comments and have endured many setbacks including the recent expansion of abortion coverage in obamacare. but it is important more now than average that we remain strong and stand together. we cannot allow the opponents of life to continually weaken the moral fabric of our country. they need to know that they need to understand that we will continue to march, we will continue to educate, we will continue to advocate and we will continue to fight for the unborn. >> despite the fact that president obama is using stealth, deception and the coercive power of the state to promote abortion violence the pro-life movement is alive and well and making serious,

significant and sustained progress. >> the annual march for life rally from the national mall in washington d.c. at 10:00 eastern. on booktv, what is the secret to a life of happiness? talk radio host? let on possible answers tonight at 8:00. on c-span3's american history tv from 1964-2004 the issues and concerns from five decades of state of the union speeches. >> upcoming book fairs and festivals happening around the country. february 7th through the ninth the book fair takes place in pasadena, calif. featuring the collections of 200 booksellers from 33 countries around the world. booktv will be live from savannah, ga. from the savannah book festival on saturday, february 15th. we will bring all the coverage

of the numerous author programs including gabriel sherman for his recent biography on fox news, roger ailes and cia lawyer john rizzo's account of his 34 year tenure at the agency. check our web site booktv.org for the complete schedule. on march 15th-sixteenth look for booktv's coverage of tucson festival of books from the university of arizona. let us know about book fairs and festivals in your area and we will add them to our list. e-mail us at booktv@c-span.org. >> begins with a question of the relationship of nature to politics. both claim that their political views are based in an idea that politics has to answer to human nature, a very different idea of what that was and different ideas what nature means in political debate has a lot to do with what follows. so an idea of nature that is an

enlightened science idea, understands nature as a source of rules, rules that govern the behavior of individual particles, if you will, and turn society itself, basically a function of particles a little like newtonian physics applied to politics, not in a simple-minded way. he understood politics was in physics but the basic way of thinking how do we get at the truth of the deepest kind of truth beneath politics he thought the way to get at it was to go to the beginning, the origins of things and not the historical origins but natural origins, pre historical origins and that meant understanding the human being in his pre social state because society is a function of human beings. understand society you first have to understand the individual human being. in this he follows what is a fairly familiar to students of

american political thought and british political thought the model of the state of nature, way of understanding society. let's imagine society begins with independent individuals coming together and deciding we would be better off if we lived together if there is a mutual enforcer of laws, protector of property and safety, that is how society is formed and exist for that purpose and needs to be understood entering to that purpose. any government, any society that doesn't answer to that purpose, violates our rights and doesn't protect our property, doesn't protect us properly from one another is a -- we have a right to destroy it. this is his vision. is a familiar vision, a liberal vision, and from there he begins his political thinking. that means his political thinking is very individualist, very rights based, very devoted to individual liberty as a defining principle of political life. every book start by looking at

that saying the problem is no one has ever lived that way. the state of nature is a fought experiment as anyone would acknowledge. but it is a very implausible thought experiment. no human being ever lived that side of family even outside society and to understand society based on what it would mean to live in a situation no human being ever lived in may not be the most useful way to think about how we ought to live. what struck him most was the radical individualism of it. the approach to political thought, to nature itself, begins in hole, not in parts. you may say his science, his major, is not newtonian. he says human beings always lived in society and we need to understand the human being and the paths that allow us to be happy, the institutions that allow us to thrive within society.

tries to understand what liberty means, what the quality means, what society means based on how people live in the real world. what has enabled people to live in a just and happy way is? society has to answer to human nature. human nature is not the same thing as the physics of political science. the human being is not just irrational animals so we don't answer to rules, the human being is also a sentimental creature and also an animal with animal needs and desires, politics has to recognize all of that because to ignore those things is to set yourself up for failure, create a system that would only work with something other than human beings living in it. his recourse to nature, what he find useful in the model of nature is a model of continuity, a model of generations, of

inheritance, how overtime species improve society's improve and it happens gradually. he is writing of course well before dark when but what he offers is is an evolutionary mo political change from these models of the nature you see some basic differences about how we understand society. >> you can watch this and other programs online at booktv.org. >> a message for my world. i see myself as a person trying to understand and situate myself. the idea of the book came to me when i was giving some lectures at the u.s. air force academy in

colorado springs. a well-educated broad minded liberal young air force officer looking after me, had lots of chats which me that i found very interesting and told me told me he was a liberal because he wanted to create in my mind and the impression i might have gotten from the media or the u.s. air force academy, right wing sort of strange radical fundamentalist. so he told me he was in favor of immigration but, he said, when people come to this country they should learn the nature. i didn't think he was speaking about comanche. i said i quite agree. everyone should learn spanish. >> settlement in the evolution of the united states from a hispanic perspective. our america tonight at 10:00 eastern and sunday at 9:00 on after words, part of booktv on

c-span to -- c-span2. you still have time to weigh in on martha levin at liberty amendment. read the book shut, join the conversation on booktv.org and enter the chat room. here is a look at some books that are being published this week. fred siegel, senior fellow at the manhattan institute presents is fought on liberalism in the united states in the rebel against the masses:how liberalism has undermined the middle class. in the second arab awakening and the battle for pluralism, the vice president for studies at the carnegie endowment for international peace presents a history of political change in the arab world. former provost at brown university recounts the relationship between pope pius xi and battalion dictator benito mussolini in the pope and miscellany:the secret history of highest xi and the rise of fascism in europe. in hundred days:the campaign

that ended world war i, the allied push to end the stalemate on the western front in the summer of 1918.