I must accept that the fault here must be mine. The blurb, on the obverse of my copy of this book, tells me that respected institutions respect this work and I see that my one star rating is the lowest of the six on this august site.

It took me but twenty pages to determine that this was not the book for me: indeed, even that is not strictly true. I had grave doubts about this work whilst reading the introduction and only continued out of a pig headed determination to find something worthwhile in the reading thereof.

So, what's wrong with, 'Green Political Thought'? Firstly, it is so dry as to make the Mojave Desert look like the Pacific Ocean: to me, being a Green is a joyous thing; a philosophy where one, almost instinctively, knows what is right. Chapters upon the schism between environmentalism and ecologism struck me as irrelevant. I am sure that the gravitas within this tome would be a requirement for entry into the grander of our educational establishments, should one wish to study Green politics under such a halloed roof but, in the real world, it rates as little more than a jumble of words.

In defence of 'Green Political Thought', the book, even in its second edition is twenty years old but I, for my sins, found nothing to detain me here. ( )

I expecting a lot going into this book and I was a little bit disappointed. I think that big problem is that I thought this would be more indepth and provide me with new information, which it failed to do. I've already studied environmental ethics a little bit and this book just repeated what I've already learned, even though I never studied ecologism.

Overall this was well-written and I'd recommend it as an introductory text to someone who has never studied environmental ethics and green politics. However, I think someone already familar with deep ecology, green politics, or sustainability would find "Green Political Thought" redundant. ( )