ReImagining Liberty

Regimes falter when opposition media is strong. But America's legacy media has failed to live up to the dangers of the political environment and the authoritarianism of Trump's administration. We need stronger opposition media, making full-throated defenses of liberalism. But what does that look like? I'm joined today by Adam Gurri, founder and editor-in-chief of Liberal Currents, which is currently fundraising to take their indispensable publication to the next level. Adam and I talk about the state of media, what it means to carve out principled opposition, and how stronger opposition media can see us through the coming years and towards a future for liberalism.Liberal Currents fundraiser: https://gofund.me/be2b76bf9Join the ReImagining Liberty Patreon to get episodes a week early, listen ad-free, and become part of the Discord community. Learn more here: https://www.patreon.com/AaronRossPowellProduced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

Welcome to ReImagining Liberty, a show about the emancipatory and cosmopolitan case for radical liberalism. I'm Aaron Ross Powell.It's still possible Trump succeeds in his project of authoritarian consolidation, but between the dramatic losses the GOP suffered in the elections on November 4th, the infighting in the conservative coalition, and the Epstein scandal, the prospects for that consolidation are looking more remote.All this makes the "How do we rebuild when Trump is behind us?" question feel less like a pipe dream. Which is why I was so happy to see my friends at The UnPopulist launch their new "Reconstruction Agenda" project, headed by frequent ReImagining Liberty guest Andy Craig. Andy is mapping out what that reconstruction should look like, and what reforms present the best opportunities to strengthen and rebuild the institutions of liberal democracy. Joining me today alongside Andy is Shikha Dalmia, founder and editor of The UnPopulist.Join the ReImagining Liberty Patreon to get episodes a week early, listen ad-free, and become part of the Discord community. Learn more here: https://www.patreon.com/AaronRossPowellProduced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

Today's episode is about the Constitution. It's a clear-eyed assessment of the assaults on it by the Trump administration, and a deep discussion of how we should think about constitutional interpretation and constitutional defense. Things aren't good. There's no denying that.But things also perhaps aren't as bad, at least not yet, as the most shrill of the doomers insist. To dig into all this, I'm joined by Evan Bernick. He's a law professor at Northern Illinois University and has been one of the most thoughtful, persistent, and effective critics of the risible scholarship the Trump administration is using to justify its assault on birthright citizenship.Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

The future of liberalism depends upon the coalitions liberals can build, both to defend institutions now and to reform them when the time comes. As my friend, and past ReImagining Liberty guest, Jason Kuznicki says, "The future is a conversation." So today I've brought on two smart liberals, with very different ideas about what liberalism means in practice, for a conversation about common ground.Matthew McManus is an assistant professor at Spelman College, author of The Political Theory of Liberal Socialism, and frequent ReImagining Liberty guest. Matt Zwolinski is a first time ReImagining Liberty guest, an omission I'm thrilled to rectify. He's a professor of philosophy at the University of San Diego, co-author of The Individualists: Radicals, Reactionaries, and the Struggle for the Soul of Libertarianism, and founder of the seminal—but now sadly defunct—blog Bleeding Heart Libertarians.This episode is prompted by a review Zwolinski wrote of McManus's book, a review that noted their shared values and dug into why, in each of their cases, those values led them to quite distinct policy conclusions. And that's our topic for today. It's a conversation about agreement, disagreement, and how to have productive conversations about liberalism.Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

Today things get particularly radical, with an introduction to left market anarchism. I'm joined by Zak Woodman, host of the Mutual Exchange Radio podcast from the Center for a Stateless Society. We talk about whether we need a state at all, the dangers a powerful government poses, even if its values are arguably good ones, and why the aims of the left are better advanced through free markets than state control of the economy. We end with a call to take anarchist ideas seriously, even if you don't ultimately accept them, because they contain lessons for how to navigate and respond to our contemporary authoritarian moment.Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

I've got a special bonus episode for you today. In August, I attended the second annual Liberalism for the 21st Century conference in DC, organized by the Institute for the Study of Modern Authoritarianism. That's the group that runs The UnPopulist, a publication I occasionally guest host for on their Zooming In podcast. I led a special live recording of that show at the conference, a conversation with journalist (and ReImagining Liberty guest) Radley Balko and commentator Charlie Sykes. I framed the conversation around the second Trump administration as vigorous effort to roll back the Civil Rights Movement, legally, institutionally, and culturally. This led to a deep and spirited discussion. I hope you enjoy this very ReImagining Liberty adjacent discussion.

Cathy Reisenwitz's "Sex and the State" is one of the handful of newsletters I consider indispensable. She writes, from what I'd label a radical liberal perspective, about culture and gender in ways I consistently find illuminating. And she was my guest on episode 50 of this show, on misogyny and the political divide, which remains one of my favorites. So when she and I were recently chatting about the future of the liberty movement, and what's needed in our authoritarian moment, I wanted to get her back on.We discuss her early days in the liberty movement, why she left, what's brought her back, and what she learned in the intervening years. Then we discuss making the case for liberty, and why the right's focus on cultural issues has given it a leg up in persuading many Americans to its side. A strong case for liberty demands taking social issues seriously, and interrogating social patterns and their origins.Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

The political right, including more right-wing sorts of self-identified libertarians, are rather down on feminism. For those right-wingers, their hostility is understandable, because feminist insights challenge truths the right imagines to be natural and immutable, about equality, and gender, and hierarchy. But for radical liberals, feminist theory offers powerful tools for understanding and critiquing power and its use by the state.Today I have on my friend Kelly Vee for a discussion of these ideas and their place within a radical liberal framework. Kelly is an individualist anarchist-feminist and a graduate of Tulane University with degrees in accounting and finance, which she puts to good use when she's not writing about mental health, feminism, and the State.

An introduction to the people and ideas most central to the ideologies of Trumpism and post-liberalism.The last episode of this show was about what ReImagining Liberty is. With frequent guest Cory Massimino, I talked about the values and perspective behind ReImagining Liberty's approach to liberalism, and how it's distinct from right-libertarianism. Today's episode is a nice companion to that. Not just because it also features a frequent guest, this time my friend Matt McManus, but because it runs further with the theme of distinctions. Namely, in this case, the ideas of the anti-liberalism of the far right. Our topic is the contemporary right-wing canon, the thinkers whose ideologies have come to dominate, and whose writings are giving form to the authoritarian fascism challenging liberal values and virtues.Matt McManus is an Assistant Professor at Spelman College and the author of The Rise of Postmodern Conservatism and The Political Theory of Liberal Socialism, among many other books.Here's Matt's essay on "The Modern Far Right Canon" that was the spark for today's conversation.

A conversation about the the values underlying radical liberalism, and what distinguishes it from more right-wing forms of libertarianism.You can think of this episode as kind of a soft reboot of ReImagining Liberty. Or a back-to-basics. This is a show about politics, but it's a politics grounded in a particular set of values and a particular perspective, and with the political and policy specifics downstream of those. Ever since the election, I've spent a lot of time on those specifics, as well as on the policy details of what the forces of illiberalism are up to. And that's important. But I want to bring the show back, at least a bit more, to those values and that perspective. What is it about the kind of radical liberalism motivating this show that sets it apart? What are those values? What is that perspective?So today's episode is the start a series of conversations on just that. And it's framed around change. I've brought back my very first guest, and my dear friend, Cory Massimino. He has been, it is fair to say, one of the biggest influences the evolution of my intellectual and moral approach to politics over the last ten years. We talk about how our views have shifted, what it means to be a radical liberal, and what sets the kind of radical liberalism at the heart of ReImagining Liberty apart from the right-leaning libertarianism many are familiar with.Cory is an independent scholar and a Fellow at the Center for a Stateless Society, where he hosts the podcasts Mutual Exchange Radio and The Long Library.

We sometimes talk about technology on ReImagining Liberty, in the context of how it interacts with a liberal society, or how technology can help us defend and advance liberal. The big technology everyone's talking about right now is, of course, artificial intelligence. It's a topic I've written about, but not one I'd yet done an episode about specifically regarding what it means for liberalism.Then I read an essay by Ted Underwood, a professor in the School of Information Sciences, and in the English Department, at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. It's titled "A more interesting upside of AI" and you can find a link to it in the show notes. He argues that the framing of AI technology as aiming at "super-intelligence" is misguided, both undesirable and misunderstanding important aspects of society and culture. Instead, he's an advocate of viewing AI as a cultural technology. What grabbed my attention was his further claim that, as a cultural technology, it can help us map and appreciate cultural differences, and cultural similarities, in ways that line up with, and support, liberal principles like pluralism, tolerance, and understanding.It's a big claim, and a fascinating one, and it lead to really fun and illuminating discussion.Get early access to ReImagining Liberty, listen ad-free, and get access to our listener Discord community, by joining my Patreon. Learn more here: https://www.patreon.com/c/AaronRossPowellProduced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's difficult to be optimistic about liberalism's future. Certainly in the short to medium term. We're in an acute period of democratic bacIt's difficult to be optimistic about liberalism's future. Certainly in the short to medium term. We're in an acute period of democratic backsliding and authoritarian ascendency. The opposition party, or at least its leadership, has been largely supine in response. A backlash is rising, but it's an open question whether it'll be enough, and soon enough, to make a difference.But it's also not a time to give up all hope. There is a backlash. The current regime is deeply unpopular. And a ton of Americans—and people around the world watching what's happening to America—are rediscovering the value of liberal principles and values.My returning guest today is Andy Craig, a Fellow in Liberalism at the Institute for Humane Studies. We discuss the blitzkrieg of lawlessness in the first six months of this new Trump administration and why so many Democratic lawmakers have failed to respond to it with seriousness and urgency. But we also talk about the way forward, and how liberalism—true and radical liberalism—can chart that course.

It's difficult to be optimistic about liberalism's future. Certainly in the short to medium term. We're in an acute period of democratic backsliding and authoritarian ascendency. The opposition party, or at least its leadership, has been largely supine in response. A backlash is rising, but it's an open question whether it'll be enough, and soon enough, to make a difference.But it's also not a time to give up all hope. There is a backlash. The current regime is deeply unpopular. And a ton of Americans—and people around the world watching what's happening to America—are rediscovering the value of liberal principles and values.My returning guest today is Andy Craig, a Fellow in Liberalism at the Institute for Humane Studies. We discuss the blitzkrieg of lawlessness in the first six months of this new Trump administration and why so many Democratic lawmakers have failed to respond to it with seriousness and urgency. But we also talk about the way forward, and how liberalism—true and radical liberalism—can chart that course.Listen to ReImagining Liberty ad-free, and get access to our listener Discord community, by joining my Patreon. Learn more here: https://www.patreon.com/c/AaronRossPowellProduced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Liberals, particularly classical liberals and libertarians, have too narrow a view of power. They focus on government force, or the threat of government force, and ignore all the other ways power is exercised in society. And the way classical liberals and libertarians imagine the fully autonomous self is at odds with our deep cultural embeddedness and the social construction of our identities, our ways of seeing, and the concepts through which we come to understand ourselves and the world.That's the argument my guest sets out in his new book, which asks classical liberals and libertarians to take seriously the analysis of power, knowledge, and identify set out by the French theorist Michel Foucault. And, as Mark Pennington further argues in Foucault and Liberal Political Economy: Power, Knowledge, and Freedom, taking Foucault seriously strengthens the foundations of liberalism and makes it better able to respond to illiberal critiques.Pennington is Professor of Political Economy and Public Policy in the Department of Political Economy, King's College, University of London, and is Director of the Centre for the Study of Governance and Society.We discuss Foucault's ideas, and introduce them for listeners who know nothing about his theories. And we show how they can point to liberal conclusions, including individual rights and a free market economy. Mark's book is the book I've been wanting someone to write a long time, and it not only doesn't disappoint but is, I think, one of the most import books in the liberal tradition in decades.Join the ReImagining Liberty community and discuss this episode with your fellow listeners.Support the show and get episodes ad-free.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Note: There were some issues with my guest's audio that make a few of his answers difficult to hear. So he kindly wrote out his answers and sent them to me. Those appear below in the show notes. Liberals, particularly classical liberals and libertarians, have too narrow a view of power. They focus on government force, or the threat of government force, and ignore all the other ways power is exercised in society. And the way classical liberals and libertarians imagine the fully autonomous self is at odds with our deep cultural embeddedness and the social construction of our identities, our ways of seeing, and the concepts through which we come to understand ourselves and the world.That's the argument my guest sets out in his new book, which asks classical liberals and libertarians to take seriously the analysis of power, knowledge, and identify set out by the French theorist Michel Foucault. And, as Mark Pennington further argues in Foucault and Liberal Political Economy: Power, Knowledge, and Freedom, taking Foucault seriously strengthens the foundations of liberalism and makes it better able to respond to illiberal critiques.Pennington is Professor of Political Economy and Public Policy in the Department of Political Economy, King's College, University of London, and is Director of the Centre for the Study of Governance and Society.We discuss Foucault's ideas, and introduce them for listeners who know nothing about his theories. And we show how they can point to liberal conclusions, including individual rights and a free market economy. Mark's book is the book I've been wanting someone to write a long time, and it not only doesn't disappoint but is, I think, one of the most import books in the liberal tradition in decades.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod.Written Answers21:59If we have seen that ideas of scientific truth have changed across different periods that might make us think twice today about thinking that we have got something like access to a scientific truth.25:00Traditions are often historically contingent – but that doesn't mean they aren't valuable. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't be sceptical about radical ideas about how they might be reformed.26:24Philosophers use the term ‘immanent criticism'27:00It isn't really a properly conservative approach to say that there are pure ‘natural' types – that is much closer to what I would call a scientific naturalism which isn't compatible with ‘true' conservatism let alone with the sort of liberalism I would like to advocate.32:00Human beings are not like atoms that can be tested in a laboratory. That doesn't mean we can't say anything useful about human beings and their relationships, but we have got to have this scepticism about, for example, claims made about human nature – these have often been wrong and that this scepticism is especially important in contexts where those claiming scientific expertise use this to claim to exercise political authority over others. So, a big concern in Foucault is about the alignment between claims to scientific expertise and state power. This is what Foucault was concerned about - as are many Foucauldians. It is not saying you should ignore science but that you should be wary of monopoly claims to that expertise arising. If we look through the history of science and the number of ideas that have been subject to radical change then it should give us reason to be sceptical of anyone who claims today to have discovered some notion of absolute scientific truth.34:35One way to think about social justice might be to focus on the distribution of income and wealth; and another aspect of social justice might be to focus on the identity aspects of it such as issues of cultural status across different groups.  What I think is common across these two discussions is the belief that – or at least this is what I think is the dominant narrative on social justice in today's world is the belief that society can be manipulated or managed to produce desired outcomes.36:38The first would be a kind of scepticism of the assumption underlying these dominant views that societies are legible or manageable objects in this way.40:12This is all about, in various organisational settings, people being told that they must meet certain targets or goals about the people that they work with or the various practices around speech they should be using – this sort of thing.41:11And in many ways can reproduce some of the categories that people in the gay liberation movement for example and some racial justice movements wanted to challenge. 41:42Some discussions around DEI reinforce certain stereotypes about gay people and other historically disadvantaged groups that reproduce various stereotypes.

What's happened to Twitter, or now X, is the clearest example of why it's actually not great that so much of our digital communication is controlled by just a few firms and, through them, the whims of guys like Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg. These single points of control not only mean a product we love today can be unlovable, or just gone, tomorrow, but also give more dangerous actors, like governments, avenues to use that centralization against us.The alternative is to revive what the internet once was: a decentralized and much more open place. I think this is really important, not just because it makes our digital communication less subject to arbitrary will, but also because it enables us to carve out communities for ourselves.My guest today wrote what is probably the most important essay about this need for decentralization, called "Protocols, Not Platforms," which inspired some of the most exciting current developments, including Bluesky. Mike Masnick is an expert in technology and technology policy and the editor of the indispensable blog, Techdirt. He's also on the board of directors of Bluesky.

What's happened to Twitter, or now X, is the clearest example of why it's actually not great that so much of our digital communication is controlled by just a few firms and, through them, the whims of guys like Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg. These single points of control not only mean a product we love today can be unlovable, or just gone, tomorrow, but also give more dangerous actors, like governments, avenues to use that centralization against us.The alternative is to revive what the internet once was: a decentralized and much more open place. I think this is really important, not just because it makes our digital communication less subject to arbitrary will, but also because it enables us to carve out communities for ourselves.My guest today wrote what is probably the most important essay about this need for decentralization, called "Protocols, Not Platforms," which inspired some of the most exciting current developments, including Bluesky. Mike Masnick is an expert in technology and technology policy and the editor of the indispensable blog, Techdirt. He's also on the board of directors of Bluesky.Join the ReImagining Liberty community and discuss this episode with your fellow listeners.Support the show and get episodes ad-free.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The government's power to see is its power to oppress. The more the state knows about us, the more levers it has to control us. Understanding that connection, its history and its application, is critical if we are to secure our liberties in the face of authoritarian threats, such as the illegal and unconstitutional actions of the federal government in Los Angeles.I'd scheduled this episode—with returning guest Patrick Eddington about his new book The Triumph of Fear: Domestic Surveillance and Political Repression from McKinley to Eisenhower—before ICE set off protests in LA. But what's happening there highlights the need for conversations like the one that follows, because the tools we give the state to protect us are the tools a rogue administration can use to destroy our freedoms.Patrick Eddington is a senior fellow in homeland security and civil liberties at the Cato Institute. He was formally a CIA analyst, but left the Agency in 1996 after he and his wife Robin, also at the CIA, became whistleblowers, publicly accusing the CIA of hiding evidence that American troops were exposed to Iraqi chemical weapons during the Gulf War.Join the ReImagining Liberty community and discuss this episode with your fellow listeners.Support the show and get episodes ad-free.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Equality is central to the liberal project. Thomas Jefferson failed, dramatically and unforgivably, to live up to this ideal, but he stated in correctly when, in a letter, he wrote that "the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately." Liberalism views us as equals, and demands the law treat us as such.The illiberal project, then, is the denial of this equality. And the failure to notice inequalities, or to view the inequalities afflicting some as less worthy of concern than the inequalities afflicting others, is how nominal liberals can slide into illiberal politics without realizing it.My guest today has spent his career reminding liberals of their blind spots, and calling for the principles of a liberal society to be applied consistently, leaving no marginalized groups marginalized.Jonathan Blanks is a writer and editor who has spent the bulk of his career focusing on constitutional law, civil liberties, due process, and criminal legal issues. After more than 12 years at the Cato Institute, Blanks has spent the past few years writing about American culture and the effects of police policy.Join the ReImagining Liberty community and discuss this episode with your fellow listeners.Support the show and get episodes ad-free.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Trumpist right has a very clear picture of what they imagine masculinity to be, and are quite upset that it's not a picture all men find all that appealing. It's one of violence, belligerence, and professions of heavy labor. Anything else, including the whole of the knowledge economy that has made the developed world rich, is inauthentically masculine, the result of corrupting feminization.As someone who earns his living communicating ideas, and is pretty happy doing so, I find their argument unpersuasive. So too, I find the politics of reaction, exclusion, and domination that accompany that argument quite a bit less desirable than a free and open and liberal society.That's what my guest and I discuss today. Toby Buckle is the host of the Political Philosophy Podcast, an excellent show that explores the intersection of politics and ideas. We talk about what men want, whether the story the right tells has any grounding in reality, the fundamentally adolescent nature of far-right masculinity, and how liberals can better pitch finding meaning in a liberal world.Toby's article about what men want: https://www.liberalcurrents.com/most-men-dont-want-to-be-heroes-and-thats-okay/If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to listen to episodes free of ads and sponsorships, become a supporter. Learn more here: https://www.aaronrosspowell.com/upgrade I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.Join the ReImagining Liberty community and discuss this episode with your fellow listeners.Support the show and get episodes ad-free.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The authoritarian right loves to talk about how they're upholding democracy. Trump didn't lose the 2020 election, because if he had, democracy would've been against him. So instead it was stolen from him, his loss a subversion of the democratic process. Now, as a deeply unpopular second-term president, he and his loyalists pretend they are executing the will of the people, instead of horrifying most Americans while circumventing the people's elected legislature.My guest today has written a terrific book, The Reactionary Spirit, about this odd contradiction in contemporary autocratic rhetoric: On the one hand, far-right anti-democratic regimes speak in the language of democracy and popular will. On the other, they are, well, anti-democratic regimes. Zack Beauchamp is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he covers challenges to democracy in the United States and abroad, right-wing populism, and the world of ideas.If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to listen to episodes free of ads and sponsorships, become a supporter. Learn more here: https://www.aaronrosspowell.com/upgrade I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

The first few months of the Trump administration have proven not just how willing much of America was to embrace and celebrate fascism, but how crucial careful, clear-eye, and thoughtful reporting and analysis are to building and sustaining a resistance movement.Few publications have been as essential in this moment as Liberal Currents, which has consistently brought deep understanding, a sense of urgency, and a commitment to the necessary practical steps of defending liberal institutions and values.That's why I'm delighted to have on today the founder and editor-in-chief of Liberal Currents, Adam Gurri. We talk about the intellectual environment, the virtues of being well-informed while not overwhelmed, and what political sciences has to say about whether Trump can succeed in his quest to become a dictator.Discuss this episode with the host and your fellow listeners in the ReImagining Liberty Reddit community: https://www.reddit.com/r/ReImaginingLiberty/ If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to listen to episodes free of ads and sponsorships, become a supporter. Learn more here: https://www.aaronrosspowell.com/upgrade I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

As we've talked about a fair amount on the show, gender is at the center of the ideological clashes defining our political moment. Trumpism is, at its heart, a misogynistic movement, and the fractious coalition of philosophies within the Trumpist tent all agree that increased freedom and opportunities for women have been very upsetting for right-wing men.My guest today brings gender into dialogue with the structure of the economy has it has manifested in the developed world. And, in doing so, she offers an intriguing challenge to libertarian and radical liberal economic priors. It's one worth engaging with and thinking through.Alysia Ames is a CPA who has spent her career as an accountant in and around government. She lives in Iowa with her husband and two daughters. Her writing can be found on her newsletter, Accounting for Taste. See the link in the show notes. You can also find her on Bluesky as @fakegreekgrill.Discuss this episode with the host and your fellow listeners in the ReImagining Liberty Reddit community: https://www.reddit.com/r/ReImaginingLiberty/ If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to listen to episodes free of ads and sponsorships, become a supporter. Learn more here: https://www.aaronrosspowell.com/upgrade I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

Many very rich men who support Trump fancy themselves heroes from the novels of Ayn Rand. I've never done an episode of this show on Rand's ideas, because I'm not a Randian, and don't think about political questions through anything like an Objectivist perspective. But the fact that so many men breaking the country believe they are Randian archetypes makes her ideas now, I think, worth talking about. Particularly because, as my guest argues, Rand would hate these guys.Paul Crider is an associate editor at Liberal Currents and an admirer of Rand. But he comes at from an interesting perspective, being on the whole pretty progressive, and decidedly not an Objectivist libertarian. He recently published an essay at The Bulwark about how Elon Musk, far from being a Randian heroes, is in fact a representative of her villains.Paul and I discuss Rand's ideas and their influence, and then walk through how men like Musk are just the sort of people she loathed.Discuss this episode with the host and your fellow listeners in the ReImagining Liberty Reddit community: https://www.reddit.com/r/ReImaginingLiberty/ If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to listen to episodes free of ads and sponsorships, become a supporter. Learn more here: https://www.aaronrosspowell.com/upgrade I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

I wanted to try to do a hopeful episode. The world look pretty grim right now, and many of us feel discouraged. The unlawful and authoritarian actions of the Trump administration keep coming at a relentless pace, and it can be difficult to see any reasons for optimism. It can also be lonely. Someone mentioned to me recently that, in times as dark as these, we need friends, but we also need comrades. We need people who share a common purpose in defending liberalism and who are working, alongside us, to fight back against those who threaten it.Which is why I'm so happy today to welcome my friend—and, in the sense above, comrade—Carolyn Fiddler to the show. She's Director of Communications at the Democratic Attorneys General Association, and an expert in state politics. We talk about what attorneys general are doing to challenge the worst of Trump's policies, and how they've already found some success. And we look ahead to future challenges and the tactics the legal system offers to protect liberal institutions from the forces of the populist right.Discuss this episode with the host and your fellow listeners in the ReImagining Liberty Reddit community: https://www.reddit.com/r/ReImaginingLiberty/ If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to listen to episodes free of ads and sponsorships, become a supporter. Learn more here: https://www.aaronrosspowell.com/upgrade I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

The right-wing ideologies we see most active in the world right now aren't intellectual by any stretch of the imagination. But there is a rich tradition of conservative political and social philosophy and, as liberals, it's important to understand what its objections to liberalism look like.ReImagining Liberty stalwart Matthew McManus, a lecturer in political science at the University of Michigan, wrote an article for Liberal Currents not too long ago about the philosopher Roger Scruton's criticism of liberalism from a conservative perspective. Scruton's work is perfect—because of its erudition, accessibility, and exemplariness—for understanding the philosophical conservative perspective.Today Matt and I use Scruton's ideas as a way to interrogate the conservative intellectual tradition and to argue that conservative philosophy aims less at a society organized around truth than it does a society where certainty rarely faces challenge.Discuss this episode with the host and your fellow listeners in the ReImagining Liberty Reddit community: https://www.reddit.com/r/ReImaginingLiberty/ If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to listen to episodes free of ads and sponsorships, become a supporter. Learn more here: https://www.aaronrosspowell.com/upgrade I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

How we navigate the new political environment the voters thrust upon on, and the new regime that seeks to tear up the very foundations of our liberal society, is a matter of ethics. And ethics is bigger than just political questions. It's about how you live, what you aspire to, and what makes for an admirable life, both inside and outside of politics.My guest today has written an important book about just that. Seth Zuihō Segall is a clinical psychologist who served for nearly three decades as an Assistant Clinical Professor at the Yale School of Medicine and is a former Director of Psychology at Waterbury Hospital and a former President of the New England Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation. He is also a Zen Buddhist priest, and if you're a regular listener to ReImagining Liberty, you'll know how much I think Buddhist philosophy contains insights of great value in understanding our current moment.Segall's newest book is The House We Live In, which explores the crises imperiling American democracy and argues that progress depends on our arriving at a new consensus on what it means to be a good person and lead a good life and re-imagines an ethics suitable for our time.Discuss this episode with the host and your fellow listeners in the ReImagining Liberty Reddit community: https://www.reddit.com/r/ReImaginingLiberty/ If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to listen to episodes free of ads and sponsorships, become a supporter. Learn more here: https://www.aaronrosspowell.com/upgrade I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

We talk a lot on this show about the benefits of free and open markets and, given the growing hostility to economic freedom, not just from the Trump administration, but from populist governments around the world, we'll continue to do so.Today I wanted to approach that conversation a little differently from usual though. Most of the time, when people say markets are good, what they mean is that markets make us richer, driven innovation, and so on. But markets do more than that. They make us better people, too.This is a controversial claim, because so many criticisms of markets will admit that they create wealth, but then chastise them for promoting selfishness and greed, or replacing cooperation with callous competition.That's wrong, however. And to discuss why, and why markets aren't just economically better, but morally bettering, as well, I've brought back my good friend Tom Palmer. He is executive vice president for international programs at Atlas Network, where he holds the George M. Yeager Chair for Advancing Liberty, and a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute.Discuss this episode with the host and your fellow listeners in the ReImagining Liberty Reddit community: https://www.reddit.com/r/ReImaginingLiberty/ If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to listen to episodes free of ads and sponsorships, become a supporter. Learn more here: https://www.aaronrosspowell.com/upgrade I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

The information environment in which Americans form and discuss their political views has gotten weird. Walter Cronkite is gone. The editorial pages of the New York Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal have lost influence to podcasters, social media influencers, and internet conspiracy theorists. Trump's rise, and return to power, was in large part fueled by figures on the far-right who knew how to take advantage of this changed environment in a way liberals haven't yet figured out.This means that, if liberalism is to have a political future, liberals need to understand how media today looks nothing like media twenty years ago. And there's no one better at explaining how weird things have become, how they got that way, and how we can navigate through it than Renée DiResta. She's an Associate Research Professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown. Prior to that, she was the technical research manager at Stanford Internet Observatory. And she's the author of the indispensable book Invisible Rulers: The People Who Turn Lies Into Reality.Current Accounts: The Hinrich Foundation Trade PodcastHinrich Foundation is a unique Asia-based philanthropic organization that works to...Listen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifyDiscuss this episode with the host and your fellow listeners in the ReImagining Liberty Reddit community: https://www.reddit.com/r/ReImaginingLiberty/ If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to listen to episodes free of ads and sponsorships, become a supporter. Learn more here: https://www.aaronrosspowell.com/upgrade I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

Last fall, I had the extraordinary opportunity to travel to Delhi, India, to give a talk to young Indian liberals. The topic was the connection between Buddhist philosophy and liberalism. If you're a regular reader of my work, or listen to my podcast, you'll know this connection has been central to my work for some time. I believe that Buddhist ideas give us important tools for understanding not just why we ought to be liberals, but why liberalism is the best political system for make the world better.This bonus episode of ReImagining Liberty is the audio of that talk. You can also read a transcript of it if you prefer.Current Accounts: The Hinrich Foundation Trade PodcastHinrich Foundation is a unique Asia-based philanthropic organization that works to...Listen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifyIf you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to support the show, you can learn more here. I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

The rise of Trump is, in many ways, a story about status. Plenty of Americans feel like their relative status has fallen in recent decades, and they believe Trump, both as an embodiment of their identity and values and as a wielder of vast power, can give them that status back.That's the argument my guest made in a recent essay at the Bulwark called "Trump's Secret Weapon Has Always Been Status Anxiety." Alan Elrod is President & CEO of the Pulaski Institution and columnist at Arc Digital.We explore how status is perceived, the role of attention in shaping political narratives, and the generational shifts in attitudes towards status and authenticity. We discuss the exhaustion of political engagement, the importance of civic connection, and the challenges posed by online interactions in fostering a civil society. Ultimately, this is a conversation highlighting the need for community engagement and the restoration of social capital in addressing the current political climate.Current Accounts: The Hinrich Foundation Trade PodcastHinrich Foundation is a unique Asia-based philanthropic organization that works to...Listen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifyIf you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to support the show, you can learn more here. I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

In this conversation, Aaron Ross Powell and Anthony L. Fisher (Senior Editor at MSNBC Daily) discuss the political landscape following Trump's second inauguration, focusing on the rapid changes in governance, the Democratic response, and the fractured media environment. They explore the implications of these dynamics on public opinion and the importance of engaging in new media spaces, particularly podcasts, to effectively communicate liberal values and counteract authoritarian tendencies.If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty and want to support the show, you can learn more here. I also encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

We've talked a lot about gender on this show, in the context of transgender rights, the way declining relative status drives men to the political right, and the broader role gender plays in the political environment. The results of the presidential election in November proved just how central gender is to story of rising illiberalism, with men shifting right while women shifted left. To discuss how we should read this shift, and dig into what's causing it, I've brought back Samantha Hancox-Li, who I last had on the show in September to talk about the distinction between progressivism and liberalism. Samantha's a writer, game designer, and associate editor at Liberal Currents, where she recently published an excellent essays called "The Crisis of Gender Relations." If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty, I encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠⁠. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

For this first episode to be recorded after the results of the presidential election, I've brought on my friend and former colleague ⁠Walter Olson⁠. Walter is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, a staunch defender of democracy and liberal institutions, and an expert in the processes and law of American elections. We talk about why the election went the way it went, avenues for electoral reform, and what lessons liberals should take from the results, given that we now need to commit ourselves, over the next four years, to a rigorous defense of liberalism. If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty, I encourage you to check out my companion newsletter, where I write about the kinds of ideas we discuss on this show. You can find it on my website at ⁠www.aaronrosspowell.com⁠. Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod.

Today's episode was recorded a few weeks before the results of the November presidential election, and before an unrelated change I've made to this podcast. So before we jump into my conversation with Matthew McManus, I wanted to take a moment to give some context and talk about ReImagining Liberty going forward. First, for all of its life, ReImagining Liberty has been a listener supported show, and the way listeners supported it was to become paying members and get early access to new episodes. Starting today, I'm no longer doing that. Every episode of ReImagining Liberty will come out when it's ready, and I've turned off paid memberships. I did this primarily because I had an increasingly difficult time being consistent with the show's release schedule, and I didn't want people paying to get early access to episodes that weren't coming out on time. If you're listening to the show right now, nothing changes for you. You'll continue to get episodes right here--just now at the same time as every else. That said, if you do want to support ReImagining Liberty, there are three ways you can do it. First, leave a review on Apple Podcasts. This helps Apple to show the podcast to more people, and encourages people who find it to subscribe. Second, tell your friends. If you like an episode, forward it along to someone. If you like the show, tell people about it. Third, I have a free newsletter at www.aaronrosspowell.com. Sign up for that to get my new writing. Any or all of those three is a huge help and does a ton for the show. Okay, now on to today's episode. The election results very much have liberalism on the defensive. The Trump years are likely to be quite dark, the darkest most of us have seen in our lifetimes. There's a lot liberals can do to fight back, and we'll explore that in future episodes. One area we need to pay a lot of attention to is why the arguments we make--and by "we" I mean what we might label "market liberals"--fail to persuade everyone they need to persuade. Today's episode is very much about that. It's about a position that overlaps with a lot of liberal principles, but also rejects a lot of the free market positions I and other market liberals take. My guest is my friend Matthew McManus, a ReImagining Liberty regular. He's a lecturer in Political Science at the University of Michigan. In his new book, The Political Theory of Liberal Socialism, he argues that not only are socialism and liberalism compatible, but that the future of liberalism depends upon the embrace of certain kinds of socialism. I'm unsurprisingly skeptical about many aspects of that argument, which is why I wanted to get Matt on the show to discuss it. I think his book sets out clearly a widely believed argument from the left against market liberalism. So I've brought him on to set out and defend his case and to help draw out the primary points of disagreement between his view of liberalism and mine. Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod.

Unless you're an early access supporter of the show, this is the last episode you'll hear before the presidential election, which will profoundly shape the state, or looming absence, of American democracy. The critical importance of the choice between Harris and Trump has much of the country thinking about getting more people involved in politics—and the question of political participation, and particularly how much of it is reasonable, is what my guest spends a great deal of his time thinking about. Kevin J. Elliott is a political scientist and Lecturer in Ethics, Politics, & Economics at Yale University. He's the author of Democracy for Busy People, and I've brought him back on the show to discuss the barriers to democratic participation, the "Paradox of Empowerment," and what it would look like to get more Americans interested in the political process. Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? ⁠⁠⁠⁠Become a supporter⁠⁠⁠⁠ and get early access and other perks. Produced by ⁠⁠⁠⁠Landry Ayres⁠⁠⁠⁠. Podcast art by ⁠⁠⁠⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠⁠⁠⁠. Music by ⁠⁠⁠⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠⁠⁠⁠.

An important theme of this show is the role of rhetoric in politics. It's not just the arguments we make that matter, but when we choose to make them, and how we talk about political issues. And we can learn a lot about the people who disagree with us not just by parsing their arguments, but by paying attention to when and how they make them. This is critically important in a political environment as charged, fraught, and arguably on-the-brink as ours in the days before a presidential election. And the fact is, with the acute threat from the right to the very foundations of our liberal, open, and democratic society, much of our journalism has fallen into a particularly worrying rhetoric, one that downplays these threats, while stirring up resentment towards vulnerable groups. I can't think of anyone better to talk with about these issues central to our political life than Parker Molloy. She's a Chicago-based writer and author of the indispensable The Present Age, a newsletter about communication in a hyperconnected world. Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? ⁠⁠⁠Become a supporter⁠⁠⁠ and get early access and other perks. Produced by ⁠⁠⁠Landry Ayres⁠⁠⁠. Podcast art by ⁠⁠⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠⁠⁠. Music by ⁠⁠⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠⁠⁠.

We're staring down the barrel of a presidential election, one that highlights deep questions about democracy and political participation. If our goal is radically more freedom, how should we think about democracy's place in achieving that, given that the popular will often isn't for more freedom. And if the system, as it exists, is rather far from fully just, how should we approach participating in it? These are questions libertarians, and others, raise frequently, and they're worth taking more seriously than most people do. To help us think through them, I'm joined by my good friend Andy Craig. He's a Fellow in Liberalism at the Institute for Humane Studies and an expert on election laws and democratic theory. Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? ⁠⁠Become a supporter⁠⁠ and get early access and other perks. Produced by ⁠⁠Landry Ayres⁠⁠. Podcast art by ⁠⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠⁠. Music by ⁠⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠⁠.

When Biden dropped out of the presidential race and Harris took over, we witnessed not just a change in candidate, but a change in rhetoric. Harris's campaign began talking in the language of "freedom" and "liberty." Harris's running mate, Tim Walz, contrasted himself with the meddlesome social conservatism of JD Vance by saying he was for "minding your own business." For those of us who have long championed a politics of radical liberty, this was met by both enthusiasm and suspicion. Enthusiasm, because it's good for the country to have a major party talking in those terms, especially as the GOP has abandoned anything like a commitment to political and social liberty. Suspicion because, despite all there talk, there are plenty of ways Harris and Walz want the government to get in the way of minding your own business. To talk about this shift, and the opportunities it might offer to better make the case for radical liberalism, I'm joined by Joshua Eakle, co-founder and president of Project Liberal. Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? ⁠Become a supporter⁠ and get early access and other perks. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

This, as it says on the tin, is a show about liberalism. But teasing out what that term means can be challenging. Not just because it's philosophically complex, but because common usage of terms doesn't always conform to rigorous conceptual categories, and even when it does, language evolves. That's the jumping off point for today's conversation. My guest is Samantha Hancox-Li and she's a writer, game designer, and associate editor at Liberal Currents. We discuss what it means to be liberal, and how that's distinct from being a progressive. Then we talk about what liberals can learn from progressives, and where progressives sometimes go wrong in matching their political actions to their values. It's a conversation about political engagement, political rhetoric, and the right way to change the world. Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks. Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod.

A liberal society is necessarily an open and diverse one. When people are free to move and free to choose, a country's population and culture will reflect all those differences in tastes, preferences, and ways of living. And that's part of what makes liberalism so great.But a pluralistic society can be bothersome for those who'd prefer everyone be just like them. And if those sorts get uncomfortable enough with cultural diversity and dynamism, they can turn against liberalism itself.To help think through these tensions, and how liberalism can defend itself against those who would rather it weren't so diverse, I've brought on my friend Jacob T. Levy. He's the Tomlinson Professor of Political Theory at McGill University and author of the terrific book Rationalism, Pluralism, and Freedom.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

I'm joined today by Janet Bufton, Program Coordinator & Co-Founder at the Institute for Liberal Studies. I'm a little embarassed it's taken me this long to get her on the show, because she's one of the most thoughtful advocates out there of the kind of genuine and broad liberalism--and liberal values--that are at the heart of ReImagining Liberty.We discuss the link between liberalism and liberation, the intellectual history that's led many self-described liberals and libertarians to be skeptical of robust social liberalism, and how we can better position liberalism to meet illiberal challengers.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On June 7th, David Boaz died. He was the Executive Vice President of the Cato Institute, author of *The Libertarian Mind*, and the most important figure in the libertarian movement in the last half century. He was also my mentor, my close friend, and, for twelve years, my boss.I had the privilege of holding, for the first two of those years, what is among the most exclusive, challenging, and rewarding jobs in Washington: Staff Writer at the Cato Institute, a role that primarily meant being David's right-hand man and primary conversation partner.David's life and work are worth celebrating, and his legacy worth cherishing. He set the standard for how to live one's principles, lead a profoundly moral life, and change the world for the better while doing it.I'm delighted to bring together a group of my fellow staff writers to talk about what David meant to the libertarian movement, what it was like to work for him, and how he enriched our lives.Aaron Steelman is a Senior Fellow and Policy Adviser at the Cato Institute, and has the honor of being David's very first staff writer.Julian Sanchez has worked as a journalist and policy analyst.Maria Santos Bier is the Director of Foundation and Corporate Relations at the Cato Institute.Andy Craig is Director of Election Policy at the Rainey Center.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Politics gets pretty emotional, and we typically view that as bad. The political scene would be better, we suppose, if more people could set aside their emotions and rationally engage with the hard questions.My guest today isn't so sure. Jason Canon is a PhD candidate at the University of Cambridge in political science, and while he doesn't reject reason, he argues that emotion plays, and ought to play, a much larger role in how we think about and approach politics than it typically gets. Reason doesn't work without emotion, and emotions can lead us to better political outcomes.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Among the various ideologies opposing liberalism that have seen new or renewed prominence in the last decade is Christian nationalism. It motivates quite a lot of the far right in the culture war, played a role in the attempted overthrow of American democracy on January 6th, and seems to be everywhere on social media.But what is it? Where did it come from? And how can liberalism respond?My guest today is my good friend Paul Matzko. He's an historian and author of The Radio Right: How a Band of Broadcasters Took on the Federal Government and Built the Modern Conservative Movement.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today's conversation is a good one, but I struggle to come up with a straightforward summary for this intro. I brought back on my good friend, and frequent guest, Cory Massimino to discuss anarchism in theory and practice. And that where we start. But we also get into a larger conversation about the nature of political debate, and the rhetoric of political change that goes well beyond the narrow confines of whether anarchism is good or bad, or what we can learn from it.This is one of those big ideas episodes of ReImagining Liberty, and why I so value talking with Cory. He's an independent scholar and a Fellow at the Center for a Stateless Society, where he hosts the podcasts "Mutual Exchange Radio" and "The Long Library."Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

One of my goals for this show is to explore the complexities of issues people have strong opinions about and assume are straightforward. And it's difficult to think of one that fits that bill better than guns.Today I'm joined by my long time friend and Free Thoughts podcast co-host, constitutional lawyer Trevor Burrus. We talk about the causes of and misconceptions around gun violence, and how a free society should approach both the role of guns and the challenges of limiting the harm they do.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We're all ideological, even if we don't admit it. We like to think of everyone else as ideological, but imagine our own views to be “reality-based,” simply a clear-eyed picture of how things really are. That's nonsense, and today's episode is all about why.My guest is Jason Blakely, a political science professor at Pepperdine University and author of the new book Lost in Ideology: Interpreting Modern Political Life. We discuss what ideology is, what purpose it plays, how it differs from religion, and why we should think of ideology as both a culture and a map.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Populism is a bundle of bad ideas motivated primarily by grievances. Once result is set of economic preferences that will only make the country poorer.With populism on the ballot in November, I've brought on my friend and old colleague Ryan A. Bourne to talk about the errors of populist economics. Ryan is the R. Evan Scharf Chair for the Public Understanding of Economics at the Cato Institute, and author of one of the best books about the pandemic, Economics in One Virus: An Introduction to Economic Reasoning through COVID-19.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The right has a problem with women. I don't mean in the sense that women are far less likely to vote for right-wing candidates than men are, though it is true that we have women voters to thank for our avoidance, so far, of the country turning fully towards hard-right authoritarianism. Instead, I mean that misogyny is much more openly expressed by the American right than was the case ten years ago, with influencers, politicians, and conservative leaders defending the view that not only are men and women different, but that the only just social hierarchy is one with men at the top.My guest, Cathy Reisenwitz, has been writing about the diverging politics and ideology of men and women at her newsletter, Sex and the State. She joins me today to talk about why so many men have convinced themselves they're smarter than women, and how that can help us understand our contemporary political scene.If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty, I encourage you to subscribe to my free newsletter, where I write frequently about the kinds of issues we discuss on the show. And if you want to support my work, you can become a member and get early access to all new episodes. Learn more by heading to reimaginingliberty.com.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Digital expression is weird. When we move our communities and communications into digital spaces, such as social media, the result is an uncertain landscape of new incentives, mechanisms of influence, vectors of information and disinformation, and evolving norms. All of which have profound effects on our personal lives, our culture, and our politics.Few people have put as much thought into how these platforms function, or dysfunction, as social ecosystems as Renée DiResta, Research Manager at the Stanford Internet Observatory. In today's conversation, we dig into what makes social media distinct, how communities form and interact online, and what evolving technologies mean for the future of digital expression.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.