by Steven Greenhut, Reason, November 29, 2024.
Excerpt:
The progressive movement is best known for meddling in everything and trying to ban and cajole us. Instead of sticking with the idea of freedom, however, the MAGA movement has decided to echo its enemies, rally people around their cultural tribe and join in all the fun of regulating, mocking, and hectoring the American people.
The result is a never-ending grudge match, with whatever side is victorious using the government to stick it to the other side. There are exceptions, such as Trump’s promise to slash federal agencies (something we’ve heard many times before but never amounts to anything), but overall this is a disturbing development.
DRH comment: Count me out of the grudge match. I continue to talk to, and be friendly with, both sides (as if there are only 2 sides), if they’re willing to talk.
by Veronique de Rugy, Reason, November 29, 2024.
Excerpt:
For the past few decades, Congress has transformed its constitutional “power of the purse” from a tool of responsible governance into an instrument of fiscal destructiveness. The most visible sign is a national debt that just crossed the $36 trillion threshold, barely three months after reaching $35 trillion. This is nuts. This year’s budget deficit is $1.9 trillion and will be $2.8 trillion in 10 years. Instead of practicing careful budgeting and oversight, Congress repeatedly relies on massive omnibus spending bills, often passed in haste without proper review.
DRH note:
I particularly liked Vero’s opening passage:
America’s greatness lies not in perfection but in her relentless pursuit of it. For nearly 250 years, this nation has strived to fully realize the revolutionary ideals laid out in its founding documents. While we have often fallen short, our capacity for self-reflection and renewal inspires hope and spurs improvement.
Why? Two words. Words that I often say don’t belong in a discussion of government but I think belong here: the words “we” and “our.” Veronique, who moved here from France, clearly thinks of herself as an American. I, who moved here from Canada, think of myself as an American. So the “we” and “our” have special meaning for me.
By Matt Zwolinski, Reason, January 2025.
The book’s core idea, to put a sophisticated argument rather crudely, is that the philosophers have screwed us all up. Philosophers, Hasnas argues, tend to put far too much stock in the construction of logically consistent systems of thought, proceeding from premise to conclusion in a neat, orderly sequence. Logic sets the standard, and if the world fails to live up to that standard, well, that’s the world’s problem, not ours.
For Hasnas, by contrast, thinking about politics begins not with a moral theory but with the actual conflicts people face when they go about the difficult business of living in a community together. Justice is not something first discerned by philosophical reason and then applied (by lesser minds) to settle particular disputes. Justice develops out of those disputes as an emergent phenomenon, often in ways that are neither foreseen nor intended by the people directly involved.
The test of a theory of justice, in this approach, is not logical consistency or completeness. To ask this of justice is to ask too much—and to ask more than is required. We do not need an airtight theory; we simply need rules that bring a dispute to an end and allow people to get on living together in peace.
by Geoffrey Miller, The Nerve, November 20, 2024.
Excerpt:
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.
Usually I 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 for Chinese University of Hong Kong – Shenzhen (CUHK-SZ). This is a new, selective, English-language university in Shenzhen, a prosperous little town of 18 million people that became the tech center of China.
I encountered a remarkable level of academic freedom and tolerance.
True, there are some political taboos in Chinese universities. Each department has a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) political officer monitoring course content for any overt criticism of the CCP or President Xi Jinping, or for promoting unacceptable views about Tibet, Taiwan, or Tiananmen Square. Everybody knows what those specific taboos are and the few lines not to cross.
But beyond that, I encountered a remarkable level of academic freedom and tolerance. I really tried to push the limits, to see how the Chinese students and administrators would respond. Apart from my online lectures, we had lively discussion forums every week where students advocated for their views, critiqued the lectures and assigned readings, debated each other, and shared links to articles, videos, memes, and news items.
DRH comment: I don’t presume, but I do wonder if Professor Miller would have the same degree of academic freedom if he were physically teaching in China.
