Virtue

Every social theory undergirding Trumpism has been broken on the steel of Minnesotan resolve. The multiracial community in Minneapolis was supposed to shatter. It did not. It held until Bovino was forced out of the Twin Cities with his long coat between his legs.

The secret fear of the morally depraved is that virtue is actually common, and that they’re the ones who are alone. In Minnesota, all of the ideological cornerstones of MAGA have been proved false at once. Minnesotans, not the armed thugs of ICE and the Border Patrol, are brave. Minnesotans have shown that their community is socially cohesive — because of its diversity and not in spite of it. Minnesotans have found and loved one another in a world atomized by social media, where empty men have tried to fill their lonely soul with lies about their own inherent superiority. Minnesotans have preserved everything worthwhile about “Western civilization,” while armed brutes try to tear it down by force.
Adam Serwer's dispatch from Minnesota (The Atlantic, 26 January 2026) as referenced by Ezra Klein, Trump Has Overwhelmed Himself, NY Times, 1 February 2026.

If you're serious about making history

I want to invoke the deathless quote given to [journalist Ron] Suskend in 2004 in which the logic the history-making, the logic of this project of power was laid out:

The aide [to President George W. Bush] said that guys like me were “in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who “believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. “That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued.

“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

There's a liberal knee-jerk in us which is just repelled by this language, by this refusal of the fact-based reality. But if you're serious about making history this is exactly how you act. This is exactly how you act. This is the template of how you would understand the process of making change. Of course, it ends in disaster…
Adam Tooze, in his 2026 lecture Electrostates, Petrostates and the New Cold War, citing Ron Suskind's 2004 story in the New York Times' magazine, Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush.

Reference slides for Hands On! conference talk: Youth, Megacities, and the New Museums of the Future

A long, excruciatingly comprehensive set of “reference slides” (and work in progress) from my short, November 2025 talk at the Hands On! Conference at the Eureka! National Children’s Museum conference Liverpool.

At some point I’ll boil this down into a shorter, 20-30 slide summary but for now I wanted to try to lay out the whole case in all its glory, warts and all.

Download/view

PDF
Slides (via Google Slides)

Contents

  1. Intro/overview: Why build a children’s museum (or any kind of museum) now?

  2. Interlude — 3 stories

  3. The world we live in — cultural revolution and axiological rifts

  4. What does this mean for young people?

  5. What does this mean for our institutions and practice?

  6. Change is possible

  7. Questions I often get at this point

  8. Helpful frameworks (tools for thinking and working together)

    The Big Frikin’ Wall; Zuckerman Quadrant; Think Big, Start Small, Move Fast, Activism, & etc

    The emergence of children’s rights and the rights of future generations

    Leverage Points in a System (Donella Meadows)

  9. Examples - real-world inspiration (~60 projects)

  10. Current work – bringing the vision to scale

  11. Conclusion

More context (cross post from LinkedIn)

Reference slides for "Youth, Megacities, and the New Museums of Tomorrow" — a short talk I gave at the Hands On! - International Association of Children in Museums conference in Liverpool in November.

I'm arguing here...laying out the evidence and rationale...that we are in the midst of a cultural revolution — a "phase change" in the functioning of the world — that is driving a wedge between young people and their human right to shape and enjoy a common future.

These changes affect all of us profoundly, and in response, I think that children's museums — all knowledge, memory, and "cultural" institutions, really — need to dramatically reconsider their purpose, scope and methods.
We need to up our game, and fast.

As Greta Thunberg told the European Parliament in 2019, seemingly a thousand years ago, "Everyone and everything has to change. But the bigger your platform, the bigger your responsibility. The bigger your carbon footprint, the bigger your moral duty."

C02 is a big driver of the cultural revolution(s) and "rift" but as I see it, the main challenge lies in the combinatory effects of climate change and biodiversity loss, digital (Big Tech) and biotech, concentrations of wealth and power, and the advent of a new kind of change (accelerating, tipping points, delays between cause and effect) that exceeds our human capacity to think, learn, and make wise decisions in an era that needs, as Zeynep Tufekci says, "all the sociological imagination we can get."

That's *a lot* to take in. It's a big problem space and a big "ask" to figure out a new way to work and act in such an uncertain time. But the great systems thinker Donella Meadows observed that paradigms in transition are actually easier to change.

And the good news is that there are loads of inspiring, practical examples to draw from for those who have the curiosity and imagination to think about our institutions and practice in new way. I've included over 60 examples of projects, exhibits, and strategies in these reference slides as well as a dozen or so frameworks and "thinking tools" that I've found particularly useful over the years.

What is the road ahead? I think it's to move beyond the idea that young people are small "future adults" to be educated and toward the idea that young people are legitimate and forceful civic actors with the rights, capabilities, and moral standing to shape the world on their own terms.

But to achieve this paradigm change, young people everywhere need dramatically better allies and institutions from the world of adults, and there are lessons here for all of museum and cultural practice.

"I came away both slightly terrified about the world young people are growing up in and inspired to do something about it" is how session chair Nick Woodrow, a Board member at Eureka! described my talk, and terrified and inspired is how I feel too ;)

Now is the time of monsters

“There’s this quote from the Italian theorist Antonio Gramsci that has been making the rounds a lot over the past few years. It goes, ‘The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum, a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.’

There’s also a looser translation of that last line that you hear sometimes: ‘Now is the time of monsters.’”
Ezra Klein, from How the World Sees America, With Adam Tooze. New York Times, January 30, 2026. The quote is from Gramsci's Prison Notebooks, over 3,000 pages in 30+ notebooks written between 1926-1937 while he was imprisonied by Benito Mussolini's fascist regime.

No room for youth

“The empire [of artificial intelligence] is being built by people who treat the world as a spreadsheet, where the ‘human condition’ is reduced to a set of computable variables. In the rooms where the most foundational decisions about our future are made, the child is not present. The needs of a developing mind, the right to privacy, and the importance of a slow, non-optimized childhood are missing from the code, because the architects are optimized for a world that has no room for the ‘unproductive’ vulnerability of youth.”
Karen Hao, The Empire of AI: Dreams and Nightmares in Sam Altman's Open AI.

All technologies

“[Neil Postman’s] questions can be asked about all technologies and media. What happens to us when we become infatuated with and then seduced by them? Do they free us or imprison us? Do they improve or degrade democracy? Do they make our leaders more accountable or less so? Our system more transparent or less so? Do they make us better citizens or better consumers? Are the trade-offs worth it? If they’re not worth it, yet we still can’t stop ourselves from embracing the next new thing because that’s just how we’re wired, then what strategies can we devise to maintain control?”
Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves To Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, 1985. (via 20th anniversary Edition, published 2005)

Contradictory, confusing, inaccurate

“The destructive power of the press becomes even more marked when spread with new technologies. In the 1850s, the telegraph confronted Americans with a steady stream of virtually instant information: contradictory, confusing, overlapping and inaccurate, it scrambled and intensified the political climate. Today, social media is doing the same. At its heart, democracy is a continuing conversation between politicians and the public; it should come as no surprise that dramatic changes in the modes of conversation cause dramatic changes in democracies themselves.”
The Violence at the Heart of Our Politics, by Joanne B. Freeman. New York Times, September 7, 2018. Ms. Freeman is a historian who studies American political violence.
“So curious that such a wealthy man never posts anything that indicates that he enjoys or is even aware of what virtually everyone appreciates— scenes from nature, pet dog or cat, praise for a movie, music, a book (but doubt that he reads); pride in a friend’s or relative’s accomplishment; condolences for someone who has died; pleasure in sports, acclaim for a favorite team; references to history. In fact he seems totally uneducated, uncultured. The poorest persons on Twitter may have access to more beauty & meaning in life than the ‘most wealthy person in the world.’”
Author Joyce Carol on Elon Musk. Post on X, 8 November 2025.
“Kids will never lie to you about whether something’s fun or not.”
From Brick by Brick: How Lego Rewrote the Rules of Innovation and Conquered the Toy Industry by David Robertson and Bill Breen (2013), a work of business journalism detailing the near collapse and eventual renewal of the LEGO group. Brick by Brick is cited as being one of the best case studies about a large corporation ‘listening to its customers’ and returning to its core purpose and values to find the path forward after suffering self-inficted wounds. The full quote/context is: “Today, LEGO regularly engages children in the process of character development, storytelling, and providing feedback on new playset ideas. ‘LEGO has a great expression for why they listen to kids when developing new toys…Mads Nipper, the former head of marketing and product development, liked to say, ‘Kids will never lie to you about whether something’s fun or not.’”

Link/reference: Gaps and flaws in the traditional boundaries of our work

This is a good writeup of my ideas about creating new norms of practice in the cultural sector. (…I had kind of forgotten that I had put these ideas together so clearly!)

Gaps and Flaws in the Traditional Boundaries of Our Work, (PDF) summary of my presentation/discussion by Janus Boye.

  • What it means to be a professional in an epoch of accelerating change.

  • The Big Frikin’ Wall that stands between us / our organizations and the work we should be doing in society.

  • The “inner dialogue” we all have with the norms/expectations of our professional disciplines.

  • The “handoff” between different sectors of society.

  • The taboos around activism (“we have been miseducated…”).

Link to U.N. Museum TEDx talk

For the convenience of some new collaborators, I dumped the video and transcript of my 2016 TEDx talk about the Museum for the United Nations onto a convenience page here:

https://usingdata.com/tedx

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the theme of top-down & bottom-up change, cultural institutions as catalysts for the know-how and creativity of others (rather than the instution as an exclusive/proprietary authority), and citizen participation is still relevant (and a largely unfulfilled vision) today.

Near-valueless concepts

“Today's internet for most Americans…is an immeasurably potent vibes machine. One powered by a complex fuel of negative emotions — hatred, rage, hopelessness, nihilism, grievance, cynicism, paranoia, discontent and addiction. It’s a machine more than capable of constructing false realities and corroding our lived experiences. Intent, meaning and sincerity are near-valueless concepts in this realm, while things like knowledge, understanding and good faith — critical elements to any healthy public sphere — have been gradually distorted beyond the point of recognition, or abandoned completely.”
Charlie Kirk’s Killing and Our Poisonous Internet, guest essay by Nathan Taylor Pemberton. (“Mr. Pemberton writes about extremisn and American politics.”) New York Times. 14 September 2025. (Soft paywall.)

An Advanced Civilization

“An advanced civilization must not limit its efforts to science and technology alone but must give full value and support to the other great branches of scholarly and cultural activity in order to achieve a better understanding of the past, a better analysis of the present, and a better view of the future. Democracy demands wisdom and vision in its citizens. It must therefore foster and support a form of education, and access to the arts and the humanities, designed to make people of all backgrounds and wherever located masters of their technology and not its unthinking servants.”
A passage from the founding legislation that established the American National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities in 1965. The Trump White House fired most of the NEH's advisory council yesterday, "hoping to place members on the board who alighn more closely with [the President's] vision." (Washington Post.) HT Marsha Semmel, who noted in her LinkedIn post, “What a shame, just as we are commemorating the 60th anniversary of the founding legislation for NEA and NEH.”

Not preordained

Cory Doctorow at a podium giving his speech.
Ursula Franklin told us that the outcomes of technology, they're not preordained, they're the result of choices we make about how we will use technology in society.

And I really like this. This is a very science fiction way of thinking about technology. I think the message of good science fiction is that it doesn't matter so much what the gadget does as who it does it for and who it does it to. Those social factors, they're far more important than the specifications of the gadget. It's the difference between a system that warns you when your car is about to drift outta your lane, and a system that tells your insurer that you nearly drifted outta your lane so they can add $10 to your insurance bill this month. I's the difference between a spell checker that lets you know you made a typo and a spell checker that runs under the “bossware” that lets your manager know that you're like the third most typo prone employee in your department so that they can cut your bonus. It's the difference between the app that remembers where you parked your car for you and the app that uses the location of your car as a criterion for including you in a, in a reverse warrant for the identities of everyone who is in the vicinity of an anti-government protest.

I think that enshittification is not caused by changes in our technology, but by changes to the policy environment, changes to the rules of the game undertaken in living memory by named parties who were warned at the time about the likely outcomes of their actions, who are today very rich and respected, who face no consequences and no accountability for their role in ushering in this and should have seen that we live in, who venture out into polite society every day without ever once wondering whether someone is sizing them up for a pitchfork.
2025 Ursula Franklin Lecture: Cory Doctorow, at 34:34.

Careless People, Facebook and de Tocqueville

To me, it seems like a very American thing. When Alexis de Tocqueville visited the US in the nineteenth century, he was on a rickety steamboat that hit a sandbar and capsized, and he nearly drowned. Afterward he found the manufacturers and asked them why they didn't make the vessels safer. They explained that technological innovation in America happened so quickly there was no point; by the time they made the necessary changes, the boats would be obsolete anyway. Better just to take a chance on what you have. If some drown, no need to dwell, safe in the knowledge that something better is just around the corner. That cheerful recklessness combined with passivity, that forward motion without introspection, that's what Javi's team has.
From Careless People: A Cautionary Tale of Power, Greed, and Lost Idealism by Sarah Wynn-Williams, a former director of public policy at Facebook. Page 54. “Javi” is Javier Oliván, who was head of Facebook's “growth team” from 2007 to 2022. He is currently Meta's COO.
“One study, published last year, found that fifty-eight per cent of students at two Midwestern universities had so much trouble interpreting the opening paragraphs of Bleak House, by Charles Dickens, that ‘they would not be able to read the novel on their own.’ And these were English majors.”
What Happens After A.I. Destroys College Writing? By Hua Hsu. The New Yorker [soft paywall]. June 30, 2025.

For reference, this is the opening paragraph of Bleak House:

LONDON. Michaelmas Term lately over, and the Lord Chancellor sitting in Lincoln’s Inn Hall. Implacable November weather. As much mud in the streets as if the waters had but newly retired from the face of the earth, and it would not be wonderful to meet a Megalosaurus, forty feet long or so, waddling like an elephantine lizard up Holborn Hill. Smoke lowering down from chimney-pots, making a soft black drizzle, with flakes of soot in it as big as full-grown snow-flakes gone into mourning, one might imagine, for the death of the sun. Dogs, undistinguishable in mire. Horses, scarcely better; splashed to their very blinkers. Foot passengers, jostling one another’s umbrellas in a general infection of ill-temper, and losing their foot-hold at street-corners, where tens of thousands of other foot passengers have been slipping and sliding since the day broke (if the day ever broke), adding new deposits to the crust upon crust of mud, sticking at those points tenaciously to the pavement, and accumulating at compound interest.

Elon stopped believing in Mars

“Peter Thiel says 2024 is the year Elon stopped believing in Mars. Mars was supposed to be a political project. It was building an alternative. And in 2024, Elon came to believe that if you went to Mars, the socialist US government, the woke AI, it would follow you to Mars. He says, if I had the seasteading version with Elon where I said if trump doesn’t win, I want to just leave the country, and then elon said there’s nowhere to go. There’s nowhere to go. This is the only place that. Maybe that was when elon decided to pump a quarter of a billion dollars into the trump campaign. I guess it was.”
Futurist and author Amy Webb, This Week In Tech episode 1040, 13 July 2025. [Around 1:12:17] Light editing for clarity.

Only a void

Like the Russians in 1917, we live in an era of rapid, sometimes unacknowledged, change: economic, political, demographic, educational, social, and, above all, informational. We, too, exist in a permanent cacophony, where conflicting messages, right and left, true and false, fash across our screens all the time. Traditional religions are in long-term decline. Trusted institutions seem to be failing.

Techno-optimism has given way to techno-pessimism, a fear that technology now controls us in ways we can't understand. And in the hands of the New Obscurantists — who actively promote fear of illness, fear of nuclear war, fear of death, dread and anxiety are powerful weapons.

The supporters of the New Obscurantism have also broken with the ideals of Americas Founders, all of whom considered themselves to be men of the Enlightenment. Benjamin Franklin was not only a political thinker but a scientist and a brave advocate of smallpox inocula-tion. George Washington was fastidious about rejecting monarchy, restricting the power of the executive, and establishing the rule of law. Later American leaders - Lincoln, Roosevelt, King-quoted the Constitution and its authors to bolster their own arguments.

By contrast, this rising international elite is creating something very different: a society in which superstition defeats reason and logic, transparency vanishes, and the nefarious actions of political leaders are obscured behind a cloud of nonsense and distraction. There are no checks and balances in a world where only charisma matters, no rule of law in a world where emotion defeats reason—only a void that anyone with a shocking and compelling story can fill.

The New Rasputins, Anti-science mysticism is enabling autocracy around the globe, by historian Anne Applebaum. The Atlantic, February 2025.