Latest news with #Founders
Yahoo
3 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
The Unconstitutional Conservatives
Not too long ago, many Republicans proudly referred to themselves as 'constitutional conservatives.' They believed in the rule of law; in limiting the power of government, especially the federal government; in protecting individual liberty; and in checks and balances and the separation of powers. They opposed central planning and warned about emotions stirred up by the mob and the moment, believing, as the Founders did, that the role of government was to mediate rather than mirror popular passions. They recognized the importance of self-restraint and the need to cultivate public and private virtues. And they had reverence for the Constitution, less as a philosophical document than a procedural one, which articulated the rules of the road for American democracy. When it came to judicial philosophy, 'constitutional conservatism' meant textualism, which prioritizes the plain meaning of the text in statutes and the Constitution. Justice Antonin Scalia excoriated outcome-based jurisprudence; judges should never prioritize their own desired outcomes, he warned, but should instead apply the text of the Constitution fairly. 'The main danger in judicial interpretation of the Constitution—or, for that matter, in judicial interpretation of any law,' he said in 1988, 'is that the judges will mistake their own predilections for the law.' One of the reasons Roe v. Wade was viewed as a travesty by conservatives is that they believed the 1973 Supreme Court decision twisted the Constitution to invent a 'right to privacy' in order to legalize abortion. The decision, they felt, was driven by a desired outcome rather than a rigorous analysis of legal precedent or constitutional text. WHICH IS WHY it's hard to think of a more anti-conservative figure than President Donald Trump or a more anti-conservative movement than MAGA. Trump and his supporters evince a disdain for laws, procedures, and the Constitution. They want to empower the federal government in order to turn it into an instrument of brute force that can be used to reward allies and destroy opponents. [Read: In Trump immigration cases, it's one thing in public, another in court] Trump and his administration have abolished agencies and imposed sweeping tariffs even when they don't have the legal authority to do so. They are deporting people without due process. Top aides are floating the idea of suspending the writ of habeas corpus, one of the most important constitutional protections against unlawful detention. Judges, who are the target of threats from the president, fear for their safety. So do the very few Republicans who are willing to assert their independence from Trump. In one of his first official acts, Trump granted clemency to more than 1,500 people charged in connection with the violent attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, including those convicted of seditious conspiracy. The president and his family are engaging in a level of corruption that was previously unfathomable. And he and his administration have shown no qualms about using the federal government to target private companies, law firms, and universities; suing news organizations for baseless reasons; and ordering criminal probes into former administration officials who criticized Trump. The Trump administration is a thugocracy, and the Republican Party he controls supports him each step of the way. Almost every principle to which Republicans once professed fealty has been jettisoned. The party is now devoted to the abuse of power and to vengeance. POLITICAL THEORISTS recognize that the governing approach of Trump and the GOP embodies the philosophy of Nietzsche and Machiavelli. It's all about the world of 'Anything goes' and 'Might makes right.' Laws and the Constitution are as malleable as hot wax; they can be reshaped as needed. Limited government has been traded for the Leviathan, and there are no constraints. The state has become a blunt-force instrument. The significance of this shift can hardly be overstated. A party that formerly proclaimed allegiance to the Constitution and the rule of law, warned about the concentration and abuse of power, and championed virtue, restraint, and moral formation has been transmogrified. The Republican Party now stands for everything it once loathed. [Peter Wehner: America's Mad King] If this rot was confined to the GOP, it would be tragic but manageable. But Trump and the Republican Party control the levers of federal power. As a result, less than five months into Trump's second term, America is heading toward a form of authoritarianism. We are still mid-story. The outcome is not ordained, and the courts are turning out to be, for the most part, a vital bulwark against Trumpism. The clashes will surely intensify as Trump rages against the storm. But as he does so, the resistance to him will grow and intensify too, and it will find expression in many different ways. The flame of liberty hasn't been extinguished quite yet. Love of country is, as the historian Gertrude Himmelfarb said, an ennobling sentiment, worthy of our affections. And love of country demands that those who love America and her ideals stand up against a man and a party intent on destroying them. *Illustration by Akshita Chandra / The Atlantic. Sources: The Nature Notes / Alamy; Getty Article originally published at The Atlantic
Atlantic
3 days ago
- Politics
- Atlantic
The Unconstitutional Conservatives
Not too long ago, many Republicans proudly referred to themselves as 'constitutional conservatives.' They believed in the rule of law; in limiting the power of government, especially the federal government; in protecting individual liberty; and in checks and balances and the separation of powers. They opposed central planning and warned about emotions stirred up by the mob and the moment, believing, as the Founders did, that the role of government was to mediate rather than mirror popular passions. They recognized the importance of self-restraint and the need to cultivate public and private virtues. And they had reverence for the Constitution, less as a philosophical document than a procedural one, which articulated the rules of the road for American democracy. When it came to judicial philosophy, 'constitutional conservatism' meant textualism, which prioritizes the plain meaning of the text in statutes and the Constitution. Justice Antonin Scalia excoriated outcome-based jurisprudence; judges should never prioritize their own desired outcomes, he warned, but should instead apply the text of the Constitution fairly. 'The main danger in judicial interpretation of the Constitution—or, for that matter, in judicial interpretation of any law,' he said in 1988, 'is that the judges will mistake their own predilections for the law.' One of the reasons Roe v. Wade was viewed as a travesty by conservatives is that they believed the 1973 Supreme Court decision twisted the Constitution to invent a 'right to privacy' in order to legalize abortion. The decision, they felt, was driven by a desired outcome rather than a rigorous analysis of legal precedent or constitutional text. WHICH IS WHY it's hard to think of a more anti-conservative figure than President Donald Trump or a more anti-conservative movement than MAGA. Trump and his supporters evince a disdain for laws, procedures, and the Constitution. They want to empower the federal government in order to turn it into an instrument of brute force that can be used to reward allies and destroy opponents. Trump and his administration have abolished agencies and imposed sweeping tariffs even when they don't have the legal authority to do so. They are deporting people without due process. Top aides are floating the idea of suspending the writ of habeas corpus, one of the most important constitutional protections against unlawful detention. Judges, who are the target of threats from the president, fear for their safety. So do the very few Republicans who are willing to assert their independence from Trump. In one of his first official acts, Trump granted clemency to more than 1,500 people charged in connection with the violent attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, including those convicted of seditious conspiracy. The president and his family are engaging in a level of corruption that was previously unfathomable. And he and his administration have shown no qualms about using the federal government to target private companies, law firms, and universities; suing news organizations for baseless reasons; and ordering criminal probes into former administration officials who criticized Trump. The Trump administration is a thugocracy, and the Republican Party he controls supports him each step of the way. Almost every principle to which Republicans once professed fealty has been jettisoned. The party is now devoted to the abuse of power and to vengeance. POLITICAL THEORISTS recognize that the governing approach of Trump and the GOP embodies the philosophy of Nietzsche and Machiavelli. It's all about the world of 'Anything goes' and 'Might makes right.' Laws and the Constitution are as malleable as hot wax; they can be reshaped as needed. Limited government has been traded for the Leviathan, and there are no constraints. The state has become a blunt-force instrument. The significance of this shift can hardly be overstated. A party that formerly proclaimed allegiance to the Constitution and the rule of law, warned about the concentration and abuse of power, and championed virtue, restraint, and moral formation has been transmogrified. The Republican Party now stands for everything it once loathed. Peter Wehner: America's Mad King If this rot was confined to the GOP, it would be tragic but manageable. But Trump and the Republican Party control the levers of federal power. As a result, less than five months into Trump's second term, America is heading toward a form of authoritarianism. We are still mid-story. The outcome is not ordained, and the courts are turning out to be, for the most part, a vital bulwark against Trumpism. The clashes will surely intensify as Trump rages against the storm. But as he does so, the resistance to him will grow and intensify too, and it will find expression in many different ways. The flame of liberty hasn't been extinguished quite yet. Love of country is, as the historian Gertrude Himmelfarb said, an ennobling sentiment, worthy of our affections. And love of country demands that those who love America and her ideals stand up against a man and a party intent on destroying them.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
A note on the news: Reorganizing the world
(Oil & Gas 360) – Donald Trump made a trip to the Middle East, and clearly, he is reorganizing the world. He strengthened US relations with Saudi Arabia and made commercial agreements with Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Agreements with Saudi Arabia involved large arms purchases and financial commitments by the US and Saudi Arabia with each other, and large commitments to the development of AI research and development in both countries. Trump gave a speech which emphatically made the point that US policy is focused on establishing and maintaining peace if possible. Another clear point from this trip is that Trump will emphasize new technology development with effective partners. It was also clear Europe is on the sidelines. Europe put itself on the sidelines when it established the European Union nearly 30 years ago but has not quite grasped that fact yet. Two articles in last week's Wall Street Journal explained the problem. The first, by Walter Russell Mead, titled Why Democracy is in Retreat (WSJ, 20 May 2025), outlined how left-wing political parties advocate democracy but do not abide by it. A basic requirement of democracy is that the portion of the population which did not vote for the winner of an election accept their loss and work peacefully with the winner. As Mead discusses, that is no longer a feature of Western democracies. The losing parties, increasingly left (viciously and sometimes violently), oppose the winning party and strongly undermine the winners. Thus, democracy erodes to authoritarianism on one side or the other. Attempts to maintain a centrist path are not successful either. Consider the poor German voter. After several years of an ineffective and misguided so-called center-left government, Germany held new elections. German sentiment swung strongly to the right. A so-called center-right won the most votes, with a further right party, the AfD, coming in second. Instead of forming a government with the AfD, however, the centrist-right teamed up with the centrist-left party, which had just been voted out. So, the German voter got no meaningful change. This plethora of political parties hinders change and undermines progress. Madison identified such a variety of political participants as Factions and identified them as a reason the Founders did not form the US Government as a democracy. It has been 80 years since the end of World War II, after which the US foisted democracies as a desirable form of government on the nations of Europe. Democracies are unstable and thus do not last very long, however, and those democracies are now reaching the end of their shelf life. One of the mysteries of American foreign policy is that it imposed a flawed system of government on other countries which it does not use itself. Discussions of the difficulties of democracies in the modern world implicitly consider only two forms of government: democracy and authoritarian-totalitarian. Seldom, if ever mentioned, is another form of elective government: a Republic. Conceived by Greeks, implemented by Rome, developed by Venice, and chosen by the Founders as the form of government for the United States, a Republic renders a more stable government than democracies. The American Pledge of Allegiance to the flag includes the phrase 'and to the Republic for which it stands'. Nevertheless, the US has busybodied itself around the world for the last 75 years or so trying to impose democracy on the rest of the world and wondering why it does not turn out very well Despite all the evidence, it is almost impossible to change the beliefs of democracy advocates, however; as Socrates found out 2500 years ago and Mead described last week. Europe would be far better off if it traded in the EU for a confederation of republics. The second pertinent WSJ article was a front-page article entitled The Tech Industry is Huge – and Europe's Share of It is Very Small (WSJ. 21 May 2025). This article describes the various ways the EU suppresses innovation and entrepreneurism. As the US and China race forward with technological development and innovation, the EU is not even in the race. The EU and the UK together hold only 2% of AI patents. Nearly 40 years ago, Timothy Berners-Lee, working at CERN in Geneva, invented the World Wide Web. Not much has been heard of a tech development in Europe or CERN for thirty years. The Journal article points out how European tech scientists and engineers migrate to the US to follow their ambitions and apply their abilities. Europe complains and various commentators deplore US abandonment of and antagonism toward Europe. These do not reflect the US attitude toward Europe, however. Europe took itself out of the game. It is no longer the same society which built the Concorde, developed high-speed rail, or built the original accelerator at CERN, and shows no inclination to change. The US seeks new partners who want to build a new future and embrace new ideas. It is finding those partners in unexpected places. The US chose the Middle East as technical partners – an area with little past accomplishment in technology – but a desire to create a new Middle East for the future. It also has the investment capability tp act on that desire. Trump should be making other foreign trips to cement relations soon. Southeast Asia should be next and then Latin America. With such trips and the preparatory contacts and discussions, a new world organization will develop. By contributor Dr. Charles Kohlhaas. 'The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Oil & Gas 360. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Forbes
6 days ago
- Business
- Forbes
The Secret To Growing On LinkedIn Without Posting Every Day
The secret to growing on LinkedIn without posting every day Founders are spending hours every day writing LinkedIn posts, adding thoughtful comments, and scrolling the feed. With 310 million active monthly users and only about 1% creating content, there's opportunity for growth on LinkedIn. But at what cost? Stop struggling with constant content creation and mindless activity that delivers minimal results. Stop wasting hours chasing likes while actual client work suffers. You can win on this platform without sacrificing your business. I figured out LinkedIn during eighteen months of consistent posting and tracking. But most importantly, treating LinkedIn as a business asset worth optimizing. When you build a system instead of a content treadmill, LinkedIn becomes your ally, not your second job. Daily posting results in most people creating junk. Quantity kills quality. Standards slip and people unfollow. Here's how to stop that right now. Block one hour each week to batch write 2-3 strong posts. This concentrated effort produces sharper insights than scattered daily attempts. Make each post count with thoughtful formatting and relevant visuals. Start with the questions your clients ask and the challenges you know they want to overcome. High-quality content, posted less often, consistently outperforms low-effort daily content. This approach builds reputation without consuming your calendar. Perfect for entrepreneurs who have actual businesses to run. Your audience would rather read one insight that changes their thinking than five posts that repeat common knowledge. Your content should match what you sell. Random posting confuses your audience about what you stand for. Accounts that stay focused on core topics see engagement rates double compared to those posting about anything and everything. Define exactly who you're writing for, bearing in mind a small fraction of LinkedIn users match your ideal client profile. Speak directly to them about their specific challenges, using their exact language. Use this targeted approach to build a following that converts to clients because they feel understood at a deeper level. Your clarity attracts their attention and makes them feel like you're writing just for them. Build a library of post formats that work for your audience. Maybe Monday posts share client transformations, Wednesday posts break down methods, and Friday posts tell personal stories. Keeps content fresh while saving mental energy and time. No one will know you're sticking to a template. But they'll get familiar with your style of posts and start to look out for them. A hook that captures attention, a body that adds value and a compelling call to comment. Simple templates for different post types save time and keep your content strong. Save ideas as they come to you during the week. Client questions, breakthrough moments, industry news become your content foundation. Use a notes app or voice notes if writing slows you down. You'll never face a blank page again. Track which posts get responses from potential clients. Do more of those. Watch which specific posts drive profile views and meaningful conversations, then create more content with those elements. Your best-performing posts contain clues about what your audience truly values from you. LinkedIn wants to eat your calendar alive. Don't let it. Two great posts that make people think and message you beat five forgettable ones any day. Create quality content that positions you as the expert you already are. Pick your posting days and stick to them. Establish your pillars, and use templates where it makes sense to. Save bright ideas when you have them, then trust your system. Your audience rewards reliability with their attention, engagement, and ultimately, their business. Access my top personal brand prompts for ChatGPT
New York Post
7 days ago
- Politics
- New York Post
The fight for liberty starts in the classroom — how one state is joining the battle
The purpose of public education in America was never just to teach basic literacy or vocational skills — it was to shape citizens capable of sustaining a free republic. Thomas Jefferson, the most forceful advocate for public education among the Founders, argued that knowledge was the first line of defense against tyranny. 'Educate and inform the whole mass of the people,' he wrote, 'They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.' Advertisement Today, that mission has been betrayed. Instead of teaching students to resist despotism and preserve liberty, much of our education system has been captured by ideologues who program young people against our country's history and principles — causing disaster in our colleges and our streets. Advertisement It is the duty of every free citizen who cares about our country to stand against this perversion of our educational system. After communism's economic collapse, Marxist theorists didn't disappear, but simply changed strategies. Instead of class warfare between workers and owners, today's neo-Marxists divide society along cultural and identity lines: race, gender, sexuality. They've successfully infiltrated key institutions — universities, corporations and government agencies — where they now push radical theories that paint America as inherently oppressive. Advertisement The tactics are more subtle than those of the old Soviet Union, but the ideology remains just as hostile to individual liberty and the merit-based values that built American prosperity. Over decades, Marxist theorists recast education as a form of political activism. Their influence can be seen clearly in the rise of critical race theory within school curricula. In 2021, the head of Detroit's public schools admitted: 'Our curriculum is deeply using critical race theory, especially in social studies, but you'll find it in English language arts and the other disciplines. We were very intentional about embedding it.' Advertisement Yet our students are taught little to nothing about Mao's China, where over a million landlords were slaughtered and forced collectivization triggered the deadliest famine in history — so extreme that desperate families resorted to cannibalism. Up to 55 million people perished, a death toll larger than the combined populations of Florida and Texas. How many students ever hear about how Stalin's communists seized Ukrainian farmers' food, leaving millions to die gnawing on tree bark and grass? Or about North Korea's modern gulags, where prisoners lose limbs to frostbite after grueling 16-hour shifts on starvation rations? No: Instead of exposing atrocities, schools sanitize communism, repackaging it in euphemisms like 'equity' and 'social justice.' But history shows what those words meant in practice: in China, for instance, 'equity' meant dividing up food from seized farms equally, destroying incentives and causing famine. To Mao's Red Guards, 'social justice' meant making family members torture each other in 'struggle sessions.' If students were taught that this — and not free health care and housing in Scandinavia — is socialism, would they still sympathize with Marxist ideas? Advertisement Keep up with today's most important news Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Moreover, we can't just teach students about gulags and famines, but also about the evolution of communist ideas to the present day. That will arm them with the knowledge and critical judgment to resist passively accepting whatever some future sociology professor tells them. That's why we're proud to have helped create and fund 'Liberty Over Communism,' a new high school program produced by the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute. Advertisement This comprehensive curriculum — combining historical analysis, survivor testimonies and modern-day applications — is teaching students both the brutal realities of communism and how its ideas have morphed into seemingly benign modern movements. Nothing in our Constitution requires taxpayers to fund communist indoctrination in our schools. But many schools and teachers are unlikely to teach this material voluntarily — and some even sympathize with these destructive ideologies. So legislation is essential. Lawmakers in Texas — led by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, Sen. Donna Campbell and Rep. Jeff Leach — recently passed a bill I'm proud to have helped develop through the Cicero Institute. Advertisement It requires Texas schools to teach the truth about communism: the mass killings, the famines, the propaganda, and how those same ideas are showing up today under new, attractive branding. Students, starting in 4th grade, will learn how communist regimes crushed freedom — and how those tactics are still being used to silence dissent and push collectivist ideologies in America. And they won't just learn the 20th-century history: The bill requires content about current-day threats to the United States and its allies posed by communist regimes and activists, the evolution of communism from economic and class-based theories into broader cultural movements dividing our society, and modern methods used to spread them. Advertisement The battle for liberty begins at home — and in the classroom. As Jefferson warned, no nation can remain simultaneously ignorant and free. Joe Lonsdale is the co-founder of Palantir and managing partner of 8VC. Adapted from the Joe Lonsdale Substack.
