AI Hype is a Feature, not a Bug: Why We Cant Trust Big Tech With Our Agentic Future Keen On 2025-10-10 | Episode 2581: Sangeet Paul Choudary on the Winners and Losers of the AI Arms Racekeenon.substack.com/p/ai-hype-is-a-feature-not-a-bug-why?utm_source=youtube
AI Hype is a Feature, not a Bug: Why We Cant Trust Big Tech With Our Agentic Future Keen On 2025-10-10 | According to the platform economist Sangeet Paul Choudary (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sangeet_Paul_Choudary) , author of Reshuffle (amazon.com/Reshuffle-wins-restacks-knowledge-economy-ebook/dp/B0DTKW6NQV?ref_=ast_author_mpb) , today’s AI hype is a feature rather than a bug in Silicon Valley. It’s a deliberate mechanism to attract capital in an “attention-poor, capital-heavy economy” while distracting from the lack of short-term business results. So who will ultimately win and who will lose in today’s AI arms race? While Choudary predicts power will concentrate around infrastructure players like Nvidia and enterprise workflow companies like Microsoft and Google, he warns that OpenAI risks becoming “the Cisco of this revolution” unless it moves beyond the commoditizing model layer. More troubling, for Choudary, is AI’s societal impact. We cannot trust Big Tech with our “agentic future,” he cautions—particularly as technologies like OpenAI’s Pulse preview eliminate the last vestige of user agency that we still possess. While pessimistic about US and Chinese models built on data hoarding and state-backed monopolies, the Dubai-based Choudary sees promise in India’s stack experiment, where digital public infrastructure allows users to own their data and get paid when AI trains on it.1. The Algorithm Creates a New Class Divide The critical inequality today isn’t traditional capital vs. labor—it’s between those who work “above the algorithm” (designing systems, like Uber data scientists) and those working “below it” (controlled by systems, like Uber drivers whose rates and job access are algorithmically determined).2. AI Hype is a Feature, Not a Bug In an attention-poor, capital-heavy economy, hype serves as a mechanism to attract investment. Companies selling distant AGI narratives and engaging in circular deals (OpenAI-Nvidia-Microsoft-Oracle) are propping up valuations while actual business results remain uncertain. A market correction is “long overdue.”3. Power Will Concentrate at Two Layers of the AI Stack Winners will emerge at the infrastructure level (Nvidia for chips/inference) and the customer workflow level (likely Google or Microsoft with their enterprise relationships). The middle layer—the model itself—is already commoditizing. OpenAI risks becoming “the Cisco of this revolution” unless it successfully moves up to the workflow layer.4. We Can’t Trust Big Tech with Our “Agentic Future” Today we still have agency to click, even if our attention is manipulated. But as AI agents make decisions for us (like OpenAI’s Pulse preview), we surrender that agency entirely, enabling even more extraction. Current business models are built on data hoarding—adding agent technology on top eliminates user agency completely.5. Four Distinct Geopolitical AI Models Are Emerging The US favors private enterprise (increasingly intertwined with government), China lets innovation happen then absorbs it into state control, India is building digital public infrastructure where users own their data and get paid for AI training, and UAE is converting oil reserves into compute power to sell AI services globally.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
Springtime for Charlatans: How Grifters, Swindlers and Hucksters are Bamboozling the Media, the Mar Keen On 2025-10-09 | Quico Toro on AI Grift, QAnonsense, Evangelical Swindles and White House Hucksterismkeenon.substack.com/p/springtime-for-charlatans-how-grifters?utm_source=youtube
Springtime for Charlatans: How Grifters, Swindlers and Hucksters are Bamboozling the Media, the M... Keen On 2025-10-09 | It’s springtime for charlatans. At least according to Quico Toro, (substack.com/@quicotoro) coauthor (with my old friend Moises Naim) of Charlatans (amazon.com/Charlatans-Grifters-Swindlers-Hucksters-Bamboozle/dp/1541606515) , a new screed about how grifters, swindlers and hucksters are bamboozling the media, the markets and the masses. If you listen to Toro, you wouldn’t want to get out of bed in the morning. Everywhere - on our screens, in our churches, even in the White House - there lurk charlatans intent on stealing our souls. As you can tell from my rat-a-tat scepticism, I’m not totally convinced by such hysterical fearmongering. Though he’s probably right that social isolation and AI-powered scams are making us sitting ducks for scammers. Anyway, at least there’s no chapter about huckster podcasters in Charlatans. So you are safe here from bamboozlers of all stripes. 1. The Harm Standard Is Everything Quico’s core thesis: charlatans aren’t just persuasive people you disagree with - they leave a trail of destroyed lives. No harm = not a charlatan (even if you find them distasteful, like the astrology businesswoman he mentions).2. Your Deepest Beliefs Are Your Biggest Vulnerabilities Charlatans don’t create new beliefs - they identify what you already passionately believe in (religion, crypto, politics, health) and exploit that commitment to manipulate you. The stronger your conviction, the easier you are to con.3. Technology + Social Isolation = Charlatan Playground AI and algorithms can now identify and target “marks” with unprecedented precision. Combined with loneliness and screen-mediated relationships (no flesh-and-blood friends to reality-check you), we’re more vulnerable than ever.4. Not All Grifters Are Criminals Motivations vary: money, sex, power - the “dark triad.” Some are outright thieves (Madoff, SBF), others are narcissists or sexual predators using their influence. But they share antisocial personality traits and lack of remorse.5. Even Legitimate Movements Get Hijacked The Falwell Sr. vs Jr. example: sincere ideological movements (even ones you disagree with) can be credible, but charlatans infiltrate and weaponize them. Brexit, prosperity gospel, anti-vax - all started somewhere and got exploited.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
Navigating around Christopher Columbus: The Nine Lives of the Genoese Sailor Who Became Historys G Keen On 2025-10-08 | Episode 2579: Matthew Restall on the many lives and legacies of Christopher Columbuskeenon.substack.com/p/navigating-around-christopher-columbus?utm_source=youtube
Navigating around Christopher Columbus: The Nine Lives of the Genoese Sailor Who Became Historys... Keen On 2025-10-08 | Next Monday is Columbus Day. Or should it be Indigenous People’s Day? According to the historian Matthew Restall (matthewrestall.com) we should be celebrating both Columbus and Indigenous People on Monday. The author of the timely The Nine Lives of Christopher Columbus (wwnorton.com/books/9781324086932) , Restall places Genoa’s most famous sailor as a prisoner of history - endlessly protean to reflect each era’s changing values. The many lives of Columbus, then, is a mirror of how we have thought differently about him over the last 500 years. As history’s greatest saint and sinner, Christopher Columbus might be the ultimate Rorschach test. Tell me what you’ll be celebrating next Monday and I’ll tell you who you are. Happy hols!1. Columbus Was a “Manic Narcissist” Who Believed He Was God’s Agent Restall discovered Columbus wasn’t likable—he descended into believing he was divinely chosen and could even be found in the Old Testament. This grandiosity was partly his undoing as a colonial administrator.2. Columbus Failed as a Colonizer and Administrator Unlike the conquistadors who came after him, Columbus lacked political and diplomatic skills. He was “just a sailor”—son of a weaver, grandson of a cheesemaker—and Spanish authorities quickly sidelined him. He died in 1506, only 13 years after his first voyage, with a declining reputation.3. The Columbus Day Debate Is About Different Columbuses Italian-Americans defend a 19th/20th century “Italian-American Columbus”—a symbol of immigrant achievement—while Indigenous Peoples’ Day supporters condemn the “historic Columbus” who began a colonization process that killed 70-90% of indigenous populations within a century. These groups are talking past each other about entirely different figures.4. Conquistadors Were “Armed Entrepreneurs” Running Investment Companies Spanish conquistadors functioned like venture capital firms—assembling ships, soldiers, and supplies as investments, seeking returns through plunder and enslaved people, then winning authority positions to generate more profit while paying a 20% tax to the crown.5. Columbus’s One Success: Founding a Noble Dynasty That Still Exists Despite his failures, Columbus achieved his main ambition—establishing an aristocratic dynasty. The title “Admiral of the Ocean Sea” granted in 1493 is still held today by the 20th admiral, a Spanish naval officer and businessman named Don Cristóbal Colón.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
41 Years for a Crime He Didnt Commit: Gary Tylers Journey from Death Row to Freedom Keen On 2025-10-07 | Episode 2578: A True Story of Injustice, Defiance, and Hope in Louisiana's Bloodiest Prison keenon.substack.com/p/41-years-for-a-crime-he-didnt-commit?utm_source=youtube
41 Years for a Crime He Didnt Commit: Gary Tylers Journey from Death Row to Freedom Keen On 2025-10-07 | Last weekend, the English reggae band UB 40 played in the Orpheum in Los Angeles and included in the set their 1980 song “Tyler”. Tyler is guilty white judges said soWhat right do we got to say it’s not soTyler is guilty white judges said soWhat right do we got to say it’s not soTyler is guilty white judges said soWhat right do we got to say it’s not soTyler is guilty white judges said soWhat right do we got to say it’s not soIn the audience was the song’s muse Gary Tyler (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Tyler) who, as a sixteen year old in 1974, was put on death row for a crime he didn’t commit:Appeal to the governor, of Louisiana (genius.com/13310484/Ub40-tyler/Appeal-to-the-governor-of-louisiana-you-may-get-an-answer-the-process-is-slow-federal-court-won-too-much-to-open-hes-been-there-for-five-years-and-they-wont-let-him-go) You may get an answer the process is slow (genius.com/13310484/Ub40-tyler/Appeal-to-the-governor-of-louisiana-you-may-get-an-answer-the-process-is-slow-federal-court-won-too-much-to-open-hes-been-there-for-five-years-and-they-wont-let-him-go) Federal court won, too much to open (genius.com/13310484/Ub40-tyler/Appeal-to-the-governor-of-louisiana-you-may-get-an-answer-the-process-is-slow-federal-court-won-too-much-to-open-hes-been-there-for-five-years-and-they-wont-let-him-go) He’s been there for five years and they won’t let him go (genius.com/13310484/Ub40-tyler/Appeal-to-the-governor-of-louisiana-you-may-get-an-answer-the-process-is-slow-federal-court-won-too-much-to-open-hes-been-there-for-five-years-and-they-wont-let-him-go) This week, Tyler released his autobiography, Stitching Freedom (simonandschuster.co.uk/books/Stitching-Freedom/Gary-Tyler/9781668097342) , in which he tells the story of the 41 years he spent in Angola high security prison for his “crime”. Yes, the process was slow - shamefully slow. It’s the shockingly true story of injustice, defiance and hope in Louisiana’s bloodiest prison. Tyler is free now, living in Los Angeles, having successfully stitched his life together. He doesn’t seem to have forgiven the system for this injustice (why should he?), yet the one thing that 41 years in Angola clearly didn’t destroy was Gary Tyler’s humanity. So I guess there’s hope in this tragic story. 1. A 16-Year-Old Scapegoat for Racial Violence Gary Tyler was arrested at age 16 during a racial confrontation at a newly integrated Louisiana school in 1974. After a 13-year-old white boy was fatally shot during the chaos, police brutally beat Tyler to extract a confession he never gave, then charged him with first-degree murder despite no evidence linking him to the crime.2. Political Prisoners Saved His Life In Angola’s death row, Tyler found unexpected mentors - former Black Panthers and civil rights activists who recognized his case as part of systemic injustice. These older inmates taught him to channel his anger into education and activism, helping him write letters that would eventually bring national attention to his case through organizations like Amnesty International.3. Finding Purpose in America’s Bloodiest Prison Despite facing execution, Tyler transformed his imprisonment into service. He became president of multiple prison organizations and, most meaningfully, a hospice volunteer caring for dying inmates - including some of the very men who had mentored him. This work became his “sense of redemption” and healing.4. Justice Denied, Freedom Granted Tyler was never exonerated. Despite multiple appeals reaching the Supreme Court and three favorable parole board recommendations, politics kept him imprisoned. He was finally released in 2016 only because of new Supreme Court rulings against juvenile life sentences - not because the system admitted its mistake.5. Stitching a Life Back Together Tyler discovered quilting in prison, initially resisting it as “feminine” before recognizing it as both a way to help dying inmates leave something for their families and a metaphor for his own healing. Now a professional artist in Pasadena, he literally and figuratively pieces together a life that was torn apart, remaining optimistic that struggle against injustice must continue.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
Dont Be Yourself: Why the Cult of Authenticity Is Killing Not Just Your Career but Your Life Keen On 2025-10-06 | Episode 2578: Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic on Why Authenticity Is Overrated and What to Do Insteadkeenon.substack.com/p/dont-be-yourself-why-the-cult-of?utm_source=youtube
Dont Be Yourself: Why the Cult of Authenticity Is Killing Not Just Your Career but Your Life Keen On 2025-10-06 | Just be yourself many career coaches tell us. But for the psychologist and entrepreneur Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic (drtomas.com) , the reverse is true. Don’t Be Yourself (amazon.com/Dont-Be-Yourself-Authenticity-Overrated/dp/1647829836) (amazon.com/Dont-Be-Yourself-Authenticity-Overrated/dp/1647829836) Chamorro-Premuzic advises in his new book, arguing that authenticity Is overrated and what to do instead. Drawing from extensive behavioral science research, Chamorro-Premuzic contends that success comes not from unleashing your unfiltered self but from understanding where “the right to be you ends and your obligation to others begins.” Authenticity has not only become a privilege for the elite and a trap for everyone else, he argues, but increasingly impossible to distinguish from AI-generated fakery. So don’t be yourself, Chamorro-Premuzic suggests, in defiantly inauthentic advice for both our careers and our lives. 1. Strategic Self-Presentation Beats Radical HonestySuccess comes from “strategic impression management” rather than authentic self-expression. The person who confidently claims “I’ve done this a hundred times” gets the job over the honest candidate who admits they’ll need to learn.2. Authenticity Is a Luxury for the PowerfulThe more status and power you have, the less you need to care what others think. For everyone else, “telling women they can just be themselves” while incompetent male leaders act without restraint perpetuates inequality.3. Self-Delusion Can Be a Competitive Advantage“B**********g others will be a lot easier if you can b******t yourself first.” While self-awareness helps build competence, overconfidence often wins in systems that confuse confidence with competence—though this benefits individuals at society’s expense.4. AI Forces Us to Fake AuthenticityAs AI becomes better at mimicking humans, we’re paradoxically pressured to be more deliberately “human”—inserting typos in emails, swearing strategically, creating “artificial hallmarks of authenticity” to prove we’re not machines.5. Focus on Your Obligations to Others, Not Your Right to Self-ExpressionThe fundamental shift Chamorro-Premuzic advocates: stop asking “how can I be more myself?” and start asking “what do others find valuable?” Your freedom to be yourself ends where your responsibility to others begins.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
Two Freedoms and Two Americas: Barry Goldwater and Martin Luther Kings Incompatible Versions of Li Keen On 2025-10-05 | Episode 2578: Nicholas Buccola on the Two Freedoms Dividing the United Stateskeenon.substack.com/p/two-freedoms-and-two-americas-barry?utm_source=youtube
Two Freedoms and Two Americas: Barry Goldwater and Martin Luther Kings Incompatible Versions of ... Keen On 2025-10-05 | What unites America, it used to be said, is a common commitment to “freedom”. But in our disunited times, it's worth remembering that two incompatible versions of freedom have actually divided rather than brought the United States together. As the historian Nicholas Buccola (nicholasbuccola.com) notes in his intriguing new book One Man’s Freedom (nicholasbuccola.com/one-mans-freedom) , these competing freedoms are represented in the thinking of the two icons of modern American conservatism and liberalism: Barry Goldwater and Martin Luther King. For Goldwater, freedom meant liberation from government interference—the right to be left alone to pursue economic success without federal meddling. For King, it meant empowerment—ensuring people had genuine capacity to participate fully in society. And as Buccola demonstrates, these competing visions persist in today’s debates over everything from healthcare to voting rights. When conservatives champion ‘medical freedom’ to refuse vaccines while liberals demand ‘reproductive freedom’ through government-protected abortion access, they’re not just disagreeing on policy—they’re wielding incompatible definitions of freedom itself. When some see voter ID laws as protecting electoral freedom while others view them as destroying it, they’re replaying the Goldwater-King divide: Is freedom merely the absence of federal interference, or does it require active measures to ensure everyone can meaningfully participate? Two freedoms, two Americas—no wonder the United States now feels so bitterly divided. 1. Freedom Isn’t One ThingGoldwater championed “negative freedom” (freedom from government interference), while King advocated “positive freedom” (empowerment to actually participate in society). Both men claimed to seek “authentic liberalism,” but their visions were fundamentally incompatible. You can’t just say you’re “for freedom” without specifying which kind.2. Goldwater’s Consequential SilenceThroughout his career, Goldwater had numerous opportunities to speak out on civil rights from his libertarian perspective but repeatedly chose silence. His refusal to use what King called “the moral power” of leadership to support racial justice—even while claiming personal opposition to segregation—helped set a pattern for the modern conservative movement’s approach to race.3. The 1964 Pivot PointThe 1964 Republican Convention was a watershed moment when race and “extremism” tore the party apart. When Goldwater sided with the far right and voted against the Civil Rights Act in the name of “freedom,” it drove Black Republicans like George Parker from the party and reshaped American political coalitions in ways that persist today.4. Economics Was Central to the DivideKing saw Goldwater’s economic philosophy as almost as dangerous as his stance on civil rights. While Goldwater focused on protecting economic freedom from “big government,” King advocated for an economic bill of rights that would address inequality across racial lines. This wasn’t just about race—it was about whether economic empowerment is necessary for genuine freedom.5. These Divisions Persist in 2025The Goldwater-King debate isn’t historical trivia. Today’s arguments about the role of government, economic inequality, and racial justice still break along these same philosophical lines. When politicians invoke “freedom,” they’re usually choosing sides in this 60-year-old debate without acknowledging that their opponents are using the same word to mean something entirely different.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
The Uberification of Academia: Why Adjunct Professors are Living in their Cars Keen On 2025-10-05 | Episode 2578: Deepa Das Acevedo on the War on Tenurekeenon.substack.com/p/the-uberification-of-academia-why?utm_source=youtube
The Uberification of Academia: Why Adjunct Professors are Living in their Cars Keen On 2025-10-04 | We’ve done a couple (here (keenon.substack.com/p/the-true-cost-of-roadkill-cars-have) and here (keenon.substack.com/p/how-evil-big-car-has-killed-more) ) of shows recently about the war on cars. But we never discussed the connections, both literal and metaphorical, between the damage of “Big Car” and “Big University” . According to the tenured Emory law professor Deepa Das Acevedo (deepadasacevedo.com/about) , what she calls in her new book, The War on Tenure (cambridge.org/core/books/war-on-tenure/F0C73B0468206AC89C109768AA45C09A) , is really an attempt to transform the modern university into an academic version of Uber. By getting rid of tenure, Acevedo argues, academia is creating a new precariat of adjunct professors who are living in their cars. What she calls the “uberification” of academia is, so to speak, driving an assault not just on tenure, but on free thought and intellectual innovation. The war on tenure, then, is part of the broader neo-liberal project to replace full-time jobs with precarious labor. Academics - you have nothing to lose but your cars!1. The Charlie Kirk Fallout is a Watershed MomentIn just one month, an estimated 40-60 professors have been fired over social media posts about the assassination - with perhaps 10-15 being tenured faculty. This represents potentially half the number of academic freedom-related terminations that occurred over the entire previous 20-year period (2000-2020).2. Rich Universities Are Leading the Race to the BottomContrary to expectations, it’s not cash-strapped colleges but wealthy universities with substantial endowments that are most aggressively replacing tenure-track positions with contingent adjunct labor - choosing to spend their resources elsewhere while casualizing their core academic workforce.3. Academic Job Markets Are Essentially MonopolisticThe entire state of Georgia has only 5-6 positions for a labor law professor. This extreme scarcity means academics can’t simply “get another job” like workers in other industries - making job security through tenure essential for attracting people to spend 8-10 years training for these positions.4. The “Lazy Professor” Myth is Unsupported by DataResearch shows tenure doesn’t reduce productivity - highly productive scholars remain productive after tenure, while those who did minimum work continue at that level. People become academics for reasons beyond job security, contradicting the stereotype of post-tenure retirement.5. Academic Precarity Has Reached Crisis LevelsAdjunct professors are literally living in cars while teaching classes. When academics lose stable employment, they typically exit the profession entirely rather than finding another academic position, creating a brain drain that threatens the future of higher education and research.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
How to Lose Loudly: What the Left can Learn from the NRA Keen On 2025-10-04 | Episode 2577: Michael Brownstein on how anyone can create social changekeenon.substack.com/p/how-to-lose-loudly-what-the-left?utm_source=youtube
How to Lose Loudly: What the Left can Learn from the NRA Keen On 2025-10-04 | One of the most painful lessons of the Kirk assassination is that conservatives are running rings around progressives in political mobilization - especially of young Americans. So how to make the left relevant in America again? For the philosopher Michael Brownstein (https://www.gc.cuny.edu/people/michael-brownstein) , co-author of Somebody Should Do Something (https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262049788/somebody-should-do-something/) , progressives need to learn to lose both cleverly and loudly. And they can learn from NRA on this. Despite holding positions unpopular with most Americans, Brownstein acknowledges that the NRA created a powerful social identity around gun ownership and leveraged it for decades of legislative victories through masterful political strategy and organization. Drawing from social science research on collective action, Brownstein argues that highly theatrical defeats—like the recent Texas Democrats’ walkout or John Lewis’ bloody fate on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in 1965—can catalyze change by forcing opponents into untenable positions. The key isn’t winning every battle, but making individual actions visible enough to shift social norms and inspire others, especially the young, to join the cause. So lose often and lose loudly, Brownstein says. It’s a winning strategy. 1. Individual Actions Are Social Signals, Not Just Drops in the Bucket When you install solar panels or drive an electric car, the impact isn’t just environmental—it’s social. Research shows your neighbors are far more likely to adopt these behaviors after seeing you do it. Stop calculating carbon molecules; start thinking about social influence.2. The “Do-Gooder’s Dilemma” Is a Corporate Invention From “jaywalking” (coined by 1920s car companies) to “personal carbon footprints” (popularized by BP), industries have systematically shifted responsibility for systemic problems onto individuals. Recognizing this manipulation is the first step to effective collective action.3. Losing Loudly Can Be More Powerful Than Winning Quietly The Texas Democrats knew they’d lose their walkout fight. John Lewis knew he’d be beaten at Selma. But theatrical defeats that force opponents to reveal their brutality or absurdity can shift public opinion more effectively than quiet procedural victories.4. Study Your Enemies’ Playbook The NRA succeeded for decades despite holding unpopular positions by creating a powerful social identity around gun ownership. Progressives should learn from these organizing tactics rather than dismissing them.5. Beware the “Anti-Incrementalism Bias” Revolutionary change like Prohibition often fails because it lacks public buy-in. Lasting progress—like Social Security—comes from incremental victories that build over time. Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
More Than Chinatown: Bruce Lee and the Invention of Asian American Identity Keen On 2025-10-03 | Episode 2576: Jeff Chang on the Making of Asian Americakeenon.substack.com/p/more-than-chinatown-bruce-lee-and?utm_source=youtube
More Than Chinatown: Bruce Lee and the Invention of Asian American Identity Keen On 2025-10-03 | “Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown,” were, of course, the closing words from Polanski’s 1974 movie, Chinatown. But the point of Jeff Chang (jeffchang.net) ’s new biography of Bruce Lee, Water Mirror Echo (jeffchang.net/water-mirror-echo) , is that by 1973, when Lee died, Asian America was more than just Chinatown. Lee made Asian America, Chang argues, by giving Asian Americans dignity. Chang shows how Lee’s journey from segregated Seattle and San Francisco neighborhoods to global stardom paralleled the rise of Asian American political consciousness. His films weren’t just action movies but anti-colonial spectacles - kicking down “No Chinese and Dogs” signs, fighting for workers against bosses, defending communities against gentrification. After Bruce Lee, chinatown became more, so much more, than just chinatown.1. Lee was an “anchor baby” who embodied the immigrant struggle Born in San Francisco in 1940 during Chinese Exclusion, Lee lived in segregated neighborhoods and learned firsthand what it meant to be a racialized minority - making him a powerful symbol for those Trump-era immigration debates Chang references.2. His movies were explicitly political, not just action films From labor solidarity in The Big Boss to anti-colonialism in Fist of Fury to fighting gentrification in Way of the Dragon, Lee’s films consistently championed underdogs against oppressors.3. Lee’s rise paralleled the birth of “Asian American” identity Just as the term “Asian American” emerged in Berkeley in 1968, Lee was transforming from Hollywood sidekick to global hero, giving form to a new political consciousness that refused second-class status.4. Hollywood’s racism forced Lee to find stardom in Asia After losing the Kung Fu role to David Carradine in yellowface, Lee had to return to Hong Kong to be seen as a leading man - becoming Asia’s biggest star in six months.5. Hip-hop embraced Lee through shared spaces of segregation Inner-city theaters showed both Blaxploitation and kung fu films to the same audiences, creating an unexpected solidarity between Black and Asian communities that continues through artists like Wu-Tang Clan.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
The AI Pioneer Who Chose Purpose Over Profit: Jim Fruchterman on Why Big Tech Cant Be Trusted with Keen On 2025-10-02 | Episode 2575: Why Philanthropy—Not Big Tech—Should Design Our Futurekeenon.substack.com/p/the-ai-pioneer-who-chose-purpose?utm_source=youtube
The AI Pioneer Who Chose Purpose Over Profit: Jim Fruchterman on Why Big Tech Cant Be Trusted wi... Keen On 2025-10-02 | Back in 1990, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur called Jim Fruchterman (fruchterman.org) chose purpose over profit. In his new book, Technology for Good (https://mitpressbookstore.mit.edu/book/9780262050975) , Fruchterman explains how nonprofit leaders like him are using software and data to solve our most pressing social problems. Thirty five years ago, when his investors vetoed a reading machine for the blind because the market was only $1 million annually, Fruchterman walked away from his $25 million-funded AI company to start his first nonprofit. Today, he’s still on the front line of the battle to show that technology’s greatest potential lies not in making billionaires richer, but in serving the 90% of humanity that big tech conveniently ignores.1. When profit and purpose clash, profit usually wins Fruchterman argues that when companies face a choice between social good and making money, they “pretty much always pick making more.” His own experience—investors vetoing a reading machine for the blind despite having the technology ready—exemplifies this. Even OpenAI, which started with a nonprofit mission, ultimately flipped to prioritize profit when Sam Altman was briefly fired then reinstated.2. The nonprofit sector is 15 years behind in technology adoption While companies like Uber and banks have essentially become software companies, most nonprofits are still operating with outdated technology. This creates what Fruchterman calls a “target-rich environment” for improvement—nonprofits don’t need cutting-edge AI to transform their operations, just the basic data and software tools that for-profit businesses mastered years ago.3. Effective altruism has gone “out of control” Some philanthropists focus so narrowly on measurable impact that they dismiss causes like women’s rights or education as “immoral” investments compared to deworming programs. Fruchterman advocates for diversity in philanthropic approaches, arguing that the complexity of global problems requires varied solutions, not just those with the cleanest metrics.4. U.S. foreign aid primarily benefits Americans Contrary to isolationist arguments, 80% of U.S. foreign aid money goes to American staff and American products. Cutting aid doesn’t help American farmers—it just leaves their grain piling up in silos. Fruchterman sees nonprofit work as “market development capital for the capitalist system,” turning aid recipients into future customers.5. Mental health represents AI’s most promising social application Within five years, Fruchterman believes AI could revolutionize mental health support—not because the technology is revolutionary, but because “we’ll never have enough people to help solve our mental health issues.” While big tech’s algorithms have exacerbated mental health problems for profit, the same tools could be redesigned to provide accessible support at scale.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
World Enemy Number One: Nazi Germanys Obsession with Judeo-Bolshevism Keen On 2025-10-01 | Episode 2574: Jochen Hellbeck on Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, and the Fate of the Jewskeenon.substack.com/p/world-enemy-number-one-nazi-germanys?utm_source=youtube
World Enemy Number One: Nazi Germanys Obsession with Judeo-Bolshevism Keen On 2025-10-01 | It’s not exactly news that the Nazis didn’t like the Jews. But according to the Rutgers historian Jochen Hellbeck (https://history.rutgers.edu/people/faculty/details/161-hellbeck-jochen) , author of World Enemy Number One (penguinrandomhouse.com/books/742338/world-enemy-no-1-by-jochen-hellbeck) , the Nazi obsession went so far as to believe that the Soviet Union was owned and operated by a global cabal of Jews. And so, Hellbeck argues, it was not the Western powers but Communist Russia that Nazi Germany viewed as an existential threat—in fact, “World Enemy No. 1.” Jewish revolutionaries, the Nazis believed, had seized power in 1917 and were preparing the Soviet state to destroy Germany and the world. This paranoid delusion drove Nazi Germany’s most catastrophic decision: launching Operation Barbarossa in 1941. While Hitler made tactical alliances and fought on multiple fronts, Hellbeck demonstrates through his meticulous archival research that the destruction of “Judeo-Bolshevism” remained the Nazis’ primary ideological mission. Drawing on overlooked Soviet sources, including war correspondent Ilya Ehrenburg’s writings, Hellbeck shows how this twisted worldview shaped not just propaganda but military strategy, ultimately leading to both the Holocaust and Germany’s catastrophic defeat on the Eastern Front.1. The Nazis saw “Judeo-Bolshevism” as one unified threat The Nazis genuinely believed Soviet communism was a Jewish conspiracy for world domination. They conflated Russians, Bolsheviks, and Jews into a single enemy - viewing Karl Marx’s Jewish heritage as proof that communism itself was a Jewish plot to destroy Germany.2. This obsession drove Nazi military strategy, not just propaganda Hitler’s decision to invade the Soviet Union wasn’t merely opportunistic. German military planning for attacking the USSR, including detailed preparations for different rail gauges and propaganda leaflets, began in the mid-1930s - showing this was a long-term ideological priority, not a tactical decision.3. Soviet sources deserve serious historical consideration Western historiography has often dismissed Soviet wartime accounts as propaganda. But Hellbeck’s research, particularly examining war correspondent Ilya Ehrenburg’s work against German documents, shows these Soviet sources accurately documented Nazi atrocities and mindsets without fabrication.4. Ordinary Germans, not just the SS, committed atrocities The Wehrmacht’s brutality on the Eastern Front wasn’t limited to special units. Hellbeck found that whenever German soldiers felt threatened, they defaulted to extreme racial violence - a pattern that intensified as the Red Army approached Germany in 1944-45.5. The war’s memory continues shaping current conflicts The different ways Eastern and Western Ukraine remembered WWII (Soviet liberation vs. Soviet occupation) contributed to the country’s political divisions. Putin’s Russia still invokes the “Great Patriotic War” to justify current actions, showing how WWII’s contested legacy remains politically explosive.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
The True Cost of Roadkill: Cars Have Caused 60 to 80 Million Deaths in the Last 100 Years Keen On 2025-09-30 | Episode 2573: Henrietta Moore and Arthur Kay unveil our toxic relationship with carskeenon.substack.com/p/the-true-cost-of-roadkill-cars-have?utm_source=youtube
The True Cost of Roadkill: Cars Have Caused 60 to 80 Million Deaths in the Last 100 Years Keen On 2025-09-30 | The numbers are mind blowing. According to Roadkill (wiley.com/en-us/Roadkill%3A+Unveiling+the+True+Cost+of+Our+Toxic+Relationship+with+Cars-p-9781394296002) (wiley.com/en-us/Roadkill%3A+Unveiling+the+True+Cost+of+Our+Toxic+Relationship+with+Cars-p-9781394296002) authors Henrietta Moore (henriettalmoore.com/road-kill) and Arthur Kay (linkedin.com/in/akay1111/?originalSubdomain=uk) , cars have killed more people than both world wars combined. That’s how toxic our relationship with cars has been over the last century, they argue. The UN figures they cite—60 to 80 million direct deaths since the automobile’s invention—don’t even include premature deaths from air pollution or the millions seriously injured. Yet we’ve become “car blind,” Moore and Kay contend, unable to see how we’ve surrendered 80% of urban public space to vehicles that sit idle 96% of the time, creating what they call a hidden “car industrial complex” that reshapes cities in its image. So what to do? They advocate for “choice not obligation”—redesigning cities so people can drive if they want but aren’t forced to. They point to successful experiments from Barcelona’s superblocks to Dallas’s highway cap parks, where reclaimed streets have actually increased business revenue by up to 34% in some cases. Their goal isn’t to ban cars but to stop letting them dominate every aspect of urban planning and life.1. The Deadly Math of “Car Blindness” Cars have directly killed 60-80 million people since their invention—more than WWI and WWII combined. Yet we’ve normalized this death toll and become “car blind” to how thoroughly automobiles dominate our lives, with 80% of urban public space dedicated to vehicles that sit unused 96% of the time.2. Electric and Self-Driving Cars Aren’t Silver Bullets Moore and Kay argue that EVs and autonomous vehicles like Waymo don’t solve the fundamental problem: they’re still cars taking up urban space. Plus, EVs bring their own issues—from lithium extraction devastating places like Chile’s Atacama Desert to the question of whether electricity generation is actually clean.3. “Choice Not Obligation” - A New Freedom Framework The authors aren’t advocating car bans but rather redesigning cities so driving becomes optional rather than mandatory. They argue true 21st-century freedom means being able to walk to school safely, access nearby shops, and move through cities without car dependence—not just the 20th-century freedom to drive anywhere.4. Global South Solutions Leading the Way Surprisingly, innovations aren’t coming from Copenhagen but from places like Nairobi’s matatu system (on-demand informal transit) and Dallas’s highway “cap parks.” These demonstrate that car reduction isn’t just for wealthy European cities but can work across diverse economic contexts.5. Follow the Money - It Actually Works When done properly, reducing car dominance boosts business. Times Square restaurants saw revenue jump 34% after pedestrianization. The key is integrated planning with communities rather than top-down mandates, ensuring alternatives exist before removing parking.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
Is that $320,000 College Degree Really Worth It? The President of Brandeis on why Colleges Must Ada Keen On 2025-09-29 | Episode 2572: Arthur Levine on Higher Education's Past, Present, and Uncertain Futurekeenon.substack.com/p/is-that-320000-college-degree-really?utm_source=youtube
Is that $320,000 College Degree Really Worth It? The President of Brandeis on why Colleges Must A... Keen On 2025-09-29 | It’s the $320,000 question both parents and students are asking themselves: Is that four-year liberal arts degree really worth it? According to Brandeis University President Arthur Levine, (https://www.brandeis.edu/president/biography/index.html) it’s a question they should, indeed, be asking. In his co-authored book The Great Upheaval (https://www.press.jhu.edu/books/title/12757/great-upheaval?srsltid=AfmBOooQm6TEZk6Ut4Z0icicdSk6SVtNIgYTlCoYm-QQi3ylyMYBenBT) , (https://www.press.jhu.edu/books/title/12757/great-upheaval?srsltid=AfmBOooQm6TEZk6Ut4Z0icicdSk6SVtNIgYTlCoYm-QQi3ylyMYBenBT) Levine argues that the United States is experiencing a profound transformation not seen since the Industrial Revolution—when America’s classical colleges adapted to meet the needs of an emerging industrial economy. So what, exactly, does that mean for a useful liberal arts education today? Should students really invest their time in women’s studies in our AI age of Claude and ChatGPT?1. America is experiencing its second great transformation in historyLevine argues we’re in a shift from national analog industrial economies to global digital knowledge economies—comparable only to the Industrial Revolution. This creates massive winners and losers, with educational level becoming the primary dividing line in society.2. The $320K liberal arts degree must prove its worthTraditional liberal arts education isn’t enough anymore. Levine is reforming Brandeis’s curriculum to combine “durable life skills” (critical thinking, communication) with practical “career skills,” creating a second transcript to show employers what graduates can actually do.3. Higher education is splitting into two unequal systemsWe’re developing one system for the wealthy (traditional campus experience) and another for working people (online education). Only 20% of college students now fit the traditional model of 18-24 year-olds attending full-time on campus.4. Universities are under political attack because they represent changeThe populist backlash against “elite” institutions isn’t really about ideology—it’s about anger from those left behind by economic transformation. Universities are being scapegoated as symbols of a changing world that has hurt many working-class Americans.5. Federal policies are actively damaging higher educationInternational student visa denials, research funding cuts based on forbidden words, and threats of deportation for student activists are isolating America and weakening universities’ capacity to innovate and compete globally.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe (keenon.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_2)
The Dark Passions Driving American Politics: Why Liberals Must Acknowledge Anger, Fear, and the Lus Keen On 2025-09-28 | Episode 2571: William Galston on How Trump's Old Testament Politics of Retribution Exposes the Limited Power of Liberal Thoughtkeenon.substack.com/p/the-dark-passions-driving-american?utm_source=youtube
