Moralistic dichotomizing is not the way to overcome ideological polarization.

From Plutarch to Kissinger, we continue to learn from studying the lives of great statesmen.

Emerson, Thoreau, and James coped with their grief in different ways. But they were all parallel paths in the same direction.

Market expansion was clearly good for European states, but Smith recognized that asymmetries of power bred injustices in the world beyond.

In No Country for Old Men, McCarthy wrestled with the question of evil and how the democratic person understands it.

China represents a real threat, but Brandon Weichert's new book is too hyperbolic to take seriously.

The seven crises of globalization studied by Harold James demonstrate that they were shaped by a heady mix of events, reactions, ideas, and choices.

There is a paleoconservative impulse to reject the conservatism of Buckley or Kirk in favor of class warfare, racial grievance, and power politics.

What exactly is a "founding"? And does the mythology that seems to surround it comport with modern democracies?

For Adam Smith, the desire to persuade was a powerful human motivation underlying his theories of rhetoric, moral philosophy, economics, and jurisprudence.