Michael Anton

Michael Anton https://dc.hillsdale.edu/Profiles/Michael-Anton/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week, the guys re joined by Hillsdale professor and David's colleague, Michael Anton. The group discuss Montesquieu's philosophy and the ways in which it proves correct, and some ways it comes up short. Plus: Professor Anton talks about Jaffa and Machiavelli. 

https://www.patreon.com/posts/61063693Published 01/12/2022

Why does everyone hate Washington, D.C., no matter who’s in power? Michael Anton has been thinking about this a long time. A popular writer, speaker, and public thinker about all things politics, he has strong opinions about a lot of pressing issues – and not everyone agrees with him. Let’s see what Michael believes about getting our government back on track.

We welcome Michael Anton of the Hillsdale College D.C. campus to discuss the growing divide within America, and what could be done to correct it. Blue America’s Messaging Problem “That’s Not Happening and It’s Good That It Is" National Divorce Is Expensive, But It's Worth Every Penny

In Today's "Moment of Truth," Saurabh sits down with Michael Anton, author of "The Stakes: America at the Point of No Return," to discuss the death of California, why he supported Trump, what a "regime" is, where the paleoconservatives were right, and what can be done to save America from the brink.Michael Anton is a lecturer and research fellow at Hillsdale College, a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute, and a former national security official in the Trump administration. In 2016, under the pseudonym Publius Decius Mus, he wrote The Flight 93 Election, an influential essay in support of Donald Trump’s campaign which was subsequently credited by various media as the one that made the argument that got the President elected.A senior fellow at the Claremont Institute and a professor at Hillsdale College, a careful student of Leo Strauss by way of tutor Harry V. Jaffa as well as a dedicated scholar of Niccolò Macchiavelli, Anton is considered by many as the leading thinker of the ‘New American Right‘. Because of his willingness to engage with thinkers outside of the Overton window and usually ignored by mainstream conservatives, he’s also one of the most appreciated figures by the online dissident Right.Learn more about Michael Anton's work at:https://dc.hillsdale.edu/Profiles/Michael-Anton/https://im1776.com/2021/09/21/michael-anton-interview/Purchase "The Stakes: America at the Point of No Return"https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-stakes-michael-anton/1137073711Follow American Moment on Social Media:Twitter – https://twitter.com/AmMomentOrgFacebook – https://www.facebook.com/AmMomentOrgInstagram – https://www.instagram.com/ammomentorg/YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4qmB5DeiFxt53ZPZiW4TcgRumble – https://rumble.com/c/c-695775BitChute – https://www.bitchute.com/channel/Xr42d9swu7O9/Gab – https://gab.com/AmMomentOrgCheck out AmCanon:https://www.americanmoment.org/amcanon/American Moment's "Moment of Truth" Podcast is recorded at the Conservative Partnership Center in Washington DC, produced and edited by Jared Cummings. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We’re not done thrashing the Afghanistan disgrace, so we coaxed Michael Anton (the Power Line podcast’s most frequent guest it turns out) to join us for a few quaffs. We use three of his recent articles to launch our discussion, starting with “Afghanistan: Doomed from the Start.” But we use a section from the middle of this essay, on the blunders of our advisers in the Middle East who don’t understand our own Constitution but presumed to advise Iraq and Afghanistan about how to write theirs, to pivot to the crisis here at home. Along the way, though, Michael has been having some very polite arguments with some of the leading “Paleoconservatives,” who for various reasons didn’t like President Trump’s 1776 Commission that was set up in explicit opposition to the pernicious 1619 Project. From there we have a vigorous argument amongst ourselves about how to think about—and more importantly argue in public about—the place of equality in America, deriving from the famous phrase “All men are created equal.” (The two Anton articles that bear on this are “Could the Founders Have Done Better?“, and “Getting Right with the Founders.”) And then at the end, we ask Michael when we can expect him to start a full fledged cooking channel on YouTube, since he recently did a boffo sample on preparing a lamb demi-glace, which naturally led to an argument about . . . lamb. Seriously. (Guess what: Lucretia is agin’ it. It figures, doesn’t it?) So for listeners who bear with us all the way through to the end, I have some fitting exit music, though not everyone will get it. Join the conversation and comment on this podcast episode: https://ricochet.com/podcast/powerline/the-three-whisky-happy-hour-with-guest-bartender-michael-anton/.Now become a Ricochet member for only $5.00 a month! Join and see what you’ve been missing: https://ricochet.com/membership/.Subscribe to Power Line in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed. Follow Power Line on Twitter (https://twitter.com/powerlineus) and Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/powerlineblog). Send any suggestions, tips, and fan mail to powerlinefeedback@gmail.com.

Titus & Mike Anton talk about Machiavelli's republicanism, his fighting spirit, his education for rash young men, & the attempt to educate the very online right away from extremism, toward political success.

Michael has a BS is Geology, and a MS in Sustainable Development focused in air quality. He has an employment history in Residential energy efficiency, Industrial furniture sales and sustainability, Industrial flooring project manager, and an Auto dealership owner. Mike also has a fellowship with sustainability task force, and is volunteering in Energy Justice Network(zero waste/anti-incineration).  It is safe to say we got into the niddy griddy of what is going on in the air of our world, and how there has been particles floating (agent orange) about that have been destructive to our mind, body, and souls. These toxic elements haven't been around prior to the start of the industrial era. They have only increased significantly as the years went on.  We also talked about how we can save energy by doing simple adjustments to our homes. It is always the small things that add up to become the largest.  We were all uninformed to the destruction that have been place in our internal and external environments. There are changes that are taking place, and it is coming to the expansion of our consciousness. This isn't just the human form, but it is Mother Earth as well. She is speaking to us to become better, and we as a collective are hearing her and becoming better. It takes small steps to cover a large distance. We can all do this together.  Another fun topic we enter into is the age of our planet and how long human history has been here. The statistic will blow your mind apart. It's being able to look at the big picture and to see the fragments of that have been scattered about through Earth's history. We, humans, are a fragment to her timeline. The amount of destruction that we have created in just milliseconds to the full length of Gaia is truly laughable, but also scary.  Everything has a solution. Being able to look at the equation, and to know a solution is there can bring peace to the mind body soul. It's being able to make the adjustments needed to bring about this solution. We all can do this ladies and gentlemen. We all can do it! Hope you enjoy this episode as much as I did! As always enjoy and love all of yourselves :)--- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/appSupport this podcast: https://anchor.fm/bryan-totten/support

One of the leading intellectuals of Trumpism, Michael was a senior national security official in the Trump administration and is most widely known for writing “The Flight 93 Election”, an essay endorsing Trump in 2016. He’s out with a new essay, “The Continuing Crisis”, and a recent book, “The Stakes”.I think you’ll find our debate, er, lively. You can listen to the episode right away in the audio player embedded above, or right below it you can click “Listen in podcast app” — which will connect you to the Dishcast feed. To listen to two excerpts from my chat with Michael — on what he believes are Trump’s greatest achievements in office; and how he thinks Trump caved to the GOP establishment — head over to our YouTube page.A lovely note from a reader about the Dishcast:My husband and I listen to your podcast separately. We then discuss it on our weekly date night. I learn something new in each episode. We miss you on Real Time. Thanks for brightening our Covid mindsets.Another reader dissents over the still-new format:One tiny piece of feedback: Please, please, please stop interrupting your interviewees/guests. I found myself thinking during the Kmele Foster podcast, “Andrew stop interrupting him and let him finish his response on the question you JUST asked him!” There are so many platforms (like Bill Maher’s) that are meant to be a more strident debate between commentators where it is more of an interruption and zinger battle between them, and that makes sense. But in a 1:1 interview for an hour-long podcast, I expect the pace to be slower and for the two people to not interrupt each other.This is not the first time a reader has told me this. I get absorbed into the conversation too easily and can forget I’m broadcasting. I will try harder. Another reader “very much enjoyed your discussion with Kmele Foster” and dissents over a passing comment of mine:I particularly enjoyed those parts that touched on the power of words and mob rule; the concepts of “use vs mention”, “intent vs impact” and the power the mob has in exercising its almost ritualistic cancelling of a person’s career.It was interesting to me, therefore, that you stated George Floyd was murdered. Interestingly — actually, surprisingly — your statement ignores the very concepts upon which much of your discussion with Mr. Foster was focused: intent and the need to defend against mob rule.Murder is when one person kills another (unlawfully) with the intention to cause either death or serious injury (UK). In the States, I understand it to be the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought — and malice aforethought means the “intention to kill or harm”.  Intent matters, and the case of George Floyd has not yet been adjudicated. Mr. Floyd was killed. From what the general public has seen, his killing was appalling, horrific and heinous, but we do not yet know if he was murdered.Defending the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” is vital. Intent in all its forms should also be defended. Otherwise the mob rules.Point taken. (There’s also the complicating factor of fentanyl in Floyd’s bloodstream at the time of death — which may be irrelevant but will still doubtless come up at the trial.) Another reader continues on the theme of preventing mob rule:I totally second the concerns of Kmele Foster. Before social media, the methods that political victors could use to suppress the other side in the USA was limited mostly to government structures. The separation of powers and the guarantees of individual rights stymie the urge to suppress others through government. When these rights are violated, individuals can seek redress through the legal system. It is not a perfect system, and it often takes longer than it should, but our civilization depends on most citizens believing the system will ultimately work.Social media has dangerously changed that by bypassing government. I fear that cancel culture and the example of groups like Antifa — which can coordinate on social media and behave as they do with few consequences — is shaking the belief in our system of government. There are new methods of suppression, outside of our legal structures. Many feel a vulnerability they did not feel a few years ago.Another reader illustrates the divisiveness of woke initiatives in the workplace, even among friends:I wanted to share a story with you after listening to your conversation with Kmele Foster. I work for a very well-known big tech company in the Bay Area. (I can hardly stand CA, from Texas originally — two different worlds.) A few weeks ago, the company sponsored a week-long summit for women of color. The summit description invited all groups of women or people who identify as women that were: black, latina, asian, native american, muslim, etc. — all listed there except white. So while they didn’t say “anyone who isn’t white”, the message was clear. I am Lebanese (not a muslim) and have never thought of myself as white until the 2020 census included Lebanese ... as white (?).The summit invited anyone outside of these listed groups to join as allies but also made it clear that swag was not available for allies. I didn’t join for numerous reasons.But a colleague who is Mexican-American did, and when next we spoke, I asked her how it went. She was most impressed by the keynote speaker’s explanation of whitewashing. She explained that having to change her look and the way she speaks to fit into corporate America is an example of whitewashing. I noted back that everyone has to change to accommodate office and business formalities, i.e., I have to leave myself at home too. Then I pressed her to say more about whitewashing so I could understand what it is. She told me that as a “white woman,” I couldn’t possibly understand. This is someone with whom I have exchanged stories of our families and childhoods. We’ve laughed more than a few times about how much we actually have in common. I am Lebanese. She is Mexican. We were both raised Catholic by big families and have many siblings. This is also a women who recently sold her house in SF for 3 million. I am still trying to pay off my student loans.In your conversation with Kmele, it was mentioned that calling people out and asking them to explain is a good first step. I try to do that where I can AND find that most folks, when pressed, CAN’T explain. But at work, I can only press so much without putting my livelihood in jeopardy.  There must be ways for people in my circumstance to counter this effectively, without having to put our families at risk. One last reader has a suggestion for an upcoming topic and guest:Just finished listening to the pod with Kmele Foster — another early gem in this project. I’m also in the midst of reading Cynical Theories, and I was struck by how much the conversation with Kmele overlaps with the dangers of applied postmodernism and critical race theory highlighted in the book. The rejection of reason and objectivity in favor of opportunistic groupthink, the emphasis on superficial and contrived identity-based power dynamics over individual experience, the dismissal of intent in favor of (often disingenuous) wailing over subjective impact — all came through in your discussion. If only more of us could approach these issues with the courage and intellectual honesty you and Kmele called for at the close. Along those lines, it would be interesting if you could find a guest to dissect some of the similar overreaches of the me-too movement. I was struck while listening to this pod by how many of the themes you and Kmele criticized with respect to race are also prevalent in some me-too cases, especially those where unprovable subjective responses to awkward situations end up ruining the lives of men and boys who actually have a lot less power than the woke left will admit — all in furtherance of a different kind of identity-based reckoning. Emily Yoffe comes to mind as someone who has shown some guts in countering the prevailing narrative.  Emily is a great idea. Thanks for prodding me. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit andrewsullivan.substack.com/subscribe