Keen On America

In this engaging conversation, James Grady, renowned author of Six Days of the Condor and American Sky, shares his insights on writing about nostalgia while confronting America's complex realities. He discusses how fiction can bridge the past and present, reflecting on civil rights struggles and generational divides. Grady emphasizes the importance of understanding cultural icons like Bruce Springsteen in storytelling and critiques the elite liberal perspective that overlooks the silent majority's concerns. His goal is to encourage readers to connect historical events with today's challenges.

Soli Ozel, an Istanbul-based political theorist and cultural critic, explores how Christopher Lasch's insights provide a roadmap for the left amidst rising populism. He argues that today's meritocratic elites, disconnected from ordinary Americans, have fueled the rise of figures like Trump. Ozel critiques Kamala Harris as a symbol of elite denial, revealing how progressives can better engage marginalized voters. He emphasizes the need for a new populist coalition that prioritizes material interests over cultural battles, echoing Lasch's warnings from decades past.

Aiden Arata, dubbed the Meme Queen of Depression, shares her journey from Instagram influencer to published author. She reveals how building a following wasn't just about fame but a strategic move to gain literary credibility. Arata discusses the 'AI'd' communication we’ve all adopted on social media, leading to an existential crisis she'd term 'plastic bag theory.' She also contrasts the richness of writing with the surface-level exchanges online, reflecting on the emotional tolls of digital culture and the true art of storytelling.

Sam Tanenhaus, author of "Buckley, The Life and Revolution That Changed America," dives into the complexities of William F. Buckley, the media-savvy founder of modern American conservatism. He reveals shocking truths about Buckley’s family's secret funding of segregationist newspapers, a revelation that even shocked his son. Tanenhaus explores the paradox of Buckley's charismatic personal life versus his toxic political beliefs, highlighting the contradictions that have shaped America’s conservative landscape, echoing into today’s political climate.

In this engaging discussion, Dror Poleg, a New York-based economic historian and author, presents a refreshing view on the impact of AI. He argues that rather than eliminating jobs, AI will preserve human employment by requiring our unique creativity for valuable tasks. Poleg envisions a future where work blends with leisure and interpersonal skills become highly valued. He stresses that AI will reshape economic value and human purpose, potentially more than electrification did, leading to a vibrant and connected society.

In this discussion, Julia Hobsbawm, a British writer and workplace futurist, uncovers the decline of American work culture. She points out how, despite a history of innovation, corporate America is stuck in outdated models. Hobsbawm discusses the impact of post-pandemic shifts and demographic changes on labor markets. As other countries embrace flexible work policies, she warns that American companies are 'sleepwalking into disaster.' The conversation emphasizes the urgent need for adaptation to maintain relevance in a rapidly evolving workplace.

Paul Vigna, a former Wall Street Journal reporter and author of 'The Almightier', uncovers the intriguing connection between money and religion, arguing that capitalism has turned currency into a modern deity. He traces money's origins back to Mesopotamian temples, emphasizing that it’s not 'real' but a system of collective trust. Vigna critiques our current obsession with wealth, advocating for a societal shift towards prioritizing human welfare, and explores the fervor surrounding cryptocurrencies as a new form of belief.

Douglas Rushkoff, a New York City media theorist and author, examines AI's role in society, likening it to Jefferson’s mechanical dumb waiter that masked unseen labor. He argues that AI isn't as independent as it seems; it relies heavily on invisible human workers, especially from developing countries. Rushkoff critiques the rapid push for AI development by tech billionaires, positioning it as a reactionary move rather than revolutionary. He advocates for a slower approach to AI, suggesting it's our last chance to rewrite societal norms and enhance human creativity.

So who killed privacy? It's the central question of Tiffany Jenkins' provocative new history of private life, Strangers and Intimates. The answer, according to Jenkins, is that we are all complicit—having gradually and often accidentally contributed to privacy's demise from the 16th century onwards. Luther started it by challenging Papal religious authority and the public sacraments, thereby creating the necessity of private conscience. Then came Enlightenment philosophers like Locke and Hobbes who carved out bounded private political and economic spheres establishing the foundations for modern capitalism and democracy. Counter-enlightenment romantics like Rousseau reacted against this by fetishizing individual innocence and authenticity, while the Victorians elevated the domestic realm as sacred. Last but not least, there's Mark Zuckerberg's socially networked age, in which we voluntarily broadcast our private lives to a worldwide audience. But why, I ask Jenkins, should we care about the death of private life in our current hyper-individualistic age? Can it be saved by more or less obsession with the self? Or might it require us to return to the world before Martin Luther, a place Thomas More half satiricizes Utopia, where “private life” was a dangerously foreign idea. 1. Privacy is a Historical Accident, Not a Natural Human Condition"There was a sense in which you shouldn't do anything privately that they wouldn't do publicly... This wasn't a kind of property-based private life." Jenkins argues that before the 17th century, the very concept of leading a separate private life didn't exist—privacy as we understand it is a relatively recent invention.2. Martin Luther Accidentally Created Modern Privacy Through Religious Rebellion"Luther inadvertently... authorized the self as against, in his case, the Catholic Church... if you follow the debates over the kind of beginnings of a private sphere and its expansion, whether you're reading Locke or Hobbes, there's a discussion about... the limits of authority." Luther's challenge to religious authority unintentionally created the need for private conscience, sparking centuries of development toward individual privacy.3. The Digital Age Represents a Return to Pre-Privacy Transparency"I think we do live in a period where there is little distinction between public and private, where the idea that you might keep something to yourself is seen as strange, as inauthentic." Jenkins suggests our current era of social media oversharing resembles pre-modern times more than the Victorian peak of privacy.4. Modern Loneliness Stems From Social Fragmentation, Not Individual Psychology"I sometimes wonder if we're pathologizing, actually, what is a social problem, which is a society where people are fragmented, not quite sure how to go beyond themselves... I would see that as a social problem." Rather than treating loneliness as a personal issue, Jenkins argues it reflects the breakdown of intermediate institutions between family and state.5. Technology Doesn't Determine Our Privacy—We Do"Can't blame the tech, tech isn't the problem... It comes down really to what sort of society we want to live in and how we want to be treated. That's not a technical thing. That has not to do with technology. That's to do humans." Jenkins rejects technological determinism, arguing that privacy's fate depends on human choices about social organization, not inevitable technological forces.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

Is Mohammed bin Salman a tyrant or an enlightened despot? According to the former Wall Street Journal publisher Karen Elliott House, Pulitzer Prize-winning author of The Man Who Would Be King, a new biography of MBS, he might be both. Or neither. House who spent years reporting from and writing on Saudi Arabia, offers a complex (and unofficial) portrait of the Crown Prince's ambitious transformation efforts, his deeply troubling human rights record, and the uncertain fate of his grand vision for modernizing the oil kingdom. Drawing on extensive access to MBS himself, she explores whether his reforms can succeed or will ultimately crumble like the ruins in Shelley's "Ozymandias." Rather than Lee Kuan Yew or Saddam Hussein, that’s probably MBS’ fate. A ruler neither sufficiently enlightened or tyrannical to leave a historical footprint. 1. MBS as an "Enlightened Despot" Shaped by Personal Experience"He is an enlightened despot. He grew up in that period when you couldn't do anything... all this trying to put the religious police aside is personal, not just policy for him."House argues that MBS's reforms stem from his own frustration with Saudi Arabia's religious restrictions, making his changes deeply personal rather than merely strategic.2. The Khashoggi Murder: A "Rendition Gone Wrong""I do believe that he too smart to order somebody to do that. I think what he ordered, that it was a rendition gone wrong. He said, bring the guy back... I don't think it would have happened if the crown prince had said, bring me that guy, but you know be sure he gets here alive."House suggests MBS likely ordered Khashoggi's return to Saudi Arabia but didn't intend for him to be killed, though she acknowledges the brutal outcome.3. Human Rights Have Worsened Under MBS"Yes, absolutely. But, you know, the only countries probably that are worse... basically Iran, China, North Korea, countries like that."When asked if Saudi's human rights record has deteriorated under MBS, House confirms it has, placing the kingdom among the world's worst offenders.4. Ambitious Projects Face Reality Checks"Some of his ideas are like the line in Naom... I mean that's a, you know, some might say a monstrosity... it's now down to there will be a mile and a half of it by 2030."House describes how MBS's grandiose vision for NEOM has been dramatically scaled back, suggesting his ambitious projects may be unrealistic.5. Uncertain Legacy: The Ozymandias Question"I quote in the book, the poet Shelley's poem, Ozymandias, about dirt and the look at me, mighty and despair, that it could all turn to dirt... if it were me and I had all of these issues that he faces now, I'd probably crawl under the bed and take a sleeping pill."House remains uncertain about MBS's ultimate success, comparing his potential fate to the fallen ruler in Shelley's poem while acknowledging his determination to persist despite enormous challenges.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