Analysis of Political Thinking by Glenn Tinder - Book Report/Review Example

Political Thinking This book uses a rather un-orthodox method to help in understanding of politics and gives the reader an idea of how they work. By use of questions, it does not follow the expected course of other political books, which provide comprehensive explanations. Therefore, it is a subject of speculation whether it makes the subject any clearer for a learner or only provides a basis of reason without clarity on the main subject. On the other hand, it can also be said to be handy in inciting curiosity that results in understanding of whatever topic. This sets it apart from other books in philosophy and politics (Tinder, 65). The most notable thing about Glen Tinder is his uniqueness in making ease at the complexity of politics far from over-view misconceptions of the subject. The different ways in which this book views politics and its focus on the numerous profound questions, is its greatest strength. This is in reference to questions on estrangement and unity, inequality and equality, who should posses, what are the limitations and what are the proper ends of power, and political change (Tinder, 90). For a person, who is able to get the insight that these questions shed light upon, he or she is bound to get a clear view of politics. Tinder uses a hands-on approach of using daily and notable historical issues to support his motives. By beginning to make sense of why it is necessary to think Politically, Tinder addresses any critic of politics and political books. The most insightful argument that is given in support is that it allows individuals to develop their own humanity. In other words, political thinking is an aspect of human beings and therefore, by engaging in it whether directly or indirectly it enables a person to understand him or herself, and generally, all human beings. As a result, an individual is able to make conscious political decisions and be aware when they are not made. This enables any person to have a basis of argument and intellectual perspective in political matters rather than being swayed by the general feeling. The examination of the value using a paradox for thinking brings forth an interesting insight. Philosophically, it is a generally accepted and appraised trait, where often-perceived self-contradictions by philosophers turns to be statements with strong meaning and sense (Tinder, 138). The value of this is observed to be the ability to quell any tensions created by political thinking. This, due to the fact that calmness is obtained as individuals try to derive the true meaning of these statements. On the other hand, abrupt statements from uninformed decisions often result to unwarranted tension that ends up in violence. The book seeks to show the importance of political thinking and how if understood can help salvage situations. To help the reader understand estrangement, Tinder uses reference of historically recognized Philosophers such as Hobbes, Aristotle, Augustine, Rousseau, Burke, Plato, Dostoevsky and Burke. The purpose for this is for a reader to evaluate the arguments whether conflicting or agreeing and then find the connecting factor among them for the true cause and result of estrangement. By getting clarity on this matter then a reader can be able to argue if a global society can be achieved or not, and if not what aspects of estrangement are in the global community (Tinder, 111). In the same context of politics of estrangement, the distinction of classes according to wealth ownership is addressed. The book tries to create a virtue argument between Marxist ideas and those of Burke, which are based on communism and capitalism respectively. In real sense, this has been the basis of the lack of unity in the global community for a long time and has often resulted to hostilities between supporters of both ideas. The issue of class distinction is more widely discussed in the principles of both ideas. The politics of estrangement is the result in such a case, which leads the leaders back to the initial argument that if a global society can ever be achieved. The book further delves in broadening the subject of class since its existence ensures that the issues of inequality and equality to be predominant. Analyzing the matter philosophically, Tinder seeks Aristotle’s opinion on whether human beings are unequal by nature (Tinder, 189). The reader is able to realize that though in normal circumstances the moral thing is to rest at the point that all human beings are equal, politically, there is a deeper meaning to this issue. Therefore, there is further allusion to the other historical philosophical figures to acknowledge their stand on the matter. Commonly this can be observed as an indirect attack of Capitalism. The reader is left to question the relationship between liberty and equality and realize that they can never exist con-currently without conflict. These are the basic principles of Capitalism. In the same context, equality and liberty he mentions feminism that is a direct product of the two (Tinder, 200). The raising of such an issue is very controversial and can lead the reader to the wrong direction of the argument. The implication of the issue is what the books endeavors to highlight by providing a common aspect that readers can relate. This is in order to show that emphasis on equality may not necessarily hatch the desired eventualities but in fact, can worsen the situation indirectly. In real sense, this is not meant to raise any emotions nor portray any opinion, but a political view that requires the understanding of the reader in order to see it. On power and those who posses it, the book seeks to make clear whether a claim can be laid that order is a direct result of vesting of power. If the notion is true, then the argument is how those who gain power by force and the democratically elected achieve order. Interestingly, these have always been the underlying issues in power possession. By considering, order and power the reader cannot immediately make a decision but has to reminisce over who is best suited to rule anarchist or liberals (Tinder, 212). At this point, the book can be said to be addressing the ideas of Capitalism and Communism again. However, it seeks not to provide any influence but provide a basis of deciding for an individual. A predominant occurrence in this book, with note, is allusion to historically philosophical figures. In this case are Smith, Burke, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Plato, Rousseau and Aristotle who have addressed the issue of power extensively (Tinder, 231). The occurrence is meant to give the reader varied and well-thought ideas for him or her to make an informed decision on the direction to take. Since democracy was originally a liberalist system, Tinder shows that it has transformed with time to have an aristocratic aspect of it. This is through the emergence of representative and direct democracy. However, as distinctively as usual, he does not directly point the readers to which lies on what side. Instead, he leaves the reader to discern this from the derived meaning of the two forms in which democracy is practiced (Tinder, 99). Therefore, the initial issue of the relationship of power to order comes into the light again placing anarchism and liberalism at opposite ends and consequently challenging democracy as the preferred system of achieving power and exercising order. In the conclusion of the fourth chapter, the book assesses over the importance of power. The views of Aristotle, Epicureans, Stoics and Machiavelli are sought in this matter for an astute understanding (Tinder, 109). The concern is whether there is a divine right of some individuals to power even by birth or is it those who are being led who make the decision of who should have power. For democracies, the book seeks to illustrate that the there must be consent to hold power through general will to give this responsibility to a certain individual. Furthermore, that for power to be held in a democracy, there must be freedom of individuals and for power in anarchies to exist, obedience is required. On the limits of power, the book references Machiavelli’s limits to governmental power. These limits are better understood through the belief of the way power should be exercised. It results in bringing on board moral relativism in comparison to moral absolutism. Therefore, the reader is able to understand how much power is exercised according to a people’s belief in the doctrines of knowledge, truth and morality. That is whether they are governed by absolute principles or they are determined according to culture, society and historical context. This shows that people are governed by their own confines that determine if exercise of power favors them or not (Tinder, 113). On the same subject, the meaning and essence of constitutionalism is examined critically. Despite being the most preferred method of establishing order and procedure, it is a challenge to its own self. This is the sense that only few individuals are able to understand its true meaning. Therefore, according to Locke there tends to be individuals who own the earth in the political sense. Their strongest strength is knowledge, which enables them to manipulate the system, and thereby making them limit the confines of power. Yet again in the context of limitation of power, Tinder focuses on another aspect of Capitalism, free enterprise. However, in this situation his motive is to show that this enterprise system is beneficial to all in equal measure other than only to those who own the enterprises. From a deep perspective, enterprising creates a web of enterprise comprised of each individual involved and related to a single enterprise. The strongest point to this is the ownership of stock not only in an enterprise that an individual involved in, but in other enterprises that have opened themselves to this activity. To broaden the subject, the book goes on to explore socialism, with a note, an aspect of Communism. However, it is not as comprehensive, may be to show where the writer’s support lies or where he would like to direct his readers. As a conclusion of chapter five, the book challenges the generally accepted view that the wisest are the most suitable to rule. This is in relation to their relative moral absolutism, which indicates that wide knowledge gained in whatever way is not to the benefit of the society (Tinder, 166). To rest the matter, the reader is left to reminisce over the statement: ‘wisdom that is not found at the end of a search but in the search itself’. The next outlook is on the ends of power that are supposed to act as the determiners of the extent to which the power of government’s is exercised. The book compels the reader to identify the purpose of the existence of government. This is the best understanding of political thinking since as reader answers that question and those related to it, he or she realizes that the government has responsibilities that are more general rather than providing individual satisfaction. Therefore, when arguing matters concerning the government through political thinking, the result is completely different from ordinary talk. With this knowledge, the book refers again to the subject of estrangement in an effort to explain why the power of government has limitations in some matters. Therefore, because it is natural that human beings will always have factors that are dividing them, the government cannot serve individual wants but will exercise power for the communal benefit. It also becomes evident that equality in reality is a superficial idea, which in rare circumstances will ever come to fruitation. However, absolutism is not encouraged either on the matter, but constant relativism is the best way to go. The power of government is also limited, and only individual actions can determine the how the idea is practiced. Liberty is observed as one of the main limiters of the power of government (Tinder, 230). The book questions whether morally unacceptable ideas are to worsen the society just because people have the freedom and right on what actions to take about these matters. Suicide, abortion and pornography are stated, just to state the least of them, since they are the most prevalent in a free society. The role of the government in these matters is challenged. Although the government has a measure of power in the same, it is limited in some cases into useless proportions. In this matter Tinder has been accused to be on the attack of particularly the United States of America that has been most profiled in this challenge. From the economic aspect, Locke’s view on economic freedom with that of contemporary liberals is highlighted. This is in consideration that Locke is not in support of liberalism of the economic sector in the sense that the government has the power to the extent that it is responsible for the development of moral citizens. However, the liberal position is that this is violation of individual freedoms but the moralistic view is that, it is the right direction towards a moral society. However, politically the book shows that this is may be a costly action. Therefore, despite the power of government to determine the matter, it should exercise tolerance to avoid any hostility that could result from this. The final chapter of the book covers historical change by speculating whether the course of actions in the present, can be changed from those in the past in dealing with situations such as establishing order. The economy is also included to let the reader decide if the government can down play external occurrence that causes economic eventualities (Tinder, 240). Considering how situations have been dealt with historically, violence being the most common way, the reader is challenged as a result, and eventually to a reasonable conclusion. Radicals are supporters of violence and resistance but their dominance has with time faded, and liberalism has taken up the position. Tinder then follows with that line of thought by stating that, if non-violence and non-resistance is to be exercised, what should be the strong points of this and what are the weaknesses that it should be considered with. In conclusion, the book is a series of questions to a reader that flow like a line of thought, which he or she is able to discern clear meaning. The lack of exaggerated comprehensiveness is a characteristic that other books of this category should follow. Glenn Tinder’s ability to evoke curiosity and interest is exceptional. In all regards, Political Thinking is one of the most well written political and philosophical books for the current generation (Tinder, 250). Work Cited Tinder, Glenn. Political Thinking: The Perennial Questions. New York: Pearson/Longman, 2003. Print. Read More