When Political Stability Comes at a Cost What happens when a political crisis is resolved through a bargain that trades long-term principles for short-term stability? In this episode of History of the Future, Jonathan Hofer and Caleb Petitt examine the disputed 1876 election and the political deal that became known as the Corrupt Bargain of 1877. With the country facing the possibility of renewed political violence, Southern Democrats agreed to accept Rutherford B. Hayes's presidency in exchange for a series of concessions, including the withdrawal of federal troops from the South and an end to Reconstruction. But the consequences went far beyond resolving a contested election. The compromise effectively gave Southern states greater freedom to determine their own racial policies, helping create the conditions in which Jim Crow would take hold. The episode raises a difficult historical question: when political stability depends on compromise, what happens when the costs of that compromise are paid by people who have little say in the deal? 🎧 Listen to the full episode of History of the Future: youtube.com/watch?v=Yttv8JIu…

Trump has a tendency, when he gets squeezed politically, to try to buy his way to victory with taxpayer-funded giveaways. This explains his infamous pledge to pay each adult a $5,000 dividend if Republicans hold onto both chambers. buff.ly/2uUl0yn

The biggest cost of California's Wealth Tax is unseen: entrepreneurs who will build their businesses in Texas, Nevada, or elsewhere instead of California. buff.ly/vofxIzM

Argentine president Javier Milei blasted the United Nations as “a useless organization whose only purpose is to sustain a cast of fatally arrogant parasites, masquerading as well-intentioned bureaucrats.” Those who were supposed to guarantee collective security and human rights, Milei said, “failed in their task. Instead, they allowed chaos, violence, and international terrorism to flourish. The alleged defenders of human rights have sheltered bloodthirsty dictatorships and regimes that stone women in the streets.” buff.ly/zspbb92

Castro: Looking back at the man, the myth, and the misery he left behind. buff.ly/c5KZpw4

Trump's over-the-top rhetoric merely indicates that he is extremely frustrated that the much weaker Iran has not capitulated to the use of overwhelming U.S. military power but instead has struck back by successfully endangering, and thus constraining, commercial petroleum traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. buff.ly/Mp0auGL

Experts project that California’s proposed Billionaire Tax could ultimately cost $24.7 billion more than it raises. buff.ly/FKgxtf5

Robust civil liberties and the rule of law that Americans cherish depend on having a more even diffusion of power among the federal branches. Join the Independent Institute for a discussion on the electoral and organizational reforms needed to Make Congress Great Again. Registration required. Wed, Nov 4 | 6:30 PM ET | Metropolitan Club, Washington, DC RSVP: buff.ly/AnpDaEg

Trump’s “Economic D-Day” against Iran bears an uncanny resemblance to his “Liberation Day” strategy for America. Both rely on the same basic mechanism: restricting trade. Yet Trump assures us they will produce opposite results. For Americans, trade restrictions will bring economic revival; for Iran, they will bring economic ruin. You don’t need a PhD in economics — or any degree at all — to spot the contradiction. The authors explore these themes further in their forthcoming book from the Independent Institute: Trade Wars: Why Freedom Trumps Tariffs buff.ly/mJ8z2jk

Studying France can give us a clearer picture of what the Democrat party is trying to sell us and the inconsistency between their goals and likely outcomes. buff.ly/VDvUXzA