#389 — The Politics of Risk

America is experiencing a profound loss of trust in liberal institutions, the market economy, and democracy

Despite material progress, there are concerning signs of cultural and economic stagnation

Sam Harris and Nate Silver note America's profound loss of trust in key institutions and the emergence of signs that indicate cultural and economic stagnation.

Sam Harris describes a disconcerting American landscape where traditional institutions and long-standing political stances are being re-evaluated, from an "America First" foreign policy that echoes Charles Lindbergh’s isolationism to questioning the sustainability of capitalism on the political left. Notably, both the Republican Party and the left share a general trend of distrust in institutions.

A Gallup poll indicates a stark decline in trust for the news media, with ratings at their lowest ever. Similarly, confidence in most institutions, except for the military, including the church and higher education, has significantly declined. Big business and technology sectors are not exempt from this trend, with their trust ratings also suffering.

This loss of trust has consequences for how communities cooperate and function. Nate Silver illustrates this using the prisoner's dilemma as an analogy, suggesting that a loss of trust can lead to suboptimal outcomes, akin to neighborhoods having to invest more in crime prevention. Despite the assumption that more information should lead to rational and collaborative behavior, Silver points out that this is not the reality. Instead, a near-infinite segmentation of information allows people to reinforce their own worldviews, fostering confirmation bias and tribalism.

Algorithms, Sam Harris argues, exacerbate this issue by prioritizing engagement over truth or social health. These algorithms, indifferent to the veracity or societal impact of content, contribute to an environment ripe for political fragmentation and secular stagnation. He suggests that this fracture impedes our ability to converge on a shared set of facts.

Nate Silver reflects further on improvements in life quality over time, considering the long-term trend of i ...

The loss of trust and skepticism towards established institutions is fostering the emergence of new influential elites, as discussed by Nate Silver and Sam Harris. These elites capitalize on these sentiments, with two contrasting cultural groups emerging: "the river" and "the village."

The divide between the "river" and the "village"

Silver suggests that there's an intuition among people that the elites, such as those in "the river" group, are not working in their best interest. He notes that this group includes analytical risk-takers from Silicon Valley, Wall Street, and the high-stakes gambling world. These elites have become increasingly dominant in the economy.

The "river" represents the world of analytical risk-takers

Silver describes "the river" as a culture of elite, analytical risk-takers who are very competitive and play to win. They are individualistic, capitalistic, and often contrarian, with many having acquired knowledge outside of traditional institutional frameworks. They include autodidacts from Silicon Valley, like Sam Altman, who aspire to advance AI.

Silver also comments on the influence of big tech money in elections and points out the tech industry's victory in having a California AI regulation bill vetoed, indicating their growing political muscle. The "river" group feels they can "make it up as they go" due to the erosion of trust in existing institutions.

The "village" represents the establishment

On the other hand, "the village" represents the establishment and more traditional institutions like the New York Times and Harvard University. This group tends to be more risk-averse and collectively oriented, with a strong concern for community standing to the point where they fear ostrac ...

Nate Silver’s experiences as both a professional poker player and election forecaster have culminated in his latest book, "On the Edge: The Art of Risking Everything," which delves into the nuanced approaches to risk among different cultural groups.

Silver, known for founding the election forecasting website FiveThirtyEight, draws from his rich background in probability and statistical analysis to offer insights on the complexities of risk in various contexts—a theme central to his book.

Silver's experiences as a professional poker player and election forecaster have shaped his perspective on how different cultural groups approach risk

Throughout Harris and Silver's discussion, it's evident that Silver sees himself as originating from what he calls "the river," indicating a propensity for risk-taking similar to that of a gambler. This mindset has been instrumental in his approach to election forecasting, with a focus on probabilistic outcomes and Bayesian reasoning.

Silver's analysis of figures like Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, and Sam Bankman-Fried reveals how influential individuals in the "river" culture often have a unique, sometimes unconventional, mindset towards risk and uncertainty

Silver, in his book, profiles influential figures such as Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, Sam Altman, Sam Bankman-Fried, and Donald Trump. He notes that these individuals from "the river" culture may exhibit a sense of uniqueness or solipsism that fuels their unconventional attitudes toward risk. For instance, he finds Thiel's conservative, anti-probabilist stance surprising amongst a culture dominated by analytical risk-takers. Additionally, Silver hints at the tremendous influence these leading figures wield, exemplified by Musk's potential to impact voter registration.

Sam Harris adds that Thiel and Musk share a dislike for "wokeness" and the identity politics on the left, suggesting that their behavior, especially in the political space, is predictable based on economic interests and social aversions. Moreover, Silver indicates that the engagement of people like Musk in politics might also stem from economic se ...

With 11 days left until the vote, the 2024 presidential election hangs in the balance, eliciting apprehension about the potential outcomes and the accuracy of election forecasts.

Silver's election forecasting model and the factors that could influence the outcome, including news events, public vs. private polling, and the behavior of undecided and marginal voters

Political analyst Nate Silver brings attention to the complexities of forecasting election outcomes. Silver mentions that some GOP-aligned polls, such as Rasmussen Reports, may aim to influence narratives rather than accurately depict public sentiment. This creates challenges in modeling where partisan polls are weighted less to correct for bias.

The possibility of a Trump victory and the potential for public unrest, as well as concerns about election integrity in swing states

There is a palpable tension surrounding the potential for a Donald Trump victory, especially considering his history of undermining trust in democratic institutions. Silver and Harris discuss voters' possible mistrust in elites, which could sway the election outcome, and mention the partisanship affecting institutions expected to be unbiased, such as prominent media outlets.

The challenges facing the Harris campaign in effectively communicating her policy shifts and addressing the concerns of voters who view her as a "woke Manchurian candidate"

Harris observes that Kamala Harris's campaign struggles to address the candidate's past policy changes effectively. There's an urgency to clarify these position shifts on border security, crime and policing, and trans activism to ease voter concerns. The term "woke Manchurian candidate" has been used to describe suspicions about her platform, adding a layer of complication in securing the confidence of undecided voters.

There is also a mention of potential mistakes in the Biden-Harris administra ...