Apropos of today's Senate hearing, a quick thread on Big Tech, conservatism, and the GOP, with links to some of my recent writings on the intersection thereof.
Conservatism, properly understood, values *prudence*. "Humility comes...from a willingness to reassess a moment in history and rethink the proper means to meet the timeless ends of politics—justice, human flourishing, individual liberty and the good life." amgreatness.com/2020/08/27/how…
In the Anglo-American conservative tradition, then, "legal and economic norms must be construed as instrumentalities serving the superlative substantive goals of politics qua politics: justice, human flourishing, and the common good." americancompass.org/the-commons/co…
Therefore, given the current climate, "it is imperative that conservatives embrace the solemn responsibility of wielding the levers of political power...to protect online speech from the heavy, censorious hand of Silicon Valley ideologues." nypost.com/2020/10/16/by-…
Section 230 reform and targeted antitrust enforcement—and kudos here to @TheJusticeDept for launching a probe against the worst offender, Google—are good places to start. But we ought to think even more outside the box, and keep all options on the table. americancompass.org/the-commons/wh…
As I recently said, "The reality is both simple and stark: Conservatives must hold Big Tech accountable or conservatives will cease to be politically relevant in this country."
This moment is critical. Conservatives must get over their fear of actually using political power and wield the levers, as my friend David Azerrad has written, “to reward friends and punish enemies (within the confines of the rule of law).” theamericanconservative.com/articles/ameri…
For the GOP, there is no political future for the sort of dogmatic, fundamentalist, "private sector can do no wrong" liberalized politics of yore. Big Tech's unprecedented assault on the @nypost is a game-changer, and it is imperative that we on the Right all treat it as such.
Good for the Senate for holding today's hearing. Good for Attorney General Barr for the DOJ antitrust probe against Google. Good for @HawleyMO for continuing to lead on Section 230.
As @docMJP put it, these are the Democratic Party’s riots.
They own this. They cannot disown this. They have fanned the flames and have consistently refused to unequivocally and forcefully condemn the anarchist/insurrectionist wellspring, Antifa-BLM. creators.com/read/josh-hamm…
@docMJP Worse, with their laughable "this is happening in Trump's America” talking point, the Democrats are taking the nation hostage. They are offering an implied quid pro quo: Vote for us and we will stop the violence. But it will continue if Trump is reelected. creators.com/read/josh-hamm…
I had a busy writing week, so figured I’d do a little end-of-week ICYMI thread.
1. In Tuesday’s @nypost, I had an initial column on Monday’s unfortunate Title VII case at SCOTUS—and what it portends for the future of the “legal conservative movement.” nypost.com/2020/06/15/nei…
2. On Thursday, I joined with @JamesWilsonInst’s Garrett Snedeker to argue, at @Newsweek, how the disappointing week at SCOTUS proves that defying the anti-constitutional fiction of judicial supremacy is more important now than ever before. newsweek.com/we-need-reject…
(Related/shameless plug: If you enjoyed that one, I have a lengthier recent academic article on the exact same subject. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…)
@nypost In February, I tweeted what was already a rapidly circulating rumor that Neil Gorsuch would side with the liberals in reading sexual orientation and transgenderism into Title VII.
@nypost The capitulation of Gorsuch, a “conservative legal movement” golden boy, reveals a deeper rot.
Conservatives must rededicate themselves to moral truths, and to underlying substantive principles. Relativistic proceduralism has finally hit a dead end. nypost.com/2020/06/15/nei…
Pelosi introducing Trump for the SOTU is more than a little bit awkward this year.
Trump is emphatically correct about one thing: By pretty much any objective metric, the U.S. really is doing phenomenally well right now.
For the second or third year in a row, Democrats in Congress refuse to applaud when Trump recites basic economic statistics about how good the economy, job market, and stock market are.
Why do Democrats hate economic growth and real, inflation-adjusted income and wage growth?