Results by title

Reassessing the man, the movement, and the making of modern Atlanta.

The popular image of Henry W. Grady is that of a champion of the postbellum South, a region that would forgive the North for defeating it and would mobilize its own many resources for hones business and agricultural competition. Biographies and collections of Grady’s essays and speeches that appeared shortly after his death enhanced this image, and for a half-century, Grady was considered the personification of the New South Movement, a movement which promised industrialization for the South, an improved Southern agriculture, and justice and opportunity for black Southerners. As managing editor of the Atlanta Constitution, he espoused the New South throughout the nation and was in demand as a speaker for audiences in New York and Boston.

Through extensive research, focusing on the decade of the 1880s in Georgia, Davis demonstrates that although Grady said all the right things to show that he wished to industrialize the South and that he was committed to the improvement of agriculture and fairness in racial matters, in fact he spent most of his efforts on behalf of Atlanta. His major interest was in making a difference for that city, leaving the rest of the South to enjoy whatever Atlanta could not garner for itself.

Although partisan polarization gets much of the attention in political science scholarship about Congress, members of Congress represent diverse communities around the country. Home Field Advantage demonstrates the importance of this understudied element of American congressional elections and representation in the modern era: the local, place-based roots that members of Congress have in their home districts. Charles Hunt argues that legislators’ local roots in their district have a significant and independent impact on their campaigns, election outcomes, and more broadly on the relationship between members of the U.S. House of Representatives and their constituents. Drawing on original data, his research reveals that there is considerable variation in election outcomes, performance relative to presidential candidates, campaign spending, and constituent communication styles that are not fully explained by partisanship, incumbency, or other well-established theories of American political representation. Rather, many of these differences are the result of the depth of a legislator’s local roots in their district that predate their time in Congress. Hunt lays out a detailed “Theory of Local Roots” and their influence in congressional representation, demonstrating this influence empirically using multiple original measures of local roots over a full cross-section of legislators and a significant period of time.

Intellectuals “have been both rallying points and railed against in American politics, vessels of hope and targets of scorn,” writes Michael J. Brown as he invigorates a recurrent debate in American life: Are intellectual public figures essential voices of knowledge and wisdom, or out-of-touch elites? Hope and Scorn investigates the role of high-profile experts and thinkers in American life and their ever-fluctuating relationship with the political and public spheres.

From Eisenhower’s era to Obama’s, the intellectual’s role in modern democracy has been up for debate. What makes an intellectual, and who can claim that privileged title? What are intellectuals’ obligations to society, and how, if at all, are their contributions compatible with democracy? For some, intellectuals were models of civic engagement. For others, the rise of the intellectual signaled the fall of the citizen. Carrying us through six key moments in this debate, Brown expertly untangles the shifting anxieties and aspirations for democracy in America in the second half of the twentieth century and beyond. Hope and Scorn begins with “egghead” politicians like Adlai Stevenson; profiles scholars like Richard Hofstadter and scholars-turned-politicians like H. Stuart Hughes; and ends with the rise of public intellectuals such as bell hooks and Cornel West. In clear and unburdened prose, Brown explicates issues of power, authority, political backlash, and more. Hope and Scorn is an essential guide to American concerns about intellectuals, their myriad shortcomings, and their formidable abilities.

Updated to take stock of recent developments, Tom Ginsburg and Aziz Z. Huq’s prescient and insightful book shows how constitutional rules both hinder and hasten democratic decline.

Around the world, autocratic leaders threaten the core structures of democratic self-rule. But democratic constitutions are not fail-proof safeguards. By looking at how such leaders exploit legal mechanisms to advance their aims, we can see how democratic constitutions can sometimes abet—and even accelerate—democratic decline. In this new edition of How to Save a Constitutional Democracy, constitutional law experts Tom Ginsburg and Aziz Z. Huq offer a powerful analysis of today’s challenges while arguing that the time has come for meaningful, actionable change.

This new edition takes up the torch of its predecessor, canvasing developments in the United States and other countries that have transpired since 2018. Drawing lessons from countries around the world and reflecting on the prospects for American democracy, the authors show how constitutional design can, in fact, either undermine or support democratic institutions. The sobering reality for the United States is that the Constitution’s design makes democratic erosion eminently feasible. But Ginsburg and Huq do not stop there. They suggest practical ways that law and constitutional design can better manage these mounting threats, analyzing constitutional and legal questions that are consequential yet poorly understood, all while cautioning against an overreliance on technocratic fixes.

Even more urgent and salient in its new edition, How to Save a Constitutional Democracy reflects on why autocrats tend to pose even greater danger the second time they come to power and asks how we can begin to repair a democracy that has failed.