In a sweeping history of the United States, Michael Lind traces how the competing Hamiltonian and Jeffersonian philosophies have shaped and defined the history of the United States for the past two hundred years.
At the core of America's economic growth has always been a dynamic relationship between technology-driven change and political modernization according to Breakthrough Journal contributor Michael Lind's important new work, Land of Promise.
In a sweeping economic history of the United States released today, Lind, who is cofounder of the New American Foundation, traces how the competing Hamiltonian and Jeffersonian philosophies have shaped and defined the history of the United States for the past two hundred years and argues that it is Hamiltonianism that has laid the foundation for America's prosperity.
Continue reading ""Land of Promise" Released Today" »
The Breakthrough Journal essay that called for a dramatic shift among conservationists has sparked further debate at the New York Times.
Peter Kareiva -- the chief scientist at the Nature Conservancy -- and coauthors Robert Lalasz and Michelle Marvier wrote that conservation was failing and needed to adopt a more human-centered approach.
Last week the Breakthrough Journal published four responses to Kareiva et al. and a rejoinder by the authors. Now John Lemons, an emeritus professor of biology and environmental sciences at the University of New England, has taken Kareiva to task at Andrew Revkin's Dot Earth blog.
Continue reading "Breakthrough Debate Continues at NYT" »
The Great Recession and the Democratic sweep in 2008 returned Keynesian economics to the center of political debate. But Rob Atkinson, founder of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, argued in a recent Breakthrough Journal essay that progressive economics, with its focus on economic distribution, had left behind a coherent economic growth agenda. Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy research, rejected Atkinson's "potshot" in a reply also published in the Journal. The two aired their differences in a debate in Washington, DC. At stake: the future of progressive economics.
Watch the video below:
Continue reading "Debating the Future of Progressive Economics" »
