Two war dramas directed by Clint Eastwood. 'Flags of Our Fathers' (2006) is based on the book by James Bradley and Ron Powers. In February 1945, even as victory in Europe was finally within reach, the war in the Pacific raged on. One of the most crucial and bloodiest battles of the war was the struggle for the island of Iwo Jima, which culminated with what would become one of the most iconic images in history: five Marines and a Navy corpsman raising the American flag on Mount Suribachi. But the surviving flag raisers had no interest in being held up as symbols and did not consider themselves heroes; they wanted only to stay on the front with their brothers in arms who were fighting and dying without fanfare or glory. 'Letters from Iwo Jima' (2006) is based on the book 'Picture Letters from Commander in Chief' by Tadamichi Kuribayashi. The island of Iwo Jima stands between the American military force and the home islands of Japan. Therefore the Imperial Japanese Army is desperate to prevent it from falling into American hands and providing a launching point for an invasion of Japan. General Tadamichi Kuribayashi (Ken Watanabe) is given command of the forces on the island and sets out to prepare for the imminent attack. General Kuribayashi, however, does not favour the rigid traditional approach recommended by his subordinates, and resentment and resistance fester among his staff.

An illuminating examination of contemporary liberalism. -Times Literary Supplement Neal does a fine job of showing the flaws in leading academic theories and accounts of liberalism. He shows the amazing vigor of Thomas Hobbes's ideas, now more than three centuries old and still in many ways the clearest and best expression of the liberal order. And he provides a salutary cold shower for those grand dreamers among us who want liberalism not only to order our lives, but also to inspire, to shape, to teach us: 'A liberal order cannot even nearly fulfill the longings of the heart and soul which move us.' -Michael Harvey, H-Net Should the state be neutral with regard to the moral practices of its citizens? Can a liberal state legitimately create a distinctively liberal character in its citizens? Can liberal ideals constitute a point of consensus in a diverse society? In Liberalism and Its Discontents, Patrick Neal answers these questions and discusses them in light of contemporary liberal theory. Approaching the topic of liberalism from a sympathetic and yet immanently critical point of view, Patrick Neal argues that the political liberalism of theorists like John Rawls and the perfectionist liberalism of theorists like Joseph Raz fail to fully express the generosity of spirit which is liberalism at its best. Instead, Neal finds resources for the expression of such a spirit in the much maligned tradition of Hobbesian, or vulgar, liberalism. He argues that a turn in this direction is necessary for the articulation of a liberalism more genuinely responsive to the diversity of modes of life in the twenty-first century.

This work explores the dynamic issues of race and religion within the Cherokee Nation and to look at the role of secret societies in shaping these forces during the nineteenth century.

"Public reason" is one of the central concepts in modern liberal political theory. As articulated by John Rawls, it presents a way to overcome the difficulties created by intractable differences among citizens' religious and moral beliefs by strictly confining the place of such convictions in the public sphere.

Identifying this conception as a key point of conflict, this book presents a debate among contemporary natural law and liberal political theorists on the definition and validity of the idea of public reason. Its distinguished contributors examine the consequences of interpreting public reason more broadly as "right reason," according to natural law theory, versus understanding it in the narrower sense in which Rawls intended. They test public reason by examining its implications for current issues, confronting the questions of abortion and slavery and matters relating to citizenship.

This energetic exchange advances our understanding of both Rawls's contribution to political philosophy and the lasting relevance of natural law. It provides new insights into crucial issues facing society today as it points to new ways of thinking about political theory and practice.

This work explores the dynamic issues of race and religion within the Cherokee Nation and to look at the role of secret societies in shaping these forces during the nineteenth century.

"An illuminating examination of contemporary liberalism."

"-Times Literary Supplement"

"Neal does a fine job of showing the flaws in leading academic theories and accounts of liberalism. He shows the amazing vigor of Thomas Hobbes's ideas, now more than three centuries old and still in many ways the clearest and best expression of the liberal order. And he provides a salutary cold shower for those grand dreamers among us who want liberalism not only to order our lives, but also to inspire, to shape, to teach us: 'A liberal order cannot even nearly fulfill the longings of the heart and soul which move us.'"

"-Michael Harvey, H-Net"

Should the state be neutral with regard to the moral practices of its citizens? Can a liberal state legitimately create a distinctively liberal character in its citizens? Can liberal ideals constitute a point of consensus in a diverse society? In Liberalism and Its Discontents, Patrick Neal answers these questions and discusses them in light of contemporary liberal theory.

Approaching the topic of liberalism from a sympathetic and yet immanently critical point of view, Patrick Neal argues that the political liberalism of theorists like John Rawls and the perfectionist liberalism of theorists like Joseph Raz fail to fully express the generosity of spirit which is liberalism at its best. Instead, Neal finds resources for the expression of such a spirit in the much maligned tradition of Hobbesian, or vulgar, liberalism. He argues that a turn in this direction is necessary for the articulation of a liberalism more genuinely responsive to the diversity of modes of life in the twenty-first century.

In these essays the reigning models of liberal political theory of John Rawls and Joseph Raz are immanently criticized. Neal argues that neither 'political' nor 'perfectionist' liberalism adequately gives expression to the liberal spirit. Surprisingly, Neal finds resources for the expression of such a spirit in the much maligned tradition of Hobbesian, or 'vulgar', liberalism. He argues that a turn in this direction is necessary for the articulation of a liberalism more genuinely responsive to the diversity of modes of life in the twenty-first century.