Talk:Cass Sunstein/Archive 1

Libertarian?

Under "legal philosophy, it says he is a "libetarian", w/ the word having a link to "liberalism in the United States". Judging by the context of the article should it read "libertarian"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.117.59.17 (talk) 20:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's described his philosophy as "libertarian paternalism". That is, he believes in a regulatory state that is optional but hard to opt out of. Depending on your read of his views in Nudge, it might even be taken as "public choice as a rhetorical flourish" in that the policy achieves political support by being optional but in practice the option can't be taken. I agree that it's not libertarian by any standard anyone other than Sunstein would accept, and I think at this point even he's dropped the label. 24.99.56.211 (talk) 02:25, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He's hardly a libertarian, as he believes in the government playing a larger role in people's lives. As a libertarian myself, I cannot see why he should be considered a member of the party. BrenMan 94 (talk) 15:47, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the correct word is "evil" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.87.77.168 (talk) 20:45, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In order to support the claim that Sunstein is a liberal, footnote 2 uses a NY Times article that calls Sunstein "a liberal and a Democrat who worked in the Obama administration". Seems to me this isn't a good source to support the claim. and furthermore, is seems this claim isn't totally relevant in the first paragraph of the entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.139.125.68 (talk) 16:35, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vegan?

Sunstein is currently categorized as a vegan, but is he really one? I have found several sources (here and here) stating that he is a vegetarian, but none that he is a vegan other than Wikipedia itself. Please let me know if you have proof either way. n-k, 13:47, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am temporarily removing him from the vegan category until we have reliable sources for that claim. n-k, 13:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Religion

What is his religion/religious background? Stonemason89 (talk) 18:09, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lock this page down

I'd suggest locking this page down ASAP. Its going to get flooded by people making subjective changes to cast Sunstein in the most negative of lights. People need to understand that Wikipedia isn't a plaything to help grind an ideological axe. Trueslicky (talk) 16:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This "lockdown" suggestion is why Wikipedia is dead. In the old days, we slugged it out. It was the golden age of Wikipedia. Now it is not an encyclopedia "that anyone can edit" it is an Establishment stronghold masquerading as a free-to-edit encyclopedia. I just read C. Sunstein's "Conspiracy Theories" .pdf: he wants "The Government" to infiltrate and undermine conspiracy theory free speech by using covert funding operations. Huh? That type of radialism is a conspiracy in and of itself! In the self-same essay, he admits that not all conspiracies are false, and that the government is both involved in true conspiracies, and has a hand in fomenting false conspiracies. He wants the same government to have the wisdom to fight only "false" and "harmul" conspiracy theories. The Academy cannot police itself: exhibit 1: Sunstein is respected in the Academy! Only the free-for-all of a free marketplace of ideas offers free society the necessary immune system that can protect it from despotism.72.131.25.78 (talk) 21:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reason they want this page locked down is they do not wnat the people to know the real facts abot Sunstein. He is a socialist, 100%. There is nothing he believes that is Ameiercan. The people will never understand how a socialist, communist, etc can be put in high position in government. If one just reads his ideas about how the bill of rights should read they will know Sunstein is a moron. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.216.46.151 (talk) 03:32, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done: I put in a Request for Protection. Stonemason89 (talk) 14:20, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done: this page has been semi-protected for a period of one week. Stonemason89 (talk) 17:20, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been locked down, but requires an alteration. In the first paragraph, where it says "Sunstein will head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs," it needs to say "Sunstein has been nominated to head the..." His nomination has not been confirmed yet, so it's premature to say that he WILL head the office mentioned. Likefood (talk) 18:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Likefood, you are incorrect. Sunstein was confirmed unanimously on August 7th according THOMAS.LOC.GOV. Run a search on the site for PN323-111.Petey05 (talk) 03:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but this is incorrect, per both the source referenced above and other sources, such as www.politico.com as of September 9, he was not confirmed. The senate only agreed upon clotureNpeters22 (talk) 14:20, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Npeters22, you are correct. I misread the LOC page. Cloture passed and the confirmation vote should be soon. Apologies. Petey05 (talk) 15:46, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sunstein was confirmed today. Petey05 (talk) 23:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if we include Cass's First Amendment beliefs, we should also include his Second Amendment beliefs. He has spoken on restricting or banning hunting and firearms in general. Likefood (talk) 18:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Likefood, I think that is fair. I am familiar with some of his writings against recreational hunting but not against firearms. Could you share some of that discussion in here and then maybe we can add it to the page? Some links to writings, discussion of their context, etc?Petey05 (talk) 04:01, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quote: "I think we should go further... the law should impose further regulation on hunting, scientific experiments, entertainment, and farming to ensure against unnecessary animal suffering". Source: 'The Rights of Animals: A Very Short Primer'

Quote: "Almost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine... On the Constitution's text, fundamentalists should not be so confident in their enthusiasm for invalidating gun control legislation." Source: 'Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts are Wrong For America' (2005)

Want more? It is more of the same. The fellow is definitely 'progressive liberal' on 2nd Amendment questions. Oh, and Petey: recreational hunting views are going to tally fairly well with firearms views in the rest of his comments on this topic. Just letting you know before you get there. 216.69.219.3 (talk) 00:46, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Academic Views - Preserving Neutrality

Related to the above section - I'm very concerned that some of the quotes attributed to Sunstein in this article may be misleading or out of context. For example, in the animals rights section, the quote about "whether animals have standing to sue" is posed as a hypothetical implication of the status of animals as property and is a more general point about awarding animals legal standing to sue, i.e. that someone could bring suit against a negligent owner on the animal's behalf (they currently cannot) not that your parakeet would hire Perry Mason. The "Congress will grant rights to animals" bit is from another author as it was only a volume that Sunstein edited.

I'm not an expert Wikipedian, but I have read much of Sunstein's works, and any guidance I could receive from the community on the best practices of editing Wikipedia with an eye to preserving neutrality while also explaining the context / circumstances of different statements (in case this does blow up to another Van Jones) would be much appreciated. Thanks. Petey05 (talk) 16:29, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to edit this material without completely erasing things but it's sort of tough because stuff like "we ought to give animals the right to sue" is so taken out of context that it's hard to even include it without paragraphs of explanatory information. Petey05 (talk) 16:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Animal Rights

I made some edits to the animal rights section today in an attempt to contextualize and clarify some of his statements. I am also concerned about insufficient attribution for some of the more controversial statements - for instance, the statement "we ought to ban hunting" is referenced with only "speech at harvard university" and no supporting documentation or information. I have held off on editing this section further pending review or feedback from others per my concerns above. However, there is no documentation of the Harvard University quotes on either the Harvard or Chicago websites and I will be removing them in a day or so unless someone provides a source. Petey05 (talk) 16:46, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After spending several more hours looking for an actual official source I have removed quotes attributed to that speech. All the hits on Google for them just cite this article or lack any citation whatsoever. If someone can provide a primary source for this, then please, post and let me know! Petey05 (talk) 18:02, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following sentence from the Wiki article is false: "However, nowhere in the introduction does Sunstein propose doing so: the discussion on page 11 is merely an exploration of the philosophical dimensions and formal sources of animal rights..." On page 14 of the book, which is still in the Introduction, it says "Cass sunstein turns to a much-disputed question: Should animals be allowed to sue? He urges that, at a minimum, suits should be permitted, on animals' behalf, to ensure compliance with existing law." (my emphasis) In context, the usage of the words "propose" and "urge" are clearly synonymous, and arguably, "urge" is an even stronger version of "propose," particularly when followed by the phrase "at a minimum." There is no question that Sunstein is proposing that animals be given the standing to sue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.137.91.58 (talk) 13:09, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Read again: "on animals' behalf", he is NOT proposing that your dog should be able to sue you. He is proposing that someone else should be able to sue you for mistreating your dog. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.78.36.86 (talk) 14:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I find it really amazing and quite amusing how far people are bending over backwards to make this guy's views seem like something less than radical, misrepresenting his words as reasonable by quoting only those that can be twisted. He has clearly stated that animals should be able to sue, not just that someone else can sue on animals' behalf. For example, in his own words, from page 252 of his book, Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, he states his "simplest suggestion" of private citizens bringing suit on behalf of animals (yes, any citizen, whether the animal would want it or not...), but then argues beyond that. He says (bolding added by me for emphasis):

"Somewhat more broadly, I will suggest that animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives, to prevent violations of current law."

I'm not presenting this out of context. His argument is in a whole chapter entitled, "Can Animals Sue?" and the supposed problems inherent with humans suing merely on behalf of animals are discussed.68.83.72.162 (talk) 04:27, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Critics??

Funny, I can't see any specific critics mentioned anywhere, only one bit about "controversy". Is that the NPOV complaint? Bachcell (talk) 00:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What reliable sources have levied notable criticism on Sunstein? That would be a constructive way to start if you feel that information is missing from the article. — Mike : tlk 15:59, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gun Owners of America for one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.69.219.3 (talk) 00:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any criticisms are removed immediately because of Wikipedia's fear of this man's power to incarcerate or fine them for allowing a dissenting view from being voiced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.20.20.129 (talk) 04:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC) And that is the ultimate criticism, Sunstein has had too much power in shaping informal law to the detriment of his fellow citizens and to the detriment of equality ... and that it cannot be talked about is further damnation.[reply]

Here's one.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/health/policy/white-house-and-fda-at-odds-on-regulatory-issues.html

White House and the F.D.A. Often at Odds

By GARDINER HARRIS

FDA officials wanted to prohibit lotions with SPF <15 from being called sunscreens, because they don't protect against cancer or skin aging. Cass R. Sunstein, director of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, and a deregulation advocate, ordered that they would merely have labels saying they were ineffective. --Nbauman (talk) 15:42, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

flaming falsities

I've removed two passages here that are plainly false or misleading. The first was: "In the book, Sunstein openly argues for bringing socialism to the U.S. and even lends support to communism." This is absurd red-baiting. The source is quoting a tiny bit of a talk at which he is plainly commenting upon theories about the history of politics in the US and elsewhere. Comments about history do not make one Gus Hall. The terms "socialism" and "communism" in this context are not adding any INFORMATION about Sunstein. They are the epithets of a political rally, appropriate on a blog or campaign page, but not on Wikipedia.

The second is: "In another book, On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done, Sunstein advocates penalizing those that "spread rumors about an appointee of a Democratic president". I can't believe this survived as long as it did on this page. This is plainly false. The quote is taken (wildly) out of context. Sunstein is at this point (circa page 13) introducing two concepts -- the idea of "narrowly self-interested" propagators of rumors, and "generally self-interested" propagators of rumors. He uses the example of spreading rumors "about an appointee of a Democratic president" as an example of the former (since tied to a narrow objective, of attacking a Democrat). He does not here -- or elsewhere -- advocate a rule to punish people criticizing the President.

I have also inserted a critical qualification to the section about Animal Rights. Sunstein is among the most prolific law professors in America. He has written thousands of pages of text (I don't know even how to count this, but could it be hundreds of thousands?). A TINY fraction address Animal Rights. That it occupies 25% of the substantive Wikipedia does not reflect well upon the balance and fairness of the entry. lessig (talk) 13:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The addition is silly and made me laugh aloud about how absurdly out of place it was. One-third of the article isn't about him sleeping, either, so should we change it to "a minority of his life has been spent on the law profession" or something? Rather that try to cover for his animal rights stance, why not post some of this "overwhelming" other work he's published?68.83.72.162 (talk) 19:05, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Info about his Jewish ethnic background removed?

Why has info and categories regarding Sunstein's ethnically Jewish background been removed from the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.164.227.182 (talk) 13:18, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law?

The article states that Sunstein is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. Doesn't Alan Dershowitz currently hold that title? Perhaps Sunstein holds some other professorial title at Harvard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.125.170.209 (talk) 03:37, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration of mentions of Jewish background

Regardless of his current religious beliefs and/or practices, Sunstein's ethnic Jewish background is well-documented, and thus I have restored the two brief mentions (in the early life section and adding him to Category:American Jews). See Who is a Jew? for details. Lockesdonkey (talk) 22:01, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just deleted the reference to him being a "khazar." This is not supported and "Khazar" is generally a codeword among white supremacist groups as a reference to "any Jew." If someone has a reference that Sunstein is in fact descended from the Khazars, that would be another matter. (At the moment there is only one such community in the world, they used to live in Soviet Georgia... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.188.220 (talk) 05:11, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Views on "cognitive infiltration"

I've added a section to the Views portion of this article, provisionally titled "Conspiracy Theories". His willingness to have government agents (and their allies) infiltrate discussions and venues where conspiracy theories are being discussed or promoted, with the intent to dampen those theories, seems notable. I'm not sure whether the text or title should be focused on conspiracy theories or maybe included in the first amendment portion of the article?

I feel there is something in this that is worth mentioning on his article, but am by no means sure that what I've put in couldn't be improved or re-wrote in some way to make it more clear. Either way, here's a spot for discussion on the change.
Jozsefs (talk) 00:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some guys tried adding some stuff to the new section, maybe we could discuss it here first? One of the additions was just an editors opinion, while the other addition was sourced but I'm not sure it's necessary to tie this specifically to the truth movement. He references about 8 or 10 different example conspiracies in his paper so I don't know that any one specifically needs to be the focus of this blurb. Jozsefs (talk) 20:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is an important discussion point, as it has certainly generated some serious commentary and is related to Sunstein's position in government. I think a better title would highlight his views on government infiltration of groups espousing these theories, since this is the issue that is most noteworthy and controversial. SCF71 (talk) 05:49 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I miss an important critic on Sunstein in this wiki article:

David Ray Griffin, "Cognitive Infiltration, An Obama Appointee s Plan To Undermine The 9/11 Conspiracy Theory." Olive Branch Press, ISBN 978-1-56656-821-0 In this book, Sunstein s and his coauthors ideas were totally refuted with clear facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.253.222.255 (talk) 07:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Role in introducing WikiLeaks

In his February 2007 article in the Washington Post, "A Brave New Wikiworld", Sunstein appears to be playing a seminal role in promoting WikiLeaks to a national audience with a focus on its utility serving US foreign policy interests. Perhaps this warrants a mention? __meco (talk) 13:56, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not unless a reliable secondary source suggests he played such a role. This is one sentence from an otherwise unrelated piece; to include such a interpretation in this article is undue weight. Calling it a "seminal role" seems particularly over-the-top. Cool Hand Luke 19:06, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right. I listened to Webster Tarpley's radio show and adopted the perspective he put forward, simply. __meco (talk) 22:21, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

R.

What does his middle initial stand for? Shoplifter (talk) 21:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Norm entrepreneur

I have just made a new little page on a term which seems to be of Prof Sunstein's coining. The term norm entrepreneur in Sunstein, Cass R. (1996) Social Norms and Social Roles, Columbia Law Review, Vol. 96, No. 4, May, pp. 903-968. Not sure how/where/if to put it in here. I will have a go in bit perhaps. (Msrasnw (talk) 15:00, 22 March 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technology

Hi. Was he elected to the Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technology? Is it notable to be added to aritcle? RS is http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/11/13/surveillance-review-group-delivers-interim-report/3517281/

Removed unrelevant Photo

Somebody appear to be spamming unrelated pictures on articles in wikipedia. I have removed some photos in other articles, myself. 190.79.153.106 (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adding link needed

New link to pdf with details on Professor Sunstein and death punishment issue. 200.75.126.45 (talk) 01:25, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Republic.com

...Internet may weaken democracy because it allows citizens to isolate themselves within groups that share their own views and experiences, and thus cut themselves off from any information that might challenge their beliefs, a phenomenon known as cyberbalkanization

Well, that's the strangest thing I've ever read. Is Sunstein's thesis supported by anyone else? Viriditas (talk) 11:16, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Government and Post-Government

What did Sunstein actually do in the Obama Administration? What were his responsibilities and how did he discharge them? Also, where did he go after he left government, while his wife was still at the UN? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.162.253.101 (talk) 18:38, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Cass Sunstein. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:17, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Cass Sunstein. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20160129231203/http://www.rawstory.com/2010/01/obama-staffer-infiltration-911-groups/ to http://rawstory.com/2010/01/obama-staffer-infiltration-911-groups/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:32, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Recent as of when?" note

No reader can tell when this was written without slogging through the page history and whatnot; and none of them should be required to, in order to get a sense of when the book was written.

BTW, I'm pretty sure I messed up the formatting. My note, IIRC, is supposed to be in smaller print, italicized, and appear as a superscript.GcT (talk) 04:20, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You might be thinking of {{When}}. -Location (talk) 14:00, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Life

This section is poorly written and makes no sense.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Cass Sunstein. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:15, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cass Sunstein Picture

I'm not one of Sunstein's fans, but fair is fair and that is the most unflattering picture of him I have seen. Most show him smiling or neutral. Here he looks scowling, angry, and dangerous. 190.100.174.213 (talk) 17:01, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Cass Sunstain discusses The World According to Star Wars.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:51, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]