A country at a crossroads
As we begin our 250th year, Americans should ask ourselves what we are becoming
In 1953, the syndicated newspaper columnist Hal Boyle wrote that America was at a crossroads. The reason? Air travel.
Boyle, who had won a Pulitzer Prize for his reporting during World War II, began his column by noting that, “A man who travels regularly by air today no longer lives at home. He spends most of his life at airports.” The point of air travel, Boyle surmised, was to get from city to city quickly; yet most airports were not in cities but in “reformed cow pasture[s].” Between waiting for the plane to take off, waiting at baggage claim, and long trips to and from the city center, a fast commute was anything but. “Sooner or later we are going to have to choose between living at airports or in cities,” Boyle mused.
Three years earlier, in 1950, a Nebraska columnist named Romaine Saunders warned the U.S. was at a crossroads similar to that of the American Civil War. The reason? The Korean War, and the potential for American intervention. “I stem from a tribe that wore the blue in the 60’s,” Saunders wrote, a reference to the blue uniforms of the Union Army, “and am now led to wonder if our national destiny must continue to send our khaki-clad legions to the ends of the earth.”
Nine years earlier, the Black intellectual Emmett J. Scott penned a column called “America At The Cross-Roads.” Scott—who had been the chief aide to Booker T. Washington as well as special advisor of black affairs to the Secretary of War during World War I—saw the storm clouds of World War II gathering and, lamenting those who were not supporting President FDR’s foreign policy, lauded the loyalty and willingness of African Americans to join the military and the war effort. “He is not asking for a New Deal. He wants a Square Deal,” Scott wrote. America had to choose whether to allow Blacks “equal treatment and recognition in the Army and Navy” and “a fair and decent place in the defense employment.”
One year earlier, Roger W. Babson declared America at the crossroads in his 1940 campaign for President. The reasons? Unemployment, the expanded role of government, the plight of the middle class and declining religious worship. A Conservative Christian, successful businessman and Isaac Newton aficionado, Babson ran for President on the Prohibition Party ticket. He argued that, “For too long our governments have been in the hands of the wealthy, the theorists, the racketeers.” To end unemployment required a recommitment to middle class job creators, as well as a national reawakening of religion. “America is at the crossroads. The next four years either will make or break us,” he wrote.
And in the presidential election of 1936, Republican Alf Landon, also running against FDR, published a book called America at the Crossroads. Landon opposed the New Deal for its alleged over-regulation of businesses, and he accused FDR of corruption for an alleged overreach of executive power. (The first chapter in the book was titled, “The New Frontier,” a phrase that would be made famous by JFK many years later.) Landon wrote, “Each generation in turn has its own problems to solve for posterity. No age has escaped this inspiring responsibility.”
In each generation, in every decade—in each year, perhaps—we as Americans face choices about who we are, the country we create, and who we wish to be. To embrace the New Deal; to grant equal opportunity to African Americans; to intervene in the Korean War; and even how and where to build our aviation infrastructure… throughout the 249-year existence of the United States, the choices made by one generation have shaped the circumstances of the next.
So, as we pass July 4, 2025, and begin our 250th year (1776-2026), we as Americans would be wise to ask ourselves what choices we are making today that will shape the lives of those who come after us. Once again, America sits at a crossroads—not one, but several. The decisions we make will reveal who we are and what future we will create for our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
Specifically, in my view, we face stark choices in three critical areas: ecological, technological and humanitarian. Allow me to use this week’s newsletter to explicate what I believe faces us.
1. Global climate change
The Earth’s climate is changing; this is undeniable. These changes are not evidenced by a single heat wave in the U.S. or Europe; a stretch of hot weather does not global ecological change make. Rather, what confronts us are difficult truths:
Each year we break records for the hottest year ever documented by human beings;
Sea ice is disappearing faster than we can tabulate it;
Parts of the planet have become so hot they are now inhospitable to human life; and,
Villages, towns, cities and islands are melting into the ground or sinking into the sea.
This has been a reality for decades. But in 2025, we stand at a crossroads; we are on pace for a nearly 3°C warming of the planet by the end of this century. Greenland—which has been in the news a lot lately—has been losing approximately 75 cubic miles of ice each year due to warming. If Greenland’s ice melts entirely, it will raise global sea levels by more than 23 feet. That means the East Coast of the United States would be underwater, as would parts of Europe, Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific islands. Entire cities will be lost and hundreds of millions of people will be displaced.
The United States is not solely responsible for this ecological collapse; it has been a global failure. But the time for incremental action is past. At our current rate, there will be no adaptation strategies left by the end of the century (unless we live underwater or relocate to Mars). As the foremost power in the world, America holds enormous leverage to lead global action before it is too late. We can use our convening power to bring nations to the table, and we can use our scientific knowledge, entrepreneurial creativity, industrial infrastructure and financial largesse to advance solutions quickly, including removing tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through “carbon dioxide removal” technology.
Yet, we are currently doing the opposite. Climate.gov, a U.S. government website that explained climate science to teachers, journalists, farmers and urban planners has been shut down. The scientists and science communicators who maintained it have been removed from federal service. The Chief Scientist at NASA, a climatologist, was fired, along with her staff. The U.S. has withdrawn from the Paris Agreement that sought to lower carbon emissions and temperatures globally. We have repealed requirements to reduce carbon dioxide in the air; granted exemptions to polluters from complying with emissions standards; and approximately 20% to 25% of Americans still believe that climate change is hoax (depending on which survey you look at). Climate change was not a top issue among Democrat, Republican or Independent voters during the 2024 elections, according to exit polls, and the average carbon footprint of Americans remains the largest in the world due to vehicle travel, air travel, utility consumption and food consumption. An attempt was recently made—avoided for now—to decimate the wind and solar industries in the U.S. through federal legislation, electrical vehicles tax credits have been ended, and federal buildings will no longer have electric charging stations.
We are at a crossroads as it relates to the fate our planet; we cannot ignore the reality that stares us in the face. We must do something to stem the rise of global temperatures, lest we pass down a world to our children and grandchildren that is significantly uninhabitable.
2. Artificial Intelligence
I have written and spoken extensively on artificial intelligence, as long-time readers of this newsletter are aware (click here for a refresher).
What is lesser known are the ramifications of A.I. adoption on the future of the workforce. There have been speculations about this future by CEOs and corporate leaders that have appeared in the news. In May, Axios published an interview with one tech CEO who warned of 10% to 20% unemployment as a result of A.I. adoption. This unemployment would especially impact entry-level positions, where much of the work could eventually be outsourced to machines.
The pending jobs crisis is not relegated to the United States or North America. Consider Africa; according to the World Bank, 1.2 billion people on the African continent will be seeking to join the workforce over the next decade. Yet, there will only be an estimated 420 million jobs available to them, as many industries that employed previous generations—such as customer service call centers—become fully automated. This does not solely portend an economic crisis; it also portends a political one. Mass unemployment and lack of economic opportunity create fertile grounds for extremism and political violence.
There is also a risk of how A.I. gets deployed not solely by corporations but also by governments. We have already seen in the U.S. how government has used A.I. to cancel contracts, terminate employees and ban books. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs reportedly relied on A.I. to make its decisions on what services to cut—overstepping the input of employees and leading to numerous errors. When books were pulled off the shelves at the U.S. Naval Academy, A.I. was reportedly used to identify the titles.
Despite concerns about how corporations and governments are implementing A.I., the most recent Congress attempted to place a moratorium on state-level A.I. laws for the next 10 years. That did not pass; yet we are at a crossroads as it relates to our relationship with technology. We must retain human agency over our technological creations in order to be fair to our children and grandchildren, lest we hand them a world where erroneous and biased decisions made by machines dictate the patterns of their everyday lives.
3. Humanitarian assistance
Lost amid the flurry of news the past few weeks was the fact that on July 1, 2025, the U.S. Agency for International Development ceased to exist. The closure of USAID and its integration into the U.S. Department of State made headlines in February; but since then, the dismantling has happened quietly while press coverage and social media attention focused in other directions.
USAID was far from perfect, but the wreckage left behind by its disappearance has been equally harmful. People around the world who depend on food assistance were suddenly cut off from that aid. Medicines to treat a wide range of diseases never reached those who needed them. Trust that the U.S. took decades to build in countries where trust is hard to foster was eroded. Some estimates are that over the next five years, the elimination of U.S. foreign assistance will lead to 8 million deaths among children under five-years-old, 4.2 million deaths among people living with AIDS/HIV, and 75 million children who will not receive necessary vaccinations.
At home, recent legislation has imperiled the lives of those who rely on supplemental nutrition assistance (SNAP) and health insurance coverage (Medicaid). SNAP has been fully funded by the U.S. government; new legislation will shift a portion of those costs to the states. However, several states do not have the money to cover those expenses, meaning they will have to cut in other areas or they will terminate SNAP altogether. More than 42 million Americans rely on SNAP for food assistance, including thousands of military service members and veterans. Up to 25% of military families have reported food insecurity.
More than 70 million Americans rely on Medicaid for health insurance coverage. This coverage primarily benefits low-income families, rural communities and people with disabilities. It gives hope to individuals who cannot afford expensive hospital treatments or pharmaceuticals. Its payments also enable hospitals—often in rural areas—to stay open, as patients often do not have private insurance and cannot afford the procedures. Recent legislation will make it more difficult for some Americans to receive Medicaid, increase fees for coverage, and prohibit certain medical services.
There is no doubt that providing medical coverage to 70 million Americans is expensive, as is providing food assistance to 42 million Americans and humanitarian assistance to tens-of-millions of people around the world. Americans have paid these costs for decades, and the lives of those less fortunate in our country and globally have benefited. Now, we stand at a crossroads: continue to be generous with life-saving care and assistance, or slowly and steadily undermine these programs. What we choose will define us domestically and internationally.
America 250, a crossroads moment
Each of these challenges returns us to a deeper existential question: will the United States act boldly and unapologetically on behalf of those who are most vulnerable and need assistance?
Impoverished and under-resourced communities are the most vulnerable to climate change. Will we act decisively for their benefit before it is too late?
Vulnerable, young and at-risk workers are most in danger of being displaced by A.I. Will we intervene to ensure they can maintain their livelihoods?
Economically disadvantaged, disabled and rural communities are most vulnerable to cuts in life-saving medical care and food assistance. Will we protect those who need nutrition and medicine?
As America begins its 250th year, we all must collectively answers these questions, regardless of party, ideology, race, religion or ethnicity. A crossroads is, literally, a place where two roads meet. Figuratively it describes an important choice to be made that, depending on the selection, can lead to widely varying possible futures. We all have an opportunity to determine our collective future.
Our choices will tell us much about what type of nation we wish to be. Do we serve the interests of a privileged few… or do we extend the hand of generosity and assistance to all who need it? Will we make choices that ensure our long-term future, even if that means making sacrifices today? Do we prioritize fiscal priorities above all else, or does the value of a human life exceed any financial calculations?
We are about to embark on a yearlong commemoration of America’s 250th birthday. Let us use this opportunity to not only look back at our past, but also use our history to make informed and compassionate decisions about our future. Perhaps, one day, our descendants will look back at 2025-2026 and marvel at the wisdom we possessed to choose as we did, enabling them to enjoy a beautiful, thriving world.
Have a good week,
-JS
Powerful. Practical and idealistic.