259 Comments
User's avatar
Marianne's avatar

The fact is that the US already has full control over Greenland and Greenland is part of the NATO defense alliance. Together with Greenland, Denmark has given the US the right to establish as many military bases in Greenland as they want. The US simply has no reason to invade Greenland - other than the greed of a vain old man with a fragile ego.

As a Dane, I have to say that I find it very difficult to see America as an ally anymore. America does not want anything good for the international world order, world peace, respect for borders or democracy.

What has happened to American values? Is money and greed the only thing Americans can unite around?

Expand full comment
Jack Craypo's avatar

Mounk tries to explain this obvious paradox of trying to take control of something you already have de facto control over as a manifestation of Trump’s “sphere of influence” world view.

In my view, describing Trump’s view as being “sphere-of-influence based” is sane-washing Trump. It is far more accurate in my opinion to describe Trump’s world as “gang turf” oriented.

Trump sees himself as one of several major state dictators who scrap with other gangster states over gang turf. Gangster states use whatever means are at their disposal to coerce, intimidate and exploit the vassal states within their gang turf and encroach, whenever feasible, on the margins of other gangs.

For most part, however, they respect the “right” of other gangster leaders to do as they please within their turf. Invade, bomb hospitals, establish rape camps, do whatever you like, and we will do the same…

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Sounds about right. Chump has fantasies of being the biggest mob boss. I'd really love to see him sent to the guillotine.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 27Edited
Comment removed
Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Ugh! That damned spam bot is back with another handle. I can't seem to get rid of this damned thing.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 26Edited
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

Get lost spammer.

Please report this person. I can’t, the Report function doesn’t work on the iPhone web version.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

It's not a person, it's a bot. Totally automated. That's why it keeps showing up with different handles.

Expand full comment
Joanie's avatar

But a question. If he invaded Greenland, a territory of Denmark, which is a NATO member, what would other NATO countries do? I doubt it was ever contemplated that one NATO country would invade another but if one did, would the other members act to defend Denmark’s (Greenland’s) sovereignty under Article 5?

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

Mob or gang turf sounds right for the Trumpian worldview.

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

Mob boss, and we will worship or be expendable.

Expand full comment
Necia L Quast's avatar

Actually if you accept that Putin has a hold on Trump this easily explained. In general Puting opposes any projection of U.S. military power, which Trump avoided almost entirely in his first administration. On the hand, Putin wants to break NATO, and Trump attacking, or even threatening two NATO members is like gold to Putin.

Expand full comment
Btll M's avatar

The super wealthy have taken full control of the mindless masses. Half the US population is around a 6th grade reading level. Just watch Kimmel "man on the street" interviews. They are almost too painful to watch.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Sickeningly, your first two sentences are all that's needed to describe this moment in American history. No doubt, future historians will debate and write numerous volumes on how the hell this happened.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

Jay walking - Alan Funt - Ring Lardner

Expand full comment
TomR's avatar

The main difference is that, in the Funt era there wasn’t an internet to unite and further confuse the low information crowd.

Expand full comment
Luis's avatar

Is this what has been called "cutting edge"?

Expand full comment
Kimberly's avatar

No, frump supporters can unite over hate too. It is actually #1 on the list.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Their Kool-Aid induced mantra: "Own the libs!". They don't even know what it means, it just sounds good to them. Morons.

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

Thanks to Rush, dead but still influential, especially as spewed by Rupert and Chump…

Expand full comment
NSAlito's avatar

"Is money and greed the only thing Americans can unite around?"

Certainly not! We also have bigotry, resentment and owning the libs.

Expand full comment
Stephen Schiff's avatar

You are entirely correct to view the US as an adversary, and the sooner that becomes the overwhelmingly predominant attitude in Europe, and indeed in democracies worldwide, the better. The concepts of equality before the law, equal rights for all, and positive freedom as elucidated by Timothy Snyder are more important than the survival or prosperity of any one country or regime. As we lose that fight in the US, we need to do our utmost to assist our Government in diminishing its influence abroad.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

We haven't lost yet. I'm not prepared to give up the fight. I vow to fight this Orange Scourge to the end of my existence, in any and every way that I can.

It's imperative that we Rise! Resist! ✊✊✊

May Day is the next nationwide rally, be there or be square!

//

Don't let up folks, it's working:

Boycott TE卐LA! Boycott Swastikar!

Short TE卐LA! Short Swastikar!

Boycott 卐tarlink!

Boycott 卐/Twitter!

Curb your DOGE!

https://generalstrikeus.com/strikecard

https://www.fiftyfifty.one/

https://indivisible.org/

https://handsoff2025.com/

https://www.teslatakedown.com/

https://www.riseandresist.org/

https://thirdact.org

Expand full comment
Luis's avatar

So true... even before Trump.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

We're not by any means united around TrumPox's grand delusions.

Witness the uprisings on April 5, 19, and soon this Thursday, May Day.

//

We are, and will continue, to fight this Orange Scourge tooth and nail in any and every way we can. Just watch us.

It's a great reminder of the imperative that we continue to Rise! Resist! ✊✊✊

May Day is the next nationwide rally, be there or be square!

//

Don't let up folks, it's working:

Boycott TE卐LA! Boycott Swastikar!

Short TE卐LA! Short Swastikar!

Boycott 卐tarlink!

Boycott 卐/Twitter!

Curb your DOGE!

https://generalstrikeus.com/strikecard

https://www.fiftyfifty.one/

https://indivisible.org/

https://handsoff2025.com/

https://www.teslatakedown.com/

https://www.riseandresist.org/

https://thirdact.org

Expand full comment
Ann Marie's avatar

Please consider that because Trump is president that this is what all Americans want. It's the fluke outcome of a flawed electoral system. He won the popular vote by less than 1.5% margin and the electoral college by only 16%. I assure you that there are a very many Americans who are appalled, greatly saddened and fearful that this 250 year experiment with democracy will soon be ended.

Expand full comment
Marianne's avatar

I know, but it frightens me, that nobody seems to stop him.

Expand full comment
Paul Olmsted's avatar

Money / Greed yep - but you left out

expanding spheres of influence with the military industrial complex . Capitalism requires growth- we no longer are the center of manufacturing- except for implements of war - so that is the likely sector of expansion.

Expand full comment
Lois W. Halbert's avatar

So sorry. I understand how you feel. It is hard to be an American anymore when I see what we have done not only to Ukraine and threatening and bullying other countries and other aspects of our daily lives and the bashing the Constitution and due process.

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

Sad,y, true for too many. Fox (Rupert) has fueled hate and ignored the greed and the fools are the suckers born every minute. They were my friends and neighbors. Fractured is us.

Expand full comment
Daniel G.'s avatar

Good point. I just wish the world would stop referring to America as though it were a monolith - an undifferentiated whole. There are fundamentally two Americas, blue and red and they could not be more diametrically opposed. Recall that Trump barely won and only because Republicans had so degraded the quality of life of working class voters for so long that they became desperate for drastic change. A lot of blue America, I believe, is as progressive as any part of Europe. Maybe more so.

Expand full comment
Anthony Beavers's avatar

It's not greed. Trump really thinks he's a genius, chosen by God to save America from Commies and Queers. In other words, he's nuts! His near assassination during the campaign has apparently unhinged what small amount of mind he had left.

Expand full comment
Ed Reno's avatar

Yes, but. With the but being the fact that the Arctic is beginning to emerge as strategic in a military sense. And Denmark has none of the military force necessary to defend Greenland from various kinds of poaching that will begin to occur. I am sympathetic to Marianne from a moral point of view. But it would be foolish to count on Russia and China tempering their realpolitik with Mariane’s morality.

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

The Northwest Passage remains impassable. As temperatures rise, that will change but it hasn’t happened yet.

Expand full comment
Stefan Paskell's avatar

I could search it out, but I'd be grateful for a link to the treaty in which Denmark gave "the US the right to establish as many military bases in Greenland as they want."

Expand full comment
Marianne's avatar

Since 1941, there has been an agreement on American military bases in Greenland. The agreement is continuously renegotiated to adapt it to American wishes. I have attached some links from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Danish Parliament. You can translate them from Danish to English yourself via Google translate or other means. The agreements themselves are not publicly available, and the renewals to the agreements are discussed in the Danish Parliament. The fact is that Denmark and Greenland have never said no to the wishes of the US - we really have no choice, we are 6 million people including babies + Greenland 55 thousand people including babies. Right now the US is establishing a huge consulate in Greenland. An agreement made during the Biden administration.

https://um.dk/udenrigspolitik/lande-og-regioner/rigsfaellesskabet/usas-tilstedevaerelse-i-groenland?

https://www.ft.dk/samling/20141/almdel/gru/spm/25/svar/1178587/1430545.pdf

Expand full comment
Glenn Burkhardt's avatar

"the United States, which is a phenomenally wealthy country to an extent that I think many Americans don't realize." Well, right. Dr. Krugman, why didn't you call him on this? It ignores the income inequality that's occurred since 1980. Real incomes for most people haven't increased as much as GDP has. The wealth is way too concentrated.

Expand full comment
Robin Epstein's avatar

Exactly! I wrote my comment below and then scrolled through the existing ones. If I’d done it in reverse, and seen yours, mine wouldn’t have been necessary. Though I guess given the gaping omission a pile-on is okay…

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 26
Comment removed
Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Apr 26
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Peter Liepmann's avatar

"But of course, it has also given huge benefits to the United States, which is a phenomenally wealthy country to an extent that I think many Americans don't realize."

Exactly. "many Americans" don't see the benefits, because THEY didn't GET the benefits. John K & Glenn Burkhardt are exactly right. And that's why Mango Mussolini still has 42% support and can mobilize his supporters by appealing to their oppressed state.

Enabled by 99% of elected Democrats who want to keep getting oligarch donations to stay in office and protect oligarchs.

Democrats could win if they tapped into this huge dissatisfaction and directed it at the actual villains.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/there-are-a-lot-of-bitter-people-here-im-one-of-them-rust-belt-voters-on-why-they-backed-trump-again-despite-his-broken-promises

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

That’s a definite point.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Yes! Thank you!

Expand full comment
Turgut Tuten's avatar

GINI coefficient dropped from about 38 in 1965 to 34.7 in 1980.

From 1980 onwards there was a steady rise to 40.4 in 1993.

During the past 20 years GINI fluctuated in the range 40 - 41.5, one could even say it held steady.

Expand full comment
Mykl Davis's avatar

Right. And although the per-capita GNP is no longer on par with Germany, I bet they are a still on par even today if you leave out our billionaires. I.E. the billionaires in the US have had their wealth increased enormously which perverts the meaning and usefulness of the per-capita GNP number.

Expand full comment
Peter Liepmann's avatar

YES!

"German GDP per capita was pretty similar to America's GDP per capita in the 80s and 90s. And today, the United States has a GDP per capita that's about twice that of most European countries. "

Implying that the US has made great progress. Instead, since most of the gains of the last 50 years went to the top 0.01%, the dissatisfaction engendered by the vast majority of Americans NOT making progress created Trump's opportunity. He acknowledged most Americans got screwed, and promised to fix it. That was his big appeal.

(Yes, his policy prescription is "More of the same, and screw you!" but his DIAGNOSIS was 100% correct. The American 90% has been screwed.)

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/18/democrats-trump-michigan-swing-voters

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/17/michigan-voters-trump-saginaw

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/there-are-a-lot-of-bitter-people-here-im-one-of-them-rust-belt-voters-on-why-they-backed-trump-again-despite-his-broken-promises

Of course, great wealth in the hands of oligarchs who want to increase their wealth & power, with a huge dissatisfied mass of the public who wants somebody to pay for their losses is a volatile combination.

Expand full comment
PipandJoe's avatar

Even with the "inequality" we are still wealthier.

As he pointed out, even West Virginia is better off on average than some. What they do not have is our problems with homelessness, etc. We seem to have the poorest of the poor. We may have some of the richest and poorest, perhaps, but on average, Americans are still among the wealthiest, overall.

Also, because an economy is not zero sum, the poor do not get richer or better off if one simply goes after the wealth of the richest. If one wants to address poverty, one should do so with programs, and in doing so, increasing their purchasing power actually grows GDP meaning even the rich tend to get richer as well, even if you tax them to help pay for these social programs.

So, although income inequality has grown to a rather alarming metric, it actually does not cause poverty. We could reduce this gap and still have a lot of poor people if we do not address poverty directly.

Expand full comment
Steve Beckwith's avatar

It's strange to see a devout neoliberal with such a young face as Mounk. I should probably look up which think tanks are funding this guy.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 26
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Steve Beckwith's avatar

His comments around GDP per capita are fairly typical neoliberal misdirection.

Expand full comment
Norbert Bollow's avatar

I wouldn’t have called Mounk “neoliberal’, but the way in which he pretended that GDP per capita has something to do with how well the people in a country are doing generally, that is definitely something out of the neoliberal cookbook.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 26
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Norbert Bollow's avatar

I was thinking of this part:

"""

We've seen over the last decades that contrary to the expectations of protesters against the WTO in Seattle in 1999, who were saying “this is going to impoverish countries like China,” we've actually seen billions of people rise out of poverty in good part because of that international trade and those international investments over the course of the last few decades.

But of course, it has also given huge benefits to the United States, which is a phenomenally wealthy country to an extent that I think many Americans don't realize.

And one of the stories of my lifetime, I was born and raised in Germany at a time when German GDP per capita was pretty similar to America's GDP per capita in the 80s and 90s. And today, the United States has a GDP per capita that's about twice that of most European countries. The GDP per capita of West Virginia is now higher than that of the United Kingdom, right?

"""

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 26
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Mark Stave's avatar

I'm still gobsmacked that very bright, very thoughtful, decent competent experts in economics or political theory, or international relations can throw around phrases like, ".. in 50 or 100 years...." - without a single reference to the oncoming catastrophic human driven climate change, currently growing more dangerous with every ton of CO2, the beginning mild effects of which are already apparent.

Strikes me that its, a bit, like a bus that has just driven over a 300 foot cliff, with some passengers in the back dissecting why the driver was even given that job, and what direction the bus will be driven in at the bottom.

Inatead, Dr. Krugman, please include in your thinking and interviews, the fact that, over the next 50 years sea level rise, persistent, wide spread lethal heat zones (wet bulb temps over 120F), bald faced resources wars, and disaster driven mass migrations will have a profound influence on what happens - everywhere.

Expand full comment
Ron's avatar

It's even worse than that. Climate change is caused by an even larger problem: ecological overshoot. Human's have exceeded the planet's ability to process our waste products. Johan Rockstrom has introduced the very relevant concept of planetary boundaries that should not be crossed because doing so will destabilize the planet's ecosystems. Research from his group indicates we have already crossed more than one of these boundaries with others soon to follow.

Expand full comment
Luis's avatar

Yet, most economists insist on a perpetual exponential production growth depleting the planet.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

For sure. We're well on our way to extinction.

Expand full comment
Lee Peters's avatar

There was a brief reference to climate change buried in the transcript. Mounk proposed nuclear as a solution to carbon emissions and as a way for Germany to become energy independent. That sounds like a major gamble. Germany (and all European nations) have small geographical footprints with limited space to store spent fuel or create exclusion zones like the one around Chernobyl when the eventual accident happens. Solving one problem (greenhouse gases) by creating another problem doesn’t get you ahead in the long run.

Expand full comment
Mark Stave's avatar

Indeed, and the risks of storage grow, if you account for increasingly dangerous, and more frequent, weather events

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

France uses nuclear power.

Expand full comment
Stephen Schiff's avatar

They are also wrong about nuclear energy (speaking of fission). Uranium reserves are finite, and are sufficient for only about 100 years at the present rate of utilization. The work-around, fast breeder reactors, extend that somewhat at the price of vastly increasing the nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism risks. Then there is the problem of the ever increasing stockpile of high level, long lived radioactive waste, and the ever present risk of catastrophic accidents, both of which are waved away by the nuclear power advocates. I think Angela Merkel was right when she set Germany on a course of de-nuclearizatiion. I like her quote as to the reason: "Weil es [Kernenergie] eine Technologie ist, bei der ein Restrisiko unabsehbare Folgen hat."

And as for fusion energy, it's been 50 years from fruition since I started following its progress in the late '50s. Not to mention the Li6 problem.

Expand full comment
Joe Ryan's avatar

The key assumption here is that, while advancing technology will resolve any issue that arises for, let's say, solar energy, it can never resolve any issue related to nuclear energy.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

Better get ready to tie up the boat in Idaho.

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

And Trump is busy trashing as much as he can related to climate change. MAGA don’t believe in it.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

I expect to be long dead by the time that happens. Lucky me.

Expand full comment
Scott Helmers's avatar

How much of this Trump cataclysm is due to ignorance? Trump and his acolytes' ignorance, of course, but how much is due to wide spread ignorance of a large portion of the American people? Anti-intellectialism is an obvious and blatant feature of anything Trumpian. Nevertheless, so many American people know no history, have no understanding of how and why the "liberal order" came into being, seem to believe in a make believe world where you don't really have to diligently pursue knowledge in orger to come out on top and be safe. Maybe it is just that I am nearly 80 and all the goals and ideals are gone that once seemed to motivate Americans. Slovenly thinking and slovenly conduct without care or responsibility seem pervasive. How can that milieu lead to anything good?

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

It’s carefully planned chaos…

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

I'd say it's a split, roughly 98% ignorance and 2% unbridled greed.

Public schools - especially rural - stopped teaching both history and civics long ago, in favor of theology and "creation as science" or "intelligent design".

You're right, it doesn't lead to anything good.

Expand full comment
Lee Peters's avatar

After January 6 the legislature in my state considered requiring civics for graduation. Republicans objected to every curriculum proposal, including the one that mirrored the curriculum taught to my parents in the 1940s and my grandparents in the 1920s. Terminating civics requirements for graduation was a profound mistake for this nation.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

The GOP thrives on ignorance. If their constituents understood civics, they'd never win another election! Even with obscene levels of gerrymandering.

Expand full comment
Anne Hammond-Meyer's avatar

Trump does not have a sense of humor unless you are referring to sadistic glee. With all due respect, Mr. Mounk, you do not understand psychopathology. His need to dominate at the expense of others and his callous functioning is not strategic- it is primitive and fueled by rage. Consulting with experts would be wise.

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

He seems not terribly disturbed by Trump.

Expand full comment
Thomas Patrick McGrane's avatar

Thank you for a European perspective.

Remember that armies built for "defense" is always a lie. They are wolves in sheep's clothing when the likes of Trump unfortunately occur.

As for Greenland; they must remain politically attached to Europe as a deterrent to our aberrant and unfortunate leader. Perhaps no army will stop Trump but the tarnish of his name will.

As for Panama, build the rest of the Pan American Highway to South America. As you know, we are less inclined to attack those from who we buy widgets.

I'm a globalist as well. I care for all the world, even the Russian people enduring their own Trump aligned nightmare leader Putin. I care about everyone, but I learned a valuable lesson from the years I cared for my mother to exhaustion; you must care first for yourself to be strong enough to care for all others.

Thank you for your discussion. We will all endure until the future has faded away.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

It's not enough to endure! We have to do anything and everything we can to fight this scourge!

It's imperative that we Rise! Resist! ✊✊✊

May Day is the next nationwide rally, be there or be square!

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 26Edited
Comment removed
Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Sheesh! How many times do I have to report a spam bot before it gets removed?

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

Keeps reappearing under different names.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

It's a bot. Nothing we can do but keep reporting it whenever and wherever it pops up.

Expand full comment
Lois Henry's avatar

I learn so much from your Substack posts, Paul. Thank you.

Expand full comment
Thomas Patrick McGrane's avatar

As crazy a notion it is, it appears Trump is counting on global warming melting the ice sheets of Greenland as nations are competing for ownership and access to the Arctic. Before Trump expressed interest in Greenland, Putin boasted about their intrusion into the melting Arctic where northern shipping lanes have opened. It's more than Trump. He is simply calling out his intentions to compete with Russia and other nations over new access to larger lands and seas of the north much as Britain fought in the Falklands to maintain a presence near Antarctica. Since the 1970's I recall, scientists have been warning about global warming and melting and sea level rise and opportunistic political leaders sought to capitalize on the misfortunes of the world to make fortunes.

Expand full comment
Bruce Olsen's avatar

To believe Trump is competing with Putin is delusional. Trump is acting as if he's a Russian agent, not an adversary.

Expand full comment
Thomas Patrick McGrane's avatar

It's the "New World Order" spoken of by Herbert Bush.

The discussion clearly alluded to nations cooperating for profit from commerce rather than wars.

It's a major shift in world culture and we are all slaves now.

Smash your TV's.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

That's entirely possible, although I'm not convinced he's capable of thinking at that level of complexity, or that far into the future.

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

Chump is following Vlad’s “wish list.”

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

The Northwest Passage (Canada) remains impassable.

Expand full comment
Norbert Bollow's avatar

I’m quite surprised that this discussion of US potentially attempting to take Greenland by force did not go into the aspect that that would be an armed attack in the sense of article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, so that all NATO countries would be treaty bound to go to war against the US.

Expand full comment
Turgut Tuten's avatar

A more plausible (and proven) scenario is to organize a local (Greenlander) group to occupy certain government buildings and perhaps a radio station, declare independence from Denmark and invite USA to protect them against Danes.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

Giant dogs attacking innocent islanders!

Expand full comment
Turgut Tuten's avatar

Great Danes for sure

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

Prune is my favorite.

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

Putin is using that in parts of the Ukraine. Not sure if Trump is motivated enough. Hard to know how deep the Greenland thing is.

Expand full comment
Chenda's avatar

Exactly - including nuclear armed Britain and France.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 27
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

GET LOST SPAMMER! I can’t report this creep—the REPORT button doesn’t work on the iPhone web version.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

There wouldn't be much force at all.

Expand full comment
Norbert Bollow's avatar

Given that the US has a base on Greenland, there are at least a few soldiers there and they are in possession of some weapons, i.e. they are armed. It is irrelevant whether they fire any bullets.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

I doubt weapons would ever come into play before, during or after a US takeover of the island. Denmark would be informed dissidents would be deported NATO will be nullified.

Expand full comment
Shauna's avatar

They ARE breaking 'all' ....and that is on purpose. It is all written in Project 2025 (900+ pages !) or listen to Katie Couric's interview with David Graham on his new book written about Project 2025 !!! SEE LINK BELOW !

Project 2025 is a total redesign of EVERYTHING, meant for decades of authoritarianism - like putin..and trump is recognized as ONLY step A in the BIG plan

In order to fight this radical full take over, we MUST FULLY UNDERSTAND the enemy (Project) and all their plans ! The Heritage Foundation is REAL and it plans to control all Americans from here on in....and right now they are 90% + successful in securing their full power

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYhxJ1hdIVg

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

Ignore at our peril

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 27
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

GET LOST SPAMMER! I can’t report this creep—the REPORT button doesn’t work on the iPhone web version.

Expand full comment
Francis A. Luthe's avatar

Honestly, I still feel that there are two primary problems that will never be overcome within a Trump Administration:

The first is Trump’s blatant stupidity. Seriously...the guy barely got through high school and college by cheating and lying and stealing, and he ran all of his commercial businesses the same way, and that's the reason so many went "broke" and out of business!

Secondly, he's a liar and a cheater.

Expand full comment
Terence J. Ollerhead's avatar

Mr Mounk's opinions on many things seem half-baked. Some commenters have already pointed out his worse omissions, but his relative neglect of Canada, while emphasizing Panama and Greenland threats, was surprising. I did have the feeling that Canada is not even on his radar. And I hardly think the invasion of Greenland will be quite as smooth as he suggests. It's as if it will have no consequence but adding to the US landmass. And Trump has a sense of humour?

Expand full comment
Jim Caserta's avatar

I'm kinda disappointed that Paul invited him on. I do not take Yascha seriously.

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

He’s also wrong about Canada: our chief exports are raw materials (oil, aluminum, potash for example) not “high value” manufactured goods.

Expand full comment
Lawrence Berman's avatar

You mention NATO. If the U.S. invaded Greenland wouldn’t that invoke the NATO clause that it would come to Greenland’s/Denmark’s defense? Wouldn’t that be starting a war with NATO?

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

I can see Macron slapping Trump with his glove now!

Expand full comment
Paul Olmsted's avatar

So would t-Rump choose pistols or golf clubs?

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

He'd turn to Justa Dick salute and walk away.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 27
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

GET LOST SPAMMER! I can’t report this creep—the REPORT button doesn’t work on the iPhone web version.

Expand full comment
David McIntosh's avatar

NATO membership didn't prevent armed conflict between Greece and Turkey over Cyprus.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 27
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

GET LOST SPAMMER! I can’t report this creep—the REPORT button doesn’t work on the iPhone web version.

Expand full comment
John Ranta's avatar

This is true about everything Trump does: “…there's all kinds of dangerous second and third order effects (that) the White House doesn't seem to be thinking about”. Trump hates to think about the complexity of the world, or the downstream effects and consequences of his impulses. It’s hard to do so, it slows everything down, it requires patience, expertise and intelligence. Trump would rather just thrash and smash, leading his supporters to think he’s a “man of action” (because his supporters aren’t very intelligent either). The reality is, Trump isn’t a man of action, he’s an impulsive, vindictive, ignorant child. We don’t usually put such people in charge of the country, or the international order.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 27
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

GET LOST SPAMMER! I can’t report this creep—the REPORT button doesn’t work on the iPhone web version.

Expand full comment
Robin Epstein's avatar

Very interesting and informative, but it’s irresponsible to let your guest say America is so rich, and West Virginia’s GDP is huge, and Trump can’t see that, without pointing out that that wealth has not helped everyone in the U.S., without pointing out the growing inequality gap here in the US and its fallout in terms of peoples’ lives and how they vote; to let him say the departure of factories is only a problem because we need steel for national security, without pointing out that it’s also a problem because people need good jobs. Because the consequences of the liberal national trade order on the lives of American workers is part of why we have Trump now, with all of the dire potential consequences your guest insightfully lays out.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 27
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

GET LOST SPAMMER! I can’t report this creep—the REPORT button doesn’t work on the iPhone web version.

Expand full comment
Philippe's avatar

The fundamental problem with the Trumpian disfunctionality is the oligarchs who created him and got the lion’s share of the wealth increase since the 80’s. They are refusing to pay taxes into the very system that created them. Incredibly myopic! Hubris is a hell of thing. If we want the best of the 3 scenarios proposed, we have to defang the Barons. Let the peasants starve is a poor strategy.

Illuminating talk, please more of this.

Expand full comment