criminal defamation, 59–61, 66–70, 73, 75, 163

and constitutionality, 63–65, 71

and division of labour, 77, 83

and purpose, 76

and sociological theory, 78

Curtis Publishing Co v. Butts, 163

Daniel, Glyn, 86, 90

defamation

and American realism, 123

and definition, 60

and First Amendment, xxviii, 60, 63, 73, 107, 110, 159, 163, 167, 170, 175, 177, 179

and public figures, 63, 110, 179

and sociological tort, xxviii, 19

and truth as defence, 61, 63–64, 66–67

democracy theory of free speech

and Alexander Meiklejohn, xxvii–xxviii, 99, 110, 115, 117, 160, 163

and political speech, 117

and reasons for, 98–99, 151, 156

and Robert Bork, 117

Democracy in America, 114

deontological perspective, 99

Devlin, Lord Patrick, 31

discourse theory, 151–152

distrust of government, 49, 98, 121

division of labour

and advanced societies, 26, 40

and decline of criminal libel, 73, 77

and freedom of expression, xxix–xxx, 11, 25, 40–42, 47, 51, 83, 97, 145–148, 154–155, 159, 184–185

division of labour (continued)

and individuation, 48, 145–146, 148, 154, 184–185

and mechanical solidarity, 25, 28, 36, 40–41, 43, 46, 51, 77, 86–87, 144, 147, 149, 154

and need for consensus, 47, 184

and organic solidarity, 25–26, 28, 36–37, 40, 42–43, 46, 50, 77, 83, 86–87, 144–146, 148, 154, 187

and pre-industrial societies, 37

and shared values, 25–26, 46, 77, 149, 154–155, 164, 184

and urbanisation, 25, 37, 68

Division of Labor in Society, 22, 30, 44

doctrinal law, 4, 10, 18–19, 103, 110, 148, 172

Durkheim, Emile

and division of labour, xxix–xxx, 16, 24–25, 28, 35–37, 39–43, 46–47, 50, 77–78, 83, 86–87, 97, 144–146, 148–149, 159, 164, 184

and conservatism, 23, 83

and criticism of Marx, xxx, 20–21, 23, 42, 78, 83–84, 89

and ethnographic studies, 36

and law, xxiv, 16, 18–23, 27–31, 34–35, 37–39, 44, 59, 64, 77–78, 84, 146, 164, 172, 184

and law as measuring device, 35

and Marxism, xxx

and religion as driving force in civilisation, 24, 90–91

Dworkin, Ronald, xxvi, 10, 32, 42, 118, 127–128

Emerson, Thomas, xxvi, 100

exclusionary rule, 121, 162