A riveting account of the decades-long effort by reactionary white conservatives to undermine democracy and entrench their power—and the movement to stop them. The mob that stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021, represented an extreme form of the central danger facing American democracy today: a blatant disregard for the will of the majority. But this crisis didn’t begin or end with Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election. Through voter suppression, election subversion, gerrymandering, dark money, the takeover of the courts, and the whitewashing of history, reactionary white conservatives have strategically entrenched power in the face of a massive demographic and political shift. Ari Berman charts these efforts with sweeping historical research and incisive on-the-ground reporting, chronicling how a wide range of antidemocratic tactics interact with profound structural inequalities in institutions like the Electoral College, the Senate, and the Supreme Court to threaten the survival of representative government in America. “The will of the people,” wrote Thomas Jefferson in 1801, “is the only legitimate foundation of any government.” But that foundation is crumbling. Some counter-majoritarian measures were deliberately built into the Constitution, which was designed in part to benefit a small propertied upper class, but they have metastasized to a degree that the Founding Fathers could never have anticipated, undermining the very notion of “a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” Chilling and revelatory, Minority Rule exposes the long history of the conflict between white supremacy and multiracial democracy that has reached a fever pitch today—while also telling the inspiring story of resistance to these regressive efforts.

Minority Rights, Majority Rule seeks to explain a phenomenon evident to most observers of the US Congress. In the House of Representatives, majority parties rule and minorities are seldom able to influence national policy making. In the Senate, minorities quite often call the shots, empowered by the filibuster to frustrate the majority. Why did the two chambers develop such distinctive legislative styles? Conventional wisdom suggests that differences in the size and workload of the House and Senate led the two chambers to develop very different rules of procedure. Sarah Binder offers an alternative, partisan theory to explain the creation and suppression of minority rights, showing that contests between partisan coalitions have throughout congressional history altered the distribution of procedural rights. Most importantly, new majorities inherit procedural choices made in the past. This institutional dynamic has fuelled the power of partisan majorities in the House but stopped them in their tracks in the Senate.

The revival of group consciousness in Eastern European countries in the wake of the Cold War has put the protection of subnational groups high on the political agenda. The present book bears witness to the renewed interest in the legal position of subnational groups in international law. This book and the Conference, at which provisional versions of most of the contributions were presented, originate in perceived deficiencies of contemporary international law to protect subnational groups within a legal framework of which the principal subjects are states. Divided into three parts, the book commences with an analysis of the antagonistic relation between the right of peoples to self-determination and the right of states to territorial integrity, and the need to redefine these concepts in the post-Cold War era. The book continues with the highly controversial issue of the attribution of rights to subnational groups and the identification of subnational groups which would be entitled to such rights. The second part deals with the identification and protection of peoples and minorities at different levels of organization, viz. subnational, national and supranational. This part is followed by an analysis of the modes and means by which international obligations vis-à-vis subnational groups can be enforced. Not only the judicial means are considered, but also the justifiability of recourse to military means to the cause of subnational groups. This book not only provides an in-depth analysis of contemporary international law with respect to the protection of peoples and minorities, but also of the law as it is developing in the post-Cold War era.

Two Italian writers, Gaetano Mosca and Antonio Gramsci, have been very influential in twentieth-century political thought, the first cast as a thoroughgoing conservative, the second as the model of a humanistic Marxist. The author of this provocative book, the first systematic study of the connection between the two men, maintains that they are closer to each other than is commonly supposed-that they in fact belong to the same political tradition of democratic elitism. Maurice A. Finocchiaro argues that Gramsci's political theory is a constructive critique of Mosca's and that the key common element is the attempt to combine democracy and elitism in a theoretical system that defines them not as opposite but as compatible and interdependent. Finocchiaro finds that a critical examination of the major works of the two men demonstrates their shared belief in the viability of democratic elitism and undermines the importance of the distinction between right and left.

Identities, Nationalism, and the State: The Politics of Ethnicity and Minority Regimes in the Middle East, calls attention to the question of how minorities position and represent themselves during and after regime transitions and the dilemmas that minorities pose to regime change and how social cleavages shape minority preferences for regime type. It traces the path of ethnic and religious identities of minority regimes using the theories of modernization and nationalism to find that ethnic nationalism can be—and often is—incompatible with nation-building. The author examines ethnic identity and ethnic conflict in the Middle East, exploring the process of identity formation within the context of colonial politics and postcolonial Arab nationalism. By considering Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Bahrain, all significant regional actors, Identities, Nationalism, and the State tries to answer questions of legitimacy and inclusivity of minority rule, focusing not only on the outcomes of minority and majority rule but also on examples of where minorities find communal representation better than modern state governance.

NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER • A call to reform our antiquated political institutions before it’s too late—from the authors of How Democracies Die “[Levitsky and Ziblatt] write with terrifying clarity about how the forces of the right have co-opted the enshrined rules to exert their tyranny.”—The Washington Post ONE OF THE CALIFORNIA REVIEW OF BOOKS’ TEN BEST BOOKS OF THE YEAR • A NEWSWEEK BEST BOOK OF THE YEAR America is undergoing a massive experiment: It is moving, in fits and starts, toward a multiracial democracy, something few societies have ever done. But the prospect of change has sparked an authoritarian backlash that threatens the very foundations of our political system. Why is democracy under assault here, and not in other wealthy, diversifying nations? And what can we do to save it? With the clarity and brilliance that made their first book, How Democracies Die, a global bestseller, Harvard professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt offer a coherent framework for understanding these volatile times. They draw on a wealth of examples—from 1930s France to present-day Thailand—to explain why and how political parties turn against democracy. They then show how our Constitution makes us uniquely vulnerable to attacks from within: It is a pernicious enabler of minority rule, allowing partisan minorities to consistently thwart and even rule over popular majorities. Most modern democracies—from Germany and Sweden to Argentina and New Zealand—have eliminated outdated institutions like elite upper chambers, indirect elections, and lifetime tenure for judges. The United States lags dangerously behind. In this revelatory book, Levitsky and Ziblatt issue an urgent call to reform our politics. It’s a daunting task, but we have remade our country before—most notably, after the Civil War and during the Progressive Era. And now we are at a crossroads: America will either become a multiracial democracy or cease to be a democracy at all.

Over the past decade or so, philosophical speculation about human rights has tended to fall into two streams. On the one hand, there are "Orthodox" theorists, who think of human rights as natural rights: moral rights that we have simply in virtue of being human. On the other hand, there are "Political" theorists, who think of human rights as rights that play a distinctive role, or set of roles, in modern international politics: setting universal standards of political legitimacy, serving as norms of international concern, and/or imposing limits on the exercise of national sovereignty. This edited volume explores this disagreement, its underlying sources, and related issues in the philosophy of human rights. Using the Orthodox-Political debate as a springboard for broader reflection, the volume covers a diverse range of questions about: the relevance of the history of human rights to their philosophical comprehension; how to properly understand the relationship between human rights morality and law; how to balance the normative character of human rights - their description of an ideal world - with the requirement that they be feasible in the here and now; the role of human rights in a world shaped by politics and power; and how to reconcile the individualistic and communitarian aspects of human rights. All chapters are accompanied by useful and probing commentaries, which help to create dialogues throughout the entire volume.

Since its publication in 1965, Brian Barry's seminal work has occupied an important role in the revival of Anglo-American political philosophy. A number of ideas and terms in it have become part of the standard vocabulary, such as the distinction between ""ideal-regarding"" and ""want-regarding"" principles and the division of principles into aggregative and distributive. The book provided the first precise analysis of the concept of political values having trade-off relations and its analysis of the notion of the public interest has also been significant.

The main purpose of the British Documents on the End of Empire Project (BDEEP) is to publish documents from British official archives on the ending of colonial rule and the context in which this took place. This publication is the second of three volumes which relate to the years 1964 to 1971, during which period ten territories became independent and all but one (Aden) became new members of the Commonwealth. Issues considered include: Britain's second application to join the EEC; colonial issues at the UN; planning and assessment of priorities for British interests after the withdrawl from Suez; major Whitehall administrative changes and the Overseas Service during 1966 to 1968; an assessment of the value of the Commonwealth to Britain; and developments relating to Rhodesia.