“legislation to curb the moral degeneracyrnof our times” and the “need for measuredrnrepression.” However, he fails tornarticulate the source of such legislationrnand repression. lie discusses the blackrncommunity’s reasonable demand for politicalrnautonomy, so that “they wouldrnhave the power to deal with antisocials inrntheir own way.” But liow is this demandrnby a minority to be self-governing, howeverrnmeasured, to be squared with a territorialrndemocracy? Furthermore, whatrnare the procedural safeguards for thernconstitutional rights of blacks and whitesrnwho arc deemed to be “antisocial”? IsrnGenoycse suggesting that we scrap constitutionalrnfederalism, popular control,rnand rights, which the Constitution wasrndesigned to secure? Perhaps. He claimsrnthat a hegemonic elite will always bernwith us. The trick is to form a new coalitionrnof elites who are determined andrnable to arrest America’s decline. Only arnprogrammatic unity of this sort “holdsrnout the main hope for a radical changernin our national fortunes.” As a case inrnpoint, Genovese challenges us to “devisernproperty relations that can sustain a socialrnbond . . . strong enough to repressrnboth personal license and totalitarianrntendencies… to devise a creative systemrnthat combines social and private propertyrnownership and renders it politically responsible.”rnGood intentions, perhaps,rnwhich pave the road to a totalitarianrnAmerican hell.rnThe Southern tradition has much tornoffer: most significantly, the advice torncomply with the original nomocraticrnConstitution, not a telocratic onernthrough which elites have license tornfunction as social engineers in theirrnquest for utopia. For the 21st century,rnGenovese would be well advised to focusrndebate on opening channels of true politicalrnparticipation (which might includernrestricting the franchise), splittingrngovernmental functions within the eontextrnof federalism (a reinvigoratcd states’rnrights program), and instituting a separationrnof powers within the two levels ofrngovernment (stripping state and federalrnbureaucracies of their administrative lawrnpowers), to name a few. The Framers’rn”original intentions” were to make therngovernments—state and national—rnaccountable to the governed. The problemrnis not a lack of government, but toornmuch government, at all levels. Yes,rnthere will be winners and losers in thisrnscheme, but to have only winners is arncontradiction in terms. And if all elsernfails, we can be grateful that the Framersrnof the original Constitution were wisernenough to provide us with the mostrnnomocratic of constitutional provisions,rnthe Second Amendment. The potentialrnof a cultural war that leads men to exerciserntheir Second Amendment rights isrnwhat makes Professor Genovese’s latestrntwo books so important. He has certainlyrndiagnosed the disease plaguing thernbody politic; the question remainsrnwhether his tentative cure is worse thanrnthe disease. crnISTHEROCKFORD INSTITUTErnIN YOUR WILL?rnPerhaps a better question is:rnDo you have a current will?rnIf not, the laws of your particular state will determine what is to be done with yourrnestate upon your death. In addition, unless there is proper planning, federal estaterntaxes can claim up to 55% of your property. If you would like to discuss elements ofrnyour estate planning, please write or call:rnLEGACYrnPROGRAMrnTHE R(X]KFORD INSTITUTErn934 NORTH MAIN STREETrnROCKFORD.IL 6110?rn(815)964-5811rn34/CHRONlCLESrnrnrn