The End of Democracy?: The Celebrated First Things Debate, With Arguments Pro and Con and " the Anatomy of a Controversy" (Hardcover)

~ Mitchell S. Muncy (Author, Editor), Richard John Neuhaus (Editor)

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

For people who follow such matters, the intellectual firefight over a 1996 symposium appearing in the conservative monthly journal First Things provided an endless stream of controversy and, perhaps, amusement. The participants--among them Robert Bork and Charles Colson--offered their views on what conservatives commonly call "judicial imperialism." Put another way, they asked whether the judicial branch of government has imperiled representative democracy by subsuming legislative authority. The writers came dangerously close to calling the U.S. government illegitimate--so close, in fact, that several of their critics accused them of fomenting revolution. The End of Democracy? collects the original symposium, all of the important responses to it--including contributions appearing in a variety of journals and by authors such as William J. Bennett, Gertrude Himmelfarb, and William Kristol--and an epilogue by First Things editor Richard John Neuhaus. Wannabe political theorists will devour this book, as will anyone who enjoys internecine warfare on the right. --This text refers to the Paperback edition.

From Kirkus Reviews

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.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 288 pages
• Publisher: Spence Publishing Company (September 15, 1997)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1890626031
• ISBN-13: 978-1890626037
• Product Dimensions: 8.8 x 5.9 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,290,805 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

1 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Real concern about the courts is justified, March 15, 2007

By	Mark Mcneil (Albuquerque, NM) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This review is from: The End of Democracy?: The Celebrated First Things Debate With Arguments Pro and Con and "the Anatomy of a Controversy" (Paperback)

We have a problem, as the judiciary is not properly checked. Very good discussions on the problem.

1 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Typical Court-Bashing from Self-Styled Constitutional Scholars, October 16, 2008

By	Nathaniel R. Stone "Suicide Survivor" (Austin, TX) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Frankly, there's nothing much here that Colson, Bork, Dobson, Arkes, and the like haven't said before or wouldn't be happy to tell you again. More interesting (although too disjointed to be of much value) are the responses that this book includes from those who were not active participants in the 1996 First Things Symposium that this book encompasses.

If you've read one screed suggesting that the Supreme Court's opinions in Casey and Romer authorize Christians to rebel against the government, then you've read them all. Dobson and Colson (one a non-lawyer, the other disbarred) are particularly obnoxious in this context, as they are both out of their depth and eager to replace our nation's history and historic Christian doctrine with a distinctly un-edifying polemic against the courts.