CEO.com
Dispatches from the frontiers of leadership.
CEO.com Magazine
"For minds that move markets and hearts that shape history.”
"Dispatches from the frontiers of leadership."
"For those who write the next chapter of history."
"A narrative of power, strategy, and the future unfolding."
Latest Magazine Articles
Free people form community
True community emerges when free individuals come together as equals, unburdened by hierarchy or dependency. Yet this ideal is fragile and often undone by success, perception, and power.The great Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw was at a party one night when the host approached him and asked, “Are you enjoying yourself, Mr. Shaw?” He replied, “Yes — and that’s the only thing I’m enjoying.”Shaw’s quip exposes the emptiness of gatherings where people are present but not genuinely connected — where the room is filled with opportunists seeking advantage, not free individuals coming together to produce something meaningful.Most communities initially organize themselves with the belief that everyone involved is a leader and has earned their place at the table. This is why newly formed communities achieve significant success right from the start. Members value each other’s company and share a clear perspective on reality — that each individual matters, but no one matters more than anyone else. There is no anxiety, pressure, fear, passivity, or struggle for power. Everyone involved is free.Success alters this reality. People from outside the community begin to care about what’s happening and what this new group of leaders has to say. Now, there are stakes, reputations to uphold, and power that must be exercised. Some individuals start to be perceived as mattering more than others. Credit must be given, egos must be stroked, and the land that’s been seized must be defended. Other groups emerge to claim a share of the harvested crop for themselves.Inevitably, the community’s spirit shifts. Of course, nothing has truly changed, but reality can’t compete with perception. The community comes to be seen as just a small group of leaders trying to control everything and everyone else. “Screw that,” say those outside the perceived inner circle. The character, integrity, and motivations of the community and its leaders come under scrutiny. Competitors arise solely from this, promising to achieve the same results as the original community but with more honorable intentions.Social media has conditioned us to believe that having followers is a good thing. In reality, followers — when they’re just dependents — weaken a community’s core. A strong, cohesive community cannot thrive if it is split into distinct groups of leaders and followers. Free people — not followers — create community.This cycle of growth and collapse is not exclusive to a specific type of community; it has clearly manifested itself across all areas of human organization. Think of a startup humming with ideas — until investors swoop in, egos swell like balloons, ready to pop, and the team splinters.To tread on safer ground, let’s consider political parties, as they seem to be disliked by almost everybody. In 2012, following President Barack Obama’s defeat of Mitt Romney, pundits and the media confidently claimed that the Republican Party was bound to remain a minority, non-governing party for decades. After Romney’s loss, the party produced a notorious autopsy report advising that it soften its stance on immigration and place significant emphasis on outreach to minority voters.You know what happened next. Four years later, Donald Trump won the presidency by doing exactly the opposite of what former party leaders recommended. Trump’s success didn’t come from appealing to followers with a softened message; it arose from mobilizing free individuals who rejected the blueprint of the perceived party elite, demonstrating that a community of leaders treated as leaders can defy expectations.The Democratic Party is where the Republican Party was in 2013. The current division among Democrats reflects a trend towards top-down control, where leaders dictate, and followers comply — undermining the freedom and hope that once unified them. However, because the ruling party will eventually overlook the reason for its success, you can be certain that the Democrats will regain power much sooner than today’s analysts expect.The cycle repeats, always.Why does this happen? A person who depends on others for access, validation, success, or happiness will eventually want to break free. Nobody wants to be a follower. Nobody wants to be the one mid-conversation, watching their partner’s eyes drift over their shoulder for someone better. Followers aren’t free — they rely on others, giving up control of their destiny. That’s what sheep do, not communities. True community rejects this dependency — it thrives on freedom instead.The term “community” has been diminished to the point of losing its meaning. It’s time to reclaim it as a space for free individuals who are unafraid to be themselves.Begin where you are: treat everyone as a leader, and see the limits fade away.
Roosevelt’s Arena: Today’s CEOs face dust, sweat, and torched Teslas
In the spring of 2021, the co-founders of Basecamp, a software company known for its project management tools, decided that political discussions had no place in their internal communications. The decree came down like a guillotine: no more debates about elections, no more arguments over social justice. The backlash was swift — employees quit in droves, and the press jumped in, with The New York Times documenting the exodus as a tale of corporate overreach.A few months earlier, Brian Armstrong, CEO of Coinbase, the cryptocurrency exchange, had taken a similar approach. He urged his staff to leave politics at the door and offered severance to those who couldn’t comply. About sixty employees — around five percent of the workforce — accepted the money and left, while critics condemned the move as a suppression of dissent. Both companies, in their pursuit of focus, stumbled into a firestorm.Elon Musk, the undisputed titan of technology, has entered a different kind of battle. Appointed by President-elect Donald Trump to co-lead a growing Department of Government Efficiency — DOGE, a reference to Musk’s cryptocurrency interests — his arrival in Washington has sparked not only debate but outright rebellion.Teslas are being vandalized in parking lots, dealerships are being picketed, and cars are being set ablaze in isolated bursts of anger. Threats against Musk’s life have emerged, serving as a grim reminder of the stakes when business and government collide. In recent days, left-wing favorite California Governor Gavin Newsom sent prepaid phones to a hundred tech CEOs, preloaded with his personal number, only to face a wave of skepticism from the media and many in his party: Why associate with the Silicon Valley elite?There are countless more examples, but the pattern is clear: when business leaders enter the public arena — or even flirt with it — the atmosphere fills with recrimination. Employees rebel, customers bristle, and the media sharpens its knives. This is enough to make any executive hesitate, questioning whether the reward is worth the effort.Let us present another perspective on this issue — one where a leader doesn’t shy away from chaos but embraces it. Theodore Roosevelt, in a speech that decorates many business leaders’ walls, articulated it best: “It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles.... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood.” For business leaders peering over the parapet today, the question isn’t whether they’ll be liked — it’s whether they’ll have the courage to step in at all.The aversion to mixing business and governance is understandable. Business thrives on clarity — profit margins, market shares, quarterly reports. Politics, by contrast, is a swamp: murky, tribal, and unforgiving.Criticism in politics often only gains traction when there are elements of truth. Let’s look at the following:But to stop there is to miss the point. Life isn’t a popularity contest, though it’s tempting to live as if it were. The alternative — shying away from the arena because the crowd might jeer — is a recipe for stasis, a slow drift toward irrelevance.Roosevelt’s words carry a sting because they’re true: the arena isn’t kind. It’s a place of bruises and missteps, where every move invites scrutiny. Basecamp’s founders lost talent; Coinbase’s Armstrong lost goodwill. Musk’s Teslas are paying a literal price, scratched and scorched by those who see him as a usurper. Yet the arena is also where history gets made, where the timid don’t tread.Business leaders who engage with it — whether to streamline bureaucracy, resolve internal conflicts, or form a new alliance — aren’t guaranteed success, but they are guaranteed to face challenges. To do otherwise — retreating and polishing one’s image until it shines — is to squander the little time we have in life to make a difference.And that, Roosevelt would argue, is the only thing that counts.
DOGE and America’s last chance at greatness
In the annals of history, empires crumble not with a bang but with a whimper — a slow bleed of resources, a quiet surrender to the weight of their own excess. This is the grim prophecy of Ferguson’s Law, named for Scottish philosopher Adam Ferguson, who distilled a simple, brutal truth from the wreckage of great powers past: when a nation spends more servicing its debt than fortifying its defenses, it teeters on the edge of oblivion. Habsburg, Spain, the Ottoman Empire, and the British Empire all faltered when their ledgers tipped this way, their coffers drained by interest payments while their swords dulled. Today, the United States stands at that precipice. In 2024, the nation crossed Ferguson’s “limit,” with debt service eclipsing defense spending — $1.124 trillion to $1.107 trillion — a razor-thin margin that signals a deeper rot. If history is a guide, this is not merely a fiscal footnote; it is an existential warning.Enter Donald Trump and Elon Musk, an unlikely duo now wielding a chainsaw (sometimes literally) against the sprawling bureaucracy of the American state. Their weapon of choice is the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE — a name that nods to Musk’s penchant for cryptocurrency mischief but carries a far weightier mission. Launched by executive order on Trump’s first day back in the White House in January 2025, DOGE is no mere advisory panel; it is a battering ram aimed at the federal government’s bloated underbelly. Musk, the world’s richest man and a self-styled “Tech Support” for the republic, has taken to the task with the zeal of a man who once fired half of Twitter’s staff overnight. Already, the team has slashed contracts, shuttered leases, and offered buyouts to millions of federal workers, all while gaining access to the Treasury’s payment systems to root out what they call “fraud and waste.” Trump, meanwhile, has blessed this blitz, framing it as a crusade to save America from itself.The stakes could not be higher. Ferguson’s Law is not a theory to be debated in ivory towers; it is a mathematical certainty etched in the ruins of empires. When debt service outpaces defense, a nation’s ability to project power erodes. Resources that should fuel innovation, secure borders, or deter adversaries are instead funneled to bondholders — many of them foreign. The U.S. national debt, now a staggering $36 trillion, is a ticking clock. By 2049, the Congressional Budget Office projects net interest payments could hit 4.9 percent of GDP, dwarfing defense spending at an estimated 2.45 percent. This is not just a financial crisis; it is a death knell for a superpower. A country that cannot defend itself — or worse, cannot afford to — invites challengers to test its resolve. In a world of rising powers like China and emboldened autocrats, the United States cannot afford to be caught counting pennies while its rivals sharpen blades.DOGE’s early moves are a desperate bid to reverse this slide. The team has targeted agencies like the Department of Education and the U.S. Agency for International Development, slashing budgets and dismantling programs with a speed that has left Washington reeling. Critics howl about legality and chaos, but the urgency is undeniable. The federal budget, a $7 trillion behemoth, is riddled with inefficiencies — $208 billion in savings identified by the Government Accountability Office alone, from Medicare payment reforms to redundant contracts. Trump and Musk are betting that by hacking away at this excess, they can free up resources to shore up the nation’s defenses and stave off the Ferguson limit’s fatal embrace. It’s a gamble, but one rooted in necessity: a nation drowning in debt cannot long remain a nation.Yet there’s a delicate dance at play. Trump has vowed to protect Medicare and Social Security, the twin pillars of America’s social contract, from DOGE’s blade. It’s a promise that resonates with the millions who brought him back to power, a nod to the elderly and vulnerable who view these programs as non-negotiable. Together, they account for nearly $2.5 trillion of annual spending — more than a third of the budget — and their costs are rising as the population ages. The math is unforgiving: by 2035, the Social Security trust fund could be insolvent without reform, and Medicare’s hospital insurance fund may follow by 2036, according to the trustees’ reports. Still, Trump’s pledge buys time, serving as a political lifeline to avoid alienating his base while DOGE takes its first swings elsewhere.This strategy — beginning with discretionary spending and then revisiting entitlements — holds merit, both tactically and ethically. The federal government is a maze of waste beyond the traditional strongholds of Medicare and Social Security. For instance, the Pentagon wastes billions on outdated systems and unaccounted expenses — a 2024 audit discovered $850 million in discrepancies.Agencies like the IRS, which Musk’s team has already infiltrated, could streamline operations to increase revenue without raising taxes. The Department of Education, a longstanding Republican target, spends $80 billion annually, yet student outcomes remain behind; DOGE’s cuts there could redirect funds to more urgent needs. By addressing these areas first, Trump and Musk can build a case — dollars saved, efficiencies gained — before confronting the more challenging issue of entitlement reform.And that sale will come. Ferguson’s Law allows no room for sentimentality. Entitlements, however valued, are the elephant in the budget, projected to grow from 10.2 percent of GDP in 2024 to 14.2 percent by 2050, according to the CBO. Without reform — whether by raising the retirement age, means-testing benefits, or capping growth — the U.S. will plunge deeper into the debt trap, leaving less for defense, infrastructure, or the innovation that Musk advocates. The American public, long used to these programs as birthrights, will need convincing. DOGE’s early victories could provide the credibility to make that argument: If billions can be saved elsewhere, why not here? The alternative is unimaginable: a future in which the U.S. cannot fund its military, its commitments, or its very existence.Musk’s role in this drama is audacious and essential. He brings an outsider’s ruthlessness and a Silicon Valley ethos that views bureaucracy as a bug to be squashed. His clashes with civil servants and his gleeful X posts — labeling USAID a “criminal organization” — are indeed theater, but they highlight a deeper truth: the status quo is untenable. Trump, for his part, provides the political muscle, offering a mandate from voters who yearn for disruption. Together, they are racing against Ferguson’s clock, knowing that financial health encompasses not just balancing the books but also preserving the nation’s soul. If they fail, the United States risks becoming a cautionary tale of hubris and neglect, another name in the graveyard of great powers. If they succeed, they may just rewrite the ledger — and the future.
Why Tho
An ongoing leadership course that further explores the subjects and themes presented in CEO.com Magazine.
Latest Blog Posts
The case for an ugly peace: Why Ukraine should embrace negotiation with Russia
Ukraine, which has showcased its resilient spirit and steadfast commitment to sovereignty, now finds itself at a crossroads. The prolonged conflict with Russia has taken a significant toll, and ironically, the outlines of an “ugly peace” may provide a route to lasting stability.Recent developments highlight a tentative shift towards de-escalation. U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin have negotiated a 30-day ceasefire to stop attacks on Ukraine's energy infrastructure. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has welcomed this initiative and expressed hope for ongoing military assistance from allies like France and Germany. However, the path to peace is fraught with complexities. Skepticism surrounds Russia’s commitment to a lasting resolution, and there are worries that the ceasefire might act as a strategic pause for Russia to regroup. European leaders, while cautiously optimistic, maintain that Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity are non-negotiable. The human aspect of this conflict cannot be emphasized enough. Reports of widespread suffering, including the torture of civilians and the abduction of over 20,000 children to Russia, underscore the urgency of integrating humanitarian considerations into any peace negotiations. Ensuring the consent of the Ukrainian population, securing the release of prisoners, and establishing mechanisms for justice are crucial to breaking the cycle of impunity. President Zelenskyy’s delicate balancing act involves satisfying domestic aspirations for sovereignty while engaging in pragmatic diplomacy to garner international support. His recent interactions with President Trump highlight this tightrope walk as he navigates the demands for concessions without alienating his citizens. While the prospect of conceding territory or delaying NATO aspirations may be undesirable, the alternative — a prolonged conflict leading to further loss of life and infrastructure — paints a bleaker picture. Engaging in earnest negotiations, supported by strong international guarantees, could create a path toward sustainable peace that acknowledges geopolitical realities while safeguarding Ukraine’s core sovereignty.
Ranking the future: How Clark Benson turned a nerdy habit into a digital dynasty
In the sprawling, sun-bleached expanse of Los Angeles, where dreams are as plentiful as palm trees and just as likely to topple in a stiff breeze, Clark Benson sits at the helm of Ranker, a digital media company that has quietly become a titan of crowd-sourced opinion. It’s a platform that thrives on a simple, almost primal impulse: people love to rank things. From the best horror movies to the most overrated tourist traps, Ranker’s lists — vetted and voted on by millions of users — offer a type of democratic clarity in an age drowning in subjective noise. Benson, a serial entrepreneur with a mop of dark hair and a restless energy that suggests he’s always chasing the next idea, has built a career on turning personal obsessions into profitable ventures. However, as he recounted in a recent interview with CEO.com, his journey is less a straight line than a series of calculated detours through the wreckage of the dot-com boom, the rise of social media, and now the murky waters of artificial intelligence.Benson’s story begins, as many entrepreneurial tales do, with youthful restlessness. Growing up in the Midwest, he was the type of kid who made lists — albums of the year, concerts he’d attended — long before the internet amplified such compulsions. “I’ve always been a list nerd,” he says, his voice echoing the faintest hint of self-deprecation. This trait stayed with him throughout his college years at the University of Illinois, where he studied finance, and into his early career, which included a position at Virgin Records in the nineties. There, he had a front-row view of the music industry’s pre-digital swagger — grunge reigned supreme, CDs were treasures, and the concept of streaming seemed like science fiction. Yet even then, Benson was looking ahead, sensing the seismic shifts that would soon transform the world he knew.His first major breakthrough came with eCrush, a proto-social network launched in 1999, just as the dot-com bubble was inflating to its delirious peak. Targeted at teens and young adults, eCrush allowed users to send anonymous flirtations to their crushes, revealing identities only if feelings were mutual. It was a clever take on the awkwardness of youth, and it caught on — big time. By 2006, Hearst Corporation acquired it, giving Benson his first taste of a lucrative exit. “It was a wild ride,” he recalls, “but it taught me that you don’t need a billion users to create something valuable. You just need the right ones.” The sale was a triumph, but it also left him at a crossroads. The internet was changing — MySpace was giving way to Facebook, and the era of scrappy startups was evolving into something slicker and more corporate. Benson, however, wasn’t ready to cash out and call it a day.Instead, he doubled down on his entrepreneurial spirit, exploring music marketing with Almighty Music Marketing and even co-owning a record store in Redondo Beach called Off/Beat Music. (It closed in 2001, a victim of the Napster era.) However, it was Ranker, launched in 2009, that would become his crowning achievement. The concept was deceptively simple: take the “wisdom of crowds”—a phrase Benson shares with the reverence of a mantra—and apply it to every imaginable topic. Want to know the best Rolling Stones album? Ranker has a list, voted on by thousands. Curious about the worst airline food? There’s a list for that, too. “I wanted to create something that didn’t depend on one expert’s opinion,” he explains. “The crowd, over time, gets it right.”Getting Ranker off the ground was no easy task. The early days were tough — Benson bootstrapped the company with his own funds, dedicating nights to mastering search engine optimization since there was no marketing budget. "I’d work all day, then go home and study SEO until 2 a.m.,” he says. “It was brutal, but it worked.” Gradually, the site gained traction, its lists appearing in Google searches like digital breadcrumbs. By 2011, Ranker was attracting millions of unique visitors each month, enough to lure venture capital and a growing staff now numbering in the dozens. Today, it ranks among the top fifty websites in the U.S., according to Quantcast, an impressive achievement considering its niche: no cat videos, no breaking news, just lists.Benson’s talent for identifying trends has kept Ranker relevant as the internet has evolved. He anticipated the rise of the influencer economy — “People trust voices they relate to, not faceless brands,” he observes — and shifted Ranker to take advantage of it, partnering with creators to extend its reach. Now, he’s focusing on AI, a technology he regards with a mix of enthusiasm and caution. “It’s going to change everything,” he says, “but it’s also going to inundate the web with low-quality content. Our advantage is human-validated data — real people voting, not bots generating answers.” It’s a bold assertion, but Ranker’s statistics support it: the site records tens of millions of votes each year, showcasing its retention in an age of short attention spans.Despite his success, Benson remains a man in motion, perpetually unsatisfied. “Ranker’s doing great — traffic’s up, revenue’s up — but I still feel like we’re only halfway there,” he admits. He dreams of spinning off new ventures from Ranker’s wealth of opinion data — perhaps a predictive analytics tool or a consumer insights platform. At home, he’s a husband to Jenifer and a father to twins Austin and Zani, but his downtime is limited. A music enthusiast, he’s seen over a hundred bands perform in a single year — twice — chasing the thrill of live shows from Phish to Radiohead. “It’s my reset button,” he says.In a way, Benson embodies the paradox of the modern entrepreneur: a dreamer anchored by pragmatism, a listmaker who flourishes in chaos. Ranker may not possess the cultural cachet of TikTok or the gravitas of the New York Times, but it has carved out a distinctive, enduring space in the digital realm. As the internet progresses toward its next transformation, Benson is already planning his next move—because, for him, the list is never complete.
Made in the USA: A dream we can’t afford to abandon
In the humming factories of Shenzhen and the sleek boardrooms of Brussels, a quiet shift is underway — one that threatens to leave the United States watching from the sidelines. China and Europe, long seen as economic rivals to American dominance, are deepening their ties, forging a partnership that could reshape the global order. Against this backdrop, the U.S. must reassert its industrial might, not out of nostalgia for a bygone era, but as a matter of survival in a world where manufacturing muscle still matters.The numbers reveal a stark story. China’s industrial output now surpasses that of the U.S., accounting for nearly 30 percent of global manufacturing, according to the World Bank, while America’s share has declined to 16 percent. Europe, meanwhile, has embraced its role as a regulatory superpower, establishing standards that ripple across continents. The recent thaw in Sino-European relations — highlighted by a 2020 investment agreement and an array of trade discussions — only intensifies the challenge. Beijing provides inexpensive labor and raw materials, while Europe contributes cutting-edge technology and a vast consumer market. Together, they are forming a bloc that could marginalize American interests, ranging from semiconductors to green energy.This isn’t just about economics — it’s about power. Industrial dominance underpins national security. A nation that can’t produce its own steel, chips, or batteries is vulnerable to its rivals. The Pentagon recognizes this: a 2021 report warned that U.S. reliance on foreign supply chains, particularly from China, poses a “strategic vulnerability.” Exhibit A: the chip shortage that crippled American automakers while Chinese firms continued to thrive. Exhibit B: Europe’s push for “strategic autonomy,” a polite way of saying it wants to rely less on America.History provides a lesson. In the 20th century, America’s industrial base won wars and forged a superpower. The Arsenal of Democracy didn’t just produce tanks; it generated jobs, innovation, and influence. Today, that base is weakening. Decades of offshoring have gutted the Rust Belt, leaving behind vacant plants and a workforce trained for yesterday’s economy. Meanwhile, China’s Belt and Road Initiative connects a network of infrastructure from Asia to Africa, and Europe invests heavily in its green industrial revolution. The U.S., in contrast, debates infrastructure bills that never seem to get started.Reclaiming industrial primacy will not be easy. It involves confronting hard truths: tax breaks for Wall Street will not rebuild factories in Ohio; free-market platitudes will not counter Beijing’s state-driven juggernaut. It requires a strong policy — subsidies for critical industries, tariffs to level the playing field, and a workforce retrained for the 21st century. Critics will shout “protectionism,” but what’s the alternative? A nation that outsources its backbone risks losing its spine.The stakes are evident. If China and Europe weave their economies closer together, America might find itself a consumer rather than a creator in the upcoming industrial age. The time for complacency has passed. In the face of rising powers, the U.S. must chart its own course — hammer, steel, and resolve intact.
Subscription Tiers
Pro
$95 Annual
Everything in Lite +
Private Community Platform: A subscribers-only platform that enables you to confidentially connect with fellow members to enhance your relationships, knowledge, resources, and opportunities to progress as a leader. Accessible on iOS, Android, and desktop.
Exclusive Podcast Access: Enjoy exclusive access to all episodes of our podcast, featuring hundreds of interviews with prominent and successful CEOs. A new interview with a world-class CEO is released every Tuesday and Thursday morning, exclusively for members.
Subscribers-Only Magazine: A narrative of power, strategy, and future unfolding. The members-only website features all past issues, essays, transcripts, and a variety of subscriber-only benefits.
Why Tho: An ongoing leadership course that further explores the subjects and themes presented in CEO.com Magazine. Pro subscribers gain access to the complete library of lessons, as well as all source materials and research.
Members-Only Events: Special invitations to CEO.com events such as summits, workshops, dinners, forums, online seminars, and networking sessions.
Lite
Free
The CEO.com Podcast: Access to publicly available episodes of our podcast, featuring interviews with prominent CEOs and leaders.
Coffee Club: Bringing leaders together to create and share opportunities for personal and mutual growth in a collaborative environment.
Exclusive Articles: Access to the CEO.com blog consisting of essays and posts on leadership, news, strategy, and economics.
Relevant Conversations: Join real-time chat spaces exclusively for CEO.com subscribers to discuss relevant topics, similar to Slack and Discord.
Live Stream: Create a live stream or room on our platform to engage with the CEO.com audience.
Daily Newsletter: The daily dispatch from the frontiers of leadership.
Why Tho: An ongoing leadership course that further explores the subjects and themes presented in CEO.com Magazine. Lite subscribers receive temporary access to the most recent lesson.
Public Articles: Access to the public CEO.com blog consisting of essays and posts on leadership, strategy, and economics.
Coffee Club
Coffee Club brings together leaders to create and share opportunities for personal and mutual growth in a collaborative environment via in-person and virtual one-on-one conversations.
For leaders and learners.
- In-person events with a small group of leaders in your city or state.
- AI-powered matchmaking pairing you with leaders with similar interests and challenges.
- Engage in secure, one-on-one conversations to ensure your connections are meaningful.
Dispatches from the frontiers of leadership.