« Matthew Yglesias Watches the Bush Social Security Clown Show | Main | Krzysztof Kowalczyk Is Completely Insane »

January 04, 2005

The New Atlantic

Their media broadcast email:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Tuesday, January 4, 2004

Tim Lavin (tlavin@theatlantic.com; 212-284-7635)



[NOTE: The links below are for media-preview purposes only. If you would like to post a link, please refer to the official URLs, which are available on The Atlantic's Web site (requires a subscription for full access).]



TEN YEARS LATER, by Richard A. Clarke
First came the wave of U.S. suicide bombings in the summer of 2005. Then came the shooting spree at the giant Mall of the States, the following December. Then Subway Day and Railroad Day, in 2006, followed by Stinger Day, in 2007. After that came the cyberattacks of 2008, and, most recently, in 2010, the ramming of executive jets into chlorine-gas facilities. "No one could stand here today, in 2011," the former White House counterterrorism chief writes in a distressingly plausible future history of terrorism in the United States, "and say that America has won the war on terror."

There is a way to stop Richard Clarke's future history (see above) before it starts. America won the Cold War because Americans embraced a set of strategic principles and pursed them steadily, decade after decade. Here's the outline of a "containment" strategy for the age of terror.

The third installment of The Atlantic's annual assessment of the nation's health is here, timed to appear just weeks before the President's State of the Union address, on February 2. The articles in the section are:

BIPOLAR DISORDER, by Jonathan Rauch
A funny thing happened to many of the scholars who went out into the country to investigate the red-blue divide. They couldn't find it.

BEYOND BELIEF, by Hanna Rosin
The real religious divide in the United States isn't between the churched and the unchurched. It's between different kinds of believers.

SHAKEN AND STIRRED, by Stephen S. Cohen and J. Bradford DeLong
"We are on the cusp of an economic era," the authors write, "whose challenges will be unfamiliar to most Americans of working age.

THE MASSLESS MEDIA, by William Powers
With the mass media losing their audience to smaller, more targeted outlets, we may be headed for an era of noisy, contentious press reminiscent of the 1800s.

The Crescent of Crime, the Spousal Spine, the Divorce Coasts, the Righteous Region, and other sources of national greatness.


WHAT AMY WOULD DO, by Sridhar Pappu
In another age it was Abby and Ann Landers -- grand dames who dished out
advice on families and marriage, nosy in-laws and virulent pets. But that was then. How do you recalibrate the advice column for the modern era? Our
columnist tracks down the answer in a profile of Amy Dickinson, the Chicago Tribune's successor to Landers -- and in the process finds some personal healing of his own.

If Rupert's so bad, why is Fox so good?

LETTER FROM BAGHDAD, by William Langewiesche
Life in the wilds of a city without trust.

The Cossacks are on the rise in Vladimir Putin's new Russia.

How I traded an education for a ticket to the ruling class.


Posted by DeLong at January 4, 2005 01:53 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The New Atlantic:

» Why Us? from Liberals Against Terrorism

The new Atlantic issue looks pretty interesting.

But why did they have to put Pittsburgh's

[Read More]

Tracked on January 4, 2005 02:47 PM


How come I'm a subscriber and I don't get these previews?

And I look forward to reading your article and then having it in the magazine on our coffee table for some time.

Posted by: Linkmeister at January 4, 2005 03:19 PM

Tom Carson's in that issue? That guy's a terrific writer. Thanks for the heads-up.

Posted by: Delicious Pundit at January 4, 2005 04:05 PM

""We are on the cusp of an economic era," the authors write, "whose challenges will be unfamiliar to most Americans of working age."

Tantalizing, but can't we have more please uncle Brad?

Posted by: Kenneth at January 4, 2005 05:18 PM

Brad, your article with Cohen is terrific. You moved the discussion forward. Everybody should read it.

[Thank you very much...]

Posted by: Lee A. Arnold at January 4, 2005 10:04 PM

Boy, I'm a dummy ... I jumped straight to the Clarke article, seduced by strange visions of Pittsburgh's Clemente Bridge covered with debris and transported to the Washington Mall ... little did I realize (not reading far enough) that The Good Professor had an article and this was his subtle way of announcing it ... time to read.

Posted by: praktike at January 5, 2005 05:28 AM

I think your article also indicates that "uncertainty" and "unpredictability" may become new watch-words... Funny to read it on the same day as two other pieces: I was just wondering HOW and WHEN the Wall Street Journal was going to effect its editorial turnaround on the Policy Issue of Global Warming, because of course they've been preaching to the moneygrubbers for decades that there's nothing to worry about; while even an imbecile, noticing how an increased shovelling of foodstuffs at his anterior orifice, tends to bloated cheeks about his posterior one, has surmised that the Journal's stance is born not of honesty nor intellectual ability, but rather self-serving aggrandizement, married to the splitting of hairs. THEN I picked up yesterday's Journal at the newsstand (I don't know what possessed me, except maybe that the new issue of Nudies Go Berserk has yet to arrive, and the money was burning a hole in my pocket--) to find that the Posner-Becker blogtwins have finally begun the process of adjusting the tender mentalities of the Journal's slavish believers. Now get this: the Sumatran Tsunami teaches us that unpredictable catastrophes may yet occur! Golly! Who knew? And, well, the climate, is just a breath away... There can be no doubt that this process of editorial adjustment will take several months, and must base its scheduling upon the normal inattention and amnesia of the boobs, since the Journal can hardly reverse itself so swiftly after years of foolishness, without its readers sniffing the change with alarm and suspicion, especially at the reliability of the paper's other editorial pronouncements, or even suffering undue duress at having their gestalts so wrenchingly reframed, and perhaps leaving the Journal open to lawsuits about psychiatric problems and the doctors' bills, from those wily Park Avenue wannabes who sure know how to wrangle a doctor or lawyer. (Would that they could actually identify a SCIENTIST! ...of climate, say, or ecology.) Consequently, among the many other virtues of this Monumental Turnaround now before us, the True Connoisseur of intellectual conniving, emotional gear-crashing, and plutocratic propagandizing, is delighted at the prospect of a long season of the choicest materials to satisfy a palate long dulled by the usual American slush. Friends, to quote the Limbaughian automaton, here it comes! I won't bother to marvel at their particular locutions, having overstepped my time-limitations (I have scheduled myself to have a coronary attack this morning) but you need only read the pieces by Posner and Becker to fall upon a cornucopea of ditherings and backsteppings, tentative formulations and judicious tut-tuttings, as well as a heartwarming reach toward inchoate ideas about complex systems, ideas that were already fully formulated in the ecosystems literature THIRTY YEARS AGO. And dismissed with laughter ever since, by the very op-ed pages spread before me... Next up!: economists admit that the economic analyses of climate treaties are almost useless, since they are based on the method of snipping lineal sequences out of larger, multi-compartment models that in reality have multiple and circular causations, unmodellable by logic, and assigning--you guessed it--probabilities! And what good is a brute-force computer sim, when the thing really can flip right over? And: Will we be inundated by a new line of pop-science books blathering about "unpredictability," how it will improve your sex life, and why it suggests that you continue to acquiesce to the various transfers of money upwards? What a mind-blast! Stay cool, won't you!

Posted by: Lee A. Arnold at January 5, 2005 07:26 AM

Along the same lines as the Atlantic counter-terror articles (sorry, Brad -- I'll be sure to read your article when I pick up a copy at the newsstand), this came over the wire today: http://www.ndu.edu/inss/books/Books_2004/Essays2004/CJCS_Essays_2004.pdf (click on name to get there). Exceptionally interesting pieces this time out.

Posted by: WatchfulBabbler at January 5, 2005 09:39 AM

Post a comment

Remember Me?