Law, Liberty, and Cass (Sunstein)

Anthropologist and Writer

One of my favorite writers—one of my favorite commenters on social affairs—is Conrad Kottak. He writes at The Anthropocene Anthropologist: Reflections on Bizarroland [https://conradkottak.substack.com/]. Maybe I could quote from the introduction of this new Q&A: … our guest today is Conrad Kottak, one of the leading anthropologists in the world. He is a cultural anthropologist—rather than an archeologist, say, or a primatologist—but he has his fingers in many pies. He is a professor emeritus at the University of Michigan, where he has taught since 1968. I myself had the privilege of taking one of his classes. He has done extensive fieldwork in Madagascar and Brazil. He is the author of several textbooks in wide use. In this Q&A, he tells me something interesting—well, many things that are interesting, but I am now thinking of this: He has been writing all his life, since he was a little boy. He always wanted to be a writer, and the writing came before the anthropology. For all these years, he has been writing as an anthropologist. He went to Columbia University, home of anthropology. Is that what introduced him to the field? Got him hooked on it? “Well,” he says, “I had a fourth-grade teacher who did a unit on South American Indians that I thought was pretty interesting. It fascinated me. But that lay in abeyance for quite a while until I got to college.” One of his teachers at Columbia was Margaret Mead, whose name for a long time was virtually synonymous with anthropology. In addition to being an anthropologist, she was a generalist, writing on a variety of subjects for a variety of publications. Conrad Kottak, too, is an anthropologist and generalist. Mead was controversial—is controversial—and I ask Professor Kottak to get into it a little, which he does, illuminatingly. The two countries of his fieldwork, Madagascar and Brazil—they seem to me remote, exotic, romantic. (Those are all forbidden words in anthropology, I’m sure. I almost specialize in forbidden words.) Professor Kottak has seen many sides of life. Indeed, he has examined them up close. I ask whether he was amused when a hit movie called “Madagascar” came out (2005). The people in Madagascar were not amused, he says. The world seemed more interested in saving wildlife than in addressing human problems. A blunt question, and a natural one: Did anthropology get flaky? Did a field that once attracted brilliant minds go all soft and political and granola? In the course of his answer, Professor Kottak says something central: Respect for fact must be paramount. Without a respect for fact, you don’t have science, social or otherwise. Here is another question: Are differences between peoples more interesting than similarities, or vice versa? Well, any anthropologist worth his salt studies and accounts for both. One thing Professor Kottak is known for is his inclusion of television. What I mean is, he writes about the impact of television on societies. Here in the United States, we used to be bonded by TV shows. Those bonds are … loosening, as we all look at select material on our phones. Oh, there are so many things you can discuss with an anthropologist, and with Conrad Kottak in particular. You will enjoy getting to know him. Q&A is the podcast of this site, Onward and Upward. The site is supported by readers and listeners. To receive new articles and episodes—and to support the work of the writer and podcaster—become a free or paid subscriber. Many thanks to you. Get full access to Onward and Upward at www.jaynordlinger.com/subscribe [https://www.jaynordlinger.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]

Your Land, My Land, Our Land

Beverly Gage [https://history.yale.edu/people/beverly-gage] is a professor at Yale and has a new book, timed for our 250th anniversary: This Land Is Your Land: A Road Trip through U.S. History [https://www.amazon.com/This-Land-Your-Through-History/dp/1668033100/ref=sr_1_1?crid=33GVBDWRFOSC0&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.YkcCYtZkCMkRNquEV5hzuCKEmTGqyj5w470ngfFb7_IbTcNj2W0VI63qbm3zJ7GqkSUV20aMGnYlJhAGEWeBNL6N6O3tEL2GupBUunFnM9JceeinFn2qnsacGpwEpx117GsToG4aRxXORaCnthfqWxYCTUgQgRFn1pvqUgB2J0D7-dwzolHHvvu0aszIOTzMaHN1ufAoajTrn6SMY26SWB5HT1CNQdq6CdpTeseKAgk.-TqkuPH7Xq-qyiarnFJGbtYDn_EsWUeg0kMVpooVv2g&dib_tag=se&keywords=this+land+is+your+land+book&qid=1781093470&sprefix=this+land+%2Caps%2C184&sr=8-1]. In a Q&A, we talk about this book and plenty more. “Q&A,” by the way, is the name of my podcast. For an interview show, it is not an especially imaginative name, but it serves. Professor Gage grew up outside Philadelphia. “When you were a girl,” I ask her, “did you read history like a fiend or did that come later?” She read “pretty widely,” she says. This reading included the trilogy by John Jakes about the Civil War—North and South. They were huge sellers, those books. Beverly was a musician: violinist, pianist, conductor. In college, however, she gravitated to other interests. She went to Yale and then, for graduate school, to Columbia. Can she name us a few of her favorite historians? Historians of the U.S., that is? She gives me two names: W. E. B. Du Bois (who, in addition to everything else he did, wrote a history of Reconstruction) and Richard Hofstadter. One thing those two had in common is: they could write like angels. That counts, when it comes to engaging a reader … In 2022, Professor Gage published a biography of J. Edgar Hoover, G-Man [https://www.amazon.com/G-Man-Pulitzer-Prize-Winner-American/dp/0593511468/ref=sr_1_1?crid=U5JJ9EXPEEZQ&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.H6QbFtyCmAJqbNjguV3tqfse-ScByFHl8ixjp-glxNTHuSEwI8w8dIrjgZTrUdwoDpYhsSJbRniqXN2vCX24neL_8FIZ8W7G52DNVhST1gw.lGbd32t9aMJ_EoHXhzQ25Q0enCeuijiz4HVmOmEDh84&dib_tag=se&keywords=beverly+gage+g-man&qid=1781053846&sprefix=beverly+gage%2Caps%2C172&sr=8-1]. It won the Bancroft Prize, the top award in U.S. history. And the Pulitzer Prize and yet others. I ask her a few questions about Hoover—including, “Was there anything good about him?” Well, he was “a believer in nonpartisan professional government service.” He was an “institutionalist.” He would not have liked the current FBI director. Was Hoover guilty in the matter of Martin Luther King? Did he and the FBI treat the civil rights leader unfairly? Very much so, answers Professor Gage. One more question, which is interesting in light of the FBI’s hounding of gays: Was Hoover himself gay? By all appearances, yes. Professor Gage’s new book, This Land Is Your Land, takes its title from a famous song: Woody Guthrie’s number from 1940. The song was, in part, a response to Irving Berlin’s “God Bless America.” Guthrie was a leftist, a supporter of Stalin’s Soviet Union. His song is an interesting story, but suffice it to say, here and now: it is part of the American treasury. You know the words: This land is your land, this land is my land,From California to the New York Island,From the Redwood Forest, to the Gulf Stream Waters.This land was made for you and me. The subtitle, remember, of Professor Gage’s book is “A Road Trip through U.S. History.” That is an American rite, and right, you could say: a road trip. I’ve always wanted to do the Maine-to-California thing. Never have. Beverly Gage has, two or three times. In this new book, she starts in Revolutionary Philadelphia and winds up at Disneyland, in SoCal. I tell her, “I think your book belongs in the category of civic education, which has been one of my causes in recent years.” “Very much so,” she says. “I mean, it’s not civic education in the sense of saying, ‘There are three branches of government, and here’s how they work,’ but it’s civic education in that it prods people to go out and get to know their country.” (I have paraphrased.) Last year, Yale formed a Committee on Trust in Higher Education [https://president.yale.edu/committees-programs/presidents-committees/committee-on-trust-in-higher-education]. It delved into a number of issues: grade inflation, tuition prices, admission policies, political bias, etc. Professor Gage was a co-chairman of the committee. It issued its report [https://president.yale.edu/sites/default/files/2026-04/Report-of-the-Committee-on-Trust-in-Higher-Education.pdf] in April. We talk about this a bit. And I ask her, “If you were czar—if you could wave a wand—what would you do, to improve higher ed?” She would get costs down. And she would get laptops and the like out of the classroom (except where strictly necessary). Maybe I have typed enough and should let you get on with hearing or watching our podcast. Beverly Gage is an excellent conversationalist and teacher. Q&A is the podcast of this site, Onward and Upward. The site is supported by readers and listeners. To receive new articles and episodes—and to support the work of the writer and podcaster—become a free or paid subscriber. Many thanks to you. Get full access to Onward and Upward at www.jaynordlinger.com/subscribe [https://www.jaynordlinger.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]

Golden Boy from Tennessee

To quote my introduction, Lamar Alexander is one of these golden children: Eagle Scout; president of his high-school class; governor of Boys State; editor of the college newspaper; Phi Beta Kappa; governor, which is to say real governor; university president; cabinet member; U.S. senator; presidential candidate. The presidency, by my calculation, is the only thing that ever eluded Mr. Alexander. He is a Republican. At the outset of our conversation, I suggest to him that he could not get anywhere in GOP politics today. His credentials and abilities would work against him. “Am I cynical or realistic?” “I hope you’re not realistic,” Alexander says. He has written his memoirs: The Education of a Senator: From JFK to Trump [https://www.amazon.com/Education-Senator-JFK-Trump/dp/B0FWZX15NQ/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1SB0J18A6ZB3E&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.NhRIg8Q-0nemCF9Id9Mxb4plnKKg8lehPFnmd9jwsxL9iaO_LJKzfQWuvdHNldzJD06XynaujcMmcFk9GMizgd6m6HQV1Oo6jxnVicKAOE5SU3lVfnSyhh5tbFe-z77yExc6--Mqb0a9rZxvpqaW56uP16r7eb8Bx8GHt-xpDm5z2KJXCkOi3mHUHy8oqvsq9e2g7bqrx0WpblpRSzQFoBZIA8WqvnZfxN2PqGJOpyA.2mXqbuuN1BO8CNSbD1B5tJWikM5TuF0hkY0AlRxTgkE&dib_tag=se&keywords=the+education+of+a+senator&qid=1779892744&sprefix=the+education%2Caps%2C168&sr=8-1]. Alexander is a seventh-generation Tennessean, a native of a mountain district that was Lincolnite. It was a Union area. When asked about his politics, Alexander’s great-grandfather would say, “I’m a Republican. I fought with the Union, and I vote like I shot.” Today, you can see Confederate flags in that district, as you can in my home state of Michigan—including way up north, in the Upper Peninsula. Curious phenomenon. In our podcast, Alexander and I discuss it a bit. His parents were teachers and public-spirited. When Lamar was ten, his father took him to the courthouse to meet Congressman Howard H. Baker Sr.—father of the future senator (and majority leader). “I was sure that I had just met the most respected man I was ever likely to meet,” says Alexander, “other than my dad and the preacher. I was raised to respect public service.” Alexander went to Vanderbilt and then to New York University Law School. It was quite a switch, living in Greenwich Village. Alexander has had a broad experience. In the Nixon White House, he worked under Bryce Harlow, the legendary staffer and adviser. (Harlow had advised Eisenhower previously.) He is known by some of us for a particular saying: “Trust is the coin of the realm in Washington, D.C.” Says Alexander, What I mostly remember about him is his wisdom and ethical attitude. At 29 years old, I sat 50 feet from the Oval Office at a desk crammed up next to his. I listened to his telephone conversations and saw other White House aides come in with difficult issues. The question he asked more often than not was, “What would be the right thing to do?,” and for many of them, that would clear up what they ought to do. I got my Ph.D. in politics and government from that remarkable person. Alexander also worked for Howard Baker (Jr.). I have an easy question: Would he have made a good president? Here is Alexander’s answer (and I will lightly paraphrase, as is my custom in these articles): In my opinion, the most important attributes of a president are character and temperament. And it would help if the president were very broad-gauge—if he had had a broad-gauge life. Then, I would hope the president leaned right, because I’m a conservative, but I’d rather have one with superior character and temperament, someone I could introduce my grandson to, someone about whom I could say to my grandson, “I hope you grow up to be like him.” Howard Baker was that kind of person. In our Q&A, we talk about Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Reagan. We talk about the difference between being a governor and being a senator. (Alexander is well positioned to discuss this issue.) We talk about education policy. (Same. Alexander was education secretary under Bush 41.) We talk about running for president. I ask him something cheesy, and something important—something along the lines of “Will our democracy survive?” Sure it will, he says. But then he holds up his smartphone: This is a problem, our “digital democracy,” which does a great job of setting people at enmity, driving them into little tribes. One of the people Alexander has most admired is John Minor Wisdom, the appeals-court judge, one of the “Fifth Circuit Four.” Young Alexander worked for him, down in New Orleans, where the court is based. The “four” were instrumental in the advancement of civil rights. In addition to his legal duties, Alexander played at Your Father’s Moustache, a bar and nightclub on Bourbon Street. Alexander plays the piano and the trombone. During one of my campaigns, a reporter said, “Mr. Alexander grew up in a lower-middle–class family in the mountains of Tennessee,” where I live today, and my mother—I talked to her that weekend, and she was reading Thessalonians to gather strength for how to deal with this slur on the family. She said, “Son, we never thought of ourselves that way. You had a piano lesson from the day you were three and a library card from the day you were four. You had everything you needed that was important.” What a joy, to speak with Lamar Alexander. As I say at the end of our podcast, I wish I could go out and vote for him today. Q&A is the podcast of this site, Onward and Upward. The site is supported by readers and listeners. To receive new articles and episodes—and to support the work of the writer and podcaster—become a free or paid subscriber. Many thanks to you. Get full access to Onward and Upward at www.jaynordlinger.com/subscribe [https://www.jaynordlinger.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]

Professor Mansfield Is In

It is always a treat to talk with Harvey Mansfield—Harvey C. Mansfield Jr., the scholar of political philosophy. He has been on the faculty of Harvard University (his alma mater) since 1962. Today, he is a professor emeritus. Many times, he has been my guest on Q&A. And he is again. His new book is The Rise and Fall of Rational Control: The History of Modern Political Philosophy [https://www.amazon.com/Rise-Fall-Rational-Control-Philosophy/dp/0674298853]. Opening question (mine): What is modern political philosophy? That is, when does it begin? It begins, says Professor Mansfield, with “Nick Machiavelli” (as he calls him, with a smile). Machiavelli advanced the idea of “rational control.” And what is rational control? Professor Mansfield explains the concept and provides a few examples. When they put speed bumps in your neighborhood, instead of going door to door asking people to drive slowly and carefully? That’s rational control. I ask Mansfield a range of questions, including this: “I assume you’ve read everything in your field—the ancient philosophers, the medieval ones, and the modern ones. But are there any gaps? Do you have a ‘lacuna,’ as Bill Buckley would say? Something you haven’t read but ought to?” “Oh, look,” says Mansfield, “I’m not as widely read as some other people.” He tries to “go deep” with selected books, rather than to get a “glimpse” at everything. Just now, he is studying Swift: Gulliver’s Travels. Another question: “When we’re young, we tend to have clear, strong opinions about things: about politics, philosophy, literature, music, and so on. But our views may shift as we grow and ripen. In the field of political philosophy, are there some who have gone up in your estimation and some who have gone down?” Yes, says Mansfield. John Rawls has gone up. As for those who have gone down—Harvey graciously demurs. One of his books is The Spirit of Liberalism [https://www.amazon.com/Spirit-Liberalism-Harvey-Mansfield-Jr/dp/0674833120/ref=sr_1_1?crid=VJQXZFXWZ4CD&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9._0DSATxZsPbpFWfhH2GrVjXYdJlrUayeP0ePfOGzWELjtcmRSR9dBfTkJuI310O4cUxYRPDI3jRh-kZCW9dYBL0e9G_nhIqgapA6JLvcYq290-fb0mHubos9wuH5NrkY.KDGSQon10oepwflWVhV6oa2-yNRIiwmDJgtAPz_sSlg&dib_tag=se&keywords=mansfield+the+spirit+of+liberalism&qid=1779538960&s=books&sprefix=mansfield+the+spirit+of+liberalism%2Cstripbooks%2C93&sr=1-1] (“liberalism” in the sense of “political freedom”). In our Q&A, we talk a bit about liberalism—its nature. Its strengths and weaknesses. Its durability and fragility. Mansfield is very canny on the subject. You know where illiberalism holds sway? On our college campuses, too many of them. In a Q&A with another regular guest, George F. Will, I asked, “Have you ever been starstruck by anyone?” Yes, he said [https://www.jaynordlinger.com/p/george-f-will-on-ukraine-us-politics-b78]—by Isaiah Berlin. Well, has Harvey C. Mansfield been starstruck by anyone? Yes—by Leo Strauss. For a year, he attended a weekly seminar with Strauss. “Astonishing,” says Mansfield. “I’d never seen anyone so smart, and so knowing, and so impressive. It took all my powers to keep up with him, or to try to keep up with him. … That was the experience of my life, I would say.” Toward the end of our podcast, we talk about novels and poetry. One genre that Mansfield reads is mysteries. They entail the importance of punishment. That’s not something you’re likely to hear about in political-science class, says Mansfield. Among his authors are Agatha Christie, J. K. Rowling, and Joe Ide. The third of these is a cousin of Francis Fukuyama, the political philosopher. By the way, does Professor Mansfield have a favorite Founder? Not really, but if he did, it would be Madison, paired with Hamilton—those two main authors of The Federalist. “That book is just so wonderful. It’s a joy to read, it lifts your mind.” A talk with Mansfield is pretty joyous and mind-lifting itself. Our podcast had some technical difficulties—some delays, some “freezing.” It’s a little choppy. But it’s smooth enough, and I know you will enjoy. Q&A is the podcast of this site, Onward and Upward. The site is supported by readers and listeners. To receive new articles and episodes—and to support the work of the writer and podcaster—become a free or paid subscriber. Many thanks to you. Get full access to Onward and Upward at www.jaynordlinger.com/subscribe [https://www.jaynordlinger.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]

Law, Liberty, and Cass (Sunstein)

Introducing this Q&A, I say, … our guest today is Cass Sunstein, the law professor, the legal thinker, the writer. For many years, he taught at the University of Chicago, and for many years since, he has taught at Harvard. He has written a profusion of books, to go with countless articles—though maybe someone has counted them. His latest books, I believe, are On Liberalism: In Defense of Freedom [https://www.amazon.com/Liberalism-Defense-Cass-R-Sunstein/dp/0262049775/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1YH3ADQSV2NAO&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.96Xo3LciH8wkE2Exg4rgIKBtPgLdv1xGSRcIj6n42V7txWUTsdbts9rhC_PffyIsLYNOQ59P4mhTtdrGMDMi0KYHbJ9G-2qPk2-Dt22u6_u2i4pYUyCLSxVbocKJAAfH3r9uU2EtDXdwfR8iCjKOUD-lEBjZ22qy0Gl8J81XQUbQC0kY_3nFXjDnaqgUZ6Xw8916EXVKTZ51tk2xl1xAMQQQ1ArbfWidO8SgFaoA12Q.eGa7pjKjqrtX1aKjKTD_ZPFjw37UgLs1P5cdkCzR1lg&dib_tag=se&keywords=On+Liberalism%3A+In+Defense+of+Freedom&qid=1776805104&sprefix=on+liberalism+in+defense+of+freedom%2Caps%2C295&sr=8-1] and Separation of Powers: How to Preserve Liberty in Troubled Times [https://www.amazon.com/Separation-Powers-Preserve-Liberty-Troubled/dp/026205177X/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1LGYBJC63Z94Z&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.2wy9Nzeal4TyvgvD9ZdxC-6WCx1hEMI3M0cc-bEZrSnx5T2GzpX9JuiEjsmRt979PcvflsGdW1kYslbRNyp90guerLageNUafXNeoY9-rkKz-MQfiu4lZA7ruYF5VLkB.GyFrCWk0EeQb6mEFNu7LhE3C0UAI3l-Md-jnm4OGWH0&dib_tag=se&keywords=Separation+of+Powers%3A+How+to+Preserve+Liberty+in+Troubled+Times&nsdOptOutParam=true&qid=1776805129&sprefix=separation+of+powers+how+to+preserve+liberty+in+troubled+times%2Caps%2C161&sr=8-1]. Professor Sunstein is also a Substacker. His Substack is called, straightforwardly enough, “Cass’s Substack [https://casssunstein.substack.com/].” Truth in advertising. It is delightful and nutritious, time after time. Toward the top of our program, we spend some time on liberalism—beginning with what it is, what we mean by it. In his book on liberalism, Sunstein isn’t talking about the policy preferences of George McGovern or Barack Obama. He’s talking about the liberalism of the American founding, a liberalism that encompasses Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, et al. The “holy trinity” of liberalism, says Sunstein, is “the rule of law, pluralism, and freedom.” Hey, what’s “the rule of law”? Sunstein gives a very clear explication of that as well. As for the separation of powers—how’s that going in these United States? Sunstein points out something interesting: Congressmen “have been more protective of their own party’s president than of their own institution.” And this is something the Framers “didn’t anticipate.” In 2020, David French published a book called “Divided We Fall: America’s Secession Threat and How to Restore Our Nation [https://www.amazon.com/Great-American-Divorce-Country-Apart_And/dp/1250201977].” Let me quote from my review [https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/the-great-american-divorce/] of it: French is doing his best to make an academic paper famous. He has cited it in his speeches for years, and he devotes a chapter to it in his book. He says that the paper does no less than “explain America.” If there is one point in the book to understand, he says, it is the point of the paper. What is this blockbuster piece of writing? Published in 1999, it’s “The Law of Group Polarization,” by Cass Sunstein … And what is its point? French boils it down to these simple words: “When people of like mind gather, they tend to become more extreme.” This extremism can lead to nasty words on social media, sure. It can also lead to a lot more. In our Q&A, Professor Sunstein expounds. His sport is squash, and he has a reputation for it. I ask, “Are you a professional or a top amateur?” He will allow the following and no more: “Well, I’d say an avid squash player. I’ve played in professional tournaments but haven’t done particularly well in them, so I consider myself an enthusiast and not incompetent.” At the end of our conversation, we say a quick goodbye—because he is “due on the court,” as he says. I have written many times about Robert Conquest [https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/09/robert-conquest-appreciation/], the historian and poet (and a friend of mine, I’m lucky to say). I once asked him (something like), “What are you?” In other words, “How would you describe yourself politically?” In the course of his answer, he brought up Orwell: who spoke of “law and liberty.” The “law-and-liberty lands.” Bob said, “I’m for a law-and-liberty culture.” So, indeed, is Cass Sunstein, who is a superb interlocutor, a superb teacher. You will see and hear. Q&A is the podcast of this site, Onward and Upward. The site is supported by readers and listeners. To receive new articles and episodes—and to support the work of the writer and podcaster—become a free or paid subscriber. Many thanks to you. Get full access to Onward and Upward at www.jaynordlinger.com/subscribe [https://www.jaynordlinger.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]