arrangement, the source of unity will notrnbe philosopher kings who rule by socialrnengineering but from a shared culturalrnframework, from what Carey’s preceptorrnWillmoore Kendall called “agreementrnabout first principles.” Owing to hisrnconcern for the role of citizenship andrnthe preconditions for popular government,rnCarey also recognizes the limitsrnof modern democracy. True self-rule, hernbelieves, requires cultural cohesion, arncautious immigration policy, and popularrnresistance to the “new morality”rnimposed by judges, public administrators,rnand the media.rnHis own prescription for defangingrnthe Supreme Court is in line with hisrnpopulist outlook. It may also be the onlyrnapproach that is both constitutionallyrnsound and efficient; namely, that a federalrnbranch, which enjoys more democraticrnlegitimacy and more authorizedrnconstitutional power, be entrustedrnwith the job of controlling the Court.rnUnfortunately, this approach is unlikelvrnto work, for at least three reasons. NornCongress which we are likely to get, includingrnthe present Republican one,rnwould ever carry out that deed of emasculationrnwhich Carey advocates. At thernpresent time, even “conservative” Republicanrnsenator and presidential contenderrnPhil Gramm is telling the publicrnthat he will do nothing to reverse Roe v.rnWade, the century’s most controversialrnand least constitutionally defensiblernSupreme Court decision. Unless Carcvrnbelieves that one can elect a truly conservativernCongress, it seems unlikelvrnthat the legislative branch will moverndecisively against usurping courts. Also,rncongressmen have behaved at least asrnoutrageously as judges in stripping thernstates of their constitutional rights. Fromrnthe New Deal’s National Recovery Actrnand labor union legislation down to thernDisabilities and Civil Rights Acts ofrn1991, Congress has moved relcntlesslvrnagainst the right of states to managerntheir internal commerce. They haverndone even more damage to our system ofrndual federalism by coirtrolling the states’rnvoting practices, most recently throughrnthe passage of the unfunded Motor VoterrnAct. Finally, the Supreme Court, asrnconceived by Hamilton, was intended tornTo order these books, (24hrs, 365 days)rnplease call (800) 962-6651 (Ext. 5200)rnfulfill the worthy role of calling attentionrnto “dangerous innovations” being practicedrnby the people’s representatives. Atrntimes, the Supreme Court has performedrnthis function: for example, asrnwhen it restrained the New Deal byrnbringing up the constitutional limitsrnon Congress’s power to regulate commerce.rnMoreover, a prudent RepublicanrnSupreme Court worked to rein in thernRadical Republican Senate after thernCivil War. While the Court may neverrnagain exhibit such tender regard for ourrnoriginal Constitution, it is not less likelyrnto do so than Congress. And there is nornjustification for believing that Congress,rnif left to its own devices, would develop arndeeper appreciation for dual federalismrnthan has been the norm since the 1930’s.rnI raise these critical points because ofrnmy general sympathy for Carey’s politics.rnUnlike other, less educated populists, herndoes fully understand the causes of ourrnpresent discontent. His essay “MajorityrnRule and the Extended Republic Theoryrnof James Madison,” though originallyrnpublished in 1976 except for the introductoryrnnote, remains as timeh- now asrnwhen it was first written. It argues thatrnMadison’s demonstration, in Federalistrn10, that the proliferation of factions in arngrowing republic is a safeguard againstrntyranny, has only diminishing value tornour generation. What Madison did notrnforesee is the “disintegration of independentrnforces” with the emergence ofrnsocial democrac) and the changed rolernof government in our own society. Suchrn”positive government” encourages culturalrnpluralism and the clash of particularrninterests to elevate itself above thernfray. It designates itself as the onl permissiblernsource of direction in a societyrnwhich it has pushed adrift. Carey criticizesrnMadison for what he neglects to sayrnin Federalist 10, that there must bernshared moral truths, definable nationalrninterests, and a common good, for Americanrnsocietv to work.rnIn these sage comments on Madison,rnCarey also reveals the common problemrnof all populist conservatives. Appeals tornthe popular will are both necessary andrnconstitutionally proper: necessary tornchallenge the undemocratic power ofrnthe political class and proper inasmuchrnas these appeals do have a constitutionalrnbasis. More problematic is whetherrnthere is still a recognizable “people,” asrnopposed to globalized consumers and anrnall-pervasive political class. If such arn”people” does not exist, that is, if there isrnno possibility for a self-defined and enduringrnpolitical community, all the talkrnabout “returning power” is so muchrnempty breath. Carey knows this, andrnsuggests it repeatedly. But he also stakesrnhis polities on a glimmering hope, thatrnthe slumbering popular giant may yetrnawaken. Without a better choice, I forrnone am willing to follow his lead.rnPaul Gottfried is a professor of humanitiesrnat Klizahethtown College in Pennsylvaniarnand author of The ConservativernMovement, revised edition.rnRole Modelsrnand Poetryrnby E. Christian KopffrnThe Epic of Gilgameshrnby Danny P. JacksonrnChicago: Bolchazv-Carducci;rn101 pp., $1x00rnSocieties, as much as individuals,rnneed role models. For good and forrnill, our cultural tradition has been influencedrnby the figures of Achilles andrnOdysseus, placed at the center of ourrnmoral imagination by Homer almostrnthree millennia ago. The shaping powerrnof the tradition is clearest where therernhas been no direct influence, as whenrnMachiavelli talks of “the Lion and thernFox” or when popular art divides itsrnheroes into the quiet strongman and thernwise-cracking li-ickster. One reason forrnthe immense staying power of actionrnmovies over the last decades is their unwaveringrnloyalty to the mythologicalrnsymbols that still rule our imagination.rn”1 here were many brac men beforernAgamemnon,” the poet I loracc remindedrnus, and there were heroes beforernAchilles and Odysseus. I’hese were symbolsrnof courage and strength and survivalrnthat shaped the imagination of thernhigh cultures of the Near East, wherernmankind first developed urban life, irrigation,rnpottery wheels, smelting, bureaucracy,rnand many other inventions, largernand small, that still structure the routinernof our dailv lives. Noah Kramer wroternabout some of these inventions in hisrnHistory Begins in Sumer. While in thern32/CHRONICLESrnrnrn