Philadelphia Political Agnostics

4.5•686 ratings

Philadelphia, PA, US

807 members · Public group

What we’re about

This meetup started in 2015 as a group for people in the Philadelphia area who were concerned with the current political turmoil in America, but who also felt that the prevailing liberal-vs-conservative political paradigm is unnecessarily limiting our ability to think rationally about politics & search for policy solutions. Since we shifted to mostly online meetups in 2020, we've opened the group up to people everywhere. If you like to talk politics but you've got some moderate or unconventional views that leave you feeling out of place at most of the activist groups, party meetings & political rallies in your area, this meetup is for you!

However, if your political views put you on the far left or far right of the political spectrum - i.e. you're a Marxist, anarchist, "woke" left-wing identitarian, fascist/ethno-nationalist, Islamist, Black Hebrew Israelite, Christian fundamentalist, etc., or sympathetic to these positions - please go elsewhere. Also, if you consider yourself a moderate Republican or moderate Democrat but your views are just generic talking points you've gleaned from listening to Fox News & Tucker Carlson or MSNBC & The View, this group is not for you. It may seem uncharitable to exclude people, but from past experience our discussions just don't work very well with these folks, since they tend to be close-minded and see all of our problems as the result of only one of our political parties - i.e. they're not even remotely "agnostic".

"Political Agnosticism" is a term I came up with back in 2015 to represent a non-dogmatic approach to politics that acknowledges uncertainty and the validity of multiple perspectives, and looks for practical solutions without worrying about adherence to an overarching political ideology. The purpose of this agnostic, skeptical & free-thinking approach is to avoid treating politics as a "culture war" based on group identities or a clash of "political religions" based more on devotion to a party than knowledge of the issues. Instead, when we cover a political issue, we look at what experts in various disciplines know (and don't know) about it, tease out the ethical implications, note the tradeoffs between different policy approaches, and then look at potential solutions that encompass everything we've learned.

The only political values that are prerequisites for members are a belief in civility & tolerance towards those we disagree with, a belief in traditional civil liberties like the freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of association, and the right to privacy, as well as respect for institutional norms like separation of church & state, academic freedom, press freedom, government transparency, due process, judicial impartiality, and free & fair elections. These principles of an "open society" form the preconditions for the existence of a non-partisan political forum like ours.

Our general approach to politics is based on a concept we've borrowed from another organization, the Circle of Reason, called "pluralistic rationalism" – i.e. a personal commitment to reasoning, regardless of one's worldview. We start by assuming that reasonable people can differ in their cores values, whether it's framed as a preference for freedom vs security, tradition vs progress, individualism vs communitarianism, meritocracy vs egalitarianism, patriotism vs cosmopolitanism, etc. However, this approach is also premised on the belief that we should all commit to following the rules of logic & evidence-based reasoning. "Pluralistic Rationalism" is based on 3 tenets: (1) Factualism (as opposed to Denialism) for sourcing knowledge, (2) Skepticism (as opposed to Dogmatism) for vetting knowledge, and (3) Moderation (as opposed to Emotion) for expressing knowledge. To learn more about "pluralistic rationalism", see the Circle of Reason's website: http://www.circleofreason.org/

We are committed to creating a space for non-partisan political discussion based on intellectual honesty, mutual respect & civility. That means adopting the conversational principles of charity & good faith, avoiding name-calling, and trying to understand the best arguments that can be made for each side.

The goals for this meetup group are as follows:

(1) We try to understand why people - including ourselves - are predisposed by inherent psychological traits, cultural milieu & life experiences to have different moral intuitions & political orientations. We generally use a mix of the Big Five personality traits & Jonathan Haidt's Moral Foundations Theory, as well as Dan Kahan's work on "cultural cognition".

(2) We look at moral philosophy to try to better understand how moral axioms logically connect to one another and form ethical systems like deontological ethics, utilitarianism, virtue ethics, and contractarianism. We examine how these ethical systems form the basis for political philosophy, legal philosophy, and normative theories in the social sciences.

(3) We try to increase our level of rationality by learning how to spot logical fallacies, cognitive biases, flawed statistics, and various forms of groupthink. We often look to the bloggers of the "rationalist community" (e.g. Eliezer Yudkowsky, Scott Alexander, Julia Galef, Spencer Greenberg, Stefan Schubert, Zvi Moshowitz, Ozy Brennan, Sarah Constantin), the board members of the Center for Applied Rationality (CFAR), as well as the hosts of the Bayesian Conspiracy podcast (Steven Zuber, Eneasz Brodski, Katrina Stanton, Jace Dickey). We could also include "rationalist-adjacent" bloggers like Tim Urban (Wait But Why), Matthew Adelstein (Bentham's Bulldog) & Jack Despain Zhou (Tracing Woodgrains), data journalists like Nate Silver & Nate Cohn, tech gurus like Paul Graham & Vitalik Buterin, and scholars like Daniel Kahneman, Philip Tetlock, Keith Stanovich, Scott Aaronson, Nick Bostrum, John Nerst, Samuel Hammond, and Zeynep Tufekci who've promoted a similar style of detached, analytical thinking & strategic forecasting.

(4) We try to educate members on both the fundamentals and the latest research from the social sciences, and we discuss how this relates to current events & trending political topics. Aside from looking at academic research, a lot of our reading material comes from data/explainer journalism sites, econ & policy blogs, as well as the major public intellectuals & pundits from across the political spectrum.

(5) We try to imagine alternative types of political & economic systems that could provide better outcomes for the future based on both theory & empirical data. This often involves looking at various "maps of the policy landscape" like the Cato & Fraser Institutes' Human Freedom Index, SPI's Social Progress Index, the Economist's Democracy Index, the UN World Happiness Report, and others, even as we acknowledge the way their limitations, particularly the way they try to quantify qualitative factors that are often vague or inherently subjective.

(6) As part of our effort to break away from the narrow range of ideas represented by the two major political parties, we often look at constellations of ideas that could be described as syncretic, contrarian or heterodox. This often involves looking to intellectuals who've resisted the major populist & identitarian currents on the left and right, such as the scholars associated with Jonathan Haidt's Heterodox Academy, Peter Singer's Journal of Controversial Ideas, Keith E. Whittington's Academic Freedom Alliance, and Yascha Mounck's Persuasion.

(a) For critical insight on trends within conservatism, we often refer to conservative pundits who've criticized the GOP's ideological capture by Trump, e.g. David French, Sarah Isgur, Jonah Goldberg, Charles Sykes, Kevin Williamson, Anne Applebaum, Bret Stephens, George Will, Mona Charen, and other writers at sites like 'The Dispatch' and 'The Bulwark'. Also of interest are the Obama-era "reformicons" (e.g. David Frum, Yuval Levin, Ross Douthat, Reihan Salam, Ramesh & April Ponnuru, David Brooks, James Pethokoukis) who tried to steer the party more towards the interests of the middle & working classes in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, only to end up politically homeless when Trump took over the GOP. (Note: I specifically didn't include some neocons like Bill Kristol, Max Boot, Stephen Hayes, Liz Cheney, etc., since they've never appeared to modify their hawkish foreign policy views in light of the disastrous Iraq War they championed.)

(b) For critical insight on trends within libertarianism, we often refer to "cosmopolitan libertarians" (a.k.a. Beltway libertarians) at the Cato Institute & its "liberaltarian" offshoot the Niskanen Center, the GMU economics department (e.g. Tyler Cowen, Alex Tabbarock, Robin Hanson, Bryan Caplan, Russ Roberts, Walter E. Williams, Arnold Kling), the members of the '200-Proof Liberals' blog - successor to the now-defunct 'Bleeding Heart Libertarians' blog (e.g. Jason Brennan, Chris Freiman, Kevin Vallier, Matt Zwolinski, Jacob Levy, Steve Horwitz, Sarah Skwire), as well as the 'Fifth Column' podcast (Kmele Foster, Michael Moynihan, Matt Welch) and writers at the magazine 'Reason' (e.g. Nick Gillespie, Robby Soave, Elizabeth Nolan Brown, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Peter Suderman, Ilya Somin, Eugene Volokh), and the anti-Trump libertarians at the new Substack 'The UnPopulist' (e.g. Shikha Dalmia, Cathy Young, Trevor Burrus, Aaron Ross Powell, Berny Belvedere, Radley Balko). The debates within Gene Epstein's Soho Forum and the Cato Institute's 'Cato Unbound' blog (although the latter is now defunct) are good venues for seeing the clash of ideas between libertarians & non-libertarians. (Note that I've excluded the paleolibertarians at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, the objectivists at the Ayn Rand Institute, and the left-libertarians at the Molinari Institute & C4SS since they seem to be more siloed in their echo chambers - although I'm fairly open to revising this opinion.)

(c) For critical insight on trends within progressivism, we often refer to liberal & centrist journalists who've criticized the biases of legacy-media outlets from within (e.g. Jonathan Chait, Adam Gopnik, George Packer, Damon Linker, James Bennet, Caitlin Flanagan, Megan McArdle, Pamela Paul, Josh Barro, Conor Friedersdorf, Jonathan Rauch, Shadi Hamid) and those who've moved to independent platforms like Substack (e.g. Andrew Sullivan, Matt Yglesias, Emily Yoffe, Freddie deBoer, Matt Taibbi, Jesse Singal, Katie Herzog, Zaid Jilani, Lee Fang). Many of these people signed the open letter against cancel culture in Harper's magazine back in July 2020. Left-leaning scholars who've broken with the progressive orthodoxy on some key issues (e.g. Camille Paglia, Kathleen Stock, Anne Applebaum, Mark Lilla, Scott Galloway, Richard Reeves) also fit into this loose intellectual cluster, as do the advocates of the "Abundance Agenda" (e.g. Ezra Klein, Derek Thompson, Steven Teles, Jerusalem Demsas, Marc Dunkelman, Binyamin & Yoni Applebaum, Misha Chellam).

(d) For critiques of trends within both conservatism & progressivism, we often look to the scholars at the Heterodox Academy (e.g. Jonathan Haidt, John Tomasi, Nadine Strossen, Musa al-Gharbi, Lee Jussim, Phil Tetlock, Scott Lilienfeld, Alice Dreger, Allison Stenger, Nicholas Christakis, Eric Smith, Sean Stevens, Yascha Mounck, Eric Kaufmann) and the moderate "enlightened centrist" faction of what used to be called the "Intellectual Dark Web", e.g. Sam Harris, Steven Pinker, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Sarah Haider, Douglas Murray, Claire Lehmann, Helen Pluckrose, Peter Boghossian, Glenn Loury, John McWhorter, Coleman Hughes, and the various other writers & editors at media outlets like 'Quillette' and 'Areo Magazine' (although the latter is now defunct). Some other heterodox pundits like Bill Maher, Razib Khan, Richard Hanania, Meghan Daum, Amy Chua, Debra Soh, Melissa Chen, Meghan Murphy, Konstantin Kisin, Michael Shellenberger, Freddie Sayers, Winston Marshall, Bari Weiss, Nellie Bowles - as well as other writers at 'Unherd' and 'The Free Press' - could be considered the successors to the IDW. (Note I've excluded some of the former IDW members like Dave Rubin, Jordan Peterson, Brett & Eric Weinstein, and Maajid Nawaz since they appeared to go off the rails amid the COVID pandemic & 2020 election due to "audience capture" and knee-jerk contrarianism. I've also excluded Joe Rogan due to his interest in pseudoscience & conspiracy theories, and Ben Shapiro is excluded because he seems more like a garden-variety conservative pundit.)

(e) For critical insight on trends within the emerging "bipartisan populist" sphere, we may refer to some members of the new think tank 'American Compass' (e.g. Oren Cass, Chris Griswold, Abigail Ball), writers at Julius Krein's journal 'American Affairs' (e.g. Michael Lind, David P. Goldman, Joel Kotkin), the strange bedfellows at Sohrab Amari's magazine 'Compact' (e.g. Edwin Aponte, Patrick Deneen, Matthew Schmitz, Geoff Shullenberger, Alex Gutentag, Adam Lehrer, Michael Tracey), so-called "reactionary feminists" who criticize both unrestrained capitalism & the sexual revolution (e.g. Mary Harrington, Louise Perry, Mary Eberstadt, Nina Power, Helen Andrews), and several "post-left" writers formerly affiliated with the "Dirtbag Left" (e.g. Amber A'Lee Frost, Angela Nagle, Aimee Terese, Oliver Bateman, Malcolm Kyeyune). We could also refer to the 'Breaking Points' online news show headed by Krystal Ball & Saagar Enjeti (with co-hosts Emily Jashinsky & Ryan Grim; and their former 'Rising' co-hosts Kim Iversen & Batya Ungar-Sargon), Glenn Greenwald's post-Intercept output (e.g. the 'System Update' podcast), the writers at 'The Liberal Patriot' blog (Ruy Teixeria, John Halpin, Michael Bahareen), as well as some of the journalists at the socialist magazine 'Jacobin' who are partly sympathetic to bipartisan populism (e.g. Jennifer Pan, Dustin Guastella, Paul Prescod). This loosely defined intellectual space is still evolving from conversations between anti-woke "class-first socialists" and "post-liberal conservatives" and is less ideologically coherent right now, although it has similarities to earlier Third Way ideologues like producerism and communitarianism. In some cases, figures in this movement have taken positions at odds with the core tenets of classical liberalism, but the left-right dialogue seems to be moderating some of their stances. (The comedians-turned-pundits Jimmy Dore & Russell Brand might fit into this space, as would Tucker Carlson, but I've excluded them as they've all promoted conspiracy theories so - like some of the former IDW members I listed above - they don't help us toward a rational view of politics. There's a similar problem with Anna Khachiyan & Dasha Nekrasova's 'Red Scare' podcast - they're too uninformed on policy & prone to knee-jerk contrarianism for shock value. The "MAGA Communism" guys have a similar problem.)

-- The common feature among all of the new media projects & public intellectuals listed above is that they are openly critical of intellectual blindspots & bad ideas coming from both the left & right, although most of them are not always *equally* aware or critical of problems on both sides of the political spectrum.

(7) In order to do our part combatting political polarization, we borrow ideas from a range of organizations that are currently working on enabling mutual understanding & civil dialogue, such as David Blankenhorn's Braver Angels project, Frank Burton's Circle of Reason, Alexandra Hudson's Civic Renaissance, Liz Joyner's Village Square, Joan Blades' Living Room Conversations, John Gable's AllSides team, David Nevins & Debilyn Molineaux's Bridge Alliance, Lisa Swallow & Kareem Abdelsadek's Crossing Party Lines, Tim Dixon & Gemma Mortensen's More In Common project, David Brooks's Social Fabric Project (a.k.a. Weave), Michael Smerconish's The Mingle Project, Charles Wheelan's Centrist Project (now called "Unite America"), Irshad Manji's Moral Courage Project, the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism (FAIR), and others.

Upcoming events

See all

Braver Angels Event: "Is America a Christian Nation?"
Sun, Jan 25 · 7:00 PM EST
·
Online
Online
Event Title:
JD Vance: “America has been and always will be a Christian nation" - Let's Discuss...

About this Event:
In this event hosted by the Berkeley/Oakland/San Francisco chapter of Braver Angels, we'll discuss Vice President J.D. Vance's recent comment that America is a Christian nation. For more context to Vance’s comment, the following link is a 6-minute video segment of Vance’s speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1whlkG_foJw

Join us online to discus what you think about the nexus of religion and politics. In our breakout rooms we’ll address questions such as:
1. When you hear the term “Christian Nation”, what does that mean to you?
2. How do your religious, moral, spiritual values influence your political views?
3. How would you like to see religious values influence public policy?
Questions? Contact Dick Patterson, dpatterson@braverangels.org

Registering for the Online Event:
This is a FREE event; however, you will need to register for it. Go to the following Eventbrite link & fill out the registration form:
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/jd-vance-america-has-been-and-always-will-be-a-christian-nation-registration-1979401924440?aff=oddtdtcreator&discount=BRAVER

Note: This is a free online event. If prompted for a code, use “BRAVER.”

Check your email for the confirmation message with the Zoom link - if you don't see it, check your "Junk" folder.
- Note: Braver Angels events may be recorded, and may be shared with media or used in Braver Angels publications, including web pages. Participants who object to this may disable their video.
What is "Braver Angels"?
Formerly known as "Better Angels", Braver Angels is an organization founded in 2016 to depolarize American politics through grassroots organizing. They do this primarily by hosting events for cross-partisan dialogue & civil debate. To learn more, go to https://braverangels.org/
3 attendees
HxA Event: "How the Culture Wars are Remaking Publishing"
Wed, Jan 28 · 7:00 PM EST
·
Online
Online
Event Title:
“That Book Is Dangerous! How Moral Panic, Social Media, and the Culture Wars Are Remaking Publishing"

How to Watch:
This online event is FREE - no need to register, just use the Zoom link listed below.
Meeting ID: 873 1828 8668
Passcode: 292236

Event Topic:
Dr. Adam Szetela will be discussing his book, which explores the self-censorship happening behind closed doors inside the biggest publishers and literary agencies in North America, ostensibly in the name of progressive values.

In his new book, That Book Is Dangerous!, Adam Szetela investigates how well-intentioned and often successful efforts to diversify American literature have also produced serious problems for literary freedom. Although progressives are correct to be focused on right-wing attempts at legislative censorship, Szetela argues for attention to the ways that left-wing censorship controls speech within the publishing industry itself.
Szetela draws on interviews with presidents and vice presidents at the Big Five publishers, literary agents at the most prestigious agencies, award-winning authors, editors, marketers, sensitivity readers, and other industry professionals to examine the new publishing landscape.

What he finds is unsettling: mandatory sensitivity reads; morality clauses in author contracts; even censorship of “dangerous” books in the name of antiracism, feminism, and other forms of social justice. These changes to acquisition practices, editing policies, and other aspects of literary culture are a direct outgrowth of the culture of public outcries on X, Goodreads, Change.org, and other online platforms, where users accuse authors—justifiably or not—of racism, sexism, homophobia, and other transgressions.
But rather than genuinely address the economic inequities of literary production, this current moral crusade over literature serves only to entrench the status quo. “While the right is remaking the world in its image,” Szetela writes, “the left is standing in a circular firing squad.”

About the Speaker:
* Adam Szetela is an author who earned his Ph.D. in English from the Department of Literatures at Cornell University. Before that, he was a visiting fellow in the Department of History at Harvard University. He writes for The Washington Post, The Guardian, Newsweek, and other publications.

About the Event Host:
The Heterodox Academy (HxA) is a nonpartisan collaborative of thousands of professors, administrators, and students committed to enhancing the quality of research and education by promoting open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement in institutions of higher learning. It was founded in 2015 by Jonathan Haidt, a psychology professor at the University of Virginia, Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, a Georgetown University law professor, and Chris Martin, an Emory University sociologist.

To learn more about their mission, go to https://heterodoxacademy.org/our-mission/
1 attendee
Commonwealth Club Event: "The Case for American Power"
Wed, Jan 28 · 9:00 PM EST
·
Online
Online
Join the Commonwealth Club of California on Jan 28, 2026 to hear Shadi Hamid discuss his new book, The Case for American Power.

HOW TO WATCH:
This event is $10 for online tickets, and you must register at the link below, at which point you'll be emailed a link to the online event - https://commonwealthclub.my.salesforce-sites.com/ticket/#/instances/a0FVb00000A1TBtMAN

EVENT DESCRIPTION:
Is the United States still the “indispensable nation,” former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright’s term to describe America’s leading role in the world? Or is the world better off as the country turns inward and downplays its historic alliances?

Washington Post columnist Shadi Hamid has made his own journey, moving from opposition to America’s role in the world to reluctantly embracing it. He says the alternative to American leadership isn’t a morally perfect superpower—it’s the brutal authoritarianism of countries like China and Russia. He explores this topic in his new book The Case for American Power, and he comes to Commonwealth Club World Affairs to make the case for America to embrace its power as the only moral option in a world beset by tragedy.

Drawing on his unique perspective as both an American and a Muslim who came of age in the shadow of the September 11 attacks, Hamid contends with the contradictions of American power: how a nation founded on moral purpose so often does not live up to its ideals. He also deals with America’s failures, from the war in Iraq to support for authoritarian regimes across the Middle East. But he says that because America is a democracy, it has the ability to correct past mistakes and change for the better—and that part is up to all of us.

ABOUT THE SPEAKER & MODERATOR:
- Shadi Hamid is a political scientist working as a columnist at The Washington Post. Previously, he worked at Brookings Institution and at The Atlantic. He is also the author of several books about political Islam and democracy in the Middle East such as Temptations of Power (2014), Islamic Exceptionalism (2016), Rethinking Political Islam (2017), Militants, Criminals and Warlords (2018), and The Problem of Democracy (2022).
- Steven Saum, the moderator, is Executive Director of Strategic Communications and Content at Saint Mary’s College and has lived and worked in the Czech Republic and Ukraine, where he directed the Fulbright program, taught as a Peace Corps volunteer, hosted a radio show, and has served as an election observer.
ABOUT THE EVENT HOST:
The Commonwealth Club of California is the nation's oldest and largest public affairs forum. Every year, they present more than 450 forums on topics ranging across politics, culture, society and the economy. Their stated mission is to be the leading national forum open to all for the impartial discussion of public issues important to the membership, community and nation. To learn more, go to: https://www.commonwealthclub.org/who-we-are
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
1 attendee
Bi-Weekly Discussion - PHIL 401: Leo Strauss & Carl Schmitt
Sun, Feb 1 · 3:00 PM EST
·
Online
Online
This is going to be an online meetup using Zoom. If you've never used Zoom before, don't worry — it's easy to use and free to join.

Click on the link above at the scheduled date/time to log in...

***

***

This meetup is titled "PHIL 401" like an upper-level college course because I'm tentatively imagining it as the third in a series of discussions where we delve into some lesser known political thinkers that wouldn't typically be covered in an introduction 101-level course on political philosophy. Specifically, we'll look at older thinkers (mostly dead now) whose ideas have recently been revived and try to figure out why some people feel they're relevant to today's concerns. (The previous entries in the PHIL 401 series include a meetup on Nietzsche back in Oct. 2024, one on James Burnham & Christopher Lasch in June, and one on Oswald Spengler & Julius Evola in July.)

This meetup will focus on Leo Strauss and Carl Schmitt, two 20th-century German thinkers whose ideas have become influential among both American & Chinese political thinkers.

In the 1st section,

In the 2nd section,

In the 3rd section,

Please note this discussion will focus on aspects of Strauss & Schmitt's philosophies that have been recently revived or reinterpreted, and why that's happened over the last decade or so, rather than trying for a more comprehensive approach you'd see in a typical college philosophy class. The videos & articles I've linked under each section are intended to give you an idea of how/why some intellectually-inclined conservatives today are attracted to Schmitt or Strauss, but also how today's Chinese intellectuals & CCP party members have been influenced by these two thinkers.

RELEVANT MATERIALS FROM PAST MEETUPS:

In June 2022, we had a meetup entitled "Is 'Constitutional Conservatism' Dying?" In the 3rd section, we looked at the dispute between the East Coast Straussians who are mostly neoconservatives and oppose Trump and the West Coast Straussians (a.k.a. the "Claremonsters" who are based around the Claremont Institute) who support Trump. We discussed whether this split was rooted in the philosophical differences between Leo Strauss's chief disciples (Harry Jaffa & Allan Bloom), or was merely related to the East Coast Straussians living & working closer to the centers of power in NYC & DC where foreign policy issues loom large, while the West Coast Straussians were living in a state (California) where Republicans quickly lost power in the 1990s amid an influx of legal & illegal immigrants from Latin America.

Back in May, we had a meetup entitled "WWII Revisionism & The Right: Why Are Neocons & Populists Debating Churchill and the Holocaust?" In the Intro section, I explained that the recent debates over Tucker Carlson & Joe Rogan hosting podcaster Darryl Cooper to discuss his contrarian views on WWII are part of a "new brand of right-wing historical revisionism, which often includes a rejection of the Founding Fathers & formerly admired Republican presidents like Abraham Lincoln, Dwight Eisenhower & Ronald Reagan; a sympathetic view of far-right governments of the past like the Confederacy, Nazi Germany, Francoist Spain & Pinochet's Chile; and admiration for a variety of reactionary intellectuals of the past (e.g. Joseph de Maitre, Friedrich Nietzsche, Oswald Spengler, Julius Evola, Martin Heidegger, Carl Schmitt)."

Back in October, we had a meetup entitled "Is America Sliding Into Authoritarianism?" and in the 4th section we discussed the view of some right-wing pundits that what their counterparts on the left perceive as an authoritarian takeover is in fact a "conservative counter-revolution" which draws upon "unitary executive theory" and seeks to reverse the left's "long march through the institutions". This relates to Carl Schmitt's thinking about the "state of exception" and the "unbound executive" we'll discuss in this meetup.

We haven't discussed Chinese political philosophy in past meetups, but we have discussed the ways in which the rise of China had confounded Francis Fukuyama's "end of history" thesis published amid the fall of the Soviet Union that predicted liberal-democracy had permanently won the contest of ideas. China's rise relates to questions of whether authoritarian governments may be better at enabling economic growth than democracy, and whether the citizens of an efficient authoritarian government can be truly happy even if they're not "free". Check out the 2nd section of our 2018 meetup entitled "Are We In a Global Democratic Recession?", the 2nd section of our Jan. 2024 meetup entitled "The Economics & Politics of Happiness", and the 2nd section of our meetup from Mar. 2025 entitled "What Is/Was The Liberal International Order?"

DIRECTIONS ON HOW TO PREPARE FOR OUR DISCUSSION:

The videos & articles you see linked below are intended to give you a basic overview of some of the major debates over some of Leo Strauss & Carl Schmitt's major works and the ideas contained therein, as well as their reception & reintrepretation by both Western & Chinese thinkers. As usual, I certainly don't expect you to read all the articles prior to attending our discussion. The easiest way to prepare for our discussion is to just watch the numbered videos linked under each section - the videos come to about XX minutes total. The articles marked with asterisks are just there to supply additional details. You can browse and look at whichever ones you want, but don't worry - we'll cover the stuff you missed in our discussion.

In terms of the discussion format, my general idea is that we'll address the topics in the order presented here. I've listed some questions under each section to stimulate discussion. We'll do our best to address most of them, as well as whatever other questions our members raise. I figure we'll spend about 30 minutes on each section.

***

I. LEO STRAUSS'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY & ITS INFLUENCE ON THE NEOCONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT IN AMERICA:
- SECTION 1, QUESTION 1: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
- SECTION 1, QUESTION 2: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
- SECTION 1, QUESTION 3: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
- SECTION 1, QUESTION 4: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
- SECTION 1, QUESTION 5: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
1.) Jonah Goldberg w/ Steven Smith, "Who Was Leo Strauss?" (video - 1:21:21, listen to 34:00)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWWKgj-K9xA
- Harvey C. Mansfield, "The Legacy of Leo Strauss After 50 Years: Why there are Straussians but not Straussism"
  https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/the-legacy-of-leo-strauss-after-50-years/
- Daniel J. Mahoney, "Leo Strauss and the Promise of Political Philosophy: If philosophy does not defend the truths inherent in common life, it risks foreswearing its ancient and venerable 'promise' to help us to live well."
  https://lawliberty.org/feature/leo-strauss-and-the-promise-of-political-philosophy/
- Ingar Solty, "Leo Strauss Was a Theorist of Counterrevolution: Strauss was one of the sharpest enemies of equality — and his work is an education in the antidemocratic spirit of the Right."
  https://jacobin.com/2024/10/leo-strauss-neoconservatism-plato-elitism
- Francis Fukuyama, "A Chilling Prediction by Leo Strauss [in his 1941 lecture 'German Nihilism]: Today’s post-liberals hate liberalism but lack a coherent alternative"
  https://www.persuasion.community/p/a-chilling-prediction-by-leo-strauss
- R. R. Reno, "Fukuyama Gets Strauss Wrong" (First Things)
  https://archive.ph/80Apl
- Glenn Ellmers, "ICE and the Screams of the Damned"
  https://chroniclesmagazine.org/web/ice-and-the-screams-of-the-damned/
II. CARL SCHMITT'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY & ITS INFLUENCE ON THE DISSIDENT RIGHT MOVEMENT IN AMERICA:
- SECTION 2, QUESTION 1: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
- SECTION 2, QUESTION 2: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
- SECTION 2, QUESTION 3: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
- SECTION 2, QUESTION 4: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
2a) Aaron McIntyre, "The Friend-Enemy Distinction" (video - 9:47 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0d3aRYlSHDU

2b) James Lindsay, "The State of Exception and the Unbound Executive"" (video - 15:42 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6T61VV35bGI
- Benjamin Balint, "The Nazi Jurist: A review of Carl Schmitt: A Biography, by Reinhard Mehring"
  https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/the-nazi-jurist/
- Tom G. Palmer, "The Philosopher of Conflict Who Inspired Both the Left and Right"
  https://fee.org/articles/carl-schmitt-the-philosopher-of-conflict-who-inspired-both-the-left-and-the-right/
- Blake Smith, "Liberalism for Losers: Carl Schmitt’s 'The Tyranny of Values'" (American Affairs)
  https://archive.ph/Goy7t
- David French, "Us and Them Is All the Rage: How A German Thinker Explains MAGA Morality" (NY Times)
  https://archive.ph/YkuuP
- Peter Michael Gratton, "Why Liberals Must Confront Carl Schmitt and the Logic of Trumpism: Schmitt's ideas help explain—and thus help us counter—the radical right's assault on American constitutional democracy"
  https://www.liberalcurrents.com/why-liberals-must-confront-carl-schmitt-and-the-logic-of-trumpism/
- N.S. Lyons, "The Temptations of Carl Schmitt: A long look at the man of the moment in a totalizing age of strife"
  https://theupheaval.substack.com/p/the-temptations-of-carl-schmitt
- Jennifer Szalia, "The Nazi Jurist Who Haunts Our Broken Politics: A contempt for compromise. An expansive vision of executive power. Both owe much to Carl Schmitt." (NY Times)
  https://archive.ph/bD7gH
- Zach Beeauchamp, "Is the Far Right Channeling German Theorist Carl Schmitt's Divisive Script? The pro-Nazi political philosopher predicted the crisis of liberal democracy and would have enjoyed watching it struggle"
  https://www.theunpopulist.net/p/is-the-far-right-channeling-german
III. LEO STRAUSS & CARL SCHMITT'S INFLUENCE ON CONTEMPORARY CHINESE POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY:
- SECTION 3, QUESTION 1: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
- SECTION 3, QUESTION 2: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
- SECTION 3, QUESTION 3: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
- SECTION 3, QUESTION 4: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
- SECTION 3, QUESTION 5: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
3.) Michael Millerman, "Why China Loves Conservatives" (video - 31:00 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbC-k6sIuEE
- Eric Hendriks-Kim, "Why China Loves Conservatives"
  https://firstthings.com/why-china-loves-conservatives/
- Gary J. Schmitt, "Leo Strauss, Carl Schmitt, and Illiberal China"
  https://www.aei.org/foreign-and-defense-policy/asia/leo-strauss-carl-schmitt-and-illiberal-china/
- Dongxian Jiang, "Carl Schmitt and Leo Strauss in the Chinese-Speaking World" (review of Kai Marchal & Carl K.Y. Shaw's 2017 book)
  https://voegelinview.com/carl-schmitt-and-leo-strauss-in-the-chinese-speaking-world/
- Matthew Dean, "Reading Leo Strauss in China: The American political theorist has gained a cult following among Chinese scholars hungry for Western classics"
  https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/leo-strauss-china
- Chang Che, "The Nazi Inspiring China’s Communists: A decades-old legal argument used by Hitler has found support in Beijing"
  https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/12/nazi-china-communists-carl-schmitt/617237/
- Benn Steil, "Reading Schmitt in Beijing: How China’s Rise Provoked America’s Illiberal Turn" (Foreign Affairs)
  https://archive.ph/BsIQB
- Alex Lo, "Don’t blame China for America’s authoritarian turn: America’s authoritarian turn didn’t start with Donald Trump and has been decades in the making" (South China Morning Post)
  https://archive.ph/UW7fB
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
2 attendees