Goldstone’s most recent book is "On Account of Race: The Supreme Court, White Supremacy, and the Ravaging of African American Voting Rights."
Democracy, which has been under assault around the world in recent years — including, sadly, in the United States — may be making a bit of a comeback.
In France, Emmanuel Macron, facing what was supposed to be an uphill and uncertain fight for re-election, trounced his far-right opponent, Marine Le Pen, by 17 percentage points. While some pundits pointed out that Le Pen had improved on her previous performance by 7 points, that analysis does not take into account that France is notoriously hard on incumbents and had not re-elected a president in two decades. Given that a hefty segment of the French population would not vote for those already in office if they were family members, Le Pen’s performance was not much of an improvement at all.
In Slovenia, highly favored three-term incumbent Janez Jansa, a would-be autocrat who has been compared to Donald Trump, lost in a huge upset to Robert Golob and the pro-environment, pro-democracy Freedom Movement. Jansa had been openly courting authoritarian rule using the Trump playbook — ruthlessly attacking his opponents in parliament, the judiciary and the media — but he still lost by more than 10 points. Finland and Sweden, two unaligned nations with democratic traditions, are seriously considering joining NATO to preserve their form of government in the face of a Russian threat.
And then, of course, there is Ukraine, whose people are enduring devastation, plunder, mass murder and unspeakable barbarism to protect what before the Russian invasion had been a fragile and fractious democracy.
Even in the United States, there was recently a glimmer of hope that some are rejecting the extremism that has been tearing the country apart.
In Utah, a state only slightly less red than a fire engine, the Democratic Party, rather than nominate its own candidate in what would have been a hopeless Senate campaign against incumbent Mike Lee, chose instead to endorse a principled conservative, former CIA officer and presidential candidate Evan McMullin. McMullin, a fiscal conservative who is far to the right of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, is also pro-environment and believes in voting rights and the rule of law. He was an anti-Trump candidate in 2016, a fierce critic of Trump’s presidency, and endorsed Joe Biden in 2020. In other words, a half-century ago, McMullin might have as easily been a moderate Democrat as a moderate Republican.
Lee, on the other hand, is one of the most conservative members of the Senate, an unapologetic supporter of Donald Trump, who, according to texts to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, “worked furiously to overturn the 2020 election and keep President Donald Trump in power before ultimately abandoning the effort when no evidence of widespread fraud surfaced and his outreach to states for alternate electors proved futile.”
The willingness of Lee to abandon the basic tenets of democratic rule is hardly unique among his fellow Republicans. The text exchange between Lee and Meadows, as damning as it may be, does not fully depict the lengths to which some of America’s elected leaders will go to subvert their own institutions for personal gain as much as the almost laughable duplicity of House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy.
McCarthy, who seems to want to be speaker as much as Vladimir Putin wants to be tsar, first angrily denied reports that he urged Trump to resign in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol — and that he had moaned, “I’ve had it with this guy” — but then was forced to admit they were true when an audiotape surfaced. McCarthy then once again kowtowed to Trump, insisting he was misunderstood, and Trump, ever magnanimous to toadies, agreed to forgive him.
If Lee and McCarthy were exceptions, the Republican Party would be faced with a problem that it possessed the resources to solve. But they are not. That the mainstream Republican Party seems to have as much contempt for democracy as for Democrats is reaffirmed almost daily. Some Republican primary candidates in national, state and local elections are campaigning on their embrace of lies, their willingness to overturn future elections and their eagerness to disenfranchise legitimate voters. And invariably they do so with flag pins in their lapels, spouting their commitment to freedom and the Constitution, neither for which they appear to have any real appreciation.
While Democrats are hardly blameless in what has often become political trench warfare, grousing over Hillary Clinton’s electoral vote loss (she beat Trump by 2.5 million popular votes) is hardly the same as pretending an 8 million vote loss did not occur. Members of “The Squad” might advocate policies that many find offensive, but they pale before the pronouncements of Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert and Matt Gaetz, among others.
Republicans, all too aware they are the minority party — their House candidates got 5 million less votes in 2020 than Democrats — seem to prefer destroying free elections rather than doing what is necessary to earn the majority’s trust. For this, they require no real program at all but simply to pander to the anger and frustration of a base that is inundated with tales of Hunter Biden’s laptop or Clinton’s emails and then to prevent enough of their opponents from voting to ensure their continued rule. Ironic is that those who cannot stop screaming about rigged elections are the ones who are most trying to rig them.
Most parents, to instill a sense of honor and fairness in their children, try to teach them not to be “sore losers,” which means admitting when they have lost and, parents hope, trying harder next time. If Ukrainians are willing to fight, starve, and die to keep the flame of democracy alive in bombed out homes and factories, it does not seem too much to ask the nation that introduced democracy to the modern world to adhere to the same standard of behavior required in a school playground.




















U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivers a keynote speech at the 62nd Munich Security Conference on Saturday, Feb. 14, 2026, in Munich, Germany.
Marco Rubio is the only adult left in the room
Finally free from the demands of being chief archivist of the United States, secretary of state, national security adviser and unofficial viceroy of Venezuela, Marco Rubio made his way to the Munich Security Conference last weekend to deliver a major address.
I shouldn’t make fun. Rubio, unlike so many major figures in this administration, is a bona fide serious person. Indeed, that’s why President Trump keeps piling responsibilities on him. Rubio knows what he’s talking about and cares about policy. He is hardly a free agent; Trump is still president after all. But in an administration full of people willing to act like social media trolls, Rubio stands out for being serious. And I welcome that.
But just because Rubio made a serious argument, that doesn’t mean it was wholly persuasive. Part of his goal was to repair some of the damage done by his boss, who not long ago threatened to blow up the North Atlantic alliance by snatching Greenland away from Denmark. Rubio’s conciliatory language was welcome, but it hardly set things right.
Whether it was his intent or not, Rubio had more success in offering a contrast with Vice President JD Vance, who used the Munich conference last year as a platform to insult allies and provide fan service to his followers on X. Rubio’s speech was the one Vance should have given, if the goal was to offer a serious argument about Trump’s “vision” for the Western alliance. I put “vision” in scare quotes because it’s unclear to me that Trump actually has one, but the broader MAGA crowd is desperate to construct a coherent theory of their case.
So what’s that case? That Western Civilization is a real thing, America is not only part of it but also its leader, and it will do the hard things required to fix it.
In Rubio’s story, America and Europe embraced policies in the 1990s that amounted to the “managed decline” of the West. European governments were free riders on America’s military might and allowed their defense capabilities to atrophy as they funded bloated welfare states and inefficient regulatory regimes. Free trade, mass migration and an infatuation with “the rules-based global order” eroded national sovereignty, undermined the “cohesion of our societies” and fueled the “de-industrialization” of our economies. The remedy for these things? Reversing course on those policies and embracing the hard reality that strength and power drive events on the global stage.
“The fundamental question we must answer at the outset is what exactly are we defending,” Rubio said, “because armies do not fight for abstractions. Armies fight for a people; armies fight for a nation. Armies fight for a way of life.”
I agree with some of this — to a point. And, honestly, given how refreshing it is to hear a grown-up argument from this administration, it feels churlish to quibble.
But, for starters, the simple fact is that Western Civilization is an abstraction, and so are nations and peoples. And that’s fine. Abstractions — like love, patriotism, moral principles, justice — are really important. Our “way of life” is largely defined and understood through abstractions: freedom, the American dream, democracy, etc. What is the “Great” in Make America Great Again, if not an abstraction?
This is important because the administration’s defenders ridicule or dismiss any principled objection critics raise as fastidious gitchy-goo eggheadery. Trump tramples the rule of law, pardons cronies, tries to steal an election and violates free market principles willy-nilly. And if you complain, it’s because you’re a goody-goody fool.
As White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller said not long ago, “we live in a world … that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world that have existed since the beginning of time.” Rubio said it better, but it’s the same idea.
There are other problems with Rubio’s story. At the start of the 1990s, the EU’s economy was 9% bigger than ours. In 2025 we were nearly twice as rich as Europe. If Europe was “ripping us off,” they have a funny way of showing it. America hasn’t “deindustrialized.” The manufacturing sector has grown during all of this decline, though not as much as the service sector, where we are a behemoth. We have shed manufacturing jobs, but that has more to do with automation than immigration. Moreover, the trends Rubio describes are not unique to America. Manufacturing tends to shrink as countries get richer.
That’s an important point because Rubio, like his boss, blames all of our economic problems on bad politicians and pretends that good politicians can fix them through sheer force of will.
I think Rubio is wrong, but I salute him for making his case seriously.
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.