|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
130944
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Gus O'Donnell's vision of 'better government' is presented as a critique of party politics, most specifically the short-termism, selfishness and incompetence of elected politicians. There are few people better placed than O'Donnell to form such judgements. However, O'Donnell goes much further, by calling into question the legitimacy of the democratic system which gives rise to party politics. His article outlines several mechanisms by which the exercise of power by elected ministers could be constrained by a managerialist accountability framework, without addressing the question of who determines the appropriate framework for ministerial performance. The House of Commons is condemned as 'too politicised'. O'Donnell also offers substantial praise for apparently 'depoliticised' policy-making processes, overlooking the inherently political constitution of such processes. In doing so, O'Donnell claims to be challenging party politics on behalf of voters/taxpayers, but instead seeks to dismantle any possibility of the public expressing a collective will via the ballot box that might challenge the immutability of the market economy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
101548
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
DelhI, Aakar Books, 2010.
|
| Description |
xv, 461p.
|
| Standard Number |
9789350020807, hbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:2/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 055596 | 320.5/AHM 055596 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
| 057637 | 320.5/AHM 057637 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
124397
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Political scientists and economists have long been interested in the role of special interests in the policymaking process. In the past few years, a series of important new books have argued forcefully that the lobbying activities of economic actors have an important influence on the prospects for war and peace. All of these analyses claim that whether economic actors enhance or decrease the likelihood of conflict ultimately depends on the domestic political balance between economic actors who have a strong vested interest in pushing for peace versus those that do not. I advance two contrary arguments. At least among the advanced states, I posit there are no longer any economic actors who will be favorable toward war and who will lobby the government with this preference. All of the identified mechanisms that previously contributed to such lobbying in these states have been swept away with the end of colonialism and the rise of economic globalization. In particular, I show that the current structure of the global economy now makes it feasible for foreign direct investment to serve as an effective substitute for conquest in a way that was not possible in previous eras. My second argument concerns those economic actors in advanced states with a preference for peace. I posit that it has become unnecessary for them to directly lobby the government to avoid war on economic grounds because economic globalization-the accumulation of decisions by economic actors throughout the globe-now has sufficiently clear economic incentives for leaders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
138971
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Physical barriers are an increasingly popular political mechanism for central government control over the flows of goods and people at borders. This medium also, however, serves as a canvas for unsanctioned expressions of belonging. Just as graffiti and art are deployed in the urban landscape as unconventional means of claiming space, they are utilised on international border barriers to contest prevalent political winds and re-claim local and alternative senses of who belongs and what is deemed important in debates over border policy. This paper considers unauthorised text and visual imagery on the border barriers of the Arizona-Sonora section of the US-Mexico boundary as a therapeutic reaction to a state-dominated border policy which downplays local impacts. It is argued that such imagery serves to re-scale border space and thereby re-capture a sense of belonging by those whose roles are marginalised by national politics and the neoliberal global economy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
128437
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Challenges to internal security of India are numerous. The extent and scope of threats are complex, varied and vast. No other country in the world confronts so many threats, with so much intensity, at the same time. Overall, more than 50 per cent of India is said to be affected by one or the other of these threats, which are not just 'law and order' problems. They have increasing external dimension falsifying conventional wisdom that internal security threats are caused mainly by internal sources. They threaten the body politic like a 'cancer'. The state of poor internal security situation is not because of India's unfavourable strategic environment but also due to weak internal security mechanism, especially its criminal justice system. In this context, the article argues that if appropriate actions are not taken, the threats may result in the gradual degradation of the Indian State. It suggests renewed set of policies and mechanisms in political, economic, socio-cultural, military and diplomatic arena.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
130788
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Man has always lived, and its still living, under two parallel social control mechanism - religion and law - and guidance for all aspects of human life is found in one or the other of these, often in both. Both are equally significant. Paradigmatic precepts teaching people how to live together in peace and harmony despite their different religious affiliations are found both in the age-old faith traditions and the national and international laws of time. I will briefly sample here relevant provisions of both but, being a law-man ignoramus in matters of religion, will begin with law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
131711
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article looks at prospects for a mechanism-based research strategy in the study of International Relations. Over the past three decades, the notions of mechanism and microfoundation have taken a central place in discussions of explanation and 'micro-macro' problems in social science. The upshot of much of this discussion has been a call for mechanism-based explanations - explanations of macro-level phenomena in terms of micro-level mechanisms. Some work of this kind can already be found in IR theory, including in systemic research. However, a number of IR theorists, including Kenneth Waltz and Alexander Wendt, have argued that micro-oriented strategies like this will not work, pointing to incongruities between system- and unit-level phenomena. This article argues that these pose less hindrance to a fully-developed model of mechanism-based explanation, and that the field has much to gain from further exploration of this strategy. In particular, mechanism-based explanations could help bring structure back to the centre of discussion in IR theory, and might even give us a way out of the field's own micro-macro problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|