Despite political theorists' repeated attempts to demonstrate their incoherence, liberal values appear to have withstood the test of time. Indeed, engagement with them has become the meeting point of the different political philosophical traditions. But should radical critique justifiably become a thing of the past? Should political philosophy now be conducted in the light of the triumph of liberalism? These are the wider questions that the book takes up in an attempt to demonstrate the intellectual power of systemic critique in the tradition of Hegel. Working through the theories of prominent liberal theorists, John Rawls, Jeremy Waldron, Charles Larmore and Will Kymlicka, the author demonstrates that an adequate appreciation of the deep structural flaws of liberal theory presupposes the application of critical reconstructionism, a philosophical methodology that has the power to reveal the systemic interconnections within and between the varieties of liberal inquiring practices. In the absence of such a methodology liberalism's radically aspiring critics, whether communitarian, feminist, discourse ethicist, post-Marxist or postcolonial, have yet to trace the individualist commitment of liberal theory back to its source in liberal inquiring practices.

First published in 1999, this is an interesting and significantly valuable example of how Hegel's Logic can be applied to his own interpretation of his time to produce a contemporary Hegelian view of our world and its problems. The authors show that by the logic of the family, as conceived by Hegal, contemporary views about same sec and single parent families can be justified and defunded. The male-dominance and heterosexual orientation taken for granted by Hegal's own world is not mandated by the Logic. I find their argument completely convincing. They demonstrate beyond dispute that Hegel's speculative philosophy remains relevant for us, a very fruitful in its applications.

First published in 1999, this is an interesting and significantly valuable example of how Hegel's Logic can be applied to his own interpretation of his time to produce a contemporary Hegelian view of our world and its problems. The authors show that by the logic of the family, as conceived by Hegal, contemporary views about same sec and single parent families can be justified and defunded. The male-dominance and heterosexual orientation taken for granted by Hegal's own world is not mandated by the Logic. I find their argument completely convincing. They demonstrate beyond dispute that Hegel's speculative philosophy remains relevant for us, a very fruitful in its applications.

Without exception, everyone is called upon today to construct his/her patriotic identity as a response to the supreme imperative of our shared whiteness: 'act as if the land were initially without owners'. For white Australia, this imperative is more primordial than the usual formulation of the call to patriotism: 'be prepared to sacrifice yourself for your country', since patriotic sacrifice presupposes that one already has a country to which one is devoted. The imperative of whiteness touches the depth of our ontology since it is from this that the white collective springs as the creator of the white Australian nation-state. White Australians perpetually enter the world in so far as we faithfully obey the imperative to act as if the land were initially without owners and it is through this imperative that we cover over the question, 'where do you come from?', posed to us by the defiant resistance of Indigenous sovereign being. White Australia is therefore unavoidably implicated in the perpetuation of the nation that must act 'as if ...' or what we call the 'hypothetical nation'.

There is today a cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural recognition of the need to reconceptualize the complexities of the global reality. In this study the authors present the view that a rethinking of Hegel's concept of Civil Society has the potential to meet this need. They argue that the standard interpretations of Hegel are largely misplaced and that a properly systemic reading of the concepts of Civil Society, the State and their relationship, has the potential to shed new light on our understandings of the normative implications of global processes ranging from the effects of economic globalization to the global activism of NGOs and social movements, to international relations and the question of global governance. The authors also engage with discussions of (global) civil society from a range of disciplines and cultural and intellectual traditions to illustrate the benefits of rethinking the Hegelian concept of Civil Society.

This study presents an original interpretation of the meaning and complex inter-relationship of the concepts of love, sexuality, family and the law. It argues that they should be understood as forms of interplay between the subjective and the objective, necessity and contingency and unity and difference. A comprehensive elaboration of these forms is to be found in Hegel's Science of Logic-the conclusions of which he used to organise his ethical and political thought. The argument is introduced with a discussion of the relevance of Hegel's speculative philosophy to modernity. The authors then explore the relationship between thought, being and recognition in Hegel's philosophical system and offer an interpretation of the Science of Logic. This interpretation forms the basis of a re-assessment of Hegel's treatment of love, sexual relationships, the family and law. A Hegelian account of familial love is employed to review recent debates within a range of discourses, including feminism, family law and gay and lesbian studies. As well as addressing current concerns about sexual difference and the ontology of homosexuality, the study provides a guide to reading Hegel in an original and productive way. It will be of interest to philosophers, feminists, theorists of sexualities, ethical and legal theorists.

Despite political theorists' repeated attempts to demonstrate their incoherence, liberal values appear to have withstood the test of time. Indeed, engagement with them has become the meeting point of the different political philosophical traditions. But should radical critique justifiably become a thing of the past? Should political philosophy now be conducted in the light of the triumph of liberalism? These are the wider questions that the book takes up in an attempt to demonstrate the intellectual power of systemic critique in the tradition of Hegel. Working through the theories of prominent liberal theorists, John Rawls, Jeremy Waldron, Charles Larmore and Will Kymlicka, the author demonstrates that an adequate appreciation of the deep structural flaws of liberal theory presupposes the application of critical reconstructionism, a philosophical methodology that has the power to reveal the systemic interconnections within and between the varieties of liberal inquiring practices. In the absence of such a methodology liberalism's radically aspiring critics, whether communitarian, feminist, discourse ethicist, post-Marxist or postcolonial, have yet to trace the individualist commitment of liberal theory back to its source in liberal inquiring practices.

'It belongs to the weakness of our time not to be able to bear the greatness, the immensity of the claims made by the human spirit, to feel crushed before them, and to flee from them faint-hearted.' (Hegel's Lectures on the History of Philosophy, v2, p. 10) Is it becoming more obvious today that the thinkers of the post-Hegelian era were/are not 'able to bear the greatness, the immensity of the claims made by the human spirit'? Is our era the era of the 'faint-hearted' philosophy? Celebrating 200 years since the publication of The Phenomenology of Spirit this volume addresses these questions through a renewed encounter with Hegel's thought. This book includes contributions from: H. S. Harris, John W. Burbidge, Paul Redding, Angelica Nuzzo, David Gray Carlson, Simon Lumsden, Karin de Boer, David Rose, Andrew Haas, Toula Nicolacopoulos, George Vassilacopoulos, Jorge Armando Reyes Escobar, Maria J. Binetti, Wendell Kisner, Paul Ashton and Robert Sinnerbrink.