The Dive - 12/1/20

Your monthly compilation of what's what on global politics, American society, and an assortment of odds and ends

Dec 01, 2020

[Apologies if anyone receives an extra copy of this month’s newsletter - I’m switching from TinyLetter to Substack!]

Quote of the Month

“Not everything that offends us is harmful to us. It is our indulgences that make us go into a frenzy, becoming enraged at anything that doesn’t suit our whim. We put on airs as if we were kings. For kings too forget their own power and the weakness of others, and so become enraged, just as if they sustained some injury - from which experience they are quite safe, thanks to the magnitude of their fortunes. And they are well aware of that fact, and yet in their pettishness they grasp at any opportunity to hurt others. They consider themselves wronged just so they can do a wrong themselves.”

- Seneca, Letters on Ethics, 47.19-20

My recent scribblings:

1. Why ‘lived experience’ has become meaningless

Why you should read it: In The Guardian, the philosopher Kwame Anthony Appiah argues that “lived experience” - a phrase currently en vogue in progressive circles - cannot be the basis for rational discourse.

“And what made the phrase so powerful was the unappealable authority it seemed to represent. As Walt Whitman wrote in Song of Myself, that most American of poems, ‘I am the man, I suffer’d, I was there.’ You can debate my sociopolitical analyses – those facts and interpretations are shared and public – but not my lived experience. Lived experience isn’t something you argue, it’s something you have… There’s no guarantee what message people will take from their experience: no guarantee that we’ll all be singing the Song of Myself in the same key.”

“When we’re thinking about policy, then, how much weight should we give to private experience? Pressed to explain what she had in mind, [Sen. Kamala] Harris listed some elements of her biography: growing up a black child in the US, serving as a prosecutor, having a mother who was a teenage immigrant from India. There’s no doubt, of course, that these are the sorts of experiences from which a person could learn a great deal. And stories drawn from our own experience can be powerful ways of recounting what we have learned. But identities are too multiple and complex to allow any individual’s experience to count as truly representative… There isn’t a black experience, shared by all black people, or an Indian immigrant experience, shared by the children of immigrants from India, or even a prosecutor’s experience, shared by all prosecutors.”

Why it matters: “What makes the invocation of lived experience such a powerful move – the fact that it’s essentially private, removed from inspection – is exactly what makes it such a perilous one. No doubt a story about an injustice you’ve experienced, or a positive story about a state school or a public hospital, may be more powerful than some abstract evocation of equality. Still, people across the ideological spectrum will have their own perceptions of injustice, their own stories of public-sector success or failure. And so I hope the vice-president-elect will offer, alongside her lived experience, her considered judgment.We go wrong when we treat personal history as revelation, to be elevated above facts and reflection. Talk of lived experience should be used not to end conversation but to begin them.”

2. How Xi Jinping blew the strategic opportunity gifted China by Donald Trump - and may have created an opening for Joe Biden

Why you should read it: Journalist Michael Schuman details the ways in which China under Xi Jinping bungled the strategic opening President Trump’s “America First” foreign policy created in The Atlantic.

“Through four years of Donald Trump’s presidency, Xi had a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to significantly, and perhaps permanently, expand Chinese influence around the world at America’s expense. By angering friend and foe alike, withdrawing from global institutions and agreements, and failing to tackle the coronavirus pandemic, Trump left the world ripe for a new leader to step into Washington’s worn shoes. Some were convinced this was China’s moment… But Xi blew it. A recent Pew Research Center global survey revealed that attitudes toward China have drastically darkened in a number of countries, sinking to all-time lows in an array of nations such as Canada, Germany, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Xi himself didn’t fare any better. Though his image around the world is still a bit better than Trump’s, a median of 78 percent of respondents said they had little or no confidence that Xi would do the right thing in global affairs, a sharp spike from 61 percent in 2019. In almost all of the 14 countries included in the report, negative opinion of Xi reached the highest levels on record. With Joe Biden about to become the next U.S. president, Xi may have lost any chance of fixing his mistakes, and the consequences for China’s role in the world could be huge.”

“Overall, [China’s] marketing effort has failed. In the Pew survey, a median of 61 percent of respondents thought China did a bad job handling the virus. But more important, whatever good Beijing did was reversed by its belligerence in other diplomatic disputes… The only way to understand this behavior is through a Chinese lens. Beijing’s aggressive foreign policy is an outgrowth of the government’s insecurity and confidence. On one hand, the Communist Party is always mindful of its standing at home. There, its propaganda has crafted a narrative of China as a victim of foreign predation whose time has come to stand tall once again on the world stage (under the firm guidance of the party). That almost requires Beijing to take a hard stance in foreign disputes—anything less might be perceived as unacceptable weakness. On the other hand, China’s growing economic clout has convinced Beijing policy makers that they possess the power to assert their will over other countries.”

Why it matters: “Even if Xi changes course, it may be too late. A well-known and well-liked president in Biden is likely to repair relations with America’s traditional allies in Europe and Asia, and even worse from Beijing’s perspective, he has already pledged to forge an international coalition to take on China. He also intends to reengage with the world in ways that could close off space for China, promising to rejoin the WHO and the Paris climate accord… an unpopular Xi and his band of angry diplomats have left the world wide open for America’s return.”

3. Why the populist right embraces apocalyptic politics

Why you should read it: New York Times columnist and Bulgarian academic Ivan Krastev explains why the populist right takes an apocalyptic approach to politics - and how President Trump’s electoral defeat will only deepen this tendency.

“Donald Trump’s victory in the 2016 presidential election was experienced by many right-wing populists in Europe as a momentous turning point. It was their version of 1989, when the fall of the Berlin Wall made liberalism appear unstoppable and triumphant. Right-wing populists from Hungary to Britain believed that if Mr. Trump could become president of the United States, the future belonged to them. President Trump’s 2020 defeat may trigger the rise of a much darker vision… By refusing to concede, Mr. Trump sends a message to his allies that for right-wing populists, the next election is of no importance; that if they concede today, there will be no victories tomorrow. If in 2016 Mr. Trump’s message was that the future belongs to the nationalist populists, today, by refusing to concede his defeat, he sent the message that populists should fear the future.”

"But the right wing has other reasons to fear the future: A generational divide fuels its deep pessimism. A good majority of Americans voters younger than 25 cast their ballots against Mr. Trump. Similar trends look likely in Europe, where the right wing’s base is dominated by the aging population. That has been intensified by the fear of the inflow of migrants who will get the right to vote.”

Why it matters: “Consider this: In the 30 years since the end of Communism, Albanians have voted nine times in parliamentary elections. In only three instances has the losing party conceded defeat. In most cases it was the opposition party that rejected the election results and asked its supporters to take to the streets. Usually, it took the American Embassy in Tirana, Albania’s capital, to force the loser to accept reality. In the current American emergency an ‘Albanian solution’ will not work because there is no American Embassy in Washington. Americans must resolve this crisis on their own. And the way they resolve it will determine the future of democracy around the world.”

4. How concentration in big cities hurts Democrats

Why you should read it: The Atlantic staff writer Derek Thompson observes that Democratic concentration in big cities and suburbs leaves the party unable to win national political power and its elites increasingly disconnected from the rest of the country.

“Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump in the 2020 election by rebuilding the “blue wall,” not around any particular geographical region, but around every major U.S. metropolitan area. America’s biggest cities and their largest suburbs are now Jerichos of the Democratic Party, walled fortresses for the future of liberalism… This [political] problem is only going to get worse. One analysis of Census Bureau data projected that by 2040, roughly half of the population will be represented by 16 senators; the other, more rural half will have 84 senators at their disposal. If Democrats don’t find a way to broaden their coalition into less populous states with smaller metro areas, it may be impossible to pass liberal laws for the next generation.”

“America’s richest and most progressive cities—from San Francisco to New York and Washington, D.C.—have filled with young, unmarried, ‘extremely online’ graduates of elite colleges, who have collectively birthed a novel philosophy you could call ‘Instagram socialism.’ Instagram socialists are highly educated, but not necessarily high-earning, urbanites who shop like capitalists and post like Marxists and frequently do so in adjacent tabs. Many of their causes are virtuous, such as universal health care and higher pay for low-income service workers. But given the dynamics of online communication, which prizes extremity, Instagram socialism usually functions as a crowd-sourcing exercise to brand widely appealing ideas in their most emotional and viral—and, therefore, most radical—fashion. Thus, major police reform (a popular idea) is branded “Abolish the Police” (an unpopular idea); a welcoming disposition toward immigrants (a popular idea) is blurred with calls for open borders (an unpopular idea); and universal health care (a popular idea) is folded into socialism (an unpopular idea)… As national politics has polarized according to youth, education, and density, the news industry has become particularly young, educated, and densely packed into a handful of cities. Thus people who work in national journalism (like me, a resident of Washington, D.C.) tend to have a set of strongly held views about the world that are artifacts of their zip code. America’s most progressive metros are becoming politically unusual at the same time that national journalists are less capable of seeing how unusual they have become.”

Why it matters: “This might be the most important lesson going forward. In the past 100 years, Democrats have transformed from a largely rural party to a coalition of density and diplomas—a political handshake between the cities and highly educated suburbs. To win not only the presidency but also legislative majorities, Democrats will have to turn back the clock and refamiliarize themselves with Americans who live outside denser zip codes where Democrats currently dominate. They will have to rediscover the right balance between their progressive urban core and the moderate exurban frontier—between metro and retro.”

5. How social alienation may explain recent polling misses

Why you should read it: For FiveThirtyEight, American Enterprise Institute polling and public opinion expert Daniel Cox posits that measures of social distrust may help explain why President Trump’s vote tally outperformed his pre-election polling.

“There are a number of possible explanations for [polls underestimating Trump support], and no definitive answers, but one thing I’ve come across in my public opinion research is that the share of Americans who are more socially disconnected from society is on the rise. And these voters disproportionately support Trump.”

“In our pre-election survey on the strength of Americans’ social networks, we found that nearly one in five Americans (17 percent) reported having no one they were close with, marking a 9 percentage point increase from 2013. What’s more, we found that these socially disconnected voters were far more likely to view Trump positively and support his reelection than those with more robust personal networks…Biden was heavily favored by registered voters with larger social networks (53 percent to 37 percent), but it was Trump who had the edge among voters without any close social contacts (45 percent to 39 percent)… this was especially true among white voters even after accounting for differences in income, education level, and racial attitudes. Sixty percent of white voters without anyone in their immediate social network favored Trump, compared to less than half (46 percent) of white voters with more robust social ties.”

Why it matters: “The consequences of this, of course, extend much further than our elections. When Americans are more distanced from society, they become untethered to local and national institutions and are less invested in their continuing function. What’s more, they are more inclined to distrust political processes and believe they are serving illegitimate ends. And they may lose faith in the messy and plodding process of democratic change… we should not forget that political reforms and economic fixes are not going to address more fundamental problems of loneliness and social isolation in this country. And that may mean we increasingly have less insight into how a growing portion of the country feels.”

6. How the quest for new batteries will make or break renewable energy

Why you should read it: Financial Times reporter Henry Sanderson goes inside the quest to build new, bigger, and longer-lasting batteries to store the intermittent power generated by renewable energy sources like wind and solar.

“Renewables such as wind and solar are becoming cheaper than fossil fuels in most parts of the world, but they need storage to be a viable, stable source of energy… That is where batteries — devices which store electricity as chemical energy — fit in. Lithium-ion batteries, used in mobile phones and Tesla electric cars, are currently the dominant storage technology and are being installed from California to Australia, and most likely Kent, to help electricity grids manage surging supplies of renewable energy… But along with lithium-ion batteries, cheaper, longer-duration storage technologies — most of which are not yet cost-effective — will be required to fully replace fossil-fuelled power plants and allow for the 100 per cent use of renewable energy. At the moment, gas-fired power plants bridge the gap from renewables to provide stable supplies of energy for longer than current batteries can.”

“Every day electricity grids must constantly match supply with demand — a feat that becomes much harder when you strip out coal and gas-fired plants that provide a reliable, steady supply of energy… Despite their various advantages, [alternative] technologies will find it hard to beat the manufacturing scale of lithium-ion, which has been driven by the surge of investment in electric cars over the past decade. The price of lithium-ion batteries fell 87 per cent in real terms between 2010 and last year, to about $156/kWh, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance… Globally, battery installations for grid storage are set to rise to 741 gigawatt-hours by 2030, most of it lithium-ion, led by the US and China, according to Wood Mackenzie. One GWh is enough to power 1m homes for an hour.”

Why it matters: “Without [battery] storage it will be harder for countries to significantly reduce their use of gas and coal-fired power plants and decrease the harmful effects of climate change, from rising sea levels to extreme weather conditions.”

7. How U.S. tech companies - no, not the ones you think - help China’s surveillance apparatus collect data

Why you should read it: New York Times reporters Paul Mozur and Don Clark outline how American semiconductor manufacturers Intel and Nvidia make the chips that power China’s surveillance supercomputers in Xinjiang.

“The computers inside the complex, known as the Urumqi Cloud Computing Center, are among the world’s most powerful. They can watch more surveillance footage in a day than one person could in a year. They look for faces and patterns of human behavior. They track cars. They monitor phones… Chips made by Intel and Nvidia, the American semiconductor companies, have powered the complex since it opened in 2016. By 2019, at a time when reports said that Beijing was using advanced technology to imprison and track Xinjiang’s mostly Muslim minorities, new U.S.-made chips helped the complex join the list of the world’s fastest supercomputers. Both Intel and Nvidia say they were unaware of what they called misuse of their technology.”

"Companies often point out that they have little say over where their products end up. The chips in the Urumqi complex, for example, were sold by Intel and Nvidia to Sugon, the Chinese company backing the center. Sugon is an important supplier to Chinese military and security forces, but it also makes computers for ordinary companies… The Urumqi complex went into development before reports of abuses in Xinjiang were widespread. By 2019, governments around the world were protesting China’s conduct in Xinjiang. That year, the Sugon computer appeared on the international supercomputing rankings, using Intel Xeon Gold 5118 processors and Nvidia Tesla V100 advanced artificial intelligence chips.”

Why it matters: “Powerful American technology and its potential misuse cut to the heart of the decisions the Biden administration must face as it tackles the country’s increasingly bitter relationship with China. The Trump administration last year banned the sale of advanced semiconductors and other technology to Chinese companies implicated in national security or humans rights issues. A crucial early question for Mr. Biden will be whether to firm up, loosen or rethink those restrictions.”

8. Why and how Joe Biden will need to fix a broken government on day one

Why you should read it: New America think-tanker Mark Schmitt contends in the New York Times that President-elect Joe Biden will need to fix the broken government left him by President Trump before he can hope to use it for good.

“There’s much more to governing than legislative initiatives. And unlike previous Democratic presidents, with low expectations for legislative breakthroughs, Mr. Biden could hit the ground running with the day-to-day work of administrative governance. And also unlike predecessors such as Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, he and his core staff have the experience in the executive branch that others needed years to acquire… In personnel and regulatory rules, the core of the day-to-day business of governing, the next president is likely to encounter a minefield of Trump-era changes; a bureaucracy that’s lost much of its experienced middle tier; and hundreds of officials who have passed the Trump loyalty tests reportedly organized by the White House personnel director, Johnny McEntee, or cabinet officials like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who asked Mr. Trump to fire his agency’s inspector general in May.”

“The Trump administration has moved aggressively to alter regulations affecting the environment, workplace health and safety, education policy and programs like Medicaid… All these regulatory changes, and the complexity of reversing them, will be like sand in the gears in the implementation of any action on climate, student loans or health care, as well as to the ordinary functioning of government. And they will make enacting an effective medical, economic and social response to the pandemic even more challenging.”

Why it matters: “People’s direct experience of government and the services and security it provides, or fails to provide, shapes our sense of ourselves as citizens in a democracy as much as, or more than, elections and legislation. Much will depend on the Biden administration’s preparation for what it finds when it finally takes the keys to the White House.”

9. Why we should talk turkey, not politics, over Thanksgiving dinner

Why you should read it: In Tablet, New America fellow Michael Lind makes the case for Thanksgiving as “the least partisan American holiday.”

“Traditional Thanksgiving imagery originated in a project of cultural imperialism—New England cultural imperialism… In the 1620 myth, all white Southerners were evil but white New Englanders were good. In the 1619 myth, all white Americans are evil, New Englanders included. But the 1619 Project is just a variant of the 1620 project of weaponizing history for partisan or subcultural purposes—it’s a middlebrow 20th-century project. And what could be more puritanical than unmasking the Puritans themselves as hypocrites who failed to live up to their ideals?”

“Thanksgiving is apolitical and heathen. Notwithstanding the efforts of generations of Protestant pastors, Thanksgiving and its predecessors in various regions of the United States have always fulfilled the function in the New World of pagan harvest festivals celebrating kinship ties before the darkness and cold of winter.”

Why it matters: “If you are a neo-Loyalist monarchist who thinks that the American War of Independence was a disaster and that Washington, Jefferson, Adams, and Franklin were traitors who should have been hanged, the Fourth of July can be difficult. And if you are Jewish or Muslim or Druid or atheist, Christmas can be awkward. Because it is and ought to be a holiday about nothing—except for what we actually share as humans—nobody is an outsider on Thanksgiving… The caloric intake of Thanksgiving should be high but the political-intellectual-nutritional value should be nonexistent. People who try to politicize America’s nonpartisan, nonsectarian autumn harvest festival are fun-hating killjoys, just like the millenarian theocrats on the Mayflower.”

Odds and Ends

An ode to the International Space Station’s cupola as the station marks its twentieth anniversary in orbit…

Taylor Swift and Paul McCartney interview one another for Rolling Stone…

How archaeologists and craft brewers around the world are partnering to bring ancient beer recipes back to life…

How movie series like the Star Wars prequels live on through dumb memes…

Why London’s “mudlarks” scour the foreshore of the River Thames for archaeological bits and bobs ranging from Roman roof tiles to eighteenth-century tooth-scrapers…

Music of the Month

“Realize,” the opening track from AC/DC’s new album Power Up.

“If I Ever Lose My Faith In You,” a 1993 Sting song covered recently by Disturbed.

“(Don’t Worry) If There’s a Hell Below, We’re All Going To Go” by Curtis Mayfield off his 1970 album Curtis.