Ignoring Complexity vs. Worshipping It
Politics in the age of Complexity.
Brilliant observation from John Gruber at the latest Talk Show episode - the Trump movement is the “How hard can it be?” movement. Confident people with low competence exhibiting the Dunning-Kruger effect across economics, geopolitics, technology, politics, and more. This is obviously a generalization but it applies broadly to most politicians and loyal voters in the Trump movement. A broad rebellion against the idea that expertise and intelligence matter, or at the very least an inability to identify when someone doesn’t have them.
On the other side of the isle (and this is me talking now) we had the “It’s just too hard and complex” Democrats. Citing studies and science and fiddling with minor changes at the edges but broadly failing to build systems that actually work for people.
The obvious antidote to these 2 incompetent forces is a true “Let’s do hard things” agenda. Intelligence, competence, and commitment to deliver despite complexity.
This spirit is present in the Democratic party at the state and city level, but largely absent from the national level. The best representative of it right now is Mamdani in NYC. An approach that doesn’t deny the complexity or difficulty of change, but is committed to battling effectively against these challenges using competent people and strategies.
Whatever else you say about Mamdani, this is the core of what’s so refreshing about him. He doesn’t say “How hard can it be?” and he doesn’t say “It’s too hard.”
Instead he says: “It’s important enough to do despite being hard and complex.”
This had to be the future.