Marc Dunkelman, a Fellow at Brown University and author of "Why Nothing Works," dives into the inefficiencies of U.S. governance and ambitious projects. He discusses the historical impact of figures like Robert Moses on urban development, contrasting centralized power with grassroots activism. The conversation also touches on the frustrations driving radical political ideas, exploring how Donald Trump represents a complex reaction to citizen disillusionment. The discussion provides insightful perspectives on infrastructure challenges and the evolving nature of political dynamics.
The historical shift from trusting centralized institutions to skepticism has stifled significant public projects in the U.S.
The political rise of Donald Trump reflects a widespread frustration with bureaucratic inefficiencies in governance and public service delivery.
A cultural shift towards embracing increased government roles in infrastructure development is crucial for fostering an economy of abundance.
Deep dives
The Paradox of Progress: Why Nothing Works
There's a growing sentiment that government and public institutions are failing to deliver results, with examples ranging from stalled infrastructure projects to issues in housing affordability. The discussion highlights the historical context of American development, where once it was feasible to construct ambitious projects like subways, now even simple upgrades face numerous obstacles. Mark Dunkelman points to a transformative misunderstanding in American progressivism, which shifted from empowering centralized institutions to a more skeptical, power-distrusting approach emphasized by the counterculture of the 1960s. This transformation has created a landscape where the regulatory framework hampers even environmentally friendly initiatives, such as high-speed rail, leading to a systemic inability to 'build' effectively.
Historical Influences on American Infrastructure
Dunkelman notes that after World War II, trust in powerful institutions allowed for significant public works projects to succeed, like the Tennessee Valley Authority, which provided essential services without bureaucratic obstruction. However, as skepticism towards central power grew in the late 20th century, spurred by events like Watergate, the landscape shifted dramatically. Critics of centralized authority established layers of regulation intended to protect communities from perceived overreach, yet they inadvertently stifled progress. The episode illustrates the irony that the mechanisms designed to prevent abuses of power now thwart the execution of necessary infrastructure advancements and housing development.
The Roots of a Stagnant Political Climate
The discussion emphasizes that a pervasive sentiment of hopelessness in public governance could lead to support for extremist political views that promise radical change. It reflects on Donald Trump's political rise, driven by a message of breaking through bureaucratic ineptitude, highlighting a demand for action over compliance with outdated systems. This frustration illustrates a potential pivot back toward favoring ambitious projects, as evident in movements advocating for more progressive building policies. The challenge remains in confronting the established regulatory frameworks that often act as barriers to progress.
Revising the Social Contract: Balancing Power and Responsibility
To achieve a balance between central power and local autonomy, there’s a call for renewed discussions on the public's expectations of government capabilities. Embracing both Hamiltonian and Jeffersonian principles could realign interests in significant construction projects while respecting community concerns. Examples cited include the need for clear trade-offs in decision-making processes, such as whether to proceed with a power line knowing it may impact local wildlife. This represents a shift from a stringent veto process that paralyzes projects to a more balanced dialogue assessing the costs and benefits of necessary infrastructure development.
Towards an Abundance Economy: Reviving Ambition
The conversation explores the rise of the YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) movement, reflecting a changing attitude among progressives who are calling for increased infrastructure and housing development. It posits that a cultural shift towards accepting a renewed government role in broad development is essential for fostering an economy of abundance. This paradigm shift emphasizes the necessity to reassess our tolerance for costs associated with public infrastructure while advocating against the paralysis of ambition due to regulatory burdens. Ultimately, reinvigorating a collective, dynamic approach could pave the way for economic growth and enhance public trust in governmental capacities.
Marc Dunkelman is a fellow at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs. His most recent book is Why Nothing Works.
In this conversation, Yascha Mounk and Marc Dunkelman explore the challenges facing big projects in the U.S., the origins of progressivism, and how Donald Trump fits into this story.
To get ad-free access to all of The Good Fight, including full weekly conversations and frequent bonus episodes, please subscribe to my Substack [insert link: www.yaschamounk.substack.com]. This will also allow you to get Yascha’s weekly column about current events and big ideas directly into your inbox.
If you are already a subscriber but have not yet set up this podcast, please do so now by following this link on your phone.