Went to the Holocaust Museum and learned something new:

1. The Nazis passed hundreds of anti-Semitic laws in their first year in power, but most were relatively minor and allowed for exemptions of popular groups (e.g., Jewish WWI veterans); some were even rolled back. 2. The non-Nazis in Hitler's cabinet ("moderate conservatives") convinced him to reverse several policies (like a permanent boycott on Jewish stores) by making pragmatic arguments about the implications for Germany's economy.

America went from exporting democracy to exporting amateur coups. Yes, protesters in Brazil have their own grievances, but without 1/6/21 there's no 1/8/23. Bolsonaro and his supporters modeled themselves on you know who. And regularly received his support. Not to mention talk of "election fraud" and military intervention.

These are the results of the less important state races in Florida. The 18% margin of victory is comparable to Louisiana and Nebraska. Even if you factor in a relatively poor election year for Democrats, Florida is like Kansas and Missouri. So much for being a swing state. Democrats should also be very concerned about New York and New Jersey. A lot of the people running for reelection in both states did 10+% worse than they did last time. Even if you account for a poor national climate, that's a huge loss. No guarantee those voters return in 2024.

People can disagree about many political topics. But someone refusing to acknowledge defeat and trying to stack election-related positions with authoritarian conmen isn't a political dispute - it's an existential one. My family didn't flee one dictatorship to live in another one. Even if you agree with those authoritarian conmen on the issues today, who's to say you will tomorrow? Except it will be too late to vote them out of office. They have no loyalty to any ideology or their own supporters. Once they're in power, their only goal is to stay there.

An independent Russian media outlet - @mediazona_en - compiled data about Russian military casualties in Ukraine by Russian region. I have data on Russian elections and protests. Anyone interested in some basic correlations? Or are the results too obvious? en.zona.media/article/2022/0… I have lots of numbers. None of them surprising. The best predictor of Russian military deaths per capita is the region's transfer rate (what portion of a region's budget comes from the federal government). Right behind that is regional rural unemployment. Some simple crosstabs:

One thing I haven't seen much about is why Russia retaliated more strongly after attacks on Crimea than attacks on Belgorod (Russian for 4 centuries). The obvious answer is this is less about Russian security and more about Putin's prestige. Crimea is his in a way Belgorod isn't. Putin sees Crimea (and by extension the bridge that connects it to Russia) as a fundamental part of his legacy. Attacks against it undermines this legacy (along with the propaganda that went with the annexation). Consequently, losing Crimea would be politically fatal for Putin.

There's a disconnect between the ostensibly high public support for the war and Russia's inability to recruit troops to fight it. The situation in Russia is much closer to the US in 2005 than the US after 9/11. Clear implications for actual public support. nytimes.com/2022/07/10/wor… Most Russians don't seem to have much sympathy for the situation Ukrainian civilians are finding themselves in, but those same Russians are unwilling to pay more than a token price to wage this war. They're going to be very upset if the economy keeps crashing thanks to the war.

School shootings are not normal. Not outside of the US.

*I excluded shootings in colleges and shootings that had no school-age fatalities.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_sh… 17 fatal school shootings in 29 months means 1 fatal shooting every 51 days. Most (large) developed countries have 1 or 2 in their entire history. And those 1 or 2 led to major legislative efforts to prevent future shootings.

I hear allowing Russia to annex the Crimea and to occupy parts of Donetsk and Lugansk for 8 years really stabilized the West's relationship with Russia and made Russia become a more productive member of the international community. Just like allowing Russia to occupy Abkhazia and S. Ossetia (along with nearby territories) totally ended Russian belligerence. As did a global non-response to Russia's occupation of Moldova's Transnistria region.

Russians dislike the '90s because of the poverty and inflation. I doubt most even remember about NATO expansion. Support for the Russian opposition dried up because the economy improved under Putin, the country became more stable, and because Putin cracked down on the opposition.

https://twitter.com/RStatecraft/status/1528526122819936256

The idea that Russia today would be more democratic and less aggressive if it had a bunch of weak but revanchist neighbors in the west is inconsistent with pretty much everything we know about contagion. Or Russia for that matter.

A clearly fraudulent group on Facebook is giving out "free" airline tickets. They're asking everyone who responds (over 600k people at this point) to log in to their fraudulent website. I report the scam. Facebook doesn't believe it's a scam. These are our tech overlords. Here's the page: m.facebook.com/Southwest-Air-…

Is enabling fraud on a massive scale consistent with the @fbsecurity mission? Especially when the people who fall for this tend to be the most vulnerable members of society.

Since a certain newspaper insists in paying an exorbitant amount of money to people who know virtually nothing about the topics they write about, here's an old thread about the accuracy of Clash of Civilizations.

https://twitter.com/grudkev/status/844306294525841414

A thread on the kind of things that do predict war. The top one being contiguity.

https://mobile.twitter.com/grudkev/status/889865201830559745

It can both be true that there are a lot of people in Russia who support Putin's war against Ukraine (mostly because nonstop propaganda is very effective) and that Putin is entirely responsible for this war. If anyone but Putin was in power, this war would be extremely unlikely. Anyone who thinks the Russian people should just "snap out of it" should try convincing a relative to switch their vote from an R to a D (or vice versa). Now imagine doing that in a country where all dissenting viewpoints are criminalized.

Belarus held a referendum last month to change its constitution. The new constitution removed Belarus's neutral and non-nuclear status. These were strange changes in a constitution that focused on restructuring the Belarusian regime. Now we know why. abcnews.go.com/International/… The wording of the new constitution was approved in December 2021. The only plausible reason for changing Belarus's neutral and non-nuclear status would be because Lukashenka was already made aware of an imminent Russian war against Ukraine. bbc.com/russian/news-5…

What's the probability of Russia invading Estonia today?

Would that probability be different if Estonia wasn't in NATO?

And that's why NATO expanded eastward. The reason we're witnessing a tragedy in Ukraine and worrying about a NATO-Russian war is not because NATO expanded too much, but because it expanded too little. With fewer targets for Russian aggression, there would be far less antagonism between Russia and NATO today.

The ruling party of South Africa refuses to call what Russia is doing in Ukraine a war, refuses to blame Russia for initiating the war, and is most concerned about a private South African broadcaster removing Russian propaganda from South African airwaves. India, despite seeking to improve ties with the US, has been unwilling to condemn Russian aggression against Ukraine. wsj.com/articles/russi…

Basic math would suggest there's a huge overlap between people who want to risk nuclear war and people who complain about paying $3.50 for gas. This is arguably the first war waged in real-time on social media. Instead of hearing updates once a day on CNN, we see horrors every minute. And that understandably evokes a desire to do something and do it fast. That's not a recipe for good policy, esp. with so much at stake.

When I teach foreign policy, I go over the role of history in constraining the choices of current leaders. It's easier (politically) to justify attacking a historical economy. Fighting for a cause consistent with national values carries a lower political risk if things go wrong. The same factors affect troop recruitmemt and their morale. Rulers can ignore these constraints (just like they can ignore other ones), but at the expense of popular support and fighting effectiveness. If a conflict ends quickly and successfully, these things won't matter.

After Ukraine, Kazakhstan has the largest number of ethnic Russians on its territory. And just like in Ukraine, most live near the Russian border.

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1497368313873133570

Coincidentally, my piece on Kazakhstan after the January protests has just been published by @east_asia_forum. Domestically, the negative effects of the Russian intervention will be short-lived. But the underlying causes of the protests aren't going away. eastasiaforum.org/2022/02/26/tok…

I'm still not seeing anyone who's arguing that NATO expansion caused the current Ukraine crisis provide a counterfactual of what eastern/central Europe would look like in the absence of that expansion. You don't have to go back very far to see a Russian/Soviet leader argue that Poland and Estonia pose a security challenge that can only be resolved through conquest. Does any major power wake up one day and decide it has no more security challenges to address?

Russia had elections in mid Sep. Based on pre-election polls, early results, and statistical evidence, Putin's United Russia party fared worse than at any point since 2003. 1.5 months later, Russia began moving additional troops to its border with Ukraine. cnbc.com/2021/11/17/the… As paranoid as Putin might be of NATO intentions, he must realize that the biggest threat to his rule are his own people, not NATO. It's not a coincidence that the pre and post-election period coincided with the biggest crackdown on dissent since Soviet times.