PY4658
Timely Topics in Political Philosophy
Semester 2, 2018-2019
Tuesdays, 1-3pm
School V
Instructor:
Dr. Adam Etinson
- Email: ae45@st-andrews.ac.uk
- Office Hours: Tuesdays, 3-4pm, or by appointment.
Description:
This module explores a variety of especially timely topics in political philosophy. As
such, the issues it addresses may change from year to year, depending on the
judgment of the instructor. In its 2019 iteration, the module explores questions about
the origins, dangers, and subversion of democracy – including worries about populism,
fascism, and the tyranny of the majority. Alongside this, the module examines
questions about structural injustice, identity politics, the nature of the “modern”
condition, and the role of anger, civility, and hope in politics.
Many of the assigned readings lie outside the confines of philosophy. They include
works of history, sociology, cultural anthropology, and psychology. Interdisciplinarity
presents its challenges, but it also brings benefits: a chance to think about the real
world, in its baffling complexity. Tackling “timely” topics does not mean ignoring the
past. On the contrary, one of the main ambitions of the module is to show how
history, and historical literature, can shed important light on the politics of the
present day.
Learning Outcomes:
By the end of this module, students will be acquainted with a number of important,
especially timely debates in political philosophy and related fields. Students should
have gained a good critical understanding of the issues at stake in these debates, the
various approaches taken by different thinkers, and the various arguments in favour of
each approach. They should be able to critically evaluate discussions of these issues in
the relevant literature, and formulate and articulate their own views on these issues.
Requirements:
To meet the learning outcomes described above, students must attend lectures and
seminars, study the assigned readings and prepare each week for seminar discussions.
1
Teaching & Assessment:
One 2-hour lecture and one 1-hour seminar per week. Coursework 100%.
The assessed coursework on this module is broken down into:
(1) One “Timely” Intervention, of a maximum of 1,250 words (20%)
• Due: Monday of Week 7 - March 11th
• Aim: The goal of this assignment is to use one (or a maximum of two)
readings from anywhere on the course syllabus to cast light on some
political event, trend, or piece of news of the day.
• Task: (i) Explain the basic argument or thesis put forward in the
reading(s) in question; (ii) show how this argument helps us
understand, or bears on, some important political issue or news of
the day; (iii) outline further questions or concerns raised by the
reading(s) and/or the political news you discuss.
• Example: This is an experimental task, so there is no single formula
to follow here. But as a template, think of the genre of the “op-ed” –
in which an author brings some piece of research or argument to
bear on some problem of the day. There are plenty of op-eds listed in
the syllabus to use as inspiration. Here is one: Eli Zaretsky, “The Mass
Psychology of Trumpism” in LRB Blog, September 18th, 2018.
(2) One Tutorial Presentation, of 15-20 minutes in length (ungraded)
• Due: One whatever week we settle on, in the seminar group.
• Aim: Tutorial presentations should guide us through one of the
required readings for the week (those required readings that are
suitable for presentation are marked with an “*”). The presentations
should provide an overview of the text and alert us to problems and
possible answers that may not be immediately obvious. The
presentation may be accompanied by a handout (of a maximum of
two pages). Presenters will be responsible for raising 2-3 questions
for general discussion, and should be able to answer some questions
from their peers after the presentation.
• Note: In tutorial sessions in general, all students will be expected to
come to class prepared with questions: not just that week’s
presenter(s).
(3) One Essay Outline, of a maximum of 750 words (ungraded)
• Due: Monday of Week 10 – April 15th.
• Task: Write a brief outline of your plan for the final essay. Try to
describe the main questions, arguments, issues, and authors you
intend to discuss – as well as your own general line of argument. The
instructor will provide feedback on the outline by Monday of Week
12 – April 29th.
• Note: Students will not be graded on this outline. But failure to
submit an outline will result in 2 penalty marks off the final essay.
2
(4) One Final Essay, of a maximum of 5,000 words (80%)
• Due: Monday of Week 14 – May 13th
• Aim: The final essay is an opportunity for the student to tackle a key
question, debate, or set of issues covered in the syllabus. Generally,
students may find it useful to write an essay on one of the eleven
topics discussed in the module. If you write on one of these topics, it
is advised that you consult not just the required but also the
supplementary readings associated with the topic in question.
Students are also free to connect readings on different topics, from
different weeks, together.
• Essay Questions: The instructor will provide students with some
sample essay questions by Monday of Week 8 – April 1st.
• Criteria: See undergraduate student handbook. Generally, research
papers will be assessed on the basis of (i) lucidity, (ii) effort, (iii)
relevance to the chosen question, (iv) independence of thought, (v)
argumentative charity; and (vi) comprehension of the relevant
readings.
Seminar Groups:
Group 1: Tuesdays, 4 – 5pm, Swallowgate (Classics) C26
Group 2: Wednesdays, 9 – 10am, Edgecliffe G03
Group 3: Wednesdays, 10 – 11am, Edgecliffe G03
Required Texts:
The following books should be purchased by all students registered in the module.
The library will have a few copies of these books on hold, for those students unable to
purchase copies for themselves. We will be reading these three books in their entirety.
(1) Jonathan Lear, Radical Hope: Ethics in the Face of Cultural Devastation
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006) [£15 on Amazon.co.uk]
(2) Jan-Werner Müller, What is Populism? (Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 2016) [£6 on Amazon.co.uk]
(3) Charles Taylor, The Malaise of Modernity (Toronto: Anansi, 1991). [£6 used on
Amazon.co.uk]
3
SYLLABUS
WEEK 1 – THE ORIGINS OF DEMOCRACY
(1) Aristotle, Constitution of the Athenians, 5-12, in Ancient Greek Democracy:
Readings and Sources (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004), ed. Eric W. Robinson, pp. 7781.
(2) Herodotus, Histories 5.62-78 in Ancient Greek Democracy: Readings and
Sources, pp. 81-86.
(3) Thucydides, “Pericles’ Funeral Oration” in History of the Peloponnesian War
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), tr. Martin Hammond, 2.34-46, pp. 8996.
(4) Benjamin Constant, “The Liberty of the Ancients Compared with That of the
Moderns” (1821) in Political Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1988), pp. 308-328. *
(5) Melissa Lane, “Democracy” in The Birth of Politics: Eight Greek and Roman
Political Ideas and Why They Matter (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
2014), pp. 93-129. *
Supplementary Reading:
(a) Robert Dahl, “The Sources of Modern Democracy” in Democracy and its Critics
(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), pp. 13-37.
(b) John Dunn, “Democracy’s First Coming” in Setting the People Free: The Story of
Democracy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2019 – Second Edition), pp.
1-48.
(c) Josiah Ober, “Conditions of Athenian Democracy” in The Making and
Unmaking of Democracy: Lessons from History and World Politics (New York:
Routledge, 2008), pp. 2-19.
(d) Jane J. Mansbridge, “The Argument” in Beyond Adversary Democracy (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1983), Part I, pp. 3-38.
(e) Jeremy Waldron, “Political Political Theory” in Political Political Theory: Essays
on Institutions (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2016), Ch. 1, pp. 1-23.
(f) VIDEO: Melissa Schwartzberg, “What did Democracy Really mean in Athens?”
(5 min TED Talk, available on YouTube)
WEEK 2 – THE TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY
(1) James Madison, “The Federalist No. 10” (1787) & “The Federalist No. 51” (1788) in
The Federalist, with Letters of “Brutus” (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2003), ed. Terence Ball, pp. 40-46, 251-255. *
(2) Alexander Hamilton, “The Federalist No. 68” (1788) in The Federalist, with
Letters of “Brutus” (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), ed. Terence
Ball, pp. 331-334.
(3) Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America (New York: Penguin Books, 2003),
Vol. 1 (1835), Part 2, Chs. 7-8; Vol. 2 (1840), Part 4, Ch. 6, pp. 287-323, 803-809. *
4
(4) James Baldwin, “In Search of a Majority” from Nobody Knows My Name (1961) in
Collected Essays (New York: Library of America, 1998), pp. 215-222.
Supplementary Reading:
(a) The Declaration of Independence (1776) & The Constitution of the United
States of America (1787), (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services), pp. 1-47.
(b) Thomas Paine, “Of Constitutions” (1792) in Rights of Man, Common Sense, and
Other Political Writings (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), ed. Mark
Philp, pp. 238-262.
(c) Terence Ball, “Introduction” in The Federalist, with Letters of “Brutus”
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), ed. Terence Ball, pp. xiii-xxxii.
(d) Isaac Kramnick, “Introduction” in Democracy in America (New York: Penguin
Books, 2003), pp. ix-xlix.
(e) Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America (New York: Penguin Books, 2003),
Vol. 1 (1835), Author’s Introduction; Vol. 1 (1835), Part 2, Ch. 9, & Conclusion,
pp. 11-27, 323-370, 479-489.
(f) John Stuart Mill, “Introductory” from On Liberty (1859), in On Liberty and Other
Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), ed. S Collini, pp. 4-18.
(g) Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt, “Gatekeeping in America” in How
Democracies Die (London: Viking Press, 2018), Ch. 2, pp. 33-53.
(h) Jeremy Waldron, Political Political Theory: Essays on Institutions (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 2016), Chs. 2-4, pp. 23-93.
(i) Jeffrey Rosen, “America is Living James Madison’s Nightmare” in The Atlantic,
October 2018 issue. (Available online)
(j) VIDEO: Danielle Allen, “How America Misunderstands the Declaration of
Independence” The Atlantic (4 mins – YouTube)
WEEK 3 – THE PSYCHOLOGY OF FASCISM
(1) Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (New York: Penguin University
Press, 1951/2017), Ch. 6, Sec. II; Ch. 10, Sec. I; Ch. 11, Sec. I, pp. 215-222, 413-427,
446-476. *
(2) Theodor W. Adorno, “Freudian Theory and the Pattern of Fascist Propaganda”
(1951), in The Essential Frankfurt School Reader (New York: Continuum Press,
1982), eds. Andrew Arato & Eike Gebhart, pp. 118-137. *
(3) Alex Wagner, “The Church of Trump” in The Atlantic, August 14th, 2018.
(4) Eli Zaretsky, “The Mass Psychology of Trumpism” in LRB Blog, Sept 18th, 2018.
Supplementary Reading:
(a) Isaiah Berlin, “The Pursuit of the Ideal” in The Crooked Timber of Humanity:
Chapters in the History of Ideas (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990),
ed. Henry Hardy, pp. 1-20.
(b) Isaiah Berlin, “Nationalism: Past Neglect and Present Power” in Against the
Current: Essays in the History of Ideas (London: Pimlico, 1997), ed. Henry
Hardy, pp. 333-356.
5
(c) Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (New York: Penguin, 1951/2017),
Ch. 11, Sec. II, pp. 476-509.
(d) Martha Nussbaum, “Fear, Early and Powerful” in The Monarchy of Fear: A
Philosopher Looks at Our Political Crisis (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2018), Ch. 2, pp. 17-63.
(e) James Q. Whitman, “On Nazi ‘Honour’ and the New European ‘Dignity’” in
Darker Legacies of Law in Europe: The Shadow of National Socialism and
Fascism over Europe and its Legal Traditions (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2003),
eds. C. Joerges & N.S. Galeigh, pp. 243-266.
(f) Jason Stanley, “Propaganda” in How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and
Them (New York: Penguin, 2018), Ch. 2, pp. 24-36.
(g) Dylan Riley, “What is Trump?” in New Left Review (2018), Vol. 114, pp. 5-31.
(h) VIDEO: Jason Stanley, Adam Westbrook, and Japhet Weeks, “If You’re Not
Scared About Fascism in the U.S., You Should Be” in The New York Times,
October 15th, 2018 (5 min Video).
(i) VIDEO: United States War Department, “Don’t Be a Sucker” (17 Minutes,
YouTube, 1943)
WEEK 4 – POPULISM
(1) Jan-Werner Müller, What is Populism? (Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 2016). [Read the whole book] *
(2) Jason Frank, “Populism Isn’t the Problem” in Boston Review, August 15th, 2018.
Supplementary Reading:
(a) Jan-Werner Muller, “Italy: The Bright Side of Populism” in The New York Review
of Books, June 8th, 2018
(b) Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt, “The Unraveling” in How Democracies Die
(New York: Penguin Press, 2018), Ch. 7, pp. 145-176.
(c) Yascha Mounk, The People vs. Democracy: Why Our Freedom is in Danger and
How to Save it (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2018)
(d) Yascha Mounk & Jordan Kyle, “What Populists Do to Democracies” in The
Atlantic, December 26th, 2018.
(e) William Galston, Anti-Pluralism: The Populist Threat to Liberal Democracy
(New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017)
(f) VIDEO: “The Dangers of Populism” (23 min video interview with Jan-Werner
Muller, Council of Europe, on Vimeo)
WEEK 5 – CONSPIRACY THEORIES
(1) Richard Hofstadter, “The Paranoid Style in American Politics” (1963) in The
Paranoid Style in American Politics and Other Essays (New York: Vintage, 2008),
Ch. 1, pp. 3-41. *
(2) Cass R. Sunstein, “Conspiracy Theories” in Conspiracy Theories & Other
Dangerous Ideas (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2016), Ch. 1, pp. 1-33. *
6
(3) Rene Girard, “What is a Myth?” in The Scapegoat (Baltimore: John Hopkins
University Press, 1989), Ch. 3, pp. 24-45.
Supplementary Reading:
(a) Bonnie Honig, “Girard’s Scapegoat” in Democracy and the Foreigner (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 2001), pp. 33-40.
(b) Rene Girard, “Stereotypes of Persecution” in The Scapegoat (Baltimore: John
Hopkins University Press, 1989), Ch. 2, pp. 12-24.
(c) Jason Stanley, “Unreality” in How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them
(New York: Penguin, 2018), Ch. 4, pp. 57-78.
(d) Steve Clark, “Conspiracy Theories and Conspiracy Theorizing” in Philosophy of
the Social Sciences (2002), Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 131-150.
(e) Michael Barkun, “Conspiracy Theories as Stigmatized Knowledge” in Diogenes
(2016 - online first)
(f) Robert Pogue Harrison, “The Prophet of Envy” in The New York Review of
Books, December 20th, 2018.
(g) Andrew Marantz, “How a Liberal Scholar of Conspiracy Theories Became the
Victim of a Right-Wing Conspiracy Theory” in The New Yorker, December 27th,
2017 (Available online).
(h) Steven Poole, “Why Bad Ideas Refuse to Die” in The Guardian, June 28th, 2016
(Available online).
(i) John Naughton, “Populism and the Internet – a Toxic Mix Shaping the Age of
Conspiracy Theories” in The Guardian, November 25th, 2018 (Available online).
(j) John Bargh, “At Yale, we conducted an experiment to turn conservatives into
liberals. The results say a lot about our political divisions” in The Washington
Post, November 22nd, 2017 (Available online).
(k) VIDEO: Cass R. Sunstein, “Why Conspiracy Theories are Rational to Believe”
(13.5 min video – Vox – YouTube).
(l) VIDEO: Contrapoints, “The Apocalypse” YouTube (24 mins).
(m) RADIO: David Cayley, “The Scapegoat – Part 1” (54 mins) CBC Player, March
1st, 2011 (online)
WEEK 6 – THE CASE AGAINST DEMOCRACY
(a) Plato, Republic (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1992), Tr. G.M.A. Grube, Revised by
C.D.C. Reeve, Book VI, 487e-489e, pp. 161-163.
(b) Jason Brennan, “The Right to a Competent Electorate” in The Philosophical
Quarterly (2011), Vol. 61, No. 245, pp. 700-724. *
(c) Jason Brennan, “The Rule of the Knowers” in Against Democracy (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 2016), Ch. 8, pp. 204-231.
Supplementary Reading:
(a) Tom Christiano, “Review: Against Democracy” in Notre Dame Philosophical
Review (2017), May 19th.
7
(b) David Estlund, “Why Not an Epistocracy of the Educated?” in Democratic
Authority: A Philosophical Framework (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
2008), Ch. 11, pp. 206-222.
(c) Jason Brennan, “Does the Demographic Objection to Epistocracy Succeed?” in
Res Publica (2018), Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 53-71.
(d) John Stuart Mill, “Of the Extension of the Suffrage” in Considerations on
Representative Government (1861) in Collected Works of John Stuart Mill,
Volume XIX: Essays on Politics and Society (Toronto: University of Toronto
Press, 1977), ed. J.M. Robson, Ch. 8, pp. 467-482.
(e) Robert Dahl, “Guardianship” & “A Critique of Guardianship” in Democracy and
its Critics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), pp. 52-83.
(f) Caleb Crain, “The Case Against Democracy” in The New Yorker, Nov 7th, 2016.
(g) Ilya Somin, “Do Voters Know Enough?” in Democracy and Political Ignorance:
Why Smaller Government is Smarter, Second Edition (Stanford: Stanford
University Press, 2016), Ch. 2, pp. 47-74.
(h) Jeremy Waldron, “The Core of the Case Against Judicial Review” in Political
Political Theory: Essays on Institutions (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
2016), Ch. 9, pp. 195-246.
(i) VIDEO: “What Socrates Hated Democracy” by The School of Life (4 Minutes,
YouTube)
WEEK 7 – MODERNITY AND ITS DISCONTENTS
(1) Charles Taylor, The Malaise of Modernity (Toronto: Anansi, 1991). [Read the
whole book] *
(2) Joshua Rothman, “How to Restore Your Faith in Democracy” in The New
Yorker, November 11th, 2016.
Supplementary Reading:
(a) Charles Taylor, “Nationalism and Modernity” & “Democratic Exclusion (and Its
Remedies?)” in Dilemmas and Connections: Selected Essays (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 2011), Chs. 5 & 7, pp. 81-105, 124-146.
(b) Max Weber, “Science as a Vocation” (1917) in From Max Weber: Essays in
Sociology (New York: Oxford University Press, 1946), H.H. Gerth & C. Wright
Mills, Ch. V, pp. 129-156, esp., 138-156.
(c) Philip Kitcher, “Challenges for Secularism” in The Joy of Secularism: 11 Essays for
How We Live Now (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011), ed. George
Levine, Ch. 1, pp. 24-57.
(d) VIDEO: Charles Taylor, “Democratic Degeneration: Three Easy Paths to
Regression”, March 26th, 2018 (1hr, 26min video on YouTube, posted by the
Neubauer Collegium)
8
WEEK 8 – (STRUCTURAL) VICTIMHOOD
(1) Tommie Shelby, “Justice, Deviance, and the Dark Ghetto” in Philosophy &
Public Affairs (2007), Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 126-160. *
(2) Kate Manne, “Sexism vs. Misogyny” & “Suspecting Victims” in Down Girl: The
Logic of Misogyny (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), Chs. 3.1 & 7, pp. 7884, 220-249. *
Supplementary Reading:
(a) Iris Marion Young, “Five Faces of Oppression” in Justice and the Politics of
Difference (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011), Ch. 2, pp. 39-65.
(b) Tommie Shelby, Dark Ghettos: Injustice, Dissent, and Reform (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 2016).
(c) Peggy McIntosh, “White Privilege and Male Privilege: A Personal Account of
Coming to See Correspondences through Work in Women’s Studies” in Race,
Ethnicity, and Gender: Selected Readings (London: Pine Forge Press, 2007), eds.
Joseph F. Healey & Eileen O’Brien, pp. 377-385.
(d) Reni Eddo-Lodge, Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race
(London: Bloomsbury, 2018), Chs. 2 & 3, pp. 57-117.
(e) Cheshire Calhoun, “Responsibility and Reproach” in Ethics (1989) Vol. 99, No.
2, pp. 389-406.
(f) Jason Stanley, “Victimhood” in How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and
Them (New York: Penguin, 2018), Ch. 4, pp. 93-109.
(g) Elizabeth Anderson, The Imperative of Integration (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 2010).
(h) Joshua Rothman, “The Origins of ‘Privilege’” in The New Yorker, May 12th 2014.
(i) VIDEO: Tommie Shelby & Amilcar Shabazz, “Difficult Dialogues: Tommie
Shelbie” (28 mins – Amherst Media, on YouTube).
(j) VIDEO: Kate Manne, “Breaking Down Sexism vs. Misogyny” (10 mins – CBS
News, on YouTube)
On Identity Politics:
(k) Iris Marion Young, “Polity and Group Difference: A Critique of the Idea of
Universal Citizenship” in Ethics (1989), Vol. 99, No. 1, pp. 250-274.
(l) Charles Taylor, “The Politics of Recognition” in Multiculturalism: Examining thr
Politics of Recognition (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), ed. Amy
Gutmann, pp. 25-75.
(m) Charles Taylor, “The Need for Recognition” in The Ethics of Authenticity
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991), Ch. 5, pp. 43-55.
(n) Mark Lilla, The Once and Future Liberal: After Identity Politics (London: Hurst
& Company, 2018)
(o) Mark Fisher, “Exiting the Vampire Castle” Open Democracy UK, Nov 29th, 2013.
(p) Susan Bickford, “Anti-Anti-Identity Politics: Feminism, Democracy, and the
Complexities of Citizenship” in Hypatia (1997), Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 111-131.
9
(q) Franz Fanon, “The Negro and Hegel” (1952) in Black Skin, White Masks (New
York: Grove Press, 2008), Ch. 7.B., pp. 191-197.
(r) David Remnick, “A Conversation with Mark Lilla on his Critique of Identity
Poltiics” in The New Yorker, August 25th, 2017.
WEEK 9 – ANGER
(1) Frederick Douglas, “I hear the mournful wail of millions” (1852) in The Penguin
Book of Historic Speeches (London: Penguin, 1996), ed. MacArthur, pp. 260-265.
(2) Arlie Russell Hochschild, “The Deep Story” in Strangers in their Own Land:
Anger and Mourning on the American Right (New York: The New Press, 2018),
Ch. 9, pp. 135-153.
(3) Katherine J. Cramer, “Making Sense of Politics Through Resentment” in The
Politics of Resentment: Rural Consciousness in Wisconsin and the Rise of Scott
Walker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2016), Ch. 1, pp. 1-25, esp. 1-18.
(4) Amia Srinivasan, “The Aptness of Anger” in The Journal of Political Philosophy
(2018), Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 123-144. *
Supplementary Reading:
(a) Arlie Russell Hochschild, “Afterword to the Paperback Edition” in Strangers in
their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right (New York: The
New Press, 2018), pp. 243-269.
(b) Robert Wuthnow, “Washington’s Broken” in The Left Behind: Decline and Rage
in Rural America (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2018), Ch. 4, pp. 95-116.
(c) Insa Lee Koch, “Democracy as Punishment: Brexit and Austerity Politics” in
Personalizing the State: An Anthropology of Law, Politics, and Welfare in
Austerity Britain (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), Ch. 7.
(d) Martha C. Nussbaum, Anger and Forgiveness: Resentment, Generosity, Justice
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016)
(e) Amia Srinivasan, “Would Politics be Better off Without Anger?” in The Nation,
November 30th, 2016.
(f) Martha Nussbaum, “Anger, Child of Fear” in The Monarchy of Fear: A
Philosopher Looks at Our Political Crisis (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2018), Ch. 3, pp. 63-97.
(g) William Hazlitt, “On the Pleasure of Hating” (1821) in The Plain Speaker: The
Key Essays (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998), ed. Duncan Wu, pp. 102-114.
(h) VIDEO: “James Baldwin Debates William F. Buckley (1965)” Cambridge Union
Debate on the question “Is the American Dream at the Expense of the
American Negro?” (1 hour long video on YouTube)
(i) VIDEO: “In Conversation: Robert Reich and Arlie Hochschild” uploaded by
Inequality Media Civic Action (27 mins – YouTube)
On The Alt-Right:
(j) Milo Yiannopoulos, “An Establishment Conservative’s Guide to the Alt-Right”
Breitbart News, March 29th, 2016 (online).
10
(k) Amia Srinivasan, “Does Anyone Have the Right to Sex?” in London Review of
Books, (March 22nd, 2018), Vol. 40, No. 6, pp. 5-10.
(l) Angela Nagle, Kill All Normies: Online Culture Wars from 4Chan and Tumblr to
Trump and the Alt-Right (Alresford: Zero Books, 2017)
WEEK 10 - CIVILITY
(1) Teresa M. Bejan, Mere Civility: Disagreement and the Limits of Toleration
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2016), Chs. 2, 5, & 6, pp. 50-82, 144-177. *
(2) Jonathan Haidt & Greg Lukianoff, “The Coddling of the American Mind” in The
Atlantic, September 2015 issue.
Supplementary Reading:
(a) Cheshire Calhoun, “The Virtue of Civility” in Philosophy & Public Affairs (2000),
Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 251-275.
(b) Scott F. Aikin & Robert B. Talisse, Why We Argue (And How We Should): A
Guide to Political Disagreement in an Age of Unreason, Second Edition (New
York: Routledge, 2019).
(c) Bradley Campbell & Jason Manning, “Microaggression and Moral Cultures” in
Comparative Sociology (2014), Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 692-726.
(d) Jonathan Haidt, “The Intuitive Dog and Its Rational Tail” in The Righteous
Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion (New York:
Penguin, 2013), Ch. 2, pp. 27-52, 67-71.
(e) Dan Sperber & Hugo Mercier, “Reasoning about Moral and Political Topics” in
The Enigma of Reason: A New Theory of Human Understanding (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 2017), Ch. 17, pp. 299-315.
(f) James E. Campbell, Polarized: Making Sense of a Divided America (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 2016), Ch. 2 & Afterword, pp. 39-59, 247-257.
(g) David Bornstein, “Recovering the (Lost) Art of Civility” in The New York Times,
October 29th, 2018.
(h) VIDEO: Teresa Bejan, “Is Civility a Sham?” Ted Talk (14 mins – on ted.com)
(i) VIDEO: Barack Obama, “A More Perfect Union” (37 mins, YouTube)
WEEK 11 – HOPE
(1) Jonathan Lear, Radical Hope: Ethics in the Face of Cultural Devastation
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006) [read the whole book] *
Supplementary Reading:
(a) Adrienne M. Martin, How We Hope: A Moral Psychology (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 2014), Chs. 1 & 4, pp. 11-35, 98-118.
(b) Martha Nussbaum, “Hope, Love, Vision” in The Monarchy of Fear: A
Philosopher Looks at Our Political Crisis (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2018), Ch. 7, pp. 197-247.
11
(c) J.D. Vance, Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis (London:
Harper Collins, 2016).
(d) Katherine J. Cramer, “We Teach These Things to Each Other” in The Politics of
Resentment: Rural Consciousness in Wisconsin and the Rise of Scott Walker
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2016), Ch. 8, pp. pp. 208-227.
(e) Naomi Klein, No is Not Enough: Defeating the New Shock Politics (New York:
Penguin, 2017), pp. 222-272.
(f) VIDEO: Martin Luther King, “I Have a Dream” (1963 – 17.5 mins, on YouTube)
(g) VIDEO: Alan Saunders & Jonathan Lear, “The Dreams of Plenty Coups” (23
mins – on YouTube)
12
Adam Etinson