In The Spectator, Jeff Fynn-Paul reviews the increasingly politicized study of “genocide” against natives – studies riddled with wild demographic exaggerations. Politically motivated genocide scholars imagine they are helping modern-day victims but, Fynn-Paul suggests, likely do more harm by convincing indigenous populations that democracy is a sham.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has been under constant fire for its controversial approach to the drafting of its “Trans and Gender Diverse People” treatment guidelines, which began in 2023. As Joseph Figliolia reports in City Journal, while WHO has since walked back some of its earlier mistakes, it remains a flawed process given the lack of credible scientific evidence for “affirming care”.
Ryan Bangert, in First Things, explains how numerous state ballot initiatives to be decided in the upcoming U.S. election could create the beginnings of a new “pro-abortion legal regime” that is far more permissive than the old regime struck down by the Supreme Court in 2022. Bangert examines what abortion law could look like if it decided by “the demos”, and what that could mean for the pro-life community.
In Law & Liberty, James Hankins seeks advice on our current social ills from 14th century Italian scholar Francesco Petrarch. Pointing his finger at an education system that had lost its way, Petrarch demanded that the universities of his time stop sowing social discord and refocus on instructing their students in the timeless pursuit of truth and knowledge. Considering the state of campuses today, it’s still good advice, says Hankins.
In Law & Liberty, Nathan W. Schlueter reveals how both Republicans and Democrats are turning against the free market, and the dangers this entails. While admitting it can be a hard concept to defend, Schlueter lists the market’s best features, including its impersonal nature and the fact it forces everyone to confront the notion of scarcity. “Nature does not spontaneously provide food, clothing, and shelter,” he writes. Someone has to do the work.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has been under constant fire for its controversial approach to the drafting of its “Trans and Gender Diverse People” treatment guidelines, which began in 2023. As Joseph Figliolia reports in City Journal, while WHO has since walked back some of its earlier mistakes, it remains a flawed process given the lack of credible scientific evidence for “affirming care”.
Ryan Bangert, in First Things, explains how numerous state ballot initiatives to be decided in the upcoming U.S. election could create the beginnings of a new “pro-abortion legal regime” that is far more permissive than the old regime struck down by the Supreme Court in 2022. Bangert examines what abortion law could look like if it decided by “the demos”, and what that could mean for the pro-life community.
In Law & Liberty, James Hankins seeks advice on our current social ills from 14th century Italian scholar Francesco Petrarch. Pointing his finger at an education system that had lost its way, Petrarch demanded that the universities of his time stop sowing social discord and refocus on instructing their students in the timeless pursuit of truth and knowledge. Considering the state of campuses today, it’s still good advice, says Hankins.
In Law & Liberty, Nathan W. Schlueter reveals how both Republicans and Democrats are turning against the free market, and the dangers this entails. While admitting it can be a hard concept to defend, Schlueter lists the market’s best features, including its impersonal nature and the fact it forces everyone to confront the notion of scarcity. “Nature does not spontaneously provide food, clothing, and shelter,” he writes. Someone has to do the work.
