Bøker utgitt av Cornell University Press

"This book examines the ideology of Russian civilizationism, according to which history does not march in a single direction but rather consists of multiple civilizations advancing in multiple directions. The book analyzes the main strands of Russian civilizationism and how civilizational rhetoric has now become commonplace in Russian official discourse"--

How do foreign policy-makers learn from history? When do states enter alliances? Beginning with these two questions, Dan Reiter uses recent work in social psychology and organization theory to build a formative-events model of learning in international politics.

Richard Polt provides a lively and accessible introduction to one of the most influential and intellectually demanding philosophers of the modern era. Covering the entire range of Heidegger's thought, Polt skillfully communicates the essence of the...

The Roots of Resilience examines governance from the ground up in the world's two most enduring electoral authoritarian or "e;hybrid"e; regimes-Singapore and Malaysia-where politically liberal and authoritarian features are blended to evade substantive democracy. Although skewed elections, curbed civil liberties, and a dose of coercion help sustain these regimes, selectively structured state policies and patronage, partisan machines that effectively stand in for local governments, and diligently sustained clientelist relations between politicians and constituents are equally important. While key attributes of these regimes differ, affecting the scope, character, and balance among national parties and policies, local machines, and personalized linkages-and notwithstanding a momentous change of government in Malaysia in 2018-the similarity in the overall patterns in these countries confirms the salience of these dimensions. As Meredith L. Weiss shows, taken together, these attributes accustom citizens to the system in place, making meaningful change in how electoral mobilization and policymaking happen all the harder to change. This authoritarian acculturation is key to the durability of both regimes, but, given weaker party competition and party-civil society links, is stronger in Singapore than Malaysia. High levels of authoritarian acculturation, amplifying the political payoffs of what parties and politicians actually provide their constituents, explain why electoral turnover alone is insufficient for real regime change in either state.

"The Dialectics of Absolute Nothingness examines the influence of German philosophical traditions on the development of the Kyoto School. Contributors explore the Kyoto School's engagement with Western thought, highlighting the centrality of German philosophy while also showing the many ways the Kyoto School critiques the philosophical traditions it incorporates"--

Reimagining Citizenship in Postwar Europe maps the generation and growth of novel forms of belonging in the years after World War II, crisscrossing the continent from Madrid to Warsaw and from Athens to London. Even as Europe struggled to rebuild, new forms of identity, statehood, and citizenship were beginning to take shape.Rachel Chin and Samuel Clowes Huneke bring together a diverse group of scholars to illustrate how citizenship was reimagined in the postwar decades in unusual settings and unexpected ways, while highlighting how ordinary citizens, living in democratic and authoritarian regimes alike, struggled to forge new kinds of belonging through which to assert their human rights and human dignity. Ultimately, Reimagining Citizenship in Postwar Europe contends that if we are to grapple with fraying citizenship in the twenty-first century, we must first look to when, how, and why citizenship originated in the calamitous years after World War II.

A fundamental question posed by the demise of the cold war is whether the superpowers' monumentally dangerous and costly arms buildup was necessary. Was it inevitable that the United States and the Soviet Union acquire capabilities to destroy each other in a nuclear war? Or could they have agreed instead to address the nuclear danger through mutual emphasis on defenses? Might such an approach be a feasible option for nuclear powers in today's world?Examining crucial episodes in U.S. security history from the Truman years through the Reagan administration, David Goldfischer considers how figures including J. Robert Oppenheimer, Donald G. Brennan, Freeman Dyson, and Jonathan Schell advanced compelling arguments for seeking an arms control agreement favoring defenses against nuclear attack. Goldfischer offers provocative explanations for why this approach, known as "mutual defense emphasis" (MDE), was rejected in favor of the offense-dominated strategies of nuclear warfighting or "mutual assured destruction" (MAD). The failure seriously to explore MDE, he shows, left supporters of arms control with a false choice between the extremes of MAD and a utopian search for complete nuclear disarmament. Goldfischer concludes with a discussion of how the "Strategic Defense Initiative" (Star Wars)--which used the rhetoric of MDE to mask a renewed search for a nuclear warfighting strategy--has since the 1980s undermined the prospect for serious debate over defense emphasis.Policymakers, activists, political scientists, and scholars and students of security studies and postwar U.S. defense history will welcome this book.

Even powerful states face disaster if their armies do not adapt military doctrine to meet new challenges. Comparing the cases of the United States Army in Vietnam and the British Army during the Boer War and the Malayan Emergency, Deborah D. Avant offers a new account of the conditions that help shape doctrine within military organizations.Drawing on the new institutional economics, Avant assumes that actors at every level will seek to enhance their political power. Military organizations will thus respond to civilian goals when military leaders expect rewards for their responsiveness. Tracing the evolution of civil-military relations in the United States and Britain, Avant concludes that a nation's political structure has a major impact on the structure of military organizations and their formation of military doctrine.Avant finds in particular that structural differences between the British and U.S. governments have resulted in very different biases within the two armies. Unified political institutions in Britain worked to create an army that was sensitive to civilian goals. Conversely, the U.S. political system tended to allow adherence to classic principles of military science within the Army and often impeded effective civilian intervention. These contra sting conditions contributed to the relative ease with which the British Army adapted to new peripheral threats and the reluctance with which the U.S. Army responded to change in Vietnam.