I’m at minute 12 here, and I’ve got to give you one point of critique that towers above everything:
If you’re driven by an earnest desire to change this system, ditch the partisan vernacular yesterday. Affiliating a program with partisan slogans like “America First” will virtually guarantee that nothing resembling it ever gets durably adopted at the level of federal policy. I’ve worked in and near federal politics for a decade and I’m telling you straight, yours wouldn’t be the first, nor the millionth, good idea to die on the altar of politics.
** Not that I take issue with giving primacy to one’s own national community — I’d assign identical toxicity to attaching it to the current administration’s “Build Back Better” sloganeering, despite these concepts’ respective merits.
Regarding my prior comment, your tone during the episode is sufficiently unpartisan -- one line in the intro stuck out to me, but your plan and ideas more broadly obviously sit on an apolitical axis. So disregard my earlier post.
A point I would add in general is that everything is politicized within the public sphere, talking about wanting to open tungsten mines, that we desperately need, is inherently political no matter what label is used.
I’d make sharp distinction between policy (the set of rules and programs affecting a system), politics (leveraging a variety of tools to dictate policy), and partisanship (politics that indiscriminately conforms to the basic moral and political intuitions of your political tribe). Partisanship, the focus of my first post, with its doxologies and relentless subjugation of fact to narrative, is a poor framework for implementing policy that succeeds on classical liberal and utilitarian terms.
“America First” and “Build Back Better” aren’t policies. They’re not even strategies for policy. They’re aspirational statements that have become heavily coded to the biases of their respective partisans. Negative partisanship in this country assures us that presenting any policy as an affiliate of those aspirations will find it rejected by approximately 50% of the public at large without any serious consideration.
There is a good 10-20 minute briefing in this. You could provide a lot value by clearly explaining current system's stocks, flows, feedback loops. Happy to help you with that if it's of interest.
Next, try small fixes and see how they shift equilibrium.
Hold off on making Gov Newsom czar via FEMA National Response Framework.
I’m at minute 12 here, and I’ve got to give you one point of critique that towers above everything:
If you’re driven by an earnest desire to change this system, ditch the partisan vernacular yesterday. Affiliating a program with partisan slogans like “America First” will virtually guarantee that nothing resembling it ever gets durably adopted at the level of federal policy. I’ve worked in and near federal politics for a decade and I’m telling you straight, yours wouldn’t be the first, nor the millionth, good idea to die on the altar of politics.
** Not that I take issue with giving primacy to one’s own national community — I’d assign identical toxicity to attaching it to the current administration’s “Build Back Better” sloganeering, despite these concepts’ respective merits.
Fair critique.
Regarding my prior comment, your tone during the episode is sufficiently unpartisan -- one line in the intro stuck out to me, but your plan and ideas more broadly obviously sit on an apolitical axis. So disregard my earlier post.
A point I would add in general is that everything is politicized within the public sphere, talking about wanting to open tungsten mines, that we desperately need, is inherently political no matter what label is used.
I’d make sharp distinction between policy (the set of rules and programs affecting a system), politics (leveraging a variety of tools to dictate policy), and partisanship (politics that indiscriminately conforms to the basic moral and political intuitions of your political tribe). Partisanship, the focus of my first post, with its doxologies and relentless subjugation of fact to narrative, is a poor framework for implementing policy that succeeds on classical liberal and utilitarian terms.
“America First” and “Build Back Better” aren’t policies. They’re not even strategies for policy. They’re aspirational statements that have become heavily coded to the biases of their respective partisans. Negative partisanship in this country assures us that presenting any policy as an affiliate of those aspirations will find it rejected by approximately 50% of the public at large without any serious consideration.
There is a good 10-20 minute briefing in this. You could provide a lot value by clearly explaining current system's stocks, flows, feedback loops. Happy to help you with that if it's of interest.
Next, try small fixes and see how they shift equilibrium.
Hold off on making Gov Newsom czar via FEMA National Response Framework.