1. I want to make one thing perfectly clear. I'm not against cos-play or LARPing if it is done in the right spirit, as dorky hobbyists who like to dress up on weekends. What I object to is foreign policy LARPing.
2. By foreign policy LARPing I mean the concerted attempt to model USA/China relations on the high cold war. There are signs of this everywhere. A new anonymous "Longer Telegram" (not a telegram but, yes, long) modelled after George Kennan (aka Mr. X)'s long telegram
3. In the Washington Post we hear calls for using putative China threat for a new Sputnik moment of financing education & science. Also, absurdly, a repurposing of NATO to contain China.
4. The NATO argument is a tell. "The alliance has been adrift for years. Countering China would give it focus." In other words we have a military system which serves no real purpose, a solution in search of a problem. China is a convenient problem.
5. If you needed to contain China, the first thing you'd do is strengthen alliances in Asia, not bring in fucking NATO! It's the goddamn North Atlantic Treaty Organization! But Asian countries have little appetite for new USA alliance, so we get Cold War cos-play.
6. The larger logic here is that USA elites are nostalgic for the Cold War -- a period of strong bipartisan consensus and a convenient threat that kept population docile & checked demands for change. More thoughts here: thenation.com/article/world/…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2. The key biographical fact about Sturges, the explanation for his extraordinary ability to capture the comedy of clashing classes, was that he was an economic yo-yo, going from riches to rags to riches to rags etc.
3. Sturges' dad was a stolid stockbroker, his mom a bohemian arty type (& gal pal of Isadora Duncan). So Sturges had a twin inheritance of 19th century stern austerity and modernist expressiveness, which played out in his work
1. Philip Roth's The Ghost Writer has a chapter titled "Married To Tolstoy" about favorite Rothian theme of the pain great writers inflict on the near & dear. Could easily be Married to Dickens, Married to Woolf, Married to Cheever, Married to Naipaul, etc.
2. But if being in the shadow of genius is hazardous, an arms length proximity can be nurturing. Consider Glenn Gould & Robert Fulford who were next door neighbors & best friends at age 9 going forward.
3. By Fulford's account, even when he was 9, everyone around Gould expected great things about him. There was even a teenage Salieri in the neighborhood who bore a grudge against the budding Canadian Mozart.
1. The Lincoln Project. Brooklyn Dad Defiant. That Abramson guy. Truly we are living in The Twilight of the Resistance Grifters.
2. I think @samuelmoyn's analysis of Never Trump holds up really well except he was too generous! In the form of The Lincoln Project, Never Trumpism was pure grift. The recent NY story documents this in detail.
1. Once an author writes a book it might belong to them in terms of copyright but it also belongs to the world as a creation. But some writers try to self-cancel. Some thoughts on this with reference to Rosemary Tonks, Sidney Hook, Kafka, Virgil, Seuss, James Gould Cozzens, etc.
2. Part of the frustration with the cloddish Dr. Seuss discourse is that what is clearly an attempt by estate to do brand management got recast in cultural war terms. But authors do brand management all the time by selecting what to put out into world & what to keep in print.
3. Seuss himself engaged in brand management by not keeping in print such now embarrassing juvenilia as "Boners: By Those Who Pull Them" and "The Pocket Book of Boners."
1. Manchin's often gets profiled as a moderate or a conservative but his actual political stance is a bit odder than that. Being a Dem Senator from a very red state, he's figured out a way vote with his party on major legislation while keeping a distance.
2. I think a lot of Manchin's behavior is more performative than ideological. He has a lot of voters who aren't Dems & don't like the Dems, so he needs to have very visible public spats with Dems. But he rarely abandons Dems on decisive votes.
3. Look at this recent actions. If scuttling Neera Tanden's nomination was the price to pay for a vote for $1.9 trillion stimulus, I'm not going to shed any tears. The trimming of UI top up by 3 weeks was bad, but pales against one of the biggest stimulus in history.
1. As Andrew Cuomo is enmeshed in multiple scandals, there's an interesting inter-Democratic debate about double standards. Dem elected officials have been good about hold Cuomo to account but, as @michelleinbklyn notes, there's some base complaint about "Frankening"
2. We've seen in Trump era not just asymmetric polarization but also asymmetric accountability. Trump & other GOP pols & bigwigs get away with outrageous stuff while lesser Dems offenses get punished. "But her emails," in short.
3. There are divergent ways to handle asymmetric polarizations. Dems could say double standards means we should also go partisan & defend our miscreants against all evidence (i.e. no standards > double standards).