(Part 2) Best legal theory & systems books according to redditors
We found 572 Reddit comments discussing the best legal theory & systems books. We ranked the 187 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the products ranked 21-40. You can also go back to the previous section.
Great question. I think Thailand is a textbook example of how military coups can beget future coups, which something that I consider at length in my book [https://smile.amazon.com/Democratic-Coup-dÉtat-Ozan-Varol/dp/019062602X/]. Over time, coups can become an acceptable way of doing business and correcting deficiencies in civilian politics.
Thailand's culture of coups also stems from frequent power vacuums in the country. As Aristotle put it, nature abhors a vacuum. When politics are deeply polarized (as they are in Thailand), power vacuums emerge as a result, and the military is more likely (and able) to step in to fill the vacuum.
Is your thesis available online somewhere? I'd love to take a look.
The best place to start is MnC or Free Markets & Capitalism?.
For additional reading, I would suggest Studies in Mutualist Political Economy and Organization Theory by Kevin Carson, Anarchy and Legal Order by Gary Chartier, Community Technology and Neighborhood Power: The New Localism by Karl Hess, and National Economic Planning: What Is Left? by Don Lavoie.
For some more classic texts, I would recommend What Is Property? by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Equitable Commerce by Josiah Warren, The Science of Society by Stephen Pearl Andrews, Mutual Banking by William B. Greene, Poverty and Progress by Henry George (non-anarchist), and Instead of a Book, By a Man Too Busy to Write One by Benjamin R. Tucker.
Every party has its connections with data miners and manipulators. They can't afford not to. It's the new frontier. I'm not defending it, only acknowledging it. No party is going to want to concede an edge to their competitors.
That is where he's going with it though; limited government, direct democracy, technology based.
The irony being that Carswell is a huge fan but he's going to be excluded from the first DD party. The schadenfreude is going to be strong.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/End-Politics-Birth-iDemocracy-x/dp/1849544220
https://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Needs-Aristocracy-Peregrine-Worsthorne-ebook/dp/B0047DVIE8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539794329&sr=8-1&keywords=democracy+needs+aristocracy
https://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Economics-Politics-Perspectives-Democratic/dp/0765808684/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539794369&sr=8-1&keywords=democracy+the+god+that+failed+by+hans-hermann+hoppe
https://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Equality-Challenge-Our-Time-ebook/dp/B0074B6T94/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539794438&sr=8-1&keywords=erik+von+kuehnelt-leddihn
>Do you think Trump's anti-Muslim rhetoric is aligned with American values?
The first duty of a country is to preserve itself. As Thomas Jefferson wrote:
>A strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means.
>Thomas Jefferson
As Justice Robert Jackson wrote in 1949:
>The choice is not between order and liberty. It is between liberty with order and anarchy without either. There is danger that, if the court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact.
>Justice Robert Jackson (1949)
If certain foreign aliens have expressed hatred for America, hatred for American values, and wish to attack American, it is the President's duty to exclude these aliens. Hence the concept of "extreme vetting," to exclude aliens who would attack us.
This is fully consistent with the law and the Constitution. The courts have exceeded their jurisdiction in blocking it. The following Supreme Court cases support the President's authority to do this:
>". . . an alien who seeks admission to this country may not do so under any claim of right. Admission of aliens to the United States is a privilege granted by the sovereign United States Government.. . . The exclusion of aliens is a fundamental act of sovereignty. The right to do so stems not alone from legislative power, but is inherent in the executive power to control the foreign affairs of the nation." (ref. Knauff v. Shaughnessy, 338 U.S. 537 (1950))
>"The courts have recognized that the President possesses independent authority over immigration which implicates international relations." (ref. Encuentro del Canto Popular v. Christopher (1996))
>"This Court is not a censor of the morals of other departments of the government; it is not invested with any authority to pass judgment upon the motives of their conduct. When once it is established that Congress possesses the power to pass an act, our province ends with its construction and its application to cases as they are presented for determination. Congress has the power under the Constitution to declare war, and in two instances where the power has been exercised -- in the war of 1812 against Great Britain and in 1846 against Mexico -- the propriety and wisdom and justice of its action were vehemently assailed by some of the ablest and best men in the country, but no one doubted the legality of the proceeding, and any imputation by this or any other court of the United States upon the motives of the members of Congress who in either case voted for the declaration would have been justly the cause of animadversion. We do not mean to intimate that the moral aspects of legislative acts may not be proper subjects of consideration. Undoubtedly they may be at proper times and places, before the public, in the halls of Congress, and in all the modes by which the public mind can be influenced. Public opinion thus enlightened, brought to bear upon legislation, will do more than all other causes to prevent abuses; but the province of the courts is to pass upon the validity of laws, not to make them, and when their validity is established, to declare their meaning and apply their provisions. All else lies beyond their domain." (ref. Chae Chan Ping v. United States (1889))
Additional References:
Case closed: Courts lack jurisdiction over Trump’s immigration EO
Rogue judges undermine our sovereignty | Congress can take action
Executive Authority to Exclude Aliens: In Brief
Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges from Transforming America
Not a Suicide Pact: The Constitution in a Time of National Emergency (Inalienable Rights)
From UK Perspective:
Peter Lloyd (7 July 2016).
Stand By Your Manhood: An Essential Guide for Modern Men.
Biteback Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84954-852-6. - Kindle
Dan Bell; Glen Poole (28 September 2015).
insideMAN: Pioneering stories about Men And Boys
Troubador Publishing Ltd. ISBN 978-1-78462-533-7. 9Electronic Purchase(http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=3553)
Neil Lyndon (1992).
No More Sex War: The Failures of Feminism .
Sinclair-Stevenson. ISBN 978-1-85619-191-3. (Buy Second hand)
Neil Lyndon (2015)
Sexual Impolitics: Heresies on sex, gender and feminism,
See Kindle Unlimited
Glen Poole (2013),
[Equality For Men],
On a More Global Perspective
Paul Nathanson; Katherine K. Young (16 October 2001).
Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture.
McGill-Queen's Press - MQUP. ISBN 978-0-7735-6969-0.
Paul Nathanson; Katherine K. Young (21 March 2006).
Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination against Men.
MQUP. ISBN 978-0-7735-7789-3.
Katherine K. Young; Paul Nathanson (2010).
Sanctifying Misandry: Goddess Ideology and the Fall of Man.
McGill-Queen's Press - MQUP. ISBN 978-0-7735-3615-9.
Paul Nathanson; Katherine K. Young (1 June 2015).
Replacing Misandry: A Revolutionary History of Men.
MQUP. ISBN 978-0-7735-8380-1.
Wendy McElroy (2015),
Rape Culture Hysteria: Fixing the Damage Done to Men and Women,
CreateSpace Independent Publishing, ISBN 978-1533629401
John Davis BA JD LLM,
Rape Hysteria: Lying with Rape Statistics (Foundations of Modern Feminism),
CreateSpace Independent Publishing
Dean Spade is one of -- if not the -- most genius person writing on trans issues. His new book will be a must-read.
I have to warn you, it was the folly of a young-and-stupid idiot. I couldn't find anyone interested in publishing it, so I self-published on Amazon. Couldn't get an editor, so it's got typos galore. And I'm pretty sure that it's about 10 pages of mildly interesting travelogue before it hits 90 pages of dry-ass game theory. Truth be told, I wrote it before I was diagnosed with Aspergers.
Caveat emptor: https://www.amazon.com/Importing-Democracy-Brian-Boyko-ebook/dp/B00G8TC4HY
That post is of no value and is not to be taken seriously.
A túath was simply a petty kingdom of the lowest rank, whose ruler, a rí túaithe, would have been subordinate to a more senior king (the word "Rí", king, was used promiscuously in Ireland). I don't even know where this idea of Ireland being politically divided into voluntary associations comes from, either. Irish kings frequently fought over territory and influence, and sought to expand both, formed military alliances, and demanded tribute from their vassals.
Kings were "elected"? Not really. The king's successor was elected by and from within a kinship group -- i.e. a certain subset of the previous king's relatives chose one of their number to be next in line, or Tánaiste.
The post's assertion that "Irish history records peaceful, voluntary cooperation until the barbarous English invaded in the 1640′s AD" is absurdly wrong in so many ways it's hard to know where to begin and it's hard to see how anyone with even a passing acquaintance with Irish history could take it seriously.
The idea that Pre-Norman Irish society was some sort of anarchist idyll is a non-starter. It is correct that there was no centralized state -- the island was a patchwork of kingdoms and subkingdoms, but society was highly stratified, and the "freemen" of landowning/aristocratic or recognized professional status were a small proportion of the population. Most people had effectively no rights or freedoms, let alone to choose their leaders, and were subject to arbitrary demands for food, shelter, military support, etc. from their lords. Even under feudal system peasants had some recourse to the law.
For more serious treatment of these issues, try:
HuffPo even plugs his book, where he wants to import the political system from the greatest country on earth... New Zealand.
Maybe he should go back there instead of Canada or Britain like he's been "threatening"?
This one is great:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Guide-Early-Irish-Law/dp/0901282952
Comes highly recommended by me, and the scholar who recommended it to me.
> the ancap view of socialism is a bogeyman made out of blood and its cutting the head off a puppy with a giant axe that says "PRIVATE PROPERTY IS BAD, ACTUALLY" written on it
So in other words, people like Cleon Skousen. Hmm, I'd agree with that.
Excellent paper. Required reading for anyone fascinated by the implications of The DAO and blockchain tech in general. I do want to mention the similar case and proposal for a new(er) democracy structure in the brand-new book Crowdocracy which gets even more in-depth on how future governance will work.
> that i simply can't go through it all myself.
You could, if you hadn't left your research until a week before you hand your dissertation in. That kind of laziness will bite you on the ass in future.
> What were the factors involved in crash in april? What caused it's spike? And why was the drop so significant?
There's plenty of primary source material both here in /r/bitcoin and at https://bitcointalk.org/ that are accessible for free and without registration. While they amount to educated guesswork, I read widely over the Internet and I have to say that I've seen nothing elsewhere that isn't essentially ill-educated guesswork. The Economist is probably the best of the rest. Certainly this forum saw a massive increase in the number of undesirable posters leading up to the crash, all of whom were wanting to buy in, none of whom wanted to do any of the work of understanding why. Panic among them ensued.
> How was the cyprus crisis a factor?
It wasn't. The time taken to download a client, open an exchange account, fund it and get trading means the crash had started before the Cyprus confiscation could get going, never mind that ordinary Cypriots themselves couldn't obtain funds as at March 25th. There was an increase in interest from the Spanish in Bitcoin at the time, but that's about it.
> Where in the world has it been taken to heart and used?
Kreuzberg, Germany.
> Who gains and who loses from its existence?
At the moment, almost no-one. It's thought that in future, those who are involved in transfer payments will be most affected, starting with the likes of Western Union and Paypal, then onto the banks. That will then reach the sovereigns who'd be less able to detain or tax international transactions. That inability, coupled with the Internet, would lead to an increase in 'international' companies that would previously have been national, migrating online for the tax benefit. Transfer payments would then start drying up for many welfare recipients, by which I mean both corporates who benefit from defense budgets, as well as people who benefit from State pensions.
> Anything you deem important in a comprehensive analysis of Bitcoin and Cryptography.
The first half of this book, covering the context we find itself in: http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-End-Politics-Birth-iDemocracy/dp/1849544220
The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip saga from years back which was among the first occasions where individual rights vs the State with respect to cryptography was played out
The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypherpunk history, which informs much of where those individual rights were first expressed
The (ongoing) story of the Darkmarkets will tell you much about nation state (in)ability to get a grip on what's happening.
Good luck with your work! I look forward to seeing it here in due course!
Communist societies do not deal with crime because there are no communist societies. You made up a scenario about a crime than was never committed in a society that never existed. This is why you are getting opinions instead of answers (I am not claiming that your question is not good, I am just explaining why you are getting the answers you get.)
I will try to answer as broadly as possible.
>I think the people who advocate for communism focus too much on the economic principles and dont question this idea of a stateless society.
That is because not having a state has not much to do with how we deal with crime. I will explain in a bit...
>...how do we try the said rapist...
With whatever trial society has decided upon. Trials (and laws) do not need a state to exist. The Xeer system is an example of that.
>...what would be the repercussions...
Whatever repercussions society has decided upon. Either set by law or decided by popular opinion/jury/juror.
>...who would decide statute of limitations...
Society. Either by law, popular opinion etc. You get the gist. I am going to skip a few...
>...who gets to decide who can or cant be a judge.
Society. Is there any reason to believe that a society can not decide on those things, voluntarily and democratically without a state? The difference would be that judges can not hold political power in a stateless society like they do now.
>What about conflicts of interest. what about sentencing guidelines, what about bail?
What about them? Conflicts of interest exist today. Sentencing guidelines and bail will be decided by society.
>Is he held until trial or not held until convicted, what about speed of trial.
Society decides about those things.
>I dont think this society that you guys envision without a state can actually work and deal with all these intricacies.
Why not? You have provided zero arguments about that. I should remind you that this sub is called DebateACommunist and not AskACommunist. It is not a debate if you do not present any arguments.
Edit: For a more in-depth analysis I recommend this book: http://www.amazon.de/Anarchy-Legal-Order-Politics-Stateless/dp/1107032288
https://www.amazon.com/Summary-Islamic-Jurisprudence-VOL-Set/dp/B004E4AHWE
It would be so great if everything could be packaged up into a little sound bite for you eh? Well sharia is a bit more comprehensive than that.
Nunca li, mas ouvi dizer que What Is Populism também é bom. Não sei se tem em português.
Purchase Ascent to Felicity. It is a basic Hanafi primer text by Imam Shurunbuali translated by Shaykh Faraz Khan. He is a teacher on Seekers Guidance and a full time lecturer at Zaytuna College.
http://www.amazon.com/Ascent-Felicity-Maraqi-l-Saadat-Jurisprudence/dp/1933764090
If you want to read books which have been a major influence on the American right-wing, specifically the Tea-Party, I'd recommend reading the works of W. Cleon Skousen and his son, Paul B. Skousen. These two men are responsible for a significant portion of America's misunderstanding of Socialism. W. Cleon Skousen was even praised by Ronald Reagan himself. If you truly want to understand the enemy, then you really ought to read these books:
Wikipedia — Amazon.com
YouTube Video: The Message of The Naked Socialist — Amazon.com
Here's another great Thomistic resource: http://www.amazon.com/Morality-Politics-Edition-Hackett-Classics/dp/0872206637
Any book that gives an overview of the different schools of thought should do. Bix or Harris, for example.
	
	
	
> # The odds of a military coup in Venezuela are going up. But coups can sometimes lead to democracy
>
>
>
> Image
> A man holds the new 100,000-bolivar note, right, to demonstrate its resemblance to the 100 note, in Caracas on Nov. 9. The new bill is worth about $30 on the official market and $2 on the black market. (Federico Parra/AFP)
>
> The news that Venezuela has started defaulting on its debts raises an important question: Can the current regime survive the likely economic fallout? Over the past few years, Venezuela has effectively become an authoritarian country. During his term in office, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has cracked down on dissidents by force and run roughshod over the country’s democratic institutions. Maduro has handpicked cronies to head a constituent assembly to rewrite the country’s constitution, disabled the opposition-controlled parliament, and made it prohibitively difficult to unseat him.
>
> In such circumstances, as I argue in my new book, “The Democratic Coup d’État”, the domestic military plays a key role in determining whether a country will move to real democracy. Where the military sides with the regime, as large factions of the military did in Syria in 2011, the dictatorship often reigns supreme. But where the military sides with the people, democracy becomes a real possibility. Here’s how that may work out in Venezuela.
>
> The Venezuelan opposition is hopelessly ineffective
>
> In a different world, the political opposition might be able to take advantage of Venezuela’s dire financial situation. Now that the government is actually defaulting, rather than just seeking to delay debt payments, it is going to have a very hard time borrowing more money on international markets. Venezuela has already had a hard time keeping the lights on. Over the near-to-medium term, things are likely to get significantly worse, generating opportunities for political dissenters.
>
> However, the political opposition in Venezuela has been unable to come together to work against the Maduro government. Opposition parties suffered an unexpected electoral loss in the regional elections earlier last month. They remain hopelessly divided, having spent more time and energy fighting each other rather than Maduro’s regime. These fractures within the opposition have provided momentum to Maduro.
>
> Now, the military is a key player
>
> With the opposition paralyzed, the most realistic threat to Maduro is his own military, which, until now, has remained loyal to him.
>
> Maduro is well-aware of the looming threat from his armed forces. Like his predecessor Hugo Chávez, Maduro has engaged in strategic engineering to ensure that his military stays loyal. He has appointed cronies to the military’s top brass (elevating 195 officers to the rank of general in a single day), showered them with substantial privileges, and appointed an “anti-coup” committee to purge officers with questionable allegiances.
>
> These strategies may have reduced the possibility of a military coup, but they have not eliminated it. The benefits doled out by Maduro have mostly gone to the military’s top brass. The mid-level officers and rank-and-file have been marginalized by Maduro and continue to languish along with the rest of Venezuela’s population.
>
> As a result, these soldiers have a significant incentive to reconsider their loyalties. Discontent has already been brewing among the ranks as growing numbers of officers join the uprising against Maduro. Aware of this dynamic, the opposition has been deliberately courting the sympathies of the domestic military, with Julio Borges, the head of the opposition-controlled parliament, asking the armed forces to “break their silence.”
>
> Still, don’t expect change right way
>
> At this point in time, a full-blown coup is unlikely because the current levels of discontent within the military’s ranks don’t appear to be strong enough. If a small cabal of isolated officers decided to go ahead with a haphazard coup attempt, it might even strengthen the regime. Maduro could emulate the tactics of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who utilized a foiled coup attempt against him in July 2016 as an excuse for intensifying his crackdown on the political opposition.
>
> Yet, as Maduro’s stranglehold continues to intensify, disenchantment with the regime could reach a tipping point where a critical mass of military officers decide to abandon ship. If ordered to escalate the use of force on civilian protesters, the armed forces may refuse regime orders and let the revolution take its course or even turn their arms against the very government they’ve been tasked to defend.
>
> Look at what happened in Serbia, Romania, and numerous other countries
>
> In Serbia, the dictatorship of Slobodan Milošević collapsed only after his military withdrew its support from his government following persistent street protests. Deprived of military backing, Milošević had no choice but to acknowledge defeat. In Romania, the revolution against the Ceauşescu dictatorship was made possible only by the withdrawal of the military forces tasked with suppressing the rebellion and protecting the regime. Although the military initially sided against the civilian protesters, they were eventually overwhelmed by the tide of discontent and quietly stepped aside to enable the overthrow of the regime in favor of democracy. As I demonstrate in my book, other countries as diverse as Portugal, Mali, Colombia, Burkina Faso, Britain, Guinea-Bissau, Guatemala, Peru and the United States have all undergone democratization after their military forces turned their arms against their authoritarian governments.
>
> A coup against Maduro could lead to a transition away from authoritarianism. However, it might also generate significant side effects. Other cases of transition suggest that Venezuela might struggle for a long time with the reverberations of the inevitable social and political turmoil that a coup would produce. The coup may also beget future coups, particularly in an already coup-prone country like Venezuela.
>
> Vladimir Lenin was no democrat. However, he got one thing right: “No revolution of the masses can triumph without the help of a portion of the armed forces that sustained the old regime.” The Venezuelan military is the levee that’s keeping the democratic movement at bay to protect the Maduro regime. Only if the military breaks can the river of democracy jump the banks.
>
> Ozan Varol is a rocket scientist turned law professor at Lewis & Clark Law School. His new book, “The Democratic Coup d’État,” was published by Oxford University Press. You can follow his writing on his website at https://ozanvarol.com.
Owner | Source Code | Stats
Reactionary Thought
Chartism – Thomas Carlyle
Latter-Day Pamphlets – Thomas Carlyle
The Bow of Ulysses – James Anthony Froude
Popular Government – Henry Summers Maine
Shooting Niagara – Carlyle
The Occasional Discourse – Carlyle
On Heroes, Hero Worship & the Heroic in History – Carlyle
The Handbook of Traditional Living – Raido
Men Among the Ruins – Julius Evola
Ride the Tiger – Julius Evola
Revolt Against the Modern World – Julius Evola
Reflections of a Russian Statesman – Konstantin Pobedonostsev
Popular Government – Henry Maine
Patriarcha (the Natural Power of Kings) – Sir Robert Filmer
Decline of the West – Oswald Spengler
Hour of Decision – Oswald Spengler
On Power – Jouvenel
Against Democracy and Equality – Tomislav Sunic
New Culture, New Right – Michael O’Meara
Why We Fight – Guillaume Faye
The Rising Tide of Color – Lothrop Stoddard
Liberty or Equality – Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn
Democracy: The God that Failed – Hans-Hermann Hoppe
****
Economics
Economics in One Lesson – Henry Hazlitt
Basic Economics – Thomas Sowell
That Which is Seen and That Which is Not Seen – Frederic Bastiat***
Man, Economy, and State – Murray Rothbard
Human Action – Ludwig von Mises
****
​
I am somewhat abhorred (and a little impressed) that you made it through such a long treatise on natural law without once mentioning the writing of St. Thomas Aquinas, who wrote a lot on the topic.
Here is a brief introduction to his writings
Here is the book my wife had for some of her pre-law classes on the topic that I picked up one daya nd enjoyed reading
Here is the mobile version of your link
The best explanation I've seen of different voting systems is David M. Farrell's book, Electoral Systems: A Comparative Introduction.
+ozan_varol:
Coups usually overthrow democratically elected leaders. The phenomenon I describe in [my book] (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/019062602X/), where the military deposes a dictator and installs democracy, is the exception, not the norm. Though it's not an outlier: According to an empirical study, in the post–cold war era, 72 percent of coups (31 out of 43) were followed by democratic elections within five years.
Trump's impeachment is certainly possible, depending on what Mueller's investigation reveals. If he is impeached, you can certainly expect significant pushback from his supporters. After all, Trump remains popular among GOP voters (with approval ratings in the 70s), many of whom would not take kindly to his ouster.
It's hard to find, but this book pretty much devastates that res
http://www.amazon.com/Normal-Life-Administrative-Violence-Critical/dp/0896087964
Watching and reading the news, real news, not Fox news, will be the best things you can do for exposure to politics. (al-Jazeera and BBC are my favorites, Last Week Tonight has some good in depth pieces)
Additionally, you are most interested in the current election, try finding a voter's guide for your county. Most counties (that I'm aware of) produce a partisan guide where each candidate gets to write about themselves.
Assuming that you mean US politics:
Here is a basic civics lesson, click on the different parts of the flow chart to read about the different parts of government.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/americas/04/us_election/govt_system/html/introduction.stm
here is two full online free courses you can take on US politics: http://www.saylor.org/courses/polsc231/
http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/political-science/17-20-introduction-to-american-politics-spring-2013/
Here is a fact checking website that explains different claims made by various people/groups:
http://www.politifact.com/
If you want to know about political science, I would suggest Theories of International Relations and Zombies for a good intro to IR theory and Principles of Comparative Politics.
http://www.amazon.com/Theories-International-Politics-Zombies-Drezner/dp/0691147833
http://www.amazon.com/Principles-Comparative-Politics-William-Roberts/dp/1608716791/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1414722373&sr=1-1&keywords=principles+of+comparative+politics
While I'm linking to things,
Here is the US Constitution http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
The declaration of independence http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
The UN universal declaration of human rights http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
I'm sorry if it wasn't clear on the wiki. To be precise, I actually read it in this book (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Principles-Comparative-Politics-William-Roberts/dp/1608716791), but I wasn't sure how to cite it properly, so I linked to the man who'd discovered the information in the first place.
It's a political science textbook, and you can find this on page 343 in the first paragraph.
I'm kind of new to Reddit, so I wasn't sure...
Start with these two to cover aqidah and fiqh:
https://www.amazon.com/Summary-Islamic-Jurisprudence-VOL-Set/dp/B004E4AHWE/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1469461069&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=concise+summary+al-fawzan
https://www.amazon.com/Concise-Commentary-Tawhid-Salih-Fawzan/dp/6036860811/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1469461069&sr=8-1-fkmr1&keywords=concise+summary+al-fawzan
they are probably available alot cheaper on muslim sites.
for tafsir, this should be sufficient:
https://www.amazon.com/Noble-Quran-Arb-eng-Large/dp/B00C92VWKO/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1469461395&sr=8-3&keywords=the+noble+quran
sirah:
https://www.amazon.com/Sealed-Nectar-Biography-Prophet-Muhammad-ebook/dp/6035001106/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1469461577&sr=8-2&keywords=the+sealed+nectar
Jan-Werner Muller's What is Populism? pretty much explains it perfectly.
>Even if someone were a bona fide rapist all that happens is that they are told to go somewhere else and do their thing...no criminal sanctions for a criminal act.
Horsefeathers. Not only "bona fide rapists" but also completely innocent young men are expelled, denied due process, denied opportunity to defend or cross-examine, with notations upon their transcripts which follow them all their lives, frequently preventing employment and matriculation. Their lives are destroyed. The situation is only a bit better than that of black men accused by white women a century ago.
https://www.amazon.com/She-Lied-College-Growing-Social-ebook/dp/B01FIV843A
https://www.amazon.com/Rape-Culture-Hysteria-Fixing-Damage/dp/1533629404
>Electoral Systems: A Comparative Introduction by David M. Farrell
https://www.amazon.ca/Electoral-Systems-Introduction-David-Farrell/dp/1403912319/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1536676870&sr=8-1&keywords=Electoral+Systems%3A+A+Comparative+Introduction+by+David+M.+Farrell
Here is the book I have. This is only volume I but still has fiqh of all 4 Sunni schools of thought. As a side note it's about 1000 pages.
https://www.amazon.com/Ascent-Felicity-Maraqi-l-Saadat-Jurisprudence/dp/1933764090/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1542042812&sr=8-1&keywords=ascent+to+felicity&dpID=41QlpzhmFqL&preST=_SY344_BO1,204,203,200_QL70_&dpSrc=srch
I suggest Jurisprudence by Brian Bix (https://www.amazon.com/Jurisprudence-Theory-Context-Brian-Bix/dp/1611633117).
Essential reading on the subject: https://www.amazon.com/Stolen-Sovereignty-Unelected-Transforming-America/dp/1944229299
>My premise is more like if a Sunni and Shia Muslim lived together for 2 years in a college dorm, what differences would they notice day to day?
If you want to know basic differences in fiqh - you'll want to pick a comparative fiqh primer. I would suggest this one:
http://www.amazon.com/Islamic-Jurisprudence-According-Sunni-Schools/dp/1887752978
And then for Imami fiqh, I would recommend man la yadhurul faqih (you'll need to understand Arabic). This is technically a hadith book (since Shi'ites consider the words of an Imam as a hadith) but it's designed as a fiqh book. If you read them comparatively, you'll notice that Imami Shi'ites often have contradictory authentic traditions (like in nikah al mut'a or saying ameen after fatiha) where one matches a popular Sunni opinion and another is aberrant. The general logic is that the aberrant opinion is the correct one for Shi'ites and the one that matches Sunnis was said by the Imam in taqiyyah.
If you speak Urdu - which I gather from your post, see if you can find a comparative fiqh book by Mufti Abdul Kareem Mushtaq. I haven't read it so I can't comment on the content, but my understanding is he compares the majority opinion in the four madhahib of Sunnis and the major opinions of Twelver Shi'ites.
There are tons of differences though you'll notice in the minutiae if you're both religious. The basis of Imami Shi'ism was to be anti-thetical to whatever the 'aam (majority) were doing. In the case of fiqh, this translated to doing the opposite of the major school of Sunni fiqh in your city - and that became the basis for the narrations that Imamis have in their books which aren't found in the books of traditional Islamic sects (Sunnis, Zaydi Shi'ites, Ibadis, etc.)
As an example, Hur Amili said:
من جملة نعماء الله على هذه الطائفة المحقة أنه خلى بين الشيطان وبين علماء العامة، فأضلهم في جميع المسائل النظرية حتى يكون الأخذ بخلافهم ضابطة لنا
Basically, Sunni scholars were so misguided by Shaitan that it became a rule in Twelver Shi'ism to simply do the opposite of what the Sunnis did.
Hopefully that helps in whatever you're trying to study.