Was sent a very nice image from the WINIR conference in Prague

If you want a thoughtful podcast that calmly digs into the ideologies behind our contemporary politics, and charts a humane, cosmopolitan, and liberal path forward, you'll likely enjoy my own ReImagining Liberty. I get brilliant guests and have focused conversations about politics and ideas.

@nathanpgoodman.bsky.social had a good thread on how “neoliberal” tools can be used to criticize what is sometimes referred to as the neoliberal era

Roderick Long Vs. Walter Block on Thick Vs. Thin libertarianism.
www.youtube.com/live/3dk0xBv...

Great podcast with Fabio Rojas interviewing the great Mark Pennington of King's on his forthcoming book which builds bridges between liberal political economy and Foucault.

They discuss the overlaps between post-modern liberals (like Hayek, Ostrom) and Foucault's conception of power and freedom.

I reviewed Quinn Slobodian's new book Hayek's Bastards. The review is forthcoming in the European Journal for the History of Economic Thought, sharing a preprint here.

The book gives us lots to chew on, but the Bastards from the title remains ambiguous, and that matters a lot for the argument.

@nathanpgoodman.bsky.social and Abigail Hall explore how U.S. military tools and tactics used abroad are repurposed for domestic border enforcement.
www.mercatus.org/hayekprogram...

Today I interviewed Tomasz Agencki, the director of a great biopic on the economist Carl Menger (1840-1921). The podcast will come out later, but nonetheless a good reason to repost the film, available for free on Youtube.

No one, literally no one, thought that anything in Ludlam undermined the leading antebellum case on birthright citizenship for the children of temporary visitors. That was Lynch v. Clarke. Ludlam was about something else, so it's no problem for me. Lynch is a problem for Ilan. End.

By the end of the debate, he will not commit to the claim that the children of unlawful entrants are not birthright citizens. Let me say that again: Ilan Wurman is not arguing that the children of unlawful entrants are not birthright citizens.

Enjoy. m.youtube.com/watch?v=IA4z...

So the thing happened and i will post the video as soon as humanly possible. But also i am now going to see Sinners to relax

Alright, I'm putting all the critiques of Wurman in one big thread.

In short, I don't think the draft changes anything. In fact, it seems obvious to me that under his own framework, the anti-birthright EO is unconstitutional.

Here's the thread: 🧵

Update: He agreed, so we're doing this

The opponents of birthright citizenship have nothing. Their arguments are unserious. But people with power are using them, and they must be contested everywhere. And so I conditionally accepted an invitation to debate Wurman.

The condition:

So I will own being the primary author of the first part of this. It is, by any measure, the harshest criticism I have ever directed at anyone. I did not want to write it, but felt compelled to do so by a truly egregious failure on the part of Wurman and Barnett to practice what they have preached.

Yes and more forthcoming lpeproject.org/blog/the-ant...

Yes that includes my coauthor. And I re-read our book and I still don’t know what’s going on or how he got there.

Look, scientists don’t spend a lot of time refuting flat-earth literature. If anything law profs spend more time refuting anti-birthright-citizenship arguments than they have to. But this literature is extremely one-sided and claims to the contrary are wrong. I’ll repeat this until they go away.