Keen On America

How to fix today’s epidemic of loneliness? For the New Yorker cartoonist and author Sophie Lucido Johnson, the answer involves both pigeons and polyamory. As she argues in her brand new book, Kin: The Future of Family, Johnson provides the tools to forge kinship in everything from asking for help on a grocery run, to choosing to have roommates later in life to combat loneliness, to living in modern day “mommunes” of single mothers sharing bills and responsibilities. And the pigeons and polyamory? Johnson draws on pigeon behavior—how pair-bonded birds navigate home more successfully than solitary ones—as a metaphor for human interdependence. Her own polyamorous life, detailed in her popular 2018 memoir Many Love, exemplifies her broader argument: that intentional, non-traditional relationship structures can provide a much richer web of connectivity than the isolated nuclear family. So the future of family goes way beyond traditional family. It’s pigeons, polyamory and mommunes. * The nuclear family is historically recent and economically failing. Johnson argues the isolated two-parent household is a post-industrial phenomenon—barely 150 years old—that leaves people emotionally and financially overburdened.* Loneliness is deadlier than obesity or alcoholism. Research shows chronic loneliness increases mortality more than smoking 15 cigarettes daily, primarily because isolated people lack support networks to catch health crises early.* Small acts of connection matter as much as close relationships. “Loose ties”—knowing your neighbors’ names, chatting at the grocery store—provide significant mental health benefits. Johnson advocates borrowing a bundt pan from a neighbor instead of ordering from Amazon.* Polyamory isn’t just about sex—it’s about intentional kinship. Johnson’s polyamorous practice means cultivating multiple committed relationships with extensive communication, creating a web of support that nuclear families can’t provide alone.* We need new language for chosen family. Johnson proposes “kin” for people who are more than friends but outside traditional family structures—roommates, co-parents in “mommunes,” neighbors who share resources—arguing blood ties shouldn’t define our primary support networks.* Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Lawyers usually like the law. The more the better. But in addition to his life as a top corporate lawyer, Philip K. Howard has made a second career out of criticizing the invasion of law into American society. In books like The Death of Common Sense, Life Without Lawyers and his latest, Saving Can-Do, Howard argues that a uncontrolled thicket of legal red tape is undermining innovation in America. The lawyer’s central thesis is against the law: America has morphed from a can-do nation into a can’t-do society where individual judgment has been replaced by legal central planning, and where citizens must ask lawyers for permission before acting. Too many lawyers and too many laws, Howard says, are transforming America into a dystopia caught between Brave New World and Nineteen Eighty-Four. But isn’t that a bit rich, perhaps even Orwellian, from the Senior Counsel at one of America’s most illustrious law firms?Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.1. America’s transformation from can-do to can’t-do spirit Howard argues America has abandoned individual judgment and self-reliance for a system where citizens must seek legal permission before acting. The “spirit of America” — the ability to make choices and associate freely — has been replaced by legal central planning.2. Law has become a secular religion Rather than a practical tool for ordering society, law has become something Americans worship and defer to reflexively. People can no longer make basic judgments about character, competence, or risk without consulting legal frameworks — transforming citizens into dependents.3. The legal profession needs radical reduction Howard believes America has far too many lawyers acting as gatekeepers in daily life. His solution isn’t reform but elimination: get lawyers out of routine human interactions, contracts, and decisions. Let people negotiate directly and make their own judgments about trust and risk.4. This isn’t partisan — it’s about human agency Howard rejects the “conservative” label, arguing both left and right have created their own legal straitjackets. Progressives impose legal controls through regulation; conservatives through litigation and status quo protection. His concern transcends ideology: can individuals still exercise judgment and take responsibility?5. The contradiction is the point Howard embraces the irony of a successful corporate lawyer attacking his profession. He’s spent his career in BigLaw precisely because he understands how the system works — and that insider knowledge fuels his conviction that legal overreach is suffocating American innovation and freedom. The question isn’t whether he’s hypocritical, but whether he’s right.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

My neologism-du-jour is “enstatification”. It’s what is happening in MAGA America with Trump’s Gaucho-style swaggering into the economy and his reversal to autarky and a back-to-the-future Monroe Doctrine. With the growth of a 19th-century style state power, America is trying to become the new China. Meanwhile, as Keith Teare notes in his latest That Was The Week newsletter, China is the new America in its embrace of technological innovation, particularly its trebling down on clean energy. That’s why the “Too Big To Fail” debate about OpenAI is so heavily laced in irony. It’s not just Sam Altman’s chutzpah in trying to simultaneously become the punter and the house in his multi-trillion-dollar bet on ChatGPT. But it might actually reflect the new realities of second-quarter 21st-century America. We’ve been wondering for a while now what comes after neo-liberalism. In a neologism: enstatification. * China Has Already Won the Clean Energy Race—And That Changes Everything Keith Teare confirms what The Economist reported: China’s clean energy capacity dwarfs America’s by a decade or more. This isn’t just about being green—it’s about controlling the energy infrastructure that AI requires. China is becoming the 21st century’s combination of America and Saudi Arabia.* Jensen Huang’s Verdict: China Will Win the AI Race Because It Deregulates While America Bureaucratizes The NVIDIA CEO’s provocative claim isn’t just marketing—it reflects a real competitive advantage. While four Democratic states pursue AI regulation at the state level, Beijing is loosening regulations and slashing energy costs for data centers. Democracy’s decentralization may be its Achilles heel in rapid technological competition.* OpenAI’s “Too Big to Fail” Status Reveals the New Age of Enstatification Despite David Sacks’ denials, OpenAI’s strategic importance means it effectively cannot be allowed to fail—not because of systemic financial risk like 2008, but because of national competitiveness concerns. This isn’t neoliberalism anymore; it’s America’s version of state capitalism.* The Real Convergence Isn’t US vs China—It’s Both Nations Embracing State-Directed Economies Trump’s Intel investment, Sacks and Andreessen’s push for centralized AI policy, and China’s directed innovation represent a global trend toward what Keith calls state involvement in “procuring and distributing wealth.” Alibaba and Google, Huawei and NVIDIA—they’re becoming more alike than different.* Keith Teare’s Optimism: “Everyone Will Win” in the AI Economy—But Some Pigs Are More Equal: Keith argues this isn’t a zero-sum race with winners and losers, but a rising tide lifting all boats through reciprocity. America and China will both capture massive value from AI’s potential $26 trillion GDP boost by 2035. I remain skeptical: history suggests great power competitions don’t end in shared prosperity.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Andrew Hill, Senior Business Writer at the Financial Times, discusses the critical themes from this year's shortlisted business books. He highlights the stark economic rivalry between the U.S. and China, particularly through Dan Wang’s concept of China as an 'engineering state.' They delve into the implications of bureaucratic obstacles in U.S. infrastructure development, as explored in titles like Abundance. Hill also emphasizes the significant narratives around economic warfare and clean energy, raising the provocative question: Is the American century over?

Dr. Chloe Carmichael, a clinical psychologist and author of 'Can I Say That?', dives into the crucial link between free speech and mental health. She argues that self-censorship leads to psychological harm and conflict, highlighting how a reluctance to express oneself can foster resentment. Chloe offers practical tools for overcoming anxieties about speaking up while exploring the patterns of liberal intolerance through her 'five D's.' Their engaging banter illuminates the importance of authentic dialogue and the necessity of allowing diverse viewpoints.

In this discussion, Alex Zakaras, a political philosopher and author of "Freedom for All," argues for a much-needed left-populist reinvention in today's political landscape. He critiques the left's defensive stance and emphasizes the need to reclaim the concept of 'freedom' from libertarian narratives. Zakaras calls for ambitious proposals to address economic inequality and build a broad coalition aimed at change. He highlights the importance of young, media-savvy leaders to revitalize the Democratic Party and respond to the populist right's rise.

Jacob Silverman, an author and journalist, dives into the volatile world of tech billionaires like Elon Musk and Peter Thiel. He discusses their surprising rage, suggesting it's rooted in societal exhaustion and childhood trauma. Silverman connects their political radicalization to a dangerous blend of corporate power and government, with a nostalgic yearning for sci-fi fantasies. He posits that their anger stems from deep insecurities and a desire to escape society altogether, raising questions about the implications of such a mindset.

Charles Murray, a renowned social scientist and co-author of The Bell Curve, explores his newfound engagement with faith in Taking Religion Seriously. He discusses the cultural shift from New Atheism to a more serious consideration of religion, attributing this change to an intellectual maturation. Murray muses on the curious relationship between science and spirituality, sharing insights on near-death experiences and human craving for miracles. He also reflects on his wife's profound faith, shaping his journey from skepticism to a nuanced understanding of belief.

Lea Ypi, a political philosopher and author of 'Indignity,' shares her insights on dignity, identity, and Balkan history. She explores the philosophical distinction between dignity and indignity, provoked by a photograph of her grandmother. Ypi discusses the impact of nationalism on individual dignity, the complexities of reconstructing personal histories, and how her grandmother's story interweaves with Balkan socialism. The conversation also touches on the evolving nature of identity and the dangers of commodifying human experience in the modern age.

Michael McFaul, former U.S. ambassador to Russia and Stanford political science professor, uncovers the alarming parallels between emerging autocracies and the U.S.'s current political climate. He argues that America's retreat from democratic norms mirrors tactics used by leaders like Putin and Trump, including the weaponization of law and suppression of media. McFaul critiques the notion that NATO expansion provoked Russian aggression, instead pointing to democratic movements as the real threat. He advocates for a collective approach to forge a resilient global order against autocracy.