" The Road to Reason "

The Liberal Lion " This is a Punk Free Zone "

2012-08-04T17:39:00.001-04:00

" Put Up or Shut Up " This is what Mitt Romney's message is to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid. Unlike the overpaid, underworked media types who seem to revel in the cognitive dissonance of this ridiculous quote, I have a logically analytical brain, and this dubious statement to Harry Reid can just as easily be applied to Mitt Romney's refusal to be transparent about his own tax returns.

In my humble opinion, Romney's attempt at chastising Senator Reid, has only served to reinforce Reid's charges.
until Mr. Romney produces his tax returns from 1999 thru 2009.

Romney advisor Ed Gillespie clearly stated in an interview that Mitt Romney retired in 2002, retro-actively to 1999.
If this is true then it raises an enormous red flag.

Mr. Romney has been campaigning around the nation about what he could do to " fix our broken economy " and how the " President is a nice guy who tried, but was in over his head. "

Well, if all that is the case then Mr Romney cannot start off leading the American People by lying to them, or telling us we do not need to examine how he has handled his own finances or his company's finances. It is precisely that reason which Mitt Romney, uses as his qualification to fix our economy and run for the Presidency.

Candidate for President Mitt Romney, I have a message for you from the American people. If you have done something unethical or illegal, you will be found out, and if you are elected you will be impeached, and or imprisoned. If you have not conducted your business or personal affairs in an unethical or illegal way, then all the unwarranted or " unfair " speculation will cease, win or lose.

In your own words Mr Romney, it is time for you to " Put Up or Shut Up . "

The Liberal Lion " This is a Punk Free Zone "

2012-06-29T20:48:00.001-04:00

I am always amazed at the stupefying majesty of Republican Congressional hypocrisy. The President reluctantly envokes Executive Privilage over the release of candid discussions between the White House and Justice Department officials briefings of the ATF’s ” Fast and Furious ” operation.
Even after White House officials reluctantly agree to turn over most of the relevant documents the House Oversight Committee requested, Chairman Darrell Issa - Rep. California decided to move ahead with a Contempt of Congress vote. This is an outrageous abuse of congressional authority under it’s current leadership.
The documents that the committee says are needed are not from the ATF’s unchecked ” Fast and Furious ” program. This program which started under George Bush was ordered stopped under the current administration.
The Justice Department has reviewed 140,000 documents and turned over 7,600 documents to the Congressional Oversight Committee. The Attorney General himself has testified before the committee several times.
Instead of hauling the ATF director who developed and ran the program with out informing the US Attorney Generals Office before the COC and vote to hold him in contempt of congress, the committee has decided to start a witch hunt and malign the Attorney Generals reputation. The Chairman and the Republican members have a transparent goal and that is to score political points and damage the Presidency.
This Dog won’t hunt Y’all!!

The Liberal Lion " This is a Punk Free Zone "

2012-06-28T22:02:00.001-04:00

Today, the SCOTUS issued a landmark ruling that upheld by a 5 to 4 decision almost the entire scope of the Affordable Health Care Act passed by Congress in 2010.

The majority decision opinion was written by Chief Justice John Roberts, who broke with the conservative Justices and sided with the liberal Justices on this issue. In so doing, he has distinguished the Roberts Court by removing political ideology from this decision, and re-establishing the legitimacy of the High Court.
Justice Roberts, showed tremendous foresight and intestinal fortitude in his carefully detailed legal interpretation of the Affordable Care Act.
Millions of grateful Americans will forever be in the High Courts Debt.

The opposition response was swift and predictable. Vowing to call for a vote to repeal " Obamacare " immediately after the Congressional recess. Continuing to misrepresent the cost, benefits, and impact of the law to their allies in the insurance industry and the media. They will energize their base, and use the ruling as a campaign issue to try and elect Mitt Romney to the Presidency.

As if to send an immediate declaration of war to the Obama Administration, the Republican Congressional leaders decided to hold and pass a Contempt of Congress vote on the Attorney General of the US, Eric Holder. This illegitimate and unwarranted vote was boycotted by House Democrats.

Rarely, has a such a watershed moment been witnessed by our nation.
June 28th, 2012 saw a monumental shift in the trajectory of our national conversation on health care.

Occasionally, I will recognize an exceptional example of courage and conviction in the face of overwhelming odds. Let's call it the " Lion Award ", for those brave souls who don't succumb to group ideology or self-interest.

I would humbly and respectfully like to nominate for the first ever " Lion Award ", SCOTUS Chief Justice, John Roberts .

I'd love to hear your thoughts and comments on this. If you know of any one who you think is deserving of the " Lion Award, " hit me back, let me know why, and we'll pick one recipient per quarter! How's that sound??

We'll talk to you soon from the " Punk Free Zone! "

Phillip Sr.

" Political Conflict in the U.S. and Abroad " Part two

2008-11-26T18:24:00.000-05:00

Welcome Back fellow Tolerance Troops,

In this edition we'll examine political conflict, both here in the US and around the world. We'll discuss the underlying causes of political conflict and we'll propose specific remedies to these causes.

In part one we left off discussing the role of lobbyists in Washington, D.C. and the role lobbies play in shaping American Policy. Let's discuss the Bush Administrations policymaking approach during the last 8 years and examine their results. The Bush Administrations policies have been pretty much in keeping with conservative and neo-conservative, right of center, and far right ideals which hold Adam Smiths model of economics in great regard. This model of smaller government, deregulated financial markets, and lowering the tax burden of business, has been followed almost without exception, even during the Clinton Administration, for the last 30 years going back to the Reagan Administration.

During the 1980's gold rush to deregulate the Banking system their were setbacks and warning signs about the Adam Smith model as far back as 1987 when the market crashed and Savings and Loan institutions nationwide started to go bankrupt. The response to this was the creation of the Resolution Trust Corporation, an ad-hoc government agency formed to help bail out the savings and loan industry.

During the first Bush Admistration and the Clinton Administrations that followed, domestic and global deregulation was countinued but at a more restrained pace than it had been under the Reagan Administration. As a consequense, real wealth, GDP, and personal investment grew for practically all sectors of the American public and its economy. Just before the close of the Clinton Administration the Banking Lobby wrote and sponsored new legislation that favored even more deregulation of the banking market place.

This legislation enabled the rise of a new class of unregulated securities called derivatives. These derivatives were a new variation on the old "Bucket Shops" which existed before the 1907 Market Crash and were quite common before they were outlawed sometime after the Crash of 1907. In fact the new legislation specifically exempted financial institutions from intra-state prosecution under the "Bucket Shops" prohibition of existing state laws.

What has been the result of all this unrestrained de-regulation and lowering of corporate taxes. The results my friends have been, to put it mildly, disasterous for our economy. Just as cars traveling on an unmarked, unpaved, and unprotected highway face increased risks of serious collisions, we now have irrefutable proof that this "invisible hand" theory of Adam Smith as outdated as it is, puts economies at risk of implosian every time it becomes the dominant paradigm. The more advanced our culture becomes, the more dangerous the "Adam Smith" model becomes.

Conservatives and Neo-Conservatives are already laying the groundwork for shifting the blame of this huge economic sunami to non-regulation of the quasi-government agencies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They argue that these agencies were too liberal in their loan practices, thereby qualifying otherwise unqualified individuals to receive sub-prime mortgages. However this argument is baseless because these agencies market share was less than 7 percent of the subprime mortgage industry. The bulk of these loans were made by private mortgage companies such as Washington Mutual, Countrywide Mortgage, and Long Beach Acceptance Corporation.

Very bright individuals who are economists and physicists were awarded Phd's and have had long and successful careers at think tanks like the "Heritage foundation" and financial institutions like the "World Bank" developing this severely flawed global economic policy model. Their model is based on an expanding pie theory. There is only however, the pie itself. It cannot expand outside of itself. If you want more of what's inside the pie you have to make more pie. That's such a simple concept, but one which many conservative economists cannot seem to grasp or accept.

What could be the answer to the conservative economic dilemma? Could it be that crafting a more transparent, controlled, equitable, and flexible economic theorem in concert with liberal "Keynesian" economists might provide a blueprint for a less volatile and stronger market/consumer based economy. The markets could grow at a more restrained and predictable manner. This could enable more effective long term planning and growth of government and markets alike. The answer may lie in shifting the dominant paradigm of conservatisms "free market" policy model, to more of a "fair market" policy model.

There must also be a concerted effort to change the way conflict based corporations are compensated. There is too much incentive in the current system for this conflict based sector of the economy to undermine efforts at compromise or efforts at resolution of ongoing conflicts. Too much incentive exists in our current tax code for principals of conflict corporations to destabilize emerging governments all over the world as a way to increase their profits and satisfy nervous stockholders.

This "Fair Market" policy model can work on a global basis as well, and in fact it may be critical to implement this system to avoid global economic depressions in the future. Working to eliminate punitive, and or potectionist tariffs which unfairly restrict the flow of trade should be a top priority in any efforts to resolve global conflicts. In fact many of the global conflicts underway right now can be de-escalated by implementing " Fair Trade" policies.

This is the end of part two. In part three we'll popose even more specific remedies.

Yours in Humanity,

Phillip Sr.

" Political Conflict in the U.S. and Abroad " Part one

2008-11-26T17:57:00.000-05:00

Welcome Back fellow Tolerance Troops,

Here in the United States there are varying degrees of two fundamentally divergent views on aquiring and retaining the " American Dream ." These views were born in the second paragraph of our "Declaration of Independence."

" WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

They also have their origin in our "Constitution" written by the founders of our nation into the preamble of that document.

" We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

One view from the liberal or left side of this issue is that all men and women should be guaranteed the right to receive the best education the nation has to offer. All public schools should have the latest and most advanced resources available to educate our children. In addition government should provide at a mininum, adequate health and welfare for all of its citizens and a decent home for them to live in. Government should also insure that all its citizens are paid a fair wage for work rendered, and the right to organize themselves into mutually beneficial unions which can protect them in the work place and negotiate with their employers. Government should also provide reasonable gun control legislation that protects an individuals right to bear arms, while at the same time severly restricting access to weapons from convicted felons or those with a history of mental disorders. Government should not interfere in a womans right to choose or restrict the rights of same sex unions to marry. Government should provide reasonable oversight of business and markets to protect the general public from fraud and create stable conditions for conducting commerce. Business should not be afforded excessive tax incentives at the expense of middle class Americans, now defined as any households receiving income of less than 250,000.00 USD per annum. Government should end the practice of emposing the death penalty because it is administered disproportionately to minority citizens and because it goes beyond the threshold of cruel and unusual punishment.

Another view from the conservative or right side of this issue is that each citizen should

Another view from the conservative or right side of this issue is that each citizen should be able to decide for his or herself what kind of education their children receive, and that the government should not interfere, except to provide tax relief in the form of vouchers to help them place their children in the best educational facility available. In addition people should be allowed to opt out of traditional educational facilities if that is their choice and to home school their children if they so desire. Governments should seek to empower individuals by reducing the tax burdens on all Americans and reducing the size and scope of regulatory restrictions on commerce. Federal Government authority should be severly curtailed and more authority should be given to the individual states. Government should seek to protect the right to life of an unborn child, but should seek to put to death all those who are adjudicated in a court of law of pre-meditated murder or the murder of a law enforcement officer. There should be no attempt whatsoever by the government to control the sale, distribution or ownership of any type of weapon as per the second amendment to the constitution. Their should be a right to work for all those who want to. Companies should be allowed to fire and replace any worker who participates in a job action or a strike. Government should restrict same sex unions and define marriage as being between a man and woman. Governments should not interfere in the normal operations of commerce because markets can more effectively police themselves. Governments highest priority should be to provide for the armed defense of its citizens both here and abroad.

In our capitalist society there is a constant tug-of-war between Adam Smith's "Invisible hand" theory of economics and John Maynard Keynes "Prime the pump" circular flow of money strategy where the public sector steps in to assist the economy generally.

Adam Smith's "Laissez-fair Capitalism" which excludes the public sector from the markets was the dominant economic theory until the "great depression" when Keynesian's theory of looking at consumer trends at the micro-level, also called macroeconomics, was adopted by the Franklin Delano Roosevelt administration as the foundation for the " New Deal. "

What does all this mean? It means that the underlying reason for the N.R.A. and it's lobbies staunch opposition to any gun control or registration legislation, is to insure the continuation of unimpeded market growth for weapons manufacturers.

The underlying reason for the Oil, Coal, and Natural Gas Companies and their lobbies is to insure the continued unimpeded market growth and demand for fossil fuel exploration and extraction technologies, no matter how outmoded these technologies are. The economies of scale needed to keep these technologies viable are enormous, so it is in their interest to extend the lifecycle of fossil fuels for as long as possible. This is also the underlying reason the Automobile Industry continued to manufacture internal combustion gasoline and diesel engines, long after the need for them existed.

The underlying reason for the renewed calls for expanded Nuclear power technologies, even though there is no credible solution available to solve the nuclear wastewater issue, other than the current storage solution is to rekindle market demand and insure future growth. The economies of scale in this technology are huge as well, but there is less possibility that the lifecycle of Nuclear power will need to be artificially extended. If the heavy wastewater bi-product of Nuclear power can be harnessed or re-used, this technology potentially has no end of life.

Most large private sector industries want to be free to pursue unimpeded market growth with as few economic restrictions as possible. For that reason, a majority of private sector firms and their principals subscribe to the Adam Smith " Invisible Hand" theory of economics. Both large and small firms in all market sectors practice tax minimization and mitigation strategies so they can reinvest as much of their profits as possible back into their businesses.

It is for this reason that most medium to large companies of nearly all key market sectors band together and form lobby organizations to defend their interests in Washington, DC. These lobbies have a singular purpose, and that is to encourage passage of legislation favorable to their industry and to vehemently oppose any legislation unfavorable to their industry. Lobbies employ specialists whose full time vocation is to use all legal means available to convince legislators to enact favorable legislation. Lobbyists are in constant contact with legislators both during and after business hours. In some cases legislation is actually drafted by the legal team of a particular lobby and given to the staff of an allied legislator for submission to a Senate or Congressional Sub-Committee. Lobbies can represent hundreds and even thousands of businesses in a particular market sector so their operating and advertising budgets can be quite large.

This is the end of part 1. In part 2 we'll conclude US political conflict and examine global political conflict. In part 3 we'll propose specific remedies.

Yours In Humanity,

Phillip Sr.

" Internal Conflict, Its causes and consequences "

2008-11-26T17:52:00.000-05:00

Welcome back fellow Tolerance Troops,

In this edition we'll examine internal conflict, it's causes and consequences. We will also attempt to provide some solutions and reframe the dominant paridigm surrounding this issue.

In an earlier volume we theorized about what forms our mental and emotional makeup. As we grow and mature we are constantly being exposed to external and internal stimuli which create a framework for our view of self, and also our view of others. This stimuli, you'll recall we receive from our immediate family, close friends and relatives. We also receive stimuli from the institutions we attend, and the family or national rituals we observe. During our formative years our personality becomes highly developed as we age towards adulthood. We carry with us extraordinary events that occur during these years both good and bad as well. For instance, if we experience a physical, mental, or emotional trauma, this will effect our ability to assess risk or to take on risk as we age.

These are also issues we face when we are assessing other individuals we meet or develop relationships with. If we don't have an internal mechanism that we can access to deal with our different intimate, personal, casual, work, formal, subordinate and dominant relationships, we will experience the stress that comes from internal conflict.

How do we begin to deal with internal conflict effectively? We must first begin to accurately assess our own character. We need to determine wether we are left brain dominant or right brain dominant.

If we are left brain dominant, we tend to be highly logical, organized, critical thinkers, who tend to see both sides of an issue. We naturally tend to evaluate both sides of an issue. We need to draw our conclusions and make decisions based on highly researched evidence. We use time tested techniques and proven formulas to arrive at a decision.

On the flip side however we have difficulty seeing the big picture. We can be highly disruptive and counterproductive in a group setting. We can be argumentative and skeptical. We are good at solving one issue and one problem at a time. We are much better at tackling issues idependently for a group in a consultative manner. We have little patience for new and unproven ideas.

If we are right brain dominant we are creative, artistic, big picture people, who constantly interpret things and people in new ways. We find inspiration everywhere and are always thinking outside the box. People are drawn to us and we are natural leaders and motivators. We tend to be fearless, and full of faith in a supreme entity higher than ourselves. We tend to create new companies, discover new medicines, find new formulas, and invent new products.

On the flip side, right brained people can be highly unorganized and scattershot. We can drive people crazy with unrealistic expectations and time-lines. We often don't delegate detail work that is not our forte'. We have a tendency to burn others out achieving our vision. We also have a tendency to have to many projects juggling at one time. While we may be good at creating new companies or inventing new products, we often do not posess the skills to take our companies or products to the next level. We need to use our team building skills and learn to make effective use of that team.

All people have some characteristics of either a right brain dominant or left brain dominant personality. If you are a predominantly left brain person then you want to expand your thinking. Learn to use and develop faith in your life. If you can develop the habit of looking outside your normal channels for information, think outside the box and nurture your creative side you will deal with less internal conflict.

If you are a predominantly right brain person then you want to learn when to delegate and when to let go. If you can accept that not everybody will have the same drive and vision that you do, and that you alone may not be equipped to be completely successful. Have faith that you have done all that you can to give birth to your company, invention, motion picture, CD project, or new drug. You too then will be able to move forward with less internal conflict.

In our next issue we'll discuss political conflict, both in the US and abroad, the underlying causes of conflict and specific remedies we can apply to them.

Yours in Humanity,

Phillip Sr.

" Male Female Conflict Resolution Strategies "

2008-11-26T17:46:00.000-05:00

Welcome back Fellow Tolerance troops,

In this edition we'll explore male-female interpersonal dynamics and conflict resolution stategies. This is some of the most difficult territory we'll cover as male-female relationships can be extremely productive, or they can be highly destructive.

What is even more difficult about these relationships is that they often affect individuals, pets and institutions around them. In fact I'll go even farther and hypothesys that these dynamics affect whole societies. They affect the governing bodies and the laws that form these societies. They even affect the trial and penalty phase of governing societies.

First, lets start with the way females and males are raised. In almost every society there is a profound difference between how each sex is reared. In most cases the male is raised to be a Mr. fix-it, dominant, ambitious, self reliant, disciplinarian, and the moral compass ( not unlike the priest of the household). He is also encouraged to be a sexual conquerer, even after committing himself to marriage or a monogamus relationship, but never commit himself to someone with the same or more sexual experience than himself. In some societies men may even be allowed to marry more than one woman. Males are trained to be aggressive and battle tested. A constant hunter always thinking strategically about adding to his personal and family wealth.

A female on the other hand is raised to be nurturing, gentle, soft spoken, a good cook, well groomed, a neat homemaker, thin as a rail, intelligent but not intimidatingly so, sexual but virginal or at least know how to give the appearnce of being virginal, submissive and to turn the other cheek metephorically speaking, when men they are married or committed to, engage in sexual encounters with other women. While the female on the other hand is expected to be totally monogamus and act sexually aggressive and experienced in bed. She is expected to keep an eye out for so called good providers. In some societies women are expected to go even further by covering their heads and faces and even using a burka to cover their whole bodies when they are out in public so as not to tempt the wondering eyes of men. Women in these societies risk public beatings if they are not dressed appropriately. In some of these same societies women are not allowed to be educated beyond an elementary education. Woman are also routinely circumcised before puberty in some societies. This is a brutal and inhumane practice that has been going on for many generations. There are also societies that allow and indeed encourage "honor killings" These murders of women are often committed by the father or her eldest brother as retribution for his daughter having a consentual sexual relationship with a male outside of marriage.

Let's put the facts out on the table as they exist today. Many conflicts that are taking place around the globe right now have there genesis in the male species interpretation of how females are perceived and interact with in that society, with domination and subjugation being the primary goal.

Where did all this begin and why have many societies still not recognized that a female can be aggressive, ambitious, dominant, strategically inclined, and sexually aggressive, just as much as a male can be gentle , nurturing, soft spoken, a good cook, a neat homemaker, and a monogamus lover inside marriage or a committed relationship.

After the basic primitive human instincts of the male being the hunter and the female being the gatherer You will recall that in a previous episode my mentioning humans venturing out of Africa to all parts of the world and establishing their own unique customs and institutions. These customs evolved on both sides of the human divide.

The more developed the societies the more ingrained the customs became. Then came ( here comes the controversial part ) organized religions. At first these religions were neopagan and based on earth based duotheistic worship, such as worship of the land trees and mountains. There are many ancient paintings depicted of this kind of worship in caves and archeolgical sites all over the world. This religion had a god and a goddess. They are currently know as Wiccans. But have been referred to by western theologans as witches

More advanced civilizations such as the Greeks and Egyptians developed polytheistic worship and a written language which started to distinguish between good magic and their deities, and bad magic and their deities. These good and bad gods were further refined by the Roman Empire. Buddhism which began in India around 2500 years ago is based upon 4 basic principals of enlightenment and generally regect the western theory of a supreme being, has evolved into many different sects and belief systems which scholars still today are unsure if it is aetheistic, polytheistic or a combination of both.

Around 7000 years ago A group of people called Hebrews who were known by the Torah as "Goy" or nation [ not in the current sense of nation but in the in the sense of a common heritage and future ]. The Jewish nation are all the spiritual or physical descendents of the "Patriarch Jacob" who was renamed Israel. In Judaism actions are far more important than belief, however there are widely accepted beliefs within the jewish culture articulated by the medieval rabbi and scholar Rambam's 13 principals of faith. The first 5 are that 1. G_d exists, 2. G_d is one and unique, 3. G_d is in corporeal, 4. G_d is eternal, 5. Prayer is to be directed to G_d alone and to no other. Technically though because there are so many tenants of Judaism it cannot be called strictly Monotheistic.

Then a major revolution started in what is now Palestine with the birth of Jesus Christ and the practice of a form of Monotheism called the "Trinity" started to spread across the Middle East, Rome, North Africa, and Turkey via the disciples of a man who was said to have transcended death and gave his life to save the world. Over the next thousand years many texts and of the life of Jesus were written and debated until the full text of the old and new testaments were chosen by the leadership of the holy church. This Document was called the Bible. Christian Nations used this document and the Leadership of the Catholic Church to codify their laws.

Some 600 years later an unlettered prophet born in Mecca around 570 C.E. named Muhammed married a widow at the age of 25 named Khadija, who was involved in the trade business and around 40 on one of his trade missions the angel Gabriel appeared to him and revealed to him the teachings of God. When he returned home to his wife he started to teach these revelations to others. His followers were called Muslims and his teachings were referred to as Islam which in Arabic means "Surrender" [to the will of Allah] and these teaching were recorded in a book called the Qur' an. Over the next several hundred years the laws of Islam called Shariah were codified and became the basis for all laws in islamic nations. One could argue that Islam is the only truly Monotheistic religion.

The result of this religious and secular immersion is that interpersonal dynamics between men and woman became highly complex and extremely regulated. Indviduals who did not quite fit into these religious and secular molds either willingly or unwillingly, were labeled evil or sinful or somehow controlled by the devil. They have been, and are in most cases still being stigmatized by their non-acceptance of local societal norms. Secular Laws are codified to punish some localized " deviant behavior" and many of these independent thinkers were imprisoned and some have been killled because of their differing beliefs or lifestyles.

This is not only true for interpersonal dynamics between men and women but between nations as well. There are on going conflicts wich have killed or displaced hundreds of thousands of people right now, that have their basis on the principals we have been discussing.

So let's move on to how we can resolve many of these conflicts between men and women.

One way is to learn how to become more empathetic towards others and by developing and normalizing a worldwide peace curriculum that would begin at the earliest stages of learning. This curriculum could take into account other cultures without demonizing any culture and build into it a wide variety of empathy developing pathways. This would be especially helpful in building a more fundamentally equal view between males and females

As we grow and become young adults we start to look for potential long term mates. I propose a more widely distributed active listening curriculum be developed so that we can learn about the support systems and the belief systems of the person we are considering a relationship [ even a physical relationship ] with.

Even if such a curriculum is not ever developed active listening is the key to a long term and healthy relationship. If you are interrupted while you are trying to make what you consider a valid point , you become demoralized and feel devalued because you feel that the other person is not actively engaged in your feelings.

Conversely if you are not actively listening but only waiting to respond, you are telling the other person that they are not valuable enough to be heard. You are trying to one-up the other person and invalidate their opinions.

Another way we can diffuse male /female conflicts is to learn and develope the habit of the "pressure pause" . This is simply a method of not instantly responding to an intense one way diatribe by either the male or the female.

Humor can be an effective method of a "pressure pause". So can an intended misdirection or change in the conversation such as an unexpected compliment to the offended party or acquiessance to a major bone of contention. All these methods have the ability to ease the amount of acrimony and provide fuel for a resolution of conflicts.

I think that there is one exception to the "pressure pause" though, and that is to not let any significant time lapse without resolving a conflict. Some people end up going to sleep or leaving the presence of another individual at the height of any perceived discord. With few exceptions this is not an advisable tactic for conflict resolution. It is much more effective and therapeutic to work through conflict continuosly to its conclusion.

In our next edition we will examine internal conflict. Some of its causitive reasons and discuss some possible resolutions.

Yours in Humanity

Phillip Sr.

" Global Immigration Strategies "

2008-11-26T17:39:00.000-05:00

Welcome Back fellow Tolerance Troops,

In this edition we'll tackle "Global Immigration Strategies" and explore the underlying reasons causing these human migration patterns from both the developed world and developing world perspectives.

From almost the inception of our species, humans have always migrated. Unlike other top predators Homo sapiens developed an innate desire to expand and explore their territory while at the same time developing new ways to control their environment. Other top predators and primates did not have this ability, so they have been relagated to instinctual territorial exploration and control. Their existance depends mainly on external non-controllable factors such as food supply and water. If their territories develop shortages of food or water, then top predators and primates will adjust their migration patterns to find more abundant supplies. This is the only motivating factor in the expansion or exploration of other species.

Humans have evolved other mechanisms that motivate migration. We have developed self awareness and an insatiable curiosity, along with a problem solving brain. Somewhere along our evolutionary path we developed language skills and started identifying and categorizing everything in our conscious experience, including other humans. In our most primitive form we were strictly hunter gatherers. Then as we started migrating out of Africa into other parts of the world we started cooperating and specializing. No longer did we just congregate in and defend small family groups. The farther away from Africa we migrated and the longer we stayed in new environments, the more we started assimilating and adapting to our new realities. We started forming extended social groups with organized dominant heirarchys.

Some humans stopped migrating and began to exploit their environments by forming Agrarian societies and planting crops. Instead of natural or temporary shelters people started building permanant shelters. These societies started to domesticate and subordinate other animal species to help in this effort. As these societies became more complex and specialized, they developed local dialects, as well as spiritual and secular customs unique to their particular locations. These dialects and customs helped to identify the members of a particular group.

As each group grows and matures its societal customs, they begin to trade and develope commerce with other groups from different locations. Trade and commerce agreements are reached, but each side interprets the agreements by its own language and customs. These agreements, whether oral or written plant the seeds of dischord. One group seeks advantage over another and conflict is born. Some groups become successful from conflict and these groups then exploit the goods and services of the conquered group and subjugate its society. Often mandating replacement of the subjugating society's spiritual ands secular customs and institutions with the conquering society's own customs and institutions.

Just as some groups are more successful than others, some individuals in a group are more successful than others. The individual may have developed skills that may be incongruent with his or her current group and more suited to another group. Or an individual may not have the skill set to adequately provide for his or her family in their current highly specialized group but may be able to support the family in a less specialized group. In both cases, the migrating individual and their families will be forced to adapt to new societal lanquages and customs if they are to become successful in their adopted groups.

Ultimately it is the drive to become successful that motivates human beings from developing societies to migrate to developed societies.

On the other hand there are several motivating factors for migration from a developed society to a developing one. Let's take a look at some of these. One reason an individual may want to migrate to a developing society is to deconstruct a well ordered life and to live a simpler lifestyle. Often this reason is personal and or spiritual and does not involve other family members. It may involve going back to a conquered group that this individual or his or her family migrated away from, to reconnect with that groups spiritual and secular customs. Or it may involve occasional respites from developed societies to rest and reinvigorate themselves. This is why public policy in developing societies often include activities and institutions that attract income from developed societies.

Another reason is for exploitation and profit. Individuals or groups migrate to developing societies to take advantage of local resources, which often are more readily available and easier to access than in developed societies. Rules are often less restrictive, and though the odds against success are longer, the rewards from exploitation of developing societies can be far greater.

In our next edition we'll explore male-female interpersonal dynamics, and conflict resolution strategies.

Yours in Humanity,

Phillip Sr.

" The Origins of Human Conflict "

2008-11-26T17:15:00.000-05:00

Welcome Back Fellow Tolerance Troops,

In this edition we'll examine more thoroughly the origins of human conflict. How conflict is born, how it grows, what it feeds on, and we will also examine the possible outcomes of conflict.

Some conflict is born out of unmet or unrealized expectations from one party towards another.

Imagine if you can, the moment of birth when you are released out of a warm, dark, comfortable, and nurturing environment and then you are suddenly falling onto a cold table in a blindingly bright room, with unfamiliar sights, smells, and sounds. There is a pain you feel almost immediately in your belly from someone cutting a perfectly fine chord attached to your body. This is your first experience with unmet expectations and internal conflict.

When one person verbalizes a demand for a product or a service to another and the reciprocating party does not carry out that demand, or a person does not verbalize a demand, but instead relies on past behavior patterns that indicate that another will fulfill a demand, can also be a basis for conflict. This is one of the most important factors in the breakup of married and unmarried couples.

Other conflict is born of fear, and or a lack of accurate information. In it's most insidieous and destructive form, large numbers of people are injured, displaced, and lives are lost. As we all know, this is the most likely culprit in the ongoing conflicts in Iraq, Darfur, Gaza, and in many other places all over the world.

But let's start at the more benign individual level. When you are young and impressionable, the first information you receive on other ethnic or religious groups outside your own are from your parents and or older siblings. You may or may not be exposed to any of these groups in your immediate neighborhood. If you have no exposure or personal experience with another ethnic or religious group then you are almost completely dependent on your closest relatives and neighbors for any information you receive on these groups. On the other hand if you live in a highly diverse neighborhood any information you receive from your relatives and neighbors is tempered by personal experiences and interactions with these different groups.

Your information on other groups is also received by external media. As you grow and gain more understanding and awarness of your surroundings, you begin to develop internal conclusions based on your own homogenous or culturally diverse environment. The older you get, and the more internal and external stimuli you receive regarding other ethnic or religious groups, the more you develop neural pathways that connect with the logic centers in your brain. The logic center then starts to perceive all this accumillated stimuli as fact. It will remain this way and affect all of your decision making until new external and internal stimuli is received and new neural pathways are formed to replace the existing pathways.

Conflict can result in either a positive or negative outcome. It is never static in that the parties involved are always moving to either a positive or a negative conclusion.

Conflict among individuals and nations alike move along a sliding scale, descending downward to physical confrontation, displacement, injury, and even loss of life. based on all of the factors previously stated. The more homogeneous an individual or society is, the greater the risk is of conflict with a differing ethnic or religious group.

Conversely, I believe that all conflict can have a positive outcome based on this same sliding scale know matter where the parties are positioned on that scale. The best method being to receive unfiltered information. All individuals and nations alike have propaganda mechanisms that are used to shape the truth to their point of view. We must use as much unedited and uncontrolled external stimuli as possible to get to the unfiltered truth, so that each party can begin to internalize this information and form new neural pathways that lead to mutual understanding. This is why when individuals, married or unmarried couples, groups, corporations, and nations have summits to achieve a modest or a grand objective. And these summits are free of unneccessary external stimuli. These summits are more often than not successful.

In the next edition we will discuss global immigration strategies.

Your in Humanity,

Phillip Sr.

" Exploring Race and Culture "

2008-11-25T23:14:00.000-05:00

Hello and welcome back fellow tolerance troops.

In this edition we're going to explore what race and culture have to do with defining and shaping human existance, human experience and human interaction.
We all start off developing our view of the world by our family. Our Mother, Father, siblings and closest relatives and friends. The language or languages they speak to us, the neighborhood we grow up in, the institutions we attend or belong to, the food we eat, the customs we learn, the holidays we celebrate, and the God or Gods we worship, all conspire to shape our earliest conception of who we are.
Customs become increasingly important as we age because we assimilate several different types of customs. The most dominant of these is internal or family customs. Those things that are unique to your close and extended family environment. Then there are the sub-primary external customs we learn. The neighborhood or village customs, and the religious customs come next. Regional, and work or play customs are somewhat lower on the scale. Finally national and racial customs are near the bottom of the scale.
It is from this framework that we start to ascertain for ourselves what is normal from what we perceive to be abnormal. We feel comfortable with what we think is normal and develope a distaste for anything outside our comfort zone. This uncomfortable state can grow into outright fear without knowledge. Assumptions and generalizations justify the fear. Hatred becomes a natural extension of that fear.
Then we start to become educated. Something as simple as going to a new neighborhood or a new school starts to expand our view of the world as we know it. We may begin to see different types of people who don't look like us, or don't sound like us. They also may not dress like us or worship like us. The more educated we become inside and outside institutions of learning, the more we begin to see others as normal. The more we travel outside of our culture and begin to empathize with others from differrent cultural, national, or racial backrounds, the more our comfort zone expands. An interesting phenomenon occurs. We start to become uncomfortable with others whose definition of what is normal in others is narrower in scope than ours has become. We then start to view these people as abnormal.
I would like to provide an example of this from my own extended family. I have a close friend whom I consider to be my daughter. She is from a southern European Nation and is very close to her Mother and Aunt. She is well travelled and highly educated but her Mother, who has a fear of flying is not as well travelled. She happens to be in love with a wonderful young fellow who is not of her race or nationality. However I believe that there may be some reservations held of this union of two people in love by her Mother and her Aunt. Like any parent or close relative they want the best for her. The issue then becomes what is in the best interest of their daughter and niece. Is it in her best interest to develop a relationship with someone who is closer to her own ethnic and national backround, but is not nearly as educated or well travelled? What would they talk about? How comfortable would she be with this local fellow? Most importantly how happy would she be? I hope for my European Daughters sake that her Mother and Aunt have considered these questions. I also hope that they will let these two young people decide for themselves their own future.

In the next edition we'll examine Human Conflict.

Yours in Humanity,

Phillip Sr.

" The Peace Struggle"

2008-11-25T22:37:00.000-05:00

Hello Fellow Tolerence Troops,

This is the first in a series of thought provoking issues that I hope will energize both myself and anyone else who reads this for the "Peace Struggle" ahead.

For over 20 years I have been involved with the struggle for civil and human rights, and in that time I have become convinced that the fight for peace and understanding can be won. I know that this assertion may seem almost humorous to a lot of people reading this. How can I make this seemingly ridiculous hypothetical conclusion? First, I have spent the better part of my adult life helping to bring about change in the community by learning about others and then changing people's perceptions and dominant paradigms about either myself or others.

All human conflict has its genesis in miscommunication and preconceived assumptions about others. A thought not fully expressed in a conversation with another. A statement not fully heard by the person being communicated to. A premature conclusion by either side weighed down by the baggage of prejudice imbedded in their character by years of lazy dinner or lunch conversation with their friends and family. Years of flippant remarks in idle and unproductive banter, that seem innocent and benign at first, can lead to a festering malignancy of intolerance and narrow minded thought.

Then there is the more dangerous and intentional shaping of opinion by some spiritual leaders who arrogantly presume that they are the only ones who truly understand the mind of God. Substantiated and scholarly researched doctrine is perverted or taken out of context. You must live a certain way, or believe a certain thing, {which may or may not relate to accepted doctrine} or you are doomed to suffer in this life and the next. You must not associate with a non-group member because they will contaminate you and defile your loved ones. This then leads to more intense character shaping by some who insist that the non-believers are beneath the chosen, and are subsequently not even worthy to exist. The believers will be rewarded if they become "Gods helpers" and annihilate the non-believers.

Fortunately there are groups like "The Cow Project" doing important work by educating the young through experience about tolerance and diversity. These young people are in the frontline of the "Tolerance Troops" and we salute their efforts. To learn more you can reach them at http://www.thecowproject.com/

Some food for thought. I'll talk to you more about race and culture in the next edition:

Yours in Humanity

Phillip Sr.