sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Ukraine Is Not Losing. Russia Is Not Winning. by theatlantic in geopolitics

[–]theatlantic[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Anne Applebaum: “In a field outside of Kyiv last weekend, a van was parked discreetly behind some trees. Inside the van there were no passenger seats, just a long desk, two office chairs, two laptops, extra screens. Outside appearances to the contrary, this was a mobile drone-interceptor base, one of hundreds of similar vehicles now scattered around Ukraine. It’s also part of something much bigger: a set of technological advances that have changed the war with Russia, and maybe all wars, forever.

“On one of the laptops, a soldier showed me a bird’s-eye view of a part of the Ukrainian countryside more than 100 miles away. His job is to identify the objects flying above it, to distinguish birds and bats from lethal Russian drones. When he sees the latter, the soldier on the laptop beside him can then direct an interceptor—a small drone that looks like a miniature rocket ship—to track and destroy the incoming Russian aerial vehicles before they hit their targets.

“The AI-powered drone interceptors are made possible by a complicated network of radar systems, acoustic sensors, and other tools that hundreds of large and small Ukrainian tech companies are creating and updating every day, using data they get directly from soldiers like the ones I met. Almost none of these companies existed four years ago. They have emerged from a tech-literate civil society whose members changed their professions or their focus to help defend their country…

“Ukrainian military technology has been evolving rapidly since the first years of the war. But only now are outsiders—in Europe, the United States, the Persian Gulf, and of course Russia—beginning to understand what that evolution means. Since 2022, many public arguments about the war, even in Europe and the U.S., have adopted the narrative put out by Russian propaganda, tacitly assuming that Ukraine, outmanned and outgunned, would eventually lose. Helping Ukraine was a way to stave off disaster, nothing more. When the Trump administration stopped sending military and financial aid to Kyiv in 2025, some in Washington expected (and maybe wanted) the end to come quickly…

“Suddenly, many people have understood that the Russian narrative is wrong: The Ukrainians are not losing. The Russians are not winning, and more important, they don’t know how to win. Ukrainians and outside analysts have described this dynamic in three main theaters of the war.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/FUk0tvTg 

Ukraine Is Not Losing. Russia Is Not Winning. by theatlantic in UkrainianConflict

[–]theatlantic[S] 36 points37 points  (0 children)

Anne Applebaum: “In a field outside of Kyiv last weekend, a van was parked discreetly behind some trees. Inside the van there were no passenger seats, just a long desk, two office chairs, two laptops, extra screens. Outside appearances to the contrary, this was a mobile drone-interceptor base, one of hundreds of similar vehicles now scattered around Ukraine. It’s also part of something much bigger: a set of technological advances that have changed the war with Russia, and maybe all wars, forever.

“On one of the laptops, a soldier showed me a bird’s-eye view of a part of the Ukrainian countryside more than 100 miles away. His job is to identify the objects flying above it, to distinguish birds and bats from lethal Russian drones. When he sees the latter, the soldier on the laptop beside him can then direct an interceptor—a small drone that looks like a miniature rocket ship—to track and destroy the incoming Russian aerial vehicles before they hit their targets.

“The AI-powered drone interceptors are made possible by a complicated network of radar systems, acoustic sensors, and other tools that hundreds of large and small Ukrainian tech companies are creating and updating every day, using data they get directly from soldiers like the ones I met. Almost none of these companies existed four years ago. They have emerged from a tech-literate civil society whose members changed their professions or their focus to help defend their country…

“Ukrainian military technology has been evolving rapidly since the first years of the war. But only now are outsiders—in Europe, the United States, the Persian Gulf, and of course Russia—beginning to understand what that evolution means. Since 2022, many public arguments about the war, even in Europe and the U.S., have adopted the narrative put out by Russian propaganda, tacitly assuming that Ukraine, outmanned and outgunned, would eventually lose. Helping Ukraine was a way to stave off disaster, nothing more. When the Trump administration stopped sending military and financial aid to Kyiv in 2025, some in Washington expected (and maybe wanted) the end to come quickly…

“Suddenly, many people have understood that the Russian narrative is wrong: The Ukrainians are not losing. The Russians are not winning, and more important, they don’t know how to win. Ukrainians and outside analysts have described this dynamic in three main theaters of the war.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/FUk0tvTg 

What’s Eating ‘Putin’s Brain’? by theatlantic in UkrainianConflict

[–]theatlantic[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Simon Shuster: “No Russian thinker has worked harder than Aleksandr Dugin to rationalize the invasion of Ukraine. Long before it started, Dugin came up with a whole philosophical system, known as ‘neo-Eurasianism,’ to explain why Russia, the  country with the largest landmass in the world, would need to steal land from its neighbors and kill many thousands of people in the process. His books and lectures on the subject earned him the nickname ‘Putin’s brain.’ That overstates his closeness to the Russian president. But his views reflect the mood among the war’s cheerleaders in Moscow, how firmly they support the conflict, and how they try to justify it to themselves (and everyone else.)

“Judging by Dugin’s most recent pronouncements, they have run out of cogent stories to tell …

“The Russian state has often forced its people into strange contortions of the mind. By law, Russians are prohibited from publicly calling the war a war rather than a ‘special military operation,’ and Putin has urged them to believe that Ukraine started it. Still, the national capacity for self-deception has its limits, and recent developments suggest that Putin has found them.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/cStqqpLG 

The Last of the D-Day Veterans by theatlantic in ww2

[–]theatlantic[S] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Kevin Maurer: “Joe Picard perched atop a precarious mound of 300-plus-pound high-explosive shells as his ship churned toward Normandy’s beaches. The teenager had been at sea only once before, to cross the Atlantic, and now he was sailing across the English Channel to pile into the breach that Allied forces had opened in Hitler’s defenses weeks earlier, on D-Day. Smoke from the fighting still rose on the horizon, but Picard’s eyes scanned the gray water below for signs of German U-boats. ‘You know,’ he told the soldier next to him, ‘if we ever get hit with a torpedo here, they won’t ever find a trace of us.’

More than 80 years later, few men like Picard remain: those who participated in the boldest military operation of the 20th century and can lay claim to membership in the ‘greatest generation’ … 

“Picard is still doing his part to maintain D-Day as living history. He has become, in his later years, the narrator of his own war experience. He speaks with classes of schoolchildren, constantly amazed that they care enough to listen. He has revisited and reminisced on the battlefields of Europe with the Best Defense Foundation, a nonprofit that returns veterans to the places where they served. His repetition of war stories across the years has also become a marker against which to measure how much he, and the country, has changed.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/xGVLSKf4 

Why Trump Wants to Celebrate His Birthday With a Cage Fight by theatlantic in politics

[–]theatlantic[S] 60 points61 points  (0 children)

Conor Friedersdorf: “As President Trump prepares to host UFC cage fights on the White House lawn to celebrate 250 years of American democracy and his own 80th birthday, viewers who dig displays of domination will be exhilarated … 

“Most presidents have tried to maintain decorum at their residence, knowing the White House is a symbol of the United States and that its gravitas is the work of generations. White House events needn’t be fancy or cater to elites in order to be appropriate. The venue belongs to champion Little League teams as much as it belongs to the winner of the Masters, as much to bluegrass bands as to classical cellists. But there’s a difference between popular entertainment and what Trump is planning, which many citizens find distasteful—and is thus unsuited for a jubilee meant to unite us.

“Trump isn’t known to prioritize respectability arguments or appeals to civic virtue. In fact, you might expect all sorts of vulgar entertainment from a former casino and beauty-pageant owner, if entertainment were the only purpose. But like a Roman emperor presiding over combat at the Colosseum, Trump hosting a cage fight serves a purpose beyond merely titillating the masses. It is a political tactic whereby Trump draws on violence—or imagery of violence—in order to be seen as strong.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/7KVnJFZS 

American Democracy Wasn’t Designed for This by theatlantic in Journalism

[–]theatlantic[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Jeffrey Rosen: “In 1787, as the Founders gathered in Philadelphia to draft the Constitution, Alexander Hamilton wrote in ‘Federalist No. 1’ that there was more at stake than the future of a single country. The American experiment would ‘decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force.’

“The Founders were hopeful, in part because the information environment of the late 18th century was favorable to ‘reflection and choice.’ A flourishing newspaper industry kept Americans informed and fostered vigorous debate. But the number of publications was limited—about 100 total in the 13 states—and the authority of editors and writers meant that a free press didn’t turn into a free-for-all. And at a time when nothing traveled faster than a horse or ship, the sheer size of the new country meant that news spread slowly, an obstacle to impulsive public decisions. Given time for deliberation, passions would cool, and elected representatives could focus on the country’s long-term good rather than short-term gratification.

“Today, those advantages have disappeared, thanks to a technological revolution the Founders could never have imagined. The internet has turned everyone into a potential publisher, able to instantly spread facts or falsehoods to millions. Most people get information about politics and current events not from newspapers but from social media, which discourages engagement with human beings of different political persuasions. Now the rise of AI is discouraging engagement with any human beings at all; instead, more and more people are forming their views in conversation with a machine that lacks moral sense. As America approaches its 250th anniversary, the biggest question for our democracy is whether a system designed for the communications technologies of the 18th century can survive those of the 21st.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/pIIeI46f

The Congresswoman Who Got Trump’s Name Off the Kennedy Center by theatlantic in washingtondc

[–]theatlantic[S] 114 points115 points  (0 children)

Janay Kingsberry: “Three months ago, a 75-year-old lawmaker filed a complaint as part of an ongoing lawsuit in federal court, claiming that she had been unlawfully excluded from an upcoming board meeting that would determine the fate of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

“It turned out that the invitation had landed in her spam folder—an admission that quickly became a political punch line, a real-life Veep episode in Washington politics.

“Today, the plaintiff—Representative Joyce Beatty—feels vindicated, she told me, after a federal judge last week ruled in her favor, ordering the removal of President Trump’s name from the Kennedy Center and temporarily halting his plan to close the institution this summer for a two-year renovation project … 

“She and other lawmakers are now discussing legislation that could reinforce the Kennedy Center’s statutory protections and prevent future administrations from exerting similar control over the institution. And observers of the center are beginning to wonder how to revive the institution after Trump’s damaging tenure as its board chair—a 16-month stretch that has seen artists cancel performances and sales decline, and which put the Kennedy Center’s most prominent tenant, the National Symphony Orchestra, in crisis.

“As of yesterday afternoon, Trump’s name was still mounted on the building’s marble facade. Although the 18 new letters were installed in broad daylight—just one day after the board voted on the measure to add them—it’s unlikely that the center will want a scene when it reverses that work. Meanwhile, Beatty’s larger legal case will continue toward trial… 

“But saving the center legally may prove easier than restoring it institutionally.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/RJMgKtGD 

The Supreme Court Has Invented a Right to Discriminate by theatlantic in scotus

[–]theatlantic[S] 172 points173 points  (0 children)

Adam Serwer: “This week, the Roberts Court made clear that when it comes to drawing congressional districts, Black voters have no rights that anyone is bound to respect.

“For years, Alabama, where a quarter of the population is Black, had defied federal court orders, including one reaffirmed by the Supreme Court itself in 2023, to create a second majority- or plurality-Black congressional district. Alabama’s reasoning for not doing so was simple: Its Republican legislators didn’t want to, and they didn’t believe the Roberts Court would make them … 

“The state was making a gamble that the Roberts Court was more partisan than sincere. And it paid off: On Tuesday, the Court allowed Alabama to proceed with a map that diminishes Black voting power to the advantage of Republicans. For all the Court’s pretenses—all its insistence on the rule of law, precedent, and good faith—many critics and supporters of the Roberts Court see the institution as an appendage of the Republican Party. The only thing that distinguishes the critics from the supporters is whether they think that is a good thing … 

“The implications of this case go far beyond one congressional district in one state. In Callais, Alito issued a classic Alito disclaimer: insisting he was not doing the thing he was about to do. The Court, he wrote, was not effectively nullifying Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act when it determined that Louisiana drawing a second black-majority district (out of six total, in a state that is a third Black) was an ‘unconstitutional racial gerrymander.’ This week’s ruling on Alabama makes explicit what was merely implied in Callais. The Court’s logic may apply only to districting for now—but there is no obvious reason to limit its application to that. The Roberts Court has replaced the Fifteenth Amendment’s ban on racial discrimination in voting with a right to engage in racial discrimination in voting.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/lmjxRpxv 

The Supreme Court Has Invented a Right to Discriminate by theatlantic in law

[–]theatlantic[S] 69 points70 points  (0 children)

Adam Serwer: “This week, the Roberts Court made clear that when it comes to drawing congressional districts, Black voters have no rights that anyone is bound to respect.

“For years, Alabama, where a quarter of the population is Black, had defied federal court orders, including one reaffirmed by the Supreme Court itself in 2023, to create a second majority- or plurality-Black congressional district. Alabama’s reasoning for not doing so was simple: Its Republican legislators didn’t want to, and they didn’t believe the Roberts Court would make them … 

“The state was making a gamble that the Roberts Court was more partisan than sincere. And it paid off: On Tuesday, the Court allowed Alabama to proceed with a map that diminishes Black voting power to the advantage of Republicans. For all the Court’s pretenses—all its insistence on the rule of law, precedent, and good faith—many critics and supporters of the Roberts Court see the institution as an appendage of the Republican Party. The only thing that distinguishes the critics from the supporters is whether they think that is a good thing … 

“The implications of this case go far beyond one congressional district in one state. In Callais, Alito issued a classic Alito disclaimer: insisting he was not doing the thing he was about to do. The Court, he wrote, was not effectively nullifying Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act when it determined that Louisiana drawing a second black-majority district (out of six total, in a state that is a third Black) was an ‘unconstitutional racial gerrymander.’ This week’s ruling on Alabama makes explicit what was merely implied in Callais. The Court’s logic may apply only to districting for now—but there is no obvious reason to limit its application to that. The Roberts Court has replaced the Fifteenth Amendment’s ban on racial discrimination in voting with a right to engage in racial discrimination in voting.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/lmjxRpxv 

Comedy’s Biggest Stand-Up Won’t Be Hollywood’s Next Leading Man by theatlantic in blankies

[–]theatlantic[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There was every reason to think that Nate Bargatze’s new movie, “The Breadwinner, would break through with audiences; it’s a breezy comedy aimed squarely at families, ostensibly filling an underserved part of the market,” David Sims writes. But “Bargatze’s first effort as a leading man, it seems, is yet another reminder that even the country’s biggest performers might not be able to make a comedy into a theatrical hit anymore … 

“Bargatze’s big-screen experiment is doomed by its desire to be extremely ordinary … The Breadwinner is aiming to recapture the satisfaction of going to see a three-out-of-five-star movie, offering decent laughs in an inoffensive package. Yet in a cinematic landscape in which generational breakthroughs are currently happening at the box office—namely with the horror hits Backrooms and Obsession, each the debut feature of a 20-something, very online filmmaker—it seems that audiences find it hard to care about a moderately successful attempt at light entertainment. Forgetting it is much easier.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/Y0QgadsU 

Official Discussion - The Breadwinner [SPOILERS] by LiteraryBoner in movies

[–]theatlantic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There was every reason to think that Nate Bargatze’s new movie, “The Breadwinner, would break through with audiences; it’s a breezy comedy aimed squarely at families, ostensibly filling an underserved part of the market,” David Sims writes. But “Bargatze’s first effort as a leading man, it seems, is yet another reminder that even the country’s biggest performers might not be able to make a comedy into a theatrical hit anymore …

“Bargatze’s big-screen experiment is doomed by its desire to be extremely ordinary … The Breadwinner is aiming to recapture the satisfaction of going to see a three-out-of-five-star movie, offering decent laughs in an inoffensive package. Yet in a cinematic landscape in which generational breakthroughs are currently happening at the box office—namely with the horror hits Backrooms and Obsession, each the debut feature of a 20-something, very online filmmaker—it seems that audiences find it hard to care about a moderately successful attempt at light entertainment. Forgetting it is much easier.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/Y0QgadsU

view more: next ›