==================

“Sureness will always elude you.

The detective will always circle around what he wants, never seeing it whole. We do not go on despite this. We go on because of it.”

—–

Claire DeWitt

==================

<note: this thought piece skews toward learning & teaching our youth but is relevant to all ages & how we learn>

So. Everyone who knows me knows that overcoming ignorance is my thing <I always hesitate to use the ‘soapbox’ word so it’s ‘thing’ here>. In fact … I was tempted to call this post “enlightened Ignorance” <because I love contradictions>.

That said, I found a guy <Jim McGee on Future Tense blog> who has actually not only thought about learning & overcoming ignorance as much as I have but has also created some interesting diagrams which better articulate the dynamic between “learning and ignorance” then I ever could <plus … the diagrams look like something I would have scribbled on a piece of paper>.

What Jim did was to articulate this idea of “boundaries of ignorance” and “circles of knowledge” in a really interesting way. The foundational idea is that by expanding the circle of knowledge you are simultaneously expanding the boundaries of ignorance. In other words, the more things you learn, the more things you become aware you don’t know.

Now that is an awesome incredibly simple concept.

The thinking behind this concept? In the beginning of your knowledge gathering life <probably think mainly children> ignorance always outpaces knowledge and learning <side note:this is just one of the places where I believe people like you and I can make a difference – think about in viewing this first diagram and young people>.

Let me be clear. By ‘people like you and I’ I mean older people with more experience and a better understanding of how expansive true knowledge can be. Why do I say this? Because if you think about this circle diagram concept it means that gaining knowledge can be frustrating.

Frustrating? Frustrating in that every time you learn something ignorance still lies outside your existing knowledge base. This translates into a state of being perpetually dissatisfied <or the glass is never completely full with knowledge> which obviously can be either encouraging or discouraging with a person’s attitude to continue learning. This diagram also makes you think about the role of schools <and do they help or hinder or minimize or maximize>.

Schools fulfill their role in this process by focusing attention on the inside of the circle and keeping youth carefully inside the boundaries. What I mean by that is the credentialing system of education looks backward at what you are supposed to have learned in its testing and measurement of success. I imagine the good news is that a good school environment helps keep you from falling off the edge into material you are unable to understand or appreciate <and in the process hopefully limiting a type of discouragement>.

In addition.

A huge purpose of schools is to introduce students <of any age> to appropriate vocabulary in a logical order … so you can progressively move on to additional learning <this is the same in business>. For example, it’s difficult to skip to more complex physics until you have basic physics understanding. Or. It is difficult to read Tolkein if you haven’t mastered Dr. Suess.

Yet. The danger, or maybe better said, the potential limitations of formal schooling <even when well done> is too much focus on what you already know. In other words, if a person <or child> isn’t pushed out to the boundaries, opportunities become limited for significant new learning. This thought gets compounded by the fact today’s schooling tends to overly protect students from failure and, therefore, from opportunities for deeper learning.

Therefore. Learning and attacking ignorance <and the boundaries of ignorance> is a place where parents and outsiders <beyond teachers> can make a HUGE difference.

I do believe as we get older we come to appreciate, or at least understand, the importance of failure in real learning.

This is important learning beyond educational building blocks and assists in ongoing career development activity and personal intellectual growth. We need to insure children don’t get discouraged with two things:

——–

(1) slow paced learning as they learn necessary foundational elements <they get discouraged because their curiosity never gets sated>

(2) failure to learn everything <they get discouraged because by remaining in the ‘ignorance zone,’ despite having invested energy in knowledge gathering to actually get in that zone, they never feel a satisfaction of ‘something completed’>.

——–

With that thought …. we get to Jim’s second diagram where the circle of knowledge has inconsistent edges/boundaries. Yeah. It is uneven. When I saw this diagram I thought it perfectly reflected not only how people expand their learning knowledge outside a school construct but also my own personal challenge when it comes to increasing knowledge and ignorance.

The problem I have personally always had … is I run the risk of collecting information book by book and article by article and with each one my point of view slightly sways in the direction of what I read. I imagine, upon reflection, over time I have gained a better understanding of my own learning flaws and I tend to treat each piece of new learning as simply a breakthrough in my ignorance and I start gathering information around that particular piece of learning to round out my thought and point of views instead of solely being invested in the ‘breakthrough thought.’ In some variation I imagine most people are like this. This would also mean … uhm … there is no such thing as a well-rounded person.

So. All that said.

Assuming I could actually create a diagram without help from someone who knows how to build diagrams, my personal third diagram would probably be the rounding out of some of the points above. In other words … the spike is the initial breakthrough which inevitably leads to a curiosity driven rounding out of fuller understanding and knowledge. Beyond that rounding out I would imagine there is an inevitable new ‘spike’ somewhere else assuming I had read or heard something that piqued my curiosity. Therefore, and I believe this is the neatest thought, this is a perpetual process with spikes and rounding out but in the end the circle just keeps getting bigger and bigger. In my mind <and personal motto> … this suggests ‘seek truth’ just expands the mind with no end destination ever truly landed upon.

Anyway.

Jim makes a great point in his blog — you become more expert and informed on certain topics at the expense of others. The well rounded circle that might have theoretically characterized the end of classic education system but reality suggests it should be replaced with the profile of an expert (or increased passion on a topic) in some particular domain. Therefore, you will never end up with a perfect circle but rather an ellipse or some wacky trapezoid <or something>. I would also suggest that at the end of high school a teen will have the first diagram and just one spike out <I am making a generalization but you get my thought>. Most kids have some passion that they become comfortable with and expand their knowledge to a point that they are pushing the ignorance boundary out on that topic.

Ok.

Before I leave that thought. I believe every kid is passionate about something. And I believe it is up to us adults to find it <not the kid>. Once again … I do believe we more experienced <older> people have a responsibility here <note: as do more experienced manager in a business organization>.

It is a tricky challenge … but we should be encouraging other “spikes” in the boundary <note: I hesitate to call it rounding out because if you believe this diagram – as I do – we are seeking to look to create the sharp salient effect on the circle and then round out the salient>. As noted earlier we adults are in a balancing act role of encouraging and managing inevitable discouragement <because of the never ending aspect of curiosity>.

We need to think about this. Really think about this.

While it is a fascinating thought process that if we do not take time to think about we are likely to mismanage.

In the end?

We need to recognize that our smallest actions can make a big impact. And that is a responsibility.

Regardless.

Do I believe there should be tools, techniques and specific tactics to take advantage of this “boundary of ignorance” and guide ongoing learning? Shit. I don’t know. I am not an education expert.

I am sure someone can come up with some voodoo technique that gets people to enhance their knowledge base. For me the success lies within the understanding of the process. For when people understand these diagrams and this thought process I believe we are on our way to success. For, as I noted with the first diagram, the issue sometimes comes down to discouragement/encouragement. In our current world people are very focused on “attaining a goal” and what this “boundary of ignorance” suggests is you can never attain the goal.

The cheese gets moved every time you get close to getting it. Maybe the trick is to make learning become visible so you recognize the next step is to further cluster more learning around something that interested you <and encouraging that gathering/clustering>. But. I am not sure how to do that.

So. Here is what I do know <or believe> from this:

–          School systems are built to create a rounded foundational learning and accumulate enough knowledge to “attack” ignorance as you get older.

That is good. And it probably pays for parents and influential people in kid’s lives to understand this. And encourage kids because there is a high risk they will sometimes get frustrated with the basics and want more.

–          In general … learning is discouraging <that is a big thought we need to wrap our heads around>.

Until maybe you attain Albert Einstein status on quantum physics you can never reach your goal. Or maybe better said you are always reaching for something and finding out there is something more to reach for. In people’s formative thinking/learning years it is helpful to remember this.

–          Personal understanding is important.

I recognized pretty early on my learning challenge. Each book contained a thought that could drive my newest “thinking” or point of view. I discovered a way to deal with it.

Do I still fall into the “tunnel vision learning” trap? Sure. Who doesn’t fall in love with a well articulated logical idea on occasion? Am I trapped for long? Nope. I know now to seek out additional learning on thoughts to round off the spikes.

–          Single topic pushing out versus multiple topics pushing out.

There is no formula. I know for a fact my own parents were scared shitless that when I picked up a science fiction book, and then another, and then another, that all I was going to read and learn about was that. But then I would find something else and then that would be my new eternal focus. Ok. Eternal until the next interesting factoid smacked me in the head.

Other people push out on multiple topics at the same time. The only thing I know for sure? Encouragement.

I don’t like the way my own parents encouraged my curiosity <it was a negative approach … “you shouldn’t just read about this .. you know there are other interesting things in the world”> … but, regardless, the intent was good.

Go get more.

More is good.

Okay. Maybe that’s the bottom line to this thought.

More is good.

More learning begets more enlightened ignorance. Question everything. Even your own knowledge.

So. In this case, oddly enough, maybe I am suggesting ignorance is good. Good in that the more you don’t know makes you want to know more. Ok. Maybe it’s the more you know makes you want to know more.

Anyway. In the end … despite the fact I abhor ignorance & fight ignorance everyday from my little corner of the world … after writing this … well … maybe I should say “Up with ignorance!” because it fosters more learning. Go figure.

=============

“For each person there is a sentence — a series of words — which has the power to destroy them.”

—

Philip K. Dick

=================================

“I would hurl words into this darkness and wait for an echo, and if an echo sounded, no matter how faintly, I would send other words to tell, to march, to fight, to create a sense of the hunger for life that gnaws in us all, to keep alive in our hearts a sense of the inexpressibly human.”

—

Richard Wright

====================

Well.

I have written about the power of words, the proper use of words and … well … the waste of good words a zillion times.

Nothing tears me out of my frame more than seeing and hearing someone abuse words.

That said.

I cannot tell everyone how often I am reminded that how you say something is possibly more important than what you say <at minimum I would suggest it is a symbiotic relationship in which the life of ‘what you say’ is in the hands of how you say it>. And ‘how you say it’ doesn’t just encompass context, tone, choice of actual words & phrasing but also internal speaker stuff – intent, purpose and, maybe the most important of all, belief in the words you are saying.

All this becomes incredibly important because when words are used well <and even poorly> in front of a receptive audience they can encourage marching, fighting and a sense of hunger for life that can gnaw at us all.

While I could write an entire book on what makes words tricky … today I will offer a couple of things:

• Words given and words used

Yes. Some words we choose on our own.

But more times than we may like to care … there are words that are given to us.

Huh?

It is easy to think about how there are speechwriters and how some people have to stand up and deliver someone else’s words … but this bleeds into everyday life. In business you can be sitting around a table and people parse out words and offer different ways of saying what you want to say. Parents suggest different words to their children and teachers do it day in and day out. Friends say “don’t say that” or “I wouldn’t say it that way” … in other words … we are given words to say all the frickin’ time.

Suffice it to say … not all words given to you are actually good words for you to use. Words have to match personal beliefs to be delivered effectively.

I was reminded of this the other day listening to Trump deliver a speech he obviously <a> had written for him and <b> didn’t agree with. Trump is incapable of keeping his thoughts to himself, or of cloaking his speech with words that could disguise his true thoughts.

Here is what I think I know from years of giving speeches and seeing people give speeches with regard to effective use of words and presenting words — intended thoughts versus underlying principles.

In general most people working together share some basic principles. These are the foundations for specific words. Therefore when given words to speak the shared principles kind of ground the tone and delivery so that they don’t sound painful or distasteful coming out of the speaker’s mouth – just maybe a little uncomfortable on occasion.

Without shared principles the words have no foundation … they are delivered hollow of anything. They are just empty words. And empty words sound … well … empty. They may be the actual right words to say but the wrong person is trying to say them – which hen strips them of any meaning.

Here is what I know about empty words — empty words are evil.

==

“And empty words are evil.”

—

Homer

<The Odyssey>

==

They have been uttered full of nothing … even though they possibly were crafted by a lot of something <passion, thought, insight, whatever>. But as they eased out from between the lips of the deliverer they were stripped of anything meaningful and simply become platitudes.

I could argue that this insures inevitable invisibility <unless some listeners/pundits attempt to parse out each word as meaningful and full of some meaning & intent – where there actually was none of that>.

These words are not harmless because in their emptiness they have become a version of evil. Evil in that they have not prompted any thought, any idea … any new passion. They are evil in that they have not inspired anything new … and everything old, or that which exists now, remains unchanged.

That’s what evil does … it fights change and thrives on inertia.

Those of us who give words should be incredibly careful, and smart, on who we give them to. Just because a word is right it may not be right for that person.

The second.

• Words can have a life of their own

Words are their own people with minds of their own. This means that they may not always remain a true reflection of the speaker’s thoughts. Once they leave the lips and they enter into the ether … well … they can be chameleons. They often take on the hues of the environment.

=========================

“Words are chameleons, which reflect the color of their environment.” 

——

Learned Hand

==============================

Whew.

This makes choosing words even more difficult. More difficult in that a word can mean several things at exactly the same time … what it means in your head, what it means as it leaves your lips, what it means as it floats thru the environment <slowly, or quickly, changing as it is bombarded with contextual environment> and what it means as it is heard.

What made me think of this was watching a Trump rally speech, a day after watching a scripted teleprompter speech, where I was reminded of the power of context. Context, and delivery, can strip a word of meaning or it can dress it in whatever clothes you would like.

For example … if I use the word ‘unity’ and, yet, it is used within an overall “us versus them” driven narrative it suggest not an overall unity but rather a unity of “us only.”

Huh.

One would think unity would be a word well used in almost any environment.

Unite. Blend. Coalesce. Combine. Fuse. Join. Merge. These words refer to the bringing or coming together of several different elements to form a whole.

Out of many one. E pluribus unim.

Unite actually comes for the Latin word ‘usus’ which means one.

Combine means to bring together in close union … more general in application than unite and does not emphasize as strongly the completeness of the process of coming together. In other words it just places things together but don’t guarantee the full integration.

Blend even more strongly than combine suggests a mingling of different elements. Unlike combine it specifically refers to the obscuring or harmonizing of various components.

Merge, like blend, suggest the loss of spate identity of ingredients, but does not imply the physical act of making or mingling together different elements.

Join is the broadest term of this group can mean to become part of to bring together or connect or to put together in close contact.

Fuse means to join by or as if by melting together – it also implies some aspect of ‘forcing or forging.’ Fuse in other contexts implies a solid lasting connection.

Coalesce suggests a gradual or natural coming together. In extended senses coalesce suggests two separate courses that gradually merge into one. .

In other words I can say unity in a number of ways or even qualify unity with another likeminded word all of which suggests this is a multi-dimensional challenge — constantly in flux. When Trump says unity it doesn’t create gold in people’s minds … it … well … creates shit.

===================

“I’m fucking King Midas in reverse here. Everything I touch turns to shit.”

Tony Soprano

===============

Regardless.

I imagine my real point is that words without their corners knocked off, or ground down, can be good words … and used for good.

They need to be shaped, protected and guided through the environment instead of being flippantly flung out assuming a basic stimulus – response world.

I clearly have a healthy respect for words. And I, frankly, have a healthy respect for the responsibility of words handed to someone.

Used well they can nudge the world.

Used hollowly they are evil.

Used poorly they are just wasted.

—————

“Words…  

They’re innocent, neutral, precise, standing for this, describing that, meaning the other, so if you look after them you can build bridges across incomprehension and chaos. But when they get their corners knocked off, they’re no good any more… I don’t think writers are sacred, but words are.  

They deserve respect.  

If you get the right ones in the right order, you can nudge the world a little or make a poem which children will speak for you when you’re dead.”

==

Tom Stoppard

——————-

I am not a speechwriter but I have been involved in, and seen, hundreds of presentations and speeches. I can say, unequivocally, the same word can nudge the world, be hollow or just be a waste of breath depending on who utters it.

You learn in business, fairly quickly, that just because a word is universally good <like love, or unity, or hope> it can quickly lose its ‘goodness’ depending on who delivers the word and how they deliver it.

You learn in business, fairly quickly, that while the audience matters you cannot ignore the deliverer of the words.

An angry speaker struggles to speak of love authentically.

A passionate speaker struggles to speak of mistakes authentically.

A storyteller speaker struggles to speak with the intent to inspire energy authentically.

You learn in business, fairly quickly, you use words, and give words, with ‘authentic delivery’ in mind. And, yes, that means that sometime you sacrifice some words despite the fact you know your audience yearns to hear that word.

You learn this, in business or in Life, or you will waste a shitload of words.

Anyway.

I would say this about anyone … but Trump is painful for me to listen to … as he either misuses words or purposefully abuses words <or is given words that he abuses>.

But I can honestly say that I, a word guy, feel insulted when I am asked to imagine that Trump believes what he says whenever he is persuaded to sound like what he believes the president of the United States is supposed to sound like.

I have lots of gripes with President Trump but the fact he abuses words so shamelessly is a crime to me.

And that may be one of the biggest crimes he will commit because words have a power stronger than a single bullet or bomb.

—-

President Donald Trump on Thursday denounced the removal of monuments to Confederate figures as “sad” and “so foolish:

“Sad to see the history and culture of our great country being ripped apart with the removal of our beautiful statues and monuments. You can’t change history, but you can learn from it.”

Uhm.

“Beautiful statues and monuments.”

He is referring to memorials to Confederate leaders as if they were lawn decorations which, if taken away, would make my perfectly coiffed yard seem a little ‘less than’ compared to my neighbor’s yard.

Please don’t take way my hand made gnomes!

This is horrible.

Simply horrible.

The lack of any intellectual awareness from Donald J Trump continues to be stunning no matter how often we are exposed to it.

Despite what our 140 character intellectual-in-chief may suggest not all the 1,500 symbols of the Confederacy in public spaces <source: SPLC> are created equal — 718 are monuments.

Look.

No sane person blames Trump for a divided country … although one could argue he is clearly exacerbating division on what used to be clearly what was right and what is wrong … and dark skinned people versus white people.

Okay. He is exacerbating divisive thinking.

However.

What he is being blamed for is not offering moral leadership in the discussion.

If anything he is stripping the conversation of any morality to suggest a naked choice. If only it were that simple. His vagueness begs people to fill in the hollowness with whatever nonsense they want to believe.  And then, to make it worse, he offers his own intellectually vapid nonsense.

This is not a vapid simple issue but I will still offer how Bruce would resolve this:

• This statue thing is not a democrat versus republican issue it is a country issue. We should celebrate soldiers who died fighting bravely for what they believed was right.

We should never celebrate the leaders who made bad decisions, no matter how much we want to justify their difficult personal choices, which created the deaths of individual brave soldiers. If I go to Europe and world war 1 battlefields I see memorials to dead soldiers on both sides … but I don’t see statues of German generals.

• oddly … in a world in which we throw around absurd words like ‘snowflakes’ and ‘politically correct’ and ‘erasing history’ far too often … we seem to forget there are winners and there are losers.

We should celebrate winners, particularly the ones who stood for something right, rather than celebrate losers <who stood for something wrong>.  I want statues of Abraham Lincoln … not Jefferson Davis.  I want statues of Grant not Lee.

• Statues dedicated to solders bravery stay up … no matter which side they were on.

Statues that celebrate leaders of the ‘wrong side’ should be in museums as ‘lessons in history.’  I could argue any confederate statue erected in the 1910’s & 1920’s should simply be destroyed because their intent was to celebrate segregation <and this would eliminate something like 50% of monuments>.

“Sad to see the history and culture of our great country being ripped apart with the removal of our beautiful statues and monuments.”

Trump is an idiot.

Okay.

He is stupid.

Yes. I just said stupid.

I say stupid in this case because not only is he intellectually hollow & amoral he also cannot seem to swim out of the shallow end of the thinking pool to see how he could appeal to the people who deemed him worthy of voting for him … and elevating them and their thinking.

He continues to miss opportunities to make a point with regard to what he suggested he stood for <the forgotten everyday schmuck>. In this situation if he stood up and was able to put any semblance of a thought together in his word salad way he would say “the everyday soldier who served bravely should never be dishonored by the flaws of their leaders. Families sent their sons and many paid the ultimate price bravely. Memorials should stand to honor their families, them and their choice to serve. Statues of their leaders, who led them for a cause which was not for what makes America great, deserve to only remain in museums so that we can learn the lessons of their mistakes.”  

While this is an incredibly complex issue, taking statues down isn’t about rewriting country history … it is about rewriting family choices and family history. If I pull them down indiscriminately I dishonor families who lost sons and take away a part of their personal history.

We need to separate the individual sacrifices made, honor them, and dishonor the larger cause and leaders who propagated it.

Sigh.

We will inevitably see hundreds of intellectual, and semi-intellectual, articles written about culture, the civil war and how a country faces its demons. People will spin this so many different ways trying to justify Trump words or demonize Trump lack of thinking you will get dizzy.

Stop spinning and take a deep breath and think with a little clarity.

I have stated ad nausea, this should be a debate of ideas and thinking because, in the end, the solution shouldn’t be some simplistic ‘take them down’ or ‘leave them up’ but rather an overall understanding and semi-alignment on the purpose of wherever we land decision-wise as a country.

And maybe that is my larger point today … Trump is not leading the discussion … he is offering the simplistic tripe of some guy on his 6^th beer at the corner of the bar.

Donald J Trump is not just a horrible president … he is a horrible man … a horrible leader … and I even, at times, think he is a horrible American.

Complex issues demand leaders to not offer simplistic tripe which appeals to one sliver of America.

Complex issues demand leaders to be their best and appeal to the better aspects of people … and America in this case.

In business … complex issues demand business leaders to develop solutions which unite an organization and show a way forward.

And let me use business leadership to head off my good friends who will send me notes about my ‘white guilt’ and ‘bleeding heart liberal inclinations.’

I am president of a 400 person company. I just told about 75 of my employees, me <an old white guy> told them, that they should lighten up and look at those statues as beautiful statements of our history blessing the appearance of our public parks.

“… start a conversation within their beautiful shadows.”

Uhm.

Seems to me about 75 of my employees may look at me and say “fuck you old white man” which doesn’t necessarily breed organizational unity.

Look.

I am an everyday schmuck. I think the last Confederate statue I can actually remember paying attention to was in New Orleans <which means I have most likely walked by a dozen others and never even noticed>. But that’s not the point … I am not a leader nor am I the leader of a 330 million person country.

Complex issues reside in the deep end of the intellectual pool and good leaders learn to swim well enough to venture to that end of the pool. Trump can only stand in the shallow end.

….. white nationalist torch march in charlottesville ………

================================

but Charlottesville sad!

President Trump tweet

===============

“… disgusted, and everyone needs to do better than this infantile bullshit because I for one have had it with senseless hostility … it’s not activism, it’s not in support of anything, it’s nothing but sickness and cruelty. I’ve had it with people behaving like … animals.

Get it together and grow up.”

—-

Kat Timpf

============================

Your opinion is not my reality.

–

Steve Maraboli

=======================

Ok.

The last couple of days in America have been sad days.

There are some real douchebags out there in the world and sometimes it seems like their little douchebag club is growing.

On the front lines of this douchebaggery are the ones who marched on Friday night <the “Unite The Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia> with torches.

On the front lines of is douchebaggery are the members of the KKK, neo-Nazis, and other armed militia groups who walked the Charlottesville streets on Saturday adorned with Confederate flags and in full Nazi regalia.

To me … these are people who want to see the world burn.

To me … these are people who don’t really give a damn about a larger sense of humanity but rather only seek dominance.

To me … these are the people who, quite disturbingly, showcase the trappings of 1930’s Nazi torch bearing marches and KKK torch bearing gatherings … in other words … they reflect the trappings of a miserable point in history and humanity.

Now.

It certainly doesn’t help that the President continues to showcase an extreme pettiness, an extreme lack of cultural & society insight and an extreme inability to articulate the most basic accepted norms of a civil society … which encourages douchebaggery.

All that said.

While I am a relentless critic with regard to President Trump’s lack of leadership skills I will not be today. Yesterday I just saw a man who is what he is and you just cannot ask more of someone who is just capable of who and what they are.

He will never be inspirational. He doesn’t have an inspirational bone in his body. And you know what? That’s okay.

It’s frustrating to watch <because I want more>.

It’s sad to watch <because I expect more>.

But what is most frustrating from a business guy’s perspective <me> are the missed opportunities. This administration misses opportunity after opportunity to … well … lead. They miss opportunity after opportunity to forward their own message in a ‘unity’ type way.

It is frustrating because while I don’t think Donald J has one inspirational bone in his body, that he is painfully transactional and his sweet spot is vague divisiveness … I do believe he could stand by his message and do so in a way that can … well … appeal to some of the greater aspects within America.

Sigh.

He is what he is. His ‘tone & message’ instincts are horrible.

He is much more comfortable, and better, at delivering a divisive message than he is offering a uniting, or unity, message <simply saying “unity” or “we should be united” is kind of cost of entry simplistic “sure … whatever” type verbiage>.

He is much more comfortable, and better, at delivering a self promoting message <what he has done, how good he is and hyperbole offered in a fantastically third person way>.

In general he is, 95% of the time, incoherent and rambling and, the worst of all, vague. Vague is horrible the majority of the time but in a moment which people seek clarity it is the worst because more often than not it falls on ears as platitudes and creates spaces in between for people to second guess and find what they want to hear.

When forced out of his ‘vagueness’ comfort zone he uses words like he is checking boxes.

I would argue that his most important speeches are a reflection of how he runs his businesses – technically within the lines. He uses many of the right words but they always seem to edge along the razor thin line of right versus wrong. One of Trump’s most effective defenders on TV, conservative Ben Ferguson, is spectacular in his technical defense. He takes Trump words and places them on a blank piece of paper and says “what is wrong with these words?” or “we should view these words literally.”

Well played on his part.

I have two words for him – Fresh Eggs.

Huh?

When I was at J Walter Thompson one of our most famous presentations was called Fresh Eggs. Client after client we would take a couple of minutes when discussing communication and how to effectively communicate thoughts to show them ‘Fresh Eggs.’

Simplistically … I can design the words ‘fresh eggs’ with some fancy font perfectly art directed on some computer graphics program and print it off … or I can take a battered piece of water stained cardboard and hand paint Fresh Eggs on it.

The same words placed in completely different context communicating two different ‘feelings.’

That is the difference between a Trump technical pragmatic delivery of some words and words well delivered.

It would behoove Ben, as well as Trump administration speechwriters & advisers, to think about that a second.

Regardless.

All that means is that Trump offers his speechwriters and advisors ‘negative space.’ Spaces in which you shouldn’t ask him to offer words or thoughts. That is okay. If it were me … I can deal with what I know and can see. It is the shit I don’t know and can’t see that kills me.

And this is where I focus my criticism. The speechwriters and advisers. They know the negative space and are intimately involved with it. In addition they know that there are certain “moments” which provide opportunities for the president. The opportunities don’t have a rhythm nor do they arise according to plan but opportunities are opportunities and you either seize them or lose them.

They need to recognize that Trump will instinctively gravitate to his ‘positive space’ any time he can. For example … in his Charlottesville ‘speech’ he gravitated to his positive space which is not only tone deaf but shows a complete lack of linkage to anything and everything he has said before:

The president, in his responses, bemoaned that the clashes were happening when “our country is doing so well in so many ways”, citing low unemployment and the renegotiation of trade deals. He noted: “We have so many incredible things happening in our country, so when I watch Charlottesville, to me it’s very, very sad.”

How could his advisors have missed he would naturally do this?

He has been the ‘carnage’ king. America is in a shithole and it is up to me to fix the shithole Obama put us in. He has been saying this for almost 2 years. Charlottesville was a perfect example of his self-proclaimed shithole that he, and only he, can pull us out of.

I would have given him some words <because I know this is his positive space> to exploit his whole shithole narrative.

Look.

I think Trump is a horrible hollow leader but even I need him to do well and I would give him words to do his job well because … well … country above any individual.

His advisors and speechwriters are failing him in that they seem to not be able to bridge what he is capable of doing to words which make America see what they are capable of.

Lastly.

Trump and Charlottesville are intertwined. I am not suggesting he is solely responsible for things like Charlottesville but I will suggest, as president, I want him to assume personal responsibility for Charlottesville.

———–

 “I think that what we are witnessing here has always been simmering beneath the surface, and now has been emboldened and enabled by the Trump administration’s politics and rhetoric.”

Steve Thomas, from Lynchburg, Virginia, who also protested against the far-right groups

—————-

He needs to understand that he is supposed to be the face of America and that what he says, or doesn’t say, reflects the … well … face of America. This is the burden of his responsibility. He needs to understand that his words really do matter and that:

• We seem to have no problem, as a country, condoning violence by black people.

• We seem to have no problem, as a country, condoning violence by Muslim people.

• We seem to struggle a bit, as a country, to condone violence by white people.

Anyway.

I know what Trump was trying to say but the way he said it made it sound like, in America, all ideologies are created equal. That neo-Nazis have as much right to exist as anyone else and it is only when they are violent that they become abhorrent.

I personally don’t think he, and his advisors, should act surprised that a lot of people find that unacceptable.

I am not a speechwriter but I do offer some words I believe he could have said which would have captured his empty platitude-like thinking with regard to America but still offered some real nods to real issues that we real everyday schmuck-like Americans should be thinking of.

—————–

<offered in as many Trump-like words I can stomach trying to offer>

Instead of offering what will now be referred to for history as the “many sides speech” I would have offered an “all lives smatter” speech.

——

I would like to take a minute and talk with Americans about Charlottesville because this is bigger than Charlottesville and it is not something we can ignore nor should we ignore it.

First.

Our constitution is a beautiful thing which should not be used for ugly things.

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom of violence.

Freedom of speech doesn’t mean the one who shouts the loudest or tries to ‘look the most powerful’ is the rightest or the ‘winner.’

Freedom of speech is freedom to use words, not fists and bottles and carrying shields and clubs.

Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom to hate but freedom to listen, argue and find opportunities to love and unite despite disagreeing.

I condone freedom of speech but do not condone, in the strongest possible terms, violence and hate using freedom of speech as an excuse.

Second.

We lost 3 lives today.

One person using their freedom of speech and two people who were serving to protect freedom of speech.

I offer you three words today.

All lives matter.

That doesn’t mean black people do not have real issues we need to discuss.

That doesn’t mean white people do not have real issues we need to discuss.

That doesn’t mean any race, religion, gender do not have real issues we need to discuss.

No person should be forgotten and no issue should be forgotten.

We, as Americans, should be united if not simply because:

• All issues matter because all Americans matter.

• All issues are important because all Americans matter.

• And all issues should not be forgotten, should be heard and should be discussed … because all lives matter.

This weekend, what we saw in Charlottesville, is wrong. It is bad. Not just because there was violence, not just because there was bigotry and hatred but because it was an example of where it seems like everyone, American citizens forgot to understand and believe that America is great because Americans believe all lives matter.

We forgot all issues matter.

We forgot hatred has no place in what makes America great.

I stated on day one I would stand for the forgotten American. And today I stand in front of you to say that I will stand for the forgotten Americans, all Americans, and the forgotten & ignored issues … but I will not stand for violence, bigotry and hate.

As your president I will stand for all lives and all issues.

I say that as today we had gathered here in Maryland to discuss that all veterans lives matter and their issues mattered enough that we did something.

<something like that>

Note: this maybe took me 15 minutes to scribble out … it isn’t right but, surely, a professional speechwriter could offer the President something similar & right, don’t you think?

———————————————

This weekend watching Charlottesville was … well … just bad. Just as I stated when discussing some of the Trump campaign events … it isn’t what America s supposed to be. That doesn’t mean it isn’t what America is … but … I tend to believe it is not what we want to be.

I wanted someone to have the moral fortitude to stand up and say “America, stop. Starting today we need to stop violence and start talking civilly. Start admitting all colors, genders, races and religions have issue they want to discuss, and should be heard, and stop denying everyone has a voice at the table.”

Yes.

I am frustrated the Trump administration misses opportunity after opportunity to offer us not only the high road but the light to show us a better way.

But yesterday put a period on my belief that Trump is what he is … and we should stop expecting something that he is not.

It is what it is.

And now it is up to the people around him to accept he is what he is and provide him the proper tools, words & thoughts <which he cannot come up with on his own>, so that we will be … well … make America great.

================

“Hey, I’m using Guam as a token in a game of chicken with North Korea and as a result putting thousands of your constituents at risk but, hey, at least you’re famous!”

Donnie Two Scoops

==================

Ok.

This whole North Korea and United States thing is dangerously bizarre. The most bizarre thing is the consistency with which Donald J Trump has offered us … from the time he became a candidate until today. He has consistently cared about one thing – how he looks, how he is perceived and how his ‘brand’ is viewed.

He is a self stylized ‘big brained, strong, best whatever’ brand <with, as we would say in the marketing business, dubious functional capabilities, i.e., not really sure it does what it is supposed to do when you buy it>.

Everything he does and says is meant to meet one objective – his brand.

Bizarrely, and justifiably, everyone takes all of his word salad and what we perceive as his thinking and parse it all out with regard to “what does this mean for America and how is this in America’s best interest.”

This is misguided and, worse, it normalizes his behavior & words by suggesting there is something there other than his own brand  building.

Everyone should never forget … and “best.”

Period.

Full stop.

Think about it for one second within this whole bizarre situation.

Guam is a potential target <only because North Korea couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn if asked to> … but the Guam governor will be famous! … and rich! … and applauded for that huuuuuuuge boost in tourism <without having to spend any money>!

That represents the thought process of the United States president – he sees only trees <things that are representative of what he believes make up his brand forest>.

 

“Don’t worry about a thing. They should have had me eight years ago…I have to say, Eddie, you’re going to become extremely famous. All over the world they’re talking about Guam and they’re talking about you.

And your tourism, I can say this, your tourism is going to go up like tenfold with the expenditure of no money, so I congratulate you.

It looks beautiful, you know I’m watching … it’s such a big story in the news.”

————-

call transcript of <President> Donald J Trump to Governor of Guam

 

Well.

I am sometimes stunned by how much we are willing to turn ourselves into pretzels normalizing some incredibly bizarre behavior and words.

It is like we spend hours sifting through the verbal garbage for the one or two items which we can wash off and show that it wasn’t all garbage. And all the while we do that we seem to overlook the person who threw out the garbage … who is most likely standing in the window of their house chuckling “look at all those people paying attention to my garbage.”

Pick your Trump interview, press conference or tweet. He is consistent with creating a brand image using an inconsistent message <garbage>.

This is not only nuts but bizarre.

Yes.

North Korea is a threat … but think of them as a threat like … well … maybe Trump would have been had he gone to a public school and had no money. A little bully wishing to be with the big kids and big money. The only thing this little bully sincerely believes in is himself … not real solutions nor doing the right thing.

The only right thing to do is to build his brand.

And while everyone casts about for ways to explain his ‘unpredictability’ I would argue he has always been predictably consistent in that he will do and say anything that he believes builds his brand.

And, no, no one should confuse this consistency with consistency in policy … because he has no policy nor ideology beyond ‘ideology of self.”

Just think about what I just said as you ponder “I want to ‘de-nuke’ the world <yet I want the largest nuclear capabilities in the world, expanding them, and willing to let Russia upgrade its nuclear power and, of course, Israel can keep its ‘nukes’>.  Or how about … well … repeal Healthcare … oh … no … repeal & replace … oh … no … ‘may be un-Republican to say but we need to take care of everyone’ … oh … no … ‘let Obamacare just die.’

Pick your policy issue. He is consistent with his brand and inconsistent with anything else.

I am not diminishing the North Korea issue but I am suggesting, in this case, the only thing that matters to Trump is that he gets to brandish “my generals” and toy soldiers and ‘nukes’ because he likes to associate his brand with them.

And, all the while real global challenges are being discussed, Donald J. spews a verbal smorgasbord of incoherent vaguery which even the everyday schmuck like me  views as “sounds strong … but what exactly does he mean?”

It sounds an awful lot like grade school playground strutting & bluster.

That said.

I cannot remember a time when China suggested our president was a victim of “emotional venting” but I also cannot remember a time when we had a president who put his brand above … well … reality.

<sigh>

I imagine the difficult in all of his is that Donnie Two Scoops has his own alternative reality in which he has attached his brand to America itself in his own head and, therefore, justifies all of his brand behavior as “representative of the America brand.”

I stated this during the primary phase of his whole sad Trump election story that someone needed to separate Trump from “America” … and no one did.

This is nuts.

Nuts with a dangerous edge.

This all feels like it is one big reality show. I am not suggesting North Korea doesn’t represent a real potential threat <although you don’t see South Korea, China, Japan, etc gearing up for any foreseeable threat beyond their normal status> but this all feels like Donnie is treating this like a great big TV show where he gets great ratings and everyone tunes in every night just to see him.

The problem is that unlike a TV show which has an executive producer who is crafting the entire scenario and scripting it out … the other main person on this show doesn’t have the TV script. Therefore within the reality TV show Trump is producing there is an unknown. Within that unknown resides the unforeseen, the human error in judgement and the misunderstanding.

On a TV show that can create ratings and little downside … and certainly no downside where people can actually physically get hurt.

In the real world this can create ratings but offers a potential huge downside where a lot of people can actually physically get hurt.

Look.

I do not really think nuclear war is likely. The big boy at the table <or ‘the principal at the grade school playground’>, China, has basically taken that off the table by a simple stance … “North Korea, if you attack you are on your own, and USA, if you act preemptively, we will consider that an attack on us.”

That said.

Can anyone really say it’s not a possibility at all?

Nope.

And that is nuts.

And it is on the edge of insanity because it well … walks like a reality TV duck, sounds like a reality TV duck which makes me think this whole Trump TV bluster and posturing is … well … a reality TV duck.

And while Trump supporters will come out of the woodwork crafting semi-logical scenarios in which Donnie Two Scoops words are strategic and smart and necessary is there anybody who really doesn’t believe the rest of the world is looking at America going “WTF.”

Or, as one of the more conservative websites stated this morning:

 Sanity.

Is there anybody who doesn’t believe that world leaders are whispering behind our backs now, discussing “the United States problem,” and wondering if this great experiment of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people has gone off the rails?

This North Korea problem is complex and while we can blame past presidents if we want <which is wasted energy> or want to wave our hands in the air moaning “why do I have to deal with his mess made by someone else” I want a president who doesn’t really care how we got here and why we are in the situation we are in … I want a president to … well … be sane. Be mature. And be better than the everyday schmuck like me.

I want a president less concerned with trees and more concerned with the forest … specifically the USA and global forest and not his own trees.

=====================

“Are you prattling about an instinct of self-preservation? An instinct of self-preservation is precisely what man does not possess.

An ‘instinct’ in as unerring and automatic form of knowledge. A desire is not an instinct. A desire to live does not give you the knowledge required for living. And even man’s desire to live is not automatic: your secret evil today is that that is the desire you do not hold. Your fear of death is not a love of life and will not give you the knowledge needed to keep it.

Man must obtain his knowledge and choose his actions by a process of thinking, which nature will not force him to perform.

Man has the power to act as his own destroyer–and that is the way he has acted through most of history.”

―

Ayn Rand

==============

Ok.

Discussing business leadership is … well … interesting.

Its also <slightly> interesting I used an Ayn Rand quote to open a thought on business leadership.

Why?

Almost everything Rand espoused focused on the individual and self-interest … and leadership inherently focuses on the group and ‘making the tide rise higher for all … sometimes at the expense of a higher one.”

In addition … <simplistically> the central thesis of Rand’s philosophy is that unfettered self-interest is good and altruism is destructive.

I am no going invest a lot of time on Rand’s thinking <of which I have mixed feelings about> but because I speak to many business leaders the balance of ‘business democracy, organizational culture, and business autocracy, i.e., someone has to make a decision at some point and organizational consensus is most likely not the most effective way to generate good decisions, I will spend a moment on Rand.

In my eyes, far too often, Americans tie the Rand philosophy of ‘supreme self-reliance devoted to the pursuit of supreme self-interest’ to a simplistic version of core American ideals: individual freedoms & hard work. The whole premise is based on the promise a better world is available if people can simply pursue their own self-interest without regard to the impact of their actions on others. That thought is usually followed by “this works because everyone is simply pursuing their own self-interest as well.”

Unfortunately what this ignores is a successful organization’s ultimate mission: “e pluribus unim” <out of many one>.

Unfortunately what this ignores is successful cultures typically exhibit a ‘twitch muscle’ which automatically makes 95% of people to find greater satisfaction in contributing to ‘the team’ rather than solely finding individual success.

All of this matters when discussing business leadership and leading organizations.

Now.

That said.

I come back to a key line in the opening quote:  an ‘instinct’ in as unerring and automatic form of knowledge. A desire is not an instinct.

In a world in which we tend to want to oversimplify things far too often “business instincts” get stripped of any context or the rich & royal hues most typically associated with ‘good business instincts.’ We also strip leadership down to its barest and far too often suggest the importance of ‘’good business instincts’ as some superior skill <and instincts are not a skill but an attribute> inherent in good leadership.

I would suggest we would be much better off stripping leadership down to not one thing but rather discussing a backbone which makes leadership stand tall.

Look.

A shitload of people can lead.

An even larger shitload of people think they can lead.

And even smaller shitload of people can actually lead well.

And while there are a shitload of well written and thoughtful piece on business leadership characteristics I would suggest that all business leadership often comes down to your ‘backbone’ of actual skills with regard to three things: developing an effective vision, having a consistent business philosophy <business acumen> & instincts.

Many leaders have some skill in one of these three, some actually are good at two out of the three but the best leaders are good at all three <with some extraordinary skill at either the visionary or instincts>.

I point out the vision and instincts aspects because it is that ‘dance’ which … well … can make a business dance. Some people talk about strategy & tactics but this is a little different. This is kind of a step up from that.

This is kind of like being able to envision the 5 lane highway which leads to a destination you kind of envision and then actually have the instincts which enable you to instinctually shift lanes, shift speeds and avoid everyone else on the highway in the moments that matter.

Suffice it to say … working with someone who understands, and can manage to, vision and someone who has good instincts is fairly rare — and all three even rarer.

By the way, as I have written before … most people who vocally espouse the fact <belief> they have good instincts tend to have shitty instincts. In fact … I could generalize relatively safely by suggesting anyone who verbalizes they have good instincts … most likely, in reality, do not have good instincts <good instinctual leaders & decision makers tend to have the humility to have an innate sense to keep their mouths shut about any instinctual behavior and focus on verbalizing functional abilities to do shit in certain situations>.

Anyway.

Someone can actually be a pretty good leader and not be very good at all these things.

For example … one of my best bosses wasn’t particularly good at the vision aspect but had an incredibly strong sense of ‘right versus wrong’ with regard to business philosophy and excellent instincts which tended to permit a shitload of progress <if not particularly visionary progress>. I would note he was pretty good at hiring some people who were visionary and combined with what he was good at he had a nice ability <albeit sometimes a lite too pragmatic> to tighten some loose vision and … well … get shit done.

For example … one of my best bosses was an incredible visionary with an excellent ability to set everyone’s sights on the ‘horizon’ coupled with a strong business philosophy of “this is the kind of shit we will do and how we will conduct ourselves in doing it” he could get people focused and emotionally connected with what they had to do. However … his instincts were not so hot. I would note he had a nice ability to surround himself with people with good instincts <maybe not enough but some key people> which permitted him to pick out what to do from options resented by good instinctual managers rather than have to depend on his own instincts.

I imagine my point here is twofold <1> leaders who are good at all three of these things are not a dime a dozen and <2> the good leaders who are not good at all three of these things tend to recognize where they are a little weaker and are smart enough, and confident enough, to surround themselves with people who do have those skills.

I imagine the greater leadership philosophical point here is that good business leaders don’t really fight truth.

They see truth. Accept truth. And work within the parameters of truth.

==========================

 

“Stop opposing the truths.

The truth is truth no matter how you take it. It is not going to be changed for your inconvenience.”

―

Bikash Bhandari

==================

I point out truth because, of all things, leadership is reliant on a leader being able to see truth … and not just what they want to see.

I point out truth because, of all things, vision and instincts are driven more by truth, knowledge and ‘learning’, than by any nebulous “I have good instincts.’

I point out truth because, of all things, people actually have a natural inclination to work for the mutual benefit of an organization … they like to cooperate and collaborate … and truth has an incredible ability to bond together the largest most disparate organization as well as offer the initial burst of energy which pushes organizations forward out of trouble and toward something better when a leader actually makes a decision.

Be wary of the verbose ‘I am good at this’ leader because … well … as with anything else in Life & business … leaders have to be ‘good’ at a number of things not just some simplistic self-interest driven accolade.

===================

A lot can happen in 6 months, but I never expected this.

–

tumblr 22:51 pm

=================

“A Nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious.”

–

Marcus Tullius Cicero

===================

Well.

I almost called this “day <fill in the blank>of the shitshow” but I didn’t.

Look.

I am no genius but at the Trump 100 day mark I suggested the second 100 days would look a lot like the first 100 days  <inconsistent, ineffective & incompetent> for several very sound, rational reasons. And as we close in on 200 days … well … I look like a genius. And … just to share my conclusion if you want to stop reading now … I envision the next 100 days just as hollow as the last 200 days for almost exactly the same reasons.

Until the main reason is solved <quality people in necessary staff positions> the lean, mean and obscenely incompetent current white house staff will remain incredibly competent at … well … doing nothing truly meaningful <but maintaining an appearance of disruptive thinkers>.

I will ignore the tweets … entertaining but absurd.

I will ignore the unnecessary hyperbole … entertaining and absurd.

I will ignore the rambling nonsensical monologues … not as entertaining and even more absurd.

I will ignore the bizarre foreign policy steps … entertaining to watch but absurdly dangerous in reality.

However … I will pay attention to leadership and results.

I have to assume despite the fact the President claims a finely tuned white house which has done more than any other resident since maybe FDR … this whole adventure has not been exactly how he planned it to go.

For someone who likes winning I am not so sure this kind of ‘winning’ is what he had in mind.

For someone who claims to be ‘the best negotiator’ <or at least better than anyone in government prior to him> I am not so sure this kind of ‘negotiating results’ or even public glimpses into his negotiating skills is what he had in mind.

For someone who claimed “I alone can fix it” I am not so sure this is the kind of ‘fixing’ he had in mind.

==============

“Deals are my art form. Other people paint beautifully or write poetry. I like making deals, preferably big deals. That’s how I get my kicks.”

—

Donald Trump

==================

What has the administration done?

Well, yes, in the first 6 months some things truly have been done.

First, I will ignore the stock market. As every president prior to this absurd one recognized … the market has a mind of its own and, in general, ignores presidents <so attaching yourself to it and ts results is like pegging my success to some squirrel in my backyard>. But even with its general disregard for a President what the stock market has really learned is that Trump will not do as much as some had hoped for … and others feared. In the stock market’s mind this is called ‘clarity’ or certainty … and markets thrive when uncertainty diminishes <because then it is all about trends and not surprises>. Trump will not like to hear it but the central banks control the fate of stock markets more than he will ever want <so he should actually be cuddling up to central bank more>.

Second, I will ignore the Supreme Court Justice nomination because this was a “gimmee putt” for any Republican who stumbled their way into the oval office.

Just as I wouldn’t have credited Hillary this “win” was owned by whatever party won the white house not the individual in the white house.

Anyway.

The first 200 days.

Yes. Things done. I would call it “tinkering under the hood” stuff. Some executive orders, some cutting back on regulations, maybe taking some, what they would consider, unnecessary  pieces out so the engine can run a little more effectively.

Most things have been ‘destruction’ type actions and not construction type actions.

And none of them are the bigger things which make radical shifts with regard to the country’s well-being.

Here is the problem with the Trump administration just tinkering under the hood. During the campaign and continuing into the first 200 days the administration, and Trump in particular, have claimed I have a Hyundai and I deserve a Ferrari.

Therefore, to date, they are just giving me a better running Hyundai and they still haven’t shown me <a> what my Ferrari is going to look like or <b> when I may expect to see my Ferrari in my driveway or even <c> what they are going to do to actually make it possible to have a Ferrari.

That alone makes for a fairly hollow first 200 days.

But why haven’t we received even those basic, what I would call, “map of things you should expect” stuff?

To date this administration has been defined by … well … a fog of dysfunction driven by a clammy inconsistent breeze called Donald J Trump which leaves us all feeling a little uneasy that something bad awaits us in the fucking clammy fog.

Look.

While I buy he is transactional … he is an inconsistent transactional person. He shows no sign of cohesive thinking, shows poor instincts and a complete lack of impulse control <which derails any necessary momentum every sane business leader knows you need to have to sustain any larger idea> and an extraordinarily immature naïve view of how the world really works <business, government and global> all buried in a pea like brain that does not envision what the end game looks like.

I score the last 200 days as relatively hollow and, once again, I see no signs of changes needed to get us out of hollow in and into substance.

I personally do not see him changing <becoming more engaged, take on more responsibility and try and lead rather than criticize> therefore the administration will live and die by the people who will end up in the administration <assuming they ever do join up>. Trump really has no policy – which is needed to lead without actually having to hold everyone’s hand — therefore he needs to <a> hire people who understand policy and can sell policy and <b> accumulate a group of policy makers who are aligned <not by loyalty but rather by ideology> so that the end puzzle gets built so it looks like a frickin’ puzzle and not just a bunch of random policies which look good in isolation but crappy when viewed together.

There needs to be a team, not a loyal team, but a qualified team for any chance to get out of this hollow hole we seem to get deeper and deeper into.

Yeah yeah yeah. Trumpeteers will come out of the woodwork and suggest “this is not Trump’s fault.”

They would be wrong.

I have been in so many companies that have told me to hire only to have my candidates get mired in the HR administrative mud for so long you are fairly sure they were just humoring you into believing you could actually hire someone that I can certainly feel the pain of hiring and open positions.

But this is not the case.

The congress has been slower in confirming Trump candidates but it is not because of democrats or congress inefficiency it is because Trump nominees are slow to complete paperwork or have to deal with conflict issues <they are often non-traditional appointees>. In addition the president has been even slower to send nominations to Congress.

The Trump administration is not eliminating the positions, Trump is just deciding not filling them <I assume he is not convinced they would actually provide value>.

Sure … there is a legitimate truth that government should be streamlined <positions eliminated> but not nominating needed people to implement your transactional ideology simply means … well … none of your frickin’ transactions get completed <and a business person of any competence whose career has been built off of transactions, and not vision, would know this>.

Anyway.

A couple things that become concerning beyond the staffing challenge as we move on to day 201 and beyond:

• They market problems not solutions

I was foolish enough to subscribe to the White House Daily email. I will admit.

If I read it every day I would most likely slit my wrists. Every single email highlights a problem … disaster, failing, crime, horrible trade deals, being taken advantage of, the list goes on and on and on.

Shit.

In one email they actually suggested one of their own departments, The Congressional Budget Office, yeah … one of their OWN DEPARTMENTS … did not know how to do their job <… dude … they report to you …>.

They peddle problems and diminish people.

So far over 200 days they have invested 198 days <I made that number up> pounding us that we are living in a shithole created by shit-for-brains people … and, yet, they have offered us solutions worth a shit.

That’s not what leaders do … even transactional leaders. Even transactional leaders stand up and show us a list of the transactions we are aiming to get done. Some leaders <most in fact> would think of this as “how you should judge me” information.

This criticism is not about the 330 million citizens of the country <albeit we would benefit from knowing his> this is more about getting shit done in the next 100, 200 and 300 days. The people who have to do the work, do the policy, will be significantly more effective if you hand out a project list of shit I want to get done. if you have smart qualified people they will be like ants on sugar <all over it>.

I am not suggesting we need an administration that is in the “unicorns & rainbow” business but I do know the country would benefit if the administration would peddle solutions rather than problems but the administration itself would also benefit because … well … that is how good organizations actually get their employees to do good shit. It would be nice if they stopped thinking in terms of being in the destruction business and thought more about being in the construction business with regard to ideas & policies.

Without it … expect more empty ‘doom & gloom’ marketing of problems in the 100 days ahead.

Which leads me to …

• Lack of vision

I hire managers to manage tactics … I hire leaders to share a vision. A transactional leader is a tactical leader.

And you can get away with that for a while but at some point the tactics need to fill some vision bucket <or they are simply scattered drops of water destined to dry up in the heat of time>.

Look.

I imagine the number one gripe against Obama was that he was too visionary and not tactical enough <in public>. But no one ever doubted his vision for America and Americans. People may have griped about some of the tactics but we always knew the ‘why’ of the tactical and transaction decisions. We bitched about ‘bad deals’ but understood why the deal was being pursued.

Without vision clarity 300 million plus people sit in their homes and go to work absent of really knowing “why.” Uhm. In the absence of why understanding everything begins to look random and people, in general, do not embrace random as a way of Life.

They need to address those 2 thing. Fast.

Those two things are going to haunt this presidency for 100’s of days unless they are addressed.

Those two things are basic Leadership 101 things.

I say that because while I am as detailed as possible with regard to how to fix the hollow presidency’s arc of behavior I remain concerned that the president, a self proclaimed successful business person, shows little signs he understands basic leadership behavior <and attitudes>. I admit … while I sensed his early on I never expected him to be this inept at basic leadership skills.

Being the president is not the same as the hollow branding crap Trump has built his riches off of. Shit. A real business leader demands more knowledge than that. Leadership requires discipline, hard work, focus, at least a basic understanding of the details they want their organization to move forward with and, as Trump himself said, a willingness to get everybody in a room and hammer out a deal.

That’s leadership.

Through the first 200 days of Trump’s presidency … uhm … he has exhibited none.

That is all on him.

After 200 days the president has managed to showcase a stunning total lack of ability to lead. And I use ‘stunning’ because he actually has a Congress completely under Republican control.

This stunning lack of leadership actually has repercussions beyond how people like I will measure 100 days to come. While we will offer ‘what was done’ report cards ad nausea the ultimate measurement , and battle, will be over character – not tangible wins & losses..

I am fairly sure in the bible <Corinthians ?> it says something like: Do not be misled: “Bad company corrupts good character.”

I state that because over the first 200 days there has been a stunning lack of truth coming from this White House which appears to be a blatant attempt to corrupt the character of good men & women.

I have a thought piece coming up on how the Trump administration is building an alternative universe in a way that I am fairly sure not many of us in a free world have ever seen before <but I am familiar with it having read dozens of books on communist Soviet Union>.

They have subverted Fake News from meaning actually unsourced, completely made-up things like the Enquirer to news they simply do not like.

Transparency means sharing information only when asked and not done in a forthcoming way.

They have attempted to make honesty irrelevant by investing gobs of energy undermining anything & everything everyone else says <if no one is honest than honesty is in the eyes of the beholder>.

They have continued to construct such a stark alternative universe to what actually exists by using scraps of truth, using a language of their own making & using cult-like recruitment tactics so that normal everyday schmucks like you & I are offered such a stark contrast it becomes difficult to bridge between what they say and what we see.

In the end.

I will restate exactly what I said at the end of the 1^st 100 days … suffice it to say that I see some fairly concerning hollowness. What I mean by that is after 100 days one could highlight a variety of empty spots which … well … will dog the administration from day 101 forward.

And while I would like to point out some specifics I think we would all like to let me conclude with the “issue to be resolved in order to eliminate future hollowness.”

I am not sure at 71 if Trump can actually attain what he really needs to be successful over the ensuing 100 day increments as a president – enlightenment.

The mind once enlightened cannot again become dark.

–

Thomas Paine, A Letter Addressed to the Abbe Raynal on the Affairs of North America

 

Beyond all the bizarre tweets, inappropriate speeches and overall adolescent behavior … he is a painful amateur leader. Painful in that even I, who has led but not to this level, cringe almost every day at the amateur mistakes he makes as a leader.

This amateurishness is a disease stalking the hallways of the White House. I say that because while it is clear to everyone but trump why ‘no one listens to him or shows loyalty to him’ it is not clear why some very talented knowledgeable leaders surrounding him aren’t building at least a semblance of a construct from which leadership could grow.

Trump must be a powerful disease to have infected true talent that much.

There are a bunch of things that could turn this bizarre ship around but one, and only one, thing truly matters – will President Trump ever permit his mind to be enlightened. For that is the path out of the darkness that his administration tries to convince us we all live in as well as some of the darker more ignorant & naïve aspects of the current administration’s behavior.

Lastly.

I don’t care if you voted for Trump or not … you have to admit this whole situation is bizarre and he is a seemingly bizarre human being.

You may not agree with me that he is a fool but I cannot find one person who doesn’t think this whole presidency so far is just fucking bizarre.

——————-

“A Nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious.”

——————-

==================

“Dads, on this Father’s Day, if you think you’ve just had the best year in the history of fatherhood, that’s awesome, count your blessings.

But if you’re like most of us, if you’ve screwed up a lot this year, your kids still need you. They need to know that you love them and you need to show up again.”

Ben Sasse

================================================

Senator Ben Sasse

✔ @SenSasse

Real fatherhood isn’t anything like a greeting card. We all screw up. Here’s to all the dads out there who show up & try again. #FathersDay

==================================

“I suppose in the end it’s almost too easy to look back and say what you should have done, how you might have changed things. What’s harder – what’s much, much harder – is to accept what you actually did do.”

–

Peter Hook <Joy Division>

=============================================

So.

…. Father’s Day “the force” be with you …….

I had no plans on posting anything relevant to father’s day this year until I saw this father’s day tweet from a senator in Nebraska: Ben Sasse: Happy Father’s Day to the Flawed Fathers (Like Me)

His words? “All the dads out there who show up & try again.”

My words? Victory in the attempt.

In a world where we seem to be more and more focused on winning it is nice to step back and maybe realize that many things can be considered a victory other than some simplified “win” … especially for fathers.

How does this sound for what could be considered a ‘win’? Showing up … and showing up again … and then showing up again.

I am not a father but as I have applauded fathers year after year <because most of my father friends are great fathers> I am not sure I have applauded the most simplistic aspect of being a parent – the persistent attempt.

I think this topic matters.

It matters because when asked … I imagine almost every parent can fondly remember “the wins”, even if they are few and far between, with regard to their children. But maybe we should be pointing out the attempts, the persistency of their parenting attempts, rather than just the wins … the victories. And while the victories must be an incredible source of pride <that their attempts in parenting actually paid off in some way> their real pride source of being a parent, a father, is more likely to be found in the persistent attempts.

The persistent attempts? The times you fell short in some way in not only your child’s eyes but also how you may have fallen short in what you believe is the responsibility of parenting, and, yet, you attempt to do what is right the next day or the next time or the next opportunity.

There should be victory found in getting up and trying to do a little better the next time – victory in the attempt.

Look.

All fathers will be a jerk on occasion and, I imagine, some are simply jerks. But all fathers are imperfect. As I noted in a non fathers day post back in 2013 <No Perfect Fathers >. Shit. We all are. And, yet, imperfect or not … 99% of us persist and attempt again.

I will say this.

In our ‘positive reinforcement world’ in which ‘everyone contributes and should be included’ we tend to give out more gold stars than a second grade class.

I sometimes think we give out so many rewards that no one can truly tell who the ‘best of the best’ really are.

Oh.

I will say this except in parenting.

In parenting we have more of a tendency in never giving out a gold star for the attempt but rather solely for some achievement attained.

Therefore there is less positive reinforcement for the attempts and more for the achievements.

Well.

That seems fucked up to me.

====

“Not in the clamor of the crowded street, not in the shouts and applause of the many, but in ourselves, are triumph and defeat.”

 –

Longfellow

===============

I am not suggesting fathers need more gold stars or that achievements don’t matter but it seems kind of fucked up to me that being a ‘perfect father’ is somehow always supposed to be attached to some achievements attained by the child.

Similar to my view on many things in life I believe more often than not success should be measured in progress not achievement.

Fathering is the same to me.

And that is why victory in the attempt matters so much. Persistent attempts are metaphorically like being a border collie to your child’s life … herding them attempt by attempt toward some progress path. If you view it that way you will most likely look back at dozens of “wins” in the herding and not just whatever destination you may attain in achievement.

Anyway.

I thought Ben Sasse’s father’s day tweet was awesome.

Back in 2014 on father’s day I wrote about  imperfectly perfect fathers.

That is most likely the closest I have ever come on fathers day of saying something similar to what the senator said.

And I would suggest ‘victory in the attempt ‘is a derivative of the thought I shared that day.

Fathers have a natural tendency look back at missed opportunities and moments where they failed … and maybe even when they were a jerk.

Maybe they should look back upon all the attempts and … well … think about the fact they showed up. And maybe that is a “win” in and of itself. And they certainly should be viewing attempts within a “37 seconds, used well, is a lifetime.”

It is quite possible this is a Life lesson for all of us, but for today, it is a Father’s Day thought.

Happy Father’s Day <and thank you Ben Sasse for making me sit down and wrote today>.

===================

“America’s about new beginnings, and the end of your story has not been written.

Happy Father’s Day to all the fathers out there who want to show up and try again.”

Ben Sasse

=======================

=============

“A single arrow is easily broken, but not ten in a bundle.”

—–

Japanese proverb

=============

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed. It is the only thing that ever has.”

—–

Margaret Mead

================

So.

I was listening to a bunch of talking heads on tv speculating on a staff shake up in the Trump white house personnel.

One thing I heard caught my attention … “well, part of the president’s issue is that he has kind of a hodgepodge of personnel.”

And that thought is correct. And it made me think a little bit.

The truth is once you move past managing a group or running a mom & pop sized business every management team you manage will be a hodgepodge of people, skills, personalities and … well … loyalty. Not only is it impossible to hire in ‘your people’ in every slot … most good leaders do not want to do that.

All that said.

To be clear.

Trump is possibly one of the crappiest senior leaders I have ever seen and he appears to have no belief that words matter and has no understanding of the concept of ‘communication alignment’ <let alone any alignment> … however … he is what he is. And because he is what he is … inconsistencies included … the staff he surrounds himself matters a shitload with regard to overall effectiveness.

What do I mean?

Trump forces his staff to adjust in real time as he communicates, and thinks, in real time.

Trump has never worked in a large organization nor has he ever truly had to manage a larger group of people, let alone senior executives.

He has always been the spokesperson and the brand and the final word … surrounded by family who was more than happy to simply double and triple down on whatever dad said <and be loyal to even his craziest tactical maneuvering and craziest words and wordsmithing>.

Real senior executives do not work that way nor is it a particularly effective method outside of a mom & pop structure.

In a real business organization you don’t get to pick & choose everyone in your circle … most times it is a hodgepodge of skills, personalities and experience. And you know what? You learn to manage them effectively because that is what a leader does.

You adapt some of you to accommodate some of them <yeah … sure … envision Trump doing that … uhm … sure … ain’t gonna happen>.

Trump is being forced out of his mom & pop management model into a more traditional larger business management model <and he is going kicking & screaming>.

Most people learn this as soon as they move from group management to department management <you cannot fire everyone and rehire only your people> and absolutely learn this lesson as soon as you move into the C-level positions.

Another aspect is when you get a position you do not treat it as an “I won so you need to …” but rather “I now get to lead and I am going to have to …”

All that said.

You learn some management personnel tricks to help you out.

I always tried to bring one person with me wherever I went as I moved up. Depending on the structure of the organization I always wanted at least one person who could “translate” me to the hodgepodge team. This wasn’t necessarily done to dictate my desires & behaviors onto a team but rather to help them align to how I managed so they could adapt and move faster.

I manage nothing like Trump but let’s assume Trump is moving into the presidency … it almost becomes mandatory for effectiveness that he has a team aligned on “what to do when Trump does his crazy.” He need a management team that doesn’t argue about what to do he needs a management team that absorbs the blow and moves out doing what needs to be done as the true power brokers for getting shit done.

By the way … this is not about loyalty to Trump this is about loyalty to most effectively getting good shit done. I didn’t care if people bitched about me behind my back <I always assumed they did> what I cared about is that they respected the general idea and invested their energy in trying to figure out how to best effectively implement the idea rather than invest energy trying to defend anything they really would have preferred just bitching about behind my back.

I always preferred loyalty to “getting good smart shit done” and always believed I would ultimately earn some respect if I <Me> always remained loyal to the idea of “enabling good smart shit to get done.”

Before I finish this thought I will admit my preference was always to try an bring in two foundational team members in order to kind of create some pillars … but you can get away with one to align a hodgepodge of managers & executives.

Anyway.

In an organization the size of a presidency Trump needs a translator but more importantly he needs an aligned team with regard to what to do with him and his behavior <and not be arguing over it>.

……… a Trump management team ………

Trump’s inclination will be with what he feels most comfortable with — family.

His next inclination will be with what makes him feel the best — the ones who unflinchingly try and power-broke the crazy <he would call them unflinching loyalists>.

Neither of those have anything to do with effective leadership nor do they have anything to do with effective ‘management of getting shit done.’

He has never been in a large organization nor has he managed a large group of people nor has he tried to get a large group of people aligned to agree & do some shit.

He naturally gravitates toward employees who don’t deliver bad news and those who deliver flattery.

They may feel good to have around but they are the absolute worst people to have on your management team. You only build a team like that if you have no interest in improving, no interest in any intellectual conflict <which is what actually sparks better ideas> and/or you are so insecure or arrogant <yes, you can be both> you don’t want any ideas other than your own.

Most often it is the senior leadership who challenges you that prompt new insights and help propel the group to success.

 

 

“You need people who have different points of view and aren’t afraid to argue. They are the kind of people who stop the organization from doing stupid things.”

Harvard Business Review

 

Look.

All leaders assume responsibility for a hodgepodge of senior managers. That’s what we do.

And we learn to set what expectations are and align on vision and encourage some flexibility & adapting and get going.

And we learn that some of what we do and what we think works a little better in one place than anther and that some people are better than we think at first blush and some people we really liked when we met them are worse than we thought.

And we learn that you don’t demand respect but rather earn it and loyalty is gained through respect.

I would imagine that engendering loyalty to Trump is hard in that up to this point loyalty most likely centered on fame & fortune.  And most of us who have led in larger organizations understand that strong foundational loyalty is less about the tangible fame & fortune but rather respect.  He is gonna have some problems with that.

I would imagine that effectiveness to Trump is blind support for him and what he says. And most of us who have led in larger organizations understand that effectiveness is less about support for what the leader says … but rather in structured response to a leader’s guidance & thoughts. I never wanted people to do what I said … I wanted people to do what needed to be done.  He is gonna have some problems with that.

I would imagine that alignment to Trump is familial. And most of us who have led in a larger organization want the exact same thing … but we know we have a hodgepodge team who is ‘the family’ and we deal with it.

Would I shake up the Trump administration? Yeah. I surely would.

And I would do it almost exactly opposite of how I envision he is likely to do it.

He doesn’t understand there is a campaign team and now he needs an effective doing team. He bludgeoned us with his dull insights on the campaign trail and now he needs to focus more on action.

What would I do with his cadre of white men?

I, personally, would make Kushner my chief of staff. He has no fucking clue how to do the job but he knows the Trumpster better than anyone in the world.

Give him some deputies who have a shitload of government experience. Send Ivanka off to write a real book. And build a staff of Republican zealots who know how to get shit done. Trust the Kushner kid to translate what the Donald J crazy means to everyone.

Bannon can stay but he just needs to focus on feeding the Trump crazy and let Kushner kid deal with the crazy output.

Others <just off the top of my head>. I love Wilbur Ross. Mnuchin almost seems overwhelmed-giddy by being in the spotlight. I would find a sane version of Mulvaney to take his job. I would tell Tillerson to start hiring like a mad man and tell him he can fire whoever he doesn’t need once he actually has some staff to do some shit. Just get out of Mattis, McMaster and Kelly’s way. I can’t get rid of Sessions even though I think he is crazy <I think he thinks he lives in the 1950’s> but because he actually translates Trump crazy better than anyone other than maybe that little pit bull Lewandowski.  I would wake up Carson, Perry, and all the other Cabinet members we haven’t heard a peep out of and ask them if they would like to participate in this circus.

I imagine my real point is that to be an effective leader of a hodgepodge group it is more important that THEY can work together than YOU like them.

Because if they can work together well than there is a better chance that the organization will not do stupid shit even if you make a stupid decision, your crazy will come to life as not-so-crazy pragmatism and knee-jerk spontaneous crazy asshat tweets simply get absorbed into seamless actions which make the tweets look a little less spontaneous, a little less knee jerk, a little less crazy … but still asshat because that is who you are.

And that is the value of a non-arguing hodgepodge group. They tend to mute the mistakes and crazy and amplify the actual good ideas and thoughts you may actually have.

A non-aligned hodgepodge managerial team simply exacerbates the problem — your crazy looks crazier, your spontaneous looks more spontaneous <see: unhinged> and your asshatedness looks more asshatted.

If I were a management consultant for Trump <I would shoot myself> I would look at him as a lost cause … he is what he is. He is a flower <with thorns> and I would turn my attention to the environment the flower is growing in.

If I were a management consultant for Trump <I would shoot myself> I would find a team that maybe wasn’t on the “Trump train” but rather find competent people who can do shit that I want done <and let the chief of staff … who is on the Trump Train … get them doing Trump train shit>.

If I were a management consultant for Trump <I would shoot myself> I would turn to the Kushner kid and say “you wanted in … you are in. You are the Trump whisperer. Make shit happen.”

Let me be clear.

Trump will shake up his staff and maybe cabinet members and he will fuck it up. He has no idea how to manage a business organization other than in a mom & pop style and he has no innate leadership skills and his management instincts suck.

And he has no clue how to build an effective team <someone should tell him there is not enough room up his ass for all the people he actually needs to run a country let alone a viably larger sized organization>.

Oh. And he is a narcissistic asshat who believes no one knows better than he does.

In the end.

As I stated in my Trump 100 day piece … he did nothing in his first 100 days that would suggest the next 100 days <and foreseeable 100 day increments> would be any smoother, efficient or effective. I am 99% confident he will shake up his staff and management team and I cannot envision it proceeding smoothly, efficiently or effectively. Why? Because he has no clue what he is doing.

==============

“America is great because she is good.

If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”

―

Alexis de Tocqueville

==============

“La vérité vaut bien qu’on passe quelques années sans la trouver”

<Truth is more valuable if it takes you a few years to find it>

—–

Renard

================

Truth has  an, unfortunate, nasty habit of taking some time to work its way into the minds of people.  Sometimes we hear something and kind of know that it sounds like Truth but remain skeptical. That is, of course, until we have gained some proof that what we ‘felt’ was really ‘real.’

I tend to believe many people felt that way about Donald J Trump during the election and as time has progressed that ‘feeling’ is being hardened into a truth.

This is happening not just in America … but globally too. Day by day Trump and his words and his actions hammer nail after nail sealing the truth in people’s minds.

Yesterday Trump put another nail into the populist coffin. Yesterday Emmanuel Macron decisively beat a smarter version of Trump, Le Pen, in the France election.

No one should doubt that Macron winning the France election is another global rejection of Trump. The backlash to a horrible America decision has echoed throughout elections around the world.

Other countries certainly feel the pangs of desire for some change of the status quo … but no other country wants to go about doing so by repeating the mistake America made <or Great Britain’s mistake>.

=============

“This win sends a clear signal that anti-EU populist parties are unable to secure a power base across the political landscape in continental Europe. This started with the presidential elections in Austria in December 2016, with a win by the Pro-European Alexander Van der Bellen, followed by the Dutch elections last March where centrist pro-European parties won the elections.

Now this trend has been echoed in France with a win by Emmanuel Macron, who has been campaigning on a pro-European agenda.”

—-

Michiel de Bruin

==============

To be clear.

Trump has done populism no favors since he has won.

If he had truly delivered upon his promise to be the one to ‘solve the problems of forgotten America’ populists around the world may have met a different fate.

Instead the negative rhetoric tied to lack of measurable activity doomed populist candidates around the world.

As I listened to Macron’s victory speech, given in front of a national cultural icon <The Louvre> and not some gold gilded Trump branded hotel, I heard the words of a leader who understood the future never resides in the past and fear but rather in being united and ‘liberty, equality and fraternity’ <France’s version of “out of many, one” or even ‘stronger together’>.

Macron gave the speech we would actually expect of an American president … not one of fear nor bombastic “I won and you didn’t” but a tone to “calm people’s fears, restore France’s confidence, and gather all of its people together to face the immense challenges that face us in the future”.

It was almost the direct opposite of a Trump speech which tends to be a “join, or else” message to a divided country.

With Macron, a 39 year old, it was a message of hope and of renewed confidence. It contained sober pragmatic thoughts of a message spoken with open eyes and open mind … recognizing that many people did not necessarily vote for him but, rather, against the other … recognizing that many doubted him and his beliefs for France … and recognizing that he was going to have to work to unite a divided France.

We should note that not only did Trump not utter any of those words in victory … he has never uttered those words since.

Look.

No one should misunderstand me … populism and nativism still exists and the ideas that have given them a voice, some of which should be heard, are being incorporated into what ‘will be.’ Populism certainly is reshaping policy, interests and the dialogue – in some good ways and in some bad ways.

The truly good ideas which should be heard are stopping policymakers and making them think a little harder.

The bad aspects of populism are making everyone stand up and speak up about what is important from a moral standpoint.

Populism has made life a little harder than it was before but … well … nothing good is easy.

Regardless.

Populism still exists but Trump has done as good a job as anyone to take some air out of its balloon.

I would suggest the France election showcases proof of several things:

First.

Your voice matters. It doesn’t matter of you feel forgotten, if you feel slighted, if you feel angry or even if you feel nothing … your vote, your actions, your words all matter. Everyone truly can make a difference and contribute to the bending of the arc of history.

Second.

Hope is more attractive than fear … united is more appealing than divided.

When cornered into having to make a choice people will step away from their fears and step toward hope.

When cornered into having to make a choice people will step away from exclusiveness and step toward inclusiveness.

Notice I didn’t say ‘embrace’ but rather ‘step toward.’

This is a nuance Trump will never understand. But the everyday person does … especially if given a little time to ponder the issue.

Countries prefer to be united behind an idea, behind hope and behind aspirations. And while fear and ‘retreating upon oneself as a way to make one

………. if your efforts suck … the universe will configure around your suckedness …

stronger’ sounds slightly appealing … a country recognizes that no matter what they do it is a globalized world and that … well … e pluribus unum —Latin for “Out of many, one.”

While I wish United States would remember the words that reside on our currency the new France leader remembers it and I believe recognizes the change at hand.

Out of many, one.

Well done France. I seriously doubt you will regret your choice.

If a country ceases to be good, a country will cease to be great.

==========================

“There are more ideas on earth than intellectuals imagine. And these ideas are more active, stronger, more resistant, more passionate than “politicians” think.

We have to be there at the birth of ideas, the bursting outward of their force: not in books expressing them, but in events manifesting this force, in struggles carried on around ideas, for or against them. Ideas do not rule the world. But it is because the world has ideas (and because it constantly produces them) that it is not passively ruled by those who are its leaders or those who would like to teach it, once and for all, what it must think.”

―

Michel Foucault

=================