Keen On America

Don’t say we weren’t warned. Project 2025, the 2022 Heritage Foundation’s 900-page policy blueprint, unambiguously plotted out the strategy of the second Trump administration. As Atlantic staff writer David A. Graham makes clear in his refreshingly brief The Project, the Heritage Foundation document is an verbose summary of Trump 2.0’s ambition to reshape government by strengthening executive power, promote traditional family structures, eliminate climate regulations, attack DEI initiatives, restructure the civil service and (gasp) outlaw pornography. Graham sees this project as both radical in its methods yet traditional in its values, produced by isolationists intent on resurrecting their fantasy of small town America.

Five Point Takeaway

* Project 2025 was created by former Trump administration officials under the Heritage Foundation to provide a comprehensive policy agenda and staffing strategy for a second Republican presidency.

* Despite Trump publicly distancing himself from the project during his campaign, many of its policies are now being implemented, particularly through executive orders and civil service reforms.

* The project emphasizes traditional Christian values, binary gender definitions, nuclear families, and aims to use government power to promote these views through various policies and incentives.

* On climate, the project seeks to eliminate climate research, end climate-related regulations, and promote fossil fuel extraction, prioritizing economic growth over environmental concerns.

* Graham believes Democrats could learn from the project's systematic, forward-thinking approach rather than remaining reactive, as Republicans are reshaping government in ways that may be difficult to reverse.

Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

We are all Waymo Democrats now. That Was the Week’s Keith Teare and I appropriate Thomas Friedman’s controversial new term to dream of an American high tech future. Keith and I also talk about last week’s interview with Peter Leyden, a founding member of the Waymo Democracy club. Keith might not be altogether convinced by Leyden’s thesis about the inevitability of America’s 80 year historical cycles, but he nonetheless acknowledges that the Democrats need to “work backwards” to establish a clear vision of a radically reinvented 21st United States.

Five Key Takeaways

* Peter Layden's optimism about America's reinvention through an 80-year cycle is met with a degree of skepticism from Keith Teare, who believes the challenges of economic reinvention are too great without massive systemic change.

* Thomas Friedman's concept of "Waymo Democrats" represents politicians focused on economic progress and innovation rather than cultural wars, which both hosts see as a potential path forward.

* Despite previous skepticism, Google posted excellent financial results with a 43% profit increase driven by search, showing successful AI integration despite competition from companies like Perplexity.

* YouTube, celebrating its 20th anniversary, is highlighted as Google's most successful acquisition, transforming from a small startup demo at a TechCrunch barbecue to dominating global entertainment.

* Keith Teare emphasizes that entrepreneurs must "work backwards from the outcome they want" rather than focusing on day-to-day management, establishing a clear vision that guides development toward a desired end state.

Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

A year ago, the great American historian Adam Hochschild came on KEEN ON AMERICA to discuss American Midnight, his best selling account of the crisis of American democracy after World War One. A year later, is history really repeating itself in today’s crisis of American democracy? For Hochschild, there are certainly parallels between the current political situation in the US and post WW1 America. Describing how wartime hysteria and fear of communism led to unprecedented government repression, including mass imprisonment for political speech, vigilante violence, and press censorship. Hochschild notes eery similarities to today’s Trump's administration. He expresses concern about today’s threats to democratic institutions while suggesting the importance of understanding Trump supporters' grievances and finding ways to bridge political divides.

Five Key Takeaways

* The period of 1917-1921 in America saw extreme government repression, including imprisoning people for speech, vigilante violence, and widespread censorship—what Hochschild calls America's "Trumpiest" era before Trump.

* American history shows recurring patterns of nativism, anti-immigrant sentiment, and scapegoating that politicians exploit during times of economic or social stress.

* The current political climate shows concerning parallels to this earlier period, including intimidation of opposition, attacks on institutions, and the widespread acceptance of authoritarian tendencies.

* Hochschild emphasizes the importance of understanding the grievances and suffering that lead people to support authoritarian figures rather than dismissing their concerns.

* Despite current divisions, Hochschild believes reconciliation is possible and necessary, pointing to historical examples like President Harding pardoning Eugene Debs after Wilson imprisoned him.

Full Transcript

Andrew Keen: Hello, everybody. We recently celebrated our 2500th edition of Keen On. Some people suggest I'm mad. I think I probably am to do so many shows. Just over a little more than a year ago, we celebrated our 2000th show featuring one of America's most distinguished historians, Adam Hochschild. I'm thrilled that Adam is joining us again a year later. He's the author of "American Midnight, The Great War, A Violent Peace, and Democracy's Forgotten Crisis." This was his last book. He's the author of many other books. He is now working on a book on the Great Depression. He's joining us from his home in Berkeley, California. Adam, to borrow a famous phrase or remix a famous phrase, a year is a long time in American history.

Adam Hochschild: That's true, Andrew. I think this past year, or actually this past 100 days or so has been a very long and very difficult time in American history that we all saw coming to some degree, but I don't think we realized it would be as extreme and as rapid as it has been.

Andrew Keen: Your book, Adam, "American Midnight, A Great War of Violent Peace and Democracy's Forgotten Crisis," is perhaps the most prescient warning. When you researched that you were saying before we went live that your books usually take you between four and five years, so you couldn't really have planned for this, although I guess you began writing and researching American Midnight during the Trump 1.0 regime. Did you write it as a warning to something like is happening today in America?

Adam Hochschild: Well, I did start writing it and did most of the work on it during Trump's first term in office. So I was very struck by the parallels. And they're in plain sight for everybody to see. There are various dark currents that run through this country of ours. Nativism, threats to deport troublemakers. Politicians stirring up violent feelings against immigrants, vigilante violence, all those things have been with us for a long time. I've always been fascinated by that period, 1917 to 21, when they surged to the surface in a very nasty way. That was the subject of the book. Naturally, I hoped we wouldn't have to go through anything like that again, but here we are definitely going through it again.

Andrew Keen: You wrote a lovely piece earlier this month for the Washington Post. "America was at its Trumpiest a hundred years ago. Here's how to prevent the worst." What did you mean by Trumpiest, Adam? I'm not sure if you came up with that title, but I know you like the term. You begin the essay. What was the Trumpiest period in American life before Donald Trump?

Adam Hochschild: Well, I didn't invent the word, but I certainly did use it in the piece. What I meant by that is that when you look at this period just over 100 years ago, 1917 to 1921, Woodrow Wilson's second term in office, two things happened in 1917 that kicked off a kind of hysteria in this country. One was that Wilson asked the American Congress to declare war on Germany, which it promptly did, and when a country enters a major war, especially a world war, it sets off a kind of hysteria. And then that was redoubled some months later when the country received news of the Russian Revolution, and many people in the establishment in America were afraid the Russian Revolution might come to the United States.

So, a number of things happened. One was that there was a total hysteria against all things German. There were bonfires of German books all around the country. People would take German books out of libraries, schools, college and university libraries and burn them in the street. 19 such bonfires in Ohio alone. You can see pictures of it on the internet. There was hysteria about the German language. I heard about this from my father as I was growing up because his father was a Jewish immigrant from Germany. They lived in New York City. They spoke German around the family dinner table, but they were terrified of doing so on the street because you could get beaten up for that. Several states passed laws against speaking German in public or speaking German on the telephone. Eminent professors declared that German was a barbaric language. So there was that kind of hysteria.

Then as soon as the United States declared war, Wilson pushed the Espionage Act through Congress, this draconian law, which essentially gave the government the right to lock up anybody who said something that was taken to be against the war. And they used this law in a devastating way. During those four years, roughly a thousand Americans spent a year or more in jail and a much larger number, shorter periods in jail solely for things that they wrote or said. These were people who were political prisoners sent to jail simply for something they wrote or said, the most famous of them was Eugene Debs, many times the socialist candidate for president. He'd gotten 6% of the popular vote in 1912 and in 1918. For giving an anti-war speech from a park bandstand in Ohio, he was sent to prison for 10 years. And he was still in prison two years after the war ended in November, 1920, when he pulled more than 900,000 votes for president from his jail cell in the federal penitentiary in Atlanta.

So that was one phase of the repression, political prisoners. Another was vigilante violence. The government itself, the Department of Justice, chartered a vigilante group, something called the American Protective League, which went around roughing up people that it thoug...

Adam Becker’s new critique of Silicon Valley More Everything Forever should probably be entitled Less Nothing Never. The science journalist accuses Silicon Valley overlords like Elon Musk and Sam Altman of promoting exaggerated dangers and promises about AI. Becker argues that these apocalyptic fears of superintelligent AI are science fictional fantasies rather than scientifically reasoned arguments. Becker acknowledges large language models have some value but believes their capabilities are overhyped. He criticizes tech billionaires for pursuing AI dominance rather than addressing real problems like climate change, and believes they are also peddling deeply troubling ideologies like eugenics. Silicon Valley is promising us more of everything forever, Becker warns, but the end result will actually be more human misery and degradation.

5 Key Takeaways

* Becker believes claims about existential risks from superintelligent AI are unfounded and based on flawed arguments, including misconceptions about intelligence as a monolithic, measurable trait.

* He identifies concerning connections between Silicon Valley AI rhetoric and eugenicist ideas, particularly in discussions about intelligence and population concerns from figures like Elon Musk and Marc Andreessen.

* While acknowledging current AI systems have some value, Becker argues they're "solutions in search of a problem" with an ecological footprint that may outweigh their benefits.

* Becker criticizes tech leaders for pursuing AI dominance instead of directing their resources toward solving urgent problems like climate change.

* Rather than worrying about future superintelligence, Becker suggests we focus on how existing AI systems are being used, their resource consumption, and their potential for misuse.

Adam Becker is a science journalist with a PhD in astrophysics. He has written for the New York Times, the BBC, NPR, Scientific American, New Scientist, Quanta, and other publications. His first book, What Is Real?, was a New York Times Book Review Editor’s Choice and was long-listed for the PEN Literary Science Writing Award. He has been a science journalism fellow at the Santa Fe Institute and a science communicator in residence at the Simons Institute for the Theory of Computing. He lives in California.

Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.

Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

In contrast with yesterday’s guest, the Paris based Financial Times writer Simon Kuper, the newspaper’s London based columnist Jemima Kelly hasn’t quite given up on the United States of America. Trump, she suggests, might be the end of the line for the MAGA movement. Indeed, like another recent guest on the show, former Wired editor Peter Leyden, Kelly suggests that the Republicans might be flirting with the destruction of their brand for the next political generation. Unlike Leyden, however, Kelly isn’t particularly bullish on the future of the Democratic Party, arguing that there is a desperate need for a formal national opposition to Trump’s MAGA Republicanism. And in contrast with Leyden, Kelly doesn’t see much of an opposition - moral or otherwise - from seemingly spineless tech billionaires like Mark Zuckerberg or Marc Andreessen.

5 Key Takeaways

* Kelly is most concerned about Trump's "utter disregard for the legal system and the kind of lawlessness" that characterizes his second administration.

* She believes Democrats lack cohesive opposition structure, noting America could benefit from a shadow cabinet system like the UK's to provide clear alternative voices.

* Kelly predicts "MAGA is going to finish with Trump" as there's no viable successor who can match his charisma and stage presence.

* She criticizes tech leaders like Mark Zuckerberg for capitulating to Trump, questioning how they justify abandoning values for business interests.

* Kelly argues that maintaining moral principles is crucial for Democrats, as sinking to Trump's level only erodes institutional trust, which has already been significantly damaged.

Full Transcript

Andrew Keen: Hello, everybody. It is Wednesday, April the 23rd, 2025. Headlines today remain dominated by Donald Trump. Every story above the fold, at least above the digital fold in the Financial Times, seems to be about him. Yesterday, we talked to FT columnist Simon Cooper, a Dutchman living in Paris, who had an interesting piece earlier this week suggesting Americans should move to Europe, indicating the American dream was over. Cooper seemed to relish this news. Today, we're talking to another FT columnist, Jemima Kelly. She's based in northeast London, in Hackney, and she's talking to us today from the FT offices in the heart of London City. Jemima, what's your take on Simon's column this week? Is it indeed time for most Americans to move to Europe?

Jemima Kelly: I thought it was a very interesting column. I'm particularly interested in this idea that you discussed on your show about the brain drain that has been going in the direction of America and that might start to come back in the other direction, which I hadn't really properly considered before in those terms. But I must say that I'm not really a fan of encouraging people to all be digital nomads. He's actually followed it up with a piece today about how to be a digital nomad in Paris. I'm not really a fan of that kind of lifestyle because I think that it means people aren't particularly invested in their local communities, and I think it makes a bit of a crappy neighborhood if everyone is just working their own jobs. The dream of earning a US salary while working remotely living in Europe—I'm just like, please don't do that because then we're just importing inequality.

Andrew Keen: Although to be fair, was Simon actually saying that?

Jemima Kelly: I think he did say that the ultimate life, the ultimate arbitrage was doing that. And it's true, it is the ultimate arbitrage. It's just not one that I would particularly want people to pursue. It's like the Airbnb culture—it's destroyed a lot of cities and priced out local people, meaning certain cities you visit have no locals, just tourists, which is quite crap as a tourist.

Andrew Keen: I guess the other critique of Simon's piece, which is an extension of yours, is for Americans who don't like Trump—and there are many, including myself—it's not time to move to Europe. It's not time to retreat. It is time to stay and fight and try to change America. So there's no reason why you have to shift. Jemima, you're a columnist at what you call on your X account "Friends of the Deep State" (FT). I'm using you as the voice of the European deep state. What's the take from London on Trump on April 23, 2025? It's so hard to make any sense of it. In a meta sense, in a structural sense, what's your take on what's happening?

Jemima Kelly: I'm going to answer that in three parts. First, the "Friends of the Deep State" is obviously a reference to Liz Truss, who referred to the FT as the deep state.

Andrew Keen: I want to come on to Truss later, another rather clownish character, your version of Donald Trump.

Jemima Kelly: Yes, Britain's proudest export. Second, I would probably not want to speak for Europe or Britain. Maybe I can start by saying what I think the mood is.

Andrew Keen: You live in Hackney in northeast London, so maybe you can speak on behalf of Hackney. What's the take on Trump from Hackney?

Jemima Kelly: Just utter dismay. And I mean, I would say that's probably the mood I'm getting, even from people who thought there was too much hyperbole used about Trump in the run-up to his election. I didn't think comparisons to Hitler were particularly helpful.

Andrew Keen: You're not alone. We've had that conversation many times on the show. I strongly agree with you.

Jemima Kelly: So while there were people who were very hysterical about the idea of a Trump 2.0 being worse than the first time, I think so far, it does seem kind of worse, doesn't it?

Andrew Keen: I'm asking you.

Jemima Kelly: I would say there is a sense that things are quite scary at the moment. I think what I personally find most worrying, and that many balanced people are talking about, is the utter disregard for the courts and the rule of law. I was amazed looking at Truth Social earlier. I saw a post from Trump about an alleged MS-13 gang member.

Andrew Keen: The Venezuelan who was illegally extradited or seized and taken to El Salvador.

Jemima Kelly: I think this guy is actually Salvadoran. Trump has posted a picture of an alleged knuckle tattoo with four symbols which some people have extrapolated to mean MS-13. It's very obviously just computer-generated text superimposed on the image. Trump has posted it and appears to believe this is actually tattooed onto the man's knuckles, using that as justification. I think the utter disregard for the legal system and the lawlessness of Trump 2.0 is for me the most disturbing aspect because where does that end? It's just utter chaos.

I might write this week about how Trump sees the world as just deal-making and transactions. The ends will always justify the means. He's openly saying he's going to keep pushing as hard as he can to get what he wants. But his followers, who are constantly rushing to justify everything he does, including his vice president, are glorifying the means themselves, which Trump himself doesn't even really believe in. People are willing to take what he says at face value and make it happen, like Vance going to Greenland on this supposed visit.

It’s official. The American Dream is dead. And it’s been resurrected in Europe where, according to the FT columnist Simon Kuper, disillusioned Americans should relocate. Compared with the United States, Kuper argues, Europe offers the three key metrics of a 21st century good life: “four years more longevity, higher self-reported happiness and less than half the carbon emissions per person”. So where exactly to move? The Paris based Kuper believes that his city is the most beautiful in Europe. He’s also partial to Madrid, which offers Europe’s sunniest lifestyle. And even London, in spite of all its post Brexit gloom, Kuper promises, offers American exiles the promise of a better life than the miserable existence which they now have to eek out in the United States.

Five Takeaways

* Quality of Life.:Kuper believes European quality of life surpasses America's for the average person, with Europeans living longer, having better physical health, and experiencing less extreme political polarization.

* Democratic Europe vs Aristocratic America: While the wealthy can achieve greater fortunes in America, Kuper argues that Europeans in the "bottom 99%" live longer and healthier lives than their American counterparts.

* Guns, Anxiety and the Threat of Violence: Political polarization in America creates more anxiety than in Europe, partly because Americans might be armed and because religion makes people hold their views more fervently.

* MAGA Madness: Kuper sees Trump as more extreme than European right-wing leaders like Italy's Meloni, who governs as "relatively pro-European" and "pro-Ukrainian."

* It’s not just a Trump thing. Kuper believes America's declining international credibility will persist even after Trump leaves office, as Europeans will fear another "America First" president could follow any moderate administration.

Full Transcript

Andrew Keen: Hello everybody. It's Monday, April the 21st, 2025. This conversation actually might go out tomorrow on the 22nd. Nonetheless, the headlines of the Financial Times, the world's most global economic newspaper, are miserable from an American point of view. US stocks and the dollar are sinking again as Donald Trump renews his attack on the Fed chair Jay Powell. Meanwhile Trump is also attacking the universities and many other bastions of civilization at least according to the FT's political columnist Gideon Rachman. For another FT journalist, my guest today Simon Kuper has been on the show many times before. All this bad news about America suggests that for Americans it's time to move to Europe. Simon is joining us from Paris, which Paris is that in Europe Simon?

Simon Kuper: I was walking around today and thinking it has probably never in its history looked as good as it does now. It really is a fabulous city, especially when the sun shines.

Andrew Keen: Nice of them where I am in San Francisco.

Simon Kuper: I always used to like San Francisco, but I knew it before every house costs $15 million.

Andrew Keen: Well, I'm not sure that's entirely true, but maybe there's some truth. Paris isn't exactly cheap either, is it? Certainly where you live.

Simon Kuper: Cheaper than San Francisco, so I did for this article that you mentioned, I did some research on house prices and certainly central Paris is one of the most expensive areas in the European Union, but still considerably cheaper than cities like New York and San Francisco. A friend of mine who lives here told me that if she moved to New York, she would move from central Paris to for the same price living in some very, very distant suburb of New York City.

Andrew Keen: Your column this week, Americans, it's time to move to Europe. You obviously wrote with a degree of relish. Is this Europe's revenge on America that it's now time to reverse the brain drain from Europe to America? Now it's from America to Europe.

Simon Kuper: I mean, I don't see it as revenge. I'm a generally pro-American person by inclination and I even married an American and have children who are American as well as being French and British. So when I went to the US as firstly as a child, age 10, 11, I was in sixth grade in California. I thought it was the most advanced, wonderful place in the world and the sunshine and there was nowhere nice than California. And then I went as a student in my early 20s. And again, I thought this was the early 90s. This is the country of the future. It's so much more advanced than Europe. And they have this new kind of wise technocratic government that is going to make things even better. And it was the beginning of a big American boom of the 90s when I think American quality of life reached its peak, that life expectancy was reached, that was then declined a long time after the late 90s. So my impressions in the past were always extremely good, but no longer. The last 20 years visiting the US I've never really felt this is a society where ordinary people can have as good a life as in Europe.

Andrew Keen: When you say ordinary people, I mean, you're not an ordinary person. And I'm guessing most of the people you and your wife certainly isn't ordinary. She's a well known writer. In fact, she's written on France and the United States and parenthood, very well known, you are well known. What do you mean by ordinary people?

Simon Kuper: Yeah, I mean, it's not entirely about me. Amazingly, I am not so egomaniac as to draw conclusions on some matters just looking at my own situation. What I wrote about the US is that if you're in the 1% in the US and you are pursuing great wealth in finance or tech and you have a genuine shot at it, you will achieve wealth that you can't really achieve in Europe. You know, the top end of the US is much higher than in Europe. Still not necessarily true that your life will be better. So even rich Americans live shorter than rich Europeans. But OK, so the 1% America really offers greater expansion opportunities than Europe does. Anywhere below that, the Europeans in the bottom 99%, let's say, they live longer than their American equivalents. They are less fat, their bodies function better because they walk more, because they're not being bombarded by processed food in the same way. Although we have political polarization here, it's not as extreme as in the US. Where I quote a European friend of mine who lives in the American South. He says he sometimes doesn't go out of his house for days at a time because he says meeting Trump supporters makes him quite anxious.

Andrew Keen: Where does he live? I saw that paragraph in the piece, you said he doesn't, and I'm quoting him, a European friend of mine who lives in the American South sometimes doesn't leave his house for days on end so as to avoid running into Trump supporters. Where does he live?

Simon Kuper: He lives, let me say he lives in Georgia, he lives in the state of Georgia.

Andrew Keen: Well, is that Atlanta? I mean, Atlanta is a large town, lots of anti-Trump sentiment there. Whereabouts in Georgia?

Simon Kuper: He doesn't live in Atlanta, but I also don't want to specify exactly where he lives because he's entitled.

Andrew Keen: In case you get started, but in all seriousness, Simon, isn't this a bit exaggerated? I mean, I'm sure there are some of your friends ...

So what, exactly, was “The Enlightenment”? According to the Princeton historian David A. Bell, it was an intellectual movement roughly spanning the early 18th century through to the French Revolution. In his Spring 2025 Liberties Quarterly piece “The Enlightenment, Then and Now”, Bell charts the Enlightenment as a complex intellectual movement centered in Paris but with hubs across Europe and America. He highlights key figures like Montesquieu, Voltaire, Kant, and Franklin, discussing their contributions to concepts of religious tolerance, free speech, and rationality. In our conversation, Bell addresses criticisms of the Enlightenment, including its complicated relationship with colonialism and slavery, while arguing that its principles of freedom and reason remain relevant today.

5 Key Takeaways

* The Enlightenment emerged in the early 18th century (around 1720s) and was characterized by intellectual inquiry, skepticism toward religion, and a growing sense among thinkers that they were living in an "enlightened century."

* While Paris was the central hub, the Enlightenment had multiple centers including Scotland, Germany, and America, with thinkers like Voltaire, Rousseau, Kant, Hume, and Franklin contributing to its development.

* The Enlightenment introduced the concept of "society" as a sphere of human existence separate from religion and politics, forming the basis of modern social sciences.

* The movement had a complex relationship with colonialism and slavery - many Enlightenment thinkers criticized slavery, but some of their ideas about human progress were later used to justify imperialism.

* According to Bell, rather than trying to "return to the Enlightenment," modern society should selectively adopt and adapt its valuable principles of free speech, religious tolerance, and education to create our "own Enlightenment."

David Avrom Bell is a historian of early modern and modern Europe at Princeton University. His most recent book, published in 2020 by Farrar, Straus and Giroux, is Men on Horseback: The Power of Charisma in the Age of Revolution. Described in the Journal of Modern History as an "instant classic," it is available in paperback from Picador, in French translation from Fayard, and in Italian translation from Viella. A study of how new forms of political charisma arose in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the book shows that charismatic authoritarianism is as modern a political form as liberal democracy, and shares many of the same origins. Based on exhaustive research in original sources, the book includes case studies of the careers of George Washington, Napoleon Bonaparte, Toussaint Louverture and Simon Bolivar. The book's Introduction can be read here. An online conversation about the book with Annette Gordon-Reed, hosted by the Cullman Center of the New York Public Library, can be viewed here. Links to material about the book, including reviews in The New York Review of Books, The Guardian, Harper's, The New Republic, The Nation, Le Monde, The Los Angeles Review of Books and other venues can be found here. Bell is also the author of six previous books. He has published academic articles in both English and French and contributes regularly to general interest publications on a variety of subjects, ranging from modern warfare, to contemporary French politics, to the impact of digital technology on learning and scholarship, and of course French history. A list of his publications from 2023 and 2024 can be found here. His Substack newsletter can be found here. His writings have been translated into French, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, Hebrew, Swedish, Polish, Russian, German, Croatian, Italian, Turkish and Japanese. At the History Department at Princeton University, he holds the Sidney and Ruth Lapidus Chair in the Era of North Atlantic Revolutions, and offers courses on early modern Europe, on military history, and on the early modern French empire. Previously, he spent fourteen years at Johns Hopkins University, including three as Dean of Faculty in its School of Arts and Sciences. From 2020 to 2024 he served as Director of the Shelby Cullom Davis Center for Historical Studies at Princeton. He is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a corresponding fellow of the British Academy. Bell's new project is a history of the Enlightenment. A preliminary article from the project was published in early 2022 by Modern Intellectual History. Another is now out in French History.

Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.

FULL TRANSCRIPT

Andrew Keen: Hello everybody, in these supposedly dark times, the E word comes up a lot, the Enlightenment. Are we at the end of the Enlightenment or the beginning? Was there even an Enlightenment? My guest today, David Bell, a professor of history, very distinguished professor of history at Princeton University, has an interesting piece in the spring issue of It is One of our, our favorite quarterlies here on Keen on America, Bell's piece is The Enlightenment Then and Now, and David is joining us from the home of the Enlightenment, perhaps Paris in France, where he's on sabbatical hard life. David being an academic these days, isn't it?

David Bell: Very difficult. I'm having to suffer the Parisian bread and croissant. It's terrible.

Andrew Keen: Yeah. Well, I won't keep you too long. Is Paris then, or France? Is it the home of the Enlightenment? I know there are many Enlightenments, the French, the Scottish, maybe even the English, perhaps even the American.

David Bell: It's certainly one of the homes of ...

Why is America so over-medicated? According to Harvard Medical School professor Jerry Avorn, author of Rethinking Medications, everything begins and ends with the unaccountable power of Big Pharma. While acknowledging the tremendous benefits of modern medications, Avorn critiques the American healthcare system's pricing structures, pharmaceutical patent abuse, and profit incentives that drives the over-prescription of medicine. Avorn advocates for more thoughtful, evidence-based approaches to medication use, encouraging us to have meaningful conversations with our doctors about prescribed drugs.

FIVE TAKEAWAYS

* Modern medications provide tremendous benefits, but Americans pay approximately twice as much for prescription drugs as citizens of other wealthy countries due to limited price controls and lobbying influence.

* The pharmaceutical industry uses "patent thickets" to extend monopolies beyond reasonable timeframes, preventing price competition that would make medications more affordable.

* Patients should engage in conversations with their doctors about medications, asking questions about purpose, alternatives, and affordability rather than blindly accepting or rejecting prescriptions.

* Progress in mental health medications has been limited compared to other fields like cancer treatment, partly due to the complexity of the brain and partly due to an over reliance on medical solutions for social problems.

* Recent government funding cuts to university research could significantly impact life-saving medical innovations, as most drug discoveries begin with federally-funded academic research.

Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Is America screwed? Not according to the former managing editor of Wired, Peter Leyden. The creator of the Substack newsletter The Great Progression, Leyden believes that U.S. history operates in 80 year cycles and that America, empowered by Northern Californian technology, is gearing up for another remarkable period of innovation. Leyden is no MAGA fanboy, but argues that Trump is enabling the American future by destroying the Republican brand and unintentionally guaranteeing a longterm Democratic majority. It’s a provocative thesis which I hope is true. But what about China? And can we really trust Silicon Valley’s tech titans to make America great again?

5 Takeaways

* Leyden believes America cycles through major reinventions approximately every 80 years, with previous transformations occurring after the Constitutional Convention, Civil War, and World War II.

* He argues that post-WWII systems (welfare state, Pax Americana) are outdated and that Trump's presidency is accelerating their necessary dismantling.

* Leyden sees an opportunity for progressives to rebuild American systems using AI, clean energy and bioengineering in more efficient, effective ways.

* Leyden references economic historian Carlota Perez's theory that technological revolutions move from "Gilded Ages" (concentrated wealth/power) to "Golden Ages" (distributed benefits) through democratic intervention.

* Leyden positions the US-China competition, particularly in AI development, as a fundamental contest between democratic and authoritarian approaches to organizing society with new technologies.

Peter Leyden is a tech expert and thought leader on artificial intelligence, climate technologies and a more positive future through his keynote speaking, writing and advising. Leyden currently is the creator of The Great Progression: 2025 to 2050, which is a series of keynote talks, Substack essays, and his next book on our new potential to harness AI and other transformative technologies to create a much better world. He also is the founder of Reinvent Futures, advising senior leaders in strategic foresight and the impacts of these new technologies. Since coming to San Francisco to work with the founders of WIRED to start​​ The Digital Age, he has followed the front edge of technological change and built an extraordinary network of pioneering innovators in Silicon Valley. Leyden most recently convened this network of elite tech experts through the first two years of the Generative AI Revolution as host and curator of one of the premier event series at ground zero in San Francisco — The AI Age Begins. Leyden is the former Managing Editor of WIRED, who then became the Founder and CEO of two startups that pioneered the early video mediums of first YouTube and then Zoom. He wrote two influential books on the future that went into multiple languages, including The Long Boom that foretold how the new digital economy would scale over 25 years — and largely did. Leyden began his career as a journalist covering America, then did a stint as a foreign correspondent in Asia for Newsweek, including covering the early rise of China. He has traveled to more than 50 countries around the world. He was raised in the heartland in Minnesota, graduated summa cum laude at Georgetown University, and earned two masters degrees from Columbia University.

Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.

Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Are Google and Facebook screwed? That’s the question which Keith Teare asks in today’s That Was The Week tech newsletter. In our age of nationalist globalization, Teare argues, Facebook and Google, the original darlings of the Web 2.0 revolution are, so-to-speak, half-fucked. On the one hand, they are the victims of a legal witch hunt by a nationalist U.S. government intent on punishing Big Tech innovation; on the other, they continue to reap the benefits of an increasingly globalized digital marketplace. No wonder, then, that Lee-Anne Mullholland, the Google VP of Regulatory Affairs, has claimed a kind of Trumpian half-victory in this week’s legal ruling against her company. “We won half of this case and we will appeal the other half,” Mullholland wrote. Perhaps. But as Teare drolly remarks in his editorial, “nobody can accuse the Government of being fast.” No, not even half-fast. In this absurdly anachronistic fight against Google and Facebook, the snail-paced U.S. government is actually fighting the war before the last war. The only Big Tech thing that matters in 2025 is artificial intelligence. And retroactively breaking up half-archaic companies like Meta or Google isn’t going to make much difference in today’s all-important race to control tomorrow’s A.I. economy.

* Google and Meta (Facebook) are facing significant antitrust challenges. Meta is undergoing a trial questioning the legitimacy of their acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp from 2012 and 2014, while Google has been found guilty of maintaining an advertising monopoly.

* Both Keith and Andrew discuss how the government's antitrust actions seem to come too late, with Keith describing it as "government overreach" and noting that "Nobody can accuse the government of being fast," calling these cases against actions from a decade ago "shocking."

* Keith argues that these companies are facing existential threats from technological shifts, not just legal challenges. He notes that Google's core business of cost-per-click advertising is shrinking both in usage and revenue per click, and faces additional challenges in the AI era where ads don't fit neatly with AI results.

* Then there’s China. Keith and Andrew discuss about the decline of Western technological dominance and the rise of the Chinese economy, with references to a shift toward "de-globalization" at the political and military level while economic globalization continues.

* They discuss the potential future impact of AI on employment and social structures, with Keith noting that the "unknown unknown" is "the impact of AI on employment and abundance," suggesting two possible futures: either a utopia where "nobody needs to work and everyone can eat, live, feed, be entertained" or an "apocalypse where it's a hellscape for anyone that isn't rich."

Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.