Top 5: Libidinalism vs. Constructivism
Plus: serving the homeless in Nashville
“Hidden Nashville” (Bitter Southerner)
Because this is a story about a day in the life of an advocate for the homeless, and what it’s like to invest in the dignity of a person.
…it’s no secret that all the good food in the world won’t solve hunger or homelessness. If food transcends more than sustenance or a temporary patch until the next meal, it works best when served in tandem with other individuals and organizations working in various ways to disrupt poverty. Rather than being served “to,” they are served “alongside” — blurring the lines between guest and host.
“At one point in my life, there was this idea that if I used my photography to illuminate or expose or educate enough people about a social injustice, that someone would step up and do something about it, and of course that didn’t happen. Instead, they would look at the photo and they’d say, ‘Wow, this is a great photo.’ And that’s as far as it went,” Adcock tells me when I ask how she went from documenting people’s lives to direct advocacy.
“Libidinal Liberalism” (The New Atlantis)
Because this essay parses through two common ideas in liberalism and limiting free speech: libidinalism and constructivism. The author sets out to explain why some believe limiting speech or certain acts may lead to more harm in society, and why some believe that limits on free speech or certain acts may lead to less harm. The essay doesn’t leave a strong conclusion other than this:
The obvious approach for the liberal is to stop trying to defend liberty based on a value the non-liberal shares, and instead focus more on arguing why liberty itself matters. The liberal can counter the idea that free speech has only a secondary value — say, in promoting psychological well-being or aiding democratic deliberation — and argue that we must grant more intrinsic value to open inquiry, debate, and freedom of thought and expression. The liberal can argue not that a restriction will cause more harm than it averts, but that we ought to place more value on liberty itself, that trampling on it is too high a price to pay for averting harm.
“I Need To Stop Scrolling” (Substack — Galaxy Brain)
Because as Charlie Warzel says, this is an essay on how ‘information during the fog of a pandemic is fraught.’
For the last two years I’ve thought a lot about whether I am lightly addicted to information that gives me a low grade level of worry.
“Out of Control” (Reuters)
Because this in-depth investigation looks at how COVID-19 has created an even bigger public health crisis in the US: the crisis of diabetes.
“How the Pandemic Now Ends” (The Atlantic)
Because Ed Yong won a Pulitzer Prize this year for his coverage of the pandemic, and his latest essay on where we stand with the Delta variant is, once again, very good.