The Dixville Nudge

With great easement comes great responsibility.

By and
92

On today’s special and prematurely released episode of The Remnant, Jonah is joined by Sarah Isgur, the host of the niche legal pseudo-podcast, Advisory Opinions, to explain Chevron deference and its prognosis at the Supreme Court. They explore the potential implications of overturning it—the good, the bad, and the ugly—and the likelihood of Congress getting its act together. However, the main event is the debate over whether our lizard brains truly care about policy. Did the abolition of slavery affect the 1860 election? Did Lincoln win because he was tall? Is Sarah a vulgar Marxist? (Plus, Sarah provides an update on Mailboxgate.)

Show Notes:
—Jonah’s LA Times column on Chevron
—Advisory Opinions on Chevron
—Ben Sasse on the third episode of The Remnant
—Last week’s episode of The Dispatch Podcast
—Kim Strassel: The Them-vs.-Us Election

By and
Comments (92)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    C C Writer

    Sorry, Sarah, I was in favor of Reagan's policies as policies, not because of the cool kids--they knew nothing about policy. I was reading Milton Friedman and The Freeman and conservative columnists, and networking with free-market types, so there was a lot of "why" available and it made sense. People actually used to get really serious about this stuff.

    I first discovered Sam Waterston in a 1973 TV movie of Much Ado About Nothing--actually a videotape of the Joseph Papp stage production--playing Benedick opposite Kathleen Widdoes. I don't remember much about it, except I found him rather compelling as a leading man.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    C C Writer

    For all of Sarah's tendency to boss people around whom she is not the boss of, I must say I'm with her on this mailbox thing. They shouldn't'a oughta've damaged her property and lied and given her the royal runaround and kept on not doing their jobs right and damaging the property even more. Someone should end up being called on the carpet. Maybe multiple someones.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    Oh also we know Jonah is happy! That curmudgeon thing is just an act. (It helps that I’m a happy curmudgeon too.)

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    I’ve finally figured out Sarah’s (at times annoying) style of argumentation: way overexaggerate a position, insist that it’s absolutely correct, force the opponent to make some concessions while also going “well surely that’s an exaggeration as seen by X,” agree with X, then proceed to concede some things in order to move the other party closer to her actual position. In other words: be a lawyer. Make the strongest case for your client even if you don’t believe it, argue forcefully until forced to concede certain obvious points, gradually move the other party to your position.

    Sarah argues that personality (lizard brain) drives a lot of political action. There’s also a personality divide I’ve been thinking about recently: that between the “true believers” and the “loose convictions.” Both types can be found in any regime, time, place, ideology. The true believers really are fully invested in their cause. The loose conviction types have trouble ever really committing to their cause and wonder “does anyone really believe all that stuff?” Jonah is a true believer (as am I) and Sarah is a loose-conviction type.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Cthocas

    Dog parks are an omen of our childless, dystopian future.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Scarlette Tarte

      Well if we all have dogs, it will be a wonderful dystopia.

      Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    MRS

    Good listen - I think both pushed each other well. Sarah's formulation that Jonah (rightfully) suggested was closed to vulgar Marxism was also dangerously close to Lost Cause reasoning. But I repeat myself!

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Ben Connelly

      Agreed. It’s also a straw man. I think Sarah is guilty of seeing everything through the lens of recent history. What she is saying is true of the Trump phenomenon, because Trump is a cult leader. But it doesn’t apply equally to everything else (the civil war). She mistakes a few trees for the forest - a classic mistake that people make all the time of extrapolating their circumstances to the whole world.

      Collapse
  7. Agran

    Jonah, when the term NIMBY just won’t do, let me introduce you to the BANANAs:
    Build
    Absolutely
    Nothing
    Anywhere
    Near
    Anything

    Collapse
  8. John Payne

    It's Thurber! The onomatopoeia comes from "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty."
    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1939/03/18/the-secret-life-of-walter-mitty-james-thurber

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Cal Amari

    As a young person with a graduate degree, but do not live in a major city (although a well-off town), and do not have an annual income in the 150k range (although guess all my roommates together - we do), I RESENT being associated with the NIMBY class you're talking about. Call me part of the professional class, fine, but I have no greater enemy than the left and right wing NIMBYs who stand in the way of organic growth, small businesses, and homeownership for future generations. You won't be hearing from my lawyer because I don't have one.

    Collapse
  10. Deleted Comment

    This comment has been deleted

Load More