Podcast appearances and mentions of joseph fishkin

Season 5, Episode 4 features the 28th Annual Frankel Lecture, “The Perennial Eclipse: Race, Immigration, and How Latinx Count in American Politics.” Our keynote Frankel Lecturer was Professor Rachel Moran of Texas A&M School of Law. Her commenters were Ilya Somin, Professor of law at George Mason University, and Joseph Fishkin, Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law. Tune in on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or any other streaming platform for a fascinating and informative discussion about race, ethnicity, voting and Texas.On behalf of the Houston Law Review, Emphasis Added would like to thank Professor Moran, Professor Somin, and Professor Fishkin for sharing their work with us. We are also deeply grateful to the Frankel family for their 28 years of support in fueling the Law Center's ability to host timely and intellectual conversations on important legal issues.For more Emphasis Added content, follow us on Instagram and check out our video content on YouTube!

If the plaintiffs get their way, Moore vs United States could be the wedge that prevents a wealth tax. Guests on this show are law professors and authors Joseph Fishkin and William Forbath whose op-ed in the New York Times The post The Case Before the SupCo That Could Hjiack a Wealth Tax appeared first on Keeping Democracy Alive.

Squarely in the heart of the Trump administration, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt published a book titled How Democracies Die which proved enormously popular. Celebrities read it. Obama read it. Most people you know probably pretended to have read it. Five years later, Levitsky and Ziblatt are back with a sequel of sorts, arguing that in the United States, democracy might never have been fully alive in the first place, strangled in the cradle by our very own constitution. To explain how their thinking has changed since How Democracies Die and discuss the new book, Tyranny of the Minority, we're thrilled to have on today's podcast Daniel Ziblatt, Eaton Professor of Government at Harvard University and director of the Transformations of Democracy group at Berlin's Social Science Center. In this episode, we poke around into all of the different ways the United States privileges minoritarian politics. Ziblatt explains that a major contribution of Tyranny of the Minority is showing how regular politics interact with our constitution's minoritarianism to create a particularly potent anti-democratic danger for the United States. We discuss the legislative advantage minorities have in the U.S. thanks to our love of holding onto grand old traditions like the filibuster and what that means for statutory interpretation. Democratic backsliding, the advantages of party politics, papal smoke and mirrors–it's all in there. We hope you enjoy. This podcast is generously supported by Themis Bar Review. Referenced Readings How Democracies Die by Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt Democratic Justice: Felix Frankfurter, the Supreme Court, and the Making of the Liberal Establishment by Brad Snyder “Inside or Outside the System?” by Eric Posner and Adrian Vermuele After Misogyny: How the Law Fails Women and What to Do about It by Julie Suk The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy by Joseph Fishkin and William Forbath “The Insulation of Local Governance from Black Electoral Power: Northern Cities and the Great Migration” by Jacob Grumbach, Robert Mickey, and Daniel Ziblatt

On this edition of Parallax Views, Joseph Fishkin, Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law, joins us to discuss his new book, co-authored with William E. Forbath, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy. Oligarchy is a term often used when describing power players in countries like Russia. But what of the United States? And what can a look at the Founding Father and the Constitution tells us about American concerns about oligarchic wealth and power throughout U.S. history? In this conversation we seek to answer that question and we talk about the history of progressive reforms in the U.S. and debates that have been had over the Constitution over the years. Additionally, Joseph and I discuss constitutional arguments, the problem with overconcentration of wealth into the hands of the few, and Fishkin's belief that American liberals and the left must not ceded constitutional arguments to the right-wing. Among the topics covered: - Beliefs among the Founding Fathers about the need for a broad middle class for the Republic to function and how to much wealth concentrated into the hands of landed oligarchs would be disruptive - FDR and the "Democracy of Opportunity" tradition; wealth inequality as a hinderance to freedom; how we conceptualize the idea of freedom on the right and the left of the political spectrum - How the American right-wing seized the ground of Constitutional arguments - The Supreme Court - Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Alexander Hamilton, class, and divisions amongst the Founding Fathers on certain issues - The Civil War, Reconstruction,  Abolitionists, Radical Republicans, the landed aristocracy, slavery and "Forty Acres and a Mule" - The collapse of Reconstruction, the political system in the South, the landed aristocracy and the use of wealth to influence politics - The landed aristocracy's attempts to prevent fusion politics between the poor black and poor whites; fusionist pro-labor politics as a challenge to oligarchic interest in the South - Explaining the Gilded Age of the late 19th and early 20th century; the resistance to the massive wealth concentration and monopolies of that time; the emerging American underclass in the Gilded Age; the call for better wage, redistribution of wealth, and more that informed the early 20th century labor movement - How early 20th century courts used constitutional law arguments to put down labor strikes; how populists and progressives crafted constitutional counter-arguments against the courts' arguments in response; parallels between the Gilded Age and today (are we living in The Second Gilded Age?) - Constitutional arguments as needing to be within the realm of politics rather than just arguments to be made in the courts; progressive claims on the Constitution; Franklin Delano Roosevelt's contention that the Constitution is a "laymen's document" rather than just a lawyer's document full of arcana to be argued over by elites - The history of American populism and it's importance; the hijacking of American populism; right-wing populism and how the right-wing defines elitism and elites in a way that differs from the left; "The Kingfish" Huey Long; Bernie Sanders and populism - LBJ's "The Great Society" and the phenomena Fishkin and Forbath refer to as "The Great Forgetting"; FDR and the New Deal; court-packing; social security and labor law; the left's move towards making technical expertise arguments over constitutional arguments - Campaign finance law and the need for Constitutional arguments in the U.S. today - And much, much more!

It's Day 1 of the Best of 2022! Here's Sam speaking with William Forbath, Associate Dean for Research at the University of Texas at Austin Law School, and Joseph Fishkin,  Professor at the UCLA School of Law, to discuss their recent book The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of Democracy. Then, Sam and Emma chat with John Hodgman and David Rees to discuss their new project "Dicktown" on FXX! Check out William and Joseph's book here: https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674980624 Check out Dicktown here: https://www.hulu.com/series/dicktown-845eca18-d4d6-46a3-a575-212f4b98fea3 Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join Subscribe to the ESVN YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/esvnshow Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! http://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: http://majority.fm/app Check out today's sponsors: Sunset Lake CBD: sunsetlakecbd is a majority employee owned farm in Vermont, producing 100% pesticide free CBD products. Great company, great product and fans of the show! Use code Leftisbest and get 20% off at http://www.sunsetlakecbd.com. All NEW hemp smokables— flower, and smalls— are buyone get one free! Mix and match cultivars to find your new favorite. No promo code needed. Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattBinder @MattLech @BF1nn @BradKAlsop Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on Youtube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Subscribe to Discourse Blog, a newsletter and website for progressive essays and related fun partly run by AM Quickie writer Jack Crosbie. https://discourseblog.com/ Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com/ The Majority Report with Sam Seder - https://majorityreportradio.com/

In this special episode John interviews filmmaker, author, and actor Guillermo del Toro about his new stop-motion animated musical adaptation of Pinocchio. And then he interviews Professor William Forbath and Professor Joseph Fishkin - authors of the new book: "The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy". See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

US Generals and Admirals on MBS's Payroll Oversee the Transfer of Advanced Weapons Even Our Reliable Allies Can't Buy | Iran's Regime is Losing Its Grip as Members of the IRGC and Basij Refuse to Shoot Down Teenage Girls | How to Reverse Our Slide Into Oligarchy Enabled by a Reactionary Supreme Court backgroundbriefing.org/donate twitter.com/ianmastersmedia facebook.com/ianmastersmedia

This episode of the series comes from the Democracy in Danger podcast, hosted by Will Hitchcock & Siva Vaidhyanathan, featuring Melissa Schwartzberg and Joseph Fishkin.The U.S. Constitution is an 18th-century straitjacket. It's almost impossible to amend, it gives outsize power to small states, and its meaning is subject to the whims of unelected and increasingly intransigent judges. So what's new? Well, you might be intrigued to learn on this episode just how America might wrench itself out of that morass, short of trashing the Constitution altogether. With the 2022 midterms on the horizon, our two guests offer up a few ideas — some new, some as old as Athens.GuestsMelissa Schwartzberg is a political theorist and the Silver Professor of Politics at New York University. Her work focuses on the historical origins of democracy and ancient Greek institutions. She is the author of Counting the Many: The Origins and Limits of Supermajority Rule (2014, Cambridge University Press). Schwartzberg is a frequent contributor to Vox and the Washington Post.Joseph Fishkin is a professor of law at the University of California–Los Angeles, and a specialist in constitutional law. His new book, with William Forbath, is The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (2022, Harvard University Press). Earlier in his career, Fishkin clerked for Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. His work has appeared in the Yale Law Journal, the Columbia Law Review and the Supreme Court Review, among other leading journals. Fishkin also blogs at Balkinization. Follow him on Twitter @joeyfishkin.Additional InformationDemocracy in Danger PodcastMore shows from The Democracy Group

Dr. Joseph Fishkin is a Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law, where he teaches and writes about employment discrimination law, election law, constitutional law, education law, fair housing law, poverty and inequality, and distributive justice. Before joining the UCLA faculty he taught for a decade at the University of Texas School of Law, where he was the Marrs McLean Professor in Law. Holding a Ph.D. in Politics from Oxford University, his latest book is titled The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy.

For decades now, the conservative legal movement has been on a mission to remake this nation's laws from the bench. And it's working. On Friday we released an episode with the legal scholar Kate Shaw that walked through case after case showing how conservative Supreme Court majorities have lurched this country's laws to the right on guns, voting, gerrymandering, regulatory authority, unions, campaign finance and more in the past 20 years. And if the Dobbs majority is any indication, this rightward shift is just getting started.But this conservative legal revolution is only half of the story. The other half is just as important: the collapse of liberal constitutional thinking. Liberals have “lost anything that would animate a positive theory of what the Constitution should be,” says the legal scholar Larry Kramer. “And so they've been left with a kind of potpourri of leftover things from the periods when liberals were ascendant in the '60s and '70s.”Kramer is a former dean of Stanford Law School, the current president of the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the author of“The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial Review.” And according to him, it hasn't always been this way. For most of American history, politicians, from Jefferson to Lincoln to Franklin Roosevelt, believed that constitutional interpretation was inextricable from politics. And they put forward distinct visions of what the Constitution meant and the kind of country it was written to build. But then, in response to the progressive victories of the Warren court, liberals began to embrace the doctrine of judicial supremacy: the view that the final authority on the Constitution rests with the courts. This has resulted in both the conservative legal victories of the past few decades and liberals' muddled, weak response.So this is a conversation about the collapse of liberal constitutional politics: why it happened, what we can learn from it and what a renewed, progressive vision of the Constitution could look like. We also discuss why the founders weren't actually originalists at all, whether liberal constitutional thinking has been captured by the legal profession, what a liberal alternative to originalism could consist of, why changing the size of the court (despite its controversies) has been an important tool for staving off constitutional crisis, the case for an “anti-oligarchy Constitution,” the merits of imposing supermajority requirements on court decisions and nominations, why Kramer views Roosevelt's infamous court-packing effort as a major success and more.Mentioned:Larry Kramer's testimony at the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States“Judicial Supremacy and the End of Judicial Restraint” by Larry D. Kramer“Marbury and the Retreat from Judicial Supremacy” by Larry D. Kramer“The Judicial Tug of War” by Adam Bonica and Maya SenBook recommendations:The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution by Joseph Fishkin and William E. ForbathThe Second Creation by Jonathan GienappWhen We Cease to Understand the World by Benjamín LabatutWe're hiring a researcher! You can apply here or by visiting nytimes.wd5.myworkdayjobs.com/NewsThoughts? Guest suggestions? Email us at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com.You can find transcripts (posted midday) and more episodes of “The Ezra Klein Show” at nytimes.com/ezra-klein-podcast, and you can find Ezra on Twitter @ezraklein. Book recommendations from all our guests are listed at https://www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-klein-show-book-recs.“The Ezra Klein Show” is produced by Annie Galvin and Rogé Karma; fact-checking by Michelle Harris, Mary Marge Locker, Kate Sinclair and Irene Noguchi; original music and mixing by Isaac Jones; audience strategy by Shannon Busta. Our executive producer is Irene Noguchi. Special thanks to Kristin Lin and Kristina Samulewski.

Is Trump Blackmailing the GOP Into Submission Threatening to Run as an Independent? | What Can the Biden Administration Do to Mitigate or Undo the Supreme Court's Assault on Women's Reproductive Rights? backgroundbriefing.org/donate twitter.com/ianmastersmedia facebook.com/ianmastersmedia

Sam hosts William Forbath, Associate Dean for Research at the University of Texas at Austin Law School, and Joseph Fishkin,  Professor at the UCLA School of Law, to discuss their recent book The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of Democracy. Sam first runs through recent updates, from AOC and progressives pushing the White House to take action on Roe and the discovery of 46 dead migrants in an abandoned San Antonio trailer, to the GOP's insistence that, no, fundamentally undermining reproductive rights in the country ISN'T important, and everything is basically the same. Then, he's joined by William Forbath and Professor Joseph Fishkin as they dive right into the state of the public's relationship to the US Constitution, with the left lacking a vision of how it functions within the political society and the right having successfully ingrained it as central to how the constitution shapes policy, before situating our political era as a second Gilded Age defined by economic and political inequality, and why the left's lack of a constitutional vision means that these are not seen as constitutional issues. Next, they trace the recent history of how the two US parties relate to the court, with the institutionalist liberals basking in the afterglow of the Warren court while the GOP, since at least Nixon, has seen opposition to the Court's “progressive” nature as central to their victories. Forbath and Fishkin then jump back to the founders, assessing how they weighed their beliefs of a judicial system as central to a functioning democracy while understanding that it had no right to overrule the will of the people via the legislature, seeing the constitution as a check on the concentration of power to be used against governmental institutions, and thus puts forward a duty to legislate against economic and political concentration. They then shift to the rise of the anti-slavery Republican Party in the mid 19th Century and their vacation of the South as any semblance of a base until they had begun to dismantle the concentration of economic and political power in the region with the prevalence of slave owners and the electoral role of the 3/5ths clause, moving into an era of egalitarian constitutionalism emphasizing checks on concentrations of economic and political powers and a distribution of opportunity that extends across race gender, that saw the Reconstruction amendments (despite clear loopholes) attempt to reshape the role of the constitution. Next comes the 20th Century, as they walk through the rise of federal courts in the wake of the industrial revolution and the simultaneous populist political movement that came out against the rising concentration of wealth, with Taft attempting to build up the Court's stature as it became clear they were on the side of the corporation, only for his (physical and meta) attempts to culminate during the reign of FDR after he forced the anti-democratic court into lockstep with him. They wrap up the interview by looking at the lasting effects of the post-FDR Warren Court, and the current shattering of the view of the courts as apolitical, before looking forwards to the upcoming judicial attacks against legislative capacities and how we can move forwards in a way that bolsters the will of the people rather than the deification of the Courts. And in the Fun Half: Sam interviews special guest Saul Seder on the state of the 3rd grade, parental rights in the state of Disney, the superiority of Jim Carrey over his father, and summarizes highlights from the 2022 little league season. Then Sam and the crew dive into Cassidy Hutchinson's surprise hearing for the 1/6 committee, Kamala Harris' only solution to the Dobbs decision being still holding midterm elections (rather than…?), and a GOP candidates' commitment to cop brotherhood by refusing to acknowledge the existence of rape. Rudy describes the reverberations of his assault, Hutchinson covers Trump's violent outbursts on and leading up to 1/6, and Russia goes after Ukrainian civilians, plus, your calls and IMs! Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here:  https://madmimi.com/signups/170390/join Join the Majority Report Discord! http://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Check out today's sponsors: Check out JustCoffee and get 25% off with the code MR25! https://justcoffee.coop/ Aura: Protect yourself from America's fastest-growing crime. Try Aura for 14 days for free: https://aura.com/majority Support the St. Vincent Nurses today! https://action.massnurses.org/we-stand-with-st-vincents-nurses/ Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on Youtube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Subscribe to Matt's other show Literary Hangover on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/literaryhangover Check out The Nomiki Show on YouTube. https://www.patreon.com/thenomikishow Check out Matt Binder's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon's show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out The Letterhack's upcoming Kickstarter project for his new graphic novel! https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/milagrocomic/milagro-heroe-de-las-calles Subscribe to Discourse Blog, a newsletter and website for progressive essays and related fun partly run by AM Quickie writer Jack Crosbie. https://discourseblog.com/ Subscribe to AM Quickie writer Corey Pein's podcast News from Nowhere. https://www.patreon.com/newsfromnowhere  Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattBinder @MattLech @BF1nn @BradKAlsop Check out AidAccess here: https://aidaccess.org/ The Majority Report with Sam Seder - https://majorityreportradio.com/

Oligarchy is a threat to the American republic. When too much economic and political power is concentrated in too few hands, we risk losing the “republican form of government” the Constitution requires. Today, courts enforce the constitution as if it had almost nothing to say about this threat. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) is a bold call to reclaim an American tradition that argues the constitution imposes a duty on government to fight oligarchy and ensure broadly shared wealth. In this revolutionary retelling of constitutional history, Dr. Joseph Fishkin and Dr. William Forbath show that a commitment to prevent oligarchy once stood at the center of a robust tradition in American political and constitutional thought. Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath argue that “The constitutional order does rest and depend on a political-economic order. That political-economic order does not maintain itself. It requires action (as well as forbearance from action) from each part of the government. The content of what is required changes radically over time in a dynamic way in response to changes in the economy and in politics. But we believe the basic principles of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition remain affirmative constitutional obligations of government today: to prevent an oligarchy from emerging and amassing too much power; to preserve a broad and open middle class as a counterweight against oligarchy and a bulwark of democratic life; and to include everyone, not just those privileged by race or sex, in a democracy of op- portunity that is broad enough to unite us all.” Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath demonstrate that reformers, legislators, and even judges working in this “democracy-of-opportunity” tradition understood that the Constitution imposes a duty on legislatures to thwart oligarchy and promote a broad distribution of wealth and political power. These ideas led Jacksonians to fight special economic privileges for the few, Populists to try to break up monopoly power, and Progressives to fight for the constitutional right to form a union. During Reconstruction, Radical Republicans argued in this tradition that racial equality required breaking up the oligarchy of the Slave Power and distributing wealth and opportunity to former slaves and their descendants. President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers built their politics around this tradition, winning the fight against the “economic royalists” and “industrial despots.” The book argues that our current understanding of what counts as a constitutional argument is anachronistic and limiting. In fact, the authors argue that “advocates of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition and their opponents throughout the long period from the founding through the New Deal disagreed about many things, but they agreed that part of arguing about the Constitution is making claims about what it requires of our political economy. “ This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

Oligarchy is a threat to the American republic. When too much economic and political power is concentrated in too few hands, we risk losing the “republican form of government” the Constitution requires. Today, courts enforce the constitution as if it had almost nothing to say about this threat. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) is a bold call to reclaim an American tradition that argues the constitution imposes a duty on government to fight oligarchy and ensure broadly shared wealth. In this revolutionary retelling of constitutional history, Dr. Joseph Fishkin and Dr. William Forbath show that a commitment to prevent oligarchy once stood at the center of a robust tradition in American political and constitutional thought. Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath argue that “The constitutional order does rest and depend on a political-economic order. That political-economic order does not maintain itself. It requires action (as well as forbearance from action) from each part of the government. The content of what is required changes radically over time in a dynamic way in response to changes in the economy and in politics. But we believe the basic principles of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition remain affirmative constitutional obligations of government today: to prevent an oligarchy from emerging and amassing too much power; to preserve a broad and open middle class as a counterweight against oligarchy and a bulwark of democratic life; and to include everyone, not just those privileged by race or sex, in a democracy of op- portunity that is broad enough to unite us all.” Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath demonstrate that reformers, legislators, and even judges working in this “democracy-of-opportunity” tradition understood that the Constitution imposes a duty on legislatures to thwart oligarchy and promote a broad distribution of wealth and political power. These ideas led Jacksonians to fight special economic privileges for the few, Populists to try to break up monopoly power, and Progressives to fight for the constitutional right to form a union. During Reconstruction, Radical Republicans argued in this tradition that racial equality required breaking up the oligarchy of the Slave Power and distributing wealth and opportunity to former slaves and their descendants. President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers built their politics around this tradition, winning the fight against the “economic royalists” and “industrial despots.” The book argues that our current understanding of what counts as a constitutional argument is anachronistic and limiting. In fact, the authors argue that “advocates of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition and their opponents throughout the long period from the founding through the New Deal disagreed about many things, but they agreed that part of arguing about the Constitution is making claims about what it requires of our political economy. “ This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Oligarchy is a threat to the American republic. When too much economic and political power is concentrated in too few hands, we risk losing the “republican form of government” the Constitution requires. Today, courts enforce the constitution as if it had almost nothing to say about this threat. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) is a bold call to reclaim an American tradition that argues the constitution imposes a duty on government to fight oligarchy and ensure broadly shared wealth. In this revolutionary retelling of constitutional history, Dr. Joseph Fishkin and Dr. William Forbath show that a commitment to prevent oligarchy once stood at the center of a robust tradition in American political and constitutional thought. Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath argue that “The constitutional order does rest and depend on a political-economic order. That political-economic order does not maintain itself. It requires action (as well as forbearance from action) from each part of the government. The content of what is required changes radically over time in a dynamic way in response to changes in the economy and in politics. But we believe the basic principles of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition remain affirmative constitutional obligations of government today: to prevent an oligarchy from emerging and amassing too much power; to preserve a broad and open middle class as a counterweight against oligarchy and a bulwark of democratic life; and to include everyone, not just those privileged by race or sex, in a democracy of op- portunity that is broad enough to unite us all.” Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath demonstrate that reformers, legislators, and even judges working in this “democracy-of-opportunity” tradition understood that the Constitution imposes a duty on legislatures to thwart oligarchy and promote a broad distribution of wealth and political power. These ideas led Jacksonians to fight special economic privileges for the few, Populists to try to break up monopoly power, and Progressives to fight for the constitutional right to form a union. During Reconstruction, Radical Republicans argued in this tradition that racial equality required breaking up the oligarchy of the Slave Power and distributing wealth and opportunity to former slaves and their descendants. President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers built their politics around this tradition, winning the fight against the “economic royalists” and “industrial despots.” The book argues that our current understanding of what counts as a constitutional argument is anachronistic and limiting. In fact, the authors argue that “advocates of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition and their opponents throughout the long period from the founding through the New Deal disagreed about many things, but they agreed that part of arguing about the Constitution is making claims about what it requires of our political economy. “ This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Oligarchy is a threat to the American republic. When too much economic and political power is concentrated in too few hands, we risk losing the “republican form of government” the Constitution requires. Today, courts enforce the constitution as if it had almost nothing to say about this threat. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) is a bold call to reclaim an American tradition that argues the constitution imposes a duty on government to fight oligarchy and ensure broadly shared wealth. In this revolutionary retelling of constitutional history, Dr. Joseph Fishkin and Dr. William Forbath show that a commitment to prevent oligarchy once stood at the center of a robust tradition in American political and constitutional thought. Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath argue that “The constitutional order does rest and depend on a political-economic order. That political-economic order does not maintain itself. It requires action (as well as forbearance from action) from each part of the government. The content of what is required changes radically over time in a dynamic way in response to changes in the economy and in politics. But we believe the basic principles of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition remain affirmative constitutional obligations of government today: to prevent an oligarchy from emerging and amassing too much power; to preserve a broad and open middle class as a counterweight against oligarchy and a bulwark of democratic life; and to include everyone, not just those privileged by race or sex, in a democracy of op- portunity that is broad enough to unite us all.” Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath demonstrate that reformers, legislators, and even judges working in this “democracy-of-opportunity” tradition understood that the Constitution imposes a duty on legislatures to thwart oligarchy and promote a broad distribution of wealth and political power. These ideas led Jacksonians to fight special economic privileges for the few, Populists to try to break up monopoly power, and Progressives to fight for the constitutional right to form a union. During Reconstruction, Radical Republicans argued in this tradition that racial equality required breaking up the oligarchy of the Slave Power and distributing wealth and opportunity to former slaves and their descendants. President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers built their politics around this tradition, winning the fight against the “economic royalists” and “industrial despots.” The book argues that our current understanding of what counts as a constitutional argument is anachronistic and limiting. In fact, the authors argue that “advocates of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition and their opponents throughout the long period from the founding through the New Deal disagreed about many things, but they agreed that part of arguing about the Constitution is making claims about what it requires of our political economy. “ This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

Oligarchy is a threat to the American republic. When too much economic and political power is concentrated in too few hands, we risk losing the “republican form of government” the Constitution requires. Today, courts enforce the constitution as if it had almost nothing to say about this threat. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) is a bold call to reclaim an American tradition that argues the constitution imposes a duty on government to fight oligarchy and ensure broadly shared wealth. In this revolutionary retelling of constitutional history, Dr. Joseph Fishkin and Dr. William Forbath show that a commitment to prevent oligarchy once stood at the center of a robust tradition in American political and constitutional thought. Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath argue that “The constitutional order does rest and depend on a political-economic order. That political-economic order does not maintain itself. It requires action (as well as forbearance from action) from each part of the government. The content of what is required changes radically over time in a dynamic way in response to changes in the economy and in politics. But we believe the basic principles of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition remain affirmative constitutional obligations of government today: to prevent an oligarchy from emerging and amassing too much power; to preserve a broad and open middle class as a counterweight against oligarchy and a bulwark of democratic life; and to include everyone, not just those privileged by race or sex, in a democracy of op- portunity that is broad enough to unite us all.” Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath demonstrate that reformers, legislators, and even judges working in this “democracy-of-opportunity” tradition understood that the Constitution imposes a duty on legislatures to thwart oligarchy and promote a broad distribution of wealth and political power. These ideas led Jacksonians to fight special economic privileges for the few, Populists to try to break up monopoly power, and Progressives to fight for the constitutional right to form a union. During Reconstruction, Radical Republicans argued in this tradition that racial equality required breaking up the oligarchy of the Slave Power and distributing wealth and opportunity to former slaves and their descendants. President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers built their politics around this tradition, winning the fight against the “economic royalists” and “industrial despots.” The book argues that our current understanding of what counts as a constitutional argument is anachronistic and limiting. In fact, the authors argue that “advocates of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition and their opponents throughout the long period from the founding through the New Deal disagreed about many things, but they agreed that part of arguing about the Constitution is making claims about what it requires of our political economy. “ This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/finance

Oligarchy is a threat to the American republic. When too much economic and political power is concentrated in too few hands, we risk losing the “republican form of government” the Constitution requires. Today, courts enforce the constitution as if it had almost nothing to say about this threat. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) is a bold call to reclaim an American tradition that argues the constitution imposes a duty on government to fight oligarchy and ensure broadly shared wealth. In this revolutionary retelling of constitutional history, Dr. Joseph Fishkin and Dr. William Forbath show that a commitment to prevent oligarchy once stood at the center of a robust tradition in American political and constitutional thought. Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath argue that “The constitutional order does rest and depend on a political-economic order. That political-economic order does not maintain itself. It requires action (as well as forbearance from action) from each part of the government. The content of what is required changes radically over time in a dynamic way in response to changes in the economy and in politics. But we believe the basic principles of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition remain affirmative constitutional obligations of government today: to prevent an oligarchy from emerging and amassing too much power; to preserve a broad and open middle class as a counterweight against oligarchy and a bulwark of democratic life; and to include everyone, not just those privileged by race or sex, in a democracy of op- portunity that is broad enough to unite us all.” Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath demonstrate that reformers, legislators, and even judges working in this “democracy-of-opportunity” tradition understood that the Constitution imposes a duty on legislatures to thwart oligarchy and promote a broad distribution of wealth and political power. These ideas led Jacksonians to fight special economic privileges for the few, Populists to try to break up monopoly power, and Progressives to fight for the constitutional right to form a union. During Reconstruction, Radical Republicans argued in this tradition that racial equality required breaking up the oligarchy of the Slave Power and distributing wealth and opportunity to former slaves and their descendants. President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers built their politics around this tradition, winning the fight against the “economic royalists” and “industrial despots.” The book argues that our current understanding of what counts as a constitutional argument is anachronistic and limiting. In fact, the authors argue that “advocates of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition and their opponents throughout the long period from the founding through the New Deal disagreed about many things, but they agreed that part of arguing about the Constitution is making claims about what it requires of our political economy. “ This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Oligarchy is a threat to the American republic. When too much economic and political power is concentrated in too few hands, we risk losing the “republican form of government” the Constitution requires. Today, courts enforce the constitution as if it had almost nothing to say about this threat. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) is a bold call to reclaim an American tradition that argues the constitution imposes a duty on government to fight oligarchy and ensure broadly shared wealth. In this revolutionary retelling of constitutional history, Dr. Joseph Fishkin and Dr. William Forbath show that a commitment to prevent oligarchy once stood at the center of a robust tradition in American political and constitutional thought. Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath argue that “The constitutional order does rest and depend on a political-economic order. That political-economic order does not maintain itself. It requires action (as well as forbearance from action) from each part of the government. The content of what is required changes radically over time in a dynamic way in response to changes in the economy and in politics. But we believe the basic principles of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition remain affirmative constitutional obligations of government today: to prevent an oligarchy from emerging and amassing too much power; to preserve a broad and open middle class as a counterweight against oligarchy and a bulwark of democratic life; and to include everyone, not just those privileged by race or sex, in a democracy of op- portunity that is broad enough to unite us all.” Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath demonstrate that reformers, legislators, and even judges working in this “democracy-of-opportunity” tradition understood that the Constitution imposes a duty on legislatures to thwart oligarchy and promote a broad distribution of wealth and political power. These ideas led Jacksonians to fight special economic privileges for the few, Populists to try to break up monopoly power, and Progressives to fight for the constitutional right to form a union. During Reconstruction, Radical Republicans argued in this tradition that racial equality required breaking up the oligarchy of the Slave Power and distributing wealth and opportunity to former slaves and their descendants. President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers built their politics around this tradition, winning the fight against the “economic royalists” and “industrial despots.” The book argues that our current understanding of what counts as a constitutional argument is anachronistic and limiting. In fact, the authors argue that “advocates of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition and their opponents throughout the long period from the founding through the New Deal disagreed about many things, but they agreed that part of arguing about the Constitution is making claims about what it requires of our political economy. “ This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Oligarchy is a threat to the American republic. When too much economic and political power is concentrated in too few hands, we risk losing the “republican form of government” the Constitution requires. Today, courts enforce the constitution as if it had almost nothing to say about this threat. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) is a bold call to reclaim an American tradition that argues the constitution imposes a duty on government to fight oligarchy and ensure broadly shared wealth. In this revolutionary retelling of constitutional history, Dr. Joseph Fishkin and Dr. William Forbath show that a commitment to prevent oligarchy once stood at the center of a robust tradition in American political and constitutional thought. Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath argue that “The constitutional order does rest and depend on a political-economic order. That political-economic order does not maintain itself. It requires action (as well as forbearance from action) from each part of the government. The content of what is required changes radically over time in a dynamic way in response to changes in the economy and in politics. But we believe the basic principles of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition remain affirmative constitutional obligations of government today: to prevent an oligarchy from emerging and amassing too much power; to preserve a broad and open middle class as a counterweight against oligarchy and a bulwark of democratic life; and to include everyone, not just those privileged by race or sex, in a democracy of op- portunity that is broad enough to unite us all.” Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath demonstrate that reformers, legislators, and even judges working in this “democracy-of-opportunity” tradition understood that the Constitution imposes a duty on legislatures to thwart oligarchy and promote a broad distribution of wealth and political power. These ideas led Jacksonians to fight special economic privileges for the few, Populists to try to break up monopoly power, and Progressives to fight for the constitutional right to form a union. During Reconstruction, Radical Republicans argued in this tradition that racial equality required breaking up the oligarchy of the Slave Power and distributing wealth and opportunity to former slaves and their descendants. President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers built their politics around this tradition, winning the fight against the “economic royalists” and “industrial despots.” The book argues that our current understanding of what counts as a constitutional argument is anachronistic and limiting. In fact, the authors argue that “advocates of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition and their opponents throughout the long period from the founding through the New Deal disagreed about many things, but they agreed that part of arguing about the Constitution is making claims about what it requires of our political economy. “ This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Oligarchy is a threat to the American republic. When too much economic and political power is concentrated in too few hands, we risk losing the “republican form of government” the Constitution requires. Today, courts enforce the constitution as if it had almost nothing to say about this threat. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) is a bold call to reclaim an American tradition that argues the constitution imposes a duty on government to fight oligarchy and ensure broadly shared wealth. In this revolutionary retelling of constitutional history, Dr. Joseph Fishkin and Dr. William Forbath show that a commitment to prevent oligarchy once stood at the center of a robust tradition in American political and constitutional thought. Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath argue that “The constitutional order does rest and depend on a political-economic order. That political-economic order does not maintain itself. It requires action (as well as forbearance from action) from each part of the government. The content of what is required changes radically over time in a dynamic way in response to changes in the economy and in politics. But we believe the basic principles of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition remain affirmative constitutional obligations of government today: to prevent an oligarchy from emerging and amassing too much power; to preserve a broad and open middle class as a counterweight against oligarchy and a bulwark of democratic life; and to include everyone, not just those privileged by race or sex, in a democracy of op- portunity that is broad enough to unite us all.” Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath demonstrate that reformers, legislators, and even judges working in this “democracy-of-opportunity” tradition understood that the Constitution imposes a duty on legislatures to thwart oligarchy and promote a broad distribution of wealth and political power. These ideas led Jacksonians to fight special economic privileges for the few, Populists to try to break up monopoly power, and Progressives to fight for the constitutional right to form a union. During Reconstruction, Radical Republicans argued in this tradition that racial equality required breaking up the oligarchy of the Slave Power and distributing wealth and opportunity to former slaves and their descendants. President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers built their politics around this tradition, winning the fight against the “economic royalists” and “industrial despots.” The book argues that our current understanding of what counts as a constitutional argument is anachronistic and limiting. In fact, the authors argue that “advocates of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition and their opponents throughout the long period from the founding through the New Deal disagreed about many things, but they agreed that part of arguing about the Constitution is making claims about what it requires of our political economy. “ This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Oligarchy is a threat to the American republic. When too much economic and political power is concentrated in too few hands, we risk losing the “republican form of government” the Constitution requires. Today, courts enforce the constitution as if it had almost nothing to say about this threat. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) is a bold call to reclaim an American tradition that argues the constitution imposes a duty on government to fight oligarchy and ensure broadly shared wealth. In this revolutionary retelling of constitutional history, Dr. Joseph Fishkin and Dr. William Forbath show that a commitment to prevent oligarchy once stood at the center of a robust tradition in American political and constitutional thought. Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath argue that “The constitutional order does rest and depend on a political-economic order. That political-economic order does not maintain itself. It requires action (as well as forbearance from action) from each part of the government. The content of what is required changes radically over time in a dynamic way in response to changes in the economy and in politics. But we believe the basic principles of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition remain affirmative constitutional obligations of government today: to prevent an oligarchy from emerging and amassing too much power; to preserve a broad and open middle class as a counterweight against oligarchy and a bulwark of democratic life; and to include everyone, not just those privileged by race or sex, in a democracy of op- portunity that is broad enough to unite us all.” Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath demonstrate that reformers, legislators, and even judges working in this “democracy-of-opportunity” tradition understood that the Constitution imposes a duty on legislatures to thwart oligarchy and promote a broad distribution of wealth and political power. These ideas led Jacksonians to fight special economic privileges for the few, Populists to try to break up monopoly power, and Progressives to fight for the constitutional right to form a union. During Reconstruction, Radical Republicans argued in this tradition that racial equality required breaking up the oligarchy of the Slave Power and distributing wealth and opportunity to former slaves and their descendants. President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers built their politics around this tradition, winning the fight against the “economic royalists” and “industrial despots.” The book argues that our current understanding of what counts as a constitutional argument is anachronistic and limiting. In fact, the authors argue that “advocates of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition and their opponents throughout the long period from the founding through the New Deal disagreed about many things, but they agreed that part of arguing about the Constitution is making claims about what it requires of our political economy. “ This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Oligarchy is a threat to the American republic. When too much economic and political power is concentrated in too few hands, we risk losing the “republican form of government” the Constitution requires. Today, courts enforce the constitution as if it had almost nothing to say about this threat. The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) is a bold call to reclaim an American tradition that argues the constitution imposes a duty on government to fight oligarchy and ensure broadly shared wealth. In this revolutionary retelling of constitutional history, Dr. Joseph Fishkin and Dr. William Forbath show that a commitment to prevent oligarchy once stood at the center of a robust tradition in American political and constitutional thought. Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath argue that “The constitutional order does rest and depend on a political-economic order. That political-economic order does not maintain itself. It requires action (as well as forbearance from action) from each part of the government. The content of what is required changes radically over time in a dynamic way in response to changes in the economy and in politics. But we believe the basic principles of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition remain affirmative constitutional obligations of government today: to prevent an oligarchy from emerging and amassing too much power; to preserve a broad and open middle class as a counterweight against oligarchy and a bulwark of democratic life; and to include everyone, not just those privileged by race or sex, in a democracy of op- portunity that is broad enough to unite us all.” Dr. Fishkin and Dr. Forbath demonstrate that reformers, legislators, and even judges working in this “democracy-of-opportunity” tradition understood that the Constitution imposes a duty on legislatures to thwart oligarchy and promote a broad distribution of wealth and political power. These ideas led Jacksonians to fight special economic privileges for the few, Populists to try to break up monopoly power, and Progressives to fight for the constitutional right to form a union. During Reconstruction, Radical Republicans argued in this tradition that racial equality required breaking up the oligarchy of the Slave Power and distributing wealth and opportunity to former slaves and their descendants. President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Dealers built their politics around this tradition, winning the fight against the “economic royalists” and “industrial despots.” The book argues that our current understanding of what counts as a constitutional argument is anachronistic and limiting. In fact, the authors argue that “advocates of the democracy-of-opportunity tradition and their opponents throughout the long period from the founding through the New Deal disagreed about many things, but they agreed that part of arguing about the Constitution is making claims about what it requires of our political economy. “ This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Since the demise of Biden's Build Back Better bill, the Democrats need other achievements to run on in the midterm campaigns. That means Biden should start using executive action. Harold Meyerson talks about the most politically important possibilities: student debt cancellation and action on prescription drug prices. Also: the Senate confirmation hearings for Biden's Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson follow a familiar script. Progressives instead should be arguing--inside and outside the hearings--that the Constitution requires protecting our “republican form of government” from becoming a “moneyed aristocracy” or “oligarchy.” Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath explain; their new book is The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy. Plus: Congressman Jamie Raskin, member of the House Select Committee investigating the January 6 insurrection, talked about the committee's evidence against Trump–-and the committee's future if Republicans prevail in the midterms. He was manager of Trump's second impeachment trial.

The Senate confirmation hearings for Biden's Supreme Court nominee, Ketanji Brown Jackson, have been following a familiar script: opponents look for scandal, and nominees say very little about how they'll decide cases. Progressives instead should be arguing—inside and outside the hearings—that the Constitution requires protecting our “republican form of government” from becoming a “moneyed aristocracy” or “oligarchy,” Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath explain. Their new book is called The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy.Also this week, P.E. Moskowitz talks about the dangers and the benefits of antidepressants, from both a scientific and personal perspective. Their piece, Breaking Off My Chemical Romance, is featured in The Nation's new special issue on drugs.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Since the demise of Biden's Build Back Better bill, the Democrats need other achievements to run on in the midterm campaigns. That means Biden should start using executive action. Harold Meyerson talks about the most politically important possibilities: student debt cancellation and action on prescription drug prices. Also: the Senate confirmation hearings for Biden's Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson follow a familiar script. Progressives instead should be arguing--inside and outside the hearings--that the Constitution requires protecting our “republican form of government” from becoming a “moneyed aristocracy” or “oligarchy.” Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath explain; their new book is The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy. Plus: Congressman Jamie Raskin, member of the House Select Committee investigating the January 6 insurrection, talked about the committee's evidence against Trump–-and the committee's future if Republicans prevail in the midterms. He was manager of Trump's second impeachment trial.

This week, Jeremi and Zachary are joined by Professors Joesph Fishkin and William Forbath, authors of The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution, to discuss the role of equality and the law. Zachary sets the scene with his poem: "Of Oligarchs and Idealists" Joseph Fishkin is a Professor of Law at UCLA, where he teaches and writes about employment discrimination law, election law, constitutional law, education law, fair housing law, poverty and inequality, and distributive justice. Before joining the UCLA faculty he taught for a decade at the University of Texas School of Law. His first book, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity, winner of the North American Society for Social Philosophy Book Award, was published by Oxford University Press. He is the coauthor with Willy Forbath of The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press 2022). William Forbath holds the Lloyd M. Bentsen Chair and is Associate Dean of Research at UT Austin School of Law. He is the author of Law and the Shaping of the American Labor Movement, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (with Joseph Fishkin), and dozens of articles, book chapters, and essays on legal and constitutional history and theory and comparative constitutional law. He is completing a trans-national history of Jewish lawyers and Jewish politics in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. In addition to UT, he has taught at UCLA, Sciences Po, Tel Aviv, Columbia, and Harvard.

For many Americans, for the first many generations really up through the mid 20th century, the constitutional order seemed to rest on and depend on an economic order in which people had enough economic clout to be independent citizens and voters. Not serfs dependent on some kind of master.Joseph FishkinA full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com or a short review of The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy  here.Joseph Fishkin is a Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law. He is the coauthor (along with William E. Forbath) of The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy.Key HighlightsHow did Montana reform its laws to limit the influence of Amalgamated Copper?When do questions of inequality become constitutional questions?How did the courts undermine labor laws in the early 20th century?What are the affirmative obligations and duties in the constitution?What is the proper role of the courts in American politics?Support Democracy Paradox on Patreon for early access to new episodes and exclusive updates and information. Key LinksThe Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy by Joseph Fishkin and William E. ForbathFollow Joseph Fishkin on Twitter @joeyfishkinLearn more about Joseph Fishkin at UCLA LawDemocracy Paradox PodcastDonald Horowitz on the Formation of Democratic ConstitutionsJacob Hacker and Paul Pierson on the Plutocratic Populism of the Republican PartyMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationDemocracy GroupApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox100 Books on DemocracySupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/demparadox)

Guess who's back, back again?! Back by popular demand, Digging a Hole returns for a 4th season! We have a star-studded line-up of guests this spring. Tired – guessing the Supreme Court nominee. Wired – guessing upcoming Digging a Hole guests. You don't have to guess for this week, though! We're thrilled to kick off this season with Joseph Fishkin and William Forbath discussing their upcoming book The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy. Professor Fishkin, Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law, is also the author of the excellent book Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity. Professor Forbath, the Lloyd M. Bentsen Chair in Law at The University of Texas at Austin School of Law and a Professor of History, has published more articles than you can count. In this episode, sub-fusc adorned Sam and noted constitutional law scholar David ask the guests how their highly anticipated book addresses how the United States Constitution could and should force legislatures to tackle economic inequality and oligarchy. We discuss why only one side of the political spectrum appears to make strong claims on the constitution regarding economic life during a time of mounting inequality, and, to do so, we trace the tradition of thought regarding the Constitution's relationship to economic power. As part of the conversation, our guests also tie their findings to the problems Democrats have to passing their agenda today and why they seem loath to proactively draw on the Constitution in their messaging. We couldn't have asked for better guests to kick off a new season!

“People should not underestimate Donald Trump's abilities as a retail politician", says my guest today, fellow Brit-American Fiona Hill. "He knows how to connect with people, he knows how to get people riled up, he knows how to pit people against each other so that they can't push back against what he's doing”. Fiona is a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and former deputy assistant to the president and senior director for European and Russian affairs on the National Security Council from 2017 to 2019. In November 2019, she testified in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump. In very personal terms, we discuss the class system and social mobility in the UK, and her childhood in the North East of England, which lost its economic heart as coal mining collapsed; as well as her experience in the Soviet Union and Russia, American academia, and the White House. Fiona compares and contrasts the authoritarian style of Trump and Putin (with some discussion of Erdogan too); the need for more aggressive social and economic policy for places devastated by the shift away from industry; and the real and present danger posed to so many nations by political populism. We conclude, as her book does, with a discussion of what we can do as individuals and our own communities to build a stronger infrastructure of opportunity.  Fiona Hill Fiona Hill is a senior fellow in the Center on the United States and Europe in the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution. She is a foreign policy expert on Russian and European affairs, and has served under three presidents: Donald Trump, Barack Obama, and George W. Bush. Hill is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and has held numerous positions directing research at Harvard University, where she obtained her PhD in History.  More Hill Hill's book, There Is Nothing for You Here: Finding Opportunity in the 21st Century, is an exceptionally honest tale of dwindling opportunity in the UK and the US.  You can read more of her work at Brookings, the New York Times, Foreign Affairs, and Politico Her testimony at Trump's first impeachment trial is also worth watching (starting at 3:08:43)    Also Mentioned  I mentioned Joseph Fishkin's book, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity, which if you haven't read by now, you really should!  Fiona mentioned The Fifth Risk, written by Michael Lewis and Angrynomics co-authored by Mark Blythe.  I quoted G.A. Cohen, “social justice isn't just found in structures and institutions, it's found in the thick of everyday life,” in his book If You're an Egalitarian, How Come You're So Rich? Fiona also mentioned the group Wider Circle and Dress for Success The Dialogues Team  Creator: Richard Reeves Research: Ashleigh Maciolek Artwork: George Vaughan Thomas Tech Support: Cameron Hauver-Reeves Music: "Remember" by Bencoolen (thanks for the permission, guys!)  

What have genes got to do with inequality? It's a thorny question. But it one that Kathryn Paige Harden squarely addresses in her book and in this episode of Dialogues. She explains the new science of genetics and how it can help understand outcomes like college completion. Along the way we discuss the importance of the disability rights movement, the nature of meritocracy, what luck has to do with it, designer babies, regional inequality, and how one byproduct of her Christian upbringing is an appreciation for the unique and equal value of every person.  Kathryn Paige Harden Kathryn Paige Harden is a Professor of Psychology at the University of Texas, where she directs the Developmental Behavior Genetics lab and co-directs the Texas Twin Project. Harden is also a fellow at the Jacobs Foundation. Having received her Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from the University of Virginia, her work has focused on genetic influences on complex human behavior, including child cognitive development, academic achievement, risk-taking, mental health, sexual activity, and childbearing.  More Harden Her thought-provoking new book, The Genetic Lottery, can be purchased here.  Harden's previous New York Times op-ed is a great starting place for learning more on this topic.  Read her recent profile in the New Yorker, “Can Progressives Be Convinced That Genetics Matters?” For more, check out her website and follow her on twitter: @kph3k Also mentioned I referred to my paper “The Glass Floor: Education, Downward Mobility, and Opportunity Hoarding”.I write a NYT oped on the same theme, too. I mentioned Joseph Fishkin's book, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity  Harden referred to the work of Pamela Herd, specifically on the topic of Genes, Gender Inequality, and Educational Attainment  I referred to Caroline Hoxby's work of mapping cognitive skills by region in the United States.  Harden mentioned a study by Abdel Abdellaoui on the geographic distribution of genetics in the United Kingdom. (See Twitter thread here).  Harden referred to Dan Belsky's study in Dunedin, New Zealand.  I mentioned an article written by Toby Young, the son of Michael Young, and what he calls “Progressive Eugenics”  The Dialogues Team  Creator: Richard Reeves Research: Ashleigh Maciolek Artwork: George Vaughan Thomas Tech Support: Cameron Hauver-Reeves Music: "Remember" by Bencoolen (thanks for the permission, guys!)