madam president…oh, that sounds good

President Uncle Joe has done something amazing. He made the decision to voluntarily relinquish the most powerful political position on Earth. He did it under some pressure, to be sure. But he did it with grace and dignity. Compare that to all the ugly bullshit Comrade Trump pulled in a desperate attempt to cling to power–the lies, the threats, the violence–even after he was legitimately defeated in a fair election.

Even more amazing, Biden did something no other politician has ever done. As an old White man, he is willingly surrendering his power to a Black woman. Think about that for a moment. He didn’t have to do that. In fact, by most reports, the majority of the Powers That Be in the Democratic Party opposed that approach. Even a lot of Harris supporters said they preferred a more open contest to determine who’d be their nominee. Biden deliberately scuttled that idea by quickly voicing his support for Kamala Harris. He basically challenged the Democratic Party, saying, ‘Don’t even think about denying a Black woman as the Democratic candidate.’ That was ballsy.

He didn’t do that out of pique; he didn’t support Harris out of spite, just to thwart the people who’d refused to support him. He did it because he believed it was the right thing to do. And lawdy, our boy Joe was right. The organic groundswell of support for Harris has been nothing short of astonishing.

The timing couldn’t have been better. I’ve no idea if this was deliberate or not (I hope it was deliberate), but Biden waited until Trump had weighed the GOP ticket down with JD Vance, the oleaginous Senator from Faux Appalachia, as his VP pick. This effectively pits the most joyless, misogynistic, racist tag-team in US political history against a young(ish), vibrant Black woman who laughs and dances and embraces diversity (along with a PTBNL).

Biden’s move has totally disrupted the MAGA election plan (such as it was). At a rally yesterday, Trump was reduced to claiming Harris “is totally against the Jewish people” despite being married to a Jewish man, and complaining that she was disrespectful by refusing to attend Bibi ‘War Criminal’ Netanyahu’s speech before Congress–which is risible coming from an asshole who refused to attend Biden’s inauguration.

Joe Biden wasn’t my first choice for POTUS in 2020. He wasn’t even in my top five. But he’s been the most effective president in my lifetime, and he did that without calling much attention to his effectiveness. In a normal election year, Kamala Harris wouldn’t be my first choice. But she’s completely changed the dynamic of this election cycle, and she is without a doubt the most authentic candidate of this generation. I couldn’t be happier.

This kid? She’s gonna be the President of the United States of America. How great is that?

I not only feel hopeful for the 2024 election, I’m beginning to feel something approaching confidence. Of course, I was confident that Clinton would win in 2016, so I distrust my confidence. But I absolutely believe that the ONLY way Trump can win is by successfully ratfucking the election–by challenging legit vote counts, by voter suppression, by installing corrupt election officials and MAGA-friendly judges. And if SCOTUS is any measure, that’s a distinct possibility. So while I’m confident that Democrats will win the election, I’m only hopeful they’ll gain the presidency.

President Harris. I like the sound of that. If we work hard and we’re fortunate, the first conflict of the Harris administration will be whether it’s Madam President (my choice) or Madame President.

EDITORIAL NOTE: A reminder that we must dismantle the patriarchy. Pull it apart at every joint, disassemble every element, demolish every component. We must gather all those fragments, douse them in oil, and set them on fire. Gather the ashes, drop them in an acid bath. Enclose the acid in a titanium container and launch it into a distant sun. Then have tapas and a colorful rum drink with a tiny umbrella in it.

the way to end the genocide in Gaza is…

…not to vote in the 2024 election, I guess?

Well, that’s what some people seem to believe. I’m basing this on recent Bsky comments responding to my ‘voting is like taking a bus‘ analogy. Granted, the voting-bus analogy is flawed. Anytime you compare a thing to a different thing, the comparison will fall short, because (obviously) they are two separate things. Still, I think that analogy is/was useful in explaining WHY I’ll be grudgingly voting for Biden in the 2024 election. Here, briefly, is the analogy:

The U.S. government is a bus. The 2024 election is about who’ll drive the bus. If neither bus driver will take the bus directly to the place we want to be, it makes sense to choose the driver who’ll deliver us closest to where we want to be.

Several people on Bsky used the analogy to lament the choice of bus drivers and/or wish there was a better bus driver we could choose. Here are some of their responses:

— There are two buses that are driving toward hell at slightly different rates, I would like to turn around and take a bus away from hell
— If my desired destination required that the bus run over tens of thousands of innocent people to get me where I was going, I’d simply not ride that bus and find some other way to get there
— So if I want guaranteed healthcare, take the genocide bus, got it.
— why don’t we change the bus routes so the bus goes where people actually want to go instead of only going to the dump.

I don’t blame these folks. I’m not happy with the choices either, or with the system that limited our choices. Unfortunately, the system we have IS the system we have. It takes time to change an entire electoral system and, sadly, the only way to change it is by voting for people who’ll change the system (very few of which are running for national office).

For a lot of these folks, the solution is obvious. Don’t take the bus. Don’t vote. They argue that voting for Biden is essentially endorsing genocide. They say Biden’s support of genocide is so defining they can’t, in good conscience, vote for him.

These folks have an uncomfortably valid point. Here’s an exchange I had with one person:

Them: Here’s the problem with this analogy: The place I want to go is a free and safe Palestine. Not only is Biden going nowhere near there, it’s impossible to get there on one’s own.
Me: I would also like a free, safe, independent Palestine. Tell me, who should I vote for to get that? I’m willing to be convinced. Hell, I’m eager to be convinced.
Them: Neither. That’s the point.
Me: So your suggestion is…not to vote? Does that help anybody at all? Voting for either Biden or Trump–or not voting at all–isn’t going to help anybody in Gaza or the West Bank. For me, personally, there are other reasons to vote; friends & family who will suffer more under Trump. Yes, the lesser of 2 evils is still evil, but it’s less evil. I can settle for that.
Them: Well, many can’t. Either get Biden to change or deal with it.

A lot of these folks argue they’ll vote for the down ballot candidates–the members of the U.S. Congress, state legislators, local offices–but not for Biden as POTUS. But here’s the thing: POTUS sets foreign policy. Congress controls the budget, but the agenda for foreign relations is established by the president. If your primary concern is a safe, independent Palestinian state, your choices are limited to a guy who reluctantly contributed to genocide or a guy who enthusiastically endorses it.

Forget the bus analogy. Instead, think of the coming election like this: somebody is going to pound a nail through the foot of every Palestinian. You have a choice: a) a ten-penny nail, or b) a railroad spike. It’s an ugly choice. In a better world, we could choose between two leaders who want to teach Palestinians to dance. But we don’t live in that world. The best we can do right now is try to reduce the harm.

I’ll be voting for Joe Biden AND doing what I can to pressure him and Congress to stop the genocide. Yes, it’s contradictory. But Walt Whitman was right; we are large, we contain multitudes.

EDITORIAL NOTE: Biden is also significantly better than Trump on a number of issues, including the environment, labor, LGBTQ issues, voting rights, civil liberties, infrastructure, taxes, and a lot of other policy stuff. Still awful on his support for Netanyahu, but multitudes and all that.

we’re all on the bus

Voting. Think of it like public transportation. Think of it like a bus service. There’s a place you want/need to go to. But there’s no bus line that will take you directly to that place. So what do you do?

You take the bus that gets you closest to where you want to be.

For me, that bus is driven by Joe Biden. Yes, he’s old and believes that the institutions of democracy will save us. Yes, his role in aiding the Palestinian genocide and his actions in support of Netanyahu are unforgivable. I could provide a long list of his faults and flaws. But he’s also the bus driver that will get the bus closer to where I want this nation to be. It might only a few blocks closer, but closer is closer.

Trump, on the other hand, wants to take the bus in the opposite direction. A big chunk of the US population is in favor of that. There are also a few third party bus drivers who have plans for the bus, and they all have their supporters. But let’s be honest about that; no bus driven by a third party driver is going to leave the terminal. That’s just a fact.

Here’s a True Thing: you’re on the bus. Whether you like it or not, if you’re a US citizen, you’re on the bus. That gives you the right to vote to decide who’ll be driving it. But here’s another True Thing: your choices are basically limited to two old white guys: Biden or Trump. Sure, there are those third party folks out there who’d LIKE to drive the bus. Some of them might be much better bus drivers than either Biden or Trump. But the reality is, it’s going to be one of the two old white guys. That’s just another fact.

So what do you do if you don’t like those two old white guys? You can choose NOT to vote; you can forfeit your right to choose the bus driver. You can opt out. You can tell yourself there’s no difference between those two old white guys. You can claim they’re both awful, that one is only marginally less evil than the other. You can argue that less evil is still evil and you won’t vote for evil.

That’s fine. But you’re still on the bus, as are all your friends and family. If you opt out, you have to be willing to ignore the fact that less evil is still less evil. You have to ignore the fact that less evil is a better choice than more evil.

When there’s no direct route, you take the closest bus.

You also have the option to cast your vote for a bus driver other than Biden or Trump, one of those third party drivers. You can, in fact, choose to vote for the BEST POSSIBLE bus driver. You can tell yourself that voting for the BEST POSSIBLE bus driver–that voting your conscience–is absolutely the right thing to do, the moral and ethical thing to do. But you know the BEST POSSIBLE bus driver isn’t going to get enough votes to drive the bus. You know either Trump or Biden IS going to be driving the bus. No matter how much you hate knowing this, you still know it’s true.

In effect, voting for the BEST POSSIBLE bus driver is passively accepting whichever old white guy eventually wins. Whoever wins, you can tell yourself (and others) it’s not your fault. You can blame everybody else for not being wise enough to vote for the BEST POSSIBLE bus driver. You can’t be held responsible for the direction the bus takes. You can take comfort in that, if/when the bus goes in the wrong direction.

The bus isn’t going to wait. The bus is on a schedule. Come November, one of those two old white guys will be chosen to drive the bus in January of 2025. You can help choose which one. Or you can shrug it off.

It sucks. But here we are and there it is.

unqualified

I haven’t written anything about Comrade Donald Trump for…well, quite a while. Months. That’s not because he’s become irrelevant; it’s because I’m just sick to fucking death of writing about him. But…

Trump disqualified from Colorado’s 2024 primary ballot by state Supreme Court

That was the headline run by The Washington Post last night. Try to imagine the size of the smile that crossed my face when I heard that.

Just a couple of weeks earlier, in another Colorado court, Judge Sarah B. Wallace found that Trump had, in fact, engaged in insurrection. However, she ruled he shouldn’t be removed from the ballot. Why? Because she determined Section 3 of the 14th Amendment didn’t “intend to include the President as ‘an officer of the United States.”

Seriously. It was a cowardly ruling, in my opinion; a clear attempt to dodge her responsibility as an officer of the court. Let’s look at the text of Section 3:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Judge Wallace’s decision was appealed (by Republicans, by the way) to Colorado’s Supreme Court. Yesterday, they basically said, “Sorry, Judge Wallace, but POTUS sure as shit IS an officer of the US. Dude ain’t eligible to be president on account of that insurrection business.”

So, what happens next? Trump will appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court of the United States. In case you’ve hit your head and forgotten, let me remind you that three SCOTUS Justices were appointed by Trump, and Clarence Thomas’s wife was directly involved in the insurrection. Thomas should recuse himself, but he’s not required to. And let’s face it, that motherfucker is massively corrupt, so he probably won’t. He can make bank off this case. The three Trump appointees? Well, we’re supposed to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they’ll judge the matter based entirely on the law. Don’t hold your fucking breath.

As I understand it (and yeah, I’m not a lawyer), the fundamental issues SCOTUS will have to determine are 1) whether the State of Colorado has the authority to determine if Trump committed insurrection against the United States, and 2) if he’s had sufficient due process to defend himself against that charge.

SCOTUS might refuse to accept the case, but that’s really unlikely. If they did, the Colorado ruling would stand. Trump won’t be on the ballot in Colorado. The reality is SCOTUS will almost certainly agree to hear the appeal. But they could slow walk it; they could hold off on issuing a ruling until early next year…February or March…by which time Trump will very likely have locked in the GOP nomination. Then they could claim removing Trump from the ballot in Colorado would create chaos and deprive the voters of their voting rights.

Is this asshole qualfiied to be POTUS?

That’s just a guess, of course. I have absolutely no idea what they’ll do. But I want to address one bullshit argument that we’re going to hear frequently over the next few weeks. People will argue that it should be up to the voters to determine if Trump should be POTUS; it shouldn’t be determined by any court.

That’s a bullshit argument. It sounds reasonable, but it’s not. The Constitution of the US tells us who is eligible to be president. Article II places only three limits on qualification: the person must be 1) at least 35 years of age, 2) be a natural born citizen, and 3) must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years. The 14th Amendment adds a 4th qualification: a person who has taken an oath to support the Constitution but engaged in insurrection or rebellion is NOT qualified. And the 22nd Amendment added a 5th qualification: no person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.

So there you have it. It’s not up to the voters. If the voters want Barack Obama to be president, they’re out of luck: he’s done his two terms. If the voters want Arnold Schwarzeneggar to be president, they’re out of luck: he’s not a natural born citizen. If they want Taylor Swift to be president, they’re out of luck: she’s not old enough…yet.

And if the voters want Trump to be president, they’re…well, they’re confused and stupid. But they’ll also have to wait until the most partisan and corrupt SCOTUS in the history of the US decides what to do.

The future of democracy in the US depends on them. I’d like to say I’m optimistic. But damn, optimism is pretty fucking hard to muster right now.

yeah, uncle joe biden is old

I had to check with Wikipedia to see how old he is. He’s 80. He’ll turn 81 in November. That’s pretty fucking old. Does it matter? Well, yeah, it kinda does. Does it matter enough to change how I’ll vote? Nofuckingway.

Is he in good health? According to his doctors (and at least Uncle Joe has real doctors, not some fluffer in a white lab coat like Comrade Trump), he’s “in good physical and mental shape relative to his years.” That’s…well, not entirely encouraging, but still somewhat comforting. I mean, the guy still rides a bike. That requires lower body strength, balance, hand-eye coordination, responsive reflexes, bilateral coordination, and postural strength. Sure, he’s not going to make the Olympic cycling squad, but he can get on a bike and crank out a few miles. That’s pretty damned good for an 80-year-old guy.

Okay, he’s also fallen on his bike. But let’s be honest about that. He fell when he was dismounting; caught his leg on the crossbar. Almost every person who’s ever ridden a bicycle with a crossbar has done that. I’m younger than Uncle Joe and I ride a step-through bike because I’ve done that too often. I’m not as flexible as I used to be.

But the ability to ride (and successfully dismount) a bike doesn’t directly translate to running the entire government of the United States. That take a certain amount of mental acuity and political savvy. Uncle Joe probably isn’t as sharp as he was when he was Vice President, but he’s still as politically savvy. He’s accomplished a hell of a lot since he was elected, and he’s done it without much drama (and without much public recognition). He’s still got great political instincts. He still travels the world and gets stuff done.

But yeah, he’s old. And he’ll be even older when/if he’s re-elected. But so what? It’s stupid to compare Uncle Joe against some ideal Democratic candidate. We have to compare him to his opponent. Which is almost certainly going to be Comrade Donald Trump. The guy who thinks he ‘aced’ a mental acuity examination because he was able to repeat man, woman, person, camera, TV. The guy who needed two hands to drink from a bottle of water. The guy who saluted a North Korean general, wanted to buy Greenland, and thought it might be a good idea to nuke a hurricane.

Since we acknowledge that Uncle Joe is old, let’s go ahead and say the ‘unthinkable’ thing we’re all thinking about. What if he gets elected but then goes toes up before the end of his term? That would be bad. But hey, Kamala Harris is perfectly competent to take over. I mean, that’s the whole reason to have a Vice-President, isn’t it. I’d be happy and feel secure with President Harris running the government.

So yeah, once again, Joe Biden is old, but he’s moderately fit and he’s very politically astute, plus he’s got Kamala insurance in case something unfortunate happens. Donald Trump, on the other hand, is a dumbfuck who…oh hell, dumbfuck ought to be enough. Seriously, the Democrats should run adverts saying Vote for the Old Guy; Don’t Vote for the Dumbfuck.

the behan school of economic theory

Let me admit up front that I understand economic theory about as well as I understand quantum field theory. I have, at best, a vague grasp of some of the concepts. This is one of the reasons I belong to the Brendan Behan School of Economic Theory. It may be simple but I find it easy to understand and support. I advocate:

“…that which makes the roads safer, the beer stronger, the food cheaper and the old men and old women warmer in the winter and happier in the summer.”

That’s a solid foundation; start right there and build on it. We should…no, wait. I meant to write about the debt ceiling bullshit. How’d I get distracted this quickly? Okay, rewind. Hit ‘start’.

I find all of this fuss about the debt ceiling to be simultaneously offensive and boring as fuck. It’s perfectly obvious to everybody that the Republican Party is threatening to fuck up the US economy–and the global economy to some extent–unless President Uncle Joe agrees to their demands. What’s less obvious is the astonishing fact that the GOP can’t even agree amongst themselves what their demands are. They’re basically saying, “We’ll shoot your dog unless you agree to do a thing and we’ll let you know what that thing is after you agree to it.”

I’m hoping President Uncle Joe has a secret plan up his sleeve. Or tucked away in a hidden pocket. Or under his hat. He’s been pretty good at teasing the GOP along, then quietly kicking them in the nuts. So it’s a real possibility that he’s openly cooperating with the House Republicans, knowing they’ll never come up with a workable solution, at which point he can say, “I tried to be reasonable” and then just kick them in the nuts.

Personally, I’d prefer it if he just told them to go fuck themselves. He should just tell the Treasury Department to mint the platinum trillion dollar coin and deposit it in the US’s savings account. This idea has been floating in the econoverse for a few decades. Is it legal? Who knows? Do it anyway. Let the Republicans legally challenge it and take it to SCOTUS. That’ll take some time, during which the debts will be paid by the coin and the global economy will continue to totter on.

“Your Honor, justice DEMANDS that we be allowed to fuck up the world’s economy!”

And what happens if SCOTUS says, “Uncle Joe, my dude, you just can’t mint a coin and spend it like that”? Fine, at that point Uncle Joe should just issue an executive order saying the notion of a debt ceiling violates the 14th Amendment. Let the Republicans legally challenge that and take it to SCOTUS. That’ll take more time, during which the debts will be paid and the global economy will continue to totter on.

And if SCOTUS says, “Sorry Uncle Joe, but dude you’ve interpreted the 14th Amendment incorrectly”? Fine, at that point Uncle Joe should just issue an executive order saying the debt ceiling violates the Contracts Clause of the US Constitution. Let the Republicans legally challenge that as well, and take it to SCOTUS. That’ll take still more time, during which the debts will be paid and the global economy will continue to totter on.

And if SCOTUS says, “Uncle Joe, c’mon, that’s not how the Contracts Clause works”? Fine, at that point Uncle Joe should just issue coupon free bonds. I don’t have a clue what a coupon free bond is, but I’ve heard the idea offered as a wonky solution to the debt ceiling. It might be complete bullshit. I don’t care. Whatever it is, let the GOP legally challenge it and take it to SCOTUS. That’ll once again take more time, during which the debts will be paid and the global economy will yada yada yada.

You get the point. If the GOP keeps fucking with the national debt, POTUSUJ should keep fucking with the GOP. He should keep making the Republican Party AND/OR the Republican Party’s SCOTUS responsible for trying to NOT pay the debt. Keep that stupid shit up until it’s time for the 2024 election. Campaign on the GOP (and the sociopath they choose as their nominee) trying desperately to ruin the US economy.

I’ll admit, that’s a shitty way to govern a nation. But the GOP has been enshittifying the US for decades. They’ve succeeded in making the US a fairly shitty nation. But shitty is as shitty does. It’s time we make the Republican Party eat its own sociopathy.

EDITORIAL NOTE: None of this is well thought out. It’s not really a plan. This is just me on a Saturday morning rant while I’m drinking coffee. You’d have to be an idiot to take me serious when I’m talking about economics.

ADDENDUM: Well, who’d a thunk it? Less than a day later, President Uncle Joe and the Squeaker of the House have reached what they call a ‘tentative’ agreement. It fits nicely inside my earlier comment about POTUSUJ “teasing the GOP along, then quietly kicking them in the nuts” except that it appears Uncle Joe has arranged for the GOP to kick themselves in the nuts.

Biden has conceded almost nothing. McCarthy, on the other hand, obtained some small largely symbolic concessions that will make the MAGA wing (can you call it a ‘wing’ when its the majority?) of his party furious, and will likely set the House GOP fighting amongst themselves like rabid wolverines on meth.

forget it joe, it’s afghanistan

There are things you can fix, and things you can’t. There are things you have a moral obligation to try to fix even if you can’t possibly fix them. There are things you believe need to be fixed, but aren’t actually broken. There are fixable things you believe you understand, but you’re wrong. There are fixable things that are none of your fucking business regardless of what you think about them. And when you’re in the middle of things, it’s hard–probably impossible–to know which things are which.

There’s a movie about that. Chinatown. Released in 1974. (I’m going to ignore the legitimate issues about the director, Roman Polanski, because for once I’m going to try to stay tangent-free.) Here’s the backstory of one of the main characters, and a short precis of the film’s plot (and yes, that means there are spoilers).

The backstory–Jake Gittes has a small private investigator business in Los Angeles. He’s a former police detective who worked in the notoriously corrupt Chinatown neighborhood. He became disillusioned (all movie PIs are disillusioned; it’s the law) partly because he was working in a culture whose norms and rules he didn’t understand, partly because of the endemic corruption, and partly because the actions and motivations of the Powers That Be (in both the Chinese and political communities) were concealed from him and inscrutable to him. When his client, Evelyn Mulwray learns he’d been a detective in Chinatown, she asks:

Evelyn Mulwray: What were you doing there?
Jake Gittes: Working for the District Attorney.
Evelyn: Doing what?
Jake: As little as possible.
Evelyn: The District Attorney gives his men advice like that?
Jake: They do in Chinatown.

As little as possible. Jake’s disillusionment was compounded when he attempted to help a Chinese woman. He says, “I thought I was keeping someone from being hurt and actually I ended up making sure she was hurt.” That same scenario plays out in the main plot, much of which is taken up with a long, brilliant McGuffin. It draws Jake into a situation in which he feels an obligation to rescue his client, Evelyn, and her daughter from an ugly situation involving Evelyn’s father–a multimillionaire developer. Once again, Jake finds himself in a situation in which the rules/laws aren’t clear to him, in which he doesn’t understand the motives or actions of the people involved, and where his attempts to help result in more harm. Had he done ‘as little as possible’ things may have worked out better, even if the situation itself remained awful.

In the final scene, his client is dead, the bad guys win, and Jake is not only helpless, he’s also partly responsible. He sees her body, mutters “…as little as possible” and is ordered away from the scene by his former Chinatown detective partner. As he’s being led away, one of Jake’s current employees tells him, “Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown.”

This scenario is being played out with President Uncle Joe and the decision to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan. It’s a culture–actually, a number of inter-related ancient tribal cultures–we don’t understand, cultures that operate on traditional rules and norms unknown to us, with values and ethics that are often alien to us, with goals that are foreign to us. The US and our Western allies have been attempting to resolve our involvement relying on OUR cultural norms and OUR values to achieve OUR goals. Forget it, Joe. It’s Afghanistan.

We had a valid reason (at least in my opinion) to intrude militarily in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda had used that nation as a training ground and recruitment center for the 9/11 attacks. We had a legit reason to go after al Qaeda. After that, things got…loose.

The fact is, no foreign adventure has ever succeeded in Afghanistan. Alexander the Great, whose Macedonian army basically walked over every army they’d fought, got caught up in a long guerrilla-style war in Afghanistan. He never fully succeeded in pacifying the various Afghan tribes. Before he died, Alexander said, “May God keep you away from the venom of the cobra, the teeth of the tiger, and the revenge of the Afghans.” Various Muslim invasions succeeded in converting most Afghan tribes to Islam, but never completely controlled the area. The Mongols, under Genghis Khan, occupied much of the area for quite a long time, but their empire also fell apart. Nobody held the area as long as Timur the Great–but it’s worth noting that Timur was known as Timur the Lame (or ‘Tamerlane’ as he was called by Europeans) because of wounds he received fighting Afghan tribes. After Timur’s empire failed, the Sikhs attempt to invade Afghan territories several times without much success. The British invaded three times in the 19th and early 20th centuries–and got their asses kicked each time. Russia invaded three times–in 1929, 1930, and finally in 1979–and got their asses kicked each time.

And, of course, the US (and NATO) invaded in 2001. We know how that worked out.

But here’s the thing the Afghan tribes have always known and the thing foreign invaders never seem to figure out: the Afghans don’t have to win any wars; they only have to keep fighting at some level, and eventually the invaders–no matter who they are, or where they’re from, and how powerful they are–will leave. The various Afghan tribes are unconcerned about foreign military deadlines or the domestic political necessities of foreign powers or the costs those powers incur; they’re operating on God’s time, and they measure cost on a different scale.

President Uncle Joe’s decision to pull out troops is just an acknowledgment that Afghanistan is Chinatown. Doesn’t matter if we had a legit reason for being there, doesn’t matter if our long low-level war of occupation was a genuine attempt to help the Afghan peoples (and I’m not convinced it was), doesn’t matter what our motives were. Like every other invasion force in Afghan history, we’ve almost certainly done more harm than good.

There’s a scene in Chinatown in which Jake Gittes speaks with Noah Cross, the millionaire developer behind all the misery that’s taking place. Cross inhabits a world where laws and rules of ordinary decency don’t seem to apply–a world that’s as ambiguous and perplexing to Jake as that of Chinatown, a world that’s just as baffling and complex as our involvement in Afghanistan.

Jake Gittes: How much are you worth?
Noah Cross: I have no idea. How much do you want?
Jake: I just wanna know what you’re worth. More than 10 million?
Noah: Oh my, yes!
Jake: Why are you doing it? How much better can you eat? What could you buy that you can’t already afford?
Noah: The future, Mr. Gittes! The future.

That’s why we’re in Afghanistan. The future. Their future, our future–we think we can make it better. We think we have the means and the power and the right to make it better. We think we know what ‘better’ means.

We don’t. We just don’t.

Forget it, Joe. It’s Afghanistan.