The End of Democracy?: The Celebrated First Things Debate, With Arguments Pro and Con and the Anatomy of a Controversy. This item is unavailable.The End of Democracy?: The Celebrated First Things Debate, With Arguments Pro and Con and the Anatomy of a Controversy

American conservatism's most ferocious internecine controversy in years erupted when the journal First Things published a symposium on "the judicial usurpation of politics," exploring the daring question "whether we have reached or are reaching the point where conscientious citizens can no longer give moral assent to the existing regime." A far-flung debate ensued, engaging scores of contestants in countless journals and newspapers. A new volume collects for the first time the original symposium and the most important responses, with a new 90-page essay by First Things' Richard John Neuhaus, "The Anatomy of a Controversy." Collected here is the original November 1996 symposium on "The End of Democracy? The Judicial Usurpation of Politics," in which Robert Bork, Russell Hittinger, Hadley Arkes, Charles Colson, Robert George, and the editors of First Things confront five decades of judicial decrees arrogating to the courts the final say on abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, obscenity, and other fundamental questions of how we order our lives together. Responses from 20 eminent commentators follow (including Gertrude Himmelfarb, Mary Ann Glendon, William Bennett, Norman Podhoretz, and William Kristol), ranging from condemnation of the symposium's reckless flirtation with rebellion to praise for its forthright engagement of distressing but urgent questions. An extended review of the contours and implications of the controversy by Father Neuhaus rounds out the volume.

A one-stop opportunity to assess in the round a durable dispute on the political right, set off by a symposium in last November's edition of First Things. The journal featured a symposium devoted to the issues of whether America's judiciary has usurped the democratic political process and what could or should be done about it. The collection (whose contributors included the heavyweight likes of Hadley Arkes, Robert H. Bork, Charles Colson, and Robert P. George) touched off an immediate furor that has yet to abate among conservative intellectuals and their principal journals (such as the American Spectator, the Weekly Standard, and Commentary). This volume encompasses all of the original articles, several of which assert that citizens repelled by the activist excesses of ultraliberal courts that purportedly find hitherto unsuspected rights in the US Constitution would be justified in considering civil disobedience or outright resistance to their government. There is also a representative sample of the impassioned responses these essays evoked (inter alia, from William J. Bennett, Midge Decter, Gertrude Himmelfarb, William Kristol, and Norman Podhoretz). Finally, there is a longish last word entitled ``The Anatomy of a Controversy'' from Richard John Neuhaus, the Catholic priest who serves as editor in chief of First Things. Although American Tories share common concerns about bedrock matters like abortion, death (assisted suicide, euthanasia), and marriage (among homosexuals), the magazine's compilation suggests that they're a diverse and fractious lot given to spirited argument on ends versus means as well as the socioeconomic and moral or religious underpinnings of their political faith. In short, an instructive and ready reference to the debate on judicial restraint being conducted by the right wing of the domestic electorate--without benefit of coverage by the mainstream press. -- Copyright ©1997, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved.