Is there a public good? A prevalent view in political science is that democracy is unavoidably chaotic, arbitrary, meaningless, and impossible. Such scepticism began with Condorcet in the eighteenth century, and continued most notably with Arrow and Riker in the twentieth century. In this powerful book, Gerry Mackie confronts and subdues these long-standing doubts about democratic governance. Problems of cycling, agenda control, strategic voting, and dimensional manipulation are not sufficiently harmful, frequent, or irremediable, he argues, to be of normative concern. Mackie also examines every serious empirical illustration of cycling and instability, including Riker's famous argument that the US Civil War was due to arbitrary dimensional manipulation. Almost every empirical claim is erroneous, and none is normatively troubling, Mackie says. This spirited defence of democratic institutions should prove both provocative and influential.
Is there a public good? A prevalent view in political science is that democracy is unavoidably chaotic, arbitrary, meaningless, and impossible. Such scepticism began with Condorcet in the eighteenth century, and continued most notably with Arrow and Riker in the twentieth century. In this powerful book, Gerry Mackie confronts and subdues these long-standing doubts about democratic governance. Problems of cycling, agenda control, strategic voting, and dimensional manipulation are not sufficiently harmful, frequent, or irremediable, he argues, to be of normative concern. Mackie also examines every serious empirical illustration of cycling and instability, including Riker's famous argument that the US Civil War was due to arbitrary dimensional manipulation. Almost every empirical claim is erroneous, and none is normatively troubling, Mackie says. This spirited defence of democratic institutions should prove both provocative and influential.
“Elaine Scarry’s consistently radical way of posing essential questions redirects inquiry in the most valuable ways, a tribute to a disciplined and erudite imagination put almost exclusiv
What is democracy? How can it be defended and justified? How do we understand the complexities of democracy in a world of rapid change?At a time when democracy appears to be universally acclaimed as t
This book explores the mindset of American government officials who decided that necessity required that American democracy should be defended by actions and policies contrary to traditional ideals of
There is continued discussion in International Relations surrounding the existence (or not) of the 'democratic peace' - the idea that democracies do not fight each other. This book argues that threats to homeland territories force centralization within the state, for three reasons. First, territorial threats are highly salient to individuals, and leaders must respond by promoting the security of the state. Second, threatened territories must be defended by large, standing land armies and these armies can then be used as forces for repression during times of peace. Finally, domestic political bargaining is dramatically altered during times of territorial threat, with government opponents joining the leader in promoting the security of the state. Leaders therefore have a favorable environment in which to institutionalize greater executive power. These forces explain why conflicts are associated with centralized states, and in turn why peace is associated with democracy.
The host of MSNBC’s Morning Joe reveals how President Harry Truman defended democracy against the Soviet threat at the dawn of the Cold War.Harry Truman had been vice president for less than three mon
New York Times BestsellerThe host of MSNBC’s Morning Joe reveals how President Harry Truman defended democracy against the Soviet threat at the dawn of the Cold War.“A compelling account of a great ma
American Founders reveals men and women of African descent as key protagonists in the story of American democracy. It chronicles how black people developed and defended New World settlements, undermin
There is continued discussion in International Relations surrounding the existence (or not) of the 'democratic peace' - the idea that democracies do not fight each other. This book argues that threats to homeland territories force centralization within the state, for three reasons. First, territorial threats are highly salient to individuals, and leaders must respond by promoting the security of the state. Second, threatened territories must be defended by large, standing land armies and these armies can then be used as forces for repression during times of peace. Finally, domestic political bargaining is dramatically altered during times of territorial threat, with government opponents joining the leader in promoting the security of the state. Leaders therefore have a favorable environment in which to institutionalize greater executive power. These forces explain why conflicts are associated with centralized states, and in turn why peace is associated with democracy.
The book argues that there is in the US, Canada and UK, a general right to conscientious exemption available to a person who objects to any legal obligation whatsoever on the basis of a religious or non-religious conscientious belief. The book provides a liberal defence of this right and argues that it should be considered a defining feature of a liberal democracy. A general right to conscientious exemption is a legal right to conscientiously object to any obligation imposed by law and to receive from a court an exemption from complying with such obligation. The general right defended in the book is not an absolute right. A court may refuse to grant an exemption if doing so would disproportionately impact the rights of others or the public interest. The book suggests how the general right should be balanced against important rights, such as non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
