Its incredibly frustrating when a factual statement, used as supporting evidence, becomes a debate about news sources or research.
I've hesitated talking about politics with my roommate for this reason, the conversation derails when I cite a NYT article and she begins to argue the legitimacy of NYT, instead of actually diving into whatever we were originally discussing.
This lack of trust disrupts the actual conversation, meaning at the end of the day nothing gets done but sowing more distrust and anger with others, then the cycle continues the next day.
Humans glom together for comfort, via tribal or familial connection. Vonnegut has an entertaining take on this in "Slapstick or Lonesome No More" in which everyone is given a new middle name with identifies their tribe/family. (In this story the Chinese miniaturize themselves and end up causing a plague when folks accidentally inhale them. Vonnegut also postulates that Nixon wished to belong to a family roughly defined as "organized crime". We might extrapolate a similar motive for dear leader.) Another interesting take on miniaturizing can be found in the film, "Downsizing", (2017) in which folks elect to shrink themselves to live in luxury (until stuff happens) and the value of community becomes clarified.
I know it's not this simple but loving one's self is predicated on receiving unconditional love in early development and receiving love is predicated on expressing love for others, for people, places, and things. Too simple, I know. The value of mindfulness can't be taught, has to be experienced by the practitioner. Good luck to us. I still have hope and faith, still talking and waving to my neighbors. I am a lucky duck to have had love poured on my ignorant head by grandparents, parents, siblings, and et cetera. Thanks for thinking and sharing, Ms. Kyla.
Great points, Kyla. Regarding the stock market, I agree it’s running 100% on vibes. It tanks due to Trump‘s intentional monkey wrenching and then soars based on the fact that he backs off? That’s not a reason to run up valuations. Has everyone forgotten about the 10% tariffs? A recession is almost a certainty at this point.
Another outstanding post!! For me this started back in the 1990s with the Gingrich takeover of the House of Representatives and his making everything a fight rather than to do what is in the best interest of the people. Intrapersonal relationships between members has never recovered and they are all too busy fundraising. I didn't know what 'Cluely' was until reading it here. I laughed and quickly thought about Thomas Pynchon's Proverbs for Paranoids in "Gravity's Rainbow!" #3 is especially relevant: "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers."
BTW, my biology professor at UC Santa Barbara was Garrett Hardin who wrote the original 'Tragedy of the Commons' paper fifty or so years ago!!! Yikes, maybe I am your oldest subscriber!
Not to mention generative AI being, at the very least, an accelerant to the degradation of the informational commons. Super handy weapon to have in your choose-your-own-reality arsenal
I like this concept of an intangible tragedy of the commons. The erosion of intellectualism, trust, and community, truly is a tragedy.
I want to add that the historical cultural differences of community prevents the US from investing in their own societal infrastructure. For instance, this concept of self reliance and independence at 18, which is just not economically feasible, can be detrimental to developing wealth. Immigrants who come from cultures which support their young for more years have better outcomes even in the same economic environment.
The idea of individualism starts far before the government and communal support, but within the family units in America. This could further explain the isolationist mindset of Americans as a whole. When you can’t even rely on your family for food, shelter, and support as you leave high school, and then are asked to support your community in giving back, you can expect they don’t have the inclination to “give back”.
While it is true that the various shared resources have deteriorated, it is wrong to imply that Trumpism has caused, or necessarily added to the problem. Trumpism is a reaction to a failed Status Quo, past tense. You may not like the reaction, but reaction it is.
I'll focus on the economic side. The reason the economy is in trouble is because for decades the "exorbitant privilege" that is the US-Dollar-as-world-reserve-currency has allowed us to print infinite money and take on infinite debt, exchanging paper for real world assets, without experiencing inflation. You cite Martin Wolf, who, like most standard commentators, views this as a great deal. Yes, we are rich, fat and safe. But those who are rich, fat and safe are also prone to being lazy, especially if they inherited that wealth.
In a collective sense, us modern Americans are that rich, fat, lazy safe person, living on the credit established by great grandfathers ingenuity. We got rid of icky manufacturing to become a service economy - fine. But the endless trade deficit we accumulated in the process wasn't benign. Most of that paper we sent abroad has to be used on dollar denominated assets at some point - Treasury debt, real estate, the stock market, farmland, etc. This is the other side of the trade no one talks about. We are slowly selling off the income-producing assets of this country (and pledging our own future labor) in exchange for Nikes produced in Vietnamese sweatshops. Not to mention the domestic jobs lost.
The money printing and deficit spending Trump and Biden did in response to Covid was unprecedented in world history. The bill for all of that is due soon, and we started to see it with the inflation we saw during Biden's term. The Federal Reserve had to raise interest rates to combat it, but that too is a problem because every part of the economy has trillions in debt to roll over in the next few years, at these new high rates. This is unsustainable, and Trump has a ticking time bomb on his hands.
At some point the US is going to have to jettison the debt-based consumer spending model if it wants to remain the dominant force in global affairs. Geopolitical strength proceeds from economic strength, which ultimately proceeds from manufacturing and industry. It has always been this way. Depending on which Status Quo defender you talk to, we should be more active in fighting Russia, China and Iran. Some want us to fight all three simultaneously. With what, exactly? All three of those countries outproduce us, as we are finding out in Ukraine. Former Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin testified that it will take until the end of 2026 to for all of Western Europe and the US combined to produce artillery at a rate that was half of what the Russians themselves were doing - in 2023. This is the US at full capacity, mind. This is why no western country has ponied up more arms for Ukraine in over a year - we just don't have the goods. It turns out that you can't win wars with Netflix subscriptions and smartphone apps.
Trump's tariffs were admittedly half-baked and poorly executed. But any serious attempt to redress the precarious imbalances plaguing our economy is going to include tariffs. But for the purposes of this article, it is interesting that the metric used to beat Trump with is the market response. For years, well-meaning liberals hated the GOP in part because of its slavish devotion to "the market." We can't do this or that, because "the market" will get mad.
Again, agree or disagree with the economic merit of tariffs if you like, but the bottom line is that Trump attempted to place longer term stability over shorter term political expedience. Virtually every politician in my lifetime has prioritized making sure this or that economic data point went up over everything else, even though this mentality has left average people in this country dying by a thousand paper cuts. Trump tries to do the opposite and gets shut down by the markets. Note that Bessent and Lutnick - who you credit for muscling Navarro out of the picture - are "market" guys by trade.
In short, you have just described why nothing of consequence can ever change in this country, absent some kind of catastrophe. The Status Quo is simply too entrenched. Perhaps more importantly real change in any arena - economic, cultural, foreign policy - likely requires short term upheaval - which is anathema to those who are "rich, fat and safe."
True when we use the market for a metric it should come with quotes. It is however Trump’s metric so it is possible not to be a fan of markets but to use Republicans’ devotion to markets and toss it back into their court. One can make arguments that globalization hurt many in the USA and trump is riding on the wave of that dissatisfaction but this is where capitalism took us…. So can one man turn the tide against the essence of modern capitalism? And still make money? As Kyla points out, xiaomi makes one smart phone per second with no humans involved. And we want to do what. Do it in Tennessee? Sure. Problem solved. The complexity of modern day production cannot be transformed but any tax or tariff. A raging man against the power of capitalism he loves so much. Won’t ever happen. So yes to what you say but in different words.
Nicely framed. Reverse Kissinger is bandied about a lot these days - I wonder if the moment calls for a reverse Walter Mitty - intead of escapism, maybe we step away from the grand gestures & use quiet exchanges in our communities to weave us back together. One coffee, one conversation at a time with agency & presence.
First the markets became a meme (GME, AMC, NAKD, etc), then the entire government and economic policy framework became a meme. What will it take for the United States to become a serious place again? Watching this increasingly nonsensical symphony progress is feeling more and more like a pre-emptive funeral by the day. Alas, I still hold hope that Americans will awaken from falling asleep at the wheel before the proverbial car hits a tree deep in the woods. Godspeed to us all and thank you for your words.
Its incredibly frustrating when a factual statement, used as supporting evidence, becomes a debate about news sources or research.
I've hesitated talking about politics with my roommate for this reason, the conversation derails when I cite a NYT article and she begins to argue the legitimacy of NYT, instead of actually diving into whatever we were originally discussing.
This lack of trust disrupts the actual conversation, meaning at the end of the day nothing gets done but sowing more distrust and anger with others, then the cycle continues the next day.
yes exactly! just a spinning top of anger and resentment with nowhere to go but around and around
Articulating the loose thoughts I've been having and organizing them for us all, what a gift.
thanks for reading!
Humans glom together for comfort, via tribal or familial connection. Vonnegut has an entertaining take on this in "Slapstick or Lonesome No More" in which everyone is given a new middle name with identifies their tribe/family. (In this story the Chinese miniaturize themselves and end up causing a plague when folks accidentally inhale them. Vonnegut also postulates that Nixon wished to belong to a family roughly defined as "organized crime". We might extrapolate a similar motive for dear leader.) Another interesting take on miniaturizing can be found in the film, "Downsizing", (2017) in which folks elect to shrink themselves to live in luxury (until stuff happens) and the value of community becomes clarified.
I know it's not this simple but loving one's self is predicated on receiving unconditional love in early development and receiving love is predicated on expressing love for others, for people, places, and things. Too simple, I know. The value of mindfulness can't be taught, has to be experienced by the practitioner. Good luck to us. I still have hope and faith, still talking and waving to my neighbors. I am a lucky duck to have had love poured on my ignorant head by grandparents, parents, siblings, and et cetera. Thanks for thinking and sharing, Ms. Kyla.
Yes! Time to reread Vonnegut.
Better to read Pynchon. His books drip with paranoia.
Great points, Kyla. Regarding the stock market, I agree it’s running 100% on vibes. It tanks due to Trump‘s intentional monkey wrenching and then soars based on the fact that he backs off? That’s not a reason to run up valuations. Has everyone forgotten about the 10% tariffs? A recession is almost a certainty at this point.
ah, vibes
Another outstanding post!! For me this started back in the 1990s with the Gingrich takeover of the House of Representatives and his making everything a fight rather than to do what is in the best interest of the people. Intrapersonal relationships between members has never recovered and they are all too busy fundraising. I didn't know what 'Cluely' was until reading it here. I laughed and quickly thought about Thomas Pynchon's Proverbs for Paranoids in "Gravity's Rainbow!" #3 is especially relevant: "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers."
BTW, my biology professor at UC Santa Barbara was Garrett Hardin who wrote the original 'Tragedy of the Commons' paper fifty or so years ago!!! Yikes, maybe I am your oldest subscriber!
oh that's so amazing! that's such an interesting reference to Pynchon!
He is one of my favorite authors and I've read all his books. The other four proverbs are here: https://gravitys-rainbow.pynchonwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Proverbs_for_Paranoids
Not to mention generative AI being, at the very least, an accelerant to the degradation of the informational commons. Super handy weapon to have in your choose-your-own-reality arsenal
Excellent as always!
Wow your an amazing writer I really liked this
I like this concept of an intangible tragedy of the commons. The erosion of intellectualism, trust, and community, truly is a tragedy.
I want to add that the historical cultural differences of community prevents the US from investing in their own societal infrastructure. For instance, this concept of self reliance and independence at 18, which is just not economically feasible, can be detrimental to developing wealth. Immigrants who come from cultures which support their young for more years have better outcomes even in the same economic environment.
The idea of individualism starts far before the government and communal support, but within the family units in America. This could further explain the isolationist mindset of Americans as a whole. When you can’t even rely on your family for food, shelter, and support as you leave high school, and then are asked to support your community in giving back, you can expect they don’t have the inclination to “give back”.
While it is true that the various shared resources have deteriorated, it is wrong to imply that Trumpism has caused, or necessarily added to the problem. Trumpism is a reaction to a failed Status Quo, past tense. You may not like the reaction, but reaction it is.
I'll focus on the economic side. The reason the economy is in trouble is because for decades the "exorbitant privilege" that is the US-Dollar-as-world-reserve-currency has allowed us to print infinite money and take on infinite debt, exchanging paper for real world assets, without experiencing inflation. You cite Martin Wolf, who, like most standard commentators, views this as a great deal. Yes, we are rich, fat and safe. But those who are rich, fat and safe are also prone to being lazy, especially if they inherited that wealth.
In a collective sense, us modern Americans are that rich, fat, lazy safe person, living on the credit established by great grandfathers ingenuity. We got rid of icky manufacturing to become a service economy - fine. But the endless trade deficit we accumulated in the process wasn't benign. Most of that paper we sent abroad has to be used on dollar denominated assets at some point - Treasury debt, real estate, the stock market, farmland, etc. This is the other side of the trade no one talks about. We are slowly selling off the income-producing assets of this country (and pledging our own future labor) in exchange for Nikes produced in Vietnamese sweatshops. Not to mention the domestic jobs lost.
The money printing and deficit spending Trump and Biden did in response to Covid was unprecedented in world history. The bill for all of that is due soon, and we started to see it with the inflation we saw during Biden's term. The Federal Reserve had to raise interest rates to combat it, but that too is a problem because every part of the economy has trillions in debt to roll over in the next few years, at these new high rates. This is unsustainable, and Trump has a ticking time bomb on his hands.
At some point the US is going to have to jettison the debt-based consumer spending model if it wants to remain the dominant force in global affairs. Geopolitical strength proceeds from economic strength, which ultimately proceeds from manufacturing and industry. It has always been this way. Depending on which Status Quo defender you talk to, we should be more active in fighting Russia, China and Iran. Some want us to fight all three simultaneously. With what, exactly? All three of those countries outproduce us, as we are finding out in Ukraine. Former Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin testified that it will take until the end of 2026 to for all of Western Europe and the US combined to produce artillery at a rate that was half of what the Russians themselves were doing - in 2023. This is the US at full capacity, mind. This is why no western country has ponied up more arms for Ukraine in over a year - we just don't have the goods. It turns out that you can't win wars with Netflix subscriptions and smartphone apps.
Trump's tariffs were admittedly half-baked and poorly executed. But any serious attempt to redress the precarious imbalances plaguing our economy is going to include tariffs. But for the purposes of this article, it is interesting that the metric used to beat Trump with is the market response. For years, well-meaning liberals hated the GOP in part because of its slavish devotion to "the market." We can't do this or that, because "the market" will get mad.
Again, agree or disagree with the economic merit of tariffs if you like, but the bottom line is that Trump attempted to place longer term stability over shorter term political expedience. Virtually every politician in my lifetime has prioritized making sure this or that economic data point went up over everything else, even though this mentality has left average people in this country dying by a thousand paper cuts. Trump tries to do the opposite and gets shut down by the markets. Note that Bessent and Lutnick - who you credit for muscling Navarro out of the picture - are "market" guys by trade.
In short, you have just described why nothing of consequence can ever change in this country, absent some kind of catastrophe. The Status Quo is simply too entrenched. Perhaps more importantly real change in any arena - economic, cultural, foreign policy - likely requires short term upheaval - which is anathema to those who are "rich, fat and safe."
True when we use the market for a metric it should come with quotes. It is however Trump’s metric so it is possible not to be a fan of markets but to use Republicans’ devotion to markets and toss it back into their court. One can make arguments that globalization hurt many in the USA and trump is riding on the wave of that dissatisfaction but this is where capitalism took us…. So can one man turn the tide against the essence of modern capitalism? And still make money? As Kyla points out, xiaomi makes one smart phone per second with no humans involved. And we want to do what. Do it in Tennessee? Sure. Problem solved. The complexity of modern day production cannot be transformed but any tax or tariff. A raging man against the power of capitalism he loves so much. Won’t ever happen. So yes to what you say but in different words.
Nicely framed. Reverse Kissinger is bandied about a lot these days - I wonder if the moment calls for a reverse Walter Mitty - intead of escapism, maybe we step away from the grand gestures & use quiet exchanges in our communities to weave us back together. One coffee, one conversation at a time with agency & presence.
Don Quixote even - not losing our playfulness is a good antidote too:https://rajeshachanta.substack.com/p/don-quixote-and-his-dreamcoat
Great article. I think about these themes quite often. I find the more time I put into them you can become a bit gloomy.
It’s the GamerGaters’ world, and we just live in it, I guess
The whole of your (long) discourse had practically zero to do with "Incels".
Mentioning them just looks like a common feminist strategy: "We must always blame men somehow".
Of course right now there's ONE man to blame: Trump :-)
But he has nothing to do with Incels either. Thanks to his money, he never had problem acquiring female companionship...
On another note: I wish that the stickers could be sent to off-USA. Latin readers read you too! =)
First the markets became a meme (GME, AMC, NAKD, etc), then the entire government and economic policy framework became a meme. What will it take for the United States to become a serious place again? Watching this increasingly nonsensical symphony progress is feeling more and more like a pre-emptive funeral by the day. Alas, I still hold hope that Americans will awaken from falling asleep at the wheel before the proverbial car hits a tree deep in the woods. Godspeed to us all and thank you for your words.