this is a good fit. matt has stayed where he is. but niskanen has moved to the left.
10+ years ago will wilkinson was respectfully interviewing jonah goldberg about liberal fascism. but now he's more SJW than klein&yglesias put together ;-)
(2) I like Niskanen, and I am a longtime fan of Jacob T. Levy among others on their strong team.
(3) This does feel like a bit of a right turn for you, or at least for your personal brand as I perceive it as a consumer of Yglesias content. Jokes about poker buddies aside, I'm curious whether you consider that (a) an intended result, (b) an unintended but acceptable result because there are other benefits from the affiliation, or (c) not to be the case at all.
I have not grilled every Niskanen person on their full ideological worldview, but I expect I would be on the left flank of the Niskanen senior fellows list. I think participating an institution whose center of gravity is somewhat to my right is probably a more effective way to generate change than doing the opposite.
Question: Isn't the Niskanen Center significantly to the right of you? They're still kinda skeptical of true universal health insurance, enthusiastic income redistribution, and some other things. I'll be the first to agree they're a million times better than Cato Libertarianism, but just after reading you for a few years, I get the sense that they're still quite to the Right of you.
Isn't the correct position to remain skeptical of universal health insurance and enthusiastic income redistribution? Both proposals would be disruptive. Disruption creates risk. Assessing that risk seems prudent (e.g., universal coverage vs. universal catastrophic coverage).
well, yes. I would not use "the correct position" and "my opinion" interchangeably. "Correct" implies objective fact, whereas opinion is by definition objective. An easy way to rephrase your first sentence would be something like "I am skeptical of universal health insurance" etc. (Unless you're using it the way a certain blogger sometimes uses it, e.g. defining the spicy chicken sandwich as "the correct order at Wendy's") I'll set aside my personal opinion of universal health insurance, etc, b/c i don't want to spend all day going down this particular rabbit hole
Yeah, I read that open letter on the green new deal... and kinda yikes. A lot of bad assumptions with no underpinning data.
Apparently Americans have only grown more prosperous since the 60s (orly?), which obviously (?) means they're sympathetic to the Republicans' low-tax libertarian positions... and the Democrats have only remained viable by tacking to the center. I've made something of a study of this, and... no, none of this is true. It reads like the work of a college Republican fresh from his first reading of the Fountainhead.
I think the GND is rather too ambitious and altogether too nebulous; no better than all those harebrained 'tax on a postcard' ideas Republicans trot out with every presidential primary. But that rebuttal was kinda bad.
I'm a little surprised that Matt would join this group, and I hope he can elevate their work a little.
From The Future is Faction: "As American political parties have become increasingly captured by their ideological extremes in recent decades, the space for cross-party coalition-building has shrunk. ". This is a both sides-ism that worries me. It seems as if Republicans move to an ideological extreme, at which point most Democrats ask themselves " starting from the Republican position, how can I appear to be centrist?"
"Let’s call this “the Grover Norquist total victory theory of policy change,” because that’s exactly what it is. And I doubt it will work any better for you than it has for him.". From the GND article. Those folks moved the country so far to the right that, on economics, the Democrats are to the right of where most Republicans were when he started. I'd say they've done reasonably well with that strategy.
former poker buddies turned officemates? doesn't sound like an ideological realignment, more like dreading working from home for forever and planning accordingly(?) lol
For those commenting on the 'rightward' turn of this move, I think people at the Niskanen Center at this point is just less connected by ideology than it is by something like disagreement with their ideological homes or change their ideological counterparts' minds on their side's dogma, usually a specific issue of their expertise.
That's how I see it too. They have a podcast and the first question they ask every guest is "what have you been wrong about recently". They're not perfect of course but the level of humility and nuance is on a different planet to some of the other (loud) voices in the discourse.
Congratulations. Also, any chance you can do more work with Karl Smith from Bloomberg? Your recent-ish weeds podcast with him was terrific. Dara’s nice and all but I basically tune her out except to hear her latest word of the day (disambiguate today). Anyway keep up the good work.
this is a good fit. matt has stayed where he is. but niskanen has moved to the left.
10+ years ago will wilkinson was respectfully interviewing jonah goldberg about liberal fascism. but now he's more SJW than klein&yglesias put together ;-)
(1) Congratulations!
(2) I like Niskanen, and I am a longtime fan of Jacob T. Levy among others on their strong team.
(3) This does feel like a bit of a right turn for you, or at least for your personal brand as I perceive it as a consumer of Yglesias content. Jokes about poker buddies aside, I'm curious whether you consider that (a) an intended result, (b) an unintended but acceptable result because there are other benefits from the affiliation, or (c) not to be the case at all.
I have not grilled every Niskanen person on their full ideological worldview, but I expect I would be on the left flank of the Niskanen senior fellows list. I think participating an institution whose center of gravity is somewhat to my right is probably a more effective way to generate change than doing the opposite.
center left former chief neolib shill 🤝 niskanen
2021 neolib shill bracket super team
Question: Isn't the Niskanen Center significantly to the right of you? They're still kinda skeptical of true universal health insurance, enthusiastic income redistribution, and some other things. I'll be the first to agree they're a million times better than Cato Libertarianism, but just after reading you for a few years, I get the sense that they're still quite to the Right of you.
Isn't the correct position to remain skeptical of universal health insurance and enthusiastic income redistribution? Both proposals would be disruptive. Disruption creates risk. Assessing that risk seems prudent (e.g., universal coverage vs. universal catastrophic coverage).
"The correct position" according to who? 🤔
Ok. Let's start with me - since I said it. I'm happy to dive a bit deeper here. Do you disagree?
well, yes. I would not use "the correct position" and "my opinion" interchangeably. "Correct" implies objective fact, whereas opinion is by definition objective. An easy way to rephrase your first sentence would be something like "I am skeptical of universal health insurance" etc. (Unless you're using it the way a certain blogger sometimes uses it, e.g. defining the spicy chicken sandwich as "the correct order at Wendy's") I'll set aside my personal opinion of universal health insurance, etc, b/c i don't want to spend all day going down this particular rabbit hole
The Spicy Chicken Sandwich is the correct order at Wendy's : )
This rabbit hole you dug.
Lady i'm not the one who used the phrase "the correct opinion" lol
Universal catastrophic coverage! Oyez, oyez!
Yeah, I read that open letter on the green new deal... and kinda yikes. A lot of bad assumptions with no underpinning data.
Apparently Americans have only grown more prosperous since the 60s (orly?), which obviously (?) means they're sympathetic to the Republicans' low-tax libertarian positions... and the Democrats have only remained viable by tacking to the center. I've made something of a study of this, and... no, none of this is true. It reads like the work of a college Republican fresh from his first reading of the Fountainhead.
I think the GND is rather too ambitious and altogether too nebulous; no better than all those harebrained 'tax on a postcard' ideas Republicans trot out with every presidential primary. But that rebuttal was kinda bad.
I'm a little surprised that Matt would join this group, and I hope he can elevate their work a little.
From The Future is Faction: "As American political parties have become increasingly captured by their ideological extremes in recent decades, the space for cross-party coalition-building has shrunk. ". This is a both sides-ism that worries me. It seems as if Republicans move to an ideological extreme, at which point most Democrats ask themselves " starting from the Republican position, how can I appear to be centrist?"
"Let’s call this “the Grover Norquist total victory theory of policy change,” because that’s exactly what it is. And I doubt it will work any better for you than it has for him.". From the GND article. Those folks moved the country so far to the right that, on economics, the Democrats are to the right of where most Republicans were when he started. I'd say they've done reasonably well with that strategy.
https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1333437522626695168
former poker buddies turned officemates? doesn't sound like an ideological realignment, more like dreading working from home for forever and planning accordingly(?) lol
For those commenting on the 'rightward' turn of this move, I think people at the Niskanen Center at this point is just less connected by ideology than it is by something like disagreement with their ideological homes or change their ideological counterparts' minds on their side's dogma, usually a specific issue of their expertise.
That's how I see it too. They have a podcast and the first question they ask every guest is "what have you been wrong about recently". They're not perfect of course but the level of humility and nuance is on a different planet to some of the other (loud) voices in the discourse.
The Niskanen Center's roster of senior fellows is 🔥🔥🔥
- @mattyglesias
- @jenniferdoleac
- @JamesBessen
- @ProfSchleich
- @JoshuaTMcCabe
- @SarahAnzia
- @dolanecon
- @chavezlinda
- @NateMJensen
- @lkatfield
- @jflier
- @ProfFortner
- @MattGrossmann
- @jtlevy
- @CrimProfessor
matt + doleac weeds ep was solid. def worth a listen.
"moderates’ embrace of empiricism rather than dogma"
lol.
So you're just going to go there and vibe? What will you be doing?
Well, we'll see what happens. They're gonna give me a desk and I'm gonna write my blog and I'm sure we'll find some stuff to do together.
This genuinely seems like a good fit. Centrist contrarianism is an underappreciated niche.
Yea never read them before today now can look them up and read all their stuff.
Weird, why didn't I get this post in email?
I didn't mail this one out because I don't want to spam people too much
I want the spam! I'm paying for the spam!
agreed re: spam!
Same
This is awesome! Congrats on this and I look forward to reading the work that arises from this
You could have just said you were smart. But we knew that. Congratulations.
Congrats! Super excited to see the fruits of this fellowship.
Congratulations Matt! Been a very big fan of Niskanen for a while.
This is a good fit for all. Congratulations!
Congratulations. Also, any chance you can do more work with Karl Smith from Bloomberg? Your recent-ish weeds podcast with him was terrific. Dara’s nice and all but I basically tune her out except to hear her latest word of the day (disambiguate today). Anyway keep up the good work.