The Best of Reason: The Post-Neoliberalism Moment

Anyone advocating neoliberal policies is now persona non grata in Washington, D.C.

1x 1.1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 3x

:15 :15

Download

The Best of Reason: The Post-Neoliberalism Moment

This week's featured article is "The Post-Neoliberalism Moment" by Daniel W. Drezner.

This audio was generated using AI trained on the voice of Katherine Mangu-Ward.

Music credits: "Deep in Thought" by CTRL and "Sunsettling" by Man with Roses

Comments

[MasterThief]

This article stills sucks. Defines things the way it wants and ignores the reality of globalism. I'll pass on this attempt to whitewash a philosophy that's created a great many of our ills

[Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2]

It amazes me how today's Republicans have soured on Reagan-style Free trade and immigration friendly policies crafted by the likes of George Gilder during his two terms.

It was pretty much the only good part of that presidency.

When will Reagan be called a communist globalist pedophile?

[JesseAz]

One example of your consistent ignorance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_motorcycle_tariff

Want more?

[MeritNathaniel]

I get paid more than $120 to $130 every hour for working on the web. I found out about this activity 3 months prior and subsequent to joining this I have earned effectively $15k from this without having internet working abilities Copy underneath site to..
Check It—>>> http://Www.Smartcareer1.com

[Fats of Fury]

You are such a dumb fuck. Reagan imposed a 100% tariff on some Japanese electronics and threatened to impose tariffs on imported cars. The Japanese self imposed a quota and eventually built assembly plants here along with German manufacturers. In addition to the 45% tariffs for motorcycles that Jesse mentioned.

[Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2]

Reagan Embraced Free Trade and Immigration
.
It was the Reagan administration that launched the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations in 1986 that lowered global tariffs and created the World Trade Organization. It was his administration that won approval of the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement in 1988. That agreement soon expanded to include Mexico in what became the North American Free Trade Agreement, realizing a vision that Reagan first articulated in the 1980 campaign. It was Reagan who vetoed protectionist textile quota bills in 1985 and 1988.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/reagan-embraced-free-trade-immigration

I tend to cite the anti-Trump communists at Cato a lot - not that you would notice.

Trump has truly shit all over Reaganism.

[Fats of Fury]

Daniel Griswald is as big a dumb fuck as you.
Like most post‐​war presidents, Reagan championed free trade while selectively deviating from it. Critics of trade note correctly that Reagan negotiated “voluntary” import quotas for steel and Japanese cars and imposed Section 201 tariffs on imported motorcycles to protect Harley‐​Davidson. All true. But those were the exceptions and not the rule.

Those were huge exceptions to the rule. His amnesty for illegals is the number one reason California is such a shithole today.

[Fats of Fury]

Also a less than rosy Cato article about "free trader" Reagan.

https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/reagan-record-trade-rhetoric-vs-reality

[JesseAz]

For the idiots like shrike and sarc they always tend to prefer words to actions. They demand benevolent dictators.

[Social Justice is neither]

No, his response to the ACLU's asylum commitment policies is why California is what it is today. The migrant amnesty did damage but nowhere near the lunatics on the streets.

[JesseAz]

Mental health issue was a JFK policy. Just finalized under Reagan.

https://www.wbur.org/news/2013/10/23/community-mental-health-kennedy

[Fats of Fury]

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/fair-illegal-immigration-costs-california-taxpayers-nearly-31-billion-a-year-301766122.html#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20report%2C%20benefits,another%20%248%20billion%20in%2

According to the report, benefits and services provided to the estimated 3.23 million illegal aliens in California cost local taxpayers $22.8 billion annually. Factoring in about 1.15 million U.S.-born children of illegal aliens adds more than another $8 billion in costs.

[Fats of Fury]

https://www.ocregister.com/2023/07/18/something-is-clearly-off-with-californias-homelessness-spending/#:~:text=PUBLISHED%3A%20July%2018%2C%202023%20at,nearly%20%2442%2C000%20per%20homeless%20person.

PUBLISHED: July 18, 2023 at 12:43 p.m. | UPDATED: July 18, 2023 at 12:49 p.m. California put aside $7.2 billion to address homelessness in the 2021-22 state budget. Last year, there were an estimated 172,000 homeless statewide, which equates to spending nearly $42,000 per homeless person

According to these cites California spends more than three times as much for illegals as for the homeless

[sarcasmic]

Sooo an actor talked a good talk about liberty while ramping up the drug war, militarizing the police, starting trade wars and invasions, and all the things that didn't occur to me off the top of my head.

[JesseAz]

Why do you rely so heavily on opinion instead of evidence?

Trump also prefers free trade and deviates from it. He offered everyone zero tariffs if they also had no tariffs. More than Reagan ever did.

[Mother's Lament]

How does Daniel Drezner make it into a libertarian magazine?
Next thing you know they'll be quoting David French.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

Didn't ENB already quote David French? Or was that David Frum?

[MasterThief]

She quoted French a lot. I think he's more of a KMW fetish though. She's the one who cites him most because she considers him one of the few reasonable people on the right (which says a ton about her biases)

[Diane Reynolds (Paul. they/them)]

I don't know much about this Drezner fellow, but one thing that seems clear pretty quickly after perusing his X (nee Twitter) account, Elon Musk lives rent-free inside his head. Upzoning FTW!

[Diane Reynolds (Paul. they/them)]

And the opening to every tweet is "to make sure my account isn't seized". It's like he thinks he's Cancel Culture's Most Wanted.

My periodic tweet to ensure my account is not seized. Let’s RT and oldie but a goodie.

My periodic tweet to ensure my account is not seized. In fairness to
@elonmusk
’s galaxy-sized own-goals, let us all remember that Twitter’s previous owner/operators didn’t have the monopoly of wisdom either.

My periodic tweet to ensure this account is not seized:

CONSERVATIVE DISCOURSE IN 2015: Facts don't care about your feelings.

CONSERVATIVE DISCOURSE IN 2023: Feelings don't care about your facts.

Closing out 2023 with one last tweet to ensure my account isn’t seized.

Let’s wrap things up w/ an old-school “How it started how it’s going” meme!!!

My periodic tweet to ensure my account is not seized. Whatever shall I tweet about today? https://nytimes.com/2023/11/24/business/x-elon-musk-advertisers.html

My periodic tweet to ensure my account is not seized. Gosh, I wonder what I should tweet about today…. https://nytimes.com/2023/11/16/technology/elon-musk-endorses-antisemitic-post-ibm.html

My periodic tweet to ensure my account is not seized. A quick question: how high was your staff when it tweeted this out?

Oh, Republicans bad... republicans... bad. Republicans... bad. Republicans bad. Hmm, yep, Republicans bad. Bad are Republicans. Oh here's another one, Republicans are bad. And I think he doesn't think highly of Republicans.

And speaking of David Dresner, he warmly retweets David French.

I'm leaving Twitter, for the indefinite future. The reason is simple: this site is becoming more like Gab every day. It's a font of hatred, lies, and harassment. And while it's never been great, at least it had its uses. No longer. At least not for me. /1

[Mother's Lament]

Neocons going to neocon. The fascists are actually the guys against political censorship or something.

[JesseAz]

Play by play of the clown show of the Epps non sentencing.

https://twitter.com/NotRadix/status/1744763728543772845

[Gaear Grimsrud]

So the dude walks? Wow. Nobody saw that coming.

[MasterThief]

Assuming he's a fed, why wouldn't they try to cloak it at least a little bit.

[Fats of Fury]

Did he get a huge payout or pension from the FBI because he's finished as an asset.

[Diane Reynolds (Paul. they/them)]

They did cloak it. They charged him with... stuff and found that his case was unique and difficult... unlike anyone else who stood around on January 6.

[Mother's Lament]

The only guy caught on camera urging an attack on the capitol was misunderstood and actually the only innocent one. Who would have ever guessed?

[Gaear Grimsrud]

In other libertarian news. Remember that guy Douglass Mackey who got a full throated defense from Reason when he was tried and sentenced for political speech by the Koch endorsed regime? Oh wait. None of that actually happened. Anyhoo he's filed an appeal. A few points:
The Government is trying to put Mackey in prison for tweeting two deceptive memes about how to vote, on the theory that any false speech that “hampers” voting violates the Enforcement Act of 1870. This is unprecedented, and lawless.
Consistent with its text and history, § 241 has never been employed to criminalize political misinformation, despite the practice’s ubiquity.
[T]he Government presses a reading of § 241 that would necessarily criminalize not only lies about how to vote, but also lies about also whether and for whom to vote. Such a sprawling political speech code is in the teeth of every applicable canon for reading criminal laws, and grossly offends the First Amendment.
The Government premised venue exclusively on the fact that internet data associated with Mackey’s tweets briefly crossed EDNY waters or airspace on its way to the broader internet. But this theory would allow for trial in any district that has internet. And a venue theory that is indifferent between Brooklyn, NY and Brooklyn, WI makes a hash of this core constitutional protection. Unsurprisingly, this Court has never upheld criminal venue on such a threadbare basis.
[T]he record failed to reveal any proof that Mackey coordinated his memes with others, or entered any agreement to violate federal law. At most, the Government adduced evidence suggesting that other Twitter trolls proximate to Mackey may have colluded with one another. Guilt by association may prove effective at trial, but is paradigmatically insufficient as a matter of law.
[P]rosecutors purported to find a ban on election misinformation in a 150-year-old statute to combat KKK violence.
Section 241 does not give the Government a roving license to criminalize political misinformation.
[T]he decision to prosecute deceptive speech is without precedent in § 241’s 150-year history, as the Government openly admitted at oral argument on the bond motion.
[T]he premise of this prosecution is that § 241 criminalizes anything, even deceptive speech, that may “hamper,” “frustrate,” “slow,” or “prevent” voting. […] Consider the repercussions of that interpretation[.]
If deceiving voters “injures” their right to vote, then any such deceit is a crime—and that interpretation is so overinclusive and so chilling that it would readily fail any form of heightened scrutiny under United States v. Alvarez, 567 U.S. 709 (2012).
A progressive activist’s Twitter posts did the same thing as Mackey’s, except she told Donald Trump supporters to vote by text. [,,,] Unlike Mackey, she was not prosecuted. That (not to mention the suspect timing of the indictment) at least suggests political bias, which reinforces why restricting speech in this context is especially fraught.
[O]nce § 241 is extended to deceptive speech, there is no way to stop it from erecting a “Ministry of Truth.” […] The Government’s reading of § 241 would invite prosecution for every hotly debated political rumor and conspiracy theory […] Extending § 241 to voter deception thus turns “the state” into “the arbiter of truth.”
[T]he Supreme Court has been clear that statutes facing First Amendment challenge cannot be artificially narrowed.
The Government secured Mackey’s conviction using not only an unprecedented interpretation of § 241. It also resorted to a novel and untenable theory of venue. […] Both the Constitution and the Federal Rules guarantee a defendant’s right to be tried in “the district where the crime was ‘committed.’” […] This is not a matter of “mere procedure.” […] The venue right was “highly prized by the founding generation,” […] which recognized that giving prosecutors “leeway” to handselect a “favorable” forum “leads to the appearance of abuses, if not to [actual] abuses.” […] To prevent “prosecutorial abuse” and its “appearance,” the Founders thus limited venue to the district “where the wrong was committed.”
[T]he Government prosecuted Mackey in EDNY. It maintained that venue was proper solely because internet data associated with Mackey’s tweets briefly flashed through EDNY en route to elsewhere. But such data passes through every district in the country, so treating that fleeting connection as establishing venue would license the Government to prosecute any internet-linked offense anywhere. The Constitution denies that “leeway.”
To ensure compliance with constitutional safeguards against “prosecutorial abuse, […] venue provisions “should not be so freely construed as to give the Government the choice of a tribunal favorable to it” […] “The founding generation had a deep and abiding antipathy to letting the government arbitrarily choose a venue in criminal prosecutions.”
[T]he “ever-increasing ubiquity of the Internet” amplifies the “‘danger’” that the Government will charge “cybercrimes” as if they occurred in “some metaphysical location” that “allow[s] the [G]overnment to choose its forum free from any external constraints” […] That is an impermissible and “outlandish outcome” that “cannot be squared with the Constitution.”
The district court identified no case holding that venue lies in every district traversed by data associated with nationally accessible internet posts—and, at oral argument on the bond motion, the Government conceded no such case exists. That itself is powerful evidence.
“Though our nation has changed in ways which it is difficult to imagine that the Framers … could have foreseen, the rights of criminal defendants which they sought to protect in the venue provisions of the Constitution are neither outdated nor outmoded.”
Prosecuting Mackey in EDNY on these facts “prejudiced” him and “undermined the fairness of [his] trial.” […] Given the meager nexus between this case and EDNY, selection of that forum (headquarters of the Clinton campaign) at minimum risked the “appearance” of manipulation.
Even if the Government’s § 241 theory and venue theory were legally viable, the evidence it introduced cannot sustain his conspiracy conviction. The trial evidence showed that Mackey found publicly available memes and posted them without anyone asking him to do so; there was no contrary evidence. The district court upheld the conviction anyway based on evidence suggesting that others […] may have conspired, but precedent forecloses such guilt-by-association analysis[.]
[T]here was no evidence that Mackey coordinated with anyone to create the memes, solicited them from anyone, or was asked by anyone to post them.
Mackey’s use of popular hashtags is not probative of any conspiratorial agreement with anyone.
The district court found the evidence sufficient, but its analysis was wrong at every turn. […] Mackey cannot be guilty of conspiracy unless he agreed to participate in unlawful conduct. […] Yet even the Government did not take the position that any of Mackey’s other Twitter trolling was criminal; nor did the district court suggest otherwise.
The district court’s claim that Mackey also participated in “discussing, creating and spreading deceptive information about how to vote” was not supported with any record citations. [T]he record shows the opposite.
Mackey’s work with the War Room “to spread their political messages” was textbook First Amendment speech […] Treating that conduct as evidence of criminal intent, as the court did, […] only exacerbates the offense to the First Amendment.

[Chumby]

The Ecuador situation, including reactions in other countries, is all over intel channels. The East has a focus on The Global South.

[Rev Arthur L kuckland]

Didnt this already get destroyed over the weekend?
Seriously Danny, move to canada and apply for maid