1/I haven't yet read @mattyglesias' book, "One Billion Americans". But this book review, by @jakebackpack, contains what I think are a number of conceptual mistakes, so I thought it would be useful to go through some of these.
2/Bacharach faults Yglesias for not presenting a "theory of political power or change" -- a road map for turning his vision into political reality.
But that seems like it's far too much to expect of any book about policy.
3/First of all, policy thinkers may not understand politics well. And the people who are good at turning ideas into reality may not be the best at coming up with ideas in the first place.
It's OK to have a division of labor between policy people and politics people!
4/Much of the review is a personal criticism of Yglesias. But when Bacharach does level a specific criticism of Yglesias' acumen, it turns out to be something that EZRA KLEIN, not Yglesias, got wrong!
How does that make sense? Ezra Klein is not Matt Yglesias!
5/When addressing the substance of the book, Bacharach asserts that Yglesias' idea to upgrade 2nd-tier research universities with federal funding (something I've long argued for) won't help the surrounding regions. But no actual evidence is presented!
6/Bacharach has anecdotes for regions that (supposedly) have not been revitalized by the nearby presence of universities.
And yet it's easy to find examples of regions that *have* been revitalized, even by small low-ranked universities.
10/In other words, something that Bacharach assumes is politically impossible is not only possible, but JUST HAPPENED. (It also came close to happening in California but failed.)
11/Finally, I would like to note that when writing a book review, before I assert that a phrase does not appear in the book, I make sure to do a word search.
If I have a physical copy, I avoid making strong claims about what does not appear. ;-)
12/To sum up, this review:
1. is an impressionistic personal broadside against Yglesias,
2. stumbles badly when discussing specific policy issues, and
3. demands a "theory of change" yet ignores the reality of actual change now taking place.
Feel like Blu*sky is a microcosm for all of American liberalism right now. The entire left-of-center became defined by cancel culture. Now the spaces where that culture exists are shrinking under external attack, but everyone on the left just stays within those shrinking spaces.
There was this big idea that social media was this infinitely powerful tool that allowed a small # of progressives to shame a huge number of Americans into accepting their values. For a decade it seemed to be working. But it overreached and collapsed.
But progressives got addicted to that seemingly infinite power. They forgot everything else. They forgot how to persuade. They forgot how to organize. They forgot how to compromise. They thought the only tool they would ever need again was heckling and shunning on social media.
2/Most of the discourse around China in Western media these days is about U.S.-China competition (e.g. this podcast by @DKThomp and @RushDoshi). But I thought I'd write about something a little more positive -- the idea that China is building The Future.
2/After Covid, there was a general sense that America needed to be REBUILT -- not just from the pandemic, but from the aftermath of the Great Recession, the Rust Belt, and decades of institutional decay.
3/People argued about HOW to rebuild America. Naturally, progressives thought it would be more government-directed, while conservatives thought it would come from the private sector and from defense spending.
This is a very subtle and interesting question. It seems clear that right-wing interest in personal health is a response to the terrible health of non-college Americans. And the rightists are trying to invent an alternative approach that resists the hegemony of academia.
The fact is, college-educated Americans tend to be hypocritical about health. They watch what they eat, get lots of exercise, and try to eat "organic", but they preach fat acceptance and a disability-based approach to poor health. Rightists don't know how to deal with that.
In fact, this is representative of a broader pattern. College-educated progressives get married and stay marriage, but denigrate the idea of marriage. They work hard but denigrate the idea of hard work. Their personal success is based on rampant, galloping hypocrisy.
1/Here's something a lot of people I talk to don't understand about Japanese urbanism, and why Japanese cities are so special.
2/Japanese cities feel different than big, dense cities elsewhere -- NYC, London, and Paris, but also other Asian cities like Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Singapore.
There are many reasons for this, but today I'll focus on one: Zakkyo buildings.
3/When many people think of "mixed-use development", they think of stores on the first floor, apartments on the higher floors. This is sometimes called "shop-top housing" or "over-store apartments".
This is how most cities in the world do mixed-use development.