Wisdom of Crowds

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveThe FBI's surprise "raid" on Donald Trump's residence in Mar-a-Lago this week has been hailed in some quarters as a triumph for the rule of law, and seen in others as signs of a slide into banana-republic status. We invited Jason Willick, a Washington Post columnist who writes on legal issues, to sit down with us and discuss the deeper implications of the event.True to the Crowd's ethos, we focused on fundamental issues. Jason argued that the polarized reactions to the raid show the difficulty of having federal-level law enforcement in an increasingly divided political climate. Shadi and Damir went back on forth on the question of justice: should law enforcement be entirely impartial, or must prosecutors exercise discretion based on the political context? Does one side bear more blame for our current spiral of mistrust and polarization, or is the problem systemic?In the subscriber-only part of the conversation, things got a little heated, as we debated what might restore Americans' belief in democracy. Shadi went (in his own words) "unplugged," talking about his hopes for restoring democratic values. Might a South-Africa-style "truth and reconciliation" commission be appropriate? Damir is skeptical.And finally, the three conclude with a discussion of whether America can pull out of the spiral. Shadi believes that we need a recovery of civic virtue. Damir thinks the national culture is no longer able to sustain democratic values. And Jason raises the point that full scale democratic backsliding is unlikely, given the size of our country. Ultimately, the choice to reject the polarization cycle will be up to voters– a conclusion both optimistic and pessimistic.Required Reading:- "An Informer Told the FBI What Docs Trump Was Hiding, and Where," by William H. Arkin (Newsweek).- Bill Barr's speech at Hillsdale College.- "The Problem of Donald Trump Didn't Start with Donald Trump," by Damir (Gen, on Medium).- Jason Tweeting about the Espionage Act.- Florida Governor Ron DeSantis Tweeting about the American "regime."- "Is Trump Crazy— or calculating? His opponents have to decide," by Jason (The Washington Post).

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveWe welcomed a truly important thinker onto the podcast this week. Walter Russell Mead joined us to discuss his latest book The Arc of a Covenant: The United States, Israel, and the Fate of the Jewish People.Many critics of American foreign policy have long pointed to our long-standing relationship with Israel as proof of the power of the "Israel Lobby" to influence American politics. Mead's latest book shows that reality is far more complicated: the struggles of Zionism in the 19th and 20th centuries have deep resonances with America's self-conception as a nation blessed by Providence. We see a little bit of ourselves in Israel, and act accordingly.We then moved on to broader questions. How has the American conception of the "arc of history," and our place in it, changed over time? Have modern Americans really lost faith in the American project to a greater degree than previous generations?In the full conversation (for paying subscribers), we discussed the future of American engagement with the wider world. How much do we need to pursue human rights abroad? And does a foreign policy based on human rights make us stronger (Damir, of course, is skeptical)?Mead offers an answer, drawn from his own belief in "Christian realism." In the closing moments of the episode, we talk about the Biden administration's failures and successes in foreign affairs, as well as the reasons recent Democratic administrations have struggled to achieve their geopolitical aims. And finally, how does Providence figure into our future struggles with a rising China?Required Reading:- Walter Russell Mead's latest book, The Arc of a Covenant: The United States, Israel, and the Fate of the Jewish People (Amazon).- God and Gold: Britain, America, and the Making of the Modern World, and Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and How It Changed the World, by Walter Russell Mead (Amazon).- "Democratic Primaries Are Embroiled in Debate Over Support for Israel," by Jonathan Weisman (The New York Times).- Huey Long: A Biography, by T. Harry Williams (Amazon).- All the King's Men, by Robert Penn Warren (Amazon).- The Jungle Grows Back: America and Our Imperiled World, by Robert Kagan (Amazon).

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveThis week, we had writer Nick Burns on the podcast. Nick's recent essay, "Why Live in America?" prompted Shadi to write his Monday Note for July 4th. We delve into the ways America is different than Europe, for good and for ill. Size, geography, culture, dynamism—all these twist and disfigure many European imports when they land on our shores.When educated Americans pine for a more European lifestyle, are they simply reflecting their own class biases? Is the building of high speed rail really a sign of decline? And are democratic values incompatible with the modern university?We then turned to foreign policy. Nick's recent article in the New Statesman questioning the core assumptions of realism was our jumping-off point for a broader discussion of morality in foreign affairs, and the role of the public's sentiments in states' decision-making. Shadi and Damir of course go at it on the question of a values, with Nick caught in between.Is arguing for human rights a universalist claim? And is arguing from the vantage point of neutrality its own kind of moralism? And was the 19th century French reactionary Chateaubriand the world's first neocon?Required Reading:- The Red Scare podcast.- The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal of Democracy, by Christopher Lasch (Amazon).- "New York's Hipster Wars," by Nick Burns (The New Statesman).- "America's Medieval Universities," by Nick Burns (American Affairs).- "What Realists Get Wrong About Putin," by Nick Burns (The New Statesman).- The Benedict Option: A Strategy for Christians in a Post-Christian Nation, by Rod Dreher (Amazon).- Sam Haselby's Twitter account.- "Unlearning the Language of Wokeness," by Sam Adler-Bell (New York Magazine).

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveWe return to a question that the Crowd has been chewing over for the last month or so: why do things– political systems, regimes, parties– change? Do ideas really change the world? And can individual actions really have any effect on larger systems?Climate change, and whether we think world governments can mend their ways in time to avert the worst of the crisis, begins the discussion. We discuss whether governments will ever be able to cooperate to the extent needed to "solve" climate change (Damir, predictably, is less sanguine) and whether humanity will find some way to muddle through. Have we, as a species, finally run into a Malthusian limit on progress? How much faith should we have in the prospect of progress?We later move into a wider ranging discussion of the role of ideas in world politics, and whether the modern world is heavily influenced by abstract ideas, as authors like Francis Fukuyama would argue. Shadi also talks about his personal effort to get his own ideas across– and hopefully accepted by– to American policymakers, in the face of political systems that seem unbearably sluggish and unresponsive.Finally, in the bonus portion of the episode, available here for subscribers, we use the proliferation of diverse candidates in the Tory leadership race as a springboard into a discussion of democracy. Does the handpicked selection of women and minorities for leadership by party leaders in the United Kingdom showcase the virtues of democracy? Or does its top-down nature show how non-democratic means are sometimes needed to achieve social goods?Required Reading:A sample of the Matt Yglesias tweets about European appliances."One Billion Americans," by Matt Yglesias (Amazon)."The Great Stagnation," by Tyler Cowen (Amazon).

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveThis week was a first for the podcast– we welcomed two guests, Michael Wear and Jane Coaston. Michael is a rare fish, an Evangelical Christian and a Democratic political strategist who worked as President Obama's director of faith outreach in the 2012 campaign, going on to lead Evangelical outreach for the Obama White House's faith based initiative. An article he recently wrote for his Substack, "This is How to End Abortion Politics as We've Known It," has sparked vigorous discussion among the online set. In it, Wear argues that what "is needed now is legislation which provides a national framework that would contain our abortion debate, even if it would also mean codifying the nation’s long-held consensus that abortion is not a social good, even if a majority also believe it necessary to (re)establish the right to have one."Jane Coaston, a New York Times opinion writer and host of "The Argument" podcast, thinks that Wear is mistaken. In her view, both sides see their position as absolute, and any compromise will be seen as an unacceptable betrayal of the cause. We decided to invite them both onto the pod, to hash it out and discuss the political fallout from the Dobbs decision.  In the full episode (for subscribers), the conversation shifted towards a discussion of first principles and political strategy. We asked Michael how he squared working for President Obama with his own pro-life position, and questioned Jane on whether she thought a "settlement" on abortion was even desirable, let alone possible.Will Republicans after the fall of Roe v. Wade be like the dog who caught the car, as Damir argues? Will Democrats be forced to moderate their strategy on abortion to meet voters where they are? Will either party be able to extricate itself from the demands of its activist class? And finally, we all debate the extent to which Democrats could, or should, have moderated their views on abortion over the past decade.Required Reading:- "This is How to End Abortion Politics as We've Known It," by Michael, on his Substack.- "Democrats Shouldn't be so Certain About Abortion," by Michael (The New York Times).- "How Will We Punish Women Who Have Abortions?" by Jane, (The New York Times).- "The Argument" episode discussing the Dobbs decision, with Ross Douthat and Michelle Goldberg (The New York Times).- "Making Abortion Illegal and Unthinkable," by Ryan T. Anderson and Alexandra Desanctis (National Review).- Kevin D. Williamson discussing his email exchange with Jane, in National Review's online blog.- "The Abortion Stories We Didn't Tell," by Rebecca Traister (New York Magazine).- The full transcript of 2016's third presidential debate (Politico).

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveThis week we sat down to debate America's greatness—or lack thereof. Somewhat to our surprise, we found a source of agreement between us: our belief in American exceptionalism, even if we have very different conceptions of the role of morality and "progress" in forging the American idea.Countries in Europe may have a more leisurely pace of life and higher levels of reported happiness, but is that really what Americans want? Should it be what they want? Central to all of this are the questions of the state, democracy, and the double-edged sword of meritocracy. If, contrary to popular belief, a certain degree of dysfunction is what makes American society so dynamic, are we better off being a "failed state" then having a strong, efficient state like in Norway, Denmark, or France?  In the full episode (for subscribers), we turned to the question of whether the main problem facing American democracy is Trump himself or Trumpism as a movement. If it's the latter, do intellectuals' dire warnings of the threat to democracy really matter, especially if Trumpism is all about resentment? Many American pundits compared the rise of Trump to the rise of Hitler, adding to their sense of urgency in "stopping" him. But, we ask, would a greater awareness of the dangers of Trump really have prevented his rise? Is it possible—or morally appropriate—to stop a criminal before the crime is committed?The debate over January 6 hinges at least in part on whether it qualified as an "attempted coup." If the coup had succeeded, would it have blocked Biden's transition to power—or was America's messy, dysfunctional democracy a protection against such an outcome?Required Reading:- "America is Great Precisely Because it's Not," by Shadi Hamid (Wisdom of Crowds).- "Why Live in America?" by Nick Burns on his Substack.- Damir's Twitter thread on America's supreme adaptability.- Damir retweeting Garry Kasparov on Europe's struggles with innovation.- Shadi's Twitter thread on humiliation, resentment, and Jon Stewart's decline.- William Galston on Tyler Cowen's Average is Over (The Wall Street Journal).- "How Life Became an Endless, Terrible, Competition" by Daniel Markovits (The Atlantic).- Shadi's infamous Atlantic piece from before the election.- Jason Stanley's Twitter.- Our episode with Bruno Macaes.- "Notes Towards a Dreampolitik," in The White Album, by Joan Didion.

Discover the triumph and sorrow of the gay experience in Washington DC, from the red scare to the closet opening, examining the impact of the national security state, progress in politics, and the lasting legacy of the gay rights movement.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveA few weeks back, a book title caught our eye. It was called Two Billion Caliphs, written by Haroon Moghul. Mixing personal narrative and theological ruminations, it promised to offer a bold new vision for Muslims living in the 21st century. Being that we frequently talk about the importance of religion in the modern world, inviting Haroon on was a no-brainer.A rich episode ensued. We talked about how 9/11 did (and didn’t) change everything for Muslims in America and how secularism and liberalism drive assimilation for good and for ill. If the Islamic tradition is being subsumed under liberalism, particularly in the West, does Islam's future include so-called "atheist Muslims"? And when it comes to politics, does the future of Islam in America include a Trumpist Republican party that, despite its anti-Muslim sentiments, still manages to run candidates like Dr. Mehmet Oz?In the full conversation (for subscribers), Shadi and Haroon debate whether Islam can (or should) be de-politicized and what that might mean in practice. Haroon then goes on to explain why he has parted ways with Sufism, and why everyone must become a caliph.Required Reading:- Two Billion Caliphs: A Vision of a Muslim Future, by Haroon Moghul.- "American Islam gets this beautiful thing right," by Haroon Moghul (CNN)

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveThis week we invited the author Oliver Traldi on the podcast to talk about the role of experts in society and how we assess different kinds of skill, talent, and truth. Oliver, a writing fellow at Heterodox Academy and a doctoral candidate in philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, is one of the most exciting young thinkers and writers around today—as evidenced by his recent tour-de-force of an essay titled "With All Due Respect to the Experts."The conversation begins with Shadi's half-joking admission that he is being red-pilled in real time, mostly due to the increase in crime and many liberals' inability to concede that it is indeed a problem. This leads to an interesting back and forth about the difficulty of pinpointing truth in a pluralistic and democratic society.What is the role of experts really? Are "experts" the academic equivalent of pilots flying planes? Would we be better off as a society if we diminished the importance of punditry?In the full subscriber episode, the conversation zeroes in on the role of elites, and the qualities needed for effective leadership. Would technocracy seem like a more desirable system if our expert class hadn't sullied its credibility so extensively over the last 20 years? Is the horse-sense of normie voters a better guiding light than the prophecies of an elite class that is all to0 often high on its own supply?Required Reading- "With All Due Respect to the Experts" by Oliver Traldi (American Compass)- "The Red-Pilling of Liberal America" by Shadi Hamid (Wisdom of Crowds)- Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction, by Phillip E. Tetlock and Dan Gardner (Amazon)- Smug Pilots New Yorker Cartoon- How Propaganda Works, by Jason Stanley (Amazon)- Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government, by Christopher H. Achen (Amazon)- "The Point of Political Belief" by Michael Hannon (Academia)- "A crying shame" by Oliver Traldi (Washington Examiner)

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveIdeas have consequences. From the early 2000s Matt Continetti, the author of the fascinating new book The Right, has worked at some of the leading institutions of American conservatism. He has seen firsthand how many of them fallen or lost their way. But where conservatism's critics see a movement that has become unrecognizable and even dangerous, Continetti sees instead a rich, vibrant, and messy war of ideas, institutions, and personalities.This week, Continetti—the co-founder of the Washington Free Beacon and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute—offered us a panoramic look at the past and future of the American right and its sometimes odd intellectual evolution. How much do ideas really matter? How might the Republican Party have been different had 9/11 not happened? And would the conservative movement have even been possible without the pervasive threat of communism?In the full subscriber episode, the conversation zeroes in on the extent to which conservatism and the right have diverged. Conservatism is meant to conserve, where the New Right is defined by populism and radicalism. Shadi pushes Matt by asking a question that is top of mind for many on the left: To what extent is the Republican Party still democratic? What is it drawing young men to such a revolutionary view of American politics? Is there a limit to anti-American ideas in American politics?Required Reading- The Right: The Hundred-Year War for American Conservatism, by Matthew Continetti (Amazon)- Democratic Realism: An American Foreign Policy for a Unipolar World (Irving Kristol Lecture), by Charles Krauthammer- "The Unipolar Moment" by Charles Krauthammer (Foreign Affairs)- Trump's American Carnage Innaugural Address (CSPAN)