iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

This is exactly the insight the Founders were groping toward and Van Buren ultimately articulated as the first modern parties emerged in the United States.

Asking people to look for pockets of privilege and corruption they might depend upon or participate in, or that split coalitions, makes for a much harder message. But it explains much more. 5/5

000

Monopoly absolutely can be a source of artificial privilege and thus lead to corruption, and that is surely part of our problem today. But the American tradition recognizes many paths to these evils and does not force us to pick just one. 4/5

100

The second holds that democratic government is easily corrupted, at times by cabals that just need to be thrown out, at other times by deep rot in the culture at large. This, too, is a much broader frame than just "anti-monopoly." 3/5

100

The first holds that economic success should not be perpetuated by legal moats or translated into political power; it has historically been applied to many actors besides mega-corporations. 2/5

100

The anti-monopoly folks have ironically consolidated two distinct strands of American political thought and claimed exclusive title to them. One is hostility to artificial privileges; the other is vigilance against corruption. 1/5

100

3) effective direct service rather than activism around federal policies 4) and possibly a new legal status that clarifies what kind of animal a gov-funded nonprofit is. 3/3

000

The future, Stid says, looks like 1) a shift to state and local funding 2) whole-neighborhood solutions rather than siloed federal programs 2/3

100

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 22/05/2026

The old system of federal funding to nonprofits is not coming back from Trump’s hatchet job, says Daniel Stid. Notably, it was coming under withering critique not just from the right, but also from the left for quite a while now. 1/1 hypertext.niskanencenter.org/p/for-nonpro...

100

Running a nonprofit? I have good news - you can expense a meal at Chez Panisse. Because, says Eboo Patel, the restaurant is a perfect model for how to run your org. hypertext.niskanencenter.org/p/the-alice-...

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 20/05/2026

My take is that orgs for whom it is on-mission to speak out on these abuses absolutely should, as should orgs that have an important perspective on a particular abuse. This cannot be an excuse for timidity. But there is a real cost to balance - not a vengeful, petty POTUS, but a jaded public. 3/3

000

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 20/05/2026

"The trap that Trump presents for nonprofit leaders is that, even as his public approval rating declines, direct opposition to the president is likely to hurt the nonprofit sector more than it hurts him." 2/3

100

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 20/05/2026

An unpopular president is making more absurd power grabs like the "weaponization" fund. Civil society may feel obliged to speak out. But Greg Berman says nonprofits should think long and hard. hypertext.niskanencenter.org/p/nonprofits... 1/3

Nonprofits should resist politicization first

Public trust is their most precious commodity, and politics erodes it.

100

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 18/05/2026

1) General societal changes that make people less connected. 2) Specific political or cultural divides. 3) Actual experiences with the institutions in question. Nonprofits cannot control (1). But they have some choices to make around (2), and lots of control over (3).

000

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 18/05/2026

We asked Greg Berman, author of The Nonprofit Crisis, Eboo Patel, Daniel Stid, and John MacIntosh to weigh in. hypertext.niskanencenter.org/p/nonprofits... One survey of the cross-institutional trust decline speculated it might be broken into thirds:

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 18/05/2026

120

Much of the nonprofit sector is reeling from indiscriminate disruptions to the federal funds that support so many of its organizations. But there's a deeper problem below the sabotage. Nonprofits at large are less trusted than business. So how should they navigate this moment?

100

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 08/03/2026

The future we feared is already here, but we can still change it. @gabemenchaca.bsky.social explains what the Anthropic mess tells us about contracting in the age of AI; browse around for all of our essays on the Fourth Industrial Revolution. hypertext.niskanencenter.org/p/hegseths-w...

Hegseth’s war on Anthropic is the wrong answer to the right question

The government is too reliant on private software vendors for core mission work and AI will make this much worse. Forcing companies to work at gunpoint won’t fix things.

020

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 08/03/2026

Hegseth’s war on Anthropic is the wrong answer to the right question

The government is too reliant on private software vendors for core mission work and AI will make this much worse. Forcing companies to work at gunpoint won’t fix things.

001

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 11/02/2026

I think there's a difference between responding to the latest right-wing media provocation and trying to persuade people who have been soaked in bad arguments why they should reconsider. Isn't that a good use of our time these days, if appropriately framed and targeted?

000

Reposted by David Dagan

The Niskanen Center @niskanencenter.bsky.social · 11/02/2026

To what extent was the U.S. already in crisis before the rise in populism we've seen over the past few years? It's a serious debate among defenders of the liberal-democratic order. Recent responses to Brink Lindsey's new book have brought it to the forefront. ⬇️

111

Reposted by David Dagan

The Niskanen Center @niskanencenter.bsky.social · 29/01/2026

Can we create a digital economy that strengthens democracy instead of eroding it? This week in Hypertext ⤵️

121

Incredible courage from these witnesses, whose fear of retaliatory or preemptive violence is 100% justified.

000

They also believe hotter rhetoric will mobilize more undecideds to their side and/or fortify their true believers for whatever final clash they imagine is coming, with the midterm clock ticking on their fascist ambitions.

But it also raises salience so the sane majority hopefully wakes up. I'm not sure this is a *strategy* given the characters involved, but it's the logic now at work. The logic, in other words, of authoritarian consolidation. 2/2

021

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 12/01/2026

The logic of the escalating violence & rhetoric is to force max number of R's and nonattentive folks into the pro-paramilitary corner because they either like what they see or just believe the lies, and/or to set off a confrontation w/ local/state authorities that provides pretext for worse. 1/2

100

But if you listen to Goldsmith and Bauer today, it becomes clear just how much of an own goal this will be. He is in a loss-overreach spiral that will badly wound us but exposes the limits of his power, and thereby degrades it.

020

The only big reveal here is that the purported truth-teller hasn’t graduated out of the wading pool of political thought. 4/4

In general, these folks imagine themselves as making bold revelations when they announce to us that the world is structured by force. But this is not something that liberalism denies or obscures; it is the underlying assumption of liberalism. 3/4

If victims can exist, that would suggest that force might be subject to reflection and accountability. In other words, that it might be constrained by something other than raw power. 2/4

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 06/01/2026

The demagogic response to the ICE killing is the domestic side of Stephen Millerism. This administration cannot recognize the category of “victim” in regard to its policies or the agents carrying them out; any victim must be immediately converted into an enemy. 1/4

120

I am thankful for the heroes of Jan. 6 and all who worked so hard for accountability. Their America will outlast the mob and its leader.

The likeliest scenario is that Venezuela's new leadership tells Trump what he wants to hear on the phone and then acts differently, and he allows it to happen - because otherwise, he's committed to a disaster. 3/3

000

Voters who thought they were getting the anti-inflation, America First president now see as dramatically as possible that they got a Mafia boss who is willing to shed American blood to extract foreign oil. 2/3

100

Domestically, this may prove Trump's biggest blunder. How will MAGA isolationists take his plans to occupy Venezuela? A cowardly Congress refused to pass a law that would have prevented this intervention, but if Venezuela's new leader refuses to play ball, will they support a bloodbath? 1/3

Walter Olson @walterolson.bsky.social · 03/01/2026

Reposted by David Dagan

Statement from Cato VP Clark Neily: Courts probably won't rule against the rendition. Yet Trump has chosen to bypass the constitutional provisions designed to cabin the president's powers in using force against other countries. And an indictment does not supply him with those powers.

Statement on Trump's Venezuela action by Cato Vice President for Legal Studies Clark Neily:
*
As a legal matter, any challenge by Nicolas Maduro to his capture last night and subsequent rendition to the United States would run headlong into precedents involving the prosecution of Manuel Noriega in the 1990s. Courts have already upheld the unilateral seizure, prosecution, and conviction of a foreign leader under materially similar circumstances, and given longstanding judicial deference in foreign-affairs cases, judges are unlikely to distinguish that line of authority in Maduro's case.
That conclusion, however, should not obscure the deeper constitutional concern here, which is profound. The Constitution deliberately assigns to Congress—not the President—the power to decide when the United States will initiate hostilities against foreign sovereigns. That assignment includes the power to declare war and the related authority to issue letters of marque and reprisal to private entities, both of which reflect a constitutional judgment that decisions risking international conflict, retaliation, and escalation should not rest with a single executive actor.
When a President unilaterally deploys military force abroad to seize a foreign head of state—effectively collapsing war powers, foreign relations, and criminal law enforcement into a single executive decision—the constitutional safeguards designed to cabin the use of force against other countries are bypassed entirely. That concern is not cured by the existence of a valid indictment. An indictment may (or may not) explain why a President wishes to act, but it cannot supply the constitutional authority to do so through military force without meaningful congressional engagement, let alone authorization.

8425157

The Niskanen Center @niskanencenter.bsky.social · 23/12/2025

The guy who ran against the Iraq War is offering us Iraq on steroids. The congressional abdication. The thin pretext. The myopia about the potential for a bloodbath. All caricatures of 23 years ago. And the caricature of 2003 - the oil play - is now real.

000

Reposted by David Dagan

Earlier this month, Ross Douthat argued that “the liberal order can’t heal itself.” The next day, @jvl.bsky.social told liberals to stop the masochism. But the answer is neither despair nor restoration, but a liberal reconstruction. hypertext.niskanencenter.org/p/lets-bake-...

Let’s bake the liberal sourdough

Yes, Jonathan V. Last, liberalism needs to revisit its recipe. No, Ross Douthat, we should not give up on the starter.

041

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 18/12/2025

I’m poking a stick just a little bit in @jvl.bsky.social's eye here, but he is an indispensable read for me in these brutal times and his insight always leaves you sharper, agree or disagree. 2/3

000

David Dagan @daviddagan.bsky.social · 18/12/2025

Examining how our elite went wrong is not masochism and New Right flirtation. The question is precisely how our leadership class wound up allowing these people anywhere close to power, and caving repeatedly to the predations of the Trump administration in recent months. 1/2