Podcasts about mencken

How historic are Trump 2.0's first few weeks? For the veteran correspondent, Nick Bryant, the longtime BBC man in Washington DC, what the Trump regime has done in the first few weeks of his second administration is as historic as the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. It's the end of the America we haver known for the last seventy years, he says. Bryant describes Trump's rapprochement with Russia as Neville Chamberlain style appeasement and notes the dramatic shifts in U.S. foreign policy, particularly regarding Ukraine and European allies. He sees Trump's actions as revealing rather than changing America's true nature. Bryant also discusses the failures of the Dems, the role of Elon Musk in the administration, and structural changes to federal institutions. Despite all the upheaval, Bryant suggests this isn't so much "goodbye to America" as a revelation of the cynically isolationist forces that were always present in American society.Here are the five KEEN ON takeaways from our conversation with Nick Bryant:* Historic Transformation: Bryant sees Trump's second term as a pivotal moment in world history, comparable to the fall of the Berlin Wall, with rapid changes in global alliances and particularly in America's relationship with Russia, which he characterizes as "appeasement."* Democratic Party Crisis: He analyzes how the Democrats' failures stemmed from multiple factors - Biden's delayed exit, Kamala Harris's weak candidacy, and the lack of time to find a stronger replacement. While Trump's victory was significant, Bryant notes it wasn't a landslide.* Elon Musk's Unexpected Role: An unforeseen development Bryant didn't predict in his book was Musk's prominent position in Trump's second administration, describing it as almost a "co-presidency" following Trump's assassination attempt and Musk's subsequent endorsement of Trump.* Federal Government Transformation: Bryant observes that Trump's dismantling of federal institutions goes beyond typical Republican small-government approaches, potentially removing not just bureaucratic waste but crucial expertise and institutional knowledge.* Trump as Revealer, Not Changer: Perhaps most significantly, Bryant argues that Trump hasn't changed America but rather revealed its true nature - arguing that authoritarianism, political violence, and distrust of big government have always been present in American history. FULL TRANSCRIPT Andrew Keen: Hello, everybody. About eight months ago, we had a great show with the BBC's former Washington correspondent, Nick Bryant. His latest book, "The Forever War: America's Unending Conflict with Itself," predicted much of what's happening in the United States now. When you look at the headlines this week about the U.S.-Russia relationship changing in a head-spinning way, apparently laying the groundwork for ending the Ukrainian war, all sorts of different relations and tariffs and many other things in this new regime. Nick is joining us from Sydney, Australia, where he now lives. Nick, do you miss America?Nick Bryant: I covered the first Trump administration and it felt like a 25/8 job, not just 24/7. Trump 2.0 feels even more relentless—round-the-clock news forever. We're checking our phones to see what has happened next. People who read my book wouldn't be surprised by how Donald Trump is conducting his second term. But some things weren't on my bingo card, like Trump suggesting a U.S. takeover of Gaza. The rapprochement with Putin, which we should look on as an act of appeasement after his aggression in Ukraine, was very easy to predict.Andrew Keen: That's quite a sharp comment, Nick—an act of appeasement equivalent to Neville Chamberlain's umbrella.Nick Bryant: It was ironic that J.D. Vance made his speech at the Munich Security Conference. Munich was where Neville Chamberlain secured the Munich Agreement, which was seen as a terrible act of appeasement towards Nazi Germany. This moment feels historic—I would liken it to the fall of the Berlin Wall. We're seeing a complete upending of the world order.Back at the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, we were talking about the end of history—Francis Fukuyama's famous thesis suggesting the triumph of liberal democracy. Now, we're talking about the end of America as we've known it since World War II. You get these Berlin Wall moments like Trump saying there should be a U.S. takeover of Gaza. J.D. Vance's speech in Munich ruptures the transatlantic alliance, which has been the basis of America's global preeminence and European security since World War II.Then you've seen what's happened in Saudi Arabia with the meeting between the Russians and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, completely resetting relations between Washington and Moscow. It's almost as if the invasions of Ukraine never happened. We're back to the situation during the Bush administration when George W. Bush famously met Vladimir Putin, looked into his soul, and gave him a clean bill of health. Things are moving at a hurtling pace, and it seems we're seeing the equivalent of a Berlin Wall tumbling every couple of days.Andrew Keen: That's quite dramatic for an experienced journalist like yourself to say. You don't exaggerate unnecessarily, Nick. It's astonishing. Nobody predicted this.Nick Bryant: When I first said this about three weeks ago, I had to think long and hard about whether the historical moments were equivalent. Two weeks on, I've got absolutely no doubt. We're seeing a massive change. European allies of America are now not only questioning whether the United States is a reliable ally—they're questioning whether the United States is an ally at all. Some are even raising the possibility that nations like Germany, the UK, and France will soon look upon America as an adversary.J.D. Vance's speech was very pointed, attacking European elitism and what he saw as denial of freedom of speech in Europe by governments, but not having a single word of criticism for Vladimir Putin. People are listening to the U.S. president, vice president, and others like Marco Rubio with their jaws on the ground. It's a very worrying moment for America's allies because they cannot look across the Atlantic anymore and see a president who will support them. Instead, they see an administration aligning itself with hard-right and far-right populist movements.Andrew Keen: The subtitle of your book was "America's Unending Conflict with Itself: The History Behind Trump in Advance." But America now—and I'm talking to you from San Francisco, where obviously there aren't a lot of Trump fans or J.D. Vance fans—seems in an odd, almost surreal way to be united. There were protests on Presidents Day earlier this week against Trump, calling him a tyrant. But is the thesis of your book about the forever war, America continually being divided between coastal elites and the hinterlands, Republicans and Democrats, still manifesting itself in late February 2025?Nick Bryant: Trump didn't win a landslide victory in the election. He won a significant victory, a decisive victory. It was hugely significant that he won the popular vote, which he didn't manage to do in 2016. But it wasn't a big win—he didn't win 50% of the popular vote. Sure, he won the seven battleground states, giving the sense of a massive victory, but it wasn't massive numerically.The divides in America are still there. The opposition has melted away at the moment with sporadic protests, but nothing really major. Don't be fooled into thinking America's forever wars have suddenly ended and Trump has won. The opposition will be back. The resistance will be back.I remember moments in the Obama administration when it looked like progressives had won every battle in America. I remember the day I went to South Carolina, to the funeral of the pastor killed in that terrible shooting in Charleston. Obama broke into "Amazing Grace"—it was almost for the first time in front of a black audience that he fully embraced the mantle of America's first African-American president. He flew back to Washington that night, and the White House was bathed in rainbow colors because the Supreme Court had made same-sex marriage legal across the country.It seemed in that moment that progressives were winning every fight. The Supreme Court also upheld the constitutionality of Obamacare. You assumed America's first black president would be followed by America's first female president. But what we were seeing in that summer of 2015 was actually the conservative backlash. Trump literally announced his presidential bid the day before that awful Charleston shooting. You can easily misread history at this moment. Sure, Trump looks dominant now, but don't be fooled. It wouldn't surprise me at all if in two years' time the Republicans end up losing the House of Representatives in the congressional midterm elections.Andrew Keen: When it comes to progressives, what do you make of the Democratic response, or perhaps the lack of response, to the failure of Kamala Harris? The huge amount of money, the uninspiring nature of her campaign, the fiasco over Biden—were these all accidental events or do they speak of a broader crisis on the left amongst progressives in America?Nick Bryant: They speak of both. There were really big mistakes made by the Democrats, not least Joe Biden's decision to contest the election as long as he did. It had become pretty clear by the beginning of 2024 that he wasn't in a fit state to serve four more years or take on the challenge of Donald Trump.Biden did too well at two critical junctures. During the midterm elections in 2022, many people predicted a red wave, a red tsunami. If that had happened, Biden would have faced pressure to step aside for an orderly primary process to pick a successor. But the red wave turned into a red ripple, and that persuaded Biden he was the right candidate. He focused on democracy, put democracy on the ballot, hammered the point about January 6th, and decided to run.Another critical juncture was the State of the Union address at the beginning of 2024. Biden did a good job, and I think that allayed a lot of concerns in the Democratic Party. Looking back on those two events, they really encouraged Biden to run again when he should never have done so.Remember, in 2020, he intimated that he would be a bridge to the next generation. He probably made a mistake then in picking Kamala Harris as his vice presidential candidate because he was basically appointing his heir. She wasn't the strongest Democrat to go up against Donald Trump—it was always going to be hard for a woman of color to win the Rust Belt. She wasn't a particularly good candidate in 2020 when she ran; she didn't even make it into 2020. She launched her campaign in Oakland, and while it looked good at the time, it became clear she was a poor candidate.Historical accidents, the wrong candidate, a suffering economy, and an America that has always been receptive to someone like Trump—all those factors played into his victory.Andrew Keen: If you were giving advice to the Democrats as they lick their wounds and begin to think about recovery and fighting the next battles, would you advise them to shift to the left or to the center?Nick Bryant: That's a fascinating question because you could argue it both ways. Do the Democrats need to find a populist of the left who can win back those blue-collar voters that have deserted the Democratic Party? This is a historical process that's been going on for many years. Working-class voters ditched the Democrats during the Reagan years and the Nixon years. Often race is part of that, often the bad economy is part of that—an economy that's not working for the working class who can't see a way to map out an American dream for themselves.You could argue for a left-wing populist, or you could argue that history shows the only way Democrats win the White House is by being centrist and moderate. That was true of LBJ, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton—all Southerners, and that wasn't a coincidence. Southern Democrats came from the center of the party. Obama was a pragmatic, centrist candidate. Kennedy was a very pragmatic centrist who tried to bring together the warring tribes of the Democratic Party.Historically, you could argue Democrats need to move to the center and stake out that ground as Trump moves further to the right and the extremes. But what makes it harder to say for sure is that we're in a political world where a lot of the old rules don't seem to apply.Andrew Keen: We don't quite know what the new rules are or if there are any rules. You describe this moment as equivalent in historic terms to the fall of the Berlin Wall or perhaps 9/11. If we reverse that lens and look inwards, is there an equivalent historical significance? You had an interesting tweet about Doge and the attempt in some people's eyes for a kind of capture of power by Elon Musk and the replacement of the traditional state with some sort of almost Leninist state. What do you make of what's happening within the United States in domestic politics, particularly Musk's role?Nick Bryant: We've seen American presidents test the Constitution before. Nobody in the modern era has done it so flagrantly as Donald Trump, but Nixon tried to maximize presidential powers to the extent that he broke the law. Nixon would have been found guilty in a Senate trial had that impeachment process continued. Of course, he was forced to resign because a delegation of his own party drove down Pennsylvania Avenue and told him he had to go.You don't get that with the Republican Party and Donald Trump—they've fallen behind him. FDR was commonly described as an American dictator. H.L. Mencken wrote that America had a Caesar, a pharaoh. Woodrow Wilson was maximalist in his presidential powers. Abraham Lincoln was the great Constitution breaker, from trashing the First Amendment to exceeding his powers with the Emancipation Proclamation. Thomas Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase was unconstitutional—he needed congressional approval, which he didn't have.There's a long history of presidents breaking rules and Americans being okay with that. Lincoln has never been displaced from his historical throne of grace. FDR is regarded as one of the great presidents. What sets this moment apart is that constraints on presidents traditionally came from the courts and their own political parties. We're not seeing that with Donald Trump.Andrew Keen: What about the cultural front? There's talk of Trump's revenge, taking over the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C., revenge against traditional scientists, possibly closing some universities. Is this overdramatic, or is Trump really taking revenge for what happened between 2020 and 2024 when he was out of power?Nick Bryant: Trump is in a vengeful mood—we always thought Trump 2.0 would be a project of vengeance. Republican presidents have always thought parts of the administrative state work against them, and Trump is dismantling it at warp speed. Elon Musk is going into various government departments acting like he's heading a hostile takeover of the federal government.Reagan launched a rhetorical assault on federal government, which was really a creation of the New Deal years under FDR. That period saw massive expansion of federal government into people's lives with Social Security and the welfare net. We haven't seen this kind of assault on federal government since then. Trump is also trying to dismantle what he regards as America's cultural establishment, which he sees as too white, too elitist, too intellectual. He's trying to remold America, its government, and cultural institutions in his own image.Andrew Keen: You've mentioned Reagan. I came to the U.S. like you—you came as a grad student to study American history. I came in the '80s and remember the hysteria at UC Berkeley over Reagan—that he would blow up the world, that he was clueless, a Hollywood actor with no right to be in politics. Is it conceivable that Trump could be just another version of Reagan? In spite of all this hysteria, might this second Trump regime actually be successful?Nick Bryant: You can't rule out that possibility. The mistake made about Reagan was seeing him as a warmonger when he really wanted to be a peacemaker. That was the point of ending the Cold War—he wanted to win it, but through gambles on people like Gorbachev and diplomatic moves his advisors warned against.There are analogies to Trump. I don't think he's a warmonger or wants to send U.S. troops into countries. He's described some surprising imperial ambitions like taking over Greenland, though Harry Truman once wanted that too. Trump wants to make peace, but the problem is on what terms. Peace in Ukraine, in Trump's view, means a massive win for Vladimir Putin and the sidelining of the Ukrainian people and America's European allies.There wasn't a big cost to Reagan's peacemaking—the European alliance stayed intact, he tinkered with government but didn't go after Social Security. The cost of Trump is the problem.Andrew Keen: The moral cost or the economic cost?Nick Bryant: Both. One thing that happened with Reagan was the opening of big disparities in income and wealth in American society. That was a big factor in Donald Trump's success—the paradox of how this billionaire from New York became the hero of the Rust Belt. When the gulf between executive pay and shop floor pay became massive, it was during the Reagan years.You see the potential of something similar now. Trump is supercharging an economy that looks like it will favor the tech giants and the world's richest man, Elon Musk. You end up worsening the problem you were arguably setting out to solve.You don't get landslides anymore in American politics—the last president to win 40 states was George Herbert Walker Bush. Reagan in '84 won 49 out of 50 states, almost getting a clean sweep except for Mondale's home state of Minnesota. I don't think Trump will be the kind of unifying president that Reagan was. There was a spontaneity and optimism about Reagan that you don't see with Trump.Andrew Keen: Where are the divisions? Where is the great threat to Trump coming from? There was a story this week that Steve Bannon called Elon Musk a parasitic illegal immigrant. Is it conceivable that the biggest weakness within the Trump regime will come from conflict between people like Bannon and Musk, the nationalists and the internationalist wing of the MAGA movement?Nick Bryant: That's a fascinating question. There doesn't seem to be much external opposition at the moment. The Democrats are knocked out or taking the eight count in boxing terms, getting back on their feet and taking as long as they can to get their gloves up. There isn't a leader in the Democratic movement who has anywhere near Trump's magnetism or personal power to take him on.Maybe the opposition comes from internal divisions and collapse of the Trump project. The relationship with Elon Musk was something I didn't anticipate in my book. After that assassination attempt, Musk endorsed Trump in a big way, put his money behind him, started offering cash prizes in Pennsylvania. Having lived at Mar-a-Lago during the transition with a cottage on the grounds and now an office in the White House—I didn't anticipate his role.Many people thought Trump wouldn't put up with somebody who overshadows him or gets more attention, but that relationship hasn't failed yet. I wonder if that speaks to something different between Trump 2.0 and 1.0. Trump's surrounded by loyalists now, but at 78 years old, I think he wanted to win the presidency more than he wanted the presidency itself. I wonder if he's happy to give more responsibility to people like Musk who he thinks will carry out his agenda.Andrew Keen: You've been described as the new Alistair Cooke. Cooke was the father of Anglo-American journalism—his Letter from America was an iconic show, the longest-running show in radio history. Cooke was always very critical of what he called the big daddy state in Washington, D.C., wasn't a fan of large government. What's your take on Trump's attack on large government in D.C.? Is there anything in it? You spent a lot of time in DC. Are these agencies full of fat and do they need to be cut?Nick Bryant: Cutting fat out of Washington budgets is one of the easy things—they're bloated, they get all these earmarks, they're full of pork. There's always been a bloated federal bureaucracy, and there's a long historical tradition of suspicion of Washington going back to the founding. That's why the federal system emerged with so much power vested in the states.Reagan's revolution was based on dismantling the New Deal government. He didn't get that far in that project, but rhetorically he shifted America's views about government. He emphasized that government was the problem, not the solution, for four decades. When Bill Clinton became president, he had to make this big ideological concession to Reaganism and deliver Reaganite lines like "the era of big government is over."The concern right now is that they're not just getting rid of fat—they're getting rid of expertise and institutional knowledge. They're removing people who may be democratic in their thinking or not on board with the Trump revolution, but who have extensive experience in making government work. In moments of national crisis, conservative ideologues tend to become operational liberals. They rely on government in disasters, pandemics, and economic crises to bail out banks and industries.Conservatives have successfully planted in many Americans' heads that government is the enemy. Hillary Clinton saw a classic sign in 2006—a protester carrying a sign saying "get your government hands off my Medicare." Well, Medicare is a government program. People need government, expertise, and people in Washington who know what they're doing. You're not just getting rid of waste—you're getting rid of institutional knowledge.Andrew Keen: One of the more colorful characters in these Trump years is RFK Jr. There was an interesting piece in the National Review about RFK Jr. forcing the left to abandon the Kennedy legacy. Is there something symbolically historical in this shift from RFK Sr. being an icon on the left to RFK Jr. being an icon on the libertarian right? Does it speak of something structural that's changed in American political culture?Nick Bryant: Yes, it does, and it speaks to how America is perceived internationally. JFK was always seen as this liberal champion, but he was an arch pragmatist, never more so than on civil rights. My doctoral thesis and first book were about tearing down that myth about Kennedy.The Kennedys did inspire international respect. The Kennedy White House seemed to be a place of rationality, refinement, and glamor. JFK embodied what was great about America—its youth, dynamism, vision. When RFK was assassinated in California, weeks after MLK's assassination, many thought that sense of America was being killed off too. These were people who inspired others internationally to enter public service. They saw America as a beacon on a hill.RFK Jr. speaks of a different, toxic American exceptionalism. People look at figures like RFK Jr. and wonder how he could possibly end up heading the American Health Department. He embodies what many people internationally reject about America, whereas JFK and RFK embodied what people loved, admired, and wanted to emulate.Andrew Keen: You do a show now on Australian television. What's the view from Australia? Are people as horrified and disturbed in Australia as they are in Europe about what you've called a historic change as profound as the fall of the Berlin Wall—or maybe rather than the fall of the Berlin Wall, it's the establishment of a new kind of Berlin Wall?Nick Bryant: One of Australia's historic diplomatic fears is abandonment. They initially looked to Britain as a security guarantor in the early days of Australian Federation when Australia became a modern country in 1901. After World War II, they realized Britain couldn't protect them, so they looked to America instead. America has underwritten Australia's security since World War II.Now many Australians realize that won't be the case anymore. Australia entered into the AUKUS deal with Britain and America for nuclear submarine technology, which has become the basis of Australia's defense. There's fear that Trump could cancel it on a whim. They're currently battling over steel and aluminum tariffs. Anthony Albanese, the center-left prime minister, got a brief diplomatic reprieve after talking with Trump last week.A country like Australia, much like Britain, France, or Germany, cannot look on Trump's America as a reliable ally right now. That's concerning in a region where China increasingly throws its weight around.Andrew Keen: Although I'm guessing some people in Australia would be encouraged by Trump's hostility towards China.Nick Bryant: Yes, that's one area where they see Trump differently than in Europe because there are so many China hawks in the Trump administration. That gives them some comfort—they don't see the situation as directly analogous to Europe. But it's still worrying. They've had presidents who've been favorable towards Australia over the years. Trump likes Australia partly because America enjoys a trade surplus with Australia and he likes Greg Norman, the golfer. But that only gives you a certain measure of security.There is concern in this part of the world, and like in Europe, people are questioning whether they share values with a president who is aligning himself with far-right parties.Andrew Keen: Finally, Nick, your penultimate book was "When America Stopped Being Great: A History of the Present." You had an interesting tweet where you noted that the final chapter in your current book, "The Forever War," is called "Goodbye America." But the more we talk, whether or not America remains great is arguable. If anything, this conversation is about "hello" to a new America. It's not goodbye America—if anything, America's more powerful, more dominant, shaping the world more in the 2020s than it's ever done.Nick Bryant: It's goodbye to the America we've known for the last 70 years, but not goodbye to America itself. That's one of the arguments of the book—Trump is far more representative of the true America than many international observers realize. If you look at American history through a different lens, Trump makes perfect sense.There's always been an authoritarian streak, a willingness to fall for demagogues, political violence, deep mistrust of government, and rich people making fortunes—from the robber barons of the late 19th century to the tech barons of the 21st century. It's goodbye to a certain America, but the America that Trump presides over now is an America that's always been there. Trump hasn't changed America—he's revealed it.Andrew Keen: Well, one thing we can say for sure is it's not goodbye to Nick Bryant. We'll get you back on the show. You're one of America's most perceptive and incisive observers, even if you're in Australia now. Thank you so much.Nick Bryant: Andrew, it's always a pleasure to be with you. I still love the country deeply—my fascination has always been born of great affection.Nick Bryant is the author of The Forever War: American's Unending Conflict with Itself and When America Stopped Being Great, a book that Joe Biden keeps in the Oval Office. He was formerly one of the BBC's most senior foreign correspondents, with postings in Washington DC, New York, South Asia and Australia. After covering the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden, he left the BBC in 2021, and now lives in Sydney with his wife and children. Nick studied history at Cambridge and has a doctorate in American history from Oxford.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Originally Recorded December 2nd, 2024About Dr. Darryl G. Hart: https://www.hillsdale.edu/faculty/darryl-hart/Check out Dr. Hart's book, Damning Words: The Life and Religious Times of H.L. Mencken: https://www.eerdmans.com/9780802875631/damning-words/ This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit musicallyspeaking.substack.com

The vibe for this recording was solemn even if the co-hosts  Korey Maas (Lutheran), Miles Smith (Anglican), and D. G. Hart (Presbyterian) were also excited for the upcoming marriage of our only confessional Protestant bachelor (sorry ladies). The reason for the somber mood was Miles Smith's piece at MereOrthodoxy on evangelicals and politics.  There he suggests that American Protestants have lost a sense of nations sitting under God's judgment. In which case, the presidential campaign and the results could be less a story of redemption than they reveal God's rebuke of an errant society.    From that starting point, conversation ranged to the degree to which confessional Protestants suffer from viewing the United States as a redeemer nation, how millennialism affects nationalism, differing estimates (Augustinian or Eusebian) of Christian government, and even whether Christians can learn a tragic sense of politics from H. L. Mencken.  No sponsors, but it should have been Joy dishwashing detergent. 

SERIES 3 EPISODE 67: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:44) SPECIAL COMMENT: "No one in this world, so far as I know—and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me—has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby. The mistake that is made always runs the other way. Because the plain people are able to speak and understand, and even, in many cases, to read and write, it is assumed that they have ideas in their heads, and an appetite for more. This assumption is a folly." H.L. Mencken (1926). Nice of Hispanic males to vote for the guy who will deport all their relatives and friends and namesakes and when they run out, deport them. Also: the anti-Trump conservative who's trying to be optimistic: at least now Trump won't try another coup! And Jeff Bezos congratulates Trump because if they're still blackmailing Bezos on Trump's behalf, this is what it would look like! And details on the future of this podcast (yes, it has one). B-Block (20:51) SPECIAL COMMENT TWO: My theory of The Lifeboat and how it explains who voted for Trump and why. C-Block (34:00) GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Darrell Castle talks about the announced plan of Kamala Harris to "fix" the American economy along with a discussion of that most undemocratic of institutions, the Democrat Party. Transcription / Notes THE HARRIS PLAN TO “FIX” THE ECONOMY Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today's Castle Report. This is Friday, the 23rd day of August in the year of our Lord 2024. I will be talking about the announced plan of Kamala Harris to “fix” the American economy along with a discussion of that most undemocratic of institutions, the Democrat Party. Why do I refer to the Democrat Party as undemocratic. There are many reasons but primarily that Party seems to regard the will of the people as nothing but a nuisance to keep the ruling elite of the Party from having their way. For example, Hillary Clinton received more primary delegates than Barack Obama but he was nominated because he had more “super delegates.” The current nominees, Kamala Harris and Tim Walz received no delegate votes at all, not a single vote but they have the nomination and not Joe Biden who received 14 million primary votes. Far a perfect explanation of American politics, and the entire election process I turn to the incomparable H.L. Mencken: “The state—or, to make matters more concrete, the government—consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can't get, and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time it is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advanced auction on stolen goods.” I search in vain for a finer explanation of the American political system and American politicians than Mencken's, but what of Kamala Harris and her solutions to our troubles. I will focus my attention right here at home for now because we have so many issues and despite the dangerous climb up the escalation ladder abroad, I look inward for today. Home where our families live and home where we struggle to feed them in spite of various government decisions which try to keep us from doing so. Inflation is obviously a problem right now and Kamala Harris wants us to know that she is aware of it and intends to fix it. Her solutions are even more interesting since she is now vice president and has been in that office while inflation was embedding itself in the economy.  The consumer price index has charts available that tell us what inflation is and how it affects our daily lives and our ability to maintain our standard of living. When we notice, little by little, that our living standard is slipping away the information from the consumer price index tells us at least partially, why that is true. For example, a U.S. dollar from 1971 is equivalent to $7.77 in 2024 an increase of 677%. So, the real value, or purchasing value of a dollar decreases over time. Does your income increase correspondingly because if not then your standard of living is declining. In some areas of the country, Ms. Harris's California for example, the change has been even more pronounced. Politicians such as Kamala Harris will try just about anything to solve the problem of inflation except the only solution that will actually work. The only solution is cut public spending drastically or raise taxes drastically or both but those things will not buy very many votes. The great economist Milton Friedman famously put it like this, in his dictum, “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary problem.” In other words, if you've got inflation as we have today, you are printing too much money. Who wants to live within their means in this day and age of empire and entitlement. We want to run the world and we want to stay in power a...

“It's much more impactful to think about what we are doing with our days to make those land deeper and more significant onto our soul.” ~Dr. Maggie Augustyn Inspired by a powerful quote from H.L. Mencken, Everyday Practices Dental Podcast co-host Dr. Chad Johnson and guest Dr. Maggie Augustyn discuss the true essence of life - not just its length, but its depth and meaning. They discuss the balance between extending our lifespan and enriching the days we have, considering how our choices, connections, and relationships shape the richness of our existence.

One hundred four years ago—on July 26, 1920, to be specific—cultural critic and journalist H.L. Mencken wrote a column in The Baltimore Sun entitled Bayard and Lionheart.  I read that column during college, never thinking I would draw from it years later in my work. That work included writing a commentary, which was published in LA Progressive a few months after Donald Trump took office in 2017. I'm back at it seven years later, wondering if words written over a century ago apply to America today. My conclusion is that they do. You be the judge. Episode 12:34 seconds with opening and closing music, "Wheels,' courtesy of Jason Shaw at Audionautix.com Cover photo courtesy The Paris Review.

"Does it really make any difference if you do believe something, but are at the same time intolerant of someone who does not agree or concur in your beliefs?" Key Moments 01:27  Meeting Freeman Tilden. 09:42 Starting a Career with Park Service at age 58. 11:54 Freeman Reevaluates National Park Service Principles and Writes "Interpreting Our Heritage" at age 71 14:59 Aiming for Visitor Engagement, Not Just Facts .17:00 Becaming a Team for National Park Service 22:58 Lasting Impact of 47 years of Documented Experiences. 26:06 Focusing on Environment, Change, and Tolerance. 27:03 Human Interference with Nature, Moral Poverty, and Creating Positive Experiences 33:03 Presentation about Freeman Tilden at Ranger Rendezvous 47 Resources Ranger Rendezvous Information National Park Service Bio of Freeman Tilden www.parkleaders.com https://parkleaders.com/about/ Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/theparkleaders/ Interpreting Freeman Tilden In this episode, Walt Dabney returns to share share his extraordinary experience as a student trainee. Walt is the retired director of Texas State Parks and a former National Park Service employee who held various roles during his distinguished career. He even spent an entire year working closely with the legendary Freeman Tilden. Tilden was an author and is known as the Father of Heritage Interpretation. Throughout his career, he wrote works like "Interpreting Our Heritage" and "The World in Debt," and collaborated with notable figures like H. L. Mencken. Imagine traveling 30,000 miles across the United States by car and train, visiting national parks, and engaging with park staff, colleges, and universities—all while being under the mentorship of one of the most influential figures in park interpretation. That's what Walt experienced in 1970. In our conversation, Walt reflects on the invaluable life lessons he learned from Freeman, the lasting friendship they forged, and how Freeman's teachings continue to influence park professionals and leaders to this day. For example, he emphasized the importance of personalized storytelling in park interpretation.  Tilden also believed that the National Park Service played a crucial role in the moral fabric of the country, advocating for self-improvement and quality over materialism. Freeman Tilden's insights go beyond just park interpretation. His guidance on self-change and passion-driven impact remains valuable life advice for us all. Make sure to listen to this episode to learn about the profound impact of Freeman Tilden on park interpretation and learn why his wisdom extends beyond parks to life itself. Thank you to Walt Dabney for taking us on a journey back to those transformative times and sharing insights into your own years interpreting Freeman Tilden.

Guests: Richard Samuelson, Jonathan Eller, & D.G. Hart   Host Scot Bertram talks with Richard Samuelson, Associate Professor of Government at Hillsdale College's Washington, D.C., campus, about the 250th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party. Jonathan Eller, chancellor's professor of English at Indiana University's School of Liberal Arts and author of a three-volume biography on Ray Bradbury, discusses Bradbury's life and legacy in writing. And D.G. Hart, associate professor of history at Hillsdale College, completes a short series on the life and works of journalist and cultural critic H.L. Mencken. This week, Hart focuses on Menken's political views.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Many saw the dark side of the American dream, but none wrote about it like Jim Tully. Having spent six years of his childhood in a Cincinnati orphanage, Tully returned to his hometown of St. Marys, Ohio before climbing aboard a freight train in 1901. Drifting across the country as a "road kid," he spent his teens, sleeping in hobo jungles, avoiding railroad cops, and haunting public libraries. After six years on the road, he settled in Kent, Ohio where he boxed professionally and began to write. Following a move to Hollywood where he worked for Charlie Chaplin, Tully issued a stream of critically acclaimed books that serve as a dark and astonishing chronicle of the American underclass. Having established himself as a major American author, he turned his attention to Hollywood writing dozens of articles about the movies, often shocking the Hollywood establishment. Along the way, he picked up such close friends as W. C. Fields, Jack Dempsey, H. L. Mencken, and Frank Capra. He also memorably crossed paths with Jack London, George Bernard Shaw, James Joyce, and Langston Hughes. My guests are Mark Dawidziak and Paul Bauer, authors of "Jim Tully: American Writer, Irish Rover, Hollywood Brawler". They not only share details from Tully's wild life, but talk about two infamous Hollywood murders that he was connected to. Paul Bauer's Archer's Used and Rare Books: https://www.biblio.com/bookstore/archersbookscom-kent Mark Dawidziak's website: https://www.markdawidziak.com/ Jim Tully Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100050314553406 The Most Notorious Podcast website: https://www.mostnotorious.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Inherit the Wind (1960) is a fictionalized account of the 1925 Scopes “Monkey Trial," where a local teacher is prosecuted for teaching about human evolution in public school in violation of state law. The film was directed by Stanley Kramer and is based on a play by Jerome Lawrence and Robert Edwin Lee. It stars Spencer Tracy as Henry Drummond (patterned after celebrated defense attorney Clarence Darrow), Frederic March as the prosecutor Matthew Harrison Brady (patterned after famous three-time presidential candidate and renowned fundamentalist Christian spokesperson, William Jennings Bryan); Dick York as Bertram T. Cates (patterned after high school science teacher John Scopes), and Gene Kelly as reporter E. K. Hornbeck (patterned after H.L. Mencken). Fans of the TV series M*A*S*H  will also enjoy seeing Harry Morgan as the trial judge. The film not only provides a glimpse into the role of religion in public life in American in the 1920s; it also contains important messages about conformism and freedom of thought directed at the McCarthyism of its own era—messages that continue to reverberate today. My guest to talk about Inherit the Wind is film critic Nell Minow (bio  here).Timestamps:0.00     Introduction4:52     The era of the Scopes “monkey trial”8:34     The Scopes trial as a “test” case12:25   The decision to exclude evidence of evolution18:40   The later theory of “intelligent design”20:30   Clarence Darrow's classic cross-examination of William Jennings Bryan23:27   Miracle on 34th Street and how courts resolve disputes about faith24:40   The film as a response to the McCarthy era26:14   The verdict and aftermath30:10   The power and methods of the religious right today 34:22   The impact of Inherit the Wind and other “issue movies”37:06   The film's continuing relevanceFurther reading:Austerlitz, Saul, "Rethinking Stanley Kramer: How a message-movie humanist became an auteurist punching bag," Moving Image Source (Aug. 25, 2010)Farrell, John F., Clarence Darrow: Attorney for the Damned (2011)Minow, Nell, “‘An Idea Is a Greater Monument Than a Cathedral': Deciding How We Know What We Know in ‘Inherit the Wind,'” 30 U. San Fran. L. Rev. 1225 (1996)National Center for Science Education, “Ten Major Court Cases about Evolution and Creationism” (June 6, 2016)Sprague de Camp, Lyon, The Great Monkey Trial (1968)Uelman, Gerald F., “The Trial as Circus: ‘Inherit the Wind,'” 30 U. San Fran. L. Rev. 1221 (1996)Law on Film is created and produced by Jonathan Hafetz. Jonathan is a professor at Seton Hall Law School. He has written many books and articles about the law. He has litigated important cases to protect civil liberties and human rights while working at the ACLU and other organizations. Jonathan is a huge film buff and has been watching, studying, and talking about movies for as long as he can remember. For more information about Jonathan, here's a link to his bio: https://law.shu.edu/faculty/full-time/jonathan-hafetz.cfmYou can contact him at jonathanhafetz@gmail.comYou can follow him on X (Twitter) @jonathanhafetz You can follow the podcast on X (Twitter) @LawOnFilmYou can follow the podcast on Instagram @lawonfilmpodcast

Eliot and Eric welcome Jacob Heilbrunn, editor of The National Interest, non-resident fellow at the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center, and author of America Last: The Right's Century Long Romance with Foreign Dictators. They discuss the origin story of "America First" during the First World War when critic and satirist H.L. Mencken and German-American propagandist (and paid agent) George Sylvester Viereck led the charge against American intervention in the Great War and how both played roles in the 30s and early 40s America First movement to prevent FDR from aiding the Allies. They discuss the hostility of America Firsters to the liberal tradition in America, its connection to anti-Semitism, William F. Buckley's role and evolution on anti-Semitism, Jeanne Kirkpatrick's views on authoritarianism and totalitarianism and the left's own tradition of admiration for tyrants as well as how these tendencies are reflected in today's MAGA movement. America Last: The Right's Century-Long Romance with Foreign Dictators https://a.co/d/91qv3YA Shield of the Republic is a Bulwark podcast co-sponsored by the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia.

What would Nietzsche say… about today's divisive issues and debates? I spoke with Glenn Wallis, author of the new book, Nietzsche Now!, on how the Great Immoralist guides us in understanding democracy, identity, civilization, consciousness, religion, and other urgent topics of our time. Wallis identifies six guiding principles in Nietzsche's work that help navigate today's concerns: curiosity, humor, courage, distance, solitude, and humor. Steeped in Nietzsche but never academic, dogmatic, or pious (which Nietzsche would have hated!), Wallis explains with infectious enthusiasm and meticulous care the reasons why Nietzsche may be the most relevant thinker for our time. Glenn Wallis is the editor and translator of The Dhammapada and Basic Teachings of the Buddha (Random House), and the author of A Critique of Western Buddhism (Bloomsbury), An Anarchist's Manifesto, and How to Fix Education (both with Warbler Press). He holds a Ph.D. from Harvard University and has taught at several universities, including Brown University, and at the University of Georgia as a tenured professor. He is the founder and director of Incite Seminars in Philadelphia. Nietzsche Now! The Great Immoralist on the Vital Issues of Our Time (Warbler Press, 2023) is now available wherever books are sold. Other Think About It episodes mentioned in this podcast: Béatrice Longueness on Immanuel Kant's What is Englightenment? Melissa Schwartzberg on Jean-Jacques Rousseau's The Social Contract Glenn Wallis on Kahlil Gibran's The Prophet Ruth Ben-Ghiat on Threats to Democracy and H. L. Mencken's Notes on Democracy 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

What would Nietzsche say… about today's divisive issues and debates? I spoke with Glenn Wallis, author of the new book, Nietzsche Now!, on how the Great Immoralist guides us in understanding democracy, identity, civilization, consciousness, religion, and other urgent topics of our time. Wallis identifies six guiding principles in Nietzsche's work that help navigate today's concerns: curiosity, humor, courage, distance, solitude, and humor. Steeped in Nietzsche but never academic, dogmatic, or pious (which Nietzsche would have hated!), Wallis explains with infectious enthusiasm and meticulous care the reasons why Nietzsche may be the most relevant thinker for our time. Glenn Wallis is the editor and translator of The Dhammapada and Basic Teachings of the Buddha (Random House), and the author of A Critique of Western Buddhism (Bloomsbury), An Anarchist's Manifesto, and How to Fix Education (both with Warbler Press). He holds a Ph.D. from Harvard University and has taught at several universities, including Brown University, and at the University of Georgia as a tenured professor. He is the founder and director of Incite Seminars in Philadelphia. Nietzsche Now! The Great Immoralist on the Vital Issues of Our Time (Warbler Press, 2023) is now available wherever books are sold. Other Think About It episodes mentioned in this podcast: Béatrice Longueness on Immanuel Kant's What is Englightenment? Melissa Schwartzberg on Jean-Jacques Rousseau's The Social Contract Glenn Wallis on Kahlil Gibran's The Prophet Ruth Ben-Ghiat on Threats to Democracy and H. L. Mencken's Notes on Democracy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

What would Nietzsche say… about today's divisive issues and debates? I spoke with Glenn Wallis, author of the new book, Nietzsche Now!, on how the Great Immoralist guides us in understanding democracy, identity, civilization, consciousness, religion, and other urgent topics of our time. Wallis identifies six guiding principles in Nietzsche's work that help navigate today's concerns: curiosity, humor, courage, distance, solitude, and humor. Steeped in Nietzsche but never academic, dogmatic, or pious (which Nietzsche would have hated!), Wallis explains with infectious enthusiasm and meticulous care the reasons why Nietzsche may be the most relevant thinker for our time. Glenn Wallis is the editor and translator of The Dhammapada and Basic Teachings of the Buddha (Random House), and the author of A Critique of Western Buddhism (Bloomsbury), An Anarchist's Manifesto, and How to Fix Education (both with Warbler Press). He holds a Ph.D. from Harvard University and has taught at several universities, including Brown University, and at the University of Georgia as a tenured professor. He is the founder and director of Incite Seminars in Philadelphia. Nietzsche Now! The Great Immoralist on the Vital Issues of Our Time (Warbler Press, 2023) is now available wherever books are sold. Other Think About It episodes mentioned in this podcast: Béatrice Longueness on Immanuel Kant's What is Englightenment? Melissa Schwartzberg on Jean-Jacques Rousseau's The Social Contract Glenn Wallis on Kahlil Gibran's The Prophet Ruth Ben-Ghiat on Threats to Democracy and H. L. Mencken's Notes on Democracy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

What would Nietzsche say… about today's divisive issues and debates? I spoke with Glenn Wallis, author of the new book, Nietzsche Now!, on how the Great Immoralist guides us in understanding democracy, identity, civilization, consciousness, religion, and other urgent topics of our time. Wallis identifies six guiding principles in Nietzsche's work that help navigate today's concerns: curiosity, humor, courage, distance, solitude, and humor. Steeped in Nietzsche but never academic, dogmatic, or pious (which Nietzsche would have hated!), Wallis explains with infectious enthusiasm and meticulous care the reasons why Nietzsche may be the most relevant thinker for our time. Glenn Wallis is the editor and translator of The Dhammapada and Basic Teachings of the Buddha (Random House), and the author of A Critique of Western Buddhism (Bloomsbury), An Anarchist's Manifesto, and How to Fix Education (both with Warbler Press). He holds a Ph.D. from Harvard University and has taught at several universities, including Brown University, and at the University of Georgia as a tenured professor. He is the founder and director of Incite Seminars in Philadelphia. Nietzsche Now! The Great Immoralist on the Vital Issues of Our Time (Warbler Press, 2023) is now available wherever books are sold. Other Think About It episodes mentioned in this podcast: Béatrice Longueness on Immanuel Kant's What is Englightenment? Melissa Schwartzberg on Jean-Jacques Rousseau's The Social Contract Glenn Wallis on Kahlil Gibran's The Prophet Ruth Ben-Ghiat on Threats to Democracy and H. L. Mencken's Notes on Democracy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

Today's poem–a layered, jokingly-serious response to one of last week's–comes from Ogden Nash, dubbed the ‘Laurate of Light Verse.' Which banner would you rally under–Nash or Byron?One of the most widely appreciated and imitated writers of light verse, Frediric Ogden Nash was born in Rye, New York, on August 19, 1902, to Edmund Strudwick and Mattie Nash. He came from a distinguished family; the city of Nashville, Tennessee, was named in honor of one of his forbearers. Nash attended Harvard College, but dropped out after only one year. He worked briefly on Wall Street, and as a schoolteacher, before becoming a copywriter. In 1925, he took a job in the marketing department with the publishing house Doubleday.Nash's first published poems began to appear in the New Yorker around 1930. His first collection of poems, Hard Lines (Simon & Schuster), was published in 1931. The book was a tremendous success; it went into seven printings in its first year alone, and Nash quit his job with Doubleday. That same year, he married Frances Rider Leonard; they had two children. Nash worked briefly for the New Yorker in 1932, before deciding to devote himself full-time to his verse.Nash considered himself a "worsifier." Among his best known lines are "Candy / Is dandy, / But liquor / Is quicker" and "If called by a panther / Don't anther." His poems also had an intensely anti-establishment quality that resounded with many Americans, particularly during the Depression. Nash was a keen observer of American social life, and frequently mocked religious moralizing and conservative politicians. His work is often compared with other satirists of the time, including Dorothy Parker, Robert Benchley, and H. L. Mencken. He appeared regularly on radio and on television, and he drew huge audiences for his readings and lectures.Nash was also the author of three screenplays for MGM, and with S. J. Perelmen, he wrote the 1943 Broadway hit One Touch of Venus. In the 1950s, Nash focused on writing poems for children, including the collection Girls Are Silly (Franklin Watts, 1962). He died on May 19, 1971.-bio via Academy of American Poets Get full access to The Daily Poem Podcast at dailypoempod.substack.com/subscribe

Thank you for tuning in to tonight's episode of Bore You To Sleep. Before we dive into our soothing story, I'd like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to all of you who support this podcast. Your kind words and encouragement truly keep me going. Tonight, let's embark on a journey through "Notes on Democracy" by H. L. Mencken, published in 1926. This insightful piece offers a unique perspective on democracy in the Western world, inviting us to ponder its complexities and nuances. But first, a quick reminder that this podcast is made possible by listeners like you. If you enjoy our content and would like to support us, there are a few ways you can do so: Follow the podcast in your favorite podcast app. Consider becoming a subscriber for just $2.99 a month to enjoy ad-free episodes on Spotify. Leave a review and rating in your podcast app—it only takes a moment and makes a world of difference. Connect with us on our website, BoreYouToSleep.com, or on social media @BoreYouToSleep. Remember, sharing this podcast with a friend in need is a wonderful way to spread the gift of peaceful sleep. Now, let's unwind together as we delve into "Notes on Democracy" by H. L. Mencken. Close your eyes, relax your body, and let the gentle rhythm of the story guide you into a restful slumber. Sweet dreams, and until next time, this is Teddy signing off. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/boreyoutosleep/message

(LANGUAGE) HOW TO STOP BEING SO DAMN STUPID! GOERGE CARLIN, HL MENCKEN, DAVE HODGES

Guests: Paul Moreno, Amity Shlaes, & D.G. Hart Host Scot Bertram talks with Paul Moreno, the William and Berniece Grewcock Chair in Constitutional History and professor of history at Hillsdale College, about the life and legacy of groundbreaking baseball player Jackie Robinson on the anniversary of his birth. Amity Shlaes, chair of the Coolidge Foundation and author of Coolidge, explains president Calvin Coolidge's legacy and how he navigated challenges like ours today. And D.G. Hart, associate professor of history at Hillsdale College, continues a series on the work of H. L. Mencken. This time, he focuses on Mencken's dedication to the principle of free speech.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We talk with Wendi C. Thomas, the editor and publisher of MLK50: Justice Through Journalism. Thomas founded MLK50 in 2017 as a one-year project designed to focus on the antipoverty work of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.  Dr. King had traveled to Memphis in April of 1968 to support striking sanitation workers who were fighting for safer working conditions and a living wage. But MLK50 became much more than a one-year project. She and her staff have gone on to produce journalism that has changed the dialogue, and changed lives, in Memphis. Her work has garnered numerous awards. In 2020, she was the winner of the Selden Ring Award for her groundbreaking investigative series, "Profiting from the Poor," an investigation of a nonprofit hospital that sued poor patients over medical debt. The series, co-published with ProPublica, had major impact: the hospital erased $11.9 million in medical debt. MLK50 is one of the projects that we profile in our book, “What Works in Community News.” Ellen has a Quick Take on the situation at Houston Landing, a highly anticipated and well-funded nonprofit newsroom that launched in 2023. Dan's Quick Take is on The Baltimore Sun, the venerable 186-year-old daily newspaper that at one time was home to the infamously caustic writer H.L. Mencken. Earlier this month, Alden Global Capital sold the Sun to a right-wing television executive who hates newspapers. But not to fear — public interest journalism is alive and well in Baltimore, as Dan will explain.  

Today we talk about all that's wrong with schools and a bit about the project Maxim is working on: https://www.greatman.com/publish/posts/detail/140740355   Ideology, Ethics, and Global Opportunities: Maxim's Substack: http://greatman.com Join our email list to get Special reports and updates: https://dougcasey.substack.com/about  Connect with us on Telegram: https://t.me/dougcasey  Today we join Doug Casey live to address education, ethics, international opportunities, and his personal intellectual journey. Explore the challenges infiltrating today's education system, specifically 'wokeness' and indoctrination strategies, and their implications on morality. Opportunities in Russia and Africa for young individuals. Doug's intellectual voyage, shaped by H. L. Mencken, Barry Goldwater, Ayn Rand, Henry Hazlitt, and the Tannehills, and understand the influence these figures had on his worldview.   Chapters: 00:00 Introduction and Starting the Conversation 01:04 Discussing the Impact of Smoking Laws 02:52 The Shift in Language and Society  03:29 The Importance of Sound Check and Audience Interaction 03:50 The Degradation of Education and Its Impact 04:41 The Influence of Media and Politics in Education 05:20 The Struggle for Accountability in Private Schools 06:01 The Personal Experience of Public School 10:13 The Challenge of Accessing Curriculum Information 11:38 The Consequences of a Lack of Personal Responsibility in Education 19:54 The Importance of Personal Ethical Codes 39:55 The Impact of Socialism on Education 43:12 Discussing the Potential of CBDC in Uruguay 44:33 The Impact of CBDC on Tax Evasion and Crime 45:08 Exploring the Reasons Behind Drug Use 46:10 The Pros and Cons of Moving to Africa 52:01 The Question of Argentina and Uruguay Joining BRICS 54:03 The Potential of Living and Working in Bermuda 01:14:00 The Importance of Work-Life Balance 01:17:37 The Development of Free Market Capitalism Ideals 01:24:48 Final Thoughts and Wrap Up

Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 1053, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: Travel Europe 1: Stops on this city's Metro Line B include Termini Station, Tiburtina Station and the Colosseum. Rome. 2: The Friseurmuseum, a hairdressing museum in this German capital, has a lock of Bismarck's hair. Berlin. 3: "Wax" nostalgic (or is that nostalgique?) at Musee Grevin, this capital's answer to Madame Tussaud's. Paris. 4: It's the country from which you're most likely to bring home a souvenir bouzouki. Greece. 5: For a great view of this capital city, climb to the top of Lykavittos Hill, or take the funicular from Kolonaki. Athens. Round 2. Category: Those Are My Initials, Too 1: Skinner,Goodrich. B.F.. 2: Milne,TV's Ron Balakay. A.A.. 3: Griffin,Du Bois. W.E.B.. 4: Woolworth,De Klerk. F.W.. 5: Hunley,Mencken. H.L.. Round 3. Category: You Can Call Me Al. With Al in quotation marks 1: A dead end lane, or a line of thought that leads nowhere, is called a blind this. an alley. 2: Italian for "to the tooth", it describes pasta cooked to be firm. al dente. 3: It designates both a constellation's brightest star and the head male in a group. alpha. 4: This bronchodilator helps ease breathing during an asthma attack. albuterol. 5: From the French for "others", this word is the opposite of egoist. altruist. Round 4. Category: Anagrammed Hobbies 1: Not just for grannies these days:TINT KING. knitting. 2: Get behind the wheel: TRY POET. pottery. 3: It's what you yeast expect: GRIN WEB. brewing. 4: Watch the fishies; NON RISK GEL. snorkeling. 5: Don't let Fluffy see what you're doing; MY DIRT AXE. taxidermy. Round 5. Category: From The German 1: Put this 4-letter word after "gab" or "fun" and you get an event with lots of those. fest. 2: If you say "he took a lot of" this, either he was criticized or his plane was shot at. flak. 3: I can't sit still; I've got this 10-letter need to roam. wanderlust. 4: Bringing extra defensive players to rush the passer. a blitz. 5: In 1969 the first watch using this mineral to keep time came on the market. quartz. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia!Special thanks to https://blog.feedspot.com/trivia_podcasts/ AI Voices used

On this day in 1917, Baltimore journalist Henry L. Mencken published a faux history of the bathtub titled “A Neglected Anniversary.”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A colorful "history" of the bathtub, as told by H. L. Mencken.   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A century ago, journalist H. L. Mencken provocatively stated in Notes On Democracy (new edition by Warbler Press, 2023) that anti-democratic behavior is not only not shocking but that we should in fact expect democracies to give rise to un- and even anti-democratic forces. Mencken doubted that such the evils of democracy will be cured by more democracy, which usually means elections and ‘fostering democratic norms and behaviors. So what is to be done? I spoke with NYU Professor and political commentator Ruth Ben-Ghiat on the current threats to democracy posed by populism, the media's role in shaping political views, what historical precedents of strongmen can teach us about today's threats to democracy, and what is crucially missing from today's political landscape. Find the texts: Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present (Norton, 2021) by Ruth Ben-Ghiat Notes On Democracy (1926) by H. L. Mencken Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a distinguished expert in the history of fascism and is appointed at NYU as Professor of History and Italian. A leading authority on the contemporary challenges facing democracies globally, she frequently provides insights as a commentator for various news networks and contributes as an MSNBC opinion columnist. In her newsletter, Lucid, she delves into the critical issues threatening democracy. Her work has been recognized with Guggenheim, NEH, Fulbright and other fellowships. Her latest book, Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present explores the regimes and rise to power of authoritarian leaders, while proposing strategies for their defeat. Follow her here: Twitter @RuthBenGhiat; Instagram @RuthBenGhiat. Ulrich Baer teaches literature and photography as University Professor at New York University. A recipient of Guggenheim, Getty and Humboldt awards, in addition to hosting "Think About It” he hosts (with Caroline Weber) the podcast "The Proust Questionnaire” and is Editorial Director at Warbler Press. Email ucb1@nyu.edu; Twitter @UliBaer; IG: @thinkaboutit.podcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A century ago, journalist H. L. Mencken provocatively stated in Notes On Democracy (new edition by Warbler Press, 2023) that anti-democratic behavior is not only not shocking but that we should in fact expect democracies to give rise to un- and even anti-democratic forces. Mencken doubted that such the evils of democracy will be cured by more democracy, which usually means elections and ‘fostering democratic norms and behaviors. So what is to be done? I spoke with NYU Professor and political commentator Ruth Ben-Ghiat on the current threats to democracy posed by populism, the media's role in shaping political views, what historical precedents of strongmen can teach us about today's threats to democracy, and what is crucially missing from today's political landscape. Find the texts: Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present (Norton, 2021) by Ruth Ben-Ghiat Notes On Democracy (1926) by H. L. Mencken Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a distinguished expert in the history of fascism and is appointed at NYU as Professor of History and Italian. A leading authority on the contemporary challenges facing democracies globally, she frequently provides insights as a commentator for various news networks and contributes as an MSNBC opinion columnist. In her newsletter, Lucid, she delves into the critical issues threatening democracy. Her work has been recognized with Guggenheim, NEH, Fulbright and other fellowships. Her latest book, Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present explores the regimes and rise to power of authoritarian leaders, while proposing strategies for their defeat. Follow her here: Twitter @RuthBenGhiat; Instagram @RuthBenGhiat. Ulrich Baer teaches literature and photography as University Professor at New York University. A recipient of Guggenheim, Getty and Humboldt awards, in addition to hosting "Think About It” he hosts (with Caroline Weber) the podcast "The Proust Questionnaire” and is Editorial Director at Warbler Press. Email ucb1@nyu.edu; Twitter @UliBaer; IG: @thinkaboutit.podcast 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

A century ago, journalist H. L. Mencken provocatively stated in Notes On Democracy (new edition by Warbler Press, 2023) that anti-democratic behavior is not only not shocking but that we should in fact expect democracies to give rise to un- and even anti-democratic forces. Mencken doubted that such the evils of democracy will be cured by more democracy, which usually means elections and ‘fostering democratic norms and behaviors. So what is to be done? I spoke with NYU Professor and political commentator Ruth Ben-Ghiat on the current threats to democracy posed by populism, the media's role in shaping political views, what historical precedents of strongmen can teach us about today's threats to democracy, and what is crucially missing from today's political landscape. Find the texts: Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present (Norton, 2021) by Ruth Ben-Ghiat Notes On Democracy (1926) by H. L. Mencken Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a distinguished expert in the history of fascism and is appointed at NYU as Professor of History and Italian. A leading authority on the contemporary challenges facing democracies globally, she frequently provides insights as a commentator for various news networks and contributes as an MSNBC opinion columnist. In her newsletter, Lucid, she delves into the critical issues threatening democracy. Her work has been recognized with Guggenheim, NEH, Fulbright and other fellowships. Her latest book, Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present explores the regimes and rise to power of authoritarian leaders, while proposing strategies for their defeat. Follow her here: Twitter @RuthBenGhiat; Instagram @RuthBenGhiat. Ulrich Baer teaches literature and photography as University Professor at New York University. A recipient of Guggenheim, Getty and Humboldt awards, in addition to hosting "Think About It” he hosts (with Caroline Weber) the podcast "The Proust Questionnaire” and is Editorial Director at Warbler Press. Email ucb1@nyu.edu; Twitter @UliBaer; IG: @thinkaboutit.podcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

A century ago, journalist H. L. Mencken provocatively stated in Notes On Democracy (new edition by Warbler Press, 2023) that anti-democratic behavior is not only not shocking but that we should in fact expect democracies to give rise to un- and even anti-democratic forces. Mencken doubted that such the evils of democracy will be cured by more democracy, which usually means elections and ‘fostering democratic norms and behaviors. So what is to be done? I spoke with NYU Professor and political commentator Ruth Ben-Ghiat on the current threats to democracy posed by populism, the media's role in shaping political views, what historical precedents of strongmen can teach us about today's threats to democracy, and what is crucially missing from today's political landscape. Find the texts: Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present (Norton, 2021) by Ruth Ben-Ghiat Notes On Democracy (1926) by H. L. Mencken Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a distinguished expert in the history of fascism and is appointed at NYU as Professor of History and Italian. A leading authority on the contemporary challenges facing democracies globally, she frequently provides insights as a commentator for various news networks and contributes as an MSNBC opinion columnist. In her newsletter, Lucid, she delves into the critical issues threatening democracy. Her work has been recognized with Guggenheim, NEH, Fulbright and other fellowships. Her latest book, Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present explores the regimes and rise to power of authoritarian leaders, while proposing strategies for their defeat. Follow her here: Twitter @RuthBenGhiat; Instagram @RuthBenGhiat. Ulrich Baer teaches literature and photography as University Professor at New York University. A recipient of Guggenheim, Getty and Humboldt awards, in addition to hosting "Think About It” he hosts (with Caroline Weber) the podcast "The Proust Questionnaire” and is Editorial Director at Warbler Press. Email ucb1@nyu.edu; Twitter @UliBaer; IG: @thinkaboutit.podcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

A century ago, journalist H. L. Mencken provocatively stated in Notes On Democracy (new edition by Warbler Press, 2023) that anti-democratic behavior is not only not shocking but that we should in fact expect democracies to give rise to un- and even anti-democratic forces. Mencken doubted that such the evils of democracy will be cured by more democracy, which usually means elections and ‘fostering democratic norms and behaviors. So what is to be done? I spoke with NYU Professor and political commentator Ruth Ben-Ghiat on the current threats to democracy posed by populism, the media's role in shaping political views, what historical precedents of strongmen can teach us about today's threats to democracy, and what is crucially missing from today's political landscape. Find the texts: Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present (Norton, 2021) by Ruth Ben-Ghiat Notes On Democracy (1926) by H. L. Mencken Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a distinguished expert in the history of fascism and is appointed at NYU as Professor of History and Italian. A leading authority on the contemporary challenges facing democracies globally, she frequently provides insights as a commentator for various news networks and contributes as an MSNBC opinion columnist. In her newsletter, Lucid, she delves into the critical issues threatening democracy. Her work has been recognized with Guggenheim, NEH, Fulbright and other fellowships. Her latest book, Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present explores the regimes and rise to power of authoritarian leaders, while proposing strategies for their defeat. Follow her here: Twitter @RuthBenGhiat; Instagram @RuthBenGhiat. Ulrich Baer teaches literature and photography as University Professor at New York University. A recipient of Guggenheim, Getty and Humboldt awards, in addition to hosting "Think About It” he hosts (with Caroline Weber) the podcast "The Proust Questionnaire” and is Editorial Director at Warbler Press. Email ucb1@nyu.edu; Twitter @UliBaer; IG: @thinkaboutit.podcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

Guests: Matthew Spalding, Timothy P. Carney, & D.G. Hart Host Scot Bertram talks with Matthew Spalding, vice president of Washington operations and dean of the Van Andel Graduate School of Government at Hillsdale in D.C., about a recent article he wrote on how the United States should educate its citizens. Timothy P. Carney, senior political columnist at the Washington Examiner, discusses the demographic dangers of America's dropping birthrates and his upcoming book Family Unfriendly: How Our Culture Made Raising Kids Much Harder Than It Needs to Be. And D.G. Hart, associate professor of history at Hillsdale College, begins a short series on the life and works of journalist and cultural critic H.L. Mencken.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

"The times when I'm writing the most are when I'm reading a lot," Carl "Buffalo" Nichols says on today's podcast. And wow is this true: you cannot be a writer of any stripe unless you read. Nichols likes to read voices that he cannot relate to. He mentions writers like Flannery O' Connor and H.L. Mencken, as well as books like A Clockwork Orange and A Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. He didn't even like them all, but he still felt that hearing those voices makes him a better writer.So on this episode we talk about how reading makes him a better songwriter, why being tired and cranky makes him a good editor, and why he likes to stop writing when he knows he still has something left in the tank.Nichols' latest album The Fatalist is out now on Fat Possum Records. 

With the release of the remaining Jan 6 footage this past week, it's very clear that the Jan 6 Committee had no intention of finding the truth. Especially since that new footage shows Capitol police inciting the crowd to fight and later helping people tour the Capitol. The ruling class is a bit shell-shocked today because a libertarian named Javier Milei has won the presidency of Argentina. Federico N. Fernández explains why Milei isn't simply a Trump clone. A story that is constantly being pushed by the corporate press in Idaho is that OB/GYN doctors are leaving that state due to its strict abortion law. John Green says, there's a crisis all right--but it's not stemming from lack of abortion. The greatest danger of covid wasn't from the virus itself, it was from governments attempting to "contain and combat" the virus. Jeffrey A. Tucker describes how nearly all governments in the world met their match. Article of the Day: There aren't many writers like the late H.L. Mencken. Gary M. Galles introduces us to the "Sage of Baltimore" and how Mencken exposed government's rotten core with wit and wisdom. Sponsors: Life Saving Food  TMCP Nation Climbing Upward Quilt & Sew

It seems that the higher up you are in the organization, the better idea you have of what really goes on. Our guest Keaton saw first hand the control, racism, and lack of accountability during his time working with different churches. When you've exhausted all options and done all you can do, what is the true breaking point? “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his income depends on his not understanding it.” —H.L. Mencken

11/03/2023 PODCAST Episodes #997 - #999 GUEST: Courtney Kramer, Johnny Vieira, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dave Brat, Judge Carolyn Carluccio, Baxter Ennis, Rabbi Yaakov Mencken + YOUR CALLS! at 1-888-480-JOHN (5646) and GETTR Live! @jfradioshow #GodzillaOfTruth #TruckingTheTruth   Want more of today's show? Episode #997 DEMS Communist Scabs Ripped Off Episode #998 No God, No America Episode #999 Rapid fire Roundtable with Carolyn Carluccio, Baxter Ennis, Rabbi Yaakov Mencken   https://johnfredericksradio.libsyn.com/

Johan Norberg's work revolves primarily around economic and intellictual history and attempting to learn lessons from past financial systems. In this episode of Faster, Please! — The Podcast, Johan takes us through his version of capitalism, giving an especially interesting perspective on the economic system of his home country. Johan is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and the author of several books. His latest is The Capitalist Manifesto: In Defense of Global Capitalism, available now. In This Episode* “Capitalism” and its meanings (0:55)* The state of contemporary capitalism (2:34)* Coordination in capitalism (7:59)* The cyclical nature of economic systems (13:54)* Swedish capitalism  (16:56)* The case for capitalism (21:48)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversationJames Pethokoukis: Let's begin with a little definitional work here. Capitalist Manifesto: “Capitalist” is a word people assign a variety of meanings to. What is the capitalism that you're talking about here?Johan Norberg: Yeah, it's not a great word. Quite often it's misunderstood; people think it's all about capital. It's not. We can have capital in many different economic systems. To me, free-market capitalism is about a decentralized economic system with private property where decisions are made locally, decentralized, not command and control, and the prices and wages and things are set in voluntary negotiations rather than top-down.The economist Deirdre McCloskey hates the word "capitalism." She prefers "innovism" or "trade-tested progress." Should we insist on using a different word to describe the world's dominant socio-economic system?Deirdre McCloskey is right. Capitalism is a bad word. I would much prefer “innovism” or something like that. But I've realized that in order to communicate with people, I'd better use some of the words that they are using. And I've realized that we're stuck with the word “capitalism” and the whole concept of capitalism, and if we don't fill it with meaning, those of us who like free markets and free trade, I've realized that somebody else is going to fill it with meaning, and in that case, we are losing the debate. Go to where the sinners are. That's my take.Twenty years ago, it seemed like markets had won. Capitalism was changing the world and bringing people out of poverty. President Clinton declared "the era of big government is over." China was opening its economy. What happened? Why did you feel the need to write this book in this moment?That's exactly why I wrote this book, because nowadays it seems like nobody likes free markets and free trade anymore. I've realized that, in the US, and that should be a place where people appreciate some of this, fewer people believe in capitalism than believe in ghosts nowadays. And there's this lack among politicians and governments everywhere in belief in global capitalism. There's this whole, repatriate stuff, subsidize specific businesses and sectors back home, rather than having global supply chains. So that's why I wrote this.I think this is all based on a complete misunderstanding of what has happened in the world in the past 20 years. It's not that markets have failed. On the contrary, despite the fact that we've had 20 rough years with financial crises and wars and the Great Pandemic and stuff like that, and yet we've seen, when you look at objective indicators of human living standards, more progress than ever before over these 20 years. When it comes to the reduction in poverty, more than 130,000 people lifted out of extreme poverty every day over the past 20 years. We've seen an increase in global GDP per capita of roughly a third. We've reduced child mortality by almost half, which means that four million fewer children died last year than in 2002. And this is because entrepreneurs and innovators, they keep innovating ourselves out of problems all the time — if we give them some freedom to do that. And that's what I'm worried about: that they'll have less freedom in the future if we do not keep on pounding and keep on explaining this.Those are some pretty impressive statistics. But people don't seem to notice. We keep hearing the same narrative of "late-stage, failed capitalism.” Why is that?I think the financial crisis is a very important part of this. If some capitalists do bad stuff, people lose faith in capitalism and I think we saw this in the US but also around the world. There's this sense that perhaps we shouldn't imitate what America is doing if these are the consequences. And I don't think that the financial crisis was a result of unleashed market forces. And I even wrote a book on this a couple of years back, Financial Fiasco. I think there were massive regulatory failures and central banks and ministers of finance trying to make capitalism very safe by implementing a very homogenous structure on everybody, telling everybody to go into the same way, searching for the same AAA-rated securities and stuff like that. And if everybody behaves in the same way, if that fails, there's massive disaster. We need decentralization partly to minimize risks like that. But — doesn't matter, we don't have to go into history. I think this partly explains why we're in this lack of trust in capitalism right now.But also other things. People, when they're afraid of the world, they tend to retreat. They don't want to explore. They don't want to innovate. It triggers their fight-or-flight mechanism and sometimes the societal fight-or-flight mechanism. You want to hide behind walls and tariff barriers and strong, big governments that protect you, and that is a misunderstanding of how we get out of crises. And this is what I think we've learned from these past 20 years. Yes, lots of bad stuff happened. It makes us afraid. It triggers some sort of evolutionary tendency to get away from openness and learning and discovery processes and instead we want just one instant solution to all the problems.But what we're learning is, how did we get out of the pandemic? We did it by having thousands of entrepreneurs constantly finding new ways to rebuild supply chains and find replacements for the resources they couldn't get. And innovators who were looking for new treatments and coming up with a vaccine in a record period of time. It didn't take a thousand years as it usually does, coming up with a vaccine against polio, but more like three months. But try to tell that to our reptilian brains. When we're fearful, we want one simple solution. And as H.L. Mencken once put it, there is always a solution to every problem: it is “neat, plausible, and wrong.” And it's so dangerous because it involves replacing all that discovery, all that learning and wisdom of millions with just the preferences of a few people at the top.Let me read a brief tweet by the right-wing populist writer, Sohrab Ahmari: “We are entering a new age of industrial war. The ‘California ideology,' neoliberalism, Reagan-Clintonism — whatever you want to call it, it's kaput. We're going to see close coordination between state, enterprise, labor. It took security threats to bring us here. I'll take it.” Why won't you take it?That's a scary prospect to me. There is a reason why he's talking about this Silicon Valley thing, because that worked splendidly, and one of the reasons it succeeded was that the outcomes weren't decided in advance by any kind of command-and-control thing. It was, as some criticized it in the ‘70s, it looks more like the Wild West, allowing entrepreneurs and innovators to experiment with crazy ideas, even in garages. And that's the way to … if you want to explore all possible avenues and ideas, we have to let everybody go out and look for it. I think the reason why Sohrab Ahmari is wrong is that he thinks that there is one solution to all the problems we face. Perhaps there is, but I don't know one and he doesn't know it. We have to allow more eyeballs to look at the problems and more brains to go out thinking hard about these things, and that involves not starting geopolitical divisions and nationalist temptations, but it involves having lots of people in other places helping us to find the solutions in a division of labor where we learn from what they're doing.Why has America been so successful so far? When people say that it's failing, this American, this Washington consensus thing, please keep in mind that just 15 years ago, the American economy was slightly smaller than the European one. Now it's almost a third bigger. It's not entirely broken, but some of the fixes might break it, I'm afraid, if we continue doing things like this. Why is it successful? Well, look at different areas. Look at AI. Why is America so successful? We thought that China would come up with it. Well, one reason is that the Chinese have to teach machines not just what to say, but also what not to say, but also the fact that America is learning from others. More than half of America's top AI experts have education or background in other countries and almost a third come from China. So if we want to win against China and everybody else, we also have to allow lots of Chinese to do the work for us.This notion of close coordination between state and business and labor, where does that work well? Is there a model? Is there an example of that kind of formula working elsewhere?A leading European economist just published a book called, I think it's some 50 of them, called Questioning the Entrepreneurial State, where they evaluate this whole idea that we would have this close coordination between governments and businesses, and what they say is that the history of it, at least in Europe but they look around the world as well, is that it's usually a full employment program for lobbyists and for attorneys who just reformulate everything that businesses would usually do as something that fits with this new industrial policy thing. If it was successful, you would look up stuff on the internet by using Quaero, because that's the close coordination stuff in Europe with the European and German and French governments heavily funded a “European Google.” The whole idea was that we will own the digital future by heavily subsidizing this one project. It doesn't work, because you lose some of the trial and error, you lose some of the mechanisms whereby we understand what's a success and what's not.It's okay to fail. Industrial policies fail all the time, but so does big tech. Entrepreneurial capitalism as well. But the great thing with free markets and not having the governments investing heavily in one particular model is that you replace this trial-and-error, constant experimentation and feedback and adaptation that comes when you work on markets and you're risking your own resources. Once you do that by having the government picking a winner, then, when you lose out, you spend more money on these projects instead. And you lose this learning process whereby we're constantly channeling capital and labor to more successful ones. What people would tell you is that China is the most successful place where we've had this…Yes, there seems to be a cyclical component to this belief. I mean, I'm old enough to have seen the version where Japan had figured it out. That didn't turn out so well. And then I think you have people who looked at China. If you have a natural inclination to like the idea of central planning and you eschew the kind of natural chaos of capitalism, you could point to China So that's why I wonder if this is a passing phase, because China doesn't seem like they're able to pull it off either.Yeah, but that'll keep on moving, then, and find another example where it seems to be working. Because it's always easy to find out in retrospect that something seemed to be working. And if the government is involved somewhere, they try to give it credit. But until recently, I think 49 American states tried to spend heavily to create a biotech cluster in their own state to attract businesses from other states. And if one of them succeeded, people would've said, “Look, this is because of this top-down government intervention,” but probably not, right?And it's the same thing with China. Yes, China has been tremendously successful for 30 years, but in which sectors? In the sectors that the government didn't plan for it, in places where we saw grassroots capitalism, farmers secretly privatizing their land, starting village enterprises. And then, and only then, did the Communist Party see that, “This seems to be more successful than what we've been doing recently, so allow them to continue to experiment,” experiment in export processing and stuff like that. But they wanted to keep it elsewhere so that it wouldn't spread throughout the rest of the economy. But it was so successful that it did. That's what succeeded: when people experimented. Entrepreneurs were allowed to innovate. What was it that failed? The large, state-owned enterprises. They were less productive. They were wasting cheap credit and ruining, destroying resources over the years. And once the government gets involved, there's plenty of research into this, they find less productive businesses and they become even less productive if they get access to this cheap credit and cheap land. And I think people are coming around to that now as they're seeing that China has many problems, some of them related to demography, as well. But they would need innovation, strange new business ideas, crazy people in garages coming up with new ideas. That's exactly the thing that top-down governments don't really like, and what they've been doing over the past few years is just destroying tech businesses, [education] businesses, and the gaming industry in China because authoritarians aren't good at spotting where the true potential lies.I wonder if you could clear up a question that confuses many Americans. Do you come from, and are you currently living in, a capitalist country?Yes, I am.We don't know. We're not sure. We're very confused about Sweden.Yes, I know, and that's because lots of perceptions, just like the ideas, are stuck in the 1970s. Sweden had a brief period of some 20 years when we really experimented with socialist ideas, but this was also the moment — the only moment in modern economic history — when Sweden lagged behind other countries. So up until the early 1970s, we had a very limited government, low taxes, free markets, and free trade — that made us rich. It made us so rich in Sweden that we thought that we could experiment with these ideas. Just stop thinking about how to create wealth, just spend it, redistribute it. And that resulted in an awful 20, 25 years when companies like Ikea and Tetra Pak and the greatest entrepreneurs, they just left Sweden because it wasn't possible to do business in Sweden.This is what people still remember: the 1970s. We did all these things: doubled the size of the government, jacking up taxes and so on. At the same time, it looked like a fairly successful place, it's a rich place. But it's like that old joke: How do you end up with a small fortune? Well, you start with a large fortune and then you waste most of it. And that's what we did. This is actually why, since that terrible economic financial crisis that we had in the early 1990s, Sweden has once again liberalized markets quite drastically compared to other places, and we're now back to a system which many Americans would actually think of as more free market in many ways than the US system.As you know, people think of Sweden and Scandinavia more generally as big government with a giant welfare [system], cradle-to-grave welfare, all the welfare you would ever want. So in what ways is Sweden maybe more market friendly than the United States, and perhaps some ways which would greatly surprise many Americans as well as Bernie Sanders?Yeah, I'm trying to tell the Bernie Sanders of the world that if they want to be like Sweden, they would have to do plenty of things. They would have to become more free trade-oriented in many ways. They would have to reform social security, partially privatize it with individual accounts, they would have to introduce a national school voucher system so private schools get the same funding as the public ones. They would actually have to lower taxes in many ways on the rich, and they would have to abolish taxes on property wealth inheritance and lower the corporate tax, and instead put most of the tax burdens on low- and middle-income households, because that's the dirty little secret of the Swedish welfare state. We learned in the 1970s that if you want to have a big universal welfare state that's very generous, in that case, everybody is going to have to pay for it.You have to redistribute over people's life cycle, rather than trying to get the rich to pay for it all, because we realized that the rich are too few and the economy is too dependent on them. So if we are trying to get them to pay for it all, they will flee Sweden, they will move to other places, leave their resources elsewhere, and we won't get the new businesses, the new successful ones that we all depend upon. So for 30 years, we didn't create a single net job in the private sector, the ‘70s, ‘80s, and the ‘90s. So instead, you have to move towards more taxing consumption, 25 percent value-added tax, and making sure that the poor and middle income households pay the bulk of income taxes. So, counterintuitively — and this is something that people really don't get—Sweden has a much less-progressive tax system than the United States does, less-progressive tax system than almost any other rich country because we've learned that the poor are loyal taxpayers. They don't move, they don't dodge taxes, and they don't have tax attorneys.What is the quick pitch for capitalism? If you're on an airplane next to someone who's heard a lot about inequality and wage stagnation and losing to the Chinese, how do you make the case for market capitalism?It's much, much better than you think, but it could be even better. It is much better because we can see, look at the long-term indicators and the data, and perhaps this is where I lose my fellow passenger. But wage stagnation was a phenomenon in the ‘70s and ‘80s, partly because we had to rebuild the economy because it was at risk of becoming much less competitive and we were about to lose jobs everywhere. Once we did that, from the ‘90s and onwards, we've had a tremendous increase in wages, and we can measure this in wages and total compensation and increase in 60 percent. I'd say if you look at the best indicators, but even more interesting is what can you do with those resources? And then you see that all those amenities and goods and technologies that we all considered luxuries in the ‘70 and ‘80s, we're getting close to 100 percent possession in American households.The poor people who fall below the poverty line in the US now own more amenities like that — washing machines, television sets, dryers, clothes washers, and of course cell phones and computers — than the rich did in 1970. That tells you something. If you look around the world, we've actually had the best era ever when it comes to poverty reduction, and we've even, since the turn of the millennium, reduced global inequality for the first time since the Industrial Revolution. So it's much better than the headlines. If you look at the trend lines, they're much better. Yeah, tell me about that. Give me a little of that “could be even better.” Give me a little flavor of that.Yeah. I think that we've lost — you know this and you just wrote a book on this — we've entered a period where we've thought that things cannot be better. We've tried to protect old business models and old ways of doing things, and often in a low interest rate environment, I think protected many businesses that should have been put out of their misery so that capital and labor could go to the new sectors, to the frontiers of the economy. We are seeing some of that happening now with everything from mRNA technology to the new space race to AI, but we're in a mindset and a regulatory situation where we don't want to experiment with the new weird stuff. But we have to do that because that's the only way where we'll get the new goods and services and jobs in the future. So here's to the crazy ones, as Steve Jobs would put it. And in that case, we can't be too protective of our old, safe ways of doing things. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

⭐ My guest today is Steven Rothstein, the founding Managing Director of the Ceres Accelerator for Sustainable Capital Markets. Previously, Steven ran the world-renowned Perkins School for the Blind, as well as Environmental Futures, Citizen Schools, and the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation. ---

Henry Louis "H. L." Mencken (1880 – 1956) was an American journalist, essayist, magazine editor, satirist, acerbic critic of American life and culture, and a student of American English. Known as the "Sage of Baltimore", he is regarded as one of the most influential American writers and prose stylists of the first half of the 20th century. Mencken is perhaps best remembered today for The American Language, a multi-volume study of how the English language is spoken in the United States, and for his satirical reporting on the Scopes trial, which he named the "Monkey" trial." --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/librivox1/support

John Singer Sargent, Henry Cabot Lodge At the 1920 Republican Convention the journalist and H.L. Mencken observed with great amusement and interest the behavior of Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, the chair of the convention. “Lodge's keynote speech, of course, was bosh,” wrote Mencken, “but it was bosh delivered with an air…Lodge got away with it because he was Lodge—because there was behind it his unescapable confidence in himself, his disarming disdain of discontent below, his unapologetic superiority. This superiority was and is quite real. Lodge is above the common level of his party, his country and his race, and he knows it very well, and is not disposed toward the puerile hypocrisy of denying it.”  It is extraordinary, given how Mencken saw Lodge, that we are much more likely to know who H.L. Mencken was then to recognize the name of Henry Cabot Lodge. Of a prominent seafaring family, he received one of the very first PhDs granted by Harvard, was involved in Massachusetts politics from 1880, and in 1892 was elected to the United States Senate—where he served until his death in 1924. He was one of the great political personalities of his age, alongside Theodore Roosevelt, his friend of 35 years, Theodore Roosevelt. Together, as Laurence Jurdem describes in his new book, The Rough Rider and the Professor: Theodore Roosevelt, Henry Cabot Lodge, and the Friendship that Changed American History, they formed an unbeatable team, with Roosevelt thrusting ahead, while Lodge offered canny tactics and strategy, serving as Roosevelt's one man think tank and advisory group. Though their friendship was threatened by Roosevelt's third-party run for the White House, their final years were warmed by their mutual detest for Woodrow Wilson.  Laurence Jurdem is currently an adjunct professor of history at Fairfield University and Fordham College's Lincoln Center campus.  The author of Paving the Way for Reagan: The Influence of Conservative Media on U.S. Foreign Policy, he is a frequent commentator on American politics. For Further Investigation Think of this conversation as begin the third of a Summer 2023 trilogy on late 19th century American politicians and political culture. It began with President Garfield, then moved backward to describe the context and foundation of "Civil War politics" in the "Age of Lincoln", and now moves out of the Age of Lincoln with two men who were very much born in the Age of Lincoln, but then shaped the foundations of progressivism. Henry Cabot Lodge, Alexander Hamilton–some have said that Roosevelt was one of the few people to respect Hamilton between his death and the late twentieth century. If so, he learned to do it from Lodge, for whom Hamilton was symbolic of what he desired to be as a politician and a policymaker. Henry Cabot Lodge and Theodore Roosevelt, Hero Tales from American History–a co-written book, composed of biographical essays they wrote for The Century Magazine. Lodge's heroes are George Washington, Gouverneur Morris, John Quincy Adams, Francis Parkman, Grant at Vicksburg, Robert Gould Shaw, James Russell Lowell, Sheridan at Cedar Creek, and Abraham Lincoln. With the exception of Grant and Sheridan, it's a collection of Federalists and Bostonians, which is about right. I quoted several times in the podcast from H.L. Mencken's "Lodge", an essay that he included in his A Mencken Chrestomathy. Very much worth seeking out.  H.W. Brands, T.R: The Last Romantic Two by Patricia O'Toole, The Five of Hearts: An Intimate Portrait of Henry Adams and  his Friends, 1880-1918, and  When Trumpets Fade: Theodore Roosevelt After The White House John Garraty, Henry Cabot Lodge: A Biography William H. Harbaugh, Power and Responsibility: The Life and Times of Theodore Roosevelt

Leonard Nimoy - "Where It's At" - The Way I Feel Storm Bugs - "Make Customers Matter" - Gift PGR / Thessalonians - "Absolute Equinox" - Altered States of Consciousness V/A Robert Ashley & Paul DeMarinis - "In Sara, Mencken, Christ And Beethoven There Were Men And Women (Excerpt)" - In Sara, Mencken, Christ and Beethoven There Were Men and Women International Harvester - "Dies Irae / The Runcorn Report on Western Progress" - Sov Gott Rose-Marie Pearls Before Swine - "Translucent Carriages" - Balakava Calcium - "Psykopathologie De La Vie Mitoyenne" - Calcium Dieter Kaufmann - "Scherzo" - Symphonie Acousmatique Cock E.S.P. - "Side 1" - Avant-Garde Disgrace https://www.wfmu.org/playlists/shows/129214

Craig Elsten, Justice Parman and Corey Stewart are back for their deep dive into the penultimate episode of Succession. Was this Jesse Armstrong's thesis statement on Logan Roy? We go scene-by-scene through the episode, present audio from three featured scenes, and award this week's #1 Boy, Best Insult and Biggest Move. Featured Scene 1: Ewan's eulogy of Logan RoyFeatured Scene 2: Matsson, Shiv and Mencken square offFeatured Scene 3: Kendall and Roman, "You tried to Dad it"

To his critics: He is not a demagogue. He is a lauded stage and screen actor, and the man responsible for Succession's terrifying President-Elect to life. It's Justin Kirk! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

SUCCESSION Season 4 continues with Episode 8 "America Decides" written by JESSIE ARMSTRONG and directed by ANDRIJ PAREKH. On election night, Tom tries to manage an increasingly chaotic newsroom, while Kendall, Shiv, and Roman spar over the consequences of the result for themselves, the company, and the country.Another great episode only on HBOMax!The Outlaw John Rocha and fellow Geek Buddy Shannon McClung break down and discuss their thoughts on this episode of SUCCESSION.____________________________________________________________________________________Chapters:0:00 Intro and Overall Thoughts for Succession Season 4 Episode 88:48 Tom's Storyline- ATN Pressures, Shiv Baby Reveal, Calling the Election16:51 Roman Storyline- Fighting for Mencken, Battling Shiv, Convincing Kendall25:14 Shiv Storyline- Working with Matsson, Confronting Tom and Greg. Her Betrayal37:45 Kendall Storyline- Losing His Spine Again, Agreeing with Roman to Spite Shiv45:50 Connor Roy Storyline and Speech and Final ThoughtsFollow John Rocha: https://twitter.com/TheRochaSays​​​​​Follow Shannon McClung: https://twitter.com/Shannon_McClung

This week we dip our toes into the well of H. L. Mencken and review his seminal work "In Defense of Women" (1918) William also opens his birthday gifts, we discuss cat psychology and incels. Don't forget to join our Telegram channel at T.me/historyhomos and to join our group chat at T.me/historyhomoschat The video version of the show is available on Youtube, bitchute, odysee. For weekly premium episodes or to contribute to the show subscribe to our channel at www.rokfin.com/historyhomos Any questions comments concerns or T-shirt/sticker requests can be leveled at historyhomos@gmail.com Later homos --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/historyhomos/support

US Senator Joseph McCarthy unleashed an era of suspicion on the American people as he went looking for communists. His trials, both public and behind closed doors, focused on the government as well as Hollywood and the Army. He claimed that he had lists of communists, but failed to produce that list. It wasn't until the Army-McCarthy hearings in the spring and summer of 1954 that his unfounded hearings were put to rest. One year later the play Inherit the Wind opened. It was supposed to be a critique of the McCarthy era set inside of a re-telling of the Scopes "monkey" trial. In doing so, it got many of the facts wrong. John Scopes never spent any time in jail. He didn't have a girlfriend, and that girlfriend was not berated on the stand. The townspeople of Dayton, TN were welcoming to both Bryan and Darrow. To explore this work of art and revisionist history I spoke with the hosts of the Seeing and Believing podcast Kevin McLenithan and Sarah Welch-Larson. Select differences between the Scopes trial and Inherit the Wind John Scopes was arrested but never spent time in jail. He was "arrested" in a soda fountain where the test trial was conceived and not in school. Scopes later claimed he never taught evolution, which is why he never took the stand in real life. The entire case was set up as a publicity stunt to bring attention to the town of Dayton, TN. They got the idea when they saw an ad placed by the ACLU. The character of Rachel did not exist in real life. The people of Dayton were welcoming to both Darrow and Bryan and Scopes was loved by many. He even spent time swimming with the prosecution between trial sessions. The moment when Bryan was on trial was held outdoors. H.L. Mencken was not some loveable curmudgeon. He was an anti-semite and a racist. Dayton largely did not vote for Bryan when he ran for president. Bryan died a few days after the trial, not while in the courtroom. Darrow did not carry a copy of the Bible and Darwin out of the courtroom. The textbook in question during the trial was clearly pro-eugenics, was sold in the soda fountain, and had been approved by the state textbook committee. The preachers of the town were kind. The odd sermon given the night of the trial never happened and the script adds a lot of strange things that are not in the Bible. Bryan wished the law to have no penalty, unlike his stand-in in the movie who hoped for a harsher punishment. Sources Inherit the Wind (1960 version) starring Spencer Tracy Summer for the Gods by Edward Larson Chris' own visit to the Dayton museum dedicated to the trial Helpful video about the Napoleon painting Discussion Questions: Where is the line between art and propaganda? Does art have an obligation to the truth? Do you see McCarthyism in Inherit the Wind? Is Inherit the Wind a fair way of discussing the Scopes trial, or a work of revisionist history? Why does it matter? What would it mean for a group that feels maligned and misunderstood to have a film misrepresent them? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A good conscience means that we are what we declare ourselves to be. H.L. Mencken, 20th century American journalist, essayist, and satirist, defined conscience as “the inner voice which warns us that somebody may be looking.” Morally speaking, you act the same when you are alone as at other times.Faith and a good conscience are three times joined together in this Epistle, showing the inseparable connection between faith and morals. If you claim to know Christ and even have strong Biblical doctrinal beliefs, you are deceived if your morals aren't also Biblical.

This week, Ryan and Brian learn about Michigeese, Saturn's Hexagon, the seaplanes of Canada, and some lyrics from a musical Ryan has to guess. Also: a week in crosswords and a rousing edition of Kealoa featuring ASAP vs. STAT. If you get bored (how could you?!), write something for the Fill Me In wiki. And if you're feeling philanthropic, donate to our Patreon. Do you enjoy our show? Actually, it doesn't matter! Please consider leaving us a 5-star review on Apple Podcasts. This will help new listeners find our show, and you'll be inducted into the Quintuple Decker Turkey Club. Drop us a note or a Tweet or a postcard or a phone call — we'd love to hear from you. Helpful links: Apple Podcasts link: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/fill-me-in/id1364379980 Google Play link: https://player.fm/series/fill-me-in-2151002 Amazon/Audible link: https://www.amazon.com/item_name/dp/B08JJRM927 RSS feed: http://bemoresmarter.libsyn.com/rss Contact us: Email (fmi@bemoresmarter.com) / Facebook / Twitter / Instagram / Google Voice (315-510-9892) We're putting these words here to help with search engine optimization. We don't think it will work, but you probably haven't read this far, so it doesn't matter: baseball, crossword, crosswords, etymology, game, hunt, kealoa, movies, musicals, mystery, oscar, pizza, puzzle, puzzles, sandwiches, soup, trivia, words

My guest this week is Ben Dow (@benjaminjdow), a professor of practice at Southern Methodist University with a focus in management studies. He recently sent me several papers he worked on with other folks about conspiracism and leadership, and we discuss what those papers suggest about the role of conspiracism in modern politics and other organizations.Ben's website: https://www.smu.edu/cox/Our-People-and-Community/Faculty/Benjamin-DowConvocation: H.L. Mencken, A Mencken ChrestomathyMusic by GW RodriguezSibling Pods:Philosophers in Space: https://0gphilosophy.libsyn.com/Filmed Live Musicals Pod: https://www.filmedlivemusicals.com/thepodcast.htmlSupport us at Patreon.com/EmbraceTheVoidIf you enjoy the show, please Like and Review us on your pod app, especially iTunes. It really helps!Recent appearances:The only one that matters really: https://religionnews.com/2023/02/01/american-atheists-board-members-exit-dogged-by-misconduct-allegations/Next Episode: High Weirdness with Erik Davis

Our guest this week is Andy Borowitz. Andy is an award-winning comedian and New York Times bestselling author. He grew up in Cleveland, Ohio, and graduated from Harvard College, where he became President of the Harvard Lampoon. In 1998, he began contributing humor to The New Yorker's “Shouts & Murmurs” and “Talk of the Town” departments, and in 2001, he created “The Borowitz Report,” a satirical news column, which has millions of readers around the world. In 2012, The New Yorker began publishing “The Borowitz Report.” As a storyteller, he hosted “Stories at the Moth” from 1999 to 2009. As a comedian, he has played to sold-out venues around the world, including during his national tour, “Make America Not Embarrassing Again,” from 2018 to 2020. His new book Profiles in Ignorance: How America's Politicians Got Dumb and Dumber is now available. Review “How did we slide into the abyss of liking our politicians to be—or to act—dumb rather than smart? In this funny but serious book, Andy Borowitz chronicles our embrace of anti-intellectualism.” —Walter Isaacson, #1 New York Times bestselling author of The Code Breaker “This is one of these brilliant books that makes you laugh until you cry. Borowitz masterfully throws light (and shade) on the confederacy of dunces who have fumbled their way into power. His writing has never been smarter, sharper, or more necessary.” —Susan Orlean, New York Times bestselling author of The Library Book “A devastatingly funny takedown of a veritable Mount Rushmore of incompetents . . . In the hallowed tradition of Will Rogers, Mark Twain, H.L. Mencken, Ambrose Bierce, and other clear-eyed satirists, Borowitz skewers all manner of chronically befuddled, willfully ignorant dolts. . . . Ravaging this seemingly endless rogues' gallery of buffoonery and corruption, Borowitz marshals mind-boggling, breathtaking evidence. . . . While there are countless laughs in the book, they have a rueful edge given that we are all affected by such widespread ignorance.” —Kirkus Reviews (starred review) “Readers may laugh, cry, or swear under their breath (sometimes all at once) with this scathing survey of the seemingly increasing ignorance of American politicians. Borowitz, a writer of page and screen and satirist for The New Yorker, humorously examines the ever-increasing, lowering-of-the-bar expectations of presidential candidates' knowledge and beyond in this book that is perfect for fans of The Daily Show or John Lithgow's “Dumpty” series. . . . For readers who have ever looked at the political landscape and asked how or why, this is a book that will inform and infuriate.” —Library Journal (starred review) “Andy makes me laugh out loud, that's a given. In this book he has also made me think out loud. Profiles in Ignorance is hilarious, original, scary, prescient and a wake-up call for us all. A must read.” —Susie Essman, HBO's Curb Your Enthusiasm “[Borowitz] sheds light on the cultural and economic trends that gave intellectualism a bad name and identifies the political operatives . . . who facilitated the rise of ignorance. Fans of The Borowitz Report will gobble this up.” —Publishers Weekly --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/alyssa-milano-sorry-not-sorry/message