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

“Any system of ethics must account for scarcity. If it doesn’t, humanity would perish due to misallocation of finite resources, including one’s own body.”

—-

Daniel Alexander Brackins

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

“If somebody never gets enough of you, they will always want more”

―

Ashly Lorenzana

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

I recently was asked to help a Brazilian design & brand consulting company expanding their business into the United State after they read my thoughts on Velocity in business (in particular my thoughts on the Velocity Zone).

It was a fascinating discussion in which I was, once again, reminded of the attitudinal differences between the United States and other countries.

While a Brazilian attitude with regard to how their work should come to life (a stronger attitude with regard to vividness & distinction) in this case it came down to abundance versus scarcity. I often found myself sitting back just thinking about how Brazil viewed the world thru a scarcity lens. It had a sense of urgency with regard to not just ‘use it or lose it’ but rather ‘if I don’t use it I will not survive.’ And that is where I gained my deepest insight – survival. In an abundant world survival may not be accepted as a fait accompli, but it certainly feels like it is more likely. In a scarcity world you almost feel like survival is a moment by moment aspect of life. This isn’t to suggest desperation but it does suggest two things:

• Enjoy the moments you have and maximize them (this comes to life in a business attitude of distinctness, boldness & distinction)
• Not fear of death but more aggressiveness in the moment to survive (this comes to life with grabbing what exists now rather than thinking something better may come along tomorrow)

Anyway.

It led to Velo. It’s a Portuguese spin on Velocity.

About Velo

We made up this word because, to us, its meaning is new. Velo is velocity with a Brazilian twist. Let’s call it the Portuguese version of Velocity.

We arrived at the term because we believe America business view is tainted by the concept of abundance – an abundance of opportunities, resources & money. It doesn’t mean all businesses actual have an abundance of money & resources just that in the back of their minds they believe America is abundant therefore attitudinally they don’t approach things through a scarcity lens. This affects decision making, strategic approaches, brand positioning and messaging, design , messaging and even budget allocation.

Abundance versus scarcity attitude

In an abundant world options are limitless, in other words, miss an opportunity and another will arise. Let’s call this a “limitless supply of water” attitude. Water is abundant so when presented with a glass of it unless I’m desperately thirsty it’s just a glass of water.  In a scarcity world a glass of water can mean life or death.

Now. In America we talk scarcity, but think abundance. This ‘abundance of options’ attitude affects not only our general attitude but also behavioral decisions – business decisions. We sift thru options with a slight lack of urgency. In Brazil one cannot simply talk scarcity but act upon it to insure you get your glass of water. Options are limited and you maximize the ones you do have.

We think of velocity in the same terms. Velocity is a scarce resource and demands a versatile view of communications, design, branding combined with a bold view on crafting a distinctive idea & brand. Velocity falters under an abundance attitude and can quickly become just speed – hamsters on a wheel in an abundant world. Velocity thrives within a scarcity attitude by assembling minimal viable teams with minimal viable products utilizing minimal viable assets & resources applying communications principles & thinking to maximize opportunities as scarce moments in time.  That’s a mouthful but suffice it to say Velocity thrives in a minimalist view.

Comunicação and scarcity

Comunicação is a little different than America communication. It’s a little bit bolder and distinct (remember, resources, including time & money are viewed as scarce therefore need to be maximized). The design has more vividness. The strategy is a little more bold. The branding is more distinct. The communications have a little more edge. Generally speaking the ideas are treated as a scarce resource not to be wasted with ‘safe’ thinking & doing, but rather vivid thinking that demands people pay attention.

Criatividade and scarcity

Criatividade is a little different than American creativity. In a scarcity world everyone is expected to be creative (remember, resources are scare therefore need to be maximized) therefore creativity comes to life from unexpected places in unexpected ways. There are no thinkers and doers in a scarcity Criatividade world, just doers who think & thinkers who do – all the time. Creativity is only abundant if you maximize the scarce resources at hand.

In an abundant world options seem limitless and discussion can actually be infinite all of which just ends with a less creative ‘safer’ solution. In a scarcity driven world options are treated as limited so discussion is finite with bolder, more vivid, creative solutions.

Think: Value on the Move

The essence of Velo is enabling value transactions to happen as effectively and efficiently as possible. By treating the world thru a scarcity lens we maximize time, resources, minds & skills to generate brand velocity.

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

“The fragile structure of logic fades and disappears against the emotional onslaught of hushed tone, a dramatic pause, and the soaring excitement of a verbal crescendo.”

——-

Bill Bernbach

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

“It was the in-between time, before day leaves and night comes, a time I’ve never been partial to because of the sadness that lingers in the space between going and coming.”

——

Sue Monk Kidd

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

Ok. Far too often when talking about pacing in life and business we focus on ‘slowing down.’ We do that because we have convinced ourselves that not only is the world moving at a faster pace than ever before, but that we actually have to move really fast or we are not doing something right.

I will not debate the sheer amount of shit we are faced with in any given moment but I would debate our concept of speed and moving fast is all that matters and our unhealthy belief there is not enough time.

Not everything has to be done immediately.

Not everything should be done with minimal information.

Not every moment has some magical window of opportunity that we will miss out on if we do not act ‘now!’.

Now. This is a little weird when we stop and think about it.

Facing reality, as an individual, it can appear like a speed boat … crashing through waves with any significant milestones flashing by so fast they become a blur.

Facing reality, collectively. It can appear like a fully loaded tanker … plowing its way through the waves where significance is measured, if significance is discernible at all, in broad sweeping miles of slow turns.

That’s life in a nutshell. That is time in a nutshell. That is reality in a nutshell.

Suffice it to say … reality can be a real bastard. Good leaders manage the bastard by managing the pacing of how we deal with all the bastard’s stuff.

Here is a truth.

The truth is that every good self-aware business leader has a panel in their head with a play, pause, rewind and fast forward button.  They have the ability to see things in real time, what has occurred up to that point and, in some way, can envision the ripples of what happens from there. Within that ability they decide to fast forward, or pause, or continue playing at the same speed … or even decide to rewind a little. They see reality and decide how to best take advantage of it.

Some leaders have one speed. There are some who we call ‘the bull in china shop’ asshats who only know forward at some fast speed bludgeoning and blustering their way forward. Some are like golf carts steadily chugging along at steady long play.

Good organizations have a variety of different types of employees, but there is no good functional organization without leaders, or a great leader, with a ‘play/pause’ panel.

Here is another truth.

The other way a good leader uses their ‘play/pause’ panel is how they think about possibilities. But we tend to make reality an even worse bastard. One thing we do that make reality worse is to convince ourselves that ‘the possibilities are infinite in any given moment.’

As I have stated before this is a false premise and a dangerously overwhelming premise. ‘Infinite’ sounds good conceptually, as does possibilities, but when it comes to real pragmatic decision-making the entire idea tends to overwhelm & freeze rather than enhance efficient & effective decision-making.

The reality is that within any given moment possibilities are finite.

And the good leaders & managers recognize that. The great leaders and managers not only see finite possibilities but they see each possibility as a window … some wide open, some slightly cracked and some closed. And in any given moment they have the ability to consistently scan the finite possibilities with a finger poised over their play/pause/rewind/fast forward buttons.

That consistency is at the foundation of any good leader’s value.

Shit. Consistency, in general, may have the highest value it has ever had in the history of Mankind.

Why? Well. Today’s world is structurally hostile to nuance. Subtlety not only doesn’t sell it invokes ‘space’ in which others are more than willing to place something. I mention this because a play/pause panel is all about nuance within the complexity of reality. It is easy to go one speed <or just stop when you get tired>. It takes touch and nuance to pause at the right time, rewind accordingly, fast forward through some difficulties or to take advantage of windows of opportunity or … well … just keep playing <which is sometime tougher than what you would think>.

This actually means great consistency is not about maintaining one speed but rather maintaining a consistent sense for how to adjust pacing accordingly.

This consistency is … well … complex. Business systems, more often than not, are a bit more complicated in their underlying dynamics than simplistic theory or simplistic diagrams attempting to create structure to an organization and its dynamics with the market & consumers/buyers/employees.

I would suggest that you cannot draw a picture for what is <because it is obsolete as soon as it is drawn> and you cannot draw a picture for what will be <because predicting multi-dimensional dynamics is outside the purview of reality>.

All that said.

That is why you cannot pay enough money to a business person who has the ability to know when to slow down to enable effective speeding up … or to pause to accept some responsibility <or explain> … or to fast forward at the right time.

That is why you cannot pay enough money to a business person who has the ability to stand still without really standing still. What I mean by that is the leader with a play/pause panel never really stands till <even though they may be pausing> because even a pause contains some activity and self-awareness to do something within that space.

===========

“She may be going to Hell, of course, but at least she isn’t standing still.”

e.e.cummings

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

I talk about this entire topic often. And it is a difficult thing to explain.

In our business world today we like to have simple formulas and handbook guides. Pacing is more ‘feel’ and awareness and, well, yeah … some humility.

I say humility because no matter how good a leader you are and no matter how good your pacing is there will always be some issues <mostly because you get some things wrong>. Part of the ‘wrong’ portion is you inevitably leave some people behind and some ‘minds’ get a little scattered. And you have to get them back on track and aligned and sometimes you have to step up and show a little humanness and everyone resets when you do that, give you another chance and get a little re energized to pick up their bags and hit the road with you again.

Look.

Real play/pause management is midstream management and not in some grand 5 year, or annual, plan. Midstream where you have some critical learnings and maybe even some momentum or real shit hits the fan. You purposefully do not have everyone stop … just maybe pause … assess … kind of like having a fighter squadron get fuel in flight … and then fast forward on the mission.

I will say one thing about the proper use of pacing. Good pacing business management creates exponential dramatic speed increases — velocity in other words. This occurs even if you pause, rewind or maintain the current play.

I feel confident saying that reality, occurring on its own, shows that these dramatic shifts don’t really happen as part of a business status quo. Dramatic business shifts are situational, contextual and often simply do not happen because a business doesn’t have a business person who sees it, senses it or can steer it … they don’t have a business person with a good play/pause panel.

It is a proven fact <I think> that pacing is one of the most effective tools an organization can wield to effectively run a successful business. I would also suggest that more often than not this pacing is not driven by the market, Reality, but rather driven by one person <or several> who have the ability to sense a contextual shift in the dynamics within a situation. A person who doesn’t have a picture drawn to adapt against but can draw a picture of what they see & sense from which others can leverage from to generate speed.

Not everyone can do this.

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

John Coltrane: “I don’t know what it is. It seems like when I get going, I just don’t know how to stop.”

Miles Davis: “Why don’t you try taking the horn out of your mouth?”

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

What I do know is that a leader who has only one speed and who claims ‘good business instincts’ when it is really only one speed is not a great leader, nor a good leader, but rather a one-trick pony <one speed> leader and they have a habit of making bad choices.

Suffice it to say a one trick pony shouldn’t be a leader, it should be an employee.

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

“[an] idea is a powerful thing — but it’s just an idea. It’s a sketch before the painting.  The truth is that an idea is rarely an answer. It’s usually a hunch wrapped in a bundle of unanswered strategic, operational, technical, and financial questions.”

———–

Mark Payne

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

“With an apple I will astonish Paris.”

———–

Paul Cezanne

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

So.

Could you ever imagine a business person suggesting surprising the world with one of the most ordinary common things in Life — an apple?

People would think that person was crazy.

“We need something new.”

“We need to be unique.”

Well. Let’s face it.

Most new things suck.

Most new ideas are just bad.

And most new shit just stinks.

Which leads me to say several things upfront:

• The concept of Big ideas in marketing is crap. Yup. Crap.
• Confusing a bunch of tactics with a big strategic idea is just plain stupid.

As a corollary to the above statement — iterative tactics without a strategy idea is insane <it is just a race to the bottom>.

• If you can get paid for having no ideas … do anything to keep that job.
• Small <with sharp edges or points> ideas, even the ordinary looking ones, may be uncool but exponentially cooler than no idea and infinitely better than supposed big ideas.

Look.

I truly believe the entire big idea discussion is crap and misguides organizations to aim for the wrong things <and encourages organizations to overlook some big things>. Success is all about tiny sharp insights. Sharp insights that have the possibility of expanding to something big <unfortunately I now have a visual of one of those stupid little sponges that expand when you put a drop of water on them>.

Yeah. It is quite possible saying Big Ideas are crap is overstating it a little, but I can unequivocally state that the entire process to “find” or “uncover” the Big idea is crap.

Huh?

Simply by starting your thought process out with this question you have complicated your business thinking and in fact you are saying you are seeking the wrong thing. For in seeking something big you have a tendency to discuss hollow good looking concepts which can easily be torn apart into meaningless little nothings. Ideas are good in any shape or size <no ideas have no shape therefore … by this logic … are not good>. I just tend to believe often big things come in very small packages when it comes to ideas. So if all you do is look for big packages … well … you are gonna be sorely disappointed when you open it up and look at the idea.

Maybe <and this is quite possible> I am missing something but what I seem to see in all this Big Idea mumbo jumbo is “hey, I don’t really have any idea so I am going to constantly implement a boatload of little tactics until some of them start working and then write up the idea.”

Pragmatic but not really that … uhm … great an idea.

Yeah. I have certainly seen a great tactical idea generate a honed strategic idea but I can honestly say I have never seen anyone just throw a whole bunch of tactical shit up against the wall and see what sticks and then like a Rorschach test identify the strategic idea from the shape of the tactical shit.

Regardless. It is kind of the way business in general seems to be evolving <to my dismay I may add> but good ideas die not because they aren’t “big” but mostly because they have to run the following gauntlet <with these things standing on each side>:

1. Consensus

———

“A consensus means that everyone agrees to say collectively what no one believes individually.”

Abba Eban

———

The consensus & ideas concept gets stated like …“if I have an idea I want to share ownership so it succeeds.” That is kind of the bullshit you hear.

Look.

A good idea is a good idea. A great idea tends to have sharper edges to it <it can hurt a little and make some people feel a little uncomfortable>. All I really know is that gaining consensus will only dull a sharp idea.

No debate on that.

A good idea, in fact, the best ideas, are typically borne of an individual not a consensus.

No debate on that.

Collaboration <not consensus> can nurture an idea to greatness but as an acorn becomes an oak — we should be seeking the acorn. We should be seeking the people who have real ideas and learn to revel in the initial seeming smallness and power of what it is … and understand the gloriousness of what this little thing can become if it is watered and nurtured … not drowned in consensus.

========= 

“Instead of meetings about meetings let’s barge into someone’s office w/ a great idea & figure out how to do it.”

Tom Goodwin

===========

Figure out a way to implement without consensus. Not saying it’s easy but that’s kind of the gig.

2. Fear

To be fearless in a room full of fear is frustrating. Fear is the biggest enemy of any idea … big, medium or small.

===========

“Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”

H. L. Mencken

===========

Fear takes shape in organizations in a couple of ways:

• Fear of being wrong or making a mistake.

This is a tough one. Nowadays with employment being what it is many people are running scared. And scared leadership is putting even more pressure on people to make fewer mistakes <rather than do more right things).

An iterative ideation process is a beautiful way to hide from making a mistake. How can you be wrong if it is baked into an admitted iterative process?

• Use data to make a subjective decision.

Ah. This is where research comes in. In other words “why use common sense and our knowledge when we can implement a congruent multi phase segmentation study that identifies the double helix DNA of our desired customer.” <or some other bullshit you hear in the business world>

I believe big research studies don’t produce big ideas. But. If you have patience and look hard enough typically within this big research study you can probably mine a little sharp looking diamond of an idea that can make a big difference.

But most organizations don’t use research that way. They use research to make a decision for them. They use data out of fear.

All that said. In the end I remind everyone of something I said in the beginning:

“With an apple I will astonish the world.”

I wish more businesses would think this way.

But.

Small & ordinary isn’t sexy in … well .. anything. In today’s business it needs to be Big & extraordinary to be meaningful.

That is just crazy.

We need more people talking about making the ordinary extraordinary and that small sharp ideas are the ones which break through a fairly cluttered world. Within the ordinary always resides a small mundane thing. And it is easy to focus on the mundane as common, useless or even pedantic. Yet each ‘ordinary thing’ also has the capacity, if we are open to it, to usher us into an experience of  something extraordinary & usher us into some new way of looking at the ordinary & usher us into some new way of experiencing the ordinary.

Even the ordinary contains infinite possibilities <if we would only seek it there>.

Within finite often resides the infinite.

Within each of us ordinary people resides something extraordinary.

I mention that last point about us ordinary everyday schmucks <people> because we need to remind ourselves something experts have been trying to tell us for quite some time … “ no one is born a genius … genius takes time and opportunity to develop.” David Shenk <The Genius in All of Us: New Insights into Genetics, Talent, and IQ> described genius as a process, not something someone has or is borne with, but rather something that someone does.

We all have some genius within us. We all have the ability to take something ordinary and surprise the world with something extraordinary. This belief, this understanding of self, far too often is trampled in the rush to get things done and the search for ‘something new’ and gets suffocated in rooms of consensus.

It’s sad that as we rush up & down the hallways of our businesses we tend to overlook the opportunities in the ordinary.

<sigh>

Surprise the world with an apple.

What an amazing thought. Just seek the small sharp insightful seemingly ordinary looking ideas and stick it to the competition.

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

“There are tiresome people who say that if you ever find yourself in a difficult situation, you should stop and figure out the right thing to do.

But there are times in this harum-scarum world when figuring out the right thing to do is quite simple, but doing the right thing is simply impossible, and then you must do something else.”

—

Lemony Snicket

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

“She wasn’t doing a thing that I could see, except standing there, leaning on the balcony railing, holding the universe together.”

–

J.D. Salinger

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

Ok.

To do or not to do is the question. That is a question a business leader gets faced with on almost a daily basis and certainly on a weekly basis.

Now.

Not all “do’s” are created equal particularly if your job is to hold the universe together. And, frankly, that is what a leader of a larger business organization does – holds the universe together. That universe has multiple layers … the business itself is at the core <because without the business the rest is irrelevant>, the employees as well as the greater universe which I will call ‘the industry’ <because your decisions either make the universe stronger or break it apart in some way>.

And I bring up the universe because that is what doing versus not doing is all about. Doing, or not doing, sends out a ripple which impacts the greater universe and, often, it is difficult to envision how the universe will react.

Yeah. That is a fairly important point to ‘decision second guessers.’ Why? Ripples are difficult to envision and second guessers tend to focus on ‘cause & affect’ criticism … linear relationships.

I rarely debate what some business leader actually does because, frankly, the decision itself is almost the least important aspect … it is most likely what comes next that matters – how you adapt to what the universe does in response to your decision & action. However. I do watch very closely as to how a business leader makes a choice because context, and reaction to the context, matters <and we all face this when stressed under a do-or-not-do decision>.

The biggest sign to watch for is ‘the use of simple equivalency on nuanced complex issues.’ Because if you see it … well … it is kind of a defense mechanism to a very stressful decision.

Universe impacting choices kind of put a leader in a corner.

They get squeezed. Personally, I do not like squeezed situation decisions. And I really don’t like when business leaders feel like they HAVE to make a decision simply because they are in a squeezed situation <especially if they themselves created the squeeze>. I am fairly harsh in my judgement with leaders who offer the simplistic “I did this because of this” simplicity and suggest a simplistic ‘we will be better off because of this’ but I will be less harsh on the decision itself. I believe all of that is fair because the situation in which the decision is made is fair game but decisions are decisions and, whatever the situation, once the die are cast the die are cast.

Look.

First & foremost I am an unequivocal do the right thing person. The thought of not doing the right thing galls me … makes me shiver to the core. Sure. From a realistic point of view that doesn’t mean I always do the right thing just that first & foremost I begin with decision making from a what the right thing to do place. And before anyone throws out the infamous ‘how can you know the right thing to do?’ I would suggest that maybe 98.863718% of the time figuring out the right thing to do is quite simple.

But, yes, sometimes … doing the exact right thing is simply impossible. Huh? How is that possible? Oh. That universe thing.

When you are holding the universe together there are easy moral decisions, there are easy right decisions, but it is never easy to see how they will always affect the universe and more often than not actually doing the right thing is a combination of luck and ability to adapt.

Sigh.

Having made some of these types of decisions myself I find second guessing these decisions tiresome. I am more than willing to judge the motivations behind the decisions. I am more than willing to judge how a leader responds to what happens when the universe responds. But I am always hesitant if not refuse to judge the decision itself.

Ok. That said.

While I believe the universe, in general, is indifferent to our fate I do believe the universe has a nasty habit of responding to us when we actually try to make something happen to our fate <like a business leader making a decision>. To be clear. If you do nothing you will gain nothing. Actually. If you do nothing you will get less than nothing. Mostly because the universe is … well … indifferent. It will not pay attention to you unless you pay attention to it <because it is far too busy focusing on those who have done something to make the universe break apart in some way>.

I say that because I think some people believe if they knew there would be no consequences for their actions they would lead a fuller life. They would have the courage to do more and take some chances.

Maybe have the courage to let themselves go forward. And they do nothing because they fear the consequences. They have forgotten that the Universe is indifferent.

And there is the tricky thing about the Universe. It is kind of a trap for a business leader. Doing more, taking some chances, and even simply making decisions, means more responsibility for actions.

It is simple math.

The more you ‘do’ the more shit you can be blamed for … or … given credit for or even have to actually do to react & adapt <there is a ratio relationship to a choice in that 1 decision can beget 10 necessary actions/decisions in response to the universe’s response>.

Well. Here is where I come back to motivation for the decision and being in a squeezed situation. In today’s world if it doesn’t appear like you are doing something … then … well … damn it … you aren’t doing something. In today’s warped business view you have to be doing something that can be seen because if you don’t everyone is convinced you are doing nothing. I call it being challenged by the ‘outcome mentality’ and, as a business leader, this is a headwind you face every morning you walk into the office.

That headwind constantly blows against anything that suggests outcome, or output, is not everything.

That’s not really truth but let’s assume for here that output is truly all that matters <note: that was extremely painful for me to type>. So what if your output is … well … holding the universe together.

Sometimes you run across that leader … or sometimes a manager … or a young employee <with the potential to do so> who holds the business or the organization together, but sometimes when you look you cannot see what they are actually doing. They may be often seen doing nothing but standing there leaning on the balcony rail.

Uh oh. In today’s business world that person is screwed.

Look.

I’m not suggesting you want people who do nothing, but sometimes people who look like they are doing nothing are actually doing a lot of something. And sometimes it is difficult to measure these people up against ‘outcome focused generators’ and particularly difficult to measure from outside a C-level perspective <employees and those looking at you without direct relationship>. What I mean by that is I have had people in my teams where during review time I have had to stack employees and justify their salary, job status, existence within the organization, whatever review line item you want to call it … based on ‘what have they done’, i.e., tangible outcome crap.

And … well … sometimes your most valuable employee doesn’t look so hot based on sheer tangible outcome. It is only when you build in intangibles that they rise above the tangible outputters <not sure that is a word>. I note that example because holding the universe together is a particular intangible talent … and one that demands a massive strength of character.

I bring up character because that is at the heart & soul of ‘to do or not to do.’ I do get a little concerned that the business world pendulum has swung so far over to outcome & output that those who ‘hold the universe together’ is becoming a dying breed. Maybe I am less concerned for the immediate, but over time. Because the young people with this talent and ability simply cannot protect themselves from an output world without help. And if all we do in business is to promote outputters … well … enough said. You get it.

Anyway.

To do or not to do.

That is the question every business leader faces … all … the … frickin … time. And while I imagine we should judge them based on whether they did or didn’t do, I would suggest I am more interested in judging business leaders on ‘the decisions after the decision.’ Frankly, that is what defines a great business leader for a couple of reasons:

• Decisions are rarely one-and-done.

Decisions impact the universe … and with many unintended consequences. And your job is to hold the universe together. Which means you have to keep an eye on the consequences of your decision … all the time.

• Decisions accumulate.

Remember the ‘keep an eye on the consequences’? Well. One decision begets 10 different consequences all of which may need a specific response/decision. Uh oh. And you make one of these decisions every day, maybe every week … yikes … every week I have to try and keep a finger on the pulse of a universe in which I am now pondering hundreds of different consequences. A decision does not, okay, rarely, make something go away which means every week your particular universe gets larger and larger.

All of that is why ‘to do or not to do’ decision should never be made  flippantly or for self-purposes because the larger decisions are more about the universe than they are about the leader themselves. I judge motivations, and we all should, but once a decision is made the die is cast and you begin judging on how a leader responds to how the universe responds.

==

“When written in Chinese, the word crisis is composed of two characters. One represents danger, and the other represents opportunity.”

–

John F. Kennedy

==

Ok.

I love this quote.  And a boatload of business management people do <dozens of books written using it>.

Uh oh. But it isn’t true.

Good ole JFK got it wrong <but he is in good company>.

The usual explanation is that the Chinese ideogram for “crisis” is made up of two characters signifying “opportunity” and “danger.” To us folk on this side of the planet this is a great example of the ancient East wisdom. And teachers, pontificators, self help specialists, motivational speakers and anyone who likes to tell people to find lemonade when given a basket of lemons have used this explanation.

The key lesson shared?

“A crisis provides an opportunity for change and growth as well as a danger of regression or stagnation.”

<but that is too long and complete to be a soundbite>

Yup. This is pretty frickin’ deep.

The truth?

1. In Chinese, the term for crisis is wei ji.

2. Native Chinese speakers tend to think the crisis = danger/opportunity connection is complete bullshit.

The Chinese word <not really an ideogram by the way> for crisis, when translated, literally means “dangerous, or precarious, moment.” That’s it.  No ‘opportunity.’  No benefiting.  Just danger. Or … maybe I should focus on the part I like … “a precarious moment.”

Not a bad lesson in itself. Crisis CAN be bad … but in reality is just all about having a precarious moment … that needs to be managed.

Just to be sure I cover all my bases as I tear down all that self-help mumbo jumbo people have absorbed and are putting in use day-to-day.

(through some research)

A mandarin expert breaks down the word and definition and wisdom mumbo-jumbo:

A whole industry of pundits and therapists has grown up around this one grossly inaccurate statement. A casual search of the Web turns up more than a million references to this spurious proverb. It appears, often complete with Chinese characters, on the covers of books, on advertisements for seminars, on expensive courses for “thinking outside of the box,” and practically everywhere one turns in the world of quick-buck business, pop psychology, and orientalist hocus-pocus. This catchy expression (Crisis = Danger + Opportunity) has rapidly become nearly as ubiquitous as The Tao of Pooh and Sun Zi’s Art of War for the Board / Bed / Bath / Whichever Room.

The explication of the Chinese word for crisis as made up of two components signifying danger and opportunity is due partly to wishful thinking, but mainly to a fundamental misunderstanding about how terms are formed in Mandarin and other Sinitic languages.

<that was awesome …>

Next.

While it is true that wēijī does indeed mean “crisis” and that the wēi syllable of wēijī does convey the notion of “danger,” the jī syllable of wēijī most definitely does not signify “opportunity.”

The jī of wēijī, in fact, means something like “incipient moment; crucial point (when something begins or changes).” Thus, a wēijī is indeed a genuine crisis, a dangerous moment, a time when things start to go awry. A wēijī indicates a perilous situation when one should be especially wary. It is not a juncture when one goes looking for advantages and benefits.

As the Mandarin language expert says quite succinctly … “In a crisis, one wants above all to save one’s skin and neck!”

As well as …

“Any would-be guru who advocates opportunism in the face of crisis should be run out of town on a rail, for his / her advice will only compound the danger of the crisis.”

I loved this guy.

A little wordy in his explanation but he was passionate about telling everyone how far off base they were on the whole crisis/opportunity thing. Sorry.  No Eastern wisdom here. In this case the east and the west agreed that a crisis is bad, dangerous and to be wary of and that’s it.

Ok.

All that said <mostly said to enlighten everyone and piss off a boatload of publishers and book writers> let’s talk about crisis and the opportunities a crisis does actually create. Most of us quickly see the danger in a crisis… and we should … because it is exactly as translated … a precarious moment.  Like its true Chinese definition a crisis is a crucial moment where things begin to go awry.

It is easy to overlook any opportunity within the crisis because, frankly, we are often just trying to survive <in other words … save our skin, neck & ass>.

And what makes this even more difficult is that the opportunity may be well hidden. The danger is always obvious and the most critical in our eye because the crisis creates potential personal harm. So what makes a crisis truly a “precarious moment” is that assuming you are seeking to find that elusive opportunity within the crisis … well … that with danger lurking its not that we forget to look for the opportunity but rather we seek to avoid the danger and the personal harm.

Lets call this for what it is … self preservation.

And that isn’t bad by the way.  Because if you don’t survive the “opportunity” becomes irrelevant. It is natural to avoid danger during a crisis and make that THE priority.  So, no, I am not going to suggest someone become an “opportunity person” when dealing with a crisis.

I believe people who can discover opportunities in a crisis are people who have already successfully managed the ‘precarious moment’ several times in the past. Maybe call it trial by fire.  Maybe call it trial & error.  But suffice it to say you ain’t gonna be seeking opportunities when dealing with your first true crisis.

Yes. Many people say that it was actually a crisis that caused them to make a much-needed change.

Yes. Living through a hard time challenges people to grow in ways that makes them more mature and opens them to new possibilities.

Where I would argue with people on this is that through surviving the crisis they … well … just found a better way to survive. And that’s not being opportunistic.  That is simply survival instinct <compounded by understanding of what makes oneself happiest>.

Look.

Life constantly gives you opportunities … and gives you crisis also <unfortunately> … regardless … you get opportunities not just to take a chance but also just to improve your current state.

Here is the formula (although in this case I am not sure A + B = C).

(A) A crisis is a forced decision making moment (typically survival based).

(B) Decision making moments represent opportunities.

(C) Opportunities typically translate into some type of change.

And everyone, obviously, wants to capitalize on any change (who would choose to have a negative result from a decision?). If someone wants to claim a crisis represents an opportunity go ahead and do so … but please recognize that it is an indirect extended relationship.  And in doing so you could be doing a disservice to people because it ignores what a crisis is truly about – survival.

Ok.

I do believe dealing with a crisis has a lot to do with attitude <which is possibly where many people get confused with this whole opportunity thing>.

A Pollyanna attitude? Nope.

Someone wrote: “Welcoming personal setbacks as rich opportunities for growth can help you survive them. Does that seem like a twisted point of view? After all, problems make us miserable, right? Scott Peck, author of The Road Less Traveled (Touchstone, 2003), considers them a gift — if you look at them in a deeper, less reactive manner. Indeed, they can give us clear perspective.”

Wow.

That is a bunch of bullhockey <bullshit>.

A crisis is just that.  A crisis.  A dangerous moment. A precarious moment.

Should we be seeking opportunities in the middle of a frickin’ crisis? Nope.

We should be seeking survival.

And that is where attitude comes in. Not “lets find the opportunity” or some baloney like that <or find the lemonade out of the lemons> but an attitude capturing a strength of character <I will be strong and overcome> and resiliency <survive>. Afterwards maybe you can look back and discover the opportunities that were an outcome from the crisis (although this has a slightly masochistic point of view in that from pain comes pleasure that kind of creeps me out) but when in a crisis … just deal with it.

Have a good attitude and explore all the possibilities/opportunities … once you have managed the experience itself.

Dealing with a true crisis takes character.  HOW you deal with a crisis says almost as much as what you do to deal with a crisis.  A crisis is a gauntlet. You have to have strength of character.  And strength in resiliency.  Please don’t measure yourself when dealing with a crisis by what opportunity you discovered from the crisis … measure yourself by how you survived.

A crisis.

It is a ‘precarious moment’ … a ‘crucial moment’ … a ‘dangerous moment.’

<East & West agree on this>

Seek to survive the moment. Don’t seek the opportunity for god’s sake. Just try and be aware should an opportunity arise <as you survive>. Leave the ‘opportunistic crisis management approach’ to people who write books and pontificate<but, please do not buy the books and live your life by all their bullshit>.

Oh.

And don’t misuse the Chinese definition of crisis. Because that is where this whole rant started. I am all for seeking opportunities and I have a shitload, too much, experience dealing with crises. But I will be honest … my first response in any crisis is “survival”. Once I can see, or sense, we will survive hen, yeah, I will most likely scan the horizon for some opportunities. But survival first.

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

“We should place confidence in our employee.

Confidence is the foundation of friendship.

If we give it, we will receive it.

Any person in a managerial position, from supervisor to president, who feels that his employee is basically not as good as he is and who suspects his employee is always trying to put something over on him, lacks the necessary qualities for human leadership – to say nothing of human friendship.”

—–

Harry Humphreys

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

“The conventional definition of management is getting work done through people, but real management is developing people through work.”

—-

Agha Abedi

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

Well.

Leading and managing people is possibly one of the most rewarding things you can do in a business career.

Firing people is possibly one of the most unrewarding things you can do in a business career.

Unfortunately these two things are inextricably linked.

I could argue that once you assume responsibility for firing someone … you learn more about yourself, and I imagine others learn about you, than from almost any other responsibility you assume as a leader.

No one likes firing people. Well. No one who is any good at business leadership. I don’t care if you absolutely hate the person you are firing, if the person has actually committed a fireable offense and you are in the right to fire them, or even if you fire someone for good reason … suffice it to say … it never feels good to fire someone.

And because of that … a good business leader never delegates the tough termination. And they never send someone to terminate a direct report.

Generally speaking … you fire anyone who is a direct report, or you were directly responsive for hiring, face to face.

Yeah.

This may not be, logistically, the easiest thing to do but it is part of the burden of responsibility. It is the mantle you wear and it is what you are obligated to offer the person being terminated – dignity & respect.

Anything less than that and you are shirking your responsibility.  Anything less than that is … well … chicken shit. And you are a chickenshit business leader if you do not do these things.

Sure.

What I just shared is a hard lesson but one business people learn in young management.

I will never forget the first person I ever fired. Paul.

An absolute great guy in absolutely the wrong position and possibly career. But that doesn’t mean it was easy to terminate him. While I was 99% sure it was the right thing to do <and my boss and her bosses agreed> there was an extraordinarily loud 1% in my head that kept me awake that night.

Inevitably he chose a different career and went on to become an SVP of sales.

And he was kind enough to drop me a couple of notes to tell me it all worked out for the best.

But I will never forget firing him. I can honestly say I never forget anyone I have fired <and that is a semi-long list after years of management>.

However.

I would like to think my leadership career is measured more by the people I did not fire.

Not firing, in a larger organization, can be harder than you think.

I think I spent more time explaining to the most senior people why I would not fire some of the people I managed than I did ever discussing almost anything else about employees with them.

Well. That is … it felt that way.

The crap that floats upwards into senior leadership about individual employees is amazing. The littlest mistakes and quirks seem to take on exponential size when it arrives at the most senior people — and they do not hesitate to share their disproportional views.

Regardless. All of those views cut into the ‘trust belief’ … are they respected within the organization, do they have the trust of the organization and can they be trusted with their responsibility.

And that is when you earn your stripes as a manager. You do not cave in to the ‘easy thing to do’ but rather stand up for your people and let the chips fall as they may. Oh. And you learn it is totally worth it to not take the easy way out.

Let me be clear.

No one is perfect. I was not a perfect employee nor was a perfect manager. And, yet, when judging employees there sometimes is the ‘perfect measure’ of which becomes the absurd standard.

Yes.

We should judge senior people more critically but we should judge them fairly.

Anyway.

I didn’t fire a lot of people. And I can think of at least 4 who made me incredibly proud that I didn’t … despite some pressure from others to do so.

All 4 of these have sent me notes at different points, not thanking me for not firing them but rather for simply giving them a chance, believing in them and seeing something in them that they knew <because all employees know when they are under ‘the human resources microscope’>  many others didn’t.

All 4 of them have been professionally successful and, more importantly, are solid good human beings. Neither of those are because I didn’t fire them but rather vindicate the non-firing decision.

All that said.

Firing someone, despite the pain of actually doing it, is often the easy way out and is certainly a way to avoid looking at your own flaws.

Flaws? I sometimes believe one of the hardest things you can learn in your career is that your best is not particularly special.

Learning the fact that your talent, in reality, is matched by a shitload of people.

Learning that your best is relatively easily matched by a shitload of people.

It is an unfortunate truth that:

• Talent is talent.
• Smarts are smarts.
• And expertise is almost always relative.

At any given point in Life and your career you can look around you and, if you are self aware, you will note you are rarely the most talented, rarely the smartest one in the room and rarely the only expert.

Even on your best day you may not actually be the best.

I imagine that is a tough thing to get your head wrapped around.

But I also imagine if you do wrap your head around it evaluating employees and how you fire them is affected.

I always watch how someone terminates an employee.

You can learn a lot about people in that situation … and you can learn a shitload about how someone feels about dignity, respect and responsibility in how they terminate an employee.

===========

Postscript 1: under the general heading of “chickenshit” from a business perspective I will comment on a Trump firing:

There are hundreds of different viable reasons to fire someone and if you have the responsibility to hire & fire and it is ‘at will’ you can do what you want. But HOW Trump fired James Comey was chickenshit.

It wasn’t face to face with a direct report <or even face to face with anyone … just a letter delivered by a non-government employee>.

While there appeared to be no sense of urgency to terminate the action was taken with an absurd sense of senseless urgency which permitted Comey the indignity of being blindsided, in the middle of a commitment to the people who reported to him and not even in town.

This was a chicken shit way of terminating an honorable employee. It is indicative of Trump’s lack of character.

Postscript 2: Under the general heading of “this is some crazy shit” from a business perspective:

Firing someone for lack of confidence when the people who you are actually working for have a general lack of confidence in you is slightly surreal.

This may actually be the ironic point of this little postscript rant.

The stated “Donald J Trump fired his FBI Director because of ‘lack of confidence’ is … well … crazy shit.

Well. If that is a true criteria and I were to look at some national polling data I could argue Trump could be fired on the same criteria by the American people.

Most leaders do not defend their firing decision through childish name calling.

“Crying Chuck” .. “Richie” in quotes <instead of Richard>. Calling people diminishing names. Childish crap like that. I have been criticized as a leader for people I have fired, as well as people who I didn’t fire, and when appropriate I responded with some “why I did it” information but I never deflected my choice & decision onto others by suggesting they were not qualified to criticize … and I certainly always treated peers with a modicum of respect.

Tweet response rather than standing up in person

Sniping from the sidelines is not leadership.

Period.

‘nuf said.

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

“Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”

–

H.L. Mencken

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

So.

This is about standing up for what you believe in <not really about being a pirate>. This is about business. And, sometimes, I imagine some of my thoughts are also about Life.

In fact.

This is about several things:

–          Not always being politically correct

–          Possibly not ‘playing nice’

–          Sacrificing some ‘art of compromise’

–          Being a pirate <yeah … I lied … it is partially about being a pirate>

Alrighty. Before I get to the fun part <slitting throats> … let me tell you how this quote is about business. Because the quote suggests that everyone … even a normal <or quasi sensible> person … is tempted to become a pirate <raise the black flag> and kill <hopefully not literally> conformity, the status quo and those things that may dull the edges in business <and life>.

Now.

This isn’t about making being a pirate a living/career, or a way of life, but rather this is more about suggesting some situations in which you are tempted to pillage all that around you, take no prisoners and get it done your way. Ok. Maybe some situations where being ‘pirate-like’ can benefit you in business.

That said.

Here are the things to think about.

Not being politically correct

Hoisting the black flag in business means you are gonna say and do some things that well behaved polite business people just may not like. In fact … it even means going out on your own, hopefully not on the plank, and sailing independently outside the conformity of what is said to be ‘right.’

Well.

Pirates were entrepreneurs. Pirates got things done fast <or faster than going through bureaucracy of some management>.

The prizes were great.

The losses were mind numbingly abrupt and conclusive.

It is often a business truth that wading your way through all the politically correct steps takes time and can sap energy. Sometimes you gotta simply say “I am a pirate … my crew will look motley … and I am abrasive myself … but this ship is gonna sail today with all those who want to hoist the black flag.”

Now.

You cannot be politically incorrect all the time … that would make you a bigot, ignorant, an asshole … and/or simply stupid <in other words … a bad pirate>. However. Selectively avoiding correctness can cut through bullshit and get the ship out of the harbor.

Oh.

And put you in a position to win a prize. Or get sunk.

But that’s the risk a pirate runs.

Not playing nice.

Being a pirate in business isn’t like playing cricket <as the British would say>. Hoyle isn’t giving everyone the rules.

Pirates cared about one thing … okay … two things.

• Booty <winning the prize>
• Not dying.

Good pirates constantly balanced between the 2. This insured they didn’t do something so incredibly stupid that their <your> own throat wasn’t slit but also insured enough risk to get what you wanted.

It also meant rules were vague at best. I am not suggesting someone be immoral or so ruthless that the integrity of the organization is compromised.

But.

To win there is a loser. And pirates didn’t let the feelings of the loser affect how they played the game. They didn’t care about playing nice. They played to win, get some loot and not get killed. This kind of attitude threaded into how you approach business just ain’t a particularly bad thing.

Sacrificing the art of compromise.

Pirates don’t compromise. They cannot.

It is about winning on their terms or losing on their terms.

Why?

Because if they don’t win they hang.

So what does that mean?

Hang compromise out to dry. Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do to win the battle. Uhm. Sometimes. This advice is a contextual ‘pick your battle’ thought.

I am not suggesting cheating.

I am not suggesting lying.

I am not suggesting anything nefarious.

I am simply suggesting that negotiating and compromising may need to be sacrificed <on occasion> in order to do what is right. And sometimes it is a truth that there is a better, if not actually best, way of doing something.

Slit the throats of compromise and do it ‘your way.’ It is kind of an all or nothing plan of action.

Oh.

Kind of like being a pirate.

Being a pirate.

No … I am not suggesting you get to wear the cool looking black eye patch or say “aargh matey” but this is about sailing the open seas, being swashbuckling and seeking booty <gold and jewels … not the other type>.

Let’s call it … well … maybe independence. And gathering those around you who want to sail off alone just this once <at least>.

Great leaders are often like the great frigate captains of the old British navy <who were kind of like pirates within a larger organization>. They showcased an ability to effectively participate in the larger organizational activities when required … and an ability to be effective taking off on independent campaigns.

Oh.

And choosing when to be independent. No one can be a pirate 100% of the time <I don’t remember reading of many old pirates> but being a pirate every once in a while can be healthy <and fun and productive>. Individually as well as to a business and organization.

Ok.

All that said. To be clear … H.L. Mencken was an extremely cynical person, disgusted with conformity, and firm in the belief that the majority opinion was pretty much always wrong. He also tended to believe the status quo <customs and traditions > was pretty much always silly if not stupid.

I don’t agree.

Selectively … all of those things are healthy.

If you are a pirate as a standard operating procedure … you are simply an outcast <if not a bitter contrarian>. I tend to believe the type of pirate I am discussing <not a greed driven corporate blood sucking leech> is needed in today’s business world more than ever. Organizations do not encourage individuality and controlled conformity <under the guise of ‘team’> is the typical guiding principle. Boring and stagnant. That’s what I think of when I read what I just wrote.

Lastly.

While I don’t recommend being a pirate and hoisting the flag all the time … I guess I would like to remind everyone that Life is awful short … and you either have to have some fun <in business> or you have to stand up for something at some point or you are just marking time. Being a pirate now and then can remind you that individuality, or non conformity, can define you to yourself a little. It can provide some personal clarity.

Something I think we could all use a dose of on occasion.

Anyway.

I can guarantee only one thing … if you hoist the black flag at least once you will certainly have one memorable moment. Oh. And you get to be a pirate for at least one moment.

That is pretty cool all by itself.

………… Joel Robison ………..

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

“And so the seasons went rolling on into summer, as one rambles into higher and higher grass.”

——

Henry David Thoreau

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

”Birds, just like the leaves, tend to vanish in the fall heading for something new. The birds will come back to start their new generations while the leaves break down and feed the forest that supports the birds.

The circle of life I suppose.”

–

Joel Robison

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

Fall finally arrived here.

It actually kind of felt like winter but … what the heck … it was our first cold weather so I will call it Fall.

The onset of Fall gave me a chance to us one of my favorite pictures of all time <Joel Robison is the photographer> where he also included his quote <above>.

I love the thought of the cycle of, and in, life.

I love the fact that in one simple piece of photography we are reminded that Life <the bigger Life around us> is never linear … it is circular.

And when reminded of that … why would we ever think our own life <the smaller more personal ‘I’ life> is linear?

We constantly circle upon things we do, don’t do, think & don’t think. Our ideas & thoughts live and die. The winds of time blow above and below and around where things happen to us almost as randomly as leaves blowing in the wind.

I say that to be poetic … but to make a point.

While cycles & circles seem so nice and neat … Life is certainly not nice and neat. It is more like the swirling chaotic leaves in a brisk autumn breeze. I say that because a wind can lift you, buffet you … and drive you down.

Life can be treacherous that way.

Beautifully chaotic.

It pays to remember in the beauty of Fall leaves resides treachery – the treachery of beautiful death. For in our jumping in piles of leaves, the beautiful rich & royal hues and crinkling of leaves underfoot we sometimes forget we are brushing lightly against the hand of death.

Death cloaked in a beautiful crisp robe encouraging us to enjoy relief from the smothering heat of summer. All Death is doing is distracting us from the more dangerous treacherous aspects of the cycle of Life.

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

“In the life of the soul, the emotions, there are these undertows, these treacherous downward forces.”

—————–

Anaïs Nin

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

Yeah.

Sure.

Life returns.

Leaves grow anew.

Lively green replaces the remaining emptiness  of leaves days gone by.

But it is there in which resides the ultimate treachery.

Life suggests to us “accept the beautiful death for it is just a cycle in which Life will return.”

Damn.

It doesn’t always work that way.

Beautiful birds can leave and never come back.

Beautiful leaves can fall and never come back.

Beautiful seasons can … well … stop rolling.

Fall is a tricky time.

first day of fall 2016 google

The birds will come back to start their new generations while the leaves break down and feed the forest that supports the birds.

The circle of life I suppose.

Whew.

That’s what I thought today as I thought about one of my favorite pictures of all time.

Oh. Yeah. Happy Halloween and, remember, it is supposed to be fun.

…………………. Halloween is here ………………………

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

“Of course.”

He picked up the brown bag of candy on the table. “What’s your . . .” He trailed off as he weighed the bag in his hands. “Didn’t I give you three pounds of candy?”

She smiled impishly.

“You ate half the bag!”

“Was I supposed to save it?”

“I would have liked some!”

“You never told me that.”

“Because I didn’t expect you to consume all of it before breakfast!”

She snatched the bag from him and put it on the table. “Well, that just shows poor judgement on your part, doesn’t it?”

——-

Sarah Maas

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

Well.

Near me … a couple of businesses have created one of the best Halloween ideas I have ever seen or heard about.

They are taking over an entire shopping center parking lot, having cars park in it with trunks open — with candy in the trunks — and invite trick or treaters from everywhere to walk around the parking lot.

They invite any and all to visit this safe space … and a space which you need not be from some high falutin’ neighborhood with “the good” candy for trick or treaters.

This is a reminder that not all kids live in great neighborhoods or have access to all the “fun” Halloween has to offer and, in some small <but big> way people can do things which permit the fun of Halloween to ‘come to them’ rather than have some well deserving kids say “I have no place to go” on an evening which all kids should enjoy.

This is an idea I wish I had had.

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

“At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst.”

—–

Aristotle

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

“We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker.

It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.”

——

Ronald Reagan

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

Well.

If there is one thing the Trump administration does well, really well <great again even> … is to find some scrap of equivalency to suggest what they have done or said is “normal.”

In addition, they gird their normalizing arguments with “because he can” simplistic tripe.

This is the Trump business mantra applied to the presidency … ‘it is technically legal & norms are irrelevant’.

This is the lesson that Trump appears to have ignored, the one where parents teach every child “just because you can doesn’t mean you should.”

Look.

Presidents can pardon whoever they want convicted of a federal crime … not a state crime. Technically Trump was within his ‘technical rights’ to pardon Sherriff Joe Arpaio and, literally, he wins because “the left” and Republicans’ with any sense of norms will go ballistic.

But I would suggest society actually loses on this one <as does the American legal system>.

In a normal world this pardon may appear in the overall scheme of things as small potatoes … but it is not. With this president it edges onto the slippery slope of a new normal <which is not normal nor desired normal>. It edges into an undermining of the justice system.

Hear me out.

2 things make me say this.

How Trump gave the pardon verbally.

He suggested in his words that the Sheriff was just doing his job well. In other words … the laws were either wrong or the law of the land restricts people from doing their jobs. Uhm. And that the president is the judge of whether the laws are right or wrong, constricting or supportive.

The words matter just as much as the pardon itself. The words send a message with regard to how people should view laws and the legal system.

By the way … the words are as much Trump as anything we have ever seen … only he knows what laws are truly worthy and he rules his business that way. In his mind Trump is the sole arbiter of right versus wrong & legal versus ‘useless law.’

How Trump came to the pardon.

He offered the pardon without his Dept. of Justice. In other words … the DOJ and what they thought <or knew> was irrelevant. Process and legal minds are irrelevant … he is the law <a shiver went down my spine as I typed that>. It should be disconcerting to any and all that Trump appears to come to a conclusion about something, particularly what is legal and what isn’t, without seeking the legal process to back it up.

But.

At the root of the issue is that a “law & order” president just pardoned a ‘law & order employee’ who … well … not only flaunted the law but broke the law of rights. The fact is he is not a law abiding sheriff if he’s disobeying a court order <let us remind ourselves that this charming fellow was a convicted sheriff, who ran sweltering, punishing jails where inmates died and was accused of targeting Latino residents … AND … during the litigation that led to his conviction for criminal contempt, he hired a private detective to investigate the wife of a federal judge hearing a case against his office >.

And at the root of the Trump issue <as if there is just one rotten root> is, as USA Today points out, Arpaio didn’t meet the Justice Department guidelines for a pardon. His conviction wasn’t five years old, he hadn’t expressed remorse and he hadn’t even applied to the Office of Pardon Attorney.

The day before, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the president would follow a “thorough and standard process” in considering the pardon.

That process usually requires seven layers of review and an FBI background check.

That did not happen.

Past Bush ethics Chief counsel Richard Painter said:

—————–

Well, I don’t see how this would have made it through any normal process.

This sheriff has been known for lawless acts for many years. I don’t think he would have lasted one week as a sheriff in my home state of Minnesota. We are a law and order state. Many places are. We favor law and order in the United States.

When a judge tells a sheriff to do something, the sheriff does it. That’s what law and order is all about. And if you’re in contempt of court and you’re a law enforcement official, you’re abusing your power. You should not be pardoned by the President of the United States.

And the message here is very clear: the President likes sheriff Joe because he likes going after immigrants. He was going after minorities. And that’s the clear message here. And I think it’s really reprehensible and I wish that something could be done about it. We gotta think seriously about whether Donald Trump is fit to be President of the United States.

I’ve been a Republican for thirty years and we’ve got a lot of great people in the Republican Party. Who can serve honorably in this United States government and can serve this President of the United States.

This is just one more stick in the eye to the minority community and to those victimized by the very few people in law enforcement like sheriff Joe who choose to use their power abusively. And choose to ignore the orders of the judiciary. And that is lawlessness. And that should not be tolerated in the United States.

————————-

Sigh.

The legal system is degraded because it is politicized in the way that it looks like the president wants to do what he wants to do which, in the end, undermines the utility of the legal system overall.

But watch.

All the Trump surrogates will be flocking to the TV shows to start shaking their fists and defiantly spouting out some false equivalence to justify this non-normal presidential behavior.

They will use scraps of truth and facts to weave a story that suggest Trump is normal, thought normally and even acted normally.

This is not normal and there are few fair equivalences.

In the most harsh view … with the pardoning of Joe Arpaio … Trump has established his place in history alongside those who exercised the same executive and dictatorial rights such as Stalin of Russia, Mussolini of Italy and Hitler <as well as Erdogan, Putin and Duterte>. That does not mean he IS them just that he is utilizing some of the same tactics.

To be clear.

While I fear that Trump and Arpaio are bigots and nationalists and authoritarians … that doesn’t make them Nazis <so I wish some people would tone down some of the rhetoric>.

It just makes them bigoted, nationalistic authoritarians. That’s bad enough and I see little value in bringing up Nazis.

That is a false equivalency.

I have said this before and I will say it until I die … the Trump presidency nor the Trump behavior is normal and we need to stop suggesting it is normal. We should be seeking to explain and justify his uniqueness in behavior <and if we cannot then he should be penalized> but no one … and I mean no one … should be using scraps of normalcy to create a false equivalency of a larger whole normalcy to a non-normal president.

This is NOT normal in how we should be viewing our legal system and legal decisions.

Trump is certainly no Reagan but maybe we, all of us, should heed Reagan’s words in the age of Trump … we must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker.