13 Comments

Thank you, Marco, for so eloquently explaining to our European friends, colleagues and relatives some basic truths. I recall very similar reactions when Ronald Reagan was elected. But it is difficult for them to understand us as they are so much more comfortable with the idea of their lives being controlled by government and have little experience of freedom, self- determination and - sadly - democracy.

Expand full comment

Loved this piece Marco, spot on.

Expand full comment

Very nice as always. I applaud your defense of responsible "whataboutism," which is pretty much all good scholars do. I am, however, more in line with your wise and thoughtful friend Fabio on issues around Democrats and democracy, climate policy and coastal elites. I believe it was Andre Gide who said "the color of truth is gray." The real challenge for us all is: just what shade of gray...

Expand full comment

Thank you Christopher. In the spirit of friendship and constructive debate, i will concede to you and Fabio that i did not make an effort to analyze the shades of gray that differentiate Democrats on various issues. I will note however, that there are equivalent shades of gray across the Republican electorate, which I also did not elaborate. The purpose of this post was to contrast the worst aspects of the two sides. We can have a constructive debate on what shade of gray we prefer, as long as we don't pretend that there are shades of gray on one side and pitch black on the other. I do not think this is what you would argue, but neither you nor Fabio complained about my portrait of the Republicans being too simplistic and unshaded...

Expand full comment

Marco: Agree with you. The "ugly American" ? Europeans should check how they are remembered in their former colonies.

Expand full comment

Dear Marco,

To agree that US Democrats are diversity-fixated warmongers surely doesn’t mean one should embrace trumpism or drop the Washington Post for Fox News ?

Anyway Let’s have coffee in Milan soon! (Not Starbucks, only tourists go there, as you know well!)

Expand full comment

Dear David, not at all, and in fact I don't watch Fox News either. My point is simply that the choice between two extremely flawed candidates and ideologies was not as straightforward. I know and respect people who voted on either side of the divide.

Let's have coffee soon, and at Starbucks, because I have to show you it's not just the tourists who go there :)

Expand full comment

Marco - I think you should go back to economics. This pearl clutching whataboutism is not your best work. Nice for you with your Italian passport that you can easily run away from America in case your Pollyannaish vision of Trump 2.0 and MAGA doesn’t play out. Maybe in your next substack essay you can defend Trump’s Star Wars Bar of a Cabinet under the guise of executive privilege and presidential mandate. America’s institutions have enabled this country to overcome enormous changes over the past 2+ centuries. They will now be severely tested by an Administration bent on their destruction. Matt Gaetz for DoJ. Tulsi Gabbard for DNI. Some Fox News blowhard for DoD. RFK Jr. for HHS. Until this last week these are Cabinet nominations that one would expect to read about in The Onion. If enough Republican Senators don’t have the courage to push back against these nominees then even before taking office the score will read MAGA 1 and Institutions 0.

Expand full comment

Blaise, I appreciate your feedback, though "pearl-clutching whataboutism" and "go back to economics" is perhaps not your best analytical criticism. First and most important, please know that it's my American passport that I hold close to my heart, and have no intention of fleeing if your dystopian view comes to pass -- much as I would not have thought of fleeing a Harris administration. Second, whataboutism is of course not pertinent when judging one person or issue in isolation. When choosing between two or more options, however, whataboutism is exactly what we need to compare them and make an informed decision. I don't see anything in your comment that negates the points I raised. You clearly believe that Trump will try to impose a dictatorship, and that I dramatically underestimate the risk he will succeed. Many Americans agree with you. Just as many -- actually a few more -- disagree. Many thought a Harris presidential bid was also straight from the Onion.

The American people were split nearly down the middle on this choice. My view is that it's because it was a difficult choice between two extremely flawed candidates. Your view, it seems to me, carries much less flattering implications for more than half the country, implications that I do not share.

Expand full comment

Dear Marco,

I have always considered myself fortunate to have many smart friends like you and to be free from addictions, religion, political affiliations, or any passion for a sport that would compel me to support one team regardless of its performance. I can still make that claim.

Your letter critiques European stereotypes of Americans, yet you wield the same blunt instrument against Democrats, painting them with the broad strokes you claim to detest. While you rightly challenge oversimplifications, your analysis ironically succumbs to them.

You accuse Europeans of relying on biased media (AND I 100% AGREE WITH THAT) yet lean heavily on conservative talking points, trading nuance for polarization. Criticism without context doesn’t elevate the debate; it mimics the very dogmatism you disdain.

Take identity politics, dismissed as divisive without recognizing its roots in addressing systemic inequities. Or immigration, where you accuse Democrats of policies that "make a mockery of our rule of law," ignoring decades of bipartisan failure. Your portrayal of climate action as "superstitious sacrifices" trivializes scientific consensus on an existential crisis. And equating Democratic governance flaws with Trumpian authoritarianism? That’s a false equivalence too glaring to ignore.

In closing, many of the decisions that benefitted both Europe and America (the Marshall Plan, NATO, the leadership in WWII just to name a few), were made by the very Washington and coastal elites you deride. These were people who painfully invested in education, understood nuance, treasured gray areas, held passports, and championed a peaceful transition of power. Even now, as they believe they’re staring into the abyss, they cling to these principles...not out of dogma, but out of a conviction forged in history and responsibility. Yes....these are the Americans that have built America. Are you sure you see that reflection in this cabinet?

If you want readers to see America’s complexities, start by applying the same rigor to your own political analysis. Nuance cuts both ways.

Faithfully,

(A reader who sees the gray)

Expand full comment

Dear Fabio, I respect you but completely disagree with your criticism. The points I raised are factual, and not partisan oversimplifications. Briefly:

1. efforts to address systemic inequities have been underway, rather successfully though not perfectly, for decades. Identity politics has nothing to do with addressing inequities, it's just a new form of divisive racism.

2. decades of bipartisan failure on immigration reform do not excuse a decision to allow massive illegal immigration. As Biden took office, Democrats had a majority in both the House and Senate and hence could have passed immigration reform had they wanted to.

3. On climate we've had extensive discussions -- you know where we disagree.

4. On authoritarianism I could not disagree more. The authoritarian tendencies on the left which I enumerated in the post are not "governance flaws" but blatant attempts to misuse and subvert institutions.

5. Finally, no, I do not see in the cabinet that's taking shape people of the same caliber and similar inclinations to those that built America -- but I did not see them in the outgoing cabinet either and would certainly not have expected in a Harris cabinet.

I'm afraid, Fabio, the rigor is there -- it just does not cut the way you like.

Expand full comment

Well... let's call this chapter of our book, the "SHOW ME THE MONEY" chapter 💰😏!

You say you're being "factual" but I still don't see the facts here. Links to official data are incredibly welcome 📊.

I'll send you some quick thoughts on the 5 points below privately. It seems you really want to get me in trouble here 😅.

Just one note and concession is the following: Both the current Biden Cabinet and the future Trump Cabinet have a cabinet that resembles the electorate they represent! Agree?

Expand full comment

we're working hard to get each other in trouble, the mark of of a true and valuable partnership! Let's take it out in the parking lot, agree on which issues you need data on, and i shall be happy to provide them (as long as you don't insist on NYT sources only, that is). On the last point I fully agree -- that after all is the beauty and bane of democracy!

Expand full comment
Error