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.
This week, we mix up the line-up with Conservatarian guest hosts Jon Gabriel and Stephen Miller. They’re joined by author Tom Nichols (his new book The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why It Matters is a must read) and our old pal James Delingpole who lets loose about Milo and CPAC in the way only he can. Also, weird goings on in North Korea and next stop, Trappist-1.
Public service announcement: if you’re not a member of Ricochet and enjoy this podcast, be one of the 1,500 and join today.
Music from this week’s podcast: You’ve Got To Stand For Somethin’ by John Mellencamp
The ALL NEW opening sequence for the Ricochet Podcast was composed and produced by James Lileks.
Yes, you should absolutely subscribe to this podcast. It helps! And leave a review too!
It’s the 1st Amendment, @EJHill.
Subscribe to The Ricochet Podcast 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 love James Delingpole, and the whole Cuck thing, OK probably shouldn’t have gone there but as someone who says things before thinking about them I’ll give him a pass. You who are without sin, cast the first stone. Milo is also a protege of James’ and is defending a friends who he thinks has been toss over unjustly. So he’s ticked off, I get it. Hey as someone who has a LOT of lefty friends I’m pretty forgiving when someone is ticked.
But this was a great podcast. Nice to hear James again.
What do you think is gained by Delingpoles slurs?
Do you have converstations with people? Have you never had an emotional moment where you may have said something because you are annoyed with them? Sometimes conversations are just conversations to just hash out things, sometimes they get heated and ad hominems come out sometimes not, I guess it just depends what side you are on as to whether or not you would be offended. I thought this was a good podcast and I like James and I think from his perspective Europe is dying and Western Values are in peril and this is a serious battle to preserve Western values and our freedom.
The more I hear people complain about President Trump, the more it reminds me of the line Lincoln said about Grant.
“I appealed to Lincoln for his own sake to remove Grant at once, and, in giving my reasons for it, I simply voiced the admittedly overwhelming protest from the loyal people of the land against Grant’s continuance in command. I could form no judgment during the conversation as to what effect my arguments had upon him beyond the fact that he was greatly distressed at this new complication. When I had said everything that could be said from my standpoint, we lapsed into silence. Lincoln remained silent for what seemed a very long time. He then gathered himself up in his chair and said in a tone of earnestness that I shall never forget: ‘I can’t spare this man; he fights.’”
Trump fights. Sometimes he wins, sometimes he loses. But he fights. Can we say that about Ryan or McConnell? Cause on this healthcare repeal is all I see is surrender and MacClellan like leadership.
There might be some casualties along the way. There certainly was a lot of squeamish talk after Shiloh and the Wilderness. Maybe the casualties are to high. Maybe we should just let them go and rot.
I am happy to have someone do some fighting and actually winning battles every now and then.
What he fights for matters. If he’s fighting for something I find abhorrent (protectionism, for instance) then he is not my ally.
Also winning battles while losing the war is pointless. If the result of all this winning is President Warren* then we’ve gained nothing.
*I’m not saying it will be, but we have to remember that it could be.
Trade suppresses wages but due to our inflationist government policy and financial system the middle class and the poor can’t capitalize. In fact, their lives go down the drain. Thus we get Trump.
https://www.researchaffiliates.com/en_us/publications/articles/414_wheres_the_beef_lies_damned_lies_and_statistics.html
David Stockman is God. Read his book. Listen to his interviews.
“Keynesian economics is actually just an abuse of democracy…”
After the bond market collapses and there is all kinds of suffering everywhere, we will do the right thing.
Yes and when I’m having a conversation with someone and they insult me to my face I end the conversation. I usually don’t speak to that person for a while afterwards.
False.
Jamie, buddy, how about if they insult you online? Asking for a friend. :D
There is brutal wage deflation from globalized labor competition and robots / computers. That is just a fact.
READ THE ARTICLES I POSTED.
If EVERYONE got to live better though specialization, trade, and technology WHICH IS POSSIBLE if we drop our inflationist government and economy, I would agree with you.
The problem is we have too much public / private debt and there is too many whoring off the government (you can’t tax deflation) for us to adopt this without a bond market collapse.
P.S. Feel free to argue with me. You are going to look stupid.
James, in fairness I think you started to make that point and then there was some conversational kerfuffle and no discussion. And no follow through. If a guest wants to assert the vital role of academic and public policy elites against the unthinking mob, why not hit him with a few pointed questions about a rather remarkable string of public policy failures over the past forty years? Ask him about the highly pedigreed global warming industry. Contrast the performance of our educational administration elites with homeschooling and charter schools.
None of it happened.
You guys did not ask a single tough question. He was just allowed to make his condescending case. I am sorry, but whenever a NeverTrumper comes on a show hosted by former NeverTrumpers they are greeted like a 5os sitcom dad coming home from the office, with slippers, afternoon paper and drink in place.
Then Delingpole walks in the door and he’s bitten by the dog. Not that James D. doesn’t deserve a bite in arse from time to time, mind you.
Would have been interesting to contrast the collective expertise of the global scientific community on the menace of climate change with Delingpole’s amateur and entertaining dismissal of that collective expertise.
How is it that Delingpole is right?
This is a very extreme version of what I’m talking about.
The Rulers of Ricochet really ought to start a separate podcast about how the GOP has to pay attention to the Austrian School of Economics. It’s just instructional. All of the worthless graft, collectivism, rent seeking is never going to go away with normal politics anyway. It’s harmless.
Also, Rep. Jason Lewis of MN CD2 is an American hero. He needs a huge voice here. Total expert on all of this stuff.
I’m going to agree and disagree with you both. Trade reduces some wages, has no effect on some, and raises others. It depends on what is being imported, what the importing country produces, and who is doing the importing.
Trade benefits everyone by lowering prices of the goods they buy and/or raising the quality of the goods. However, for those who lose their jobs or have their wages suppressed, the harm outweighs the benefits.
In the long run, free trade raises everyone’s standard of living. If, for example, we dropped all trade restrictions today, people twenty years down the road will be better off than they would be if we either leave things as they are or increase trade barriers.
That does not change the fact that some people will be harmed today if we eliminate all restrictions. The fact that everyone will be better off twenty years from now doesn’t put food on their tables today.
I believe that the least bad solution is to eliminate the regulations that make it difficult or impossible for people to find new jobs when they lose the jobs they have – whether those jobs are lost to foreign trade or to new technology. Minimum wage laws, employer mandates, and licensing laws should all be cut back or eliminated.
This would be true if the Fed stopped being inflationist. People without assets, IQ, education, or some non-outsourceable trade skills get hosed. They can’t do this because there is too much public and private debt. Also, “Better Living Through Deflation” can’t be taxed. The government is broke but still has massive obligations and graft to pay out, so the In-Reality-Politically-Controlled-Federal Reserve will give us inflation and asset bubbles until ALL of the Western bond markets collapse. I’m dead serious.
Feel free to ask questions.
In the USA, all shelter, education, health insurance and many other things are overpriced relative to global wages and what robots are going to unleash on us. We will get a Ron Paul world the hard way. It is going to be brutal.
Trump and Bernie were popular for one reason, and one reason only: inflationist government.
The whole political system is a Truman Show illusion waste of time, shiny distraction compared to the Fed and the financial system. Voting just makes everything worse in the short and medium term.
Admit it, you pulled this line from the movie Stepbrothers, right?
No. It ain’t bragging if you can do it. Also, I am majorly unhappy about all of this stuff.
Understandable, but do remember that you’re arguing on the Internet, which may be the least effective way yet developed to change minds and policies.
Ha, I’ve been insulted I guess an online version of TO MY FACE, on by members of ricochet but I don’t take it personal, and I usually continue talking to the person, IF they have balance in their moral bank account with me ( Google moral bank account it’s a great concept) if they are running a deficit then they get the boot. Why do I do this? Because sometimes in heated debates emotions run high and sometimes people get frustrated and resort to insults. it happens, even to us on ricochet.
I like the Conservatarian Podcast, but I didn’t need a second one this week.
That’s not what this show is. Not in the slightest.
@blueyeti , maybe not, but it didn’t feel like a Ricochet Flagship Podcast either.
Politics is genuinely a waste of time right now unless you get your head around what David Stockman is saying.
You made a good play, I think. I think any talk about experts should involve global warming and how the experts push that.
I also have yet to hear anyone push back on experts about how their IPhone works. The Death of expertise, to me, is in very specific areas, where experts have overreached, to make things that are not as scientific as what holds up a building, into hard science.
Your guest also mentioned food. Have we not just seen the experts change on why they think we get fat? On Salt? On eggs.
People don’t believe the experts, not just because they are into themselves, but because the experts have been wrong so much of the past 50 years. Experts are in charge of the schools. How’s that working out?
If we didn’t have an insanely regressive economy that looks like it’s being commandeered by the Ruling Class Davos idiots and K Street parasites , people would love all experts.
I got just a bit farther than you did. I deleted it when James Lileks calls him out on it and then he insisted that he didn’t like the word either. I think James Lileks was about to take a long hard swing at that softball and knock it out of the park, but I’ll never know.
@rufusrjones, that, “you’re unhappy about all this stuff,” is obvious from basically every comment I’ve seen you make here. Consider the “definition” of a fanatic- a man who won’t change his mind and can’t change the subject. Wanna know why most folks pass on most of your comments? Consider what your reaction would be to a friend who, in all situations, felt the need to bring up how we’ve had 60 million abortions since Roe v Wade. Even if you agree with his opinions on abortion, sometimes you wanna talk about sports, or foreign policy, or cooking. This podcast had very little to do with Austrian economics, and the more you insist that every topic requires bringing up David Stockman, the less people will listen.
Also, regarding the actual podcast, I liked it as usual. Some of my thoughts while listening:
Regarding Tom Nichol’s points (who I like as a pundit) – some humility about experts would help his case, though he might provide this in his book. Experts get things wrong all the time, but it’s still better to listen to an expert versus believe what you want, i.e. “doctors make plenty of mistakes, but still listen to your doctor.” Also, it’s important to note that experts making mistakes is a newsworthy event, while experts “getting it right” is how we live life. Bridge collapses make news in a way that bridges functioning normally don’t. He’s right that people take it personally now, and to explore the problems that creates in society.