Department of depressing juxtapositions, NYT trending edition:
The first piece there is my column, about Biden’s supply-side crises and mistakes, where I write:
The second is an extremely popular, helpful article on avoiding counterfeit masks, which would be unnecessary if the supply chain for good masks was clearer, and if you could just get them free from the gov. nytimes.com/article/covid-…
I've seen a lot of people link to my piece with Tip O'Neill's old aphorism that "all politics is local."
I don't think that's quite right. It's that local politics is increasingly national. nytimes.com/2022/01/09/opi…
I talked with @JakeMGrumbach for the piece, who's forthcoming book, "Laboratories Against Democracy," is all about this. He had a line I didn't end up getting into the column, but have been thinking about since:
As he put it, this moment is unique in how much "national conflict is playing out through subnational institutions."
It reminds me of the old line about war: Amateurs talk strategy; professionals talk logistics. Right now, Trumpists are talking logistics.
“These local races that determine the mechanics of American democracy are the ventilation shaft in the Republican death star. These races get zero national attention. They hardly get local attention. Turnout is often lower than 20%.” - @benwikler
What Substack and other newsletters have brought back is the long blog essay. That's a great form, and I'm thrilled to see it revived.
But that was always a small fraction of blogging, and it wasn't what built the ecosystem.
So much of blogging was "Link + quick comment."
The sites that built the blogosphere as a conversational ecosystem — Instapundit, Atrios, Daily Dish — specialized in that. But we all did a lot of it. And it created maps and conversations for readers to follow.
Another example: It looks like CDC is going to revisit ending quarantine after 5 days without a test. But there isn't an available supply of rapid tests in many areas.
So we're going to have possibly infectious people driving from drugstore to drugstore, looking?
I enjoyed this @VitalikButerin post on the Bulldozer vs. Vetocracy axis, but I think the problem is vetocracies are, by nature, complex and opaque, and people often don't even know the vetocracies shaping their lives. vitalik.eth.limo/general/2021/1…
Which is to say: This might be a good way of thinking about the problems of different societies, i.e., China's has bulldozer problems, America has vetocracy problems.
But I'm skeptical it's a good way of thinking about individual or even collective preferences.
Also: People's preference for veto points tend to change a lot with who's in power. I don't find that irrational or insincere, as some do, but it makes it harder to pinpoint an abstract preference in the area.