Terror in Japan

Observers of early twenty-first-century Japan commonly note economic, political, and social crisis, on the one hand, and pessimism, lethargy, or helplessness about the possibility of reform, on the other. Yet Japan's civil society was idealistic and energetic in the early postwar decades. What happened? The reform movement that captured much of the vitality of the early postwar decades was either foreclosed, as many were co-opted in the “all-for-growth” economism, consumerism, and the corporation, or crushed in successive waves of repression of dissidence as the cold war order took shape. Political parties sacrificed broad vision and ideals to narrow-interest articulation. While the mass base of the reform movement was discouraged, demoralized, and depoliticized, one minority in the late 1960s turned to violent revolution and another in the late 1980s turned inward to seek spiritual satisfaction. Both paths led to violence. This article looks at the course of the student movement between the late 1940s and the late 1970s, with particular reference to the Japan Red Army, and at the new religious movement Aum Supreme Truth in the 1980s and 1990s. Both adopted “terrorist” tactics, by almost any understanding of that term. However, they were children of their times, reflecting the same deep social, political, and moral problems that Japan as a whole continues to face in the early twenty-first century.     

'Inevitable and Unacceptable?' Methodological Rawlsianism in Anglo-American Political Philosophy

This article attempts two parallel tasks. First, it gives a sympathetic explication of the implicit working methodology ('Methodological Rawlsianism') of mainstream contemporary political theory in the English-speaking world. And second, principally in footnotes, it surveys the recent literature on justification to see what light these debates cast on the tenets of this methodology. It is worth examining methodological presuppositions because these can have a profound influence on substantive theories: many of the differences between philosophical traditions can be traced to their methodologies. My aim is to expose the central features of methodological Rawlsianism in order to challenge critics of this tradition to explain exactly where and why they depart from the method. While I do not defend it at length, I do suggest that methodological Rawlsianism is inevitable insofar as it is basically a form of common sense. This fact should probably lower expectations about the amount of progress consistent methodological Rawlsians are likely to make in grounding comprehensive normative political theories.     

Traditional Organized Crime in Chicago

For 78 years the Chicago Outfit or Mob has been the focus of the Chicago Crime Commission's1 efforts to combat organized crime. Indeed, the perception of organized crime in Chicago, as well as much of the city's reputation, stems from the notorious, and often inappropriately glamorized, activities of the Outfit from Al Capone in the 1930s through John DiFronzo in the 1990s. While the Outfit is most certainly still alive, much of the organized criminal activity presently targeting Chicago and its suburbs is perpetrated by new and emerging criminal enterprises. These groups range from local burglary rings to highly sophisticated international criminal organizations headquartered in Asia, Eastern Europe, Africa and South America, involved in corporate kidnapping and extortion, murder-for-hire, high-tech crime and drug trafficking. All require public attention and relentless law enforcement scrutiny. This paper deals with traditional organized crime in Chicago. Emerging Organized Crime will be dealt with in a forthcoming paper.     

Analyzing Multiple-Item Measures of Crime and Deviance II: Tobit Regression Analysis of Transformed Scores

The purpose of this article is to inform criminological researchers about tobit regression, an alternative regression model that deserves more attention in this field. Tobit regression is intended for continuous data that are censored, or bounded at a limiting value. The tobit model may be a particularly good match to measures of self-reported offending, provided they have been transformed to reduce skewness. We present empirical analyses that evaluate the match of self-report measures to the assumptions of ordinary least square (OLS) and tobit regression models and that assess the consequences of any violations of assumptions. The analyses use a fourteen-item, self-report measure of delinquency from the Monitoring the Future study, a national survey of high school seniors. These analyses provide clear evidence that (1) transformations to reduce skewness improve the match of OLS to the data but still leave considerable discrepancies, and (2) the tobit model is well suited to the transformed measure. We conclude by assessing the purposes for which tobit offers greater and smaller advantages over OLS regression.     

Special Masters in the Pretrial Development of Big Cases: Potential and Problems

This article explores the advantages and disadvantages of referring discovery matters in complex cases to special masters. In the first section Brazil explains how the results of his earlier research into the discovery system exposed problems that the appointment of masters might help solve. He then describes the kinds of pretrial tasks and roles federal courts have assigned to special masters and the ways that using a master can expedite and rationalize the case development process. In the second half of the article, the author assesses the major objections to delegating judicial responsibilities to masters and the problems that frequent appointments might cause. Along the way, Brazil offers practical suggestions to judges about how to avoid potential difficulties and how to maximize the effectiveness of this increasingly popular procedure.     

Referring Discovery Tasks to Special Masters: Is Rule 53 a Source of Authority and Restrictions?

The author concludes that federal judges who want to appoint special masters to perform duties related to civil discovery may not look to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for authority to do so. By examining the historical backdrop against which the original rules were written, as well as the minutes of the proceedings of the first Advisory Committee, Brazil demonstrates that neither Rule 53 nor any other rule was designed to grant federal trial courts power to assign pretrial discovery tasks to special masters. In fact, the evidence the author marshalls shows that the original Advisory Committee explicitly rejected the idea that the Federal Rules should authorize even a limited role for special masters in connection with discovery depositions.
Finding no authority for such appointments in the Federal Rules, the author turns to the judiciary's "inherent power." Drawing principles from the seminal Supreme Court opinion in this area, Brazil infers that in some circumstances the courts' inherent authority is a sufficient premise for delegating discovery tasks to special masters. Noting that the reported cases contain no clear guidelines about when or how federal judges should use this authority in making pretrial appointments, Brazil concludes by calling for a new federal rule covering this important subject.