“How could it be, then, that the same party touting its credibility in the fight against big-government economic planning is also led by a president who is offering every American adult a free $5,000? Is this not an example of the very economic interventionism Republicans claim to oppose? This creates a clear bind for the Republicans. Are they for ‘free markets’ or ‘free handouts?'” (09/16/26)
“In my recent book, Crisis of the Common Good, I make the argument that our hyper-individualistic, market-obsessed culture has made us more isolated and less powerful. I think Donald Trump is a symptom of this spiritual unspooling. My book argues that happiness comes from a sense of connection and shared purpose with others, and that government should not outsource virtue or morality to private markets. I do not suggest the public sector should dictate one single version of ‘the good life’. I suggest it should instead seek, as an agent of the public will, to order our economy in a way that gives power and dignity to every actor in it, and our culture in a way that encourages communion and shared experience. The Argument’s Jerusalem Demsas, in her critique ‘No, Senator Murphy, I don’t want to join your cult,’ argues confidently for more or less a maintenance of the status quo.” (09/16/26)
“If the last 18 months are any guide, President Donald Trump is not going to send you $5,000. At last week’s two-night midterm convention in Dallas, he promised every adult citizen a ‘Trump dividend’ should Republicans win both houses of Congress in November. It pushes his running tab of unpaid cash pledges past $13,000 per person. On the first night, he described the payout as a profit-sharing distribution: ‘because our country is making so much money.’ During the second night, Trump morphed it into reparations for surviving Joe Biden’s presidency: ‘We went through hell.’ … Given Trump’s track record of broken promises, the offer itself is the point, not the payout — and it’s aimed squarely at his base. Rather than a proposal meant to persuade midterm swing voters or flip those who lean Democratic, the ‘Trump dividend’ mostly serves as a turnout incentive, gladly offering a payday for a vote on Election Tuesday.” (09/16/26)
“I understand that the American revolutionaries saw election of representatives as the primary vehicle for consent. That view of consent appears to have much in common with the concept of ‘government legitimacy’ as described by modern political scientists who focus on procedural rules such as the existence of free and fair elections. It also appears to have a lot in common with the concept of ‘tacit consent’ as described by John Locke …. [Max] Borders argues that consent of the governed means ‘a real, contractual civil association that a sovereign person selects in a governance market’. I will outline his ideal model of consent after considering the case he makes that we should be concerned about consent.” (09/16/26)
“September 16, 1774: Paul Revere galloped into Philadelphia with urgent business from Boston, a document that laid out a blueprint for total resistance. If the Continental Congress adopted it, secession from the British Empire would be unavoidable. The very next day, after a round of wild applause, they did just that. This is the story of Joseph Warren’s forgotten and ignored Suffolk Resolves, the American Revolution’s step-by-step guide for beating an empire and defeating tyranny.” (09/15/26)
“For now, then, the administration’s effort to impose these requirements on ballot mail before November is effectively dead. The larger legal fight isn’t, and Kavanaugh’s concurrence is a pretty clear warning against treating Monday’s decision as a final Supreme Court judgment on the USPS’s authority. There will be plenty of time to litigate whether Congress actually gave the USPS the power it claims. What the administration doesn’t get to do is impose the rule first, potentially disrupt an election, and ask everyone to sort out whether it was legal after the ballots have been counted.” (09/15/26)
“Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei wants to shape the future of artificial intelligence—and, by extension, the future of civilization. Yet in doing so, he seeks input and advice from an ideologically uniform group of individuals and institutions. In a series of sprawling essays on his website, Amodei has outlined his expectations for a world transformed by powerful AI. His forecasts range from curing diseases and accelerating economic growth to creating catastrophic biological threats and destabilizing the balance of power between the United States and China. These essays are presented as the work of a sober-minded technologist trying to navigate humanity through an unprecedented transition. In the acknowledgments section, Amodei inadvertently reveals insight into the ideas forming his worldview.” (09/16/26)
“In 2023, as I was preparing for my term as American Bar Association (ABA) President, I thought about what issue should be the focus of my term as president. Recognizing that while the ABA had a long history of focusing on the most important legal issues, it was important to focus not solely on a legal issue but the most critical issue of our time. I kept coming back to the single most important issue facing our country today: threats to democracy.” (09/15/26)
Source: Ludwig von Mises Institute
by Ryan McMaken
“[L]ast Saturday, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, in an article titled ‘We Must Pace the Frontier,’ called for extensive government regulation of AI firms. Amodei insisted that, unless governments step in to control the AI industry, then there will be insufficient ‘guardrails’ to prevent ‘losing control of AI systems, misuse of AI for cyberattacks and bioterrorism, and serious economic disruption.’ … whenever we see a group of politically active billionaires agree that government should have more power, we should be alarmed, to say the least.” (09/15/26)
