Roe v. Wade
SCOTUS opinions are intended in part to persuade as well as to explain. Is Blackmun’s opinion in Roe persuasive?
Notre Dame undergrad (math); JD, Indiana University at Bloomington; 1st Lieutenant, US Army.; private practice in corporate and securities law; Assistant AG in Tennessee for consumer protection and securities; Blue Sky Securities Commissioner, Tennessee; private practice, bankruptcy and corporate law.
I have had a lifelong interest in economics. For most of my career, that interest was practical, focused on the problems in front of me. Lately I have been more interested in economics as a theory, especially its impact on the lives of people like those I met in my bankruptcy practice, and on the politics of money in the US. I also enjoy reading philosophers, starting in college and steadily expanding my reading ever since. I wrote at FireDogLake for a number of years.
Generally, I think the problem facing the US is the dominance of neoliberal discourse. I think it clouds the vision, and limits the kinds of problems that can be identified and solved. For example, the existence and danger of climate change can easily be identified in a scientific discussion. However, the problem does not fit the neoliberal discourse because science insists that the pursuit of individual and corporate self-interest will lead to devastation. In neoliberal discourse, the pursuit of self-interest always leads to Eden.
The neoliberal project has two prongs. One is the police function of crushing dissent and alternative views. The police function is provided by government agencies and private and institutional actors. The counterpart is the economic system , which is operated by government and by private and institutional actors. Some of these actors operate in both spheres. I focus on the second prong.
SCOTUS opinions are intended in part to persuade as well as to explain. Is Blackmun’s opinion in Roe persuasive?
Some ideas about rights in preparation for reading How Rights Went Wrong by Jamal Greene
The Roberts Court is a mob of judicial activists
Citizenship entails rights common to all. It starts with the participation of all.
SCOTUS right-wingers are helping Trump. Why though?
What does it mean to have human rights if there is no one to protect those rights?
Denaturalization rising, asylum sinking, at least on the angry right
The text for the next posts is Chapter 9 of Hannah Arendt’s The Origins Of Totalitarianism, titled “The Decline of the Nation-State and the End of the Rights of Man”. It’s a short chapter, 37 pages, and can be read as a stand-alone essay. I didn’t discuss it in my series on the book, […]
We’ve been fogged in here in Chicago for the last five days, after a week of brutally cold weather: perfect for reading. And a good time, too. My family’s go-to Christmas gifts are books, and I have a bunch of new ones, so here’s some of what I’ve been reading. Current and recent books 1. […]
Tomasello shows how agency might have evolved. Is there another form of free will?