Digital & Print Membership
Yearly + Receive 8 free printed back issues
$420 Annually
Monthly + Receive 3 free printed back issues
$40 Monthly
Are we at a Turning Point? Trump, Israel, and America’s Endless Wars
As I write this Trump is lashing out at Israel in a way that no U.S. president ever has, saying they “don’t know what the fuck they’re doing” and stating the simple fact that they have violated the ceasefire he announced on his social media platform. Iran is also stating that Israel has broken the temporary truce announced by Trump, with the Mehr and ISNA news agencies saying there have been explosions in Babol and Babolsar cities in Mazandaran. The initial announcement by the U.S. president, which seemed to many to be tenuous at best, and a farce at worst, appears to have collapsed before it ever held.
The source of this immediate disintegration of the ceasefire is Israel, who clearly never wanted peace to begin with. Trump is now face to face with the reality that Israel is the belligerent in the region, attacking Syria and Lebanon and Iran all while never ceasing their genocide in Gaza and constantly and illegally encroaching further into the West Bank.
For his many flaws, Trump’s approach to politics sometimes brings contradictions into focus, and here he has brought the global mainstream conversation face to face with having to admit the simple basic truth, that no U.S. administration has confronted in decades: Israel is the primary source of violence and conflict across the Middle East.
All of this is not to say that Trump will suddenly hold Netanyahu and the Israeli government to account, but rather that he is now at a crossroads with the dominant Western narrative. We have reached a point, collectively, of the status quo no longer being tenable. The genocide in Gaza and the norm of endless war have collided with rapidly changing perceptions brought about by a shifting media landscape and by decades of organizing and dialogue by Palestinians, anti-Zionists across the world, peace activists and more. And Trump somehow finds himself operating near the center of this collision. He can either be embarrassed and dogwalked by genocidaires, or take material action to hold them to task. That has always been the calculus, under both parties. And in recent years both Biden and Trump have thus far chosen to willingly be undercut on the global stage rather than take any material action to halt Israel.
This calculation comes from the power of AIPAC, from the massive Christian Zionist lobby, from the way presidents and others have internalized Zionist propaganda, and above all from the typical convergence of interests where Israel’s constant violence aligns with, and is a tool of, the interests of the U.S. empire and the military-industrial complex. But we might be seeing something different right now. It’s too early to tell how intent Trump is on curbing Israel, although his recent public statements do deviate from his predecessors.
But what’s really different is public sentiment. The U.S. public is deeply fed up with endless war in the Middle East. It’s a sea change from 22 years ago where a few weak lies were enough to get Americans riled up about invading Iraq under false pretenses. We’re in a different era, and that may mean an opportunity for peace presenting itself.
So many of us remember the Islamophobia and bloodlust that swept the U.S. after 9/11. It wasn’t just a “natural” reaction to the attack, it was a deliberately manufactured fervor, a whipping up of hatred and anger and violence. It led to two endless and disastrous wars, and between 4-5 million people dead in the fundamentally dishonest “war on terror”.
But twenty years of those wars did change minds. Trillions were spent, civilians killed, soldiers died and lost limbs all for nothing. No good came from 20 years of slaughter, as the anti-war camp claimed from the beginning. Today staying away from endless wars is such a popular sentiment that Trump vaguely ran on it. Serious people never trusted him, but if that man has one skill it’s seeing which way the wind is blowing. He and his camp know what polling confirms: war is unpopular. Israel’s genocide is similarly unpopular. So the idea of going to war with Iran for Israel is, unsurprisingly, supported by only a tiny fraction of the population.
That doesn’t mean the efforts to manufacture consent didn’t come around again, of course. Trump world briefly tried to convince people that we needed to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites, and CNN, Fox, and other outlets gleefully took up the charge. Anderson Cooper, in his element, preached the virtue of bombing yet another nation in the Middle East. The calls for regime change (we need to bomb Iran to save the women of Iran!) rang out across the airwaves for a moment. But most people didn’t bite. Some Republicans rapidly followed their leader, like they always do, but most people stuck to their position.
Despite the efforts of Zionists and propaganda outlets, people are tired of endless war.
And people are sick of genocide. The impact of seeing amputee children on our phones, something that was not happening when the U.S. bombed and invaded Iraq 22 years ago, is immeasurable. The impact of independent media and critical, thoughtful, political alternatives to the corporate outlets and their narrative have had a profound impact on these conversations. Deep in our souls, with deep anger and conviction, millions and millions of people across the United States have rejected Israel, have rejected the logic of Zionism, have grown deeply sickened by the genocide Israel is carrying out. Public opinion, once firmly behind the state of Israel because of a lopsided and dishonest narrative and media environment and political establishment, has seen the truth and rejected the false story we’ve been fed.
I have no faith in Trump. His comments about Israel could mean something, or they could mean nothing. Any meaningful change can only be measured through action. But it matters that the people no longer consent to war. It matters that the majority of this country doesn’t consent to genocide. Authoritarians, and all governments, find themselves on dangerous footing when they try to act without the consent of the people.
Now it’s up to us to take this opposition to war and violence and sending bombs and money to Israel and turn it into tangible actions. It’s up to us to build pressure and build power. It’s up to us to stand against the military-industrial complex and take away the massive power they currently hold. It’s up to us to make noise, to build alternatives, to create new media ecosystems, tell new stories, and forge a way out of the status quo of violence. But now the people are with us, and we can move forward with that knowledge, and with the power lent to us by millions of people opposed to endless war.
{
"article":
{
"title" : "Are we at a Turning Point? Trump, Israel, and America’s Endless Wars",
"author" : "J.P. Hill",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/are-we-at-a-turning-point-trump-israel-and-americas-endless-wars",
"date" : "2025-06-24 18:21:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/no-consent.jpg",
"excerpt" : "As I write this Trump is lashing out at Israel in a way that no U.S. president ever has, saying they “don’t know what the fuck they’re doing” and stating the simple fact that they have violated the ceasefire he announced on his social media platform. Iran is also stating that Israel has broken the temporary truce announced by Trump, with the Mehr and ISNA news agencies saying there have been explosions in Babol and Babolsar cities in Mazandaran. The initial announcement by the U.S. president, which seemed to many to be tenuous at best, and a farce at worst, appears to have collapsed before it ever held.",
"content" : "As I write this Trump is lashing out at Israel in a way that no U.S. president ever has, saying they “don’t know what the fuck they’re doing” and stating the simple fact that they have violated the ceasefire he announced on his social media platform. Iran is also stating that Israel has broken the temporary truce announced by Trump, with the Mehr and ISNA news agencies saying there have been explosions in Babol and Babolsar cities in Mazandaran. The initial announcement by the U.S. president, which seemed to many to be tenuous at best, and a farce at worst, appears to have collapsed before it ever held.The source of this immediate disintegration of the ceasefire is Israel, who clearly never wanted peace to begin with. Trump is now face to face with the reality that Israel is the belligerent in the region, attacking Syria and Lebanon and Iran all while never ceasing their genocide in Gaza and constantly and illegally encroaching further into the West Bank. For his many flaws, Trump’s approach to politics sometimes brings contradictions into focus, and here he has brought the global mainstream conversation face to face with having to admit the simple basic truth, that no U.S. administration has confronted in decades: Israel is the primary source of violence and conflict across the Middle East.All of this is not to say that Trump will suddenly hold Netanyahu and the Israeli government to account, but rather that he is now at a crossroads with the dominant Western narrative. We have reached a point, collectively, of the status quo no longer being tenable. The genocide in Gaza and the norm of endless war have collided with rapidly changing perceptions brought about by a shifting media landscape and by decades of organizing and dialogue by Palestinians, anti-Zionists across the world, peace activists and more. And Trump somehow finds himself operating near the center of this collision. He can either be embarrassed and dogwalked by genocidaires, or take material action to hold them to task. That has always been the calculus, under both parties. And in recent years both Biden and Trump have thus far chosen to willingly be undercut on the global stage rather than take any material action to halt Israel.This calculation comes from the power of AIPAC, from the massive Christian Zionist lobby, from the way presidents and others have internalized Zionist propaganda, and above all from the typical convergence of interests where Israel’s constant violence aligns with, and is a tool of, the interests of the U.S. empire and the military-industrial complex. But we might be seeing something different right now. It’s too early to tell how intent Trump is on curbing Israel, although his recent public statements do deviate from his predecessors.But what’s really different is public sentiment. The U.S. public is deeply fed up with endless war in the Middle East. It’s a sea change from 22 years ago where a few weak lies were enough to get Americans riled up about invading Iraq under false pretenses. We’re in a different era, and that may mean an opportunity for peace presenting itself.So many of us remember the Islamophobia and bloodlust that swept the U.S. after 9/11. It wasn’t just a “natural” reaction to the attack, it was a deliberately manufactured fervor, a whipping up of hatred and anger and violence. It led to two endless and disastrous wars, and between 4-5 million people dead in the fundamentally dishonest “war on terror”.But twenty years of those wars did change minds. Trillions were spent, civilians killed, soldiers died and lost limbs all for nothing. No good came from 20 years of slaughter, as the anti-war camp claimed from the beginning. Today staying away from endless wars is such a popular sentiment that Trump vaguely ran on it. Serious people never trusted him, but if that man has one skill it’s seeing which way the wind is blowing. He and his camp know what polling confirms: war is unpopular. Israel’s genocide is similarly unpopular. So the idea of going to war with Iran for Israel is, unsurprisingly, supported by only a tiny fraction of the population.That doesn’t mean the efforts to manufacture consent didn’t come around again, of course. Trump world briefly tried to convince people that we needed to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites, and CNN, Fox, and other outlets gleefully took up the charge. Anderson Cooper, in his element, preached the virtue of bombing yet another nation in the Middle East. The calls for regime change (we need to bomb Iran to save the women of Iran!) rang out across the airwaves for a moment. But most people didn’t bite. Some Republicans rapidly followed their leader, like they always do, but most people stuck to their position. Despite the efforts of Zionists and propaganda outlets, people are tired of endless war.And people are sick of genocide. The impact of seeing amputee children on our phones, something that was not happening when the U.S. bombed and invaded Iraq 22 years ago, is immeasurable. The impact of independent media and critical, thoughtful, political alternatives to the corporate outlets and their narrative have had a profound impact on these conversations. Deep in our souls, with deep anger and conviction, millions and millions of people across the United States have rejected Israel, have rejected the logic of Zionism, have grown deeply sickened by the genocide Israel is carrying out. Public opinion, once firmly behind the state of Israel because of a lopsided and dishonest narrative and media environment and political establishment, has seen the truth and rejected the false story we’ve been fed.I have no faith in Trump. His comments about Israel could mean something, or they could mean nothing. Any meaningful change can only be measured through action. But it matters that the people no longer consent to war. It matters that the majority of this country doesn’t consent to genocide. Authoritarians, and all governments, find themselves on dangerous footing when they try to act without the consent of the people.Now it’s up to us to take this opposition to war and violence and sending bombs and money to Israel and turn it into tangible actions. It’s up to us to build pressure and build power. It’s up to us to stand against the military-industrial complex and take away the massive power they currently hold. It’s up to us to make noise, to build alternatives, to create new media ecosystems, tell new stories, and forge a way out of the status quo of violence. But now the people are with us, and we can move forward with that knowledge, and with the power lent to us by millions of people opposed to endless war."
}
,
"relatedposts": [
{
"title" : "Black Liberation Views on Palestine",
"author" : "EIP Editors",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/black-liberation-on-palestine",
"date" : "2025-10-17 09:01:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/mandela-keffiyeh.jpg",
"excerpt" : "",
"content" : "In understanding global politics, it is important to look at Black liberation struggles as one important source of moral perspective. So, when looking at Palestine, we look to Black leaders to see how they perceived the Palestinian struggle in relation to theirs, from the 1960’s to today.Why must we understand where the injustice lies? Because, as Desmond Tutu famously said, “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”{% for person in site.data.quotes-black-liberation-palestine %}{{ person.name }}{% for quote in person.quotes %}“{{ quote.text }}”{% if quote.source %}— {{ quote.source }}{% endif %}{% endfor %}{% endfor %}"
}
,
{
"title" : "First Anniversary Celebration of EIP",
"author" : "EIP Editors",
"category" : "events",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/1st-anniversary-of-eip",
"date" : "2025-10-14 18:01:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/WSA_EIP_Launch_Cover.jpg",
"excerpt" : "Celebrating One Year of Independent Publishing",
"content" : "Celebrating One Year of Independent PublishingJoin Everything is Political on November 21st for the launch of our End-of-Year Special Edition Magazine.This members-only evening will feature a benefit dinner, cocktails, and live performances in celebration of a year of independent media, critical voices, and collective resistance.The EventNovember 21, 2025, 7-11pmLower Manhattan, New YorkLaunching our End-of-Year Special Edition MagazineSpecial appearances and performancesFood & Drink includedTickets are extremely limited, reserve yours now!Become an annual print member: get x back issues of EIP, receive the End-of-Year Special Edition Magazine, and come to the Anniversary Celebration.$470Already a member? Sign in to get your special offer. Buy Ticket $150 Just $50 ! and get the End-of-Year Special Edition Magazine Buy ticket $150 and get the End-of-Year Special Edition Magazine "
}
,
{
"title" : "Miu Miu Transforms the Apron From Trad Wife to Boss Lady: The sexiest thing in Paris was a work garment",
"author" : "Khaoula Ghanem",
"category" : "",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/miu-miu-transforms-the-apron-from-trad-wife-to-boss-lady",
"date" : "2025-10-14 13:05:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_MiuMiu_Apron.jpg",
"excerpt" : "Miuccia Prada has a habit of taking the least “fashion” thing in the room and making it the argument. For Spring 2026 at Miu Miu, the argument is the apron; staged not as a coy retro flourish but as a total system. The show’s mise-en-scène read like a canteen or factory floor with melamine-like tables, rationalist severity, a whiff of cleaning fluid. In other words, a runway designed to force a conversation about labor before any sparkle could distract us.",
"content" : "Miuccia Prada has a habit of taking the least “fashion” thing in the room and making it the argument. For Spring 2026 at Miu Miu, the argument is the apron; staged not as a coy retro flourish but as a total system. The show’s mise-en-scène read like a canteen or factory floor with melamine-like tables, rationalist severity, a whiff of cleaning fluid. In other words, a runway designed to force a conversation about labor before any sparkle could distract us.From the opening look—German actress Sandra Hüller in a utilitarian deep-blue apron layered over a barn jacket and neat blue shirting—the thesis was loud: the “cover” becomes the thing itself. As silhouettes marched on, aprons multiplied and mutated—industrial drill cotton with front pockets, raw canvas, taffeta and cloqué silk, lace-edged versions that flirted with lingerie, even black leather and crystal-studded incarnations that reframed function as ornament. What the apron traditionally shields (clothes, bodies, “the good dress”) was inverted; the protection became the prized surface. Prada herself spelled it out: “The apron is my favorite piece of clothing… it symbolizes women, from factories through to serving to the home.”Miu Miu Spring 2026 Ready-to-Wear. SuppliedThis inversion matters historically. The apron’s earliest fashion-adjacent life was industrial. It served as a barrier against grease, heat, stain. It was a token of paid and unpaid care. Miu Miu tapped that lineage directly (canvas, work belts, D-ring hardware), then sliced it against domestic codes (florals, ruffles, crochet), and finally pushed into nightlife with bejeweled and leather bibs. The garment’s migration across materials made its social migrations visible. It is a kitchen apron, yes, but also one for labs, hospitals, and factories; the set and styling insisted on that plurality.What makes the apron such a loaded emblem is not just what it covers, but what it reveals about who has always been working. Before industrialization formalized labor into factory shifts and wages, women were already performing invisible labour, the kind that doesn’t exist on payrolls but sits at the foundation of every functioning society. They were cooking, cleaning, raising children, nursing the ill. These tasks were foundational to every economy and yet absent from every ledger. Even when women entered the industrial workforce, from textile plants to wartime assembly lines, their domestic responsibilities did not disappear, they doubled. In that context, the apron here is a quiet manifesto for the strength that goes unrecorded, unthanked, and yet keeps civilization running.The algorithmic rise of the “tradwife,” the influencer economy that packages domesticity as soft power, is the contemporary cultural shadow here. Miu Miu’s apron refuses that rehearsal. In fact, it’s intentionally awkward—oversized, undone, worn over bikinis or with sturdy shoes—so the viewer can’t flatten it into Pinterest-ready nostalgia. Critics noted the collection as a reclamation, a rebuttal to the flattening forces of the feed: the apron as a uniform for endurance rather than submission. The show notes framed it simply as “a consideration of the work of women,” a reminder that the invisible economies of effort—paid, unpaid, emotional—still structure daily life.If that sounds unusually explicit for a luxury runway, consider the designer. Prada trained as a mime at Milan’s Piccolo Teatro, earned a PhD in political science, joined the Italian Communist Party, and was active in the women’s rights movement in 1970s Milan. Those facts are not trivia; they are the grammar of her clothes. Decades of “ugly chic” were, essentially, a slow campaign against easy consumption and default beauty. In 2026, the apron becomes the newest dialect. An emblem drawn from leftist feminist history, recoded into a product that still has to sell. That tension—belief versus business—is the Miuccia paradox, and it’s precisely why these aprons read as statements, not trends.The runway narrative traced a journey from function to fetish. Early looks were squarely utilitarian—thick cottons, pocketed bibs—before migrating toward fragility and sparkle. Lace aprons laid transparently over swimmers; crystal-studded aprons slipped across cocktail territory; leather apron-dresses stiffened posture into armor. The sequencing proposed the same silhouette can encode labor, intimacy, and spectacle depending on fabrication. If most brands smuggle “workwear” in as set dressing, Miu Miu forced it onto the body as the central garment and an unmissable reminder that the feminine is often asked to be both shield and display at once.It’s instructive to read this collection against the house’s last mega-viral object: the micro-mini of Spring 2022, a pleated, raw-hem wafer that colonized timelines and magazine covers. That skirt’s thesis was exposure—hip bones and hemlines as post-lockdown spectacle, Y2K nostalgia framed as liberation-lite. The apron, ironically, covers. Where the micro-mini trafficked in the optics of freedom (and the speed of virality), the apron asks about the conditions that make freedom possible: who launders, who cooks, who cares? To move from “look at me” to “who is working here?” is a pivot from optics to ethics, without abandoning desire. (The aprons are, after all, deeply covetable.) In a platform economy that still rewards the shortest hemline with the biggest click-through, this is a sophisticated counter-program.Yet the designer is not romanticizing toil. There’s wit in the ruffles and perversity in the crystals; neither negate labor, they metabolize it. The most striking image is the apron treated as couture-adjacent. Traditionally, an apron protects the precious thing beneath; here, the apron is the precious thing. You could call that hypocrisy—luxurizing the uniform of workers. Or, strategy, insisting that the symbols of care and effort deserve visibility and investment.Of course, none of this exists in a vacuum. The “tradwife” script thrives because it is aesthetically legible and commercially scalable. It packages gender ideology as moodboard. Miu Miu counters with garments whose legibility flickers. The collection’s best looks ask viewers to reconcile tenderness with toughness, convenience with care, which is exactly the mental choreography demanded of women in every context from office to home to online.If you wanted a season-defining “It” item, you’ll still find it. The apron is poised to proliferate across fast-fashion and luxury alike. But the deeper success is structural: Miu Miu re-centered labor as an aesthetic category. That’s rarer than a viral skirt. It’s a reminder that clothes don’t merely decorate life, they describe and negotiate it. In making the apron the subject rather than the prop, Prada turned a garment of service into a platform for agency. It’s precisely the kind of cultural recursion you’d expect from a designer shaped by feminist politics, who never stopped treating fashion as an instrument of thought as much as style.The last image to hold onto is deceptively simple: a woman in an apron, neither fetishized nor infantilized, striding, hands free. Not a costume for nostalgia, not a meme for the feed, but a working uniform reframed, respected, and suddenly, undeniably beautiful. That is Miu Miu’s provocation for Spring 2026: the work behind the work, made visible at last."
}
]
}