Enlightened Conflict

echoes of all the footsteps

May 21st, 2013

“This may be the most important proposition revealed by history: past visitingAt the time, no one knew what was coming.” ― Haruki Murakami

 

Well.

Looking back is a timeless tradition in second guessing and seeking blame … okay … okay … as well as even some forward thinking.

But the opening quote is a humdinger of a Life truth … at that time no one knew what was coming.

Yup.

 

You can be pessimistic <and be proven right … or wrong>.

You can be optimistic <and be proven right … or wrong>.

You can plan incessantly … and smartly <and the plans can work perfectly … or go awry>.

You can make it up as you go <and it works perfectly … or all goes wrong>.

 

But in general … you are guessing.

Sure.

You can make an educated guess … and the odds may be higher or lower based on what you decide to do … but someone is lying if they say “I knew it was going to end up that way.”

 

They did not know.

They guessed <and possibly guessed well>.

 

Here is a ponderable factoid.

‘History teaches by analogy, not identity.’ <Hank Kissinger … Hank to me>

 

Analogy is … well … not a blueprint of what will be. People tend to mistake a study of history, or a historical moment, for proof of what is to come. They are often sorely proven wrong.  And, in fact, those proven right have the benefit of going backwards and connecting dots <even when the connection is tenuous at best> to prove why they were right.

 

Hmmmm … once again. A reminder. “No one knew what was coming.” <corollary?: sure is easier to know what came>

 

Regardless <here is the entire thought from Hank>.

 

History teaches by analogy, not identity.

This means that the lessons of history are never automatic, that they can be apprehended only by a standard which admits the significance of a range of experience, that the answers we obtain will never be better than the questions we pose.

No profound conclusions were drawn in the natural sciences before the significance of sensory experience was admitted by what was essentially a moral act.

No significant conclusions are possible … without an awareness of the historical context.

For societies exist in time more than in space. At any given moment a state is but a collection of individuals, as positivist scholars have never wearied of pointing out.

But it achieves identity through the consciousness of a common history. This is the only “experience” nations have, their only possibility of learning from themselves.

History is the memory of states.

To be sure, states tend to be forgetful.

It is not often that nations learn from the past, even rarer that they draw the correct conclusions from it. For the lessons of historical experience, as of personal experience, are contingent.

They teach the consequences of certain actions, but they cannot force recognition of comparable situations.  – Henry Kissinger

 

What a powerful thought.

… teach the consequences of certain actions, but they cannot force recognition of comparable situations.

 

Once again … cannot force recognition of comparable situations.

I love it.

So often we suggest ‘this has happened before’ and … well … yeah … kind of. Close. But close only counts with hand grenades <and horse shoes>.  Ultimately you are simply assessing the echoes of history.

You may listen to the echoes of history … but until they walk in to your life … you will not truly recognize who and what they are.

 

follow him“I have sometimes sat alone here of an evening, listening, until I have made the echoes out to be the echoes of all the footsteps that are coming by and by into our lives.” - Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities

 

Studying history is just like Dickens says.

You are inevitably sitting alone listening … listening to the echoes of the footsteps of those who have walked before and envisioning, from those echoes, who may be coming into your life.

 

That is it. No more. No less.

 

In the end.

I believe all of us would probably like to have a better sense of how to plan for the future. To better understand the best and proper actions to take to maximize the future in some form or fashion.

Therefore we do the best we can … and most often that means examining the past to assess actions affecting the future … trying to understand consequences for our decisions yet to be made.

The intent is good … and true.

 

However.

 

We should never confuse honest good intent … with ‘what is right’ or even worse ‘what will be.’

The echoes of footsteps are context. But they are simply echoes.

And as for the future?

We simply hear the echoes of footsteps but never meet their owners until they actually enter our lives. And, frankly, you cannot control all that ‘are coming by and by into our lives.’

 

Oh.

And at each point in time … no one knew what was coming.

 

A Life truth for all to remember.

the strongest bridge

May 20th, 2013

So.

hope bridge by michael underwood

hope bridge by michael underwood

Several of my friends give me crap because of some of the obscure things I have stored away in my pea like brain <because I tend to read random obscure things and store it all away>. Therefore they ask me random obscure questions to see what I have stored away.

The random question this time?

 

What is the strongest bridge in the world?

 

My random answer?

Hope.

Hope is the strongest bridge in the world.

 

“All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope.” - Winston Churchill

 

Well.

It was a flippant response on my part … but it kind of made everyone at the table sit back and hesitate … because it is one of those rare insightful non-smartass flippant responses.

Ok. First.

To be clear.

I am not a psychologist <nor psychiatrist … I get them mixed up> nor am I a behavioral scientist <possible a mad scientist though … a childhood goal>. I say that because I may just not know jackshit. But here’s what I think.

Lots of discussions about the strongest motivators/demotivators on human behavior seem to revolve around fear, love, self esteem, hate , etc. <Maslow created that excellent chart which I have used so often and adhere to> … however … I tend to believe that all these experts overlook hope.

Research digs deep down into the moments of minutiae with regard to why we do the things we do.

Heck.

That is how the best companies in the world attempt to derive strategies to make their companies <and products & services> a success in people’s heads, hearts & wallets.

In my own pea–like brain something shadows each response found in research … hope.

 

“The present is the ever moving shadow that divides yesterday from tomorrow. In that lies hope.” - Frank Lloyd Wright

 

I imagine it is so often overlooked as something impactful or something we should pay attention to because it is stealthily present in everything. Yup. Everything. Attitudes & behaviors. Thoughts & actions. And because of its omnipresence it gets overlooked as “non differentiator.”

Silly thinking.

Because it is everything.

It is what someone called “the well of self” which can permit you to begin again … and again.

 

hope bridge feelings“Hope arouses, as nothing else can arouse, a passion for the possible.” – William Sloane Coffin

 

Everyone wants to be aroused by the possible.

And I am not even talking about this in the grandiose abstract <dreams and such> but even in the drivel of the day.

A grocery shopper has the simple hope that everything will be found as quickly as possible.

A coffee drinker hopes that the first sip is everything they expected <and desired>.

A father hopes his daughter has a good day at school.

You get it.

Hope isn’t often the really big things … it is in the gazillion little things that happen in everyday life as well as the big “I want a better life” type things.

And maybe that is why I flippantly suggested it is the strongest bridge in the world.

It is strong enough to span generations of years.

Strong enough to span yesterday to tomorrow.

Strong enough to span the micro-second subconscious thought.

 

So. I say all that maybe to suggest that losing hope deprives someone of an essential structure in Life. The bridge to … well … make it in Life.

To be able to get from here to there.

Now. That said.

I do believe more of those who actually have hope to share … should share it <pragmatically> with those who struggle to reach that bridge.

Yes.

I do believe professionally I am a ‘dealer of hope.’

Yes.

I do believe all forms of hope, realistic and unrealistic, are better than no hope at all.

Yes.

I do believe the moment you have lost sight of how to see, or reach out and touch, hope you have entered some version of Hell.

Sure. Life offers a multitude of disappointments. Life is not easy. But I fear it becomes unliveable without hope because then disappointment becomes infinite in a finite Life.

That, my friends, sounds overwhelming distressing even as I type it.

 

“We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope.” - Martin Luther King, Jr.

 

John Lennon suggested people like me … believers in hope … are dreamers.

Well.

Maybe.

But Martin Luther King also said this …

“The hope of a secure and livable world lies with disciplined nonconformists who are dedicated to …”

 

In a way … a secure livable world lies with those dreamers. We disciplined nonconformists. Or maybe more pragmatically … bridge builders.drink from well of self

The resilience of Hope lies in we happy few … we happy disciplined nonconformists … we happy believers in hope despite what appears to be an infinite disappointment.

We happy few who have bridges to share.

We happy few who constantly drink from the well of self and … well … know how to begin again.

So, yes, the strongest bridge in the world is Hope.

murphy’s laws of war (& business)

May 15th, 2013

Well.murphys stupid

This post is partially silly and partially truth.

And maybe that summarizes all of Murphy’s laws in general. What makes them fun to read is that they almost always seem to contain a <maddening> grain of truth.

I was cleaning out a folder and came across a shortened <there is a website that has almost 100 Murphy’s laws of war> list of Murphy’s Laws of war.

And, no, Murphy is no Sun Tzu <The Art of War>. Oh. But just to say this while it is on my mind … every business person should, at minimum, read The Art of War but it doesn’t hurt to have a copy of the little easy to read pamphlet in your working space. Its good <business> stuff.

Anyway.

Let me share Murphy’s version of war theory before I wax poetically on how relevant they are to business.

Murphy’s Laws of War:

 

-          Professionals are predictable. It is the amateurs that are dangerous.

-          Never draw fire … it irritates everyone around you.

-          Friendly fire … isn’t.

-          Never forget your weapon was made by the lowest bidder.

-          The enemy invariably attacks on 2 occasions:

  • When they are ready
  • When you are not

-          If the enemy is within range … so are you.

-          Mines are equal opportunity weapons

-          When the pin is pulled Mr. Grenade is not our friend

-          When in doubt, empty your magazine.

-          Don’t ever be first, don’t ever be last, and don’t ever volunteer.

-          If it’s stupid but it works, it isn’t stupid.

 

Well.

On every single point I was drawing a correlation to business.

 

interviewing jonny_asking_questions_2Professionals are predictable. Professionals can be bad … good … lazy … but predictable. And consistent. Why? Because they actually do know their shit. They may get lazy, or play politics or even get bullied by someone louder … but they really do know their shit. Amateurs? Well. Simply … they don’t know their shit. Sure. They may get lucky on occasion as well as they may instinctually be okay <on occasion> but they are extremely unpredictable. Even worse? If an amateur has an early success they stretch that to ‘I am now a professional’ and become dangerous. Amateurs are valuable to have around because (a) they can see things differently so you can work the wheat from the chaff and (b) someday they will be professionals. But on their own? They are dangerous.

 

Never draw fire … because it does irritate people around you. There is an art & a science to actually raising the objection … drawing out a complaint or criticism. It also contains risk. People do not like risk. Especially if they are not controlling it. If you draw the fire … be prepared to take the bullet(s). If you are not ready to do so? You will irritate the people around you even more.

 

Ah. Friendly fire. Let’s call it constructive criticism or what could be <and is often called> ‘healthy debate.’ Well. It may be healthy but it sure doesn’t feel good or healthy. I guess this also falls under the ‘if it hurts it must be good for you’ philosophy. By the way? That is a stupid philosophy. Work is difficult enough without offering up the supposed friendly fire to your co-workers.

 

Your weapon is made by the lowest bidder.   Oh so true. In today’s business world, despite the fact everyone says ‘quality is number one’ they don’t really mean it. Ok. Maybe they mean it sometimes. And ‘sometimes’ means … well … there will always be an aspect where someone decided to go ‘lowest bidder.’ What do I mean? I have a project with 25 aspects. I decide to go lowest cost on 15 aspects so I can go high quality on the other 10. Murphy’s Law? Somewhere within the 15 going on the cheap will haunt you. I say all that <bringing it back to business> because while you may decide to put your ass on the line because you feel confident ‘we did it the right way’ … just know that somewhere within all that ‘right way’ a component was given to the lowest bidder.

 

The enemy attacking. I laughed when I read this. Why are people in business always scrambling to address competition? Well. It’s because they are always surprised when it happens. And it’s crazy. More time is wasted (a) preparing yourself for an attack that will never come when you want it to and (b) flailing in response to an attack. The point? You control what you can control. Your own company and business. Ignore an attack if it has acceptable losses and attack when you are ready.

 

If they are in range … you are in range. To me this is the disillusionment of believing you have an advantage. Advantages are so fleeting if you blink you can miss it <and get your ass blown off>. The moment you have an advantage … trust me … someone is already moving into either (a) the space you just left to get you from the rear or (b) into the same space you are moving into to attack all on their own. Never assume you have an advantage. Never assume if you perceive you have an advantage that it will last. Well.  Never assume you are out of range.

 

Mines are equal opportunity weapons. Pointing out problems doesn’t mean you are absolved from (a) blame, (b) becoming part of the problem or even (c) getting your ass blown up. Notice how people are often hesitant to complain or point out some flaws? It isn’t because they don’t see them or recognize that they shouldn’t be solved … it’s because they also recognize that they could get hurt themselves.  Oh. That’s why having a minesweeper employee is priceless. Pay her/him anything they want if they are good at it.

 

The grenade one. Well. That is a silly one. Kind of. Why kind of? Everyone makes mistakes … in life and in work. Mistakes, like it or not, are like grenades. Once a mistake is made … the pin is pulled. It may be on a 5 second timer, 5 hour timer … even a 5 year timer … but it is a grenade and it is on a timer. Too many times I see people trapped by their own mistakes. And, frankly, they get their ass blown off simply because they held on to the grenade. I know the metaphor is silly … but you get it. In business <for sure> and in Life <most of the time> mistakes have to be shared. By sharing you not only potentially save your own ass … you most likely decrease collateral damage. Simplistically … Mr. Grenade is not your friend.

 

When in doubt, empty your magazine. Whew. If I had seen this earlier I would have put it up as a sign in my office. Inside an office there is so much discussion on strategy of what to do and what to say and ‘showing all your cards’ and when … and it is such wasted energy. If you have the bullets use them. Trust me. If you use them all and still get killed it’s because you didn’t have enough or you didn’t shoot straight enough … you didn’t get killed because you should have held one or two back. Plus. There is a fairly well-known fact that magazines <business bullets> are manufactured in quantities. You can always grab another magazine if you get the opportunity. Say what? No more magazines or bullets! Oh well. Just means someone was smarter than you and had more bullets. Holding one or two back ain’t gonna help here either. Use it if you got it.mustache reindeer

 

Don’t be first, last or volunteer. This one is tricky. But I will give a personal opinion on this … I prefer, in business, to be a quick follower. I know that may sound strange <because leading implies being first and I like leading> but I have always tended to believe the ‘first’ <in general> were simply the most hasty. The most impatient. The ones most scared to not be first. In their desire to be first they just didn’t have all their proverbial shit together. In fact … my dream business scenario is actually to see 2 hasty ‘firsts’ coming out of the blocks duking it out and bludgeoning each other. Whew. Did I just say I liked being the 3rd out of the blocks? Well. Yeah. If it could play out that way. Being last? Nope. Too late. But a quick follower? Absolutely.

 

If it’s stupid and works it isn’t stupid. In the business world … too often when things go right and someone perceives it happened out of sheer luck or ‘stupidity gone right’ … it gets ignored. It gets ignored as (a) non replicable and (b) don’t want to replicate <because it was stupid>. You want to know what’s stupid? Ignoring something that worked. I am certainly not suggesting that the ends always justify the means but I am suggesting that working is working. Somehow, someway … it worked. Therefore somewhere within what happened something was not stupid.

Please note that it is mostly the arrogant know it all senior managers who overlook the ‘stupid but worked.’ They “know better.” They “know the right way to do it.” Aw … baloney. They are being stupid.

 

Well.

That was fun <for me>.

Oddly <in my pea like brain> I thought of writing this using Murphy when I saw this list in some magazine from the J.Crew CEO on business. Maybe because some of the things he suggests would make great Murphy’s Laws at some point.

In addition? I happen to agree with him on his list. Here are his thoughts … the ones I really liked.

 

corporate cultureCreativity Tips From J.Crew CEO Mickey Drexler

 

-          “Every business could be creative.”

I talk to so many people about the lack of creativity in companies in America. Part of creativity is contrarianism. Creativity battles common wisdom. Because if there’s common wisdom, there’s an opportunity. In my own experience, whatever was a good idea was a bad idea to most people.

-          “Companies are in the Stone Ages organizationally.”

You can tell by the offices. “I’m going to see the king!” The king is on the top floor and there are 17 people in front of the king’s office. There are layers of bureaucracy. It shouldn’t be like that.

-          “Most companies should have a rule about how big they get.”

Not necessarily assigning a billion-dollar value or a 10 billion-dollar value, but companies that become too ubiquitous go one way.

-          “America’s companies are built to destroy creativity.”

If you become the head of a big company today, you’re not the youngest person in the world. You have a contract. You get a jet. You have a huge overpaid salary. You get bonuses. Do you think that CEO is going to screw around with fast, creative change? No. And the board of directors–the last thing they want is someone who’s going to change things. Steve Jobs–he would bet the company, he wouldn’t care. But there are very few people who run companies that way.

-          “You have to keep moving forward.”

Everything has a trend to it; I don’t care if it’s appliances or engines. I always ask: What has a company done in the past five years that somebody’s noticed?

-          “You cannot copy high quality.”

It takes a long time to get a reputation for quality. There are people in our industry, they’re basically copiers. Look at the cars on the streets. They all look alike. But if you put quality into a product, then have it validated, you have huge credibility. It takes time to earn that.

-          “Simplicity is very difficult to achieve.”

Try to ask someone to make a really good roast chicken.

—–

Good stuff.

Smart guy this Mickey. Maybe he should meet Murphy and create some laws.

 

storytelling

May 14th, 2013

Ok.clorox reinventing

This TV commercial will not be for everyone. But it is exactly for the audience it was designed to talk to. Teens and young people will be bored. It is slow and unfolds and … well … it tells a story.

Older people <old as well as aspiring old> … will enjoy. Get a chuckle.

Oh.

And the good news? It is for a household cleaning product.

Oh.

More good news? It is from a staple household brand with gobs of heritage <been around for gobs of years> so it is relevant to whom they are <and subliminally kind of reminds you that they have been around for gobs of years thru a really nice hyperbole-stretched reference>.

 

Clorox Makes Cleaning History: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdXxcoo8L-w

 

The commercial is about this new ‘no waste’ cleaner pump spray they have. Not only is it a nice product/packaging idea but it is a nice storytelling way to talk about it.

Relevant to today <no waste, efficiency, good value, best expenditure you could make, etc.> but they also suggest that the idea has always been relevant.

 

Why is that important? Well. First. People who are saving money don’t really want to feel like today’s circumstances are forcing them to save money. They would like to feel they are just being smart … and being smart is timeless. Second. People don’t want to feel cheap. Cheap as in “that last little drop really does matter to me.”

Now.

That is a wonderful little insight … and that wonderful little insight <which apparently I did not come up with> was utilized in this little TV commercial.

And I bet research was used … and I finally get to talk about how research can be used well <because I am guessing this is a good example>. Here is my guess on what happened.

 

-          Trivial out loud, aggravating inside

clorox last dropThey <researchers> probably had to work pretty hard to get people to not only talk about this … but admit it. it sounds so trivial <the last spray … or … the last little drop>, petty and cheap. People probably didn’t really want to admit it.

You’re cleaning, spraying … it spritzes a little … and then the next squeeze of the trigger … nothin’. Nada <insert thought bubble of ‘crap’ over users head here>. You shake the container and … hey … there is still something in there <albeit just a smidge>! So you point, squeeze and … nothin’. Nada. You know it is, at best, one more use … maybe even a halfhearted spritz remaining … but it is aggravating <on a variety of levels … you didn’t get to finish cleaning to the level desired -  a lack of completing objective – as well as ‘I paid for it’>.

Whew. Even typing this it sounds trivial. Saying it out loud? You sound cheap and petty.

C’mon. It’s just the dregs at the bottom of the bottle. Yup. BUT. Aggravating nonetheless.

Good use of research.

 

Next.

-           It’s not the 1000, it’s the 1 I didn’t get.

This may seem obvious after what I just wrote in the first point … but it is a nuance that has to get recognized <and you would be flabbergasted – I just wanted to use that word – by how many professionals would miss this important nuance>. So it is only obvious if you don’t ignore it.

This is a well forgotten Life and marketing truth.

It ain’t the first impression that matters … it is the last.

The practical <hack> brand manager is likely to think … “great value … they got 1000 efficient uses for only $x … that is only pennies per pull!”

The insightful brand manager thinks … “they aren’t happy with the product … well … they are feeling less than satisfied as they throw it in the trash <and listen to a little sloshing as it drops into the trash can> … their last impression is tinged with a sense of aggravation or dissatisfaction. Hmmmmmmmmm …. They are defining the product by the one spray they didn’t get rather than the 1000 they did get.”

Does that make an irrational consumer? You bet.

Does it matter anyway? You bet.

Perceptions don’t always match up to reality. You have a choice … manage the perceptions or change reality. Clorox was smart. They changed reality. They eliminated the ‘one I didn’t get.’ Smart.

Good use of research <and someone who could actually decipher it>.

 

<note: detergent manufacturers should take note of this insight because all the new ‘free flow’ liquid containers leave an aggravatingly large amount of detergent left sloshing around that you cannot get out>

 

Regardless.

I like this commercial for a number of reason.

Good insight(s). it’s smart.

Meaningful product enhancement <addresses a user problem>.

Clorox Ben FranklinHeritage. Clorox has been around forever. In a nice understated way they remind you they have been around since … well … a long frickin’ time.

They make the user feel smart.

They even have a slight chuckle at their own expense <we did think of this a long time ago but lost it>.

And it’s a simple execution … but entertaining. It doesn’t have any of those flashy production techniques nor any of those quick cuts back and forth between random vignettes … but rather it is … well … a story.

 

Stories are timeless when told well.

Marketing people should remind themselves of this on occasion.

Well done Clorox.

 

 

 

the price of the tempestuous sea of liberty

May 14th, 2013

 

Well.liberty freedomnotfortimidthumb

Liberty is certainly not for the timid.

 

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin

 

First.

The actions committed by the Boston marathon bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his brother, Tamerlan, were cowardly, heinous and unforgivable.

Four people dead and over 150 wounded.

Second.

This is certainly not the first time that homicidal killers have attacked a major American city.

In 2002, Washington DC was terrorized by two roving snipers, who randomly shot and killed 10 people. In February, an unhappy police officer murdered four people over several days in Los Angeles.

I would also note that on the same day as the Boston tragedy I believe 30+ other people were killed in America because of some type of violence.

Now.

I say this not to diminish the Boston tragedy but rather instead to suggest we fight this battle every day.

We are constantly at war with those who attack liberty.

 

Liberty is certainly not for the timid.

 

We cannot allow ourselves to be easily and willingly cowed by the threat of terrorism.

We cannot allow fears for temporary safety permit us to be timid with liberty.

It would be easy to begin increasing restrictions, surveillance, and oversight of the citizenship under the overall <good> guise of safety.

I do believe people deserve to not actually feel safe … but also to be safe. But I say that also with an eye toward ‘we cannot always be 100% safe.’

It can easily go beyond punishing everyone for the evil transgressions of a few to punishing the foundation of liberty. We should be seeking to remain vigilant without superseding liberty.

 

Liberty is not for the timid.

 

“It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it.” – George Washington

 

American liberty, democracy, is all about the freedom of citizens to speak their mind, choose their leaders, demand their rights, be entities in their society and be different <think and believe different thoughts>.

Now … democracy, to be truly effective, must be rooted in the hearts and souls of each individual within that citizenship.

But here is an uncomfortable <and unsafe> truth.

Within a citizenship of over 300million people not only are the roots going to vary <depth & breadth of belief> but also the simple meaning of democracy <how it is defined> will be different in each individual.

Some will abuse it.

That is a fact.

That is an unfortunate truth.

That means people will get hurt on occasion.

And that also does not mean we can deprive people of liberty because we ‘think’ they will abuse it.

Yes.

This is difficult.

And it makes you feel unsafe even thinking it.

There is risk in democracy and liberty.

Because this means we need to stop seeing ‘enemies’ everywhere … even though they may truly be everywhere.

 

Liberty is certainly not for the timid.

 

“Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. liberty under_waterBut notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” – Alexis de Tocqueville

 

A democracy seeks equality in liberty.

For good or for bad. The highs and the lows <of the people making up that society>.

I do not suggest this lightly … for death is a very high price to pay.

I am certainly not suggesting senseless sacrifice of life. Nor am I suggesting losing life through the ineptitude and irresponsibility of practical monitoring of the citizenship and its safety <note: I am not suggesting that anyone did that in the Boston tragedy>.

Nor am I suggesting any perpetrators of violence should not be pursued to the full extent of the law.

I am suggesting that sacrificing life for liberty … well … that I, personally, would do.

Restraint and servitude are not characteristics of democracy and the liberty our forefathers foresaw for the country’s citizens.

Freedom means … well … freedom.

“… what we call freedom … it is necessary to determine the justice or injustice of this phrase. Try to draw a circle with the ‘free’ hand, and with a single line. You cannot do it of your hand trembles, nor if it hesitates, nor if it is unmanageable, nor if it is in the common sense of the word ‘free.’ So far from being free , it must be under control as absolute and accurate as if it were fastened to an inflexible bar of steel. And yet it must move, under this necessary control, with perfect, untormented serenity of ease.” <1905 Evolution of Expression>

The circle must be drawn with a strong hand. And, yet, it must be absolute and accurate true with its intent. The circle, drawn with intent, does not wax and wane with fear or the thought of ‘what could happen.’ It remains resolute in its space.

Restricting liberty is not, should not, be what democracy & freedom is defined by.

Will some people abuse a broad definition of liberty? Absolutely.

Should they pay the price for that abuse? Absolutely.

<unfortunately> Will others pay the price when those few abuse it? Absolutely.

Does that mean we should restrict liberty? Absolutely not.

 

Liberty is not for the timid.

 

Lastly.

The tempestuous sea.

That sea called liberty.

 

“Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.” - Thomas Jefferson

 

liberty Tempestuous ThomasEvery day, week, year, decade … whatever … we are buffeted on this sea of liberty. That is the challenge liberty to gives us all. We get tugged this way and that way by waves of ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ but our intent is to remain afloat … and not sink. Sink to tyranny or fear or … well … lack of liberty.

 

“It is of small importance to any of us whether we get liberty; but of the greatest that we deserve it. Whether we can win it, fate must determine; but that we will be worthy of it we may ourselves determine; and the sorrowfullest fate of all that we can suffer is to have it without deserving it.” <1905 Evolution of Expression>

Oh my.  “… that we will be worthy of it we may ourselves determine.” Yes. We <the people> determine whether we are worthy of Liberty.

Regardless.

A mistake <to me>?

Seeking absolute calm or safety. And I fully recognize that we could end up debating what constitutes ‘absolute’ or ‘acceptable’ and what a citizenship deserves.

All I suggest is that we remember Liberty rarely equals safety or calmness.

It most often provides the turmoil of great minds and great thinking and … well … greatness.

Is it an uncomfortable greatness? Surely.

It is the greatness insured by not remaining stagnant despite the temptation to find some calmness in the tempest.

Not a mistake <to me>?

Freedom and equality.

Liberty is a choice. And with that choice comes some responsibility … and some broad boundaries … an expansive circle as it were.

And certainly some uneasiness within that wide open space … that tumultuous sea.

And unequivocally some fear because of its broadness.

In the end … the enemy of liberty is fear & ignorance.

Therefore to enable liberty there must remain the courage in all of us to accept it even with its imperfections.

Sadly the cost of having true liberty may be lives.

But the true tragedy would be if the cost of liberty was our freedom.

It seems to me that the biggest tragedy would be to have lost lives, which most likely embraced the full liberty America had to offer, as means to kill or restrain liberty.

Harsh words? Maybe.

But.

 

Liberty is certainly not for the timid.

whew new song … Crickets

April 21st, 2013

 

Ok.drop city-yacht-club

Last year it was Foster the Children and the song ‘pumped up kicks’ which was an awesome song but played and played .. and well … played.

This year? Here ya go. Its gonna be Crickets.

<and maybe this new song. … a  “whew” song  will make up for the fact I just wrote about Justin & Tim McGraw>.

 

“Crickets” by Drop City Yacht Club ft Jeremih: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F95RD4wGpdc

 

I heard this song driving home last night and it is infectious, fun and makes you drive a little faster than you were <always a good random sign you like it>. This song got stuck in my head and i immediately searched for it … its just one of those songs. The chorus will be on your lips as soon as you hear it in the car … after the song is over.

 

I didn’t know shit about who this band was but here is their website which not only has the song, but the video … and a download remix <which is kind of cool>.

Drop City-Yacht-Club. bwhttp://www.dropcityyachtclub.com/

 

 

They were originally called The Freshmen, but ‘re-branded ‘ themselves <renamed> Drop City Yacht Club <or DCYC> in early 2013. From San Francisco they are hip hop. Crickets seems to be the most radio friendly <they may be this year’s one hit wonder> so I am not sure how mainstream they will end up … but this song? … whew. This one is gonna shoot up the charts and you will be hearing it endlessly on the radio this summer.

In fact … I almost called this my “future overplayed song” selection. But. It is good stuff.

Enjoy.

 

 

 

the antichrist bigfoot and global warming

April 18th, 2013

“One in four Americans suspect Barack Obama to be the anti-Christ”. – Public Policy Pollconspiracy theory director

<note: for the mathematically challenged that equates to 25%>

 

Well.

There are moments where I not only scratch my head with regard to the present possibilities for the human race … but there are also moments that I encounter full despair about the future of the human race.

25% think the American president is the anti-christ?

Please. Someone tell me this is a joke.

Unfortunately it is not a joke … and it is because of this recent Public Policy Polling survey conducted in America with regard to conspiracy theories that has me very worried about the future.

Because in the here and now? There are a shitload of people who are either unequivocally nuts or absolutely clueless.

Ok.

Maybe not nuts.

But they are … for some reason … deluded into believing some really wacky things.

Like what?

Beyond the 25% who suspect that President Barack Obama might be the antichrist … more than a third believe that global warming is a hoax  … and more than 50% suspect that a secretive global elite is trying to set up a New World Order.

Yikes.

conspiracy paranoiaHave we become so paranoid?

The survey asked a sample of American voters about a number of conspiracy theories, albeit the phrasing the questions in eye-catching language that will have the country’s educators banging their heads on their desks makes for interesting reading itself, and the results are disturbing.

The study revealed:

-          13% of respondents thought Obama was “the antichrist”, while another 13% were “not sure” – and so were at least appeared to be open to the possibility that he might be.

Thankfully … some 73% of people were able to say outright that they did not think Obama was “the antichrist”.

-          37% of Americans thought that global warming was a hoax, while 12% were not sure and a slim majority – 51% – agreed with the overwhelming majority view of the scientific establishment and thought that it was not.

-          The survey also revealed that 28% of people believed in a sinister global New World Order conspiracy, aimed at ruling the whole world through authoritarian government.

Another 25% were “not sure” and only a minority of American voters – 46% – thought such a conspiracy theory was not true.

 

At least some of the insane theories suggested by the poll were dismissed by large majorities. For example:

-          only 7% of Americans in the survey believed the moon landing was faked

-          only <a stunningly large amount to me> 14% believed in Bigfoot

-          only 4% accepted that “shape-shifting alien reptilian people control our world by taking on human form”

-          only 6% believe Osama Bin Laden is still alive

-          21% of voters say a UFO crashed in Roswell, NM in 1947 and the US government covered it up.

-          20% of voters believe there is a link between childhood vaccines and autism <thankfully 51% do not>

-          29% of voters believe aliens exist

-           14% of voters say the CIA was instrumental in creating the crack cocaine epidemic in America’s inner cities in the 1980’s

-          9% of voters think the government adds fluoride to our water supply for sinister reasons (not just dental health)

-          4% of voters say they believe “lizard people” control our societies by gaining political power

-          51% of voters say a larger conspiracy was at work in the JFK assassination, just 25% say Oswald acted alone

-          15% of voters say the government or the media adds mind-controlling technology to TV broadcast signals (the so-called Tinfoil Hat crowd)

-          5% believe exhaust seen in the sky behind airplanes is actually chemicals sprayed by the government for sinister reasons

-          15% of voters think the medical industry and the pharmaceutical industry “invent” new diseases to make moneyConspiracy Theory Words

 

In some good news, Paul McCartney will be relieved that a mere 5% of respondents believed that he died in a car crash in 1966 and was replaced by a double so the Beatles could continue their careers

And thankfully just 11% embraced the concept that the US government knowingly allowed the terror attacks of 9/11 to take place.

 

Here is the link to the full results: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_National_ConspiracyTheories_040213.pdf

 

Ok. I won’t dwell on the real purpose behind the survey <it was carried out in order to explore how voters’ political beliefs impact on their willingness to embrace conspiracy theories> despite the fact it did indeed find that the partisan divide that is blamed for many problems in Washington DC also extends to the world of paranoia, aliens and Big Foot.

I will not dwell on the politics because my real concern has nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans but rather the fact such paranoia, fear and irrational thinking is so prevalent among people.

Look.

I have written many times on how difficult it is these days to discern truth from non-truth as well as partial truth.

But at its core … conspiracies have a sense of irrationality.

 

According to conspiracy monger Alex Jones, “The military-industrial complex killed John F. Kennedy” and “I can prove that there’s a private banking cartel setting up a world government because they admit they are” and “No matter how you look at 9/11 there was no Islamic terrorist connection—the hijackers were clearly U.S. government assets who were set up as patsies like Lee Harvey Oswald.”

 

This is crazy talk.

But people are listening.

And even more scarily … if they are not fully believing … they are accepting this garbage.

 

I dug up some research to try and explain what I would consider ‘indications of an ignorant paranoid population.”

University of Kent psychologists Michael J. Wood, Karen M. Douglas and Robbie M. Sutton in a paper entitled “Dead and Alive: Beliefs in Contradictory Conspiracy Theories,” published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science.

The authors begin by defining a conspiracy theory as “a proposed plot by powerful people or organizations working together in secret to accomplish some (usually sinister) goal” that is “notoriously resistant to falsification … with new layers of conspiracy being added to rationalize each new piece of disconfirming evidence.”

Once you believe that “one massive, sinister conspiracy could be successfully executed in near-perfect secrecy, [it] suggests that many such plots are possible.”

With this cabalistic paradigm in place, conspiracies can become “the default explanation for any given event—a unitary, closed-off worldview in which beliefs come together in a mutually supportive network known as a monological belief system.”

This monological belief system explains the significant correlations between different conspiracy theories in the study.

For example, “a belief that a rogue cell of MI6 was responsible for [Princess] Diana’s death was correlated with belief in theories that HIV was created in a laboratory … that the moon landing was a hoax … and that governments are covering up the existence of aliens.”

The effect continues even when the conspiracies contradict one another: the more participants believed that Diana faked her own death … the more they believed that she was murdered.

 

The authors suggest there is a higher-order process at work that they call global coherence that overrules local contradictions:

“Someone who believes in a significant number of conspiracy theories would naturally begin to see authorities as fundamentally deceptive, and new conspiracy theories would seem more plausible in light of that belief.”

Moreover, “conspiracy advocates’ distrust of official narratives may be so strong that many alternative theories are simultaneously endorsed in spite of any contradictions between them.” Thus, they assert, “the more that participants believe that a person at the center of a death-related conspiracy theory, such as Princess Diana or Osama [bin] Laden, is still alive, the more they also tend to believe that the same person was killed, so long as the alleged manner of death involves deception by officialdom.

Wow.

That is scary.

Alex Jones proclaimed in Conspiracy Rising: “No one is safe, do you understand that? Pure evil is running wild everywhere at the highest levels.”

This is rampant paranoia … at its worst.

 

Okay.

To me … conspiracies are for the lazy thinkers.

I now that sounds odd because the amount of energy they take to think these things up would make you believe they are hard working thinkers.

But here is the deal with conspiracy thinking.

Conspiracies are all about isolating empty spaces … empty of information … or the gaps as it were … and then accumulating all the empty space and creating a theory <and feasts on empty minds>.

But what is a conspiracy theory in the end?

Just empty space filled with speculation and not facts.

Yes.

Everyone is entitled to challenge conventional wisdom but that doesn’t mean the alternative conspiracy theories are true … they simply represent intriguing possibilities.

And these possibilities only exist because the theories’ “reality” only lives in the empty spaces.

And the biggest empty space seems to be people’s minds.

On his Infowars.com Web site, Jones headlines his page with “Because There Is a War on for Your Mind.”

Well. There is certainly a war on for our minds.

It is called the war between reason and fear & the irrational.

Conspiracy mongering feasts on the second at the expense of the first.

 

I imagine the lure of conspiracies is twofold:

First it makes the believer special, in their own eyes and the eyes of many. That person knows “the secret” … something no one else knows. It’s a matter of having inside information nobody else has, unless they are wise enough to be in on the scoop.

Second it permits the believer to blame someone else for their lot in life.

The possible third lure is conspiracies can never be proven … nor disproven to a conspirator … therefore they are always right <although they are not proven right>.

 

conspiracy threatIt makes my head hurt.

Here is something I read that explained why my head hurts on this topic:

“… remember that the best place for a nefarious conspirator to hide is inside a conspiracy theory which by its nature is infinite in complexity, there is always another layer needed to cover up the inconsistencies.

Conspiracies are non-falsifiable hypothesis. There are the refuge for those without proof.

What we have then is the extremes at both ends, those that believe in nothing but the norm, the mindless sheep awaiting orders. And at the other end those that believe nothing they are told and no longer have a coherent grasp of reality because of their missing pool of shared experiences.”

 

So.

I blame a lot of things and mostly people themselves <because they are being unerringly paranoid and duped by selective truths and speculative thinking> for this trend but I will point out a major contributor … television. This report summarizes why I wanted to point out TV as a major culprit:

 

According to “The State of the News Media 2013”, a report by the Project for Excellence in Journalism at the Pew Research Centre, the deteriorating financial state of news organizations has hurt their output.

Americans who think media firms are putting out fewer original, thoughtful stories are probably right. Weather, traffic and sport now account for around 40% of local television newscasts. The average length of a story keeps falling. Only 20% of local TV stories exceed a minute, and half take less than 30 seconds.

On cable-news channels, live reports, which require camera crews and journalists actually to show up somewhere, have fallen by a third in daytime programs in the past five years. Interview segments, which are cheap, have risen.

Americans may also prefer talking heads because they increasingly prefer to hear opinion rather than fact.

This trend is highlighted by the popularity of Fox, a conservative news network, and of MSNBC, its left-leaning counterpart. CNN, which tends to toe the middle line, continues to struggle with its ratings unless there is a big news event.

Pew says the news industry is “undermanned and underprepared to uncover stories, dig deep into emerging ones or to question information put into its hands.”

 

This dependence on “opinion entertainers” as news is probably the most damaging … and disturbing.

I know lots of people who get 100% of their news from Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh or Jon Stewart. Unfortunately, while smart people, they are entertainers.

Their existence is based on ratings not truth. Opinions drive ratings. Apparently Truth isn’t a big seller these days.

 

Anyway.

Conspiracies and paranoia and irrational thinking.

Sure.

Be skeptical.

Disbelieve, doubt and look askance.

If you want, look askance twice.

Assume you are being lobbied if not actually lied to if you want.conspiracy anxiety-bw

But in the end make up your own mind using common sense <and try and avoid too many ‘what ifs’ and made up shit>.

And remember a conspiracy theory is just empty space filled with speculation and not facts.

Make sure that description isn’t your mind.

Oh. And make sure you just aren’t paranoid.

Oh. And you may have to recognize that all this poking holes in conventional wisdom and faux science and conspiracy theories will take strength of character, a constant battle for clarity <and common sense> and a boatload of courage to take on people whose only real argument is “so you just don’t get it”.

the web as the problem? (and children’s education)

April 17th, 2013

Well. web is problem mr peabody-and-sherman

 

My project global generation may never go anywhere … but it certainly puts me within some of the most interesting conversations with regard to educating the youth.

 

Let me share the part of the conversations that is a head scratcher <at least to me>.

 

But it is a consistent head scratcher part.

 

Like in the over 90% of the time consistent.

 

My conversations begin with ‘it is a web based global children’s education’ and always <and I mean always> veers very quickly to someone stating unequivocally … “how the world wide web has made things more difficult-worse-insert some negative comment here.”

 

 

The web is destroying reading skills.

 

The web is destroying cognitive skills.

 

The web is spreading criminal (lower value-ethic) attitudes to a broad audience.

 

The web facilitates laziness.

 

The web is diminishing attention spans.

 

The web is giving voice to thoughts that are encouraging the destruction of character.

 

All, some, most and more.

 

The majority of older people want to go back to the “way it was before” because it was better (definition of better would be “we weren’t lazy, had broader attention spans, stronger character, less people thought criminal like thoughts, we read more … ).

 

 

The majority of older people seem to think of the past as ‘simpler.’

 

 

“How many people long for that “past, simpler, and better world,” I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them?” – R.A. Salvatore

 

 

Well. after scratching my head … In the beginning I used to just chuckle and try the “it is what it is today … we cannot ‘undo’ the web so why waste energy looking backwards?”

 

Well.

 

Experience has taught me that (a) that is not the A response (b) that response got me nowhere very fast (c) there are a shitload of people – people with leadership roles, smarts and influence – who are dedicating a shitload of energy into trying to reintroduce past plans of action <albeit at least focusing on those which can often be associated with some success thank god>.

 

So.

 

I have regrouped. While my path of least resistance would seem to be to find those who don’t want to go backwards but instead embrace what is and move forward , alas, I can’t.

 

Maybe I am too stubborn <yes>.

 

Or maybe in some semi smart way I have realized there is a significant group damming up the flow of progress. And this ‘stubborn against change’ group are creating a double fold issue:

 

web is problem teach 

 

(1)    – They are increasing creating an ever increasing gap between age generations.

 

While there is always friction between age generations as innovations occur something like the web (just as the printing press and maybe the automobile did) is a lightning rod of paradigm shifting attitudes and behaviors. Generations have never been further apart.

 

 

(2)    – They are increasing the problem gap.

 

Issues are being exacerbated as they balk at moving forward. No solution behavior translates into issues being permitted to gain momentum (which I feel obligated to point out from a physics perspective that a faster moving object is more difficult to slow down, stop or change direction than one moving at a slower pace).

 

 

Anyway.

 

Let’s try some of this thinking out.

 

 

-          1. Kids read more today than ever before.

 

Oh. And reading is reading.

 

Yeah.

 

Reading is reading (with regard to cognitive skills). I was part of an online TED forum on this subject and I was getting the shit kicked out of me (by people who were arguing the web/texting/twitter was destroying cognitive skills in children) until this gentleman stepped in (or ‘up to the plate’ or ‘to stand by my side’ or whatever phrase indicative of a sigh of relief on my part) and said this:

 

 

 

“but … I don’t even know where to begin with this one. I have a PhD in reading. Not that this necessarily means I’m smart, it’s just that I’ve studied and continue to study reading. So here goes…it doesn’t matter what a person reads, in what form, by which author, on which device. Reading is reading.
My first “Crayola secret” for you is that we all read on 4 different levels: instructional, informational, recreational , and frustrational. Not any one is better than the other. Just read. The definition of comprehension? It’s still being worked on. No one, not even the experts and researchers, can seem to agree.”
- Marti Dryk, PhD

 

 

Amen.

 

Reading is reading. And between tweets, social media, web searches, e-books … and good ole fashioned paper literature … kids are absorbing more words and thoughts than ever before.

 

 

-          2. Young people have always had short attention spans.

 

<note: and I could argue changes in parenting style have affected children’s attitudes and behaviors – including attention span – more than the web>.

 

Regardless.

 

A teen brain has always been a teen brain. As I have written before in that stage of development it simply gets overloaded (with stimulus) and it is wired for short bursts of stimulus. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be teaching the value of “make haste slowly” but on the other hand we do not have any research proof suggesting teaching USING how their brain works (of which the web provides that opportunity where an adult teacher is not readily capable (their brains are built differently) is not effective. If you search for data you will find it is mostly negatively anecdotal (obviously from adults). All I am suggesting is that sometimes a classroom is less effective because we are teaching one way and the recipients natural way of absorbing is another way. That misalignment creates inefficiencies. Why not use a tool and educate in a way that is aligned.

 

 

-          3. The web is not encouraging laziness <or lazy thinking>

 

First.

When we were young we were exactly the same type of ‘lazy thinker’ we older folk claim the web is creating. In our youth we wanted to get to the solution <or whatever would get us the good grade> as quickly as we possibly could. The web is a double edged sword. Quick solutions or answers  are easily at your fingertips. Now. They may not be the right solutions or answers but they are right there. On the other hand … multiple solutions or answers are at your fingertips. Some right and some wrong. I have to be honest … I see as many adults today seeking the ‘shortcut’ to answer as I do the youth.

 

Second.

I actually believe the web is creating a more vigorous thinker … albeit a different type of thinking than we old folk were. The web makes such a myriad of factoids <and semi-factoids> available so quickly that the young are becoming more discernible analyzers, evaluators and thinkers earlier than any generation before.

 

Who gets the credit? The web <note … with some good guidance from teachers>.

 

 

Ok.

 

Moving on. 

 

I always hesitate to say this <as a nonparent> but I am not sure it is any more difficult to bring up children today than it was in the past.

 

Different? Absolutely … more difficult? I think not.

 

Kids are kids.

 

And they have always been kids.

 

They are adults in training.

 

As adults we want what we want. Kids are the same. The web has simply given them a new tool to do what kids do and have always done. The web has probably made it more difficult for a parent to be lazy thinkers (as parents) and at the same time make it more difficult to be “opinion selective” when sharing thoughts.

 

I think of it as a balance sheet. The web has increased both assets and expenses. But it is still a balance sheet.

 

I just tend to believe that the value of the overall balance sheet has increased with the advent of the web.

 

 

gg thinker and girlAnyway.

 

I cannot remember who wrote this <it was an author> … “the web … it is just a matter of time before some kid from North Dakota decides to blow past the popular kids … just blow them out of the water … with something spectacular.”

 

 

Maybe the greatest aspect of the web is the fact it is an equalizer. It can level the playing field so that all kids … whether they are popular or not … whether they live in upper income New York or rural North Dakota … whether … well … whatever … can do something spectacular.

 

And, geez, who the heck wouldn’t want that for our kids?

 

 

I have met the enemy (and it is we)

April 17th, 2013

 

“There is no need to sally forth, for it remains true that those things which make us human are, curiously enough, always close at hand. boston terror photo_by_hahatango_30107Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.” – Pogo Possum

 

Pogo was a cartoon strip character … an amiable, humble, philosophical, personable, everyman opossum. Pogo was “the reasonable, patient, softhearted, naive, friendly person we all think we are.” He was also the wisest (and probably sanest) resident of the cartoon swamp

 

 

Ok.

 

The enemy … as in … ‘we the people.’

 

What happened at the Boston Marathon was a tragedy … a tragedy of human kind more than anything else.

 

A cowardly act committed by a misguided soul <or souls … yet to be determined>.

 

Oh.

 

I would like to take a moment and remind everyone that on that exact same day:

 

-          -  The Syrian Network for Human Rights said 126 people had been killed including 37 in Damascus. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a British-based monitoring group, said 130 people were killed. These figures and reports cannot be verified because media access to Syria is limited.

 

-          -  A suicide bomber in Peshawar, Pakistan killed nine people and wounded dozens more at a Pakistan election campaign rally attended by a former cabinet minister in the northwestern city of Peshawar

 

 

Next.

 

This event reminded me of two others.

 

 

-          – 1996: The Olympics in Atlanta. Two people died and 111 were injured after pipe bombs in a rucksack exploded in the Centennial Olympic Park. Eric Rudolph, an anti-abortion extremist, was jailed for life in 2003 after pleading guilty to the bombing.

 

 

-          –  2008: Marathon in Sri Lanka. A suicide bomber killed 15 people including a government minister when he targeted the start of a marathon race near Colombo in Sri Lanka. The bomb killed 15 people, including a number of runners, and injured 90 others. The Sri Lankan government claimed the militant group Tamil Tigers were responsible for the attack.

 

 

Why did I begin there?

 

Boston Marathon tragedy. It would not surprise me in the least if we were to find there was no foreign influence or nefarious foreign underpinnings but rather this was some wackjob misguided American<s> making some point.

 

That said.

 

The day’s events made me think several thoughts:

 

-          -   An individual with intent to harm will harm. Especially if they are cowardly. If they hide from their actions and hide what they want to do and hide how they will do it … they will find a way to harm innocent people.  I don’t say that to lessen the event or to suggest we shouldn’t be outraged when it happens … just that it can, and inevitably will, happen. The best systems in the world will not stop, 100%, an individual with intent to harm.

 

-          -    Events like a marathon, or any large sporting event, is staffed and are surrounded by very capable people to minimize the effect of large ‘intent to harm’ acts <I hope misguided wackos read that>. Their intent may be to destroy people … their will as well as their bodies. But in the end they will fail. The good of the capable rise to the occasion. And while devastation is … well … devastating. In the moment the doctors, the medical people, the firemen & police … step up to the plate and accept responsibility to manage the devastation and protect citizens from future & additional harm. Not every harmful act can be deterred or stopped … but they can be managed.

 

-          -    Words. Whew. Terror, terrorism … acts of terror. Pick your poison. Who cares? This was the first news media salvo in the war on words … ‘Obama strangely avoided the use of the word “terrorism” to describe the incident in his first comments hours after the bombings, even as White House officials were quick to call it “an act of terror.” But on Tuesday morning he noted that investigators were pursuing it as an “act of terrorism.”’

 

While politicians make every effort to distance themselves from the politics of an event like this <initially> you can almost feel them preparing the groundwork for the moment they can shift into politicking. Their biggest weapon? Words. They wield them like little armies trying to outflank the enemy.

 

My words?

 

It was a tragedy. A tragedy of humans. It is our job, no, our responsibility, to insure it doesn’t create terror. Eliminate the terror and it is not a terrorist act but rather simply an inhuman act. Therefore we do not seek to eliminate terrorists <who claim to have some cause> but rather we seek to eliminate the inhuman <who have no cause anyone would want to stand behind>.

In the end … terror gives them exactly what they want. Let’s not give them what they want.

 

-          -   News on TV. Oh my. Rarely have I been so disappointed in American television. Flipping channels you saw a battle of who could use the word terrorism first, who could speculate <with caveats> the most extreme and who could bludgeon you with whatever they had to bludgeon you with at that moment.

 

If anyone could use a lesson in “less words communicate more” the news industry is it. The American president used less than 3 minutes to say “we are not sure what happened or who did it and we will tell you when we do. Do not jump to conclusions. We will hunt down who did it.” The American news television have spent 30 hours doing that. The difference? News has filled the additional 29 hours and 57 minutes with speculation.

 

-             Where we go from here.

 

First.

The London Marathon official … “we will proceed … send a very clear message to those responsible we will not be deterred.” The Brits have it right. In World War 2 it was “stay calm and carry on” <as bombs dropped nightly>. America is still shocked by domestic acts of terror. It happens other places … not here.  We can either become a paranoid nation driven by fear of “what’s next” or a country that remains calm and carries on. This is our choice.

 

Second.

Unity and the blame game. I imagine I could have just said any actions which create division among Americans. It is a separate bigger thought but philosopher Leszek Kolakowski  outlined something called “the Myth of Unity.” He suggested that there is a type of unity created as the result of a crisis or shock. He also suggests that is an artificial façade of unity which cannot survive where a consciousness of moral and political crisis has seeped through and taken root. I imagine my point is that not all moments are created equal. We can use this moment as one to focus on ongoing unity or diminish it by reverting back to the divisive path we seem to be moving forward on. Once again … this is our choice.  

 

 

Anyway.

 

america one heartbeatAs I stated earlier … I would not be surprised if this was an American tragedy … Americans harming other Americans.

 

Terror these days is created by those close to home. Everywhere. Libyans harming Libyans. Pakistanis harming Pakistanis. Norwegians harming Norwegians. Americans harming Americans.

 

The list goes on and on.

 

We may seek to find enemies from afar … but most of them seem to reside within the confines of our own countries borders.

 

 

“we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.”

 

 

I apologize if anyone believes I am diminishing the tragedy by using a quote from Pogo. But we seem often to seek evil anywhere but where we are <because we believe in good and believe we are a good country>. And even while that may be so <that we are a good country> there will always reside a ‘not good’ minority seeking to find a voice – going to whatever extent they need to do so.

 

Anarchists called terrorism “propaganda by the deed.”

 

Events like this are measured by the deed <by us> and by the propaganda <by them>.

 

 

Ultimately I would like the propaganda to be focused on whatever absurd irrational attitude that drove their behavior. But I am an attitudes & behavior guy.

 

Anarchists, wackjobs … the cowardly … actually have some attitudes or beliefs that drive them to this act of behavior. If we attack those things maybe we can deter people from having the attitude that creates this behavior. That is called “enlightening the ignorant” in my little world.

 

Anyway.

 

I was thinking about this and just began writing.

 

My thoughts go out to everyone and anyone effected by this act.

 

 

 

Enlightened Conflict