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.
When people are free to associate as they please, we can’t be surprised if they sometimes self-segregate. People self-sort along many affinities, including ethnic affinities. This is what lawyers call de facto segregation, and it’s none of the law’s business. De jure segregation — segregation imposed by law, including segregation promoted by public policy — is, on the other hand, very much the law’s business.
In 1866, Congress passed a Civil Rights Act (the 1866 CRA) asserting the equal rights of blacks before the law, including property rights, and real-estate rights in particular. The 1866 CRA warned
Bridget and Peter Boghossian have a conversation under the Colorado stars about the search for ultimate meaning in life, the denigration of reason, the loss of being able to wonder publicly, figuring out the best type of life to lead, and teaching people how to value the right things. Peter explains how bales of hay, lifting weights, and prison inmates got him started on his career path and led him to question whether you can fundamentally change the way people think about problems and the way they view morality. They cover street epistemology, the truth about “pecking orders,” the difference between rationalizing and reasoning, and the glorification of violence in our society. His book, How to Have Impossible Conversations: A Very Practical Guide, co-written with James Lindsay, is a distillation of decades of study and offers the best ways to approach and have conversations with people who have different opinions and foster a climate of civility.
Full transcript available here: WiW-PeterBoghossian-Transcript
This post stems out of a conversation at the work lunch table. Someone brought up that Brooklyn Bug-Eye’s economic illiteracy. “We’ve chased Amazon away! That’s three billion in tax incentives that we can spend elsewhere!” Not quite how that works. The discussion moved on to banning cow farts and air travel and so forth. I’ll spare you the details, you’ve heard ’em all before. The problem is that by the time you get to how you’re going to pay for such a thing you’ve already lost the argument.
Here, let’s have Rachael Carson tell it.
Every writer has a specific purpose for doing what they do. Some write to share their observations and experiences; some write to instruct or inform, and others write to entertain; there are writers who work to appease an audience, and there are those who write to serve their own ego. We all have a reason, […]
“We are afraid to put men to live and trade each on his own private stock of reason, because we suspect that the stock in each man is small, and that the individuals would do better to avail themselves of the general bank and capital of nations and ages.” Edmund Burke, from Yuval Levin’s book, […]
John Stossel joins the Whiskey Politics Podcast just as we were setting up at Freedom Fest (apologies for the few audio glitches). John spoke on regulations, entitlements, the ongoing drug war, the impact of legalization, why he despises Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and how to ensure future generations will be taught about the benefits of free markets. John can now be found on Reason TV and is focusing on teaching students basic economic principals at Stossel In The Classroom where students can get free DVDs.
For decades you have seen John appear on ABC News and Fox Business Channel preaching libertarian political philosophy and views on economics focusing on free markets. John has received 19 Emmy Awards and five National Press Club awards for excellence in consumer reporting. Stossel has written three books recounting how his experiences in journalism shaped his socioeconomic views, Give Me a Break in 2004, Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity in 2007, and No They Can’t! Why Government Fails but Individuals Succeed.
When it comes to tackling regulations (Title 9, Obamacare, small business, etc.) Trump has many Libertarians applauding. So why does Reason’s Nick Gillespie suggest Trump may be bad for the Libertarian cause? Nick is currently the Contributing Editor of Reason.com and the Editor-in-Chief at Reason.tv, the home of Free Minds and Free Markets. We discuss entitlements, Libertarianism as a governing body, limited government in the age of Trump and much more. You can (and should) find Nick on Twitter and Facebook. Special thanks to virtuoso pianist Hyperion Knight for his beautiful background music taped at the Freedom Fest Convention at the Paris Hotel in Las Vegas, NV.
Please subscribe to Whiskey Politics at YouTube and our audio podcasts at iTunes, Stitcher or GooglePlay where your 5-star rating would be appreciated! (iTunes especially!) In: Little Green Bag, George Baker Selection. Out: Everybody Wants to Rule the World, Tears for Fears. Produced by Praemonitus Communications, pictures by Thompson Clicks Photos.
“Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.” These words of Jesus may suggest that Christianity is about faith and not about knowledge. But it’s not. The separation of belief and seeing, of faith and sight, in the New Testament is only a separation of one […]
Our discussion on Ayn Rand and Objectivism has — unsurprisingly — turned to questions of reason, rationality, and empiricism. As a number of members have pointed out, Rand’s claim that her philosophy is distinguished by its reliance on rationality is both self-flattery and self-deception: all philosophies rely on unproven and unprovable assumptions, particularly those regarding morality, the good life, etc. In this sense, Objectivism is no exception.
However, Objectivism is distinguished in its affinity for rationality. You can see this not only in its declarations on the matter and in its atheism, but in the way it makes its arguments. It’s premised on the idea that Truth is totally knowable and understandable to anyone who applies their mind, and it argues that its conclusions are objectively and demonstrably correct. Bear in mind further that Objectivism purports to be a whole philosophy of life — something classical liberalism, for instance, never claims for itself — and that one of Rand’s favorite aphorisms is that contradictions do not exist.
Welcome, at last, to the official book discussion of Fr. Robert J. Spitzer’s Ten Universal Principles: A Brief Philosophy of the Life Issues. I’ll pose a question or two to get us started, but first, I’d like to restate the principles for reference throughout our discussion. Principles of Reason Read More View Post