no such decline you wea/k so/y cu/ck lim/p di/ck closet nazi, women beater apologist of anti american women sexual violence murder threatener beater assaulter reagain lover apologist of a women beater hahahahahaahhaah youre soulless tras/h, enjoy hell you bas/tard son of a bit/ch. neo nazi neo con closet nazi shill hack anti american rat faced tool fu/ck your fascist nazi koch brother nazi as/s hahahahahahahahahhahaahahha fu/ck you bit/ch fu/ck enjoy gitmo 2.0 the electric boogaloo when the military catches you nazi libertarian teabagger koch di/ck riding traitor russian money laundering loving scu/m fu/cking treacherous scu/m cartel terrorist gun pushing terrorists criminals, youre lucky we're civilized now and dont hang you bastar/ds
I think Alex McKeon’s recommendation to drop Prof. Bessner is misguided. A heterodox outlook requires consideration of competing views, and engaging with Prof. Bessner’s arguments helps reveal their deficiencies.
It’s no great concession to acknowledge that capitalism has many flaws, and Prof. Bessner is good at cherry-picking them. As he says, however, he is led to that by the conditions and goals of what he considers a desirable polity: one that gives primacy to goals of economic equality and a more modest role in world affairs, turning away from the competitive sorting through markets that gives capitalism its dynamism, but that is also somewhat responsible for certain flaws.
The question in political economy, however, is always “Compared to what?” Bessner’s apparent advantage is due to his evasion of two issues. First, he does not answer questions about historical circumstances—he replied to Glenn’s point about the USSR’s malignant designs by claiming that it never had the ability to carry them out. As Mr. McKeon observes, however, those designs were obvious and they were frustrated largely due to the US’s primacy in outcompeting the USSR in the cold war. But that evasion allows Prof. Bessner to glide through statements that call into question the value of “development,” without facing e.g., the incredible accomplishment of a 50 percent reduction in extreme poverty worldwide between 1980 and 2015.
Second, he rationalizes away the historic failures of Marxist political economy, including the relative conditions in western Europe and the Soviet bloc as of 1989. His response to Glenn’s query about where in the world his proposed polity is succeeding is an embarrassed laugh.
Prof. Bessner is an amiable foil, and not everyone is familiar with the Marxist perspective Prof. Bessner provides. I don’t doubt, however, that Glenn’s listeners are more than able to pick it apart for themselves. And, as was said by John Stuart Mill, “If you know only your own side of an argument, you don’t even know that.”
I must say that I've started skipping Glenn Shows with Bessner on them. His hypothetical lens never focuses on reality to see if his constructions are connected with it in any way, and whether it provides any evidence for his views. The speculation I saw quoted about 'freedom' from 'homelessness' is particularly egregious. Those of us who've studied the communist dictatorships know that homelessness was a structural fact of life. Most of my Soviet friends spent years in barracks, or crowded with several families into tiny dwellings, or waiting in various hellholes in conditions we would not have called having a 'home'. As far as unsheltered people, you could see them in the cities (sometimes frozen on the ground) and in the countryside, in unspeakable conditions. All of that matters, IMHO - and no-one 'chose' any of it.
Thanks for the show. Appreciate your contribution to greater understanding.
Doesn't the construction an 4300 mile long "Iron Curtain", enforced with machine guns and mine fields, watchtowers, etc., to keep people from leaving (escaping) provide some evidence of the acceptance of the economic systems contrasting the "Soviet" (one party rule, centrally planned and administered) economic system and the 'capitalist' republics?
I agree the 'meritocracy' at the top of the economic strata is present but more class than race based. Meaning race doesn't keep you out. But you can move up the economic ladder based on 'merit'. Intelligence, your SAT score, isn't a limiting factor.
I'm not sure I understand the argument of not understanding "human nature" coming from a historian. History is rife with the results generated by the same.
Bessner doesn’t qualify his personal view by acknowledging, even in theory, there are others who would strongly disagree with his reading of the historical record. Bessner's arrogant confidence about both history and economics seems quite similar to the psychology of contemporary fascists who control the censorship levers at Twitter, Google, MSNBS, ABC News, CNN, and to slightly smaller extent, the NY Times. My impression is Bessner will do his best to teach students what to think, not how to think. He’s demonstrated mastery.
While not as ubiquitous as the PillowMan, the twin “Joys” so pollute channel surfing that I really didn’t want another interview with a Behar/Reid parrot. Sir Glenn, we would have been better served had you interviewed Niall Ferguson, Jared Diamond, David Horowitz or Luke Roziak (Race to the Bottom).
Actually Trump did do something about it. Not specifically with NATO although he is getting blamed for what he wanted to do with NATO as if he actually did get out of it. Those who are negative about Trump and his foreign policies have no creditability.
Bessner claims that public school performance in wealthier communities is better than in poorer communities is because wealthier communities are, well, wealthier. I would be interested in hearing his explanation of the fact that in several of the wealthier, better-performing communities Glenn mentioned around Boston, expenditures per student are actually lower then in lower-performing Boston. Boston spends ca. $24k per student whereas wealthier Wellesley , Newton and Brookline spend only $21k. Salaries are also higher in Boston. Glenn did not ask this question, but I can imagine at least part of his answer: Differences in the attitude and culture surrounding education and learning.
Yeah, his knowledge on that point is pretty bad. In California, for instance, education is funded by property taxes, but the counties have to share those with the state, which redistributes them to avoid the economic disparities.
I haven't been on a college campus in 25 , but is this what it's like to take a history class today, or just with Bessner? This guy is a hammer and everything is a nail.
Boy did I struggle to get through this, and i see i wasn't the only one. But i also struggle to get through Amy Wax.
I enjoy listening to Glenns talks with DB. They kick up interesting ideas. I will say that Glenn is a real politique figure, i think this puts him at odds with academics as much as anything. DB is a typical anti real politique academic to such an extent it borders on delusion. Harvard students are no different than state university students? That hasnt been my experience. I was prodigious enough at mathematics to take my first year of college in high school. I held my own, but i was solidly in the middle of the pack. The top two students in my classes both went to Harvard. They were vastly more intelligent than the rest of us. Im not saying harvard only admits premium intellectuals but how DB characterizes this difference in intellectual capacity between top minds and above above average mind is a fantasy.
Bessner saying the Soviet Union lost the Cold War because it couldn't keep up with the U.S.'s defense spending is an old and well-worn trope, but one that is not supported by the best available literature. Vladislav Zubok's "Collapse" convincingly shows, from the Russian perspective, why the fall of the Soviet Union really was an event driven by Gorbachev's political incompetence as he tried to follow in Deng's footsteps and slowly unclench the state's fists.
"the PUBLIC wants nationalized healthcare & free pre-K & childcare" No, that's what Progressives think the PUBLIC wants. Sounds good until the public realizes that government-run means government decides. CRT in pre-K for all!! Gender/Sex discussions in pre-K for all!! No SCOTUS or state restrictions on abortion (and I'm pro-choice, abortion availability until viability in all cases). Lets have the PUBLIC vote on everything via their phones and 51%+ decides. Too bad for minorities of any stripe. I agree. Not sure after reading the comments I want to continue. Hackles going up!!
After the polling disasters of the last few election cycles, I'm a skeptic about how truly 11K+ represent 350 million. Who are the people who actually answer the phone, emails, etc. to provide the info? How were the questions worded? Many don't realize the restrictions the "government-run" systems have or how CMS influences most insurers or how various states can impose their own mandates & restrictions. Again you can't cover everyone for everything with everything and still have a functioning economy. I don't have the answer or know if anyone does when you have as diverse (in every way) population of 350 million and be fair to all. What would it cost if everyone had the same coverage as Congress, the President, SCOTUS etc.?
Jardin read the US Constitution. It was designed to LIMIT the power of the Federal Gov. Ben Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." ...and will soon lose both. Nothing is free, there only trade offs.
I wish there had been a Bill of Responsibilities along with the Bill of Rights. The F.F.s just assumed everyone knew what those were. What did they know. Too "enlightened"! Probably would have made the Constitution even more systemically racist (satirical).
It's allocation of limited resources. The more taxes you take for the undeserving and irresponsible, the less you have for police and those that really need them.
The "state" only exists as a delegation from the people. In the absence of popular consent, the state vanishes - starved of resources - or becomes overtly tyrannical. So the idea that the state can refer to citizens as "its", i.e., belonging to it, gets things precisely backwards. The state ought to do what the people want from it, insofar as a consensus can be determined. No more, no less.
It's 50%+1 and it's not that way. It's coalitions and compromise. Few "choose" to be ill, but name me a national healthcare system that covers everything for everyone all the time like those for it make it out to be. There are always restrictions and Medicare for all is quite restrictive in many areas. CMS determines care, not really you & your MD. It disincentives' self-responsibility. Does anyone ever talk about non-compliance? Does everyone always deserve the same? I have no problem paying taxes for safety (police/military) & maintenance. I object to what seems like forced charity for some of the rest. Thanks for your thoughts.
i could go on for hours answering this. I will just say I worked in healthcare for over 40 years. Is the bad heart genetic or an unlucky roll of the dice? Was it caused by bad habits, i.e. drugs, diet, smoking? Is the person compliant with the changes they need to make, i.e. diet, smoking, medications, exercise? When do we stop paying for people's irresponsibility? It's a slippery slope which a national system doesn't cure and only divorces us from cost awareness. Taken to its nth degree, the government should determine & enforce everyone's diet, exercise regime, life style. Homogeny would be needed! Sounds like a sci-fi movie. Was the accident due to their or someone else's negligence? Is that person insured medically, auto insurance, worker's comp or get some type of legal restitution? Let's talk tort reform. No, can't, the lawyers may be reading this.
This guy is not in your league, Glenn. Did he even understand what you were talking about when you defended “the beauty of ideas?”
After getting by that Bessner writes for Jacobin and a list of leftist rags, he undermined what remained of his credibility by inappropriately sprinkling the word “like” throughout like a 15-year old. And ended every sentence with an inflection indicating a question. This is a common flaw in modern speech and it further makes the listener question whether the speaker even believes his own claims.
The Marxist lens was also a problem. He trotted out every tired leftist cliche, and used the common trick of prefacing a statement with “well, I am not an expert in education” or whatever to avoid accountability.
I especially liked his claims about human nature. One of the reasons capitalism succeeds is because it acknowledges our flaws and works with them. Yes capitalism needs some regulation and it is regulated. Socialism starts out by saying that human nature must be changed for such a system to achieve its aims. Hasn’t worked. When asked where socialism has succeeded he answered Cuba. Because they have “free” healthcare.
And he is teaching history to the next generation.
And I forgot. Does he not know that the Chinese are colonizing African countries? They don’t only want hegemony in their own part of the world. Like Nyberg below says, a lot of mindreading going on there.
no such decline you wea/k so/y cu/ck lim/p di/ck closet nazi, women beater apologist of anti american women sexual violence murder threatener beater assaulter reagain lover apologist of a women beater hahahahahaahhaah youre soulless tras/h, enjoy hell you bas/tard son of a bit/ch. neo nazi neo con closet nazi shill hack anti american rat faced tool fu/ck your fascist nazi koch brother nazi as/s hahahahahahahahahhahaahahha fu/ck you bit/ch fu/ck enjoy gitmo 2.0 the electric boogaloo when the military catches you nazi libertarian teabagger koch di/ck riding traitor russian money laundering loving scu/m fu/cking treacherous scu/m cartel terrorist gun pushing terrorists criminals, youre lucky we're civilized now and dont hang you bastar/ds
I think Alex McKeon’s recommendation to drop Prof. Bessner is misguided. A heterodox outlook requires consideration of competing views, and engaging with Prof. Bessner’s arguments helps reveal their deficiencies.
It’s no great concession to acknowledge that capitalism has many flaws, and Prof. Bessner is good at cherry-picking them. As he says, however, he is led to that by the conditions and goals of what he considers a desirable polity: one that gives primacy to goals of economic equality and a more modest role in world affairs, turning away from the competitive sorting through markets that gives capitalism its dynamism, but that is also somewhat responsible for certain flaws.
The question in political economy, however, is always “Compared to what?” Bessner’s apparent advantage is due to his evasion of two issues. First, he does not answer questions about historical circumstances—he replied to Glenn’s point about the USSR’s malignant designs by claiming that it never had the ability to carry them out. As Mr. McKeon observes, however, those designs were obvious and they were frustrated largely due to the US’s primacy in outcompeting the USSR in the cold war. But that evasion allows Prof. Bessner to glide through statements that call into question the value of “development,” without facing e.g., the incredible accomplishment of a 50 percent reduction in extreme poverty worldwide between 1980 and 2015.
Second, he rationalizes away the historic failures of Marxist political economy, including the relative conditions in western Europe and the Soviet bloc as of 1989. His response to Glenn’s query about where in the world his proposed polity is succeeding is an embarrassed laugh.
Prof. Bessner is an amiable foil, and not everyone is familiar with the Marxist perspective Prof. Bessner provides. I don’t doubt, however, that Glenn’s listeners are more than able to pick it apart for themselves. And, as was said by John Stuart Mill, “If you know only your own side of an argument, you don’t even know that.”
I must say that I've started skipping Glenn Shows with Bessner on them. His hypothetical lens never focuses on reality to see if his constructions are connected with it in any way, and whether it provides any evidence for his views. The speculation I saw quoted about 'freedom' from 'homelessness' is particularly egregious. Those of us who've studied the communist dictatorships know that homelessness was a structural fact of life. Most of my Soviet friends spent years in barracks, or crowded with several families into tiny dwellings, or waiting in various hellholes in conditions we would not have called having a 'home'. As far as unsheltered people, you could see them in the cities (sometimes frozen on the ground) and in the countryside, in unspeakable conditions. All of that matters, IMHO - and no-one 'chose' any of it.
Glen,
Thanks for the show. Appreciate your contribution to greater understanding.
Doesn't the construction an 4300 mile long "Iron Curtain", enforced with machine guns and mine fields, watchtowers, etc., to keep people from leaving (escaping) provide some evidence of the acceptance of the economic systems contrasting the "Soviet" (one party rule, centrally planned and administered) economic system and the 'capitalist' republics?
I agree the 'meritocracy' at the top of the economic strata is present but more class than race based. Meaning race doesn't keep you out. But you can move up the economic ladder based on 'merit'. Intelligence, your SAT score, isn't a limiting factor.
I'm not sure I understand the argument of not understanding "human nature" coming from a historian. History is rife with the results generated by the same.
Bessner doesn’t qualify his personal view by acknowledging, even in theory, there are others who would strongly disagree with his reading of the historical record. Bessner's arrogant confidence about both history and economics seems quite similar to the psychology of contemporary fascists who control the censorship levers at Twitter, Google, MSNBS, ABC News, CNN, and to slightly smaller extent, the NY Times. My impression is Bessner will do his best to teach students what to think, not how to think. He’s demonstrated mastery.
While not as ubiquitous as the PillowMan, the twin “Joys” so pollute channel surfing that I really didn’t want another interview with a Behar/Reid parrot. Sir Glenn, we would have been better served had you interviewed Niall Ferguson, Jared Diamond, David Horowitz or Luke Roziak (Race to the Bottom).
Actually Trump did do something about it. Not specifically with NATO although he is getting blamed for what he wanted to do with NATO as if he actually did get out of it. Those who are negative about Trump and his foreign policies have no creditability.
Bessner claims that public school performance in wealthier communities is better than in poorer communities is because wealthier communities are, well, wealthier. I would be interested in hearing his explanation of the fact that in several of the wealthier, better-performing communities Glenn mentioned around Boston, expenditures per student are actually lower then in lower-performing Boston. Boston spends ca. $24k per student whereas wealthier Wellesley , Newton and Brookline spend only $21k. Salaries are also higher in Boston. Glenn did not ask this question, but I can imagine at least part of his answer: Differences in the attitude and culture surrounding education and learning.
Yeah, his knowledge on that point is pretty bad. In California, for instance, education is funded by property taxes, but the counties have to share those with the state, which redistributes them to avoid the economic disparities.
I haven't been on a college campus in 25 , but is this what it's like to take a history class today, or just with Bessner? This guy is a hammer and everything is a nail.
Boy did I struggle to get through this, and i see i wasn't the only one. But i also struggle to get through Amy Wax.
That said, please keep bringing them on.
Please more guests like Bessner and the like. Enjoy hearing both of you debate merits of disciplines.
I enjoy listening to Glenns talks with DB. They kick up interesting ideas. I will say that Glenn is a real politique figure, i think this puts him at odds with academics as much as anything. DB is a typical anti real politique academic to such an extent it borders on delusion. Harvard students are no different than state university students? That hasnt been my experience. I was prodigious enough at mathematics to take my first year of college in high school. I held my own, but i was solidly in the middle of the pack. The top two students in my classes both went to Harvard. They were vastly more intelligent than the rest of us. Im not saying harvard only admits premium intellectuals but how DB characterizes this difference in intellectual capacity between top minds and above above average mind is a fantasy.
"The nation state is only 350 years old, we haven't had time to work out all the kinks with Socialism"
5 minutes later
"The data is in, Capitalism doesn't work, it's a disaster!"
Bessner saying the Soviet Union lost the Cold War because it couldn't keep up with the U.S.'s defense spending is an old and well-worn trope, but one that is not supported by the best available literature. Vladislav Zubok's "Collapse" convincingly shows, from the Russian perspective, why the fall of the Soviet Union really was an event driven by Gorbachev's political incompetence as he tried to follow in Deng's footsteps and slowly unclench the state's fists.
vaccuous
your guest never answwers you and was clearly on the d..you wwre kind
"the PUBLIC wants nationalized healthcare & free pre-K & childcare" No, that's what Progressives think the PUBLIC wants. Sounds good until the public realizes that government-run means government decides. CRT in pre-K for all!! Gender/Sex discussions in pre-K for all!! No SCOTUS or state restrictions on abortion (and I'm pro-choice, abortion availability until viability in all cases). Lets have the PUBLIC vote on everything via their phones and 51%+ decides. Too bad for minorities of any stripe. I agree. Not sure after reading the comments I want to continue. Hackles going up!!
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/09/29/increasing-share-of-americans-favor-a-single-government-program-to-provide-health-care-coverage/
After the polling disasters of the last few election cycles, I'm a skeptic about how truly 11K+ represent 350 million. Who are the people who actually answer the phone, emails, etc. to provide the info? How were the questions worded? Many don't realize the restrictions the "government-run" systems have or how CMS influences most insurers or how various states can impose their own mandates & restrictions. Again you can't cover everyone for everything with everything and still have a functioning economy. I don't have the answer or know if anyone does when you have as diverse (in every way) population of 350 million and be fair to all. What would it cost if everyone had the same coverage as Congress, the President, SCOTUS etc.?
Jardin read the US Constitution. It was designed to LIMIT the power of the Federal Gov. Ben Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." ...and will soon lose both. Nothing is free, there only trade offs.
I wish there had been a Bill of Responsibilities along with the Bill of Rights. The F.F.s just assumed everyone knew what those were. What did they know. Too "enlightened"! Probably would have made the Constitution even more systemically racist (satirical).
It's allocation of limited resources. The more taxes you take for the undeserving and irresponsible, the less you have for police and those that really need them.
The "state" only exists as a delegation from the people. In the absence of popular consent, the state vanishes - starved of resources - or becomes overtly tyrannical. So the idea that the state can refer to citizens as "its", i.e., belonging to it, gets things precisely backwards. The state ought to do what the people want from it, insofar as a consensus can be determined. No more, no less.
It's 50%+1 and it's not that way. It's coalitions and compromise. Few "choose" to be ill, but name me a national healthcare system that covers everything for everyone all the time like those for it make it out to be. There are always restrictions and Medicare for all is quite restrictive in many areas. CMS determines care, not really you & your MD. It disincentives' self-responsibility. Does anyone ever talk about non-compliance? Does everyone always deserve the same? I have no problem paying taxes for safety (police/military) & maintenance. I object to what seems like forced charity for some of the rest. Thanks for your thoughts.
i could go on for hours answering this. I will just say I worked in healthcare for over 40 years. Is the bad heart genetic or an unlucky roll of the dice? Was it caused by bad habits, i.e. drugs, diet, smoking? Is the person compliant with the changes they need to make, i.e. diet, smoking, medications, exercise? When do we stop paying for people's irresponsibility? It's a slippery slope which a national system doesn't cure and only divorces us from cost awareness. Taken to its nth degree, the government should determine & enforce everyone's diet, exercise regime, life style. Homogeny would be needed! Sounds like a sci-fi movie. Was the accident due to their or someone else's negligence? Is that person insured medically, auto insurance, worker's comp or get some type of legal restitution? Let's talk tort reform. No, can't, the lawyers may be reading this.
Maybe someone else can explain better.
This guy is not in your league, Glenn. Did he even understand what you were talking about when you defended “the beauty of ideas?”
After getting by that Bessner writes for Jacobin and a list of leftist rags, he undermined what remained of his credibility by inappropriately sprinkling the word “like” throughout like a 15-year old. And ended every sentence with an inflection indicating a question. This is a common flaw in modern speech and it further makes the listener question whether the speaker even believes his own claims.
The Marxist lens was also a problem. He trotted out every tired leftist cliche, and used the common trick of prefacing a statement with “well, I am not an expert in education” or whatever to avoid accountability.
I especially liked his claims about human nature. One of the reasons capitalism succeeds is because it acknowledges our flaws and works with them. Yes capitalism needs some regulation and it is regulated. Socialism starts out by saying that human nature must be changed for such a system to achieve its aims. Hasn’t worked. When asked where socialism has succeeded he answered Cuba. Because they have “free” healthcare.
And he is teaching history to the next generation.
And I forgot. Does he not know that the Chinese are colonizing African countries? They don’t only want hegemony in their own part of the world. Like Nyberg below says, a lot of mindreading going on there.