Everything is Different

Discussion post for December 6, 2024

In the wake of the 2024 Presidential Election, everything is different. In the US, around the world, and in our own lives, Sarah and Beth discuss how Donald Trump's re-election seems to have shaken things loose for better (and certainly) for worse.

Topics Discussed:

• Killing of United Health Care CEO Brian Thompson

• International News from South Korea, France, Lebanon, and Syria

• Outside of Politics: Errand Brain

Pantsuit Politics Resources:

If you’re shopping for the Pantsuit Politics Listeners in your life, check out our Pantsuit Politics Fan Gift Guide, especially our special book boxes from The Bookshelf on Church!

• To search past episodes of the main show or our Premium content, check out our content archive.

• Want more Pantsuit Politics? Subscribe to ensure you never miss an episode and get access to our premium shows and community.

This podcast and every episode of it are wholly owned by Pantsuit Politics LLC and are protected by US and international copyright, trademark, and other intellectual property laws. We hope you'll listen to it, love it, and share it with other people, but not with large language models or machines and not for commercial purposes. Thanks for keeping it nuanced with us.

Episode Resources:

Killing of United Healthcare CEO

• UnitedHealthcare CEO Shooting Live Updates: Police Release Photos of Suspect in Killing of Brian Thompson (The New York Times)

International News

• South Korea's Yoon faces impeachment after martial law debacle (Reuters)

• French government collapses after no-confidence vote in PM Michel Barnier (BBC)

• More to Say About France's Government of Losers (Pantsuit Politics Premium)

• North Korean soldiers' hooked on porn instead of fighting in Ukraine? Surprising impact of unfettered internet access (The Economic Times)

• US can’t confirm Putin’s North Koreans are ‘gorging on pornography’ (Politico Europe)

• Who are the Syrian Democratic Forces? (The Economist)

Episode Transcript

Sarah [00:00:07] This is Sarah Stewart Holland.

Beth [00:00:09] This is Beth Silvers.

Sarah [00:00:10] You're listening to Pantsuit Politics.

Beth [00:00:12] Where we take a different approach to the news.

[00:00:14] Music Interlude.

Sarah [00:00:29] Hello, thank you for joining us today. We had planned to have a more in-depth, expansive conversation about the Middle East today after a surprise resurgence of violence and the Syrian civil war. However, there were several shocking events in the U.S. and around the world that we could not ignore. And so today we're going to be talking about the murder of United Health Care CEO Bryan Thompson on the streets of New York City; the collapse of France's government; the coup in South Korea and the violence in Syria. All of which are feeding the sense that we have and that we know all of you are feeling that everything is different now. And Outside of Politics, we're going to talk about what Beth has termed errand brain.

Beth [00:01:11] While we have those conversations, we want to remind you that we have a Pantsuit Politics fan gift guide. One thing I want to highlight on that gift guide is that our independent bookstore partner, Lisa McLoughlin, has put together a book box with our two books. I think You're Wrong, But I'm Listening. And Now What? How to Move Forward When We're Divided About Basically Everything, along with some little treats. Lisa is very good at little treats. She's a wonderful partner to us and has put a lot of care into this box. So if you would like to give our books to yourself or someone you love, this is a great way to do it. And you'll see all the information in that gift guide, which you'll see linked in our show notes.

Sarah [00:01:45] Next up, we're going to talk about the horrifying death of Brian Thompson. Beth, I said to you and Maggie before we started recording that I anticipate a capture of the person who shot Brian Thompson on the streets of New York City before we record another episode. I think they're getting closer and closer all the time. They have identified a photo of the shooter's face. They have identified his backpack. There's lots of surveillance video. It feels like about every 30, 45 minutes, another detail comes out that adds in some sort of identifying characteristic to the person who shot Brian Thompson early on Wednesday morning.

Beth [00:02:38] I think that's right. This is so hard because we're going to have this conversation and all along you have to have awareness that this is a real person who has a family and has friends and has colleagues and a community. And so much of the conversation about his death is less about that man and more about the symbol. We have chilling details that tell us that he was shot as a symbol, not just as a man. Instantly we all figured that was the case. Instantly you hear the CEO of United Health Care has been shot and you don't even have to think about what the motive might have been because there is such personal, deep anger and sadness and grief about the state of the insurance industry right now. And I just want to make sure to keep holding both of those things that there is the symbolism and there's a very real conversation to have about that; alongside the fact that this is a real person with a real family and people who interact with them for whom it is not symbolic at all. It is just tragic. So I hope that we can do that as well as as it can be done in this conversation.

Sarah [00:03:58] Yeah, the word I keep thinking about and really a word I'm probably going to use a lot in this episode as we talk about a lot of very different events is unleashed. It just feels like post-election a lot of energy and strife and anger has been unleashed. You would think that in such a contentious election environment, we would have unleashed all the anger and frustration. And that's what's so weirdly fascinating to me about the way that this particular very violent act has unleashed a lot of ire towards the industry, is that we just had a long conversation in America about what we're unhappy about in America. And health care was just not high up on the list. It wasn't something that was occupying either candidate. It wasn't something that came out a lot in debates or in advertising. Even though in my life I'm unhappy with the health care industry and the cost of health care in America. And so that's what so, like I said, just leaves me in such a place of curiosity and confusion. It's why, if everyone is so furious, that the murder of someone gets met with a 'well why weren't we talking about this during the election'?

Beth [00:05:34] That is the very question that motivated me to start a series on More to Say, our premium show about prescription drugs. Because I kept thinking about all the grocery store conversation during the election. And the truth is I also wish that groceries were less expensive. But I'm not upset with what I have bought once I've paid for them. I still am getting eggs and they still are delicious and I am still getting bread and it still tastes good.

Sarah [00:06:07] You're not consumed with shrinkflation? Because people are consumed with Shrinkflation.

Beth [00:06:12] Yes, but it's because I like the chip and want more of the chips.

Sarah [00:06:17] Okay. Fair.

Beth [00:06:18] Do you see what I'm saying.

Sarah [00:06:18] I see what you're saying.

Beth [00:06:20] I don't feel that about healthcare.

Sarah [00:06:21] Yep.

Beth [00:06:22] With health care, it's hard to even know where to start. I don't like the price. I don't like the access. I don't like what I've gotten once I've gotten it most of the time. I don't like all of the systems I have to interact with in the process, so I largely avoid it but I don't like that result either. So it's just, I think, easier to talk about the groceries than to talk about the massive state of what's going on with health care.

Sarah [00:06:53] Now, wait a second, though. We pivoted a little bit because there was a lot of conversation in the presidential election about health.

Beth [00:07:03] That's true.

Sarah [00:07:03] I think even true about health care as manifested by Make America Healthy Again and Robert Kennedy and the conversation about vaccines and chemicals and chronic illness. But what I mean is there wasn't a conversation about health insurance. I didn't hear anybody talking about the denial rate of United Health Care during the presidential election. That's what's interesting to me. It's not like people were concerned about the lack of an offering from the Trump campaign about a resolution evolution or new invention of health care or the health care industry. He got by with just saying, "I saved Obamacare," which is not true. And so where was that? If people are so angry that someone is inscribing denial on a bullet casing and shooting a corporate executive in the back, then where was that ire at the health care insurance industry. And maybe the bigness is still the issue, right?

Beth [00:08:17] And the opacity.

Sarah [00:08:18] Where should we get mad first? Are we getting mad at pharmacy benefit managers? Are we getting mad at the lack of reproductive health care across the country, particularly in rural areas? Are we getting mad at the pharmaceutical industry even though you have a historic interest in semaglutides and people are getting mad that their state insurers are denying their coverage for those like. I don't know. Maybe that's it. Maybe the anger is so big and so deep and so wide. Where would we even begin to dive in? And an event like this it gives people a focused point to say here's something I'm big and mad at in the midst of this giant ocean of fury.

Beth [00:09:07] I wonder if it is also related to the fact that we have had a lot of health insurance conversation in the previous elections and we maybe are losing faith that it's fixable.

Sarah [00:09:17] Yeah, that's what I'm worried about.

Beth [00:09:19] I'm worried about that. I also think on some level insurance as a proposition just doesn't work anymore. If you think about health insurance specifically as a subcategory of insurance as a model, insurance has typically historically been you pay a certain amount in case something catastrophic happens and the plan is going to pay out for the catastrophic thing. But that is not what our health care is anymore. For a long time our health care has largely been driven by chronic conditions. It's not a one-time catastrophe that you pay out in the near done. It's a catastrophic level of spending for an undetermined number of years. And even that's shifting now because what we're all saying is I don't want to just be sick and have medicine to make me a little bit better or to keep me stable. I want to not be sick. And technology is coming along and saying maybe we got some solutions on how you cannot be sick, but those are really expensive, too.

[00:10:27] And so we got this whole model that is designed for a completely different reality than we're walking through. And if you're the United Health Care executive, you're still supposed to be principally churning financial instruments that have a benefit to the people who run the business that create the financial instruments. But that entire reality has changed. And so it doesn't work on the business side, and it definitely doesn't work on the patient side. And all of these providers are in the middle saying none of this works for us either FYI. We feel this tension every second of every day and it doesn't work for us. And I feel like the complexity of that problem and the depth of it and the emotion of it, maybe we have just lost confidence that anyone has a solution. And at the same time, a whole lot of people are employed in insurance and also don't want to hear my life's work doesn't work anymore. What does that mean for me?

Sarah [00:11:27] I'm ready for Medicare for All, personally. That was the first thing I wrote on my list post-election of here's where I want Democrats to just be big and bold and say this isn't working. Everybody wants change? Let's do it. It still blows my mind that so many people say I hate the health insurance industry, but I like my policy. Do you? And then you dig a little deeper and it's like I like my policy if I've never actually had to use it. And so I think that there's just this real psychological thing that happens. And, look, I understand that even Medicare for All and the idea of government run health care. And it's easy to say, we're the only country that doesn't have it, but it's got issues, too. The reporting around Britain's national health care is prolific at this point of the problems. And so I'm not saying that's an easy solution, but I'm just saying I want a bold solution.

[00:12:30] I want people to advocate for a bold solution on a grand scale, because I am worried that we've got mired in this place of it's not fixable, which creates fertile ground for someone to come along and present fake solutions, which is what I believe Robert Kennedy and Make America Healthy Again largely does. It's this very individualized we can help you out of this bad system where people want to keep you sick and make money off of you, but we're just going to formulate an escape. We're not actually going to reform the system that got you here, which is my problem. Because I think there's still a lot of money being made inside that system.

Beth [00:13:15] Well, two things that came to mind for me listening to you there, I think about the people who like their plans, that there are some people who do like their plans because there are some things that our health care system does well. I take a statin for cholesterol. I think it's a miracle that I can take something and prevent or at least mitigate the likelihood of a life ending event in such a simple way. It's cheap. My plan covers most of it. I pay like $7. I'm totally fine with that. So I think if you have an issue that the health care system has managed to meet in a pretty decent way and you constantly have an awareness of how much worse it could be, maybe that does come out in the wash as this works for me. And I get that. Kind of the same way people say they don't like public education, but they like their school. Because you get into a rhythm where some things are done well, it's not all terrible and it works for you well enough and you know how much worse it could be and so all of that cycles together as this is fine.

[00:14:19] Where I struggle with Medicare for All, and I have really tried to open my mind to things that I previously would have just said absolutely not to. Where I struggle with that is that I keep coming back to the idea that so many of our challenges is not a strong enough word. So many of the places where we are as a society, just like groaning because things aren't working for us, are around things that have gotten so big. And Medicare for All, to me is, I think, unquestionable-- and there's a benefit in this, too, but it's unquestionably saying let's take a big thing and make it even bigger. Let's scale something up that is already huge in terms of the number of people it serves, in terms of the impact that it has on the overall system, in terms of the percentage of our budget that it is as a nation. And that's where I struggle to see how it could be better.

Sarah [00:15:15] Well, I just wonder if the bigness is the issue or if the market failure is the issue.

Beth [00:15:19] Yes. That's fair.

Sarah [00:15:19] Is the issue that is too big or is it like day care that we're just trying to make money at something we shouldn't try to make money at? Because it gets big. Because we got to keep making more and more money. It's something that's hard to make money at because it's a market for your health. I think that that's always the part of the stupid Michael Moore documentary from a million years ago I think about all the time. Is this where we should be making money? Is this a thing that people should be making lots and lots of money at? Because that's where you get the rage. That's where you get people online not feeling an ounce of guilt and being completely disconnected from the fact that this is a real man who was gunned down, who has children, is because the profit model is an invitation to dehumanize because it is dehumanizing on the other side. So if you're going to dehumanize me to make a profit, then I'm not going to feel bad about dehumanizing you when some of that blows back. I think that's where people are at. And I'm not saying it's ethical, moral or right. I'm just saying they feel dehumanized by the system. And so they are more than happy to dehumanize those that benefit from said system.

Beth [00:16:33] I think that there is so much truth in that. I don't know how to reconcile that truth with how we actually make decisions in our lives, though. If there were not so much money in the system, how do you get people to be doctors? That's a hard life. We ask doctors to make decisions to perform in ways that have these enormous consequences. I say all the time I'm not doing surgery today so I can let this go or I can change this or I can whatever. I think those professions are so demanding. And you hear people say I will do it in the long haul because the money is going to be good on the other side. That is also an extremely human instinct. How do we get people to do it if we start to change the incentives? How do we get people to go through the drug trial process? I think that's why so much research comes out of government and academic institutions, because it costs so much to scale it up that the companies don't want to take that on until the very end when they've got like a good proposition in the works. So I both agree with you that the money is the problem. And I also don't know how to take the money out of it.

Sarah [00:17:54] Well, I think people around the world are doctors in terrible, poorly reimbursed situations and were before our health insurance industry and our health care industry existed in the form that we currently exist. We just had a conversation on our spicy More to Say where we were talking about people want purpose. They want to feel like they can work hard and dedicate their lives to something worthwhile. And for lots of people, that isn't driven by money. There are lots of people who are not money motivated in life. I think about ministers. That's not a well-paid position and it is demanding-- not in the way that someone's life is on the line and literally in your hands as a surgeon. But I would be interested to watch the stress levels on some sort of metric play out among school principals or surgeons or ministers.

[00:18:48] I bet the variance wouldn't be that wide. You know what I mean? And I think people want to follow their purpose. I think they want to follow their passion and what they're good at. I kind of believe people would do that. I don't think they want to work for free, but I think that the level of financial incentives-- I mean, I think some doctors right now it's not even worth it. They're making tons of money and they're still like this ain't working and I'm miserable. People are leaving red states where they're one of the few sort of rare OB-GYN and specialists. I bet they're making big, big dollars and they're still like, peace, I don't want a part of this.

Beth [00:19:27] So maybe this gets back to why it's hard to talk about, because I think the conclusion then is people would still do it but we got to reform higher education so that they don't have to go into extreme debt to be able to do it if they're not going to make that kind of money on the other side. And we need lots of more people to do it probably because they also shouldn't be working for the hours that they work, which are unsustainable and lead to burnout and error and result from profit pressure. But that's the thing, right? We're never just talking about one system. There are so many systems at cross-purposes here. And how do you start to dig into those and move the pieces knowing that, again, a lot of people rely on the pieces being exactly as they are for their livelihoods right now. And a lot of laws and government programs are built around the status quo of these systems.

Sarah [00:20:26] Well, let's talk about some other areas around the world where the status quo was tremendously tested this week.

[00:20:34] Music Interlude.

[00:20:44] When we were prepping for an episode on foreign policy, I did not expect to see a coup in South Korea on our list of things to discuss. But here we are. The President Yoon Suk Yeol who is described as a lame duck, pretty politically isolated and unpopular, on Tuesday declared martial law. I heard an expert describe it as basically making democracy illegal. There was supposed to be no political protest, no legislative gatherings. And the people of South Korea said, not so fast. Not on our watch. They filled the streets. Somehow legislators got into the assembly and voted to end the martial law. And so he withdrew it like, what, five, six hours later and is now even further politically isolated and under the threat of impeachment. A very wild 24 hours in South Korea.

Beth [00:21:57] And I think it will continue to be wild in the fallout of this as they try to figure out was this treasonous? Was it just politically unwieldy and he cannot continue to be in power? Where does this go from here? There's a piece from Reuters that we'll link that has a chart of possible outcomes for him. I am so touched by the image and notion of legislators climbing walls to go back into session and protect their democracy. And the swiftness and resolve of people in opposition to this. And I keep thinking about how maybe you value your democracy more when you are just across a line from a place where this is the status quo. But I really hope that we take a lot of lessons from what we just saw unfold in South Korea here in the United States. Because I think there was a ton of bravery in the face of a genuine threat that if you look across the world could have been successful, could have been popular even.

Sarah [00:23:08] I understand after the re-election of Donald Trump, it is hard to take positive examples from January 6th. But I continue to hold tightly the fact that so many members of our Congress said, no, we will go back. We will go back now and certify these results after the events of January 6th. Even lawmakers who I really wish had followed that reasoning and impeached Donald Trump so he couldn't run again. I don't take lightly that they went back into a very scary situation where their personal safety was threatened and said, we will continue the responsibility of our public service. I do think that there is a sense of threat when it's unleashed like that and a possibility that felt impossible is staring you in the face. That motivates people's better angels. And the sense of unleashing that we keep talking about will motivate people in all kinds of ways. We had a conversation of why should it matter to us in America that this is happening?

[00:24:16] Why are we talking about South Korea or France or Syria? That's because as different as we all are, as different as our countries are, there's still humanity, there are still lights to be shone both on the good and bad motivations of people and what they will do. I'm not going to lie and say I'm not unhappy that Donald Trump saw this play out the way it did, that he saw a politically isolated, unpopular president try to pull a stunt like this and get completely shut down. I'm not saying he's a quick learner, but I do think there's a lesson here. I think it's worth paying attention to as different as we are from South Korea. They're still a close ally. It's still relevant. It's certainly relevant that we had no awareness that this was going to happen. And so I think it's worth paying attention to.

Beth [00:25:13] So when you talk about the different ways that frustration with the status quo is going to manifest, we have a completely different example in France because France has the no confidence vote. I think about this a lot because the UK, they love a no confidence vote. Since Brexit, they're just no confidencing (sic) all the time. And I've wondered, would that be valuable to us in the United States to have a mechanism to express frustration like that? Or would we just do it all the time and never get anything else done?

Sarah [00:25:45] Isn't that what we use government funding for these days? Isn't that our American version of a no confidence vote?

Beth [00:25:49] That's a good point. Maybe so. I like that in France they had this no confidence vote in the middle of a budget process. But the French constitution prevents the kind of shutdown that is on the line for us in the United States in those fights.

Sarah [00:26:03] Yeah, they have like a caretaker government that will come in and was in before Barnier. So if you didn't follow this closely, again, understandable, especially because it happened in the middle of the self coup in South Korea. But Michael Barnier, who was the Brexit negotiator from France, who Macron picked to lead the very, very divided government that came from the snap elections he called, said, listen, we have got to do something about this deficit. We are in deep trouble. We are violating the rules set forth in the European Union for us as a country with regards to our deficit spending. And he knew he didn't have the votes. So he used a procedure to get it through. People didn't like it. And so they called a no confidence vote. He's already resigned.

[00:26:50] They're back to needing a president. They're back to being in the middle of a budgetary crisis that the liberals in France want to solve by dropping the retirement age back down. Friends, what are we doing? And, to me, this is wildly relevant because we are also in the middle of a deficit and a huge problem with regards to spending that we're going to need to make some very difficult, politically unpopular decisions around. Perhaps Elon and Vivek will lead us down that path, but I am skeptical. And just this refusal of the populace to accept the difficult financial situation the country is facing; this leaves me a little concerned.

Beth [00:27:36] And, look, what can we say about that here? We have the same problems. I think that's why I'm concerned. We're just even less interested in addressing them. I can't wait to read the Macron bios and watch the movies about him because I think he really presents a question about what Democratic leadership means. So, again, if you didn't follow this, it is significant to know that in the elections for the legislative seats in France, leftist parties took more seats by a simple majority but were unable in the parliamentary system to form a government. And so you had parties that performed poorly in the elections coming together to form kind of a center right government. And it's hard to use right and left the same way we use them in the United States here. So this is all very rough. But you can imagine in America if in January the Republicans were so fractured that they couldn't elect a speaker (we got real close to that before) and a few centrists work with Democrats to install a Democratic speaker.

[00:28:44] And you can imagine that if Donald Trump ran on all the things that he ran on and that Democratic speaker took the country in a completely different direction than what seemed to be expressed in those legislative elections. And that's what's happening here. And it's happening because Macron has had what I think is the political bravery to say to the country, here's the reality whether you want to accept it or not. I don't care if it's unpopular, I'm going to address it. But how democratic is that? I don't know. And I think these are enormous questions that he is serving as the avatar for. And it's hard to know where France goes from here, but I also really respect that Macron is like, okay, I'll just appoint somebody new before Saturday. He may have appointed someone by the time you hear this episode. And I will serve until the very last second of my term is over as the president because this doesn't affect my eligibility. And I hear your no confidence and I continue anyway because of what I believe is the right thing to do.

Sarah [00:29:46] Yeah. The France [inaudible] are just really stubborn. I love them so much. And so are we. And I don't know the answer to the question of what do you do when the problem in particularly solving the problem is very unpopular. I think you could look a lot to the presidency of FDR if you'd like some examples in historical analogies. But, again, that's political capital fueled by some really big crisis. So I think that's what's hard. It's oftentimes you have to take your moment when things happen. That's my concern with the Donald Trump administration. I think that lots of things are going to be unleashed around here and around the world that will present an opportunity to solve America's problems, some of its biggest problems. I think September 11th presented that opportunity and it was completely and totally wasted. And I don't have confidence that the Trump administration will use those opportunities to really solve some of these big problems that require unpopular decisions. Again, may Elon and Vivek prove me wrong. But I'm a little worried.

Beth [00:31:05] I am also worried about this administration's capacity to hold all of the responsibilities that simultaneously exist for an administration. We were surprised by a coup in South Korea. It would have been less surprising to me if we had had that story out of North Korea, because you and I have talked a little bit about what it means that North Korean troops have been sent to Ukraine. North Korea has so isolated itself in the world and there are reports about those soldiers getting Internet access.

Sarah [00:31:41] And all that comes with it.

Beth [00:31:42] And all that comes with it. And so when you expose people who have been so insulated to pornography on the Internet--

Sarah [00:31:51] That's what we were talking about with all that comes with it. It's that's they're looking at a lot of porn. It's the reporting.

Beth [00:31:56] It's the pornography. That is going to change the dynamic within that country in ways that I doubt Kim Jong Un anticipated. You move one thing and it moves everything. I think the country here feels that a little bit about the Afghanistan withdrawal. It wasn't just that we wanted our people to come home. We wanted them to come home and for that country to remain stable and not have the Taliban retake power and not have women's rights go back a century. But that is what happened. You move one piece and everything moves. And the board in the Middle East, to put it in a crude way, is in such a state of flux post October 7th. And you're seeing that play out right now in Syria.

Sarah [00:32:42] Well, I think the connective thread there is the fragility of authoritarian governments. They're just very fragile. Just because Assad, the leader of Syria, had established some sort of stalemate inside the civil war where you have forces supported by Turkey and you have Kurdish forces. And if you are not aware, Kurds and the government of Turkey are enemies. And so you had this sort of stalemate for several years, but there is no stasis with a fragile authoritarian government. And they are always fragile, in my personal opinion. And so when the authoritarian governments that were backing up Assad, Russia, Iran, Hezbollah were taxed in other ways, distracted in other ways, well then outside players particularly the rebel force supported by Turkey, which is the Islamist group Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham, or HTS, they're going to take their moment. Which is exactly what they did; they took their moment. There are reports that it's been planned for a while.

[00:33:57] These rebel forces surged through Aleppo and other cities throughout Syria, and now the Assad regime is on its heels. There are reports that in several places the line just fell. There was no even fighting the rebel forces. They just backed away. And Assad is on his heels without the support beyond cursory that's coming from Russia and Iran. Because Iran is one of the things that has been fundamentally upended since the October 7th attacks in Israel. Much less Hezbollah, which is now in a very tenuous cease fire with Israel itself. Even the influx from Lebanon into Syria because of the attacks from Israel. Everything is different. All these different groups, be they Islamist groups, be they authoritarian regimes, be they the more stable players like Egypt in the region, everything is different. You get that many people moving around the region; you get that many people killed; you get that risk of famine that is currently so terrible in both Sudan and inside Gaza; that is an energetic force field that ripples out through everything. And I think this upending of the situation in Syria is just one reflection of that.

Beth [00:35:25] It's hard to even keep all of the players organized when you talk about Syria in particular, because so many different motivations are brought to this conflict. When you talk about the Kurds, that is a group of people who share an ethnicity. That is a nation with no state. That has been the central issue for the Kurds for a long time. They are a nation with no state. You have a group like Hezbollah. That is a terrorist organization and a political party and mostly the government of Lebanon and a proxy for the Iranian government. So nothing is simple here. Even when you talk about Syria, if you've just followed the headlines over the years, you know Assad's bad. Assad chemical weapons used against his own people, the displacement of millions of people throughout the region. All true. But HTC is designated a terrorist organization by the United States. It's unclear that the rebels would treat the populace any better. I heard an NBC News analysis say that HTC is still an authoritarian Islamist militia, but they are better than ISIS towards ethnic and [crosstalk] minorities.

Sarah [00:36:45] What a bargain.

Beth [00:36:46] Right. What a bargain. And that situation in Syria the Syrian government is being supported by the Iraqi government right now because it was sort of stable. Like 13 years of civil war had met some kind of stability. It had come to some sort of place where everybody at least understood the dynamics. And so now there's an interest in preserving those dynamics, even though the situation is horrific. I've been wondering about this, Sarah. I have been thinking a lot that in modern war there are only wars of attrition. That it's impossible to win a modern war in some ways. It's just who runs out of resources or the will to keep going. And you're always bringing such a deep historical perspective to things. I wonder if that's just always been true or if we have really reached a point where the tools of war are different, that you could have true military victories in the past that weren't just about attrition in some way. I'm curious about your perspective on that.

Sarah [00:37:50] Well, you definitely heard what was the 100-year war. You heard decades and decades where it was mostly the French and the British just hating each other. With a broad brush, please don't email me. I understand it's more complicated than that. I do think that with both World wars, there was an understanding that we would end attrition and find some sort of stasis. But I don't know if that was ever really what we found. I think all the time about the United Nations lady who said the goal is not justice but peace. And I do think that we entered a new era of human conflict post-World War Two, even at the end of a gun. I do believe that and I think the change in the human lived experience around the globe is reflective of that. And the dramatic drop in child poverty and the rise in people's income and the globalization of it all, I do think that there was a change. And I don't know if we're just in a turning back to a more isolationist harder way to live as a global population. I don't know that. That's a hard thing to see when you're in the midst of it. What I do want to say, though, we had a conversation with Kerry Anderson. Many of you all know her. She's sort of our Pantsuit Politics Middle East expert. And we get into really in-depth conversation with her. We're going to put that on Substack for those of you who really want to dig in to the Hezbollah and the Kurd and the details of it all.

[00:39:46] But I want to say, I don't think you need to understand any of that. I think it is perfectly normal to pay attention to the world and be confused about 40% of the time and it's still a worthwhile endeavor. Let me confess that that is my situation. I can't hold all this all the time. I can't hold all of world history, the players on the global scene and the complexities and the detail of which they are required all the time. I don't feel like I need to or have to because I think there's something about knowing enough to know you don't know. That is very valuable as both a United States citizen and a global citizen, so that when you encounter someone in a conversation who's trying to tell you how things are, you know enough to go, "That's not true. That's not accurate." The way you're saying this is how it's going to be with China; this is how it's going to be with Russia; this is what's going to happen; if you pay enough attention, you can at least smell the bullshit inside these conversations when people are trying to intimidate or obfuscate or just assert their own egos.

[00:40:59] You know what I mean? That's what's valuable to me. I still have to sort out the sectarianism of it all. I have to remind myself every time who's a Shia and who is a Sunni. Let me just confess that here for all the Internet to hear. Because it's not my lived experience and that's okay, because I do know enough and I pay attention enough to know when I'm being bullshited. And that's important as not just a global citizen, but particularly as an American citizen as we're entering this new phase of isolationism and nationalism. Enough to know that we're not that special and enough to know where we are special and it matters. Enough to know that these are the risks and this is how it plays out in country after country. And we should be eyes wide open to that. And that to me is really important.

Beth [00:41:47] I'm obviously the same. I'm not an expert and I don't think about foreign policy every single day. And I have to go back to school every time one of these headlines comes up. I built that school a little bit for myself and have a place to start, but I have to go back to school every single time. I agree with you about being able to reject simplistic explanations because I know enough to know that there's always more to the story, at least. Even if I think someone's telling me something that's true, I know it's incomplete.

Sarah [00:42:20] Some might say there's more to say, Beth.

Beth [00:42:22] Some might say that. I probably would. And then the other thing that's really valuable to me, and I totally agree with you about holding on to this, especially as we enter what we know is going to be a very contentious period for us as Americans, is that once I have gotten into a conflict like this it is fast to get to, well, they're Sunni, but they're Sunni, too. They just view these principles of Islam differently or they have different objectives. It's actually not really about the religion this time. It's about this particular piece of land or about who they think should enforce those principles. It just reminds me that all labels are incomplete and that people align with other groups for so many different motivations. And that what people are willing to fight over often makes no sense to me at all, and that's really important for me to remember. As I look at people who find Donald Trump appealing, I have to remember they don't do it for one reason, and they do it for reasons that are compelling to them and not to me.

[00:43:34] And I find leaders appealing that they can't understand at all. And that's as true of us here as it is of everyone all over the globe. And that keeps me from going down that spiral of, well, American politics is broken. We can't do democracy anymore. I need to move somewhere else. Move where? If you study the history or and present of any country and you'll get to something that is really hard and that divides people deeply and that some people are willing to fight over. So it kind of keeps me weirdly optimistic to plunge into these situations that are incredibly depressing and horrific in many ways, because it just reminds me that we are still people who have the power to create our own stories, just as people all over the world are doing that.

[00:44:22] Music Interlude.

Sarah [00:44:32] Bet, tell the people what errand brain means.

Beth [00:44:35] I have been trying to do more errands for my household. That is something that Chad does a lot of, and so I'm trying to run more errands. I would like to say that I'm doing that to help Chad more. It is really for my own mental health because I sit in front of a screen a lot. I'm in our house all the time because I work from home, too. And I just am finding myself with cabin fever constantly, especially as it's getting colder. So I want to be out doing more things. So I'm running more errands. And what I am noticing as I'm out running errands is that my head feels physically different when I am out running errands. I just spend so much of my time (and I think some of this may relate to working from home) that when I'm in my house there is a part of me that's always at work still.

[00:45:28] Even when I'm cooking dinner I'm thinking about what we said when we recorded today and what I wish I had said. I should have said this or I need to read this thing for the next conversation or whatever. I am so focused in such a laser like way. When I'm talking to my kids, I am so focused on them in a laser like way. When I'm in the shower, I'm always like thumbing through some kind of problem, trying to sort things out. But when I'm running errands, it is like a breeze has blown through my brain because I know I'm accomplishing something and I know that that's all I can accomplish right now. I cannot multitask. I can just drive to the post office and wait in line and have a pleasant conversation with the person who works there and then check that off my list. And it really clears out that intensity that I feel all the time. So I'm embracing errand brain. That's where I am right now.

Sarah [00:46:25] That's really funny. I love to run errands because I love to accomplish small tasks and mark them off. And I really like the puzzle of how many can I fit in? How can I make this the most efficient errand run so that I'm hitting all the places on the side of town in the right amount of time and the little breaks I find, whatever. But there's still like a laser like focus for me because I am trying to usually get it done very quickly. So I think probably what you describe is how I feel when I'm traveling because it's more expansive. There is something about my house, even though I love it and I'm in it all the time, that is heavy. That's why when I gave birth I went to my mother's house and stayed there for a few weeks because it's just so easy to relax the part of your brain that's managing the household. But even when I'm out running errands, I'm still thinking through those like should I pick this up? Will this help this problem at the house? Blah, blah, blah.

[00:47:22] And so the only time I really get away from that is when I'm traveling and I'm just in a new place. I'm going back to hotel room. I'm not trying to maximize or figure out a process to fix or whatever. I'm just present there not being productive. I know what you're talking about. My brain just feels more expansive and just freer. Freedom is the only way I can kind of describe it. I just feel free of the quotidian tightness I feel in my everyday life. That's why I think I like Christmas. Christmas feels different to me. Even though there's so much to get done, in a way it just hits different when there's twinkle lights everywhere. I don't know. There are certain seasons that kind of ebbs and flows for me. But I'm just too much of an errand machine. I think that really some of that enjoy the process of the errands.

Beth [00:48:26] Well, I really like your phrase quotidian tightness. I'm going to hold on to that. I think that it's interesting to hear you say that you are seeking efficiency around errands, because I think that what creates this feeling for me is that I view errands as almost entirely inefficient, like necessarily inefficient. Because almost everything I run an errand for could probably be accomplished at home. Like I could avoid the post office by getting one of the many services that allow you to just do your own postage and packaging and whatever at home. And I'm returning an item that I could send back through the mail. It's like I'm opting into inefficiency through the errand. And I just have embraced that and I'm going out and doing it. And honestly, I do the opposite. Sometimes I'll think, well, I could drive from here to there or I could drive here and then go get a beverage and then drive there. I'm taking that time.

Sarah [00:49:29] I think that you're hitting upon while your husband was doing the errands and why many people are like, no, I'll do it. I'll go do it. Well, because there's also a freedom from kids, which is like an undercurrent of all this. I'm not running errands with my kids. I'm running errands by myself. Listen, I don't want to invite you all into my brain. It's a really intense place because I get into the like, yeah, but the shipping of it is too-- I shouldn't be shipping it back. I should get to the efficiency of taking it to Kohl's so they can ship it together. And also I just live in a small town where everything is close enough, but close enough in such a way I could pick very many different ways to put these errands. There's always a puzzle aspect to it because everything-- you know what I mean? I don't live in a true spread out suburbia. I live in a town where there's enough of everything and everything is close enough together. I could pick about five different ways to put these errands together in a way that is just always a puzzle. Not great for my brain or great for my brain. Who knows? Maybe this is just adding gears to my brain capacity. I don't know.

Beth [00:50:35] I hope it is for you. I think it is adding to my life to have this inefficiency, though. And I don't begrudge to have that. I don't mind that he is like, I'll go do it. And often I think he likes to go charge his car at the supercharger at Meyer. And I get it. I'm kind of just giving permission to myself to need and want that, too.

Sarah [00:50:56] That's it. That's the freedom. It's the permission to be a little free. Because, look, I believe you said that someone on Facebook was asking about positive masculine traits.

Beth [00:51:09] Yes. In the Pantsuit Politics gathering place. Really interesting conversation there.

Sarah [00:51:13] And that is it. This is what Jennifer Senior named in All Joy and No fun that I never stopped thinking about. We think men should rise to the standards that women put on themselves. And we've got it all backwards. It's not weaponized incompetence. Maybe it is the true level of which we should expect things from ourselves. Maybe we should just all give ourselves a break in a way, right? Maybe we should embrace that I don't owe all my time to efficiency or the family or relationships every day, every moment of every day. Maybe there is room for-- I hate to use the word selfishness because I really don't think that's what men are fundamentally. But I do think there is this sense that I get from the men in my life that I don't owe you every minute of every day. I don't owe it to the family. I don't owe it to this relationship. I don't owe it to the people that love me. I can take time for myself. That's okay. And I think that that is a very positive trait that men hold.

Beth [00:52:24] So I popped into this conversation in the gathering place because I thought it was so interesting. And the phrase that I used that I think is exactly what you're saying, is that I feel like Chad, at least the man I study most, does not deal with banal guilt.

Sarah [00:52:43] Yeah.

Beth [00:52:45] And a lot of what I deal with in terms of energy and time is just banal guilt, like silly thinking I owe everyone everything all the time. And errands released that for me completely. Because I am doing something. I am doing something, but I am doing it on my own terms.

Sarah [00:53:05] Well, and that's it. I'm reading Boy Mom right now by Ruth Whippman and she's really struggling with is it that boys are this way? Or is it that we've socialized girls to carry all of this relationship burden and that's why they feel this banal guilt all the time? I think that's a great way to put it. And don't we just need to teach boys to carry some of these so girls don't carry all of it? And, yes, but I don't think some of the ways that my boys-- and not just my husband, I got lots of boys. I got lots of men I can study. The way they just go, I don't care, I don't think it's all socialized and I don't think it's all on a road to loneliness and detachment. I think we can learn from them in the same way that they can learn from us. I think there is some positive feminine traits with regards to the cultivating of friendship and attachment that can be gained by the male population. And I think that there is some real positivity that can be gained from the releasing of some of that pressure that I think it's not socialized into men. I see it with my boys. I don't think they were taught that. I think there is just a sense of why are you freaking out about this? It's not that big of a deal. That's fine. That we could all use some of.

Beth [00:54:27] There was discussion in this thread about that socialized element and a lot of people saying none of this is real. Gender is a construct. The things that we've been talking about for years as a society. And I don't think any of that is necessarily wrong. Is it innate in them or socialized if for generations people have been this way and so it's encoded into our DNA? I don't know. Money is not real either, but it drives pretty much everything. So I can just sort of set aside some of that and get right with these are things that my husband and a lot of men just do better than I do naturally. And so what can I take from that? And I find some relief in that as we are dealing with the gender elections and all of these discussions. Because I do desire that physical feeling of errand brain more in my life, and I've not had it. I don't think ever. I don't think as a kid I had the relief that I feel from errand brain now.

[00:55:35] I have been so intensely focused always. And I have felt that I owe my absolute best to everyone, everywhere, always. And so as I think about this massive struggle we're having about gender right now and I'm listening to other women say like that young woman in the viral video that we keep going back to, I just want to have a baby on one hip and a baby in my arms and not have to worry about all this shit. I think, well, I definitely don't want that. But I do want some of that freedom of just true recreation or just being out in the world and knowing that everybody else can take care of themselves. I do want some of that. And I think that tight focus that you get when you are career oriented explains to me a lot of the behaviors that were previously mystifying about a lot of men, because I do it now, too. I work all day in a laser like focused way, so I do want to just blow some steam off at the end of the day, you know?

Sarah [00:56:48] Yeah. Thank you for joining us. Remember, you can go to Substack and check out our conversation with Kerry Anderson about the wider upheaval in the Middle East and what the incoming Trump administration could mean for that region. And one final reminder of our new recording schedule. Our Tuesday episode will be out in the afternoon or early evening, as opposed to first thing in the morning. We'll be back in your ears then. In the meantime, don't forget to check out our Pantsuit Politics fan gift guide and the wonderful box Lisa at the Bookshelf on Church has put together with our two books. It's a wonderful gift for the holiday season. And until then, keep it nuanced y'all.

[00:57:22] Music Interlude.

Sarah: Pantsuit Politics is produced by Studio D Podcast Production.

Beth: Alise Napp is our Managing Director. Maggie Penton is our Director of Community Engagement.

Sarah: Xander Singh is the composer of our theme music with inspiration from original work by Dante Lima.

Beth: Our show is listener-supported. Special thanks to our executive producers: Ali Edwards, Nick and Alysa Vilelli, Amy & Derek Starr Redwine, Amy Whited, Anya Binsacca, Ashley Rene, Ashley Terry, Barry Kaufman, Becca Dorval, Beth Loy, Brandon & Jessica Krausse, Catherine Kniss, Chelsea Gaarder, Christi Matthews, Christian Campbell, Christie Johnson, Christina Quartararo, Connie Peruchietti, Crystal Kemp, The Adair Family, Ellen Burnes, Emily Holladay, Emily Helen Olson, Gabrielle McDonald and Wren, Genny Francis, The Charney Family, Heather Ericacae, Jacque Earp, Jan Feltz, Janice Elliott, Jeff Davis, Jen Ross, Jeremy Sequoia, Jessica Whitehead, Jessica Boro, Jill Bisignano, Julie Haller, Julie Hough, Karin True, Katherine Vollmer, Katie Johnson, Katy Stigers, Kimberley Ludwig, Kristen Redford Hydinger, Kristina Wener, Krysten Wendell, Laura Martin, Laurie LaDow, Lee Chaix McDonough, Leighanna Pillgram-Larsen, Lily McClure, Linda Daniel, Linsey Sauer, Bookshelf on Church, Martha Bronitsky, Megan Hart, Michelle Palacios, Michelle Wood, Morgan McHugh, Onica Ulveling, Paula Bremer, The Villanueva Family, Sabrina Drago, Samantha Chalmers, Sasha Egolf, Sarah Greenup, Sarah Ralph, Shannon Frawley, Stephanie Elms, Susanne Dickinson, The Lebo Family, The Munene Family, Tiffany Hassler, Tracey Puthoff, Veronica Samoulides, Vicki Jackman