A bipartisan politics for human flourishing

Beyond taxes, tariffs, and the culture wars

Dear Friends,

Whatever your politics, I’m guessing you’d rather spend more time outside with friends than online alone?

This post is meant to frame a possible eight-part series looking at how policy can both reduce the lure of digital addictions (sports betting, porn, gaming, social media) and make it easier to spend time doing what we actually enjoy: hanging out with friends and family, playing sports, exploring nature.

That’s the plan, anyway. Half the time I announce a series, I don’t follow through. And even when I do, most of you seem to lose interest around the third post. So should I go for it? What could make it more compelling? I’d love your ideas—feel free to reply or leave a comment below. Okay, here goes!

Addiction Capitalism

However you feel about tariffs and taxes, or guns and pronouns, I bet you’d like to spend more time exploring nature, hanging with your friends and family, and playing sports.

And while maybe you wouldn’t ban them outright, I bet you’d like to spend less time doomscrolling, watching porn, gambling, and impulse-shopping for things you don’t need and regret buying.

There’s nothing partisan about our shared desire to resist the temptations of so-called limbic capitalism and spend more time having fun with our friends and family.¹

Beyond Economic Debates and Culture Wars

Our political debates are economic or cultural. Do we want to prioritize innovation and growth, or redistribution and equality?² Or, how do we feel about pronouns, guns, sexuality, abortion, college admissions, and permissible speech?³

I’m interested in a third kind of politics, one that cuts across the usual tribal affiliations to bring out the best in us. Adrian Pabst calls it a “politics of flourishing.”

A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte by Georges Seurat

What is Human Flourishing?

Does anyone disagree with any of the following?

• More time outside and less time online

• More time with friends and family, less time on screens.

• Richer relationships and fewer dopamine traps.

• More mentorship and apprenticeship, fewer winner-take-all college admissions

• More time creating, less time consuming

• Town squares, not echo chambers

• Meals with friends, not fast food slumped over a desk

• Beauty and utility⁴

• Belonging over personal branding

• Meaningful work and more time off

If that strikes you as a clichéd list, it’s because we hear these things constantly on podcasts. And we nod along, like “wouldn’t that be nice.” But we haven’t seen a leader shape it into a political agenda.

Or have you? I hear pieces of discourse about human flourishing from Cory Booker (D), Josh Hawley (R), Andrew Yang (I), John Tester (D), Angus King (I), and Ro Khanna (D). I might even add RFK Jr. to the list. Not exactly a coherent ideological or political bloc. (Which might help muster bipartisan support in Congress?)

The Human Flourishing Agenda

So what would a politics of flourishing actually do?

• Public space. More parks, pools, plazas, libraries, and community gardens—places to be human together, without buying anything. Like Bogotá and Mexico City, shut down major roads on Sundays for cycling, walking, running, and rollerskating. Also, more ping pong tables in public parks, please.

• Time. Paid family leave, better scheduling, and reasonable work hours.

• Attention. Regulate the most addictive parts of the digital economy like we regulate tobacco or alcohol.

• Apprenticeships and mentorship. Funding vocational training, apprenticeship programs, coaching, mentoring, and support networks.

• Offline civic rituals. Block parties, free concerts, amateur sports leagues, local festivals, outdoor movie nights, and neighborhood volunteering.

Yes, it’s mostly a local policy agenda. But what if we earmarked 10–50% of AI and robotics profits into a federal fund for human flourishing?

Paseo Dominical Muévete en Bici in Mexico City

The Obstacles

The human flourishing agenda seems so commonsense that it practically feels inevitable. But there are plenty of opponents. Social media, online casinos, porn sites, fast fashion brands, e-commerce, advertising: they profit off loneliness, anxiety, and boredom.

Plus, who wants to think about improving our lives and society when we prefer to stay outraged, anxious, and loyal to our ideological tribe?

The last obstacle is time. Everyone says they’re too busy to hang out, volunteer, or join a sports league. But be honest: check your screen time and you’ll find plenty of time. The real challenge is resisting the addictive dopamine traps.

Textile by Kayla Mattes

The Obvious

Liberal or conservative, we know what a flourishing life looks like: time outside, flexible work with meaning, and friends around the table (without phones!). Our politics should help us get more of the good life. Let’s stop pretending we disagree.

What do you think? And are you up for a follow-up post on online sports betting?

1. Sure, there’s a balance to strike between banning porn or letting anyone watch anything. But most of us are in the common-sense middle. Similarly, we don’t want to ban alcohol or cigarettes, but we support regulation and taxes that discourage excessive use.

2. Similarly, do we want to privilege domestic companies by raising tariffs even if it causes prices to go up for consumers? Or do we want to save money on consumer goods by outsourcing manufacturing jobs to other countries?

Those are good-faith arguments, and thoughtful people will explain their positions. But most people follow tribal affiliations: I have friends who would support tariffs if Bernie proposed them, but hate them because it was Trump.

3. Again, you could have good-faith arguments about each of those issues. But mostly we don’t.

4. I’m surprised that so few women come to mind, though Mariana Mazzucato’s work on a public purpose economy deserves a mention. I’m grateful for your suggestions.