April 2025 - Five Things
This Month's Recommendations
This weekend I’m planning on posting a full piece about cults of personality and personalism, which we are seeing in full bloom around Trump these days. This is a very specific form of authoritarianism that is usually associated with bad things—incompetence, “yes-man” band-wagoning, and policy disasters. That’s probably starting to sound familiar. More on Sunday.
In the meantime, here are this month’s “Five Things” that I found particularly useful and interesting.
1. Substack Diaries, by
.I’ve written about this previously, but worth stating again— Przeworski is considered one of the greatest political scientists of all time, and he’s keeping a weekly diary on Substack with his thoughts on the daily news. Read as much as you can. Here’s a snapshot from this week’s post, worth quoting in full:
Friday, April 25 - For me, this is the most significant anti-democratic move to date. President's Memorandum of yesterday, entitled "Investigation into Unlawful 'Straw Donor' and Foreign Contributions in American Elections," directs "the Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, to use all lawful authority, as necessary, to investigate allegations regarding the unlawful use of online fund-raising platforms to make 'straw' or 'dummy' contributions or foreign contributions to political candidates and committees, and to take all appropriate actions to enforce the law." The target is ActBlue, the main Democratic fund-raising platform. I have always thought that the defining feature of democracy is that governments remain vulnerable to the possibility of losing elections. This possibility incentivizes the current opposition to wait peacefully for its turn. And, as James Madison already observed, it forces the current government to listen to the voice of the people, to anticipate electoral consequences of its actions. Hence, throughout the past 10 weeks I was repeatedly surprised that the Trump administration appeared oblivious to the electoral effects of its policies. I entertained the possibility that Trump believes that his actions would be electorally successful. But my dark thought has been that he does not care because he is planning to repress the Democratic opposition by force. Now, in a cliché, the cat is out of the bag.
I stayed away from the labeling which engages a lot of people on the media: Is the US still a democracy? I considered that Trump won an election and that he is pursuing his announced program, so the question does not arise. Constitutionalism, "rule of law," may be at stake, I thought, but not democracy. But denying the opposition the possibility to compete in competitive elections is a flagrantly anti-democratic, "backsliding," move. It places Trump in the company of Chàvez, Erdogan, Modi, and Orban. The only question now is how far will he go.
2. Opinion: CT Primary Physicians Stand for Science and Healthcare, by 18 doctors in CT, The Hartford Courant.
This one is from my dad, who always avoids the spotlight but felt compelled to speak out on behalf of science and medicine. He took charge and spearheaded this piece with his colleagues. He is such a good writer. Here’s a part I especially liked:
We know that microbes cause disease, that antibiotics and antivirals work, that bleach doesn’t cure Covid, that cod liver oil won’t stop a measles outbreak and that vaccines are among the most miraculous of creations of the human mind, eliminating from the planet diseases that once killed millions. We know that cigarette smoking is a leading cause of lung cancer. We know that clean water and safe foods are essential to health. We know that uncontrolled high blood pressure is a risk factor for stroke and heart disease and can be treated with lifestyle changes and modern pharmaceuticals. We know that diabetes is a multisystem and deadly disease that can be controlled with modern day treatment. We know that rigorously tested treatment protocols cure many pediatric cancers that were once universally fatal. All of this we know through the achievements of science.
And later:
We in the healthcare community are speaking up. We ask you as our patients , as Americans, as consumers of healthcare and as citizens of the world to speak up as well. Raise your consciousness to this crisis, speak to your family, neighbors friends. Contact those whom you think will listen. Donate time and/or money where you feel it will be most impactful.
And most important of all, when the time comes to vote, vote. Vote for candidates who believe in science. Vote for candidates who believe that healthcare is a right and should be accessible and affordable to all.
3. Trump Is Paving the Way for Another ‘China Shock’, by Rogé Karma, The Atlantic. This is a GREAT piece to read for background on how we got here in terms of trade policy. It features an interview with David Autor, one of the economists behind the original “China shock” paper that is used to justify new protectionist policies. Here’s the big quote:
The jobs that we lost to China 20 years ago: We’re not getting those back. China doesn’t even want those jobs anymore. They are losing them to Vietnam, and they aren’t upset about it. They don’t want to be making commodity furniture and tube socks. They want to make semiconductors and electric vehicles and airplanes and robots and drones. They want those frontier sectors.
As it happens, those are the sectors we’ve actually held on to. But we could lose those too. We could lose Boeing. We could lose GM and Ford. We could lose Apple. We could lose the AI sector. These are the parts of manufacturing that generate good jobs but also so much more than that. They are where innovation occurs, where the big profits are, where technology and military leadership come from. And those are the sectors that we stand to lose next.
So the goal shouldn’t be to reverse the first China shock. It should be to prevent a China shock 2.0.
4. Double-edged Swords in the U.S.-China Cold War,
, High Capacity.Kyle is a postdoc and former Ph.D. student at Princeton. In addition to being an extraordinary teacher and researcher, he has emerged as one the leading public voices on China’s tech scene and economy more broadly. I always learn a great deal from reading his Substack. This piece is about how the tools each side has in the ongoing trade war. Here’s the takeaway quote:
Every weapon in the US-China Cold War is a double-edged sword. Because the US and China are so deeply integrated—both in terms of bilateral ties and as parts of a highly integrated global economic system—any action that one country takes will end up hurting both sides to some degree. The question then becomes: what is the balance of pain? Are you able to inflict more pain on your opponent than you would on yourself?
5. The House of R Podcast, Mallory Rubin & Joanna Robinson, The Ringer.
I don’t know how many of you are watching shows about murder in Thailand or mushroom zombies, but Mal & Jo have become one of my favorite parts of watching TV. Their podcast covers all the major “prestige” shows with a wonderful English major nerd vibe. Fantastic banter all around. Their official podcast email address is hobbitsanddragons@gmail.com. That’s all you need to know.
That’s all for today. There will be a column coming on Sunday if I get my act together. Thanks for reading and sharing!
Rory
Looking forward to your post, and thanks for taking the time to write to us.
My paternal grandfather was persecuted for writing critically of the local government in his copper mine town near Yongping, Jiangxi. When my father was ten or eleven — early in the revolution — a group of a four (or so) boys from his class pushed him off a bridge onto the rocky stream below. He remembered his attackers accusing him of being the "son of counter-revolutionaries." He fractured his arms and legs and was bed-ridden for a few months. My father, till this day, still refuses to criticize Mao for his role and for what happened to him.
I wonder sometimes about this cult of personality stuff. If there are any parallels that one can draw between the Cultural Revolution in China and what's happening in the US today, I wonder how much of it is because Trump, through his rhetoric and actions by his administration, frees individuals to act out epistemic, verbal and physical violence that they would otherwise have been ostracized or arrested for committing. Those at the elite level who profess loyalty to Trump do so as a way to avoid political retribution not only in the form of primary challenges but in actual reputation loss by seeming to oppose Trump and his base's freedom of political expression. This seemingly is different from a number of existing theories on MAGA movement and groupthink, notably works of Hogg, Mudde, or Colin Campbell. Are you familiar with anyone who has thought (and rejected) such a hypothesis?
In the same vein, I wonder how much of Trump's cult at the popular level, should really be considered as separate to those who simply have political loyalty to him, but as a core group of constituents that, for whatever reason — be it anti-establishmentarianism or ideological radicalization — need a figure like Trump to free them from social and legal restraints. Political loyalists, in this case, will change their minds when enough evidence of the economy downturn and political injustice are undeniably brought to light.
Perhaps you will discuss this in your post. Or if you have time, it would be great to hear your thoughts.
Cheers.
Yes, Xi and Trump both evidence a rise in personality-based centralization of power. I fear more our rejection of science that originates in China's technological progress. I also concur that China is offloading low-tech, labor-intensive industries to its neighbors.
A common ground to share scientific achievements is a win-win for both. BYD has 110,000 scientists/engineers in its workforce - more than the entire workforce of Intel or TSMC. It's folly to ignore the progress such a talent base has created. We see the same with DeepSeek in AI and advanced manufacturing emerging from CATL and Huawei.
Perhaps the next US administration will strike a cooperative path.