Incoming Feed Items

On this episode of After America, Allan Behm and Dr Emma Shortis discuss Trump’s inauguration, his radical agenda to reshape American life and the United States’ role in the world, and how Australia can respond.

This discussion was recorded on Tuesday 21 January 2025 and things may have changed since recording.

Get your tickets for the Australia Institute’s Climate Integrity Summit 2025 now.

Order What’s the Big Idea? 32 Big Ideas for a Better Australia now, via the Australia Institute website.

Guest: Allan Behm, Special Advisor in International & Security Affairs, the Australia Institute

Host: Emma Shortis, Director, International & Security Affairs, the Australia Institute // @EmmaShortis

Show notes:

‘Trump promises a second term focused on immigration and nationalism – as well as revenge and retribution’ by Emma Shortis, The Conversation (January 2025)

Today, Donald Trump is inaugurated for his second term as President of the United States of America. It’s important that we acknowledge and remember who Republican lawmakers and the incoming President have marked as their greatest enemy: the transgender community.

It is the night before the second inauguration of Donald Trump as the President of the United States. I thought I would be agitated, but I am not. I am resolved. I feel a steely calm. I expect the coming Trump regime to be very bad, and I expect it will be worse than I can even anticipate. Yet I am as prepared for it as I can be: I fought hard as hell to avoid this, which means I have no regrets about my own role so far; I have been gathering as much reliable information as I can about what the Republican Fascists have in store for the country and the world; I have been slowly finding some organizations to follow and support because they seem to appreciate the gravity of the current moment and to be taking some concrete steps to fight back; I have been gathering my inner circle close to me and have been expanding my local activities and ties. I have also begun to figure out how to write some scholarship about legal topics without hiding or understating the precariousness of rule of law in the United States now and for the foreseeable future.

Tonight, I found myself remembering the hard times and serious challenges I have overcome in my own life, personal, professional, and political. This reminds me of my own values and the strength and courage I have to draw upon. I have also been thinking about those who have endured and struggled against dark political and social circumstances in the United States and elsewhere, historically and today. I am thankful for their examples and for a feeling of camaraderie and solidarity with them, across time and space.

At 12:01 pm today, Democracy Forward and CREW filed a lawsuit, seeking a halt to DOGE unless and until it comes into compliance with law regulating “federal advisory committees.” Here’s the complaint. Democracy Forward spearheads legal actions for a consortium of pro-democracy groups, several of whom are named plaintiffs along with CREW. The suit shows the value of sophisticated pro-democracy legal actions, though of course with the federal judiciary and Supreme Court riddled with Trump minions, we can’t know if rule of law will hold.

At the heart of the complaint is the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), a 1972 law Congress passed to curb Executive Branch use of secretive and unnecessary “advisory committees.” Congress wanted to make sure that industry and special interests couldn’t unduly make or influence executive policy and operations. FACA imposes procedural and substantive requirements to ensure advisory committees are kept to a minimum; have a balanced membership reflecting all those likely to be affected by any agency working with a committee; and have defined and public objectives, budgets, and operations. By law, advisory committees must provide for public input and make their own records publicly available.

One of the most critical questions of our time is whether the Westphalian system in which sovereign nation states remain the primary form of societal and political organization or if it will be replaced by some form of global government. The U.N. was formed to establish the latter, and unsurprisingly, it has devolved into a trade association for corrupt Third World governments. The time has come for the United States to reassert its status as a sovereign and independent nation and consider withdrawing from the U.N.

Essentially an attempt to revive the failed League of Nations under a new name, the U.N. was founded in June 1945 to prevent war by establishing a deliberative body which could resolve disputes in a peaceful manner. This was based on the belief that it was both feasible and desirable to establish a system where individual nations would depend on multilateral organizations instead of protecting their own national interests.

The adoption of the U.N. Charter was followed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which breathlessly declares it to be “a milestone document in the history of human rights.” It lays out “a common standard of achievements for all people and all nations,” including a list of “fundamental human rights to be universally protected.” Whoever wrote this platitudinous drivel was apparently unaware of Magna Carta or the U.S. Constitution.

The changes would double the tax on super balances of $3m and over, from 15% to 30%.

The vast majority of Australians can only dream of retiring with a super balance of $3 million. Most people end their working lives with just a fraction of that.

While the superannuation system has enabled the likes of farmers and small business owners to place assets such as farms and properties into their super, the number of those who do that is small and most – if not all – do so as a way of reducing the amount of tax they pay.

This is not what the superannuation system was designed to do.

In the most recent financial year, the Treasury Department estimated the concessions of superannuation earnings and contributions cost the government $51.7bn in foregone revenue. This compares to the cost of the Age Pension of $58.9b.

If these companies were adequately taxed, federal and state governments would have more money to spend on healthcare, education, infrastructure and more money to spend on the arts.

When a local author publishes a book, they sign an agreement with a company for their work to be edited, designed and published, then sold to readers.

For each book sold, the author is entitled to a royalty or a share of the total revenue the publisher received for selling the book.

If they’re lucky, the rights will sell internationally, and the book will be available around the world. In each territory, on each sale, the author will receive a small cut.

When Australia allows fossil fuel companies to extract resources without paying royalties or even any tax, it would be like local authors giving their finished manuscripts to companies such as Penguin Random House or Allen & Unwin and not expecting to see any money from the sales of books sold locally.

It would be like those companies, who profited off local book sales not paying any tax.

Aside from failing to collect adequate tax, Australia also offers generous subsidies – including over $14 billion in fossil fuel subsidies across state and territory governments in 2023.

Meanwhile, Australia provides a fraction of the funding which organisations and individuals need to make art.

Introduction

How should direct action campaigners use mainstream media? Here are 2 case studies from Australia – Blockade Australia and Disrupt Burrup Hub. This article is part one of two on the role of media in the strategies of Australian direct action climate groups. Read Part 2 – How Disruptive Climate Campaigners use Social Media.

If no one reports on your blockade of fossil fuel infrastructure, was your disruption effective?

The grassroots of the climate movement often deploy nonviolent direct action as a tactic. Activists target fossil fuel companies and projects in order to reduce emissions and cause cost and delay for big polluters. But it’s not just about material disruption. Most of the time, direct action practitioners are also trying to spread a message. For that, they rely on traditional media, including newspapers, radio, television, and online news websites.

Activists often use the amount and sentiment of media coverage they receive as key metrics of an action’s success –

Introduction

How can direct action campaigners use social media? Here are 2 case studies from Australia – Blockade Australia and Disrupt Burrup Hub.  This article is the second installment in a two-part series focussing on the role of media in the strategies of Australian direct action climate groups. Read part one on traditional media here.

In the 21st century, social media has been utilised for political ends by a diverse range of actors. For example, progressive activists used Twitter to organise and network during the Arab Spring uprisings and Occupy protests of the early 2010s.

More than a decade later, tech billionaire Elon Musk bought the same platform and renamed it as X. He transformed it into a key component of a right-wing online media ecosystem that was a key contributor to Donald Trump’s 2024 reelection. Clearly, social media platforms can be both powerful and volatile.

Submissions due February 15, 2025


More “Announcement
Call for submissions: The Treasury Historical Association’s 1500 Penn Prize”

At a House Oversight Committee meeting, Nancy Mace willfully misinterpreted the words of Representative Jasmine Crockett and then… ask her to step outside? If a handshake nearly took her out, I’d hate to see what an actual fight would do to her!

Before the Coronavirus pandemic gripped the American consciousness in early 2020, America was seized by a pandemic of another kind: a hysteria among the nation’s elites over President Donald Trump’s immigration policies. The frenzy generated by the progressive-liberal press, Hollywood radicals, progressive politicians (both Democrat and Republican), the minions of the Deep State, academics, and law professors was unprecedented.

It was driven, for the most part, by the Trump Administration’s attempts to curtail illegal immigration by the adoption of a zero-tolerance policy for illegal border crossers; significant restrictions on asylum policies; the use of the National Emergencies Act to shift funds allocated for other purposes to build a border war; the use of the “remain in Mexico” policy for asylum seekers while their claims are evaluated; and the end of the long-standing “catch and release” policy.

But nothing engendered as much hysteria as the president’s bare suggestion that, in 2018—the year of the sesquicentennial of the adoption of the 14th Amendment—the policy of granting automatic birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens born in the United States should be ended.

Olivier Armantier, Marco Cipriani, and Asani Sarkar

Treasury yields have been climbing steadily, particularly on the long end of the curve, sparking renewed chatter from macro bears who see this as the harbinger of an impending crisis. If you’ve followed my content for a while, you won’t be surprised when I say: this isn’t the disaster they’re hoping for. Let’s break down why yields are rising, debunk some common macro bear arguments, and explore the dynamics behind this shift.

Why Are Yields Rising?

At its core, rising yields boil down to one thing: investor expectations. Specifically, expectations for future growth and inflation are now higher than they were just months ago. As markets anticipate stronger economic performance, this is being priced into the long end of the yield curve.

But there’s more to it than just investor sentiment. Understanding this phenomenon requires addressing two pervasive myths propagated by those forecasting doom: the “debt crisis” narrative and the “lack of demand for treasuries” argument.

Debunking the Debt Crisis Myth

One popular theory among macro bears is that the U.S. is on the brink of a debt crisis, fueled by the notion that our national debt is unsustainable. This view ignores some fundamental principles of monetary and fiscal policy in the United States.

Mr. Assange was released from custody in June following a 14-year legal battle which only ended when he was forced to plead guilty to a charge of conspiring to obtain and disclose classified documents.

The signatories to the letter say Mr. Assange’s conviction should be set aside, and he should be granted a Presidential pardon, a power often exercised by US Presidents in their final days in office.

“Mr. Assange’s recent conviction under the United States Espionage Act sets a deeply troubling precedent for press freedom globally,” the letter states, adding that the deal which forced him to plead guilty in exchange for his freedom sets a “dangerous precedent (and) endangers journalists worldwide, whilst simultaneously undermining both Australia and the United States’ longstanding commitment to press freedom and democratic accountability.”

The signatories include independent MPs Zoe Daniel, Helen Haines, Monique Ryan, David Pocock, Kylea Tink and Andrew Wilkie, as well as senior members of the Human Rights Law Centre, the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance and The Australia Institute.

Last year, the Biden administration brought the pursuit of Julian Assange to an end. But his prosecution still sets a dangerous precedent for press freedom globally,” said Dr Emma Shortis, Director of the International & Security Affairs Program at The Australia Institute and a signatory to the open letter to President Biden.

Abstracts due February 15, 2025


More “Announcement
Calls for papers: Methodological Pluralism in Critical Finance Research”

Assigned media interviews author and paleontologist Riley Black.

The American Mind’s ‘Editorial Roundtable’ podcast is a weekly conversation with Ryan Williams, Spencer Klavan, and Mike Sabo devoted to uncovering the ideas and principles that drive American political life. Stream here or download from your favorite podcast host.

Big Tech Turns Red | The Roundtable Ep. 250

America’s universities may be a disgrace, but the deeper problems with our education system lie with grades K-12. Higher education still ranks as a U.S. strength that other countries might admire—but our grade schools might even be inadequate for poor, developing countries.

The most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress, known as The Nation’s Report Card, found that barely a quarter or less of students are proficient in reading, and even less are proficient in math, geography, and U.S. history. U.S. 4th and 8th graders are performing worse not only compared to East Asian countries, but also to such places as Poland, the U.K., South Africa, Turkey, and Sweden, all of which have boosted their scores.

Some of this can be blamed on the pandemic, but not all of it can. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, between pre-pandemic 2019 and 2023, the average score for 4th graders on standardized math tests dropped by 18 points, while scores for 8th graders declined by 27 points. Overall, some 40% of all U.S. public school students fail to meet standards in either math or english, up 8% from pre-pandemic levels.

On Monday, January 13, Mayor Karen Bass tweeted that hundreds of thousands of N95 masks would be made available across the city of LA at libraries, senior centers, and recreation centers. The tweet came nearly a full week after the fires began to consume entire neighborhoods on January 7, and six months after Mayor Bass herself proposed a mask ban for protestors during this summer’s sustained COVID surge. (She went on to catch the virus herself mere days later.)

As local Long COVID activist Angela Vázquez put it, “government has finally entered the chat”.

How Brazilian cities are nurturing transformative capabilities

 — Organisation: UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose (IIPP) — Thursday 16th January 2025

By Anna Goulden

Structural autonomy, political support, and a balance of skills have been key for cultivating the transformative capabilities required to solve public policy problems in Brazilian city governments. This blog explores lessons learned from our research with three city governments in Brazil and what other governments looking to strengthen their capabilities can learn.

São Paulo City Hall, Recife City Hall and Niterói City Hall were studied to help identify how Brazilian city governments conceptualise and deploy their transformative capabilities. The research forms part of developing the Public Sector Capabilities Index which aims to create a first-of-its-kind global tool for measuring and developing city government capabilities.

More…