So, I am admittedly a bit of an Ezra Klein fan, but I feel this reads slightly unfair when lumping him in with Musk/Zuckerberg. When I think about Musk/Zuckerberg, they really do feel like they’d say anything for the grift and to remain in the good graces of the party in power. I agree with you.
Klein? Not so much. I think the one large datapoint that seems to wreck your theory is that Ezra Klein came out in February saying Joe Biden was looking old and needed to change the campaign/step down. This was a BOLD statement, and generated a ton of intra-party vitriol against him.
While there are elements of this piece I find persuasive, it’s hard to square the narrative of Klein as a squishy yes man with his bold stance during the campaign.
I agree with this. And it's more generally a misrepresentation of him. Yes he's responding to the cultural backlash, but he caveats statements about that with notes that he still is in fact for robust rights and respect for trans people and the like constantly.
And in the vein of coming out early against Biden, he's been signaling marination of the themes in abundance for years in his show. I mean, obviously, since one doesn't write books in 3-4 months (time between election and book launch).
We all evolve, but this strikes me as a lazy attempt to not just write another Zuck/Musk mockery take 🤷♂️
> “His new book Abundance seems to be a pretty radical rejection of the "everything bagel liberalism" he would have advocated for even just a few short years ago.”
Given his article critiquing “Everything Bagel Liberalism” was written in summer 2023, aka “a few short years ago, which only summarized things he had either written or discussed on his podcast during the Biden Administration.
Quite frankly, Klein and the collection of writers you could fairly group as “the reformist left” (Yglesias, Noah Smith, Maurer, etc) spent most of 2024 calling out democratic weakness and blind spots in the areas republicans successfully attacked them in, including blowback from leftist academia excess.
Thank you for noting this. I’d also add that Klein’s advocacy for deregulation to spur residential development (dense developments at that) pre-dates Biden’s electoral
Is it possible that a smaller but very powerful part of the Democratic Party elite also wanted Biden out of the race long before the debate and Ezra was speaking for them? The Obama/Clooney/HRC sect definitely wanted to run someone other than Biden and wanted time to establish someone else so maybe they nominated Ezra to represent this view? Remember, Ezra was basically an unofficial advisor to Obama during his presidency. If Ezra was working for power players was it really so bold? I’m honestly curious what you think and accept that I could be wrong.
Maybe? I think that’s totally fair. My memory of the time is hazy and I don’t listen to every episode.
My sense is that yes, many in the party probably did not want him to run again, but no one had the courage to say it. But the idea that Ezra was cajoled into coming out against Biden feels like an extraordinary claim that needs extraordinary evidence. I don’t know enough about his relationship to party insiders, so I couldn’t say if the claim is true. I’d probably say that theory isn’t true, but it isn’t implausible either.
Every single un-conflicted politically informed Dem was constantly biting his/her nails every time Biden was in public view long before June 2024. Those of us who never thought highly of Biden before 2020 checked ourselves for two reasons even as we could see Biden deteriorating:
1. We thought we were not good at understanding what draws the median voter to any politician. Most college educated Dem base voters supported Warren/Bernie/Buttigeig in 2020 and realized we were so wrong to do so after Trump came very close to winning against Biden. Since we did not understand either the South Carolina Dem base voter or the median US voter we had low confidence in our own assessment of Biden's lack of viability.
2. We assumed that Dem elites had access to on-the-ground intelligence regarding voter preferences which we lacked and their assurances regarding Biden we thought were well informed.
Ezra and the people he hangs with probably realized sooner than the rest of us that the Biden team was totally delusional and decided to act.
Yeah, Klein has been focusing on the failures of governmental “building” efforts for a few years. To people who’ve followed him—I’m one—his intellectual concerns have seemed to evolve organically, gradually, and naturally. But mostly he really seems like the same guy he’s always been, and none of this is a put-on. I see his personal style evolution as more a part of his move to NYC and becoming a parent. His life is changing, and he’s evolving like anybody does. He still comes off pretty girly-man to me. I think he’s fantastic.
"Additionally, it should be obvious to everyone that if Kamala had won in 2024, he would not be coming out so strongly against the clear and evident failures of Biden’s domestic policy or the decline in quality of life in Blue states caused by a breakdown in basic state services."
Abundance was definitely written before the results of the election were known, and he makes those strong critiques throughout that book. Your claim is almost certainly just false here, unless you're referring to even stronger statements that aren't covered by the book.
this is a recent clip where he’s discussing a bit of his book that was written last year? again the allegation that this is something that ezra is only saying all this since kamala lost the election is weird and clearly wrong. 2021 https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/19/opinion/supply-side-progressivism.html
I guess the author hasn't met anyone over at the Hoover Institute? I'd think there would be a few cultural conservatives there.
In any event, the anti-intellectual stance of the Republican Party for some years, along with the debacle of the Iraq War followed by Trump Administration #1, has pushed away whole groups of educated people who used to be aligned with the GOP. I'm old enough to remember when almost all doctors, military officers, engineers, and scientists were both Republican and culturally conservative. Now that's not the case. The movement has been greatest for doctors and scientists. It's not an academe thing, it's an educated person thing.
As for the personal style changes you highlight: they look to me to be moving in the opposite direction. Ezra just turned 40; he's moved toward a more mature, professorial look. Zuck also just turned 40. But he's moving toward 14. As a heterosexual woman I can assure you the long hair, loose t-shirt, and chain reads as anything but masculine. He looks ridiculous.
I came here to say that. I was at Caltech in the 80s, and while some people like Feynman were clearly liberal, others like Gell-Mann clearly were not. Almost all the old-timers had worked on the Manhattan Project and were patriotic. So physics was split about 50/50. Bio for some reason coded more feminine and was more liberal and engineering leaned the other way. Just my impressions as an undergrad, but I do remember surveys in the 90s where academia was clearly liberal, but more like 2:1. The numbers above astonish me, especially for scientists.
I found these so incredible that I went to the source and read it - I am a skeptic that way. It's a good read and supports your claim. Interestingly, some academic institutions are able to maintain a high intellectual quality and still have more diversity of thought, amongst them the service academies and Claremont McKenna.
“Additionally, it should be obvious to everyone that if Kamala had won in 2024, he would not be coming out so strongly against the clear and evident failures of Biden’s domestic policy or the decline in quality of life in Blue states caused by a breakdown in basic state services.”
Im not sure if this is totally fair. I think he started writing the Abundance book (and the sections in it about the breakdown in Blue states) in 2023. And he was an early critic of Biden’s cognitive state.
Some people are grifters and opportunists, and so what they signal changes. (Like Zuckerberg.) I wouldn’t put Ezra in this camp.
I think it would be fair to say that he is/was prone to ideological capture, and so his analysis of certain topics was far from objective. I think being ideological captured is different than being a mask wearer. (And all of us are ideologically captured to some degree.)
I’ve gotten this pushback on the specific line a good amount. I think it’s a ~fair~ criticism. Here is an example of the type of thing I was thinking about when I wrote it.
So I actually listened to that whole podcast recently (it was pretty good!)
I am not sure what you are saying though? That came out just recently, so what does that have to do with pre-election Ezra? Or what does it tell us about the counterfactual world where Kamala won?
I specially mean his very open criticism of one of Biden’s landmark bills. Was he critical specially of BBB before the election? If so I missed it.
We can never actually know the counter factual but my contention is that he would be MUCH more muted in his criticism of Dems - and the Biden legacy specifically - if Kamala had won decisively.
But overall yes, your - and other commentators - pushback taken.
Ah okay, I guess I think that at the time people like Ezra didn't realize that these onerous requirements were in BBB. It is only something you notice after things have gone wrong and you look back on it.
I agree he would probably be more muted in criticism of Dems. I'm not sure if that is a bad thing though. The election provided new information about the popularity of the Democratic Party. Once you realize the Democratic Party is less popular than you initially thought, it is rational/virtuous to increase your criticism so that you can "figure out what has been going wrong."
Yes, Ezra Klein was critical of the IIJA implementation before the election. Your link is to Klein discussing rural broadband with Jon Steward. Here's Klein pushing Senator Schatz on many themes from the book, including that exact same rural broadband program roll-out, in August 2024:
A beard with a touch of gray in it is a good luck for a man looking to influence others, because it triggers “respected elder” when paired with good clothes and solid posture. Definitely a good appearance shift for Klein here.
I dunno if Zuckerberg or Klein are signalling virtues, or just doing branding for the podcast age, but the branding aspect of this is interesting.
The branding of the media left is so obnoxiously anti-masculine that even the supposedly straight male players in this space have suspiciously gay affects. All of the NPR and NYT crowd of presenters sound incredibly gay, which is fine, but unrelatable to virile young men. The 1900s communist movements had no problem attracting male energy.
OTOH, the combative conservative voice in media is so rage filled and uncurious, it signals serious lack of introspection, and drives away more considered individuals in a way no one would recognize as conservative 100 years ago.
No shirt. As a pretty conservative guy I am amazed at the shallow thinking that now dominates our movement. True of both sides I suspect, and part of the phenomenon this article identifies where people start out signaling and eventually reprogram themselves into believing what their reductive, meme-based and people-pleasing messages are. And, as a secondary effect, once people have expressed an opinion, especially publicly, on any topic, they become extremely reluctant to process any new information that might reveal them to be even partially wrong.
Knee deep is a bit generous when you’re promoting Vitamin A as a treatment for measles. That’s an outright dangerous lie and has already hospitalized folks for overdosing. I think it’s a fool’s errand to expect any sort of restraint or moderation from today’s GOP. Can you list one example where they moderated out of virtue and not electoral defeat (abortion)?
On a personal note, I should be a poster child for GOP. I am a straight, white male who is Anglican. I come from a wealthy background and my parents were in banking and engineering. I am never voting GOP again until every Trump supporter recants their position or moves on in life. The 2020 Big Lie was enough but when you throw in abortion (threatened my wife), federal layoffs (trashed a career), and anti-vaccine hysteria (hastened my MIL’s end), I see every reason to be angry. They have personally affected my life in huge ways and it’s something that will take a lifetime to forgive if I ever do. And if I do forgive, it’s for me, not them. But boy is it hard.
Thinking you’re the poster child of the GOP is why the left lost. You’re white and elite. You’re actually the poster child of the New Democratic Party which is run by costal elites.
It’s true, man. Look up who rich white people voted for this election. You just can’t accept the fact that the party you root for and think looks out for the poor is actually the party that represents rich coastal elites. Rather than engage with that idea, you rather just say, ok man. Enjoy your bubble, man.
Cool. For the record, my parents are 3x Trump voters. I lived in Marjorie Greene's district for 3 years. My job serves red America and I am a Christian. I am well aware how Dems have failed middle America. You're making a lot of assumptions about me that just aren't true. As for wealth breakdown, Harris won the >$100k annual income by a 51-47 margin. That's not huge and suggests the high income households are more even than suggested.
Assumptions? You’re the one that said you’re white and come from a wealth background. Guess the only part of the electorate that shifted left in 2024? Yep, people making over $100k. Imagine how much that group voted Republican 10, 15, 20 year ago. It has shifted left dramatically and it’s because the dem party represents coastal elites more than any other group.
Klein and Zuckerberg's transformations seem pretty distinct to me.
You're right that they're both trying to signal masculinity, but its a completely different kind of masculinity aimed different types of people. The missing dimension here is youth/maturity.
Progressive liberal men like Klein famously dressed like they were teenagers well into their 20s or even 30s(If you really want to be depressed, go check out the 40-somethings on Bluesky who are still acting like characters from Mean Girls). But as Millennials have settled into the job market, started families, bought homes, etc. they've started to mellow out and are increasingly embarrassed about their overly-long adolescence. Klein's transformation seems much more like he's signaling to those types(or just is one himself).
Zuckerberg is almost the opposite. He's trying to signal a much more youthful(and therefore virile) masculinity. He's going for disaffected young men, whereas Klein's target audience are the opposite: well-established people who just like people to dress well and act normal.
None of which invalidates your point, of course, which I agree with.
I'm also curious to see how well this 'vibe shift' survives the tariff recession. The macho guys are going to look pretty bad pretty fast.
I have to say, that sculpture looks awful. Why couldn't Mark do an old-school sculpture of his wife in the real Roman tradition? You've got the money, Mark.
"Conversely, where this Trump administration will end up is totally unclear, but they have power now, and the era of vice signaling to counterbalance liberals has passed. They need to begin to signal honesty and virtue or continue sinking into the swamp they stand knee-deep in already."
Really enjoyed this. Former Trump supporter. I've been talking and writing about this a lot. I don't your soul can tell the difference between an ironically nihilistic bit that you do to own and shock the libs and the real thing, which you will eventually become.
I agree with a lot of this, and you're getting at something important here. I think the critical point of change for both Zuck and Klein was having kids. It matured their boyishness into manliness. It's interesting to compare them to the largely childless 'brocasters,' who, in my opinion, are all still 'trying to find themselves' as middle-aged boys. In different ways, Zuck and Klein have been able to become themselves, laissez-faire of their audiences. Rogan is unique in this way, too. All three of them have wife+kids who are the people that matter. Compare them to say Tate, where everything he does is for the adulation of other lost boys, the 12-year-old's version of a big man.
If there is one point of failure in modern masculinity, it is that bridging between boyish bravado like vice signaling by jumping down a flight of stairs on a dare versus the manly confidence of someone who can virtue signal by saying 'no, that's a stupid idea.'
It is easy to prove that Klein’s critique of left-governed states like California predates any knowledge the 2024 Election outcome. He has been writing articles that contained aspects of his critique since 2021ish, and Abundance was finished and set to be released well before the election.
Fun read with excellent image comparisons. As the 'Hot or Not' guy, Zuck never struck me as fully anti-macho. His single-minded drive to build something monumental while remaining heads-down on Facebook represents an internal version of masculine purpose—with confidence ultimately manifesting externally. Most men take the opposite approach, focusing exclusively on external appearances with little internal substance to back it up.
Regarding Klein, analyzing his collective works suggests he's strategically positioning himself as a contrarian progressive rather than genuinely evolving intellectually. His exchange with Sam Harris—which I listened to when it was released —likely reveals his authentic, somewhat authoritative perspective. Even now, he doesn’t say “we need to reduce regulations in California to build better transportation options and allow new populations center to thrive”. Instead, he says, “I want a high speed rail like China and Japan, so we should deregulate to make it happen”. That said, I acknowledge that age and fatherhood can profoundly transform a man's worldview. Perhaps Klein has genuinely changed, though the convenient timing of his contrarian positions makes me skeptical. He one of the few progressives that I still actively read/listen to, since he has become the somewhat rational elite in that circle.
So, I am admittedly a bit of an Ezra Klein fan, but I feel this reads slightly unfair when lumping him in with Musk/Zuckerberg. When I think about Musk/Zuckerberg, they really do feel like they’d say anything for the grift and to remain in the good graces of the party in power. I agree with you.
Klein? Not so much. I think the one large datapoint that seems to wreck your theory is that Ezra Klein came out in February saying Joe Biden was looking old and needed to change the campaign/step down. This was a BOLD statement, and generated a ton of intra-party vitriol against him.
While there are elements of this piece I find persuasive, it’s hard to square the narrative of Klein as a squishy yes man with his bold stance during the campaign.
thanks for reading and pushing back on the parts you disagree with. Always appreciate other perspectives.
I agree with this. And it's more generally a misrepresentation of him. Yes he's responding to the cultural backlash, but he caveats statements about that with notes that he still is in fact for robust rights and respect for trans people and the like constantly.
And in the vein of coming out early against Biden, he's been signaling marination of the themes in abundance for years in his show. I mean, obviously, since one doesn't write books in 3-4 months (time between election and book launch).
We all evolve, but this strikes me as a lazy attempt to not just write another Zuck/Musk mockery take 🤷♂️
Perhaps there are some interesting ideas in the piece.
Also, a haircut is just a haircut.
Fashion historian here. A haircut is never just a haircut. But otherwise, I agree with you.
I don’t have an opinion, but admire your adherence to principle on this one.
Agreed.
> “His new book Abundance seems to be a pretty radical rejection of the "everything bagel liberalism" he would have advocated for even just a few short years ago.”
Given his article critiquing “Everything Bagel Liberalism” was written in summer 2023, aka “a few short years ago, which only summarized things he had either written or discussed on his podcast during the Biden Administration.
Quite frankly, Klein and the collection of writers you could fairly group as “the reformist left” (Yglesias, Noah Smith, Maurer, etc) spent most of 2024 calling out democratic weakness and blind spots in the areas republicans successfully attacked them in, including blowback from leftist academia excess.
See a few Klein examples below: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/12/opinion/traffic-congestion-new-york-climate-policy.html
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/id1548604447?i=1000598436272
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/id1548604447?i=1000597846456
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/id1548604447?i=1000565097689
yea I think this article is somewhat correct about a tone change from Ezra, but topically, this is all old news.
Thank you for noting this. I’d also add that Klein’s advocacy for deregulation to spur residential development (dense developments at that) pre-dates Biden’s electoral
struggles.
Is it possible that a smaller but very powerful part of the Democratic Party elite also wanted Biden out of the race long before the debate and Ezra was speaking for them? The Obama/Clooney/HRC sect definitely wanted to run someone other than Biden and wanted time to establish someone else so maybe they nominated Ezra to represent this view? Remember, Ezra was basically an unofficial advisor to Obama during his presidency. If Ezra was working for power players was it really so bold? I’m honestly curious what you think and accept that I could be wrong.
Maybe? I think that’s totally fair. My memory of the time is hazy and I don’t listen to every episode.
My sense is that yes, many in the party probably did not want him to run again, but no one had the courage to say it. But the idea that Ezra was cajoled into coming out against Biden feels like an extraordinary claim that needs extraordinary evidence. I don’t know enough about his relationship to party insiders, so I couldn’t say if the claim is true. I’d probably say that theory isn’t true, but it isn’t implausible either.
Every single un-conflicted politically informed Dem was constantly biting his/her nails every time Biden was in public view long before June 2024. Those of us who never thought highly of Biden before 2020 checked ourselves for two reasons even as we could see Biden deteriorating:
1. We thought we were not good at understanding what draws the median voter to any politician. Most college educated Dem base voters supported Warren/Bernie/Buttigeig in 2020 and realized we were so wrong to do so after Trump came very close to winning against Biden. Since we did not understand either the South Carolina Dem base voter or the median US voter we had low confidence in our own assessment of Biden's lack of viability.
2. We assumed that Dem elites had access to on-the-ground intelligence regarding voter preferences which we lacked and their assurances regarding Biden we thought were well informed.
Ezra and the people he hangs with probably realized sooner than the rest of us that the Biden team was totally delusional and decided to act.
Well Biden was in fact the best the Dems had, which says something about the rest of their lineup.
"Best" in what sense? In terms of ability to win over the median voter or ability to actually speak coherently and convey concrete ideas?
In terms of ability to win over the median voter. Also in terms of ratio of good to bad ideas: he had no ideas, good or bad.
Yes, in 2020 he was probably the best among those that ran to win over the median voter.
"Also in terms of ratio of good to bad ideas: he had no ideas, good or bad"
That's a meaningless statement since neither you nor anyone else can read Biden's mind.
We can agree that Biden was not good at communicating whatever ideas he had whether good or bad. That is not the same as not having any ideas.
Thank you for saying this. Exactly my thoughts.
Yeah, Klein has been focusing on the failures of governmental “building” efforts for a few years. To people who’ve followed him—I’m one—his intellectual concerns have seemed to evolve organically, gradually, and naturally. But mostly he really seems like the same guy he’s always been, and none of this is a put-on. I see his personal style evolution as more a part of his move to NYC and becoming a parent. His life is changing, and he’s evolving like anybody does. He still comes off pretty girly-man to me. I think he’s fantastic.
How was it a “bold stance” during the campaign to call out something that was painfully obvious about Biden?
"Additionally, it should be obvious to everyone that if Kamala had won in 2024, he would not be coming out so strongly against the clear and evident failures of Biden’s domestic policy or the decline in quality of life in Blue states caused by a breakdown in basic state services."
Abundance was definitely written before the results of the election were known, and he makes those strong critiques throughout that book. Your claim is almost certainly just false here, unless you're referring to even stronger statements that aren't covered by the book.
I appreciate you reading and commenting!
Here is an example of something I’m talking about.
https://youtu.be/_cl1Rs1hqSs?si=OTcCFLwwl6XNmYof
this is a recent clip where he’s discussing a bit of his book that was written last year? again the allegation that this is something that ezra is only saying all this since kamala lost the election is weird and clearly wrong. 2021 https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/19/opinion/supply-side-progressivism.html
Agreed, Abundance would have been written regardless of who won the election. (Or was being written during the presidential campaigns).
I guess the author hasn't met anyone over at the Hoover Institute? I'd think there would be a few cultural conservatives there.
In any event, the anti-intellectual stance of the Republican Party for some years, along with the debacle of the Iraq War followed by Trump Administration #1, has pushed away whole groups of educated people who used to be aligned with the GOP. I'm old enough to remember when almost all doctors, military officers, engineers, and scientists were both Republican and culturally conservative. Now that's not the case. The movement has been greatest for doctors and scientists. It's not an academe thing, it's an educated person thing.
As for the personal style changes you highlight: they look to me to be moving in the opposite direction. Ezra just turned 40; he's moved toward a more mature, professorial look. Zuck also just turned 40. But he's moving toward 14. As a heterosexual woman I can assure you the long hair, loose t-shirt, and chain reads as anything but masculine. He looks ridiculous.
I came here to say that. I was at Caltech in the 80s, and while some people like Feynman were clearly liberal, others like Gell-Mann clearly were not. Almost all the old-timers had worked on the Manhattan Project and were patriotic. So physics was split about 50/50. Bio for some reason coded more feminine and was more liberal and engineering leaned the other way. Just my impressions as an undergrad, but I do remember surveys in the 90s where academia was clearly liberal, but more like 2:1. The numbers above astonish me, especially for scientists.
I found these so incredible that I went to the source and read it - I am a skeptic that way. It's a good read and supports your claim. Interestingly, some academic institutions are able to maintain a high intellectual quality and still have more diversity of thought, amongst them the service academies and Claremont McKenna.
https://www.nas.org/academic-questions/31/2/homogenous_the_political_affiliations_of_elite_liberal_arts_college_faculty
I’m a doctor and former military officer & actually moved from left to right during this whole time.
“Additionally, it should be obvious to everyone that if Kamala had won in 2024, he would not be coming out so strongly against the clear and evident failures of Biden’s domestic policy or the decline in quality of life in Blue states caused by a breakdown in basic state services.”
Im not sure if this is totally fair. I think he started writing the Abundance book (and the sections in it about the breakdown in Blue states) in 2023. And he was an early critic of Biden’s cognitive state.
Some people are grifters and opportunists, and so what they signal changes. (Like Zuckerberg.) I wouldn’t put Ezra in this camp.
I think it would be fair to say that he is/was prone to ideological capture, and so his analysis of certain topics was far from objective. I think being ideological captured is different than being a mask wearer. (And all of us are ideologically captured to some degree.)
I’ve gotten this pushback on the specific line a good amount. I think it’s a ~fair~ criticism. Here is an example of the type of thing I was thinking about when I wrote it.
https://youtu.be/_cl1Rs1hqSs?si=OTcCFLwwl6XNmYof
So I actually listened to that whole podcast recently (it was pretty good!)
I am not sure what you are saying though? That came out just recently, so what does that have to do with pre-election Ezra? Or what does it tell us about the counterfactual world where Kamala won?
I specially mean his very open criticism of one of Biden’s landmark bills. Was he critical specially of BBB before the election? If so I missed it.
We can never actually know the counter factual but my contention is that he would be MUCH more muted in his criticism of Dems - and the Biden legacy specifically - if Kamala had won decisively.
But overall yes, your - and other commentators - pushback taken.
Ah okay, I guess I think that at the time people like Ezra didn't realize that these onerous requirements were in BBB. It is only something you notice after things have gone wrong and you look back on it.
I agree he would probably be more muted in criticism of Dems. I'm not sure if that is a bad thing though. The election provided new information about the popularity of the Democratic Party. Once you realize the Democratic Party is less popular than you initially thought, it is rational/virtuous to increase your criticism so that you can "figure out what has been going wrong."
Yes, Ezra Klein was critical of the IIJA implementation before the election. Your link is to Klein discussing rural broadband with Jon Steward. Here's Klein pushing Senator Schatz on many themes from the book, including that exact same rural broadband program roll-out, in August 2024:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/06/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-brian-schatz.html
A beard with a touch of gray in it is a good luck for a man looking to influence others, because it triggers “respected elder” when paired with good clothes and solid posture. Definitely a good appearance shift for Klein here.
Totally agree
I dunno if Zuckerberg or Klein are signalling virtues, or just doing branding for the podcast age, but the branding aspect of this is interesting.
The branding of the media left is so obnoxiously anti-masculine that even the supposedly straight male players in this space have suspiciously gay affects. All of the NPR and NYT crowd of presenters sound incredibly gay, which is fine, but unrelatable to virile young men. The 1900s communist movements had no problem attracting male energy.
OTOH, the combative conservative voice in media is so rage filled and uncurious, it signals serious lack of introspection, and drives away more considered individuals in a way no one would recognize as conservative 100 years ago.
Virtue-signalling, or vice-signalling?
Thank you for reading and sharing your thoughts!!
No shirt. As a pretty conservative guy I am amazed at the shallow thinking that now dominates our movement. True of both sides I suspect, and part of the phenomenon this article identifies where people start out signaling and eventually reprogram themselves into believing what their reductive, meme-based and people-pleasing messages are. And, as a secondary effect, once people have expressed an opinion, especially publicly, on any topic, they become extremely reluctant to process any new information that might reveal them to be even partially wrong.
This Klein style maleness is big in suburban church circles too
Knee deep is a bit generous when you’re promoting Vitamin A as a treatment for measles. That’s an outright dangerous lie and has already hospitalized folks for overdosing. I think it’s a fool’s errand to expect any sort of restraint or moderation from today’s GOP. Can you list one example where they moderated out of virtue and not electoral defeat (abortion)?
On a personal note, I should be a poster child for GOP. I am a straight, white male who is Anglican. I come from a wealthy background and my parents were in banking and engineering. I am never voting GOP again until every Trump supporter recants their position or moves on in life. The 2020 Big Lie was enough but when you throw in abortion (threatened my wife), federal layoffs (trashed a career), and anti-vaccine hysteria (hastened my MIL’s end), I see every reason to be angry. They have personally affected my life in huge ways and it’s something that will take a lifetime to forgive if I ever do. And if I do forgive, it’s for me, not them. But boy is it hard.
Lol you’re just a leftist. You worship at the altar of infanticide and look past the Democrats calling every GOP win of the 21st century illegitimate.
Proverbs 26:4
Thinking you’re the poster child of the GOP is why the left lost. You’re white and elite. You’re actually the poster child of the New Democratic Party which is run by costal elites.
Ok man.
It’s true, man. Look up who rich white people voted for this election. You just can’t accept the fact that the party you root for and think looks out for the poor is actually the party that represents rich coastal elites. Rather than engage with that idea, you rather just say, ok man. Enjoy your bubble, man.
Cool. For the record, my parents are 3x Trump voters. I lived in Marjorie Greene's district for 3 years. My job serves red America and I am a Christian. I am well aware how Dems have failed middle America. You're making a lot of assumptions about me that just aren't true. As for wealth breakdown, Harris won the >$100k annual income by a 51-47 margin. That's not huge and suggests the high income households are more even than suggested.
Assumptions? You’re the one that said you’re white and come from a wealth background. Guess the only part of the electorate that shifted left in 2024? Yep, people making over $100k. Imagine how much that group voted Republican 10, 15, 20 year ago. It has shifted left dramatically and it’s because the dem party represents coastal elites more than any other group.
Look, you sound really angry and I don’t need that. Best of luck. I’ll be blocking.
Klein and Zuckerberg's transformations seem pretty distinct to me.
You're right that they're both trying to signal masculinity, but its a completely different kind of masculinity aimed different types of people. The missing dimension here is youth/maturity.
Progressive liberal men like Klein famously dressed like they were teenagers well into their 20s or even 30s(If you really want to be depressed, go check out the 40-somethings on Bluesky who are still acting like characters from Mean Girls). But as Millennials have settled into the job market, started families, bought homes, etc. they've started to mellow out and are increasingly embarrassed about their overly-long adolescence. Klein's transformation seems much more like he's signaling to those types(or just is one himself).
Zuckerberg is almost the opposite. He's trying to signal a much more youthful(and therefore virile) masculinity. He's going for disaffected young men, whereas Klein's target audience are the opposite: well-established people who just like people to dress well and act normal.
Ezra Klein is notorious (OK, to me) for the 'cold spike of fear' essay:
https://www.vox.com/2014/10/13/6966847/yes-means-yes-is-a-terrible-bill-and-i-completely-support-it
None of which invalidates your point, of course, which I agree with.
I'm also curious to see how well this 'vibe shift' survives the tariff recession. The macho guys are going to look pretty bad pretty fast.
I have to say, that sculpture looks awful. Why couldn't Mark do an old-school sculpture of his wife in the real Roman tradition? You've got the money, Mark.
"Conversely, where this Trump administration will end up is totally unclear, but they have power now, and the era of vice signaling to counterbalance liberals has passed. They need to begin to signal honesty and virtue or continue sinking into the swamp they stand knee-deep in already."
Really enjoyed this. Former Trump supporter. I've been talking and writing about this a lot. I don't your soul can tell the difference between an ironically nihilistic bit that you do to own and shock the libs and the real thing, which you will eventually become.
Thanks man :) 🫶
How did I miss your reply back in April
"Looksmaxing" sounds like making a balloon look big by inflating it with hot air.
💀
1. Agreed about Xitter - maybe I fell into a spell, but it seems the content quality dropped off a cliff after November.
2. Could we construe vengeance against progressive overreach as the virtue of justice?
1. Yeah sad :(
2. Idk. Maybe in a different world but what I see right now is not virtuous.
Appreciate you reading and sharing your thoughts!
You might like this examination of Elon’s polarization and how it relates to conflict in general: https://defusingamericananger.substack.com/p/the-polarization-of-elon-musk-and
I agree with a lot of this, and you're getting at something important here. I think the critical point of change for both Zuck and Klein was having kids. It matured their boyishness into manliness. It's interesting to compare them to the largely childless 'brocasters,' who, in my opinion, are all still 'trying to find themselves' as middle-aged boys. In different ways, Zuck and Klein have been able to become themselves, laissez-faire of their audiences. Rogan is unique in this way, too. All three of them have wife+kids who are the people that matter. Compare them to say Tate, where everything he does is for the adulation of other lost boys, the 12-year-old's version of a big man.
If there is one point of failure in modern masculinity, it is that bridging between boyish bravado like vice signaling by jumping down a flight of stairs on a dare versus the manly confidence of someone who can virtue signal by saying 'no, that's a stupid idea.'
Yeah I didn’t mention the family side of this but I think it’s a huge variable. Thanks for reading and commenting :)
It is easy to prove that Klein’s critique of left-governed states like California predates any knowledge the 2024 Election outcome. He has been writing articles that contained aspects of his critique since 2021ish, and Abundance was finished and set to be released well before the election.
Fun read with excellent image comparisons. As the 'Hot or Not' guy, Zuck never struck me as fully anti-macho. His single-minded drive to build something monumental while remaining heads-down on Facebook represents an internal version of masculine purpose—with confidence ultimately manifesting externally. Most men take the opposite approach, focusing exclusively on external appearances with little internal substance to back it up.
Regarding Klein, analyzing his collective works suggests he's strategically positioning himself as a contrarian progressive rather than genuinely evolving intellectually. His exchange with Sam Harris—which I listened to when it was released —likely reveals his authentic, somewhat authoritative perspective. Even now, he doesn’t say “we need to reduce regulations in California to build better transportation options and allow new populations center to thrive”. Instead, he says, “I want a high speed rail like China and Japan, so we should deregulate to make it happen”. That said, I acknowledge that age and fatherhood can profoundly transform a man's worldview. Perhaps Klein has genuinely changed, though the convenient timing of his contrarian positions makes me skeptical. He one of the few progressives that I still actively read/listen to, since he has become the somewhat rational elite in that circle.