For most of us, the speed and intensity of the coronavirus pandemic has come as a shock. But not for <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/lawrence-wright">Lawrence Wright</a>. A staff writer and the author of nonfiction books about Scientology and Al Qaeda, Wright recently wrote a novel—yet to be published—called “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/End-October-novel-Lawrence-Wright/dp/0525658653">The End of October</a>,” about the spread of a novel virus that eerily resembles the outbreak of COVID-19. Wright looked to illnesses of the past to try to understand their enduring consequences, and he mapped those ripple effects onto our contemporary circumstances. “The End of October” is a work of fiction and firmly in the thriller genre, but what he imagined in it turns out to be eerily close to what we are experiencing now. “I read the paper and I feel like I’m reading another chapter of my own book,” he tells David Remnick.     Lawrence Wright’s “The End of October” is due out in April.

For most of us, the speed and intensity of the coronavirus pandemic has come as a shock. But not for Lawrence Wright. A staff writer and the author of nonfiction books about Scientology and Al Qaeda, Wright recently wrote a novel—yet to be published—called “The End of October,” about the spread of a novel virus that eerily resembles the outbreak of COVID-19. Wright looked to illnesses of the past to try to understand their enduring consequences, and he mapped those ripple effects onto our contemporary circumstances. “The End of October” is a work of fiction and firmly in the thriller genre, but what he imagined in it turns out to be eerily close to what we are experiencing now. “I read the paper and I feel like I’m reading another chapter of my own book,” he tells David Remnick.     Lawrence Wright’s “The End of October” is due out in April. 

The New Yorker: Politics and More

The Ripple Effects of a Pandemic

<a href="https://www.newyorker.com/tag/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a> never really stopped running for President. On the day of his inauguration, in 2017, he filed the paperwork to run for reëlection in 2020. As the Democrats have fought a historically long primary battle, Trump has been gearing up for the general election. In particular, his campaign will take place online—he has tapped his 2016 digital-media director, Brad Parscale, to run his 2020 campaign. <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/andrew-marantz">Andrew Marantz</a>, who <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/03/09/the-man-behind-trumps-facebook-juggernaut">profiled Parscale</a> for The New Yorker, joins <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/eric-lach">Eric Lach</a> to discuss Parscale’s role in the Trump phenomenon and what to expect from an increasingly online reëlection campaign.

Donald Trump never really stopped running for President. On the day of his inauguration, in 2017, he filed the paperwork to run for reëlection in 2020. As the Democrats have fought a historically long primary battle, Trump has been gearing up for the general election. In particular, his campaign will take place online—he has tapped his 2016 digital-media director, Brad Parscale, to run his 2020 campaign. Andrew Marantz, who profiled Parscale for The New Yorker, joins Eric Lach to discuss Parscale’s role in the Trump phenomenon and what to expect from an increasingly online reëlection campaign.

How Donald Trump Will Wage His Reëlection Campaign

Just over a week ago, Bernie Sanders seemed to be the front-runner for the Democratic nomination. Then came some prominent withdrawals from the race, and, on Super Tuesday, the resurgence of Joe Biden’s campaign. (Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii remains in the race, but has no chance of winning the nomination.) But the narrowing of the field only highlights the gulf between the Party’s moderate center and its energized Left.  David Remnick talks with Amy Davidson Sorkin, a political columnist for The New Yorker, about the possibility of a contested Convention. Then Remnick interviews Michael Kazin, an historian and the co-editor of Dissent magazine. Kazin points out that Sanders is struggling against a headwind: even voters sympathetic to democratic socialism may vote for a pragmatist if they think Biden is more likely to beat the incumbent President in November. But Sanders seems unlikely to moderate his message. “There is a problem,” Kazin tells David Remnick. “A divided party—a party that’s divided at the Convention—never has won in American politics.”

Just over a week ago, Bernie Sanders seemed to be the front-runner for the Democratic nomination. Then came some prominent withdrawals from the race, and, on Super Tuesday, the resurgence of Joe Biden’s campaign. (Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii remains in the race, but has no chance of winning the nomination.) But the narrowing of the field only highlights the gulf between the Party’s moderate center and its energized Left.  David Remnick talks with Amy Davidson Sorkin, a political columnist for The New Yorker, about the possibility of a contested Convention. Then Remnick interviews Michael Kazin, an historian and the co-editor of Dissent magazine. Kazin points out that Sanders is struggling against a headwind: even voters sympathetic to democratic socialism may vote for a pragmatist if they think Biden is more likely to beat the incumbent President in November. But Sanders seems unlikely to moderate his message. “There is a problem,” Kazin tells David Remnick. “A divided party—a party that’s divided at the Convention—never has won in American politics.” 

And Then There Were Two: Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden

<a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/07/28/biden-agenda">Joe Biden</a>’s pitch to voters has been remarkably consistent: he says he can unite older voters, people of color, and moderates into a coalition that can defeat <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/tag/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a>. A series of gaffes, concerns about his voting record, and disappointing results in the early primaries seemed to doom Biden’s candidacy. But big victories in <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/joe-bidens-south-carolina-win-black-voters-and-the-democrats-way-forward">South Carolina</a> and on <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/joe-bidens-super-tuesday-revival">Super Tuesday</a> have given new credence to his claim that he’s the best person to take on Trump in November. <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/evan-osnos">Evan Osnos</a> joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss how Biden became the Democratic front-runner and how he’ll go about winning over skeptical young, progressive voters.

Joe Biden’s pitch to voters has been remarkably consistent: he says he can unite older voters, people of color, and moderates into a coalition that can defeat Donald Trump. A series of gaffes, concerns about his voting record, and disappointing results in the early primaries seemed to doom Biden’s candidacy. But big victories in South Carolina and on Super Tuesday have given new credence to his claim that he’s the best person to take on Trump in November. Evan Osnos joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss how Biden became the Democratic front-runner and how he’ll go about winning over skeptical young, progressive voters.

Is Joe Biden the Future of the Democratic Party?

<div class="cl-preview-section"> Eleanor Randolph finished her biography of <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/tag/michael-bloomberg">Michael Bloomberg</a> in June, 2019, just as the former mayor decided not to run for President. “He didn’t want to go on an apology tour,” Randolph tells <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/david-remnick">David Remnick</a>. Bloomberg knew that he would be called to answer for his vigorous pursuit of unconstitutional <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/tag/stop-and-frisk">stop-and-frisk</a> policing, accusations against him of sexual misconduct, and his history as a Republican. Ultimately, Bloomberg did enter the race, and he has spent more than four hundred million dollars on political ads to defeat another New York billionaire, the incumbent, <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/tag/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a>. Randolph and Andrea Bernstein, a reporter for WNYC who covered Bloomberg’s three terms as mayor, join Remnick to discuss the candidate’s time in Gracie Mansion, his philosophy of governing, and his philanthropy. Trump’s political contributions have been unabashedly transactional, but Bloomberg’s generous philanthropy also has an expected return. “All the money that he gave to philanthropies and charities were a way of doing good in the world, sure, but they were also a way of making him more powerful as mayor,” Bernstein says. “Everything with Bloomberg, there’s a countervailing thing. Something benefits somebody: it also might benefit him, it also might benefit billionaires from Russia.” </div> <div class="cl-preview-section"> Eleanor Randolph is the author of “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Many-Lives-Michael-Bloomberg/dp/1476772207">The Many Lives of Michael Bloomberg</a>.” Andrea Bernstein’s book is “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/American-Oligarchs-Kushners-Trumps-Marriage-ebook/dp/B07ZQJM562">American Oligarchs: The Kushners, the Trumps, and the Marriage of Money and Power</a>.” </div>

 Eleanor Randolph finished her biography of Michael Bloomberg in June, 2019, just as the former mayor decided not to run for President. “He didn’t want to go on an apology tour,” Randolph tells David Remnick. Bloomberg knew that he would be called to answer for his vigorous pursuit of unconstitutional stop-and-frisk policing, accusations against him of sexual misconduct, and his history as a Republican. Ultimately, Bloomberg did enter the race, and he has spent more than four hundred million dollars on political ads to defeat another New York billionaire, the incumbent, Donald Trump. Randolph and Andrea Bernstein, a reporter for WNYC who covered Bloomberg’s three terms as mayor, join Remnick to discuss the candidate’s time in Gracie Mansion, his philosophy of governing, and his philanthropy. Trump’s political contributions have been unabashedly transactional, but Bloomberg’s generous philanthropy also has an expected return. “All the money that he gave to philanthropies and charities were a way of doing good in the world, sure, but they were also a way of making him more powerful as mayor,” Bernstein says. “Everything with Bloomberg, there’s a countervailing thing. Something benefits somebody: it also might benefit him, it also might benefit billionaires from Russia.” Eleanor Randolph is the author of “The Many Lives of Michael Bloomberg.” Andrea Bernstein’s book is “American Oligarchs: The Kushners, the Trumps, and the Marriage of Money and Power.” 

The Many Iterations of Michael Bloomberg, C.E.O., Mayor, and Presidential Hopeful

This week, the former film producer Harvey Weinstein was <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-local-correspondents/the-weinstein-trials-imperfect-moving-conclusion">convicted on two counts of sexual assault</a> in a New York court. Weinstein, <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/books/double-take/the-reporting-that-led-to-harvey-weinsteins-trial-and-conviction">who has been accused of sexual misconduct</a> by more than ninety women, has become an emblem of misogyny in Hollywood, and of the systems that <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/08/05/alan-dershowitz-devils-advocate">protect wealthy and powerful men</a> from the consequences of <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/01/20/how-far-can-abused-women-go-to-protect-themselves">criminal misconduct</a>. Rebecca Solnit joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss whether the Weinstein verdict is a turning point in the #MeToo movement, and what it takes to expose the lies of those in power in business and politics.

This week, the former film producer Harvey Weinstein was convicted on two counts of sexual assault in a New York court. Weinstein, who has been accused of sexual misconduct by more than ninety women, has become an emblem of misogyny in Hollywood, and of the systems that protect wealthy and powerful men from the consequences of criminal misconduct. Rebecca Solnit joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss whether the Weinstein verdict is a turning point in the #MeToo movement, and what it takes to expose the lies of those in power in business and politics.

Rebecca Solnit on Harvey Weinstein and the Lies that Powerful Men Tell

Donald Trump began his Presidential bid, in 2015, with an infamous speech, at Trump Tower, in which he said of Mexican immigrants, “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” But it was not until a former aide to Jeff Sessions joined Trump’s campaign that the nativist rhetoric coalesced into a policy platform—including the separation of children from their families at the border. <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/jonathan-blitzer">Jonathan Blitzer</a>, who writes about immigration for The New Yorker, has been reporting on Stephen Miller’s sway in the Trump Administration and his remarkable success in advancing an extremist agenda. “There has never been an American President who built his campaign around the issue of immigration and later won on that campaign on immigration. Trump was the first and only President really ever to do it,” Blitzer tells David Remnick. Despite this influence, Miller remains largely behind the scenes. Blitzer explains why: “He knows that the kiss of death in this Administration is to be identified as the brains behind the man. He can’t let on that he’s the one who effectively is manipulating Trump on these issues.”

Donald Trump began his Presidential bid, in 2015, with an infamous speech, at Trump Tower, in which he said of Mexican immigrants, “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” But it was not until a former aide to Jeff Sessions joined Trump’s campaign that the nativist rhetoric coalesced into a policy platform—including the separation of children from their families at the border. Jonathan Blitzer, who writes about immigration for The New Yorker, has been reporting on Stephen Miller’s sway in the Trump Administration and his remarkable success in advancing an extremist agenda. “There has never been an American President who built his campaign around the issue of immigration and later won on that campaign on immigration. Trump was the first and only President really ever to do it,” Blitzer tells David Remnick. Despite this influence, Miller remains largely behind the scenes. Blitzer explains why: “He knows that the kiss of death in this Administration is to be identified as the brains behind the man. He can’t let on that he’s the one who effectively is manipulating Trump on these issues.” 

Stephen Miller, the Architect of Trump’s Immigration Plan

Rachel Bitecofer, a political scientist at the Niskanen Center, in Washington, D.C., thinks that most pollsters and forecasters rely on outdated ideas about how candidates succeed. She argues that the outcome has far less to do with the candidates’ ideology than we think it does. Her perspective has been controversial, but in July, 2018, months before the midterm elections, her model predicted the Democratic victory in the House with an accuracy unmatched by conventional forecasters. And it suggests that Democrats should stop worrying about losing, and focus on firing up their voters.

Rachel Bitecofer, a political scientist at the Niskanen Center, in Washington, D.C., thinks that most pollsters and forecasters rely on outdated ideas about how candidates succeed. She argues that the outcome has far less to do with the candidates’ ideology than we think it does. Her perspective has been controversial, but in July, 2018, months before the midterm elections, her model predicted the Democratic victory in the House with an accuracy unmatched by conventional forecasters. And it suggests that Democrats should stop worrying about losing, and focus on firing up their voters.

Does It Really Matter Who the Democratic Nominee Is?

Every year, Townsend Harris High School, in Queens, New York, holds a schoolwide election simulation. Students are assigned roles and begin campaigning in September. Every candidate has a staff, raises money, and makes ads for the school’s radio and television network. This fall, the school simulated the Democratic and Republican primaries. Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Joe Biden got into a rap battle. The American Family Association joined the fray and released a rap of its own.    The New Yorker’s <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/joshua-rothman">Joshua Rothman</a> first observed the simulation during the primaries of the 2016 Presidential election. At the time, he saw that Trump’s political arrival was greeted with distaste at a school where many students come from immigrant families. “There was some stuff Donald Trump was saying that, if you heard from any other candidate, it would frankly be disgusting,” Justin, who played Pete Buttigieg this cycle, said. But Togay, who was assigned the role of Trump—he’s a Democrat in real life—was determined to make the President more appealing to his classmates. “In preparation, I watched Alec Baldwin for a couple weeks,” he tells Rothman. For Togay and the Townsend Harris student body, Donald Trump’s unprecedented Presidency is normal. “We’ve seen what’s actually going on in Washington, because it’s been like a reality show to us,” Justin said. “This isn’t really surprising. This isn’t new.”

Every year, Townsend Harris High School, in Queens, New York, holds a schoolwide election simulation. Students are assigned roles and begin campaigning in September. Every candidate has a staff, raises money, and makes ads for the school’s radio and television network. This fall, the school simulated the Democratic and Republican primaries. Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Joe Biden got into a rap battle. The American Family Association joined the fray and released a rap of its own.    The New Yorker’s Joshua Rothman first observed the simulation during the primaries of the 2016 Presidential election. At the time, he saw that Trump’s political arrival was greeted with distaste at a school where many students come from immigrant families. “There was some stuff Donald Trump was saying that, if you heard from any other candidate, it would frankly be disgusting,” Justin, who played Pete Buttigieg this cycle, said. But Togay, who was assigned the role of Trump—he’s a Democrat in real life—was determined to make the President more appealing to his classmates. “In preparation, I watched Alec Baldwin for a couple weeks,” he tells Rothman. For Togay and the Townsend Harris student body, Donald Trump’s unprecedented Presidency is normal. “We’ve seen what’s actually going on in Washington, because it’s been like a reality show to us,” Justin said. “This isn’t really surprising. This isn’t new.”

A Teen-age Trump Tries to Win His High School’s Election

On Tuesday, voters in New Hampshire cast their ballots in the Democratic Presidential primary. Following <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/campaign-chronicles/pretty-much-a-big-mess-one-iowa-caucus-precincts-drama-filled-night">the debacle</a> surrounding the Iowa caucuses, many Democrats hoped that the results from New Hampshire would bring clarity to the race. Bernie Sanders <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/bernie-sanders-leads-a-jumbled-new-hampshire-primary">won</a>, arguably making him the front-runner. But close behind him was Pete Buttigieg, who also narrowly won the Iowa caucuses, and Amy Klobuchar, whose third-place finish gave her campaign renewed energy. <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/benjamin-wallace-wells">Benjamin Wallace-Wells</a> joins <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/eric-lach">Eric Lach</a> to discuss the New Hampshire primaries and how a clear picture of the future of the Democratic contest remains elusive.

On Tuesday, voters in New Hampshire cast their ballots in the Democratic Presidential primary. Following the debacle surrounding the Iowa caucuses, many Democrats hoped that the results from New Hampshire would bring clarity to the race. Bernie Sanders won, arguably making him the front-runner. But close behind him was Pete Buttigieg, who also narrowly won the Iowa caucuses, and Amy Klobuchar, whose third-place finish gave her campaign renewed energy. Benjamin Wallace-Wells joins Eric Lach to discuss the New Hampshire primaries and how a clear picture of the future of the Democratic contest remains elusive.

After Two Primary Contests, What’s Ahead for the Democratic Race?

The last time a Democrat won the White House, he had enormous support from black voters; lower support from black voters was one of many reasons Hillary Clinton lost in 2016. Marcus Ferrell, a political organizer from Atlanta, tells Radio Hour about the importance of turning out “unlikely voters” in order to win an election, which, for him, means black men. <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/jelani-cobb">Jelani Cobb</a>, a New Yorker staff writer and historian, points out that the four Democratic front-runners, all of whom are white, may struggle to get the turnout they need. Cobb tells David Remnick that Joe Biden’s strong lead may begin to fall after his weak showing among largely white voters in Iowa; Pete Buttigieg has very low support among South Carolina voters, and even faces opposition from black constituents in his home town, South Bend. But Bernie Sanders, Cobb says, seems to have made inroads with at least younger black voters since 2016.

The last time a Democrat won the White House, he had enormous support from black voters; lower support from black voters was one of many reasons Hillary Clinton lost in 2016. Marcus Ferrell, a political organizer from Atlanta, tells Radio Hour about the importance of turning out “unlikely voters” in order to win an election, which, for him, means black men. Jelani Cobb, a New Yorker staff writer and historian, points out that the four Democratic front-runners, all of whom are white, may struggle to get the turnout they need. Cobb tells David Remnick that Joe Biden’s strong lead may begin to fall after his weak showing among largely white voters in Iowa; Pete Buttigieg has very low support among South Carolina voters, and even faces opposition from black constituents in his home town, South Bend. But Bernie Sanders, Cobb says, seems to have made inroads with at least younger black voters since 2016.

The Black Vote in 2020

On Monday, at the Iowa caucuses, a new smartphone app was used to report the results from each precinct. The app <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-lesson-american-voters-can-learn-from-iowa">proved faulty</a>, leading to a catastrophic failure to collect and report vote totals. In theory, advances in voting technology make voting easier and more accessible. In practice, they have introduced new vulnerabilities that can be exploited to suppress or undermine the will of the voters. <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/sue-halpern">Sue Halpern</a> joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss the recent history of voter suppression and malfunctions at polling places and whether the 2020 election can be saved.

On Monday, at the Iowa caucuses, a new smartphone app was used to report the results from each precinct. The app proved faulty, leading to a catastrophic failure to collect and report vote totals. In theory, advances in voting technology make voting easier and more accessible. In practice, they have introduced new vulnerabilities that can be exploited to suppress or undermine the will of the voters. Sue Halpern joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss the recent history of voter suppression and malfunctions at polling places and whether the 2020 election can be saved.

Disasters at America’s Polling Places

In the nineteen-thirties, authoritarian regimes were on the rise around the world—as they are again today—and democratic governments that came into existence after the First World War were toppling. “American democracy, too, staggered,” Jill Lepore <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/02/03/the-last-time-democracy-almost-died">wrote</a> in The New Yorker, “weakened by corruption, monopoly, apathy, inequality, political violence, hucksterism, racial injustice, unemployment, even starvation.” Lepore talks with David Remnick about how Americans rallied to save democracy, and how we might apply those lessons in a new era with similar problems.

In the nineteen-thirties, authoritarian regimes were on the rise around the world—as they are again today—and democratic governments that came into existence after the First World War were toppling. “American democracy, too, staggered,” Jill Lepore wrote in The New Yorker, “weakened by corruption, monopoly, apathy, inequality, political violence, hucksterism, racial injustice, unemployment, even starvation.” Lepore talks with David Remnick about how Americans rallied to save democracy, and how we might apply those lessons in a new era with similar problems. 

Jill Lepore on Democracy in Peril, Then and Now

On Tuesday, President <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/tag/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a> announced his Administration’s <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/trump-unveils-the-giveaway-of-the-century-on-middle-east-peace">Middle East peace plan</a>. The unveiling occurred in the midst of <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/tag/impeachment">the Senate impeachment trial</a> of Trump, for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, and on the day that the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was indicted on charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust, in three cases. While nominally presenting a two-state solution, the plan heavily favors Israeli interests. <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/robin-wright">Robin Wright</a> joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss the Trump Administration’s plan in the Middle East and the dangers that Trump and Netanyahu pose to the future of democracy in their countries.

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump announced his Administration’s Middle East peace plan. The unveiling occurred in the midst of the Senate impeachment trial of Trump, for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, and on the day that the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was indicted on charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust, in three cases. While nominally presenting a two-state solution, the plan heavily favors Israeli interests. Robin Wright joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss the Trump Administration’s plan in the Middle East and the dangers that Trump and Netanyahu pose to the future of democracy in their countries.

The Trump-Netanyahu “Deal of the Century”

Mass incarceration is now widely regarded as a prejudiced and deeply harmful set of policies. Bipartisan support exists for some degree of criminal-justice reform, and, in some circles, the idea of prison abolition is also gaining traction. Kai Wright, the host of the WNYC podcast “The United States of Anxiety,” spoke about the movement with Paul Butler, a law professor and former federal prosecutor who saw firsthand the damage that prosecution causes; and sujatha baliga, a MacArthur Foundation fellow who leads the Restorative Justice Project at the nonprofit Impact Justice and a survivor of sexual violence. “Prison abolition doesn’t mean that everybody who’s locked up gets to come home tomorrow,” Butler explains. Instead, activists envision a gradual process of “decarceration,” and the creation of alternative forms of justice and harm reduction. “Abolition, to my mind, isn’t just about ending the prisons,” baliga adds. “It’s about ending binary processes which pit us as ‘us, them,’ ‘right, wrong’; somebody has to be lying, somebody’s telling the truth. That is not the way that we get to healing.”

Mass incarceration is now widely regarded as a prejudiced and deeply harmful set of policies. Bipartisan support exists for some degree of criminal-justice reform, and, in some circles, the idea of prison abolition is also gaining traction. Kai Wright, the host of the WNYC podcast “The United States of Anxiety,” spoke about the movement with Paul Butler, a law professor and former federal prosecutor who saw firsthand the damage that prosecution causes; and sujatha baliga, a MacArthur Foundation fellow who leads the Restorative Justice Project at the nonprofit Impact Justice and a survivor of sexual violence. “Prison abolition doesn’t mean that everybody who’s locked up gets to come home tomorrow,” Butler explains. Instead, activists envision a gradual process of “decarceration,” and the creation of alternative forms of justice and harm reduction. “Abolition, to my mind, isn’t just about ending the prisons,” baliga adds. “It’s about ending binary processes which pit us as ‘us, them,’ ‘right, wrong’; somebody has to be lying, somebody’s telling the truth. That is not the way that we get to healing.”

What Would a World Without Prisons Be Like?

A weekly discussion about politics, hosted by The New Yorker's executive editor, Dorothy Wickenden.

hubhopper

The New Yorker: Politics and More

hubhopper