Scott Horton of The Libertarian Institute and Eli Lake of The Free Press debate the resolution, "The United States started the new Cold War with Russia and provoked Russia's invasion of Ukraine." Taking the affirmative is Horton, the director of The Libertarian Institute and the editorial director of antiwar.com. He recently published a book on the debate subject called Provoked: How Washington Started the New Cold War with Russia and the Catastrophe in Ukraine. Arguing for the negative is Lake, a columnist for The Free Press and contributing editor for Commentary magazine, whose longtime beat has been foreign affairs and national security. The debate was hosted at Dartmouth College by the Dartmouth Political Union and moderated by Soho Forum director Gene Epstein. Post Production: John OsterhoudtThe post Did the U.S. Provoke Russia's Invasion of Ukraine? appeared first on Reason.com.

Peter Gietl of Blaze Media and Salvadoran journalist Ricardo Avelar debate the resolution, "President Nayib Bukele's crime-fighting policies in El Salvador provide a model for reducing violence in other Latin American countries." Arguing in favor is Gietl, the managing editor for Return and Frontier magazine for Blaze Media. In November of last year, Gietl published a lengthy photojournalistic essay chronicling his travels to El Salvador, titled "J'Adore El Salvador," which he concludes by asking: "Can we bottle [El Salvador's transformation] up and ship it back to America?" Taking the negative is Avelar, a senior journalist and presenter for the Central American news outlet Revista Factum. In 2021, he co-directed a docuseries called 9F: The Return of Rifles, which is about the "El Bukelazo" events of February 9, 2020. The debate is moderated by Soho Forum director Gene Epstein. Post Production: John OsterhoudtThe post El Salvador's Bukele: Authoritarian or Model President? appeared first on Reason.com.

Elizabeth Price Foley, a constitutional law professor known for her expertise in separation of powers, and Glenn Greenwald, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, engage in a lively debate over the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity. Foley defends the necessity of immunity for executive functions, while Greenwald argues it creates a dangerous precedent. They explore historical examples, the implications of unchecked power, and the balance between accountability and presidential authority, shedding light on a crucial aspect of U.S. governance.

Santiago Forster, a fellow at Fundación Rioplatense de Estudios and student, defends President Javier Milei’s economic reforms in Argentina. Agustín Dante Rombolá, founder of Kairos Global and a youth leader in the Unión Cívica Radical, critiques these policies, arguing they worsen poverty and inequality. They discuss Argentina's troubling economic history and the challenges of Milei's aggressive reforms, debating their effectiveness and long-term implications for everyday citizens. The dialogue showcases a clash of ideals around liberty and justice in the context of economic freedom.

David Leonhardt of The New York Times and John Early of the Cato Institute debate the resolution, "The stagnation of living standards and soaring economic inequality have become the defining economic trends of American life." For the affirmative is Leonhardt, a senior writer at The New York Times and the author of Ours Was the Shining Future: The Story of the American Dream, which The Atlantic, the Financial Times, and McKinsey & Co. named one of the best books of 2023. He writes The Morning, the Times's flagship newsletter. In 2012, he won a Pulitzer Prize for commentary. Early is taking the negative. He is an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and president of the consultancy Vital Few LLC. He is a former assistant commissioner at the Bureau of Labor Statistics and former legislative assistant to Sen. George McGovern (D–S.D.). His more than 80 publications include The Myth of American Inequality: How Government Biases Policy Debate. The debate is moderated by Soho Forum director Gene Epstein.The post Are American Living Standards In Decline? appeared first on Reason.com.

Former budget director under Ronald Reagan, David Stockman, and Stephen Moore, Donald Trump's former senior economic advisor, debate the resolution, "In the current presidential election, both Democrats and Republicans consist of a UniParty that will lead us to the bottom of the national 'policy dumpster.'" Arguing for the affirmative is David Stockman, former budget director under President Reagan. He is the author of six books, the most recent being his 2024 Trump's War on Capitalism. He blogs on his website Contra Corner. The resolution's mention of a "policy dumpster" comes from a three-part blog Stockman authored in August. Taking the negative is Stephen Moore, Trump's former senior economic advisor and the research director of President Reagan's Privatization Commission. He is now a Senior Visiting Fellow in Economics at The Heritage Foundation. He is also the co-founder of Unleash Prosperity, which aims to educate policy makers in supply-side economics. He's the author of the 2012 book Who's the Fairest of Them All?: The Truth about Opportunity, Taxes, and Wealth in America. The debate was moderated by Soho Forum director Gene Epstein.The post Are the Two Parties Any Different? appeared first on Reason.com.

Arthur B. Laffer, a key figure in supply-side economics and advisor to Ronald Reagan, defends Donald Trump's candidacy. He argues for Trump's economic policies, including tax cuts and deregulation, highlighting their potential benefits. Chase Oliver, the Libertarian presidential candidate, counters with concerns about government spending and the need for accountability. The debate covers trade, health care costs, and the importance of third-party candidates, all while tackling the complexities of modern political choices. Humor and insightful anecdotes add to the spirited discussion.

Best-selling science and technology author Matt Ridley and University of Utah virologist Stephen Goldstein debate the resolution: "It is likely that the SARS-CoV-2 virus originated in the Wuhan laboratory in China." Defending the resolution is Ridley, the author of 10 books, including Viral: The Search for the Origin of COVID-19. He sat in the U.K.'s House of Lords between 2013 and 2021 and served on the Science and Technology Select Committee. He is a fellow of the Royal Society of Literature, a fellow at the Academy of Medical Sciences, and a foreign honorary member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Arguing against the resolution is Goldstein, a virologist at the University of Utah conducting research on human genetics. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania, where he conducted research on the biology of MERS-CoV, a zoonotic virus first identified in 2012. Over the course of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, Goldstein has engaged with the Utah Department of Health and Human Services, University of Utah Health, and local and national media to provide scientific expertise. He has co-authored reviews and original research papers on the origin of SARS-CoV-2. The debate is moderated by the Soho Forum's Chief Operating Officer Jane Menton.The post Did COVID Come From a Lab? appeared first on Reason.com.

Free State Project activist Dennis Pratt and Soho Forum Director Gene Epstein debate the resolution, "A better way to persuade more people of libertarianism is to convince them of the ethics stemming from self-ownership and the non-aggression principle, without relying primarily on consequentialist/utilitarian arguments." Dennis Pratt, a libertarian writer and activist in New Hampshire, took the affirmative, arguing that the consequentialist arguments typical of libertarian economists are only narrowly effective, don't represent the core of libertarianism, and are too difficult for most people to quickly grasp. The philosophy of self-ownership, he said, has far more force in its ability to persuade the most people. Soho Forum Director Gene Epstein disagreed. While he espouses the same philosophy as his opponent, he made the argument that the empirical facts related to the poor results of government interventions can get many people to rethink their anti-libertarian assumptions. The debate occurred on June 20, 2024, at the Porcupine Freedom Festival in Lancaster, New Hampshire, and was moderated by Free State Project founder Jason Sorens.The post What's the Best Argument for Libertarianism? appeared first on Reason.com.

David Friedman, an economist and legal scholar known for his book 'The Machinery of Freedom,' engages in a lively debate with Gene Epstein, former economics editor at Barron's. They tackle the stark contrasts between Austrian and Chicago economics, discussing the relevance of economic intuition versus empirical data. Topics include the interpretations of utility, the critiques of government policies, and the complexities of non-rational behavior in economic predictions. Their exchange challenges listeners to reconsider entrenched economic doctrines.