
The Lost History of Liberalism
From Ancient Rome to the Twenty-First Century
Failed to add items
Add to Cart failed.
Add to Wish List failed.
Remove from wishlist failed.
Adding to library failed
Follow podcast failed
Unfollow podcast failed
$0.00 for first 30 days
Buy for $17.19
No default payment method selected.
We are sorry. We are not allowed to sell this product with the selected payment method
-
Narrated by:
-
Xe Sands
The changing face of the liberal creed from the ancient world to today
The Lost History of Liberalism challenges our most basic assumptions about a political creed that has become a rallying cry - and a term of derision - in today's increasingly divided public square. Taking listeners from ancient Rome to today, Helena Rosenblatt traces the evolution of the words "liberal" and "liberalism", revealing the heated debates that have taken place over their meaning.
In this timely and provocative book, Rosenblatt debunks the popular myth of liberalism as a uniquely Anglo-American tradition centered on individual rights. She reveals that it was the French Revolution that gave birth to liberalism and Germans who transformed it. Only in the mid-20th century did the concept become widely known in the United States - and then, as now, its meaning was hotly debated.
Liberals were originally moralists at heart. They believed in the power of religion to reform society, emphasized the sanctity of the family, and never spoke of rights without speaking of duties. It was only during the Cold War and America's growing world hegemony that liberalism was refashioned into an American ideology focused so strongly on individual freedoms.
Today, we still can't seem to agree on liberalism's meaning. In the United States, a "liberal" is someone who advocates big government, while in France, big government is contrary to "liberalism". Political debates become befuddled because of semantic and conceptual confusion. The Lost History of Liberalism sets the record straight on a core tenet of today's political conversation and lays the foundations for a more constructive discussion about the future of liberal democracy.
©2018 Princeton University Press (P)2018 TantorListeners also enjoyed...




















People who viewed this also viewed...


















It's s a shame though, that the audio volume is not properly adjusted, which makes it impossible to listen to with phone in even just a little noise. Just turn up the volume god damn it, is it so hard!?
good book, but bad audio
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
I enjoyed this history of Liberalism
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
Great history, much needed
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
Narrator made the history of liberalism sexy
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
Educative and informative
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
horrible mispronunciations
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
In the quest to shine a light on the continental history of liberalism however, the author inevitably falls prey to the same temptation as she argues plagues so much of the contemporary history of liberalism - to belittle or ignore notable works of authors and political thinkers outside of the preferred school or region. In some parts, the book verges in on the line of downright revisionism.
The author also portrays a typical straw-man of contemporary liberalism as an atomistic ideology hellbent on destroying social cooperation and morals, not unlike the ones she criticize for being unfair in historical portrayals of liberals.
The dichotomy between enforcing rights/ methodological individualism and a moral, pluralistic and empathic liberalism is obviously faulty and the book names more than a few thinkers who are known for this very idea, but whose ideas about this are outright ignored. (E.g. Smith, Mill, Berlin, Rawls and even Hayek)
In sum the book puts a spotlight on a number of interesting uses and characteristics of liberalism throughout western history, but the book is also severely flawed and in some sense self-defeating in itself being an example of a politicized history, and unjust critique of liberalism.
Interesting but in the end self-defeating
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.