|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
139948
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New York, Center for Asian, African and Caribbean Studies, 2003.
|
| Description |
v, 366p.Hbk
|
| Standard Number |
0972537406
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 058261 | 327.73054/MOT 058261 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
133129
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
By synthesizing recent works on early American warfare and biographies of George Washington with his own writings, this essay attempts to reconcile divergent interpretations of Washington as a paragon of frontier martial virtue, a pedant for European orthodoxy, a genius, and a stumblebum. The officer who emerges is a martial cosmopolitan; the forces he constructed and the strategy by which he employed them were the hybrid products of his own experience on the American frontier and European precedents for both grande and petite guerre. Ultimately, they served his nation's dearest interests: independence and territorial expansion at the expense of American Indians.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
150511
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Native Americans have been structurally excluded from the discipline of political science in the continental United States, as has Native epistemology and political issues. I analyze the reasons for these erasures and elisions, noting the combined effects of rejecting Native scholars, political issues, analysis, and texts. I describe how these arise from presumptions inherent to the disciplinary practices of U.S. political science, and suggest a set of alternative formulations that could expand our understanding of politics, including attention to other forms of law, constitutions, relationships to the environment, sovereignty, collective decision-making, U.S. history, and majoritarianism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
117175
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
150507
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Native Americans have been structurally excluded from the discipline of political science in the continental United States, as has Native epistemology and political issues. I analyze the reasons for these erasures and elisions, noting the combined effects of rejecting Native scholars, political issues, analysis, and texts. I describe how these arise from presumptions inherent to the disciplinary practices of U.S. political science, and suggest a set of alternative formulations that could expand our understanding of politics, including attention to other forms of law, constitutions, relationships to the environment, sovereignty, collective decision-making, U.S. history, and majoritarianism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|