In his new book, Sovereignty or Submission: Will Americans Rule Themselves or be Ruled by Others? (Encounter Books, 2011), John Fonte, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for American Common Culture at Hudson Institute, discusses the rise of post-democratic global governing agencies, as well as the inherent problems they pose to American sovereignty. Fonte argues that, for these global governing agencies to succeed, American self-governance must become second to transnational governing organizations, including an alteration of the U.S. Constitution to include a provision for “evolving norms of international law.” In our interview, we talked about the rise of transnational progressives, which American politicians are sympathetic to this concept, and how America can best retain its sovereignty. Read all about it, and more, in Fonte’s troubling new book. Please become a fan of “New Books in Public Policy” on Facebook if you haven’t already.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Justice requires that each person gets what he or she deserves. Luck is a matter of good or bad things simply befalling people; hence luck distributes to people things they do not deserve. Justice must then be in the business of morally correcting the impact of luck on individuals’ lives.

This is an extremely simplified articulation of a popular–and in certain philosophical circles infamous–conception of justice called luck egalitarianism. As a kind of egalitarianism, luck egalitarianism holds that justice requires something to be distributed equally, and various versions of the doctrine disagree about what this is. The luck in luck egalitarianism holds that justice requires that individuals not be advantaged (or disadvantaged) for features of their lives that have simply befallen them as a matter of good (or bad) luck; rather, social advantage (and disadvantage) should be tied to an individual’s choices. This basic principle of luck egalitarianism seems intuitive. The difficulty lies in building a conception of social justice upon it. Three pressing details confronting the luck egalitarian are the site, ground, and scope of egalitarian justice. These correspond, roughly to the following three questions: (1) to what do egalitarian principles of justice apply?; (2) Why does equality matter?; and (3) To whom are egalitarian duties of justice owed?

In his new book, Justice, Institutions, and Luck: The Site, Ground, and Scope of Equality (Oxford University Press, 2012), Kok-Chor Tan articulates and defends an original conception of luck egalitarianism according to which (1) egalitarian principles of justice apply to social institutions rather than to the whole of social life; (2) equality matters because there is a fundamental moral distinction between luck and choice; and (3) duties of justice are not bounded by state borders, but are owed globally. In developing his view, Tan responds to luck egalitarianism’s critics and launches compelling critiques of its competitors. The book hence provides the reader with both a detailed roadmap of the current debates over egalitarianism and a state-of-the-art formulation of a distinctive egalitarian conception of justice.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Mitchel A. Sollenberger, assistant professor of political science at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, and Mark J. Rozell, professor of public policy at George Mason University, have co-authored the provocative The President’s Czars: Undermining Congress and the Constitution (University of Kansas Press, 2012). The book uses a public law methodology to study the evolving role so-called “czars” play in the presidency. Presidential czars, as they define them, are given policy making authority by the president, but are not confirmed by the Senate. Thus, they operate with little accountability to the legislative branch. Their existence, which increased in numbers and importance over the twentieth century, raises serious questions about their appropriateness and constitutionality. The book concludes with a set of recommendations to address these concerns and rebalance the relationship between the president and Congress.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the new edition to Islam and Human Rights: Traditions and Politics (Westview Press, 2012), Ann Elizabeth Mayer analyzes the complex issue of international human rights standards in Muslim countries. In the book’s preface, Dr. Mayer says that it could more accurately be titled “A Comparison of Selected Civil and Political Rights Formulations in International Law and in Actual and Proposed Human Rights Schemes Purporting to Embody Islamic Principles, with a Critical Appraisal of the Latter with Reference to International Law, Evolving Islamic Thought, and Relevant State Practice in the Middle East.”

Throughout the book she makes that comparison in a way that is detailed, yet still easily approachable by someone new to the topic. In this 5th edition of the book she addresses increased pressures for human rights brought on by the Arab Spring, the efforts of Islamic regimes to use the human rights debate to their advantage, and the issue of the human rights of sexual minorities in the Middle East. Dr. Mayer’s book describes not only the history and evolution of human rights under Islamic law, but also addresses how these developments might continue in the future.

Enid Logan‘s At this Defining Moment: Barack Obama: Presidential Candidacy and the New Politics of Race (NYU Press, 2011) examines the campaign and politics around the election of Barack Obama from a sociological perspective. Drawing on a rich array of television, newspaper, and blogs, Logan challenges many of the conventional interpretations of the Obama victory. In trying to define the “new politics of race”, the book is a contribution to the field of political science, where scholars have also grappled with putting the first African American president into political, historical, and social context. One of the more compelling chapters of the book deals with the intersection of Hispanic and Asian Americans and the Obama campaign. The length, clear-writing, and salient topic should make this a considered adoption for many courses in American politics, race and politics, and campaigns/elections.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In his new book Spoiled Rotten: How the Politics of Patronage Corrupted the Once Noble Democratic Party and Now Threatens the American Republic (Broadside Books, 2012), Jay Cost, a political analyst and columnist for The Weekly Standard, traces the history of the Democratic party from its 1828 conception through to the modern day. Costa believes the party has strayed from its once noble goal of standing up for the “little guy” and become a political force ruled by the combined influences of a variety of special interest groups.

In our interview, we talked about why he sees Woodrow Wilson, not FDR, as the founder of the modern Democratic party, the relationship between the Democrats and the press, and how American labor unions have changed over time. Read all about it, and more, in Cost’s tough new book.

Please become a fan of New Books in Public Policy on Facebook if you haven’t already.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In his new book, The Tyranny of Cliches: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas (Sentinel HC, 2012), Jonah Goldberg, founding editor of National Review Online and columnist for the Los Angeles Times, analyzes various media strategies used by liberals to “cheat in the war of ideas.” He believes radical ideas are frequently presented swathed in cliches and aphorisms, and attempts to disentangle some of the most recent examples.

In our interview, we talked about how he speaks in a pop culture idiom to appeal to young readers, that Voltaire never said “I disagree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it,” and why he takes on the role of Jewish defender of the Catholic Church.

Read all about it, and more, in Goldberg’s very funny new book.

Please become a fan of New Books in Public Policy on Facebook if you haven’t already.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Richard Sakwa‘s new book, The Crisis of Russian Democracy: The Dual State, Factionalism, and the Medvedev Succession (Cambridge University Press, 2011), comes at a moment in Russian political history when uncertainty is once again in the headlines and on the lips of experts and journalists. While Sakwa’s book is principally about how Dmitri Medvedev became Russia’s third President, The Crisis of Russian Democracy is more importantly an analysis of the institutions and dynamics that animate Russian politics today.

Rejecting the typologies of “democracy with adjectives,” as Sakwa calls it (like semi-authoritarian democracy or sovereign democracy or transitional democracy), he identifies competing institutions in Russia (“the dual state”), and studies them dynamically in order to document the interaction of various social and political forces. Sakwa’s concept of the dual state describes the permanent struggle and imbalance between Russia’s administrative regime and its constitutional state apparatus. Rooted firmly in the nitty gritty details of Kremlinology and intrigue, Sakwa’s methodology also allows him to explore the role that ideological norms play in Moscow high politics. The result is a fascinating medley of perspective — one that any scholar of Russia cannot help but find appealing.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Matt Grossmann, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Michigan State University, has authored the recently released book, The Not-So-Special Interests: Interest Groups, Public Representation, and American Governance (Stanford University Press, 2012). The book challenges scholarly and conventional notions of how interest groups influence the policy process. Grossman argues that the focus of political scientists on collective-action and free riding, which has dominated the field for decades, has overlooked the significant contributions of David Truman. In fact, Grossman argues, the few good predictions that Olson made were in general the same ones made by Truman.

The approach of the book is empirical and includes many statistical models, but the writing is clear and accessible to non-academics. It seeks to answer the question of why certain advocacy organizations are so visible in public debates, by foregrounding the prominence of Jews, lawyers, and gun owners. In one of the more interesting cases, Grossmann follows the formation and evolution of the AARP as the leading voice for seniors in Washington, and why conservative opposition groups have failed to challenge their influence over key policy issues. Grossman ends by offering a theory of Institutionalized Pluralism to explain the system of advocacy in the US today.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Stephen White‘s Understanding Russian Politics (Cambridge University Press, 2011) begins simply enough: “Russia is no longer the Soviet Union.” While this is a well-known fact, the details of Russia’s postcommunist transition — the emergence of a party system and presidential government, as well as the dismantling of the planned economy and construction of modern political communication — have rarely been as consciously and seamlessly fit into the setting of Russia’s immediate present. Stephen White’s ambitious text tracks the most significant developments in Russia’s post-Soviet formation, and more importantly plugs those events back into the framework of today, equipping readers with the context required for a deeper reading of contemporary Russian politics.

Understanding Russian Politics tackles all the biggest components of Russian statecraft and social transformation over the past twenty-five years. In my interview with Professor White, we discussed topics as current as President Medvedev’s 2012 legal initiative to liberalize political party registration in Russia, as well as the role the previous winter’s street demonstrations played in prompting such reforms offered by the Kremlin. In this context, White addressed the constitutional legacy of Yeltsin’s super presidential state, and explained why Putin’s economic policies have deviated from the extreme market liberalism of Russia in the early 1990s. Our conversation finished on the subject of Russian foreign policy and domestic interest groups, highlighting the roles that competing schools of thought play in policymaking today.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices