Introduction: Jewish Conditions,Theories of Nationalism

Thinkers with Jewish backgrounds, whether ascribed, embraced or even denied, created the central grammar used in modern attempts to understand nationalism. This introduction first describes the central dilemma faced by those with Jewish conditions when confronted by the rise of ethnonationalism. The responses to the dilemma were varied, so the bulk of this introduction describes some of the most important intellectual boundaries—doing so in such a manner as to introduce the specialist studies that then follow.     

Vigilant Jewish fundamentalism: From the JDL to Kach (or ‘Shalom Jews,Shalom Dogs')

The essay aims to explain the emergence of Kahanism in Israel and why Israeli democracy saw it necessary to defend itself against Kahane's quasi‐fascist ideas and to curtail his legitimacy. The author reflects on the Kahanist phenomenon, its ideology and political programme which brought Rabbi Kahane to the Knesset. The reading of Kach's racist proposals explains why extraordinary measures were taken against Kahane by the political system as well as by the media and the educational system.     

Reflections on Habermas on Democracy

Jürgen Habermas is a radical democrat. The source of that self-designation is that his conception of democracy—what he calls “discursive democracy”—is founded on the ideal of “a self-organizing community of free and equal citizens,” coordinating their collective affairs through their common reason. The author discusses three large challenges to this radical-democratic ideal of collective self-regulation: 1) What is the role of private autonomy in a radical-democratic view? 2) What role does reason play in collective self-regulation? 3) What relevance might a radical-democratic outlook have for contemporary democracies? The author addresses these questions by considering Habermas' answers, and then presenting alternative responses to them. The alternatives are also radical-democratic in inspiration, but they draw on a richer set of normative-political ideas than Habermas wants to rely on, and are more ambitious in their hopes for democratic practice.     

Science, politics, and the regulation of dietary supplements: it's time to repeal DSHEA

Since the turn of the century, resourceful entrepreneurs have advertised a wide variety of purportedly simple and painless cures for cancer, including liniments of turpentine, mustard, oil, eggs, and ammonia; peat moss; arrangements of colored floodlamps; pastes made from glycerine and limburger cheese . . . [T]his historical experience does suggest why Congress could reasonably have determined to protect the terminally ill, no less than other patients, from the vast range of self-styled panaceas that inventive minds can devise. [Individuals have] the right to be treated by a health care practitioner with any medical treatment (including a treatment that is not approved, certified, or licensed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services) that such individual desires or the legal representative of such individual desires. The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the Government, the right to be left alone--the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.     

Transnational and International Exploitation

There are four types of exploitation in the international arena: exploitation between states; exploitation within state A, the beneficiaries of which are mainly people in state B; exploitation of individuals from one country by another state in which they work; exploitation of individuals from one country by individuals in another state, in which they work. The Marxian and the liberal theories of exploitation are inadequate to discuss these cases. After exploring the difficulties of applying these theories to international and transnational exploitation, it is suggested that the theories could be reconstructed: exploitation is when the exploiter benefits from treating the exploitee not as equal in circumstances of bargaining. It is finally shown how this interpretation helps us in the discussion of all four types of international and transnational exploitation.     

PRESIDENTIAL POLICY PREFERENCES AND SUPREME COURT APPOINTMENT SUCCESS

Presidential appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court are major constitutional events. Few studies assess whether this political process benefits presidents with appointment opportunities. This article estimates the policy success of presidents since Eisenhower in appointing favorable justices on the racial equality issues. Previous research uses the president's party affiliation as an indirect measure of presidential preferences. This research examines the president's policy stance more directly by using presidential public statements on racial equality issues. An issue specific measure of presidential preferences shows that presidents have been more successful in appointing like-minded justices than reliance on presidential party would suggest. Regression estimates of the justices aggregate voting record on racial equality cases are robust even in light of other controls. The implications for democratic theory and future research are discussed.     

Presidents,Supreme Court justices,and racial equality cases: 1954–1984

This research assesses the policy success of presidents since Eisenhower in their appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court in racial equality cases from 1954–1984. The research examines presidential preferences in a much more detailed and sensitive manner than previous research. While past research has used presidential party as a measure of the policy preferences of presidents, we examine policy preferences in a very direct manner. Specifically, the preferences of presidents on racial equality issues are gauged by their public policy statements. These statements serve to tap the degree of liberalness, the level of attention, and the level of concern with judicial actions in racial equality matters. The results demonstrate that presidents have been much more successful in appointing like-minded justices than is suggested by the existing literature. In addition, it is shown that prior judicial experience is not related to presidential success. This is discussed in terms of the perennial debate over the political control of the Supreme Court and the congruence of Court policy making with majoritarian values.