It’s not grabbing the headlines, as it’s been coming for months. But this is still a disastrous decision for America and the world. I wrote and talked about the history of the World Health Organization and its relationship to the U.S. several times over the past few months 1/
In May, I wrote about Trump attacking the WHO for the @washingtonpost, why it would only exacerbate the problems that have always hampered WHO’s effectiveness, and what the history of global public health can tell us about the best way forward. 2/
I wrote an essay for @G_der_Gegenwart (in German) on the history of the WHO, the international community’s response to the threat of epidemics – and why the West needs to break out of the cycle of panic and neglect if we really care about global health. 3/
This longer essay just came out in @redaktionmerkur, on the international response to pandemics from Cholera to Covid-19, emphasized how unusual that moment in the mid-1940s was when the idea of “world health” animated many of those who founded the WHO. 4/ merkur-zeitschrift.de/2020/06/23/das…
Here’s an interview with @swissinfo_de (available in several languages) about why much of the critique of the World Health Organization is based on a misunderstanding of the organization’s past and present. 5/
Back in May I went on the #InfectiousHistorians podcast to talk about the idea of global health and why the founding of the WHO in 1948 marked an important moment in the history of global health politics. 6/
Also from mid-June, this wide-ranging conversation with @dg_history on the political responses to and repercussions of Covid-19 starts with a 15-minute talk on pandemics in global history and the place of the World Health Organization in that story 8/
Finally, if you’re interested in a much more detailed exploration of the story, here’s my book on the history of global health politics in the 20th century (in German, unfortunately – although I’m working on getting an English version published) 9/ wallstein-verlag.de/9783835319196-…
I don’t have anything to add beyond what I’ve written or said publicly already – and I know we’re all pretty tired and have become numb to much of what is going on… But this is still really bad: It has the potential to harm a lot of people - while helping absolutely no one. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In the MAGA imagination, America is simultaneously threatened by outsiders – invaders who are “poisoning the blood” of the nation, as Trump has put it – and by the “enemy within.” The core promise of Trumpism is to purge those inherently connected “threats.”
To the Trumpists, the “enemy within” - those radical “leftists” and “globalists” – are as acutely dangerous as the invaders from without.
In order to restore the nation to former glory, to Make America Great Again, it has as to be “purified” – the enemies have to be purged.
According to the Trumpists, only the providential leader can guide the nation to its re-birth and former glory – “Only I,” Trump loves to say. The rightwing base is all in on this, fiercely loyal to Trump personally, bound to him by a cult of personality.
What does the U.S. look like in five or ten years?
I was asked to reflect on this question, alongside other scholars. In a stable democracy, the range of plausible outcomes is narrow. But for America, it now includes complete democratic breakdown.
There should not have been any doubt about the intention of the Trumpists. They desire to erect a form of plebiscitary autocracy, constantly invoking the true “will of the people” while aggressively narrowing the boundaries of who gets to belong and whose rights are recognized.
At every turn, the response to the rise of Trumpism has been hampered by a lack of political imagination – a lingering sense that “It cannot happen here” (or not anymore), fueled by a deep-seated mythology of exceptionalism, progress gospel, and willful historical ignorance.
I wrote about why even critical observers underestimated the speed and scope of the Trumpist assault, why they overestimated democratic resilience – about what America is now, and what comes next?
New piece (link below)
I take stock of where we are after two months of Trumpist rule, explore that space between (no longer) democracy and full-scale autocracy where America exists now, reflect on what competitive authoritarianism means in theory and practice, and recalibrate my expectations.
I revisit “The Path to Authoritarianism,” a crucial essay Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way published in Foreign Affairs in early February. It captured their expectations at the outset of the Trumpist regime – a powerful warning that has nevertheless been overtaken by events already.
People who claim Zelensky was at fault yesterday and should have been more “diplomatic” or “respectful” are either deliberately propagating the Trumpist attack line – or they fundamentally misunderstand what the Trumpist project is and who is now in power in the United States.
There is this pervasive idea that Trump doesn’t really mean it, has no real position, and can therefore be steered and manipulated by tactical and diplomatic finesse; or maybe he’s just a businessman looking for a great deal. But that’s all irrelevant here.
Trump himself has been very consistent about his preference for foreign autocrats, especially Putin, and his (at best) disinterest and siding with Ukraine and (actually) explicit antagonism towards not only Zelensky, but Europe’s democracies more generally.
MAGA, the German Far Right, and the Transnational Assault on Democracy
A reflection on the German far right, Musk’s interference in the German election, and why the MAGA-AfD alliance isn’t nearly as irresistible as they want us to believe.
Some thoughts (and link below):
🧵
The results of the German election are in. On the one hand: About three quarters of the voting public stuck with democratic parties. On the other: The AfD got 20.8 percent of the vote - by far the strongest result the far right has achieved in Germany since 1945.
After it was founded in 2013, the AfD quickly evolved from what was initially mainstream-rightwing-to-reactionary territory into a far-right party that fully rejects liberal democracy and is undoubtedly the political home of Germany’s rightwing extremists.
I wrote a long profile of him: He’s one of the architects of Project 2025, an avowed Christian nationalist, and a radical ideologue of the “post-constitutional” Right
Vought is at war with pluralistic democracy (link below):
🧵
Vought will be singularly focused on bending the entire government machine to Trump’s will. He believes that any check on the power of Donald Trump, who Vought literally describes as a “gift of God,” is illegitimate. There is no line he doesn’t feel justified to cross.
Key to understanding Vought’s worldview is the idea that the constitutional order - and with it the “natural” order itself - has been destroyed: The revolution has already happened, “the Left” won. Therefore, conservatives err when they try to preserve what is no more.