Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
With John Yoo still away somewhere in the jungles of South America, Steve and Lucretia are delighted to be joined by a very special guest, Prof. Amy Wax of Penn Law School. Followers of the campus scene may be familiar with Penn Law’s crusade to fire Prof. Wax for the sin of offending against campus orthodoxies on race and immigration, at the same time Penn so conspicuously tolerates anti-Semitism.
Prof. Wax isn’t at liberty to discuss the details of her ongoing ordeal ((you can read more about the case from her lawyer David Shapiro here), but we do get into the thick of several pertinent questions, such as:
—Does the current crisis of tolerance for anti-Semitism on campus represent a possible inflection point to turn back “wokery” at last, or will this episode prove that higher education has passed the point of no return?
—Is there any evidence that the high-profile donor revolt at Penn and elsewhere is having an effect?
—On a wider note, many conservative law professors are leaving their posts because of the increasing ideological hostility. This seems another bad omen for academia.
Subscribe to Power Line in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.
I get the desire for tolerance of the intolerant, but there is the line you *must* draw. The “liberal” idea of a common square of free speech only works if there is an ultimate authority that enforces the ground rules of tolerance and free speech.
Mccarthy-ism is a pejorative that should be properly dismissed for it brings as its example a flawed man, flawed actions, and flawed execution – no matter how “correct” parts of it was. What needs to be recognized by “classical” liberals is that the liberal project will fail if left to engage with those that wish to destroy that system.
Simple game theory will show that, given time, any majority rolled organization if it chooses to allow those who wish to destroy the organization itself (communists, Marxists, woke-ists, etc) into their organization, eventually a critical mass will be reached and the scorpion will sting the frog. Boundaries must be set, enforced, and (key) the next generation must be purposefully indoctrinated into understanding and supporting this order. The use of expulsion, economic banishment, societal shame, etc., should be employed on those that wish the system harm.
Sounds authorisation, because it is, but we can hedge that and use the anti-fragile system of state/ local federalism, city independence, and private property (gonna have to reform civil rights laws) to bring the overarching systemic threat of homogenous authority to a minimum.
OK rant off- I love me some libertarian liberal classical blah blah because I was one and it’s a lovely theory, but we need to live in the real world. Beauty is, the Founders (again) left us the system to use.
Great pod!!
When will the light go on and a critical mass of modern Democrat Liberals realize that the vilest anti-Semitic rhetoric and pro-Hamas support find a home in THEIR Party?
(but Trump…)
I’d be satisfied if just the Jews in the Democratic Party finally woke up and realized what their party had turned into. And it at least seems that a few are paying attention.
Of course, given that the cost of changing sides is being shunned by all your leftist friends, it will not be very surprising if people go to great lengths to rationalize staying in the Democratic Party. Probably by insisting that the Republicans are even worse!