The Great Fiction: Property, Economy, Society, and the Politics of Decline (LFB)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online The Great Fiction: Property, Economy, Society, and the Politics of Decline (LFB) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with The Great Fiction: Property, Economy, Society, and the Politics of Decline (LFB) book. Happy reading The Great Fiction: Property, Economy, Society, and the Politics of Decline (LFB) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF The Great Fiction: Property, Economy, Society, and the Politics of Decline (LFB) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF The Great Fiction: Property, Economy, Society, and the Politics of Decline (LFB) Pocket Guide.

A research annual. R v. Hont, Istvan, author. Levitt, Steven D. When to rob a bank New York, N. New York : W. Jennings, John F. Popper, Nathaniel, author. New York, NY : Harper, Somin, Ilya, author. The grasping hand : Kelo v. Deane, Felicity Law teacher , author. Emissions trading and WTO law. Guerin, Lisa, author. Cioffi, Frank L. Mazzucato, Mariana. The entrepreneurial state : debunking public vs.

Revised edition. Working on earth : class and environmental justice. Hill, Barry E. Environmental justice : legal theory and practice. Weisberg, Richard H. Delaisi, Francis. Political myths and economic realities. Duarte d'Almeida, Luis, author. Legal fictions in theory and practice. Wallach, Philip A. Carlson, Jennifer. Cooley, Angela Jill, author. O'Donnell, Edward T. Kekes, John. Facing evil. Green, Kristen Journalist , author.

Spitzer, Robert J. Iganski, Paul, author. Hate crime : a global perspective. Brown, Alexander, author. Hate speech law : a philosophical examination. Kronenfeld, Jennie J. Second edition. Hemstock, G. Kevin, author. Templeman, Eleanor Lee Reading. Arlington, Va. Templeman, Schneider, Carl, author.

Hyland, Kelly, author. Lorberbaum, Yair, author. Sayer, R. Andrew, author. Why we can't afford the rich. Metz, Harold W. Labor policy of the federal government. Lambert, Craig, author. Cyberwar : law and ethics for virtual conflicts. Chisum, Donald S. Understanding intellectual property law. Ridgeway, George L. Novak, Andrew, author. The International Criminal Court : an introduction. Cham : Springer, Desierto, Diane A.

First Edition.

The Great Fiction: Property, Economy, Society, and the Politics of Decline

International financial disputes : arbitration and mediation. Alting von Geusau, Frans Alphons Maria, author. Understanding international law. Aspremont, Jean d', author. Baum, Matthew. Balleste, Roy, author. Bhojani, Ali Reza, author. London : I. Inskeep, Steve, author. Haire, Susan B. Courts of Appeals. Ibrahim, Ahmed Fekry, author. Aiello, Thomas, author. Appleman, Laura I. Kerik, Bernard B. The law and politics of the Kosovo Advisory Opinion.

Ojeda Aviles, Antonio, author. Transnational labour law. Steingold, Fred S. The employer's legal handbook. Berkeley, California : Nolo, Killingsworth, Charles C. Chicago, Univ. Dubofsky, Melvyn, compiler. American labor since the New Deal. Portman, Janet, author. Every tenant's legal guide. Quema, Anne, author. Power and legitimacy : law, culture, and literature. Snook, Ben, author. Dempsey, John S. An introduction to policing. Sixth edition. Masiola Rosini, Rosanna, author. Dina, Yemisi, author. Macklem, Timothy, author.

Law and life in common. Wang, Taisheng, author. First paperback edition. Seattle : University Of Washington Press, The new 1L : first-year lawyering with clients. Wark, Colin author. Lanham : Lexington Books, James City County Va. Deverell, William, author. Sing a worried song. Henry, Deborah Epstein, author. The relevant lawyer : reimagining the future of the legal profession.

Pedersen, Susan, author. Mixed legal systems, east and west. Semple, Noel, author. Fowler, Linda L. Gahlen, Sarah Fiona, author. Civil liability for accidents at sea. Fagan, Mark, author. Santo, Avi, author. Greaves, Chuck, author. The last heir : a mystery. Vincent, Nicholas, author. London : Third Millennium Publishing, Roberts, Neil, author. Freedom as marronage. Cuno, Kenneth M. Singular, Stephen, author. Chandler, Lester Vernon. American monetary policy, Cruz, Kathy, author. Munley, Kathleen Purcell, author.

The legal guide for museum professionals. Ascoli, Giorgio A. Trees of the brain, roots of the mind. Runquist, Lisa, author. The ABCs of nonprofits. Oppenheimer, J. The open mind: [lectures]. New York [N. After Snowden : privacy, secrecy, and security in the information age. New York : Thomas Dunne Books, Wright, Alex, author. Leigey, Margaret E. Pressman, David, author. Nolo's patents for beginners. Cahill, Bernadette. Gill, Michael Carl, author. Matthews, J. How to win your personal injury claim. Berkeley, CA : Nolo, Yetiv, Steven A.

New York : Oxford University Press, Tolorunse, Joseph A. Policante, Amedeo, author. Archbold, Carol.

New Arrivals: June 2015

Thousand Oaks, Calif. Worrall, John L. Sehat, David, author. Barton, Benjamin H. Rhode, Deborah L. The trouble with lawyers. Smith, Robert C. Boulder, Colorado : Lynne Rienner Publishers, Norrander, Barbara, author. Cohen, Jeffrey E. Alvarez, R. Michael, author. Maslen, Hannah, author. Remorse, penal theory and sentencing. Privacy in the modern age : the search for solutions. Surdam, David G. Tracy, Janice Branch, author. The first global prosecutor : promise and constraints. Martinez-Fraga, Pedro J. Angermeyer, Philipp Sebastian. Speak English or what? Lopez-Santana, Mariely, author.

Nuclear waste governance : an international comparison. Brands, H. Reagan : the life. Downs, Gregory P. Cambridge, Massachusetts : Harvard University Press, Routledge handbook of law and religion. Thomson, Keith Stewart, author. Ardito, Alissa M. The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development : a commentary. Alston, Richard, author. Classen, Mikel B. Douglass, Robin, author.

Oxford, U. Gilder, Ginny. Boston : Beacon Press, Laoutaris, Chris, author. First Pegasus Books hardcover edition. Bridger, Sarah. Scientists at war : the ethics of Cold War weapons research. School desegregation : documents and commentaries. New York : Thomas Y. Hasinoff, Amy Adele, author.

The shale energy revolution : a lawyer's guide. Boyd, Susan B. Autonomous motherhood? Matteoni, Norman E. Aguet, Isabelle. A pictorial history of the slave trade. Emancipation and the remaking of the British imperial world. The Snowden reader. LaMotte, David. Worldchanging : challenging the myth of powerlessness.

Montreat, N. Sinclair, Upton, editor. Philadelphia, The John C. Winston Co. Stewart, Maxwell S. Social security. Revised and enlarged edition. Socialist thought : a documentary history. Ross, Jack, author. The Socialist Party of America : a complete history. Mickey, Robert Waite, author. Grimm, Dieter, author. Zhao, Yun, author. Connelly, Stephen James, author. Spinoza, right and absolute freedom. Lasslett, Kristian, author. Chamberlain, Neil W. The impact of strikes, their social and economic costs. Schein, Michael, author. John Surratt : the Lincoln assassin who got away.

Smith, Stephen, author. Taxation : a very short introduction. Oxford : Oxford University Press, Rolim, Joao Dacio, author. Proportionality and fair taxation. Controversies in tax law : a matter of perspective. Wallach, Wendell, author. Ponce de Leon, Charles L. Strangelove, Michael, author. Paepcke, Frederik von, author. E Bd. Diab, Robert, author. Daniels, Stephen, author. Espindola Mata, Juan, author. Boynton, Cynthia Wolfe, author. Guthrey, Holly L. Menon, Rajan. Norton, Anne. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, Berkin, Carol, author. Do guns make us free?

Goidel, Robert K. Zimmerman, Joseph Francis, author. Alba, Richard D. Dueck, Colin, author. The Obama doctrine : American grand strategy today. Roberts, Cokie, author. Venator-Santiago, Charles R. Abingdon, Oxon : Routledge, Poloni-Staudinger, Lori, author. Roosevelt, Franklin D. On our way. New York : John Day Co. Hughes, Ken. Sununu, John H. Grossi, Simona, author. The U. Thompson, Bankole, author. Unkefer, Dean, author. First U. New York : Picador, Hart, Tanya, author. Tierney, Dominic, author. Public waste management and the ocean choice.

Magsig, Bjrn-Oliver, author. Allen, Arthur. The fantastic laboratory of Dr. Wolters, Cleary, author. Out of orange : a memoir. Harris, Deborah Ann, author. Woloch, Nancy, author. Nelson, Jennifer, author. McCullough, David G. The Wright brothers. Supreme justice : a thriller. Terminal city : a novel. Innocence ; or, Murder on Steep Street.

Every fifteen minutes. New York : St. Martin's Press, Notting Hill [videorecording]. Universal City, Calif. Halfmann, Drew. Doctors and demonstrators : how political institutions shape abortion law in the United States, Britain, and Canada. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, c McNeil, Christopher B. Administrative agency litigation.

Tomsen, Peter. The wars of Afghanistan : messianic terrorism, tribal conflicts, and the failures of great powers. New York : PublicAffairs, c Myers, Amrita Chakrabarti. Forging freedom : Black women and the pursuit of liberty in antebellum Charleston. Who's afraid of post-blackness? New York : Free Press, Mitchell, Koritha. Living with lynching : African American lynching plays, performance, and citizenship, Urbana : University of Illinois Press, c Donaldson, Sue. Zoopolis : a political theory of animal rights. Hovenkamp, Herbert. Federal antitrust policy : the law of competition and its practice.

Paul, MN : West, c Consumer arbitration agreements : enforceability and other topics. Boston, Mass. Deadly metal rain : the legality of Flechette weapons in international law : a reappraisal following Israel's use of Flechettes in the Gaza Strip Leiden ; Boston : Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Alexander, Shana. The pizza connection : lawyers, money, drugs, mafia. Fein, Melanie L. Federal bank holding company law. Skurka, Steven. Tilted : the trials of Conrad Black.

Toronto : Dundurn Press, c McLeod, Jacqueline. Colquhoun, Kate. Murder in the first-class carriage : the first Victorian railway killing. Brady, Diane. Mooney, James E. John Graham Brooks, prophet of social justice; a career story. Worcester, Mass. Ryu, Jay Eungha. Bounded bureaucracy and the budgetary process in the United States. New Brunswick, N. The assault on public education : confronting the politics of corporate school reform.

New York : Teachers College Press, c Sardoni, Claudio. Unemployment, recession and effective demand : the contributions of Marx, Keynes and Kalecki. Cheltenham [England] : Edward Elgar, Latzer, Barry. Death penalty cases : leading U. Supreme Court cases on capital punishment. Bernstein, Andrew.

Capitalist solutions : a philosophy of American moral dilemmas. Carbon capture and storage : emerging legal and regulatory issues. Oxford ; Portland, Or. Marshall, Paul A. Silenced : how apostasy and blasphemy codes are choking freedom worldwide. New York : Oxford University Press, c Dahlman, Carl J. The world under pressure : how China and India are influencing the global economy and environment. Rubenstein, William B. Newberg on class actions. Savelsberg, Joachim J. American memories : atrocities and the law.

New York : Russell Sage Foundation, c Tonkin, Hannah. State control over private military and security companies in armed conflict. Cambridge, U. Draper, Theodore. The roots of American communism. New York, Viking Press, Higgins, George E. Digital piracy : an integrated theoretical approach. Durham, N. Jaeger, Paul T. Disability and the Internet : confronting a digital divide. Boulder, Colo.

Marietta, Morgan. A citizen's guide to American ideology : conservatism and liberalism in contemporary politics. Ozbudun, Ergun. The constitutional system of Turkey : to the present. New York : Palgrave Macmillan, McClanahan, Brion T. The Founding Fathers' guide to the constitution. The changing constitution. Constitution 3. C Vermeule, Adrian. The system of the constitution.

Dinan, John J. The Virginia state constitution. KFV Farnsworth, E. New York : Aspen Publishers, c The Genocide Convention sixty years after its adoption. The Hague : Asser, c Crews, Kenneth D. Copyright law for librarians and educators : creative strategies and practical solutions. Chicago : American Library Association, For whom the whistle blows : advancing corporate compliance and integrity efforts in the era of Dodd-Frank.

Santa Monica, CA : Rand, c Bank, Steven A. Anglo-American corporate taxation : tracing the common roots of divergent approaches. Agnew, Robert. Toward a unified criminology : integrating assumptions about crime, people and society. A38 The Oxford handbook of crime and public policy. Oxford [England] ; New York, N. Moran, Jon. Crime and corruption in new democracies : the politics of in security. Geras, Norman. Crimes against humanity : birth of a concept. Dale, Elizabeth.

Criminal justice in the United States, Greenwald, Glenn. With liberty and justice for some : how the law is used to destroy equality and protect the powerful. The Rehnquist court and criminal justice. Lanham, Md. Budewitz, Leslie. Books, crooks and counselors : how to write accurately about criminal law and courtroom procedure. Fresno, Calif. Clarke, Joseph M. Virginia criminal law case finder.

Bernat, Frances P. Criminal procedure law : police issues and the Supreme Court. Burlington, Mass. Nash, Jay Robert. Bloodletters and badmen; a narrative encyclopedia of American criminals from the Pilgrims to the present. New York, M. Evans; distributed in association with Lippincott, Philadelphia [] HV Kinkela, David. DDT and the American century : global health, environmental politics, and the pesticide that changed the world.

Guest, Robert. Borderless economics : Chinese sea turtles, Indian fridges and the new fruits of global capitalism. Feminist disability studies. Bloomington : Indiana University Press, c Edsall, Thomas Byrne. The age of austerity : how scarcity will remake American politics. New York : Doubleday, c Family Law Seminar 30th : : Va.

The 30th annual Family Law Seminar ; the death of marriage. Varoufakis, Yanis. The global minotaur : America, the true origins of the financial crisis and the future of the world economy. London ; New York : Zed Books, Aristotle on education, being from the ethics and politics. Cambridge : Cambridge, University Press, , reprinted Keeling, Richard P. We're losing our minds : rethinking American higher education. Hoffmann, Banesh. The tyranny of testing.

Prescott, Heather Munro. The morning after : a history of emergency contraception in the United States. Wellman, Christopher Heath, author. Debating the ethics of immigration : is there a right to exclude? Oxford : Oxford University Press, [], McGerr, Rosemarie Potz. Smith, Mick. Against ecological sovereignty : ethics, biopolitics, and saving the natural world. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press, c Casner, A. Estate planning.

Chicago : CCH, c C3 Leslie, Melanie B. Trusts and estates. Kitcher, Philip. The ethical project. Cambridge, Mass. Laqueur, Walter. After the fall : the end of the European dream and the decline of a continent. Davies, Norman. Vanished kingdoms : the rise and fall of states and nations. New York : Viking, Slapin, Jonathan B.

Veto power : institutional design in the European Union. Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press, Rothstein, Paul F. Evidence in a nutshell. Z9 R6 Saltzburg, Stephen A. Federal rules of evidence manual : a complete guide to the Federal Rules of Evidence. S3 Weissenberger, Glen. Weissenberger's federal evidence.

San Francisco, Calif. Merritt, Deborah Jones. Learning evidence : from the federal rules to the courtroom. Park, Roger. The new Wigmore : a treatise on evidence : impeachment and rehabilitation. Stone, Lawrence. The family, sex and marriage in England, Goodmark, Leigh. A troubled marriage : domestic violence and the legal system. New York : New York University, c Cosimo, S. Domestic violence : legal sanctions and recidivism rates among male perpetrators. LLC, Springer Verlag Market denial and international fisheries regulation : the targeted and effective use of trade measures against the flag of convenience fishing industry.

Leiden ; Boston : Martinus Nihoff Publishers, Fitzpatrick, Robert. New York : Forge, Johnson, Willis Fletcher. The national flag : a history. Boston and New York : Houghton Mifflin, Pinkerton, Stewart. The fall of the house of Forbes : the inside story of the collapse of a media empire. Making global trade governance work for development : perspectives and priorities from developing countries.

Lang, Andrew. World trade law after neoliberalism : re-imagining the global economic order. Shah, Nayan. Stranger intimacy : contesting race, sexuality, and the law in the North American West. Berkeley : University of California Press, c Bishop, Cheryl Ann. Access to information as a human right. I've been working very hard with my co-editors, Roger E. Bissell and Edward W. I'll have lots more information to share about the book, our plans for an extended moderated discussion of its contents in the fall, and all the special marketing we have planned to spread the word with regard to this trailblazing volume that includes the contributions of nineteen wonderful scholars.

They are already advertising it on the Lexington Books site and on amazon. We have ways of bringing the volume to the masses; stay tuned. In the meanwhile, I wanted to extend my appreciation to both Stephen Cox and Mario Rizzo for their kind blurbs in support of the project. Stephen writes:. I'm struck by the fact that both gentlemen use the word "lively"and if anything that's one word that definitely describes the book's contents. In fact, it's "Big Tent" approach, encompassing so many different perspectives, will lead some readers to smile with glee while reading one essay, only to be challenged not to throw the book against the nearest wall while reading the very next essay.

Get ready, folks. We're in for a lively summer and an even livelier fall, when we intend to begin a more formal discussion of the book's contents. On top of all this, I'm also in the midst of proofing the copyedited essays for the forthcoming July issue of The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies ; it too will be a lively issueand it will be announced with yet a new incarnation of our ever-growing website in the near future. If this isn't enough for you, then take a look at Anoop Verma's blog entry today, " On Ayn Rand's Clean Shaven Acolytes ," wherein Anoop quotes a passage from my book, Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical , explaining some of the deep divides within the Russian culture of Rand's youth that pitted the "beards" against the "non-beards.

Always young at heart, even if my body is hanging onto its youth by a hair, out came the razor So that's the update from your Notablog reporter; I'll be back as soon as I get all these important chores done! On deadline! It is my distinct honorand pleasureto formally announce a forthcoming book: The Dialectics of Liberty: Exploring the Context of Human Freedom , a trailblazing collection of essays by a diverse group of scholars, coming from a variety of disciplines and perspectives.

The anthology has been coedited by Roger E. It is slated for publication by Lexington Books in June and it is sure to be a provocative read for anyone interested in liberty and the contexts that nourishor undermineit. Readers can find the book's home page here which is redirected from both Dialectics of Liberty. As we state on our abstracts page:. Abstracts for all the articles that are included in the anthology can be found here and contributor biographies can be found here.

For those who just can't wait to read through those links, here is a glimpse of what to expect:. Anyone taking a look at the contributors to this book might be scratching their heads a bit, wondering how some of the authors associated with the volume may very well not associate themselves with the views of other authors herein represented. Rather, it is a sign of the fruitful interplay of ideas and theories that might result when classical liberal and libertarian thinkers adopt a context-sensitive dialectical approach, making their political project a living research program that will necessarily generate a variety of perspectives, united only in their ideological commitment to freedom and their methodological commitment to a dialectical sensibility.

I should just add that this is purely an announcement: I'd like to save the debates for when the book is published and folks actually have a chance to read the essays, before passing judgments, either positive or negative on the contents of the volume. I know that our authors would greatly appreciate critical feedback; but nothing advances human knowledge when judgments are reached on the basis of reading short abstracts or brief biographies.

Suffice it to say: We are going to have plenty of time and many forums in which to debate the contents of this book. For now, I would simply like to extend my heartfelt appreciation to my hard-working fellow editors, and our remarkable group of superb scholars, whose commitment to the project has been a delight to behold.

Postscript : This Notablog announcement was shared on Facebook by quite a few people, reaching potentially thousands of readers. I'm delighted by the response, and added a few points in several threads. The most important point I made, however, was in response to some folks who criticized the inclusion of people whose views they oppose. Here was my response:. Postscript II : The debate over the contents and its contributors has continued, so I made the following observation on one of the Facebook threads:.

In New York, our very own "Democratic Socialist," Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , has been a vocal proponent of a so-called "Green" New Deal , aimed at solving the problem of "climate change" with massive government intervention.

Independent news email

I replied to a Facebook question on the issue, and will share what I said with Notablog readers:. I think there are two very real issues that need to be examined with this climate change question. Let us assume that every point by those who argue for the validity of climate change is correct. With regard to pollution issues, why assume that the government has any more "knowledge" in resolving the issues than actors in a competitive market system in which there are different players acting on their differential "know how" of the market for clean energy?

Central planning didn't work for any other issue, so why assume it will do anything but shift billions of dollars in taxpayer money to industries created or favored by a government-sanctioned scientific and technological elite? Typically, the only "products" that governments have been been good at "creating", in league with scientific and technological elites, are weapons of mass destruction. And secondly, folks who advocate stronger government involvement in this area should focus on the so-called " tragedy of the commons " which has been a principal cause of much pollution and the need to allow courts to take on class action suits against corporate polluters many of them already politically-privileged monopoly energy utilities.

To simply hand over billions of dollars of taxpayer money to favored industries allegedly committed to resolving the problems caused by climate change is to think that, somehow, government will change its stripes and not be what it has always been: a dispenser of privilege to those who are most adept at grabbing and using political power. That's what happened with the New Deal which was based on the corporativist model of "War Collectivism" from World War I and was praised by Benito Mussolini for its fascistic character ; why will it be any different with a "Green" New Deal?

With regard to the view that "government has only been good at 'creating' weapons of mass destruction," one reader asked: "What about the space program, interstate highway system, NIH. I responded:. It is very good at socializing the costs for building large projects that are typically related to 'national defense': typically, it takes market actors to take these projects and to develop them for the benefit of consumers.

And with regard to the issue of fossil fuels and oil, it has had a primary role in developing a foreign policy of war and interventionism to benefit Big Oil, whether it has been in propping up "friendly" autocratic regimes, like that in Saudi Arabia , or in benefiting ARAMCO, with which Exxon-Mobil has always been intimately involved. I added the following point when a reader proposed that a government, freed of corporate power, could act in the public interest:.

But in my view, the government will always be captive to corporate power. On this point, I think Hayek was right when he said that the more politics comes to dominate economic and social life, the more political power will be the only power worth havingwhich is why those most adept at using political power get the most privileges. Which is "why the worst get on top. Talk about an article of faith: Why would you put faith in a single institution the state to come up with the necessary knowledge which is not simply "data" but both articulated and tacit, and tied to differential contexts to introduce a whole "Green New Deal" that would cost trillions of dollars and benefit specific industries?

And if we are living in a state capitalist-corporatist system, how do we avoid the central problem of state-generated privileges being handed over to whole industries invested in "alternative" energies if you actually believe that the energy industry wouldn't just seek to cash-in on the newly generated expropriated funds to take advantage of the instituted changes?

Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, for example, where the government subsidized the great expansion of "infrastructure" long before any private investment would have taken the risk, some of that expansion didn't really work out. The railroads "benefited" from this kind of subsidization but were, of course, eventually undermined by the lack of market support. The results were fairly typical: eventually these railroads went bankrupt and were 'nationalized'. Typically, "crony" state capitalists are at the forefront of getting the government to make the big "infrastructure" investments because it does socialize the costs of their expansion.

But it doesn't always work out in the long run. The reader rejected my reasoning and argued that the state was the only institution available that could make the changes required to save the planet from climate catastrophe. To which I replied:. Well, then all I can say is we'll have to agree to disagree.

I don't see how effective it will be to institute the kind of massive shifts you envision in the current state-capitalist context, whose class character will be fundamentally the same. No change of the sort you envision comes to this country without a massive amount of under-the-table deal-making where the worst seem to always get on top and profit the most. I don't think of this as a libertarian article of faith; I think of it as a simple fact of reality. The discussion continued and I shared a link to a post by my dear friend and colleague, Steve Horwitz, on the timeline of the thread:.

Steve Horwitz['s post] These kinds of expansions amount to the militarization of the economy, and given what we have seen in other such militarizations from the War Collectivism of World War I to the original New Deal to the War Collectivism of World War II, and so forth , I do not see how a Green New Deal avoids the problems inherent in the proposed 'solution'. As Steve puts it:. I should add that Don Lavoie's work, especially his Rivalry and Central Planning and his National Economic Planning: What is Left , is among the most radical and highly dialectical work in the Austrian tradition.

His integration of hermeneutics, his use of Hayek's work on knowledge especially the Polanyi-Ryle 'tacit' dimension of knowledge , and a dialectical understanding of the interrelationships of politics, economics, and culture, make his contributions all the more significant and worthy of study. He was a fine scholar and a dear friend, and Steve's quoting of him is "spot on" indeed! In a comment on a Facebook thread begun by my colleague Susan Love Brown, I made a stark political admission, not without a lot of consideration as to the damage that Donald Trump has created in his wake.

As I stated on Facebook:. Now, for those who have claimed that Trump has reduced regulation and, to that extent, has freed up the economy, all I can say is: No action of the government is neutral and selective de-regulation benefits some interests at the expense of others. My own family has felt the impact of the Trump Tax Plan up close and personal.

As I state above, my opposition to Trump is not a vote of confidence in the alternative being presented by so-called "Progressives" in the Democratic Party, who favor "democratic socialism. If only "None of the Above" were a ballot choice, we might, at least, be able to de-legitimize the entire government. It would be a vote against the damage that government has done to human libertywhether in the name of corporatist nationalism or corporatist welfare statism.

Sorry to disappoint Trumpsters and Non-Trumpsters alike. I'm just tired of voting for the lesser of two evils, and I've had it with this One-Party System that offers two variants of statist tyranny. After posting this on Facebook, I offered some additional observations, and will update this blog entry should I have anything else to say as of November 6, , there have been comments on the thread :. Another respondent claimed that in a choice between Trump and the left, the choice for Trump is clear, given the left's penchant for "identity politics.

That same respondent claimed that my comment that the right has embraced identity politics as much as the left was "utter bullshit" "with all due respect," as he put it , to which I responded:. Persisting in his attack on my perspective, the reader alleged that I had swallowed the "hysterical" "drivel" of the politically-correct Left, which blamed all white men for society's sins.

I replied at length:. Another reader asked if I was giving a "moral equivalence" to the identity politics on the right to the identity politics on the left, and I responded:. I was criticized by another reader for my "moralizing and sanctimonious" post, somebody who wondered whether I was a "Never-Trumper. Another comment questioned my views on Trump as a political outsider, and on Trump's approach to border security, the U.

Another reader also questioned why I had not placed more emphasis on Trump's anti-immigration policies, and I replied:. Another reader asks, given the conditions that exist, which side of the political divide in this country offers the most hope for repairing American society? I replied:. The Facebook discussion generated a lot of comments, not all of which I could possibly address, but I've tried to keep the essence of that discussion centered on this Notablog entry for the sake of posterity. One reader raised the question of Trump as a superior strategist, and I made the following comment:.

The discussion has proceeded through the weekend of November , ; I posted a few additional comments. On Trump being among those who could change history, I stated:. I was asked to expand on who I thought might embody the principles of freedom, in contrast to Trump; my reply was not an optimistic one:. On November 5, one of the original discussants on Susan Love Brown's thread asked me once again to address the central question: "Would you choose fascism or 'democratic socialism' which I believed I also identified as 'welfare capitalism'?

But this is hoping for a "miracle," which the reader defined as "something outside of the ordinary course of experience and events. Since you apparently believe there is no solution, I continue to be puzzled about why you spend all this time discussing ideology. On November 6, the Day of Midterm Madness Election Day , I responded to readers who had questions about how to get "from here to there":. On another thread initiated by Anoop Verma but on a related note to much of what has been discussed above , the question at hand was: "What will be the verdict of the intellectual historians, who are living more than or years from today, on the twentieth century?

On November 10, , I added a link to an essay by my long-time colleague and friend, Barry Vacker, who has contributed a controversial, thought-provoking piece to Medium , " Texas vs. There was an interesting thread started by my friend Ryan Neugebauer on his own Facebook page, to which I contributed, which I reproduce here, as it points to some of the themes that will be central to the forthcoming collection, The Dialectics of Liberty: Exploring the Context of Human Freedom , which I'm co-editing with Roger E. Ryan gave me permission to cut and paste our little chat:. YouTube link] and that a superb new collection entitled The Dialectics of Liberty: Exploring the Context of Human Freedom will be published in The book, co-edited by Roger E.

Bissell , Edward W. Younkins , and yours truly , features the contributions of eighteen extraordinary scholars in fields as diverse as aesthetics, business, economics, higher education, history, the humanities, law, philosophy, politics, psychology, and social theory. Despite spirited disagreements among them, and the diversity of perspectives represented, all of our authors work under the Big Tent that is "dialectical libertarianism"a form of social analysis that seeks to understand the larger dynamic and systemic context within which freedom is nourished and sustained. The homepage we have developed is sparse right now, because we are in the process of collecting, editing, and organizing essays from our contributors and integrating them into an organic unity; in other words, you might say that the very creation of this trailblazing volume will be an unfolding dialectical processso, for now, we are purposely not providing a list of our contributors.

That will come in time; indeed, very soon, we'll unveil our stellar cast of authors. But the news of the book's acceptance for publication was just too wonderful not to share with you. I look forward to filling in the blanks very soon. But most importantly, I look forward to the publication of the volume itself. And speaking only for myself, as a person who felt as if his was the voice of one crying in the wilderness over the past forty years, in championing the very notion of a "dialectical libertarianism" with my "Dialectics and Liberty Trilogy" Marx, Hayek, and Utopia , Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical , and Total Freedom: Toward a Dialectical Libertarianism , I have immense personal satisfaction in having played a part in bringing together this remarkable group of contributors from whom I've learned so muchand who have honored us with their presence in what promises to be one of the most important and provocative contributions to the scholarly literature of its generation.

Very soon I hope to provide some information on some important resources that will be made available to scholars of the work of Murray Rothbard, thanks to my preservation of them for nearly 40 years. However, a recent discussion on Rothbard has broken out, especially with regard to his contentious relationship with the inner circle of Ayn Rand, on the FB site of "For the New Intellectual" and I just wanted to bring together, in a single Notablog entry, the various comments I made about Rothbard, especially in light of that forthcoming announcement.

I observed that I was. In another post, I acknowledge that Rothbard's personal biases became the basis of raging interpersonal wars even among those in libertarian circles. But for Objectivists to point to this as proof that he was off his rocker is a bit like: Pot. The same stuff has happened within Objectivist circles for eons, and Rand's behavior was not exemplary at all times and in all cases.

But that doesn't mean we throw the baby out with the bathwater. I also acknowledge my disagreements with Rothbard on such subjects as Gandhi and the strategic use of nonviolence, mentioning that no single theorist has done more for that area of study than the late Gene Sharp , who was a friend and colleague. Check out especially his book, The Politics of Nonviolent Action and his many works on Gandhi's political strategies.

But the charges that Murray Rothbard was enamored by folks connected to the Holocaust-denying Institute for Historical Review led me to post further on the charges of Rothbard's alleged "anti-Semitism":. In a later post, somebody presented anecdotal evidence of somebody else who had a conversation with Rothbard, in which he showed skepticism about the Holocaust.

I received some criticism from readers who argued that Murray Rothbard wasn't a very nice guy and that he did things that were not above board, especially in his dealings with Rand, Branden, and others in the Objectivist movement. I will have more to say about the forthcoming original resources that will soon be available to Rothbard scholars. For the first time, the first book in my "Dialectics and Liberty Trilogy," is available in e-book form. Today, for the first time, my book, Marx, Hayek, and Utopia , has been made available in a searchable Kindle Edition!

Of course, as editor of an academic journal, on these "wages", I can barely afford to purchase it! But it's still nice to know that "MHU" is now available as an e-book. Soon, I'll have some great news to share about the forthcoming Kindle edition of Total Freedom: Toward a Dialectical Libertarianism , because when that finally happens, with the second edition of Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical already Kindle-ized, my trilogy will have finally entered the twenty-first century!

There are a lot of folks out there who are still fighting the election: those who seem to wholeheartedly believe that Trump is Satan Incarnate and who are typically affected by "Trump Derangement Syndrome" and those who seem to believe there is nothing Trump can do wrong. Let us call this "Trump Worship Syndrome. The problem is that whether Demon or Deity, no one man can alter the trajectory of the system, because the system itself is fundamentally committed to traveling down "the road to serfdom. Ironically, this morning, I wake to a fabulous quote posted by Anoop Verma, written by Edith Efron, which goes to the core of what I'm driving at.

It speaks implicitly to the need to think dialectically , that is, to think in terms of understanding and changing the larger context, upon which political and economic issues depend. Here is that eloquent quote that Anoop has shared with us this morning:. I know that Anoop and I have had some differences in terms of our evaluation of Trump, but I agree fundamentally with what he is trying to convey in that Efron passage. I shared the post on Facebook, and added a "tongue-in-cheek" comment: "Sounds like the makings of a 'Dialectics and Liberty Trilogy' : ".

I have often argued on the basis of what I have called a "Tri-Level Analysis of Social Relations"that is a tri-level model of understanding how power is exercised, and, consequently, the kinds of strategies that are needed to fundamentally alter that structure of power. I used it to describe the ways in which Ayn Rand typically approached the analysis of any social problem, but it is a model that one should keep in mind whether or not one accepts Rand's analysis in any specific instance.

But the approach is outlined briefly in my essay, " Dialectics and Liberty. And this is why that passage from Edith Efron's Secular Fundamentalism resonates with me. Since we have been discussing political and economic issues on the Facebook thread to which I posted, any Level III focus must take into account all that is entailed in the "political" and the "economic" which is why I label that level "structural". Even if one is attempting to alter the political and economic trends in this country, these trends cannot be changed without grasping the fundamental structures that both reflect these trends and sustain them.

On the eve of celebrating Independence Day, it might be worth remembering that this was a country "conceived in liberty"; it has traveled so far away from the origins of its conception such that the actions of one man cannot possibly change the systemic and dynamic complexities of a system that has been built up over the last century, one that embraces "perpetual war for perpetual peace" and that requires several key institutions that are only the tip of the "Deep State," unresponsive to the electorate, and firmly entrenched to serve the systems they were designed to protect.

Three key institutions that must be mentioned in this context are:. The Federal Reserve System, which sustains a "state-banking nexus" that, in its policies of boom and bust, redistributes wealth to the most politically potent debtors the biggest of which are financiers and big businesses that depend on both inflationary policies and government assurances that they are "too big to fail" ;. Eisenhower warned against in his farewell address about the growing power of the "military-industrial complex"; and.

A regulatory apparatus that, since the late nineteenth century, was designed and maintained to benefit the very businesses to be regulated, who have used its various tools to destroy competition and wield control over markets. With all this in mind, I reproduce below my comments on the various threads dealing with some of the issues surrounding the Trump presidencyissues that go to the core of why a "welfare-warfare state" will not weaken, whether one believes Trump to be a Demon or a Deity. My first Facebook musings yesterday were posted in response to an essay written by Jim Peron, which effectively dispensed with some of the more idiotic views of journalist David Brooks: " The Enemies of Individualism: Conservatism, Collectivism, and Tribalism.

In fact, it is the exact opposite, as Peron argues. I wrote:. I contributed an additional comment to that thread, in response to Jim's argument that Trump suffered from a typical narcissistic disorder that helped to explain his "authoritarian personality":. A defender of Trump's policies took exception to my placing him in the "neofascist" swamp, in which virtually every politician swims, and I replied:. I also added a note about a newly published collection of essays by Murray Rothbard that dealt with the origins of the modern U.

Since I'm likely to have more to say in the give-and-take, I'll update my commentary here, as time warrants. But before pursuing any further discussion, I might as well reproduce another comment I made on an entirely different FB thread, initiated by Aeon Skoble, where he bemoans the incivility of the dialogue on many threads, especially those devoted to current political and economic issues:.

The problems I am focused on here go far beyond the terms of the debate as framed by that false alternative. Of course, my FB post elicited responses, and I'll devote the space below just to expanding on the comments I have already made on this topic. With regard to someone who remarked that I went "overboard" in my praise of Reagan and that my post went on a bit long, I responded:. The reason for this will become apparent.

Post navigation

I've been having a conversation with a few friends, and among the issues we were discussing was why it seemed that the novelist and philosopher Ayn Rand set herself up against so many on the left and the right, and burned so many bridges to folks across the political spectrum, who might have been her allies. It is as if Rand and her acolytes created a world, a "Galt's Gulch" of their own, which became hermetically sealed from the rest of the world. Even as Rand warned against the fallacy of "thinking in a square," too many of her devoted followers have been incapable of stepping out of that box and critically engaging with the wider intellectual world.

This is not just a debate between those who have advocated a "closed system" approach, which views Rand's thought as consisting only of whatever she wrote or endorsed in her lifetime, versus those who have argued that Rand's philosophy is an open system: that is, we can agree on the fundamentals she set forth in each of the major branches of her philosophy, but that with intellectual evolution over time, there will be many additional contributions that will fill in the many gaps that were left by Rand and consistent with her fundamentals.

On this point, I've always had one major question for those on either side of the divide: Where do we draw the line as to what is "essential" or "nonessential" or "fundamental" or "not fundamental" to Objectivism? And the list goes on and on and on. I've never quite heard a satisfactory answer to these questions. It is ironic, too, that so many advocates of the "closed system" approach almost always find a way to bracket out of that closed system the very real contributions made by both Nathaniel Branden and Barbara Brandenwhen Rand herself argued that the work of these individuals, prior to her break with them in , were among "the only authentic sources of information on Objectivism.

And regardless of whether one ascribes to a "closed" or "open" system approach, what is the ultimate goal of those who claim to be Rand's intellectual progeny? To be consistent with "Objectivism" or to be consistent with reality? In one sense, the work of anybody influenced by Rand may not be consistent with "Objectivism" but consistent with a "Randian" approach to philosophy and social theory, broadly understood.

To this extent, " we are all Randians now. One thing I think is fairly clear, however: Over her lifetime, Rand definitely became more and more insulated and isolated, unwilling to engage those on the left or the right. And even though she clearly had no problem with "purges" during the days of the Nathaniel Branden Institute, today, those associated with the Ayn Rand Institute have turned such "purges" into an art form. But I think that at least with regard to Ayn Rand , too many people on either side of the "closed" or "open" system debate tend to be extremely ahistorical in their understanding of Rand's intellectual evolution, which sheds light on why she became more isolated and less ecumenical in her approach to her perceived opponents.

I have argued in my book, Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical , that, despite her claim of challenging the ideas of 2, years of cultural and philosophic thought, neither she nor anyone could possibly extricate themselves from the culture in which they were embedded as they came to intellectual maturity. Every thinkerevery personis of a particular time and place. On this point, it must be understood that there was always a genuine Russian streak in Rand insofar as she was both a novelist and a philosopher.

Throughout the history of the Russian literary tradition, especially during the Silver Age, when Rand was born and came to intellectual maturity, writers were almost always considered both novelists and philosophers or at the very least advocates of a certain set of intellectual ideas , and virtually all of these writers found themselves on the outskirts of power, using literature as a means to struggle against various kinds of social oppression.

It therefore comes as no surprise that when asked whether she was a novelist or a philosopher, Rand answered: "Both. Most, of course, were writers of implicit "mixed" premises. For Rand, the realm of ideas was inescapable for novelists. She was a master of projecting philosophical ideas in the context of fictiona very Russian project. And like all the Russian dissident writers before her, those ideas were almost always opposed to the status quo, seeking to alter it fundamentally. In the end, Rand may not have become a full-fledged technical philosopher, but she was a fully radical social theorist, much like her Russian forebears.

Rand did say that the goal of her writing was the projection of the ideal man and whether she meant it or not, the ideal woman as well.

What's happening in Zuma's South Africa? - CNBC Explains

She realized that she had achieved at least a certain aspect of that goal in her creation of Howard Roark, the triumphant architect in The Fountainhead. But she turned to the larger social questions in Atlas Shrugged because, as she has written, there could be no projection of ideal men or ideal women without also projecting the kinds of social relations that such individuals required in order to fully flourish, to bring forth their talents and creativity in a social environment.

Sociality was inescapable.

  • Survey of Covenant History: A Historical Overview of the Old Testament.
  • History of London.
  • My First Book of Southern African Insects.
  • Mastering the Forehand.

These relations were expressed in organizations, institutions, and throughout civil society. Rand may never have wanted to become a technical philosopher, but she was writing nonfiction essays early in her career and the equivalent of philosophical tracts within every novel she authored. Her first nonfiction book, For the New Intellectual , basically extracted all of the philosophical speeches from her works of fiction to show the kinds of ideas she was projecting, even if she had not yet reached the point of full integration.

But it is there, right in her novels. So many people from so many political persuasions were attracted to aspects of her thought. But Rand would have had none of it. Over time, she had systematically demonized conservative, liberals, libertarians, and socialists. But she once stated that her appeal was ultimately to the nontraditional conservatives and the nontotalitarian liberals. I think that as she aged, she realized there were fewer and fewer representatives of those groups. And then there were those conservatives who embraced the Jim Crow laws of apartheid in the South as a means of perpetuating institutional racism, which utterly disgusted her.

As the years went by, and her close relationships with those among the Old Right collapsed, she witnessed how conservatives increasingly embraced a religious defense of capitalism, while she was fighting for the idea that capitalism must be defended as the only rational and moral social system an odd parallel with those atheistic, secular leftists who fought for "scientific socialism". As for the libertarians, I think a lot of Rand's falling out with that group was due to her experiences with folks from the Circle Bastiat Murray Rothbard chief among them.

But she lived during a time when, to her, "libertarianism" was as much of a mixed bag as conservatism. And when Rothbard became Mr. Libertarian, she became increasingly hostile to a group of fellow travelers in politics most of them advocates of limited government rather than of anarcho-capitalism. She repudiated libertarians as "hippies of the right," who then turned around and attacked her with as much ferocity as the religious and traditional conservatives. But, of course, Rand was just as adamantly opposed to the New Left as she was to the conservatives and the libertarians.

So what are we left with?

Mencius Moldbug: A Short Lesson from a Sith Lord | Southern Nights

And in the end, she had made so many enemies on the left and the right that it became almost impossible for heror any of her acolytesto truly engage their philosophical opponents. And those opponents became so hostile to Rand that they sought to remove her from the canon as a thinker worthy only of disdain and dismissal. Rand's acolytes have only dug-in their heels in response to such attacks, clinging to a siege mentality that cultivated isolation from the wider world.

  • June 27, 12222.
  • Jeux pour lire à lécole élémentaire (Pédagogie pratique) (French Edition).
  • Home and Dry.
  • Hans-Hermann Hoppe in 10 Great Quotes | The Ludwig von Mises Centre.
  • Hedwigs Theme - Alto Saxophone.

Either you were for Rand in toto or opposed; either you were among the Chosen or the Damned. For those of us who are so inclined, I think it is essential to address those on the left and the right in a spirit of critical but respectful engagement. This was a woman who fought the Welfare-Warfare state, who battled on the front lines against U. Rand reminded us that those who fight in the future must live in it today. She fought for that future and advocated the kinds of ideas that she believed were essential to the fundamental social change that was possibleand necessaryto the survival of the human species.

In a Facebook thread, a question was raised as to whether Ayn Rand had created a complete philosophical system and I remarked:. My essay, "Reply to Critics of Russian Radical 2. I am reluctant to say much about the essay until people have actually read it, though in truth, I think the essay speaks for itself. I did, however, clarify one issue that has dogged my use of the word "dialectics" for over twenty years now.

Some folks may think my use of the word is idiosyncratic, but as I explain in the first four chapters of my book, Total Freedom: Toward a Dialectical Libertarianism , though the word has come to be associated with various untenable philosophical doctrines, it originates among the ancients, and its theoretical father is Aristotle.

On Facebook, I posted this reply to one commentator:. Postscript 15 December : In a tangential Facebook discussion on Marxism, I had the opportunity to pay tribute to a brilliant friend and colleague, the late Don Lavoie:. Postscript 18 December : Anoop Verma's blog post on my essay has elicited a provocative response from Irfan Khawaja, which can be viewed here.

Irfan says:. But readers should go to Anoop Verma's blog to see Anoop's comments as well; it is a very interesting conversation to say the least. In May , I had earned my undergraduate degree magna cum laude from New York University, with a triple major in politics, economics, and history with honors. To say I was stoked to have been accepted to the NYU doctoral program in politics, where I would go on in , to earn a master's degree in political theory, and in , a Ph.

I was positively ecstatic. I had, by this time, laid out a path of professional goals that merged my passionate libertarian political convictions with a rigorous course of study that would include seminars and colloquia with scholars that only New York University could offer. In this combustible intersection of ideas, there would emerge the seeds of what would become a life-long commitment to the development of a " dialectical libertarianism ", and a trilogy of books Marx, Hayek, and Utopia , Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical , and Total Freedom: Toward a Dialectical Libertarianism that would articulate the foundations of that approach.

Alas, these scholarly goals were made all the more joyful to achieve because of so many individuals whose lives touched mine in ways that were fundamental both to my intellectual and personal growth as a human being. One of these individuals was a guy named Michael Southern. When Kirzner finished his first lecture, logically structured as one would expect from any esteemed student of the great Ludwig von Mises , I introduced myself to Michael.

He seemed a little shy at first, but I think he was genuinely surprised by my friendliness and that unmistakable Brooklyn accent. We went to a local cafe and talked for a very long time. I got to know a lot about him in that first encounter. I learned, for example, that he was two years older than me, almost to the day: I was born on February 17, ; he was born on February 23, I also learned that he hailed from Massachusetts, and was a rabid Boston Red Sox fan.

Back then, that was almost a non-starter for me. After all, I was and remain a New York Yankees fanatic. And, I argued, no man was more valuable to that team than Guidry, who had pitched back-to-back two-hit shutouts against Boston down the stretch, and won the deciding extra rd game of the season, enabling the Yanks to advance to the AL Championship series against the Kansas City Royals, and ultimately to win their second straight World Series over the Los Angeles Dodgers.

Michael was going on and on about Rice's hitting. Blah, blah, blah. But that homer lifted the Yanks ahead for good. I guess Michael was still a little bitter. Even this diehard Yankees fan reveled in Boston's loss that year! Oh was it fun locking horns with Michael on these issues.

Animated baseball disagreements aside, it was clear that Michael and I had a lot in common; we were both avid fans of Ayn Rand, devoted readers of Nathaniel Branden, extremely interested in politics and culture, lovers of film and of music from jazz to progressive rock. All he had to say was that he had seen my favorite jazz pianist Bill Evans perform live, and that he had fallen in love with the emotional depth of his music, and I just knew that there was something very special about this man. Over time, our friendship deepened; he'd tell me about some trouble he was having with a girl he was dating, I'd tell him about my own dating woes; we talked about our families, our friends, our goals, our triumphs, and our tragedies.

He had extraordinary qualities about him; he was perceptive, intelligent, gentle, kind, compassionate, and had a great sense of humor. By holiday time in December, that sense of humor manifested itself on both sides of the baseball divide. Such was the nature of our developing affection for one another. He had taken a waiter's job at the Cheese Cellar on East 54th Street in Manhattan , which became a regular stop for me and my family.

The waiter's service was terrific, I might add. As he got to know my jazz guitarist brother Carl and jazz vocalist sister-in-law Joanne, and saw them perform at so many jazz clubs in Manhattan, loving their music, he eventually offered to do a website for them as he would eventually develop my own website all for free.

But something was troubling him deeply, early in that first semester, as the class with Kirzner continued. I'm paraphrasing the conversation from memory, but it went something like this. He said to me: "I can see you coming from blocks away. You just have a way about you. It's in your walk. Your step. It's never timid, but it's not overbearing. It's just the walk of a man comfortable in his own body, walking purposefully to his destination, wherever that might be. The way you walk is a bit of an inspiration to me. I just don't walk that way. I don't feel that way inside.

My walk? I'd never even given a second thought to the way I walked. And here, my friend was telling me that there was something in my walk that inspired him, and that made him focus on the things that he felt he lacked. He had attended weekend Intensives in New York run by Nathaniel Branden and his wife Devers Branden, and felt that they had tapped into something that needed greater attention. I was no professional, but I was becoming a very dear and trusted friend. I tried to help him through it, with long phone conversations into the wee hours, but he seemed stuck, unable to get through a term paper for Kirzner's class.

It was then that he made a momentous decision that I figured spelled the end of a friendship; he decided he was too overwhelmed by the course, that something deeper was at work, and that he needed help. To my surprise, Michael and I never lost touch. He was in therapy with Nathaniel Branden, and making strides.

Every so often, we'd speak, not so much about the details of his therapy, but more about how he was challenging himself to keep moving. Sometimes a month would pass, or two, and he'd call, and it was as if the last conversation had occurred only an hour ago; we picked up where we left off, never missing a beat.

And during this period, as I faced my own trials and tribulationswith everything from relationships to my health problems an outgrowth of a congenital intestinal condition he was as present and tuned-in to me, as I was to him. This was never a one-way street; the friendship that I thought would be lost by distance, had intensified. And the feeling that he was a "brotha from another mutha" only deepened. It was clear that we loved one another as only brothers couldsomething that geographic distance did nothing to alter.

As Michael explained in that wonderful essay of his, he was able to work through so many of his problems; he credited Nathaniel Branden and Devers Branden with saving years of his life. He'd go back to school to earn a master of science in management from Lesley College and a master of science in information systems from Boston University. As a technology specialist, he did wonderful work for Fortune companies.

Through all the years, our friendship only grew. In fact, he was a member of the JARS family from its beginnings in , as we unveiled the website on the day that our first issue was published. He was never so far away, however, that he didn't participate once or twice in my cyberseminars on "Dialectics and Liberty. There were bumps along the waythough never between us. His marriage didn't work out, his work took him out of New York again, and his interests, especially in the history of the Holocaust, took him to other countries.

But again, geographic distance never seemed to interfere with our friendship. Eventually, he came back to the states, and his software expertise gave him many job opportunities, including business with a company in Detroit, Michigan, where he worked for several years. Indeed, his software expertise was certainly highly valued by JARS; the two of us worked hard in as he created a brand spanking-new website for the journal, which made its debut with the Nathaniel Branden symposium, to which he contributed that enormously revealing and enlightening essay. In many ways, writing that essay was, for Michael, a catharsis of sorts; while it served the greater symposium's purpose of understanding the work and legacy of Branden, it also served as a profoundly personal statement of how Michael stood up courageously to the challenges he faced.

It was a commitment to a life of promise, of so much more to come. Immediately after the debut of the new JARS site and the publication of our Branden symposium, Michael began working on a prototype to finally revamp my website, which, he said, "embarrassed" him because he'd become so much more sophisticated in his software development. We had so many plans for so many projects. But, of course, life always seemed to get in the way of smooth transitions.

As my own health problems became more difficult to bear, he spent as many hours on the phone with me in , as I had spent on the phone with him in , except that now, we both knew each other so well that we could complete each other's sentences, anticipate each other's thoughts.

Thirty-five-plus years will do that. We last spoke in early September about the website and a few other issues; Lord knows, we still had our differences with regard to sports teams though I was enough of a good sport to congratulate him back in , when his Red Sox finally beat the Yankees, and went on to win their first World Series since We even had developed a few political differences.

But nothing ever affected our mutual love, admiration, and respect for one another. When I'd call him on the phone, he'd answer "Chris! There was always joy in his voice when he heard mine on the other end of the phone. And if I needed to cry because of a slew of unending medical or personal problems, the gentility with which he treated me was just the medicine I needed. We last corresponded on September 11th.

A few days passed by, and I hadn't heard back from him, so I wrote him again. Still, no reply. I figured he was busy or traveling, but it was unlike him not to reply to an email. So on the weekend of September 23rd, I called him on both his personal and business lines and left voice mail. It was comforting to hear his voice, even if it was automated, telling callers to leave a message. So I left messages. And still, no reply. She told me to give her a call. My heart dropped. I knew that this meant something had happened to Michael; maybe he was in a hospital.

Maybe something worse. I called her immediately. She told me that Michael had been pursuing new business in Detroit, a city where he had once worked for so many years. And then she told me that his body was found at a. Police are investigating the crime as a homicide. I have suffered many losses in my life. I lost my father suddenly to a massive coronary, when I was 12 years old.

I lost my Uncle Sam, who was like a second father to me, in , to prostate cancer. I lost my mother in , before my first two books were published, after five years of being one of her primary care-givers, as she struggled with the ravages of lung cancer and the effects of chemotherapy and radiation. I've lost many loving friends and relatives over the years, in circumstances that were painful and difficult.

But absolutely nothing could have possibly prepared me for the grief that I felt upon hearing that one of my best friends in the whole wide world had just lost his life by a wanton act of brutality. I had the phone in my hands, tears streaming down my face, stunned, shocked, horrified, feeling literally destroyed. My heart had not been broken; it had felt as if it had been completely shattered. I still can't quite wrap my mind around this event.

Michael's funeral is scheduled for Monday, October 2, in Waco, Texas. My health issues prevent me from attending his funeral. But my heart goes out to his family and friends, who so loved him, and who suffer with unimaginable grief. Both of these men were part of the JARS family from the very beginning, and deserve to be so honored. But they were both among the dearest human beings and friends I've ever known. To have lost both of them within two months of one another is unbelievable. But to have lost Michael in such a violent manner is just beyond tragic.

He didn't deserve this ending. The pain of this loss is almost unbearable. Rest in peace, dear friend. You made such a difference in the lives of so many people. And you made a difference in my life. I will honor you and remember you for the rest of my days.

And I will miss you until the day I die. Postscript October 2, : I posted a link to this tribute to Facebook, and was comforted by how many folks have shared the post and shared their condolences with me, both publicly and privately; I added this to my own Facebook thread:. Recently, I have been deeply critical of President Trump , especially with regard to his tepid response to the mini- Nuremberg-like rallies of neo-Nazis and white supremacists in places like Charlottesville, Virginia whether they have ACLU-approved permits or not. Trump, I have argued, is becoming more and more like a typical politician, rather than the "outsider" he claimed to be; it seems to me that he is not wanting to offend some of these groups, since they were among the constituencies that voted for him.

And the first goal of all elected politicians is to be re-elected; a politician can't achieve the latter by alienating core groups that were supportive of his or her election in the first place. When all the political pundits were predicting a Clinton victory, I was predicting a Trump victory back in July I saw that he was speaking to a large swath of American voters who felt disenfranchised and disillusioned, but I was especially critical of some of the proposals he was putting forth as solutions to the economic and political problems faced by the United States.

His high-tariff, protectionist agenda was certainly in keeping with the nineteenth-century roots of the Republican party, with its "pro-business" neomercantilist policies and support of banks and infrastructure back then, especially railroad subsidies. But I warned that Trump's proposed anti-immigration policies, which threatened to round up 11 million undocumented individuals, had all the makings of a police state in terms of its enforcement. Fortunately, though he's taken a tougher stance on immigration, I suspect that his proposals for walls and such may fall by the wayside.

And while I've been critical of the fact that Trump's hirings and firings in the Oval Office or the West Wing appear like weekly installments of " The Apprentice ," it is clear that despite Republican control of both Houses of Congress, 26 governorships, and 32 state legislatures, the GOP is so fractured that it is as much a demonstration of Madisonian "checks and balances" and frustrated ambitions, as if two or more parties were vying for power, as my old NYU politics professor, the late H.

As I have maintained, due to "this political fragmentation, the GOP can't seem to do one fundamental thing to alter the course that this country has been on for a hundred years or more I have never been comfortable with Trump's alliance with Steve Bannon , so his departure from the White House brings no tears to my eyes.

And I am not fond of the so-called " alt-right ", even though its stanceand Trump's original stanceagainst the neoconservative foreign policy that has dominated this country for too long was a breath of fresh air. Alas, now, even Trump's noninterventionist " instincts " against unending war are at odds with his newly declared policy shift in the Middle East.

No timetable has been offered for 'strategic' reasons for the end of the longest war in American history , but at least Trump retains the view that the United States should not be attempting to "rebuild" other countries in its own image. Gone is the " nation-building " agenda put forth by the neocons who ran George W.