Thread by @BaldingsWorld

I forget who said it but one of the truisms of the Trump era was that Trump enemies always sunk to his level and lower. In foreign policy it seems like most everyone automatically lost 20 IQ points because the thinking is so poorly though through. Let's take one example 1/n

The buzz word dominating Acela Corridor think tanks and media (neither the brightest lights in the house) is "allies" to challenge China. As an amorphous vacuous meaningless cliche it's wonderful. However, it stems not from an realistic appraisal of the foreign policy 2/n

Landscape but from a critique of Trump (leave aside the accuracy for now) and a desire for boring peace, love, and kumbaya. The reality is that for numerous reasons, all these supposed "allies" are not nearly the "allies" our media and think tank overlords suppose 3/n

It works because who isn't for allies? What is wrong with you if you question this vacuous devoid of meaning campaign slogan? If you will notice, uttering allies is treated like a force field which protects the speaker from any need to understand the position of said allies 4/n

Rendering them immune from criticism and you a crank conspiracy racist if you disagree with them. For years, I have written about the cracks in the international system and alliances that have existed, that existed under Obama and even before. The bankruptcy of foreign policy 5/n

Is now built upon a philosophy unrealism. A year ago I wrote "we need to rethink what the United States wants and needs from institutions and alliances and how this evolution will need to play out in the brave new great power conflict with China." baldingsworld.com/2019/09/27/wha… 6/n

More broadly, in May 2019 I wrote "The United States needs to rethink how it wants to project its influence abroad; specifically, in support of foreign policy objectives." Overlords say "allies" but have nothing to add about what that means in practice 7/n baldingsworld.com/2019/05/20/a-n…

There are a couple of very real problems that have yet to be acknowledged and that is the post WWII and post Cold War order that served the international liberal order is decidedly creaky and does not enjoy the support or robustness as before. It is perfectly fair to question 8/n

Trump objectives and methods, but the WTO is not a robust, adaptable, or deeply supported institution. Many "alliances" suffer from much greater long term rot with increasingly divergent positions that stray from fundamental values than is appreciated. There is a great demand 9/n

For much more fundamental thinking about US foreign policy and how to achieve objectives in what is clearly a decidedly different environment than what most Acela Corridor Galaxy Brains©️ recognize. Just how empty is the Biden alliance foreign policy philosophy? 10/n

Europe reaching an investment agreement with China before Biden enters the White House would be a giant middle finger to this entire philosophy. At what point to you admit your suppositions are simply wrong and need to be recalibrated? Done.