Sir Henry Taylor's classic treatise The Statesman, originally published in 1836, is the first modern book to be devoted to the subject of public administration. It has been read and studied by generations for its keen insights into the relationship between public administrators and elected officials in a democracy. It has also been appreciated for its wit. The present volume is the first twentieth-century edition to be based on the revised and expanded text that Taylor published in 1878 as part of his Collected Works. It is also the first edition to be fully annotated. The lengthy editors' introduction to this volume emphasizes the relevance of Taylor's thought to the fundamental issues of public administration in the contemporary United States. The editors demonstrate the superiority of Taylor's understanding of the relationship between politics and administration to the widely accepted model of that relation that derives from the thought of Woodrow Wilson. Above all, they argue, Taylor's insights merit our attention because they indicate how a properly organized civil service can be a locus of statesmanship in a democracy, fulfilling the intentions of the authors of the American Constitution in a contemporary context that differs significantly from what the Founders themselves anticipated.

Democratic Decision-Making: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives contains eight essays by political scientists addressing various aspects of the democratic decision-making process. The book is divided into four parts: democratic statesmanship, the extent to which limitations of the democratic principle of majority rule are desirable, the contemporary doctrine of "deliberative democracy," and informal modes of democratic decision-making. Under these four headings, the contributors discuss a wide variety of issues, including the practice of "political opportunism" by such statesmen as Hamilton and Madison; the historical development of legal restraints on democracy in America ranging from judicial review (during the colonial period) to the filibuster; the operation of classical Athenian democracy, the defects of which may have been exaggerated by the American Founders; the significance of the reflections of Tammany Hall boss George Washington Plunkitt for the development of the American party system; the relation of deliberative-democracy theory to the thought of Rousseau; and the means by which cooperative land-use agreements have been arrived at in California, eliciting the voluntary consent of the affected parties instead of relying on judicial or bureaucratic dictates. The book is well-suited for use in courses on American political thought, democratic theory, American political development, and related subjects.

This volume contains five articles by prominent scholars of French literature and political philosophy that examine the relation between Montaigne's Essays, one of the classic works of the French philosophical and literary traditions, and the writings attributed by Montaigne to his friend, the French "humanist" Etienne de La Boetie. Three contributors to the volume suggest that Montaigne was the real author of the revolutionary tract On Voluntary Servitude, along with the other works he attributed to La Boetie. Two contributors describe the remarkable mathematical and/or mythological patterns found in both the Essays and the works ascribed to La Boetie. Several essays articulate the revolutionary political teaching found in the Essays as well as On Voluntary Servitude, challenging the conventional view of Montaigne as a political conservative. And all the contributors challenge the received view that he was an "artless" or "nonchalant" writer. The volume also includes new translations of both On Voluntary Servitude and the "29 Sonnets of Etienne de La Boetie" that Montaigne included in all editions of the Essays except the final one. An important work for students and scholars of political philosophy, Renaissance history, and French and comparative literature.

Matter and Form explores the relationship that has long existed between natural science and political philosophy. Plato's Socrates articulates the Ideas or Forms as an account of the ultimate source of causality in the cosmos. Aristotle's natural philosophy had a significant impact on his political philosophy: he argues that humans are by nature political animals, having their natural end in the city whose regime is hierarchically structured based on differences in moral and intellectual capacity. Medieval theorists attempt to synthesize classical natural and political philosophy with the revealed truths of scripture; they argue that divine reason structures an ordered universe, the awareness of which allows for psychic and political harmony among human beings. Enlightenment thinkers challenge the natural philosophy of classical and medieval philosophers, ushering in a more liberal political order. For example, for Hobbes, there is no rest in nature as there are no Aristotelian forms or natural places that govern matter. Hobbes applies his mechanistic understanding of material nature to his understanding of human nature: individuals are by nature locked in an endless pursuit of power until death. However, from this mechanistic understanding of humanity's natural condition, Hobbes develops a social contract theory in which civil and political society is constituted from consent. Later thinkers, such as Locke and Rousseau, modify this Hobbesian premise in their pursuit of the protection of rights and a free society. Nevertheless, materialist conceptions of the cosmos have not always given rise to liberal democratic philosophies. Historicist influence on scientific inquiry in the nineteenth century is connected to Darwin's theory of evolution; Darwin reasoned that over time the process of natural selection produces ever newer and more highly adapted species. Reflecting a form of social Darwinism, Nietzsche envisions an aristocratic order that draws its inspiration from art rather than the rationalism

In Active Duty: Public Administration as Democratic Statesmanship, a distinguished group of contributors examines the role of the American civil service under the Constitution. The common concern that unites the otherwise diverse approaches of the authors is the conception of public administration as a particular form of political activity. The contributors relate administrative issues to the broader questions of political life, such as political judgment and responsibility, the Constitution and constitutionalism, and the promotion of human liberty and the common good. They aim to encourage the administrator to become a democratic statesman. Present and prospective American civil servants, as well as political scientists and political philosophers, will find this book of interest.

Sir Henry Taylor's classic treatise "The Statesman," originally published in 1836, is the first modern book to be devoted to the subject of public administration. It has been read and studied by generations for its keen insights into the relationship between public administrators and elected officials in a democracy. It has also been appreciated for its wit. The present volume is the first twentieth-century edition to be based on the revised and expanded text that Taylor published in 1878 as part of his Collected Works. It is also the first edition to be fully annotated.

The lengthy editors' introduction to this volume emphasizes the relevance of Taylor's thought to the fundamental issues of public administration in the contemporary United States. The editors demonstrate the superiority of Taylor's understanding of the relationship between politics and administration to the widely accepted model of that relation that derives from the thought of Woodrow Wilson. Above all, they argue, Taylor's insights merit our attention because they indicate how a properly organized civil service can be a locus of statesmanship in a democracy, fulfilling the intentions of the authors of the American Constitution in a contemporary context that differs significantly from what the Founders themselves anticipated.

Arguing that Montaigne was a far more systematic and radical figure than other scholars have recognized, David Lewis Schaefer demonstrates that Montaigne offers important lessons about the theoretical foundations of modern politics and morality.