The all new M1A2 Abrams recreational utility vehicle!

Back before Christmas and shortly after Ukrainian President Zelenskyy visited the US Congress Cathy Young wrote an article for Bulwark about Putin’s Useful Idiots. A good chunk of the article is various people on the right criticizing the visit. They include nasty junior, Josh Hammer and Batya Ungar-Sargon of Newsweek, Matt Walsh of Daily Wire, Tucker Carlson of Fox News, and let’s just say many more. There is a strong consensus that Ukraine is fighting for freedom against authoritarianism and for a free world and its values. There’s also a sense that if Ukraine succumbs all of the countries on Russia’s border may be next.

The question of why the Trumpian populist right is so consumed with hatred for Ukraine—a hatred that clearly goes beyond concerns about U.S. spending, a very small portion of our military budget, or about the nonexistent involvement of American troops—doesn’t have a simple answer. Partly, it’s simply partisanship: If the libs are for it, we’re against it, and the more offensively the better. (And if the pre-Trump Republican establishment is also for it, then we’re even more against it.) Partly, it’s the belief that Ukrainian democracy is a Biden/Obama/Hillary Clinton/“Deep State” project, all the more suspect because it’s related to Trump’s first impeachment. Partly, it’s the “national conservative” distaste for liberalism—not only in its American progressive iteration, but in the more fundamental sense that includes conservatives like Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher: the outlook based on individual freedom and personal autonomy, equality before the law, limited government, and an international order rooted in those values. Many NatCons are far more sympathetic to Russia’s crusade against secular liberalism than to Ukraine’s desire for integration into liberal, secular Europe. Whatever the reason, the anti-Ukraine animus on the right is quite real and widespread.

A reminder that the goal of “limited government” means a government that is not able to help anyone (but the rich), meaning if you don’t have it the government isn’t going to give you resources to get it. In a sense proponents of limited government are saying, “I have mine, too bad you don’t have yours. And, oh goody! There is no one able to prevent me from exploiting and oppressing you.” From the way that American insurrectionists have been protected, in spite of the law, they don’t believe that bit about “equality before the law.” Mark Sumner of Daily Kos wrote about the town of Soledar in Ukraine. Russia claims to have “liberated” it. Ukraine says no, they haven’t. Soledar is a bit north of Bakhmut, which Russia has been repeatedly trying to take for months and has lost thousands of lives in the attempt. Perhaps if Soledar is taken Russia would then be able to take Bakhmut. At the moment the fog of war is too murky to actually tell who controls the town. Likely both control a part. Of interest to Sumner is the propaganda value of claiming the town.

Because it’s been so long since Russia had anything that even looked like a marginal victory, pro-Russian sources are trying to turn Soledar into “proof” of every claim out of the Kremlin. Soledar has already been turned into a banner they can wave to show that everything is going according to plan. Those feints at Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Kherson? Bah. Only now is Russia seriously beginning to fight. There’s a good reason for this propaganda flood: If Russia captures Soledar, it would be their first significant advance since July. If. There’s no doubt that Ukraine is also attempting to paint the situation favorably. However, their motivations for exaggerating the ability of Ukrainian forces to withstand a large assault are certainly mixed. Would the loss of Soledar and increasing threat to Bakhmut make it more likely or less likely that modern main battle tanks roll into Ukraine in the next few weeks? Good question.

The invasion is almost 11 months old and only now Russia is seriously beginning to fight? Heh. Why wait so long? In an update at the top of this post Sumner included a video from the Twitter account Defense of Ukraine. The video acknowledges that some countries are reluctant to send tanks to Ukraine. Others are arguing about the definition of “tank.” So they offer a solution: The all new M1A2 Abrams recreational utility vehicle! It then plays like a commercial for an SUV with comparisons to galloping horses. The Ukrainian Institute of Modern Art in Chicago is hosting the exhibit Children of War through February 12. Shortly after the war began art teacher Nataliia Pavliuk and daughter Yustyna started an art therapy program for the refugee children who settled in Lviv. They held classes in orphanages, hospitals, community centers, art galleries, and wherever they encountered refugee children. This therapy helps them deal with the hell they endured. Some of the art will break a heart, other images show the love and hope they hold on to. The best way to see the art is to click on the “for sale” button. Sales will benefit the therapy program, but it looks like it has all been sold. Frances Nguyen of Kos Prism wrote about a small effort of community reparations. Back in 1963 the City Council of Berkeley, California passed an anti-segregation law. The opposition was so fierce it was repealed by referendum just a few months later. Of course, at the time redlining was already well established. That’s the practice of refusing to lend money for mortgages in black neighborhoods. That meant black people could not accumulate wealth. To reverse a bit of that the Arlington Community Church, United Church of Christ of Kensington, a predominantly white church just north of Berkeley, established the Black Wealth Builders Fund. It offers zero-interest loans to help black residents to make a down payment on a home. The church considered what to do following the 2020 murder of George Floyd. They created an anti-racist discussion group and what they heard about the most was housing. So that’s what they worked on. While they have used the term reparations to recover from past injustices, the word doesn’t appear in the title of their project because what they offer is a tiny bit of money in what would be needed to restore the denied wealth of black people. Also, they do not call it charity. The money does need to be paid back – when the home is refinanced or sold. Leah McElrath tweeted a quote from The Wounded Healer:

The longer I work in psychiatry, the more & more I'm reminded that poverty is one of the most harmful factors (if not the most harmful factor) affecting peoples' mental health.

McElrath added:

Can attest professionally and personally. Also: life events like divorce, job loss, and disability can all lead to becoming unhoused, which then can exacerbate mental illness. We mistakenly think mental illness leads to becoming unhoused, but it’s a dual direction relationship.

Randall Woodfin, mayor of Birmingham, Alabama, tweeted:

Announcing "Home for All" We are launching project Home for All, to provide dignified and safe housing units and wraparound services to residents in need. Each unit is lockable, heated and cooled, and furnished with a desk and bed. We've heard from y'all, our neighbors experiencing homelessness, & local service providers about the need for temporary housing for those experiencing homelessness paired with wraparound services that identify needs, addresses them, & helps transition them into permanent housing. ... Everyone deserves to have safe shelter. This project, which we will be presenting to the City Council next week, is a big step forward in the fight for a more equitable and just society that protects all of our people.

Woodfin included photos of these shelters. They don’t appear to be any bigger than that desk and bed and don’t look all that sturdy. But as temporary shelter it sure beats a tent or a spot under a bridge. And since it comes with helpful services one shouldn’t need to live in them for very long. More communities need to provide such shelters and services rather than forcing homeless people out of encampments.