series starts with examining and accounting for British political theory/practice as it would have been the direct precursor and shaper of initial American settlements and their governments (to paraphrase Professor Kobylka: they brought baggage, and not just in the form of stuff); discusses Locke and his influence on all the Revolutionary-era giants, along with their own interpretations of and divergence from his political philosophy; discusses backlash and reorganization in the aftermath of the initial generation's passing; discusses the Civil War era and the genesis of modern active state governance (with Lincoln, who was the idol and influence of later Roosevelts more famous for bringing it to fruition) in the context of the way those not considered to be part of the initial conception of The People (black Americans and women) tried to expand that definition so they could also participate in governance and society more generally; discusses backlash in the form of social darwinism, particularly during the Gilded Age; discusses the Great Depression and the subsequent widespread demands for active state liberal governance; and discusses the backlash in the form of political philosophy most associated with Ronald Reagan.

Key to the lecturer's conception and exploration of liberalism is not just the focus on the individual, but also the concept of apparently limitless space and resources. Professor Kobylka argues that, for a long time and through several cycles, freedom and equality were considered to be interchangeable in an economic sense because freedom to move around and do stuff that would make money was a precursor to and necessary state for equality (ie: prosperity more generally). Implicit in this seems to be the acknowledgement that more recent times (the last hundred and fifty years or so) have seen more pointed and strident criticisms of laissez-faire liberalism because, as there was less and less space/resources not already owned by someone else (to be clear: someone else white; I'll get to that in minute), if there was a problem an individual couldn't just move elsewhere with more plentiful resources (ie: "go west, young man!"). To quote my notes: When you've run out of "free resources/land" (ie: stolen from their indigenous inhabitants, but that's not really a part of this lecture) to throw at citizens you can't just continue to scream 'make something of yourself!' The citizens will look at each other, then at you and respond 'with what?'

All in all, I thought this was a very thorough and educational lecture series. It covered a lot of history from perspectives I hadn't considered before, introduced me to historical figures that I hadn't known about, and caused me to think about the influence of factors I hadn't realized were even part of the equation. This is a lecture series that I would highly recommend.



As an aside: One aspect of the laissez-faire liberalism repeatedly gets brought up and I just disagree with it. Basically, the argument is that national governments should be weak and uninvolved with most policies because they are far-removed from the everyday life of the average citizen and does not know what those citizens want or need. This sounds, to me, like something that might have been true when it was originally articulated during the argument over the Constitution, but not now. Furthermore, it never sounds more like bullshit than when it's simultaneously used to attack federal policies meant to expand rights/protections (like the Civil Rights Act) while arguing that federal powers should actually go to state governments on the grounds that they're 'closer to The People.' By the 'closer to the The People' argument, mayors should be the most powerful politicians and municipal governments should exert more influence than state governments because local government is 'closer to The People' than state governments are. Oddly enough, that is not the case in practice, because - at least in my experience - an argument like this isn't made in good faith but comes from a place of desire to control, to impose 'agreement' with larger social, economic, or political concerns. For example, there are multiple municipalities in red states that have had local ordinances mandating a $15 minimum wage overturned by state government (Denver and Colorado as well as St. Louis and Missouri), which would seem to me to illustrate how hollow and fallacious this argument really is.
Practical politics, however, was NOT what this series was about (it was about the history of political theory), which is why is little rant is located in this aside. From the standpoint of pure theory and historical context the lecturer did a good enough job including it, I just couldn't maintain the emotional disengagement from what I see as it's actual use now.

[Emily · Rating 2 out of 5]

This course is a fairly comprehensive overview of the main throughlines of American thought. Kobylka really brings his point home in the end where he points out that we Americans on opposite sides of the spectrum have far more in common than we don't. He does a good job of showing how our current liberal/progressive and conservative viewpoints arose and how they're all an interpretation of what best leads us to liberty and freedom. This message is even more important today, days before the 2020 election.

So why the low rating? Really, it's because for eighteen hours of audio, I didn't learn a whole lot. There was hardly anything he mentioned that I didn't remember from high school history classes. I don't think it's a reason not to listen to this course, especially if this is a topic you're less informed on, but for me it felt really slow paced and I struggled to stay interested because I didn't really feel like I was learning anything new. It's not a fault with Kobylka or the course, I was just perhaps not the right person for the course.

[Xavier Patiño · Rating 4 out of 5]

This course was an exhaustive look into the fluctuations of American political thought, beginning with the Puritans and Quakers and finishing with Regan.

Professor Kobylka narrates clearly and concisely so it made for a pleasant listen. The topics covered are loaded, and repeated hearings were necessary. Even so, some lectures were difficult to fully comprehend, but that fault lies within me. My thoughts on politics is an undulating one; I simultaneously love and hate it!

Nevertheless, the entire course helped lay a foundation of understanding, albeit a cloudy one, on the different kinds of philosophies that have arisen since the founding of the United States. A good place to start!

[Sam Motes · Rating 4 out of 5]

36 lectures on the political traditions in the US that is very poignant to our severely devised country today. All the veins of liberalism, conservatism, socialism, capitalism and libertarianism bounce off each other through the events and thinkers of history to build the political divisiveness we live with today. As the author points out though political divisiveness has always existed in different levels throughout history and so far we have been able to get through them as a united nation through our common beliefs and values.

[Jim Robles · Rating 5 out of 5]

Five stars for another Great Course from The Teaching Company!

[Kiki · Rating 4 out of 5]

CD course. This was good as I recall.

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

I liked it. I'll listen to it again in a few years.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

With this course, Kobylka uses American history to discuss the various aspects and origins of American political thought. Although it almost seems like a discussion of overlapping circles rather than a repetition of the same thoughts over and over, I think this does much to break down the groups of ideals that various thinkers or politicians grouped together and championed throughout out history.

[Paulette · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another great course to listen to in the car.