#### Metadata - Author: [[Jonah Goldberg]] - ([View Text](https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/gfile/its-complicated-2/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=It%20s%20Complicated&utm_campaign=The%20G-File_Everyone_It%20s%20Complicated)) - Full Title: It’s Complicated - Summary: The text discusses the concept of "one-thingism" where complex issues are simplified into single causes, leading to binary thinking in politics and society. It highlights how this approach can limit understanding, hinder nuanced discussions, and fuel tribalism in various contexts. The author advocates for embracing complexity and avoiding simplistic narratives to promote thoughtful dialogue and decision-making. #### Highlights - Quoting the Author - There are instances for which monocausal explanations are valid. But they tend to be very tightly constrained to narrow facts and time periods. Why did Lincoln die? For that I can give a simple singular answer: John Wilkes Booth fatally shot him. What did Lincoln die for? How much time do you have? - Good historians hate monocausal explanations. If you ever meet one who says there was one reason for stuff like the fall of Rome, or the rise of the Bolsheviks or the Nazis, you can be pretty sure you’re talking to a bad historian. - My objection to one-thingism extends into normal life, too. If you’re looking for a potential spouse and your criteria is a single-item checklist, things probably won’t go well. The one arguable exception is, of course, “love.” But I cut several hundred words explaining how love is really a multivariate thing that magically becomes a unitary thing. So, let’s leave that there. ### Note from Bullhorn: Everyone with two brain cells that connect and who has lived in the world for ten minutes intuits that reducing complex problems to single causalities doesn’t pass the smell test. It offends our common sense and the lived experience of the world. This is a challenge for advertisers writing short scripts. How do you make your necessarily simple assertions pass the threshold of common sense and [[Don't offend the Voter|not offend the voter]]. No one really thinks it’s one Congressman’s fault the border is overflowing. If they think about it for one minute. Of course, said strategy relies on the fact that they **don’t** think about it for one minute. And lots of people don't. But if that’s the case, what the hell will they actually remember your point? A snarly Catch-22