Today’s Utterly Moderate podcast episode focuses on the positives and negatives of President Trump’s first 100 days in office in this his second term. We are joined by Jim Swift, a longtime Republican and senior editor at The Bulwark.

If you aren’t familiar with the work that they do over at The Bulwark, it is an online publication founded by longtime Republicans from the now-defunct Weekly Standard magazine. They aim to provide good faith, intelligent, center-right and center-left perspectives on the news of the day in the form of articles, newsletters, podcasts, and YouTube videos. Above all they aim to defend America’s democracy, put country over party, and oppose tribalism and polarization—just like us here at the Connors Institute at Shippensburg University.

Enjoy the conversation!

-------------

Episode audio: "Air Background Corporate" by REDCVT (Free Music Archive), "Please Listen Carefully" by Jahzzar (Free Music Archive), "Last Dance" by Jahzzar (Free Music Archive), and “Happy Trails (To You)” by the Riders in the Sky (used with artist’s permission)

This episode of the Utterly Moderate Podcast deals with liberal bias in higher education and what to do about it, with a specific focus on the field of sociology.

According to Gallup, a strong majority (68%) of Americans believe that higher education is headed in the wrong direction. Barely more than a third (36%) of Americans express a high level of confidence in U.S. colleges and universities, down from 57% only a decade ago.

Americans give the following reasons for this low confidence: political agendas, wrong focus/teaching the wrong things, and cost/expenses.

Is this concern about “political agendas” warranted? Let’s first take a look at the politics of American professors.

In a 2016-2017 survey, UCLA researchers found a liberal-to-conservative (L:C) ratio of 5:1 among American college professors.

Other studies show a much larger gap. When Mitchell Langbert and Sean Stevens analyzed the voter registrations of college professors, for instance, they found a Democrat-to-Republican (D:R) ratio of 8:1. Among the same sample, they found the D:R political donor ratio to be a whopping 95:1.

A discrepancy between the public—American voters are about evenly split between Democrats and Republicans—and the professoriate is not a problem by itself. It becomes a problem if it impacts the teaching and research being done at American colleges.

On this count, it seems to have become a problem.

Many academics blur the line between activism and research, letting their leftist beliefs and values skew their work. This includes a number of big claims about systemic racism, police shootings, implicit bias, microaggressions, free markets, sexism, sex differences, transgender issues, single parenthood, IQ, and more. It is of course not the case that all or even most of the teaching and research happening on college campuses is corrupted by ideology. But far too many academics—perhaps most notably in fields in the humanities, social sciences, and education—make high-profile claims about social phenomena that go well beyond what the evidence will support, and these claims frequently align with leftwing ideologies. This can distort the public discourse, workplace practices, and social policy.

You can read a much deeper discussion of this in the book, The Poisoning of the American Mind, as well as the documentary of the same name.

On this podcast episode, we discuss liberal bias in higher education, why it is a problem, and what we might do about it. Enjoy!

-------------

-------------

Episode Audio:

America is separating into two nations with two different experiences of reality itself: Red America and Blue America.

As Robert Talisse, Vanderbilt University political theorist and today’s Utterly Moderate podcast guest, writes:

“[O]ur everyday social environments are increasingly segregated along partisan lines. It is no exaggeration to say that in the United States today, opposing partisans live in different social worlds. For example, liberals and conservatives live in different kinds of neighborhoods, shop at different stores, purchase different products, drive different vehicles, express different aesthetic preferences, work in different occupations, and form different kinds of family groups. They eat different foods. They understand words differently and even exhibit different patterns of pronunciation. The familiar narrative of ‘red’ and ‘blue’ states goes far deeper than geography. In the United States today, political affiliation is more of a lifestyle than an outlook on the purposes of government.”

Utterly Moderate host Lawrence Eppard has written about similar phenomena: the increasingly distinct epistemologies of left and right.

On this episode of Utterly Moderate, Eppard and Talisse discuss the troubling state of polarization in America today, and how each of us might better ourselves in order to better our democracy. Enjoy!

-------------

-------------

Episode Audio:

From all of us at the Connors Institute at Shippensburg University, we thank you for listening and hope you have a truly Happy Thanksgiving!

Wherever you spend the holiday and whoever you spend it with, we hope you have lots to be thankful for and good people to be thankful with.

On this episode of the Utterly Moderate Podcast, social scientist Mark Rank is here to discuss his newest book, The Random Factor: How Chance and Luck Profoundly Shape Our Lives and the World around Us.

We hope you enjoy this conversation during a time that you are counting your blessings—and your lucky stars!

Don't forget to join our FREE SUBSTACK!

-------------

-------------

Episode Audio:

Before we begin, don't forget to check out Lawrence Eppard's new book, The Poisoning of the American Mind, and to read the newest piece in the Connors Journal on single parenthood in the U.S.

Now on to the podcast. . . 

Kimberly Wehle, a constitutional law expert at the University of Baltimore's School of Law, joins the Utterly Moderate Podcast to discuss her new book,  Pardon Power: How the Pardon Power System Works—and Why.

Wehle and host Lawrence Eppard discuss a variety of topics, including:

Enjoy the conversation and please consider JOINING OUR MAILING LIST!

-------------

-------------

Episode Audio:

Single parenthood has risen dramatically in the United States over time. Today, 34% of all children live in a single parent household, up from 9% in 1960.

There are regrettable negative consequences of these statistics, as The Bulwark’s Mona Charen notes:

“[C]hildren in mother-only homes are five times more likely to live in poverty than children with two parents. And children in father-only homes were twice as likely to be poor as those in married-couple homes. Poverty is not conducive to thriving, but even for kids who are not poor, those who grow up with only one parent fare worse than others on everything from school to work to trouble with the law. And the consequences of fatherlessness are more dire for boys than girls. Boys raised without fathers and/or without good adult male influences in their lives are less likely to attend college, be employed as adults, or remain drug-free.”

And as the Manhattan Institute’s Kay Hymowitz writes:

“Kids in single-parent homes have lower educational achievement, commit more crime, and suffer more emotional problems, even when controlling for parental income and education. Not only do young men and women from intact families (regardless of race and ethnicity) get more education and earn higher earnings than those raised with single mothers; they also do better than children who have a stepparent at home. Children growing up in an area where single-parent families are the norm have less of a chance of upward mobility than a child who lives where married-couple families dominate (regardless of whether that child lives with a single parent or with married parents). The evidence that the prevalence of single-parent households poses risks to individual children and communities goes on and on.”

There are large variations in single parenthood rates by race/ethnicity, with 63% of Black children, 50% of Indigenous children, 42% of Latino children, 24% of non-Hispanic White children, and 16% of Asian American children living in single parent households.

University of Maryland economist Melissa Kearney has published important research on how family structure impacts American children, including her new book, The Two Parent Privilege: How Americans Stopped Getting Married and Started Falling Behind:

“The most recent research, much of which incorporates advanced statistical techniques, continues to show that children who are raised in single-mother households tend to have lower levels of completed education and lower levels of income as adults, even after statistically accounting for observable demographic characteristics (for example, where the family lives or the mother’s level of education)” (p. 52).

In Table 1, Kearney shows how children of single parents differ in their life chances compared with children of married parents. For children of college-educated mothers, for instance, 57.0% have a college degree by age 25 if their mother was married, but only 28.6% of those raised with a college educated single mother.  

In Figure 1 you can see, as Mona Charen alluded to, the strong correlation between the dominant family structure in a neighborhood and the upward mobility rate of children raised there.

Even for children who themselves are raised in married parent households, they are statistically more likely to struggle in adulthood if they are raised in a community where there is widespread single parenthood. If you want to dive deeper into this subject, this paper from the Connors Institute has got you covered.

Table 2 shows the large variations in poverty rates between American families with different structures. Taken together, all of these data strongly suggest that parents really matter.

We discuss rising single parenthood and its consequences for children on the most recent episode of the Utterly Moderate Podcast.

Joining us in this discussion is Kay Hymowitz, a research fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor of City Journal. She writes not only on family issues and childhood, but also poverty and cultural change in America.

Hymowitz is the author of the books The New Brooklyn: What It Takes to Bring a City Back (2017), Manning Up: How the Rise of Women Has Turned Men into Boys (2011), Marriage and Caste in America: Separate and Unequal Families in a Post-Marital Age (2006), and Liberation’s Children: Parents and Kids in a Postmodern Age (2004), among others.

Don't forget to sign up for our FREE NEWSLETTER!

-------------

-------------

Episode Audio:

On this episode of the Utterly Moderate Podcast, the authors of the brand new book, The Poisoning of the American Mind, talk about the book and its implications for America. 

So what is their argument?

A significant amount of research suggests that most people seek out news and information sources that mirror their worldviews, avoid ones that don’t, and interpret information using cognitive filters that force an alignment with what they already believe. As social psychologist David Dunning writes, “Each of us possesses certain foundational beliefs—narratives about the self, ideas about the social order—that essentially cannot be violated. . . And any information that we glean from the world is amended, distorted, diminished, or forgotten in order to make sure that these sacrosanct beliefs remain whole and unharmed.” 

As they document in their brand new book and their free online documentary of the same name, the evidence suggests that this problem afflicts both conservative and liberal Americans.

Conservative Americans tend to place their trust in very few sources of news and information, and those sources tend to be low-quality, like the openly partisan Fox News. Conservatives also tend to cocoon themselves within a partisan media ecosystem of like-minded low-quality outlets, an “internally coherent, relatively insulated knowledge community, reinforcing the shared worldview of readers and shielding them from journalism that challenge[s] it.” 

Liberal Americans are more likely than conservatives to trust legitimate journalistic outlets, but those sources often unknowingly spread misleading claims that they truly believe are backed by “the science.” Why do they believe this? Sometimes it’s because the outlet doesn’t fully grasp the preponderance of the evidence on the issue at hand. But too often it is because irresponsible experts, who news outlets should be able to trust, said “the science” backed their claims when it didn’t.

Consider the following statements that many on the left assume are backed by “the science”:

None of these claims are backed by strong evidence. At best, the research is mixed, not clearly pointing in one direction or the other. At worst, the evidence supports the opposite conclusion. But many on the left believe these statements are backed by “the science” because prominent academics have made big, irresponsible claims that go far beyond what the preponderance of the evidence supports. 

In Poisoning, the authors give equal attention to epistemic failings on both sides. They believe the evidence shows that Americans across the political spectrum fall for questionable assertions from sources that they believe to be trustworthy and authoritative, sources which often present the information in a manner that appeals to the sacred beliefs of consumers’ in-groups. 

They make no assertions about which side’s epistemic failings are “worse” due to their honest inability to quantify such a thing—and they are not sure it matters as much as some may think. Both red and blue America face epistemic crises that act like serious illnesses that sicken American society—even if you could measure which one makes us feel “worse” as a nation, the reality is that either one would make our country seriously ill, and experiencing them simultaneously is a nightmare.

In Poisoning the authors discuss not only the misleading information that is hurting American, but a variety of possible ideas for how to get ourselves out of this mess.

You can buy the book, watch the free documentary, and read the other work they have published on this topic.

And of course don’t forget to sign up for our FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTER in just one click!

-------------

-------------

Episode Audio:

We want to express our deepest sympathies and condolences to the family of Corey Comperatore. He was killed during the attempted assassination of former President Trump. 

According to NBC Philadelphia, Comperatore raised two daughters with his high school sweetheart and spent his final moments shielding his family that he loved so much from the gunfire.

May he rest in peace. His family is in our prayers.

We also want to wish a quick recovery to those who were injured in the assassination attempt, including former president Donald Trump and rally attendees David Dutch and James Copenhaver.

And lastly our condolences to all others impacted by this political violence.

Violence has absolutely no place in a civilized society.

Given how much our democracy and country have been through, we thought on this episode of the Utterly Moderate Podcast we would lighten things up a bit and talk about something that perhaps we all might have some positive feelings about: one of our founding fathers. 

It is July after all, America’s month of celebrating our independence.

In the spirit of July and America and trying to find some positivity right now, on this episode we bring you a replay of our conversation with George Washington University historian Denver Brunsman. He previously joined the show to share his insights on the life and career of George Washington, as well as his general reflections on the study of history and its place in the modern university. 

Enjoy the conversation and don’t forget to sign up for our free email newsletter in one click!

-------------

-------------

Episode Audio:

On this episode of the Utterly Moderate Podcast, host Lawrence Eppard and Connors Institute co-director Jacob Mackey discuss techniques and shortcuts that you can use to spot real expertise in a world where people with expert credentials are sometimes frauds and where people without expert credentials are often very knowledgeable. They also discuss crucial techniques for examining your personal biases and the limits of your own knowledge.

This conversation is based on two really good readings, and we hope you will not only listen to this episode but go to these websites and read these short but very illuminating pieces:

Enjoy the episode! And PLEASE subscribe to our newsletter in just one click!

-------------

-------------

Episode Audio:

Before we talk about this episode, we hope you didn’t miss the latest research from the Connors Institute on the gender pay gap. Check it out now!

We talk quite a bit on this podcast about some of the things that many liberal and conservative Americans believe that just ain’t so.

In fact, we just released a free online documentary about this titled The Poisoning of the American Mind. 

On this episode of the Utterly Moderate Podcast we are joined by Wilfred Reilly, political scientist at Kentucky State University, to talk about misleading claims that have made their way into educational curricula in the U.S. Friend of the show Jacob Mackey joins the conversation as a special guest cohost.

Our guest, Dr. Reilly, is the author of several books, two of which are particularly informative in this discussion:

Enjoy the conversation, and don’t forget to subscribe in just one click to our FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTER!

-------------------

-------------------

Episode Audio: