The Rational Nationalist

Why do ordinary people become devoted members of increasingly extreme organizations? This episode explores the psychology of gradual commitment—from harmless slogans and small acts of participation to identity, groupthink, and institutional influence. Using a fictional anti-bullying movement as a case study, we examine how individuals and organizations become radicalized, why these processes often...

Most people assume the majority gets its way. This episode explores why group decisions are often determined less by numbers than by the willingness of competing factions to apply pressure, and what that means for politics, corporations, and modern institutions.

Most people believe they follow the evidence wherever it leads. In reality, we often do the opposite. When confronted with information that challenges our existing beliefs, we rarely evaluate it objectively. Instead, we rationalize it, reinterpret it, or dismiss it altogether in order to preserve our preferred theories, narratives, and worldviews. In this episode of The Rational Nationalist, Lee E...

In this episode of The Rational Nationalist, Lee Ellis examines how individuals and societies create "windmills" to fight. Drawing on the story of Don Quixote, he explores the psychological and social forces that cause threats to be exaggerated, narratives to spiral, and well-intentioned responses to become overreactions. From evolutionary instincts and strategic calculations to ego needs and inst...

In this episode of The Rational Nationalist, Lee Ellis examines how personal incentives influence decision-making inside institutions. Although individuals are expected to act in the best interests of the organizations they serve, competing pressures—including career advancement, ideology, comfort, relationships, and ego—often shape decisions in ways that diverge from an institution's stated purpo...

In this episode of The Rational Nationalist, Lee Ellis examines why governments often appear less efficient than other organizations and explores whether that outcome is inevitable. Using socialism, bureaucracy, and institutional incentives as a case study, the episode examines how organizations develop interests of their own, how bureaucratic structures expand over time, and why the goals of inst...

In this episode of The Rational Nationalist, Lee Ellis examines forecasting, probability, and the challenges of political prediction through the lens of game theory, chaos theory, and mass psychology. Using the 2028 election as a case study, the episode explores deterministic vs. probabilistic thinking, why simple models often outperform complex ones, the psychology of certainty, and how incentive...

In this episode of The Rational Nationalist, Lee Ellis expands the discussion of mass politics from the national to the global level, examining how ideological coalitions, institutional power, and competing political systems shape the emerging world order. The episode explores how the ideological divisions of the global populace correspond to the institutions shaping the current geopolitical order...

In this episode of The Rational Nationalist, Lee Ellis examines the internal divisions within the modern political Right, distinguishing between the Free Right and the Authoritarian Right. Building on previous discussions of the Marxist Left and the Institutional Center, this episode explores nationalism, constitutionalism, political coalitions, and the growing tension between individual liberty a...

A look at how the global population had divided itself into transnational camps of Right, Left, and Center. We'll take a look at the Marxist Left and the Institutional Center, breaking down the transnational Right in our next episode.

We'll talk about how America never really won the Cold War - the enemy just transformed. We'll also distinguish between ideals and ideologies, and how the world's first capitalist Communist country is led by a honey-loving bear.

Throughout history, most people's level of political awareness was hoping that they would not get their crops burned and their families murdered by marauders. During the Enlightenment, people learned to start thinking for themselves; during the Internet Era, they promptly stopped doing so. We'll examine the development of mass political awareness and activism that we see today.

People love dividing up into teams and killing each other, even when those teams are based on religions preaching pretty much the opposite. We'll examine the Crusades and why Joan of Arc was willing to fight and die for a Dauphin who viewed people like her as little more than cattle.

We'll take a look to see what we'll need to get out of the Iran negotiations for it to have been worth risking a nuclear World War 3. Also, we'll start to make sense of the contours of a new global political system in which we're all players. 

Is Trump changing goals in the middle of the Iran War by substituting nuclear disarmament for "unconditional surrender"? Is he actually negotiating with anyone in Iran? And, finally, is TACO (Trump Always Cowards Out) the sloganeering equivalent of poking a bear in the eye? Do we have answers, or just more questions? Find out on this week's episode.

Does Donald Trump's obsession with being the center of attention skew his views on the Iran War? What about the prosecutions facing Bibi, or the potential impact of the elections on the American midterms?   We'll explore the personal motives of both leaders and how they may impact their decision-making process, focusing on their decision to attack Iran.

The American public's position on the Iran War is surprisingly united and clear - do it quickly and cleanly, or don't do it at all. Trump is wagering his entire legacy on having this thing wrapped up by midterms. 

Trump clearly has reasons for his actions in Iran, but that doesn't mean they're good reasons. Just like weak evidence is still evidence, bad reasons are still reasons. We'll also evaluate the competence or lack thereof of the 'bros running the show' when it comes to Trump's foreign policy team.   Finally, we'll look ahead to the coming mental health pandemic as the TDS crowd tries to cope with th...

The first in our series analyzing and drawing lessons from the latest Middle East conflict. We'll talk a lot about organized crime, since relationships between criminal organizations are, not surprisingly, similar to relationships among governments.   We'll also look at why it's important to keep your promises, zooming in specifically on Obama's Syrian "red line" and his inversion of TR's axiom. 

This episode examines the proper role of the judiciary, which, contrary to popular belief, is not to rubber-stamp the President's agenda or organize the resistance to it. In fact, it's surprisingly simple - just interpret the damn law.

The basic thesis is that Americans don't trust our institutions - the media, academia, and, in this case, medical professionals - because many of these institutions have been taken over by those driven by ideological agendas.   Restoring faith requires ensuring that those running these institutions are operating in good faith.

A lot of problems in this country could be fixed if a bunch of forty-somethings and older could figure out how to act like adults. Humility and emotional self-discipline are life skills this country desperately needs among its population.

It's not just TDS tearing this country apart - both the left and the right are so threatened by the tyrannical tendencies of their political opponents that they blind themselves to the threats coming from their own side of the aisle. On this episode, instead of pointing fingers, we'll examine the tactics used by totalitarian and authoritarian movements more generally.

Why do nations struggle to strategically pursue their long-term interests, even when they're clear and obvious? It's because the nation is an abstract concept incapable of conscious decision-making; instead, the decision is made by a number of individual human beings, most of whom will inevitably be selfish assholes. We'll examine how individual incentives undermine group interests in this episode...

We'll take a look at how a petty, partisan pissing match between Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell took the once respected, impartial judiciary and turned it into a carbon copy of their own institution - a partisan joke that's devolved from a deliberative decision-making body to a literal streetfight.