Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Snarkiness

In the wake of the Black Little Mermaid casting “controversy” (now replaced by Area 51 memes!), guest Faith Liu returns to the podcast to discuss both this and other casting controversies from the perspective of a Hollywood writer. Faith and Aaron discuss what is meant by “colorblind casting,” and why Faith considers it a cop-out, the whitewashing phenomenon and why it’s different from other forms of ethnicity-changing casting decisions, why representation matters in media, and the merits of different representation strategies for race and gender. 

Faith Liu is a writer currently working in Hollywood. Among her other projects, she has worked on AMC’s “Better Call Saul,” and is currently working on Cinemax’s show “Warrior.”

The Asian Americana Podcast: http://www.asianamericana.com/about

Now You See It on Writing Women: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5asVUCGmmEE

Eric July with a libertarian perspective on race-changing (Content warning: language) 

Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRmnbtSs1fw

Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNZsuRltmDQ

In this episode, we have a chance to talk to Dr. Eric Larson, host of The Paradocs Podcast, about the healthcare crisis in America. As seen in the recent Democratic debates, it seems that the Healthcare system is going to become a major issue in the upcoming election, and everyone seems to have their own potential solution to the problem. The issue, of course, is that all these potential solutions have one alarming commonality; creating more government control. 

Dr. Larson outlines his views on the problems with the American healthcare system - especially the cronyism and market distortions that plague the health insurance industry. He then also goes over some of the issues with proposed solutions to this problem, both the suggestions of more government involvement and the idea that we should imitate the healthcare systems of other countries. Finally, we discuss some potential free-market, individual-focused solutions. 

Dr. Larson’s Podcast, The Paradocs, where he discusses issues like those brought up today (and so much more!) from a practitioner and patient-oriented perspective: https://theparadocs.com/

The Heritage Foundation’s 2019 Report on Healthcare and Public Policy: https://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/report/public-opinion-health-care-policy

An overview on Direct Primary Care, one of the solutions that Dr. Larson brought up in today’s episode: https://www.businessinsider.com/direct-primary-care-a-no-insurance-healthcare-model-2017-3

Aaron interviews Andrew Kern, founder of “The Principled Libertarian,” regarding his recent article about the dangers a standing army poses to liberty. Andrew explains some of the historical and economic context for why a standing army might not be all it’s cracked up to be in the popular consciousness, as well as bringing up some potential solutions to the problem. Aaron tries to bring up some popular objections to Andrew’s position, and Andrew responds to these criticisms with why he still, despite everything, thinks that reforming our foreign policy would involve getting rid of our standing military. Also discussed are militias, federalism and decentralization, and the dangers of conscription. 

Andrew’s original article: https://www.antiwar.com/blog/2019/06/11/the-standing-army-a-threat-to-peace/

Economist Robert Higgs on the dangers of a standing army: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2008/01/robert-higgs/libertarian-foreign-policy-in-the-hobbesian-crosshairs/

The Principled Libertarian on Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/ThePrincipledLibertarian/?ref=br_rs

Andrew’s website, The Principled Libertarian, where you can find more of his work: https://principledlibertarian.com/

One of the episodes of “The Dangerous History Podcast” that Andrew referenced during the episode: http://profcj.org/ep182/

The Militia Act of 1903: https://www.loc.gov/law/help/statutes-at-large/57th-congress/session-2/c57s2ch196.pdf

Jeffrey Rogers Hummel on the Dangers of Militias: https://mises.org/library/american-militia-and-origin-conscription-reassessment-0

Aaron and Austin discuss the recent congressional hearings regarding healing race relations by Federal reparations for slavery. Austin brings up some of the moral and practical concerns that the proposed financial reparations would pose (yes, Taxation is Theft is brought up) but also suggests other ways that the Federal Government could attempt to make reparations for slavery without a plaintiff/defendant dynamic. Aaron brings up social psychology’s Contact Hypothesis, as well as the notion of transitional justice, and how we need the latter to get to the first. Aaron and Austin discuss the specific utility that transitional justice possesses due to its individual and community-based focus, rather than it being an ineffective top-down solution, as any Federal solution is likely to be. 

The Chicago Principles on Post-Conflict Justice: http://www.concernedhistorians.org/content_files/file/to/213.pdf

The Case for Reparations by Ta-Nehisi Coates: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/

Coleman Hughes on Reparations: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/coleman-hughes-slavery-reparations-defense/

Ron Chimelis on Reparations: https://www.masslive.com/opinion/2019/06/reparations-wont-work-but-a-serious-conversation-might-viewpoint.html?outputType=amp

How Slavery Existed Far Beyond the Emancipation Proclamation: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/437573/blacks-were-enslaved-well-into-the-1960s

A Summary of the Reparation Hearings: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cory-booker-to-testify-before-house-panel-on-reparations.amp

Dr. Anthony Bradley on Transitional Justice: https://www.fathommag.com/stories/finally-healing-the-wounds-of-jim-crow

Aaron and guest Kevin Bell, one of Aaron’s fellow psychologists, discuss Jonathan Haidt and Moral Foundations Theory, a psychological model of how we define, experience, and interpret morality. They discuss each of the five basic moral foundations (with Liberty as a controversial sixth), how Moral Foundations Theory works with the idea of absolute morality, and how Moral Foundations Theory plays out in our modern political sphere, especially between conservatives and liberals. 

A website explaining the five/six moral foundations more in-depth: https://moralfoundations.org/

Jonathan Haidt’s website, which contains links to his articles, projects, and Ted Talks, including a wonderful series on capitalism: https://righteousmind.com/

We’ve talked about free speech a lot on this podcast, typically from the perspective of what you CAN do. This week, we discuss what you SHOULD do, as Aaron and Jason discuss Youtube’s recent demonetization of conservative shock jock Stephen Crowder. In the first half, Aaron raises the question of “it was a joke” being used as a defense for egregious behavior, and what psychology can tell us about the dangers of using humor as a mask for prejudice. Jason brings up the importance of defending the right to free speech, even when that right is misused, because of the importance of freedom of ideas in a functioning society. In the second half, Jason and Aaron discuss the massive power that platforms like Youtube have over their customers, and how big platforms have demonstrated irresponsibility regarding how, when, why, and who they choose to demonetize. Aaron discusses the empirical results and how they suggest that support for such demonetization is a function of authoritarianism and belief content, while Jason reminds us again how important it is that we engage with controversial and “dangerous” ideas in order to broaden our minds and test our beliefs. 

A piece from the Bulwark saying that just because we can defend Crowder doesn’t mean we should: https://thebulwark.com/just-because-you-can-defend-steven-crowder-doesnt-mean-you-have-to/

A Quillette article discussing the censoring of people like Crowder by big tech companies: https://quillette.com/2019/06/06/against-big-tech-viewpoint-discrimination/

Aaron and Austin discuss the recent allegations brought up against Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., which neither Aaron nor Austin accept as true, but provides an opportunity to reflect on how our culture views history and heroism. Austin brings up his frustration with the moral-absolutist perspective of history that he perceives as defining the popular narrative, where historical figures can either be angels or demons, rather than simple fallen, flawed humans. Aaron brings up the idea of viewing historical individuals as scientific objects, looking at the context in which they acted and what their accomplishments and flaws can tell us about the overarching narrative of history. Finally, both hosts discuss the broader idea of "erasing history," and whether or not challenging the established narrative surrounding historical figures and causes is truly erasing history or instead taking a more holistic view of it. 

The Standpoint article that goes over the accusations against Dr. King: https://standpointmag.co.uk/issues/june-2019/the-troubling-legacy-of-martin-luther-king/?fbclid=IwAR0maafEOEOvUHMqzpBy5jyjLXt2b1MZ10rIOoiqlYJnuXjuSDgJFzDp8mE

Matt Walsh's take on the MLK situation: https://www.dailywire.com/news/47833/walsh-martin-luther-king-jr-was-reportedly-abuser-matt-walsh?fbclid=IwAR0pBivie1doKjZRNdTeMNhdMzfAOxgm_ftH7VwqLhijcolckrBCCqjJR_A

One of the recent causes of the resurfacing confederate flag controversy: https://www.jacksonsun.com/story/news/local/2019/06/01/confederate-flags-humboldt-rose-hill-cemetery-grave-sites-memorial-day/1288253001/?fbclid=IwAR2dmRv9KmfcR9ssxukQlu3cJflkQCmeT2eL9BkdSvuckWXzAPGITdzvd0U

Aaron and Jason discuss Justin Amash’s recent controversial tweets regarding potentially impeaching President Trump. Aaron supports Justin Amash’s statements, and discusses the psychology of why the Republican party is so violently and hypocritically turning on Justin Amash for them. Jason more hesitantly sides with Amash, bringing up some issues he sees with his position, but also brings up some especially insane accusations being levied against Amash and shows how they don’t hold water. Aaron and Jason also discuss just what impeachment is and why it exists, as well as how the history of impeachment’s use has deviated from the Founders’ principles. 

Jacob Sullum’s piece for Reason as to why he agrees with Justin Amash on impeachment: https://reason.com/2019/05/22/justin-amash-is-right-about-impeachable-conduct/?fbclid=IwAR1Lul-vs7N0Ieao03q_19Kjo_sDRtYAMq2_NU9Cmu5PqyVHiooIfmlGvBY

The House Freedom Caucus’s response to Amash: https://reason.com/2019/05/21/house-freedom-caucus-too-busy-scolding-justin-amash-to-care-about-todays-bipartisan-budget-apocalypse/?fbclid=IwAR2M66eL6ktJDWYwV5XLBVRwxK4QYs_8AuTdwI6CDbQxhRUYzBPXnbt3ctU

The Bulwark’s take on why the Republican Party’s actions against Amash may hurt them: https://thebulwark.com/justin-amash-could-keep-trump-from-getting-re-elected/?fbclid=IwAR3zRKAcXXq19GjpCeydqiKHIVjCWhzI92Iq5APe-J2f_qGQ9ISK60j9rWA

An overview of Amash’s history of clashing with Trump’s agenda: https://reason.com/2019/05/22/11-other-times-justin-amash-crossed-swords-with-president-trump/?fbclid=IwAR1_y8ojz41CUFmWcFLUM4pqKo7uHp8trbc4l8K94SnMf4Ep0XEtWCOipnQ

Charlie Kirk’s Response to Justin Amash: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/charlie-kirk-rep-justin-amash-makes-no-sense-embracing-impeachment-of-trump

Aaron and Jenn decide to tackle a thoroughly non-controversial topic by discussing the finale of the small, tiny, and barely known show Game of Thrones, as well as the reasonable, rational, and thoughtful responses of its few fans feeling mild disappointment with the show’s ending. They discuss toxic fandom, and how the entitlement fans feel to a “satisfying” (read: getting what they wanted) ending can end up being harmful to the nature of art itself. Jenn also brings up how fans are becoming harder and harder to please, while Aaron brings up how the psychological phenomenon of group polarization is potentially responsible for how angry and entitled fans, both GoT and non-GoT related, are getting. 

Game of Thrones star Jacob Anderson on the fans’ remake petition: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/game-of-thrones-jacob-anderson-petition_n_5cdff038e4b00735a9176126?fbclid=IwAR2jvIpOd8QNmxa6HawTojFDttHgfHDdJkaEPEw99eJR5fOqxxnQGQauuEs

Rick Marshall’s take on the same for Digital Trends: https://www.digitaltrends.com/movies/game-of-thrones-petition-season-8/?fbclid=IwAR1uhUbvM6CNHIBnZRFQlVNy6uTce3SF4yJLANPEmDJ5P_9EWIrW1gvcW3s

The Slate article dissing the GoT finale: https://slate.com/culture/2019/05/game-of-thrones-ends-wanting-to-be-what-its-not.amp

The Slate article praising the GoT finale: https://slate.com/culture/2019/05/game-of-thrones-finale-review-it-was-good.amp

Reason Magazine’s Ilya Somin on Game of Thrones and Libertarianism: https://reason.com/2019/05/20/reflections-on-game-of-thrones/

FEE’s Brittany Hunter on Game of Thrones and its message on the dangers of power: https://fee.org/articles/game-of-thrones-shows-how-power-turns-heroes-into-monsters/?fbclid=IwAR2DL0sYL2P_NhgFJg7b8QyiLuMl9cplg4Y3Kz_Ow5BxfbvvM64YnMKKPOA

In our 40th episode, Aaron and Austin discuss learning from Aaron’s recent mistakes regarding a big company. Aaron talks about what happened, and how, even after some introspection, he still believes that government regulation of companies and corporations is not the solution. Austin then gives his answer to the infamous question “Are corporations people?” Austin argues that yes, they should be treated as people, but that contrary to popular belief, this will protect the little guy, rather than enabling corporate rule over society. Aaron and Austin wrestle through some of the intricacies and problems of corporations in our current political landscape, before Aaron points out that even if corporations may legally need to be treated like people, psychologically, they will behave very differently, and that whatever solution is reached will need to take this into account.