Corey Robin's Blog

I’ve been meaning to write about one piece of writing for some time, but thanks to two others, I don’t need to. The first is Frances Wilson’s biography of Muriel Spark, which I read in the fall and thoroughly enjoyed. I’d say more about how terrific it is were it not for the fact of… …the second piece of writing, Audrey Wollen’s rollicking, gripping review of it in the current issue of The New Yorker. I couldn’t possibly improve upon Wollen’s piece, even if I wanted to or tried. The review is as terrific as the book, but don’t let its terrific-ness prevent you from enjoying the terrific-ness of the book. And if you doubt me about the terrific-ness of […]

In 1753, Britain considered a bill to allow the naturalization of the country’s 4,000 foreign-born Jews. Formally titled “An Act to permit Persons professing the Jewish Religion to be naturalized by Parliament,” the bill was widely known as the “Jew Bill.” Though it initially passed both houses of Parliament, it was repealed after a vicious campaign of antisemitism and nativism, led by the Tories. Today’s Republican Islamophobes in Congress are more brazen. They don’t wait for the public to do their dirty work of name-calling. They have actually titled a bill that would, among other things, strip Muslim citizens of their citizenship, the “MAMDANI Act.” When people say that the historic Jewish Question, which was about whether Jews could ever […]

“JD Vance Gave A Speech To Almost No One.” “Meanwhile, Zohran Is Just Getting Things Done.”

The first appearance of the phrase “Jewish question” was in not in Germany, France, or anywhere on the Continent. It was in Britain, in 1754. In 1753, Parliament passed a bill allowing for the naturalization of Jews living in Britain. The bill, publicly called the “Jew-Bill,” provoked a massive controversy, leading to its repeal the following year. Joseph Grove wrote his “Reply to the Famous Jew Question” in response to the bill and the controversy. In 2026, nearly 275 years later, Stephen Miller, a Jewish American, is spearheading the most potent revival of today’s version of the original Jewish Question—that is, whether a religious, ethnic, or national minority can belong to a polity or not—in Britain’s most successful colony. And […]

The New York Times has a decent-enough report tonight on how the US made its decision to go war with Iran. Though it’s filled with sharp reporting and detailed accounting, it fails to identify the big forest amid the trees. That’s this: Despite the differences in personnel between the Bush and the Trump administrations, the parallels between the war in Iraq and the war in Iran are pretty straightforward. First, a hard-right Republican president comes to power denouncing the more “internationalist” and “establishment” Republicans and Democrats who see the United States as the world’s policeman. We often forget that one of Bush’s promises when he ran in 2000 was that he wouldn’t do nation-building, the United States would be “humble,” […]

Donald Trump this morning: “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” New York Times tonight: “One big question: Experts say Trump’s threatened attacks could be unlawful. It comes down to: What defines a civilian target?”

In June 2013, thirteen years ago, President Obama nominated Samantha Power to serve as US Ambassador to the United Nations. During her Senate hearings, Power was grilled by Marco Rubio, then serving as Republican senator from Florida, about an article she had written many years earlier in The New Republic, suggesting that the United States should take stock of its history and acknowledge with humility some of the mischief it had made in the world. The following exchange ensued. Which makes for some grim reading today, when people wonder how the US got into the mess it has gotten into under Trump in Iran. Reading Power’s words, knowing who became Rubio became, it all seems there, in black and white, […]

I’ve been following the online debate over the slogan “no kings” with some interest. On the one side, critics argue that it’s a normie notion, which obscures all sorts of questions about imperial war, Palestine, oil, and oligarchy. On the other side, defenders say it appeals to a broad set of values and voters, providing the basis for a popular movement against not just Trump but all the ills he stands for and promotes, not to mention the kind of state he is trying to create and consolidate. Interestingly enough, as Bruno Leipold shows in his magnificent book, Citizen Marx, Marx struggled with this very question across the 1840s, 50s, and 60s. While most readers associate Marx with the claim […]

From Schoenberg’s opera Moses und Aron: whensoever you employed those gifts for false and negative ends, and whensoever you had abandoned the desert’s renunciation and your gifts led you to the highest summit, then as a result of that misuse you were and ever shall be hurled back into the desert. Chag Sameach.

1. Iran Condemns Attacks on Its Universities, Warns of Retaliation 2. How Bard College Became a Major Real Estate Player 20 Miles Away 3. It’s Probably Time to Clean Your Water Bottle 4. Federal Trial Opens Over Lack of Air Conditioning in Texas Prisons 5. Wealthy Investors Are Targeting Foes of Clean Energy, and They Want Revenge 6. U.S. Special Operations Forces Sent to Mideast as Trump Weighs Next Move 7. Israel Passes Law to Allow Hanging of Palestinians Convicted of Deadly Attacks 8. ‘The Real Housewives of Rhode Island,’ Plus 7 Things to Watch on TV This Week 9. Marine Is Charged With Stealing Missile Launcher and Ammunition 10. Why Marriage, for So Many, Is Less Appealing Than Ever