For some reason, people have a mental image of racism as violent, ignorant, lower-class, crude, crass, and irrational. I talk about what racist beliefs look like when they're held by genteel, polite, educated, upper class, scientifically-minded people, and why we should care about this form of racism.
The author of this book read the writings of a lot of conservative intellectuals and uses that to describe the psychology of a reactionary -- a type of conservative who is largely driven by preservation of hierarchy, even at the expense of tradition. He describes the process that creates reactionary politics, which I summarize with a meme.
Some musings on why people found the suburban nuclear family ideal of the 1950s and 1960s so hellish and eventually rejected it. In particular, we posit that the suburban nuclear family ideal was an attempt to emulate the planter class aristocracy but collapsed because the social dimensions of emulating that lifestyle were ignored.
Though it was written in the 4th century B.C.E., Mengzi's philosophy, especially his democratic tendencies, his policy recommendations, and his humanistic outlook, can still be inspirational to the left today.
A first stab at describing how I see race in the U.S. informed by experiences as an Asian. My experiences with racism involve both experiencing it firsthand and being largely protected from it. I think Asian-Americans tend to have the effect of thwarting white racial supremacy beliefs. And I think the Asian-American ethnic category is kind of bizarre and fake but also can be an uplifting symbol of solidarity capable of transcending nations, language, and histories of violence and oppression.
This book carefully lays out something that may not be too surprising at this point: corporate lobbying is a worrying phenomenon in the U.S.
I introduce some philosophical concepts (the is-ought problem and the notion of thick concepts) to illustrate why you cannot remove morals from political debate, why avoiding words like "racist" because they are "inherently alienating" is an unproductive exercise, and why explicitly appealing to values helps facilitate political discussion and communication.