Castle Lecture Series – serie

In this wise and eloquent book, one of the world’s preeminent senior statesmen presents his views on the challenges of diplomacy in the post-Cold War era. Abba Eban, who has been Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations and to the United States as well as the foreign minister in several Israeli governments, draws on his years of experience and knowledge to offer an overview of diplomacy as practiced in today’s world.Interweaving historical data with personal reminiscences, Eban reviews the Cold War period and its end in 1989, praising the diplomatic restraint in the years that have followed; discusses the ethical confrontation between power and conscience in a wide range of international decisions and actions; and points out the difficulty of reconciling the promotion of universal human rights with respect for national sovereignty. Eban goes on to deplore the lack of privacy in international negotiations that is the result of an increasingly intrusive media, shows that nuclear warfare is not a restraint against frequent military intervention, and warns against inflated views of what can be expected from the United Nations. He concludes with thoughts about the quest for peace in the Middle East.Instructive, erudite, and witty, Eban’s tour through diplomatic history vividly demonstrates that the wisdom of the past can be immensely valuable as we seek to negotiate and maintain peace in the future.

A Washington Post Book World Best Seller  “Robert A. Dahl . . . is about as covered in honors as a scholar can be. . . . He knows what he is talking about. And he thinks that the Constitution has something the matter with it.”—Hendrik Hertzberg, New Yorker  “A devastating attack on the undemocratic character of the American Constitution.”—Gordon S. Wood, New York Review of Books  In this provocative book, one of our most eminent political scientists poses the question, “Why should Americans uphold their constitution?” The vast majority of Americans venerate the Constitution and the democratic principles it embodies, but many also worry that the United States has fallen behind other nations on crucial issues, including economic equality, racial integration, and women’s rights. Robert Dahl explores this vital tension between the Americans’ belief in the legitimacy of their constitution and their belief in the principles of democracy.  Dahl starts with the assumption that the legitimacy of the American Constitution derives solely from its utility as an instrument of democratic governance. Dahl demonstrates that, due to the context in which it was conceived, our constitution came to incorporate significant antidemocratic elements. Because the Framers of the Constitution had no relevant example of a democratic political system on which to model the American government, many defining aspects of our political system were implemented as a result of shortsightedness or last-minute compromise. Dahl highlights those elements of the American system that are most unusual and potentially antidemocratic: the federal system, the bicameral legislature, judicial review, presidentialism, and the electoral college system.  The political system that emerged from the world’s first great democratic experiment is unique—no other well-established democracy has copied it. How does the American constitutional system function in comparison to other democratic systems? How could our political system be altered to achieve more democratic ends? To what extent did the Framers of the Constitution build features into our political system that militate against significant democratic reform?  Refusing to accept the status of the American Constitution as a sacred text, Dahl challenges us all to think critically about the origins of our political system and to consider the opportunities for creating a more democratic society.

In this inspiring book, one of the most respected senior figures in American politics defines his political philosophy for the country as we approach the end of the twentieth century. For many years Paul Tsongas, the former United States senator from Massachusetts and 1992 Democratic presidential candidate, has stressed the virtues of economic growth, fiscal responsibility, and social inclusiveness. He now tells us how we can achieve these goals if responsible politicians and ordinary citizens view the future as a "journey of purpose." Tsongas begins with a personal account of his 1992 political campaign, revealing why he entered the race for president, how he felt as the campaign foundered for lack of funds, and the lessons he learned. He next discusses the need for a multicultural meritocracy in the United States, presenting his opinions on gays in the military, affirmative action, and other controversial subjects. Finally he offers his interpretation of the 1994 election that swept the Republican Party into power in both the Senate and House, asserting that the election should be seen not as a mandate for Republican ideology but rather as a massive rejection of Democratic policy. Tsongas suggests that there is a vast number of Americans who are socially liberal and fiscally conservative, who are not satisfied with the programs of either major party, and whose needs might be filled by a third party, and he articulates principles that this party might follow. He concludes by challenging America's young people to broaden the view of who Americans are and what Americans can be, to make their own lives a journey of purpose.

In this pathbreaking book one of America’s most distinguished philosophers brilliantly explores the status and authority of law and the nature of political allegiance through close readings of three classic Hollywood Westerns: Howard Hawks’ Red River and John Ford’s The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance and The Searchers.Robert Pippin treats these films as sophisticated mythic accounts of a key moment in American history: its “second founding,” or the western expansion. His central question concerns how these films explore classical problems in political psychology, especially how the virtues of a commercial republic gained some hold on individuals at a time when the heroic and martial virtues were so important. Westerns, Pippin shows, raise central questions about the difference between private violence and revenge and the state’s claim to a legitimate monopoly on violence, and they show how these claims come to be experienced and accepted or rejected.Pippin’s account of the best Hollywood Westerns brings this genre into the center of the tradition of political thought, and his readings raise questions about political psychology and the political passions that have been neglected in contemporary political thought in favor of a limited concern with the question of legitimacy.

Why do policies and business practices that ignore the moral and generous side of human nature often fail?Should the idea of economic man—the amoral and self-interested Homo economicus—determine how we expect people to respond to monetary rewards, punishments, and other incentives? Samuel Bowles answers with a resounding “no.” Policies that follow from this paradigm, he shows, may “crowd out” ethical and generous motives and thus backfire.  But incentives per se are not really the culprit. Bowles shows that crowding out occurs when the message conveyed by fines and rewards is that self-interest is expected, that the employer thinks the workforce is lazy, or that the citizen cannot otherwise be trusted to contribute to the public good. Using historical and recent case studies as well as behavioral experiments, Bowles shows how well-designed incentives can crowd in the civic motives on which good governance depends.

The question of when or if a nation should intervene in another country’s affairs is one of the most important concerns in today’s volatile world. Taking John Stuart Mill’s famous 1859 essay “A Few Words on Non-Intervention” as his starting point, international relations scholar Michael W. Doyle addresses the thorny issue of when a state’s sovereignty should be respected and when it should be overridden or disregarded by other states in the name of humanitarian protection, national self-determination, or national security. In this time of complex social and political interplay and increasingly sophisticated and deadly weaponry, Doyle reinvigorates Mill’s principles for a new era while assessing the new United Nations doctrine of responsibility to protect. In the twenty-first century, intervention can take many forms: military and economic, unilateral and multilateral. Doyle’s thought-provoking argument examines essential moral and legal questions underlying significant American foreign policy dilemmas of recent years, including Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan.