This is my new favorite Slow Boring piece that does not address the issue of mandatory parking minimums. Throw in a paragraph or two about zoning regulations and the availability of affordable apartments in urban Chad and it'd be the #1 for sure.
Friend, have I got an article for you (which happens to be the only other article I've written in this super-confrontational voice -- I don't normally use this gimmick).
I really appreciate the second to last paragraph. Unfortunately I often feel that (a) geopolitics is really complicated, and there's no way I'll be able to understand it all and (b) most of it doesn't directly concern me. The paragraph about the US's role in this is a direct reminder that it does concern us, and our elections have consequences even in areas we're not thinking about. Sometimes the quiet, boring work of appointing ambassadors and bureaucrats is what saves lives.
I really enjoyed this. On the writing style, which I lot of people commented on, for me it is like having fish for dinner. I wouldn't want to have it every day, or even most days, but it works as variety and occasional change of pace.
Yes, the population thing was my mistake, very sorry about that, it's been corrected. And Andrew, your theory about the source of the confusion is correct -- turns out when you google "Israel/Palestine population" you get 100 different numbers!
Yeah think Palestine territory's population got subbed in for the whole thing accidentally. It's a cute anecdote (if true!) but think everyone gets that in reality intensity American foreign policy discussions are typically not tethered to population of target country. If this is a huge problem, lets first focus on the enormously outsized per capita attention the Holy See gets...
I enjoyed this piece, but Matt, can you put 'GUEST POST' in the title of guest posts? I always read about a paragraph before realizing, and get very confused.
I'm just going to point out that in this phrase... "here’s where rank ignorance by the Matt Yglesias’ of the world really starts to matter" ...house style calls for the form, "Matthews Yglesias".
Do you listen to The Weeds? Over-generalizing the pluralization style of "Attorneys General" is a whole thing there (I think started by Dara?) which has spread from Vox to the broader center-left-y interwebz community.
Maybe we leave this one to France? I mean, we aren't the only potential pro-stability and pro-Western political influencer on the world front. Why not take advantage of those Biden-repairing relationships with our allies and let them handle some of the load (which was kind of Trump's obsession anyway)? Especially because France seems to already be ahead of the curve on this one (due to their prior Colonial connections, etc), so rather than being the Drunk Uncle who steps in with a Grand Opinion about Hanging Chads back in 2000, we leave it to Macron and Company to do both the grandstanding and the backchanneling?
Biden is repairing relationships with whom? Asking for a lot of angry EU citizens living in the US. The EU is still under a travel ban that doesn't allow parents/friends to come see us here AND demands us to somehow convince our employers to let us work from Mexico for two weeks before re-entering if we want to go back to see our parents/friends.
Certainly we aren't the only influencer. But why wouldn't we add whatever influence we do have on top of the French influence? If you have a real reason to think our attempts would be counterproductive, that's one thing, but the existence of other countries doesn't seem like a real reason to ignore something if we can help.
1) With a hollowed out State Department, maybe we don't have the experts who really know what's going on and how to respond. So we bumble in and step on France's toes while they attempt to craft a more nuanced approach. If France can do this on their own, why not let them?
2) With our credibility in the rest of the world diminished, maybe we shut the fuck up on things we aren't truly expert on and haven't cultivated influence in? As Matt points out in his other piece today, "activism" by itself can be counter-productive, and the last thing we need is a bunch of lazy hashgtaggers stirring up U.S. college protests on the latest Issue De Jure with Instagram headlines that obscure rather than enlighten. (See how much that's helping with the Israeli-Palestine conflict...)
3) Though the Trump adminstration's ham-handedness ruined everything, the (formerly) conservative premise that America has to be the world cop on everything is still rightly questioned. Especially since World War II, we have helped build up pro-democracy, pro-stability alliances where countries like France, Germany and Britain can actually carry some of that load. Why not enjoy the fruits of those labors in a constructive way? Why do we always have to be In Charge?
I didn't say we have to be in charge, nor do I think the article or anybody else here did. It seems France has appropriately taken a lead. There is a great deal of space between "in charge" and "do nothing" and I think it's appropriate for State to evaluate whether they can make a marginally positive impact. I see your other points, although I think they assume without evidence we have zero expertise on the subject. If we really don't think we can have any positive impact, fine. But that's a very different thought than your original comment.
I hear you on that great deal of space. I imagine State is doing that evaluation and letting them do it without the pressure of needing to be appearing to do something may be the sweet spot. If they decide France can handle it, then maybe France can handle it.
Yeah. That sounds about right to me. Of course it goes without saying that Chad itself will be the real determinant. Certainly I hope they can find a good result, and I hope they get whatever help is available whether French, American or otherwise. I'll be paying more than the zero attention I was before Matt's earlier post and this one.
This is my new favorite Slow Boring piece that does not address the issue of mandatory parking minimums. Throw in a paragraph or two about zoning regulations and the availability of affordable apartments in urban Chad and it'd be the #1 for sure.
Friend, have I got an article for you (which happens to be the only other article I've written in this super-confrontational voice -- I don't normally use this gimmick).
https://imightbewrong.substack.com/p/oh-fuck-yes-the-national-conversation
I really appreciate the second to last paragraph. Unfortunately I often feel that (a) geopolitics is really complicated, and there's no way I'll be able to understand it all and (b) most of it doesn't directly concern me. The paragraph about the US's role in this is a direct reminder that it does concern us, and our elections have consequences even in areas we're not thinking about. Sometimes the quiet, boring work of appointing ambassadors and bureaucrats is what saves lives.
A good backgrounder on the coup- https://fx.substack.com/p/the-deby-dynasty-with-nathaniel-powell
also, fx.substack.com is a really good source for world news. The full world firehose.
Hard to write an entire post about Chad and forget to note that it was the first nation to recognize Free Luna.
Yes, yes, fictionally(in Heinlein's Moon Is a Harsh Mistress) but take what you can get.
Read the entire thing in John Oliver's voice. Bravo, nicely done!
I really enjoyed this. On the writing style, which I lot of people commented on, for me it is like having fish for dinner. I wouldn't want to have it every day, or even most days, but it works as variety and occasional change of pace.
But what if the fish is salmon
Israel-Palestine has 14m people to Chad's 16, so Chad does not have three times as many people.
Yes, the population thing was my mistake, very sorry about that, it's been corrected. And Andrew, your theory about the source of the confusion is correct -- turns out when you google "Israel/Palestine population" you get 100 different numbers!
Yeah think Palestine territory's population got subbed in for the whole thing accidentally. It's a cute anecdote (if true!) but think everyone gets that in reality intensity American foreign policy discussions are typically not tethered to population of target country. If this is a huge problem, lets first focus on the enormously outsized per capita attention the Holy See gets...
This was extremely informative and also an enjoyable read. I'd love more international affairs takes of this sort, either by Matt or by guests.
(Really, I should subscribe to the Economist... but their insistence on ads even for subscribers turns me off.)
I enjoyed this piece, but Matt, can you put 'GUEST POST' in the title of guest posts? I always read about a paragraph before realizing, and get very confused.
I'm just going to point out that in this phrase... "here’s where rank ignorance by the Matt Yglesias’ of the world really starts to matter" ...house style calls for the form, "Matthews Yglesias".
Upon further review, I'm leaning towards "Matthews Yglesii".
Do you listen to The Weeds? Over-generalizing the pluralization style of "Attorneys General" is a whole thing there (I think started by Dara?) which has spread from Vox to the broader center-left-y interwebz community.
Oh so *that's* what they were doing. I listen to the Weeds sometimes, not all the time, hadn't realised it was an inside joke.
We could blame the Daras Lind of the world, but who are we kidding, there can be only one. She is sui generis. :-D
Dara, or someone pretending to be Dara(!), posted below about it.
I have to question your area expertise in light of your failure to mention Chad's attempt to form an alliance with Uruguay and Paraguay.
So what you're saying is they're advancing the Guay Agenda?
Please have/make Michael Satow read this for Curio. It is important.
Or persuade John Oliver to take it up as an upcoming episode of Last Week Tonight. :-D
Maybe we leave this one to France? I mean, we aren't the only potential pro-stability and pro-Western political influencer on the world front. Why not take advantage of those Biden-repairing relationships with our allies and let them handle some of the load (which was kind of Trump's obsession anyway)? Especially because France seems to already be ahead of the curve on this one (due to their prior Colonial connections, etc), so rather than being the Drunk Uncle who steps in with a Grand Opinion about Hanging Chads back in 2000, we leave it to Macron and Company to do both the grandstanding and the backchanneling?
Biden is repairing relationships with whom? Asking for a lot of angry EU citizens living in the US. The EU is still under a travel ban that doesn't allow parents/friends to come see us here AND demands us to somehow convince our employers to let us work from Mexico for two weeks before re-entering if we want to go back to see our parents/friends.
Certainly we aren't the only influencer. But why wouldn't we add whatever influence we do have on top of the French influence? If you have a real reason to think our attempts would be counterproductive, that's one thing, but the existence of other countries doesn't seem like a real reason to ignore something if we can help.
Here are my concerns:
1) With a hollowed out State Department, maybe we don't have the experts who really know what's going on and how to respond. So we bumble in and step on France's toes while they attempt to craft a more nuanced approach. If France can do this on their own, why not let them?
2) With our credibility in the rest of the world diminished, maybe we shut the fuck up on things we aren't truly expert on and haven't cultivated influence in? As Matt points out in his other piece today, "activism" by itself can be counter-productive, and the last thing we need is a bunch of lazy hashgtaggers stirring up U.S. college protests on the latest Issue De Jure with Instagram headlines that obscure rather than enlighten. (See how much that's helping with the Israeli-Palestine conflict...)
3) Though the Trump adminstration's ham-handedness ruined everything, the (formerly) conservative premise that America has to be the world cop on everything is still rightly questioned. Especially since World War II, we have helped build up pro-democracy, pro-stability alliances where countries like France, Germany and Britain can actually carry some of that load. Why not enjoy the fruits of those labors in a constructive way? Why do we always have to be In Charge?
I didn't say we have to be in charge, nor do I think the article or anybody else here did. It seems France has appropriately taken a lead. There is a great deal of space between "in charge" and "do nothing" and I think it's appropriate for State to evaluate whether they can make a marginally positive impact. I see your other points, although I think they assume without evidence we have zero expertise on the subject. If we really don't think we can have any positive impact, fine. But that's a very different thought than your original comment.
I hear you on that great deal of space. I imagine State is doing that evaluation and letting them do it without the pressure of needing to be appearing to do something may be the sweet spot. If they decide France can handle it, then maybe France can handle it.
Yeah. That sounds about right to me. Of course it goes without saying that Chad itself will be the real determinant. Certainly I hope they can find a good result, and I hope they get whatever help is available whether French, American or otherwise. I'll be paying more than the zero attention I was before Matt's earlier post and this one.
Fantastic piece, what a fun read
This was awesome- informative, funny, and irreverent.
So what I hear you saying is you're volunteering to be nominated for Ambassador to Chad.