iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 19/09/2026

Comparative and counterfactual analysis are good antidotes to the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

Chart comparing life-expectancy trends in China and Taiwan. The data clearly shows that China lagged way behind Taiwan under Mao's leadership, and even now hasn't quite caught up

1423028

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 18/09/2026

I prefer Gordian Knots with greater density.

The "mixing bowl" in which 495, 395, and 95 converge on the Virginia side of the Capital Beltway.

240

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 13/09/2026

The points: First, exploitation of brokerage positions is a more general power-political strategy; for example, it's a time-honored practice in imperial rule 👇 (see www.dhnexon.net/wp-content/u...)

A figure depicting an empire with four peripheral segments. The metropole (or "central rulers" in the diagram) sit at the center, authority runs from them to local intermediaries and then to local populations. There are no significant lateral political ties that link segments. The Figure is from “'The Empire Will Compensate You'”:
The Structural Dynamics of the U.S.
Overseas Basing Network" by Cooley and Nexon, 2013.

100

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 13/09/2026

The only way for an exchange to cross between two political communities is go through "A." In theory, this provides A with the ability to: 1. Engage in informational arbitrage—this is how the "panopticon effect" empowers it; and 2. Mediate or block all cross-boundary exchanges in the network.

100

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 13/09/2026

Both of its mechanisms — chokepoints and panopticons — are examples of exploiting a brokerage position. The figure below shows three political communities. In each, a single social site ("A","B," or "C") monopolizes external relations, i.e., they might be the governments of sovereign states.

A network diagram comprised of three clusters. Each cluster is linked to one another via one social site, A.

100

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 05/09/2026

I'm sorry but you can't release conference acceptances ~70 days before it starts -- and to register within two weeks of the announcement. The organizers are good people. I hope there's a damn good explanation.

The top of a 9/5 email announcing acceptance to a conference that starts on 11/13.

140

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 27/08/2026

Canada would never do this, because It isn't run by an overgrown toddler.

0160

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 26/08/2026

@stephenwalt.bsky.social is right here. I’m a bad person — I’ve largely just stopped answering these queries. But I would add that plenty of people applying from overseas assume we’re more like the British system — it’s not necessarily their fault for making that mistake. tinyurl.com/5drw3k9w

“Finally, be aware that reaching out to individual faculty is unlikely to improve your chances and may even reduce them. Every year I get dozens of emails from students from all around the world saying that they want to come to Harvard and study under my supervision. They sometimes attach CVs and even writing samples. Such inquiries are flattering, but individual faculty do not make admissions decisions and are unlikely to go to bat for an applicant they've never met. When I get this kind of inquiry (and assuming it's not spam or being generated by a bot), it tells me that the student doesn't understand how the application process works and may not have bothered to look at the Kennedy School's website to find out what the application process is.”

4191

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 24/08/2026

As @dandrezner.bsky.social puts it "even utter buffoons can achieve a few of their ends if they control" the vast arsenal of 🇺🇸 power-political instruments. But eventually their own buffoonery will catch up to them — especially when their policies deplete those instruments. tinyurl.com/2s4xv28d

First paragraph: "The funny thing is, people will now look back on 2025 as if it was the golden age of Trump's foreign policy. The reason for that is not because 2025's foreign policy was better —it wasn't. Rather, it was due to the fact that U.S, power remained sufficiently fearsome such that even Trump's gang of dipshits could still coerce and bluster some other actors in world politics into making some concessions. Trump's willingness to use force occasionally yielded tangible results. It turns out that even utter buffoons can achieve a few of their ends if they control the world's most powerful military."

Second paragraph: "As the war in Iran continues to not be won, however, the cracks in the foundations of American power are showing. Whether it's guns or butter, the America is coming up short. The U.S. has badly depleted its stockpile of missile interceptors, eliminating the ability to deter Russia and China. Members of the U.S. military on extended deployment are starting to fray at the seams. Total U.S. federal debt just exceeded $40 trillion. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's recent efforts to intervene in the bond market have failed miserably."

1328

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 23/08/2026

Saving this for posterity.

An excerpt from the signatories list which includes:

"WE ARE PROUD RACISTS AND SUPPORT WHITE SUPREMANCY
King's College University - john.armstrong@kcl.ac.uk"

2395

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 19/08/2026

I just can't even. The guy has spent 20+ years repackaging classic (critics might say "shopworn") realist arguments... and his occasional attempts to "product differentiate" are almost invariably rubbish.

Mearsheimer in Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities: "E. H. Carr's famous book The Twenty Years' Crisis, written in the late 1930s, is widely considered a classic critique of liberalism as it applies to international politics. ' In fact, his target is not rights-based liberalism of the sort I discuss here. Carr cares little about either modus vivendi or progressive liberalism, which at the time were not highly regarded isms. Instead he takes dead aim at liberal idealism and utilitarianism, which were much more influential in I930s Britain.' Carr and I thus mean different things when we talk about liberalism, and there is not much overlap in our critiques."

2100

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 19/08/2026

One of my cats is… difficult… about food. So I tried to kill the time by reading this piece. You know the argument that LLMs are bullshit machines? Yeah. Like a lot of LLM writing, it lacks properly structured claim-warrant-evidence arguments. Also incredibly repetitive.

What I discovered last week was not that I am a fraud. I discovered that I was feeling like one. There is an important difference. The feeling was not wasted. It forced me to examine my process without hiding behind comfortable words such as “tool” or “assistance”. AI did almost all of the writing, and I should be transparent about that. But I will not allow that fact to erase the expertise and intellectual labour behind the piece.

I know that some professional writers will still disagree with me. I want them to. They may say that I am the originator of the ideas but not the writer. I am prepared to hear that. My concern is the larger conclusion that, because AI wrote the sentences, the expertise and thought leadership behind them must somehow be fraudulent.

Educators may think the boundary I draw is too loose. Editors may conclude that disclosure is not enough. I would rather have that debate openly than pretend that a detector score has already settled it.

This opinion piece was made in the same way. It began with me speaking an untidy account of what had happened and what it made me think. AI did almost all of the writing. I questioned it, redirected it, removed what was too smooth, restored what mattered and decided what I could stand behind.

The ideas are mine. The expertise is mine. The experience is mine. The responsibility is mine. That does not make AI’s contribution invisible, and it does not make the work of professional writers less valuable.

AI did almost all of the writing. I remain the expert and the thought leader behind the piece. Does that also make me its author? I do not expect everyone to agree. But that is the debate I think we now need.

5296

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 22/07/2026

Also, Grok Imagine has an outstanding continuity algorithm.

I won't add alt text to each clip. Three scenes from the AI "trailer." Three obviously different ship designs.

010

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 18/07/2026

Thinking about 👇 a lot today. Not sure why. tinyurl.com/ycyt97tr "[P]eople familiar with Mr. Trump’s private conversations say he has long scorned those who served in Vietnam as being too dumb to have gotten out of it...."

Trump attacked her in response. “Jennifer Griffin should be fired for this kind of reporting,” he tweeted at the time. “Fox News is gone!” The Washington Post subsequently reported that “Trump believed people who served in the Vietnam War must be ‘losers’ because they hadn’t gotten out of it, according to a person familiar with the comments.” (The newspaper also noted that although Trump, in a tweeted response to the Atlantic story, claimed, “I never called John [McCain] a loser. I swear on whatever, or whoever, I was asked to swear on,” he did, in fact, call McCain a loser in a 2015 interview, which you can watch for yourself.)

The New York Times similarly reported that its sources verified “that Mr. Trump resisted supporting an official funeral and lowering flags after the death of Senator John McCain of Arizona, a Vietnam War hero whose military service he had disparaged.” (Ultimately, Trump relented, and the flags were lowered.) And the Times reported that “people familiar with Mr. Trump’s private conversations say he has long scorned those who served in Vietnam as being too dumb to have gotten out of it,” as Trump had done. The Times further reported that “some also recalled him asking why the United States should be so interested in finding captured soldiers” who are prisoners of war.

0168

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 17/07/2026

Trump wants to interdict the 2026 midterms. He's an authoritarian; he has no compunction about destroying the Republic for his own benefit. That's the most important thing. But let's talk take a second to talk about Georgia in 2021. 1/5

CNNs election map of the January 5, 2021 Senate runoff in Georgia. Ossoff beat Perdue 50.6–49.4% — a margin of around 55,000 votes.

CNN"s map of the results of the January 5, 2021 runoff between Warnock and Loeffler. Warnock prevailed 51–49% — a margin of roughly 90,000 votes.

1246

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 16/07/2026

Uh, ok. edition.cnn.com/2026/07/15/p...

"President Donald Trump has passed up multiple chances to explain to Americans how his latest escalation will win the war in Iran or how he'll alleviate their perpetually high costs for groceries, housing and fuel.
Now he's planning to anchor a national address Thursday evening on a personal fixation about the past — his false claim that he won the 2020 election.
Critics fear this is all part of a quickening effort to buckle trust in voting systems and to create a pretext to use federal powers to sway November's midterm elections. It would not be the first time that this president — who convention states should seek to bolster American democracy — has instead undermined it."

I've circled "convention" in red.

3221

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 13/07/2026

FYSA, Michael Williams wrote a fascinating article about the American postwar backlash against political aesthetics — a backlash driven by its close association with fascism. tinyurl.com/v846tvm9

Screencap of part of the article. It reads:

The Aestheticization of Politics

Famously coined by Walter Benjamin in 1936, the theme of the aestheticization of politics was a key part of wider debates over political modernity, democracy, and liberalism that coursed throughout the interwar period, reaching their most intense and, in many ways, sophisticated forms in Weimar Germany.3 As Benjamin (1936/68, 217-51) noted, engagements with aesthetic politics ranged from anarchist avowals of the virtues of violence to conservative and fascist visions of war as an aesthetic object espoused by Italian Futurists such as Marinetti and German "young conservatives" including Ernst Jünger. Amongst this general intellectual tumult stood also the Weimar jurist and legal thinker Carl Schmitt.

Schmitt's vision of aesthetics and images forms part of his analysis of the wider crisis of liberal modernity and democracy that he viewed as the central political issue of the time.
At the center of his critique lies the claim that liberalism reduces politics to individualistic calculation and competition and the advancement of purely subjective values. Since the liberal state is subordinate to the interests and values of individuals, he argues, its citizens will support it only so long as it furthers their private ends. Liberal governments thus tended to become paralyzed by entropic competition between factional interests or captured by powerful agents or coalitions who used public power solely for their private benefit. As a result, the idea of a public or national interest became discredited, and the citizenry increasingly disaffected and disillusioned from a government that was either ineffective or mendacious.

The excerpt continues:

These issues were most pressing in the case of war, where the pathologies of liberal individualism undercut the state's capacity to engage in armed conflict. For Schmitt, the ability of the sovereign to decide definitively on questions of war, and the individual's willingness and obligation to obey those decisions, is fundamental. All functioning sovereignties are founded on this principle and capacity; those that do not possess it are unlikely to survive. Yet, liberal individualism's ultimately subjective foundations fatally undermined this ca-pacity, leaving the liberal state incapable of defending itself.
"In case of need," Schmitt argued "the political entity must demand the sacrifice of life. Such a demand is in no way justifiable by the individualism of liberal thought. No consistent individualism can entrust to someone other than to the individual himself the right to dispose of the physical life of the individual" (1996, 71). Liberal governments thus lacked the capacity to decide authoritatively upon substantive val-ues, and—crucially—their societies lacked any broader commitment to the liberal order or the state itself. This erosion of political commitment left the liberal state an empty shell, easy prey for internal or external enemies who were willing to risk and sacrifice their lives to gain control of the state and achieve their ends, and who used the freedom of belief and organization provided by the pluralistic "liberal Leviathan" to organize its destruction (Schmitt 2008, 74).

0111

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 02/07/2026

Bowers is just an appalling, disgusting decision. Blackmun's dissent is methodical and devastating. Also this from Stevens' separate dissent 👇

If the Georgia statute cannot be enforced as it is written -- if the conduct it seeks to prohibit is a protected form of liberty for the vast majority of Georgia's citizens - the State must assume the burden of justifying a selective application of its law. Either the persons to whom Georgia seeks to apply its statute do not have the same interest in "liberty" that others have, or there must be a reason why the State may be permitted to apply a generally applicable law to certain persons that it does not apply to others.

The first possibility is plainly unacceptable. Although the meaning of the principle that "all men are created equal" is not always clear it surely must mean that every free citizen has the same interest in liberty that
the members of the majority share. From the standpoint of the individual, the homosexual and the heterosexual have the same interest in deciding how he will live his own life, and, more narrowly, how he will conduct himself in his personal and voluntary associations with his companions. State intrusion into the private conduct of either is equally burdensome.

0183

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 19/06/2026

So let’s be clear: Trump’s approach isn’t the “madman theory.” He latched onto the phrase to try to justify his erratic behavior. Some commentators played along. It’s long past time to stop. As @dknedal.bsky.social and I wrote back in 2017, Trump’s ‘craziness’ is simply bad foreign policy👇 /🧵

If Trump wants America to remain a dominant power, and wants others to respect American interests around the world, he needs to bolster American credibility. This requires a good measure of predictability, not the attitudes of an unpredictable rogue state.

2404

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 19/06/2026

Per the original piece, this is one reason the deal might still fall apart. The Iranians don’t trust the U.S. and they don’t trust Trump. And why should they? Some in the regime are already making this case, even though the MOU is a gift to Teheran. thehill.com/policy/inter...

The regime is also appealing to hard-liners in its messaging. “This memorandum does not mean trusting the enemy; it has been written with active distrust,” Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi told Iran’s Tasnim News Agency. “We will monitor the implementation of US commitments.”

1141

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 19/06/2026

The moment negotiating partners figure this out, they tend to get the upper hand. But that’s not the only reason Trump’s lack of impulse control undermines U.S. influence. It’s also because he can’t credibly commit to uphold agreements. 👇

1140

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 19/06/2026

The problem for Trump is that he’s *not* insensitive to costs. He’s highly sensitive to anything that he believes will undermine him: increases in gas prices, big stock market drops, etc. Hence “TACO.” As @notus.com stresses: the Iranians have figured this out, and that’s why they’re eating his 🥙.

Iran, experts say, has learned to focus on what Trump does and not just what he says.
And after two U.S.-Israeli assaults in less than two years since the president's return to office, Iran has seen that depleting stocks of U.S. weaponry "didn't move the needle for Trump," but hiking gas prices by shutting down the Strait of Hormuz did, Sina Toossi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, told NOTUS.

2131

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 19/06/2026

🧵This @notus.com bulletin inadvertently nails it. The “madman theory” isn’t about “unpredictability” in the Trump sense. It’s about *insensitivity to costs*. mailchi.mp/notus/madman...

White House officials have long said Trump's unpredictability is an essential part of his dealmaking — the main reason he's been able to get rivals to concede in ways other presidents haven't. But now Trump has to embrace a framework for talks that overwhelmingly benefit Iran, and his personal volatility is unlikely to tilt the discussions in the U.S.'s favor.
Iran, experts say, has learned to focus on what Trump does and not just what he says.
And after two U.S.-Israeli assaults in less than two years since the president's return to office, Iran has seen that depleting stocks of U.S. weaponry "didn't move the needle for Trump," but hiking gas prices by shutting down the Strait of Hormuz did, Sina Toossi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, told NOTUS.

23213

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 18/06/2026

It's also a very good indication you're in a bubble when you describe a party that receives 40%, 48%, and 43% of the male vote over the last three residential elections is the "girl's party" and the one that received 39%, 44%, and 46% of the female vote is the "boy's party."

Table titled "Trump's support among Hispanic, Black voters higher in 2024 than in 2020, 2016," showing percent of validated voters by candidate and vote margin (Dem minus Rep) across 2016 (Clinton/Trump), 2020 (Biden/Trump), and 2024 (Harris/Trump), broken out by gender within racial groups.
Overall gender gap narrowed over time: Men favored Trump by 11 points in 2016, 2 points in 2020, and 12 points in 2024 (41/52, 48/50, 43/55). Women favored the Democratic candidate by 15 points in 2016, 11 points in 2020, and 7 points in 2024 (54/39, 55/44, 53/46).
White men: Trump margin was -30 in 2016 (32/62), narrowed to -17 in 2020 (40/57), then widened to -20 in 2024 (39/59). White women: -2 in 2016 (45/47), -8 in 2020 (45/53), -4 in 2024 (47/51) — the only female subgroup favoring Trump in all three years shown.
Black men and women not reported for 2016. In 2020, Black men favored Biden +75 (87/12) and Black women +90 (95/5). In 2024, those margins narrowed to +54 for Black men (75/21) and +79 for Black women (89/10).
Hispanic men and women not reported for 2016. In 2020, Hispanic men favored Biden +18 (57/39) and Hispanic women +32 (65/33). In 2024, Hispanic men flipped to Trump by 2 points (48/50), and the Hispanic women margin narrowed to +6 (52/46). (generated by LLM, sorry all)

711223

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 14/06/2026

On the left is a screenshot of part of a phishing email that’s been around for at least six months. On the right is what Gemini tells you when you search for the email in Google… directly above results identifying it correctly as a scam.

Screenshot of an email. It reads: “Student Support Form Filed - Behavioral & Academic Support

OFFICIAL NOTIFICATION: STUDENT
SERVICES

Case ID: SSN-52532
Greetings,
This message is to inform you that a new Student Support Form has been logged for a student currently enrolled in your course. To maintain compliance with district policy and ensure the student receives timely intervention, please review the submission via the link below:

[Access Support Form Records]
Submission Details:
• Date Filed: June 13th, 2026
• Filed By: Parent/Guardian
• Category: Behavioral Concern / Academic
Support”

The rest is outside of the screenshot.

A screenshot of the AI Overview from Google search results: “AI Overview

This appears to be an automated alert notifying you that a student in your class requires academic or behavioral intervention. To ensure the student gets the help they need, you should click the provided link to review the specific concerns, document any classroom interventions you’ve already tried, and reply to the support team to coordinate next steps.”

The rest is cut off.

2225

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 06/06/2026

At Williams College for the kid’s graduation, in library special collections — where the kid works. And guess what i found, @abuaardvark.bsky.social?

Marc Lynch’s International Relations syllabus from 2000

4210

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 21/05/2026

12. Through a fountain in the rain, Hong Kong.

Sheets of water falling between the camera and a small park with trees, waterway, and building.

160

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 20/05/2026

11. Rain on car window, Hong Kong.

A picture through a car window distorted by rain, taken in the morning in Hong Kong.

170

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 09/05/2026

Multi-party FPTP is insane. Look at both the absolute vote shares and the deltas.

LLM-generated alt-text: Wikipedia infobox for the 7 May 2026 United Kingdom local elections, covering 5,066 council seats across 136 unitary, metropolitan, county, district, and London councils in England, plus 6 directly elected mayors in England and 2 council by-elections in Wales. Results are 98.53% declared as of 9 May 2026 at 16:45 BST. A table presents five party leaders with headshots and the following data:

Reform UK, leader Nigel Farage (since 3 June 2024): 986 seats before (78 up for election); projected vote share 26%, down 4pp; 1,453 councillors, 14 councils; gains of +1,451 councillors, +14 councils.
Labour, leader Keir Starmer (since 4 April 2020): 5,830 seats before (2,196 up for election); projected vote share 17%, down 3pp; 1,049 councillors, 28 councils; losses of −1,446 councillors, −37 councils.
Liberal Democrats, leader Ed Davey (since 27 August 2020): 3,180 seats before (663 up for election); projected vote share 16%, down 1pp; 843 councillors, 15 councils; gains of +154 councillors, +1 council.
Conservative, leader Kemi Badenoch (since 2 November 2024): 4,180 seats before (1,134 up for election); projected vote share 17%, up 2pp; 797 councillors, 9 councils; losses of −563 councillors, −6 councils.
Green, leader Zack Polanski (since 2 September 2025): 914 seats before (170 up for election); projected vote share 18%, up 7pp; 550 councillors, 4 councils; gains of +404 councillors (councils figure partially cut off in image).

85612

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 30/04/2026

Susan Collins being released to log some "I'm a moderate" votes in an election year != "GOP unity" starting "to crack." www.politico.com/live-updates...

"GOP unity over the Iran war started to crack Thursday when Sen. Susan Collins of Maine voted with Democrats to halt the conflict, marking the first time a Republican has changed their vote on the military campaign in the Middle East.

While the vote failed, the shift signaled President Donald Trump could soon face far more resistance over the conflict. That’s especially true as he blows past a legal deadline this week for the U.S. to exit the war without congressional authorization."

3294

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 30/04/2026

7. I needed a frontal-cortex off hobby. So, a few weeks ago, I followed the lead of one of my former PhD students (now a prof elsewhere) and tried painting minis a few weeks ago. I suck at it, but I do find it relaxing. Here are my first attempts 👇

Badly painted, cheap resin minis (some missing face details). Two female elf warriors dual-wielding swords and five goblin-ish figures: two with bows, two with swords, one with a spear. Painting supplies are in the background.

7161

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 30/04/2026

6. A much better view, which is what I actually meant to post for 5.

top-down view of a dry-erase grid board with cardboard props (five long tables arranged in an open-at-the-bottom rectangle), with a fifth, narrower "head table" on a raised platform. Various PC, NPC, and monster minis are on "the floor" or "on tables" on the mat. A drawn firepit sits at the center of the map. At the head table is a mini of Lich and a sorceress — an NPC held captive — and five orange plastic cubes representing seated, unconscious, undead "lords." Five plastic blocks in front of the table represent a magic barrier. Various mins, pens, and accruement are scattered around the map.

360

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 30/04/2026

5. Part of the board for the second night of the boss battle in my Zoom-based D&D group, made up of a group of middle-aged former policy debaters. We've cycled through VTTs and theater of the mind, but this seems to be the best option these days.

1120

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 28/04/2026

4. Figures for the forthcoming book (Dynamics of Power Politics) with @pkmacdonald.bsky.social & @segoddard.bsky.social. Two of the logics of power politics: "severing" and "wedging." See alt-text for more details.

Two social sites A and B, depicted as network nodes. They are connected by a line representing their social (military, economic, whatever) ties. The figure depicts A "cutting" or "eroding" its ties with B, with an thick arrow extending out from A to the center of the tie and a "lighting" icon cutting through the tie. The thick arrow is labelled "power-political action taken by 'A'." The lighting bolt is labelled "Cutting or Eroding Ties."

A network triad showing three social sites: "A," "B," and "C." Each is a node connected by ties. An arrow (not labelled, since the key is integrated into the prior image) representing a power-political action extends from A to the center of the tie between C and B, where it points to a lightning bolt that represents cutting or eroding the tie between C and B. "Wedging" is a popular term in International Relations for tactics/strategies of "divide and rule," "divide and conquer" or other efforts to interfere with joint-action among two other sites (states, individuals, ethnic groups, or whatever).

240

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 27/04/2026

Georgetown University is a land of contrasts.

Tom Brady, the seven-time Super Bowl champion, and John Kerry, former secretary of state, are among the 13 speakers who will address the Class of 2026 at Georgetown’s commencement this year.

Brady will speak to undergraduates in the School of Business on May 16. The former football player won the most Super Bowl titles of any quarterback in NFL history: six with the New England Patriots and one with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. He is now the lead analyst for Fox Sports’ NFL coverage. Brady also co-owns the Las Vegas Raiders and Birmingham City Football Club and has founded several wellness, athletic clothing and media companies.

Later that day, John Kerry will speak to undergraduates at the School of Foreign Service’s ceremony. Kerry served as a U.S. senator for 28 years and the 68th secretary of state under the Obama Administration. In 2021, he was nominated as the first special presidential envoy for climate in the Biden Administration.

2180

Dan Nexon @dhnexon.net · 25/04/2026

Anyway, I think this might hit a new record for a combination of pretentiousness, wheel reinvention, and unintentional hilarity. Come for an obligatory walk through the 'greatest hits' of stylized 'grand strategy' history. Stay for paragraphs like these 👇

"Earlier consolidation strategies came to similar forks in the road.
Hadrian faced a crisis in the Levant that required the dispatch of several legions and could have become a multifront problem. In Fisher's time, the British faced crises in Asia, North Africa, and the Balkans that could have derailed his plans for naval concentration.
The Nixon administration faced an escalatory spiral in Vietnam that could have prevented it from reprioritizing Europe. In all these cases, leaders managed the crises without allowing them to subvert the
'entral logic of their strategy. For the United States now, management will mean using any successes in Iran to truly deprioritize the Middle East going forward."

"If the United States can stay the consolidationist path, it could, a decade or so down the road, find itself in a much-improved state of affairs. It would have a thriving economy fueled by abundant cheap energy, a strong manufacturing base, and an AI sector second to none. It would have confident allies fielding serious militaries that have fundamentally altered the balance of power in the world’s major regions and have freed the country from the worst aspects of the simultaneity problem. It would have a deeper arsenal of weapons, backed by a reanimated American industry that is less reliant on its main rival to develop lifesaving medicines, power the U.S. economy, or acquire the materials to wage war. That United States would have truly gained a second wind as a great power—and be in a position to ensure its citizens and allies a continuation of the safety and prosperity to which they have become accustomed well into the twenty-first century."

3112