Last week, I delivered a paper at a conference about the work of Sheldon Wolin in Lausanne, Switzerland. For those of you who don’t know the name, Wolin was a political theorist who taught at Berkeley and Princeton. I took undergraduate courses with him on modern political thought and radical political thought; many other political theorists, including Wendy Brown, Cornel West, and Hanna Pitkin, studied with him as graduate students. He was one of the most influential teachers of political theory in the United States during the second half of the twentieth-century. Though I’ve always valued him most as a reader and teacher of political theory, he also had a wide audience as a political theorist in his own right. […]
In his Deontology (1834), Jeremy Bentham anticipates our world of “steps” and smartphones: A whole kingdom, the great globe itself, will become a gymnasium, in which every man exercises himself before the eyes of every other man. Every gesture, every turn of limb or feature, in those whose motions have a visible influence on the general happiness, will be noticed and marked down.
I love this line that you see increasingly on social media and in politics: “Jews get to decide what antisemitism is.” I won’t go through all the obvious problems with the claim. I’m more fascinated by idea that somehow it’s part of our inheritance, our heritage, our privilege, our right, our pleasure and our joy, as Jews, to get to decide what antisemitism is. It’s not that, as Jews, we get to worship God as we see fit, or we get to celebrate our holidays as we see fit (and even, as is the case in New York, have the government acknowledge our holidays as public holidays), or that we get to cherish and teach our authors and texts. No, […]
Since my review of Sven Beckert’s book on capitalism went live (and, truth be told, a few days before that), I’ve been engaged in a back and forth, sometimes bitchy, sometimes friendly, with various critics—of me, of Beckert, of capitalism, of Marxism, of Dylan Riley, of Robert Brenner. You can find many of these exchanges on my Facebook page. Others have sent me screenshots from Twitter and other social media platforms I’m not on. One of the steady drumbeats in these conversations is privilege. My privilege as a senior scholar with social media followers, Beckert’s privilege as a Harvard professor, Riley’s privilege as a male Marxist, and on and on. But there’s a kind of privilege that never gets mentioned […]
In the June issue of The Nation, I have a review of Sven Beckert’s Capitalism: A Global History. It’s a long review, in part because it’s a long book. While I wound up being quite critical of the book, I’m more than mindful of what it takes to write such a book. I thought I owed the book, and Beckert, the courtesy of giving it its due. Hence the length. The review may be behind the paywall, so if you cannot access it, you can sign up for a subscription to the magazine or email me, and I can send you a pdf. Many thanks to readers of earlier drafts of the review, particularly Lucas Pinheiro, Joan Scott, Greg Grandin, […]
1. “A 1990 poll found that 76 percent of Americans regarded the deficit as ‘a very serious problem calling for immediate action.’….At the time, the debt was around $4 trillion. Now it’s over $31 trillion, bigger than our entire economy. In about 20 years, no amount of tax hikes or spending cuts will be able to stop the country from defaulting on its debt, according to projections shared by Kent Smetters, an economist at Wharton.” 2. “The White House approved another $17 billion worth in sales of missiles and related services to Gulf nations, despite worries inside the Pentagon about dwindling U.S. stockpiles.” 3. “New brain research might someday help people with dementia preserve their memories.”
I’ve been meaning to write about one piece of writing for some time, but thanks to two others, I don’t need to. The first is Frances Wilson’s biography of Muriel Spark, which I read in the fall and thoroughly enjoyed. I’d say more about how terrific it is were it not for the fact of… …the second piece of writing, Audrey Wollen’s rollicking, gripping review of it in the current issue of The New Yorker. I couldn’t possibly improve upon Wollen’s piece, even if I wanted to or tried. The review is as terrific as the book, but don’t let its terrific-ness prevent you from enjoying the terrific-ness of the book. And if you doubt me about the terrific-ness of […]
In 1753, Britain considered a bill to allow the naturalization of the country’s 4,000 foreign-born Jews. Formally titled “An Act to permit Persons professing the Jewish Religion to be naturalized by Parliament,” the bill was widely known as the “Jew Bill.” Though it initially passed both houses of Parliament, it was repealed after a vicious campaign of antisemitism and nativism, led by the Tories. Today’s Republican Islamophobes in Congress are more brazen. They don’t wait for the public to do their dirty work of name-calling. They have actually titled a bill that would, among other things, strip Muslim citizens of their citizenship, the “MAMDANI Act.” When people say that the historic Jewish Question, which was about whether Jews could ever […]
“JD Vance Gave A Speech To Almost No One.” “Meanwhile, Zohran Is Just Getting Things Done.”
The first appearance of the phrase “Jewish question” was in not in Germany, France, or anywhere on the Continent. It was in Britain, in 1754. In 1753, Parliament passed a bill allowing for the naturalization of Jews living in Britain. The bill, publicly called the “Jew-Bill,” provoked a massive controversy, leading to its repeal the following year. Joseph Grove wrote his “Reply to the Famous Jew Question” in response to the bill and the controversy. In 2026, nearly 275 years later, Stephen Miller, a Jewish American, is spearheading the most potent revival of today’s version of the original Jewish Question—that is, whether a religious, ethnic, or national minority can belong to a polity or not—in Britain’s most successful colony. And […]
The New York Times has a decent-enough report tonight on how the US made its decision to go war with Iran. Though it’s filled with sharp reporting and detailed accounting, it fails to identify the big forest amid the trees. That’s this: Despite the differences in personnel between the Bush and the Trump administrations, the parallels between the war in Iraq and the war in Iran are pretty straightforward. First, a hard-right Republican president comes to power denouncing the more “internationalist” and “establishment” Republicans and Democrats who see the United States as the world’s policeman. We often forget that one of Bush’s promises when he ran in 2000 was that he wouldn’t do nation-building, the United States would be “humble,” […]
Donald Trump this morning: “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” New York Times tonight: “One big question: Experts say Trump’s threatened attacks could be unlawful. It comes down to: What defines a civilian target?”
In June 2013, thirteen years ago, President Obama nominated Samantha Power to serve as US Ambassador to the United Nations. During her Senate hearings, Power was grilled by Marco Rubio, then serving as Republican senator from Florida, about an article she had written many years earlier in The New Republic, suggesting that the United States should take stock of its history and acknowledge with humility some of the mischief it had made in the world. The following exchange ensued. Which makes for some grim reading today, when people wonder how the US got into the mess it has gotten into under Trump in Iran. Reading Power’s words, knowing who became Rubio became, it all seems there, in black and white, […]
I’ve been following the online debate over the slogan “no kings” with some interest. On the one side, critics argue that it’s a normie notion, which obscures all sorts of questions about imperial war, Palestine, oil, and oligarchy. On the other side, defenders say it appeals to a broad set of values and voters, providing the basis for a popular movement against not just Trump but all the ills he stands for and promotes, not to mention the kind of state he is trying to create and consolidate. Interestingly enough, as Bruno Leipold shows in his magnificent book, Citizen Marx, Marx struggled with this very question across the 1840s, 50s, and 60s. While most readers associate Marx with the claim […]
From Schoenberg’s opera Moses und Aron: whensoever you employed those gifts for false and negative ends, and whensoever you had abandoned the desert’s renunciation and your gifts led you to the highest summit, then as a result of that misuse you were and ever shall be hurled back into the desert. Chag Sameach.
1. Iran Condemns Attacks on Its Universities, Warns of Retaliation 2. How Bard College Became a Major Real Estate Player 20 Miles Away 3. It’s Probably Time to Clean Your Water Bottle 4. Federal Trial Opens Over Lack of Air Conditioning in Texas Prisons 5. Wealthy Investors Are Targeting Foes of Clean Energy, and They Want Revenge 6. U.S. Special Operations Forces Sent to Mideast as Trump Weighs Next Move 7. Israel Passes Law to Allow Hanging of Palestinians Convicted of Deadly Attacks 8. ‘The Real Housewives of Rhode Island,’ Plus 7 Things to Watch on TV This Week 9. Marine Is Charged With Stealing Missile Launcher and Ammunition 10. Why Marriage, for So Many, Is Less Appealing Than Ever
If you watch this short clip of Zohran Mamdani getting heckled, you’ll see why he’s the greatest living politician in the United States today. Without batting an eye, Mamdani says, in response to the heckler: I want that man to be able to afford to keep living in New York City. Because the day that I don’t hear him yelling at me, it means he got priced out of this place. And I don’t want that. I don’t want that for him. I don’t want that for anybody in this city. We need to make this a city where it’s affordable enough to yell at your politicians. Notice the four things Mamdani is doing. First, he remains unflappable, gracious, calm, […]
1. Israel Plans to Control Large Parts of Southern Lebanon, Defense Minister Says 2. The War Is Going Better Than You Think 3. With Moon Base and Nuclear Mars Mission, NASA Wants You to ‘Start Believing Again’ 4. The Oil Price Shock Could Make Italian Ice More Expensive 5. How Fast Do Our Journalists Type? 6. Blockade Iran’s Oil 7. ‘Who Doesn’t Love Elvis?’ Trump Takes an Unexpected Detour to Graceland. 8. Newsom Says He Regrets Remarks Comparing Israel to ‘Apartheid State’ 9. Should You Need to Prove Citizenship to Vote? Ask Kansas. 10. Young Graduates Face the Grimmest Job Market in Years
In no order… 1. You’ve Lost Your Health Insurance. It Shouldn’t Have Been a Surprise. 2. Trump’s Reaction to Mueller’s Death: ‘Good, I’m Glad.’ 3. I Predicted the 2008 Financial Crisis. What Is Coming May Be Worse. 4. The ‘Hunger Games,’ Hamptons-Style: Hiring a Private Chef for Summer 5. No Pills or Needles, Just Paper: How Deadly Drugs Are Changing 6. Student Freed From ICE Detention Worries About Those Left Behind 7. Across the West, Record Heat Is Colliding With a Snow Drought 8. Unclogging a Hairy Drain Is Gross. This $15 Stopper Makes It Less So. 9. The Future of the Democratic Party Is Emerging 10. Here’s what happened in the war in the Middle East on Saturday.
Marc Andreessen, one of the most powerful people in Silicon Valley, doesn’t do introspection. So he tells David Senra—whose great point of pride and life achievement, according to Senra’s website and statement to Andreessen, is that “I’ve read obviously four hundred, I think now, ten [that’s 410] biographies of history’s greatest entrepreneurs”—in a conversation that’s been making the rounds online. Many commentators seem intent on challenging Andreeseen’s claim that he doesn’t do introspection. It is, after all, a bit of a performative contradiction, since the mere affirmation, when asked if he has any levels of introspection, “Zero, as little as possible,” would seem to require at least some introspection and stock-taking. Otherwise, how would he know? But I’ll believe Andresseen. […]
According to this latest NBC News poll, 67% of Democrats say that their sympathies lie with Palestinians over Israelis. This is an astonishing sea change in the opinion of a major part of the electorate. Just thirteen years ago, in 2013, only 18% of Democrats said that their sympathies lay with the Palestinians. This shift, moreover, is not confined to Democrats. Thirty-seven percent of independents claim that their sympathies lie with the Palestinians; only twenty-seven percent claim that their sympathies lie with the Israelis. In 2013, those numbers were nearly reversed: 37% of independent voters claimed that their sympathies lay with the Israelis, while only ten percent of independent voters claimed that their sympathies lay with the Palestinians. As NBC […]
One of the more delightful innovations of the Obama era was the requirement that every full-time employee—or taxpayer, I don’t know—has to provide proof of “health insurance offering and coverage” when filing their taxes. It’s called a 1095-C form. The employer provides it to you, the employee, and you file it with your taxes. The 1095-C form is yet one more way that Americans show to the world our pitch-perfect sense of how to waste time while pretending to do something good. Instead of having the government provide everyone with healthcare or health insurance, our leaders and experts come up with some sort of nudge that somehow or another is supposed to get us somehow closer to some group of […]
Why does one question impinge upon the other? Why does one evoke the other when there is no obvious connection between them? . . . [A]ll the most important questions of Europe and humankind in our day are forever being raised simultaneously. And it’s this simultaneity that is so remarkable. The necessary condition for these questions to appear simultaneously is what constitutes the riddle! —Dostoevsky One of the most powerful insights of Marx’s On the Jewish Question, and the reason we return to it, is that he, almost alone among all the people who set out to answer the Jewish Question in the early 1840s, saw that the question itself was not really about the Jews at all but about […]
On Thursday, my daughter, who’s a high school senior, won first place for the best paper in the National History Day competition for all of New York City. The title of her paper is “Drop Dead University: The Fight for Free Education at the City University of New York.” She worked hard on it, dug deep into the municipal archives about the 1975 Fiscal Crisis and the decision to end free tuition at CUNY, read widely in the secondary literature, and, though I’m obviously not objective, did a good job. Now she goes on to the New York State competition, which will be at the end of April. Aside from proud-parent bragging, I’m posting about this tonight because I just […]