bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
The Republic in Danger
Authors: Pettinger Andrew 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
M. Scribonius Drusus Libo has always been considered an inexplicable victim of predatory prosecutors, destroyed in the changed conditions of Tiberius’ succession to the founder of the Principate. This is wrong. Drusus Libo conspired with a group of Tiberius’ opponents to challenge Tiberius’ right. The senate’s investigation of Drusus Libo will be examined in Chapter One and Chapter Two. It will be shown that Drusus Libo was treated in a way reminiscent of Catiline’s associate P. Lentulus Sura in 63 bc. Drusus Libo’s collaborators are then identified as a group of persons who supported first Gaius Caesar, then L. Aemilius Paullus and finally Agrippa Postumus. It is argued that the relationship of this group to Tiberius was beyond repair long before he succeeded Augustus. Tiberius’ succession to the supreme power in ad 14 signalled, therefore, a decisive defeat for this group. The succession is thus reconsidered from a new point of view: it was by no means sewn up. Drusus Libo is central to our understanding of Tiberius’ behaviour at this time. This is what the book examines in detail. A new historical model for the years 6 bc to ad 16 is offered, which has repercussions for the study of both the preceding and subsequent periods. The book is therefore a contribution to the study of the invention of the Principate at Rome.
Introduction
Authors: Pettinger Andrew 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
The introduction points out that the Principate established by Augustus is usually treated as a benign and popular political structure, but that the case of M. Scribonius Drusus Libo throws doubt on this view. The case is connected with the conspiracy of the pseudo Agrippa Postumus, (i.e. Clemens). Drusus Libo was chosen as heir to a political movement bent on denying Tiberius his right. Finally, the reader learns that the result of the book is a re-conception of the Principate: it was brutal, destructive and met with serious opposition.
An Urgent Summons and a Terrible Charge
Authors: Pettinger Andrew 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
This chapter provides a brief narrative of Drusus Libo’s trial in the senate, and then explores the significance of senatorial investigations during the early Principate. It is established that Drusus Libo was accused of having planned revolution. This argument falls into two parts. The first part shows that, by calling an emergency meeting of the senate, the consuls took Drusus Libo to be an immediate threat. The second part establishes that Drusus Libo was not, as is commonly held, accused of a criminal fascination with the occult, but rather of intending to cause revolution. He was charged with treason (maiestas). The law regarding astrology and magic is misunderstood. Consulting an astrologer or magician about the health of the Princeps was not, as is supposed, prima facie treason during the early Principate.
The Treatment of an Enemy
Authors: Pettinger Andrew 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
This chapter, along with the previous chapter, proposes that Drusus Libo was treated as an enemy of the State. The evidence is as follows: Drusus Libo was abandoned by family and friends; he was placed under a guard of praetorians; efforts were made to remove him from public memory (damnatio memoriae); the day of his suicide was made a holiday; and public thanks were given to the goddess Concordia, who was usually invoked when a great social disturbance had occurred. Republican precedents are explored to place Drusus Libo’s treatment in context. It is argued that Drusus Libo’s treatment is best explained by placing him among those involved in the conspiracy of Clemens, which occurred at the same time.
The Adoption of Agrippa Postumus and the Friends of Gaius Caesar
Authors: Pettinger Andrew 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
This chapter explains Augustus’ decision to adopt Agrippa Postumus in ad 4 by proposing that Augustus and Tiberius were concerned Agrippa was being courted by the ‘wrong people’ and was behaving inappropriately. The treatment of Tiberius’ nephew, the future emperor Claudius, is offered as a comparison. The ‘wrong people’ were former allies of Agrippa’s elder brother, Gaius Caesar. They had encouraged Gaius’ dislike of his stepfather Tiberius, and were blamed by Augustus for leading Gaius astray. The second part of the chapter investigates the enmity between Tiberius and Gaius’ entourage in more detail. It is proposed that when Gaius died in ad 4, Gaius’ friends were in no position to reconcile with the now ascendant Tiberius.
The Buck Stops Where?
Authors: Pettinger Andrew 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
This chapter offers a political explanation for Agrippa’s abdicatio. A combination of crises in ad 5 and 6 led to popular anger at the government’s inability to manage. Revolutionary pamphlets spread across Rome. L. Aemilius Paullus, the husband of Augustus’ granddaughter Julia and a relative of Agrippa’s, is identified as the chief architect of the protest. It is proposed that Gaius’ supporters, and Tiberius’ enemies, lurked behind Paullus. They were trying to destabilise Tiberius’ relationship with Augustus and the people. Agrippa was ‘abdicated’ and sent to Surrentum because he displayed sympathy for the troublemakers. L. Aemilius Paullus was prosecuted for treason. This chapter contains a refutation of R. A. Bauman’s theory regarding covert defamation as treason; it is shown that the case did not involve covert defamation, but overt sedition.
The United States: The Strange Survival of (Neo)Liberalism
Authors: Wilson Graham K. 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
The consequences of the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) in the United States have differed significantly between the short and longer terms. The initial consequences were to strengthen the center-left (nowadays synonymous with the Democrats) politically and to discredit faith in markets and other neoliberal nostrums. The longer terms consequences have been to strengthen the center-right (the Republicans), to leave little legacy in terms of financial reform, and to open up the possibility of a major shift to the right in public policy more generally. The chapter attempts to explain these apparently contradictory consequences.
Institutional Failure and the Global Financial Crisis
Authors: Sinclair Timothy J. 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
Who could have imagined the obscure, arcane business of debt rating would become — in the context of the worst economic and financial crisis since the Great Depression — a matter for serious public comment by presidents and prime ministers? The public debate about the role of the rating agencies in the generation of the subprime crisis revolved around an idea which now seems deeply entrenched in popular, financial market and academic understandings of the agencies and their incentives. The core element of this thinking is that how the agencies are regulated generates a significant weakness in the ratings they produce. This chapter argues that the concern with regulation of the rating agencies is largely mistaken. Regulation is concerned with the ‘rules of the road’, not with the design of the road itself. The road is the problem, not the rules we invent to govern it. Although criticism of the agencies may serve a useful political purpose, too much attention to this issue will produce complacency about the inherent volatility of global finance, setting the world up for a repeat of the Global Financial Crisis once the appetite for risk returns.
What Happened to the State-Influenced Market Economies (SMEs)? France, Italy, and Spain Confront the Crisis as the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Authors: Schmidt Vivien A. 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
The economic crisis that began in 2008 had a differential impact on France, which had a pretty good crisis; Italy, which had a pretty bad one; and Spain, for which the crisis was downright ugly. All three can be categorized as part of a third variety of capitalism, as state-influenced market economies (SMEs) in which the state’s role is central as the main driver of capitalism, as a state of mind as much as the state in action, by contrast with market-driven liberal market economies and network-based coordinated market economies (LMEs and CMEs). But to understand these countries’ trajectories over time as well as their responses to the economic crisis, the chapter supplements the consideration of the political economic institutions with an examination of the differences in these countries’ policies, political institutions, and politics — encompassing not just the role party-based coalitions and interest-based bargains but also the role of leadership, ideas, and discourse—along with the role of the EU.
Overview
Authors: Uribe‐Etxebarria Myriam , Valmala Vidal 
Published: September 2012

AbstractThis chapter introduces the chapters included in the volume and discusses the importance of the proposals contained in them for our understanding of the operations, triggers, and constraints involved in structure-building in natural languages. The different approaches to structure-building defended in the chapters are put into context, and the way in which recent developments in the theory have paved the way for their emergence are made explicit.
Clitic Placement and Multidominance
Authors: Gračanin‐Yuksek Martina 
Published: September 2012

AbstractAccording to Kayne”s (1994) Linear Correspondence Axiom (LCA), the linear order of terminals in a structure depends on asymmetric c-command relations among the non-terminals. Since the LCA is incompatible with multidominance (MD), the questions arise: how are MD structures linearized, and what constrains MD? Recently, several proposals have argued that an MD representation is admissible if it is linearizable by (some version of) the LCA. This chapter argues against this view. The chapter shows that an MD compatible version of the LCA cannot linearize Croatian non-MD structures containing the clitic je. The problem re-emerges in Croatian coordinated wh-questions (Q&Qs), and German Subjektlücke in finiten Sätzen. The chapter concludes that in MD representations, linear order is not predictable from the structure. Consequently, the claim that MD is constrained by linearization becomes moot. The data are explained if we adopt the claim that what constrains MD is a syntactic constraint, the COSH.
Structure Building That Can't Be
Authors: Epstein Samuel David , Kitahara Hisatsugu , Seely T. Daniel 
Published: September 2012

AbstractThis chapter proposes and explores a “new” deduction of cyclic Transfer. A new account of cyclic Transfer is motivated since Chomsky’s (2007, 2008) “valuation-induced” account has both conceptual and empirical problems. The proposal is guided by strict adherence to: Strong Minimalist Thesis (optimal satisfaction of the interfaces) and 3rd factor considerations. There is one necessary, and simple, structure building operation, Merge. Minimizing search, External Merge can apply only to root nodes. Internal Merge can apply only if all External Merges have been exhausted. Internal Merge, based on the simplest form of Merge, creates structures which trigger Transfer. cyclic Transfer is then a natural and immediate consequence of strict adherence to SMT and 3rd factor.
Structure Building From Below: More on Survive and Covert Movement
Authors: Lechner Winfried 
Published: September 2012

AbstractIn derivational models, syntactic dislocation can be motivated by one of two requirements. Either a node moves in order to obtain a closer relation with a matching set of features higher in the tree, or movement evacuates a category from a local environment with which it is incompatible. This chapter discusses the second conception: movement is not teleological but serves the purpose of resolving local conflicts. Specifically, it proposes that various aspects of dislocation are best understood as a consequence of The Survive Principle (TSP; Stroik 2009). Based on Lechner (2009), the chapter suggests that syntactic movement and type driven dislocation are induced by one factor that shows up in two guises: incompatibility of a node with its sister node and its feature specification and/or logical type. The chapter also shows that the TSP model admits a unified analysis of scope restrictions on double object construction and inverse linking.
Feature‐Splitting Internal Merge: The Case ofTough‐constructions
Authors: Obata Miki , Epstein Samuel David 
Published: September 2012

AbstractThis chapter seeks to shed new light on the formal properties of Merge. Chomsky's (2007, 2008) feature-inheritance system makes it possible that two heads such as T and C simultaneously attract a single element. Obata and Epstein (2008, 2011) propose a new kind of structure building operation called Feature-Splitting Internal Merge (FSIM): which splits a single element into two syntactic objects. FSIM gives a new derivational, agreement-based, phi-featural account of improper movement phenomena, some of which converge. The FSIM hypothesis is applied to other types of structure building with the proposal that as there are three kinds of T/C there are also three kinds of v/V (including one licensing null-Case). One consequence is that tough-constructions are, in fact, derivable by a kind of “proper” (i.e. convergent) improper movement derivation. In addition, the analysis implies that Case on a tough-subject is revised" in the course of the derivation.
REBUTTING THE CIVILIAN PRESUMPTION: PLAYING WHACK-A-MOLE WITHOUT A MALLET?
Authors: Maxwell Colonel Mark “Max” 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
This chapter outlines how the law of war regarding targeted killing can be tailored to combat international terrorism. To accomplish this objective, it grapples with the principal legal question raised by the targeting of terrorists: how can a state determine that an individual is a belligerent, a vice civilian, and therefore a legitimate target under the law of war, just as a combatant is a legitimate target because of his status as a member of an armed force? The chapter first provides the history of targeted killing from a U.S. perspective. It explains how terrorism has traditionally been handled as a domestic law enforcement matter and how this approach limits the U.S. government's ability to combat terrorism. It then explains the U.S. position that certain terrorists hold a different status than the civilian population. This position has been met with resistance from those who posit that terrorists are civilians who are taking a direct part in hostilities against the state and can be targeted only for such time as they do so. A new approach within the law of war to categorize individuals as either civilians, who are not targetable, or as belligerents who are targetable because of their status is outlined, which furthers the cause of states in effectively combating terrorism. The chapter concludes that while status is paramount in targeting decisions, the determination of status should be based on the individual's pattern of conduct and that pattern must be sufficient to rebut the presumption that the individual enjoys the protected status of a civilian.
TARGETED KILLING AS PREEMPTIVE ACTION
Authors: Finkelstein Claire 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
The policy of the Bush Administration with regard to terror suspects focused on detention and interrogation: detention as a temporary immobilization of potential terrorists, and interrogation to gather information needed to fight the war on terror. No one was surprised, then, when the new Obama Administration wanted to distance itself from the tactics of the former Bush Administration. It sought ways of addressing the threat of terrorism that avoided the brutality in interrogations, indefinite detentions, and the moral and legal thicket of conducting legal proceedings against terror suspects, whose situations were dramatically different from ordinary criminal defendants. It is perhaps no accident, then, that targeted killing emerged as the central strategy for fighting the war on terror. This chapter begins by arguing that the justification that applies to the practice of killing in war, in its traditional form, cannot properly be extended to the practice of targeting previously identified individuals in a way that abstracts from the proximity of their connection to active hostilities. The practice of targeted killing, as currently fashioned, is for this reason not easily justifiable under the traditional laws of war. It suggests however, that there are yet other rationales for killing those who pose a danger to national security that do not rely on either traditional just war theory or on the domestic law of personal justifications. The chapter advances an argument for an expansive approach to prevention called ‘preemptive killing’. Preemption, unlike prevention, extends the preventive privilege to a number of cases in which the anticipated harm is non-imminent.
GOING MEDIEVAL: TARGETED KILLING, SELF-DEFENSE AND THE JUS AD BELLUM REGIME
Authors: Martin Craig 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
This chapter analyzes the U.S. claims that the targeted killing policy is justified under the jus ad bellum doctrine of self-defence. It argues that this very broad and general claim, as a basis for strikes against targets in countries that are not sufficiently responsible for the actions of the terrorists, and in which the United States is not clearly a belligerent in an armed conflict, is not consistent with current international law principles. Arguments that the targeted killing policy is unlawful are not of course new or novel — others have already made this point quite persuasively. But the jus ad bellum issues raised by the policy have not received as much attention in the literature as the international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law aspects. Moreover, in addition to assessing the policy from a jus ad bellum perspective, the chapter considers the impact that the policy may have on the legal regime itself. The manner in which the targeted killing program is being prosecuted, together with its justifications and rationales, may lead to changes to the jus ad bellum regime, and to the nature of the relationship between it and the IHL regime, and the analysis here explores how such changes could have harmful unintended consequences for the entire system of constraints on the use of force and armed conflict.
THE IMPORTANCE OF CRITERIA-BASED REASONING IN TARGETED KILLING DECISIONS
Authors: Guiora Amos N. 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
This chapter presents an account of how targeted killing does, and should, work on the ground. The discussion is based on the author's twin perspectives of having served as a legal advisor in the Israeli Defence Forces and now as a professor of law with numerous opportunities to reflect on decisions in which he was involved. His concentration on ‘process’ stems from the belief that a criteria-based model of decision-making is essential to minimizing collateral damage and enhancing the effectiveness of existing policies. Simply put, beyond the legal, moral, and theoretical underpinnings, lawful targeted killing must be based on criteria-based decision-making, which increases the probability of correctly identifying and attacking the legitimate target. A state's decision to kill a human being during a counterterrorism operation must be predicated on an objective determination that the ‘target’ is, indeed, a legitimate target. Otherwise, the state's action is illegal, immoral, and ultimately ineffective. Subjective decisions based on fear or perception alone pose grave danger to both the suspected terrorist and innocent civilians.
ARE TARGETED KILLINGS UNLAWFUL? A CASE STUDY IN EMPIRICAL CLAIMS WITHOUT EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE
Authors: McNeal Gregory S. 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
Critics of the U.S. policy of targeted killing by unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs or drones) generally lack credible information to justify their critiques. In fact, in many instances their claims are easily refuted, calling into question the reliability of their criticism. This chapter highlights some of the most striking examples of inaccurate claims raised by critics of the U.S. policy of drone-based targeted killing. Specifically, it offers a much-needed corrective to clarify the public record or offer empirical nuance where targeted killing critics provide only unsubstantiated and conclusory statements of fact and law. The chapter is organized as follows. Section I discusses the decision protocol used by the U.S. military before launching a drone strike, a process that goes to extraordinary lengths to minimize civilian casualties. Section II addresses the critics' unsubstantiated claims about the legal, diplomatic, and strategic results of drone strikes.
OPERATION NEPTUNE SPEAR: WAS KILLING BIN LADEN A LEGITIMATE MILITARY OBJECTIVE?
Authors: Govern Kevin H. 
Published: September 2012

Abstract
This chapter takes the killing of Osama bin Laden as a test case for considering the moral and legal status of intentionally killing individuals deemed a threat to national security, under conditions in which the object of the targeted attack is offered little or no opportunity to surrender to attacking forces. The target in such operations, in short, is treated as though he were a belligerent: a person placed on a kill list may be targeted in a way that would be legitimate if he were an enemy combatant. It is argued that bin Laden was a legitimate military target, and that the decision-makers involved in his killing had thoroughly considered the range of options available to stop bin Laden from further terroristic acts, and were warranted in the decision to lean towards targeted killing in lieu of a capture operation. Thus, those who carried out the killing were within their scope of authority and responsibility for killing rather than for capturing bin Laden.
The Antinomy of Pure Reason Section Nine (A515–67/B543–95)
Authors: Allison Henry E. 
Published: September 2012

AbstractThe aim of this essay is to analyze the ninth section of Kant's chapter on the antinomies in the first Critique (Critique of Pure Reason). Inasmuch as Kant discusses the resolution of all four antinomies it was necessary to discuss them all, but the emphasis is on the Third Antinomy, which deals with an apparent contradiction between freedom and causal determinism. The essay analyzes the various steps in Kant's resolution, with special attention to his insistence that the free will problem is “transcendental” rather than “psychological” and the connection between Kant's account of freedom and his conception of rational agency. It argues that Kant is best read as offering a conceptual thesis regarding what is built into the thought of rational agency rather than a metaphysical thesis regarding an inaccessible noumenal self.
On the Very Idea of a Propensity to Evil
Authors: Allison Henry E. 
Published: September 2012

AbstractThis essay analyzes Kant's attempt to ground radical evil, understood as the root of all moral evil, in the concept of finite rational agency. Kant is seen as holding that such evil consists in a fundamental orientation of the will, which in order to count as moral must be imputable to the agent. Accordingly, he asks what must be presupposed if such evil is to be imputable and he finds the answer in the paradoxical notion of a freely chosen propensity. In addition to defending the coherence of this notion, the essay discusses Allen Wood's effort to naturalize radical evil by identifying it with “unsociable sociability.” Although the importance of this conception for understanding Kant's view of evil is acknowledged, it is denied that this can be the whole story, since it is unable to deal with the question of imputation.