“Ag Reform Must Put Farmers First.” Charles Eisenstein lays out some initial policy proposals that could help farmers stay solvent while transitioning to more regenerative agricultural practices: “MAHA activists concerned about pesticide residues, municipal sludge, animal antibiotics, GMOs, and the rest must accept a crucial principle: For agrarian reform to succeed, each step toward regenerative, less chemical-intensive practices must also double as a step toward farmers’ prosperity. To those immersed in the assumptions of the current system, this sounds impossible. Again, holding everything else constant, conventional farmers who subtract glyphosate or animal antibiotics, or chemical fertilizers from their arsenal will suffer disaster. But regenerative agriculture is not conventional agriculture minus the chemicals. It is an entirely different suite of practices, relationships, and economics.” (Recommended by Teddy Macker.)
“The Weedkiller Tearing Apart Trump’s Coalition.” River Page reports on why the MAHA commission is expected to backtrack on its efforts to ban the chemical in Roundup: “The fact is, the Trump administration spends a lot of time trying to please completely contradictory parts of its coalition: hawks and doves, for instance, or a MAGA base that wants to deport illegals, and the blue-collar businesses that hire them. Or, most recently: People who want to Make America Healthy Again by banning a nearly ubiquitous weedkiller, and the farmers who say they need it.”
“Letter From the Farm, #2.” Brian Miller has a new series of fictional letters from the farm: “Last Wednesday I was planning to head to Southland Books in Maryville to do some trading, but it was raining, and the idea of driving an hour to exchange $500 worth of quality books for $25 of cash … well, the juice just wasn’t worth the squeeze, as they say. Where have all the good bookstores gone? I headed instead just down the road to Sweetwater. Every Wednesday the city offers free mulch. I’ve been getting a load most weeks to put on the garden paths. Already things look tidier, in spite of the rainy summer.”
“Making Cash Off ‘AI slop’: The Surreal Video Business Taking over the Web.” Drew Harwell examines the disturbing world of cheap and dumb AI videos: “AI videos don’t try to compete on ‘authenticity, aesthetic value or thought-provoking concepts,’ he said. Instead, they’re pumped out at industrial speed for maximum engagement, relying on viewers’ shock and fascination to make them spread. The creators themselves say that AI videos are inevitable, regardless of their impact, and that they enjoy experimenting on AI’s cutting edge. They are also eager to reap the rewards of mass attention.”
“Beyond Safetyism: A Modest Proposal for Conservative AI Regulation.” Brad Littlejohn argues AI tools should be kept away from young people: “I would suggest turning our focus to four other Es: Educational Risk, Epistemological Risk, Emotional Risk, and Ethical Risk, priorities that are better aligned with the conservative mood in Washington and throughout the nation. A quick survey of the daunting challenges that AI poses across these domains could leave us feeling powerless to resist the destructive impacts of this transformative new technology. In fact, however, a closer look reveals that many of the features we take for granted in consumer-facing AI tools could be designed and deployed very differently. As an initial step toward taming this technology, I propose treating AI like other very powerful technologies that we keep out of the hands of children, at least until it can meet design standards that avoid exploiting their vulnerable developing minds and emotions.”
“A Culture of Conversation.” Wilfred McClay thinks Oakeshott has wisdom we need to heed if we hope to learn to converse well and, perhaps, join the great conversation itself: “I think most of us would agree that a greater degree of commitment to freedom of speech on our campuses and in our public life would be a salutary improvement over the walking-on-eggshells environment that we’ve had to endure for far too many years. But what would be far better is a commitment to the kind of mutuality and breadth that the term ‘free conversation’ implies. Particularly if Michael Oakeshott is right that conversation, as opposed to mere utterance, is such an important feature of our very humanity.”
“The Small-town Alabamians Fighting a Data Centre.” Farahn Morgan details the local opposition to a huge data center that seems to be moving ahead: “According to public documents obtained by Inside Climate News, the Bessemer data centre campus is projected to consume roughly 10.5 million megawatt hours of energy per year at full scale. That would increase Alabama’s total annual energy output by about 10%. Meanwhile, correspondence between the Warrior River Water Authority and the developer suggests daily water usage could reach two million gallons, requiring major infrastructure upgrades before demand could conceivably be met.” (Recommended by Brian Miller.)
“Egypt’s War Against the World’s Oldest Christian Monastery.” Mariam Wahba describes how Egypt’s government is steadily increasing its control over this remarkable monastery and its library: “In May, an Egyptian court ruled that the monastery’s monks are mere ‘occupants,’ allowing the state to essentially take control of what is—and is not—allowed at St. Catherine’s, and stripping the monks of all legal authority. With enough pressure, they may be forced to abandon the monastery altogether. When the Greek foreign minister sat down with his Egyptian counterpart earlier this month, they faced a quiet standoff over exactly this possibility. The outcome of this fight will signal whether Egypt still makes room for religion that is outside state control.”
“The Fisher King.” Francis Young surveys the history of the Fisher King and draws lessons about the weight and nature of authority: “The sheer importance of a king’s physical fitness in medieval Europe is something that is difficult for us to understand, accustomed as we are to viewing the role of a head of state as political, rhetorical, inspirational, and even symbolic. . . . Physical injuries to the body of a king, therefore, especially those that prevented him fighting or rendered him impotent, were open wounds on the body of the realm itself.”
