Jihadist ideology inspires a diverse and decentralized collection of radical groups to fight alleged enemies of Islam and to attempt to "restore" a holy caliphate to unite Muslim peoples across the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. " Islamic Radicalism and Global Jihad" provides unique insights into the philosophical foundations, strategic vision, organizational dynamics, and tactics of the modern jihadist movement -- with specific attention to its primary driver, Al-Qa'ida.

Springer, Regens, and Edger draw heavily on Arabic language sources seldom seen in the West to explain what jihadists want and how radical thinkers have distorted the teachings of Islam to convince followers to pursue terrorism as a religious duty. With sophisticated and systematic analysis, the authors lead their readers on a fascinating intellectual journey through the differing ideas, goals, and vulnerabilities of the jihadist movement as it has evolved over time. The authors also impart wisdom from their own professional experience with terrorism, counterinsurgency, and intelligence to provide scholars, students, counterterrorism professionals, and general readers with this accessible overview of key radical Islamic thinkers and today's jihadists.

A central political issue in American politics during the 1990s is the need for political campaign reform. A variety of proposals have been advanced to reform the system of congressional elections, most notably in relation to campaign financing. The authors examine U.S. Senate elections to determine the role money plays in the contests; their analysis indicates that the system of campaign finance resembles a market, with legislators serving as the recipients of financial largesse based on their institutional positions and political vulnerability. This rent-seeking relationship between economic interests and legislators has transformed the dynamic of Senate elections. Assessing the potential impact of several electoral reform proposals, Professors Regens and Gaddie argue that debates over the nature and consequences of proposed changes in election finance are often waged without an underlying point of theoretical reference. In addition, little consideration is placed upon impacts relative to each other or collectively on the political system. Spending limits and public funding proposals, they contend, will not have the effects expected by reform advocates. Term limit and public funding proposals would disrupt the rent-seeking relationship between legislators and economic interests, and these proposals would also face political and constitutional barriers to implementation.

A central political issue in American politics during the 1990s is the need for political campaign reform. A variety of proposals have been advanced to reform the system of congressional elections, most notably in relation to campaign financing. The authors examine U.S. Senate elections to determine the role money plays in the contests; their analysis indicates that the system of campaign finance resembles a market, with legislators serving as the recipients of financial largesse based on their institutional positions and political vulnerability. This rent-seeking relationship between economic interests and legislators has transformed the dynamic of Senate elections. Assessing the potential impact of several electoral reform proposals, Professors Regens and Gaddie argue that debates over the nature and consequences of proposed changes in election finance are often waged without an underlying point of theoretical reference. In addition, little consideration is placed upon impacts relative to each other or collectively on the political system. Spending limits and public funding proposals, they contend, will not have the effects expected by reform advocates. Term limit and public funding proposals would disrupt the rent-seeking relationship between legislators and economic interests, and these proposals would also face political and constitutional barriers to implementation.