I feel that. I wish - in a perfect world - we weren't facing down an intolerant Left that guards culture like the ghost in Poltergeist. If they just let down the high wall, we could all talk like regular people again. Because man, do we all need shared culture...
Culture is based on shared values. We no longer have those. What we are experiencing, I believe, is a sorting out of shared value cohorts that will eventually result in the balkanization of the US. And I believe it will be quite violent.
The problem with this, like the problem with just about every "Civil War II" prediction I can recall reading to date, is that conventional divisions rely on geography, and the present divisions rely less and less on geography or any objective reality. Also and as such, it's worth remembering that the worst of the hate is from/by/against the "terminally-online" or similarly-sequestered (e.g. pseudoacademics); this is a good thing to some extent, but it does pose a question of what's to be done about them.
I understand that LLMs, if left unchecked, will kill the Internet in the manner of electronic Mad-Cow Disease...not to mention the ever-looming specter of another Carrington/Miyake Event or other cosmic nuisance. Hardly ideal scenarios (I wish we could just roll the Internet back to "Web 1.0"), but if all else fails, maybe two problems solve each other?
Getting back to your point, I don't mean to purely dismiss it: Balkanization is something I've thought about for many years, and it doesn't HAVE TO BE a bad fate. Think of the 'amicable divorce' of Czechoslovakia, or maybe even Brexit, which at least has not yet resulted in sectarian violence (and is itself an interesting lesson in beyond-binary politics; I know at least one stridently "left-wing" British Web-pal who voted for it and has no regrets). I also recommend "American Nations", by Colin Woodard, for a guide to more reality-based cultural cleavage.
I assume he means dissolution into a number of smaller nations. I'd like to believe that federalism and a return to a smaller U.S. government on top of stronger state governments could forestall that, but it seems neither side really wants that any more -- the whole ball game for the left and the right is control of the federal government in order to suppress your enemies.
Hardly. I can’t count how many times I’ve heard Matt say something along the lines of “there are 10 million other people writing articles every day about how horrible Trump is; what could I possibly add.” He’s not picking sides. He’s exhausted with the people who won’t let him not pick sides.
I did try to make the point in an email with a relative that idolatry was not loving something necessarily, but centering that person; that we just broke it off with two couples we can no longer stand because they bicker and act out in public (and treat waitstaff horribly) and seem to hate each other yet stand united "against Trump" (a great foundation for a marriage!); and that talking about Trump 24/7 was a way to avoid one's owns issues and problems.
Trump and his more ardent idolators as well as the people who really, really hate him are interesting fun-house mirror images of one another. The only real difference is that the Trump Troop don't typically see the need to premptively seize the moral high ground on every issue, large and small. But both view politics and indeed life itself in purely transactional and materialist terms. Both take the "personal is political" to absurd lengths. Both are corrupt, though Trump is corrupt in the kind of crass, obvious ways that are easy to understand, whereas the Never Trumpers are intellectually corrupt but obfuscate with academic bafflegab larded with appeals to base emotions. They are the perfect example of Churchill's definition of a fanatic as someone "who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."
I think the people who hatey-hate him actually envy him his perceived control. If they could seize the crown, they would really straighten out the rest of us!
Trump has taken the tactics that leftists used against conservatives for decades and turned them upside down, and achieved a decent degree of success (though he has also sowed a lot of needless chaos) doing so. And it DRIVES THEM NUTS.
My (now ex-) mother-in-law got involved in state level IL politics about 15 years ago. Her husband has always owned small businesses and they had all these ideas about how to improve IL’s economy. But, out canvassing, people would stop them before they even got to that and ask how they felt about the gays, or abortion. Pro or con, too many people get fixated on one issue and ignore everything else, often to their own detriment. It does get boring quickly.
Take your time. The fact that you recognize and can string together coherent words and thoughts to describe this bizarre circus is good enough for me. The world has turned into a never ending LSD laced with magic mushrooms trip of an experience - difficult to watch much less internalize in any meaningful way. So, have at it at your own pace - your efforts are appreciated.
Reading a newspaper, listening to the news, perusing social media. It is exhausting-Trump, climate change, far right, woke progressives. You get to a point where you discount everything as hyperbole. My trust in journalism is limited to a handful of people and I find that dangerous and incredibly disheartening.
I think it takes living in a dysfunctional municipality to see it. And then you talk with people who listen to kimmel, oliver, owens or alex jones and realize how easy it is to persuade large numbers of people to believe utter horse shit.
For me, that is the most disheartening. The most educated people are the easiest to fool. Their egos won't let them admit they're wrong.
Moving from a big (liberal) city to a bedroom community in a different part of the country has been a real eye-opener. By and large, this is a more working class/successful small businness owner community and ironically I find I can talk freely with people here over a much wider range of topics and politics rarely, if ever comes up, except maybe peripherally. The hyper-educated types that I used to dwell amongst are IMO hyper-obsessed with meaningless BS and all their "ideas" tend to come from the same place.
I know someone who made a similar move from the West coast to Michigan. He went Mount Vesuvius when Hillary lost, closed his online accounts and blew up friendships..... over politics. His MI move changed him because he met people who were outside his groupthink bubble. To his credit, he put his anger aside and listened. He doesn't agree with their politics, but he understands why they feel as they do. Mostly, it's hard to hate people you like.
So many thoughts. All I'll say is that the world needs... the country needs... *I* need journalists who care more about what's true than ideology. You're in such short supply. Insert the standard "I don't always agree with you, but..." caveat here. Because it's true. But I've been a subscriber here since the beginning and an avid reader since well before that (the lit discussions with WK were a cherished diversion, for the reasons given), with no intention to bolt. I'll stop there, except to say that every time you mention following the story where it takes you, no matter what, I cheer a little. And it's not boring.
Thanks for this. Ringside has a bell. But it still takes a referee to count the fighter out or winner.
Listen to the bell, rest on your knees or laurels for as long as it takes to get back up and win the fight. For us. For us. We are the referee. And we are partial to you as fighter.
I appreciate your angst. Good luck on the book. I particularly understand trying to read the classics or things that are more life affirming, things humans have in common, and not political. Everything is political to a leftist. Everything. I had to quit the book club because I'm sick of leftist virtue signaling and over-simplified messaging at the expense of any kind of nuanced or complex character development. Or ANY attempt to frame the questions there are no real answers to with the insipid moralizing. I went back to reading classics, too. Thanks for doing that. However, about journalism. If I were a journalist, I'd be more concerned about framing the dangers of the communist left (and their "unholy" alignment with Islam--a group of atheists and religious fanatics--who would have figured) than how I handled Trump, who will soon be gone. The communist left will not be gone soon. Perhaps that should be somewhat rewarding since I can see writing about Trump would get tedious. If leftists actually wrote about the issues and NOT Trump, perhaps it wouldn't be such a garbage dump and people might have SOME shot at common sense and compromise. But I don't see that happening anytime soon. But I must say, my last five years would have been bereft without your work. I suspect it feels like tilting at windmills because it is; the virtue is doing it anyway. L
You know what was good journalism? Matt and Walter discussing books and conflating them into today’s news. Best podcast ever. (No disrespect to Brad, but his brain works faster than the rest of ours. Slow your roll Brad and let us appreciate your interpretations).
I have been told that many times, and it was said to me by people Ive long known when I told them the podcast was starting. Will continue to work on explaining things more slowly lol.
As you ruminate on this question, let me suggest an option. You might choose to write about things on which our dear President has expressed no opinion. There are a shocking number of them even giving his prolific opining.
To give you an example, I recently wrote an editorial that I submitted to the WSJ (fingers crossed) about our Federal budget. As near as I can tell, neither President Trump nor MAGA has a defined opinion on the topic I chose. Now if it gets published maybe they will, but I don't control that.
I guess I'm suggesting you explore the many, many issues that matter but are not the subject of his focus. I truly believe many of those exist...maybe I'm naive but it's my .02 for you.
The overriding issue of our time is the federal debt, which everyone is ignoring. Perhaps your op-ed does talk about it but I fear it will do no good because everyone is on the Titanic and knows we're heading for an iceberg. They don't seem to have the will to change the direction of the ship. John Glubb wrote a long essay called "The Fate of Empires" about the British Empire and it mirrors our situation.
You love free speech, hate overbearing bureaucrats, and love it when wannabe authoritarians get the piss taken out of them. How about an international incident culminating in being humiliated by a giant AI cartoon hamster?
Man, I've appreciated your writing for a very long time and reason three kind of feels like a cop-out. Since when do you care about being put into a binary bin by the nincompoops in corporate journalism? Yes, it's ridiculous that the idiocy of our current politics dominates how we define each other, and I'm happy to give you time to write meaningfully and truthfully about issues that matter, but journalism can be as timeless as anything. If the books that still ring true today can tell us anything it's that the technology may change but the ups and downs of the human condition do not. I don't want this to be true, but some part of this makes me feel like what you're trying to avoid is having your audience put you in binary bin. If you're true to form, that's their fucking problem. It's a contemporary annoyance of the highest degree, the whole Trump not Trump thing, but there's a million binaries a MFer can be put into and until recently, that never seemed to stop you from writing before. Nothing is more paralyzing to a writer than thinking about what the readers will think. Make us think. Period. Stop worrying about what we'll think.
Caring about what other people think is the end of honest journalism. Matt is a journalist, but most of what he writes is political commentary. He's a good writer, but he has a problem being all things to all people to make a living. It's the risk people take when they perform for an audience.
I feel that. I wish - in a perfect world - we weren't facing down an intolerant Left that guards culture like the ghost in Poltergeist. If they just let down the high wall, we could all talk like regular people again. Because man, do we all need shared culture...
Culture is based on shared values. We no longer have those. What we are experiencing, I believe, is a sorting out of shared value cohorts that will eventually result in the balkanization of the US. And I believe it will be quite violent.
The problem with this, like the problem with just about every "Civil War II" prediction I can recall reading to date, is that conventional divisions rely on geography, and the present divisions rely less and less on geography or any objective reality. Also and as such, it's worth remembering that the worst of the hate is from/by/against the "terminally-online" or similarly-sequestered (e.g. pseudoacademics); this is a good thing to some extent, but it does pose a question of what's to be done about them.
I understand that LLMs, if left unchecked, will kill the Internet in the manner of electronic Mad-Cow Disease...not to mention the ever-looming specter of another Carrington/Miyake Event or other cosmic nuisance. Hardly ideal scenarios (I wish we could just roll the Internet back to "Web 1.0"), but if all else fails, maybe two problems solve each other?
Getting back to your point, I don't mean to purely dismiss it: Balkanization is something I've thought about for many years, and it doesn't HAVE TO BE a bad fate. Think of the 'amicable divorce' of Czechoslovakia, or maybe even Brexit, which at least has not yet resulted in sectarian violence (and is itself an interesting lesson in beyond-binary politics; I know at least one stridently "left-wing" British Web-pal who voted for it and has no regrets). I also recommend "American Nations", by Colin Woodard, for a guide to more reality-based cultural cleavage.
What do you mean by ‘balkanization?’
I assume he means dissolution into a number of smaller nations. I'd like to believe that federalism and a return to a smaller U.S. government on top of stronger state governments could forestall that, but it seems neither side really wants that any more -- the whole ball game for the left and the right is control of the federal government in order to suppress your enemies.
The “right” wants to be left alone. The “left” wants control of every aspect of your life.
...and consolidate your power
- complains about the binary
- blames the left
This is why we’re where we are.
Hardly. I can’t count how many times I’ve heard Matt say something along the lines of “there are 10 million other people writing articles every day about how horrible Trump is; what could I possibly add.” He’s not picking sides. He’s exhausted with the people who won’t let him not pick sides.
I was referring to Sasha, not Matt.
Fair. I wouldn't blame Sasha for "why we are where we are," but she can't say she escapes the binary.
A real good chunk of it, anyway. We've all been trained well.
You’re waxing binary still.
Thanks for noticing. 😜
This is pure Matt Taibbi and I love it. Take all the time you need, Matt, I’ll be waiting.
Always love a good Hunter Thompson reference. Thank you.
Thank you! I couldn't have said it better myself.
I did try to make the point in an email with a relative that idolatry was not loving something necessarily, but centering that person; that we just broke it off with two couples we can no longer stand because they bicker and act out in public (and treat waitstaff horribly) and seem to hate each other yet stand united "against Trump" (a great foundation for a marriage!); and that talking about Trump 24/7 was a way to avoid one's owns issues and problems.
No reply.
Trump and his more ardent idolators as well as the people who really, really hate him are interesting fun-house mirror images of one another. The only real difference is that the Trump Troop don't typically see the need to premptively seize the moral high ground on every issue, large and small. But both view politics and indeed life itself in purely transactional and materialist terms. Both take the "personal is political" to absurd lengths. Both are corrupt, though Trump is corrupt in the kind of crass, obvious ways that are easy to understand, whereas the Never Trumpers are intellectually corrupt but obfuscate with academic bafflegab larded with appeals to base emotions. They are the perfect example of Churchill's definition of a fanatic as someone "who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."
Well said!
I think the people who hatey-hate him actually envy him his perceived control. If they could seize the crown, they would really straighten out the rest of us!
Trump has taken the tactics that leftists used against conservatives for decades and turned them upside down, and achieved a decent degree of success (though he has also sowed a lot of needless chaos) doing so. And it DRIVES THEM NUTS.
You just described Canada.
Eeeew.
My (now ex-) mother-in-law got involved in state level IL politics about 15 years ago. Her husband has always owned small businesses and they had all these ideas about how to improve IL’s economy. But, out canvassing, people would stop them before they even got to that and ask how they felt about the gays, or abortion. Pro or con, too many people get fixated on one issue and ignore everything else, often to their own detriment. It does get boring quickly.
Take your time. The fact that you recognize and can string together coherent words and thoughts to describe this bizarre circus is good enough for me. The world has turned into a never ending LSD laced with magic mushrooms trip of an experience - difficult to watch much less internalize in any meaningful way. So, have at it at your own pace - your efforts are appreciated.
Reading a newspaper, listening to the news, perusing social media. It is exhausting-Trump, climate change, far right, woke progressives. You get to a point where you discount everything as hyperbole. My trust in journalism is limited to a handful of people and I find that dangerous and incredibly disheartening.
Please, don’t you give up hope as well, Matt.
I think it takes living in a dysfunctional municipality to see it. And then you talk with people who listen to kimmel, oliver, owens or alex jones and realize how easy it is to persuade large numbers of people to believe utter horse shit.
For me, that is the most disheartening. The most educated people are the easiest to fool. Their egos won't let them admit they're wrong.
Moving from a big (liberal) city to a bedroom community in a different part of the country has been a real eye-opener. By and large, this is a more working class/successful small businness owner community and ironically I find I can talk freely with people here over a much wider range of topics and politics rarely, if ever comes up, except maybe peripherally. The hyper-educated types that I used to dwell amongst are IMO hyper-obsessed with meaningless BS and all their "ideas" tend to come from the same place.
I know someone who made a similar move from the West coast to Michigan. He went Mount Vesuvius when Hillary lost, closed his online accounts and blew up friendships..... over politics. His MI move changed him because he met people who were outside his groupthink bubble. To his credit, he put his anger aside and listened. He doesn't agree with their politics, but he understands why they feel as they do. Mostly, it's hard to hate people you like.
Matt, thanks for the shout out to Walter Kirn. I miss the podcast you two did.
So many thoughts. All I'll say is that the world needs... the country needs... *I* need journalists who care more about what's true than ideology. You're in such short supply. Insert the standard "I don't always agree with you, but..." caveat here. Because it's true. But I've been a subscriber here since the beginning and an avid reader since well before that (the lit discussions with WK were a cherished diversion, for the reasons given), with no intention to bolt. I'll stop there, except to say that every time you mention following the story where it takes you, no matter what, I cheer a little. And it's not boring.
Thanks for this. Ringside has a bell. But it still takes a referee to count the fighter out or winner.
Listen to the bell, rest on your knees or laurels for as long as it takes to get back up and win the fight. For us. For us. We are the referee. And we are partial to you as fighter.
Maybe we can all just agree that the boring thing is the people who insist on using every essay as a Trump-compass. Keep on keepin' on, Matt.
I appreciate your angst. Good luck on the book. I particularly understand trying to read the classics or things that are more life affirming, things humans have in common, and not political. Everything is political to a leftist. Everything. I had to quit the book club because I'm sick of leftist virtue signaling and over-simplified messaging at the expense of any kind of nuanced or complex character development. Or ANY attempt to frame the questions there are no real answers to with the insipid moralizing. I went back to reading classics, too. Thanks for doing that. However, about journalism. If I were a journalist, I'd be more concerned about framing the dangers of the communist left (and their "unholy" alignment with Islam--a group of atheists and religious fanatics--who would have figured) than how I handled Trump, who will soon be gone. The communist left will not be gone soon. Perhaps that should be somewhat rewarding since I can see writing about Trump would get tedious. If leftists actually wrote about the issues and NOT Trump, perhaps it wouldn't be such a garbage dump and people might have SOME shot at common sense and compromise. But I don't see that happening anytime soon. But I must say, my last five years would have been bereft without your work. I suspect it feels like tilting at windmills because it is; the virtue is doing it anyway. L
You know what was good journalism? Matt and Walter discussing books and conflating them into today’s news. Best podcast ever. (No disrespect to Brad, but his brain works faster than the rest of ours. Slow your roll Brad and let us appreciate your interpretations).
I have been told that many times, and it was said to me by people Ive long known when I told them the podcast was starting. Will continue to work on explaining things more slowly lol.
Matt, I feel like you were not anti-Trump enough in this piece
(ducks)
Matt,
As you ruminate on this question, let me suggest an option. You might choose to write about things on which our dear President has expressed no opinion. There are a shocking number of them even giving his prolific opining.
To give you an example, I recently wrote an editorial that I submitted to the WSJ (fingers crossed) about our Federal budget. As near as I can tell, neither President Trump nor MAGA has a defined opinion on the topic I chose. Now if it gets published maybe they will, but I don't control that.
I guess I'm suggesting you explore the many, many issues that matter but are not the subject of his focus. I truly believe many of those exist...maybe I'm naive but it's my .02 for you.
The overriding issue of our time is the federal debt, which everyone is ignoring. Perhaps your op-ed does talk about it but I fear it will do no good because everyone is on the Titanic and knows we're heading for an iceberg. They don't seem to have the will to change the direction of the ship. John Glubb wrote a long essay called "The Fate of Empires" about the British Empire and it mirrors our situation.
You love free speech, hate overbearing bureaucrats, and love it when wannabe authoritarians get the piss taken out of them. How about an international incident culminating in being humiliated by a giant AI cartoon hamster?
https://prestonbyrne.com/2026/06/16/free_speech_hamsters/
Man, I've appreciated your writing for a very long time and reason three kind of feels like a cop-out. Since when do you care about being put into a binary bin by the nincompoops in corporate journalism? Yes, it's ridiculous that the idiocy of our current politics dominates how we define each other, and I'm happy to give you time to write meaningfully and truthfully about issues that matter, but journalism can be as timeless as anything. If the books that still ring true today can tell us anything it's that the technology may change but the ups and downs of the human condition do not. I don't want this to be true, but some part of this makes me feel like what you're trying to avoid is having your audience put you in binary bin. If you're true to form, that's their fucking problem. It's a contemporary annoyance of the highest degree, the whole Trump not Trump thing, but there's a million binaries a MFer can be put into and until recently, that never seemed to stop you from writing before. Nothing is more paralyzing to a writer than thinking about what the readers will think. Make us think. Period. Stop worrying about what we'll think.
Caring about what other people think is the end of honest journalism. Matt is a journalist, but most of what he writes is political commentary. He's a good writer, but he has a problem being all things to all people to make a living. It's the risk people take when they perform for an audience.