A demonstration outside the former US embassy in Tehran (Kaveh Kazemi/Getty Images)
![](https://unherd.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/blued-up-fella-100x100.jpg)
In January 1999, in a Washington of bustling bars and soaring stock markets, Bill Clinton rose to deliver his State of the Union address. America was so untroubled by threat or misfortune that it had spent the previous year debating the precise significance of fellatio. But Clinton, who had survived the scandal, exuded unshakeable personal and civilisational self-confidence. Declaring “a new dawn for America” and a future of “limitless possibility”, he called on Congress to decide how to spend all the record surpluses the government was soon going to enjoy. America’s only inconvenience, it seemed, was too much money. Today, as America struggles to support a crumbling dollar, marshal allies against Russia, ward off a rising China, it’s easy to forget that barely two decades ago it strode the planet like a colossus.
But pride before a fall has an ancient lineage, and only the arrogance of the historical present could treat American imperial decline as a novel phenomenon, let alone mere metaphor. Some 16 centuries before Clinton, in an uncannily similar setting of domes and colonnades, a Roman orator stood before the imperial Senate to deliver an equally triumphal speech. It was 1 January 399, inauguration day for the latest in a millennium-old line of consuls, the most prestigious Roman office. This year’s candidate was Flavius Mallius Theodorus. After rising to praise his audience — “here I see gathered all the brilliance of the world” — he went on to proclaim the dawn of a new Golden Age, celebrating the unparalleled prosperity of the Empire.
Rome’s rapid comeuppance is now a historical parable that America can learn from in real-time. Because the rhetoric of Clinton and his ancient predecessor was spoken from atop the crest of the same wave: an identical process of rise and decline which Peter Heather and I, in our new book, call “the imperial lifecycle”. Empires grow rich and powerful and attain supremacy through the economic exploitation of their colonial periphery. But in the process, they inadvertently spur the economic development of that same periphery until it can roll back and ultimately displace its overlord.
America has never thought of itself as an empire, mainly because with the exception of the few islands in the Pacific and Caribbean, it has never accumulated a large network of overseas territories. But this modern European model, in which colonies were (and in a few cases, still are) administered by governors who answered directly to the imperial capital, was but one of many. The late Roman Empire, for instance, functioned as an “inside-out” empire — effectively run from the provinces, with Rome serving more as a spiritual than administrative capital. What held it all together was the shared culture of the provincial nobility that ran it, most of whom has provincial origins but had been socialised into what Peter Heather has called the imperial culture of “Latin, towns and togas”.
The American Empire — or more accurately the American-led Western empire — mirrors this confederal model, with an updated cultural-political glue that we might call “neoliberalism, Nato and denim”. Under this regime, the nation-state was primary, borders were inviolable, relatively open trade and capital movement prevailed, governing elites were committed to liberal principles, and bureaucracy was based on increasingly standardised education systems (with economics training assuming an increasingly central role as the century progressed). But since its establishment in 1944 at the Bretton Woods conference, its fundamental economic model has been in the timeless imperial mould: exploitation of the periphery to the benefit of the imperial core.
The great wave of decolonisation that followed the war was meant to end that. But the Bretton Woods system, which created a trading regime that favoured industrial over primary producers and enshrined the dollar as the global reserve currency, ensured that the net flow of financial resources continued to move from developing countries to developed ones. Even when the economies of the newly-independent states grew, those of the G7 economies and their partners grew more. And while the treaty arrangements that cemented this system were periodically updated at international summits, even then the US and its main trading partners would typically draft a deal for sign-off by everyone else. As a result, the gap between rich and poor countries grew bigger than ever.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeSomehow it was slipped into this article that ‘austerity’ or debt ceiling worries are causing the decline. This is bizarre. One of the key features of every collapse in history is reckless spending and debt accumulation. Backed up by a magical belief (apparently shared by this author) that one never has to pay back what is borrowed, and that there is no surrender of sovereignty implicit in becoming heavily indebted and beholden to creditors. “Modern monetary theory” is the equivalent of the French King sacking every finance minister who tells him he’s broke until he finds one who says more spending is the answer.
I took it that debrt ceilings and austerity were dymptrather than causes.. in any event the decline seems irreversible as long as those inane distractions referred to persist; and that, sadly seems to be likely. Rearranging the deck chairs seems to be growing ever more popular in the West with a corresponding decline in reason, fiscal responsibility, and commonsense.
I took it that debrt ceilings and austerity were dymptrather than causes.. in any event the decline seems irreversible as long as those inane distractions referred to persist; and that, sadly seems to be likely. Rearranging the deck chairs seems to be growing ever more popular in the West with a corresponding decline in reason, fiscal responsibility, and commonsense.
Somehow it was slipped into this article that ‘austerity’ or debt ceiling worries are causing the decline. This is bizarre. One of the key features of every collapse in history is reckless spending and debt accumulation. Backed up by a magical belief (apparently shared by this author) that one never has to pay back what is borrowed, and that there is no surrender of sovereignty implicit in becoming heavily indebted and beholden to creditors. “Modern monetary theory” is the equivalent of the French King sacking every finance minister who tells him he’s broke until he finds one who says more spending is the answer.
Alongside issues with the US dollar, the same old trope is brought out about the UK responding to the end of empire with “a manic and counter-productive declinism”, citing the so-called “austerity” period during the 2010s. It was “austerity” by political jibe, characterised as such by HM Opposition (which includes the BBC), an argument which also omits the obvious non-declinism of periods such as the mid/late 1980s.
The vast majority of “cuts” the Opposition railed against were, in fact, merely smaller rises in spending than under the profligacy of the previous government which had resulted in the infamous note left in the Treasury about “nothing left in the coffers” to be found by the new Chancellor.
When such economic and (i suspect) politically-motivated nonsense is used as the basis for making one’s case, it brings into question the entire thesis.
..and furthermore, the Emperor’s outfit is quite nice if looked at in a certain light.
..and furthermore, the Emperor’s outfit is quite nice if looked at in a certain light.
Alongside issues with the US dollar, the same old trope is brought out about the UK responding to the end of empire with “a manic and counter-productive declinism”, citing the so-called “austerity” period during the 2010s. It was “austerity” by political jibe, characterised as such by HM Opposition (which includes the BBC), an argument which also omits the obvious non-declinism of periods such as the mid/late 1980s.
The vast majority of “cuts” the Opposition railed against were, in fact, merely smaller rises in spending than under the profligacy of the previous government which had resulted in the infamous note left in the Treasury about “nothing left in the coffers” to be found by the new Chancellor.
When such economic and (i suspect) politically-motivated nonsense is used as the basis for making one’s case, it brings into question the entire thesis.
Yawn….. Oh, I am sorry – did you say something? Some old, dusted off, fall of Rome meme perhaps?
‘‘America’s interminable annual wranglings over debt ceilings could, if they continue, diminish the attractiveness of the dollar, at a time when developing countries are looking for alternatives.”
Sure… But what replaces it? Yes, China can pay Brazil for Bauxite in Yuan… Maybe Brazil can pay Iran for oil with those Yuan, and Iran can use it to buy refrigerators from Vietnam…..
This is Barter. Who ever ends up at the end of the hot potato passing, and wants to then stick it in the bank as it is surplus…..what then? They sell the Yuan on the global currency market for USA $ and buy Treasuries. Yuan is not a store of value. It is not reserves, it is hot potato barter tokens. The $ is still reserve. Global debt is still owed in $.
Only USA has the securities system in place, the 4 month to 30 year treasuries. No other currency can do this, none. US Bonds, Treasuries..good as gold as Bretton Woods said.
Then there are EuroDollars, Trillions and Trillions of them. They are created by international Non-American Banks by the process of ‘Loaning Them Into Existence, same as all currency is created.
A Company wants to open a Peruvian copper mine. They have the licenses and proven metals to collateralize the loan for the $70,000,000 to buy the heavy equipment and staffing and build a dock to load it. They go to a Cayman Island Bank who have no relation to the USA – and that banks loans them $70,000,000, US Dollars. They created seventy million Dollars – pow, ‘Loaned it into existence’. No one is selling Cat Diggers in Peruvian money; Indian engineers and Pakistani heavy equipment mechanics, they are paid in $ – so they need to borrow $.
Now they have to service this debt in $s to the Cayman Bank – so they have to sell the copper in ‘US’ $…haha – they are called ‘Euro-Dollars’. They never saw the USA, or the FED or the US Treasury – but there they are – out there, making money, and requiring huge $ amounts to pay the loans every month….$ created outside of America, haha, and this is just one of the Huge Madness which is the Global economy. What, $400,000,000,000,000, four hundred Trillion perhaps? so a total default of the USA Federal debt – what, $32 Trillion? 12.5% It is survivable – only it will be paid by inflation rather that default – and more debt. The $ is the prettiest mare in the glue factory as Rick Rule says. But every nation is a horse in the glue factory too, just not pretty ones, haha…
It all is crazy shi*. The Dollar has escaped ‘Into The Wild’, as AI will one day – and it is run amok……. and it is like the rats in New York City – you are not getting rid of them……
haha, just having fun – but as the cliche goes, and the Dollar may say it too, in 30 years…..
”Twain had told the reporter, “Just say the report of my death has been grossly exaggerated.”.
No mention of the vast quantities of gold now in the hands of Russia and China? ..irrelevant? I fear much of your case is mere wishful thinking. All the Chinese ducks are quacking.. they merely need to be put in a row.. The cost of the Ukraine proxy war is damaging the US in several ways but it will pale into insignificance when the war with China is started. China, like Russia will be fighting in its own backyard with all the logistical and financial benefits that accrues to China while the US, as usual will be 5,000+ miles from home. As with Vietnam when the body bags start arriving the American moms won’t pit up with it..
No mention of the vast quantities of gold now in the hands of Russia and China? ..irrelevant? I fear much of your case is mere wishful thinking. All the Chinese ducks are quacking.. they merely need to be put in a row.. The cost of the Ukraine proxy war is damaging the US in several ways but it will pale into insignificance when the war with China is started. China, like Russia will be fighting in its own backyard with all the logistical and financial benefits that accrues to China while the US, as usual will be 5,000+ miles from home. As with Vietnam when the body bags start arriving the American moms won’t pit up with it..
Yawn….. Oh, I am sorry – did you say something? Some old, dusted off, fall of Rome meme perhaps?
‘‘America’s interminable annual wranglings over debt ceilings could, if they continue, diminish the attractiveness of the dollar, at a time when developing countries are looking for alternatives.”
Sure… But what replaces it? Yes, China can pay Brazil for Bauxite in Yuan… Maybe Brazil can pay Iran for oil with those Yuan, and Iran can use it to buy refrigerators from Vietnam…..
This is Barter. Who ever ends up at the end of the hot potato passing, and wants to then stick it in the bank as it is surplus…..what then? They sell the Yuan on the global currency market for USA $ and buy Treasuries. Yuan is not a store of value. It is not reserves, it is hot potato barter tokens. The $ is still reserve. Global debt is still owed in $.
Only USA has the securities system in place, the 4 month to 30 year treasuries. No other currency can do this, none. US Bonds, Treasuries..good as gold as Bretton Woods said.
Then there are EuroDollars, Trillions and Trillions of them. They are created by international Non-American Banks by the process of ‘Loaning Them Into Existence, same as all currency is created.
A Company wants to open a Peruvian copper mine. They have the licenses and proven metals to collateralize the loan for the $70,000,000 to buy the heavy equipment and staffing and build a dock to load it. They go to a Cayman Island Bank who have no relation to the USA – and that banks loans them $70,000,000, US Dollars. They created seventy million Dollars – pow, ‘Loaned it into existence’. No one is selling Cat Diggers in Peruvian money; Indian engineers and Pakistani heavy equipment mechanics, they are paid in $ – so they need to borrow $.
Now they have to service this debt in $s to the Cayman Bank – so they have to sell the copper in ‘US’ $…haha – they are called ‘Euro-Dollars’. They never saw the USA, or the FED or the US Treasury – but there they are – out there, making money, and requiring huge $ amounts to pay the loans every month….$ created outside of America, haha, and this is just one of the Huge Madness which is the Global economy. What, $400,000,000,000,000, four hundred Trillion perhaps? so a total default of the USA Federal debt – what, $32 Trillion? 12.5% It is survivable – only it will be paid by inflation rather that default – and more debt. The $ is the prettiest mare in the glue factory as Rick Rule says. But every nation is a horse in the glue factory too, just not pretty ones, haha…
It all is crazy shi*. The Dollar has escaped ‘Into The Wild’, as AI will one day – and it is run amok……. and it is like the rats in New York City – you are not getting rid of them……
haha, just having fun – but as the cliche goes, and the Dollar may say it too, in 30 years…..
”Twain had told the reporter, “Just say the report of my death has been grossly exaggerated.”.
I believe it was Mary Harrington in these very pages just a few weeks ago that that suggested we have the wrong Roman comparison in mind. Everyone is talking like it’s 475 AD, but what if it’s actually BC 51? What if what we see coming over the horizon isn’t barbarian hordes but Caesar’s army? Mary specifically suggested that the those who fear a near-term American collapse are likely to be disappointed. As Adam Smith said, “there’s a lot of ruin in a nation”. The American Republic is almost certainly coming to an end, but the American Empire may well be just beginning.
..really? ..and what, pray tell will sustain that American Empire? ..its manufacturing base is gone, its vassal states are rebelling, it’s running out of resources and it’s a political basket case.. Sounds like the Fall of the RE to me.. and whether it’s the Barbarian hoards or Caesar’s army (Donald Trump’s insurrection army) the result will be the same. Down the tubes..
..really? ..and what, pray tell will sustain that American Empire? ..its manufacturing base is gone, its vassal states are rebelling, it’s running out of resources and it’s a political basket case.. Sounds like the Fall of the RE to me.. and whether it’s the Barbarian hoards or Caesar’s army (Donald Trump’s insurrection army) the result will be the same. Down the tubes..
I believe it was Mary Harrington in these very pages just a few weeks ago that that suggested we have the wrong Roman comparison in mind. Everyone is talking like it’s 475 AD, but what if it’s actually BC 51? What if what we see coming over the horizon isn’t barbarian hordes but Caesar’s army? Mary specifically suggested that the those who fear a near-term American collapse are likely to be disappointed. As Adam Smith said, “there’s a lot of ruin in a nation”. The American Republic is almost certainly coming to an end, but the American Empire may well be just beginning.
Every couple of weeks one of these articles comes up…
Every couple of weeks one of these articles comes up…
If and when people start buying boltholes in Beijing, confident in the knowledge their money will be safe in the Bank of China…because they know for sure the Celestial Emperor Xi and his heirs and successors would not dream of confiscating it and shooting them…and will honour contracts and allow disputes to be settled by due process of Law within an independent judiciary…possibly.
… Until then, maybe not…
Looking at the analogy with Rome: Rome didn’t collapse because there were better places to live, work or invest. It collapsed because its internal economy was weakened and its purpose was lost. There doesn’t have to be something better in place before what is OK is destroyed.
Your money is much safer in Beijing or maybe Singapore or UAE than in New York or London. Those Western cleptocrats steal your money. Ask the Afghans. Iranians, Venezuelans, Russians etc.
Looking at the analogy with Rome: Rome didn’t collapse because there were better places to live, work or invest. It collapsed because its internal economy was weakened and its purpose was lost. There doesn’t have to be something better in place before what is OK is destroyed.
Your money is much safer in Beijing or maybe Singapore or UAE than in New York or London. Those Western cleptocrats steal your money. Ask the Afghans. Iranians, Venezuelans, Russians etc.
If and when people start buying boltholes in Beijing, confident in the knowledge their money will be safe in the Bank of China…because they know for sure the Celestial Emperor Xi and his heirs and successors would not dream of confiscating it and shooting them…and will honour contracts and allow disputes to be settled by due process of Law within an independent judiciary…possibly.
… Until then, maybe not…
I’ve read some version of this article every year, for forty years.
I once attended a lecture by a Jewish survivor of the holocaust. The idea of an anti-semitic pogrom wasn’t new to the world, but in Germany in the modern era?! And then it happened.
In many ways the decline of the dollar has begun, but incremental decline is hard to see over just 40 years. Rome didn’t fall in a year.
40 year trends include: the American middle class is declining; American quality of life is now very far from the best in the world, the dollar share of reserves has been falling; the USA’s share of global GDP has been in retreat; and the USA government has – along with its defacto dominions like the UK – resorted to the printing of money to finance deficits that the bond markets cannot.
Sure, the dollar won’t collapse overnight, but neither did the denarius. I’m pretty sure no one generation noticed the decline. It was only after the fact that it became possible to see what had gone before – and wouldn’t be coming back.
I once attended a lecture by a Jewish survivor of the holocaust. The idea of an anti-semitic pogrom wasn’t new to the world, but in Germany in the modern era?! And then it happened.
In many ways the decline of the dollar has begun, but incremental decline is hard to see over just 40 years. Rome didn’t fall in a year.
40 year trends include: the American middle class is declining; American quality of life is now very far from the best in the world, the dollar share of reserves has been falling; the USA’s share of global GDP has been in retreat; and the USA government has – along with its defacto dominions like the UK – resorted to the printing of money to finance deficits that the bond markets cannot.
Sure, the dollar won’t collapse overnight, but neither did the denarius. I’m pretty sure no one generation noticed the decline. It was only after the fact that it became possible to see what had gone before – and wouldn’t be coming back.
I’ve read some version of this article every year, for forty years.
America’s rivals – namely China and Russia – are in far direr straits than the US. Predictions of American decline and fall have been around for the past century. I’ll only start to worry when people *stop* predicting it.
Agreed.
But I think you have a typo – you meant “China and Russia” ?
China actually doesn’t want the Yuan to be anything close to a reserve currency – their system requires they tightly control their currency. Hardly any is held outside China.
Oops, corrected it now. Although you could argue America is its own worst enemy…
And yes, you’re right about the Yuan. As it stands, even the pound and the yen are used more widely.
Indeed, all the chatter about China’ s currency becoming the new go to ignores the reality that China’s leaders would never cede to the world’s markets the valuation of Chinese currency.
Oops, corrected it now. Although you could argue America is its own worst enemy…
And yes, you’re right about the Yuan. As it stands, even the pound and the yen are used more widely.
Indeed, all the chatter about China’ s currency becoming the new go to ignores the reality that China’s leaders would never cede to the world’s markets the valuation of Chinese currency.
..yes and the Emperor’s clothes look fine to me!
Agreed.
But I think you have a typo – you meant “China and Russia” ?
China actually doesn’t want the Yuan to be anything close to a reserve currency – their system requires they tightly control their currency. Hardly any is held outside China.
..yes and the Emperor’s clothes look fine to me!
America’s rivals – namely China and Russia – are in far direr straits than the US. Predictions of American decline and fall have been around for the past century. I’ll only start to worry when people *stop* predicting it.
Whilst US Treasuries remain the world’s no 1 investment asset, something people on this medium seem unable to comprehend, all will continue to be well, but the decline of the US will one day in the near future, bring this to an end.
Whilst US Treasuries remain the world’s no 1 investment asset, something people on this medium seem unable to comprehend, all will continue to be well, but the decline of the US will one day in the near future, bring this to an end.
Oh, ffs, not another economist desperate to prove the end of the American hegemony. All of whom are simply iterations of, “What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing new under the sun.” Ecclesiastes 1:9
Oh, ffs, not another economist desperate to prove the end of the American hegemony. All of whom are simply iterations of, “What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing new under the sun.” Ecclesiastes 1:9
I completely agree the USA is an Empire, but completely disagree that it’s been geared to send wealth back to the interior. It was a model to contain a rival economic system by promising the periphery protection and the ability to trade in exchange for being on the “western” side of the wall.
It’s literally a model to curtail the USA’s massive advantages for political alliance, and is completely obsolete today. It was obsolete when Clinton was giving that speech in ’99, although he didn’t know it.
S Korea has no energy, raw materials, agriculture, and relies on exports for its economy. It also has no Navy (edit ok it does, but nothing that is going to protect the sea lanes needed for the civilization to survive on its own). At no point in history would Korea be able to prosper outside of The Empire. In fact, we know exactly what S Korea would look like without the Empire: North Korea. Ditto most East Asian countries, other than Japan– who would simply dominate the region under almost any other ruling Imperium.
China still relies on millions of barrels a day of oil from the Middle East. Do they have a Navy that could protect this? No. Would previous Empires have allowed this trade? Not without mammoth cost. If China did not agree, they would de-industrialize. The US Navy insures all of their shipping— For Free! Why?
For the vast majority of history, shipping was the most expensive part of international trade, by far. Today it’s less than 1%. Why? The US Navy kills anyone who disrupts it.
Meanwhile, as a % of GDP, the US trades the least of any G7 member. And most of our international trade is with our North American neighbors.
It’s time to end the Global Empire and refocus on a core “US Friends and Family” model:
NAFTA, AUKUS, Japan, S Korea, Most of the Western Hemisphere. Anyone messes with our trade we kill ’em dead.
To the rest: Good luck!
I completely agree the USA is an Empire, but completely disagree that it’s been geared to send wealth back to the interior. It was a model to contain a rival economic system by promising the periphery protection and the ability to trade in exchange for being on the “western” side of the wall.
It’s literally a model to curtail the USA’s massive advantages for political alliance, and is completely obsolete today. It was obsolete when Clinton was giving that speech in ’99, although he didn’t know it.
S Korea has no energy, raw materials, agriculture, and relies on exports for its economy. It also has no Navy (edit ok it does, but nothing that is going to protect the sea lanes needed for the civilization to survive on its own). At no point in history would Korea be able to prosper outside of The Empire. In fact, we know exactly what S Korea would look like without the Empire: North Korea. Ditto most East Asian countries, other than Japan– who would simply dominate the region under almost any other ruling Imperium.
China still relies on millions of barrels a day of oil from the Middle East. Do they have a Navy that could protect this? No. Would previous Empires have allowed this trade? Not without mammoth cost. If China did not agree, they would de-industrialize. The US Navy insures all of their shipping— For Free! Why?
For the vast majority of history, shipping was the most expensive part of international trade, by far. Today it’s less than 1%. Why? The US Navy kills anyone who disrupts it.
Meanwhile, as a % of GDP, the US trades the least of any G7 member. And most of our international trade is with our North American neighbors.
It’s time to end the Global Empire and refocus on a core “US Friends and Family” model:
NAFTA, AUKUS, Japan, S Korea, Most of the Western Hemisphere. Anyone messes with our trade we kill ’em dead.
To the rest: Good luck!
The US must learn to peacefully live with its rival, China? It takes two to tango, as they say, and it’s very clear that China has no intention if living peacefully with their western rivals, unless, of course, the US just surrender and hand over the keys to the kingdom without resistance.
The US must learn to peacefully live with its rival, China? It takes two to tango, as they say, and it’s very clear that China has no intention if living peacefully with their western rivals, unless, of course, the US just surrender and hand over the keys to the kingdom without resistance.
There’s some sweeping generalisations made here in relation to the US-led “Empire” post World War II “Exploitation of the periphery for the benefit of the Imperial core”
What did America gain from rebuilding Korea, Japan and indeed Europe via the Marshall plan post WWII?
It willingly developed competitors rather than colonies. Indeed many would say the EU’s primary raison d’etre is to act as a competitor to USA (while happily allowing USA to subsidise its own security)
Sure, there’s plenty evidence of decline in democratic institutions in the West, but the dollar can’t be replaced as a reserve by China until China changes and removes capital controls, free stock market, floating currency. Ie.Until it becomes more like America. Not likely.
“What did America gain from rebuilding Korea, Japan and indeed Europe via the Marshall plan post WWII?”
Allies to keep the USSR at bay.
“What did America gain from rebuilding Korea, Japan and indeed Europe via the Marshall plan post WWII?”
Allies to keep the USSR at bay.
There’s some sweeping generalisations made here in relation to the US-led “Empire” post World War II “Exploitation of the periphery for the benefit of the Imperial core”
What did America gain from rebuilding Korea, Japan and indeed Europe via the Marshall plan post WWII?
It willingly developed competitors rather than colonies. Indeed many would say the EU’s primary raison d’etre is to act as a competitor to USA (while happily allowing USA to subsidise its own security)
Sure, there’s plenty evidence of decline in democratic institutions in the West, but the dollar can’t be replaced as a reserve by China until China changes and removes capital controls, free stock market, floating currency. Ie.Until it becomes more like America. Not likely.
To think someone who can produce an article like this is let loose at Cambridge to educate our future elite.
Ha! Bill the emperor really did have no clothes. All 100% accurate.
It doesn’t help that we used to have just one anti-science party, but since the pandemic we now have two. “Technocrat” – i. e. leaders who actually know stuff and can get big things done – is now a dirty word. In this week’s news, the chair of the Georgia GOP literally believes that the Earth is flat. I take it that this woman proudly struts around unvaccinated.
Gosh, Alan, if she can ‘strut’ around she must be healthy, vaccinated or not. You know her vaccination status, I take it.
Gosh, Alan, if she can ‘strut’ around she must be healthy, vaccinated or not. You know her vaccination status, I take it.
It doesn’t help that we used to have just one anti-science party, but since the pandemic we now have two. “Technocrat” – i. e. leaders who actually know stuff and can get big things done – is now a dirty word. In this week’s news, the chair of the Georgia GOP literally believes that the Earth is flat. I take it that this woman proudly struts around unvaccinated.