Ezra Klein is a renowned American blogger and journalist. Behind his interpretation of the political events shaking the United States in 2025 lies a demanding philosophy that guides us in our approach to a highly sensitive political subject: the future.
Translated from French with AI assistance.
Journalists have a duty to report the facts. It is this function, and the ethics that accompany it, that give them their dignity and make their task so essential. And it is because this dignity and mission are under threat that democracies are faltering in the face of a new technological and media regime of opinion-making, fanaticism, and manipulation.
But it is precisely when the vital balance of the democratic and media system is threatened that the role of the journalist becomes that of an activist. Not for a cause or a party. But simply for the very survival of fact-based debate, and thus for the maintenance of the conditions necessary for the exercise of democracy. The journalist then becomes a scout on the path to an uncertain future. And in addition to examining the facts, they must anticipate the future, its risks and its potential. This is a delicate exercise. This is where Ezra Klein comes in.
“The prospective analyst must be a meticulous observer of the small quantities and small bifurcations that, at every moment, alter the chances of different possible worlds coming into being. It’s a very different exercise from making a prediction and shouting it from the rooftops in the hope that it will come true.
When asked about the upheavals of Donald Trump’s first months in office and his position as a journalist and engaged writer, Klein offered a series of methodological remarks. Taken in the abstract, they can be summarized in three simple ideas, at least at first glance. We formulate them below in the form of maxims and riddles to be solved.
1. Premonitions are preferable to predictions
Making predictions is a superfluous and dangerous art. They should be avoided, and even more so clung to as if they were lucky charms. Making a prediction necessarily adds another piece to the pinball machine of speculation and controversy that agitates the media and the political storm of the moment. Ezra Klein has his own way of projecting himself into the disturbing twists and turns of the future. For example, he begins his sentences with: “In the various possible versions of the world in 2028, there is one where…”. This formula reveals his attention to the way the future is constructed, through small additions of probability.
The prospective analyst must therefore be a meticulous observer of the small quantities and small bifurcations that, at every moment, alter the chances of different possible worlds coming to pass. This is a very different exercise from making a prediction, like throwing a greyhound into a race and shouting its name in the hope that it will win (because prophecies generally offer nothing more than a risky bet on their self-fulfillment).
However, at an advanced level of this prospective science presented by Klein, the factors influencing the probability of scenarios are so tenuous and vague that predictions must rely on a form of intuition. This is why I have indicated that premonition is preferable to prediction.
2. History is not made up of repetitions, but of critical moments
Knowing history is a necessary and highly commendable task, today more than ever. History is a reservoir of figures and forms that constantly feed the present and the imagination of those who shape it (including us). However, looking to history for a sequence of events and imagining that it will overlap with the present to produce the future is a magical view of history that does not work. Ezra Klein puts it this way (I paraphrase): “I don’t believe that history repeats itself. I prefer to devote myself to seeing the next moment that will tip the balance of history again.” This time, it’s not just a matter of assessing the chances of a potential world, it’s about detecting the moment when that world will become reality. That is, the moment of tipping, precipitation, or creation in the collective construction of history. The political momentum.
3. An authentic voice is better than an inflatable hero
The third point is a predictable complement to the previous two. History needs heroes (and heroines), if only to be told. Some of these heroes even play an active role in shaping it. But just as predictions made too early can turn out to be empty incantations, heroes who are too quickly adulated can deflate like balloons. The political scene is littered with the flaccid skins of these shadow knights who thought themselves the substance of their age.
“If no one knows who the next hero will be, we know and believe that their voice must come from a pure heart and an enthusiastic soul.
When asked who he thinks will be the future standard-bearer for democracy and progressivism in the United States, Ezra Klein responds as he did to previous questions: “I don’t know who it will be, and I think it’s too early to know. What I do know is that there are people who have a unique and authentic voice that resonates in the present moment. Those are the people I listen to. »
Once again, meaning and sensitivity are called upon in a kind of urgent need to slow down and keep pace with the times. This time, it is the ear that must listen to the debate, to hear the hearts of the protagonists beating. Because while no one knows who the next hero will be, we know and believe that he or she must be sincere and that their voice must come from a pure heart and an enthusiastic soul. Let’s seek out these voices, rather than betting on heroes as if they were mere racehorses.
In conclusion: the creativity of the times
These three deceptively simple guidelines are linked by a keen awareness of the dangers of polarization in public debate. Ezra Klein talks about a self-perpetuating mechanism. Polarized systems are self-sustaining and self-balancing: they perpetuate themselves because they feed on mutual hatred between opposing camps; they balance themselves because every gain in one camp reinforces the violence of the other camp (in two-party systems and two-round elections, doesn’t poll-driven democracy lead to ever closer elections?).
On closer inspection, Klein’s three precautions described above betray the same effort to surf the surface of the conflicting waves of this polarized field, avoiding diving into it or feeding it with apocalyptic predictions, references to the 1930s, or an absurd cult of personality.
But Klein’s “dogmas” are not just a demand for rigor and vigilance. They are also a philosophical optimism. Or rather, a deep faith in the uncertain and plural nature of the world in the making. That is to say, in the creativity of time. For, as Bergson said in one of his famous philosophical insights: what use would time be if it brought nothing new? Let us rejoice, for uncertainty is the glory and hope of this world. Above all, it is the very fabric of politics. And the possibility of democracy.
symbiosphere 