Photograph of Hiroshima after the atomic bomb. (National Archives Identifier 22345671)
September 28, 2025 @ 2:00 pm – 3:30 pm CDT
As the memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki fades, the world faces a new wave of nuclear danger. Once limited to a handful of major powers, nuclear weapons are again at the center of an accelerating arms race: North Korea expands its arsenal, China rapidly builds warheads, and U.S. allies like South Korea and Japan openly debate whether they too must “go nuclear”.
Experts warn the “nuclear club” could grow from 9 members today to as many as 18, undermining decades of arms-control treaties and raising the risk of miscalculation or catastrophic war. With proliferation pressures spreading from Asia to the Middle East and beyond, the stability of the nuclear order is in doubt—and the consequences could be global. The article, by Ross Andersen, a staff writer at The Atlantic, appeared in the August 2025 issue of The Atlantic (link).
Can’t access the article? Ken Novak will start us with a short summary of the article by Ken Novak before we discuss the issues involved and what, if anything, might be done.
Join us!
Note:
The is the last in our series of Articles of the Month. We’re seeking greater participation for our new Fourth Sunday series: for the next year, we’ll be discussing the history of secular people in American history, each month using one chapter of Susan Jacoby’s “Freethinkers” to prompt our discussion.
Musk on April 7, 2022 at the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colo. (U.S. Air Force photo by Trevor Cokley)
May 25, 2025 @ 2:00 pm – 3:30 pm CDT
This month the article provoking our Fourth Sunday discussion is “America Is Learning the Wrong Lesson From Elon Musk’s Success”, by Adam Grant, an organizational psychology professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, in the Sunday NYTimes Opinion section on 4/13/2025 (link).
It’s not about politics, but about responsible management of people.
The essay criticizes Elon Musk’s leadership style, noting that while his visionary drive has yielded major successes with Tesla and SpaceX, his treatment of people—marked by insults, fear, and mass firings—is deeply flawed. While some in the business world admire Musk’s aggressive methods, research shows such behavior harms performance, morale, and collaboration. The author, an organizational psychologist, argues that success doesn’t stem from intimidation but from emotional intelligence and respect. He cites evidence across fields—from sports to healthcare—demonstrating the damage of abusive leadership. Ultimately, the essay urges aspiring leaders to emulate Musk’s ambition, not his disrespect, advocating for servant leadership that balances tough standards with compassion.
We will talk about the article and the studies behind it, as well as our own experiences with difficult bosses, after a short summary of the article’s findings by Ken Novak.
Want to learn more before the discussion?
While the original essay doesn’t cite them directly, here are some studies and likely sources behind the claims, as gathered by ChaptGPT 4.0:
1. NBA Players and Abusive Coaches:
• Study: “Abusive Supervision and Employee Performance: A Study of the NBA” by Mitchell et al. (2018)
• Findings: Players under abusive coaches performed worse and exhibited more negative behaviors even after leaving those teams.
• Study: “The Impact of Rudeness on Medical Team Performance: A Randomized Trial” by Riskin et al. (2015)
• Findings: Brief rude comments from a supposed expert significantly impaired diagnostic and procedural performance in neonatal intensive care unit teams.
• Original concept: Edward J. Hollander (1958, 1985)
• Theory: Leaders gain “idiosyncrasy credits” that allow more leeway to deviate from norms, but overuse of this credit can lead to failure.
These sources support the essay’s claims that abusive leadership undermines long-term success and that respect and emotional intelligence are critical to effective leadership.
This month the article provoking our Fourth Sunday discussion is Beverly Gage’s New Yorker review of Clay Risen’s Red Scare, in which she explores how post-WWII anti-Communist fervor reshaped American politics. Per Gage, Risen details the era’s widespread fear and suspicion, initiated by the Truman Administration’s loyalty program, which led to numerous resignations and dismissals. The movement spread Hollywood and universities, and, though started long before him, was epitomized by Joseph McCarthy’s aggressive and mostly baseless allegations. Gage emphasizes the parallels between the Red Scare and contemporary political tactics, highlighting the enduring impact of this period on American political strategy and culture.
The review was published in the print edition of the March 17, 2025, issue, with the headline “Fear Factor.” If you are blocked by the Conde Nast paywall, see if you can read the review via your local library’s online resources. In any case, Ken Novak will summarize the review and then open the discussion to what we might learn from those times.
“This is a work of history, and as such it is not concerned with drawing parallels between the past and the present,” he writes. “I leave it up to the reader to find those as they will.”
We will talk about the implications of the trend, and our own experience with housing prices, after a short summary of the article’s findings by Ken Novak.
