Podcast appearances and mentions of stephanie slade

On the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, it's worth asking: What was the American Revolution actually about? We all remember the broad strokes we learned in school: Independence from the British crown. Taxes on tea. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But on a deeper level, the American Revolution was—and is—a revolution in political theory, reimagining what a legitimate government is and what its relationship to its citizens should be. Washington's troops won the ground war 245 years ago at Yorktown, but the ideological battle continues against forces on both the left and the right who are pursuing a ruthless assault on America's core values. The American Revolution isn't over. Inscribed inside the dome of the Jefferson Memorial are the words: "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." Thomas Jefferson wrote that in an 1800 letter, but that feeling of hostility toward the tyranny of a distant monarch is what drove him and his fellow revolutionaries in 1776. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch summarized the Declaration's core ideas in an interview with Reason: "The Declaration of Independence had three great ideas in it. That all of us are equal. That each of us has inalienable rights given to us by God, not government. And that we have the right to rule ourselves." That's why Jefferson declared that a legitimate government requires the "consent of the governed." Thomas Paine put it more scathingly in his 1776 pamphlet Common Sense, writing that "government by kings was first introduced into the world by the Heathens." Monarchy was the Devil's most effective and enduring form of "idolatry." We don't fret over tyrannical kings in today's America. Only ceremonial vestiges of hereditary monarchy remain in the modern world. The Revolution achieved a complete victory in that sense. Yet a counterrevolution is underway, one that views the American Revolution and the republic it birthed as a failed liberal regime that has outlived its usefulness. And these counterrevolutionaries sit remarkably close to the levers of power. Self-Rule Under Threat Three years before he became vice president, J.D. Vance told podcaster Jack Murphy that America had reached a point of no return. "We are in the late republican period," he said. "If we're going to push back against it we have to get pretty wild and pretty far out there and go in directions that a lot of conservatives right now are uncomfortable with. Indeed, among some of my circle the phrase 'extra-constitutional' has come up quite a bit." Vance regularly cites and associates with a group of so-called "postliberals." He appeared on a panel with one of this movement's leading intellectuals, Patrick Deneen, a Notre Dame political science professor and the author of Regime Change: Toward a Postliberal Future, in 2023. Deneen believes there is an unbridgeable divide between the "elite" and "ordinary" people. "What is needed," he writes in the book, "in short, is regime change—the peaceful but vigorous overthrow of a corrupt and corrupting liberal ruling class," which will be replaced by a more virtuous one. He envisions the kind of aristocratic government favored by the ancients like Plato and Aristotle, endorsing "aristopopulism," where an elite class works to further the interests of the masses. "The replacement of the current elites in our society ought to be more closely aligned to the interests of ordinary people," Deneen said at the panel. He invokes a "premodern conception of liberty—expressed in the pages of Plato, Aristotle, the Bible," where institutions like the family, the church, and the state worked together to impose "guardrails" protecting individuals from becoming "slaves" to their own desires. My colleague Stephanie Slade writes about the postliberal right for Reason magazine. "He says people like [himself] should just be in charge of our government. That's what he means by regime change," Slade says. "[That] we should replace the current elites." She notes that postliberals are willing to frame the entire American Founding as a mistake: "They might say, yeah, America did have a liberal founding and that's why it was a mistake. Actually, this whole experiment was a mistake, and it maybe took a couple hundred years for that mistake to play out….We now can see that it doesn't lead to good conservative outcomes." In his book Common Good Constitutionalism, Adrian Vermeule, a postliberal Harvard Law professor and appointee to President Donald Trump's Council of the Administrative Conference of the United States, wrote that "the central aim of the constitutional order is to promote good rule, not to 'protect liberty' as an end in itself." That's a rejection of the spirit of 1776. Paine saw the existence of government as a necessary evil because of "the inability of moral virtue to govern the world." A minimal state, in his view, should be restricted to supplying "freedom and security." As Gorsuch put it in the same Reason interview: "If you think of the Declaration as kind of our mission statement, our ideals, and the Constitution is the how-to manual—well, the Constitution is all about dividing power. Madison realized men are not angels and that their aspirations for power need to be checked and checked and checked again." The "regime change" Deneen and Vermeule call for isn't explicitly violent. Deneen describes "Machiavellian means to achieve Aristotelian ends." The strategy manifests as a steady expansion of presidential authority, as we've seen under Donald Trump's second term: the 143 executive orders he signed in just his first 100 days, more than any other president in history; his decision to send troops to American cities without permission from local authorities; his declaring of 21 national emergencies while in office; and his decision to send illegal immigrants to overseas prisons in defiance of the judicial branch. Incidentally, one of the grievances listed in the Declaration of Independence was King George III's penchant for shipping the accused "beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offenses." Before he became vice president, Vance encouraged Trump to emulate Andrew Jackson and dare the Supreme Court to try enforcing its rulings against him. "If I was giving him one piece of advice," Vance said, "fire every single mid-level bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, replace them with our people, and when the courts—because you will get taken to court—and when the courts stop you, stand before the country like Andrew Jackson did and say, 'The chief justice has made his ruling, now let him enforce it.'" "That's a really dangerous idea to be even casually trotting out there, let alone for somebody who is now the sitting vice president to be on the record," Slade says. "He said it a number of years ago when he was just a candidate for office, but I've never seen anything from him since he's been in office that makes me think that he doesn't ultimately believe in that sort of approach to politics." Some postliberals call for measures far more dramatic than the steady erosion of constitutional restraints currently underway. Michael Anton, who worked in Trump's State Department over two terms, wrote in his book The Stakes about the prospect of a "Red Caesar"—a right-wing dictator who would rise from the ashes of the fallen republic. "Caesar's word replaces constitutionalism and even, in the final analysis, law," he wrote. In a podcast conversation with pro-monarchist blogger Curtis Yarvin, Anton discussed what that might look like. "Caesarism is a form of monarchy, but that follows a nonfunctioning republic, a republic that doesn't work anymore," Anton said. Yarvin proposed that the path to power would begin with declaring a state of emergency in an inaugural address, "taking direct control over all law enforcement authorities….Basically like Caesar, you're using all of the force available to you."  "There is just clearly much more of a sense that government power is meant to be used to advance our side in the face of our enemies," Slade says. "And the enemies are the left, the political left, and anyone on the right who isn't going to line up with [them]. [They believe] political power should be used to reward our friends and punish our enemies, and that to me is a clear violation of one of the core principles of rule of law, which is equal treatment for everyone under law." In the COVID era, President Joe Biden imposed national mandates by executive fiat, and his administration tried to suppress dissent by pressuring tech companies to censor critics. The Democratic Party has also flirted with the idea of packing the Supreme Court to get its way, which is not a new impulse for the party. When President Franklin Delano Roosevelt tried to pack the Court in 1937, it cost him the support of progressives who had previously backed the New Deal. FDR is revered by progressives and cited by Yarvin as a prototype for an American Caesar. "Was FDR a dictator? What does it mean to be a dictator? What does this pejorative word mean?" Yarvin asks. "A dictator is somebody who rules alone. And that, I think, is a beautiful thing." The Revolution was, first and foremost, about self-rule: We would no longer abide by a diktat from an overseas king. From the very beginning of the republic, power-seeking men have tried to undermine that vision. In its earliest days, there was a plot to install a Prussian prince as king of a new American monarchy. Jefferson accused John Adams and Alexander Hamilton of being monarchists, recounting in horror a dinner conversation in which Hamilton told him "the greatest man…that ever lived was Julius Caesar." But monarchy is seductive because strongmen promise order in chaotic times. In the wake of Shays' Rebellion, a post-Revolution farmer's uprising, Jefferson worried the Constitution's drafters were overreacting by creating a powerful presidency that would devolve into a monarchy. "What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?" he wrote. And then, famously: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." Hopefully, patriots won't be shedding blood anytime soon. But Jefferson's point stands: Preserving the promises of the Revolution will always be an ongoing battle. Self-rule was one of those promises. Another was self-ownership, which includes the right to do what you want with your own property. The Rise of 'Right-Wing Progressivism' The Declaration accused the king of "cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world." The American colonies experienced unprecedented economic growth, a topic of keen interest to the laissez faire economist Adam Smith, whose book The Wealth of Nations also turns 250 this year. Smith was fascinated by the American colonies, observing that their "progress has been more rapid than that of the English in North America. Plenty of good land, and liberty to manage their own affairs their own way, seem to be the two great causes of the prosperity." Other imperial powers, such as the Spanish and Portuguese, mandated that their colonists trade only through state-created monopolies. Smith pointed out that because American colonists could export lumber to the wider European market, they were incentivized to clear and improve land. Low taxes enabled them to reinvest their profits. Smith criticized England's Navigation Acts for prohibiting colonists from buying from other countries and for discouraging manufacturing to protect domestic competitors. Although England's "mercantile spirit" hampered the economy, Smith believed that in virtually every other respect the liberty of the English colonists "to manage their own affairs their own way is complete," concluding that both England and the colonies would be better off with an independent America that traded freely with England. Like the American revolutionaries, Smith described economic freedom as not just smart policy, but as a natural right. "To prohibit a great people…from making all that they can of every part of their own produce," he wrote, "is a manifest violation of the most sacred rights of mankind." That revolutionary understanding is still under attack today from both the left and the right. Socialists like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani talk about individual profits as if they are the property of the collective. And Trump has the same mercantilist instincts toward trade that Smith argued against 250 years ago. "I love tariffs. Most beautiful word," Trump said in September 2025. "I said my favorite word in the English dictionary is the word tariff."  The postliberal right argues that laissez faire economics has undermined the working class. "Conservatives have outsourced our economic and domestic policy thinking to libertarians," Vance said at a 2019 National Conservatism Conference. "Do we serve pure unfettered commercial freedom, do we serve commerce at the expense of the public good, or do we serve something higher? And are we willing to use political power to actually accomplish those things?" "It is really important to recognize that what the postliberal right is pushing in terms of economics is progressivism," Slade says. "It's not conservatism." Tucker Carlson made the point in 2019 when he praised Elizabeth Warren's "economic patriotism" platform, noting it "sounds like Donald Trump at his best." What the so-called "economic patriots" of the left and right are converging on is a rejection of the spirit of 1776 and an embrace of monarchy. In the 18th century, many colonists could trade only through state-licensed monopolies. Warren has proposed remarrying corporations and the state through "stakeholder capitalism," in which political appointees sit on corporate boards to steer them in the right direction. Trump took a major step toward the corporatist approach in 2025 when directing the federal government to take a 10 percent stake in Intel. Before him, President Barack Obama took stakes in GM and Chrysler as part of a bailout package. "I don't think it's really a sustainable political equilibrium to have two parties that are both economically leftist," Slade says. "The American people are not on board with that. That is the horseshoe in action. And it's part of why I think there is an opportunity for old-school Reagan-style free-market conservatism to make a comeback." The slow abandonment of the revolutionary ideas of self-rule and private property that American patriots fought for in the late 18th century is downstream of a third, fundamental aspect of the American Revolution that is also under attack: freedom of conscience. Remarrying Church and State The postliberal right wants to tear down the wall between church and state. "They want to integrate church and state instead of separating them," Slade says. In some cases, it's Catholic integralists like Harvard's Vermeule, who has described a strategy of turning the government Catholic by "strategically locat[ing]" integralists "within liberal institutions…to undo the liberalism of the state from within." Deneen has suggested passing "blue laws" that would ban pornography, online gambling, and operating businesses on Sundays. A Protestant variety of Christian nationalism is embodied by pastor Doug Wilson—a spiritual mentor to Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, who invited Wilson to lead a prayer at the Pentagon. In a recent interview, Wilson said the "governing authorities should recognize formally that Jesus rose from the dead" and that "the basis of law would have to be Christian, and I would want it to be Protestant." Most of the revolutionaries were Christian Protestants, but they insisted on separating church and state to avoid the horrific religious wars that had ravaged Europe. "Torrents of blood have been spilt in the old world" to end religious discord by establishing state churches, wrote James Madison in opposition to taxes that would have funded an official church of Virginia. An even deeper problem for these devout believers in divine providence was that marrying religion to the state removed the very freedom to choose faith that God desires. In his opposition to the Virginia law, Jefferson wrote that "Almighty God hath created the mind free" and that "all attempts" to force religious belief "are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion." Madison argued historically that Christianity reached its "greatest lustre" in the times before it incorporated with the state, and that religious laws would counterproductively discourage nonbelievers from entering a region he hoped would become a beacon of Christianity. "Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man." Slade draws on her own Catholic faith in making the case. "I am a libertarian because I'm a Catholic, because I believe that every person was created in the image of God," she says. "I just think it's morally wrong from a Catholic or Christian perspective to try to use the coercive, violent power of the state to make people live a certain way. Even if the way that these guys would like to make people live—going to church on Sunday, praying, investing in your community and your family, self-sacrifice—all these good Christian values. They're good Christian values, but they can't be coerced or imposed from the top down. It's wrong and morally offensive from a Christian perspective." Slade says she understands the despair postliberals feel about the collapse of faith and virtue in contemporary America and that they have a point about the progressive capture of institutions. "What they're channeling is a really influential belief, which isn't totally wrong, that the left made a very concerted effort to make what is often referred to as a 'long march through the institutions' and to capture so many of our elite institutions—both at the governmental level but also at the cultural level: higher education, Hollywood, the mainstream media." Critics of the progressive agenda—or "wokeness"—often describe it as its own kind of religion. Linguist and social critic John McWhorter has argued that it has "slowly transmogrified into a kind of replacement for Protestant Christianity" among its adherents. Whether religious or not, progressives have imposed their social values on Americans through public school curricula, federal policy, and civil rights law. They have violated the freedom of conscience that Jefferson and Madison wrote about in a way very similar to how mandating religion would. Postliberalism is part of the political backlash. A poll conducted in early 2021 of people who voted for Trump in 2020 didn't find agreement on nationalist economic policies—tariffs, industrial policy, any of that—but found near-universal agreement on a sense of cultural siege. About 90 percent agreed with statements like "the mainstream media has become just an arm of the Democratic Party" or "Christianity is under attack today." "This sense that the culture has been captured by people who are hostile to people like me and who hate me and want to drive me out of the public square has created so much resentment and so much of a backlash that's driving this postliberal right-wing politics," Slade says. "I don't think it's possible to understand what's going on on the right without looking at what's been going on on the left, definitely ramping up during the period referred to as the great awakening." Slade's new book argues that the remedy to this postliberal moment is a rediscovery of "fusionism"—the reintegration of liberty and virtue. "A good society needs to be both free and virtuous. And the Founders certainly believed this," she says. John Adams wrote just 13 days before the signing of the Declaration that "the only foundation of a free Constitution is pure Virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our People…they will not obtain a lasting Liberty." "What he's saying is, we can have a limited government in a free society, but if the people aren't naturally virtuous, if they don't trust each other, if they aren't good to each other—that [the Republic] is going to end up succumbing to tyranny and to a strongman government," Slade says. His fellow revolutionary and intellectual adversary Jefferson flipped the equation by writing that liberty "is the great parent…of virtue." Balancing liberty and virtue means reconstructing some of the civic "guardrails" that Deneen laments having lost in modernity—but not handing the power to regulate our conscience to the government. "What we're seeing a lot is people who are focused either on liberty but don't spend a lot of time thinking about how do we cultivate virtue, or who say, forget your liberty, we want virtue at the point of a gun," Slade says. "Government's job is to protect our basic rights and liberties. It should be prioritizing the protection of liberty." "That doesn't mean that virtue isn't important. In fact, it's the highest, most important thing in life—to pursue a virtuous life," Slade continues. "But it's not OK to expect government to do that for us. Government protects our freedom and we use that freedom to pursue virtue." The solution, Slade argues, has to be ground-up. She invokes Alexis de Tocqueville, who observed when he came to America in the 1830s that Americans excel at coming together and creating voluntary community solutions to social problems. "We should have some muscle memory here. We should be able to get back to that idea of thinking of ourselves as being on the front lines of solving problems, building new civil society institutions, nongovernmental institutions that can try to solve the problems we see in our society," Slade says. "Good policy can make this easier. And bad policy can crowd it out and make it a lot harder." The Declaration of Independence is 250 years old, but the Revolution it started is as vital as ever. During the final days of the Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin was famously asked what kind of government they were in the process of designing. "A Republic," he said, "if you can keep it." Photo Credits: Horst Galuschka/dpa/picture-alliance/Newscom/ Dennis Flaherty / Jaynes Gallery / DanitaDelimont.com / Danita Delimont/ Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom/ TIA DUFOUR/UPI/Newscom/Antonio Perez/TNS/Newscom/ Aaron Schwartz - Pool via CNP/picture alliance / Consolidated News Photos/Newscom/ Ron Adar / SOPA/ Images/Sipa USA/Newscom/ JT Vintage/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom/ AdMedia/SIPA/Newscom/ Hugh Rooney / Eye Ubiquitous/Newscom/ Bonnie Cash - Pool via CNP/CNP / Polaris/Newscom/AdMedia/Newscom/ Graeme Sloan/Sipa USA/Newscom/ Polaris/Newscom; Eric Lee - Pool via CNP/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Department of Defense The post The American Revolution Isn't Over appeared first on Reason.com.

This July, the United States will celebrate its 250th year as an independent nation.The Founding Fathers established the U.S. on the foundation of the ideals they believed in. The Declaration of Independence famously says: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”Here we see equality, justice and the knowledge of a creator being upheld and dignified.We see similar themes in the constitution. Its preamble reads: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.Again, justice appears, as does peace, perfection and blessings.All of these ideas are deeply intertwined with religious principles. And, this remains true despite the great variety of belief present among the founding fathers. While some were certainly Christians, many were very skeptical of Christianity and several others were deists.But for the Founding Fathers, these were not principles that only religious people could respect, they were common virtues—ideas that all Americans ought to see as essential to a flourishing society.But, while this virtue is baked into the very founding documents of our nation, what does its role look like in politics today?To find out, I spoke with Stephanie Slade. Slade is a senior editor at Reason magazine and the author of an upcoming book called “Fusionism.” In her book, Slade argues that the pursuit of virtue and liberty ought to be at the center of American policymaking. She argues that there was a time when conservative politicians in particular exhibited this balance well, but that, today, politicians who openly fight for legislation that upholds both virtue and liberty are largely absent from the most powerful rooms on American soil.

01-14-2026 Stephanie Slade Learn more about the interview and get additional links here: https://usdailyreview.com/what-would-william-f-buckley-jr-think-of-donald-trump/ Subscribe to the best of our content here: https://priceofbusiness.substack.com/ Subscribe to our YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCywgbHv7dpiBG2Qswr_ceEQ

While Saving Elephants defends the classical conservative position, the loudest voices on the Right today coalesce around different policies, priorities, and goals.  Those that form the dissident Right are comprised of multiple sub-groups with overlapping and, at times, incompatible views.  So who is this disparate group of dissidents?  What holds them together, and how do they differ from conservatives?  Joining Saving Elephants host Josh Lewis is Stephanie Slade to explore the contours of the dissident Right.   About Stephanie Slade From reason.com Stephanie Slade is a senior editor at Reason, the magazine of "free minds and free markets," and a fellow in liberal studies at the Acton Institute. Her writing has appeared in America magazine, The New York Times, U.S. News and World Report, the Online Library of Liberty, and elsewhere. She covers the intersection of religion and politics.   Slade is best known for her piece "Why I Am a Pro-Life Libertarian," her magazine feature on booze-producing monks, and her defenses of "fusionism" (which probably isn't what you think!). Don't miss her discussing the differences between comprehensive and political libertarianism on The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie.   In 2013, Slade was named a finalist for the Bastiat Prize for Journalism. In 2016, she was selected as a Robert Novak Journalism Fellow. She serves as a member of the board of advisors for Young Voices and has been a guest on a variety of podcasts, including Jonah Goldberg's The Remnant, Charlie Sykes' The Bulwark Podcast, and The New York Times' Ezra Klein Show.   Prior to joining Reason, Slade worked as a speechwriter and pollster. She's a proud graduate of the University of Florida, where she studied economics and political science. Follow her on X: @sladesr.  

In this episode, Dan Hugger speaks with Stephanie Slade, senior editor at Reason magazine and a fellow in liberal studies at the Acton Institute, about the “New Right.” Who comprises the New Right, and what is their approach to politics? Has the old conservative movement failed? How does the New Right's rhetoric relate to their […]

07-17-2025 Stephanie Slade Learn more about the interview and get additional links here: https://usabusinessradio.com/liberty-meets-morality-reagans-fusionist-legacy-revisited/ Subscribe to the best of our content here: https://priceofbusiness.substack.com/ Subscribe to our YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCywgbHv7dpiBG2Qswr_ceEQ

In the fifth installment of our “What is the Right?” summer series, Peter explores the philosophy of Fusionism. As the name implies, Fusionism melds together different strands of conservatism into a single winning coalition. This is often understood as the three-legged stool of conservatism, bringing together traditionalist conservatives, libertarians, and anti-communists into a coalition that ended the Cold War. But as we will hear, that isn't necessarily the right way to think about it. This episode features two great thinkers in the Fusionist movement, Stephanie Slade and Tim Chapman. Stephanie has established herself as perhaps the foremost thinker about Fusionism today, and is careening toward a deadline on a new book exploring the subject that'll be out next year. She is a Senior Editor with Reason Magazine, as well as a fellow in liberal studies at the Acton Institute. Tim Chapman is President of Advancing American Freedom, a newer group started by Mike Pence. He also co-founded Heritage Action, the activism arm of Heritage Foundation, where he worked closely with Jim DeMint, and also ran Nikki Haley's Stand for America organization.

In this episode, your host, Rebecca LaSavio, sits down with Stephanie Slade, the visionary founder behind the Northern California Homeschool Convention. Whether you're a seasoned homeschooler or just getting started, this conversation will open your eyes to the incredible value of homeschool conferences. From building community and discovering new resources to getting energized for the school year ahead, Stephanie shares why these events are much more than just vendor halls and workshops.Find out what's in store for this year's convention, including keynote speakers, new offerings, special sessions for new families, and more. If you've ever wondered whether attending a conference is worth your time, this episode will convince you it absolutely is.So grab your coffee, get comfy, and let's dive into a conversation that might just reshape your homeschool journey.Show Notes:Convention website: thenchc.usCoupon Code for $10 off ticket: SG2025

Caleb O. Brown hosted the Cato Daily Podcast for nearly 18 years, producing well over 4000 episodes. He has gone on to head Kentucky's Bluegrass Institute. This is one among the best episodes produced in his tenure, selected by the host and listeners.“Fusionism,” something of an ideological nonaggression pact between libertarians and conservatives, has fallen on hard times. Can it be reborn? Stephanie Slade of Reason discusses her new article on the subject. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Charles C. W. Cooke, Samuel Goldman, and Stephanie Slade discuss and debate fusionism—what it is and how it speaks to our time.

Join me for Episode 103 of the Let People Prosper Show to hear a deep discussion about fusionism, liberty, and more with the delightful Stephanie Slade, a senior editor at Reason, the magazine of "free minds and free markets"; a fellow in liberal studies at the Acton Institute; and a media fellow at the Institute for Human Ecology at Catholic University of America. Like, subscribe, and share the Let People Prosper Show, and visit vanceginn.com for more insights from me, my research, and ways to invite me on your show, give a speech, and more.

Amid the shifting ideological commitments among the voting public, how welcoming will voters be toward more liberty-friendly ideas? Stephanie Slade of Reason comments. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The New Right has been associated with everyone from Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri to right-wing influencers and Catholic integralists. The breadth of the term can make it hard to define: Is the New Right a budding ideological movement or a toxic online subculture? What does it mean if it's both?Stephanie Slade is a senior editor at the magazine Reason, and has covered the New Right extensively. She argues that the New Right subverts the conventional left/right political binary and is better understood as the illiberal backlash to classical liberalism.This conversation is a tour of the New Right. The guest host, David French, talks to Slade about the politicians who have been attached to the ideological movement; why the New Right is critical of Reaganism; her problems with its self-branding as “common good conservatism”; how the Ron DeSantis “Stop Woke Act” signals a diversion from conservative free speech values; why the New Right is so angry; how online factions of the New Right are often in a delicate dance between flirting with bigotry and actually aligning with the provocative beliefs they post; why Catholic integralism matters, even if the average Catholic might have never heard of the ideology; and much more.This episode was hosted by David French, an Opinion columnist at The New York Times. Previously, he was a senior editor and co-founder of The Dispatch and a contributing writer at The Atlantic.Mentioned:More information about Ezra's lecture at UC Berkeley“The Lost Boys of the American Right” by David French“Both Left and Right Are Converging on Authoritarianism” by Stephanie SladeBook Recommendations:Radicals for Capitalism by Brian DohertyThe Ethics of Authenticity by Charles TaylorWar and Peace by Leo TolstoyThoughts? Guest suggestions? Email us at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com.You can find transcripts (posted midday) and more episodes of “The Ezra Klein Show” at nytimes.com/ezra-klein-podcast, and you can find Ezra on Twitter @ezraklein. Book recommendations from all our guests are listed at https://www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-klein-show-book-recs.This episode of “The Ezra Klein Show” was produced by Kristin Lin. Fact checking by Michelle Harris. Our senior engineer is Jeff Geld. Our senior editor is Annie-Rose Strasser. The show's production team also includes Emefa Agawu and Rollin Hu. Original music by Isaac Jones. Audience strategy by Kristina Samulewski and Shannon Busta. The executive producer of New York Times Opinion Audio is Annie-Rose Strasser. Special thanks to Sonia Herrero.

National conservatism (or conservative nationalism) may have had its moment, but a group of so-called Freedom Conservatives have unveiled a statement of principles that includes a more robust voluntary sector of society. Stephanie Slade of Reason comments. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

One of the most underrated documents from our country's founding is the Bill of Rights. And in today's polarized climate, it's more important than ever. Stephanie Slade from Reason Magazine says the beauty of the Bill of Rights is that it takes whole issues and questions off the table. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

"Don't let schooling get in the way of your education" ~ Mark TwainThere is a huge difference between doing school at home and home educating.  In this week's coffee date, Carrie talks with Stephanie Slade, the founder and organizer of the Northern California Homeschool Convention. Carrie and Stephanie discuss the differences between home "schooling" and true home education and the freedom that truly comes when the classroom model, state standards, and school schedules are replaced with a learning lifestyle.  Pour yourself a cup of coffee, get ready to change your perspective, and join Carrie and Stephanie for some coffee and conversation.To register for the Northern CA Homeschool Convention (July 21st-22nd 2023), go to https://thenchc.us For more information on future NCHC events, follow Stephanie @the_nchc.Support the showTo purchase Carrie's homeschooling book, Just Breathe (and Take a Sip of Coffee): Homeschool in Step with God), visit Amazon.com. To subscribe to Coffee With Carrie email newsletter and blog, visit https://coffeewithcarrie.org To hear more podcasts about homeschooling, subscribe to Coffee With Carrie Podcast. New episodes are dropped every Thursday.If you enjoy CWC Podcasts, we would love for you to leave a review and a 5-Star Rating. Click HERE#coffeewithcarriepodcast#justbreathesipcoffee#homeschoolencouragement#homeschoolwithcarrie#simplehomeschooling#sabbathhomeschooling

Patrick Deneen has released a new book, and predictably, Jonah has some pointed opinions on it. To critique Deneen's post-liberal vision for American society and the political right, Jonah is joined by a returning Stephanie Slade, senior editor at Reason and noted liberty-lover. With furious agreement and ornery hand-wringing, they take a deep dive into the strange world of the new right, analyzing how seriously we should take its vision for the conservative movement. They also provide a few thoughts on the state of Catholicism, what the Dobbs decision revealed about voters, and why nobody can agree about immigration. Show Notes: -Stephanie's page at Reason -Jonah: “Patrick Deneen's Otherworldly Regime” - Stephanie: “Liberalism Isn't Rule by Elites” -Stephanie: “The New Right Isn't So New” -Stephanie: “The Rise of Right-Progressivism” -Adrian Vermeule: “Integration From Within” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Stephanie Slade is a senior editor at Reason, the magazine of "free minds and free markets" and a fellow in liberal studies at the Acton Institute. Today we talk about fusionism, the fusion of freedom and virtue. We talk about the necessary relationship between seemingly contradictory ideals and the importance of civil society. She explains to us the history of fusionism and the need for it in today's current political environment. Never miss another AdamSmithWorks update.Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

Stephanie Slade is a senior editor at Reason, the magazine of "free minds and free markets" and a fellow in liberal studies at the Acton Institute. Today we talk about fusionism, the fusion of freedom and virtue. We talk about the necessary relationship between seemingly contradictory ideals and the importance of civil society. She explains to us the history of fusionism and the need for it in today's current political environment. Never miss another AdamSmithWorks update.Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

Stephanie Slade is a senior editor at Reason magazine, a fellow at the Action Institute, and a media fellow at the Institute for Human Ecology at the Catholic University of America. She wrote a recent piece for Reason where she explores the relationship between political expression and civil rights. She argues against the claim made by Vivek Ramaswamy, a 2024 Republican presidential hopeful, that political expression should be a civil right. Slade demonstrates that making political expression a protected class is a threat to freedom of association and that organizations and business should not be forced to accept those that hold political views that are radically contradictory to their own and explains why political expression is essential for a free society. We also discuss her Catholic faith, the state of libertarianism within Catholicism, and what she finds appealing about the Catholic tradition. You won't want to miss this one!Media Referenced:Political expression and civil rights: https://reason.com/2023/02/22/no-vivek-ramaswamy-political-expression-shouldnt-be-a-civil-right/How the Right Started the Culture Wars: https://reason.com/2017/03/23/christians-started-the-wedding/Stephanie Slade on Twitter: @sladesrStephanie Slade Website: https://about.me/sladesr   The Protestant Libertarian Podcast is a project of the Libertarian Christian Institute and a part of the Christians For Liberty Network. The Libertarian Christian Institute can be found at www.libertarianchristians.com. Questions, comments, suggestions? Please reach out to me at theprotestantlibertarian@gmail.com.  You can also follow the podcast on Twitter: @prolibertypod. For more about the show, you can go to theprotestantlibertarianpodcast.com. If you like the show and want to support it, you can! Check out the Protestant Libertarian Podcast page at https://www.buymeacoffee.com/theplpodcast. Also, please consider giving me a star rating and leaving me a review, it really helps expand the shows profile! Thanks!

On this episode of Future of Freedom, host Scot Bertram is joined by two guests with opposing viewpoints on the place of nationalism in the center-right movement. First on the show is Rich Lowry, editor of National Review and author of the book The Case for Nationalism: How It Made Us Powerful, United, and Free. Later, we hear from Stephanie Slade, senior editor at Reason. You can find Rich on Twitter at @richlowry and Stephanie at @sladesr. --- Listen to Other ATN Productions: America in Focus: A weekly feature of the top TheCenterSquare.com stories of the week out of Washington D.C. with commentary from The Center Square editors and more! America's Talking: An interview podcast hosted by Austin Berg. Guests include professors, journalists, artists, business and nonprofit leaders, authors, and more. Everyday Economics: Join economist Dr. Orphe Divounguy and Chris Krug as they discuss global markets, inflation, and everything else that will help you understand the economic world around you. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/future-of-freedom/support

In this episode, we look at a recent piece published at Reason Magazine by Stephany Slade entitled ‘Against Game of Thrones Christianity', in which she argues that there is a growing tendency among members of the Christian right to use state power against their political opponents. According to Slade, this represents an abandonment of classical liberalism and is antithetical to Biblical teaching. I read and comment on this excellent article, and then provide a Biblical reflection on the problematic use of state power by those that claim to follow a crucified Messiah.  Media Referenced:‘Against Game of Thrones Christianity' by Stephanie Slade: https://reason.com/2022/12/24/against-game-of-thrones-christianity/Stephany Slade on Twitter: @sladesrQuestions, comments, suggestions? Please reach out to me at theprotestantlibertarian@gmail.com.  You can also follow the podcast on Twitter: @prolibertypod. If you like the show and want to support it, you can! Check out the Protestant Libertarian Podcast page at https://www.buymeacoffee.com/theplpodcast. Also, please consider giving me a star rating and leaving me a review, it really helps expand the shows profile! Thanks!

“Our guest today,” says Jay Nordlinger, “is a writer, a journalist—an unusual one, a distinctive one: her own woman. She is Stephanie Slade, a senior editor at Reason…” She is a libertarian who is religious and pro-life. With Jay, she discusses a number of issues, all of them at the heart of our politics today: […]

“Our guest today,” says Jay Nordlinger, “is a writer, a journalist—an unusual one, a distinctive one: her own woman. She is Stephanie Slade, a senior editor at Reason…” She is a libertarian who is religious and pro-life. With Jay, she discusses a number of issues, all of them at the heart of our politics today: the political wars, liberalism, conservatism, economic policy, drugs, marriage... Source

“Our guest today,” says Jay Nordlinger, “is a writer, a journalist—an unusual one, a distinctive one: her own woman. She is Stephanie Slade, a senior editor at Reason…” She is a libertarian who is religious and pro-life. With Jay, she discusses a number of issues, all of them at the heart of our politics today: the political wars, liberalism, conservatism, economic policy, drugs, marriage... Source

For decades libertarian and conservative thought formed the basis of the American right. Free markets, limited government, rule of law, and morality summed up a fusion between two groups that shared skepticism of big government. Fusionism, as this coalition and ideology were to be called, came into popularity during the latter half of the 20th Century because of the looming threat of Communism. However, today, both sides are showing signs of disillusionment as the Conservatives drift toward nationalism and the Libertarians fight over what it means to be a Libertarian. In this episode, Stephanie Slade argues that the Fusionist tradition was and is a synthesis worth defending.

With Reason editor Stephanie Slade and Eric Kohn and Dan Hugger of the Acton Institute, Jack explores the mysteries, intricacies, tensions, and contradictions of national conservatism as filtered through the third National Conservatism Conference, held earlier this month in Miami. (This is a cross-posting of the Acton Unwind podcast.)

With Reason editor Stephanie Slade and Eric Kohn and Dan Hugger of the Acton Institute, Jack explores the mysteries, intricacies, tensions, and contradictions of national conservatism as filtered through the third National Conservatism Conference, held earlier this month in Miami. (This is a cross-posting of the Acton Unwind podcast.)... Source

This week, Eric Kohn and Dan Hugger are joined by two special guests—Stephanie Slade, senior editor at Reason magazine and Fellow in Liberal Studies at the Acton Institute, and Jack Butler, submissions editor at National Review—both of whom attended the National Conservatism 3 conference, to discuss all things pertaining to the conference and the National […]

This week, Eric Kohn and Dan Hugger are joined by two special guests—Stephanie Slade, senior editor at Reason magazine and Fellow in Liberal Studies at the Acton Institute, and Jack Butler, submissions editor at National Review—both of whom attended the National Conservatism 3 conference, to discuss all things pertaining to the conference and the National Conservatism movement.Subscribe to our podcasts The Will to Power Was Front and Center at NatCon III | Stephanie Slade, Reason Both Left and Right Are Converging on Authoritarianism | Stephanie Slade, Reason Four Myths About National Conservatism You Should Stop Believing | David Brog, The Federalist National Conservatism and the Declaration | David Tucker, Law & Liberty National Conservatism and Its Enemies | Religion & Liberty What I Saw at the National Conservatism Conference | Dan Hugger, Religion & Liberty National Conservatism: A Primer for the Uninitiated | Josh Hammer, Newsweek National Conservatism: A Statement of Principles | The American Conservative The hundred-year war for American conservatism | Acton Line Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Elements on both the left and right are tracking in the same illiberal direction on economic regulation, the First Amendment, and on radical rhetoric. Plus, the NatCons' plan to get the country to go full Trump. Stephanie Slade joins Charlie Sykes today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Elements on both the left and right are tracking in the same illiberal direction on economic regulation, the First Amendment, and on radical rhetoric. Plus, the NatCons' plan to get the country to go full Trump. Stephanie Slade joins Charlie Sykes today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Both political parties... Republican and Democrat... are leaning more and more towards the extremes. But by moving farther to the left and farther to the right... are they actually moving closer together? Stephanie Slade from Reason explains how both parties are converging on authoritarianism, especially when it comes to free markets and free speech. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Merry Christmas! Ed hosts an end of year news quiz with special guests Katie Ruvalcaba, Stephanie Slade, and Stephen White, and JD behaves about as well as you'd expect.

This  week, we have another amazing TFAS alumna on the Liberty + Leadership Podcast: Reason Magazine senior editor and a 2016 Robert Novak Journalism Fellowship winner, Stephanie Slade. In addition to being a regular contributor to the U.S. News and World Report, Stephanie is also a fellow at the Acton Institute. In this week's episode, Roger and Stephanie discuss the separation between church and state, libertarianism, integrity in journalism, and the future of political parties. The Liberty + Leadership Podcast is hosted by TFAS President Roger Ream (https://tfas.org/podcast) and produced by kglobal (https://kglobal.com/podcast-studio). If you have a comment or question for the show, please drop us an email at podcast@TFAS.orgSupport the show

The post-Trump era has been a time of extraordinary political ferment on the right. Stephanie Slade, senior editor of Reason magazine, has had a front-line view of these new political developments. She is both a libertarian and a Catholic, and has written extensively for both libertarian publications and for religious publications, such as the Jesuit magazine America. She covers the intersection of religion and politics as well as the growing illiberalism of the New Right, evident in such new movements as National Conservatism and Catholic integralism. Most recently, she wrote an op-ed in the New York Times on how Florida Republican governor Ron DeSantis' clash with the Walt Disney Company demonstrates the ways that the Republican Party is distancing itself from libertarian conservatism, particularly in the realm of economics. Trump-aligned, populist-leaning Republicans such as DeSantis, Missouri senator Josh Hawley, and Ohio senatorial candidate J. D. Vance show a new willingness to use the power of the state to punish their political enemies, including allegedly “woke” institutions such as colleges, universities, and foundations as well as large corporations such as Disney speaking out against Republican-authored legislation. Slade believes that what's at stake in these clashes is the future of fusionism – the commitment to liberty and virtue – as the animating philosophy driving the modern American conservative movement. Unlike many on the New Right, she believes that libertarianism is compatible with religious social thought, like Catholic teachings on subsidiarity, for example. And although (in her estimation) the energy and momentum in intellectual and activist circles on the right are currently with the illiberals, she believes the fusionists have the potential to revive.

The Party of Big Business Is Getting More Anti-Conservative by the Day With Stephanie Slade Senior Editor of Reason Magazine and Host Richard Levick of LEVICK: For decades, it was taken as a given that the GOP was the party of business. Entire elections at the highest level, including Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, among others, instantly come to mind as candidates who artfully articulated and ran on this platform. Today, that position has been turned on its head at every level, with just the latest example being Disney in Florida, AT&T in Texas and others, where Republican governors are increasingly retaliating against companies for the positions they take. Stephanie Slade, senior editor at Reason, the magazine of "free minds and free markets," speaks with host Richard Levick of LEVICK about a recent opinion piece she published in the New York Times, The Party of Big Business Is Getting More Anti-Conservative by the Day. How do companies, individuals, historical Republicans and others react to this tectonic shift?

Many people in the United States feel ‘homeschooling” is old fashion. Stephanie Slade of Sacramento, CA, is a homeschool mom of two — ages 5 and 8. This is her 4th year of homeschooling. She carefully explains on this podcast … Continue reading →

Subscribe to the show: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google PodcastsOne of the difficult, and interesting, questions a system of political liberty needs to deal with is how to approach differing conceptions of what the good life looks like and how people ought to behave.We can say that the government shouldn't interfere in people's lifestyle choices, but does that mean we should also say that being pro-liberty means being pro- every choice people might make, as long as it's peaceful?My guest today is Stephanie Slade (@sladesr), a senior editor at Reason Magazine. She recently published an article about whether a commitment to political and economic liberty necessarily entails a commitment to and celebration of social liberalism and cultural progressivism.Stephanie and I diverge in some ways in how we answer that question. Which makes it an important discussion to have.We talk about whether libertarianism is only a political project, or if it's an ethical one, too.We talk about the role of social conservatism in a free society, how both the left and the right are too quick to use the state to enforce their social preferences, and how we can have a more tolerant world and more just world if we'd all just mutually disarm a little.Support the show and get every episode two weeks early, as well as access to the Discord community. Sign up here: https://reimaginingliberty.substack.com/subscribeProduced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte.Music: Finding the Balance by Kevin MacLeod | Link | License This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.reimaginingliberty.com/subscribe

One of the difficult, and interesting, questions a system of political liberty needs to deal with is how to approach differing conceptions of what the good life looks like and how people ought to behave. We can say that the government shouldn't interfere in people's lifestyle choices, but does that mean we should also say that being pro-liberty means being pro- every choice people might make, as long as it's peaceful? My guest today is Stephanie Slade (@sladesr), a senior editor at Reason Magazine. She recently published an article about whether a commitment to political and economic liberty necessarily entails a commitment to and celebration of social liberalism and cultural progressivism. Stephanie and I diverge in some ways in how we answer that question. Which makes it an important discussion to have. We talk about whether libertarianism is only a political project, or if it's an ethical one, too. We talk about the role of social conservatism in a free society, how both the left and the right are too quick to use the state to enforce their social preferences, and how we can have a more tolerant world and more just world if we'd all just mutually disarm a little. ReImagining Liberty is a project of The UnPopulist, and is produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Join the ReImagining Liberty Discord community and book club. Music: Finding the Balance by Kevin MacLeod | Link | License

Figuring out the limits of big-tent libertarianism is no easy matter, but it's central to the movement's success.

Pope John Paul II was an artist, an author, an actor, a philosopher, and a theologian. But most important, he was a lover of freedom and liberty. In this episode, Reason magazine's managing editor, Stephanie Slade, sits down with Eric Kohn to discuss her new article on the pope who helped bring down communism. The Pope Who Helped Bring Down Communism Stephanie Slade on the future of fusionism Will-to-power conservatism with Stephanie Slade About Stephanie Slade Subscribe to our podcasts See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Pope John Paul II was an artist, an author, an actor, a philosopher, and a theologian. But most important, he was a lover of freedom and liberty. In this episode, Reason magazine’s managing editor, Stephanie Slade, sits down with Eric Kohn to discuss her new article on the pope who helped bring down communism. The […]

This week we bring you an episode from  the To Build a Bridge Podcast and our partners at the Bridge Alliance, an organization dedicated to providing resources to non profits involved in democracy reform.Being Right-of-Center in the era of social justice has become unpopular and suppressive. All too often, the right wing is labeled as prejudiced, hateful and uneducated conductors of national misinformation. This unfortunately discourages many from openly sharing their outlook which is a direct contradiction to this country's constitution. Bridge Alliance Deputy Chief of Staff, Shakira Mills is sitting down with Shoshana Weissmann of RStreet Institute, Stephanie Slade of Reason Magazine, Jeremy Garson and Michelle Dickson of Bridge Alliance to discuss the modern American polarized experience and what the right wing is really trying to accomplish.

Being Right-of-Center in the era of social justice has become unpopular and suppressive. All too often, the right wing is labeled as prejudiced, hateful and uneducated conductors of national misinformation. This unfortunately discourages many from openly sharing their outlook which is a direct contradiction to this country's constitution. I am sitting down with Shoshana Weissmann of RStreet Institute, Stephanie Slade of Reason Magazine, Jeremy Garson and Michelle Dickson of Bridge Alliance to discuss the modern American polarized experience and what the right wing is really trying to accomplish.

Author and journalist Asra Nomani joins host Amy Marxkors to discuss how critical race theory is discriminating against Asian Americans. Stephanie Slade, Managing Editor at Reason Magazine, discusses the future of fusionism and examines fuel for the “Trump Train.” See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On the first episode of Critics Corner, Oren is joined by Stephanie Slade, managing editor of Reason magazine. They discuss the importance of liberty to the common good, whether government should fund research or infrastructure, the meaning of free trade in the context of China, and quite a bit more.

What a fun conversation with had with Steph, a health coach who centers her practice around mindfulness, moderations, and accountability! Steph has such a unique story and you will love hearing her health tips and tricks!

Stephanie Slade from Reason joined Brady to discuss libertarianism during a national emergency and much more! Follow Stephanie @sladesr and follow us @bradyleonard @nogimmickspod Support our sponsors! manbeardco.com promo code: NoGimmicks patreon.com/thenogimmickspodcast

Do ordinary libertarians have something to learn from Christian social teaching? Are all of the Popes wrong about economics? Why is conservative nationalism on the rise? Stephanie Slade from Reason joins us to talk about how Christians can be enlightening libertarians on the importance of culture, not just the role of the regulatory state. She also discusses a concerning phenomenon within conservatism that libertarians should pay attention to. Audio Production by Podsworth Media.

Ep. #72! Our friend Carey Helmick stops by to talk about liberalism. Is it compatible with Catholicism? What is required of us as Catholics. This is a follow up to our episode with Stephanie Slade a few months ago so go check that out if you haven't! Tweet us @romancircuspod, @heyitsmattbaker, @zacmabry Email us podcast@romancircusblog.com Find us on Apple Podcasts. Rate and review us if you want. You can also find us on Podbean, Stitcher, Google Play. Patreon.com/romancircuspod  

  The topic of abortion seems to have gained more momentum in the news cycle of late with states passing laws relaxing or loosening restrictions on the practice. It feels like the 1973 ruling of Roe v. Wade might actually come before the US Supreme Court with a chance of reversing or affirming the 46 year old opinion.   As a physician and hospital, the social and ethical questions that surround abortion are both personal and professional. What is the obligation of institutions to perform abortions? How about the physicians or nursing staff? Do you have a legal obligation to perform a procedure that you find morally reprehensible?   To answer those questions, today I have Stephanie Slade on the show from Reason magazine. Stephanie is a managing editor and follows the public and legal debate on the subject. She wrote a piece for the America magazine a year ago documenting the efforts of the ACLU to compel catholic hospitals to perform abortions and other reproductive health procedures (sterilization, gender reassignment, etc.).   As with all political discussions, this one is nuanced and also uniquely American as our legal focus is heavily directed by our founding documents and the Bill of Rights. What role freedom of speech and association has for private institutions like catholic charities and what rules can the government impose on those same hospitals is what is under dispute with these ACLU directed claims. The ACLU believes that hospitals are a uniquely public institution that provides critical care to large populations and therefore should be compelled to perform abortions and other medical procedures that the catholic church finds morally objectionable.   To date, the ACLU has been unsuccessful in any of their lawsuits even with sympathetic federal judges who point to the first amendment as the basis for their rulings. However, the ACLU is now bringing forth cases of gender reassignment against the catholic church to see if that issue will bring a different ruling. Finally, as state legislatures continue to pass laws that allow abortion up to the moment of birth or ban abortion as soon as a heartbeat is present (~6 weeks gestation or around when a typical urine pregnancy test is positive) the US Supreme Court may feel its hands are tied and have to reexamine Roe v. Wade.   Stephanie Slade is the managing editor for Reason magazine where she writes but mostly edits. She also writes for the American and resides in Washington, D.C. show notes Why is the ACLU Targeting Catholic Hospitals?: Stephanie Slade's article that we discuss during the show highlighting the history of the catholic church and charitable ministries in the US and the ACLU's attempts to force the hospitals to perform abortions. Reason magazine: Where Stephanie Slade is managing editor. The magazine is dedicated to advancing libertarian thought and "Free Minds and Free Markets." Acton University: Acton University is hosted annually by the Acton Institute in Grand Rapids, MI. Its synopsis: Acton University is not your typical conference. It's a four-day celebration with 1,000 of your newest liberty loving friends from all over the world. Each day is packed with thought-provoking presentations on the intellectual foundations of a free society. Sharpen your intellect. Expand your worldview. Explore theology, philosophy, business, development, and market-based economics at the most unique conference in the liberty movement. Twittering for Stephanie Slade: @sladesr Episode 29: Overcharged - Why American Health Care is So Expensive with David Hyman. Episode 48: A template for a better health care system where I describe the trends in health care today and how they might lead to something better for all of us. YouTube for Paradocs: Here you can watch the video of my late son singing his solo on the Paradocs YouTube page. Patreon - Become a show supporter today and visit my Patreon page for extra bonus material. Every dollar raised goes towards the production and promotion of the show.    

Ep. #64! Stephanie Slade joins us to talk about her latest piece for Reason in response to Sohrab Ahmari. We talk about classical liberalism, libertarianism and the role it plays in society, the Catholic state, and how far we should go to ensure favorable policies are enacted.   Tweet us @romancircuspod, @heyitsmattbaker, @zacmabry Email us podcast@romancircusblog.com Find us on itunes. Rate and review us if you want. You can also find us on podbean, stitcher, google play. Patreon.com/romancircuspod

One of the most common issues raised by non-libertarian Christians about libertarian thought is marriage licensing. Because the family unit is essential to social order, the argument goes, Christians should allegedly support state regulation of what constitutes 'marriage' and who is allowed to 'marry.' But state power is a sharp and dangerous sword; what happens when the proponents of such a plan no longer have the political capital they once did, and that sword is turned against them? This is precisely what has happened to socially conservative Christians in recent decades. Stephanie Slade, libertarian Christian and Managing Editor at Reason Magazine, walks us through the history of how it was Christians who set the very legal precedent on state regulation of marriage (and other social issues of conscience) which are now being wielded against them by non-Christians. For generations, Christians chose to 'live by the sword' of using state power against their opponents, and now that they are in the minority, the sword is turned on them. Only by upholding liberty for all issues of conscience, including those we think are wrong, can this tragic cycle of trying to shape society by legislation be halted.