I'm noticing pro Trump commenter names that I have never seen before. Is the paid disinformation crowd jumping on Noah's comprehensive geopolitical view that fast?
As for me, 50 likes! The only thing I can add is that if Israel continues its belligerence in the Middle East, it too is working against American strength and is cutting off the single plank it stands on.
It’s interesting to see all the comments that boil down to “hey, I’m just being reasonable when I say Russia and China taking world power is inevitable.” I’m curious if we’re seeing pair disinformation or the less scary but more depressing rise of a bunch of tankies
They don't bother arguing that Russia and China taking world power is inevitable. They simply repeat, repeat, repeat. Despair is the most effective form of disinformation.
Much of it is sincere and downstream from the dark MAGA tech world. It’s tankie-adjacent, but somewhat different:
Elon Musk, to cite the most famous guy involved here, sincerely believes there is no moral difference between the American world order and a hypothetical China-dominated world order. More cuttingly, he fundamentally doesn’t believe in any kind of notion of “democracy” as championed by Reagan and company. To him, an SEC that gets in the way of his companies is literally the same as, say, the Chinese Politburo ordering a violent crackdown.
His view of the American government, bizarrely enough, is basically identical to how it is portrayed by Dan Houser and Rockstar Games in Grand Theft Auto V—A simultaneously tyrannical, bloodthirsty, and yet somehow incompetent bunch of cartoon characters that, above all, get in the way of benevolent geniuses (like himself, of course).
On top of all that, Elon’s been genuinely obsessed with colonizing Mars and issuing in a techtopia for decades. Attempting such things is hard, verging on impossible, and probably broke his brain from lack of sleep alone years ago. As such, he is obsessed with the possibility that great power conflict could doom all his beautiful dreams and render all his brain-breaking labor for naught.
Put all that together, and you have a guy who doesn’t just think that a multipolar tri-imperial world divided between China, Russia, and a shrinking America is “inevitable”—he looks *forward* to it. Is determined to *force it into existence*, even, by hook or by crook.
And, more to the point, is very clear-eyed about who and what Trump is, and the crucial role he would play in bringing that dystopia (but in Elon’s mind, utopia) about. He loves Trump for all the reasons Noah (rightly, in my mind) lays out here for abhorring him.
I’m singling Elon out, but you’ll find that way of thinking is tragically pervasive among the crabby contrarians currently angling to take over the heights of political power in Silicon Valley.
It’s tankie-ness for sure, but the vengeful billionaire nature of it begs a different name, I think. Reactionary techbro anti-patriotism would fit the bill.
Musk himself just days ago said that a Harris victory will be the “end of elections in America”, that she will be a “dictator”, and that she will build a “tyranny”. And has called representative democracy “inherently corrupt”, and loudly called too many anodyne government functions to name (the SEC, the NLRB, HHS, and on and on) “tyrannical”, “Nazi Germany”, etc.
Meanwhile, he’s spending literally every waking second of his life right now trying to elect a man who promises ‘retribution’ and military crackdowns on the part of America he doesn’t like, as well as political purges of the civil service, while also promising to surrender Ukraine to Putin and openly admits he doesn’t give a damn about China conquering Taiwan.
Maybe you think, somehow, those are the actions of a man who thinks America is morally better than actual dictatorships, and that American democracy is just fine and dandy when it inconveniences him. Maybe you think being “pro-America” just means founding a company that builds cool shit.
Maybe you just skipped the parts of the biography where he openly intervened in the war to help Russia, or think that doesn’t matter. Or take him at his word, not his actions, on “free speech”. Or don’t like to pay attention in general if it’s inconvenient for you. Who knows.
For my part, I’ve admired Elon for far longer than you likely have, and certainly for far longer than I currently abhor him. I’m able to change my mind when my heroes change. I hope to God you learn to do the same.
> Musk himself just days ago said that a Harris victory will be the “end of elections in America”, that she will be a “dictator”, and that she will build a “tyranny”.
That’s what the other side says about Trump. It’s hyperbole.
“ And has called representative democracy “inherently corrupt”
“ sincerely believes there is no moral difference between the American world order and a hypothetical China-dominated world order. ”
I certainly don’t, or rather I think the US order is far worse. Some kind of restraint on neo conservative world destroying ideologies would be welcome. China is nowhere near as belligerent outside its borders as the US, and its proxies are.
I’m not even American. In fact I’m a left wing European. American democracy doesn’t exist. You are a genocidal nation engaged in another genocide by proxy right now. Your representative democracy is a sham, bought off my special interests and in particularly AIPAC. The problem the war party had with Trump was that he was more reluctant to go to war at the time - he was clear about that. This time he’s about as war mongering as the other side, maybe worse, so if I did have a vote in the empire I’d reluctantly vote for the lesser genocidal candidate.
Russia is obviously not going to take world power, and the alignment with China is weak. China will probably be the world’s greatest economic power later this century, a prospect that isn’t as terrifying to those of us who don’t fear a yellow peril.
Please change your residence to the poorest, worst policed, most violent neighborhood. Assuming that you survive, you will then be qualified to decry Israeli belligerence, if indeed, you still hold that opinion. Our pundits proclaim it’s all Netanyahu’s fault, dismissing the fact that he, a politician in a democracy, by definition has wide support. Our pundits also ignore the truth that it takes two parties acting in good faith to make a substantive agreement.
I agree with everything you said except supporting Israel is part of the same fight against Authoritarianism and upholding the international rules based order. Don’t forget who’s ultimately on the other side - Iran, who is part of the New Axis that Noah. Israel, as imperfect as it is (as is the case with the Saudis) is a much needed ally in this fight.
When two nasty regimes fight each other (Israel and Iran), neither deserves American support. I hope you are aware of the following facts:
Israel's treatment of the West Bank Palestinians has been condemned in countless UN General Assembly resolutions.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has condemned Israel's behavior in Palestine. On July 19, 2024, the ICJ declared that Israel's continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is "unlawful" and called for an end to settlement construction and the occupation. This ruling is a significant condemnation of Israel's actions in the region.
Israel has inflicted tens of thousands of civilian casualties in Gaza with the justification that they were aiming at Hamas militants. Often, they have claimed that these deadly attacks have killed Hamas leaders, yet they hardly ever produce a body or name a name of the military targets that they claim to be aiming for. It is very rare for Israel to produce evidence that they actually have killed a member of Hamas. Israel does not allow journalists into Gaza who could an independent assessment of the behavior of the IDF on the ground. Several reputable newspapers have spoken to Israeli soldiers and Gaza civilians who describe the IDF as sending Gaza and civilians into tunnels as human shields.
Oct 14, 2024 — Israeli soldiers and Palestinian former detainees say troops have regularly forced captured Gazans to carry out life-threatening tasks, ...
In view of these facts, who could possibly describe Israel as a supporter of the international rule of law? For decades, I was an enthusiastic supporter of Israel. Now I am revolted by the behavior of the country.
If it were up to me, I would allow Israel 6 months to make peace with the Palestinians and then cut off all aid if they refused. I believe that Israel can achieve sufficient security by building a truly effective wall and by manning it adequately.
1. Israel is a functioning democracy, even if it is lead by a scumbag in Bibi - it's in no way comparable to the theocratic autocracy of Iranian Islamic Republic. There's a total and complete asymmetry here.
2. The UN has long been discredited when it comes to Israel. That it has levied more humans rights violations on Israel than all other countries combined is prima facie evidence of their total lack of credibility on this topic.
4. Unfortunately, we live in a world where we need to ally ourselves with imperfect allies. India and Saudi Arabia are highly flawed but crucial in our defense against China, Russia and the rest of the New Axis.
You have presented the standard defense of Israel. Because of Israel's actions from 1947 onward and especially since November 2023, fewer and fewer people embrace these views. Point 2 states that Israel is right and more than 150 countries belonging to the UN are wrong. That's a pretty startling position.
My advice to Israel: Remove every Israeli from the West Bank. Build giant and effective walls to separate yourselves from the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. I'm counting on Israelis to be smart enough to do this. Because Bibi's wall wasn't good enough and because Bibi's wall was poorly manned, it doesn't mean that a wall can't get the job done. If Israel did both of these things, I would be happy to support its continued existence.
You haven’t engaged with any of my points. Explain to me how Israel is in any way comparable to Iran. Is it not true that the UN has imposed far more human rights violations on Israel than countries like China and Russia that actually commit civil rights? How should Israel carry out its war against Hamas?
What you’ve provided is an anti-intellectual diatribe about building a wall or something.
Clearly, neither of us can say anything to each other that would change either person’s thinking about Israel. I acknowledge your deeply held beliefs, and I believe you are sincere in holding them. I have not insulted anything you have said or called it “an anti intellectual diatribe.” Here, I will violate my intention not to discuss anything with you ever again. Until October 7, BiBi Netanyahu believed that a wall could protect Israel from Hamas. I continue to believe that a better wall that is better manned by the IDF can protect Israel from Hamas.
Noah never addresses that. His pivot to Asia is undermined by Gaza, the Muslim Asian countries are firmly not in the America camp anymore. The rest of the world is going to the “liberal world order” even less seriously than they did before.
For a year, the U.S. under the Biden-Harris administration has been unable to open shipping routes in the Red Sea, facing a ridiculous collection of Yemeni jihadist barbarians. So don’t tell us how the continuation of Democratic rule will bring security to the liberal world—it’s not credible. The self-hatred of the woke extremists has destroyed the Democratic Party’s ability to defend the free world. Trump might not be the most appealing alternative, but even he is preferable, and the world was indeed calmer during his time.
"the world was indeed calmer during his time" <-- I view this as a sort of cargo cult belief. Rush Doshi makes a very convincing argument that Trump's approach during his term weakened the U.S. vs. China and Russia, and was ultimately responsible for their increased aggression. Correlation isn't causation, and bringing in a weak leader focused on fighting internal battles isn't going to magically make world peace come back.
"So don’t tell us how the continuation of Democratic rule will bring security to the liberal world—it’s not credible." <-- Oh, and nothing will immediately bring security to the liberal world, but continuation of Democratic rule will do a heck of a lot more in that direction than electing Trump to lick the boots of our enemies.
You are overlooking Peter Navarro, the hard core driver of Trump's anti-China strategies. He went to jail in loyalty to Trump, so his position and influential voice of economic opposition to China through trade restrictions and joint treaties with Japan, Australia, South Korea will continue, smarter and stronger than ever.
You are writing off Mike Pompeo, but Mike is running a sizable PAC supporting Trump. He'll qualify for any number of roles. I'd like to see him pick up where he left off - driving the Abraham Accords - though he'll have to pick up the pieces of what's left after Biden abandoned it in favor of appeasing Iran, yet another foreign policy mistake of the Biden team of flakes and amateurs.
Lighthizer was the negotiator but Navarro was the strategy guy. He's the one who convinced Trump to bail on all the large multilateral trade treaties in favor of multiple one-on-one deals. We were getting "screwed and you can't get out" in the multilateral arrangements whereas we could afford to walk away from any individual deal until the other party came to reason.
As for Trump, you say he did little in rebuilding the manufacturing base. What he did was stop the offshoring momentum, reversing it. You'll recall Obama belittling Trump when he promised to stop the flow, asking "How's he going to do that? Does he think he has a magic wand?" I think it was Toyota that then stepped up with a promise to build a $50 Million factory in the US. Trump arranged some significant tax incentives for re-shoring and quite a bit was happening up until the pandemic hit. I imagine a lot more would have happened if he'd had a second term...and even more if the Dems hadn't fought everything he did, piling two phony impeachments on top of it all.
But having a prez who is OK with Houthis shutting down the Red Sea and hurting a key ally (Egypt), allowing China to bully the Philippines in violation of international law, who appeases Iran and runs an admin full of Iranian apologists, who wants Israel to appease terrorists, who appeased Putin and perhaps inadvertently signaled that an invasion of Ukraine would be OK (just as Obama did in Georgia and Crimea) is the answer? I don’t like Trump but it is 100pct obvious that Biden has been a disaster.
If the Biden admin is OK with shipping being attacked in the Red Sea then why spend billions on it? It's obvious the admin is trying to avoid taking Iran's bait on a(nother) land war.
Iran's regime is busy doing itself in, and the Biden administration has wisely not interrupted that. No matter - Israel is now poised to restore Iranian unity.
And Biden has done pretty much the opposite of appeasing Putin. You've slept through more of the Biden admin years than Biden himself!
The world became far less calm during Roosevelt’s first two terms. Does that mean he was an idiot or a craven isolationist? No, it means that the POTUS is only a small part of the foreign policy equation. Yes, the President can destroy the world at the push of a button, but there are still almost 8 billion other human beings out there, not to mention 9 known nuclear powers.
I respect your economic insights but passionately disagree with you on two issues. First, Ukraine is of principally symbolic importance. It has about 0.6% of the world’s population, a similar share of its GDP, and no unique and critical exports. It also has 45 million human beings in it who deserve self determination, but who would rather not have this war drag on for half a generation. They might be willing to make concessions to get on with their lives, especially if people who wind up on the wrong side of whatever border is drawn have the right to choose which side they live on. Asking a few million people to move to end a major European war is a no brainer. Development aid could make the average Ukrainian better off in 2028 than 2018 notwithstanding the ethnic and ideological cleansing.
To say that Germany will somehow become a soviet satellite if Ukraine loses is craven hysteria. German elites sensibly think of Ukraine as a peripheral theater. It used to be part of Russia. Warsaw used to be part of Russia too. And that’s the thing. There are plenty of other lines that could be drawn far east of the Oder. Supporting Ukraine for three years is an exercise in reasoned line drawing. Poland is a NATO member and an integral part of Europe. It is a brighter line. Russia has been embarrassed on the battlefield even if it can ultimately claim some sort of phyrric victory. The European project does not depend on victory in Ukraine.
I’m happy to keep aiding Ukraine in fighting for Zapporitzia. I like their pluck and respect their courage. I don’t think Trump will want to deal with defeat early in his term, I do think Putin has a lot to gain by normalized relations with with West, and there is room to negotiate if we stop treating foreign policy as a morality play where abstractions and punishment are more important than lives and trade patterns.
Second, I do not want my son to die fighting for Taiwan. The sensible policy is to reduce our dependence on Taiwanese products. It looks like this can be done at reasonable cost.
China has a long history of not projecting power beyond a reasonably well defined circle of lands. It has natural borders. It can be strong without threatening others beyond this circle.
The political status of Taiwan is important, I prefer freedom. However, militarily defending Taiwan could be catastrophic. China has twice our manufacturing capacity. It has four times our population. All it needs to do is punch it’s industrial and demographic weight on the battlefield and we are toast. I don’t want to lose a war to a stronger opponent. Nor do I want to engage in hard core nuclear brinkmanship over the political status of 20-some million people. Nor do I want to pay higher taxes to build a huge navy. I prefer to offer immigrant visas to aircraft carriers.
The choice is between accommodating the rise of China and risking massive carnage. I prefer a foreign policy that bends with the balance of power to one that breaks and sweeps millions of soldiers and civilians with it.
Did you know Alaska was historically part of Russia? Would you engage in nuclear brinksmanship for 700,000 Alaskans? You are repeating the Russian and Chinese talking points. If self-determination and national boundaries mean nothing, then the world will succumb to the most recklessly aggressive. China’s boundaries are wherever it is convenient for China—they have exercised aggression in every compass direction. They haven’t had the military and technical capability until recently to project power over great distances, so it’s no surprise they haven’t. What would you do if they nuke Guam as part of their Taiwan invasion? It seems you don’t believe anything is worth the price of defending—which is what the tyrants count on.
It has something equivalent: 80% of the world's manufacturing capacity for high-end graphics chips. Microprocessors are an essential strategic resource, in case you didn't know.
So we need to onshore that chip capacity. I think China will avoid acting aggressively for a while especially if it sees we are decoupling from Taiwan.
It's not that simple, as there's a vetting process. Followed by a staged admission process. Most NATO member states now consider Ukraine fully worthy of admission for the blood it has shed in their defense.
Wasn't the problem with Ukraine more that it didn't WANT to join NATO (because it was divided between a nationalist west and a Russophile east) until 2014, when Russia invaded Crimea and Donbas and it was too late?
The pigments of the people responsible for the closure of the Red Sea (Iranians and Yemenis) are dark, and attacking people with dark pigments is a monstrous sin in the woke religion that the Democratic Party worships.
I think you need to get some fresh air and step away from the computer for a bit. The current Democratic administration is funneling billions of dollars in arms to Israel which are being used to kill Arabs. This “woke religion” talking point doesn’t hold together. The real woke leftists absolutely despise the Democratic Party, they call Biden “Genocide Joe” and they’re lining up to gift wrap Michigan to Trump.
Just goes to show what half measures gets you. Biden can’t get credit for Israeli victory because of his admin’s bad advice and lack of fortitude and he’s taking Leftist blame anyway.
I'm guessing that the votes the Democrats risked losing for being insufficiently pro-Israel would mostly be Jewish votes, as non-Jews who were passionately pro-Israeli would likely mostly be Muslim-haters who would be voting Trump anyway.
Is it just that it's extremely difficult to defend civilian shipping (at least to the levels that insurers expect) from missile attacks, meaning that only a direct attack on the supplier of the missiles (presumably Iran) might work?
More or less, yes. Many of the Iranian missiles Yemen has are road-mobile. Easy to hide and can launch from anywhere. Same for the drones. Yemeni terrain is very rugged which also helps hide stuff.
Worst, it takes more expensive and slow to build western interceptors to take down (relatively) cheap and easy to manufacture Iranian drones/missiles. It's a bad equation for the US Navy to burn through limited stocks shooting this shit down. Obviously it should spur massive investment in interceptor production!
The Saudis were spending $7bn a month trying to quell the Houthis and they failed miserably. Without a massive US campaign (for which there is no domestic support) it would be very difficult to eliminate the threat. US would have to have boots on the ground, at least SOF enablers to Saudi troops (and there's no domestic Saudi desire to get back involved in that quagmire anyway!)
For the same reason Israel has virtually obliterated Gaza as an city; but a battered Hamas keeps fighting back. The same reason Hezbollah bloodied the IDF's nose in 2006.
Underground tunnels and bunkers.
Start another $3-4 trillion dollar war that invades Yemen & Iran...and we'll have peace...of a sort.
You have admitted that "a ridiculous collection of Yemeni jihadist barbarians" have succeeded in closing the Red Sea. Do you think that their level of skin pigmentation has contributed to their success?
Isn't it the case that the "ridiculous collection of Yemeni jihadist barbarians" are only able to close the Red Sea because an outside actor (probably Iran) is supplying them with powerful anti-ship missiles?
I suspect that the war on the Houthis since 2015 led by Saudi Arabia (a brutal absolute monarchy supported by the US) probably had more of a role in building sympathy for the Houthis among Western leftists.
While among non-leftist Westerners, the fact pointed out by RT that (after Iraq and Afghanistan) the American public is sick and tired of fighting land wars in the Middle East is probably the main factor.
Biden doesn’t want to upset the mullahs and is OK with Egypt going into fiscal distress from the collapse in Suez Canal revenues and is OK with America’s commitment to freedom of navigation becoming a laughing stock. China has likely noticed that the US is unwilling to put the Houthis in their place and is willing to let the Chinese attack the Philippines on internationally-recognized Filipino territory.
Maybe you are right. Maybe it's time to pre-emptively start WW3 by smashing Iran down militarily now. Knock them out of the fight now, so they'll be much less help to the Russia/China/N.Korea part of the Axis later.
It won't be easy. It will be very expensive. As in multi-trillion dollar expensive. And precipitate a global recession/depression, as Iran will close the Hormuz Strait to oil traffic. And require a huge portion of our military capabilities for probably a few years' time. During which time if China moves on Taiwan, we will not be able to provide much assistance.
Trump is responsible for Azerbaijan, Armenia, and the Crimea? He is also responsible for Chinese actions in the South China Sea, attacking India, and pressuring Taiwan? If only Hillary Clinton had won, the co-author of our Libyan debacle would have spoken magic words to Russia (reset) and China (?), changing their already set courses?
Probably not. But Trump is in deed--if not in behaviour--an FSB thrall, in service to Russia. And now by extension to Russia's new senior partner, China. He severely strained NATO during his tenure, recently cut off US ammunition supply for SIX months, and has made clear he will surrender Ukraine to Russia on day one. He would let Tik Tok continue its role as a CCP mouthpiece.
The GOP, once a proud party of natsec patriotism, under Trump has become a bunch of defeatist Quislings.
If the tenor, attitude and language contained in this top (!) comment (on what is an exceedingly well-written writeup of the real and tangible threats our country is facing) isn't proof alone that we'll have zero focus on external threats during a Trump admin, I don't know what is.
I fear the war is already lost, decided for us because some people wanted to try and make America a little more equitable (term used: woke) and folks like Tamritz got their feelings really hurt. Personally, I find it hard to take the position that desiring equity merits the reaction they received, even if their efforts were pretty imperfect. Add a little bit of digital fire-stoking by Russian and Chinese trolls to Tamritz's imagined slights and you get WW3 I guess.
But, as Noah says. Regardless of the feelings of Mr. Tamritz, our success is likely decided by the coin flip luck Kamala Harris is facing to win the presidency. What a shame. What an unjust denouncement of everything great that liberal democracy stands for, that America has a 50/50 chance of producing this devastating outcome.
I do appreciate Tamritz's comment for existing as a microcosm of America today of minds online heavily influenced by foreign state actors - hopefully captured by the Internet Archive and recorded for posterity to the benefit of researchers 100 years in the future.
The idea that children can be educated in schools to believe that their homeland is the source of all evil on earth, and that borders are a racist concept — and then expect them to be willing to die in the army to defend it or its allies — is ridiculous. It’s not even clear what they are supposed to die for. A country without borders is not a country at all.
You've mentioned this before. It's credible, I guess. Considering Occam's Razor, the far simpler explanation is that FOX exists to support the GOP, and Trump heads the GOP. Therefore, FOX will always laud Trump, and accept or make excuses for his total subordination to Putin.
It’s a silly right wing talking point that’s been in circulation for 50 years. It does describe some groups of people, IMO, but those groups are farrrrr to the left of the Democrats. Its basically the mirror image of describing all Republicans as racists.
Those I've spoken call it imperialist-colonialism or blame America first from reading pro-Palestine Substack, Amnesty International, and Upstream podcast. Thankfully the ability to have a reasonable discussion about history means not all is lost.
I'd say those particular extreme leftists are an excellent example of oikophobia, as they want a Trump victory precisely _because_ they believe it will weaken America.
The Democrats may not have the entire solution but there is no indication they are ready to capitulate to the Axis. More than Democratic party resolve, the bigger problem is Republican opposition to any effective policies in order to gain political advantage.
History is sadly repeating itself, as the GOP took many of the same positions in the run up to WW2. GOP industrialists--like the Bush family--admired and praised Hitler; while the GOP as a party was strongly isolationist.
It took FDR and the Democrats to recognize that war was inevitable, and begin both a process of industrialiization, and accelerated military shipbuilding, to give us an early advantage after Dec. 1941.
The post-Reagan GOP talks tough on defense; but they exist now only to give tax cuts to billionaires.
I suspect the GOP industrialists admired the Nazis for crushing the left and the labor unions in Germany: they also supported the Spanish Nationalists, who were even more viciously anti-working-class to the point of viewing them as Untermenschen. As Franco's press officer Gonzalo de Aguirez Munro put it:
"Sewers caused all our troubles. The masses in this country are not like your Americans, nor even like the British. They are slave stock. They are good for nothing but slaves and only when they are used as slaves are they happy. But we made the mistake of giving them modern housing in the cities where we have our factories. We put sewers in these cities, sewers which extend right down to the workers’ quarters. Not content with the work of God, we thus interfere with His Will. The result is that the slave stock increases. Had we no sewers in Madrid, Barcelona, and Bilbao, all these Red leaders would have died in infancy instead of exciting the rabble and causing good Spanish blood to flow. When the war is over, we should destroy the sewers.. The perfect birth control for Spain is the birth control God intended for us. Sewers should reserved for those who deserve them, not the slave stock"
As with so many things, the Republicans prefer to have the problem, to run on it, rather than contribute to a solution. See: Trump torpedoing the immigration crackdown bill, because he doesn't want it to pass while a Democrat is in the White House.
There is a danger lurking for America and its power and prestige. Neither our Parties nor their candidates have their heads screwed on when it comes to these dangers. Our enemies are outside the country.
Iran is at war with us, we’re the stupid dolts who don’t see it. Russia has been destabilizing the globe for a century. A coalition is being built to take America down and end its role as the enforcer of the world rules-based order that was created after WWII. Our Asian allies will most likely develop nuclear weapons. At least I hope so rather than knuckle under to Chinese domination.
Europe is a catastrophe. No longer capable of imagining war and the sacrifices to prevent war, NATO will likely die. Much of Europe is in an anti-immigrant mood. Combined with the growth of right-wing parties, they also have internal struggles. Several European governments are more sympathetic to Putin than to allies in the West.
There are trends, there are events, and there are movements. All are happening simultaneously, and the globe is going through a time of dislocation. The US, its leaders along with our allies are currently incapable of responding to it.
I doubt, however, that everything Noah laid out will pass. Trump could be worse or he could be better, but we do have institutions that will hold. The Army won’t take illegal orders, SCOTUS will defend the Constitution. I am worried about the House doing some chicanery after the election should Trump lose. That said, should the House remain in GOP control, we can all go to bed and get sound sleep.
The House GOP was unable to compromise, even with itself. I do not expect the bad blood, the malcontents to suddenly have a fit of love for each other and agree. The other two things for you to remember is that Trump will be a lame Duck. I see no evidence that JD Vance will have the same control over people that Trump does. Yes, well, we have new regulations. Yes, he’ll pull out of some deals, but people will only work with him because they have to. His acolytes will continue to march to his tune, but people will move on, and his popularity will increase when he gets into office. He will be disliked just as before.
If you have never read the story of the Buddhist Farmer, it is the one piece of advice I have for everyone. Once you read it you’ll understand. Even you Noah, cheer up.
I hope you are right. But US Presidents have a lot of power exercisable through Executive Actions. Congress, for example, could theoretically approve a $50bn arms package for Ukraine; but a Trump Admin could delay delivery virtually indefinitely.
Trump, if not in fact, then in deed is an FSB (KGB) thrall. He nearly destroyed NATO once, and it's not impossible he could severely damage the alliance.
He could indeed, but that goes for every President. Let me put it this way. You have to answer this for yourself.
Personally, I don’t believe Biden nor Trump will go to war with China over Taiwan. When they don’t, the risk for South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines increases exponentially. They will wonder if the US nuclear umbrella is still viable. Is the US a viable partner and ally?
I also do not believe that Biden nor Trump would go to war with Russia if it invaded Estonia. That would be the end of NATO. I do feel NATO has expanded to too many countries. For this reason. I’m not sure the public whats to see its 19 year olds die for Estonia. France or England maybe, Estonia? I want to believe I am wrong.
The wokism of the left wing of the Democratic Party is not why the US has not been able to maintain shipping in the Red Sea. That's mainly due to tech changes, and the need to avoid entanglement in another land war - which they're failing at.
The irony is that trouble in Red Sea shipping lanes is a greater disadvantage for the Chinese than the Americans.
That's right. I'd forgotten about Trump's magic Houthi solution.
So what's Trump's concepts of a plan here? No points for concepts that involve giving away hegemony in the ME to Iran and/or a free hand for the Axis to supply weapons and deploy troops in Ukraine.
No points either for Trump leaning on his personal rapport with the world's thugs or expending US resources that benefits China more than the US.
Like Moses, he will part the waters of the Red Sea, right into Sa'na, yes?
Wake up Tamritz, WW3 is coming. It's already being fought in Ukraine. And soon will in Taiwan. Like in 1941, GOP leadership under Trump is too weak to be of any use, and will give Ukraine to Putin and Taiwan to Xi.
Thanks for exposing this risk so clearly. Spot on. While I understand why some dislike/disagree with democratic policy/positions/Harris, I wish I had a better understanding of Trumps appeal as an alternative. Bush/mccain/Romney… serious republicans. Trump? WTF?
You can see it in the comments section here. It's grievance politics: people who feel like they have been cut out of a fair slice of American society want to "own the libs". There is really no more thought to it than that.
Trump has a solid devoted base, and the opposition was divided amongst too many contenders. It was simple math of divide and conquer. Additionally, even if all of the other primary candidates could be considered superior in intellect and poise, clearly none of them had the "it" to consolidate support and emerge victorious. Polls of the "average republican" candidate versus Biden aside, not generating momentum would be a serious flaw in the general election, so something else to be considered by those tired of losing - wrongly or rightly.
Agree. I understand why he won the primary. But I don’t feel I understand why this is a close election. The maga base isn’t so big… so there must be a large number of traditional republicans that are voting for him, vs sitting it out or holding their nose and voting for Harris.
I have severe Trump voting friends who regularly write (copy paste) posts that boil down to “sure, Trump is a piece of human garbage, but there weren’t any wars and the economy was better.” For low info voters, that’s persuasive
I don’t think they think about Ukraine at all. If they do, they don’t care. There may be a few who think Trump will magically convince Putin to stop invading.
Putin has time--and resources--on his side. With roughly 5x the manpower and 5x the money. And now with N.Korea supplying troops; and China supplying weapons.
Ukraine is like Spain was in the run up to WW2. Trump will either: a) Do nothing, and let Russia continue to crush Ukraine until it breaks; or, b) Cut off all US aid & push Ukraine to accept a humiliating peace treaty, that will likely mean losing more territory, and ban it from NATO membership.
What will happen to Ukraine has already been determined by facts on the ground and general disinterest amongst electorates in the US and Europe. The only question is timing, no matter who is elected.
Because Dems are not in favor of centrist policies. They are beholden to progressive donors and activists. Given Trump’s low ceiling of support, an actual centrist candidate who would repudiate the exec orders on immigration, student loans, energy that the donors wrote up for Biden to sign and who would repudiate the lawless approach of appointees at the FTC, EPA, DHS, etc and craft policies for the people rather than the activists would be running away with this election. They just can’t do it. The Dems by now are all a product of their donor/activist ecosystem. The best hope might be a governor (a la Clinton, Carter) from a state who has realized that there is more to governing than doing what the activists want. That is not Newsom, maybe not even Whitmer. The MD guy, maybe. Harris is just a less gangrenous meat puppet to replace Biden atop the donor/activist agenda.
As much as you didn't want to write this I don't think I wished to read it. I share most of the concerns here. But it drained my spirit to read through all those reasons to fear.
I find the rhetoric of fear unhelpful to living with it. I believe what is needed most are three things. First, a reminder of the strength and potential of the 'liberal world'. Second, that the non-liberal powers are not all aligned, nor might they ever be (they may not even remain non-liberal). Third, events - all the upredictable consequences of any major conflict. It is unlikely to be total triumph or defeat. What we need is courage, self-belief and an iron will to be independent.
We do not teeter on the edge of a knife, not yet, and we can find a path that does not take us there.
As a dyed-in-the-wool Liberal, I wish you were right. I truly do.
But the clouds of a world war are gathering just as surely as they were in the 1930's. Noah's reasoning is pretty spot on. What Biden-Harris and the Dems have done with onshoring industrial policy (microchips, batteries, energy), only Harris can continue with diplomatic policy; namely, an alliance of NATO, ASEAN, and India & N. Vietnam. Where an attack on one is an attack on all. Which is probably the only thing that can dissuade China from moving on Taiwan, and starting WW3. Probably.
With China now openly arming Russia, and North Korea entering the war, the Axis has decided to up the ante. What do you think we should do?
This is the most important article I’ve read lately laying out the stakes of the election for the world, not just the United States.
Some of the comments concern me.
I would posit that if people are so emotionally latched to Trump that they seriously imagine his domestic “woke enemies” to be either in cahoots with China, or a greater threat than China/Russia, or both, one is not grasping the situation and is not trying to grasp the situation.
I'm an American, and I believe that the Pax Americana with its rules-based mostly democratic order is preferable in every way to the authoritarian semi-Communist models of Russia and China. Besides, I'm averse to learning to read/write in Mandarin.
What do you think the effect on the US will be when China takes Taiwan, the S. Korea, the. Japan (maybe Guam)? All historical enemies and all a natural ring boundary for its “defense”. No consequence to losing our Asian trade?
The key to stopping Russia is stopping Russia. The population problem is dealt with by conquering other populations and using the as cannon fodder for the next invasion—that’s what the SSRs were and what Russia, quite openly, is trying to reestablish.
That’s. . . exactly what both countries want to do, bruh.
That doesn’t mean literally conquer, like Napoleon invading Russia or something. But it does mean to dominate. They want in their regions of the globe what America had in its own for much of the 20th century.
They talk about it all the time. This is what they want. It’s not some fever paranoid dream people you don’t like made up. Take them at their word.
If it is controlled by Republicans, and he wins, it will do whatever he wants, at least for a year or two.
The shrinking Reaganite caucus of the GOP will strive mightily, and desperately, to rescue American foreign policy, but they will be fighting the combined might of the president, his hand-picked vice president, Elon Musk, all of Elon Musk’s buddies, the MAGA mediasphere (much empowered) and god knows how many violent pro-MAGA organizations, likely fresh off a rampage and believing they have a pre-emptive pardon from the most powerful man on Earth. Also, a Trumpified law enforcement apparatus.
A Trump victory, and a GOP victory in Congress (especially the Senate), almost certainly means all the foreign policy horrors Smith laid out here.
If Democrats hold Congress, on the other hand, or even just the House, we have utter, constant chaos. He is a convicted felon; he will likely be impeached on day one for his efforts to protect himself by politically purging law enforcement alone. That’s to say nothing of all the military crackdowns and roundups he has planned (confession: I’m one of the few guys on this comment board who believes every literal word from him when he talks about such things).
So, either way, it’s not looking good. The courts have no constitutional authority on this sphere of government either.
Realistically, everything comes down to the next seventeen days. :/
Yeah, I mean it is critical that Democrats at the very least within the house. Only allow them to begin in peaceful proceedings and investigations, but forces the senate to negotiate with them.
I think if democrats control the house and Republicans control the Senate, you’ll be able to see some genuine bipartisan legislation around foreign policy (for example Congress passed a law that made it illegal for a president to leave nato)
"... if Germany, France, Japan, South Korea, and America’s other allies fall, it will dramatically weaken America’s ability to defend itself. Remember that China is four times the size of America, and manufactures well over twice as much. Without its coalition of allies, the U.S. just doesn’t have the size to stand up to China." But how are you sure that China will want to do anything to take on the US? Economically, they'd like their companies to grow at the expense of companies in the West but they'd do that through a combination of coercion and sweetheart deals with countries in Southeast Asia, East Asia, Africa and select countries in Western Europe.
Most likely, Xi Jinping will seek to elevate his status as the elder statesman of the world by getting Russia to give up on Ukraine by promising to help him get the necessary ammunition and security apparatus to re-conquer Central Asia and Eastern Europe. He'd definitely invade Taiwan and establish a puppet regime. Brooking no opposition, they'd eventually pressure countries in Southeast Asia, East Asia and Western Europe to sign free trade agreements after some peace summit likely brokered by the Big Orange man.
I highly doubt the likes of Russia and China want to invade the US in any way. Yes, they'd seek to sow discord through disinformation campaigns and possibly cut it off from trading routes and natural resources... but I think they care more about having dominion over their neighbourhoods than really upturning the global order. At best, they'd try to get countries to abandon Western institutions and create new ones like the BRICs that will only be a pale imitation of the original ones.
nobody said anything about invading the usa. in fact, that seems like the least effective way to actually combat americans and fails to take advantage of most chinese & russian advantages in the situation
the goal is as was said: to weaken american influence and prosperity through economic and strategic means
as for china and russia respecting the current world order… lol. they both have unilaterally declared their hostility to it by claiming massive territories that are not theirs to take, and have openly stated that the reason for this is that they are strong and others are weak.
We’ve lived under four years of Trump as well as four years of Biden/Harris. We will survive another four years of either one.
Contrasting the two four year periods I would say the biggest differences are more inflation under Biden, bigger deficits at full employment, my kids can’t afford to buy a house at these home prices and mortgage rates, more censorship, more authoritarian/lawless exec orders (illegally handing out $100 billion in student loan relief), and the world is a much more dangerous place.
I’m not sure that paying people to assemble Chinese battery components really seals the deal for me given all of the above.
I don’t really care who is elected - none of my business, and neither candidate seems particularly responsible nor reliable. We’ll survive another four years either way.
It's curious how the same GOP isolationistic tendencies emerge when global war clouds gather. They didn't mind when the Axis won in Spain in '38, or when FR/GB gave Czechoslovakia to Hitler. There's many conservatives now who wouldn't care if Ukraine falls to Putin, or Xi conquers Taiwan. Such a curious lack of strategic thinking.
No it's not 1939. In 1939 the US had failed to effectively oppose Japanese incursions into China and the European powers had passed up every opportunity to engage in the forward defensive actions that might have snuffed out German territorial ambitions before they gained an (almost) unstoppable momentum. So far, NATO has done much better in the Ukraine and Taiwan.
It's not the despair that gets you; its the hope. A month ago when Harris looked like she was going to leave Trump behind in the dust at the polls, I was strangely nervous. Now that it looks like she may lose I actually feel a bit more positive. Despair can be liberating. You're right to be worried about what might happen in America under Trump. But if Republicans think that the worst that US progressives can do in defence of their values is to de-platform the occasional right-wing loudmouth and try to stop people using cruel names to describe each other, then they're deluding themselves. If Trump and his proxies start in with Project 2025, I think progressive America is more than capable of setting aside its differences and resisting at whatever level and in whatever way is necessary. Churchill said that America can always be relied on to do the right thing, once it had tried everything else. And I still think that's true. Over here we're forever being disappointed, exasperated or shocked by America but then you turn up at the last and save the day: like Han Solo or Daryl Dixon. As for Europe, it's true that since the end of WWII we Europeans have been content to shelter lazily under the US defence umbrella. Ever since we embroiled the world in two wars we've been a bit leery of conflict. America can be forgiven for seeing Europe as soft and complacent. But if its a live option, then being soft and living complacently is the rational, the civilized choice. 'The paths of glory lead but to the grave' is a very European sentiment. But don't forget those two world wars. They weren't the aberrations we sometimes like to think they were. On both sides of the Atlantic, the Left, the Centre and those on the Right who still believe in truth and decency have left it a bit late to stop contemplating their own navels and do what must be done. But that doesn't mean that it won't get done. Or that, if we get lucky, it may not have to be done.
Unfortunately, it's exactly that kind of rhetoric and action that convinces Trump and his supporters that domestic extremists are a much bigger threat than China or Russia. After all, Trump has now been the victim of no fewer than TWO left wing assassination attempts, along with bent leftist judges and courts trying to imprison or bankrupt him no less than THREE times. What did those people think the outcome would be? That Trump would just shrug and say, nah, the Dems are alright, I'm still gonna focus on China?
Noah makes it out like Trump's position here is irrational or wrong, but let's face it - if a large, organized group of people had spent years attempting to kill or imprison you then you'd consider them a much bigger threat than a government the other side of the world who had done nothing to you.
lol. Behold, the power of media brainwashing. They were doing things like donating to Biden, weren't they? And practically by definition if they're trying to kill the head of the Republican party, they are not Republicans.
members of hitler, Stalin, and Fidel Castro's political parties tried to kill them too. you probably don't know that though because you're not as brainwashed as me
It's weird now feeling like the neocons were directionally accurate, even if the particular conflicts they tilted at were often dubious. America just making motions toward standing down globally has enabled a lot of bad shit. They were right about constant vigilence and willingness with miltary might being necessary to keep the free world free.
You finally lost me with this one. I did enjoy and learn from your non-political posts, but those have been mostly replaced with your DNC campaign posts. Sad.
True to form the comments section here just underscores the degree to which this isn’t being taken seriously enough and the denial of the GOP as it supports a man, at best, with character flaws the office has rarely seen.
It’s pretty striking when you see people on Twitter that work in the DFIB who exclaim that we don’t seem to yet understand the scope of the problem and are currently doing nothing to indicate it’s being taken seriously.
I’m convinced that it doesn’t matter who wins the election - China, Russia, Iran, and the DPRK have a set of goals that do not change based on what party wins the office. The next four years are going to be rough no matter who wins and the sooner you can accept that the sooner you will realize this is not a time for “owning the libz” or culture wars….REAL war is on the prowl.
The character flaw attack would be more effective if the supposedly superior POTUS hadn't been completely senile for years. You can't really compete in the bad character stakes with someone whose character changes randomly depending on the time of day due to mental incapacity.
2. Despite his age Biden managed to pass qualitatively and quantitatively more significant legislation than Trump’s administration. The Biden admin’s efficacy simply cannot be understated.
3. I don’t understand why you’re equating the quality of one’s character with senility? They seem, to me, to be very distinct and different things.
The only reason he's not running for office is he was forced to debate Trump. If Trump had never agreed to a debate we'd still be hearing about how Biden is on top of his game, and Biden would be sitting there letting people lie on his behalf. Clearly, nobody in his camp actually cares about character.
As for (3) you can't be senile and even have a consistent character, let alone one of high quality. Senile people routinely forget who they're talking to or become wildly aggressive out of nowhere.
….then why did you use senility to attack Biden’s character?
And I agree - as usual Trump made a strategic mistake in agreeing to an early debate with Biden. Had he not done so he very well could have been sailing right now. Again - not an action that indicates he’s a master tactician or full of strategery. He’s so good at selecting people for his cabinet that he fires all of them…and they all come out against him for this election.
I’m afraid that a lot more may be at stakes than democracy and the liberal world order.
I’m an AI researcher and I believe it’s not unlikely that we develop AGI by the end of the next presidential term. Extrapolating the exponential growth in computing power (and buying into some other assumptions) one would arrive at AGI by 2027 (plus minus one year). I’m curious, Noah, what you think about Leopold Aschenbrenner’s “Situational Awareness”?
That would mean the most powerful weapon ever - true artificial intelligence - may be controlled by the next POTUS. Assuming AI safety research succeeds on value alignment, what values would we lock in then?
Practical AI will be field-tested in this almost-upon-us World War. At a tactical level. Autonomous flying and undersea weapons.
Strategically, AI will be likely employed in air defense. And in determining when a saturation drone + missile attack is not conventional, but nuclear. Skynet, in other words.
The question is, is this unique? Is every election from here on out for the foreseeable future “ the most important” (tm)? Or is Trump such a unique figure that once off the scene we can all breath a sigh of relief? How structural is this shift in American politics? It’s certainly not going to go “poof” and blow away if Kamala wins, but is it now a permanent feature of the American political scene?
"Is trump such a unique figure?" What other president has shown and demonstrated such a flagrant disrespect for the law, constitution, American values, and the electorate with a attempted self-coup?
More to the point of this current diary, Trump has repeatedly shown a flagrant disregard for US National Security concerns both during and after his time in office. If he is not actually an FSB asset, he does an amazingly convincing imitation of one.
I'm noticing pro Trump commenter names that I have never seen before. Is the paid disinformation crowd jumping on Noah's comprehensive geopolitical view that fast?
As for me, 50 likes! The only thing I can add is that if Israel continues its belligerence in the Middle East, it too is working against American strength and is cutting off the single plank it stands on.
It’s interesting to see all the comments that boil down to “hey, I’m just being reasonable when I say Russia and China taking world power is inevitable.” I’m curious if we’re seeing pair disinformation or the less scary but more depressing rise of a bunch of tankies
They don't bother arguing that Russia and China taking world power is inevitable. They simply repeat, repeat, repeat. Despair is the most effective form of disinformation.
Much of it is sincere and downstream from the dark MAGA tech world. It’s tankie-adjacent, but somewhat different:
Elon Musk, to cite the most famous guy involved here, sincerely believes there is no moral difference between the American world order and a hypothetical China-dominated world order. More cuttingly, he fundamentally doesn’t believe in any kind of notion of “democracy” as championed by Reagan and company. To him, an SEC that gets in the way of his companies is literally the same as, say, the Chinese Politburo ordering a violent crackdown.
His view of the American government, bizarrely enough, is basically identical to how it is portrayed by Dan Houser and Rockstar Games in Grand Theft Auto V—A simultaneously tyrannical, bloodthirsty, and yet somehow incompetent bunch of cartoon characters that, above all, get in the way of benevolent geniuses (like himself, of course).
On top of all that, Elon’s been genuinely obsessed with colonizing Mars and issuing in a techtopia for decades. Attempting such things is hard, verging on impossible, and probably broke his brain from lack of sleep alone years ago. As such, he is obsessed with the possibility that great power conflict could doom all his beautiful dreams and render all his brain-breaking labor for naught.
Put all that together, and you have a guy who doesn’t just think that a multipolar tri-imperial world divided between China, Russia, and a shrinking America is “inevitable”—he looks *forward* to it. Is determined to *force it into existence*, even, by hook or by crook.
And, more to the point, is very clear-eyed about who and what Trump is, and the crucial role he would play in bringing that dystopia (but in Elon’s mind, utopia) about. He loves Trump for all the reasons Noah (rightly, in my mind) lays out here for abhorring him.
I’m singling Elon out, but you’ll find that way of thinking is tragically pervasive among the crabby contrarians currently angling to take over the heights of political power in Silicon Valley.
It’s tankie-ness for sure, but the vengeful billionaire nature of it begs a different name, I think. Reactionary techbro anti-patriotism would fit the bill.
Can you justify any of those claims about Musk? Because having read his biography all that sounds like complete nonsense.
Musk himself just days ago said that a Harris victory will be the “end of elections in America”, that she will be a “dictator”, and that she will build a “tyranny”. And has called representative democracy “inherently corrupt”, and loudly called too many anodyne government functions to name (the SEC, the NLRB, HHS, and on and on) “tyrannical”, “Nazi Germany”, etc.
Meanwhile, he’s spending literally every waking second of his life right now trying to elect a man who promises ‘retribution’ and military crackdowns on the part of America he doesn’t like, as well as political purges of the civil service, while also promising to surrender Ukraine to Putin and openly admits he doesn’t give a damn about China conquering Taiwan.
Maybe you think, somehow, those are the actions of a man who thinks America is morally better than actual dictatorships, and that American democracy is just fine and dandy when it inconveniences him. Maybe you think being “pro-America” just means founding a company that builds cool shit.
Maybe you just skipped the parts of the biography where he openly intervened in the war to help Russia, or think that doesn’t matter. Or take him at his word, not his actions, on “free speech”. Or don’t like to pay attention in general if it’s inconvenient for you. Who knows.
For my part, I’ve admired Elon for far longer than you likely have, and certainly for far longer than I currently abhor him. I’m able to change my mind when my heroes change. I hope to God you learn to do the same.
> Musk himself just days ago said that a Harris victory will be the “end of elections in America”, that she will be a “dictator”, and that she will build a “tyranny”.
That’s what the other side says about Trump. It’s hyperbole.
“ And has called representative democracy “inherently corrupt”
Of course it is.
“ sincerely believes there is no moral difference between the American world order and a hypothetical China-dominated world order. ”
I certainly don’t, or rather I think the US order is far worse. Some kind of restraint on neo conservative world destroying ideologies would be welcome. China is nowhere near as belligerent outside its borders as the US, and its proxies are.
At least you’re honest about your terrible worldview. Thanks for that, I guess.
I pray those who oppose it swamp you at the polls in 9 days.
I’m not even American. In fact I’m a left wing European. American democracy doesn’t exist. You are a genocidal nation engaged in another genocide by proxy right now. Your representative democracy is a sham, bought off my special interests and in particularly AIPAC. The problem the war party had with Trump was that he was more reluctant to go to war at the time - he was clear about that. This time he’s about as war mongering as the other side, maybe worse, so if I did have a vote in the empire I’d reluctantly vote for the lesser genocidal candidate.
*paid disinformation
Russia is obviously not going to take world power, and the alignment with China is weak. China will probably be the world’s greatest economic power later this century, a prospect that isn’t as terrifying to those of us who don’t fear a yellow peril.
Please change your residence to the poorest, worst policed, most violent neighborhood. Assuming that you survive, you will then be qualified to decry Israeli belligerence, if indeed, you still hold that opinion. Our pundits proclaim it’s all Netanyahu’s fault, dismissing the fact that he, a politician in a democracy, by definition has wide support. Our pundits also ignore the truth that it takes two parties acting in good faith to make a substantive agreement.
Sir, this is a Wendy’s
I agree with everything you said except supporting Israel is part of the same fight against Authoritarianism and upholding the international rules based order. Don’t forget who’s ultimately on the other side - Iran, who is part of the New Axis that Noah. Israel, as imperfect as it is (as is the case with the Saudis) is a much needed ally in this fight.
When two nasty regimes fight each other (Israel and Iran), neither deserves American support. I hope you are aware of the following facts:
Israel's treatment of the West Bank Palestinians has been condemned in countless UN General Assembly resolutions.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has condemned Israel's behavior in Palestine. On July 19, 2024, the ICJ declared that Israel's continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is "unlawful" and called for an end to settlement construction and the occupation. This ruling is a significant condemnation of Israel's actions in the region.
https://apnews.com/article/icj-court-israel-palestinians-settlements-2d5178500c0410341b252335859f2316
Israel has inflicted tens of thousands of civilian casualties in Gaza with the justification that they were aiming at Hamas militants. Often, they have claimed that these deadly attacks have killed Hamas leaders, yet they hardly ever produce a body or name a name of the military targets that they claim to be aiming for. It is very rare for Israel to produce evidence that they actually have killed a member of Hamas. Israel does not allow journalists into Gaza who could an independent assessment of the behavior of the IDF on the ground. Several reputable newspapers have spoken to Israeli soldiers and Gaza civilians who describe the IDF as sending Gaza and civilians into tunnels as human shields.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/14/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-military-human-shields.html
Oct 14, 2024 — Israeli soldiers and Palestinian former detainees say troops have regularly forced captured Gazans to carry out life-threatening tasks, ...
In view of these facts, who could possibly describe Israel as a supporter of the international rule of law? For decades, I was an enthusiastic supporter of Israel. Now I am revolted by the behavior of the country.
If it were up to me, I would allow Israel 6 months to make peace with the Palestinians and then cut off all aid if they refused. I believe that Israel can achieve sufficient security by building a truly effective wall and by manning it adequately.
This is just wrong on so many levels:
1. Israel is a functioning democracy, even if it is lead by a scumbag in Bibi - it's in no way comparable to the theocratic autocracy of Iranian Islamic Republic. There's a total and complete asymmetry here.
2. The UN has long been discredited when it comes to Israel. That it has levied more humans rights violations on Israel than all other countries combined is prima facie evidence of their total lack of credibility on this topic.
3. If you're to believe Urban warfare experts like John Spencer then Israel is arguably carrying out the most ethical urban ware of all time with respect to the ratio of civilian to combatant casualties: https://www.newsweek.com/israel-has-created-new-standard-urban-warfare-why-will-no-one-admit-it-opinion-1883286.
4. Unfortunately, we live in a world where we need to ally ourselves with imperfect allies. India and Saudi Arabia are highly flawed but crucial in our defense against China, Russia and the rest of the New Axis.
You have presented the standard defense of Israel. Because of Israel's actions from 1947 onward and especially since November 2023, fewer and fewer people embrace these views. Point 2 states that Israel is right and more than 150 countries belonging to the UN are wrong. That's a pretty startling position.
My advice to Israel: Remove every Israeli from the West Bank. Build giant and effective walls to separate yourselves from the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. I'm counting on Israelis to be smart enough to do this. Because Bibi's wall wasn't good enough and because Bibi's wall was poorly manned, it doesn't mean that a wall can't get the job done. If Israel did both of these things, I would be happy to support its continued existence.
You haven’t engaged with any of my points. Explain to me how Israel is in any way comparable to Iran. Is it not true that the UN has imposed far more human rights violations on Israel than countries like China and Russia that actually commit civil rights? How should Israel carry out its war against Hamas?
What you’ve provided is an anti-intellectual diatribe about building a wall or something.
Clearly, neither of us can say anything to each other that would change either person’s thinking about Israel. I acknowledge your deeply held beliefs, and I believe you are sincere in holding them. I have not insulted anything you have said or called it “an anti intellectual diatribe.” Here, I will violate my intention not to discuss anything with you ever again. Until October 7, BiBi Netanyahu believed that a wall could protect Israel from Hamas. I continue to believe that a better wall that is better manned by the IDF can protect Israel from Hamas.
Build The Wall!! lmao
Noah never addresses that. His pivot to Asia is undermined by Gaza, the Muslim Asian countries are firmly not in the America camp anymore. The rest of the world is going to the “liberal world order” even less seriously than they did before.
For a year, the U.S. under the Biden-Harris administration has been unable to open shipping routes in the Red Sea, facing a ridiculous collection of Yemeni jihadist barbarians. So don’t tell us how the continuation of Democratic rule will bring security to the liberal world—it’s not credible. The self-hatred of the woke extremists has destroyed the Democratic Party’s ability to defend the free world. Trump might not be the most appealing alternative, but even he is preferable, and the world was indeed calmer during his time.
"the world was indeed calmer during his time" <-- I view this as a sort of cargo cult belief. Rush Doshi makes a very convincing argument that Trump's approach during his term weakened the U.S. vs. China and Russia, and was ultimately responsible for their increased aggression. Correlation isn't causation, and bringing in a weak leader focused on fighting internal battles isn't going to magically make world peace come back.
"So don’t tell us how the continuation of Democratic rule will bring security to the liberal world—it’s not credible." <-- Oh, and nothing will immediately bring security to the liberal world, but continuation of Democratic rule will do a heck of a lot more in that direction than electing Trump to lick the boots of our enemies.
You are overlooking Peter Navarro, the hard core driver of Trump's anti-China strategies. He went to jail in loyalty to Trump, so his position and influential voice of economic opposition to China through trade restrictions and joint treaties with Japan, Australia, South Korea will continue, smarter and stronger than ever.
You are writing off Mike Pompeo, but Mike is running a sizable PAC supporting Trump. He'll qualify for any number of roles. I'd like to see him pick up where he left off - driving the Abraham Accords - though he'll have to pick up the pieces of what's left after Biden abandoned it in favor of appeasing Iran, yet another foreign policy mistake of the Biden team of flakes and amateurs.
Mike could come back. But Navarro is a kook that Trump doesn't listen to. Lighthizer is much more significant here. But all he wants is tariffs.
Lighthizer was the negotiator but Navarro was the strategy guy. He's the one who convinced Trump to bail on all the large multilateral trade treaties in favor of multiple one-on-one deals. We were getting "screwed and you can't get out" in the multilateral arrangements whereas we could afford to walk away from any individual deal until the other party came to reason.
As for Trump, you say he did little in rebuilding the manufacturing base. What he did was stop the offshoring momentum, reversing it. You'll recall Obama belittling Trump when he promised to stop the flow, asking "How's he going to do that? Does he think he has a magic wand?" I think it was Toyota that then stepped up with a promise to build a $50 Million factory in the US. Trump arranged some significant tax incentives for re-shoring and quite a bit was happening up until the pandemic hit. I imagine a lot more would have happened if he'd had a second term...and even more if the Dems hadn't fought everything he did, piling two phony impeachments on top of it all.
"What he did was stop the offshoring momentum, reversing it." <-- Actually he didn't. Offshoring didn't even slow down under Trump.
Update: Trump just said Mike Pompeo won't be returning to his administration.
+ infinity
But having a prez who is OK with Houthis shutting down the Red Sea and hurting a key ally (Egypt), allowing China to bully the Philippines in violation of international law, who appeases Iran and runs an admin full of Iranian apologists, who wants Israel to appease terrorists, who appeased Putin and perhaps inadvertently signaled that an invasion of Ukraine would be OK (just as Obama did in Georgia and Crimea) is the answer? I don’t like Trump but it is 100pct obvious that Biden has been a disaster.
If the Biden admin is OK with shipping being attacked in the Red Sea then why spend billions on it? It's obvious the admin is trying to avoid taking Iran's bait on a(nother) land war.
Iran's regime is busy doing itself in, and the Biden administration has wisely not interrupted that. No matter - Israel is now poised to restore Iranian unity.
And Biden has done pretty much the opposite of appeasing Putin. You've slept through more of the Biden admin years than Biden himself!
Excellent reply.
The world became far less calm during Roosevelt’s first two terms. Does that mean he was an idiot or a craven isolationist? No, it means that the POTUS is only a small part of the foreign policy equation. Yes, the President can destroy the world at the push of a button, but there are still almost 8 billion other human beings out there, not to mention 9 known nuclear powers.
I respect your economic insights but passionately disagree with you on two issues. First, Ukraine is of principally symbolic importance. It has about 0.6% of the world’s population, a similar share of its GDP, and no unique and critical exports. It also has 45 million human beings in it who deserve self determination, but who would rather not have this war drag on for half a generation. They might be willing to make concessions to get on with their lives, especially if people who wind up on the wrong side of whatever border is drawn have the right to choose which side they live on. Asking a few million people to move to end a major European war is a no brainer. Development aid could make the average Ukrainian better off in 2028 than 2018 notwithstanding the ethnic and ideological cleansing.
To say that Germany will somehow become a soviet satellite if Ukraine loses is craven hysteria. German elites sensibly think of Ukraine as a peripheral theater. It used to be part of Russia. Warsaw used to be part of Russia too. And that’s the thing. There are plenty of other lines that could be drawn far east of the Oder. Supporting Ukraine for three years is an exercise in reasoned line drawing. Poland is a NATO member and an integral part of Europe. It is a brighter line. Russia has been embarrassed on the battlefield even if it can ultimately claim some sort of phyrric victory. The European project does not depend on victory in Ukraine.
I’m happy to keep aiding Ukraine in fighting for Zapporitzia. I like their pluck and respect their courage. I don’t think Trump will want to deal with defeat early in his term, I do think Putin has a lot to gain by normalized relations with with West, and there is room to negotiate if we stop treating foreign policy as a morality play where abstractions and punishment are more important than lives and trade patterns.
Second, I do not want my son to die fighting for Taiwan. The sensible policy is to reduce our dependence on Taiwanese products. It looks like this can be done at reasonable cost.
China has a long history of not projecting power beyond a reasonably well defined circle of lands. It has natural borders. It can be strong without threatening others beyond this circle.
The political status of Taiwan is important, I prefer freedom. However, militarily defending Taiwan could be catastrophic. China has twice our manufacturing capacity. It has four times our population. All it needs to do is punch it’s industrial and demographic weight on the battlefield and we are toast. I don’t want to lose a war to a stronger opponent. Nor do I want to engage in hard core nuclear brinkmanship over the political status of 20-some million people. Nor do I want to pay higher taxes to build a huge navy. I prefer to offer immigrant visas to aircraft carriers.
The choice is between accommodating the rise of China and risking massive carnage. I prefer a foreign policy that bends with the balance of power to one that breaks and sweeps millions of soldiers and civilians with it.
Did you know Alaska was historically part of Russia? Would you engage in nuclear brinksmanship for 700,000 Alaskans? You are repeating the Russian and Chinese talking points. If self-determination and national boundaries mean nothing, then the world will succumb to the most recklessly aggressive. China’s boundaries are wherever it is convenient for China—they have exercised aggression in every compass direction. They haven’t had the military and technical capability until recently to project power over great distances, so it’s no surprise they haven’t. What would you do if they nuke Guam as part of their Taiwan invasion? It seems you don’t believe anything is worth the price of defending—which is what the tyrants count on.
Alaska is part of the US and has lots of oil. Taiwan is not part of the U.S..
It has something equivalent: 80% of the world's manufacturing capacity for high-end graphics chips. Microprocessors are an essential strategic resource, in case you didn't know.
So we need to onshore that chip capacity. I think China will avoid acting aggressively for a while especially if it sees we are decoupling from Taiwan.
If Ukraine was worth defending, it should have been admitted to NATO.
It's not that simple, as there's a vetting process. Followed by a staged admission process. Most NATO member states now consider Ukraine fully worthy of admission for the blood it has shed in their defense.
It could have been simple, it was the choice of the West to make it not simple.
Wasn't the problem with Ukraine more that it didn't WANT to join NATO (because it was divided between a nationalist west and a Russophile east) until 2014, when Russia invaded Crimea and Donbas and it was too late?
If Ukraine did not want to join NATO, then that's all the more reason for NATO to stay out of the conflict now.
What are your thoughts on why the US and its allies have been unable to reopen the Red Sea to international shipping?
The pigments of the people responsible for the closure of the Red Sea (Iranians and Yemenis) are dark, and attacking people with dark pigments is a monstrous sin in the woke religion that the Democratic Party worships.
I think you need to get some fresh air and step away from the computer for a bit. The current Democratic administration is funneling billions of dollars in arms to Israel which are being used to kill Arabs. This “woke religion” talking point doesn’t hold together. The real woke leftists absolutely despise the Democratic Party, they call Biden “Genocide Joe” and they’re lining up to gift wrap Michigan to Trump.
Just goes to show what half measures gets you. Biden can’t get credit for Israeli victory because of his admin’s bad advice and lack of fortitude and he’s taking Leftist blame anyway.
I'm guessing that the votes the Democrats risked losing for being insufficiently pro-Israel would mostly be Jewish votes, as non-Jews who were passionately pro-Israeli would likely mostly be Muslim-haters who would be voting Trump anyway.
Someone doesn’t know that the US has been conducting bombing operations in Yemen to weaken the Houthis
So why isn't it working?
Is it just that it's extremely difficult to defend civilian shipping (at least to the levels that insurers expect) from missile attacks, meaning that only a direct attack on the supplier of the missiles (presumably Iran) might work?
More or less, yes. Many of the Iranian missiles Yemen has are road-mobile. Easy to hide and can launch from anywhere. Same for the drones. Yemeni terrain is very rugged which also helps hide stuff.
Worst, it takes more expensive and slow to build western interceptors to take down (relatively) cheap and easy to manufacture Iranian drones/missiles. It's a bad equation for the US Navy to burn through limited stocks shooting this shit down. Obviously it should spur massive investment in interceptor production!
The Saudis were spending $7bn a month trying to quell the Houthis and they failed miserably. Without a massive US campaign (for which there is no domestic support) it would be very difficult to eliminate the threat. US would have to have boots on the ground, at least SOF enablers to Saudi troops (and there's no domestic Saudi desire to get back involved in that quagmire anyway!)
For the same reason Israel has virtually obliterated Gaza as an city; but a battered Hamas keeps fighting back. The same reason Hezbollah bloodied the IDF's nose in 2006.
Underground tunnels and bunkers.
Start another $3-4 trillion dollar war that invades Yemen & Iran...and we'll have peace...of a sort.
You have admitted that "a ridiculous collection of Yemeni jihadist barbarians" have succeeded in closing the Red Sea. Do you think that their level of skin pigmentation has contributed to their success?
Isn't it the case that the "ridiculous collection of Yemeni jihadist barbarians" are only able to close the Red Sea because an outside actor (probably Iran) is supplying them with powerful anti-ship missiles?
It's pretty hard to see how anyone could prevent Iran from supplying these weapons.
I suspect that the war on the Houthis since 2015 led by Saudi Arabia (a brutal absolute monarchy supported by the US) probably had more of a role in building sympathy for the Houthis among Western leftists.
While among non-leftist Westerners, the fact pointed out by RT that (after Iraq and Afghanistan) the American public is sick and tired of fighting land wars in the Middle East is probably the main factor.
Biden doesn’t want to upset the mullahs and is OK with Egypt going into fiscal distress from the collapse in Suez Canal revenues and is OK with America’s commitment to freedom of navigation becoming a laughing stock. China has likely noticed that the US is unwilling to put the Houthis in their place and is willing to let the Chinese attack the Philippines on internationally-recognized Filipino territory.
Maybe you are right. Maybe it's time to pre-emptively start WW3 by smashing Iran down militarily now. Knock them out of the fight now, so they'll be much less help to the Russia/China/N.Korea part of the Axis later.
It won't be easy. It will be very expensive. As in multi-trillion dollar expensive. And precipitate a global recession/depression, as Iran will close the Hormuz Strait to oil traffic. And require a huge portion of our military capabilities for probably a few years' time. During which time if China moves on Taiwan, we will not be able to provide much assistance.
Trump is responsible for Azerbaijan, Armenia, and the Crimea? He is also responsible for Chinese actions in the South China Sea, attacking India, and pressuring Taiwan? If only Hillary Clinton had won, the co-author of our Libyan debacle would have spoken magic words to Russia (reset) and China (?), changing their already set courses?
Probably not. But Trump is in deed--if not in behaviour--an FSB thrall, in service to Russia. And now by extension to Russia's new senior partner, China. He severely strained NATO during his tenure, recently cut off US ammunition supply for SIX months, and has made clear he will surrender Ukraine to Russia on day one. He would let Tik Tok continue its role as a CCP mouthpiece.
The GOP, once a proud party of natsec patriotism, under Trump has become a bunch of defeatist Quislings.
If the tenor, attitude and language contained in this top (!) comment (on what is an exceedingly well-written writeup of the real and tangible threats our country is facing) isn't proof alone that we'll have zero focus on external threats during a Trump admin, I don't know what is.
I fear the war is already lost, decided for us because some people wanted to try and make America a little more equitable (term used: woke) and folks like Tamritz got their feelings really hurt. Personally, I find it hard to take the position that desiring equity merits the reaction they received, even if their efforts were pretty imperfect. Add a little bit of digital fire-stoking by Russian and Chinese trolls to Tamritz's imagined slights and you get WW3 I guess.
But, as Noah says. Regardless of the feelings of Mr. Tamritz, our success is likely decided by the coin flip luck Kamala Harris is facing to win the presidency. What a shame. What an unjust denouncement of everything great that liberal democracy stands for, that America has a 50/50 chance of producing this devastating outcome.
I do appreciate Tamritz's comment for existing as a microcosm of America today of minds online heavily influenced by foreign state actors - hopefully captured by the Internet Archive and recorded for posterity to the benefit of researchers 100 years in the future.
The idea that children can be educated in schools to believe that their homeland is the source of all evil on earth, and that borders are a racist concept — and then expect them to be willing to die in the army to defend it or its allies — is ridiculous. It’s not even clear what they are supposed to die for. A country without borders is not a country at all.
The idea that children are being educated in schools to believe that their homeland is the source of all evil on earth is ridiculous
Maybe stop watching so much FOX News?
What do you think of Phillip Hallam-Baker's hypothesis that Russia suborned Fox News by hacking into its email server in 2014?
You've mentioned this before. It's credible, I guess. Considering Occam's Razor, the far simpler explanation is that FOX exists to support the GOP, and Trump heads the GOP. Therefore, FOX will always laud Trump, and accept or make excuses for his total subordination to Putin.
Trump didn't head the GOP in 2014, and he probably isn't smart enough to have pulled off a hostile takeover of the party without serious help.
Here's the really crazy part of all that - nothing you said has any basis in reality at all! I won't be responding to any further messages but of course will send you my thoughts and prayers, and hope you read this one day: https://aeon.co/essays/why-its-as-hard-to-escape-an-echo-chamber-as-it-is-to-flee-a-cult
I keep hearing this ‘self-hatred’ being cited, but have never seen evidence of this. Where does this idea come from?
It’s a silly right wing talking point that’s been in circulation for 50 years. It does describe some groups of people, IMO, but those groups are farrrrr to the left of the Democrats. Its basically the mirror image of describing all Republicans as racists.
From FOX News. And its lesser imitators. RW "alternative facts" sold as actual news.
Those I've spoken call it imperialist-colonialism or blame America first from reading pro-Palestine Substack, Amnesty International, and Upstream podcast. Thankfully the ability to have a reasonable discussion about history means not all is lost.
Among extreme leftists, not mainstream Democrats.
Extreme leftists hate Democrats and openly admit they want Trump to win.
You are just rattling off culture war gibberish that doesn't have any relation to any actual economic debates.
I'd say those particular extreme leftists are an excellent example of oikophobia, as they want a Trump victory precisely _because_ they believe it will weaken America.
Do you see "transing of minors" as a case of exploiting the natural gender-fluidity of adolescents to trick them into sterilizing themselves?
That's the only way in which I could see it as being driven by oikophobia.
The Democrats may not have the entire solution but there is no indication they are ready to capitulate to the Axis. More than Democratic party resolve, the bigger problem is Republican opposition to any effective policies in order to gain political advantage.
History is sadly repeating itself, as the GOP took many of the same positions in the run up to WW2. GOP industrialists--like the Bush family--admired and praised Hitler; while the GOP as a party was strongly isolationist.
It took FDR and the Democrats to recognize that war was inevitable, and begin both a process of industrialiization, and accelerated military shipbuilding, to give us an early advantage after Dec. 1941.
The post-Reagan GOP talks tough on defense; but they exist now only to give tax cuts to billionaires.
I suspect the GOP industrialists admired the Nazis for crushing the left and the labor unions in Germany: they also supported the Spanish Nationalists, who were even more viciously anti-working-class to the point of viewing them as Untermenschen. As Franco's press officer Gonzalo de Aguirez Munro put it:
"Sewers caused all our troubles. The masses in this country are not like your Americans, nor even like the British. They are slave stock. They are good for nothing but slaves and only when they are used as slaves are they happy. But we made the mistake of giving them modern housing in the cities where we have our factories. We put sewers in these cities, sewers which extend right down to the workers’ quarters. Not content with the work of God, we thus interfere with His Will. The result is that the slave stock increases. Had we no sewers in Madrid, Barcelona, and Bilbao, all these Red leaders would have died in infancy instead of exciting the rabble and causing good Spanish blood to flow. When the war is over, we should destroy the sewers.. The perfect birth control for Spain is the birth control God intended for us. Sewers should reserved for those who deserve them, not the slave stock"
wow! What a quote
Sure, Gonzalo certainly didn't mince his words!
As with so many things, the Republicans prefer to have the problem, to run on it, rather than contribute to a solution. See: Trump torpedoing the immigration crackdown bill, because he doesn't want it to pass while a Democrat is in the White House.
There is a danger lurking for America and its power and prestige. Neither our Parties nor their candidates have their heads screwed on when it comes to these dangers. Our enemies are outside the country.
Iran is at war with us, we’re the stupid dolts who don’t see it. Russia has been destabilizing the globe for a century. A coalition is being built to take America down and end its role as the enforcer of the world rules-based order that was created after WWII. Our Asian allies will most likely develop nuclear weapons. At least I hope so rather than knuckle under to Chinese domination.
Europe is a catastrophe. No longer capable of imagining war and the sacrifices to prevent war, NATO will likely die. Much of Europe is in an anti-immigrant mood. Combined with the growth of right-wing parties, they also have internal struggles. Several European governments are more sympathetic to Putin than to allies in the West.
There are trends, there are events, and there are movements. All are happening simultaneously, and the globe is going through a time of dislocation. The US, its leaders along with our allies are currently incapable of responding to it.
I doubt, however, that everything Noah laid out will pass. Trump could be worse or he could be better, but we do have institutions that will hold. The Army won’t take illegal orders, SCOTUS will defend the Constitution. I am worried about the House doing some chicanery after the election should Trump lose. That said, should the House remain in GOP control, we can all go to bed and get sound sleep.
The House GOP was unable to compromise, even with itself. I do not expect the bad blood, the malcontents to suddenly have a fit of love for each other and agree. The other two things for you to remember is that Trump will be a lame Duck. I see no evidence that JD Vance will have the same control over people that Trump does. Yes, well, we have new regulations. Yes, he’ll pull out of some deals, but people will only work with him because they have to. His acolytes will continue to march to his tune, but people will move on, and his popularity will increase when he gets into office. He will be disliked just as before.
If you have never read the story of the Buddhist Farmer, it is the one piece of advice I have for everyone. Once you read it you’ll understand. Even you Noah, cheer up.
https://mindfulness.com/mindful-living/are-these-bad-times-or-good-times-the-story-of-the-zen-farmer
I hope you are right. But US Presidents have a lot of power exercisable through Executive Actions. Congress, for example, could theoretically approve a $50bn arms package for Ukraine; but a Trump Admin could delay delivery virtually indefinitely.
Trump, if not in fact, then in deed is an FSB (KGB) thrall. He nearly destroyed NATO once, and it's not impossible he could severely damage the alliance.
He could indeed, but that goes for every President. Let me put it this way. You have to answer this for yourself.
Personally, I don’t believe Biden nor Trump will go to war with China over Taiwan. When they don’t, the risk for South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines increases exponentially. They will wonder if the US nuclear umbrella is still viable. Is the US a viable partner and ally?
I also do not believe that Biden nor Trump would go to war with Russia if it invaded Estonia. That would be the end of NATO. I do feel NATO has expanded to too many countries. For this reason. I’m not sure the public whats to see its 19 year olds die for Estonia. France or England maybe, Estonia? I want to believe I am wrong.
I just don’t feel that way.
The wokism of the left wing of the Democratic Party is not why the US has not been able to maintain shipping in the Red Sea. That's mainly due to tech changes, and the need to avoid entanglement in another land war - which they're failing at.
The irony is that trouble in Red Sea shipping lanes is a greater disadvantage for the Chinese than the Americans.
If Trump is elected, shipping lanes will open, and no ground war will be required for that.
That's right. I'd forgotten about Trump's magic Houthi solution.
So what's Trump's concepts of a plan here? No points for concepts that involve giving away hegemony in the ME to Iran and/or a free hand for the Axis to supply weapons and deploy troops in Ukraine.
No points either for Trump leaning on his personal rapport with the world's thugs or expending US resources that benefits China more than the US.
Maybe Trump's solution would be "nuke the Houthis"?
Thank you, Mr Putin
Like Moses, he will part the waters of the Red Sea, right into Sa'na, yes?
Wake up Tamritz, WW3 is coming. It's already being fought in Ukraine. And soon will in Taiwan. Like in 1941, GOP leadership under Trump is too weak to be of any use, and will give Ukraine to Putin and Taiwan to Xi.
Thanks for exposing this risk so clearly. Spot on. While I understand why some dislike/disagree with democratic policy/positions/Harris, I wish I had a better understanding of Trumps appeal as an alternative. Bush/mccain/Romney… serious republicans. Trump? WTF?
You can see it in the comments section here. It's grievance politics: people who feel like they have been cut out of a fair slice of American society want to "own the libs". There is really no more thought to it than that.
Unfortunately, I tend to agree. But imho, no matter how well the economy is doing, grievance politics is always easy to shout about. What to do?
Trump has a solid devoted base, and the opposition was divided amongst too many contenders. It was simple math of divide and conquer. Additionally, even if all of the other primary candidates could be considered superior in intellect and poise, clearly none of them had the "it" to consolidate support and emerge victorious. Polls of the "average republican" candidate versus Biden aside, not generating momentum would be a serious flaw in the general election, so something else to be considered by those tired of losing - wrongly or rightly.
Agree. I understand why he won the primary. But I don’t feel I understand why this is a close election. The maga base isn’t so big… so there must be a large number of traditional republicans that are voting for him, vs sitting it out or holding their nose and voting for Harris.
I have severe Trump voting friends who regularly write (copy paste) posts that boil down to “sure, Trump is a piece of human garbage, but there weren’t any wars and the economy was better.” For low info voters, that’s persuasive
No inflation, either. And we could afford to finance cars and houses. And we didn’t need 7pct deficits at full employment to generate 2 pct growth.
Exactly. Magical thinking basically unrelated to how the world works
So I’m curious… what do they think will happen in Ukraine if trump is elected, and do they like that answer, or just not care?
Most Americans don’t care. It’s the Europeans who should be really agitated in any case.
Just like pre-WW2 GOP pols and voters didn't care about the Axis victory in Spain, or the relentless Japanese advances in China.
Only the Dems and FDR got it. History is repeating itself.
I don’t think they think about Ukraine at all. If they do, they don’t care. There may be a few who think Trump will magically convince Putin to stop invading.
Putin has time--and resources--on his side. With roughly 5x the manpower and 5x the money. And now with N.Korea supplying troops; and China supplying weapons.
Ukraine is like Spain was in the run up to WW2. Trump will either: a) Do nothing, and let Russia continue to crush Ukraine until it breaks; or, b) Cut off all US aid & push Ukraine to accept a humiliating peace treaty, that will likely mean losing more territory, and ban it from NATO membership.
What will happen to Ukraine has already been determined by facts on the ground and general disinterest amongst electorates in the US and Europe. The only question is timing, no matter who is elected.
I wonder if some of them think "if we let Putin take over Eastern Europe again, he'll reward us with cheap oil and gas"?
Just like the French, even in early 1940, were thinking they were safe behind their Maginot Line.
Surrendering Ukraine & Taiwan will only embolden the Axis, not appease them.
Because Dems are not in favor of centrist policies. They are beholden to progressive donors and activists. Given Trump’s low ceiling of support, an actual centrist candidate who would repudiate the exec orders on immigration, student loans, energy that the donors wrote up for Biden to sign and who would repudiate the lawless approach of appointees at the FTC, EPA, DHS, etc and craft policies for the people rather than the activists would be running away with this election. They just can’t do it. The Dems by now are all a product of their donor/activist ecosystem. The best hope might be a governor (a la Clinton, Carter) from a state who has realized that there is more to governing than doing what the activists want. That is not Newsom, maybe not even Whitmer. The MD guy, maybe. Harris is just a less gangrenous meat puppet to replace Biden atop the donor/activist agenda.
Harris will win the popular vote, the issue is the Electoral College. MAGA Republicans are indeed a minority.
OK Gandalf!
As much as you didn't want to write this I don't think I wished to read it. I share most of the concerns here. But it drained my spirit to read through all those reasons to fear.
I find the rhetoric of fear unhelpful to living with it. I believe what is needed most are three things. First, a reminder of the strength and potential of the 'liberal world'. Second, that the non-liberal powers are not all aligned, nor might they ever be (they may not even remain non-liberal). Third, events - all the upredictable consequences of any major conflict. It is unlikely to be total triumph or defeat. What we need is courage, self-belief and an iron will to be independent.
We do not teeter on the edge of a knife, not yet, and we can find a path that does not take us there.
As a dyed-in-the-wool Liberal, I wish you were right. I truly do.
But the clouds of a world war are gathering just as surely as they were in the 1930's. Noah's reasoning is pretty spot on. What Biden-Harris and the Dems have done with onshoring industrial policy (microchips, batteries, energy), only Harris can continue with diplomatic policy; namely, an alliance of NATO, ASEAN, and India & N. Vietnam. Where an attack on one is an attack on all. Which is probably the only thing that can dissuade China from moving on Taiwan, and starting WW3. Probably.
With China now openly arming Russia, and North Korea entering the war, the Axis has decided to up the ante. What do you think we should do?
This is the most important article I’ve read lately laying out the stakes of the election for the world, not just the United States.
Some of the comments concern me.
I would posit that if people are so emotionally latched to Trump that they seriously imagine his domestic “woke enemies” to be either in cahoots with China, or a greater threat than China/Russia, or both, one is not grasping the situation and is not trying to grasp the situation.
It's what happens when you watch too much FOX News. It impairs cognitive function.
I'm an American, and I believe that the Pax Americana with its rules-based mostly democratic order is preferable in every way to the authoritarian semi-Communist models of Russia and China. Besides, I'm averse to learning to read/write in Mandarin.
Re-read the final three paragraphs of this article for a glimpse of just what “China and Russia will do to the US”
What do you think the effect on the US will be when China takes Taiwan, the S. Korea, the. Japan (maybe Guam)? All historical enemies and all a natural ring boundary for its “defense”. No consequence to losing our Asian trade?
The key to stopping Russia is stopping Russia. The population problem is dealt with by conquering other populations and using the as cannon fodder for the next invasion—that’s what the SSRs were and what Russia, quite openly, is trying to reestablish.
That’s. . . exactly what both countries want to do, bruh.
That doesn’t mean literally conquer, like Napoleon invading Russia or something. But it does mean to dominate. They want in their regions of the globe what America had in its own for much of the 20th century.
They talk about it all the time. This is what they want. It’s not some fever paranoid dream people you don’t like made up. Take them at their word.
There is one lasting, possible check on a Trump presidency- Congress, though it leaves much to be desired
My assessment of Congress, right now:
If it is controlled by Republicans, and he wins, it will do whatever he wants, at least for a year or two.
The shrinking Reaganite caucus of the GOP will strive mightily, and desperately, to rescue American foreign policy, but they will be fighting the combined might of the president, his hand-picked vice president, Elon Musk, all of Elon Musk’s buddies, the MAGA mediasphere (much empowered) and god knows how many violent pro-MAGA organizations, likely fresh off a rampage and believing they have a pre-emptive pardon from the most powerful man on Earth. Also, a Trumpified law enforcement apparatus.
A Trump victory, and a GOP victory in Congress (especially the Senate), almost certainly means all the foreign policy horrors Smith laid out here.
If Democrats hold Congress, on the other hand, or even just the House, we have utter, constant chaos. He is a convicted felon; he will likely be impeached on day one for his efforts to protect himself by politically purging law enforcement alone. That’s to say nothing of all the military crackdowns and roundups he has planned (confession: I’m one of the few guys on this comment board who believes every literal word from him when he talks about such things).
So, either way, it’s not looking good. The courts have no constitutional authority on this sphere of government either.
Realistically, everything comes down to the next seventeen days. :/
Yeah, I mean it is critical that Democrats at the very least within the house. Only allow them to begin in peaceful proceedings and investigations, but forces the senate to negotiate with them.
I think if democrats control the house and Republicans control the Senate, you’ll be able to see some genuine bipartisan legislation around foreign policy (for example Congress passed a law that made it illegal for a president to leave nato)
"... if Germany, France, Japan, South Korea, and America’s other allies fall, it will dramatically weaken America’s ability to defend itself. Remember that China is four times the size of America, and manufactures well over twice as much. Without its coalition of allies, the U.S. just doesn’t have the size to stand up to China." But how are you sure that China will want to do anything to take on the US? Economically, they'd like their companies to grow at the expense of companies in the West but they'd do that through a combination of coercion and sweetheart deals with countries in Southeast Asia, East Asia, Africa and select countries in Western Europe.
Most likely, Xi Jinping will seek to elevate his status as the elder statesman of the world by getting Russia to give up on Ukraine by promising to help him get the necessary ammunition and security apparatus to re-conquer Central Asia and Eastern Europe. He'd definitely invade Taiwan and establish a puppet regime. Brooking no opposition, they'd eventually pressure countries in Southeast Asia, East Asia and Western Europe to sign free trade agreements after some peace summit likely brokered by the Big Orange man.
I highly doubt the likes of Russia and China want to invade the US in any way. Yes, they'd seek to sow discord through disinformation campaigns and possibly cut it off from trading routes and natural resources... but I think they care more about having dominion over their neighbourhoods than really upturning the global order. At best, they'd try to get countries to abandon Western institutions and create new ones like the BRICs that will only be a pale imitation of the original ones.
nobody said anything about invading the usa. in fact, that seems like the least effective way to actually combat americans and fails to take advantage of most chinese & russian advantages in the situation
the goal is as was said: to weaken american influence and prosperity through economic and strategic means
as for china and russia respecting the current world order… lol. they both have unilaterally declared their hostility to it by claiming massive territories that are not theirs to take, and have openly stated that the reason for this is that they are strong and others are weak.
We’ve lived under four years of Trump as well as four years of Biden/Harris. We will survive another four years of either one.
Contrasting the two four year periods I would say the biggest differences are more inflation under Biden, bigger deficits at full employment, my kids can’t afford to buy a house at these home prices and mortgage rates, more censorship, more authoritarian/lawless exec orders (illegally handing out $100 billion in student loan relief), and the world is a much more dangerous place.
I’m not sure that paying people to assemble Chinese battery components really seals the deal for me given all of the above.
I don’t really care who is elected - none of my business, and neither candidate seems particularly responsible nor reliable. We’ll survive another four years either way.
You should be a lot more worried about what happens internationally. Today you feel insulated from it. Tomorrow it could be on your doorstep.
It's curious how the same GOP isolationistic tendencies emerge when global war clouds gather. They didn't mind when the Axis won in Spain in '38, or when FR/GB gave Czechoslovakia to Hitler. There's many conservatives now who wouldn't care if Ukraine falls to Putin, or Xi conquers Taiwan. Such a curious lack of strategic thinking.
No it's not 1939. In 1939 the US had failed to effectively oppose Japanese incursions into China and the European powers had passed up every opportunity to engage in the forward defensive actions that might have snuffed out German territorial ambitions before they gained an (almost) unstoppable momentum. So far, NATO has done much better in the Ukraine and Taiwan.
That's what turkeys say every day until Thanksgiving
"The Quest stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little, and it will fail, to the ruin of all. Yet hope remains while the Company is true."
- Galadriel in The Fellowship of the Ring:
It's not the despair that gets you; its the hope. A month ago when Harris looked like she was going to leave Trump behind in the dust at the polls, I was strangely nervous. Now that it looks like she may lose I actually feel a bit more positive. Despair can be liberating. You're right to be worried about what might happen in America under Trump. But if Republicans think that the worst that US progressives can do in defence of their values is to de-platform the occasional right-wing loudmouth and try to stop people using cruel names to describe each other, then they're deluding themselves. If Trump and his proxies start in with Project 2025, I think progressive America is more than capable of setting aside its differences and resisting at whatever level and in whatever way is necessary. Churchill said that America can always be relied on to do the right thing, once it had tried everything else. And I still think that's true. Over here we're forever being disappointed, exasperated or shocked by America but then you turn up at the last and save the day: like Han Solo or Daryl Dixon. As for Europe, it's true that since the end of WWII we Europeans have been content to shelter lazily under the US defence umbrella. Ever since we embroiled the world in two wars we've been a bit leery of conflict. America can be forgiven for seeing Europe as soft and complacent. But if its a live option, then being soft and living complacently is the rational, the civilized choice. 'The paths of glory lead but to the grave' is a very European sentiment. But don't forget those two world wars. They weren't the aberrations we sometimes like to think they were. On both sides of the Atlantic, the Left, the Centre and those on the Right who still believe in truth and decency have left it a bit late to stop contemplating their own navels and do what must be done. But that doesn't mean that it won't get done. Or that, if we get lucky, it may not have to be done.
Unfortunately, it's exactly that kind of rhetoric and action that convinces Trump and his supporters that domestic extremists are a much bigger threat than China or Russia. After all, Trump has now been the victim of no fewer than TWO left wing assassination attempts, along with bent leftist judges and courts trying to imprison or bankrupt him no less than THREE times. What did those people think the outcome would be? That Trump would just shrug and say, nah, the Dems are alright, I'm still gonna focus on China?
Noah makes it out like Trump's position here is irrational or wrong, but let's face it - if a large, organized group of people had spent years attempting to kill or imprison you then you'd consider them a much bigger threat than a government the other side of the world who had done nothing to you.
Both attempted assassins were republicans
lol. Behold, the power of media brainwashing. They were doing things like donating to Biden, weren't they? And practically by definition if they're trying to kill the head of the Republican party, they are not Republicans.
members of hitler, Stalin, and Fidel Castro's political parties tried to kill them too. you probably don't know that though because you're not as brainwashed as me
You mean in countries where only one political party was allowed, the assassins were not members of competing parties? What a shock.
And, note, nobody describes those people as Nazis or communists.
they were nazis and communists, and the guy who shot trump was a republican
It's weird now feeling like the neocons were directionally accurate, even if the particular conflicts they tilted at were often dubious. America just making motions toward standing down globally has enabled a lot of bad shit. They were right about constant vigilence and willingness with miltary might being necessary to keep the free world free.
Yup.
You finally lost me with this one. I did enjoy and learn from your non-political posts, but those have been mostly replaced with your DNC campaign posts. Sad.
You should put country above party, David.
True to form the comments section here just underscores the degree to which this isn’t being taken seriously enough and the denial of the GOP as it supports a man, at best, with character flaws the office has rarely seen.
It’s pretty striking when you see people on Twitter that work in the DFIB who exclaim that we don’t seem to yet understand the scope of the problem and are currently doing nothing to indicate it’s being taken seriously.
I’m convinced that it doesn’t matter who wins the election - China, Russia, Iran, and the DPRK have a set of goals that do not change based on what party wins the office. The next four years are going to be rough no matter who wins and the sooner you can accept that the sooner you will realize this is not a time for “owning the libz” or culture wars….REAL war is on the prowl.
The character flaw attack would be more effective if the supposedly superior POTUS hadn't been completely senile for years. You can't really compete in the bad character stakes with someone whose character changes randomly depending on the time of day due to mental incapacity.
1. Biden is no longer running for office
2. Despite his age Biden managed to pass qualitatively and quantitatively more significant legislation than Trump’s administration. The Biden admin’s efficacy simply cannot be understated.
3. I don’t understand why you’re equating the quality of one’s character with senility? They seem, to me, to be very distinct and different things.
The only reason he's not running for office is he was forced to debate Trump. If Trump had never agreed to a debate we'd still be hearing about how Biden is on top of his game, and Biden would be sitting there letting people lie on his behalf. Clearly, nobody in his camp actually cares about character.
As for (3) you can't be senile and even have a consistent character, let alone one of high quality. Senile people routinely forget who they're talking to or become wildly aggressive out of nowhere.
….then why did you use senility to attack Biden’s character?
And I agree - as usual Trump made a strategic mistake in agreeing to an early debate with Biden. Had he not done so he very well could have been sailing right now. Again - not an action that indicates he’s a master tactician or full of strategery. He’s so good at selecting people for his cabinet that he fires all of them…and they all come out against him for this election.
Thank for the beautiful, strong-worded write-up.
I’m afraid that a lot more may be at stakes than democracy and the liberal world order.
I’m an AI researcher and I believe it’s not unlikely that we develop AGI by the end of the next presidential term. Extrapolating the exponential growth in computing power (and buying into some other assumptions) one would arrive at AGI by 2027 (plus minus one year). I’m curious, Noah, what you think about Leopold Aschenbrenner’s “Situational Awareness”?
That would mean the most powerful weapon ever - true artificial intelligence - may be controlled by the next POTUS. Assuming AI safety research succeeds on value alignment, what values would we lock in then?
Practical AI will be field-tested in this almost-upon-us World War. At a tactical level. Autonomous flying and undersea weapons.
Strategically, AI will be likely employed in air defense. And in determining when a saturation drone + missile attack is not conventional, but nuclear. Skynet, in other words.
The question is, is this unique? Is every election from here on out for the foreseeable future “ the most important” (tm)? Or is Trump such a unique figure that once off the scene we can all breath a sigh of relief? How structural is this shift in American politics? It’s certainly not going to go “poof” and blow away if Kamala wins, but is it now a permanent feature of the American political scene?
"Is trump such a unique figure?" What other president has shown and demonstrated such a flagrant disrespect for the law, constitution, American values, and the electorate with a attempted self-coup?
More to the point of this current diary, Trump has repeatedly shown a flagrant disregard for US National Security concerns both during and after his time in office. If he is not actually an FSB asset, he does an amazingly convincing imitation of one.
Trump supporters would simply say, "the last one and he was successful", of course.