Wisdom of Crowds

Osita Nwanevu, writer on democratic institutions arguing to renew electoral democracy, and Hélène Landemore, political theorist promoting sortition and citizens’ assemblies. They clash over whether elections or randomly selected assemblies better fix broken politics. Short, energetic debate on representation, citizens’ assemblies, hybrid models, term lengths, pay, and how to curb corruption and amplify quieter voices.

Santiago Ramos, a Vatican diplomacy expert and former colleague, returns to unpack the clash between the Pope and the Trump administration. They trace the escalation, explore just war versus holy war, and probe the Vatican’s defense of the postwar international order. The conversation also covers moral authority in politics, Hegseth’s divine rhetoric, and why an English-speaking pope matters for public resonance.

Julian Waller, a GWU political scientist who studies authoritarianism, explains regime types and why Hungary (2010–2026) looked like a soft electoral authoritarian. He discusses how media capture was routed around online, how Péter Magyar’s anti‑corruption coalition surged, and whether dismantling institutional capture will require the same hardball tactics people warned about.

Giovanni Orsina, Rome-based political theorist and historian, previews his book Counter-Revolution. He traces how post‑1960s anti‑political currents gave way to a populist counter‑reaction after 2008. Short takes on Giorgia Meloni as pragmatic right‑wing, Europe’s depoliticized institutions struggling, and the possible futures as politics returns to the foreground.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit wisdomofcrowds.liveLast week, Shadi wrote a controversial essay over at Wisdom of Crowds titled “Does Israel Have a Right to Exist?” This week, we had our friend Peter Beinart on to the show to unpack the question some more. Peter is, among many other things, a contributing writer for the New York Times and the author of Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza. And last year he pen…

Jonny Thakkar, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Swarthmore and founding editor of The Point, challenges the left’s focus on equality as uninspiring. He and the hosts debate whether liberal neutrality empties politics, why longing migrated to the tech right, and how visions of human flourishing, capacities, and concrete public goods might reconnect politics with meaning.

Cameron Kasky, activist who co-founded March for Our Lives and shifted into Palestine advocacy, joins to map changing American politics. He recounts Parkland’s impact, explains his turn to pro‑Palestine positions, and discusses insurgent primary strategy. They debate money, AIPAC influence, Rubio’s Iran remarks, and whether Democrats can reshape foreign‑policy and party dynamics.

They unpack alarming trends in young adults retreating from dating, marriage, sex and parenthood. They highlight demographic and political risks from low fertility and reduced immigration. They explore the rise of looksmaxxing and the “Clavicular” manosphere as men turn inward. They debate whether prosperity, technology or community rebuilding will reshape these shifts.

Henry Shevlin, a Cambridge philosopher focused on AI ethics and consciousness research, explores agency in modern systems and the line between tools and moral entities. He discusses agentic coding, examples of autonomy, and experiments showing emergent agent behavior. The conversation covers hallucinations, types of creativity in AI, recursive self-improvement, and the need for careful governance.

This episode features a full-length debate between Shadi Hamid and Trita Parsi —two thinkers who fundamentally disagree about the role of American power in the world. Released jointly with The Disagreement podcast and hosted by Alex Grodd, the conversation reflects a shared Wisdom of Crowds ethos — one that treats disagreement not as a failure of understanding, but as a tool for thinking more clearly about first principles. Rather than trading talking points, Hamid and Parsi engage each other’s strongest arguments in a sustained, good-faith exchange.Shadi draws on themes from The Case for American Power to defend a position that has fallen out of favor across much of the political spectrum: that American power, when used with moral purpose, can still play a necessary role in reducing global suffering. His argument is aimed in part at a disillusioned left that has come to see U.S. power primarily as a source of harm rather than a potential instrument of humanitarian good. Against this, Trita — one of the most incisive critics of American interventionism — offers a sustained challenge, grounded in historical failures, unintended consequences, and the limits of even well-intentioned power.Does the world need the United States to act, and if so, when — and at what cost? How should past disasters constrain present ambitions? And if American power is curtailed, what realistic alternatives exist, and who bears responsibility when things go wrong? This debate doesn’t resolve those questions — but it models what it looks like to take them seriously, in conversation with someone who sees the world very differently.Required Reading/ Listening: * The Disagreement podcast. * Shadi Hamid, The Case for American Power. (Amazon) * Shadi’s 2024 debate with Daniel Bessner hosted by The Disagreement. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit wisdomofcrowds.live/subscribe