Jake Gannon

Jake currently resides in Texas, where he works as Director of the Office of the President at The Claremont Institute. He is responsible for a combination of administrative duties and special projects for President Ryan P. Williams. He has held other roles within Claremont, including Assistant Director for the Center for the American Way of Life and Communications and Production Manager for The Roundtable podcast. Jake served as a White House intern at the Office of Political Affairs during Donald Trump’s first term as president. He holds a B.A. in Political Science with a law emphasis from the California State University, Los Angeles Honors College.

---

What is your current position?
I presently serve as The Claremont Institute’s Director of the Office of the President. In this role, I manage the schedule of Claremont’s President, Ryan P. Williams, and essentially work behind the scenes to plug gaps in the Institute’s needs as they arise, which has included everything from working on budgets to annual planning. That there’s always something new going on is what I enjoy most about my job.

What inspired you to choose this career path?

I’ll go a little further into it in another question below, but I never really thought I’d be working at a non-profit, much less one as incredible as Claremont. I come from a long line of police officers, going back to before my family ever immigrated to America. As far back as grade school, I thought I’d be a criminal prosecutor one day. A couple of events lined up and that set me down the path I’m walking now, which I do not regret one bit.

How did you hear about The Claremont Institute?

I learned about Claremont during my first year of college, back in 2016. I hit it off with my intro to political philosophy professor, Professor J, and asked him one Friday afternoon toward the end of the semester if he knew of any interesting internship opportunities I might be able to apply for the following spring. He said he’d think about it.

The next Monday he pulled me aside after class and asked, “Have you ever heard of The Claremont Institute?” I said, “No, but I can find out about them tonight.” His reply was “Good. You have an internship interview with them tomorrow morning at ten with Muhammed Syed. Don’t f*** it up.”

Evidently I didn’t, because it’s been nearly a decade and I’m still here!

What is your fondest memory of The Claremont Institute?

I’ve been around Claremont for quite a while, so while there are many to choose from, I’ll stick to the most pivotal one: being a chauffeur for Dr. Michael Uhlmann during the 2018 fellowship season. It would not be an exaggeration to say that a few car rides to and from the fellowships changed my life’s trajectory.

Just by chance, Dr. Uhlmann was waiting for a ride back to his home in Claremont after a day of teaching at the hotel where we held Publius, and I was leaving to go home for the day and noticed him standing there. He recognized me from his talk to the fellows, and we struck up a conversation. I offered to drive him home since it would only be a 15-minute detour. While on the drive, our conversation went everywhere from how Siri and Apple Maps worked, to my plans for law school at the time, to how the fellowships were going.

Dr. Uhlmann, with his usual flair, delivered a spontaneous, impassioned speech about exactly what benchmarks I’d need to hit to make law school a worthwhile endeavor, which I would summarize as “get into a top 20, or don’t go.” I dropped him off at his house, and that was that, or so I thought.

To my surprise, Dr. Uhlmann started calling me every so often asking for a ride to a doctor’s appointment, a store, etc., which I always obliged. He even called me to take him to the hospital for what would ultimately be the last time. He would always ask first and foremost how I was doing in progressing toward law school, and I hit every benchmark he set out for me, except the last one that I didn’t totally control: gaining admission to a top 20. I got into a few in the top 30, but didn’t quite crack the top 20.

Dr. Uhlmann speculated it was probably due to admissions placing their thumb on the scale in favor of other applicants, but nevertheless his advice was “don’t go; it’s not worth it.” His advice coincided closely with Ryan P. Williams offering me a job at Claremont as a podcast producer. I accepted and have been with Claremont since. Without Uhlmann’s advice, I’d probably be an attorney somewhere, which would have been a very different life.

There are all sorts of educational programs out there for current and rising conservative professionals. What do you think makes The Claremont Institute Fellowships so unique?

Claremont’s fellowships are unique in multiple ways. For one, its fellowships are a standout in how they create lasting bonds through camaraderie. I’m still in regular communication with my fellowship class and likely will be for life. To put it in perspective, Speechwriters is Claremont’s shortest fellowship, and by a noticeable margin. That strong bonds can be forged there is a testament to how good at fostering them Claremont really is.

Moreover, something that goes unsaid in the programs themselves, but is critically important, is that Claremont’s position on the American regime starts from a loving place. Claremont believes the American regime is fundamentally good, even if we might insist on reforms to return it to its constitutional first principles. In other words, Claremont’s West Coast Straussian nature runs deep, permeating all of its programming, and that flavor is a sizable part of why Claremont and its fellowships are so special to watch and be a part of, but also catalyzes the formation of strong bonds among fellows.

If you could have a fireside chat with an American Founder, or any great thinker, who would it be, why, and what would you discuss?

While I think it’s so obvious an answer that it’s bordering on being a cop-out, I’d have to pick George Washington because without him, there is no America as we know it.

Much of his military strategy speaks for itself, though there’s always more to learn, especially if you can ask the man himself, but I’d most like to ask him about his personal habits.

Unlike the great powers of Europe, Asia, and Africa, all of which played host to aristocratic elites that had thoroughly entrenched themselves, and with millennia of local examples to draw from for behavior, America didn’t yet have an established one.

Washington was acutely aware of his monolithic status in the new nation and that his example would become the basis of a new American aristocracy. It’s almost as if he’d been preparing for the role for most of his life. In his early teenage years, he had even written out a copy of the 110 Rules of Civility in his school book. Asking him about his distinguished tendencies and from where else he may have drawn inspiration would be both a conversation I don’t think he’d expect and one that’d be quite illuminating.

Who was more important for their time, George Washington or Abraham Lincoln? Why?

Now this is a definite cop-out, but I reject the premise of the question. Replace either with a weaker leader, and we probably wouldn’t be sitting here today.

Washington is one of the primary reasons the nation exists in the first place. With excellent help, he sowed the seeds of a hegemonic power the world had never seen before.

Lincoln inherited that fledgling and rapidly rising nation, ultimately giving, to borrow his own words from Gettysburg, the last full measure of devotion to protect it from coming apart at the seams. And he managed to start the rectification process of slavery while he did it too.

In which one of the original 13 colonies, looking back on history, would you have wanted to live and why?

I’d choose Pennsylvania for practical reasons. When people think back to the late 1700s, they probably aren’t thinking first about the fact that over 80% of people were farmers. It’s quite likely that agriculture would be one’s profession, and Pennsylvania was considered the breadbasket of the colonies.

There were other benefits to living in Pennsylvania at the time too. Its winters were cold enough to keep mosquito populations at bay, which is no small part of why the average life expectancy in Pennsylvania was over ten years higher than colonies like Virginia further south. Other practical benefits included more positive relationships with Native Americans than other colonies, and Philadelphia was an early economic powerhouse in the colonies, meaning better—albeit still distant—prospects for upward mobility in the vicinity.

Plus, on the off chance I was lucky enough to not be a farmer and get involved in the Revolution, Philadelphia was at the heart of it.

What would the artifact be, if you could hold one piece of history from the early founding of our country and why?

I’d want to hold and thumb through an old tavern ledger. The tavern was a waystation where just about everyone would stop at some point, which made it a natural place for meetings, to talk about the news, and where ideas could proliferate. Just about everyone frequented taverns back then, including Washington, who was a favorite in Williamsburg because he always paid his debts before he left town, unlike Jefferson, who also frequented Williamsburg.

To comb through pages and pages of the transactions, names, debts, and purchases would be a fascinating look at the whole social tapestry surrounding the tavern.

What qualities do you believe are needed to achieve great statesmanship in this century, and why?

While I don’t think Randall Wood and Carmine DeLuca’s Dictator’s Handbook gets everything right, I do think any good statesman will need to have a firm grasp on the so-called “keys to power” if they want to get anything done. The rules, in short, are (1) get key supporters on your side, (2) control the treasure, (3) minimize the number of key supporters you need, and (an implicit rule zero) you control nothing without power. These rules apply to any power structure, from your local fast-food restaurant all the way up to the presidency itself.

Beyond that, a statesman looking to succeed needs charisma, especially in a democratic nation, along with a little luck, good judgment about whom they allow into their circle—and, just as importantly, whose circles they enter—and a forward-looking vision backed by sound policy.

What books are you currently reading?

Right now, I’m revisiting my Thomas Sowell collection. Once I finish the excellent overview of the lineage of the gangster subculture that is Black Rednecks and White Liberals, I’m going to go back to the first Sowell book I read, A Conflict of Visions, which I think remains an excellent look at the fundamental question that largely determines which side of the aisle someone ends up on, whether one believes human nature is a moving target, or an unchanging force.

What book, film, or speech has left a lasting impression on you and why?

While I’m tempted to say The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, which is a tradition to watch at the Publius Fellowship and absolutely worth a watch, I’d say Hell or High Water left a mark. It’s a movie worth your time if you like Westerns.

Released just before the 2016 elections on a small-for-Hollywood budget, and with a strong populist tone, it came and went without too much fanfare, but its message is very much still relevant.

Elites, and those in fintech especially, would benefit from giving it a whirl to see how America’s recent flirtations with neofeudalism can look from the other side of the economy.

Do you have a favorite quote?  Is there a reason this quote resonates so strongly with you?

My favorite quote is really a paraphrase of what Claremont’s former Director of Programs, Muhammed Syed, told me the day he hired me as an intern. At the close of my interview, he said, “No matter what you do here, remember it contributes to the mission. It doesn’t matter if you’re sweeping floors or on the frontlines.” 

I don’t actually believe it’s literally true for all workers. After all, much of the federal bureaucracy is a monument in opposition to that idea. Nevertheless, I’ve lived my entire professional life so far by that line. It’s not about the literal truth of the quote. It’s about the underlying point that no one should think a task is beneath them.

What is the most distinctive attribute/character of the people in the state where you grew up that you genuinely admire?

I grew up in California. After living in Alexandria, Virginia, for a few years as a point of comparison, I have to say I admire that Californians are noticeably more laid back on average and have fewer transactional friendships than the East Coast crowd.

What is your favorite cultural/recreational pastime (or hobby) and why?

These days, my favorite recreational pastime is going for drives off the beaten path. I enjoy it because I find great satisfaction in all aspects of it, shifting through gears, hearing the (stock) exhaust, and loading up a set of tires entering a corner. In short, I enjoy the experience as much as going anywhere specific.

I think there’s a bit of a generational divide between people on the later side of millennial and younger vs. those older. Those older seem to, in my experience, think of it as “freedom to drive” and those younger think of it as “freedom from driving.” It’s a cultural shift that I can’t say I’m a fan of, and one I expect to accelerate as technological assistants like self-driving takes firmer shape and even becomes mandated.

Self-driving might make life easier for some, like the infirm, but it’ll be replacing a human skill in the trade for convenience. People who are overly reliant on those systems will see their driving skill atrophy. When technology makes life easier by replacing that developed skill, what will happen to us when we no longer possess that skill?

It’s something of a meme to reference Idiocracy or even Wall-E when posing such a question in this context, but the future certainly is looking distinctly less human.

Where do you hope to see yourself and this country in five years?

If I’m lucky, I’ll be in the same place in five years as I am now. I stumbled into the perfect place for me and am in no rush to move along. As for where I see the country in five years, I’m heartened by the grassroots anti-surveillance tendencies in groups like DeFlock, that more people oppose passive mass surveillance cameras than support them, and that a grand jury recently refused to indict a man caught destroying a Flock camera pole. That said, I think the proliferation of mass surveillance is here to stay. That ship left the docks in the early aughts, but we’re just now entering the parabolic growth phase. Big Tech is wearing a mask of false innocence for now. I’m not looking forward to Big Tech taking off the mask when they’re ready.