Fifth is the increased resistance in the United States to a reduction in civil lib- erties. Harvey avoids the domestic political discussion in the US on this issue, con- centrating instead on illuminating the problem of protecting personal freedoms while preventing terrorists from using those same liberties as security gaps. The final basis for Harvey’s HSD argument pulls together the first five points in light of findings in his 2004 Smoke and Mirrors: Globalized Terrorism and the Illusion of Multilateral Security ~Toronto: University of Toronto Press!. There are many problems associated with multilateral approaches to security. For example, states have different security needs and a variety of political cultures that may not mesh into a single policy. In addition, there is the problem, addressed as early as Thucy- dides, of placing too much reliance on allies that may not respond as expected, as wanted, when needed. After presenting the interplay of HSD and political realities via the Dubai Ports World controversy, Harvey addresses directly weaknesses and contradictions of the optimist argument, concentrating on John Mueller’s Overblown: How Politicians and the Terrorism Industry Inflate National Security Threats, and Why We Believe Them ~New York: Simon and Schuster, 2006!. This is perhaps the most interesting part of the book to social scientists, as it provides, based on the HSD, a convincing analysis of work that depends too much on often contradictory anecdotal information. More important is the argument that subjective measurements of, for example, “sufficient threat” and reliance on counterfactuals result in weak theories that can produce coun- terproductive, even dangerous, policies. The book concludes with a thought-provoking application of HSD to current arguments in international relations and security studies literature. It also sets the stage for a comparative discussion of the Obama administration. A must read for security analysts, The Homeland Security Dilemma provides an excellent platform for debating issues in a very approachable manner to academics, graduate and under- graduate students alike as well as members of the policy-making community. CAROLYN C. JAMES Pepperdine University Gender, Class, and Freedom in Modern Political Theory Nancy J. Hirschmann Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2008, pp. x, 342. doi:10.10170S0008423909990564 The stated goals of Gender, Class, and Freedom are ambitious and significant, and, for the most part, beautifully achieved. Nancy Hirschmann sets out to provide a re-reading of five ~modern! canonical figures: Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Kant and Mill, and interrogate the concept of freedom through careful examination of the ways in which gender and class are understood and constructed in the work of each figure. She begins by considering Isaiah Berlin’s typology of negative and positive freedom and demonstrates that the widely held view is that the contributors to the modern foundations of the liberal tradition fit neatly into one side of the typology or the other; they are either decidedly resolved to an impartial conception of liberty ~and have no preference concerning values or outcomes! or unapologetically generative. Her central argument convincingly contradicts this view. She states in the introduc- tion that “it is my contention that most canonical theorists actually display elements of both positive and negative liberty” ~8!. In the following chapters, each dedicated to one of the modern figures, she carefully and thoroughly identifies the positive, prescriptive dimensions of their work. The results of this analytical inquiry are perhaps most surprising and illuminating for the work of Hobbes and Locke ~who are usually placed within the first camp!, 1068 Recensions / Reviews