Suchergebnisse

Justice O'Connor is rightly admired for her inspiring life story and unswerving loyalty to the highest civic principles as well as the ideals of the judiciary.

President Milei and leading liberals from around the world will come together to discuss specific policy reforms to limit power and expand individual liberty.

Further debate on textualism, "common good constitutionalism," and the classical legal method.

Quinn Slobodian's new book, Crack-Up Capitalism is an original and striking analysis of a weird apparent disjuncture. Libertarians and classical liberals famously claim to be opposed to state power. So why do some of them resort to it so readily? In his previous book, The Globalists, Quinn argued that globalization was poorly understood. It wasn't […]

We seem to be watching a new elite consensus view being formed. As ever, it's wrong, wholly wrong, but it is, we think, very fun indeed. In that forehead slapping, "No, really, they're not trying this are they?" definition of fun.So, Ireland: At the core of it were a number of key propositions. Ireland would have to embrace the idea of free trade, which meant encouraging competition and ending the protectionism that had been the hallmark of Irish economic policy under Lemass's predecessor Éamon de Valera (whose economic philosophy had once been satirised as: "Burn everything English except their coal"). Most importantly, though, the strategy required that, henceforth, Ireland would have to be welcoming to foreign capital, which essentially meant being nice to multinationals – giving them generous tax breaks, assistance in finding locations for building and generally bending over backwards to attend to their needs.Whitaker's was a bold strategy, but it worked.Ireland got rich by being standardly classical liberal sensible. OK.There's a massive shortage of affordable housing and an associated homelessness crisis: nearly 12,000 people in emergency accommodation and average monthly rents of €1,468;But there's a problem associated with those riches. Hmm. The source for this is: The national budget surplus – essentially the difference between the amount of money coming in and going out in day-to-day expenditure – is forecast to add up to €65.2bn (£56.3bn) over the next four years.Loadsamoney - Ireland is rich. This has made Ireland an "outlier", according to Prof Barrett, who pointed out more than 25% of tax revenue in the Republic of Ireland comes from corporation tax – compared an average figure of less than 10% across Europe.The money's made by stinging the capitalists. Rather a Laffer Curve there in fact - low rates means lots of capitalists and so beaucoup de revenue. Could be a plan for more countries really. Nationwide, the touchstone social and political issue is housing.Homelessness in Ireland is at a record high – with the most recent figures showing 12,600 people were in emergency accommodation in June.But the housing shortage is having wider effects.Ah, housing. So, The Observer and the BBC agree here, and that is one of those elite consensi forming. Obviously. Ireland's got rich because low taxes on corporations but this cannot be allowed - we can't have an example of actual classical liberalism working now, can we - because housing.And where the argument becomes, in the local argot, a bit of a cute hoor: Rent controls are a fiscal policy that governments around the globe incorporate to control and regulate the amount that a landlord can charge for a lease of a property. The challenge lies in finding a balance between the rights of sitting tenants, new tenants and landlords. Rent regulation that is too strict can have a negative impact on the market, but complete deregulation can also have negative effects as it will push people into home ownership even where it is not feasible.And: Government measures to control rents have backfired and in many cases have led to an increase in rents, a new report has claimed.The study by economist Jim Power suggests that rent pressure zones (RPZs), introduced in 2016 to limit rent price increases, have resulted in significant "rent rigidities" and an inefficient two-tier system where the proper maintenance of rental properties is no longer economically viable.Rent controls are not a classical liberal policy. Rent controls are what are screwing the Irish rental property market. Which is where that argument becomes so fun, isn't it? Classical liberalism makes a place rich. Not classical liberalism on rents makes housing expensive. But as the argument - that elite consensus view - is becoming it's the bit that works, the stinging the capitalists for the costs of running the state that must go and it's the idiocy of rent controls which is unquestioned and so presumably should stay.Well, it would be a fun argument if it wasn't palpably so damn stupid an argument.

Methodological issues pervade contemporary debates in EU law. There are many reasons for this. Some are specific to the subject matter of EU law itself. The multiple crises that the European Union is experiencing lead EU law scholars to question their classical conception of EU law: a law of integration that should more or less naturally lead to a constitutional or federal order. These crises may also lead scholars to question their relationship with the European institutions, which have been central to the development of the core concepts of EU law and of EU law as a disciplinary field.

Colleen Hroncich


In the United States today, the word "liberal" is often linked to Democrats and others on the political left who favor using government to implement social change. But the word actually comes from the Latin root liber, which means free. And that is at the heart of the Institute for Catholic Liberal Education (ICLE), which was founded in 1999. ICLE's mission is to renew Catholic schools "by drawing on the Church's tradition of education, which frees teachers and students for the joyful pursuit of faith, wisdom, and virtue."
According to the Institute, most modern schools are based on a pragmatic, utilitarian, secular philosophy that is fragmented and focused on skills, job training, and standardized tests. A Catholic classical liberal arts education, on the other hand, emphasizes wisdom, independent thought, and discovery while focusing on the whole child created in the image of God.
ICLE provides a number of resources for schools that want to adopt the Catholic classical educational philosophy. For schools that are considering this path, ICLE offers presentations for parents, clergy, and boards as well as training for teachers and school leaders. There are also conferences, workshops on various topics, publications, and site visits.
New this year after a pilot program in Denver, ICLE is launching a Catholic Educator Formation and Credential (CEFC) program. This 18‐​month program, delivered online and in‐​person, is designed to be an alternative to state licensure that can be used by Catholic dioceses across the nation.
Emily Zgonc is the principal at St. Michael School, a Catholic school in western Pennsylvania that was founded in 1899. This year, the school is embarking on a new ICLE partnership that Emily is very excited about. "ICLE has been working with Catholic schools across the United States to support a refreshing renewal of Catholic education," she explains.
"We're going back to our roots of what made Catholic education so effective and vibrant: the importance of story and wonder. Our students will be reading great stories that they can delve deeply into, befriending and learning life lessons from the characters. Instead of bland 'social studies,' our students will learn the history of western civilization and where they fit in that story. Going beyond a typical science class, we're going to incorporate nature studies so our students can 'get their hands dirty' and dig into what they are learning about, awakening a sense of wonder and leading to deep questions. Our newly revamped curriculum will help our students grow to become intelligent, curious, and engaging adults."
St. Michael School is not alone. Interest in classical education, including ICLE, has exploded in recent years. Earlier this week, ICLE hosted its national conference at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh. While the Institute expanded conference capacity by 25 percent compared to last year, the event still sold out quicker than in the past.
I attended the ICLE conference to participate on a panel about school choice and Catholic schools. One of the topics I discussed was how the government largely monopolized education in the late 1800s and early 1900s, which crowded out many other models. School choice policies, like tax credit scholarships, education savings accounts, and vouchers, are helping to correct that problem. As interest grows in education options beyond local district schools—including interest in classical Catholic schools like ICLE partners—the expansion of school choice programs will help families access these options.

In a fundamental misunderstanding of classical Islamic law, legendary sociologist Max Weber conceptualised it as 'Qadi justice' quintessentially characterized as an Islamic judge "sitting under a tree" handing out informal and irrational decisions. Weber may have been incorrect in his characterization of Islamic law, but the Qazi Court of Pakistan appears to fit that mould. In several decisions, the Qazi Court effectively condoned the unconstitutional delay in elections, suppression of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) of Imran Khan's election campaign, and turned a blind eye towards a campaign of repression by the military-backed establishment. However, the unkindest cut of them all to Pakistan's democracy and the legitimacy of the elections was the Qazi Court's decision denying the PTI its electoral symbol: the cricket bat.

In his new book, Sohrab Ahmari argues that the concentration of economic power in the hands of a few corporations has created a new form of tyranny in America. "Coercion is far more widespread in supposedly noncoercive societies than we would like to think—provided we pay attention to private power and admit the possibility of private coercion," he writes.

Ahmari, founder and editor of Compact magazine, joins Bethany and Luigi to discuss his book, "Tyranny Inc.: How Private Power Crushed American Liberty--and What to Do About It." In this episode, they discuss the complex relationship between capitalism, personal freedoms, and political power. The conversation sheds light on what classical liberalism ignores, how today's Right is discovering what the Left may have forgotten, and ultimately, where today's political Left and Right may be able to work together.

The year 2023, which is slowly approaching its end, has marked a twofold jubilee of the late US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. It is both the 90th anniversary of her birth and the 30th anniversary of her Supreme Court appointment. Her immense impact on US law and culture has been honored in a variety of ways, from a special issue of the Harvard Law Review and a ship's name to a LEGO figure. One dimension of her remembrance, however, often escapes notice, although it offers a unique understanding of RBG's legacy. This dimension is classical music. Music history has on many occasions venerated living or recently deceased contemporaries – it is enough to mention Verdi's Requiem and the tangled ways of Beethoven's Eroica dedication. It is, however, an extremely rare form of tribute when extended to lawyers for the sake of their legal accomplishments as such. Let's take a look.

Yes, OK, slow time of year, PR attempts to get a company written up will work well right now: AI sparks revolution in how much supermarkets charge you for foodDigital labelling can pass on price fluctuations more quickly and cut wasteYes, super and that might even be the effect. But the driver is, we very strongly suspect, this: electronic shelf labels (ESLs), the first step towards dynamic pricing, had been introduced in a small number of existing shops,……..Retail expert Clare Bailey said the move to digital labelling is the first step towards a "dynamic pricing model" in supermarkets as they look to reduce labour, ….. costsWe've all seen this in a shop, an individual clacking out new price labels to stick on a shelf of something or other. That person costs the shop about £10 an hour this year, it'll soon be about £11 just in wages alone (then add NI, benefits etc) and so the hunt is on to reduce labour costs. One central data entry to change the price on a whole shelf of product, job's a good 'un.We can think of this as just tech reducing labour costs, or labour costs being forced up and thereby inducing the job killing use of technology. Either works.Far more fun, to us at least, is that this begins to destroy a core tenet of New Keynesian economics. The idea of menu costs is central - it explains price stickiness. Prices do not smoothly change, they move in shuddery jumps. For there's a cost to changing the price - the cost of reprinting the menu - so it's only worth doing that when the underlying has changed enough to justify that cost of actually making the price change. This is true too. It's also why the New Classical and Real Business Cycle theories seem not to explain the world quite right, but New Keynesian seem to do better. Which is why every central bank and Treasury economic model is, by and large, New Keynesian.That's all a recent development, certainly recent decades. Which is where the fun comes in really. For those real world economic models have all zeroed in on a specific explanatory structure just as that structure becomes non-explanatory. If changing prices is now the one single entry in a central database for a shop, possibly for an entire chain, then menus costs are much less of an issue. The world is moving closer to those RBC and New Classical models where prices change swiftly and near costlessly and so the economy as a whole reacts near instantly to change. Yes, obviously, these are all tendencies, not absolutes. But we really do think that it's terribly fun that just as the orthodoxy narrows in on something generally agreed that it is also becoming untrue.As in that old joke about economics exams. Universities still use the same questions they did a century ago - it's the answers that have changed. Which, actually, they have.

Erec Smith


On Friday, June 2nd at 3 PM, Cato will hold a book forum on the newly published Letters in Black and White: A New Correspondence of Race in America. This book is a epistolary correspondence between a white woman (Jennifer Richmond) and a black man (Winkfield Twyman). This book models civil discourse on race and illustrates how dialogue about this touchy subject can be difficult yet generative and, ultimately, worth it.
I am proud to have written the Foreword for this book. In that Foreword, available for free in The Journal of Free Black Thought, I explain what I see as the book's primary benefit.
Twyman and Richmond provide us with profound lessons: the power of immersion into cultural pluralities that shed light on our commonalities while appreciating our differences; the detriments of dogma and empty sloganeering; the necessity to define ourselves by our present and not our past; the importance of a black history that celebrates triumph as much as tragedy, etc. I could go on—and the reader will no doubt uncover their own lessons—but my main point is that a dialogue between two people can hold a trove of insights, considerations, and facts that power us toward that Blessed Society.
This is a valuably informative and entertaining book. "Edutainment," the hybridization of "education" and "entertainment," is achieved! And what better way to convey such an important message. As I write in the foreword:
I truly believe that it is exactly what we need at this moment in the American culture war of race relations. Not only does it provide perspectives one does not get from mainstream accounts of "whiteness" and "blackness," but it also shows the benefits of mature and honest dialogue, the need to embrace America's virtues in the face of its vices, and the promise of classical liberal values.

I hope you can attend the book forum and read the book at your earliest convenience.

The idea that someone standing for election should promise things that the populace might like to vote for seems to us to be rather the point of the system. And, as Mencken said, democracy means they then get it good and hard. Milei, in Argentina, diagnosed that the entire Argentinian state, its economics, its management - in both senses, what is done and who is doing it - is rotten and needs to be swept away. He got elected. Of course, for all those others who are part of the management of other states this poses something of a risk. What if it works and then their own restive managees decide to do the same? We'd thus expect the establishments of everywhere else to not just denigrate but actively block anything Milei tries to do. As, of course, the domestic managerial class will also be trying to do the same.We do indeed think that it's possible for a place to be so badly run that only truly radical action will restore matters. We are not conservatives, we are classical liberals after all - neoliberals even.But perhaps someone could explain this to us: "Fiery right-wing populist Javier Milei wins Argentina's presidency and promises 'drastic' changes" Why is he being described as a populist? Other than in that manner of proposing things that the electorate might find popular that is?For we've also had this in this same election: Argentina will exempt millions of workers from paying income taxes, a dramatic attempt by Economy Minister Sergio Massa to improve his standings in next month's presidential election at the risk of deepening the country's fiscal hole.Workers earning less than 1.7 million pesos ($4,857) per month won't have to pay income taxes as of October, up from the previous threshold of about 700,000 pesos, Massa said Monday in Buenos Aires. The measure means only 90,000 top executives and high-ranking managers across the country will have to pay the tax, he said. That's less than 1% of total registered workers.The incumbent finance minister essentially abolishes income tax (not a bad idea!) and still loses. But it's his opponent, the other guy, who is described as the populist? Other than "populist" merely meaning someone the managerial class doesn't like what does it actually mean?

A week ago Jay Bhattacharya gave a great talk at the weekly Stanford Classical Liberalism workshop. (Link in case the embed doesn't work.) He detailed the story of government+media Covid censorship, along with the dramatic injunction in the Missouri v. Biden case. The discovery in that case alone, detailing how the administration used the threat of arbitrary regulatory retaliation to get tech companies to censor covid information -- along with other matters, including the Hunter Biden laptop -- is astonishing. We now know what they did, no matter what judges say about its technical legality. Toward the end, it came out that Stanford hosts an "internet observatory," specifically named in the injunction for colluding with the government to find and censor people on the internet. Internal matters always drawing attention, there was a longish discussion about that.  It does matter. Using (tax exempt) universities and other "nonprofits" to do things that are illegal for the government to do is, at least, not very pretty. As with all matters Israel, academic freedom and free speech seem to be pretty selectively applied. Another example of university efforts on  "disinformation" came up in later discussion, at Cambridge. It has an interesting mandate: "Strategic disinformation is an accelerant for major societal problems such as climate change,.... "Yes, I thought, channeling Bjorn Lomborg and Steve Koonin. The climate-catastrophe, climate-justice, degrowth, anti-capitalism, let-them-stay-poor, get-back-to-the-farm-and-set-my-soul-free crowd has spread immense disinformation about actual climate science. Oh wait, somehow I don't think that's what they have in mind.  Orwell would be proud. (I would be delighted to be wrong in this case. Let me know.) But these internal matters are minor, really. The story of government, using threat of regulatory attack, to censor the internet is the real shocker. It also reveals a lot about our regulatory state. Can't internet companies say "well, regulation follows rules and procedures; you can't hurt us with regulation when we haven't done anything wrong and there is no provable case?" Ha Ha. Give us the company, and we'll find the regulation.  

Mustafa Akyol and Neal McCluskey


America's culture wars are sometimes perceived as conflict between "conservatives," who defend the values of white Christians, and "progressives," who defend the rights of minorities. But there is something new these days complicating this always too‐​simple dichotomy: Some minorities are also quite conservative in their moral standards, and they are raising their voices against impositions from the progressive side.
This is evident in ongoing protests by Muslim and Christian families, among others, from Maryland to Los Angeles, against public schools pushing lessons about gender and sexuality that contradict religious values. "Protect our children" these families have called together, adding, "Protect religious freedom."
On June 24, in National Review, we highlighted this new development in a co‐​authored article: "Defuse the Culture War with Liberated Education."
First, we argued that the newly emerging Muslim‐​Christian alliance for traditional values offers interesting lessons:
There are lessons for both political camps. America's assertive progressives should realize that theirs is a counterproductive campaign. By advancing their ideals through assertion and coercion, instead of persuasion, they are alienating many people, including some minorities they claim to defend. Among Muslims, they are also giving ammunition to hardliners, who preach that Western freedom is a lie, that it only means freedom from religion and tradition, and thus Muslims should reject it everywhere.

On the other hand, America's conservatives should reconsider their distance from minorities, including a rigid stance against immigration, symbolized by Donald Trump's famous "Build the Wall" campaign. Those on the political right should realize that they may well share values with some of the people that they want to push behind that wall.

Then, we also proposed a solution to these increasingly intense culture wars in American education:
We believe that the best strategy is to keep government out of decisions about values and culture whenever possible, including — perhaps especially — in education, which is about nothing less than shaping human minds. This requires allowing more choice, so families can decide for themselves what their kids will learn. Instead of diverse people being forced to fight, they can freely pursue what they think is right.

The solution, in other words, was in going back to the classical liberal foundations of America:
Government should not discriminate against LGBTQ individuals, nor should it discriminate against people with traditional values. The only way to treat all equally, while advancing genuine tolerance, is the good old American value of limited government.

Read the whole article here in National Review. Read more about School Choice here. And see our catalogue of culture war in public schools – the Public Schooling Battle Map – here.