===

 “… Trump is a “guy whose thoughts are often just six fireflies beeping randomly in a jar”

David Brooks

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

“This fundamentally boils down to character, and his character is rotten. He’s a narcissist who happens to have taken control of the Republican party. There’s some areas where he agrees with party orthodoxy, and some where he doesn’t. But his only doctrine is: whatever is good for Donald Trump is good for the country. When he goes down – and he will go down, at some point – one of the things that will be striking is just how quickly members of Congress will turn on him.”

Eliot Cohen, former state department counsellor to secretary of state Condoleezza Rice

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

“Ultimately, Trump is not dangerous because he is immoral, but because he is amoral. Trump has already bought into the system entirely. He is as vacuous a candidate as there can be, giving no thought to the moral questions and the theological issues that underpin those questions. He doesn’t care about who he hurts or what philosophy he takes, as long as it gains him power. He is an antichrist not because he is explicitly evil, shouting and screaming against God, but because he disregards God and morality all together.”

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

So. With some new polling coming out in the USA suggesting voters in some key states think Biden is too old and a Trump administration would be better for the economy than the Biden administration, I thought I would remind everyone how horrible Trump is, and was as a president. I will set aside the age issue because even though I would prefer a younger president its not like we are choosing between 2 spring chickens. And as for the economy, that perception is just nuts.

What isn’t nuts is just how horrible Trump is – as a person, a president, a leader and even a nation decisionmaker. Trump is a divider, he is a fierce destroyer of systems and institutions (and even results and outcomes), and consistently lies (about everything). Worse, he consistently plays to the nation’s fears, not its hopes. Trump is dangerous on so many economic, societal & cultural levels its disturbing. All that said maybe the most dangerous is he has bludgeoned our senses so much that many of us have become numb to Trump and his amorality. A significant portion of us have normalized the non-normal behavior under a “it is what it is and will not change.” And this is partially driven by the fact we are tired. Not tired of news coverage, but just tired of having to deal with the amoral incessant simplistic drivel he offers. And its even more tiring to think we need to fight this battle one more time in another election cycle. That said. In all of this tiredness society has permitted the majority of people to reside in a world of amoral relativism despite the fact they are actually quite moral. We have learned to straddle a world in which there are two moral universes and one universe is grounded in reality and the other is grounded in perceptions. The paradox is that Trump speaks in absolutes with total disregard to reality. His absolutes speak to the perceptions of a minority – a passionate minority.

Which leads me to the consequence of relativism – exception acceptance.

Everything is imperfect, but Trump has made being grossly imperfect a relative argument. The moderate Republican finds themselves saying things like “I find myself saying there are some conservative things I like but ….” Ah. “But-ism.” The idea is that “well, maybe he is imperfectly okay (which is reflective of the world in totality).” He offers this idea to undermine institutions, but it is the basis for his existence. This is not ‘what-aboutism’; this is exception acceptance. And once he puts us on the slippery slope of exceptions it cascades into a debate on what % of good is necessary to make it all okay. He creates a scenario in which there is no good or bad which enable him to suggest he is ‘good.’ This also reflects his view of “winning.”, i.e., there is no perfect way to win so don’t judge me on how I (or we) win. Suggest what is possible, not probable. This is what every conspiracy theorist does, but Trump resides solely in “possibilities not probabilities” which forces all of us to discuss everything in degrees, nuances & complexity. We do this in a world which craves simplicity. He forces us to frame off of ‘what could be possible’ rather than “let’s deal in probabilities.” He wins as soon as we offer up “the possibility of bias exists” because as soon as we admit the possibility of existence – it exists. This kills the idea that two things can exist at the same time like:

• “I can think something, have some specific beliefs, but I can still do my job.”

• “It is quite possible MSNBC is biased, but it is more probable they care about the truth.”

Anyway. He treats “what if”, i.e., exceptions, as absolutism and we debate degrees & relativism, all compounded by the fact he banks on the fact we have had it pounded into our heads that “if it is not simple it is wrong (or someone is lying).” His amorality deserves no exception relativism. It takes no exaggeration to make that point.

Which leads me to Healthy narcissism versus being a narcissistic asshat.

The difference between healthy and asshat is usually found in someone’s ‘devoid-ness.’ And Trump is devoid of … well … he is devoid. To be clear. I fully recognize some people like his bluster and bloviated sense of self. They view it as confidence; not a con man. But let’s just agree that is horrible for a leader of a country. But back to that distinction between healthy and asshat. Craig Malkin, a clinical psychologist and lecturer for Harvard medical school, suggests a Healthy narcissism is a trait that all of us carry: the drive to feel special or unique.

“In fact, people with a healthy dose of narcissism are happier, more optimistic and consistently confident than people at the low end of the spectrum”

Pathological, malignant, or asshat narcissism begins “when people become so addicted to feeling special that, just like with any drug, they’ll do anything to get their ‘high.’” Uhm.

“Now, you know, I was a good student. I always hear about the elite. You know, the elite. They’re elite? I went to better schools than they did. I was a better student than they were. I live in a bigger, more beautiful apartment, and I live in the White House, too, which is really great.”

Trump talking about himself

Trump is a narcissistic asshat who thrives on being adored AND hated. Always remember this fundamental truth about Trump: – he has always felt like the guy on the outside looking in, the guy people wouldn’t accept in their social circles and wouldn’t let into their club. Stuffing it in all of their faces is the motivation for everything in his life. His unhealthy narcissism is one driven of amoral vengeance. That amorality, and vengeance, means his legal boundaries are crooked, at best, and nonexistent, at worst. That said. The question isn’t whether Trump is a crook. The question is: What kind of crook is he? Well. An amoral one for sure.

Which leads me to a crooked version of leading.

There is a bunch I can say about having an amoral leader <one I actually called “fighting for the soul of America”> but for today what I would suggest is that it will inevitably lead to leading from behind which in Trump’s case was having a transactional relationship with the world. Obama always got crapped on for leading behind, but listening to Trump and watching some of the ‘deals’ he built he offered a different version of leading from behind – values do not matter, i.e., if you can pay, we will play. That is non-leadership leadership. This is ceding the ability to guide through power relationships, but rather simply make everything transactional. This cedes bending the arc of things to the benefit of a country, and its people, and empties everything (amorally) into dollars & cents. Simplistically his leadership was “we will provide whoever wants our arms & support <if you will pay for it>” and “we don’t want to fight but we will supply you so that you can fight.”  It is a hollow America standing behind anyone who wants to pay for our support. Our criteria beyond money? Appearance of global security. In other words … we support any global conflict under the guise of if we support it well it will end faster <and peace arrives faster>. We don’t carry the stain of intervention and yet gain the short term economic fruits.

He almost seems to believe that by standing behind he will be able to assess the pieces as they fall and gather up the ones he wants. And, yes, I wrote standing behind because this is not a leadership position; this is an opportunistic position. He seems to seek an opportunistic global strategy. In his amoral naïve approach others used him for their own gains and the world splintered using American resources to do so.  Needless to say, we are now paying the piper for that attitude and policy attitude.

On a grander note it is relatively easy to see that America, under Trump, ceded its position as global leader. Circling back to the polls I mentioned upfront, it’s almost like people are oblivious to the fact that he is the one who created the issues we are dealing with at the moment.

Which leads me to remind everyone Trump is a racist.

I have one friend who adamantly believes Trump is not a racist and that he “treats everyone equally horrible.” That’s nuts. That is actually relativism. Taken in isolation Trump is racist. And all you have to do is look to who gravitates to him. As I have stated time and time again, not all who are in the Trump cult are racist, but all racist people are in the Trump cult. Racism or not let’s call it Trump driven white victimhood <which is an extension of his belief he is always the victim>.

————–

“It’s about the white middle class—we have not been represented, and the only way we are going to get representation is if Donald Trump is our next president.

We’re treated like the minority, even though there are more of us.”

A Trump Follower

—-

Trump is a less bigoted version of Obama. His crime is being white.”

A Trump follower

—-

Ah. Trump and that “white thing.” 85% agreed that “America has lost its identity.” This is the group who hyperventilates over any hyphenated ethnic-Americans. They want, no demand, genuine Americans with no hyphens. They struggle to believe someone could be loyal to both American and their native ethnic culture.  It is this basic principle Trump has given voice to <under the guise of political correctness>.  In their belief, America must become culturally and politically a White, Anglo Saxon Christian (WASP) nation again. Simplistically he is shouting that America needs to put the interests of the white working classes first. Trump sees ‘victim’ as ‘white warrior.’ Uhm. That’s racism.

Trump fits the Archie Bunker archetype of “lovable bigot.” His racism signals authenticity and a willingness to tell “hard truths” to white Americans. Yeah. Not only is Trump amoral, he is also a racist.

——

“The three most charismatic leaders in this century inflicted more suffering on the human race than almost any trio in history: Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. What matters is not the leader’s charisma. What matters is the leader’s mission.”

Peter F. Drucker

Which leads me to remind everyone what the world looked like when Trump was president.

Ah. Remember those heady days of angst, turmoil, tweets and general twattery? Everyday he was shouting into cameras what we were supposed to be thinking.

• The economy was the best ever! (it was no better than Obama’s). immigration control is stronger than ever! (all they did was hold them in Mexico and separate parents and children – and lost track of them).
• The military is strongest ever! (he pardoned amoral behavior of some military opposite what military standards desire).
• USA has never been more respected around the world! (every country’s faith in America plummeted – except Russia and Israel).

It was simplistic bloviating drivel where the louder he shouted, and the more confident he sounded, the more reality stood in proof that, objectively, what he was saying was absurd and just an alternative version of reality.

During that period, I wrote this:

• I vaguely remember when the USA was leading the world intellectually and policy wise.
• I vaguely remember a world in which the rest of the world may have occasionally mocked America for its sense of hubris but didn’t mock the country for its idiocy.
• I vaguely remember that global leadership didn’t take on the banal hues of a high school.

Trump was rude and crude and scary. He was intent on destroying anything he could get his hands on – the legal system, norms, foreign relationships and even the global economy. He was transparent  – transparently dumb, transparently ignorant, transparently a liar.

He didn’t make USA safer, didn’t make the world safer, didn’t make the USA more economically sound (but kind of encouraged the rest of the world be to be more economically sound), subsidized businesses to cloak his horrible business policies and managed the country’s finances like he did his businesses (he actually made a casino bankrupt). He is a horrible amoral man and he was a horrible amoral president heading up a horribly inept amoral cabinet only putting the country into a horrible position for the future. but, hey, some people will still vote for him. So maybe the sane rest of us should remember how horrible he was and get out and make him lose again. Ponder. Seriously Ponder.

Earlier today I reshared my thoughts on the lack of civility in political rhetoric and how that fosters an environment of violence – either unacted upon violent thoughts or actual violent actions. I even wrote ‘the politics of resentment’. Which leads me to Trump. Violence has always bubbled below the surface in America, but where I lay a large burden of the blame on Trump is for using it as a tool of “America Greatness”, i.e., the violence is done by patriots passionate about their great America. It really was not that long ago that in 2015 and 2016 the Trump cult was being shaped with violence.

It seemed like just another day and another violent Trump rally. The incidents kept piling up.

Chicago protest fights. A Black Lives Matters protester was sucker-punched by a white bystander at a rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina. A young black woman was surrounded and shoved aggressively by a number of individuals at a rally in Louisville, Kentucky. A black protester was tackled, then punched and kicked by a group of men as he curled up on the ground in Birmingham, Alabama. Immigration activists were shoved and stripped of their signs by a crowd in Richmond, Virginia. A Latino protester was knocked down and kicked by a Trump supporter in Miami.

At that time I said this version of America is not the America I know, the America I want nor is it America anywhere near great. While I remain steadfast on the latter two, on the first I was wrong. I now know the Trump America and it is violent.

It makes me angry.

It disturbs me.

Just to remind everyone, one of the most disturbing moments, one which truly made me angry, was angry as I watched a protest in Chicago devolve into what could only look like a riot to the entire world.

Another reminder. A Republican, at that time, said: “Tonight the seeds of division that Donald Trump has been sowing this whole campaign finally bore fruit, and it was ugly.”

I am angry because Mr. Trump knew what he is doing. He was playing with fire. Playing it as close to the fire as he could without getting burned <or burning down the house> because in his own pea like mind he has decided that this warped version of passion will energize change and ‘winning.’

Just as he has shown a complete disdain for a ‘good win’ versus a ‘bad win’ he also shows no signs that he understands the difference between ‘bad passion’ and ‘good passion.’

That is the sign of an incompetent ignorant lazy leader.

I am angry.

I am not angry at America or its people or even most of Trump’s followers; I am angry at a person who wants to be the emperor who has no clothes. He offers only platitudes of ‘deals & wins’ as solutions to any issue he is asked about and, worse, simplistically twists the “us versus them” narrative into “we good people & they bad/evil people” platitudes.

He skates on the slippery superficial surface of emotion and an enhanced feeling of irrelevance <or being marginalized> from a minority of the populace who has now found a voice.

I remain angry even to this day.

And I get even angrier because Trump, to this day, assumes no, none, nada, whatever version of “zero” you want to apply here … responsibility for anything.

It is never his problem. It is never his issue. It is never anything but ‘the bad people’ <media, people who do not agree, Muslims/Islam, Mexicans, immigrants, stupid elite, etc.>. It is never him.

This despite the fact he is the common denominator.

And this also means, to Mr. Tump, he is never responsible for his words.

We are all responsible for the words we say. Everyone.

That said.

It most likely took me far too long to understand this, but while freedom of speech is an equal freedom for all & everyone, the responsibility tied to that freedom is not equal. Responsibility increases upwards. The larger the forum, the more impact as a leader I have, the larger the actual managerial/actionable responsibility the leader has AND the larger the responsibility to the speech portion of my freedom I have.

Trump acts, and has always acted, like he has no more responsibility with regard to what he says than the guy sitting at the end of the bar after a 10 hour day drinking his 5th draft beer with his buddies bitching about the world.

======== Trump supporter ==========

A leader has a responsibility to listen to his/her people but any good leader knows you don’t incite latent negative emotion within an organization … you show you listen, unite and give specifics on how the organization will progress from that point on.

Lastly.

I am angry because I have run across these faux business leaders in business and they are the worst of the worst. They are hollow of anything. And blanket their hollowness with superficiality or faux emotion. And, most importantly, they make nothing great.

Trump is particularly skilled at manipulating his version of the public to his own ends. And, in that, he doesn’t even recognize his divisiveness <which is frightening for someone who was leader of the free world>. I believe he doesn’t recognize the divisiveness because he lives in an alternative universe in which everyone else is wrong and the problem and protestors never have a valid reason and anyone not in ‘his crowd’ must be unpatriotic.

Mr. Trump, assuming he actually desired to be a president, never understood all citizens are his crowd. You either decide to try and unite by listening and convincing them of your path to ‘greatness’ or I imagine you just let them rot somewhere as you, and your followers, shun them. And, well, that’s what he did. And by shunning them, while fostering a violent attitude, he gave implicit permission to be violent as long as it was targeted to those he shunned.

I cannot remember in my 60something lifetime anything like this.

And, yeah, I am still angry.

And, if I am honest, a little nervous certainly unsettled and, well, maybe a little scared.

This feeling did not come easily.

And I know exactly when it happened. It was a March morning in 2016 when I discussed my anger at Trump’s lack of assuming responsibility after the Chicago rally incident and it happened as I said “I have never seen this before in my lifetime.”

Because I do know where I have seen it before. This is the divisiveness of dictators and autocrats. I hesitated to use examples from the past, but the names came very very close to crossing my lips. It was an uncomfortable feeling to be that close to comparing Trump to some of the worst of the worst leaders from past history. And what got me that close to uttering the examples is that instead of making a call for discussion and debate he insists on calling for silence and authoritarianism <absurdly under the guise of ‘freedom of speech’>. To be clear, I no longer hesitate to draw these comparisons. To be clear, as he harkens back to the ‘good ole days’ he even seems to encourages violence <under the guise of “we are so weak and need to be strong again”>.

This is bully logic.

Trump disavows violence and yet encourages it. He encourages a consistent ‘strong message’ <however you, the followers, would like to deliver that message to ‘them’> of silencing dissent, silencing debate, silencing real solutions, silencing critics and silencing competitors. And he fills their silent space with bombastic platitudes of deals & wins and divisive rhetoric.

While he’s narcissistic, self-absorbed, power hungry/crazy and driven by either greed or ‘winning by any measure” I almost think we are seeing a public case study example of the Dunning–Kruger effect.

This is a cognitive bias in which a relatively unskilled person suffers illusory superiority. This translates into mistakenly assessing their ability and believing their skills, and themselves, to be significantly better than what it actually is. Dunning and Kruger attributed this bias to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their own ineptitude and evaluate their own ability accurately. When Trump looks in the mirror he sees only something superior to everyone else … maybe even superior to America itself.

Anyway.

I am not a huge follower of politics but it seems to me that consistent violence at the scale of 2016 was rare in American politics, but now it has almost become the norm.

And I am still angry at Mr. Trump.

Angry at his overall lack or personal responsibility. Angry at his disdain for the power of words. Angry at his lack of understanding of freedom of speech as it pertains to leadership. Angry at his lack of desire to try and convert dissenters, but rather silence or eject/reject dissenters.

Angry at his hollowness <because I want a leader who is full of a robust vision beyond deals & wins>.

And, mostly, I am angry at what he has done to America.

He never had any interest in making America great, he simply encouraged us to hate.

And hate is the foundation for violence. Ponder because this is important.

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

“America is great because she is good.

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

Alexis de Tocqueville

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

“We Americans are a do-it-yourself people.

We are an impatient people.

Instead of teaching someone else to do a job, we like to do it ourselves. And this trait has been carried over into our foreign policy.”

Nixon from his Silent Majority speech

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

Nationalism, populism, and “America First,” and economics are inextricably linked. The Trump administration simply embodied the dull axe version of nationalism economics so we have some indications of what it means in terms of implementation as well as consequences. That said. It is a little difficult to unpack everything happening with regard to “America First” and what it means for America economically short term and long term.

Alternatively. The Biden administration is (mostly) returning to the economic path the Obama administration implemented with the twist that the pandemic permits them, because of the global supply chain shakeup, to redesign global structure a bit. But the main thing the Biden administration is doing, significantly different than the Trump administration, is the balancing of short-term results and long term desires/needs. As I pointed out before, the Obama administration never got enough credit for doing this. it is a trickier path because it does sacrifice some short-term metrics in order to be able to retool for a healthy future economy. The truth is America is now on a much healthier path going in the right direction (one does wonder what a better place we would be in if we hadn’t had to endure the dull axe policies of the Trump administration which set us off the path) and supply chains are shaking out, businesses are reshaping (too slowly in my mind) their economic structures, there are some significant strides in retooling for a future economy and a globalized economy is taking on a new healthier shape. Yes. Contrary to alarmist headlines the American economy is in really good shape, (particularly compared to other countries) and we should not confuse systemic consequences like inequality with a poor economy or inflation with poor domestic policy because inflation is not an American issue, but rather a global issue, therefore, it is not a reflection of any American ‘flaw’ but reflective of a global response to a myriad of issues.

I have a lot to suggest on the America First Economics topic, but because there is so much let me offer some overarching ways of viewing it all. I will also note that I am purposefully using Trump and not Republican or Trump administration because I believe we would be incredibly shortsighted to think that his personal views on how the world exists <in his mind> do not drive his behavior and the administration decisions being made:

• How Trump views the leadership concept of dragging up versus dragging down
• How Trump views rules & regulations
• How Trump views I versus team
• How Trump views uncertainty
• How Trump views life only through a dollars & cents lens <driving an economics first, and only, view>
• How Trump views infrastructure (building)

All of these views drive America First all of which <I would suggest> actually encourage an America Alone strategy. In addition, to a larger extent, all actually encourage an “every man for himself” attitude <kind of an extremely perverse version of traditional conservative ideology>.

Dragging up versus dragging down

America didn’t stay in the Paris Climate agreement, among other transnational alignments, so I will use it as an example of how Trump views America leadership and leadership in general <because it applies to almost everything the administration did>.

Leaders understand that to lead you need to ‘drag up’ behavior. This comes at an expense in that you are demanded to do more things without any real compensation or obvious immediate ROI. For example, part of the Paris agreement was that United State had higher standards. This certainly places a burden on American companies. It also translates into an innovation push to meet those standards. And, ultimately, because we lead in innovation the rest of the world will eventually buy our innovations. As noted earlier this is an example of sacrificing some short term results for longer term structural value creation and, ultimately, a stronger economic presence. This leadership also encourages other countries to ‘play up’ as close to United States as possible.

Conversely, if United States drops out of the overall leadership, standards drops and, as any organizational study will tell you, the overall tide of standards will be lower as things get dragged downwards. This is, simplistically, why leaders have higher standards in business. It drags the organization up and not down. As for businesses, as I will highlight again later, without normalizing stanards a business will typically align with the lowest possible standard that optimizes profits. That’s why businesses need to be given some guardrails if we want new standards of behavior/operations.

Trump does not understand this. Nor does he believe in this. I believe ‘America First,’ generally speaking, understands this, but ignores this.

Rules & regulations

I took a lot of big gulps during the Trump years as I viewed lists of regulations the Trump administration eliminated. I viewed this as general incompetence <they appeared to follow an “if it exists it should not exist” strategy and not “a thoughtful consideration of its impact” type decision> or general lack of understanding of how business works. What I mean by that is business has a fairly simple objective; profit making. It is within that simplicity that a lot of bad things, and bad behavior, can occur. Government has always been in the business of ‘guardrails to ensure the populace benefits’ and, generally speaking, do fairly well at that. I am certainly not suggesting governments shouldn’t be reviewing regulations all the time and eliminating, or editing, existing regulations that have served their purpose. The Trump administration applied the dull axe version of my last sentence. One could ponder if at the core of their deregulation there was some corruption, but let’s just say they embraced unfettered free market (which almost any eminent economist would tell you is a bad idea).

That said. Trump believes if there had been no rules & regulations, he would be the wealthiest man in the world. He has never found a rule or regulation he has ever liked. He also believes that if he thinks that everyone should think that. I have written about capitalism a zillion times and I have argued that unfettered capitalism simply brings out the worst in people and increases inequality. Rules & regulations, done well, tend to herd behavior.

Trump doesn’t think rules apply to him so why wouldn’t we expect him to eliminate rules so he doesn’t even have to pretend he plays by the rules.

I versus team

Economics, whether we admit it or not, is about people. More specifically, it is about people working together and communicating with each other. There really is no such thing as a ‘sole business person’ because in order to achieve any profits, at scale or not, that one must interact with others (the market). That said. Trump has never been part of a team nor does he have any desire to be a team leader. How this translates into his decision attitude is that the global interconnectedness is irrelevant to him. No. He actually thinks it is a negative. We are not a global team seeking to win, but rather it is ‘every man for himself.’ Unfortunately this attitude also cascades down into domestic policy.

And because I used the Paris Climate deal earlier to make a point on something else I will do so again here. One would think it would be remarkable that someone who has not appointed someone to run the White House Office of Science and Technology <a person who traditionally serves as the President’s chief science officer> or has the majority of posts on the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology <a group of civilian science and tech leaders who advise the president> unfilled would feel qualified to make his decision.  However, if you do not value a team effort and believe “I” is all that matters then the qualified support doesn’t really matter and, in fact, could negatively affect “the I.” Trump is a focus group of one making decisions. And it has become apparent he believes the ‘best of the best’ work that way. Once again, effective economies do not work that way.

All that said. Everything Trump does and supports gives the finger to anything that could be construed as a team effort. It is “I” in the world. “I” as a country. “I” as a business and, well, “I alone” is the mantra. The problem is that every “I” in the American economy is dependent, and connected, with a variety of other resources, distribution partners, and customers. Basically even the American economy is a system nested within a larger global system and attempting to optimize a part, or an “I”, will never improve the system nor optimize the return.

That said, “it has always been about me and just me” bleeds into everything Trump believes and does.

Uncertainty

Solid economies tend to lean on some certainties – monetary systems, distribution systems, partnership systems, resource systems, etc. as the pandemic reminded us, when these certainties become less certain, bad things happen. Trump views uncertainty as a positive <with regard to everything>. This attitude undergirds behavior. For example, whole sale immigration changes disrupts the entire workforce and negatively affects a variety of industries. His appositive view of certainty upends industries within his actual behavior – and he doesn’t care. It seems to me that wrenching the entire system 180degrees creates what I offered up as the biggest flaw in Trump’s way of doing business — uncertainty. He believed everyone was like him and every business would thrive if he created the uncertainty and he thrives on the belief America will ultimately benefit from uncertainty. He believed America will swoop in now that is it is free from the shackles of the ‘old order’ <way of doing things, deals, regulations, etc.> and dominate what, uhm, we already dominated.

The country that had spent decades erecting an international order based on free trade, multilateral cooperation, a global alliance network, and the promotion of democratic values had now chosen as its leader a man who detests any structure supporting all those things.

What a bad idea. Very bad. And, once again, while I am disappointed in Trump, I am even more disappointed a business man <his 1st secretary of state> thought this way because it ignores business 101.  Well. It ignores business 101 depending on whether you think America is special, exceptional in some way or that part of what makes America distinct in the world is not the bigness of our economy but rather the bigness of our idea.

That said, Trump doesn’t believe in big ideas he only believes in big money. Oh. If you have no ideas the only way to make money is to take advantage of uncertainty. The problem is that America is built on an idea, ideals and a system of implementing those to the benefit of the economy (in a globalized interconnected economy) and not just “more money” and while we may <if we are really lucky> benefit economically, under this Trump philosophy we would do so at the sacrifice of our ideas, ideals and leadership in this uncertain world Trump desires to play his dangerous game in.

Leaders don’t act with uncertainty as their compass, they use certainty, or degrees of, to lead. Of course, Trump wouldn’t know how to lead even if given an instruction manual with lots of pictures.

The dollars & cents lens <economics first>

I am not a diplomat or some foreign policy expert, but I admit that I took a big gulp when early on in the Trump administration I saw the secretary of state suggest that America should make economic and security needs above American ‘values.’ It seems to be that everything will be decided on an exchange of money and not on an exchange of ideas <where value is a combination of economics and values>.

US foreign policy, Tillerson said, is guided by fundamental values, but he cautioned: “If we condition too heavily that others must adopt this value that we’ve come to over a long history of our own, it really creates obstacles to our ability to advance our national security interests, our economic interests.”

Well. It seems to me while USA is in the ‘doing & making & selling shit” business we are also in the “doing & making & selling with values” business.

It seems to me that USA is not particularly in the “partnerships of convenience “business where we can conveniently set aside our values & ideals but rather we are in the “partnership with ideals” business where we are delighted to do business with you but you are gonna have to accept the fact we are gonna showcase freedom, democracy and what we believe people deserve.

To Trump everything is marginalized excepting economics <money>.

Let’s be clear. American ‘values’, or a belief in winning the right way, doesn’t get in the way of our economic interests. To believe that is to not believe in ‘value’ <in which premium price relies on some value equation above a dollar is a dollar>.  As Gen. George Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, commented in 1945, Washington could no longer pursue a narrow conception of national interest or limit its strategic horizons to the Western Hemisphere: “We are now concerned with the peace of the entire world.” I would be remiss if I didn’t point out peace is, well, certainty, and certainty, through peace, is good for our economic interests.

To me, the pursuit of “America First” can often be accomplished best by protecting and defending the rights of others which actually includes economic relationships. I dug up a speech made on December 20, 1951 by Dean Acheson which laid out a view of American foreign policy very different from Trump’s first secretary of state Rex Tillerson:

——————–

The greatest asset we have in all the world—even greater than our material power—is the American idea. No one needs to tell an American audience all the things that this holds for us. It is so much a part of our everyday lives that we do not stop to define it, or to put it into packages for export. But throughout the world, wherever people are oppressed, wherever people dream of freedom and opportunity, they feel the inspiration of the American idea.

What we are trying to do, in our foreign policy, is to make possible a world in which our own people, and all people who have the same determination, can work in their own way toward a better life, without having to bear the yoke of tyranny.

—————-

I have always known the Trump administration would be putting economy, money, above all and I did outline some concerns I had about attacking a foreign policy based on transactional relationships, but it now had become a reality; it is commerce over conscience.

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

“Life doesn’t get easier or more forgiving, we get stronger and more resilient.

Steve Maraboli,

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

Money is the currency of survival in today’s world and offers an ongoing temptation for “well, just a little bit more would be nice.” 90% of us know money isn’t everything, but that same 90% knows money is something. I mentioned it that way because it becomes easy to think money as a ‘this or that’ thought, everything or nothing, and, yet, in this case it is not everything, but is certainly still something. That said. I think Trump yielding the high ground to simply gain some perceived temporary ‘economic advantage’ was simply wrong and is haunting us now.

To be clear. Trump wouldn’t recognize the high ground if it smacked him in the face.

           The myth of being a builder

As noted above, America is the business of making and selling shit. Now. While that has certainly shifted over the decades (we do significantly less ‘making’ and significantly more ‘services economy’), the core of any country’s economic resilience resides in manufacturing (large, medium and small sized businesses). That said. Trump always claimed he was a builder and America must have had a dozen “infrastructure weeks” espousing a growth in manufacturing that never occurred. While it is easy to chuckle over ‘the infrastructure week that never was’ it is actually sad because it was a reflection of a cascading number of issues surrounding an “American first” belief. You need money to build infrastructure – government money. Government money subsidizes innovation and growth for which it gets paid back in tax revenue (business and individual wages) over time. Governments get crucified when they make a bad bet or ROI isn’t clear upfront, but the reality is for every ‘bad bet’ government has made that bet has evolved into, well, economic progress. In other words, you need government money for infrastructure. Which leads me to the Trump tax decreases. Ignore the fact it benefited the wealthy, it increased deficits as America gained less in tax revenue which, as a consequence, they didn’t have for, yes, an infrastructure week. In addition, the tariffs. I am neither anti nor pro tariffs. They can be used tactically quite effectively to help specific industries compete. The Trump administration implemented tariffs like a dull axe in combination with the fact they didn’t coordinate with the EU so tariffs hurt the US doubly as that business went elsewhere. But the tariffs situation got a bit worse as we think about money to invest. Trump, in the attempt to limit the bad news domestically, began subsidizing the American industries he crippled with the tariffs. Basically, the government money wasn’t being used to innovate or invest but rather to prop up industries he was hurting with his policies. To be clear, I am not opposed to doing that when warranted, but this was a self-inflicted deficit increaser which capped any opportunities to invest elsewhere.

Trump really was never a builder, he just likes to own things, and the American economy got trapped in the wretched hollow in between his ‘builder myth’ and the reality of how a country actually builds shit.

In the end.

“The U.S. is, for now, out of the world order business.” <Robert Kagan>. After more than 70 years, American internationalism was pronounced politically dead during the Trump administration.

What is really stunning, and upsetting, to people like me is that the United States started going backwards. It is simply beyond me that we began steering ourselves toward antiquated systems and antiquated thinking rather than moving forward to leading in innovations and ideas. I can only feel a sinking feeling in my stomach as the rest of the world understood what Trump, and his administration, apparently did not; that the United States was about to give away the markets, the technology, the innovation, the jobs and the leadership. The unifying thread through Trump’s agenda appeared to be an attempt to resurrect an earlier antiquated world which marginalizes future considerations and maximizes short term considerations culminating in a stunningly self-destructive United States act of diplomatic and economic isolation.

“Our plan will put America First. Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo. As long as we are led by politicians who will not put America First, then we can be assured that other nations will not treat America with respect.”

Donald Trump

Well. That in a nutshell summarizes a naïve view of Life.

For in those words, he implies the only way to gain respect is to act only as an “I” and that within a “we” world a country, or a person, no one can be first. And, well, first is all that matters. For in these words, he implies globalism is a hollow idea and that first can never be achieved, at any time, by creating a rising tide for everyone, but rather if it is only our tide that rises.

During the Trump administration Pew surveys showed United States became less and less popular and while popularity is not the best measuring stick I could suggest <in looking at the information> that the decline is a reflection of our growing indifference to democratic values and increasing interest in economic values.

They see United States assuming a transactional based relationship with the world and not a democratic based relationship with the world.

There is a price to pay for such positions – both morally and economically.

Here is what I believe.

Trump’s attempt to reverse the shift toward the future is not sustainable. Going backwards never is. And while his quasi-insane onslaught against any rule and regulation under his belief that rules and regulations were the only thing that kept him from being the wealthiest man in the world, he is actually going to be a horrible temporary “aberration” in the world’s long march toward the future.

I also believe the aberration came at a terrible cost to America.

Trump is a profoundly mediocre man with a profoundly dangerous idea of how to make America First.

I personally don’t believe Trump has ever known what America First meant, it was simply a slogan to him and he would laugh if he ever read this “If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great” <Alexis de Tocqueville>. An Economics First strategy sacrifices “the good” which inevitably means America will cease to be great.

For that, even beyond the economic malpractice, I will never forgive Trump. Ever.

===

“As societies grow decadent, the language grows decadent, too.

Words are used to disguise, not to illuminate, action: you liberate a city by destroying it.

Words are to confuse, so that at election time people will solemnly vote against their own interests.”

Gore Vidal

===

“The greatest enemy of clear language is insincerity.”

George Orwell

===

Well.  I thought it was time to pull out my thoughts on political correctness. Let me begin with the poster child of political correctness – Merry Christmas. Well. I am not really sure when Merry Christmas got hijacked by Happy Holidays, but I wish I had been there to repulse the hijackers. Look. I am clearly sensitive to responses to Merry Christmas and am more than happy to pull my Happy Holidays greeting out of my seasonal greeting joy bag when appropriate but, in general, most people recognize that I like Christmas in spirit, not spiritually, and I am simply wishing everyone a little bit of the magic we call Christmas during this time of the year. But, frankly, political correctness has made it significantly harder to authentically spread joy by demanding people to actually think about what they will say (I imagine this could be good – be thoughtful before you speak – or it could be bad – takes the spontaneous out of the joy wish). In the end. Where political correctness got us during the holidays is either spew soft joyful platitudes or defiantly stabbing people with a Merry Christmas.

That is where political correctness has taken us. To be clear. I think everyone believes the idea of political correctness has gone too far.

That said. My thoughts today are about that political correctness has beget an even more heinous idea – ‘anti-political correctness’. It has become the flag bearer for anything that anyone wants to say which can span from tactless ignorance to blind ignorance to, at its best, true common sense clarity <called “talking simply” by many people>.

The trouble we are running into is all three of those are amalgamating into one big blob of things being said.

Basically, anti-political correctness is becoming the go-to answer for anything people may object to. What I mean by that is you can now say the stupidest thing known to mankind, someone can point out that it is stupid <even in a tactful way>, and the answer is almost always “I am tired of political correctness standing in the way of truth.”

Basically, we are now facing the backlash to an overextended political correctness from people sick of being told that they have to admit things that they don’t really believe <or think>.

Individuals are realizing they are individuals and that they don’t have to play by the same rules as a large corporation or the ‘pretentious few who try and speak for the many.’ Speaking out has become independent of anything other than “I”, i.e., what is in MY mind, and feel like they will say whatever the fuck they feel like saying. In other words, many people are standing up and saying “I am society so why can’t I speak for society” <as if that was as easy as I just typed>.

Well. Let state the obvious point. Among the many cases in “the problems in the world today”, political correctness isn’t standing in the way of truth; stupidity <or irresponsible thinking & speaking> is. But, and this is a big ‘But’, overreaching political correctness does create a problem and it HAS created a problem in some people’s minds and it is now being released <and some of our leaders are taking advantage of it>.

Look. I am absolutely with many people who suggest political correctness has become a bigger problem than the problem it was intended to try and address. However … maybe … just maybe … instead of ignoring the original good intent of political correctness <encourage tact and sensitivity to others’ feelings around issues of gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, physical abilities/disabilities … among other things> maybe we go back to its original intent and just keep the ground rules a little simpler and stop its invasion into the minutiae of Life and what we say.

We need to keep the ground rules simple because this effort to not offend has spiraled into a type of verbal censorship, certainly has generated conflict and sometimes seems to infringe upon some fundamental freedoms.

We need to take a close look at this <without completely rejecting it> because what constitutes offensive or unacceptable speech has bled into the minutiae in everyday Life approaching simple everyday actions bludgeoning Life into a … well … wussified world.

We need to “fix” political correctness because we do need some harsh truths. We need some ‘edges’ in the world view. We need to discuss them, express them and debate them. We need a little, well, enlightened conflict.

All that said that doesn’t mean that under the guise of some sense of individual sincerity <“I truly feel this way”> that good taste and respectful of what others think & feel has to be sacrificed <this is the balancing act> – everyone should show respect for your audience and any audience you are speaking about.

Words carry some responsibility beyond “what I feel.”

Yet. Political correctness has become a nomenclature for “not being able to speak what you feel” so words start getting thrown around without any thought beyond … ‘this is what I feel.’ Well. Sometimes what we feel is not what we know <knowledge is different than feeling> and what we feel may seem like truth, to us, but it is tainted by everything we do not know <therefore is nothing more than an opinion> and, frankly, sometimes what we feel should be kept to ourselves.

Let’s be clear. We got to this point because many of us were afraid to speak something for fear it offends someone rather than for fear it may actually be stupid, ignorance or just wrong <I say this because this creates misguided thoughts in one’s head on how to correct the situation>. Therefore, by overcoming our fear of offensiveness we simply roar our way into stupidity, ignorance or wrongness under the guise of simple speak or simply speaking our mind.

This also translates into the belief that all of a sudden those who decide to eschew being politically correct have decided they are smart or smarter than everyone else or , at minimum, as smart as everyone else. So smart that they can say whatever they believe and simply point to ‘I refuse to be politically correct’ when challenged over any stupidity they may be spewing.

====

Commenter: JoeAmerica • 4 hours ago

Get off my back libtard, you can’t control my speech.

====

It becomes words of stark harshness because there is no version of modesty, respect or dignity in the harsh backlash to political correctness.  And why should there be any concern for those things when you are simply stating common sense? <that is the logic>. And you get the added bonus of sticking it up the pretentiousness of, well, everyone who has even a tinge of respect for decorum or what someone may truly be offended by.

====

“Political correctness does not legislate tolerance; it only organizes hatred.”

Jacques Barzun

===

We now have organized hatred, anger and frustration. And these organizations <and some leaders words feeding on those organizations> use words that can shame, ridicule, and humiliate … delivered not with the intent to  deliver the shame or ridicule, but to show “my point of view & thoughts should be heard!”

Anti-political correctness has simply tapped into a pent up sense of relief that people can debate and talk in simple terms. Corporate speak and political language and marketing bullshit sayings and even tmotivational speak is dying.

No. It is being killed.

To be clear. All this ‘non political correctness bullshit is not just ‘simple talk’ <therefore the path to solving this issue isn’t simplicity or ‘dumbed down’> it is simply monologue stripped of political correctness.

It is addition by subtraction.

Do I like it? Of course not.

Do I understand it? Yes, I surely do.

It needs to be addressed for the good of society and what is going on in our heads.

Someone can get a grip on this without having to be plain-spoken <which implies ‘dumbing down’>, it can be managed intellectually and smartly because, frankly, the people who are most frustrated with political correctness ain’t dumb.

=====

“Democracy was supposed to champion freedom of speech, and yet the simple rules of table decorum could clamp down on the rights their forefathers had fought and died for.”

E.A. Bucchianeri

=====

Here is why they aren’t dumb.

This is what they see. They see that we are in a bad place with political correctness because if we have to constantly censor any conversation pertaining to race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or physical ability/disability, then it seems like we will simply bury the issues and perpetuate that what exists in the minds of people without taking the opportunity to confront them. This means in the effort to protect everyone’s feelings we have essentially lost, or willingly sacrificed, the edges and imposed the wretched middle on everyone.

This wretched vacuous middle hinders progress with regard to understanding different perspectives, viewpoints, feelings, and doesn’t really permit the discussion of real life experiences in the harsh light of reality but instead in muted thoughts of what should be discussed.

Anyway. Here is my real fear about this whole political correctness shitstorm.

Inclusiveness versus exclusiveness.

While the intent of political correctness was to make a more inclusive society and rhetoric it is now creating divisive rhetoric in which society is splintering.

While I could argue that it was pious arrogant intellectuals who created the overblown political correct environment we are chafing against, it is the everyday mostly white middle aged people who are now clearly anti-political correct.

=====

The angriest and most pessimistic people in America are the people we used to call Middle Americans. Middle-class and middle-aged; not rich and not poor; people who are irked when asked to press 1 for English, and who wonder how white male became an accusation rather than a description. You can measure their pessimism in polls that ask about their expectations for their lives—and for those of their children.

On both counts, whites without a college degree express the bleakest view. You can see the effects of their despair in the new statistics describing horrifying rates of suicide and substance-abuse fatality among this same group, in middle age.

The Atlantic

======

Regardless what you read about the anti-political correctness crowd <mostly embodied it seems by those who follow Trump around these days> they are not stupid, dumb nor ignorant. Some may have less education than the population median, but since when has education always been a reflection of true smarts <never>.

Yes. It is a mainly white population that is making up the anti-political correctness crowd, but we shouldn’t ignore what they are saying or feeling because of their skin color. Why? Because they have a point.

They are angry & frustrated with how political correctness has infringed upon their lives.

Now … when people get angry or frustrated they say things that they regret <or more likely they just don’t get articulated in the best possible way>.

I think this is pretty much a Life truth.

A lot of today’s frustration with what seems to be overreaching political correctness is being captured in a loud voice fighting back without any debate wordsmithing training other than what you may get sitting at the bar with a group of your friends yelling at each other.

That said. I think it is the responsibility of those in leadership positions to recognize the frustration with political correctness and permit frustrations and anger to be heard and respectfully listened to — the frustrated masses deserve that.

What they do not deserve is to have their anger flame fanned and encouraged. People deserve to be heard and offered solutions not someone simply agreeing with them and offering platitudes.

I think the leaders who will end up being the most successful in this ugly stage of political correctness will be the one who leads us to the proper respectful place – where we respect the fact that not all people believe in the same things, that all people have the right to believe in different things and say different things, that simply having a different point of view doesn’t mean you are an outcast, ignorant or stupid just that you view things differently and, finally, that there is balance.

It will be within balance that we will finally encounter inclusiveness and not divisiveness.

Let’s handle this discourse with some respect & dignity. Everyone deserves that. I don’t need a leader talking down to me and, frankly, I don’t need some leader suggesting my frustrations are the source of the problems of the world or my country.

Political correctness hasn’t created shit for problems other than it makes discussing things more difficult. Simply pointing that out isn’t a leader’s job. A leader offers solutions in a respectful way. They offer solutions to a group of people no matter what point of view they have. They speak TO the people without demeaning the larger view of ‘what we should be’ as people.

In the end. Political correctness has created some problems, but it is not a problem (despite what some politicians suggest). It hasn’t directly created what some idiots call “the cancel culture”, but, indirectly, anti-political correctness yahoos are actually canceling out voices. The intent behind political correctness actually does have good merit – forcing society to face some harsh truths. What I would now suggest is we talk about some of those harsh truths rather than cancel them out.

** note: This does not mean everyone can say whatever they want wherever they want. Lies or, worse, heinous activity, shut not be permitted a platform. Eliminating their platforms is not political correctness nor is it censor, it is consequences for bad behavior.

This is not censorship. This is consequences.

==========

updated from December 2015

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

“When a fact begins to resemble whatever you feel is true, it becomes very difficult for anyone to tell the difference between facts that are true and “facts” that are not.”

—-

Katharine Viner

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

“Alternative facts aren’t facts, they are falsehoods.”

Chuck Todd

===========

 “Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?”

Groucho Marx

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

“Perception is a dynamic conflict between the attempts of an outer world to impose an actuality on us and our efforts to transform this actuality into a self-centered perspective. 

Perception is a confrontation between an inward-directed vector of external reality compelling awareness and an outward-directed vector of physiological, cultural, and psychological transformation.

Where these vectors clash, where they balance each other, is what we perceive. This in sum is my view of perception.”

—–

Source: Understanding Conflict and War – Volume 1: The Dynamic Psychological Field

==========

So. I had this piece in my draft folder for months and pulled it out when I heard the term “alternative facts.” Yeah. Not ‘non-truisms’, but real actual ‘alternative facts’.

This is a bastardized version of the false branding concept of “perception is reality.’

My belief is that at some point a long long time ago Trump read the back of some book about branding <because he has never read a book> that said “perception is reality” and he was off to the races creating a hollow universe of ‘perceptions’ in which he could skate along the superficial surface toward riches & fame.

Today, Trump and his merry band of liars, are now taking the perception business to a whole new level of absurdity.

Let us be very clear on some basic Truths:

• Alternative facts live only in an alternative universe.
• Perception is not reality.

As someone who has dabbled in marketing professionally “perception is reality” truly galls me. It is an ugly lie.

And it is even uglier because in an untrained, inexperienced mind … or a misguided lack of moral individual … it can be used to defraud people – unintentionally or intentionally.

Perception is perception.

Reality is reality.

And perception is reality only, and ONLY if you permit it to be so.

Here is a fact.

Perceptions, by definition, are hollow things unless they are truly a reflection of reality. And how can you know if this is true? If you puncture perception, it deflates to whatever reality is. That is a ‘full honest perception.’

Let me be clear <because any real business person who has worked on any consumer brand in the world understands this>.

When you float on the superficial surface of a “perception based Life” you can only get away with it until people get interested enough to actually interact. Because interaction is when the piper gets paid. As one famous advertising person said “nothing kills a bad product faster than good advertising.”

Look. I am not suggesting perceptions, and managing them, is not a viable marketing objective nor am I suggesting that perceptions aren’t important. What I am saying, not suggesting, is that you learn very quickly in the business world that perceptions MUST align with reality or you are screwed. Reality must deliver upon perceptions offered & promised.

For example.

Trump can tell me he is intellectual, smart and knows the best words, but every time his reality, his actions, deliver hollow simplicity, idiot thin-skinned responses and odd word salad verbiage I start questioning the perceptions he is asking us to believe.

The only people I have ever seen try and exist in a ‘perception is reality’ universe have been marketing hacks <who didn’t know any better> and con men <who knew better but wanted to make money and run>.

Perception is not reality and trying to create a universe based on perceptions is a hollow world.

Unfortunately in the universe we live in the American president, from day one to, well, ad finitum, will constantly be trying to convince us reality is not reality, perceptions are what he and his merry band of liars say are truth, alternative facts exist and there is some alternative universe that he, and they, can only see.

We seem to be entering a new era in which truth is what Trump and his administration wants it to be.

Trump was a historically dishonest presidential candidate, a historical dishonest president and his merry band of surrogates <liars> have displayed a persistent commitment to lying – needless lying or necessary lying. Trump is a man who creates his own reality and lives in it … and he and his surrogates are asking us to live in it. Okay, not ‘ask’, he is demanding it.

As his inauguration speech suggested, you will believe in his reality and will live in it and therefore you will be demanded, not asked, to follow his lead within it.

You & I, America and the rest of the world will have to decide whether it will accept this alternative universe or convince him his reality is actually a hollow universe of perversely wrong perceptions.

There are a number of risks at hand.

One is basic society construct – reality is no longer fact based, but ‘feeling’ based.

The other is that Trump anchors this alternative universe based solely on some warped perceptions and therefore those  who elect to follow will follow the pied piper <allegiance to him above all> and not to any ideology, values or principles <not even the US Constitution … because he becomes the sole arbiter of what the Constitution “means to say to us”>. Trump is not a normal phenomenon and his alternative universe of false perceptions and alternative facts should not be normalized by something as simplistic a “politicians have always lied” and “we can never trust the media.”

Politics has always had a tenuous relationship with truth but even in that environment there are limits.

As Jonathan Last wrote in the conservative paper The Weekly Standard … “you can obfuscate, you can misrepresent, you can shade the truth to a ridiculous degree, or play dumb and pretend not to know things you absolutely do know. But you can’t peddle affirmative, provable falsehoods.”

Here is the surprising truth to add.

Journalism has always had a good relationship with truth, but even in that environment there have been missteps which create a false narrative that journalism, as a whole, is dishonest. The majority of journalists are not dishonest, every viable publication in existence has a standard of honesty & proof and while they may tend to a more liberal skewed perspective truth is truth and facts are facts and they treat both with reverence <because their existence relies on that>.

Anyway. This ‘perception is not reality’ truth is going to be challenged like it has never been challenged before.

I will give you the easiest way to puncture a reality/perception gap. Get someone to envision the repercussion of acting, or not acting, upon the perception. What does the day after look like, feel like and … well … be like.

This helps meet the challenge created by false leaders who exaggerate crises or create them with the intent to subvert, and pervert, the constitution, the judiciary process and the system itself.

This helps meet the challenge created by false leaders who offer simple solutions for complex problems.

===

“The simpler past seems more attractive than today’s complex reality, and so people vote [thanks to] inchoate frustrations. They choose simplicity and locality over complexity; identity over internationalism. Politicians promote themselves by giving voice to this. Hence, in addition to Brexit, we have calls for Scottish independence, Catalan independence, and so forth.”

—

Tainter

====

And maybe that is where perception gains traction in a complex world. If complexity doesn’t show simple benefits, or maybe the real benefits are difficult to align in a cause & effect way, perception starts beating reality.

Well. It will until reality catches up to the false promises & false simple solutions offered by perceptions.

The alternative universe can only last as long as the alternative universe can stave off the real universe. Just as alternative facts can only last as long as the real facts can get their shit together and get in the game.

I would note that Trump’s alternative universe isn’t so much about his lying <although that is truly the shiny object we focus on> but rather he’s just wrong in a simplistically naive way about almost everything <and even on the things he has a valid point on and I could construe as ‘right’ he unnecessarily cloaks it in ambiguity & hyperbole so that even his right is wrong>. He rambles aimlessly about anything that happens to pop into his brain and is convenient for him to say at the time. He is not typically deliberate about his lying he is simply authentically living in his own alternative universe and explaining that universe to us.

The universe itself may be one bigly lie, but his explanations are truth about the universe.

Trump is a rambling, bombastic, amoral narcissist. He’s never pretended to be anything else. What you see is what you get. His integrity resides solely on authentically communicating the big Lie <although … in his mind … in his universe … it is the big Truth>.

Oddly this seems to mean, at least to a lot of everyday people, that an authentic liar has more integrity than a calculated communicator.

He is genuine in his belief of this alternative universe.

His perception is actually his reality <just ponder that scary thought for a moment>.

Ok. That is bizarre. Fucking bizarre.

Trump and his merry band of liars use a variety of truth-blurring techniques <i call it “chaff”>. Their objective appears to not only be to control by creating doubts about what is real and what isn’t, but also to create an alternative universe in which whatever he does actually looks like it makes sense.

To quote President Trump himself … Bad! Sad!

There is a much bigger lesson here for everyone beyond whether our new president is capable of telling the truth or whether he, and his followers, even care and accept alternative truths as reality … perceptions are NOT reality.

Perceptions should always be held accountable.

People should be always be held accountable for the perceptions they create and offer.

In the end I come back to the beginning.

Here is what I think as an everyday person. Envision the day after your perception is faced by the harsh truth of reality.

Will you be scared?

Will you be excited?

Will you be happy, sad, or somewhere in between?

Good on you if you come out of these questions excited, happy and looking forward to the reality which perceptions suggested it would be. Just make sure you treat what you perceive with care.

Here is what I think as a business & marketing person.

The gap between perception and reality is the “death trap.”

====

‘In the day we sweat it out on the streets of a runaway American dream …’ It’s a ‘death trap,’ a ‘suicide rap.’  I want to guard your dreams and visions. ”

Born to Run

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

Perceptions create expectations. Expectations are developed to meet personal dreams & visions.

If expectations are not met in reality … people swing back angrily upon the ‘perception creators.’

Creating false perceptions is a suicide rap.

Creating false perceptions is a death trap.

Many of us business folk have the scars to prove this.

Treat what you ‘build’ as perceptions with care.

Perceptions are simply that … perceptions.

Facts are facts.

Reality is truth.

===

“I can only say this: My whole life has been about winning.

My whole life.

My life has been about victories. I’ve won a lot. I win a lot. I win – when I do something, I win. And even in sports, I always won. I was always a good athlete. And I always won. In golf, I’ve won many club championships. Many, many club championships. And I have people that can play golf great, but they can’t win under pressure.

So I’ve always won.”

Donald Trump

=========

“Donald Trump cannot possibly understand [Geneva] because he has neither the experience, the expertise or the moral compass to grasp it,” Geneva is “a fundamental moral and tactical construct that serves as a foundation for the law of armed conflict, because all wars, including the global war on terror, come to an end.

We as a community of nations need to engage with one another and not be separated by horrible, immoral treatment of one side over another.”

——

Steve Kleinman

air force reserve colonel and an interrogations expert

===

Well. I almost called this “whatever serves your purpose.” It seems like every day we talk about winning and, yet, we don’t really spend a shitload of time talking about how we will go about winning.

Donald J. Trump has made me think a lot, like A LOT, about winning and how you conduct yourself in gaining wins .in light of the fact that not everyone conducts themselves the same.

Ah. Conduct.

Yeah. There are some basic human driven rules which 99% of people have imprinted on their attitudes & beliefs that affect their behavior & conduct, but, beyond that, the way you play the game can be dictated by who you are, where you live, who you are playing against and a variety of emotional <and Maslow> triggers.

Now. Today, in discussing conduct, I am not talking about what you say or being ‘political correct’ <which may be the most bastardized discussed concept in this particular point in history> but rather I am speaking of conduct as things like “well, if they chop off heads and we do not doesn’t that give them an edge … so …” … or … “if they are breaking the rules maybe we should relook at the rules <or how we play despite the rules>.”

Those kind of things.

Now. While Trump is a horrible little man ethically <amoral in fact>, he is bringing to the forefront a topic which should be discussed at a national level all the way down to the kitchen table level. This is a discussion about who we are as a country and the identity of America exceptionalism.

I say that because how you play the game matters <especially with regard to character>.

To be clear. Outcomes do matter, but inevitably you get judged or measured on both the outcome AND how you attained that outcome. With Trump blustering about ‘winning’ — maybe we have lost sight of that.

So let’s discuss the ‘how we play’ part. And, yes, this is a discussion because it is not as simple as playing by the rules versus cheating — surprisingly there is a lot of room in-between those lines.

====

“When people cheat in any arena, they diminish themselves – they threaten their own self-esteem and their relationships with others by undermining the trust they have in their ability to succeed and in their ability to be true.”

Cheryl Hughes

===

I will begin in a less than obvious place … truth & lies <and bullshit>.

Yale philosopher Harry Frankfurt outlined in “On Bullsh*t” that there is a difference between BS-ers and liars:

Liars respect the truth, because they must know what it is in order to effectively conceal it. BS-ers are different, in that “truth” is simply not a useful category to them. Any belief is “true” if it serves, if it is convenient. BS-ers have no coherent theory of evidence or of inference, have no need for such things, are contemptuous of reason. In this sense, they are much more corrupting of discourse than liars.

In other words, in order to win, the “truth”, to a bullshitter, will become whatever serves the purpose. I believe this also bleeds into “rules” <which are a version of truths>. I brought that up because I stated upfront almost everyone of us inevitably gets judged by how we got the win, not just the win and of itself. Therefore, I would suggest while outcomes/wins matter we should understand that how you play the game either diminishes you or increases you as a person.

Yes. In today’s world we actually get judged on both aspects … not just one or the other. This leads me to point out that we then get trapped in a personal tug of war — a ‘win at any cost’ attitude is the ultimate reflection of a “respect is about winning” attitude where there is such an emphasis on ‘the win’ we get pulled one way — away from always playing the game “right” and lets the ‘chips fall as they may’.

This is our wretched tug of war.

Winning is absolutely good, but the true essence of sportsmanship is something more than merely getting the most points on the board.

Getting good grades is important but not if it requires cheating.

Getting a promotion is good but not if you do so at the expense of another person.

This is hard stuff. But, if it helps, remember:

How many people do you respect that whine their way to victory?

How many people do you truly respect who has cut corners or ‘won on some technicality’?

I would suggest the notion that ‘winning is the highest value’ runs counter to most usual definitions of heroism, decency and good character. Think about:

Atticus Finch is the hero of To Kill a Mockingbird even though he loses.

Martin Luther King Jr. is a hero but his true victory, while living, was in the attempt.

Ned Stark in Game of Thrones is a hero even though he gets his head chopped off.

Even in business winning isn’t everything. Integrity matters. Integrity matters in business because every sane business leader knows you cannot win every time and your employees need to be able to seize upon ‘something’ to get up and go after the next “what’s next.”

Think about this in a comparison way, while Trump defends his any-means-necessary approach to winning & making as much money as he can <as if that is the only meaningful measure of business greatness>, I could point out many business people who are far richer than Trump who have played the game within the rules with integrity & dignity.

But while I would love to continue to point out the hollowness of The Donald this is, more importantly, about America.

I would argue that in order to have a better America, and a better world, that thinking about ‘how we play the game’ very quickly becomes a metaphorical and reality ethical exercise.

Uhm. As I typed that I made a note to google ethical game theory:

——————

An ethical game is usually not the kind of game that lets us replay a dichotomy of good and evil and, in worst case, denies us to judge between right and wrong. An ethical game design takes the player seriously as an individual with an ethical reasoning developed appropriate to their age, leaving it up to them to make a decision.

For this reason, an ethical game is also in no way a game that treats its players as »moral infants«. It presents the player with ethical challenges just as it poses motoric, exploratory, strategic or logical challenges. Purely abstract game mechanics can’t create an ethical aspect. Ethical challenges can only be generated through portraying them in the game world (and particularly through the story) – and through the medial interaction of the player with it.

Conversely, however, an ethical challenge can create game mechanics, which are never abstract, but result from the conflict in the player’s mind as a very specific challenge in the game world.

————————

Well. When I read that I immediately thought it paralleled what I believe is what we everyday schmucks do, and face, every frickin’ day. The game of life, and business, constantly adjusts to the skill of the players involved. And as reality adjusts those playing get better and better. And, yet, the constant adjusting also demands the players to improve their skills. That demands work. I say that because, uh oh, that is where “rules” truly get challenged.

Work. Yikes. Rather than put in the work to improve the skills to win … uhm … some players ‘do whatever it takes’ or use ‘whatever serves the purpose’ to win. In other words they ‘park’ ethical reasoning somewhere and focus solely on ‘the win.’

This is America in a nutshell. While Life is lived and challenges are met some players’ ethics get nurtured while other players shelve ethical growth so as not … well … not lose. It is here that I would point out this is exactly what Trump is advocating: not losing’ rather than ‘winning.’

Think about it.

Not losing, as an objective, basically makes winning a morally empty principle. The win itself is the glory … and we spend little focus on how you played the game <because the glory resides in the outcome>.

Let me be clear. This can be an attractive thought to most of us everyday schmucks.

Anyone in today’s world, in the daily & weekly grind focusing on all the challenges facing us and mentally taking each obstacle & challenge and, in addition, permitting each to take on a life of its own … could quite easily begin to think everything was going in the wrong direction … in other words … we were losing <and the wins are difficult to see>.

And that mental ‘loser’ hole gets a little deeper if you believe you have been working hard and ‘playing the game hard’ and doing all the right things the right way. And in that moment … in that hole … in that moment in which you are tired of working so hard and not seeing any clear cut victories, you start edging in to “so what will it take for me/us to finally win” <and get out of his loser hole>.

Uh oh. The slippery slope of ‘how you play the game matters’ looms in front of you.

Let me be absolutely clear on this. It is hard, even for the most principled person, to not think about stepping on this slope. Especially when you have someone like Trump shining a spotlight on your thoughts with regard to the ‘loser hole’ and offering a “let’s start winning” again message <with no rules on how to go about getting the win>.

Anyway. Here is what I think.

Trump has seized a moment and offered a ride on a fairly attractive slippery slope. For years, in our culture, America <society> has been in conflict with regard to winning.

Winning is everything versus everyone is a winner.

Conflict 1: Winners get demonized by their win at any cost attitude <and celebrated to the same time>.

Conflict 2: Participants get demonized by their inability to win <and yet celebrated by the victory in the attempt>.

You cannot, well, win.

This conflict is exacerbated by generational conflict. Conceptually the former <winning is everything> is owned by the older generations and the latter <everyone who participates in the game wins> is owned by the younger generations.

The old see their version of winning being marginalized and at exactly the same time they see overall larger country and economic results lagging <or in their eyes … “the country is going the way of the loser shithole”>. Therefore, to those people, anyone who dares reject the rules of their game, especially if they do not win, are double losers because they were not smart enough to “do anything it takes to win because winning is everything” we need to get out of this frickin’ loser shithole we are in.

This is where someone like Trump can look attractive to some people. It is like hiring a new coach who looks like he is someone prepared to defy conventions – this creates some exhilaration in the fan base.

“fuck yeah … it’s about time.”

It signals the arrival of a maverick outsider who is not just going to shake things up, but is prepared to destroy to create.

That sounds good.

Well. It is good as long as it is within the rules of the game and by ‘rules’ I mean the true construct of playing the game <Geneva Convention offers specific rules and, of course, there is something called the Constitution and things called ‘laws’ and every sport organization has codes, rules and penalties> as well as the integrity of playing the game.

I admit. I am a ‘play by the rules guy.’And, I admit, Trump’s attitude irks me as a business guy. Here is what I know from a business guy perspective <and I believe it is relevant to America in general>.

Give me the construct, give me the box to play within, and I can be creative enough WITHIN the box to beat anyone. I wrote this in 2015:

I would suggest that the highest quality freedom <in and of anything>, the most satisfying freedom, is not found without fences but within fences.

This may sound odd <especially to someone like Trump> but true creativity, innovation and disruption is found within the box and not out of the box. Out of the box is most often impractical, not realistic long term and ultimately pales when placed next to ethical principles.

I would also note that winning within the box is maybe the most satisfying feeling in the world.

In the end.

How you win matters. And changing the rules simply to ‘win’ loses sight of what is really important – not the win itself but the principled effort you took to gain the win.

And if that doesn’t convince you, remember, rules represent:

“a fundamental moral and tactical construct that serves as a foundation for the law of conflict, because all conflict comes to an end. <and you have to live with yourself and what you have done>“

———

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

“Even if the altered contract had been legally enforceable, it is still morally damaged. Morality and law do differ.“

—–

George Brenkert

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

“They were careless people, Tom and Daisy — they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”

———-

F. Scott Fitzgerald “The Great Gatsby”

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

Well. Sloppiness pollutes everything, but particularly so in business. Suffice it to say, nothing bothers me more than sloppiness in leadership.

Now. Sloppiness can occur in behavior and in thinking AND in morality.

Let’s call that the holy trinity of leadership.

Let’s call it your ‘contract’ to a business, society and your betterment of your employees.

Anyway. Sloppiness matters. It matters because it leaves spaces, some little and some large, in which an organization can slide into some bad behavior or ineffective behavior. And THAT matters because, as Harvard Business Review <who knows more about management than I ever will> once wrote: “The highest measure of leadership is that it creates circumstances under which great things happen without heroics. Much of the art of good management lies in designing systems and incentives in such a way that people naturally do the right things.”

Let me highlight two sloppy features:

• 1. Winging it.

Winging it may be the stupidest thing a business leader could ever do.

Stupidest.

In today’s business world instincts appear to have gained exponential value over preparation. And this is stupid too. Preparation is the engine to instincts.

No preparation = no good instincts.

It is a simple formula and one that should be tattooed onto any aspiring business leader. Lack of preparation seems like it creates some obvious challenges, but to the “wingers” out there all they see is how preparation stifles their “in the moment creativity of thinking.”

What bullshit.

Lack of preparation can kill you so many ways your head will spin but let me point out two:

• The easy detail which lubricates the moment.

The name of someone. The key component in the production line. A specific date.

These sound like less-than-relevant extraneous details but in the moment they can lubricate the experience so you can slip into a credibility space, a caring space or a critical audience listening space which enables you to get to the larger point. Used well, and not gratuitously, details enable progress. With no details progress is often unsustainable of not completely halted.

Winging it, more often than not, sacrifices details. In other words, you walk into situations without a valuable weapon in order to do battle in that moment.

• context.

All problems without context appear to have round holes, therefore, without preparation you are, more likely than not, to offer a round hole thought. I will state the obvious – the business world is not made up of only round holes.

Period.

Full stop.

Sloppy preparation more often than not means you lack the greater context from which you can actually offer the truly good & effective leadership thoughts.

Sloppy preparation leads to, well, sloppy thinking which leads to, well, sloppy solutions & behavior.

• 2. Moral boundaries.

I almost called this ‘rules’ but rules, to me, are more the written aspects of business and moral boundaries are more the unwritten norms of good behavior.

This is a different type of sloppy leadership.

It is sloppy because it defers all morality, ethics and soul directional leadership decisions to, uhm, what is legal. As we all know … okay, as most of us know, morality & law can differ. Not surprisingly, in business, I can do the legal thing and, yet, still be doing the wrong thing.

Sloppy leaders have a tendency to absolve themselves of providing an organization with a steady moral compass. They may on occasion make a statement, or a stand, on some aspect of what could be construed as a ‘moral weather vane’ but they will consistently fall back on “it is legal” as their organizational guide to behavior.

I would argue, and will, that this sloppy leadership only makes behavior worse over time. just as lawyers make gobs of money debating law in a court of law an organization can be quite creative with regard to “what is legal” in justifying their behavior – and most times it is creatively bad.

Sloppy leadership far too often leads to sloppy organizational moral behavior.

Anyway.

I focused on those two things for a couple of reasons.

• ‘just enough leadership.’

This isn’t a phrase we use often enough. Far too often we imply leadership is one individual guiding a ship alone at the wheel. The truth is that the most functional companies, and most functional leadership, is inextricably linked to the organization and leaders who get shit done.

While being a leader can have a quasi-isolated feel <because, inevitably, the buck stops there> the most effective leaders are anything but isolated. They are more often like a queen bee in which they are a hub of activity with everyone swirling around.

This image is significantly different than a top-down, office on high, leadership image. Just enough leadership is almost always inherent in an engaged leader who listens instead of dictates. They care more about shit than they can actually cure. All that leads me to say that we don’t need business heroes we need business leaders.

More leaders should remember this.

===========

“Unhappy is the land that has no heroes.

No.

Unhappy the land that needs heroes.”

Bertolt Brecht

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

All of this leads to point out why I am relentless in my criticism of Donald J Trump as a president.

Trump is a sloppy leader

Oh. What a horrible horrible lesson Trump is showcasing for the up and coming generation of leaders. While the fact Trump is an amoral egoist “me – only – matters” human being, which disgusts me, it is his sloppy business leadership which embarrasses me, saddens me, concerns me and … well … just makes me mad.

If anybody embodies, winging it, inability to discern between morality & law <boundaries> and a desire to be “the hero” as a business leader … Trump is it. He stands for everything I, and Harvard Business Review, believe is wrong as a leader. I believe it is imperative for the future soul of the business world that we continue to speak out, loudly, that the way Trump depicts leadership is NOT the way effective leadership is done.

Sigh.

Anyway.

I am not naive.  A lot of businesses are led by less-than-stellar leaders. I am often reminded of something a business guy, Peter Lynch, said to prospective business leaders seeking new positions: “go for a business that any idiot can run – because sooner or later, any idiot probably is going to run it.”

Trump is a leadership idiot.

But we do not all have to be leadership idiots.

And we all, certainly, do not have to be sloppy leader and sloppy thinkers.

We don’t all have to be great leaders but we can all not be sloppy leaders. Not being sloppy at least gives you a chance of being a great leader. And it insures your business isn’t sloppy.

<note: when originally posted September 2017 this began with “Trump is exhausting”, I am reposting because nothing has changed>

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

“For in every adult there dwells the child that was, and in every child there lies the adult that will be.”

=

John Connolly

===========

“Refusing to grow up may be a form of rebellion. But really growing up could be a revolution.”

—

Susan Neiman

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

Trump is exhausting. Not his presidency, not his administration, not his lack of policies or lack of any intellectual thought … just Trump.

Trump is exhausting.

I have decided he is exhausting because while I have continuously woken up every day hoping that today would be the day he would actually act like a president … okay … maybe just like a business leader … okay … I actually just want to wake up and see him act like an grownup.

Today, just another day, he wakes up and starts tweeting about London terrorism <which the UK prime minister and Scotland Yard have to respond “not very helpful”>, about an ESPN anchor, about his stupid wall, about … well … too numerous to count. And it isn’t just his lack-of-any-real-thought 140 character tweeting it is also his tween tone, teen sensitivity and teen words/grammar/punctuation.

He is not even the junior class president, he is just the gossip girl between classes.

Think about it.

Everything is unfair.

He is sad.

Girls confuse him.

I told you so.

I wish everyone would pay attention to me.

I am misunderstood.

Create drama <to Armageddon-like levels when possible>.

<sigh>

You would think I would have been smart enough to know that this is the new normal for us, but the same normal for Donald J Trump. I mean, what the hell, I wrote ‘teens celebrate Trump as new leader (’cause he is just like us)’ in March 2016 <yeah, 18 months ago, seems like a lifetime in Trump squirrel years>:

—————

And then, after my first response, I laughed. I laughed because I sudden realized that every teen in America must be celebrating in the halls of their high school.

Trump is one of them.

<and imagine the kitchen table conversations now taking place where parents are counseling their children only to hear “you are being so unfair !!! … I was just retweeting what was on the internet … c’mon Mom … Donald Trump does it … you are being unfair …!!!”> 

Look.

Sit around a bunch of older folk and pretty soon the conversation will ease its way into how the younger generation is addicted to their phones, they cannot think for themselves, twitter is the universe of the mindless illiterate generation, twitter is the death of grammar & punctuation and they believe everything they see on the internet. Suffice it to say, older folk have a tendency to believe handheld technology is destroying young people’s minds <the implication is that ‘sensible grownups would never do the things that immature, selfish, entitled young people would do.’

<please note … I do not agree and that when I am involved in this discussion it is typically around that lat comment that my head explodes>

Anyway. Trump is what older folk actually fear & believe. Trump embodies teen twitterology. He cannot stop retweeting and cannot stop from commenting on anything and he tweets before thinking … and retweets anything that comes across his phone that looks interesting to retweet <regardless of whether he has actually checked that it is real or not> .

He can summarize his policies, with detail, in maybe 2 tweets issued as he sips his coffee in the morning.

After the coffee kicks in it will take about 6 tweets to change the previous 2.

And later in the day he gets to go on air and discuss how the world is unfair <only to him>.

This is Trump’s doom loop of consistent inconsistencies whereby the next tweet update absolves responsibility for the less than thoughtful tweets up to that point. And, of course, it would be unfair to judge him on his 25^th tweet when he is already on his 1250^th tweet.

Wow.

Dear Donald, have you thought about enrolling in high school again so you can troll the hallways as a bully and be the most important boy in the sophomore class? His immaturity almost makes teens look mature in contrast.

————————

Trump’s tweening behavior is tiring.

Exhausting.

I just want him to act like a grownup.

That’s it.

Yeah.

The bar is that low. Is that too much to ask?

I ask this because I know that being a grownup & “grownuphood” <a little different than adulthood> is all about becoming someone and something and unbecoming someone and something.

The truth about growing up is that we are constantly developing and un-developing and we continue to survive the missteps and step backs and figure out where & how to excel with momentary glimpses of what ‘could be’ … and that is what grownuphood is all about. And that is the ‘growing up’ I fear Donald J Trump is not doing <nor has ever done>.

If I could talk to Donald J <most likely using lots of pictures> I would tell him that grownuphood is much much better than okay. It is really good. It is much better because while some call it the burden of responsibility I call it “the freedom to enable my destiny.”

Yeah. Destiny kind of demands some grownupness <sorry about that Donald J>.

But the prize of grownuphood? You do with your destiny what you want. You can  get angry if it doesn’t happen the way you want, but suffice it to say grownuphood is great because it is YOUR time to make it happen.

And I wish grownups would reclaim grownuphood and let the youth have their youth.

And I wish Trump would claim some grownuphood and let the youth have their youth.

But … this is Trumpville.

A place where little makes sense.

That is where we seem to live today.

Look.

He can be an idiot if he wants.

He can be incompetent <because he is>.

He can be an empty intellectual vessel <he is>.

But for god’s sake … just please start acting like a grown up.

=========

“Your opportunity is going to come whenever it comes.

You have to take advantage of it when it does.”

—

Mike Darnold

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

    “But, my dear, how long will you wait for something that will never come?”

—

(via saudi-barbie)

=====

So. Opportunities. ok. Opportunities and blinking.

Yeah. What happens if you blink at the wrong time in Life?

Well. Life, in general, doesn’t permit blinking. Okay. It is relentlessly unforgiving if you blink at the wrong time.

Simplistically, Life happens … even if you are not paying attention. Shit. Life happens even if you ARE paying attention and you blink.

Sigh.

Sadly … far too often we blink at just the wrong moment.

Sometimes it is because we … well … just have other shit to do.

Sometimes it is because we … well … we are just a dumbass

Sometimes it is because … well … that is just reality <sometimes>.

And, sometimes, well, it doesn’t really matter.

Doesn’t matter? Opportunities are like pebbles. If you throw a pebble into a pond, you have no way of predicting exact way the ripples will ripple <unless you are some mathematics professor at Harvard where you could probably extrapolate it … uhm … but the window of opportunity would most likely close anyway before you figured it out>. Ripples depend on how you drop, or throw, or skip the pebble. Shit. Ripples depend on if some other asshole drops a pebble, stone or clod of mud in the frickin’ pond.

=====

“How can I begin anything new with all of yesterday in me?”

Leonard Cohen

======

That said.

Not all blinks are created equal. Some blinks are … well … blinks. You just cannot keep your eyes open all the time.

And then there are hesitation blinks. The ones created by the ‘all of yesterday in me.’ Sometimes we blink because the present is a pretty cluttered moment for everyone. Maximizing your present, the “now”, is hard. Fucking hard. Anyone who suggests it is easy or ‘you should try and do it more’ is fucking crazy.

All that clutter can make us blink. And sometimes, yes, it makes us blink at exactly the wrong time.

Wrong time? Not only is ‘the present’ small, but windows of opportunity within ‘the present’ can open and close pretty fucking fast. And all of that just gets even smaller when squeezed by past and future.

Then you start trying to cram in all the tangible shit you need to do <as well as the things you don’t really need to do but have convinced yourself it is ‘need’>.

Holy shit. Then. Yeah. You blink. Shit. The ‘present’ has completely disappeared.

While it makes my head hurt just typing this there is a reason I bring it up.

While I have written ad nausea about managing time in general and how we focus on the wrong shit <spending more time making lists than actually doing shit> I would suggest that if you want to manage your time more effectively you need to get your head out of the ‘past & future’ head game the best you can.

If you do that effectively than you have effectively maximized your present time the best you can.

In blinking terms this means you have narrowed your blinks to natural blinking versus hesitation blinking. This type of decision on your part really can make a difference. Moments, ‘things’, feelings, opportunities, the possibilities die fast – like in the blink of an eye. In a blink of an eye what was possible simply disappears and is no longer possible.

===

“In the blink of an eye, what was possible is possible no longer.”

Nelika McDonald

===

You blink and what was possible is no longer even in view.

You blink and all the plans you had mapped out get crumpled up.

Blinking insures you either grasp the concept of adaptability or you will inevitably grasp only disappointment an discouragement.

Yeah. It’s nice to have plans, and even recommended in most situations, but when a plan doesn’t happen, you have to be able to think on your feet, and change courses if necessary. Life doesn’t always cooperate with what you wanted to do, so you have to be prepared. We all know that if you aren’t paying attention to your own life, you are gonna miss some important things. Life does what it does whether you want it to or not.

Regardless. It can seem fairly overwhelming if you dwell on a belief that every minute that passes is a minute that you will never get back or every opportunity you miss is an opportunity you will never get back.

==========

“We don’t always get the luxury of having closure.

Sometimes things just end. There’s not always a rhyme or reason for why they do, they just do.”

Ashleigh Catibog-Abraham

==========

But that means you have to find some peace in blinking.

You need to find some peace in the fact that some opportunities are just missed.

You need to find peace in those the moments where you had got it right for yourself and not for anyone else <even if you did blink>.

Life is complex as it is.

Far too often we speak of opportunities in some simplistic fashion … and mostly from an individualistic point of view. Therein lies the foundation of opportunities & complexity.

We live in a world of collaboration and anything but individual decision making.

Simplicity is being demanded by the whole and implemented by the parts. And aligning attitudes and desires is difficult. And so is insuring aligning in strengths in today’s idealistic view of collaboration.

Maybe that is where simplicity faces its most difficult contradiction – facing the conflict in aligning making bigness small <in vision for the whole> and capturing the importance, and bigness, of the small.

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

“Incredible change happens in your life when you decide to take control of what you do have power over instead of craving control over what you don’t.”

Steve Maraboli

=====

Huh? Well.

Simplistically <which is dangerous on this topic> opportunities truly are like windows. They open and close. When defined that simply it is nice and tight and makes something big smaller and more easily grasped. But these less-than-simple windows are actually representative of something that looks more like a bow tie or an hourglass on its side.

Lots of complex things and thoughts funneling into this nice tight little window and should you step through the window of opportunity … well … the vista of what could be, can be and will be widens to some pretty extraordinarily complex aspects.

In the end.

Maybe that is my bigger point about blinking and opportunities.

That window is always there.

That window opens and closes all the time.

That complex experience and stuff is always happening.

That complex vista beyond the window is always there and changing.

Oh.

Whether you blink or not.

Control what you can.

Accept what you cannot control.

Don’t blink because of hesitation.

And accept that, well, you have to blink sometime and you will miss something when you do.

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

“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.