New York Times columnist Ross Douthat says he began crafting this 2020/2021 book in 2014. He argues that we are stuck in a stagnant society that has lost its ability to reach for the future. Technological, space, business, economics, politics, ideologies, and cultural achievements in the arts, film and music have lost their dynamism. We are pictured as a weak shadow of 1945, 1965 or 1975.
He argues that stagnation eventually leads to decline or disaster. His preferred future contains “growth, innovation, aesthetic reinvention and religious ferment”. Any solution must contain “zeal, coherence, mysticism and futurism”. He outlines several possible paths to decline and further stagnation.
He also describes some potential routes to a renaissance. Modified Islam. African Christianity. Expanded Chinese influence. Massive African migration and impact on Europe. Illiberal democracies like Russia gain favor. Populism governs pragmatically. Local communities flourish in the communitarian model promoted by Patrick Deneen. Nationalism recovers its power. A revised global socialism. Pure scientism. Updated paganism or polytheism. A paradigm shift that makes religion a real option for educated elites, displacing the “materialist neo-Darwinian conception of nature”. A religious “great awakening” or new delivery mechanism. A merger of scientific and religious sensibilities that recognize our unique position as self-aware humans on planet earth.
Our columnist and critic evaluates the modern world much too negatively in my view. Despite challenges, the US and global economy is doing very well. It overcame the Great Recession and the Covid Pandemic. It is adjusting to Trump’s “tariff wars”. Growth is solid, trade is growing, employment is up. The business cycle is effectively managed. Productivity growth continues. These economies are resilient, reflected in stock market values. There are greater inequality and rent-seeking, which can be addressed politically.
Europe and other US allies are adjusting to Trump’s “America first” approach. They are adjusting to Russia’s threats and invasion of Ukraine.
Science progresses. Covid solutions. Weight control. Driverless cars. Smart phone capabilities. Artificial intelligence. Robotics. Modern satellite communications. Medicines. Fracking. Nanotechnologies. Green power. Electric cars. Blockchain and cryptocurrencies.
The ongoing integration of race, class, region and immigrants in the US continues. It’s not perfect but a solid majority embraces the multicultural US. Young Americans only know this positive world.
Many critics agree with Mr. Douthat that the arts and culture have stagnated. I’m not sure that marks “the end of civilization”. Today I have quick access to everything that has been offered for 100 years. We are culturally blessed.
https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/why-has-american-pop-culture-stagnated
https://www.honest-broker.com/p/are-we-living-in-a-time-of-cultural
The author invests several pages in analyzing Francis Fukuyama’s 1992 “end of history” claim. He agrees that the Western liberal democracies have fended off the BIG challenges of fascism and communism but notes that new and old critics have returned. He gives Fukuyama a fair treatment and notes his more recent focus on the role of “identity” in shaping political views.
Unfortunately, Mr. Douthat is not interested in refining “liberal democracy” as a solution to our alleged stagnation. He is critical of managerialism, technocracy and modern meritocracy. He sees it as inherently self-interested and narrow. I think that we have no choice but to invest in improving our historical “liberal democracy” framework.
I think the gap between science and the humanities remains even wider than it was in 1959 when CP Snow called out his educated colleagues. We need a way to connect science and religion, politics and people. The “structural” advantages of strong political, social and economic systems are not inherently opposed to human values. We should invest in closing this gap in our universities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Cultures
My followers know that I have become a “true believer” in the potential of “civility” to become formally defined and promoted as a shared cultural norm to support our political, social and economic institutions.
Solutions
I wholeheartedly agree with his two real religious solutions. The default paradigm today is “science versus religion” and “science alone is real”. There is significant scientific and philosophical evidence to overturn this current worldview.
Many of our current challenges exist because we have not revised our laws and political structures to adapt to modern wealth, amoral political actors and media capabilities.
We could choose to invest in economic and breakthrough scientific progress by making political choices.
We could choose to support the modern “therapeutic society” approach of encouraging every child to “live a great life today” in pursuit of their self-actualizing possibilities.
We could invest in improving the productivity of our lagging economic sectors: government, education, health care and not for profits.
We could revise our goals to emphasize quality as equal to quantity.
We could invest in promoting communities of all kinds, not just those local, total communities suggested by Patrick Deneen.
We could do a better job of outlining. defining and communicating to everyone our 5-part political spectrum of left, center-left, independent, center-right and right. Individuals rarely change. We are stuck with each other. How do we effectively structure our political, social and economic systems to accommodate these different views?
Summary
Douthat argues that we have stagnated on all dimensions. We need to find a way forward. I agree with 2 of his options and offer a few more possibilities.
Good News 