Timothy Edgar for the Progressive Policy Institute: In Edward Snowden’s first interview from Hong Kong, he warned against “turnkey tyranny.” One day, he said, “a new leader will be elected” and “they’ll find the switch.”
With Trump’s election, it is important that this warning not be proved prophetic. While the United States has a robust system of intelligence oversight — the strongest in the world — it still largely depends on the good faith of executive branch officials.
Are there ways to prevent Trump from turning that key, or at least to make it a little harder? I believe that there are, but they require immediate action — and continued vigilance after Jan. 20 …
Obama has already declassified a substantial amount of information about surveillance programs, using mechanisms like “IC on the Record,” an official site that provides detailed information about the National Security Agency and other surveillance. Still, the culture of secrecy persists.
Before Obama leaves office, he should take a hard look at ways in which his administration has contributed to that culture — especially by continuing to insist on dismissing challenges to NSA surveillance on secrecy grounds instead of on the merits …
Instead of leaving positions open for Trump to fill, Obama should do the opposite and staff up — especially when it comes to key national security positions that involve oversight, including lawyers, privacy officials and inspectors general.
Obama can make liberal use of the recess appointment power to ensure that Trump inherits a fully functioning national security establishment on Jan. 20.
Why space matters
Michelle Shevin-Coetzee, and Jerry Hendrix for the Center for a New American Security: One useful way of addressing the strategic oddity of space is to examine it anew through the familiar lens of sea power theory.
In particular, studying the works of Alfred Thayer Mahan and Julian Corbett can provide essential guidance, informing the strategic, commercial and military aspects of space. President John F. Kennedy turned to such an analogy in 1962 when he outlined his vision for why the United States should undertake manned exploration of the moon.
“We set sail on this new sea,” he declared, suggesting that pioneering efforts in space could be understood within the more familiar context of nautical achievement …
The open ocean — the dark, deep blue domain beyond a nation’s territorial waters and extended economic zone — is perhaps the most analogous realm to consider because of its strategic similarities. Both environments seem vast and trackless, often lacking obvious territorial attributes or frontiers, and both are insusceptible to ownership.
Likewise, the sea and space are viewed as symbolically significant, with the potential to evoke nationalistic sentiment. Consider the importance of dreadnought battleships before World War I or of the “space race” to the moon during the Cold War. These achievements were a source of prestige, affording a quick and readily grasped means of comparing the relative strengths of great powers.
Finally, both environments are exploited or controlled most effectively by diverse elements of national power, rather than by single weapons or platforms.
Digital goods drive increase in living standards
Michael Mandel for the Progressive Policy Institute: Per capita real consumption of physical goods and services, outside of housing and healthcare, has grown by only 10 percent since 2000, or an average of 0.6 percent annually. By comparison, per capita real consumption of digital goods and services has soared, growing by 64 percent, or 3.4 percent annually.
In other words, to the extent that consumer living standards have been rising, the gains have been mainly driven by digital goods and services. For example, per capita real consumption of communication services — including Internet, wireless and cable — is up by 60 percent since 2000. This calculation is based only on government data, without taking into effect possible unmeasured gains in consumer surplus.
By contrast, in the physical sector, per capita real purchases of motor vehicles and parts has risen by only 6 percent since 2000, or only 0.4 percent per year. Similarly, per capita real purchases of food and beverages for home use has risen by only 4 percent, or 0.3 percent annually. It should be noted that food processing is a manufacturing industry that has shown no labor productivity growth in the past 10 years.
Compiled by Joseph Lawler from reports published by the various think tanks.
