World On Fire: The Root Causes of Populism, Authoritarianism and The Whole Global Mess

Educational opportunity in America is radically stratified by parental income: three-year-olds from families earning over $100,000 per year are twice as likely to attend preschool as children from poorer families; by 8th grade, children from affluent families perform four grade levels higher than children from poor families; students from families earning over $200,000 per year have a 1-in-5 chance of scoring 1400 on the SAT, while poorer students have a 1-in-50 chance.

“Three-year-olds who come from a home with parents making over $100,000 a year are twice as likely to attend preschool as poor parent poorer kids. By 8th grade, children from affluent families are performing four grade levels higher than children from poorer families. Students who grow up in a home making over $200,000 a year have a one in5 chance of scoring a 1400 on their SATs. One in five. For poorer kids, the chances are one in 50.”

When people around you see, hear, respect, and know you, you feel safe and experience existential security. The example of Jimmy Darrell greeting Mrs. Dorsey—shaking her and saying 'you're the best, I love you'—transformed her from a stern disciplinarian into a bright-eyed child through the power of his gaze. We evolved to be surrounded by people looking out for us.

“And that's when when you have people around you who are will able to see you in that way, then it's you feel seen, heard, you feel safe. We evolved to be surrounded by people who are looking out for us.”

Only 11% of people are fired because they lack intelligence or technical knowledge; 89% are fired because they are unteachable, uncoachable, or don't work well with teammates. Character and coachability are far better predictors of success than intelligence.

“Ask people there somebody did a study why do people get fired in only 11% of cases are people fired because they're not smart enough to do the job or they lack the technical knowledge. The main reason people get fired 89% of cases is because they're or they're unc they're unteachable. They're uncoachable. They don't do well with their teammates.”

The most important traits in human ability are: first, hunger—the drive to keep working, learning, moving, and improving; second, the ability to work in teams; and third, character. There is zero correlation between school grades and life success because school measures individual performance while life is about team performance.

“To me, the most important trait in human ability is hunger. It's the drive to keep working, to keep learning, to keep moving, and to keep getting better at something. The second trait is the ability to work in teams. There's a funny thing that there's zero correlation between how you do in school and how you do in life. Grades predict nothing. And that's because school is all about self. It's about how am I doing individually. Life is generally about how am I doing as a team?”

Media headlines generating fear and anger have increased by approximately 200% over the last 15 years, driven by business model incentives where fear and anger content generates eyeballs.

“We've also gotten a lot more pessimistic. And some of that is the media's fault. We've determined that we can get your eyeballs if we create headlines that generate fear and anger. And so the number of headlines that generate fear and anger is up by about 200% over the last 15 years.”

The primary dividing line in contemporary American politics and politics worldwide is the 'diploma divide': educational attainment, not wealth, now predicts political behavior. Highly educated people vote Democrat/progressive; less educated people vote Republican/right-wing. This pattern repeats consistently across all countries measured and represents a major shift from previous eras when wealth (not education) was the primary political predictor.

“And the key divide in American society right now and the key divide in our politics is over education levels. And this is not only true in America. It's true in all the countries I've been talking about. What they call the diploma divide. So why would there be this gap which did not used to exist? It used to be the political divisions were about money. Rich voted Republican, poorer people voted for the Democrats. Now it's highly educated people vote for the Democrats, less educated people vote for the Republicans. And this basic pattern occurs again and again and again all around the world.”

Life outcomes differ dramatically by education level: high school graduates live 8 years shorter than college graduates; 40% of high school grads are obese vs 20% of college grads; high school grads marry less and divorce twice as often; 60% of births to high school-educated women happen out of wedlock vs a rate 20 times lower for college-educated women; opioid death rate is 10 per 100,000 for high school grads vs 2 per 100,000 for college grads.

“The average high school grad in this country lives eight years shorter than the average college grad. 40% of high school grads are obese compared to 20% of college grads. High school grads are much less likely to marry and twice as likely to get divorced than college grads. 60% of births to women with a high school degree happen out of wedlock. That's a rate 20 times higher than college grads. The opioid death rate for those with a high school degree was 10,000 was 10 deaths per 100,000. 10 deaths per 100,000. For a college degree, it was only two deaths per 100,000.”

Daniel Marovitz argues that the educational gap between rich and poor children is now wider than the educational gap between whites and blacks during the Jim Crow era

“Marovitz makes to me the shocking claim which he's a very careful scholar is that the educational gap between rich kids and poor kids is now wider than the educational gap between whites and blacks in the era of Jim Crow.”

James Baldwin, who was severely mistreated for his race and sexual orientation, refused to be consumed by hatred and enmity. Instead, he embodied 'defiant humanism': even in brutal times when political opponents are brutal and authoritarian, the paradoxical response is to be more human, to touch the things that heal souls and emphasize the deepest parts of human nature.

“Now Baldwin was a guy who was horribly mistreated by his society because of the color of his skin and because of his sexual orientation. And that guy had a right to feel bitter and hatred. he had to the right to sink into the enmity that drives so much of our politics. But in this interview, he says, you know, there's not as much humanity as you would like in the world, but there's enough. There's more than you would think. And then he says, you've got to remember as you walk down the street, that every single person you meet, that could be you. You could be that person. You could be that saint. You could be that monster. and you've got to decide who you're going to be.”

Walter Lippmann warned in 1955 that if 'what is good, what is right, what is true is only what the individual chooses to invent,' then 'we are outside the traditions of civility'

“Walter Litman a great columnist in the middle of the 20th century saw this coming in 1955. He wrote a book called uh the essays in public philosophy. And he wrote if what is good, what is right, what is true is only what the individual chooses to invent, then we are outside the traditions of civility.”

Liberal democratic societies only prosper when built on pre-choice foundations: covenantal obligations through family, nation, God, or a shared sense of right and wrong. When individual choice becomes extreme enough to erode these covenantal foundations, it begins to erode the foundation of liberal society itself.

“But liberal societies only prosper when they are based on things that precede choice. There's only a firm foundation for us to make our choices when there is these covenantal obligations to each other through family, through nation, through God, or through some idea that there's a thing called right and wrong. And when individual choice gets so extreme that it eats away at the covenants of our life, then it begins to erode the foundation of liberal society.”

Healthy societies have 'politics of redistribution' where political debates center on concrete policy questions like tax rates and spending priorities. Contemporary society instead has 'politics of recognition' where people engage in politics to affirm their identity, shame opponents, gain purpose and meaning, feel righteous, experience belonging, and seek retribution against those they dislike.

“In a healthy society, we have what you call the politics of redistribution. We have big arguments, but there are arguments about how high taxes should be or where spending should go. That's in a healthy society. We don't have that kind of politics anymore. We have the politics of recognition. People are going into politics in order to feel good about themselves and in order to make the other side feel shamed. They're going out for a sense of purpose and meaning.”

The rise of right-wing populism globally is not primarily driven by specific policy failures or regional variations, but by something deeper: a global spiritual, relational, and moral crisis. Policy failures like the financial crisis, Afghanistan, and Iraq are not uniform globally, yet right-wing populism surges uniformly everywhere, suggesting the cause transcends particular policy errors.

“uh now there are certain obvious things we could say. People are reacting against globalization. There have been policy failures, the financial crisis, Afghanistan, Iraq, but these policy failures are not all around the world. And yet, right-wing populism is all around the world. It's something deeper is going on. And I think it's some sort of global spiritual, relational, and moral crisis and it shows up in the deepest essences of our societies.”

A covenant differs from a contract in that a contract is about interests and benefits while a covenant is about identity and transforms people by creating an 'us' based on lifelong commitment, not reciprocal advantage.

“Rabbi Jonathan Sax, who was the head rabbi in Britain until he died recently, explained the difference between a contract and a covenant. He wrote, 'A contract is about interests. A covenant is about identity. It is about you and me coming together to form an us. That is why contracts benefits. A contract will benefit a person, but a covenant will transform a person.'”

Progressives, centrists, and others in the political center must reclaim faith, family, and patriotism from the right rather than allowing authoritarians to monopolize these values. The British Guardian's response of publishing the St. George's Cross on page two and editorially refusing to let the far right claim patriotism exemplifies this necessary reclamation.

“The first is people who are in the center and people are on the left have to have some version of faith, family and flag. We have too often allowed populist authoritarians to grab, for example, patriotism. I took a walk today with a guy named Richard Reeves who's speaking here today and he's from Britain and he noticed that the far right was seizing the British flag and seizing a lot of the symbols of British patriotism. So there's a paper in the UK called the Guardian which hope many of you know it's a progressive paper and on page two they had a big full page picture of the Red Cross which is what there's a certain symbol of England and that the whole page two was that and on the page one editorial said we're not letting the far right take this from us.”

A secure psychological base in John Bowlby's framework consists of three covenantal attachments: first, family (deep bonds not chosen but woven into identity); second, loyalty to sacred place/nation (loyalty to country and town); third, a sense of coherent moral order (the belief that right and wrong exist in the fabric of human life, not merely as subjective preferences).

“Secure base in Bsby's terms was family. And family is not something you choose. Family is something that we're bred into. It's deep in our soul. Uh people are not transformed by institutions to which they are lightly attached. We're attached to this specific family, this specific sacred piece of land, this specific country, this specific philosophy or faith. These are things that we don't choose often, but they are deeply woven into the fabric of our identity of who we are, and they give us a secure psychological base.”

Jimmy Darrell, who pastors to homeless people in Waco under a highway overpass, embodies a spiritual lens where every person is made in the image of God, has a soul of infinite value and dignity, and is so important that Jesus was willing to die for that person. Whether one is Christian, Jewish, atheist, Muslim, or Buddhist, learning to see each other with this level of reverence and respect is necessary to avoid existential unsafety.

“He pastors to the homeless in Waco. He has a church called Church under the bridge. The homeless people didn't feel comfortable going into his church. So he brought the church to them. He has it under a highway overpass where they sleep. And so he's a pastor. So he thinks every person he sees in is made in the image of God. Every person he sees has a soul of infinite value and dignity. Every person he sees is so important. Jesus was willing to die for that person. Now you could be Christian or Jewish or atheist or Muslim or Buddhist. I don't care. But we have to learn to see each other with that level of reverence and respect.”

We must build a meritocracy around a broader definition of merit that includes drive, resilience, good character, empathy, and social ability—traits that cannot be easily gamed by wealth and privilege. This broader definition will create a fairer society with fewer bottlenecks for people without wealthy parents.

“And somehow we have to build a meritocracy around a broader definition of merit that won't be able to be gained by the rich, a definition of merit that includes drive, resilience, good character, empathy, social ability. And if we widen out that what we how we define merit, I think we'll have a fairer society and we won't have these bottlenecks for people.”

Authoritarians across the ideological spectrum—Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, Iran, Hamas, Viktor Orbán, Marine Le Pen, MAGA—all use the same appeal: promising to restore order to streets, borders, and most importantly 'to your soul' by standing up for family, traditional values, and moral order. This spiritual appeal to restore inner order is powerfully attractive to people experiencing existential chaos.

“And the authoritarians know exactly what to do with us. Whether it's Xiinping, Vladimir Putin, Iran, Hamas, Victor Orban, Marine Le Pen, MAGA, what unites them? They say, 'I'm going to restore order. I'm going to restore order to the street. I'm going to restore order to the borders. I'm also going to restore order to the your your soul.' They stand up for family. They stand up for what to me are reactionary values on LGBTQ issues. They stand up for everything and they make it all about order. And so a lot of people flock to the authoritarians and the populism because they're not only saying screw those elites, they're saying, 'I'm restoring order to your deepest anxieties.'”

Right-wing populism is surging in multiple democracies worldwide: Geert Wilders' party rose to power in the Netherlands; the German AFD surged in European elections; Marine Le Pen's party surged in France causing the French political system to go into meltdown; populists are surging in Indonesia and Latin America; The Economist estimates a two-thirds probability that Donald Trump will be reelected president.

“Garrett Vdders is a right-wing populist in the Netherlands. His party rose to power. In the European elections, the German AFD, a very far-right group, surged in in France. The Marine Le Pen Party surged causing a the whole French political system to go into meltdown. You look at Indonesia, you look around Latin America, right-wing populists are surging all around the country. And of course, here at home, Donald Trump, I noticed uh The Economist says it's about twothirds likely that Donald Trump will be reelected president.”

Global culture (measured in books, magazines, and newspaper articles from 1850 to present) shows that positivity dominated from 1850 to 2008, with dips during the Great Depression and increases during 1990s prosperity. However, starting with the financial crisis and continuing to present, American culture has become more negative than it was during the Great Depression, World War I, World War II, or any other crisis of the past 150 years.

“Somebody some researchers took a look at sort of global conversation uh in print starting in 1850 up till today and they measured how many of the of thing books, magazine articles, newspaper articles, whatever, how many of them were positive and how many were negative. And from 1850 to about 2008, most of this stuff was positive. There were dips during the Great Depression, which you'd expect, and there were increases in the 1990s when we had prosperity. But basically, we're a pretty happy country. And then starting in the financial crisis, but ever since the negativity of American culture has just collapsed. So we are have a more negative public culture than we did in the Great Depression, during World War II, than during World War I, than any of the crises of the past 150 years.”

Every conversation exists at two levels: what is being discussed and the flow of emotions between people; with each comment, people are being made to feel more or less respected and more or less safe.

“every conversation exists at two levels. What we're normally talking about and the real conversation, which is the flow of emotions flowing between us. With every comment we make to each other, we're making each other feel more respected or less respected, more safe or less safe.”

The fatal problem with using politics to fill holes in one's soul is that it fails to deliver genuine solutions: you don't have real community (you're just hating the same people); you don't have genuine moral action (you're just indignant at a TV); there's no morally comprehensible landscape (one side doesn't have a monopoly on virtue or vice). The result is that people seeking escape from anxiety, alienation, and depression end up in a state of moral war that makes everyone meaner and more brutal and worsens all problems.

“The problem is if you're asking politics to fill a hole in your soul to solve your psychological, relational, and moral problems, you're asking more of politics than it can give you because you don't really have community. You're not working with others. You're just hating the same people. You don't really have moral action. You're just indignant in front of the TV set. There's not really a morally comprehensible landscape. It's not like one side has the monopoly on virtue and the other side has monopoly on vice. And so when you try to use politics to fill the hole in your soul, you get you're you're seeking to get out of the sense of anxiety, alienation, depression, but you're simply winding up in a state of moral war.”

People who talk to strangers on planes or other settings report that such interactions strengthen social trust and weaken existential loneliness, which Brooks considers one of the root causes of contemporary political dysfunction and populism.

“So now when I'm on the plane, I often talk to the stranger. I wait till there's only an hour left in the flight in case it'll be boring, but still. Um, but it's just a concrete practical way to instill a little social relationship, a little social trust, and to weaken the kind of existential loneliness that I think is a cause of a lot of our problems.”