Flux Podcasts (Formerly Theory of Change)

Flux Community Media
  • 4.7 (64)
  • Politics
  • Updated Daily

Flux is a progressive podcast platform, with daily content from shows like Theory of Change, The Electorette, and Embrace The Void.

  1. 2d ago

    The U.S. is inexperienced as a democracy, and it’s showing

    “We live in the worst timeline” is a phrase you often hear people say in left-leaning social spaces. It’s usually a joke, but I think it’s more than that. The truth is that, while Donald Trump is the most corrupt president in American history, democracy in this country has been at risk many times throughout its lifetime, and also that it really couldn’t be said to have fully existed until the passage of the civil rights acts of the 1960s. The moment we’re living in is complicated. On the one hand, it is true that the United States has never had more social progress than right now. But it’s also the case that people are right to feel that things are precarious. We have to keep two things in mind at all times: Things have been worse in the past, but they can get worse if we don’t understand how they were improved. It’s a lot to consider. That’s why I wanted to talk in this episode with Lisa Corrigan, she’s a professor of communications and gender studies at the University of Arkansas who specializes in African American and Latino history. This is her second time on the program, in her previous appearance, Lisa and I discussed why there is no “Joe Rogan of the left.” In this episode, we talk about how political change and cultural power, the relationship of conservatives to the Democratic and Republican parties, and a lot more. If you’re interested in supporting Theory of Change, we are doing a fundraising drive for the show and for Flux on GoFundMe. I’d really appreciate your support. You can also become a paid supporter on Patreon or on Substack. Thank you so much for your help. I cannot do this work without you. The video of this conversation is available. Access the episode page to get the full transcript. You can subscribe to Theory of Change and other Flux podcasts on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Podcasts, YouTube, Patreon, Substack, and elsewhere. Audio Chapters 00:00 — Introduction 07:02 — How the left lost its organizing culture 13:35 — Liberals’ misplaced faith in business and capital 21:22 — The right’s ploy of lowering everyone’s expectations 35:41 — Reactionaries changed Republican political culture through media 37:30 — The importance of formal debate 42:55 — America as a young, tentative democracy About the Show Theory of Change is hosted by Matthew Sheffield about larger trends and intersections of politics, religion, media, and technology. It's part of the Flux network, a new content community of podcasters and writers. Please visit us at flux.community to learn more and to tell us about what you're doing. We're constantly growing and learning from the great people we meet. Theory of Change on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheoryChange Matthew Sheffield on Social Media Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@mattsheffield Twitter: https://twitter.com/mattsheffield Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/matthew.flux.community This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit plus.flux.community/subscribe

    52 min

  2. May 30

    Trump is at record-low approval, but Democrats have not been able to build their own public support

    Donald Trump is in serious political trouble. His approval ratings are even lower than they were after the Capitol Putsch, as independent voters have turned against him. He’s even began losing support from fellow Republicans as well, which is a new thing in his political career. It’s easy to see why: tariffs have increased inflation, his war on Iran has been a disaster, gas prices are up significantly, and people are upset about his desecration of American landmarks like the White House and the Kennedy Center. If you had paid attention during his first term, you’d have seen that Trump has wanted to take over Greenland, bomb Iran, and tariff the entire world for a very long time. But many of the people who voted for him in 2024 did not pay attention, and now they’re feeling betrayed, claiming that they voted for none of this. The Republican Party is hollowing out from the inside, but despite this reality, Democrats are even less popular than Trump because they have no affirmative vision and largely refuse to run on the policies their voters actually want, such as universal healthcare and ending financial support for Israel’s genocide in Gaza. So what happens next? No one knows for sure, of course, but to ponder the future, I thought it would be worth looking to the past with my good friend Rick Perlstein who is one of the best historians of the Republican party. His first book on Barry Goldwater’s 1964 presidential campaign is being released in a 25th anniversary edition, and he’s got another one in the works that we talk about in our discussion. The video of our conversation is available, the transcript is below. Because of its length, some podcast apps and email programs may truncate it. Access the episode page to get the full text. You can subscribe to Theory of Change and other Flux podcasts on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Podcasts, YouTube, Patreon, Substack, and elsewhere. Related Content --Kamala Harris lost because Democrats don’t have a political ecosystem --The economy has collapsed for the middle class, Democrats must admit this and act accordingly --How the American left became post-political, and how to change that --Even Democrats who hate him can learn a lot from Zohran Mamdani --Caving to conservative religious fears does not work electorally --There is no ‘Joe Rogan of the left’ because Democrats stopped being interested in public debate --As Republicans have radicalized, Democrats have become more passive—and less successful electorally --The self-proclaimed ‘popularists’ aren’t doing political science Audio Chapters 00:00 — Introduction11:21 — What happens to politically homeless Trumpists?22:31 — The Iran war and Republican antisemitism28:00 — Democratic decline and the New Deal legacy39:52 — Politics as teaching48:35 — Perlstein’s new book: The Infernal Triangle53:46 — The U.S. left does not practice democracy in its own affairs About the Show Theory of Change is hosted by Matthew Sheffield about larger trends and intersections of politics, religion, media, and technology. It's part of the Flux network, a new content community of podcasters and writers. Please visit us at flux.community to learn more and to tell us about what you're doing. We're constantly growing and learning from the great people we meet. Theory of Change on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheoryChange Matthew Sheffield on Social Media Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@mattsheffield Twitter: https://twitter.com/mattsheffield Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/matthew.flux.community This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit plus.flux.community/subscribe

    1h 4m

  3. May 25

    Pope Leo, Opus Dei, and the battle for the soul of Catholicism

    Reactionary Catholics are a small minority of core Republican voters, but in many ways they set the party’s agenda because they’re so well organized and have a much stronger intellectual tradition than the Evangelicals who dominate the Republican voting base. But this trend exists internationally as well, and Opus Dei, a lay-member organization founded in Spain, has become a political powerhouse in a number of different countries. Aside from the ridiculous caricatures of the group painted by Dan Brown in his Da Vinci Code novels, there has not been much detailed reporting on Opus Dei’s activities. The group is so secretive, in fact, that even the leadership of the church itself has often not known what Opus Dei has been up to. That has began to change in recent years, however, thanks in large measure to journalist Gareth Gore, who has been reporting on the group for several years and has released an important book which is now out in paperback called Opus: The Cult of Dark Money, Human Trafficking, and Right-Wing Conspiracy Inside the Catholic Church. It’s become an international bestseller that has become so influential that Pope Leo XIV actually invited him to discuss his findings and recommendations at a private meeting. I was pleased to be joined by Gareth to discuss Opus Dei and his book for this episode. We also talked about why Leo, the first American pope, is becoming a historically significant figure through his efforts to reconcile the conservative faith with democracy in the twenty-first century by telling conservative Catholics that they have a place in modernity—contrary to what reactionary and anti-democratic groups like Opus Dei are telling them. I hope you’ll enjoy. If you’re interested in supporting Theory of Change, we are doing a fundraising drive for the show and for Flux on GoFundMe. I’d really appreciate your support. You can also become a paid supporter on Patreon or on Substack. Thank you so much for your help. I cannot do this work without you. The video of our conversation is available, the transcript is below. Because of its length, some podcast apps and email programs may truncate it. Access the episode page to get the full text. You can subscribe to Theory of Change and other Flux podcasts on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Podcasts, YouTube, Patreon, Substack, and elsewhere. Related Content —Trump hates Pope Leo because he sees himself as the real representative of Christians —In the Republican Party, reactionary Catholics set the agenda rather than Evangelicals —To understand the Christian right, learn the history of the postwar Christian left —Trumpism isn’t conservative, and saying this is still important —James Talarico and the re-invigoration of liberal Christianity —The Apocalypse of Don: Trump, Nietzsche, and Antichrist America 🔒 —The Christian Right was a theological rebellion against the idea of improving society —Inside the rallies, the January 6th attack was undeniably a Christian nationalist event —Far-right pastors ask God to ‘kill’ Democrats spiritually —How the EWTN cable channel sought to radicalize Catholics Audio Chapters 00:00 — Introduction 12:26 — Pope Leo XIV standing as a conservative against reactionaries 15:48 — Reactionary billionaire Peter Thiel trying to merge reactionary apocalypse traditions 20:14 — René Girard as the source of Thiel’s Antichrist obsessions 23:10 — A brief history of Opus Dei 29:14 — The Fatima miracle tradition within Hispanic reactionary Catholicism 33:52 — Opus Dei and Spanish dictator Francisco Franco 38:00 — The expansion of Opus Dei outside of Spain, including in the U.S. 42:35 — Opus Dei priest converted many Republicans to Catholicism and was accused of sexual assault 44:58 — Dan Brown’s ‘Da Vinci Code’ and Opus Dei 51:19 — Reactionary Christian traditions grow because they provide economic and social support 57:09 — Abuses, including sex trafficking, were protected by Opus Dei’s secrecy 01:02:22 — Pope Leo’s investigation of Opus Dei About the Show Theory of Change is hosted by Matthew Sheffield about larger trends and intersections of politics, religion, media, and technology. It's part of the Flux network, a new content community of podcasters and writers. Please visit us at flux.community to learn more and to tell us about what you're doing. We're constantly growing and learning from the great people we meet. Theory of Change on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheoryChange Matthew Sheffield on Social Media Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@mattsheffield Twitter: https://twitter.com/mattsheffield Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/matthew.flux.community This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit plus.flux.community/subscribe

    1h 11m

  4. May 19

    Uncertainty makes science powerful — and incredibly vulnerable

    Thirty years ago, John Horgan had a dream—or rather a nightmare. Here and there, scientists were saying that all the major problems of the universe had essentially been solved, and that the work of the future was just going to be filling in the details of what we already knew. But those voices were largely drowned out in the generation of scientists who came of age promoting radical new ideas that they claimed would push their disciplines far beyond what was then-currently known. Despite their creators’ claims, however, ideas like string theory, quantum consciousness, and chaos theory, were unable to generate actual testable ideas and inventions. Had scientific progress stalled? Is it possible that there are real limits on what humans can ever know because of the type of beings that we are? This was the thesis of John’s book, The End of Science, which was published in 1996. The book was instantly controversial, and he was fired from Scientific American because of it. And yet in the intervening 30 years, many of the exact same people he had profiled are still promoting the same unproductive ideas. Is it accurate to say that science is stalled out though? That’s why I wanted to talk with John about the book, and where he sees things in 2026, especially now that one of America’s two major parties has rebuilt itself around attacking science and secular knowledge. The video of this conversation is available. Access the episode page to get the full transcript. You can subscribe to Theory of Change and other Flux podcasts on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Podcasts, YouTube, Patreon, Substack, and elsewhere. Related Content —Science fiction and the authoritarian imagination —Thinking outside Schrödinger’s cat box: Reality as quantum —Chatbots aren’t conscious, but it’s important to understand the science and philosophy of why —In Silicon Valley, creationists and atheist post-libertarians have a lot in common —Why thinking about aliens can help us better understand philosophy of science —Why the far-right’s wars on science and sex are linked —Trump super fans are impossible to argue with because they don’t believe in traditional logic 🔒 —Mental qualia are real, but they create experiences, rather than being created by them Audio Chapters 00:00 — Introduction 14:51 — Isn’t all science just a type of philosophy? 25:14 — Peter Thiel’s claim that scientific progress has stalled 31:33 — Why science has such difficulty understanding consciousness 38:08 — The tension some religious believers feel with consciousness research 49:02 — Jeffrey Epstein’s obsession with scientists 53:20 — The fragility of the postwar liberal consensuses, and why they were taken for granted About the Show Theory of Change is hosted by Matthew Sheffield about larger trends and intersections of politics, religion, media, and technology. It's part of the Flux network, a new content community of podcasters and writers. Please visit us at flux.community to learn more and to tell us about what you're doing. We're constantly growing and learning from the great people we meet. Theory of Change on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheoryChange Matthew Sheffield on Social Media Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@mattsheffield Twitter: https://twitter.com/mattsheffield Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/matthew.flux.community Threads: https://www.threads.net/@realmattsheffield This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit plus.flux.community/subscribe

    1h 5m

  5. May 15

    Chatbots aren’t conscious, but the specific details as to why are important

    As artificial intelligence software like ChatGPT, Stable Diffusion, and Claude are becoming more integrated into many people’s lives, it’s perfectly natural to wonder why and how these things work and what possible implications they have for philosophy. The current AI systems are not conscious, but unfortunately, a lot of people are becoming enamored with the idea that they might be, including Richard Dawkins, the world’s most famous atheist, who actually wrote an entire book, which he seems to have forgotten about called The God Delusion, which argued that minds aren’t necessary to produce perceived order or intentional behavior. But instead of taking his own advice, Dawkins has spent the past several weeks writing embarrassing essays and almost love letters to his AI agent, which he named “Claudia.” I’ve already dealt with Dawkins’s specific behavior in a previous column, but he is far from alone in thinking that these things might be conscious. And since that’s the case, my friend Virginia Heffernan of Magic and Loss and I decided to dig in further into why large language models are not full minds using some of the tools in the new philosophical and scientific framework that I’m developing called the Epistemic Flux Theory. As we often do in our recordings, however, we packed in a lot of other subject material into the discussion. This episode is on the longer side, but it’s also filled with asides and tangents that I hope can make the science and philosophy understandable and relevant to everyday life. I hope you’ll enjoy. The video of this conversation is available. Access the episode page to get the full transcript. You can subscribe to Theory of Change and other Flux podcasts on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Podcasts, YouTube, Patreon, Substack, and elsewhere. Protecting and supporting democracy is a team effort! We need your help to keep going. Please support my work with a paid or free subscription! Related Content --Richard Dawkins has a Claude delusion --Minds don’t create experiences, they are made by them --Epistemic Flux Theory working glossary --The dark philosophy of authoritarian capitalism animating Trump’s chaotic second term --AI is not the main problem—how people use it can be --How you think about minds influences how you think about humanity --In an age of fictionalized reality, we need literary criticism more than ever --Trump super fans are impossible to argue with because they don’t believe in traditional logic 🔒 Audio Chapters 00:00 — Richard Dawkins thinks a chatbot is his special friend 10:45 — An introduction to Epistemic Flux Theory 18:16 — Consciousness is mental autonomy, not the ability to have experience 28:39 — Extrinsic thinking requires a body, memetic thinking does not 39:56 — Is AI sycophancy what people want, even though they won’t admit it? 55:40 — Embodied robotics as a better machine intelligence 01:06:16 — Cognition as deciphering relationalities 01:15:50 — What Alan Turing actually was trying to test 01:26:48 — AI as authoritarian fantasy, an the problem with computational functionalism 01:35:24 — How imperfect chatbots and robots reveal human cruelty 01:42:24 — How much human cultural output was already synthetic before the AI revolution? 01:45:34 — Cognition is individuated, but epistemology is necessarily communal 01:53:17 — Philosophy and religion must accept that science is best able to answer certain questions 02:01:21 — Substance as an illusion of processes 02:05:43 — Liberalism must reinvent itself in order to thrive in this future About the Show Theory of Change is hosted by Matthew Sheffield about larger trends and intersections of politics, religion, media, and technology. It's part of the Flux network, a new content community of podcasters and writers. Please visit us at flux.community to learn more and to tell us about what you're doing. We're constantly growing and learning from the great people we meet. Theory of Change on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheoryChange Matthew Sheffield on Social Media Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@mattsheffield Twitter: https://twitter.com/mattsheffield Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/matthew.flux.community Threads: https://www.threads.net/@realmattsheffield This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit plus.flux.community/subscribe

    2h 12m
  6. MAGA is not a monolith, and that’s why Trump’s poll numbers have fallen

    May 8

    MAGA is not a monolith, and that’s why Trump’s poll numbers have fallen

    One of the biggest myths in politics today is that Donald Trump’s supporters are just a gigantic monolith, a group of people who will say whatever he says and believe whatever he tells them to believe. While there are many Americans who will change their opinions to suit Trump’s, it’s also true many people support Trump for their own reasons and reasons, which may not be compatible with his form of governance and the agenda that he has been imposing since he became president for the second time. It is certainly the case that a lot of Trump voters are super fans of his and really do view him as some sort of blunt instrument to attack a culture gone awry in their opinion. But there are plenty of people also who don’t pay attention to news and who may not be religious at all who supported Trump in 2024. That matters because these people are, in many cases, up for grabs this year and in years to come. So why did they vote for Trump? Joining me in this episode to discuss is Stephen Hawkins. He is the global director of research at More In Common, which is a research organization that does political polling and psychological analysis of voters to analyze why it is that they have certain opinions, and what opinions they might have in common with other people who vote differently. They released an extremely large survey earlier this year called “Beyond MAGA” that’s very much worth your time. This is an audio-only episode. Access the episode page to get the full transcript. You can subscribe to Theory of Change and other Flux podcasts on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Podcasts, YouTube, Patreon, Substack, and elsewhere. Related Content —Latino evangelicals are reshaping American politics, politicians and parties should take notice —How much do political party leaders know about the Americans who vote form them? —In 2024, Trump was betting bigly on ‘unlikely voters’ —Charlie Kirk built a powerhouse organization based on finding needy young people 🔒 —What does it mean for Democrats’ future that many black Americans don’t like them? —Why attacking Trump will not be enough to stop his movement —Mentioned paper: “Belief in a Dangerous World Does Not Explain Substantial Variance in Political Attitudes, But Other World Beliefs Do” Audio Chapters 00:00 — Introduction 10:11 — ‘MAGA hardliners,’ the hardcore Christian nationalists who see Trump as divinely destined 15:51 — ‘Mainline Republicans,’ party loyalists who don’t follow news much 17:47 — Politics as a cognitive style and deeper antagonistic divisions 22:50 — ‘Anti-woke conservatives,’ a more secular group that is oppositional more than affirmative 32:27 — The ‘reluctant right,’ a younger group that knew little about politics 36:51 — Did Elon Musk’s ads in Pennsylvania win the state for Trump? 42:43 — ‘New traditionalists,’ young men with very strongly misogynist viewpoints 53:48 — Younger Trump supporters favor more extremist media figures 58:03 — Reactionary religious identity as an act of youthful rebellion About the Show Theory of Change is hosted by Matthew Sheffield about larger trends and intersections of politics, religion, media, and technology. It's part of the Flux network, a new content community of podcasters and writers. Please visit us at flux.community to learn more and to tell us about what you're doing. We're constantly growing and learning from the great people we meet. Theory of Change on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheoryChange Matthew Sheffield on Social Media Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@mattsheffield Twitter: https://twitter.com/mattsheffield Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/matthew.flux.community Threads: https://www.threads.net/@realmattsheffield This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit plus.flux.community/subscribe

    1h 5m

  7. May 5

    In the AI-powered job market, knowing what truth looks like will matter most

    Since the public release of ChatGPT in late 2022, large language model artificial intelligence systems have become the most rapidly adopted technology in human history. Last March, ChatGPT’s website had 5.7 billion visits, while its competitors Claude and Gemini combined for another 3 billion. Despite how much people are using these services, however, AI still has many critics who argue that they are nothing more than simplistic pattern matchers that are vastly overhyped. While the critics are underestimating what you can do with these systems, they do indeed have a point. LLMs excel at many abstract reasoning tasks but because they have no somatic, embodied connection to reality, there is still a lot that today’s models struggle with. Full cognition depends upon the ability to designate “this” in the world and to compare “what it’s like” based on lived experience. Love it or hate it, this technology has already changed the economies of every country, and this process is only just beginning. No one can say what will happen everywhere, but one thing seems evident: As abstract knowledge of facts becomes commodified, human somatic adjudication will become more valuable than ever before. The future will belong to people who can think across multiple disciplines and who understand what truth looks like, both broadly and in particular. All of this is the topic of a recent essay that my friend Nils Gilman, the former associate chancellor at the University of California–Berkeley and deputy editor of Noema magazine, recently published about future-proofing your career in the age of AI, that is the focus of today’s discussion. The video of our conversation is available. Access the episode page to get the full transcript. You can subscribe to Theory of Change and other Flux podcasts on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Podcasts, YouTube, Patreon, Substack, and elsewhere. Related Content —Big business and government are adopting artificial intelligence, what can it do for the rest of us? —AI is not the main problem—how people use it can be —How you think about minds influences how you treat others —Richard Dawkins and his Claude Delusion —AI content is here to stay, laws and norms need to change accordingly —Why mediocrity just might be the key to innovation —An ancient Greek philosophical tradition has become extremely relevant in the social media age —To build a better future, we must never stop imagining and working for it Audio Chapters 00:00 — Introduction 06:56 — Large language models’ limitations are where future jobs will flourish 15:41 — AI supplementation and the human role in improvement 26:14 — Analogies for AI adoption and disruptive technology 34:50 — Art, reproduction, and the value of authenticity 41:11 — The jobs of the future will be at the intersection of somatic and abstract reasoning 46:44 — Liberal education and metacognitive skills 54:14 — Porting knowledge from within time and other disciplines Membership Benefits This is a free episode of Theory of Change. But in order to keep the show sustainable, the full audio, video, and transcript for some episodes are available to paid subscribers only. The deep conversations we bring you about politics, religion, technology, and media take great time and care to produce. Your subscriptions make Theory of Change possible and we’re very grateful for your help. Please join today to get full access with Patreon or Substack. If you would like to support the show but don’t want to subscribe, you can also send one-time donations via PayPal. If you're not able to support financially, please help us by subscribing and/or leaving a nice review on Apple Podcasts. Doing this helps other people find Theory of Change and our great guests. You can also subscribe to the show on YouTube. About the Show Theory of Change is hosted by Matthew Sheffield about larger trends and intersections of politics, religion, media, and technology. It's part of the Flux network, a new content community of podcasters and writers. Please visit us at flux.community to learn more and to tell us about what you're doing. We're constantly growing and learning from the great people we meet. Theory of Change on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheoryChange Matthew Sheffield on Social Media Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@mattsheffield Twitter: https://twitter.com/mattsheffield Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/matthew.flux.community This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit plus.flux.community/subscribe

    1h 4m

  8. May 4

    What Deserves Our Attention?

    Ben Saltzman is an associate professor of English at the University of Chicago, where he has taught since 2017. He currently serves as the Director of Undergraduate Studies in English and Director of the Program in Medieval Studies. He also co-edits one of the longest-running literary studies journals in the country, Modern Philology. Previously, he was a Weisman Postdoctoral Instructor at Caltech from 2014–2017 after earning his PhD from UC Berkeley in 2014.

    53 min
See All (214)

4.7
out of 5
64 Ratings

About

Flux is a progressive podcast platform, with daily content from shows like Theory of Change, The Electorette, and Embrace The Void.

Information

You Might Also Like