The Damaged Soul of The Mother and the Whore

Jean Eustache’s famous elegy for a left-wing generation is, at its heart, reactionary.

A degree of self-motivation is the key to university success | Letters

Lesley Matthews and Margaret Squires respond to a piece by Adrian Chiles in which he compares the workload at English and French universities

Adrian Chiles (English students spend a fortune to go to university. Shouldn’t that buy them more teaching and less partying?, 29 March) extols the virtues of the French university regime, comparing it with the UK, where students can do what they like. At the start of my sixth form (60 years ago), our history teacher told us that he would not be chasing us to get our essays in on time as he knew that we wanted to go to university. We had to be self‑motivated. Result? I did nothing for a year and a half. I failed my mock A-level history exam. I then worked prodigiously hard and got a B in my A-level. I went to university. He had not just taught me history – he had taught me to be responsible for my own learning.
Lesley Matthews
Shipley, West Yorkshire

• Adrian Chiles is right to blame the culture in some universities in this country for scrappy degrees. Maybe the universities should make it compulsory for each student to join a work group. When my daughter studied in Belgium, a group of Germans asked her if she had one, and seeing that she did not understand the concept, invited her to join theirs. She has never worked so hard in her life.
Margaret Squires
St Andrews, Fife

Continue reading...

Why Democracies Aren’t More Reliable Alliance Partners

Guest post by Mark Nieman and Doug Gibler

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine set off a security spiral in Europe. Despite US President Biden’s pledge to “defend every inch of NATO territory,” Poland increased its military budget by a whopping 60 percent and asked to have US nuclear weapons based on its territory. Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia also announced sizable defense increases, with Latvia re-instating compulsory military training.

Why didn’t Biden’s pledge reassure these NATO members? Is the alliance’s famed Article 5 promise—that an attack on one member is an attack on all—a less than ironclad guarantee?

NATO is an unprecedented and unique organization of formidable military might. It is also an alliance made up of democracies, which are generally considered more reliable alliance partners: they form more lasting alliance commitments, and honor them at higher rates than autocracies. So why then are the NATO members most vulnerable to Russian aggression also the most skeptical about NATO’s commitment to defend them?

Democracies are often put on a pedestal. It is a truth (almost) universally acknowledged among scholars of international relations that democratic countries are qualitatively different from authoritarian regimes—nicer, better, and more cooperative—especially when they interact with one another. Democracies do not fight wars against other democracies, though they are just as likely to fight autocracies as autocracies fight one another. Democracies are more likely to win the wars they do fight. And democracies are more likely to trade with other democracies.

But our research suggests that what drives the effectiveness of alliance isn’t democracy or shared values. Our recent article in The Journal of Politics shows that alliance reliability is driven by strategic geopolitical context and opportunities to renege, rather than domestic institutions.

What exactly would make democratic countries any more reliable allies than autocracies? Standard arguments focus on the nature of democratic norms and institutions, often pointing to their legalistic culture, foreign policy stability, or concern for international reputation. All of these explanations are valid, and many have been backed with sound empirical analysis. But they miss a key difference between democracies and autocracies: geography. A quick glance at a map reveals heavy geographical concentration among democratic countries. What distinguishes these areas of concentration—Western Europe, in particular—is a long history of violent conflict, which, once resolved, has been followed by a long history of peace. The geographical areas of concentration of authoritarian countries, in contrast, are characterized by periods of relative peace, followed by continuous or intermittent violence. This violence often centers around a small set of unresolved contentious issues, with those related to conflicting territorial claims being the most violent.

This geopolitical context matters for tests of alliance reliability: alliances are most likely to be called upon and violated when their geopolitical environment is hostile. In contrast, alliances in peaceful environments are less likely to be called upon, so they are less likely to be broken. So while democracies might appear to be better alliance partners, this is only because their commitments are rarely tested. Indeed, peaceful environments may themselves produce democratic counties. Without the threat of attack by a neighbor, states can devote fewer resources to the military, concentration of power devolves, and focus more on economic development and diversification. Threatening environments, in contrast, encourage greater militarization and power concentration, increasing the prospects of a garrison state and authoritarian regimes. To paraphrase Charles Tilly, war makes the state, but it is much more likely to make an authoritarian state than a democratic one.

In short, once the geopolitical environment is accounted for, democracies have the same reliability as other types of regimes. Instead, it is the strategic environment that seems to best predict whether alliances are honored: the riskier the environment, the more likely allies are to abrogate their commitments.

So are Finland and Sweden right to rush their NATO accession in response to the threat of Russian aggression? Will a formal membership make them safer than a mere promise? Yes, but this answer has nothing to do with the virtues of democracies. Alliances deter aggression, but they do so through the aggregation of capabilities rather than any enhanced commitments stemming from the domestic institutions of its members. Shared democratic institutions did not prevent France from abandoning Czechoslovakia in 1938. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has given rise to similar fears of abandonment among NATO’s eastward members. These countries rightfully question whether Germany and France would come to their defense should they become the next target of Russian aggression.

Unable to trust their democratic allies, Eastern European countries are openly calling for assurance from NATO’s long-standing bedrock, the US. When push comes to shove, NATO’s junior partners are smart to not put their faith in a piece of paper and demand more tangible acts of support, such as troop deployments, training, and arms transfers. A promise, even by a democratic state, must be backed by action.

Mark Nieman is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science and Trinity College at the University of Toronto, and an affiliate of the Data Sciences Institute. Doug Gibler is a Professor of Political Science in the Institute for Social Science Research at the University of Alabama.

ONSEN Wins Wallpaper* Design Award for Best Outdoor Lounge

“The ONSEN collection is very simple and blends well with diverse architectural spaces. We developed it with the intention of transmitting calm, like Japanese architecture. We are inspired by rationality, by geometry, and elemental shapes that do not need heavy ornamentation,” said designers Francesco Meda and David Quincoces.

When Wallpaper* announced their 2023 Design Awards winners, Gandiablasco’s ONSEN came out on top in the “Best Outdoor Lounge” category. The iconic collection is lightweight, practical, and cozy – all things Wallpaper* considers when choosing ideal outdoor furniture. Smart decisions were made throughout the series’ design that features calm, clean, refined lines borrowed from elements of Japanese architecture.

ONSEN’s materials are chosen just as carefully, with efforts taken to maintain their natural properties. The structure of each piece is constructed from uncoated stainless-steel tubes, with the rest of the design employing repetitive vinyl straps resembling leather. Highly resistant and functional, the collection wraps up with two low coffee tables using the same steel. For their surfaces there’s a choice between thermos-lacquered aluminum – Gandiablasco’s flagship material – or iroko wood slats.

To learn more about Onsen, visit gandiablasco.com.

Louise Carmen Notebook Review Part 1

I’m always a sucker for a nice leather notebook— there is something so seductive about the patina on well-broken in leather, and the way it starts to form to the shape of its contents. It’s what made me love the Filofax notebooks I’ve used in the past, and it’s what made me buy a passport … Continue reading Louise Carmen Notebook Review Part 1 →