(Part 2) Top products from r/tuesday

> Ted Halstead, who leads the Climate Leadership Council, applauded the new legislation. His group is pushing another proposal to tax carbon dioxide emissions and to return the money to taxpayers, an effort backed by former Republican political leaders including former Treasury Secretary James Baker and former Secretary of State George P. Schultz.

> Halstead said in a statement that the bill “provides a clear proof of concept that a conservative-inspired carbon dividends framework can attract bipartisan support.”

If you haven't before, watch Ted Halstead's TED Talk on this carbon tax + dividends solution that his current group endorses, as mentioned: A climate solution where all sides can win.

Ted Halstead co-founded the New America Foundation, a non-partisan think tank, and is co-author of the book The Radical Center: The Future of American Politics, which I also highly recommend!

I’m not an expert on foreign policy by any means, but I was a fan of Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and How It Changed the World by Walter Russell Mead. Mead taught Foreign Policy at Yale and the books provides a decent base for Foreign Policy over the history of America.

Link

The book as good reviews pretty much anywhere you look. Here’s a link to some, but feel free to look up more.

lol. About what I expected. Have a good day!

One of the best books written on the theory of money, its evolution, and the role of Central Banks

https://www.amazon.com/Money-Mischief-Episodes-Monetary-History/dp/015661930X

Written by who you'd think

Oh dear Lord.

This looks like the same sort of hyperbolic screeching as Jane Meyer's Dark Money. Some of these muckrakers need a heavy dose of Hanlon's Razor.

I think foreign aid has it's place, but people should be wary of the limitations of conventional aid in helping people in the long term.

Note: I am not advocating cutting foreign aid.

I am very tempted to buy this book.

It is extremely difficult to understand fascism without understanding European intellectual history, mainly how the French Revolution gave rise to nationalism, which replaced subcultures as a new identity. Here are some good books on fascism (which is not the same as Nazism) from a conservative perspective:

​

https://www.amazon.com/Nationalism-Religion-Carlton-J-Hayes/dp/141286285X

https://www.amazon.com/Cult-Nation-France-Inventing-Nationalism/dp/0674012372

https://www.amazon.com/Generation-Materialism-1871-1900-Modern-William/dp/0313240825/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=generation+of+materialism&qid=1554230072&s=books&sr=1-1

​

https://www.amazon.com/War-Against-Catholicism-Anti-Catholic-Nineteenth-century/dp/B00Y31I5TU/ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_8?keywords=germany%27s+war+on+catholicism&qid=1554230134&s=books&sr=1-8-fkmrnull

​

https://www.amazon.com/Giuseppe-Mazzini-Origins-Fascism-American/dp/1137514582/ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_1?keywords=mazzini+fascism&qid=1554230156&s=books&sr=1-1-fkmrnull

I agree with your concerns for the future of the moderate left, especially when I see the likes of Sanders and Corbyn. But, honestly, the party’s are responding to the incentives given to them. The last generation of liberal politicians was the most moderate produced by either political system in a generation. And what did they have to show for it? Torn apart by both sides as out-of-touch elite technocrats, with the attack from the right feeling even more vicious for the party’s moderation.

A couple of decades of that also makes it pretty hard to muster the energy to say, “no, no, we should take the other side’s concerns seriously.”

Take Kevin Williamson. I honestly just don’t have much concern left for defending the author of this. Jonah Goldberg is another good example. I follow him on Twitter and like his dogs, but every time he says something about civility in discourse, this cover flashes through my head.

My grandparents emigrated from the bloodlands of Europe of world war 2. I was raised to be well aware of the horrors of totalitarianism from either side of the spectrum. Telling me that because I think government has a role in the solution to societal problems puts me on the slippery spectrum to Stalin and Hitler is both intellectually lazy and deeply personally infuriating. It’s better articulated and researched, but it strikes the same chord with me as old school John Birch Society crap. It’s exactly why the one point I reacted against in the first place was claiming that no one links liberalism and communism.

So what motivation do I have to come to the defense of thinkers who apparently are willing to lump my political preferences in the same camp as the 20th century’s worst monsters? Again, I understand that nothing I’m saying is particularly fair or constructive, and you could point to plenty of authors on the left guilty of similar rhetoric. But I also don’t see a groundswell of discussion insisting that those authors get a voice on Fox News or the National Review. I’m tired of being in the only camp (moderate liberals) apparently expected to take everyone’s views and preferences into account.