#^d 2019-09-15 #^h Weekend Roundup
No time (or stomach?) for an introduction.
Some scattered links this week:
Andrew J Bacevich: What to know what's next for Afghanistan? Ask Vietnam. I have my doubts about the analogy, but the final point about carelessness is well taken. Related: Stephen M Walt: We lost the war in Afghanistan. Get over it.
Zack Beauchamp:
Benjamin Netanyahu's plan to annex a massive part of the West Bank, explained.
The real scandal behind the last week of Trump news: "Trump has spent the past week showing us that he's still fundamentally unfit for office."
The anti-liberal moment: "Critics on the left and right are waging war on liberalism. And liberals don't seem to have a good defense."
Jared Bernstein: A generation of economists helped get us into this mess. A new generation can get us out. Refers to Binyamin Appelbaum's book, The Economist's Hour, for the first assertion.
Jedediah Britton-Purdy: A shared place: "Wendell Berry's lifelong dissent."
Alexia Fernández Campbell: Trump wants to cut the safety net. It kept 47 million people out of poverty last year.
Jonathan Chait:
What if the only Democrat who isn't too radical to win is too old? Perhaps the reason neoliberals argue for Biden on electability grounds is that they recognize their positive program has no real appeal beyond the wealthy liberal donor class. At least with Biden, you get a cipher who signifies no big changes without even trying to explain why.
Watch Liz Cheney and Rand Paul fight over who Trump loves more:
As befitting his very large ego and power and very tiny brain, Donald Trump is constantly surrounded by people trying to manipulate him. . . . On most issues, Trump does not know what to think, so he gravitates toward whatever position is expressed more sycophantically. The "debates" within the party therefore play out in the form of competitive groveling for his favor. . . . The secret here is that Paul and Cheney, while anchoring opposite sides of an intellectual debate within their party, both consider Trump a moron, but each thinks he or she can gain influence with him and his supporters by presenting the other one as his enemy.
John Bolton era ends with no casualties except Bolton's dignity: Talk about lowering the bar: "The fact we made it through Bolton's 17-month-long tenure without killing tens of millions of people counts as a major win." More on Bolton:
Christine Ahn: With Bolton out of the way, peace with North Korea is possible.
Quint Forgey: 'Mr. Tough Guy': Trump delivers vicious takedown of Bolton.
Susan B Glasser: Trump is finally rid of John Bolton, but does it really matter?
Fred Kaplan: Trump doesn't make many good decisions. Getting rid of John Bolton was one. Although, one shouldn't forget that he hired Bolton in the first place. Kaplan also wrote: Trump's bizarre Camp David stunt has imperiled the best chance in years for a negotiated peace in Afghanistan.
Aaron Maté: Ex-CIA analyst on why he predicted John Bolton's firing: Interview with John Kiriakou.
Danny Sjursen: John Bolton's living obituary.
Alex Ward: John Bolton left because Trump wouldn't let him start a war. Also John Bolton is out. Let the era of Trump Alone begin.
How Trump learned to make 9/11 a racket. Related: Zak Cheney-Rice: The uses of 9/11.
Trump has figured out how to corrupt the entire government. Given what he had to start with, it couldn't have been that hard. Trump's contribution was his venality and utter shamelessness, along with his implicit guarantee that none of his minions would bear any risk for doing business. (Note that Tom Price, Scott Pruit, and Ryan Zinke managed to lose their jobs anyway. But nobody's holding their breath waiting for Bill Barr to prosecute them.)
None of these stories by itself has the singular drama of a Teapot Dome or a Watergate. Indeed, the mere fact that there is so much corruption prevents any single episode from capturing the imagination of the media and the public. But it is the totality of dynamic that matters. A corrupt miasma has slowly enveloped Washington. For generations, both parties generally upheld an assumption that the government would abide rules and norms dividing its proper functioning from the president's personal and political interests.
The norm of bureaucratic professionalism and fairness is a pillar of the political legitimacy and economic strength of the American system, the thing that separates countries like the U.S. from countries like Russia. The decay of that culture is difficult to quantify, but the signs are everywhere. Trump's stench is slowly seeping into every corner of government.
Sean Collins: Wilbur Ross's threat to fire NOAA officials over a tweet turns Sharpiegate into a real scandal.
Manny Fernandez/Miriam Jordan/Zolan Kanno-Youngs/Caitlin Dickinson: 'People actively hate us': Inside the Border Patrol's morale crisis.
Dexter Filkins: The moral logic of humanitarian intervention: A writer I never expect much from takes on a subject I'm not interested in (Samantha Power), least of all by him. Still, this raises real questions, like what gives her the right to decide who to "protect"? And how "humanitarian" is it really to intervene with anything from Seal Team 6 to full infantry divisions? And once you've done it so badly, what makes you think the next time will be any different? As Filkins notes, "during her years in the White House, it became clear that benevolent motives can have calamitous results."
FiveThirtyEight: What went down in the Third Democratic Debate: The "live blog" transcript, followed by Who won the Third Democratic Debate?. More links:
Zack Beauchamp: The weird, telling Joe Biden debate moment that didn't get enough attention: "His Iraq and Afghanistan answer raises some serious questions about his fitness for office."
Laura Bronner/Elia Koeze: The third Democratic debate in 7 charts. One chart shows "Warren gained the most new potential supporters."
Ed Kilgore: The big three are still dominant in the Democratic race after the third debate.
Jen Kirby: 2020 Democrats hate Trump's China trade war. Too bad they don't have any better ideas.
Eric Levitz: Would you leave Joe Biden alone with Trump?
Delia Paunescu: The third Democratic presidential debate, explained in under 30 minutes: With Tara Golshan, Sean Rameswaram, Matt Yglesias.
William Rivers Pitt: Biden's "best night" was pretty damn bad.
Andrew Prokop: The big moment that didn't happen in the Democratic debate: "Warren did not confront Biden on bankruptcy -- an issue they've long disagreed on."
Bridget Read: Joe Biden sounded like a very broken record at the debate.
Dylan Scott/Tara Golshan: Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren really do talk about trade differently.
Emily Stewart: Here are the best and most substantive answers of the third Democratic debate.
Alex Ward: The Democratic candidates' debate answers on Afghanistan were terrible. Not that Ward is any smarter; e.g., when he presents his "perils of a quick Afghanistan withdrawal" laundry list without any assessment of the costs and risks of not withdrawing.
Lisa Friedman/Coral Davenport: Trump administration rolls back clean water protections.
Masha Gessen: President Trump wages war on government and expertise, and our institutions surrender.
Tara Golshan: Did Brett Kavanaugh perjure himself during his confirmation hearing? "New allegations are raising questions about whether he met the very high bar for perjury." Not the only Kavanaugh piece this week:
Anya van Wagtendonk: A year after his confirmation hearing, Brett Kavanaugh faces a new sexual misconduct allegation.
Dylan Matthews: Impeaching a Supreme Court justice, explained.
Hanna Rosin: 'The Education of Brett Kavanaugh' takes a hard look at the Supreme Court Justice and his accusers: Review of the new book by Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly.
Heather Hurlburt: Saudi oil attack prompts more incoherence from Trump administration.
Umair Irfan: The best case for and against a fracking ban.
Robert Kagan: Israel and the decline of the liberal order.
Ed Kilgore:
GOP hangs onto bright-red North Carolina congressional district and Trump gloats.
Warren continues to emerge as a potential Democratic unity figure. For some support of this idea, see Andrew Prokop/Christina Animashaun: Elizabeth Warren leads Joe Biden in ranked-choice poll.
David Leonhardt: The forces that are killing the American dream: Review of Nicholas Lemann's Transaction Man: The Rise of the Deal and the Decline of the American Dream. For another review, see Robert Christgau: To bust you shall return.
Eric Levitz:
The Republican Party is (probably) not doomed. Refers to, and argues with, Stanley B Greenberg: The Republican Party is doomed, which starts:
The 2020 election will be transformative like few in our history. It will end with the death of the Republican Party as we know it, leaving the survivors to begin the struggle to renew the party of Lincoln and make it relevant for our times. It will liberate the Democratic Party from the country's suffocating polarization and allow it to use government to address the vast array of problems facing the nation.
Levitz responds:
It's possible the GOP is on the cusp of maxing out its appeal with rural voters and its capacity to bend election law to its own ends. But any persuasive case for the party's imminent demise must explain why the party's structural advantages will fail it. Establishing that Republicans have alienated a majority of Americans is insufficient. If this country were governed by popular sovereignty, the GOP would already be dead.
Greenberg expands on his argument his new book: R.I.P. G.O.P.: How the New America Is Dooming the Republicans. Also on Greenberg: Michelle Goldberg: Dare we dream of the end of the GOP? Goldberg, by the way, also wrote: Mazel tov, Trump. You've revived the Jewish left.
Jonathan Franzen's climate pessimism is justified. His fatalism is not. I cited Franzen's article, What if we stopped pretending, favorably last week, so I was surprised to find the article widely attacked from the "left" -- I've lost track of the tweets (Roxanne Gay is the one name I recall), but this riposte by Jeet Heer seems typical: Jonathan Franzen pens another environmental disaster story ("the famed novelist is resigned to a global ecological catastrophe because his imagination can't move beyond the status quo"). I'm generally dismissive of complaints about "leftist thought police," but that pegs Heer pretty well.has little more to offer. Levitz is only marginally more sensible, conceding the facts if not the attitude. Other articles (mostly against) Franzen:
Eliza Barclay: 3 horrifying extreme weather scenarios the US doesn't talk about enough.
Kevin Drum: Jonathan Franzen isn't quite right, but he has a point.
Kate Marvel: Shut up, Franzen. "But I'm a scientist, which means I believe in miracles." Really?
Sigal Samuel: The controversy over Jonathan Franzen's climate change opinions, explained.
Ryan Lizza: Biden camp thinks the media just doesn't get it: "The vice president's allies say neither detractors in the media, nor his rivals on the stump, understand the root of his appeal."
Ian Millhiser:
Nicole Narea: The Supreme Court has delivered a devastating blow to the US asylum system.
Tom O'Connor: US has spent six trillion dollars on wars that killed half a million people since 9/11, report says: George Bush effectively responded to Osama Bin Laden's 9/11 taunt with: "You think that's terror. I'll show you terror." Bush and the political class brought America down to Al Qaeda's level within weeks, and kept digging for 18 years and counting. While Bush is gone, the politicians and pundits who backed and blessed him have continued his path of destruction.
Aaron Rupar:
How Fox News lets the Trump family off the hook for profiting off the presidency.
Trump's bizarre speech during the Dem debate illustrated the stark differences between the parties: "Trump talked about fake tax cuts while Democrats debated how to pay for their ambitious policies."
Why officials patronizing Trump's businesses is corrupt, explained for Kevin McCarthy.
The flawed thinking behind Trump's campaign to discredit mainstream polls, explained.
Matt Taibbi:
Anya van Wagtendonk:
Matthew Yglesias:
The 20-year argument between Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren over bankruptcy, explained.
Elizabeth Warren's plan to expand Social Security, explained.
The debate over swing voters versus mobilizing the base, explained. Argues for the importance of swing voters, as expected. Also notes that "extremists motivate the other party's base," suggesting that Trump will drive more Democratic voters to the polls than the left-right split in the Democratic Party. I could write a lot more about this, but for now will just note that Republicans have been much more effective at firing up their base (mostly by convincing them that everything the Democrats want to do is insanely radical) while appealing to centrists as sensible custodians of the status quo. Democrats seem to think it's impossible to do both at the same time, and suffer on both ends: many in their natural see them as willing to sell them out, while they often struggle to get any centrist votes.
The Trump administration's new plan to privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, explained.
Li Zhou: Congress has only three weeks to avert another government shutdown.
Tweeted this along the way:
Bush effectively responded to Bin Laden's 9/11 taunt with: "You think that's terror. I'll show you terror." Bush and the political class brought America down to Al Qaeda's level within weeks, and kept digging, 18+ years: [Link: U.S. has spent $6 trillion on wars that killed 500,000 people since 9/11.]