Read on Twitter
& #39;Sure, he made a hash of things, but he saves us from liberal delusions& #39;
You& #39;ve got to admire the single-minded devotion to rehabilitating Trump–and those who served in his administration–by portraying him as a bold teller of hard realist truths. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/americas/2020-08-11/end-american-illusion?utm_medium=promo_email&utm_source=special_send&utm_campaign=so20_new_issue_launch_digital&utm_term=all-digital">https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/...
You& #39;ve got to admire the single-minded devotion to rehabilitating Trump–and those who served in his administration–by portraying him as a bold teller of hard realist truths. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/americas/2020-08-11/end-american-illusion?utm_medium=promo_email&utm_source=special_send&utm_campaign=so20_new_issue_launch_digital&utm_term=all-digital">https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/...
It& #39;s difficult to express the insidiousness of this kind of apologia – a kind that is, I expect, fast on its way to becoming the party line. Why is it insidious?
In part, because it starts with a basic truth – what @thomaswright08 calls the "convergence" wager was too optimistic – and then places it in front of a funhouse mirror.
First, who, exactly, believed the strong form of that wager by the time Trump arrived on the scene? What specific Obama policies that he scuttled depended on that wager? The answer is "not very many people" and "none."
Second, what the argument does is, in effect, take the *damage* that Trump has done – by sabotaging key areas of global governance, by conceding policy spaces to Russia and China, by alienating core allies – and use that as *evidence* that Trump was right.
Third, at the end of the day, we see the politer, smarter, more erudite channeling of Trump& #39;s world, where rhetoric is substance and credit goes to those who claim it. For example, there& #39;s a reason for this rather weird syntax.
Fourth, admit some problems but treat them as products of a basically functional and purposive, if sometimes & #39;misguided& #39;, approach to foreign policy. Remember when Erdogan *twice* goaded Trump into impulsively pulling support for US Kurdish proxies? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yes, the problem is just that the administration is just too brash sometimes. They need to remember that our allies can be a bit sensitive.
It& #39;s also important to make strategic of the passive voice.
It& #39;s also important to make strategic of the passive voice.
Anyway, this is a skilled example of the basic blueprint (it& #39;s also like the nth version 
https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="👇" title="Rückhand Zeigefinger nach unten" aria-label="Emoji: Rückhand Zeigefinger nach unten">). Get used to it. Because you can bet that you& #39;re going to be seeing a LOT more of this. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/04/consider-possibility-trump-right-china/609493/">https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/arc... /END
