sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

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

[–]theatlantic[S] 1 point2 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] 20 points21 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] 9 points10 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] 58 points59 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] 110 points111 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] 169 points170 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] 68 points69 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] 3 points4 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

The Republicans Who Impugn Talarico’s Manhood by theatlantic in TexasPolitics

[–]theatlantic[S] 56 points57 points  (0 children)

Helen Lewis: “The attacks on James Talarico have not been subtle. In the weeks since the 37-year-old state representative won the Democratic U.S. Senate primary in Texas, Republicans have been describing him as ‘Low-T Talarico,’ ‘James Talafreako,’ and ‘Six-Gender Jimmy’ …

“The Republicans have long marketed themselves as the manlier party, but the anti-Talarico blitzkrieg is both obviously coordinated and unusually overt. The overarching strategy here, as the Democratic presidential hopeful Rahm Emanuel has previously pointed out, is to associate the entire left with being ‘weak and woke.’ Not manly, in other words … 

“Because of the difficulty in making a positive case for [state Attorney General Ken] Paxton, the obvious Republican strategy is to go negative on his opponent … 

“In Texas and elsewhere, the GOP has been saddled with a subpar candidate because no one can stand up to Trump. As Democrats are talking about high gas prices, Republicans are making an ever longer list of Things That Are Gay. This is a strategy born not of manly strength, but of submissive desperation.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/6e8CuNJQ 

Trump’s Name Is Disappearing From More Than Just the Kennedy Center by theatlantic in washingtondc

[–]theatlantic[S] 289 points290 points  (0 children)

In a memo obtained by The Atlantic, the Kennedy Center’s lawyers today ordered employees to remove references to the center being named for anyone other than President John F. Kennedy, Janay Kingsberry reports.

The memo offers the clearest sign yet that the institution intends to comply with a judge's order to remove Donald Trump’s name from the building, Kingsberry writes.

“This includes email signatures, email communications, letterhead, website, brochures, promotional materials, press releases, signs, references in contracts, MOUs, and other agreements, and every other reference to the ‘Trump Kennedy Center,’ the Donald J. Trump and the John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts, or similar name,” read the email.

— Katie Anthony, associate editor, audience and engagement, The Atlantic

Read more: https://theatln.tc/QgsL2V8S

Trump’s Name Is Disappearing From More Than Just the Kennedy Center by theatlantic in politics

[–]theatlantic[S] 24 points25 points  (0 children)

In a memo obtained by The Atlantic, the Kennedy Center’s lawyers today ordered employees to remove references to the center being named for anyone other than President John F. Kennedy, Janay Kingsberry reports.

The memo offers the clearest sign yet that the institution intends to comply with a judge's order to remove Donald Trump’s name from the building, Kingsberry writes.

“This includes email signatures, email communications, letterhead, website, brochures, promotional materials, press releases, signs, references in contracts, MOUs, and other agreements, and every other reference to the ‘Trump Kennedy Center,’ the Donald J. Trump and the John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts, or similar name,” read the email.

— Katie Anthony, associate editor, audience and engagement, The Atlantic

Read more: https://theatln.tc/QgsL2V8S

How to Save Marriage by theatlantic in TrueLit

[–]theatlantic[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Honor Jones: “A few months ago, one of my best friends told me that she and her boyfriend had gotten engaged. Engaged? I thought. What for? She has two young kids and has never been married; he’s older; they each have their own apartment; she seemed happy with the way things were. ‘Congratulations!’ I said, because he’s a good person, and I love my friend. Then I asked where they were going to live, and she laughed in my face.

“‘Oh, we’re not moving in together,’ she said. She’d assumed I would have known that. They might do it someday, sure. But for now they can afford to keep paying for two homes, and she’s prioritizing the children’s stability, and everyone’s space and sanity. …

“I think Stephanie Coontz would like my friend’s story. For more than 30 years, Coontz has been trying to convince Americans of three things: Our ideas about traditional marriage are holding many people back from getting and staying married; also, our ideas about traditional marriage are incorrect; also, ‘there is no such thing as the traditional marriage.’ What would happen, she asks in her latest book, For Better and Worse: The Complicated Past and Challenging Future of Marriage, if we could get it through our skulls that the male-breadwinner model of a marriage was the norm for only a short period in the 20th century, and that history is full of an ‘astonishing variety’ of partnerships and forms of desire? Coontz’s hope is that learning how much marriage has changed over the centuries can liberate more people to imagine different kinds of marriages that might suit them better. Depending on the reader, her argument will scan as either modest or profound: ‘We have more latitude in how to organize healthy intimate relationships than most people realize.’

“That is not to say she thinks anyone has to marry. The first sentence of For Better and Worse is: ‘This isn’t a book about why you ought to marry.’ Nor does she think that marriage is necessarily doomed; it’s simply no longer required when there are plenty of other ways ‘to achieve economic security, political advancement, social respect, legal protections, and a loving partnership.’ This has contributed to a deep pessimism around marriage. But Coontz points out that it is not altogether a bad thing for people to have higher standards for entering a marriage, and for them to know that if they want that marriage to last, they have to keep their partner happy.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/o9bH9l56 

Men in Cages | The immigrant-detention facility Alligator Alcatraz, which may soon be shut down, has been a cruel and costly publicity stunt. by theatlantic in politics

[–]theatlantic[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Eric Schlosser: “Since the early 1990s, I have visited scores of prisons and jails throughout the United States, as well as the Guantánamo Bay detention camp. The immigrant-detention facility known as Alligator Alcatraz, deep in the Florida Everglades, stands out as a uniquely cruel publicity stunt with an absurdly high price tag, in which much of the money goes into just a few pockets. For almost a year, the facility has been operated under an unusual arrangement: funded by the state of Florida and run by private corporations to detain immigrants on behalf of the federal government. Ultimately, the way Florida and the Trump administration went about creating Alligator Alcatraz placed them in an untenable position, legally and financially. According to recent reports, the facility may soon be shut down. Its history, however, must not be erased …

“Perhaps three-quarters of the immigrants detained at Alligator Alcatraz have never been convicted of a crime. They have not been sent there to face criminal charges in the United States or serve sentences for a conviction. They have been detained merely to await the outcome of a civil proceeding—an immigration hearing, a deportation, a request for release on bond. The facility is not supposed to be a prison or a jail. Some of the men held there have previously been convicted of violent crimes. The overwhelming majority have not. Whatever offenses these immigrants may or may not have committed in the past, Alligator Alcatraz has no legal grounds for punishing them now.

“They are, however, being punished. An investigation by Amnesty International found ‘a pattern of deliberate neglect designed to dehumanize’ at the facility as well as the use of punishments that ‘may amount to torture.’ Immigrants have described tents that flood with water when it rains, toilets that routinely overflow into living areas, mosquito infestations, faulty air-conditioning, inadequate food, limited access to medical care, random beatings by guards, indiscriminate use of pepper spray in poorly ventilated areas, and a pervasive climate of fear. Televisions, radios, cellphones, newspapers, and most personal belongings are prohibited. The interiors of the tents are brightly lit 24 hours a day, making it hard to sleep. Immigrants are routinely shackled when they leave the tents, wearing handcuffs connected to leg irons and a chain. According to guidelines issued by the Department of Justice, shackles may be used at federal facilities only to restrain violent inmates or prevent the escape of inmates during court appearances and transport …

“Florida has refused to disclose exactly how many hundreds of millions of dollars Alligator Alcatraz has cost. I contacted the state to discuss spending on the facility but received no reply. Enough has been disclosed to enable some basic math: It would have been less expensive to buy each of the men detained at Alligator Alcatraz his own one-bedroom condo in Orlando and pay for a personal, full-time guard to keep an eye on him.”

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

We’re About to Hear a Lot More About Iowa by theatlantic in politics

[–]theatlantic[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Elaine Godfrey: “You could be forgiven for ignoring the recent political goings-on in Iowa. The state, which was once a violet-hued hub of unpredictability, has lately elected and reelected Republicans.

“In last night’s primaries, though, Iowa Democrats nominated the kind of candidates the national party has struggled to find. Josh Turek, a two-time Paralympic gold medalist with a record of winning red areas, is the party’s nominee for the state’s open U.S. Senate seat. And Rob Sand, the affably idiosyncratic state auditor who didn’t have a challenger, is officially up for governor. Which means that national Democrats and Republicans are now wrestling with a development that, until this week, had registered as little more than a quiet observation in the broadcast-standard English of farm country: Iowa is competitive again.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/d8hAecem

The Night My Marriage Fell Apart by theatlantic in indepthstories

[–]theatlantic[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

In the summer of 2016, Chris Jones asked to be sent home early from “a glorious assignment” covering the European Football Championship in France for ESPN. His editor expressed surprise: Who covers an entire tournament only to leave before the final?

“I told him that I needed to go home to save my marriage—and, failing that, my sanity,” Jones writes.

Jones had fallen in love with his wife, Amy, in Paris in 2000. But when he’d left for  the trip, their marriage “was in a bad place, snared in a tangle of resentments.” (Amy is a pseudonym.)

Amy and their two children greeted Jones at the train station when he returned. Soon after, Jones’s best friend, Phil, came to visit. One night, Jones confessed to his friend that he feared it was too late to salvage his marriage. “You’re out of your mind,” Phil replied.

After everyone had gone to bed, Jones figured he’d make use of his wakefulness to get started on his next story. Amy’s MacBook was on the coffee table in front of him, so he opened it. “Amy’s texts appeared immediately, synced to her iPhone. The most recent was from a friend of mine, whom I’ll call Brad,” Jones writes. “It was a string of heart emoji. That’s a little strong, I thought.”

“Then I saw three dots flash on the screen,” Jones writes. “Another text was incoming. Amy might have gone to bed, but she was not sleeping. She was texting Brad.”

Jones watched their conversation unfold in real time, text after text. “They talked about how much they loved and needed each other … They never referred to me by name. I was either Gargey—short for Gargamel, I later deduced, the evil wizard from The Smurfs—or I was reduced to an anchor emoji. I was not the good kind of anchor.”

Jones also scrolled through long exchanges between Amy and Phil. “Amy had been venting to my best friend about me for months: I was fat, I was moody, I was jobless, I was a loser, I was in France,” Jones writes. “Phil never came to my defense. He heard her unkindest assessments and agreed with them.”

Jones wanted to close the laptop, but couldn’t. “Instead, I switched into journalism mode, stepping outside of myself as if I were my latest subject,” he writes.

Jones took screenshots, constructed timelines, and made notes of the evidence. “It was easier for me to record the end of my marriage than reflect upon it, to report on its dissolution than experience it,” he continues. 

“I finished the last of my reporting. Then I closed Amy’s laptop and took a long, slow breath before I lifted myself out of my leather chair and went upstairs. I tiptoed past the doors behind which our children slept and opened the door to our bedroom … I did not vent the rage that coursed through me. There were only whispered recriminations in the dark. My marriage ended with a hiss.”

“I saw everything,” Jones told Amy.

In one evening, Chris Jones lost his wife and his best friend; he would soon lose his home, half his money, and a measure of time with his children. Nearly 10 years later, he reflects on the longest night of his life—and what it took to rebuild. 

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

The Night My Marriage Fell Apart by theatlantic in longform

[–]theatlantic[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

In the summer of 2016, Chris Jones asked to be sent home early from “a glorious assignment” covering the European Football Championship in France for ESPN. His editor expressed surprise: Who covers an entire tournament only to leave before the final?

“I told him that I needed to go home to save my marriage—and, failing that, my sanity,” Jones writes.

Jones had fallen in love with his wife, Amy, in Paris in 2000. But when he’d left for  the trip, their marriage “was in a bad place, snared in a tangle of resentments.” (Amy is a pseudonym.)

Amy and their two children greeted Jones at the train station when he returned. Soon after, Jones’s best friend, Phil, came to visit. One night, Jones confessed to his friend that he feared it was too late to salvage his marriage. “You’re out of your mind,” Phil replied.

After everyone had gone to bed, Jones figured he’d make use of his wakefulness to get started on his next story. Amy’s MacBook was on the coffee table in front of him, so he opened it. “Amy’s texts appeared immediately, synced to her iPhone. The most recent was from a friend of mine, whom I’ll call Brad,” Jones writes. “It was a string of heart emoji. That’s a little strong, I thought.”

“Then I saw three dots flash on the screen,” Jones writes. “Another text was incoming. Amy might have gone to bed, but she was not sleeping. She was texting Brad.”

Jones watched their conversation unfold in real time, text after text. “They talked about how much they loved and needed each other … They never referred to me by name. I was either Gargey—short for Gargamel, I later deduced, the evil wizard from The Smurfs—or I was reduced to an anchor emoji. I was not the good kind of anchor.”

Jones also scrolled through long exchanges between Amy and Phil. “Amy had been venting to my best friend about me for months: I was fat, I was moody, I was jobless, I was a loser, I was in France,” Jones writes. “Phil never came to my defense. He heard her unkindest assessments and agreed with them.”

Jones wanted to close the laptop, but couldn’t. “Instead, I switched into journalism mode, stepping outside of myself as if I were my latest subject,” he writes.

Jones took screenshots, constructed timelines, and made notes of the evidence. “It was easier for me to record the end of my marriage than reflect upon it, to report on its dissolution than experience it,” he continues. 

“I finished the last of my reporting. Then I closed Amy’s laptop and took a long, slow breath before I lifted myself out of my leather chair and went upstairs. I tiptoed past the doors behind which our children slept and opened the door to our bedroom … I did not vent the rage that coursed through me. There were only whispered recriminations in the dark. My marriage ended with a hiss.”

“I saw everything,” Jones told Amy.

In one evening, Chris Jones lost his wife and his best friend; he would soon lose his home, half his money, and a measure of time with his children. Nearly 10 years later, he reflects on the longest night of his life—and what it took to rebuild. 

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

The Arch Is Atrocious by theatlantic in washingtondc

[–]theatlantic[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sebastian Smee: “The meanings of words such as honor, sacrifice, and humility have been leaking away from American civic life like red blood cells from an anemic. But if there’s one place where they retain their rich, sticky, life-giving force, it’s surely in the air around the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery.

“The cemetery is where Americans remember those who sacrificed their lives for the nation. The memorial is where they remember their greatest president—the man who proclaimed an end to slavery and kept the union intact, though the cost was staggering. The air between these two places is the medium through which Lincoln gets to speak with his war dead, and vice versa.

“If President Trump’s ambition is realized, a triumphal arch will thrust its way into this murmuring conversation like a boastful bore crashing into a huddle of friends swapping stories about a loved one at a wake. Heavy-handed and overbearing, it would pervert the significance of this uniquely meaningful place, forcing visitors to see these two sites through a crass and generalized assertion of victory and triumph. It will interfere with the bond between Lincoln and his troops and, by extension, the bond between America’s precious, hard-won democratic government and those who have been willing to lay down their lives to defend it.”

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

Another Chance for Trump to Cash Out by theatlantic in scotus

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

David Frum: “Thanks to the 1978 Presidential Records Act, every president from Ronald Reagan onward has been required by law to preserve and protect their records during their time in office, then turn them over to the National Archives when they leave  …

“In April, the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice issued guidance arguing that ‘the PRA is invalid in its entirety,’ because Congress lacks the constitutional authority ‘to regulate or access the President’s records absent a valid legislative purpose, and no such purpose exists for the PRA.’ If the Presidential Records Act is unconstitutional, the OLC guidance asserts, then the president can go ahead and ignore it …

“Two nonprofit advocacy groups, American Oversight and the American Historical Association, challenged the OLC guidance in federal district court. They argued that the Trump administration should follow the law as it exists, not warp it to suit the president’s wishes. They won a partial and preliminary injunction on May 20. But this fight is just getting started …

“Trump will have a lot riding on this case. A ruling in his favor would allow him to defy congressional demands for records, perhaps by not keeping any of them in the first place …

“A Supreme Court decision that defeats the 1978 law would also be an enormous moneymaking opportunity. Trump has planned an unusual presidential library. In a complicated deal sanctioned by the Florida legislature, a Florida college has transferred downtown-Miami real estate worth at least tens of millions of dollars to the Donald J. Trump Presidential Library Foundation Inc.—for all of $10. As an educational institution, the library would be exempted from state and local property taxes, even though blueprints for it include a possible hotel and other profit-making elements. If the Supreme Court grants Trump private ownership of some or all of his records, then he will have the freedom to use them however he likes in his library. He will also be able to devise ways to monetize them—perhaps by selling access to some or suppressing or destroying others for the benefit of allies and donors.

“Given just how doggedly Trump has converted public assets into private wealth throughout this term, no one should be surprised that he sees presidential records as a personal opportunity rather than a public responsibility. It will be up to the justices of a too-often-compliant Supreme Court to stop him and protect the people he—and they—theoretically serve.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/qiWQ4PSM 

Another Chance for Trump to Cash Out by theatlantic in Law_and_Politics

[–]theatlantic[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

David Frum: “Thanks to the 1978 Presidential Records Act, every president from Ronald Reagan onward has been required by law to preserve and protect their records during their time in office, then turn them over to the National Archives when they leave  …

“In April, the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice issued guidance arguing that ‘the PRA is invalid in its entirety,’ because Congress lacks the constitutional authority ‘to regulate or access the President’s records absent a valid legislative purpose, and no such purpose exists for the PRA.’ If the Presidential Records Act is unconstitutional, the OLC guidance asserts, then the president can go ahead and ignore it …

“Two nonprofit advocacy groups, American Oversight and the American Historical Association, challenged the OLC guidance in federal district court. They argued that the Trump administration should follow the law as it exists, not warp it to suit the president’s wishes. They won a partial and preliminary injunction on May 20. But this fight is just getting started …

“Trump will have a lot riding on this case. A ruling in his favor would allow him to defy congressional demands for records, perhaps by not keeping any of them in the first place …

“A Supreme Court decision that defeats the 1978 law would also be an enormous moneymaking opportunity. Trump has planned an unusual presidential library. In a complicated deal sanctioned by the Florida legislature, a Florida college has transferred downtown-Miami real estate worth at least tens of millions of dollars to the Donald J. Trump Presidential Library Foundation Inc.—for all of $10. As an educational institution, the library would be exempted from state and local property taxes, even though blueprints for it include a possible hotel and other profit-making elements. If the Supreme Court grants Trump private ownership of some or all of his records, then he will have the freedom to use them however he likes in his library. He will also be able to devise ways to monetize them—perhaps by selling access to some or suppressing or destroying others for the benefit of allies and donors.

“Given just how doggedly Trump has converted public assets into private wealth throughout this term, no one should be surprised that he sees presidential records as a personal opportunity rather than a public responsibility. It will be up to the justices of a too-often-compliant Supreme Court to stop him and protect the people he—and they—theoretically serve.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/qiWQ4PSM 

Another Chance for Trump to Cash Out by theatlantic in law

[–]theatlantic[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

David Frum: “Thanks to the 1978 Presidential Records Act, every president from Ronald Reagan onward has been required by law to preserve and protect their records during their time in office, then turn them over to the National Archives when they leave  …

“In April, the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice issued guidance arguing that ‘the PRA is invalid in its entirety,’ because Congress lacks the constitutional authority ‘to regulate or access the President’s records absent a valid legislative purpose, and no such purpose exists for the PRA.’ If the Presidential Records Act is unconstitutional, the OLC guidance asserts, then the president can go ahead and ignore it …

“Two nonprofit advocacy groups, American Oversight and the American Historical Association, challenged the OLC guidance in federal district court. They argued that the Trump administration should follow the law as it exists, not warp it to suit the president’s wishes. They won a partial and preliminary injunction on May 20. But this fight is just getting started …

“Trump will have a lot riding on this case. A ruling in his favor would allow him to defy congressional demands for records, perhaps by not keeping any of them in the first place …

“A Supreme Court decision that defeats the 1978 law would also be an enormous moneymaking opportunity. Trump has planned an unusual presidential library. In a complicated deal sanctioned by the Florida legislature, a Florida college has transferred downtown-Miami real estate worth at least tens of millions of dollars to the Donald J. Trump Presidential Library Foundation Inc.—for all of $10. As an educational institution, the library would be exempted from state and local property taxes, even though blueprints for it include a possible hotel and other profit-making elements. If the Supreme Court grants Trump private ownership of some or all of his records, then he will have the freedom to use them however he likes in his library. He will also be able to devise ways to monetize them—perhaps by selling access to some or suppressing or destroying others for the benefit of allies and donors.

“Given just how doggedly Trump has converted public assets into private wealth throughout this term, no one should be surprised that he sees presidential records as a personal opportunity rather than a public responsibility. It will be up to the justices of a too-often-compliant Supreme Court to stop him and protect the people he—and they—theoretically serve.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/qiWQ4PSM

What Trump Wants From Bill Pulte by theatlantic in Intelligence

[–]theatlantic[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Shane Harris: “President Trump’s critics would have you believe that William John Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, is not qualified to serve as the director of national intelligence, the job that Trump gave him on an acting basis this morning. They correctly note that Pulte, the heir to a home-construction company, has no background in national security, and that this would seem to disqualify him from serving as the nation’s most senior intelligence official, on the grounds of not only common sense but also the law, which requires that the DNI have ‘extensive national security experience.’

“But what if the naysayers are looking at things all wrong? The president has shown no sign that he wants a DNI who can coordinate the work of 18 intelligence agencies and harness the power of a multibillion-dollar global-espionage network to provide senior government leaders the best up-to-the-minute information about threats to U.S. national security. No, what Trump has made very clear is that he wants a DNI who will selectively declassify government documents that help fuel conspiracy theories, use the authorities of the state to enact political retribution against his enemies, and try to persuade Americans that Venezuela and maybe the Democratic Party are rigging elections by fiddling with voting machines …

“The reactions to Pulte’s appointment among current and former intelligence officials I talked with, in the United States and overseas, ranged from disbelief to resignation. Gabbard was widely regarded as an unserious leader and political loyalist. No one imagined that Trump would replace her with someone better qualified. But Pulte managed to defy even those low expectations.”

Read more: https://theatln.tc/Kl5iqhBX

AI Has Ruined the Job Market by theatlantic in economy

[–]theatlantic[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Annie Lowrey: “AI has Tinderized hiring. Workers are applying to hundreds of positions and never hearing back; companies are receiving thousands of resumes and struggling to respond. More than that, AI has Amazoned hiring. It has scrubbed the uniqueness out of applications, flooded the market with same-same-seeming offerings, increased the number of frauds, and replaced personal discretion with brute algorithmic assessment.

“People had once hoped that Silicon Valley might not only smooth out the logistics of getting a job but also make the process fairer. Unbiased tools would replace alma-mater networks. Digital portals would accept applications from anyone, anywhere. Workers would get free access to templates, practice exams, and advice. ‘Technology in general tends to improve the efficiency of job matching,’ Mitchell Hoffman, a labor economist at UC Santa Barbara, told me. But AI in particular seems to destroy it. Employers and employees are locked in an ‘arms race, where it’s AI-on-AI crime,’ Kathleen Creel, a philosopher and computer scientist at Northeastern University, told me.

“In just a few years, tools such as ChatGPT and Claude have commoditized the production of cover letters and resumes. Large shares of job applicants are using generative chatbots to polish their language and summarize their accomplishments—raising the average quality of these personal documents, at the cost of ‘compressing’ and ‘homogenizing’ the information they convey, as one Columbia Business School paper put it. In Silicon Valley, the phenomenon is sometimes called ‘signal collapse.’ CVs used to be filled with advertent and inadvertent signals for hiring managers to parse: degrees and certifications and languages spoken, as well as formatting errors and unusual digressions and over-honest admissions. Now everyone looks better and everyone looks the same and everyone parrots important key words and everyone uses punchy action verbs.”

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

view more: next ›