I have beaten on foreign policy expert Dan Drezner so extensively that I feel a little giddy to “find myself” praising him as a film critic—a field in which I myself sometimes claim some level of expertise. (Go here, or here, or here for more.) It is Dan’s particular, self-chosen mission, so I gather, to “correct”—so far as that is possible—the enthusiasms his fellow academics too often feel towards “progressive”, preach to the choir mass media kitsch—particularly the kind that tells them how much better they are than other people.
A few months ago, Dan took dead aim at The shallow, blinkered message of ‘Squid Game’, unsportingly noting that the “message” of the break-out Korean mini-series—that our “dystopian world of neoliberal capitalism” runs on organ theft and murder—is, well, totally false. Which is, in fact, totally true, but, as Dan does not point out, is still a premise that his fellow academics, virtually none of whom are as important as they would like to be—chafing with impotent rage as they see soulless, smart-ass Wall Street/Silicon Valley hustlers making billions while doing either nothing or undermining democracy!—love to hear.
More recently, Dan bravely dissected another shitload of environmental BS from Hollywood in the form of Don’t Look Up, bravely pointing out that the reason governments don’t follow the sort of get tough, obsessive-compulsive, anal-retentive measures Hollywood loudly demands (and would never follow in real life) is that the general public is strongly opposed to them. (Dan doesn’t go on to second my “shocking” argument that, while the case for anthropogenic global warming is undeniable, the notion that we must entirely rework the way we live our lives to avoid immediate global catastrophe is entirely unproven and very likely false).
Continuing on the environmental theme, but dropping the movies, Dan provides an Anatomy of a political theory controversy, coming up a bit short, in my opinion, out of deference to a colleague of sorts, Ross Mittiga, an assistant professor in the Institute of Political Science, Catholic University of Chile. (Dan is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.) Ross recently published an article in the American Political Science Review, Political Legitimacy, Authoritarianism, and Climate Change, stating that he is “interested in determining under what conditions authoritarian climate governance may be considered legitimate and, more broadly, how governments’ responses to climate change influence normative assessments of their political legitimacy.”
What that translates into, apparently, is that democratically elected officials, presidents in particular, should, if they can’t get “necessary” climate change measures through their legislatures, simply declare emergencies and, you know, ram those “necessary” measures right on through. According to Dan, Ross says we should begin with measures “curbing meat-heavy diets,” “[establishing] a censorship regime that prevents the proliferation of climate denialism or disinformation in public media,” and “imposing a climate litmus-test on those who seek public office”. And, yeah, that’s just for starters!
Well, Dan is shocked, shocked to tell us, all this “nonsense” (my word) created a bit of a twitter storm calling poor Ross some sort of environmental fascist. Just because he wants to lock people up for eating a Big Mac! Or prevent people from running for office if they don’t think like he does! That’s so unfair! Who do these people think they are? The people?
Well, color me unimpressed on this one, Dan. Musing on whether it would be a good idea to stomp on the Constitution in the name of an all-tofu America or Chile sounds damn stupid to me. “Political Science Professors Against Free Speech” is not a slogan I’m going to get behind any time soon.
UPDATE
Ross Douthat argues, cogently enough, that Don’t Look Up is actually about COVID, contrasting American “decadence” (Ross’ word) with Chinese efficiency—said American decadence particularly manifesting itself in the form of our recurrent “twitter storms” and other outbursts of mass media/social media irrationality.1 I’m guessing that Ross isn’t all that much in love with the Chinese as he is receptive to indictments of U.S. “decadence”. I would observe that it was often the received opinion of the past that both the Nazis and the Communists were more “efficient” than us fat-assed, self-indulgent democracies, and, in any case, I don’t think we’re as decadent as Ross does. As a “proud” secular liberal and outright atheist, I offer my opinion that Catholicism (Ross is a believer, of course) and any and all other supernatural value systems are in a lot more trouble—are, in fact, a lot more “decadent”—than us liberals.
1. According to Ross’ synopsis, Don’t Look Up, which, in case you haven’t guessed, I am too lazy to have watched for myself, sounds a lot like either Stanley Kubrick’s black comedy classic, Dr. Strangelove, or an episode of South Park. I pretty much loved Dr. Strangelove, which I saw when it first came out, while disliking the nihilistic ending, in which all of humanity is wiped out. (In Don’t Look Up, only the U.S. is destroyed, for our “sins”.) I never liked South Park, which strikes me as all nihilism all the time. I like a little moral center, guys.
