“In 1988, Peng Peiyun was assigned to China’s State Family Planning Commission. Her job was to implement the relatively new one-child policy. The Communist Party was sure that it knew how many people should be in the Chinese population to prevent famine and overcrowding — so sure, in fact, that it was willing to require abortions and sterilization under threat of violence. … Today, China’s population is shrinking, births are collapsing, and the same government that once punished pregnancy is now begging for it with subsidies, propaganda, and social pressure, all of which have so far failed to reverse the trend. Even after decades of highly directive engineering and violent enforcement, the ‘right’ number of people remains stubbornly out of reach. The same category error animates today’s immigration crackdowns in the United States. Population control is technocratic arrogance at its most intimate and brutal.” (for publication 04/26)
“On the night of Feb. 28, the U.S. and Israel initiated a large-scale military attack on Iran. Bypassing congressional authorization, President Donald Trump acted with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to strike top Iranian leadership and a variety of other targets. This action is blatantly unconstitutional. Its wisdom and morality are more debatable.” [editor’s note: The reverse, actually. There’s no doubt that the war is stupid and evil. As for “authorization,” most of the people whining about that NOW still pretend that something other than an actual declaration of war would suffice, which starts the debate down a false path immediately – TLK] (03/01/26)
“The rise of generative AI has led to alternating waves of hype and fear. One day the S&P 500 is soaring, led by AI-adjacent companies. A few months later the S&P is falling due to fears that too much money is being spent on datacenters and that AI will undermine business models. It’s still difficult to predict what AI will actually do, and I have no special insights on that front. But while AI is an unprecedented technology, hype and fear about the impacts of new technology — together with hard thinking about the issue — are anything but new. In fact, concerns about the effects of new technology and attempts to model those effects go back more than two centuries, to the early days of the Industrial Revolution and the dawn of economics as an intellectual field.” (03/01/26)
Source: Foundation for Economic Education
by Rachel Chiu
“Earlier this month, US District Judge Alan Albright granted an injunction against Texas Senate Bill 13 (‘SB 13’), a state law aimed at curbing ‘woke capitalism’ and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practices. Over the past few years, these practices have taken the form of regulations, reporting requirements, and credit metrics on areas including environmental impact and diversity. Conservatives have pushed back on ESG, believing that these initiatives have enabled progressive ideology and values to undermine business investments. … Lawmakers have good reason to be skeptical of ESG principles and their effects on investment. However, Judge Albright’s ruling is a potent reminder that overly expansive legislative fixes can skirt too close to civil liberties and ultimately fail to achieve their intended objectives.” (03/01/26)
“In 1996, Harry answered the call to run for president. I discovered Harry and libertarianism as he won and accepted the Libertarian Party nomination. I read his first campaign book, Why Government Doesn’t Work. As a result of that campaign, I became a party member, almost immediately a county chair, then quickly a state chair. That could’ve been the end of the story, and Harry Browne still would’ve made an indelible impression on my life. But then I was hired to be his 2000 campaign press secretary.” (03/01/26)
“Even in wars described as strategic, children die first. In many cities, including Tehran, explosions were heard near major government and military sites, including parts of the Supreme Leader’s compound. News followed that Ayatollah Khamenei himself was dead. I can’t lie — when I saw satellite images of his compound in ruins and heard the reports of his assassination, it felt surreal. When I lived in Iran, I passed that heavily guarded building many times on the way to my grandmother’s house. I would not dare look up at the armed guards, irrationally afraid they might recognize my hatred. For many Iranians inside the country — and for those condemned to exile — this is a cathartic moment decades in the making.” (03/01/26)
“You read the labels. You check the ingredients. You avoid seed oils, limit sugar, and side-eye anything with a barcode longer than a haiku. You subscribe to Substacks that dissect institutional capture. You understand, probably better than most, that ‘the science’ can be quietly purchased by the people it is supposed to regulate. So let me ask you a question that might sting. What did you feed your dog this morning? If the answer is a brown pellet from a bag, you are running the same ultraprocessed food experiment on your dog that you have spent the last few years learning to reject for yourself and your family.” (03/01/26)
“They frame the crisis not as an act of war against a UN member state, but as a natural consequence of Tehran’s failure to capitulate unconditionally.” (03/01/26)
“The proposed Paramount-Warner Bros. Discovery merger, which the principals are trying to get done quickly before state attorneys general can react with a challenge, is terrible for a host of reasons, the most politically salient being the fairly explicit effort to convert a healthy chunk of American media organizations into a swamp of pro-MAGA propaganda. But perhaps the worst part is how bad a business deal it is, and that has implications for both the future of Hollywood and the ability for states to actually block it. The deal is tied up with so much debt that it virtually guarantees layoffs the likes of which Hollywood hasn’t seen before. That’s going to mean far less output from the suite of properties under Paramount and Warner’s control.” (03/02/26)
“On April 21, 1996, Russian forces executed one of the most precise assassinations of the modern era. The target was Dzhokhar Dudayev, leader of Chechnya’s separatist war against Moscow. … When U.S. strikes failed to kill Moammar Kadafi in 1986 or Saddam Hussein numerous times in the 1990s, many airpower advocates concluded near misses were the problem. If the leader actually died, the regime would fracture. Russia — with a critical U.S. assist — proved the execution could be perfected.
But execution was never the core variable. Leadership assassination in international disputes does not simply remove authority; it redistributes it under emotional mobilization.” (03/01/26)
