Podcast appearances and mentions of walter berns

Today we bring you the final episode in our series on speech and censorship. We wrap up a series by bringing back guests from previous episodes to discuss the broader themes and dilemmas that have persisted over the course of the series.  In this conversation we discuss if and how making distinctions among different kinds of speech might improve our ability to navigate the dilemmas around free speech. We discuss the recent phenomenon of campus protests and this extent to which this sort of activity should be protected in higher education. And we wonder if the idea of self-restraint is gone forever or how it might make a comeback. We're excited to have three guests back with us to bring the series to a close: Alex Duff, Yuval Levin and Jonathan Rauch.  Alex Duff was with us before to discuss Herbert Marcuse's “Repressive Tolerance.” is the author of Heidegger and Politics: The Ontology of Radical Discontent. He teaches at the University of North Texas where he is Assistant Professor of Political Science and Director of the Constitutionalism and Democracy Forum   Yuval Levin discussed essays by Walter Berns and Irving Kristol on obscenity and censorship. He is the director of Social, Cultural, and Constitutional Studies at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). He's the founder and editor of National Affairs and author of the forthcoming book American Covenant.  Jonathan Rauch launched our series with a discussion of his book Kindly Inquisitors. He is Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution and his most recent book is The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth.

With our December episode we continue our series on speech and censorship. We take up two essays which make the case for a particular kind of censorship: Walter Berns's “Pornography v. Democracy: The Case for Censorship” and Irving Kristol's “Pornography, Obscenity and the Case for Censorship.” Berns's essay was published in The Public Interest in […]

With our December episode we continue our series on speech and censorship. We take up two essays which make the case for a particular kind of censorship: Walter Berns's “Pornography v. Democracy: The Case for Censorship” and Irving Kristol's “Pornography, Obscenity and the Case for Censorship.” Berns's essay was published in The Public Interest in the winter of 1971 and Kristol's in The New York Times Magazine in March 1971. Our guest is Yuval Levin, who's the director of Social, Cultural, and Constitutional Studies at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), where he also holds the Beth and Ravenel Curry Chair in Public Policy. The founder and editor of National Affairs, he is also a senior editor at The New Atlantis, a contributing editor at National Review, and a contributing opinion writer at The New York Times.Dr. Levin publishes essays and articles in numerous publications, including The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The Atlantic, and Commentary. He is the author of several books on political theory and public policy, most recently A Time to Build: From Family and Community to Congress and the Campus, How Recommitting to Our Institutions Can Revive the American Dream.We discuss how Berns and Kristol define obscenity and why they each think a healthy society must make a distinction between the obscene and the non-obscene. Levin shows how Berns explores the distinction between the public and the private and why the capacity for shame is central to his thinking. We look at how both authors draw on the idea that democracy, perhaps more that any other form of government, demands a kind of moral formation that requires censorship and whether liberal democracy can be an exception to this idea. Berns concludes his essay with a defense of obscenity and its use by the great authors so we spend some time grappling with the necessity of transgression and how that might affect the case for censorship.

Here at Enduring Interest we are in the midst of exploring books and essays that address the question of speech and censorship. Forthcoming episodes will discuss authors including Walter Berns, Irving Kristol, Herbert Marcuse, James Madison, and Pierre Manent. However, this month we're pausing on that theme to discuss a newly published book by the […]

Here at Enduring Interest we are in the midst of exploring books and essays that address the question of speech and censorship. Forthcoming episodes will discuss authors including Walter Berns, Irving Kristol, Herbert Marcuse, James Madison, and Pierre Manent. However, this month we're pausing on that theme to discuss a newly published book by the great French thinker and writer Raymond Aron. On April 4, 1978 Aron brought his academic career to close with a final lecture at the College de France. It has been translated into English and brought out by Princeton University Press with the title of Liberty and Equality. It is a short but penetrating lecture which provides much needed precision and clarity on the question of liberty or liberties.My guest is Daniel J. Mahoney, an expert on Aron's thought. He has been a guest on this show before—he was here last time to discuss Aron's classic book The Opium of the Intellectuals. Dan is Professor of Political Science Emeritus at Assumption University. His latest books include The Statesman as Thinker, Recovering Politics, Civilization and the Soul, and The Other Solzhenitsyn: Telling the Truth about a Misunderstood Writer and Thinker. He's the co-editor of the indispensable volume The Solzhenitsyn Reader: New and Essential Writings. His first book, The Liberal Political Science of Raymond Aron, was published in 1992.

Matthew Whalan and Ben Burgis continue the weekly series of Thursday Night Debate Breakdowns by watching a debate on "Resolved: That the Death Penalty Is a Good Thing" from a 1994 episode of William F. Buckley's Firing Line. These names didn't all fit in the title but the guests are Ed Koch, Walter Berns, Susan Boleyn, Ira Glasser, Leon Botstein, Stephen B. Bright, Bryan Stevenson.Matthew has written some relevant essays on His Substack:https://matthewvernonwhalan.substack.com/p/the-jimmy-davis-jr-story-death-rowhttps://matthewvernonwhalan.substack.com/p/ending-peoples-lives-putting-peoplehttps://matthewvernonwhalan.substack.com/p/institutional-racism-and-classismFollow Matthew on Twitter: @VernonWhalanFollow Ben on Twitter: @BenBurgisFollow GTAA on Twitter: @Gtaa_ShowBecome a GTAA Patron and receive numerous benefits ranging from patron-exclusive postgames every Monday night to our undying love and gratitude for helping us keep this thing going:patreon.com/benburgisRead the weekly philosophy Substack:benburgis.substack.comVisit benburgis.com

Are Washington and Lincoln taught anymore?  We're joined by John Dombroski, founder and president of Grand Canyon Planning.  Walter Berns's words on tyrants, and the power of fear.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On September 9-10, 1988, The Federalist Society hosted its second annual National Lawyers Convention at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. on "The Constitution and Federal Criminal Law." The second day of the convention commenced with a debate over whether the death penalty can be administered constitutionally.Opponents of the death penalty, including several Supreme Court Justices, argue that, under the evolving moral standards of our society and culture, capital punishment is inherently "cruel and unusual" and therefore unconstitutional. Others argue that the framers passed the injunction against cruel and unusual punishment at the same time as language in the Fifth Amendment directly contemplating imposition of the death penalty, and that if the two could constitutionally co-exist then, they can continue to do so unless a specific amendmentis passed to change the Constitution in that regard.Featuring:Prof. Walter Berns, Georgetown UniversityProf. Walter Dellinger, Duke University School of LawModerator: Judge Patrick Higginbotham, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit*******As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

On September 9-10, 1988, The Federalist Society hosted its second annual National Lawyers Convention at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. on "The Constitution and Federal Criminal Law." The second day of the convention commenced with a debate over whether the death penalty can be administered constitutionally.Opponents of the death penalty, including several Supreme Court Justices, argue that, under the evolving moral standards of our society and culture, capital punishment is inherently "cruel and unusual" and therefore unconstitutional. Others argue that the framers passed the injunction against cruel and unusual punishment at the same time as language in the Fifth Amendment directly contemplating imposition of the death penalty, and that if the two could constitutionally co-exist then, they can continue to do so unless a specific amendmentis passed to change the Constitution in that regard.Featuring:Prof. Walter Berns, Georgetown UniversityProf. Walter Dellinger, Duke University School of LawModerator: Judge Patrick Higginbotham, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit*******As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

How did key participants in Straussian fight club, especially Harry Jaffa and Walter Berns, challenge the progressive settlement of political science, the history of the American Founding, and constitutionalism? Our guide for understanding this debate will be Steven Hayward who joins this edition of Liberty Law Talk to discuss his latest book, Patriotism Is Not Enough: […]

The late Walter Berns's important book, "Making Patriots." Some of the 12 reasons to love America, from the American Patriots' Almanac. Dennis Prager testifies to Congress. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of the Bradley Lecture Series Podcast, released for President’s Day 2019, Walter Berns discusses the life and legacy of Abraham Lincoln. The ideas contained in this lecture were the fruits of life-long study and reflection, and Professor Berns offers us additional reasons for sharing his regard for Lincoln, a man supreme in […] The post Bradley Lecture Series Podcast: Abraham Lincoln at 200 with Walter Berns appeared first on American Enterprise Institute - AEI.

Steven Hayward joins us at Whiskey Politics to discuss Trump, Russia, the media's double standard, North Korea, U.C. Berkeley, Single Payer healthcare in California, the election in England, and of course, James Bond.Steven F. Hayward is currently senior resident scholar at the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley, and a visiting lecturer at Boalt Hall Law School. He was previously the Ronald Reagan Distinguished Visiting Professor at Pepperdine University’s Graduate School of Public Policy, and was the inaugural visiting scholar in conservative thought and policy at the University of Colorado at Boulder in 2013-14. From 2002 to 2012 he was the F.K Weyerhaeuser Fellow in Law and Economics at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington DC, and has been senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute in San Francisco since 1991. He writes frequently for the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, National Review, the Weekly Standard, the Claremont Review of Books, and other publications. The author of six books including a two-volume chronicle of Reagan and his times entitled The Age of Reagan: The Fall of the Old Liberal Order, 1964-1980, and The Age of Reagan: The Conservative Counter-Revolution, 1980-1989, and the Almanac of Environmental Trends. His latest book, Patriotism is Not Enough: Harry Jaffa, Walter Berns, and the Arguments That Redefined American Conservatism, was published in February. He frequently guest-hosts Bill Bennett's national morning radio show, and writes an occasional online column for Forbes entitled "The Sinews of Politics." He writes daily on Powerlineblog.com, one of the nation's most read political websites.Please subscribe to Whiskey Politics at YouTube and our audio podcasts at iTunes, Stitcher or GooglePlay where your 5-star rating would be appreciated!In: Little Green Bag, George Baker SelectionOut: Live And Let Die, Paul McCartney and Wings 

PowerLine is back with frontline details of a decades-long war among conservatives. This isn't a debate about same-sex marriage, drug legalization, or conservatives vs. libertarians, it's the great battle between Harry Jaffa and Walter Berns. Their vibrant and vigorous debates about the Declaration and the Constitution are credited with revitalizing the right. Steven F. Source