Chase Tibbs, organizer and host of the Faith and Capital podcast joins the show this week to discuss the intersections between Christianity and Left politics.
Before you make up your mind about “Free College,” have a listen to this episode. Danny Anderson is joined by Matthew Filipic, former VP of Business and Fiscal Affairs at Wright State University, for a detailed exploration of the context and history of an idea that Bernie Sanders’ campaign has recently thrust into the political spotlight.
Richard Shatten and Ohio’s problems with educational attainment
The historical importance of college in America: “The Rising Tide”
Income gains lessen in the 1970s
State withdraw of support for public higher education
University of California system and City College of New York as prior examples of state support
Higher education, “The Baumol Disease,” and the necessity of inefficiency
The burden of Medicaid upon individual states
Resistance to tax increases by the public
Danny’s modest proposal: Single Payer Healthcare as solution to free college
Current Free College proposals
New York Proposal
The problems for private colleges
Oregon, Tennessee, and Rhode Island versions of “free college”
Targeting money to populations that need it
The Sanders plan versus the Clinton plan
Avoiding “perverse incentives” in national funding of “free college”
Free college and student motivation
What we’ve lost as a society in neglecting higher education
Richard Shatten Bio
The Baumol Disease
New York's tuition-free college program sparks debates and defenses
New York Republicans have an alternative to Governor Cuomo's free tuition plan
Most of Oregon's free-tuition dollars aren't going to poor students
The drawbacks to New York State's free college plan (essay) | Inside Higher Ed
HOPE changes may mean fewer women, minorities at UGA
HOPE Scholarship: The cons - Atlanta Magazine
Free-Tuition Program Transforms a University
Authentication Code: 0123456
Join Danny and the Christian Humanist Podcast's Nathan Gilmour for a fun, angry rhetorical analysis of the internet's newest laughingstock, Verrit.com. Learn about Hillary Clinton sycophant Peter Daou, nephew of Fear of Flying author Erica Jong, and his Freshman Comp capacity for essay-writing. What's a "Daouist?" What do Kenneth Burke, Aristotle, and basic logical argumentation have to say about Verrit? Why can't Liberal rhetoric succeed outside the "serious middle?" Will Danny finally be able to enter polite society after purging his rage over the stupidity of Verrit? All this and more!
The Strange Life of Peter Daou
The Dada Engine
Hilarious Jacob Bacharach Tweet:
Well it was an accident, but the Sectarian Review Podcast is timely for once. In a conversation recorded before Meryl Streep's controversial political speech at the Golden Globes, Danny picks the brain of Symptomatic Redness host C. Derick Varn. The first in an anticipated series of "celebritism" episodes, listen to find out why liberalism is drawn to celebrity spokespeople. What are the possibilies and problems of this kind of politics? What does the Democratic party (and liberalism as an idea) gain or lose by handing their rhetorical authority over to the rich and famous?
The Guardian on Celebrity as the face of a corporate machine.
"Bad Ways to Criticism Trump" via Current Affairs
And The New Republic (of course)
Q1: So everybody has a “theory of everything” that explains Trump’s election, which seems like a chasing after the wind to me. Today, I just want to focus on some of American Liberalism’s failings. Specifically, its tendency to defer its rhetorical work to celebrities, I can see the roots of this in Jane Fonda’s public opposition to Vietnam. Am I wrong to place so much of this on the New Left?
Q2: You shared an article from Current Affairs recently called “Bad Ways to Criticize Trump.” John Oliver was a specific target of that piece’s scorn. What is the essential problem with the “Daily Show-style” of politics?
Q3: In Liberalism, there seems to be a divide between believing and doing. The whole celebrity thing is a convenient way to rallying behind a belief that requires no action. It leads me to wonder what we even mean when we say “politics.” Is celebrity activism really politics or is it posturing?
Q4: So people flock to the music and movies that feature these celebrities, yet their ability to impact the voting habits of much of that fan base is uncertain at best. Why the disconnect between popularity and influence? Is the problem that these folks are “brands” and therefore necessarily limited in their ability to connect to the political lives of much of the electorate?
Q5: Much of this style of politics explains Hillary Clinton’s unexpected failing among the general electorate in certain states. However, weren’t many of Bernie Sanders’ supporters partaking in a similar type of hero-worship? And Trump himself of course is a reality TV star. Is the real question not whether celebrity politics is effective, but what type of celebrity politics we’re talking?
Danny Anderson is joined by Jordan Poss and Nathan Gilmour to talk about Political Correctness and its many discontents. What are the term's roots and when did people start worrying about it? How did the Bill Clinton era affect us? What role did identity politics play in the election, and will become of the Democratic party's reckoning in the dawn of the Trump Dystopia? And finally, Danny asks "pitchforks and torches?" Plus listener responses to subject.
Frank Bruni on Democratic failures
Aaron Hanlon on the PC Left and language wars
Larry Summers on Political Correctness
Cracked on Donald Trump
Slate Star Codex: You Are Still Crying Wolf
Mad Dogs and Englishmen Podcast