“Interdependence was once our choice. Now it is our condition.”
–Thomas Friedman
The 2026 midterm elections may prove to be a turning point in American democracy. Voters have spoken, political power has shifted, and opportunities for a different direction have emerged.
But let’s not confuse a political turning point with a moral one.
Our technological achievements are outpacing our ability to cooperate, exercise restraint, respect differences and care for one another. Whatever changes follow this election, they address only a small part of that greater challenge facing our country and the world.
Twenty-one years ago, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman argued in The World Is Flat that technology was breaking down barriers between nations, economies and individuals. The internet and globalization were opening unprecedented opportunities to connect, compete and collaborate around the world.
It was an exciting vision of the future, even if the benefits were never distributed equally.
Now Friedman is sounding a much more urgent alarm.
In a recent commentary, Friedman compares humanity’s technological transformation to the Big Bang that created the universe some 13.8 billion years ago. He calls this human-made transformation the “Second Big Bang.”
Artificial intelligence is only the beginning. Advances in quantum computing, energy, communications and other technologies are giving human beings powers once unimaginable. We can communicate instantly across the planet, manipulate the natural world and develop machines capable of performing intellectual tasks previously reserved for humans.
Friedman uses a biblical analogy. Humanity is acquiring something approaching the power to part the Red Sea, but without the Ten Commandments to govern that power.
We have the technology.
Do we have the wisdom to use it wisely?
Consider the contradictions of our time.
We can connect billions of people, yet political and cultural divisions seem to deepen. We create extraordinary wealth, yet millions struggle to afford housing, food and health care. We develop technologies to save lives, and increasingly sophisticated means of taking them.
We have access to more information than any generation in history yet struggle to agree on what is true.
Artificial intelligence promises to transform medicine, education, science and virtually every aspect of daily life. Yet it already raises difficult questions: What will it mean for privacy, employment and security? How can we guard against manipulation, and who will control its enormous power?
These are not problems that can be solved by winning an election.
Nor can they be solved by one nation, however wealthy or powerful, acting alone.
Climate change doesn’t recognize national borders. Neither do pandemics, economic disruptions, cyberattacks or the consequences of wars. Artificial intelligence developed in one country can affect the lives of people everywhere.
Our technological achievements have made us increasingly dependent on one another, whether we acknowledge it or not.
Yet our politics too often encourages us to see the world as a competition between winners and losers, friends and enemies, people who belong and people who don’t.
Friedman’s warning is that humanity must learn to depolarize and cooperate at a speed and scale never before required. Otherwise, the extraordinary powers we are creating could become instruments of our own destruction.
That may sound dramatic. But consider the alternative.
What happens when technological power outpaces moral responsibility? When our capacity to inflict harm grows exponentially but our restraint does not. When political leaders find division more rewarding than cooperation, and when the interests of a few powerful individuals outweigh the welfare of millions?
And what happens when we measure progress primarily by economic growth, technological superiority or military strength, rather than by the quality of human life?
These questions bring us back to the midterm elections.
Elections matter enormously because they give voters opportunities to hold leaders accountable, change policies and reaffirm the principles of representative government.
But democracy is more than the mechanics of elections. It is also a moral undertaking, built on the recognition that people with different beliefs, backgrounds and circumstances possess equal human dignity.
Its success should be measured not simply by which political party controls Congress or occupies the White House, but by whether government makes life better for the people it serves.
And in an interconnected world, that responsibility cannot end at our borders.
Making America better and helping make the world better are not competing objectives. Increasingly, they are inseparable.
A more peaceful world makes Americans safer. A healthier world makes us less vulnerable. A more prosperous and stable world creates opportunities that isolation and confrontation cannot.
None of this requires abandoning national interests. It requires recognizing that our long-term interests are often best served through cooperation rather than domination.
Nor does cooperation mean surrendering our principles. It means having the confidence and moral maturity to defend them without abandoning our humanity.
For journalism, this means looking beyond who wins power to how that power affects human lives.
Our job is to help people understand the consequences of decisions, not merely to chronicle political victories and defeats or repeat declarations from those in power. That means exposing abuses of authority, distinguishing facts from falsehoods and giving voice to those whose lives are affected.
It is to remind the public that behind every policy, every conflict and every political argument are human beings.
The family struggling to pay its bills. The child whose education is interrupted by war. The worker whose livelihood is threatened by technological change. The person whose dignity is diminished because of race, religion, gender or nationality.
They are not abstractions in a political debate. They are the measure of whether our civilization is progressing.
Wiser leadership, stronger institutions and a renewed commitment to the public good: These are the outcomes we should hope for if the 2026 elections give America an opportunity to change course.
But we should also recognize how far we still have to go.
In 2005, Friedman described a world becoming smaller through technology. Today, he is warning that our survival may depend on learning how to live together in that smaller world.
Perhaps the greatest challenge of our time is not developing artificial intelligence, mastering quantum computing or discovering new sources of energy.
It is developing the moral intelligence to use those achievements wisely, compassionately and for the benefit of humanity.
We have become remarkably good at changing the world.
Now we must become better at making it worth living in.
That is humanity’s greatest test.