Profile avatar
nicholasgrossman.bsky.social
International Relations prof at U. Illinois. Editor of Arc Digital. Author “Drones and Terrorism.” Politics, national security, and occasional nerdery.
12,297 posts 59,197 followers 807 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter

Ukraine’s big drone attack, and what it means for the war, Trump administration “peace” efforts, US security, and warfare more broadly. Me, on the implications of “Operation Spiderweb”:

Assessing the fascist threat of Trump (and why it won’t go away on its own) I joined David Artman to discuss fascism, democratic backsliding, the uses and limits of Nazi comparisons, and more. Happy to discuss this in an environment that typically focuses on other areas (in this case, religion).

Hey everyone, I'm taking a news and social media break. Been doing that around this time for a few years, and find it's good for my head. Last year, I said something like "I'd like Bluesky to work, I'll be back." But at this point, I think it has worked. Good. See you in 2-3 weeks (give or take).

What if young men who are into cryptocurrency are not actually policy voters who closely follow the details of regulatory proposals, and are in fact broader culture war voters, moved by conceptions of identity more than position papers?

Maria Bartiromo: Can you validate this nutso conspiracy theory? Kash Patel: Wish I could, but I can't. Bartiromo: Weren't you guys elected to do that? Patel: Maybe, but I see inside the info now. Nothing to it. Bartiromo: So you're in on it? Patel: Wha? Bartiromo: How did you think this works?

People in history who carved out some normalcy as fascism happened around them get a bad rap. When big things are out of your control, providing a degree of normal life to your family and community feels like defiance.

"Drones and Terrorism" focuses on how terrorists/insurgents use drones (and how states use drones against them). Ukraine has essentially done that—many small drones, jury-rigging, innovation—but with state-level resources and organization, driven by extreme pressure of foreign invasion. Remarkable.

I've said it before, and I'll repeat it: The expulsion of expertise from government and academia during Mao's Cultural Revolution devastated China for decades, particularly in science and technology. That profound harm led the country to take education as seriously as it does today. wapo.st/3YTivKW

I read the 2024 election as an affirmative choice for Trump—plus some of the COVID anti-incumbent sentiment seen around the world—rather than one where many Trump voters didn't know about him or didn't care about him, but were hanging on Democrats' words. Post-2024 flagellation assumes the opposite.

Democratic politicians pay Democratic consultants to tell them the right response to this moment is say Democrats are bad and draw public attention away from Trump’s malfeasance, because Democrats successfully pushed out a Democrat for being too old but should’ve pushed more, do I have that right?

What an odd, telling lie. Prompted to validate conspiracy theories, which he can't because they're made up, Patel says Trump authorized the Nat. Guard on Jan. 6. But as the Jan. 6 Committee highlighted, the order came from SecDef in consultation with VP. Trump refused, enjoying the violence on TV.

Crypto: we are building a world free from state control, where people are responsible for their own security, and anyone can move money around anonymously. Also crypto; why isn’t the state doing more to protect us from violent kidnappers who are taking our money???

Do media executives realize that their message to politicians is "if you act to correct things we say are bad, we'll denounce you for that same thing more, but if you want us to let the bad thing go, you should double down on it, lie about it, attack us, and threaten us with frivolous lawsuits"?

Democratic politician: But Marc Andreessen told me... Let me stop you right there. Before you continue, could you give some thought to the possibility that (1) he is not an expert on elections and might not have special insight into winning votes, and (2) he might not have your interests at heart?

Musk and DOGE are acting in bad faith, yes. At least mostly. But in some of the participants and supporters, there's an unmistakable element of "govt is so easy, our problems are because stupid people run it stupidly, I could fix it no problem," only to get in and see otherwise. This happens a lot.

people need to internalize, very quickly, that federal research grants are a hypercompetitive contracting process not charity, and that what Uncle Sam gets in return for that money is American dominance in the future