I wrote a whole book on why democracies become illiberal, but something about America after Trump's indictment really strikes me. Yes, MAGA world is about resentment and ignorance and displaced anger and all that. But it's also a time that seems to me incredibly...juvenile.
🧵/1
Trump hawking t-shirts with his mug shot is like some hair band selling posters of their guy getting busted for drugs or waggling his junk onstage or something. It's beyond unserious. It's child-like, the political version of Oppositional Defiance Disorder. And yet it'll sell. /2
In the book, I argue that peace and affluence have been a big part of America's slide: Life's good and people don't grasp that ghastly decisions can have disastrous effects - including on *them*. Because other adults make sure the nation functions even when the voters go nuts. /3
But maybe peace and affluence, in addition to making people bored out of their skulls, also prevents them developing into adults who make democracy possble. This is the world, as I wrote in the book, in which Huxley wins, not Orwell. (I am stealing Neil Postman's point here.) /4
I suppose you could call all this *decadence*, but it's not even gloriously decadent in that grandiose, Weimar, "Cabaret" kind of decadence. It's just people putting on costumes and hats and being violent and then crying in front of judges when it all goes horribly wrong. /5
Childishness doesn't make voters less dangerous to democracy. But even if Trump is defeated (again), this is a serious level of social dysfunction. You can't sustain a superpower when nearly half of its citizens are mired in eternal petulant childhood. /6
And millions of our oldest citizens, people my age - Trump's most reliable voting bloc - who should be our wisest among us, are the ones most like angry, irrational toddlers (much like Trump himself). This is incomprehensible to me, especially as I get older. /7
In another weird role-switch, these right-wingers are now like the dilettantish countercultural activists of the 60s: well-off would-be revolutionaries who really have no idea what they're doing and merely want to act on ill-defined, self-actualizing, self-centered emotion. /8
Adults, however, know that there were people who came before us, and people who will come after us, and that "the moment" is not supreme. We have a civic inheritance, a trust, to hold and to protect, and then to pass on. This used to be central to the American idea. No longer./9
All we can do is hope that the generations coming up can learn to embrace civic adulthood. I'm (mildly) optimistic - if we get past these next few elections.
But how weird that so many adults now worship - and emulate - a choleric 77 year old toddler./10x
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
When I was a professor at the totally woke Naval War College, I had fellowship 20 yrs ago with the Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs, which produced this very woke study about going to war in places like, say, Iran. Some of my very woke predictions:
/1
"The United States and the regime in Tehran are avowed enemies, and for good reason. Iran not only is trying to acquire nuclear arms, but is a proven state sponsor of terror."
The same people who had an aneurysm about Lloyd Austin going AWOL for two days are going to defend Hegseth, the most reckless and unqualified SECDEF in history, to the bitter end. /1
You know better than this, @cdrsalamander, and I know that from talking to you. Your comments are in bad faith. But for others who are curious, I'll explain.
NWC's curriculum revision 50 years ago was to prevent another civil-military failure on the level of Vietnam. /1
VADM Turner was explicit about this, and it's been a guiding principle ever since to make sure that NWC graduates are intelligent strategic contributors in the room, instead of pure operators who have no idea how to advise or confer with civilians. /2
Sal is focused on about 30 minutes of a 90 minute seminar out of some 20 meetings. But as I told my students: You need to recognize what drives the arguments of the civilians in the room. If you don't, you'll be the guy sent out for coffee while the grownups talk. /3
The Israelis are calling this a "preemptive" strike. Whether you agree or disagree with this attack, these are not - from what we know tonight - "preemptive" strikes. The Israelis are using that word for a reason. Read on. /1
In tradition and international law, a "preemptive" attack is a spoiling attack, meant to strike an enemy who is *imminently* going to strike you. This is what Israel did in 1967, getting the jump on Arab armies that were about to attack. That's usually permissable. /2
What's going on right now are *preventive* strikes, which are usually NOT permissable in law or tradition. This is striking an enemy far in advance, because you believe time and situation is favorable to you. That, for example, is Japan striking the US in 1941. /3