The last few cycles have been a weird time for NATO, as the escalating Russian aggression revitalised the alliance, but the unreliability of Trump vastly diminished the status of the US

Concur

Europe is now actively trying to get out of the military subordinate role.

Europe has been trying to get out of this role since WWII. I view that they were forced into this role post-WWII with American occupation. I also see that American power also led to European decolonization through the Atlantic Charter e.g. Vietnam and Asia, Africa, and controversially, India.

I view that America maintains Europe’s subordinate role, both militarily and economically, through military influence, as discussed by prior NATO Commander Haig in 2002:

… Q – Why is the United States still stationing 70,000 troops in Germany?

A – A lot of good reasons for that. This presence is the basis for our influence in the European region and for the cooperation of allied nations whose security it enhances. A lot of people forget it is also the bona fide of our economic success. The presence of U.S. troops keeps European markets open to us. If those troops weren’t there, those markets would probably be more difficult to access.

Q – I didn’t forget. I just didn’t know that if the United States didn’t maintain 70,000 troops in Germany, European markets might be closed to American goods and services.

A – On occasion, even with our presence, we have confronted protectionism in a number of industries, such as automotive and aerospace. In addition to economic benefits derived from our presence in Europe, there is perhaps an even more important diplomatic and political benefit.

Q – But the United States is not defending Europe against anything anymore. …

I concur. Nuclear has had seventy years to compete. Renewable is cheaper and has nowhere near the political hurdles of nuclear. Give renewables a chance to compete!

I use Bing because it gives points at ~$120/yr sent to the FSF. I asked FSF and they validated that they get what MSFT says they send.

Regarding more privacy-based search engines, I perceive the privacy argument from corporate search as marketing. Any corporate search engine should be selling your data to maximize profit, even if you pay monthly.

I view FA as an arena for American political elite to build legitimacy for their ideas.

That, combined with an expected surge of corrupt foreign policy practices, will leave the United States looking like a garden-variety great power.

I’m surprised to hear such strong language out of FA. I normally expect boring policy-style language.

He believes that the U.S.-created liberal international order has, over time, stacked the deck against the United States.

I’ve perceived that things have never been better for American international order than under Trump/Biden.

he will likely use Schedule F—a measure to reclassify civil service positions as political slots—to force them out.

Interesting precedence if so. Having career civil servants keeps things from changing too fast, and turning them political could enable instability. I’m curious how this interacts with the Hatch act.

The first is the inevitable corruption that will compromise U.S. policies.

I’m surprised at the emphasis on “corruption” language, especially in FA. This type of language gets people labeled “troublemaker” as Chomsky might say.

Is China getting involved here?