I really enjoyed this conversation, but while we had a few segues back to our original intended topic this show took on a life of its own as we just go into enjoying our conversation so much. I hope you guys like it too!

In the interest of completeness, I am providing the complete text of the letter and the original signatories below. I am generally skeptical of appeals to authority, but this doesn’t cost anything and is potentially very useful. So I have to say that I fully endorse and co-sign the text below:

“We appeal to you, Your Holiness Pope Leo XIV, as the leader who has made the greatest effort to speak for humanity as a whole, instead of for specific nations, religions, or constituencies, to call for an emergency international summit to guide the world away from the current path of war and potential nuclear disaster and to peacefully resolve the greatest crises facing humanity today. Such an effort would be consistent with your repeated calls for peace and justice ever since you assumed the papacy—calls that have inspired and given hope to millions if not billions of people across our planet.

On June 10, 2025, then U.S. Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard released a brief but chilling video that began in Hiroshima and warned we are “closer to the brink of nuclear annihilation than ever before” and that “political elite warmongers are carelessly fomenting fear and tensions between nuclear powers.” “It’s up to us, the people,” she concluded, “to speak up and demand an end to this madness. We must reject this path to nuclear war and work toward a world where no one has to live in fear of a nuclear holocaust.”

On October 20, 2025, Sergei Naryshkin, the head of Russia’s SVR foreign intelligence agency, warned, “The world is now experiencing the most fragile moment for international security since World War II.” Naryshkin continued, “Our shared, and perhaps principal, task is to ensure that adaptation to the new reality proceeds without a major war, as has happened at previous historical stages.” It has been many months since the two intelligence chiefs rang the alarm and we’ve only gotten closer to nuclear annihilation—much closer.

When Gabbard and Naryshkin issued those warnings, the war in Ukraine was raging, Israel was conducting its genocide in Gaza, and tensions were high between China and the U.S. over Taiwan and the South China Sea. We have since added the U.S./Israeli war with Iran. The threat of WWIII has thus grown exponentially.

Signs continue to appear that leaders are planning for such an eventuality, even though we have known for more than four decades that even a limited nuclear war, let alone a large-scale one, could unleash unthinkable damage globally, including nuclear winter, which would threaten to end life on our planet. On August 20, 2024, the New York Times ran a front-page article warning that the U.S. was preparing to fight a simultaneous three-front nuclear war against Russia, China, and North Korea. That same day, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists reported on a growing school of nuclear strategists who believe a nuclear war can be fought and won, effectively overturning decades of understanding that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. Last year, U.S. Admiral Thomas Buchanan said that the U.S. was preparing to fight and win a nuclear war and keep enough nuclear weapons in reserve to be able to maintain its global hegemony. More recently, the U.S. Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby has discussed the need for the U.S. to use tactical nuclear weapons on top of deploying troops from South Korea and Japan if fighting breaks out between the U.S. and China over the Taiwan Strait.

The experts behind the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists’ Doomsday Clock are not alone in believing that the world is getting closer and closer to nuclear annihilation. And on top of the threats coming from the U.S., several influential Russian leaders have called on Vladimir Putin to use nuclear weapons to defeat Ukraine.

We, the undersigned from around the world, think the timing is propitious for calling an emergency international summit to address major conflicts in the world and the need for stepping away from the nuclear precipice. Russia has been bogged down in Ukraine for almost five years. Though Russia continues to make incremental gains at great cost, the battlefield has largely stalled and both sides are causing extensive damage to energy infrastructure and shipping in their drone and missile warfare, causing global energy and food shortages and suffering both inside and outside their respective countries. If NATO-backed Ukraine continues to cross Russia’s red lines, will Putin be willing and able to thwart Russia’s hawks? The U.S, meanwhile, has been unable to find a diplomatic escape route from its war with Iran, which shows no sign of allowing the U.S. to end the crisis it and Israel created by attacking Iran. While China insists that retaining Taiwan is its ultimate red line, everyone in the region would benefit from a calming of tension and diverting resources into development, along the lines of China’s Belt and Road initiative, instead of into warmaking.

That last point should be applied universally. It is painfully wasteful to see so many nations diverting resources from food, housing, education, and healthcare to their militaries. This has especially been true in North America, Europe, and Asia, where talk of peacefully resolving conflicts has given way to talk of preparing for war. This wastefulness and irrationality are at their clearest when it comes to the spending of nine nuclear armed states to support, modernize, and increase their arsenals of nuclear weapons that could end human civilization in a matter of minutes. As the first state to sign and ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) in 2017, the Holy See under your leadership must remain true to the goals of this powerful effort of one hundred nations who have so far joined the treaty.

As you yourself wisely and powerfully stated a couple of months ago, “I have repeated more than once the fervent appeal that Saint Paul VI made to the United Nations Assembly--What unites me, my venerable predecessor noted, is a pact sealed ‘with an oath that ought to change the future history of the world: never again war, never again war! It is peace, peace, that has to guide the destiny of the nations of all mankind’! Above all in the atomic era, the affirmation of the truth must push through: it is not atomic weapons that generate peace, but disarmament. This truth, which seemed clear in past decades when we witnessed a nuclear de-escalation, has been obscured by a race to armament that today frightens and terrifies.”

was indeed Pope Paul VI, the first pope to address the United Nations in October 1965, who, in that extraordinary address, quoted President Kennedy, “Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind.” He cited the Book of Isaiah, declaring, “They shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks.” In his 1967 Encyclical “Populorum Progressio,” Pope Paul VI emphasized, “Development is the new name for Peace.”

Other popes have also taken bold initiatives to save humanity in moments of crisis. In October 1962, Pope John XXIII appealed for peaceful resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis and helped provide both President Kennedy and Premier Khrushchev with face-saving means to resolve the crisis diplomatically rather than militarily at a moment when war seemed imminent. A similar effort might succeed today when the world’s two major wars seem to be intractably bogged down. The same is true of the nuclear arms race as the nine nuclear powers are not only modernizing their arsenals but expanding them after decades of sensible if much too slow reductions. And, for the first time in decades, the two major nuclear antagonists are constrained by no nuclear arms control treaties. Other countries and territories, including Japan, South Korea, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, and Ukraine, have begun discussing the attainment of nuclear weapons of their own, which would only turn the world into a larger nuclear tinderbox.

A papal appeal for an emergency summit to end the current wars and reverse the growing dependence on nuclear weapons and warfighting might give global leaders the chance to select a new course of action and get us off the current drive toward planet-destroying nuclear war. We urge you, Pope Leo, to use your unique moral authority to convene such a meeting of the world’s leaders, including the heads of state of the three principal nuclear powers, to meet and respond to the pleas of humanity to take our world in a fundamentally different direction before it is too late.

Initiating Signers

Peter Kuznick, Professor of History and Director of the Nuclear Studies Institute, American University

Jack Gilroy, Pax Christi, Veterans for Peace, Ban Killer Drones, International Peace Coalition of Schiller Institute

Ivana Nikolić Hughes, President, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation and Senior Lecturer in Chemistry, Columbia University

Richard Falk, Albert Milbank Professor Emeritus of International Law, Princeton University and Senior Vice President, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

Naledi Pandor, former Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, South Africa (2019-2024)

H.E. Donald Ramotar, former President of Guyana, 2011-2015

Yukio Hatoyama, Former Prime Minister of Japan, 2009-2010

Chandra Muzaffar, Islamic Reformist and Activist, President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST); Convenor of SHAPE (Save Humanity and Planet Earth

Hon. Douglas Roche, O.C., Canada

Kathy Kelly, Pax Christi Teacher of Peace 1998; Board President, World Beyond War

David Swanson, Executive Director of World Beyond War; author, “War is Still a Lie”

Marjorie Cohn, Professor Emerita, Thomas Jefferson School of Law; Dean, People’s Academy of International Law

Bandy X. Lee, President of the World Mental Health Coalition; Co-founder of Preventing Violence Now

Dr. James C. Cobey, Founder, Health Volunteers Overseas; Steering Committee, Voices from the Holy Land; Member, International Committee to Ban Landmines (ICBLM), which received the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize

Dr. Mohammad A. Toor, Chairman of Board of Trustees, Pakistani American Congress; President, American Pakistani Physicians for Justice & Democracy; Chairman, American Muslim Alliance

Glenn Diesen, Professor, University of South East Norway

Ann Wright, US Army Colonel (Ret) and former US diplomat who resigned in March 2003 in opposition to the US war on Iraq. Member of Veterans for Peace, World Beyond War, CODEPINK and Hawaii Peace and Justice

Susan Schnall, President, Veterans for Peace

Normon Solomon, Author and National Director of Roots Action

Hon. Melissa Parke, Executive Director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (winner of the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize)

Margaret Power and Van Gosse, Co-Chairs, Historians for Peace and Democracy

Ray McGovern, Co-founder, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

Martin Sheen, Golden Globe and Emmy Award-winning actor; Pax Christi Teacher of Peace (1999)

Setsuko Thurlow, Hiroshima atomic bomb survivor, Nobel Peace Prize Recipient, Order of Canada Recipient

Frida Stranne, Professor, John Morton Center for North American Studies, University of Turku, Finland

Gerry Condon, Co-Coordinator, Nuclear Abolition Working Group of Veterans for Peace; Board of Directors, Veterans for Peace; Chair, Golden Rule Committee

Lawrence B. Wilkerson, Colonel, U.S. Army (Retired), Former Chiel of Staff to the U.S. Secretary of State

Theodore Postol, Professor Emeritus of Science, Technology, and National Security Policy, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Christina Spannar & Jan Oberg, founders, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFF, Lund, Sweden -

https://transnational.live

Ambassador Akbar Ahmed, Distinguished Professor American University

Martin Sieff, Former Chief Political Correspondent, United Press International, Three time Pulitzer Prize Nominee

Hall Gardner, Professor Emeritus, Department of History and Politics, American University of Paris

Tadatoshi Akiba, Mayor of Hiroshima, 1999-2011; Former President of Mayors for Peace

This episode talks a lot about the English monarchy, its succession issues, the establishment of parliament as a British institution, and of course the ultimate consequences: the English Civil War and the Glorious Revolution.

John Locke was a propagandist for William III and this matters.

The bulk of this episode is about the history of Athens, with special mention of Pisistratus, the Greek definition of “tyrant,” and the word “demagogue.” I also discuss the contradiction of democracy and empire, with the democrats also being the imperialists. One thing I didn’t mention in the stream that bears thinking about is that the Athenian democratic faction justified its imperialism upon a desire to spread democracy and overthrow oligarchies. The Peloponnesian War was, in many ways, a struggle between democracy and oligarchy that democracy lost because it was undermined by an imperial project.

Please let me know what you think!

This show is based on some work I am writing, which go out for patrons and paying subscribers in several parts when I finish polishing it. In the meantime, I intend to use the thoughts generated by the writing to create some streams.

A guest sent me a link to his appearance, with a colleague, on another show and so I watched it and added my own thoughts. Now I am sharing it with you and also encouraging you to watch the original without the distraction of my commentary as well.

It’s worth noting that serious people are worried about the potential that Trump might start a nuclear war. This isn’t just a concern held by liberals, but one held by thinkers who have been frozen out of the liberal mainstream here in the US for being too honest or critical of our policy while speaking regularly to international media on these topics.

Our media chooses to keep us ignorant of the real threats posed by Trump and the lack of solutions that Trump’s opposition are willing to implement.

I spoke with Dr. Peter Kuznick on this subject and others.

Let me know what you think!

Read more

We also touched on the thin line between extremists and opportunistic grifters.

This is this week’s show! I was joined by Erica Ifill to talk about Canada, the US, how they have more in common than they do differences, and about what words like “liberal” and “emir” really mean and how that matters in the modern world.

This was, to use Erica’s words on Bluesky, a very fecund conversation that think everyone can learn from!

There is some good stuff about Japan and Taiwan in this show too, but I really recommend this conversation for the content on Iran that Dr. Kuznick is frequently invited to discuss by Indian and CHinese media but never by American media.

I hope you find it useful!

This was a great show and I hope you all get something from it too!

This is a big episode and a long conversation, so feel free to take it in chunks.

We have political movements, bankrolled by billionaires and landlords, that say they want to fix this problem but the leaders all profit from the problem and speak the language of gentrification. Yet parts of neighborhoods like Brooklyn still haven’t been gentrified and find themselves on the block. Meanwhile, in many cities the apparent beneficiaries of gentrification find that it is now working against them!

Enjoy this important conversation!

At the end of 2018, I joined Twitter because I needed an intellectual outlet and a way to share my thoughts with people interested in sharing their thoughts. As a result of my activity on Twitter, by late 2019 a friend and I started an ad hoc group DM for progressive candidates for Congress whose members ultimately formed the “Progressive Wave 2020” cooperative and networked an array of pro-sex worker, pro-pot, pro-labor, pro-healthcare, pro-Palestine, pro-peace messages on Twitter in focused and collaborative fashion aimed at progressive Democrats and independent socialists willing to compromise with progressive Democrats and support Bernie Sanders.

If you have heard of Jason Call, Melanie D’arrigo, Jen Perelman, or Donna Imam and ever followed them on social media (or if you still do) then you have probably interacted with my work indirectly already.

It was during this same period that I became a co-host of a show called “Poltical Hack and Slash” with a YouTuber who used the name “Nial Elkim” on his channel. This was my first experience with indy media and I loved it. I learned how to schedule a show, how to run a livestream, how to moderate a conversation, and a lot of other useful skills.

Sadly, we lost in 2020 and Bernie Sanders never supported the Progressive Wave 2020 candidates in any meaningful way. Our biggest success was Donna Imam’s win in her district primary, and while she did the work we were able to get enough Twitter buzz generated to platform her message all over progressive spaces. She lost the general election when COVID stopped her live canvassing strategy. I still believe she would have won if not for COVID.

We can’t claim credit for Cori Bush winning. She was in our chatroom and provided a lot of help to other candidates through Brand New Congress, but she was never super active with us. We were able bring multiple candidates to the attention of Brand New Congress, and excellent networking happened between members of our group and BNC candidates at BNC events.

This is where I met BNC alums Zana Day and Paula Jean Swearengen, who I consider friends to this day.

After Biden won the nomination, my critical support for third party candidates like Howie Hawkins and Joe Kishore slowly alienated me from many of my collaborators in the Democratic Party. After Biden won the election, criticism of Biden and of Biden critics flirting with the MAGA movement alienated me from many so-called socialists who listened to right wing hacks like Jimmy Dore.

It feels like so long ago and like I was so much older than and am younger and hotter now, but it was a relatively short period of time. Just a bit less than eight years.

Share

So what do I stand for now?

1. I am a revolutionary socialist

a. This means I do not support the US Constitution as currently composed. I am in agreement with the great abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison that the US Constitution is a covenant with death.

b. I do not support Democrats or Republicans in presidential or gubernatorial elections and I am extremely skeptical of the power of elections to meaningfully change our system. I believe in labor struggle, direct action, active political journalism, discussions of Cold War liberation struggles in the proper historical context, and a critical understanding of the ways in which the United States is an oligarchy rather than a democracy.

c. I am extremely skeptical of our political system and do not believe it can be reformed, but must be replaced.

2. Inalienable rights do not exist, but we can fight for freedom

a. We have been alienated from our theoretical rights entirely.

b. Rights are an expression of social power, controlled by the ruling class.

c. Freedoms only exist if we are willing to constantly struggle for those freedoms whenever they are threatened. To reference a popular movie, “People should not fear their governments. Governments should fear their people.”

3. The goal is a democratic society

a. A democratic society is one in which social and economic class divisions have been eliminated and all members of the society have a democratic share in society’s wealth as well in political decision making.

b. The current constitutional government of the United States is designed to prevent a democratic society from developing in the United States, by protecting the status quo class society.

c. Any government formed under the existing political system will support the privilege of the ruling class against the natural formation of a democratic society.

4. The means to achieve a democratic society is class struggle. No war but class war.

a. Class struggle is an unremitting effort to take power and space from the landlord and the boss to reclaim them for the people.

b. Class struggle can be maintained within liberal institutions, but only if workers in those institutions directly challenge those institutions themselves repeatedly and consistently.

c. Class struggle within liberal institutions will never replace labor struggle.

d. The words “general strike” must be taken seriously.

I hope all this helps!

Jacob, from the Worker’s Lit gang, was kind enough to join me on my own show on Feb 15, 2026 to follow up on a previous episode about AI with Connor Exum.

In this conversation, Jacob and I discuss the brilliant work of SF author William Gibson and how his futuristic dystopia became our present reality!

If you’re already a patron, check it out here

If you’re not a patron yet, check out my mission statement

If you like what you see here and on YouTube, please consider becoming a patron

Youri Smouter, host of the 1+1 program, will be making a return as co-host for this episode as well so I am doubly excited!

Please join us if you can, and please watch the show on YT if you can’t!