In this seminal work in the fields of political history and political theory; Jean Bethke Elshtain shows how the powerful notion of sovereignty—complete independence and self-government—has irrevocably sculpted contemporary notions of God; state and self. Elshtain examines the conceptual underpinnings of sovereignty; considering the early modern ideas of God that formed the basis for the modern paradigm of the sovereign state; and making the unprecedented claim that political theories of state sovereignty fuel contemporary understandings of sovereignty of the self—arguing; in other words; that when we understand why we have the politics we have; we will understand what makes humans themselves tick. The implications of Elshtain's monumental thesis go as far as to suggest that self-sovereignty; which understands the self to be an independent; self-sufficient entity; undermines the bedrock on which human communities are fundamentally sustained. In thoughtful; provocative prose; Elshtain explores the connections between our political and ethical convictions; changing forever the way we understand the notion of sovereignty.
#329871 in Books 2010-01-05 2010-01-05Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 8.50 x .60 x 5.50l; .51 #File Name: 046501819X240 pages
Review
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful. A Succinct; Entertaining History of Free Speech in the United StatesBy Robert BoltonAnthony Lewis cut his teeth writing at the New York Times and spent a significant portion of his career there. In this slim book; he traces the history of free speech from the Founding era through the post-9/11 debates about what is appropriate boundary between free expression and national security; and oftentimes ends up discussing cases he had firsthand knowledge of.As Lewis points out; in the first decade following the American Revolution and the establishment of the Constitution; freedom of speech was not a significant issue. Most Americans were bound together; despite often extreme philosophical differences over governmental philosophy; and there were few attempts to oppress those on the opposing side. After John Adams succeeded George Washington to the presidency; however; the partisan chasm widened and harsh feelings grew. Allegedly fearing the tremors of the French Revolution and its possibility for chaos here (but really angered at Jefferson and his Democratic-Republican supporters); the Federalists in Congress passed the Alien Sedition Acts of 1798 that criminalizes certain types of libelous speech by public figures; and the Adams administration signed off on them. Although relatively small by modern standards; dozens of Jeffersonians were arrested; tried; convicted; and then fined and/or thrown in jail. These actions produced such an uproar that they were soon rendered feckless by the American public; which swept Adams and the Federalists from power. Once Jefferson was inaugurated as president; he pardoned all of those prosecuted under the acts and remitted their fines. As Lewis notes; although the Supreme Court of the United States never ruled on the laws' constitutionality; today they would almost certainly be struck down as a violation of the First Amendment.In the next section; Lewis covers the persecutions during; and subsequent to; World War One. Unfortunately; this jump forward in time is perhaps my biggest criticism of the book. Although Lewis does give a two-page summary that says there was no federal law restricting speech during this time; he certainly was aware that there were prosecutions during that time for sedition; particularly during the Civil War. Even if he had given a brief summary of whether or not it was the focus of much academic study or discussion in state courts that thereby influenced federal law later on would have been welcomed. However; this is a minor flaw in my opinion. The central figure of the World War One-era free speech trials is Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes; Jr. A thrice-wounded hero of the Civil War; Holmes more than most could speak of what it took to defend or wreck a society; so when he reversed his prior stance of upholding the convictions of communists and labor organizers; it was a strong indication that federal government had gone too far. Lewis also discusses the origins of that famous phrase of law; "fire in a crowded theatre;" which I particularly enjoyed. He does offer some criticisms of Holmes; however; noting that certain types of speech may have a cumulative effect that ultimately leads to criminal activity; rather than simply restricting prosecution to immediately approaching events as Holmes advocated.The next chapters cover the Red Scares of McCarthyism; attempts at suppressing the main speakers of the Civil Rights Movement; the protests over the Vietnam War; and some major cases of the modern era. Lewis notes that recently obscenity has been almost totally removed as a justification for speech restrictions; but I wish he had discussed more what caused society and the Court to change its mind on the issue; and also how governments have utilized new tools; such as zoning laws; to achieve the same effects. In his final sections; Lewis discusses where the future of free speech lies and this is perhaps where I have my strongest disagreements with him. In one part; he discusses the path of Europe and its embrace of laws criminalizing hate speech. While I understand that speech can produce serious consequences; I think it is a dangerous idea to throw someone in jail for what they say about a particular religious; ethnic; sexual; or national group; no matter how crude the language. He also discusses issues of national security and the Bush administration (and now Obama administration)'s efforts to combat terrorist activity. I share his concern that we are approaching a dangerous line in what types of activity we are forbidding and what is a justifiable cause for intruding into someone's privacy; but nonetheless I suspect we will not have an accurate idea of what really went on during the War on Terror for another fifty years.On the whole; I found this to be a great book for a layman. Lewis does not go into the more abstract parts of legal theory justifying free speech and unfortunately does not deeply detail the history of free speech leading up to the American Revolution. He does; however; provide the most important American cases on the subject and occasionally offers his own opinions (which I respect; if sometimes disagree with) without be pedantic. A great way to pass a weekend.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Liberty of Expression and DemocracyBy MarcusLiberty of thought and liberty of expression are essential in modern democracies. The path to the implementation of the first amendment and the meanings it assumes in American Law are explained in this book. The author refers U.S. Supreme Court decisions to elaborate in the matter; reflecting about liberty of speech; liberty of expression and freedom of the press. The understanding of this constitutional right; so argues Anthony Lewis; evolves through time; broadening it's scope. Specially attention is gave to the opinions of Justice Oliver W. Holmes; to whom the author attributed a major contribution to the realization of the first amendment. This is a readable book that deals with an important question in modern societies.1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. covers a multitude of fascinating First Amendment subjectsBy lindapanzoLewis; the author of the terrific Gideon's Trumpet; among other legal books; presents an overview of issues; cases; and trends involving the First Amendment. When I was in school; I always thought that cases involving the First Amendment were difficult; often with more than one party having a compelling argument; but they had interesting facts.This book is geared to the non-attorney and is not at all technical. It gets into a lot of interesting First Amendment subjects. Not just freedom of speech; freedom of the press; or freedom of association; but also such topics as obscenity (including the infamous legal line "I know it when I see it"); censorship; hate speech; flag burning; and campaign financing limits.It's interesting for Lewis to suggest why the Court might've changed its mind; as it sometimes does.Unfortunately; the book is from 2007 because I would have loved to have read Lewis' take on more recent First Amendment cases; such as the Citizens United case (applying the First Amendment to corporations).Overall; though; I would highly recommend this book.
