20 Burst results for "John Stuart"

Andrew Sullivan: The Problem With Jon Stewart

Mark Levin

01:58 min | 4 months ago

Andrew Sullivan: The Problem With Jon Stewart

"I wish I could but I can't and that is read this entire piece written by Andrew Sullivan on this site the weekly dish It is a fantastic piece And mister producer let's link to it if we would The problem with Jon Stewart how painfully cringingly super woke must a comedian get to stay relevant And he appeared on this Jon Stewart show I don't even know where the hell it is I guess some podcast maybe on the Internet And he was set up in John Stuart has just discovered his Or racism Not him of course the rest of us So he promotes this entire ideology You know he probably read one or two of the books put out there By the race hustlers But I have to say Andrew Sullivan's response is extremely thoughtful and very comprehensive And I will touch on some of it here I'll move on from the way he was set up And to this on the race question Stewart has decided to go way past even Robin Deangelo if you read my book American Marxism you know she's a cook And his passionate anti whiteness is opening monologue was intoned at times in a somber tone As if you were delivering hard truce that only bigots could disagree with Yaga that no one in America had been prepared to have an honest discussion about race until the reckoning of 2020 He also suggested that nothing had been done by whites to support African Americans from 1619 Yeah he went there until now The most obvious solution reparations was he implied somehow absurdly taboo

Jon Stewart Andrew Sullivan John Stuart Robin Deangelo Stewart Yaga America
Trevor Noah Made Anti-Semitic Jokes Prior to Hosting 'The Daily Show'

Mark Levin

01:29 min | 6 months ago

Trevor Noah Made Anti-Semitic Jokes Prior to Hosting 'The Daily Show'

"Trevor Noah he's the host of the show calls himself a comedian daily shows on Comedy Central which means it's a comedy show and The Daily Show is in fact ruined comedy Blame Jon Stewart because he took himself so seriously Because he had these people who did you know them were more young people get their news from The Daily Show than from cable news well actually I'd be okay with that because cable news is a cesspool But that went to John Stuart's head and went to all these other comedian centers like oh we're important now We're important now So daily shows Trevor Noah yesterday He attacks Joe Rogan These are jokes that Joe Rogan made 11 years ago They're stupid their offensive nothing I would say That's not the point here The point is this is Trevor Noah going after Rogan for things he said 11 years ago Now let me take you back to 2015 when Trevor Noah was named the new host of The Daily Show Jokes that he made 6 years before in 2009 only 6 years before he got the gig I'm going to tell you some of his jokes Here's Trevor Noah's joke here Almost bumped a Jewish kid crossing the road He didn't look before crossing but I still would have felt so bad in my German car You know because Germans killing Jewish children is funny Some of these jokes I can't say on the air But they're almost all directed at Jewish people

Trevor Noah The Daily Show Joe Rogan Comedy Central Jon Stewart John Stuart The Daily Show Jokes Rogan
Trevor Noah: Moderna Chief Not a Source You Should Trust

The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated

02:01 min | 8 months ago

Trevor Noah: Moderna Chief Not a Source You Should Trust

"Day. Trevor, Noah gets the dummy today. Now I've long said, you take Bill Mars earpiece off. You take Trevor Noah's earpiece off. John Stuart any of them. Gobert, you put them in a room with a smart man or woman who's well read, and you'll let him talk for two hours. There will be nothing left but ribbons of them. There will be cut to pieces. By anyone who knows their way around a set of facts and how to argue. They're not that bad. They're not smart. They're funny, and they have good timing, they're good comics. But Trevor Noah is a moron. Cut number 21. And while most of the world is willing to wait and see, at least one person feels comfortable about making predictions, the Moderna CEO told the Financial Times he expects the existing vaccines to be less effective against the new variant of COVID. I think it's going to be a material drop. This was on vaccine efficacy. I just don't know how much because we still need to wait for the data, but all the scientists I've spoken to are saying this is not going to be good. So on the one hand, almost all the only cron cases have been mild so far. But on the other hand, the guy who stands to gain millions of dollars from new vaccines says we need new vaccines. Huh. If we don't make a new vaccine, this disease could be with us Ferrari. I mean forever. Sorry, I was thinking of something else. Now, look, I'm not saying that the CEO of Moderna is lying. I'm not saying that at all. I'm just saying, I don't think he's the most objective source on this topic, you know? I'll wait to hear what neutral experts say about a new vaccine. People like public health officials or the CEO of Johnson & Johnson. I mean, he's got nothing a game 'cause nobody's gonna buy his vaccines either way, so I trust him. And also, if we do need a new vaccine for this new variant, it's not a big deal. All right, people. I see people online being like, we're going to get a new shot every year. There's no way. Yeah, yeah, you know what? Maybe to not die, you might need to take 15 minutes out of your year.

Trevor Noah Bill Mars Gobert The Financial Times Moderna John Stuart Trevor Noah Ferrari Johnson & Johnson
"john stuart" Discussed on The Book Review

The Book Review

08:02 min | 9 months ago

"john stuart" Discussed on The Book Review

"John's point is that denies something, not just in our basic right of expression and the ability to speak. But the ability in a democracy to hear all arguments to determine for ourselves as citizens, what we think and to make informed opinions that puts deliberation at the center of not just democracy, but also political freedom. And so that to me is a huge part of what the volume is about. Religious freedom volume to the idea that yes, you're free to practice your religion, but you're also free to not have the government impose its idea of religion on you, whether that be through taxation or through laws that resemble a Christian republic as the constitution puts it not only is there a ban on establishment, but there's a ban on laws that respect an establishment of religion and respect there means relate to. So it's a multi dimensional idea of liberty and centered around the idea, not just as you say exactly not of just freedom from intervention, but also what it means to be free in a democracy. That sounds so lovely and foreign right now. That's the idea of the volume. I want to talk about the intended reader because earlier you said something about families disagreeing. And this episode will be dropping right after Thanksgiving. When people are probably immersed in arguing with their families, you know, extended and immediate and otherwise, I'm curious, who is your intended reader here? Did you think of it primarily as students? Did you think of this as something to be assigned in classes? I think that's part of it. I certainly would hope that professors would use this. But really, I think if we're going to continue on as a democracy and I don't think that as we learn about January 6th, this is hyperbole. I think that we are under threat. When it comes to a very different idea of what government is supposed to look like, that's prevailing in much of the public right now. And how are we to combat it? I think in order to really take seriously the idea that we're going to defend liberty in any defensible robust sense, we have to know what it is. And that means that citizens have to think about these things. So I don't know if it's a pie in the sky, ambition, you know, some of these volumes actually are doing quite well, but my hope is that this is going to have a wide readership in America that it will be part of a national conversation. I'd like to see a common set of readings and thinking about democracy for the nation, not just for students who are in college or in high school. You tried to get a variety of perspectives in each of these books, which again is unusual for our times. How do you balance that with you are furthering an argument at the same time? Absolutely. I think that there is within these ideas of democracy and liberty a really legitimate and robust discussion about how to balance equality and free speech, which is a lot of the discussion or a lot of the debate as I put it in the free speech volume, for instance. The way to think about the limits on religious freedom when it comes to the establishment of religion. For instance, the question of the kind of prayer of any that we should allow in town meetings or in public spaces. Those are all to me arguments that a healthy democracy discusses, but at the same time, a healthy democracy has to leave out certain views and I think challenge them directly. So I do in the volume in the introduction, not include fascistic viewpoints, for instance, or a white nationalist viewpoints. And those do have a role in American history certainly they played a prevalent role not just at points in early 20th century in the 19th century when we're talking about white supremacy in 18th century, of course. But I don't think those are views that we should think of as within the realm of reasonable disagreement within democracy. At this moment, free speech feels like it's coming under threat from all sides all corners from the right from the left from people who would probably consider themselves politically conservative to those who would consider themselves politically progressive. How do you capture that in this book? The pieces that you include are obviously older. Some of them obviously from the constitutional period. There are some more recent ones, including The New York Times company versus Sullivan from 1964. Did you try to get at that interesting moment through these earlier pieces? Exactly. And as you say, it really speaks to the news that we're seeing every day and debates going on about free speech right now. Out of a belief that if you look at John Stuart mill, for instance, who I would say anchors the volume that he gives us a way of thinking about free speech that's neither right nor left, and his argument is maybe too optimistic for our time, but I think we have to begin with that. And it suggests that deliberation and discussion, robust discussion, robust reasoning isn't just a good thing, but that ultimately it will result in the truth that it will result in a society that is worth preserving and that we should trust in free speech if it's accompanied by. And this is essential and this ties into the volumes too. Robust education, the ability not just to read and think, but to deliberate. And I think that is a great beginning for our time in thinking about it. That free speech isn't just about saying what you want. It's not a free for all. It's supposed to serve a purpose in democracy. Another piece that we have here that really hasn't been published. I don't think since 1968 is Alexander mickel John's piece about democracy that I mentioned earlier also providing a very not just a defensive deliberation, but again, pointing out its role in democracy, the ability to hear all arguments, not just to make all arguments. And then when you look at the case law, I think in the United States, we have such a robust case law and protecting free speech notably. I know I'm on a times podcast, so I'm not trying to kiss up, but that can't go ahead. That's right. Times versus Sullivan, which is, of course, not just about The New York Times, but it's about the rights of the civil rights movement, defenders of Martin Luther King, to speak in a way that might involve small errors and not be sued into oblivion. And that victory really preserved not just the ability of The New York Times to do its job, but the civil rights movement to carry on and criticizing southern segregationists. Fundamental for democracy to allow for that kind of robust free speech. But yet, on the other hand, I include voices that see contemporary American a different way, especially when it comes to hate speech to think about within democracy, the idea that look, if mill is wrong and far from truth prevailing, if white supremacy prevails, then the whole thing is lost. And so maybe we should look to the rest of the world, which doesn't have quite the same kind of protections. The U.S. has the most protective free speech in the world. The rest of the world limits hate speech, limits Holocaust denial limits certain kinds of racist speech. And so we have voices making that point here. And I think of that as an argument from within democracy, and it leaves room two for a third view of you that I favor, which is, look, it's possible to both protect all viewpoints from criminalization, but also have a government that's devoted to promoting certain ideals, the idea of equality under law, anti white supremacy, and that can be done not just through putting people in prison, but through, and this, again, ties into the volume, but through education and through promulgating the idea of deliberation. You mentioned hate speech and the discussion about whether hate speech is the same as violence, or if it incites violence is obviously a subject conversation that's been raging for the last few years. The other one with regard to free speech is just misinformation. And I wonder if any of the selections that you have in here get at that. If blatant falsehoods.

versus Sullivan The New York Times U.S. Alexander mickel John John John Stuart mill Martin Luther King Sullivan
"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

01:40 min | 11 months ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"As i should have aspired to this complete union of our lives at anytime in the course of my existence at which it had been practicable. I as much as my wife would far. Rather have foregone that privilege forever than have oded to premature death of one for whom i had the sincerest respect and she the strongest faction that event however having taken place in july eighteen forty nine. It was granted to me to derive from that evil. My own greatest good but adding to the partnership thought feeling and writing which had long existed a partnership of our entire existence for seven and a half years. That blessing was mind for seven and a half. Only i can say nothing which could describe even in the faintest manner what that loss was and it is but because i know that she would have wished it. I endeavoured to make the best of what laugh. I have left and to work on for her purposes with such diminished straight as can be derived from thoughts off her and communion with her memory..

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

05:24 min | 11 months ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"Was doubtless help as well as encouragement to be derived from one who had arrived at many of the same results by steady and reasoning and in the rapidity of her intellectual growth. Her mental activity which converted everything into knowledge doubtless drew from me as it did from other sources many of its materials when i go even intellectually to her is in its detail almost infinite of its general character few words will give some though a very imperfect idea with those who like all the best and wisest of mankind are dissatisfied with human life as it is and his feelings are wholly identified with its radical amendment. There are two main regions of thought. One is the region of ultimate aims the constituent elements of the highest realizable ideal of human life. The other is that of the immediately useful and practically attainable in both these departments. I have acquired more from her teaching than from all other sources taken together and to say truth. It is in these. Two extremes principally that real certainty lies my own strength lay wholly in the uncertain and slippery intermediate region that of theory or moral and political science respecting the conclusions of which in any of the forms. In which i have received originated them whether as political economy analytic psychology logic philosophy of history or anything else it is not the least of my intellectual obligations to her that have derived from her a wise skepticism which while it has not hindered me from following out to honest exercise of my thinking faculties to whatever conclusion might result from. It has put me on my guard against holding or announcing these conclusions with a degree of confidence which the nature of such speculation does not warrant and has kept my mind not only open to admit but prompt to welcome an eager to seek even on the questions on which i have. Most meditated any prospect of clear perceptions and better evidence. I have often received praise which end my own right. I only partially deserve for the greater practicality which is supposed to be found in my writings compared with those of most thinkers who have been equally addicted to large generalizations. The writings in which this quality has been observed. Were not the work of one mind. But of the fusion of two one of them as preeminently practical in its judgments and perceptions of things present as it was high and bold in its anticipations for a remote futurity at the present period however this influence was only one among many which were helping to shape the character of my future development and even after it became. I'm may truly say the presiding principle of my mental progress. It did not alter the path but only made me move forward more boldly and at the same time more cautiously and the same course the only actual revolution which has ever taken place in. My modes of thinking was already complete. My new tendencies had to be confirmed in some respects moderated and others but the only substantial changes of opinion that were yet to come related to politics and consisted on one hand in a greater approximation so far as regards the ultimate prospects of humanity to a qualified socialism and on the other a shifting of my political ideal from pure democracy as commonly understood by. Its partisans to the modified form of it which is set forth in my considerations on representative government chapter seven view of the remainder of my life recording but tony. Richardson between the time of which i have now spoken and the president took place the most important events in my private life. The first of these was my marriage. In april eighteen. Fifty one to the lady who's incomparable. Worth has made her friendship. The greatest source to make both of happiness and of improvement during many years in which we never expected to be in any closer relation to one another.

Richardson tony
"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

05:14 min | 11 months ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"Faculties in action on the world without her life was one of inward meditation varied by familiar intercourse with the a small circle of friends. Of whom one only long. Since deceased was a person of genius or of capacities of feeling or intellect kindred with her own but all had more or less of alliance with her in sentiments and opinions into this circle. I had the good fortune to be admitted. And i soon perceived the sheep zest in combination the qualities which in all other persons whom i had known i had been only too happy to find singly in her complete emancipation from every kind of superstition including that which attributes pretended perfection to the order of nature and the universe an earnest protest against many things which are still hard of the established constitution of society resulted not from the heart intellect but from strength of noble and elevated feeling and coexisted with a highly reverential nature in general spiritual characteristics as well as in temperament and organization. I have often compared her as she was at this time to shelley but in thought an intellect shelly so far as his powers were developed in his short life was but a child compared with what she ultimately became a light in the highest regions of speculation and in the smaller practical concerns of daily life. Her mind was the same perfect instrument piercing to the very heart and marrow of the matter. Always seizing the essential idea or principle the same exactness and rapidity of operation. Pervading as it'd her sensitive as was her mental faculties would with her gifts of feeling and imagination had visited her to be a consummate artist as her fiery and tender soul and her vigorous eloquence was certainly have made her a great orator in her profound knowledge of human nature and discernment and sagacity. In practical life would in the times when such a career was open to women have made her imminent among the rulers of mankind. Her intellectual gifts did but minister to a moral character at once the noblest and the best balanced which i had ever met with an life her unselfishness was not that of a taught system of duties but of a heart which thoroughly identified itself with the feelings of others and often went to excess in consideration for them by imaginatively investing their feelings with the intensity of its own..

shelly shelley
"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

03:29 min | 1 year ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"People <Speech_Male> decide <Speech_Male> according to their <Speech_Male> personal preferences. <Silence> <Speech_Male> Some <Speech_Male> whenever they <Speech_Male> see any good <Speech_Male> to be done <Speech_Male> or evil to <Speech_Male> be remedied <Speech_Male> would willingly <Speech_Male> instigate <Speech_Male> the government to undertake <Silence> the business <Speech_Male> while <Speech_Male> others prefer <Speech_Male> to bear almost <Speech_Male> any amount <Speech_Male> of social evil <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> than add one <Speech_Male> to the department <Speech_Male> of human interests <Speech_Male> amenable <Speech_Male> to governmental <Silence> control <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> and men range <Speech_Male> themselves on <Speech_Male> one or the other <Speech_Male> side of any particular <Speech_Male> case <Speech_Male> according <Speech_Male> to this general direction <Speech_Male> of their sentiments <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> or according <Speech_Male> to the degree of <Speech_Male> interest which they <Speech_Male> feel in the particular <Speech_Male> thing <Speech_Male> which it is proposed <Speech_Male> that the government <Silence> should do <Speech_Male> or according <Speech_Male> to the belief <Speech_Male> they entertain that <Speech_Male> the government would or <Speech_Male> would not <SpeakerChange> do <Speech_Male> it in the mandate <Silence> prefer <Speech_Male> but <Speech_Male> very rarely <SpeakerChange> <Speech_Male> on account of any <Speech_Male> opinion tweets. <Speech_Male> They consistently <Speech_Male> idea <Speech_Male> as to <Speech_Male> what things off <Speech_Male> fit to be done <Silence> by the government <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> and it seems to me <Speech_Male> that in <Speech_Male> consequence of <Speech_Male> this absence of <Speech_Male> rule or principle <Speech_Male> one <Speech_Male> side is <Speech_Male> at present has often <Speech_Male> wrong has <Speech_Male> the other. <Speech_Male> The interference <Speech_Male> of government is <Speech_Male> with <Speech_Male> about equal <Speech_Male> frequency <Speech_Male> improperly <Speech_Male> invoked <SpeakerChange> <Speech_Male> or improperly <Silence> condemned. <Silence> <SpeakerChange> <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> The object of. This <Speech_Male> essay <Speech_Male> is <SpeakerChange> to assert <Speech_Male> one very simple <Silence> principle <Speech_Male> as <Speech_Male> entitled to govern <Speech_Male> absolutely <Speech_Male> the dealings of <Speech_Male> society <Speech_Male> with the individual <Speech_Male> in <Speech_Male> the way of compulsion <SpeakerChange> <Silence> and control <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> whether the means used <Speech_Male> physical <Speech_Male> full in <Speech_Male> the form of legal <Speech_Male> penalties <Speech_Male> all the moral <Speech_Male> coercion of public <Silence> opinion. <Speech_Male> That <Speech_Male> principle <SpeakerChange> is <Speech_Male> that's <Speech_Male> the sole and <Speech_Male> for which mankind <Speech_Male> are warranted <Speech_Male> individually <Speech_Male> or collectively <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> in interfering <Speech_Male> with the liberty <Speech_Male> of action of <Speech_Male> any. One of their <Speech_Male> number <Speech_Male> is self <Silence> protection <Speech_Male> that <Speech_Male> the only purpose <Speech_Male> for which power <Speech_Male> can be rightfully <Speech_Male> exercised <Speech_Male> over any member <Speech_Male> of a civilized <Speech_Male> community <Speech_Male> against <Speech_Male> his will <Speech_Male> is to prevent <Speech_Male> harm <SpeakerChange> to <Silence> others <Speech_Male> his <Speech_Male> own. Good <Speech_Male> either physical <Speech_Male> or moral <Speech_Male> is not <Speech_Male> a sufficient <Silence> warrant. <Speech_Male> He cannot <Speech_Male> rightfully <Speech_Male> be compelled <Speech_Male> to do or forbear <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> because it will <Speech_Male> be better for him to <Silence> do so <Speech_Male> because it will <Silence> make him happier <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> because in the opinions <Speech_Male> of others <Speech_Male> to do so <Speech_Male> would it be wise <Silence> or even right <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> these are good <Speech_Male> reasons for <Speech_Male> remonstrating <Speech_Male> with him or <Speech_Male> reasoning with him <Speech_Male> all persuading <Speech_Male> him or <Speech_Male> entreating him <Speech_Male> but not <Speech_Male> for compelling <Speech_Male> him <Speech_Male> or visiting <Speech_Male> him with any evil <Speech_Male> in case <SpeakerChange> you do <Silence> otherwise <Speech_Male> justify <SpeakerChange> that <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> the conduct from <Speech_Male> which it is desired <Speech_Male> to deter <Speech_Male> him must <Speech_Male> be calculated <Speech_Male> to produce <SpeakerChange> <Speech_Male> evil to someone <Silence> else. <Speech_Male> The <Speech_Male> new policy of the conduct <Speech_Male> of anyone <Speech_Male> for which <Speech_Male> he is amenable to <Speech_Male> society <Speech_Male> is that <Speech_Male> which concerns <Silence> others <Speech_Male> in the <Speech_Male> pot which mainly concerns <Speech_Male> himself. <Speech_Male> His <Speech_Male> independence <Speech_Male> is of <Speech_Male> right <Silence> absolute. <Speech_Male> Ova <Speech_Male> himself <Speech_Male> over his <Speech_Male> own body and mind. <Speech_Male> The <Speech_Male> individual is sovereign.

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

05:29 min | 1 year ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"Those who have been in advance of society in thought and failing have left this condition of things on assailed in principle however they may have come into conflict with it in some of his details they have oh pied themselves raw enquiring into what things society old to like or dislike than in questioning whether it's likings all disliking should be a law to individuals they preferred endeavouring to all to the feelings of mankind on the particular points on which they were themselves heretical rather than make common cause in defense of freedom with heretics generally the only case in which the higher ground has been taken on principle and maintained with consistency by any individual here and there is that's all religious belief a case instructive in many ways and not least so is forming a most striking instance of the fallibility of what is called the moral sense for the odium theological in a sincere bigot is one of the most unequivocal cases of moral failing. Those who i broke the yoke of what cold itself the universal church wearing as little willing to permit difference of religious opinion as that church itself but when the heat of the conflict was over without giving a complete victory to any party and each church or sect was reduced to limited hopes to retaining possession of the ground already minorities saying that they had no chance of becoming majorities were under the necessity of pleading to those whom they could not convert for permission to differ. It is accordingly on this battlefield. Almo- sola that the rights of the individual against society have been asserted on broad grounds of principle and the claim of society to exercise authority over dissensions openly controver. -ted the great writers to whom the world owes what religious liberty at possesses have mostly asserted freedom of conscience as an indefeasible right and denied absolutely that a human being is accountable to others for his religious belief yet so natural to mankind is intolerance of whatever they really care about..

ted
"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

04:57 min | 1 year ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"Is all a more complete because the subject is one on which it is not generally considered necessary that reasons should be given either by one person to others all by each to himself. People are accustomed to believe and have been encouraged in the belief by some who aspired to the character of philosophers that their feelings on subjects of this nature are better than reasons and render reasons unnecessary. Necessary the practical principle which guides them to their opinions on. The regulation of human conduct is the feeling in each person's mind that everybody should be required to act as hey and those with whom he sympathizes would like them to act. No-one indeed acknowledges to himself that his standard of judgment is his own liking but an opinion on a point of conduct not supported by reasons can only count as one person's preference and if the reasons when given our amir appeal to a similar preference felt by other people. It is still only many people's liking instead of one to an ordinary man however his own preference the supported. It is no tony. A perfectly satisfactory reason bulbs the only one. He generally has for any of his notions of morality taste or propriety which expressly richardson in his religious creed and his chief guide in the interpretation. Even of that men's opinions accordingly on what is laudable. Whole blamable are affected by all the multifarious causes which influence their wishes in regard to the conduct of others and we are as numerous as those which determined that wishes on any other subject. Sometimes their reason. I told the times that prejudices all superstitions often their social affections not seldom their anti-social runs that envy or jealousy arrogance or contemptuous nece but most commonly that desire has all fears for themselves. That legitimate or illegitimate self-interest. Wherever there is an ascendant class a large portion of the morality of the country emanates from his class entrusts and his feelings of class superiority the morality between spartans and helds between planters and negroes between princes subjects between nobles and rotea areas between men and women has been for the most part the creation of these clause interests and feelings and the sentiments thus generated reacting turn upon the moral feelings of the members of the ascendant class in their relations among themselves. Where on the other hand. A- class formerly ascendant has lost. Its ascendancy aware. It's ascendancy is unpopular. The prevailing moral sentiments frequently as the impress of an impatience dislike of superiority another grand determining principle of the rules of conduct both in acts and forbearance which have been enforced by lower opinion has been the civility of mankind towards the supposed preferences or aversions over temporal masters or of gods this ability though essentially selfish is not hypocrisy it gives rise to perfectly genuine sentiments of lebron's it made men burn magicians heretics among so many base sur influences the general and obvious interests societe have of course had to share and large one in the direction of the moral sentiments less however has a metro reason and on their own account than as a consequence of the sympathies and antipathies which grew out of them and sympathies and antipathies which had little or nothing to do with the interests of society have made themselves felt in the establishment of moralities with quite as great force the light kings and disliking society or of some powerful portion of it although the main thing which has practically determines the rules laid down for general observance under the penalties of law or opinion.

richardson tony societe lebron
"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

05:19 min | 1 year ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"The will of the people moreover practically means the will of the most numerous soul the most active parts of the people the majority though those who succeed in making themselves accepted as the majority the people consequently may desire to oppress apart of the number and precautions are as much needed against this as against any other abuse of power the limitation therefore of the power of government over individuals loses none of its importance when the hold is of power are regularly accountable to the community that is to the strongest party there. In this view of things recommending itself equally to the intelligence of thing 'cause and to the inclination of those important classes in european society to whose real all supposed interests democracy is adverse has had no difficulty in establishing itself and in political speculations. The tyranny of the majority is now generally included among the eagles against which society requires to be on god like other tyrannies the tyranny of the majority was at first and is still voguly held in dread chiefly as operating through the act solve the public authorities but reflecting persons perceived that when societies itself the tyrant society collectively over the separate individuals who compose it. It's means of tyrannising on not restricted to the app switch. It may do by the hands of his political function functionaries society can and does execute so mandates and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right or any mandates a toll in things with which told not meddle. It practices a social tyranny. More formidable than many kinds of political oppression since though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties. It leaves fewer means of escape penetrating much more deeply into the details of life and enslaving the sole self protection therefore against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough that needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling against the tendency of society to impose by other means than civil penalties. It so ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who descend from them to fetter the development and if possible prevents the formation of any individuality not in harmony with his ways and compel old characters to fashion themselves. Upon the model of his own. There is a limit to the legitimate interference of collective opinion with individual independence to find that limit and maintain it against encroachment is is indispensable to a good condition of human affairs as protection against political despotism but though this proposition is not likely to be contested in general terms the practical question where to place the limit how to make the fitting adjustment between the individual independence and control is a subject home which nearly everything remains to be done. All that makes existence valuable to anyone depends on the enforcement of restraints upon the actions of other people. Some rules of conduct therefore must be imposed by law in the first place and by opinion on many things which are not fit subjects for the operation of law. What these rules should be is the principal question in human affairs but if we accept a few of the most obvious case is it is one of those which least progress has been made in resolving not to ages and scarcely any two countries have decided it's like and the decision of one age or country is a wonder to another yet to the people of any given age and country. No more suspect any difficulty in it than if it were subject home which mankind has always been agreed the rules which obtain among themselves appear to them self evident and self justifying this but universal illusion is one of the examples of the magical influence of custom which is not only has the proverb says a second nature but his continually mistaken for the first the effect of custom in preventing any misgiving respecting the rules of conduct which mankind imposed on one..

eagles
"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

02:49 min | 1 year ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"Removable by it and it could afford to trust them with power of which it could itself dictate the use to be made. The power was bought. The nation's own power concentrated and in a form convenient for exercise this mode of thought or rather perhaps feeling was common among the last generation of european liberalism in the continental section of which it still apparently predominates. Those who admit any limit to what the government may do except in the case of such governments as they think ought not to exist. Stand out as brilliant exceptions among the political thing because of the continent a similar tone of sentiment might by this time have been prevalent in our own country. If the circumstances which for a time encouraged it had continued on altered in political and philosophical. Fear is as well. As in persons success discloses faults and infirmities which failure might have concealed from observation. The notion that the people have no need to limit their power over themselves might see axiomatic. When popular government was thing only dreamed about allred overs having existed some distant period of the past. Neither was that notion necessarily disturbed by such temporary aberrations. As those of the french revolution the worst of wage whether work van usurping few and which in any case belonged not to the permanent working of popular institutions but to a southern and convulsive outbreak against monarchical and socratic despotism in time however a democratic republic came to occupy a large portion of the earth's surface and made itself felt as one of the most powerful members of the community of nations and elective and responsible government became subject to observations and criticisms which way to put a great existing fact it was now perceived that such phrases as self government and the power of the people over themselves do not express the true state of the case. The people who exercise the power on not always the same people as those over whom it is exercised and the self-government spoken of is not the government of each by himself but salvage by.

allred
"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

05:24 min | 1 year ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"The struggle between liberty and authority is the most conspicuous feature in the portions of history with which we are earliest familiar particularly in that of greece. Rome and england but in old times. This contest was between subjects or some classes of subjects and the government by liberty was meant protection against the tyranny of the political rulers. The rulers were conceived except in some of the popular governments of greece as in a necessarily antagonistic position to the people whom they ruled they consisted of a governing one or governing tribal cast who derived their authority from inheritance or conquest who atole events did not hold its at the pleasure of the governor and who's supremacy men did not venture baps did not desire to contest whatever precautions might be taken against oppressive exercise. The power was regarded as necessary but also is highly dangerous as a weapon which they would attempt to use against their subjects. No less than against external enemies to prevent the week members of the community from being preyed upon by innumerable vultures. It was needful that there should be an animal of prey stronger than the rest commissions to keep them down. But has the king of the vultures would be no less bent upon preying on the flocks and any of the minor hop is it was indispensable to be in a perpetual attitude of defense against his big and klaus the at four of patriots walls to set limits to the power which the ruler should be suffered to exercise over the community and this limitation was what they meant by liberty. It was attempted in two ways. First by obtaining a recognition of certain immunities called political liberties or rights which it was to be regarded as a breach of duty in the ruler to infringe. and which if he did infringe specific resistance or general rebellion was held to be justifiable a second and generally a later expedient whilst the establishment of constitutional checks by which the consent of the community or of a body of some sort supposed to represent. Its interests made a necessary condition to some of the more important acts of the governing power to the first of these modes of limitation. The ruling power in most european countries was compelled more or less to submit it was malt so with the second and to attain this or win already in some degree possessed to attain. More completely became everywhere. The principal objects of the lovers of liberty and so long as mankind was content to combat one enemy by another and to be ruled by masta on condition of being guaranteed more or less efficaciously against his tyranny. They did not carry their aspirations beyond this point a time however came in the progressive human as when men's ceased to think it's a necessity of nature that governors should be an independent power opposed interest to themselves it appeared to them much better that the various managers straits of the state should be the tenants all delegates revocable at their pleasure. In that way alone it seemed could they have complete security that the powers of government would never be abused to that disadvantage by degrees. This new demand for elective and temporary rulers became the prominent objects of the exertions of the popular party wherever any such party existed and superseded to a considerable extent the previous efforts to limit the powers of rulers as the struggle preceded for making the ruling power emanate from the periodical. Choice of the ruled..

greece Rome england patriots
"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

01:30 min | 1 year ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"Own liberty this is a liberal. Vox recording all liberty. Fox recordings are in the public domain for more information. Ulta find out how you can volunteer. Please visit lib. Revokes dot org own liberty by john. Stuart mill trump to one introductory. The subject of this essay is not the so called liberty of the will so unfortunately opposed to the misnamed doctrine of philosophical necessity but civil all social liberty the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual question seldom stated and hardly ever discussed in general terms but which profoundly influence is the practical control voices of the age by its latent presence and is likely soon to make itself recognized as the vital question of the future. It is so far from being knew. That's in a certain sense. It has divided mankind almost from the remotest stages but in the stage of progress. Into which the more civilized portions of the species have now entered it presents itself under new conditions and requires.

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

03:55 min | 1 year ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"When i read them <Speech_Male> to him were very <Speech_Male> instructive to me. <Speech_Male> He not only drew <Speech_Male> my attention to <Speech_Male> the insight. They <Speech_Male> afforded into <Speech_Male> athenian institutions <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> and the principles <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> of legislation <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> and government which <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> they often illustrated <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> but pointed out <Speech_Male> the skill and <Silence> art of the her. <Speech_Male> How everything <Speech_Male> important <Speech_Male> to his purpose <Speech_Male> was said at <Speech_Male> the exact moment <Speech_Male> when he had brought the <Speech_Male> minds of his audience <Speech_Male> into <Speech_Male> the state most <Speech_Male> fitted to <Speech_Male> receive it how <Speech_Male> he made steel <Speech_Male> into <Speech_Male> their minds <Speech_Male> gradually <Speech_Male> and by <Speech_Male> insinuation <Speech_Male> thoughts which <Speech_Male> if expressed <Speech_Male> in a more direct <Speech_Male> manner <Speech_Male> would have roused <Silence> their opposition. <Speech_Male> Most <Speech_Male> of these reflections <Speech_Male> were beyond my <Speech_Male> capacity of <Speech_Male> full comprehension <Speech_Male> at the time <Speech_Male> but they left seed. <Speech_Male> Behind <Speech_Male> which germinated <Silence> induced season. <Speech_Male> At <Speech_Male> this time. I also <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> read the whole of <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> tacitus juvenile <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> and <Speech_Male> couldn't fillon <Speech_Male> the ladder <Speech_Male> owing to <Speech_Male> his obscure style <Speech_Male> and to the scholastic <Speech_Male> details <Speech_Male> of which many <Speech_Male> parts of his <Speech_Male> Are <Speech_Male> made up his <Speech_Male> little red and <Speech_Male> seldom sufficiently <Speech_Male> appreciate. <Speech_Male> His book is <Speech_Male> a kind of <Speech_Male> encyclopedia <Speech_Male> of the thoughts <Speech_Male> of the ancients on <Speech_Male> the whole field <Speech_Male> of education <Silence> and culture <Speech_Male> and i have <Speech_Male> retained through <Speech_Male> life many <Speech_Male> valuable ideas <Speech_Male> which i <Speech_Male> can distinctly <Speech_Male> traced to my reading <Speech_Male> of him <Speech_Male> even at that <Speech_Male> early age. <Speech_Male> It was <Speech_Male> at this period. <Speech_Male> That i read <Speech_Male> for first time. <Speech_Male> Some of <Speech_Male> the most important dialogues <Speech_Male> of plato. <Speech_Male> In particular <Speech_Male> the <Speech_Male> gorgias <Speech_Male> the protagoras <Speech_Male> and <Speech_Male> the republic <Speech_Male> there is <Speech_Male> no author to whom <Speech_Male> my father thought <Speech_Male> himself more <Speech_Male> indebted for <Speech_Male> his own mental <Speech_Male> culture <Speech_Male> and plato <Speech_Male> or whom he <Speech_Male> more frequently <Speech_Male> recommended to young <Speech_Male> students. <Speech_Male> I can bear <Speech_Male> similar testimony <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> in regard to myself <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> the socratic method <Speech_Male> of which <Speech_Male> the platonic dialogues <Speech_Male> are. The chief <Speech_Male> example <Speech_Male> is unsurpassed <Speech_Male> as a discipline <Speech_Male> for correcting the <Speech_Male> errors and clearing <Speech_Male> up the confusions <Speech_Male> incident <Speech_Male> into the intellectuals <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> promiscuous <Speech_Male> the understanding <Speech_Male> which has made <Speech_Male> up all <Speech_Male> the bundles of <Speech_Male> associations <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> under the guidance <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> of <SpeakerChange> popular <Speech_Male> phraseology. <Silence> <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> Close searching <Speech_Male> ellen <Speech_Male> chooses <Speech_Male> by which. <Speech_Male> The man of <Speech_Male> vague generalities <Speech_Male> is <Speech_Male> constrained <Speech_Male> either to express <Speech_Male> his meaning to himself <Speech_Male> indefinite <Speech_Male> terms or <Speech_Male> to confess that <Speech_Male> he does not know <Speech_Male> what he's talking about <Speech_Male> the <Speech_Male> perpetual testing <Speech_Male> of all general <Speech_Male> statements by <Speech_Male> particular instances <Speech_Male> his siege <Speech_Male> in form. <Speech_Male> Which is laid <Speech_Male> to the meaning <Speech_Male> of large <Speech_Male> abstract terms <Speech_Male> by fixing <Speech_Male> upon some still <Speech_Male> larger <Speech_Male> class name <Speech_Male> which includes <Silence> that and more <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> and <Speech_Male> dividing down to <Speech_Male> the thing <Speech_Male> sought <Speech_Male> marked out <Speech_Male> limited ended <Speech_Male> definition <Speech_Male> by a series of <Speech_Male> accurately <Speech_Male> drawn distinctions <Speech_Male> between it <Speech_Male> and each of <Speech_Male> the cognate acts <Speech_Male> which are successively <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> <Speech_Male> parted off <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> from it. All <Speech_Male> this <Speech_Male> as an education <Speech_Male> for <Speech_Male> precise thinking <Speech_Male> is <Speech_Male> inevitable <Speech_Male> and all <Speech_Male> this even <Speech_Male> at that age <Speech_Male> took such hold <Speech_Male> of me <Speech_Male> that became part <Silence> of my own mind. <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> <Speech_Male> <Advertisement> I have felt ever <Speech_Male> since that <Speech_Male> the title of plate nist <Speech_Male> longs <Speech_Male> by far better <Speech_Male> right to <Speech_Male> those who <Speech_Male> have been nourished <Speech_Male> in and have <Speech_Male> endeavored to practice. <Speech_Male> Plato's motive <Speech_Male> investigation <Speech_Male> than to <Speech_Male> those who are <Speech_Male> distinguished only <Speech_Male> by the adoption <Speech_Male> of certain dogmatic <Speech_Male> conclusions <Speech_Male> drawn <Speech_Male> mostly from the <Speech_Male> least intelligible <Speech_Male> of his works and <Speech_Male> which the <Speech_Male> character of his <Speech_Male> mind and writings <Speech_Male> makes it uncertain <Speech_Male> whether <Speech_Male> he himself regarded <Speech_Male> as anything. More <Speech_Male> than poetic <Speech_Male> fancies <Speech_Male> or philosophic conjectures.

first time Plato
"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

04:50 min | 1 year ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"Unlike his usual practice of making me read to him the first book of the fairy queen. I took little pleasure in the poetry of the present century. He saw scarcely any meridean and i hardly became acquainted with any of it until i was grown up to man her except the metrical romances of walter scott which i read at his recommendation and was intensely delighted with as i always was with animated narrative. Dryden's poems were among my father's books and many of these. He made me read. But i never cared for any of them except alexander's feast. Which as well as many of the songs in walter scott. I used to sing internally to a music of my own to some of the latter on deed i went so far as to compose airs which i still remember cuppers short poems i read with some pleasure but never got far into the longer ones and nothing in two volumes. Interested me like the pros account of his three hairs in my thirteenth year. I met with campbell's poems among which locale the of erin and some others gave me sensations. I had never before experienced from poetry here too. I made nothing of the longer bonds. Except the striking openness of gertrude of wyoming which long kept its place in my feelings as the perfection of paco's during this part of my childhood when of migrants amusements was experimental science in theoretical. Not the practical sense of the word not trying experiments a kind of discipline which i have often regretted not having had nor even seen but merely reading about them. I never remember being so wrapped up in any book. As i was in joyce's scientific dialogues and i was rather recalcitrant to my father's criticism of the bad reasoning respecting the first principles of physics which abounds in the early part of that work. I devoured tracy's on chemistry especially that of my fathers early friend on school fellow dr thompson for years before i attended a lecture or saw an experiment from about the age twelve i entered into another and more advanced stage in my courses instruction in which the main object was no longer.

Dryden thirteenth year two volumes first book first campbell age twelve dr thompson walter scott three hairs scott feast alexander walter joyce
"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

04:07 min | 1 year ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"I destroyed all these papers not been anticipating that i could ever feel any curiosity about my first attempts at writing and reasoning. My father encouraged me in this useful amusement. Though as i think judiciously he never asked to see what i wrote so that i did not feel that in writing it. I was accountable to anyone nor had the chilling sensation of being under a critical eye. But though these exercises in history were never quite compulsory lessons there was another kind of composition which was so namely writing versus and it was one of the most disagreeable of my tasks greek and latin verses. I did not write nor learnt the pros of those languages. My father thinking this not worth the time required contented himself with making me read aloud to him and correcting faults quantities. I never composed at all in greek even in prose and but a little inland not that my father could be indifferent to the value of this practice and giving a thorough knowledge of these languages but because there really was not time court reverses iowa's required to write were english when i first read hopes homer. I- ambitiously attempted to compose something of the same time and achieved as much as one book of continuation of the iliad. They're probably the spontaneous promptings of my potential ambition which have stopped but the exercise become from choice was continued by command conformable to my father's usual practice of explaining to me as far as possible reasons for he required me to do. He gave me for this. Is i will remember two reasons. Highly characteristic of him one was that some things could be expressed better and more forcibly verse than in prose. this he said was a real advantage. He other was that people. In general attached more value to verse than it deserved. And the power of writing it was on this account worth acquiring. He generally left me to choose my own subjects. Which as far as i remember were mostly addresses to some mythological personage or allegorical abstraction. But he made me translate into english verse..

latin first greek first attempts two reasons one book english one iowa
"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

Harvard Classics

05:01 min | 1 year ago

"john stuart" Discussed on Harvard Classics

"Of plutarch in english history. Begun the time at which humor leaves off. I remember reading burnett's history of his own time. Though i cared little for anything in it except the wars and battles and the historical part of the annual register from the beginning to about seventeen eighty eight where the volumes my father borrowed for me from mr bentham left off. I felt alive lively interest in frederick of prussia during his difficulties and in paoli the corsican patriot but when i came to the american war i took my part like child as i was until set right by my father on the wrong side because it was called the english side in these frequent talks about the books i read. He used as opportunity offered to give me explanations and ideas respecting civilization government morality which required me afterward to restate to him in my own words and he also made me read and give him a verbal account of many books which would not have interested me sufficiently to induce me to read them of myself. Among others miller's historical view of the english government a book of great merit for its time and which he highly valued moshe himes ecclesiastical. History mcrae's life of john knox and even soule and readies histories of the quakers. He was fond of putting into my hands. Books which exhibited men of energy and resource in unusual circumstances struggling against difficulties in overcoming them of which works. I remember beavers african memoranda and collins account of the first settlement of new south wales two books which i never worried of reading were anson's voyages so delightful to most young persons and a collection hawksworth. Either leave of wages round the world in four volumes beginning with drake and ending with cook in bougainville of children's books anymore than playthings. I add scantly. Any except an occasional gift from a relation or acquaintance. Among those i had robinson crusoe was pre eminent and continued to delight me through all my boyhood..

bentham john knox paoli two books burnett american war corsican frederick of prussia first four volumes new south wales miller bougainville about seventeen eighty eight collins english african moshe himes hawksworth robinson
"john stuart" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

C-SPAN Radio

02:29 min | 3 years ago

"john stuart" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

"Has only be in Q and A by Ted grow mon-, senior fellow at heritage. Thank you very much that was that was wonderful in wonderfully thought provoking, I'm gonna take the normal. Prerogative of the host. The ask ask a couple of questions and one is perhaps somewhat supportive in one is perhaps somewhat challenging so you can you can answer. You can you can duck and dodge or or you can take the vote in the order that you prefer you write on page twenty six and you see something very similar impeach twenty four the book that. In some senses, no nation. Even in the world of nationalism is an is an island that there is a certain mole. Minimum a certain of God-given standard of national conduct. Describe what the moral minimum is even in a world of independent, sovereign self-governing states, you simply sunset out that there is some sort of minimum. A good expand a little bit. What is the minimum for the conduct of of eating the ideally constituted, independent sovereign nation state in the world of of others such entities. And then second a little bit less supported you. You quote, John Stuart mill. Considerations on Representative government, and and you say in mob. You quite rightly that mill advances a common nineteenth century point of view and arguing that it is quote, a necessary condition of free institutions at the boundaries government should coincide the main with those of nationalities. In other words, the English nation if I take this right should be composed primarily of the English the German nation should be composed primarily of the Germans French nation on survivor on survivor. So to speak. What are we what are we get in a world? That is like the world we have where nationalities or salted and distributed all over the map and were either if you want to achieve this world, you have to move people around the suit, borders or move borders around the suit people on those borders will be very complicated. If the people aren't moved. Okay..

John Stuart mill senior fellow Ted Representative mill
"john stuart" Discussed on The Economist Radio

The Economist Radio

04:17 min | 3 years ago

"john stuart" Discussed on The Economist Radio

"There's Rennes or bargaining or when people have trouble understanding too complex, tax code, and the third is actually about people form their social preferences. So what are their perceptions attitudes and values underlying why would support some tax policies rather than others? Let's talk about the specific findings in your research and start off with this idea that some have which is that really what you should be doing is just whacking the rich with higher taxes. Right. They're not taxed enough we need to we need to tax them. And you've looked into some of the on intended consequences of that. Yes. Absolutely. You're right. That you know, every tax has a cost, which are sometimes unintended. And I think innovation is a great example of that. So. When we set taxes for reasons other than targeted to innovation like redistribution raising revenues. We may act as a byproduct reduce innovation by firms and individuals. And that's because when they're faced with the tax the funds and the individuals just don't bother to innovate as much because they don't get to keep as much of the proceeds for themselves. Exactly. And you know, in theory, we always have this idea that inventors arbit- Matt scientists who just love their research and unresponsive to financial returns, you know, a bit like Newton sitting under tree the upper falls invention happens, but actually a major increasing part of innovation happens within companies and requires quite intentional directed often, very costly inputs. And so these companies and individual inventors may very well changed activity in response to Texas. And so Texas can have tremendous of innovation if it's wrong incentives for them does that mean, we shouldn't tax these innovators tool. No, it definitely does not mean that. So the efficiency costs of tax. Ios such as reduced innovation are just one part of the equation that we need to solve to set the right level of taxes. A no the other one is the benefits of those taxes which are raising revenues in a fairway and redistributing income, so we have to balance these economic costs, for instance, loss innovation against those benefits from redistribution, and what do we know about how people think about those benefits? So if you had this idea of the government trying to set the right balance between those two, and I suppose they might be responding to voters in some way. What do we know about how those preferences of formed? Yes. In fact, this area of social preferences, which are looting do is an area that's been quite neglected by economists. Although we know the early fathers like Adam Smith, and John Stuart mill were really worrying about this without having any data on it. And that's the other big part of my research agenda is what are the social attitudes values and perceptions that determine why some people? Support some policies rather than others. And for this us new tool, which is large scale surveys and online experiments that I design and run and several countries. And I think this use of survey data is really key. Because there are things like perceptions and attitudes. That you cannot really see any other data. No matter how good it is. What do you find the big finding would be that when it comes to social preferences? Yes. People have much more complex attitudes and perceptions than what we typically think of of the communists and behind these attitudes. Live perceptions or often misperceptions that inform them. And so I can tell you about two specific projects. One is about immigration one is about social mobility on immigration people tend to prefer to redistribute towards people. More like them in the data. We see that people are quite opposed to redistributing towards immigrants so generosity seems to not travel very well across national ethnic and religious groups. But the. Twist is that people have quite wrong perceptions about immigrants people tend to think this way more immigrants than there actually are that there were culturally distant from them and economically much weaker. So low educated more unemployed moorland on government transfers, and in fact, you know, if you just make people think about immigration before asking them about how much redistribution they support that has a significantly negative effect on on the view distribution. These large misperceptions about immigrants could be very strongly related to your wished not redistribute towards these groups..

Texas Rennes Adam Smith Matt Newton John Stuart mill mill