Articles & Videos

13829 items
Super Bowl Guac Is Super Destructive. Some People Want to Fix That.
New Republic Feb 6, 2026

Super Bowl Guac Is Super Destructive. Some People Want to Fix That.

For many Americans, chips and guacamole are as much a part of Super Bowl Sunday as the game itself. More avocados are sold for the big game than at any other time of year. This wasn’t always the case. Americans eat almost 10 times as much guacamole during the Super Bowl as we did 25 years ago. But America’s increasing guac obsession has come with huge hidden costs: deforestation, water theft, violence, and a threat to the survival of one of North America’s most iconic species. Now it’s up to new initiatives to mitigate some of the damage before it’s too late for these irreplaceable ecosystems, communities, and wildlife.Most of the avocados consumed in the United States come from Mexico, specifically Michoacán, a culturally rich region known for its natural wonders. Among those wonders are the mountain forests where millions of monarch butterflies spend the winter clustered in the oyamel fir trees. Monarchs from the United States and Canada journey as far as 3,000 miles to reach these forests in one of the most incredible migrations on the planet, making them a symbol of resilience, community, and immigrant rights.But avocado expansion is destroying the overwintering forests that monarchs need to survive. Last year’s population count in Mexico found monarchs in just 4.42 acres of forests. They need to be in a minimum of 15 acres to stay out of the danger zone of migratory collapse. This year’s count is expected to be similarly grim.By 2018, nearly 2,400 acres of the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve had been cleared for avocados. With additional logging in surrounding forests and water hoarding by avocado plantations—it takes about 18.5 gallons to grow one avocado—the remaining butterfly habitat has become even more vulnerable to the effects of climate change. A 2023 report by Climate Rights International, titled “Unholy Guacamole,” documented widespread deforestation beyond the borders of the reserve. More than 10 football fields a day have been cleared for the past 10 years to make room for more avocados.This rampant deforestation isn’t just devastating for monarch butterflies. Local communities are losing their forestland. A guide from a small village in the area told me the butterflies and their forests are part of their heritage and their future—butterfly tourism helps keep their community afloat. The local guides are afraid of what the loss of monarchs will mean for them and their families. But they’re also afraid to speak out. The U.S. market turned avocados into “green gold,” attracting organized crime, corruption, and violence to the region. Forest defenders have been abducted and beaten. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has repeatedly suspended avocado imports because of threats and violence against its inspectors.Yet avocados are only growing more popular in the United States. This is already a record-breaking year, with around 290 million pounds of avocados imported in the weeks leading up to the Super Bowl. It’s estimated that the amount of land used for avocados in the region will grow 70 percent by 2050. Since so much agricultural land has already been converted to avocado plantations, that could put even more forests at risk.But there’s hope that avocados’ path of destruction can be stopped. Last year, the government of Michoacán worked with a committee of environmental and agricultural experts to launch a certification program aimed at preventing producers who destroy forests from accessing lucrative U.S. markets. The Guardián Forestal program certifies packinghouses that only source from orchards that don’t have any land deforested since 2018 or affected by forest fire since 2012. Because the certification is based on satellite data, it has a level of accountability and transparency that may be missing from similar programs, which too often rely on self-reported data or understaffed inspection teams. In less than a year, more than 40 packinghouses across five Mexican states have signed on to the certification program. The two states authorized to export to the United States—Michoacán and Jalisco—account for more than 90 percent of companies exporting to the United States and about 70 percent of the avocados consumed here. The packinghouses have worked with the program to screen their suppliers, resulting in 2,900 orchards being blocked from selling to them. Although it’s early to fully assess the outcomes, at least 16 municipalities have shown reduced forest loss since the program started.The momentum is impressive, especially for a voluntary program in an industry rife with challenges. Much of the success so far comes from packinghouses realizing that they could face liabilities on both sides of the border. In Michoacán, the environmental threats are taking a very real toll. The region suffers from extreme drought, and the loss of forests makes the problem much worse.In the U.S., people are becoming more aware of the damage caused by the avocado industry. Companies that have made sustainability claims or tout deforestation-free policies for other products recognize this could become a problem with their customers and investors. (Already, some of these companies have been sued.) They’re starting to ask questions, signaling that they’d like to buy from certified orchards. But having most packinghouses exporting avocados in the certification program isn’t the same as having all of them. Even a relatively small percentage of orchards can result in devastating deforestation in a region that can’t afford to lose any more of its forests. The entire industry needs to be on board to stop the destruction in Michoacán and ensure that similar bad practices don’t reach other regions where avocado production is expanding.The U.S. government could bolster the certification program by banning imports of avocados linked to recent deforestation. In 2024, more than 25 organizations urged the State Department to work with USDA to do just that. Based on existing mechanisms that regulate imports for pests and the readily available satellite data on forest cover, there was a clear path forward for the United States to help transform the industry and support its own deforestation and climate goals. That path no longer seems likely under an administration that prefers deregulation and has jettisoned the country’s environmental commitments.In December 2024, monarch butterflies were proposed for Endangered Species Act protection. These protections would include a recovery plan and funding to restore their habitat in the United States, which would ease pressure on the butterflies on this side of the border, creating more resilient populations to survive the winters in Mexico. But Trump officials have indicated that they don’t plan to do anything about the proposal this year, which is hardly a surprise since they didn’t list any species under the Endangered Species Act last year, instead working to weaken the act and cut staff working to help wildlife.Even with the federal government on the sidelines, the U.S. market may be the strongest hope of getting efforts to end avocado deforestation across the goal line. If U.S. retailers adopt policies to only buy imported avocados from certified suppliers, the remaining packinghouses will have to sign on or risk losing their biggest market. Costco introduced commitments in its 2025 sustainability report to reduce deforestation in its avocado supply chain by moving away from sourcing in regions with the highest deforestation risk, increasing its purchases of Fair Trade and other certified avocados, and engaging with suppliers around the Guardián Forestal program. Shareholder resolutions on avocado deforestation have been introduced at several other companies, including Walmart and Kroger.“We’ve made real progress and have a solution in place, but the risk to our forests isn’t gone yet,” said Heriberto Padilla, director general of Guardián Forestal. “American supermarkets can help us finish the job by using our certification program to clean up their supply chains.”

What Offshore Wind and the Kennedy Center Have in Common
New Republic Feb 6, 2026

What Offshore Wind and the Kennedy Center Have in Common

On Monday, the Trump administration suffered its fifth consecutive courtroom defeat in its war on offshore wind. All of these cases stem from an order in December in which the Interior Department claimed that a classified Defense Department report had deemed offshore wind a “national security threat” and Interior was therefore “pausing” the leases on five already-under-construction offshore wind projects on the East Coast, “effective immediately.”How, you may wonder, did offshore wind pose a national security threat? That’s unclear. The Interior order mentioned previous findings of radar interference but seemed to be suggesting that the information in the “Department of War” reports contained something beyond that. Judge Royce Lamberth, a Reagan appointee, apparently reviewed the new classified report and didn’t buy it. So Sunrise Wind in New York, like the other four wind projects (including Vineyard Wind in Massachusetts, which is already sending power to the grid and was particularly useful during the recent winter storm), is free to proceed as the appeals process continues. “The administration is now 0-5 in its effort to stop wind farms under construction along the East Coast,” The New York Times’ Maxine Joselow noted.This is not the only embarrassing result of the administration’s odd flurry of late-December energy orders. The administration has long claimed that coal plants have been unfairly demonized by environmentalists, that the country urgently needs fossil fuels, while—in Trump’s words at the World Economic Forum recently—“windmills” are “losers.” But two utilities are now petitioning the administration to, pretty please, let them close their coal plants as planned.Craig Generating Station’s Unit 1 is one of several coal plants targeted by the administration’s unusual “emergency orders” to remain open past their scheduled retirement. Obviously, environmental groups aren’t thrilled: Previous research has found that some 460,000 deaths in the United States were attributable to coal plant pollution between 1999 and 2020. But reviving coal was always a pretty foolish economic proposition, as well. “Reopening closed coal plants makes no economic sense,” two analysts at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis wrote last summer. The reason is simple: “As coal plants age, maintenance costs rise, pushing up their generation costs, making them uncompetitive.”This is now precisely what two power utilities are saying in their petition. Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association and Platte River Power Authority, two co-operative utilities that run Craig Unit 1, along with three co-owners, weren’t just planning to close the plant to meet Colorado’s goal of phasing out coal by 2030. They were planning to close it because it’s extremely expensive to run, reports Canary Media’s Jeff St. John. One estimate suggests keeping the plant open merely 90 days could cost $20 million. The utilities are arguing, St. John writes, that “forcing them to operate it past December will require their members to bear unnecessary costs, which constitutes an ‘uncompensated taking’ of their property in violation of the Constitution.”It’s one thing for environmentalists to point out that propping up fossil fuels makes no sense. It’s another thing for utilities themselves to say it. Between this and being defeated five-nil on offshore wind, another administration might be feeling embarrassed right now (although not as embarrassed as it should have been for arguing that wind turbines pose a secret national security threat to begin with). And that’s typically the subtext when Bluesky liberals share these news stories—smugly or wryly noting further evidence of the administration’s consistent incompetence. But this is a bit like Trump’s face-plant over the Kennedy Center—“an implicit admission of defeat,” in the words of The Atlantic’s David Graham. Trump now plans to close the storied D.C. arts institution for a complete reconstruction because, after a year with him at the helm promising to make the arts great again, droves of high-profile artists have canceled their performances and ticket sales have plummeted. It’s not working. While it’s standard for political opponents to cheer when their adversaries are shown up repeatedly, there’s always a dark undercurrent to these stories when it comes to the Trump administration. The Kennedy Center has been a vital institution, and not just for Western high culture for well-dressed attendees, as originally intended, but through loads of free performances at its smaller stages, making arts from around the world accessible to residents in a way they wouldn’t otherwise have been and giving artists work and exposure they wouldn’t otherwise have had. Shutting it down will be a serious blow to the region’s arts.This president doesn’t withdraw when humiliated. He just gets more vindictive and aggressive. And it’s worth emphasizing what that means on energy policy. As stupid and damaging as it is, the president’s attempt to revive coal is, to some extent, working. Coal plants aren’t just delaying retirement—they’re polluting more too, thanks to the administration’s environmental rollbacks. The toll of these policies will be measured in extra consumer costs, in health damage, as well as in lives and livelihoods lost in climate disasters.Wind projects, likewise, may be free to proceed thanks to the courts but will suffer the effects of these delays. Wind investments are complicated. Delays are extremely expensive and have helped sink wind projects before. And it’s foolish to think that the administration will take the five-nil defeat and make its peace with renewables. Trump will just charge forward again like an enraged Don Quixote.Stat of the Week565,744 kidsThat’s how many live “within 3 miles of a power plant or other corporate polluter that has received a two-year free pass from President Trump to avoid complying with toxic air pollution limits,” according to a new report from the Center for American Progress.What I’m ReadingEPA set to reapprove dicamba, an herbicide previously banned by courtsThe bizarre contradictions in the Make America Healthy Again agenda continue to accumulate. The Washington Post recently reviewed an “unreleased statement” showing the Environmental Protection Agency plans to reapprove dicamba, an herbicide so prone to drifting (even more than a mile) from its area of application that it’s been known to kill loads of crops it was never intended to kill.The statement also mentioned that the EPA’s review of dicamba found no risk to human health. Still, the decision could cause tension between the Trump administration and Make America Healthy Again activists who have advocated for more limits on herbicides and pesticides.“The use of this pesticide has been economically devastating and socially divisive, which is why the courts ruled for its removal,” said Kelly Ryerson, known as “Glyphosate Girl” on social media.Read Amudalat Ajasa’s full report at The Washington Post.This article first appeared in Life in a Warming World, a weekly TNR newsletter authored by deputy editor Heather Souvaine Horn. Sign up here.

Jeffrey Sachs: Western Dominance Ended 25 Years Ago
Scheer Post Feb 6, 2026

Jeffrey Sachs: Western Dominance Ended 25 Years Ago

By Jeffrey Sachs / Thinkers Forum On January 19, American economist Professor Jeffrey Sachs visited the China Institute at Fudan University to deliver a keynote speech titled “Emerging Asia.”He later engaged in an in-depth dialogue with Professor Zhang Weiwei, Director of the China Institute, on the theme “The Rise of Asia: Past, Present, and Future.”

Trump Press Sec Snaps at Media as Spin on Threat to Rig 2026 Goes Awry
New Republic Feb 6, 2026

Trump Press Sec Snaps at Media as Spin on Threat to Rig 2026 Goes Awry

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt lost her temper with a reporter who asked if Donald Trump intends to flood polling places with ICE agents during the midterms. She called the question “silly” and “hypothetical” and “disingenuous,” even though Steve Bannon, who’s influential in the White House, explicitly said this week that this will happen. This comes as Trump himself called for Republicans to “nationalize the voting.” Leavitt also struggled to spin this threat from Trump, suggesting that’s not what he meant, only to have Trump undercut her by reiterating his demand soon after. The White House is all over the place on this. So we talked to legal expert Rick Hasen, author of the excellent Election Law Blog. He separates the real from the fake in Trump’s threats, outlines the nightmare scenarios that Trump actually could attempt to pull off, and explains how we can gear up right now to fight back. Listen to this episode here. A transcript is here.