<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><feed
	xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0"
	xml:lang="en-US"
	>
	<title type="text">Vox</title>
	<subtitle type="text">Our world has too much noise and too little context. Vox helps you understand what matters.</subtitle>

	<updated>2026-05-13T18:08:27+00:00</updated>

	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com" />
	<id>https://www.vox.com/rss/index.xml</id>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.vox.com/rss/index.xml" />

	<icon>https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/08/vox_logo_rss_light_mode.png?w=150&amp;h=100&amp;crop=1</icon>
		<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Peter Balonon-Rosen</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Sean Rameswaram</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[The Supreme Court abortion pills case, explained]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/podcasts/488434/supreme-court-abortion-pills-mifepristone-louisiana-telehealth" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/?p=488434</id>
			<updated>2026-05-13T13:48:22-04:00</updated>
			<published>2026-05-13T13:50:00-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Abortion" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Podcasts" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Policy" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Politics" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Supreme Court" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Today, Explained podcast" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Abortion pills have been on a bit of a journey in the United States over the past few weeks. It starts in Louisiana: The state sued the Food and Drug Administration late last year, seeking to eliminate access to the abortion pill mifepristone through telehealth and mail order. On May 1, the US Fifth Circuit [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="The columned front of the US Supreme Court building is seen surrounded by greenery." data-caption="The Supreme Court building on May 4, 2026, in Washington, DC. | Andrew Harnik/Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Andrew Harnik/Getty Images" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/05/gettyimages-2273951119.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	The Supreme Court building on May 4, 2026, in Washington, DC. | Andrew Harnik/Getty Images	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p class="has-text-align-none">Abortion pills have been on a bit of a journey in the United States over the past few weeks.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">It starts in Louisiana: The state sued the Food and Drug Administration late last year, seeking to eliminate access to the abortion pill mifepristone through telehealth and mail order.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">On May 1, the US Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Louisiana, temporarily blocking access to telehealth abortion and pills by mail nationwide. Then the Supreme Court <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/487721/supreme-court-danco-genbiopro-mifepristone-louisiana-abortion">weighed in</a>; Justice Samuel Alito, a conservative opponent of abortion rights, nonetheless temporarily restored access to the pill by telehealth and mail while the Court considers at the merits of the case.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Now, the Court says it will maintain its stay on the Fifth Circuit’s decision until at least 5pm on Thursday as it deliberates.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">To understand the intricacies of the court case and what’s at stake, <em>Today, Explained</em> co-host Sean Rameswaram spoke with Alice Miranda Ollstein, a senior healthcare reporter at Politico.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Below is an excerpt of their conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full podcast, so listen to <em>Today, Explained</em> wherever you get podcasts, including <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/today-explained/id1346207297">Apple Podcasts</a>, <a href="https://www.pandora.com/podcast/today-explained/PC:140">Pandora</a>, and <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/3pXx5SXzXwJxnf4A5pWN2A">Spotify</a>.</p>

<iframe frameborder="0" height="200" src="https://playlist.megaphone.fm/?e=VMP5981688338" width="100%"></iframe>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><strong>By the end of the week, could the nature of access to abortion pills across the country change?</strong></p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Yes. What Louisiana is demanding is that the Supreme Court allow restrictions to go into effect right now, even before the case is finally resolved. Louisiana says that every day that patients in our state can get abortion pills online and get them shipped in — in violation of our state&#8217;s ban — is a day we are being injured as a state. They&#8217;re claiming sovereign injury.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">They say the ability of patients around the country to access these pills by telehealth, to have them prescribed by a doctor online and sent by mail, is helping people in their state circumvent the law. And that&#8217;s why they want the Supreme Court to step in and cut that off for everyone nationwide, because it&#8217;s a federal policy.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The drugmakers are the ones fighting back against that — the two companies that make this abortion pill. And they say there&#8217;s no sovereign injury. You can&#8217;t just get rid of a policy for everyone because you don&#8217;t like how people are using it.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">And they say that this policy has been in effect for several years already. There&#8217;s no sudden emergency where you need it banned just now. And thus, the Supreme Court should keep everything the way it currently is while the case works its way through.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><strong>Do we have any idea where the Supreme Court stands on abortion pills at this point?</strong></p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The reading of the tea leaves is always a tricky venture with the Supreme Court. People try to guess based on the questions that were asked at oral arguments. We haven&#8217;t even gotten there yet in this case. It&#8217;s very hard to know.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><strong>Politico hasn&#8217;t gotten, like, a leak this time about the decision.</strong></p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Not on this one. It&#8217;s very possible that, once again, they duck the heart of the issue on abortion, on federal power versus state power, and they just say, “Nah, you don&#8217;t have standing. You can&#8217;t prove that you, the state, are being injured by this policy.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><strong>It seems a little contradictory, right? I mean, the Supreme Court said let the states decide. Years later, you have Louisiana saying, “Hey, ban abortion pills for the entire country.</strong>”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">What&#8217;s interesting here is you really have both sides making a states’ rights argument and saying, “My rights as a state are being infringed upon.” You have Louisiana saying, “Why should other blue states’ liberal abortion policies where anybody can get pills be allowed to invade our state when we&#8217;re over here trying to ban abortion?”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">They&#8217;re basically saying that allowing this anywhere, you know, infringes on their right as a state to prohibit it. Now, of course, as you just articulated, you also have people saying, “Wait a minute, so that means it gets to be restricted for everybody, even people who have laws on the books in their states supporting access to abortion?”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">It’s one of those compromises that pleases nobody, because the anti-abortion folks, they are not ever going to be satisfied. They say, “Why should a fetus&#8217;s rights end at a state border?” And of course, on the other side, you have folks saying, “Why should a pregnant woman&#8217;s rights end at a state border?”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">And so this is always going to be a federal fight.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-pullquote"><blockquote><p>“Even if the pills aren&#8217;t banned entirely, but telehealth is restricted, that&#8217;s going to be a big blow.”</p></blockquote></figure>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><strong>How big a deal have abortion pills become since the Supreme Court overturned <em>Roe v. Wade</em> [in 2022]?</strong></p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Even before that, they were becoming more and more popular as a method of abortion. And especially since the Covid pandemic, they have become the predominant method that people are choosing in order to terminate their pregnancies.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">More than a quarter get them by telehealth. So even if the pills aren&#8217;t banned entirely, but telehealth is restricted, that&#8217;s going to be a big blow. And it&#8217;s not just a big blow to people living in states like Louisiana, where there&#8217;s a ban locally and they can&#8217;t go to a doctor&#8217;s office and get them even if they want to. It&#8217;ll impact people in states like California, where there are these huge swaths of the state where it&#8217;s very difficult to get to a clinic.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">We have medical deserts all around the country, have shortages of providers, and telehealth has really broadened access, including in states where it was already legal and technically accessible on paper, but not in practice.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><strong>Let&#8217;s say the Supreme Court weighs in on Thursday afternoon, Thursday morning, who knows? If they say no more abortion pills via telehealth, what does this look like in the United States?</strong></p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">We actually got a sneak preview of what it would look like a couple weeks ago.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">We had a few days between when the Fifth Circuit ruled for Louisiana and said, “Okay, we&#8217;re gonna restrict access to these pills nationwide.” It took the Supreme Court a few days after that to step in and say, “Whoa, whoa, whoa, let&#8217;s hit pause. Let&#8217;s go back to the way things were. Let&#8217;s restore telehealth access while we figure this out.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">In those few days, you saw these providers who prescribe and ship the pills to people living in states with bans make a variety of decisions. Some of these groups immediately paused. Other groups, including some doctors I talked to in Massachusetts, have been preparing for this for years. And so they had a plan already in place to pivot to only providing the second pill of the two-pill abortion regimen.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">To have an abortion, you can&#8217;t just take mifepristone alone. You have to take it in combination with another pill, misoprostol. You can take misoprostol alone, and that’s actually pretty common in other countries. So these groups, including the ones I talked to, immediately pivoted to only sending misoprostol to patients who are ordering the pills.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><strong>So there&#8217;s a lot at stake here for abortion access in the United States this week at the Supreme Court. I&#8217;m curious how the president of the United States feels about this. Not that he has a say, per se, but has he weighed in?</strong></p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">He has not, and neither has his Justice Department. What was really striking is that the Supreme Court was like, “Okay, we&#8217;re gonna step in here and at least decide this case on a temporary basis.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">They heard from Louisiana, they heard from the drug makers, they heard from all of these other people — members of Congress, governors, medical groups, activist groups on all sides, former FDA officials.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Everybody was sending briefs up to the Supreme Court, but you know who didn&#8217;t? The Trump administration.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><strong>The guy who talks about everything didn’t say anything?</strong></p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The Trump administration did not weigh in, did not either ask the Supreme Court to maintain the status quo or side with Louisiana. They were silent. The FDA has said it is reviewing the safety of the pills and will make its own decision, so the Trump administration had told lower courts, “Hey, back off, let the FDA do its thing.” But now that the case is before the Supreme Court — nothing to say, silent.</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Allie Volpe</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[How old am I supposed to look?]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/life/488424/how-old-am-i-supposed-to-look-botox-fillers-ozempic-identity-crisis-aging" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/?p=488424</id>
			<updated>2026-05-12T16:07:44-04:00</updated>
			<published>2026-05-13T07:30:00-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Advice" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Even Better" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Life" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Self" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[A few months ago, while engaging in one of my more recent pastimes (or compulsions), I verbalized a fear I’d long kept buried, perhaps out of shame or denial or some combination of both. First, the compulsory ritual: Before bed, with the precision of a brain surgeon, I arrange a layer of stickers on my [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="an illustration of a woman’s face being manipulated and pulled in different directions by several hands" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Lauren Tamaki for Vox" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/05/Vox_Face_LaurenTamaki.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
		</figcaption>
</figure>
<p class="has-text-align-none">A few months ago, while engaging in one of my more recent pastimes (or compulsions), I verbalized a fear I’d long kept buried, perhaps out of shame or denial or some combination of both. First, the compulsory ritual: Before bed, with the precision of a brain surgeon, I arrange a layer of stickers on my face. The brand is Frownies, and they have been marketed to me as a cheaper, less invasive alternative to Botox. Place these beige patches — offered in unique shapes meant to hug your eyes, caress your forehead, or cradle your mouth — over your wrinkles, and by daybreak, perceptible signs of aging will have vanished. Allegedly.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Which brings me to the admission. No one with any confidence in their face willingly adheres appliques that calcify into what can only be described as a layer of concrete. I perform this routine for a simple reason: I’m visibly aging, and I’m not happy about it. As a woman in her 30s, with years of continued living to look forward to, I don’t want to socially vanish, which is what usually happens to many women of a certain age. I don’t want to become invisible once my face droops a little or when the wrinkles won’t abate with stickers. I want to look not like a puerile being, but some mysterious, age-ambiguous alien. (I do recognize this is a concern for the fortunate, but don’t fret: I also worry about whether I will be able to pay my bills each month. I contain multitudes.)&nbsp;</p>

<div class="wp-block-vox-media-highlight vox-media-highlight">
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Why I reported this</h2>



<p class="has-text-align-none">I’m a product of the early 2000s when magazines and entertainment glorified beauty, youth, and thinness to the highest degree. The trend cycle has worked its way back around and these ideals are in fashion again, only now with the added pressures of social media and the accessibility of cosmetic procedures. At a moment of transition in my life, I wondered whether I should ignore the constant pressure to look perfect — and what it meant for my identity if I did.</p>
</div>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The desire to not age is laughable, I’m well aware. We’re all hurtling toward the same inevitable fate. But some people’s journeys to the pearly gates are more poreless than others. Cosmetic procedures like Botox, fillers, and facelifts aren’t new, but their startling ubiquity is. Between 2019 and 2022, the <a href="https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/news/Statistics/2022/plastic-surgery-statistics-report-2022.pdf">prevalence of Botox and similar neuromodulators increased by 73 percent</a>, according to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. <a href="https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/news/statistics/2024/plastic-surgery-statistics-report-2024.pdf">Fillers were second to Botox</a> in terms of the most popular “minimally invasive” procedures in 2024. Since 2017, surgeons have reported a <a href="https://www.aafprs.org/Media/Press_Releases/2024_02_01_PressRelease.aspx">60 percent increase in facelifts</a> and <a href="https://www.thecut.com/article/undetectable-facelifts-trend-popularity-deep-plane-face-lift-vs-smas.html">younger patients are increasingly seeking them out</a>. And although <a href="https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/news/statistics/2024/cosmetic-procedures-men-2024.pdf">more men are seeking cosmetic procedures</a>, the population who most frequently undergoes these treatments is <a href="https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/news/statistics/2024/cosmetic-procedures-women-2024.pdf">overwhelmingly female</a>. All told, between 2020 and 2023, <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39103642/">aesthetic procedures increased 40 percent globally, according to one study</a>.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">People aren’t just modifying their faces, but shrinking their bodies, too. Nearly <a href="https://www.kff.org/public-opinion/poll-1-in-8-adults-say-they-are-currently-taking-a-glp-1-drug-for-weight-loss-diabetes-or-another-condition-even-as-half-say-the-drugs-are-difficult-to-afford/">one in eight American adults said they were taking a GLP-1</a>, according to a 2025 KFF Health Tracking Poll. The term “Ozempic” has become shorthand for the class of drugs that <a href="https://www.vox.com/advice/481657/ozempic-glp1s-weight-loss-body-positivity-tips">celebrities and everyday people alike</a> utilize for weight loss, helping to reinvigorate the briefly dormant ideal that to be beautiful and desired, you must be small.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">In other words, we now, as a society, have more control over our bodies and appearances than at any point in history. We’re both sculptor and marble, chiseling our images into a version that most aligns with who we are — or who we think we are. But our lives, and our bodies, are constantly changing. We age, we get pregnant, we break bones, we get sick, we grieve, throwing off the balance between how we see ourselves and how the world perceives us. There exists a fear of not recognizing ourselves as we move through these transitions. When bodies and appearances are malleable, what does that mean for the person underneath?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<hr class="wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity" />

<p class="has-text-align-none">Let’s get one thing out of the way: I am completely average-looking. Never one to have been praised for my beauty or to have profited from pretty privilege, I hardly see my face as central to my status in the world. But it is directly related to how I see myself and how I’d like to telegraph that version of me to others, and I’m not alone in this.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">When the book she co-authored, <a href="https://bookshop.org/p/books/face-it-what-women-really-feel-as-their-looks-change-and-what-to-do-about-it-vivian-diller-ph-d/b5f25ffe36e7a94e?ean=9781401925413&amp;next=t"><em>Face It: What Women Really Feel as Their Looks Change</em></a><em>, </em>was released in 2010, psychologist <a href="https://www.viviandiller.com/">Vivian Diller</a>’s audience was primarily in their 40s and 50s. The term “anti-aging” was en vogue at the time and Botox hadn’t quite hit the mainstream, so options for transforming your face were fairly limited, Diller says. Some women felt the pressure to take drastic measures, like full facelifts, to look younger. “If I were to write that book now,” Diller tells me, “it almost feels a little old-fashioned because the age that one thinks about aging or looking old is no longer in your 40s, 50s.” Instead, it’s late 20s. And it’s not just that people want to look younger, Diller says; they want to look age<em>less</em>, to prevent the passing of time from occurring in the first place.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">That an idealized image is so often conflated with a past self signifies there was a version (or will be a version) that was most aligned with our “true” identity. In <a href="https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/316701/intact-by-chambers-clare/9780141992501"><em>Intact: In Defence of the Unmodified Body</em></a>, University of Cambridge political philosophy professor <a href="http://www.clarechambers.com/">Clare Chambers</a> argues that people tend to believe there was a point in time, often in the past, where their bodies were most authentically their own: the post-college glow-up, the pre-baby body, the pre-menopause face.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Inevitably, we fail to embrace this edition of our appearance in the moment, only appreciating it much later as something we’ve lost. If you identify as young and beautiful or a parent or an athlete or a career-oriented professional, and the outer shell of that identity changes, you can fall into an existential crisis.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The result, Chambers tells me, is a feeling that our bodies as they are <em>right now</em> are never enough. “In this narrative, the body must be constantly modified to remain true to itself,” Chambers writes in her book. “But why on earth should that particular body, the one that has done so much less than you have, be the ‘real’ you?”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“The body we have right now is our authentic body,” Chambers tells me. “That&#8217;s simply the body we have.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The idea that you will miss the current version of your body when it’s gone is also stressful, particularly when you are surrounded by “anti-aging” marketing making it clear that this is the phase of life everyone else is chasing, one which you’ll eventually look back upon with envy. Although she is only 24 years old, Medha Arora, an actor who lives in Toronto, is terrified of losing her fleeting youth and the benefits that being young and beautiful confers. The more she hears of women her age getting Botox, the more pressure she feels to preserve what she currently has and follow suit. “I feel so confident and I love how I look, and then as a result, there&#8217;s this anxiety that&#8217;s like, you have to do something to keep it,” she tells me.</p>

<hr class="wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity" />

<p class="has-text-align-none">The core tension at the center of today’s obsession with idealized bodies, American Society of Plastic Surgeons president <a href="https://www.basuplasticsurgery.com/about-us/meet-dr-basu/">Bob Basu</a> tells me, is the mismatch between how people feel and how they look. No matter what you do to feel your best — therapy, sleep, a nutritious diet, a great sex life, strength training, fulfilling relationships — time, gravity, and…life will eventually leave their mark. “As we get older, we want to look as good as we feel,” Basu says. Now, we’re told, fillers, Botox, facelifts, and the like can help close that gap.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">A better way of thinking about whether our bodies and identities are aligned is to be mindful of how it feels to be in them, Chambers says. “Do they feel like our own bodies? Do they feel healthy, comfortable, easy to live in, familiar to us?” she says.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Because pregnancy, menopause, illness, and disability can drastically alter the corporeal form, sometimes quite rapidly, the body and soul can feel diametrically opposed. The outer shell is foreign. But there are other ways to reconcile this that don’t involve neurotoxins.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">In many ways, I feel especially youthful. Thanks to my longtime devotion to cardio and strength training, my body is sturdy. I try to eat as balanced as possible, and I remember to wear sunscreen most days. Sleep used to come easily and in great quantities, but a recent breakup derailed such rejuvenation. (I’m working on it.)&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">However, my face betrays these healthful habits. There are bags under my eyes, dark and heavy, and the tone of my skin is sallow and wan. I look in the mirror and see crow’s feet and forehead lines — memorials of happy, more expressive times — and emerging dark spots are coming to claim vengeance for the one summer in high school I decided to be really tan. While I may feel 23, I no longer appear to be.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Running on the hamster wheel of nostalgia often gets us nowhere; we’re chasing a face and body that’s lost to history. But that doesn’t mean that person didn’t exist. There is a difference, however, in <em>grieving</em> who we once were and <em>grasping</em> for who we once were.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“Grief is <em>I miss who I was and I&#8217;m letting myself feel that fully</em>. Grasping is <em>I miss who I was, so I&#8217;m going to chase that through procedures, restriction, trying to reverse time</em>,” licensed psychotherapist <a href="https://anniewright.com/">Annie Wright</a> tells me. “Grief is a passage. Grasping is like a prison. And the cruel irony is that grasping is what most of the cosmetic and wellness industries are selling.”&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">When Wright’s clients find themselves hyperfocused on a past version of themselves, she invites them to consider what their younger self had access to that they lack now. “Honestly, it&#8217;s almost never just about the body,” she says. “It&#8217;s usually something like possibility, attention, lightness, being at the beginning of things.”&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">My 23-year-old self felt hungry for the opportunities that lay ahead; the 33-year-old is open to big shifts while still being grounded by the predictability and stability of routine. “We can&#8217;t compare across stages,” Wright says. “That&#8217;s really rigged. Instead, we ask, what&#8217;s uniquely available to me now that wasn&#8217;t available before?”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">And what is available to you now may be access to filters on videoconferencing platforms, beauty products, and cosmetic procedures with the potential to change your appearance. “The mirror becomes a threat detection device,” Wright says. Clocking every life transition that manifests on our faces becomes a way of asking whether we’re still acceptable, still valuable, still safe.&nbsp;</p>

<hr class="wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity" />

<p class="has-text-align-none">If she could afford it, Patricia Catallo would get a facelift. The 62-year-old retired bartender from Philadelphia considered herself a “bombshell” earlier in life, but after a recent illness caused her to lose 60 pounds, Catallo says she wasn’t comfortable with the reflection staring back at her. “I felt like I just didn&#8217;t look good anymore and I felt invisible,” she tells me. Catallo was used to being approached by fellow shoppers in the store to get her opinion on what shampoo to buy, to chatting with the patrons at the bar where she worked. Now, she feels like someone who isn’t worth engaging with at all.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Talking to Catallo was like staring into the future, or maybe the sun — necessary and painful and impossible to ignore. <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12760283/">Ageism is felt by both men and women</a>, but people are generally more positive <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fbul0000467">toward young women than older ones, research shows</a>. Older women <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11996891/">report feeling invisible and inconsequential,</a> uncertain about their role in a world that coupled their utility with youth and attractiveness. This <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/invisible-women-50s-male-gaze_n_63a38c4fe4b033ea8cc577aa">waning irrelevance</a> has <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37097812/">become somewhat</a> <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/not-the-norm/202202/the-invisibility-war-on-older-women">of a stereotype</a>, a seeming inevitability — “and that I think is not changing,” Diller, the psychologist and author, tells me. Is it wrong to want to avoid this fate myself?</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">If freezing and tightening away every little wrinkle to remain visible is the goal, it might be masking a deeper identity crisis. “Botox, fillers, lasers can soften the visual signs of aging, but they don’t resolve deeper questions about identity or self-worth,” <a href="https://elitemd.doctorlogic.com/dr-sonia-badreshia-bansal">Sonia Badreshia-Bansal</a>, a dermatologist with offices in the Bay Area and Beverly Hills, tells me in an email. “When patients expect a procedure to fix something emotional, the results are almost always temporary in how they feel.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Perhaps it’s for the best that I lack the funds for cosmetic procedures, as I should not be left unattended with an injector right now. Because, if I’m being totally honest, I’m unsure of my worth, of who I am, and therefore, how I should look, and I would most definitely be using procedures to fix something emotional.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">While I was already meandering down the path of insecurity over the past few years, the end of my seven-year relationship a few months ago sent me spiraling toward full existential catastrophe. The life and future I’d envisioned were wiped away overnight, and in its place, a new face, haggard from crying and sleepless nights and poor nutrition. Noticeably more grey hair than a year prior. I questioned whether I, let alone anyone else, would find me desirable again. Still wading through the muck of self-doubt, wondering who I was supposed to be at this stage in my life, fixating on my appearance became a distraction from the lingering question of “What do I do now?” It’s easier to fix your face than to fix your life.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“What do I do now?” is a question best served for a therapist and not an injector, which doesn’t mean <a href="https://www.dermpartners.com/medical-staff/crnp-s/174-sun-lee-nguyen">Sun Nguyen</a> still doesn’t field it. A dermatology nurse practitioner in central Pennsylvania, Nguyen sometimes deals with patients who struggle to articulate why, exactly, they’re in her office; who, like me, are unsure of how they’re supposed to look at the present stage of their life. Instead of pushing procedures, Nguyen tries to help clients get introspective, especially when she sees them more often and has a relationship with them. “It&#8217;s deeper than a 15-minute exam can do,” she says.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Nguyen and other dermatologists I spoke to reiterated something so simple I’m embarrassed I’d never considered it: it’s important to know <em>why </em>you’re seeking cosmetic procedures, to understand your specific motivations for changing your face. And Nguyen is right that this soul searching should go beyond the brief questions your doctor asks in an exam room.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Someone who is driven by the fear of losing attention, relevance, and love, who is letting external voices into their head, is likely being driven not by their true self, says Wright, the psychotherapist. Instead, they are outsourcing their sense of self to the mirror.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">When there’s a disconnect between what you see in the mirror and who you believe yourself to be, Chambers, the philosopher and author, suggests acceptance instead of rebellion. That means really settling into the fact that aging is a never-ending process, and will be an uphill battle if you choose to fight it. It starts from the moment we enter this mortal plane, and it never stops. She encourages us to push back against the idea that the pre-baby, pre-breakup, pre-accident, pre-sickness body was the “real” version of each of us, and to be okay in our bodies as they currently are.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">That’s not to say we can’t delight in utilizing makeup, hair dye, tattoos, piercings, and even some cosmetic procedures as a form of self- or gender-expression, but it’s important to seriously consider how these modifications connect to an identity that goes beyond just “hot person” or “person in her 20s” or “me, but before this bad thing happened.” It requires getting comfortable with the uncomfortable notion that things change, that our lives and statuses change, often in ways that we don’t like. “In trying to pursue a sense of an aesthetic ideal, we risk not really keeping that connection between who we actually are and what we look like,” Chambers says.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">My breakup, Chambers reminds me, has made me acutely aware of how I present to others and whether my appearance will be enticing enough for people to want to get to know what’s beyond the surface. I’m in my 30s and I’m not getting any younger. Still, I tell myself that my value as a friend, a daughter, a potential partner, a human does not depreciate even if society is hinting that it does. I’m reminded of this fact when speaking with Jen Janke, a 53-year-old elementary school teacher in Portland.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Her entire life, Janke was constantly reminded how attractive her parents were, and came to see the value in looking good. At her mother’s funeral, she remembers many guests mentioning how beautiful her mother was. “People also talked about how funny my mom was and thoughtful,” Janke tells me. “But I would want the first thing for someone to say is how thoughtful and funny she was.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">I agree. When my time expires and people are called to remember me, I hope they won’t talk about my face or my wrinkles or gray hair, or really anything about my appearance. What’s more lasting is how I make people feel.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“The most radical thing a woman can do in a culture that profits from her self-doubt, is to know herself well enough that she stops looking to her face for the answer,” Wright says. “Your face will keep changing, and your true self, that&#8217;s the one you should spend the time getting to know.”</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Bryan Walsh</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[We&#8217;re asking the wrong question about the hantavirus outbreak]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/488471/hantavirus-pandemic-covid-cruise-ship-cdc-trump" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/?p=488471</id>
			<updated>2026-05-13T14:08:27-04:00</updated>
			<published>2026-05-13T07:15:00-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Covid-19" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Future Perfect" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Health" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Public Health" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Should you be worried about the hantavirus outbreak? Should you be afraid? Should you be panicking? Should you start freaking out? If you’ve been following the coverage of the hantavirus outbreak aboard the cruise ship MV Hondius, these are the questions you’ve seen posed in headlines. And a small tip from inside&#160; the media: If [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="Passengers getting off hantavirus cruise ship" data-caption="Medical staff direct some of the last passengers to be evacuated from the MV Hondius on May 11, 2026 in Tenerife, part of the Canary Islands, Spain. | Chris McGrath/Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Chris McGrath/Getty Images" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/05/GettyImages-2275664276.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	Medical staff direct some of the last passengers to be evacuated from the MV Hondius on May 11, 2026 in Tenerife, part of the Canary Islands, Spain. | Chris McGrath/Getty Images	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p class="has-text-align-none">Should you be <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/05/11/make-it-make-sense-should-you-be-worried-about-hantavirus/">worried about the hantavirus outbreak</a>? Should you be <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/dr-marc-siegel-hantavirus-cruise-outbreak-alarming-fear-spreading-faster-facts">afraid</a>? Should you <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/10/politics/video/hantavirus-cdc-covid-fda-trump">be panicking</a>? Should you start <a href="https://www.rd.com/article/hantavirus-outbreak/"><em>freaking out</em></a>?</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">If you’ve been following the coverage of the hantavirus outbreak aboard the cruise ship MV Hondius, these are the questions you’ve seen posed in headlines. And a small tip from inside&nbsp; the media: If a question is posed in a headline, the answer is almost always “no.” (It’s such a common trope that there’s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines">even an informal law about it</a>.)</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">So, unless you’re a passenger or close contact of someone on the Hondius, you shouldn’t really worry about the hantavirus outbreak. You shouldn’t really fear it. You definitely shouldn’t panic. And do I really need to tell you that freaking out generally stops being acceptable behavior after the age of 15?</p>
<div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="Hantavirus and misinformation" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Eqe7f9tPtas?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p class="has-text-align-none">As my colleague Dylan Scott <a href="https://www.vox.com/health/488101/what-is-hantavirus-cruise-ship-outbreak">has reported</a>, by far the most likely outcome is that the hantavirus outbreak will ultimately be controlled and won’t become something that will disturb the general public. <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/05/1167477">As of May 12</a>, there were 11 confirmed or probable cases and three deaths. While a hantavirus outbreak in a tightly packed cruise ship is new and certainly suboptimal — not to mention <a href="https://www.bu.edu/bhr/2020/07/08/the-case-of-the-diamond-princess-stranded-at-sea-in-a-pandemic/">bringing back unsettling memories of early Covid</a> — experience with the deadly virus strongly suggests it probably <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hantavirus-covid-infectious-disease-experts/">doesn&#8217;t have the transmissibility</a> required to become a larger pandemic threat.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">After some initial dysfunction that was itself partially explainable by just how unusual a seaborne hantavirus outbreak was, the response system appears to be working relatively well. Citing moral and legal obligations, Spain <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/10/health/live-news/hantavirus-cruise-outbreak">accepted</a> the passengers at Tenerife in the Canary Islands over the objections of some officials there; they were met on the dock by hazmat suited workers. Eighteen US-bound passengers from the cruise <a href="https://time.com/article/2026/05/11/hantavirus-andes-cruise-ship-passengers-quarantine-nebraska/">are being kept in quarantine units</a> where they can be safely monitored for symptoms; even the planes they flew out on had special biocontainment equipment. Other passengers and contacts around the world are being isolated and watched.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">So, yes, without outright telling you what you should feel, you have reason to feel reassured.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">But framing emerging disease coverage around how the audience feels — should you worry, should you panic — is exactly the problem.</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Panic-demic</h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">For one thing, the personal fear framing has a single, predictable response. The only answer a responsible public health official can give to “should the public panic?” is “no,” which is precisely why every senior figure taking part in hantavirus response has been singing in this key for two weeks. World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus <a href="https://www.who.int/news/item/09-05-2026-message-by-the-who-director-general-to-the-people-of-tenerife-regarding-the-hantavirus-response">specifically told</a> Tenerife residents that “this is not another Covid.” WHO epidemic and pandemic chief Maria Van Kerkhove <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hantavirus-covid-infectious-disease-experts/">told the media</a>: “This is not SARS-CoV-2. This is not the start of a Covid pandemic.” Acting Centers for Disease Control Director Jay Bhattacharya <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/10/politics/video/hantavirus-cdc-covid-fda-trump">said on CNN</a> that “we don’t want to cause a public panic over this.”&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<figure class="wp-block-embed is-type-rich is-provider-instagram wp-block-embed-instagram"><div class="wp-block-embed__wrapper">
<blockquote class="instagram-media" data-instgrm-captioned data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/reel/DYDcDRAAsIv/?utm_source=ig_embed&#038;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"><div> <a href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/DYDcDRAAsIv/?utm_source=ig_embed&#038;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank"> <div> <div></div> <div> <div></div> <div></div></div></div><div></div> <div></div><div> <div>View this post on Instagram</div></div><div></div> <div><div> <div></div> <div></div> <div></div></div><div> <div></div> <div></div></div><div> <div></div> <div></div> <div></div></div></div> <div> <div></div> <div></div></div></a></div></blockquote>
</div></figure>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The reassurance is technically accurate, but because of the way the media asks the question, it’s the only thing anyone can say. That framing flattens out the actual, complicated response to an actual, complicated emerging disease outbreak. The implicit tone of the coverage is that the only reason that you, the audience, should care about a disease outbreak is whether it is coming for you personally.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">That’s a problem, because it can cede the ground to precisely the kind of hysteria these statements are meant to counteract. Just because the audience doesn’t have anything to directly worry about now does not mean this situation is normal or okay. An outbreak with some person-to-person transmission of a respiratory disease with no vaccine or cure that has a <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/han/php/notices/han00528.html">fatality rate of around 40 percent</a> is not normal. And in the current media <s>hellscape</s> environment, the gap between what reporters are pressing public health officials to say and what people can see on their TVs is filled by TikTok influencers <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/hantavirus-pandemic-fears-9.7195958">predicting</a> the virus could wipe out the whole human race.&nbsp;</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">What you don’t know can hurt you</h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">I can say with the highest confidence that hantavirus will not, in fact, wipe out the human race. (Hope that makes you feel better.) But there is a more reasonable argument that the current messaging may be overconfident on the underlying science.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">We know hantavirus, but we don’t know it that well. The total scientific record on person-to-person transmission of this strain of the hantavirus is <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/08/health/hantavirus-by-the-numbers">maybe 300 cases in all</a>, while <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2009040">one outbreak in 2018</a> featured three super-spreader events before it was suppressed. While the WHO says that person-to-person hantavirus transmissions generally only occur with “close prolonged contact,” that’s the median case, not the potential outliers. And, as we learned with Covid, assurances about how a virus behaves early in a new outbreak can sometimes turn out to be wrong in a big way.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The fundamental fact that Covid taught us is that a pandemic can be so catastrophic that it can be worth doing almost anything to prevent one. That’s why some experts, like <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/12/health/hantavirus-public-health-officials-calm-mongering">Harvard’s Joseph Allen</a> and <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/what-to-know-about-the-cruise-ship-hantavirus-outbreak-and-the-americans-facing-quarantine">former White House Covid coordinator Ashish Jha</a>, have argued for a much fuller quarantine of Hondius passengers, rather than the <a href="https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/two-texans-self-monitoring-after-disembarking-from-hantavirus-ship">self-monitoring approach</a> that has been allowed for some returnees viewed as lower risk. Even the 2003 SARS outbreak, which <a href="https://archive.cdc.gov/www_cdc_gov/sars/about/fs-sars.html">ultimately killed</a> fewer than 800 people, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK92486/">cost the global economy</a> at least $40 billion and led to worldwide disruptions. The cost of caution is small; the price of being wrong the other way could be immeasurable. And the calculation of how we should respond should not be driven by feeling.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">If you need something to be worried about, worry about this: The global public health system that is meant to be driving this response is being dismantled. The CDC has lost about a <a href="https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2025/06/cdc-has-shed-one-quarter-staff-even-it-recalls-some-laid-workers/406147/">quarter of its staff</a> since January 2025, leaving the remainder stretched thin. That includes the acting director, who was already <a href="https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/public-health/nih-director-bhattacharya-will-temporarily-oversee-cdc">running the National Institutes of Health</a>. Georgetown’s Lawrence Gostin <a href="https://www.ksbw.com/article/experts-wonder-cdc-response-hantavirus-outbreak-cruise/71259035">told</a> the Associated Press that “the CDC is not even a player” in the global response, which has been further hampered by the fact that Argentina — likely where the outbreak began — followed in America’s footsteps by <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/2/5/following-trump-argentina-withdraws-from-world-health-organization">withdrawing</a> from the WHO just two weeks before the Hondius left the country.     </p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">A pandemic is the <a href="https://humanrisks.com/blog/managing-low-probability-high-impact-risks/">ultimate low-probability, high-consequence event</a>. I can easily count off the outbreaks that appeared scary at the moment but ultimately fell well short of a pandemic — Nipah virus, MERS, SARS — both because of the characteristics of the pathogens and because of the response. That’s almost always the way it goes, and most signs indicate that the same will be true for hantavirus. But we also have very fresh memories of just how horrible a true pandemic can be.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">It’s a hard ask to keep both possibilities in mind, but the way the media covers these events doesn’t help. “Should we panic about hantavirus?” asks the wrong question. The right one is whether an increasingly fractured global health system still has the capacity — and the political and public support — to go beyond reassurance. The best way to keep people from panicking about hantavirus is to do everything possible to ensure there is nothing to panic about.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><em>A version of this story originally appeared in the&nbsp;</em><a href="https://www.vox.com/future-perfect"><em><strong>Future Perfect</strong></em></a><em>&nbsp;newsletter.&nbsp;</em><a href="https://www.vox.com/pages/future-perfect-newsletter-signup"><em><strong>Sign up here!</strong></em></a></p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Joshua Keating</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Trump&#8217;s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expected]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/politics/488386/trumps-china-policy-is-nearly-the-exact-opposite-of-what-everyone-expected" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/?p=488386</id>
			<updated>2026-05-12T13:32:23-04:00</updated>
			<published>2026-05-13T06:45:00-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="China" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Iran" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Politics" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="World Politics" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[President Donald Trump has never had a strict foreign policy doctrine, but coming into office, the influential figures around him could be classified into three broad camps. There were the so-called “primacists,” who supported a traditional muscular and assertive US rule in the world; the “restrainers,” who wanted to dial back US commitments abroad and [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="Donald Trump shakes Xi Jinping’s hand and speaks into his ear in front of an American flag. " data-caption="President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping shake hands as they depart following a bilateral meeting at Gimhae Air Base on October 30, 2025, in Busan, South Korea. | Andrew Harnik/Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Andrew Harnik/Getty Images" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/05/gettyimages-2244103334.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping shake hands as they depart following a bilateral meeting at Gimhae Air Base on October 30, 2025, in Busan, South Korea. | Andrew Harnik/Getty Images	</figcaption>
</figure>
<div class="wp-block-vox-media-highlight vox-media-highlight">
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Key takeaways</h2>



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Donald Trump’s upcoming summit with Xi Jinping is likely to be dominated and somewhat overshadowed by the ongoing conflict in Iran.&nbsp;</li>
</ul>



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>In recent months, US attention and military resources have been shifted from Asia to the Middle East, where the war has proven longer and more difficult than anticipated. At the same time, the administration has seemed to go out of its way to avoid offending China.&nbsp;</li>
</ul>



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>This is in many ways the opposite of what many expected from this administration, given the president’s frequent criticism of past wars of choice in the Middle East, and the “Asia-first” orientation of many of his top officials.</li>
</ul>
</div>

<p class="has-text-align-none">President Donald Trump has never had a strict foreign policy doctrine, but coming into office, the influential figures around him could be classified into <a href="https://www.vox.com/world-politics/386680/trump-foreign-policy-rubio-hegseth-waltz-gabbard">three broad camps</a>. There were the so-called “primacists,” who supported a traditional muscular and assertive US rule in the world; the “restrainers,” who wanted to dial back US commitments abroad and avoid costly military operations whenever possible; and the “prioritizers,” or “Asia-firsters,” who favored scaling back US involvement in the Middle East and support for Ukraine in order to focus on what they saw as the real threat: the growing military strength of the People’s Republic of China.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">If you had to put money on one of these camps winning out at the beginning of the second Trump administration, the prioritizers seemed like a logical bet. It was a position that both traditional Republican hawks like Secretary of State <a href="https://www.theamericanconservative.com/my-plan-for-american-renewal/">Marco Rubio</a> and America Firsters like Vice <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/jd-vance-tim-dillon-taiwan-priority-over-ukraine-1975851">President JD Vance</a> could get behind. The defense scholar Elbridge Colby, whose 2021 book, <a href="https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-strategy-of-denial-american-defense-in-an-age-of-great-power-conflict-elbridge-a-colby/58b550a18e025b29?ean=9780300268027&amp;next=t"><em>The Strategy of Denial</em></a>, is effectively the prioritizer bible, got an influential strategic planning role as undersecretary of defense for policy. After 20 years of frustrating US military engagement in the Middle East, there was broad consensus among both Democrats and Republicans of various stripes that the country needed to focus on other issues.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">What few would have anticipated is an administration that has effectively run the prioritizer playbook in reverse: quick to use military force abroad, engaged in yet another open-ended and costly war in the Middle East, and diverting valuable resources <em>away from</em> the Pacific while taking a remarkably accommodating stance toward China. In Trump’s second term, his foreign policy has been defined by <em>deprioritizing</em> Asian affairs in many ways. </p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">This surprising state of affairs will be highlighted this week as Trump heads to Beijing for a summit meeting with Xi Jinping. The summit was originally scheduled for March, but it was postponed due to the war that the White House no doubt hoped would be over by now. A meeting between the two most powerful men in the world might normally dominate the global conversation for a week, but in this case, there’s a good chance it will be overshadowed by events in the Persian Gulf.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">In the lead-up to the meeting, Trump seemed to be doing everything possible to not upset relations with China. As one White House official told Politico last month, the administration is “<a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/05/walking-on-eggshells-how-trump-is-managing-his-delicate-china-truce-00856475?utm_source=substack&amp;utm_medium=email">walking on eggshells</a>” with Beijing in hopes for a breakthrough on trade relations. This approach has continued despite <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/world/china-aiding-iran-missile-program-amid-us-israeli-strikes-reports-say?utm_source=substack&amp;utm_medium=email">widespread reports of</a> Chinese <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/china/iran-used-chinese-spy-satellite-target-us-bases-ft-reports-2026-04-15/">assistance</a> to the Iranian forces that have fought and killed US troops. “I thought I had an understanding with President Xi, but that’s alright. That’s the way the war goes right?” Trump said, discussing an unspecified <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-04-22/trump-says-us-caught-chinese-gift-for-iran-testing-red-line">“gift” from China to Iran intercepted by</a> the US military in April.      </p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">How did we get to the point where the president is taking a more aggressive and hawkish approach to nearly every global issue — except for America’s main global rival?&nbsp;</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading has-text-align-none"><strong>From unconventional hawk to unexpected dove</strong></h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Trump distinguished himself during his first campaign for president with his inflammatory <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-36185012">rhetoric about China “raping”</a> the United States, but he was never a traditional China hawk. His focus has always been squarely on trade and economic competition, rather than geopolitics, military competition, or human rights.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Nevertheless, officials in Trump’s first administration — including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Deputy National Security Adviser Matt Pottinger — pushed a maximally hawkish line on China <a href="https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf">and promoted a narrative</a> that, while the first two decades of the 21st century had been dominated by the fight against extremist groups, the decades to come would be dominated by Cold War-style “great power competition” with China.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The overwhelming focus on great power competition as the organizing principle for American foreign policy — and, <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/12/elizabeth-warren-bernie-sanders-foreign-policy-authoritarianism.html">to a large extent, domestic policy</a>, as well — was taken up with gusto by the Biden administration. The imperative to prepare for a potential war with China, likely in the Taiwan Strait, was widely referred to as the “pacing challenge” in the Pentagon and <a href="https://www.vox.com/world-politics/24107959/replicator-drones-china-taiwan-ukraine-pentagon">prompted investments in a swathe of new programs and technologies</a>. Over the past decade, the prospect of a real shooting war between the two nuclear armed superpowers has become disturbingly plausible, and military planners are far from comfortably confident the US would prevail in such a conflict.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">One might have expected the overwhelming focus on competition with China to continue or even accelerate with Trump returning to office.&nbsp;But ironically, “the second Trump administration has gone out of its way to downplay the notion of great power competition, which is something that the first Trump administration introduced into Washington&#8217;s strategic lexicon,” said Patricia Kim, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s John L. Thornton China Center.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">On the trade front at least, the second Trump administration came into office <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/473085/us-china-rare-earths-2025">looking to pick a fight</a>, slapping “emergency” tariffs on China that reached as high as 145 percent, citing unfair trading practices, as well as China’s role in the international fentanyl trade. But when China retaliated with punishing tariffs of its own and <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/473085/us-china-rare-earths-2025">sparked market panic by suspending exports</a> of the rare earth metals (essential materials for automobile, electronics, and defense manufacturers) over which China has a near monopoly, the White House backed down on the trade war. That retreat,&nbsp;combined with the February Supreme Court decision that limited the administration’s ability to unilaterally levy tariffs, made it clear the US was <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/479992/supreme-court-foreign-policy-tariffs">not as well positioned for a trade war</a> as the administration had thought.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The simplest explanation for why Trump backed down from his trade war with China may be that China showed that it is able to fight back. “Trump is kind of a bully, and bullies don&#8217;t like to have even fights,” said Jeremy Shapiro, research director at the European Council on Foreign Relations.&nbsp;</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading has-text-align-none"><strong>Reverse prioritization</strong></h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Colby’s 2021 book warned that America would be unable to counter China’s military rise if the US continued to expand its security commitments throughout the world by pushing for NATO expansion into Eastern Europe for instance and getting bogged down in costly long-term wars in the Middle East. “What is used for the Middle East will not be available for Asia,” he warned starkly.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The second Trump administration has followed the prioritizer <a href="https://www.wsj.com/opinion/ukraine-aid-europe-kiel-institute-russia-vladimir-putin-9fe47d4f">playbook by substantially reducing aid</a> to Ukraine — though he hasn’t eliminated intelligence sharing with Ukraine’s military or halted weapons sales paid for by other countries — and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/16/world/middleeast/us-handover-military-bases-syria.html">completing the withdrawal of US troops from Syria</a>. On the other hand, the US has taken on a swathe of new international commitments, including a <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/474168/donroe-doctrine-trump-latin-america-venezuela-colombia-mexico-cuba">militarized new approach to Latin America</a>, and it has actually <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/478961/trump-somalia-airstrikes-shabab-isis">ramped up ongoing counterterrorism operations</a> in places like Somalia. In contrast to the first Trump administration’s 2017 National Security Strategy, which heralded a new era of Great Power Competition, <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/471443/trump-national-security-strategy-europe">the document released in 2025 was more focused on the threat</a> posed by woke governments in Europe than authoritarians in Beijing.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“They have probably been more engaged <em>outside</em> of Asia than any administration has been in at least a decade,” said Zack Cooper, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who studies US strategy in China.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Those commitments have been dwarfed by the current war in Iran, which has dramatically drawn down US stocks of precisely the sort of advanced munitions like <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/482198/iran-missiles-interceptors-drones">tomahawk cruise missiles and Patriot interceptors</a> that would be vital in a conflict over Taiwan. The war has also required diverting resources (including THAAD interceptors, an aircraft carrier strike group, and a <a href="https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2026/03/marine-expeditionary-unit-ordered-to-the-middle-east/#:~:text=At%20least%202%2C000%20U.S.%20Marines,Iran%20enter%20their%20third%20week.">marine expeditionary unit</a>) from the Indo-Pacific region to the Middle East.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“We have patiently accumulated these capabilities [in the Pacific] over time,” said a former senior US official who spoke with reporters on condition of anonymity last week. “It has now been vacated. It is all back in the Middle East.”</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading has-text-align-none"><strong>The eternally postponed pivot to Asia</strong></h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">This is <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/10/11/americas-pacific-century/">hardly the first US administration</a> that sought to redirect US attention to the Pacific, but it hasn’t quite yet. As the Wall Street Journal’s <a href="https://x.com/alexbward/status/2052395836479324433">Alex Ward recently joked</a>, “The ‘pivot to Asia’ is the U.S. foreign policy version of ‘infrastructure week.’”&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Given the number of pressing global conflicts that come across the president’s desk every day, particularly in the Middle East, “it takes a tremendous amount of discipline in the US government system to ensure you actually can execute an Indo-Pacific strategy,” said the former US official.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Still, one would have thought that the particular distraction that the US recently got involved in — another open-ended and draining Middle East war — would be one that this particular administration would avoid. Trump, after all, distinguished himself from his Republican rivals in 2016 by his willingness to criticize the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and his team is stocked with veterans of those wars, including Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who came to see them as strategic blunders.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">It’s now clear that the “great power competition” framing of the first term was more the work of Trump’s advisers than the president himself, who has always seen Xi more as a peer with whom he can cut deals than a rival for global dominance whom he must defeat.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“The idea that the administration was going to prioritize Asia was something that was pushed by a number of people, especially on the defense side, who really believe that that would be the better approach from the US,” said the AEI’s Cooper. “The problem ultimately is that the president of the United States doesn&#8217;t share that view.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Shapiro, of the European Council on Foreign Relations, who co-wrote the article that originally laid out the three “tribes” framework — primacists, restrainers, and prioritizers — says all three are present within the administration, but Trump ultimately doesn’t fit neatly within any of them. And in contrast to previous presidents who relied primarily on advice from their own officials and intelligence services, Trump often seems to put more stock in advice from outsiders he considers peers. This can include foreign leaders like Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, who <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/07/us/politics/trump-iran-war.html">effectively made the case for the war with Iran</a>, or business leaders like Nvidia’s Jensen Huang, who <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/471884/nvidia-chips-china-trump-huang">advocated for Trump to ease restrictions</a> on selling his company’s most advanced microchips to China, undermining an export control regime that took shape under the first Trump administration.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">In Washington’s China-watching circles, Trump is often described as his own China “desk officer.” His policies are often based on his own intuitions, and he’s far less hemmed in by more conventional advisers than during his first term. So it was always probably a mistake to attempt to glean clues about how he would approach America’s most important geopolitical relationship from the views of those around him. It also makes the outcome of any meeting between these two leaders particularly hard to predict.&nbsp;</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading has-text-align-none">Where is the US-China relationship heading?</h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">It’s not quite as if everything is entirely rosy in the US-China relationship. The two countries remain locked in a legal and <a href="https://www.npr.org/2025/08/12/nx-s1-5500001/china-us-un-panama-canal-clash">diplomatic spat over their interests </a>in the Panama Canal, for instance. The White House has <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpqxgxx9nrqo">accused China of “industrial-scale campaigns”</a> to steal artificial intelligence advances. A potential plan to require <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/white-house-considers-vetting-ai-models-before-they-are-released-nyt-reports-2026-05-04/">government reviews of new AI models</a> is motivated by the imperative of keeping an edge over China, notwithstanding the White House’s recent flip on chip exports.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">And while the potential for military conflict may not be front and center when it comes to the White House’s rhetoric these days, <a href="https://www.defenseone.com/policy/2026/04/marines-will-update-land-warfare-doctrine-they-prep-near-peer-drone-driven-fight/413169/">the scenario remains</a> at the center of the US military’s planning and doctrine.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“I don&#8217;t think the Chinese are counting on the US leaving their sphere of interest,” said Brookings’ Kim. “If anything, I think they see strategic encirclement as increasing.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Chinese leaders likely know that with the Iran war not going according to plan, Trump may feel he needs a global win —&nbsp;and US allies are nervously watching what he may be willing to concede in order to get one with Xi by striking a deal on trade or another issue. Trump’s comments in February, suggesting that <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/why-trumps-remark-about-discussing-taiwan-arms-sales-with-china-has-raised-concerns">he was discussing potential arms</a> sales to Taiwan with Xi raised alarm bells in Taipei. The White House has also held off on approving about $15 million dollars worth of sales <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/08/world/asia/taiwan-trump-military-china-spending-25-billion.html">until after the summit to avoid offending</a> Beijing. Xi may hope to get Trump to make an explicit statement in opposition to Taiwanese independence, overturning decades of purposeful US ambiguity on the question. If there is anything even close to that for the US side, it could boost the standing of political factions in Taiwan <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/10/asia/taiwan-us-china-kmt-intl-hnk">that want a more accommodating relationship </a>with the mainland. A Taiwan under Chinese control might once have been considered the nightmare scenario for “Asia firsters” in Trump’s orbit. But even Colby now argues that Taiwan is “very important,” but not “essential,” for the overall goal of “denying China regional hegemony over Asia.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">This visit was already postponed once due to the war in Iran and is likely to be a bit more low-key than anticipated when it was first announced. Trump is bringing a few US CEOs along with him <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/china/trump-plans-bring-smaller-ceo-delegation-beijing-summit-sources-say-2026-05-08/">but fewer than when he visited in 2017.</a> Unlike that visit, during which Trump was deeply impressed with the pomp and ceremony he was greeted with, this meeting is notably not being described by the Chinese as a “state visit plus.” It’s just a standard summit.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The summit may well result in some investment deals and perhaps some statements on issues like fentanyl and AI governance. The administration has made several calls for China to do more to help resolve the ongoing Strait of Hormuz crisis, but Beijing has shown little interest in getting more deeply involved in Middle East crises.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Low-key or not, the summit will be closely watched by US allies in the region. “Given President Trump&#8217;s criticism of wars of choice, and given the Asia-first orientation of some of his advisors, if even <em>this</em> administration is finding itself bogged down in the Middle East and distracted from the Indo-Pacific, I think a lot of allies and partners will conclude that the United States has a propensity for distraction, is fundamentally unreliable, and they&#8217;re going to have to make calculations accordingly,” said Ali Wyne, senior researcher on US-China relations at the International Crisis Group.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The summit may ultimately be taken as confirmation that, for all the talk of an Asian century, the US remains perpetually mired in the Middle East. If that’s ever going to change, it’s not likely to happen under this president.&nbsp;</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Zack Beauchamp</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Are far-right politics just the new normal?]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/politics/488450/liberals-far-right-obama-carney-global-progress-action" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/?p=488450</id>
			<updated>2026-05-13T11:40:28-04:00</updated>
			<published>2026-05-13T06:00:00-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Politics" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="World Politics" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[TORONTO — At a conference bookended by speeches from President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, the leading lights of the global center-left gathered to consider their fate.&#160; The Global Progress Action Summit was billed as a “progressive version of CPAC,” the right-wing conference that has become a premier gathering for populist conservatives [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="Buttigieg speaks into a microphone." data-caption="Pete Buttigieg, former US secretary of transportation, speaks during the Global Progress Action Summit at the Fairmont Royal York Hotel in Toronto, Canada. | Soeren Stache/Picture Alliance via Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Soeren Stache/Picture Alliance via Getty Images" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/05/gettyimages-2274950567.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	Pete Buttigieg, former US secretary of transportation, speaks during the Global Progress Action Summit at the Fairmont Royal York Hotel in Toronto, Canada. | Soeren Stache/Picture Alliance via Getty Images	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p class="has-text-align-none">TORONTO — At a conference bookended by speeches from President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, the leading lights of the global center-left gathered to consider their fate.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The Global Progress Action Summit was billed as a “progressive version of CPAC,” the right-wing conference that has become a premier gathering for populist conservatives from around the world. And indeed, the conference was preoccupied with its right-mirror image — with speakers admitting that the far right had outmaneuvered them in the past, and advancing ideas for how to blunt its seemingly persistent appeal going forward.</p>

<div class="wp-block-vox-media-highlight vox-media-highlight">
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Key takeaways</h2>



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Vox attended a recent conference for the international left, featuring people like former US President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, to try and understand how liberals are responding to the far-right’s persistent political power.</li>



<li>We learned that liberals around the world are talking a lot less about the fever breaking, and the far right going away, and much more about how to live in a reality where large numbers of voters support those parties.</li>



<li>They are increasingly optimistic that they can manage — even succeed — in a political environment where the far right is a leading alternative.</li>
</ul>
</div>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“This is the raison d’être for this work,” as Neera Tanden, the president of the Center for American Progress (one of the conference’s organizers), put it to me.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">For years, liberal elites on both sides of the Atlantic saw figures like President Donald Trump as a blip to be outlasted. The right’s “fever” would, as the last two <a href="https://www.vox.com/2016/7/28/12306782/obama-convention-speech">Democratic</a> <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-once-asserted-republicans-would-have-an-epiphany-now-he-admits-he-doesnt-understand-them/2021/05/06/a8204a84-ae77-11eb-acd3-24b44a57093a_story.html">presidents</a> suggested, eventually break after electoral rebukes — returning <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-donald-trump-re-defines-the-term-gop-establishment/">the old establishment</a> to its traditional leadership positions.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The evidence on this theory is in, and it has failed. Biden’s presidency did not mark the end of Trumpism, nor have far-right electoral defeats in countries ranging from France to Poland been Waterloos.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“It’s clear that Democrats can’t just treat this as some random anomaly or self-correcting problem,” Pete Buttigieg, secretary of transportation under Joe Biden and a rumored 2028 candidate, told me in an interview at the conference. “Look around the world for evidence of that.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The conference organizers chose to meet in Toronto because Canada was an exception to these trends. Canada’s center-left Liberal party has been in power for 11 unbroken years; its main opposition, the Conservative Party, has grown more populist in recent years but remains <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/24140480/canada-pierre-poilievre-conservative-party-populism-democracy">considerably more moderate</a> than Trump’s Republicans or the typical European far-right faction.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Yet few attendees had anything like a plan for making their countries more Canadian. In fact, their comments revealed an implicitly opposite approach: Instead of figuring out how to head off the far right entirely, the center-left was learning to live with their presence.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">That means redefining victory not as crushing the far right, but defeating it the way they would any other normal political opponent.</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">“This is not normal” — except it is</h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The main reason behind the new liberal stance is simple, brute reality: polls and election results show that the far right is simply part of the new normal.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">In the US, Trump long ago transformed the Republican Party in his image. The right-wing Italian prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, began her political career as <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/how-a-right-wing-party-of-neo-fascist-roots-became-poised-to-lead-italy">a neo-fascist activist</a> and is now a major world leader. The far-right AfD is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/19/world/europe/germany-far-right-afd.html">topping German polls</a> despite frequent accusations of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/26/world/europe/germany-ruling-afd-extremist.html">neo-Nazi ties,</a> and France’s National Rally is the <a href="https://kalshi.com/markets/kxfrenchpres/french-presidential-election/kxfrenchpres-27">odds-on favorite</a> to win the presidency in 2027. <a href="https://www.npr.org/2026/05/10/nx-s1-5817491/uk-elections-keir-starmer-resign-reform-green">Two days before the conference</a>, the United Kingdom’s Reform Party stomped to victory over the ruling Labour Party in local elections so resoundingly that the centrist Prime Minister Keir Starmer is now on <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/12/world/live-news/uk-keir-starmer-labour">resignation watch</a>.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">One theory, popular among conference goers, is that this far-right trend could be blunted by economic success. Speaker after speaker touted various policies in this area, on the implicit —&nbsp;and sometimes explicit —&nbsp;assumption they could deliver victory by striking at the heart of the far right’s appeal.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“It’s gotten harder to get and stay in the middle class,” Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan told me. “That economic stress is causing people to head into the arms of someone who will tell them they have an easy solution and they have someone to blame.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">A version of this approach, widely termed “deliverism” at the time, was an animating idea behind the Biden administration’s pursuit of a large stimulus and redistributive policy. But it’s also easier said than done: Biden <em>did</em> deliver low unemployment, high economic growth, and more manufacturing jobs in cutting-edge industries —&nbsp;producing a US economy that The Economist famously termed “<a href="https://www.economist.com/special-report/2024-10-19">the envy of the world</a>” in October 2024. That obviously didn’t work out as planned, as voters <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy/385932/biden-inflation-record-worse-unpopular-mistakes">revolted against spiking inflation</a> and grew more pessimistic than ever.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Slotkin’s response is that Biden simply delivered in the wrong ways, trumpeting good economic statistics while ignoring the devastating effects of higher prices.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“They tried to tell the American people that they were better off than they felt they were,” she says. “Even while it was happening, I said, ‘If I hear one more Harvard economist tell me people are better off than they really think they are,&#8217; I’m going to lose it.’ Because people know their own pocketbooks.”</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/05/gettyimages-2274950842.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="" title="" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Sen. Elissa Slotkin speaks during the Global Progress Action Summit at the Fairmont Royal York Hotel in Toronto, Canada. | Soeren Stache/Picture Alliance via Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Soeren Stache/Picture Alliance via Getty Images" />
<p class="has-text-align-none">The underlying premise is questionable. The best social science has shown, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Reactionary-Spirit-Insidious-Political-Tradition/dp/154170441X">time and again</a>, that the far right’s base is motivated less by the economic anxiety that Slotkin cites and much more by concerns about cultural and demographic change. The far right persists across different democracies with different economic circumstances and models because all of them are, in one way or another, grappling with changes wrought by mass immigration and shifting cultural roles surrounding race and gender.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">But what’s interesting about Slotkin’s approach is just how <em>normal</em> it is.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Trying to beat the other party by delivering concrete economic goods is perhaps the most traditional of traditional political strategies. “It’s the economy, stupid” was James Carville’s famous tagline back when he was running <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_the_economy,_stupid">Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign</a>. It is also a necessarily cyclical strategy; eventually, the economy will perform poorly under your watch, and your party will lose. Slotkin’s deliverism isn’t a strategy for vanquishing the far right, but beating it temporarily in the traditional manner of democratic politics. It is how you deal with a rival, not an existential threat.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Of course, the far right can indeed pose a kind of existential threat by attacking democracy. When the Hungarian center-left lost the country’s 2010 election, they did not get another fair shot in 2014. Instead, they were forced to compete on increasingly uneven ground, locking them out of power until this year’s wave election gave Prime Minister Viktor Orbán no choice but to concede defeat.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Center-left politicians are, at this point, acutely aware of the danger. On the American side, Buttigieg suggested that this required fundamental political reform.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“If return to normal could have been done, could have succeeded, the last administration would have done it,” he says.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">He believes the ultimate goal should be to create a system where moderate Republicans could break with Trump more easily when democracy is on the line. True MAGA, he estimates, represents only 20 percent to 30 percent of the population; perhaps changing the way the system works could bring its political representation more in line with that.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">How exactly to get here from there was more fuzzy: the two reforms he floated as examples, ranked-choice voting and California-style jungle primaries, would <a href="https://leedrutman.substack.com/p/how-i-updated-my-views-on-ranked">almost certainly</a> be <a href="https://digitalcommons.csp.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027&amp;context=clr">insufficient</a>. Moreover, even his ideal state concedes a significant role for MAGA —&nbsp;one not far from what we see in many European democracies, where far-right parties are always a visible part of the legislature. In Germany, for example, the AfD has reached a position of significant influence while commanding a small plurality (roughly 27 percent) in the polls.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Even the most radically ambitious vision, in short, still sees MAGA as a persistent and durable force in American politics.</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Maybe normal politics can work</h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">But if liberals now seem to be conceding that the far right won’t simply be vanquished, they also are growing more hopeful as to their ability to contain it.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Even as the far right has risen in power around the world in recent years, it’s also held power in relatively few places —&nbsp;and the closer it gets to governing, the more voters seem to remember why they kept them out of power so long in the first place.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Trump’s second administration is a case in point. The president followed through on his promises to boost the economy by throwing up protective tariffs, blowing up government agencies, expelling immigrants, and slashing taxes —&nbsp;only to see his approval scraping new lows on issue after issue. Government by the far right and for the far right is so far backfiring on its own terms and producing a doom loop of corruption, infighting, war, and economic uncertainty.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Elly Schlein&nbsp;— the leader of Italy’s Democrats, the center-left opposition to Meloni’s government —&nbsp;was perhaps the most optimistic in this regard. Coming off of <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/italian-voters-reject-judicial-reform-in-setback-for-meloni">a recent victory in a national referendum</a>, where the opposition defeated a Meloni proposal to increase her control over the judiciary, Schlein saw a far-right whose ascent was finally starting to ebb&nbsp;— primarily as a result of its own governing failures.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“The time of right-wing nationalists is over, because they are not delivering with people,” she said in a panel appearance.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The strategy for the left must not be “running after them or trying to speak their language” —&nbsp;an implicit rebuke to leaders like the UK’s Starmer, who tacked to the right on immigration and got wiped out. Rather, Schlein suggested, the center-left should try to force the conversation onto “uncomfortable ground” for the right —&nbsp;meaning economic issues like “housing, wages, healthcare, and education.”&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Though Schlein is a leftist, one occasionally termed <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/13/italy-aoc-elly-schlein-pd-is-reviving-italian-politics.html">Italy’s AOC</a>, her advice sounded strikingly similar to the moderate Slotkin’s. Both believed that the center-left can survive periods of far-right government and then, subsequently, return to power by attacking the incumbent’s corruption and unequal governance. The battle will never be over, but losing once doesn’t necessarily mean the setback is permanent.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Perhaps the most striking piece of evidence that “normal” political rhetoric can work&nbsp;—&nbsp;even in the context of democratic backsliding or outright authoritarianism — came from the success of new Hungarian Prime Minister Peter Magyar.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">As it happened, the day of the conference was the day that Magyar was officially sworn into office — and, as such, everyone was talking about him. In our conversation, Slotkin explicitly cited “the Hungarian model” as an inspiration for her own approach to thinking about beating back the far-right tide.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Magyar campaigned both on economic issues and as an agent of structural transformation, while linking the two topics together. Focusing on the Orbán regime’s ostentatious corruption, he argued that the current government’s nature had made its very existence a barrier to prosperity for ordinary Hungarians. He promised not just a change in economic policy, but also the functional demolition of what Orbán had built: transforming politicized institutions and even prosecuting top government officials and allies who committed crimes on the former government’s behalf.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Now, the circumstances in Hungary are different from those in any other Western democracy. Orbán was not just a far-right politician but an authoritarian who had twisted every aspect of the political system to try to maintain power indefinitely. After 16 years of such a regime, and amid an economic disaster, Magyar’s message was unusually likely to hit (especially given his clever tactics for getting around the government’s tight control over information).</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">But his success at least offers a hint of hope for the otherwise beleaguered liberal movement represented at the conference. If a country that had <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/13/17823488/hungary-democracy-authoritarianism-trump">crossed the line into authoritarianism</a> can come back through the tools of “normal” politics, the thinking goes, then perhaps the world’s oldest democracy and its allies can save themselves the same way.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"></p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Cameron Peters</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Flavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA head]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/the-logoff-newsletter-trump/488492/marty-makary-resigns-fda-flavored-vapes-mifepristone-trump" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/488492/the-logoff-template</id>
			<updated>2026-05-12T18:01:36-04:00</updated>
			<published>2026-05-12T18:15:00-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Donald Trump" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Health" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Politics" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Public Health" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="The Logoff" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[This story appeared in&#160;The Logoff, a daily newsletter that helps you stay informed about the Trump administration without letting political news take over your life.&#160;Subscribe here. Welcome to The Logoff: Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary is out of a job.&#160; What happened? Makary, who led the federal agency in charge of regulating drugs, [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="Marty Makary, a clean-shaven man wearing a navy suit with a fuchsia tie, stands in the Oval Office." data-caption="FDA Commissioner Marty Makary in the Oval Office of the White House on December 18, 2025. | Aaron Schwartz/CNP/Bloomberg via Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Aaron Schwartz/CNP/Bloomberg via Getty Images" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/05/gettyimages-2251915201.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	FDA Commissioner Marty Makary in the Oval Office of the White House on December 18, 2025. | Aaron Schwartz/CNP/Bloomberg via Getty Images	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p class="has-text-align-none"><em>This story appeared in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.vox.com/the-logoff-newsletter-trump" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">The Logoff</a>, a daily newsletter that helps you stay informed about the Trump administration without letting political news take over your life.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.vox.com/pages/logoff-newsletter-trump-administration-updates" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Subscribe here</a></em>.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><strong>Welcome to The Logoff:</strong> Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary is out of a job.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><strong>What happened?</strong> Makary, who led the federal agency in charge of regulating drugs, medical devices, food safety, cosmetics, and more, resigned under pressure on Tuesday, after <a href="https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/trump-planning-to-fire-fda-commissioner-marty-makary-34c072e2">reports surfaced last week</a> that President Donald Trump had approved a plan to fire him.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">His ouster is just the latest upheaval for the country’s public health infrastructure, which has been in turmoil under Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><strong>What’s the context?</strong> Makary’s departure leaves HHS without a confirmed CDC director, FDA commissioner, or surgeon general.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Susan Monarez was forced out in August after clashing with Kennedy over vaccines, and HHS Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill, who took over as acting CDC director after Monarez left, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/13/health/rfk-aides-jim-oneill-hhs-cdc">departed</a> in February. Trump has yet to have a surgeon general nominee confirmed, and earlier this month made his <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/07/politics/rfk-jr-trump-maha-maga-rift">third nomination</a> for the role.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><strong>Why was Makary forced out?</strong> The proximate cause — but not the only one — was seemingly his opposition to approving fruit-flavored e-cigarettes for sale, something which Trump has pushed for. (The vapes were authorized last week, and the FDA also issued <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/10/science/fda-flavored-vapes.html">additional favorable guidance</a> on Friday.)&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Trump, who promised to “save Vaping” in 2024, has expressed interest in the issue as a way to court young voters; the change is a gift to tobacco companies. However, public health officials warn that flavors such as mango and blueberry could boost vapes’ appeal to teenagers and younger children. </p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Makary was also not popular with conservative Republicans for his approach to the abortion drug mifepristone, an issue Trump has <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/05/politics/mifepristone-abortion-trump-political-pressure">tried to avoid</a>. On Tuesday, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) described him as “uniquely destructive to the prolife movement,” while Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) said in a post that Makary was “part of a broader symptom of an administration that has not paid attention to pro-life issues.”</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading has-text-align-none">And with that, it’s time to log off…</h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">For the <a href="https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/488114/anti-humanism-climate-anthropocene-hope-buddhism?view_token=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJpZCI6IndEVVVVc2x3bmwiLCJwIjoiL2Z1dHVyZS1wZXJmZWN0LzQ4ODExNC9hbnRpLWh1bWFuaXNtLWNsaW1hdGUtYW50aHJvcG9jZW5lLWhvcGUtYnVkZGhpc20iLCJleHAiOjE3Nzk4Mjg5MDksImlhdCI6MTc3ODYxOTMwOX0.VkP5aT-MwHyklfPXraLpihy-sNQDYU9YxWCe5v9agOc&amp;utm_medium=gift-link">latest edition</a> of her indispensable advice column, my colleague Sigal Samuel wrote about what to do if the news has you feeling misanthropic lately. It’s an evocative reminder of the value of “Renaissance humanism, the tradition that emphasized just how beautiful and wonderful human beings can be.” You can read Sigal’s piece <a href="https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/488114/anti-humanism-climate-anthropocene-hope-buddhism?view_token=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJpZCI6IndEVVVVc2x3bmwiLCJwIjoiL2Z1dHVyZS1wZXJmZWN0LzQ4ODExNC9hbnRpLWh1bWFuaXNtLWNsaW1hdGUtYW50aHJvcG9jZW5lLWhvcGUtYnVkZGhpc20iLCJleHAiOjE3Nzk4Mjg5MDksImlhdCI6MTc3ODYxOTMwOX0.VkP5aT-MwHyklfPXraLpihy-sNQDYU9YxWCe5v9agOc&amp;utm_medium=gift-link">here with a gift link</a>.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Thanks for reading, have a great evening, and we’ll see you back here tomorrow!</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Dylan Scott</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Hantavirus will test if the world learned anything from Covid]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/health/488447/hantavirus-cruise-ship-outbreak-spread-response" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/?p=488447</id>
			<updated>2026-05-12T16:38:20-04:00</updated>
			<published>2026-05-12T16:45:00-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Health" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Health Care" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Policy" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Public Health" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Almost as soon as the hantavirus outbreak on the cruise ship MV Hondius became international news, public health experts rushed to assuage the public: This is not Covid-19. Don’t worry — this is a virus that requires “close contact” to spread. The risk of a pandemic is quite low. But if this apparent certainty from [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="The cruise ship MV Hondius, site of the hantavirus outbreak" data-caption="The cruise ship MV Hondius, initial site of the hantavirus outbreak. | Europa Press via Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Europa Press via Getty Images" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/05/GettyImages-2275667544.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	The cruise ship MV Hondius, initial site of the hantavirus outbreak. | Europa Press via Getty Images	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p class="has-text-align-none">Almost as soon as the hantavirus outbreak on the cruise ship MV Hondius became international news, public health experts rushed to assuage the public: <a href="https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/misc-emerging-topics/who-officials-hantavirus-cases-outbreak-ship-not-another-covid-19">This is not Covid-19</a>. Don’t worry — this is a virus that requires “close contact” to spread. <a href="https://www.vox.com/health/488101/what-is-hantavirus-cruise-ship-outbreak">The risk of a pandemic is quite low</a>.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">But if this apparent certainty from public health leaders amid another emergent health crisis made you recall the earliest days of the Covid-19 emergency, <a href="https://x.com/zeynep/status/2053481163839160600?s=20">you’re not alone</a>. In February and March of 2020, health authorities also <a href="https://x.com/WHO/status/1243972193169616898">reassured</a> the public that the novel coronavirus was not airborne (<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00925-7?">not true</a>) and said that people <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/27/science/face-mask-guidelines-timeline.html">shouldn’t wear masks</a> (<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02457-y">whoops</a>). <a href="https://www.vox.com/coronavirus-covid19/22870268/cdc-covid-19-guidelines-isolation-boosters-masks">One of the central lessons of the pandemic</a> was that health experts should not be overly confident in their public pronouncements, because any later changes based on new information could lead the public to lose trust.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">So six years later, with hantavirus, you might wonder why health leaders sound so confident about controlling a virus with a <a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/hantavirus">much higher mortality rate</a> than influenza or Covid-19. Wouldn’t it be better to be too aggressive rather than too cautious? One international group of doctors and scientists <a href="https://trishgreenhalgh.substack.com/p/fb368a53-f848-4b25-86de-aae5358f52be?open=false">wrote an open letter on Substack</a> to the World Health Organization, urging them to adopt a precaution-first approach. If there is any chance the hantavirus could be airborne or transmit more easily than “close contact” would suggest, public health authorities should assume the worst and act accordingly, the authors argued.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“The costs of implementing these protections early are modest,” they wrote. “The costs of delaying them during a high-consequence outbreak may be profound.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Right now, the course of the hantavirus outbreak remains uncertain. There are still <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/hantavirus-cases-rise-11-cruise-ship-passengers-quarantine-rcna344683">less than a dozen reported cases</a>. How much bigger will it get? We don’t know for sure. A hantavirus outbreak has never occurred in this kind of environment before. Previous known outbreaks were small — <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2009040">a few dozen cases at most</a> — and <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6199996/">occurred in rural communities</a> that are not conducive to widespread virus transmission. This one happened on a tightly packed cruise ship, with travelers from all over the world now returning to their home countries; it could be a perfect setting for rapid spread, as we know from the <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/covid-19-cruise-passengers-recall-painful-memories-hantavirus-outbreak-rcna343826">early days of Covid</a>. How many of the passengers will get sick? Will they follow isolation protocols? How many more people will they infect? We don’t know.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">But what’s already clear is that the shadow of the pandemic still hangs over both the public health organizations responsible for responding to the crisis and <a href="https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/public-health/new-poll-reflects-broad-american-distrust-health-agencies-and-their-advice">the increasingly distrustful public</a> that those groups are supposed to serve.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Public health faces genuine dilemmas during any infectious disease emergency — how to balance the needs of the individual with the needs of the public at large, how to convey what they do (and don’t) know about a dangerous pathogen without confusing people if the situation changes. Public health authorities have struggled to strike the right tone in one of the highest-profile viral outbreaks since Covid-19.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“If you underreact, you can miss a window to contain something. But if you overreact without any clear evidence, you lose public trust, and you exhaust resources, and you make it harder to get compliance when you really need it,” <a href="https://ph.ucla.edu/about/faculty-staff-directory/anne-rimoin">Anne Rimoin</a>, an epidemiologist at UCLA, told me. “I do think that public health officials are operating in a much more politicized, trust-fragile environment, and it certainly will make agencies more cautious about how they communicate uncertainty or escalate interventions.”</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">How much do we actually know about hantavirus?</h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Hantavirus almost seems perfectly designed to poke the wounds of the pandemic. The superficial details of the cruise outbreak are too similar to the <a href="https://www.bu.edu/bhr/2020/07/08/the-case-of-the-diamond-princess-stranded-at-sea-in-a-pandemic/">opening rounds of Covid</a> to ignore: passengers forbidden from coming ashore, aggressive respiratory symptoms. And while scientists are undoubtedly more familiar with hantavirus, which has been documented and studied for more than 30 years, than they were with the virus that was eventually called SARS-Cov-2, there is still plenty we do not know about it.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Case studies from <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM199404073301401?">a 1993 outbreak in the southwestern United States</a> and <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2009040">a 2018-19 outbreak in Argentina</a> —&nbsp;the former the first documented cases of the deadly pulmonary syndrome caused by the strain of hantavirus common in the Americas, the latter a large and recent outbreak involving human-to-human transmission — are suggestive but hardly definitive. They both involved fewer than 40 cases and the evidence of hantavirus’s person-to-person transmissibility was mixed.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">In Argentina, there appeared to be a superspreading event (a birthday party attended by the first symptomatic patient), that led to five new infections; one of those patients likely infected six more people. But there were also dozens of healthcare workers who treated infected patients, most without protective equipment, and none of them got sick. That led to the hypothesis that some people are more likely to spread the virus than others, but there isn’t a lot of clarity around which people it will be. The evidence suggests only that such spreaders have an unusually high viral load and compromised liver function during their infection.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">And in both of those prior outbreaks, the virus took hold in sparsely populated rural areas. A cruise ship or a plane full of passengers is a very different environment. As <a href="https://www.uthsc.edu/faculty/profile/?netid=cjonsson">Colleen Jonsson</a>, a professor at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center and member of the International Society for Hantaviruses’s advisory board, put it to me, the rarity of hantavirus outbreaks means scientists are working with limited data as they attempt to predict what might happen next. “There are a lot of unknowns,” she said.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">But at the same time, scientists have been studying hantavirus in animals and analyzing its genetics for decades now. In one bit of good news, <a href="https://virological.org/t/preliminary-analysis-of-orthohantavirus-andesense-virus-sequences-from-a-cruise-ship-related-cluster-may-2026/1029">a preliminary analysis</a> of a sample from the cruise outbreak showed the virus was nearly 99 percent the same as a sample from the 2018-19 outbreak in Argentina and a 1997 outbreak there. One of the most challenging aspects of Covid-19 was <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha6yUxze1vk">how it mutated into new variants</a> like <a href="https://www.vox.com/22547537/delta-coronavirus-variant-covid-19-vaccines-masks-lockdown">delta</a> and <a href="https://www.vox.com/22824183/omicron-variant-covid-19-vaccine-south-africa-pfizer-vaccine">omicron</a> that led to subsequent waves. </p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">So based on what scientists know of hantavirus to date, this is not a virus that is very efficient at transmitting; there are hundreds of cases in North and South America every year. That’s why most public health experts, including everyone I’ve talked to, don’t believe hantavirus will cause a crisis comparable to Covid-19. (Though that is a very low bar.) But when you dive into the details, there is still a lot of uncertainty —&nbsp;and part of what the public health critics are focused on is what they see as a failure to convey those uncertainties and craft an outbreak response that accounts for them.</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">How should public health be responding to the cruise ship outbreak?</h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The worst-case scenario would be overly confident pronouncements about the relative lack of danger from hantavirus, only for poor infection control to lead to many more cases and deaths, further eroding whatever trust in public health authorities still remains. That is why many public health experts have been urging the WHO and its national partners to be more aggressive.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">And in recent days, the WHO and its national partners have ramped up their response; for example, based on their ongoing investigations, WHO has upgraded <a href="https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/management-of-contacts-of-andes-virus-(andv)-cases-fromthe-mv-hondius-cruise-ship">their guidance</a> to say everyone on the ship should be considered high-risk contacts. Most of the 18 American passengers who returned to the US are <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2026/05/11/cruise-hantavirus-nebraska-quarantine/">quarantined at the National Quarantine Unit in Nebraska</a> and are expected to remain there for 42 days; two were sent to Atlanta for closer monitoring. (The incubation period for hantavirus can be <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3291207/">as long as 40 days</a>.) Other countries, including France, have also <a href="https://x.com/seblecornu/status/2053875868578054456?s=46">said</a> they are requiring passengers to quarantine at a hospital.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Rimoin and <a href="https://publichealth.jhu.edu/faculty/3525/caitlin-m-rivers">Caitlin Rivers</a>, senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, both said they thought that the response had progressed appropriately: based on the initial situation (infections among a husband and wife and a close contact) and prior history with the virus, it made sense to focus on close contacts. As evidence came in that even some people on the cruise who were not in close contact had gotten sick, WHO adjusted, deeming anyone on the ship as high-risk for infection. </p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“From the outside, that can sometimes look inconsistent. But in reality, it generally reflects the fact that outbreak investigations are iterative and data-driven,” Rimoin said. “It&#8217;s always easier to reconstruct the ideal response retrospectively once you know the outcome. But in real time, officials are making decisions with incomplete information. So far, we&#8217;re seeing the response escalate as the risk picture becomes clearer.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">In other words, some of this is a matter of perception. When I <a href="https://www.vox.com/health/488101/what-is-hantavirus-cruise-ship-outbreak">first reported on hantavirus last week</a>, I was struck by the gap between the April 11 death of the first patient and the May 2 confirmation that hantavirus was the cause of the ship’s outbreak. How did it take three weeks to figure out what pathogen was spreading? But several of the experts I spoke to saw it differently: Rimoin said hantavirus “wouldn’t necessarily have been top of mind for anybody on that ship,” especially with respiratory symptoms. Jonsson was impressed that the South African facilities that accepted the infected passengers had the necessary diagnostic test on hand, and credited them for identifying the hantavirus as the cause as quickly as they did.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“All of those things are why it&#8217;s so complicated to be able to identify infectious diseases and to be able to react, because often by the time you realize what you have in front of you, you already have some spread,” Rimoin said.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Public health also requires risk management, balancing the need to protect the broader public with the rights and concerns of individuals. Rivers pointed out that keeping uninfected people on a cruise with infected people poses its own health risk to the first group.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">But hantavirus is a reminder of how difficult that balance is to strike —&nbsp;and to communicate. And the challenge is only growing: We now have a general public traumatized and radicalized by the Covid-19 experience, something that was unprecedented in living memory. The mistakes made during that crisis conditioned people to be skeptical of WHO and public health authorities, whether they believe those experts are being too cautious, or not being aggressive enough.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“I think threading the needle is hard,” Rivers said. “And I know that there are some eerie parallels to Covid-19 that are putting people on edge.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">If the outbreak peters out, it will be vindication for the confidence that public health authorities projected and their efforts to manage the outbreak in a less draconian manner. But if it does spiral into a larger crisis, even if it falls short of something like Covid, it may be another breaking point for public trust in the WHO and public health at large.</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Benjamin Stephen</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[What would J.R.R. Tolkien think of Palantir?]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/videos/488383/jrr-tolkien-palantir-peter-thiel-lord-of-the-rings" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/?post_type=vm_video_post&#038;p=488383</id>
			<updated>2026-05-12T13:00:17-04:00</updated>
			<published>2026-05-12T14:00:00-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Books" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Video" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Peter Thiel and Alex Karp’s Palantir Technologies is one of the most powerful and mysterious tech companies in Silicon Valley. Its namesake is also one of the most powerful and mysterious magical objects in the lore of J.R.R. Tolkien’s epic fantasy series The Lord of the Rings. The palantiri of The Lord of the Rings [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/05/Tolkien_Voxsitethumb.png?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
		</figcaption>
</figure>
<p class="has-text-align-none">Peter Thiel and Alex Karp’s <a href="https://www.palantir.com/">Palantir Technologies</a> is one of the most powerful and mysterious tech companies in Silicon Valley. Its namesake is also one of the most powerful and mysterious magical objects in the lore of J.R.R. Tolkien’s epic fantasy series <em>The Lord of the Rings</em>.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The palantiri of <em>The Lord of the Rings</em> are sort of like crystal balls or “seeing stones” that allow their users to communicate across vast distances, see events from afar, and sometimes even peer into the future. But just about everybody who tries to use a palantir in <em>The Lord of the Rings</em> is deceived by it, acting on the visions they’re receiving without the greater context or wisdom of what’s behind them. So why would the people behind Palantir want to name the company and build its culture around these powerful yet easily corruptible magical objects?</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">J.R.R. Tolkien was famously anti-tech and anti-government, expressing his fears of what would happen when those two forces combined through his fantasy works and his <a href="https://www.tolkienestate.com/letters/">letters to friends, family, and colleagues</a>. If he were alive in the age of Palantir, he might not be thrilled that a tech company with <a href="https://www.axios.com/2025/08/05/palantir-army-software-contract">lucrative government contracts</a> is name-checking his creations.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Vox producer Benjamin Stephen went on a quest to find out the story behind Palantir’s name, what the link to <em>The Lord of the Rings</em> reveals about the company, and what Tolkien might think about how his words are being used.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">More about Palantir and <em>The Lord of the Rings</em>:</p>

<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li><a href="https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25930212/the-scouring-of-the-shire.pdf">The Scouring of the Shire</a> letter written by Palantir alumni</li>



<li>Vox senior correspondent Constance Grady’s piece on the <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/466858/lord-of-the-rings-conservatives-right-republicans-elon-musk-jd-vance-peter-thiel">conservative reading of <em>The Lord of the Rings</em></a></li>



<li><em>Today, Explained</em>’s take on <a href="https://open.spotify.com/episode/6p2Jxa9KRttPTF15vwPmjR">what the right gets wrong about Tolkien</a></li>



<li>Caroline Haskins’s Wired piece on <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/palantir-what-the-company-does/">what Palantir actually does</a></li>



<li>&#8220;<a href="https://spectrejournal.com/tolkiens-deplorable-cultus/">Tolkien&#8217;s Deplorable Cultus</a>&#8221; by literature professor Robert Tally</li>
</ul>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Ian Millhiser</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Virginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymander]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/politics/488391/supreme-court-virginia-gerrymander-scott-mcdougle-jay-jones" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/?p=488391</id>
			<updated>2026-05-12T12:15:47-04:00</updated>
			<published>2026-05-12T12:15:47-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Midterm Elections 2026" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Politics" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Supreme Court" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[If you’re a Democrat, ask yourself a simple question: When was the last time something got better after Brett Kavanaugh put his hands on it? Unfortunately, Jay Jones, the Democratic attorney general of Virginia, does not appear to have considered this question before he asked the US Supreme Court to get involved in his state’s [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="Justices Kavanagh and Roberts sharing what’s a funny moment to them" data-caption="Why on Earth would Democrats want to give these guys more power over elections? | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/05/gettyimages-2194970910.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	Why on Earth would Democrats want to give these guys more power over elections? | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p class="has-text-align-none">If you’re a Democrat, ask yourself a simple question: When was the last time something got better after Brett Kavanaugh put his hands on it?</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Unfortunately, Jay Jones, the Democratic attorney general of Virginia, does not appear to have considered this question before he asked the US Supreme Court to get involved in his state’s <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/488176/virginia-supreme-court-gerrymandering-decision-republicans-win">fight over gerrymandering</a>. If the Court actually buys one of Jones’s arguments, they will leave Democrats in a much worse position than if Jones had never filed this case in the first place.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Earlier this year, Virginia voters approved a referendum to amend their state’s constitution — and to approve new congressional maps that were intended to give Democrats four additional seats in the US House of Representatives. The map was also intended to counterbalance Republican gerrymanders in states like Texas.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Last week, however, the Virginia Supreme Court handed down a <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/488176/virginia-supreme-court-gerrymandering-decision-republicans-win">surprising decision invalidating that referendum</a>, and reinstating the state’s previous congressional maps. The state supreme court’s decision in <a href="https://www.vacourts.gov/static/opinions/opnscvwp/1260127.pdf"><em>Scott v. McDougle</em></a> was wrong. It rested on a claim that Virginia voters were denied the right to weigh in on whether to amend their constitution. This claim is absurd because, again, the redistricting amendment was submitted to the state’s voters and approved by them in a referendum.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">But the fact that the state supreme court’s decision was wrong does not mean that the US Supreme Court has any business getting involved in this case. While the federal justices have the final word on all questions of federal law, <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/488176/virginia-supreme-court-gerrymandering-decision-republicans-win">state supreme courts have the final say</a> on how to interpret their own state’s law and their own state’s constitution.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">This means that, if the Virginia Supreme Court misreads Virginia’s constitution, then Virginia voters are stuck with that interpretation. But it also means that if the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which will <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/485133/wisconsin-supreme-court-democratic-blowout">soon have a Democratic supermajority</a>, rejects a Republican attempt to overturn an election, then the US Supreme Court cannot interfere with that decision either.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Jones’s <a href="https://www.vacourts.gov/static/opinions/opnscvwp/1260127.pdf">brief to the justices in the <em>Scott</em> case</a> asks the federal justices to upend this balance. Among other things, Jones relies on a discredited legal theory known as the “<a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/12/4/23481063/supreme-court-moore-harper-independent-state-legislature-doctrine-elections">independent state legislature doctrine</a>” (“ISLD”) to argue that the US Supreme Court should overrule Virginia’s highest court on a question about Virginia’s own election law.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Jones, in other words, wants to give a Republican US Supreme Court the final word on state election law disputes. There is simply no way that ends well for Democrats.</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Jones’s terrible legal arguments</h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Jones’s <a href="https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/28113284/vascotus051126.pdf">brief</a> makes two separate attacks on the state supreme court’s decision, one of which is wrong but trivial, and the other is outright dangerous.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The trivial argument relies on the fact that the state supreme court’s decision in <em>Scott</em> cites a US Supreme Court decision,<em> </em><a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/522/67/"><em>Foster v. Love</em></a> (1997), to justify its conclusion. The brief claims that the state supreme court misread <em>Foster</em>, and thus the US Supreme Court can get involved because the state court misread a federal case.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">But this argument is a huge stretch. While it’s true that the state supreme court’s opinion includes several citations to <em>Foster</em>, the court also relied on state law sources in its opinion, as well as historical documents, dictionaries, scholarly sources, and the state justices’ false conclusion that Virginia voters were somehow disenfranchised.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">As Jones acknowledges in his brief to the federal justices, the US Supreme Court may overrule a state supreme court decision when that decision is “<a href="https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/28113284/vascotus051126.pdf">interwoven with the federal law</a>.” But when that state court merely cites a federal court decision, even if it reads that federal decision incorrectly, that is not enough to transform a state case into a federal case. State courts routinely cite cases from other states or from federal courts because they find those decisions persuasive, and a few citations to a US Supreme Court decision does not give the federal justices the right to overrule a state supreme court decision.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Jones’s worst argument, meanwhile, hinges on the ISLD.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/12/4/23481063/supreme-court-moore-harper-independent-state-legislature-doctrine-elections">independent state legislature doctrine</a> arises out of two provisions of the US Constitution which say that the rules governing federal elections should typically be determined by each state’s “legislature.” For more than a century, the US Supreme Court has understood the word “legislature,” when used in this context, to refer to whichever <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/13-1314#writing-13-1314_OPINION_3">body has the power to make laws within a state</a> — which may include the people themselves if the state’s constitution permits ballot initiatives or referendums.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The ISLD, however, claims that the word “legislature” must be read to refer solely to a state’s legislative branch. Thus, under the strongest version of the ISLD, a state governor cannot veto an election-related bill (because the governor is part of the executive branch and not the legislative branch), a state supreme court cannot interpret a state’s election law (because the judiciary is not the “legislature”), and a state may not alter its election laws through a ballot initiative or referendum.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Though the US Supreme Court rejected this strong form of the ISLD many times, in <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-1271_3f14.pdf"><em>Moore v. Harper</em></a> (2023), the Court flirted with a weaker form of the doctrine that would effectively permit federal courts to overrule a state court’s interpretation of its own election law. “State courts,” the US Supreme Court said in <em>Moore</em>, “may not so exceed the bounds of ordinary judicial review as to unconstitutionally intrude upon the role specifically reserved to state legislatures.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none"><em>Moore</em> did not explain what it means to “exceed the bounds of ordinary judicial review,” and the US Supreme Court has never actually ruled that a state court did so. If it ever did so, however, that would be a massive transfer of power from state supreme courts (which are sometimes controlled by Democrats) to the US Supreme Court (which has a Republican supermajority for the foreseeable future).</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">By invoking <em>Moore</em> in his brief to the federal justices, in other words, <em>Jones</em> is asking the US Supreme Court’s Republican majority to seize total control over all disputes relating to federal elections, regardless of whether those disputes involve a question of state or federal law. It’s hard to imagine a more reckless request from a Democratic elected official.</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">The US Supreme Court is the reason why gerrymandering is out of control</h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Until fairly recently, US states typically only <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/487895/supreme-court-callais-voting-rights-citizens-united">redrew their maps every 10 years</a>. (The Constitution requires states to draw their legislative maps after each census.) And before this Court’s big redistricting rulings, maximal gerrymanders, like the 10-1 Democratic map at issue in <em>Scott</em> or the <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/12/supreme-court-allows-texas-to-use-redistricting-map-challenged-as-racially-discriminatory/">30-8 Republican map</a> recently drawn by Texas Republicans, were far less common than they are today.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">What changed was two Supreme Court decisions, both joined exclusively by the Court’s Republicans, that eliminated virtually all federal legal safeguards against gerrymandering. <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/18-422_9ol1.pdf"><em>Rucho v. Common Cause</em></a> (2019) held that federal courts may do nothing to stop partisan gerrymandering. And <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-109_21o3.pdf"><em>Louisiana v. Callais</em></a> (2026) abolished a 1982 amendment to the federal Voting Rights Act that prevented many states from drawing congressional maps that would only elect white Republicans.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">But now Virginia Democrats are asking the GOP-dominated Supreme Court to correct the state supreme court’s error in a gerrymandering case. That’s like hiring Osama bin Laden to rebuild the World Trade Center.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">No one has done more to supercharge gerrymandering, or to give Republicans an unfair advantage in congressional redistricting, than the Supreme Court’s six Republican justices. It is truly bizarre that an elected Democratic official now wants to give these six Republicans even more power over federal elections.&nbsp;</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Kiley Price</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Why the American Southeast is becoming a new hotspot for wildfires]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/climate/488335/southeast-florida-georgia-wildfire-drought-whiplash" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/?p=488335</id>
			<updated>2026-05-11T17:56:00-04:00</updated>
			<published>2026-05-12T07:45:00-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Climate" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Natural Disasters" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[This story was originally published by&#160;Inside Climate News&#160;and is reproduced here as part of the&#160;Climate Desk&#160;collaboration. Drought and fire are a dangerous duo. The Southeastern United States is witnessing this firsthand, as several major blazes have burned tens of thousands of acres across the parched region, destroying homes and prompting evacuations in some areas. Florida [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="tree backlit by sun with smoke and emergency vehicle in background" data-caption="Smoke lingers in the air from the Brantley Highway 82 Fire on April 24, 2026, in Atkinson, Georgia. The wildfire was one of many burning in the southeastern United States. | Sean Rayford/Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Sean Rayford/Getty Images" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/05/gettyimages-2272228492.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	Smoke lingers in the air from the Brantley Highway 82 Fire on April 24, 2026, in Atkinson, Georgia. The wildfire was one of many burning in the southeastern United States. | Sean Rayford/Getty Images	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p class="has-text-align-none"><em>This story was originally published by</em>&nbsp;<a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/28042026/todays-climate-drought-wildfire-southeast-us/"><em>Inside Climate News</em></a>&nbsp;<em>and is reproduced here as part of the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.climatedesk.org/">Climate Desk</a>&nbsp;collaboration.</em></p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Drought and fire are a dangerous duo. The Southeastern United States is witnessing this firsthand, as several major blazes have burned tens of thousands of acres across the parched region, destroying homes and prompting evacuations in some areas. Florida and Georgia have been particularly hard hit, and strong winds and unusually low humidity have made it difficult to combat the flames. </p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">With much of the Southeast in a <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-southeast-is-burning-extreme-drought-is-only-part-of-the-cause-281392" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">long-standing drought since July 2025</a>, dried-out vegetation has provided ample fuel for wildfires to spread the minute they spark. That can even be something as small as a <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2026/04/25/georgia-wildfire-cause-balloon/89794319007/#:~:text=A%20fast%2Dmoving%20blaze%20that,electrical%20line%2C%20wildfire%20investigators%20believe." target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">balloon hitting a power line</a>, which is likely what ignited one of the largest fires that tore through Georgia late last month, officials said. </p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Typically, forest managers ignite planned, controlled fires — known as prescribed burns — earlier in the season to clear this brittle brush. But this technique was&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wunc.org/2026-04-02/climate-change-is-stamping-out-north-carolinas-best-defense-against-wildfires" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">on hold</a>&nbsp;in certain areas amid the drought over concerns that small burns could quickly get out of control. Among this dried-out vegetation are the felled trees and branches left behind by Hurricane Helene in 2024, showing the lingering and compounding risks of climate disasters, experts said.&nbsp;</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>A drought-stricken ‘tinderbox’&nbsp;</strong></h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Throughout March, I reported on the&nbsp;<a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/31032026/todays-climate-water-use-restrictions-snow-drought-western-us/">widespread drought</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24032026/todays-climate-storms-hawaii-western-heat-wave/">afflicting&nbsp;</a>the&nbsp;<a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/13032026/march-heat-wave-western-united-states/">Western U.S.</a>, which experts say could ramp up fire risk throughout the summer.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">The situation in the Southeast is proof of that risk. Overall, fire is not uncommon during spring in the region, which technically has&nbsp;<a href="https://science.nasa.gov/earth/earth-observatory/fires-in-the-southeastern-united-states-49056/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">more blazes than any other part of the country</a>&nbsp;in a given year, though many are small or planned for agriculture or prescribed burns. However, the current spate of wildfires stands out, experts say.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“It’s unusual to see this level of wildfire activity across the Southeast in April. Widespread drought has left fuels extremely dry. Drought is the driving force behind this fire risk,” said&nbsp;<a href="https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/southeast-wildfires-explode-in-florida-georgia-as-smoke-spreads-and-evacuations-continue/1885848" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">AccuWeather meteorologist Brandon Buckingham</a>.</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/05/gettyimages-2271364797.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="firefighter in a vehicle surrounded by a forest with smoke in the air" title="firefighter in a vehicle surrounded by a forest with smoke in the air" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="A firefighter helps the Florida Forest Service battle a wildfire on April 14, 2026, in Naples, Florida. The historic drought triggered evacuations in the area. | Joe Raedle/Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Joe Raedle/Getty Images" />
<p class="has-text-align-none">In Florida, fires had burned through <a href="https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/southeast-wildfires-explode-in-florida-georgia-as-smoke-spreads-and-evacuations-continue/1885848" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">nearly 120,000 acres</a> as of late April of this year, after the “intensity and extent of the drought ratcheted up starting in January 2026,” <a href="https://science.nasa.gov/earth/earth-observatory/drought-parches-florida/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">according to NASA</a>. Meanwhile, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp <a href="https://gov.georgia.gov/press-releases/2026-04-22/gov-kemp-declares-state-emergency-response-south-georgia-wildfires" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">declared a state of emergency</a> in April for much of the southern part of the state, where just two large fires had scorched more than 50,000 acres. One of them has become the most destructive wildfire in the state’s history, <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/georgia-wildfires-destroy-homes-scorch-acres/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">CBS News reported</a>. </p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Despite days of firefighting and a short rain spell over one weekend, the flames were far from fully contained. Smaller, scattered fires burned in other states, such as South Carolina and North Carolina, where statewide burn bans remained in place.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“The fact that you have all this vegetation here in North Carolina or across the Southeast US, and in a drought, it gets very dry and that becomes material that can become fuel for the wildfires,” Lauren Lowman, an associate professor in environmental engineering at Wake Forest University, told me.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">I&nbsp;<a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/11032025/todays-climate-hurricanes-fuel-wildfires-southeast/">spoke to Lowman last March</a>&nbsp;about wildfires in the Southeastern US, when she first explained to me the interplay between hurricane damage and wildfire. In September 2024, Hurricane Helene passed through millions of acres of forestland in Florida, North Carolina, and Georgia, leaving a graveyard of downed trees that dried out and provided ample kindling for wildfires. Two years later, much of the wood debris remains in parts of the forest — as does the fire risk.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“There’s a ton of old Hurricane Helene debris down in the woods,” Seth Hawkins, a Georgia Forestry Commission spokesperson,&nbsp;<a href="https://thecurrentga.org/2026/04/24/debris-from-hurricane-helene-is-helping-fuel-georgias-wildfires/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">told the Current GA</a>. “It’s lying around, and it’s just a tinderbox out there.”</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>Vegetation whiplash</strong></h2>

<p class="has-text-align-none">As climate change accelerates, droughts in the Southeastern US are expected to become more common, research shows. These warming and increasingly dry conditions “could reduce the window of time each year when forest managers can safely implement prescribed fire,” according to a&nbsp;<a href="https://research.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/69155" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">2025 report by the US Forest Service</a>.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">Shifts from severe rain to drought can lead to rapid swings in extremes known as “weather whiplash.” This dynamic, in turn, can fuel a response from plants on the ground — what Lowman calls “vegetation whiplash.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“You’ll get more plants growing after these hurricanes, and a lot of water, and so, they become lusher and greener,” Lowman said. “And if that’s followed by an extreme drought, and, you know, conditions dry out, and then you’re left with even more wildfire fuel [and] potential to burn afterwards.”</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">At the same time, people are&nbsp;<a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.ado9587" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">increasingly moving closer to this vegetation</a>&nbsp;at the wildland-urban interface, where homes start to overlap with undeveloped land and forests. Given that&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nps.gov/articles/wildfire-causes-and-evaluation.htm" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">humans cause the vast majority of wildland fires in the US.</a>&nbsp;(remember the balloon?), their presence increases the likelihood of ignitions.&nbsp;</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">As the Southeast contends with wildfires raging through the region, communities out West are preparing for their own fire season after an historic snow drought. Though it’s difficult to flesh out the global warming connection with a single fire season,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.c2es.org/content/wildfires-and-climate-change/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">research shows</a>&nbsp;it’s clear that compounding climate risks are setting the stage for more frequent and severe wildfires to burn in many areas.</p>

<p class="has-text-align-none">“That’s the thing that stands out when you’re thinking about climate change, is just seeing year after year, or day after day, in some cases, records being broken,” Lowman said. “If you’re going to say, like, what’s normal? It’s not normal to see records broken consistently.”</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
	</feed>
