In writing the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, our Founding Fathers established a democratic republic with a solid political basis. What they wrote was the political map that future representatives would need to follow to conduct the people's business in an efficient and effective manner. As long as they faithfully carried out the people's will, our democracy and republic would function in a way congruent with our forebears' wishes. What in the world happened? H. John Lyke, a board-certified psychologist and professor emeritus at Metropolitan State College of Denver, and the author of multiple political psychology books, suggests that ever since George Washington retired as captain of our ship of state, subsequent presidents and members of Congress have failed to use the sailing chart of the Constitution. Instead, they've chosen to pursue their own and their political parties' self-interests. Lyke uses psychological principles to explore the reasons why our government has fallen so low, and in the voice of a kind but determined therapist, he offers simple and viable solutions to get us back to following our map.

So begins this collection of Stéphane Dion's speeches from 1996 to 1998. Organized around four central themes, Straight Talk shows the breadth and strength of Dion's convictions. Dion believes that Canada is first and foremost a nation of caring people, in contrast to the image projected by the endless, dry constitutional debate. He argues that the melding of diversity and unity that is the basis of this nation is possible only because of the particular federalism that Canadians have invented. This federalism, however, is far from perfect and it is the responsibility of government to continue to work to improve it, always remembering that its core must be the quality of service it provides to Canadians. Dion believes that the Quebec question is not a constitutional question but one that concerns identity: many francophones believe that their identity and culture are not respected in the rest of Canada and see the anglophone majority as a force for assimilation, while many in other provinces feel that separatists do not share the same values of openness and tolerance. He believes strongly that the secession process the Parti Québecois has proposed - effecting independence on the basis of incorrect legal theory, an unclear referendum question, and a majority of fifty percent plus one - is difficult to reconcile with democracy and raises questions that must be discussed openly and resolved democratically. Straight Talk is a refreshingly honest and frank discussion about a matter that has been at the forefront of Canadian's thoughts for too many years.

Deftly navigating the tensions among globalization, national sovereignty, and democracy, Straight Talk on Trade presents an indispensable commentary on today's world economy and its dilemmas, and offers a visionary framework at a critical time when it is most needed.

"In much of the theory of meaning, philosophers and linguists have focused on the use of language in conveying information in cooperative informational exchanges. As a result, political uses of speech, of the sort that political propaganda exemplifies, have not been taken to be a central case of language use. In this book, Jason Stanley and David Beaver focus on the political use of speech as a central case, which leads to a foundational rethinking of the theory of meaning. By focusing on the political uses of speech, one arrives at better (and more general) tools to describe speech, as well as a more accurate view of its central functions. More dramatically, it enables us to see the ways in which virtually all speech is political-a fact that is masked by much of the theory of meaning. Stanley and Beaver's topic is speech generally-its function and how best to represent that function. Political propaganda serves as a window into that topic, since its function is not obviously to share information, or even misinformation. They emphasize the importance of understanding how political propaganda works via the topic of the justification of free speech and argue that political propaganda poses a problem for a broad range of justifications of free speech. Stanley and Beaver argue that it is not possible to compartmentalize the political aspects of speech from the non-political aspects of speech, nor is it possible to carve out a neutral deliberative space of evaluating reasons qua reasons. Speech is invariably political"--

From It’s All Politics Like business in general, politics is not a spectator sport. You cannot afford to be apolitical at work if you have any aspirations for advancement. The only way to avoid politics is to avoid people—by finding an out-of-the-way corner where you can do your job. Of course, it’s the same job you’ll likely be doing for the rest of your career. In any job, when you reach a certain level of technical competence, politics is what makes all the difference with regard to success. At that point, it is indeed all politics. Everyday brilliant people take a backseat to their politically adept colleagues by failing to win crucial support for their ideas. Sometimes politics involves going around or bending rules, but more typically it’s about positioning your ideas in a favorable light, and knowing what to say, and how and when to say it.… Keep in mind that people benefit from perpetuating the image of politics as something you either know or you don’t. Ignore them. Political acumen is largely learned from observation. And then it’s a matter of practice, practice, practice. When a journalist suggested that golfing great Gary Player was very lucky, he replied: “It’s funny, but the more I practice, the luckier I get.” The same is true of politics. An indispensable guide to mastering the ins and outs of office politics—the single most important factor in getting ahead in your career As management professor and consultant Kathleen Reardon explains in her new book, It's All Politics, talent and hard work alone will not get you to the top. What separates the winners from the losers in corporate life is politics. As Reardon explains, the most talented and accomplished employees often take a backseat to their politically adept coworkers, losing ground in the race to get ahead—sometimes even losing their jobs. Why? Because they’ve failed to manage the important relationships with the people who can best reward their creativity and intelligence. To determine whether you need a crash course in Office Politics 101, ask yourself the following questions: Do I get credit for my ideas? Do I know how to deal with a difficult colleague? Do I get the plum assignments? Do I have a mentor? Do I say no gracefully and pick my battles wisely? Am I in the loop? Reardon has interviewed hundreds of employees, from successful veterans to aspiring hopefuls, examining why some people who work hard and effectively at their jobs fall behind, while those who are adept at “reading the office tea leaves” forge ahead. Being politically savvy doesn’t mean being unethical or devious. At heart, it’s about listening to and relating to others, and making choices that advance everyone’s goals. Like it or not, when it comes to work, it’s all politics. And politics is all about knowing what to say, when to say it, and who to say it to.

The book presents cinematic case studies in political realism versus political idealism, demonstrating methods of viewing popular cinema as political theory. The book appreciates political myth-making in popular genres as especially practical and accessible theorizing about politics.

Drawing on an innovative dataset of the professional careers of 628 presidential campaign staffers working in technology from 2004-2012 and interviews with more than 60 staffers, Prototype Politics details how and explains why the Democrats have taken up technology more than Republicans over the past decade.

There is more to parking law than just parking penalties. Considering the ways in which law works in everyday life, and in familiar places of common experience where the presence of law is not obvious, this book explores the various notions of the right to park, which jurisprudentially is enacted between individuals in everyday parking. From parking areas to the courtroom, parking engenders disputes over equality, speech, legitimacy, and entitlement that reach beyond the stated scope of policy. Looking beyond the obvious, this book examines the contested site of the parking space as a place of socio-legal meaning where property claims and rights shape identities. Adopting a constitutive approach to the study of law, the book examines how regulation of parking policy is at odds with the force of localised politics, producing competing notions of legality and examples of legal semiotics within the terrain of legal geography.

Power is immanent in human affairs; by definition, human beings are political animals. The only way to fully comprehend and analyze the complexities of power is to locate where material, psychological, and social dimensions of political power are ultimately and socially situated and reproduced. This collection of essays highlights the theoretical concerns of political anthropology. Initially published in the journal Ethnology, the essays were classroom tested and collected on the basis of student comments. An in-depth introduction presents the intellectual traditions in political anthropology and focuses particularly on the manner in which various periods defined and dealt with the nature of social power. It also places current works within the framework of critical but constantly revised theoretical problems.Contributors: Mart Bax; Ernest Brandewie; Karen J. Brison; Philip A. Dennis; Richard G. Dillon; Harvey E. Goldberg; James Howe; Donald T. Hughes; Roger M. Keesing; Donald V. Kurtz; Charles Lindhom; Robert F. Maher; Richard W. Miller; Sydel F. Silverman; L. Lewis Wall; Daniela Weinberg

These 13 essays explore Bruno Latour's legal theory from a variety of disciplinary perspectives. They combine analytical tools drawn from Latour's actor-network theory developed in Science in Action, Reassembling the Social and The Making of Law with the philosophical anthropology of the Moderns in An Inquiry into Modes of Existence to blaze a new trail in legal epistemology.