American politics and society were transformed by the antislavery movement. But as Corey M. Brooks shows, it was the antislavery third parties not the Democrats or Whigs that had the largest and least-understood impact. Third-party abolitionists exploited opportunities to achieve outsized influence and shaping the national debate. Political abolitionists key contribution was the elaboration and dissemination of the notion of the Slave Power the claim that slaveholders wielded disproportionate political power and therefore threatened the liberties and political power of northern whites. By convincing northerners of the Slave Power menace, abolitionists paved the way for broader coalitions, and ultimately for Abraham Lincoln s Republican Party."

As an engaging and persuasive survey of American public life from 1816 to 1848, this work remains a landmark achievement. Now updated to address twenty-five years of new scholarship, the book interprets the exciting political landscape that was the age of Jackson, a time that saw the rise of strong political parties and an increased popular involvement in national politics. In this work, the author examines the tension between liberty and power that both characterized the period and formed part of its historical legacy.

Does every increase in the power of government entail a loss of liberty for the people? James H. Read examines how four key Founders--James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, James Wilson, and Thomas Jefferson--wrestled with this question during the first two decades of the American Republic. Power versus Liberty reconstructs a four-way conversation--sometimes respectful, sometimes shrill--that touched on the most important issues facing the new nation: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, federal authority versus states' rights, freedom of the press, the controversial Bank of the United States, the relation between nationalism and democracy, and the elusive meaning of "the consent of the governed." Each of the men whose thought Read considers differed on these key questions. Jefferson believed that every increase in the power of government came at the expense of liberty: energetic governments, he insisted, are always oppressive. Madison believed that this view was too simple, that liberty can be threatened either by too much or too little governmental power. Hamilton and Wilson likewise rejected the Jeffersonian view of power and liberty but disagreed with Madison and with each other. The question of how to reconcile energetic government with the liberty of citizens is as timely today as it was in the first decades of the Republic. It pervades our political discourse and colors our readings of events from the confrontation at Waco to the Oklahoma City bombing to Congressional debate over how to spend the government surplus. While the rhetoric of both major political parties seems to posit a direct relationship between the size of our government and the scope of our political freedoms, the debates of Madison, Hamilton, Wilson, and Jefferson confound such simple dichotomies. As Read concludes, the relation between power and liberty is inherently complex.

Hispanic Engineer & Information Technology is a publication devoted to science and technology and to promoting opportunities in those fields for Hispanic Americans.

Free Will, also known as Freedom of the Will, is appraised as the one of the greatest works ever produced in America. The mid-eighteenth-century New England philosophical theologian Jonathan Edwards (1703-58) defines the will by importing terms from John Locke. Edwards states the Arminian nature of free will, suspects the need for such free will, and finally defends Calvinist free will and objects to the Arminian one. In his argument, he chooses three British antagonists: Daniel Whitby, Thomas Chubb, and Isaac Watts. These antagonists insist that the self-determining will is necessary for us to be morally accountable. Edwards disputes their objections that God's determination is contradictory to the liberty of the human will. He then goes to argue what kind of freedom of the will is necessary for the former and latter to be compatible. Edwards's psychological, moral, and theological philosophy is displayed. In addition, readers can learn how our will chooses something pleasant by following the dictate of understanding, while the author demonstrates the natures of New England Arminianism and Calvinism.

Jurisprudence offers a comprehensive overview of legal theory and philosophy. Written in plain English, it examines and demystifies the discipline's major ideas, promoting a deeper understanding of the social, moral and economic dimensions of the law. It critically assesses the major schools of jurisprudential thought throughout history and to the present, from Plato and Aristotle to Enlightenment thinkers, postmodernists and economic analysts. The book challenges students to reconsider their moral intuitions in light of established theories. This edition examines recent debates and literature in legal philosophy. It features new material on scientific advances in cognition and human behaviour in relation to the law. The book expands significantly on its discussion of natural law theory, evolutionary jurisprudence and theories of justice. Special attention is paid to the revival of theological natural law, challenges to legal positivism, assessments of Scandinavian realism and critiques of law and economics from the Austrian economic perspective.