I’ve been enjoying DR’s lectures a great deal, and also rereading sections of his Politics of Good Intentions. But I don’t see why any of that should stop me pointing and laughing at Mr Cameron, esp. in his Bullingdon suit.
I suppose in his Bullingdon suit. I just thought Jim Bliss’ accusation of hypocrisy was rather misplaced. Is The Politics Of Good Intentions as good as the lectures have been?
Politics of Good Intentions is a mixed bag, but the best bits are really very good indeed — such as ch.2, which seamlessly oscillates between discussions of Weber’s “Politics as a Vocation” and the journalism of Blairite lickspittle Sion Simon MP. The book is basically a collection of the columns that DR wrote for the London Review of Books, without a great deal of editing or new material, as far as I could tell.
Have you not been going to the Runciman lectures?
This, it strikes me, for example, is much better:
http://www.ox.ac.uk/gazette/2006-7/weekly/010207/lecs.htm#5Ref
I’ve been enjoying DR’s lectures a great deal, and also rereading sections of his Politics of Good Intentions. But I don’t see why any of that should stop me pointing and laughing at Mr Cameron, esp. in his Bullingdon suit.
I suppose in his Bullingdon suit. I just thought Jim Bliss’ accusation of hypocrisy was rather misplaced. Is The Politics Of Good Intentions as good as the lectures have been?
Politics of Good Intentions is a mixed bag, but the best bits are really very good indeed — such as ch.2, which seamlessly oscillates between discussions of Weber’s “Politics as a Vocation” and the journalism of Blairite lickspittle Sion Simon MP. The book is basically a collection of the columns that DR wrote for the London Review of Books, without a great deal of editing or new material, as far as I could tell.
I’ve probably read most of them then…