“Diversity” is a recent construct in our equal protection jurisprudence, but during its relatively short existence it has garnered many critics. Even critical race scholars, the most vocal proponents of aggressive civil rights and equal protection enforcement, are skeptical about “diversity,” to say nothing of its many opponents. Critiques of “diversity” as vague, an alter ego of affirmative action, and an inferior method of achieving the remedial purposes of equal protection abound. These critiques, I posit, result from a lack of awareness of the realities of “modern diversity practice” and its aspirational aims, which are readily distinguished from old forms of affirmative action, and its associated remedial aims. The fundamental distinction between diversity and affirmative action is the difference between the desire to achieve some general good versus the need to remedy a discrete harm. This inability to distinguish between modern diversity practice and affirmative action conceptually is compounded in the law by the inadequacy of our equal protection jurisprudence to account for any non-remedial purpose expressed by the Equal Protection Clause. The primary aim of this article is to elucidate the “diversity interest” as recognized in our equal protection jurisprudence through the lens of modern diversity practice. Viewing the constitutional diversity interest from the perspective of modern diversity practice reveals a fundamental distinction between diversity and affirmative action that has confounded legal scholars and jurists alike. This distinction exposes the deficiency of our equal protection jurisprudence grounded solely in a remedial principle of equality to appropriately define or adequately accommodate the distinct aspirational aims of the new diversity interest. Modern diversity practice offers insight and analogy for how our equal protection jurisprudence should respond to this deficiency by embracing the broader equality aim of democratic pluralism.

Deliberative democracy has been one of the main games in contemporary political theory for two decades, growing enormously in size and importance in political science and many other disciplines. The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy takes stock of deliberative democracy as a research field, in philosophy, in various research programmes in the social sciences and law, and in political practice around the globe. It provides a concise history of deliberative ideals in political thought and discusses their philosophical origins. The Handbook locates deliberation in political systems with different spaces, publics, and venues, including parliaments, courts, governance networks, protests, mini-publics, old and new media, and everyday talk. It engages with practical applications, mapping deliberation as a reform movement and as a device for conflict resolution, documenting the practice and study of deliberative democracy around the world and in global governance.

What can motivate citizens in divided societies to engage in free, open, and reasoned dialogue? Attempts by philosophers to answer this question focus largely on elucidating what citizens owe to one another as free and equal citizens, as members of a shared social context, or as agents who are mutually dependent on one another for our well-being. In The Deliberative Impulse: Motivating Discourse in Divided Societies, Andrew F. Smith suggests that that a better answer can be offered in terms of what we owe to our convictions. Given the defining role they play in how we live our lives and regard ourselves, among the highest-order interests that we maintain is being in a position to do right by our convictions—to abide by conscience. By developing a clear understanding of how best to act on this interest, we see that we are well served by engaging in public deliberation. Particularly for citizens in societies that are fragmented along ethnic, cultural, ideological, and religious lines, our interest in abiding by conscience should give us clear moral, epistemic, and religious incentives to deliberatively engage with allies and adversaries alike. Scholars who focus on issues in political philosophy, ethics, and political theory will value this book for how it suggests we can overcome the motivational roadblocks to active political participation and robust deliberation.

Since its publication in 1993, John Rawls's Political Liberalism has been central to debates concerning political legitimacy, democratic theory, toleration, and multiculturalism in contemporary political theory. Yet, despite the immense body of literature which has been produced since Rawls's work was published, very little has been said or written regarding the place of political parties and partisanship within political liberalism. This book aims to fill this gap in the literature. Its central argument is that political liberalism needs and nourishes political parties, and that political parties are therefore not hostile but vital to it. First, partisanship generates its own distinctive kind of political obligations, additional to any political obligations people may have qua ordinary citizens. Second, contrary to what many critics argue, and despite its admittedly restrictive features, Rawls's conception of public reason allows significant scope for partisan advocacy and partisan pluralism, and in fact the very normative demands of partisanship are in syntony with those of public reason. Third, parties contribute to the overlapping consensus that for Rawls guarantees stability in diverse societies. Fourth, political liberalism nourishes political parties, by leaving many issues, including religious and socio-economic ones, open to democratic contestation. In summary, parties contribute both to the legitimacy and to the stability of political liberalism.

The contributions in this anthology address tensions that arise between reason and politics in a democracy inspired by the ideal of achieving reasoned agreement among free and equal citizens.

Robson Crim is housed in Robson Hall, one of Canada's oldest law schools. Robson Crim has transformed into a Canada wide research hub in criminal law, with blog contributions from coast to coast, and from outside of this nation's borders. With over 30 academic peer collaborators at Canada's top law schools, Robson Crim is bringing leading criminal law research and writing to the reader. We also annually publish a special edition criminal law volume of the Manitoba Law Journal, providing a chance for authors to enter the peer reviewed fray. The Journal has ranked in the top 0.1 percent on Academia.edu and is widely used. This issue has articles from a variety of contributing authors.

With its emphasis on emerging and cutting-edge debates in the study of comparative constitutional law and politics, its suitability for both research and teaching use, and its distinguished and diverse cast of contributors, this handbook is a must-have for scholars and instructors alike. This versatile volume combines the depth and rigor of a scholarly reference work with features for teaching in law and social science courses. Its interdisciplinary case-study approach provides political and historical as well as legal context: each modular chapter offers an overview of a topic and a jurisdiction, followed by a case study that simultaneously contextualizes both. Its forward-looking and highly diverse selection of topics and jurisdictions fills gaps in the literature on the Global South as well as the West. A timely section on challenges to liberal constitutional democracy addresses pressing concerns about democratic backsliding and illiberal and/or authoritarian regimes.

Applied philosophy has been a growing area of research for the last 40 years. Until now, however, almost all of this research has been centered around the field of ethics. A Companion to Applied Philosophy breaks new ground, demonstrating that all areasof philosophy, including epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of science, and philosophy of mind, can be applied, and are relevant to questions of everyday life. This perennial topic in philosophy provides an overview of these various applied philosophy developments, highlighting similarities and differences between various areas of applied philosophy, and examining the very nature of this topic. It is an area to which many of the towering figures in the history of philosophy have contributed, and this timely Companion demonstrates how various historical contributions are actually contributions within applied philosophy, even if they are not traditionally seen as such. The Companion contains 42 essays covering major areas of philosophy; the articles themselves are all original contributions to the literature and represent the state of the art on this topic, as well as offering a map to the current debates.

The far right is back with a vengeance. After several decades at the political margins, far-right politics has again taken center stage. Three of the world’s largest democracies – Brazil, India, and the United States – now have a radical right leader, while far-right parties continue to increase their profile and support within Europe. In this timely book, leading global expert on political extremism Cas Mudde provides a concise overview of the fourth wave of postwar far-right politics, exploring its history, ideology, organization, causes, and consequences, as well as the responses available to civil society, party, and state actors to challenge its ideas and influence. What defines this current far-right renaissance, Mudde argues, is its mainstreaming and normalization within the contemporary political landscape. Challenging orthodox thinking on the relationship between conventional and far-right politics, Mudde offers a complex and insightful picture of one of the key political challenges of our time.

It is easy to be in favor of a government that reflects the will of people you like. It is more difficult to be in favor of a government that reflects the will of people you hate. But this is precisely what democracy requires of us. And one of the most serious threats facing democracy today, in the United States and around the world, is the discomfort that many citizens feel toward this core democratic principle: that even those citizens we think of as evil, deluded, or simply wrong should still be allowed a say in what their own government does. Perhaps the best hope of resolving this tension can be found in the idea of deliberative democracy, which sees a particular form of non-coercive dialogue as an essential component of democratic governance. But in this book, Graham Wright argues that the traditional approach to deliberation through persuasion faces serious challenges that may limit its potential in exactly the situations where the threats to democracy are greatest. Instead, he argues that an alternative method of deliberation based on the process of “integration,” as described by the early 20th-century philosopher Mary Parker Follett, can do a better job of navigating these challenges, and can help us make democratic decisions that better reflect the will of the whole people. Persuasion, Integration, and Deliberative Democracy: The Will of the Whole is a fresh approach to debates about the challenges of democracy, and the value of democratic deliberation. For anyone wanting to understand the dangers facing deeply divided societies, this is an essential read.