I had to take a minute before I could write anything about Dolly.

I am not someone who digs celebrities. I don’t even think I follow any, aside from authors. I could not care less about the products celebrities hawk or who they’re feuding with or the affairs they have.

I also don’t care about their opinions, unless they happen to have expertise in a particular subject or unless they’re out there spewing wanton ignorance.

But since my childhood, there is one celebrity I have admired mightily … and that is Dolly.

Dolly was the best of us. Her virtues were numerous:

• She was a brilliant songwriter with an angelic voice

• She boasted a compelling and righteous rags-to-riches origin story

• She was a classic go-getting, achievement-oriented, persistent, resilient workaholic

• Her level of personal compassion and philanthropy was unsurpassed

• She churned out witty and unique commentary as if it were her job to create T-shirt quotations

• She stuck to her own authentic fashion ethos, no matter what other people thought.

  ---

But one thing — one characteristic— made Dolly singular.

This trait is the reason that on the day of her death the United States sank into a collective storm of grief.

College campuses played her music from their bell towers. Flags lowered. Skyscrapers glowed pink. Whole communities gathered for sing-alongs. Tributes saturated social media and digital platforms. Donations flooded her Imagination Library. If they weren’t already on it, everyone joined the Dollywagon.

Here is what she did better than any other living human: Dolly united us.

She was a born nurturer. She had opinions—and quietly acted on them—but she rarely, if ever, trashed anyone else. She responded to criticism with humility and humor. She made everyone feel loved, made everyone feel seen. Politicians as wide-ranging as Mike Johnson and Nancy Pelosi issued public statements praising her to the skies, all of them apparently convinced that she stood for them.

Even Donald Trump, who often responds to the deaths of non-Trump fans by spewing hateful insults, wrote this:

This is a true loss for millions of people. There has never been anyone like her, and never will. In her honor I am lowering the American flag throughout the United States for a one week period … Rest in Peace, Dolly! The World loves you.*

Those words are as beautiful as she was.

In this era of vicious partisan hatred, can you think of another person so globally beloved? Liberals loved her. Conservatives loved her. People of every faith, every race, and every country loved her.

Dolly defended the downtrodden. She spoke up for those suffering abuse and ridicule. She did not judge. She did not scold. She embodied true Christianity, her life a glorious, shining example of the way the Gospels implored us to act. She treated everyone—no matter how grotesque or alienated or scorned by others—with courtesy and empathy and kindness.

Still, her civility did not mask a silent acquiescence to the nonsense of powerful men. She was as feminine as it is possible to be, but she was not passive and she did not submit. She made a difference in the areas that mattered to her, somehow without alienating people with whom she did not agree. Her impact on a variety of causes, from childhood literacy to vaccine development to women’s rights, was profound.

She died at Vanderbilt, in the hospital where I trained, the same place to which she’d given millions of dollars for medical research benefitting all of us.

The day she died, I sat in my kitchen and could not hold back my tears. To me, her death signifies the end of an era, one in which our better angels stood a fighting chance. Can you imagine what humanity could achieve in a world governed by Dolly Partons?

I’ve written about Dolly before in this column. She was a champion of literacy and medical science—my two greatest interests—so of course I admired her as an adult. But as I child I revered her. We listened to her records on repeat. I read and reread my first battered copy of her autobiography, which I still have to this day. She was the famous person who understood my people. Like me, she was born into an Appalachian mountain family. Like my great-grandmother, her mother raised twelve children in a two-room house in a holler, without electricity and without plumbing. She had very little that was store-bought.

What she did have: an abundance of creativity. Raised on folk tales, bluegrass, and ballads, she was a natural songwriter. She was also a world-class beauty, and that combination proved irresistible first to Nashville and later to Hollywood. Dolly became a global superstar, and she deserved every minute of that stardom.

I’m not a newcomer to the Dolly bandwagon. She was my idol. When she died, all my children checked on me, and later that day, at my youngest child’s volleyball game, the players looked up, saw me in the stands, and made the heart symbol with their hands; one of them told me later she remembered me saying years ago that day Dolly dies will be the saddest day. She was such a bright light.

I would not say, however, that her light will ever fully extinguish.

Myself, I vow to try to be more like her. Extending grace to everyone sounds good in theory, but do I really want to associate with people whose beliefs I consider immoral? Should I be nice to liars, to grifters, to raging narcissists, to misogynists, to racists, to people who cause suffering on an epic scale?

Well. Yes and no.

If you read this column regularly, then please know I don’t plan to suddenly offer a free pass to our political leaders. Actions speak louder than words, and if those actions cause way more harm than benefit, by all means, we should call them out. Plus, politicians are public figures. If they do something heinous, I’m not going to mince words to spare their egos.

But regular people, that’s something else. We are told every day by the highest levels of government—on both sides, to be sure, but especially by a president who belittles and dehumanizes almost everyone he comes into contact with—that regular people on “the other side” are contemptible. We are fed a constant stream of lies and distortions. We are told to hate.

Plenty of my dearest friends do not share my ideology. Plenty of my people back home don’t either. Same for a myriad of acquaintances, both IRL and online. I’ve seen reprehensible behavior from people I care about and I have committed sins of my own.

I’ve also changed my mind when someone with a better understanding than mine comes along. Who among us has nothing to learn by being challenged? Who among us is not worthy of redemption? Do you really want to live in an ideology bubble? No one is right about everything.

And no one is ever going to change their mind if you call them names, especially if you are blasting them anonymously online. I genuinely believe that you don’t have to agree on everything to find the good in another person. I am not pure-hearted like Dolly; my motivation might spring a bit more from a desire to convert people to my way of thinking, usually by trying to logic them to death. Dolly’s way was modeling love and avoiding controversy; mine is loving people individually, but publicly speaking my truth. (Or yelling it, really.) But if I cannot convert you, I do not want to condemn you. Very few people are irredeemably bad; most of us will be better if someone gives us a chance.

Like Dolly did. Unconditional love was her gift to the world.

Bonus Section: My Top Ten Twelve Favorite Dolly Songs

If you look up Dolly’s discography, she’s done collabs with everyone from Lynyrd Skynyrd to The Beatles to The Wiggles to Queen Latifah to Beyoncé. So listen to all those, of course, and listen to her Christmas albums too.

Here are my personal favorites from her albums:

12. Islands in the Stream: A duet with the late great Kenny Rogers, who co-dominated my musical taste in the 1970s. And guess what? Kenny and Dolly have become cool again

11. Blackie, Kentucky: Okay, yes; I like this because it excoriates a loser who bolted and left behind a resilient wife in small-town Kentucky

10. Where Have All The Flowers Gone: The classic anti-war ode, performed with Norah Jones and LeeAnn Womack

9. How Great Thou Art: Dolly shines on hymns

8. Coat of Many Colors: If any song sums up Dolly, it’s this tale of what she made of ridicule from schoolmates over her homemade coat

7. Love Is Like A Butterfly: A twinkly, sweet, ethereal song

6. Jolene: What the hell could Jolene have had going for her that Dolly didnt?!?

5. 9 to 5: Take that, corporate fat cats. You suck.

4. Down from Dover: Written when she was 18, this is a heart-wrenching, gorgeous, tear-inducing ballad about betrayal. Controversial at the time, because nice families didn’t talk about unwed pregnancy.

3. Wildflowers: LOVE LOVE LOVE this one, about following your own path. With Linda Ronstadt and Emmylou Harris. Have listened to it 10,000 times.

2. I Will Always Love You: You know it. Everyone knows it. One of the most beautiful love songs ever written

1. Mule Skinner Blues: I’m gonna take some heat from Jolene fans, but this is her best song. A fast-paced, fiery, bluegrass feminist tune in which she argues that women can work male-dominated jobs (such as driving a team of team of mules, naturally) as well or better than men. She holds a note for waaayyyy longer than I can hold my breath AND she yodels. Plus there is some mighty fine bango-ing. The recorded version is musically best, but here’s a live version.

Tell me your favorite songs! Or tell me why you loved her.

XX, Kimmery

Kimmery Martin is an American novelist, physician, medical school assistant professor, mother, wife, columnist, travel writer, oversharer, and dog owner. Also, recently, bread baker. Despite no popular demand whatsoever, she is currently at work on her fourth and fifth novels. She also teaches Narrative Medicine, advocates for libraries, and offers writing classes.

This Week’s Emergency is free for all readers for three weeks after publication. After that, access requires a subscription.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. I appreciate you!!!

Hi everyone. I’m a little embarrassed that I haven’t sent you a private message before now. I am eternally grateful for your patronage and willingness to read!

Originally when I started this column, I envisioned it as bimonthly or maybe even weekly. (Hence the sadly ironic name of this Substack.) In reality, it turns out it takes me weeks sometimes to w…

Read more

A couple weeks ago, I watched a Fox News segment that said this:

Read more

First, I need to offer a big thank you to my subscribers for sticking with me even if you don’t agree with me. You might have signed up because you like my novels or my travelogues or my photography or my occasional humor columns—obvi, I have a bit of an issue when it comes to brand consistency. Most of my subscribers, I think, probably don’t love my po…

Read more

Read more

This is Part III in a summer travel series that started in Germany. You can read about Munich here and here in prior travelogues.

Coming soon: The Amalfi Coast and a bonus day in the German Alps, as well as British Columbia: Vancouver, Whistler, and Victoria.

If you are new to my newsletter, please consider a free (or paid!) subscription. In return you…

Read more

My name is Euphemia Grace Rose. I am a twin. I am a medical student.

I am twenty-four years old.

At the present moment, I’m seated in a small antechamber in the Old Federal Building in Frankfort, Kentucky, having been given a pen and a writing tablet in order to pass the time as I wait for my interrogation to begin. It’s curious to me th…

Read more

Read more

In case you missed the title of this article, let me say it again: I wrote this piece in 2016, during the Clinton v Trump presidential campaign. It was originally published Huffpost under the title Sex, Politics And Religion: A Christian’s View Of Donald Trump.

I am reposting it now. Later this week, I will publish a Part II 2026 update, which is perhap…

Read more

Read more

In today’s edition of I Can’t Believe This Is Happening In America, we are going to discuss fascism—and relatedly—Neo-Nazism, white supremacism, and authoritarianism. Here’s a poll:

I wanted to keep this short, but then I decided, screw it. No one is likely to read this whole thing, but I wrote it for me. In the realm of politics, there is nothing—and I mean nothing—that I feel as strongly about as opposing fascism. So, fair warning: I am extremely mad.

On a personal note, it doesn’t matter to me if you are a Democrat, Republican, Independent, Libertarian, MAGA, or Democratic Socialist—if you are my friend, I love you. If you read my columns, I thank you. I don’t subscribe to the view that we must shun friends with opposing beliefs.

Instead, I’m going to try to convince you that we are facing a peril from within. I’m a sarcastic writer, so brace yourself. But if you are not alarmed about the American drift toward fascism after reading this column, then I have failed.

But … I’ll probably keep trying. As always, I thank you for subscribing—especially if we have differing views.

Subscribe now

Okay, so: Fascism, racism, etc. Hot topics this month.

Vice-Pres J.D. Vance, who refers to people who disagree with him as radical left lunatic childless sociopaths, summed up the problem this way:

“If you want to stop political violence,” he said, “stop telling your supporters that everybody who disagrees with you is a Nazi.”

Fair enough. President Trump—who referred to Kamala Harris as “fascist”, called the Democrats a “Gestapo administration,” and compared the U.S. intelligence community to Nazi Germany —had this to say on the subject of people who refer to others as fascists and Nazis:

“This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today.”

We have a situation where people on the political left are calling people on the political right Nazis … while meanwhile people on the political right are calling people on the political left Nazis.

So when is it okay—or even necessary—to use these words?

I’d boil it down to this:

• It’s okay to say someone is a fascist (or Neo-Nazi or white supremacist) if they regularly say or do fascist (or Neo-Nazi or white supremacist) things.

• It’s okay to say a political party is drifting toward fascism if their leaders tolerate multiple people within their ranks who say or do those things. And it’s beyond okay to say it if they appoint those people to high-ranking government jobs. This is not the same as saying everyone in that party supports fascism.

• Finally—and this is more complex—it is okay to express concern about the country drifting toward fascism when the government undertakes dozens of actions associated with fascism that are not normally tolerated in democracies. This is also true of concerns about authoritarianism.

Table that last point for now1. It deserves a column of its own.

Back to the issue of throwing around terms like fascist: When is this not okay?

• I agree with Vance on this one: calling everyone who disagrees with you these names is wrong.

What I will be pointing out in this article is that once-unthinkable support for these ideas is rising … especially among young men.

It’s easy to throw derogatory terms at regular people who support the “other” political party. It is more work to cite specific actions of specific politicians. I’m about to get very specific.

First, a definition of authoritarianism:

I would also define authoritarianism as a pit stop on the way to fascism. It’s a continuum.

A definition of fascism:

There is no doubt that America is in the grip of attempted authoritarianism right now.

The more we fail to object to the institutionalization of these views, the more legitimized they get. These views are no longer fringy either: they’re being openly expressed by some of the most powerful people in the American government.

Rather than characterizing various people as fascist, racist, etc, let’s allow these people to speak for themselves.

You be the judge! Here are a few … in their own words.

PAUL INGRASSIA

TRUMP NOMINEE FOR OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL

Here are some of Ingrassia’s opinions, sourced from an article citing his own texts, as well as his tweets and Substack column.

ON MLK JR:

• “MLK Jr. was the 1960s George Floyd and his ‘holiday’ should be ended and tossed into the seventh circle of hell where it belongs.”

• “I said we’re making kwanza illegal in the next Trump admin…No moulignon holidays … From kwanza to mlk jr day to black history month to Juneteenth …Every single one needs to be eviscerated.”

[Moulignon is an Italian slur referring to Black people.]

ON NAZIS:

• “I do have a Nazi streak in me from time to time, I will admit it.”

[This comment was in reply to a participant in this text chain who suggested Ingrassia belonged in the Hitler Youth with “Ubergruppenfuher Steve Bannon.”]

ON FORMER REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE VIVEK RAMASWAMY:

• “Never trust a chinaman or Indian … NEVER.”

ON WHO SHOULD BE IN CHARGE:

• “We need competent white men in positions of leadership. … The founding fathers were wrong that all men are created equal … We need to reject that part of our heritage.”

• [Education should focus on] “elevating the high IQ section of your demographics, so you know, basically young men, straight White men.”

[To be fair to the other participants in the text, they did push back. One of them said Ingrassia sounded like a scumbag and the other expressed concern about his “White Nationalist” tone and “tinge of racism.” Ingrassia responded by telling them not to be Boomers.]

• “Exceptional white men are not only the builders of Western civilization but are the ones most capable of appreciating the fruits of our heritage.”

Ingrassia might be obsessed with white men all on his own, of course, but is it possible he has a fixation with the new U.S. Department of Labor ad campaign? The DOL is very excited to promote real American workers!

After these sentiments exploded into public consciousness—or at least into the consciousness of people who read Politico—Ingrassia’s attorney responded, saying:

“Even if … the texts are authentic, they clearly read as self-deprecating and satirical humor making fun of the fact that liberals outlandishly and routinely call MAGA supporters ‘Nazis.”

Well, geez. Where would the liberals get that idea?

To be honest, I’m getting a little irked at criticism of people who call out powerful people expressing Nazi sentiments. NAZI SENTIMENTS, people. Have we lost our capacity to care?

Mr. Ingrassia’s nomination was eventually withdrawn—partly thanks to the four Republican Senators willing to publicly oppose him—but here is the question that matters:

Why would President Trump nominate a man who openly expressed the opinions above?

DARREN BEATTIE

STATE DEPARTMENT ACTING UNDER SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY

In a classic case of failing up, Mr. Beattie was initially fired for attending a gathering including White Nationalists, and then was awarded a big fat promotion in Trump’s second term. He now runs the U.S Institute for Peace, which leads public diplomacy outreach.

Here are some of his views, in his own words:

ON WHO SHOULD BE IN CHARGE:

• “Competent white men must be in charge if you want things to work.”

[I sense a theme here. Perhaps these guys read each other?]

ON WHERE LOW IQ AND HIGH IQ PEOPLE BELONG:

• “It’s not politically correct to say, but low-IQ, low-impulse control populations lack higher reasoning and moral faculties---they require strict corporal punishment and threat of violence to function properly within a society. Instead of anarcho-tyranny, we need Singapore for the dumb and violent, and Sweden for the more elevated.”

[Bear in mind Trump selected this guy to represent American diplomacy to the world.]

ON A BEAUTIFUL COMPLIMENT FOR THE CHINESE:

• “The UK is infinitely more repulsive than China.”

[When Marco Rubio, The U.S. Secretary of State, was explaining why the State Department wanted this particular individual to represent our country, he stated Beattie would be of great assistance to the State Department in avoiding “censorship.” This prompted one bewildered Congressman who’d been working with Rubio on U.S.-Chinese foreign policy to ask, “To have someone like that appointed to a high position — what the hell is wrong with everybody?”

ON FERTILITY:

• “Higher quality humans are subsidizing the fertility of lower quality humans.”

[Beattie was arguing for sterilization of “low-IQ trash,” who, he said, could be enticed into the procedure if we offered them Air Jordans.]

ON HOW TO CONTROL CRIME:

• “In China this vagrant would be sterilized and his organs donated to science.”

[I’m not certain Mr. High IQ understands what sterilization is. Quick! If you’ve had a vasectomy, check to see if you are still alive.]

ON WHO SHOULD ACTUALLY BE CODDLED:

• “Unfortunately, our entire national ideology is predicated on coddling the feelings of women and minorities, and demoralizing competent white men.”

Again with the competent white men. Don’t get me wrong, I love a competent white man. There have been some really good ones! Stephen Hawking! Abe Lincoln! Leonardo Da Vinci! (Not sure he counts tho, because gay.)

From white men, we got the steam engine AND Saturday Night Live. iPhones and the Theory of Relativity! Hamlet! The American Revolution! The impact on epistemology of Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason! The stirring heartbreak of Michelangelo’s Pietà! (No, wait: Michelangelo also gay.)

Directly or indirectly, white men have also gifted us with the Holocaust, Chernobyl, the Great Depression, the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, an unnecessarily elevated death toll during the Irish Potato Famine, Agent Orange, the nefarious concept of planned obsolescence, the Dred Scott case, Alex Jones, the DMV, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, the BP Oil Rig Spill, the sinking of the Titanic, nearly every war in history, the Crusades, the Salem Witch Trials, Collateralized Debt Obligations, Prince Andrew, robocalls, and the entire oeuvre of Andrew Tate … not to mention all the worst specimens of Florida Man.

Still. Of course men are known to always make good decisions compared to, say, women, amirite?

But perhaps I should curb my sarcasm, since my personal accomplishments are the result of coddling.

ON WHO IS INTELLIGENT:

• “It is perhaps significant that, when the United States clown world machine destroyed the greatest living American scientist—James Watson—and Dr. Watson had to sell his Nobel Prize, it was a Russian billionaire who purchased it and gave it back to him.”

[This one requires context. Dr. Watson, lauded for his work in modern genetics, was stripped of honors after he began a campaign to persuade the woke ‘clown world’ that black people are not as intelligent as white people. In one such message, he said he had hoped that all people were equal, but added, “people who have to deal with black employees find this is not true.” I don’t know how anyone could argue with this super-scientific conclusion.]

MARKO ELEZ

“SPECIAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE”

Elez, who at 25 years old had zero experience relevant to the Treasury Department, was ‘accidentally’ granted administrator access to the government’s Treasury mainframe and payment systems as part of Elon Musk’s DOGE initiative. Here are some of his important thoughts:

ON WHO TO HATE:

• “Normalize Indian hate.”

ON WHAT IS NOW CONSIDERED COOL:

• “Just for the record, I was racist before it was cool.”

ON MARITAL DISQUALIFICATIONS:

• “You could not pay me to marry outside of my ethnicity.”

ON THE INTERSECTION OF IMMIGRATION AND SCIENCE:

• “I just want a eugenic immigration policy, is that too much to ask”

[Eugenics is a scientifically delusional manipulation of breeding to increase “desirable” hereditary traits, which the Nazis wanted to employ as a method to cleanse their country of populations they considered “unworthy of life.”]

ON WHO DOESN’T DESERVE TO LIVE:

• “I would not mind at all if Gaza and Israel were both wiped off the face of the Earth”

This charmer also copied at least one sensitive file to his laptop (which is a big no-no) and emailed an unencrypted spreadsheet containing personal information to non-Treasury members of the Trump administration.

He resigned after these social media posts came to light, but he was hired back after both Elon Musk and President Trump came to his defense. So, yeah: now he apparently works for ICE.

Trump knows his views (and knows he violated governmental policies) but rehired him.

Again, ask yourself: WHY ARE THESE PEOPLE IN OUR GOVERNMENT?

Elez was also defended by—of all people—Vice President J.D. Vance, who commented that “stupid social media activity” should not “ruin a kid’s life,” adding, “We shouldn’t reward journalists who try to destroy people. Ever. So I say bring him back.”

Ummm, okay. Personal accountability applies to welfare moms, but when some jackass with access to everyone’s financial data proudly announces he’s racist, we should blame The Wall Street Journal for telling us about it?

Which is it: posting vile trash on the internet should ruin your life or should not ruin your life?

Because right now, it seems that posting vile trash is ruining the lives of people who expressed celebratory glee about the death of Charlie Kirk. Here’s a message from a United States Congressman that is pretty explicit about the ruining lives part:

• [I plan to] “use Congressional authority and every influence with big tech platforms to mandate immediate ban for life of every post or commenter that belittled the assassination,” wrote U.S. Rep. Clay Higgins, R-La. He added, “I’m also going after their business licenses and permitting, their businesses will be blacklisted aggressively, they should be kicked from every school, and their drivers licenses should be revoked.”

Note the difference here. We have two instances of terrible posts. One is expressing the wish that millions of innocent Jews and Muslims should die, another is mocking someone’s death because of the views of the dead person.

In one case you have the vice president saying social media activity shouldn’t ruin someone’s life. In the other, you have a powerful congressman vowing to use the full power of the U.S. government to ruin someone’s life.2

Note I am NOT defending people who wrote that Charlie Kirk got what he deserved.3 Kirk’s assassination was a tragic crime. Businesses may be within their rights to terminate employees whose statements violate their ethical standards. I am saying the United States government should not police social media and ruin the lives of people who express views with which they disagree—as long as the posters are not explicitly planning violence (or some other exception to the First Amendment right to free speech.)

To use the power of the federal government to mandate or pressure employers to terminate their employees and schools to expel their students—and only those employees and students with whom the federal government politically disagrees—is a catastrophic slide toward fascism.

America is great precisely because we can criticize the government. And its proxies.

If you think the government should go after people who criticize Charlie Kirk, imagine if the Democrats win the next election and vow to revoke drivers licenses from anyone dissing AOC. Or even if the government pressures universities and businesses to ruin the lives of specific private individuals. That would be intolerable, right?4

STEVEN CHEUNG

TRUMP’S EXTREMELY SANE-SOUNDING SPOKESMAN

ON WHO WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO LIVE:

• “Those who try to make that ridiculous assertion are clearly snowflakes grasping for anything because they are suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome and their entire existence will be crushed when President Trump returns to the White House.”

This one is my fave because it is just so bonkers. He issued this statement during the 2024 campaign, after both Biden and Trump exhibited multiple episodes of cognitive malfunction.5

To be fair, when he offered this response, Cheung had not been asked whether Trump was exhibiting symptoms of dementia. He’d been asked if Trump would behave as a dictator if he were re-elected. Obviously not, because it is normal behavior for non-dictators to crush the “entire existence” of people who accuse them of dictator-like behavior. Glad we got that cleared up.

[Cheung also later clarified that he meant to say their “sad, miserable existence” instead of their “entire existence.” ]

If you set aside the savage stupidity of this exchange, it is kinda funny. I looked up some other Cheung quotes and have to admit that if there were a contest for vicious insults, he’d win. He once referred to Ron DeSantis as a “desperate eunuch,” for example.

Cheung’s irreverence is not a boon to democracy, but it’s not as bad as what’s currently happening at the Pentagon. The Defense Department instituted a press policy resulting in nearly all mainstream media outlets losing access.

(Please refer back to one of the core tenets of fascism: suppressing the press.)

Pete Hegseth, the Defense Secretary, is so desperate to limit typical press coverage that even Fox News and Newsmax (!!) refused to agree to the new policy, which would ban news outlets from reporting anything not personally approved by Hegseth.6

In place of legitimate news organizations, access to the Pentagon will now be granted to Trump friendlies such as LindellTV. If you are unfamiliar with LindellTV, it is a journalistic powerhouse hosted by the My Pillow guy.

Hegseth’s propensity for fascist-type concealment is beginning to dawn on normal conservatives too: this week, Republican senators excoriated a Hegseth Pentagon nominee over information the department was refusing to share with the Armed Services Committee.

“I can’t even get a response,” said Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), obviously angry. “And we’re on your team!”

The nominee, Austin Dahmer, dismissed the allegations (from Republicans!) as “fake news” (which is kind of funny if you’re into schadenfreude.)

A bipartisan group of lawmakers, alarmed by the extrajudicial killings of alleged drug smugglers, report that Hegseth’s actions are most likely illegal under both U.S. and international law.

The military is illegally executing people a) without providing evidence of their crimes, b) without providing proof of their identity c) for crimes which do not carry the death penalty, d) without any form of due process, and e) without the legally required approval of Congress. This is such a monstrous affront against American values that it even stirred up notorious liberal snowflake Senator Rand Paul R-Ky:

.

As best I can tell, it is indeed a war crime to deliberately kill noncombatant civilians, even if you just know they are transporting illegal drugs on their boat. In addition, Hegseth fired multiple generals with decades of valuable combat experience after they questioned the legality of his orders. Others were fired after providing honest assessments of operational outcomes (i.e. pointing out evidence that Iran’s nuclear program was not, as the president insists, “obliterated.”)

I don’t know how you could get more fascist than this. Committing international war crimes and terminating anyone who points out you’re doing something the laws of your own country forbid? Or anyone who uses evidence to contradict the Supreme Leader? I’m not mourning for drug smugglers—if indeed every single one of them were actively smuggling drugs, which is not a given — but I am mourning for the values that define our country. Due process is enshrined in our constitution. Without it, we are a dictatorship.

With the I-Don’t-Give-A-Shit-About-The-Law philosophy, any leader could accuse anyone of anything, designate them a “terrorist,” and just … kill them. This. Is Explicitly. Fascist.

This is also the very definition of a naked emperor metaphor: we risk a military that cannot prepare for reality (ie weapons that still exist in Iran) if we have to stroke the ego of a psychologically fragile leader who cannot handle anything anything other than sycophantic flattery. Generals have to be able to respond to the actual situation on the ground, not an idealized version of it.

In other less serious but completely juvenile press news, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt responded to a reporter asking a serious question about Ukraine with the words “Your Mom.”

NICK FUENTES

WHITE CHRISTIAN NATIONALIST MISOGYNIST HOLOCAUST-DENYING TROLL

Nick Fuentes is not in any way a member of the government, so why am I including him? Bear with me.

First, Nicky is an extreme nutball. Read his opinions with caution.

ON WHO IS NOT SO BAD AFTER ALL:

• “The Taliban is going to ban abortion, vaccines, and gay marriage... maybe we were fighting on the wrong side for 20 years.”

ON THE HALCYON DAYS WHEN WOMEN KNEW THEIR PLACE:

• “It’s not enough to say, ‘We’re against trannies.’ You’ve got to be against women’s rights, too ... or else, what are we really trying to achieve here, 1999? We want to go back to 1099! We want to go back to the Middle Ages.”

[Fuentes was arguing that the ideal society would be one where women are not allowed in the workforce and do not have the right to vote. He’s not alone in this: Pete Hegseth, the United States of America Secretary of Defense, recently posted a video of several pastors arguing that women should not have the right to vote.]

ON WHOSE BODY IT IS:

• “Women lose again! Your body, OUR CHOICE [laughing emoji] that ceiling is made out of BRICK!”

[Fuentes was celebrating the election of Donald Trump.]

ON HOW WIVES DIE:

• “I totally see myself accidentally killing my wife ’cause I just get mad.”

[Fuentes, who has somehow not yet managed to land a wife, went on an extended rant about how at some point in the future when he was hangry and had slept poorly the night before and it was too hot in the house, his hypothetical wife would make a comment he didn’t like and he’d lose control and bash in her skull. He followed it up with the word “kidding” nine times, but then added, “but you know, women do piss me off a lot.”]

ON THE PEDOPHILIC GOAL OF ONE DAY MARRYING A 16 YEAR-OLD:

• “Right when the milk is good, I want to start drinking the milk.”

[As if this weren’t clear enough, he added: “Women age like milk.”]

ON THE PROPER RESPONSE IF A BLACK PERSON LITTERS:

• “It’s always Black people. ... This is in my neighborhood. I’m supposed to be mad at Hitler? I’m supposed to be cross with Hitler? I want this guy dead. And I wish Hitler would kill him. I wish Hitler would have killed him, you know?”

[Yes, Nicky, you are supposed to be mad at Hitler. But not because he didn’t murder enough Black people.]

ON JIM CROW LAWS:

• “They had to drink out of a different water fountain,’ big fucking deal. Oh no, they had to go to different schools. Their water fountain in that famous picture was worse. Who cares? Grow up, drink out of the fucking water fountain. It’s water, it’s the same. Even it was bad, who cares. We all agree, it’s better for them, it’s better for us. It’s better in general.”

ON THE REAL ENEMIES:

• “Jews are running society, women need to shut up … Blacks need to be imprisoned for the most part.”

ON WHO AMERICA IS FOR (AND NOT FOR):

• “America, for what it’s worth, was founded by white Christians. It was not founded by Jewish people. It was not founded by Judeo-Christians … Christianity is the religion of this nation. Not Judaism, not the Talmud … And if we want to restore America, we’ve got to make America a Christian nation again. And you can understand why influential Jewish people in conservative media are not really gung-ho about that.”

ON THE USE OF FORCE:

• “It is us and our ancestors that created everything good … All these people that have taken over our country—we do not need them ... It is the American people, and our leader, Donald Trump, against everybody else in this country ... Our Founding Fathers would get in the streets, and they would take this country back by force if necessary. And that is what we must be prepared to do.”

[In a twist of irony, some of the other Neo-Nazis don’t like Fuentes because he had a Mexican grandparent. So, I don’t know, would that undermine the militia? Will there be a racial purity test? So confusing.]

ON PROBLEMATIC STATE LEGISLATORS:

• “What can you and I do to a state legislator—besides kill them? We should not do that. I’m not advising that, but I mean, what else can you do, right?”

[This was in response to state legislators who were unwilling to violate the Constitution in order to overturn the 2020 election in Donald Trump’s favor.]

ON WHO DESERVES SUPREME ALLEGIANCE:

• “I am not a Republican. I am a Trump cultist, and I want everyone to know that. ... I am a soldier for Donald Trump. I am part of — I serve at the personal pleasure of Donald Trump, my supreme leader. I am part of the paramilitary wing of the Trump movement. I am part of the Revolutionary Guard. I do not answer to the Pentagon. I do not answer to the civilian government. I answer — I am the Praetorian Guard of Donald Trump. If Donald Trump ordered me to do an extrajudicial killing, I would perform it. If he sent me somewhere and said, look, we need to torture Hillary Clinton — theoretically.”

I could go on—there are tons of equally disturbing quotes, Nazi salutes, etc—but I’ll give you a minute to finish vomiting.

Fuentes is not in the Trump administration and, until recently, he was considered by pretty much the entire Republican Party to be political poison.

So why include him on this list?

Because last week, Fuentes hit the MAGA jackpot: Tucker Carlson interviewed him for two hours.

At times, he’s been so far to the right that he attacked Charlie Kirk, Donald Trump, and the entire GOP for being too centrist, but currently he’s in the midst of an attempted media glow-up. (Aided immeasurably by Elon Musk, who reinstated his X platform.)

Reportedly, even Donald Trump has reposted memes created by Fuentes’s followers, who call themselves Groypers.

Trump has signaled support for fascist organizations on many occasions, including dining with Nick Fuentes at Mar-a-Lago, reposting content from white nationalists7, asking the Proud Boys to stand by, referring to opponents as ‘vermin,’ stating that immigrants are ‘poisoning the blood of our nation’, and pardoning and/or commuting the sentences of violent January 6th rioters. (I just don’t get this. How can anyone defend the president reposting white nationalist content????)

In the past, various conservatives have denounced Fuentes’s white supremacist views. After the fawning Tucker Carlson interview, many conservatives again spoke out against Fuentes because of his seething hatred of Israel—although not one of them (that I could find) denounced his views on on women.

I want to emphasize that last point. I’ve read dozens of articles in conservative media outlets about the raging debate between (most) Republicans who think Tucker Carlson should be condemned for a gushing interview with a Hitler fanboy and (a few) Republicans who think it’s okay to do this.8 All of those articles framed the choice as centered around whether or not platforming an anti-Semite is acceptable. Not one of them listed Fuentes’s statements about women as a reason to reject him.

The biggest area of concern, I think, is this: although many, many conservatives publicly oppose anti-semitism, and, less often, racism—and even less often, misogyny—we are also seeing an increasing faction of the MAGA crowd who emphasize the maxim “No enemies on the right.”

This includes the head of the Heritage Foundation and the Vice President of the United States, who, after the Fuentes interview, put out a call for people on the right to “stop infighting.”

Meaning there is a growing tolerance for people like Nick Fuentes. Certainly not the majority; I understand that. But his views are beginning to seep into the MAGA mainstream, especially for young men. There are unverified but persistent reports that a significant percentage of young male GOP staffers are Groypers. One friend of JD Vance’s estimates the Groyper percentage in this group on Capitol Hill to be in the vicinity of 30-40%.

If it seems impossible that a Hitler freak like Nick Fuentes has become influential with a significant percentage of young male conservatives, let’s turn to our next selection of quotes.

THE YOUNG REPUBLICANS

You might have heard about the now-infamous chat group among Young Republican leaders across the country. Here are some unfiltered observations they made:

ON THE IMPORTANCE OF SKIN TONE WHILE FLYING:

• “If your pilot is a she and she looks ten shades darker than someone from Sicily, just end it there. Scream the no no word.”

[Do I have to tell you what “the no no word” is? It also starts with ’n’.]

ON NBA PLAYERS:

• “I’d go to the zoo if I wanted to watch monkey play ball.”

[Elsewhere in the chat, this same guy also referred to Black people as “the watermelon people.”]

ON CUISINE:

• “Bro is at a chicken restaurant ordering his food. Would he like some watermelon and kool aid with that?”

ON HITLER:

[‘I love Hitler’ is bad enough, but somebody gave it a smiley face.]

ON ACCEPTABLE MILITARY HONOREES:

• “I prefer my war heroes not captured.”

[Wonder where he got that idea?]

ON A DELIGHTFUL WHITE SUPREMACY COINCIDENCE:

• “GUESS WHAT ROOM WE’RE IN” … “1488”

[The number 14 is a reference to the white supremacist slogan We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children, which contains 14 words. 88 is a reference to Heil Hitler since H is the eight letter of the alphabet.

1488 is frequently used as a signifier of Neo-Nazi or white supremacy allegiance.]

ON THE VALUES OF NEW YORK TEENAGED REPUBLICANS:

• “They support slavery and all that shit. Mega based.”

[Based is Gen Z terminology expressing authenticity. The alt-right uses it to praise someone for standing their ground against popular opinion. Note: the GOP chair of Orange County denies affiliation of any of its teen volunteers with the groups involved in the chat.]

ON MINNESOTA, ARKANSAS, MARYLAND AND RHODE ISLAND:

• “Minnesota - faggots”

• “Arkansas - inbred cow fuckers”

• “Maryland - fat stinky Jew”

• “Rhode Island - traitorous c---s who I will eradicate from the face of this planet”

This text thread contained a withering assessment of the Young Republican delegates from each state, based, I think, on whether or not they supported an extreme right-wing guy running for chairman of the Young Republican National Federation.

ON HITLER, PART II:

Another text stated at one point that people from Kansas would be attracted to a “pro nazi” agenda, a comment to which the two Kansans in the chat reacted with outrage. Just kidding. They reacted with laughing emojis.

They also stated that anyone voting against their candidate would be sent to the gas chambers… and then followed that up with a comment about their showers and the “Hitler aesthetic.”

• “We gotta pretend that we like them. “Hey, come on in. Take a nice shower and relax”. Boom - they’re dead”

ON JEWS:

• “I was about to say you’re giving nationals to [sic] much credit and expecting the Jew to be honest.”

And finally:

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN ANTI-SEMITIC, RACIST, WHITE NATIONALIST TEXTS LEAK:

• “If we ever had a leak of this chat we would be cooked fr fr”

This was accurate. They were cooked.

Almost all Republicans recoiled once this leaked—but not everyone. Matt Walsh put out a statement begging Republicans to stop eating their own over “edgy jokes.” (C’mon Matt—saying “expecting the Jew to be honest” is a joke? Black people are monkeys? Delight at being in Room 1488? This is a genuine reveal of who these people are.)

These guys—for the most part—don’t hold political office yet. But I am including them because a) this is evidence for the surreptitious but significant adoption of Groyper/fascist viewpoints among young men in the GOP, and b) guess who defended them?

This should be obvious at this point: J.D. Vance!

He made the valid but whataboutist point that a Democrat running for office in Virginia once sent horrendous text messages hoping for the death of a rival politician (and his children!) … and then in nearly the same breath, made the totally invalid point that “pearl-clutching” critics of the Republican texts should “grow up” and “focus on the real issues.”

(And yeah, I absolutely think the Virginia guy should have bowed out of the race. Totally disqualifying.)

Which leads me to…

J.D. VANCE

VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

Perhaps you are thinking everything I’ve written so far concerns a few outliers. There’s no chance, for instance, that an American Veep would tolerate the idea that Americans should no longer be given the option of voting to choose their president.

Or that he’d fail to condemn the idea that political violence—including mass murder of thousands of citizens on the political left—is tolerable, as long as it allows right-wing ideas to prevail.

Surprise! He not only did not condemn these fascist ideas, he endorsed them.

In 2024, an internet troll named Jack Posobiec9 published a book called Unhumans: The Secret History of Communist Revolutions (and How to Crush Them).

Posobiec, whose Twitter posts contained multiple Neo-Nazi and white supremacy references, argues in the book that people on the modern political left—whom he frames as part of an ongoing “anti-civilization” revolution—are unworthy of the designation “human.”

So: liberal people = unhumans. With me so far?

What, exactly, does Posobiec think should happen to the liberal unhumans?

In the book, he praises right-wing fascism, especially dictators who subjugated people on the left by killing them. (Cue the jokes about tossing liberals out of helicopters!)

Posobiec seems to harbor some kind of special man-crush on Francisco Franco of Spain and Augusto Pinochet of Chile. If you’re blanking on the history of these particular fascists, the short version is that they tortured, raped, murdered, and/or exiled thousands of their own citizens, including non-political people, mothers, college students, and priests. They disbanded democracy in their countries and sent military juntas after any opposition, whether it was communist or not.

Posobiec advocates following their methods to get rid of present-day “unhumans” if necessary.

He and his co-author also call for the end of democracy in America, explicitly stating: “We do not believe in government through the voting booth.”

Believe it or not, J.D. Vance liked this book so much, he provided a blurb for it. These are his words:

• “In the past, communists marched in the streets waving red flags. Today, they march through HR, college campuses, and courtrooms to wage lawfare against good, honest people. In Unhumans, Jack Posobiec and Joshua Lisec reveal their plans and show us what to do to fight back.”

There is no pretense here that these “plans” apply to actual communists. Vance makes it clear: he’s talking about woke HR employees, judges who rule in ways he does not like, and college faculty. Those are the anti-civilization “Unhumans. His party are the “good, honest people.”

Over and over, the book makes it clear: people on the left are not human. They should not be allowed to vote … and if necessary to establish total right-wing dominance, people on the left can be killed.

The Vice-President of the United States is openly praising a fascist book calling for the end of democracy in the United States.

This, to me, is still the most astonishing thing I’ve ever witnessed in American politics.

HE IS THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

So yeah: it is not baseless name-calling to say J.D. Vance is drifting toward fascism. J.D. Vance is straight-up telling us that. As Maya Angelou famously observed, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”

The majority of Republicans detest fascism, I’m certain. But also: we have to fix this before it metastasizes further. When Naziism swept Germany, it wasn’t because most German citizens were fanatical believers. It was because a large majority didn’t speak out against a critical minority.

If you are still unconvinced, consider this: Jack Posobiec—known poster of Neo-Nazi tweets, author of a book calling for fascism—was invited to speak at the 2024 Conservative Political Action Conference. He got up on stage and said this:

• “Welcome to the end of democracy. We are here to overthrow it completely. We didn’t get all the way there on January 6, but we will endeavor to get rid of it and replace it with this right here.”

At this point, he raised a clenched fist. Again, he said this—out loud—at a mainstream Republican political conference. Could this be any clearer? We are here to overthrow democracy.

It’s no longer fringe when the Vice President of the United States endorses the man in this photo. (Or when the President of the United States retweets him, which has also happened.) Or when people openly expressing fascist ideas are appointed to significant government positions—and when those same people are defended by both the president and vice-president.

The ADL is a group devoted to protecting Jewish people. Jack Posobiec is taunting the ADL while standing in front of Auschwitz.

SPECIAL BONUS SECTION: HOW I SEE THE WORLD

Do I sound mad? I am mad. I am sick of being told concerns about the erosion of democracy are overblown. They. Are. Not. Overblown.

I love this country. I revere freedom of speech, especially the right to criticize my government.

I revere my right as an American to pursue happiness, even if I am different. (As a woman, I also want to vote and have the option of a career.) I freaking detest authoritarianism.

JD Vance would undoubtedly consider me to be an Unhuman, because politically and personally, I skew liberal … but some of my beliefs are libertarian and some are even traditionally conservative.

I am also well aware that sometimes I get things wrong.

Like many Americans, I dislike the extremes in politics. I don’t feel comfortable in any political party.10

But no matter, there is no possible whataboutism that justifies tolerance of fascism and authoritarianism in the American government, especially when one party controls Congress, the presidency, the Supreme Court and the military.

This is not a blanket condemnation of conservatism. At all. I adore many conservatives personally. I read conservative writers every day. But the things I’ve illustrated here are not the conservative way! It’s fair to say the political right is starting to evolve into something decidedly non-Republican.

If we are friends, there’s a reason I love you, no matter our respective politics. Preaching to the choir doesn’t accomplish much either. If JD Vance himself called me up and said, Hey Kimmery, I want to explain why I endorsed a book that sounds totally okay with the idea of killing people like you, I would 100% meet with him. I’d ask him what I’m getting wrong about him and I would respectfully listen to his answer. And I’d respectfully ask him to listen to me … and I’d pray I could influence the way he thinks abut ‘liberals.’

And yes, maybe that is a privileged attitude, because I am a white Christian—but if people like me don’t speak up, who will?

I renounce the anti-democratic, authoritarian bent of the current American government.

As of right now, we still have the First Amendment right to criticize our government. I hope every single one of us will use it to condemn the far-far-right positions seeping their way into mainstream politics.

If I didn’t succeed in convincing you, at least I tried.

Thank you for reading11.

Kimmery Martin is an American novelist, physician, medical school assistant professor, mother, wife, columnist, travel writer, oversharer, and dog owner. Also, recently, bread baker. Despite no popular demand whatsoever, she is currently at work on her fourth and fifth novels. She also teaches Narrative Medicine, advocates for libraries, and offers writing classes.

This Week’s Emergency is free for all readers for three weeks after publication. After that, access requires a subscription.

Subscribe now to support publication of this column.

3

This is even worse when you consider that quite a few of the people who’ve been fired or doxxed for Charlie Kirk posts did not actually celebrate his death. Some said something along the lines of Some of his views are morally reprehensible in my opinion, but no one should be assassinated for their politics.”

On the other hand, saying you are glad someone died or saying you dig Hitler or even saying something hugely consequential and provably untrue (such as “I actually won the election but the other side stole my victory by widespread fraud”)—even those things generally still are awarded First Amendment protection from interference by the government.

DAY TWO IN MUNICH

(This is Part II of a travel series about Munich, Germany. If you missed Part I, read that one first.)

Guten morgen! After brewing foamy cappuccinos in our fancy machine, my sister, daughter, and I snuggle on our balcony to caffeinate and nibble some fruit. Then we’re off for a bike tour.

Read more

Welcome to my latest travelogue. If you haven’t read one of my travel stories before, here are a couple things to know:

• My travelogues are looooong. Personally, I like to travel to a place knowing something about the backstory. But not the boring history! Which leads me to the second point:

• I am not a reverent historian. Read at your own risk.

That being said, please enjoy! This is Part 1 of an extended series covering recent summer travel locations, including:

🇩🇪 Munich (in two parts)

🇩🇰 Copenhagen and a bit of central Denmark

🇸🇪 Malmö, Sweden; and—somewhat randomly—

🇨🇦 The British Columbia province of Canada.

In this post and the next one, you’ll learn about:

• The bizarre history of the last few Bavarian Kings

• The absolute best hotel in the history of hotels

• What college kids adore about Munich

• Who wrecked a bike in the middle of a busy street

• What links Beyoncé to a Roman Empire-era saint

• What I did wrong in church

• The surprising identity of the only country willing to take sizable numbers of Jewish refugees in 1938

• How to recognize the dawn of fascism

• How much it costs to go to college in Germany

• Where a spaceship landed in Munich

• The funniest inscription in Bavaria

• Where to get naked in Munich

and, as a special bonus,

• The world’s worst poem

Plus an (unpublished) truly terrible novel excerpt! Let’s go!

DAY ONE

Willkommen in München, Deutschland!

I’m on an overnight flight to Munich with my beloved sister and oldest daughter! Yippee! (New good travel pillow and sleep mask. Highly recommend both.)

Every travel advice column I’ve ever read insists that in order not to shrivel into a husk by the end of the flight, you must refuse all salty food. I vow to avoid salt and immediately eat a bunch of over-salted nuts because they are free. Then I overcompensate with tons of water, thereby ruining my sleep. What all these other travel advice columns fail to mention about drinking lots of water on planes is that it produces a need for lots of bathroom trips. More on this scintillating topic when we get to my return journey at the end of the multi-part series. I bet you can’t wait.

We land in Munich on a gorgeous sunny morning. True to reputation, the Germans run an efficient airport. We are whisked from the plane onto a clean, quiet bus, which swooshes around the corner to deposit us at a clean, quiet customs area of the airport.

We get our passports stamped and collect my sister’s absolutely freaking enormous suitcase from baggage claim. She and I hold opposing travel philosophies: I do not believe in checked bags and she has checked a bag the size of my first apartment.

TRANSPORTATION:

In a savvy and economical manner, I’d planned to take the S-Bahn, located between terminals 1 and 2, to the Marienplatz exit.

However, our hotel first emailed and then actually called to say they strongly recommended a car service, because the S-Bahn was messed up in some way I did not quite understand. They seemed very dubious about my navigational abilities, so I agreed.

Our driver is a kindly-looking man who does not speak much English. I am not even certain he speaks much German, although we manage to agree that Bayern Munchen, the city’s professional soccer team, is very fine. That being established, we run out of conversational topics.

We arrive near our hotel, DO & Co, which is tucked along a pedestrian-only area in Old Town Munich, a few steps away from the famous Marienplatz. We tip the driver and enjoy a cappuccino in a sunlit lobby cafe while we wait for our room to be ready. About twenty minutes after he leaves, my sister makes a tragic discovery.

“I think I left my phone in the car.”

“Was there not room for it in the gigantic suitcase?” I ask.

So this is a less-than-ideal start.

THE HOTEL: DO & CO

After we solve the phone problem, the hotel people announce the room is ready. Prepare yourselves for my unfiltered opinion about this hotel. Ready? Here it is:

The is the best experience I have ever had in a hotel. I mean, EVER.

First of all, I splurged on the penthouse. Not something I’d normally do, but I am writing a travel column. Plus, it’s the only room in the hotel allowing three people to stay together. My sis will be turning 50 on this trip and because she is a saintly social worker, I plan to surprise her.

We reach the fourth floor—the top floor—and enter into a little vestibule with a half-bath, its own small elevator, and a sweeping spiral staircase. We haul a certain behemoth suitcase up the stairs and lurch to a stop.

This place is stunning.

Photo courtesy of Do & Co

We all gape. The expression on my sister’s face—who had no idea where we were staying—is priceless. Her eyeballs pop out of their sockets and dangle from coils, like a cartoon person’s. She is speechless with shock and delight. My daughter is more chill.

“Valid,” she says. “Love the vibes in here.”

Yes. I too love the vibes. First of all, the sun streams in through vast skylights and floor-length sliding doors, flickering on the floors as if someone sprinkled them with gold dust.

The room—apartment, really—is posh, but not in a tacky gold toilet sort of way. Instead, it feels more like a comfortable, stylish artist loft, if the artist in question were rich enough to afford a fat penthouse in one of the most desirable parts of Europe.

Along one side, there’s a private balcony with chaises and tables and potted trees, tucked under the domes of our next-door neighbor, which happens to be the Munich Cathedral (aka the Frauenkirche).

In no particular order we also discover: an extra bathroom, a fireplace, fresh flowers, a foosball table, a yoga station, a fully-stocked kitchen, an island, a silver tea service, an espresso station, a bar cart, a comfy king bed, a full-length architect’s desk, and a living room with soft couches and a fuzzy rug. There are motorized shades for every window and at least three refrigerators stocked with every imaginable drink.

Our host beams. “No extra charge for anything in the room. Including the bar.”

I look at the bar. A neat row of expensive liquors from all over the world looks back at me. I’m not much of a drinker (see my prior travelogue on Spain ) but I am nonetheless delighted. Free! Free alcohol! I might have to get hammered at 8:00 in the morning, just on principle.

“And” —the guy motions to the kitchen table “—we have a few gifts for you.” On the table is a handwritten note declaring itself ecstatic that we are here, along with a platter of fifteen kinds of exotic cut fruit, a tray of apples, and a glass dish of macaroons and fresh berries. A bottle of champagne on ice nestles in a silver stand.

Continuing on: there’s an enormous bathroom with a soaker tub and a rainfall shower. The bathroom faces the office windows in Munich’s Old Town Hall, so unless I can figure out how to work the motorized shades, the municipal workers over there will be in for a delightful treat later on when I have my bath.

“Whuhhht,” I say weakly. Cautiously, I pinch myself. Yep, still here. On the occasions in the past when I’ve forked over for a luxurious hotel room, I usually fret over the expense so much that I ruin the experience … which is generally underwhelming anyway. Not this time.

“This is unreal.”

“Enjoy!” says the German guy.

As soon as he departs, we high five each other and whoop it up. The we gobble fruit and macaroons. Standing in this sensational penthouse in Munich is so far outside my normal realm of experience that I feel like a rock star.

DAY ONE: TOURISM + HISTORY

We don’t want to leave, but the hour for the Glockenspiel draws nigh.

If that last sentence is meaningless to you, then you have never been to Munich. Watching the Glockenspiel the most touristy thing possible to do in Munich, but we have forty-five minutes until it begins, so we decide to climb to the top of Alter Peter aka Peterskirche, aka The Church of St. Peter.

You climb 10,000 stairs in a narrow, twisty little tower (if you want to be technical about it, it’s 306 stairs, but feels like more) and then you reach an outdoor viewing platform buffeted by strong winds and populated by tourists taking selfies. The platform provides a breathtaking view of Munich, and, in good weather, the faraway Alps.

On the way up, be sure to catch a glimpse of the Arme Sünder (the “Poor Sinners” bell) that used to toll a mournful sound in medieval days whenever they’d string up some doomed soul on the gallows nearby.

After taking our own selfies, we haul ourselves back down and check out the interior of the church.

Like many other spectacular churches of Europe, this one is laden with elaborate paintings of St Peter, gilded frescoes, a golden altar, and, in this case, the relics of a saint named Munditia. If you’re curious about which Catholic constituency Munditia represents, I’ll throw you a hint:

What is the subject of Beyoncé’s most famous song?

If you guessed single ladies, you are correct! According to some hasty Wikipedia research conducted right before I wrote this, Munditia is the patron saint of spinsters.

However, I am sorry to report that Munditia—who was born in the third century AD and who may have been beheaded by a hatchet — is straight-up creepy. Her skeleton is studded with jewels and googly false eyes have been inserted into her orbital cavities, which are surrounded by gilded eyelids and a golden hairnet thingie. Still, she is a very interesting relic.

After bidding goodbye to Munditia, we go outside, cross the Marienplatz, and assemble with other excited foreigners for the Glockenspiel.

The Glockenspiel is a twice-daily animatronic reenactment of a medieval wedding and a jousting tournament.

I have confidently informed my relatives that this life-size puppet show originated in medieval times. After hastily consulting The Google, I am forced to issue a retraction regarding dates: the Glockenspiel was built not during medieval times, but in the early 1900s.

The characters, however, represent the 1500s: they depict the wedding of a noble couple, along with a couple of jousting knights. As one of the knights gets lanced, everyone in the Marienplatz goes ‘ooh!’ in unison.

Then the characters launch into the Schäfflertanz, which is a dance apparently meant to raise spirits during the plague. By ‘raise spirits,’ I assume they are referring to cheering people up, not summoning plague zombies.

Spirits sufficiently raised, we check out a couple of the multiple stunning cathedrals/churches (kirches) within steps of the Marienplatz: Alter Peter, Asamkirche, Frauenkirche, and St. Michael.

Inside the Catholic Cathedral, I get scolded by a young but stern German woman for taking a photo of the vestibule ceiling during Mass. In my defense, I did not realize it is a Mass because a) there is no visible priest, only a woman singing somewhere out of sight; and b) the pews are empty.

“Ich bedauere!” I whisper, fleeing before she can confiscate my phone or hit me with a stick or something. Here’s my travel advice regarding accidentally disrespecting locals: learn to say I’m sorry in the language of the country. That, along with thank you and where is the bathroom? are the essential phrases you must master.

We cross the Marienplatz again. This is a good time for a history lesson, because the Marienplatz is the site of some of the most impactful history in the world.

Marienplatz means Mary’s Square, named in honor of Our Lady Saint Mary. Way back in the 700s, this place was a minor pit stop on a vast salt trading route, but later a group of monks settled here and it became a city in its own right.

München —or Munich in English— means ‘home of the monks.’

The Home of the Monks has always been a lively place. During the Middle Ages, this was the place to view exciting tournaments involving knights and steeds, and, less appealingly, gruesome public executions.

Later, of course, the city would devolve into fascism; nearby in 1938, Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels delivered a speech calling for carefully coordinated “spontaneous” demonstrations against Jewish people. This, of course, led to one of the most infamous early incidents of antisemitic violence during the Nazi reign: Kristallnacht, or the Night of Broken Glass.

You’ve probably heard of Kristallnacht. In 1938, over 12,000 Jews of Polish descent were seized, arrested, stripped of their property, and forced aboard trains headed for Poland. However, no one consulted Poland, and Poland refused to accept them. They found themselves stranded in a no-man’s-land along the Polish-German border. Conditions were dire. Many of them died.

Among the refugees was the family of a teenager who’d been sent to Paris. To make a long story short, distraught over the persecution of his family back home, this kid bought a gun, hopped on the Parisian Metro, got off at the German embassy, went inside, announced that he was a spy with important information, and shot a German diplomat five times in the stomach.

Despite the fact that Jewish organizations immediately condemned the killing, Hitler, and later Goebbels, worked themselves into a frenzy of vengeful glee. Immigrants were bad! Jews were dangerous! Immigrant Jews were murderous invaders! “The Jews,” hissed Goebbels, “must feel the people’s fury.”

Within hours, a bunch of rampaging SA (stormtroopers), the SS (Schutzstaffel), the Hitler Youth, and some really vile civilians torched synagogues in full view of firefighters, who were instructed by Hitler to chill unless, of course, the flames threatened to spread to non-Jewish buildings.

Not content with arson, Hitler’s thugs looted and trashed thousands of Jewish-owned businesses, spraying the streets with broken glass from the shattered windows. As The New York Times later reported, one of Marienplatz's main shopping streets, the famous Kaufingerstraße, was so strewn with wreckage it "looked as if it had been raided by a bombing plane.”

Plenty of people got hurt too, because, you know, when you’re systematically destroying buildings, it’s not that much of a leap to destroy humans. So they barged into Jewish homes and beat people, killing more than ninety of them. They also arrested tens of thousands of Jewish men and sent them to concentration camps.

Afterward, German officials such as Hermann Göring criticized the violence—not because innocent Jewish people were robbed and assaulted and kidnapped and murdered, but on the grounds that German insurance companies might have to reimburse Jewish business owners for the damages.

Alarmed at this potential financial travesty, the Nazi government immediately issued an announcement that the blame for the pogram belonged to “the Jews” themselves. To follow that up, they smacked a fine of one billion Reichsmark on the German Jewish community for the crime of having been robbed, assaulted, and terrorized by state-sponsored thugs. The Reich government also confiscated all insurance payouts to Jewish business owners.

Americans leapt to the rescue, taking in Jewish refugees by the tens of thousands.

Just kidding. They did no such thing, at least not in the 1930s when it might have made a big difference. At this point, Americans overwhelmingly thought the Nazis were wrong to assault Jewish people, but they also overwhelmingly wanted no part of allowing a bunch of exiled Jews into their country. Understandably, many people were desperate to escape Germany at this point, but most of them had nowhere to go.

Source: United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

Random History Question: What was the only country willing (in 1938) to admit a very large number of Jewish refugees?

Answer: The Dominican Republic. If you got this right, you’re obviously an intense scholar of WWII!

But yes: the tiny DR offered to take in 100,000 refugees at an international conference set up by Roosevelt to discuss the issue. (They didn’t actually carry this out, however, and I am not sure why.)

Almost everyone else either refused outright in an exceedingly nasty manner1, or grudgingly agreed to accept small quotas. Ultimately a dozen or so nations took in some people. (The U.S. eventually did accept quite a lot, despite rampant public sentiment against Jewish immigrants. However, an absurd number of people would also be murdered after having been refused entry to the U.S., compounding the tragedy.)

In Germany today there is a concept called Vergangenheitsbewältigung, which is a process of acknowledging and learning from the past. By law—and as matter of culture—Germany strives to prevent historical traumas and injustices from desecrating the future the way they befouled the past.

Contemporary German politics is also beyond the scope of this article, but it is no secret that authoritarianism, fascism, and ultranationalism are on the rise in many places around the globe. More on this later … but we should all be wary.

Back to our journey: from the Marienplatz, we wander over to get some lunch at the Viktualienmarkt.

The V-Markt is a charming outdoor area packed with stalls selling flowers, cheese, fruits, vegetables, meat, fish, bread, pickles, soup, honey, ice cream, pastries, coffee, sandwiches, spices, crafts, and—this being Munich—a lot of beer. There’s also a Maypole.

The weather is breezy and fine, the people are friendly, the flowers are lush, and the food is delicious. We have gourmet grilled cheese sandwiches, pickles, and soup with some sort of German dumplings.

Next up: I have a meeting with an academician at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich (LMU). Before I describe our meeting, I must say a few words about LMU.

Like most universities in Germany, LMU does not charge tuition. They do charge some minor fees and students must pay for housing. But education itself is free—and this applies even if you are an international student!

LMU is located in one of the coolest parts of Munich, walkable or bikeable to every imaginable kind of historical, artistic, governmental, cultural, and recreational site of interest. Watching students mill around—some basking in the sunshine on the lawn, some engaged in some sort of hiphop exercise class, some toting backpacks— I am seized with longing to be in my early twenties again, so I can do a study abroad course here.

The woman I am meeting, who holds a PhD in political science, takes us on a tour of resistance sites against the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (aka the Nazis.)

I don’t want to reveal her particular sub-area of expertise, because I don’t want to give away the ending of my next novel, which is loosely inspired by a real event from the 1930s. So for now I will gloss over the event I have come here to learn about, which not coincidentally is most compelling part of our tour. But I promise when the next book comes out, there will be an extensive—and shocking—afterword on the subject.

In the meantime, my sister and I have a fascinating conversation with our brilliant host about fascism.

A quick Google of fascism defines it this way:

Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian ultranationalist political ideology characterized by dictatorial power, suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.

Munich was, unfortunately, the epicenter of the Nazi party. Adolf Hitler lived there, the party was headquartered there, and it was the symbolic capital of the fascist movement. This topic ranges far beyond the scope of this article, but if for some totally random reason you are interested in how authoritarian governments arise, I urge you to study the progression of events occurring in 1930s Germany.

Hitler didn’t begin with concentration camps and genocide. He began with the following:

—Demonizing the press

—Demonizing political opponents (including referring to them as ‘sub-human’)

—Demonizing anyone who dared criticize him

—Demonizing immigrants, gay men, the homeless, Black people, the Roma people, people with disabilities, and Jews

—Firing and belittling educators and scientific experts

—Firing government officials who contradicted his government’s propaganda

—Forcing non-Nazi academicians to leave their jobs (which created an exodus of scientists, including physicists and mathematicians—and we all know how that turned out for Hitler)

—Controlling universities in order to propagandize them

—Controlling schools in order to alter academic material

—Encouraging the population to inform on their neighbors

—Destroying art that didn’t align with their ideology

—Banning books

—Rewriting accounts of history under the guise of patriotism

—Using the media to promote disinformation

—Appointing unqualified loyalists to government positions

—Systematically transferring legislative authority from the elected parliament to Hitler and his cabinet

—Declaring emergencies due to “attacks” from people engaging in political resistance — or from isolated episodes of violence

—Using these emergencies as a pretext to justify suspending or eroding civil liberties on a broad basis

—Allowing for the detention of individuals without trial

For many people, these events were insidious—initially drowned out by the essential demands of everyday life.

Most Germans weren’t monitoring the government’s communications to judges about how to sentence political dissidents. They may not have noticed when a scientist on some obscure advisory board was replaced with an inexperienced ideologue, or when their child’s schoolbooks suddenly omitted a few chapters of unflattering history. Fascism didn’t happen overnight. But neither did these events go unremarked: lately I have been fascinated by the (shamefully uncommon) role of Christian opposition to the rise of fascism, including that of church leaders like Dietrich Bonhoeffer—but mostly the role of lesser known laypeople.

We all have a voice. Until we don’t.

On a much happier note, after our Resistance tour, we wander over to Alte Pinakothek, aka The Old Picture Gallery. If you are into the Old Masters, this is your happy place: it is jammed with paintings from every conceivable Renaissance artist. Like most of the old buildings in Munch, it was nearly obliterated by multiple bombs during WWII, suffering the destruction of its walls and a 45-meter crater in the center.

We do not have time to do it justice, but we barrel through snapping pictures of Monets and Van Goghs, marveling at the fact that we can hover inches away from some of the most famous works of art in the world. The museum is not crowded at all.

On our way back to the hotel, we pass by the Bayerische Hypotheken-und Wechsel-Bank, better known as Hypo-Bank, which was founded by King Ludwig I of Bavaria.

More on Ludwig I later, because

1) Apparently he founded everything in Munich, and

2) His subsequent family history is weird beyond all comprehension

3) He was a notorious womanizer with a smirky look, crazy hair, and what can only be described as a badass ‘stache, and finally,

4) I am obsessed with one line in his Wikipedia description: “Ludwig was an eccentric and notoriously bad poet.”

In Part II of this series, I will quote some of his poetry so you can judge for yourself.

I mention Hypo-Bank because I took a photo of its head office as we walked past, and then later while reading about it online, I was struck by the architectural contrast between its original and current headquarters:

Both beautiful—and very German—in their own way!

We have to hustle back to the hotel so we can make our dinner reservation at what our hotel has described as an authentic Bavarian neighborhood restaurant called Ayinger in der Au which sources sustainable local produce and describes their beer as ‘liquid gold’.

We have a pleasant, delicious meal in an outdoor courtyard in which we do appear to be some of the very few non-German speakers present. Our server clearly thinks we are dolts because we do not order any liquid gold, but it is still a lovely meal on a lovely evening. We decide to walk back.

Side note: the summer sunsets in Munich are staggeringly pretty.

Upon our return to DC & Co, we are surprised by a call: the staff want to send something up to us. Would that be okay? Certainly, we say, hastily checking to see if my sister left her phone in the lobby.

But no: instead there is a knock on the door and a young man arrives bearing a tray. He shows us the contents: three chilled copper mugs, a flask of fresh-squeezed lime juice, three bottles of cold ginger beer, mint leaves, crushed ice, and a flask of excellent bourbon.

“We read online that you like Kentucky Mules,” he tells me, “and we wanted to surprise you.” I am beyond touched. This is the most considerate hotel on the planet.

We have drinks on the balcony, play foosball, each take a bath, and retire for the evening. It’s been one of the most interesting travel days of my life.

Stay tuned for tomorrow, when you can read Part II!

In addition to all the other stuff I promised you, I will include the prettiest photos from the trip, including a shot of some real-life dudes in lederhosen.

AND you will meet the Ludwigs! You are going to dig the Ludwigs. I promise.

Kimmery Martin is an American novelist, physician, medical school assistant professor, mother, wife, columnist, travel writer, oversharer, and dog owner. Also, recently, bread baker. Despite no popular demand whatsoever, she is currently at work on her fourth and fifth novels. She also teaches Narrative Medicine, advocates for libraries, and offers writing classes.

This Week’s Emergency is free for all readers for three weeks after publication. After that, access requires a subscription.

Subscribe now to support publication of this column.

Subscribe now

It’s been awhile since I wrote anything about who I am and what I am doing with this column. However, I notice a bunch of new followers (thanks to renowned writer ) so before I address today’s topic of procrastination, here’s a quick overview in case you’d like to subscribe.

Who I am: novelist; recovering doctor; mom of three; wife of brilliant, hot, hil…

Read more

I cannot believe this day has come. Last week, you graduated from high school.

Of my children, you are the most and the least like me. The most, because we are academically alike: fast learners, curious, and prone to arguing. The least because, unlike me, you are chill. And very funny.

Your easygoing nature manifested itself at birth, wh…

Read more

Over a decade ago, I began writing a novel called The Amortals, which is finished but as-yet unpublished. The storyline was prompted by two unrelated yet burning questions keeping me awake at night:

• First, what (or who) caused the 2009-2010 financial meltdown?

and

• Second, how will the advent of quantum computing change everyday life?

What I came up with was a novel about a commodities trader turned biotech venture capitalist named Rolly Farrow who is hiding a large secret from his wife—and an even larger secret from everyone on the planet. In the course of researching it, I learned a bit about financial terms like collateral debt obligations and mortgage-backed securities and debt ratings. I also read about what happens when deregulation allows financial behemoths to govern themselves.

Although that topic is still interesting today, it is not the focus of today’s essay. Instead, I want to briefly touch on the second issue raised in my novel: quantum computing.

The quantum world is a deeply weird place. To quote a passage from The Amortals:

Rolly and Caudle advanced to the next window. This one overlooked a smaller space, packed with giant metallic canisters, vacuum pumps, and tubes. The view was a bit indistinct: instead of one pane, this window was composed of multiple layers.

“It’s incredibly cold in there,” Rolly told Caudle. “We use liquid nitrogen for cooling, and we’re talking about temperatures only a tenth of a degree above absolute zero. So most of what you’re seeing is equipment established to maintain conditions for a very small computer. In fact—” he broke off, because he could tell by the look on his attorney’s face that he had some inkling where this was going. He must be more scientifically literate than he let on.

Caudle stopped walking. “You did not build a quantum computer.”

Rolly nodded, beaming. “We did. This was our first attempt, anyway. How much do you know about quantum mechanics?”

“I thought I was doing pretty well just to have heard the term ‘quantum computer’, actually. I know it’s the holy grail of computing, but I couldn’t tell you what it is.”

“Okay. So you understand current computers operate on a binary basis. That means each bit of information is stored as either a ‘1’ or a ‘0’, right? And they’re based on silicon semiconductors.” He gestured back down the hall, toward the massively parallel processors.

“Right.”

“Quantum computing uses units called qubits, and it takes advantage of some very weird subatomic properties. Imagine a computer so small it carries out its calculations on an individual atom.”

“I’m really not getting a clear mental picture there, to be honest.”

“Roll with me. Because it gets even stranger. We’re used to a world where things exist in a definable state: the switch is either on or off. The cat is either alive or dead. But in the quantum world—the subatomic world—things can exist in multiple states at once. Scientists call this ‘superposition.’”

“Okay,” Caudle said again, more dubiously this time.

“You’ll just have to take my word for it. But this is not a new discovery: people have been theorizing and investigating this stuff for more than a hundred years. Remember Schrodinger’s cat from college physics?”

“I’m a lawyer,” Caudle pointed out.

“It’s a famous paradox in quantum mechanics: Schrodinger described an experiment where an unfortunate cat is placed in a windowless chamber with a vial of hydrocyanic acid. If the vial is broken, the cat dies. If not, the cat still lives. But we, the observers, don’t know which state the cat is in, and therefore, until it is directly observed, the cat is both alive and dead.”

“How do people come up with this shit?”

Rolly couldn’t suppress a grin. “It’s called quantum indeterminacy, or the observer's paradox: there is no single outcome unless it is observed. Observing something narrows down the superposition—the multiple states of existence—into only one outcome. And that’s why no one has ever been able to build a quantum computer: trying to use it makes it useless.”

“So how did you do it?”

“We had to overcome the fragility of the quantum state. There are a whole bunch of things that can mess with atoms, but our researchers figured out a way to fire photons at them, so their spins aligned. This prevented them from becoming entangled.”

“Oh good,” Caudle held out a sarcastic hand. “Photon gun. Got it. Because I was worried about entanglement.”

“Very funny.”

“So…the point is now you have more computing power, because the computers are so tiny?”

“Exactly. We can use the parallel power of billions of computers. Therefore, we can process massive amounts of information.”

Caudle nodded, but he was frowning. “To do what?”

“Ah,” Rolly said. “Next window.”

Okay, so that passage may not qualify as the finest offering in all of literature — or even as scientifically accurate — but if you can endure the geek-speak, it is deeply relevant.

At the risk of getting myself canceled by the federal government, I’m going to use the woke term ‘nonbinary’. 1 As Rolly explained, current computers operate on a binary system—an either/or system. In the quantum world, however, an atom can exist in multiple states at once. They’re nonbinary and will therefore not be allowed in Florida. (Sorry, couldn’t resist.)

To oversimplify, the cat is both dead and alive.

Quantum computers, while harnessing the indeterminate state of individual atoms, can be linked together.2 Linking billions and billions of these teeny computers together means we will be able to do stuff we can only dream of today.

And that’s where it gets terrifying. Because on the day someone finally builds a functional and scalable quantum computer, all hell will break loose.3

Okay, to be more accurate but less dramatic, hell may or may not break loose immediately. It depends on who wins the quantum race and how they choose to deploy that power.

Everybody wants it. The U.S. government, of course, is a big player in the quantum arms race, as are the E.U. and China. The semi-autonomous tech nations of Google, Huawei, Microsoft, Amazon, etc are also in the mix. Just about any university, institution, private industry, or nation-state that can cobble together some hardcore nerds, high-tech labs, a megaton of financing, and a colossal energy source is probably engaged in the balls-out quest to be the first quantum overlord.

Why? With quantum computers, almost any complex system can be optimized. The possibility for scientific advancement is endless: pharmaceuticals, genetics, materials science, manufacturing, market analysis, military capabilities, atomic-level data collection, weather prediction, climate change amelioration, energy technology—all of this will be revolutionized, especially in conjunction with artificial intelligence.

Many careers will cease to exist. New occupations will spring into being. If things go well, we could have access to cheap, easily available energy sources. We could cure the planet’s climate woes. Medical conditions could be cured or prevented altogether. People could conceivably live for an extremely long time without suffering — or, at some point, people could live indefinitely. Poverty and hunger could be alleviated. All of this could lead to a more egalitarian and resourced world.

Or not. Unfortunately, the potential downsides are also dramatic. Once quantum computers exist, everyone and everything on earth becomes vulnerable.

The first issue with quantum computing relates to security.

Because they do not rely on a binary system, quantum computers do not have to use a process of trial and error to solve problems. Instead, they can explore all potential solutions simultaneously. This, we think, will allow them to crack almost any form of encryption. On Q-day, all encoded information will be instantly accessible — global financial systems, bitcoin wallets, confidential institutional records, sensitive communications, power systems. The current cybersecurity industry will become almost instantly obsolete, as will crypto-based financial systems.

If this happens and we are not prepared, the world could be plunged into chaos overnight. If a bad actor has first access, what’s to stop them from hacking America’s energy grid and stock markets? They could lock us out of our communications and pillage our bank accounts. They could activate our missile silos and deploy our nuclear subs. They could program every cell phone in America to play My Humps by the Black Eyed Peas on repeat at top volume. (I made up that last one, so hopefully I’m not generating evil ideas for some rogue non-state actor.)

Players around the globe are feverishly preparing for the glorious (or inglorious) advent of Q-day. To quote Amit Katwala of Wired magazine, “Hackers aligned with the Chinese state have reportedly been hoovering up encrypted data for years in hopes of one day having a quantum computer.”

In other words, they’re harvesting data they can’t currently read in the hope that quantum computing, once they have it, will allow them instant entry into our most sensitive systems. (This is apparently known in the biz as ‘harvest now, decrypt later.’)

What will happen to us? Will we go back to the pre-digital world of paper records? Will spies start leaving chalk marks on benches again? Will merchants demand gold coins? Maybe not. The U.S. government is preparing post-quantum cryptography, so we could be okay if enough critical systems convert in time.

Or—the U.S. government was almost certainly preparing post-q cryptography. The current administration is purging scientists, destroying vital agencies, and sledgehammering research faster than anyone can keep up right now, and they are doing it without bothering to understand the implications of their actions. This kind of ready-fire-aim approach leaves us vulnerable in nearly every facet of life. I mean, I hope they haven’t inadvertently fired the main people working on post-quantum cryptography, but it’s quite possible they have: there have already been DOGE cuts to the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), as well as buyout offers to high-level scientists working on cybersecurity. That along with a potential vast reduction in the workforce at the CISA (Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency) does not bode well for our national security.

It’s true that I don’t know what’s happening in detail at tech-related government programs. In my particular field—medicine—I do know many vital research projects have been abruptly terminated by Emperor Elon Musk. I also know many top-level medical researchers are being courted by other countries right now. If you’ve heard the fired CDC and NIH workers were all merrily burning taxpayer dollars while “researching” the impact of microagressions against pregnant trans gay nonwhite endangered climate-intolerant breastfeeding beetle slugs, you’ve been misinformed. (And even the studies that sound crazy often have potential applications that are way more useful than they seem at first glance—if you bother to read beyond the headlines.)

Knowing how inefficient the federal government can be, I’m sure there were plenty of niche projects that could have been legitimately targeted to save money, but why, for example, are we defunding trials that were investigating new treatments for Stage IV colon cancer? Or pancreatic cancer? Why terminate a decades-long multifaceted research program—with tons of real-world successes so far— examining diabetes prevention and dementia risk factors? (The answer to that one: because the lead researcher is at Columbia University.) Why refuse to renew a program educating pediatricians to include chronic childhood diseases in medical research? (That one got defunded because they specifically tried to include doctors who treat patients of diverse ethnicities and socioeconomic backgrounds—and doing that ran afoul of DEI bans.)

I could go on and on and on listing the irrevocably reversed progress of decades of research. Poof! So much valuable knowledge, just … gone.

There’s a good way and a phenomenally stupid way to address waste. We are engaged in the phenomenally stupid way.

America will lose scientific dominance if these purges continue.

Another reason the quantum arms race is on my mind right now is my TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) flared up after listening to the president rhapsodize about how his beautiful tariffs are going to restore manufacturing jobs and revitalize factories in the U.S. Um, what? We need to focus on the 2030s, not the 1930s. I’m all for jobs, but many manufacturing jobs are going away no matter what—tariffs or no tariffs. In the near future, if it can be automated or figured out by a computer, it likely will be. Between AI and Q-day4, I’m guessing many jobs of the near future requiring a human will be those that employ person-to-person relationships. It won’t happen immediately, obviously, but it is going to happen.

That leads me to the second issue that will inevitably arise after Q-day.

Our government should be preparing its citizenry for the coming techocultural revolution5, not insisting we’re going back to assembly lines and oil-fueled factories. We are barreling toward a vast upheaval in human existence. Why aren’t we focusing more on how to ethically and logistically address the changes we’ll face? If you are reading this right now, you’re alive during what I believe will be the most consequential phase transition in human history. To quote from The Amortals again:

“You and I—we are the generation, out of all the millions of years of humanity, who happened to be born just at the onset of the most extraordinary change in the history of humankind.”

I think about this all the time since I have young adult children. Why are we training them for jobs that may no longer exist? Why aren’t we focusing on finding jobs for factory workers and coal miners in industries that aren’t doomed to shrink? We can’t totally stop the technology from progressing, because it’s too decentralized. I’m not saying I am in favor of this technology, necessarily, but I am saying we have to think about the potential consequences and we have to plan ahead. Strike that: we need to implement action now.

I’m certain governments and institutions are in fact working behind the scenes to optimize their own priorities—whatever those may be—for the changes we face. But that is not the message we are getting from the current administration: they tout a return to old-school manufacturing; to fossil fuels; to human-staffed factories; to near-autarky—the idea that one country can become self-sufficient by producing nearly everything it consumes. (Also an extremely impractical goal, to say the least.) Barring a catastrophic world war or a complete financial/social collapse, we are going to advance into this new era whether we are prepared or not.

Unfortunately, we seem to be becoming less prepared, not more prepared.

Another thing triggering my TDS is the blind decimation of research I mentioned above. But it goes further than that; in some ways, our government is actively making it more difficult for the U.S. to protect our national security interests. Even as Trump gushes about bringing back the “old, beautiful, falling-down factories,” he reportedly wants to repeal a law directing billions of dollars in subsidies toward semiconductor manufacturing … whereas China is ramping up their support for such industries.

Not only that, but we get the majority of the raw materials needed for semiconductor manufacture from China. Or we did. Last week, in retaliation for our tariffs, Beijing slapped export controls on a number of rare-earth minerals and metals critical to tech manufacturers.6 So, in a self-inflicted triple-whammy, we are firing our government scientists and experts, we’re at risk of losing a stimulus helpful to boost necessary semiconductor manufacturing, and we are losing access to materials critical to their manufacture.7

Remember this if China gets to Q-Day first.

1

It would be hilarious if it weren’t so horrifying: in their heated quest to stamp out woke, the current administration is discouraging the use of certain words in scientific research papers—with apparently no awareness that words can have multiple meanings. Some of the verboten words include common non-DEI statistical terms used in almost every scientific paper: bias, binary, inclusion, etc. Meanwhile use of the highly offensive terms ‘woman’ and ‘female’ apparently will get a scientific paper flagged for review at the NSF. (No such flag for use of the word ‘man,’ alas.)

Unfortunately, these word bans aren’t just limited to review situations— see above for an example of valuable scientific medical research that lost funding because it included too much “diversity.” (Meaning the inclusion of low SES, multiple ethnicity pediatric patients.)

It’s detestable that we are trying to purge non-white ethnicities and poor people from medical studies, but this mess is also affecting elderly retired aircraft. In one tragically comical example of word banning, photos of the WWII B-29 bomber the Enola Gay were removed from aDefense Department database. Because … the plane was homosexual? Got it. In other word-related news, Trump recently confused transgenic mice with transgender mice and banned the Gulf of Mexico.

4

Counterpoint: I used AI to create the title image in this article, using the prompt “Quantum physics gone wrong.” As you can see, it generated a lab full of distressed Charlie Sheens + one guy who looks vaguely French. I wasn’t sure if this was an intelligent response or not, so I tried again with the same prompt and got this:

7

I need a physicist to weigh in here. My understanding is that even though quantum computing doesn’t require semiconductors in the same way digital computing does, semiconductor-based components are still used to manage operations and interface with classical computing systems. And in any case, right now we don’t have functional quantum computers. Estimates vary on when that milestone might be achieved, but it sounds like it could be a long way off. Or maybe not. Some people believe there’s a decent chance it could happen in the next ten years.

---

This Week's Emergency is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

---

Kimmery Martin is an American novelist, physician, medical school assistant professor, mother, wife, columnist, oversharer, and dog owner. Also, recently, bread baker. Despite no popular demand whatsoever, she is currently at work on her fourth and fifth novels. She also teaches Narrative Medicine, advocates for libraries, and offers writing classes.

Read more

Hello readers! After terrifying/annoying everyone with my political observations in my last couple articles, I’m pivoting to terrify/annoy you with my advice on writing. Just kidding! No one should be terrified. This advice will most likely annoy other writers and confuse everyone else.

Nevertheless, I persist.

For those of you who’ve managed to land on …

Read more

Welcome Emergency readers!

As promised (threatened?) I have one more post related to politics—and science—before I pivot to something less infuriating for a bit. This week I am joined by two super-nerds, Elisabeth Marnik, PhD (aka @sciencewhizliz) and Sabina Vohra-Miller, MSc (aka @unambiguousscience), who are both superb science explainers. Follow them…

Read more

If your political beliefs differ from mine, you’ll be gratified to know t…

Read more