What is the proper role of the intellectual in public life? Plato believed that philosophers should govern society. He founded his famous Academy with the hope of creating such "philosopher kings." Another philosopher, Immanuel Kant, however, believed that "the possession of power unavoidably spoils the free use of reason." Therefore, he argued that intellectuals should keep a proper distance from the political realm. Who is right, Kant or Plato?
The impact of a health crisis that has businesses across the country re-examining their investments abroad.
In the new online volume, Future Challenges in National Security and Law, members of the Hoover Institution’s Koret-Taube Task Force on National Security and Law and guest contributors offer incisive commentary on the controversies that have erupted over national security law in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, laying the foundations for understanding such future issues...
It may be that, as the Gilbert and Sullivan jingle has it, everybody is born a little liberal or a little conservative, but it usually takes some time before one decides for oneself which it is, followed by some more time before one decides one got it wrong the first time. Such are the shiftings and switchings experienced by the contributors to Why I Turned Right: Leading Baby Boom Conservatives Chronicle Their Political Journeys...
The Endangered Virtues essay series is an online volume, written by members of Hoover’s Boyd and Jill Smith Task Force on Virtues of a Free Society that rests on several shared convictions: that the American constitutional tradition is a source of wisdom about the mutual dependence of liberty and virtue and the tension between them; that the tradition places primary responsibility for the cultivation of the virtues on which liberty depends not on government but on the institutions of civil society, particularly the family and faith but also on education, work, and civic life; that in recent decades and owing to a variety of causes—social, cultural, economic, and political—those virtues and the sources that sustain have been exposed to danger and are weakening; and that renewing the virtues and the sources that sustain them is an urgent task.
The dean brings charges of ‘unprofessional conduct’ for a vigorous defense of free inquiry.
The former FBI directors tend to investigate Republicans far more zealously than Democrats.
Use the power of the purse to abolish speech codes—making public colleges into a model for private ones.
Few top colleges explain their purpose to students. They want to talk gender and inequality instead.
As administrators foist ‘social justice’ on 4,000 suburban students, parents plead for balance.
The contributors to this volume examine the past, present, and future of progressivism in America from different perspectives and with different expertise. What is the future of progressivism in America in an increasingly unfriendly political climate? How can progressives increase opportunity in America and make social and political life more inclusive and equal?
TA distinctive group of professional contributors examine the questions that divide conservatives today and reveal the variety of answer put forward by classical conservatives, libertarians, and neoconservatives. They each bring a distinctive voice to bear, reinforcing that conservatism in America represents a family of opinions and ideas rather than a rigid doctrine or set creed.
Despite the fundamental distinction between the two, misunderstandings of capitalism and socialism — and their implications for freedom — abound, and usually in favor socialism. In these circumstances, a return to the basics is warranted. The 17th-century writings of John Locke in defense of political and economic freedom and the 19th- century critique by Karl Marx of political and economic freedom represent classics of the genre.
Why did communism fail and liberal democracy prosper?
We are in the midst of a revolution in medicine: human genetic engineering. Like earlier revolutions in health care, such as surgery with anesthesia or the use of antibiotics, genetic engineering has the potential to greatly advance the health and wellbeing of mankind. Yet unlike earlier innovations, human genetic engineering raises serious ethical questions. It may be one thing for an adult to undergo gene therapy to cure a disease, but what about modifying human embryos to prevent that disease? And if embryos can be altered to improve health, what about to improve intelligence or to select physical characteristics such as hair or eye color?
A case currently before the Supreme Court challenges the constitutionality of the Texas Homosexual Conduct Law, which in 1974 legalized heterosexual sodomy but not same-sex sodomy. Does the Texas law violate the constitutional rights of homosexuals, or are states permitted to pass such laws if they choose? If the Supreme Court does strike down the Texas law, what implications will that have for other civil rights that gays and lesbians are seeking, such as same-sex marriage?
Every year it seems that popular culture goes a little bit further—bigger explosions, more action, more violence, more sex... Is pop culture harmless or should we be concerned about the values presented in pop culture and the effects those presentations have on society? For instance, what is the connection between depictions of violence in films and on television and the incidence of violence in real life? If pop culture is having a negative impact on our society, what should we do about it?
Should property owners be compensated for the effects of government regulation? According to the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution "No person shall … be deprived of … property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." But what exactly is a property right and what constitutes a taking? Seizure of land by the government may be a taking, but what about environmental or zoning regulations that place restrictions on land use? With one such taking case already before the Supreme Court, the legal battle over these questions could alter the very nature of the relationship between the rights of the individual property owner and those of society as a whole.
Of the 6 billion people on earth, 1 billion—primarily in North America, Europe, and East Asia—receive 80 percent of the global income. Meanwhile more than 1 billion people subsist on less than one dollar a day. Despite billions in development aid, many Third World nations are no better off than they were half a century ago. Why are developing countries still so poor? And what can international development agencies such as the World Bank do to help?