May 8, 2019 | Politics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEXL5USuDGIFrom the video description:"How did blue-collar voters connect with a millionaire from Queens in the 2016 election? Martin and Illie Anderson Senior fellow Victor Davis Hanson addresses that question and more in his newly released book, The Case for Trump. He sits down with Peter Robinson to chat about his motivation to write a book making a rational case for those voters who chose Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton. Hanson and Robinson, the Murdoch Distinguished Policy Fellow, discuss how voters connected with Trump’s “personal authenticity” during the campaign and how the media has a “historical amnesia” of the bad behavior of past presidents when talking about President Trump. The president, Hanson argues, was always an outsider from elite society in Manhattan, which helped him to better to connect with voters who felt like outsiders. He analyzes President Trump’s platform agenda, which was composed 80% of traditionally conservative views with the remaining 20% being radical ideas that fit with many of the views of the midwestern states. He breaks down why, in the end, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, and John Kasich didn’t appeal to voters in the way that Trump managed to. Hanson turns to talk about his background and life growing up in California’s Central Valley and how different the area feels now compared to when he was younger...."
Hanson argues that the political "outsider" Trump is not merely the lessor of two evils, but putting aside his anti-intellectuality, pettyiness and crudeness, in some policy areas he is good. For a contrasting view see Onkar Ghate: Why Ayn Rand Would Have Despised a President Trump. The era of the Trump Presidency is an interesting test for America's constitutional republic and rule of law.Related:
Apr 30, 2019 | Politics
The Soho Forum hosted a debate about the Israeli - Palestinian conflict and whether the Palestinian movement has a right to exist. Israeli author Elan Journo, the Ayn Rand Institute’s research director, debated U.S. Army Strategist Major Danny Sjursen at the Subculture Theater in New York City.
Comments Elan Journo at New Ideal:
The debate vividly brought out an important contrast between my opponent’s approach to the issue and mine. In my own remarks, I highlighted my book’s distinctive approach to the conflict: a secular, individualist moral framework. I take the principle of individual freedom as a standard for evaluating the adversaries. Central to my view is that we must evaluate the nature of the Palestinian movement. The evidence shows that this movement is hostile to freedom; its main factions strive to establish militant authoritarian and theocratic regimes. To resolve the conflict, then, we must start by taking seriously this movement’s ideological aims. My opponent, by contrast, challenged the premise that there’s any coherence to the “Palestinian movement,” denied the importance of its ideological outlook, and urged a return to solutions that have demonstrably made matters worse.
Link: Soho Forum Debate on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict | C-SPAN.orgFor further reading: What Justice Demands
Apr 24, 2019 | Politics
Writes Matthew Walther on Obstruction is the new collusion inThe Week:
"Obstruction of justice is the new, even lamer sequel to collusion."
[...]
"Instead we have moved in the space of about five minutes from theorizing about Trump's 30-plus years of experience working for the KGB to arguing that his unwillingness to pretend that he really enjoyed having his presidency undermined for half of his first term was a pleasant experience makes him guilty of something called 'obstruction of justice.' "
"What kind of person do you have to be to spend two years insisting on the basis of no evidence whatsoever that a crime occurred and then, virtually the minute your baseless assertions are proven false, start banging on about how the suspect's attempts to prove himself innocent are themselves criminal?"
Mar 20, 2019 | Business, Politics
Economist Steven Kates speaks with Tom Woods on why the Keynesian attack on Say's Law is the truly fundamental error in the Keynesian system.A wonderful listen for fans of pro-capitalist economics.For a more comprehensive coverage of all of these issues and why they matter, read Kate's Free Market Economics: an Introduction for the General Reader.
Feb 16, 2019 | Business, Politics
Ayn Rand Student Conference Europe (AynRandCon) is officially underway in Prague, the Czech Republic! This is ARI's first ever conference in Europe and the theme is “Individualism in an Age of Tribalism.”Some particular new talks and panels of note:- An Individualist Doing Business in Collectivist Europe - Mr. Christensen, co-founder of Denmark’s Saxo Bank and founder of the private equity firm Seier Capital, has had a long, successful career as an innovator in banking and finance. In this talk, he discusses some of the challenges he’s faced as a staunch individualist (indeed, an Objectivist!) doing business in collectivist Europe.
Panel + Q&A: Immigration and Islam
The issue of Muslim immigration is one of the major sources of political and cultural tension in Europe today. This panel will explore the controversies over immigration and Islam and the future of Europe.
- Panel + Q&A: Capitalism, Individualism and the Welfare State - This panel will discuss the ways in which tribalism leads to the “mixed economy” welfare state—and how that political-economic system reinforces the anti-individual mindset. The result is a vicious circle of increasingly collectivist policies and an increasingly collectivist electorate that both supports and is victimized by the system.
Even if you are not at AynRandCon, you have the opportunity to join attendees and speakers and watch all or some of the program live on the Ayn Rand Institute’s YouTube channel, beginning this Saturday, February 16 at 8:40 AM CET. (Note that Prague is on Central European Standard Time or six hours ahead of Eastern Standard Time.)Link: Ayn Rand Institute’s YouTube channelFeb 15, 2019 | Business, Politics
The leading Objectivist economist, "Saysean" Richard Salsman has an excellent article in Capitalism Magazine on why "Justice Demands That We Should Celebrate Diversity in Wealth Too".Writes Dr. Salsman:In most realms of life today, diversity and variety are justifiably celebrated and respected. Differences in athletic and artistic talent, for example, entail not only robust, entertaining competitions, but fanatics (“fans”) who respect, applaud, award, and handsomely compensate the winners (“stars” and “champions”) while also depriving (at least relatively) the losers.Yet the realm of economics — of markets and commerce, business and finance, income and wealth — elicits a near-opposite response, even though it’s not, like sporting matches, a zero-sum game. In the economic realm, we observe differential talents and outcomes unequally compensated (as we should expect), but for many people, diversity and variety in this realm are disdained and envied, with predictable results: a perpetual redistribution of income and wealth by punitive taxation, stiff regulation, and periodic trust-busting. Here winners are more suspected than respected, while losers receive sympathies and subsidies.What accounts for this rather odd anomaly?
Read the rest of Justice Demands That We Should Celebrate Diversity in Wealth Too.Jan 28, 2019 | Politics
Download it here: Gold and Liberty | AIER
Mr. Salsman’s “Gold and Liberty” emphasizes the importance of the evolution of gold-based money to human advancement and, even more significantly, to human freedom. The book shows what the arbitrary manipulation of the medium of exchange by unelected and unaccountable central bankers really means for ordinary citizens and points the way to useful reform.