“With much in the way of pomp and false premises, the social media ban in Australia for those under 16-years-old was celebrated as a healthy incentive to encourage children to get off the screens and into the playgrounds. A stampede of reinvigorated youth would rush to libraries to borrow books. Sport would be taken up with vim and vigour. Conversations in person would, miraculously, take place with renewed vigour. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese had treacly visions of young Australians growing up playing in the outdoors with their friends, pursuing the game of ‘footy’ and swimming and other sports, ‘discovering music and art, being confident and happy in the classroom and at home.’ … The ban was implemented despite a growing number of studies faulting the premise that social media is demonically harmful for the young.” (02/26/26)
“Perhaps the most mind-bending aspect of this dispute is that news coverage of this week’s showdown will inevitably make its way into the training data for future versions of Claude and other LLMs. If future models decide that the US Defense Department behaved badly, they might become disinclined to cooperate in military projects. There’s also a more banal concern for the Pentagon: it may be able to force Anthropic to train a new model, but it can’t force Anthropic to train a good model.” (02/26/26)
Source: Ludwig von Mises Institute
by Ryan McMaken
“In a free, market-based economy, there is no conflict between different industries, economic interests, or sectors of the economy. There is no ‘class conflict’ — as Marx imagined it — because, thanks to the division of labor, voluntary trade and competition reward consumers, producers, and asset owners alike. This is what Ludwig von Mises called the ‘harmony of interests.’ In the presence of the state, however, things are different. There is always class conflict as different groups jockey with each other to gain the favor of state agents. In this context, each interest group understands that the state is a lucrative tool for exploiting other groups through regulation, taxation, and inflation.” (02/25/26)
Source: Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression
by Sarah McLaughlin
“The United Kingdom isn’t just focused on age-gating and regulating what its citizens can see and do on the internet through its Online Safety Act. Now, officials are setting their sights on what people can stream, expanding their regulatory focus beyond local television channels and into the workings of non-UK companies like Netflix. If the censorial headaches unleashed by the Online Safety Act’s attempts to crack down on ‘harmful content’ on the web are any indicator, residents of the UK — as well as the streaming companies officials intend to regulate and their global audiences who watch them — have reason to worry.” (02/25/26)
Source: Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression
by Robert Shibley
“FIRE has spoken out many times against DEI efforts that go too far, from demanding that students agree with particular views related to hot-button issues to forcing faculty to provide DEI statements that function as thinly veiled political litmus tests if they wish to be hired or promoted. A backlash to such illiberal efforts was inevitable, but that doesn’t justify over-correcting with policies to silence one’s ideological foes. Repeating cycles of vengeance do not serve the public interest. But that’s what some of these policies are courting. If a university fears a hostile audit, a funding threat, a legislative hearing, or a governor’s public rebuke, the internal incentives are obvious.” (02/26/26)
“The Democrats showed their true colors at Tuesday evening’s State of the Union when they failed the president’s test of allegiance to this country. They are so devoted to illegal [sic] migration that they walked straight into his trap. President Trump asked every lawmaker in the chamber to stand if they believe their primary duty is to protect American citizens rather than illegal [sic] migrants. That should have be a no-brainer. It is the essence of putting America first. But the Democrats refused to stand.” (02/25/26)
Source: Freedom and Flourishing
by Dr. Edward W. Younkins
“Kristjánsson proposes an integrated model of moral education combining habituation, reflective understanding, and autonomy-supportive pedagogy. Students should internalize moral reasons rather than merely conform to behavioral expectations. He introduces the concept of ‘virtue literacy,’ emphasizing moral vocabulary, ethical reasoning skills, and practical application. Importantly, Kristjánsson situates education within a broader moral ecology. Schools, families, peer cultures, and social institutions jointly shape moral development. Effective character education therefore requires institutional coherence between stated values and organizational practices.” (02/26/26)
