The History of Political Thought: A Very Short Introduction

Very Short Introductions #692

by Richard Whatmore

Thinking about politics has tended to be historical in nature because of the comparisons and contrasts that can be drawn between past and present. Different periods in politics have used the past differently. At times political thought can be said to have been drawn directly from the study of history; at others, perhaps including our own time, the relationship is more indirect. This Very Short Introduction explores the core concerns and questions in the field of the history of political thought. Richard Whatmore considers the history of political thought as a branch of political philosophy/political science, and examines the approaches of core theorists such as Reinhart Koselleck, Strauss, Michel Foucault, and the so-called Cambridge School of Quentin Skinner and John Pocock. Assessing the current relationship between political history, theory and action, Whatmore concludes with an analysis of its relevance for current politics.

Genres: Politics, History, Philosophy, Nonfiction, Audiobook

137 pages, Paperback

Published November 25, 2021

About the author

Richard Whatmore is professor of modern history and codirector of the Institute of Intellectual History at the University of St Andrews. He is the author of What Is Intellectual History?, Against War and Empire, and Republicanism and the French Revolution.

Reviews

[Kelly · Rating 2 out of 5]

What is says on the tin. This book was easy to read and gave an overview of history from empire and globally. I was intrigued by Whatmores description of meritocracy in Chinese politics as well as punishment for political mistakes in Asia. Also intriguing was Foucault and authorship. Thirdly, critiquing dead white men in political philosophy.

[Taylor Swift Scholar · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was different than what I was expecting, based on the title. It was less a history of political thought throughout the ages, and more an introduction to a discipline called "The History of Political Thought" about which I previously knew nothing. It was interesting to think about how current political thinkers have eschewed or espoused "the death of the author" when considering political texts from the past. Does it make sense to look for abstract concepts in texts from the past, or do they need to be evaluated in their historical context? I am looking forward to exploring some of the texts recommended in the "Further reading" section.

[Elsie · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an intro to the discipline rather than of the history of political thought generally but I still really enjoyed this. I’ve always been a proponent of NOT understanding/interpreting political philosophy/theory in a ahistorical bubble so this does make me feel a bit more justified ahaha. I would like to learn more about this discipline should I have the time so this book did the job!

[Anastacia · Rating 2 out of 5]

For starters, I was not expecting the title to be expounded so literally. Rather than being a book about political theory through time, it is about the specific discipline of approaching political theory through a historically-minded lens, and how it interacts (or doesn’t) with views of the past.

That being said, this was not an issue at all, but rather the disjointed way this introduction is written. While I don’t like overly redundant summaries or excessive context, it was definitely missing enough to make it feel like the author was walking in and out of the room while continuously talking. A lot of super quick introductions and rapid fire of different names, authors and their works, with jumps between their main messages without always conveying it properly to an audience unfamiliar with these thinkers.

There were some gems in the book though, especially when the author summarized the relevance of this field in their own words, or made broader insights into the contributions of the thinkers discussed. A favourite insight of mine was describing the history of political theory as an approach to understanding political risk, probabilities and understanding what contexts may make political actions more likely to succeed or fail.

Another gem for me was the constant reminder that we must avoid the trap of perceiving superiority in our philosophies and illusions of novel progress compared to the past. The idea that we are finally “doing something different” and progressing toward improvement can be deceptive, especially when many failed or dangerous ideological projects held the exact same perception of themselves.

tldr: just use some a as transition words man

[R. S. Alamsyah · Rating 4 out of 5]

Certainly a Very Short Introduction, but a decidedly exhaustive one. The title might deceive some readers, as it is not an overview of political thought, but rather an overview of the discipline of the *history* of political thought. Nonetheless, it does the overview excellently.

It goes through some of the greatest intellectual historians of the discipline across the political spectrum - from the right-wing scholarship of Leo Strauss to the leftist readings of Foucault and Althusser. However, the writer does show a bias towards the liberal-leaning side of things, Skinner and Rawls in particular.

His descriptions of Straussian and Marxist historians of political theory lack the attention he gives to the Cambridge school, with certain omissions being puzzling, like the lack of the leftist interpreters of early modern political theory, such as Carole Pateman, Charles Mills, and C.B. Macpherson.

Nonetheless, it serves as a great starting point for anyone who wishes to know the field!

[Ilia · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is fundamentally a survey of a methodology, i.e. the different ways to study political thought historically and the possible benefits of doing so. Whatmore is quite circumspect, and occasionally torturous, on the latter point. But the central idea is sound – that appreciating the context in which political justifications are made protects against fanaticism, demagoguery and triviality. Smart people have thought about these things in the past and understanding how they argued against them is useful when arguing against them today.

[Marco · Rating 2 out of 5]

Some interesting thoughts in the final chapter, but otherwise this is an introduction that does not go beyond a surface-level recap of some key schools of the History of Political Thought, rather than presenting a more vivid image of what animates research in the field and what is it for (as is often the case in other VSIs).

[Aaron · Rating 3 out of 5]

A reasonably decent introduction to the history of political thought. It gets a bit overwhelming with name dropping when I hoped it would be a little more focused on ideas. As with many VSI, it was nice to get some references for further, advanced reading.

[Marcus Lira · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's a brief history of the history of political thought. It gives you the tools you need so you can study the actual history of political thought. Although it's not a life changing book, it does pretty much what it set out to do.

[Sam(antha)]

This was certainly a very brief introduction

[Troy Obasi · Rating 3 out of 5]

Was a good book which gave me a broad overview of how multiple thinkers view the historical of political thought. 6.5-7/10

[Satya · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good introduction.

More an introduction into the discipline 'The History of Political Thought' rather than a History of Political Thought.