The Bob Zadek Show

UPDATE: A previous version of this post said that Austin Petersen is in favor of Trump's border wall, which he is not. Petersen's Twitter feed made reference to "building a wall around the welfare state," which is quite distinct and compatible with the libertarian position.

Back in 2015, U.S. Representative Mark Meadows took a major political risk to stand on his North Carolina constituents’ principles. He filed a motion to vacate the speaker chair held by John Boehner. Members of the House Freedom Caucus like Meadows have routinely been accused of dividing the Republican Party by holding fast to radical ideas, like cutting the $20 trillion deficit. Austin Petersen – a 2018 U.S. Senate candidate in Missouri – looks to join the ranks of Meadows, et al. in returning the party to fiscal sanity and constitutional principles. A libertarian until recently, Petersen earned his reputation as a provocative media producer and commentator, who gave Gary Johnson a run for his money in seeking the 2016 Libertarian Presidential nomination. His plan for resolving the GOP’s identity crisis invokes federalism – the principle that states reserve powers not granted to the Federal Government – and a flat tax to spur growth and shrink government. For this, he will no doubt be vilified by moderate Republicans as much as by his actual opponent, Senator Claire McCaskill. Petersen joins Bob this Sunday (9/24, 8-9am PT) to discuss his stance on these issues, along with those where he disagrees with the Libertarian Party, such as the non-aggression principle. You can follow Austin on Twitter at @AP4Liberty, and hear him live, this Sunday, on the show of ideas not attitude. Call in with your questions at (424) BOB-SHOW.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.bobzadek.com/subscribe

The year is 1710, and the Industrial Revolution is taking off in the West, creating the world's first middle class, and giving rise to prosperous colonial outposts on the American frontier. But the colonies' new-found wealth has its critics. Cotton Mather, a Puritan minister at Harvard University, laments that "Religion brought forth prosperity, and the daughter destroyed the mother." Puritanism's offshoots – the Protestant work ethic, and arguably, the prosperity gospel – still drive the biggest engine of material wealth the world has ever seen, and Harvard types are still suspicious of its fruit. Joseph Schumpeter, the Austrian economist behind the term "creative destruction," predicted that intellectuals – who don't labor or trade to earn their income – would undermine the capitalist system and shackle the entrepreneur. Michael Strong – an intellectual and an entrepreneur, as well as critic and champion of the market – is an exception. Strong has founded multiple innovative charter schools based on Montessori, Socratic and entrepreneurial principles, written books on education and entrepreneurship, and co-founded Conscious Capitalism, Inc., with Whole Foods CEO John Mackey to promote entrepreneurial solutions to world problems. Voices like Strong's are especially important as the West loses faith in the very ideas that brought about its prosperity – just when these ideas are needed most in the developing world. Michael joins guest hosts Charlie Deist (producer of The Bob Zadek Show) and Joe Quirk (President of The Seasteading Institute) to distinguish between valid critiques of historical capitalism and dogmatic repression of the entrepreneurial spirit. Strong will also propose his biggest idea yet for unleashing human potential – the startup city.

The year is 1710, and the Industrial Revolution is taking off in the West, creating the world's first middle class, and giving rise to prosperous colonial outposts on the American frontier. But the colonies' new-found wealth has its critics. Cotton Mather, a Puritan minister at Harvard University, laments that "Religion brought forth prosperity, and the daughter destroyed the mother." Puritanism's offshoots – the Protestant work ethic, and arguably, the prosperity gospel – still drive the biggest engine of material wealth the world has ever seen, and Harvard types are still suspicious of its fruit. Joseph Schumpeter, the Austrian economist behind the term "creative destruction," predicted that intellectuals – who don't labor or trade to earn their income – would undermine the capitalist system and shackle the entrepreneur. Michael Strong – an intellectual and an entrepreneur, as well as critic and champion of the market – is an exception. Strong has founded multiple innovative charter schools based on Montessori, Socratic and entrepreneurial principles, written books on education and entrepreneurship, and co-founded Conscious Capitalism, Inc., with Whole Foods CEO John Mackey to promote entrepreneurial solutions to world problems. Voices like Strong's are especially important as the West loses faith in the very ideas that brought about its prosperity – just when these ideas are needed most in the developing world. Michael joins guest hosts Charlie Deist (producer of The Bob Zadek Show) and Joe Quirk (President of The Seasteading Institute) to distinguish between valid critiques of historical capitalism and dogmatic repression of the entrepreneurial spirit. Strong will also propose his biggest idea yet for unleashing human potential – the startup city.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.bobzadek.com/subscribe

"Democracy is and must be a balancing of … the rights of minorities, and … the ability of the majority to have its way within the domain established as “political” by the constitution."

Nancy MacLean’s Democracy in Chains purports to be a bombshell of a book. Praised by NPR, her tale of how a southern academic single-handedly masterminded a plan to subvert American democracy is perfectly crafted to inflame and entertain progressive partisans. MacLean's conspiracy theory traces the “radical right’s stealth plan,” and insinuates the central bogeyman, Professor James M. Buchanan, saying “I can fight this [democracy] . . . I want to fight this.” The bad news for MacLean’s fawning reviewers is that Buchanan never said this. MacLean made it up (or at least made it sound like he said it). Vox.com delivers a death blow to the book’s premise of the shadowy origins of public choice economics – a common-sense branch of the dismal science that explains government failures in terms of bad incentives facing politicians and bureaucrats. Professor Michael Munger is both MacLean's colleague at Duke and an expert on public choice. He joins the show this Sunday to break down Buchanan’s real legacy – his Nobel-Prize winning contributions to economic science – and to help Bob understand the bizarre progressive reaction to his work. One of public choice’s central insights, and the theme of Bob’s new book, Secret Sauce, is that democracy must be limited by a constitution to protect the rights of minorities and individuals from infringement by the majority. Ironically, it is progressives who can best utilize Buchanan's insights to resist a power-grab by our democratically-elected president and congress. Don’t miss the autopsy of MacLean’s failed attempt at revisionist history (or “historical fiction,” to put it in Michael's more charitable terms).

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.bobzadek.com/subscribe

Lt. Col. Anthony Alfidi explains why the U.S. is having such a difficult time in Afghanistan.

Professor Richard Epstein notes that the so-called "Social Cost of Carbon" is a misleading concept, that ignores basic economics. Meanwhile, climate change skeptics are referred to given the ugly label "deniers" to associate them with Holocaust deniers. He joins Bob to discuss this tragedy of the chattering classes and clear the air on CO2 emissions.

A new "state of the climate" report from 13 Federal agencies says Americans may already be experiencing the impacts of climate change. Meanwhile, President Trump is doubling down in defense of his withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris climate accord. This may have been a prudent decision, but Trump's reasons for ignoring the accord's emissions reductions goals are based on the same flawed logic that he's used to promote protectionist trade policy. Namely, the President says he stands for "Pittsburgh, not Paris" – suggesting that what’s good for one (environmentally or economically) is bad for the other. In June, Professor Richard Epstein corrected Trump’s zero-sum mindset on trade. The Professor returns to the show with an economic analysis of why the Paris agreement is a bad deal. Bob will pose a thought experiment to highlight the core principles (or lack thereof) behind typical environmental regulations. What are our obligations to future generations when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions? Can we analyze environmental externalities within the framework of the libertarian non-aggression principle, or is the cause-and-effect too flimsy to inflict damages on the biggest emitters? Tune in for another edition of Advanced Topics in Libertarianism with "The Libertarian” himself.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.bobzadek.com/subscribe

Learn about this dark, forgotten chapter of American history.

Here’s a fun fact: there are more Chinese restaurants in the United States than there are McDonald’s, KFC’s and Burger Kings combined. No doubt this is partly a result of the dedicated entrepreneurship of Chinese immigrants and the American appetite for sweet and sour pork, but there is also a story of economic discrimination behind the flourishing of dim sum dens, chop suey canteens, and Szechuan saloons. Because of the prejudicial hiring environment at the turn of the 20th century, restaurants and launderettes were among the only sectors in which Chinese immigrants to the United States could get a foothold. Even as self-employed restaurateurs, Chinese Americans faced fierce resistance from unionized competition, who hid behind a smokescreen of moral panic and virulently racist propaganda. Gabriel “Jack” Chin is a legal scholar and Law Professor at UC Davis, where he teaches Immigration Law, Criminal Procedure, and Race and Law. Chin recently co-authored an eye-opening article titled “The War on Chinese Restaurants” for Cato’s quarterly journal Regulation. He documents this sorry episode in American history, in which states and local governments persistently discriminated against Chinese immigrants – including bans on white women entering their restaurants – even after the courts declared such policies unconstitutional. The market demand for Chinese food eventually won out, but only after two pieces of federal legislation excluding Chinese immigrants. Listen in and call in with your questions for Bob and Jack at any time during the show: (424) BOB-SHOW.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.bobzadek.com/subscribe