(Part 2) Top products from r/ukpolitics

Well, here are a list of sources that talk about 'cultural marxism' from academics that have literally nothing to do with conspiracies, or nazis that I found while looking into it:

1. Richard R. Weiner's 1981 book "Cultural Marxism and Political Sociology" is "a thorough examination of the tensions between political sociology and the cultural oriented Marxism that emerged in the 1960s and 1970s." You can buy it here: http://www.amazon.com/Cultural-Marxism-Political-Sociology-Research/dp/0803916450
   
   
2. Marxist scholars Lawrence Grossberg and Cary Nelson further popularized the term in "Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture", a collection of papers from 1983 that suggested that Cultural Marxism was ideally suited to "politicizing interpretative and cultural practices" and "radically historicizing our understanding of signifying practices." You can buy it here:http://www.amazon.com/Marxism-Interpretation-Culture-Cary-Nelson/dp/0252014014
   
   Note that the left-wing and progressive Professor Grossberg is a world-renowned professor who is the Chair of Cultural Studies at UNC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Grossberg
   
   
3. "Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain", by Dennis Dworkin, is described by Amazon as "an intellectual history of British cultural Marxism" that "explores one of the most influential bodies of contemporary thought" that represents "an explicit theoretical effort to resolve the crisis of the postwar Left". You can buy it here: http://www.amazon.com/Cultural-Marxism-Postwar-Britain-Post-Contemporary/dp/0822319144
   
   Note that Dennis Dworkin is a progressive professor at the University of Nevada, where his most recent book, "Class Struggles", extends the themes of "Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain".
   
   
4. "Conversations on Cultural Marxism", by Fredric Jameson, is a collection of essays from 1982 to 2005 about how "the intersections of politics and culture have reshaped the critical landscape across the humanities and social sciences". You can buy it here: http://www.amazon.com/Jameson-Conversations-Cultural-Post-Contemporary-Interventions/dp/0822341093
   
   
5. "Cultural Marxism," by Frederic Miller and Agnes F. Vandome, states that "Cultural Marxism is a generic term referring to a loosely associated group of critical theorists who have been influenced by Marxist thought and who share an interest in analyzing the role of the media, art, theatre, film and other cultural institutions in a society. The phrase refers to any critique of culture that has been informed by Marxist thought. Although scholars around the globe have employed various types of Marxist critique to analyze cultural artefacts, the two most influential have been the Institute for Social Research at the University of Frankfurt am Main in Germany (the Frankfurt School) and the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies in Birmingham, UK. The latter has been at the center of a resurgent interest in the broader category of Cultural Studies." You can buy it here. http://www.abebooks.co.uk/Cultural-Marxism-Frederic-Miller-Agnes-Vandome/2237883213/bd
   
   
6. The essay "Cultural Marxism and Cultural Studies," by UCLA Professor Douglas Kellner, says " 20th century Marxian theorists ranging from Georg Lukacs, Antonio Gramsci, Ernst Bloch, Walter Benjamin, and T.W. Adorno to Fredric Jameson and Terry Eagleton employed the Marxian theory to analyze cultural forms in relation to their production, their imbrications with society and history, and their impact and influences on audiences and social life... There are, however, many traditions and models of cultural studies, ranging from neo-Marxist models developed by Lukàcs, Gramsci, Bloch, and the Frankfurt school in the 1930s to feminist and psychoanalytic cultural studies to semiotic and post-structuralist perspectives (see Durham and Kellner 2001)." The essay is available here: http://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/culturalmarxism.pdf
   
   Note that Professor Kellner is a progressive professor, an expert in Herbert Marcuse, and critic of the culture of masculinity for school shootings.
   
   
7. For another reference, see http://culturalpolitics.net/cultural_theory/journals for a list of cultural studies journals such as "Monthly Review", the long-standing journal of Marxist cultural and political studies". Note that the website Cultural Politics is a progressive site devoted to "critical analysis" of the "arena where social, economic, and political values and meanings are created and contested."
   
   
8. You could also check out "Cultural Marxism: Media, Culture and Society", Volume 7, Issue 1 of Critical sociology, of the Transforming Sociology series, from the Institute for Advanced Studies in Sociology.

>Really ? Can you give me one example where in any social science women are treated as the majority group.

academia is much larger than social science.

here is one example:

>The Majority Finds Its Past: Placing Women in History

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Majority-Finds-Its-Past-Placing/dp/0807856061/

Another which talks about demographics which is a social science... Any form of geography that deals with demographics is a social science and will talk about statistics and women are in fact a statistical majority in the UK.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-503-x/2010001/article/11475-eng.htm

>In the statistical sense it is definitely true. Feel free to look at the number of women in position in power. I think you mean that numerically women are not a minority. Which is true. But when people talk about minorities in the context of social groups, it almost never means in a numerical sense.

Nobody mentioned women in power. They were only mentioned as a percentage of population. If you want to say women are a minority of MPs, CEOs etc, then that is true, but you MUST specify the specific situation. Just to say women are a minority generally implies to most people in terms of total population, which is not true in the UK.

>I think you mean that numerically women are not a minority

Of course I do, people in this country do, I don't think I know anyone in my social or professional life who doesn't use minority to use statistical minority (I did a STEM PhD).

>But when people talk about minorities in the context of social groups, it almost never means in a numerical sense.

Outside of certain social sciences (not including geography) it is uncommon for people to do that.

>Everybody that would discuss this with any BASIC KNOWLEDGE would understand that it's perfectly valid to describe women as minority group. Give that you apparently find Oxford reliable may I suggest the dictionary of sociology

Basic knowledge of sociology as used by a particular part of the field..... Outside of that field, people would not get what your are saying as most people only deal with statistic majorities.

It seems the term minority has been used to equate/compare women to statistical minority groups. As someone who deals with numbers on a regular basis, this terminology is rather counter intuitive. It is strange to use it when the exact opposite is true statistically.

> You would be surprised how powerful an argument based on non-judgement is to a group of people whom have been brought up with the idea of "may he who is without sin cast the first stone".

You're such an ameteur. Jesus did not tell people not to judge.

> Your hedonism, which you so decry, does not seem to be having a notable effect on the human species other than to make weekends more enjoyable.

If you were to read this book, you would learn that the working-class of the 19th century were far more educated than those today. Hedonism and anti-intellectualism are bound tightly, like two rotten peas in a pod. I'm sure you've lamented the dreadful level of political discourse... Well, you indirectly support it.

Moreover, it is well known that people are generally less happy than they used to be, despite huge increases of personal wealth. Huh, I wonder why that is... Certainly nothing to do with the fact that we live in a spiritual wasteland.

> In those societies where the protestant ethic was not so brutally imposed on the populace and they have a far more balanced idea of hedonism - surprise surprise - they do not have this problem.

You don't appear to even understand what the Protestant Work Ethic is. A country with a Protestant Work Ethic would have no problems with hedonism; work itself would be pleasing.

If you want a good grounding in European Union politics, since that is my speciality, I can help you there.

Firstly, I would avoid all of the 'airport' read books written by journalists of a particular bent pushing their narrative on today's politics or Brexit, so "All out War", etc. (This goes for whether you want more info about Westminster politics, or UK interaction with EU politics.) Whilst they may be entertaining, they're written to "push" a narrative or viewpoint of the author, and aren't meant to be neutral accounts or fact laden at all.

For EU affairs I recommend two textbooks that would be required reading for any undergraduate studying EU politics, and serve as a core quick reference texts for any postgrad looking at it too. These will help you to actually base your opinions on the EU on some core facts and/or well established arguments (something that is sorely lacking on here).

• European Union Politics (Fifth Edition) by Michelle Cini and Nieves Pérez-Solórzano Borragán
  
  
• The Government and Politics of the European Union (8th edition), The European Union Series by Neill Nugent
  
  Both of these should be fairly cheap to pick up second hand, but I do not recommend purchasing earlier versions than those I have listed, since a lot has happened in the intervening years since their previous editions were published.
  
  Both of these textbooks are laid out in a concise and simple to follow manner, with key infoboxes for further reading and detail. They both look at theories of integration (why member states chose to integrate/who are the actors), the history and evolution of the Union, and the logic behind certain policies, how its institutions operate and have evolved, how they interact with each other both in theory and practice, arguments as to what the "Union" is, and finally critiques (and counterarguments to them) of the Union and its policies.
  
  You can either read through them chapter by chapter, or keep them at hand, and when something comes up, flick through and examine them.
  
  I can recommend further text books if you so wish.
  
  Edit: PS. I see others on this post are recommending several political theory texts from 17th century authors and later. My tip is to find textbooks on political theory if that is something you want to look into. Whilst those texts are important, there are many interpretations of them and their often flowery, and to put it bluntly longwinded prose, (Hobbes taking several pages to discuss what is "power" springs to mind) can make digesting them difficult. A good textbook will digest the key arguments from political theory texts and lay them out in a nice concise manner, with critiques and counter arguments. You can then go and read the actual texts that stand out if you so wish.

I've mentioned a lot of what you just said in another comment, so I won't reply to specific disputes.

But I will say that it matters very little what the media say about UKIP as a party so long as they get coverage. Robert Ford's recent research on the phenomenon shows that UKIP attracts emotional support from a few middle and working class voting groups. A recent poll showed that a clear majority of the public guessed wrongly when quizzed about Farage's background even though he's clear to flaunt it whenever.

So really, extreme-right sentiment - about benefits, immigration or europe and general discontent/government fuckupery covered by the media is likely to build up hysteria and public support for UKIP. Looking at the media lately, its hard to doubt that's the case.

What's the answer then? More diversity in the press - give more of a voice to trade unionist and left-wing opinion than at present. Don't call climate change and otherwise settled matters a 'debate', accept them as fact. Realise that there are some opinions that are plain wrong and some voices that don't need to be heard. Focus on a wider portfolio of government activity - not just DWP stuff but whats happening in local government, infrastructure, house, energy and foreign policy. Engage with young people and otherwise looked over groups rather than focusing everything on the elderly.

A bit of a different book from me.

The Politics Book - Paul Kelly

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1409364453/ref=cm_sw_r_other_apa_VvB1xbAZFK029

It is a good, fairly unbiased, summary of politics and philosophy from history and is great for beginners who want to grasp political ideas and understand political history at a basic level.

The layout is modern and easy to understand so I highly recommend it.

> The Majority Finds Its Past: Placing Women in History
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Majority-Finds-Its-Past-Placing/dp/0807856061/

May I guess you never read the book ? She was a radical socialist and feminist, with the title almost surely like this because it plays on the contradiction of women being a minority group despite being a numerical majority.

>Gerda Lerner. One of the most influential feminist historians, Lerner is often credited with being the first to offer college courses in women's history. Lerner was a giant in her field: she rose to prominence in the 1960s, a time of tremendous expansion in the field of history. During this time, social history became popular: increasingly historians began to pay attention to every-day people, including women, the African Americans, the poor, and other minorities, as opposed to the ''great men'' embodied in generals like Robert E. Lee. and politicians like Thomas Jefferson.

You can read maybe The Creation of Patriarchy :P To make sure that she would probably have no issue with describing women as a minority group and would surely understand.

>Of course I do, people in this country do, I don't think I know anyone in my social or professional life who doesn't use minority to use statistical minority (I did a STEM PhD).

Why do you use statistical majority, when you mean numerical majority ? This is the second time now and it's confusing me a bit. And again, sure you and your friends might use the colloquial definition of minority. Which is totally fine, but pretending that women can't be called a minority is just wrong and shows that you have no understanding of minority groups and the social sciences.

>Basic knowledge of sociology as used by a particular part of the field..... Outside of that field, people would not get what your are saying as most people only deal with statistic majorities.

Is what we are discussing right now related to the social sciences or more to numerics ? Also you are kinda not telling the truth when you talk people are dealing with statistic majorities. Because which groups are you dealing with ? Blonde people ? They are a statistical minority. Would you want to give me a list of minorities you are thinking of when you talk about minority ? Because I seriously doubt it coincides with "statistical minorities"

>It seems the term minority has been used to equate/compare women to statistical minority groups. As someone

No, it seems like you don't understand what minority groups are. Like most of society. The term comes from academia, and people just perverse the meaning.

It's a lie to claim people think of "statistical minorities" because then they would think of blonde people, brown eyed people, people with super high IQ, aristocrats, etc etc. There are many many people that you are almost surely not thinking about when talking about minorities. Maybe you mean ethnic minorities. Maybe.

>It is strange to use it when the exact opposite is true statistically.

It's stranger to use it in a way that's completely inconsistent. And ignores the history of the word. Even stranger to not know the multiple meanings of the word, and defend your ignorance like the problem is people who spent decades on this topic know less than you.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0198749953/?coliid=I1VZM8NH4D8427&colid=2ZKBN4RSJSYJV&psc=0&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it - Catherine Barnard - The Substantive Law of the EU: The Four Freedoms.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0198789130/?coliid=I3FQZDCZWZQQW7&colid=2ZKBN4RSJSYJV&psc=0&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it - Catherine Barnard and Steve Peers (as mentioned above, he is really very good)

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0198708939/?coliid=I2G9WKHW05Z4U3&colid=2ZKBN4RSJSYJV&psc=0&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it - EU Politics.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Institutions-European-Union-New/dp/0198737416/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1524610636&sr=1-2-fkmr1&keywords=dermot+oleary+eu - Dermot Hodson, John Peterson 9eds) - Institutions of the EU.

A simple look on Amazon or Oxford University Press/Routledge etc will give you a great start for this type of text book and references will point you to further reading if you find yourself interested. The links I posted are most recent versions which I have read a bit but this type was my UG and PG essentially.

Not that you're probably interested in the reality of the situation, this (probably now outdated) book is well worth a read, on the topic of Islam vs Islamists - The Islamist by Ed Husain

I kid you not this book is often left in our office by people who are reading it:

Dangerous Hero: Unmissable new biography of Jeremy Corbyn from our best investigative biographer https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0008299579/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_XZ2BDbE7VDV60




I work with a few Jewish people and they are all convinced that he hates Jews.

>My plan this time around is to base a collection of ten threads each based on a chapter of 'The Politics Book' published by Dorling Kindersley.

I bought that yesterday! Asdas for £8, cheaper than Amazon, I thought it was a bargain considering how clear and yet how jam packed it was.

OK well here's one SOLEY about universities.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/8560409/Universities-The-breeding-grounds-of-terror.html

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/sep/20/westminster-university-islamic-students-society-ultra-conservative-muslims

And here's an entire book about it:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Islamist-joined-radical-Britain-inside/dp/0141030437

for those not familiar- dont listen to this guy

read it for yourselves, then look back at this guys comment

Richard R. Weiner's 1981 book "Cultural Marxism and Political Sociology" is "a thorough examination of the tensions between political sociology and the cultural oriented Marxism that emerged int the 1960s and 1970s." You can buy it here: http://www.amazon.com/Cultural-Marxism-Political-Sociology-Research/dp/0803916450

Marxist scholars Lawrence Grossberg and Cary Nelson further popularized the term in "Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture", a collection of papers from 1983 that suggested that Cultural Marxism was ideally suited to "politicizing interpretative and cultural practices" and "radically historicizing our understanding of signifying practices." You can buy it here:http://www.amazon.com/Marxism-Interpretation-Culture-Cary-Nelson/dp/0252014014

"Conversations on Cultural Marxism", by Fredric Jameson, is a collection of essays from 1982 to 2005 about how "the intersections of politics and culture have reshaped the critical landscape across the humanities and social sciences". You can buy it here: http://www.amazon.com/Jameson-Conversations-Cultural-Post-Contemporary-Interventions/dp/0822341093

Cultural Marxism," by Frederic Miller and Agnes F. Vandome, states that "Cultural Marxism is a generic term referring to a loosely associated group of critical theorists who have been influenced by Marxist thought and who share an interest in analyzing the role of the media, art, theatre, film and other cultural institutions in a society You can buy it here. http://www.abebooks.co.uk/Cultural-Marxism-Frederic-Miller-Agnes-Vandome/2237883213/bd

The essay "Cultural Marxism and Cultural Studies," by UCLA Professor Douglas Kellner, says " 20th century Marxian theorists ranging from Georg Lukacs, Antonio Gramsci, Ernst Bloch, Walter Benjamin, and T.W. Adorno to Fredric Jameson and Terry Eagleton employed the Marxian theory to analyze cultural forms in relation to their production, their imbrications with society and history, and their impact and influences on audiences and social life... http://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/culturalmarxism.pdf

see http://culturalpolitics.net/cultural_theory/journals for a list of cultural studies journals such as "Monthly Review", the long-standing journal of Marxist cultural and political studies"

"Cultural Marxism: Media, Culture and Society", Volume 7, Issue 1 of Critical sociology, of the Transforming Sociology series, from the Institute for Advanced Studies in Sociology

I recomend a refersher course in The Intellectual Life of the British Working Classes

Found a book you might enjoy reading.

And a well reviewed book https://www.amazon.co.uk/Everything-I-know-about-teaching/dp/1492912417

Revolt on teh Right

By far the most indepth, analytical insight into UKIPs support base. I reccomend anybody to read it. Guardian luvvies Goodwin and Ford have produced a worldy that is very well recommended by even the said paper as well as by BBC BookTalk. I am using their figures.

> NHS....

Evolving policies. I think they may lose a lot of that support if they went into 2015 with such policies, hence why they won;t. They tap into the anxiety of globalisation, something people scoff at and deem racist. Bizzarely.

> I'm not sure why you think it shields them or their supporters from criticism

I think you should be careful about mocking genuine economic concerns and labelling them merely racist, when they are on the whole normal people who observe the world around the, and perceive to know what is in their best interests. Mass influxes of cheap labour is not in their interests.

I read one of his books for my degree and plagiarised was influenced by much of its commentary, so I have a personal debt of gratitude to owe Anthony King.

Why Socialism Works by Harrison Lievesley

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Why-Socialism-Works-Harrison-Lievesley/dp/1521531218

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/0822319144/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1480358452&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40&keywords=cultural+marxism&dpPl=1&dpID=414j9KPiZeL&ref=plSrch
Dennis Dworkin
Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain: History, the New Left, and the Origins of Cultural Studies (Post-Contemporary Interventions

I don't think you do. You believe in the mere fantasy of what socialism should be.

eta: Here's your 'internationalism', and here, and here.

I can't get over how delusional you are.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Gulag-Archipelago-1918-1956-v-1/dp/0813332893

It wasn't in an article per say but you can read all about it in his book Captive State

My view that the EU is bloated comes from this book.

I rate Anthony King highly.

Hannan has always wanted a swiss model based on bilateral accords. He wrote an entire book outlining his position.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Why-Vote-Leave-Daniel-Hannan/dp/1784977101

https://www.cps.org.uk/files/reports/original/141210110634-BritainandtheEUasolution.pdf

It's a reference to a book titile.

If you'd rather stay in denial by reading critical literature through a skewed eye glass, then fine.

I don't recommend you try this one then.

Read All Out War by Tim Shipman, it doesn’t have many kind words for Cameron

Why does a quote from a book not make sense?

You want me to find you a copy of the book really?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Friends-Voters-Countrymen-Boris-Johnson/dp/0007119143
less than 10 seconds that took.

Ohh wait let me guess you want me to provide you with a pdf link to the full book? No. It's Illegal, Do your own research and don't be lazy.

>The only book to tell the full story of how and why Britain voted to leave the EU.

>This is the acclaimed inside story of the EU referendum in 2016 that takes you behind the scenes of the most extraordinary episode in British politics since the Second World War.

>With unparalleled access to all key players, this is a story of calculation, attempted coups and people torn between principles and loyalty. It is a book about our leaders and their closest aides, the decisions they make, how and why they make them and how they feel when they turn out to be so wrong.

>In All Out War, Tim Shipman has written a political history that reads like a thriller, exploring how and why David Cameron chose to take the biggest political gamble of his life, and why he lost.

If you were only allowed one book about Brexit, it’s the one most people seem to recommend

> The fact that he's representing the UK on an international level horrifies and embarrasses me.

Well I think he's absolutely fine. Educated in Brussels, Eton and Oxford. European correspondent for the Telegraph, MP for Henley, Cabinet member under two different Conservative leaders, (three now). Mayor of London for two consecutive terms and author of several highly regarded books spanning history and politics.

Talking of which, how many of them have you read?

I can recommend this one and this one

I don't think he need give much of a fuck about what you're "horrified and embarrassed" by to be honest.

The Bad Boys of Brexit: Tales of Mischief, Mayhem & Guerrilla Warfare in the EU Referendum Campaign https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1785901826/

Captive State: The Corporate Takeover of Britain by George Monbiot [2001]

> The Dome, the lottery, the Scottish Parliament, the Manchester tram scam, the destruction of the railways and London Underground: these are all scandals we know about and which make us think the lunatics are running the asylum. We feel bewildered disempowered, ripped off and plain scared for the future of our country and the world.

> None of these episodes is covered in this book. Yet through its coverage of the Skye Bridge, the Coventry hospitals, the “regeneration” of Southampton, genetic engineering in agriculture and medicine, the takeover of our universities - and much, much more it explains everything about the decline in quality of life, accelerating gap between rich and poor, and the total destruction of anything remotely resembling “democracy” which is going on all around us while we sit there swigging Special Brew and watching reality tv.

> If Monbiot never wrote another thing he would have entirely justified his existence with this book which is quite simply THE most important book on politics in Britain this century. In reading it you realise that you are not mad after all and neither are “they”!

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Captive-State-Corporate-Takeover-Britain/dp/0330369431