Customer Reviews

Shouting Fire: Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

A good definition of human rights is needed to establish a firm foundation for reliable construction of effective civil rights law. Alan Dershowitz reviews philosophies of human rights (divine law, natural law, legal positivism, utilitarianism, and egalitarianism) and finds them all to be either fatally flawed or inadequate. Dershowitz defines human rights as human injustice prophylactics.

These "nurtural rights" are anchored in a slowly changing collective human experience of injustice. Persistent struggle and persuasive advocates are required to define rights. The process starts with identifying injustices and seeking remedies. This bottom up approach emphasizes the view that human rights are limitations on government power. Dershowitz briefly addresses economic rights and affirmative rights but they are not the focus of this book. His United States legal training and experience is reflected in this book's focus.

For the remainder of the book Dershowitz applies these ideas to a broad range of contemporary United States legal issues. Sometimes he reaches definite legal policy conclusions, such as deferring to legislative laws regarding grandparents visitation rights. He sometimes advocates legislative remedies, such as giving organ recipient candidates who voluntered to donate their organs preference over those who did not volunter to donate. Sometimes he makes fine distinctions, as when he favors seat belt laws but opposes motorcycle helmet laws. Sometimes he delves into history.

He defends freedom of expression, the rights to believe and disbelieve and favors the eventual abolishment of capital punishment, although he makes an exception for pre-emptive targeted assassination of suicide terrorists. He argues persuasively that the lack of restrictions on undercover police scams is a serious problem and he advocates the creation of a scam warrant, similiar to search and wiretap warrants, as a remedy. He argues for a torture warrant applicable when coercion of confession can pre-empt terrorist plans and save lives. He also argues persuasively that the law currently allows psychiatrists to routinely provide "expert" testimony or advice concerning legal matters that are outside of their expertise and that this subjectivity leads to unjust detentions. He argues that judicial review should be used primarily as a check and balance in defense of minority rights against the excesses of untrammeled democratic majoritarian rule. He argues that Senaters should vote for or against Supreme Court nominees based on their own political, judicial, philosophical opinions without deferring to the president but should be deferential towards the president's executive nominees. He argues that unaccountable warrantless surveillance authorized by the attorney general is a major breach of separation of powers and results in politically motivated violations of privacy. And much more...

It was a pleasure to read new as well as previously published material from Dershowitz. He truly is an inspired thinker as well as a beautiful writer. It is not necessary to agree with all that he presents, for the delight is in the mental sitmulation of working through the basis of the arguement and the arguement itself. His writing style is so unlike his oral presentation, for where the later is often caustic and arrogant, the former is inviting, accepting and instructive. Treat yourself to thinking about some new ideas this summer. A great read!

In legal circles, Dershowitz is a legend. He has written over a dozen books about life and law, but more importantly, he is an esteemed legal scholar. His teachings at Harvard Law School are considered soem of the most insightful and valuable legal classes going.

In Shouting Fire, Dershowitz mines the concept of rights: human rights, civil rights and constitutional rights. In this post September 11th world of shrinking rights and liberties, the book could not be more appropriate.

His writing prowess is as strong and fiery as his courtroom delivery. Dershowitz is one of the strongest defenders of civil liberties in America today. The essays in Shouting Fire are enough to satisfy any legal or civic scholar, but what truly sets this book apart from its field is Dershowitz's philosophies. He outlines the origin of rights according to his years of study and his countless cases.

The philosophy of civil liberties is something I did not expect to recieve from dershowitz, but I am thrilled to have received it. Truly informative.

Alan Dershowitz addresses the changeability of the word "liberty" in a book that draws its title from "decades of government apologists analogizing free speech to shouting `Fire!' in a crowded movie theater." Rather than taking the long view of the straightforward historian, he dissects individual court rulings in a series of essays (some previously published, some written exclusively for this book), from early British law to Oliver Wendell Holmes to the present-day Supreme Court. The question of "rights" is not as cut-and-dried as one would like to believe. Some of the essays are more philosophical on the subject of "rights;" that they cannot necessarily come from God (or "Nature's God") and so therefore may not be "self-evident." One theme Dershowitz seems to return to with regularity is the paradox that it often seems to be the citizens _themselves_ who want their rights curtailed in the name of safety or security (or sometimes just convenience, as evidenced by the current furor over the entertainment industry's "voluntary television ratings" system and how many parents' advocacy groups claim not to be able to decipher it and actually want the government to exercise more direct control, not only on the public stations but even on cable and other pay networks. Alarmingly, Dershowitz predicts tacit public approval on civil rights clampdowns on groups such as Muslims -a survey which was released by Cornell University in December 2004). For every "right" asserted by a particular group, there is almost inevitable a "counter right" that is claimed. Some of Dershowitz's essays address this directly (as with grandparent right-of-visitation statutes) while others venture off into what seem like wandering tangents (as with animal rights). It is Dershowitz's contention (echoing an opinion once written by Jefferson) that truth must be understood as a _process_ and not a _product_. In other words, any charter of liberty that professes to value free speech must inherently recognize the individual's right to be _wrong_.

If you're like me, the "you can't say that" mentality, the censorous mentality that seeks comfort through control of others (which exists, like fungus and ugly shoes, in abundance), is a source of extreme irritation. Acting as an antidote to such freedom-snuffing mind-sets is Alan Dershowitz, scholar, attorney, and author. Here he's produced a nice-sized collection of his work, examining the rights we covet, ignore, talk about and fight about, that we live for and sometimes die for.

As Dershowitz says, the contest to develop and maintain rights is a perpetual one, and for the past several decades, he's done his part, and then some. Read this clear-thinking, interesting, and well-written book, and you'll be better equipped to do your share, as well.

This brain dead liberal can't see the truth through his agenda. It's the likes of this bum that caused 9/11 and other tragic US events. When Dershowitz is not springing rapists and murders from rightful justice, he is writing drivel like this book to pad his pockets. Dershowitz is out for money and has found liberal sheep will throw money in his pocket. Shame on you liberals. Shame on you Alan.

This book is a good read...for the deaf and blind.