Thoreau in the 21<Superscript>st</Superscript> Century

Laura Dassow Walls’s superb biography of Henry David Thoreau is the most important study of this author thus far in the twenty-first century. Beautifully written, and packed with rich detail and subtle interpretation, Walls’s book teaches us much that is new about Thoreau and, furthermore, prompts us to think more deeply about and reassess this complex person and challenging writer—a writer whose range and mass of published and unpublished work, produced during his all too brief life (he died at age 44), is astounding. Thoreau is an inspiring radical voice for personal change and social reform, yet he is, at the same time, extremely self-centered and highly skeptical about the capacity of readers and audiences to bring about the transformations that he advocates.     

Unipolarity,Hegemony, and the New Peace

Despite a few persistent, high-profile conflicts in the Middle East, the world is experiencing an era of unprecedented peace and stability. Many scholars have offered explanations for this “New Peace,” to borrow Steven Pinker's phrase, but few have devoted much time to the possibility that US hegemony has brought stability to the system. This paper examines the theoretical, empirical, and psychological foundations of the hegemonic-stability explanation for the decline in armed conflict. Those foundations are rather thin, as it turns out, and a review of relevant insights from political psychology suggests that unipolarity and stability are probably epiphenomenal. The New Peace can in all likelihood continue without US dominance and should persist long after unipolarity comes to an end.     

The Conditional Nature of Political Risk: How Home Institutions Influence the Location of Foreign Direct Investment

What determines whether countries' institutions attract or deter investment? Although existing theories predict that multinational enterprises (MNEs) avoid locations where institutions cannot constrain public and private actors' opportunistic behavior, we argue host institutions' attractiveness depends on firms' home environment. Home country institutions shape firms' practices and capabilities, thus helping to determine the environments that firms are best prepared to face abroad. We test our predictions using multiple data sets at different levels of analysis: firm‐level data on MNEs' foreign subsidiaries, data on bilateral foreign direct investment (FDI) positions, and longitudinal data on bilateral FDI flows. We find that states with independent judiciaries are particularly attractive to investment from countries also possessing independent courts. Similarly, countries with low judicial independence disproportionately send FDI to countries lacking independent judiciaries. These findings' implications challenge conventional wisdom: “Good” institutions may not attract all investors, and “bad” institutions may not always deter, as current research suggests.     

The Closeness Problem and the Doctrine of Double Effect: A Way Forward

A major challenge to the Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE) is the concern that an agent’s intention can be identified in such a fine-grained way as to eliminate an intention to harm from a putative example of an intended harm, and yet, the resulting case appears to be a case of impermissibility. This is the so-called “closeness problem.” Many people believe that one can address the closeness problem by adopting Warren Quinn’s version of the DDE, call it DDE*, which distinguishes between harmful direct agency and harmful indirect agency. In this paper, I first argue that Quinn’s DDE* is just as vulnerable to the closeness problem as the DDE is. Second, some might think that what we should therefore do is give up on intentions altogether and move towards some kind of non-state-of-mind, victim-based deontology. I shall argue against this move and explain why intentions are indispensable to an adequate nonconsequentialist theory. Finally, I shall propose a new way of answering the closeness problem.     

‘Hurry no man's cattle’: British rule and suicide in China

The British authorities in the leased territory of Weihaiwei were concerned that too many Chinese, particularly women, resorted to suicide. In response, they made it obligatory to report suicides, educated the public and the police on how to effect rescues, and appointed a medical assistant with special responsibility for suicide rescue work. In spite of being remarkably well informed of the social significance of suicide in China, government efforts to deal with the causes of suicide were limited. In particular, the government did little to alter the circumstances of women in the territory. They provided few opportunities for education and were reluctant to prohibit foot-binding or to discourage families from putting pressure on widows to remarry. The limited response of the government to the problem of suicide was consistent with its general administrative policy of effecting little change to the fabric of life in the Chinese villages. The fact that the magistrates, in their treatment of suicide, expressed a deference to Chinese law, was part and parcel of the same general policy of the British administration of Weihaiwei.     

The Influence of Personal Values on Legal Judgments

The non‐legal factors that influence judicial decisions have been the subject of extensive debate. Theoretical and empirical work has focused on factors including political ideology, activism, attitudes, and demographics. Personal values are related to these factors and are central to decision making. The study described in this article translated theories and techniques from psychological research to examine the role of personal values in judicial decision making. A novel method of assessment of value expression in legal opinions revealed a different pattern of values expressed in the majority and minority opinions of a case that divided the Supreme Court. An empirical study of legal academics extended this analysis and highlighted the significant influence of personal values on legal decisions. The value:decision paradigm provides a new framework to analyse judicial decision making, judicial division, and judicial discretion and has significant implications for judicial diversity.