Podcasts about Princeton University

Parvez and Omar finally return after the longest hiatus in the show's history! They bring us up to speed with all the going-ons in their lives from new jobs, moves, kids graduating to new kids being born! As the show returns so does the show's guest! David Coolidge returns to discuss his groundbreaking new book, Hindu Bhakti Through Muslim Eyes. The book places the Caitanya Vaiṣṇava tradition—devotion to Krishna—into conversation with Islam, tracing a rich millennium-long trajectory of Muslim reflection on Hindu theology and spirituality. The discussion balances between diving deep into the book while at the same time offering a layperson's perspective to the theology and basic tenants of the faith. The discussion is deeply enriched by David's ability to interweave analogs from his own Islamic theological, ethical, and liturgical commitments. This offers not only a unique perspective but a remarkable example of inter-religious scholarship.  About David Coolidge David earned his PhD from the Graduate Theological Union in 2023 and serves as Research Faculty at Bayan Islamic Graduate School. David Coolidge was born in Chicago, and raised in Kenilworth, IL. He has a BA from Brown University and an MA from Princeton University. He converted to Islam in 1998.  From 2008-2013 he worked as a Muslim chaplain, first at Dartmouth College and then again at Brown. From 2014-2017 he taught an undergraduate course on Islamic law and ethics at New York University.  Highly recommend folks go and listen to David's first appearance on the show where he discusses his unique and deeply moving journey to Islam as well as within the Islamic Tradition.       

No news and clips today because I am on a college visit with my daughter. You can watch my conversation with Waj on YouTube Stand Up is a daily podcast. I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. This show is Ad free and fully supported by listeners like you! Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 750 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Subscribe to Waj Substack Channel "The Left Hook" Check out his new show on youtube ‘America Unhinged,' with Francesca Fiorentini and Wajahat Ali - Zeteo's new weekly show following Trump's first 100 days in office. Wajahat Ali is a Daily Beast columnist, public speaker, recovering attorney, and tired dad of three cute kids. Get his book Go Back To Where You Came From: And, Other Helpful Recommendations on Becoming American which will be published in January 2022 by Norton. He believes in sharing stories that are by us, for everyone: universal narratives told through a culturally specific lens to entertain, educate and bridge the global divides. Listen to WAj and DAnielle Moodie on Democracy-ish  He frequently appears on television and podcasts for his brilliant, incisive, and witty political commentary. Born in the Bay Area, California to Pakistani immigrant parents, Ali went to school wearing Husky pants and knowing only three words of English. He graduated from UC Berkeley with an English major and became a licensed attorney. He knows what it feels like to be the token minority in the classroom and the darkest person in a boardroom. Like Spiderman, he's often had the power and responsibility of being the cultural ambassador of an entire group of people, those who are often marginalized, silenced, or reduced to stereotypes. His essays, interviews, and reporting have appeared in The New York Times, The Atlantic, The Washington Post, The Guardian, and New York Review of Books. Ali has spoken at many organizations, from Google to Walmart-Jet to Princeton University to the United Nations to the Chandni Indian-Pakistani Restaurant in Newark, California, and his living room in front of his three kids.  Bill Boyle is a well sourced and connected businessman who lives in Washington DC with his wife and son. Bill is a trusted friend and source for me who I met after he listened and became a regular and highly respected caller of my siriusxm radio show. Bill is a voracious reader and listeners love to hear his take. I think his analysis is as sharp as anyone you will hear on radio or TV and he has well placed friends across the federal government who are always talking to him. As far as I can tell he is not in the CIA. Follow him on twitter and park at his garages. Join us Monday's and Thursday's at 8EST for our Bi Weekly Happy Hour Hangout's !  Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing Gift a Subscription https://www.patreon.com/PeteDominick/gift

Our Christian Heritage goes "On Location" with Randy Melchert to a Princeton, NJ cemetery to find the grave of America's Founding Pastors: Jonathan Edwards, Samuel Davies, and John Witherspoon. Explore the intertwined histories of Princeton University and the prominent religious figures who shaped its early development. It highlights the legacies of Jonathan Edwards, Samuel Davies, and John Witherspoon, demonstrating how these influential ministers – pivotal figures in the Great Awakening and champions of religious freedom – also served as presidents of the institution and profoundly impacted the intellectual and spiritual landscape of America. The narrative underscores the original purpose of Princeton as a training ground for ministers dedicated to spreading the Gospel, and connects these academic leaders to the broader narrative of American patriotism and the founding of the nation.

Shift Key is off for Labor Day, so we're re-running this classic episode.For the first time in 15 years, American electricity demand is rising again as new data centers, factories, and electric vehicles come online. The easiest option is to meet that new demand with new supply — new power plants. But in many parts of the country, it can take years to hook up new wind, solar, and batteries to the grid. The reason why is a clogged and broken system called the interconnection queue. On this week's episode of Shift Key, which first aired in 2024, Jesse and Rob speak with two experts about how to understand — and how to fix — what is perhaps the biggest obstacle to deploying more renewables on the U.S. power grid. Tyler Norris is a doctoral student at Duke University's Nicholas School of the Environment. He was formerly vice president of development at Cypress Creek Renewables, and he served on North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper's Carbon Policy Working Group. Claire Wayner is a senior associate at RMI's carbon-free electricity program, where she works on the clean and competitive grids team. Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap, and Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University.Mentioned: Tyler's study on “energy only” interconnection rulesMatthew Zeitlin on Tyler's research into flexible loadsFERC Order 2023Advanced Energy United on “Unlocking America's Energy”PJM's Capacity Auction: The Real StoryRob's downshift; Jesse's upshift.--This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by …Accelerate your clean energy career with Yale's online certificate programs. Gain real-world skills, build strong networks, and keep working while you learn. Explore the year-long Financing and Deploying Clean Energy program or the 5-month Clean and Equitable Energy Development program. Learn more here.Join clean energy leaders at RE+ 25, September 8–11 in Las Vegas. Explore opportunities to meet rising energy demand with the latest in solar, storage, EVs, and more at North America's largest energy event. Save 20% with code HEATMAP20 at re-plus.com.Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Our Christian Heritage goes "On Location" with Randy Melchert to a Princeton, NJ cemetery to find the grave of America's Founding Pastors: Jonathan Edwards, Samuel Davies, and John Witherspoon. Explore the intertwined histories of Princeton University and the prominent religious figures who shaped its early development. It highlights the legacies of Jonathan Edwards, Samuel Davies, and John Witherspoon, demonstrating how these influential ministers – pivotal figures in the Great Awakening and champions of religious freedom – also served as presidents of the institution and profoundly impacted the intellectual and spiritual landscape of America. The narrative underscores the original purpose of Princeton as a training ground for ministers dedicated to spreading the Gospel, and connects these academic leaders to the broader narrative of American patriotism and the founding of the nation.

On this episode we're joined by Laura Robertson. Laura just completed a stint as a writer for The Nome Nugget – that's Nome as in Nome, Alaska – and the Nugget is an award-winning weekly that serves a population of 3,700 in western Alaska. It is Alaska's oldest newspaper. She is a graduate of Princeton University.As she prepares to start a new job she talked about her experience both with the Nugget and in freelance writing. She shared examples of stories she's written (including an award-winning piece before going to Nome). She described what Nome is like and what kind of stories she covered.She also had some profound observations about what it's like to be an early-career journalist in 2025.Article examplesNew York Press Club award-winning piecehttps://nysfocus.com/2024/07/18/primecare-private-medical-contractor-jail-deathsGold mining storyhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1qvSugUUYYa6gUnJ6BrexfoSpzrxt9jiW/viewLaura can sing too - jazz and operaLaura's salutes: Laurelai Ivanoff High Country News; Anna Lionis, Diana Haecker, and Nils Hahn of The Nome NuggetPlease support your local public radio station: adoptastation.orgThank you for listening. You can e-mail me at journalismsalute@gmail.com Visit our website: thejournalismsalute.org Mark's website (MarkSimonmedia.com)Tweet us at @journalismpod and Bluesky at @marksimon.bsky.socialSubscribe to our newsletter– journalismsalute.substack.com

This summer, the fourth summer of the Russo-Ukrainian War that started in the winter of 2022, we find the first serious and determined effort towards a genuine negotiation to end this grinding war in Eastern Europe.The experiences and lessons of this war aren't only changing how nations throughout the world prepare for their next war, it has forced even greater changes on both combatants how they fight now and plan structuring their national defense post-war.Returning to Midrats again to discuss this and related issues is Dr. Dmitry Gorenburg, a Senior Research Scientist in the Strategy, Policy, Plans, and Programs division of CNA, where he has worked since 2000. Dr. Gorenburg is an associate at the Harvard University Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies and previously served as Executive Director of the American Association of the Advancement of Slavic Studies (AAASS). His research interests include security issues in the former Soviet Union, Russian military reform, Russian foreign policy, and ethnic politics and identity. Dr. Gorenburg is author of Nationalism for the Masses: Minority Ethnic Mobilization in the Russian Federation (Cambridge University Press, 2003), and has been published in journals such as World Politics and Post-Soviet Affairs. He currently serves as editor of Problems of Post-Communism and was also editor of Russian Politics and Law from 2009 to 2016. Dr. Gorenburg received a B.A. in international relations from Princeton University and a Ph.D. in political science from Harvard University.Show LinksInside Russia's Shadow Military Sustaining the War, by Mariya Y. OmelichevaIndia's Ministry of External Affairs letter of 04 August 2025.Center for Naval Analysis (CNA) Analysis papers.Russian Military Reform BlogSummaryIn this episode of the Midrats Podcast, the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict is explored in depth, focusing on the initial misjudgments about the war's duration, the societal costs for Russia, and the regional disparities in the impact of the war. The conversation also delves into recruitment strategies, the role of paramilitary forces, economic pressures, and the dynamics within NATO. Additionally, military reforms, the influence of drones on warfare, and international support for Russia's military efforts are discussed, providing a comprehensive overview of the current state of the conflict and its broader implications.TakeawaysThe initial belief was that Russia would win quickly.The price of repression in Russia has increased significantly.Recruitment for the war is more successful in rural areas.The narrative has shifted to a defensive stance against the West.Paramilitary forces were initially relied upon due to manpower shortages.The Russian economy has held up better than expected despite sanctions.Drones have made battlefields more static and less mobile.Russia is undergoing military reforms to adapt to the ongoing conflict.The North-South divide in NATO influences regional support for Ukraine.Russia's GDP is lower than that of Texas, highlighting economic challenges.Chapters00:00: Intro to the Ongoing Russia-Ukraine Conflict05:34: Initial Misjudgments and Long-Term Perspectives08:31: The Price of War on Russian Society12:11: Regional Disparities in Russia's War Impact16:38: Shifting Narratives and Recruitment Strategies20:28: The Role of Paramilitary Forces24:52: Economic Pressures and Negotiation Prospects30:12: Russia's War Economy and International Trade31:16: Military Reforms and Logistics Improvements38:50: The Impact of Drones on Warfare54:34: International Support and Drone Development56:25: NATO Dynamics and Eastern European Politics

Elaine Marino (she/her/ella), Head of Corporate Social Responsibility, Meltwater and I recap the latest 5 Things (good vibes in DEI) in just 15 minutes. This week our conversation is about paid leave for period pain, rocking true access in our national parks, queer rights protection in Illinois, and more!Here are this week's good vibes:Portugal pays up for period painRocky Mountain rolls out real accessLive Nation finally hits inclusion notesIllinois schools the nation on queer rightsPrinceton pays up, but diversity slipsGood Vibes to Go: Bernadette's GVTG: Looking for a light, fun TV series? Check out Acupulco on Apple TV. The dialogue is in English and Spanish and it's a great celebration of family and culture. Elaine's GVTG: Listen to or read “Born a Crime”, Trevor Noah's memoir. Listening to it is ideal as he is hilarious as he tells stories from his childhood growing up in South Africa.Read the Stories.Connect with Elaine Marino. Join thousands of readers by subscribing to the 5 Things newsletter. Enjoy some good vibes in DEI every Saturday morning. https://5thingsdei.com/

My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers,Global population growth is slowing, and it's not showing any signs of recovery. To the environmentalists of the 1970s, this may have seemed like a movement in the right direction. The drawbacks to population decline, however, are severe and numerous, and they're not all obvious.Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I talk with economist and demographer Dean Spears about the depopulation trend that is transcending cultural barriers and ushering in a new global reality. We discuss the costs to the economy and human progress, and the inherent value of more people.Spears is an associate professor of economics at Princeton University where he studies demography and development. He is also the founding executive director of r.i.c.e., a nonprofit research organization seeking to uplift children in rural northern India. He is a co-author with Michael Geruso of After the Spike: Population, Progress, and the Case for People.In This Episode* Where we're headed (1:32)* Pumping the breaks (5:41)* A pro-parenting culture (12:40)* A place for AI (19:13)* Preaching to the pro-natalist choir (23:40)* Quantity and quality of life (28:48)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. Where we're headed (1:32). . . two thirds of people now live in a country where the birth rate is below the two children per two adults level that would stabilize the population.Pethokoukis: Who are you and your co-author trying to persuade and what are you trying to persuade them of? Are you trying to persuade them that global depopulation is a real thing, that it's a problem? Are you trying to persuade them to have more kids? Are you trying to persuade them to support a certain set of pro-child or pro-natalist policies?Spears: We are trying to persuade quite a lot of people of two important things: One is that global depopulation is the most likely future — and what global depopulation means is that every decade, every generation, the world's population will shrink. That's the path that we're on. We're on that path because birth rates are low and falling almost everywhere. It's one thing we're trying to persuade people of, that fact, and we're trying to persuade people to engage with a question of whether global depopulation is a future to welcome or whether we should want something else to happen. Should we let depopulation happen by default or could it be better to stabilize the global population at some appropriate level instead?We fundamentally think that this is a question that a much broader section of society, of policy discourse, of academia should be talking about. We shouldn't just be leaving this discussion to the population scientists, demographic experts, not only to the people who already are worried about, or talking about low birth rates, but this is important enough and unprecedented enough that everybody should be engaging in this question. Whatever your ongoing values or commitments, there's a place for you in this conversation.Is it your impression that the general public is aware of this phenomenon? Or are they still stuck in the '70s thinking that population is running amok and we'll have 30 billion people on this planet like was the scenario in the famous film, Soylent Green? I feel like the people I know are sort of aware that this is happening. I don't know what your experience is.I think it's changing fast. I think more and more people are aware that birth rates are falling. I don't think that people are broadly aware — because when you hear it in the news, you might hear that birth rates in the United States have fallen low or birth rates in South Korea have fallen low. I think what not everybody knows is that two thirds of people now live in a country where the birth rate is below the two children per two adults level that would stabilize the population.I think people don't know that the world's birth rate has fallen from an average around five in 1950 to about 2.3 today, and that it's still falling and that people just haven't engaged with the thought that there's no special reason to expect it to stop and hold it to. But the same processes that have been bringing birth rates down will continue to bring them down, and people don't know that there's no real automatic stabilizer to expect it to come back up. Of the 26 countries that have had the lifetime birth rate fall below 1.9, none of them have had it go back up to two.That's a lot of facts that are not as widely known as they should be, but then the implication of it, that if the world's birth rate goes below two and stays there, we're going to have depopulation generation after generation. I think for a lot of people, they're still in the mindset that depopulation is almost conceptually impossible, that either we're going to have population growth or something else like zero population growth like people might've talked about in the '70s. But the idea that a growth rate of zero is just a number and then that it's not going to stop there, it's going to go negative, I think that's something that a lot of people just haven't thought about.Pumping the breaks (5:41)We wrote this book because we hope that there will be an alternative to depopulation society will choose, but there's no reason to expect or believe that it's going happen automatically.You said there's no automatic stabilizers — at first take, that sounds like we're going to zero. Is there a point where the global population does hit a stability point?No, that's just the thing.So we're going to zero?Well, “there's no automatic stabilizer” isn't the same thing as “we're definitely going to zero.” It could be that society comes together and decides to support parenting, invest more in the next generation, invest more in parents and families, and do more to help people choose to be parents. We wrote this book because we hope that there will be an alternative to depopulation society will choose, but there's no reason to expect or believe that it's going happen automatically. In no country where the birth rate has gone to two has it just magically stopped and held there forever.I think a biologist might say that the desire to reproduce, that's an evolved drive, and even if right now we're choosing to have smaller families, that biological urge doesn't vanish. We've had population, fertility rates, rise and fall throughout history — don't you think that there is some sort of natural stabilizer?We've had fluctuations throughout history, but those fluctuations have been around a pretty long and pretty widely-shared downward trend. Americans might be mostly only now hearing about falling birth rates because the US was sort of anomalous amongst richer countries and having a relatively flat period from the 1970s to around 2010 or so, whereas birth rates were falling in other countries, they weren't falling in the US in the same way, but they were falling in the US before then, they're falling in the US since then, and when you plot it over the long history with other countries, it's clear that, for the world as a whole, as long as we've had records, not just for decades, but for centuries, we've seen birth rates be falling. It's not just a new thing, it's a very long-term trend.It's a very widely-shared trend because humans are unlike other animals in the important way that we make decisions. We have culture, we have rationality, we have irrationality, we have all of these. The reason the population grew is because we've learned how to keep ourselves and our children alive. We learned how to implement sanitation, implement antibiotics, implement vaccines, and so more of the children who were born survived even as the birth rate was falling all along. Other animals don't do that. Other animals don't invent sanitation systems and antibiotics and so I think that we can't just reason immediately from other animal populations to what's going to happen to humans.I think one can make a plausible case that, even if you think that this is a problem — and again, it's a global problem, or a global phenomenon, advanced countries, less-advanced countries — that it is a phenomenon of such sweep that if you're going to say we need to stabilize or slow down, that it would take a set of policies of equal sweep to counter it. Do those actually exist?No. Nobody has a turnkey solution. There's nothing shovel-ready here. In fact, it's too early to be talking about policy solutions or “here's my piece of legislation, here's what the government should do” because we're just not there yet, both in terms of the democratic process of people understanding the situation and there even being a consensus that stabilization, at some level, would be better than depopulation, nor are we there yet on having any sort of answer that we can honestly recommend as being tested and known to be something that will reliably stabilize the population.I think the place to start is by having conversations like this one where we get people to engage with the evidence, and engage with the question, and just sort of move beyond a reflexive welcoming of depopulation by default and start thinking about, well, what are the costs of people and what are the benefits of people? Would we be better off in a future that isn't depopulating over the long run?The only concrete step I can think of us taking right now is adapting the social safety net to a new demographic reality. Beyond that, it seems like there might have to be a cultural shift of some kind, like a large-scale religious revival. Or maybe we all become so rich that we have more time on our hands and decide to have more kids. But do you think at some point someone will have a concrete solution to bring global fertility back up to 2.1 or 2.2?Look at it like this: The UN projects that the peak will be about six decades from now in 2084. Of course, I don't have a crystal ball, I don't know that it's going to be 2084, but let's take that six-decades timeline seriously because we're not talking about something that's going to happen next year or even next decade.But six decades ago, people were aware that — or at least leading scientists and even some policymakers were aware that climate change was a challenge. The original computations by Arrhenius of the radiative forcing were long before that. You have the Johnson speech to Congress, you have Nixon and the EPA. People were talking about climate change as a challenge six decades ago, but if somebody had gotten on their equivalent of a podcast and said, “What we need to do is immediately get rid of the internal combustion engine,” they would've been rightly laughed out of the room because that would've been the wrong policy solution at that time. That would've been jumping to the wrong solution. Instead, what we needed to do was what we've done, which is the science, the research, the social change that we're now at a place where emissions per person in the US have been falling for 20 years and we have technologies — wind, and solar, and batteries — that didn't exist before because there have been decades of working on it.So similarly, over the next six decades, let's build the research, build the science, build the social movement, discover things we don't know, more social science, more awareness, and future people will know more than you and I do about what might be constructive responses to this challenge, but only if we start talking about it now. It's not a crisis to panic about and do the first thing that comes to mind. This is a call to be more thoughtful about the future.A pro-parenting culture (12:40)The world's becoming more similar in this important way that the difference across countries and difference across societies is getting smaller as birth rates converge downward.But to be clear, you would like people to have more kids.I would like for us to get on a path where more people who want to be parents have the sort of support, and environment, and communities they need to be able to choose that. I would like people to be thinking about all of this when they make their family decisions. I'd like the rest of us to be thinking about this when we pitch in and do more to help us. I don't think that anybody's necessarily making the wrong decision for themselves if they look around and think that parenting is not for them or having more children is not for them, but I think we might all be making a mistake if we're not doing more to support parents or to recognize the stake we have in the next generation.But all those sorts of individual decisions that seem right for an individual or for a couple, combined, might turn into a societal decision.Absolutely. I'm an economics professor. We call this “externalities,” where there are social benefits of something that are different from the private costs and benefits. If I decide that I want to drive and I contribute to traffic congestion, then that's an externality. At least in principle, we understand what to do about that: You share the cost, you share the benefits, you help the people internalize the social decision.It's tied up in the fact that we have a society where some people we think of as doing care work and some people we think of as doing important work. So we've loaded all of these costs of making the next generation on people during the years of their parenting and especially on women and mothers. It's understandable that, from a strictly economic point of view, somebody looks at that and thinks, “The private costs are greater than the private benefits. I'm not going to do that.” It's not my position to tell somebody that they're wrong about that. What you do in a situation like that is share and lighten that burden. If there's a social reason to solve traffic congestion, then you solve it with public policy over the long run. If the social benefits of there being a flourishing next generation are greater than people are finding in their own decision making, then we need to find the ways to invest in families, invest in parenting, lift and share those burdens so that people feel like they can choose to be parents.I would think there's a cultural component here. I am reminded of a book by Jonathan Last about this very issue in which he talks about Old Town Alexandria here in Virginia, how, if you go to Old Town, you can find lots of stores selling stuff for dogs, but if you want to buy a baby carriage, you can't find anything.Of course, that's an equilibrium outcome, but go on.If we see a young couple pushing a stroller down the street and inside they have a Chihuahua — as society, or you personally, would you see that and “Think that's wrong. That seems like a young couple living in a nice area, probably have plenty of dough, they can afford daycare, and yet they're still not going to have a kid and they're pushing a dog around a stroller?” Should we view that as something's gone wrong with our society?My own research is about India. My book's co-authored with Mike Geruso. He studies the United States more. I'm more of an expert on India.Paul Ehrlich, of course, begins his book, The Population Bomb, in India.Yes, I know. He starts with this feeling of being too crowded with too many people. I say in the book that I almost wonder if I know the exact spot where he has that experience. I think it's where one of my favorite shops are for buying scales and measuring tape for measuring the health of children in Uttar Pradesh. But I digress about Paul Ehrlich.India now, where Paul Ehrlich was worried about overpopulation, is now a society with an average birth rate below two kids per two adults. Even Uttar Pradesh, the big, disadvantaged, poor state where I do my work in research, the average young woman there says that they want an average of 1.9 children. This is a place where society and culture is pretty different from the United States. In the US, we're very accustomed to this story of work and family conflict, and career conflicts, especially for women, and that's probably very important in a lot of people's lives. But that's not what's going on in India where female labor force participation is pretty low. Or you hear questions about whether this is about the decline of religiosity, but India is a place where religion is still very important to a lot of people's lives. Marriage is almost universal. Marriage happens early. People start their childbearing careers in their early twenties, and you still see people having an average below two kids. They start childbearing young and they end childbearing young.Similarly, in Latin America, where religiosity, at least as reported in surveys, remains pretty high, but Latin America is at an average of 1.8, and it's not because people are delaying fertility until they're too old to get pregnant. You see a lot of people having permanent contraception surgery, tubal obligations.And so this cultural story where people aren't getting married, they're starting too late, they're putting careers first, it doesn't match the worldwide diversity. These diverse societies we're seeing are all converging towards low birth rates. The world's becoming more similar in this important way that the difference across countries and difference across societies is getting smaller as birth rates converge downward. So I don't think we can easily point towards any one cultural for this long-term and widely shared trend.A place for AI (19:13)If AI in the future is a compliment to what humans produce . . . if AI is making us more productive, then it's all the bigger loss to have fewer people.At least from an economic perspective, I think you can make the case: fewer people, less strain on resources, you're worried about workers, AI-powered robots are going to be doing a lot of work, and if you're worried about fewer scientists, the scientists we do have are going to have AI-powered research assistants.Which makes the scientists more important. Many technologies over history have been compliments to what humans do, not substitutes. If AI in the future is a compliment to what humans produce — scientific research or just the learning by doing that people do whenever they're engaging in an enterprise or trying to create something — if AI is making us more productive, then it's all the bigger loss to have fewer people.To me, the best of both worlds would be to have even more scientists plus AI. But isn't the fear of too few people causing a labor shortage sort of offset by AI and robotics? Maybe we'll have plenty of technology and capital to supply the workers we do have. If that's not the worry, maybe the worry is that the human experience is simply worse when there are fewer children around.You used the term “plenty of,” and I think that sort of assumes that there's a “good enough,” and I want to push back on that because I think what matters is to continue to make progress towards higher living standards, towards poverty alleviation, towards longer, better, healthier, safer, richer lives. What matters is whether we're making as much progress as we could towards an abundant, rich, safe, healthy future. I think we shouldn't let ourselves sloppily accept a concept of “good enough.” If we're not making the sort of progress that we could towards better lives, then that's a loss, and that matters for people all around the world.We're better off for living in a world with other people. Other people are win-win: Their lives are good for them and their lives are good for you. Part of that, as you say, is people on the supply side of the economy, people having the ideas and the realizations that then can get shared over and over again. The fact that ideas are this non-depletable resource that don't get used up but might never be discovered if there aren't people to discover them. That's one reason people are important on the supply side of the economy, but other people are also good for you on the demand side of the economy.This is very surprising because people think that other people are eating your slice of the pie, and if there are more other people, there's less for me. But you have to ask yourself, why does the pie exist in the first place? Why is it worth some baker's while to bake a pie that I could get a slice of? And that's because there were enough people wanting slices of pie to make it worth paying the fixed costs of having a bakery and baking a whole pie.In other words, you're made better off when other people want and need the same things that you want and need because that makes it more likely for it to exist. If you have some sort of specialized medical need and need specialized care, you're going to be more likely to find it in a city where there are more other people than in a less-populated rural place, and you're going to be more likely to find it in a course of history where there have been more other people who have had the same medical need that you do so that it's been worthwhile for some sort of cure to exist. The goodness of other people for you isn't just when they're creating things, it's also when they're just needing the same things that you do.And, of course, if you think that getting to live a good life is a good thing, that there's something valuable about being around to have good experiences, that a world of more people having good experiences has more goodness in it than a world of fewer people having good experiences in it. That's one thing that counts, and it's one important consideration for why a stabilized future might be better than a depopulating future. Now, I don't expect everyone to immediately agree with that, but I do think that the likelihood of depopulation should prompt us to ask that question.Preaching to the pro-natalist choir (23:40)If you are already persuaded listening to this, then go strike up a conversation with somebody.Now, listening to what you just said, which I thought was fantastic, you're a great explainer, that is wonderful stuff — but I couldn't help but think, as you explained that, that you end up spending a lot of time with people who, because they read the New York Times, they may understand that the '70s population fears aren't going to happen, that we're not going to have a population of 30 billion that we're going to hit, I don't know, 10 billion in the 2060s and then go down. And they think, “Well, that's great.”You have to spend a lot of time explaining to them about the potential downsides and why people are good, when like half the population in this country already gets it: “You say ‘depopulation,' you had us at the word, ‘depopulation.'” You have all these people who are on the right who already think that — a lot of people I know, they're there.Is your book an effective tool to build on that foundation who already think it's an issue, are open to policy ideas, does your book build on that or offer anything to those people?I think that, even if this is something that people have thought about before, a lot of how people have thought about it is in terms of pension plans, the government's budget, the age structure, the nearer-term balance of workers to retirees.There's plenty of people on the right who maybe they're aware of those things, but also think that it really is kind of a The Children of Men argument. They just think a world with more children is better. A world where the playgrounds are alive is better — and yes, that also may help us with social security, but there's a lot of people for whom you don't have to even make that economic argument. That seems to me that that would be a powerful team of evangelists — and I mean it in a nonreligious way — evangelists for your idea that population is declining and there are going to be some serious side effects.If you are already persuaded listening to this, then go strike up a conversation with somebody. That's what we want to have happen. I think minds are going to be changed in small batches on this one. So if you're somebody who already thinks this way, then I encourage you to go out there and start a conversation. I think not everybody, even people who think about population for a living — for example, one of the things that we engage with in the book is the philosophy of population ethics, or population in social welfare as economists might talk about it.There have been big debates there over should we care about average wellbeing? Should we care about total wellbeing? Part of what we're trying to say in the book is, one, we think that some of those debates have been misplaced or are asking what we don't think are the right questions, but also to draw people to what we can learn from thinking of where questions like this agree. Because this whole question of should we make the future better in total or make the better on average is sort of presuming this Ehrlich-style mindset that if the future is more populous, then it must be worse for each. But once you see that a future that's more populous is also more prosperous, it'd be better in total and better on average, then a lot of these debates might still have academic interest, but both ways of thinking about what would be a better future agree.So there are these pockets of people out there who have thought about this before, and part of what we're trying to do is bring them together in a unified conversation where we're talking about the climate modeling, we're talking about the economics, we're talking about the philosophy, we're talking about the importance of gender equity and reproductive freedom, and showing that you can think and care about all of these things and still think that a stabilized future might be better than depopulation.In the think tank world, the dream is to have an idea and then some presidential candidate adopts the idea and pushes it forward. There's a decent chance that the 2028 Republican nominee is already really worried about this issue, maybe someone like JD Vance. Wouldn't that be helpful for you?I've never spoken with JD Vance, but from my point of view, I would also be excited for India's population to stabilize and not depopulate. I don't see this as an “America First” issue because it isn't an America First issue. It's a worldwide, broadly-shared phenomenon. I think that no one country is going to be able to solve this all on its own because, if nothing else, people move, people immigrate, societies influence one another. I think it's really a broadly-shared issue.Quantity and quality of life (28:48)What I do feel confident about is that some stabilized size would be better than depopulation generation after generation, after generation, after generation, without any sort of leveling out, and I think that's the plan that we're on by default.Can you imagine an earth of 10 to 12 billion people at a sustained level being a great place to live, where everybody is doing far better than they are today, the poorest countries are doing better — can you imagine that scenario? Can you also imagine a scenario where we have a world of three to four billion, which is a way nicer place to live for everybody than it is today? Can both those scenarios happen?I don't see any reason to think that either of those couldn't be an equilibrium, depending on all the various policy choices and all the various . . .This is a very broad question.Exactly. I think it's way beyond the social science, economics, climate science we have right now to say “three billion is the optimal size, 10 billion is the optimal size, eight billion is the optimal size.” What I do feel confident about is that some stabilized size would be better than depopulation generation after generation, after generation, after generation, without any sort of leveling out, and I think that's the plan that we're on by default. That doesn't mean it's what's going to happen, I hope it's not what happens, and that's sort of the point of the conversation here to get more people to consider that.But let's say we were able to stabilize the population at 11 billion. That would be fine.It could be depending on what the people do.But I'm talking about a world of 11 billion, and I'm talking about a world where the average person in India is as wealthy as, let's say this is in the year 2080, 2090, and at minimum, the average person in India is as wealthy as the average American is today. So that's a big huge jump in wealth and, of course, environmentalism.And we make responsible environmental choices, whether that's wind, or solar, or nuclear, or whatever, I'm not going to be prescriptive on that, but I don't see any reason why not. My hope is that future people will know more about that question than I do. Ehrlich would've said that our present world of eight billion would be impossible, that we would've starved long before this, that England would've ceased to exist, I think is a prediction in his book somewhere.And there's more food per person on every continent. Even in the couple decades that I've been going to India, children are taller than they used to be, on average. You can measure it, and maybe I'm fooling myself, but I feel like I can see it. Even as the world's been growing more populous, people have been getting better off, poverty has been going down, the absolute number of people in extreme poverty has been going down, even as the world's been getting more populous. As I say, emissions per person have been going down in a lot of places.I don't see any in principle, reason, if people make the right decisions, that we couldn't have a sustainable, healthy, and good, large sustained population. I've got two kids and they didn't add to the hole in the ozone layer, which I would've heard about in school as a big problem in the '80s. They didn't add to acid rain. Why not? Because the hole in the ozone layer was confronted with the Montreal Protocol. The acid rain was confronted with the Clean Air Act. They don't drive around in cars with leaded gasoline because in the '70s, the gasoline was unleaded. Adding more people doesn't have to make things worse. It depends on what happens. Again, I hope future people will know more about this than I do, but I don't see any, in principle reason why we couldn't stabilize at a size larger than today and have it be a healthy, and sustainable, and flourishing society.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedMicro Reads▶ Economics* Generative AI's Impact on Student Achievement and Implications for Worker Productivity - SSRN* The Real China Model: Beijing's Enduring Formula for Wealth and Power - FA* What Matters More to the Stock Market? The Fed or Nvidia? - NYT* AI Isn't Really Stealing Jobs Yet. That Doesn't Mean We're Ready for It. - Barron's* Trump's Attacks on the Fed and BLS Threaten Key Source of Economic Strength - NYT* A Stock Market Crash Foretold - PS* The Macro Impact of AI on GDP - The Overshoot* Powell Sends Strongest Signal Yet That Interest Rate Cuts Are Coming - NYT* Big Announcements, Small Results: FDI Falls Yet Again - ITIF▶ Business* An MIT report that 95% of AI pilots fail spooked investors. But the reason why those pilots failed is what should make the C-suite anxious - Fortune* Alexandr Wang is now leading Meta's AI dream team. Will Mark Zuckerberg's big bet pay off? - Fortune* Amazon is betting on agents to win the AI race - The Verge* Intuit Earnings Beat Estimates as Company Focuses on Artificial Intelligence Growth Drivers - Barron's* Will Tesla Robotaxis Kill Auto Insurers? Hardly. - Barron's* Wall Street Is Too Complex to Be Left to Humans - Bberg Opinion* Meta Freezes AI Hiring After Blockbuster Spending Spree - WSJ* Trump Is Betting Big on Intel. Will the Chips Fall His Way? - Wired* Trump Says Intel Has Agreed to Give the US 10% Equity Stake - Bberg▶ Policy/Politics* Poll shows California policy influencers want harsher social media laws than voters - Politico* How Trump Will Decide Which Chips Act Companies Must Give Up Equity - WSJ* This Democrat Thinks Voters Seeking Order Will Make or Break Elections - WSJ* California Republicans trust tech companies as much as Trump on AI - Politico* The Japanese city betting on immigrants to breathe life into its economy - FT▶ AI/Digital* AI Is Designing Bizarre New Physics Experiments That Actually Work - Wired* Generative AI in Higher Education: Evidence from an Elite College - SSRN* AI Unveils a Major Discovery in Ancient Microbes That Could Hold the Key to Next Generation Antibiotics - The Debrief* A.I. May Be Just Kind of Ordinary - NYT Opinion* Is the AI bubble about to pop? Sam Altman is prepared either way. - Ars* China's DeepSeek quietly releases an open-source rival to GPT-5—optimized for Chinese chips and priced to undercut OpenAI - Fortune* The world should prepare for the looming quantum era - FT* Brace for a crash before the golden age of AI - FT* How AI will change the browser wars - FT* Can We Tell if ChatGPT is a Parasite? Studying Human-AI Symbiosis with Game Theory - Arxiv* Apple Explores Using Google Gemini AI to Power Revamped Siri - Bberg* The AI Doomers Are Getting Doomier - The Atlantic* State of AI in Business 2025 - MIT NANDA* Silicon Valley Is Drifting Out of Touch With the Rest of America - NYT Opinion* What Workers Really Want from Artificial Intelligence - Stanford HAI▶ Biotech/Health* A 1990 Measles Outbreak Shows How the Disease Can Roar Back - NYT* Corporate egg freezing won't break the glass ceiling - FT* How to Vaccinate the World - Asterisk* COVID Revisionism Has Gone Too Far - MSN* Securing America's Pharmaceutical Innovation Edge - JAMA Forum▶ Clean Energy/Climate* Trump's Global War on Decarbonization - PS* Aalo Atomics secures funding to build its first reactor - WNN* Trump's nuclear policy favors startups, widening industry rifts - E&E* How Electricity Got So Expensive - Heatmap* Nuclear fusion gets a boost from a controversial debunked experiment - NS* Google Wants You to Know the Environmental Cost of Quizzing Its AI - WSJ* Trump Blamed Rising Electricity Prices on Renewables. It's Not True. - Heatmap* Trump's Cuts May Spell the End for America's Only Antarctic Research Ship - NYT* How Bill McKibben Lost the Plot - The New Atlantis* Does it make sense for America to keep subsidising a sinking city? - Economist▶ Robotics/Drones/AVs* I'm a cyclist. Will the arrival of robotaxis make my journeys safer? - NS* Si chiplet–controlled 3D modular microrobots with smart communication in natural aqueous environments - Science▶ Space/Transportation* On the ground in Ukraine's largest Starlink repair shop - MIT* Trump can't stop America from building cheap EVs - Vox* SpaceX has built the machine to build the machine. But what about the machine? - Ars* 'Invasion' Season 3 showrunner Simon Kinberg on creating ''War of the Worlds' meets 'Babel'' (exclusive) - Space▶ Up Wing/Down Wing* The era of the public apology is ending - Axios* Warren Brodey, 101, Dies; a Visionary at the Dawn of the Information Age - NYT* Reality is evil - Aeon* The Case for Crazy Philanthropy - Palladium▶ Substacks/Newsletters* Claude Code is growing crazy fast, and it's not just for writing code - AI Supremacy* No, ‘the Economists' Didn't Botch Trump's Tariffs - The Dispatch* How Does the US Use Water? - Construction Physics* A Climate-Related Financial Risk Boondoggle - The Ecomodernist* What's up with the States? - Hyperdimensional▶ Social Media* On why AI won't take all the jobs - @Dan_Jeffries1* On four nuclear reactors to be built in Amarillo, TX - @NuclearHazelnut* On AI welfare and consciousness - @sebkrier Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

So far on Shift Key Summer School we've covered how electricity gets made and how it gets sold. But none of that matters without the grid, which is how that electricity gets to you, the consumer. Who actually keeps the grid running? And what decisions did they make an hour ago, a day ago, a week ago, five years ago to make sure that it would still be running right this second? This week on Shift Key, Rob and Jesse chat with Mark Rothleder, senior vice president and chief operating officer of the California Independent System Operator, which manages about 80% of the state's electricity flow. As the longest-serving employee at CAISO, he's full of institutional knowledge. How does he manage the resource mix throughout the day? What happens in a blackout? And how do you pronounce CAISO in the first place?Shift Key is hosted by Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University, and Robinson Meyer, Heatmap's executive editor. Mentioned: Jesse's slides on long-run equilibrium and electricity marketsThe CAISO appShift Key Summer School episodes 1, 2, 3, and 4Also on Shift Key: Spain's Blackout and the Miracle of the Modern Power Grid--This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by …Accelerate your clean energy career with Yale's online certificate programs. Gain real-world skills, build strong networks, and keep working while you learn. Explore the year-long Financing and Deploying Clean Energy program or the 5-month Clean and Equitable Energy Development program. Learn more here.Join clean energy leaders at RE+ 25, September 8–11 in Las Vegas. Explore opportunities to meet rising energy demand with the latest in solar, storage, EVs, and more at North America's largest energy event. Save 20% with code HEATMAP20 at re-plus.com.Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode Dominic Bowen and Dr. Audrye Wong dive into how Beijing is recalibrating power and influence in a turbulent world. Find out more about China's two-pronged response to US decoupling, sharpened economic coercion and rare-earth export controls, charm offensives across the Global South, Belt and Road's “small yet beautiful” recalibration, BRICS and BRICS Plus positioning, propaganda and strategic narrative, domestic headwinds from slower growth and EV overcapacity, Taiwan deterrence and non-kinetic pressure, multilateral influence and institution-building, technology ties with the Global North amid export controls, shifting perceptions of economic power, and the risks ahead for the international order, and more.Audrye Wong is Jeane Kirkpatrick Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and assistant professor of political science and international relations at the University of Southern California. Her research covers China's economic statecraft, including a book forthcoming with Oxford University Press, as well as China's foreign influence activities and propaganda campaigns. Her work has been supported by the Smith Richardson Foundation and the U.S. Department of Defense, among others. Audrye received a PhD in Security Studies from Princeton University's School of Public and International Affairs, where she was a National Science Foundation Graduate Fellow. She has held affiliations with the Wilson Center, Brookings Institution, Harvard's Belfer Center, and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.The International Risk Podcast brings you conversations with global experts, frontline practitioners, and senior decision-makers who are shaping how we understand and respond to international risk. From geopolitical volatility and organised crime, to cybersecurity threats and hybrid warfare, each episode explores the forces transforming our world and what smart leaders must do to navigate them. Whether you're a board member, policymaker, or risk professional, The International Risk Podcast delivers actionable insights, sharp analysis, and real-world stories that matter. The International Risk Podcast – Reducing risk by increasing knowledge.Follow us on LinkedIn and Subscribe for all our updates!Tell us what you liked!

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, we're hearing an awful lot about the fraught relationship between science and media. In his book, News from Mars: Mass Media and the Forging of a New Astronomy, 1860-1910 (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2019), historian of science Joshua Nall shows us that a blurry boundary between science and journalism was a key feature—not a bug—of the emergence of modern astronomy. Focusing on objects and media, such as newspapers, encyclopedias, cigarette cards, and globes, Nall offers a history of how astronomers' cultivation of a mass public shaped their discipline as it managed controversies over the possibility of canals on Mars, and even interplanetary communication. This book is strongly recommended for historians of science and communication, as well as those with an eye for material culture. Joshua Nall is curator of modern sciences at the Whipple Museum of the History of Science in the Department of the History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Cambridge. Mikey McGovern is a PhD candidate in Princeton University's Program in the History of Science. He is writing a dissertation on how people used statistics to make claims of discrimination in 1970s America, and how the relationship between rights and num- bers became a flashpoint in political struggles over bureaucracy, race, and law. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

This episode looks at the courtroom drama that helped to shape Asia after World War II with Princeton University's Gary Bass. Far more than a simple account of justice served, the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal represents a fascinating intersection of international law, power politics, and competing visions of history that continues to reverberate through East Asian relations today.The tribunal tried 28 Japanese leaders for crimes that began long before Pearl Harbor. Imperial Japan's expansionist wars stretched back decades, leaving a trail of atrocities including the Nanjing Massacre where approximately 200,000 civilians were killed. Yet political calculations ensured Emperor Hirohito remained untouched, creating an enduring contradiction where his closest advisor received a life sentence while the monarch himself watched from his palace.Three defendants embody the trial's moral complexities: defiant Prime Minister Tojo Hideki who used his testimony to justify the war; the Emperor's advisor Kido Koichi who claimed to restrain militarists yet enabled their actions; and perhaps most poignantly, Foreign Minister Togo Shigenori who actively opposed the war, confronted military leadership, and later pushed for surrender—only to die in prison after conviction.What truly distinguishes this tribunal from Nuremberg is its contested legacy. While Germany embraced denazification, some Japanese war criminals later returned triumphantly to politics—including Kishi Nobusuke who became Prime Minister in 1957. His grandson, former Prime Minister Abe Shinzo, continued questioning the tribunal's legitimacy decades later. Meanwhile, at the controversial Yasukuni Shrine, war criminals are venerated alongside fallen soldiers, revealing Japan's unresolved relationship with its imperial past.How do nations reconcile with dark chapters in their past? Can justice truly be served when political considerations shape legal proceedings? You can send a message to the show/feedback by clicking here. The system doesn't let me reply so if you need one please include your email.

Over the past several years, the United States has escalated its use of sanctions and export controls in the context of growing strategic competition with China. A central goal has been to contain China's rise in high-tech industries—especially semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and clean energy—by cutting off access to advanced technology. This approach reflects a bipartisan consensus in Washington that restricting China's access to innovation is key to preserving American technological dominance.But there is an emerging debate about whether this approach is working as intended. Recent developments suggest that export controls and sanctions might be spurring faster innovation in China—forcing Chinese firms and the state to deepen their technological capabilities and reorganize industrial supply chains.Kyle Chan is a postdoctoral researcher at Princeton University whose work focuses on industrial policy, innovation, and green technology in China. He is the author of an excellent newsletter titled High Capacity. He also recently published an op-ed in the New York Times on US-China technological competition.The Sanctions Age is hosted by Esfandyar Batmanghelidj.The show is produced by Spiritland Productions.Sign up to The Sanctions Age newsletter:www.thesanctionsage.comThe Sanctions Age is hosted by Esfandyar Batmanghelidj. The show is produced by Spiritland Productions.To receive an email when new episodes are released, access episode transcripts, and read Esfandyar's notes on each episode, sign-up for the The Sanctions Age newsletter on Substack: https://www.thesanctionsage.com/

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, we're hearing an awful lot about the fraught relationship between science and media. In his book, News from Mars: Mass Media and the Forging of a New Astronomy, 1860-1910 (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2019), historian of science Joshua Nall shows us that a blurry boundary between science and journalism was a key feature—not a bug—of the emergence of modern astronomy. Focusing on objects and media, such as newspapers, encyclopedias, cigarette cards, and globes, Nall offers a history of how astronomers' cultivation of a mass public shaped their discipline as it managed controversies over the possibility of canals on Mars, and even interplanetary communication. This book is strongly recommended for historians of science and communication, as well as those with an eye for material culture. Joshua Nall is curator of modern sciences at the Whipple Museum of the History of Science in the Department of the History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Cambridge. Mikey McGovern is a PhD candidate in Princeton University's Program in the History of Science. He is writing a dissertation on how people used statistics to make claims of discrimination in 1970s America, and how the relationship between rights and num- bers became a flashpoint in political struggles over bureaucracy, race, and law. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

About the GuestDr. John Ahern holds a PhD from Princeton University in historical musicology. He currently teaches at The Wilberforce School as an Upper School Humanities and Latin instructor. He is also faculty at the Theopolis Institute and directs their Te Deum Fellows Program in Liturgical Music. His writings on a variety of topics have appeared in First Things, Ad Fontes, The Lamp, Mere Orthodoxy, Eidolon, the Theopolis Institute blog, and the CiRCE Institute blog. He lives in New Jersey with his wife and four children.Show NotesJohn Ahern has successfully implemented the practice of keeping a commonplace book with his students. In this episode he explains why it is an important practice, how to create time to do it, and how to establish best practices in a school setting. If you have wondered how to succeed at keeping a commonplace book, this episode is incredibly practical and will help you confidently get started in this beautiful practice. Resources MentionedLink to the Circe Institute article: https://circeinstitute.org/blog/how-to-make-a-commonplace-book/ Notebooks the school uses: https://www.leuchtturm1917.us/classic-notebooks-1.html Also: https://www.amazon.com/Leuchturm1917-Journal-Hardcover-Notebook-Numbered/dp/B09T75BG8L?ref_=ast_sto_dp&th=1The Book of Memory by Mary CarruthersLeisure the Basis of Culture by Josef PieperBleak House by Charles DickensTo Kill a MockingbirdIsaac Newton's Common Place Notebook19C Common Place NotebooksBleak House by Charles DickensA Man for All Seasons by Robert BoltAuthors MentionedCharlotte MasonPlatoAristotleSt AugustineHomerQuintillionCiceroRomansDostoevskyDanteAquinasJohn Winthrop_____________________________________Beautiful Teaching online courses & narration conference:BT online webinars, interactive courses, and book studies registration: https://beautifulteaching.coursestorm.com/2025  Online Conference with the Beautiful Teaching Team- Narration: The Art of Learning with Keynote Guest, Jason Barney, October 24-25, 2025Reading Josef Pieper with Dr. Fred Putnam will take place on Thursday evenings Sept-Dec. Space is very limited. This is a seminar experience. Interaction with Dr. Putnam is essential for this online course. If you are interested in having this immersive experience with him, you can enroll here: https://beautifulteaching.coursestorm.com/course/reading-josef-pieper-with-fred-putnam ★ Support this podcast ★

Recently, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio imposed sanctions on the UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Francesca Albanese, saying, “The United States has repeatedly condemned and objected to biased and malicious activities of Albanese that have long made her unfit for service as a Special Rapporteur.”  Today we are joined by three of Albanese's predecessors—John Dugard, Richard Falk, and Michael Lynk, who talk about what these sanctions mean. They trace the United States' and Israel's longstanding attacks on not only Special Rapporteurs on Palestine, but the very claims to Palestinian rights. This latest instance is a particularly egregious attack on the UN and international law. We end with a plea to the international community to come to the aid of the Palestinian people, who are suffering famine, disease, and warfare of immense proportions.John Dugard SC, Emeritus Professor of Law, Universities of the Witwatersrand and Leiden; Member of Institut de Droit International; ; Director of Lauterpacht Centre for International Law, Cambridge (1995-1997); Judge ad hoc  International Court of Justice (2000-2018); Member of UN International Law Commission (1997 -2011); UN Special Rapporteur on Situation of Human Rights in Occupied Palestinian Territory (2001-2008); Legal Counsel, South Africa v Israel (Genocide Convention).Richard Falk is Albert G. Milbank Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University (1961-2001) and Chair of Global Law, Faculty of Law, Queen Mary University London. Since 2002 has been a Research Fellow at the Orfalea Center of Global and International Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Between 2008 and 2014 he served as UN Special Rapporteur on Israeli Violations of Human Rights in Occupied Palestine.Falk has advocated and written widely about ‘nations' that are captive within existing states, including Palestine, Kashmir, Western Sahara, Catalonia, Dombas.Falk has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize several times since 2008.Michael Lynk was a member of the Faculty of Law, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada between 1999 and his retirement in 2022. He taught courses in labour, human rights, disability, constitutional and administrative law. He served as Associate Dean of the Faculty between 2008-11. He became Professor Emeritus in 2023.In March 2016, the United Nations Human Rights Council unanimously selected Professor Lynk for a six-year term as the 7th Special Rapporteur for the human rights situation in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967. He completed his term in April 2022.He has written about his UN experiences in a 2022 book co-authored with Richard Falk and John Dugard, two of his predecessors as UN special rapporteurs: Protecting Human Rights in Occupied Palestine: Working Through the United Nations (Clarity Press).Professor Lynk's academic scholarship and his United Nations reports have been cited by the Supreme Court of Canada, the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court and the United Nations General Assembly.  

In an overloaded, superficial, technological world, in which almost everything and everybody is judged by its usefulness, where can we turn for escape, lasting pleasure, contemplation, or connection to others? While many forms of leisure meet these needs, Zena Hitz writes, few experiences are so fulfilling as the inner life, whether that of a bookworm, an amateur astronomer, a birdwatcher, or someone who takes a deep interest in one of countless other subjects. Drawing on inspiring examples, from Socrates and Augustine to Malcolm X and Elena Ferrante, and from films to Dr. Hitz's own experiences as someone who walked away from elite university life in search of greater fulfillment, Lost in Thought is a passionate and timely reminder that a rich life is a life rich in thought.Today, when even the humanities are often defended only for their economic or political usefulness, Dr. Hitz says our intellectual lives are valuable not despite but because of their practical uselessness. And while anyone can have an intellectual life, she encourages academics in particular to get back in touch with the desire to learn for its own sake, and calls on universities to return to the person-to-person transmission of the habits of mind and heart that bring out the best in us. Reminding us of who we once were and who we might become, Lost in Thought is a moving account of why renewing our inner lives is fundamental to preserving our humanity. Our guest is: Dr. Zena Hitz, who is a Tutor in the great books program at St. John's College. She has a PhD in ancient philosophy from Princeton University and studies and teaches across the liberal arts. She is the founder of the Catherine Project, and the author of Lost in Thought. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who works as a developmental editor and grad student coach. She is the founder of the Academic Life project including this podcast, and writes the Academic Life Newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.Com. Playlist for listeners: Once Upon A Tome Skills for Scholars: How Can Mindfulness Help? The Well-Gardened Mind Community Building and How We Show Up The Good-Enough Life Look Again: The Power of Noticing What Was Already There Tackling Burnout How To Human Common-Sense Ideas For Diversity and Inclusion Hope for the Humanities PhD Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 275+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In episode 213, Coffey talks with Vianei Braun about how HR leaders can effectively work with boards of directors.  They discuss the strategic vs operational divide between board oversight and executive execution; skills needed for senior HR roles including broad industry perspective and data-driven insights; the importance of moving beyond compliance mindset to strategic partnership; executive compensation benchmarking and peer analysis; culture preservation during mergers and acquisitions; AI implementation ethics and workforce planning; the critical role of data in board communications; and characteristics of successful senior HR leaders including truth-telling, collaboration, and ambiguity management. Good Morning, HR is brought to you by Imperative—Bulletproof Background Checks. For more information about our commitment to quality and excellent customer service, visit us at https://imperativeinfo.com.  If you are an HRCI or SHRM-certified professional, this episode of Good Morning, HR has been pre-approved for half a recertification credit—business credit for SPHRs! To obtain the recertification information for this episode, visit https://goodmorninghr.com.  About our Guest: Vianei Braun leads the employment law practice at Decker Jones, P.C., a full-service law firm in Fort Worth. She has been recognized as a Texas Monthly “Super Lawyer” and is listed in Best Lawyers in America for Labor & Employment Law.  Vianei is also a member of the Board of Directors of First Financial Bankshares, Inc. (NASDAQ: FFIN), a banking institution with assets of $14 billion and 79 banking locations throughout Texas. Vianei serves on the board's Compensation, Nom/Gov and Risk Committees and chairs the Advisory Board of First Financial Bank's Chisholm Trail Region. In addition, Vianei serves on the Board of Trustees and the Audit & Compliance Committee of Texas Health Resources.  Vianei is an honors graduate of Princeton University and the University of Texas School of Law. Vianei has been honored as a “Great Woman of Texas” by the Fort Worth Business Press, and as a member of the “Fort Worth 500” by Fort Worth Inc. Vianei Braun can be reached at www.deckerjones.com www.linkedin.com/in/vianeibraunattorney About Mike Coffey: Mike Coffey is an entrepreneur, licensed private investigator, business strategist, HR consultant, and registered yoga teacher. In 1999, he founded Imperative, a background investigations and due diligence firm helping risk-averse clients make well-informed decisions about the people they involve in their business. Imperative delivers in-depth employment background investigations, know-your-customer and anti-money laundering compliance, and due diligence investigations to more than 300 risk-averse corporate clients across the US, and, through its PFC Caregiver & Household Screening brand, many more private estates, family offices, and personal service agencies. Imperative has been named a Best Places to Work, the Texas Association of Business' small business of the year, and is accredited by the Professional Background Screening Association.  Mike shares his insight from 25+ years of HR-entrepreneurship on the Good Morning, HR podcast, where each week he talks to business leaders about bringing people together to create value for customers, shareholders, and community. Mike has been recognized as an Entrepreneur of Excellence by FW, Inc. and has twice been recognized as the North Texas HR Professional of the Year.  Mike serves as a board member of a number of organizations, including the Texas State Council, where he serves Texas' 31 SHRM chapters as State Director-Elect; Workforce Solutions for Tarrant County; the Texas Association of Business; and the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce, where he is chair of the Talent Committee. Mike is a certified Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR) through the HR Certification Institute and a SHRM Senior Certified Professional (SHRM-SCP). He is also a Yoga Alliance registered yoga teacher (RYT-200) and teaches multiple times each week. Mike and his very patient wife of 28 years are empty nesters in Fort Worth.  Learning Objectives: Develop strategic thinking capabilities that focus on industry trends and long-term organizational health rather than just operational HR tasks when communicating with senior leadership. Present data-driven recommendations to boards using benchmarking, competitive analysis, and concrete evidence to support HR initiatives and policy changes. Shift from a compliance-focused "department of no" mindset to a collaborative problem-solving approach that offers solutions while managing organizational risks.  

In our Season 2 finale, we learn about Christian women from late antiquity who sought to transform their bodies inside and out: ascetics and monastics. From fasting to renouncing sexual “appetites” to special clothing—there were lots of things that marked a monk. Dr. Rebecca Krawiec explains all of this and more.Why did women join monasteries? What do we do with those extreme stories of saints punishing their bodies? How can letters give us a more full understanding of women monastics? Who were Tappole and her sister Tsophia? Access full transcript and episode show notesWomen Who Went Before is written, produced, and edited by Rebekah Haigh and Emily Chesley.Music is composed and produced by Moses Sun.Sponsored by the Center for Culture, Society, and Religion, the Program in Judaic Studies, the Stanley J. Seeger Center for Hellenic Studies, and the Committtee for the Study of Late Antiquity at Princeton University.Views expressed on the podcast are solely those of the individuals, and do not represent Princeton University.

Derek Jones is an accomplished play-by-play broadcaster. He does work for ESPN while also serving as the voice of Princeton University men's basketball. In addition, Jones teaches at Rowan University in Glassboro, New Jersey, while serving as the station manager of the student radio station there, WGLS-FM. In Episode #265 of “1-on-1 with Matt Leon,” Matt welcomes Jones in studio to talk about his career. They discuss what inspired him to get into the business, how he approaches a broadcast, the difference in calling a game for TV as opposed to radio and much more. “1-on-1 with Matt Leon” is a KYW Newsradio original podcast. You can follow the show on X @1on1pod and you can follow Matt @Mattleon1060.

Most electricity used in America today is sold on a wholesale power market. These markets are one of the most important institutions structuring the modern U.S. energy economy, but they're also not very well understood, even in climate nerd circles. And after all: How would you even run a market for something that's used at the second it's created — and moves at the speed of light? On this week's episode of Shift Key Summer School, Rob and Jesse talk about how electricity finds a price and how modern power markets work. Why run a power market in the first place? Who makes the most money in power markets? How do you encourage new power plants to get built? And what do power markets mean for renewables? Shift Key is hosted by Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University, and Robinson Meyer, Heatmap's executive editor. Mentioned: Jesse's slides on electricity pricing in the short runJesse's lecture slides on electricity pricing in the long run“The duck curve”Shift Key Summer School episodes 1, 2, and 3--This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by …Accelerate your clean energy career with Yale's online certificate programs. Gain real-world skills, build strong networks, and keep working while you learn. Explore the year-long Financing and Deploying Clean Energy program or the 5-month Clean and Equitable Energy Development program. Learn more here.Join clean energy leaders at RE+ 25, September 8–11 in Las Vegas. Explore opportunities to meet rising energy demand with the latest in solar, storage, EVs, and more at North America's largest energy event. Save 20% with code HEATMAP20 at re-plus.com.Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode of The Plastic Surgery Revolution, Dr. Steven Davis welcomes Lisa Johnson, President of Sales and Marketing for Epicutus, to discuss how science, safety, and simplicity can redefine professional skincare. With over two decades in aesthetics and medicine, Lisa shares how Epicutus blends luxury with real science, backed by patented research from Princeton University and clean, globally consistent formulations. Dr. Davis explains why a consistent skincare regimen is critical before and after procedures like facelifts, neck lifts, and laser treatments—and how the right products can elevate surgical results. Key topics include: Why clean beauty needs more than great packaging – and how Epicutus combines luxury, efficacy, and safety in one streamlined system. Global formulation standards – why Epicutus uses the same EU-compliant formula worldwide, avoiding harmful ingredients banned overseas but still allowed in the U.S. EWG Verification – the only third-party certification that independently reviews every ingredient, final formulation, and manufacturing process. Safe for all life stages – from pregnancy and breastfeeding to oncology patients, Epicutus products are designed to be effective without sacrificing safety. One line for every skin type – how reducing inflammation benefits acne-prone teens, rosacea patients, and even older adults with aging concerns. Innovation on the horizon – a new sunscreen launch and future category-defining products in development. Japanese influence – the company's deep connection to Japan's formulation philosophy, ingredient sourcing, and meticulous quality control. Dr. Davis also shares a story from the operating room about a nurse seeking safe skincare during pregnancy, highlighting why ingredient transparency matters more than ever. Whether you're a skincare enthusiast, a patient preparing for surgery, or someone seeking safer, more effective products, this episode offers valuable insights into the next generation of professional skincare. Listen now to learn why Dr. Davis and his patients are excited about Epicutus—and how its approach could transform your daily regimen.

What can be gained from looking back now at the pandemic response during COVID? What would a “postmortem” tell us about how policies were designed and how scientific discussions played out? Stephen Macedo is a professor of politics at Princeton University, as well as at the University Center for Human Values, and the author of several books including Greg and Stephen discuss the decision-making flaws during the COVID-19 pandemic, the lack of robust debate, the role of public health experts, and the increasing influence of partisanship. Stephen explores the potential long-term implications for democracy and science, the concept of noble lies, and the necessity of balancing expert advice with broader public interests. Their conversation also touches on the importance of liberal virtues and the need for both improved decision-making structures and individual adherence to professional ethics.*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:When public health crowds out public values09:52: The public health mindset is that you only pay attention to reducing disease, and so public health experts had too much power. Wider decision-making should have been made by people looking at the whole range of public values, not just disease reduction or attempts to reduce disease. So, the many things that came together—but we regard the book as a window onto the state of our democracy, and in a way, our—you know—the dangers of our epistemic tribalism, to put it that way. The degraded state of deliberation in our country.How epistemic bubbles are making us dumber50:57: We are making ourselves stupider by being ensconced in these epistemic bubbles. We are undermining our own capacity for critical thought by not being more open to disagreement.Science can't decide for a democracy alone55:58: We need both more checking of a wide array of elites being involved in thinking, challenging, questioning decisions, but also some way of making sure—possibly through legislative oversight, House of Representatives being involved. The public voices need to be heard as well because they bear the cost of these—need to be heard as well because they bear the cost of these measures. And as we said before, science is not going to make these decisions for us. There are value judgments involved, and it is the people's value judgments that matter to some degree of risk tolerance…[56:35] We need more checking and balancing in these kinds of decisions that affect the public as a whole, and more open debate, discussion, more tolerance of disagreement—including, or maybe even especially, coming from the partisan other, as it were.Science needs scrutiny, not censorship14:17: We need empirical inquiry to test the assumptions behind these particular policies and assumptions—not censorship in advance of evidence that might be unwelcome with respect to, you know, certain kinds of policy claims. So, I think there's a wider politicization of science. I do think we need more viewpoint diversity in the academy, and people say, "Wasn't this the code word for having more conservatives?" And I'll say, yes. I think we're a bit too far out of balance. We should not reflect the American public—I mean, that's not the aim—but I think we do not take seriously enough, reasonable concerns coming from the other side of the political spectrum. So, it's a long-winded answer to your question, but I think the COVID experience is emblematic and indicative of a wider problem and deeper problem.Show Links:Recommended Resources:David HalberstamGraham AllisonNeil FergusonDavid ZweigFrancis CollinsAnthony FauciSandro GaleaStephen HaberJohn IoannidisScott AtlasDeborah BirxAlasdair MacIntyreCharles TaylorThe Federalist PapersJohn LockeAdam SmithConsequentialismBen BernankeThe Great Exception: The New Deal and the Limits of American Politics (Politics and Society in Modern America) by Jefferson CowieInsecure Majorities: Congress and the Perpetual Campaign by Frances E. LeeGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at Princeton UniversityWikipedia PagePrinceton Politics PageSocial Profile on XPhilPeople.org ProfileGuest Work:Amazon Author PageIn Covid's Wake: How Our Politics Failed UsDeliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and DisagreementDiversity and Distrust: Civic Education in a Multicultural DemocracyAmerican Constitutional InterpretationThe New Right v. the Constitution | CATO Institute

Disclaimer: This conversation with Mr. Ajay Bisaria was recorded on August 6, 2025 and reflects the information available to us at that time. Any developments that occurred after the recording date have not been covered by the guest or the host.Episode 120 of The Prakhar Gupta Xperience features Ajay Bisaria.Ajay Bisaria is a former Indian diplomat who served as High Commissioner to Canada (2020–2022) and Pakistan (2017–2020), and as Ambassador to Poland and Lithuania. He was an aide to Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee from 1999 to 2004, contributing to major policy initiatives. Over his 35-year career in the Indian Foreign Service, he specialized in India's relations with Eurasia, including Russia, Ukraine, and Central Asia. Academically, he holds degrees from St. Stephen's College, the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, and Princeton University. Currently, he is a strategic advisor and Distinguished Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation, advising global businesses on geopolitics, governance, and international strategy.This is what we talked about:00:00 - Intro00:53 - Trump calls India a "Dead Economy"09:21 - Are We in a Tariff War?12:11 - India–U.S. Relations History15:14 - Is Pakistan a New Ally?24:25 - Failures of Indian Media28:17 - Impact of 50% Tariff31:12 - Ambassador vs High Commissioner35:26 - Pakistan as a Paradox38:31 - Collapse of Diplomacy Talks42:25 - Why Pakistan is Different47:28 - Pakistan's Denial of Terrorism50:42 - Indus Water Treaty Basics1:04:09 - Trump's Issue with BRICS1:06:22 - China's Global Rise1:10:39 - Could Bangladesh Betray India?1:14:21 - Complexity of Global Diplomacy1:17:12 - India–Russia Friendship1:18:54 - India's Non-Alignment Advantage1:19:18 - Final Question for Prakhar

Join Kyle Chan and Arindam Goswami in this episode of All Things Policy, where we dive deep into the heart of global manufacturing. As the world grapples with shifting supply chains, trade tensions, and the race for technological dominance, understanding China's manufacturing powerhouse has never been more critical. From the persistent challenge of overcapacity to the strategic pivots triggered by the US-China trade war, we try to unpack the complexities behind China's rise - and what lessons India and the rest of the world can draw from this unfolding story. Whether you're a policymaker, industry insider, or curious listener, get ready for a fascinating conversation that goes beyond headlines to reveal the forces shaping the future of manufacturing.Our guest today, Kyle Chan, is a postdoctoral researcher in the Sociology Department at Princeton University and an adjunct researcher at the RAND Corporation, a US think tank. His research focuses on industrial policy, clean technology, and infrastructure in China and India, and his work has been published in peer-reviewed academic journals, including Current Sociology, Asian Survey, and the Chinese Journal of Sociology. He has also testified as an expert before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. He writes a fantastic, popular newsletter called High Capacity focused on current issues in industrial policy, technology, and economic competition, particularly in China. He has insightful views on how China has come to dominate key industries such as electric vehicles, solar energy, high-speed rail, and consumer electronics through a sophisticated and multifaceted industrial policy. His insights have been featured in various major international media outlets, including The Wall Street Journal, The Financial Times, The Washington Post, The New Yorker, India's Economic Times, and others.All Things Policy is a daily podcast on public policy brought to you by the Takshashila Institution, Bengaluru.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Find out more on our research and other work here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://takshashila.org.in/research-areas⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Check out our public policy courses here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://school.takshashila.org.in⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Kicking off our annual What the Hell's summer book series, Zach Cooper discusses his new book, Tides of Fortune: The Rise and Decline of Great Militaries (Yale University Press, 2025). How will the United States and China evolve militarily in the years ahead? Many experts believe the answer to this question is largely unknowable. But in his book, Zack Cooper argues that the American and Chinese militaries are following a well-trodden path. For centuries, the world's most powerful militaries have adhered to a remarkably consistent pattern of behavior, determined largely by their leaders' perceptions of relative power shifts. WTH is China on this path? And importantly, WTH is the US?Zack Cooper is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, where he studies US strategy in Asia, including alliance dynamics and US-China competition. He also teaches at Princeton University and serves as chair of the board of the Open Technology Fund. Before joining AEI, Dr. Cooper was the senior fellow for Asian security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Find Tides of Fortune: The Rise and Fall of Great Militaries here.Find the transcript here.

Aanya discusses her project, "Sharing the Joys of Cultural Diversity," which focused on fostering understanding and appreciation of cultural differences among children in her community. Aanya highlights two key components of her project: facilitating discussions about cultural identity in local schools and creating a children's book that details her own experiences as an immigrant from India. She reflects on her personal struggles with cultural acceptance and the importance of embracing one's identity. Join us as Aanya shares her insights and the impact of her work in promoting cultural diversity. More about Annya: Aanya is a sophomore at Princeton University studying Molecular Biology on the pre medicine track. For her Gold Award, Aanya created a cultural education and appreciation initiative in her community to encourage children to develop their global literacy and spark their love for diversity. Aanya published a children's book, Samosas with Saanvi, to share how she grew to love her cultural identity, capture the joys of cultural diversity, and portray the emotional journey behind acceptance. The mission of her project was to bridge the cultural literacy gap she noticed in her community, allow children to discover their own cultural identities, and foster meaningful community connections. At Princeton, Aanya is involved in The Daily Princetonian Podcast and STEM Research Journalism teams, the Undergraduate Student Government Mental Health and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committees, and the Council on Science & Technology Student Advisory Board. She is very interested in scientific and medical research, working with the IMDEA Materials Institute to learn more about biomaterials and regenerative medicine, as well as Fundação Oswaldo Cruz in virology and immunology. She loves to continue sharing her book and cultural story with family, friends, and community members. In her freetime, you may find her reading the newest fantasy or mystery novel, singing karaoke with her little sister, or playing with her shih tzu poodle Daisy. https://www.amazon.com/Samosas-Saanvi-Aanya-Kasera/dp/B0CCCKNZW3

The Trump administration has formally declared that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are not dangerous pollutants. If the president gets his way, then the Environmental Protection Agency may soon surrender any ability to regulate heat-trapping pollution from cars and trucks, power plants, and factories — in ways that a future Democratic president potentially could not reverse.On this week's episode of Shift Key, we discuss whether Trump's EPA gambit will work, the arguments that the administration is using, and what it could mean for the future of U.S. climate and energy policy. We're joined by Jody Freeman, the Archibald Cox Professor of Law at Harvard and the director of Harvard's environmental and energy law program. She was an architect of the Obama administration's landmark deal with automakers to accept carbon dioxide regulations.Shift Key is hosted by Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University, and Robinson Meyer, Heatmap's executive editor.Mentioned:The EPA Says Carbon Pollution Isn't Dangerous. What Comes Next?The EPA on its reconsideration of the endangerment findingJody's story on the change: Trump's EPA proposes to end the U.S. fight against climate changeJesse's upshift (and accompanying video); Rob's sort of upshift.--This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by …Accelerate your clean energy career with Yale's online certificate programs. Gain real-world skills, build strong networks, and keep working while you learn. Explore the year-long Financing and Deploying Clean Energy program or the 5-month Clean and Equitable Energy Development program. Learn more here.Join clean energy leaders at RE+ 25, September 8–11 in Las Vegas. Explore opportunities to meet rising energy demand with the latest in solar, storage, EVs, and more at North America's largest energy event. Save 20% with code HEATMAP20 at re-plus.com.Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this special crossover episode of CleanLaw and Shift Key, Heatmap's weekly podcast on decarbonization and the shift away from fossil fuels, EELP's Founding Director Professor Jody Freeman speaks with Shift Key hosts Robinson Meyer, the Founding Executive Editor of Heatmap News, and Jesse Jenkins, Professor of Energy Systems Engineering at Princeton University.  They discuss the Trump administration's proposed finding that that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are not dangerous pollutants and the potential for EPA to soon surrender its ability to regulate heat-trapping pollution from cars and trucks, power plants, and factories. They also talk about whether Trump gambit will work, the arguments that the administration is using, and what it could mean for the future of U.S. climate and energy policy. Transcript: https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/CleanLaw_EP107-Transcript.pdf

While media pundits continually speculate over the future leanings of the so-called “Latino vote,” Benjamin Francis-Fallon historicizes how Latinos were imagined into a national electoral constituency in his new book The Rise of the Latino Vote: A History (Harvard University Press, 2019). Francis-Fallon, Assistant Professor of History at Western Carolina University, examines the rhetorical construction of a national voting bloc by politicians, parties, and a national network of Latino political elites. This interview explores some of the major themes in the book, including the essential role of Latino congressmen, the ideological struggles between Latino elected officials and radical activists, and the ongoing appeals to a panethnic Latino voting bloc from presidential campaigns. Of course Democratic Party politics is only half of the story, with the efforts of the Republican Party featuring prominently in the text as well. By discussing the parallel Latino engagement strategies of both parties, Francis-Fallon underscores the fact that the “rise of the Latino vote was a multiparty phenomenon.” Building upon existing studies that detail how panethnic Latinidad was constructed in the twentieth-century United States, Francis-Fallon adds national and presidential politics to the list of forces that continue to define what it means to be Latino. Jaime Sánchez, Jr. is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of History at Princeton University and a scholar of U.S. politics and Latino studies. He is currently writing an institutional history of the Democratic National Committee and partisan coalition politics in the twentieth century. You can follow him on Twitter @Jaime_SanchezJr. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

While media pundits continually speculate over the future leanings of the so-called “Latino vote,” Benjamin Francis-Fallon historicizes how Latinos were imagined into a national electoral constituency in his new book The Rise of the Latino Vote: A History (Harvard University Press, 2019). Francis-Fallon, Assistant Professor of History at Western Carolina University, examines the rhetorical construction of a national voting bloc by politicians, parties, and a national network of Latino political elites. This interview explores some of the major themes in the book, including the essential role of Latino congressmen, the ideological struggles between Latino elected officials and radical activists, and the ongoing appeals to a panethnic Latino voting bloc from presidential campaigns. Of course Democratic Party politics is only half of the story, with the efforts of the Republican Party featuring prominently in the text as well. By discussing the parallel Latino engagement strategies of both parties, Francis-Fallon underscores the fact that the “rise of the Latino vote was a multiparty phenomenon.” Building upon existing studies that detail how panethnic Latinidad was constructed in the twentieth-century United States, Francis-Fallon adds national and presidential politics to the list of forces that continue to define what it means to be Latino. Jaime Sánchez, Jr. is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of History at Princeton University and a scholar of U.S. politics and Latino studies. He is currently writing an institutional history of the Democratic National Committee and partisan coalition politics in the twentieth century. You can follow him on Twitter @Jaime_SanchezJr. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

While media pundits continually speculate over the future leanings of the so-called “Latino vote,” Benjamin Francis-Fallon historicizes how Latinos were imagined into a national electoral constituency in his new book The Rise of the Latino Vote: A History (Harvard University Press, 2019). Francis-Fallon, Assistant Professor of History at Western Carolina University, examines the rhetorical construction of a national voting bloc by politicians, parties, and a national network of Latino political elites. This interview explores some of the major themes in the book, including the essential role of Latino congressmen, the ideological struggles between Latino elected officials and radical activists, and the ongoing appeals to a panethnic Latino voting bloc from presidential campaigns. Of course Democratic Party politics is only half of the story, with the efforts of the Republican Party featuring prominently in the text as well. By discussing the parallel Latino engagement strategies of both parties, Francis-Fallon underscores the fact that the “rise of the Latino vote was a multiparty phenomenon.” Building upon existing studies that detail how panethnic Latinidad was constructed in the twentieth-century United States, Francis-Fallon adds national and presidential politics to the list of forces that continue to define what it means to be Latino. Jaime Sánchez, Jr. is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of History at Princeton University and a scholar of U.S. politics and Latino studies. He is currently writing an institutional history of the Democratic National Committee and partisan coalition politics in the twentieth century. You can follow him on Twitter @Jaime_SanchezJr. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

This month at Mosaic, we hosted a very important set of conversations, spurred on by a very important essay: “The Enchantment of the Arab Mind,” by the Egyptian-American writer Hussein Aboubakr Mansour. Mansour traces the roots of jihadism to European, and especially German, philosophy, transmitted through 20th-century Arab radicalism. Earlier this week, we broadcast a conversation about the essay with Hussein and two eminent professors: Bernard Haykel from Princeton University and Ze'ev Maghen from Bar-Ilan University. The discussion was at times contentious in the best, and most illuminating, of ways. For anyone interested in intellectual history and the history of the Middle East, this is one of the most fascinating conversations we've ever convened.   Musical selections in this podcast are drawn from the Quintet for Clarinet and Strings, op. 31a, composed by Paul Ben-Haim and performed by the ARC Ensemble.  

On May 15, international legal experts Lara Elborno, Richard Falk, and Penny Green joined me to discuss the work of the Gaza Tribunal, a group devoted to creating an archive of facts and a set of documents and arguments to help international civil society fight against the genocide in Gaza and the Zionist regime that, along with the United States, has perpetrated this atrocity.  Today they all return to update us. They present a grim picture of what they call the final phase of genocide and note both the overwhelming global support for Palestine and the concurrent repression against advocacy and protest. This is a critical episode to listen to and share.Lara Elborno is a Palestinian-American lawyer specialized in international disputes. She has worked for over 10 years as counsel acting for individuals, private entities, and States in international commercial and investment arbitrations. She dedicates a large part of her legal practice to pro-bono work including the representation of asylum seekers in France and advising clients on matters related to IHRL and the business and human rights framework.  She previously taught US and UK constitutional law at the Université de Paris II - Panthéon Assas. She currently serves as a board member of ARDD-Europe and sits on the Steering Committee of the Gaza Tribunal. She has moreover appeared as a commentator on Al Jazeera, TRTWorld, DoubleDown News, and George Galloway's MOAT speaking about the Palestinian liberation struggle, offering analysis and critiques of international law."Richard Falk is Albert G. Milbank Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University (1961-2001) and Chair of Global Law, Faculty of Law, Queen Mary University London. Since 2002 has been a Research Fellow at the Orfalea Center of Global and International Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Between 2008 and 2014 he served as UN Special Rapporteur on Israeli Violations of Human Rights in Occupied Palestine.He is Senior Vice President of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, having served for seven years as Chair of its Board. He is Chair of the Board of Trustees of Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor. He is co-director of the Centre of Climate Crime, QMUL.Falk has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize several times since 2008.His recent books include (Re)Imagining Humane Global Governance (2014), Power Shift: The New Global Order (2016), Palestine Horizon: Toward a Just Peace (2017), Revisiting the Vietnam War (ed. Stefan Andersson, 2017), On Nuclear Weapons: Denuclearization, Demilitarization and Disarmament (ed. Stefan Andersson & Curt Dahlgren, 2019.Penny Green is Professor of Law and Globalisation at QMUL and Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences. She has published extensively on state crime theory, resistance to state violence and the Rohingya genocide, (including with Tony Ward, State Crime: Governments, Violence and Corruption, 2004 and State Crime and Civil Activism 2019). She has a long track record of researching in hostile environments and has conducted fieldwork in the UK, Turkey, Kurdistan, the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Israel, Tunisia, Myanmar and Bangladesh. In 2015 she and her colleagues published ‘Countdown to Annihilation: Genocide in Myanmar' and in March 2018 ‘The Genocide is Over: the genocide continues'. Professor Green is Founder and co-Director of the award winning International State Crime Initiative (ISCI); co-editor in Chief of the international journal, State Crime; Executive member of the Gaza Tribunal and Palestine Book Awards judge. Her new book with Thomas MacManus Chronicle of a Genocide Foretold: Myanmar and the Rohingya will be published by Rutgers university Press in 2025

Today we're continuing our series on Harry Frankfurt's seminal work, On Bullshit. I have the privilege to speak with Arvind Narayanan co-author of the book AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What it Can't, and How to Tell the Difference (Princeton University Press, 2024). Arvind is the perfect guest to explore the subject of bullshit in AI as AI Snake Oil takes on the ridiculous hype ascribed to the promise of AI. AI chatbots often hallucinate and many of the promoters of AI engage in the art of bullshit when selling people on wild and crazy AI applications. Arvind Narayanan is professor of computer science at Princeton University and director of its Center for Information Technology Policy. Caleb Zakarin is editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Can we trust Roman statues to tell us about real people? What were the differences between gods and humans in art? How much of a say did the emperor have over how Roman women dressed and lived their lives? Dr. Caroline Vout answers these questions and many more in the penultimate episode of Season 2, as we learn how the Romans put bodies on display.Access full transcript and episode show notesWomen Who Went Before is written, produced, and edited by Rebekah Haigh and Emily Chesley.Music is composed and produced by Moses Sun.Sponsored by the Center for Culture, Society, and Religion, the Program in Judaic Studies, the Stanley J. Seeger Center for Hellenic Studies, and the Committtee for the Study of Late Antiquity at Princeton University.Views expressed on the podcast are solely those of the individuals, and do not represent Princeton University.

Classicism and Other Phobias (Princeton University Press, 2025) shows how the concept of “classicism” lacks the capacity to affirm the aesthetic value of Black life and asks whether a different kind of classicism—one of insurgence, fugitivity, and emancipation—is possible. Engaging with the work of Sylvia Wynter and other trailblazers in Black studies while drawing on his own experiences as a Black classicist, Dan-el Padilla Peralta situates the history of the classics in the racial and settler-colonialist settings of early modern and modern Europe and North America. He argues that immortalizing ancient Greek and Roman authors as “the classical” comes at the cost of devaluing Black forms of expression. Is a newfound emphasis on Black classicism the most effective counter to this phobia? In search of answers, Padilla Peralta ranges from the poetry of Juan de Castellanos to the writings of W.E.B. Du Bois and paintings by contemporary artists Kehinde Wiley and Harmonia Rosales. Based on the prestigious W.E.B. Du Bois Lectures delivered at Harvard University, Classicism and Other Phobias draws necessary attention to the inability of the classics as a field of study to fully cope with Blackness and Black people. Dan-el Padilla Peralta is professor of classics at Princeton University. Caleb Zakarin is editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

Classicism and Other Phobias (Princeton University Press, 2025) shows how the concept of “classicism” lacks the capacity to affirm the aesthetic value of Black life and asks whether a different kind of classicism—one of insurgence, fugitivity, and emancipation—is possible. Engaging with the work of Sylvia Wynter and other trailblazers in Black studies while drawing on his own experiences as a Black classicist, Dan-el Padilla Peralta situates the history of the classics in the racial and settler-colonialist settings of early modern and modern Europe and North America. He argues that immortalizing ancient Greek and Roman authors as “the classical” comes at the cost of devaluing Black forms of expression. Is a newfound emphasis on Black classicism the most effective counter to this phobia? In search of answers, Padilla Peralta ranges from the poetry of Juan de Castellanos to the writings of W.E.B. Du Bois and paintings by contemporary artists Kehinde Wiley and Harmonia Rosales. Based on the prestigious W.E.B. Du Bois Lectures delivered at Harvard University, Classicism and Other Phobias draws necessary attention to the inability of the classics as a field of study to fully cope with Blackness and Black people. Dan-el Padilla Peralta is professor of classics at Princeton University. Caleb Zakarin is editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/african-american-studies

In the next few years, the United States is going to see the fastest growth in electricity demand since the 1970s. And that's only the beginning of the challenges that our power grid will face. When you step back, virtually every trend facing the power system — such as the coming surge in liquified natural gas exports or President Trump's repeal of wind and solar tax credits — threatens to constrain the supply of new electricity. On this week's episode of Shift Key, Rob and Jesse talk about why they're increasingly worried about a surge in electricity prices. What's setting us up for an electricity shortfall? What does the recent auction in the country's largest electricity market tell us about what's coming? And what would a power shock mean for utility customers, the economy, and decarbonization? Shift Key is hosted by Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University, and Robinson Meyer, Heatmap's executive editor. Mentioned: Jesse on The Ezra Klein ShowFrom Rob: The Electricity Affordability Crisis Is ComingU.S. power use to reach record highs in 2025 and 2026, per EIAWhy the EIA expects natural gas prices to riseThe Messy Truth of America's Natural Gas ExportsGovernor Josh Schapiro's legal action to constrain power pricesJesse's upshift; Rob's downshift.--This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by …Accelerate your clean energy career with Yale's online certificate programs. Gain real-world skills, build strong networks, and keep working while you learn. Explore the year-long Financing and Deploying Clean Energy program or the 5-month Clean and Equitable Energy Development program. Learn more here.Join clean energy leaders at RE+ 25, September 8–11 in Las Vegas. Explore opportunities to meet rising energy demand with the latest in solar, storage, EVs, and more at North America's largest energy event. Save 20% with code HEATMAP20 at re-plus.com.Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Classicism and Other Phobias (Princeton University Press, 2025) shows how the concept of “classicism” lacks the capacity to affirm the aesthetic value of Black life and asks whether a different kind of classicism—one of insurgence, fugitivity, and emancipation—is possible. Engaging with the work of Sylvia Wynter and other trailblazers in Black studies while drawing on his own experiences as a Black classicist, Dan-el Padilla Peralta situates the history of the classics in the racial and settler-colonialist settings of early modern and modern Europe and North America. He argues that immortalizing ancient Greek and Roman authors as “the classical” comes at the cost of devaluing Black forms of expression. Is a newfound emphasis on Black classicism the most effective counter to this phobia? In search of answers, Padilla Peralta ranges from the poetry of Juan de Castellanos to the writings of W.E.B. Du Bois and paintings by contemporary artists Kehinde Wiley and Harmonia Rosales. Based on the prestigious W.E.B. Du Bois Lectures delivered at Harvard University, Classicism and Other Phobias draws necessary attention to the inability of the classics as a field of study to fully cope with Blackness and Black people. Dan-el Padilla Peralta is professor of classics at Princeton University. Caleb Zakarin is editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Classicism and Other Phobias (Princeton University Press, 2025) shows how the concept of “classicism” lacks the capacity to affirm the aesthetic value of Black life and asks whether a different kind of classicism—one of insurgence, fugitivity, and emancipation—is possible. Engaging with the work of Sylvia Wynter and other trailblazers in Black studies while drawing on his own experiences as a Black classicist, Dan-el Padilla Peralta situates the history of the classics in the racial and settler-colonialist settings of early modern and modern Europe and North America. He argues that immortalizing ancient Greek and Roman authors as “the classical” comes at the cost of devaluing Black forms of expression. Is a newfound emphasis on Black classicism the most effective counter to this phobia? In search of answers, Padilla Peralta ranges from the poetry of Juan de Castellanos to the writings of W.E.B. Du Bois and paintings by contemporary artists Kehinde Wiley and Harmonia Rosales. Based on the prestigious W.E.B. Du Bois Lectures delivered at Harvard University, Classicism and Other Phobias draws necessary attention to the inability of the classics as a field of study to fully cope with Blackness and Black people. Dan-el Padilla Peralta is professor of classics at Princeton University. Caleb Zakarin is editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/latin-american-studies

Classicism and Other Phobias (Princeton University Press, 2025) shows how the concept of “classicism” lacks the capacity to affirm the aesthetic value of Black life and asks whether a different kind of classicism—one of insurgence, fugitivity, and emancipation—is possible. Engaging with the work of Sylvia Wynter and other trailblazers in Black studies while drawing on his own experiences as a Black classicist, Dan-el Padilla Peralta situates the history of the classics in the racial and settler-colonialist settings of early modern and modern Europe and North America. He argues that immortalizing ancient Greek and Roman authors as “the classical” comes at the cost of devaluing Black forms of expression. Is a newfound emphasis on Black classicism the most effective counter to this phobia? In search of answers, Padilla Peralta ranges from the poetry of Juan de Castellanos to the writings of W.E.B. Du Bois and paintings by contemporary artists Kehinde Wiley and Harmonia Rosales. Based on the prestigious W.E.B. Du Bois Lectures delivered at Harvard University, Classicism and Other Phobias draws necessary attention to the inability of the classics as a field of study to fully cope with Blackness and Black people. Dan-el Padilla Peralta is professor of classics at Princeton University. Caleb Zakarin is editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/caribbean-studies

After 20 years in the corporate world (with IBM, Pepsi and Goldman Sachs), Roland Warren spent 11 years as president of the National Fatherhood Initiative before joining Care Net in 2012 as president and CEO. A graduate of Princeton University and the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, Roland is an inspirational servant leader with a heart for Christ and a mind for business. His new book is called The Alternative to Abortion: Why We Must Be Pro Abundant Life.    For more Axis resources, go to axis.org.

Progressive professor Cornel West and conservative professor Robert George talk about their decades-long friendship and teaching together at Princeton University. They also discuss their new book, "Truth Matters," a dialogue between the two on such topics as American history, great books, faith, and free speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Divya speaks with Saad Gulzar, Associate Professor of Political Science and Global Affairs at the University of Notre Dame. At the time of recording of this episode, he was at Princeton University and has since moved to Notre Dame. Gulzar's research focuses on the politics of development in South Asia and centers on a critical question: How can governments deliver better outcomes for their citizens? His work combines randomized control trials, administrative data, and in-depth qualitative insights to examine how political representation and bureaucracies can become more responsive. The conversation explores Gulzar's research on the relationship between politicians and bureaucrats, and the conditions under which their collaboration leads to more effective governance. Gulzar's findings highlight how the everyday decisions and motivations of these key actors shape the design and delivery of public policy. By uncovering these dynamics, his work offers valuable insights into how governments can better align expectations and improve the delivery of services in people's daily lives. References: Gulzar, S., Pathak, D., Thompson, S., & Toth, A. (2025). Can Party Elites Shape the Rank and File? Evidence from a Recruitment Campaign in India. American Political Science Review, 119(2), 812-831. Gulzar, S., & Khan, M. Y. (2025). Good politicians: Experimental evidence on motivations for political candidacy and government performance. Review of Economic Studies, 92(1), 339-364. Gulzar, S. (2021). Who enters politics and why?. Annual Review of Political Science, 24(1), 253-275. Gulzar, S., & Pasquale, B. J. (2017). Politicians, bureaucrats, and development: Evidence from India. American Political Science Review, 111(1), 162-183.    

Progressive professor Cornel West and conservative professor Robert George talk about their decades-long friendship and teaching together at Princeton University. They also discuss their new book, "Truth Matters," a dialogue between the two on such topics as American history, great books, faith, and free speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Biden passed the most ambitious climate legislation in American history. Trump just shredded it. What does that mean for the future of renewable energy in America? Where does the climate movement go from here? And is it too late for us to avert climate catastrophe? To answer these questions, I invited onto the show two climate experts: Jesse Jenkins, who is a leading climate modeler and a professor at Princeton University, where he runs the Princeton ZERO Lab, and Jane Flegal, who is the executive director of the Blue Horizons Foundation and served on the Biden administration's climate policy team.We discuss how far Trump's policies have set us back, the lessons the climate movement should learn from this loss and what the next wave of climate politics may look like. Mentioned:“Impacts of the One Big Beautiful Bill On The US Energy Transition – Summary Report” by REPEAT Project“There's a Race to Power the Future. China Is Pulling Away.” by David Gelles, Somini Sengupta, Keith Bradsher and Brad PlumerJesse's Book Recommendations:Why Nothing Works by Marc J. DunkelmanEnergy by Richard RhodesMars Trilogy Series by Kim Stanley RobinsonJane's Book Recommendations:Mating by Norman RushFrontiers of Illusion by Daniel SarewitzAn Engine, Not a Camera by Donald MacKenzieThoughts? Guest suggestions? Email us at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com.You can find the transcript and more episodes of “The Ezra Klein Show” at nytimes.com/ezra-klein-podcast. Book recommendations from all our guests are listed at https://www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-klein-show-book-recs.htmlThis episode of “The Ezra Klein Show” was produced by Rollin Hu and Jack McCordick. Fact-checking by Michelle Harris. Our senior engineer is Jeff Geld, with additional mixing by Aman Sahota. Our executive producer is Claire Gordon. The show's production team also includes Marie Cascione, Annie Galvin, Elias Isquith, Marina King, Jan Kobal and Kristin Lin. Original music by Pat McCusker. Audience strategy by Kristina Samulewski and Shannon Busta. The director of New York Times Opinion Audio is Annie-Rose Strasser. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

When we think of the capacities that distinguish humans from other species, we generally turn to intelligence and its byproducts, including our technological prowess. But our intelligence is highly connected to our ability to use language, which is in turn closely related to our capacities as social creatures. Philosopher Philip Pettit would encourage us to think of those social capacities, as enabled by language, as the primary locus of what makes humans different, as discussed in his new book When Minds Converse: A Social Genealogy of the Human Soul. And that linguistic aptitude helps us understand the nature of agency, responsibility, and freedom.Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2025/07/21/322-philip-pettit-on-language-agency-politics-and-freedom/Support Mindscape on Patreon.Philip Pettit received his Ph.D. in philosophy from University College Belfast. He is currently Laurance S. Rockefeller University Professor of Human Values at Princeton University and Distinguished University Professor of Philosophy at Australian National University. He is a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences in Australia, the Australian Academy of the Humanities, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the Guggenheim Foundation, among other honors.Princeton web pageGoogle Scholar publicationsWikipediaAmazon author pageSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

We all know that poverty is an existing problem in the United States, but what does that really mean in a country with so much wealth? Sharon is joined by Matthew Desmond, Professor of Sociology at Princeton University and the founding director of the Eviction Lab. Together, they discuss his best-selling book, Poverty, By America, and take a hard look at poverty in one of the richest countries in the world, while reimagining how we perceive poverty. Credits: Host and Executive Producer: Sharon McMahon Supervising Producer: Melanie Buck Parks Audio Producer: Craig Thompson To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices