Essential reads on international politics?

[Dalek]

I haven't been paying as much attention to history and politics as I now want to, and I have a kindle reader and access to pirate websites, so please, dear spags, spam me with books I should download, that will help me expand my knowledge in history, politics and all the stuff that Cain  talks about. I want to get a more in-depth understanding 

[Cain]

Ok.  Three things first though:

1) there are books you need to read which are not good books.  They are not good books, because they provide fallacious models and use dubious methods.  Nevertheless, because of the influence they exert, knowing what they are and what they claim are essential to understanding that paradigm or theory.

2) There are books I will not tell you about.  There are books which detail things that it is best off not knowing, not until you are comfortable with other stuff.  There are also books which detail certain techniques and methods, or historical events, which would be better off not being widely known.  Knowledge is power and true knowledge is invariably dangerous - sometimes to those who know it as much as those who don't.

3) Even if I give you a reading list, there is no guarantee you will end up knowing what I know.  I have access to other sources for my information, too...friends in certain ministries, former professors who do consulting work with particular agencies, things I've pieced together based on personal experience, so on and so forth.

With that said, putting together a reading list is going to take a few days, possibly.

[McGrupp]

I too would be interested in such a list.

[Cain]

First book you need to get is The Prince.  No exceptions, no excuses, go get it right now. 

It has been claimed, with some justification, that The Prince may well be a satire.  If so, this does not detract from the fact that it is one of the books you will be made to read in any introductory course to politics...and if you're not, then you are not getting your full money's worth.

Niccolo Machiavelli was a historian, courtier, administrator, ambassador and occasional playwright in Renaissance Florence.  He was involved in some of the major events of that period of history, including the ascension of the Borgia clan to control of the Vatican and the French invasion of Italy.

The Prince details how one may maintain one's rule over a country that is not a Republic.  It is probably because many of these tactics were used so shamelessly by the Vatican that the book was censured.  Indeed, Machiavelli's constant admiration for Cesare Borgia was potentially embarassing, given how he detailed his tactics and would not doubt cause a reader to note the universality of such tactics and how they applied to the Vatican's new rulers, the Medici, the French monarch and practically everyone else.

That is the strength of The Prince, it is one of the first western attempts at a political science.  It does not give the reader advice on cultivating Christian virtues to become a successful ruler.  Indeed, many of his examples are taken from antiquity, the Ancient Greeks and Romans.  Machiavelli discusses types of regime in terms of centralization/decentralization and how that can affect their military policy, the varying kinds of principalities which exist, how to engage in warfare, how to keep one's own population satisfied and similar topics.

It is not necessary, but it is worth also considering reading his Discourses on Livy.  The Discourses are far larger, deal with the topic of republics, and are most probably not a satire.  Reading it will give you a fuller appreciation of his approach to politics.

[Cain]

Next essential read is Sun Tzu's The Art of War.

I am working from the basis of you being someone who knows nothing, I should mention.  You probably don't (I read your post on the state of play in Bulgaria recently...+10 points for awareness), but that is both the safest assumption to make, and will allow to "debug" you of potentially erroneous information.

The Art of War is, of course, the classic manual on battle strategy.  Why is this useful?  Because if you want to really understand politics, you have to be able to think strategically, that is, in terms of having defined, achievable goals and working towards them in a structured way.  Also, if you've read Machiavelli, you know that understanding warfare is necessary for a Prince.  And if you want to be able to outthink a contemporary Prince, you need to know what they know even better than they do.

Incidentally, that is one of the most important pieces of advice Sun Tzu will give you.

"It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle."

Politics is war by institutional means.  Democracy, even the fake democracies most of us live under, is an institutional method whereby ruling factions avoid open warfare through a contest of legitimacy which allows broad ideological groupings a decent chance at having a go at leading, with the promise of leadership for their major enemies when they fuck it up. However, you can bet that if the incentives were there to support it, they'd be raising armies, supporting rebellions and fighting each other until one particular clan asserted authority.

And in some parts of the world, that is still the case.

So, what will Sun Tzu teach you?

Firstly, while warfare has changed a hell of a lot since his time, and some of his more technical advice is outdated, Sun Tzu also focuses on the psychological and social contexts of warfare.  Those psychological aspects are the closest thing we have to a constant in human behaviour, and so are effectively timeless.  Sun Tzu will advise you in how to lay plans, and adapt them to evolving situations, will advise that all warfare is based on deception, how to use disinformation, attack an enemies weaknesses, take advantage of their personality and temperment, to use the infrastructure of the enemy against them, to win the war before even engaging in battle, how to take the offensive position and how to use various kinds of spy.

Again, Sun Tzu is also on the list not only for his utility, but because he is on other people's lists.  You will encounter people who know their Art of War, and if you do not, you are at a significant disadvantage.

[Cain]

The History of the Peloponnesian War is next on your list.  Why do you care about some ancient Greek conflict?

First, this is the first history book.  That is, history as a critical engagement in what events took place.  Unlike Herodotus, who wrote his own Histories before this book, Thucydides does not simply record any passing rumour that comes his way and refuse to pass judgement.  He was a general in the war, and after being dismissed, he interviewed generals and leaders on both sides.  He recorded speeches, recounted troop movements and posited explanations for the actions of each side.

Not only that, it's a book with a theory.  Or, rather, with several theories.  Thucydides recounts how imperialism made Athens arrogant, then cruel.  He comes up with the concept of the "security dilemma", whereby states arm themselves to defend against aggression, only for their actions to be considered as potentially aggressive by surrounding powers, who then compete in an arms race while distrusting the intentions of their neighbours.  He recounts how the alliance system drew the powers into conflicts.  He also tells how the war was as much about installing preferred systems of government in other city-states as it was about hegemony and security.

For this reason, The History of the Peloponnesian War is considered a foundational text in the study of history, and the study of international politics.  It is dry, it is long and the style is not an interesting one.  But it deserves your attention regardless.

[LMNO]

This thread is great.  That's all.

[Cain]

Still working on the list.

Problem is, essential things are usually also general things and so boring things.  Interesting things are specialized things and so not "necessary".

[P3nT4gR4m]

I've never read the other two but the art of war is beyond awesome. It's lessons apply not only to open warfare and politics (which few of us will ever have the opportunity to play) but also to damn near any other situation where strategic thinking is an advantage. Read - practically all situations. Believe it or not I drew heavily from Sun Tzu when I was trying to piece myself back together after a full blown psychotic episode and I probably wouldn't have managed without it.

[Cain]

True that.

Anyway, more books now, with less commentary.

The 36 Strategies by T'ai Kung
Arthashastra by Kautilya
Unrestricted Warfare by Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui
The Road to War by Overy and Wheatcroft
The Struggle for Mastery in Europe by AJP Taylor
Superpower Rivalry and Conflict by Chandra Chari
Classical Theory in International Relations by Beate Jahn
Constructivism and International Relations by Guzzini and Leander
Dominoes and Bandwagons: Strategic Beliefs and Great Power Competition in the Eurasian Rimland by Jervis and Snyder
Dynamics of Conflict by Ronald Francisco
The Wretched of the Earth by Franz Fanon
In Confidence by Anatoly Dobrynin
International Relations: A Very Short Introduction by Paul Wilkinson
Man, the State and War by Kenneth Waltz
Rethinking World History by Marshall G. S. Hodgson

That should do you for now.

[LMNO]

"For now," he says, as if it won't take me two years minimum to get through all that.

[Cain]

I could just name the standard textbook:  The Globalization of World Politics by Baylis and Smith.

Thing is, it's a textbook.  For undergrads.  It's painfully basic.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I could just name the standard textbook:  The Globalization of World Politics by Baylis and Smith.

Thing is, it's a textbook.  For undergrads.  It's painfully basic.

Okay, getting it.

I need basic.

[Cain]

It's also 800 pages long.  It falls under the "you should read it to understand the basic political science concepts, but you shouldn't really trust it or use it beyond that" category. 

Also, Dalek will likely be issued it (or Andrew Heywood's equally craptastic textbook) for his course, should he end up coming to the UK.