Zooming In at The UnPopulist

At a recent conference at the Heterodox Academy, an organization founded in 2016 to promote viewpoint diversity on college campuses and defend academic freedom from the “woke threat,” attendees grappled with the new threat to academic freedom, this time coming from the White House. There was real disagreement about how much attention each threat deserved and we explored these tensions in a podacast episode with writer Cathy Young, who attended the conference. This week, we take a look at that topic from a different perspective, as Berny Belvedere sits down with another guest at the conference; Michael Roth, the president of Wesleyan University. Roth advocates forcefully pivoting to take on the authoritarian threat that Donald Trump poses.They discuss how concepts like "safe spaces" and "DEI" have evolved, often serving as convenient scapegoats for political ends and the Trump administration's efforts to strong-arm universities through funding threats and legal action. They also discuss whether the failure to appropriately prioritize the relative threats coming from right and the left would risk undermining liberal democracy itself.We hope you find the discussion valuable.***Thanks for checking out The UnPopulist! Subscribe for free to support our project.Follow us on Bluesky, Threads, YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and X.© The UnPopulist, 2025 This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theunpopulist.net

Brink Lindsey, senior vice president at the Niskanen Center and writer of The Permanent Problem, dives into how mass affluence is reshaping expectations and creating a crisis within liberal democracies. He discusses the paradox of success leading to skepticism and diminishing trust in democratic institutions. The conversation addresses societal changes, the rise of populism, and a yearning for deeper fulfillment beyond material wealth. Lindsey also critiques the perceived tensions between economic performance and social cohesion, drawing on historical insights.

Academia finds itself at a critical juncture, navigating internal debates over the lack of intellectual diversity and too much in the thrall of prevailing orthodoxies, while simultaneously facing unprecedented external pressures from political forces intent on reshaping higher education. How can institutions uphold their mission of truth-seeking and open inquiry amidst such formidable challenges?Today, senior editor Berny Belvedere sits down with distinguished journalist Cathy Young, who recently covered the Heterodox Academy’s annual conference for The Bulwark. Together, they examine how internal criticisms of “woke” excesses and progressive orthodoxy intersect with the Trump administration’s aggressive assault on academic freedom and civil society. They explore the critical question of whether focusing on internal academic illiberalism inadvertently aligns with broader authoritarian aims, and what it means for a heterodox movement to truly champion intellectual diversity against threats from both the left and the right.We hope you enjoy. Thanks for checking out The UnPopulist! Subscribe for free to support our project.© The UnPopulist, 2025Follow us on Bluesky, Threads, YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and X. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theunpopulist.net

For generations, the idea of American liberty has been synonymous with limited government and individual freedoms. Yet, since the Founding, the reach of state surveillance has grown exponentially, often shrouded in secrecy and justified by the need to fight threats to safety and security.To explore the historic choices and institutional dynamics that paved the way for the modern surveillance apparatus, Aaron Ross Powell sits down with Patrick Eddington, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and author of the new book, The Triumph of Fear: Domestic Surveillance and Political Repression from McKinley to Eisenhower.They discuss the long and often unsettling story of state surveillance in America, how it has led to a system susceptible to profound rights violations and political repression, and how actions—or inaction—by all three branches of government have allowed these capabilities to grow.You will finding it interesting if deeply troubling.© The UnPopulist, 2025Follow us on Bluesky, Threads, YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and X. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theunpopulist.net

When President Trump launched his so-called Liberation Day tariffs, he didn’t just ignite a global trade war—he may have also triggered yet another constitutional crisis. This week, first an international trade court and then a federal court ruled those tariffs unlawful, striking at the heart of Trump’s sweeping claims of executive power under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. But almost immediately, an appeals court hit pause.To help us unpack what these rapid developments mean—not just for trade policy, but for the separation of powers and the future of emergency authority in America—director of Executive Watch, Rob Tracinski, talked to George Mason University law professor, Ilya Somin. Somin is co-counsel in the case and the legal brains behind the lawsuit. They explore whether emergency powers have become a blank check for presidential overreach, and what this case could mean for rebalancing power between Congress and the White House.© The UnPopulist, 2025Follow us on Bluesky, Threads, YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and X. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theunpopulist.net

In this discussion, Jerome Copulsky, a research fellow at the Berkley Center for Religion, shares insights on the rise of postliberalism and national conservatism in America. He explores how certain religious groups are challenging the foundational ideals of liberal democracy. Copulsky delves into the reactions of religious conservatives to landmark Supreme Court rulings, the concept of common good constitutionalism linked to the MAGA movement, and the critical examination of George Washington's views on religion in governance. An engaging exploration of faith, politics, and American identity.

The executive branch is currently being run by an aspiring autocrat who neither respects institutional safeguards nor accepts the separation of powers. As part of his project to subsume all governmental authority under his control, he has empowered a tech billionaire to reshape and repurpose government agencies—through what they’ve called the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE—so that those agencies and their information can be weaponized for his purposes.To explain how all this is unfolding, Zooming In host Aaron Ross Powell sits down with Julian Sanchez and Noah Kunin, the co-hosts of Watch Cats, a new podcast dedicated to critically covering DOGE. They discuss what DOGE actually is and what it is doing, and assess what its impact is likely to be on future attempts to pursue government reforms.We hope you enjoy. © The UnPopulist, 2025Follow us on Bluesky, Threads, YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and X.We welcome your reactions and replies. Please adhere to our comments policy. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theunpopulist.net

In a post on Truth Social on May 2, President Trump promised to “[take] away Harvard's Tax Exempt Status,” because, “it's what they deserve!" While Trump may succeed in initiating such an action, our guest today doubts it will last, due to a long history of Supreme Court precedence regarding the tax code’s application to private institutions.Speaking with the director of Executive Watch, Rob Tracinski is New York Times columnist David French. They discuss the Trump administration’s hypocritical implementation of viewpoint diversity, the rushed and indiscriminate defunding of scientific research, and whether to consider if the social compact of government is based on the honors system of mutually assured destruction.We hope you enjoy.© The UnPopulist, 2025Follow us on Bluesky, Threads, YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and X. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theunpopulist.net

Immigration policy has long been a battlefield for ideological disputes. But what we’re witnessing during Trump’s second term isn't just a debate over border security or visa policy. It’s an attempt to reconfigure the U.S. immigration system into a tool for authoritarian governance—an assault not only on due process, but on the foundational belief that laws must constrain power.Joining Shikha Dalmia is immigration expert and senior fellow at the American Immigration Council Dara Lind. Together, they explore how Trump’s second term has differed from his first in his weaponization of obscure legal tools and administrative procedures—many of them relics from the Cold War and even the John Adams era—to strip people of legal status, bypass the courts, and normalize practices once considered unthinkable.Tune in for an informative but chilling discussion.© The UnPopulist, 2025Follow us on Bluesky, Threads, YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and X. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theunpopulist.net

In a piece for our new project Executive Watch, Walter Olson, senior fellow at the Cato Institute’s Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, clarified the dangers of a recent presidential memo from the Trump administration, which accuses prominent law firms of “grossly unethical misconduct” and threatens them with severe penalties—such as revoking security clearances and cutting off federal contractsSpeaking with the director of Executive Watch, Rob Tracinski, Olson explains how, under the guise of promoting “accountability” for “frivolous, unreasonable, and vexatious litigation,” this move threatens the current means of accountability relied on by judges and undermines the independence of the entire legal profession.We hope you enjoy.© The UnPopulist, 2025Follow us on Bluesky, Threads, YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and X. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theunpopulist.net