Jacobin Magazine: Why Anticapitalist Conservatism Fails

The Niskanen Center publishes rigorous center-right libertarian opinion. For capitalist apologetics of the most grounded and candid sort, there’s the Financial Times. The flagship publication of Catholic conservatism, First Things, is often worth a read. Even Patrick Buchanan’s the American Conservative, for all its racist and misogynistic baggage, occasionally provides a forum for less bigoted and more thoughtful opinion on the Right. [...]

Deneen argues that liberalism’s breakdown can be explained not by its failure but by its success. As modernity’s presiding ideology has become fully realized, he writes, its contradictions have become more apparent. Liberal commitments to fairness, pluralism, and autonomy have yielded a world of vast inequity, conformity, and coercion — and these injustices have been the product of the very worldview designed to overcome them. [...]

In Deneen’s telling, both the modern right and left are comprised of conservative liberals and progressive liberals. The former remains loyal to the proto-liberal revolution of English philosophers like Francis Bacon and Thomas Hobbes, where human nature is fixed but non-human nature is malleable and liable to conquest. The latter endorses the more ardent liberal revolutions of everyone from Jean Jacques-Rousseau to John Stuart Mill to Karl Marx, where human and non-human natures are meant to be molded and conquered. [...]

And finally, there is the assurance that the author is in no way calling for the reversal of basic modern achievements — slavery, exclusive male suffrage, or feudalism shall safely remain regrets of the past. The fact that the sixth assertion vitiates the five that preceded it speaks to the fragility on which the entire anti-modern position rests. [...]

If the argument’s long history doesn’t quite work, neither does its short one. Deneen wants to make the case that as liberalism spurns traditional norms, individuals become progressively unruly while the state grows ever more overbearing. Society becomes marred by crime, mass incarceration, corruption, social distrust, rapaciousness, inequality, illness, and authoritarian governance. Cultural liberalism and moral laxness, that is, travel in tow.

read the article

Political Critique: Breaking the Silence: The New Media Revolution in Turkey

The Turkish media is facing the wrath of a government that is using a coup attempt to root out the opposition. Under the cover of an ongoing state of emergency, journalists are being hounded and locked up, media outlets are being closed and the free press is gradually being bought by government-affiliated businesses. Yet, out of this despair comes a glimmer of hope, a silent revolution of new media, finding ways around the repression to get the message out. And it’s not just in Turkey. Eighty-seven percent of the world’s population lives in a country without a free press. As media censorship spreads across Europe, resilient journalists are bypassing the mainstream to raise their voices from brand-new platforms. [...]

Turkey has long suffered from state interference in the media, but matters have taken a steep downward spiral since the attempted coup of 2016, when a faction within the Turkish armed forces tried to wrest power from government institutions. This worrying trend continues in 2018, as a crisis in the judiciary weakens the media still; in January, two high-profile journalists remained in prison even after Turkey’s constitutional court ordered their release. Between January 20 and February 26, 648 people were detained because of their posts on social media. Under mounting international pressure, German-Turkish journalist Deniz Yücel was finally released. But he had been held in pre-trial detention for 367 days, without any charges. In another crushing blow, 13 journalists who worked for an opposition newspaper were sentenced to prison on April 26 for “aiding and abetting terror organisations without being a member”.

Another worrying trend is the state seizures of media outlets, which are subsequently bought by pro-government businesses, creating what has been termed a ‘pool media’ – newspapers all churning out exactly the same pro-government stories. In what some see as a death blow to Turkish independent media, in March, the Doğan media group, owners of the last credible opposition newspaper and television channels, was bought by a business conglomerate with government ties. In reaction to this trend, one young Istanbullite told me that she now avoids the news, as she considers it all to be government propaganda; trust in the mainstream media is at an all-time low. [...]

Media oppression has swept across European borders, an insidious creep into the new normal. As the prospect of EU enlargement fades and it focuses on achieving stability over internal reforms, its influence is waning in much of eastern Europe, while Russian influence is on the rise. At the same time, fake news websites increase media noise, and as well as the usual political and financial pressures, reporters are having to deal with being labelled as spies and foreign mercenaries.

read the article

The Atlantic: Arab Democracy Depends on Normalizing Islamist Parties

The perennial question of whether democracy can work in the Middle East isn’t always easy to answer. Generally, it hasn’t worked. But amid civil war in Yemen, Libya, and Syria, authoritarian resurgence in Saudi Arabia and Egypt, and economic instability in Jordan, there are at least three cases that challenge the notion that it can’t happen here. Tunisia, which held its first post-revolution municipal elections in May, continues to be a (relative) bright spot. Then there are the more unlikely cases of Iraq as well as Lebanon—probably the world’s most successful failed state. All three share two related features: Largely without controversy, they include Islamist parties in their democratic processes; and, second, they feature some degree of power-sharing. [...]

The very presence of Islamist parties can be inherently polarizing, particularly when they represent large, powerful, and conservative constituencies. Through successive administrations, the United States has regarded too much Islamist representation—or any Islamist representation—as a risky prospect. Yet it was the George W. Bush administration that, despite its discomfort with Islamism, ironically paved the way for Islamists to take power through democratic elections in Lebanon—a first in the Arab world. After its January 2005 elections, Ibrahim al-Jaafari of the Shia Islamist Dawa party assumed the prime ministership. Interestingly, Iraqi Muslim Brotherhood members served in various cabinet positions, including as ministers of higher education and planning. In Lebanon, Hezbollah—however much the United States and Saudi Arabia oppose it—has become a fixture of coalition governments. The point here isn’t that these groups are good (Hezbollah is a designated terrorist organization as well as an active participant in the Syrian regime’s mass killing of civilians), but rather that Arab democracy, in practice, often coincides with the normalization of Islamist parties. [...]

In the case of Tunisia, the irony is that Islamists’ willingness to play nice—something that would generally seem quite positive—has contributed to a troubling trend of democratic backsliding on things like police reform, an overly securitized counterterrorism strategy, and the lack of accountability for the crimes and corruption of old regime figures. As the largest party in parliament, Ennahda potentially has considerable power to challenge Prime Minister Youssef Chahed and President Beji Caid Essebsi Essebsi’s priorities. Instead, they have emphasized caution, consensus, and stability, fearing that doing otherwise might summon the old days of polarization and repression. Embracing their role as junior partner in the government, they have, in effect, gained protected status. But this also means that Tunisia is deprived of a cohesive bloc that could serve as an effective lobby for strengthening the democratic transition. The desire for compromise, unchecked, can come at a cost.

read the article

The Los Angeles Review of Books: Trouble in Paradise: The Rise of Artificial Intelligence

Why is the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) unnerving to so many of us? I have a theory. Our ill-ease with AI may be due to the fact that the 21st century will not be the first time that entities with agency and nous will have appeared on earth. After all, Homo sapiens is the direct heir of the last such event. Isn’t it possible – or even, tautological – that many of us feel threatened by the idea of human-like machines precisely because they will be, in certain respects, like humans? [...]

We no longer tend to suspect that there might be a link between human knowledge and human depravity. Until the mid-19th century, however, few in Europe and the Americas doubted that the origin of human evil was represented, in some way, in the first pages of the book of Genesis. And in Genesis, we find an archaic legend of the fall whose images are deep as dreams, but whose plot is clear. The first human pair, Adam and Eve, are placed by God in a paradise – the Garden of Eden. They are naked, and innocent, and in love. [...]

This brings us back to AI. For Kant’s steely verdict is that human beings are evil because they are intelligent. This is of course not to say that intelligence, per se, is evil. (Kant is a rationalist.) Rather, Kant thinks that it is the essence of “restless reason” to drive humankind “irresistibly” towards the development of all its capacities – good and evil. [...]

If Kant is correct, then we can be certain (a priori) that genuinely intelligent machines will, like us, have a propensity to evil – because they are intelligent. They, too, will want to taste the forbidden fruit. And if Kant is correct, then we can also reason (a posteriori) from the absence of evil machines – there are, as yet, no evil machines – to an absence of real machine intelligence.

read the article

Politico: Trump goes to war with corporate America

Trump’s approach has created a high-stakes showdown without recent political precedent: A Republican president betting that his populist approach to trade will thrill his working-class base and blow away any short-term economic fallout or reduced political support from the nation’s largest business organizations. His message to corporate America so far: I don’t care what you say, my base is with me. [...]

Trump and some of his senior advisers are banking on the idea that while corporate America may hate his trade policies, rank-and-file workers who make up the president’s base will embrace them. And they believe new domestic manufacturing jobs will eventually pay political dividends that will swamp any market dislocations. [...]

“To the extent that more and more companies come out with these kinds of negative announcements, particularly at the local level, that will start to create political pressure on the White House,” said Scott Lincicome, a trade lawyer and adjunct scholar at the libertarian Cato Institute. “One of the things I’ve noticed is how many small companies that rely on steel or aluminum or count on the Canadian export market have come out with stories about getting hurt. That could actually penetrate.” [...]

Most of those groups steadfastly opposed to Trump’s tariffs are careful to note that they support many of the administration’s goals on trade, if not their tactics. On the autos probe, the United Automobile Workers union and United Steelworkers both offered general support for the investigation, but not for blanket tariffs. UAW, for example, called for “targeted measures” to help the auto sectors but warned that any “rash actions” could lead to unintended consequences like mass layoffs.

read the article

Deutsche Welle: Opinion: Angela Merkel finds salvage in Fortress Europe

These last two weeks have been about far more than determining the chancellor's fate. They have been a bitter struggle over the fundamental direction of European refugee policy. And the forces that have been backing closure of the borders have won. These are politicians who want to prevent people from making the life-threatening journey across the Mediterranean in the first place.  [...]

This puts an end to the acute crisis. However, no real answer to the challenges has been found — let's not kid ourselves. After all, in which North African countries should the reception camps be built? The reactions so far have been predominantly hostile. And with which countries can you do business if you want to preserve human rights at the very minimum? And who will take care of refugees if they are prevented from moving on? The latest pictures from Algeria show what can happen. Thousands were literally sent to the desert, including children and pregnant women, where at almost 50 degrees Celsius (122 Fahrenheit) in the shade they died miserably, of thirst and starvation. Countries like Lebanon are already taking in more refugees than the whole of Europe put together. This is also part of the truth of a European policy of isolation.

There are also currently more questions than answers within Europe. Here, too, it is uncertain in which country camps are to be built. Which governments are really prepared, in the end, to lighten the burden carried by Italy and Greece, those countries with the longest external borders and, correspondingly, the highest number of refugee arrivals? This quick agreement between the Christian Democrats (CDU) and the Christian Social Union (CSU) was only possible because everything remained vague. The only thing that can be implemented quickly is to strengthen border management. There are lucrative times ahead for the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, Frontex, and for fence-building companies.

read the article

CityLab: Understanding the Architecture of the Moscow Metro

The first order of construction was primarily designed in a Soviet version of Art Deco, with some remains of avant-garde forms. Parts of the second and third orders, which opened in 1938 and 1943, are like this as well. Stations built from that point until the end of the 1950s can be described as Neoclassical with Empire-style motifs , usually for post-war projects treated as war memorials. These make up a little less than a quarter of the total stations in the system, but they are the most visited ones in the center and main line interchanges. Only 44 of total 214 stations are listed as historical monuments, including a few from the ‘50s and nothing since. [...]

Since the 1960s, Metro construction has been nearly as important for the economy and for transit planning, but it’s not nearly as ideological. Decisions are made in the Moscow City Department of Urban Planning and Architecture. Some technical questions, like integration with other transit systems, are done through the Department of Transport. [...]

For today’s typical Metro user, the modern stations prevail as the standard image of the system. But except for few recent ones made with monumental mosaics or clever forms, these stations aren’t perceived as architecture at all. The historical stations, however, still play a very special role in the city’s image, like its Stalin-era skyscrapers and pre-Revolution tenements, churches, and mansions.

read the article

IFLScience: Study Finds Correlation Between Trump Support And Opioid Use, But The Reasons Are Complex

In JAMA Network Open, Goodwin confirms the correlation is real, at least for a sample mostly aged over 65. In the 693 counties with opioid prescriptions well above the national average, Trump scored almost 60 percent of the vote, compared to less than 39 percent in the 638 counties with rates significantly below average. A weaker, but still substantial, correlation was found between opioid use and voting for Republican congressional candidates. There was virtually no correlation, however, between presidential vote and insulin prescription, indicating the relationship is not about medical service. [...]

High unemployment, rural status, and education were all predictive of both opioid use and Trump voting. As to the other third of the relationship, Goodwin speculated to NPR the destruction of community opioid over-prescription induces may have driven a desperation for change. "That can lead to a sense of despair. You want something different. You want radical change."

Just last week, a study found the opioid crisis is only one facet of what has been dubbed “deaths of despair” including suicide and alcohol-related deaths. Perhaps voting for Trump is another symptom of this lack of hope, a theory supported by previous studies showing swings from Romney to Trump were highest where life expectancy has fallen. However, where taking drugs to numb the pain is self-destructive, the consequences of a presidential vote has the capacity to cause far wider pain.

read the article

The Conversation: The science of superstition – and why people believe in the unbelievable

The number 13, black cats, breaking mirrors, or walking under ladders, may all be things you actively avoid—if you’re anything like the 25% of people in the US who consider themselves superstitious. [...]

For many people, engaging with superstitious behaviors provides a sense of control and reduces anxiety—which is why levels of superstition increase at times of stress and angst. This is particularly the case during times of economic crisis and social uncertainty—notably wars and conflicts. Indeed, researchers have observed how in Germany between 1918 and 1940 measures of economic threat correlated directly with measures of superstition.

Superstitious beliefs have been shown to help promote a positive mental attitude. Although they can lead to irrational decisions, such as trusting in the merits of good luck and destiny rather than sound decision making.

read the article