The concept of impeachment was not new at the time of the Constitutional Convention. The Framers thought including the ability to impeach the Chief Magistrate to the Constitution was extremely important. However, today it is hard to picture in our polarized political climate that there would ever be a super majority in the Senate in order to impeach and remove a president.Were there debates about including impeachment in the Constitution at the Constitutional Convention? What is the scope of the impeachment clause? What does the process of impeachment look like? What level of incompetence could be grounds for impeachment?Further Reading:Democrats Abandon the Constitution, written by David B. Rivkin Jr. and Lee A. CaseyIndispensable Remedy: The Broad Scope of the Constitution’s Impeachment Power, written by Gene HealyNixon v. U.S.Related Content:America’s Dangerous Devotion to Executive Power, Free Thoughts PodcastKing Obama, King Trump: The Dangers of an Imperial Presidency, Free Thoughts Podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Like economic policy, it can be hard to judge the relative freedom of tech policy. Depending on the tech policy we are referring to, the United States is still a massive hub and innovator. That is not to say that we do not have current regulations that may inhibit innovation of certain emerging tech sectors. Naturally, with new technology, comes fear of the unknown and we have to make sure that we do not succumb to those fears. Listening to fears could result in limiting our ability to develop the tech to the fullest extent.How do we address the federalism question when it comes to tech policy? When it comes to emerging tech, are we forced to imagine threats? Should we be concerned about the level of pervasive private surveillance? What threat do Amazon, Google, and Facebook pose since they centralize our data?Further Reading:Permissionless Innovation, written by Adam ThiererTechnopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology, written by Neil PostmanOf Rockets and Robotics: The Regulation of Emerging Aerial Technology, The Cato InstituteRelated Content:Killer Drones or Delivery Drones, Building Tomorrow PodcastIs China beating the U.S. at Innovation?, Building Tomorrow PodcastWelcome to the Sharing Economy, Free Thoughts PodcastIn the Economy of the Future, You Won’t Own Your Kitchen, written by Pamela J. Hobart Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

 If you are a regular listener of Free Thoughts, you are surely familiar with Free Thoughts fan favorite Peter Van Doren. Today, Peter Van Doren joins us for special bonus episode of Free Thoughts to discuss the latest issue of Regulation Magazine. If you like what you hear, you can check out Regulation online by heading to cato.org/regulation.What percent of American consumer expenditures actually end up in China? Is trade to blame for the disappearing manufacturing jobs? Why does the federal government own so much land in the West?Further Reading:Cato Regulation Magazine Fall 2018Related Content:Is Public Transportation Worth it? (with Peter Van Doren), Free Thoughts PodcastRegulation Magazine, Summer 2018 (with Peter Van Doren), Free Thoughts PodcastPeter Van Doren vs. MS-13, Free Thoughts Podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

 Sahar Khan explains the complicated history of Pakistan, and its’ relationship with the U.S., from its designation as an independent country from Great Britain in 1947.Is a majority of Pakistan Muslim? What is the difference between a Sunni Muslim and a Shi’a Muslim? Do they get along? Are their other divisions between Muslims? What is the government structure of Pakistan? Did September 11th, 2001 change the relationship between the U.S. and Pakistan? What military groups does Pakistan sponsor? Was the Taliban ever a political party?Further Reading:Libertarians Shouldn’t Accept the Case for Colonialism, written by Sahar KhanPakistan’s Youth: An Untapped Resource by Pakistan’s Political Parties, written by Sahar KhanThe Stalemate: Implications of Afghanistan’s Stalled Peace Process on U.S.–Pakistan Relations, written by Sahar KhanRelated Content:America’s Authoritarian Alliances, Free Thoughts PodcastGovernment, War, and Libertarianism, written by Justin Logan Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

America has roughly 4500 institutions of higher education. In a majority of those institutions, there aren’t any students shouting down, sometimes violently, guest speakers. These widely-publicized events tend to occur in left-leaning parts of the country, most notably the Northeast and the Western seaboard. However, heightened levels of anxiety and depression within student populations is readily visible across the country. Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt join us to discuss their theory, which is explained in great detail throughout their book The Coddling of the American Mind, of why this trend is occurring among the iGen generation and how parents, school administrators, and the students themselves can help mitigate its’ effects.What is the justification that students use to oppose speakers, demand speech codes, and request trigger warning policies? Do students overuse the word “trauma”? What is the new kind of student activism and how is it toxic to educational institutions? How widespread is this issue? What is the mental health state of students who are attending college now, as part of the iGen generation? What role does social media play in this young “mental health crisis”?Further Reading:The Coddling of the American Mind, article in the Atlantic, written by Greg Lukianoff & Jonathan HaidtThe Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion, written by Jonathan HaidtUnlearning Liberty: Campus Censorship and the End of American Debate, written by Greg LukianoffFIRE websiteHeterodox Academy websiteRelated Content:Campus Freedom, Free Thoughts EpisodeCampus Censorship and the End of American Debate, Free Thoughts Episode Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jesse Norman believes that many books about Adam Smith miss two key parts of his work. The first being some technical consequences associated with Smiths’ work on economics. The second is that he was part of the Scottish Enlightenment, which was not a result of questioning religion, as the Enlightenment in other parts of the world was. Norman explains how Adam Smith’s life progressed to the point of where he produced The Wealth of Nations. Norman thinks of Smith as not only the father of economics, but also the father of social psychology.What is Smith’s policy impact today? What was the intellectual environment was Smith in? When was the Scottish Enlightenment? How was the Scottish Enlightenment different than the French Enlightenment? What was the relationship between David Hume and Adam Smith? Why is the Theory of Moral Sentiments often ignored? What is an “impartial spectator” according to Smith?Further Reading:Adam Smith: Father of Economics, written by Jesse NormanThe Condensed Wealth of Nations and The Incredibly Condensed Theory of Moral Sentiments, written by Eamonn ButlerAdam Smith InstituteRelated Content:Was Adam Smith a Libertarian?, written by Paul MuellerThe Ideas of Adam Smith, Free Thoughts EpisodeHow Adam Smith Can Change Your Life, Free Thoughts Episode Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

P.J. O’Rourke offers comedic relief about the state of our politics from his unique journalistic perspective influenced by the “sunshine” of the 1960s. O’Rourke has worked for many notable publications such as the National Lampoon and Rolling Stone Magazine. He has had two New York Times #1 Bestsellers; Parliament of Whores and Give War a Chance. He is currently a correspondent for the Atlantic as well as the H.L. Mencken Research Fellow at the Cato Institute.Why does show business and left-wing politics have an affinity for each other? What happened to politics in the 1960s? How did the baby boomers ruin the world? What does O’Rourke think of the state of journalism today? Are we more divided today, as a society, than we were in the latter half of the 1960s?Further Reading:None of My Business, written by P.J. O’RourkeAll the Trouble in the World: The Lighter Side of Overpopulation, Famine, Ecological Disaster, Ethnic Hatred, Plague, and Poverty, written by P.J. O’RourkeIt’s Worse than Vulgar, It’s Trendy, written by P.J. O’RourkeRelated Content:Is Liberalism in Danger?, Free Thoughts EpisodeHarambe to Trump: 2016 was the Worst, Free Thoughts EpisodeKing Obama, King Trump: The Dangers of an Imperial Presidency, Free Thoughts Episode Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chris Fettweis joins us this week to discuss his book Psychology of a Superpower: Security and Dominance in U.S. Foreign Policy. Fettweis argues that as a country, Americans, tend to be so fearful of our perceived enemies that we are willing to spend much more on national security measures than is neccessary. Ultimately, we may end up doing more harm than good.What is unipolarity? Is the United States the most fearful country in the world? Do we spend more money on national security because of that fear? Is the world safer than it was during the Cold War? If so, why do people have nostalgia for the Cold War? What is the “enemy image” problem and do we need an enemy in order to continue interactions abroad? Does everyone value human life in the same way?Further Reading:Psychology of a Superpower: Security and Dominance in U.S. Foreign Policy, written by Chris FettweisChristopher J. Fettweis on his book Psychology of a Superpower, Cato AudioLosing Hurts Twice as Bad: The Four Stages to Moving Beyond Iraq, written by Christopher FettweisRelated Content:When is it appropriate to go to war?, Free Thoughts EpisodeHow much should we worry about ISIS?, Free Thoughts EpisodeThree Arguments against War, written by Jason Kuznicki Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Do enough people benefit from public transportation considering the amount of money poured into those politically-driven endeavors? Peter Van Doren joins us this week to break down this issue. The percentage of people who use public transit on a daily basis is higher, for obvious reasons, in urban areas. However, even in a city like Washington, D.C., only “700,000 people use the public metro rail system in comparison to the 5 million who commute downtown by car.” Van Doren argues that mass transit spending grew the most under the Nixon presidency because it made the most political sense. Unfortunately, that mindset tends to persist today.How would you define public transit? What does all the money we spend on public transit actually do? Why are there always more calls for public transit? Why are we fixated on public transit options like trains? Why is there a negative connotation associated with public buses?Further Reading:Report: 98 Percent Of U.S. Commuters Favor Public Transportation For Others, from the OnionThe Urban Transportation System: Politics and Policy Innovation, written by Alan A. AltshulerRegulation MagazineRelated Content:Transportation, Land Use, and Freedom, Free Thoughts EpisodeWho will build the roads?, Free Thoughts EpisodeRide-Sharing Services Aren’t a Problem, They’re a Solution, written by Aeon SkobleUncle Sam, the Monopoly Man: Paying for Roads, written by William Wooldridge   Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Matthew J. Moore discusses how Buddhism may align with libertarian tendencies; most importantly the need to think for yourself. At the core of Buddhism is the hope or want to escape from suffering, with that being said it is grounded on four noble truths. In traditional Buddhist teaching, there are gods, but they’re all mortal. The universe according to the Buddha has no beginning and no end, and they will all eventually die and be reincarnated.Matthew J. Moore elaborates on the Buddhist political theory that is more substantiative than simple absolute monarchy. When Buddha talks about politics, Moore claims that it always goes back to a deeper level that there is no self. The Buddha believes that your self is an “ongoing project” and that very fact creates many social disruptions, distractions, and tensions. What could Buddhist politics look like in practice? Moore argues that the Buddha believes that you shouldn’t put a ton of thought or hope in to political duties- you should do them, but it should not be the element of your life that makes you feel “free”. Ultimately, Moore argues when it comes to politics and Buddhism, “the quality of your experience matters and the quality of your intention matters.”Who is the Buddha? Is Buddha thought of as a divine person, as a spiritual being like Jesus, or like one of the Hebrew prophets? Is he a philosopher and not divine? Why would Buddhism have something to say about political theory? Does the Buddha believe that there are human rights?Further Reading:Buddhism and Political Theory, written by Matthew J. MooreReasons and Persons, written by Derek ParfitRelated Content:The Effects of Liberty on Religion, written by Adam SmithLibertarianism and Christianity, Free Thoughts EpisodeA Muslim Case for Liberty, Free Thoughts EpisodeReligion and Liberty, Encyclopedia of Libertarianism.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.