Wisdom of Crowds

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)

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveThis week Shadi and Damir sat down to discuss the Uvalde mass shooting and its aftermath. Tragedy has struck the American psyche once again. The murder of innocent children has Americans groping for answers but the seemingly scripted discourse in the wake of such tragedies provides anything but solid answers. Are there really any viable legislative paths to prevent such terrible shootings? Must everyone “read the room” when Twitter is collectively grieving?As the conversation progresses, the discussion turns to liberals’ squeamishness about appearing patriotic and what to do when one’s political party changes before their eyes.In Part 2 of their discussion, available here for subscribers, Shadi admits that he feels somewhat perplexed by swing voters—after all, who hasn’t had time to make up their minds by this point—only to find out that Damir is in fact one of these elusive voters. They go on to discuss their voting histories and ask whether Republicans are more antidemocratic than their counterparts. Also, Shadi admits that he views Mitt Romney and John McCain in a new light while Damir explains his concerns about Vice President Harris potentially taking over for an aging Biden.Required Reading- "The U.S. has more in common with South America than Europe" by Samuel Goldman (The Week)- Shadi's controversial Atlantic piece from before the election.- "How the Left Lost Me" by Shadi Hamid (Wisdom of Crowds)- Pat Buchanan's 1992 speech at the RNC- Matt Yglessias' initial tweet- Matt Yglessias' apology tweet- Elon Musk's tweet about voting for Republicans.- Elon Musk's tweet about the Democrats moving to the left.- Ted Cruz's one door for schools idea- "Happiness Is a Warm Gun" by The Beatles (Youtube)

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveShadi has been curious about whether he has diverged from the left since Bernie Sanders' campaign, so he invited the socialist thinker Daniel Bessner onto the podcast this week for a spirited discussion of first principles. Bessner is one of the most influential and important leftist intellectuals writing on foreign policy today. He is the Joff Hanauer Honors Professor in Western Civilization at the University of Washington and the author of Democracy in Exile.What followed was perhaps the most contentious episode in Wisdom of Crowds history. Of course, here at the podcast, we see deep difference as a feature and not a bug, so we hope you'll see this as an example of what spirited but civil disagreement might look like in practice. The fundamental question we wanted to ask was whether American hegemony has, on balance, been "good" or "bad" for the world.This is a question about a world that seems to have been lost. The unipolar moment is quickly coming to an end—that is, if it isn't already gone. Daniel argues that the decline in American power is both an inescapable reality and a net positive for the world. Shadi and Damir both disagree, but for quite different reasons.In the longer episode (for subscribers only), the guys dive even deeper into their disagreements over America's role in the world. If the status quo is anything but ideal, what exactly are the alternatives—and are those alternatives plausible?Damir, looking to press Daniel, suggests that the socialist vision for how the world will improve with an inward-facing Socialist America leaves too many questions unanswered. Shadi bristled at the suggestion of decreasing America's military footprint at the exact time when Russia and China are becoming increasingly aggressive. All the while, Daniel rejects the premise that it's in our interest to militarily aid Ukraine and would prefer that the U.S. take care of its own people and address its own moral disasters instead of pushing its pretend values on the world.Required Reading- Daniel Bessner's podcast, "American Prestige"- Daniel's recent appearance on Glenn Loury's podcast- Democracy in Exile: Hans Speier and the Rise of the Defense Intellectual, by Daniel Bessner (Amazon)- "The American Empire and Existential Enemies" by Daniel Bessner (Foreign Exchanges)- "There Are Many Things Worse Than American Power" by Shadi Hamid (Atlantic)- "Are We The Good Guys? A Debate with Glenn Greenwald" (Wisdom of Crowds)- The Communist Manifesto, by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels (Amazon)

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveThis week we were joined by Molly Ball, bestselling author of Pelosi, to talk about how the possible overturning of Roe v. Wade will (or won't) change American politics for decades to come. Until a few days ago, Americans could act politically under the assumption that Roe was permanent. But it may not be.Ending Roe v. Wade would mean abortion would be decided by states, presumably according to the whims, desires—and wisdom—of crowds. To what extent would this be a more "democratic" outcome?In the full subscriber-only conversation, the discussion turned toward questions of legitimacy and minority rule. The debate over abortion, after all, is a debate about elites and institutions—and whether bodies like the Supreme Court can, or should, ever be neutral. We also debate whether Evangelicals really believe that abortion is tantamount to genocide. Presumably, if they did, more of them would do something about it.  Also, after Molly raises the specter that "progress" may in fact be real, chaos ensues—featuring a rapid-fire exchange between Molly and Damir on first principles.Required Reading- Pelosi, by Molly Ball (Amazon)- "Overturning Roe would make America more democratic" by Jason Willick (Washington Post)- "The war that never ends" (Economist)- "Is This Trump’s World Now? Four Opinion Writers on the Dobbs Leak and Vance’s Big Win." by Lulu Garcia-Navarro, Jane Coaston, Michelle Cottle and Ross Douthat (New York Times)- "How Southern Baptists became pro-life" by David Roach (Baptist Press)

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveMuch of the freakout about Elon Musk buying Twitter is based on an assumption that social media is integral to democracies and a critical tool for dissidents living in repressive regimes. But what if that assumption is overblown? Are the dustups over Twitter's new ownership really just a proxy war for the broader freedom of speech debate that has been ratcheting up recently?Just as Elon was talking up Twitter, Barack Obama gave a major address calling for government regulation of social media platforms to curb "misinformation." Here, then, are two contrasting visions that speak to essential differences over freedom and truth—and who determines what constitutes truth in the first place.  In the subscriber-only version of the episode, Shadi and Damir go on to debate whether low information or high information voters are better for democracy. Ordinary voters say they believe in crazy things, but in their day-to-day lives don't behave as if they believe. Ideologues, on the other hand, tend to be well-educated, so clearly better education or information isn't the answer. But then what is?Required Reading- Damir's tweet about Elon buying Twitter- Obama's speech on misinformation and disinformation at Standford- "Human rights groups raise hate speech concerns after Musk's takeover of Twitter" by Kanishka Singh (Reuters)- "To End Foreign Meddling, End Anonymity" by Damir Marusic (American Interest)- "How Musk could burst Obama’s ‘disinformation’ bubble" by Jason Willick (Washington Post)- "Bad News" by Joseph Bernstein (Harpers)- National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin (Department of Homeland Security)- "Just Keep It Off My Timeline!" by Freddie deBoer (Substack)- "READING: H.L. Mencken (December 1933): On Adolf Hitler" by Brad DeLong (Brad DeLong's Grasping Reality)- The Reckless Mind: Intellectuals in Politics, by Mark Lilla (Amazon)- The Shipwrecked Mind: On Political Reaction, by Mark Lilla (Amazon)- "The Texas Lawsuit and the Age of Dreampolitik" by Ross Douthat (New York Times)- Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government, by Christopher H. Achen and Larry M. Bartels (Amazon)- "Fantasy and Reality in Biden's America" with guest Bruno Bruno Maçães (Wisdom of Crowds)