ReImagining Liberty

Today's episode was recorded a few weeks before the results of the November presidential election, and before an unrelated change I've made to this podcast. So before we jump into my conversation with Matthew McManus, I wanted to take a moment to give some context and talk about ReImagining Liberty going forward. First, for all of its life, ReImagining Liberty has been a listener supported show, and the way listeners supported it was to become paying members and get early access to new episodes. Starting today, I'm no longer doing that. Every episode of ReImagining Liberty will come out when it's ready, and I've turned off paid memberships. I did this primarily because I had an increasingly difficult time being consistent with the show's release schedule, and I didn't want people paying to get early access to episodes that weren't coming out on time. If you're listening to the show right now, nothing changes for you. You'll continue to get episodes right here--just now at the same time as every else. That said, if you do want to support ReImagining Liberty, there are three ways you can do it. First, leave a review on Apple Podcasts. This helps Apple to show the podcast to more people, and encourages people who find it to subscribe. Second, tell your friends. If you like an episode, forward it along to someone. If you like the show, tell people about it. Third, I have a free newsletter at www.aaronrosspowell.com. Sign up for that to get my new writing. Any or all of those three is a huge help and does a ton for the show. Okay, now on to today's episode. The election results very much have liberalism on the defensive. The Trump years are likely to be quite dark, the darkest most of us have seen in our lifetimes. There's a lot liberals can do to fight back, and we'll explore that in future episodes. One area we need to pay a lot of attention to is why the arguments we make--and by "we" I mean what we might label "market liberals"--fail to persuade everyone they need to persuade. Today's episode is very much about that. It's about a position that overlaps with a lot of liberal principles, but also rejects a lot of the free market positions I and other market liberals take. My guest is my friend Matthew McManus, a ReImagining Liberty regular. He's a lecturer in Political Science at the University of Michigan. In his new book, The Political Theory of Liberal Socialism, he argues that not only are socialism and liberalism compatible, but that the future of liberalism depends upon the embrace of certain kinds of socialism. I'm unsurprisingly skeptical about many aspects of that argument, which is why I wanted to get Matt on the show to discuss it. I think his book sets out clearly a widely believed argument from the left against market liberalism. So I've brought him on to set out and defend his case and to help draw out the primary points of disagreement between his view of liberalism and mine. Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod.

Unless you're an early access supporter of the show, this is the last episode you'll hear before the presidential election, which will profoundly shape the state, or looming absence, of American democracy. The critical importance of the choice between Harris and Trump has much of the country thinking about getting more people involved in politics—and the question of political participation, and particularly how much of it is reasonable, is what my guest spends a great deal of his time thinking about. Kevin J. Elliott is a political scientist and Lecturer in Ethics, Politics, & Economics at Yale University. He's the author of Democracy for Busy People, and I've brought him back on the show to discuss the barriers to democratic participation, the "Paradox of Empowerment," and what it would look like to get more Americans interested in the political process. Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? ⁠⁠⁠⁠Become a supporter⁠⁠⁠⁠ and get early access and other perks. Produced by ⁠⁠⁠⁠Landry Ayres⁠⁠⁠⁠. Podcast art by ⁠⁠⁠⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠⁠⁠⁠. Music by ⁠⁠⁠⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠⁠⁠⁠.

An important theme of this show is the role of rhetoric in politics. It's not just the arguments we make that matter, but when we choose to make them, and how we talk about political issues. And we can learn a lot about the people who disagree with us not just by parsing their arguments, but by paying attention to when and how they make them. This is critically important in a political environment as charged, fraught, and arguably on-the-brink as ours in the days before a presidential election. And the fact is, with the acute threat from the right to the very foundations of our liberal, open, and democratic society, much of our journalism has fallen into a particularly worrying rhetoric, one that downplays these threats, while stirring up resentment towards vulnerable groups. I can't think of anyone better to talk with about these issues central to our political life than Parker Molloy. She's a Chicago-based writer and author of the indispensable The Present Age, a newsletter about communication in a hyperconnected world. Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? ⁠⁠⁠Become a supporter⁠⁠⁠ and get early access and other perks. Produced by ⁠⁠⁠Landry Ayres⁠⁠⁠. Podcast art by ⁠⁠⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠⁠⁠. Music by ⁠⁠⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠⁠⁠.

We're staring down the barrel of a presidential election, one that highlights deep questions about democracy and political participation. If our goal is radically more freedom, how should we think about democracy's place in achieving that, given that the popular will often isn't for more freedom. And if the system, as it exists, is rather far from fully just, how should we approach participating in it? These are questions libertarians, and others, raise frequently, and they're worth taking more seriously than most people do. To help us think through them, I'm joined by my good friend Andy Craig. He's a Fellow in Liberalism at the Institute for Humane Studies and an expert on election laws and democratic theory. Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? ⁠⁠Become a supporter⁠⁠ and get early access and other perks. Produced by ⁠⁠Landry Ayres⁠⁠. Podcast art by ⁠⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠⁠. Music by ⁠⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠⁠.

When Biden dropped out of the presidential race and Harris took over, we witnessed not just a change in candidate, but a change in rhetoric. Harris's campaign began talking in the language of "freedom" and "liberty." Harris's running mate, Tim Walz, contrasted himself with the meddlesome social conservatism of JD Vance by saying he was for "minding your own business." For those of us who have long championed a politics of radical liberty, this was met by both enthusiasm and suspicion. Enthusiasm, because it's good for the country to have a major party talking in those terms, especially as the GOP has abandoned anything like a commitment to political and social liberty. Suspicion because, despite all there talk, there are plenty of ways Harris and Walz want the government to get in the way of minding your own business. To talk about this shift, and the opportunities it might offer to better make the case for radical liberalism, I'm joined by Joshua Eakle, co-founder and president of Project Liberal. Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? ⁠Become a supporter⁠ and get early access and other perks. Produced by ⁠Landry Ayres⁠. Podcast art by ⁠Sergio R. M. Duarte⁠. Music by ⁠Kevin MacLeod⁠.

This, as it says on the tin, is a show about liberalism. But teasing out what that term means can be challenging. Not just because it's philosophically complex, but because common usage of terms doesn't always conform to rigorous conceptual categories, and even when it does, language evolves. That's the jumping off point for today's conversation. My guest is Samantha Hancox-Li and she's a writer, game designer, and associate editor at Liberal Currents. We discuss what it means to be liberal, and how that's distinct from being a progressive. Then we talk about what liberals can learn from progressives, and where progressives sometimes go wrong in matching their political actions to their values. It's a conversation about political engagement, political rhetoric, and the right way to change the world. Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks. Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod.

A liberal society is necessarily an open and diverse one. When people are free to move and free to choose, a country's population and culture will reflect all those differences in tastes, preferences, and ways of living. And that's part of what makes liberalism so great.But a pluralistic society can be bothersome for those who'd prefer everyone be just like them. And if those sorts get uncomfortable enough with cultural diversity and dynamism, they can turn against liberalism itself.To help think through these tensions, and how liberalism can defend itself against those who would rather it weren't so diverse, I've brought on my friend Jacob T. Levy. He's the Tomlinson Professor of Political Theory at McGill University and author of the terrific book Rationalism, Pluralism, and Freedom.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

I'm joined today by Janet Bufton, Program Coordinator & Co-Founder at the Institute for Liberal Studies. I'm a little embarassed it's taken me this long to get her on the show, because she's one of the most thoughtful advocates out there of the kind of genuine and broad liberalism--and liberal values--that are at the heart of ReImagining Liberty.We discuss the link between liberalism and liberation, the intellectual history that's led many self-described liberals and libertarians to be skeptical of robust social liberalism, and how we can better position liberalism to meet illiberal challengers.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On June 7th, David Boaz died. He was the Executive Vice President of the Cato Institute, author of *The Libertarian Mind*, and the most important figure in the libertarian movement in the last half century. He was also my mentor, my close friend, and, for twelve years, my boss.I had the privilege of holding, for the first two of those years, what is among the most exclusive, challenging, and rewarding jobs in Washington: Staff Writer at the Cato Institute, a role that primarily meant being David's right-hand man and primary conversation partner.David's life and work are worth celebrating, and his legacy worth cherishing. He set the standard for how to live one's principles, lead a profoundly moral life, and change the world for the better while doing it.I'm delighted to bring together a group of my fellow staff writers to talk about what David meant to the libertarian movement, what it was like to work for him, and how he enriched our lives.Aaron Steelman is a Senior Fellow and Policy Adviser at the Cato Institute, and has the honor of being David's very first staff writer.Julian Sanchez has worked as a journalist and policy analyst.Maria Santos Bier is the Director of Foundation and Corporate Relations at the Cato Institute.Andy Craig is Director of Election Policy at the Rainey Center.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Politics gets pretty emotional, and we typically view that as bad. The political scene would be better, we suppose, if more people could set aside their emotions and rationally engage with the hard questions.My guest today isn't so sure. Jason Canon is a PhD candidate at the University of Cambridge in political science, and while he doesn't reject reason, he argues that emotion plays, and ought to play, a much larger role in how we think about and approach politics than it typically gets. Reason doesn't work without emotion, and emotions can lead us to better political outcomes.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Among the various ideologies opposing liberalism that have seen new or renewed prominence in the last decade is Christian nationalism. It motivates quite a lot of the far right in the culture war, played a role in the attempted overthrow of American democracy on January 6th, and seems to be everywhere on social media.But what is it? Where did it come from? And how can liberalism respond?My guest today is my good friend Paul Matzko. He's an historian and author of The Radio Right: How a Band of Broadcasters Took on the Federal Government and Built the Modern Conservative Movement.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today's conversation is a good one, but I struggle to come up with a straightforward summary for this intro. I brought back on my good friend, and frequent guest, Cory Massimino to discuss anarchism in theory and practice. And that where we start. But we also get into a larger conversation about the nature of political debate, and the rhetoric of political change that goes well beyond the narrow confines of whether anarchism is good or bad, or what we can learn from it.This is one of those big ideas episodes of ReImagining Liberty, and why I so value talking with Cory. He's an independent scholar and a Fellow at the Center for a Stateless Society, where he hosts the podcasts "Mutual Exchange Radio" and "The Long Library."Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

One of my goals for this show is to explore the complexities of issues people have strong opinions about and assume are straightforward. And it's difficult to think of one that fits that bill better than guns.Today I'm joined by my long time friend and Free Thoughts podcast co-host, constitutional lawyer Trevor Burrus. We talk about the causes of and misconceptions around gun violence, and how a free society should approach both the role of guns and the challenges of limiting the harm they do.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We’re all ideological, even if we don’t admit it. We like to think of everyone else as ideological, but imagine our own views to be “reality-based,” simply a clear-eyed picture of how things really are. That's nonsense, and today's episode is all about why.My guest is Jason Blakely, a political science professor at Pepperdine University and author of the new book Lost in Ideology: Interpreting Modern Political Life. We discuss what ideology is, what purpose it plays, how it differs from religion, and why we should think of ideology as both a culture and a map.Want to listen to new episodes of ReImagining Liberty two weeks early? Become a supporter and get early access and other perks.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Populism is a bundle of bad ideas motivated primarily by grievances. Once result is set of economic preferences that will only make the country poorer.With populism on the ballot in November, I've brought on my friend and old colleague Ryan A. Bourne to talk about the errors of populist economics. Ryan is the R. Evan Scharf Chair for the Public Understanding of Economics at the Cato Institute, and author of one of the best books about the pandemic, Economics in One Virus: An Introduction to Economic Reasoning through COVID-19.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The right has a problem with women. I don't mean in the sense that women are far less likely to vote for right-wing candidates than men are, though it is true that we have women voters to thank for our avoidance, so far, of the country turning fully towards hard-right authoritarianism. Instead, I mean that misogyny is much more openly expressed by the American right than was the case ten years ago, with influencers, politicians, and conservative leaders defending the view that not only are men and women different, but that the only just social hierarchy is one with men at the top.My guest, Cathy Reisenwitz, has been writing about the diverging politics and ideology of men and women at her newsletter, Sex and the State. She joins me today to talk about why so many men have convinced themselves they're smarter than women, and how that can help us understand our contemporary political scene.If you enjoy ReImagining Liberty, I encourage you to subscribe to my free newsletter, where I write frequently about the kinds of issues we discuss on the show. And if you want to support my work, you can become a member and get early access to all new episodes. Learn more by heading to reimaginingliberty.com.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Digital expression is weird. When we move our communities and communications into digital spaces, such as social media, the result is an uncertain landscape of new incentives, mechanisms of influence, vectors of information and disinformation, and evolving norms. All of which have profound effects on our personal lives, our culture, and our politics.Few people have put as much thought into how these platforms function, or dysfunction, as social ecosystems as Renée DiResta, Research Manager at the Stanford Internet Observatory. In today's conversation, we dig into what makes social media distinct, how communities form and interact online, and what evolving technologies mean for the future of digital expression.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Both the short and long term impact of AI technologies is unknown, but it's almost certain to be significant. It will destroy some industries, accelerate others, and revolutionize still more. And, it seems, no one has a lukewarm opinion about AI. You're either excited about its prospects, or convinced it's nothing more than intellectual property theft, or the inevitable end of the market for human creativity.Worries are particularly acute about what this all means for journalism, and those worries are worth taking seriously, given the importance of quality journalism to a free society and a functioning democracy.My guest today, writer Julian Sanchez, has worked as a journalist and policy analyst, and thought quite a lot about these issues. He joins me for a conversation about AI, the state of content creation, and the future of journalism as a profession.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The January 6th insurrection demonstrated the Trumpist right's willing to use violence to advance its political interests. My guest today is worried that was just the start.Patrick Eddington is a former CIA analyst and a senior fellow in homeland security and civil liberties at the Cato Institute. In a series of essays at his newsletter, The Republic Sentinel, he's been exploring the risks of more widespread political violence should Trump be removed from the ballot, convicted of a crime, or lose the November election. Trump's followers sometimes talk of a new Civil War, and it's important to assess their seriousness and what it might mean to see a sudden increase in violent acts from the far-right.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On the one hand, we're told we live in a postmodern age. On the other, postmodernism is a notoriously challenging set of philosophical ideas to nail down and understand. But it's worth the effort, because postmodernism, even if it gets some of its arguments wrong or overstates its case, is deeply interesting, with genuinely valuable insights.To help me tease out just what postmodernism is and what we might learn from it, I'm joined by my good friend, and frequent ReImagining Liberty guest, Matt McManus.He's a lecturer in political science at the University of Michigan, and author of many books, including and The Rise of Post-Modern Conservatism and The Emergence of Post-modernity at the Intersection of Liberalism, Capitalism, and Secularism.Produced by Landry Ayres. Podcast art by Sergio R. M. Duarte. Music by Kevin MacLeod. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.