Download Free The Process Of Government A Study Of Social Pressures By Arthur F Bentley Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online The Process Of Government A Study Of Social Pressures By Arthur F Bentley and write the review.

Bentley wrote this book over the years 18961908 while working as a Chicago newspaper reporter and editor. He was hailed on methodological grounds as an early supporter of the "behavioral revolution," which called for the use of natural scientific methods in the social sciences and for offering a group theory of politics. Bentley's implicit critique of narrow empiricism reflects the diverse influences of Dilthey, Simmel, and Dewey.
Bentley wrote this book over the years 18961908 while working as a Chicago newspaper reporter and editor. He was hailed on methodological grounds as an early supporter of the "behavioral revolution," which called for the use of natural scientific methods in the social sciences and for offering a group theory of politics. Bentley's implicit critique of narrow empiricism reflects the diverse influences of Dilthey, Simmel, and Dewey.
"Arthur F. Bentley originally wrote this book over the years 1896-1908 while working as a Chicago newspaper reporter and editor, during which time he had a sense of tremendous social activity taking place, and a feeling that all the politics of the country, so to speak, were drifting across [his] desk. This prompted Bentley to develop an analysis of group interests, which he believed to be the true dictators of government decisions. He was hailed on methodological grounds as an early supporter of the behavioral revolution, which called for the use of natural scientific methods in the social sciences and for offering a group theory of politics. Bentley's implicit critique of narrow empiricism reflects the diverse influences of Dilthey, Simmel, and Dewey. The Process of Government was virtually ignored until the post-World War II period, but is now regarded as a classic in political science."--Provided by publisher.
The Dual State, first published in 1941, remains one of the most erudite books on the logic of dictatorship. It was the first comprehensive analysis of the rise and nature of National Socialism and the only such analysis written from within Hitler's Germany. Ernst Fraenkel's courageous ethnography of law was widely acclaimed upon publication, and it has influenced considerably postwar debates about the nature of the Third Reich. But The Dual State also has relevance for the study of dictatorship in the twenty-first century. Fraenkel's innovative concept of the dual state, with its two halvesthe normative state (which generally respects its own laws and regulations) and the prerogative state (which violates them wantonly) illuminates powerfully the complicated relationship between law and order in many countries around the world. It speaks directly to the idea of an authoritarian rule of law. This republication of Fraenkel's classic makes it once again available to scholars and students in law, the social sciences, and the humanities. It includes Fraenkel's 1974 preface to and two appendices from the first German editionnever before published in English. An extensive introduction by Jens Meierhenrich places Fraenkel's ethnography of law in historical and theoretical context.
Tackles one of the most enduring and contentious issues of positive political economy: common pool resource management.
When people disagree about justice and about individual rights, how should political decisions be made among them? How should they decide about issues like tax policy, welfare provision, criminal procedure, discrimination law, hate speech, pornography, political dissent and the limits of religious toleration? The most familiar answer is that these decisions should be made democratically, by majority voting among the people or their representatives. Often, however, this answer is qualified by adding ' providing that the majority decision does not violate individual rights.' In this book Jeremy Waldron has revisited and thoroughly revised thirteen of his most recent essays. He argues that the familiar answer is correct, but that the qualification about individual rights is incoherent. If rights are the very things we disagree about, then we are quarrelling precisely about what that qualification should amount to. At best, what it means is that disagreements about rights should be resolved by some other procedure, for example, by majority voting, not among the people or their representatives, but among judges in a court. This proposal - although initially attractive - seems much less agreeable when we consider that the judges too disagree about rights, and they disagree about them along exactly the same lines as the citizens. This book offers a comprehensive critique of the idea of the judicial review of legislation. The author argues that a belief in rights is not the same as a commitment to a Bill of Rights. He shows the flaws and difficulties in many common defences of the 'democratic' character of judicial review. And he argues for an alternative approach to the problem of disagreement: when disagreements about rights arise, the respectful way to resolve them is by decision-making among the right-holders on a basis that reflects an equal respect for them as the holders of views about rights. This respect for ordinary right-holders, he argues, has been sadly lacking in the theories of justice, rights, and constitutionalism put forward in recent years by philosophers such as John Rawls and Donald Dworkin. But the book is not only about judicial review. The first tranche of essays is devoted to a theory of legislation, a theory which highlights the size, the scale and the diversity of modern legislative assemblies. Although legislation is often denigrated as a source of law, Waldron seeks to restore its tattered dignity. He deprecates the tendency to disparage legislatures and argues that such disparagement is often a way of bolstering the legitimacy of the courts, as if we had to transform our parliaments into something like the American Congress to justify importing American-style judicial reviews. Law and Disagreement redresses the balances in modern jurisprudence. It presents legislation by a representative assembly as a form of law making which is especially apt for a society whose members disagree with one another about fundamental issues of principle, for it is a form of law making that does not attempt to conceal the fact that our decisions are made and claim their authority in the midst of, not in spite of, our political and moral disagreements. This timely rights-based defence of majoritarian legislation will be welcomed by scholars of legal and political philosophy throughout the world.
Problems associated with cronyism, corporatism, and policies that favor the elite over the masses have received increasing attention in recent years. Political Capitalism explains that what people often view as the result of corruption and unethical behavior are symptoms of a distinct system of political economy. The symptoms of political capitalism are often viewed as the result of government intervention in a market economy, or as attributes of a capitalist economy itself. Randall G. Holcombe combines well-established theories in economics and the social sciences to show that political capitalism is not a mixed economy, or government intervention in a market economy, or some intermediate step between capitalism and socialism. After developing the economic theory of political capitalism, Holcombe goes on to explain how changes in political ideology have facilitated the growth of political capitalism, and what can be done to redirect public policy back toward the public interest.