The sectors within the "American Dynamism" thesis—defense, energy, space, manufacturing—are not siloed but form an interdependent system. Strong national security requires a resilient energy grid and space-based communications, which in turn depend on domestic manufacturing and critical minerals. This holistic view is crucial for both investors and policymakers.
Related Insights
Successful "American Dynamism" companies de-risk hardware development by initially using off-the-shelf commodity components. Their unique value comes from pairing this accessible hardware with sophisticated, proprietary software for AI, computer vision, and autonomy. This approach lowers capital intensity and accelerates time-to-market compared to traditional hardware manufacturing.
The goal for a majority-EV fleet is not viable with current technology. The material requirements for batteries and components are so vast that a US-only transition would consume every scrap of lithium, copper, graphite, and other key minerals produced globally, leaving none for any other country or industry.
The conflict in Ukraine exposed the vulnerability of expensive, "exquisite" military platforms (like tanks) to inexpensive technologies (like drones). This has shifted defense priorities toward cheap, mass-producible, "attritable" systems. This fundamental change in product and economics creates a massive opportunity for startups to innovate outside the traditional defense prime model.
The next wave of space companies is moving away from the vertically integrated "SpaceX model" where everything is built in-house. Instead, a new ecosystem is emerging where companies specialize in specific parts of the stack, such as satellite buses or ground stations. This unbundling creates efficiency and lowers barriers to entry for new players.
Unlike traditional tech, founders in the American Dynamism space often succeed because of their deep, first-hand understanding of the customer (e.g., government, military). Many have prior service, hold security clearances, or have sold to government before. This "customer intimacy" allows them to speak the language and navigate complex procurement, a crucial advantage.
Beyond the well-known semiconductor race, the AI competition is shifting to energy. China's massive, cheaper electricity production is a significant, often overlooked strategic advantage. This redefines the AI landscape, suggesting that superiority in atoms (energy) may become as crucial as superiority in bytes (algorithms and chips).
Beyond environmental benefits, climate tech is crucial for national economic survival. Failing to innovate in green energy cedes economic dominance to countries like China. This positions climate investment as a matter of long-term financial and geopolitical future-proofing for the U.S. and Europe.
Despite what is described as "stupid" and "sclerotic" economic policies like tariffs and trade wars, the U.S. economy continues to grow. This resilience is not due to government strategy but to the relentless daily innovation of American businesses, which succeed in spite of, not because of, macro-level decisions.
A large government commitment, like the $80 billion nuclear development plan with Westinghouse, does more than create a single customer. It acts as a powerful catalyst for the entire industry. This de-risks the supply chain, signals market viability, and attracts massive private capital (e.g., Brookfield), creating tailwinds for all players.
While the West may lead in AI models, China's key strategic advantage is its ability to 'embody' AI in hardware. Decades of de-industrialization in the U.S. have left a gap, while China's manufacturing dominance allows it to integrate AI into cars, drones, and robots at a scale the West cannot currently match.