Hi Sup Forums, this is my nonfiction politics and history collection

Hi Sup Forums, this is my nonfiction politics and history collection.
What do you think of it?
Do you know of any other works or authors that would go well with it?

Let me see

Uhm, yeah, you're an humungous faggot

You have a good selection of classic history books, I'd suggest adding Plutarch to them. In terms of politics you're missing the classics entirely. Get Plato, Hobbes, Marx (I'm surprised not to see him there considering your flag), Mill, basically anything that's been influential in Western politics.

>The Untold History Of The United States By Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick
>The WikiLeaks Files: The World According to US Empire By Julian Assange
>The Illegal War on Libya by Cynthia Mckinney
>The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by R Wendell Harrison and John J Mearsheimer
>A Brief History of Neoliberalism by David Harvey
>Bad Samaritans By Ha Joon Chang

^^^ Who runs the world.

old
move along

Voltaire.

Round 2:

Social policies...

>Preventing Violence By James Gilligan
>The Locust Effect By Gary Haugen and Victor Boutros
>Why Nations Fail By Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson
>The Equality Effect By Danny Dorling

^^^ Right, Left or Fascist, IMO essential reading when thinking about political ideology.

What do you mean?
I have only 5, I'd like to read some more classical works but not sure what to proceed with
Also, Marx and anarchism? Kek.
Stones book just seems sensationalism and I already have Killing Hope
Assange is a bum
McKinney might be good
Harrison and Mearsheimers reasoning is flawed.
Changs book is there

This is an ancient picture. This is bait, faggots.

No its not its my library

>Stones book just seems sensationalism

Have you read it, or watched the documentary series?

I'm baffled if you made that statement and have.

>Assange is a bum

He just write the intro. It's various cables, explained and put into context regarding contemporary politcs.

>Harrison and Mearsheimers reasoning is flawed.

Have you read it?

Time stamp, cunt.

Get a Bible(KJV) and get rid of the other ones user.

I haven't read Harrison and Mearsheimers book but have read the essays they had written into its lead up
There is no secret control over the USA forcing it to support Israel
It supports Israel for its geopolitical aims for the region
The exact same reason it supported apartheid South Africa, the dictatorships of Central and South America, Suharto, Marcos, the South Korean Generals, the Shah, et cetera ad nauseum
You would have to argue that in every case the American government was being compelled to aid them against its will
Which is absurd

I also have read Stones book, but it just looks sensationalistic and like I said I've already read things like Killing Hope and Politics of Heroin so I don't know what he has left to offer

>I'd like to read some more classical works but not sure what to proceed with
Plutarch. Montaigne's essays are also fantastic.

>Also, Marx and anarchism?
You shouldn't just read things that conform to your worldview. Anything influential will help you understand politics better and Marx has been incredibly influential whether you love or hate him.

you need a lot more history. see the future through the past, read more

>You would have to argue that in every case the American government was being compelled to aid them against its will
Which is absurd

Your reasoning is flawed.

They are focusing on middle eastern foreign policy, and how zionism influences US foreign policy in that regards.

They are not claiming that is the only influence on US foreign policy.

I would read the book.

>I also have read Stones book, but it just looks sensationalistic

You've read it but 'it looks sensationalist'?

Wat?

>Daron Acemoglu
posting a book by a roach. kys

>You shouldn't just read things that conform to your worldview.

I agree with that.

IME it's easy to spot people who don't challenge their worldview from time to time. They don't develop the ability to respond to feedback, or empathize with other people's perspective.

Whenever I come across people who say that their beliefs haven't change in 20 years, I'm pretty certain that they don't read anything that challenges their worldview. Your core values and tenets may not change, but everyone's ideology changes over time as you come across new information.

>I also haven't read it
Typo
>They are focusing on middle eastern foreign policy
And when you look at Americas approach and compare it to everywhere else you see its doing the exact same thing
It supports Israel because it is its intervention force in the region
It did a major service for the USA in 1967 when it broke Arab pan-nationalism, especially when at the time the USA was bogged down in Indochina
Its a big aid for subsidising the defence industry, the money given to it comes right back in arms purchases
This then spurs on the rest of the countries in the region to buy more from America too
Its been a big help in its imperial adventures, like in the 1980s when Congress barred Raygun from supporting El Salvador and Guatemalas counter insurgencies it got Israel to step in with trainers and arms
Provided same help with South Africa
And aided the arms for hostages exchanges
Its also a big hub for tech investment

It ticks all the boxes for why the USA would support it

Indeed. To add to what you're saying, I find that an increased understanding of other ideologies makes me much less frustrated when I hear people espousing ideas that I don't like.

My primary news source is Vice: the bookshelf

>I RED BUK I SMART

What is Vice-like about this?
Are any of the authors published by Vice?

I tend to avoid vice articles to be perfectly honest I just don't find them very informative
Some are okay, but a lot meh

You might like “The Big Lie” by D’Neish D’souza.

...

Why would I read designated troll?

It also blackmailed the US into saving it's ass in the Yom Kippur War by threatening to nuke the Golan Heights and spark WWIII. Believe it or not, prior to that war France was their primary benefactor, not the US. Nixon was wholly opposed to the idea and actually wanted Jews to be left out of policy decisions related to Israel. Now look where we are.

The USA has been amping up arms sales to it since 1967
It put a halt to things when the Soviets were going to get involved
You've got no facts or rational argument only "now look where we are" which doesn't even mean anything
As the USA got more involved in controlling the Middle East naturally its relationship with a regional power grew
Its the spear carrier
Or cop on the beat, something Nixon described it as - but of course the police chief is in DC

How does its relationship differ from that of its relationship with Apartheid South Africa? Defended it right to the bitter end, armed and funded it, lied about conditions in the country and the racism and segregation - Raygun once tried to claim they'd gotten rid of all the segregation and blacks were no longer forbidden from businesses or certain areas
Obviously the Boer conspiracy had got to him