Politics and Passion: Toward a More Egalitarian Liberalism (Paperback)

~ Professor Michael Walzer (Author)
Key Phrases: totalizing groups, involuntary association, durable inequality, United States (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Review

"An elegant and probing critique of contemporary liberal thought." G. John Ikenberry, Foreign Affairs "With his usual originality, clarity, depth, and intelligent judgments, Michael Walzer offers a perspective on political life that reveals serious inadequacies in standard liberal views and points to directions of change." Robert Dahl, Sterling Professor Emeritus, Yale University "In this elegant and incisive book, Michael Walzer draws on everyday political experience to open up some of the theoretical dead-ends in which contemporary democratic theory has become stalled. The book's positive, constructive emphasis will make it useful to anyone interested in issues of social equality." Bernard Yack, Brandeis University"

Review

"In this elegant and incisive book, Michael Walzer draws on everyday political experience to open up some of the theoretical dead-ends in which contemporary democratic theory has become stalled. The book’s positive, constructive emphasis will make it useful to anyone interested in issues of social equality."—Bernard Yack, Brandeis University

"This book is brim full of the acute intelligence, human understanding, and practical wisdom that we have come to expect from Michael Walzer. In Politics and Passion he combines a radical commitment to equality and democracy with a hard-won recognition of the realities of politics.

“This clearly and engagingly written book shows up the thinness of much contemporary liberal theory. Informed by his social democratic convictions, Walzer allows the real dilemmas of egalitarian liberalism to surface, and faces them honestly, without the conjuring tricks and obfuscation that philosophy can lend itself to.”--Charles Taylor, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, McGill University

--This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 208 pages
• Publisher: Yale University Press (June 7, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0300115369
• ISBN-13: 978-0300115369
• Product Dimensions: 7.8 x 5.2 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #686,182 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

23 of 25 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Raises some interesting issues about liberalism, June 9, 2005

By	Jill Malter ([e-mail]) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)

This review is from: Politics and Passion: Toward a More Egalitarian Liberalism (Hardcover)

Nobody ought to expect political ethics to be easy. And maybe that's a good way to start thinking about the topics in this book. Walzer asks us some tough questions right away.

Try this one first. Should liberals be tolerant of totalitarian groups within their society? There is no easy answer. If we rule that some religious parents have no right to raise their children in religious schools we would be saying, in effect, "We're tolerant! We're liberals! We tolerate all liberals! And we don't tolerate others, but so what ... they're different than us!"

Obviously, that won't do at all.

If we go to the other extreme, and tolerate everyone, no matter how much of a threat they are to our society, that won't work either. If we smugly decide to do something in between these two extremes, that means being arbitrary rather than following easily applied principles.

Walzer concludes that when "political power is at stake, we should tilt decisively against the totalizing groups," just for the sake of decency. But he reminds us that this is merely a guideline. "It doesn't solve the problem of day-to-day coexistence." Such problems require "a long and unstable series of compromises."

The author also talks about involuntary associations, such as family or cultural group. Are we morally obliged to defend our families or cultural groups if they are attacked? Walzer thinks we generally are.

Walzer also asks about the concept of deliberation. That's different than debate, which is simply a contest in which one tries to win, even with an unsound argument. Deliberation involves trying to make as good a decision as possible about what policy to pursue. Here, the author points out that liberal societies debate thinkable policies with great freedom. But they also define what policies are thinkable, and those which are not simply don't get brought up.

A final topic is passion in politics. Do we want our villains to be cold and calculating? Or wild and frenzied? Do we need more passion or less?

I guess I disagree with the author here. Any human is likely to be passionate enough about any interesting issue, the more so if there is widespread debate about it. As a liberal, I'm not afraid of fickleness on social issues. I'm not afraid of having kids disagree politically with their parents. But I am afraid of people going overboard and taking dubious and illogical political positions, unsupported by facts, which they then passionately refuse to reconsider.

In any case, the author has some good ideas, and I recommend the book.

3 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Not His Finest Effort, August 13, 2006

By	Thomas A. Hanson "philosoman" (Garberville, CA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This review is from: Politics and Passion: Toward a More Egalitarian Liberalism (Hardcover)

It's not that I disagree with Walzer's ideas in "Politics and Passion," it's that I find them unexceptionable to a rather boring degree. Even the title essay lacks the fire that I look for in a political essay. Unless the reader wishes to be a Michael Walzer "completist," to read every word he writes, I would suggest purchasing an earlier collection called "Arguing About War." Walzer at his best is possibly our most humane political thinker, and an essay such as "Can There Be a Decent Left" would be required reading in my utopia. I eagerly await his next book and hope it avoids the blandness of this one.