I have been very impressed with Notes from the Circus since I discovered your writing a few months ago. I particularly appreciate how you frame so many issues as moral issues - many of the writers I find here do not make that commitment. That said, I read this essay very carefully, looking for some mention of Palestine, Gaza, the West Bank, Israel... I didn't find it. The US has supported Israel militarily for decades. Meanwhile, international consensus has turned against what the IDF has done and continues to do on a daily basis. I am curious whether you have an opinion on this?
It was interesting to see you curse for emphasis. Even the mytho-poetical has had quite enough of this BS. Your point and discussion of it is excellent, but I don't see that morality/democracy over profit, will ever become a thing in the American corporate world.
Mike Brock: I’m god. If you object to any part of my vision for forcefully reshaping the planet, it’s cuz you’re a deeply deranged and very morally unserious person.
I prefer to think that we are all human beings. A few people in suits and politics, whatever country and ideology they are from, are responsible for the deaths of countless human beings.
As happens all too often, I got all the way to the bottom still not quite sure what you're talking about. Because a positive answer was not available I have to default to the negative one, to wit: that -- never mind what's going on right now in our news -- something else has been going on all along. Perhaps we should have been doing something about that before all of this happened?
That works for me; I'm there, too. I hope others were able to figure that out. There's probably a way to convey that message in the first paragraph.
Yes, bad faith has a long history in our country, and yes, if we ever extricate ourselves from the current predicament (not a sure thing, but, you know...), then we need to clean up the back story. Hell yes. Most are unaware of all that, and it's high time we linked the causes of our current plight so it doesn't happen "never again". Pragmatism be damned, the ethics underlie our future at every point. If we don't clean up the backstory, we'll suffer more of this shit. Thanks for itemizing so many of the things on that long agenda. Next up: what to do about any of that.
Mike Brock: Surveys the last 30 years and decides the problem is that the US didn’t neocon hard enough. A few million more skulls would surely have done the trick.
I’m not usually in the habit of quoting CS Lewis, but he absolutely had you pegged. The overwhelming majority of global citizens reject your vision of endless imperial destruction. Grow up and shed your fucking absurd reading of US history.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
Liking your spirit, Mike. Word of caution: let's try to stay humble when pretending to be the epitome of moral leadership. We're all down with our faces in the dirt here. Yes, we can dust ourselves off, and reach out with clear communication. But condemning the leadership in Iran - which the US have helped to put in place - may be a little too conventient?
I genuinely don't know what you're talking about. This moral accounting method you're using seems very untenable to me. I say this not to be rude or confrontational. But a nation is not a person. It is not a moral entity unto itself. To account for morality in this way, is a moral category error.
I don’t think we’re born onto a "clean slate"—we inherit history, yes, and responsibility to understand it. But moral responsibility is fundamentally individual; it depends on our choices, our actions, and our commitments. To say a citizen automatically inherits a nation’s historical debts is to blur that important distinction. We inherit responsibility—but not collective guilt. Our moral task is clarity, accountability, and making better choices in the present, not endless atonement for the actions of others.
Fair position. I would dispute that the nucleus of morality is in the 'individual'. A contested concept, wouldn't you say? We emerge from a shared culture, and the notion of an individual existing separately from 'others' is the kind of craziness that got us here in the first place. That may sound a little out there, but this is in line with non-dual worldviews (Taoism, Tantra, Christian mystics) that resonate over here.
No one. I was asking about the companies that facilitate sales of technology into countries who use it to support authoritarianism and against their own people, to keep them down. I don’t think there is any way to stop this.
If we protect democracy in America and re-establish rule-of-law, why wold the world punish us for the forces that we internally defeated? This is a very confused question you are asking me, I think.
Perhaps I worded it poorly. On a daily basis, you document how the U.S. is rapidly becoming the type of state that needs to have justice imposed upon it by the liberal democratic order. I would expect within a few years this will get worse. You listed a number of things that would amount to justice. Do you expect within the next few years that what is left of the liberal democratic order should impose some justice on the United States? This was the idea that repeatedly occurred to me while reading, and I don’t think you brought it up, unless I skimmed past it.
To me, a logical extension of your essay is a call to the rest of the G7/AUSNZ/EU to be on high alert and prepared to take active steps towards justice. Obviously, there are tremendous practical downsides to such actions that make them unlikely, but it seems like the moral clarity you're pushing towards would still demand it.
I'm not thinking about what the US should impose upon itself after reestablishing democratic governance, or what the rest of the world should do AFTER that. When I said "by the end of the Trump regime", I meant between now and that time. Based on what we're already doing and what we are the path to do, is it incumbent upon others to act now or in the near future? If so, what should it look like? If not, why not?
I have been very impressed with Notes from the Circus since I discovered your writing a few months ago. I particularly appreciate how you frame so many issues as moral issues - many of the writers I find here do not make that commitment. That said, I read this essay very carefully, looking for some mention of Palestine, Gaza, the West Bank, Israel... I didn't find it. The US has supported Israel militarily for decades. Meanwhile, international consensus has turned against what the IDF has done and continues to do on a daily basis. I am curious whether you have an opinion on this?
I suspect you'd appreciate Alexander Vindman's writing. He frankly lays out why international relations' "realism" is indeed folly.
https://www.avindman.com/p/a-review-of-the-folly-of-realism
It was interesting to see you curse for emphasis. Even the mytho-poetical has had quite enough of this BS. Your point and discussion of it is excellent, but I don't see that morality/democracy over profit, will ever become a thing in the American corporate world.
Mike Brock: I’m god. If you object to any part of my vision for forcefully reshaping the planet, it’s cuz you’re a deeply deranged and very morally unserious person.
Mike Brock:
Bruh I was totes against the Iraq war, trust me. Iran is sooo different, we gotta take the Ayatollah out.
[20 years from now]
Bruh I was totes against the Iran war, trust me.
I prefer to think that we are all human beings. A few people in suits and politics, whatever country and ideology they are from, are responsible for the deaths of countless human beings.
As happens all too often, I got all the way to the bottom still not quite sure what you're talking about. Because a positive answer was not available I have to default to the negative one, to wit: that -- never mind what's going on right now in our news -- something else has been going on all along. Perhaps we should have been doing something about that before all of this happened?
That works for me; I'm there, too. I hope others were able to figure that out. There's probably a way to convey that message in the first paragraph.
Yes, bad faith has a long history in our country, and yes, if we ever extricate ourselves from the current predicament (not a sure thing, but, you know...), then we need to clean up the back story. Hell yes. Most are unaware of all that, and it's high time we linked the causes of our current plight so it doesn't happen "never again". Pragmatism be damned, the ethics underlie our future at every point. If we don't clean up the backstory, we'll suffer more of this shit. Thanks for itemizing so many of the things on that long agenda. Next up: what to do about any of that.
Mike Brock: “China!”
Mike Brock: Takes a look at the Gaza holocaust and decides the US and Israel should prolly just turn the entire Middle East into glass.
Mike Brock: Surveys the last 30 years and decides the problem is that the US didn’t neocon hard enough. A few million more skulls would surely have done the trick.
🗽
I’m not usually in the habit of quoting CS Lewis, but he absolutely had you pegged. The overwhelming majority of global citizens reject your vision of endless imperial destruction. Grow up and shed your fucking absurd reading of US history.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
Liking your spirit, Mike. Word of caution: let's try to stay humble when pretending to be the epitome of moral leadership. We're all down with our faces in the dirt here. Yes, we can dust ourselves off, and reach out with clear communication. But condemning the leadership in Iran - which the US have helped to put in place - may be a little too conventient?
I assure you, I played no role in positioning the Ayatollah into his perch of unchecked power.
Hahahah, I had a hunch. But yeah, claiming the moral high ground as an American is a delicate dance, my friend.
I genuinely don't know what you're talking about. This moral accounting method you're using seems very untenable to me. I say this not to be rude or confrontational. But a nation is not a person. It is not a moral entity unto itself. To account for morality in this way, is a moral category error.
Rrreally? Doesn't a nation have its debt to history, jointly carried by its citizens? We're not a clean slate when we're born, or are we, you think?
I don’t think we’re born onto a "clean slate"—we inherit history, yes, and responsibility to understand it. But moral responsibility is fundamentally individual; it depends on our choices, our actions, and our commitments. To say a citizen automatically inherits a nation’s historical debts is to blur that important distinction. We inherit responsibility—but not collective guilt. Our moral task is clarity, accountability, and making better choices in the present, not endless atonement for the actions of others.
Fair position. I would dispute that the nucleus of morality is in the 'individual'. A contested concept, wouldn't you say? We emerge from a shared culture, and the notion of an individual existing separately from 'others' is the kind of craziness that got us here in the first place. That may sound a little out there, but this is in line with non-dual worldviews (Taoism, Tantra, Christian mystics) that resonate over here.
How can we balance unfettered capitalism and moral dignity? Is that even possible?
Who is espousing "unfettered capitalism" here?
No one. I was asking about the companies that facilitate sales of technology into countries who use it to support authoritarianism and against their own people, to keep them down. I don’t think there is any way to stop this.
Well, then you've already given into despair. I reject despair.
By the end of the Trump regime, what type of accountability and justice do you expect the democratic world should impose on the United States?
If we protect democracy in America and re-establish rule-of-law, why wold the world punish us for the forces that we internally defeated? This is a very confused question you are asking me, I think.
Perhaps I worded it poorly. On a daily basis, you document how the U.S. is rapidly becoming the type of state that needs to have justice imposed upon it by the liberal democratic order. I would expect within a few years this will get worse. You listed a number of things that would amount to justice. Do you expect within the next few years that what is left of the liberal democratic order should impose some justice on the United States? This was the idea that repeatedly occurred to me while reading, and I don’t think you brought it up, unless I skimmed past it.
I think we should impose justice on the tyrants who seek to enslave us. Not the people of the United States. That's what I think.
To me, a logical extension of your essay is a call to the rest of the G7/AUSNZ/EU to be on high alert and prepared to take active steps towards justice. Obviously, there are tremendous practical downsides to such actions that make them unlikely, but it seems like the moral clarity you're pushing towards would still demand it.
I'm not thinking about what the US should impose upon itself after reestablishing democratic governance, or what the rest of the world should do AFTER that. When I said "by the end of the Trump regime", I meant between now and that time. Based on what we're already doing and what we are the path to do, is it incumbent upon others to act now or in the near future? If so, what should it look like? If not, why not?