Jan
22
2026

Nothing About Greenland Today!

At the Free Press Yuval Levin chides: America’s 250th Isn’t Just a Birthday. (archive.today link)

On December 31, The Washington Post carried the headline “Washington Monument illuminated on New Year’s Eve to mark country’s 250th.” The article described an installation that projected patriotic images onto the monument and noted that the display “kicks off a year of events on the National Mall to mark the nation’s 250th.”

Such peculiarly vague locutions, an adjective without a noun, are everywhere in this year’s civic festivities. We say “America’s 250th” or “America at 250.” In 1976, people did something similar by calling that year’s celebrations simply “the bicentennial.” Some call this year “the semiquincentennial,” which is just as indeterminate as “the 250th” but harder to pronounce.

This vagueness is not a coincidence. It points to our uncertainty about how to approach what ought to be a year of patriotic celebration. When you mark a wedding anniversary, you don’t just call it “the 25th.” When you wish someone a happy 40th, they know perfectly well you mean a birthday. But as we approach this civic milestone, we are oddly at a loss for words—because we are unsure quite what kind of occasion we are marking, and therefore how we should mark it.

So let’s ask plainly: What kind of occasion is “America’s 250th”?

You'll want to RTWT for Yuval's argument, but here's a spoiler: it's most certainly an anniversary. (And you'll note that the folks who composted today's Getty Images Eye Candy have already adopted his suggestion.)

Also of note:

  • And probably not an honest mistake. At the Dispatch, Matthew Gagnon tells a sad story of that state across the Salmon Falls River: My State Adopted Ranked-Choice Voting. It Was a Mistake. (archive.today link)

    Would you like to make elections more civil? Are you tired of “spoiler” candidates? Do you think the winners of elections should be supported by the majority of citizens? If so, great news: Ranked-choice voting is here to fix our electoral system!

    At least, that’s the story pitched to you by its proponents. To hear them tell the tale, our politics are broken because of the way we choose the winners of elections, and a trendy new mechanism for voting will solve all of our problems.

    Wouldn’t it be nice if it were that simple? Unfortunately, the reality is quite the opposite.

    In Maine—the first state in the country to adopt ranked-choice voting in statewide and federal elections—I’ve witnessed the hype, the slogans, the lawsuits, and the “trust us, it’s simple” sales pitch. But it is now clear that this electoral experiment has been a mistake. Other states should learn from our example and resist efforts to implement ranked-choice voting for presidential primaries nationwide.

    RCV is a gimmick that appeals to geeks. (So you would think I'd like it, right?) Matthew has a pretty good argument based on the real-world results seen in Maine.

    The Dispatch also has a pro-RCV article from Larry Diamond. The comments seem relatively civil and informative too.

  • Probability somewhere around zero, but … Nevertheless, Robert Bradley writes on Nuclear Power: A Free Market Approach. He provides a useful summary of his recommended path up front:

    A free-market approach to nuclear policy would entail the following: Ending governmental research and development in the field. Abolishing public grants and tax preferences for the industry. Halting foreign-loan guarantees. Repealing the Price-Anderson Act in order to privatize safety and insurance regulation. Lifting all antitrust constraints on industry collaboration. Making waste storage the responsibility of waste owners. Removing the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the US Department of Energy from civilian nuclear policy.

    Simply said, "we" (specifically: wannabe czars of energy policy) simply don't know the "right" mix of energy sources. Hayek tells us that.

    Government should get out of the way and let the market decide.

  • Heresy! At Minding the Campus, Andrew Gillen thinks FIRE Is Wrong About Public Syllabi.

    The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) is a stalwart defender of free speech for all. I’m close to a free speech absolutist myself, and therefore rarely disagree with FIRE. But we come down on different sides on the question of whether state governments may require public universities to post course syllabi publicly. Along with Peter Wood, Jared Gould, and Samuel J. Abrams, I think it is appropriate for state governments to require public colleges to post syllabi. FIRE takes the opposite stance.

    My case for allowing mandated disclosure hinges on public funding of universities. State taxpayers provide around $10,000 per student to public colleges, and it is unreasonable to expect this massive investment to be made without any oversight by or accountability to taxpayers. The specific forms that oversight and accountability should take are certainly open to debate, but publicly available syllabi are among the least intrusive mechanisms for giving the public a fairly comprehensive and accurate sense of what universities are teaching.

    My usual stance is that FIRE is right about everything, all the time. But I think Gillen has a good argument here. I'd be curious to see how the University Near Here performs on "ideological diversity".

    For an example of what UNH does make public on that score, see the library's Racial Justice Resources site. I believe the ideological spectrum runs from … left to hard left.

  • Go Fund Them. . For some reason, I asked the Google about Joëlle Ruby Ryan. As it turns out, she's they are not doing well.

    (Sorry, Joëlle uses they/them/their pronouns.)

    The most recent Googleable thing was a GoFundMe plea set up last November: Help Joelle Ruby Ryan Afford Food and Medicine. (Sometimes Joëlle umlauts the first 'e', sometimes not.) Anyway:

    Greetings. My name is Joelle Ruby Ryan. I am starting this gofundme to raise money for living expenses. Although I am currently employed, I live pay check to pay check. I have diabetes and am insulin dependent and take many medications. As you know, groceries are through the roof. I am disabled (an amputee) so doing my own grocery shopping is difficult and I usually rely on ordering my groceries from various services that deliver. Although convenient, it is definitely more expensive. After paying my regular bills, I struggle to have enough left for food and medicine. I am creating this gofundme to supplement my income to pay for food and medications. Thank you for your consideration. Every bit helps! Have a lovely day.

    There's a $5K goal, of which $465 has been raised.

    This is in addition to Joëlle's previous GoFundMe, set up back in August 2022, and apparently still accepting donations: Food, Meds & Insulin for a Disabled Trans Woman.

    Hi, my name is Joelle and I am fundraising for monthly food and medication costs. Due to a low salary, high cost of living and high monthly bills, I am consistently having difficulty making ends meet. I have thought of starting this godfundme for months but was too ashamed to do so. After every check is dispersed, I pay a bunch of bills and quickly go into a very small balance on my checking account or sometimes go into the negative. As a result, I do not have adequate funds for groceries. I also am disabled [I am an amputee] and have multiple chronic illnesses, including diabetes. I am also a transgender woman and have faced a lot of discrimination because of this. Due to my chronic illnesses, I take a lot of medications and two different kinds of insulin. There are often times when I do not have money to refill my prescriptions or my insulin. I must do what so many people do nowadays which is "ration" my medications and insulin until I can afford them again when I get paid. I know this is a hard time for most people and I understand it is hard to give. There are also so many people in need and I am one of millions in need of assistance. But if you are in a position to give, I would appreciate it greatly. No amount is too small. The $5k is simply meant to keep the gofundme open long term as I do not see this problem improving anytime soon. Thanks so much for considering.

    This one did better, currently at $3848/$5K.

    Joëlle came to my attention back in 2018, when they were part of a mob attempting to obstruct and disrupt Dave Rubin's Turning Point USA appearance at the University Near Here. I made a long post about them, noting their position as a Senior Lecturer (in Women's Studies) at UNH. (A shorter update a week later here.

    Guess what? Joëlle is still a lecturer at UNH. She lives "pay check to pay check" on (according to the USNH 2025 Salary Book) annual base pay of $76,633.04. True enough, that money doesn't go as far as it used to.

    Especially for meds. Back in 2018 she listed twenty of them on her now-defunct blog:

    Remeron. Cymbalta. Paxil. Zoloft. Klonopin. Valium. Ativan. Nuvigil. Adderall. Vyvanse. Gabapentin. Effexor. Lexapro. Celexa. Buspar. Trazodone. Lamictal. Risperidone. Lithium. Hydroxyzine.

    The preceding 20 medications are all psych meds that I am either currently taking or have taken at one time or another. They are the ones that I remember; there are more.[…]

    I assume that's a pretty steep hit, if she's still on them.

    Also back in 2018, she claimed to be $200K in debt, mostly from student loans. I have no idea if that balance has gone down since.

Recently on the book blog: