It seems to me that from some paths you go down in this essay, it could also be argued that a watershed moment literally is not a watershed moment at the time; the end of an era is literally not the end of an era until later events make it so. So it’s not just that you can’t know, it’s that it can’t BE, until the future arrives.
Excellent. And after 20 years of writing this stuff, I can say with confidence that "we don't know because no one can know" is the least-popular statement a journalist, consultant, or anyone else can make.
I appreciate the point being made, but were any of the isolationists you covered also deeply criminal wanna-be gangsters who planned to prosecute their political opponents, and redefine the mandate of all government institutions to prioritize personal loyalty to the President above all else? Who mused that he may remain in power after his second term, and that voters would not need to vote again.
While we may not know now with certainty how future historians will regard this moment, we can and should describe with confidence the many ways in which Trump 2.0 represents a threat of the highest order to our way of life.
Certainly! This has nothing do with what could/is likely to happen in the immediate future. It only speaks to Douthat's "irrevocable" turning point, etc.
I appreciate that. I suppose I am just trying to be mindful that while we should not get collectively over our skis in pronouncing with certainty on the unknowable, we should ensure this sensible caution is not taken to be a dissuasion from pronouncing on the threat.
I should say, I really enjoy your work and the deep intellectual honesty that seems to so often be at the heart of it!
A small correction: Thomas Dewey, who lost to Truman in 1948, was seen as a moderate like Eisenhower four years later. He supported the new international consensus, and though he loved a good balanced budget, rolling back the New Deal wasn't in the cards (especially given that he'd be working with a Democratic Congress).
Fair point. What I presented was indeed simplistic. In fact, lots more points like that could be raised when you get into the weeds of each event I mentioned and the "what ifs" related to it. But in all those details, you encounter more "what ifs." And in those... So if we were to unpack with severe care to detail, it would rapidly get bewilderingly complex. And that's when we're looking backwards! Now think of the complexity looking forwards. And not for one event, but many, over years and decades. It rapidly becomes inconceivably complex -- which underscores how ludicrous it is to think we can forecast it all accurately.
Absolutely! It's a valuable point you're making, and it's absolutely right. No reader should let a nitpicky alternate history enthusiast get in the way of the central message.
This is speculation obviously but based on his track record and documented health decline during his campaign Donald Trump's attempts to be a reverse of Woodrow Wilson will fail in the same manner that Wilson failed. His America First agenda wiped away by his successor in 2028 (which will be someone less inclined to appease progressively circles like Biden did mixed with appeasing the right wing Anti Trumpers and be more of a centrist political figure).
Much like Bush Jr who was the last Republican to win the popular vote with a Republican Congressional majority Trump will also lose big in the midterms in 2026 with more centrist Democrats such as Ruben Gallegos of Arizona winning races in Red and Purple Districts and more progressive leaning incumbents losing Congressional seats.
According to exit polling roughly 56% of American voters either dislike or are indifferent to Trump. Whereas Joe Biden was at roughly 48% dislike or indifference. Add to the fact Trump is currently trolling the most senior members of his Congressional majority with his foolish Cabinet nominations and roughly 20% of his voters reluctantly voted for him because they believed he'd improve their personal financial situations it's likely (again speculation) Trump will fail so spectacularly that Trumpism will collapse entirely and not be remembered as a great political triumph.
Instead it'll be seen as a repudiation on progressivism/Corporate (Right of Center) Democrats and traditional Republican/Neo Conservatives. That forced different types of political candidates to the forefront to fix what Trump has broken.
This is a great piece for reflection. On the path forward that can end up in so many different unknown destinations I so wish that the world had better souls leading us. Being a boomer I inevitably compare current leaders and wonder how *they* would have navigated the Cuban missile crisis.
There is certainly a tendency to think current events have much more importance than they ultimately do, when placed in a broader context with the passage of time.
As a small grace note to your excellent post... on the day the Bastille was stormed King Louis wrote "rein" in his diary. But I can't help but think we are in a new era - tho' Trump is the effect not the cause. It is the era of horizontal information where individuals can broadcast and narrow receive.
Absolutely timely words of caution. This is why I subscribe to Dan Gardner. This kind of read helps times that feel dark. History is full of times of breaking and hating, and eras emerge again of building and caring. Eras can only be known in hindsight.
Thank you. While we often grasp for seeming-certainty to avoid the anxiety of the unknown, in this case undetermined-ness is the great comfort.
It seems to me that from some paths you go down in this essay, it could also be argued that a watershed moment literally is not a watershed moment at the time; the end of an era is literally not the end of an era until later events make it so. So it’s not just that you can’t know, it’s that it can’t BE, until the future arrives.
Agreed. It is undetermined. It is only determined by subsequent events. Until then, we are all Schrodinger's cat.
Very similar point to what my firm wrote here: https://open.substack.com/pub/mbpolicy/p/humility?r=2jucr&utm_medium=ios
Excellent. And after 20 years of writing this stuff, I can say with confidence that "we don't know because no one can know" is the least-popular statement a journalist, consultant, or anyone else can make.
I appreciate the point being made, but were any of the isolationists you covered also deeply criminal wanna-be gangsters who planned to prosecute their political opponents, and redefine the mandate of all government institutions to prioritize personal loyalty to the President above all else? Who mused that he may remain in power after his second term, and that voters would not need to vote again.
While we may not know now with certainty how future historians will regard this moment, we can and should describe with confidence the many ways in which Trump 2.0 represents a threat of the highest order to our way of life.
Certainly! This has nothing do with what could/is likely to happen in the immediate future. It only speaks to Douthat's "irrevocable" turning point, etc.
I appreciate that. I suppose I am just trying to be mindful that while we should not get collectively over our skis in pronouncing with certainty on the unknowable, we should ensure this sensible caution is not taken to be a dissuasion from pronouncing on the threat.
I should say, I really enjoy your work and the deep intellectual honesty that seems to so often be at the heart of it!
History puts things into perspective. Thanks.
A small correction: Thomas Dewey, who lost to Truman in 1948, was seen as a moderate like Eisenhower four years later. He supported the new international consensus, and though he loved a good balanced budget, rolling back the New Deal wasn't in the cards (especially given that he'd be working with a Democratic Congress).
Fair point. What I presented was indeed simplistic. In fact, lots more points like that could be raised when you get into the weeds of each event I mentioned and the "what ifs" related to it. But in all those details, you encounter more "what ifs." And in those... So if we were to unpack with severe care to detail, it would rapidly get bewilderingly complex. And that's when we're looking backwards! Now think of the complexity looking forwards. And not for one event, but many, over years and decades. It rapidly becomes inconceivably complex -- which underscores how ludicrous it is to think we can forecast it all accurately.
Absolutely! It's a valuable point you're making, and it's absolutely right. No reader should let a nitpicky alternate history enthusiast get in the way of the central message.
"Nitpicky alternate history enthusiast" is my core audience. Nitpick away!
This is speculation obviously but based on his track record and documented health decline during his campaign Donald Trump's attempts to be a reverse of Woodrow Wilson will fail in the same manner that Wilson failed. His America First agenda wiped away by his successor in 2028 (which will be someone less inclined to appease progressively circles like Biden did mixed with appeasing the right wing Anti Trumpers and be more of a centrist political figure).
Much like Bush Jr who was the last Republican to win the popular vote with a Republican Congressional majority Trump will also lose big in the midterms in 2026 with more centrist Democrats such as Ruben Gallegos of Arizona winning races in Red and Purple Districts and more progressive leaning incumbents losing Congressional seats.
According to exit polling roughly 56% of American voters either dislike or are indifferent to Trump. Whereas Joe Biden was at roughly 48% dislike or indifference. Add to the fact Trump is currently trolling the most senior members of his Congressional majority with his foolish Cabinet nominations and roughly 20% of his voters reluctantly voted for him because they believed he'd improve their personal financial situations it's likely (again speculation) Trump will fail so spectacularly that Trumpism will collapse entirely and not be remembered as a great political triumph.
Instead it'll be seen as a repudiation on progressivism/Corporate (Right of Center) Democrats and traditional Republican/Neo Conservatives. That forced different types of political candidates to the forefront to fix what Trump has broken.
This is a great piece for reflection. On the path forward that can end up in so many different unknown destinations I so wish that the world had better souls leading us. Being a boomer I inevitably compare current leaders and wonder how *they* would have navigated the Cuban missile crisis.
There is certainly a tendency to think current events have much more importance than they ultimately do, when placed in a broader context with the passage of time.
As a small grace note to your excellent post... on the day the Bastille was stormed King Louis wrote "rein" in his diary. But I can't help but think we are in a new era - tho' Trump is the effect not the cause. It is the era of horizontal information where individuals can broadcast and narrow receive.
Well I hope I'm wrong but let me get this on the record: Those who survive the next.four years may envy those who don't.
Absolutely timely words of caution. This is why I subscribe to Dan Gardner. This kind of read helps times that feel dark. History is full of times of breaking and hating, and eras emerge again of building and caring. Eras can only be known in hindsight.