by Steven Greenhut, RodeNovember 29, 2024.
Extract:
The progressive movement is best known for its meddling in everything and its attempts to ban and persuade us. However, instead of clinging to the idea of freedom, the MAGA movement has decided to repeat its enemies, rally people around their cultural tribe and engage in all the fun of regulating, mocking and hectoring the American people.
The result is a never-ending grudge match, with whichever side wins using the government to stick it on the other side. There are exceptions, like Trump’s promise to cut federal agencies (something we’ve heard before but never amounted to anything), but overall this is a troubling development.
Comment from DRH: Count me out of the grudge match. I continue to talk to both sides and remain friendly (as if there were only two sides), if they are willing to talk.
by Véronique de Rugy, RodeNovember 29, 2024.
Extract:
Over the past decades, Congress has transformed its constitutional “money power” from an instrument of responsible governance to an instrument of fiscal destructiveness. The most visible sign is a national debt that has just crossed the $36 trillion threshold, just three months after reaching $35 trillion. This is crazy. The budget deficit is $1.9 trillion this year and will reach $2.8 trillion in ten years. Instead of exercising careful budgeting and oversight, Congress repeatedly relies on massive omnibus spending bills, often passed in haste without proper evaluation.
DRH note:
I especially liked Vero’s opening passage:
America’s greatness lies not in perfection, but in its relentless pursuit of it. For nearly 250 years, this nation has striven to fully realize the revolutionary ideals set forth in its founding documents. Although we often fall short, our capacity for self-reflection and innovation inspires hope and drives improvement.
Why? Two words. Words I often say don’t belong in a discussion about government, but I think they belong here: the words “we” and “our.” Veronique, who moved here from France, clearly considers herself American. I, who moved here from Canada, consider myself an American. So the ‘we’ and ‘our’ have special meaning for me.
By Matt Zwolinski, RodeJanuary 2025.
The core idea of the book, to put a sophisticated argument rather crudely, is that the philosophers have confused us all. Philosophers, Hasnas argues, tend to place far too much value on the construction of logically consistent systems of thought, moving from premise to conclusion in a neat, orderly sequence. Logic sets the standard, and if the world fails to meet that standard, then that’s the world’s problem, not ours.
For Hasnas, on the other hand, thinking about politics does not begin with a moral theory, but with the actual conflicts that people face as they tackle the difficult task of living together in a community. Justice is not something first discerned by philosophical reason and then applied (by lesser minds) to settle particular disputes. Justice emerges from these disputes as an emergent phenomenon, often in ways not anticipated or intended by the people directly involved.
The test of a theory of justice, in this approach, is not its logical consistency or completeness. To ask this of justice is to ask too much – and more than is necessary. We don’t need a watertight theory; we simply need rules that end a dispute and allow people to live together in peace.
by Geoffrey Miller, The nerveNovember 20, 2024.
Extract:
Take China for example. The Western stereotype is that China is the land of totalitarian mind control, so its universities must be wastelands of intellectual conformity compared to American universities, right? In my experience the opposite is true.
I usually teach psychology at a large American state university. But during the height of the Covid pandemic (2021-2022), I ended up teaching three online classes at the Chinese University of Hong Kong – Shenzhen (CUHK-SZ). This is a new, selective, English-language university in Shenzhen, a prosperous city of 18 million that became the technology center of China.
I found a remarkable level of academic freedom and tolerance.
It is true that some political taboos exist in Chinese universities. Each department has a political official from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) who monitors course content for overt criticism of the CCP or President Xi Jinping, or for promoting unacceptable positions on Tibet, Taiwan, or the Tiananmen square. Everyone knows what those specific taboos are and what boundaries we should not cross.
But beyond that, I found a remarkable level of academic freedom and tolerance. I really tried to push the boundaries, to see how the Chinese students and administrators would react. In addition to my online lectures, we had lively discussion forums every week where students argued their positions, criticized the lectures, assigned readings, debated with each other and shared links to articles, videos, memes and news items.
DRH comment: I don’t assume so, but I do wonder if Professor Miller would have the same degree of academic freedom if he were physically teaching in China.