thenation--2020-11-23--What Biden Can Do About the Israeli-Palestinian Mess He’ll Inherit

As if finding a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict weren ’ t difficult enough , the Trump administration and the Netanyahu government seem hell-bent on making this already bad situation even worse .
Sensing that the Trump era will soon be over , members of his team and the Israelis are racing against the clock to implement new “ facts on the ground ” that will , they hope , permanently alter the political landscape in Israel ’ s favor .
In just the past month , Israel § announced plans to add 1,257 settlement housing units—located on Palestinian land @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bethlehem from Jerusalem ; § announced another 4,948 settlement units , most between Ramallah and Nablus , thickening the settler presence in the heart of the West Bank , further impeding Palestinian movement northward ; § demolished entire Palestinian villages and seized Palestinian homes and properties in areas Israel covets for expansion and control—in Jerusalem , the Jordan Valley , and the northern West Bank ; § stepped up demolition of European Union–funded projects ( schools , field hospitals , etc . )
serving Palestinians ; and § announced a plan to “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ previously built without permits , while proceeding to demolish Palestinian homes that were also built without permits .
During this same period , the Trump administration § took steps to further legitimize the Israeli occupation by announcing that henceforth US assistance to Israel can be earmarked for West Bank settlements .
This announcement came during the US ambassador to Israel ’ s visit to Ariel , a controversial colony in the heart of the West Bank ; § had Secretary of State Mike Pompeo make a formal visit to a West Bank settlement—a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which time he announced that products made in Israeli settlements could be sold in the US labeled “ Made in Israel ” ; and § in an effort to silence critics of Israel , had Pompeo also announce plans to designate the Boycott , Divestment , and Sanctions ( BDS ) movement as anti-Semitic , as well as respected global human rights groups—since both have been critical of Israel ’ s violations of Palestinian human rights .
All of these moves combined serve to deepen Israeli control over the occupied territories—a form of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration ’ s changes in policy toward Jerusalem , Israel ’ s entire settlement enterprise , and the changed nomenclature now used to describe the occupied lands amount to recognizing Israeli sovereignty in those territories , thereby implementing the underpinnings of the “ Deal of the Century.
” All of this puts the incoming Biden administration in a bind , because the damage now being done is real and will make its pledge to return to the status quo ante more difficult to achieve .
Additionally , while Joe Biden , most of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world community continue to pledge allegiance to the “ two-state solution , ” that hill has now become significantly harder to climb .
Blame for this state of affairs belongs to successive US administrations , all of which have been , to varying degrees , complicit in Israel ’ s acquisitiveness .
For decades , the United States turned a blind eye or neglected to take effective measures to restrain Israel ’ s settlement expansion in Palestinian lands .
They sinned by omission .
The pro-settlement agenda pursued by the Trump administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more grievous sin of commission .
The past two decades of failed policies created a number of deformities that make the future of a two-state solution difficult to even envision .
The territories that were to have been dedicated to the future Palestinian State have been cut into pieces by settlements , infrastructure , and Jewish-only roads connecting them to each other and Israel proper .
Tomorrow My Family and Neighbors May Be Forced From Our Homes by Israeli Settlers Years of US enabling and coddling of the settlement enterprise has so emboldened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have moved dramatically rightward while the peace camp has shrunk to a tiny fraction of Israel ’ s political map .
As a result , it is impossible to see how any coalition government could emerge in coming years that would be willing to make a peace with Palestinians that would include a sovereign , contiguous , and viable Palestinian State .
At the same time , US acquiescence to Israel ’ s disgraceful , abusive treatment of the Palestinians has weakened the credibility of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consolidation of power in the Gaza Strip .
And finally , the erratic , often incoherent , and always pro-Israel US policies regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict discredited the US role as the main party responsible for brokering a just peace .
This is true not only for the Palestinians but for much of the rest of the world as well .
These , then , are the main challenges to a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that will confront the incoming Biden administration .
It must address : the territorial , political , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s massive settlement expansion ; the consolidation of power by the far right in Israel ; the dysfunction that has come to define the Palestinian polity ; and the lack of trust in Washington ’ s discredited “ go it alone ” approach to peacemaking .
What follows are some steps the Biden administration could take to begin to set things right .
As a first step , it must put muscle behind the Democratic Party platform pledges to oppose Israeli settlement construction and any moves toward annexation ( including the “ creeping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ land and home demolitions ) .
To ensure that the US opposition is seen as credible , the new administration will need to revisit the country ’ s reluctance to hold Israel accountable for any violations .
This will inevitably require a reassessment of the platform ’ s rejection of conditioning US assistance used in any expansionist activities .
The Biden team must rescind the Trump administration ’ s refusal to call the territories “ occupied.
” This must include not only the West Bank and Gaza Strip but also what Israel refers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also reverse Secretary Pompeo ’ s recent changes in long-standing US policy by rejecting the notion that US assistance to Israel can be spent in the occupied lands or that settlement products can be labeled “ Made in Israel.
” And , in line with their platform pledge to protect free speech , the Biden team must rescind the blanket designation of BDS as anti-Semitic .
The Biden platform also calls for several steps that will be supportive of Palestinians and that should be enacted as soon as possible .
These include pledges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UNWRA , to take the steps needed to reopen the Palestinian Mission in Washington , D.C. , and to reopen the US Consulate in East Jerusalem .
This reopening would best be coupled with the insistence that Palestinians from across the West Bank be allowed unimpeded access to the consulate ’ s services and that the United States intends that the consulate will one day serve as its embassy to the future State of Palestine .
And the Biden administration should make it clear that it will apply internationally recognized human rights standards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calling out Israel for home demolitions , land seizures , acts of collective punishment , and other violations of individual and communal rights .
I Lost My Son in a Hail of Bullets at an Israeli Checkpoint Finally , given the Biden administration ’ s intention to reengage in multinational efforts to address the environment , health , nuclear weapons , and trade , it would be wise to take a multilateral approach to Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking .
It could , for example , use the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Madrid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conference to restart Israeli-Palestinian peace talks .
The support of the four Arab countries that now have peace agreements with Israel should be enlisted to assist in this conference and its aftermath .
Biden ’ s people should also strive to empower the Quartet on the Middle East ( comprising United Nations , the United States , the European Union , and Russia ) to engage in mediation—but without Washington dominating the process and ignoring the role of the other parties .
If actions such as these were taken by the Biden administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dynamics on the ground in the Israeli-Palestinian arena by helping end the sense of impunity that currently exists in Israel , while breathing new life into the dormant Israeli peace camp , thus creating a much-needed debate about the future of peace with the Palestinians .
Positive Biden moves toward the Palestinians would also serve to rebuild the credibility of the Palestinian Authority and give hope to the Palestinian people that the United States will stand with them in defense of their political and human rights .
And by taking a multilateral approach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ restore confidence both in peacemaking efforts and in the US role as a trusted partner in international affairs .
We should , however , have no illusion that the road forward will be swift and easy , even if the Biden administration were to take all of the steps outlined here .
Cleaning up the mess left by decades of neglect and four years of Trump will not happen overnight .
It will take time for attitudes to change and hope to be rekindled .
But of one thing we can be certain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , then we are , for sure , on the downward slope to consolidating an apartheid reality and continued oppression that will inevitably lead to more bloodshed .

As if finding a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict weren’t difficult enough, the Trump administration and the Netanyahu government seem hell-bent on making this already bad situation even worse. Sensing that the Trump era will soon be over, members of his team and the Israelis are racing against the clock to implement new “facts on the ground” that will, they hope, permanently alter the political landscape in Israel’s favor.
In just the past month, Israel
§ announced plans to add 1,257 settlement housing units—located on Palestinian land in an area that would permanently sever Bethlehem from Jerusalem;
§ announced another 4,948 settlement units, most between Ramallah and Nablus, thickening the settler presence in the heart of the West Bank, further impeding Palestinian movement northward;
§ demolished entire Palestinian villages and seized Palestinian homes and properties in areas Israel covets for expansion and control—in Jerusalem, the Jordan Valley, and the northern West Bank;
§ stepped up demolition of European Union–funded projects (schools, field hospitals, etc.) serving Palestinians; and
§ announced a plan to “legalize” 1,700 settlement units that were previously built without permits, while proceeding to demolish Palestinian homes that were also built without permits.
During this same period, the Trump administration
§ took steps to further legitimize the Israeli occupation by announcing that henceforth US assistance to Israel can be earmarked for West Bank settlements. This announcement came during the US ambassador to Israel’s visit to Ariel, a controversial colony in the heart of the West Bank;
§ had Secretary of State Mike Pompeo make a formal visit to a West Bank settlement—a first for a US Secretary of State—at which time he announced that products made in Israeli settlements could be sold in the US labeled “Made in Israel”; and Current Issue View our current issue
§ in an effort to silence critics of Israel, had Pompeo also announce plans to designate the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement as anti-Semitic, as well as respected global human rights groups—since both have been critical of Israel’s violations of Palestinian human rights. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
All of these moves combined serve to deepen Israeli control over the occupied territories—a form of “creeping annexation.” And the Trump administration’s changes in policy toward Jerusalem, Israel’s entire settlement enterprise, and the changed nomenclature now used to describe the occupied lands amount to recognizing Israeli sovereignty in those territories, thereby implementing the underpinnings of the “Deal of the Century.”
All of this puts the incoming Biden administration in a bind, because the damage now being done is real and will make its pledge to return to the status quo ante more difficult to achieve. Additionally, while Joe Biden, most of the US Congress, and much of the world community continue to pledge allegiance to the “two-state solution,” that hill has now become significantly harder to climb.
Blame for this state of affairs belongs to successive US administrations, all of which have been, to varying degrees, complicit in Israel’s acquisitiveness. For decades, the United States turned a blind eye or neglected to take effective measures to restrain Israel’s settlement expansion in Palestinian lands. They sinned by omission. The pro-settlement agenda pursued by the Trump administration, however, has amounted to a more grievous sin of commission.
The past two decades of failed policies created a number of deformities that make the future of a two-state solution difficult to even envision. The territories that were to have been dedicated to the future Palestinian State have been cut into pieces by settlements, infrastructure, and Jewish-only roads connecting them to each other and Israel proper. Settlers Tomorrow My Family and Neighbors May Be Forced From Our Homes by Israeli Settlers Mohammed El-Kurd
Years of US enabling and coddling of the settlement enterprise has so emboldened Israeli hard-liners that politics in that country have moved dramatically rightward while the peace camp has shrunk to a tiny fraction of Israel’s political map. As a result, it is impossible to see how any coalition government could emerge in coming years that would be willing to make a peace with Palestinians that would include a sovereign, contiguous, and viable Palestinian State.
At the same time, US acquiescence to Israel’s disgraceful, abusive treatment of the Palestinians has weakened the credibility of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, while empowering and emboldening Hamas’s consolidation of power in the Gaza Strip. And finally, the erratic, often incoherent, and always pro-Israel US policies regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict discredited the US role as the main party responsible for brokering a just peace. This is true not only for the Palestinians but for much of the rest of the world as well.
These, then, are the main challenges to a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that will confront the incoming Biden administration. It must address: the territorial, political, and economic issues created by Israel’s massive settlement expansion; the consolidation of power by the far right in Israel; the dysfunction that has come to define the Palestinian polity; and the lack of trust in Washington’s discredited “go it alone” approach to peacemaking. Foreign Policy Reimagining American Foreign Policy Andrew J. Bacevich
What follows are some steps the Biden administration could take to begin to set things right. As a first step, it must put muscle behind the Democratic Party platform pledges to oppose Israeli settlement construction and any moves toward annexation (including the “creeping annexation” involved in seizures of Palestinian land and home demolitions). To ensure that the US opposition is seen as credible, the new administration will need to revisit the country’s reluctance to hold Israel accountable for any violations. This will inevitably require a reassessment of the platform’s rejection of conditioning US assistance used in any expansionist activities.
The Biden team must rescind the Trump administration’s refusal to call the territories “occupied.” This must include not only the West Bank and Gaza Strip but also what Israel refers to as East Jerusalem. They must also reverse Secretary Pompeo’s recent changes in long-standing US policy by rejecting the notion that US assistance to Israel can be spent in the occupied lands or that settlement products can be labeled “Made in Israel.” And, in line with their platform pledge to protect free speech, the Biden team must rescind the blanket designation of BDS as anti-Semitic.
The Biden platform also calls for several steps that will be supportive of Palestinians and that should be enacted as soon as possible. These include pledges to restart aid to the Palestinians and UNWRA, to take the steps needed to reopen the Palestinian Mission in Washington, D.C., and to reopen the US Consulate in East Jerusalem. This reopening would best be coupled with the insistence that Palestinians from across the West Bank be allowed unimpeded access to the consulate’s services and that the United States intends that the consulate will one day serve as its embassy to the future State of Palestine. And the Biden administration should make it clear that it will apply internationally recognized human rights standards to Israeli behavior in the occupied territories— calling out Israel for home demolitions, land seizures, acts of collective punishment, and other violations of individual and communal rights. Checkpoint I Lost My Son in a Hail of Bullets at an Israeli Checkpoint Najah Erekat
Finally, given the Biden administration’s intention to reengage in multinational efforts to address the environment, health, nuclear weapons, and trade, it would be wise to take a multilateral approach to Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking. It could, for example, use the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Madrid Peace Conference to convene an international peace conference to restart Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. The support of the four Arab countries that now have peace agreements with Israel should be enlisted to assist in this conference and its aftermath. Biden’s people should also strive to empower the Quartet on the Middle East (comprising United Nations, the United States, the European Union, and Russia) to engage in mediation—but without Washington dominating the process and ignoring the role of the other parties.
If actions such as these were taken by the Biden administration, it might begin to alter the dynamics on the ground in the Israeli-Palestinian arena by helping end the sense of impunity that currently exists in Israel, while breathing new life into the dormant Israeli peace camp, thus creating a much-needed debate about the future of peace with the Palestinians.
Positive Biden moves toward the Palestinians would also serve to rebuild the credibility of the Palestinian Authority and give hope to the Palestinian people that the United States will stand with them in defense of their political and human rights. And by taking a multilateral approach, the Biden administration would help to restore confidence both in peacemaking efforts and in the US role as a trusted partner in international affairs.
We should, however, have no illusion that the road forward will be swift and easy, even if the Biden administration were to take all of the steps outlined here. Cleaning up the mess left by decades of neglect and four years of Trump will not happen overnight. It will take time for attitudes to change and hope to be rekindled. But of one thing we can be certain: If bold steps are not taken, then we are, for sure, on the downward slope to consolidating an apartheid reality and continued oppression that will inevitably lead to more bloodshed.


thenation--2020-11-23--Georgia GOP Senator Kelly Loeffler Just Got Caught Violating the Law

Georgia Republican Kelly Loeffler is the richest member of the United States Senate , but that hasn ’ t stopped the appointed senator from making an illegal pitch for money to fund her embattled bid for a full term in the chamber .
Loeffler is locked in a January 5 runoff race with the Rev .
Raphael Warnock , a Democrat who finished ahead of her in the initial voting on November 3 .
She ’ s mounting a desperate campaign that is filling the Atlanta airwaves with an onslaught of negative ads and , though the multimillionaire could afford @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s instead appealing for money from across the country to pay for what could turn out to be the most expensive Senate campaign in history .
That ’ s what the senator did November 18 , when she appeared on a Fox News program from the Russell Senate Office Building Rotunda .
Loeffler wasn ’ t talking about Senate business that day .
She was talking politics , and , after attacking Warnock repeatedly , the senator announced , “ Well look , we know that hundreds of millions of dark , liberal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s why it ’ s so important that everyone across the country get involved .
They can visit KellyforSenate.com to chip in five or 10 bucks , and get involved , volunteer.
” The appeal was a direct request for campaign money , made inside a federal building .
That ’ s illegal .
The section of the Code of Laws of the United States of America dealing with the solicitation of campaign funds inside federal buildings , 18 USC 607 , plainly states : It shall be unlawful for an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Federal Government , including the President , Vice President , and Members of Congress , to solicit or receive a donation of money or other thing of value in connection with a Federal , State , or local election , while in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by an officer or employee of the United States , from any person .
The code outlines tough penalties for wrongdoers : “ A person who violates this section shall be fined not more than $ 5,000 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or both.
” Loeffler ’ s appeal was also in conflict with US Senate ethics rules , which state clearly that “ Senate Members and staff may not receive or solicit campaign contributions in any federal building.
” Wisconsin ’ s Recount Will Only Serve to Confirm Donald Trump ’ s Humiliating Defeat Should Biden Hire Rahm Emanuel ?
Chicago Says , ‘ Never !
Never !
Never !
’ Georgia Senator David Perdue Is Terrified That Jon Ossoff Will Shred Him in Another Debate Loeffler ’ s not the first embattled Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ethical lines in pursuit of campaign cash .
In October , South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham was called out for pleading in a televised appearance from outside the room where the Senate Judiciary Committee was deliberating on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett , “ I don ’ t know how much [ the hearing ] affected fundraising today , but if you want to help me close the gap , lindseygraham.com .
A little bit goes a long way.
” That comment led US Representative Eric Swalwell , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to highlight federal laws barring such activities and declare , “ This is a crime .
[ Lindsey Graham ] committed a crime in plain sight.
” An ethics complaint was filed against Graham , though it has yet to be resolved by the lethargic Senate Ethics Committee .
Loeffler ’ s pitch was a good deal more more blatant than Graham ’ s .
She mentioned explicit dollar amounts and specifically asked donors to “ chip in ” to her campaign .
And watchdog groups noticed .
The nonpartisan Campaign Legal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asks the Ethics Committee to mount “ a swift investigation ” into what the organization describes as a “ blatant violation of rules that prohibits political fundraising on federal property.
” “ If the Ethics Committee again fails to review this matter and hold both Graham and Loeffler accountable , the Senate will establish a dangerous precedent that solicitations of campaign contributions on federal property are permissible , ” warn the center ’ s general counsel , Kedric Payne , and Delaney Marsco , a legal counsel who focuses on ethics issues .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the Ethics Committee ’ s unequivocal rules and guidance , but also a fundamental principle of ethical public service : that federal resources are not to be used for political purposes.
” The American Democracy Legal Fund has also filed a complaint .
That organization ’ s president , Brad Woodhouse , says that Loeffler ’ s “ fundraising solicitation from the Capitol was illegal , plain and simple.
” The Georgia Democratic Party has filed its own complaint , along with a request that the Department of Justice investigate Loeffler ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kelly Loeffler has once again chosen to use her position of power for personal and political advantage by illegally asking for donations on national television while on federal property , ” says Scott Hogan , the party ’ s executive director .
“ She broke not only Senate rules but also federal law.
” Loeffler ’ s apologists have mounted a novel defense that suggests the legal ban on senators soliciting money inside federal buildings is intended merely to prevent legislators from meeting with donors in their offices or making fundraising calls on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ absurd .
The Senate Ethics Manual specifically states that “ no activities of a political solicitation nature should occur with the support of any federal resources [ staff or space ] in order to avoid any question that a violation of 18 U.S.C .
§ 607 has occurred ” ( emphasis added ) .
The whole point of the rules barring senators from begging for campaign cash inside federal buildings—whether they ’ re “ dialing for dollars ” or appearing on national television and asking donors to “ chip in ” —is to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ benefit their election bids .
Loeffler took the swampiest part of politics out of the back room and amplified it on national television .
If she is not held to account , then the message will be that ethics standards and the rule of law do not apply to the millionaires and billionaires who seek to make the Congress of the United State their privileged playground .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
Georgia Republican Kelly Loeffler is the richest member of the United States Senate, but that hasn’t stopped the appointed senator from making an illegal pitch for money to fund her embattled bid for a full term in the chamber.
Loeffler is locked in a January 5 runoff race with the Rev. Raphael Warnock, a Democrat who finished ahead of her in the initial voting on November 3. She’s mounting a desperate campaign that is filling the Atlanta airwaves with an onslaught of negative ads and, though the multimillionaire could afford to buy them herself, Loeffler’s instead appealing for money from across the country to pay for what could turn out to be the most expensive Senate campaign in history.
That’s what the senator did November 18, when she appeared on a Fox News program from the Russell Senate Office Building Rotunda. Loeffler wasn’t talking about Senate business that day. She was talking politics, and, after attacking Warnock repeatedly, the senator announced, “Well look, we know that hundreds of millions of dark, liberal money is pouring into our state. That’s why it’s so important that everyone across the country get involved. They can visit KellyforSenate.com to chip in five or 10 bucks, and get involved, volunteer.”
The appeal was a direct request for campaign money, made inside a federal building. That’s illegal. The section of the Code of Laws of the United States of America dealing with the solicitation of campaign funds inside federal buildings, 18 USC 607, plainly states:
It shall be unlawful for an individual who is an officer or employee of the Federal Government, including the President, Vice President, and Members of Congress, to solicit or receive a donation of money or other thing of value in connection with a Federal, State, or local election, while in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by an officer or employee of the United States, from any person.
The code outlines tough penalties for wrongdoers: “A person who violates this section shall be fined not more than $5,000, imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both.”
Loeffler’s appeal was also in conflict with US Senate ethics rules, which state clearly that “Senate Members and staff may not receive or solicit campaign contributions in any federal building.” Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann More From John Nichols A GOP Debate Without Trump Is the Definition of Pointlessness August 11, 2023 A Win for Abortion Rights, a Win for Democracy: Ohio Voters Reject Issue 1 August 9, 2023 The Biggest Threat to Donald Trump Could Be the Constitution Itself August 4, 2023
Loeffler’s not the first embattled Republican to have gotten caught crossing legal and ethical lines in pursuit of campaign cash. In October, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham was called out for pleading in a televised appearance from outside the room where the Senate Judiciary Committee was deliberating on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, “I don’t know how much [the hearing] affected fundraising today, but if you want to help me close the gap, lindseygraham.com. A little bit goes a long way.” That comment led US Representative Eric Swalwell, a California Democrat who is a former prosecutor, to highlight federal laws barring such activities and declare, “This is a crime. [Lindsey Graham] committed a crime in plain sight.” An ethics complaint was filed against Graham, though it has yet to be resolved by the lethargic Senate Ethics Committee.
Loeffler’s pitch was a good deal more more blatant than Graham’s. She mentioned explicit dollar amounts and specifically asked donors to “chip in” to her campaign. And watchdog groups noticed. The nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center has filed a complaint, which asks the Ethics Committee to mount “a swift investigation” into what the organization describes as a “blatant violation of rules that prohibits political fundraising on federal property.”
“If the Ethics Committee again fails to review this matter and hold both Graham and Loeffler accountable, the Senate will establish a dangerous precedent that solicitations of campaign contributions on federal property are permissible,” warn the center’s general counsel, Kedric Payne, and Delaney Marsco, a legal counsel who focuses on ethics issues. “Such a result conflicts not only with the Ethics Committee’s unequivocal rules and guidance, but also a fundamental principle of ethical public service: that federal resources are not to be used for political purposes.”
The American Democracy Legal Fund has also filed a complaint. That organization’s president, Brad Woodhouse, says that Loeffler’s “fundraising solicitation from the Capitol was illegal, plain and simple.”
The Georgia Democratic Party has filed its own complaint, along with a request that the Department of Justice investigate Loeffler’s televised fundraising appeal. “Senator Kelly Loeffler has once again chosen to use her position of power for personal and political advantage by illegally asking for donations on national television while on federal property,” says Scott Hogan, the party’s executive director. “She broke not only Senate rules but also federal law.” Current Issue View our current issue
Loeffler’s apologists have mounted a novel defense that suggests the legal ban on senators soliciting money inside federal buildings is intended merely to prevent legislators from meeting with donors in their offices or making fundraising calls on official phones. But that’s absurd.
The Senate Ethics Manual specifically states that “no activities of a political solicitation nature should occur with the support of any federal resources [staff or space] in order to avoid any question that a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 607 has occurred” (emphasis added). The whole point of the rules barring senators from begging for campaign cash inside federal buildings—whether they’re “dialing for dollars” or appearing on national television and asking donors to “chip in”—is to prevent them from leveraging their offices to benefit their election bids. Loeffler took the swampiest part of politics out of the back room and amplified it on national television. If she is not held to account, then the message will be that ethics standards and the rule of law do not apply to the millionaires and billionaires who seek to make the Congress of the United State their privileged playground.


thenation--2020-11-23--How Long Can Biden Avoid Confronting Trump?

Refusing to concede his loss in the presidential election , Donald Trump continues to spin absurd conspiracy theories , file vexatious lawsuits , pressure state lawmakers to overturn vote counts , and in general stonewall the transition to the next presidency .
On Sunday night , Trump sent out one of his typically nonsensical tweets , writing , “ In certain swing states , there were more votes than people who voted , and in big numbers .
Does that not really matter ?
Stopping Poll Watchers , voting for unsuspecting people , fake ballots and so much more .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ !
” The stalled transition is becoming a big problem for Joe Biden , since his staffers aren ’ t able to meet their counterparts in government or receive briefings .
Nor is the Biden team getting any federal funding to set up the offices it needs to staff the new presidency .
On Friday , Biden used this unprecedented situation to fundraise .
He tweeted , “ Here ’ s the deal : Because President Trump refuses to concede and is delaying the transition , we have to fund it ourselves and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re able , chip in to help fund the Biden-Harris transition.
” It ’ s common for campaigns to turn to donors to help defray some of the costs of a transition .
But Biden ’ s request for money struck a discordant note because of the special circumstances of 2020 .
After all , Trump is forbidding medical experts inside the government from talking to the Biden team .
This will slow down the ability of the new president to develop a Covid policy .
It ’ s not hyperbolic to say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s peevish inability to admit he was defeated .
The Perils of Not Prosecuting Trump Even a Clownish Coup Can Still Hurt Democracy But Biden has shied away from fighting Trump on those grounds .
As Ben Smith noted in The New York Times , “ some of President-elect Biden ’ s supporters ” are frustrated “ as he forgoes a full-throated confrontation over President Trump ’ s refusal to concede and delivers without fanfare a stream of appointments and an online transition fund-raiser.
” Biden prefers to do the steady work of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s clownishness .
This is an understandable strategy .
Biden ’ s low-key approach to Trump ’ s sabotaging of the transition is in keeping with the president-elect ’ s larger theory of the political moment .
Biden has long seen Trump as an outlier or anomaly , a destructive force who somehow gained the presidency and warped the country ’ s natural evolution .
By this theory , once Trump is out of office , he ’ ll lose his sway over the Republican Party .
American politics will cease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pre-Trump era , with Republicans and Democrats forced to make concessions in order to govern .
Biden articulated this theory in the speech he gave in May 2019 announcing his candidacy .
“ The American people want their government to work , and I don ’ t think that ’ s too much for them to ask , ” Biden said .
“ I know some people in DC say it can ’ t be done .
but let me tell them something , and make sure they understand this .
The country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re sick of the fighting .
They ’ re sick of the childish behavior.
” As Chris Cillizza of CNN noted , “ That belief—that Trump was an anomaly , a glitch in the Matrix—undergirded Biden ’ s entire primary and general election campaign .
He campaigned as the change candidate—to change things back to the way they were in the not-so-bad old days when Republicans and Democrats fought but eventually found ways to work together.
” But already in the transition , we are seeing the major problem with this theory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t go away ?
What if he decides to stay in the fray , remain a Republican kingmaker and possibly run again in 2024 ?
It would go against political norms , since you would have to go back to the era of Grover Cleveland and Theodore Roosevelt to find a former president eager to get back into the ring .
But Trump has never respected norms .
He likes to be the center of attention .
If anything , the transition has highlighted how much power Trump still has over Republican lawmakers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ acknowledged Biden ’ s victory : Lisa Murkowski , Ben Sasse , Marco Rubio , Susan Collins , Pat Toomey , and Mitt Romney .
A few other senators have called for the Trump White House to share intelligence briefings with Biden , even though they refuse to acknowledge the results of the election : John Cornyn , Ted Cruz , James Lankford .
As Carl Bernstein noted on CNN , many Republican senators in private express “ extreme contempt ” for Trump ( Bernstein provided a list of 21 ) .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in public , for fear of offending the Trump-loving base of the Republican Party .
Trump ’ s attempts to thwart the results of the election have put him into conflict with the Republican governors of states like Georgia and Ohio .
As Politico notes , these conflicts are a way for Trump to assert his power over the party .
“ Trump ’ s intrusions into Georgia and Ohio provide an early test case for how he might use his stranglehold on the conservative base to control the party long after he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ observes .
“ Never mind that Trump will no longer be in power : Cross him , and you will pay.
” Trump is preparing to be both a kingmaker and something more : the king in exile .
The myth of the stolen election will bind ordinary Republicans to him more tightly and make party leaders even more fearful of offending him .
But if Trump remains a force in American political life , then what happens to Biden ’ s theory that the electoral defeat of Trump will restore normality ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ but Biden is likely to have won a decisive popular-vote victory of more than 7 million ( almost all the outstanding votes are in Democratic areas ) .
But this victory has done nothing to sever the ties between Trump and the GOP .
Still loyal to Trump , most Republican elected officials can ’ t even grant Biden the title of president-elect .
After inauguration , these same Republicans will be under enormous pressure from Trump and his followers to not cooperate with Biden and to do what they can sabotage his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden will have to admit that he needs a new theory of politics .
Just expecting Trump to fade away after electoral defeat is a forlorn hope .
Biden will have to govern as the president of a nation where Trump is the leader of the opposition .
Which means Biden can ill-afford to keep avoiding a fight with Trump .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
Refusing to concede his loss in the presidential election, Donald Trump continues to spin absurd conspiracy theories, file vexatious lawsuits, pressure state lawmakers to overturn vote counts, and in general stonewall the transition to the next presidency. On Sunday night, Trump sent out one of his typically nonsensical tweets, writing, “In certain swing states, there were more votes than people who voted, and in big numbers. Does that not really matter? Stopping Poll Watchers, voting for unsuspecting people, fake ballots and so much more. Such egregious conduct. We will win!”
The stalled transition is becoming a big problem for Joe Biden, since his staffers aren’t able to meet their counterparts in government or receive briefings. Nor is the Biden team getting any federal funding to set up the offices it needs to staff the new presidency. On Friday, Biden used this unprecedented situation to fundraise. He tweeted, “Here’s the deal: Because President Trump refuses to concede and is delaying the transition, we have to fund it ourselves and need your help. If you’re able, chip in to help fund the Biden-Harris transition.”
It’s common for campaigns to turn to donors to help defray some of the costs of a transition. But Biden’s request for money struck a discordant note because of the special circumstances of 2020. After all, Trump is forbidding medical experts inside the government from talking to the Biden team. This will slow down the ability of the new president to develop a Covid policy. It’s not hyperbolic to say people will die because of Trump’s peevish inability to admit he was defeated. More From Jeet Heer The Indigenous Roots of Robbie Robertson’s Rock and Roll Revolution August 14, 2023 Why Does This Racist Keep Getting Silicon Valley Money? August 11, 2023 When Phallocrats Go Limp August 4, 2023
But Biden has shied away from fighting Trump on those grounds. As Ben Smith noted in The New York Times, “some of President-elect Biden’s supporters” are frustrated “as he forgoes a full-throated confrontation over President Trump’s refusal to concede and delivers without fanfare a stream of appointments and an online transition fund-raiser.” Biden prefers to do the steady work of staffing his administration rather than respond to Trump’s clownishness. This is an understandable strategy.
Biden’s low-key approach to Trump’s sabotaging of the transition is in keeping with the president-elect’s larger theory of the political moment. Biden has long seen Trump as an outlier or anomaly, a destructive force who somehow gained the presidency and warped the country’s natural evolution. By this theory, once Trump is out of office, he’ll lose his sway over the Republican Party. American politics will cease their extreme polarization and return to the pre-Trump era, with Republicans and Democrats forced to make concessions in order to govern.
Biden articulated this theory in the speech he gave in May 2019 announcing his candidacy. “The American people want their government to work, and I don’t think that’s too much for them to ask,” Biden said. “I know some people in DC say it can’t be done. but let me tell them something, and make sure they understand this. The country is sick of the division. They’re sick of the fighting. They’re sick of the childish behavior.” As Chris Cillizza of CNN noted, “That belief—that Trump was an anomaly, a glitch in the Matrix—undergirded Biden’s entire primary and general election campaign. He campaigned as the change candidate—to change things back to the way they were in the not-so-bad old days when Republicans and Democrats fought but eventually found ways to work together.” Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. Manny Maung Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. Manny Maung Current Issue View our current issue
But already in the transition, we are seeing the major problem with this theory: What happens if Trump doesn’t go away? What if he decides to stay in the fray, remain a Republican kingmaker and possibly run again in 2024? It would go against political norms, since you would have to go back to the era of Grover Cleveland and Theodore Roosevelt to find a former president eager to get back into the ring. But Trump has never respected norms. He likes to be the center of attention.
If anything, the transition has highlighted how much power Trump still has over Republican lawmakers. Only six Republican senators have even acknowledged Biden’s victory: Lisa Murkowski, Ben Sasse, Marco Rubio, Susan Collins, Pat Toomey, and Mitt Romney. A few other senators have called for the Trump White House to share intelligence briefings with Biden, even though they refuse to acknowledge the results of the election: John Cornyn, Ted Cruz, James Lankford. As Carl Bernstein noted on CNN, many Republican senators in private express “extreme contempt” for Trump (Bernstein provided a list of 21). But they usually shy away from saying so in public, for fear of offending the Trump-loving base of the Republican Party.
Trump’s attempts to thwart the results of the election have put him into conflict with the Republican governors of states like Georgia and Ohio. As Politico notes, these conflicts are a way for Trump to assert his power over the party. “Trump’s intrusions into Georgia and Ohio provide an early test case for how he might use his stranglehold on the conservative base to control the party long after he leaves the White House,” Politico observes. “Never mind that Trump will no longer be in power: Cross him, and you will pay.” President-Elect Representative Ilhan Omar: ‘I Hope President Biden Seizes This Opportunity.’ Representative Ilhan Omar
Trump is preparing to be both a kingmaker and something more: the king in exile. The myth of the stolen election will bind ordinary Republicans to him more tightly and make party leaders even more fearful of offending him.
But if Trump remains a force in American political life, then what happens to Biden’s theory that the electoral defeat of Trump will restore normality? The votes are still being counted, but Biden is likely to have won a decisive popular-vote victory of more than 7 million (almost all the outstanding votes are in Democratic areas). But this victory has done nothing to sever the ties between Trump and the GOP. Still loyal to Trump, most Republican elected officials can’t even grant Biden the title of president-elect. After inauguration, these same Republicans will be under enormous pressure from Trump and his followers to not cooperate with Biden and to do what they can sabotage his presidency.
At some point soon, Biden will have to admit that he needs a new theory of politics. Just expecting Trump to fade away after electoral defeat is a forlorn hope. Biden will have to govern as the president of a nation where Trump is the leader of the opposition. Which means Biden can ill-afford to keep avoiding a fight with Trump.


thenation--2020-11-24--Diane Cook’s Morality Tales for Our Climate Future

“ The Way the End of Days Should Be , ” a story from Diane Cook ’ s 2014 collection Man V. Nature , takes place in a flooded world .
The story ’ s unnamed narrator defends their home from desperate strangers with the help of a man named Gary .
The narrator ’ s neighbor , meanwhile , houses every newcomer who washes up on his porch—he welcomes so many people , in fact , that his house begins to deteriorate .
No matter how bad things get for the neighbor and the refugees living in his house @ @ @ @ @ @ @ isolationist ways .
Eventually , Gary abandons the narrator to help the neighbor , and the narrator reacts by suspecting Gary and the neighbor of conspiring against him .
We leave the narrator lingering near their front door , a knife in each hand , waiting to defend his home from a siege that may never come .
This story is a piece of climate change fiction ( or “ CliFI ” ) , sure .
But it ’ s also a parable , a morality tale about the decisions one must make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ apocalypse .
Do you empathize with the survivalist narrator or his selfless neighbor ?
How would you act if your neighborhood flooded tomorrow ?
Diane Cook centers her stories around moral conundrums like this one .
As Man V. Nature ’ s title suggests , Cook forces readers to question the limits of their humanity in the face of extreme circumstances—supernatural , environmental , futuristic , or a combination of the three .
Cook ’ s debut novel , The New Wilderness , towers above the stories in her collection .
It takes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people are struggling to survive in urban society ( referred to simply as “ the City ” ) .
A group of the most vulnerable citizens retreat to an area known as “ the Wilderness ” to live in a nomadic hunter-gatherer place called “ the Community.
” Our protagonist , Bea , decides to join the Community because her daughter Agnes is sick : If she and Agnes don ’ t leave the City for the Wilderness , Agnes ’ s death is all but assured .
The emotional core of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the relationship between Bea and Agnes , the most intricate and morally arresting relationship Cook has conjured to date .
Bea has joined the Community to save her daughter ’ s life , and yet Bea has entered into an existence full of cultish polyamory , grisly hunting expeditions , the consumption of raw meat , insects , and rodents , not to mention maiming and death .
When Bea can ’ t bear life in the Community any longer and abandons Agnes to return to the City , Cook switches from Bea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and in doing so forces us to challenge our conception of Bea from the viewpoint of the daughter she abandoned .
Agnes dismisses her “ mean mother who had run away .
The meanest of them all .
Perhaps she ’ d never been anything but a mean mother and every kiss had been cruel , meant to eventually cause pain with its absence.
” In presenting both sides of the situation , Cook asks : How can we morally balance the initial sacrifice with the later abandonment ?
How much are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action , considering the brutality of life in the Wilderness to which Bea was exposed ?
Things only get more complicated after Bea returns to the Community and attempts to get back into her daughter ’ s good graces .
“ Agnes hated that her mind would not let her curl back into her mother .
Would not let her run to her without a care or worry or resentment .
Would not let her forget that cloud of dust her mother had disappeared into… .
She fell asleep to the exhalation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to the urgency of her own thrumming heart.
” The relationship between mother and daughter continues to oscillate between caring and rejection , love and hate , as Agnes matures and becomes a woman in her own right , falls in love , and begins to contemplate becoming a mother herself , a process that throws her understanding of her mother ’ s actions into a new light entirely .
The Community ’ s social dynamics place a similar strain on our beliefs .
Carl , the Community ’ s self-serving philosopher-king @ @ @ @ @ @ @ encounters a gaggle of “ Newcomers , ” who insist upon resolving issues by vote .
Just like that , the Community evolves from a monarchy into a democracy , a change that causes more problems than it solves as the majority begin to become tyrannical .
If you strip away its apocalyptic backdrop , the novel presents fresh commentary about group-think , human psychology , and governance .
By the end of it , the situation makes you wonder if democracy will be the most effective way to survive the apocalypse .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , otherworldly terrains .
At the outset of the novel , when the Community as a group are crossing a river , they witness “ a loose log , stripped naked of its bark and limbs , bobb [ ing ] and roll [ ing ] past even though the nearby landscape was treeless.
” Later on , Agnes ’ s friend Celeste “ peel [ s ] back the moss in one wet green sheet and reveal [ s ] a notch in the rock .
From the notch , a neon-pink @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” And when the Community subsequently travel to the top of a caldera , “ [ a ] round a bend the lakes emerged .
One black and one blue .
The closer they got , the more the black one evolved into a deep murky green and the blue one became white like the clouded sky above it.
” Diane Cook makes the Wilderness feel as real , and surreal , as if you were living in it yourself .
In concert with the sharp rendering of social relations , Cook makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Novels like hers can help us more deeply understand the estrangement and horror produced by each extreme weather pattern or mass extinction event we read about in the news .
In his 2016 book The Great Derangement : Climate Change and the Unthinkable , Amitav Ghosh decries the ghettoization of climate change as a subject within the landscape of fiction : “ It could even be said that fiction that deals with climate change is almost by definition not of the kind that is taken seriously by literary journals , ” Ghosh writes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subject is often enough to relegate a novel or a short story to the genre of science fiction.
” Ghosh is right , but with some caveats .
Many well-regarded English-language writers of literary fiction have tried their hand at CliFi .
J.G .
Ballard ’ s first three novels—The Wind From Nowhere , The Drowned World , and The Burned World—envision three different settings affected by three different climate change apocalypses .
T.C .
Boyle ’ s A Friend of the Earth is set in a 2025 world in which the biosphere @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate change as the backdrop for his 2010 novel Solar .
None of the novels mentioned above are considered canonic novels in the careers of their authors .
As Ghosh would argue , they have been consigned to the category of CliFi merely because of their subject matter , and aren ’ t ever compared to Ballard ’ s High Rise , Boyle ’ s The Tortilla Curtain , or McEwan ’ s Atonement .
But this is changing now .
Critics consider Weather , Jenny Offill ’ s fragmented rumination on climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ best works of English-language fiction published this year .
John Lanchester ’ s climate change parable The Wall was heralded as a timely work last year .
And Diane Cook has found herself on this year ’ s Booker Prize short list .
What has precipitated CliFi ’ s acceptance by the mainstream literary establishment ?
Open a newspaper .
Turn on the TV .
Climate change is no longer a phenomenon for science fiction writers alone to envision .
We are living in a climate-changed world .
The City in Diane Cook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or Lahore or Miami .
Climate change fiction isn ’ t a speculative genre anymore—it is quickly becoming its own form of literary realism .
Well , perhaps not quite realism .
Maybe we should call it literary relativism , as the phenomena are real but the places and people feeling the impact aren ’ t supposed to be .
Cook and others barely exaggerate what we ’ re reading in the news but place these exaggerations within fictional universes , making the gravity of what we ’ re experiencing that much more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ constructed , but the mechanics of the novel , just like the mechanics of Cook ’ s short stories , are those of a simple parable .
We have pushed the world to the point where we will soon have to change our way of life .
The lives that we will soon lead will test our morality , our courage , our sheer willingness to survive .
What sacrifices will we have to make to stay alive in the next 20 years ?
The next 50 years ?
Will those sacrifices even @ @ @ @

“The Way the End of Days Should Be,” a story from Diane Cook’s 2014 collection Man V. Nature, takes place in a flooded world. The story’s unnamed narrator defends their home from desperate strangers with the help of a man named Gary. The narrator’s neighbor, meanwhile, houses every newcomer who washes up on his porch—he welcomes so many people, in fact, that his house begins to deteriorate. No matter how bad things get for the neighbor and the refugees living in his house, the narrator refuses to change their isolationist ways. Eventually, Gary abandons the narrator to help the neighbor, and the narrator reacts by suspecting Gary and the neighbor of conspiring against him. We leave the narrator lingering near their front door, a knife in each hand, waiting to defend his home from a siege that may never come. Books in Review The New Wilderness By Diane Cook Buy this book
This story is a piece of climate change fiction (or “CliFI”), sure. But it’s also a parable, a morality tale about the decisions one must make when living in the midst of the apocalypse. Do you empathize with the survivalist narrator or his selfless neighbor? How would you act if your neighborhood flooded tomorrow?
Diane Cook centers her stories around moral conundrums like this one. As Man V. Nature’s title suggests, Cook forces readers to question the limits of their humanity in the face of extreme circumstances—supernatural, environmental, futuristic, or a combination of the three.
Cook’s debut novel, The New Wilderness, towers above the stories in her collection. It takes on a future Earth so polluted that people are struggling to survive in urban society (referred to simply as “the City”). A group of the most vulnerable citizens retreat to an area known as “the Wilderness” to live in a nomadic hunter-gatherer place called “the Community.” Our protagonist, Bea, decides to join the Community because her daughter Agnes is sick: If she and Agnes don’t leave the City for the Wilderness, Agnes’s death is all but assured.
The emotional core of the novel—and its true source of brilliance—lies in the relationship between Bea and Agnes, the most intricate and morally arresting relationship Cook has conjured to date. Bea has joined the Community to save her daughter’s life, and yet Bea has entered into an existence full of cultish polyamory, grisly hunting expeditions, the consumption of raw meat, insects, and rodents, not to mention maiming and death. When Bea can’t bear life in the Community any longer and abandons Agnes to return to the City, Cook switches from Bea’s perspective to that of Agnes, and in doing so forces us to challenge our conception of Bea from the viewpoint of the daughter she abandoned. Agnes dismisses her “mean mother who had run away. The meanest of them all. Perhaps she’d never been anything but a mean mother and every kiss had been cruel, meant to eventually cause pain with its absence.” In presenting both sides of the situation, Cook asks: How can we morally balance the initial sacrifice with the later abandonment? How much are we willing to justify such a reprehensible action, considering the brutality of life in the Wilderness to which Bea was exposed?
Things only get more complicated after Bea returns to the Community and attempts to get back into her daughter’s good graces. “Agnes hated that her mind would not let her curl back into her mother. Would not let her run to her without a care or worry or resentment. Would not let her forget that cloud of dust her mother had disappeared into…. She fell asleep to the exhalation of her mother’s spent breath, and to the urgency of her own thrumming heart.” The relationship between mother and daughter continues to oscillate between caring and rejection, love and hate, as Agnes matures and becomes a woman in her own right, falls in love, and begins to contemplate becoming a mother herself, a process that throws her understanding of her mother’s actions into a new light entirely. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
The Community’s social dynamics place a similar strain on our beliefs. Carl, the Community’s self-serving philosopher-king, makes unilateral decisions until the group encounters a gaggle of “Newcomers,” who insist upon resolving issues by vote. Just like that, the Community evolves from a monarchy into a democracy, a change that causes more problems than it solves as the majority begin to become tyrannical. If you strip away its apocalyptic backdrop, the novel presents fresh commentary about group-think, human psychology, and governance. By the end of it, the situation makes you wonder if democracy will be the most effective way to survive the apocalypse.
Cook undergirds these human dynamics with bewildering, otherworldly terrains. At the outset of the novel, when the Community as a group are crossing a river, they witness “a loose log, stripped naked of its bark and limbs, bobb[ing] and roll[ing] past even though the nearby landscape was treeless.” Later on, Agnes’s friend Celeste “peel[s] back the moss in one wet green sheet and reveal[s] a notch in the rock. From the notch, a neon-pink glow spread[s] like sunburst.” And when the Community subsequently travel to the top of a caldera, “[a]round a bend the lakes emerged. One black and one blue. The closer they got, the more the black one evolved into a deep murky green and the blue one became white like the clouded sky above it.” Diane Cook makes the Wilderness feel as real, and surreal, as if you were living in it yourself. In concert with the sharp rendering of social relations, Cook makes the appeal of climate fiction apparent: Novels like hers can help us more deeply understand the estrangement and horror produced by each extreme weather pattern or mass extinction event we read about in the news.
In his 2016 book The Great Derangement: Climate Change and the Unthinkable, Amitav Ghosh decries the ghettoization of climate change as a subject within the landscape of fiction: “It could even be said that fiction that deals with climate change is almost by definition not of the kind that is taken seriously by literary journals,” Ghosh writes. “The mere mention of the subject is often enough to relegate a novel or a short story to the genre of science fiction.”
Ghosh is right, but with some caveats. Many well-regarded English-language writers of literary fiction have tried their hand at CliFi. J.G. Ballard’s first three novels—The Wind From Nowhere, The Drowned World, and The Burned World—envision three different settings affected by three different climate change apocalypses. T.C. Boyle’s A Friend of the Earth is set in a 2025 world in which the biosphere has collapsed. Ian McEwan turned to climate change as the backdrop for his 2010 novel Solar.
None of the novels mentioned above are considered canonic novels in the careers of their authors. As Ghosh would argue, they have been consigned to the category of CliFi merely because of their subject matter, and aren’t ever compared to Ballard’s High Rise, Boyle’s The Tortilla Curtain, or McEwan’s Atonement.
But this is changing now. Critics consider Weather, Jenny Offill’s fragmented rumination on climate change, to be one of the best works of English-language fiction published this year. John Lanchester’s climate change parable The Wall was heralded as a timely work last year. And Diane Cook has found herself on this year’s Booker Prize short list.
What has precipitated CliFi’s acceptance by the mainstream literary establishment? Open a newspaper. Turn on the TV. Climate change is no longer a phenomenon for science fiction writers alone to envision. We are living in a climate-changed world. The City in Diane Cook’s novel could be New Delhi or Lahore or Miami. Climate change fiction isn’t a speculative genre anymore—it is quickly becoming its own form of literary realism.
Well, perhaps not quite realism. Maybe we should call it literary relativism, as the phenomena are real but the places and people feeling the impact aren’t supposed to be. Cook and others barely exaggerate what we’re reading in the news but place these exaggerations within fictional universes, making the gravity of what we’re experiencing that much more affecting.
The New Wilderness is carefully constructed, but the mechanics of the novel, just like the mechanics of Cook’s short stories, are those of a simple parable. We have pushed the world to the point where we will soon have to change our way of life. The lives that we will soon lead will test our morality, our courage, our sheer willingness to survive. What sacrifices will we have to make to stay alive in the next 20 years? The next 50 years? Will those sacrifices even be worth making?


thenation--2020-11-24--How Biden Can ‘Build Back Better’ With or Without the Senate

In 2008 , as the economy was in free fall , Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama worked together with their secretaries of the Treasury , the chair of the Federal Reserve , and the president of the New York Federal Reserve and created one of the largest financing schemes in the history of the United States to prevent total economic meltdown .
Part of this was the Troubled Asset Relief Program , the $ 700 billion package that Congress passed in response to the financial crisis .
But the overwhelmingly greater part of this plan used the Fed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trillion and $ 29 trillion in near-zero-interest loans directly to banks to keep them afloat .
While this worked to save our banking system and avoid the worst possible disaster , the plan neglected to invest in rebuilding the real economy .
As a result , Americans saw a grueling , decade-long recovery—if they saw any recovery at all .
In 2021 , the Biden administration will face an even deeper and potentially longer recession , triggered by Covid-19—but with roots in a chronic failure to invest in vast swaths of our country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ambitious plan for recovery : “ Build Back Better.
” It promises to create millions of new high-wage jobs by investing in efforts to , e.g.
, supply the world with electric cars , build the infrastructure to charge those cars , upgrade millions of homes to be more energy-efficient , and support and create small businesses in every community across our country .
Though Biden campaigned on this plan , we ’ re now told that if Democrats can not win the two Senate races in Georgia , “ Build Back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on arrival .
Or would it ?
As it turns out , Biden can directly and swiftly implement almost all of his plan to “ Build Back Better ” and renew the American economy without Congress—using only his presidential powers and responsibilities .
A new memo sent to the Biden transition team by my colleagues at New Consensus lays out exactly how he can do so .
In a nutshell , just like Bush and Obama did in 2008–09 , Biden would work with his secretary of the Treasury and the chair of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dollars in low-interest loans .
Only this time , instead of lending only to banks , the Fed would make long-term , productive investments to help small businesses struggling because of the pandemic , modernize existing industries , and build the industries of the future .
This may sound unusual to some , but would in fact be returning the Fed to its original mission as a network of regional development banks .
This is how we spur the next generation of start-ups in everything from electric vehicles to artificial intelligence , creating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden has envisioned in his plan to “ Build Back Better.
” Further , since this money is provided in the form of low-interest loans to businesses , as the economy recovers and businesses prosper , the Fed will make its money back—with interest .
In many ways , the Fed has already begun this transition through its new Municipal Liquidity Facility and Main Street Lending Programs .
However , these programs , in their current form , are hamstrung by being based entirely in the New York and Boston Feds .
Not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Feds too short-staffed to handle the volume required by “ Build Back Better , ” but they are at a severe informational and tactical disadvantage compared to , say , the Dallas Fed in knowing how to develop the Southwestern economy , the Atlanta Fed in knowing how to develop the Southeastern economy , and so on .
In addition to working with the chair of the Fed to extend trillions of dollars in loans to businesses , Biden ’ s administration should work with the chair to turn the Fed into a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with each regional Federal Reserve Bank given the discretion , finances , and responsibility for developing its local region .
Our plan requires the Fed to lend productively to help the real economy recover , not just lend money to banks and large businesses that are interested in speculative trading to make a quick buck or stock buybacks to prop up share prices .
The details of where that productive investment should go can also be managed directly through a Biden administration without the need for congressional authorization or approval .
Specifically , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bodies within the executive branch : a National Development Council , which Biden could form from relevant cabinet members and other officials , with the mandate of converting Biden ’ s “ Build Back Better ” plan into an executable national economic development strategy and a National Development Bank , housed in the Treasury , which could contract federal agencies like the Army Corps of Engineers to fund projects that are more public in nature such as nationwide infrastructure upgrades .
Just as Bush had the ability to bail out Wall Street in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and just as Trump has been able to redirect defense money to his “ wall ” and pump money into the stock market without waiting on Congress , Biden has a path to rebuild and upgrade the entire American economy starting on January 20 , 2021 , regardless of the results of Georgia ’ s dual Senate runoffs .
By providing the Fed with an actual plan for making money directly available to Main Street instead of just Wall Street , Biden can have not just a faster recovery , he can also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two years that he is fighting with every tool at his disposal to create a booming , high-wage , and more sustainable economy that is building the industries of the future .
Will Biden lead the charge ?

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
In 2008, as the economy was in free fall, Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama worked together with their secretaries of the Treasury, the chair of the Federal Reserve, and the president of the New York Federal Reserve and created one of the largest financing schemes in the history of the United States to prevent total economic meltdown. Part of this was the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the $700 billion package that Congress passed in response to the financial crisis. But the overwhelmingly greater part of this plan used the Fed to lend out somewhere between $7 trillion and $29 trillion in near-zero-interest loans directly to banks to keep them afloat. While this worked to save our banking system and avoid the worst possible disaster, the plan neglected to invest in rebuilding the real economy. As a result, Americans saw a grueling, decade-long recovery—if they saw any recovery at all.
In 2021, the Biden administration will face an even deeper and potentially longer recession, triggered by Covid-19—but with roots in a chronic failure to invest in vast swaths of our country. Luckily, Biden has a smart and ambitious plan for recovery: “Build Back Better.” It promises to create millions of new high-wage jobs by investing in efforts to, e.g., supply the world with electric cars, build the infrastructure to charge those cars, upgrade millions of homes to be more energy-efficient, and support and create small businesses in every community across our country. Though Biden campaigned on this plan, we’re now told that if Democrats cannot win the two Senate races in Georgia, “Build Back Better” would be all but dead on arrival.
Or would it?
As it turns out, Biden can directly and swiftly implement almost all of his plan to “Build Back Better” and renew the American economy without Congress—using only his presidential powers and responsibilities. A new memo sent to the Biden transition team by my colleagues at New Consensus lays out exactly how he can do so. In a nutshell, just like Bush and Obama did in 2008–09, Biden would work with his secretary of the Treasury and the chair of the Fed to make available trillions of dollars in low-interest loans. Only this time, instead of lending only to banks, the Fed would make long-term, productive investments to help small businesses struggling because of the pandemic, modernize existing industries, and build the industries of the future.
This may sound unusual to some, but would in fact be returning the Fed to its original mission as a network of regional development banks. This is how we spur the next generation of start-ups in everything from electric vehicles to artificial intelligence, creating millions of high-wage jobs, just as Biden has envisioned in his plan to “Build Back Better.” Further, since this money is provided in the form of low-interest loans to businesses, as the economy recovers and businesses prosper, the Fed will make its money back—with interest.
In many ways, the Fed has already begun this transition through its new Municipal Liquidity Facility and Main Street Lending Programs. However, these programs, in their current form, are hamstrung by being based entirely in the New York and Boston Feds. Not only are the New York and Boston Feds too short-staffed to handle the volume required by “Build Back Better,” but they are at a severe informational and tactical disadvantage compared to, say, the Dallas Fed in knowing how to develop the Southwestern economy, the Atlanta Fed in knowing how to develop the Southeastern economy, and so on. In addition to working with the chair of the Fed to extend trillions of dollars in loans to businesses, Biden’s administration should work with the chair to turn the Fed into a true system of regional development banks, with each regional Federal Reserve Bank given the discretion, finances, and responsibility for developing its local region.
Our plan requires the Fed to lend productively to help the real economy recover, not just lend money to banks and large businesses that are interested in speculative trading to make a quick buck or stock buybacks to prop up share prices. The details of where that productive investment should go can also be managed directly through a Biden administration without the need for congressional authorization or approval. Specifically, the Biden administration should create two new bodies within the executive branch: a National Development Council, which Biden could form from relevant cabinet members and other officials, with the mandate of converting Biden’s “Build Back Better” plan into an executable national economic development strategy and a National Development Bank, housed in the Treasury, which could contract federal agencies like the Army Corps of Engineers to fund projects that are more public in nature such as nationwide infrastructure upgrades.
Just as Bush had the ability to bail out Wall Street in 2008 without waiting on the Senate, and just as Trump has been able to redirect defense money to his “wall” and pump money into the stock market without waiting on Congress, Biden has a path to rebuild and upgrade the entire American economy starting on January 20, 2021, regardless of the results of Georgia’s dual Senate runoffs. By providing the Fed with an actual plan for making money directly available to Main Street instead of just Wall Street, Biden can have not just a faster recovery, he can also show the American people within his first two years that he is fighting with every tool at his disposal to create a booming, high-wage, and more sustainable economy that is building the industries of the future. Will Biden lead the charge?