Extending the Sphere

2021 ◽  
pp. 83-105
Author(s):  
Charles Edel
Keyword(s):  
Dominant Role ◽  
The United States ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Grand Strategy ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Early American ◽  
Federalist Papers ◽  
The Government ◽  
American Grand Strategy

This chapter traces the development of early American grand strategy by examining the context in which the Federalist Papers were written, drawing out the grand strategy for America's rise to power as articulated by its authors, and evaluating the impact of, and departure from, those ideas on subsequent American statecraft. In doing so, it makes several arguments. First, there was a coherent set of ideas guiding American grand strategy from the outset, even as those ideas evolved over time. Second, the Federalist Papers are usually read as a defense of the United States Constitution and in a largely domestic political context for what they have to say about the structure of the government, the powers and limitations of its component parts, and the nature of federalism. But, even by a numerical count, it is clear that the requirements of national security played a dominant role in the minds of the drafters. Third, grand strategy, conceived in this manner, can be understood as the integration of foreign policy and domestic developments; politics and the economy play as much a part in grand strategy as do diplomacy and military force. Finally, evaluation of a grand strategy entails charting its successes and failures, consistencies and inconsistencies, internal tensions and unintended consequences.

scholarly journals Book Review | George Will’s Conservatism and Democracy in Crisis

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Direct Democracy ◽  
The United States ◽  
James Madison ◽  
American Government ◽  
Federalist Papers ◽  
The Federalist ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Federalist Papers

Americans typically view the United States as a democracy and are rightly proud of that. Of course, as those of a more precise nature, along with smug college students enrolled in introductory American government classes, are quick to point out, the United States is technically a republic. This is a bit too clever by half since James Madison, in The Federalist Papers, defined a republic the way most people think of a democracy—a system of representative government with elections: “[The]… difference between a Democracy and a Republic are, first the delegation of the Government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest.” What the framers thought of as democracy is today referred to as direct democracy, the belief that citizens should have more direct control over governing. The Athenian assembly was what the framers, Madison in particular, saw as the paragon of direct democracy—and as quite dangerous. While direct democracy has its champions, most Americans equate democracy with electing officials to do the business of government.

Africa and the New World Order

1993 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Volman
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Military Force ◽  
New World Order ◽  
Policy Changes ◽  
New Developments ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Cold War

Theend of the cold war and of the bi-polar world order that shaped international relations over the past 50 years is forcing the Government of the United States to make dramatic policy changes that affect all parts of the globe. In Africa, it is also confronted by significant new developments on local, regional, and continent-wide levels. Of particular concern to American leaders are increasing internal demands for political democracy, and the intensification of ethnic and other conflicts which call national integrity into question. And, as the decision to send up to 30,000 marines, infantrymen, and other troops to Somalia proves, the U.S. Administration will not hesitate to use military force if authorised by the United Nations.

scholarly journals Freedoms of Expression, Political Extremism and Seditious Speech in the United States Supreme Court’s Jurisprudence Part I

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 7-21
Author(s):  
Łukasz Machaj
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Political Extremism ◽  
Constitutional Protection ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Sedition Act ◽  
The Government

FREEDOMS OF EXPRESSION, POLITICAL EXTREMISM AND SEDITIOUS SPEECH IN THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT’S JURISPRUDENCE PART IThe article is the first part of a monothematic cycle devoted to the case law of the Supreme Court of the United States concerning the scope of constitutional protection of seditious and pol­itically extremist speech under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The author discusses the historical origins of the problem in question, focusing particularly on the decisions and practical application of the so-called Sedition Act of 1798, a regulation which drastically restricted the freedom of public debate by de facto criminalising speech that was critical of the government. Although the normative act in question has never been the subject of the Supreme Court’s rulings, it was unequivocally condemned in the obiter dicta to several statements of reasons behind the Su­preme Court’s opinions and is commonly deemed unconstitutional in the doctrine.

scholarly journals Rule by the Few in the Federalist Papers: An Examination of the Aristocratic Preference of Publius

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl M. Felice
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
American People ◽  
Alexander Hamilton ◽  
James Madison ◽  
Federalist Papers ◽  
The Federalist ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Federalist Papers

AbstractThe Federalist Papers are a set of eighty-five essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay during the founding era of the United States, with the purpose of persuading the states to adopt the Constitution as the replacement for the Articles of Confederation. The Papers were some of the most impressive political writings of the time, and are still cited frequently today by the United States Supreme Court. The arguments set forth in the Papers attempted to defend the Constitution's aristocratic characteristics against its opponents, the Anti-Federalists, while also attempting to normalize an anti-democratic, representative form of government in the minds of the American people. The clever advocacy and skillful rhetoric employed by Hamilton, Madison, and Jay led to the eventual ratification of the Constitution, and consequently the creation of the most powerful and prosperous nation on the planet. This paper examines the differences between the traditional forms of government, the political philosophies of the Papers’ authors, the anti-democratic, aristocratic nature of the government proposed by the Constitution, and the arguments for and against its adoption, as articulated in the Papers and various other writings.

Habeas Corpus in Wartime

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda L. Tyler
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Habeas Corpus ◽  
Legal Tradition ◽  
Early American ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Historical Resources

Habeas Corpus in Wartime unearths and presents a comprehensive account of the legal and political history of habeas corpus in wartime in the Anglo-American legal tradition. The book begins by tracing the origins of the habeas privilege in English law, giving special attention to the English Habeas Corpus Act of 1679, which limited the scope of executive detention and used the machinery of the English courts to enforce its terms. It also explores the circumstances that led Parliament to invent the concept of suspension as a tool for setting aside the protections of the Habeas Corpus Act in wartime. Turning to the United States, the book highlights how the English suspension framework greatly influenced the development of early American habeas law before and after the American Revolution and during the Founding period, when the United States Constitution enshrined a habeas privilege in its Suspension Clause. The book then chronicles the story of the habeas privilege and suspension over the course of American history, giving special attention to the Civil War period. The final chapters explore how the challenges posed by modern warfare during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries have placed great strain on the previously well-settled understanding of the role of the habeas privilege and suspension in American constitutional law. Throughout, the book draws upon a wealth of original and heretofore untapped historical resources to shed light on the purpose and role of the Suspension Clause in the United States Constitution, revealing all along that many of the questions that arise today regarding the scope of executive power to arrest and detain in wartime are not new ones.

Economic Interests and the American Constitution: A Quantitative Rehabilitation of Charles A. Beard

1984 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 509-519 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert A. McGuire ◽  
Robert L. Ohsfeldt
Keyword(s):  
Voting Behavior ◽  
Personal Characteristics ◽  
The United States ◽  
Important Change ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
American Constitution ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
Economic Interpretation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Significant Patterns

An important change in the structure of U.S. institutions occurred when the government under the Articles of Confederation was replaced by a new government under the Constitution. In 1913, Charles A. Beard proposed a view of the formation of the United States Constitution—an economic interpretation—that remains a much discussed yet unresolved explanation of the behavior and motives of the men who wrote the document. This paper provides the first rigorous statistical test of this issue. We summarize the preliminary results of a statistical analysis of the relationship between the voting behavior of individual delegates involved in the making of the Constitution and their economic and personal characteristics. Contrary to current historical wisdom, significant patterns related to economic interests are found in the voting, with the division of interests generally consistent with that outlined by Charles A. Beard seventy years ago.

scholarly journals The Impact of Medical Technology on the Pregnant Woman’s Right to Privacy

1987 ◽  
Vol 13 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 213-232
Author(s):  
George J. Annas
Keyword(s):  
Medical Technology ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Human Reproduction ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

In the context of the bicentennial of the Constitution and science's relationship to society, it has been argued that “the advance of science and technology in the West has changed not only the relation of man to nature but of man to man.“ This seemingly immodest statement may soon prove an understatement. In the arena of human reproduction, the marriage of science and technology in medicine may change not only the relationship of man to nature and man to man, but more significantly, the very concept of what it means to be human. This, in turn, will directly affect how we define the “rights” this “new human” may properly claim.This article begins to explore developing reproductive medical technology with a view toward examining the way it might change our concept of humanness, and how this change might be accommodated, encouraged, or truncated by the relationship between the government and its pregnant citizens as defined by the United States Constitution and the “right to privacy.”

scholarly journals Cyberspace and Libel: A Dangerous Balance for Physicians

10.2196/22271 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e22271
Author(s):  
Varsha Chiruvella ◽  
Achuta Kumar Guddati
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Past Century ◽  
Media Access ◽  
Media Freedom ◽  
Early American ◽  
Online Presence

Freedom of speech and expression is one of the core tenets of modern societies. It was deemed to be so fundamentally essential to early American life that it was inscribed as the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Over the past century, the rise of modern life also marked the rise of the digital era and age of social media. Freedom of speech thus transitioned from print to electronic media. Access to such content is almost instantaneous and available to a vast audience. From social media to online rating websites, online defamation may cause irreparable damage to a physician’s reputation and practice. It is especially relevant in these times of political turbulence where the battle to separate facts from misinformation has started a debate about the responsibility of social media. The historical context of libel and its applicability in the age of increasing online presence is important for physicians since they are also bound by duty to protect the privacy of their patients. The use of public rating sites and social media will continue to be important for physicians, as online presence and incidents of defamation impact the practice of medicine.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document