Acton Line

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020 has brought with it enormous costs. These include, first and foremost, an enormous cost in the terms of human life, with more than 178,000 deaths from the coronavirus in the United States alone, and at least 814,000 deaths worldwide, as of late August 2020. But also, with the pandemic have come significant economic costs, fiscal costs, and personal costs to our happiness and quality of life.

Why is living under quarantine so hard for people? In large part it’s because, prior to the pandemic, many people have enjoyed living under a system of mostly-free markets. But when we’re robbed of our ability to work in a lockdown, we’re also robbed of part of what comprises our innate human dignity, as this pandemic takes a toll not only in the loss of human life but in the loss of community.

What can we learn from the economic cost of the coronavirus pandemic? How can economics and public choice theory help us better understand the actions of political leaders during this time? And how can entrepreneurship allowed for under free market systems innovate solutions to these problems?

In this episode, Acton’s managing director of programs Stephen Barrows speaks with Dr. David Hebert, chair of the economics department and associate professor of economics at Aquinas College, about the economics of the quarantines and lock-downs in the Covid-19.

Dr. David Hebert at Aquinas College

Why quarantine is no fun, part 1 (video) - Dr. David Hebert

Why quarantine is no fun, part 2 (video) - Dr. David Hebert

Pen and Paper Economics

Creativity will kill COVID-19 - Anne Rathbone Bradley

Rev. Robert Sirico on the church's response to COVID-19 - Acton Line

A free-market agenda for rebuilding from the coronavirus - Henrik Rasmussen

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From accusations of embracing socialism leveled at the Obama administration by the Tea Party movement to the rise of self-proclaimed democratic socialist Bernie Sanders as the second highest vote-getter in the 2016 and 2020 Democratic Party primaries, socialism has been an emerging movement and topic of conversation in the American body politic.

While polling data suggests that socialism is generally still viewed far less favorably than capitalism or free markets overall, the younger Millennial and Gen Z generations are more embracing of socialism than generations before. Similarly, those younger generations are more likely than their forbearers to be among the Nones: those who proclaim no religious affiliation and no religious or spiritual beliefs.

Is socialism filling in for the human religious impulse, allowing people to feel a part of something larger than themselves without embracing the concepts of God and church?

On this episode, Kevin Williamson, roving correspondent for National Review and author of the 2010 book, “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism,” discusses the emergence of socialism in American politics and the spiritual role it seems to play now, and has historically played, for its proponents.

Kevin Williamson at National Review

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism - Kevin Williamson

The Celestial Afterlife of Karl Marx - Kevin Williamson

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s crass Marxist materialism - Dan Hugger

The key to understanding Bernie Sanders - Rev. Ben Johnson

Bruce Ashford: Marxism is a false religion (video) - Rev. Ben Johnson

There is no 'Catholic case for communism' - Rev. Ben Johnson

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The conservative movement in America has always been evolving. From the old right of the progressive era to the conservative intellectual movement identified with William F. Buckley Jr. and National Review to the Reagan revolution to today, the political right in America has changed with the challenges it has faced and with the context of the times in which it has existed.

The current iteration of the conservative movement is today more nationalist, more populist and more skeptical, if not opposed, to classical liberalism, liberal institutions and free markets than ever before – at times even expressing doubt or skepticism about the American founding itself.

How did the conservative movement get here? 

On the episode, Matthew Continetti, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, discusses the history of the American conservative movement, its evolution into being dominated by nationalism and populism, and where it may be headed in the future.

Matthew Continetti at the American Enterprise Institute

Making Sense of the New American Right - Matthew Continetti

The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America Since 1945 - George Nash

A healthy conservative nationalism? Not without classical liberalism - Joseph Sunde

The biggest problems of national conservatism - Acton Line

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since debuting in the New York Times Magazine on August 14, 2019, the 1619 Project has ignited a debate about American history, the founding of the country and the legacy emanating from the nation’s history with chattel slavery.

The project’s creator and editor, Nikole Hannah-Jones, has described the project as seeking to place “the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of our national narrative.” Components of a related school curriculum have been adopted in major cities like Chicago, Washington, D.C., and Buffalo, New York. For her work on the project, Hannah-Jones was awarded the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary.

But the project has also come in for heavy criticism from historians and economists of all political and philosophical persuasions for inaccuracies in "matters of verifiable fact” in history and economics. In response to these critics, Hannah-Jones just recently declared the project not a work history, but instead a work of journalism.

One of the project’s most frequent critics is Phil Magness, Senior Research Fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research.

On this episode, Phil Magness discusses the objectives of the 1619 project, the economic history of slavery, the project’s historical errors and why many Americans seem to have such a difficult time accepting the complicated totality of our own history.

Phillip W. Magness at the American Institute for Economic Research

The 1619 Project - The New York Times Magazine

The 1619 Project: A Critique - Phil Magness

Public Schools Are Teaching The 1619 Project in Class, Despite Concerns From Historians - Reason

Karl Marx: Intellectual father of the 1619 Project? - Rev. Ben Johnson

The 1619 Projection: 3 lies Pulitzer should not reward - Rev. Ben Johnson

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Richard Baxter, the English Puritan churchman and theologian, was perhaps one of most prolific English language author in the seventeenth century. His writings were wide ranging from doctrinal theology to devotional classics. And his practical theology was a model of German sociologist Max Weber’s understanding of the protestant work ethic.

Baxter’s worldly aestheticism was focused on service to others across sectarian divides. His book, How to Do Good to Many: The Public Good is the Christian’s Life, offers practical guidance to lay people grounded in Christian faith.

This classic, updated for modern readers by Jordan Ballor, remains a thought provoking and inspirational meditation on Paul’s admonition to, “…do good to all people…” (Gal. 6:10)

Acton’s Dan Hugger talks with Jordan Ballor, senior research fellow and director of publishing at the Acton Institute, about Baxter’s life and work, and the new updated edition of How to Do Good to Many.

How to Do Good to Many: The Public Good Is the Christian’s Life

How to do Good to Many (1682)

Selections from How to Do Good to Many (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3)

Maslow, material needs, and the gospel

The Redemption and Restoration of Man in the Thought of Richard Baxter

The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism

How Groundhog Day changed my life

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since 2006, economist Russ Roberts – the John and Jean De Nault Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution – has hosted the podcast EconTalk, a weekly deep conversation with economists and thinkers from other disciplines on ideas related both directly and indirectly to economics and the economic way of thinking.

Economics is a powerful analytic tool which can empower us to choose more wisely as both individuals and groups. Such tools, however, should not be confused as either ends in themselves or the measure of human values.

Religion is, like economics, embedded in the fabric of life itself. Its neglect, and the neglect of other humanistic values in the face of unprecedented prosperity, poses new challenges to animate our lives of affluence with purpose.

Acton’s Dan Hugger talks with Russ Roberts about the intersection of faith and economics, and how Roberts’ own Jewish faith has influenced his life and work.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The latest term of the Supreme Court, which wrapped up on July 8th, saw the Court decide several cases with major implications for religious liberty. While the outcomes of Espinoza v. Montana, Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania have been largely viewed as victories for advocates of expanding religious liberty in America, the court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch and holding that an employer who fires an individual for being gay or transgender violates Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, has been viewed as potentially having adverse consequences for the cause of religious liberty.

What are we to make of these latest developments in the Supreme Court’s religious liberty jurisprudence?

David French – Senior Editor at The Dispatch and a former constitutional litigator with Alliance Defending Freedom and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education – joins us to discuss the current status of religious liberty, both in the courts and in the culture writ large.

Espinoza v. Montana: A victory for school choice – but for how long? - Rev. Ben Johnson

Little Sisters, big victories - Rev. Ben Johnson

The Case for Religious Liberty Is More Compelling than the Case for Christian Power - David French

Whatever Happened to Baby Blaine? - David French & Sarah Isgur

Little Sisters 2: Vacated and Remanded - David French & Sarah Isgur

The Supreme Court Tries to Settle the Religious Liberty Culture War - David French

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week we’re rebroadcasting a conversation about religious liberty with Ryan T. Anderson, the William E. Simon senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, that was first released on the podcast in April of 2015. In the intervening five years since we first aired this episode, much has changed in our conversations on religious liberty – but much is still the same.

While the focus is no longer on Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act as it was in 2015, religious liberty is front and center this term at the Supreme Court, which major cases impacting American’s right to free exercise of religion in Bostock v. Clayton County, Espinoza v. Montana, Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania and Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru. We’ll be bringing you more converge of these important cases on the podcast in the coming weeks.

In this episode, Acton’s Marc Vander Maas talks with Ryan Anderson about what we mean when we talk about religious liberty – if it’s restricted merely to the freedom to worship or if the correct understanding is more expansive than that.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.