We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter examines trimming as a face of moderation. It starts from the definition of trimming given by the Marquess of Halifax in a famous essay, “The Character of a Trimmer” (1684), and compares trimmers to tightrope walkers. It argues that trimmers tend to support the parties they dislike least and search for a “wise mean between barbarous extremes.”
This chapter presents moderation as an alternative to ideology and relies on the definition of politics given by Michael Oakeshott, according to which politics is and must remain a limited activity providing the general rules of conduct. It makes a distinction between ideological and political thinking and comments on the overlap and differences between moderation and conservatism.
This chapter analyzes the dangers posed by the politics of warfare by drawing on concrete examples from contemporary politics. It focuses on the controversial “Flight 93” essay by Michael J. Anton and shows how the rhetoric of warfare politics informed its theses and recommendations. It warns that this type of destructive politics, fueled by an apocalyptic rhetoric and Manichaean view, has become all too common in American society, and suggests a few way to fight against it.
Michael Oakeshott was an extraordinary teacher and lecturer, enjoying exchanges with students that faculty half his age could not match. In essays that he wrote on the nature of philosophy and political philosophy in the 1930s and 1940s, Oakeshott insisted on the open-endedness of thought, referring to philosophy as radically subversive questioning that shuns ideology and political advocacy. Oakeshott was skeptical of the pretensions of politics and spoke of politics as a necessary evil. He was at the same time reserved in speaking of transcendence even though he had a lifelong interest in religion. He looked for the poetic in the midst of the quotidian experience. Oakeshott was a radical individualist. Every human being is an essay in self-understanding; every human being thinks and interprets and responds to the world. Oakeshott understands the self-understanding in terms of such beings.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.