The Grand Illusion
Why do most human societies end up building houses, roads, and other structures?
The usual answer to that question is that people wish to provide shelter and protect themselves from the elements and other unpredictable threats, or some variation thereof.
I’ll submit that the physical growth of societies is an outgrowth of the human desire to reduce uncertainty. Human belief systems in lower-tech societies often reflect that desire as well, with prayers to the gods viewed as most capricious, which is why the native Hawaiians worshipped Pele as their most important deity.
Laws prescribe certain codes of behavior, with the goal of reducing the uncertainty caused by violence.
And that desire for certainty affects the political system as well. Older voters want to be able to count on Social Security. Most investors want comparatively predictable rates of return. Businesses worry about government policies that affect the cost of production unpredictably because they can’t plan for the future effectively.
People worry about large numbers of immigrants because they’re unknown quantities and therefore unpredictable and possibly dangerous.
Zoning laws have become increasingly stringent over the years because people fear, that without zoning, their property values could suddenly decline in an uncertain fashion.
One of the “downsides” of the “woke movement” is that its apparent goal or result to many people was to upset long-held beliefs about gender and ethnicities, creating social uncertainty. At the same time, modern technology is definitely increasing uncertainty in all areas in the United States and elsewhere in the world.
Whether they like it or will admit it, most people prefer certainty over uncertainty, and on all fronts, prior to the last election, and even now, the Democrats are perceived as creating uncertainty socially, economically, and politically.
Trump’s appeal to the majority of voters lay in the certainty he projected in a time of uncertainty. Out with immigrants! Build manufacturing jobs here in the U.S.! Decrease taxes!
For the Democrats to merely oppose Trump won’t create certainty, and right now the Democrats can’t unite on a positive program which radiates certainty, and while they might take back the House in mid-term elections, they won’t hold that without dealing with the certainty problem.
Well, your last paragraph highlights the problem. Trump has a program which radiates certainty, but it’s based on lies. Trump voters don’t care about that.
As you say, Democrats have to unite on a program which radiates certainty. But it can’t be based on convenient lies, because alas, Democratic voters don’t believe that “immigrants are eating the cats and dogs.”
Unfortunately for the Democrats, there are millions of voters who like a platform based on grievance and lies. They prefer their grievances to reality. So if you tell them facts which counter their grievances, they won’t vote for you.
Barack Obama succeeded at the national level without catering to the grievance voters with a nebulous message of Hope. That’s nice, but Hope is not a platform, and it doesn’t identify enemies that the grievance-obsessed Trump voters crave.
The desire for certainty is deep and real. And even as someone who might with some justice be called a bleeding-heart progressive, the thing that has caused me the most trouble is all the efforts by people I would nominally consider allies “throwing out the old rules”. I /like/ rules. I agree that the old rules caused problems. But when I go to friends (and family) and am told that the answer to “how should I behave politely in this type of social interaction” is “it depends on the specific person”…That doesn’t help anything. If I’m asking for advice on what to do, it’s because I don’t know someone.
Too often it seems that the pursuit of egalitarianism is wrapped up in a desire to treat everyone as unique, when it’s just not possible for a society to function that way. It may be a small “uncertainty”, but I think it’s indicative of the larger problems.
Wow, to lay uncertainty at the foot of the Democrats in 2025, with what’s going on across the country today, is a bit of a stretch. So, how about testing that hypothesis against tariffs, Executive Orders testing the constitution, Supreme Court decisions also testing long held constitutional decisions, congressional deferment of it’s long standing responsibilities, the effects of climate change, and many others.
I realize these are uncertainties that are more ‘global’, but they are there nonetheless. Of course, the natural inclination of the fearful human to shout no, no, no and cover their eyes and ears May be hard wired into us. But governing in that fashion is certainly I’ll advised.
Is this take on the needs of its populace a uniquely American perspective?
I have no idea; it’s just my observation on what I’m seeing.
Part of the problem is the issues you’ve pointed out don’t affect the majority of people on a day to day basis in a way they can see. Yes, tariffs will affect pricing, but it can be explained away as just a remainder of inflation from the “Bad Biden” years. Rounding up and jailing or deporting the “others” doesn’t affect the majority of people directly and immediately (though it eventually will). A number of women (unfortunately) don’t feel affected by the end of Roe because they wouldn’t need an abortion (past child bearing age, morally against it), even though it removed a right they had. Climate change events generally don’t cause problems for the majority of people every day, instead causing minor inconvenience until a major event happens. But again, those major events aren’t every day issues for the majority (though inability to get fire insurance is becoming a bigger issue for many).
On the flip side of that, the social issues the Democrats have been (rightly) fighting for do cause people to have to questions assumptions constantly. They have to wonder how to politely interact when they meet someone new, what pronouns should they use, and what assumptions they can make about shared experiences. Most people don’t like feeling awkward in person, and the certainty of the old ways gives them comfort because they “know” how it’s supposed to be.
This leads to the major problem for the Democrats: how to project certainty for daily life issues, without resorting to fear or scapegoating.
Prior to the US entry to WW2 there was a lot of division, antisemitism, and in-your-face bigotry (sound familiar?). A big chunk of that was pushed aside (or redirected against a different minority) after Pearl Harbor because there was a new common enemy. It still remained, but wasn’t as important, and the horrors of the war caused some (but not even most) of it to go away or be pushed below the surface.
Without some major event like a major war to unite people I’m actually not sure it’s possible to give such certainty anymore.
I don’t disagree with the thesis at all. Even so, in the end people need to get over it.
Just over a century and a half ago, it was a certainty that the fight over slavery would engulf the nation.
A century ago, it was a certainty that everyone was going to get rich, the stock market would go up forever.
Half a century ago, it was a certainty that if you got a good job, you’d have it for a lifetime, the company would take care of you.
All temporary.
Everything is temporary, except human nature. Whatever we take for granted now, our grandchildren will chuckle at. Cultures evolve, nations change.
Someone thinking Trump will bring certainty is someone short-sighted.
“… Is this take on the needs of its populace a uniquely American perspective?…”
Yes and No. Yes: in that it is in the US that the tension (uncertainty) between owning and owing is the greatest (perhaps because we want Rule of Law and we want Personal Freedom Absolute). No: because the similar tensions are world-wide with the greatest similarity in those nations nearest to the economic levels of the US via the hegemony of the US in world affairs during the last century (at the least).
The problem with the desire for “certainty” is the similar to what LEM has made us aware of regarding the desire for “order” which dies when it its goal reaches 100%!
The “crisis”, of which “uncertainty” is a factor, is mainly generated by the two greatest gaps within humanity: the gap between the haves and the have-nothing (not even government by Rule of Law, let alone building houses), and the diminishing gap between humans because of increasing human populations. That is competition for “a life” rather than our imagined “get a Life”!