vox--2020-01-12--Capitalism is turning us into addicts

Capitalism is turning us into addicts

Capitalism is great at making people want things they don ’ t need .
And of course this is what we should expect from a system that runs on production and consumption .
Companies make and sell products and those products have to be consumed by as many people as possible — that ’ s what makes the whole thing work .
So it ’ s not surprising that businesses do everything they can to convince people to buy whatever they ’ re selling .
But what happens when marketing becomes active manipulation ?
More precisely , what happens when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to refine our pleasures but to engineer addictive behaviors ?
A recent book by University of North Florida historian and addiction expert David T. Courtwright , called The Age of Addiction : How Bad Habits Became Big Business , tries to answer these questions in a fascinating history of corporate America ’ s efforts to shape our habits and desires .
What we have today is something Courtwright calls “ limbic capitalism , ” a reference to the part of the brain that deals with pleasure and motivation .
As our understanding of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have gotten better at exploiting our instincts for profit .
Think , for example , of all the apps and platforms specifically designed to hijack our attention with pings and dopamine hits while harvesting our data .
We ’ ve always had some form of limbic capitalism , Courtwright says , but the methods are much more sophisticated now and the range of addictive behaviors are much wider than they used to be .
I spoke to Courtwright about the problems this has created , why the battle against limbic capitalism is seemingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re destined to live in a consumerist dystopia .
A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows .
“ Limbic capitalism ” is a strange phrase at the center of your book .
What does it mean and why should people be aware of it ?
Well , limbic capitalism is just my shorthand for global industries that basically encourage excessive consumption and even addiction .
In fact , you could make that even stronger and say not only do they encourage it but now they ’ ve reached the point where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And where does that word “ limbic ” come from ?
It ’ s a reference to the limbic region of your brain , which is the part of your brain that deals with pleasure , motivation , long-term memory , and other functions that are crucial for survival .
You couldn ’ t live without your limbic system and you couldn ’ t reproduce without it and that ’ s why it has evolved .
And yet that same system is now susceptible to hijacking by corporate interests in a way that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That ’ s the paradox .
How is it hijacked ?
The short answer is that companies offer products that will produce a burst release of dopamine in a way that conditions and ultimately changes the brain and develops certain addictive behaviors , which is to say behaviors that are harmful .
Now , people have always peddled products that are potentially addictive .
But what ’ s happened in the last 100 years or so is that more of these commercial strategies come from highly organized corporations that do very sophisticated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these addictive goods and services .
It seems to me that capitalism runs on the addictions of consumers , has always run on the addictions of consumers , and therefore this isn ’ t all that revelatory .
I hear this sort of point all the time , and my answer is that it ’ s not quite right .
I make a distinction between ordinary capitalist enterprises like companies that sell people rakes or plows or nails or whatever — there ’ s absolutely nothing wrong with that , and , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good at distributing those goods .
It ’ s a force for human progress .
But I think of limbic capitalism as capitalism ’ s evil twin , a really cancerous outgrowth of productive capitalism .
There is a certain class of brain-rewarding products that lead to a form of pathological learning that we call addiction and it ’ s that branch of capitalism that is especially dangerous .
So I ’ m not anti-capitalism , but am I calling attention to a certain species of capitalism that cultivates addictive behavior for profit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are we talking about ?
Who traffics in limbic capitalism ?
If you ’ d asked that question half a century ago I would ’ ve said we ’ re mainly talking about alcohol , tobacco , and other drugs .
But in the last 20 or 25 years , there ’ s been a big expansion of the concept of addiction .
So now we don ’ t just speak about addiction to drugs , we speak about addiction to pornography , to computer games , to social media , to food @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What happens in the last few decades is an explosion of technological innovation and mass production and mass marketing and , most recently , the rise of the internet , which has really accelerated the process and opened up new spaces for limbic capitalists to both grab our attention and sell us more products .
Limbic capitalism in the age of digital technology is truly a whole new ballgame .
The point about digital technology seems especially important .
Everyone who has a smartphone in their pocket , everyone who uses social media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is , one way or another , a prisoner of limbic capitalism .
Every time we hear that ping from a like or a retweet , we get that dopamine hit .
If that ’ s not an addiction , I don ’ t know what is .
That actually gets at a very interesting question : Is it the internet and [ related ] devices that are addictive , or is it the content of the internet that ’ s addictive ?
I think it ’ s both .
You have traditional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or drugs that are available through the internet , but you also have internet-linked mobile devices that themselves come to function almost like gambling machines , where you ’ re constantly getting dinged .
You ’ re constantly getting messages , you ’ re concerned about likes , you ’ re wondering about the latest post , you have this fear of missing out .
And this is key : You ’ re not just responding to these devices , you ’ re anticipating them .
That ’ s another thing about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simply provide reward , they also provide conditioning .
Smartphone technologies arguably accomplish this better than any device or product in human history .
The recent controversy around vaping and Juul seems like a good example of how limbic capitalism works in practice .
It ’ s a perfect example because it captures several features of a limbic capitalist enterprise , both historically and in terms of its current manifestation .
So number one , limbic capitalists target the young .
This is probably the most politically sensitive aspect of limbic capitalism .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a harm-reduction smoking replacement device for confirmed devices is great — who could object to that ?
But as the product has developed , especially since Juul came along , there ’ s been more and more of an emphasis on the youth market .
Which is what we ’ ve always seen from Big Tobacco and Big Alcohol : the youth are your best customers because they ’ ll be around the longest .
It ’ s about more than just delivering the product , though .
One of the discoveries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the history of potentially addictive pleasures there ’ s a tendency to blend vices and experiences in ways that increase the addictive qualities of products .
Las Vegas is a great example of this .
Vegas is not just about gambling ; it ’ s a place where you can booze it up , it ’ s about nightclubs and big spectacles and all the dazzling amusements — everything is wrapped up in a big hedonic package .
I ’ d love to know how you distinguish the manufacture of new demands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exist .
That ’ s a very interesting question .
Eating is not a manufactured demand .
You have to eat to survive , but you don ’ t have to eat highly processed food that stimulates the release of dopamine in a way that alters your mood and gives you a rush .
What we ’ ve done is we ’ ve taken things like sugar or salt that were once comparatively scarce and valuable commodities and made these things massively available .
So once you get the ingredients that are capable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s just a matter of designing products that will essentially maximize that brain reward .
So again , the demand , “ I ’ ve got to eat something , ” was always there but what the processed food industry does , because it ’ s so competitive , is create products that will provide the calories and nutrients in ways that act like mood-altering drugs .
And that ’ s where the line between simple marketing and limbic capitalism lies .
Sure , everyone needs to eat , but not everyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of sunglasses or own a closet of products that add nothing to their life apart from marking their identity and status for other people .
These are the sorts of manufactured demands I had in mind , and they ’ re harder to pin down than our appetite for things like booze or junk food .
Ten years ago I would ’ ve agreed with you .
I would ’ ve said nobody really needs to tweet , nobody needs a Facebook page .
But there are what I call opt-in and opt-out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the internet and internet access were opt-in technologies .
In other words , you adopted these things , you learned how to use them .
But now I think we ’ ve reached the point where they ’ ve become opt-out technologies , where you ’ re going to have to do something radical or unusual like go off the grid or throw away your smartphone to escape it .
Once you ’ re in an environment where you ’ ve got to have this device , you ’ re in an environment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what the policy analyst Jonathan Caulkins calls “ temptation goods.
” You may have a firm resolution to use your smartphone just for email , or just to check the New York Times , or for a handful of other more or less straightforward functions , but sooner or later the convenience of these other devices and other apps will creep up on you and then you ’ ll become enmeshed in all of it .
Another way to say this is that as consumers we swim in a sea with sharp hooks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ main hooks were drugs like alcohol and tobacco .
Those were the primary addictive threats .
And now there ’ s been this tremendous multiplication of hooks in our consumerist sea .
You end the book on an optimistic note , but I have to say , the problem seems insoluble to me .
American capitalism is extremely good at undercutting threats .
I feel like the most likely scenario is a consumerist dystopia propped up by a whole range of new and widespread addictions .
Feel free to talk me off the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strikes against limbic capitalism is that when it goes after children , which it has to do to find replacement users , that eventually becomes an issue and it leads to serious pushback .
There are really good examples of campaigns against limbic capitalist products like cigarettes that , if not quite successful , at least fought the industry to a standstill .
I ’ d also say that ridicule is an effective weapon .
I mean , think about what happened to the tobacco industry both in the United States and in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were exposed by some very aggressive activists who used ridicule and satire as effective tools .
And we have tax policy , we have potential structural limitations , we have lawsuits and big class action cases that pose serious problems for American limbic capitalists .
We ’ re already seeing these sorts of actions against the opioid industry , for example , and that ’ s encouraging .
So it ’ s not quite true that we don ’ t have tools to fight back , but you ’ re right — it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ article was originally published on October 17 , 2019 .

Capitalism is great at making people want things they don’t need.
And of course this is what we should expect from a system that runs on production and consumption. Companies make and sell products and those products have to be consumed by as many people as possible — that’s what makes the whole thing work.
So it’s not surprising that businesses do everything they can to convince people to buy whatever they’re selling. But what happens when marketing becomes active manipulation? More precisely, what happens when companies use science and technology not only to refine our pleasures but to engineer addictive behaviors?
A 2019 book by University of North Florida historian and addiction expert David T. Courtwright, called The Age of Addiction: How Bad Habits Became Big Business, tries to answer these questions in a fascinating history of corporate America’s efforts to shape our habits and desires.
What we have is something Courtwright calls “limbic capitalism,” a reference to the part of the brain that deals with pleasure and motivation. As our understanding of psychology and neurochemistry has advanced, companies have gotten better at exploiting our instincts for profit. Think, for example, of all the apps and platforms specifically designed to hijack our attention with pings and dopamine hits while harvesting our data.
We’ve always had some form of limbic capitalism, Courtwright says, but the methods are much more sophisticated now and the range of addictive behaviors are much wider than they used to be. I spoke to Courtwright about the problems this has created, why the battle against limbic capitalism is seemingly endless, and if he thinks we’re destined to live in a consumerist dystopia.
A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows.
Sean Illing
“Limbic capitalism” is a strange phrase at the center of your book. What does it mean and why should people be aware of it?
David T. Courtwright
Well, limbic capitalism is just my shorthand for global industries that basically encourage excessive consumption and even addiction. In fact, you could make that even stronger and say not only do they encourage it but now they’ve reached the point where they’re actually designing it.
Sean Illing
And where does that word “limbic” come from?
David T. Courtwright
It’s a reference to the limbic region of your brain, which is the part of your brain that deals with pleasure, motivation, long-term memory, and other functions that are crucial for survival. You couldn’t live without your limbic system and you couldn’t reproduce without it, and that’s why it has evolved. And yet that same system is now susceptible to hijacking by corporate interests in a way that actually works against your long-term survival prospects. That’s the paradox.
Sean Illing
How is it hijacked?
David T. Courtwright
The short answer is that companies offer products that will produce a burst release of dopamine in a way that conditions and ultimately changes the brain and develops certain addictive behaviors, which is to say behaviors that are harmful. Now, people have always peddled products that are potentially addictive. But what’s happened in the last 100 years or so is that more of these commercial strategies come from highly organized corporations that do very sophisticated research and find more ways to market these addictive goods and services.
Sean Illing
It seems to me that capitalism runs on the addictions of consumers, has always run on the addictions of consumers, and therefore this isn’t all that revelatory.
David T. Courtwright
I hear this sort of point all the time, and my answer is that it’s not quite right. I make a distinction between ordinary capitalist enterprises like companies that sell people rakes or plows or nails or whatever — there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that, and, in fact, the free market is very good at distributing those goods. It’s a force for human progress.
But I think of limbic capitalism as capitalism’s evil twin, a really cancerous outgrowth of productive capitalism. There is a certain class of brain-rewarding products that lead to a form of pathological learning that we call addiction, and it’s that branch of capitalism that is especially dangerous.
So I’m not anti-capitalism, but I am calling attention to a certain species of capitalism that cultivates addictive behavior for profit.
Sean Illing
What sort of industries or products are we talking about? Who traffics in limbic capitalism?
David T. Courtwright
If you’d asked that question half a century ago I would’ve said we’re mainly talking about alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs. But in the last 20 or 25 years, there’s been a big expansion of the concept of addiction. So now we don’t just speak about addiction to drugs, we speak about addiction to pornography, to computer games, to social media, to food, to all kinds of things.
What happens in the last few decades is an explosion of technological innovation and mass production and mass marketing and, most recently, the rise of the internet, which has really accelerated the process and opened up new spaces for limbic capitalists to both grab our attention and sell us more products.
Limbic capitalism in the age of digital technology is truly a whole new ballgame.
Sean Illing
The point about digital technology seems especially important. Everyone who has a smartphone in their pocket, everyone who uses social media, everyone participating in the digital game is, one way or another, a prisoner of limbic capitalism. Every time we hear that ping from a like or a retweet, we get that dopamine hit. If that’s not an addiction, I don’t know what is.
David T. Courtwright
That actually gets at a very interesting question: Is it the internet and [related] devices that are addictive, or is it the content of the internet that’s addictive? I think it’s both.
You have traditional commercial vices like pornography, or alcohol, or drugs that are available through the internet, but you also have internet-linked mobile devices that themselves come to function almost like gambling machines, where you’re constantly getting dinged. You’re constantly getting messages, you’re concerned about likes, you’re wondering about the latest post, you have this fear of missing out.
And this is key: You’re not just responding to these devices, you’re anticipating them. That’s another thing about addictive behaviors: they don’t simply provide reward, they also provide conditioning. Smartphone technologies arguably accomplish this better than any device or product in human history.
Sean Illing
The controversy around vaping and Juul seems like a good example of how limbic capitalism works in practice.
David T. Courtwright
It’s a perfect example because it captures several features of a limbic capitalist enterprise, both historically and in terms of its current manifestation. So number one, limbic capitalists target the young. This is probably the most politically sensitive aspect of limbic capitalism. The idea of vaping, the idea of a harm-reduction smoking replacement device for confirmed devices is great — who could object to that?
But as the product has developed, especially since Juul came along, there’s been more and more of an emphasis on the youth market. Which is what we’ve always seen from Big Tobacco and Big Alcohol: the youth are your best customers because they’ll be around the longest.
It’s about more than just delivering the product, though. One of the discoveries I made is that when you look at the history of potentially addictive pleasures, there’s a tendency to blend vices and experiences in ways that increase the addictive qualities of products. Las Vegas is a great example of this. Vegas is not just about gambling; it’s a place where you can booze it up, it’s about nightclubs and big spectacles and all the dazzling amusements — everything is wrapped up in a big hedonic package.
Sean Illing
I’d love to know how you distinguish the manufacture of new demands with the satisfaction of demands that already exist.
David T. Courtwright
That’s a very interesting question. Eating is not a manufactured demand. You have to eat to survive, but you don’t have to eat highly processed food that stimulates the release of dopamine in a way that alters your mood and gives you a rush.
What we’ve done is we’ve taken things like sugar or salt that were once comparatively scarce and valuable commodities and made these things massively available. So once you get the ingredients that are capable of producing brain reward, then it’s just a matter of designing products that will essentially maximize that brain reward.
So again, the demand, “I’ve got to eat something,” was always there, but what the processed food industry does, because it’s so competitive, is create products that will provide the calories and nutrients in ways that act like mood-altering drugs. And that’s where the line between simple marketing and limbic capitalism lies.
Sean Illing
Sure, everyone needs to eat, but not everyone needs to tweet or buy 13 pairs of sunglasses or own a closet of products that add nothing to their life apart from marking their identity and status for other people. These are the sorts of manufactured demands I had in mind, and they’re harder to pin down than our appetite for things like booze or junk food.
David T. Courtwright
Ten years ago I would’ve agreed with you. I would’ve said nobody really needs to tweet, nobody needs a Facebook page. But there are what I call opt-in and opt-out technologies.
Once upon a time, the internet and internet access were opt-in technologies. In other words, you adopted these things, you learned how to use them. But now I think we’ve reached the point where they’ve become opt-out technologies, where you’re going to have to do something radical or unusual like go off the grid or throw away your smartphone to escape it.
Once you’re in an environment where you’ve got to have this device, you’re in an environment where you will be constantly exposed to what the policy analyst Jonathan Caulkins calls “temptation goods.” You may have a firm resolution to use your smartphone just for email, or just to check the New York Times, or for a handful of other more or less straightforward functions, but sooner or later the convenience of these other devices and other apps will creep up on you and then you’ll become enmeshed in all of it.
Another way to say this is that as consumers we swim in a sea with sharp hooks everywhere. Fifty years ago, the main hooks were drugs like alcohol and tobacco. Those were the primary addictive threats. And now there’s been this tremendous multiplication of hooks in our consumerist sea.
Sean Illing
You end the book on an optimistic note, but I have to say, the problem seems insoluble to me. American capitalism is extremely good at undercutting threats. I feel like the most likely scenario is a consumerist dystopia propped up by a whole range of new and widespread addictions.
Feel free to talk me off the ledge.
David T. Courtwright
Well, one of the strikes against limbic capitalism is that when it goes after children, which it has to do to find replacement users, that eventually becomes an issue and it leads to serious pushback. There are really good examples of campaigns against limbic capitalist products like cigarettes that, if not quite successful, at least fought the industry to a standstill.
I’d also say that ridicule is an effective weapon. I mean, think about what happened to the tobacco industry both in the United States and in Australia when the lies of the industry were exposed by some very aggressive activists who used ridicule and satire as effective tools.
And we have tax policy, we have potential structural limitations, we have lawsuits and big class action cases that pose serious problems for American limbic capitalists. We’re already seeing these sorts of actions against the opioid industry, for example, and that’s encouraging.
So it’s not quite true that we don’t have tools to fight back, but you’re right — it’s an uphill battle.
This article was originally published on October 17, 2019.


vox--2020-01-12--The Trump administration is still struggling to get its story straight on why it killed Soleimani

The Trump administration has given ever-changing answers about its reasons for deciding to kill Iranian military leader Qassem Soleimani , first claiming that the leader posed an “ imminent threat ” to the US , before suggesting that maybe the threat wasn ’ t so imminent after all .
The rationale took a new turn Friday evening when President Donald Trump gave Fox News ’ Laura Ingraham what has been perhaps the most definitive answer so far on what the threat was ; according to the president , Soleimani was planning attacks on “ four US embassies , ” including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violent protests on New Year ’ s Eve .
But the president ’ s assertion about the four embassies has already begun to unravel , in part due to efforts by his top defense officials Sunday to string together a consistent narrative justifying Soleimani ’ s killing .
On Meet the Press Sunday , National Security Advisor Robert O ’ Brien suggested that there may not have been intelligence explicitly tying Soleimani to plans to attack embassies , saying Trump interpreted the US ’ “ exquisite intelligence ” that stated “ [ Iranians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the region and that they wanted to inflict casualties on US soldiers , sailors , and marines , as well as diplomats.
” O ’ Brien said Trump ’ s “ interpretation ” of the available intelligence — namely the conclusion four embassies were at immediate risk — was “ consistent ” with what the brief said .
On Fox News Sunday , O ’ Brien suggested the idea embassies would be attacked was an assumption .
“ It ’ s always difficult even with the exquisite intelligence we have to know exactly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , adding , “ It ’ s certainly consistent with the intelligence to assume they would have hit embassies in at least four countries.
” Defense Secretary Mark Esper further muddied the issue Sunday morning on Face the Nation .
Esper said that while he “ believed ” that there “ probably , could have been attacks ” that put Americans in the Middle East in immediate danger , he “ didn ’ t see ” specific intelligence indicating an imminent attack on multiple embassies , an odd statement given that , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to have seen such intelligence , if it exists .
And he refused to elaborate on the existence of intelligence showing four embassies at risk on CNN ’ s State of the Union , saying only , “ There was intelligence that there was an intent to target the US embassy in Baghdad.
” Complicating the administration ’ s narrative even further was a Washington Post report Friday from Shane Harris , Josh Dawsey , and Seung Min Kim indicating that US embassy officials in Baghdad were not warned of a larger imminent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not receive an alert commensurate to the threat Trump described , said a person familiar with the situation , who was not authorized to comment publicly , ” read the Post report .
When asked why the embassy in Baghdad was not alerted , O ’ Brien told ABC ’ s This Week Sunday that the US isn ’ t “ going to cut and run every time someone threatens us , ” before saying that the US will not have another “ Tehran 1979 ” or Benghazi .
When asked the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ O ’ Brien said “ this was a very fast-moving situation ” and said he couldn ’ t “ get into the details ” about what action — if any — was taken to protect the other embassies Trump said were in danger .
The Trump administration is having a lot of difficulty explaining why it killed Soleimani The Trump administration ’ s messaging on Soleimani has been muddled from the beginning , as Vox ’ s Alex Ward explained : From political rallies to press conferences to secret briefings to official documents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to provide evidence that Soleimani posed more danger to Americans at the time he was killed than he routinely did for decades .
Trump ’ s team has so bungled its justification for the strike that even some Republicans have criticized the administration .
Without evidence establishing the “ imminent threat ” rationale , which could help bolster a self-defense case , experts say the government would struggle to legally justify greenlighting the operation in court .
And despite having now had over a week to provide that evidence to the public , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have increasingly begun to talk about the operation as retribution for the killing of an American contractor in Iraq by members of an Iranian-backed militia and the storming of the US embassy in Baghdad in late December .
And as Ward reported , the administration has had trouble not just explaining the rationale behind the assassination to the public , but to Congress .
Republican Sen. Mike Lee called a Wednesday congressional briefing in which the administration laid out its intelligence and reasoning for the strike “ probably the worst briefing I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military issue , in the nine years I ’ ve served in the US Senate.
” That briefing also became an issue Sunday , as O ’ Brien was asked to explain why a number of lawmakers said the administration failed to mention the supposed threats to the embassies .
In his Fox News Sunday interview , O ’ Brien again obfuscated , saying he was not present at the congressional briefing , and that perhaps the threat wasn ’ t mentioned because lawmakers didn ’ t ask the right questions .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” O ’ Brien said .
“ I don ’ t know how the Q and A went back and forth — sometimes it depends on the questions that were asked , or how they were phrased.
” He added , “ All I can tell you is that we ’ ve been clear from the start that there were very significant threats to American facilities in the region and to American military officials , officers and men and women and also to US diplomats and I think that ’ s consistent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying now.
” But none of the administration ’ s most statements offer any sort of proof that there was , in fact , a specific imminent threat killing Soleimani would prevent .
Nor is it clear whether the threat to the embassies existed — Trump says it did , O ’ Brien says Trump assumed it did , and Esper says he never saw any intelligence explicitly stating the threat existed .
Instead , the official reasons behind Soleimani ’ s killing are as opaque as ever , and still require Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ word — something that is is difficult to do given the administration often lies .

The Trump administration has given ever-changing answers about its reasons for deciding to kill Iranian military leader Qassem Soleimani, first claiming that the leader posed an “imminent threat” to the US, before suggesting that maybe the threat wasn’t so imminent after all.
The rationale took a new turn Friday evening when President Donald Trump gave Fox News’s Laura Ingraham what has been perhaps the most definitive answer so far on what the threat was; according to the president, Soleimani was planning attacks on “four US embassies,” including the one in Baghdad, which faced violent protests on New Year’s Eve.
But the president’s assertion about the four embassies has already begun to unravel, in part due to efforts by his top defense officials Sunday to string together a consistent narrative justifying Soleimani’s killing.
On Meet the Press Sunday, National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien suggested that there may not have been intelligence explicitly tying Soleimani to plans to attack embassies, saying Trump interpreted the US’s “exquisite intelligence” that stated “[Iranians] were looking at US facilities throughout the region and that they wanted to inflict casualties on US soldiers, sailors, and marines, as well as diplomats.”
O’Brien said Trump’s “interpretation” of the available intelligence — namely the conclusion that four embassies were at immediate risk — was “consistent” with what the brief said.
WATCH: Nat’l Sec. Adviser O’Brien defends Trump’s claim an attack was imminent on embassies in Baghdad and 4 unnamed countries. #IfItsSunday@chucktodd: “What did you do for the other 3 embassies?”
O’Brien: “We took measures … I am not going to get in the details of that.” pic.twitter.com/0voWTs9Cy9 — Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) January 12, 2020
On Fox News Sunday, O’Brien suggested that the idea the embassies would be attacked was an assumption.
“It’s always difficult even with the exquisite intelligence we have to know exactly what the targets are,” he said, adding, “It’s certainly consistent with the intelligence to assume they would have hit embassies in at least four countries.”
Defense Secretary Mark Esper further muddied the issue Sunday morning on Face the Nation. He said that while he “believed” there “probably, could have been attacks” that put Americans in the Middle East in immediate danger, he “didn’t see” specific intelligence indicating an imminent attack on multiple embassies, an odd statement given that, as secretary of defense, Esper ought to have seen such intelligence, if it exists.
NEWS: @EsperDod tells @margbrennan he "didn't see" specific evidence showing Iran planned to strike 4 U.S. embassies, despite @realDonaldTrump saying an attack at multiple embassies was “imminent." Watch more of Esper's interview on @FacetheNation today. pic.twitter.com/1Nud8waok1 — Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) January 12, 2020
And he refused to elaborate on the existence of intelligence showing four embassies at risk on CNN’s State of the Union, saying only, “There was intelligence that there was an intent to target the US embassy in Baghdad.”
Defense Secretary Mark Esper: "There was intelligence that there was an intent to target the US embassy in Baghdad. What the President said with regard to the four embassies is what I believe as well" #CNNSOTU pic.twitter.com/CNwo6PLK41 — CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) January 12, 2020
Complicating the administration’s narrative even further was a Washington Post report Friday from Shane Harris, Josh Dawsey, and Seung Min Kim indicating that US embassy officials in Baghdad were not warned of a larger imminent threat.
“The embassy in Baghdad did not receive an alert commensurate to the threat Trump described, said a person familiar with the situation, who was not authorized to comment publicly,” read the Post report.
When asked why the embassy in Baghdad was not alerted, O’Brien told ABC’s This Week Sunday that the US isn’t “going to cut and run every time someone threatens us,” before saying that the US will not have another “Tehran 1979” or Benghazi.
When asked the same question on Meet the Press, O’Brien said “this was a very fast-moving situation” and said he couldn’t “get into the details” about what action — if any — was taken to protect the other embassies Trump said were in danger.
Pressed on why embassies allegedly targeted by Iran's Gen. Soleimani weren't alerted or evacuated, national security adviser Robert O'Brien: "We're not going to cut and run every time somebody threatens us...we're not going to have another Benghazi." https://t.co/A9mOySQrdm pic.twitter.com/EczuftS6kr — This Week (@ThisWeekABC) January 12, 2020
The Trump administration is having a lot of difficulty explaining why it killed Soleimani
The Trump administration’s messaging on Soleimani has been muddled from the beginning, as Vox’s Alex Ward explained:
From political rallies to press conferences to secret briefings to official documents, Trump administration officials have repeatedly failed to provide evidence that Soleimani posed more danger to Americans at the time he was killed than he routinely did for decades. Trump’s team has so bungled its justification for the strike that even some Republicans have criticized the administration. Without evidence establishing the “imminent threat” rationale, which could help bolster a self-defense case, experts say the government would struggle to legally justify greenlighting the operation in court. And despite having now had over a week to provide that evidence to the public, officials from President Donald Trump on down have increasingly begun to talk about the operation as retribution for the killing of an American contractor in Iraq by members of an Iranian-backed militia and the storming of the US embassy in Baghdad in late December.
And as Ward reported, the administration has had trouble not just explaining the rationale behind the assassination to the public, but to Congress. Republican Sen. Mike Lee called a Wednesday congressional briefing in which the administration laid out its intelligence and reasoning for the strike “probably the worst briefing I’ve seen, at least on a military issue, in the nine years I’ve served in the US Senate.”
That briefing also became an issue Sunday, as O’Brien was asked to explain why a number of lawmakers said the administration failed to mention the supposed threats to the embassies.
In his Fox News Sunday interview, O’Brien again obfuscated, saying he was not present at the congressional briefing, and that perhaps the threat wasn’t mentioned because lawmakers didn’t ask the right questions.
“I wasn’t at the briefing,” O’Brien said. “I don’t know how the Q and A went back and forth — sometimes it depends on the questions that were asked, or how they were phrased.”
He added, “All I can tell you is that we’ve been clear from the start that there were very significant threats to American facilities in the region and to American military officials, officers and men and women and also to US diplomats and I think that’s consistent with what the president’s been saying now.”
Members of Congress say the Iranian threat to blow up multiple U.S. embassies was not mentioned in the intel briefing. But the President says there were threats to four embassies. Plus, is the Trump administration's strategy working? Robert O'Brien reacts. #FNS pic.twitter.com/hqIMScY2Tk — FoxNewsSunday (@FoxNewsSunday) January 12, 2020
But none of the administration’s most recent statements offer any sort of proof that there was, in fact, a specific imminent threat killing Soleimani would have prevented. Nor is it clear whether the threat to the embassies existed — Trump says it did, O’Brien says Trump assumed it did, and Esper says he never saw any intelligence explicitly stating the threat existed.
Instead, the official reasons behind Soleimani’s killing are as opaque as ever, and still require Americans to take the Trump administration at its word — something that is difficult to do given the administration often lies.


vox--2020-01-12--Trump demands Iran allow new anti-government protests to continue

President Donald Trump tweeted support for anti-government Iranian protesters in both English and Farsi Saturday evening , writing , “ I ’ ve stood with you since the beginning of my Presidency , and my Administration will continue to stand with you .
We are following your protests closely , and are inspired by your courage.
” Protests began Saturday at two universities in Iran , as Iranians gathered to mourn the 176 lives lost on Ukraine International Airlines Flight PS752 , which the Iranian government admitted to accidentally shooting down early Saturday .
That flight contained 82 Iranian citizens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a technical error , calling US and Canadian claims that it had been shot down “ lies.
” Angered over the Iranian government ’ s apparent attempt to hide the accidental killing of civilians , mourners in the crowd turned hostile , chanting anti-regime slogans and tearing up pictures of senior Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani , who was killed in a US airstrike on January 3 .
Ahead of shooting down the plane , Iran responded to Soleimani ’ s death with missile strikes on US positions in Iraq ; the government said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials mistaking the aircraft for an enemy plane in the wake of those strikes .
At the protests , Iranians chanted “ commander-in-chief resign , ” referring to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei , and “ death to liars.
” Some also chanted , “ They are lying that our enemy is America , our enemy is right here.
” Iranian security forces reportedly broke up the protests using tear gas .
It isn ’ t clear how many people attended the demonstrations , or how widespread they were .
Iran ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there were roughly 1,000 people protesting , however , given that the agency is seen as being pro-Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps , it is possible the number was higher .
The US continued to encourage the protests Sunday , with Trump warning Iran to allow the protests to continue .
He also called on the country to restore internet access — there were reports on social media that it had been shut down to limit the spread of protest videos , a tactic Iran has used in the past — and , despite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demanded Iran allow journalists complete freedom of the press .
He also demanded protesters not be killed , a nod to the anti-government protests in Iran last fall , during which more than 1,000 people were arrested , and at least 300 killed .
The Trump administration has attempted to encourage protests in Iran before , to little avail During 2019 ’ s protests , the Trump administration actively worked to encourage protesters with messages of support .
And this weekend , it issued similar messages , with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for war with Iran , saying “ America hears you .
America supports you .
America stands with you .
May God bless the people of Iran.
” This weekend ’ s anti-regime protests are the first in Iran since the airstrike that killed Soleimani .
Last year , however , thousands of Iranians took to the streets to protest a sudden 50 percent rise in gas prices , and difficult economic realities more broadly .
The rise in fuel prices came two days after Iranian President Hassan Rouhani announced that the government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two thirds of its $ 45 billion budget .
Iran has been hit hard by economic hardship , in large part due to heavy sanctions imposed by Trump , but the demands of the anti-government protesters were obscured earlier this month by the thousands who turned out for Suleimani ’ s funeral and anti-US protests that followed .
The US State Department endorsed those earlier protests , but Trump initially did not , later saying he did .
Iran dismissed that US support as “ hypocritical , ” and it is not clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department ’ s statements and Trump ’ s tweets had on the demonstrations .
Nor is it clear the demonstrators in the most recent protests will take Trump ’ s latest tweets as the words of an ally .
As Vox ’ s Jen Kirby explained , Trump ’ s recent threat to bomb Iranian cultural sites eroded some Iranians ’ trust in the US leader : For some , the promise to attack cultural sites also proved that , despite all of Trump ’ s rhetoric , he — and maybe his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually care about the Iranian people after all .
Maryam , the student from Kermanshah , said she once believed Trump separated the Iranian government from the people .
That ’ s how she saw the economic sanctions : as punishment against the regime , not the people .
But when Trump threatened to bomb Iran ’ s cultural sites , she thought , what harm would that do to the government ?
None .
“ That ’ s when we realized he isn ’ t anti-regime , he ’ s just anti-Iranian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t know it , ” Maryam said .
Regardless of what Trump has to say about them — and the risks involved — the anti-government protests seem set to continue .
Journalist Yashar Ali reported that more protests are planned for Sunday night , and according to Reuters , protests continued in Tehran throughout the day Sunday with “ scores ” of demonstrators calling for government reforms .

President Donald Trump tweeted support for anti-government Iranian protesters in both English and Farsi Saturday evening, writing, “I’ve stood with you since the beginning of my Presidency, and my Administration will continue to stand with you. We are following your protests closely, and are inspired by your courage.”
To the brave, long-suffering people of Iran: I've stood with you since the beginning of my Presidency, and my Administration will continue to stand with you. We are following your protests closely, and are inspired by your courage. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 11, 2020
به مردم شجاع و رنج کشیده ایران: من از ابتدای دوره ریاست جمهوریم با شما ایستاده‌ام و دولت من همچنان با شما خواهد ایستاد. ما اعتراضات شما را از نزدیک دنبال می کنیم. شجاعت شما الهام بخش است. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 11, 2020
Protests began Saturday at two universities in Iran, as Iranians gathered to mourn the 176 lives lost on Ukraine International Airlines Flight PS752, which the Iranian government admitted to accidentally shooting down early Saturday. That flight contained 82 Iranian citizens; Iran initially blamed its crashing on a technical error, calling US and Canadian claims that it had been shot down “lies.”
Angered over the Iranian government’s apparent attempt to hide the accidental killing of civilians, mourners in the crowd turned hostile, chanting anti-regime slogans and tearing up pictures of senior Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, who was killed in a US airstrike on January 3.
Ahead of shooting down the plane, Iran responded to Soleimani’s death with missile strikes on US positions in Iraq; the government said “human error” led to military officials mistaking the aircraft for an enemy plane in the wake of those strikes.
At the protests, Iranians chanted “commander in chief resign,” referring to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and “death to liars.” Some also chanted, “They are lying that our enemy is America, our enemy is right here.”
Chants of می‌کشم، می‌کشم، آن که برادرم کشت - which roughly translates to "I will kill those who killed my brother." Protests in #Iran following the government admitting it shot down the Ukrainian airliner by mistake.
Outside Amir Kabir University pic.twitter.com/c6h70Kre9n — Nilo Tabrizy (@ntabrizy) January 11, 2020
Iranian security forces reportedly broke up the protests using tear gas. It isn’t clear how many people attended the demonstrations, or how widespread they were. Iran’s semi-official news agency, Fars, said there were roughly 1,000 people protesting, however, given that the agency is seen as being pro-Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, it is possible the number was higher.
The US continued to encourage the protests Sunday, with Trump warning Iran to allow the protests to continue. He also called on the country to restore internet access — there were reports on social media that it had been shut down to limit the spread of protest videos, a tactic Iran has used in the past — and, despite his own attacks on reporters, Trump demanded Iran allow journalists complete freedom of the press.
To the leaders of Iran - DO NOT KILL YOUR PROTESTERS. Thousands have already been killed or imprisoned by you, and the World is watching. More importantly, the USA is watching. Turn your internet back on and let reporters roam free! Stop the killing of your great Iranian people! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 12, 2020
He also demanded protesters not be killed, a nod to the anti-government protests in Iran last fall, during which more than 1,000 people were arrested, and at least 300 killed.
The Trump administration has attempted to encourage protests in Iran before, to little avail
During 2019’s protests, the Trump administration actively worked to encourage protesters with messages of support. And this weekend, it issued similar messages, with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, a key voice in the push for war with Iran, saying “America hears you. America supports you. America stands with you. May God bless the people of Iran.”
This weekend’s anti-regime protests are the first in Iran since the airstrike that killed Soleimani. Last year, however, thousands of Iranians took to the streets to protest a sudden 50 percent rise in gas prices, and difficult economic realities more broadly. The rise in fuel prices came two days after Iranian President Hassan Rouhani announced that the government faced a deficit that amounted to nearly two-thirds of its $45 billion budget.
Iran has been hit hard by economic woes, in large part due to heavy sanctions imposed by Trump, but the demands of the anti-government protesters were obscured earlier this month by the thousands who turned out for Soleimani’s funeral and anti-US protests that followed.
The US State Department endorsed those earlier protests, but Trump initially did not, later saying he did.
Iran dismissed that US support as “hypocritical,” and it is not clear how much of an effect the State Department’s statements and Trump’s tweets had on the demonstrations. Nor is it clear the demonstrators in the most recent protests will take Trump’s latest tweets as the words of an ally. As Vox’s Jen Kirby explained, Trump’s recent threat to bomb Iranian cultural sites eroded some Iranians’ trust in the US leader:
For some, the promise to attack cultural sites also proved that, despite all of Trump’s rhetoric, he — and maybe his administration, too — didn’t actually care about the Iranian people after all. Maryam, the student from Kermanshah, said she once believed Trump separated the Iranian government from the people. That’s how she saw the economic sanctions: as punishment against the regime, not the people. But when Trump threatened to bomb Iran’s cultural sites, she thought, what harm would that do to the government? None. “That’s when we realized he isn’t anti-regime, he’s just anti-Iranian all along, and we didn’t know it,” Maryam said.
Regardless of what Trump has to say about them — and the risks involved — the anti-government protests seem set to continue.
Journalist Yashar Ali reported that more protests are planned for Sunday night, and according to Reuters, protests continued in Tehran throughout the day Sunday with “scores” of demonstrators calling for government reforms.


vox--2020-01-12--Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen, an opponent of Beijing, has won reelection

Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen has won reelection in this Saturday ’ s elections .
She received 57 percent of the vote , to her chief rival ’ s 38 percent , in a victory that had a lot to do with China , and the continuing upheaval in Hong Kong .
“ Taiwan is showing the world how much we cherish our free democratic way of life and how much we cherish our nation , ” Tsai said in her victory speech , as she warned China to stay out of the island ’ s affairs : “ I also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ democratic Taiwan , and our democratically elected government , will not concede to threats and intimidation.
” China always hangs over Taiwan ’ s elections .
Taiwan , also known as the Republic of China , was established in 1949 when the Chinese nationalists fled after the Communist Party took control in mainland China .
It wasn ’ t always a democracy ; Taiwan was ruled by one party ( the Kuomintang ) until democratic reforms took hold in the 1980s , and it ’ s had direct presidential elections since 1996 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Taiwan , as Vox ’ s Jennifer Williams has explained : Just a handful of countries have formal ties with Taiwan , but its democratic rule and de facto independence remain a sore spot for Beijing , which wants to exert its influence there and , ultimately , bring the island back under its control .
And during this year ’ s elections , Beijing has been even harder to ignore .
Chinese President Xi Jinping has been explicit that he wants to reunify Taiwan and mainland China , and he appears willing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That could establish a “ one country , two systems ” setup that currently governs its relationship with Hong Kong .
For many Taiwanese , six months of massive pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong have shown just what a bad deal that would be , and in Saturday ’ s election , they signaled they want a leader who will fight efforts to bring Taiwan under Beijing ’ s rule .
“ I want to once again call upon Beijing authorities to remind them that peace , clarity , democracy and dialogue are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ development , ” Tsai said Saturday .
“ Peace means that China must abandon threats of force against Taiwan.
” How China — and Hong Kong — play into Taiwan ’ s elections Tsai , the incumbent Taiwanese president , is a member of the Democratic Progressive Party ( DPP ) , which favors an independent Taiwan .
She was first elected in 2016 , along with a majority in Taiwan ’ s legislature , the Legislative Yuan .
Her tenure faced some troubles early on .
In 2018 , the DPP suffered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were seen as a rebuke of her leadership .
Tsai was forced to resign as leader of the party , and the calls quickly began for her not to seek reelection in 2020 .
But Tsai ’ s candidacy surged in recent months , and her tough line against China and unequivocal embrace of the protesters in Hong Kong likely has a lot to do with it .
Many Taiwanese who worry about Chinese encroachment see Tsai ( who also has cultivated pretty strong ties with the US ) as the better candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heavy hand .
This is especially true of Taiwan ’ s younger voters , who ’ ve grown up with Taiwan as a democracy .
Tsai played this up as a campaign issue , too , including running ads that compare normal daily life in Taiwan with the unrest in Hong Kong .
“ Part of it [ is an ] effort by Tsai and by her party to show that she is the one that can protect Taiwan ’ s sovereignty and security , ” Bonnie Glaser , the China Power Project @ @ @ @ @ @ @ International Studies ( CSIS ) , told me .
She added that the Hong Kong protests wouldn ’ t be as large an issue if there wasn ’ t an upcoming election , mostly because “ people in Taiwan don ’ t look to Hong Kong as their future .
They never have.
” In other words , even voters who may see the benefit in closer ties between Taiwan and China never envisioned Taiwan becoming a vassal state , even before the protests .
This still created a problem for Tsai ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ represents the Kuomintang Party ( KMT ) .
Han favors closer ties economic and cultural ties with Beijing , seeing a tighter relationship with the mainland as better securing Taiwan ’ s economy in the long term .
To be clear , Han himself opposes a Hong Kong model for Taiwan .
He has explicitly said Taiwan would enter a “ one country , two systems ” arrangement with China “ over my dead body.
” But Han , who won a key mayoral election in a DPP stronghold in 2018 , has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seen as being too friendly toward Beijing at a time when the Hong Kong protests make that position look a lot less tenable .
Han was also implicated in a scandal this fall , when a man who claimed to be a Chinese intelligence operative told Australian authorities that Beijing had been meddling in elections in Hong Kong and Taiwan , including by spreading disinformation .
This alleged operative also claimed that he had poured about $ 2 million directly into Han ’ s 2018 mayoral campaign , which Han has denied .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s one other candidate running , but these are the main two ) and that ’ s also increased popular skepticism of him .
And there ’ s little doubt that China again tried to interfere in Taiwan ’ s vote , using tools to spread fake news and disinformation .
China has moved in more direct ways to put pressure on Tsai , including conducting military exercises in the Taiwan Strait .
The question is whether such pressure will intensify now that Tsai has won reelection .
And it may , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into office with a clear mandate .
The DPP has won 61 of the Legislative Yuan ’ s 113 seats , with Han ’ s KMT winning just 38 .
Tsai ’ s party retaining its majority will go a long way in boosting the president ’ s effectiveness in implementing her agenda — and , like her election , is certainly a blow to Beijing .

Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen has won reelection in this Saturday’s elections.
She received 57 percent of the vote, to her chief rival’s 38 percent, in a victory that had a lot to do with China, and the continuing upheaval in Hong Kong.
“Taiwan is showing the world how much we cherish our free democratic way of life and how much we cherish our nation,” Tsai said in her victory speech, as she warned China to stay out of the island’s affairs: “I also hope that the Beijing authorities understand that democratic Taiwan, and our democratically elected government, will not concede to threats and intimidation.”
China always hangs over Taiwan’s elections. Taiwan, also known as the Republic of China, was established in 1949 when the Chinese nationalists fled after the Communist Party took control in mainland China. It wasn’t always a democracy; Taiwan was ruled by one party (the Kuomintang) until democratic reforms took hold in the 1980s, and it’s had direct presidential elections since 1996.
When it comes to mainland China and Taiwan, as Vox’s Jennifer Williams has explained:
The two territories have been governed separately ever since, with both governments claiming to be the legitimate representative of “One China” — that is, China and Taiwan.” Most countries, including the US, only have formal diplomatic relations with mainland China and don’t officially recognize the government in Taiwan ...
Just a handful of countries have formal ties with Taiwan, but its democratic rule and de facto independence remain a sore spot for Beijing, which wants to exert its influence there and, ultimately, bring the island back under its control.
And during this year’s elections, Beijing has been even harder to ignore. Chinese President Xi Jinping has been explicit that he wants to reunify Taiwan and mainland China, and he appears willing to use force to do so. That could establish a “one country, two systems” setup that currently governs its relationship with Hong Kong. For many Taiwanese, six months of massive pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong have shown just what a bad deal that would be, and in Saturday’s election, they signaled they want a leader who will fight efforts to bring Taiwan under Beijing’s rule.
“I want to once again call upon Beijing authorities to remind them that peace, parity, democracy and dialogue are key to positive cross-strait interactions and long-term development,” Tsai said Saturday. “Peace means that China must abandon threats of force against Taiwan.”
How China — and Hong Kong — play into Taiwan’s elections
Tsai, the incumbent Taiwanese president, is a member of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which favors an independent Taiwan. She was first elected in 2016, along with a majority in Taiwan’s legislature, the Legislative Yuan.
Her tenure faced some troubles early on. In 2018, the DPP suffered big defeats in local elections, which were seen as a rebuke of her leadership. Tsai was forced to resign as leader of the party, and the calls quickly began for her not to seek reelection in 2020.
But Tsai’s candidacy surged in recent months, and her tough line against China and unequivocal embrace of the protesters in Hong Kong likely has a lot to do with it. Many Taiwanese who worry about Chinese encroachment see Tsai (who also has cultivated pretty strong ties with the US) as the better candidate to protect Taiwan from Beijing’s heavy hand. This is especially true of Taiwan’s younger voters, who’ve grown up with Taiwan as a democracy.
Tsai played this up as a campaign issue, too, including running ads that compare normal daily life in Taiwan with the unrest in Hong Kong.
“Part of it [is an] effort by Tsai and by her party to show that she is the one that can protect Taiwan’s sovereignty and security,” Bonnie Glaser, the China Power Project director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), told me.
She added that the Hong Kong protests wouldn’t be as large an issue if there wasn’t an upcoming election, mostly because “people in Taiwan don’t look to Hong Kong as their future. They never have.”
In other words, even voters who may see the benefit in closer ties between Taiwan and China never envisioned Taiwan becoming a vassal state, even before the protests.
This still created a problem for Tsai’s opponent, Han Kuo-yu, who represents the Kuomintang Party (KMT). Han favors closer ties economic and cultural ties with Beijing, seeing a tighter relationship with the mainland as better securing Taiwan’s economy in the long term.
To be clear, Han himself opposes a Hong Kong model for Taiwan. He has explicitly said Taiwan would enter a “one country, two systems” arrangement with China “over my dead body.”
But Han, who won a key mayoral election in a DPP stronghold in 2018, has since struggled because he’s still seen as being too friendly toward Beijing at a time when the Hong Kong protests make that position look a lot less tenable.
Han was also implicated in a scandal this fall, when a man who claimed to be a Chinese intelligence operative told Australian authorities that Beijing had been meddling in elections in Hong Kong and Taiwan, including by spreading disinformation. This alleged operative also claimed that he had poured about $2 million directly into Han’s 2018 mayoral campaign, which Han has denied.
Beijing preferred Han over Tsai (there’s one other candidate running, but these are the main two) and that’s also increased popular skepticism of him. And there’s little doubt that China again tried to interfere in Taiwan’s vote, using tools to spread fake news and disinformation.
China has moved in more direct ways to put pressure on Tsai, including conducting military exercises in the Taiwan Strait. The question is whether such pressure will intensify now that Tsai has won reelection.
And it may, particularly given that Tsai will come back into office with a clear mandate. The DPP has won 61 of the Legislative Yuan’s 113 seats, with Han’s KMT winning just 38. Tsai’s party retaining its majority will go a long way in boosting the president’s effectiveness in implementing her agenda — and, like her election, is certainly a blow to Beijing.
Correction: A mistranslation of the word “parity” in Tsai’s statement has been corrected.


vox--2020-01-13--How Rothy’s became an “It” shoe

How Rothy’s became an “It” shoe

Megan Mahon was feeding her daughter cereal one morning when the 2-and-a-half-year-old spilled her bowl of Special K all down the leg of Mahon ’ s pants .
Before cleaning up , the auto industry executive snapped a photo of her milk-splashed shoes — wine-colored flats with a pointed toe — and posted it to the Rothy ’ s Addicts Facebook group with the caption : “ Does this cereal complement my Orchid points ?
” Throughout the rest of the morning , other members of the group — all fellow fans of Rothy ’ s , the ultra-popular San @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responded with messages of # MomLife solidarity and suggestions of styles that might better go with the soggy cereal ( perhaps a pair of gold houndstooth loafers ? )
They weren ’ t worried about shoes ; the fact that they ’ re machine-washable is , for many , half the appeal .
The rest of the appeal depends on who you ask : Rothy ’ s shoes are knit from recycled plastic water bottles , and the company says it has repurposed more than 40 million bottles since it launched in 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it has struck a chord among professional women who rave about the comfort of its work-appropriate flats — a category of shoe that , for many , is usually synonymous with either blistered heels and bandaged toes or else sad , orthopedic styles .
Like them or not , Rothy ’ s aren ’ t the latter .
They come in a staggering array of colors and prints — 186 new colorways in 2019 alone , and roughly 400 colorways to date — as well as five silhouettes , ranging from The Flat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Chelsea ( a cross between a high-top sneaker and an ankle boot ) .
In 2018 , the company sold more than 1 million pairs of shoes and brought in revenue of over $ 140 million , landing a valuation of $ 700 million at its most recent funding round .
Though it declined to share revenue figures for 2019 , Rothy ’ s said it surpassed 1 million customers in June , bringing in more customers last year than the previous three years combined .
Most of the colorways it releases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ snap them up before they ’ re gone .
The company says this is part of an overall effort to avoid overproduction , but it ’ s also created ideal conditions for a thriving secondary market .
At more than 16,000 members , Rothy ’ s Addicts is one of the larger Facebook groups devoted to the brand , though Mahon says she also belongs to about half a dozen others .
Most of the groups have a buy/sell/trade ( BST ) element , but each has its own niche : There are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and in-between feet , for example , and one group that specializes in “ unicorns , ” the coveted , hard-to-find styles that can sell for many times their original price point of $ 125 to $ 195 .
In May , the 5,000-member-strong Unicorn Collective group set a new record with a pair of Indigo Giraffe-print pointed-toe flats that sold for $ 2,000 .
There are countless BST groups on Facebook , many for brands with huge cult followings , such as Lululemon and Patagonia .
Most of these groups are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to join , a process that generally involves agreeing to a lengthy list of rules .
They also tend to be primarily transactional — more akin to specialized marketplaces than they are communities .
Rothy ’ s groups are different , though .
Members post their outfits of the day ; compare colorways and ask for advice about which pair they should keep ( the answer , inevitably : “ Why not both ?
” ) ; share screenshots of texts with significant others ( “ Another delivery , babe ?
” ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s wheels , ” in which they arrange their collections in neat circles that are both staggering in size and oddly satisfying to look at .
A cottage industry has sprung up around customization , too , as crafty fans have posted pairs they ’ ve modified with hand-stitched thread , fabric paint , and crystals .
There are also countless posts tagged “ NRR ” ( “ not Rothy ’ s related ” ) : life updates , appeals for advice , and questions about other brands .
More than once @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thousands of dollars for a fellow Rothy ’ s fan struggling with a sick child , a lost job , or a death in the family .
“ It ’ s more than a shoe , ” says Brandi Waymire , an administrator of the Finding Bigfoot group , for women whose shoe sizes are 9 and up .
“ It ’ s turned into a sisterhood of sorts , which was unexpected.
” Waymire has made friends through these groups , attending meetups and running into other fans at the brand ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brick-and-mortar location .
( Its second , in Washington , DC , opened last month , and Rothy ’ s has plans to expand to Los Angeles , New York City , and Boston in early 2020 . )
Rothy ’ s itself doesn ’ t monitor the groups , according to Elie Donahue , the company ’ s vice president of marketing , though its customer service team is in touch with the volunteer moderators who manage them .
The tight-knit community that has developed around the brand online has been totally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ somebody who ’ s been in consumer goods for a really long time , it ’ s like nothing I ’ ve ever seen … it ’ s not just the category .
It ’ s not just shoe addicts .
It ’ s people who truly feel a part of this brand.
” Naturally , having such an avid fanbase has its advantages : Members say the groups stir up such FOMO around new releases that they ’ ve ended up growing their collections to 20 , 50 , or even 100-plus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nurse practitioner in Terre Haute , Indiana , describes it , “ Sometimes your first-gut look at something , you ’ ll go , ‘ Nah , I don ’ t think I want that.
’ And then as people start getting them and pairing them with outfits , or just talking about how different the color looks in real life versus the stock photos online , it totally changes it up for you.
” Karen Shelton , an educational therapist in the San Francisco area , was reluctant to even buy a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point .
When she did , though , she found them so comfortable that she managed to justify purchasing two more .
“ I don ’ t even know what flipped the switch , ” she says .
“ I think part of it was I got on some of those Facebook pages , and it kind of stirred the pot a little bit , like , ‘ Oh my gosh , I didn ’ t even know that there were these older styles.
’ ” “ There ’ s moments where I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ‘ Karen , they ’ re just shoes.
’ ” Now Shelton has 18 pairs , including a pair of Rose Quartz Giraffe points — a “ unicorn ” style released exclusively in-store in April — for which someone once offered her $ 1,000 .
( She ’ s holding out for a trade for the Indigo Giraffes , though . )
“ There ’ s moments where I have to sit myself down and say , ‘ Karen , they ’ re just shoes , ’ ” she says .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the fever , but I ’ m getting ready to do a house remodel .
So I ’ m having to kind of pull myself out of my addiction and say , ‘ What ’ s real ?
What ’ s real life ?
’ ” It helps that the women in the groups aren ’ t professional YouTubers or Instagram stars with sponsorship deals and expertly edited photos .
Recommendations from friends and family remain invaluable for brands : They ’ re trusted by 83 percent of consumers , according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s , “ Word-of-mouth continues to blow away all other channels with regards to how people find out about the brand , ” says Donahue .
Fans of popular brands have been congregating in Facebook groups , subreddits , and forums for years : In 2015 , Racked covered Lululemon ’ s massive resale market , which was ( and is ) centered mostly around Facebook and eBay .
At the time , the brand ’ s most coveted products were being sold at markups as high as 1,000 percent , and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suspected resellers .
Facing customer pressure , it later reversed its decision , but still notes on its website that Lululemon does not condone the practice .
The market for activewear and athleisure , which propelled the stratospheric growth of Lululemon over the past decade , is beginning to cool somewhat , says Romney Jacob , director of consulting at the Doneger Group , a fashion and retail strategy firm .
“ In its place is not really the opposite , but it ’ s moving into the space between active and lifestyle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me , Rothy ’ s really sits there — it ’ s obviously not an athletic shoe , but it ’ s a shoe that allows you to move and be comfortable.
” In this case , though , the community that ’ s developed around Rothy ’ s may be even more important to its continued growth than the category it ’ s in .
“ If you look at the brands that are most successful today , all of them have established a strong sense of connection between the shopper and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a strong community amongst all the people that interact with the brand , ” says Jacob , who points to Nike and Glossier as examples of such brands .
There are , however , downsides for a brand whose fans congregate in online spaces over which it has no control : Shipping delays , customer service complaints , and quality control issues all become public grievances generating dozens , if not hundreds , of comments , comparing responses from the company and mobilizing others to post on the brand ’ s official pages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one group shutting down entirely .
Several Rothy ’ s fans say they ’ ve lost patience with the brand recently due to canceled or unfulfilled orders , miscommunication from customer service reps , and inconsistent sizing — issues the company has attributed to problems with third-party fulfillment providers , unexpectedly high demand for certain releases , and variations between different weaves .
Though a few customers I spoke to say they haven ’ t had trouble with sizing— and the brand ’ s website says its shoes fit true to size for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what motivated them to join the Facebook groups in the first place .
There , they could read tips on finding their “ Rothy ’ s size ” — often a half-size to a size-and-a-half up from one ’ s “ street size , ” depending on the style , though recent releases have run larger .
The innumerable posts in this vein illustrate a common challenge for digitally native direct-to-consumer brands : There are elements of the in-store experience , such as trying on a shoe , that are inevitably lost online @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help fill in the gaps .
For each new release , members post in exhaustive detail , often sharing multiple photos comparing colorways and showing the shoes in different lights , turning the Facebook wall into a sort of virtual fitting room or giant group chat .
Rothy ’ s , understandably , wants to reclaim some of this process , and in August launched the first phase of its ambassador program , The Collective , by recruiting 19 fans in its biggest markets ( the same ones in which it will soon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ events and collect feedback to bring back to the brand .
“ We want to start to create communities here , so that when we do have a physical space , we hit the ground running , ” says Donahue .
Collective ambassadors are unpaid ( at least for now ) but receive perks like free shoes , invitations to Rothy ’ s events , and meetings with top executives .
None are professional influencers , which was an intentional choice , says Donahue .
Instead , the ideal Collective member is “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” she says .
“ They ’ re more genuinely influential , because they are the cool , stylish woman in the office or on the bus or in a book club or whatever it might be , from whom their friends get style tips and ideas.
” The brand took a similar tack for the launch of its Chelsea boot in September , asking a select group of fans to send them the names of five friends or family members who would be willing to post photos of themselves wearing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the brand ’ s # RothysInTheWild hashtag .
As the company continues to scale and ramp up its release schedule — as it began to do in recent months , with its release of the Merino wool collection and a collaboration with Italian designer Marta Ferri — some fans have speculated that the resale market will wane .
For now , though , it seems that as long as there are limited-edition , sold-out styles , there will be people willing to buy them , often for a premium .
For Mahon , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than just adding to her collection .
More than half of the 30-odd pairs she owns once belonged to fellow members , she says : “ You find somebody who wears the same size you do and you just keep in touch with them .
It really is like this weird family.
” Sign up for The Goods newsletter .
Twice a week , we ’ ll send you the best Goods stories exploring what we buy , why we buy it , and why it matters .

Megan Mahon was feeding her daughter cereal one morning when the 2-and-a-half-year-old spilled her bowl of Special K all down the leg of Mahon’s pants. Before cleaning up, the auto industry executive snapped a photo of her milk-splashed shoes — wine-colored flats with a pointed toe — and posted it to the Rothy’s Addicts Facebook group with the caption: “Does this cereal complement my Orchid points?”
Throughout the rest of the morning, other members of the group — all fellow fans of Rothy’s, the ultra-popular San Francisco startup that designed her shoes — responded with messages of #MomLife solidarity and suggestions of styles that might better go with the soggy cereal (perhaps a pair of gold houndstooth loafers?) They weren’t worried about shoes; the fact that they’re machine-washable is, for many, half the appeal.
“Does this cereal complement my Orchid points?”
The rest of the appeal depends on who you ask: Rothy’s shoes are knit from recycled plastic water bottles, and the company says it has repurposed more than 40 million bottles since it launched in 2016. Beyond its environmental bona fides, it has struck a chord among professional women who rave about the comfort of its work-appropriate flats — a category of shoe that, for many, is usually synonymous with either blistered heels and bandaged toes or else sad, orthopedic styles.
Like them or not, Rothy’s aren’t the latter. They come in a staggering array of colors and prints — 186 new colorways in 2019 alone, and roughly 400 colorways to date — as well as five silhouettes, ranging from The Flat (a round-toe ballet flat) to The Chelsea (a cross between a high-top sneaker and an ankle boot). In 2018, the company sold more than 1 million pairs of shoes and brought in revenue of over $140 million, landing a valuation of $700 million at its most recent funding round. Though it declined to share revenue figures for 2019, Rothy’s said it surpassed 1 million customers in June, bringing in more customers last year than the previous three years combined.
Most of the colorways it releases are limited-edition, and fans scramble to snap them up before they’re gone. The company says this is part of an overall effort to avoid overproduction, but it’s also created ideal conditions for a thriving secondary market.
At more than 16,000 members, Rothy’s Addicts is one of the larger Facebook groups devoted to the brand, though Mahon says she also belongs to about half a dozen others. Most of the groups have a buy/sell/trade (BST) element, but each has its own niche: There are groups for big feet, small feet, and in-between feet, for example, and one group that specializes in “unicorns,” the coveted, hard-to-find styles that can sell for many times their original price point of $125 to $195. In May, the 5,000-member-strong Unicorn Collective group set a new record with a pair of Indigo Giraffe-print pointed-toe flats that sold for $2,000.
There are countless BST groups on Facebook, many for brands with huge cult followings, such as Lululemon and Patagonia. Most of these groups are private, so users have to request to join, a process that generally involves agreeing to a lengthy list of rules. They also tend to be primarily transactional — more akin to specialized marketplaces than they are communities. Rothy’s groups are different, though.
Members post their outfits of the day; compare colorways and ask for advice about which pair they should keep (the answer, inevitably: “Why not both?”); share screenshots of texts with significant others (“Another delivery, babe?”); and show off their “Rothy’s wheels,” in which they arrange their collections in neat circles that are both staggering in size and oddly satisfying to look at. A cottage industry has sprung up around customization, too, as crafty fans have posted pairs they’ve modified with hand-stitched thread, fabric paint, and crystals. There are also countless posts tagged “NRR” (“not Rothy’s related”): life updates, appeals for advice, and questions about other brands. More than once, members have banded together to raise thousands of dollars for a fellow Rothy’s fan struggling with a sick child, a lost job, or a death in the family.
“It’s more than a shoe,” says Brandi Waymire, an administrator of the Finding Bigfoot group, for women whose shoe sizes are 9 and up. “It’s turned into a sisterhood of sorts, which was unexpected.” Waymire has made friends through these groups, attending meetups and running into other fans at the brand’s San Francisco store, its first brick-and-mortar location. (Its second, in Washington, DC, opened last month, and Rothy’s has plans to expand to Los Angeles, New York City, and Boston in early 2020.)
Rothy’s itself doesn’t monitor the groups, according to Elie Donahue, the company’s vice president of marketing, though its customer service team is in touch with the volunteer moderators who manage them. The tight-knit community that has developed around the brand online has been totally unexpected, she says. “As somebody who’s been in consumer goods for a really long time, it’s like nothing I’ve ever seen … it’s not just the category. It’s not just shoe addicts. It’s people who truly feel a part of this brand.”
Naturally, having such an avid fanbase has its advantages: Members say the groups stir up such FOMO around new releases that they’ve ended up growing their collections to 20, 50, or even 100-plus pairs.
As Elena Tansy, a nurse practitioner in Terre Haute, Indiana, describes it, “Sometimes your first-gut look at something, you’ll go, ‘Nah, I don’t think I want that.’ And then as people start getting them and pairing them with outfits, or just talking about how different the color looks in real life versus the stock photos online, it totally changes it up for you.”
Karen Shelton, an educational therapist in the San Francisco area, was reluctant to even buy a pair at first because of its price point. When she did, though, she found them so comfortable that she managed to justify purchasing two more. “I don’t even know what flipped the switch,” she says. “I think part of it was I got on some of those Facebook pages, and it kind of stirred the pot a little bit, like, ‘Oh my gosh, I didn’t even know that there were these older styles.’”
“There’s moments where I have to sit myself down and say, ‘Karen, they’re just shoes.’”
Now Shelton has 18 pairs, including a pair of Rose Quartz Giraffe points — a “unicorn” style released exclusively in-store in April — for which someone once offered her $1,000. (She’s holding out for a trade for the Indigo Giraffes, though.) “There’s moments where I have to sit myself down and say, ‘Karen, they’re just shoes,’” she says. “I’ve got a little bit of the fever, but I’m getting ready to do a house remodel. So I’m having to kind of pull myself out of my addiction and say, ‘What’s real? What’s real life?’”
It helps that the women in the groups aren’t professional YouTubers or Instagram stars with sponsorship deals and expertly edited photos. Recommendations from friends and family remain invaluable for brands: They’re trusted by 83 percent of consumers, according to a Nielsen survey. For Rothy’s, “Word-of-mouth continues to blow away all other channels with regards to how people find out about the brand,” says Donahue.
Fans of popular brands have been congregating in Facebook groups, subreddits, and forums for years: In 2015, Racked covered Lululemon’s massive resale market, which was (and is) centered mostly around Facebook and eBay. At the time, the brand’s most coveted products were being sold at markups as high as 1,000 percent, and the company went as far as to ban suspected resellers. Facing customer pressure, it later reversed its decision, but still notes on its website that Lululemon does not condone the practice.
The market for activewear and athleisure, which propelled the stratospheric growth of Lululemon over the past decade, is beginning to cool somewhat, says Romney Jacob, director of consulting at the Doneger Group, a fashion and retail strategy firm. “In its place is not really the opposite, but it’s moving into the space between active and lifestyle,” Jacob says. “To me, Rothy’s really sits there — it’s obviously not an athletic shoe, but it’s a shoe that allows you to move and be comfortable.”
In this case, though, the community that’s developed around Rothy’s may be even more important to its continued growth than the category it’s in. “If you look at the brands that are most successful today, all of them have established a strong sense of connection between the shopper and the brand itself, and have established a strong community amongst all the people that interact with the brand,” says Jacob, who points to Nike and Glossier as examples of such brands.
There are, however, downsides for a brand whose fans congregate in online spaces over which it has no control: Shipping delays, customer service complaints, and quality control issues all become public grievances generating dozens, if not hundreds, of comments, comparing responses from the company and mobilizing others to post on the brand’s official pages. Infighting has led to at least one group shutting down entirely. Several Rothy’s fans say they’ve lost patience with the brand recently due to canceled or unfulfilled orders, miscommunication from customer service reps, and inconsistent sizing — issues the company has attributed to problems with third-party fulfillment providers, unexpectedly high demand for certain releases, and variations between different weaves.
Though a few customers I spoke to say they haven’t had trouble with sizing— and the brand’s website says its shoes fit true to size for most — others say the inconsistency is what motivated them to join the Facebook groups in the first place. There, they could read tips on finding their “Rothy’s size” — often a half-size to a size-and-a-half up from one’s “street size,” depending on the style, though recent releases have run larger.
The innumerable posts in this vein illustrate a common challenge for digitally native direct-to-consumer brands: There are elements of the in-store experience, such as trying on a shoe, that are inevitably lost online. For these, online communities can help fill in the gaps.
For each new release, members post in exhaustive detail, often sharing multiple photos comparing colorways and showing the shoes in different lights, turning the Facebook wall into a sort of virtual fitting room or giant group chat.
Rothy’s, understandably, wants to reclaim some of this process, and in August launched the first phase of its ambassador program, The Collective, by recruiting 19 fans in its biggest markets (the same ones in which it will soon have physical stores) to attend try-on events and collect feedback to bring back to the brand. “We want to start to create communities here, so that when we do have a physical space, we hit the ground running,” says Donahue.
Collective ambassadors are unpaid (at least for now) but receive perks like free shoes, invitations to Rothy’s events, and meetings with top executives. None are professional influencers, which was an intentional choice, says Donahue. Instead, the ideal Collective member is “the tastemaker of her own friend group,” she says. “They’re more genuinely influential, because they are the cool, stylish woman in the office or on the bus or in a book club or whatever it might be, from whom their friends get style tips and ideas.”
The brand took a similar tack for the launch of its Chelsea boot in September, asking a select group of fans to send them the names of five friends or family members who would be willing to post photos of themselves wearing the style on the day it launched with the brand’s #RothysInTheWild hashtag.
As the company continues to scale and ramp up its release schedule — as it began to do in recent months, with its release of the Merino wool collection and a collaboration with Italian designer Marta Ferri — some fans have speculated that the resale market will wane. For now, though, it seems that as long as there are limited-edition, sold-out styles, there will be people willing to buy them, often for a premium.
For Mahon, buying from the Facebook groups is about more than just adding to her collection. More than half of the 30-odd pairs she owns once belonged to fellow members, she says: “You find somebody who wears the same size you do and you just keep in touch with them. It really is like this weird family.”
Sign up for The Goods newsletter. Twice a week, we’ll send you the best Goods stories exploring what we buy, why we buy it, and why it matters.