How to explain US imperialism in Venezuela. NATO's existential trouble and America's threat to annex Greenland. The economics of American empire. How the Trump administration quietly killed the last initiative for a progressive global order. And the struggle against A.I. data centers.

A special holiday crossover with The Bang-Bang Podcast! Van Jackson and Lyle Rubin are joined by the preeminent nuclear scholar Scott Sagan to discuss A House of Dynamite, the 2025 political thriller that imagines nuclear catastrophe not as spectacle or obvious madness, but as an orderly sequence of decisions made under crushing time pressure. Structured as interlocking vignettes rather than a single command-room drama, the film moves between the White House, STRATCOM, missile defense sites, continuity bunkers, and civilian spaces, sketching a system that largely works as designed and still produces annihilation. The film’s opening establishes its governing logic. Inclination is flattening. Timelines shrink. Judgment collapses into procedure. “Nineteen minutes to impact.” “Sixteen minutes.” “Confirm impact.” Across locations, professionals do their jobs calmly while the meaning drains out of their actions. A senior officer tells a junior colleague to keep the cafeteria line moving. A staffer compiles names and Social Security numbers for the dead. Phones come out. Final calls are made. The end of the world arrives not with hysteria, but with etiquette. Much of the tension turns on probability. Missile defense is described as “hitting a bullet with a bullet.” Sixty-one percent becomes the moral threshold, a coin toss bought with billions of dollars. Baseball chatter at STRATCOM blends into DEFCON alerts. A Civil War reenactment at Gettysburg unfolds alongside real-time catastrophe, collapsing past and present forms of American mass death into a single frame. Scott is critical of the film’s portrayal of nuclear command and control. He argues that its depiction of retaliatory decision-making is wrong, that no president would order nuclear strikes against loosely defined adversaries without firm attribution or confirmation, and that the film risks backfiring by encouraging faith in ever more elaborate missile defenses rather than disarmament. Lyle pushes back, questioning whether this confidence in institutional sanity is warranted, especially given the political moment. Either way, the film lands a disturbing insight. The danger is not wild irrationality, but systems that normalize impossible choices. Nuclear war here would not look like collapse. It would look like competence.

Free crossover episode with the American Prestige Podcast! Julia Gledhill and Van Jackson joined Daniel Bessemer and Derek Davison to breakdown the Trump administration’s newly released National Security Strategy. They discuss how the document leans on civilizational framing, portrays competition as existential conflict, omits diplomacy and institutions in favor of coercion and deal-making, and deemphasizes democracy promotion. They also touch on the strategy’s treatment of Europe and Latin America, its assumptions about American power, and what the new NSS suggests about the direction of U.S. foreign policy.

Free crossover episode with The Jacob Shapiro Podcast! It's a strategy of primitive accumulation masquerading as a culture warrior grand strategy. It's doing white Christian nationalism as foreign policy, imperialism in Latin America, far-right revolution in Europe. And what about China? In this crossover episode between The Un-Diplomatic Podcast and The Jacob Shapiro Podcast, Dr. Van Jackson--a former national security strategist--explains the significance of the Trump administration's new National Security Strategy and what it means for the world.

Free episode crossover with The Bang-Bang Podcast! Van Jackson and Lyle Rubin are joined by returning guest Sam Carliner to take on Marines, Netflix’s new 250th-anniversary docuseries, an unmistakable propaganda piece (it’s literally featured on the official Marine Corps website) that nonetheless reveals more candor than the institution intended. Directed by Chelsea Yarnell, whose style veers into Riefenstahl-lite, the series moves through the familiar mythology: Marines as the “meanest, baddest motherfuckers,” war as manhood, China as the next “bloody” proving ground. But between the clichés, something truer keeps slipping out. The Marines themselves come across not as caricatures but as young people grasping for purpose. Some raised amid violence, poverty, absent fathers, and broken homes; others from supportive families, following beloved relatives into the Corps, seeking adventure, education benefits, or what they sincerely understand as patriotic duty. Some speak with chilling bravado about killing; others struggle openly with faith, family, and the sense that combat is the only place they’ll ever feel whole. A sniper mourns the disbanding of scout-sniper platoons as if losing a piece of himself. A Huey pilot wonders how to make “non-emotional decisions” when his whole life has been shaped by emotion, and a mother tries to bless a choice she privately cannot support. And despite itself, the series also exposes the machinery surrounding them. Deployments that make no sense. A surreal shipboard announcement about Yemen, where Houthi attacks are called “unprovoked” with no mention of the U.S.-backed genocide in Gaza driving them, all delivered in a breezy “Good morning, Team America” tone. Marines saddled with the weight of great-power delusions they never chose. The political culture is bankrupt, but the individuals inside it are often heartbreakingly earnest. That tension, between Yarnell’s promo frame and the unfiltered vulnerability of the people she films, turns Marines into something worthwhile. Even in its worst moments, the series forces a deeper question: What happens when a society offering so little to its young men teaches them that violence is the only stable form of meaning?

Free episode cross-over! Van Jackson appeared as a guest on Davis Ellison’s Official Positions podcast. They talk about how Van became a scholar, why he left Washington for New Zealand, the social realities of being a foreign policy wonk, the dark side of life in rich countries, what strategic studies ought to be, and how Davis himself went from being NATO analyst to being a NATO critic.

Why regime-change war with Venezuela is about drugs. And cartels. And immigration. And resource exploitation. And because it will be good for inflation. And because uranium to all of the world’s bad guys. What the fuck!? Things are shaping up like a choose-your-own adventure story that fails to learn from the Iraq War. What is the Ukraine peace plan and why is it destined to fail in its current form? The opportunity and threat of national-security democrats like Elissa Slotkin and Mark Kelly, and what it says that Trump is accusing them of sedition. Trump’s effort to bring back the action films from the ‘80s and ‘90s, including a remake of Rush Hour and Blood Sport. And what Marjorie Taylor Greene’s resignation says about MAGA’s infighting about artificial intelligence.

Van Jackson and Julia Gledhill link back up to discuss Bret Stephens' op-ed in the New York Times making the case for overthrowing Maduro in Venezuela...and why it's the Iraq War all over again. How the Democrats are in bed with Palantir and why they need to get out. The G-7 meeting in Canada revealed what can only be called imperialist multilateralism. And Secretary of State Marco Rubio designates Antifa a foreign terrorist organization, which escalates an ongoing fight between rulers and subjects in most countries.

In this crossover episode with The Time of Monsters--a podcast of The Nation Magazine--Jeet Heer and Van Jackson discuss the worldmaking of Jeffrey Epstein and the complicity of America's entire ruling class in his crimes, from Larry Summers and Leon Panetta to Trump himself. Thousands of leaked emails reported by DropSite News have revealed something about Jeffrey Epstein that few people realized: He was one of the world's preeminent geopoliticians during the unipolar moment, and that's not a good thing. We now know that Epstein actively promoted the interests of the global far right; worked with Israeli security services to export the tools of oppression to the Global South; helped strengthen Russia's oligarchy and deal intimately with Putin; lobbied to bomb Iran and kill the Iran nuclear deal; secured the US and Russian removal of chemical weapons from Syria FOR Israel; and capitalized on the global instability caused in part by US foreign policy. Epstein's work as a geopolitician reveals a dark side to American hegemony not previously known or seen. It's one giant case study of Naomi Klein's disaster-capitalism thesis.

Who’s afraid of Zohran Mamdani, and why New York newest mayor will lead to Trump escalating his war against Americans. An economic great depression is already hiding in plain sight. The Nazi debate within the Republican Party. Why the Trump administration’s war on Venezuela will expand to Colombia and Mexico. Making sense of Trump’s trip across East Asia as a symptom of hegemonic decline.

Xi Jinping and Donald Trump just met in South Korea, agreeing to suspend the most acute aspects of economic warfare for 12 months, lowering US tariffs on Chinese goods, and resuming Chinese purchases of US soybeans. But Dr. Van Jackson explains why the inter-imperialist rivalry between China and the US endures, why talk of a G2 is premature, and what needs to be done to address the structural sources of great-power competition.

Part II of our crossover episode with The Bang-Bang Podcast! Van and Lyle are joined by Sam Ratner, Policy Director at Win Without War, and Andy Facini, Communications Director at the Council on Strategic Risks, to discuss WarGames, John Badham’s Cold-War techno-thriller that accidentally foresaw the age of algorithmic warfare. What begins as a teenage prank—Matthew Broderick’s David Lightman breaking into what he thinks is a computer game—quickly becomes a meditation on automation, deterrence, and human judgment in systems built to annihilate. Together, the group unpacks how WarGames’ “WOPR” supercomputer prefigures today’s AI decision-making, where machines learn to “take men out of the loop.” They trace how the film’s closing revelation (“The only winning move is not to play”) echoes across four decades of nuclear strategy and modern debates over escalation, autonomy, and control. The conversation ranges from NORAD and machine learning to the moral limits of deterrence, the psychology of Cold-War adolescence, and the comic absurdity of believing one can win an unwinnable game. Like Dr. Strangelove before it, WarGames shows us a military machine that runs on fear, faith, and code, and a civilization learning to live with its own programmed self-destruction.

Free crossover episode with The Bang-Bang Podcast! Van and Lyle are joined by Sam Ratner, Policy Director at Win Without War, and Andy Facini, Communications Director at the Council on Strategic Risks, to discuss WarGames, John Badham’s Cold-War techno-thriller that accidentally foresaw the age of algorithmic warfare. What begins as a teenage prank—Matthew Broderick’s David Lightman breaking into what he thinks is a computer game—quickly becomes a meditation on automation, deterrence, and human judgment in systems built to annihilate. Together, the group unpacks how WarGames’ “WOPR” supercomputer prefigures today’s AI decision-making, where machines learn to “take men out of the loop.” They trace how the film’s closing revelation (“The only winning move is not to play”) echoes across four decades of nuclear strategy and modern debates over escalation, autonomy, and control. The conversation ranges from NORAD and machine learning to the moral limits of deterrence, the psychology of Cold-War adolescence, and the comic absurdity of believing one can win an unwinnable game. Like Dr. Strangelove before it, WarGames shows us a military machine that runs on fear, faith, and code, and a civilization learning to live with its own programmed self-destruction.

The RAND Corporation just cut 11% of staff--which is a further sign of a crisis of capital accumulation. The CIA is maybe rethinking China. The Trump administration is accelerating decoupling from China. Progressives and antiwar organizations send an open letter to Trump about detente with China. Graham Platner's tattoo is getting way too much attention, and also the reason he'll beat Susan Collins. Steve Bannon says Trump will be president in 2028, despite being unconstitutional.

What it means that the Department of War just revoked the press credentials for more than 100 media outlets. Why the China trade crisis is a self-imposed Cuban Missile Crisis that could nuke the global economy (China has predictable control of critical minerals). Trump's covert action authorization against Venezuela is part of Monroe Doctrine 2.0. Why the criminal charges against Ashley Tellis signal a more perilous age for foreign policy analysts. And what Gaza ceasefire does and does not mean. And why everyone but Matt looks forward to pumpkin-spice latte season.

Jamie Merchant, author of Endgame: Economic Nationalism and Global Decline, wants you to stop thinking like a policymaker! He joins the pod to talk about a new essay he has in The Brooklyn Rail about the decline and decay of the "progressive managerial state." Van and Jamie also discuss their shared critique of the book Trade Wars Are Class Wars, the contradiction of Trump's tariffs, their mixed evaluation of Adam Tooze, why international relations as a discipline appears to be in terminal decline, the ideological conflicts within MAGA and what it has to do with a crisis of capital accumulation, and why the various competing sections of capitalism find themselves at war with one another. If you want to make sense of our current historical conjuncture, you can't afford to miss this episode.

Pete Hegseth's fat-generals theory of war is a stabbed-in-the-back myth meant to justify brutality. Trump's NSPM-7 is very explicitly a war on anyone who advocates for peace, democracy, and equality. The government shutdown is being used as a war on Democrats and liberal democracy. The Gaza Sumud Flotilla gets targeted by Israel, in violation of international law--why don't modern states protect their citizens anymore? Trump wants to make a soybean deal with China--the makings of a new detente, but with corrupt, elite-serving foundations.

Why are both the left and the right opposed to the "liberal international order?" What are different schools of right-wing thought about the world, what makes the global far right a counter-order movement, and what, if anything, does it have in common with progressive foreign policy. Dr. Van Jackson, a scholar of international relations, explains the competing global visions of left and right in this live lecture you don't want to miss. This is part two of a two-part lecture on the politics of global order.

What was the "Liberal International Order," and why did people start calling it the "Rules-Based International Order?" Why do experts debate its meaning? What good has it been? How liberal was the Liberal International Order? And why is it over? Dr. Van Jackson, a scholar of international relations, explains in this live lecture you don't want to miss. This is part one of a two-part lecture on the politics of global order.

How do territorial disputes in the South China Sea impact biodiversity? Madelyn MacMurray joins the podcast to discuss how militarized fishing fleets deplete fish stocks – and why that matters to the world.