This book explores the struggle to define self-government in the critical years following the Declaration of Independence, when Americans throughout the country looked to the Keystone State of Pennsylvania for guidance on political mobilization and the best ways to create a stable arrangement that could balance liberty with order. In 1776 radicals mobilized the people to overthrow the Colonial Assembly and adopt a new constitution, one that asserted average citizens’ rights to exercise their sovereignty directly not only through elections but also through town meeting, petitions, speeches, parades, and even political violence. Although highly democratic, this system proved unwieldy and chaotic. David Houpt finds that over the course of the 1780s, a relatively small group of middling and elite Pennsylvanians learned to harness these various forms of "popular" mobilization to establish themselves as the legitimate spokesmen of the entire citizenry. In examining this process, he provides a granular account of how the meaning of democracy changed, solidifying around party politics and elections, and how a small group of white men succeeded in setting the framework for what self-government means in the United States to this day.

This book started out to be an attempt to formulate a theory of political organization. While the emphasis has shifted somewhat in the course of the writing, it is still a book about political organization, an attempt to work out a theory about the relation between organization and conflict, the relation between political organization and democracy, and the organizational alternatives open to the American people. The assumption made throughout is that the nature of political organization depends on the conflicts exploited in the political system, which ultimately is what politics is about. The thesis is that we shall never understand politics unless we know what the struggle is about. The great problem in American politics is: What makes things happen? We might understand the dynamics of American politics if we knew what is going on when things are happening. What is the process of change? What does change look like? These questions are worth asking because obviously tremendous things are going on in American public affairs, even in quiet times... To understand why Americans generally have been unconscious of the process of change it is necessary to take a new look at the dynamics of American politics. Throughout this book the emphasis has been on the dynamic character of the American political system. The concepts formulated here constitute an attack on all political theories, all research techniques and concepts tending to show that American politics is a meaningless stalemate about which no one can do anything. Because so much is going on, one object of the book is to show the need for a new public policy about politics.--from the Preface.

This brief serves to educate readers about the sovereign citizen movement, presenting relevant case studies and offering suggestions for measures to address problems caused by this movement. Sovereign citizens are considered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to be a prominent domestic terrorist threat in the United States, and are broadly defined as a loosely-afflicted anti-government group who believes that the United States government and its laws are invalid and fraudulent. Because they consider themselves to be immune to the consequences of American law, members identifying with this group often engage in criminal activities such as tax fraud, “paper terrorism”, and in more extreme cases, attempted murder or other acts of violence. Sovereign Citizens is one of the first scholarly works to explicitly focus on the sovereign citizen movement by explaining the movement’s origin, interactions with the criminal justice system, and ideology.

The sovereign citizen movement combines radical anti-government activism with well-placed lies and carefully structured conspiracy theories about the origins of the United States. Inside, the author exposes the strange, the interesting, and the dangerous, and deconstructs, decodes and deflates the global sovereign citizen movement. The most elaborate conspiracy theories often contain a morsel of truth. This is certainly the case when it comes to the sovereign citizen movement. This movement is not structured, and it has no leader. Yet its ideas have spread around the world in the past thirty years. From the United States to the United Kingdom and all the way to Singapore, you can find instances of sovereign citizen activists splashing the headlines and popping up on YouTube. Most often, sovereign citizens defy the police when they are pulled over for breaking traffic laws. A sovereign citizen will tell the police that they have no lawful authority, no rightful jurisdiction and that they work for a "corporation" known as the United States. Usually, this does not end well for the sovereign citizen. Sovereign citizens will also spread their anti-government activism in YouTube videos, in fraudulent court filings and through elaborate moneymaking schemes where they pose as lawyers and judges. These con artists have swindled millions of dollars from the United States government and perhaps much more money from regular citizens. This book explores the origins of the movement, the conspiracies that form the foundation of the movement and the common words and actions that sovereign citizens adopt and use. Joe Pometto is a licensed attorney in Pittsburgh, PA and a United States Air Force veteran. He also has a YouTube channel called "Attorney Audits Agitators" where he analyzes encounters with sovereign citizens and other movements that brush up against the law.

This book argues that the introduction of popular sovereignty as the basis for government in France facilitated a dramatic transformation in international law in the eighteenth century.

Sovereignty, originally the figure of 'sovereign', then the state, today meets new challenges of globalization and privatization of power.

Globalisation and the increasing role of international financial institutions have led many to question the continued viability of the sovereign state. This text disagrees, arguing that states have never been as sovereign as some have supposed.