Greg Conti — who can’t be written off as an apologist for the current state of things on campus — sounds the alarm about Trumpism’s crude assault on higher education. A must-read. compactmag.com/article/trumps…

The anti-university right has become, in its moral panic and grandstanding, as extremist and cluelessly destructive as the abolish-the-police left, seeking to burn down what is flawed rather than to carefully reform it.

But if you went to the University of Chicago and got your PhD in English at Berkley in how the early novel in Britain mobilized scenarios of rape, colonization, cannibalism and infection in order to model a phenomenology of reading that renders the reader's autonomy as a fiction,

Sometimes the activist isn’t the judges, but the Presidential Administration.

This isn’t just about Title VI. Or antisemitism. Or even Harvard. It’s about power, and whether the First Amendment still has any teeth. Read my warning in The Atlantic.

It is not the duty of judges nominated by a president to rule in favor of that president or his position in litigation in which the president is a party or has an interest. It is their duty--the duty of all judges in all cases--faithfully to apply the relevant common law norm,

States had blasphemy laws, it’s true. They were enforced rarely to begin with, then less and less over the years until being essentially ended by the Supreme Court in 1952. We struck down blasphemy laws before we struck down segregation. (1/10)

The civil rights movement literally laid out the blueprint and no one can manage to follow it.

Should government fund science? I say yes, and address some objections based on fiscal conservatism and the crowd-out effect. I also present a new theory on the creation of prestige economies to maximize human capital returns. Read the article here. richardhanania.com/p/government-s…

No, AI and LLMs are not making us stupider: thefp.com/p/tyler-cowen-…

A Melbourne-based writer was recently detained and then turned back at the US border because of his online posts about last year’s protests at Columbia University. That is not the kind of example that the US needs to be setting on free speech.

You can read our full statement on The Substack Post. post.substack.com/p/standing-up-…

Let's be clear: this is the U.S. government policing hate speech (about a foreign military, no less). We're losing the moral authority to call out other governments for doing the same.

The Continuing Tech Policy Realignment on the Right Much of Jason Hausenloy’s analysis in his essays on the “The Populist Awakening on AI” and the Right’s ongoing tech realignment reflect much of what I’ve been witnessing and writing about lately. Importantly, he points out how

Everyone who cares about free speech should be disgusted with this administration.

Paramount folded because it wants the admin to approve its merger and not hassle it with regulation. The broader lesson: regulation is a threat to speech. The more tools the state has to coerce, the less the First Amendment protects. Free speech depends on a free economy.

I wrote in Wall Street Journal Opinion about why we should thank the Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek for AI (and Wikipedia). Most people think The Sensory Order was written by his cousin Salma. But it wasn't.

Are the common goals in the room with us right now?

America is awesome because it is a nation “conceived in liberty." Not heredity, ethnicity, or arbitrary borders, like many countries. An idea. Liberty. That's an origin story — a mission statement — worth celebrating.

I’m struck by how profoundly non-humanistic many AI leaders sound. - Sutton sees us as transitional artifacts - x-risk/EA types reduce the human good to bare survival or aggregates of pleasure and pain - e/accs reduce us to variables in a thermodynamic equation - Alex Wang calls