Today at Liberalism.org, I propose a model of thinking about our politics in terms of clear principles that can act as coordination points for people with many different motivations, beliefs, resources, and plans of their own.
My hope is that it helps liberals better navigate the political world we're in today and shows them that today's politics are politics that principled liberals can and should join.
"The ability to get pregnant, in our society, means that for the duration of your fertile years, you’re seen with double vision, like a ghost of yourself superimposed over who you actually are."
This important piece offers a corrective to what Aligica calls the "inherited arguments" of globalised liberalism and suggests a way forward for liberalism's defenders.
Essential reading on the Declaration of Independence, its underlying values, and the mess the United States finds itself in as the 250th anniversary of the Declaration approaches. From Jacob Levy at Liberty Fund.
My piece this week at Liberal Currents: on the long push (including in this piece) to convince classical liberals they can rejoin the left to work against authoritarianism and why it's taking so long.
It is based on having worked through what happened politically around me as the postliberal moment emerged from the apparently libertarian one. It holds out a hand to those still where I was and tries to show a way forward.
A good breakdown of the evidence from 2024 in the US of "moderating" messaging from the left by making it more congenial to the right. Moderating is based on the theory that the winning electoral strategy for the left is to position around a fixed, large set of voters who favour median policies + belief that elections are a bad time to try to move voters. As with UK Labour, the *quantitative evidence*, which is supposed to matter so much to the technocrats, says this is worse than useless.
"The Peterson family, by contrast, presides over more than a dozen companies. And the only (contested) information we have about their inner workings come from this lawsuit. There’s nothing inherently nefarious about this, but Peterson — and others like him — frequently position themselves as more trustworthy and reputable than mainstream media."
"It’s fine to just ignore these stupid projects but maybe also we should mention sometimes that this is all part of the systematic hollowing out of news institutions that once did very good work that people cared about."
Jacob Levy pulverizing the idea that liberals can't fight back because they're prevented by commitments to neutrality or civility, apparently with a baseball bat.
A very uncomfortable subject for those of us who have struggled with eating disorders. I think this is a realistic take. (the answer is "no" but still depressing.)
Additional note: I am pessimistic libertarians writ large will take the body autonomy position here, at least in the short run. The libertarian movement provided tons of reinforcement for my disordered eating. (no sugar! no breakfast! no seed oils! one meal a day! etc)
Part 2 of the piece I posted a few days ago. If you don't know this stuff, you will absolutely talk past people who disagree. (If you're the kind of person who gets into "Were the Nazis socialist?" conversations.)
A recent Liberalism.org post from the OG bleeding heart libertarian Matt Zwolinski. Very happy to see libertarians reckoning with the problems of power that come with severe wealth inequality.
I wake up every day and check the headlines in case someone's been nuked because Trump has a tantrum overnight.
I'm sure this is taking a toll, but I don't see the grown-ups in the room with the big red button to make it feel less likely. It's the never ending stupid Cuban Missile Crisis.
I have been thinking back on this piece about writing lately.
"Writing is about being in touch with your feelings. At the absolute core of it, it is about feeling something yourself, realising others may do too, and basing your work around that moment. It's about having confidence in your feelings and the manner in which they might be shared. It's a process that is conducted entirely on your own, but which demonstrates the extent of your bonds with those around you."
I make my debut at Liberalism.org, arguing that liberal principles don't to have to be separated from politics for liberalism to defend itself and thrive. In fact, they shouldn't be.
Principled liberal commitments have to be paired with commitment to liberal—persuasive, democratic—politics.
It's not as though we don't know, with big deal pundits speculating aloud about things like the virginity status of women public figures, how we're talked about behind closed doors. It's still demoralizing to see it.
Previously the earliest evidence was from 50,000 years ago, so another 350,000 is a big jump. The fact that it's also evidence of moving minerals over long distances and *baking clay?!* adds to the wildness.
This article about how easily accessible metrics is creating problems for the music industry is much more broadly relevant. The conviction that if you can measure it, it must be what matters has been a problem for anyone trying to build anything real for years.
"Moderation is more conventional than wise, and the most prominent cases for it badly misunderstand how politics works."
On the spent relevance of moderation and popularism in today's politics.
Essential reading from the ground in Minneapolis. An overwhelming mix of fear at what is happening and appreciation for how ordinary people are responding.
I'd never seen this essay before and enjoyed reading it as a clear exploration of the limits of civil discourse.
I struggle with where to set that limit. Setting it should involve the belief that giving up on persuasion is always regrettable. But no one sets the limit for everyone. We can use our personal lines in the sand. It's as wrongheaded to insist that's never acceptable as it is to insist we don't give up anything when we conclude some politics have left the realm of peaceful persuasion.
This review of Bronze Age Mindset hits just the right tone. Kuznicki is clear that this is a stupid book for people we should be able to pity. He is also clear that this is a dangerous book, influential in the halls of power. And he reminds us that we already have the tools to fight these ideas—ideas that have won before and can win again.
This is so good. On the historical and economic inadequacy of the postliberal "Great Feminization" narrative, and a more robust (and positive) liberal alternative.
I love this very much.
The forgotten of history and the liberals of today, against the fictions of homogeneity and nationalism and the social contract.
The narrative that the danger of social media comes from envy doesn't ring true to me. But this piece does—it's fear. Fear makes us uncertain, angry, and closed off to risk. And it's bled into our offline lives. Recognizing that gives us the power to short circuit it.
Typically great stuff from Ling.
This is typically terrific stuff at Liberal Currents, and a good articulation of something many liberals struggle to express.
(They're crowdfunding right now and worth your support. See the link at the top of the page.)
I'm fond of this article from Econlog about the importance of reciprocity. The warning at the end about how partisanship can undermine reciprocity has stuck with me. We need to be thoughtful about what we prioritize and when.
