Jack, you continue to blow me away with your depth of soul for someone so young. I started reading young money after coming across your hysterical Goldman Sachs intern booze race post and am constantly in awe in your ability to see through surface situations to our deeper human nature. And find levity in the process. This post is one of your best and your closing statements are a masterclass in self awareness. (I read the last one and was like, oh shit.... That's sometimes me....). Keep it coming my man and for real, think about running for office. Haha.
Great article! I think all the points you made are spot on. I also find it rather silly that the way that people try to get other people to agree with them (on both sides) is "tell people how much their person sucks" rather than "try to understand their actual issues and empathize." Like, even if you don't agree with someone, you should try to understand why they believe something so that you can talk to them about that. And it probably helps to have a more charitable understanding than "oh they're just super sexist and racist and xenophobic" because then that breeds defensiveness, which digs people further into their existing views.
I will say that I disagree about the overlap between Biden and Trump voters, though. It's pretty clear that this country has gone through pretty extreme political polarization in the last few decades due to a variety of reasons. To the extent that partisanship of elected officials reflects the electorate itself, the elected officials from both parties have also gotten ideologically farther apart over the past few decades (see https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/03/10/the-polarization-in-todays-congress-has-roots-that-go-back-decades/). Plus, what we see online is more and more reflective of an echo chamber (the algorithms show you stuff that you already agree with and push you towards more extreme versions of that).
Great article Jack, probably the best I've seen from you so far.
I especially liked your point on nuance. I think the lack of nuance in political discourse in the US might be (at least partly) perpetuated by the two-party system, I see less of this in my home country where voters have more to choose from. I wonder if there are any studies on whether the prevalence of polarization is higher in countries with fewer political parties than there are in countries with more options.
Jack, I agree with most of this post but I disagree with one big point. The point about those on the right being vilified by their left leaning peers. That might be the case in the circles that you observe but in practically every social interaction I’ve witnessed it’s been the opposite. I voted for Biden in 2020 and I intend to vote again on the Democratic side this year. I am from NC and I live in Florida. Most everyone I interact with supports Trump and they have been spewing hateful rhetoric towards democrats for years. It’s only gotten more hateful as they feel supported in their hate. I don’t hang out with upper class folks who are into technology and finance. So it makes a difference where you are in the country and what crowd you socialize with.
This is 100% valid, and I think the loudest folks on the right are much more aggressive than the loudest on the left. I'm from South GA originally and live in NYC now so I've seen the full range from both sides.
Big fan of the newsletter, and I wholeheartedly agree with your overarching theme of using writing as a way to understand our own thoughts.
One point though:
"Over time, policies grew more extreme, moving further and further left of the median voter. Without visible opposition, those promoting these policies believed that the majority either supported or remained neutral to their ideas, but under the surface, the collective political belief system was approaching a breaking point. "
From what I recall, this may be true, but the perception of attitude changes on policies (and by extension, political discourse) varies significantly. Technically, this bias has swung both farther left and farther right, but overall, I believe that people’s perceptions have shifted more than actual policies.
Now this whole concept was very counter intuitive to me (how could people be so wrong about others' beliefs? You did hit on this!), so I would encourage you to read a bit more on this. One paper that got me started was "Widespread misperceptions of long-term attitude change" (https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2107260119) or if you prefer it as a blog post, "You're probably wrong about how things have changed" (Experimental History).
Regarding the statement about moving left of center, the study highlights:
“People overestimated the liberal shift in attitudes, particularly on items they associated with being liberal or conservative. Simultaneously, they slightly underestimated how liberal attitudes are today.”
More importantly, there’s undoubtedly a disconnect between policies and the majority of Americans’ opinions—for better or worse.
This is interesting on the perceptions have shifted more than policies, going to check out the paper you linked this weekend. Thanks for shooting my way. I agree that opinions have grown more polarized in both directions over time. IMO, probably connected to our constant exposure to the news cycle now.
Or our constant exposure to news "headlining"....I find myself guilty of being inundated with headlines in my email, LinkedIn, social and rarely have the time to read even a few of the articles (especially if I've hit my free limit) or more than just the preview text and of course, the bit I see is the most extreme headline-worthy aspect of the full piece. I find my perceptions ride more extreme and then when I finally have the time to read a full piece, I come back to the middle.
I think some of your analysis is off, but it's honestly not worth trying to be convincing in a comment section.
I guess my bigger concern is that the level of engagement you see on this post will convince you to write about politics more. I'm hoping that's not the case. Especially in election years, there's a lot of stress in the air. I like encountering election discourse in the places I expect it, but I also like having places where I won't have to deal with it.
I understand that this is basically a "stick to sports" reply, which probably means I'm wrong. I'm just stating that my reaction is that I subscribed for other kinds of content. Obviously you're free to write whatever you want. Just stating my preference.
Agree with the overall premise, but some points are not quite as simple.
Registered Republicans are a completely different group than ALL Trump voters. The former often has much more extreme right views than the latter.
Also, not convinced that most social circles are 50/50 political split. The city/rural split of voters is evidence of this. You are often surrounded by folks who vote similarly.
On the second, yes, the city/rural split is totally fair and my analogy was intentionally oversimplified for brevity purposes, but I do think most social groups have more hidden nuance than participants realize. Even in situations where voting decisions are homogenous, the issue-by-issue beliefs probably vary greatly.
I love (and I'm being serious) how you used "gaslighted" instead of the nonsensical "gaslit." Small pet peeve of mine, when people treat "light" as the verb there. The verb is gaslight.
Also appreciate the cautious tone and the "let's not get carried away punishing the left" message. Very useful and I think necessary at this point. Revenge for wokeness is not a good idea.
I agree on the “revenge for wokeness” point, it isn’t a good idea at all.
But I do hope people don’t go through the usual short memory cycle and suddenly forget all about it either.
Several in entertainment/media, health care, transportation, general trades, etc have lost a lot, or even a fair shot at it robbed from them for being born with the “wrong” cherished traits of the day. Or because “diversity” doesn’t include diversity of opinions. Their lives upended on a whim.
It’s ok if, let’s say, a movies or razor blades company decides to backtrack on the moral and political lecturing that nobody asked for on their products. But they have shown their true colors, they put ideologies over good services at a good price, and they have been there for too long… so I think it’s fine to let it collapse on its own weight (if it was going to) and let something new and fresh take its place (if it exists and there’s room for it).
I find it too convenient to make a mess of everything for well over a decade and then overnight expect some sort of reversal.
We can very passively, without getting out of our way, continue voting with our wallets and judge of character.
How do I write for you my brotha? This is a heater btw (as per usual).
Just do it, Max.
Jack, you continue to blow me away with your depth of soul for someone so young. I started reading young money after coming across your hysterical Goldman Sachs intern booze race post and am constantly in awe in your ability to see through surface situations to our deeper human nature. And find levity in the process. This post is one of your best and your closing statements are a masterclass in self awareness. (I read the last one and was like, oh shit.... That's sometimes me....). Keep it coming my man and for real, think about running for office. Haha.
Thank you so much!
Great article! I think all the points you made are spot on. I also find it rather silly that the way that people try to get other people to agree with them (on both sides) is "tell people how much their person sucks" rather than "try to understand their actual issues and empathize." Like, even if you don't agree with someone, you should try to understand why they believe something so that you can talk to them about that. And it probably helps to have a more charitable understanding than "oh they're just super sexist and racist and xenophobic" because then that breeds defensiveness, which digs people further into their existing views.
I will say that I disagree about the overlap between Biden and Trump voters, though. It's pretty clear that this country has gone through pretty extreme political polarization in the last few decades due to a variety of reasons. To the extent that partisanship of elected officials reflects the electorate itself, the elected officials from both parties have also gotten ideologically farther apart over the past few decades (see https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/03/10/the-polarization-in-todays-congress-has-roots-that-go-back-decades/). Plus, what we see online is more and more reflective of an echo chamber (the algorithms show you stuff that you already agree with and push you towards more extreme versions of that).
Great article Jack, probably the best I've seen from you so far.
I especially liked your point on nuance. I think the lack of nuance in political discourse in the US might be (at least partly) perpetuated by the two-party system, I see less of this in my home country where voters have more to choose from. I wonder if there are any studies on whether the prevalence of polarization is higher in countries with fewer political parties than there are in countries with more options.
This is really good Jack.
A very well-written distillation of things.
Great stuff Jack! From one kid who (unfortunately) grew up in the Baptist church to another.
Fantastic article, Jack.
Great stuff
Jack, I agree with most of this post but I disagree with one big point. The point about those on the right being vilified by their left leaning peers. That might be the case in the circles that you observe but in practically every social interaction I’ve witnessed it’s been the opposite. I voted for Biden in 2020 and I intend to vote again on the Democratic side this year. I am from NC and I live in Florida. Most everyone I interact with supports Trump and they have been spewing hateful rhetoric towards democrats for years. It’s only gotten more hateful as they feel supported in their hate. I don’t hang out with upper class folks who are into technology and finance. So it makes a difference where you are in the country and what crowd you socialize with.
This is 100% valid, and I think the loudest folks on the right are much more aggressive than the loudest on the left. I'm from South GA originally and live in NYC now so I've seen the full range from both sides.
Big fan of the newsletter, and I wholeheartedly agree with your overarching theme of using writing as a way to understand our own thoughts.
One point though:
"Over time, policies grew more extreme, moving further and further left of the median voter. Without visible opposition, those promoting these policies believed that the majority either supported or remained neutral to their ideas, but under the surface, the collective political belief system was approaching a breaking point. "
From what I recall, this may be true, but the perception of attitude changes on policies (and by extension, political discourse) varies significantly. Technically, this bias has swung both farther left and farther right, but overall, I believe that people’s perceptions have shifted more than actual policies.
Now this whole concept was very counter intuitive to me (how could people be so wrong about others' beliefs? You did hit on this!), so I would encourage you to read a bit more on this. One paper that got me started was "Widespread misperceptions of long-term attitude change" (https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2107260119) or if you prefer it as a blog post, "You're probably wrong about how things have changed" (Experimental History).
Regarding the statement about moving left of center, the study highlights:
“People overestimated the liberal shift in attitudes, particularly on items they associated with being liberal or conservative. Simultaneously, they slightly underestimated how liberal attitudes are today.”
More importantly, there’s undoubtedly a disconnect between policies and the majority of Americans’ opinions—for better or worse.
This is spot on, I second this
This is interesting on the perceptions have shifted more than policies, going to check out the paper you linked this weekend. Thanks for shooting my way. I agree that opinions have grown more polarized in both directions over time. IMO, probably connected to our constant exposure to the news cycle now.
Or our constant exposure to news "headlining"....I find myself guilty of being inundated with headlines in my email, LinkedIn, social and rarely have the time to read even a few of the articles (especially if I've hit my free limit) or more than just the preview text and of course, the bit I see is the most extreme headline-worthy aspect of the full piece. I find my perceptions ride more extreme and then when I finally have the time to read a full piece, I come back to the middle.
I think some of your analysis is off, but it's honestly not worth trying to be convincing in a comment section.
I guess my bigger concern is that the level of engagement you see on this post will convince you to write about politics more. I'm hoping that's not the case. Especially in election years, there's a lot of stress in the air. I like encountering election discourse in the places I expect it, but I also like having places where I won't have to deal with it.
I understand that this is basically a "stick to sports" reply, which probably means I'm wrong. I'm just stating that my reaction is that I subscribed for other kinds of content. Obviously you're free to write whatever you want. Just stating my preference.
Agree with the overall premise, but some points are not quite as simple.
Registered Republicans are a completely different group than ALL Trump voters. The former often has much more extreme right views than the latter.
Also, not convinced that most social circles are 50/50 political split. The city/rural split of voters is evidence of this. You are often surrounded by folks who vote similarly.
I agree 100% on the first point.
On the second, yes, the city/rural split is totally fair and my analogy was intentionally oversimplified for brevity purposes, but I do think most social groups have more hidden nuance than participants realize. Even in situations where voting decisions are homogenous, the issue-by-issue beliefs probably vary greatly.
I love (and I'm being serious) how you used "gaslighted" instead of the nonsensical "gaslit." Small pet peeve of mine, when people treat "light" as the verb there. The verb is gaslight.
Also appreciate the cautious tone and the "let's not get carried away punishing the left" message. Very useful and I think necessary at this point. Revenge for wokeness is not a good idea.
Thank you! I actually looked up “gaslighted” vs “gaslit” as I wasn’t sure which was the correct usage haha
I agree on the “revenge for wokeness” point, it isn’t a good idea at all.
But I do hope people don’t go through the usual short memory cycle and suddenly forget all about it either.
Several in entertainment/media, health care, transportation, general trades, etc have lost a lot, or even a fair shot at it robbed from them for being born with the “wrong” cherished traits of the day. Or because “diversity” doesn’t include diversity of opinions. Their lives upended on a whim.
It’s ok if, let’s say, a movies or razor blades company decides to backtrack on the moral and political lecturing that nobody asked for on their products. But they have shown their true colors, they put ideologies over good services at a good price, and they have been there for too long… so I think it’s fine to let it collapse on its own weight (if it was going to) and let something new and fresh take its place (if it exists and there’s room for it).
I find it too convenient to make a mess of everything for well over a decade and then overnight expect some sort of reversal.
We can very passively, without getting out of our way, continue voting with our wallets and judge of character.
Definitely agree
Extremely nuanced, thoughtful and well written essay. Amazing to package so many complex threads into one piece.
Thanks Phil!
Nobody's employer has any business caring about what they post on their own social media accounts.