THE BIG PICTURE

The political climate in 2018 serves up enough action and surprises to rival the new Avengers movie. The emotions it invokes are so over the moon, no matter what ones’ political allegiance, that it feels like history is being made each day, if not each hour. 

The President’s supporters believe the dark state is working to bring down his term in office.  His detractors are convinced Trump is undermining the foundations of our democracy.  But while the daily media output may be the outline of history, it is not the final determination of what will one day be considered historically significant. There is a danger in getting overrun in detail and losing sight of the big picture.

Lately, I have been trying to force myself to view the barrage of information and new political developments within the framework of Google Maps.  The closer I zoom in on the news of the day, the smaller, more intricate things I learn about the political climate. However, to gain perspective and really determine what is important, it pays to zoom out, sometimes very far out, to place current events into an historical time frame covering decades.

My task in searching for a larger context was helped along when I recently read a feature article in Foreign Affairs by Walter Russell Mead. (The Big Shift: How American Democracy Fails its Way to Success) Mr. Mead sets the stage with the following observation:

“As Americans struggle to make sense of a series of uncomfortable economic changes and disturbing political developments, a worrying picture emerges: of ineffective politicians, frequent scandals, racial backsliding, polarized and irresponsible news media, populists spouting quack economic remedies, growing suspicion of elites and experts, frightening outbreaks of violence, major job losses, high-profile terrorist attacks, anti-immigrant agitation, declining social mobility, giant corporations dominating the economy, rising inequality, and the appearance of a new class of super-empowered billionaires in finance and technology-heavy industries.”

What is being described above by Mr. Mead, with a great deal of convincing historical accuracy, is not 2018 America but rather the 35 years between the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln in 1865 and that of President William McKinley in 1901. Clearly our present political turmoil offers little that is new to the history of our country.  We have seen and survived it all before.

However, Mr. Mead is not seeking to highlight another period in American history much like our own.  His premise is that the earlier historical period was a time when the United States “failed its way to success” by making the difficult transition from an agricultural society to an industrial one.  He sees a similar dynamic at work today, observing that: “The information revolution is disrupting the country’s social and economic order as profoundly as the industrial revolution did.”

In my view, Mr. Mead is spot on in focusing on the effects of rapid change that will lead to a major transformation in the United States rather than to become overly concerned with day to day political events. Not many Americans well versed in today’s tribal politics can name the Presidents, senators or representatives who passed through history in the latter part of the 19^th century.  One hundred years from now the same will be true of today’s leaders and turbulent events.  The years from 2016 through 2020 will be best remembered for the advances in technology and information sharing, not for Russian election meddling, special prosecutors, or payoffs to porn stars.  The history books will discuss Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerberg, testifying before Congress on issues of internet reform, not the testimony of former FBI Director James Comey discussing Presidential conversations.

One might ask why it is important to reserve resources for the big picture rather than commit all on day to day events.  First, political capital is limited.  If well-meaning progressives spent it all on attacking the President rather than on developing policies for the information revolution, they will miss a valuable opportunity.  Second, as pointed out by Mr. Mead, our American brand of democracy is messy but well suited to grow and develop and not decline and fall when faced with what appear to be periods of insurmountable dysfunction.  When under attack American institutions (the courts, the press, the bureaucracy, the rule of law) are strong and have always been able to withstand temporary setbacks. 

Third, elections matter in our representative democracy and have always protected us from the extremes on the left and right. Over time, elected officials on the fringes are consistently voted out of office.

If Mr. Mead’s thesis is correct, that American democracy will prevail and that as a country we will fail our way to success in the information revolution, much like we did in the industrial revolution, what steps can be taken by concerned progressives to help matters along?

Similar to our experience during the industrial revolution, the most profound changes will occur to the American worker.  President Trump was wrong in assuming that resources should be spent in recapturing the past glory of industrialization.  This may have garnered votes in 2016 but is a false hope.   No one could imagine in 1890 that only 2% of the American work force would be employed in agriculture in 2018. Similarly, old line industrial jobs will continue to disappear. But the information revolution will provide a wealth of new jobs, many as yet undefined. As the information revolution gathers momentum, education and job training must be ever changing to provide qualified workers.

On the other hand, President Trump was partially correct in calling for deregulation of business, but only for small businesses that are becoming prevalent in the information age.  Startups in the “gig economy” struggle when competing with large corporations and deserve more governmental assistance and less governmental interference and nuisance paperwork that inhibits them becoming established. 

Well placed small business regulation reform in taxes, health care, overtime rules, and licensing requirements contrasts with the ill-advised tax reform which permitted Apple (which may soon be our first trillion-dollar company) to repatriate billions in overseas profits.  The Apple corporation just announced a 100-billion-dollar share repurchase plan for investors that will do nothing to aid the American worker or the economy.

My point is that once progressive political forces step back and see the big picture, the Donald Trump Presidency, as earth shattering as it may seem, has little to do with our future.  The future is the information revolution.  We must harness its potential by electing officials who understand the transformation and who will utilize the public sector to improve the lives of all Americans.

 For those who believe my assessment is overly optimistic, please consider historian John Meacham’s new book: The Soul of America.  Mr. Meacham reviews a large swath of American history to prove his point that the “better angels of our nature” have, without exception, prevailed.  Following periods of intrigue and dysfunction the country has always looked forward rather than back, to assert hope over fear.  It is time to stop wasting time and effort attacking the latest Trump tweet and to begin planning for the information revolution.