Katrina vanden Heuvel | The Nation

The conventional wisdom is that magazines are in decline. Newsweek’s print downfall was mourned as a death in the family (last week’s New Yorker described a gathering of ex-editors as an “Irish Wake”). Facing dwindling circulation, U.S. News and World Report has become more focused on its staple college and hospital rankings rather than on long-form journalism. Rolling Stone and Martha Stewart’s Omnimedia have seen layoffs, while old favorites like Gourmet and Life are long gone.

Last spring, the entrepreneurial and well-funded GOOD laid off virtually all of its editorial and writing staff. When The American Prospect, a haven for intelligent liberalism, was hit by a nearly fatal half-a-million-dollar deficit, The Nation spoke out urging people to help the magazine. The Prospect survived—barely—but journalism nearly lost an informed voice and essential training ground for many of America’s finest progressive journalists.

Given all the depressing news we should raise a glass to the redesign (in print) and relaunch (online) of The New Republic, The Nation’s sister fellow-liberal magazine of opinion for nearly 100 years. In rebooting the magazine, publisher Chris Hughes—co-founder of Facebook and steeped in online organizing—did something surprising: he doubled down on long-form, investigative journalism and political opinion. Hughes bought The New Republic, and could have done as he pleased: stripped it bare, sold it for parts or gone online only. But he invested instead in fact-checking, reporting and—as The New York Times reported—went to great pains to “include The New Republic’s rich history in a magazine designed for the modern media age.”

The Nation has invested in a similar type of journalism—intelligent, cutting-edge, bold writing and reporting that is embedded in our historical DNA—and we’ve embraced the digital age with passion and integrity.

In 2014, The New Republic will turn 100. A year later The Nation will turn 150. In 1948 we almost merged. Like many grand bargains between liberals, this one fell apart. (You’ll find the full story of the merger-that-almost-was in former editor Victor Navasky’s rollicking memoir, A Matter of Opinion.)

We’ve survived, I think, for 150 years by staying truly independent, and by filling our pages with unfiltered takes on politics and culture. As Navasky has noted, journals of opinion like The Nation continue to matter because they are a critical counterforce against the tabloidization, consolidation, dumbing-down and fact-challenged “debate” that dominates our political culture. Intelligent readers increasingly are looking to these magazines to set the standard for serious public discussion and debate. Sticking to that standard has won us dozens of honors, from National Magazine Awards to the George Polk, James Aronson and Sidney Hillman Awards for investigative reporting and social justice journalism. And The Nation has launched the careers of myriad young writers, from Hunter S. Thompson in the early 1960s to Jeremy Scahill today, and driven bold ideas into the national conversation.

Like The New Republic, we believe in covering culture, both high and low—one of our most-read stories this week is a smart piece by a rising cultural critic on what we can learn from the TV shows Girls and Shameless about being broke, down and out. And we feature one of America’s finest sports writers in Dave Zirin and boast the inimitable JoAnn Wypijewski as our sex columnist. It’s a mix that’s good for journalism and good for the public debate. But while The New Republic appears intent on competing with New York magazine, investing in glossy paper and highly designed pages and ramping up its lifestyle coverage, we’re keeping our gritty newsprint—and more radical-edged politics.

Please support our journalism. Get a digital subscription for just $9.50!

The Nation and The New Republic’s political paths have diverged over the years, at times dramatically. The Nation has been a bigger tent when it comes to political views, welcoming radicals, liberals, progressives, anarchists and even a few big-hearted conservatives to our pages over the years. The New Republic has been more centrist, with a neoconservative streak and dark period post-9/11, which it revisited (almost) in a special issue apologizing for the magazine’s editorial march to war in Iraq.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, magazines are surviving—even thriving. The Nation is now available weekly on more than a dozen digital platforms with more than 1.1 million readers. We have more print subscribers today than we did a decade ago, because we firmly believe that the printed word is an essential part of the mix. At Mother Jones, print subscriptions jumped dramatically after they broke the “47 percent” story in September. AtGarden and Gun, one of publishing’s unlikeliest success stories, subscriptions continue to rise on the back of top-flight writing. And as the Times reported, The New Republic, whose circulation dipped to dangerous lows last spring, is slowly making its way back in print.

I was intrigued earlier this month to read that The American Prospect, still struggling to make ends meet, had decided to sublet part of its office to The American Conservative, founded in 2002 by Pat Buchanan. “We can only benefit from sharing ideas,” Maisie Allison, web editor at the Conservative, told the Times.

Cynics might scoff at strange print bedfellows huddling together for warmth in an economic chill. But I see something different in their collaboration. A mutual and shared commitment to the vital role of the independent journal of opinion in our American democracy.

Besides just progressive magazines, progressive politics in general are resurgent, Katrina vanden Heuvel writes. Will we finally get serious about fixing economic inequality in this country?

SENECA FALLS TO SELMA TO STONEWALL. “We the people declare today that the most evident of truths—that all of us are created equal—is the star that guides us still; just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls and Selma and Stonewall.” The president’s much-quoted line from his inaugural speech powerfully charts “an arc of history that bends toward justice,” as John Nichols writes this week. Linking these historic moments to today’s struggle for pay equity for women and immigrants’ rights was a meaningful nod to the electorate that gave him victory on November 6. And while symbolic recognition is not a substitute for policy, it still matters, argues Melissa Harris-Perry in her column this week. “Obama positioned Seneca Falls, Selma and Stonewall as the fulfillment of a nascent promise in Jefferson’s declaration, and thereby recognizes the deeply American narrative embedded in these moments,” writes Harris-Perry.

YES, HE CAN. After a disappointing filibuster reform deal this week in Congress, Obama’s use of executive power has become even more significant going forward. In this week’s issue, we zero in on twenty actions the president should take to push for progressive change. From addressing the economy by creating a National Development Bank to challenging the school-to-prison pipeline—to auditing the Pentagon—the president can, and must, act in his second term to make our country better. “Pressing for reforms through executive action—using both “street heat” and “suite heat”—should be a serious focus of our work in the coming months,” we write. Read more about these twenty actions focusing on the environment, foreign policy, criminal justice, immigration, civil liberties and more. Also, we asked our readers to weigh in—find out what our thoughtful readers would like to see from the president during his second term.

BIG MONEY & POLITICS. As Lee Fang reports, Obama’s first term was shaped by clashes with big-business interests. Take the health reform fight, for example—opponents of reform spent over $323 million in negative advertising and offered $450,000 starting salaries to Democratic Senate staffers willing to join up with lobbying firms. And in the case of some senators, like Nebraska’s Ben Nelson—who eventually became a health industry lobbyist—their efforts paid off. But looking forward, President Obama plans to use his legions of volunteers to push back against special interests. “For Obama’s second term, even with a weaker position given the composition of Congress, he may succeed by returning to his community organizing roots—a recognition that social movements are an essential component in advancing progressive reforms over corporate or partisan opposition.” Find out more from Fang.

CLIMATE CHANGE. “Addressing climate change was—quite remarkably—the most prominent policy vow President Obama made yesterday on the steps of the US Capitol,” wrote George Zornick on Tuesday. But White House Press Secretary Jay Carney gave no comfort to environmentalists when talking about the Keystone XL pipeline this week. Read more from Zornick on the troubling signals from the White House—and how approving the pipeline “would cripple any notion that the White House is actually serious about addressing climate change.” Zornick also writes about a new congressional task force on climate change, which will work to push the Obama administration to take action as well as mobilize public support to enact real change. Find out more on how the task force aims to “break through barricades of denial.”

ELECTION REFORM. We‘ve long been familiar with the GOP’s gerrymandering strategy—as John Nichols reports, even though Democrats won 1.4 million more votes than Republicans in House races, the GOP still retains control of the chamber. Now Republicans in statehouses want to divvy up Electoral College votes based on district pluralities in key battleground states like Virginia—which would further rig the system to yield better results for the GOP. After an election with rampant efforts to suppress the votes of people of color, immigrants, women, college students, and the elderly, it’s crucial for the Obama administration and Congress to act and fix our elections. Find out more from Ari Berman on the Voter Empowerment Act and other proposals in Congress—and how they would boost voter participation. Also, take a look at my piece this week on campaign finance reform in New York—the votes are there to clean up our elections, but will Governor Cuomo push to pass legislation? Read that piece here.

GUNS, RACE & POLITICS. President Obama announced some of the most sweeping gun control proposals in over two decades this week—George Zornick breaks down the president’s proposals, and what might happen next. But are our media and politics fostering an honest debate on what comprehensive reform will do? As Bryce Covert writes, as we push for gun control legislation, we must remember how reforms might impact those most affected by gun violence—and how the criminalization of certain guns could disproportionately affect people of color. “What may look like a colorblind law on the books can be interpreted and implemented in incredibly racist ways,” writes Covert. And as Mychal Denzel Smith argues, the conversation about guns has focused too much on keeping the weapons out of the hands of certain people—and not on real ways to reduce gun violence. But who are the “bad guys”? Read Smith’s piece, “It’s Not the Bad Guys—It’s the Guns,” here.

REMEMBERING AARON SWARTZ. We were saddened at the loss of Aaron Swartz last weekend, a tireless activist committed to making information free and accessible to all. “I remember always thinking that he always seemed too sensitive for this world we happen to live in, and I remember him working so mightily, so heroically, to try to bend the world into a place more hospitable to people like him, which also means hospitable to people like us,” writes The Nation’s Rick Perlstein. The New York Times cited Perlstein’s moving tribute in an article on Swartz’s extraordinary work as a data crusader. And on the prosecution of Swartz, Michelle Dean writes how the case was about more than hacking; rather, “it reflected a completely bizarre set of priorities in law enforcement, one which fetishizes the technicalities of the issues over the real justice of them.” Read more from Dean about the larger attack on those who want to “challenge the public to think more deeply and carefully about what justice demands.”

A NEW COLD WAR. “With the full support of a feckless policy elite and an uncritical media establishment, Washington is slipping, if not plunging, into a new cold war with Moscow,” writes Stephen F. Cohen in this week’s issue. “Relations, already deeply chilled by fundamental disputes over missile defense, the Middle East and Russia’s internal politics, have now been further poisoned by two conflicts reminiscent of tit-for-tat policy-making during the previous Cold War.” Russia’s adoption ban, or “Dima’s Law” comes on the tails of the US’s Magnitsky Act, which would essentially put Russian officials on a blacklist without due process. Find out more from Cohen on how this one-dimensional approach from President Obama, Congress and the media could prove disastrous for US-Russian relations.

ROE AT 40. Forty years after Roe v. Wade, we’re still fighting for reproductive justice—in 2011 alone, states passed ninety-two restrictions on abortion rights. “The piecemeal strategy of the anti-choice movement has paid off, and the Republicans’ ascendance at the state level has been a disaster for choice,” we write in this week’s editorial. After taking some hits, though, the movement for abortion rights is pushing back. And, as columnist Katha Pollitt writes, while Americans might be wary of identifying as “pro-choice,” they still believe that abortion is a decision best left to a pregnant woman and her doctor. Is “pro-choice” passe? Read more from Pollitt here. Also, take a look at Peter Rothberg’s blog which highlights the many groups, including Planned Parenthood and NARAL, working to defend Roe forty years later. And visit our Take Action blog to learn about the Hyde Amendment and how it’s the main obstacle to abortion access for low-income women. Find out what you can do to repeal the Hyde Amendment.

OBAMA’S CABINET. President Obama’s nomination of Chuck Hagel for Secretary of Defense this week drew fire from his former Republicans in Congress. And as a conservative Republican, he’s certainly not an ideal candidate for progressives either, as Phyllis Bennis notes this week. But Obama’s pick signals his break with the Bush administration and could alter the trajectory of the president’s military policy. Could Hagel’s appointment actually help the anti-war left? Read more from Bennis here. Perhaps the more controversial cabinet pick should be Obama’s choice for Treasury Secretary—after choosing Jack Lew this week, progressives have reason for concern. As John Nichols writes, Lew is “the steady defender of deregulation” and “hails from the same inner circle as Geithner and Lawrence Summers.” Read more from Nichols on twelve questions Senate Democrats should ask Jack Lew.

OWNING THE FUTURE. Guest-edited by Antonino D’Ambrosio, and inspired by his film Let Fury Have the Hour, this week’s issue of The Nationincludes a forum that explores how creative responses can transform our world—and be the antidote to the consumerism and cynicism that define our culture. “Ultimately, creative response insists that each of us maintain the courage of our convictions to meet the extraordinary challenges that confront our world,” he writes. “It’s this spirit that answers the question, ‘Who owns the future?’” From musicians like Billy Bragg and DJ Spooky to writers and poets like Hari Kunzru and Staceyann Chin, read more from this remarkable group.

AVOIDING A CLIMATE-CHANGE APOCALYPSE. According to scientists, 2012 was the hottest year on record and the second-worst year ever on the government’s Climate Extremes Index. In my online column for The Washington Post this week, I highlight the catastrophic effects of climate change—with extreme weather like droughts, storms, and heat waves, it’s time to act. The Nation’s environment correspondent, Mark Hertsgaard, calls on the Obama administration to open a national debate on climate change, as he promised after his reelection—and to veto the Keystone XL pipeline. Find out more about the kind of executive actions the Obama administration could take, especially if the climate-change deniers in Congress continue to thwart efforts to pass meaningful legislation. Change might be slow, as Bill McKibben writes this week, but there is also hope in grassroots movements. Read more from McKibben here, and find out what you can do to help.

WELCOME: RICK PERLSTEIN, AURA BOGADO, MICHELLE DEAN. The Nation is pleased to welcome three new bloggers. Award-winning author and former columnist for The New Republic and Rolling Stone, Rick Perlstein will provide analysis on current events and political developments, engaging with the debates of the day through the lens of history. “I’m especially interested in educating folks on the left about the organic continuities in right-wing thought and action,” says Perlstein. “Too often we act as if the forces we’re fighting came about only the day before yesterday.”

Joining Perlstein as new bloggers are Michelle Dean and Aura Bogado. Dean, who has written for The New Yorker’s Page Turner blog, Slate, Salon and other publications, will cover pop culture, arts and books, signaling The Nation’s growing commitment to its online pop culture coverage. Dean’s first post reminds us that the blockbuster movie musical Les Misérables owes its birth to a debate over public arts funding. Aura Bogado, a writer for Voting Rights Watch, our reporting partnership with Colorlines, will build on the project’s success by highlighting issues central to Native rights, immigration and the fight for racial justice. Bogado’s first post illuminates the Idle No More movement making major waves in Canada but facing an almost complete media blackout in the US.