Explore the vast range of titles available.

In this article, the author reflects on the question of how policing institutions can help to foster and sustain the values and practices of democracy. The author's overarching concern is to outline and defend a conception of democratic policing that highlights the role of policing agencies in recognizing the legitimate claims of all individuals and groups affected by police actions and affirming their sense of belonging to a political community. From this perspective, the author offers a critique of certain prominent forms of what he calls \"ambient policing\" and aims to cast some new light on the issue of how policing contributes to-or undermines-citizen security in democratic societies.

This article explores how counterterrorism policing strategies and practices in the United Kingdom have changed in the face of recent terrorist attacks. It considers the evident limitations of these developments and how a local, democratic style of neighborhood policing could be used to manufacture the community intelligence \"feed\" that offers the best probability of preventing and deterring future forms of such violence. These substantive concerns are set against a theoretical back-drop attending to how policing can respond to risks where the contours of the threat are uncertain. The analysis is informed by interviews with U.K. police officers involved in intelligence and counterterrorism work conducted during the early part of 2005.

Realism, the dominant theory of international relations, particularly regarding security, seems compelling in part because of its claim to embody so much of Western political thought from the ancient Greeks to the present. Its main challenger, liberalism, looks to Kant and nineteenth-century economists. Despite their many insights, neither realism nor liberalism gives us adequate tools to grapple with security globalization, the liberal ascent, and the American role in their development. In reality, both realism and liberalism and their main insights were largely invented by republicans writing about republics. The main ideas of realism and liberalism are but fragments of republican security theory, whose primary claim is that security entails the simultaneous avoidance of the extremes of anarchy and hierarchy, and that the size of the space within which this is necessary has expanded due to technological change. In Daniel Deudney's reading, there is one main security tradition and its fragmentary descendants. This theory began in classical antiquity, and its pivotal early modern and Enlightenment culmination was the founding of the United States. Moving into the industrial and nuclear eras, this line of thinking becomes the basis for the claim that mutually restraining world government is now necessary for security and that political liberty cannot survive without new types of global unions. Unique in scope, depth, and timeliness,Bounding Poweroffers an international political theory for our fractious and perilous global village.

This article examines the possible relationship between democracy and perceptions of risk and safety in the Brazilian city of Belo Horizonte. The author combines the argument that violence and insecurity in Brazil are consequences of the lack of civil democracy with insights from systemic social control theorists, who argue that perceptions of risk depend on the interaction of social control on private, parochial, and public levels. While social bonds at the private and parochial level did not affect perceptions of safety, public-level bonds, such as support for democratic government and legitimacy of neighborhood police, had positive effects on perceptions of security. However, contrary to the author's hypotheses, support for authoritarianism and generalized distrust of the police also decreased perceptions of risk in the case of robbery.

Uncivil Disobedienceexamines the roles violence and terrorism have played in the exercise of democratic ideals in America. Jennet Kirkpatrick explores how crowds, rallying behind the principle of popular sovereignty and desiring to make law conform to justice, can disdain law and engage in violence. She exposes the hazards of democracy that arise when citizens seek to control government directly, and demonstrates the importance of laws and institutions as limitations on the will of the people. Kirkpatrick looks at some of the most explosive instances of uncivil disobedience in American history: the contemporary militia movement, Southern lynch mobs, frontier vigilantism, and militant abolitionism. She argues that the groups behind these violent episodes are often motivated by admirable democratic ideas of popular power and autonomy. Kirkpatrick shows how, in this respect, they are not so unlike the much-admired adherents of nonviolent civil disobedience, yet she reveals how those who engage in violent disobedience use these admirable democratic principles as a justification for terrorism and killing. She uses a \"bottom-up\" analysis of events to explain how this transformation takes place, paying close attention to what members of these groups do and how they think about the relationship between citizens and the law. Uncivil Disobediencecalls for a new vision of liberal democracy where the rule of the people and the rule of law are recognized as fundamental ideals, and where neither is triumphant or transcendent.

Advocates of school vouchers and other choice proposals couch their arguments in the fashionable language of economic theory. Choice initiatives at all levels of government have succeeded, it is claimed, because they shift responsibility for education reform from government to market forces. This timely book disputes the appropriateness of the market metaphor as a guide to education policy.

Throughout the world, politicians are dismantling state enterprises and heaping praise on private markets, while in the United States a new rhetoric of \"citizen empowerment\" links a widespread distrust of government to decentralization and privatization. Here Joel Handler asks whether this restructuring of authority really allows ordinary citizens to take more control of the things that matter in their roles as parents and children, teachers and students, tenants and owners, producers and consumers. Looking at citizens as stakeholders in the modern social welfare state created by the New Deal, he traces the surprising ideological shifts of empowerment from its beginning as a cornerstone of the war on poverty in the 1960s to its central place in conservative market-based voucher schemes for school reform in the 1990s. Handler shows that in the past the gains from decentralization have proved to be more symbol than substance: some disadvantaged members of society will find new opportunities in the changes of the 1990s, but others will simply experience powerlessness under another name. He carefully distinguishes \"empowerment by invitation\" (in special education, worker safety, home health care, public housing tenancy, and neighborhood organizations) from the \"empowerment by conflict\" exemplified by the radical decentralization of the Chicago public schools. What emerges is a map of the major pitfalls and possible successes in the current journey away from a discredited regulatory state.

We propose a model of motivated skepticism that helps explain when and why citizens are biased-information processors. Two experimental studies explore how citizens evaluate arguments about affirmative action and gun control, finding strong evidence of a prior attitude effect such that attitudinally congruent arguments are evaluated as stronger than attitudinally incongruent arguments. When reading pro and con arguments, participants (Ps) counterargue the contrary arguments and uncritically accept supporting arguments, evidence of a disconfirmation bias. We also find a confirmation bias-the seeking out of confirmatory evidence-when Ps are free to self-select the source of the arguments they read. Both the confirmation and disconfirmation biases lead to attitude polarization-the strengthening of t2over t1attitudes-especially among those with the strongest priors and highest levels of political sophistication. We conclude with a discussion of the normative implications of these findings for rational behavior in a democracy.

Consumer policy must address the unsustainability of consumption which now threatens consumer safety in the form of the climate and ecological crises. Arguably, only strong sustainable consumption governance methods can bring about changes at the scale and speed required. This article discusses one emerging policy tool within strong governance, namely consumption corridors which could bring about absolute reductions in the negative impacts of consumption in a just manner and using deliberative democracy. Consumption corridors are applied in the context of the current meat system, a common driver for the twin crises, and an issue central to achieving the sustainable development, biodiversity, and Paris climate goals. The recently developed planetary health diet offers a useful plan for the transformation of global food systems, and could be combined with sustainable consumption corridors for meat. Systems thinking identifies change in societal paradigms as most effective. To support such change, this article suggests two metaphors as discourse tools, whereby individual and societal transformation in meat consumption occurs as a journey along a continuum of different meatways. The article also suggests specific actions for bringing about meat consumption corridors, and argues that this context could also serve as a bridge for increased societal acceptance of recomposed consumption.

It is indisputable that Black Theology of Liberation (BTL) intentionally un-thinks the West. BTL has its own independent conceptual and theoretical foundations and can hold without the West if it rejects the architecture of Western knowledge as a final norm for life. This, however, is a spiritual matter which the article argues. The historical arrest of the progression of liberative logic and its promises might be self-inflicted by rearticulating and reinterpreting liberation strong thought. At a time when neofascism, which is virtually an open display of psychological and ideological confusion, racism, classism, sensibilities of integralism and gender violence, having become rife, liberal democracy is arguably in crisis today. BTL has to move beyond rethinking and repeating its tried and tested ways of response to black pain caused by racism and colonialism. Un-thinking the West is not only cognitive but also spiritual. Umoya, the spirit of life, the article argues, to un-think the West, constitutes inter alia, the rejection of Hellenocentric concepts as a starting point of knowledge. Umoya should reject the self-serving periodisation of history centred on Europe, dualistic obfuscating secularism and willingness by black to occlude their knowledge systems. Without this, the article argues, the lethargic sleep, the mocking laughter of the West at the self-wounding black African remains a syndrome that arrests the translation of liberation knowledge from history.