<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: John Redwood reviews &#8220;Political Hypocrisy&#8221; by David Runciman</title>
	<atom:link href="http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2008/05/14/john-redwood-reviews-political-hypocrisy-by-david-runciman/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2008/05/14/john-redwood-reviews-political-hypocrisy-by-david-runciman/</link>
	<description>Incisive and topical campaigns and commentary on today&#039;s issues and tomorrow&#039;s problems</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 13:35:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Junius</title>
		<link>http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2008/05/14/john-redwood-reviews-political-hypocrisy-by-david-runciman/#comment-3302</link>
		<dc:creator>Junius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 20:20:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/?p=1075#comment-3302</guid>
		<description>So - politician disagrees with book that says politicians must be liars to be successful? Mandy Rice-Davies, your immortal words apply once more. 
 
Also, you state &quot;It is perhaps difficult for a senior lecturer in political theory to have enough grasp of history to appreciate the interplay between ideas, actions and words in the case of so many historical figures operating at different times.&quot; Obviously, it is perhaps difficult for a senior politician to have enough grasp of proper, in-depth academic research or genuine intellectual matters more generally to appreciate the interplay between different schools of thought in the case of so many researchers and thinkers, but it&#039;s worth pointing out that Runciman is a representative of the Cambridge School of interpretation of political theory, according to which historical context and location of ideas within discourses and events is of central importance. So if that charge is inappropriate to any political theorist, it&#039;s Runciman. Looks like your standards have slipped since those halcyon days at All Souls. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So &#8211; politician disagrees with book that says politicians must be liars to be successful? Mandy Rice-Davies, your immortal words apply once more. </p>
<p>Also, you state &quot;It is perhaps difficult for a senior lecturer in political theory to have enough grasp of history to appreciate the interplay between ideas, actions and words in the case of so many historical figures operating at different times.&quot; Obviously, it is perhaps difficult for a senior politician to have enough grasp of proper, in-depth academic research or genuine intellectual matters more generally to appreciate the interplay between different schools of thought in the case of so many researchers and thinkers, but it&#039;s worth pointing out that Runciman is a representative of the Cambridge School of interpretation of political theory, according to which historical context and location of ideas within discourses and events is of central importance. So if that charge is inappropriate to any political theorist, it&#039;s Runciman. Looks like your standards have slipped since those halcyon days at All Souls. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mikestallard</title>
		<link>http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2008/05/14/john-redwood-reviews-political-hypocrisy-by-david-runciman/#comment-3301</link>
		<dc:creator>mikestallard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 19:38:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/?p=1075#comment-3301</guid>
		<description>OK, throughout History, rulers have said one thing and done another. Saul and David? David and Bath Sheba? Absalom? Themistocles? Augustus and the empire? I could go on.... 
(sentence left out) 
So? 
What is different nowadays (thank heavens) is the press which caters to all tastes. Blair understood that the medium is the message - it doesn&#039;t matter what you do, so long as it looks right. 
A politician nowadays has every single chance of getting caught. 
And that must be very scary for people in the public view. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, throughout History, rulers have said one thing and done another. Saul and David? David and Bath Sheba? Absalom? Themistocles? Augustus and the empire? I could go on&#8230;.<br />
(sentence left out)<br />
So?<br />
What is different nowadays (thank heavens) is the press which caters to all tastes. Blair understood that the medium is the message &#8211; it doesn&#039;t matter what you do, so long as it looks right.<br />
A politician nowadays has every single chance of getting caught.<br />
And that must be very scary for people in the public view. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

