Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

For more on this subject, read Dr. Gutmann’s new book, co-authored with Dennis Thompson, The Spirit of Compromise: Why Governing Demands It and Campaigning Undermines It.

Princeton Readings in American Politics
Edited by Richard M. Valelly

Princeton Readings in American Politics offers an exciting and challenging new way to learn about American politics. It brings together political science that has stood the test of time and recent cutting-edge analyses to acquaint undergraduate and graduate students with the substantive, conceptual, and methodological foundations they need to make sense of American politics today.

Princeton Readings in American Politics features writings by such eminent scholars as Larry M. Bartels, Robert Dahl, Martha Derthick, Howard Gillman, Jacob Hacker, Kay L. Schlozman, Deborah Stone, Marta Tienda, and Kent Weaver, among others. The book is organized in sections that cover the major American political institutions—the presidency, Congress, the courts—as well as core topics such as political parties, macroeconomic management, voting and elections, policymaking, public opinion, and federalism. Richard Valelly provides an insightful general introduction to political science as a vibrant form of inquiry, as well as a succinct, informative introduction to each reading.

Rigorous yet accessible, Princeton Readings in American Politics can serve as a primary textbook or as a supplement to standard introductory texts.

We invite you to read the Introduction here: http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i9080.pdf

Be sure to check in every Tuesday for a new tidbit from our great selection of politically-minded books.

Alan Turing’s Systems of Logic: The Princeton Thesis

Between inventing the concept of a universal computer in 1936 and breaking the German Enigma code during World War II, Alan Turing (1912-1954), the British founder of computer science and artificial intelligence, came to Princeton University to study mathematical logic. Some of the greatest logicians in the world—including Alonzo Church, Kurt Gödel, John von Neumann, and Stephen Kleene—were at Princeton in the 1930s, and they were working on ideas that would lay the groundwork for what would become known as computer science. Though less well known than his other work, Turing’s 1938 Princeton PhD thesis, “Systems of Logic Based on Ordinals,” which includes his notion of an oracle machine, has had a lasting influence on computer science and mathematics. This book presents a facsimile of the original typescript of the thesis along with essays by Andrew Appel and Solomon Feferman that explain its still-unfolding significance.

A work of philosophy as well as mathematics, Turing’s thesis envisions a practical goal—a logical system to formalize mathematical proofs so they can be checked mechanically. If every step of a theorem could be verified mechanically, the burden on intuition would be limited to the axioms. Turing’s point, as Appel writes, is that “mathematical reasoning can be done, and should be done, in mechanizable formal logic.” Turing’s vision of “constructive systems of logic for practical use” has become reality: in the twenty-first century, automated “formal methods” are now routine.

Presented here in its original form, this fascinating thesis is one of the key documents in the history of mathematics and computer science.

A slight change this week—the random draw for this book with be Thursday 5/17 at 3 pm EST. Be sure to like us on Facebook if you haven’t already to be entered to win!

“Factions” have held sway in American politics from the time of the Founding Fathers (“In Federalist Paper number 10, James Madison famously warned of the dangers of faction…”), but how have they insinuated themselves so thoroughly in American politics? Elisabeth S. Clemens gives us a short history lesson in this article.

The historical development of interest group politics may be traced by following each element of this threefold name: politics is modified by group, group by interest. By extension, group politics differ in some important way from other kinds of politics, just as interest groups are distinct from other sorts of social groups. The emergence of recognizably modern interest group politics required the mobilization of groups outside of electoral politics, the development of methods by which such groups could influence policy outcomes, and the legitimation of these interests as recognized elements of a political system that extended beyond the boundaries of the formal political institutions themselves. Although the presence of organized interests near to government has steadily expanded throughout American history, opinions differ over whether these groups support democracy by expanding citizens’ access to politics or undermine it by allowing representatives of narrow interests to control policy making.

Read the complete article here: http://press.princeton.edu/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2Who-Votes.Interest-Groups.pdf

The preceding is an excerpt from The Concise Princeton Encyclopedia of American Political History, edited by Michael Kazin, Rebecca Edwards, and Adam Rothman. To learn more about this book, please visit http://press.princeton.edu. Copyright © 2011 by Princeton University Press. No part of this text may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher.

FACT:

Alabama in Africa: Booker T. Washington, the German Empire, and the Globalization of the New South
by Andrew Zimmerman

In 1901, the Tuskegee Institute, founded by Booker T. Washington, sent an expedition to the German colony of Togo in West Africa, with the purpose of transforming the region into a cotton economy similar to that of the post-Reconstruction American South. Alabama in Africa explores the politics of labor, sexuality, and race behind this endeavor, and the economic, political, and intellectual links connecting Germany, Africa, and the southern United States. The cross-fertilization of histories and practices led to the emergence of a global South, reproduced social inequities on both sides of the Atlantic, and pushed the American South and the German Empire to the forefront of modern colonialism.

Zimmerman shows how the people of Togo, rather than serving as a blank slate for American and German ideologies, helped shape their region’s place in the global South. He looks at the forms of resistance pioneered by African American freedpeople, Polish migrant laborers, African cotton cultivators, and other groups exploited by, but never passive victims of, the growing colonial political economy. Zimmerman reconstructs the social science of the global South formulated by such thinkers as Max Weber and W.E.B. Du Bois, and reveals how their theories continue to define contemporary race, class, and culture.

Tracking the intertwined histories of Europe, Africa, and the Americas at the turn of the century, Alabama in Africa shows how the politics and economics of the segregated American South significantly reshaped other areas of the world.

“This book . . . is incontestably a major contribution. It demonstrates decisively the value of the vanguard trend that is the internationalizing of the African-American experience.”—Gerald Horne, Journal of American History

We invite you to read the Introduction here: http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i9190.pdf

John Tomasi has been in London discussing whether libertarians care about social justice. In his new book Free Market Fairness he argues that they can and should.

On Wednesday 3 May he spoke at The RSA (Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce). You can listen to the podcast here.

Still Waiting for the Liberal Realignment

Douglas S. Massey

When I published Return of the L-Word in 2005, I argued that the time was ripe for a liberal realignment and that what was lacking was a clear explanation to voters of the key role played by government in producing a healthier, more equitable, and less divided society.  I was impressed by what Obama accomplished in the 2008 campaign and thought someone in his campaign must have been channeling my book, or may even have read it!

The electoral campaign he put together in 2008 constructed exactly the coalition that Democrats need to build for the future, creating high turnouts among blacks, Latinos, Asians, young voters, and progressive whites.  The three minority groups by themselves together comprise a third of the population, liberals make up another 20%, and persons aged 18-29 another 17%.

Despite some overlap between these various components, it is clear that a working majority of the electorate is easily achievable by firing the passions of minorities, liberal whites, and young people while drawing in as many independents as practical.  More importantly, given current demographic trends, size of the ruling majority will only become ever larger over time.  By 2050, minorities by themselves are projected to comprise 54% of the U.S. population.  Older, conservative white people are a withering demographic.

Obama demonstrated the feasability of this political strategy by putting together a coalition that captured 53% of the popular vote, 28 states, and 68% of the electoral college.  The obvious strategy upon assuming office was for him to play to the base that elected him by fulfilling campaign promises to reform wall street, enact immigration reform, spend to create jobs, end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and generally move forward on a progressive agenda of fairness and redistribution.

Instead, to my growing amazement as President Obama did the opposite.  Once in office he bent over backwards to appease older, conservative white voters—a segment of the population that would never support him under any circumstances—by cutting taxes, limiting the size of the stimulus, accelerating deportations, increasing border enforcement, inviting Goldman Sachs into his administration, escalating the war in Afghanistan, and continuing to support a highly racialized criminal justice system.  Even on his signature achievement—health care reform—he caved into health insurance monopolists and big pharma before legislative negotiations had even begun.

It is all well and good to reach across the aisle and make a big show of bipartisanship.  It was a nice gesture right after the inauguration; but once his hand was slapped away and the Republicans had proclaimed their policy of opposition at all costs, he should have doubled down on principle and fought tenaciously for the causes he believed in.  The winning strategy was to send up proposal after proposal and have the Republicans shoot them down and then run on the moral vision behind the defeated proposals and against Republican obstructionism.

Alas, that was not the path President Obama chose, with predictable and inevitable political consequences.  Of course, older white voters were not placated, Republicans never found it within themselves to compromise, the economic recovery proved anemic, and Obama now faces reelection with a demoralized and unenthusiastic base.  The young voters and eager activists that flooded into his campaign and fueled his victory in 2008 are nowhere to be seen, Latinos are furious over his failure to pursue immigration reform, liberals are disgusted with the condition-free bailout of Wall Street, and Americans everywhere are still waiting for any financier to be brought to justice for causing the collapse of 2008.  At this point, even African Americans are beginning to ask what they got and how they benefitted from electing the nation’s first black president.

Obama’s only saving grace at this point is the disarray and delusion in the Republican ranks; but he cannot count on Republicans’ tenuous grasp on reality or their internecine squabbling to guarantee victory in November.  If President Obama is going to win, he needs to articulate and vigorously defend a principled program that will, first and foremost, appeal to his political base.  Despite his impressive victory in 2008, he will find it difficult to win if Hispanics sit on their hands, young people stay at home, African Americans barely drag themselves to the polls, and liberal whites vote without spirit election day.  Although Obama faces a weak and divided Republican opposition, he still has his work cut out for him.  Although he campaigned as a visionary in 2008, he has governed as a technocrat.  He has lost the enthusiastic backing of his base and failed to connect emotionally with the American public.  In order to win he needs to articulate his values clearly and forcefully and defend them with passion and conviction to voters.

Douglas S. Massey is Henry G. Bryant Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs at Princeton University.

Do citizens value compromise? Americans are ambivalent about it. That is the most striking pattern revealed in surveys of public opinion in recent years. The ambivalence shows itself in public attitudes toward politicians who compromise and also toward compromise itself. In a typical survey, the vast majority of Americans said they prefer leaders willing to compromise, but at the same time two-thirds of all the respondents also said that they “like politicians who stick to their positions, even if unpopular.”

For the complete excerpt, please visit Salon.com

Are these conflicted feelings about compromise to blame for Senator Lugar’s upset in Indiana?

Some news reports have suggested that Lugar’s openness to compromise may have played a factor in his stunning loss to challenger Richard Mourdock (“Mr. Mourdock’s campaign was fueled by Tea Party groups and national conservative organizations that deemed Mr. Lugar too willing to compromise…” writes the New York Times).

And Mourdock, for his part, is already trumping his unwillingness to compromise in places like The Hill:

Mourdock, who won in part on the strength of the Tea Party, also predicted there won’t be much compromise in the next Senate.

“I recognize that this is one of those times where there is great polarization between the two parties, and frankly the ideas for which the parties are working are really at opposite ends of the spectrum — I don’t think there’s going to be a lot of successful compromise,” Mourdock said on CNN’s “Starting Point” Wednesday.

…

“You never compromise on principles — if people on the far left have a principle they want to stand by, they should never compromise. Those of us on the right should not either,” he said.

Yet, history tells us that successful government requires compromise, so where does this leave us?

For a more circumspect take on the role of compromise in government, check out this exclusive excerpt at Salon.com from The Spirit of Compromise: Why Governing Demands It and Campaigning Undermines It by Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson.

The 5 Elements of Effective Thinking publishes in September 2012 and you can find more information about it (including a Q&A with the authors) on our site.

“I remember as a kid in school being told by teachers to think harder and having no idea what to do. This book solves that once and for all. We now have a guide for people of all ages to learn how to think more effectively. I highly recommend this book.”–Jack Canfield, cocreator of the New York Times best-selling Chicken Soup for the Soul® series and The Success Principles

David Vogel, whose book The Politics of Precaution: Regulating Health, Safety, and Environmental Risks in Europe and the United States was published this Spring, will be in the UK on 10 May and will be speaking at the Said Business School, Oxford at 11.30am, and the London School of Economics at 6.30pm.

Please follow links to sign up for either of these events or contact Julia Hall jhall@pupress.co.uk for more information.