Current Affairs

This episode originally aired on October 29, 2024. Get new podcasts early at patreon.com/CurrentAffairsRight!

Richard Seymour is one of the most learned and provocative leftist writers in the world. He has written books on subjects ranging from social media (The Twittering Machine) to British Labour politics (Corbyn: The Strange Rebirth of Radical Politics) to liberal apologists for imperialism (The Liberal Defense of Murder) to the career of Christopher Hitchens (Unhitched). On whatever he writes about, Seymour is well-read and thoughtful, posing challenging ideas in elegantly-crafted prose. Today he joins to talk to us about "disaster nationalism," the apocalyptic brand of right-wing politics that Seymour says is on the ascent, and threatens to destroy liberal civilization as we know it. It's not necessarily an encouraging conversation, but Seymour encourages us to look honestly at the dark trends in right-wing politics in our time, and to be cognizant of the extent of the threat we face. Helping us understand what the right believes and what it might be capable of, Seymour's warnings could not be more timely as we get closer and closer to an election that might see Donald Trump returned to power.

"Reaction always thrives on the prospect of annihilation. ‘American carnage’, ‘white genocide’, ‘death panels’, ‘invasion’, ‘great replacement’, ‘Islamisation’, ‘treason’, ‘cultural marxists’, ‘scum’, ‘communism’. The erosion and  threatened destruction of worlds of power resembling, from its ideological purview, civilisational collapse, defeat, devastation. With which it is both appalled and enthralled... Amid the decomposition of the old party system, the legacy media, and associated forms of public authority, political forces organising around the nation and its enemies have won the major battles of the last decade. What is more, incumbency has been incredibly forgiving of their failures, their political gains proving far less fragile than those of the Left... The phrase ‘disaster nationalism’ implies something disastrous, or exploitative of disaster, or in elective affinity with disaster, or opaquely drawn to, or hurtling toward, or yearning for disaster. It is all of this." — Richard Seymour

This episode originally aired on October 22, 2024. Get new episodes early at patreon.com/CurrentAffairs!

Carolyn Dupont, a professor of history at Eastern Kentucky University, is one of the country's leading experts on the Electoral College. She is the author of the book Distorting Democracy The Forgotten History of the Electoral College—and Why It Matters Today, which debunks defenses of the Electoral College and shows why it's harmful to democracy. She joins us today to help us better understand this peculiar system and to go through the arguments in favor of it. Prof. Dupont notes in particular that the "Electoral College" we have today bears little resemblance to the system the Founding Fathers actually set up, which means that we can't appeal to their "intent" in order to defend it. She explains how this system came into being, how it changed over the years, and how it fails at achieving its supposed purposes, like giving small states a voice.

Listeners may be interested in the Current Affairs article by Alex Skopic on the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which is one possible way to neutralize the Electoral College for good.

"This system increasingly returns results that threaten to undo the expressed wishes of a majority of voters, and these “misfires” profoundly damage the body politic... From its inception, Americans have disliked the Electoral College. In recent decades this dissatisfaction has shown up in polling, but it has manifested over the life of our nation in other ways. In the earliest days of our republic, even the men who helped create the Electoral College recommended key changes. Since then, more than 700 proposals to alter or abolish it have been introduced into Congress—more than on any other topic." - Carolyn Dupont, Distorting Democracy

This episode originally aired on October 10, 2024. Get new episodes early at patreon.com/CurrentAffairs!

Osamah Khalil of Syracuse University is the author of A World of Enemies: America’s Wars at Home and Abroad from Kennedy to Biden, a vital history of the wars of the last 50 years. Prof. Khalil shows how, from the Vietnam war to the present day, American leaders (and American pop culture) conjured a "world of enemies" in which force was preferable to diplomacy. A cast of rotating villains (from Ho Chi Minh to Saddam Hussein to Hamas) are treated as existential threats to freedom and democracy, and because they are monstrous they cannot be negotiated with and can only be destroyed. Prof. Khalil joins today to discuss his work, which argues that our militaristic attitude toward the rest of the world has also come to characterize domestic political discourse.

"American militarism has not been limited to foreign battlefields. Politicians and policymakers have insisted that Americans are engaged in an existential struggle against foes seen and unseen, foreign and domestic. Thus, militarism has seeped into everyday American life as the United States has not settled for defeat or victory but for war as a permanent state." - Osamah F. Khalil

Those who value this conversation will also probably want to check out The Myth of American Idealism, out now from Penguin Random House.

This episode originally aired on October 2, 2024. Get new episodes early at patreon.com/CurrentAffairs!

Recently, New York Times columnist Pamela Paul made an argument for aggressively policing subway fare evasion. To explain why a major new crackdown is necessary, she cited "broken windows theory," which she said that progressives refuse to admit "works." She explained that allowing minor crimes "invites graver forms of crime," which is why we need to make sure laws against seemingly minor crimes are enforced. This is the core of the argument made in The Atlantic in 1982 by two political scientists, who argued that when a community allows small offenses (like broken windows) to go unpunished, soon the whole place is going to hell in a handbasket.

But the broken windows theory was a fraud. The writers of the original article did not produce evidence that it was true, and indeed there hasn't been evidence produced since to show that it's true. Joining us today is Bernard Harcourt of Columbia Law School, who wrote the first book critical of broken windows policing, The Illusion of Order: The False Promise of Broken Windows Policing(2004). At the time the book was written, "broken windows" was credited with having produced major crime reductions across the country. Today Prof. Harcourt joins to explain how this theory became so popular. One reason, he says, is that it appealed to both liberals and conservatives: liberals because policing "order" was seen as an attractive alternative to mass incarceration, conservatives because it advocated aggressively keeping unruly poor people in check. But the evidence for the theory just wasn't there, and Prof. Harcourt explains that it ended up serving as the intellectual foundation for outrages like the mass stopping and frisking of young Black men.

"The broken windows theory and order-maintenance policing continue to receive extremely favorable reviews in policy circles, academia, and the press. Ironically the continued popularity of order-maintenance policing is due, in large part, to the dramatic rise in incarceration. Broken windows policing presents itself as the only viable alternative to three- strikes and mandatory minimum sentencing laws. Order-maintenance proponents affirmatively promote youth curfews, anti-gang loitering ordinances, and order-maintenance crackdowns as milder alternatives to the theory of incapacitation and increased incarceration. ... [But] decades after its first articulation in the Atlantic Monthly, the famous broken windows theory has never been verified. Despite repeated claims that the theory has in fact been "empirically verified" , there is no reliable evidence that the broken windows theory works."

The evidentiary problems with broken windows are also discussed in Nathan's recent essay about The Atlantic.

This episode originally aired on September 26, 2024. Get new episodes early at patreon.com/CurrentAffairs!

Donald Trump and J.D. Vance have recently been pushing vicious racist fake news about Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, claiming they are stealing and eating people's pets and destroying the town. But why are there Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio in the first place? What role has U.S. foreign policy played in driving Haitians from Haiti? Today, we are joined by Jonathan Katz, one of the leading journalists writing about U.S. imperialism and a specialist in Haiti. Katz tells us about the history of U.S. relations with Haiti, common misconceptions about the country, and the deeper meaning of the Springfield pet-eating scare, and how it fits with longstanding racialized narratives about threatening Haitians.

The former Port-au-Prince bureau chief for the Associated Press, Katz is the author of the books The Big Truck That Went By: How the World Came to Save Haiti and Left Behind a Disaster and Gangsters of Capitalism: Smedley Butler, the Marines, and the Making and Breaking of America’s Empire. His newsletter can be found here.

It is not a matter of whether the United States should get involved in Haiti following the first presidential assassination there in more than a century. The United States is already deeply involved. The questions are how that involvement helped, at a minimum, to set the stage for the crisis now enveloping a nation of 11.5 million people and what to do with that reality from here on out...Ever since Haiti won its independence from France in a slave revolution that culminated in 1804, the mere idea of a republic run by self-liberated Black people has sent shivers through the white world. -Jonathan Katz, "U.S. Intervention in Haiti Would Be a Disaster—Again," Foreign Policy (2021)

Get new episodes early at patreon.com/CurrentAffairs!

This week The Myth of American Idealism: How U.S. Foreign Policy Endangers The World was finally released! The book, co-written by Noam Chomsky and Current Affairs editor in chief Nathan J. Robinson. Today, Nathan joins managing editor Lily Sánchez and associate editor Alex Skopic to discuss the book and introduce Prof. Chomsky's views on U.S. foreign policy, explaining why he finds Chomsky's warnings so important for our time. An article Nathan wrote further introducing the subject matter of the book can be found here.

This book is a huge deal for us here at Current Affairs, so please help us by spreading the word about it and encouraging those you know to buy it!

This book is in many ways an attempt to distill Chomsky's vision and critique of U.S. power. That major theme is that in U.S. political discourse, many of the criticisms of U.S. foreign policy share a certain premise. You can criticize U.S. foreign policy, but only within a certain spectrum. He points out that even critics of U.S. foreign policy argue that the United States makes mistakes, but it doesn't commit crimes. We have numerous examples of this in the book. Basically, when you talk about the Afghanistan War, it’s said, well, that didn't go well, but it was a well-intentioned war. In the Ken Burns documentary on the Vietnam War, he says it was a war begun by good men for noble reasons, but it was just a tragedy. In the case of the Iraq War: we meant well, we meant to bring democracy, and it's a shame it ended up a catastrophe. And Chomsky has always argued that a lot of U.S. policy does not consist of idealistic mistakes. In fact, oftentimes, the things that are horrifying about it are either intentional results of the policy, or at least are well understood to be likely consequences of the policy that are just ignored by policymakers. — Nathan J. Robinson

This episode originally aired on September 20, 2024. Get new episodes early at patreon.com/CurrentAffairs!

Today on Current Affairs, it's our second-ever musical episode! We're joined today by Danny Bradley, who has written many songs for Current Affairs. Today, we listen to a few of those and Danny plays us some other favorites of his live on the air, including his new tune about a manosphere-influenced "Hopeless Romantic." Danny and Nathan also discuss what makes for good musical satire, why folk music is wonderfully socialistic, and why Danny once wrote a song called "Fuck The Guardian."

A playlist of all the songs Danny has made for Current Affairs is here.

This episode originally aired on September 17, 2024. Get new episodes early at patreon.com/CurrentAffairs!

Today on the program, Malaika Jabali returns to discuss the issues that were left out of the first presidential debate, and why Democrats should not embrace right-wing framings of issues even if they think doing so is electorally pragmatic. Malaika is the author of It's Not You, It's Capitalism. Nathan's recent piece "What Doesn't Get Said" also addresses many of these issues. This episode is also available in video form on our YouTube channel. Nathan's book "Superpredator: Bill Clinton's Use and Abuse of Black America" goes into depth about one of the most infamous periods in which Democrats decided the best way to win elections was to talk like conservatives. A recent Current Affairs article by Alex Skopic on Harris's Dick Cheney endorsement is here.

This episode originally aired on September 13, 2024. Get new episodes early at patreon.com/CurrentAffairs!

Jordan Chariton of Status Coup News is a leading investigative journalist and the author of We The Poisoned: Exposing the Flint Water Crisis Cover-Up and the Poisoning of 100,000 Americans, a major expose of one of the most outrageous scandals of our time, the Flint water crisis. Chariton has spent extensive time on the ground in Flint even as the mainstream media lost interest and moved on, and he joins today to explain why every one of us should understand this story of the poisoning of a city, which was not an accident and for which there has still been no justice.

"Infuriatingly, our mainstream national media ignores most of this and peppers us nonstop with the political horserace and political tribalism (and an unhealthy dose of sensationalism and conflict). We are, of course, living through extraordinary times with seemingly endless calamities erupting domestically and internationally. It’s hard to stay focused on one city’s crisis when we’re being hit constantly with one disaster after the next... But if there is just one thing you take away from this story, I hope it is this: please, don’t forget Flint. If we allow the poisoning of our fellow man and woman to simply fade away into the ether . . . don’t be shocked when it comes to your neighborhood next." - Jordan Chariton, We The Poisoned

This episode originally aired on September 10, 2024. Get new episodes early at patreon.com/CurrentAffairs!

Today Kat Abugazaleh of Mother Jones and Zeteo News returns to the program to tell us what the DNC in Chicago was like. How did the Harris campaign try to court influencers and creators? How were the influencers treated differently than the press, and what responsibility does a "creator" have, given that they're not journalists but are also not formally with the campaign? How did the Harris campaign deal with the Palestine solidarity movement? Kat, who was on the ground in Chicago at the convention, tells us what political conventions are really like and how it differs from the spectacle presented on television.

"[The creators] were treated a lot better than pretty much everyone else there. We had our own designated workspace that had free drinks. It was like nine bucks to get a soda there, but in the creator workspace, we had free beer, wine....There was a giant thing on the wall that said, "Creators for Kamala Harris.... There was a lot of incentive to be a cheerleader... It was definitely way more privilege than was given to any other place covering [the convention]." - Kat Abughazaleh