by liberal japonicus
from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hail_to_the_Chief
"Hail to the Chief" is a piece originally about a boat in Scotland...
An open thread and all that goes with it.
« Warming? | Main | And that's our signal! »
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Your Information
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
I assume His Orangeness only knows the first four words. Otherwise he would (mis)quote it constantly, in particular the part about "aim to make this grand country grander".
Interesting to read that Carter tried to get rid of it but was forced to resume its use. Did they play it as his funeral?
Posted by: Hartmut | January 19, 2025 at 09:15 AM
"Hail To The Thief"
Posted by: russell | January 19, 2025 at 10:00 AM
Two of the Biden Administration people who resigned over its Gaza policy have started a new PAC that favors Mideast policy based on adherence to American and international law. Hard to imagine but I am going to donate.
https://anewpolicy.org/
I also want to see if there are any groups trying to hold Biden and Blinken accountable in court. That is a really long shot and I think the Supreme Court would shoot it down if it ever got anywhere, but the attempt should be made, similar to the attempts to bring Kissinger to justice. From my pov it is worthwhile to change the mindset common to Western officials that nice polite Western officials ( nevermind Trump) do not have as much right to a jail cell as any of our enemies. Nobody really expects to see Putin in prison but he has to be careful where he travels.
Between Biden and Trump, the idea of American exceptionalism ought to be dead and buried. Presumably for most of the world, it is.
Posted by: Donald | January 19, 2025 at 11:08 AM
Presumably for most of the world, it is.
It certainly is in any moral sense, if such a sense ever applied. We are now down to what is not dead and buried, T H White's "might is right".
Meanwhile, on a marginally lighter note, someone just emailed me a banner reading:
If civil war breaks out, meet me at the library.
They don't know where it is.
It's certainly true of Trump and the MAGA crowd, less so for the tech bros unfortunately. And I really don't know whether to hope that Trump survives the next four years or not - Vance could be significantly worse. Time will tell.
Posted by: GftNC | January 19, 2025 at 11:34 AM
Not the only American song using the tune of another English song. See To Anachreon in Heaven. Repurposed as The Star Spangled Banner. Wonder if the fact that our national anthem is originally a drinking song says something about us...?
Posted by: wj | January 19, 2025 at 12:05 PM
If civil war breaks out, meet me at the library.
They don't know where it is.
It's certainly true of Trump and the MAGA crowd
Of course they know where it is. Just like they know where the abortion clinics are. And for much the same reason: so they can stage demonstrations against it.
Posted by: wj | January 19, 2025 at 12:09 PM
Well since we're doing painful, gallows humour, and in the context of our recent discussion with russell about the meaning and manifestations of cool, I cannot resist linking this which I admit (slightly shame-facedly, because I know this aspect of the whole clusterfuck is the least of it) spoke for me.
Whether I am engaging with the news, or with Musk tweeting constantly like a man with no job or friends, or with Zuckerberg sending out weird videos and appearing on Rogan, I am in pain. Not just because I don’t like what they are doing but because they are so incredibly, painfully cringe.
I knew that one day we might have to watch as capitalism and greed and bigotry led to a world where powerful men, deserving or not, would burn it all down. What I didn’t expect, and don’t think I could have foreseen, is how incredibly cringe it would all be. I have been prepared for evil, for greed, for cruelty, for injustice – but I did not anticipate that the people in power would also be such huge losers.
Posted by: GftNC | January 19, 2025 at 12:43 PM
I wonder whether the robber barons of the first Gilded Age were as cringe-worthy as the current crop. Anybody know enough history to speak to that? (And if not, why the difference?)
Posted by: wj | January 19, 2025 at 01:11 PM
They absolutely were, wj. Jay Gould could give Thiel a run for his money on the cringe scale. An old, but good book on this subject: The Robber Barons by Matthew Josephson....but I date myself.
I have been prepared for evil, for greed, for cruelty, for injustice – but I did not anticipate that the people in power would also be such huge losers.
Reminds me how I felt after election night, 1980.
Posted by: bobbyp | January 19, 2025 at 01:21 PM
....and 1968, 1972, 1984, 1988, 2000, 2004, and last but not least...2016.
Posted by: bobbyp | January 19, 2025 at 01:40 PM
As an interesting turn of events, the ICE raid on undocumented immigrants originally intended to happen in Chicago on Tuesday is apparently now being rethought.
For "safety reasons", says border czar Tom Homan.
And so, the reign of big talk but confusing and incompetent execution begins. It's notable that the change in plans follows so closely on the plan being leaked to the public.
Trump is entering office with favorability rating 44% positive, 49% negative, which if I'm not mistaken may be the first time a POTUS is entering office with a net negative rating. His "landslide" failed to achieve 50% of the popular vote.
The policies he says he plans to implement are not that popular. Many of them - notably mass deportation and blanket tariffs - will, if enacted, affect many of his supporters in negative ways, which is not likely to boost his approval ratings. His cabinet nominees, with possible exception of Kennedy, are less popular than he is.
The (R) majority in the Senate - 53 to 47 - is solid but not overwhelming. They'll need to get 100% of the (R) votes and flip 7 (D)'s to get to cloture on anything that gets fillibustered.
The (R) majority in the House is razor thin.
My own sense is that Trump is going to make a mess, and people aren't really going to like it all that much, whether they're able to admit that to themselves or others. The inevitable and (R)-obligatory tax cuts will make very high earners happy, everybody else less so. The billionaires are all lining up to kiss his ass, but the rest of us are not obliged to follow suit.
Trump's an asshole, and his first priority is and always been whatever is good for him, personally. There will always be some number of folks for whom the Teflon asshole bully persona will have an appeal, but I think a lot of other folks are going to get tired of it.
I have no idea if the (D)'s will have the wit and gumption to capitalize on the inherent weakness of his position. If not, more fools them (and early signs are that there is no shortage of fools). But governance by a parade of obnoxious preening assholes is IMO likely to wear thin with the body politic.
That's my prediction. Or, my guess, really, but I suppose we'll see.
All of that has to do with Trump as a domestic US phenomenon. Sadly, I also think the damage he is going to do to the standing of this country in the world is going to be longer lasting, and consequential. The whole loudmouth jerk persona and cynical transactional style of human relationships has an amazing and, to me, disturbing appeal here, but is less likely to be popular elsewhere.
People don't like being pushed around, and neither do nations.
Posted by: russell | January 19, 2025 at 01:54 PM
Sadly, I also think the damage he is going to do to the standing of this country in the world is going to be longer lasting, and consequential.
Well, everybody has listened him before. So, not as big a shock to their systems as the first time on that front.
But the fact that we were daft enough to elect him again will, quite reasonably, make the rest of the world look at us askance.
I've read a lot, over the past 4+ years, of people denigrating those around him in his first term who were failing to constrain him enough. Now they get to see how bad he is surrounded by sycophants, toadies, and true believers. Those earlier "adults in the room" are going to look a lot better in retrospect.
Posted by: wj | January 19, 2025 at 06:20 PM
I'd like to add that if my comment above makes it seem like I'm not taking the incoming regime all that seriously, that is not so.
Support for Trump and his policies is not that strong in terms of polling numbers, but his base is absolutely completely all in. They love the guy, and he cannot and will not ever do wrong in their eyes. Many of them are quite belligerent, and not a few are actually or potentially violent. Not a trivial thing.
And, competent or not, life under Trump is going to absolutely suck for a lot of people. He's going to make a lot of folks' lives freaking miserable.
And a number of folks, most notably anyone whose last name is Trump, are going to make a shitload of money.
It's already weird, but it's going to get weirder. And it's going to suck for a lot of folks.
I very much like nous' counsel in the other thread - don't expect much help from the institutions, because they are being corrupted or undermined. Find ways to make things better within the scope of your own life and connections, on your own initiative and from your own resources, whatever those may be.
Posted by: russell | January 19, 2025 at 07:29 PM
Support for Trump and his policies is not that strong in terms of polling numbers, but his base is absolutely completely all in.
Support for the policies which Trump says he will implement is underwhelming. As opposed to what his supporters think he will do (which is higher, because they hear what they want to hear) or what his administration will actually do (which is lower).
But the critical point is his support in Congress, which is probably adequate in the Senate. As for the House, it's hard to tell at this point. With a 2-4 vote nominal majority, getting a majority to actually vote for something is likely to be a challenge. The crazies, and the burn-it-all-down types (an overlapping group), simply outnumber the margin . . . and trying to put thru legislation which depends on Democrats is problematic as well.
Expect to see a lot of Executive Orders. Many of which will be outside the President's authority -- like refusing to spend money Congress orders spent. And some of which conflict with the law, or even the Constitution. So there will doubtless be a flood of court cases on them.
We are looking at interesting times.
Posted by: wj | January 20, 2025 at 09:28 AM
But with all the other crap coming down on us today, at least Biden managed to commute Leonard Peltier's sentence on the way out the door.
Posted by: nous | January 20, 2025 at 01:15 PM
Robert Reich in the Guardian with an optimistic take:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jan/20/trump-return-hopeful-america
It’s unfortunate that America has come to this point. But, as a friend put it, the authoritarian forces that have been building for years are like the pus in an ugly boil. The only way we work up enough outrage to lance it, she said, is for the boil to get so big and ugly that it disgusts all of us.
A few years of another Trump regime even more disgusting than the first will be hard on many people. We cannot gloss over the magnitude of the suffering that will occur.
But when the oligarchy is exposed for what it is, the nation will see, more clearly than ever before, that we have no alternative other than to take back power.
Only then can we continue the essential work of America: the pursuit of equality and prosperity for the many, not the few. The preservation and strengthening of a government of, by and for the people.
Dear God, I hope he's right.
Posted by: GftNC | January 20, 2025 at 06:25 PM
Reich says:
I think Reich is overly optimistic here. I'm not sure Americans are as dedicated to the kinds of egalitarian ideals he cites as he thinks.
I do think this is partly true:
The part I think is true is the "helping their communities" part. People do that now, and will continue to do so, probably more so if things get difficult economically.
I'm not convinced about the "protecting the most vulnerable" part.
I'm sorry to say this, but I don't see the kind of small-d democratic impulses Reich cites in a broad cross-section of the American public. Not in a way that would result in a groundswell of reaction to the influence of absurd wealth in public affairs. Certainly not in a way that will result in "the people taking back power".
A lot of people think "the people taking back power" is what just happened. And those people have demonstrated a remarkable immunity to taking a critical view of Trump. They think he's great. They think "taking back power" means a tax cut and eliminating regulations of whatever kind.
I generally agree with his sense that Americans don't like aristocracy, but I don't think they see the ridiculously wealthy people - men, all of them - who lined up on the dais today as an "aristocracy". They see them as winners. Rich guys. Guys they wish they were. Americans valorize wealth, and they idolize people who "break the rules".
I don't mean to rain on anybody's parade, but I'm just not seeing the America Reich is talking about. There are people who align with the kinds of ideals he cites, but I do not see them as a majority, or even close to one.
Posted by: russell | January 20, 2025 at 07:17 PM
Reich or anybody else with a megaphone needs to say:
"Listen up, MAGAts. Elon Musk's wealth -- I don't say worth, but wealth -- is something like 300 billion dollars. If you could work hard enough and smart enough to earn one million dollars a year, it would take you 300,000 years to pull in that much money. And you have the time to worry about transgender bathrooms??"
--TP
Posted by: Tony P. | January 20, 2025 at 07:47 PM
russell, I fear you're right. But I hope you're wrong (as you do yourself, of course).
If it makes it into the news sources that the great American public consume, I wonder what they would make of e.g. the prosecution of Alexander Vindman (which God forbid, but who unfortunately has not been pardoned)? Perhaps they would be so distracted by the bread and circuses (well, circuses anyway) of the southern border, withdrawal from COP etc etc, that such matters of principle would be irrelevant. Like conflicts of interest, and other such quaint relics of a bygone age.
I must say, I do await with a kind of queasy interest what the SCOTUS will do in the next few years.
Tony P: I really can't see that that would make any difference at all to the MAGA people. At least not until their Medicaid, healthcare and other benefits are adversely affected.
Posted by: GftNC | January 20, 2025 at 09:27 PM
At least not until their Medicaid, [general] healthcare and other benefits are adversely affected.
And now that I see he has taken America out of the WHO, we must desperately hope that the next pandemic does not come along any time soon.
Posted by: GftNC | January 20, 2025 at 09:31 PM
Another common-sense-ish metric of Trump's wealth (currently $433.9B) that I've seen:
If he stayed in a hotel that charged $100,000 *a night*, he could stay there for about 12,000 *years* before he ran out of money. So, basically 100K a night, every night, since the Ice Age. Longer than recorded human history.
I think the reason a lot of people aren't more disturbed by Musk's wealth (and that of similar people) is because it's just so freaking hard to imagine it. It's surreal.
Thinking more about my comment above, it strikes me that my parent's and grandparent's generations actually did have a stronger egalitarian ethic, for lack of a better word. They had a stronger sense of a common good, and a greater willingness to invest in basic public goods. And, they had a sense that accumulating extraordinary wealth was not really a virtuous goal, and that doing so and especially that flaunting it was in really bad taste.
If you were to ask me what the difference is, I'd say it's that they lived through the Great Depression and then WWII, all within 20 years. They understood poverty or the threat of poverty, and they understood sacrifice for a common purpose. And, they understood what it meant for government to act for the general public good - not just for the good of a few wealthy people with the claim that their fortune would "trickle down".
I don't really see that now. It could be that it will take a similar calamity to bring something like that back, which is frankly not something I would wish on anyone.
So yes, losing federal entitlements might be a wake up call. But even given that, I'm not sure how folks would respond.
And un-fucking-believable that pulling us out of both the WHO and the Paris agreements on his first day. What a dick.
Posted by: russell | January 20, 2025 at 10:04 PM
I very much like nous' counsel in the other thread - don't expect much help from the institutions, because they are being corrupted or undermined. Find ways to make things better within the scope of your own life and connections, on your own initiative and from your own resources, whatever those may be.
Just to amplify, here - the connections part is crucial. What we are seeing crippled are our governmental institutions. Community and mutual aid are crucial in such conditions.
I see a lot of friends on social media who are talking about the importance of self-care and thoughts to that effect. I prefer to think of it as communal care, though. There are others out there who are under attack for the same reasons that you are. Find them and pool your care and your resources. Care for each other. Expand your circles of care.
Posted by: nous | January 20, 2025 at 10:11 PM
Amen.
FWIW, it seems to me that communal care *is* self care. Yes, pay attention to your own state of mind and emotional health, but nothing will lift you like helping other people does.
Thanks again for this reminder, nous.
Posted by: russell | January 20, 2025 at 10:17 PM
I prefer to think of it as communal care, though. There are others out there who are under attack for the same reasons that you are. Find them and pool your care and your resources. Care for each other. Expand your circles of care.
I think this is really good advice. The very act of making an effort for others, as well as oneself, has important and far-reaching knock-on effects, like the ripples after throwing a stone in a pool.
Posted by: GftNC | January 20, 2025 at 10:22 PM
Russell, I think you must have meant Musk's wealth. Trump's net worth is far less than $433.9B, by a couple of orders of magnitude. Still obscene, of course.
Posted by: Gary K | January 21, 2025 at 01:51 AM
Good god, I just saw Musk's "speech" and his Hitler salute. The latter is shocking and even more so the ADL's exculpatory reaction to it. It just goes to show the fear of the institutions in the face of fascism (or call it what you want, I use the term as a convenient shortcut).
But what is even more telling is the sheer vacousness of what Musk has to say: basically he talks about optimism, planting a flag on Mars and how he loves his audience - and that's all he has to say.
I couldn't get myself to watch Trump's speech, but from what I read it was a similarly vacuous "how the west was won" and how Americans have been awesome through the ages speech.
What does this mean for the next four years? While some might think that the lack of policy and vision could be a good thing, as it will eventually reveal that the emperor has no clothes, I think it's very dangerous: They know they have nothing to offer to solve the problems facing us, so they will turn to symbolic acts satisfying the base while making sure they solidify their power.
We have seen inept attempts at achieving both objectives in the first administration, which were largely frustrated by still funtioning institutions and some adults in the room. Now all bets are off. Remember that one of the defining features of the Nazi leadership was that they were inept: they never got the economy going until the war started and the persection of the jews had in part economical reasons. They were a bunch of chancers and their only talent was propaganda and feeding the base - they didn't know where the heck they were going and ran straight towards the abyss...
/rant
Posted by: novakant | January 21, 2025 at 04:14 AM
Hitler knew exactly where he was going. His initial successes were implementations of plans from earlier democratic governments that he claimed to be his own. By blocking market mechanisms he could avoid (for a time) the adverse consequences. He impressed the majoriry with his foreign policy victories (that the other nations allowed him while they had denied them to the earlier republican government). And once the war started the usual mechanisms were out of function. The Nazis stayed ahead of the crushing wave remarkably long. The main difference being that they at least could not (as the Right did in 1918) hand over the final disaster to the Left and then blame it for losing an already won war. Hitlers 'The next 1918 will be different' turned out to be true.
The modern Right sees the only problem in him losing not in his methods and ignore that it was a house of cards to begin with.
Posted by: Hartmut | January 21, 2025 at 07:45 AM
Following up on Hartmut's comment, David Brooks, (who I hold no brief for) had been trotting out the line that Trump is the most 'consequential' president, at least in the post-war era. Setting aside the rhetorical move to stay in the good graces of MAGA types while trying to keep some shred of dignity, if you accept that Trump is 'consequential', has there ever been a stupider 'consequential' world leader? I'm hard pressed to think of one.
Posted by: liberal japonicus | January 21, 2025 at 08:22 AM
There were some medieval monarchs...
In particular those that underestimated the Mongols (China, Choresm).
But still they probably had more between the ears than His Orangeness.
---
In an addition to my previous post I would also note that a certain infamous campaign poster from the Weimar republic (the iconic 'stab in the back') has been copied and used multiple times for decades by the US Right (with the Dem donkey replacing the social democrat/communist stabbing the soldier). And some other 'art' from the era has been copied at least in spirit (e.g. DJT as superhero is an equivalent to this https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Hubert_Lanzinger_Der_Bannertr%C3%A4ger_(The_Standard_bearer)_Oil_on_plywood_ca_1934-36_Adolf_Hitler_as_knight_Denazified_hole_in_Hitler%27s_face_scrathes_US_Army_Center_of_Military_History_USHMM_No_known_copyright_restrictions_2450324-2396x2.jpg .)
Posted by: Hartmut | January 21, 2025 at 08:55 AM
Good god, I just saw Musk's "speech" and his Hitler salute.
Some more Hitler salutes.
Posted by: CharlesWT | January 21, 2025 at 10:35 AM
Russell, I think you must have meant Musk's wealth
Yikes, yes I did mean Musk. Thank you for catching that.
Trump is the most 'consequential' president, at least in the post-war era
Wins the Academy Award for "most obfuscating euphemism by a public figure".
Some more Hitler salutes.
Nice try, Charles.
That said, TBH I am way less disturbed by Musk's antics than I am by his ambition and by Trump's deference to money and the people that have it.
Posted by: russell | January 21, 2025 at 11:12 AM
My take is that it wasn't ElMu intentionally giving the Nazi salute. It was just him being the f**king weirdo that he his. Most people have the self-awareness to avoid doing things that will be taken the wrong way. I doubt he's one of them.
Posted by: hairshirthedonist | January 21, 2025 at 12:12 PM
I bow to absolutely no-one in my contempt for Musk, but I thought it was a gesture thrown to the MAGA crowd showing gratitude and fellow-feeling from his heart out to them. One can despise him, and his sympathies with rightwing parties and tropes, and fear the fact of his unearned power, without thinking he'd be stupid enough to give a Hitler salute to a crowd.
As well as my now longterm theory that he is going mad, I am starting to believe that he is actually quite happy to see the world burn in chaos and disaster as long as he has enough time to organise a survivable migration to Mars for him and his selected population of superior breeding stock.
Posted by: GftNC | January 21, 2025 at 12:16 PM
Re my first para just above, however, it's only fair to add that I seem to be in a tiny minority (possibly of one) among people I respect and share views and values with!
Posted by: GftNC | January 21, 2025 at 01:14 PM
Trump is the most 'consequential' president, at least in the post-war era.
My sense is that the main dispute is whether those are positive or negative consequences.
Posted by: wj | January 21, 2025 at 01:20 PM
This should keep the courts and other parts of government busy for a few years. A waste of time and resources.
"Donald Trump announced today a wide range of planned executive orders and other actions. Several of them are dangerous and illegal abuses of power. This post is a nonexhaustive list, focusing primarily on issues where I have some expertise, and (in many cases) I have written about them previously.
1. Denying birthright citizenship to children of undocumented immigrants. ...
2. Using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 as a tool of mass deportation. ...
3. Declaring a national emergency at the southern border. ...
4. Declaring a national energy emergency. ...
5. Designating Latin American drug cartels as terrorist organizations. ...
6. "Taking back" the Panama Canal. ..."
Trump's Illegal First-Day Executive Actions: Several of his announced actions are likely to be illegal, especially some related to immigration.
Posted by: CharlesWT | January 21, 2025 at 02:11 PM
Hitler knew exactly where he was going.
I don't think we're actually far apart, Hartmut. My point was that he had no knowledge of and no interest in the creation of a functioning and sustainable society.
The Nazis stayed ahead of the crushing wave remarkably long.
This speaks to my point. They were canny in some limited ways, but they knew that they had no idea what they were doing in any productive sense of the word, hence the escape to war and suicide.
Hitler's view of the German people when the war started going badly are telling: he blamed them and was completely indifferent to their suffering. He assumed another, stronger people would supercede them and that's just the way it goes.
I can see Trump and Musk having the same mindset once things go awry - thiugh they won't commit suicide, but fly to Mars together instead...
Posted by: novakant | January 21, 2025 at 02:28 PM
but fly to Mars together instead...
That's just a very expensive and slow way to commit suicide. ;^)
Posted by: hairshirthedonist | January 21, 2025 at 02:32 PM
That's just a very expensive and slow way to commit suicide. ;^)
Godspeed You! Daft Emperors.
Posted by: nous | January 21, 2025 at 02:37 PM
GftNC: Tony P: I really can't see that that would make any difference at all to the MAGA people. At least not until their Medicaid, healthcare and other benefits are adversely affected.
A single argument (or fact, or slogan) alone almost never changes anybody's world view. Certainly not if they only hear it one time. But repeat it often enough, and you begin to get somewhere. Couple it with other arguments (or facts, or slogans) and repeat those often enough and you can hope to make a difference.
Cower the mass media, social or not, into letting you flood the mental universe with your own "alternate facts" and you can get people to blame Democrats for MAGAt cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Rote repetition is not a form of logic, but it has proved to be effective rhetoric, and not just in low-IQ countries like the US.
My sister, who is even more appalled than you are, GftNC, had the same reaction to my arithmetical observation as you did: it won't change any MAGAt minds. This was during an hours-long conversation in which she lamented the current state of affairs and decried the rhetorical wimpiness of Democrats. I was reduced to saying "I'm open to suggestions. What, or what else, do you propose?"
The trouble with sane people, politically, is our boundless ability to see the flaws or shortcomings in any proposal, including (or maybe especially) our own. The MAGAts are much more inclined to unify behind, and repeat ad nauseam, whatever "facts" or "arguments" their betters are pushing that day. Confronted with disciplined propaganda on one side, and a babble of timid overthought objections on the other, morons have an easy choice, alas.
--TP
Posted by: Tony P. | January 21, 2025 at 03:28 PM
"A lot of people think "the people taking back power" is what just happened. And those people have demonstrated a remarkable immunity to taking a critical view of Trump. They think he's great. They think "taking back power" means a tax cut and eliminating regulations of whatever kind."
I don't think MAGAs care about policy. I think they care about taking back America--meaning they think their elected people are in charge, which gives them a feeling of having won. I really think that is the extent of their interest.
Since they want to feel like winners, they will believe only what reinforces that belief. They will believe that the pussygrabber's policies are good ( on the rare occasions when they correctly identify who is responsible for a policy) and refuse to believe anything that reflect on the Dear Leader because that reflects on them.
They won the election. Faux etc will tell them that everything the Dear Leader does is great and successful. They will be happy.
And will continue to hate the rest of America because putting us down is essential to building themselves up.
To understand MAGA, think in terms of the behavior of the twelve-year-olds who get vicarious self-estemme from standing behind a bully.
Posted by: Wonkie | January 21, 2025 at 03:33 PM
I think it will never be 100% clear whether Hitler acted out of spite when he in essence ordered national suicide or whether the sentiment in his testament was genuine that the Easterners had proven their superiority and thus had won the right to do with the Germans what the Germans had tried to do with them (and that it would be best for everyone concerned, if Germany spared them the effort).
Btw Hitler was from the start explicitly willing to end his own life, should he come to the conclusion that he had failed. There was a moment during the Weimar era when his party came close to splitting and he said to a confidant that he would 'end it with the pistol within 5 minutes' should he lose the decisive (intra-party) vote. It was always all-or-nothing with him.
It has been a never-ending debate whether that should be seen as cowardice to face the consequences of his deeds or as a principled stand.
What is probably beyond dispute is that His Orangeness would not act that way.
Posted by: Hartmut | January 21, 2025 at 03:45 PM
Youtube comment sections have become even more of a cesspool. As I have stated often MAGA has three modes: 1) whining 2) gloating 3) whining while gloating (preferred mode).
They also constantly complain that ALL their comments get removed, that only THEIR comments get removed while the threads drown in statements that in civilized countries could be legally liable (e.g. calling for the collective murder of the Biden family should the DoJ of His Orangeness not be quick enough in getting them first).
And the endless cut-and-paste posting of sick 'jokes'.
No idea how many of them are dumb bots, how many are AI and how many are just digestive rear exits with too much time on their hands.
Posted by: Hartmut | January 21, 2025 at 04:40 PM
I'm open to suggestions. What, or what else, do you propose?
This seems like a good start.
Basically, "That's illegal, we're not doing it". Which is basically the elected official version of "you and the horse you rode in on".
Who knows if Pritzker will prevail, but at least he's making Trump et al work for it.
Posted by: russell | January 21, 2025 at 05:55 PM
Also, and maybe in the same vein, this from Josh Marshall (for anyone who doesn't already get his stuff) is, as always, interesting:
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/day-two/sharetoken/44c9a525-3edf-414f-ac1e-1027316143df
Maybe it's all whistling in the wind. But maybe it's part of the way we'll all get through the next four years.
Posted by: GftNC | January 21, 2025 at 07:12 PM
I cannot believe I’m watching this in real time. This frog knows the pot is hot. There’s just nowhere else to go.
Posted by: Pete | January 21, 2025 at 07:14 PM
Just watched Bernie on CNN. Coulda had him for 8 years. Yeah, yeah, yeah… good call, DNC. Whatever. /rant
Posted by: Pete | January 21, 2025 at 09:19 PM
Trump just did something to make most libertarians happy.
"President Donald Trump, fulfilling a promise made at the Libertarian Party's National Convention in May, pardoned Ross Ulbricht today. Ulbricht had been serving a life sentence for his role in founding and operating the dark web marketplace Silk Road.
As Trump put it in a Truth Social post: "in honor of [his mother Lyn Ulbricht], and the Libertarian Movement, which supported me so strongly, it was my pleasure to have just signed a full and unconditional pardon of her son, Ross." He said "the scum that worked to convict him were some of the same lunatics who were involved in the modern-day weaponization of government against me.""
President Donald Trump Pardons Silk Road Founder Ross Ulbricht: Fulfilling a campaign promise to libertarians and the bitcoin community, the Silk Road founder's life sentence without parole is now over.
Posted by: CharlesWT | January 21, 2025 at 09:45 PM
Of all the things, this stands out, Charles?
Posted by: Pete | January 21, 2025 at 10:43 PM
I mean, I get the darkweb/crypto tie-in, I guess? But small potatoes.
Posted by: Pete | January 21, 2025 at 10:45 PM
Um... why is the Dark Web good?
just asking.
Posted by: russell | January 21, 2025 at 11:03 PM
Also, I know most folks here are at best agnostic, so apologies if this rubs anyone here the wrong way. But I thought this was profound and elegant, so I thought I'd share it.
The sermon of Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde in the morning service on inauguration day.
Trump attended but apparently he did not enjoy it.
Posted by: russell | January 21, 2025 at 11:08 PM
Crypto was the currency of choice on Silk Road et al. Trump has interests that align. That's all.
Posted by: Pete | January 21, 2025 at 11:56 PM
Trump attended but apparently he did not enjoy it.
I imagine his prevailing sentiment was "Who invited her?" What a miracle it would be if her message had any sway over his actions.
Posted by: hairshirthedonist | January 22, 2025 at 02:37 AM
Another proof that he does not even know the evangelical talking points: A female bishop? That's illegitimate and blasphemous to start with. No need to even talk about the content. [/sarcasm]
Please also remember: a proper sermon is supposed to be something to endure* not enjoy.
*the technical term is 'one's cross to bear'
Posted by: Hartmut | January 22, 2025 at 03:52 AM
Any bets, whether the official portraits of Obama and Biden will also get removed?
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/retired-gen-mark-milley-becomes-team-trumps-new-john-mccain-rcna188549
And someone should do a new version of this:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Soviet_censorship_with_Stalin2.jpg
Posted by: Hartmut | January 22, 2025 at 04:32 AM
It was profound and elegant, russell. And brave. If Trump has any sway with the hierarchy of that denomination, I'd expect that she's about to be "going through some things", like Marie Yovanovitch.
Posted by: GftNC | January 22, 2025 at 12:49 PM
Hartmut, you remind me very much of the great Milan Kundera quote from The Book of Laughter and Forgetting (my bold for the part that I think applies most particularly to Trump):
“People are always shouting they want to create a better future. It's not true. The future is an apathetic void of no interest to anyone. The past is full of life, eager to irritate us, provoke and insult us, tempt us to destroy or repaint it. The only reason people want to be masters of the future is to change the past.”
Posted by: GftNC | January 22, 2025 at 02:51 PM
"Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past." —George Orwell
Posted by: CharlesWT | January 22, 2025 at 03:10 PM
About that sermon, this Tennessee Brando clip is pretty much my reaction.
More accurately it's what my reaction would be if I were an agnostic liberal hillbilly musician. The man is correct to say that it's fellow Christians, not people like himself (or me), who stand a chance of getting through to people like his MAGAt friends and neighbors.
A chance, I say. It does depend on what color their Jesus is.
--TP
Posted by: Tony P. | January 22, 2025 at 05:28 PM
Meanwhile, this is an excellent Josh Marshall piece on how the Dems can and should be going after low hanging fruit:
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/democrats-are-surrounded-by-low-hanging-fruit-get-to-it/sharetoken/0c95f42e-a001-4a84-b788-f67f1e4e7d4c
Posted by: GftNC | January 22, 2025 at 05:47 PM
My interests are parochial, so I've just been watching Trump's EOs relating to energy and water. One of the EOs appears to say that federal water in California can only be distributed to Central Valley agriculture and Southern California. "Southern California" covers a lot of ground, and of course he's trying to back up his statement that if the water were allocated differently there would have been enormous supplies (and presumably the infrastructure) to deliver it to the current LA County fires.
Another of the EOs calls for revoking California's waiver that allows it to issue more stringent vehicle emission standards. Part of me looks forward to the SCOTUS case where the Trump administration argues that people living in the LA basin, Denver, New York, and Boston must simply breath more crappy air.
Posted by: Michael Cain | January 22, 2025 at 08:32 PM
Another of the EOs calls for revoking California's waiver that allows it to issue more stringent vehicle emission standards.
He could, maybe, stretch the Interstate Commerce clause to keep California from outright banning the sale of vehicles which don't meet an emission standard more stringent than the Federal one.
But all that likely means is that California enacts a license fee graduated by emissions. Instead of just getting a smog check, you get a smog evaluation, which feeds into your license fee. Make it high enough that it's cheaper to just get the smog system fixed.
Net/net: if you're rich enough, you can ignore that detail. But for new cars, it simply wouldn't be worth the lost sales for the auto companies to roll back the technology they already provide.
Posted by: wj | January 22, 2025 at 09:15 PM
The man is correct to say that it's fellow Christians, not people like himself (or me), who stand a chance of getting through to people like his MAGAt friends and neighbors.
Thanks for posting the Tennessee Brando thing Tony, I very much enjoyed it.
I'm sorry to say that, as a member of a liberal religious community and as someone whose beliefs probably track Bishop Budde's pretty closely, MAGAs don't listen to us either. They likely would not even acknowledge me as a fellow believer.
And, really, they could right about that. They and I might not actually believe the same things, when it comes right down to it.
people living in the LA basin, Denver, New York, and Boston must simply breath more crappy air.
Not unlikely, if they can figure out a way to do that. That's how the immigration stuff is rolling out - Chicago, then NY, then Boston, big cities in blue states. I doubt they'll ever get around to targeting ag workers in rural communities in red states. Those people voted for Trump, so their immigrant labor will probably continue unmolested.
He'll find ways to f***k over us blue state folks until and unless we bend the knee.
Posted by: russell | January 22, 2025 at 10:07 PM
The impact of podcasts on the election according to Bloomberg.
"As Donald Trump was sworn in as the 47th US President on Monday, he was surrounded by his family, donors and wealthy tech executives. Just a few feet farther away stood a political newcomer who’s been credited with encouraging lots of votes: Joe Rogan.
The fact that Rogan, the host of the world’s most popular podcast, watched from the Capitol Rotunda as Republican luminaries like Florida Governor Ron DeSantis were confined to overflow speaks volumes about the new dynamics at play in Washington and the media writ large. Over the past two years, a set of massively popular podcasters and streamers cemented themselves as the new mainstream source of information for millions of young men, and, according to a new Bloomberg analysis, used their perch to rally these constituents in support of Trump and the political right."
The Second Trump Presidency, Brought to You by YouTubers: Podcasters including Joe Rogan, Theo Von and Logan Paul are mobilizing America’s men to lean right. An analysis of over 2,000 videos shows how.
Posted by: CharlesWT | January 23, 2025 at 11:17 AM
But all that likely means is that California enacts a license fee graduated by emissions.
IANAL, but I read some of the EO language as intended to stop things like this. The EO appears (to me) to forbid any action that would disadvantage purchasers of new vehicles that use an ICE. You can only lower emissions from a hydrocarbon-powered ICE so far, especially if CO2 counts. As of this moment, Massachusetts v. EPA still stands so CO2 is a pollutant under the Clean Air Act. How long that is true is an open question. At least one of the current SCOTUS justices has always said Massachusetts was wrongly decided. Changing the Clean Air Act to include the sentence "For the purposes of this Act, carbon dioxide is not a pollutant" may be easy if the Senate drops the filibuster. Maybe not if Republican House members from states already feeling the pinch of climate change don't go along.
Posted by: Michael Cain | January 23, 2025 at 01:50 PM
There's no "federal" issue in how CA sets motor vehicle registration fees/taxes, so just typical Trump bluster.
Of course, the Supremely Deplorable Six might claim otherwise, being Deplorable wastes of oxygen that they are.
Posted by: Snarki, child of Loki | January 23, 2025 at 01:59 PM
There's no "federal" issue in how CA sets motor vehicle registration fees/taxes, so just typical Trump bluster.
You think that, and I think that even if there is a federal interest it is subordinate to California's interest in having both breathable air and attempting to reduce how bad climate change gets. But Trump is going to turn the EPA and DOJ loose to try to win the case that (a) such a registration structure in CA would favor electric vehicles and (b) CA can't favor electric vehicles if the federal government says they can't. And as you say, there's no telling if the Sinister Six will go along with that.
I've read comments by constitutional law professors saying that after the last couple of SCOTUS terms they no longer are sure what they should teach in their con law classes. Another couple of terms and they're going to be in a deeper hole.
Posted by: Michael Cain | January 23, 2025 at 03:59 PM
"I've read comments by constitutional law professors saying that after the last couple of SCOTUS terms they no longer are sure what they should teach in their con law classes."
What to teach?
How to use a sniper rifle.
Posted by: Snarki, child of Loki | January 23, 2025 at 04:02 PM
How to use a sniper rifle.
I am too old to acquire a decent long gun and relearn my long-range shooting skills.
Posted by: Michael Cain | January 23, 2025 at 04:13 PM
We may soon see the RWers on the court trying to declare the 14th invalid because the Confederates were excluded from the process (not to forget the bribes paid to some congressmen for their 'aye' votes). Of course an exception for Thomas has to be made in that.
Posted by: Hartmut | January 23, 2025 at 04:15 PM
contra charles above...
https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2025/01/what-the-2024-presidential-election-looked-like-in-terms-of-all-eligible-voters
Posted by: [email protected] | January 23, 2025 at 05:34 PM
Hartmut,
Yes, the Court has gutted the 15th Amendment, and they are now taking aim at the 14th. The 13th can't be far behind. After all, glibertarians assert people have an individual right to sell themselves into slavery, therefore abolishing it goes against free market principles and individual liberty.
Posted by: bobbyp | January 23, 2025 at 05:39 PM
Josh Marshall again, on how the Jan 6 pardons are a huge problem for Trump:
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-jan-6-pardons-are-a-huge-liability-for-trump/sharetoken/6e1c717a-8cb1-4d27-9cfd-06febe46975f
Posted by: GftNC | January 23, 2025 at 05:41 PM
Open thread... Several years ago South Carolina's large state-owned electric utility abandoned two partially built nuclear power reactors. At that time, the overruns and delays had made the plants so expensive that finishing them made no sense versus buying power from almost any other source. (Kudos to the SC PUC for not falling into the sunk cost trap.) SC announced this week it is looking to sell the partially built reactors. They want the buyer to consist of a consortium of companies that include someone with the ability to handle the construction, someone to handle the operation, someone to handle the financing, and tech companies with data centers to consume the generated power. The state indicated that it has no interest in owning or operating the reactors itself.
Posted by: Michael Cain | January 23, 2025 at 06:42 PM
Gotta say, it makes better sense than building new coal fired plants to power the huge data centers needed for the AI fad. Which probably means TICG will probably weigh in for building the coal fired plants instead. Unless President Musk overrules him.
Posted by: wj | January 23, 2025 at 06:57 PM
Coal's too clean. Tar sand oil and peat can do until something worse can be found.
Waiting for the return of coal powered submarines.
Posted by: Hartmut | January 23, 2025 at 08:47 PM
Meanwhile, I just followed through on the One Tree Planted thing I mentioned in the other post and am now helping them plant 20 trees a month.
It's not much, but it ain't nothing, and it doesn't require convincing anyone else of anything. That's the equivalent of creating an acre of woodland a year once those trees reach maturity.
Posted by: nous | January 23, 2025 at 10:03 PM
Trump demands WHO being renamed before US exit
The White House has sent an official demand to the WHO to change its name to
WHACK (World Health Aid Conspiracy Komintern) before the US leaves the organisation.
"It it essential that the president can claim that the US are truly and finally out of WHACK."
We all could imagine that in The ONION but are we ready yet to imagine that for real too?
If not, please upgrade your imagination in time before it happens.
[/bad pun of the day]
Posted by: Hartmut | January 24, 2025 at 06:06 AM
This, by Matthew Parris (moderate ex Tory MP, used to work for Margaret Thatcher) in Monday's Times:
No one should be making excuses for Trump
Liberals are going soft on the US president but he is a bully who degrades moral statesmanship and will come unstuck
Matthew Parris
Monday January 20 2025, 12.01am, The Times
Fellow liberals, why the tails between legs? As a new president enters the White House we, his former detractors, seem to be responding by beating ourselves up instead of him. We who always believed in constitutional democracy, in justice and decency in politics, are suffering a collapse in morale.
Everywhere you look, columnists, commentators and politicians who only yesterday fervently wanted Kamala Harris to win are now wailing that the victory of Trump and Trumpism is a consequence of the failure of liberalism. This presidential impostor, apparently, is our fault.
My Times colleague Daniel Finkelstein, writing about the Musk-Trump bond last week, went as far as to lament that, “At least part of this is my fault. Or people like me.” Daniel says that Trumpism “is a protest against a centre that has been too complacent and institutions that are falling short”.
Yes, but then again no, because it was ever thus. There is nothing new in the tendency of centrist politics towards smugness, institutions don’t always receive sufficiently wary scrutiny, and I confess to a momentary thrill as Trump lurched, growling, on to the world stage; but a vigorous democracy is capable of disruption without destruction. Margaret Thatcher didn’t threaten to seize other countries’ territories, or encourage an attempted coup when she was felled. She disrupted, yes, but remained a decent citizen and a stickler for the rule of law.
Donald Trump is a slob, a cheat, a lawbreaker, a bully, a careless liar, a cheap jingoist and a very dangerous politician indeed. He appeals to the dark side, the chaos in human nature. His presidency may prove a disaster for the United States and a threat to the free world. This is not the fault of Kamala Harris, or Daniel Finkelstein, or of liberals and liberalism the world over. It’s the fault of one wicked individual and the folly of those who sent him to the White House. They will regret it.
Having just inveighed against the liberal tendency to blame ourselves for a bad situation, I turn now to an even worse tendency: concocting too-clever-by-half arguments for the proposition that this isn’t a bad situation after all. These arguments centre on a word which, if I hear it again, may make me scream. It is “transactional”.
Political analysts are horribly prone to grasp at a big word expressing a commonplace idea in lofty language, then flog it to death. With Bill Clinton it was “triangulation” (how we loved that word!) which meant little more than splitting the difference. From Joe Biden we got “inflection point”, which meant little more than a significant change in direction. Now, with Trump, we have “transactional”, which means making a deal. Of course political leaders have been doing this since history began.
Gosh, Donald Trump is “transactional”! He may be prepared to compromise — genius! And, get this, he may start with a bolder demand than he’ll settle for. Wow! The politics of the flea market — whoever would have thought of that? The conclusion is that we don’t need to worry when he declares he’ll smash world trade with sky-high tariffs. We need take no notice when he threatens to occupy Greenland, or make Canada the 51st state, or deport (he says) 21 million illegal immigrants who are eating hometown Americans’ domestic pets.
His threats to jail Liz Cheney and prosecute his political opponents are only bluster. His (for now) sidekick Elon Musk’s menacing remarks about domestic UK politics are just hot air. It’s all fine because we’ve got a four-syllable word for it: transactional.
Well, not so fast. Demanding more than you expect is something toddlers learn by the age of four. Threatening worse than you’d actually carry through with is something their parents learn early. And offering something your competitor might want in return for something you want from them has been called “trade” since long before the Devil took Jesus up to a mountaintop. We must get over being impressed at our discovery that an American president is “transactional”, note that he is more crudely transactional than most and remember that infantile tantrums aren’t clever and they aren’t funny. Bluffing can be counterproductive.
We should ask, what are the limits? Because there are limits. Says the commentator Jon Sopel: “My only counsel would be not to sweat about what he says, but judge him by what he does.” Up to a point, Jon. Push the technique too far and we end up in a Marrakesh souk, posturing, pouting, walking out, returning, huffing, puffing, wrangling and wheedling — where a realistic price tag might have saved a lot of bother and avoided the risk of a fistfight.
There’s a reason that sophisticated economies prefer honest pricing, and Greenland is not a Moroccan rug. Of course pragmatic politics may involve some bluff, but in a field where failure to agree can mean war or ruin, stupid threats and performative haggling can tip nations and economies into danger.
Worse, this degrades moral statesmanship. I’m a little tired of boastful cynicism about the art of politics. We’re better than that. Not everything is for sale. Not every value is expendable. There are things we will not trade, compromises we will not contemplate, values that abide. Free trade is a great good and tariffs are a last resort, not (in Trump’s phrase) a “beautiful word”. Immigrants are human beings, they bleed, as do you or I. Mexicans have their pride, as all nations do. Politicians should not be above the law. Institutions matter. Due process and sanctity of contract are key to a successful modern democracy.
These may be ideals, things to aim for rather than require, but they are of account. Trump in his person, and Trumpism as a pursuit, holds — even boasts — that they are of no account. He debases an idea of America that one of the president’s predecessors, John F Kennedy, however flawed, helped define in the minds of ordinary people the world over.
If there’s any sense in which we liberals might be at fault, it is this: liberalism can be too eager to look for the hidden good in transparently bad people. A little less understanding of the new president, and a little more contempt, is called for.
Nobody should be making excuses for this man. Nobody should kid themselves that he’s only ever bluffing. Nobody should admire insolence, cruelty and braggadocio as tools of statesmanship. To liberals, democrats and moderates (and to those conservatives who believe truth matters and the rule of law is the bedrock of civilisation) I say chins up. Stiffen your spines. Believe. History will find this Caliban out.
Posted by: GftNC | January 24, 2025 at 10:38 AM
Existing coal-fired plants' retirement dates are already being extended, or dropped entirely. One of the reasons given in some cases is to meet the burgeoning demand from data centers. This seems odd, at least to me, because all of the big companies have indicated they want to purchase no-carbon electricity.
Posted by: Michael Cain | January 24, 2025 at 10:49 AM
History will find this Caliban out.
I basically agree with this, and with everything Parris said above.
But that said, a lot of stuff is going to get broken before Caliban leaves the stage. And we (Americans, certainly) need to be prepared for that.
Posted by: russell | January 24, 2025 at 11:14 AM
Existing coal-fired plants' retirement dates are already being extended, or dropped entirely. One of the reasons given in some cases is to meet the burgeoning demand from data centers. This seems odd, at least to me, because all of the big companies have indicated they want to purchase no-carbon electricity. [Emphasis added]
They may sincerely want to. But the reality is that the data centers required to run AI are simply huge. Specifically, their power demands are huge. And they are proliferating like mad. Eventually, there may be sufficient no-carbon power generation capacity. But we're nowhere near that now, and new capacity on that scale takes years to roll out.
Sure, they could figure out that AI isn't to the point that it's cost effective. But it's the fad du jour, and nobody wants to miss out. Or even be seen to be missing out.
Posted by: wj | January 24, 2025 at 11:51 AM
I am reading a book on Baruch Spinoza.
Spinoza wrote in the mid-17th Century. He is one of the titans of secular philosophy:
he laid out an explicit case for keeping church and state separate, he insisted that humans were part of Nature and subject to its rules, and his writings were among the cornerstones of the Enlightenment.
It is profoundly disconcerting to read about him and his work right now, while our kleptocrat MOTUs and their nitwit followers are busily dismantling the Enlightenment before our very eyes.
Posted by: CaseyL | January 24, 2025 at 01:18 PM
But that said, a lot of stuff is going to get broken before Caliban leaves the stage. And we (Americans, certainly) need to be prepared for that.
I believe I got the term "chaos monkey" from you, russell, when you were describing Boston drivers. But that is the term I've adopted to describe that which now occupies the White House.
He's shutting down federal agencies that perform functions he has no practical understanding of. He's blackmailing state governments to implement his preferred policies by threatening to without emergency aid. He's freed members of private militias who attacked our Capitol on his behalf. I've seen reports that immigrant raids are being conducted without warrants on his orders. All of this in a matter of days.
I don't know where this is all headed. I don't know if there is sufficient institutional wherewithal to curb him. Whether this all meets whatever definition of fascism, it might as well if things continue in this direction.
Will midterm elections happen in a free and fair way without undue challenge? Will they matter, regardless of outcome? Will legislation matter? Will a conviction after impeachment be able to remove him? What can courts do if there's no one to enforce their rulings?
If you have the cops, the military, and the militia wackos on your side, what's to stop you if you have no respect for the law (or believe you are the source of law)?
Posted by: hairshirthedonist | January 24, 2025 at 01:41 PM
But that said, a lot of stuff is going to get broken before Caliban leaves the stage. And we (Americans, certainly) need to be prepared for that.
Very true. And while of course it's mainly Americans in the first place, the world and its institutions need to be prepared as well. It's going to be a wild and terrible ride, and who knows where we'll all end up.
Posted by: GftNC | January 24, 2025 at 01:52 PM
And what hsh said.
Posted by: GftNC | January 24, 2025 at 01:54 PM
"Chaos monkey" actually comes from Netflix IT, where it describes software and processes designed to deliberately break stuff to see how resilient the system is.
So, a good analogy for our current situation. We'll see how resilient the system is.
Trump has no fucking idea what he's doing, other than to smash and punish anything he personally doesn't like. That's actually going to affect a lot of people, and far from all of them will be liberals and blue staters.
So I think there will be a shelf life for all of this bullshit. I have no idea how long that shelf life will be, but I'll be suprised if he gets through all four years without a lot of people becoming disenchanted with the whole MAGA thing.
Or at least with Trump, personally. The true MAGA hard core will likely just find some other focus for their resentment and hostility. Or, they'll just freaking suffer and kiss his ass anyway.
But a lot of stuff is going to get broken, and we need to be prepared for that. I think that is probably going to mean finding ways to help each other out from our own resources, rather than rely on up-to-now existing federal or other governmental actors.
Which should make the libertarians happy, but I'm not sure there are local or private replacements for things like the NIH or FEMA or NOAA.
And none of that even gets into the loss of this country's international standing. As we step back from institutions like the UN and the WHO and the Paris agreements, other countries will likely step in. Trading partners will basically get sick of putting up with the bullshit and find other partners and markets. Net/net, we'll be less important, which might not be (*might* not be, depending on who the "others" are) a bad thing in all cases, but probably won't be good for us.
We have a weird way of electing our President, and we have a population that is remarkably ignorant of basic economics, civics, and history, and is profoundly ignorant of and frankly doesn't give a crap about other countries and cultures. Plus, a lot of people whose general position in the world really has declined, and who love having somebody to hate for that.
And so here we are. It's gonna suck, no way around it.
Posted by: russell | January 24, 2025 at 02:02 PM
the world and its institutions need to be prepared as well.
My first thought in all of this is that the EU (and Europe generally) needs to assume that we are no longer a reliable partner, and they therefore need to take steps immediately if not sooner to guarantee their own security.
See also, Russia.
And I think that is already sinking in. Seriously, they (and probably the UK as well) must be getting sick and tired of having to re-evaluate the state of the world every time US leadership switches between (D) and (R).
In any case, should it go that way, our loss, their gain.
Posted by: russell | January 24, 2025 at 02:08 PM
So, a good analogy for our current situation.
Even more than I knew.
Posted by: hairshirthedonist | January 24, 2025 at 02:13 PM
Spinoza wrote in the mid-17th Century. He is one of the titans of secular philosophy:
he laid out an explicit case for keeping church and state separate, he insisted that humans were part of Nature and subject to its rules, and his writings were among the cornerstones of the Enlightenment.
I've seen Spinoza mentioned a lot in my current research into environmental ethics. His biocentric cosmology had a significant influence on Emerson, and from there on through John Muir and Aldo Leopold and Arne Naess straight into the heart of modern environmentalism.
The anti-environmentalists, meanwhile, oppose biocentrism as a fuzzy, pantheistic tendency that is anti-human. This meshes with the religious right's longstanding paranoia about the New Age movement and provides the right with a lot of fodder for conspiracy mongering by groups like the Heartland Institute. It's a mess.
I'm starting to wonder if the big left/right split in Christianity isn't a split along biocentric/anthropocentric lines, with the left seeing humans as one part of God's creation, and the right seeing nature as a temporary and inconsequential backdrop against which humans play out the divine plan - the focus on the individual soul strips away all sense of community except as it applies to collective human relations to God.
Posted by: nous | January 24, 2025 at 02:20 PM
nous - I did a lot of thinking about that split, the split between bio- and anthropo- centrism, after reading what Spinoza (and other philosophers of his time) said about miracles.
Briefly: Spinoza hedged his words but clearly didn't believe in miracles per se, as they violated Nature. He stated quite plainly that Biblical miracles were cases of people simply not understanding the natural forces involved, and making stuff up to explain the events. So, yeah, definitely a biocentrist!
And that got me thinking pretty hard, about living in a world where hardly anyone is a biocentrist: where everything is a mystery and the only explanation is God. I cannot imagine living like that, knowing nothing beyond the simple facts of everyday life, having no greater context in which to see and understand the world.
It's not merely insane, to live and think like that.
It's dull, boring, and devoid of wonder.
Wonder, to me, is contemplating the vastness of the universe, the vastness of geological time, the changes and ripples and waves every epochal event triggers throughout life-on-Earth and through the universe.
Seeing the world through a literalist, evangelical, neo-medieval lens is like being stuck in a small room, lit only by candlelight, full of smoke and stink.
(Like Plato's cave, only much more limited!)
It's mind boggling how many people want to live in that small room - and infuriating that they insist on the rest of us being stuck there with them.
Posted by: CaseyL | January 24, 2025 at 03:13 PM
But the reality is that the data centers required to run AI are simply huge.... Eventually, there may be sufficient no-carbon power generation capacity. But we're nowhere near that now, and new capacity on that scale takes years to roll out.
For the first ten months of 2024, generation in the Western Interconnect states* was 54% from low-carbon sources, 35% from natural gas, 12% from coal, then some dribs and drabs**. Numbers don't add to 100% because of rounding. The split in 2014 was 42% low-carbon, 30% natural gas, and 27% coal. Total generation in the WI increased by 16% over that ten years. The WI may well be able to meet data center demand with renewables. Farther east, particularly east of the Mississippi River, things may be more difficult. The MISO and PJM regional authorities are projecting summer shortages within a couple of years.
One of the reasons that the big AI guys are looking at buying their own nuclear power stations is that given their size, the only contracts they can get from utilities will require the data centers to drop off the grid when there are shortages.
* Numbers are by summing state generation, which doesn't exactly align with the interconnect boundaries.
** Data from EIA 923 reports.
Posted by: Michael Cain | January 24, 2025 at 05:08 PM
Wonder, to me, is contemplating the vastness of the universe, the vastness of geological time, the changes and ripples and waves every epochal event triggers throughout life-on-Earth and through the universe.
Works on an ever smaller scales as well. The ideas behind a 100-billion transistor integrated circuit are mind-boggling. Of course, I'm easy to impress. When I taught the fundamental theorem of the calculus, I always told students how amazing this was. We took one approach to develop differentiation; another approach to develop integration; then it turns out that as operators on functions, they're inverses of each other (plus-or-minus a constant :^)).
Posted by: Michael Cain | January 24, 2025 at 05:21 PM
Wonder, to me, is contemplating the vastness of the universe, the vastness of geological time, the changes and ripples and waves every epochal event triggers throughout life-on-Earth and through the universe.
I've heard Richard Dawkins say almost exactly this, when countering the scorn and condescension of certain theists. It certainly speaks to me.
nous, I think your final para @02.20 is exactly right.
Posted by: GftNC | January 24, 2025 at 05:38 PM
I know quite a few of you here read the Guardian, but for any who don't this is Robert Reich today, headlined Trump’s neofascism is here now. Here are 10 things you can do to resist:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jan/24/trump-fascism-what-to-do
A lot of it echoes stuff that e.g. nous and russell have talked about, but this is the way it ends:
10. Keep the faith. Do not give up on America
Remember, Trump won the popular vote by only one and a half points. By any historical measure, this was a squeaker. In the House, the Republicans’ five-seat lead is the smallest since the Great Depression. In the Senate, Republicans lost half of 2024’s competitive Senate races, including in four states Trump won.
America has deep problems, to be sure. Which is why we can’t give up on it – or give up the fights for social justice, equal political rights, equal opportunity and the rule of law. The forces of Trumpian repression and neofascism would like nothing better than for us to give up. Then they’d win it all. But we cannot allow them to.
We will never give up.
What is giving me hope now
Finding room in life for joy, fun and laughter. We cannot let Trump and his darkness take over. Just as it’s important not to give up the fight, it’s critically important to take care of ourselves. If we obsess about Trump and fall down the rabbit hole of outrage, worry and anxiety, we won’t be able to keep fighting.
Posted by: GftNC | January 24, 2025 at 07:30 PM
I hesitate to offer this comment, because I have no desire to initiate arguments about god or religion. I recognize and respect the fact that most here are not religious or believers in god.
But as a data point, and nothing more than a data point, CaseyL's eloquent description of the things that give rise to a sense of wonder for him, resonate with me as well.
Nous' biocentric / anthrocentric analysis of the left / right split within Christianity is interesting, and I think apt, but maybe not exactly right. My own sense, or impression, is that liberal Christians are more likely to have a sense of humility about their own status as creatures like every other created thing. At most, they are stewards of the given world, responsible for its care and preservation. So not biocentric, exactly, but also not anthrocentric. Creation-centric, perhaps, with a sense of responsibility toward all of that.
I'm sorry to say that the more conservative / literalist / fundamentalist communities are prone to seeing the world as something to dominate and use.
These are generalizations, of course. There are exceptions everywhere.
And as noted above, all of this is offered as a set data points in case they are of interest, rather than invitations to argument.
Posted by: russell | January 25, 2025 at 12:30 AM
I took a class at UMaine about twenty-five years ago called "This Sacred Earth," which an anthology of the same name as its text:
This Sacred Earth
One of the best and most interesting books I've ever read, if anyone has the time/patience for it. That's where I first read Annie Dillard's essay Teaching a Stone to Talk.
"We are here to witness."
(Possibly repeating myself ...)
Posted by: JanieM | January 25, 2025 at 12:48 AM
PS the book reference was inspired by russell's 12:30, in case that wasn't obvious.
Posted by: JanieM | January 25, 2025 at 12:48 AM
I'm sorry to say that the more conservative / literalist / fundamentalist communities are prone to seeing the world as something to dominate and use.
I don't know about religions generally, but Abrahamic religions start from:
And typically generalize it to plants and non-living parts of our environment without conscious thought.** It's Old Testament (Genesis). But Christian "fundamentalists" routinely ignore the New Testament as much as possible.
Posted by: wj | January 25, 2025 at 02:43 AM