Articles of interest
1. Matt Yglesias points out that as America’s conservatives are rejecting YIMBYism, Canada’s conservative are embracing the freedom to build.
Aitchison is not alone on the Canadian right. Conservative MP Raquel Dancho questioned the incumbent housing minister on land use regulation in Parliament on April 5, while interim party leader Candice Bergen said on April 7: “Canada’s housing crisis can’t be left up to municipalities to solve on their own. We need federal leadership to build more supply.” Pierre Poilievre, another leadership candidate, said that under his fiscal plans, “if they want more federal money, these big-city politicians will need to approve more homebuilding.”
2. Sadly, Miami’s commissioners do not believe in YIMBYism:
Miami commissioners voted 4-1 last week in favor of an ordinance that would essentially force developers to build more parking.
“This is not a pedestrian and bicycle city,” Commissioner Manolo Reyes said. “we don’t have a mass transit system, period.”
Reyes went on to complain that people were parking in front of his house due to a lack of parking space. . . .
Commissioners are going against a recommendation of a Miami zoning task force, which recommended further reducing minimum parking requirements. . . .
They also overrode the Planning and Zoning Board, which voted against the plan. One member of that board called the proposal “garbage.”
Requiring more parking will make housing even less affordable to build in Miami, and smaller developments might become completely unviable, advocates say.
3. Janan Ganesh has an excellent article on the value of optimism:
The modern world is said to over-reward academic intelligence, and so it does. Of the most successful people I know, though, none are the very smartest in their organisations, much less their generational cohorts. Beyond a certain cognitive level, another trait seems to become more decisive. “Optimism” is the crispest word for it, but it gives a banal ring to what is a complex and eerie mental gift: the sifting for good news among the bad, the willingness to magnify and even invent some, the reinterpretation of adverse events as what one had wanted all along.
It can border on self-deception. But it also gets people through the night. And the most underrated component of success is continuing to show up.
Ganesh speaks of optimism in instrumental terms, as an aid to success. I’d go further and argue that optimism is success. Listed in order of importance in generating utility, I’d say:
1. Optimism
2. Beauty (and more broadly physical advantages such as talent in sports and dancing)
3. Wealth
4. Intelligence
Progressives worried about “inequality” should worry most of all about optimism inequality, then beauty inequality, then wealth, then intelligence.
4. This tweet hits the nail on the head:
5. I’m not sure if FBI agents believe that black lives matter, but I have no doubt that they believe wealthy lives matter:
When FBI agents served a search warrant at Abou-Khatwa’s home in Kalorama Heights, a swanky D.C. neighborhood “favored by diplomats and power brokers,” there was no answer at the door. But instead of breaching the front door, the agents went around the back to preserve “the aesthetics” of an “affluent neighborhood.”
While that issue was not part of Abou-Khatwa’s appeal, Millett said, “I found this deeply disturbing.” When it became clear that a forced entry was necessary, an FBI agent testified, “the decision was made, since it was an affluent neighborhood,” to do it inconspicuously. “Due to the aesthetics of the neighborhood,” he said, “we decided to use a rear entrance so as to maintain the integrity of the front of the residence.”
6. Literally NOTHING surprises me anymore. Polls suggest that Americans are much more likely to blame the US for the Ukraine war than are residents of Europe or Brazil? I don’t even recognize my country any longer.
Take a deep breath; gotta maintain my optimism here . . .
7. Unfortunately, the “man on horseback” is on the rise all over the world. The Economist has a good review of a new book by Gideon Rachman, entitled “The Age of the Strongman.”
Mr Rachman argues convincingly that the strongman style is a continuum, in which its exponents’ affinities are amplified or muffled by the particular political system in which each operates. . . .
The harm is not just to the people they oppress or the national political systems that they corrode. Strongmen also chip away at global institutions, international norms and multilateral co-operation. Many are suspicious of free trade. Few are inclined to endure much inconvenience to curb climate change. They are prone to adventurism and aggression in foreign policy—witness Mr Putin’s murderous invasion of Ukraine.
Putin supporter Viktor Orban was just re-elected in Hungary, a country that’s just barely holding on to democracy. Putin supporter Marine Le Pen might win in France, and Putin admirer Donald Trump is likely to win in 2024. He privately told his aides that he intended to pull out of NATO if re-elected. Putin cannot defeat the Ukrainians, but he can seduce the West.
It’s getting harder to be optimistic. . . .
8. The Economist has an interesting article discussing how Putin’s views changed over time:
[T]he onset of the covid-19 pandemic two years ago brought a raising of the ideological stakes. At the time, the most discussed aspect of the constitutional changes that Mr Putin finagled in July 2020 was that they effectively removed all limits on his term in office. But they also installed new ideological norms: gay marriage was banned, Russian enshrined as the “language of the state-forming people” and God given an official place in the nation’s heritage.
Mr Putin’s long subsequent periods of isolation seem to have firmed up the transformation. He is said to have lost much of his interest in current affairs and become preoccupied instead with history, paying particular heed to figures like Konstantin Leontyev, an ultra-reactionary 19th-century visionary who admired hierarchy and monarchy, cringed at democratic uniformity and believed in the freezing of time. One of the few people he appears to have spent time with is Yuri Kovalchuk, a close friend who controls a vast media group. According to Russian journalists they discussed Mr Putin’s mission to restore unity between Russia and Ukraine.
It also feels like China’s gone to a much darker place since the onset of Covid. Someday, we are going to wake up and find that we miss globalization.
9. Even here in Orange County the forces of darkness are getting closer each day. Our local multiplex cinema is showing The Kashmir Files. This is from a review in The Economist:
These other casualties get no mention in the film. Instead, within its first 15 minutes we see Muslims betraying Hindu neighbours, chanting “Convert or die!”, beating Pandit children and visiting unspeakable (but apparently not unfilmable) acts of savagery upon women. By the end of the film it is not just the awfulness of Muslims that is doggedly bludgeoned into viewers. So is the perfidy of whiny leftists, intellectuals and politicians who dare suggest that Muslims, who are 95% of the Kashmir Valley’s population, might be victims of a sort, too. Small wonder that in cinemas across India hot-headed youths, many of whom appear to belong to extreme Hindu-nationalist groups, are making rousing sectarian speeches.
The purpose of these films seems to be to whip up enthusiasm for oppressing India’s Muslims. Lots of people here in Orange County support Putin, Xi Jinping and/or Modi. These people are all around us.
But I try to remain optimistic. I’m relatively old, and thus I may avoid seeing the full impact of the rising wave of nationalism.
Tags:
18. April 2022 at 11:25
2. So not only are they required to have parking spots they might not need, the Commission can shake down any developer for concessions and more if they decide to try for an exemption on it. Ugh.
5. That might have just been the whims of the FBI agents in question, but it is disturbing. Assuming there was anything more than that, it could just be that rich folks are more likely to sue and get a friendly ear from government officials if their front door gets knocked down.
7. I can’t see Le Pen winning in the run-off against Macron. It’s probably going to be like last time, with him winning something like 60-65% of the vote – with much of the French left holding their nose and voting against the far-right candidate.
18. April 2022 at 11:57
Can conservative tell me why a the cost of a business vehicle (including interest) needed to earn more money is fully tax deductible but my investment in a degree to also earn more money is not?
18. April 2022 at 12:06
Brett, This is the way our legal system works. Rich drug users get “rehab”, poor drug users get prison. Also cocaine/crack—the examples are endless.
Randomize, The treatment should be symmetrical, but note that education is currently massively subsidized.
18. April 2022 at 13:15
Of course, I miss at least two other options for people to blame in the survey: The European Union and Germany under Steinmeier, Scholz, Schröder, Merkel.
And the survey’s design is wrong; you can only name one culprit. And it’s not even a person, it’s a whole country. If one could only name one person, then of course it would be shocking that the result is not 80-100% Putin all the way.
In another survey that would allow several culprits, it might be positive to look for the blame also in oneself and not only in others.
Not to mention that one has the best information about one’s own country’s dirty deals and therefore an information advantage. I just know too much stuff about Schröder, Steinmeier, Scholz and Merkel. So it’s hard not to blame them.
This is also the case in Germany. I recently had a drug dealer as a patient. He was really big in business, cocaine in large quantities. He got 3 years psychiatric rehabilitation. And 2 of these 3 years were on probation. Kind of absurd compared to other penalties I know of.
But he said you only get that with very expensive lawyers. His lawyer ended up costing him almost 200,000€ for a few trial days. The lawyer used about every trick in the book.
The rich are often treated differently than the poor. What exactly is the message here? How would someone really change that? The rich people have money and they will make the money work for them. I don’t see what the simple solution is supposed to be. Money always seems to find a way.
You have partially given the reasons in point 3: This drug dealer was handsome, nice, eloquent, sympathetic, rich, and intelligent. And now we are supposed to be surprised that such a person gets a different punishment than someone who is ugly, vicious, stupid, brazen, impudent and who annoys and accosts the judge. Well, think again.
However, this only works up to a certain limit. People are known to be sensitive about certain injustices. When it comes out, it’s often a scandal. And even a “Ted Bundy” also ends up on death row eventually. It might take a few decades though…
18. April 2022 at 13:18
It’s hard to be optimistic, but at least the last 60-70 years has allowed a billion or so humans to enjoy the most comfortable lives in all of history, and some fraction of that group has done some interesting and enjoyable things. Even if it all ends tomorrow, that will still have been true.
Humanity won’t last forever, so any year in which 98% of us aren’t breaking our backs from sunup to sundown is gravy as far as I can tell. Might as well crack open a beer and enjoy what time we have left.
Speaking of physical advantages in sports, I’m sure you will enjoy this breakdown of Pelicans rookie Herb Jones. The sequence at 8:00 is an amazing real-time application of game theory, and play at 4:55 is unreal, like something out of the Matrix.
As Tyler Cowen would say, just watch the whole thing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zayqcbyebrQ
18. April 2022 at 13:42
This continuing shift to the hard right we’re seeing in much of the world reminds me of the Democratic Party in 1994, when a combination of corruption, out of touch, lurching left-wing ideology, and general arrogance and complacency helped lead to the so-called Gingrich revolution. I keep thinking the far right will overreach at some point and the centrists and sensible leftists will go on the attack against the extremists, pushing them back into the shadows. Perhaps this is just wishful thinking, in the short-run.
18. April 2022 at 14:21
John, Thanks, I saw Herb Jones in that play-in game with the Spurs.
18. April 2022 at 14:41
Prediction markets give Macron a 93% chance of winning. I would have preferred Les Republicans, and was extremely disappointed in their performance, but oh well. Hes not Le Pen.
How many Americans today deny the evils of the Viet Cong? Or doubt the fact that Saddam Hussein was a murdering psychopath? Isnt it a good thing about this country that we have reasonable space for criticism about the conflicts we engage in? Sometimes that translates to support for the enemy, an idiotic position. But I wouldn’t have it any other way.
In 2017, the top film in India, and its submission to the Oscar’s, was Newton, an extremely anti government pro democracy film. Recent submissions are less political but not Hindu nationalist in any way. Gully Boy is a celebration of the lower class. And almost every recent film tears down caste barriers in India. Progress in that front is so prevalent that its hardly acknowledged.
Yes, its on the rise, I see it in my own temple. But people carparmentalize. And frankly, the west isn’t helping! Everyone in the US freaked out about random farm reforms in India, reforms that, if implemented, would greatly advance everything about India economy! No one cares during the religious riots.
We have been through the rise of nationalism in the past. It will pass. Your too cynical Scott. Watch more neo realist films. I’ve found they give perspective 🙂
18. April 2022 at 15:52
Aladdin, These swings of the pendulum tend to last for many decades. So while I agree that things will turn around at some point, I suspect the nationalism wave has a lot longer to run. I doubt I’ll live to see the next trend begin.
“Everyone in the US freaked out about random farm reforms in India”
And I get accused of hyperbole!! 🙂
18. April 2022 at 17:04
It gets started at such an early age by irresponsible adults. A nine year old here in China said to me this week: “Is the war in Ukraine still going on?” “Yes, they’re still fighting.” “America’s causing trouble again!” “Er… what?” “That’s what my teacher [i.e. public school teacher] says. America’s inciting trouble.”
18. April 2022 at 17:10
Im just as much of a Yimby as the next guy, but I feel very suspicious of shifting power to a higher more centralised level of government when the lower, more decentralised levels don’t do what we want.
Subsidiarity is important. And who’s to say that I’m a few years the central government won’t swing to do what we don’t like either?
Also, if local people want bad local government, they can have it. That’s democracy.
And even if you agree that municipalities are doing a bad job of regulating local building, why go to the federal level in one jump? The next logical level beyond the municipalities are surely the provinces, not the federal government?
Federal Yimby regulation is just as suspicious as federal minimum wages. (Or any other number of issues that can and thus should be handled at a more local level.)
18. April 2022 at 17:15
Scott, about #6: that’s probably not because Americans hate America, but because Americans think that everything revolves around them.
18. April 2022 at 17:54
Christian List,
Yes, I don’t want to take agency away from Putin, who is evil and has had a corrupting influence on Western politics and ideology. His decision to invade Ukraine is indefensible, and especially given the poor execution, it’s also catastrophic for Russia. But, NATO deserves a lot of blame for the situation in Ukraine, as I’ve previously stated.
Sadly, the US and the rest of NATO have been running extraordinarily stupid foreign polices for decades, and this is just another crisis that could have been averted. Why not, for example, pile the sanctions on while Russia was building up its forces at the Ukrainian border?
We’ve already gone over how stupid it was for the US to insist that Ukraine and Georgia be publicly named future NATO members, despite the fact that Germany and France opposed it. Half-assed commitments can be very dangerous in foreign policy.
And, you’re correct that Germany deserves a lot of blame for shutting down its nuclear power sector and welcoming dependence on Russian petroluem.
Even many very well-informed, intelligent Westerners can’t seem to understand that pushing an alliance right up to Russia’s front door was bound to be provocative. Who are we allied against, when we offer that essentially every country in Europe can join NATO, except for Russia? It’s not that it’s necessarily and “existential threat”, like some simplistic realists would have one believe, but it certainly boxes Russia in and threatens to greatly diminish their power around the world. Russia’s nightmare is that we have a solid NATO block on their western border, and then we start to stage anti-ballistic missiles there to somewhat degrade their strategic nuclear deterrent over time. Sure, they have other means to deliver strategic warheads, but this could be a problem, particularly given the apparent appalling shape of the Russian navy and the rest of its conventional forces.
Mind you, I’m not saying we shouldn’t box Russia in that way. I’m we should either not have expanded NATO, or we should have committed to boxing Russia in from the beginning. This halfway house of European defense is a disaster.
I was opposed to NATO expansion all along, but now that we’ve gone this far, and with Russia led by someone as dangerous as Putin, I think we need to guarantee that Ukraine wins this war, even if it means direct NATO involvement. We can’t allow nuclear powers a free hand, just because they act crazy and threaten to use nukes. We should remind them, behind the scenes at least, that we can use nukes too, and we will obliterate any forces in Ukraine who oppose us by any means necessary.
18. April 2022 at 17:59
“Matt Yglesias points out that as America’s conservatives are rejecting YIMBYism”
Trolling right up front. Just conservatives, right? How about the CA housing shortage? Those damn CA conservatives.
18. April 2022 at 18:07
Randomize whines: “Can conservative tell me why a the cost of a business vehicle (including interest) needed to earn more money is fully tax deductible but my investment in a degree to also earn more money is not?”
Why do you want a conservative to tell you? You won’t believe a liberal? I’m not a conservative but I can tell you. First, it’s the law. Second, you could, if you did it the right way. To deduct business expenses, you must be engaging in a business activity, providing goods and services to the public. Going to college is not, unless you already are in a business activity and it is directly related to furthering your business rather than training you for a new business activity that you aren’t already performing. In short, business expenses are deductible. Personal expenses are not.
18. April 2022 at 18:10
It is possible that if liberal democracies want to remain liberal, we will have to unleash Hell on people like Putin. We can’t always be the squeamish ones, reigned in by our morally superior humanitarian sensibilties. People like Putin take advantage of that.
We should offer a deal such that, Putin must withdraw all forces from Ukraine, without delay. They must sign a treaty in which Ukraine agrees to neutrality, with NATO explicitly taking NATO membership off the table. Formally recognize Crimea as Russian.
If Putin doesn’t accept the deal, let’s destroy the naval base and sink the Black Sea Fleet and kill every Russian soldier in Ukraine.
We shouldn’t forget that Russia is tremendously weaker than the US and NATO, and has far more to lose here. The paradox of nuclear diplomacy is that one must convince one’s adversaries of the willingness to use such weapons, despite the catastrophic consequences. Russia, unless suicidal, does not want to welcome the credible threat of a nuclear volley with NATO.
18. April 2022 at 18:17
That said, it is preferable if Ukraine defeats Russia without direct NATO intervention. I just think we should guarantee that Ukraine does not lose.
18. April 2022 at 19:13
The US doesn’t trust our government anymore. And a lot of that was earned. We had 1 congressional no vote for the Iraq War. And too many other times we’ve been lied to have led to this environment. Personally while I completely blame Putin and accept non of the apologist arguments I still feel better that we now have people opposing the narrative. Most people can’t sort out all these geopolitical games so it’s just a vote on do you trust your government.
I would still have to vote intelligence number 1. Pays a lot better. It’s certainly above physical traits. Correlates strongly with all sorts of Ses outcomes. Being athletic only pays if you are in the top .1% maybe .01%.
(5). Wealthy don’t normally have the same externalities on the rest of society if their drug addicts etc. You don’t get street crime. Wealth most of the time correlates with IQ. It’s their ability to clean up their own mess that makes the difference.
18. April 2022 at 20:50
Zoning laws in most large cities LIMIT the number of parking spaces per apartment. The limit is typically one spot per apartment in order to discourage driving. They often also discourage parking lots by requiring a large portion of the lot be dedicated to grass. Existing parking lots must meet requirements if they are upgraded.
18. April 2022 at 21:22
Matthias, You said:
“Federal Yimby regulation is just as suspicious as federal minimum wages.”
This is actually rather misleading. Would you say the same about the Commerce Clause in the Constitution, which prevents states from restricting imports from other states? Is that suspicious because it interferes with local control? How about the 1st Amendment?
Unfortunately, the framers never envisioned that 20th century Americans would be stupid enough to create zoning laws, hence they did not include a right to build housing on one’s property.
I’m not saying you are wrong about subsidiarity. But we need to decide one way or another. Right now we force states to do bad things like minimum wages and drug laws, but don’t force them to do good things like YIMBY. Choose one or the other. If we are going to choose big government, at least use it wisely. If we are going to choose local control, then let’s do it consistently.
Michael, You said:
“Who are we allied against, when we offer that essentially every country in Europe can join NATO, except for Russia?”
Every well-behaving country can join NATO, including Russia. That is, once they start behaving like a civilized country.
Vince, Liberals are not abandoning YIMBYism. Many never favored it, many are switching in favor.
Sean, You said:
“I would still have to vote intelligence number 1. Pays a lot better.”
You misunderstood what I wrote. Whether intelligence leads to more income has no bearing on whether you get utility directly from intelligence, holding wealth, beauty and optimism fixed.
Ken, My understanding is that today most parking regs cause the number of spaces to exceed the free market equilibrium, although there may be a few cases in the other direction. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable can chime in.
18. April 2022 at 22:02
Scott,
Two points:
1. What makes you think NATO would ever invite Russia to be a member, under any circumstances?
2. What’s the point of having NATO if it’s not organized against Russia?
You seem to want NATO to exist in absence of European geopolitical conflict. But, shouldn’t the European Union play the role you would have NATO play if Russia wasn’t a problem?
18. April 2022 at 22:46
Scott,
Not sure if you saw Tucker Carlson’s promo video for his “End of Men” documentary. It’s getting rave reviews. Trigger warning: if you watch it you may have to repress the urge to rush out to buy a cow and a machine gun.
Matt’s article on YIMBYism was quite good. I tend to agree with him that zoning/housing reform should happen at the state level, but ultimately I think Federal intervention will be necessary. Whether that happens in the courts or through some subtle legislation is up for grabs. I’m not holding my breath. Zoning regulations have only gotten worse in the past 10 years.
19. April 2022 at 02:28
Michael Sandifer,
as you said, the only really serious mistake the US has made was listening to idiot countries like Germany and France. Ukraine would have been in NATO few years ago.
Powerful politicians from Germany and France have very close relations with Russia for decades. Trump and other Americans look like choir boys in comparison. As Tyler Cowen has correctly mentioned several times, it is questionable to count countries like Germany as 100% part of the Western alliance anymore. They are not. These countries are 35-60% pro-Russian infiltrated.
I’m right there with you on the other points. Not helping the Ukrainians hurts the Western agenda immensely. The Sunday speeches about values, democracy, freedom and “never again”, which especially German politicians like to intonate – it is just that: mendacious Sunday speeches. Biden and Scholz are dead to me, and at least Scholz has a lot of blood on his hands.
As one of my favorite German authors wrote a few days ago, who lost both his parents in the Holocaust: the German chancellor can shove his “never again” hypocrisy up there, where the sun doesn’t shine. It is the most mendacious remembrance theater ever.
19. April 2022 at 02:53
#2 I can see the commissioner’s point here. Dropping the requirement to build parking may not result in less car use, but only in parking-less residents using more public areas for parking (He mentioned people were parking in front of his house).
#3 Scott said “Progressives should worry more about optimism inequality” They haven’t figured out yet how to measure and tax this so…
#4 I think the call for student loan forgiveness benefitted greatly from framing it as a hindrance to more people starting more businesses and buying houses.
19. April 2022 at 03:44
– The war in Ukraine shows once more that the interests of Europe and the US are not the same. By blindly following the US Europe is hurting its own interests more than its helps Europe’s interests.
@Christian list:
“Not helping the Ukainians hurts the Western agenda immensely” ? Far from. Helping the Ukraine hurts the western agenda more than people are willing to believe. But to undestand that one has stop listening to the propaganda coming out of the US.
19. April 2022 at 04:39
Willy2,
Of course the situation NATO is in is terrible for all involved. We’ve been slouching toward the worst possible outcomes for post-Soviet Western security for more than a generation.
We should have been much more helpful to Russia after the collapse of the USSR, and instead of expanding NATO, gradually replaced it with an EU that represented a pan European free trade zone that would also aspire to increasingly integrated security cooperation. Instead, we’ve fueled Russian nationalism since the fall of the iron curtain.
It would be far better if the US didn’t have to maintain its NATO commitment, and could more fully pivot to containing China in Asia, but we are where we are.
Within NATO, the US is the indispensable country. We’re the leader and logistical backbone. We’re the European hegemon. Everyone knows that we see European peace as essential to US security, hence the free rider problem.
19. April 2022 at 04:50
Great essay——if one can call the implied doom inherent in this essay “great”.
YIMBYism. This is my favorite. Few realize how anti-yimbyism is so locally driven. One example from rural NJ. My house was built 26 years ago. Everything was approved before built. I wanted to install a gas generated (Generac) back up electrical power system (about 3x3x5 feet in size) after some hurricanes. I was told NO, due to having “too much hard scape”—-??——driveway, patio, pool on 5 acres -there must have been a mistake—-as all was approved. But the “rules” had changed (huh?). “But I am putting it on top of hard scape”. Bla bla—-NO—-shut up or we will make you eliminate some hard scape. I bought a gasoline powered one that was moveable—-that was okay. BTW, they changed the rules back 3 years ago. I have many more stories
Student Debt—it amazes me that colleges are not on the hook at all. They are the beneficiaries. But we MUST go to private colleges—-they are “so nice”. BTW, the smart guys are plumbers and electricians, not the poly sci majors. At least where I live they make as much or more than many lawyers, even doctors. But “knowing how to make or fix machinery” is not part of school curriculum. I like my plumbers, by the way.
Optimism is number one—-and is success in itself. But I cannot tell if one is born with it; or it gets generated by behavior and outcomes that creates it. I think commitment to effort is it’s partner. Re: the other 3, I think we are born with it at various levels, but optimism creates “optimal outcomes”
Re: who is to blame? As a general matter we point fingers—-, I assume we are all at least partially to blame for everything——(and partially to be given credit for good things). We think we know more than we do, we think we are smarter than others, we are very weak at empathizing——-to quote Dylan “no,I,don’t feel that good for the heartaches you embrace, if I were a master thief, perhaps I’d rob them………. And tho I know you’re dissatisfied with your position and your place. Don’t you understand, its not my problem? We need to be self responsible and recognize Borg perfection is a nightmare. The Federalist Papers are good on this subject.
Re:Man on the Horseback——yes, a great illusion——and it goes both ways—-we see more of them than exist—-but many exist.
I am currently reading various histories and historical style novels about the 20th century. What a mess. It seems like we should better off now but It is as if we are determined not to be.
Russia Ukraine reminds me of WW1 for some reason. It feels like “history rhyming”. If so, this century’s prospects do not look so hot.
China. I have often said they are the greatest opportunity cost loss of our time; or “they are running out of time”, and more recently, they exhibit strangeness
US? this could just be a “get off my lawn” reaction. From an old guy. But we seem fractured and as crazy in our own way as we have ever been.
Just look at what I wrote.
19. April 2022 at 05:31
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/chris-queen/2022/04/18/matt-yglesias-wants-to-go-medieval-on-capitalism-n1590600
Comment on this.
19. April 2022 at 06:43
Is Western Liberal Democracy just a phase in the long arc of history, its demise hastened by kudzu-like strangulation of free markets?
By progressives ostensibly promoting Social Justice but with an unspoken, unconscious undercurrent of jealousy?
19. April 2022 at 08:42
Michael Sandifer, 1. Why wouldn’t Russia be allowed to join if it behaved like Canada?
2. The point of NATO is to eliminate war.
David, I believe Germany’s constitution gives landowners the right to build. We need that in our constitution.
Michael Rulle, Kudos for quoting Dylan.
Swope, Yes, I’ll comment. Is there anyone in the world with less of a sense of humor than the guy who wrote that piece? My God! A 3-year old would recognize that Yglesias’s tweet was a joke.
Todd, Yeah, SJW’s like Putin are ruining everything. SMH.
19. April 2022 at 09:11
Scott,
If Russia behaved like Canada, why would Europe need the American hegemon? With gentleman’s borders, why isn’t the EU and related security arrangements the right approach?
I guess I understand that you’d like to see all of Europe in one big, happy continental family with the US, but was this ever a realistic vision?
And what’s in such an arrangment for Americans? Why would we invest, as opposed to allying with the broader EU in conflicts in other parts of the world?
19. April 2022 at 09:33
Optimism, intelligence, and wealth are all correlated, because investment & entrepreneurship requires a high level of confidence in one’s idea (otherwise you cannot act on that idea), and good ideas require intelligence; success on a greater scale also requires a risk-taking personality. The reason most academics are depressed, particularly in the social sciences, is because they chose to pursue a Ph.D. for the wrong reason. To achieve happiness, one must be authentic – that is, they must be honest about their mental capability, their strengths, weaknesses, and so forth. They must recognize that being average or slightly above average is fine, and they can do something practical and purposeful with their life outside of academy. Trying to be something your not, and pursuing something for recognition and adulation from peers, instead of passion, is the best way to live a miserable life. In other words, there are too many academics who became academics because they thought others would admire them, and they thought this admiration – virtue signaling and status waving – would provide them with purpose and happiness. Its really no different than Veblen’s conspicuous consumption. The consumption in this case is simply a degree.
People are also more likely to admire mathematicians, medical scientists, physicists, and philosophers because such degrees require first rate intelligence. Generally, they don’t admire academics with degrees in gender studies, business, econ, geography, social justice, or other busybody disciplines that anyone with average – or slightly above average intelligence can achieve.
There are geniuses in every industry & every profession. There are carpenters and plumbers and bouncers who could destroy you on an IQ test. Christopher Langan is a great example. And he’s not the only one.
19. April 2022 at 10:18
Michael, The ultimate goal is to get the entire world into NATO, and eliminate war (other than civil war). One step at a time.
Before we achieve that nirvana, at least NATO can protect small countries from dangerous predators.
Ricardo, You said:
“To achieve happiness, one must be authentic – that is, they must be honest about their mental capability”
Hmmm, Trump seems pretty happy. And I’ve known plenty of other happy people with unrealistic views of their intelligence. (And vice versa.) Having said that, it’s certainly possible that academics are less happy than average.
You said:
“People are also more likely to admire mathematicians, medical scientists, physicists, and philosophers because such degrees require first rate intelligence. Generally, they don’t admire academics with degrees in gender studies, business, econ, geography, social justice, or other busybody disciplines that anyone with average – or slightly above average intelligence can achieve.”
There are lots of mediocre minds in all fields, including economics, science, medicine, philosophy, sociology etc. And a fair number of brilliant minds in economics and most other fields. (Check out Marginal Revolution if you don’t believe me, but I could cite dozens of other examples.)
These days you need a lot of math to get a PhD in econ. (Too much in my view) People with average intelligence would not have a chance of getting through most programs.
Most people have no idea what philosophers do, or what economists do, or what physicists do, so how could they possibly have an intelligent opinion on the relative merits of people in those fields? Next time you meet a “man on the street”, ask him to describe the good at bad points of ten living philosophers. Heck, ask him if he can name one living philosopher. Many people I meet literally do not know what economics is. They think it has something to do with business. I’m told that not one person in ten even knows what poetry is. (I’m not sure I know.)
19. April 2022 at 11:30
Scott,
You replied:
“Michael, The ultimate goal is to get the entire world into NATO, and eliminate war (other than civil war). One step at a time.
Before we achieve that nirvana, at least NATO can protect small countries from dangerous predators.”
I’m assuming you aren’t serious here. Obviously, there’s no reason to have militaries, much less military alliances if the world has gentleman’s borders.
And which small countries would NATO be protecting if Russia was like Canada? Presumably, the EU would be the best approach to an overarching organization at that point, with military projection focused beyond the EU. In that situation, why would Europe want American leadership on their continent? And there would be no security situation for the US to address in Europe.
Obviously, NATO is just a military alliance. There’s no purpose for a military alliance absent the realistic possibility of military conflict. A post-NATO EU-led collective security body might form a new alliance in Asia, for example, with the US as leader.
19. April 2022 at 13:40
Scott, you said:
“Hmmm, Trump seems pretty happy. And I’ve known plenty of other happy people with unrealistic views of their intelligence. (And vice versa.) Having said that, it’s certainly possible that academics are less happy than average.”
I think Trump is miserable, because he is living anachronistically. He wants to recapture the glorious eighty’s wherein he was loved and adored by the media. Trump dreams of redeeming himself (ever since the early 90’s), and he wants to prove to others that he’s truly exceptional. If Trump were more reflective and authentic, he would recognize that he’s great at real estate, that his mind is best suited for business, and that politics is a more — at least it’s supposed to be — an intellectual pursuit. Furthermore, what you see from “other people” might be what they display publicly, rather than what they feel internally. I don’t believe it is possible for one to be truly content unless they live an authentic life. Rich Western countries are very unhappy, and much of that unhappiness seems to be rooted in their in-authenticity (this would indicate wealth is not really much of a factor). These symptoms manifest themselves on social media. People pretend they are rich, or claim there is no difference between good and bad ideas, presumably because it allows them a shortcut to achieve their goals, in the sense that they can go from beginner to expert without taking time to do the reading; or they pretend that a hierarchy is oppressing their views, or they artificially change their bodies to represent some conception of their dream self; we can see this manifested in other statements too: like men can be pregnant, and that there is no difference at all between a man and a woman. Some social science academics now claim math is oppressive because it only has one right answer.
You said:
“These days you need a lot of math to get a PhD in econ. (Too much in my view) People with average intelligence would not have a chance of getting through most programs”.
This is a good point, but one wonders whether the profession would be better served if modern economists had as much training in Philosophy, or the history thereof, as they do in econometrics. Mathematicians do not consider econometrics advanced mathematics. It’s more or less advanced statistics.
You said:
“Most people have no idea what philosophers do, or what economists do, or what physicists do, so how could they possibly have an intelligent opinion on the relative merits of people in those fields? Next time you meet a “man on the street”, ask him to describe the good at bad points of ten living philosophers. Heck, ask him if he can name one living philosopher. Many people I meet literally do not know what economics is. They think it has something to do with business. I’m told that not one person in ten even knows what poetry is. (I’m not sure I know.)”
Okay, but I remember reading that almost 40% of Americans have a bachelors degree, and I assume over 95% have a high school degree. Therefore, we can conclude these people know the difference between the hard sciences and social sciences. An average college kid concerned about their grade point average will carefully avoid choosing electives in mathematics, chemistry or physics, so clearly the average person knows there is an intellectual difference between subjective art and objective mathematics. Students in High School also quickly learn to fear mathematics and chemistry, predominantly because they know that such classes require more intellectual effort and study time, which means less time playing sports, video games, TikTok, or whatever else they are interested in. An economist would probably call this “opportunity cost”.
I do believe authenticity is an important factor in achieving happiness, otherwise one cannot be content with their life achievements. I believe academics are more depressed than the general population because their ambition exceeds their grasp (not all, but most). I believe they compensate for this feeling of inadequacy, or inability to come to grips with reality, with the Orwellian doublespeak that shields their ego from anxiety (from being wrong).
Sorry if that was hard to read. My English is not as precise as I’d like it to be.
19. April 2022 at 18:42
–“Michael, The ultimate goal is to get the entire world into NATO”–
And this is why there is a war in Ukraine and why some people (even Americans!) are willing to blame America/NATO for it.
To be in NATO is, more or less, to be subject to the United States. There are always going to be countries that will resist that, violently in some cases.
Getting rid of zero sum arms races is our best bet for reducing the possibility/costs of war, but organizations like NATO exacerbate such things.
19. April 2022 at 19:19
Michael, They would obviously protect all their members from a rogue state that defected from NATO. Is that so complicated?
Ricardo, You said:
“If Trump were more reflective and authentic, he would recognize that he’s great at real estate”
He’s terrible at real estate (many bankruptcies), he made his money as an actor. And as a politician. He’s an authentic demagogue.
“This is a good point, but one wonders whether the profession would be better served if modern economists had as much training in Philosophy, or the history thereof,”
I’ve made this point many times.
“Okay, but I remember reading that almost 40% of Americans have a bachelors degree, and I assume over 95% have a high school degree. Therefore, we can conclude these people know the difference between the hard sciences and social sciences.”
You have no idea how wrong you are. I taught in college for years, and most students don’t know much about what economists do or what scientists do. Certainly not enough to judge the merits of these professions.
As far as grades, that has far more to do with how tough the teacher is than how hard the subject is. Many social science profs are softies.
Justin, You said:
“To be in NATO is, more or less, to be subject to the United States.”
Really? So France and Italy are subject to the US but Afghanistan and Iraq and Guatemala are not? Care to explain what you mean by “subject”?
19. April 2022 at 19:56
Scott,
You replied:
“Is that so complicated?”
Instead of assuming I struggle to understand your point, you might want to consider that you’re view is simply unrealistic, to put it as kindly as possible.
Can you give me one example of a mutual defense treaty that wasn’t organized against a specific adversary? Take any era in history or even prehistory.
On the other hand, an organization that aspires to be a frictionless free trade zone with many members that share a currency and that could further integrate politically greatly restrains the scope of conflict between member states. Something like the EU would be the appropriate organization to take the torch from NATO in helping ensure security on the continent, in absence of rogue states.
The whole point of NATO was to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down. That makes no sense if Europe has gentleman’s borders. America has no role in Europe in such a situation, and NATO fundamentally changes without a hegemon.
20. April 2022 at 05:25
I meant to say that due to slow growth in Western Liberal Democracies, there are fewer high-performing free market systems that set a good example for autocracies like Russia, or nationalists like Orban, to aspire to.
And furthermore, that slow growth in countries like Germany is a factor in shrinking defense budgets, creating a power vacuum for dictators like Putin to potentially exploit.
My previous comment wrongly assumed that people could see through to my second-order thinking. I apologize for the lack of clarity.
20. April 2022 at 08:32
Michael, “Instead of assuming I struggle to understand your point, you might want to consider that you’re view is simply unrealistic,”
Well then, I’m glad you understand my point. Your comment has no bearing on anything I said. I never claimed NATO was not originally set up to oppose Russia. I staked out what I thought would be a useful goal for the future of NATO.
Todd, If the Russians were smart they’d aspire to be like Germany.
20. April 2022 at 09:11
@Michael Sandifer:
You asked
How about the Hanseatic League?
@ssumner
Regarding how to measure success: I prefer the Stoic metrics to the Utilitarian.
20. April 2022 at 10:23
Yeah, not really. It’s a typical German absurdity.
The constitutional guarantee of property under Article 14 (1) sentence 1 of the Basic Law includes the right to build on a plot of land without hindrance. However, according to Article 14 (1) sentence 2 of the Basic Law, the right to property is shaped by the legislature, which is why it may restrict the free use of property.
With regard to the right to build, the legislator decided in favor of a fundamental obligation to obtain a permit: A building may only be erected or its substance changed or its use changed or even just demolished if this has been approved by the building authority!!!
Thus, “the right to build is generally under a preventive prohibition with the condition of permission”.
That’s Germany in its very essence: Sentence 1: You can do everything you want to. Sentence 2,3,4,5,6..113: Just kidding, you actually cannot. Everything is extremely regulated and you basically need an official permit if you want to let off a fart.
There is a regulation called “Bebauungsplan”, which is zoning in its most hardcore form. Everything is precisely regulated there. This goes as far as the permitted color of the facade, the permitted types of roofs, the type and color of the windows. The usage of the house of course. How many apartments are allowed in there. How many persons. How many animals. How many farts. How many trees in the front, how many trees in the back. And don’t think that you can just remove some trees. No, no. Everything is regulated. Think of anything: Changes are high that it’s regulated.
Land use is also extremely regulated. There is a famous phrase from the authorities: “building outside settlements is generally forbidden, and all unauthorized buildings are being demolished”.
Not to mention that such a permit will take months, oftentimes years. I’m not kidding here. 2-4 years are not uncommon. It can take forever. You can’t even bribe those fuckers. German officials are hard to bribe, they might take just the attempt very personally, so as a reaction they will never finish.
Think of the worst zoning laws the US has, and changes are high that some huge part of Germany is topping even that. Easily.
20. April 2022 at 11:19
Of course, the U.S. is to blame.
NATO is a military alliance. Any expansion is a direct threat to world peace. Sending 1.5B in arms is not peaceful.
NATO has a long history of bullying nations that don’t submit to western agenda (mostly WEF agenda). Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Somalia, Bosnia, Nicaragua, Guatamala, Russia, North Korea, and so many others are victims of this bully behavior. We, by which I mean the U.S., has changed our policy from self defense to offense. We’ve gone searching for “monsters to destroy”, which is precisely what the framers didn’t want! We justify this offensive approach to foreign policy by telling our citizens that we must fear Russia, as if Russia has any interest in the United States. Economic sanctions are a form of totalitarianism. It’s a form of war.
Wasn’t it Robert Lefevre in his book the nature of man and his government who lambasted NATO and predicted this tyrannical force back in the late 50’s? Are we suprised that another libertarian/austrian, in the mold of our framers, has turned out to be correct yet again?
The Neocon’s are a significant threat to the world, and that is precisely why they have no support. Brazil, India, RU and China are not going to play this game any longer. They don’t have too. They are in a better fiscal position, and they don’t need to bully others to achieve economic output.
But low and behold, the thuggery doesn’t stop with NATO. Take a look at the articles this morning: Time Magazine says “Elon Musk should have been STOPPED”. Hmmm…..”STOPPED”. The article says he should be prosecuted to teach him a lesson. Really? So much for the free market. I wonder why they are so worried about free speech.
The Hill, known for it’s poor writing and dumb articles, writes another dumb article today titled: “Musk says twitter is biased against conservatives – the facts say otherwise”.
The article then explains that an MIT study determines Twitter is biased, but says the bias is “justified” because people are spreading “misinformation”. Yes, all of those scientists with a different opinion are spreading “disinformation and misinformation”. Anyone with a different opinion from the state is spreading “disinformation and misinformation”.
Surely, people can see through this. Didn’t we all read Orwell in High School. Did we not read the Gulag Archipelago in College? Did we all not read about Mao’s little red books?
And WTF are you talking about, when you say you want every country to join NATO. What would be the purpose of NATO if every country joins NATO? That comment is laughable. What the hell are you thinking? That we’ll all live happily ever after under one law, one global governance? The UN is a governments goverment. It’s answerable to nobody. It’s the centralization of power that will return humanity to the dark ages of uniformity. What Utopia are you smoking? Please give me something that.
20. April 2022 at 11:31
Progressives worried about “inequality” should worry most of all about optimism inequality, then beauty inequality, then wealth, then intelligence.
Perhaps so, but I can’t really imagine what could be done to reduce optimism or beauty inequality. Any specific ideas in mind?
While beauty is important, I’m not sure it ranks second. I would rank “interest” above it, in the sense of “taking an interest in various subjects and pastimes”. (I don’t think this is synonymous with intelligence; I’m not particularly intelligent, but I am very interested in a few fields, which has given me a lot of utility.)
For example, lately I’ve been learning Chinese characters using the Heisig method of mnemonics and visual imagery. One character that gave me some trouble recently is 拒; in the Heisig system, the left part is “fingers” and the right part is “giant”. The overall meaning of the character is “refuse”. So “fingers” + “giant” = “refuse”? Hmm…
I was struggling to think of story to link these elements when one day it hit me: Dikembe Mutumbo waving his finger after REFUSING to allow a shot at the rim. Voila, I’ll never forget that!
Now is that “beautiful”? Not really. But solving these little puzzles is interesting as hell, and it literally gets me jumping out of bed to do my 30 minutes of character study with my coffee. Taken together, I feel these moments of discovering something interesting far outweigh the times when I am awestruck by something beautiful. (I’m also a history fanatic, but is history beautiful? I dunno, it’s mostly people killing each other, but again it’s interesting as hell…)
Anyway, my point is that if “interest” is a key generator of pleasure, then one of the biggest destroyers of utility in the modern world has to be the factory-style school system of the last 150 years. It would be hard to design a more effective way of destroying children’s innate curiosity than by force feeding them a flood of disconnected information while being held at gunpoint (grades and vague threats about “one’s future”). Is it any wonder that most adults want nothing to do with math, history, science, or Shakespeare after 12-16 years of being trained like circus animals to perform tricks at the Temple of Right Answers?
To me that sad thing is that most of the debate about education inequality revolves around fighting for the right to inflict more schooling on children — more schooling for rich/poor kids, more schooling for white/black kids, etc. No one seems to give a damn about whether kids leave school with more interest about the world than when they started.
Have you ever read “How Children Fail” by John Holt? You may have heard of him in the 70s; he eventually became a big advocate for homeschooling. While that isn’t a scalable solution, at the end of HCF he did sketch out his vision for a reformed school system. Essentially, public schools would be more like libraries where anyone — not just kids — could come and learn as much as they liked about whatever they chose. I think you would really sympathize with many of Holt’s reactions to schooling (he started teaching as an outsider with no formal training in education).
There’s a book review on HCF at Scott Alexander’s blog:
https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/your-book-review-how-children-fail?s=r
20. April 2022 at 12:31
@Sarah
Hard to respond to something like that. It will be like answering a really stupid wall. But do you really want to serve stereotypes about US Americans?
Bosnia for example has begged for NATO intervention because it was attacked by pro-Russian thugs who applied their typical genocidal massacres to this poor country.
Iraq? NMI is a non-combat mission requested by the Iraqi government.
Egypt? Asked for partnership activities.
Close to every sentence you write only exposes your incredible ignorance and stupidity. My advice for you: Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses.
20. April 2022 at 13:13
John, I agree on schooling.
Christian, Sarah is a Russia troll. Ignore her.
20. April 2022 at 13:36
Hi Scott, in a previous post you said something like “all excessive inflation can be blamed on monetary policy”. Another narrative out there is we should blame federal spending during covid. Those arent mutually exclusive narratives, but what would you say about that argument?
21. April 2022 at 08:32
AM, If the Fed is doing its job, it will tighten policy enough to offset any fiscal stimulus. So excessive inflation is always the Fed’s fault.
The fiscal stimulus was a bad policy, which I opposed. But not because it caused inflation.
21. April 2022 at 08:34
“Nobody can teach anyone anything”, 1971 by W. R. Wees
21. April 2022 at 10:06
Scott,
You replied:
“Your comment has no bearing on anything I said. I never claimed NATO was not originally set up to oppose Russia. I staked out what I thought would be a useful goal for the future of NATO.”
Generally, I think your economics knowledge gives you a good intuition when it comes to foreign policy matters, as economics, and more generally, the role of incentives, are critically important for understanding the subject. Hence, you almost always have good takes.
That said, this is an exception. My reference to the original purpose of NATO is related to my reference to the history of mutual defense pacts. I don’t think any were ever organized without a conflict with specific entities in mind. Such pacts can be difficult enough to credibly organize even with regard to manifest threats at times. Witness the inter-war period, for example. This failure, along with many other examples in Europe are obviously why the US is the indispensable NATO leader.
NATO seemed increasingly wobbly before Putin recently invaded Ukraine. That the US had a President who wanted to withdraw and Germany chose to increase dependence on Russian petroleum are very telling. So, the idea that NATO would hold together if Russia was like Canada is, again to be kind, unrealistic.
21. April 2022 at 10:09
Carl,
You replied:
“How about the Hanseatic League?”
No.
21. April 2022 at 10:38
Anti-nationalism, mutually beneficial increasing economic and political integration under ever stronger international law, is the key to future peace and prosperity in the world. It does require shared liberal values.
Too many right-wingers in the US see this as some sort a national betrayal, failing to understand the nature and purpose of cartelization. Too many left-wingers see this efforts to build such institutions as efforts of the rich world to exploit the poor. Too many in the middle just don’t care.
21. April 2022 at 12:45
@Michael Sandifer
You’re looking for one example of a “mutual defense treaty that wasn’t organized against a specific adversary” but one not like the Hanseatic League. I’m not sure why you think the Hanseatic League fails your criterion but you could also consider the the Inter-American Defense Board, the Economic Community of West African States and so on. It just doesn’t seem that rare a thing in history for a group of countries or townships to form a military alliance often for the purpose of protecting a trading zone.
21. April 2022 at 16:18
Carl,
The Hanseatic League was much more than a mutual defense organization. It was a a free trade zone with mutual defense organized against pirates, etc. It was much closer to an EU than a NATO.
None of your examples have anything to do with the present discussion.
21. April 2022 at 16:26
It’s not a complicated point I’m making. There will be no mutual defense pacts in absence of the bases for militarily conflict. A Europe with nothing, but gentleman’s borders within might have a nutual defense pact for threats from without, but that would be fundamentally different and certainlywouldn’t involve US military bases on the continent.
As I pointed out previously, it has often been historically difficult to organize sufficient mutual defense even against very specific, rising threats, particularly in Europe, which is why the hegemonic leadership of the US is required there. Collective security is very challenging absent a strong leader.
21. April 2022 at 22:49
Thanks Scott. As I’m sure you know, the fiscal policy -> inflation narrative is very popular, e.g. Tyler Cowen, Larry Summers (who you linked recently), John Cochrane. Do you think they agree with you but prefer to call out fiscal policy over monetary, or do they disagree?
22. April 2022 at 04:03
Michael,
A few posts earlier, you wrote something along the lines that the Americans should withdraw, dissolve NATO, and leave the defense task to the Europeans — who are obviously too divided and incompetent for doing so. A little more consistency might be useful?
22. April 2022 at 05:19
Christian List,
Where did write that? Quote and link?
22. April 2022 at 07:04
How else would you read that:
Of course, it would also be better if unicorns excreted gold.
And Putin, of course, would be fine with “NATO” being renamed “EU”.
Unfortunately, this makes no sense at all. The problem is Putin and the Russian Cold War KGB mentality, not the EU or NATO.
The Russians continue to view Eastern Europe as their imperialist playing field, consisting of nations with no will of their own, no own identity, no own rights, not even the right to exist. That is the problem. This problem will not be solved by rebranding NATO into EU.
The problem might be solved by crushing Russia as much as possible though. Take Germany after 1945 as an example. In parts, it might work out. How is Putin calling it? Entnazifizierung. Denazification. Денацификация. Great idea. Let’s do that with Putin and his version of Russia.
22. April 2022 at 07:17
Yesterday, the Somalians woke up to peaceful and Utopian NATO shells falling from the sky. How lovely. But don’t worry, because we are just a “peaceful” club. Those are love bombs.
Peaceful and utopian NATO just sent another 800M in arms to Kiev. That is 2.3B in american tax dollars in less than three years. A NATO official told a Reuters journalist that NATO “cannot be sure how those arms are used”. Hmmm….so we don’t know which battallions are using them, but we know that they aren’t being used to bomb Donbass? That is interesting logic.
Last week, Peaceful and utopian NATO staged the largest ever cybersecurity war games in Estonia, which as you all know is on Russia’s border. But the neocon military industrial complex says there is nothing provactive about that. Yes, I can see that this is not provacative at all. Russia holding war games in Mexico would be perfectly normal.
And just yesterday, the Peaceful and Utopian NATO staged a walkout at the United Nations when Russia (with support) asked for evidence that the bombings in Donbass were a “false flag”.
But guess who didn’t walk out? China, India, Brazil, most of Africa and Eastern Europe, and, of course, Russia.
We are losing support. If intelligence has the evidence, then show it. If not, stop making bizarre political claims that eight years of bombings are an organized “false flag”, and instead recognize that Kiev has played a role (wittingly or unwittingly). Walking out, because you don’t want to engage in facts, is not going to win the hearts and minds.
22. April 2022 at 07:58
Sarah, that was a US airstrike in February against Al Shabab militants. Your creator needs to do some work on you, at least one clock is off.
22. April 2022 at 08:44
Christian,
Thanks for that description of German zoning—particularly in the context of German legal tradition. “Everything that is not prescribed is forbidden” becomes the natural endgame of all zoning regulations in all cultures it seems.
Incidentally, you have a considerably more cynical take on German zoning than what I read about in Sonia Hirt’s book “Zoned in the U.S.A.”
The only thing worse than Zoning is HOA’s….
22. April 2022 at 09:17
David,
thank you, I appreciate that very much.
Yes, the grass is always greener on the other side. But when you’re on the other side? Not so much.
I didn’t talk nonsense either. Bureaucracy can be so extreme in Germany, just ask Elon Musk. And what he got in Brandenburg, Grünheide was the “easy treatment”. We also have many more civil servants, so that’s that. They all need to work on something stupid.
And believe me, I am well versed in building law. My father is a civil engineer, and he was one of the most important civil servants in the construction ministry, first for road construction, then for hydraulic engineering, then for road construction again. (There’s basically no road construction in Germany anymore, so I really wonder what he was doing all day).
He’s also still on the local council and on the building committee of the local municipality. He knows how to build houses. He knows all the tricks when it comes to building applications. Good relationships are very important for German building applications. Then things move forward, but only then.
His credo as a civil servant has always been: We have to find the one paragraph out of thousands that allows building in this specific situation!
But there are equally as many civil servants who work according to the credo: We have to apply thousands of paragraphs that prohibit building. All of them. And one after the other.
So it’s basically a war between those guys – so now we know what they have been doing all day.
22. April 2022 at 09:28
Christian List,
You’re misunderstanding what I wrote. I opposed expansion of NATO, and in the years just after the fall of the USSR, I favored disbanding NATO and offering much more help to Russia and other former Soviet countries. I did want the EU to replace NATO and include much, if not all, of eastern Europe and Turkey.
I didn’t get what I wanted, and since Russia turned dangerous just before 2008, I have favored either pausing NATO expansion, or having every eastern European country join, given a strong commitment to either policy. In other words, since it was too late to avoid permanent geopolitic conflict with Russia, we should have either committed 100% to not making it worse, or 100% to boxing the Russians in and trying to accelerate their decline as a power. Sadly, we made a half commitment to helping Ukraine and Georgia.
At this point, though I didn’t think NATO was counter-productive in the years immediately following the end of the Cold War, today we need it more than at any time since the Cold War, and we must now fully commit to dominating Russia and accelerating its decline.
22. April 2022 at 09:30
“At this point, though I didn’t think NATO was counter-productive in the years immediately following the end of the Cold War, today we need it more than at any time since the Cold War, and we must now fully commit to dominating Russia and accelerating its decline.
That first line should read, “,…though I did think NATO was counter-productive in the years immediately following the end of the Cold War,…”
22. April 2022 at 09:40
Another way of making my point, is that we shouldn’t have spent a generation after the Cold War rubbing Russia’s nose in defeat, and spurring nationalist sentiments and security concerns. It helped set the table for someone like Putin. However, now that we’ve poked the bear enough that it is angry and on the loose, we have to try to kill it with as little damage to ourselves and others as possible.
This is not to say that Russia would not have become a problem in absence of our behavior. No one can know for sure, but it seems it would have been a less likely outcome without creating the problems that we did. Some more aid and other goodwill building gestures were in order.
And I want to separate Putin’s interests from those of Russia. I think Putin sees NATO and EU expansion, particularly on Russia’s border, as an existential threat to him. I don’t think it’s an existential threat to Russia, but I do think reasonable Russian national security analysts and citizens understand that NATO countries all along its western border undermines its power in Europe, and regional power being largely globally fungible, undermines its power globally. Large conventional, and possibly nuclear, and/or anti-ballistic missile missile systems can help give NATO an increasing edge over Russia militarily over time. This is obviously in the context of what is largely a petro state in a world that is largely moving away from demand for petroluem products, and a country that is experiencing population decline.
22. April 2022 at 11:22
@Michael Sandifer
Nobody rubbed Russia’s nose into anything. You’re making two mistakes, you’re just applying your American citizen view.
There are internal Russian movements that you basically can’t influence at all. Don’t just ignore them. Putin already said during his stationing in the GDR that the freedom movement there must be brutally put down. He directly witnessed the fall of the USSR and vowed already back then to reverse it. Nothing you do will change his opinion.
There was also never any Western plan that NATO must be enlarged. There was no NATO “expansion”. It was the view of the Eastern European countries themselves that they desperately wanted to be in NATO. These countries have their own interests and rights. That’s what you seem to forget (2nd mistake). These states knew from the beginning how Russia and Putin tick. These states knew exactly: we have this very short window where we can join and after that we are basically f….
22. April 2022 at 13:14
Christian List,
Yes, I did mention that I cannot say for sure that Russia would not be a problem now, if not for Western provocations. Russia has never proven to have a culture that is friendly toward democracy. But, our behavior did not help.
And I do respect the sovereign will of the eastern European countries that joined NATO and understand why they want to join. That doesn’t mean maintaining NATO was the right decision, much less letting them join.
Of course, one thing we all agree on is that at this point, NATO again serves a critical role in containing Russian aggression in Europe, and as I said, we cannot let Ukraine lose, even if it means we must directly attack Russians in Ukraine, and perhaps elsewhere in the world.
What I mean by “lose” is, we may have to concede Crimea at this point as a part of any peace deal, but we should not cede any new territory. Russia must withdraw all forces in exchange for the lifting of sanctions, Ukrainian neutrality, and recognition of its control of Crimea. They must cease all support of rebel forces in eastern Ukraine and recognize Ukraine in its entirety. If they don’t accept such a deal, the US and NATO should destroy all the Russian forces in Ukraine, including in Crimea and take Crimea back, while sinking the entire Black Sea Fleet, including the naval base in Crimea. While we’re at it, let’s destroy the naval base at Tartus in Syria. We should make it clear, behind the scenes, that these are the consequences of failing to accept our peace deal. We will neuter Russia’s military power internationally, while boxing them in in Europe, and strangle them economically. Any use of weapons of mass destruction will be met with same.
22. April 2022 at 13:52
Michael, If it makes you feel better, after we admit Russia we can focus on China as the biggest threat.
AM, I suspect they disagree with me, although I can’t say why.
22. April 2022 at 14:14
Scott,
The most important thing at this point is that most of us agree that NATO currently has a critical role to play in the security of Europe and that Russia must be contained. It is unfortunate that it turned out this way, but there’s no turning back the clock.
Yes, we do need to focus more resources on military containment of China, but we should not forget to engage as much as possible otherwise.
22. April 2022 at 16:47
I figure they put the blame on fiscal policy because they assume that in a hypothetical scenario with less spending, the Fed would have acted in a way that resulted in less inflation. I have no idea whether thats true or not, but it seems believable.
I also see the point of your model, because it’s the Feds job to control inflation, and Biden’s job involves many other things.
23. April 2022 at 07:27
Michael Sandifer,
I also like to be self-critical. But really, get this out of your head that there were “Western provocations” and that someone like Putin becomes Putin because of Western provocations and that there is a relevant different American super-smart play in 1989-1999 that gives us a very different outcome.
Bush and Obama were not consistent enough on NATO expansion wishes, they listened way too much to heavily Russian-influenced countries like Germany and France, instead of finishing the path consistently and quickly — as you said before, that was the problem. Do it for real and do it fast.
That was close to the only play that really could have been done differently. But even then we could still be where we are today, Putin could just attack anyway. I don’t trust Article 5 and people like Scholz and Biden anyhow. It’s just a piece of paper, really.
Article 5 leaves extreme leeway. It says quite clearly, that someone like Biden and Scholz may decide how their own country reacts. Each country may decide for itself, which makes sense, but it leaves you so much leeway, too.
So by now we already know how someone like Scholz will react if Article 5 is triggered: 2-3 weeks nothing will happen, then a few fuses might come. Maybe even some old Strelas from the former GDR. And then Frank-Walter Steinmeier might give a charity concert. Maybe even two charity concerts.
25. April 2022 at 08:34
Michael, You said:
“Yes, we do need to focus more resources on military containment of China,”
No, we don’t.