Belonging in a House Divided chronicles the everyday lives of resettled North Korean refugees in South Korea and their experiences of violence, postwar citizenship, and ethnic boundary making. Through extensive ethnographic research, Joowon Park documents the emergence of cultural differences and tensions between Koreans from the North and South, as well as new transnational kinship practices that connect family members across the Korean Demilitarized Zone. As a South Korean citizen raised outside the peninsula and later drafted into the military, Park weaves in autoethnographic accounts of his own experience in the army to provide an empathetic and vivid analysis of the multiple overlapping layers of violence that shape the embodied experiences of belonging. He asks readers to consider why North Korean resettlement in South Korea is a difficult process, despite a shared goal of reunification and the absence of a language barrier. The book is essential reading for anyone interested in anthropology, migration, and the politics of humanitarianism.

Belonging in a House Divided chronicles the everyday lives of resettled North Korean refugees in South Korea and their experiences of violence, postwar citizenship, and ethnic boundary making. Through extensive ethnographic research, Joowon Park documents the emergence of cultural differences and tensions between Koreans from the North and South, as well as new transnational kinship practices that connect family members across the Korean Demilitarized Zone. As a South Korean citizen raised outside the peninsula and later drafted into the military, Park weaves in autoethnographic accounts of his own experience in the army to provide an empathetic and vivid analysis of the multiple overlapping layers of violence that shape the embodied experiences of belonging. He asks readers to consider why North Korean resettlement in South Korea is a difficult process, despite a shared goal of reunification and the absence of a language barrier. The book is essential reading for anyone interested in anthropology, migration, and the politics of humanitarianism.

For more than seven decades there has been a broad gap between how philosophy is conceived and practiced. Two ill-defined but well-recognized traditions have developed--the "analytic" and "Continental" schools of philosophy. The former traces its roots to philosophers like Frege, Russell, Moore, Wittgenstein, and the logical positivists. The latter has been heavily influenced by Nietzsche, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Foucault, and Derrida, among others. The aim of this collection is to reconsider the often facile characterization of major thinkers as belonging to either one or the other philosophical tradition. The contributors--philosophers from both sides of the divide working in different countries and contexts--all question the problematic conception that the two traditions are incommensurable. Each of their articles compares individual philosophers who have had a major influence on the analytic and Continental traditions with a view to clarifying their similarities and dissimilarities of approach. What this collection of thoughtful articles clearly demonstrates is that regardless of approach and precedents, analytic and Continental philosophers are all doing philosophy, and there are many important points of contact between them. The contributors are: Richard Rorty (Stanford University), whose thoughtful overview highlights the salient points in both traditions; Barry Allen (McMaster University); Babette E. Babich (Fordham University); David Cerbone (West Virginia University); Sharyn Clough (Rowan University); Jonathan Kaplan (University of Tennessee); Richard Matthews (Memorial University of Newfoundland); Carlos G. Prado (Queen's University); Bjorn Torgrim Ramberg (University of Oslo); Mike Sandbothe (Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena); Barry Stocker (Yeditepe University Istanbul); and Ed Witherspoon (Colgate University).

This definitive analysis of the Lincoln-Douglas debates is “one of the most influential works of American history and political philosophy ever published (National Review). In Crisis of the House Divided, noted conservative scholar and historian Harry V. Jaffa illuminates the political principles that guided Abraham Lincoln from his reentry into politics in 1854 through his Senate campaign against Stephen Douglas in 1858. Through critical analysis of the Lincoln-Douglas debates, Jaffa demonstrates that Lincoln’s political career was grounded in his commitment to constitutionalism, the rule of law, and abolition. A landmark work of American history, it “has shaped the thought of a generation of Abraham Lincoln and Civil War scholars." To mark the fiftieth anniversary of the original publication, Jaffa has provided a new introduction (Civil War History). "A searching and provocative analysis of the issues confronted and the ideas expounded in the great debates…A book which displays such learning and insight that it cannot fail to excite the admiration even of scholars who disagree with its major arguments and conclusions."—D. E. Fehrenbacher, American Historical Review