Ian Welsh

The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Russo-Ukraine War Update June 30, 2025

By

On June 30, 2025

Comments

Before we get into the most recent developments of the war between Russia and the Ukraine, I want to focus a little bit about how Russia is outstripping the West technology-wise. We all know necessity is the mother of all invention. And war is the mother of all necessity. The Russians haven’t missed a beat innovating. One of the most terrifying weapon systems in Russia’s developing arsenal are its multifarious thermobaric weapon systems. They now have at least three operating platforms to deliver these utterly destructive weapons. Thermobaric weapons are not illegal under the rules of war. They are accepted as valid and while the Ukrainians might complain, no one is listening.

If you recall the MOAB–so called Mother of all Bombs, was a thermobaric weapon. Thermobaric weapons explode and aerosolize fuel in the air before they ignite. They are designed to destroy bunkers, and killl everyone in them. The United States has not developed them futher, resting on their laurels as they have no need to do so, so they think.

Not so Russia. Here is a primer on thermobaric weapons. Here is a primer in a more Russo-Ukraine conflict context. So far the US has only developed a thermobaric grenade, the MOAB, the Hellfire missile and one for a minor Marine rocket launcher. That is the limit of US innovation.

TOS-1A on a T-72 tank chassis.

The Russians on the other hand have taken things a lot further. First, the MOAB destructive power is 9.8 tonnes. The Russian version, dubbed the FOAB (father), is the equivalent of 44.4 tonnes. But the Russian version of the bomb is overkill and the Russians know it, using it only sparingly. Instead they developed a launch system of 24 thermobaric rockts placed on top of a T-72 tank chassis with a maximum range of about 6 kilometers, called the TOS-1A. Many of the TOS-1A were destroyed early in the war. The TOS-1A could be spotted and destroyed by some of the more advanced counter-artillery weapons systems the West gave the Ukrainians. So, the Russians, as trench, fortified and urban warfare became more prevalent, reboubled their efforts.

TOS-2, mounted on a six wheeled Ural.

The Russians soon upgraded the TOS-1A with the TOS-2. The TOS-2 is based on a wheeled vehicle for better shoot and scoot capability to avoid being blown up by counter battery attacks. The rockets are more lethal–having flecks of magnesium and aluminum to make them hotter (tests are ongoing with nanofuels) and have a range of almost 15 kilometers. It is also equipped with modern sights and target navigation systems, I beleive based on Russia’s GLONASS, their version of GPS satellite targeting. TOS-2 vehicles can self reload, and come equipped with electronic warfare jamming systems. Here is the first of two videos, made within the last two months showing the devastation the TOS-2 system, which recently underwent an upgrade, can do to Ukrainian lines. Here is the second. Warning to the viewer: these are real scenes of war. Viewer discretion advised.

Iskander Misiles topped with thermobaric warheads.

Moreover, even the much vaunted Iskander ballistic missile can be mounted with a 700 kg thermobaric warhead. The list of Russian thermobaric weapons is simply to long to itemize and discuss. The important fact here is that the United States has no answer to weapons like this. The Russians have officially incorporated these fearsome weapons into their artillery doctrine and are now using them all across the front lines to destroy bunkers, trenches and near the front hardened command centers. The results, per the CIA (arguably not the most trustworthy source, but it’s what I got) describe horrifying results:

the effect of a [thermobaric] explosion within confined spaces is immense. Those near the ignition point are [incenerated]. Those at the fringe are likely to suffer many internal, invisible injuries, including burst eardrums and crushed inner ear organs, severe concussions, ruptured lungs and internal organs, and possibly blindness.

Not to mention the harderned structures they are sheltering in collapse on top of them. It has been frequently reported that many Ukrainian soldiers who experience such explosions and survive surrender immediately, the psychological effect is that crippling. The pressure on the front and the Ukrainian infantryman gets greater and greater every day.

Five quick links. This first one is worth everyone’s time because it actually destroys a BBC article based on Russia’s neglect of Mariopol, a town it took early in the war and supposedly has left to rot, per the BBC. The video proves the exact opposite. Watch it here.

Second, brutal attacks on Kremenchuk, and third Russia prepares to storm Pokhrovsk.

Third, a brief summary of Russian advances along the line of contact and a Ukrainian counter-attack.Worth the 3.34 minutes of the video.

Lastly, a pretty respectful and wide ranging conversation between an American interviewer and the Russian ambassador to the UN. Longish but all in English and worth watching. It’s a rare example of no-bullshit in my opinion.

More as it develops.

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – June 29, 2025

By

On June 29, 2025

Comments

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – June 29, 2025

by Tony Wikrent

 

Remembering Bill Moyers: A Colossus of Journalism and Public Service

Jonathan Alter, June 28, 2025 [Washington Monthly]

‘We Have Lost a Giant’: Broadcast Legend Bill Moyers Dies at 91

Jessica Corbett, June 26, 2025 [CommonDreams]

Free Press Mourns Bill Moyers

[Free Press, June 26 2025, via CommonDreams]

The (anti)Federalist Society assault on the Constitution

Amy Coney Barrett and the Supreme Court Give Birth to a Disaster

Garrett Epps, June 27, 2025 [Washington Monthly]

…Three federal district courts concluded that the birthright citizenship order is almost certainly unconstitutional and barred the executive branch from enforcing it pending a final decision. The issue seemed headed to the Supreme Court, where it would be decided in the normal course of American law.

The administration, however, did an end run around that process. It filed an application with the Supreme Court that denied any interest in the issue of the order’s constitutionality. Instead, it said, it wanted the Court to look at whether district courts can tell the president he can’t do something he wants to do—to issue “universal injunctions” barring the government from, for example, stripping citizenship from any baby until the constitutionality of the order can be settled. The two things, the government suggested, have nothing to do with each other….

The Supreme Court Just Gave Trump Three Victories in One Ruling

Matt Ford, June 27, 2025 [The New Republic]

The Supreme Court’s ruling on Friday in Trump v. CASA is a disastrous moment for the American constitutional order. In a 6–3 decision, the court’s conservative justices curbed the judiciary’s power to prevent the executive branch from carrying out blatantly unconstitutional policies and orders.

The court effectively granted Trump three major victories in one stroke. First, the ruling severely narrowed federal judges’ power to temporarily halt the Trump administration’s actions in general, freeing the president from a major constraint on his policy agenda.

In response to lawsuits, lower courts had often issued what are known as “nationwide injunctions,” which blocked the executive branch from enacting a new policy while litigation continued in court. Those injunctions typically applied beyond the plaintiffs in a particular case. But Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the court, held that courts had acted unlawfully by granting relief to anyone beyond the plaintiffs themselves….

The Real Judicial Coup: How the Supreme Court Just Redefined Presidential Authority

Mike Brock, June 27, 2025 [Notes From The Circus]

…Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, has created what amounts to a doctrine of presumptive executive constitutionality. The Court ruled that when a president issues an order that appears to violate the Constitution, courts must assume the president is correct until proven wrong—not once, but individually, circuit by circuit, plaintiff by plaintiff.

Let’s be absolutely clear about what this means: the Supreme Court has ruled that birthright citizenship—guaranteed by the plain text of the 14th Amendment—can be suspended nationwide based solely on a president’s claim of authority, and anyone who wants their constitutional rights restored must file individual lawsuits seeking individual relief.

This isn’t judicial restraint. This is a fundamental rewriting of how constitutional rights work in America….

This represents a systematic advantage for executive power over constitutional constraint through procedural manipulation. It’s not that rights disappear—it’s that protecting them becomes exponentially more difficult and expensive….

“No Right Is Safe”: SCOTUS Bars Judges From Reining in Trump

Shawn Musgrave, June 27 2025 [The Intercept]

The Supreme Court halted courts from issuing national injunctions, forcing “judges to shrug and turn their backs to intermittent lawlessness.”

By Limiting Nationwide Injunctions, Supreme Court Declares ‘Open Season on All Our Rights’

Jessica Corbett, June 27, 2025 [CommonDreams]

In a ruling that stems from the president’s birthright citizenship order, the “conservative supermajority just took away lower courts’ single most powerful tool for reining in the Trump administration’s lawless excesses.”

It’s Not Just a Constitutional Crisis in the Trump Era. It’s Constitutional Failure

Jack Rakove, June 27, 2025

[TW: Rakove is a leading scholar of the creation of the American republic. His 1996 book Original Meanings: Politics and Ideas in the Making of the Constitution dismantled many of the claims of the Constitutional originalism of conservatives, and was awarded the 1997 Pulitzer Prize for History.]

…Our ongoing constitutional crisis began with the presidential election last November 5. Reelecting an individual culpable for January 6 who has twice made a mockery of the presidential oath of office is itself a constitutional crisis. Nothing in his past or current behavior suggests that Trump has ever felt fidelity to his constitutional duties.

Once a constitutional crisis becomes an endemic condition, the term no longer usefully describes our collapsing system. Instead, we live in an era of constitutional failure when the relevant institutions cannot fulfill their responsibilities….

…When audiences at constituent meetings repeatedly shout, “Do your jobs,” they have a better grasp of Congress’s responsibility than their feckless representatives….

In the face of this congressional passivity, what path of constitutional repair is left open? Unsurprisingly, the best answer remains the courts. Although it has taken time to respond to the turmoil Trump has unleashed, the judiciary’s actions have been encouraging. Remarkably, the difference between Republican and Democratic-appointed judges has been slight, suggesting that judicial independence enshrined in Article III may be fulfilled amid this grave situation.

Yet, with the current Supreme Court, one cannot be too confident. Why? Its responses to the two 2024 critical election cases remain deeply troubling to anyone who takes the injunctions of the Constitution seriously.  The Court handled one case with striking expedition. But it manifestly stalled the other with a run-out-the-clock set of procedural delays that deprived voters of findings they were entitled to possess before November 5. The decisions in Trump v. Anderson (which involved the application of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to Trump’s eligibility to appear on the Colorado primary ballot) and Trump v. U.S. (the presidential immunity case) should sit atop any hit list of constitutional failures….

…The second condition seems more surprising. It is the stunning inadequacy of the majority’s understanding of constitutional history and core concepts of American constitutionalism….

In our fractious polity, fresh insults to constitutional norms and settled practices of governance occur daily. That is why the phrase constitutional crisis no longer describes our situation. The Constitution has failed, and we no longer know which institution will rescue it.

Sotomayor joined by Jackson, Kagan on fiery birthright citizenship dissent 

[The Hill, via Naked Capitalism 06-28-2025]

Trump not violating any law

‘He who saves his Country does not violate any Law’

Trump Stuns By Saying ‘I Don’t Know’ When Asked Directly NBC’s Kristen Welker ‘Don’t You Need to Uphold the Constitution?’

Joe DePaolo, May 4th, 2025 [mediaite.com]

Trump’s ICE Agents Are Arresting US Citizens. GOP Budget Would Hire 10,000 More. 

[Truthout, via Naked Capitalism 06-24-2025]

Trump’s secret police are terrorizing American streets: The altercations are growing more tense — especially in Los Angeles.

Justin Glawe, June 27, 2025 [Public Notice]

Militarized LA: troops here to stay as Trump doubles down on deployments 

[The Guardian, via Naked Capitalism 06-24-2025]

Justice Dept. whistleblower details senior officials’ efforts to stonewall judges, ignore decisions 

[CBS News, via Naked Capitalism 06-26-2025]

How To Talk To Your Senators About Emil Bove

Joyce Vance, June 25, 2025 [Civil Discourse]

Meet the D.C. Bigwigs Literally Profiting Off Trump’s Deportations 

[The Bulwark, via Naked Capitalism 06-26-2025]

 

Strategic Political Economy

Solving America’s Chip Manufacturing Crisis

Kenneth Flamm and William B. Bonvillian

American Affairs Volume IX, Number 2 (Summer 2025): 41–68.

[TW: Flamm documented the origins of the U.S. computer industry in his 1998 book, Creating the Computer: government, industry, and high technology, published by the Brookings Institution and available in full online. This book should be required reading for all courses of study in economics and American history because it devastates the myth of “entrepreneurial free enterprise” by showing how it was carefully created and targeted U.S. government programs and funding which allowed the risky new technologies required for computers to reach commercial success and create an entire, new industry. This new article is long and brimming with technical industrial information very few people have mastered, making it an extremely important and informative read. ]

…Economies of scale are the fundamental economic force reshaping industrial structure in leading-edge chip fabrication. For context, note that at the peak of its market power in the global computer processor (CPU) market in the third quarter of 2014, Intel alone produced a record 100 million x86 processors (x86 is Intel’s famous foundational architecture and instruction set for computer processors), implying an annual Intel production rate of somewhere between 300 and 400 million processors….

Intel’s current problems are in part linked to the relentless increase in fabrication equipment costs at every new technology node as well as to the increasing volume of production needed to reach minimum efficient scale at the new nodes. In 2014, Intel’s dominant market position gave it massive volume that was produced at multiple Intel fabs (using the “copy exactly” strategy Intel invented in the 1980s). But by 2023, Intel’s annual x86 processor volumes appear to have dropped 30–50 percent, to 190–230 million sold annually….

…in the early 2000s, Intel began to stray from the vision of its legendary early leaders Robert Noyce, Gordon Moore, and Andy Grove, who focused on fielding the most technically advanced, complex, and capable products on the market.… The connection to Intel’s current woes is that the first decade of the twenty-first century was a distracting one for Intel management. The firm’s resources and managerial attention were diverted into sales and marketing initiatives aimed at defending an entrenched position of market power. The company had lost its singular focus on technical innovation that had been its hallmark under Noyce, Moore, and Grove’s early vision for Intel….

Intel Foundry is not really a case of “too big to fail”; it is a case of “too intertwined with national security to fail.” There are no other U.S. company alternatives to Intel Foundry: the capital costs of entering advanced chip manufacturing, R&D, and production are staggering, the technology challenges and risks are massive, and all of Intel’s former U.S. competitors have by now exited advanced chipmaking. The national security imperative requires that the U.S. government backstop Intel Foundry,…

In addition to the task of supporting Intel Foundry’s commercial success, there is a longer-term financing task.58 The chips Act is a stop­gap measure. It assures some production in the United States of the pending generation of advanced chip processes, but not the following generations of chips.59 It was a onetime law with the authorization running out, as noted, in 2027; and the funding for new fab construction is already committed. The U.S. semiconductor challenge is a long-term one, and CHIPS was an important but decidedly short-term fix….

…Because the federal government refused to engage in a subsidy competition to finance the massive costs of new semiconductor fabs, no new leading-edge logic fabs had been built in the United States for over a decade, and no new leading-edge memory fabs for roughly two decades, before the chips Act.80 Congress passed the chips Act in recognition of this major security vulnerability.

But the chips Act is only authorized for five years, expiring in 2027, and it is not at all clear that it will be renewed….

Congress Is Pushing for a Medicaid Work Requirement. Here’s What Happened When Georgia Tried It. 

[ProPublica, via Naked Capitalism 06-27-2025]

…Georgia, the only state with a Medicaid work mandate, started experimenting with the requirement on July 1, 2023. As the Medicaid program’s two-year anniversary approaches, Georgia has enrolled just a fraction of those eligible, a result health policy researchers largely attribute to bureaucratic hurdles in the state’s work verification system. As of May 2025, approximately 7,500 of the nearly 250,000 eligible Georgians were enrolled, even though state statistics show 64% of that group is working.

Read More

Sean-Paul Kelley

By

On June 29, 2025

Comments

Just a quick word that my friend and ex-boss Sean-Paul Kelley is posting fairly often now. Sean-Paul founded the (now defunct) Agonist blog back in the day, which was very important during the Iraq War. He also gave me my first salaried blogging job as the managing editor of the Agonist. (I received some money for writing at BOPNews, but only some.)

I’m pleased to have him here. Do take the time to read the author byline above posts so you know if it’s him or me. Because almost all writing here has been mine and the blog is titled “Ian Welsh” people often assume all posts are from me. Sean-Paul’s more of an old school blogger than I am. Remember that guest posters are invited in part to give different takes than I would and I don’t pre-approve their posts, unless they’re very infrequent or new.

(Those who remember Mandos will get this. Out of a hundred Mandos posts, I might have agreed with one.) That said, Sean-Paul and I agree about most things.

Open Thread

By

On June 28, 2025

Comments

Use to discuss topics unrelated to recent posts. No vax/anti-vax this week.

Reducing Suffering

By

On June 27, 2025

Comments

As a Canadian, the issue of people removing snow from the sidewalk is a big deal. Some years ago, I lived near a house where they never removed the snow. It piled up until it was almost four feet high, and some partial thaws meant that underneath all that snow was ice. Every time I had to walk in that direction I cursed the owners (there was an SUV that came and went, so I knew it wasn’t uninhabited). One time, I did slip, and I was furious, even though the pain of the fall was minor.

Thing is, I don’t enjoy being furious or upset. Oh, a little anger is sometimes nice enough, but overall it’s an unpleasant feeling unless you’ve been having even worse emotions like fear, despair, powerlessness, or self-pity.

This is what Buddha called the second arrow. If you’ve been shot by an arrow, you’re in pain. If you’re upset that you’ve been shot by an arrow, you’re adding additional suffering.

Let’s run through three scenarios. Imagine each of them briefly, as if they happened to you:

1) You turn a corner and trip over a fallen branch, falling. You’re a little hurt (abraded hands), but basically okay. How upset are you?

2) You slip on some ice someone was supposed to clean up and fall. You’re a little hurt, but basically okay. How upset are you?

3) You’re walking down the street, and someone sticks out their leg and trips you, then laughs at you. You fall, but catch yourself. While a little hurt, you’re basically okay. How upset are you?

If you’re a normal person either (negligence) or (active malevolence) upsets you more. Probably, it’s the asshole who tripped you. (You might also get upset at the branch and kick it, swear at it, or enjoy breaking it, but hopefully not.)

The point here is that being upset makes your suffering worse. It also doesn’t deal with whatever caused the problem. Picking up the branch you tripped over, getting the city to fine the person not shoveling their snow, and either calling the cops or in times and places where it’s allowed, beating the hell out of the guy who tripped you might make sure there are no repeats.

You can do any of those things without being upset, through cold, clear calculation. If you don’t remove the branch, you or someone else could trip over it again. If you don’t convince the homeowner to shovel the snow, same thing. If you don’t make the tripper decide tripping people is a bad idea, he’ll do it again.

Much of why we get upset is that we have expectations about how other people should behave or even how the world should be. (How dare that branch trip you up!) Then, we think that if someone hurts us, we should get upset.

But, again, being upset doesn’t hurt the other person (though a display of anger might make a difference if you can make them scared of you) and doesn’t get them to change their behaviour. Indeed, in the case of the tripper, they want you to be upset. Your anger is part of their reward, just like how online trolls are trying to make you angry.

Being upset does hurt you, though. It makes your suffering worse.

But if you believe you should be upset, you will be.

So the first step is to ask yourself: What benefit there is to being upset? Do this all the time when something makes you upset, just ask yourself, “Does this help? Do I like feeling this?” Maybe you do (usually in the case of anger), but most of the time, the honest answer is gong to be no.

Over time, if you keep doing this, you’ll be upset less and less. You’ll change the reflex.

We add suffering to almost everything. If you get a bad headache and are upset because it “isn’t fair,” that adds suffering to the headache. If you get upset at yourself for doing something stupid, that adds suffering. I used to be like that; I stopped when I realized that, after decades of being harsh with myself, my behaviour hadn’t changed. In other words, being upset when I made a mistake wasn’t reducing the number of mistakes, it was just making me unhappy. (When I did stop being too self-critical, mistakes decreased somewhat, ironically.)

Buddha’s Second Arrow is the low-lying fruit, the easiest way to reduce your suffering — suffering which doesn’t help you deal with whatever issues you face. When you’re cool and calm, you’re more likely to fix whatever the problem is — if it can be fixed — faster and more competently than you are upset.

Pull out the second arrow.

If you’ve read this far, and you read a lot of my articles, you might wish to Subscribe or donate. I’ve written over 3,500 posts, and the site, and Ian, take money to run.

The Term Toxic Masculinity Is Nothing But a Gratuitous Insult to Men

By

On June 27, 2025

Comments

Only a woman with solid feminist bona fides can makethis argument in the modern US. The high-tech economy has leveled the playing field between men and women. This is a great development. But the argument ignores, as does the Democratic party in general, a larger reality: blue-collar men. White-collar men are now indoctrinated in high school and college how to behave around women. But blue-collar men are not. And there are more of them than white-collar Ivy Leaguers. Give the video a watch. It’s refreshing.

 

On a similar note, about American culture in general, this woman makes a very trenchant critique about us: “A culture that believes in nothing and tolerates everything is doomed.” 

The War in Ukraine Enters A New Phase

By

On June 26, 2025

Comments

The Russo-Ukrainian War of 2021-present has entered a new phase. In the wake of the Ukraine’s hybrid/asymmetric attack on Russia’s strategic bomber fleet (a.k.a., Operation Spiderweb), Russia is getting its revenge in the smartest way possible. Russia has begun a massive, month-long air/missile/drone campaign that is systematically attacking command and control centers all over the country. The latest was a Russian X-22 missile attack on a former drilling rig disguised as a seaborne command and control center. A Tu-22M3 Backfire bomber launched the X-22 cruise missile where it reached Mach 4 and then dove into the command center and obliterated it. There are dozens of videos out now on reputable sites indicating this campaign is ongoing and will continue.

Couple that withpolling data coming out of the Ukraine where 73.2 percent of Ukrainians polled believe the conflict should end along the current line of control, and it just gets worse.

This is very, very bad news for Ukraine. This might not be the beginning of the end, but it is the end of the middle.

The site for reasonably unbiased updates is Military TV. But, viewer beware, this is uncensored warfare.

UPDATE: At the St. Petersburg Economic Forum, which I watched in Russian — the translators often miss subtle points. Putin was talking about how Russia always respected Ukraine’s right to independence, and he gave an enormous amount of context in his answers, but, when it came to discussing Russia’s army moving into new regions in relation to Ukraine’s independence, he did so in the Russian past perfect aspect. Russian verbs have tense. But they also have aspect, meaning is an action fully completed, or temporarily or ongoing, etc. Putins use of the past perfect aspect signifies to me two things: 1) Putin has come around to the necessity of destroying the Zelensky regime, and the will of the Ukrainian people, and; 2) Following on logically, peace will not be negotiated; it willl be dictated, and there is fuck all Ukraine can do now except suffer for the deceitful sins of the West.

UPDATE 2: Medvedev just announced that Ukraine will not be allowed to enter the EU. At one time, Russia was fine with Ukrainian EU membership — so long as it remained militarily neutral, like Austria. In Medvedev owns words (apologies in advance for the terrible translation): “Brussels today is a real enemy of Russia. In such a distorted form, the European Union is no less a threat to us than the North Atlantic Alliance. Therefore, the complacent slogan, “Join anywhere but NATO” must be adjusted. Thus, the so-called Ukraine in the EU is a danger for our country. There are two ways to stop this danger: A) Either the EU itself must realize that it does not need the Kiev quasi-state, in principle, or a certainly preferable; B) There is simply no one to join the EU.”

Medvedev is always the one who lets the trial balloon loose, so it is only a matter of time until Putin makes options A and B into official Russian policy.

Does Zohran Mamdani Matter?

By

On June 26, 2025

Comments

So, Democratic Socialist (ie. has politics a 70s liberal would have agreed with, but is less racist) Zohran Mamdani has won the nomination as the Democratic candidate for New York City Mayor.

The best analysis I’ve read of this is definitely from Matt Stoller. He says this win helps define this as a “system-defining election,” that is, an attempt to not just to change who runs a system, but how that system is run. Read the article.

I’ll point out here that there have been a few such attempts. Stoller writes about Lamont’s challenge to Lieberman, in which Lamont won the primary, then Lieberman won the election. It’s similar to what will be tried here: The oligarchical part of the Democratic party will align behind another candidate, possibly even the Republican one. Those who don’t will try to co-opt Mamdani, and turn him into a centrist left-winger.

Mamdani is more radical than Sanders; he isn’t a Zionist, for example. But he’s basically suggesting policies than no Democrat during the 50s, 60s, and even into the 70s would have found extraordinary.

What Stoller calls system-defining elections, I call sub-ideological revolutions. FDR changed the form of capitalism practiced in the US, so did Carter and Reagan. Mamdani, for all the screams from rich operatives like Larry Summers and various oligarchs, isn’t a radical — any more than FDR was. He doesn’t want to switch to economic Communism (i.e., worker ownership of the means of production or Soviet-style central control), say, or a single-party state. He wants real changes in how capitalism is practiced, and some changes to who has power in Democracy.

Sanders’ runs in 2016 and 2020 were an attempt at a sub-ideological revolution, or, system-defining elections. This is why Obama intervened and lined everyone up behind Biden, a nearly unprecedented step.

Likewise, Corbyn represented such an attempt, except Corybn got further, winning the Labour leadership. It’s not an accident that (and we have receipts, so don’t argue) Labour operatives actually sabotaged him in two elections to ensure a Conservative win. They wanted the old ideology/system to keep running more than they wanted their party to win. And once Corbyn was removed, his successor, Starmer, purged the party of the democratic socialist left. Once in power, Starmer doubled down on austerity and politics no different in substance, but actually more punitive, than those followed by the Conservative party.

The Reform Party in the UK is now coming on hard.

Be clear that sub-ideological transitions/system changes can be bad. Neoliberalism was a bad change. In the UK, if Reform sets the new system/ideological norm, it will be awful.

This is one reason why I said that Corbyn was the UK’s last chance: If the left failed, the right would then get its shot, and what the right wants to do is beyond awful.

It’s why Germany is beyond hosed: Doubling down on military Keynesianism (which won’t work in a corrupt, neoliberal system), while cutting social welfare will simply lead to the new-right getting into power. Their policies will make most people worse off, not better.

As for Mamdani, he’s a good sign. The fact that men, as well as the youngs, went for him is also excellent, because it shows that men and youngsters aren’t really “right-wing” in any way that matters. Yet. What they want is change. If they are offered good change, they’ll take it. However, they’re so desperate that if all that’s on the menu is shitty change, or the status quo, they’ll take shitty change.

This was obviously going to happen. I wrote years ago that we wouldn’t see real change until the mid-2020s, at the earliest, because it required generational change as well.

Mamdani tells us that what sort of change will finally win in the US is not yet decided. It doesn’t have to be MAGA stupidity and meanness.

So if you want something better in the US, if you want a chance at a New New Deal, get behind Mamdani and people like him — hard.

There still remains a question of whether Mamdani can deliver, even if he is elected. Will he be be co-opted? Will he run into opposition from enemies so powerful he either can’t overcome them? Or will he use them as a rallying call? Is he competent enough to create and run a new system like the one he’s suggesting?

This is a chance because, if Mamdani wins and then improves New Yorker’s lives, he’ll be copied. And if you’re in a position to do something to improve the chance of this happening and then working, I suggest you do so.

If you’ve read this far, and you read a lot of my articles, you might wish to Subscribe or donate. I’ve written over 3,500 posts, and the site, and Ian, take money to run.

Page 3 of 468

Previous

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén