Podcasts about On Liberty

Zum Beginn der Ferien freue ich mich, Ihnen eine ganz besondere Episode mit dem Titel »Freiheit oder Sicherheit« präsentieren zu dürfen. Eine besondere Episode deshalb, weil mein Gast Prof. Konrad Paul Liessmann ist. Konrad Paul Liessmann ist emeritierter Professor für Philosophie an der Universität Wien. Aber er ist nicht nur wissenschaftlich äußerst erfolgreich. Er steht auch seit Jahrzehnten als herausragender Beobachter und wichtiger Kritiker der kulturellen und politischen Landschaft in der Öffentlichkeit. Öffentlichkeit meint damit dutzende Bücher, unzählige Artikel in Zeitungen und Magazinen sowie Auftritte in Fernsehen, Radio und Veranstaltungen aller Art. Für die Hörer dieser Episode möchte ich besonders die folgenden Bücher hervorheben: Theorie der Unbildung Lauter Lügen Was nun? Eine Philosophie der Krise . Prof. Liessmann ist auch Intendant des Philosophicums Lech, das im September unter dem Titel »Betreutes Denken« stattfindet. Ein Thema, das perfekt zu diesem Podcast passt; ich hoffe, Ihnen dazu im Herbst noch mehr Informationen bieten zu können. Für mich persönlich war es eine ganz besondere Freude, dass Prof. Liessmann sich Zeit für ein Zukunft-Denken-Gespräch genommen hat, da ich seine Artikel und Bücher seit mindestens 30 Jahren mit großer Bereicherung lese. Hinzu kommt, dass er seine fundierte Kritik etwa am Bildungssystem oder an der Universität schon als aktiver Wissenschafter deutlich vorgetragen hat, im Gegensatz zu vielen anderen, die dies nur hinter vorgehaltener Hand tun. Viele Themen die wir in diesem Gespräch ansprechen, diskutiere ich auch in meinem neuen Buch: Hexenmeister oder Zauberlehrling? Die Wissensgesellschaft in der Krise. Ich beginne das Gespräch mit der grundlegenden Frage: Was ist der Mensch? Ist der Mensch von Natur aus gut und wird verführt oder von der Natur her schlecht und muss eingehegt werden? »In der Antike wird der Mensch als Wesen betrachtet, das zwischen Extremen hin und her pendeln kann. Aber gleichzeitig durch seine Vernunftbegabung die Möglichkeit hat, das Bessere zu wählen und das Schlechtere zu vermeiden.« Was hat sich in der Betrachtung des Menschen von der klassischen Tugendlehre bis heute verändert? »Wenn wir ein Naturwesen sind — was ist die Natur?« Einer der häufig genannten Denker in diesem Themenfeld ist Thomas Hobbes: »Im Naturzustand ist der Mensch dem Menschen ein Wolf.« Liegt der Ursprung der Konflikte darin, dass wir gleich sind? Ist der Mensch gar von Natur aus gut, wie Jean-Jacques Rousseau annimmt? Gibt es folglich keinen zivilisatorischen Fortschritt oder wird gar das Bild eines vermeintlich »edlen Wilden« verherrlicht? Behindern also, konsequent weitergedacht, Wissenschaft und Kunst die Humanität und führen zu Rückschritt statt Fortschritt? Oder sollten wir uns eher an Immanuel Kant orientieren? »Der Mensch ist nicht von Natur aus böse, er ist aber auch nicht von Natur aus gut. Er ist ein Wesen, das verschiedene Motivlagen in sich hat.« Aber all diese Fragen scheinen nur Sinn zu ergeben, wenn wir handlungsfähige Wesen sind. Verfügen wir nun über Handlungs- und Willensfreiheit? Unterliege ich also meinen Neigungen oder bin ich in der Lage, mich zu entscheiden, diese zu verändern? Folgen wir wieder Immanuel Kant? »Man kann natürlich darüber diskutieren, ob der Mensch ein freies Wesen ist. Tatsache ist, wir müssen uns das wechselseitig unterstellen und tun es auch.« Gilt die kühne These der politischen Geschichte: »Das Problem war nie, ob Menschen frei sind, sondern das Problem war immer, wie kann ich ihnen diese Freiheit nehmen.« Ist also der Mensch von Natur aus frei? Damit sind wir im Gespräch beim Begriff der Freiheit angelangt. Wie hat sich dieser Begriff auch über die vergangenen Jahrhunderte verändert? »By liberty, was meant protection against the tyranny of the political rulers.« John Stuart Mill (1859) Was war die programmatische Rolle der Französischen Revolution? Kann die Romantik und damit die Idee der romantischen Liebe als frühes Emanzipationsmodell gesehen werden? Was sind die Ideen der Freiheit des 19. Jahrhunderts von John Stuart Mill über Karl Marx bis Hegel? »Freiheit ist [nach Mill] etwas, das sich gegen jetzt nicht mehr legitimierbare Herrschaftsansprüche richtet. Das muss man wieder in Erinnerung rufen, weil wir das vergessen haben. Die Erklärung der Menschenrechte war eine Erklärung von Abwehrrechten. Man hat versucht, die Zugriffe des Staates auf den einzelnen Bürger abzuwehren. Menschenrechte waren immer Individualrechte, nie Kollektivrechte.« Freiheit bezieht sich also unter anderem auf Eigentum, freie Religionsausübung, freies Denken, Bewegungsfreiheit, wirtschaftliche Freiheit. Heute sprechen viele hingegen, als ginge es um Anspruchsrechte. Wie hat sich das verändert? Wie ist dieser unglaubliche Paradigmenwechsel, der die Idee der Menschenrechte neu definiert, in den letzten Jahrzehnten zustande gekommen? »Wir waren die ersten, die erklärt haben, daß die Freiheit des Individuums um so mehr beschränkt werden muß, je komplizierter die Zivilisation wird.« Benito Mussolini Hat diese Idee des Faschismus bis in die heutige Zeit Wirkmacht? So manche Äußerung von Intellektuellen scheint in diese Richtung zu deuten? »Ich bin extrem vorsichtig und skeptisch gegenüber allen Konzeptionen, die mit der angeblichen Komplexität der Welt versuchen, die Freiheit des Menschen einzuschränken, beziehungsweise Strategien argumentieren, dass der Mensch geleitet, gelenkt und in ein Kollektiv eingebunden werden muss. […] Das hat immer schon den Keim des Totalitären in sich.« Auch hier stellt sich wieder die alte Kantische Frage: woher wissen diejenigen, die leiten wollen, die uns bevormunden wollen, was »das Richtige« ist? Wie lässt sich diese Problematik auf die aktuelle Diskussion um die Nutzung sozialer Netzwerke, sowohl von Jugendlichen wie auch von Erwachsenen, anwenden? Welche besonderen Fähigkeiten besitzen diejenigen, die im Gegensatz zu uns Normalsterblichen so genau wissen, was richtig und falsch ist, und damit unseren Zugang zu Information — zu unserem Wohle — beschneiden wollen? »Offensichtlich ist die Welt nur für eine bestimmte Art von Menschen komplex, andere haben den Durchblick.« Wenn nun aber möglicherweise der »Normalbürger« von der Komplexität der Welt überfordert ist und bei jedem Schritt von »Experten« an die Hand genommen werden muss, welchen Sinn ergibt dann überhaupt Demokratie? Wer entscheidet, wer als Experte gilt? Geht es da nur um »unsere Demokratie« oder hat diese Problematik eine längere Geschichte? Wie verändert sich das Verhalten von Menschen in Gruppen? »Demokratie steht immer vor diesem paradoxen Problem, auf der einen Seite den Bürgern tatsächlich alle Rechte zu geben und sie zum Souverän zu machen, und auf der anderen Seite nach Verfahren und Regeln zu suchen, wo man die Abgründe dieses Souveräns, seine Irrtumsanfälligkeit, auch seine Gehässigkeit in geregelte Bahnen lenkt.« Die Rolle von Verfassungen und rechtsstaatlichen Rahmenbedingungen? Was ist dann etwa davon zu halten, wenn nach Wahlen ein Teil des Volkes das Wahlergebnis nicht akzeptieren möchte? Betrachtet man die Gruppe der »Experten«, der Akademiker, der Unis — sind dort keine Gruppenphänomene zu betrachten? Handelt es sich nur um rein rationale Denker auf der Suche nach Wahrheit oder kommt es auch dort zu opportunistischen Irrwegen? Was folgt daraus? »Die Expertokratie ist kein Gegenmodell […] man muss in den sauren Apfel beißen.« Ab wann wäre also man gebildet und erwachsen genug, um an der Demokratie teilnehmen zu können, und noch wichtiger: wer beurteilt das. “The most basic question is not what is best but who shall decide what is best.”, Thomas Sowell Damit wird eine der schwierigsten Fragen aufgeworfen: Was ist der Zusammenhang zwischen Expertise und Entscheidungsfindung in einer Demokratie? »Auch die kommunistischen Staaten haben sich auf dem Boden einer materialistischen Wissenschaft gewähnt. Sie haben auch geglaubt, sie bauen ihre zukünftige Gesellschaft auf Basis wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse auf.« Zu welchen totalitären Exzessen hat dies geführt?! »Die Rassentheoretiker und Anthropologen der Nazis haben sich als Wissenschaftler gefühlt, nicht als Ideologen.« Neue Erkenntnisse und die Veränderung des Wissens scheinen die Konstante zu sein und nicht »die Wissenschaft« als Begründung für vermeintlich alternativlose Entscheidungen...? »Das Spannende an der Wissenschaft ist ja genau das Prinzip der Vorläufigkeit.« Was ist von Popper und dem Prinzip der Asymmetrie zu halten, und zwar sowohl in Politik wie Wissenschaftstheorie? »Der friedliche Regierungswechsel gehört zum Wesen der Demokratie.« Macht tendiert immer dazu, sich selbst über alle Maßen bestätigen zu wollen. Was sind die grundlegenden Prinzipien und Ideen, ja das Wesen der Demokratie? »Demokratie läuft auch immer Gefahr, sich selbst aufzuheben.« Kommen wir nun zum Begriff der Sicherheit — wie steht Sicherheit im Wechselspiel oder gar im Gegensatz zu Freiheit? Leben wir in Zeiten radikaler Unsicherheit — was bedeutet das überhaupt und was sind die Folgen davon? Wie hat sich das Gefühl der Sicherheit und die Sicherheit, was der nächste Tag bringt, über die Zeit verändert? Der Wunsch nach dem Blick in die Zukunft hat die Menschen immer angetrieben, wir erinnern uns an das Orakel von Delphi und die zahlreichen (teuren) Institute, die sich um Wirtschaftsprognosen bemühen. »Die Unsicherheit der Zukunft gegenüber zu beklagen, hieße genauso darüber zu klagen, dass wir keine determinierten Maschinen sind.« Wie hängt der mögliche oder unmögliche Blick in die Zukunft mit unserem Gefühl der Sicherheit im Hier und Jetzt zusammen? »Wir sind eine zukunftsversessene Gesellschaft. Wir fragen immer 'Was kommt?', nie 'Was ist?'« Sind Sicherheit und Freiheit nun Gegensätze oder vielmehr einander bedingende Prinzipien? Kann ein Leben in Sicherheit gerade durch die Bedingungen dieser Sicherheit ein nicht-lebenswertes Leben sein? Was ist die Rolle des Staates in diesem Wechselspiel oder Gegensatz? Hat sich der Staat um das Glück seiner Bürger zu kümmern? Welche philosophischen Ideen stehen sich hier gegenüber? Welche Rolle spielen Meinungsfreiheit und individuelle Werte in dieser Diskussion? »Das Problem ist nicht, dass es das Unverfügbare oder das Neue gibt, sondern das Problem ist, mit welcher Ausstattung und welcher Einstellung, mit welchen Möglichkeiten und Fähigkeiten treten wir dem gegenüber.« Was bedeutet dies für Bildung, Schule und Universität? »Wir müssen lernen, wieder mit dem Problem der Offenheit umzugehen, aber gleichzeitig Geschichtsfatalismus vermeiden. […] Wir trauen uns sowohl als Individuum als auch als Gesellschaft nicht mehr zu, tatsächliche Entscheidungen zu treffen.« Was können wir aus früheren Krisen lernen? »I am more concerned by what the Bomb is doing already.«, C. S. Lewis (1958) »Human life has always been lived on the edge of a precipice. Human culture has always had to exist under the shadow of something infinitely more important than itself. If man had postponed the search for knowledge and beauty until they were secure, the search would never had begun. […] Life has never been normal.«, C. S. Lewis (1939!) Gehen wir auf der einen Seite in vielen politischen und gesellschaftlichen Bereichen große Risiken ein, aber dort, wo es wirklich zählt — etwa beim Denken — wird es immer eindimensionaler? Kann der Staat zugleich schwach und übermächtig sein? Kann der Staat somit einerseits ohnmächtig sein, andererseits versuchen, seine Macht in den verbleibenden Bereichen übermäßig auszuspielen, und wer ist eigentlich »der Staat«? »Müssen mündige Bürger wirklich ständig darauf hingewiesen werden, was sie zu essen haben, vor was sie sich in Acht nehmen sollen...?« Gilt nicht der Satz von Wilhelm von Humboldt immer noch: »Was nicht von dem Menschen selbst gewählt, worin er auch nur eingeschränkt und geleitet wird, das geht nicht in sein Wesen über, das bleibt ihm ewig fremd, das verrichtet er nicht eigentlich mit menschlicher Kraft, sondern mit mechanischer Fertigkeit.« Wer entscheidet folglich in komplexen Fragen, deren Ausgang höchst unklar ist? »In diesem Wechselspiel von Risiko, Sicherheit und Freiheit taucht selten das Problem der Verantwortlichkeit auf.« Diese Frage muss, wie so manche anderen, offen bleiben oder vertagt werden... »Man muss ja nicht auf alle Fragen gleich eine Antwort finden!« Andere Episoden Episode 153: Potent Stuff, A Conversation with Prof. Jacob Howland Episode 137: Alles Leben ist Problemlösen Episode 135: Friedrich Hayek und die Beschränktheit der menschlichen Vernunft. Ein Gespräch mit Nickolas Emrich Episode 133: Desinformiere Dich! Ein Gespräch mit Jakob Schirrmacher Episode 126: Schwarz gekleidet im dunklen Kohlekeller. Ein Gespräch mit Axel Bojanowski Episode 125: Ist Fortschritt möglich? Ideen als Widergänger über Generationen Episode 122: Komplexitätsillusion oder Heuristik, ein Gespräch mit Gerd Gigerenzer Episode 117: Der humpelnde Staat, ein Gespräch mit Prof. Christoph Kletzer Episode 106: Wissenschaft als Ersatzreligion? Ein Gespräch mit  Manfred Glauninger Episode 103: Schwarze Schwäne in Extremistan; die Welt des Nassim Taleb, ein Gespräch mit Ralph Zlabinger Episode 91: Die Heidi-Klum-Universität, ein Gespräch mit Prof. Ehrmann und Prof. Sommer Episode 88: Liberalismus und Freiheitsgrade, ein Gespräch mit Prof. Christoph Möllers Episode 72: Scheitern an komplexen Problemen? Wissenschaft, Sprache und Gesellschaft — Ein Gespräch mit Jan David Zimmermann Episode 44: Was ist Fortschritt? Ein Gespräch mit Philipp Blom Episode 28: Jochen Hörisch: Für eine (denk)anstössige Universität! Referenzen Konrad Paul Liessmann: Theorie der Unbildung. Die Irrtümer der Wissensgesellschaft, Paul Zsolnay Verlag (2006) Lauter Lügen. Und andere Versuche, die Wahrheit zu sagen, Paul Zsolnay Verlag (2015) Was nun? Über die Zukunft. Eine Philosophie der Krise, Paul Zsolnay Verlag (2021) Immanuel Kant, Die Metaphysik der Sitten (1797) Platon, Politeia John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, John W. Parker and Son (1859) Benito Mussolini, Rede vor dem Gran Consiglio del Fascismo (1929), zitiert in Friedrich von Hayek, Der Weg zur Knechtschaft, Eugen Rentsch Verlag (1945) [engl. Original: The Road to Serfdom, Routledge (1944)] Immanuel Kant, Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung? (1784) Elias Canetti, Masse und Macht, Claassen Verlag (1960) Alexis de Tocqueville, Über die Demokratie in Amerika (De la démocratie en Amérique, 1835/1840) Thomas Sowell, Knowledge and Decisions, Basic Books (1980) Karl Popper, Die offene Gesellschaft und ihre Feinde (The Open Society and Its Enemies, Routledge (1945)) Orakel von Delphi C. S. Lewis, Is Progress Possible? Willing Slaves of the Welfare State (1958), in: God in the Dock, Eerdmans (1970) C. S. Lewis, Learning in War-Time (1939), in: The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses, Macmillan (1949) Wilhelm von Humboldt, Ideen zu einem Versuch, die Grenzen der Wirksamkeit des Staats zu bestimmen (verfasst 1792, posthum erstveröffentlicht 1851 bei Eduard Trewendt, Breslau). Philosophicum Lech Philosophicum Lech — Abenteuer (2025)

As the war on diversity upends government, corporate and education policies, the history of the idea of diversity has never been more important. David Oppenheimer, a diversity skeptic turned diversity admirer, chronicles how diversity became a foundational value of higher education over the last 200 years, how it evolved as it was adopted by commerce and science, and what the implications are of the current backlash.The diversity principle—the idea that people with different backgrounds, experiences, identities, and viewpoints produce better work by engaging with one another—was a core tenet of the first modern research university, founded in Germany in 1810. It was the inspiration for John Stuart Mill's On Liberty, a touchstone of academic freedom; a hallmark of Charles Eliot's remaking of Harvard in the late 19th century to promote the “clash of ideas”; and a foundation of the 20th-century efforts toward equality of Thurgood Marshall, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Pauli Murray. In telling the story of the diversity principle through the experiences of these and other remarkable thinkers, Oppenheimer argues for affirming diversity as a central value of education and an “essential ingredient for a robust intellectual and political culture.” Join us for a fascinating discussion about an important concept that underpins our intellectual, social, and economic lives. A Humanities Member-led Forum program. Forums at the Club are organized and run by volunteer programmers who are members of The Commonwealth Club, and they cover a diverse range of topics. Learn more about our Forums. ORGANIZER George Hammond Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

https://soundcloud.com/rene-de-paula-jr/especial-o-nascimento-da-web-e My brain made me do it https://pca.st/mbffvovw Tim Berners-Lee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee The birth of the Web https://home.cern/science/computing/birth-web Notions of ‘Christendom' often miss the mark – medieval Europe's ideas about faith and power were not so simple https://theconversation.com/notions-of-christendom-often-miss-the-mark-medieval-europes-ideas-about-faith-and-power-were-not-so-simple-275285 We study pandemics, and the resurgence of measles is a grim sign of what's coming https://arstechnica.com/science/2026/03/we-study-pandemics-and-the-resurgence-of-measles-is-a-grim-sign-of-whats-coming/ China approves ‘ethnic unity’ law requiring minorities to learn Mandarin https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp9meeek051o o primeiro website: https://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/TheProject.html  On Liberty https://pca.st/m99n6e3f a app do radinho!!!    http://radinhodepilha.com/radinho  canal do radinho no telegram:   http://t.me/radinhodepilha meu perfil no Threads: https://www.threads.net/@renedepaulajr meu perfil no BlueSky https://bsky.app/profile/renedepaula.bsky.social meu twitter http://twitter.com/renedepaula aqui está o link para a caneca no Colab55:  https://www.colab55.com/@rene/mugs/caneca-rarissima  para xs raríssimxs internacionais, aqui está nossa caneca no Zazzle: https://www.zazzle.com/radinhos_anniversary_mug-168129613992374138 minha lojinha no Colab55 (posters, camisetas, adesivos, sacolas):  http://bit.ly/renecolab meu livro novo na lojinha!  blue notes https://www.ko-fi.com/s/550d7d5e22 meu livro solo https://www.ko-fi.com/s/0f990d61c7  o adesivo do radinho!!!   http://bit.ly/rarissimos  minha lojinha no ko-fi: https://ko-fi.com/renedepaula/shop muito obrigado pelos cafés!!!  http://ko-fi.com/renedepaula

"Great minds think alike? It's completely wrong. It's not that great minds think alike; it's that different minds are great." — David OppenheimerIt's diversity week. Yesterday, Brian Soucek argued in favor of what he calls the "opinionated university" to protect free speech. Today David Oppenheimer, law professor at UC Berkeley, on The Diversity Principle: The Story of a Transformative Idea. Oppenheimer reminds us that diversity isn't a modern invention. It traces back to Wilhelm von Humboldt's University of Berlin in 1810, which admitted Catholics and Jews to what would otherwise have been an entirely Protestant institution. And to John Stuart Mill, whose On Liberty—written with his wife Harriet Taylor Mill—might be renamed On Liberty and Diversity.Oppenheimer's case for diversity is partly moral, partly utilitarian. Diverse boards result in more profitable corporations, he says. Diverse science labs make more significant discoveries. Diverse classrooms generate better ideas. The phrase "great minds think alike" is, he says, the product of a poor mind. Different minds are great. That's where the greatness comes from.Oppenheimer takes seriously Clarence Thomas's critique of diversity. Thomas argues that racial diversity assumes Black people all think alike, which is its own form of liberal racism. But Oppenheimer responds by citing Thomas's "brilliant" dissent in Virginia v. Black, where he argued that cross burning isn't political speech but terrorism. That insight, Oppenheimer says, came from Thomas's lived experience as a Black man. The other justices, all white, couldn't see it.The unsung hero in Oppenheimer's history of diversity is Pauli Murray. Born 1910 into the segregated South, Murray coined the term "Jane Crow," influenced Thurgood Marshall's arguments in Brown v. Board, saved the sex discrimination clause in the Civil Rights Act, hired Ruth Bader Ginsburg at the ACLU against the judgment of the men who thought her "meek," and ended her life as an Episcopal priest. Now recognized by the church as a saint, Oppenheimer cites Murray as not just a great theorist of diversity, but also as a paragon of a diverse life. Maybe every week should be diversity week. Five Takeaways●      Different Minds Are Great: The phrase "great minds think alike" is, Oppenheimer says, the product of a poor mind. Different minds are great. That's where their greatness comes from.●      Diversity Traces Back to 1810: Diversity isn't a modern invention. It traces back to Humboldt's University of Berlin in 1810, which admitted Catholics and Jews. Mill's On Liberty might be renamed On Liberty and Diversity.●      Clarence Thomas's Critique Is Serious: Thomas argues that racial diversity assumes Black people all think alike—its own form of liberal racism. But Oppenheimer responds by citing Thomas's own "brilliant" dissent in Virginia v. Black, which came from his lived experience as a Black man.●      Pauli Murray Is the Model of a Great Mind: Murray coined the term "Jane Crow," influenced Thurgood Marshall's arguments in Brown v. Board, saved the sex discrimination clause in the Civil Rights Act, and hired Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Oppenheimer cites her as a paragon of a diverse life.●      Mill Warned Against Majoritarianism: On Liberty is instructive today. When everyone agrees, listen harder to those who disagree. The majority is not only often ill-informed but often wrong. About the GuestDavid Oppenheimer is a Clinical Professor of Law at UC Berkeley School of Law. He is the author of The Diversity Principle: The Story of a Transformative Idea and co-director of a center on comparative equality law. He attended Harvard Law School and spent his final year at Berkeley.ReferencesPeople mentioned:●      John Stuart Mill wrote On Liberty with his wife Harriet Taylor Mill. Oppenheimer argues the book might be renamed On Liberty and Diversity.●      Wilhelm von Humboldt founded the University of Berlin in 1810 on principles of diversity, admitting Catholics and Jews to a Protestant institution.●      Pauli Murray coined "Jane Crow," influenced Thurgood Marshall, saved sex discrimination in the Civil Rights Act, hired RBG, and became an Episcopal saint.●      Charles William Eliot was President of Harvard who brought diversity principles to American higher education, encouraging the "clash of ideas" among undergraduates.●      Clarence Thomas offers a critique of diversity that Oppenheimer takes seriously but ultimately rejects, using Thomas's own dissent in Virginia v. Black.About Keen On AmericaNobody asks more awkward questions than the Anglo-American writer and filmmaker Andrew Keen. In Keen On America, Andrew brings his pointed Transatlantic wit to making sense of the United States—hosting daily interviews about the history and future of this now venerable Republic. With nearly 2,800 episodes since the show launched on TechCrunch in 2010, Keen On America is the most prolific intellectual interview show in the history of podcasting.WebsiteSubstackYouTubeApple PodcastsSpotify Chapters:(00:00) - Introduction: A legal week on diversity (01:32) - Diversity traces back to Humboldt's Berlin, 1810 (02:08) - What is diversity? (03:19) - Mill and On Liberty: The philosophy of diversity (05:08) - Great minds don't think alike—different minds are great (06:13) - Mill against the tyranny of the majority (07:23) - Is diversity utilitarian? (09:14) - Charles William Eliot brings diversity to Harvard (11:04) - Harvard vs. Princeton: Who welcomed outsiders? (12:47) - What's the strongest argument against diversity?

Journalist, author and historian Misha Glenny presents his first edition of In Our Time, succeeding Melvyn Bragg who retired from this role last summer. Misha and his guests discuss the landmark work On Liberty by John Stuart Mill, published in 1859 and the increasing recognition for his wife Harriet Taylor Mill's contribution. The subject matter of the essay is ‘civil or social liberty: the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual' and it argues that the sole end for which mankind may interfere with the liberty of action of anyone is self-protection and even then only to prevent harm to others. This essay became enormously popular and a foundational text for liberalism.WithHelen McCabe Professor of Political Theory at the University of NottinghamMark Philp Emeritus Professor of History and Politics at the University of WarwickAndPiers Norris Turner Associate Professor of Philosophy at The Ohio State UniversityProducer: Simon TillotsonReading list: Jo Ellen Jacobs (ed.), Harriet Taylor Mill, Complete Works (Indiana University Press, 1998) Bruce L. Kinzer, Ann P. Robson and John M. Robson, A Moralist In and Out of Parliament: John Stuart Mill at Westminster, 1865-1868 (University of Toronto Press, 1992) Christopher Macleod and Dale Miller (eds.), A Companion to Mill (Wiley, 2016)Helen McCabe, John Stuart Mill, Socialist (McGill-Queen's University Press, 2021)Helen McCabe, Harriet Taylor Mill (Cambridge, 2023)Piers Norris Turner, ‘The Arguments of On Liberty: Mill's Institutional Designs' (Nineteenth-Century Prose 47 (1), 2020)Piers Norris Turner et al (eds.), John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor Mill, On Liberty with Related Writings (Hackett Publishing, forthcoming 2026)Mark Philp (ed.), John Stuart Mill: Autobiography (Oxford University Press, 2018)Mark Philp and Frederick Rosen (eds.), John Stuart Mill: On Liberty, Utilitarianism and other Essays (Oxford University Press, 2015)Frederick Rosen, Mill (Oxford University Press, 2013)Alan Ryan, The Philosophy of John Stuart Mill (Palgrave MacMillan, 1998)Ben Saunders, ‘Reformulating Mill's Harm Principle' (Mind 125/500, 2016)John Skorupski, Why Read Mill Today? (Routledge, 2006)William Stafford, John Stuart Mill (Red Globe Press, 1998)C. L. Ten (ed.), Mill: On Liberty: A Critical Guide (Cambridge University Press, 2008)Nadia Urbinati and Alex Zakaras (eds.), John Stuart Mill's Political Thought: A Bicentennial Reassessment (Cambridge University Press, 2007) In Our Time is a BBC Studios production

‘On Liberty' by JS Mill is beloved by libertarians across the world - it championed the freedom of the individual in the face of growing state power. This individualism is at the heart of orthodox economic thought with Mill's ideas arguably acting as a guard rail against the malign actions of ‘the nanny state' . However, as we will demonstrate,  Mill was a complex thinker whose thinking evolved over time. Mill had an "interesting" childhood with an intellectual hot-housing that a modern day tennis dad would find extreme. Not long out of the nursery he would be constructing Latin poetry, writing commentaries on Greek philosophy and going on long walks in the country where he mused on the thoughts of our old friend David Ricardo. A perhaps inevitable breakdown in early adulthood led to a major change of heart and thought. Mill developed into a wide ranging thinker whose ideas at times can come across as almost socialist, jarring with the more common image of Mill as libertarian champion as beloved by free market think tanks. In this first episode of Season 9, your friendly neighbourhood economists Pete and Gav, discuss the life and times of this stern looking man. As always there is a quiz, some musical suggestions and books galore to hunt down. Technical support as always comes from our good friend Nic.

Week 38 of Ted Gioia's Immersive Humanities Course pairs two seemingly unrelated works: Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species (chapters 1–4) and John Stuart Mill's On Liberty. What initially felt random turned out to be an enlightening combination! Darwin's early chapters focus not on sweeping conclusions but on careful observation—natural selection as a real, ongoing process, and the frustratingly blurry boundary between “species” and “variety.” His meticulous attention to detail is both humbling and persuasive, even if the book's once-shocking claims now feel familiar. Mill's On Liberty complements Darwin perfectly by arguing that truth itself depends on open discussion. A society, Mill insists, produces great individuals only when it protects freedom of thought and speech and resists dogma. Read together, these works reveal how revolutionary ideas require not just insight, but a culture willing to debate, question, and change. This week left a lasting impression—and a renewed appreciation for intellectual humility and openness.We have a special Christmas Episode next week--be sure to check in!LINKTed Gioia/The Honest Broker's 12-Month Immersive Humanities Course (paywalled!)My Amazon Book List (NOT an affiliate link)CONNECTThe complete list of Crack the Book Episodes: https://cheryldrury.substack.com/p/crack-the-book-start-here?r=u3t2rTo read more of my writing, visit my Substack - https://www.cheryldrury.substack.com.Follow me on Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/cldrury/ LISTENSpotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/5GpySInw1e8IqNQvXow7Lv?si=9ebd5508daa245bdApple Podcasts - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/crack-the-book/id1749793321 Captivate - https://crackthebook.captivate.fm

Aaron Benanav discusses the second part of his ‘Beyond Capitalism' essay series in the New Left Review. In this part he lays out the institutional design of his proposal of a multi-criterial economy. Shownotes Aaron at Cornell University: https://cals.cornell.edu/people/aaron-benanav Aaron's personal website: https://www.aaronbenanav.com/ Access to Aaron's paywalled publications: https://www.aaronbenanav.com/papers Mailing List to join the Movement for Multi-Dimensional Economics: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeUF7MZ2jQJXY_wHKn5xSIo-_L0tkMO-SG079sa5lGhRJTgqg/viewform Benanav, A. (2025). Beyond Capitalism—1. New Left Review, Issue 153, 65–128. https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii153/articles/aaron-benanav-beyond-capitalism-1 Benanav, A. (2025). Beyond Capitalism—2. New Left Review, Issue 154, 97–143. https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii154/articles/aaron-benanav-beyond-capitalism-2 Benanv, A. (2020). Automation and the Future of Work. Verso. https://www.versobooks.com/products/2682-automation-and-the-future-of-work on economic stagnation, see especially chapter 3, “In the Shadow of Stagnation”. on Marx's concept of the Value-Form: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/appendix.htm Moore, J.W. & Patel, R. (2020). A History of the World in Seven Cheap Things. A Guide to Capitalism, Nature, and the Future of the Planet. Verso. https://www.versobooks.com/products/817-a-history-of-the-world-in-seven-cheap-things on the abstract domination of capitalism: Postone, M. (1993). Time, Labor and Social Domination. A Reinterpretation of Marx's Critical Theory. Cambridge University Press. https://files.libcom.org/files/Moishe%20Postone%20-%20Time,%20Labor,%20and%20Social%20Domination.pdf Mau, S. (2023). Mute Compulsion. A Marxist Theory of the Economic Power of Capital. Verso. https://www.versobooks.com/products/2759-mute-compulsion Leipold, B. (2024). Citizen Marx. Republicanism and the Formation of Karl Marx's Social and Political Thought. Princeton University Press. https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691205236/citizen-marx on GDP (Gross Domestic Product): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product on the Five-Year Plans in the Soviet Union: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-year_plans_of_the_Soviet_Union Katsenelinboigen, A. (1977). Coloured Markets in the Soviet Union. Soviet Studies. Vol. 29, No.1. 62-85. https://www.jstor.org/stable/150728 Uvalić, M. (2018). The Rise and Fall of Market Socialism in Yugoslavia. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331223694_The_Rise_and_Fall_of_Market_Socialism_in_Yugoslavia on Friedrich Hayek: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Hayek Hayek, F. A. (1945). The Use of Knowledge in Society. The American Economic Review, 35(4), 519–530. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1809376 on the Pareto Optimum: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_efficiency on Rational Choice Theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_choice_model on Behavioral Economics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_economics on Otto Neurath: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Neurath on Neurath's technocratic tendencies: https://jacobin.com/2023/02/technocratic-socialism-otto-neurath-utopianism-capitalism on Joseph Raz: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Raz on Utilitarianism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism on the Capability Approach by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capability_approach on the Human Development Index (HDI): https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/human-development-index#/indicies/HDI on the Sustainability Development Goals (SDGs): https://sdgs.un.org/goals on Multi-Objective Optimization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-objective_optimization Saros, D. E. (2014). Information Technology and Socialist Construction. The End of Capital and the Transition to Socialism. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Information-Technology-and-Socialist-Construction-The-End-of-Capital-and-the-Transition-to-Socialism/Saros/p/book/9780415742924 on Neoclassical Economics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_economics on Citizen Assemblies and Sortition: https://www.sortitionfoundation.org/ on John Stuart Mill: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill Mill, J. S. (2011). On Liberty. Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/on-liberty/62EC27F1E66E2BCBA29DDCD5294B3DE0 McCabe, H. (2021). John Stuart Mill, Socialist. McGill-Queen's University Press. https://www.mqup.ca/john-stuart-mill--socialist-products-9780228005742.php on Degrowth: https://degrowth.info/ on Nick Land and Right Accelerationism: https://youtu.be/lrOVKHg_PJQ?si=Q4oFbaM1p4fhcWP0 on Left Accelerationism: https://criticallegalthinking.com/2013/05/14/accelerate-manifesto-for-an-accelerationist-politics/ Devine, P. (2002). Participatory Planning through Negotiated Coordination. Science & Society, Vol. 66, No. 1, 72-85. https://guilfordjournals.com/doi/abs/10.1521/siso.66.1.72.21001?journalCode=siso on Oskar R. Lange: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oskar_R._Lange on Lange's neoclassical approach to Socialism: https://jacobin.com/2022/10/oskar-lange-neoclassical-marxism-limits-of-capitalism-economic-theory Kowalik, T. (1990). Lange-Lerner Mechanism. In: Eatwell, J., Milgate, M., Newman, P. (eds). Problems of the Planned Economy. Palgrave Macmillan. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-349-20863-0_21 on Joseph Schumpeters concept of Creative Destruction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction Shaikh, A. (2016). Capitalism. Competition, Conflict, Crises. Oxford Academic. https://academic.oup.com/book/1464 Kornai, J. (1980). “Hard” and “Soft” Budget Constraint. Acta Oeconomica, 25(3/4), 231–245. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40728773 on the Cobb-Douglas Production Function: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobb%E2%80%93Douglas_production_function on Adam Smith: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Smith Lutosch, H. (2025). Embracing the Small Stuff. Caring for Children in a Liberated Society. In: Groos, J., & Sorg, C. (Eds.). (2025). Creative Construction. Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Bristol University Press. https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/creative-construction Hahnel, R. (2021). Democratic Economic Planning. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Democratic-Economic-Planning/Hahnel/p/book/9781032003320 Cockshott, P. & Cottrell, A. (1993). Towards a New Socialism. Spokesman. https://users.wfu.edu/cottrell/socialism_book/new_socialism.pdf on Universal Basic Services (UBS): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_basic_services https://autonomy.work/ubs-hub/ Fraser, N. & Sorg, C. (2025). Socialism, Planning and the Relativity of Dirt. In: Groos, J., & Sorg, C. (Eds.). (2025). Creative Construction. Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Bristol University Press. https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/creative-construction on Milton Friedman: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Friedman on John Maynard Keynes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Maynard_Keynes Aaron on what to learn from radical Keynesianism for a transitionary Program: Benanav, A. & Henwood, D. (2025). Behind the News. Beyond the Capitalist Economy w/ Aaron Benanav. https://open.spotify.com/episode/2diIiFkkM4x7MoZhi9e0tx on Socializing Finance: McCarthy, M. A. (2025). The Master's Tools. How Finance Wrecked Democracy (And a Radical Plan to Rebuild It). Verso. https://www.versobooks.com/products/755-the-master-s-tools Future Histories Episodes on Related Topics S3E47 | Jason W. Moore on Socialism in the Web of Life https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e47-jason-w-moore-on-socialism-in-the-web-of-life/ S03E29 | Nancy Fraser on Alternatives to Capitalism https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e29-nancy-fraser-on-alternatives-to-capitalism/ S03E04 | Tim Platenkamp on Republican Socialism, General Planning and Parametric Control https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e04-tim-platenkamp-on-republican-socialism-general-planning-and-parametric-control/ S02E33 | Pat Devine on Negotiated Coordination https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e33-pat-devine-on-negotiated-coordination/ S03E10 | Aaron Benanav on Associational Socialism and Democratic Planning https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e10-aaron-benanav-on-associational-socialism-and-democratic-planning/ S01E32 | Daniel E. Saros on Digital Socialism and the Abolition of Capital (Part 2) https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e32-daniel-e-saros-on-digital-socialism-and-the-abolition-of-capital-part-2/ S02E31 | Daniel E. Saros on Digital Socialism and the Abolition of Capital (Part 1) https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e31-daniel-e-saros-on-digital-socialism-and-the-abolition-of-capital-part-1/ --- If you are interested in democratic economic planning, these resources might be of help: Democratic planning – an information website https://www.democratic-planning.com/ Sorg, C. & Groos, J. (eds.)(2025). Rethinking Economic Planning. Competition & Change Special Issue Volume 29 Issue 1. https://journals.sagepub.com/toc/ccha/29/1 Groos, J. & Sorg, C. (2025). Creative Construction - Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Bristol University Press. [for a review copy, please contact: amber.lanfranchi[at]bristol.ac.uk] https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/creative-construction International Network for Democratic Economic Planning https://www.indep.network/ Democratic Planning Research Platform: https://www.planningresearch.net/ --- Future Histories Contact & Support If you like Future Histories, please consider supporting us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/join/FutureHistories Contact: office@futurehistories.today Twitter: https://twitter.com/FutureHpodcast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/futurehpodcast/ Mastodon: https://mstdn.social/@FutureHistories English webpage: https://futurehistories-international.com   Episode Keywords #AaronBenanav, #JanGroos, #Interview, #FutureHistories, #FutureHistoriesInternational, #futurehistoriesinternational, #Transition, #DemocraticPlanning, #Keynes, #Efficiency, #Economics, #NeoclassicalEconomics, #NeoclassicalSocialism, #OttoNeurath, #DemocraticEconomicPlanning, #Capitalism, #Economics, #Socialism, #Socialisation, #Investment, #Degrowth, #UniversalBasicServices, #CareWork

Aaron Benanav discusses the first part of his ‘Beyond Capitalism' essay series in the New Left Review. In this part he lays the groundwork for his proposal of a multi-criterial economy. SASE - Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics: https://sase.org/ SASE Network I: Alternatives to Capitalism (including CfP): https://sase.org/networks/i-alternatives-to-capitalism/     Shownotes Aaron at Cornell University: https://cals.cornell.edu/people/aaron-benanav Aaron's personal website: https://www.aaronbenanav.com/ Access to Aaron's paywalled publications: https://www.aaronbenanav.com/papers Mailing List to join the Movement for Multi-Dimensional Economics: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeUF7MZ2jQJXY_wHKn5xSIo-_L0tkMO-SG079sa5lGhRJTgqg/viewform Benanav, A. (2025). Beyond Capitalism—1. New Left Review, Issue 153, 65–128. https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii153/articles/aaron-benanav-beyond-capitalism-1 Benanav, A. (2025). Beyond Capitalism—2. New Left Review, Issue 154, 97–143. https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii154/articles/aaron-benanav-beyond-capitalism-2 Benanv, A. (2020). Automation and the Future of Work. Verso. https://www.versobooks.com/products/2682-automation-and-the-future-of-work on economic stagnation, see especially chapter 3, “In the Shadow of Stagnation”. on Marx's concept of the Value-Form: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/appendix.htm Moore, J.W. & Patel, R. (2020). A History of the World in Seven Cheap Things. A Guide to Capitalism, Nature, and the Future of the Planet. Verso. https://www.versobooks.com/products/817-a-history-of-the-world-in-seven-cheap-things on the abstract domination of capitalism: Postone, M. (1993). Time, Labor and Social Domination. A Reinterpretation of Marx's Critical Theory. Cambridge University Press. https://files.libcom.org/files/Moishe%20Postone%20-%20Time,%20Labor,%20and%20Social%20Domination.pdf Mau, S. (2023). Mute Compulsion. A Marxist Theory of the Economic Power of Capital. Verso. https://www.versobooks.com/products/2759-mute-compulsion Leipold, B. (2024). Citizen Marx. Republicanism and the Formation of Karl Marx's Social and Political Thought. Princeton University Press. https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691205236/citizen-marx on GDP (Gross Domestic Product): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product on the Five-Year Plans in the Soviet Union: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-year_plans_of_the_Soviet_Union Katsenelinboigen, A. (1977). Coloured Markets in the Soviet Union. Soviet Studies. Vol. 29, No.1. 62-85. https://www.jstor.org/stable/150728 Uvalić, M. (2018). The Rise and Fall of Market Socialism in Yugoslavia. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331223694_The_Rise_and_Fall_of_Market_Socialism_in_Yugoslavia on Friedrich Hayek: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Hayek Hayek, F. A. (1945). The Use of Knowledge in Society. The American Economic Review, 35(4), 519–530. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1809376 on the Pareto Optimum: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_efficiency on Rational Choice Theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_choice_model on Behavioral Economics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_economics on Otto Neurath: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Neurath on Neurath's technocratic tendencies: https://jacobin.com/2023/02/technocratic-socialism-otto-neurath-utopianism-capitalism on Joseph Raz: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Raz on Utilitarianism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism on the Capability Approach by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capability_approach on the Human Development Index (HDI): https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/human-development-index#/indicies/HDI on the Sustainability Development Goals (SDGs): https://sdgs.un.org/goals on Multi-Objective Optimization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-objective_optimization Saros, D. E. (2014). Information Technology and Socialist Construction. The End of Capital and the Transition to Socialism. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Information-Technology-and-Socialist-Construction-The-End-of-Capital-and-the-Transition-to-Socialism/Saros/p/book/9780415742924 on Neoclassical Economics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_economics on Citizen Assemblies and Sortition: https://www.sortitionfoundation.org/ on John Stuart Mill: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill Mill, J. S. (2011). On Liberty. Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/on-liberty/62EC27F1E66E2BCBA29DDCD5294B3DE0 McCabe, H. (2021). John Stuart Mill, Socialist. McGill-Queen's University Press. https://www.mqup.ca/john-stuart-mill--socialist-products-9780228005742.php on Degrowth: https://degrowth.info/ on Nick Land and Right Accelerationism: https://youtu.be/lrOVKHg_PJQ?si=Q4oFbaM1p4fhcWP0 on Left Accelerationism: https://criticallegalthinking.com/2013/05/14/accelerate-manifesto-for-an-accelerationist-politics/ Devine, P. (2002). Participatory Planning through Negotiated Coordination. Science & Society, Vol. 66, No. 1, 72-85. https://guilfordjournals.com/doi/abs/10.1521/siso.66.1.72.21001?journalCode=siso on Oskar R. Lange: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oskar_R._Lange on Lange's neoclassical approach to Socialism: https://jacobin.com/2022/10/oskar-lange-neoclassical-marxism-limits-of-capitalism-economic-theory Kowalik, T. (1990). Lange-Lerner Mechanism. In: Eatwell, J., Milgate, M., Newman, P. (eds). Problems of the Planned Economy. Palgrave Macmillan. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-349-20863-0_21 on Joseph Schumpeters concept of Creative Destruction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction Shaikh, A. (2016). Capitalism. Competition, Conflict, Crises. Oxford Academic. https://academic.oup.com/book/1464 Kornai, J. (1980). “Hard” and “Soft” Budget Constraint. Acta Oeconomica, 25(3/4), 231–245. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40728773 on the Cobb-Douglas Production Function: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobb%E2%80%93Douglas_production_function on Adam Smith: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Smith Lutosch, H. (2025). Embracing the Small Stuff. Caring for Children in a Liberated Society. In: Groos, J., & Sorg, C. (Eds.). (2025). Creative Construction. Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Bristol University Press. https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/creative-construction Hahnel, R. (2021). Democratic Economic Planning. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Democratic-Economic-Planning/Hahnel/p/book/9781032003320 Cockshott, P. & Cottrell, A. (1993). Towards a New Socialism. Spokesman. https://users.wfu.edu/cottrell/socialism_book/new_socialism.pdf on Universal Basic Services (UBS): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_basic_services https://autonomy.work/ubs-hub/ Fraser, N. & Sorg, C. (2025). Socialism, Planning and the Relativity of Dirt. In: Groos, J., & Sorg, C. (Eds.). (2025). Creative Construction. Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Bristol University Press. https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/creative-construction on Milton Friedman: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Friedman on John Maynard Keynes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Maynard_Keynes Aaron on what to learn from radical Keynesianism for a transitionary Program: Benanav, A. & Henwood, D. (2025). Behind the News. Beyond the Capitalist Economy w/ Aaron Benanav. https://open.spotify.com/episode/2diIiFkkM4x7MoZhi9e0tx on Socializing Finance: McCarthy, M. A. (2025). The Master's Tools. How Finance Wrecked Democracy (And a Radical Plan to Rebuild It). Verso. https://www.versobooks.com/products/755-the-master-s-tools Future Histories Episodes on Related Topics S3E47 | Jason W. Moore on Socialism in the Web of Life https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e47-jason-w-moore-on-socialism-in-the-web-of-life/ S03E29 | Nancy Fraser on Alternatives to Capitalism https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e29-nancy-fraser-on-alternatives-to-capitalism/ S03E04 | Tim Platenkamp on Republican Socialism, General Planning and Parametric Control https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e04-tim-platenkamp-on-republican-socialism-general-planning-and-parametric-control/ S02E33 | Pat Devine on Negotiated Coordination https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e33-pat-devine-on-negotiated-coordination/ S03E10 | Aaron Benanav on Associational Socialism and Democratic Planning https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e10-aaron-benanav-on-associational-socialism-and-democratic-planning/ S01E32 | Daniel E. Saros on Digital Socialism and the Abolition of Capital (Part 2) https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e32-daniel-e-saros-on-digital-socialism-and-the-abolition-of-capital-part-2/ S02E31 | Daniel E. Saros on Digital Socialism and the Abolition of Capital (Part 1) https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e31-daniel-e-saros-on-digital-socialism-and-the-abolition-of-capital-part-1/ --- If you are interested in democratic economic planning, these resources might be of help: Democratic planning – an information website https://www.democratic-planning.com/ Sorg, C. & Groos, J. (eds.)(2025). Rethinking Economic Planning. Competition & Change Special Issue Volume 29 Issue 1. https://journals.sagepub.com/toc/ccha/29/1 Groos, J. & Sorg, C. (2025). Creative Construction - Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Bristol University Press. [for a review copy, please contact: amber.lanfranchi[at]bristol.ac.uk] https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/creative-construction International Network for Democratic Economic Planning https://www.indep.network/ Democratic Planning Research Platform: https://www.planningresearch.net/ --- Future Histories Contact & Support If you like Future Histories, please consider supporting us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/join/FutureHistories Contact: office@futurehistories.today Twitter: https://twitter.com/FutureHpodcast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/futurehpodcast/ Mastodon: https://mstdn.social/@FutureHistories English webpage: https://futurehistories-international.com   Episode Keywords #AaronBenanav, #JanGroos, #Interview, #FutureHistories, #FutureHistoriesInternational, #futurehistoriesinternational, #Transition, #DemocraticPlanning, #Keynes, #Efficiency, #Economics, #NeoclassicalEconomics, #NeoclassicalSocialism, #OttoNeurath, #DemocraticEconomicPlanning, #Capitalism, #Economics, #Socialism, #Socialisation, #Investment, #Degrowth, #UniversalBasicServices, #CareWork

Today we confront the primary moral philosophy presented as a challenge to Kant's Deontology: Utilitarianism. We'll read Chapter 1 of Bentham's "An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation" as well as a sizable portion of Mill's On Liberty - which is remarkably NOT Utilitarian, and famous as one of the primary texts underlying contemporary Libertarianism. Along the way we'll have some very serious discussions about free speech, personal freedom, and Christian insularity - and how the world of rights and personal independence has changed in the past few hundred years.Additional readings this week include: Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, Foucault's Birth of the Clinic, Turgenev's Fathers and Sons, Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, and Hugo's Les Miserables. It's a mixed bag, with some anachronistic choices, but these will provide a good cross-section of perspectives about the virtues and vices of Mill's text. Speaking of mixed bags and individualism run amok, our game recommendations for this week are: John Company (2nd edition) and Darkest Dungeon.If you're interested in Professor Kozlowski's other online projects, check out his website: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠professorkozlowski.wordpress.com

What happens when a seasoned sailor with Parkinson's, his daughter and a plucky 24-metre yacht set off across the Atlantic? In this Big BOAT Interview, we follow Joe and Amy Leitch aboard On Liberty - the first Outer Reef to cross the Atlantic on its own bottom - as they journey from the U.S. to Sweden via ice fields, open seas and long stretches of remote coastline. But this isn't just a story of exploration. Partnering with Yachts for Science, the duo welcomed two researchers aboard, turning part of their voyage into a mobile lab for ocean exploration. Their journey proves that groundbreaking science doesn't require a megayacht or your own private submersible - just commitment, curiosity and a spot on deck. BOAT Pro: https://boatint.com/1p5 Subscribe: https://boatint.com/1p6 Contact us: podcast@boatinternationalmedia.com

Anna Kornbluh on the prevalence of aesthetic immediacy and why we need climate counteraesthetics. Events (from the introduction): at the Zollo Collective: https://www.instagram.com/zollo.hamburg/?hl=en at La Band Varga: https://labandavaga.org/?page_id=102 Rethinking Economics Summer School Switzerland: https://resuso.ch/   Shownotes Anna Kornbluh's personal website (including all her publications): http://www.annakornbluh.com/ Anna at the University of Illinois Chicago: https://engl.uic.edu/profiles/kornbluh-anna/ Kornbluh, A. (2024). Immediacy, or the Style of Too Late Capitalism. Verso Books. https://www.versobooks.com/products/3031-immediacy-or-the-style-of-too-late-capitalism Kornbluh, A. (2023). We Didn't Start The Fire. Death Drive and Ecocide. Parapraxis Magazine Issue 3. https://www.parapraxismagazine.com/articles/we-didnt-start-the-fire Kornbluh, A. (2020). Climate Realism, Capitalist and Otherwise. Mediations. Journal of the Marxist Literary Group. Vol. 33. No. 1-2. P. 99-118. https://mediationsjournal.org/articles/climate-realism Kornbluh, A. (2019). The Order of Forms. Realism, Formalism, and Social Space. University of Chicago Press. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/O/bo44521006.html Groos, J., Sorg, C. (2025). Creative Construction. Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Bristol University Press https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/creative-construction on Alexis Pauline Gumbs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexis_Pauline_Gumbs https://www.alexispauline.com/ her essay on the Maui wildfires: https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/features/a44819303/climate-crisis-maui/  on climate fiction (cli-fi): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_fiction Rebecca Saltzman: https://rebeccasaltzman.net/ Haraway, D. J. (2016). Staying with the Trouble. Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Duke University Press. https://www.dukeupress.edu/staying-with-the-trouble Tsing, A. L. (2021). The Mushroom at the End of the World. On the Possibility of Life in Capitalist Ruins. Princeton University Press. https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691220550/the-mushroom-at-the-end-of-the-world on the genre of the Heist film: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heist_film on “Logan Lucky”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Lucky Strange, S. (2015). Casino Capitalism. Manchester University Press. https://manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/9781784991340/ Edward Morgan Forster on Narrative: https://www.aerogrammestudio.com/2013/03/04/e-m-forster-the-difference-between-story-and-plot/ on climate/eco-anxiety: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-anxiety Spufford, F. (2012). Red Plenty. Graywolf Press. https://www.graywolfpress.org/books/red-plenty explanation “hypersititon”: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hyperstition on Kim Stanley Robinson: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Stanley_Robinson Robinson, K. S. (2020). The Ministry for the Future. Orbit. https://store.orbit-books.co.uk/products/the-ministry-for-the-future Robinson, K. S. (2017). New York 2140. Orbit. https://store.orbit-books.co.uk/products/new-york-2140 on the Inflation Reduction Act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_Reduction_Act on the Green New Deal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal website of Daniel Aldana Cohen (including all his publications): https://aldanacohen.com/ Climate & Community Institute: https://climateandcommunity.org/ “A Message from the Future with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez” video from 2019: https://youtu.be/d9uTH0iprVQ?si=8O-M_fS2iO_AQhiL Aronoff, K., Battistoni, A., Cohen, D. A., & Riofrancos, T. (2019). A Planet to Win. Why We Need a Green New Deal. Verso Books. https://www.versobooks.com/products/2546-a-planet-to-win Klein, N., Taylor, A. (2025). The Rise of End Times Fascism. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2025/apr/13/end-times-fascism-far-right-trump-musk on the Zohran Mamdani campaign: https://www.zohranfornyc.com/ on Social Realism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_realism on Brandon Taylor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Taylor_(writer) his website: https://brandonlgtaylor.com/ on Colson Whitehead: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colson_Whitehead his website: https://www.colsonwhitehead.com/ on “Succession”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succession_(TV_series) on “Somebody Somewhere”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somebody_Somewhere_(TV_series) on public luxury: https://communia.de/en/project/public-luxury/ https://autonomy.work/portfolio/public-luxury-in-practice/ Nunes, R. (2021). Neither Vertical nor Horizontal. A Theory of Political Organization. Verso Books. https://www.versobooks.com/products/772-neither-vertical-nor-horizontal Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò's website: http://www.olufemiotaiwo.com/ Táíwò, O. (2020). Who gets to feel secure? On Liberty, Security, and Our System of Racial Capitalism. Aeon. https://aeon.co/essays/on-liberty-security-and-our-system-of-racial-capitalism Boston Review issue on “What is the State for?”: https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/from-the-editors-what-is-the-state-for/ on Freud's concept of the Death drive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_drive Future Histories Episodes on Related Topics S3E32 | Jacob Blumenfeld on Climate Barbarism and Managing Decline https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e32-jacob-blumenfeld-on-climate-barbarism-and-managing-decline/ S03E30 | Matt Huber & Kohei Saito on Growth, Progress and Left Imaginaries https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e30-matt-huber-kohei-saito-on-growth-progress-and-left-imaginaries/ S03E23 | Andreas Malm on Overshooting into Climate Breakdown https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e23-andreas-malm-on-overshooting-into-climate-breakdown/ S03E03 | Planning for Entropy on Sociometabolic Planning https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e03-planning-for-entropy-on-sociometabolic-planning/ S03E02 | George Monbiot on Public Luxury https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e02-george-monbiot-on-public-luxury/ S02E27 | Nick Dyer-Witheford on Biocommunism https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e27-nick-dyer-witheford-on-biocommunism/ S02E18 | Drew Pendergrass and Troy Vettese on Half Earth Socialism https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e18-drew-pendergrass-and-troy-vettese-on-half-earth-socialism/ S01E16 | Richard Barbrook on Imaginary Futures https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e16-richard-barbrook-on-imaginary-futures/ --- If you are interested in democratic economic planning, these resources might be of help: Democratic planning – an information website https://www.democratic-planning.com/ Sorg, C. & Groos, J. (eds.)(2025). Rethinking Economic Planning. Competition & Change Special Issue Volume 29 Issue 1. https://journals.sagepub.com/toc/ccha/29/1 Groos, J. & Sorg, C. (2025). Creative Construction - Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Bristol University Press. [for a review copy, please contact: amber.lanfranchi[at]bristol.ac.uk] https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/creative-construction International Network for Democratic Economic Planning https://www.indep.network/ Democratic Planning Research Platform: https://www.planningresearch.net/ --- Future Histories Contact & Support If you like Future Histories, please consider supporting us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/join/FutureHistories Contact: office@futurehistories.today Twitter: https://twitter.com/FutureHpodcast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/futurehpodcast/ Mastodon: https://mstdn.social/@FutureHistories English webpage: https://futurehistories-international.com   Episode Keywords #AnnaKornbluh, #JanGroos, #Interview, #FutureHistories, #FutureHistoriesInternational, #futurehistoriesinternational, #DemocraticPlanning, #DemocraticEconomicPlanning, #FutureImaginaries, #Art, #Literature, #Representation, #Immediacy, #ClimateChange, #ClimateBreakdown, #ClimateCollapse, #Capitalism, #Economics, #Collapse, #GreenNewDeal, #ClimateAnxiety

The libertarian is back. Not The Libertarian. But the libertarian, Richard Epstein, now fashioned as the classical liberal, and debuting his new show, On Liberty. On this first episode, Richard talks to host Charles C. W. Cooke about immigration. What powers was the federal government given over this area? What—and why—did those powers change? Can […]

How is the notion of “free speech” abused and misunderstood? What's wrong with “debate me” culture – and with the value placed on appearing to be “controversial”? And what happens when people who are actually pretty powerful claim they “can't say anything anymore”? Sociologist Aaron Winter, an expert on racism and the far right, joins Uncommon Sense to discuss all this and more.Showing what sociology has to offer to discussions of “freedom” often found in politics, Aaron describes how “free speech” has been invoked through the decades in North America and Europe, including in the victimisation narratives found in far-right discourse today. Plus, we reflect on the importance of no-platforming, and the need for critical thought when we hear that certain ideas are simply the “voice of the people”.Featuring discussion of Aaron's work with Aurelien Mondon on “Reactionary Democracy”. Also: celebration of influential American sociologist Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, author of “Racism without Racists”, and the UK band The Specials.Guest: Aaron Winter; Hosts: Rosie Hancock, Alexis Hieu Truong; Executive Producer: Alice Bloch; Sound Engineer: David Crackles; Music: Joe Gardner; Artwork: Erin AnikerFind more about Uncommon SenseEpisode ResourcesBy Aaron WinterReactionary Democracy: How Racism and the Populist Far Right Became Mainstream – co-authored with Aurelien Mondon, 2020Reading Mein Kampf, Misreading Education: The reactionary backlash goes back to school – co-authored with Aurelien Mondon, 2017Online Hate: From the Far-Right to the ‘Alt-Right' and from the Margins to the Mainstream – 2019Conflating antisemitism and anti-zionism emboldens the far right – 2023From the Sociological Review FoundationThe Cacophony of Critique – Tom BolandVoice, with Claire Alexander, Dan McCulloch and Belinda ScarlettPalestine: A Sociological IssueFurther resources"On Liberty" – John Stuart Mill"White Supremacy and Racism in the Post-civil Rights Era" – Eduardo Bonilla-Silva"Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in America" – Eduardo Bonilla-SilvaThe SpecialsRead more about Jose Medina, Miranda Fricker and the concept of epistemic injustice, as well as Michèle Diotte at The University of Ottawa.Support our work. Make a one-off or regular donation to help fund future episodes of Uncommon Sense: donorbox.org/uncommon-sense

In this conversation from 2023, Alex speaks with Professor Jacob Levy about the concept of neutrality within the history of liberalism and how many historical thinkers have approached the subject within that tradition.  Episode Notes: Michael Oakeshott on “adverbial rules” https://lawliberty.org/forum/michael-oakeshott-on-the-rule-of-law-and-the-liberal-order/  John Locke's religious beliefs https://rb.gy/1yg43  Heresy of Americanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americanism_(heresy)  Deirdre McCloskey's Bourgeois Virtues Thesis https://www.deirdremccloskey.com/docs/bv_selection.pdf  Ronald Dworkin “Liberalism” https://www.scribd.com/document/313373358/Ronald-Dworkin-Liberalism#  Stephanie Slade, "Must Libertarians Care About More Than the State?" https://reason.com/2022/03/19/two-libertarianisms/  Alexis De Toqueville's concerns about the rising liberal democratic order https://www.economist.com/schools-brief/2018/08/09/de-tocqueville-and-the-french-exception  John Stuart Mill “On Liberty” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty 

On Liberty by John Stuart Mill is an essay about individual freedom and its limits. Mill argues that people should be free to think, speak, and act as they wish, as long as they don't harm others. He believes this freedom leads to progress and happiness. Governments and society shouldn't control people's choices unless those choices hurt someone else. On Liberty is pertinent to contemporary debates about free speech, personal rights, and social control and so retains its relevance, perhaps more urgently than ever. Mill's work is key to a proper understanding of the balance between freedom and responsibility, in a world where the exercise of power and the use of new technologies threaten liberty around the world.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

On Liberty by John Stuart Mill is an essay about individual freedom and its limits. Mill argues that people should be free to think, speak, and act as they wish, as long as they don't harm others. He believes this freedom leads to progress and happiness. Governments and society shouldn't control people's choices unless those choices hurt someone else. On Liberty is pertinent to contemporary debates about free speech, personal rights, and social control and so retains its relevance, perhaps more urgently than ever. Mill's work is key to a proper understanding of the balance between freedom and responsibility, in a world where the exercise of power and the use of new technologies threaten liberty around the world.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

On Liberty by John Stuart Mill is an essay about individual freedom and its limits. Mill argues that people should be free to think, speak, and act as they wish, as long as they don't harm others. He believes this freedom leads to progress and happiness. Governments and society shouldn't control people's choices unless those choices hurt someone else. On Liberty is pertinent to contemporary debates about free speech, personal rights, and social control and so retains its relevance, perhaps more urgently than ever. Mill's work is key to a proper understanding of the balance between freedom and responsibility, in a world where the exercise of power and the use of new technologies threaten liberty around the world.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

On Liberty by John Stuart Mill is an essay about individual freedom and its limits. Mill argues that people should be free to think, speak, and act as they wish, as long as they don't harm others. He believes this freedom leads to progress and happiness. Governments and society shouldn't control people's choices unless those choices hurt someone else. On Liberty is pertinent to contemporary debates about free speech, personal rights, and social control and so retains its relevance, perhaps more urgently than ever. Mill's work is key to a proper understanding of the balance between freedom and responsibility, in a world where the exercise of power and the use of new technologies threaten liberty around the world.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Today's revolutionary idea is one with a long history, not all of it revolutionary: David talks to the historian Fara Dabhoiwala about the idea of free speech. When did free speech first get articulated as a fundamental right? How has that right been used and abused, from the eighteenth century to the present? And what changed in the history of the idea of free speech with the publication of J. S. Mill's On Liberty in 1859? Fara Dabhoiwala's What Is Free Speech? is available now https://bit.ly/4jgcvDt Next time: Marx and the Paris Commune w/Bruno Leipold Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Misinformation, fake news, hate speech, satire, the arts, political protest. These are all examples of what you might call disruptive speech. A free speech absolutist would say that all of these forms of speech should be tolerated, if not welcomed. On the other hand, it does look as though some of them are disruptive in a good way, and others are disruptive in a bad way. But can we tell the good from the bad in a way that isn't just politically partisan? Carl Fox, Lecturer in Applied Ethics at the IDEA Centre, thinks we can, and that we should treat different forms of disruptive speech differently. Here is Carl's paper on the subject in the Journal of Social Philosophy.Carl co-edited The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy and Media Ethics with fellow Ethics Untangled alumnus Joe Saunders, which contains a chapter by Carl on satire and stability. For further reading, there's Amy Olberding's book on manners and civility.In the interview, Carl mentions a paper on lying by Don Fallis. That's here:Fallis, D. 2009. “What Is Lying?” Journal of Philosophy 106(1): 29–56. And then there's the classic text on freedom and its limits, John Stuart Mill's On Liberty: Mill, J. S. 1974. On Liberty. London: Penguin.Ethics Untangled is produced by IDEA, The Ethics Centre at the University of Leeds.Twitter/X: @EthicsUntangledBluesky: @ethicsuntangled.bsky.socialFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/ideacetlLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/idea-ethics-centre/

Unde se termină libertatea mea și unde începe libertatea celuilalt? Mill introduce 'principiul vătămării' care este atât de cunoscut în filosofia politică încât a devenit clișeu pe care îl spun toți suporterii înaintea meciurilor amicale sau din preliminarii: poți face ce vrei tu câtă vreme nu mă rănești pe mine. Sună bine, dar care sunt problemele acestui principiu? Octăvelu Capul Chelu' explică. "Despre libertate" (On Liberty) de John Stuart Mill este o lucrare fundamentală a liberalismului clasic, publicată în 1859. Mill susține că libertatea individuală trebuie protejată de stat și de presiunea socială, atâta timp cât acțiunile unei persoane nu dăunează altora (principiul vătămării). Unul dintre aspectele centrale este libertatea de gândire și exprimare. Mill argumentează că toate opiniile, indiferent cât de controversate, trebuie să fie libere pentru a permite progresul și confruntarea ideilor. Cenzura limitează descoperirea adevărului și dezvoltarea intelectuală. Un alt punct cheie este pericolul „tiraniei majorității”, adică impunerea de către societate a normelor dominante asupra indivizilor. Mill avertizează că nu doar guvernul poate restricționa libertatea, ci și opinia publică. Societatea nu ar trebui să impună un mod unic de viață dacă acesta nu afectează direct alte persoane. Mill respinge intervenția statului în aspecte private precum obiceiurile personale, moralitatea sau stilul de viață. Totuși, guvernul are rolul de a proteja cetățenii de violență, fraudă și exploatare. Educația și accesul la informație sunt esențiale pentru ca oamenii să ia decizii raționale. Lucrarea a influențat profund gândirea modernă despre drepturile omului, democrație și libertatea de exprimare, fiind o referință importantă pentru sistemele politice liberale de azi.☞ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/octavpopa ☞ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/podcastuldefilosofie☞ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/podcastuldefilosofie☞ Spotify, Apple: https://podcastfilosofie.buzzsprout.comSupport the showhttps://www.patreon.com/octavpopahttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCC91fciphdkZyUquL3M5BiA

Should we care about the personal lives of influential thinkers? In Marx's case, probably! In this episode, we discuss two more articles from Thomas Sowell: one evaluating John Stuart Mill's On Liberty, and the other giving a detailed description of Karl Marx. We also talk about Donald Trump's second inauguration and what it means for the country!Follow us on Twitter! https://twitter.com/UlmtdOpinionsGive us your opinions here!

Join the #McConnellCenter as we host Dr. Aurelein Craiutu for a conversation regarding John Stuart Mill's book On Liberty. Aurelian Craiutu (Ph.D. Princeton, 1999) is Professor in the Department of Political Science at Indiana University, Bloomington, and Adjunct Professor in the Lilly Family School of Philanthropic Studies at IUPUI, Indianapolis.  We all know we need to read more and there are literally millions of books on shelves with new ones printed every day. How do we sort through all the possibilities to find the book that is just right for us now? Well, the McConnell Center is bringing authors and experts to inspire us to read impactful and entertaining books that might be on our shelves or in our e-readers, but which we haven't yet picked up. We hope you learn a lot in the following podcast and we hope you might be inspired to pick up one or more of the books we are highlighting this year at the University of Louisville's McConnell Center. Stay Connected Visit us at McConnellcenter.org Subscribe to our newsletter  Facebook: @mcconnellcenter Instagram: @ulmcenter  Twitter: @ULmCenter This podcast is a production of the McConnell Center

Você que acompanha o Café Brasil sabe que estamos passando por um período de intensa polarização política e deve ter ficado preocupado como eu fiquei, com a privação de liberdade. De repente, eu me vi impedido de seguir alguns canais que passaram a ser censurados por motivos políticos. Além disso eu queria acessar séries e filmes dos Estados Unidos e Europa que ainda não estão disponíveis aqui no Brasil. Então eu fui procurar um VPN. VPN significa Virtual Private Network ou Rede Privada Virtual. As pessoas recorrem a VPNs para acessar conteúdos restritos de outros países, contornar bloqueios locais e encontrar melhores ofertas de produtos e serviços online. Além disso, VPNs protegem contra vigilância digital, assegurando liberdade de expressão e navegação segura. Sabe o que eu fiz? Eu assinei a NordVPN, com a qual passei a acessar o mundo todo sem deixar traços e com liberdade absoluta. Muito fácil, cara! E ainda ganhei a oportunidade de comprar passagens aéreas mais baratas, como se eu tivesse fora do Brasil, cara. É sensacional. E aqui a melhor parte. Se você acessar nordvpn.com/cafebrasil, eu vou repetir: nordvpn.com/cafebrasil, vai obter um ótimo desconto no seu plano. E além disso mais quatro meses adicionais grátis. Experimente! Se você não gostar, a NordVPN oferece reembolso total em 30 dias sem perguntas. De novo: nordvpn.com/cafebrasil. Comece sua jornada de navegação segura hoje mesmo. John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) foi um importante filósofo e economista britânico, conhecido por suas ideias sobre liberdade e utilitarismo. Seu livro mais famoso, On Liberty – Sobre Liberdade - publicado em 1859, defende a importância da liberdade individual e os limites da interferência do Estado. Mesmo sendo um livro antigo, On Liberty mostra que as ideias de Mill continuam atuais.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Summary Alex speaks with Jacob Levy about the concept of a liberal party, exploring its philosophical foundations, historical context, and touch on all of these points within the context of Jacob's article "The Liberal Party Idea" (2024). References The Liberal Party Idea by Jacob Levy: Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381323406_The_liberal_party_idea_and_American_ideology "On Liberty" by John Stuart Mill Link: https://www.amazon.ca/Liberty-John-Stuart-Mill/dp/1505851210 "The Constitution of Liberty" by Friedrich Hayek Link: https://www.amazon.ca/Constitution-Liberty-Friedrich-Hayek/dp/0226320847 "The Federalist Papers" by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay Link: https://www.amazon.ca/Federalist-Papers-Alexander-Hamilton/dp/0486496363 "Reflections on the Revolution in France" by Edmund Burke Link: https://www.amazon.ca/Reflections-Revolution-France-Edmund-Burke/dp/0199539022 "Democracy in America" by Alexis de Tocqueville Link: https://www.amazon.ca/Democracy-America-Alexis-Tocqueville/dp/0140447601 "Two Treatises of Government" by John Locke Link: https://www.amazon.ca/Two-Treatises-Government-John-Locke/dp/1532846815 "Political Liberalism" by John Rawls Link: https://www.amazon.ca/Political-Liberalism-John-Rawls/dp/0231130899 Thanks to our patrons including: Amy Willis, Kris Rondolo, and Christopher McDonald. To become a patron, go to patreon.com/curioustask

How has 19th-century English philosopher John Stuart Mill influenced America's conception of free speech and the First Amendment? In their new book, “The Supreme Court and the Philosopher: How John Stuart Mill Shaped U.S. Free Speech Protections,” co-authors Eric Kasper and Troy Kozma look at how the Supreme Court has increasingly aligned its interpretation of free expression with Mill's philosophy, as articulated in “On Liberty.” Eric Kasper is professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, where he serves as the director of the Menard Center for Constitutional Studies. Troy Kozma is a professor of philosophy and the academic chair at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire - Barron County. Timestamps 00:00 Intro 02:26 Book's origin 06:51 Who is John Stuart Mill? 10:09 What is the “harm principle”? 16:30 Early Supreme Court interpretation of the First Amendment 26:25 What was Justice Holmes' dissent in Abrams v. U.S.? 30:28 Why did Justice Brandeis join Holmes' dissents? 36:10 What are loyalty oaths? 40:36 Justice Black's nuanced view of the First Amendment 43:33 What were Mill's views on race and education? 50:42 Private beliefs vs. public service? 52:40 Commercial speech 55:51 Where do we stand today? 1:03:32 Outro Transcript is HERE  

Paul Meany of Libertarianism.org walks us through the importance of John Stuart Mill through his powerful treatise On Liberty. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The ongoing crackdown on protests at many American universities prompts a discussion on the politics, ethics, and metaphysics of free expression. Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/weirdstudies). Buy the Weird Studies soundtrack, volumes 1 (https://pierre-yvesmartel.bandcamp.com/album/weird-studies-music-from-the-podcast-vol-1) and 2 (https://pierre-yvesmartel.bandcamp.com/album/weird-studies-music-from-the-podcast-vol-2), on Pierre-Yves Martel's Bandcamp (https://pierre-yvesmartel.bandcamp.com) page. Listen to Meredith Michael and Gabriel Lubell's podcast, Cosmophonia (https://cosmophonia.podbean.com/). Visit the Weird Studies Bookshop (https://bookshop.org/shop/weirdstudies) Find us on Discord (https://discord.com/invite/Jw22CHfGwp) Get the T-shirt design from Cotton Bureau (https://cottonbureau.com/products/can-o-content#/13435958/tee-men-standard-tee-vintage-black-tri-blend-s)! REFERENCES Virginia Woolf, A Room of One's Own (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780156787338) Federico Campagna, Technic and Magic (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9781350044029) George Orwell, The Prevention of Literature (https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/the-prevention-of-literature/) George Orwell, Inside the Whale (https://orwell.ru/library/essays/whale/english/e_itw) New York Times, “At Indiana University, Protests Only Add to a Full Year of Conflicts (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/02/us/indiana-university-protest-encampment.html) John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780521379175) Indiana Daily Student, “Provost Addresses Controversy” (https://www.idsnews.com/article/2024/01/provost-addresses-controversy-suspension-palestinian-artist-bfc) Official government page for the Proposed Bill to address Online (https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/online-harms.html) Harms in Canada. Immanuel Kant, Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9781515436874) GK Chesterton, Orthodoxy (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9781511903608) Daryl Davis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis), American musician and activist DavidFoster Wallace, Just Asking (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2007/11/just-asking/306288/)

Brendan McCord is the founder of Cosmos Institute — a non-profit dedicated to exploring the intersection of AI and philosophy. Brendan joins the show to discuss Cosmos' origins, the pursuit of philosophy as a technologist, the different schools of thought in AI, complex adaptive systems and MUCH more! Important Links: Brendan McCord's Reading List Cosmos Institute Substack Brendan's Twitter Show Notes: The Genesis of the Cosmos Institute Philosophy as a Quixotic Pursuit The Man of the System Dilemma Existential Risk & Scenario Agnosticism The AI Schools of Thought The Religious Nature of the E/Acc Movement What Tocqueville Can Teach Us About AI The Philosophy-to-Code Pipeline “Cars ignited the Sexual Revolution” and Other Unexpected Occurrences The Best Systems are Adaptive Heterogeneity & Resilient Systems Open Source and the US-China Situation Automation, Augmentation & Open-Ended Generation The Underrated Nuance of Russian Realism Cinematic Visions of the Future Great Talent & the Risk of the Tasmanian Devil Brendan as Emperor of the World MORE! Books Mentioned: Murray Rothbard, “For A New Liberty” David R. Hawkins, “Power vs. Force” Jung Chang, “Wild Swans: Three Daughters of China” Jung Chang, “Mao: The Unknown Story” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, “The Gulag Archipelago” Arthur Koestler, “Darkness At Noon” Adam Smith, “The Theory of Moral Sentiments” Lewis Carroll, “Alice's Adventures in Wonderland” Lewis Carroll, “What the Tortoise Said To Achilles” Eliezer Yudkowsky, “Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality” Marc Andreessen, “The Techno-Optimist Manifesto” Alexis De Tocqueville, “Democracy in America” 'Pericles's Funeral Oration' quoted in Thucydides' “History of the Peloponnesian War”. Plato, “Theaetetus” Plato, “The Republic” Nietzsche, “The Gay Science” C.P Snow, “The Two Cultures” Elinor Ostrom, “Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action” James M. Buchanan, "Freedom in Constitutional Contract: Perspectives of a Political Economist” Iain M. Banks, “Consider Phlebas” (Culture Series #1) Chen Qiufan and Kai-Fu Lee, “AI 2041: Ten Visions for Our Future” Christopher Buckley, “Thank You for Smoking” John Stuart Mill, “On Liberty”

Sabine speaks with Aeon Skoble about the harms of limiting access to information, including book bans and why a better understanding of ideas we disagree with often strengthens rather than weakens our arguments in support of the ideas we endorse. Episode Notes: - “Free Speech and the Function of a University” Aeon J. Skoble https://vc.bridgew.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2081&context=br_rev  - A brief history of Hume's works being banned: https://oll.libertyfund.org/publications/reading-room/2023-10-25-donway-hume-great-work-on-religion-banned  - A handy breakdown from the University of Notre Dame on J.S. Mill's case for disagreement and free speech in “On Liberty”: https://philife.nd.edu/j-s-mills-on-liberty-seek-disagreement/  - Jacob Mchangama's book “Free Speech: A History From Socrates to Social Media” https://a.co/d/8lcEV6a    

Jon Manson, ASeaOfRed.com On Liberty's Fiesta Bowl Experience, The 2023 Season & The Fallout by Ed Lane

John Stuart Mill's On Liberty has been a consistent and prominent reference point in the ongoing debates about free speech. In this episode we discuss an elegant and powerful critique of Mill by the twentieth century political theorist Willmoore Kendall. His essay “The ‘Open Society' and Its Fallacies” was published in the American Political Science Review in December of 1960. Our conversation covers various aspects of Kendall's critique. Kendall claims that Mill's argument for freedom rests on a false conception of the nature of society and human nature itself. We explore Kendall's understanding of Mill's thoroughgoing radicalism. “Mill,” Kendall writes, “is in full rebellion against both religion and philosophy, and so in full rebellion also against the traditional society that embodies them.” We also take up the phenomenon of what Kendall calls the “dispersal of opinion.” He contends that any society which guides itself according to Mill's prescriptions will “descend ineluctably into ever deepening differences of opinion, into progressive breakdown of those common premises upon which alone a society can its affairs by discussion.”   Our guest is James Stoner. Professor Stoner is the Hermann Moyse, Jr., Professor and Director of the Eric Voegelin Institute in the Department of Political Science at Louisiana State University, where he has taught since 1988.  He is the author of Common-Law Liberty (Kansas, 2003) and Common Law and Liberal Theory (Kansas, 1992), and co-editor of Free Speech and Intellectual Diversity in Higher Education with Paul Carrese and Carol McNamara—just published in September of 2023. He also contributed a chapter to this volume called “Was John Stuart Mill Right About Free Speech?” which will be of interest to anyone who listens to our conversation here.

Should we be outraged that Roger Waters has been accused of anti-Semitism for a dramatic piece that shows the downfall of an authoritarian leader? We believe with John Stuart Mill's On Liberty which insists that we should never close our ears to disagreeable ideas and always be open to discussion.   The Roger Waters video Jon mentions

تاریخ انتشار: 10 تیر 1402 تو این قسمت در مورد نظریه‌ها و دیدگاه‌های جان استوارت میل درباره آزادی صحبت می‌کنیم. حمایت مالی از خوره کتاب ما اینجاها فعالیم: اینستاگرام - تلگرام - یوتیوب - وبسایت منابع:1- کتاب آزادی (On Liberty) نوشته جان استوارت میل2- کتاب فایده‌گرایی (utilitarianism) نوشته جان استوارت میل3- کتاب موضوع زنان (The Subjection of Women) نوشته جان استوارت میل4- سخنرانی ریک رادریک (Rick Roderick) درباره کتاب “آزادی” موسیقی متن: ترک Lotus از Soen و ترک Girl On Fire از Alicia Keys The post مرز آزادی کجاست؟ از دیدگاه جان استوارت میل (قسمت سوم) appeared first on پادکست خوره کتاب.

Sure, you might be free from things, but now what are you free to do?! Coming up, negative and positive freedom! 

“Life and Liberty with Drew McKissick” “Labeled Hate Groups with Tina Descovich” “Corrupt Systems of Justice Bill Pascoe” “Biden's Distain for Freedom”

Alex speaks with Professor Jacob Levy about the concept of neutrality within the history of liberalism and how many historical thinkers have approached the subject within that tradition.  Episode Notes: Michael Oakeshott on “adverbial rules” https://lawliberty.org/forum/michael-oakeshott-on-the-rule-of-law-and-the-liberal-order/  John Locke's religious beliefs https://rb.gy/1yg43  Heresy of Americanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americanism_(heresy)  Deirdre McCloskey's Bourgeois Virtues Thesis https://www.deirdremccloskey.com/docs/bv_selection.pdf  Ronald Dworkin “Liberalism” https://www.scribd.com/document/313373358/Ronald-Dworkin-Liberalism#  Stephanie Slade, "Must Libertarians Care About More Than the State?" https://reason.com/2022/03/19/two-libertarianisms/  Alexis De Toqueville's concerns about the rising liberal democratic order https://www.economist.com/schools-brief/2018/08/09/de-tocqueville-and-the-french-exception  John Stuart Mill “On Liberty” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty 

On Liberty by John Stuart Mill audiobook. Published in 1859, On Liberty details Mill's view that individuals should be left wholly free to engage in any activity, thought or belief that does not harm others. Simple though it sounds, it is a position that challenges our ideas on the very nature of government and society, and sheds light on some of the key issues we face today. A key text of political philosophy, On Liberty has been continuously in print since its first publication. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Published in 1859, On Liberty details Mill's view that individuals should be left wholly free to engage in any activity, thought or belief that does not harm others. Simple though it sounds, it is a position that challenges our ideas on the very nature of government and society, and sheds light on some of the key issues we face today. A key text of political philosophy, On Liberty has been continuously in print since its first publication. (Summary by David Barnes) --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/librivox1/support

Guest host Sigal Samuel talks with professor of philosophy and law Nita Farahany about her new book The Battle for Your Brain. In it, Farahany details the new brain-scanning tech that has already arrived, and the risks this poses to our privacy and freedom of thought. Sigal and Nita discuss what this technology can currently do (and what it can't), how new devices might be used by corporations or governments to infringe on our rights, and the prospect of using new technologies to rid ourselves of painful or traumatic memories — even, potentially, before they've been formed. Host: Sigal Samuel (@SigalSamuel), Senior Reporter, Vox Guest: Nita Farahany (@NitaFarahany), author; professor of philosophy & Robinson O. Everett Professor of Law, Duke University References:  The Battle for Your Brain: Defending the Right to Think Freely in the Age of Neurotechnology by Nita A. Farahany (St. Martin's; 2023) "Your brain may not be private much longer" by Sigal Samuel (Vox; March 17) "BGU develops wearable advanced warning system for epileptic seizures" (Jerusalem Post; Sept. 29, 2020) "Elon Musk shows off updates to his brain chips and says he's going to install one in himself when they are ready" by Ashley Capoot (CNBC; Dec. 1, 2022) "Brain-implant companies balk at moves to regulate their nascent tech" by Sarah McBride (Los Angeles Times; Feb. 19) "NHS trials headset that claims to zap depression" by Katie Prescott (The Times; Jan. 23) "Australian man uses brain implant to send texts from his iPad" by Kristin Houser (Freethink; Nov. 12, 2022) "Is 'brain fingerprinting' a breakthrough or a sham?" by Russell Brandom (The Verge; Feb. 2, 2015) "China Claims It's Scanning Workers' Brainwaves to Increase Efficiency and Profits" by Samantha Cole (VICE; May 1, 2018) "Incriminating Thoughts" by Nita A. Farahany (Stanford Law Review, vol. 64 (2); Feb. 2012) John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty" (1859) Immanuel Kant, Critique of Practical Reason (1788) "Non-conscious brain modulation may help PTSD patients forget their fears" by Brooks Hays (UPI; Feb. 23, 2021) No Mud, No Lotus: The Art of Transforming Suffering by Thich Nhat Hanh (Parallax Press; 2019)   Enjoyed this episode? Rate The Gray Area ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ and leave a review on Apple Podcasts. Subscribe for free. Be the first to hear the next episode of The Gray Area. Subscribe in your favorite podcast app. Support The Gray Area by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts This episode was made by:  Producer: Erikk Geannikis Engineers: Patrick Boyd & Brandon McFarland Editorial Director, Vox Talk: A.M. Hall Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Phil Steele, PhilSteele.com On Liberty, ODU, JMU And Other VA Schools by Ed Lane

Substack — the popular newsletter and publishing service — has made a name for itself by swimming against the current: As many technology companies devise new ways to censor or moderate content on their platforms, Substack made free speech one of its core values and, in doing so, has attracted bloggers and journalists from across the political spectrum.“While we have content guidelines that allow us to protect the platform at the extremes, we will always view censorship as a last resort, because we believe open discourse is better for writers and better for society,” proclaimed Substack's founders.Lulu Cheng Meservey is Vice President of Communications for Substack. She went viral earlier this year when she tweeted about why free expression is an important principle for Substack. She joins us this week to discuss Substack, free speech, and the new media ecosystem. Show notes: Transcript Lulu's viral tweet thread “Society has a trust problem. More censorship will only make it worse.” by Hamish McKenzie, Chris Best, and Jairaj Sethi Substack's “Content Guidelines” Substackers mentioned: Andrew Sullivan, Casey Newton, The Fifth Column, Patti Smith, George Saunders, Salman Rushdie, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Freddie deBoer, Nikita Petrov, Blocked and Reported John Stuart Mill's “On Liberty” www.sotospeakpodcast.com YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/SotoSpeakTheFreeSpeechPodcast Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/freespeechtalk Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sotospeakpodcast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/freespeechtalk/ Email us: sotospeak@thefire.org

Does the First Amendment of the Constitution Cover Freedom of Speech?The United States of America is the freest nation on Earth, for the time being. The Supreme Law of the land continues to be the Constitution. The founding document of our great nation on its own is the crowning achievement of the Founding Fathers, but before its ratification, ten articles were included as amendments.These ten articles became known as the Bill of Rights. The first of those rights, called the First Amendment, is:"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."Today, we are going to provide Free Speech 101: The Essential Guide. There are many things which ought to be said in the realm of freedom of speech, but these things are the roots, the essence of the topic.What is Freedom of Speech?The Constitution's First Amendment protects the nation from Congress attempted to make laws abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. This is the cornerstone of a healthy democracy.Geoffrey Stone and Eugene Volokh, in conjunction with the National Constitution Center, provide a fantastic layman's version of this freedom: "Generally speaking, it means that the government may not jail, fine, or impose civil liability on people or organizations based on what they say or write, except in exceptional circumstances."The Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution as protecting speakers from any and all government agencies and officials. Further, "speech" and "press" refers to talking, writing, printing, broadcasting, the Internet, and other forms of expressing oneself. Much to the chagrin of some, "freedom of speech also applies to symbolic expression, such as displaying flags, burning flags, wearing armbands, burning crosses, and the like (Stone, Volokh)."What Circumstances Are Not Covered as Free Speech Under the First Amendment?The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has a reputation as a liberal organization, to put it mildly. However, in an article regarding free speech, the ACLU wrote:"Over the years, the ACLU has represented or defended individuals engaged in some truly offensive speech. We have defended the speech rights of communists, Nazis, Ku Klux Klan members, accused terrorists, pornographers, anti-LGBT activists, and flag burners. That's because the defense of freedom of speech is most necessary when the message is one most people find repulsive. Constitutional rights must apply to even the most unpopular groups if they're going to be preserved for everyone."Quite right! So, when is freedom of speech NOT covered by the First Amendment of the Constitution?First, certain types of speech are considered "low" value to the Supreme Court and thus provide circumstances under which the First Amendment barely applies or does not apply. These are outlined, with references to specific cases by Stone and Volohk:DefamationTrue threats"Fighting words"Hard-core obscenity (such as highly sexually explicit pornography)Child pornographyCommercial Advertising which is misleadingSecond, if the speaker is in a special relationship to the government, they are less protected. Government employees, such as public school employees can be restricted, even in the content of their speech.Third, the government can restrict speech under certain circumstances which are irrespective of content. For example, restrictions on noise, blocking traffic, and large distracting signs are constitutional, if they are reasonable. However, a law prohibiting demonstrations in public parks or handing out leaflets on public streets would be unconstitutional.Who was John Stuart Mill and What Did He Believe About Speech?Where did the American notion of freedom of speech which we possess come from? The lion's share of that work belongs to the British philosopher John Stuart Mill. In his 1859 book, On Liberty, Mill provided a bold argument for freedom of speech. Mill believed in the freedom of speech to discuss any topic at all, without molestation. The fullest expression of liberty in his mind was following topics of conversation to their logical limits. Social niceties be damned. He did, however, hold to what is called the "Harm Principle." Writing on this subject, Mill says, "... the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others (Mill, J.S., 1978. On Liberty, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing)." Application of this principle is the subject of not a few debates. However, it is important to take note of this principle because it is the default liberal position on almost everything. "Well... I'm not hurting anyone!!!"To find the most liberal position's boundaries, we need only determine if someone would be harmed by someone's else's free expression. Important to distinguish, however, is that Mill would not have argued that freedom of speech be limited simply because a person was harmed. Only when speech causes direct and clear harm should it be limited.What are the Critiques of John Stuart Mill? Do They Bear Any Merit?The extreme liberal position of John Stuart Mill was an important contribution to the debate on freedom of speech. Many topics would have remained undiscussed due to taboos and socially acceptable limits. One important critique comes from an article in the Boston Review by Jacob Stanley in 2018. Stanley rightly points out that, "Disagreement requires a shared set of presuppositions about the world. Even dueling requires agreement about the rules." In his estimation, John Stuart Mill believed that "true belief becomes knowledge only by emerging victorious from the din of argument and discussion, which must occur either with actual opponents or through internal dialogue." Stanley, therefore, argues that false claims and conspiracy theories must be defended, if we are to have a chance of achieving knowledge. Stanley, however, recognizes the limits of the idea of a "marketplace of ideas" saying that human nature does not really allow for the truth to always prevail.This pragmatic view seems to provide a tempering of John Stuart Mill's unadulterated view of freedom of speech. We must understand our own limitations, as humanity, if we are to understand what freedom of speech offers us. We also cannot forget what freedom of speech requires of us!Taking OffensePresently, hate speech and taking offense are unfortunately conflated. Hate speech is determined based on the intention of the speaker. Whereas, taking offense is based on the decision of the hearer. They are not the same. In fact, sometimes a person might say something which another person takes as offensive. Let us imagine, though, that the thing which the speaker said is absolutely true and the problem is with the hearer being out of step with the truth. At this point, we can start analyzing whether what was said needed to be said. Did it need to be said in the way that it did? Did it need to be said in the circumstances that it did? Did it need to be said by that speaker to that hearer at that time?We need to dispel this myth that we have a right to not be offended. Sometimes we need to be offended. We are not perfect, not one of us. And so, if a truth is given to us, we need to be receptive, even if it hurts. That is how we grow.So, it would seem that freedom of speech extends to being offensive? But what about offensive statements which are not based in reality and actually point to a deeper more problematic issue under the surface? True hate speech causes offense, more often than not. But it is not the offense which is the primary issue. Hate speech can do injustice to privacy, equity, and security. Speech which shows a blatant disregard for the equity of people based on skin color, religion, sexual orientation, or gender (biological sex - male or female) which intends harm, cannot be under freedom of speech. No one is free to threaten harm. The Limits of Freedom of Speech and Our God-Given RightsI have no desire to opine on every possible aspect of freedom of speech in which limitations might be appropriate. Instead, I want to call us back to seeing freedom of speech as a right which necessarily is accompanied by responsibility. Here I am going to stray into philosophy rather than legality. To be clear, I am not going to be discussing what is constitutional or not, but rather stating what I believe to be right or not. Rooted in respect for human dignity, all are called to seek the common good. An integral part of securing the common good is protecting the basic and inalienable rights of all people. This begins with the right to life. Mothers and fathers have a responsibility to protect their children (from the first moment of his or her existence) to the best of their ability. Generally, the best decision is made at the local level. And so, each family must make decisions for themselves and their neighbors. These micro-communities need to serve their macro-communities. Those communities need to serve the common good of the state, then the nation, then the world. Our rights do not come primarily from our government. They begin at home. They begin with life. Responsibility Accompanies Rights, AlwaysIn justice, as we seek the common good, we exercise these rights, but we must never lose sight of the accompanying responsibilities. Put another way: we are not given rights by the Creator to be kept for our sole use. When it comes to speech, we do not have freedom of speech so much as freedom FOR speech. Our rights are geared towards our duties and responsibilities. We have to use our gifts and powers well. As Pope John XXIII wrote well in his 1963 letter Pacem in Terris:"... in human society one man's natural right gives rise to a corresponding duty in other men; the duty, that is, of recognizing and respecting that right. Every basic human right draws its authoritative force from the natural law, which confers it and attaches to it its respective duty. Hence, to claim one's rights and ignore one's duties, or only half fulfill them, is like building a house with one hand and tearing it down with the other (30)."When we speak, we do not have a license to say whatever we would like. Certainly, we have the protected right to do so in the United States, under certain limitations. But I am arguing that we should use our freedom of speech wisely. By using it well, our words will have greater impact. Our well-chosen words will add social value and lift our neighbors up. Let us build up this common house and humanity, rather than tear it down.Thanks for reading Will Wright Catholic! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.Sources:https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/amendment-i/interps/266What is free speech? What is not considered free speech?https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-speech/Freedom of Speech entry at Stanfordhttps://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1258/john-stuart-mill1st Amendment Encyclopediahttp://bostonreview.net/politics-philosophy-religion/jason-stanley-what-mill-got-wrong-about-freedom-of-speechLiberal critique of John Stuart Millhttps://www.aclu.org/issues/free-speechACLU on Freedom of Speechhttps://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/Text of the 1st Amendmenthttps://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/the-ongoing-challenge-to-define-free-speech/in-the-age-of-socia-media-first-amendment/Free speech and the internet This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit willwrightcatholic.substack.com

WHY IT'S DESIRABLE TO BE ECCENTRIC: "Originality is the one thing which unoriginal minds cannot feel the use of." In 1859 the great English thinker John Stuart Mill published, in Chapter Three of his treatise On Liberty, one of history's most cogent essays on the subject of Individuality, originality, genius, and eccentricity. To Mill's view, mass opinion (what we might call “mass culture” these days), is an undeniable blight to individuality, and therefore directly threatens freedoms civic and intellectual, cultural, and democratic. While explicitly political, Mill's argument reaches down to the foundations of human nature and culture, articulating many of the challenges artists and writers face in a media-driven society fixated upon dollars earned, hits per day, and “going viral.” Mentioned in this episode: John Stuart Mill; Mill's "On Liberty"; Victorian England; keeping up with the joneses; Ray Bradbury; bestseller lists; Billboard charts; Oprah endorsements; culture vs. commerce; becoming valuable to oneself and to others; despotism; John Gardner; the National Endowment for the Arts; the tyrannical majority; unpopular vs. uncommercial; persons of genius; arts funding.  Music: "Hands of Time" by Narrow Skies; "Interspacing" by Yehezkel Raz; "Fragments" by Borrtex; "Birds & Daisies" by Racoon Racoon (All music used courtesy of the artists through a licensing agreement with Artlist.) --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/in-the-atelier/support

Misinformation, hate speech, platforming, de-platforming, free speech, and censorship. Almost any recent controversy you can name touches on these topics. Should we allow people to spread hate online? Should we allow tech monopolies and governments to suppress the free expression of individuals? Who should decide and on what basis? John Stuart Mill articulated one of the most powerful, deep, and comprehensive arguments for free speech in an essay called On Liberty. His world-changing argument is as relevant today as it was 163 years ago, and arguably much more so. Dig into this deep and contentious topic with us on this episode of Reading Rebellion and transform your understanding of the nature of liberty.

This month, Toby Buckle, host of the Political Philosophy Podcast, returns to talk about John Stuart Mill's liberty principle! (Also sometimes called the ‘harm principle'.) The occasion for the episode is the recent release of Toby's cool new book, What is Freedom?, which is out now from Oxford University Press. Get it while it's hot!John Stuart Mill is probably one of the most influential intellectuals of the 19th century, having penned treatises on markets, logic, feminism, utilitarianism, and freedom of speech that people continue to pick up and read today. In this episode, we talk about how he had one foot in the free market-oriented tradition of liberalism and another in the more social justice-oriented type of liberalism, how he was raised under the world's most ambitious parenting/education regime, and how he had a lifelong collaboration with Harriet Taylor. We also introduce what gets called his ‘liberty princple'.The idea behind the liberty principle is that we want as much freedom for each person as possible: they should have the ability to set their own agenda and carry it out. But we also need to limit it somewhat, because if everyone was completely unconstrained in how they set their agenda and carried it out, they'd interfere with each other. We'd have one person's freedom detracting from other people's freedom. So in order to achieve the perfect equilibrium we want, the thing to do is aim for sort of a greatest lower bound: every person should be allowed to do whatever they want for whatever reason they want, only stopping shy once they reach the point where doing whatever they want would harm another person. It might seem like an obvious principle to us now, but arguably that's because we're all living in the shadow of Mill!Part of the background context for this principle is a worry about paternalism. There's a natural tendency for Person A to prevent Person B from doing what they want because Person A thinks it's obvious that what Person B wants to do right now is harmful to them. The liberty principle tells us that that's not a good reason to have laws prohibiting some course of action. We should only have a law prohibiting some course of action if allowing that course of action would interfere with other people's freedom. That way, Mill argued, we keep the decision about whether to pass a law prohibiting something grounded in empirical facts about what would actually happen if it were passed. He also wanted to emphasize that each person has the right to be their own arbiter of what kinds of risk they will assume.I hope you enjoy our discussion! It was a fun one.Further ReadingIf you'd like to hear more along the lines of what Toby and I discuss in this episode, you can do no better than to take a look at Mill's exquisite On Liberty, which you can get for free here:https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/34901And if you missed the link up at the top, definitely check out Toby's edited volume, which gathers together a number of the interviews from his own podcast. The overarching theme is what freedom is and what it can be.What is Freedom?: Conversations with Historians, Philosophers, and Activists, Toby BuckleHappy reading!Matt Teichman See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

AVERSION TO COERCION NOVEMBER 14, 2021      AARON SMITH      SEASON 1      EPISODE 4     SHOW NOTES: In Episode #4, we take a look at the COVID-19 vaccine mandates and how the Nuremburg Code may apply to them. We dig into a few scientific papers related to the topic and also consider the ethical implications of coercive techniques being employed by governments and corporations. We recognize that this is a difficult and nuanced subject that has divided many people. It is not possible to present an exhaustive analysis of the issue. My intentions are only to bring some things to light that have not been covered adequately, if at all, by mainstream media. Hopefully this episode will help give you some new perspectives to consider.Thank you for your continued support! Please consider contributing via the links at the bottom of the show notes. Your contributions are a way to help produce this show, as I am not accepting any advertising money to mitigate the risk of having corporate interests influencing the content of The subtlecain Podcast!I am now on Substack: https://subtlecain.substack.comHere are the articles and quotes I referenced in today's episode:  Nuremburg Trials: https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/nuremberg-trials"If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind." — John Stuart Mill: https://www.azquotes.com/author/10083-John_Stuart_Mill“With respect to his thinking about coercion, Mill is most famous for his views, in On Liberty, about what coercion is not fit to do: namely, be used to regulate people's behavior for their own good.” (John Stuart Mill: Stanford paper) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/coercionNIH Articles: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34407747 and https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7843207FDA Media Release: https://www.fda.gov/media/150386/downloadCNBC on liability: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/covid-vaccine-side-effects-compensation-lawsuit.htmlExperimental and Clinical Transplantation article: http://www.ectrx.org/forms/ectrxcontentshow.php?year=2021&volume=19&issue=7&supplement=0&makale_no=0&spage_number=627&content_type=FULL%20TEXTIs the Nuremburg Code law? https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199711133372006Feel free to email me at subtlecain@protonmail.com with any questions or suggestions. Your support is always appreciated! You can support the show in these ways:Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/subtlecainPayPal: https://paypal.me/subtlecain?country.x=US&locale.x=en_USVenmo: https://venmo.com/u/subtlecainSupport the show (https://paypal.me/subtlecain?country.x=US&locale.x=en_US)

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873) penned the most powerful and winsome defense of the freedom of speech, but it is not without its presuppositions. Those assumptions have eroded in our culture, which means the freedom of speech is eroding, too. Are human beings mouthpieces of power and prejudice, or is the truth a valuable common ground from which we can evaluate each other's ideas? Mill concludes that censorship is hubris and indoctrination is cowardice.LinksVisit our website: https://www.wellreadchristian.comCheck our our blog: https://www.wellreadchristian.com/blogFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/wellreadchristianInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/wellreadchristianTwitter: https://www.twitter.com/WellReadChrist1Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfGxz4OH1-hVD0fL9AWR4Xg