I have to say, "Korean women under Japanese military occupation weren't forced into prostitution, they just had to fulfill a contractual obligation" is a level of libertarian galaxy brain I didn't even imagine was possible.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This shld really be seen in the context of the larger absurdity of much of the legal academy in which amateurs freelance in fields they have no expertise in under the imprimatur of elite university distinction. We might call it the Law and Economics Grandiosity Problem.
-
Or maybe the Richard Epstein syndrome?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I'm always fascinated by absurd, relatively esoteric claims like this. Obviously reasonable people can be wrong -- in that they interpret law, evidence, or reason incorrectly -- but when *this* wrong, I have to suspect some sort of emotional investment animating the conclusions.
-
Agreed. I also question his detractors who insist on "we disagree" framing when the more accurate frame is "he's wrong but refuses to concede that he's wrong"
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is the result of law & economics as a discipline It’s morally barren
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
From the Crimson story she mentions: “Asked why he did not cite any Korean sources in the paper, Ramseyer said he is “very upfront” about the fact that he does not read Korean.”
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.