Aspects of the interviews with Filkins are interesting, but he’s simply not dealing in facts when he infers that both parties are equally radicalized. That’s not what has happened in the US, and it’s discrediting that he treats that as an article of faith.
On Sean and George's general points, I agree. This interaction falls way below Anand's trademark high standards. I hope readers will fix their critical thinking skills on this one. Anand's and Filkins' geo-political and financial takes on the full invasion in Ukraine are under-informed. I'm only writing because this has opportunity costs when we've no room for error going into the wood-chipper of the next administration.
Aspects of the interviews with Filkins are interesting, but he’s simply not dealing in facts when he infers that both parties are equally radicalized. That’s not what has happened in the US, and it’s discrediting that he treats that as an article of faith.
I agree. Reading this interview reminded me of the very good reasons I had to cancel my New Yorker subscription.
On Sean and George's general points, I agree. This interaction falls way below Anand's trademark high standards. I hope readers will fix their critical thinking skills on this one. Anand's and Filkins' geo-political and financial takes on the full invasion in Ukraine are under-informed. I'm only writing because this has opportunity costs when we've no room for error going into the wood-chipper of the next administration.