Sovereignty: The Battle for the Hearts and Minds of Men

Product Information

The price to be paid for this honesty, though, is that for most of the book Tombs is writing less as a scrupulous historical scholar and more as a political polemicist. The difficulty is that the two sides of his persona never really cohere. He makes, for example, a good historical case that the declinist narrative of the 1950s and 60s that led Britain to see membership of the common market as its only route to salvation was exaggerated. But he then bases most of the book on a very similar trope of Europe as “a declining Continent”. What the historian challenges, the polemicist embraces. this book is a very impressive achievement and well worth reading by anyone interested in the debates on global governance, international law and constitutionalism, and reform of the UN system. The author does a superb job in weaving together some of the diffuse and often somewhat inaccessible bodies of literature that together present the complex picture of scholarly understandings of the future of global governance.' Political and legal sovereignty have always been closely linked in the history of the concept; most theories either derive legal sovereignty from political sovereignty or vice-versa, while others see both dimensions as irreducibly connected. The paradox of pouvoir constituant and pouvoir constitué or of rule sovereignty and ruler sovereignty is inextricably tied to the modern claim to sovereignty. Different accounts have been given of the priority between political and legal sovereignty across the centuries and have contributed to perpetuating the centrality of the concept of sovereignty. Some authors have even argued that this paradox and mutual claim are testimony of the conceptual incoherence of sovereignty.

Parliamentary Sovereignty - Cambridge University Press Parliamentary Sovereignty - Cambridge University Press

Gradually, and sensibly more so since the end of the Cold War (1947–91) and the 1990s, new subjects of international law have been recognized (by sovereign States): IOs, of course, but also, even though to a lesser extent, individuals and groups of individuals. Furthermore, with increased interdependence and cooperation among States, international law has gradually applied to areas that previously belonged to the domestic sphere. This is the case in the field of international economic law and international human rights, of course, but also, more recently, of international migration law or international environmental law. Finally, new forms of relative normativity have emerged in international law by which States can be bound through objective legal norms they have not consented to, or cannot derogate to imperative norms even if they want to ( Ius Cogens). Ryan talks about his life experience including family moments, military moments when he got sent to Iraq, and starting his own financial business later on.The entry provides, on the one hand, a restatement of sovereignty’s historical development, a presentation of the concept and its various conceptions, a critical explanation of its legal nature and sources, and an analysis of its current regime under international law; and, on the other, a discussion of its contentious relationship to human rights and democracy and an assessment of some of the specific difficulties it raises for international law nowadays and of how it is currently developing. I think the best audience for this is someone you know who is struggling and would be receptive to the advice in here. The biggest contradiction of all is that, on the one hand, he argues that the future lies with the nation state and the sense of rootedness in place that makes democratic engagement possible. Fair enough – except that, on the other hand, he ends up suggesting that place doesn’t really matter anymore: “Geography comes before history. But for centuries we have been loosening the bonds of time and distance. Place has become less important.” If that is so, how can the old idea of pure sovereignty not need to be rethought? At the Supreme Court of New South Wales in Melbourne in April 1841, Justice J. Willis ruled over the murder of an Aboriginal man [6]. The Justice made some remarkable statements in his judgement (my emphasis): Stephen Bronner has been an important critical voice on the American political scene for the past few decades. Here, in his book The Sovereign, Bronner provides an original and provocative set of views on this urgent topic—especially topical owing to its clear focus on such pressing issues as immigration, refugees, populism, transnational power, and the fate of democracy not only in the United States but around the world. As usual, Bronner presents his work in a style accessible to both an academic and general readership. The book is highly recommended for anyone interested in the special challenges facing contemporary American politics." — Carl Boggs, Professor of Social Sciences, National University, author of Fascism Old and New and Origins of the Warfare State

Sovereignty Oxford Public International Law: Sovereignty

Authors like Bodin or Hobbes feared the division of sovereignty as much as its limitation. In a post-Westphalian world where competences are not only transferred, but also concurrent or shared, however, such fears have become obsolete; the division of competences has indeed become the rule in the EU and beyond. This applies in almost all domains and at all degrees of authority. The division of sovereignty can be vertical or horizontal, depending on whether it takes place among distinct political entities such as two States or between a State and the EU, or whether it takes place within a single political entity according to territorial or other federal divisions or according to distinct political functions. In the EU, the division of sovereignty goes along both vertical and horizontal lines. I really enjoyed how Ryan focused the book on men. With that said, however, women could learn a ton by reading this book. The lessons, disciplines, and focuses that Ryan mentions in the book are for nothing but the constructive building by a man, no matter his situation. There is no privilege in pertinence to this book – you either achieve the goals that the book puts out for men or you don’t. D. Grimm and B. Cooper, Sovereignty: The Origin and Future of a Political and Legal Concept (New York: Columbia University Press, 2015) The acceptance of human rights and minority rights, the increasing role of international financial institutions, and globalization have led many observers to question the continued viability of the sovereign state. Here a leading expert challenges this conclusion. Stephen Krasner contends that states have never been as sovereign as some have supposed. Throughout history, rulers have been motivated by a desire to stay in power, not by some abstract adherence to international principles. Organized hypocrisy—the presence of longstanding norms that are frequently violated—has been an enduring attribute of international relations. Jean Cohen’s book is a rare combination: a legal treatise that is also a political theory. Her analysis of the UN charter and of UN resolutions is cogent and illuminating; her advocacy of constitutional pluralism as the critical feature of global governance is exhilarating.’

For those familiar with the podcast I’m not sure if it’s really worth reading the book. Honestly, if you listen to a couple episodes you don’t really don’t need to read the book. You get all the same information. Though I wouldn’t listen to current podcast episodes as they’ve gotten overtly political and very echo-chambery. Ryan also writes about how most men live goal-less life, living each day to make money for their boss and for their family, only to go home to their kids and wife, watching TV till evening, going to sleep, and repeating. By embodying the thirteen Sovereign Virtues we detail inside , every man will be more capable of fulfilling his masculine duties and responsibilities. b) From the 19 th Century to the Early 20 th Century: Matching Domestic Sovereignty with International Sovereignty

Sovereignty: The Battle for the Hearts and Minds of Men Sovereignty: The Battle for the Hearts and Minds of Men

Another valuable element of the collection is the repeated demonstration that the mining of Indigenous data by non-Indigenous nations is just the most recent example of colonial powers extracting resources from Indigenous People, communities, and nations. Making this connection helps detach the common misperception that data merely demonstrate objective facts and establishes that at best the current social construction of data prioritizes the needs of dominant society at the expense of Indigenous People.' In international law, internal sovereignty is used to mean the supreme authority within a territory or the ultimate power within that territory ( Customs Regime between Germany and Austria [Advisory Opinion] [Individual Opinion of Judge Anzilotti] 57). These two definitions refer to very different facets of sovereignty which correspond to its normative and empirical dimensions. Both have been present at different times in the evolution of the concept of internal sovereignty and their tension underlies most of the concept’s history. A third additional conception of sovereignty is absolute independence or freedom and it captures what is at stake in external sovereignty (arbitrator Max Huber in the Palmas Island Arbitration).The battle plan is good, I’d just not take it so far as to stress yourself out too much. Metrics have been proven not to be all that effective and you don’t wanna project manager your life into being miserable, but it’s still a good template. Traditionally, the concept of sovereignty has always operated in two distinct manners: sovereignty can be exercised in relation to one’s internal affairs, on the one hand, but also to one’s external affairs, on the other. The former is usually referred to as internal sovereignty and the latter as external sovereignty. Stephen Krasner played a key role in transforming state sovereignty from a neorealist presumption into an object of sustained inquiry. Thus his new book is particularly noteworthy. . . . Keeping different kinds of sovereignty straight is crucial to the study of international relations, whether at the hands of neorealists or constructivists, nonliberal institutionalists, or postmodernists. ---Fred H. Lawson, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science

Sovereignty and Policy - 1st Edition - Maggie Indigenous Data Sovereignty and Policy - 1st Edition - Maggie

Political leaders have usually but not always honored international legal sovereignty, the principle that international recognition should be accorded only to juridically independent sovereign states, while treating Westphalian sovereignty, the principle that states have the right to exclude external authority from their own territory, in a much more provisional way. In some instances violations of the principles of sovereignty have been coercive, as in the imposition of minority rights on newly created states after the First World War or the successor states of Yugoslavia after 1990; at other times cooperative, as in the European Human Rights regime or conditionality agreements with the International Monetary Fund. I love the message and the principles that this book stand for. I love its teachings and straightforward manner of relaying messages. I love that Ryan Michler is unashamed to plant his flag and declare his message to the world. The Sovereign responds to pressing political issues of our time, like immigration and refugees, transnationalism and populism, the prospects for democracy, and the relationship between civil society and the state. The chapters trace the concept of sovereignty from its origins in political theory, providing perspective and insights that leave the reader with a phenomenological sketch of the sovereign. Bronner transforms our ideas about political power, what it is, how it has been used, and how itcan be used. His new theory of sovereignty concludes with twenty-five provocative theses on the sovereign’s role in modern capitalist society. The author of the book admits he is not a "writer" in the traditional sense, and his language is colloquial and sounds very much like how he speaks on his podcast. But, while his prose may not be world-class, the message certainly is. Our society, particularly in the West, is diseased, and that's obvious to those paying attention and being honest with themselves. Interestingly, this book comes on the heels of Ryan already creating a movement. It's a retroactive charter for what he is trying to achieve - better society, through building better men, by encouraging virtue, and providing a system of accountability and support so that "just do it" isn't a bland platitude.if this colony were acquired by occupying such lands as were uncultivated and unoccupied by the natives, and within the limits of the sovereignty asserted under the commission, the aborigines would have remained unconquered and free, but dependent tribes, dependent on the colonists as their superiors for protection; their rights as a distinct people cannot, from their peculiar situation, be considered to have been tacitly surrendered. But the frequent conflicts that have occurred between the colonists and the Aborigines within the limits of the colony of New South Wales, make it, I think, sufficiently manifest that the Aboriginal tribes are neither a conquered people, nor have tacitly acquiesced in the supremacy of the settlers." Reverend Dr Djiniyini Goṉḏarra OAM, Senior Elder Dhurili Clan Nation and Chairman of Arnhem Land Progress Aboriginal Corporation, explains how law relates to sovereignty (Madayin = Yolngu law system): Ezra Manela, The Wilsonian Moment: Self Determination and the International Origins of Anticolonial Nationalism (Oxford: OUP, 2007) Constantin Ardelenau, The European Commission of the Danube, 1856-1948: An Experiment in International Administration (Brill, 2020)