BREAKING: We’re calling on President Biden to pause all federal government use of face recognition technology.

This tech is flawed, biased against people of color, women, trans people, and more.

Even if it worked exactly as advertised, it would be a nightmare. Let’s explain.

After 4 years of Donald Trump, the US must "reassure" its allies.

That's what I'm reading/hearing lately, such as in this @nytimes piece. What do international relations scholars know about reassuring allies? Can it be done? Is it even

This passage from the article captures well the call for "reassurance": the US must convince its allies in Asia and Europe that the US would indeed use its nukes to protect them.

That's a tall order!

Indeed, such a tall order that it's been a major question explored by international relations scholars for a long time. A LONG TIME.

The topic was of keen debate in the 1950s, with Henry Kissinger writing a series of pieces on the topic, such as this 1956 @ForeignAffairs

The academic discussion picked up in the late 1950s and early 1960s.

This included Robert Schelling's paper in the first issue of the Journal of Conflict

THREAD/ Taliban's messaging/ approach to Biden admin's policy review:
-high-level meetings with top US adversaries
-insists foreign troops will be targeted if not gone by 1 May
-repeats accusations of US non-compliance with deal (and insists a delay in withdrawal would be same).

Taliban repeating their view of Doha deal: smoothed the way for US to leave after "unsuccessful" 20-year intervention. A "safe passage" deal.

The more Taliban insist they are meeting deal's conditions, the less need for a "review." Almost as if to pre-argue a US policy shift. /2

But no Western official or international audience is convinced by Taliban claims alone. Even Taliban can't believe that.

Who is Taliban's audience, as they display rigidity on the deal's terms and insist their interpretation is justified? /3

Perhaps Taliban reached a point where offering compromise/ flexibility to US on withdrawal would be perceived as too weak among its own ranks.

Or the interpretation & expectation of a swift return to power was genuine - and everything US did the past year seems like welching. /4

Or, regardless of internal discourse, current Taliban assessment could be that US/NATO will not leave by May deadline.

Since US does not seem to have begun re-negotiating or bargaining on a withdrawal extension, Taliban might feel boxed in by that, obliged to posture. /5

1/Today's Substack post is about Biden's chances of becoming a truly transformational president -- someone who will move U.S. economic policy onto a leftward track, as Reagan once moved it onto a rightward

2/Political scientist Stephen Skowronek has a theory that says we're due for a "reconstructive" President who will define a new paradigm for the next few

3/Like most people, I thought Biden would be an incrementalist centrist who would get little done other than restoring competence and morality to the executive branch (and that alone would have been plenty of reason to vote for him!).

4/When I read Skowronek's theory, I read it as a prediction of a Bernie or Warren presidency.

I did not imagine that Biden could be a transformational president.

BUT, it's looking like he just might be one!

5/Check out @mehdirhasan's rundown of Biden's rapid blitz.

My prediction: the Biden era will be the inverse of Obama era. Obama was seen as a progressive in the last phase of the Reagan-Clinton era. Biden is a moderate in the beginning of a post-neoliberal era.

He will represent a transition between neoliberal hegemony and new ideas.