Samuel Hammond is a Director at the Niskanen Center and a prolific essayist with by-lines in the Atlantic, The American Mind, National Affairs, and more.
He wrote one of the most important pieces in 2019, detailing how our Grand Strategy with China has failed us and the world.
After I read this essay I knew I had to talk to Sam, so we set up a podcast, which we recorded in early 2020.
As Corona Virus broke in late February, it became even more obvious that our nation requires a national conversation around our engagement with a hostile and powerful China.
Together Sam and I use the China Shock Doctrine as an outline to explore all of the pertinent issues of our day. If you want to have a comprehensive view of current events and even a deeper understanding of why Covid-19 has devastated our economy – then settle back and listen to one of the most valuable podcasts you’re ever going to hear.
Here’s some of the many items we cover:
PAUL KRUGMAN IS A SCUM BAG
Paul Krugman knew the dangers of globalized trade and deeper political integration. But he tried to keep the real data out of our hands. He even called us barbarians, as if we were incapable of processing information on our own. He wanted us ignorant so the elites could force globalization down our throats and to prevent us, god forbid, from coming to our own conclusions.
IS COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AN UNQUESTIONABLE GOOD?
Comparative advantage is the corner stone of modern trade theory and it drives our global political economy. Yet after three decades of open trade with China, the United States is left with a hallowed out industrial core, a vulnerable medical supply chain, and a weakened national defense system. Sam and I dig into the false songs of comparative advantage and in doing so reveal a weakness of our modern economic policies.
WHERE DOES OUR CIVIL SOCIETY COME FROM?
Where does our national identity come from? From what substrate do our laws and customs evolve? Are Americans better suited for one style of governance over another? Can one culture engage another with the intent of harmonizing trade policies while preserving their own societal standards? Was the race to the bottom a real thing?
LABOR MOBILITY
Trade liberalization requires unfettered movement of money, machines, and people across state and national boundaries. Labor Mobility theories believe humans will commonly up and move away from their hometowns in search of dollars and opportunities, abandoning their homes and communities. Theory and practice often contradict each other and in the area of labor mobility, this is no different. Learn why the economic theories don’t always play out as expected.
CULTURE, IDENTITY, and MORE
Sam is a well read and dynamic intellect so naturally our conversation spilled over into a wide-range of pertinent issues. Some additional topics covered include:
- Identity Politics
- Cultural Rationing
- SJW’s and Religion
- Michael Lind’s “New Class War”
- Honor Culture vs Victim Culture
- Historical School vs Austrian School
- Dream Hoarders
- Intra-class Warfare
- Feminization of the Economy
SAMUEL HAMMOND vs JACK MURPHY
Sam is a clear thinker and an excellent writer. His essays are notable for the depth of analysis and the historic context he provides. Our conversation is an extension of that work and the standards he sets for himself are evident throughout our podcast.
And at the end he even challenges me and my views – which I appreciate! Make sure to listen through the end to hear Sam and I go back and forth on Trump, 2016, and the future.
JACK MURPHY LIVE PODCAST with SAMUEL HAMMOND
- iTunes: Listen here.
- Spotify: Listen here.
- Direct Download: Get it here.
- YouTube: Subscribe here.
Or listen now:
Speaking as an ancient Canadian, who traveled the world back in the 70s, when everything wasn’t homogenized — oh, and that isn’t a uniquely left critique of globalism, the dissident right have their own catch phrase for it: globohomo — and was at the same time a left Canadian nationalist, much concerned about American cultural imperialism. And, yes, George Grant’s book, Lament for a Nation, is a great book, which it would behoove today’s national populists in Canada to brush off.
But this suggestion of Hammond’s that Canadian cultural restrictions has had anything at all to do with mitigating Canadian culture being subsumed by U.S. culture is preposterous. Those regulations were purely economic, keeping dollars in the Canadian economy and helping to prop up cultural industry elites within the country. Reliably, though, the music, TV shows, films, etc., by Canadian cultural producers, most popular in Canada, thus receiving the most air time, are those that are most economically successful in the U.S. In other words, Canadian cultural products that resonate with American culture are the ones that get the most air time even under the Canadian content restrictions. So, those regulations have done pretty much nothing for preserving some kind of supposedly unique Canadian culture. Certainly not in mainstream culture. Which was always the concern.
I’m only about half an hour through this thing. I have a feeling I might have more to say by the time I’m done. 😉
🙂
Thanks for the comment.
Sam is his own man, I don’t agree with a lot of what he says, and I definitely let a LOT of things go by unchallenged in the interest of time.
My main goal was discussing China and I think we accomplished that.
At the end he challenges me and I think I responded well. Keep listening 🙂
Thanks for the support!