davidwearing.bsky.social
Assistant Professor in International Relations at the University of Sussex (own views, obviously).
Interested in British (and Western) foreign relations in the Middle East and elsewhere, and how they're shaped by legacies of colonialism.
664 posts
7,187 followers
2,137 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Remember this from 2018? It's an expression of the same underlying worldview as the one he's expressing now. If anything he was more dangerous back then given that he still had at least one foot in mainstream polsci
www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemoc...
comment in response to
post
I think it's at least as much a case of the mask coming off, or of him becoming emboldened by the changed political climate, as it is of him moving to the right. If you'd told 2015 me about 2025 Goodwin I wouldn't have been even slightly surprised
comment in response to
post
He's been leveraging his academic status to advance a repellent agenda for a long time, and frankly he's had more than a little help in doing so.
comment in response to
post
It's a revealing one, isn't it?
comment in response to
post
Exactly. He's assuming intra-group unity and intergroup incommensurability.
Wracking my brain for a concise term to capture what that is. I'm sure it'll come to me.
comment in response to
post
*caving
comment in response to
post
Can you imagine actually having in to this feeble nonsense rather than just laughing in their faces?
comment in response to
post
He's a useful barometer. More useful as that than as an analyst
comment in response to
post
Very, very strange people. Not clear why whatever issues they have should be the nation's problem.
comment in response to
post
Not while there remains so much as one square inch of civil society that doesn't conform to their sane and rational demands
comment in response to
post
It's a weak caveat as worded, but it's true irrespective of what Balfour or the LoN mandate said
comment in response to
post
I seem to recall the US Declaration of Independence resting on the fundamental principle that regimes don't have rights, people do, and that regimes that don't honour people's rights should be replaced with regimes that do. Supposedly a key principle of Enlightenment liberalism? 🤷🏽♂️
comment in response to
post
Thank you, this is all very well put.
comment in response to
post
I don't recall saying article 5 should be abrogated
comment in response to
post
I don't recall arguing for total disarmament either.
British militarism has a long history of going well beyond legitimate defence of the UK and its allies, and expanding into excessive spending on global power projection with disastrous effects. Perfectly legitimate to raise concerns about that.
comment in response to
post
I don't recall saying anything about abrogating article 5
comment in response to
post
And they're getting away with it so easily
comment in response to
post
In my scenario, this is after they've conquered France, Germany, etc
comment in response to
post
Sure, I understand.
Nothing is more likely to delegitimise support for Russia's neighbours, in the eyes of Western publics, than the sense that the threat is being inflated to secure a blank cheque for our militaries. Keeping the discussion about this in proportion would be sensible all round.
comment in response to
post
bsky.app/profile/davi...
comment in response to
post
I definitely don't suggest abandoning Ukraine or attempting to do a deal with Putin over Ukraine's head, Trump-style.
comment in response to
post
So pleased to hear this, Charlotte! They're very lucky to have you.
comment in response to
post
The protection racket routine is a major part of his repertoire. But you know, are we nation states here or a bunch of family owned corner stores?
comment in response to
post
Yeah potentially
comment in response to
post
It's a beautiful day my friend
comment in response to
post
There's a kind of disgust there that I'm not sure it's possible to reason with, unfortunately.
comment in response to
post
My personal theory is that a genuine (if debatable) view that you need to move tactically rightwards to win elections has curdled - through years of bitter disputes over this - into a genuine contempt for progressive politics. Hence the self-styled pragmatists have become self-defeating dogmatists.
comment in response to
post
It is about policy, yes. And I do think we focus far too much on "comms", the news cycle, etc, as a left. But we do also need to engage people and build real organic relationships at a mass level. Or we end up with 2019. A great policy offer which people generally like, but still don't vote for
comment in response to
post
Yes, maybe our culture has generally been too self conscious for that sort of thing. But I think now people - particularly younger people - would embrace it if it was on offer.
In fairness, I do think some at least have the potential. Polanski is definitely one.
comment in response to
post
He's a genuine socialist, unlike Khan. Just not the caricature of what that means. I agree that he'll govern pragmatically, but knowing very well the sort of people who support and campaign for him, I don't see that disappointing them.
comment in response to
post
From your lips to God's ears