Peter Zeihan hits a lot of nails on the head, but I’m not convinced by his rosy prognosis for the States. Of course, I’m a pretty dyed in the wool pessimist.
Sorry to be the pedant here, but the Press claims to be the Fourth Estate, even if they do behave as if they were on the more bestial end of the Third Estate.
Well that's embarrassing - I failed to interpret the results correctly so didn't get 100% after all. I feel appropriately chastened so will pay more attention in future. Very informative, thanks Claire.
The article you linked about the draft is almost three years old.
I do strongly disagree with his contention that the purpose of the military is not solely to fight and win our wars. It's possible that it would be nice if the military were representative (of course, I'm not entirely sure what that means) of the country as a whole, but as far as I know that's only rarely been the case, even during times when we had a draft.
Read it in more detail. If found this to be interesting: "those whose families fall into the top income tax bracket would be the only ones eligible." So only if the family has at least half a mil in AGI. And only for combat specialties.
Does he really think that would fly politically?
I also would like to know when the military "was, a societal leveler, in which men and women of diverse backgrounds, at an impressionable age, were forced together in the pursuit of a mission larger than themselves" occurred. WWII maybe, but not in Nam or from what I've read Korea.
I understand that his purpose isn't really to help the military, or even leaven society and government with the military experience it needs, but rather to make it more difficult to use the military.
To pick one bit of trivium out of this long list, and to beat one of my horses, Stoltenberg said "NATO is a defensive alliance."
He's not far wrong, but he--and far too many of his peers, predecessors, and potential successors--is missing the far larger and more important aspect of this: the best defense is an overpowering offense. With the enemy always having to react to us, with the enemy never being permitted to disengage and rest, refit, prepare better, with the initiative firmly in our hands, we have a much better chance of defeating that enemy.
Stoltenberg, et al., unfortunately see defense as intrinsically reactive rather than of necessity proactive, even preemptive on occasion.
I am happy to report that I didn’t miss any of the quiz questions. I attribute that largely to the fact that I am on vacation and don’t take quizzes while vacationing. Was there a question about the pickled heart (or was it embalmed) story you ran a few weeks ago? I saw no mention of that story in any other media outlet.
Aug 31, 2022·edited Aug 31, 2022Liked by Claire Berlinski
A quick elaboration on Question #4, about different sorts of fertilizers.
"But shortfalls from Belarus only make it more important that fertilizer plants in Europe keep operating. Unfortunately, given the price of gas, they can’t."
Belarus produces a lot of potash, used to make potassium based fertilizers, but doesn't make much in the way of nitrogen based fertilizers (it's not nothing, maybe 2% of global production. But not much compared to its potash production). Natural gas price doesn't directly affect the production of potash as it isn't an input. But natural gas (along with nitrogen from the air) are the key ingredients in nitrogen based fertilizers, which are probably the most important to crop growth.
The two types of fertilizers mentioned here aren't directly related, though I'll admit I don't know whether they're mixed before being applied to crops, or whether they're applied separately.
Owen is correct. It continues to annoy me to no end that we burn gasoline in cars when we don't have to; demand for oil is not going away given the absolute necessity of plastics, machine lubricants and fertiliser for the continued existence of civilisation. Oil is the key raw material for manufacturing all those things. (Bonus annoyance: the continued steady drumbeat of annoyingly wrong-headed stories about the lack of lithium and rare earths. The stuff is rare because demand is low, not because rare earths (or lithium) are actually rare. There's a perfectly good rare earth mine in California that can be brought online anytime it's worth the cost to mine. Or the federal government could just buy the site and just start mining continuously with running small fiscal losses if needed. The materials can be HAD.)
If California is telling people not to charge their EVs during peak periods with the current grid, I'm not sure that it is true that we have an alternative to burning petroleum fuels for transportation.
Peter Zeihan hits a lot of nails on the head, but I’m not convinced by his rosy prognosis for the States. Of course, I’m a pretty dyed in the wool pessimist.
Sorry to be the pedant here, but the Press claims to be the Fourth Estate, even if they do behave as if they were on the more bestial end of the Third Estate.
You're right. I'll fix that.
Fixed.
And just so you don’t get hit with a suit for royalties, the RNC has copyrighted “Banana Republican.”
Well that's embarrassing - I failed to interpret the results correctly so didn't get 100% after all. I feel appropriately chastened so will pay more attention in future. Very informative, thanks Claire.
I'm sorry if I disappointed you, but answering "Hate for Peronist love" did seem funny at the time.
The article you linked about the draft is almost three years old.
I do strongly disagree with his contention that the purpose of the military is not solely to fight and win our wars. It's possible that it would be nice if the military were representative (of course, I'm not entirely sure what that means) of the country as a whole, but as far as I know that's only rarely been the case, even during times when we had a draft.
Yes, he's said it more recently, too, but those articles were paywalled--and his argument hasn't changed.
Read it in more detail. If found this to be interesting: "those whose families fall into the top income tax bracket would be the only ones eligible." So only if the family has at least half a mil in AGI. And only for combat specialties.
Does he really think that would fly politically?
I also would like to know when the military "was, a societal leveler, in which men and women of diverse backgrounds, at an impressionable age, were forced together in the pursuit of a mission larger than themselves" occurred. WWII maybe, but not in Nam or from what I've read Korea.
I understand that his purpose isn't really to help the military, or even leaven society and government with the military experience it needs, but rather to make it more difficult to use the military.
I think the military still is a societal leveler; it just levels the society of those within rather than without the ranks.
The draft is a good idea in principle, but I cannot see it happening in any way, shape, or form in today’s America.
To pick one bit of trivium out of this long list, and to beat one of my horses, Stoltenberg said "NATO is a defensive alliance."
He's not far wrong, but he--and far too many of his peers, predecessors, and potential successors--is missing the far larger and more important aspect of this: the best defense is an overpowering offense. With the enemy always having to react to us, with the enemy never being permitted to disengage and rest, refit, prepare better, with the initiative firmly in our hands, we have a much better chance of defeating that enemy.
Stoltenberg, et al., unfortunately see defense as intrinsically reactive rather than of necessity proactive, even preemptive on occasion.
Eric Hines
I am happy to report that I didn’t miss any of the quiz questions. I attribute that largely to the fact that I am on vacation and don’t take quizzes while vacationing. Was there a question about the pickled heart (or was it embalmed) story you ran a few weeks ago? I saw no mention of that story in any other media outlet.
Nope! It was all based on the most recent edition of Global Eyes.
A quick elaboration on Question #4, about different sorts of fertilizers.
"But shortfalls from Belarus only make it more important that fertilizer plants in Europe keep operating. Unfortunately, given the price of gas, they can’t."
Belarus produces a lot of potash, used to make potassium based fertilizers, but doesn't make much in the way of nitrogen based fertilizers (it's not nothing, maybe 2% of global production. But not much compared to its potash production). Natural gas price doesn't directly affect the production of potash as it isn't an input. But natural gas (along with nitrogen from the air) are the key ingredients in nitrogen based fertilizers, which are probably the most important to crop growth.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fertilizer-exports-russia-ukraine?country=Nitrogen~Phosphorous~Potassium
The two types of fertilizers mentioned here aren't directly related, though I'll admit I don't know whether they're mixed before being applied to crops, or whether they're applied separately.
Owen is correct. It continues to annoy me to no end that we burn gasoline in cars when we don't have to; demand for oil is not going away given the absolute necessity of plastics, machine lubricants and fertiliser for the continued existence of civilisation. Oil is the key raw material for manufacturing all those things. (Bonus annoyance: the continued steady drumbeat of annoyingly wrong-headed stories about the lack of lithium and rare earths. The stuff is rare because demand is low, not because rare earths (or lithium) are actually rare. There's a perfectly good rare earth mine in California that can be brought online anytime it's worth the cost to mine. Or the federal government could just buy the site and just start mining continuously with running small fiscal losses if needed. The materials can be HAD.)
elm
sorry
If California is telling people not to charge their EVs during peak periods with the current grid, I'm not sure that it is true that we have an alternative to burning petroleum fuels for transportation.