2026

BERNIE BRO IN CHIEF:

The ‘Affordability’ Horseshoe: The president is stealing progressive Democrats’ worst economic ideas. (Scott Lincicome, February 4, 2026, The Dispatch)


Trump was never a doctrinaire Reaganite supply-sider, of course, but his embrace of domestic economic policies championed by U.S. progressives is the clearest evidence yet that the “horseshoe” theory of politics—i.e., that the extreme left and extreme right have more in common with each other than with the moderate center—is alive and well in the United States. The similarities have been clearest on trade, where both the far left and far right uniformly disdain “globalization” and the “elites” who supposedly use it to profit at The People’s expense. But we now see the same parallels in domestic economic policy, too—both in the details and the script that each policy follows: target common enemies and offer easy solutions to complex problems—solutions that don’t actually work and, in fact, can often make things worse for the very people that they claim to be helping.

Trump’s “affordability” proposals follow the “horseshoe economics” script to the letter. Smacking institutional investors (aka “Wall Street”) might make for a great populist soundbite, but as housing expert Jay Parsons explained at considerable length (and as we’ve discussed here at Capitolism), there’s simply no good case for the ban, which would likely harm rental markets yet have a minimal effect on the supply of single family homes—even in investor-rich markets. (My Cato Institute colleague Norbert Michel has more on this myth in The Dispatch this week.)

Trump’s populist attack on Big Meat would be similarly ineffective: As Reason’s Jack Nicastro explains, there’s no evidence that meatpackers are, as Trump alleges, “criminally profiting at the expense of the American People,” because the real culprit for high beef prices is the greatly reduced supply of cattle in the United States and from Mexico, which is struggling to stave off the New World screwworm. (More bad news on that front today, unfortunately. Sorry, fellow carnivores.)


Other proposals, meanwhile, would be downright bad for most Americans

I’M A STRANGER HERE MYSELF:

A Theology of Immigration: “None of us have a permanent residence here in this world,” the Reverend Dan Groody says. (Jay Caspian Kang, February 3, 2026, The New Yorker)

These thoughts and the current battle over immigration brought me to the work of the Reverend Dan Groody, a Catholic priest and a professor of theology at Notre Dame, who spent years working in Latin America. In 2009, Groody published a paper titled “Crossing the Divide: Foundations of a Theology of Migration and Refugees,” in which he grappled with Imago Dei, the idea found throughout the Bible that human beings are created in the image and likeness of God. “On the surface it may seem basic to ground a theology of migration on imago Dei, but the term is often ignored in public discourse,” Groody writes. “Defining the migrant and refugee first and foremost in terms of imago Dei roots such persons in the world very differently than if they are principally defined as social and political problems or as illegal aliens; the theological terms include a set of moral demands as well. Without adequate consideration of the humanity of the migrant, it is impossible to construct just policies ordered to the common good and to the benefit of society’s weakest members.”

Last week, I talked with the activist Wayne Hsiung about some of the practical assets—physical infrastructure, collective belief—that religious communities bring to progressive activism. The point Hsiung made was that we cannot actually build movements without institutional support, which, at least in this country, still has to come from faith. My conversation with Groody was more philosophical, focussed on how we think, in the most foundational way, about other people, and how essential this is to political change. The transcript below has been edited for length and clarity.

the Reverend Dan Groody: I knew instinctively, as a pastor, that something of God was interwoven in their stories. And as I began to look even more closely to the Scriptures and other places, I recognized that Jesus himself was a migrant. Jesus himself was a refugee. In fact, I use this almost as the organizing understanding of God, who migrated to our human race, who in turn reconciled us to God, so that we can migrate back to our homeland and become naturalized citizens again in God’s kingdom, if you will. So there’s a way in which migration frames and can frame the whole understanding of the Scriptures from beginning to end. We come from God. We’re called to return to God. Migration is a metaphor that can be used to understand what it means to be human in this world. If that be the case, none of us are fixed or stayed and none of us have a permanent residence here in this world.

CROSSING THE DIVIDE: FOUNDATIONS OF A THEOLOGY OF MIGRATION AND REFUGEES (DANIEL G. GROODY, C.S.C., 2009, Theological Studies)

In the book of Genesis we are introduced to a central truth that human beings are created in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:26–27; 5:1–3; 9:6; 1 Cor 11:7; Jas 3:9). This is not just another label but a way of speaking profoundly about human nature. Defining all human beings in terms of imago Dei provides a very different starting point for the discourse on migration and creates a very different trajectory for the discussion. Imago Dei names the personal and relational nature of human existence and the mystery that human life cannot be understood apart from of the mystery of God.

Lisa Sowle Cahill notes that the image of God is “the primary Christian category or symbol of interpretation of personal value.”21 “[This] symbol,” Mary Catherine Hilkert adds, “grounds further claims to human rights” and “gives rise to justice.”22 One reason why it is better to speak in terms of irregular migration rather than “illegal aliens” is that the word alien is dehumanizing and obfuscates the imago Dei in those who are forcibly uprooted. On the surface it may seem basic to ground a theology of migration on imago Dei, but the term is often ignored in public discourse. Defining the migrant and refugee first and foremost in terms of imago Dei roots such persons in the world very differently than if they are principally defined as social and political problems or as illegal aliens; the theological terms include a set of moral demands as well. Without adequate consideration of the humanity of the migrant, it is impossible to construct just policies ordered to the common good and to the benefit of society’s weakest members. The fact that in our current global economy it is easier for a coffee bean to cross borders than those who cultivate it raises serious questions about how our economy is structured and ordered.

DEPROGRAMMING THE CULT:

Plastic surgeons ditch gender ideology (Benjamin Ryan, 4 Feb 2026, UnHerd)

On Tuesday, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons came out in opposition to providing gender-transition surgeries to minors. The recommendation, the first of its kind from a mainstream medical association, was published in a nine-page policy statement that marks a watershed moment in these debates. It’s part of a broader rethink among many experts, a reminder that science can trump ideology when investigators follow time-tested, evidence-based processes.

THE GREATEST PUNCH LINE IN HUMAN HISTORY?:

Russell Kirk’s Tragic Sense of Life : Far from unthinkingly celebrating an illusory “golden age,” conservatism at its best always recognizes the tragic sense of life. (Miles Smith IV, 2/03/26, Law & Liberty)

Conservatives, Kirk knew, had to live with tragedy more than golden ages, and it was that knowledge of tragedy that made someone truly conservative. MAGA seems too blinded by acquisitiveness and economic neo-mercantilism to be aware that this moment, too, will come to an end, most likely with tragedy rather than a golden age. In the foreword to the seventh edition of his opus The Conservative Mind, Kirk warned that modern humanity, “enslaved by our readily gratified lusts, reduced to fatuity by our own ingenious toys,” ignored to its peril “the mene, mene, tekel, upharsin upon our wall.” Kirk understood that, paradoxically, only a conservatism aware that it too will inevitably fail might stand a chance of lasting through the ages.

Since the American Revolution, conservatives in the United States have embraced the inevitability, or at least probability, of tragedy both in their literature and politics. The nineteenth century golden age of American literature, interestingly enough, was predicated on tragedy. Melville in Moby Dick posited that “all men tragically great are made so through a certain morbidness. Be sure of this, O young ambition, all mortal greatness is but disease.” The very idea of greatness, in Melville’s literary economy, was a disease.

Tragedy and tragic figures, in fact, marked American literature more than golden ages or heroes did. Hester Prynn and Dimsdale, Captain Ahab, Billy Budd, Poe’s Roderick Usher, Kate Chopin’s Edna Pontellier, Edith Wharton’s Lily Bart, Ethan Frome, Jay Gatbsy, Faulkner’s Quintin Compson, Llewelyn Moss of No Country for Old Men, and others inform the American literary psyche and have historically affected how Americans understood their place in the world. Seventeenth century Puritan New Englanders, no strangers to the effect of letters both sacred and secular on their political order, spurred themselves to action by hanging over their heads the fear that they would serve as a tragic lesson in civil and moral disobedience. John Winthrop’s “City on a Hill” did not portray the Massachusetts Bay Colony as a golden city on a hill, prosperous and well, and a beacon to the world’s hopeless, but a Christian commonwealth whose failures would be placed on a pillar for all the world to see. That politics and society might be tragic did not mean that life was not without levity. Mid-twentieth-century science fiction luminary Philip K. Dick quipped that “It really seems to me that in the midst of great tragedy, there is always the horrible possibility that something terribly funny will happen.” American composer Steve Allen smilingly suggested that “humor is tragedy plus time.”

“My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”

THE CULTURE WARS ARE A ROUT:

The Comic Faith of O Brother, Where Art Thou? (Coby Dolloff, 2/02/26, Christ and Pop Culture)

Returning to Everett’s farm, not to find the treasure they sought, but to retrieve his wedding ring, they are met by the bespectacled lawman who has dogged their trail all along. He has prepared nooses, graves—and even a haunting troupe of gravedigging singers.

“But we’s been pardoned! They announced it on the radio!” the three protest. The policeman replies with haunting simplicity: “We don’t have a radio.”

Faced with the impending reality of death, Everett puts up an earnest prayer for salvation. There are no atheists in foxholes.

And, like clockwork, the deus ex-es the machina. Floodwaters come streaming down that engulf both the just and the unjust in a torrent of household furniture and Dapper Dan pomade. Safely afloat a coffin Moby-Dick style, Delmar attempts to point out to Everett that his prayer worked.

But on the other side of peril, Everett is back to rationalizing. The valley was, of course, already scheduled to be flooded by local bureaucrats. It is not God, but modern technology that has saved them. Everett smugly concludes, “Yessir, we’re gonna have us a veritable age of reason.” But then something floats by which leaves both protagonist and viewer with the furrowed brow of recall.

The other cow just dropped. Memory has spoken. It has all come to pass, just as the old prophet Tiresias predicted.

The Coens’ comic masterpiece fits comfortably into the “Christ-haunted American South” of Flannery O’Connor. It muses, alongside Hamlet, “There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy!”

IF IT TASTES LIKE BEEF IT’S BEEF:

AI Translation Triumphs Over Human Translators in Korean Literary Contest (Park Jin-seong, 2026.02.02, Chosun Daily)

Recently, the Literature Translation Institute of Korea under the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism conducted a blind test involving 16 domestic English literature professors. The test compared an English version translated by a professional translator and one translated by ChatGPT for the Joseon-era poet Jang Yu’s poem “Be Cautious When Alone (Shindokjam),” which is set to be exported to English-speaking regions. Without revealing which translation was done by whom, the professors were shown the original Korean text and the two translations and asked which was better. The results showed that 12 professors chose the ChatGPT translation, two selected the human translation, and two declared “undecidable.”

TOUGH BEAT FOR SERIAL KILLERS:

A century of hair samples proves leaded gas ban worked (Jennifer Ouellette – Feb 2, 2026, Ars Technica)

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cracked down on lead-based products—including lead paint and leaded gasoline—in the 1970s because of its toxic effects on human health. Scientists at the University of Utah have analyzed human hair samples spanning nearly 100 years and found a 100-fold decrease in lead concentrations, concluding that this regulatory action was highly effective in achieving its stated objectives. They described their findings in a new paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

BREVITY…:

Covering the Cops: The world of Miami’s top crime reporter. (Calvin Trillin, February 10, 1986, The New Yorker)

In the newsroom of the Miami Herald, there is some disagreement about which of Edna Buchanan’s first paragraphs stands as the classic Edna lead. I line up with the fried-chicken faction. The fried-chicken story was about a rowdy ex-con named Gary Robinson, who late one Sunday night lurched drunkenly into a Church’s outlet, shoved his way to the front of the line, and ordered a three-piece box of fried chicken. Persuaded to wait his turn, he reached the counter again five or ten minutes later, only to be told that Church’s had run out of fried chicken. The young woman at the counter suggested that he might like chicken nuggets instead. Robinson responded to the suggestion by slugging her in the head. That set off a chain of events that ended with Robinson’s being shot dead by a security guard. Edna Buchanan covered the murder for the Herald—there are policemen in Miami who say that it wouldn’t be a murder without her—and her story began with what the fried-chicken faction still regards as the classic Edna lead: “Gary Robinson died hungry.”

All connoisseurs would agree, I think, that the classic Edna lead would have to include one staple of crime reporting—the simple, matter-of-fact statement that registers with a jolt. The question is where the jolt should be. There’s a lot to be said for starting right out with it. I’m rather partial to the Edna lead on a story last year about a woman about to go on trial for a murder conspiracy: “Bad things happen to the husbands of Widow Elkin.” On the other hand, I can understand the preference that others have for the device of beginning a crime story with a more or less conventional sentence or two, then snapping the reader back in his chair with an abbreviated sentence that is used like a blunt instrument. One student of the form at the Herald refers to that device as the Miller Chop. The reference is to Gene Miller, now a Herald editor, who, in a remarkable reporting career that concentrated on the felonious, won the Pulitzer Prize twice for stories that resulted in the release of people in prison for murder. Miller likes short sentences in general—it is sometimes said at the Herald that he writes as if he were paid by the period—and he particularly likes to use a short sentence after a couple of rather long ones. Some years ago, Gene Miller and Edna Buchanan did a story together on the murder of a high-living Miami lawyer who was shot to death on a day he had planned to while away on the golf course of La Gorce Country Club, and the lead said, “. . . he had his golf clubs in the trunk of his Cadillac. Wednesday looked like an easy day. He figured he might pick up a game later with Eddie Arcaro, the jockey. He didn’t.”

These days, Miller sometimes edits the longer pieces that Edna Buchanan does for the Herald, and she often uses the Miller Chop—as in a piece about a lovers’ spat: “The man she loved slapped her face. Furious, she says she told him never, ever to do that again. ‘What are you going to do, kill me?’ he asked, and handed her a gun. ‘Here, kill me,’ he challenged. She did.”

Now that I think of it, that may be the classic Edna lead.

IT’S A PURITAN NATION:

REVIEW: Righteous Strife By Richard Carwardine (Tom Peebles, February 1, 2026, Washington Independent Review of Books)

As a rising political star and presidential candidate in the newly formed Republican Party, Lincoln appeared to entertain a broad and bland view of God as the creative presence behind the universe but not an entity actively involved in human affairs — a perspective at odds with most religious nationalists on both sides. As wartime president, however, his theological perspective took what Carwardine terms a “providentialist turn,” in which he acknowledged a “God who intervened in the life of the nation for his own mysterious purposes.” This shift brought Lincoln ever closer to the “historic Calvinism that colored much of Northern Protestantism,” and thus into broad theological alignment with both anti-slavery and conservative religious nationalists.

But Lincoln’s spiritual metamorphosis was intertwined with his evolution regarding the slavery question. The pre-presidential Lincoln had advocated for the containment of slavery in locations where it already existed. Yet as war president, his anti-slavery convictions deepened. A “more capacious moral framework,” Carwardine argues, led Lincoln to “embrace emancipation…and equality of civic opportunity for both black and white.” As the war progressed, Lincoln’s thinking on these intertwined issues came to align with anti-slavery religious nationalists, although for a remarkably long period, he was able maintain the support of both sides.

Lincoln did not lose substantial support among conservative religious nationalists until, fortified by a series of battlefield successes, he issued the Emancipation Proclamation on New Year’s Day 1863, the “most important presidential edict since the foundation of the republic” in Carwardine’s words.

SOVEREIGNTY REQUIRES SELF-DETERMINATION:

Greenland’s Inuit Have Spent Decades Fighting for Self-DeterminationL While contemporary Greenland encompasses this range of lifestyles, Kalaallit are unified in their desire for self-determination. Greenland’s leaders have delivered this message clearly to the public and to the White House directly. (Susan A. Kaplan and Genevieve LeMoine, 1/30/26, The Conversation)

The U.S. formally recognized Denmark’s claim to the island in 1916 when the Americans purchased the Danish West Indies, which are now the U.S. Virgin Islands. And in 1921, Denmark declared sovereignty over the whole of Greenland, a claim upheld in 1933 by the Permanent Court of International Justice. But Greenlanders were not consulted about these decisions. […]

In a 1979 Greenland-wide referendum, a substantial majority of Kalaallit voters opted for what was called “home rule” within the Danish Kingdom. That meant a parliament of elected Kalaallit representatives handled internal affairs, such as education and social welfare, while Denmark retained control of foreign affairs and mineral rights.

However, the push for full independence from Denmark continued: In 2009, home rule was replaced by a policy of self-government, which outlines a clear path to independence from Denmark, based on negotiations following a potential future referendum vote by Greenlanders. Self-government also allows Greenland to assert and benefit from control over its mineral resources, but not to manage foreign affairs.