Every once in a while, there is a seminal article written that elucidates political calculations not obvious on their surface.

In particular, foreign policy matters tend to be complicated to the point that most Americans focus little attention on understanding the motivations of presidents’ foreign policy decisions despite their broad national security implications.

One of the most important columns that comes to mind is Michael Doran’s brilliant essay from 2015 entitled Obama’s Secret Iran Strategy in which Doran explains Barack Obama’s motivation for empowering Iran as a regional hegemon at the expense of U.S. national security and regional alliances.

That column was followed in 2021 by another must-read essay co-written by Doran and Tony Badran entitled The Realignment in which the authors conclude that in the Middle East, “Biden is finishing what Obama started. And his top advisers are on board.”

The authors discuss the influence of returning Obama advisors on a policy intended to realign the Middle Eastern order into “one that relies more on partnership with Iran.”

[TTP: Skye asked the question, “Is this a case of DEI = DIE?” when he shared this article about our Woke Army’s relief efforts. Mike Ryan responded to his question and TTP thought his insight should be shared. His response is at the end of this article.]

Four of the U.S. Army vessels supporting the “floating pier” in Gaza broke from their moorings Saturday and ran aground, with two of the four beaching themselves on the Israeli coast.

The Navy Times reported:

Four U.S. Army vessels supporting the maritime humanitarian aid mission in Gaza broke free from their moorings due to heavy sea states Saturday, U.S. Central Command said.

Bad ideas are sometimes the hardest to dethrone.

It’s probably accurate to say most people think of money as the paper currency printed by governments. And it is money in the sense that it functions as a medium of exchange, but is it sound? Is it vulnerable to inflation?

Its very existence is evidence that it is, so why are so many people reluctant to switch to a money that isn’t?

There any many myths surrounding hard money currencies, and one of them is that money, both its nature and supply, is best left to the alleged guardian of our rights, the state.

The fact that money came into existence on the market, and that its ultimate form and supply were determined by economic law, is disregarded.

Money matters belong to the state because the state, unlike the rest of us, is in a position to remove itself from market discipline. Since the state is necessary to our survival, the story goes, it cannot do its job unless it can control the growth of money.

Money, therefore, must be of such a nature that its supply can grow in accordance with the orders of a state-appointed committee.

Even the classical gold standard was under control of the state.

When that control proved too limited for those eager for war, it was abandoned.

The gold standard did not fail. States failed to keep the gold standard.

[Editor:  This falls into the “stating the obvious” category – but sometimes the obvious needs stating.]

“How big is the sun?

We just heard right this minute

A million of our earths

could all fit right in it.”

Those words can be found in Dr. Seuss children’s book There’s No Place Like Space: All About Our Solar System.

About what you’re about to read, it won’t be a statistical or scientific argument supporting or disdaining the theory that is global warming. No such skills exist to make either, but even if they did exist, the view here is that statistical arguments about anything involving personal freedom are loser arguments.

Think back to the spring of 2020 and the coronavirus to see why.

Anti-Israel/pro-Hamas campus protests have engulfed hundreds of college campuses. But the more coastal, blue-state, and supposedly elite the campus was, the more furious the violence that sometimes followed these demonstrations.

Even rowdier and more vicious street analogs shut down key bridges, freeways, and religious services. Protestors often defaced hallowed American monuments, national cemeteries, and iconic buildings. Visa-holders were among the worst perpetrators, adding ingratitude to their criminality.

The vast majority wore masks, not to protect from infection but to hide their identities. It is received wisdom, however, that those who wear masks do so for obvious reasons: so authorities cannot identify and punish those who commit crimes (e.g. the Klan, antifa, bank robbers, criminal gangs), or so that anonymity can help incite mob furor, given that participants feel that their vehemence increases once it cannot be traced.

More mundanely, why don’t the students simply identify themselves, insist they want their “resistance” to be known, and then hope their arrests will be proof of their courage to galvanize like-minded people to join them?

Why? One, because the students are sunshine and careerist revolutionaries. They see no inconsistency between shouting “Death to Israel,” “Global Intifada,” or “River to the Sea” one day and then the next, applying for a top spot at Goldman Sachs, a tony university, or a federal bureaucracy. Jacobin professors protest like it is 1793, but when politely arrested, they collapse into fetal positions and scream hysterically that consequences cannot follow their illegality, given they are privileged, superior intellects and moralists, with titles and degrees no less.