New Republic, before that a speechnwriter for Walter Mondale during then1980 campaign, and before that a psychiatrist,nKrauthammer considers himselfnan old-style Democrat, the kindnthat told Americans to “ask not whatnyour country can do for you” instead ofn”What can I promise to you today?” Innshort, Krauthammer is neither a liberalnnor a conservative but a kind of reactionarynwhose essays contain a mixturenof hopefulness for the future and piningnfor the days when America was pledgednto “bear any burden” in defense ofnfreedom and when poverty seemed asncapable of eradication as smallpox.nYet Krauthammer apparently survivednthe collapse of Camelot with hisnwit and sense of humor intact. In anpiece entitled “Stretch Marx” he recommendsn]ane Fonda’s Workout Booknfor those who missed out on limitedneditions of Pumping Iron With Engehnor In Sneakers: Michael HarringtonnSpeaks Out. Similarly, he puncturesnthe pompous use of “Marxists” as aneuphemism for those whom we oncencalled communists: “One imagines then[Salvadoran] guerrillas sitting aroundnthe campfire in their mountain redoubtnreading Das Kapital.” Neither comparablenworth, the nuclear freeze, then”New Ideas” fad, nor the Sandinistaphilesncommand much more reverencenin his essays.nHumor is ingratiating, and no doubtnKrauthammer, like The New Republic,nwants to appeal to as broad a spectrumnof readers as possible. He bashes thenright less frequently than does GeorgenWill and often tries to sympathize withnthe intentions of the left, even thoughnthe left bears the brunt of his criticismsnfar more often. Usually Krauthammerndefends his centrist position successfullyn—but not always. His essay on abortionnrefutes both Geraldine Ferraro’s andnMario Cuomo’s public stands on abortionnby showing that at the very leastndoctrinal consistency requires an earnestneffort to persuade others to opposenthe evil of abortion. But then Krauthammernmuddles the issue by invokingnJohn Courtney Murray’s theory of thencivil peace: “So many [Americans]nbelieve — however wrongly—[abortion]nto be a right, that even if onencould muster a majority to ban abortion,nthat would constitute a grave violationnof the civil peace, which bothnsupports and is itself supported by religiousnpluralism.” Who can accept thenargument that abortion is murder butnwe must allow it anyway? More disturbing,nKrauthammer never explains whatnmoral calculus makes the mass exterminationnof human beings less horriblenthan “disturbing the civil peace.”nBut with few other exceptions, Krauthammer’snarguments do appeal to bothnsides on the issues he covers. In hisnheart, Krauthammer wants to revive thenold center of the Democratic Party, ancombination of welfare-state compassionnand cold-war willingness to bearnthe burden of being the leader andnguardian of the free world. But (as henadmits), that part of the party died thensame day as Senator Henry Jackson,nNor, to judge by the Democratic frontrunnersnin the 1988 race, is there hopenfor its immediate resurrection. Perhapsnit is some consolation that in a partynwithout credible leadership, at least onenwriter remains to testify of a betrayednheritage, ccnMichael Fumento is the foundingneditor of lUini Review at thenUniversity of Illinois innChampaign-Urbana.nTrouble innParadisenAt the Dawn of Tyranny: The Originsnof Individualism, Pohtical Oppression,nand the State by Eli Sagan,nNew York: Alfred A. Knopf.nThe origin and nature of the state hasnbeen at the heart of political theorynfrom the time of Plato and Aristotle.nWhile speculations about man’s primalninnocence in a state of nature cannot bentaken seriously as science, they continuento influence political propaganda.nLiberal philosophers like Rawls andnNozick continue to write about man’snnatural equality or our natural rights asnif they could actually see them lying onnthe dewy earth of Eden, waiting to benpicked up by our “general mother” (andnfather). And some Marxists of morenthan ordinary credulity still write aboutnthe origin of private property and thenoppressive state in language that wouldnhave warmed the heart of FriedrichnEngels. Despite certain differences, ElinSagan clearly fits the Engels mold.nIn Sagan’s view, the state is by itsnvery nature oppressive. In what purportsnto be a study in comparativenethnology, he surveys the rise of thenstate among the Baganda of Africa andnon the islands of Tonga, Tahiti, and thenHawaiian chain. His central thesis, derivednfrom lucid books of Elman Service,nis unimpeachable: the state representsna break from the most primitivenlevel of social organization in whichnLh^rtyBvssnII..”,””‘”‘” “•nORIGINS OF THE COMMON LAWnBy Arthur R. Hoguennnirst published in 1966, Origins ofnFthe Common Law looks at thenmedieval roots of our legal systemnduring the early formative period ofnthe common law. Between 1154 andn1307, common law experienced anspectacular growth as a legal systemnenforced in the English Royal Courts.nIn the form of writs, judicial decisions,ntreatises, royal ordinances, and parliamentarynstatutes, the common law,nemerged into explicit written form andnformal procedure.nHogue concludes, “The rule of law,nthe development of law by means ofnjudicial precedents, the use of the jurynto determine the material facts of ancase, and the definition of numerousncauses of action—these form thenprincipal and valuable legacy of thenmedieval law to the modern law.”nNot a technical legal treatise, thisnwork should be of interest to the generalnreader and the specialist alike.nHardcover $10.00nISBN 0-86597-053-XnPaperback $4.50nISBN 0-86597-054-8nPrepayment is required on all orders not fornresale. We pay book rate postage on prepaidnorders. Please allow 4 to 6 weeks for delivery.nAll orders from outside the United Statesnmust be prepaid in U.S. dollars. To order, ornfor a copy of our catalogue, write:nLibertyPresi/LibertyCtosicsn7440 North Shadeland, Dept. S106nIndianapolis, IN 46250nMAY 1986/37n