I think if we draw out our diagonalization matrix for this problem, we can see exactly where this is coming from, which is the fact that connectivity and integration have been brought into coincidence as if they are synonymous terms, and are grouped together under this extremely I think awkward intrinsically paradoxical and complicated notion of globalization and its opposite so that globalization is seen as being pro connectivity pro integration and its to use Christopher Hayes is an ethno
nationalist backlash is a reaction against both connectivity and integration So obviously the critical diagonal suggestion, which I think leads us directly into the sort of things that actually Friedman is trying to do with this course, is to uncouple these terms a little bit, put them onto a diagonalization matrix and therefore suggest the possibility So if everyone accepts that the current debate is dominated by the notion that there's a high connectivity, high integration option, and its natural antonym is a low connectivity, low integration option.
So you have a choice between globalization and insularity or xenophobia or whatever your terms, more or less abusive for both of those sides. Footloose cosmopolitans versus xenophobic nationalists or however one wants to put that distinction. What is not being tolerated or explored or critically entertained is the possibility of a low connectivity, high integration option. And I think this would be what Patrick Friedman's ideas are wanting to criticize, that it would be interesting to see someone defend that. I'm worried about saying too much about it because I would be very tempted to straw man
my own notions of a kind of nightmarish leftist politics there. But yes, I'd be interested whether people want to fight over that or not. And as its opposite vector, and this is what I think Friedman is wanting, and this is the repressed critical option in this whole thing, the diagonal, I would say positive diagonal trajectory of catapulted politics is a high connectivity, low integration model of geopolitical organisation. So that's to say what's the missing diagonal box there heading out on a diagonal from the terms of the debate that is utterly dominant at the moment is the notion
of a connective disintegration. Now I think this plugs into the Patrick Friedman material that we're going to be talking about today but I think it might be better for the sake of interaction if I sort of take a break before doing that and throw things open for some Brexit conversation and then maybe come back to Patrick Friedman's text in a moment.