9 Comments
User's avatar
Jim Brown's avatar

I especially like the article about leaving academia to pursue an intellectual career. That rings true in my discipline, economics. James Elias, an accomplished physicist, also agrees. His illuminating lectures and interviews are well worth viewing.

https://www.patreon.com/c/inductica/posts?utm_source=creator_link&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=patron_engagement&utm_id=a3447f52-d4de-4f72-97c0-0fa47fc0af34&redirect=true

Expand full comment
Torrance Stephens's avatar

Well said

Expand full comment
Lori Meldrum's avatar

Unbelievable that so many concluded the 51st post was favorable to Trump. All I can say is "Wow".

Expand full comment
The Reason We Learn's avatar

This is great, and terrible at the same time! LOL

Expand full comment
Susan VanFleet's avatar

Absolutely loved your article on Canada. Having lived in Toronto for two years in the late 1950’s, I totally agree, we do not want the Canadians voting in our United States!!!

Everything else Trump is doing is fantastic!!! So are you!!

Susan VanFleet

Expand full comment
John Lewis's avatar

If Thompson was serious about the deep state he would address the fact that the US spends more than Canada on Healthcare(per capita) for similar results, and the US spends more on education per capita. The Canadian's under the liberal party would never let anyone borrow as much money as the US allows. Canada also allows default or bankruptcy as a remedy. So on Healthcare and education the US is more deep state Keynesian. Now you could say the US education system is dumb because of climate(both political and geographic, pace Montesquieu.) That is in theory the extent to which aristotle was right about contemplation being the highest pursuit varies according to climate and age/maturity. Which is why Aristotle doesn't recommend an education in politics until later in life. So the general timing of education as typically consumed is off. There is in many ways a definite "throwness" to life, you are born into the

US or Canada and the Regime is something you can't control. One

reason I might consider Canada is that it appears even before say Carney that it is ruled by Harvard on policy. Also the essay on the puritans should include

the somewhat sham and antiquated

Distinction between the originalist from Yale and the living originalists from

Harvard. Technically speaking one

wonders if they aren't just quasi-

independent thinkers who in pajama

pants Nietzscheian style have a mask

projected upon them. Education reform

does seem pointless when you

consider the state of Massachusetts

spent several million collecting

evidence to prove that tobacco

shouldn't be advertised to kids within a

specified distance, only to have "Yale"

point out that the faction whose theory

of justice is that of glaucon(help

friends+ punish enemies, also a theory

Gay was accused of plagerizing) has

after consideration and in consideration

for campaign donations preempted the

field. Canada's liberal party is stealing

"our intellectual property" but that is in

part because the state of Massachusetts isn't even allowed to

use or implement it. That said if I went Canada it would be Manitoba a much

prettier state, it just lacks football. The difference between Harvard/Canada and the US is negligible and can be written off as red ocean scaffolding/sane washing in comparison to the blue ocean creative destruction of the singularity. Especially since you are actually wrong about the systemic identity of the labels you toss around. Canada is not objectively speaking more "socialist" than the US, federalism and shell games with the state action doctrine obscure so so much. Canada is just colder and more thoughtful.

Expand full comment
Daniel Melgar's avatar

I wanted to mention that the new Thomas Sowell interview is out today. https://youtu.be/uejTE6-nIQI?si=NI244PJfLyFe0y21

Also, Thomas Sowell has launched a new website for anyone who wants to start learning how to think (perfect for college students and especially Ivy League students). https://www.tsfreemind.com/

Expand full comment
Richard's avatar

Many judges are actually quite stupid which is understandable given the ways they get to be judges. More problematic though is that their unit of analysis is the case rather than the policy. Can't see the forest for the trees and they get lost when they try to see the forest.

Expand full comment
John Lewis's avatar

All of this is still sort of channeled in a certain direction. As to the "non-elite" schools say the Big10/SEC schools...It appears to me that it is a self-evident truth with near universal acceptance that excellence in Athletics has been achieved. As to the extent which medical knowledge of risks should play a part in taming "football" that is another question. But it clearly seems to me that a great majority of the Americans are heavily invested in this "copyright". Both the subjective theory of value and the labor theory of value align. No one in the field of athletics denies the labor theory of value/efficient causation. (Genetics plays a huge role in the outcome, but it is a lot of work) Now I suspect that a majority of professors are against affirmative action in fact, if simply because it means they have to sift thru applications. Or they are in favor of affirmative action, because fighting a thing only creates more pushback...That is run it thru ChatGTP(or any other "trade secret" metric) and be done with it. That is they suspect their labor theory of value could be spent better elsewhere. My interest in supporting Affirmative Action (in an ideal regime) proceeds by anchoring what appears from common sense to be yielding decent results, albeit I am not convinced the results of our state public universities are in any way poor. But why couldn't a university for all the subjects it teaches actually employ affirmative action and recruit students according the subject taught. Just as a university like Ohio State has a football program and doesn't simply offer a kid because of some calculus involving bench press, 40 yard dash et al...so too could a flagship university essentially have say a chemistry department composed of "football coaches"...recruiting students based on what they themselves as experts in the field believe are the virtues best suited for creating products that can be alienated in commerce. Maybe the chemistry department does some affirmative action and brings in some rich kid simply because he is wealthy and that kids contribution to his graduation requirement is stakeholding/funding it with "capital" to actually develop drugs that should by all rights be out of patent and in the public domain. (that is the professors just build the team) and the Ohio State University essentially acts as a business incubator (just as it already does in Football). That is in football there is no bitching if Ohio State doesn't offer you ( I mean folks use that as motivation which is fine). In my considered opinion going to college is an act of "faith", you have to buy into the program, put in the sweat equity (the labor theory of value is no guarantee of success, but it is all the efficient causation you have.) The Ohio State University in my opinion should begin the process of essentially incubating businesses, which in some extent aligns with the general direction of Ohio as moving towards trade schools. You go in and you build a "product" from the ground up and the product that the team builds is a business. There are no A's, no B's...just grit, you work as a team you build your product, your professors can "fire you/cut you" as easily as the Ohio State football team currently does. You graduate in your class when the product you develop is ready for market and the Ohio State University/State of Ohio takes some percentage of equity in the business. It is set up as a C-Corps so "graduates" can liquidate and move on elsewhere, but instead of a BA or a BS your CV says you took some idea/process and made something out of it. Now some of these "businesses" might fail, then the Ohio State University does what it does in football...puts pressure on the coaches. That is these "biology coaches"(or whatever the case may be) teach and incubate the 4 causes of whatever product the subject matter is supposed to alienate in commerce. Now technically this is actually what a couple Universities in China do, ergo "communism" or "fordism" or whatever you want to call it, but Ohio is a somewhat diversified agriculture and mechanics state (i.e. pretty much the truth in advertising on the communist flag.) The high school teachers send texts or messages to the "coaches" and these folks then recruit the students at fairs, excetera. Students in high school take "pride" in a particular field taught at Ohio State and work to go "pro". Make as many subjects at our flagship University Ohio State "Football". That is actually what the people of Ohio think they want when they hear Trump saying make America Great Again. Can it be done in Ohio? It is being done in China(thus the whole unfair competition mantra), Ohio has more than enough young people that want to build a "progressive"(article I, Section 8, clause 8) business. Will it be Harvard? No. Will it lead to individuation or spiritual growth (magic 8 ball says: probably not)? But the State of Ohio spends an ungodly amount trying to lure corporations, when it could be incubating them from the ground up. Again for these programs (100% full ride with coaches/instructors with near benevolent quasi-dictatorial power). The Script is Ohio State Football with the students recruited by the faculty/coaches based on whatever criteria they as experts deem fit(academic merit, capitalist merit, pure gumption, grit old school virtue, post modern sophistication, et al) and all methods+music and material causes they as respected Phosita wish to employ. I wrote this myself without the help of ChatGTP, but if anyone thinks it plagerized I assure you the gist of it is capable of independent creation by anyone who ever watched the scarlet and gray.

Expand full comment