The Wire Beneath Our Feet

Coherence, Courage, and the Meaning of American Life

Photo by Josh Johnson on Unsplash

Two plus two equals four. There are twenty-four hours in a day. And the ground approaches.

We are falling now. The collapse is not hypothetical. It is kinetic. Civic structures fracture beneath the weight of opportunism. Moral language has been hollowed into performance. Political movements drift into cults. Meaning itself is under siege. And yet—

Here we are. Still holding the wire.

This essay is not a lament. It is not a prediction. It is a declaration: that coherence remains. That moral courage matters. That in this moment—this long, slow fall—we are not helpless. We are not lost. We are not broken.

The Fall

The collapse we face is not simply political. It is ontological. It is the disintegration of our shared structures of understanding: the moral grammar, the civic rituals, the interpretive coherence that once allowed us to navigate difference without denying reality. We no longer argue about the same things. We no longer mean the same words. We no longer trust the same frame.

Truth has become optional. Loyalty has replaced principle. Patriotism has been inverted—redefined as loyalty to a leader rather than commitment to a republic.

In this confusion, authoritarianism thrives. It does not need to win arguments. It only needs to dissolve the capacity to have them.

And so the fall accelerates.

What makes this moment unique is not merely the intensity of our polarization but its epistemic character. Previous American crises—from the Civil War to the Great Depression to the tumult of the 1960s—occurred within shared frameworks of meaning. Even at our most divided, Americans largely inhabited the same reality. They disagreed, often violently, about what should be done, but they disagreed about the same things.

Today, the nature of reality itself has become contested. When millions of citizens can be convinced that an election was stolen without evidence, that violence against constitutional processes is patriotic, that expertise is elitism, and that loyalty to a single man supersedes loyalty to law, the problem transcends ordinary politics. We are witnessing what philosopher Jean Baudrillard called “the murder of the real”—the systematic destruction of shared reference points that make meaningful debate possible.

This collapse of epistemic coherence manifests across our institutions. Universities retreat from truth-seeking into ideological comfort. Journalism blurs into entertainment and partisan advocacy. Religious communities abandon moral witness for political power. The judiciary becomes an extension of partisan will. Each institution that once helped establish shared understandings of reality now contributes to its fragmentation.

The consequences are not merely theoretical. When societies can no longer agree on basic facts, when truth becomes whatever serves power, governance becomes impossible. Policies cannot be evaluated on their merits. Leaders cannot be held accountable. Democracy itself—which depends on the capacity of citizens to make informed judgments—begins to hollow from within.

This is the nature of our fall: not just a decline in civic virtue or political norms, but a disintegration of the shared reality that makes collective life possible. And in this disintegration, authoritarianism finds its opportunity. It flourishes not through superior arguments but through the destruction of the conditions that make argument possible. It thrives in the fog of epistemic collapse, where power can assert itself without restraint because the very concept of restraint has lost coherence.

The Wire

But beneath our feet, still taut, is a wire.

It is not made of slogans. It is not held up by partisanship. It is not dependent on the visibility of its defenders. It is made of something deeper: coherence.

Coherence is not just clarity. It is the structure of reality itself. The patterns that bind the cosmos. The relationships that make meaning possible. The alignment of our inner selves with the outer world. It is what allows thought to match world, what allows language to carry truth, what allows love to mean anything at all.

We live in a time of epistemic trauma. And yet, every time we insist on coherence—when we name what is real, when we call betrayal by its name, when we refuse the theater of false equivalence—we strengthen that wire. We refuse the fall. Or rather, we meet it standing.

Coherence is not merely logical consistency, though it includes this. It is the deeper alignment between mind and world, between word and deed, between our understanding and reality itself. It is what philosopher Bernard Williams called “the desire for truth”—not just accuracy in particular claims, but a comprehensive orientation toward what is real. It is the refusal to subordinate truth to comfort, convenience, or tribal loyalty.

This coherence manifests in multiple dimensions simultaneously:

Epistemic coherence is the alignment of belief with evidence. It is the commitment to proportion conviction to proof, to adjust understanding in light of new information, to maintain logical consistency across domains. It means acknowledging that reality has a structure independent of our preferences—that two plus two equals four regardless of what we might wish or what might be politically expedient.

Moral coherence is the alignment of values with action. It means applying the same principles consistently rather than selectively, demanding of ourselves what we demand of others, and refusing to excuse in our allies what we condemn in our opponents. It means acknowledging that moral principles either bind everyone or no one—that they cannot be mere weapons to deploy against enemies while shielding friends.

Narrative coherence is the alignment of our stories with lived experience. It means constructing accounts of ourselves and our society that make sense of the full range of human experience rather than excluding inconvenient elements. It means acknowledging both America's extraordinary promise and its profound failures, both the ideals of our founding and the violence that accompanied it.

Temporal coherence is the alignment of past, present, and future. It means approaching history not as a weapon for present battles but as a complex reality that shapes and constrains us. It means acknowledging both continuity and change, both the debts we owe to the past and the possibilities we create for the future.

These dimensions of coherence form the wire beneath our feet—the foundation of meaningful democratic citizenship. They are not partisan. They do not belong to liberals or conservatives, Democrats or Republicans. They belong to reality itself.

And in times of epistemic collapse, maintaining this coherence becomes an act of radical courage. It means standing firm when others retreat into comfortable falsehoods. It means speaking clearly when euphemism becomes the norm. It means calling betrayal by its name when others rationalize it as strategy.

This is not about rigid dogmatism or claims to absolute truth. Coherence accommodates uncertainty, complexity, and revision. But it refuses to surrender the distinction between truth and falsehood, between evidence and assertion, between principle and convenience. It insists that reality, however complex, is not infinitely malleable to power.

Patriotism as Praxis

There are those who would have you believe that patriotism is a matter of flag-waving and anthem-singing. That dissent is treason. That moral clarity is arrogance. But the American tradition—at its best—has always known better.

True patriotism is the courage to hold the center when others abandon it. It is the love of country expressed through fidelity to its principles, not its idols. It is the refusal to surrender constitutional governance to cults of personality or reactionary nihilism.

To love America is to fight for what makes it worth loving: the rule of law, the dignity of persons, the accountability of power, the ideal that no one is above the Constitution.

The center must be held—not because it is safe, but because it is ours to hold. Not because it guarantees victory, but because abandoning it is a form of moral suicide.

Patriotism has been weaponized in our time—transformed from love of country into blind loyalty to faction. The symbols of American identity—the flag, the anthem, the language of freedom—have been appropriated as partisan emblems rather than shared inheritance. Those who question authority are branded enemies of the state, while those who undermine constitutional order wrap themselves in the mantle of patriotic virtue.

This inversion is more than rhetorical sleight-of-hand. It represents a fundamental shift in our understanding of what America is and means. Is America a set of principles—equality under law, constitutional governance, pluralistic democracy—or is it merely a tribal identity, a team to which one pledges unquestioning allegiance?

The founding generation was clear on this question. For them, America was not defined by blood or soil or tradition, but by commitment to a constitutional order and the principles that animate it. When Benjamin Franklin was asked what the Constitutional Convention had created, he famously replied, “a republic, if you can keep it.” The keeping—the active maintenance of constitutional governance—was understood as the essential patriotic duty.

This understanding has been echoed by America's most profound patriots throughout our history. Abraham Lincoln defended the Union not through appeals to tribal loyalty but through rigorous articulation of constitutional principle. Frederick Douglass criticized America's failures precisely because he took its promises seriously. Martin Luther King Jr. called the nation to account not by rejecting its founding values but by insisting on their universal application.

In each case, patriotism manifested not as blind devotion but as critical engagement—as the willingness to hold America accountable to its highest aspirations. This is patriotism as praxis—as active participation in the ongoing creation of the republic, rather than passive reverence for its symbols.

Today, this form of patriotism requires specific commitments:

It requires defending constitutional processes against authoritarian subversion, even when those processes produce outcomes we dislike.

It requires insisting on the rule of law for all citizens, regardless of wealth, power, or partisan affiliation.

It requires rejecting the cult of personality that places loyalty to a leader above loyalty to the Constitution.

It requires acknowledging America's profound failures and injustices, not to denigrate the nation but to perfect it.

It requires recognizing that dissent is not disloyalty—that the most patriotic act is often to say “no” when the nation strays from its principles.

These commitments constitute the center that must be held. Not the center as moderate compromise between left and right, but the center as the constitutional core, the foundational principles that make self-governance possible. Holding this center is not a matter of political calculation but of existential necessity. If we surrender it, we surrender not just policy preferences but the possibility of democratic life itself.

Meaning as Resistance

To survive this age is to insist that meaning is not arbitrary. That love is not performance. That justice is not preference. That truth is not a team sport.

This is not the time for neutrality. Nor is it the time for performative outrage. It is the time for clear thinking. For epistemic courage. For radical moral coherence.

It is the time to say, plainly: The president defying the Supreme Court is not strategy. It is lawlessness. It is an attack on the Republic. It is treason.

It is the time to say, plainly: The attempt to coerce nations into approving the private infrastructure of billionaire donors, under threat of tariff, is not diplomacy. It is corruption. It is economic coercion under national colors.

It is the time to say, plainly: This is not acceptable. This is not patriotic. This is not American.

In an age of epistemic collapse, the preservation of meaning becomes an act of resistance. When language is systematically distorted, when truth is treated as optional, when moral principles are applied selectively based on partisan advantage, the insistence on coherent meaning becomes revolutionary.

Consider how language has been corrupted in our public discourse:

“Freedom” is invoked to justify the rejection of civic responsibility.

“Patriotism” is redefined as loyalty to a single leader rather than to constitutional principles.

“Truth" is reduced to whatever narrative serves immediate political interests.

"Justice” becomes selective punishment of political enemies while excusing allies.

“Rights” are transformed from universal principles to tribal privileges.

This corruption of language is not accidental. It is a deliberate strategy to dissolve the possibility of shared meaning, to create a world where power alone determines reality. In such a world, reasoned argument becomes impossible. Evidence cannot persuade. Moral appeals cannot move. The only logic that remains is the logic of dominance.

To resist this dissolution, we must become stewards of meaning. This means:

Precision in language. We must use words with consistency and care, refusing euphemisms that obscure reality and hyperbole that distorts it.

Moral consistency. We must apply principles uniformly, not selectively based on partisan advantage.

Epistemic humility. We must acknowledge uncertainty where it exists, distinguish between fact and opinion, and proportion conviction to evidence.

Narrative honesty. We must tell stories that account for complexity rather than reducing reality to simplistic morality tales.

Integrated judgment. We must evaluate claims and actions based on their coherence with reality, not their utility for our side.

These practices constitute what Václav Havel called “living in truth”—the refusal to participate in ideological distortions of reality, even when such participation seems pragmatically advantageous. It means naming things for what they are, even when doing so is costly. It means insisting that meaning matters, that truth is not merely what power declares it to be.

This insistence is not a retreat from politics but its precondition. Without shared meaning, without some common understanding of reality, politics becomes mere struggle for dominance. Democracy requires the possibility of persuasion, of changing minds through reason rather than force. When meaning dissolves, when truth becomes whatever serves power, democracy becomes impossible.

The preservation of meaning is thus the preservation of the possibility of democratic life. It is resistance not merely to particular policies or leaders but to the conditions that make authoritarianism possible.

The Flame

To hold coherence in the chaos is to become a flame of resistance. Not a flame of destruction. A flame of illumination. A flame of clarity. A flame that burns through illusion and kindles moral imagination.

Love is not just feeling. It is ontological alignment. It is coherence between self and world, between one human soul and another. It is the recognition of truth in another's being. And it is the refusal to betray that truth for comfort or conformity.

We do not resist out of hate. We resist out of love. Because love without coherence is sentimentality, and coherence without love is sterility. Together, they form the praxis of democratic citizenship. Together, they form the condition for moral life.

The image of the flame captures something essential about our moment. In darkness, a flame does not add more darkness. It illuminates. It provides orientation. It allows us to see both where we are and what surrounds us. Similarly, in times of epistemic collapse, coherence does not contribute to confusion—it cuts through it, providing clarity and direction.

But the metaphor extends further. A flame requires three elements: fuel, oxygen, and heat. Similarly, the flame of coherence requires material conditions: educated citizens, institutional integrity, and a culture that values truth. When these elements are depleted or corrupted, the flame weakens. When they are abundant, it grows stronger.

Our task, then, is not merely individual resistance but collective cultivation of the conditions for coherence:

Education that develops not just marketable skills but critical thinking, moral reasoning, and historical understanding.

Institutions that maintain independence from partisan capture and commitment to their core missions.

Culture that rewards truthfulness rather than appealing distortion, that elevates substance over spectacle.

Community that provides sustenance for those engaged in the difficult work of maintaining coherence.

These conditions don't emerge spontaneously. They must be deliberately created and maintained through consistent practice and intentional design. This is the deeper meaning of the Grand Praxis—the ongoing, collective effort to create conditions where coherence can flourish.

At the heart of this effort is a particular understanding of love. Not love as mere sentiment or personal preference, but love as recognition of and commitment to what is real. This love manifests in multiple dimensions:

Love of truth, which refuses to subordinate reality to convenience or comfort.

Love of democracy, which values the agency of citizens and the accountability of power.

Love of humanity, which recognizes the dignity of all persons regardless of tribe or faction.

Love of country, which demands more of America rather than accepting its failures.

These forms of love are not opposed to clarity or reason. They are expressions of coherence—of the alignment between what we value and what is real. They represent not the abandonment of critical thinking but its fulfillment.

In this sense, resistance to authoritarianism is not primarily about hatred of oppressors but love of freedom. It is not mainly about fear of what might be lost but commitment to what must be preserved. It springs not from rage at enemies but from care for the democratic community that makes moral life possible.

This reframing matters because hatred, while sometimes justified, is rarely sustainable. It consumes those who harbor it. It distorts judgment. It reduces complex reality to simple enmity. Love, by contrast, generates the sustained commitment necessary for the long struggle to maintain coherence.

The flame of resistance, then, is not the destructive fire of hatred but the illuminating light of love—love disciplined by truth, directed by principle, and expressed through consistent action. It is the flame that guides us through the darkness of epistemic collapse, that helps us find each other when shared reference points dissolve, that keeps alive the possibility of meaning when meaning itself is under siege.

My Note from the Circus

You know the noise. You know the spectacle. You know the bait. But beneath it all, you also know what's real. You know the wire.

This note is your reminder. That you are not alone. That coherence persists. That the center, however strained, has not disappeared.

Hold the wire.

Tell the truth.

Love what's real.

The flood will come. But the center can hold—if we do.

We find ourselves in the circus of modern American life—surrounded by spectacle, bombarded with noise, tempted by distraction. The ringmasters of outrage compete for our attention. The acrobats of moral performance fly above, untethered from principle. The clowns of cynicism mock any attempt at sincerity. And all around, the crowd roars—sometimes in approval, sometimes in anger, but always in response to the show.

It is easy, in such an environment, to forget what's real. To become another performer, another spectator, another voice in the cacophony. To surrender coherence for visibility, principle for advantage, truth for comfort.

But beneath the spectacle remains reality. Beneath the circus tent lies solid ground. Beneath the manipulated emotions and manufactured controversies exist facts that do not bend to will or preference: Two plus two equals four. There are twenty-four hours in a day. Accountability matters. Truth exists. Democracy requires shared meaning.

These truths form the wire beneath our feet—the foundation upon which we can stand even as institutions sway and norms collapse around us. They provide orientation when disorientation becomes the primary tool of power. They offer stability when instability is deliberately cultivated to prevent resistance.

To hold this wire is to maintain your own coherence even when systems lose theirs. It means:

Remembering what matters beneath the noise of what screams for attention.

Distinguishing between the urgent and the important, between the spectacular and the significant.

Refusing the false choices presented by those who benefit from confusion.

Cultivating relationships that sustain truth-telling rather than reward performance.

Practicing the disciplines of coherence even when they seem to offer no immediate advantage.

This holding is not passive. It is not retreat from engagement or withdrawal from public life. It is active resistance to the dissolution of meaning. It is insistence that even in the circus, reality matters. It is the courage to be the still point in the turning world, the clear voice in the noise, the steady hand when others tremble.

And crucially, it is not solitary work. Even in our fragmented reality, others hold the same wire. They may use different language. They may come from different traditions. They may have different priorities. But they share the essential commitment to coherence, to meaning, to the preservation of democratic possibility.

These wire-holders exist across the political spectrum. They are conservatives who refuse to abandon principle for power. They are progressives who reject simplistic narratives that ignore complexity. They are people of faith who won't surrender moral witness for political advantage. They are secular citizens who recognize the ethical demands of shared reality.

Together, they form what might be called a coherence community—not unified by ideology or identity, but by commitment to the conditions that make meaningful democratic life possible. This community exists not as a formal organization but as a network of relationships, a constellation of practices, a shared orientation toward reality.

The note from the circus is an invitation to recognize this community and join it. To see that you are not alone in your commitment to coherence. To understand that the center can hold, not because institutions remain strong, but because enough citizens refuse to abandon it.

This is not naive optimism. The floods will come. The pressures will intensify. The temptations to surrender coherence for safety or advantage will grow stronger. But the wire remains. Reality persists. Truth, however contested, continues to matter.

And so, amid the spectacle and the noise, amid the collapse and the confusion, we return to fundamentals:

Hold the wire.

Tell the truth.

Love what's real.

These simple disciplines, practiced consistently, form the foundation of resistance. Not resistance as mere opposition, but resistance as the active maintenance of the conditions for meaning. Not resistance born of hatred, but resistance rooted in love for what is real and what is possible.

The center can hold—if we do. If we refuse to surrender coherence for comfort. If we maintain fidelity to truth even when truth is inconvenient. If we practice the disciplines of democratic citizenship even when democracy itself is under siege.

This is the grand praxis: to construct meaning as if it is real. Because in that construction, it becomes real. Not as fantasy or wish, but as the lived reality of those who refuse to participate in the dissolution of meaning. Who insist, through word and deed, that coherence matters. Who hold the wire even as the ground approaches.

Who stand, together, in the circus—refusing to be mere spectators, refusing to be manipulated performers, insisting instead on being citizens. Citizens of reality. Citizens of possibility. Citizens of the republic we have not yet ceased to be.

---

Go forth. May God keep you. May coherence hold you. May truth light the way. And may love carry you home.