This is an amazing examination, using the ideas of Hobbes, of how the politics of national security play out in America.
He uses three chief claims to show not only why Democrats lose, time and again, on matters of national security, but also why some dissenting voices are tolerated while others are not.
1. States have a great deal of freedom to determine what threatens a people and how to respond to those threats, and in making those determinations, they are influenced by the interests and ideologies of their primary constituencies.
2. States have strong incentives and have been given strong justifications for exaggerating threats.
3. While states aspire, rhetorically, to a unity of will and judgment, they seldom achieve it in practice.
This is really wonderful stuff.