The overthrow of Viceroy Joaqu&ín de la Pezuela on 29 January 1821 has not received much attention from historians, who have viewed it as a simple military uprising. Yet in this careful study of the episode, based on deep archival research, Patricia Marks reveals it to be the culmination of decades of Peruvian opposition to the Bourbon reforms of the late eighteenth century, especially the Reglamento de comercio libre of 1778. It also marked a radical change in political culture brought about by the constitutional upheavals that followed Napolean's invasion of Spain. Although Pezuela's overthrow was organized and carried out by royalists among the merchants and the military, it proved to be an important event in the development of the independence movement as well as a pivotal factor in the failure to establish a stable national state in post-independence Peru. The golpe de estado may thereby be seen as an early manifestation of Latin American praetorianism, in which a sector of the civilian population, unable to prevail politically and unwilling to compromise, pressures army officers to act in order to &"save&" the state.

Offering a corrective to previous views of Spanish-American independence, this book shows how political culture in Peru was dramatically transformed in this period of transition and how the popular classes as well as elites played crucial roles in this process. Honor, underpinning the legitimacy of Spanish rule and a social hierarchy based on race and class during the colonial era, came to be an important source of resistance by ordinary citizens to repressive action by republican authorities fearful of disorder. Claiming the protection of their civil liberties as guaranteed by the constitution, these &"honorable&" citizens cited their hard work and respectable conduct in justification of their rights, in this way contributing to the shaping of republican discourse. Prominent politicians from Arequipa, familiar with these arguments made in courtrooms where they served as jurists, promoted at the national level a form of liberalism that emphasized not only discipline but also individual liberties and praise for the honest working man. But the protection of men's public reputations and their patriarchal authority, the author argues, came at the expense of women, who suffered further oppression from increasing public scrutiny of their sexual behavior through the definition of female virtue as private morality, which also justified their exclusion from politics. The advent of political liberalism was thus not associated with greater freedom, social or political, for women.

The word custom is part of everyday vocabulary in all languages, meaning the habitual behaviour of people in a particular community. Once adopted by lawyers it becomes necessary to distinguish legal customs from non-legal customs. That distinction focuses on the creation of legal norms of customary law. In international law, the creation of rules of customary law has been the subject of much commentary. Customary international law has been described as a mysterious phenomenon that has lost its utility. Some have called for its abandonment and others for a radical reformulation of the doctrine. A former judge of the International Court of Justice perceived it to be both delicate and difficult. However, the majority of rules of international law are customary in nature. Therefore, the transparency, consistency and determinacy of custom - the process by which rules of customary law are created is central to the legitimacy of rules of customary law. This book examines the issues at the heart of this complex problem and recommends a deconstructionist approach to custom as a means of resolving the legitimacy deficit in custom.

Does God love everyone? When Jesus died on the cross at Calvary, did he die for the sins of the elect only or for the sins of the whole world? Can anyone respond in faith to the gospel message? Or is the act of believing a gift of God only given to a subset of humanity called the elect so that the rest of humanity is unable to believe and destined to spend eternity apart from God? What does the term elect mean in the New Testament? These are fundamental questions about the God of the Bible and the salvation He provides in Jesus Christ. This book invites you to sit as an unbiased juror and consider the traditional principles of TULIP Calvinism as explained by the leading Calvinists in their own words, then to weigh their proffered Scriptural evidence to make your own determination. This book will address exegetically all of the most commonly cited proof texts for Calvinism, with a thorough consideration of the "pillar" passages like John 6:44, Romans 3 and 9, and Ephesians 1:4. This book will defend a middle ground position (called NULIF - "new life") between TULIP Calvinism and Arminianism and demonstrate that you can tell people with confidence that God loves them, Jesus died for their sins, and they can be saved by trusting Christ for the forgiveness of their sins based on his finished work at Calvary. HUTSON SMELLEY is an attorney, Bible teacher and seminary student residing in Houston, Texas with his wife and seven children. He has a degree in Biblical Studies from the College of Biblical Studies, a B.S. in Mathematics from the University of Houston, a M.S. in Mathematics from Texas A&M University, and a J.D. from the University of Houston. His website can be found at www.proclaimtheword.net.

Our political climate is increasingly characterised by hostility towards constructed others. Steven Gormley answers the question: what does it mean to do justice to others? He pursues this question by developing a critical, but productive, dialogue between deliberative theory and deconstruction. Two key claims emerge from this. First: doing justice to the other demands that we maintain an ethos of interruption. And secondly: Such an ethos requires a democratic form of politics. In developing this account, Gormley places deliberative theory and deconstruction into critical conversation with the work of Mouffe, Aristotle, Rorty, Laclau and different traditions of critical theory.

This book is the first book-length deconstructive study of the political philosophy of Jürgen Habermas. Inspired by the work of Jacques Derrida, the book applies deconstruction to key issues in Habermas’s work: rational discourse and rational consensus, constitutional democracy, tolerance and civil disobedience. The war in Iraq brought Habermas and Derrida together in defense of international law and in favor of a bigger role for a united Europe in international affairs. Yet, despite the rapprochement between Habermas and Derrida in the years prior to Derrida’s death, important differences remain between Habermas’s critical theory and Derrida’s deconstruction. These differences reflect differences between post-structuralism and critical theory and between postmodernists and the defenders of modernity.