Four bangers in a single post! I don't know how you do it man!
To follow your throughline, I'll note my personal thoughts on academics — the two fields I can't grok are economics and foreign affairs. In econ everything is counter intuitive, and in international relations all options are bad.
As for the university presidents, as someone who is shocked by the state of campus, I'm enjoying the schadenfreude like a good b-list action flick. BUT it comes with a worry, "hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue" so their firing(s) make me worried that this will lead to more regulated speech. Then again, maybe we have to start by cleaning out the Augean Stables.
Thank you Justus! It's pretty much just opening up about a thousand tabs and then having tunnel vision for about a day.
Great point re the schadenfreude. I really do care about these institutions, and do think they have real issues, but it's hard to get away from the "man, did they do this to themselves" marble circulating around in one's head. Yes, cleaning the Augean Stables=the absolute worst labor. Would much rather fight a famous lion or a nine-headed snake than sweep up generations' worth of animal shit.
Helpful this. Myself recognized late two days ago that Sjw's are warriors. I always have an admiration I express w faint praise. The moment is like what you said. The picture of you unpacking the scene as if from a backpack. So they have found tools for safe words I mean tools for is it semi private? Strong feelings of togetherness. I admire...This of yours was right on time. You with the desk there. My last Scandal was a movable part for your desk. To the effect that Sapolsky leaves off in his No Self Control, Determined book open endedly to the point he feels obligated to in interviews snatch at ideas abt extending kindness toward ourselves. Simply is that the first logical extension of having no you start looking how to be as organized as a book. Be a hell of a start if you were at the beginng a month novel writing.
Do you feel like Sapolsky and the anti-free will argument connect to the social justice movement? Would be interesting if so. I think of the no free will thing as being connected to a B.S. Skinner sort of scientific determinism but interesting that it's gaining ground at the moment of progressivism.
Yeah-no, I see SJW's much too in need of lyrical words for the Heideggerian thickness of describing what it might mean if we have no self control. I had to hack my way through my book report cutting prepstns and attribitions to just pronounce the words. In that same moment though, you wrote some words clarifying abt the detour I sent your readers on into hyperspecifcs abt the This american common experience...you said some words about empire and a body can see that comfort and empire rhyme. Maybe I will notice more common culture in a hierophany, I believe everybody who read Can we exist w/out a common culture? Will be thinking abt it this year.
Here is the picture with Determined. In his first of 11 or 20 interviews S'sky made up for not giving any behavioral Rx's prscrptns in t book by saying It means that the best place for a person is in th research dpt at a university. Then in the next interview on the fly he came up with some more general population ways of looking at people as like motivated reasoners? For us it is like reading Nassim Taleb. A way to see and touch that we really are respecters of science....
Interesting insights into the conflict inherent in the two great flaws of the American politic. Hypocrisy and morality with each act in your four part play outlining the inherent flaws that have arrived at the door of a failing empire. That part got missed. Also the role of economic greed inside this global projection of power. Which in reality has now turned on its own citizens inside the bubble and is slowly eating its own. From outside the bubble as an interested observer one has to say the American projection of power as a project is a failure and is actively failing to such an extent that Ukraine and Israel acting inside Gaza exemplify and announce to the world said failure because they embody both the hypocrisy and an immorality that clears away any misconceptions around the notions of liberty, freedom and self determination for all mankind. It’s been made more than clear to even the most propagandized American citizen, this was just spin and marketing. The reality lies much closer to the organizing principles of a more modern and updated version of fascism some now call soft totalitarianism and the real motivations of the American project are economic on a global scale. Protecting the dollar hegemony, protecting unfettered access to the dwindling energy supplies for its military capabilities on which the whole projection depends etc. And most of all by protecting its economic dominance by proxy war in small regional conflicts that thwart alliances between rivals. Mostly Russia, China and Iran. Tying up Russia in Ukraine. Iran in the ME leaves the US free to pursue its war with China which its military has been preparing in earnest for at least five years now and speak openly about now in real terms as happening. So it seems to me your analysis is accurate but excludes the third leg of the stool, hypocrisy-immorality and greed. This is what has built the American project and one only has to look at history to see the truth. Puritan religiosity (hypocrisy)settles new land followed by genocide of its inhabitants then built largely on the backs of African slaves (immorality)and lastly entering two world wars late and at their conclusions to reap the economic largesse of a demolished Europe (greed). Everything we see now as American projections of power are built on the basis of these three flaws. It’s been remarkable it’s lasted this long. But that’s what 1 Trillion a year in military spending and 800+ military bases around the world can buy a failing empire. Time.
Very interesting points. I'm definitely a bit more "pro-American" than I take it you are - but could one day be convinced that that's just my naivete. I guess a big thing for me is that I really can't figure out the shape of power. If there is basically a coherent "Washington Consensus" and that's driving the whole American hegemonic project; if it's less orchestrated than that, and it's a fairly dysfunctional body politic lurching along in response to different crises.
I was very bullish on Ukraine and continue to be. The Ukrainians badly wanted help and I was proud of America to be in a position to support them. But I can understand arguments that are much more cynical than that.
You feel that the US will instigate a war with China?
Sam it’s great to have these discussions with you even though we disagree on some things. Collectively a huge problem these days. I don’t disagree with your points in terms of what’s “right” or “wrong”. Your points are valid but from an outside the bubble perspective to me anyway it’s missing some of the overall context. Ukraine for example started in 2014 with a US backed coup led by Victoria Newland. She backed some fascist elements and the NATO rôle effectively lured Russia into invading. That’s a perspective not discussed inside the US very much but has real value in terms of a more comprehensive perspective of Ukraine. Now that the US is essentially bailing on the Ukrainian’s it’s about to get a whole lot more problematic.
China is a real concern. Elements in the Pentagon are actively preparing for war with China over Taiwan. Just meander theu the Task and Purpose Blog for the last five years to see what they say and make your own assessment. Press releases from active Generals also talk openly about these preparations. Is it just projections, possibly? But knowing the US propensity for war these last twenty years it’s not a bad bet to place on this insanity going next level. Financially the US is losing its reserve currency status at some point in the future. Not if but when and this is really what is underlying all the political maneuvering. Power, money and control underlies all of the US geopolitical maneuvering of late and it’s been eye opening to see even a ghoul like Kissinger sounding like a moderate on these issues. That’s how far the US politic has lurched into neocon jingoistic territory lately.
Personally you can’t look to too many Americans for accurate reporting on any of these topics. Only those who don’t depend on US dollars for income can openly report from a more clear eyed perspective.
Adding to your comments on the shape of power in the US - that’s an interesting and alarming concept that needs much more widespread discussion. I’m with you on that point and have little conception as to what that really looks like. I think, for me anyway, it’s framed around a troika. Washington-Pentagon-Wall Street. Which effectively is the policy framework projected onto the rest of the world (which most Americans sitting at home never see, witness first hand or truly understand). It’s this troika construction because these three bodies reflect policy-power-money. Which for all intents and purpose is what the real US machine is about. Money. Money needs power and power needs policy. The relationship is interconnected.
What’s clear is the Red/Blue paradigm is all just theatre because on any real issue around real and significant issues that involve money-power-policy there is NEVER any dissent between the dems or republicans of any real significance when it comes to war. They always act as one. Every war this century has been unanimously voted on and ratified as legal and just when in fact years later they have all been proven to be illegal, unjust and outright criminal endeavours. Iraq being the clearest example of this.
Lastly, no one can rationally explain how a country of 350 million people with the wealth and power of the US can present to its electorate and the world that Joe Biden and Donald Trump are the best they can offer as leaders of their political movements. And if not them, then Newsome and/or Desantis are the next in line. How is this even remotely possible? How did the UK end up with Boris Johnson? An obvious clown. How are men like this (of such low character and ability) allowed anywhere near this role as supreme leader of the “free” world. I’m not sure of the entire answer but it’s clear - because it’s not the real seat of power - it can’t be. These men are fools and we are subjected to political theatre not real power and decision making of any real significance. Wars always get whatever it needs in terms of funding but never any healthcare. Banks get bailed out by the trillions but poverty and wealth inequality continues to grow exponentially. Educational outcomes and quality of general intellect and critical thinking continues to decline. Americans rank among some of the lowest in results for key metrics in education/health/quality of life. All easily researchable and published widely yet affects little to zero discussion of much purpose or outcome in the US. But a war or invasion and everyone is involved and hotly discussed but never denied its path to fruition. When was the last US war, hotly debated internally and then calmly and rationally resolved diplomatically without going hot?
The Troika is a valid analogy and comments in the past always say/ask if you’re not American why do care so much? The answer in reply is I don’t but your hot mess always spills out onto the rest of the globe killing and maiming millions of innocent people and serves to destabilize and foment violent reactions in regions most Americans could hardly spell let alone find on a map. It’s ridiculous.
I'm definitely not unsympathetic to your framing. The period I've been reading around in is the '40s-'50s when America really emerges as a world power, and it's pretty dark what was going on! - various rival branches of the military and intelligence services pretty much holding civilian government hostage (and civilian presidents saying that directly). But I really do lose sight of it after that. I don't know the extent to which Congress reasserted a degree of control in the '70s. I don't know the extent to which NSA domestic spying, "dirty wars," "the Washington Consensus," etc, represent a self-sustaining power infrastructure that has no connection whatsoever to democratic processes. And I don't know the extent to which that infrastructure is tightly controlled or is better understood as a fragile consensus between rival entities within the power apparatus.
I've listened to Victoria Nuland's phone call and I don't see 2014 as a coup - it seems more a bit of opportunism by the US trying to get its hand in in an unstable situation. I've read the statements by generals on China and that just feels to me like what you would expect of generals - their job is to be prepared for war (and they always think war is imminent).
But I may well be naive on both counts! There have certainly always been insane warmongers within the US establishment and it's possible that some have outsize influence now.
Thank you for the kind words. Always enjoy talking to you.
Aaron Goode is a PhD in History? It might be something else but his book American Exception is a well researched and academically rigorous approach to some of the questions you pose. For me, studying the documents around Vault 7 changed my outlook of the US from a democratic enterprise trying to allow for a libertarian approach to governance and all the quirky growing pains that would entail, to a criminal enterprise with an expensive military to flex its muscle as a global racket.
Inside those documents is a clear pattern of thinking about surveillance and control that has multiple avenues to embed itself in our social structure on a global level. This is clearly not by accident. Add to that the complete memory holing of Jeff Epstein and what he was really up to beyond underage sexploiation and there are certainly some very very dark elements exercising a ton of power within the US security state apparatus. And in terms of relevance and importance to our futures these things are met with crickets. Much like what the US is doing to Julian Assange.
Well done! I hope your novel's going well. Gonna keep my ear open for when it comes out: would love to check it out! But how to comment on this excellent post: just two for two I guess. By the way, I'm also curious about your thoughts on the brewing Venezuela-Guyana conflict. Guyana certainly has no problem with the US existing as an empire.
With Israel/Palestine, the collapse of the two-state solution is the elephant in the room. If it really was feasible, Israel at least would have cooled down by now. So however gruesome it might be, it is also logical. Israel, no doubt, wants the "Palestinian issue" to be over for good. Now's their opportunity.
As for Ukraine, the US and Americans never truly cared about Ukrainian people or their culture: that's not to say Americans don't have hearts, just that there is zero historical precedence for caring about a region no one in the West has ever cared about. Our caring for Ukraine is in fact anti-Russian sentiment in disguise. Those are two very different things. How many people who claimed they cared about the Balkan conflict in the 90s became lifelong cultural connoisseurs of Croatian or Bosnian culture? I suspect the number is less than my combined fingers and toes.
Pro-Ukrainianism is a fad: nothing more. America's sudden disinterest in Ukraine is also, I think, partly due to Israel/Gaza being a new front in what many have said is WWIII or a prologue to it; after all US armories can't be very well stocked at this moment, can they? but this disinterest should have surprised no one.
I know a lot of people would love nothing more than to stop Putin. But while he'll certainly need time to recuperate I think the West underestimated him, just as people always think that Lukashenko in Belarus is some kind of Communist holdover dummy. (He's a lot of things, but most certainly not a dummy) Russia has gained as well as lost: the shift of its oil market to China (or to the West second-hand through India) might cause transitional problems in the short-term, but in the long-term it'll be more secure. But rather than strategizing perhaps it's time to cool things down for the Ukrainians. It's hard to see how the hidden yet clearly large casualty rate and extreme gender division doesn't cause the country to collapse in the near future. All those who put Ukrainian flags on their social media profile won't be even thinking about Ukraine if and when such a collapse takes place.
In any case, Russia most probably has what it wants: a land bridge to Crimea. That would explain the heavy fortifying of the Russian line. For this reason it'll probably be possible to negotiate an end to the war. Biden might end up doing it if only to have something to point to in 2024: "look at me, everyone, I'm a Great Peacemaker!"
Regarding the Woke universities: while this is a moment of triumph it is not at all the end. Universities across the country remain indoctrination centers. Radical Marxist professors aren't the kind who simply change their mind, let alone curriculum, because of something like this. If 1989 and the Gulag Archipelago didn't change their mind, nothing will. But if universities care at all about survival as an institution, they'll fire and/or demote as many ideologues as they can. Harvard lost $1 billion, I heard: and now everyone knows it's not the venerable place it used to be, but a place you pay money to go to if you want to be an ideologue. Its reputation is ruined. And I hope it stays that way. Such a revolution will only end if and when smaller universities, sniffing a moment to enhance their reputations, take action and advertise themselves as Woke-free universities. I hope liberals begin talking about how anti-White all these universities have been for over a decade as well. But I won't get my hopes up.
As for Kissinger: good riddance. Powermongers will powermonger in an empire: for sure. I get that. But it is thanks to his handiwork that we're now in the position we're in with China, who liked to call Kissinger their "old friend." In CCP-talk, that means "guy who is on our side." Now we're dependent on these Commies for everything, while pretending they aren't committing a genocide. (They are, against the Uighurs: I'm sure the pro-Palestinians who shout genocide every ten seconds are so upset by it) If an empire is gonna have its powermongers, at least they should serve that empire's interests.
I hope you're wrong about Israel's approach to Palestine, but I have no idea at this stage what's even feasible as a long-term strategy. I guess it's drop a lot of bombs and then go back to where things were before 10/7.
Good point about Yugoslavia. When is the last time an American (any American) gave a thought to Kosovo?
It's really hard to believe what the elite universities have engineered for themselves in a very short period of time. I think the structural problems are grade inflation, rising cost of tuition (without corresponding improvement in quality of product), and a general doubt about meritocracy/test scores, etc. Once you start believing that meritocracy doesn't exist, then you're really questioning the whole premise of your own institution. I didn't realize it was a loss of $1 billion for Harvard. Ouch!
Hopefully I'm wrong as well. But much as everyone kind of knew it was a pipe dream, I don't think the collapse of the two-state solution was something anyone was consciously prepared for. After all, it kept the peace even if it was a dissatisfactory peace. Realistically, Israel might well content itself with putting Hamas in its place. (If it can't wipe them out) But I don't think Israel's actions and policy will be the same after the kibbutz massacre. In that sense, the "Israeli 9/11" observations aren't wrong.
When the Ukraine war started, many news outlets - and people listening to them uncritically - were saying it's the first conflict in Europe since 1945. The Croats were like: wait a minute. You already forgot about our conflict? XD I imagine the Kosovars might have felt similarly.
Economics explains a lot, but I don't think the ideological corruption should be downplayed. Especially as these Woke institutions are clearly willing to defend their ideologue presidents even with financial loss. (Even Penn: that lady isn't president, but she's not going anywhere) A lot of people can convince themselves quite easily that if they get into Harvard, they'll have to pay a lot of money: inflation or otherwise. It's Harvard. What you pay for: that's where people start having doubts. Paying lots of money is fine if someone gets a spanking good education and then a cushy job on Wall Street. If they pay a lot of money to become a Woke ideologue activist...that's a different story.
As you've probably heard now, Harvard's president has just been discovered to be a plagiarist. A juicy twist, as you can imagine. You're right about meritocracy. Add to that the understanding that while a Harvard student gets into serious trouble for even unintentional plagiarism, Harvard's own president gets a free pass for being a Black woman. When this kind of thing goes on, there's only one thing to do: make the name Harvard synonymous with dirt. I know it'll sadden proud Americans who love their historical institutions. But it's that, or watch the institution they claim to love become a cesspit of ideological stupidity.
I'm sure you are in trouble one way or another! And the Commentator will be back!
Four bangers in a single post! I don't know how you do it man!
To follow your throughline, I'll note my personal thoughts on academics — the two fields I can't grok are economics and foreign affairs. In econ everything is counter intuitive, and in international relations all options are bad.
As for the university presidents, as someone who is shocked by the state of campus, I'm enjoying the schadenfreude like a good b-list action flick. BUT it comes with a worry, "hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue" so their firing(s) make me worried that this will lead to more regulated speech. Then again, maybe we have to start by cleaning out the Augean Stables.
Thank you Justus! It's pretty much just opening up about a thousand tabs and then having tunnel vision for about a day.
Great point re the schadenfreude. I really do care about these institutions, and do think they have real issues, but it's hard to get away from the "man, did they do this to themselves" marble circulating around in one's head. Yes, cleaning the Augean Stables=the absolute worst labor. Would much rather fight a famous lion or a nine-headed snake than sweep up generations' worth of animal shit.
"The Progressive Revolution (2017-2023)". Some future history student has an MA thesis ready to go thanks to you!
Thank you David. That poor masters' student is going to have to wade through a lot of lousy art and some very perplexing controversies!
Wide ranging and well-done. Thank you for the mention, Sam.
Thank you Mary!!
Excellent.
Thank you Sean!
Beautiful 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥👌👌
Helpful this. Myself recognized late two days ago that Sjw's are warriors. I always have an admiration I express w faint praise. The moment is like what you said. The picture of you unpacking the scene as if from a backpack. So they have found tools for safe words I mean tools for is it semi private? Strong feelings of togetherness. I admire...This of yours was right on time. You with the desk there. My last Scandal was a movable part for your desk. To the effect that Sapolsky leaves off in his No Self Control, Determined book open endedly to the point he feels obligated to in interviews snatch at ideas abt extending kindness toward ourselves. Simply is that the first logical extension of having no you start looking how to be as organized as a book. Be a hell of a start if you were at the beginng a month novel writing.
Do you feel like Sapolsky and the anti-free will argument connect to the social justice movement? Would be interesting if so. I think of the no free will thing as being connected to a B.S. Skinner sort of scientific determinism but interesting that it's gaining ground at the moment of progressivism.
Yeah-no, I see SJW's much too in need of lyrical words for the Heideggerian thickness of describing what it might mean if we have no self control. I had to hack my way through my book report cutting prepstns and attribitions to just pronounce the words. In that same moment though, you wrote some words clarifying abt the detour I sent your readers on into hyperspecifcs abt the This american common experience...you said some words about empire and a body can see that comfort and empire rhyme. Maybe I will notice more common culture in a hierophany, I believe everybody who read Can we exist w/out a common culture? Will be thinking abt it this year.
Here is the picture with Determined. In his first of 11 or 20 interviews S'sky made up for not giving any behavioral Rx's prscrptns in t book by saying It means that the best place for a person is in th research dpt at a university. Then in the next interview on the fly he came up with some more general population ways of looking at people as like motivated reasoners? For us it is like reading Nassim Taleb. A way to see and touch that we really are respecters of science....
Interesting insights into the conflict inherent in the two great flaws of the American politic. Hypocrisy and morality with each act in your four part play outlining the inherent flaws that have arrived at the door of a failing empire. That part got missed. Also the role of economic greed inside this global projection of power. Which in reality has now turned on its own citizens inside the bubble and is slowly eating its own. From outside the bubble as an interested observer one has to say the American projection of power as a project is a failure and is actively failing to such an extent that Ukraine and Israel acting inside Gaza exemplify and announce to the world said failure because they embody both the hypocrisy and an immorality that clears away any misconceptions around the notions of liberty, freedom and self determination for all mankind. It’s been made more than clear to even the most propagandized American citizen, this was just spin and marketing. The reality lies much closer to the organizing principles of a more modern and updated version of fascism some now call soft totalitarianism and the real motivations of the American project are economic on a global scale. Protecting the dollar hegemony, protecting unfettered access to the dwindling energy supplies for its military capabilities on which the whole projection depends etc. And most of all by protecting its economic dominance by proxy war in small regional conflicts that thwart alliances between rivals. Mostly Russia, China and Iran. Tying up Russia in Ukraine. Iran in the ME leaves the US free to pursue its war with China which its military has been preparing in earnest for at least five years now and speak openly about now in real terms as happening. So it seems to me your analysis is accurate but excludes the third leg of the stool, hypocrisy-immorality and greed. This is what has built the American project and one only has to look at history to see the truth. Puritan religiosity (hypocrisy)settles new land followed by genocide of its inhabitants then built largely on the backs of African slaves (immorality)and lastly entering two world wars late and at their conclusions to reap the economic largesse of a demolished Europe (greed). Everything we see now as American projections of power are built on the basis of these three flaws. It’s been remarkable it’s lasted this long. But that’s what 1 Trillion a year in military spending and 800+ military bases around the world can buy a failing empire. Time.
Very interesting points. I'm definitely a bit more "pro-American" than I take it you are - but could one day be convinced that that's just my naivete. I guess a big thing for me is that I really can't figure out the shape of power. If there is basically a coherent "Washington Consensus" and that's driving the whole American hegemonic project; if it's less orchestrated than that, and it's a fairly dysfunctional body politic lurching along in response to different crises.
I was very bullish on Ukraine and continue to be. The Ukrainians badly wanted help and I was proud of America to be in a position to support them. But I can understand arguments that are much more cynical than that.
You feel that the US will instigate a war with China?
Sam it’s great to have these discussions with you even though we disagree on some things. Collectively a huge problem these days. I don’t disagree with your points in terms of what’s “right” or “wrong”. Your points are valid but from an outside the bubble perspective to me anyway it’s missing some of the overall context. Ukraine for example started in 2014 with a US backed coup led by Victoria Newland. She backed some fascist elements and the NATO rôle effectively lured Russia into invading. That’s a perspective not discussed inside the US very much but has real value in terms of a more comprehensive perspective of Ukraine. Now that the US is essentially bailing on the Ukrainian’s it’s about to get a whole lot more problematic.
China is a real concern. Elements in the Pentagon are actively preparing for war with China over Taiwan. Just meander theu the Task and Purpose Blog for the last five years to see what they say and make your own assessment. Press releases from active Generals also talk openly about these preparations. Is it just projections, possibly? But knowing the US propensity for war these last twenty years it’s not a bad bet to place on this insanity going next level. Financially the US is losing its reserve currency status at some point in the future. Not if but when and this is really what is underlying all the political maneuvering. Power, money and control underlies all of the US geopolitical maneuvering of late and it’s been eye opening to see even a ghoul like Kissinger sounding like a moderate on these issues. That’s how far the US politic has lurched into neocon jingoistic territory lately.
Personally you can’t look to too many Americans for accurate reporting on any of these topics. Only those who don’t depend on US dollars for income can openly report from a more clear eyed perspective.
Adding to your comments on the shape of power in the US - that’s an interesting and alarming concept that needs much more widespread discussion. I’m with you on that point and have little conception as to what that really looks like. I think, for me anyway, it’s framed around a troika. Washington-Pentagon-Wall Street. Which effectively is the policy framework projected onto the rest of the world (which most Americans sitting at home never see, witness first hand or truly understand). It’s this troika construction because these three bodies reflect policy-power-money. Which for all intents and purpose is what the real US machine is about. Money. Money needs power and power needs policy. The relationship is interconnected.
What’s clear is the Red/Blue paradigm is all just theatre because on any real issue around real and significant issues that involve money-power-policy there is NEVER any dissent between the dems or republicans of any real significance when it comes to war. They always act as one. Every war this century has been unanimously voted on and ratified as legal and just when in fact years later they have all been proven to be illegal, unjust and outright criminal endeavours. Iraq being the clearest example of this.
Lastly, no one can rationally explain how a country of 350 million people with the wealth and power of the US can present to its electorate and the world that Joe Biden and Donald Trump are the best they can offer as leaders of their political movements. And if not them, then Newsome and/or Desantis are the next in line. How is this even remotely possible? How did the UK end up with Boris Johnson? An obvious clown. How are men like this (of such low character and ability) allowed anywhere near this role as supreme leader of the “free” world. I’m not sure of the entire answer but it’s clear - because it’s not the real seat of power - it can’t be. These men are fools and we are subjected to political theatre not real power and decision making of any real significance. Wars always get whatever it needs in terms of funding but never any healthcare. Banks get bailed out by the trillions but poverty and wealth inequality continues to grow exponentially. Educational outcomes and quality of general intellect and critical thinking continues to decline. Americans rank among some of the lowest in results for key metrics in education/health/quality of life. All easily researchable and published widely yet affects little to zero discussion of much purpose or outcome in the US. But a war or invasion and everyone is involved and hotly discussed but never denied its path to fruition. When was the last US war, hotly debated internally and then calmly and rationally resolved diplomatically without going hot?
The Troika is a valid analogy and comments in the past always say/ask if you’re not American why do care so much? The answer in reply is I don’t but your hot mess always spills out onto the rest of the globe killing and maiming millions of innocent people and serves to destabilize and foment violent reactions in regions most Americans could hardly spell let alone find on a map. It’s ridiculous.
I'm definitely not unsympathetic to your framing. The period I've been reading around in is the '40s-'50s when America really emerges as a world power, and it's pretty dark what was going on! - various rival branches of the military and intelligence services pretty much holding civilian government hostage (and civilian presidents saying that directly). But I really do lose sight of it after that. I don't know the extent to which Congress reasserted a degree of control in the '70s. I don't know the extent to which NSA domestic spying, "dirty wars," "the Washington Consensus," etc, represent a self-sustaining power infrastructure that has no connection whatsoever to democratic processes. And I don't know the extent to which that infrastructure is tightly controlled or is better understood as a fragile consensus between rival entities within the power apparatus.
I've listened to Victoria Nuland's phone call and I don't see 2014 as a coup - it seems more a bit of opportunism by the US trying to get its hand in in an unstable situation. I've read the statements by generals on China and that just feels to me like what you would expect of generals - their job is to be prepared for war (and they always think war is imminent).
But I may well be naive on both counts! There have certainly always been insane warmongers within the US establishment and it's possible that some have outsize influence now.
Thank you for the kind words. Always enjoy talking to you.
Aaron Goode is a PhD in History? It might be something else but his book American Exception is a well researched and academically rigorous approach to some of the questions you pose. For me, studying the documents around Vault 7 changed my outlook of the US from a democratic enterprise trying to allow for a libertarian approach to governance and all the quirky growing pains that would entail, to a criminal enterprise with an expensive military to flex its muscle as a global racket.
Inside those documents is a clear pattern of thinking about surveillance and control that has multiple avenues to embed itself in our social structure on a global level. This is clearly not by accident. Add to that the complete memory holing of Jeff Epstein and what he was really up to beyond underage sexploiation and there are certainly some very very dark elements exercising a ton of power within the US security state apparatus. And in terms of relevance and importance to our futures these things are met with crickets. Much like what the US is doing to Julian Assange.
Well done! I hope your novel's going well. Gonna keep my ear open for when it comes out: would love to check it out! But how to comment on this excellent post: just two for two I guess. By the way, I'm also curious about your thoughts on the brewing Venezuela-Guyana conflict. Guyana certainly has no problem with the US existing as an empire.
With Israel/Palestine, the collapse of the two-state solution is the elephant in the room. If it really was feasible, Israel at least would have cooled down by now. So however gruesome it might be, it is also logical. Israel, no doubt, wants the "Palestinian issue" to be over for good. Now's their opportunity.
As for Ukraine, the US and Americans never truly cared about Ukrainian people or their culture: that's not to say Americans don't have hearts, just that there is zero historical precedence for caring about a region no one in the West has ever cared about. Our caring for Ukraine is in fact anti-Russian sentiment in disguise. Those are two very different things. How many people who claimed they cared about the Balkan conflict in the 90s became lifelong cultural connoisseurs of Croatian or Bosnian culture? I suspect the number is less than my combined fingers and toes.
Pro-Ukrainianism is a fad: nothing more. America's sudden disinterest in Ukraine is also, I think, partly due to Israel/Gaza being a new front in what many have said is WWIII or a prologue to it; after all US armories can't be very well stocked at this moment, can they? but this disinterest should have surprised no one.
I know a lot of people would love nothing more than to stop Putin. But while he'll certainly need time to recuperate I think the West underestimated him, just as people always think that Lukashenko in Belarus is some kind of Communist holdover dummy. (He's a lot of things, but most certainly not a dummy) Russia has gained as well as lost: the shift of its oil market to China (or to the West second-hand through India) might cause transitional problems in the short-term, but in the long-term it'll be more secure. But rather than strategizing perhaps it's time to cool things down for the Ukrainians. It's hard to see how the hidden yet clearly large casualty rate and extreme gender division doesn't cause the country to collapse in the near future. All those who put Ukrainian flags on their social media profile won't be even thinking about Ukraine if and when such a collapse takes place.
In any case, Russia most probably has what it wants: a land bridge to Crimea. That would explain the heavy fortifying of the Russian line. For this reason it'll probably be possible to negotiate an end to the war. Biden might end up doing it if only to have something to point to in 2024: "look at me, everyone, I'm a Great Peacemaker!"
Regarding the Woke universities: while this is a moment of triumph it is not at all the end. Universities across the country remain indoctrination centers. Radical Marxist professors aren't the kind who simply change their mind, let alone curriculum, because of something like this. If 1989 and the Gulag Archipelago didn't change their mind, nothing will. But if universities care at all about survival as an institution, they'll fire and/or demote as many ideologues as they can. Harvard lost $1 billion, I heard: and now everyone knows it's not the venerable place it used to be, but a place you pay money to go to if you want to be an ideologue. Its reputation is ruined. And I hope it stays that way. Such a revolution will only end if and when smaller universities, sniffing a moment to enhance their reputations, take action and advertise themselves as Woke-free universities. I hope liberals begin talking about how anti-White all these universities have been for over a decade as well. But I won't get my hopes up.
As for Kissinger: good riddance. Powermongers will powermonger in an empire: for sure. I get that. But it is thanks to his handiwork that we're now in the position we're in with China, who liked to call Kissinger their "old friend." In CCP-talk, that means "guy who is on our side." Now we're dependent on these Commies for everything, while pretending they aren't committing a genocide. (They are, against the Uighurs: I'm sure the pro-Palestinians who shout genocide every ten seconds are so upset by it) If an empire is gonna have its powermongers, at least they should serve that empire's interests.
Very smart points Felix.
I hope you're wrong about Israel's approach to Palestine, but I have no idea at this stage what's even feasible as a long-term strategy. I guess it's drop a lot of bombs and then go back to where things were before 10/7.
Good point about Yugoslavia. When is the last time an American (any American) gave a thought to Kosovo?
It's really hard to believe what the elite universities have engineered for themselves in a very short period of time. I think the structural problems are grade inflation, rising cost of tuition (without corresponding improvement in quality of product), and a general doubt about meritocracy/test scores, etc. Once you start believing that meritocracy doesn't exist, then you're really questioning the whole premise of your own institution. I didn't realize it was a loss of $1 billion for Harvard. Ouch!
Hopefully I'm wrong as well. But much as everyone kind of knew it was a pipe dream, I don't think the collapse of the two-state solution was something anyone was consciously prepared for. After all, it kept the peace even if it was a dissatisfactory peace. Realistically, Israel might well content itself with putting Hamas in its place. (If it can't wipe them out) But I don't think Israel's actions and policy will be the same after the kibbutz massacre. In that sense, the "Israeli 9/11" observations aren't wrong.
When the Ukraine war started, many news outlets - and people listening to them uncritically - were saying it's the first conflict in Europe since 1945. The Croats were like: wait a minute. You already forgot about our conflict? XD I imagine the Kosovars might have felt similarly.
Economics explains a lot, but I don't think the ideological corruption should be downplayed. Especially as these Woke institutions are clearly willing to defend their ideologue presidents even with financial loss. (Even Penn: that lady isn't president, but she's not going anywhere) A lot of people can convince themselves quite easily that if they get into Harvard, they'll have to pay a lot of money: inflation or otherwise. It's Harvard. What you pay for: that's where people start having doubts. Paying lots of money is fine if someone gets a spanking good education and then a cushy job on Wall Street. If they pay a lot of money to become a Woke ideologue activist...that's a different story.
As you've probably heard now, Harvard's president has just been discovered to be a plagiarist. A juicy twist, as you can imagine. You're right about meritocracy. Add to that the understanding that while a Harvard student gets into serious trouble for even unintentional plagiarism, Harvard's own president gets a free pass for being a Black woman. When this kind of thing goes on, there's only one thing to do: make the name Harvard synonymous with dirt. I know it'll sadden proud Americans who love their historical institutions. But it's that, or watch the institution they claim to love become a cesspit of ideological stupidity.