Free Thoughts

Russell Muirhead joins us to discuss the difference between conspiracism and conspiracy theory and how it has influence modern political discussions. Classic conspiracy theory insists that things are not what they seem and gathers evidence—especially facts ominously withheld by official sources—to tease out secret machinations. The new conspiracism is different. There is no demand for evidence, no dots revealed to form a pattern, no close examination of shadowy plotters. Dispensing with the burden of explanation, the new conspiracism imposes its own reality through repetition (exemplified by the Trump catchphrase “a lot of people are saying”) and bare assertion (“rigged!”).What makes a theory a conspiracy theory? What is ‘conspiracism’? What is the difference between gossip and news? What are the foundations of society and how are they fragile? Do people care about facts?Further Reading:A Lot of People Are Saying, written by Russell Muirhead and Nancy L. RosenblumThe Promise of Party in a Polarized Age, writt

Tyler Cowen joins us to discuss his new book; Big Business: A Love Letter to an American Anti-Hero. Throughout the conversation, Trevor and Aaron ask Tyler about crony capitalism, how Trump engages with big businesses, and the role of CEO’s. Cowen believes that big businesses are actually given a pretty unfair reputation as they create much more value than they are given credit for.Why is big business coming under heavier fire recently? How big is “big business”? Do CEO’s cheat more or less than others? Do you people like going to work and should they? How should big businesses interact with the federal government? How big is the finance world and is it too big? Why is a healthy financial sector important? If big business is good, why is it widely unliked?Further Reading:Big Business: A Love Letter to an American Anti-Hero, written by Tyler CowenConscious CapitalismBig Business Isn’t Big Politics, written by Tyler CowenMarginal RevolutionRelated Content:Why We’re Too Complacent, Free Thoughts PodcastHow Taxat

Eric Mack joins our show again to talk about common objections to libertarianism by dissecting John Rawls view of libertarianism. Many people have reservations about libertarianism because they see it as lacking compassion, but in the long-run people who are on the lowest rung of society do better in a free market system. Some others argue that there isn’t enough substance to libertarianism to live your life in that way, but Eric Mack consistently challenges that point of view throughout the episode. What are the objections to libertarianism? Why was John Rawls not a libertarian? What is the “difference principle”? Does free market economics raise the standard of living? How would libertarians help the ‘worst-off’? Are libertarians lacking compassion? What is a just society?Further Reading:Libertarianism (Key Concepts in Political Theory), written by Eric MackAnarchy, State, and Utopia, by Robert NozickRelated Content:Arguments for Liberty, edited by Aaron Ross Powell and Grant BabcockA Rawlsian Case for Libe

Now that Endgame has been released, we invited Jacob T. Levy to discuss the series as a whole. We talk about how it is possible to analyze the movies through a political lens, but it is important to remember that the message of many of these movies is metaphorical.Is Tony Stark a war monger? What does the Avengers series say about coercion and the abuse of power? What does society look like under the conditions of radical human ability? How should society function with extreme inequalities? Do super hero movies typically have a clean energy story? How do super heroes relate to liability insurance?Further Reading:Movie Review: Avengers: Endgame, written by Kurt LoderReview: What “Avengers: Endgame” Could Have Been, written by Richard BrodyThe Politics of “Avengers: Endgame”: Thanos, Iron Man, and the Malthusian extreme, written by Matthew RozsaRelated Content:10 Tips to Facilitate Collective Action from Elinor and Vincent Ostrom, written by Jayme LemkeAnarchism Versus Limited Government Abolitionism, written b

Has the United States been a force for liberty around the world? Should it be? And if so, how? To answer these questions, Christopher A. Preble, in his new book, traces the history of U.S. foreign policy from the American Founding to the present, examining the ideas that have animated it, asking whether America’s policy choices have made the world safer and freer, and considering the impact of those choices on freedom at home. Preble explains the need to question the assumptions that drive American foreign policy in the modern era―especially the assumption that American politicians can and should forcibly remake the international order to suit their desires. What did Hayek think about foreign policy? What is the difference between preventive war and preemption? What should we do about genocide? What was the original purpose of the U.S. military and how has that changed over time?Further Reading:The Power Problem: How American Military Dominance Makes Us Less Safe, Less Prosperous and Less Free, written by Chr

Jason Kuznicki joins us again to discuss the problem of political authority. His new book, Technology and the End of Authority: What is Government For?, examines the relationship between the state and technology over time. Technological developments may make the state more or less necessary over time, which is a consideration that is relatively new in the history of political philosophy, but increasingly important.What is the state? What is a nation? What is the difference between ‘the state’ and government? Why do libertarians oppose coercion? How has the state evolved over time? What is the ‘bundle theory’ of the state?Further Reading:Technology and the End of Authority: What is Government For?, written by Jason KuznickiMax Weber’s Theory of the Modern State, written by Andreas AnterThe Republic, written by PlatoRelated Content:Recognizing the State for What It Is, written by Aaron Ross PowellUnderstanding the Modern State, written by David S. D’AmatoPrivate Lives and Public Education, written by Jason Kuzn

No matter how often we debate America’s role in the world, we are not throwing around original ideas. This debate resurfaces each time we decide whether or not to intervene in a foreign country. It was the main discussion amongst Theodore Roosevelt, Henry Cabot Lodge, and William Randolph Hearst who favored imperial expansion while other notable intellectuals; Mark Twain and Andrew Carnegie valued restraint. Stephen Kinzer joins us today to discuss how this original debate unfolded.What is manifest destiny? Who were the expansionists in 1898? Who was Henry Cabot Lodge? Who was William Randolph Hearst? What was Teddy Roosevelt’s view on war? How did the U.S. acquire Puerto Rico and Guam? What is plutocracy?Further Reading:The True Flag: Theodore Roosevelt, Mark Twain, and the Birth of American Empire, written by Stephen KinzerJohn Winthrop Dreams of a City on a Hill, 1630Theodore RooseveltThe Spanish-American War in the Philippines and the Battle for Manilla, American ExperienceRelated Content:The World Wide R

Joshua Childress joins us today to explain why his growing dissatisfaction of his Customs Border Patrol work led him to resign. He thought he was joining a line of work that was deterring violent actors from entering the United States, but he quickly realized that the people he encountered on the border on a daily basis were not threatening and weren’t fitting the narrative he had been told.What is it like to be a Customs Border Patrol (CBP) agent? How do you train and prepare to become a CBP agent? Who do CBP agents stop at the southern border of the United States? Do migrants understand their constitutional rights? When do CBP agents separate children from their families?Further Reading:Why I Quit the Border Patrol, written by Joshua ChildressThis Border Patrol Agent Resigned After Changing His Mind About Immigration, ReasonTVRelated Content:You Are Now Free to Move About the Planet, Free Thoughts PodcastTrump’s Immigration Crackdown, Free Thoughts PodcastThe Libertarian Argument for Open Borders, written b

Throughout the history of America, we have used a variety of methods to tax the income of the public. Prior to the World War II only a fraction of the population actually made enough money to reach a taxable threshold. However, during and after the war, that threshold was lowered so much that about 90% of the population qualified for taxes to be automatically deducted from their paycheck. With that being said, there was also more deduction opportunities than their are today to avoid a large tax bill.What assumptions do we make about income inequality? Is economic inequality inherently bad? How high is income inequality in the U.S.? What is a marginal tax rate? What is tax planning? What is modern monetary theory and what is it missing?Further Reading:Anti-Piketty: Capital for the 21st Century, edited by Jean-Philippe Delsol, Nicolas Lecaussin, & Emmanuel MartinCapital in the Twenty-First Century, written by Thomas PikettyRelated Content:What Paul Krugman Got Wrong About Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s 70% Tax

James Madison would have turned 268 on March 16, 2019 so we dedicated a whole episode to him! Even though Madison was not a great president (be sure to check out our upcoming profile of him as part of our Everything Wrong with the President’s Series), he was a great American. He was skeptical about who he trusted, which made him ever-cautious of who to create alliances with. Also, he would be disappointed to learn that war has become a permanent backdrop to the conduct of federal affairs.Is impeachment a key remedy according to James Madison? What did James Madison think about going to war? What did Madison think of having a standing army? What did James Madison think of the Electoral College?Further Reading:Indispensable Remedy: The Broad Scope of the Constitution’s Impeachment Power, written by Gene HealyRepeal, Don’t Replace, Trump’s War Powers, written by Gene Healy and John GlaserRemembering James Madison, written by John SamplesRelated Content:The Federalist No. 10, written by James MadisonJames Madison

Jonathan Blanks returns to our show to discuss how different versions of liberty were promoted by Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X during the Civil Rights Movement. Malcolm X was very weary of trusting authority, which is seen as a favorable trait by libertarians. The discussion then shifts to whether or not racism has improved since the Civil Rights Movement and how that affects how we view law enforcement.How is Malcolm X portrayed to the American public? Is the American government hypocritical? Was Malcolm X a libertarian? What type of liberty did Malcolm X promote? What qualifies as police harassment? Why do police have a higher presence where more crimes are committed? Do people generally trust the police? Have we made any progress when it comes to racism?Further Reading:The Autobiography of Malcolm X, written by Malcom XLawsuit: Car Passenger Tased 11 Times, Criminally Charged Asking Officer “Why”, written by Jonathan BlanksAbuse of Force: Body Camera Shows Man Tased 11 Times by Glendale Officers,

Tim Carney joins us to discuss the premise of his book; how the decline of the American dream it is not purely the result of economics as the left claims, but the collapse of the institutions that made us successful, including (but not limited to): marriage, church, and civic life. While the well-educated and wealthy elites still enjoy strong communities, most blue-collar Americans lack strong communities and institutions that bind them to their neighbors.Why is Donald Trump’s innaguration speech labelled “America’s carnage” speech? How has the collapse of local communities affected the American people? What is economic mobility? Why has the decline of the Church occurred? What is the main institution of civil society? What adds to increased involvement in the community?Further Reading:Alienated America: Why Some Places Thrive While Others Collapse, written by Tim CarneyCan Trump Fix ‘Alienated America’?, written by Alexandra DesanctisHow Will Alienated America Save For Retirement?, written by Elizabeth Bauer

Revisiting the root of our ideas in freedom and liberty, Eric Mack argues that everyone has a claim to liberty because it represents the possibility to live a valuable life. With that being said, people believe in varying degrees of liberty, even libertarians. Mack believes that libertarians encompass a wide spectrum of thought ranging from classical liberal to anarchists. What is libertarianism? What are the fundamental principles of justice? What is a political good? Are anarchists libertarians? Are classical liberals libertarians? Are all libertarians against coercion? Who is Herbert Spencer?Further Reading:Libertarianism (Key Concepts in Political Theory), written by Eric MackThe Libertarian Mind, written by David Boaz10 Books Every Libertarian Should Read, written by Madsen PirieRelated Content:A Natural Rights Case for Libertarianism, written by Eric MackArguments for Liberty, edited by Aaron Ross Powell & Grant BabcockWhat is Libertarianism?, Free Thoughts Podcast See acast.com/privacy for privacy

Lenore Skenazy let her son ride the metro by himself at the age of nine after studying the map with him in order to prepare. Unbeknownst to her, this caused great unrest and scrutiny from a variety of parenting groups, so much so that she decided to write a book and start a project on letting your kid grow to be self-reliant.Should children ride the NYC subway by themselves? When did children stop having unsupervised and unstructured time? What did ‘strange danger’ do to change the way we parent? What are the consequences of over-parenting?Further Reading:Let Grow Website, founded by Jonathan Haidt, Peter Gray, Lenore Skenazy, and Daniel SchuchmanThe Fragile Generation, written by Lenore Skenazy and Jonathan HaidtFree-Range Kids, How to Raise Safe, Self-Reliant Children (Without Going Nuts with Worry), written by Lenore SkenazyJonathan Haidt Lets His 9-Year-Old Daughter Walk to School Alone for the First TimeLet Grow projectRelated Content:The Coddling of the American Mind, Free Thoughts PodcastConformist Stu

Drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes are legal activities, but politicians use the law in order to discourage people from doing these things that may seen as poor for your health. This is inconsistent with John Stuart Mill’s famous principle that people should be free in the sense that they should be able to do whatever they like as long as they are not harming others.What is paternalism? Should we take care of those who do not know any better for themselves? Are there different types of paternalism? What is considered coercion? Should the government enforce vaccinations for the purpose of collective action? Should the government worry about public health?Further Reading:Killjoys: A Critique of Paternalism, written by Christopher SnowdenNudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness, written by Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. SunsteinRelated Content:“Libertarian” Paternalism?, Free Thoughts PodcastPaternalism and Barbarism, written by Aaron Ross PowellAgainst Paternalism, written by Neera K.

In Candice Delma’s book A Duty to Resist she highlights a theory of resisting injustice as a duty in of itself. This specific duty could require breaking the law. She also defends uncivil disobedience and where it is limited in feasibility. Throughout this episode she makes us question how far we should go in order to fight an injustice. Delmas argues that the duty of justice, the principle of fairness, the Samaritan duty, and political association impose responsibility to resist under conditions of injustice.What is civil disobedience? How did John Rawls shape our understanding of civil disobedience? What is a just society? What are the principles of justice? Should disobedience always be civil?Further Reading:A Duty to Resist, written by Candice DelmasSamaritanism and Civil Disobedience, written by Candice DelmasRelated Content:Resisting the State Injustice, Free Thoughts PodcastDo We Have a Duty to Obey the Government?, Free Thoughts PodcastWhat’s Fairness Got to Do With Obeying the Law?, written by Aaron

As the American “foodie” culture grows, it will clash more and more with previously established USDA and FDA rules and regulations since they typically promote uniformity. The USDA has taken it upon themselves to enforce standards of identity laws which allows them to basically enforce cosmetic standards. These laws encourage farmers to produce foods that are uniform and look gorgeous, but neither of these measurements have anything to do with the quality or taste of the product. Throughout history the FDA has certainly made the food we eat safer, especially now that it can perform a mandatory recall of any food that they know contains an illness, but that was not always the case.How does the USDA affect the way that we produce food in the U.S.? Should USDA laws and regulations be imposed subjectively by inspectors? Can you challenge USDA regulations? What is the Food Safety Modernization Act? Does regulating how we produce food actually make food safer to consume? Should the FDA have a preemptive or reactive

As more states aim to legalize marijuana, whether it be for recreation or medicinal purposes, there is an on-going talk debate about if public policy should determine what pleasures are okay to indulge in and which ones are not. Jeff Miron joins us today to discuss drug prohibition actually hurts the naive drug user the most. Are drugs an economic good? What is the economic logic of prohibition? How much does drug prohibition cost? Did alcohol use go down during prohibition? Are drug companies trying to make their products more addictive in order to drive revenue?Further Reading:The Budgetary Effects of Ending Drug Prohibition, written by Jeffrey MironData Confirm That Marijuana Decriminalization is Long Overdue, written by Jeffrey Miron and Sietse GoffardRelated Content:Is the DEA Trippin’?, with Rick Doblin, Free Thoughts PodcastHow Drug Prohibition Caused the Opioid Crisis, Free Thoughts PodcastThe Case for Legalizing Hard Drugs, written by Jarrett Wollstein See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out in

Peter Van Doren argues that consumers correctly consider fuel costs when making vehicle-buying decisions. However, CAFE standards cannot be justified as correcting some sort of consumer failure to appreciate fuel savings. The idea that CAFE reduces carbon emissions is slightly more reasonable, but it is a very indirect, inefficient and regressive method. For these reasons, it is difficult to not side with Trumps’ negative view of CAFE.What is CAFE? How does regulation affect markets? How did Richard Nixon use price controls? Is Trump the great deregulator?Further Reading:Regulation without Results, written by Peter Van DorenCAFE Standards, written by Peter Van DorenRelated Content:Regulations Gone Wrong, Free Thoughts PodcastThe Implications of Behavioral Economics, Free Thoughts PodcastWhat Role Should Science Play in Public Policy?, Free Thoughts Podcast  See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Prior to the 2008 financial crisis, the Federal Reserve had a long-standing policy of maintaining a minimal footprint on the credit system. According to Selgin, the Fed use to be a “lean and mean” player in the credit system. However, on the eve of the 2008 financial crisis they made some changes to decades’ old policies that they believed would aid the financial instability of the country at the time. In retrospect, we can now deeply analyze where the Federal Reserve misstepped. What is the Federal Reserve? What are mandatory reserves? What is the chevron deference? What did emergency lending have to do with the 2008 financial crisis? Is the Fed more constrained than private banks?Further Reading:Floored!: How a Misguided Fed Experiment Deepened and Prolonged the Great Recession, written by George SelginAnniversary of a Fed Blunder, written by George SelginInterest on Excess Reserves: The Hobie Cat Effect, written by George SelginThe Fed’s Recent Defense of Interest on Reserves, written by George SelginRelat