Podcasts about deresiewicz

So why did Harris lose in 2024? For one very big reason, according to the progressive essayist Bill Deresiewicz: “because she represented the exhausted Democratic establishment”. This rotting establishment, Deresiewicz believes, is symbolized by both the collective denial of Biden's mental decline and by Harris' pathetically rudderless Presidential campaign. But there's a much more troubling problem with the Democratic party, he argues. It has become “the party of institutionalized liberalism, which is itself exhausted”. So how to reinvent American liberalism in the 2020's? How to make the left once again, in Deresiewicz words, “the locus of openness, playfulness, productive contention, experiment, excess, risk, shock, camp, mirth, mischief, irony and curiosity"? That's the question for all progressives in our MAGA/Woke age. 5 Key Takeaways * Deresiewicz believes the Democratic establishment and aligned media engaged in a "tacit cover-up" of Biden's condition and other major issues like crime, border policies, and pandemic missteps rather than addressing them honestly.* The liberal movement that began in the 1960s has become "exhausted" and the Democratic Party is now an uneasy alliance of establishment elites and working-class voters whose interests don't align well.* Progressive institutions suffer from a repressive intolerance characterized by "an unearned sense of moral superiority" and a fear of vitality that leads to excessive rules, bureaucracy, and speech codes.* While young conservatives are creating new movements with energy and creativity, the progressive establishment stifles innovation by purging anyone who "violates the code" or criticizes their side.* Rebuilding the left requires creating conditions for new ideas by ending censoriousness, embracing true courage that risks something real, and potentially building new institutions rather than trying to reform existing ones. Full Transcript Andrew Keen: Hello, everyone. It's the old question on this show, Keen on America, how to make sense of this bewildering, frustrating, exciting country in the wake, particularly of the last election. A couple of years ago, we had the CNN journalist who I rather like and admire, Jake Tapper, on the show. Arguing in a piece of fiction that he thinks, to make sense of America, we need to return to the 1970s. He had a thriller out a couple of years ago called All the Demons Are Here. But I wonder if Tapper's changed his mind on this. His latest book, which is a sensation, which he co-wrote with Alex Thompson, is Original Sin, President Biden's Decline, its Cover-up and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again. Tapper, I think, tells the truth about Biden, as the New York Times notes. It's a damning portrait of an enfeebled Biden protected by his inner circle. I would extend that, rather than his inner circle protected by an elite, perhaps a coastal elite of Democrats, unable or unwilling to come to terms with the fact that Biden was way, way past his shelf life. My guest today, William Deresiewicz—always get his last name wrong—it must be...William Deresiewicz: No, that was good. You got it.Andrew Keen: Probably because I'm anti-semitic. He has a new piece out called "Post-Election" which addresses much of the rottenness of the American progressive establishment in 2025. Bill, congratulations on the piece.William Deresiewicz: Thank you.Andrew Keen: Have you had a chance to look at this Tapper book or have you read about Original Sin?William Deresiewicz: Yeah, I read that piece. I read the piece that's on the screen and I've heard some people talking about it. And I mean, as you said, it's not just his inner circle. I don't want to blame Tapper. Tapper did the work. But one immediate reaction to the debate debacle was, where have the journalists been? For example, just to unfairly call one person out, but they're just so full of themselves, the New Yorker dripping with self-congratulations, especially in its centennial year, its boundless appetite for self-celebration—to quote something one of my students once said about Yale—they've got a guy named Evan Osnos, who's one of their regulars on their political...Andrew Keen: Yeah, and he's been on the show, Evan, and in fact, I rather like his, I was going to say his husband, his father, Peter Osnos, who's a very heavy-hitting ex-publisher. But anyway, go on. And Evan's quite a nice guy, personally.William Deresiewicz: I'm sure he's a nice guy, but the fact is he's not only a New Yorker journalist, but he wrote a book about Biden, which means that he's presumably theoretically well-sourced within Biden world. He didn't say anything. I mean, did he not know or did he know?Andrew Keen: Yeah, I agree. I mean you just don't want to ask, right? You don't know. But you're a journalist, so you're supposed to know. You're supposed to ask. So I'm sure you're right on Osnos. I mean, he was on the show, but all journalists are progressives, or at least all the journalists at the Times and the New Yorker and the Atlantic. And there seemed to be, as Jake Tapper is suggesting in this new book, and he was part of the cover-up, there seemed to be a cover-up on the part of the entire professional American journalist establishment, high-end establishment, to ignore the fact that the guy running for president or the president himself clearly had no idea of what was going on around him. It's just astonishing, isn't it? I mean, hindsight's always easy, of course, 2020 in retrospect, but it was obvious at the time. I made it clear whenever I spoke about Biden, that here was a guy clearly way out of his depth, that he shouldn't have been president, maybe shouldn't have been president in the first place, but whatever you think about his ideas, he clearly was way beyond his shelf date, a year or two into the presidency.William Deresiewicz: Yeah, but here's the thing, and it's one of the things I say in the post-election piece, but I'm certainly not the only person to say this. There was an at least tacit cover-up of Biden, of his condition, but the whole thing was a cover-up, meaning every major issue that the 2024 election was about—crime, at the border, woke excess, affordability. The whole strategy of not just the Democrats, but this media establishment that's aligned with them is to just pretend that it wasn't happening, to explain it away. And we can also throw in pandemic policy, right? Which people were still thinking about and all the missteps in pandemic policy. The strategy was effectively a cover-up. We're not gonna talk about it, or we're gonna gaslight you, or we're gonna make excuses. So is it a surprise that people don't trust these establishment institutions anymore? I mean, I don't trust them anymore and I want to trust them.Andrew Keen: Were there journalists? I mean, there were a handful of journalists telling the truth about Biden. Progressives, people on the left rather than conservatives.William Deresiewicz: Ezra Klein started to talk about it, I remember that. So yes, there were a handful, but it wasn't enough. And you know, I don't say this to take away from Ezra Klein what I just gave him with my right hand, take away with my left, but he was also the guy, as soon as the Kamala succession was effected, who was talking about how Kamala in recent months has been going from strength to strength and hasn't put a foot wrong and isn't she fantastic. So all credit to him for telling the truth about Biden, but it seems to me that he immediately pivoted to—I mean, I'm sure he thought he was telling the truth about Harris, but I didn't believe that for one second.Andrew Keen: Well, meanwhile, the lies about Harris or the mythology of Harris, the false—I mean, all mythology, I guess, is false—about Harris building again. Headline in Newsweek that Harris would beat Donald Trump if an election was held again. I mean I would probably beat—I would beat Trump if an election was held again, I can't even run for president. So anyone could beat Trump, given the situation. David Plouffe suggested that—I think he's quoted in the Tapper book—that Biden totally fucked us, but it suggests that somehow Harris was a coherent progressive candidate, which she wasn't.William Deresiewicz: She wasn't. First of all, I hadn't seen this poll that she would beat Trump. I mean, it's a meaningless poll, because...Andrew Keen: You could beat him, Bill, and no one can even pronounce your last name.William Deresiewicz: Nobody could say what would actually happen if there were a real election. It's easy enough to have a hypothetical poll. People often look much better in these kinds of hypothetical polls where there's no actual election than they do when it's time for an election. I mean, I think everyone except maybe David Plouffe understands that Harris should never have been a candidate—not just after Biden dropped out way too late, but ever, right? I mean the real problem with Biden running again is that he essentially saddled us with Harris. Instead of having a real primary campaign where we could have at least entertained the possibility of some competent people—you know, there are lots of governors. I mean, I'm a little, and maybe we'll get to this, I'm little skeptical that any normal democratic politician is going to end up looking good. But at least we do have a whole bunch of what seem to be competent governors, people with executive experience. And we never had a chance to entertain any of those people because this democratic establishment just keeps telling us who we're going to vote for. I mean, it's now three elections in a row—they forced Hillary on us, and then Biden. I'm not going to say they forced Biden on us although elements of it did. It probably was a good thing because he won and he may have been the only one who could have won. And then Harris—it's like reductio ad absurdum. These candidates they keep handing us keep getting worse and worse.Andrew Keen: But it's more than being worse. I mean, whatever one can say about Harris, she couldn't explain why she wanted to be president, which seems to me a disqualifier if you're running for president. The point, the broader point, which I think you bring out very well in the piece you write, and you and I are very much on the same page here, so I'm not going to criticize you in your post-election—William Deresiewicz: You can criticize me, Andrew, I love—Andrew Keen: I know I can criticize you, and I will, but not in this particular area—is that these people are the establishment. They're protecting a globalized world, they're the coast. I mean, in some ways, certainly the Bannonite analysis is right, and it's not surprising that they're borrowing from Lenin and the left is borrowing from Edmund Burke.William Deresiewicz: Yeah, I mean I think, and I think this is the real problem. I mean, part of what I say in the piece is that it just seems, maybe this is too organicist, but there just seems to be an exhaustion that the liberal impulse that started, you know, around the time I was born in 1964, and I cite the Dylan movie just because it's a picture of that time where you get a sense of the energy on the left, the dawning of all this exciting—Andrew Keen: You know that movie—and we've done a show on that movie—itself was critical I guess in a way of Dylan for not being political.William Deresiewicz: Well, but even leaving that aside, just the reminder you get of what that time felt like. That seems in the movie relatively accurate, that this new youth culture, the rights revolution, the counterculture, a new kind of impulse of liberalism and progressivism that was very powerful and strong and carried us through the 60s and 70s and then became the establishment and has just become completely exhausted now. So I just feel like it's just gotten to the end of its possibility. Gotten to the end of its life cycle, but also in a less sort of mystical way. And I think this is a structural problem that the Democrats have not been able to address for a long time, and I don't see how they're going to address it. The party is now the party, as you just said, of the establishment, uneasily wedded to a mainly non-white sort of working class, lower class, maybe somewhat middle class. So it's sort of this kind of hybrid beast, the two halves of which don't really fit together. The educated upper middle class, the professional managerial class that you and I are part of, and then sort of the average Black Latino female, white female voter who doesn't share the interests of that class. So what are you gonna do about that? How's that gonna work?Andrew Keen: And the thing that you've always given a lot of thought to, and it certainly comes out in this piece, is the intolerance of the Democratic Party. But it's an intolerance—it's not a sort of, and I don't like this word, it's not the fascist intolerance of the MAGA movement or of Trump. It's a repressive intolerance, it's this idea that we're always right and if you disagree with us, then there must be something wrong with you.William Deresiewicz: Yeah, right. It's this, at this point, completely unearned sense of moral superiority and intellectual superiority, which are not really very clearly distinguished in their mind, I think. And you know, they just reek of it and people hate it and it's understandable that they hate it. I mean, it's Hillary in a word. It's Hillary in a word and again, I'm wary of treading on this kind of ground, but I do think there's an element of—I mean, obviously Trump and his whole camp is very masculinist in a very repulsive way, but there is also a way to be maternalist in a repulsive way. It's this kind of maternal control. I think of it as the sushi mom voice where we're gonna explain to you in a calm way why you should listen to us and why we're going to control every move you make. And it's this fear—I mean what my piece is really about is this sort of quasi-Nietzschean argument for energy and vitality that's lacking on the left. And I think it's lacking because the left fears it. It fears sort of the chaos of the life force. So it just wants to shackle it in all of these rules and bureaucracy and speech codes and consent codes. It just feels lifeless. And I think everybody feels that.Andrew Keen: Yeah, and it's the inability to imagine you can be wrong. It's the moral greediness of some people, at least, who think of themselves on the left. Some people might be listening to this, thinking it's just these two old white guys who think themselves as progressives but are actually really conservative. And all this idea of nature is itself chilling, that it's a kind of anti-feminism.William Deresiewicz: Well, that's b******t. I mean, let me have a chance to respond. I mean I plead guilty to being an old white man—Andrew Keen: I mean you can't argue with that one.William Deresiewicz: I'm not arguing with it. But the whole point rests on this notion of positionality, like I'm an older white man, therefore I think this or I believe that, which I think is b******t to begin with because, you know, down the street there's another older white guy who believes the exact opposite of me, so what's the argument here? But leaving that aside, and whether I am or am not a progressive—okay, my ideal politician is Bernie Sanders, so I'll just leave it at that. The point is, I mean, one point is that feminism hasn't always been like this. Second wave feminism that started in the late sixties, when I was a little kid—there was a censorious aspect to it, but there was also this tremendous vitality. I mean I think of somebody like Andrea Dworkin—this is like, "f**k you" feminism. This is like, "I'm not only not gonna shave my legs, I'm gonna shave my armpits and I don't give a s**t what you think." And then the next generation when I was a young man was the Mary Gates, Camille Paglia, sex-positive power feminism which also had a different kind of vitality. So I don't think feminism has to be the feminism of the women's studies departments and of Hillary Clinton with "you can't say this" and "if you want to have sex with me you have to follow these 10 rules." I don't think anybody likes that.Andrew Keen: The deplorables!William Deresiewicz: Yes, yes, yes. Like I said, I don't just think that the enemies don't like it, and I don't really care what they think. I think the people on our side don't like it. Nobody is having fun on our side. It's boring. No one's having sex from what they tell me. The young—it just feels dead. And I think when there's no vitality, you also have no creative vitality. And I think the intellectual cul-de-sac that the left seems to be stuck in, where there are no new ideas, is related to that.Andrew Keen: Yeah, and I think the more I think about it, I think you're right, it's a generational war. All the action seems to be coming from old people, whether it's the Pelosis and the Bidens, or it's people like Richard Reeves making a fortune off books about worrying about young men or Jonathan Haidt writing about the anxious generation. Where are, to quote David Bowie, the young Americans? Why aren't they—I mean, Bill, you're in a way guilty of this. You made your name with your book, Excellent Sheep about the miseducation...William Deresiewicz: Yeah, so what am I guilty of exactly?Andrew Keen: I'm not saying you're all, but aren't you and Reeves and Haidt, you're all involved in this weird kind of generational war.William Deresiewicz: OK, let's pump the brakes here for a second. Where the young people are—I mean, obviously most people, even young people today, still vote for Democrats. But the young who seem to be exploring new things and having energy and excitement are on the right. And there was a piece—I'm gonna forget the name of the piece and the author—Daniel Oppenheimer had her on the podcast. I think it appeared in The Point. Young woman. Fairly recent college graduate, went to a convention of young republicans, I don't know what they call themselves, and also to democrats or liberals in quick succession and wrote a really good piece about it. I don't think she had ever written anything before or published anything before, but it got a lot of attention because she talked about the youthful vitality at this conservative gathering. And then she goes to the liberals and they're all gray-haired men like us. The one person who had anything interesting to say was Francis Fukuyama, who's in his 80s. She's making the point—this is the point—it's not a generational war, because there are young people on the right side of the spectrum who are doing interesting things. I mean, I don't like what they're doing, because I'm not a rightist, but they're interesting, they're different, they're new, there's excitement there, there's creativity there.Andrew Keen: But could one argue, Bill, that all these labels are meaningless and that whatever they're doing—I'm sure they're having more sex than young progressives, they're having more fun, they're able to make jokes, they are able, for better or worse, to change the system. Does it really matter whether they claim to be MAGA people or leftists? They're the ones who are driving change in the country.William Deresiewicz: Yes, they're the ones who are driving change in the country. The counter-cultural energy that was on the left in the sixties and seventies is now on the right. And it does matter because they are operating in the political sphere, have an effect in the political sphere, and they're unmistakably on the right. I mean, there are all these new weird species on the right—the trads and the neo-pagans and the alt-right and very sort of anti-capitalist conservatives or at least anti-corporate conservatives and all kinds of things that you would never have imagined five years ago. And again, it's not that I like these things. It's that they're new, there's ferment there. So stuff is coming out that is going to drive, is already driving the culture and therefore the politics forward. And as somebody who, yes, is progressive, it is endlessly frustrating to me that we have lost this kind of initiative, momentum, energy, creativity, to what used to be the stodgy old right. Now we're the stodgy old left.Andrew Keen: What do you want to go back to? I mean you brought up Dylan earlier. Do you just want to resurrect...William Deresiewicz: No, I don't.Andrew Keen: You know another one who comes to mind is another sort of bundle of contradictions, Bruce Springsteen. He recently talked about the corrupt, incompetent, and treasonous nature of Trump. I mean Springsteen's a billionaire. He even acknowledged that he mythologized his own working-class status. He's never spent more than an hour in a factory. He's never had a job. So aren't all the pigeons coming back to roost here? The fraud of men like Springsteen are merely being exposed and young people recognize it.William Deresiewicz: Well, I don't know about Springsteen in particular...Andrew Keen: Well, he's a big deal.William Deresiewicz: No, I know he's a big deal, and I love Springsteen. I listened to him on repeat when I was young, and I actually didn't know that he'd never worked in a factory, and I quite frankly don't care because he's an artist, and he made great art out of those experiences, whether they were his or not. But to address the real issue here, he is an old guy. It sounds like he's just—I mean, I'm sure he's sincere about it and I would agree with him about Trump. But to have people like Springsteen or Robert De Niro or George Clooney...Andrew Keen: Here it is.William Deresiewicz: Okay, yes, it's all to the point that these are old guys. So you asked me, do I want to go back? The whole point is I don't want to go back. I want to go forward. I'm not going to be the one to bring us forward because I'm older. And also, I don't think I was ever that kind of creative spirit, but I want to know why there isn't sort of youthful creativity given the fact that most young people do still vote for Democrats, but there's no youthful creativity on the left. Is it just that the—I want to be surprised is the point. I'm not calling for X, Y, or Z. I'm saying astonish me, right? Like Diaghilev said to Cocteau. Astonish me the way you did in the 60s and 70s. Show me something new. And I worry that it simply isn't possible on the left now, precisely because it's so locked down in this kind of establishment, censorious mode that there's no room for a new idea to come from anywhere.Andrew Keen: As it happens, you published this essay in Salmagundi—and that predates, if not even be pre-counterculture. How many years old is it? I think it started in '64. Yeah, so alongside your piece is an interesting piece from Adam Phillips about influence and anxiety. And he quotes Montaigne from "On Experience": "There is always room for a successor, even for ourselves, and a different way to proceed." Is the problem, Bill, that we haven't, we're not willing to leave the stage? I mean, Nancy Pelosi is a good example of this. Biden's a good example. In this Salmagundi piece, there's an essay from Martin Jay, who's 81 years old. I was a grad student in Berkeley in the 80s. Even at that point, he seemed old. Why are these people not able to leave the stage?William Deresiewicz: I am not going to necessarily sign on to that argument, and not just because I'm getting older. Biden...Andrew Keen: How old are you, by the way?William Deresiewicz: I'm 61. So you mentioned Pelosi. I would have been happy for Pelosi to remain in her position for as long as she wanted, because she was effective. It's not about how old you are. Although it can be, obviously as you get older you can become less effective like Joe Biden. I think there's room for the old and the young together if the old are saying valuable things and if the young are saying valuable things. It's not like there's a shortage of young voices on the left now. They're just not interesting voices. I mean, the one that comes immediately to mind that I'm more interested in is Ritchie Torres, who's this congressman who's a genuinely working-class Black congressman from the Bronx, unlike AOC, who grew up the daughter of an architect in Northern Westchester and went to a fancy private university, Boston University. So Ritchie Torres is not a doctrinaire leftist Democrat. And he seems to speak from a real self. Like he isn't just talking about boilerplate. I just feel like there isn't a lot of room for the Ritchie Torres. I think the system that produces democratic candidates militates against people like Ritchie Torres. And that's what I am talking about.Andrew Keen: In the essay, you write about Andy Mills, who was one of the pioneers of the New York Times podcast. He got thrown out of The New York Times for various offenses. It's one of the problems with the left—they've, rather like the Stalinists in the 1930s, purged all the energy out of themselves. Anyone of any originality has been thrown out for one reason or another.William Deresiewicz: Well, because it's always the same reason, because they violate the code. I mean, yes, this is one of the main problems. And to go back to where we started with the journalists, it seems like the rationale for the cover-up, all the cover-ups was, "we can't say anything bad about our side. We can't point out any of the flaws because that's going to help the bad guys." So if anybody breaks ranks, we're going to cancel them. We're going to purge them. I mean, any idiot understands that that's a very short-term strategy. You need the possibility of self-criticism and self-difference. I mean that's the thing—you asked me about old people leaving the stage, but the quotation from Montaigne said, "there's always room for a successor, even ourselves." So this is about the possibility of continuous self-reinvention. Whatever you want to say about Dylan, some people like him, some don't, he's done that. Bowie's done that. This was sort of our idea, like you're constantly reinventing yourself, but this is what we don't have.Andrew Keen: Yeah, actually, I read the quote the wrong way, that we need to reinvent ourselves. Bowie is a very good example if one acknowledges, and Dylan of course, one's own fundamental plasticity. And that's another problem with the progressive movement—they don't think of the human condition as a plastic one.William Deresiewicz: That's interesting. I mean, in one respect, I think they think of it as too plastic, right? This is sort of the blank slate fallacy that we can make—there's no such thing as human nature and we can reshape it as we wish. But at the same time, they've created a situation, and this really is what Excellent Sheep is about, where they're turning out the same human product over and over.Andrew Keen: But in that sense, then, the excellent sheep you write about at Yale, they've all ended up now as neo-liberal, neo-conservative, so they're just rebelling...William Deresiewicz: No, they haven't. No, they are the backbone of this soggy liberal progressive establishment. A lot of them are. I mean, why is, you know, even Wall Street and Silicon Valley sort of by preference liberal? It's because they're full of these kinds of elite college graduates who have been trained to be liberal.Andrew Keen: So what are we to make of the Musk-Thiel, particularly the Musk phenomenon? I mean, certainly Thiel, very much influenced by Rand, who herself, of course, was about as deeply Nietzschean as you can get. Why isn't Thiel and Musk just a model of the virility, the vitality of the early 21st century? You might not like what they say, but they're full of vitality.William Deresiewicz: It's interesting, there's a place in my piece where I say that the liberal can't accept the idea that a bad person can do great things. And one of my examples was Elon Musk. And the other one—Andrew Keen: Zuckerberg.William Deresiewicz: But Musk is not in the piece, because I wrote the piece before the inauguration and they asked me to change it because of what Musk was doing. And even I was beginning to get a little queasy just because the association with Musk is now different. It's now DOGE. But Musk, who I've always hated, I've never liked the guy, even when liberals loved him for making electric cars. He is an example, at least the pre-DOGE Musk, of a horrible human being with incredible vitality who's done great things, whether you like it or not. And I want—I mean, this is the energy that I want to harness for our team.Andrew Keen: I actually mostly agreed with your piece, but I didn't agree with that because I think most progressives believe that actually, the Zuckerbergs and the Musks, by doing, by being so successful, by becoming multi-billionaires, are morally a bit dodgy. I mean, I don't know where you get that.William Deresiewicz: That's exactly the point. But I think what they do is when they don't like somebody, they just negate the idea that they're great. "Well, he's just not really doing anything that great." You disagree.Andrew Keen: So what about ideas, Bill? Where is there room to rebuild the left? I take your points, and I don't think many people would actually disagree with you. Where does the left, if there's such a term anymore, need to go out on a limb, break some eggs, offend some people, but nonetheless rebuild itself? It's not going back to Bernie Sanders and some sort of nostalgic New Deal.William Deresiewicz: No, no, I agree. So this is, this may be unsatisfying, but this is what I'm saying. If there were specific new ideas that I thought the left should embrace, I would have said so. What I'm seeing is the left needs, to begin with, to create the conditions from which new ideas can come. So I mean, we've been talking about a lot of it. The censoriousness needs to go.I would also say—actually, I talk about this also—you know, maybe you would consider yourself part of, I don't know. There's this whole sort of heterodox realm of people who did dare to violate the progressive pieties and say, "maybe the pandemic response isn't going so well; maybe the Black Lives Matter protests did have a lot of violence"—maybe all the things, right? And they were all driven out from 2020 and so forth. A lot of them were people who started on the left and would even still describe themselves as liberal, would never vote for a Republican. So these people are out there. They're just, they don't have a voice within the Democratic camp because the orthodoxy continues to be enforced.So that's what I'm saying. You've got to start with the structural conditions. And one of them may be that we need to get—I don't even know that these institutions can reform themselves, whether it's the Times or the New Yorker or the Ivy League. And it may be that we need to build new institutions, which is also something that's happening. I mean, it's something that's happening in the realm of publishing and journalism on Substack. But again, they're still marginalized because that liberal establishment does not—it's not that old people don't wanna give up power, it's that the established people don't want to give up the power. I mean Harris is, you know, she's like my age. So the establishment as embodied by the Times, the New Yorker, the Ivy League, foundations, the think tanks, the Democratic Party establishment—they don't want to move aside. But it's so obviously clear at this point that they are not the solution. They're not the solutions.Andrew Keen: What about the so-called resistance? I mean, a lot of people were deeply disappointed by the response of law firms, maybe even universities, the democratic party as we noted is pretty much irrelevant. Is it possible for the left to rebuild itself by a kind of self-sacrifice, by lawyers who say "I don't care what you think of me, I'm simply against you" and to work together, or university presidents who will take massive pay cuts and take on MAGA/Trump world?William Deresiewicz: Yeah, I mean, I don't know if this is going to be the solution to the left rebuilding itself, but I think it has to happen, not just because it has to happen for policy reasons, but I mean you need to start by finding your courage again. I'm not going to say your testicles because that's gendered, but you need to start—I mean the law firms, maybe that's a little, people have said, well, it's different because they're in a competitive business with each other, but why did the university—I mean I'm a Columbia alumnus. I could not believe that Columbia immediately caved.It occurs to me as we're talking that these are people, university presidents who have learned cowardice. This is how they got to be where they got and how they keep their jobs. They've learned to yield in the face of the demands of students, the demands of alumni, the demands of donors, maybe the demands of faculty. They don't know how to be courageous anymore. And as much as I have lots of reasons, including personal ones, to hate Harvard University, good for them. Somebody finally stood up, and I was really glad to see that. So yeah, I think this would be one good way to start.Andrew Keen: Courage, in other words, is the beginning.William Deresiewicz: Courage is the beginning.Andrew Keen: But not a courage that takes itself too seriously.William Deresiewicz: I mean, you know, sure. I mean I don't really care how seriously—not the self-referential courage. Real courage, which means you're really risking losing something. That's what it means.Andrew Keen: And how can you and I then manifest this courage?William Deresiewicz: You know, you made me listen to Jocelyn Benson.Andrew Keen: Oh, yeah, I forgot and I actually I have to admit I saw that on the email and then I forgot who Jocelyn Benson is, which is probably reflects the fact that she didn't say very much.William Deresiewicz: For those of you who don't know what we're talking about, she's the Secretary of State of Michigan. She's running for governor.Andrew Keen: Oh yeah, and she was absolutely diabolical. She was on the show, I thought.William Deresiewicz: She wrote a book called Purposeful Warrior, and the whole interview was just this salad of cliches. Purpose, warrior, grit, authenticity. And part of, I mentioned her partly because she talked about courage in a way that was complete nonsense.Andrew Keen: Real courage, yeah, real courage. I remember her now. Yeah, yeah.William Deresiewicz: Yeah, she got made into a martyr because she got threatened after the 2020 election.Andrew Keen: Well, lots to think about, Bill. Very good conversation, as always. I think we need to get rid of old white men like you and I, but what do I know?William Deresiewicz: I mean, I am going to keep a death grip on my position, which is no good whatsoever.Andrew Keen: As I half-joked, Bill, maybe you should have called the piece "Post-Erection." If you can't get an erection, then you certainly shouldn't be in public office. That would have meant that Joe Biden would have had to have retired immediately.William Deresiewicz: I'm looking forward to seeing the test you devise to determine whether people meet your criterion.Andrew Keen: Yeah, maybe it will be a public one. Bread and circuses, bread and elections. We shall see, Bill, I'm not even going to do your last name because I got it right once. I'm never going to say it again. Bill, congratulations on the piece "Post-Election," not "Post-Erection," and we will talk again. This story is going to run and run. We will talk again in the not too distant future. Thank you so much.William Deresiewicz: That's 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

Few observers are more insightful than the critic William Deresiewicz at identifying the changing landscape of American culture. In my latest conversation with Deresiewicz, best known for his book Excellent Sheep, we explore how young American men are increasingly drawn to right-wing politics while feeling socially devalued and alienated by progressive rhetoric. Deresiewicz critiques universities for embracing a censorious left-wing ideology that has become intellectually stagnant. He contrasts this with the creative ferment happening on the right, while at the same time rejecting Trump's authoritarian tactics against universities. Deresiewicz argues that art has lost its cultural significance as consumption has become disposable, and notes that a new counter-elite is attempting to destroy the established liberal elite rather than join its exclusive club.Here are the 5 KEEN ON AMERICA takeaways in our conversation with Deresiewicz: * Young men, particularly those without elite educations, are increasingly drawn to right-wing politics partly due to economic changes, dating app dynamics, and what Deresiewicz perceives as dismissive rhetoric from the progressive left.* Universities have embraced a "far left progressive ideology" that has been repeatedly rejected by voters even in traditionally liberal areas, yet Deresiewicz condemns Trump's authoritarian tactics against these institutions.* The political left has become intellectually stagnant, with creative energy now more visible on the right, while progressive spaces have become censorious and intolerant of debate.* Art has lost its cultural significance as streaming platforms and internet culture have turned creative works into disposable "content," diminishing both audience engagement and artistic seriousness.* A new counter-elite (represented by figures like Trump and Musk) isn't seeking admission to established power structures but rather aims to destroy them entirely, representing a significant shift in elite dynamics.William Deresiewicz is an award-winning essayist and critic, a frequent speaker at colleges, high schools, and other venues, and the author of five books including the New York Times bestseller Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life. His most recent book is The End of Solitude: Selected Essays on Culture and Society. His current project is a historically informed memoir about being Jewish. Bill has published over 300 essays and reviews. He has won the Hiett Prize in the Humanities, the National Book Critics Circle's Nona Balakian Citation for Excellence in Reviewing, and a Sydney Award; he is also a three-time National Magazine Award nominee. His work, which has appeared in The New York Times, The Atlantic, Harper's, The London Review of Books, and many other publications, has been translated into 19 languages and included in over 40 college readers and other anthologies. Bill taught English at Yale and Columbia before becoming a full-time writer. He has appeared on The Colbert Report, Here & Now, The New Yorker Radio Hour, and many other outlets and has held visiting positions at Bard, Scripps, and Claremont McKenna Colleges as well as at American Jewish University and the University of San Diego. His previous books are The Death of the Artist: How Creators are Struggling to Survive in the Age of Billionaires and Big Tech, A Jane Austen Education, and Jane Austen and the Romantic Poets. Bill is a member of the board (directorial, editorial, or advisory) of The Matthew Strother Center for the Examined Life, a retreat and study program in Catskill, NY; The Metropolitan Review, a new literary journal; Tivnu: Building Justice, which runs a Jewish service-learning gap year and other programs in Portland, OR; the Prohuman Foundation, which promotes the ideals of individual identity and shared humanity; Circle, a group coaching and purpose-finding program for college and graduate students; and Clio's, a selectively curated, chronologically organized bookstore in Oakland.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. 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

What kind of life do you really want to be living? What kind of life has meaning for you? And if you have children, and even, like me, have ones thinkinga about college, what kind of life should they be thinking about? This was a true privilege to speak with William Deresiewicz and hear his thoughts on these questions. William Deresiewicz is an American author and essayist who has written the New York Times bestseller Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life, published May, 2024 in a 10th-anniversary edition. Some of his essays are published in his recent book The End of Solitude: Selected Essays on Culture and Society. Mr. Deresiewicz has won the Hiett Prize in the Humanities, the National Book Critics Circle's Nona Balakian Citation for Excellence in Reviewing, and a Sydney Award. He taught English at both Yale and Columbia and is currently serving as an inaugural Public Fellow at American Jewish University. Here's a link to the article that introduced me to his work.  

“The system of elite education, which I can define at greater lengths is making kids miserable, and it's producing an elite class that's wrecking the country,” says best-selling author and essayist Bill Deresiewicz in this week's episode of The Syllabus. Syllabus host Mark Oppenheimer discusses topics in Deresiewicz's book Excellent Sheep, including societal pressures to attend elite colleges, overwhelming careerism, admissions competition, and increasing inequality in access to education. Guest Bio: William Deresiewicz is an essayist, critic, speaker, and author of the best-seller Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life. Formerly a Yale and Columbia English professor, Deresiewicz transitioned to full-time writing and has taught or lectured at schools including Bard, Scripps, Claremont McKenna, and the University of San Diego. Deresiewicz is also active with Tivnu: Building Justice and Project Wayfinder, promoting social justice and purpose-based learning.Stay informed about this podcast and all of AJU's latest programs and offerings by subscribing to our mailing list HERE If you'd like to support AJU and this podcast, please consider donating to us at aju.edu/donate

As an English professor at Yale University, essayist and literary critic William Deresiewicz observed a trend across American higher education that troubled him deeply. Instead of learning to think independently, critically, creatively, and courageously, students were increasingly subscribing to a mode of careerism, credentialism, and conformism that focused on climbing the academic or professional ladder. So what is the value of higher education? As Deresiewicz writes in his 2014 book Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life, colleges, first and foremost, are supposed to teach you to think, to help you develop a habit of skepticism and the capacity to put it into practice. More than that, college is where you build a soul — your moral, intellectual, sensual, emotional self, through exposure to books, ideas, works of art, and pressures of the minds around you that are looking for their own answers to the big questions. Questions of love, family, God, mortality, time, truth, dignity, and the human experience. Over the course of our conversation, we discuss the search for a meaningful life, the worth of a liberal education, the role of mentorship, the relationship between solitude and leadership, what it means to cultivate moral imagination, and more.In this episode, we discuss: 3:00 - Deresiewicz' approach to teaching during his years as a college professor6:25 - The reason why parents are not ideally positioned to guide their children through questions of what they want to do with their lives 8:02 - What Deresiewicz believes is the purpose of higher education 10:50 - What it means to “shape the soul” of students 17:12 - What we miss when we take a scientistic view of the world 20:45 - The challenge of establishing normative values in society, and why a “moral education” should be prioritized instead28:25 - The search for individualism among students today30:55 - What true leadership looks like and why people in powerful positions in our society do not often exhibit these traits40:28 - What does it mean to have a sense of purpose?43:00 - How young people can work to develop their sense of a calling or purposeWilliam Deresiewicz is the author of four books, including A Jane Austen Education (2011), Excellent Sheep (2014), The Death of the Artist (2020), and The End of Solitude (2022), as well as multiple essays, including Solitude and Leadership (2010) and The Disadvantages of an Elite Education (2008). William Deresiewicz can be found on Twitter/X at @Wderesiewicz.Visit our website www.TheDoctorsArt.com where you can find transcripts of all episodes.If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, rate, and review our show, available for free on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. If you know of a doctor, patient, or anyone working in health care who would love to explore meaning in medicine with us on the show, feel free to leave a suggestion in the comments or send an email to info@

Chapter 1 Understand the idea behind Excellent Sheep"Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life" is a book by William Deresiewicz. In this book, Deresiewicz explores the flaws of the modern education system and the pressure placed on students to pursue narrow definitions of success and achievement.Deresiewicz, a former Yale professor, argues that the education system focuses too much on grades, test scores, and prestige, rather than fostering creativity, intellectual curiosity, and a sense of purpose. He criticizes what he calls the "meritocracy" where students are pushed to achieve for the sake of achievement, often leading to a lack of authenticity and fulfillment in their adult lives.The term "Excellent Sheep" comes from a quote by former Yale professor William Sloan Coffin, who said, "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity." Deresiewicz sees this as reflective of the conformity and lack of critical thinking fostered by the education system.Through personal anecdotes, interviews with students, and a deep analysis of societal pressures, Deresiewicz offers insights and suggestions for creating a more meaningful education system that values personal growth, self-discovery, and the pursuit of true passions. He encourages students to think critically about their goals and aspirations, and to find their own paths rather than conforming to societal expectations."Excellent Sheep" has sparked much discussion and debate about the current state of higher education and the effects of the pressure to achieve. It offers a critique of the status quo and a call to action for reforming the education system to better serve the needs of students.Chapter 2 Is Excellent Sheep Worth the Hype?The book has received generally positive reviews and has been praised for its critique of the higher education system and its examination of the pressure and conformity faced by college students. It has been described as thought-provoking, insightful, and well-researched. If you are interested in exploring topics related to education, personal development, and the challenges faced by students, you might find "Excellent Sheep" to be a valuable read.Chapter 3 Overview of Excellent Sheep"Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life" is a book written by William Deresiewicz that examines the flaws of the education system in America, particularly within elite institutions.The book argues that many elite colleges and universities prioritize the development of narrow skills and the pursuit of prestige over the pursuit of a truly meaningful and fulfilling education. Deresiewicz suggests that these institutions and their students are often consumed with competition, conformity, and achievement, leading to a culture of "excellent sheep" who are focused on getting the best grades, securing high-paying jobs, and maintaining a certain social status, rather than cultivating genuine intellectual curiosity and personal growth.Deresiewicz draws on his own experiences as a professor at Yale University, as well as interviews with students and faculty from various elite institutions, to shed light on the detrimental effects of this education system. He critiques the overspecialization and hyper-competitive nature of these institutions, arguing that they produce graduates who lack the ability to think critically, engage in meaningful social and political discourse, and find true fulfillment in their lives.Additionally, Deresiewicz highlights the impact of societal pressures and...

William Deresiewicz — author of Excellent Sheep, The Death of the Artist, and The End of Solitude — has lived many lives. He's been an orthodox Jewish boy who lost his faith; a journalism school student unimpressed by the pretensions of the profession; a literature professor who (blasphemously) loved books and teaching. Today, he's an author, essayist, and nostalgic ex-New Yorker. No matter where he's been in life, Deresiewicz has often been on the outside looking in, which is maybe why he's able to see and analyze our culture so clearly. We start off this conversation diving into The Death of the Artist, and how the concept/role of the artist has evolved and changed throughout history; we then meander into a discussion on community, solitude, and cities; and conclude by diving into his two definitions of the word “culture,” while unpacking the techno-solutionism of America.Check out our ‘Uncertainty' newsletter for updates and rants. To support us and gain access to exclusive content, consider becoming a paid member of Uncertain on Substack. Follow @UncertainPod on your social media of choice.On the agenda:-Phantasms, Batman, and Bill [0:00-6:00]-The first paradigm - artist as artisan [6:01-17:04]-The second paradigm - artist as bohemian  [17:05-27:55]-The third paradigm - artist as professional  [27:56-33:40]-To the fourth paradigm [33:41-39:41]-Artist as producer vs. truth teller [39:42-57:53]-Art and community [57:54-1:01:59]-Solitude and cities [1:02:00-1:19:25]-Culture vs culture [1:19:26-1:40:06]Mentioned in this conversation: -Washington Post's Leonard Downie Jr. on moving beyond “objectivity”-The Herd of Independent MindsThe Two Cultures and the Scientific RevolutionUncertain Things is hosted and produced by Adaam James Levin-Areddy and Vanessa M. Quirk. For more doomsday rumination, subscribe to: uncertain.substack.com. Get full access to Uncertain Things at uncertain.substack.com/subscribe

William "Bill" Deresiewicz - Acclaimed essayist, critic, and best-selling author - joins Tavis for a conversation on the delicate balance between free speech and censorship, the impact of social media on public discourse, and the importance of intellectual diversity in a democratic society.

Writer and cultural critic William Deresiewicz, author of The Death of the Artist, talks about: His motivations in writing the book, largely motivated by dispelling the myth that this (our current internet/social media era) was the greatest time ever to be an artist, as well as trying to understand how artists (not just visual, artists across all fields- writing, music, film & television) were adapting to making art and surviving in an this world; why he strongly believes that not everyone can be an artist; how and why the monopoly on taste has been broken through a more middle-brow level of connoisseurship; how we can't dispense with the gatekeeper, whether it's the curator of artists or our listening playlists; artists' relative comfort (or discomfort) with using social media, which isn't as tied to age as you would think; the wide variety of day jobs that artists do (including a list of 50 jobs/gigs that Deresiewicz compiled), and the degrees of poverty artists live with; the delicate and complex dynamic of artists walking away from being artists (which is of course very hard to document); the artist Paul Rucker (perhaps the only artist profiled in the book whom I should have heard of) who's had a wide-ranging and remarkable career; the challenge of finding and working with the ‘typical' working artist- artists whose careers were coming up but not yet well known; and what a solid work-lifestyle balance looks like for one of the artists in the book, as well as for Deresiewicz himself.

William Deresiewicz joins Celeste Marcus to discuss his upcoming book "The End of Solitude: Selected Essays on Culture and Society." In this conversation they broach many of the themes which Deresiewicz explores in his book, including the nature of attention, the meaning of art, the purpose of education, and the snares endemic to membership in any community.

How do you make a living as an artist when the big platforms price your work at zero? How do you get your big break when all the institutions that used to discover young artists have been decimated by the tech monopolies? In this episode, I talk to essayist and critic William Deresiewicz about his book, The Death of the Artist: How Creators Are Struggling to Survive in the Age of Billionaires and Big Tech. BILL'S WEBSITE billderesiewicz.com WORKS CITED -Deresiewicz, William. The Death of the Artist: How Creators Are Struggling to Survive in the Age of Billionaires and Big Tech. New York, New York: Henry Holt and Co., 2020. -Khan, Lina M. “Amazon's Antitrust Paradox.” The Yale Law Journal 126, no. 3 (January 2017). https://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/amazons-antitrust-paradox. -Davis, Ben. 9.5 Theses on Art and Class. Chicago, Illinois: Haymarket Books, 2013. -Graeber, David. Bullshit Jobs: A Theory. 1st edition. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2018. -Deresiewicz, William. “Stages of Grief: What the Pandemic Has Done to the Arts.” Harper's Magazine, May 12, 2021. https://harpers.org/archive/2021/06/stages-of-grief-what-the-pandemic-has-done-to-the-arts/. -Lanier, Jaron. “Opinion | Jaron Lanier Fixes the Internet.” The New York Times, September 23, 2019, sec. Opinion. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/23/opinion/data-privacy-jaron-lanier.html. MUSIC -Theme music and consultation: Georgina Rossi, www.georginarossi.com -Interlude: Alban Berg, 4 Stücke for clarinet and piano, Op.5; Carol McGonnell, clarinet; Steven Beck, piano SPONSOR Capital A is sponsored by Shoestring Press in Brooklyn: www.shoestringpressny.com --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/capital-a/message

The author William Deresiewicz, who formerly taught English at Yale University, describes what he sees as essential threats to free speech—and ultimately to the process of education—on campuses across the country. Students, he says, are afraid to speak their minds, in fear of a backlash. Deresiewicz sees the impact of cancel culture extending well beyond newsworthy cancellations of prominent people. “For every high-profile cancellation . . . there are a hundred, say, low-profile cancellations that don't get picked up,” Deresiewicz tells David Remnick. “And, even more importantly, for every one of those, there are a thousand people . . . who just keep their mouth shut.” Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, on the other hand, argues that cancel culture isn't real. It's largely, she says, an excuse made by those on the political right to lodge their own restrictions on what can be said in the public sphere. Kliph Nesteroff, a historian of comedy, agrees with that assessment. “There used to be this conceit, a few years ago—‘They're going to take your guns away,' ” he says; now the refrain is “ ‘They're going to take your jokes away. They're going to take your comedians!' It's the same sort of element driving the narrative.” Pushback to jokes at the expense of marginalized people is nothing new, Nesteroff explains. He offers the example of Native Americans protesting insulting portrayals in silent films more than a century ago. But social media has brought these criticisms into the public consciousness. “It's not even cancel culture. It's just culture,” Nesteroff says. “The history of America is a tug-of-war between opposing forces—powerful forces versus weak forces.”

A former Yale professor on the clever but morally clueless students pursuing an elite education.  ------ In 2014, William Deresiewicz's book Excellent Sheep: The miseducation of the American elite and the way to a meaningful life became an instant best-seller. The former Yale professor called out the way that elite American universities produced “excellent sheep”: clever, highly credentialled, and conscientious young people who were nonetheless stumped about the meaning of life. Instead, they funnelled themselves into high-paying jobs in law, finance, medicine, consulting, or tech.    In this fascinating discussion, Deresiewicz talks about the way that words like “soul” have a gravity that non-religious language can't replicate, why a good education is necessarily going to ask existential questions about “love and time and God and everything”, and how he annoyed Canadian psychologist and popular science writer Steven Pinker with talk about university as a time to “build your self”. As the Australian federal government changes the pricing structure of university degrees to encourage students to pursue courses in areas of expected job growth, it's clear that we're also asking: what exactly is the value of an education? ------ Explore: Excellent Sheep: The miseducation of the American elite and the way to a meaningful life (Bill's most recent book) The Death of the Artist: How Creators Are Struggling to Survive in the Age of Billionaires and Big Tech

Artists communicate and articulate emotionally what we are unable to do ourselves. When we don’t value and support artists, society as a whole misses out on truth, introspection, and depth. An Urban Institute study found that “96 percent of respondents said they were greatly inspired and moved by various kinds of art…[and] only 27 percent of respondents said that artists contribute "a lot" to the good of society.” If so many of us value and are moved by art, why don’t we support the artists that create it?In the final episode of this three-part podcast series, Russ concludes his conversation with William Deresiewicz, discussing his book, The Death of the Artist: How Creators Are Struggling to Survive in the Age of Billionaires and Big Tech, and the importance of supporting and valuing artists’ contributions to society.Deresiewicz has published more than 280 essays and reviews, won the Hiett Prize in the Humanities, the National Book Critics Circle’s Balakian Citation for Excellence in Reviewing, as well as a Sydney Award. He is a three-time National Magazine Award nominee, and his work has appeared in The New York Times, The Atlantic, Harper’s, The American Scholar, and many other publications. These works have been translated into 18 languages and anthologized in more than 30 college and scholastic readers.ResourcesThe Death of the ArtistExcellent SheepA Jane Austen EducationSolitude and LeadershipThe best education for all - Bill Deresiewicz TedTalkJFK quote the importance of artist in culture“If art is to nourish the roots of our culture, society must set the artist free to follow his vision wherever it takes him. We must never forget that art is not a form of propaganda; it is a form of truth…”Juice Wrld

Students are people, first and foremost. When we treat them as products or resources for the job market, we deprive both them and the world of the creativity and depth necessary to develop holistic leaders. In this second episode of three, Russ continues his conversation with William Deresiewicz about rethinking and redefining education and the importance of seeing students as human beings.Deresiewicz has published more than 280 essays and reviews, won the Hiett Prize in the Humanities, the National Book Critics Circle’s Balakian Citation for Excellence in Reviewing, as well as a Sydney Award. He is a three-time National Magazine Award nominee, and his work has appeared in The New York Times, The Atlantic, Harper’s, The American Scholar, and many other publications. These works have been translated into 18 languages and anthologized in more than 30 college and scholastic readers.ResourcesPosition, Purpose, and the Midlife Crisis This Side of Paradise DostoevskyExcellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life“Achievement machines,” from “Stressed for Success?” by David BrooksPeter Drucker

A meritocracia funciona? Durante muito tempo, o argumento pró-meritocracia não apenas se estabeleceu como fundamento para as sociedades mais justas e democráticas, como, também, foi um dos princípios norteadores para que as pessoas buscassem se aprimorar, sobretudo no âmbito profissional, a fim de que alcançassem melhores condições de trabalho e reconhecimento pelo que realizaram. De uns anos para cá, no entanto, tem existido verdadeira preocupação com os limites da meritocracia. Afinal, será que determinados processos podem ser classificados como meritocráticos? Para falar a respeito do tema, nosso convidado de hoje é William Deresiewicz , autor do livro “Excelent Sheep: the miseducation of the american elite and the way to a meaninful life”. Deresiewicz é um dos críticos mais contundentes da meritocracia e na entrevista a seguir comenta como essa ideologia pode contaminar até mesmo o ambiente cultural e político em que vivemos. A entrevista está em inglês.

A meritocracia funciona? Durante muito tempo, o argumento pró-meritocracia não apenas se estabeleceu como fundamento para as sociedades mais justas e democráticas, como, também, foi um dos princípios norteadores para que as pessoas buscassem se aprimorar, sobretudo no âmbito profissional, a fim de que alcançassem melhores condições de trabalho e reconhecimento pelo que realizaram. De uns anos para cá, no entanto, tem existido verdadeira preocupação com os limites da meritocracia. Afinal, será que determinados processos podem ser classificados como meritocráticos? Para falar a respeito do tema, nosso convidado de hoje é William Deresiewicz , autor do livro “Excelent Sheep: the miseducation of the american elite and the way to a meaninful life”. Deresiewicz é um dos críticos mais contundentes da meritocracia e na entrevista a seguir comenta como essa ideologia pode contaminar até mesmo o ambiente cultural e político em que vivemos. A entrevista está em inglês.

Bestselling author William Deresiewicz's new book, The Death of the Artist: How Creators Are Struggling to Survive in the Age of Billionaires and Big Tech, paints a grim picture of the state of the arts-at least as far as actual artists are concerned. For all the talk about how it's never been easier to be creative, the truth is that it's never been more difficult to do so professionally. In this conversation, Deresiewicz relays what he learned from interviews with more than one hundred working artists, how the digital economy has obliterated the creative economy, and what he portends for the future of his own career. Guest Bio:  William Deresiewicz is an award-winning essayist and critic, a frequent speaker at colleges and other venues, and a former professor of English at Yale. His writing has appeared in the New York Times, the Atlantic, Harper's Magazine, the Nation, the New Republic, and many other publications. He is the recipient of a National Book Critics Circle award for excellence in reviewing and is the New York Times bestselling author of Excellent Sheep, The Death of the Artist, and A Jane Austen Education.  

The pandemic has made life as an artist hard — real hard. Museums and studios have closed, live shows have been canceled and concerts have been pushed online. But according to William Deresiewicz, this is just the most recent act in a long, profound shift in the arts. Deresiewicz, a former English professor at Yale University and author of “The Death of the Artist: How Creators Are Struggling to Survive in the Age of Billionaires and Big Tech,” says the digital age has devastated and demonetized the arts — whether that’s music, videos, visual art or the written word. We’re facing the loss of the moderately successful artist and “you can’t have even the stars without an ecosystem that supports them,” he says. So where does that leave us?

Michael talks with William Deresiewicz, author about Excellent Sheep, on parent and counselor expectations and Fear around the broken educational systemAs a Yale professor, Bill Deresiewicz saw something deeply troubling. His students were adrift when it came to the big questions: how to think critically and creatively, and how to find a sense of purpose.Excellent Sheep takes a sharp look at the high-pressure conveyor belt that begins with parents and counselors who demand perfect grades and continues into college. As schools shift focus from the liberal arts to narrowly “practical” subjects like economics and computer science, students are losing the ability to think for themselves.Deresiewicz explains how college should be a time for self-discovery, when young people can establish their own values and measures of success in order to forge their own path. He addresses parents, students, educators, and anyone who’s interested in the direction of American society, featuring quotes from real students and graduates he has corresponded with over the years, candidly exposing where the system is broken and clearly presenting solutions.William Deresiewicz is an award-winning essayist and critic, a frequent speaker at colleges, high schools, and other venues, and the best-selling author of Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life. His new book is The Death of the Artist: How Creators Are Struggling to Survive in the Age of Billionaires and Big Tech.Bill has published more than 250 essays and reviews. He has won the Hiett Prize in the Humanities, the Balakian Citation for Excellence in Reviewing, and a Sydney Award; he is also a three-time National Magazine Award nominee. His work, which has appeared in The New York Times, The Atlantic, Harper’s, The American Scholar, and many other publications, has been translated into 17 languages and anthologized in more than 30 college and scholastic readers.Bill taught English at Yale and Columbia before becoming a full-time writer in 2008. He has spoken at over 100 educational and other venues and held visiting positions at Bard, Scripps, and Claremont McKenna Colleges as well as at the University of San Diego. His previous book is A Jane Austen Education.About the Crushing Your Fear PodcastBioMichael is an Entrepreneur who has started multiple revenue generating companies both in the US and Europe. He currently hosts two Podcasts (Crushing Your Fear and Craft Beer Storm) and has learned to conquer Fear through leaving the past behind, learning from it and adopting Gratitude and a Positive outlook for the future. On his Crushing Your Fear Podcast, Michael explains "We live in a Society of Fear. Everywhere we turn, fear is there. Most people we know are affected by fear in one form or another. We ourselves are consumed by fear - we cant move forward - we wont take chances - we "fear' what others may "think" of us - and on and on and on. Enough! There is another way. We explore different areas in society, flush out the manipulation and empower you to overcome fear. Our guests are experts and give you the insight and tools needed to identify and conquer fear. So join us and Crush Your Fear..."Michael BearaHostCrushing Your Fear Podcastmichael@crushingyourfear.comWebsite: http://www.crushingyourfear.com/Instagram: @crushingyourfearFacebook: @crushingyourfearTwitter: @crushingfearTik Tok: @crushingyourfearSubscribe to our Podcast!iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/crushing-your-fear/id1465751659Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/craft-beer-storm/crushing-your-fear

Dr. William Deresiewicz is an author, essayist, and literary critic. He received his bachelor’s, master’s, and Ph.D. from Columbia University and taught English at Yale University before becoming a full-time writer. In 2014, Dr. Deresiewicz wrote the best-selling book Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life. Excellent Sheep on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Excellent-Sheep-Miseducation-American-Meaningful/dp/1476702721   ———   Website: https://www.ericcervone.comYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC13h27HBHpqpHWtzxJF4jQA Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ericcervone Twitter: https://twitter.com/ericcervone  

Gov. Roy Cooper has signed an executive order calling on state agencies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The goal is to have North Carolina follow through on dictates of the Paris climate agreement, even though the Trump administration has pulled the United States out of that agreement. Donald van der Vaart, John Locke Foundation senior fellow and former N.C. environmental secretary, dissects Cooper’s order and analyzes its implications. Many American cities appear to face a state of decline. The group Strong Towns endorses action that would help reverse that decline. Development director Bo Wright discusses Strong Towns’ recommendations. That includes the roles public and private actors should take. After less than three years on the job, UNC System President Margaret Spellings has announced plans to resign in March. Despite the surprise announcement, Spellings told reporters she is proud of the system’s accomplishments during her tenure. She outlined some of those accomplishments during a recent news conference. Today’s college students have embraced activism to a degree last seen in the 1970s. But former Yale professor William Deresiewicz recently cautioned a Duke audience against treating college as a way to promote that activism. Deresiewicz made a plea for a traditional liberal-arts education that forces people to think, reason, and question their beliefs. The federal government has granted North Carolina a waiver to make major changes in its Medicaid program. Among the changes is a shift from a fee-for-service system to one in which the state allots a set amount of funding to address care for each Medicaid patient. Statewide and regional groups will contract with state government to manage its Medicaid services. Dan Way, Carolina Journal associate editor, discusses waiver details and assesses the significance for Medicaid’s future.

Solitude is what you have the least of here, especially as plebes. You don’t even have privacy, the opportunity simply to be physically alone, never mind solitude, the ability to be alone with your thoughts. And yet I submit to you that solitude is one of the most important necessities of true leadership. In this episode of Made You Think, Neil and Nat cover the first speech on this show! Solitude and Leadership by William Deresiewicz is a speech held by the professor at West Point Military Academy. In it, Deresiewicz goes against the common thinking that Yale’s professors or MBAs are leaders, just because they are the best at following what they are told to do, and looks at solitude and moments of deep work the roots for true leadership. Multitasking is not only not thinking, it impairs your ability to think. Thinking means concentrating on one thing long enough to develop an idea about it. [...] Developing your own ideas. In short, thinking for yourself. You simply cannot do that in bursts of 20 seconds at a time, constantly interrupted by Facebook messages or Twitter tweets, or fiddling with your iPod, or watching something on YouTube. We cover a wide range of topics, including: Turning chaos into order vs maintaining the order The “clever” app that interrupts you to check if you are in the flow Guns and drug wars in Chicago Nat and Neil's rituals for solitude Why starting your podcast with your friends will bring you to the best of deep thinking A new sponsor that will make you smell better And much more. Please enjoy, and be sure to read Solitude and Leadership by William Deresiewicz! If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to check out our episode on The Way of Zen by Alan Watts, a book that lingers in the benefits of meditation, as well as our episode on Work Clean by Dan Charnas, a live episode with the author of the book brings the shows how to work and manage like a chef. Be sure to join our mailing list to find out about what books are coming up, giveaways we're running, special events, and more. Links from the Episode Mentioned in the show William Deresiewicz on Nat Chat [2:12] On Political Correctness by William Deresiewicz [2:46] William Deresiewicz Speech at West Point 7:26 Yale University [7:32] CMU - Carnegie Mellon University [7:56] McKinsey [12:35] Kanye West tweets [16:49] AirPods [20:14] Slack [23:36] Asana [23:36] IKEA [30:39] Salesforce [32:03] HelpSpot 32:28 Ephemerality vs Value by Nat Eliason [37:29] Snapchat [37:40] Blinkist [38:43] Mentorbox [38:43] Joe Rogan and Colion Noir on Chicago's gang violence [47:22] Russell Brand - Legalisation of Drugs [48:47] Ron Paul’s view on abortion [50:36] Stephen Colbert’s The Late Show [51:52] Wait But Why articles on AI part 1 and part 2 [51:59] Melting Asphalt [52:25] Sam Harris’ reply to Robert Spencer about immigration [52:32] Books mentioned Solitude and Leadership by William Deresiewicz Homo Deus by Yuval Harari [1:25] (book episode) Excellence Sheep by William Deresiewicz [7:38] (Nat’s notes) Extreme Ownership by Jocko [11:34] 12 Rules for Life by Dr. Jordan B. Peterson [18:09] (Nat’s notes) (Neil’s notes) (book episode) Antifragile by Nassim Taleb [18:09] (Nat’s notes) (book episode) Discipline and Punish by Michel Foucault [25:29] (Nat’s notes) (book episode) In Praise of Idleness [26:44] (Nat’s notes) (book episode) Ulysses by James Joyce [27:08] Way of Zen by Alan Watts [30:08] (Nat’s notes) (Neil’s notes) (book episode) Work Clean [31:08] (Nat’s notes) (book episode) The Rise of Superman by Steven Kotler [34:23] Amusing Ourselves to Death [36:02] (Nat’s notes) (book episode) Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari [45:19] (Nat’s notes) (book episode part 1 & part 2) The Riddle of the Gun by Sam Harris [47:10] (article episode) The Elephant in the Brain by Kevin Simler and Robin Hanson [52:25] People mentioned Sam Harris [47:10] (Guns episode) Kanye West [16:49] Jordan B. Peterson [17:09] (on Twitter) (12 Rules episode) Dave Rubin [17:21] Donald Trump [44:14] Show Topics 3:13 – New sponsor! Scentsbird are the Netflix for perfumes. They will send you premium perfumes and colognes like Dolce and Gabbana, Chanel and Armani on a monthly basis. Their their cartridge system is very clever and light, super convenient and easy to carry even on airplanes (try getting big bottles on airplanes). Listen the episode to get 50% OFF the first month subscription. 7:13 – Leadership. "Excellence sheep" concept, or what people do to get a position at Yale. Being the best at following orders doesn't make you a leader. People's confusion between leadership and being good at what one is supposed to do. Turning chaos into order vs maintaining the order. 12:05 – West Point vs Yale Leadership concept. One line Commander's intent employees. 13:18 – Solitude. Bringing Chaos back to Order requires solitude and focus. Creative thinking is not possible nowadays unless we take the concentrated effort to avoid all kind of interruptions. Kayne West and Jordan Peterson on tour. Multitasking and interruptions vs learning. 16:29 – Generally, our first though may not be the result of our creativity, but a subconscious recall of someone else's idea. Places where many ideas come because we are concentrated (and not multitasking), even on other activities. 21:07 – Meditation and background processing. Tips for reducing notifications distractions. Training your friends to not expect immediate response. Following a team at bird's eye view without babysitting them. 25:00 – The effects of talking about ideas on this podcast. 27:02 – Good work starts slow and needs time to get up to the core ideas. Experiences writing good articles or books. Japanese Zen practices and working clean are part of the many activities that foster conditions for creative spark. Organizing the CRM. 33:43 – Different types of flow. Getting "lost" in a mindless activity or reading a fiction book that helps "defrag" your hard drive. The absurd notification app to check if you are in flow or not. Differences between a book and a tweet or the newspaper. Nat & Neil's secret to read 60 books a year like top performers CEOs. Discover the fiction book we are reading listening to back episodes and participate of the give away! 40:43 – What is solitude: introspection, concentration of focused work, sustained reading. And... deep friendship. The traits of good long conversations with friends. Taking the part of the Devil's advocate, and the problem to link our identity with ideas. Not reasonable ideas are just as logical as reasonable ones, but with different inputs. Trump's voters example. 45:18 – Immigration. Extreme views like open borders and racism. Naturally moving toward the middle. Tailor-made narco-economy and guns in Chicago. The reason to legalize drugs. Libertarians against Abortion. 51:59 – The bad habit of everyone should have an opinion on everything. Replying emotionally on Twitter without being informed. Trump bringing peace in Korea. 57:07 – Solitude being the essence of leadership. Nat and Neil's rituals for solitude. Physical stresses that help freeing the mind. 1:01:40 – Sponsors! Scentbird is a monthly premium perfumes subscription service. It’s very convenient, for guys and girls. Use the code mentioned in the episode to get 50% off on the first month. Go to Four Sigmatic for your mushroom coffee needs. Perfect Keto is the one-stop shop for all your ketogenic diet needs. Learn on their blog why MCT oils and powder are amazing fats for your diet. Kettle & Fire for your collagen ancestral needs. Try the meat one with quinoa. The chicken one is good for sipping. Amazon has crushed their earning thanks to the MYT affiliate link! Let your friends know about the show. Share angrily on Twitter as our show is antifragile. If you enjoyed this episode, don’t forget to subscribe at https://madeyouthinkpodcast.com

Quote: “If you want others to follow, learn to be alone with your thoughts. -William Deresiewicz Free people must always cultivate their own ideas. Otherwise, we're only either reacting to, or agreeing with, the ideas of the day. In order to do either very well, we have to know who we are and where our thoughts come from. What's worth living or dying for? Is it better to leave our kids without a father and be a coward, or to give them memories of your bravery? Is it better to create an inclusive working environment based on what society tells you about diversity, or to create your culture that reflects excellence in another way? And how will you know? In this talk, I read Deresiewicz's 2009 address to West Point's plebe class, where he gives us a key discipline in understanding how to think and lead in a world of information overload.

“Don’t Send Your Kid to the Ivy League.”  This was the headline of a recent New Republic article that reverberated across the internet recently, going viral as it was shared over 160 thousands times on Facebook. The author of this piece, Dr. William Deresiewicz, joins the New Books in Education podcast to discuss his new book Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life (Free Press 2014), which further elaborates upon his recent viral article and another from 2008,  “The Disadvantages of an Elite Education“. In Excellent Sheep, Deresiewicz draws on his decades of experience at Ivy League institutions; first, at Columbia where he did his undergraduate and graduate degrees, and then later at Yale where he taught for a decade. With an insiders view and a critical lens, he dissects what education at these types of institutions has become. He asserts that the hypercompetitive nature of elite institutions has taken away from self-discovery of students, a key facet to innovation and creativity. Deresiewicz’s book also confronts the social implications of a less meritocratic elite system of education. Particularly, he is concerned by the kind of elites that are being produced by prestigious education in America, with graduates that disproportionally pursue careers in self-serving fields like finance. Like his past viral essays, Excellent Sheep is a thought-provoking look at American society and provides keen insights into the world of elite education. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“Don’t Send Your Kid to the Ivy League.”  This was the headline of a recent New Republic article that reverberated across the internet recently, going viral as it was shared over 160 thousands times on Facebook. The author of this piece, Dr. William Deresiewicz, joins the New Books in Education podcast to discuss his new book Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life (Free Press 2014), which further elaborates upon his recent viral article and another from 2008,  “The Disadvantages of an Elite Education“. In Excellent Sheep, Deresiewicz draws on his decades of experience at Ivy League institutions; first, at Columbia where he did his undergraduate and graduate degrees, and then later at Yale where he taught for a decade. With an insiders view and a critical lens, he dissects what education at these types of institutions has become. He asserts that the hypercompetitive nature of elite institutions has taken away from self-discovery of students, a key facet to innovation and creativity. Deresiewicz’s book also confronts the social implications of a less meritocratic elite system of education. Particularly, he is concerned by the kind of elites that are being produced by prestigious education in America, with graduates that disproportionally pursue careers in self-serving fields like finance. Like his past viral essays, Excellent Sheep is a thought-provoking look at American society and provides keen insights into the world of elite education. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“Don’t Send Your Kid to the Ivy League.”  This was the headline of a recent New Republic article that reverberated across the internet recently, going viral as it was shared over 160 thousands times on Facebook. The author of this piece, Dr. William Deresiewicz, joins the New Books in Education podcast to discuss his new book Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life (Free Press 2014), which further elaborates upon his recent viral article and another from 2008,  “The Disadvantages of an Elite Education“. In Excellent Sheep, Deresiewicz draws on his decades of experience at Ivy League institutions; first, at Columbia where he did his undergraduate and graduate degrees, and then later at Yale where he taught for a decade. With an insiders view and a critical lens, he dissects what education at these types of institutions has become. He asserts that the hypercompetitive nature of elite institutions has taken away from self-discovery of students, a key facet to innovation and creativity. Deresiewicz’s book also confronts the social implications of a less meritocratic elite system of education. Particularly, he is concerned by the kind of elites that are being produced by prestigious education in America, with graduates that disproportionally pursue careers in self-serving fields like finance. Like his past viral essays, Excellent Sheep is a thought-provoking look at American society and provides keen insights into the world of elite education. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“Don’t Send Your Kid to the Ivy League.”  This was the headline of a recent New Republic article that reverberated across the internet recently, going viral as it was shared over 160 thousands times on Facebook. The author of this piece, Dr. William Deresiewicz, joins the New Books in Education podcast to discuss his new book Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life (Free Press 2014), which further elaborates upon his recent viral article and another from 2008,  “The Disadvantages of an Elite Education“. In Excellent Sheep, Deresiewicz draws on his decades of experience at Ivy League institutions; first, at Columbia where he did his undergraduate and graduate degrees, and then later at Yale where he taught for a decade. With an insiders view and a critical lens, he dissects what education at these types of institutions has become. He asserts that the hypercompetitive nature of elite institutions has taken away from self-discovery of students, a key facet to innovation and creativity. Deresiewicz’s book also confronts the social implications of a less meritocratic elite system of education. Particularly, he is concerned by the kind of elites that are being produced by prestigious education in America, with graduates that disproportionally pursue careers in self-serving fields like finance. Like his past viral essays, Excellent Sheep is a thought-provoking look at American society and provides keen insights into the world of elite education. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices