The Realignment: What Was Up with Our Matthew McConaughey Segment on Breaking Points?
Original written content, episodes of the week, Bookshop, and more...
Thanks for checking out our Substack!
If you’re new, hit subscribe to get future issues in your inbox every Thursday.
Welcome Back to The Realignment
This week, we put out two great episodes with Jacob Helberg and Evan Osnos. On top of that, Marshall filled in for Krystal on Breaking Points on Monday. Below, you’ll find a quick response to folks wondering why Marshall and Saagar dedicated a full segment to Matthew McConaughey’s podcast with Kara Swisher.
Read the take, and respond with your thoughts below. Does it matter that Matthew won’t talk about policy? What type of leader(s) does the country need right now? What type of leader corresponds to specifically contentious moments in America’s history? Please respond below. Audience participation helps us build another show.
On another quick note, next week’s finally The Realignment Conference in Miami! It’s incredibly difficult to plan events, especially if they’re in-person. Once we’ve settled everything next Friday, we’re excited to dive back into the show and continue to step things up on both our ends.
Why Marshall and Saagar Got So Excited About Matthew McConaughey
Saagar and my Breaking Points segment about Matthew McConaughey’s appearance on Kara Swisher’s New York Times Sway podcast really took off. 221,000 views and counting. It was also an incredibly polarizing clip. Some people thought we were onto something, the other half of the audience seemed to be evenly divided between people who thought we were out-to-lunch and those who thought we were just trying to suck up.
Here’s my attempt at better articulating what drew our attention.
We excerpted a couple of segments of the episode’s audio, but below is my favorite section:
Kara Swisher
Why are you not doing that, letting anybody know who you’re for, who you’re against?
Matthew Mcconaughey
Run for, issues, where I’m standing on this, and bills, and laws, and policies, et cetera?
Kara Swisher
Yeah.
Matthew Mcconaughey
(SING-SONG VOICE) On purpose. [CHUCKLES]
Kara Swisher
I figured it’s on purpose.
Matthew Mcconaughey
On purpose right now. Taking sides on a political issue right now, to me, precedes the discussion of something larger and much more important, like the questions we were asking a minute ago. The definition is, what the hell is politics? But you got to re— before we start saying, hey, this is where I stand, and this is where I stand, which creates, already, a divide where some of you— 50% of the people are going to come at you, let’s answer these other questions about purpose of democracy, right? What is progress? Or how about this question— do we really want to be a United States of America? And I don’t say that with arrogance or condescension. It’s a question we got to answer. What is leadership? Why is our nation’s trust level so low with our leaders, with ourselves, with each other? That’s more interesting to me, before I start hopping in the middle of politics going, well, this is where I stand here, and this is where I stand here. Everybody needs to be in the conversation to answer the questions that I was just bringing up.
I’ve discussed this before (especially in today’s episode with Evan Osnos), but the biggest change in Saagar and my approach to politics over the past five or six years is that I’m increasingly disinterested in what specific public policy stances individual politicians adopt.
That’s not to say that I’m always disinterested in policy, just that different moments in American history require different abilities and strengths than others. If its the post-Cold War, holiday from history 1990s, where Newt Gingrich is charting out his conservative Contract with America to take back the House for the first time in 40 years, and Bill Clinton is redefining himself as a centrist “New Democrat” to differentiate himself from his parties losing reputation in the 1980s, policy is incredibly important.
We are both heavily influenced by Michael Lind’s conception of politics. The idea of conceiving of America as a complicated combination of distinct interest groups whose needs and wants need to be balanced against each other feels incredibly accurate. I feel that we need leaders who aren’t competing to become the tribal chieftains of their own minority group or coalition incapable of governing. We need leaders who can actually forge something out of the disparate forces and trends the country’s going through this decade.
What Matthew says that’s so important in the episode is he lays out the foundational tasks any leader governing in today’s environment should focus on. My suggestion, especially for Democrats, is that they let go the idea of themselves as wonk or policy activist in chief and instead think of themselves as someone holding a broad objective, i.e. turning down the temperature on politics and building the foundational trust and competence required for actual political and policy accomplishment. The means of attaining that objective aren’t going to come about by releasing a Green New Deal or writing a wonky book about tech policy to demonstrate how smart you are.
Beto O’Rourke will take all sorts of polarizing stands on policy, and it definitely won’t help him win the Texas governorship.
I’m willing to bet that at this moment in our history, ambitious politicians who conceive of themselves, not as policy persons or activists are going to win in the long run. All this isn’t to say that Matthew’s going to pull it off or that he could actually sit down America’s various factions and help forge something new. Still, at a rhetorical level, he’s moving in exactly the direction Saagar and I feel smarter folks are moving.
This Week’s Episodes
Episode 167: Evan Osnos: The Making of America’s Fury and China’s Ambition
Evan’s three books: Wildland: The Making of America’s Fury, Joe Biden: The Life, the Run, and What Matters Now, and Age of Ambition: Chasing Fortune, Truth, and Faith in the New China are available at our Bookshop storefront.
Episode 166: Jacob Helberg: What a Tech “Gray War” Means for Taiwan, U.S.-China Relations, and Geopolitics
Jacob’s new book, The Wires of War, is now available at our Bookshop storefront.
The Realignment Bookshop
As a reminder, we’ve created a Realignment Bookshop affiliate store showcasing books by guests, what we’re actively reading this year, and deeper dives into the featured topic of an episode.
Most importantly, you don’t need to go with our recommendations if you want to support the show. If you go to Bookshop.org through our link and then purchase *anything* we still get your support.
If you purchase a book using our link, the show gets a 10% commission, a local, independent bookseller gets support, and you get an awesome book!
Here are two lists we’ve built out:
1) Books by Realignment Guests
2) Books we’ve read/listened to in 2021
Let us know what you think about this or any other week’s episodes. Please share The Realignment with anyone who’d enjoy the podcast.
I would find it helpful to compare and contrast Mcconaughey's approach and why you think it works with Obama's deliberate vagueness that you've criticized so I could better understand both.
Damn, Marshall, I hope to hell you go back and read new comments because I have a lot to say...
Let me open w/ your criticism of Smedley Butler. It really rubbed me the wrong way- so much I yelled at my phone.
But then...
I have yet to read his book, so there.
Having said that, I do believe that war ultimately becomes a racket. My example of that was the guest on your show who pointed out the unconscionable waste in Afghanistan. If that's not a racket, what is, man?
Look, we can agree to disagree, K?
Now THIS show... THIS show was sooo dam good I listened to it 2x. YOur guest is amazingly smart, yadda yadda.
What I loved the most was his take on he's just trying to describe WTF is out there, not give a BS prescription. That humility makes people like me listen more.
It also made me go back to BP and your discussion of Matt McCon. (Kara Swisher is as toxic to me as Donald Trump, BTW; the Yin to his Yang)
McC is onto something, as is your guest and as are you & Saagar. You're asking huge questions about the nature of the USA. What does it mean to be an American? What IS America today?
I think these questions are critical b/c they're the only way the nation will be able to stay whole...
The Constitution is under assault by politico's in DC (See Greenwald's discussion of the Jan 6 hearings for a good examination of what I mean).
IF the question of 'What is America' isn't answered soon, there's not going to be one much longer. Maybe even w/in my lifetime (63 years old).
Keep up the fantastic work you guys are doing.
All the Best,
Jim Moriarty