WEBVTT 1 00:00:07.160 --> 00:00:11.400 It's the three Whiskey Happy Hour, the podcast dedicated to 2 00:00:11.480 --> 00:00:15.919 single molts and blended opinions with your hosts Steve Hayward, 3 00:00:16.160 --> 00:00:21.719 John You, and some mystery woman named Lucretia, along with 4 00:00:21.760 --> 00:00:26.079 the floating cast of regular guests. So pour yourself, adrom 5 00:00:26.120 --> 00:00:29.760 and settle in for another episode of one hundred Proof Conversation. 6 00:00:35.439 --> 00:00:37.520 I want to start today by first giving a shout 7 00:00:37.520 --> 00:00:40.359 out to our new voiceover artists for our introduction. It's 8 00:00:40.719 --> 00:00:43.960 Colin MacLean of Norwich, England, and I'll say more about 9 00:00:44.000 --> 00:00:46.399 him on our closing show notes at the end or 10 00:00:46.439 --> 00:00:48.679 in the actual show notes printed on the website. But 11 00:00:48.799 --> 00:00:52.359 for today, because John You is away traveling and doing 12 00:00:52.359 --> 00:00:56.000 his usual nonsense, we are delighted to have Phil Munio's 13 00:00:56.079 --> 00:00:58.920 from the University of Notre Dame joining us, filling John 14 00:00:59.039 --> 00:01:01.399 seat as the I guess sort of a legal andlst 15 00:01:01.439 --> 00:01:04.959 but generally just all around hail fellow, well met. 16 00:01:05.239 --> 00:01:07.799 Just seut of curiosity. How does John feel about that? Phil? 17 00:01:09.719 --> 00:01:12.120 I think we should all look like this, as you know, 18 00:01:12.159 --> 00:01:14.840 like an upgrade from economy to economy plus. 19 00:01:16.280 --> 00:01:18.280 There you go. Yeah, but we want to get the 20 00:01:18.280 --> 00:01:21.480 business class. But look, you know, we already hadn't mind 21 00:01:21.480 --> 00:01:24.599 having you on the show in John's place now and then, 22 00:01:25.040 --> 00:01:28.439 but it turns out to be really timely because you 23 00:01:28.599 --> 00:01:31.359 have just published an article that the kids these days 24 00:01:31.359 --> 00:01:33.920 would call a banger. I think it's your article in 25 00:01:34.000 --> 00:01:36.640 the First Things that just came to my mailbox three 26 00:01:36.719 --> 00:01:39.480 four days ago, maybe last week, I'm not sure, called 27 00:01:39.480 --> 00:01:42.799 the Founders and the Common Good, and it's getting some 28 00:01:42.799 --> 00:01:45.480 buzz I have noticed, which I think is you know, 29 00:01:45.560 --> 00:01:49.280 also significant and interesting. So the Founders of the Common 30 00:01:49.280 --> 00:01:52.719 Good you're taking on, you know, the post liberals, I guess, 31 00:01:52.760 --> 00:01:55.239 and the whole revival of the idea of the common good. 32 00:01:56.079 --> 00:01:59.040 And a lot to be said here. But I want 33 00:01:59.239 --> 00:02:01.400 for our listeners who are not schooled, and you know, 34 00:02:01.439 --> 00:02:03.159 as much as we try to educate our listeners in 35 00:02:03.159 --> 00:02:06.480 political philosophy and so forth, many of them are not 36 00:02:06.680 --> 00:02:08.400 well schooled. And some of the things that are so 37 00:02:08.479 --> 00:02:10.919 familiar to us and five levels deep. So I want 38 00:02:10.919 --> 00:02:14.800 to start out simple in any case, So why don't 39 00:02:14.800 --> 00:02:18.439 we do this when we say liberalism, let's start really simple. 40 00:02:19.520 --> 00:02:22.360 Liberalism is not, I always say, just tax and spend 41 00:02:22.479 --> 00:02:25.919 and big government regulation, not the Democratic Party platform. I 42 00:02:25.960 --> 00:02:28.759 understand why that's the commonplace word for it. But I 43 00:02:28.800 --> 00:02:31.120 mean it's something different and richer and deeper than that. 44 00:02:31.199 --> 00:02:34.560 So why don't you Your article gives a couple of definitions, 45 00:02:34.599 --> 00:02:36.360 So why don't you fill start out and give us 46 00:02:36.400 --> 00:02:39.360 your thumbnail definition of what is meant by liberalism when 47 00:02:39.360 --> 00:02:40.840 we're talking about it in these terms. 48 00:02:41.759 --> 00:02:46.080 Yeah, well, thanks for having me on. I'm no substitute 49 00:02:46.080 --> 00:02:49.240 for John Yu and I love listening to this show, 50 00:02:49.280 --> 00:02:51.840 as you know, so it's real fun for me to 51 00:02:51.919 --> 00:02:56.879 be on. You ask what do I mean by liberalism? 52 00:02:56.960 --> 00:02:59.520 I mean the term. Different people use the term in 53 00:02:59.520 --> 00:03:04.520 different ways, And for a while I would distinguish what 54 00:03:04.520 --> 00:03:08.599 I would call classical liberalism, and I talk about the 55 00:03:08.599 --> 00:03:12.960 founders classical liberalism as opposed to modern liberalism, and people 56 00:03:13.000 --> 00:03:16.479 get confused, and what about political liberalism, you know, which 57 00:03:16.680 --> 00:03:21.479 by you know, contemporary democrats. So for the purposes of 58 00:03:21.520 --> 00:03:26.240 this article or with the post liberals called liberalism, I 59 00:03:26.360 --> 00:03:30.599 narrow it down to two kind of key elements. The 60 00:03:30.639 --> 00:03:39.680 first is that human freedom is wilful choice, and there's 61 00:03:39.719 --> 00:03:43.280 an implicit anthropology, or an implicit understanding of what human 62 00:03:43.319 --> 00:03:50.039 beings are. Human beings are creative, willful, beings. To put 63 00:03:50.039 --> 00:03:52.919 it in a different way, we are our own gods, 64 00:03:55.159 --> 00:04:01.080 We are creators, our own legislators, and so that some 65 00:04:01.120 --> 00:04:03.840 people say, you know, we need to author our own 66 00:04:03.960 --> 00:04:09.000 laws something like that, as opposed to play the role 67 00:04:09.080 --> 00:04:14.199 that our creator has authored for us, or accept the 68 00:04:14.360 --> 00:04:18.959 place that the creator has authored for us. Okay, So 69 00:04:19.000 --> 00:04:22.839 that's the first time liberalism that the human will, human 70 00:04:22.920 --> 00:04:29.639 desire is the fundamental attribute of human nature. And then 71 00:04:29.519 --> 00:04:33.680 the second attribute of liberalism, as I'm using it here 72 00:04:33.839 --> 00:04:36.600 is the role of the government is to be neutral. 73 00:04:38.800 --> 00:04:42.279 The purpose of government is simply to for as many 74 00:04:42.319 --> 00:04:45.560 people to let them author their own lives in whatever 75 00:04:45.839 --> 00:04:49.399 way they want. And the academic way of putting this 76 00:04:49.560 --> 00:04:53.360 is that the government is neutral towards competing conceptions of 77 00:04:53.399 --> 00:04:53.759 the good. 78 00:04:54.759 --> 00:04:56.759 Yeah. So I want to hold that thought, and I 79 00:04:56.800 --> 00:04:59.519 actually want to ask Linda to answer the question, is 80 00:04:59.560 --> 00:05:03.399 her stay liberal state in practice actually neutral? Hold that 81 00:05:03.399 --> 00:05:06.000 for now, because I suspect it. We'll summon forth an 82 00:05:06.000 --> 00:05:09.800 epic rant or not all promptu lucretia. Now I hold 83 00:05:09.800 --> 00:05:11.959 it for now. I want to dwell on that first 84 00:05:12.000 --> 00:05:15.800 point a bit about sometimes if I'm asked for a 85 00:05:15.839 --> 00:05:19.680 one sentence definition I will say liberalism, classical liberalis is 86 00:05:19.680 --> 00:05:22.759 the idea that individuals should be free to pursue their 87 00:05:22.839 --> 00:05:26.079 own self chosen purposes, which is will forless. It's as 88 00:05:26.399 --> 00:05:29.360 parallels yours. That's also John Stuart Mel. It's not original 89 00:05:29.360 --> 00:05:33.199 to me. I've just paraphrased him. But of course it 90 00:05:33.240 --> 00:05:35.879 does then imply if he just ended there, that there's 91 00:05:35.920 --> 00:05:39.920 no standard of judgment. All purposes are equal right, equally 92 00:05:39.920 --> 00:05:43.000 good or equally bad, because we've abandoned a judgment on 93 00:05:43.079 --> 00:05:46.480 good and bad. But then also, this is something lately 94 00:05:46.720 --> 00:05:49.560 I can't believe I've never thought of this before. I've 95 00:05:49.600 --> 00:05:52.199 been having a back and forth with Paul Gottfried, one 96 00:05:52.199 --> 00:05:55.480 of the famous old paleocons. I've come to like the 97 00:05:55.480 --> 00:05:57.120 guy a little more. Of course, he's very old now 98 00:05:57.120 --> 00:05:59.399 and he's mellowed a bit, and you know I mellowed 99 00:05:59.439 --> 00:06:02.759 when I was five years old anyway. And he points 100 00:06:02.800 --> 00:06:03.199 out that. 101 00:06:03.079 --> 00:06:03.639 Look, you're. 102 00:06:05.600 --> 00:06:10.959 Okay, Well, it's because I never mind. Where was I 103 00:06:11.000 --> 00:06:16.680 going with that? Oh no, it was about how uh, 104 00:06:17.160 --> 00:06:20.920 if you're a progressive, or even worse, a tyrant, you 105 00:06:20.959 --> 00:06:24.600 really want people to think of themselves as autonomous individuals 106 00:06:24.639 --> 00:06:27.000 cut off from any other wider communities because it makes 107 00:06:27.040 --> 00:06:31.560 you easier to govern and tyrannize over right, And they 108 00:06:31.600 --> 00:06:33.560 said that's the one part of the liberal tradition that 109 00:06:33.600 --> 00:06:37.399 will Woodrow Wilson the Progressives actually wanted to keep. I thought, oh, 110 00:06:37.439 --> 00:06:40.240 I think he's right about that. I'm not which part, well, 111 00:06:40.279 --> 00:06:42.360 the part of you you want people to conceive of 112 00:06:42.399 --> 00:06:46.120 themselves as willful individuals, creating their own purposes, owing no 113 00:06:46.199 --> 00:06:49.160 obligation to any social community or even their own families, 114 00:06:49.399 --> 00:06:53.079 right their churches, their union halls, because it makes them 115 00:06:53.079 --> 00:06:55.920 easier for a large government to dominate. I think there's 116 00:06:55.920 --> 00:06:57.879 something to that. I'm not sure if they ever put. 117 00:06:57.759 --> 00:07:01.480 It in that I would probably that's a central tenet 118 00:07:01.839 --> 00:07:05.439 of Marxism. Steve it cut a little bit watered down, 119 00:07:05.480 --> 00:07:08.120 But of course the idea is that you everything in 120 00:07:08.160 --> 00:07:10.720 the state, nothing outside of the state, whatever the stupid 121 00:07:10.759 --> 00:07:16.759 phrase is. And one of the but but follow on Marx. 122 00:07:17.360 --> 00:07:21.160 Marx had the same idea that you destroy those communities 123 00:07:21.360 --> 00:07:26.560 and those relationships that that make people truly human, and 124 00:07:26.600 --> 00:07:29.079 then you replace him, of course, with a complete and 125 00:07:29.120 --> 00:07:34.120 total reliance upon dependence upon the state, and then you 126 00:07:34.279 --> 00:07:37.759 make people very easy to control and so I think, 127 00:07:37.879 --> 00:07:40.480 I guess what I'm saying is is that to the 128 00:07:40.519 --> 00:07:44.399 extent that progressivism or liberalism is just watered down and 129 00:07:44.480 --> 00:07:47.920 less and less watered down these days of socialism, communism. 130 00:07:48.279 --> 00:07:49.759 I think that that's absolutely true. 131 00:07:50.160 --> 00:07:52.079 Yeah, I think I was trying to say something like that. 132 00:07:52.120 --> 00:07:54.279 I was just winging it. Let me do this. I 133 00:07:55.399 --> 00:07:57.759 want to read to you a couple of sentences from 134 00:07:57.800 --> 00:08:00.680 your first paragraph and then bring up an other term 135 00:08:00.800 --> 00:08:02.720 to be talked about a bit, and that term is 136 00:08:02.720 --> 00:08:06.920 common good. So here's what you wrote. Liberalism, so understood, 137 00:08:07.079 --> 00:08:12.560 is both relativistic and ultimately nihilistic. It makes the individual's 138 00:08:12.639 --> 00:08:16.759 will sovereign over reality. It denies the existence of a 139 00:08:16.839 --> 00:08:20.079 common good because it holds that there are no rational, 140 00:08:20.199 --> 00:08:23.680 intrinsic goods that human beings hold in common. The essence 141 00:08:23.680 --> 00:08:27.120 of man, in the liberal view, is willful individual choice, 142 00:08:27.360 --> 00:08:30.839 asserting one's view of oneself and of reality, and then 143 00:08:30.879 --> 00:08:34.759 shaping one's life in light of that positive worldview. That's 144 00:08:34.799 --> 00:08:36.639 the end of the quote you do. Before that quote 145 00:08:36.679 --> 00:08:39.320 the famous Mystery of the Universe class from Justice Kennedy, 146 00:08:39.360 --> 00:08:43.399 which i'll leave out for now. I wish i'd written 147 00:08:43.399 --> 00:08:45.759 that passage I think it's really good. But then I 148 00:08:45.759 --> 00:08:47.720 think it should be added that to the extent that 149 00:08:47.759 --> 00:08:50.200 there could be. I mean, maybe someone would argue back 150 00:08:50.200 --> 00:08:54.399 to you that the common good or the public interest. 151 00:08:54.480 --> 00:08:56.279 I mean this is something that I remembered at Irving 152 00:08:56.320 --> 00:08:58.600 Crystal and Dan Bell when they founded the Public Interest 153 00:08:58.639 --> 00:09:01.480 magazine in the sixty said they said something like, we 154 00:09:01.519 --> 00:09:04.480 don't think the public interest, if that's equivalent of the 155 00:09:04.480 --> 00:09:07.919 common good, is simply the sum total of private preferences. 156 00:09:08.240 --> 00:09:11.080 You know what's the common good just sort of lays 157 00:09:11.120 --> 00:09:13.480 a fair view. Let everybody pursue their private purposes, and 158 00:09:13.919 --> 00:09:17.559 it'll spontaneously order itself, in the libertarian view, into the 159 00:09:17.559 --> 00:09:21.720 best of all possible worlds. And so there's still no 160 00:09:21.799 --> 00:09:25.279 substance of view there. It's a procedural view. Is that 161 00:09:25.320 --> 00:09:28.879 a fair characterization or how do you I should be 162 00:09:28.879 --> 00:09:31.039 thinking about the term common good in the context of 163 00:09:31.080 --> 00:09:32.519 this current conversation going on? 164 00:09:33.039 --> 00:09:35.960 Well, you know the example I use with my students, 165 00:09:36.080 --> 00:09:37.840 and you know, I teach a notre dame. So this 166 00:09:38.120 --> 00:09:40.639 you got to speak the language they understand and. 167 00:09:42.879 --> 00:09:46.720 Which means what, by the way, not Christian Catholic doctrine. 168 00:09:46.799 --> 00:09:51.279 I'm to assume no, I know something, but it should 169 00:09:51.320 --> 00:09:54.360 be even more more fundamental here at Notre Dame. 170 00:09:54.440 --> 00:09:57.799 So what's the common good of the Notre Dame football team? 171 00:09:58.639 --> 00:09:59.000 Winning? 172 00:10:00.159 --> 00:10:00.360 Yeah? 173 00:10:00.440 --> 00:10:04.960 No, So what's the good of the quarterback? You know? When? 174 00:10:05.080 --> 00:10:10.759 Is how in? And the quarterback doesn't have a good 175 00:10:11.679 --> 00:10:15.120 that is really can be comprehended or understood apart from 176 00:10:15.120 --> 00:10:18.679 the good of the team. When the team wins, the 177 00:10:18.759 --> 00:10:24.639 quarterback wins, but the quarterback's enjoyment or satisfaction or excellence 178 00:10:24.679 --> 00:10:30.080 in the winning uh is not diminished by the running 179 00:10:30.120 --> 00:10:34.200 back also winning. It really is a good enjoyed, enjoyed, 180 00:10:34.440 --> 00:10:40.840 experienced in common and that's part of a team, right, 181 00:10:40.919 --> 00:10:43.399 And it's it's it's a very simple way. It's not perfect, 182 00:10:43.399 --> 00:10:45.360 but it's a way of understanding the common goods. So 183 00:10:45.399 --> 00:10:48.440 common goods and sort of a technical definition or goods 184 00:10:48.480 --> 00:10:51.320 that when I enjoy it, if we have a common good, 185 00:10:51.320 --> 00:10:55.240 when I enjoy it, your enjoyment isn't diminished or decreased 186 00:10:55.360 --> 00:10:55.799 at all. 187 00:10:56.519 --> 00:10:56.720 Right. 188 00:10:56.799 --> 00:11:02.279 So, so healthcare, sorry to bring that up just off 189 00:11:02.320 --> 00:11:05.039 the top of my mind, is not really a common 190 00:11:05.080 --> 00:11:08.279 good because it's a scarce resource. And if I and 191 00:11:08.320 --> 00:11:10.799 if I enjoy it, you can't you can't enjoy. You know, 192 00:11:11.000 --> 00:11:14.320 if if if the doctors doing surgery on me, he 193 00:11:14.360 --> 00:11:16.360 can't be doing surgery at you at the same time. 194 00:11:17.320 --> 00:11:20.759 Whereas if the nation is providing defense for me, it's 195 00:11:20.799 --> 00:11:22.480 also providing defense for you. 196 00:11:23.639 --> 00:11:27.679 And I play Devil's advocate. Say that again, Yeah, I 197 00:11:27.679 --> 00:11:31.759 played Devil's advocate for a moment. By that definition, Sorry 198 00:11:31.799 --> 00:11:35.759 to do this family show, But since Minneapolis has recently 199 00:11:35.840 --> 00:11:43.679 resurrected this lovely institution, people gays who who hang out 200 00:11:43.799 --> 00:11:48.080 in and have public sex and public bathhouses can all 201 00:11:48.120 --> 00:11:52.919 be said to be sharing a common good, and one's 202 00:11:53.120 --> 00:11:57.440 sharing of it does not reduce the sharing of by 203 00:11:57.480 --> 00:12:04.279 another person. That's way. I don't really fully believe that, 204 00:12:04.360 --> 00:12:07.639 but I'm I really am trying to play Devil's advocate that. 205 00:12:07.799 --> 00:12:11.200 In fact, it's not just enough to say that that 206 00:12:11.279 --> 00:12:13.080 a common good is something that you and I can 207 00:12:13.080 --> 00:12:15.679 both enjoy without diminishing it for the other person. There 208 00:12:15.720 --> 00:12:17.799 is something more to it, and that's my point. 209 00:12:17.879 --> 00:12:21.399 Oh yeah, yeah, sure, sure, I mean you can say 210 00:12:21.440 --> 00:12:24.039 that's a necessary but not sufficient common goods. So there 211 00:12:24.039 --> 00:12:26.720 are different common goods, right, So the common good of 212 00:12:26.720 --> 00:12:31.039 the football team is winning the real question is what's 213 00:12:31.039 --> 00:12:35.960 the common good of the political community, because that are 214 00:12:36.039 --> 00:12:38.679 not within the political community too. I mean this is 215 00:12:38.720 --> 00:12:42.759 this is part of the problem. People assume that whatever 216 00:12:44.279 --> 00:12:46.759 whatever common goods I mean there really are common goods. 217 00:12:46.960 --> 00:12:50.200 Whatever the common good is, the political community must aim 218 00:12:50.240 --> 00:12:53.639 at it. No, there's a political common good proper to 219 00:12:53.759 --> 00:12:56.799 the political community. But there are other common goods. There's 220 00:12:56.879 --> 00:13:00.279 a common good of the moon Yo's household and is 221 00:13:00.279 --> 00:13:02.879 for the moon Yo's household. There's the common good of 222 00:13:02.919 --> 00:13:05.639 the University of Notre Dame, which is separate. You know, 223 00:13:05.679 --> 00:13:08.200 it's a private school. It's its own thing. There's the 224 00:13:08.240 --> 00:13:11.080 common good of the nation. There's common goods within the 225 00:13:11.159 --> 00:13:15.200 church itself, right, and those are not So it's it's 226 00:13:15.240 --> 00:13:17.840 the real question is what is the common good of 227 00:13:17.879 --> 00:13:19.200 the political community. 228 00:13:20.559 --> 00:13:22.360 Yeah, so let's let's linger on this a little bit 229 00:13:22.360 --> 00:13:26.559 and bring in a constitutional dimension. Perhaps the first point 230 00:13:26.679 --> 00:13:28.759 is I'll just make this we don't have to discuss. 231 00:13:28.799 --> 00:13:31.200 If we can come back to it, is what is 232 00:13:31.240 --> 00:13:33.679 the common good? Let's use your football metaphor. Yeah, you 233 00:13:33.720 --> 00:13:35.279 want to win. Do you want the people on the 234 00:13:35.320 --> 00:13:38.440 team to be happy and play with you? Play the 235 00:13:38.559 --> 00:13:41.759 roles and so the team prospers together. But even that 236 00:13:41.879 --> 00:13:43.720 is controversial. You know, is it a run player or 237 00:13:43.639 --> 00:13:46.039 a pass play? You know, I want the ball, You're 238 00:13:46.080 --> 00:13:48.879 not giving me the ball often enough? Right, And now 239 00:13:48.960 --> 00:13:52.279 that's a you know, kind of simplistic analogy. But the 240 00:13:52.320 --> 00:13:54.360 point is that what is the public interest of the 241 00:13:54.399 --> 00:13:57.320 common good is inherently controversial. It's not just a matter 242 00:13:57.360 --> 00:13:59.679 of will we differ about what the good is? Right, 243 00:13:59.720 --> 00:14:01.240 that's arguing about justice. Right. 244 00:14:01.399 --> 00:14:05.600 What about instead, instead of using a football team as 245 00:14:05.600 --> 00:14:08.679 an example, let's use a w NBA team as an example. 246 00:14:09.720 --> 00:14:13.600 And I'm being very serious about that and purposeful because 247 00:14:13.639 --> 00:14:19.200 of course, winning obviously is not the only common good 248 00:14:19.480 --> 00:14:22.279 as defined by at least by the owners, by the 249 00:14:22.799 --> 00:14:27.159 organization itself, winning, the winning, making money off of winning, 250 00:14:27.320 --> 00:14:30.240 being you know, all of those things that we probably 251 00:14:30.279 --> 00:14:33.720 would attribute to a football team, whether a high school, 252 00:14:33.759 --> 00:14:38.000 college or professional. The WNBA kind of messes up the 253 00:14:38.000 --> 00:14:42.360 whole thing and just goes to show you how easy 254 00:14:42.360 --> 00:14:45.120 it is to take what should be an obvious common good. 255 00:14:45.840 --> 00:14:49.519 Maybe I'm sounding like a good liberal here and turn 256 00:14:49.639 --> 00:14:53.039 it into something that you know, the people with enough 257 00:14:53.080 --> 00:14:58.559 power have have substituted something entirely different. And there's the 258 00:14:59.000 --> 00:15:01.039 heart of their argument. I think a faulty argument, by 259 00:15:01.080 --> 00:15:03.440 the way, But the heart of their argument is who's 260 00:15:03.559 --> 00:15:06.679 to say what the common good is? Right? That's what 261 00:15:06.759 --> 00:15:08.200 it always comes down to. 262 00:15:08.559 --> 00:15:11.279 Well, that's the nihilist and relevus part that Phil points out. 263 00:15:11.600 --> 00:15:14.600 That's the way I thought. I wasn't sure where you 264 00:15:14.600 --> 00:15:16.159 were going there. I thought maybe you were trying to 265 00:15:16.200 --> 00:15:18.639 sneak in a way to get me to admit that 266 00:15:18.679 --> 00:15:21.440 Sophie Cunningham has replaced Sidney Sweeney as the object of 267 00:15:21.440 --> 00:15:22.960 our affections on the shoe okay with. 268 00:15:22.879 --> 00:15:25.399 Both of them. I'm okay with both of them. Sidney 269 00:15:25.399 --> 00:15:27.559 Sweeney is a little more solid across the board, but 270 00:15:27.720 --> 00:15:31.000 Sophie Sophie's standing up as well. So good for them. 271 00:15:31.039 --> 00:15:33.200 And they're both beautiful, so you know me, I have 272 00:15:33.240 --> 00:15:36.200 a thing for beautiful blondes that are. 273 00:15:36.600 --> 00:15:39.919 I don't know why you knew this was going to happen, Phil, 274 00:15:39.960 --> 00:15:40.279 didn't you? 275 00:15:40.639 --> 00:15:41.399 Yeah? 276 00:15:41.919 --> 00:15:43.639 No, I actually you know I had. What I had 277 00:15:43.639 --> 00:15:47.080 on my mind was Clay Travish offering a ten million 278 00:15:47.159 --> 00:15:51.919 dollar bet with a high school team versus the anyway, Sorry, 279 00:15:51.159 --> 00:15:55.240 I am not trying to tribute for anything like that. Phil, 280 00:15:56.240 --> 00:15:59.039 I'm just coming at you with what every argument would 281 00:15:59.039 --> 00:16:01.480 be by some dumb girl who actually took the time 282 00:16:01.519 --> 00:16:03.240 to read your article. 283 00:16:03.559 --> 00:16:06.240 Well, that's what we're that's what we're We're gonna get 284 00:16:06.279 --> 00:16:09.399 some question of what is the remedy for various problems? 285 00:16:09.600 --> 00:16:11.279 Let me let me get let me get two points 286 00:16:11.320 --> 00:16:14.159 in real quick. Okay, So that Steve's question was original 287 00:16:14.200 --> 00:16:16.000 question is you know what is the common good? And 288 00:16:16.080 --> 00:16:18.360 I and I use the football team as an example, 289 00:16:18.879 --> 00:16:22.600 and and here and then Linda, Linda points us to 290 00:16:22.840 --> 00:16:24.879 another dimension. So my first point is on Steve, my 291 00:16:24.919 --> 00:16:26.879 second point on Lucretia. 292 00:16:26.919 --> 00:16:27.080 Here. 293 00:16:27.320 --> 00:16:30.879 The first point is the football team clearly has a 294 00:16:30.960 --> 00:16:35.080 common good, Like there's a purpose. There's a purpose of 295 00:16:35.120 --> 00:16:39.039 the team. It's to win games. Now there might be 296 00:16:39.159 --> 00:16:41.759 other purposes, and you know, and if you really think 297 00:16:41.799 --> 00:16:44.840 about it, actually the real purpose of the football team 298 00:16:45.000 --> 00:16:47.559 is to develop the character of these men. And but 299 00:16:47.559 --> 00:16:50.279 but but look just in the simple sense that the 300 00:16:50.320 --> 00:16:53.519 team has an end, a t los a purpose and 301 00:16:53.559 --> 00:16:56.960 that's the's say, to win. Okay, what Lucretia and then 302 00:16:57.000 --> 00:17:00.879 introduces is with the w n B A is well, hey, 303 00:17:00.679 --> 00:17:04.079 but we're using it for other things to have a 304 00:17:04.279 --> 00:17:07.759 gender equality or whatever it might be. And that's to say, 305 00:17:07.880 --> 00:17:10.359 that's to admit there is a purpose. It's just saying 306 00:17:10.400 --> 00:17:12.640 it's not to win the games. It might be to 307 00:17:12.640 --> 00:17:17.200 make money or to social transformation or whatever. And so 308 00:17:17.240 --> 00:17:20.480 there's disputes about what the common good is. But my 309 00:17:20.599 --> 00:17:24.720 point with this point st brought up was why this nihilism? 310 00:17:25.160 --> 00:17:30.240 How's nihilism if there's no common good? Because the modern 311 00:17:30.279 --> 00:17:34.599 liberal position or the liberal position is there's only private goods, 312 00:17:34.599 --> 00:17:38.319 because there's only private wills, So there really is no 313 00:17:38.440 --> 00:17:41.680 purpose to anything, and therefore there can be no common 314 00:17:41.720 --> 00:17:44.359 good because common good and purpose or tilS are connected. 315 00:17:44.680 --> 00:17:46.880 Okay, I wanted to have a quick ad break here 316 00:17:46.920 --> 00:17:48.279 and then I want to come back and ask the 317 00:17:48.319 --> 00:17:51.880 second half of that question. So don't go, everybody, We'll 318 00:17:51.880 --> 00:18:01.359 be right back. All right. We're still working on this 319 00:18:01.480 --> 00:18:04.000 question of the common good, and I've got another question 320 00:18:04.039 --> 00:18:06.920 that's on the constitutional level. But first, Lucretian wants to 321 00:18:06.920 --> 00:18:08.519 play on a couple more aspects of this, and I 322 00:18:08.559 --> 00:18:11.200 have one more aspect of the current focus as well. 323 00:18:11.240 --> 00:18:12.039 So Lucretia go. 324 00:18:12.640 --> 00:18:14.480 So I'm going to go just a little bit deeper 325 00:18:14.519 --> 00:18:17.559 to something you said about that in your article. You 326 00:18:17.640 --> 00:18:21.759 said that liberals believe that creation has no purpose. And 327 00:18:21.799 --> 00:18:25.480 I don't disagree with that, but my tendency is to 328 00:18:25.519 --> 00:18:27.480 look at it just a little bit differently, and that 329 00:18:27.640 --> 00:18:30.720 is that the modern liberal, the modern leftist, whatever you 330 00:18:30.759 --> 00:18:34.000 want to call it, progressive, does not believe that, first 331 00:18:34.000 --> 00:18:37.839 in the first place, we are created. They actually and 332 00:18:38.359 --> 00:18:43.599 the role of the theory of evolution, the philosophical idea 333 00:18:43.759 --> 00:18:48.640 of evolution, is so critical here in the sense that 334 00:18:49.200 --> 00:18:50.960 one of the things, let me throw this at you, 335 00:18:51.200 --> 00:18:54.039 one of the things that evolution did was it made 336 00:18:54.119 --> 00:18:57.039 it possible to deny not only that there was a creation, 337 00:18:57.160 --> 00:19:00.119 but that that creation would have a purpose. Because if 338 00:19:00.160 --> 00:19:05.799 you can attribute all of life, all of the complexity 339 00:19:05.839 --> 00:19:10.960 and beauty of life, to the primordial muck uh, and 340 00:19:11.000 --> 00:19:12.440 then the rest of it's just a you know, a 341 00:19:12.480 --> 00:19:15.839 series of accidents, right, And so I think that that 342 00:19:16.720 --> 00:19:22.559 in and of itself creates its own set of nihilistic facing, 343 00:19:22.599 --> 00:19:27.880 the abyss and the absolute need to create your own universe, 344 00:19:28.000 --> 00:19:31.720 be your own gods, and then force that force that 345 00:19:32.279 --> 00:19:35.759 on others in order to have the comfort of knowing 346 00:19:35.799 --> 00:19:38.400 that it's something beyond that abyss that you can't face. 347 00:19:38.799 --> 00:19:41.400 Does that make sense? Again, I'm not disagreeing with the 348 00:19:41.440 --> 00:19:44.400 way you put it, but there's implications to the idea 349 00:19:44.920 --> 00:19:49.160 that modern liberals just don't believe in any kind of 350 00:19:49.240 --> 00:19:53.119 creation because that would in and of itself assume a creator, 351 00:19:54.119 --> 00:19:55.359 and that they deny. 352 00:19:56.119 --> 00:20:00.519 I agree, And you're getting you're digging much deeper into 353 00:20:00.960 --> 00:20:06.519 how did this form of liberalism arise? And I think 354 00:20:06.599 --> 00:20:10.079 you're pointing us way beneath the surface, and I think 355 00:20:10.160 --> 00:20:14.680 Darwin is exactly right, and it's the really the idea 356 00:20:14.720 --> 00:20:18.839 that it's all chance, it's all purposeless, there is no purpose, 357 00:20:18.880 --> 00:20:22.720 there are no ends, and. 358 00:20:22.079 --> 00:20:26.960 Which is again why the old Throsymachus way of ordering 359 00:20:26.960 --> 00:20:31.279 the universe just is the advantage of the stronger survival 360 00:20:31.559 --> 00:20:35.160 is the advantage of the stronger right, and so therefore 361 00:20:36.759 --> 00:20:42.240 it's very necessary, not just you almost lose that what 362 00:20:42.640 --> 00:20:45.039 the founding father saw is is a way to work 363 00:20:45.079 --> 00:20:47.759 out our differences in a way that would contribute to 364 00:20:47.799 --> 00:20:50.240 the common good. Not just because you don't believe in it, 365 00:20:50.279 --> 00:20:53.319 but because you can't. You have to be the stronger. 366 00:20:53.640 --> 00:20:54.559 That's how you survive. 367 00:20:54.920 --> 00:20:58.200 Well, my angle on this is maybe a little simpler. 368 00:20:58.440 --> 00:21:01.720 You know, I was startled when I started thirty years ago, 369 00:21:01.799 --> 00:21:04.200 pointing to all the data I assembled about how environmental 370 00:21:04.200 --> 00:21:06.839 conditions are getting better in America and all prosperous countries. 371 00:21:07.319 --> 00:21:11.480 Environmentalists would erupt into a rage. They hated that things 372 00:21:11.519 --> 00:21:14.000 could be getting better. Why because fundamental to a lot 373 00:21:14.000 --> 00:21:16.559 of environmentalists is the environmental apocalypse, the end of the 374 00:21:16.599 --> 00:21:20.960 world's coming. It's their secular eschatology. Now, similarly, you know 375 00:21:21.039 --> 00:21:23.799 these fights we've had the last several years of Obamacare 376 00:21:24.279 --> 00:21:27.759 requiring that little sisters of the poor include abortion services 377 00:21:27.799 --> 00:21:30.400 and their health care plans and so forth. Why the 378 00:21:30.440 --> 00:21:34.839 compulsion to mandate that? And I know they'll give you 379 00:21:34.839 --> 00:21:37.240 a wonky reason that's unpersuasive, But I actually think the 380 00:21:37.279 --> 00:21:40.559 deeper reason Lucretia hints at, which is the way I 381 00:21:40.640 --> 00:21:42.519 put it, is this way though, ways, I think they 382 00:21:42.559 --> 00:21:48.480 are offended, outraged, unnerved by people who actually believe in 383 00:21:48.519 --> 00:21:52.400 something that there's a basis in reality. It could be 384 00:21:52.400 --> 00:21:56.160 a transcendent basis if you're a devout religious person, and 385 00:21:56.200 --> 00:21:59.920 they have to be hostile to it, and that manif 386 00:22:00.160 --> 00:22:02.599 itself there for me, that's just you know, my rant 387 00:22:02.599 --> 00:22:02.839 on this. 388 00:22:03.119 --> 00:22:07.400 I agree and I want filter respond, But but that explains, 389 00:22:07.480 --> 00:22:13.000 for instance, the DOJ going after parents, at going after 390 00:22:13.680 --> 00:22:18.480 fundamental Catholics or Conservative Catholics whatever they call them, all 391 00:22:18.519 --> 00:22:22.480 of us after you know, preachers praying outside of abortion clinics. 392 00:22:22.759 --> 00:22:25.119 It explains all of it, Steve, it's actually a really 393 00:22:25.119 --> 00:22:25.720 good point. 394 00:22:26.079 --> 00:22:27.400 Now now the question. 395 00:22:27.680 --> 00:22:29.720 But I was going to let fil Oh. 396 00:22:29.599 --> 00:22:30.880 Sorry, yeah, I don't know if you want to tell me. 397 00:22:31.160 --> 00:22:35.000 So I agree. I mean, it's much like being on 398 00:22:35.039 --> 00:22:38.480 the podcast. As much like my experience of listening to 399 00:22:38.519 --> 00:22:41.200 the podcast. You guys say things that are perfectly reasonable, 400 00:22:41.200 --> 00:22:43.319 and then I wait for John to say something that 401 00:22:43.440 --> 00:22:44.279