The point of this project has always been to take a look at the news and pop culture of the moment and try to dig a little bit deeper.

To spark conversations about ideas, beyond superficial reactions of: “this movie is good and I like it” or “this article is interesting and I agree with it”, by taking the focus off of opinions and instead asking questions that lead to discussions among friends. Ideally, discussions that reveal something about who we are, and what matters to us. The kind of conversations that maybe even bring us closer to some deeper truths, and to each other.

It seems like that’s the kind of discussion we’re all having right now, about one very big thing: America’s structural racism, and the police violence that’s both a symptom — and a perpetuator — of that racism.

Beyond acknowledging their validity, I’m no expert on this stuff. I’m still very much in listening and learning mode right now. So in this moment, I wanted to share someone else’s discussion. It’s between two people I admire even though I don’t always agree with them, who’ve both proven to have incredible critical minds, and who I know think deeply about the world’s problems and what we can do to fix them.

On the June 3rd, 2020 episode of the Ezra Klein Show, he and author Ta-Nahisi Coates discussed the role of the police in society, and what some alternatives might look like. The whole conversation was strangely hopeful, and though I wouldn’t normally lift such a large chunk verbatim, this exchange gave me a lot to think about — both on how to understand what’s happening today and how to imagine what the future could look like.

Right now feels like a critical moment to really consider ideas like these, and honestly discuss:

What situations have you seen or been in involving police, and how could they have gone differently with a different kind of help?

Instead of dialing 911 and having armed police respond to every problem in our communities, what might an alternative system look like?

What does the world need more of right now, that we could deploy in a nationwide effort, instead of more police forces?

**note: most of these are intended to have a long “discussable shelf-life,” which I believe to be equally true here — but this one takes on added importance at this moment in particular.**

**additional note: because of this moment in time (and the time it’s afforded us), I’ve also started experimenting with a video format. Similar content either way. Please be kind, it’s early days yet.**

In this coronavirus-plagued spring of 2020, we find ourselves stuck at home with our roommates, family or partners in a way we never have before.  Meanwhile the media (from news outlets to advertisers) have all-too-eagerly tried to frame this moment as a heartwarming opportunity — to spend that time growing closer, if we use it right.

This reminded me of an episode from John Greene’s podcast, The Anthropocene Reviewed, where late last year, while discussing the merits and uses of the iPhone’s Notes app, he quotes something he had once jotted down in his phone: a the poet Donald Hall’s much more artful take on how we spend time with loved ones. Less a maximization strategy, than a reckoning with the reality of relationships.

“We did not spend our days gazing into each other’s eyes. We did that gazing when we made love or when one of us was in trouble, but most of the time our gazes met and entwined as they looked at a third thing. Third things are essential to marriages, objects or practices or habits or arts or institutions or games or human beings that provide a site of joint rapture or contentment. Each member of a couple is separate; the two come together in double attention.”

So in this time of being together, alone, for longer-than-usual stretches, it seemed like a good time to reflect on those Third Things, and decide which ones are better at deepening our relationships vs merely filling time.

What are the Third Things in your relationships?

Which are best at bringing you together,
and what makes them better than others?

How is our reliance on Third Things a positive
or negative reality of how we connect to each other?

Inspired by this lovely little visual essay (only partially screen-capped above) about the need to cool down social media, and maybe make it harder to instantly reach millions of people any time you want, a simple tangent:

Should there be limits on how easy it is to “go viral” or have your message spread globally in seconds?

Do we really need that ability? If so, why?

If not, what’s a fair but useful way to limit that power without old-fashioned corporate gatekeeping?

Or is it a clever way to keep useless people pleasantly occupied and out of trouble?

Andrew Sullivan’s longform reflection on his own struggle resisting the constant distraction of the digital age — titled “I Used To Be a Human Being” — is full of interesting arguments. Some are obvious, like the obvious pros and cons of the unending stream of info we’re all immersed in. Some are more personal, like his experience trying to battle that connectivity compulsion through meditation. All of it is recognizably relevant to our daily lives, and worth a read.

One quote I liked in particular:

Has our enslavement to dopamine — to the instant hits of validation that come with a well-crafted tweet or Snapchat streak — made us happier? I suspect it has simply made us less unhappy, or rather less aware of our unhappiness, and that our phones are merely new and powerful antidepressants of a non-pharmaceutical variety.

It may be oversimple, but worth asking:

Are you really happier when you’re more digitally connected, or is a constant stream of digital stimulation a distraction from “real life”?

“Man is free; but his freedom does not look like the glorious liberty of the Enlightenment; it is no longer the gift of God. Once again, man stands alone in the universe, responsible for his condition, likely to remain in a lowly state, but free to reach above the stars.”

Jean-Paul Sartre asks us to think: is freedom a privilege or a burden?