I think this is a slight misreading. Economic calamity after 08 gave space for reactionary resentment politics to emerge as a driving force of democratic politics. Here w/ TeaParty/Trump and in Europe: AfD-Germany, Lega/5 star-Itay, National Front-France, Brexit...
Basically the 08 crisis destabilized politics in the center, creating problems for moderate parties on left and right. For ex. GOP “moderates” ala the Romney wing gradually lost control of the party. In France, the fringy National Front/Rally became leading party on the right...
AfD pulled from the SPD labor base. The left wing Syriza in Greece came to power after centrist parties failed.
But now with a major socio-economic calamity... a true oh s*** moment...populists everywhere are flailing.
The big question is whether this is temporary. My fear is that populists are down now... but if there’s another follow on economic crisis populists could capitalize.
Worth remembering that the Nazi party emerged politically after econ crises of early 20s. Yet it only took power in 1933, 4yrs after 1929 econ crash and did so w/ just 1/3rd of the vote. It was a fringe presence that was able to capitalize on disaffection with mainstream parties.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
To clarify, many of Ukraine’s ardent backers in DC are never Trump Rs that attacked the Biden admin from the right. But this group is politically homeless. Biden is the HAWK in US politics. Meanwhile, the Trump/GOP are filled w/ China-firsters, neo-isolationists, withholding aid.
The never trumpets were listened to by Ukraine. But the challenge for the Biden admin was that when GOP took congress they had to spend 18 months groveling for a supplemental. They also had a Pentagon that really doesn’t care that much and is hyper China focused. Therefore…
Some NATO summit thoughts. Overall, it was a drama-less summit (at least on substance). Admin did a good job setting Ukrainian expectations, limiting acrimony, and focusing on NATO’s historic role. But summit was also a missed opportunity to set a new course. Thread. 1/
Let’s start with the deliverables. First, the Ukraine aid (air defense, etc) and the security agreements and compact are significant. NATO coordinating Ukraine aid less so (is the US doing a bad job???) but may insulate coordination in event of Trump. 2/
Second, actual purpose of this summit is highly technocratic; checking in regional plan implementation (not the sexiest deliverable because classified!). Apparently, going well, yay! (Though not quite sure how since no one has any ammo anymore.) 3/
My main take away from the European Parliamentary elections is that it is kinda hard to have a grand European take away. Lots of cross-cutting trends that makes me think the general direction of travel Europe is basically okay. Some misc thoughts/caveats. 1/
1. The big caveat is France and Germany. Europe's two most important countries are a political mess. Berlin's dysfunction has been a huge problem for the EU. Now Paris c/d be as well.
The EU is not just France and Germany but it can't work without them either. With all eyes in France now, it is also critical in Germany for either Greens or SDP to become viable CDU coalition partners before next election.
The chaos in the House leaves Ukraine in a dangerous limbo.
Let’s be clear, if the US congress does not pass a funding bill, Ukraine will be in deep trouble. A lot of Ukrainians will die and their ability to fight on will be severely compromised. Here’s why… 🧵
Without funding the US will not be able to rapidly supply Ukrainian forces. The US is currently doing this through “Presidential Drawdown Authority” which enables POTUS to take equipment from US military stocks and send to Ukraine. That enables rapid supply. 2/
Congress last fiscal year raised the ceiling on the amount POTUS can take from the US mil stocks from $100 Million to $14.5 BILLION. Huge! But when the FY23 ended on Oct 1st, drawdown authority went back to $100 million… which is basically nothing. 3/
Does any one have any sense of what is going on with the Ukraine supplemental??? I see @PunchbowlNews and @JakeSherman reporting we're now heading to a govt shutdown. This does not seem to bode well for Ukraine funding... which seems nowhere. 1/ punchbowl.news/archive/72623-…
To fund Ukraine McCarthy w/d have to bring a supplemental appropriation for Ukraine up for a floor vote. That will be difficult for him, as it will divide his caucus. Alternatively, congress c/d plus up reg State/DoD sec asst budgets. But this c/d run up vs. debt ceiling deal. 2/
But where's the White House supplemental request? Money for Ukraine is likely close to running out. In May, @reporterjoe and others @politico reported there was only $6bn left. 3/ politico.com/news/2023/05/1…
A quick thread on European arms shipments to Ukraine. It’s both impressive and disappointing. What folks are missing is this is all about money. The US has allocated funds, the EU has not (it’s now out of EU funding). This means US arms flow, while European arms don’t 1/
For ex, this announcement is possible b/c Congress passed bills allocating $50+bn to support Ukraine. This $600m is thee admin just drawing down from that funding and implementing the bill. The funding is what enables the US to give away equipment. Europe doesn’t have that. 2/
You might say - you don’t need funding to give away equipment! That’s true! But what happens is that the defense bureaucracy is instinctively (and often vigorously) against giving stuff away. Why? Because how do they replace it, from what pot of money, from which supplier. 3/