That line at the airport is security theater

Oliver Willis of Daily Kos reported that the nasty guy has been losing elections all over the world. I’ve already written that the nasty guy’s portrayal of Canada boosted the chances of the liberal party, giving a win to Mark Carney. The latest example is the Labor Party in Australia getting a comfortable win over the Liberal Party (which is center-right, not really liberal). The next Australian Prime Minister is Anthony Albanese and not Peter Dutton, who had been portrayed as a cheap knock-off of the nasty guy. And in Singapore the People’s Action Party and Prime Minister Lawrence Wong won in a landslide. They portrayed themselves as a force for stability in a world made turbulent because of the nasty guy’s tariffs. Steve Inskeep of NPR talked to author Walter Isaacson about the end of World War II in Europe, which happened 80 years ago. At the time America helped build global institutions. How are those institutions being changed now? The Marshall Plan sent billions of dollars to help rebuild Europe. The plan created a market for US goods. It stopped the spread of Soviet communism. It was also “one of the most generous, least selfish acts in history because it took a war-battered Europe and got it back on its feet.” Then came the United Nations, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and agreements on tariffs and trade that became the World Trade Organization. All were designed to protect free markets and democracy from the threat of communism. Dean Acheson had developed the Marshall Plan with George Kennen. They saw that after WWI the Treaty of Versailles punished Germany so harshly that it fueled the rise of Hitler, resulting in WWII. They wanted to not do that again. Rebuilding Germany and Japan would make the world safer. We now have tight alliances with both. These institutions that promoted free markets also meant free trade and free immigration. A lot of wealth was built. And a lot of people got left behind. That produced a nationalist backlash. See Brexit, Orban in Hungary, and the nasty guy here. Some of those who created and believed in the global institutions didn’t understand the number of people left behind was so huge, how resentful they would feel, and how strong nationalism would become. After WWII politicians put the national interests and values before party. That isn’t true now. Also, no one is proposing the next set of global institutions we need now to make sure everybody shares in the prosperity they help build, to balance trade with domestic manufacturing that promotes democracy, to address climate change, to lessen terrorism, and to find meaning in living. A week ago Kos of Kos discussed the resource-sharing agreement between the US and Ukraine. This is the successor to the deal that didn’t happen in February when the nasty guy and vice nasty verbally attacked Zelenskyy. And, from the way Kos tells it, this time the nasty guy caved. The deal creates the United States–Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund. The deal does not include reimbursement for the aid the US gave to Ukraine. The deal covers only new leases, not existing ones. While the minerals, oil, and gas may be exported, the money stays in Ukraine for at least ten years to fund new projects and reconstruction. The US commits to long-term peace. This is a joint project, not one directed by the US. By those terms one can see what the nasty guy wanted and didn’t get. There is a big reason why the deal covers only new leases.

Most of Ukraine’s mineral wealth is in Russian-occupied territory. That is literally the reason Russia invaded. If Trump really wants it, he’s gonna have to fight the Russians (via Ukraine) for it.

One thing Ukraine didn’t get – American security guarantees. The resource deal is separate from a peace deal. About that Mike Luckovich posted a cartoon on Kos. It shows the nasty guy dictating terms to a skeptical Zelenskyy, saying, “Here’s the deal, let the guy who broke in and attacked your family, remain inside and be gifted the kitchen, guest bedroom and den.” In a pundit roundup for Kos Chitown Kev quoted Paul Krugman, writing in his own Substack about the defunding of scientific research.

Why should those who aren’t scientists care? In the 21st century, science isn’t some esoteric intellectual affair. It’s the foundation of social and economic progress. And no, we can’t expect the private sector to fill the gap left by loss of government support. Basic research is a public good: it generates real benefits, but those benefits can’t be monetized because everyone can make use of the knowledge gained. So government support is the only way to sustain science. And that support is being rapidly ended. But why do our new rulers want to destroy science in America? Sadly, the answer is obvious: Science has a tendency to tell you things you may not want to hear. Medical research may tell you that vaccines work and don’t cause autism. Energy research may tell wind power works and doesn’t massacre birds. And one thing we know about MAGA types is that they are determined to hold on to their prejudices. If science conflicts with those prejudices, they don’t want to know, and they don’t want anyone else to know either. So they really want to destroy science.

Kev quoted Rebecca Gordon of TomDispatch:

It’s tempting to think of Donald Trump’s second term as a sui generis reign of lawlessness. But sadly, the federal government’s willingness to violate federal and international law with impunity didn’t begin with Trump. If anything, the present incumbent is harvesting a crop of autocratic powers from seeds planted by President George W. Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney in those war on terror years following the attacks of September 11, 2001. In their wake, the hastily-passed Patriot Act granted the federal government vast new detention and surveillance powers. The Homeland Security Act of 2002 established a new cabinet-level department, one whose existence we now take for granted. [...] The constant thrill of what some have called security theater has kept us primed for new enemies and so set the stage for the second set of Trump years that we now find ourselves in. We still encounter this theater of the absurd every time we stand in line at an airport, unpacking our computers, removing our shoes, sorting our liquids into quart-sized baggies — all to reinforce the idea that we are in terrible danger and that the government will indeed protect us.

Michigan Public, my NPR outlet, has a spot that runs frequently that says public media is under threat. It then directs me to a website. I haven’t gone there yet. That’s not because I think the threat isn’t real. Wednesday of last week Willis reported that the nasty guy fired three of the five directors of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. In response the CPB said it is not a government entity and is not subject to the president’s authority. It filed a lawsuit to block the firings. Willis then gave some of the history of the CPB. Willis reported last Friday that the nasty guy issued an executive order instructing the CPB to “cease Federal funding for NPR and PBS.” The order says NPR and PBS don’t provide unbiased, fair, and nonpartisan news. Patricia Harrison, president and CEO of CPB repeated the CPB is not subject to the president’s authority. It is authorized and funded by Congress to be independent of the federal government. His executive order is meaningless. The nasty guy claims the media landscape has changed since CPB was created. There are now “abundant, diverse, and innovative news options.” Willis responds that most mainstream media are owned by private corporations that are willing to bow to him. He’s already shown he doesn’t like media that doesn’t do his bidding. I’ve heard the Nasty Guy’s proposed budget calls on Congress to defund the CPB. At the end of March Willis, in one of his posts explaining the right, sets out to explain why Republicans want to murder Big Bird. This is a long Republican tradition going all the way back to Nixon in the 1970s, shortly after the CPB was created. One reason why Republicans hate is it because PBS and NPR content is trusted by a large number of Americans because they provide info without corporate or political influence. For 22 years PBS has ranked as the most trusted institution in the US, beating out commercial television, print media, courts of law, Congress, and the federal government. Sesame Street and related companies are trusted by 88% of parents and 90% of parents say the programs help prepare children, including black and brown children, for schooling. It also tackles important topics like racism.

In short, public broadcasting represents the opposite of many conservative beliefs. The networks support accessible information, prioritize education, and strive to produce content opposing bigotry. Conservatives see more utility in divisive, bigoted figures—like Greene and Trump—than in Big Bird, who promotes kindness and friendship. That’s why the networks are under attack from one Republican leader to the next.

In the comments of another pundit roundup is a cartoon by Garth German:

Man: ...But the Founding Fathers didn’t intend... Woman: I’mma stop you right there. The Founding Fathers didn’t intend for black slaves to go free. Nor for me to vote. Nor for you to vote since you don’t own land. I’m kinda over the Founding Father’s intent.

Trilemma posted a cartoon of the white supremacist future.

You dreamed of a whites-only paradise. Big checks, cheap gas, everything finally “right.” But your heroes were flying over your potholes, on their way to brunch with billionaires. A man says: “We were never one of them. Just the background noise for their victory lap.” You thought expelling non-whites & immigrants would elevate you. But it fed no one. Built nothing. And the messes still needed cleaned. The blame still needed a name. You used to cheer as your leader crushed dissent. Now it’s your turn, hogtied, silenced & robbed blind by the man you worshipped.

Those who hate need a social hierarchy. The hierarchy is how they define themselves. They assume their position is high in that hierarchy. But if the lowest levels of a hierarchy are swept away those higher in the hierarchy still need the hierarchy and will oppress those now at the bottom. They don’t care you supported their previous efforts. In the comments of a third roundup is a meme posted by exlrrp showing a man and two women drinking Champagne on a yacht. The caption:

Billionaires Imagine having more money than you can spend in 1,000 lifetimes and still being mad that people get Social Security. It is time to end this!

For those toward the top of the hierarchy having lots more money than other people isn’t enough. They also need to take money away from the poor to emphasize the gap between themselves and those at the bottom. Another example of that is a cartoon by Toonerman. It shows a man sitting on a large mound of bags of money talking to a red hat family below. “There’s been a change in plans. Things are gonna suck for awhile ... for you that is. MAGA’s working for me.” Another meme posted by exlrrp shows a man in a bathing suit and wearing a MAGA hat next to a (real?) woman whose bikini top is strained by her assets. The caption, “I voted for him, and now I only get to have a couple of dolls?” Just below that is a tweet by Dare Obasanjo, “At this rate MAGA will only be able to afford to rent the libs.”