Wisdom of Crowds

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.live It’s been a turbulent few months for the United Kingdom: the scandal-ridden departure of a prime minister, the death of a beloved queen, economic woes, and the accession of a less-beloved king. We decided it would be best to have an actual British person on the podcast to discuss it all with, so we invited Josh Glancy, columnist for The Sunday Times. We began by highlighting the strange contrast between the recent upswell of support for the monarchy and Britain’s parlous economic state. Does having a monarchy suppress public discontent by deflecting its attention, and is this a good thing? Also, how can Americans wrap their heads around the monarchy’s function in Britain? Shadi, Damir, and Josh discuss whether the Constitution or Presidency might serve a similar role. Then, we discussed the monarch who now rules over Britain. Will (now-King) Charles be able to preserve the apolitical, broadly popular place his mother carved out in British life? Or is the institution doomed to become politicized and controversial? The answer, we surmise, might lie in how similar British political culture is to America’s. In Part 2 (available here for subscribers) Damir asks the question that's on everyone’s mind: is Prince Charles a secret Muslim? Shadi has his thoughts. More seriously, we discuss the religious role of the British monarch, as the head of the Church of England, and how much Christianity shapes public life there. In a relatively irreligious and diverse country like Britain, are average citizens affected by Christianity’s presence in the state? And does the United States, a far more religious country on paper, “feel” any more Christian? Required Reading: Adrian Woolridge, “How a Journalist, a Bureaucrat, and a King Invented British Majesty” (Bloomberg). Josh Glancy, “Divided America Needs a Dose of the British Royal Family” (The Times). Josh Glancy, “How the British Royal Family Became a Very American Obsession” (American Spectator). Josh Glancy, “King Charles III: A New Era Begins With the Most Gloriously Elaborate Piece of Box-Ticking” (The Times). Josh Glancy, “Even Now it’s Still Good to be Jewish in the U.S.A.,” (The Jewish Chronicle) Josh Glancy, “Party of a Lifetime for the ‘World’s Grandmother’” (The Times).Damir tweeting about the crypto-Islamism of King Charles.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.live The Crowd is flying solo (duo?) again for this week's episode, focusing on recent developments in the war in Ukraine, Iranian protests, and Europe's under-the-radar political upheavals. The Russian government recently declared a "partial mobilization" to aid in the war effort, and Vladimir Putin threatened to defend Russia's gains with nuclear weapons. How much affect will mobilization have on the course of the war? What kind of precedent does it set to seize territory, then defend those gains with nuclear threats? Then, we turned to the recent protests shaking Iran—and a larger discussion of how authoritarian regimes hold onto power. Have governments become better at crushing dissent in recent years? And why do dictators seem to love running a dictatorship–an often unpleasant job–so much? In Part 2 (available here for subscribers), we talked about the recent success of far right parties in Europe. The Sweden Democrats, a party with roots in neo-fascism, have become the second biggest political party in Sweden's parliament. If Sweden is as tolerant as many Americans would like it to be, what explains their rise? The country's recent rise in Muslim immigration, as well as crime, might point to an answer, although we disagree on the "solutions." Can a crackdown on crime forestall a far-right backlash? Is Muslim integration helped or harmed by such methods? And why do hobbits come into it? Required Reading: “'Nothing Has Really Changed': In Moscow, the Fighting is Worlds Away,” by Valerie Hopkins (The New York Times). “Hobbits and the Hard Right: How Fantasy Inspires Italy’s Potential New Leader,” by Jason Horowitz (The New York Times). “How Italy is facing a crucial election,” Gideon Rachman’s interview with Nathalie Tocci (The Financial Times). “Will Jean Monnet’s Vision for Europe Win Out?” Damir’s interview with Nathalie Tocci for the Atlantic Council. The Happiness Lab’s episode on Denmark. “Europe’s Growing Muslim Population,” a report from the Pew Research Center. “Lead: America’s Real Criminal Element,” Kevin Drum (Mother Jones).

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveThis podcast came after a whirlwind few weeks for the Crowd– Damir returned from his odyssey through the Balkans, and Shadi was the recipient of several Twitter pile-ons. Oh, and the Queen died.Before getting to all that, though, we ramble through a potpourri of other subjects. Damir gives relationship advice.  Shadi tells us why he's against pets and hiking. A conversation about whether animals have souls turns into a discuss of creationism and free speech, touching on some recent arguments in the pages of The Atlantic.We also continue our conversation about national conservatism from last week, addressing statements made by national conservatives about the nature of rights in the international system. Are rights only real if they're enforceable? And if not, should the very concept be thrown out the window?In the full episode (for subscribers only) Damir discusses some of the takeaways from his trip to the Balkans: what he saw on his travels made him wonder whether authoritarians like Vladimir Putin imposed themselves on unwilling societies, or if "the people" were more active participants in the process. In other words, are the Russian people as victimized as Western media makes them seem? Finally, Shadi shares his surprise at Britons; depth of feeling for their monarch, as well as his thoughts on what role monarchs play in Western democracies.

We did something a little unusual for this week: a crossover episode. We sat down with Susannah Black Roberts and Peter Mommsen—the hosts of Ploughcast, from Plough Quarterly, a Christian magazine of ideas and culture—for a conversation about the "post-liberal" movement as well as broader questions of the "common good" (does it exist?).  All four of us are coming from vastly different perspectives and backgrounds, and that came out in our spirited conversation.Our conversation about the common good led to deep questions about the nature of politics and law. What are the practical implications of saying, as Martin Luther King did, that "an unjust law is no law at all?" If all humans have souls (even Damir) what does that mean about how we should organize political communities? And how can citizens with fundamental differences be reconciled?We also discussed the recently released National Conservative Statement of Principles: a manifesto signed by many leaders of the post-liberal right. All four of us had significant disagreements with the Statement—but for different reasons. Will its advocacy for a more robust role for Christianity in public life crowd out religious minorities, as Shadi notes? Susannah, as a self-identified Christian post-liberal herself, goes further, wondering if a Christian conception of the good can even be the foundation for an American political movement.We also talked about how Christian ideas of justice cohere—or don't—with liberalism. Damir makes a bold claim: articulating a "common good" can't be done without reference to religious principles, and anyone claiming otherwise is deluding themselves. Needless to say, everyone else on the podcast disagrees (the word "Satanic" comes up).  Required Reading:- The National Conservative Statement of Principles.- The open letter responding to the National Conservative Statement of Principles (The European Conservative).- “Our Post-Liberal Moment,” by Susannah Black Roberts (The Spectator World).- Why Liberalism Failed, by Patrick Deneen (Amazon).- The AP’s recent report on Canada’s euthanasia policies (The Associated Press). This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit wisdomofcrowds.live/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.live Just as it has a past, liberalism has a future. The only question is whether this future will be compelling enough for those who have lost faith. We have our doubts. Which is why we wanted to talk to Francis Fukuyama, author of The End of History and the Last Man and perhaps the foremost thinker on the development of modern political order. In his new book, Liberalism and Its Discontents, Fukuyama mounts a comprehensive and stirring defense of the liberal idea. But is it enough? We started by discussing Donald Trump—and other possible threats from the GOP to liberalism. Liberalism hasn't necessarily failed, but it has weakened. How and why did this happen? Is liberalism too "thin" to serve as the bedrock of American identity? Fukuyama argues that modern liberalism has become deformed and is no longer liberal. What would it mean to return to "classical liberalism" and is it even possible? In Part 2 of the conversation (available here for subscribers), Shadi questioned Fukuyama on whether ostensibly liberal states do in fact promote their own particular conception of the Good. For example, can state-enforced secularism, like France's, be reasonably considered liberal? Damir raises the point that the universalist assumptions behind liberalism may simply not be workable in a large, diverse, societies. Finally, we talk about the specific ways in which rising illiberalism could be beaten back. Fukuyama believes that the only way to defeat right-wing illiberalism is to defeat it decisively at the polls, through the Democratic Party moving towards the center and ditching its "woke" wing. In the long term, however, Fukuyama is optimistic about liberalism's prospects, and the chances for "partisans of human freedom" to succeed. Required Reading: “Paths to Depolarization,” by Francis Fukuyama (Persuasion). Liberalism and Its Discontents, by Francis Fukuyama (Amazon). The End of History and the Last Man, by Francis Fukuyama (Amazon). Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy, by Francis Fukuyama (Amazon). The Transformation of Title IX: Regulating Gender Equality in Education, by R. Shep Melnick (Amazon). The Inheritors: An Intimate Portrait of South Africa’s Racial Reckoning, by Eve Fairbanks (Amazon).

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.live This week's episode features one of Twitter's more controversial figures: Jason Stanley, a professor of philosophy at Yale and author of How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them. In true Wisdom of Crowds fashion, we wanted a more measured and wide-ranging exchange of views than Twitter could provide, so we invited Stanley onto the podcast to discuss Trumpism and the Republican Party, the use of the word "fascism," and the dangers of an emerging fascist international. While there were significant disagreements, our desire for more open and honest dialogue was richly rewarded. Stanley believes that the fascist mode of politics—a precursor to actual fascism—takes American form in Donald Trump and today's GOP. To what extent is Trumpism "legitimate"? Should federal prosecutors do all in their power put Trump away even if that imperils the legitimacy of our democracy? Under what conditions should a political party be banned for anti-democratic activity in the United States? In Part 2 (available here for subscribers), we asked whether Stanley's definition of fascism included things that many would merely consider illiberal. How does diagnosing fascism work in Europe, where almost every country's notion of belonging is at least partly tied to ethnic origin? Are modern notions of citizenship compatible with a non-fascist political philosophy? We also asked Stanley some more personal questions to close out the episode. Does he see his combative Twitter activity as separate from his academic work and his writing? What is the role of philosophers in the public sphere, and how would he like to be remembered in 200 years (or 50)? Required Reading: How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them, by Jason Stanley (Amazon). How Propaganda Works, by Jason Stanley (Amazon). Jason’s 2015 article, “Democracy and the Demagogue,” where he describes the source of Trump’s appeal (The New York Times). “American Fascism?” by Jason Stanley (El Pais). “America is now in fascism’s legal phase,” by Jason Stanley (The Guardian). The Newsweek story about Sam Harris’ controversial interview (Newsweek). Emile: On Education, by Jean-Jacques Rosseau (Amazon).

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).