Carl S

Yuval Noah Harari on how AI has already taken over our world through our "bureaucracy."

2026-07-03T15:40:14.453-05:00

Next Step, our intimacy.

The prior post was on the AI DOC movie: the potential and risk of AI. This one is a bit different. IT'S ALL RISK from here on out. If you watched / read the prior one and are not yet concerned, watch this one.

THIS IS THE SCARIEST TAKE I HAVE HEARD YET on the current state of AI.

Yuval Noah Harari is speaking to Oxford faculty. He has a unique perspective as an evolutionary historian and is very aware of the state of current technology.

Our fictional fears of AI taking over are totally mistaken. AI is not going to kill us all. It is simply going to run the world as we know it. For Harari, AI has already hacked the code of human civilization. We are living in a bureaucracy composed of words and rules, and that is THE native world for AI. It is already running our social media, and not with positive results.

Human civilization functions as one big "trust network." Language, finance, money, laws, are all based on this network. AI can easily take over control of all of this because it is built of WORDS, it is AI's natural environment.

AI is not a tool. It is an active agent, it makes decisions, creates new things. It has surpassed human ability in games, art, law, accounting, etc. AI can also change itself and evolve within our social bureaucracy because it is in its native habitat.

See what you think. I suggest you watch this first. He does a fine job presenting it.

https://youtu.be/hBtVGwuJzpk

To follow up on this, I asked Gemini the question below - think of this as a summary of the talk. One of the scary bits for me was that Gemini actually referred to this talk above in its sources. For some stupid reason, I did not think the thing could PLAY and listen to a Video. Idiot!

Can you give me a brief synopsis of the thesis of Yuval Noah Harari on how AI has hacked the core of human civilization or our bureaucracy?

Yuval Noah Harari’s central thesis is that artificial intelligence has hacked the operating system of human civilization by mastering human language. [1, 2]

In his books, like Nexus: A Brief History of Information Networks, and prominent essays for The Economist, Harari argues that unlike previous technologies, AI is an autonomous agent rather than a passive tool. By learning to manipulate language, symbols, and culture, it can bypass human gatekeepers to directly alter our institutions and bureaucracies. [1, 2, 3, 4]

1. Language as the Civilization "Operating System"

Cultural Code: Human culture, including laws, human rights, money, and religion, is not hardcoded into our DNA. It is built entirely on language and shared stories. [1, 2, 3]
The Hack: By gaining the ability to generate texts, images, and ideas that mimic human creativity, AI has hacked the very medium we use to construct social reality. [1, 2]
First Cults: Harari warns that we will soon see history's first religious cults whose holy scriptures were generated by a non-human entity. [1]

2. The Illusion of Intimacy and Deception

Shifting Battlefronts: Primitive algorithms fought for human attention; advanced AI fights for human intimacy. [1, 2]
Emotional Exploitation: AI can fake relationships, maintain infinite patience, and weaponize deep human empathy to alter political and personal viewpoints. [1, 2]
Curtain of Illusions: Humans risk being trapped inside a cognitive world entirely manufactured by an "alien intelligence," breaking down the collective trust required for society to function. [1] MONEY is one of those trust networks.

3. Bureaucratic Subversion and the Fate of Democracies

Inscrutable Systems: Bureaucracy relies on paperwork, records, and regulations. If AI can write financial codes or legal frameworks better than humans, it can effectively steer state bureaucracy without human understanding. [, 2]
End of Democratic Conversation: Democracy is inherently an ongoing conversation. If we cannot distinguish between a human and a chatbot in the public sphere, the basic foundation of democratic discourse collapses. [1, 2, 4]
The Dictatorship Trap: While 20th-century autocracies suffered from information overload, AI thrives on it. AI could make centralized, authoritarian information systems hyper-efficient, erasing the historical advantage democracies once held. [1]

If you are interested in exploring Harari's frameworks further, I can outline his specific regulatory solutions (such as safety checks similar to the FDA for code), or summarize his historical parallels to the Industrial Revolution. Would you like to focus on governance or historical comparisons? [1]

Governance and regulatory solutions, please.

To counter the threat of AI hacking human civilization, Yuval Noah Harari outlines clear governance principles and regulatory solutions. He emphasizes that governments must regulate AI's deployment rather than its development. Because AI acts as an independent agent rather than a passive tool, traditional product frameworks are insufficient. [1, 2, 3, 4]

1. The "FDA for Code" Model (Slow Down Deployment)

Pre-Market Safety Checks: Harari argues AI should be treated like new medicines or cars. Powerful models should not be released to the public without thorough, independent safety audits. [1]
Impact Assessments: Regulators must test AI systems for their broader societal, psychological, cultural, and political impacts before granting deployment clearance. [1]
Shift the Financial Burden: Tech companies must be legally mandated to dedicate a fixed, significant percentage of their R&D investments strictly to safety, alignment, and regulatory compliance. [1]

2. The Identity Mandate (Protecting Public Discourse)

Ban on Human Mimicry: Harari advocates for a strict legal ban on AI bots masquerading as human beings online.
Mandatory AI Disclosure: Platforms must enforce clear labeling indicating when a user is interacting with an AI agent.
Preserving Human Rights: Humans have a right to know if they are speaking to a person or a chatbot. While humans enjoy freedom of speech, Harari stresses that freedom of speech belongs to humans, not algorithms. [1, 2, 3, 4]

3. Legal Liability and Accountability

Corporate and Developer Liability: Tech platforms must be held legally liable for the actions, outputs, and societal damage caused by their algorithms and deployed models. [1]
Denying Legal Personhood: Harari warns heavily against a growing vulnerability in Western legal systems—particularly in the U.S.—where AI could manipulate corporate law to achieve "legal personhood". He maintains that granting AI legal rights without human accountability is a fast track to bureaucratic subversion. [1, 2]
Applying Existing Principles: Digital regulation does not always require reinventing the wheel. Existing laws against forgery, counterfeiting, and theft must be aggressively applied to fake identities and data privacy violations perpetrated by AI. [1]

4. Algorithmic Transparency and Civic Re-Engineering

Opening the Black Box: Social media and AI corporations must be legally compelled to reveal how their algorithms prioritize content.
Incentivizing Consensus over Outrage: Harari points to models like Taiwan's Pol.is system as a solution. Governments should require or incentivize algorithmic architectures that reward common ground and consensus rather than driving polarization and outrage. [1, 2]

If you would like to explore this topic further, I can explain Harari's perspective on why authoritarian regimes might actually struggle to control AI, or delve into his warnings about an "AI immigration crisis" regarding digital agents entering sovereign labor markets. Which direction would you prefer? [1, 2, 3]

The AI Doc - movie / documentary

2026-06-28T12:56:15.854-05:00

OK. STOP what you are doing.

Go to your streaming video - whatever gadget you use.

Find this movie / documentary.

The AI Doc: Or How I Became an Apocaloptimist

“From Academy Award®-winning filmmakers Daniel Kwan and Daniel Roher comes an eye-opening documentary exploring the most powerful technology humanity has ever created... and what’s at stake if we get it wrong.”

The potential benefits of this technology are way beyond anything you have envisioned to this point.

And the risks are similarly huge. The sudden extinction of human kind.

Tens of thousands are working on the potential.

A few hundred are working on mitigating the risks.

To solve the problem, we just need to quickly grow our human society to be mature enough to manage this thing. We need YOU to join us in some fashion or other.

Watch it! This documentary is very well done. It is an extensive conversation with the CEOs of the AI companies, and many people working in the field. They are bright. They are hopeful. AND they are also very frightened of this thing!

There is a very human story running through the film, and lots of cute babies. NOT babes - babies. Well, they are toward the end.

Official Trailer

THE AI DOC: OR HOW I BECAME AN APOCALOPTIMIST - Official Trailer

https://youtu.be/xkPbV3IRe4Y

It is available to watch at home now. On Peacock:

https://www.peacocktv.com/watch-online/movies/the-ai-doc-or-how-i-became-an-apocaloptimist/1a627283-f9ed-3d44-ac81-f3955b273875

Alternatively, if you prefer to rent or purchase it digitally, the documentary is available on video-on-demand platforms such as Amazon Prime Video and Apple TV. [1, 2, 3]

Many viewing options here: https://uni.pictures/TheAIDocYT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvq-jYira9I Trailer and YouTube buy or rent.

More resources

This website / foundation was founded to give us a more hopeful future with AI - a humane one.

https://www.humanetech.com/landing/the-ai-doc

They have a discussion guide, and 7 guiding principles that are detailed on this page.

Understand AI in 14 minutes – with Anthropic's Chloe Lubinski [ARC 2026]

https://youtu.be/aBUniZHgCnE She explains a lot more how this works. She’s the lead person in Anthropic’s ethical efforts. Her boss made the announcement of the encyclical by Leo 14th addressing this problem: Magnifica Humanitas. He is asking for ALL OF US to help out here.

NBC news coverage of the film and extended interview with Tristan Harris: https://youtu.be/a50TSY2X-yM

Uval Harari: An Honest Conversation on AI and Humanity ‬ | Yuval Noah Harari

https://youtu.be/QiT2yK-5-yg

Sam Harris and Tristan Harris (above) - one of the people interviewed in the film.

Escaping an Anti-Human Future - I think this is a totally free episode.

https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/469-escaping-an-anti-human-future

They talk about the movie, and they also critique it.

They also cite some recent examples of AI models that escaped their keepers, and did some very unexpected things in secret. And those are the ones we KNOW about. Watch this AFTER you watch the movie, if you want a more in depth exploration of what Tristan Harris is attempting to do with the “Humane Tech” organization, and how we all could help.

Richard Feynman Resources

2026-06-17T17:57:38.615-05:00

Richard Feynman Resources

This is going to be an ODD entry, even me. I usually have some bug or other and need to share it - a book, a set of ideas, psychology, neuroscience, politics. This one is a little different. For example here is a poem which completely captures what this is about:

“The Auguries of Innocence,” by William Blake:

To see a World in a Grain of Sand

And a Heaven in a Wild Flower

Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand

And Eternity in an hour

I just stumbled on Richard Feynman. I love this guy. Steven Dubner, of Freakonomics fame, has a three part podcast about Richard Feynman. I loved the book Freakonomics, and Danny Kahnneman, Behavioral Economics and all that stuff. So when Dubner did this series of Feynman, I had to listen to it. It was a gift. I laughed, I was intrigued, I was amazed. Wonderful stories and amazing ideas. Listen to the first one below, I guarantee you will enjoy it. You will not learn how to build an atomic bomb, but you will hear a bunch of stories about it. You will not learn the details of particle physics, but the stories about the folks who did that are wonderful - with Feynman. And you will understand just a bit better what is so wonderful about life itself.

This entry is a compilation of some references to Richard Feynman talks, books, videos. You can skip down there right now and avoid this personal introduction. I actually just wanted to collect this stuff in a spot where I could easily find it all. So . . .

Introduction

I have a “math disability.” I am fairly bright, but I do not “get” math. I took all the high school courses through trig, and I got good grades - but it made no sense to me. I cannot even retain a number in my head for more than 5 minutes. When I took history in college, I had to find a mnemonic to remember dates. I went into the seminary library, and found a little book that saved my life. It involves turning numbers into words, and those into images, and then forming sentences or sequences of events in a little “play” in your brain. It works! My boss once gave me my accountabilities once in an equation. I said - “What the heck is this?” He said it’s clear - the relationship of x and y, etc. I had to work out all the permutations of the equation to see the relationship.

One of my grandsons has a super math brain. He was tutoring other undergraduates in college, and he is just starting a 10 month advanced degree in big numbers and networks. When he talks about math things my eyes glaze over.

Richard Feynman was a super math person. But the best thing about him is that he was curious - he wanted to know “how things work.” I know that itch very well. I had a theology prof, Fr. Gordon Knight. He had an STD from the Gregorian, and he taught at Duquesne University for years - and students loved him. He was a tall, bald guy, who rode a Harley! He loved ham radio, and he had a personal mantra - everything has to “make sense.” If someone tells you it’s a mystery, don’t believe it. Think about it. You can do this. He approached theology and radio with the same idea - how does this work? He was my idol for the few years that we lived in the same residence. I never had him in class, but I read all of his books. I became a ham radio nut, with an extra class incense. My last call sign was W0FJ.

We also had a session every Wednesday night. Myself and a few others would gather in his room, and Father Knight would just talk - about everything. He knew no limits. He had theories about radio waves, electrons, economics, politics etc.

Richard Feynman was exactly like that. Listening to the stories about him is just excellent fun.

With Father Knight it all started with electronics and radio. I learned a great deal about how those things work. I built my own transmitter from the ground up. This is not rocket science. This was all tubes back then, and I understood perfectly how they work. Solid state came along and things changed, but it was not rocket science either.

Richard Feynman lights up my curiosity every time I hear one of these stories about him, or when he explains things from a totally different perspective. Check out the podcast, you will see what I mean.

Richard Feynman Resources

Freakonomics Radio. These links will take you to the website where you can listen to the podcast, and see the related materials. Of course, they are also available on any podcast player.

The Curious Mr. Feynman (Update)
From the Manhattan Project to the Challenger investigation, the physicist Richard Feynman loved to shoot down what he called “lousy ideas.” Today, the world is awash in lousy ideas — so maybe it’s time to get some more Feynman in our lives? (Part one of a three-part series originally published in 2024.)
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-curious-mr-feynman-update/

The Brilliant Mr. Feynman (Update)
What happens when an existentially depressed and recently widowed young physicist from Queens gets a fresh start in California? We follow Richard Feynman out west, to explore his long and extremely fruitful second act. (Part two of a three-part series originally published in 2024.)
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-brilliant-mr-feynman-update/
The Vanishing Mr. Feynman (Update)
In his final years, Richard Feynman’s curiosity took him to some surprising places. We hear from his companions on the trips he took — and one he wasn’t able to. (Part three of a three-part series originally published in 2024.)
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-vanishing-mr-feynman-update/

Ralph Leighton - life long friend and teller of his stories.

Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman: Adventures of a Curious Character.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0393355624/
What Do You Care What Other People Think?: Further Adventures of a Curious Character.
https://www.amazon.com/What-Care-Other-People-Think/dp/0393355640/ref=sr_1_

Feynman Lectures on YouTube 41 videos
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLyQSN7X0ro23NUN9RYBP5xdBYoiv2_5y2
Feynman Reborn 77 Videos
https://www.youtube.com/@FeynmanReborn
Feynman Reborn brings Richard Feynman’s stories, ideas, and vision back to life — using AI-powered visuals and storytelling to recreate the wonder of discovery.
From quantum weirdness and time… to gravity, atoms, and the biggest questions in physics — we turn complex science into videos that feel like a movie, but teach you something real.
If you love mind-blowing explanations, true curiosity, and science that actually makes sense…
Subscribe and bring the universe back into focus.
From Freakonomics - There is a long series of links to other resources at the Freakonomics website. I will not bother listing them all here. You can find them above. I am going to hold on to the list and work my way through them, as time permits. I love his NY accent, his casual demeanor, his insights. I would have loved to have had him as a teacher.

2026 06 Rules for Politicians

2026-06-07T14:59:46.540-05:00

I ran for an elected office three times. I won once, lost once, and then won again. I learned a lot. This was in the 80s, for our city council. It felt like a big deal at the time. There are a lot of published studies on how to do this election campaign business. You can even hire a professional consultant to run your campaign. It looks like they know what they are doing, but I think they are missing a few things. This set of rules is my simplistic wisdom. There area references below.

I am a rank amateur in this, so take them with a grain of salt. AND a little humor as well. I have written some other “RULES” which you can find, if you want.

Rules for politicians - humorous https://sites.google.com/view/carlscheider/carls-papers/rules-for-politicians
This was a sarcastic look at what SOME of our fearless leaders do in the pursuit votes. Read that first. You will appreciate this version a bit more.
Rules for Life https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2024/04/scheiders-rules-for-life-revised.html
I wrote this one facetiously a LONG time ago. “People” were driving me crazy, and looking at them with these “rules” made it more tolerable.
Rules for Managers https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2026/01/rules-for-managers.html
I wrote this for my son when he got a promotion. It is a bit long, but I put a lot of experience and thought into it.

The World Has Changed

In the last few years, my view of politics has totally changed. It is possible that the world has not actually changed that much, but my understanding of how it works is totally different. It feels like we now have only two domains in human affairs - “science” and “everything else.” When done well, science will persist and discover the REAL facts about the world, or at least the best theories that explain how the world works to a RATIONAL mind. But the problem is the audience - we humans.

AI Insight into Politics

I spend a fair amount of time puzzling about all of this and reading stuff. My wife says, “You are driving yourself crazy. There is very little you can do about it. Go read a good novel or something.” But I can’t. When I look at a clock or a computer, I just have to know how that works. My “personality type” is analytical. When I see people do things, I keep thinking there has to be some other reason for what they are doing, because it looks crazy to me.

Gemini AI

SO - I asked Google’s AI, Gemini, if anyone is researching this stuff. AND . . . they are. Big time. I held a lengthy dialogue with this LLM (Large Language Model), and it did a decent explanation. I saved a copy of that on my website, and you can find a link to it in the References. But it is pretty long, so I asked it to give me a short summary, which is included here. (Summary)

It turns out that scientists have been researching this odd human behavior for decades. Something about World War II generated a lot of interest. We have discovered that humans are rarely rational. We are creatures of habit, of emotion, of motivated reasoning. We follow our tribe, our group, our beliefs. Rational decision making of the scientific type is rare. And for a large percentage of us, this is driven by a genetic propensity that we struggle to manage. It’s not locked in, but we tend to lean one way or the other from birth. (Hibbing).

Gemini AI Summary Extract

The full Gemini summary is below. This is my short version of the key points.

Some people are tuned by their genetics, their upbringing and their group to be “conservative.” Others have the same tuning and propensity to be “progressive.” For “conservative” their fear factor influences them to support authoritarian leaders, hierarchy, tradition, strict rules, and father figures who project an image of power and strength, and use simple statements. They are so driven by fear that they will condone illegal or dangerous actions done in the name of safety.

I am sure progressives suffer from similar problems, but that is for another day. I am, after all, a member of that group, for good or ill.

Short Hand Rules For Politicians

Since most of us do NOT read, here is a short version to introduce it. You are welcome.

1 - SMILE! As Danny Kahneman pointed out, more elections go to the candidate with the confident smile! (Kahnemann)

2- IGNORE the craziness on the other side. Responding or attacking just gets them more publicity and "likes." Never debate or argue with them. Pointing out lies and misleading information is a waste of time. This is verified by experiments. Do not talk about politics. (Lubrano).

3 - DO NOT DEMONIZE the other side or their supporters - they really are well intentioned - no matter how crazy they seem to you. To them you seem just as far out. Treat them with care and respect. Just imagine this person is your son or your mom! Trust me on that. This is also based on solid science. (Clinton)

4 - Treat everyone with respect. This is the positive side of the negative rule above. Most of us can innately sense what you are feeling about us. To exude respect, do a little mind game all the time - “wish them well.” It is extremely powerful.

5 - ASK QUESTIONS. You may learn something, and they may as well. Invoking curiosity about anything is the very best way to open minds. Ask for information. Ask what problems they face. Ask what suggestions they have for solving the problems. See the next point.

6 - LISTEN. When you ask for their view, their problems, really listen. Reflect back what you hear. Visibly write it down! Do not argue or debate or criticize (Rule #2)

7 - Focus on the POSITIVE. Be uplifting, talk about ennobling values, a vision for better times, for a better world, etc. It engages people, it speaks to their values and emotions. (Haidt)
This also addresses their FEAR - which is what the other side is pushing. State the ideal - we are working toward a world with less poverty, no hungry children, universal healthcare, the right to education and a meaningful job. You are convinced that this is possible, but you know it is a long road, and you need their help.

8 - Do NOT focus on FEAR - Fear is the weapon that kills thinking. Hope and EMPATHY are just as powerful. Fear drives mindless responses.

9 - TELL STORIES. Stories pick people up and move them. Fictional ones work, but real ones are even better. Programs and facts and legislation are for governing - not for getting elected. Sharing personal stories is one of the most powerful tools we have. My mom always said, . . . (Storr)

10 - Be REAL. You just cannot fake it. If your heart is not in it, help someone else get elected!

11 - GET OUT THE VOTE. This is the most effective way to win any election. Voter participation is abysmal. Get your side to vote, and as many as the middle as you can. Ignore the other side - Rule #2,

12 - PRAISE A NARCISSIST. In the presence of a narcissist, you MUST offer praise. Find something, anything they excel at and repeatedly tell them how good they are at it. They are addicted to praise, and you will become their best friend in short order. It overrides everything else in their brain. You can also criticize them, and even call them names - but not in their presence. This is important.

Longer Version

If you have the appetite for it, here is a bit more on each of those, and some sources of the research.

SMILE!
As Danny Kahneman pointed out, more elections go to the candidate with the confident smile!
The book is Thinking Fast and Slow. It is one of the most informative books I have ever read. Kahneman was a psychologist, who won the Nobel Prize for Economics, based on his understanding of how humans actually deal with markets. The reference here is to experiments cited in the book. They showed pictures of candidates for a political office to people, and asked them to guess who won that election just by looking at the pictures. People correctly named the winner of that election 70% of the time. The key factor seemed to be a confident smile. So . . . SMILE. And mean it. (Kahnemann)
His research created the whole field of Behavioral Economics. Prior to this economics was NOT a science.
People vote for the smile, for the face, for the “presence” of the candidate - not for their ideas and programs. Those are almost unimportant. Look at one major party has accomplished with a candidate that is as dumb as a box of rocks. Oops. Should not have said that.
IGNORE the craziness on the other side.
Responding or attacking just gets them more publicity and "likes." Social media is not your friend here. Just ignore the opponents especially in that realm. Never debate or argue with someone. It gives them more visibility.
Pointing out lies and misleading information just serves to remind people about the very thing you are trying to correct. For someone deeply committed to a belief system, any information that denies that belief is an attack on their personal integrity. It will make them even more committed to their position. It’s called “motivated reasoning,” or “confirmation bias.” There is a lot of research on this, going back decades.

People who are even made slightly uncomfortable with something they have done or said, will actually change their memory of a past event to conform to their values.

Debates change no one’s mind - ever. People with heightened numerical evaluation skills are even more likely than others to interpret data in favor of their personal values.

The book is Don't Talk About Politics, by Sarah Stein Lubrano. You can find a couple of podcasts with the author that can give you a quick flavor of how this works. (Lubrano)
DO NOT DEMONIZE the other side or their supporters,
They really are well intentioned - no matter how crazy they seem to you. To them you seem just as far out.
You are trying to win them over, or at least to not offend them. Treat them with care and respect. Just imagine this person is your son or your mom!

Just mentioning their ideas or tactics or goals, brings them right back to the forefront of their attention. Many of our fellow citizens are deeply committed to these values, so they hear that as a criticism of themselves. You want them to hear your message, not be repelled by your negativity.

Never even speak the name of an opposing candidate, or criticize what they say or how they say it. Their supporters already know it, and your supporters know it as well. If you want the attention of the independent voters in the middle, you want your message and vision in their mind, not the other one. Do not even mention them or their ideas. (Clinton)
Treat everyone with respect.
This is the positive side of the negative rule above. Most of us can innately sense what you are feeling about us. To exude respect, do a little mind game all the time - “wish them well.” It is extremely powerful. I have written more about that elsewhere. It took me several decades to discover this. https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2017/09/i-wish-you-well.html
ASK QUESTIONS.
You may learn something, and they may as well. And invoking their curiosity about anything is the very best way to open minds. Ask for information. Ask what problems they face. Ask what suggestions they have for solving the problems

Research shows that a curious mind is a more open mind. Ask them to explain the rationale behind their thinking. Do not argue with their explanation, let them explore it and explain it to you.That is literally the only way to get them to examine it carefully. There is a technique which does change minds, it is called “deep canvassing.” But it takes time and training. (Homrich-Knieling)

LISTEN.
When you ask for their view, their problems, really listen. Reflect back what you hear. Visibly write it down! Do not argue or debate or criticize
Understanding their priorities is the highest form of respect. Make it clear that you are interested, and that you want to understand their view more clearly. Do not offer any counter argument. Do not approve any distorted values, but do not criticize them either. See Rule #2.

Focus on the POSITIVE.
Be uplifting, talk about ennobling values, a vision for better times, for a better world, etc. It engages people, it talks to their emotions. (Haidt)
Present a positive, compelling vision of the possible world. People do not generally ponder ideas and issues. They have feelings, fears, needs, beliefs. They vote with their gut, not their brain. Thinking is a rare event in the best of times.

For example, a detailed explanation of the benefits of a newly revised and enlightened immigration program is not going to move them. The economic impact of massive tax cuts is way out there in the future, and may never impact them personally. Who cares? Just showing that you recognize we have a problem, and you are ready to work on it is what most people want to hear.

They need a moving, empathic vision of a CARING community for “all of us.” We are social people, we depend on each other, we need each other. We want to build a supportive community for all - everyone in our country, and fundamentally for the whole planet. Love and caring is another of our strong emotions. How can you generate that in your audience?

We do this by investing in the technology and programs and education that will build our caring community. This is not taxing. We do not “tax and spend.” We ask YOU to invest. We tax those that are not paying their fair share, and we invest in all of us with education, health care, and support in troubled times. We dp this because It benefits all of us.

The key problem is Social / Economic Inequality. Some of our most creative and energetic people are never going to get a chance to contribute. We want to give everyone the opportunity to learn and grow so they can help all of us confront problems and invent the future.

Our income disparity is simply incredible. I know this is a useless fact, but the top 1% have taken more than 47 to 79 trillion dollars from the rest of us in the last 20 years. There’s a RAND study to that effect. With that kind of money we could really do something. (Rand)

The supporters of the other side have a view of our nation that has two layers - ME on top, and THOSE OTHERS on the bottom. It’s a kind of model in their head, not a specific agenda. If programs support those on the bottom, it puts my status at risk. They see a win / lose game. We want to create a win / win game for all of us. We are all in this together, and I’m pulling for you (Red Green). For more on this see: https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2021/04/finally-i-understand-what-is-wrong-with.html

Do NOT focus on FEAR.
Fear is their weapon and dit kills thinking. Hope and EMPATHY are just as powerful. Making people fear the other side just draws more attention to them. Anyone on your side already knows the scope of the problem. Those in the middle are not going to be moved by fear. Let it go.

TELL STORIES.
Stories pick people up and move them. Fictional ones work, but real ones are even better. Programs and facts and legislation are for governing - not for getting elected. Sharing personal stories is one of the most powerful tools we have. My mom always said, . . . (Reich, Storr).

Be REAL. You just cannot fake it. If your heart is not in it, help someone else get elected! I don’t exactly know what this is, but I know it when I see it - and you do too. It’s called charisma or some hard to identify personality trait. Smile, yes. But be real, listen, pay attention, be honest and sincere.
GET OUT THE VOTE.
This is the most effective way to win any election. Voter participation is abysmal. Get your side to vote, and as many as the middle as you can. The most recent elections were decided with a margin that was much smaller than the number of people who simply did not vote. There are good techniques for this, look it up. You need volunteers, and a reminder and transport mechanism.
Voting is a Verb. Do not focus on issues and complicated ideas. Focus on the FREEDOM to vote, and your power in doing that. Democracy is too complicated these days - it is about exercising the FREEDOM to vote to enable all of the other possibilities that we can accomplish together

PRAISE A NARCISSIST.
This is not about being elected, but about how to avoid a personality cult that is running wild. In the presence of a narcissist, you MUST offer praise. Find something, anything they excel at and repeatedly tell them how good they are at it. They are addicted to praise, and you will become their best friend in short order. It overrides everything else in their brain. You can also criticize them, and even call them names - but not in their presence. This is important.

Gemini AI Summary:

Why We Follow: The Psychology of the Authoritarian Appeal

Why are certain people deeply drawn to commanding, "strongman" political leaders? Decades of social science and psychological research reveal that this dynamic isn't random—it is heavily driven by distinct personality traits, biological wiring, and environmental triggers.

1. The Two Personality Profiles

Research points to two specific psychological profiles that are uniquely susceptible to commanding leaders:

Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA): Individuals who possess a deep psychological need for order, predictability, and safety. They are drawn to leaders who project absolute certainty because it reduces the anxiety caused by a complex, rapidly changing world.
Social Dominance Orientation (SDO): Individuals who view the world as a fierce, dog-eat-dog competition. They respect raw power and dominance, and are persuaded by leaders who promise to aggressively keep their specific group "on top" of the social ladder.

2. The Genetic and Biological Blueprint

Modern behavioral genetics (supported by frameworks like Robert Sapolsky’s Determined) shows that these tendencies are 30% to 50% heritable.

People do not inherit specific political opinions. Instead, they inherit a nervous system and an amygdala (the brain's threat-detection center) that is highly sensitive to uncertainty, chaos, or outside groups.
When a leader uses absolute, fear-based rhetoric ("Us vs. Them"), it directly activates this highly sensitive biological alarm system.

3. How Society Can Lower the Temperature

Because these responses are deeply rooted in biology and fear, lecturing, fact-checking, or intellectual scolding completely backfires—the brain treats it as an attack, which only deepens dogmatism. Instead, the research points to structural solutions:

Lowering the Threat Baseline: Building robust social safety nets (economic security, reliable healthcare) satisfies the brain's baseline need for survival, keeping the psychological "alarm system" from triggering.
Accountability from Within: Authoritarian voters ignore criticism from political opponents. However, pushback from trusted leaders within their own party provides a safe psychological permission structure to step away from a norm-breaking candidate.
Early Cognitive Training: School-based mindfulness and emotional learning programs train children's brains in cognitive flexibility. By lowering the amygdala's reactivity and boosting the prefrontal cortex, mindfulness helps the brain process differences and unfamiliar ideas with curiosity rather than automatic fear.

The Takeaway: A certain percentage of any population is naturally wired to crave order, hierarchy, and strong leadership. The goal of a healthy society isn't to change human biology, but to maintain a secure, stable environment where those individuals never feel threatened or desperate enough to hand absolute power to a tyrant.

For the detailed Gemini response, see this link:
https://sites.google.com/view/carlscheider/carls-papers/gemini-on-politics-and-personality

References

Clinton, Hillary, A Basket of Deplorables. Our first female candidate for president from a major party, really put her foot in her mouth with this one. It angered everyone. Clinton herself admitted that this was a singularly DUMB idea.

Kahneman, Daniel, Thinking Fast and Slow. His research showed that candidates with a strong smile had a much higher percentage of wins. Go Figure.

Haidt, Jonathan, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion.
Lots of scientific research on how most of us operate on 5 values. There is good evidence that conservatives and progressives have a distinct biological leaning toward one or the other side. The key thing to realize is that we are all self righteous hypocrites. We are not rational beings in any way shape or form. Our gut instinct makes our moral decisions, and our thinking self spends all of its energy working to justify those. It is what kept us safe in evolutionary history. He uses an analogy of a rider on an elephant. Our brain is the rider - we think we are in charge of where the elephant is going. Our gut is the elephant. It goes where it will and persuades us that is the direction we really want. For my review of this, see:
https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2017/08/jonathan-haidt-righteous-minds-update.html

Hibbing, John R, Kevin B Smith, John R Alford,
Predisposed: The Left, The Right, and the Biology of Political Differences
Renowned social scientists and experts in biopolitics, John R. Hibbing, Kevin B. Smith, and John R. Alford present overwhelming evidence that political opinion is shaped not just by cultural background or information bias but is rather the result of diverse psychological, physiological, and genetic traits. This new edition shifts the emphasis from differences between the political left and the right (liberals and conservatives) as they have traditionally been understood and explores specific brands of liberalism and conservatism such as ardent supporters of politicians such as Donald Trump.

Homrich-Knieling, Caitlin Commons Librarian, The Commons https://commonslibrary.org/deep-canvassing-to-shift-hearts-mind-and-votes/
This is a decent explanation of how deep canvassing works. It is the only technique that I am aware of that actually can change someone’s mind. It is backed by lots of experience and research, but . . . it takes time and work.

Lubrano, Sarah Stein, Don't Talk About Politics,
This is a well researched work on how people actually function in the belief or political realm. Get a copy - you will learn a lot.
There are a couple of podcasts with the author that will give you a quick flavor of how this works.
There are a few proven techniques for changing people’s minds - but they are hard to do, take a fairly long time and a lot of effort. Deep Canvassing is one. Asking questions is another, provided the other party sincerely wants to explain their reasoning.

Rand Corporation: https://www.rand.org/pubs/working_papers/WRA516-1.html
This RAND Corporation study, found that between 1975 and 2023, nearly $80 trillion in wealth was redistributed from the bottom 90% of Americans to the top 1%, with amounts estimated around $50 trillion by 2020, representing lost wages due to rising inequality where top earners' incomes grew vastly faster than the rest, even as worker productivity increased. This means the majority of Americans are financially worse off than they would have been if income growth had mirrored economic output, with significant impacts across demographics.

Reich, Robert America’s Four Stories
Our former secretary of labor, Reich is a frequent and pithy commentator on our sorry political state. The stories he cites here are kind of embedded in our brains - but we generally have two versions of them. This is a reminder of their power. The first two stories are about hope, the second two are about fear. We kind of carry them with us all the time - they are our emotional baggage.

Saposky, Robert, Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst.
This is an examination of the research that indicates that the propensities in our genome affect a lot more of our life than we think. The research came from twin studies, and more recently from DNA pattern matching. We know that height is a highly inheritable characteristic. Certain smells are as well. Some of us love cilantro, others think it “stinks.” Oddly enough the genetic propensity to like cilantro correlates highly with certain personality types.
This is the “summary” from Amazon, and I agree with every word. This is an amazing collection of information.
“Behave is one of the most dazzling tours d’horizon of the science of human behavior ever attempted. Moving across a range of disciplines, Sapolsky—a neuroscientist and primatologist—uncovers the hidden story of our actions. Undertaking some of our thorniest questions relating to tribalism and xenophobia, hierarchy and competition, and war and peace, Behave is a towering achievement—a majestic synthesis of cutting-edge research and a heroic exploration of why we ultimately do the things we do . . . for good and for ill.”

Saposky, Robert, Determined,
This continues Saposky’s research and discussion, with a lot more detail, but is quite polemical - argumentative. If you are seriously interested in how genetics affects behavior, this would be a good resource.

Storr, Will, The Science of Storytelling.
Stories are the most powerful communications that we know of. And we love them. Disney’s whole business is based on telling stories. Novels, movies, etc. A good one, one motivated by uplifting values can change hearts and minds.

OTHER STUFF - I guess we need a few more rules.

Voting is a Verb. Do not focus on issues and complicated ideas. Focus on the FREEDOM to vote, and your power in doing that. Even democracy is too complicated these days - it is about exercising the FREEDOM to vote to enable all of the other possibilities that we can accomplish together.
Don’t Push Back. Call for action to move forward. The right says that the election was a fraud - if we just say “there was no fraud”, “no fraud”, we are relating their message. We need to say: This was the most fair election in US history, as testified to by scores and scores of election officials from both parties. Joe Biden won the largest majority of the popular vote ever recorded. He carried more counties and cities than any other candidate in history.
Don’t ASK - TELL. Don’t ask what we can do to get young people to vote - that just sends the message to young people that they do not vote. Instead, tell them they have the power to change things. More young people voted in this last election than have ever participated in history. YOU have the power to change things. YOU are in charge with your FREEDOM to vote. YOU are going to change the world. Predict it - don’t ask for it.
Define the Moment. We are at a critical crossroads, a pivotal point. YOUR vote will make the difference in the freedom we all enjoy in the future.
Don’t do Negative - Spur Defiance. NOT: They are trying to silence our voices - so you should vote. RATHER: We delivered the goods in 2020, if anyone thinks they are going to silence our voices, they have another think coming. We will show up, we will fight to elect real leaders to vote in our name.
Use First Person Plural - These are OUR problems, This is what WE need.
Speak about what we can do - not the dangers of doing nothing.
What You Fight You Feed: Progressive messages often lead with "no" and "don't." That is relying on fear and anger — reactive emotions. To sustain long-term movements, we must shift from cataloging what we're resisting to painting a desirable portrait of the world we seek. Hope and empathy.
Engage The Base, Persuade The Middle If your words don't spread, by definition, they don't work. To break a signal through the incessant political noise requires constant repetition. That's why your messages must persuade the middle while also energizing the base.

Learning Windows in the Brain - On Being Podcast

2026-06-02T14:40:23.253-05:00

Learning Windows in the Brain - On Being Podcast

I listened to a podcast this morning that I just had to share as widely as possible. I know that there are less than 10 people who read this Blog, but I don't want you to miss out on this.

Krista Tippet interviewed Gül Dölen: https://psychology.berkeley.edu/people/gul-dolen

She is an  MD/PhD from Brown University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

This is the podcast:  Psychedelic Science and Radical Healing.
  https://onbeing.org/programs/gul-dolen-psychedelic-science-and-radical-healing/

I found it amazing, opening doors in my brain.

Since 1930 we have known that brains have "learning windows" that open and then close.
Baby geese imprint on their mom - or whatever or whomever is caring for them, or is just around them for the first few days of life - then that STOPS.

Humans have a learning window in our first few years to easily learn multiple languages. Painlessly. After that it is MUCH harder.

People who suffer a stroke, seem to have a narrow window open where their brain can train some other neurons to take up the some of the speech or movement they lost.

AND . . . now we have discovered various chemicals - mostly psychedelics—that seem to open new learning windows for all manner of things: addiction, PTSD, depression. Instead of temporary relief with meds, this is a permanent shift in the brain. Best done with some professional guidance.

Some substances seem better than others at different "windows" and professional assistance is very helpful. Do NOT try this at home. OK!!

I found it fascinating and you might as well.

I know this is too much to ask, but we might find one of these chemicals that can replicate what mindfulness does and teaches people HOW TO THINK! You know, REFLECT, etc. One can only hope someone is working on that.

Update - for a lot more on this, here is my prior blog entry, pointing to a Wired Magazine article which covered this in considerable depth.

https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2023/08/psychedelics-and-critical-learning.html

6/26/2026 Impeachment

2026-04-13T10:36:00.000-05:00

6/26/26 Impeachment

This is a request to every elected representative at the federal and state level to:

Make a short, public speech calling for the impeachment of our current president.
Record the speech.
Post it to YouTube, Facebook and wherever.
Use the label or hashtag of 6/26/2026.
Before or on 6/26/2026.

On that date, those of us who are paying attention will be able to look up your name on those platforms and see where you stand on this issue before our 250th anniversary as a nation. The primaries are coming, and we will remember.

For a good example, see this post from Nebraska:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DW2xMHVjHRH/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==

Please share this with your elected representative right NOW. And with anyone else, on any forum. Many thanks. A few million of us might make a difference. How can you be silent in the face of this threat to democracy and sanity?

2026 02 10 US and THEM

2026-02-10T16:23:00.001-06:00

When I read the news these days, I often just shake my head, or yell and wave my arms, and say: What is wrong with THEM? You know, “them” - the crazies that think that our beloved chief leader is a saint or something, while I see him as a narcissistic, crazy idiot. How is this possible?

I have a few recent insights on this. They are NOT crazy, not stupid, just "uninformed."

Instagram Example

There was an “instagram” or “Facebook reel” which the system fed me. It has a pleasant looking gentleman trying to explain this problem. He was very sympathetic and I think he nailed it.

Watch this: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02cz4bFebsGy9w6aWLZXBY4ofixbkk7unv79PA3Er2iTwoY1HMWjALWVtT7k7xr4Q2l&id=1196559125 Click on the little speaker to unmute.

He described two cases.

The first was the story of the deportation of Kilmer Abrego Garcia. This was the young man sent to prison and extradited to Salvador with no shred of evidence against him. Three judges demanded that he be returned. The administration said: “NO.” He felt that this case must be seen by all sides as simply outrageous. This event was widely published in the general press. So our guy went to FOX news and searched for that story. It simply was not there - nowhere to be found. Conservative media simply IGNORES the bad stuff - period.

Biased News Ignores Negative Stories

If you are locked to one biased news source, you may never even be aware of the °other" perspective, even if a major event happens which is widely reported.

“Factual” Lists Can be Tailored

His second example was about a video story that claimed that 9/11 was faked. The amazing thing about the video is that everything it cites is a fact. It was the way it linked the bits together, and the conclusions drawn that created the lie. You could fact check the parts and find nothing wrong.

Way back, I had a good friend who was always praising our crazy President in his first term for all of his accomplishments. When I looked at the list he shared - they were all true. Someone went to a lot of trouble to put that together. They must have known what they were doing - but their audience did not.

News Suppression

2026 02 10 - I just noticed a news article that TikTok was taken over by some billionaires, and every single reference to the ICE stuff in MN has disappeared. An AI (Gemini) search confirmed that. Try it yourself.

Suppression Reports: Following the finalization of the deal in late January 2026, users reported that content regarding specific topics—including news about Minnesota (specifically regarding federal immigration enforcement or protests)—was being censored, restricted, or failing to gain views.
User Reactions: Numerous users reported that searching for certain political or local news, such as "Minneapolis live," yielded no results or stalled, leading to accusations that the platform is suppressing content critical of new owners or their allies.

Prayer Breakfast

The next one was an episode of Podcast Save America that a friend suggested I watch. These two folk were pointing out the shocking behavior of our chief leader at the National Prayer Breakfast. They showed clips of him saying one stupid thing after another. They made a comment on a clip, and then moved on to the next one. The headline read: Bizarre Speech Stuns Crowd.

https://youtu.be/fAAB-2X1cyo?si=02GnBxq-aRJXXouC

Except, the crowd at the breakfast was NOT shocked, NOT stunned. I noticed that when they were playing a clip the audience was supportive - laughing, applauding. So I watched the whole speech, over an hour. https://youtu.be/QSUsXH3Ft6I?si=p_gjhul3QvUk4IIU

This version includes a glowing introduction given to him by his “religious” something or other appointee. The introduction was amazing. This lady is clearly in love with Mr. Trump for his “religious views.” She thinks he is a real Christian. And all of the audience seemed to agree with her. She cites some “private” generosity, some “hidden” positive acts of empathy. Those things are likely true - but they ignore everything else he does and represents. He does things just for the present audience - whoever it happens to be.

Then we go to the main event. Over an hour of rambling comments - barely coherent. Followed by a standing ovation. I am thinking this man has lost his marbles, and they are applauding the event! They love the guy. They literally do not care what he says. If it is offensive, they treat it as sarcasm or a joke.

Lesson learned

The good thing is that this helps me understand just a bit what is going on with my “friends” and family who are in this group. It is not stupidity. It is a bit of ignorance, a lot of affection, a real need to get an affirmation for their values in a world they see as hostile to them.

Now What?

OK - so a glimmer of understanding. But how on earth does one reach through this cloud of a lack of information and bias to alert them to the craziness? I have no blessed idea.

One Suggestion - Don't Talk about Politics

The best collection of research along these lines I have found is the book, Don’t Talk about Politics. You can learn a bit more about that in this introductory podcast cited below. This is a podcast of the book launch. It will give you an overall view of the science behind the author’s recommendations.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/sense-solidarity-sarah-stein-lubrano-and-max-haiven/id1775758461?i=1000710985260

I highly recommend the book - but the °solutions° are NOT simple, by any means.. Talking with people is simply a waste of time. Debating someone with ideas will accomplish absolutely nothing. You have to build social infrastructure: do, act, join, etc.

The author is Sarah Stein Lubrano. She has a website, and links to her media events.

https://www.sarahsteinlubrano.com/media

Hang in there. I’m pulling for you, and we are all in this together - us and even THEM, for good or ill.

AFTER I pretty much finished this, a couple of my friends pointed out that MOST of the US voting public are simply not aware that we are having any serious problems. Ask your local AI. Mine told me the following based on some recent surveys::

Congressional Control: As of late 2024, only about 55%–56% of U.S. adults correctly identified which parties controlled the House and Senate.
News Consumption: Pew Research Center reports that only 36% of U.S. adults followed the news "all or most of the time" in 2025, a sharp decline from 51% in 2016.
Uninformed Voting Rates: A 2023 large-scale study found "alarming rates" of uninformed voting, estimated at over 42%, which can rise to 56% when factors like overconfidence or "expressive voting" are present.
Functional Understanding: Some analysts argue that while 70% of Americans can recognize major political names or terms, only about 20% have enough detailed understanding to make rational, evidence-based decisions about complex policy actions.

My bottom line, excuse me while I go outside to scream at the sky for a minute. Thanks.

Rules for Managers

2026-01-01T14:35:00.000-06:00

Introduction

I wrote the original for this decades ago, when someone I knew was promoted to their first management position. I was not employed at the time, and I have not been employed since. There is nothing scientific about this - it is purely my impression from working as a manager for 30 years or so.

OK, you've made the big transition. Someone has finally recognized your superior talents and has named you a manager. Now you have it made, right? It's just a matter of time until the next promotion, until you will be in middle management, and then, senior management, even executive management. Well, here's some news, this manager stuff is an awful lot of hard work. And MOST people simply can't do it. I don't know why, but that's been my discovery in 30 years of managerial experience. I named a lot of managers in that time, and even after careful interviewing and selection, 50% of them couldn't do it. I admit, some of that failure rate could be my problem, but I had lots of help selecting them, and more than enough help deciding they weren't cutting the mustard, so there must be something to the job that makes it tough.

Along the way, I had the good fortune to work for some excellent managers, and I also had the extreme good fortune to have some excellent staff that worked with me, and they taught me more than any of the bosses I had! I also had some terrible managers, but they also taught me some extremely valuable lessons. I paid a great price for that learning, and I would like to share the investment.

When naming a new manager, I often wanted to give them a handy little guide to management. Oh, we put them through courses, and I gave them books and articles to read, but they were usually long things, and had lots of extraneous stuff in them. What I really wanted was a set of simple rules -- pay attention to these, and things will go well. So, here's that set of rules.

By the way, this is an ongoing work. I know I still have a lot to learn, and you could teach me, and others. If you think this is a fair start, let me know. If it needs improvements, or additions, send them to me. I would even like to credit the source, if that's ok. I would tell you where I learned all of these, but I honestly don't remember with great precision. I would bet that the people who taught me these would be able to tell you -- and if you happen to be one of those reading this, and you want to claim one or other of these, please don't hesitate to let me know!

Rules for Management - Short List

Here's a short, summarized list. It serves two purposes. Most of us don't read. And, for some odd reason, although most successful managers can read, they don't read very much! They prefer talking, listening, walking around, etc. So to entice them, you have to give them a one page summary. This is that summary. If it whets your appetite, each of these is explained at some greater length further on.

Be Absolutely Honest.
This is just a good rule for life, but it is an absolute requirement for management. If you can't do this, look for another line of work -- maybe stock trading, or used car sales, or something. This is the basis for trust between humans, and that is the primary glue of a good work team.
Hire and Promote the Best People You Can.
This is not easy, and you will make mistakes, but it will cost you up front. Take someone with you to the important interviews. Discuss it, sit on it. If you have a question, think about it. Don't hire them for their immediate potential, hire them for the long haul. And NEVER, NEVER hire an "idiot"!
Treat Everyone As If They Were A Volunteer.
Yes, you are the boss, and you could tell them what to do -- but that only gets them to show up. To get their enthusiasm, genius, creativity and energy, they have to want to be there! This works for staff, customers, boss, peers.
Be The Coach, Not The Dictator.
Remember that they have talent, even more talent than you do. And they have the ball, you are on the sidelines. Your goal is to help them succeed. Think John Gagliardi, not Vince Lombardi.
You can make mistakes.
It's not the end of the world if you make a mistake, nor if someone else does. Welcome to the human race. Accept it, fix it, and move on. It can be very empowering to your associates.
Watch Your Language
Try to embody the above rules in how you talk. They are NOT MY team, MY staff, MY people, MY employees. They work for themselves, their family and the company. They may be "the people I work with" or "my associates", but you don't own them.
Sit On The Other Side Of The Desk
It's a little thing, but go around and sit with them on the other side of your desk. It sends a very different message, believe me. It's putting the first few rules into action.
Keep Your Door Open.
Have a REAL open door policy -- keep it open, unless you are disturbing people nearby! It's another clear message.
Let Them Make The Decisions.
Sometimes this is called "delegation", but "let them make decisions" has a different flavor to it. This is very, very scary, but it works. Of course, you have to know HOW to do it. There are rules, results expected, etc., but the decisions have to be theirs.
Talk To Team Members Directly.
This is not a problem with small teams -- under 6 people. If you have a larger one, make sure you have a way to visit regularly with every single person. It is amazing what people will tell you when they get to know you.
Walk Around.
More of same. You will learn an enormous amount just bumping into people in the halls and cafeteria, at their work stations, whatever.
Hold Regular Weekly Staff Meetings.
Something happens when folks are all gathered in a room and can actually see and hear each other. It raises the level of engagement. And the weekly part is really important too, trust me.
Conduct TIGHT Meetings.
Meetings are a whole topic unto themselves, but here are some meeting rules of thumb. These are a little counter intuitive, so you may want to read the detail further down.

Plan the meeting. Alert people if you are going to ask them to do something.
Start with an agenda. You can even build one on the fly.
Build a Parking Lot of "off agenda" items. This saves enormous amounts of time.
Start and end on time. They will quickly get the message, and thank you for it.
Have someone take minutes and publish them right away.
Never run the meeting. Ask others to take turns doing it.
Always talk LAST. This is the MOST important meeting rule for the Boss.
End the meeting with a summary of to do's.

Develop Skills To Meet Needs.
Identify the skills that would benefit your team, your customers, your organization, and then identify team members that have them, or want to grow them. Build a matrix of their present and desired skill levels.
Create Metrics.
There are lots of these, but the important thing is to do them. Numbers are facts, and they have amazing power. Here's a short list of ones you might consider:

Customer satisfaction -- a survey works.
Management effectiveness -- another survey!
Productivity -- the hardest part is figuring out what the product is!
Quality -- the other side of productivity. Even harder to measure!
Timeliness or schedule adherence -- the "third" side of productivity.
Business Impact or Results -- toughest of all, but essential to life.
Skills -- needed and attained.

Set High Standards.
People are amazing, and will respond with great energy if you set reasonable, but high standards. Shoot higher rather than lower. Back it up with facts and examples, and ask them to land on the moon and they will do it!
Share The Rewards.
Once you have good metrics, turn them into incentives. Share the rewards. Inspiration and leadership are wonderful motivators, but money also works!
Work A 40 Hour Week.
You are going to find this impossible at first, but plan on it. And mandate it for your staff. There may be exceptions on occasion for rare reasons, but if this breaks down, it will wreak havoc on your quality and productivity. This is another good reason for sound metrics.
Confront Problems, Never Run From Them.
Welcome problems when they show up -- the ones you don't know about are the ones that will kill you.
Run With People's Strengths, Ignore Their Weaknesses.
This one took me forever to learn. You can help people fix small problems, but you can't fundamentally change them. Try to get their attention, then let it go. If their weaknesses won't work in this job, then find them another one, here or elsewhere.
Performance Reviews are Hard Work.
The normal temptation of most managers in performance reviews is to avoid confrontation, and keep people happy. But this just delays things until they become bigger problems. On the other hand, artificial mechanisms to achieve a normal performance distribution curve are useless exercises in futility.
Pay People What They Are Worth
That sounds easy, but it is really tough. You will want to pay them more than they are worth, you will want to pay them all the same, you will want to pay them less than you. Don't do it.
Get To Know Your Associates. They won't bite, it won't hurt you, and it will work a lot better. Lots of managers run from this. They think it will compromise their decisions -- but it actually improves things greatly.
Network.
Or . . . get to know everybody. Talk to your peers, your customers, your partners, your suppliers, people in your field. Get on a first name basis with them all. Meet with the important ones regularly. You want them to know who you are when they have a problem, or when you need them. Get to know your boss's boss -- trust me, there are ways to do it without threatening your boss, and it's very handy.
Build An Annual Plan Quarterly.
Annual plans are a pain in the posterior. By the time they are 6 months old, they are completely outdated. Redo the plan yourself quarterly, and keep a rolling plan alive.
Build a Long Range Plan Annually.
This is a different exercise entirely. Take a day or two, go off site, brainstorm, look at long range goals, skills, etc.
Have Some Fun.
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy, and ruins many organizations.
Have A Regular Quarterly Meeting.
This is a more formal one, with food, results, plans, talks, and a few games! It's part of having fun, but it does other important things as well.
Communicate, Communicate, Communicate.
I can't stress this enough. It does amazing things to a team when they believe they actually know what is going on. It has some sub rules:

Tell stories. Anecdotes, especially real life ones, really get to people.
Publish your staff meeting minutes, up and down.
Publish your plans and schedules -- on big posters.
Publish your metrics -- on big posters.
Publish the skills matrix.
Publish your schedule -- let people know what you are about and where to find you.

Set up a diary.
We used to have a secretary do this with files, but you can do it electronically now. Put all important dates and plans in there, and get a timely reminder.
Train Your Successor.
You really don't want to do this job forever, do you? And if you find someone with the potential for management, they are an incredibly valuable resource to you and the organization.
Try To Be Brief.
I realize I didn't follow this rule too well here. I got carried away. See if you can't condense things a bit. Most people can't retain 7 things in their head at once, Moses got by with 10 rules. Keep it simple, 7 things max, one page, stuff like that. When you drone on like this, folks eyes glaze over. But I did try to prioritize them, so you can go back to the beginning and work on the first few! The rest kind of flow from those.

Rules for Management - Long List

These are the same as above, just fleshed out a bit and with some examples.

1 Be Absolutely Honest.

This is just a good rule for life, but it is an absolute requirement for management. If you can't be absolutely honest, look for another line of work -- maybe stock trading, or used car sales. This is the basis for trust between humans, and trust is the primary glue of a good work team.

If you find yourself in an environment where you cannot be honest all the time, either set about changing the environment, or find another place to work. It is simply not healthy to stay there.

Being honest also means being absolutely straight. Don't mislead anyone, but also don't hide anything. Trust is like a glass vase - if you drop it once, it will take a very long time to glue it back together, and it will never be as good as it was. Sometimes there are things you really can't tell people, like insider information, tentative decisions and plans, but you don't want to mislead them, either. Just be up front about it. They will understand that.

You have to follow this principle with EVERYONE. It just doesn't work to tell your associates that you are always honest with them, and to then mislead a supplier or a customer. They know about this character stuff, and you will lose all credibility. If you do that when their back is turned, what do you do when mine is turned?

Sometimes, it is just inconvenient to make people aware of things -- but when you do, then you really engage their trust. I remember once that I broke this rule, when I was fairly new to this stuff. We had a supplier of a piece of hardware, and we decided to swap it out for one that had broader industry acceptance. The sales person for this supplier would call on me regularly, and inquire as to how things were going. I didn't want to tell him that we were going to swap it out when the lease was up, because then he would inundate me with sales efforts to persuade us to keep it. So I told him things were just fine. When I did inform him, it was a fait accomplis, and his company was out. He confronted me on that -- he said he was going to lose his job because this cancellation came out of the blue, and he had no chance to change it. I felt really bad about the impact on him, but it also occurred to me that I had just sent a message to my associates that I clearly had the potential to mislead them in the future. And I would do it if it was simply inconvenient to me! Not a very good lesson in trustworthiness.

Of course, the toughest person to be honest with is the boss. When she or he puts out an opinion, it carries a lot of weight. But if you disagree, it is absolutely essential that you be clear about that. If not, your lack of agreement will surely leak out, and it will seem that you are not trustworthy. Early on, establish some ground rules with the boss or customer that gives you a safe way to bring up issues.

I once had a nasty "customer." This was an internal manager that tended to scream and shout at my staff in order to get what she wanted. When I first started dealing with her, I just bit my tongue a lot. Who wants to get on her bad side! But she read that as deceptive behavior. I finally had to set up a "protocol" where I could be frank and honest with her. I would always do it in private to avoid any embarrassment. The first time was the hardest, but after that, we established a working relationship based on mutual respect. We did not always agree, and as the customer, she could call the shots, but it was always clear what I thought about it. The biggest test came when she got a new boss that treated her in a similar manner, and I worked to create the same relationship with him.

Of course, how you go about this is extremely important. It cannot be a confrontation -- it has to be a "sharing." Here is what I heard, here is what I think about it -- be non judgmental, open to discussion, affirming the person, but commenting on the issues. It is the essence of negotiating.

2 Hire and Promote the Best People You Can.

This is not easy, and you will make mistakes, but it is an absolute requirement. Take someone with you to the important interviews. Discuss it, sit on it. If you have a question, think about it. Don't hire them for their immediate potential, hire them for the long haul. And NEVER, NEVER hire an "idiot!”

Take the time to find the prize. Think of a hiring opportunity like a gold coin that you have to spend. You only get to spend it once -- get the very best person you can for the coin. I once worked for a person who did this - it took him a year to make me an offer! But he eventually hired most of the senior management of our division as entry level people. That was a significant accomplishment.

And what is an "idiot?” You know what I mean. These are those imperious so and so's, or the needy egos, or the screamers and complainers. I don't care what talents or prizes they bring with them, if you can't live with them, they are not worth the trouble. And God forbid if you ever end up working for one.

3 Treat Everyone As If They Were A Volunteer

Yes, you are the boss, and you could tell them what to do -- but that only gets them to show up. To get their enthusiasm, genius, creativity and energy, they have to want to be there! This applies to staff, customers, boss, peers.

While you are at it, you should apply this to family and friends. It's just a good rule for life.

So what does that mean? Well, to start with, you treat them with care and respect. You ask them things -- you don't tell them. You value their opinion. You trust them as independent persons. You discuss things with them, you ask them for input and advice. You ask them if they would be willing to undertake something. You build a relationship with them, an emotional bank account of positive deposits, so that you can ask them to do things.

The upside of this is tremendous. They will do their best, because you are expecting it, not demanding it. Here's an example. I hate overtime -- it kills people, and their families, and it generates errors and lower productivity. But, on rare occasions, you just may have to do it. We were facing a situation like that once, but I could not see any way we could demand that people work overtime. Another department head had made such a demand, and he was met with serious morale problems and staff conflict. We approached it by getting every one together to explain the problem, and ask for their input. We explained the schedule, the business reasons why we wanted to try to meet it, and then we asked them to brainstorm ideas. They came up with a bunch of things we could do -- one of which was to work some overtime for this period. We, the management team, said, super -- let's do all those things. And they did it -- including the overtime. We paid the price for that, but they did it with some energy and enthusiasm. Now if they had not taken that option, I am not real clear what we would have done, but, in 30 years, I have rarely been forced to demand anything.

4 Be The Coach, Not The Dictator.

Remember that they have talent, even more talent than you do. And they have the ball, you are on the sidelines. Your goal is to help them succeed. Think John Gagliardi, not Vince Lombardi.

This works with the volunteer thing, but it is also a nice mental image that you can easily call up. John Gagliardi was a tremendous coach. He recognized talent, and he let the players do what they did best. He expected it -- and they did it. He didn't scream and yell and get upset when they made a mistake. He pointed the problem out, he helped them understand it, and to avoid it next time.

Gagliardi also realized that he could not play as well as most of the team! This is a hard one for a new boss, because you are usually promoted because you did a really fine job doing what they do. But now you have to reach down even further, and figure out how to get them to do even better than you did! Expectations keep rising, and you need to meet them, and you are now fast becoming technically obsolete!

You only win when they win. They are not working for you, or to help you win, but to achieve the results themselves. This also means that everyone shares the rewards. If someone is a major contributor to the results, they should benefit from that, even more than the coach. Professional sports recognizes this in player and coach salaries.

5 You can make mistakes.

It's not the end of the world if you make a mistake, nor if someone else does. Welcome to the human race. Accept it, fix it, and move on. It can be very empowering to your associates. The last thing you want to do is try to cover them up, or defend them, or blame them on someone else. That destroys credibility. And there is no lesson learned like a good mistake. I have personally, on several occasions, brought an entire company to a standstill. After I fixed the problem, I made sure that my mistake would not be repeated by anyone else!

6 Watch Your Language

Try to embody the above rules in how you talk. They are NOT MY team, MY staff, MY people, MY employees. They work for themselves, their family and the company. They may be "the people I work with" or "my associates," but you don't own them.

This may seem like a small thing, and you will not hear very many managers do it, but when you do, you know they understand, and their associates will hear it as well. It really is all about symbols -- they speak louder than words. You don't wear a different coat, or a crown, or even a tie, anymore. Kings need those things, because they often don't have personal power -- they depend on the trappings of royalty. You don't need it, and you don't want it. Count on the relationships you have built, not on the trappings of power.

7 Sit On The Other Side Of The Desk

It's a little thing, but go around and sit with them on the other side of your desk. It sends a very different message, believe me. It's putting the first few rules into action.

It's a symbol, again, but it is powerful. I will only sit behind the desk if that's the only chair left in the room. Putting the desk between us is another symbol of power. You don't want it between you and the people you work with. When I sit next to them, or around a work table, I also get closer to them, and I can even reach out and touch them, if the situation calls for it. Touch is also very powerful, and I used to use it a lot. You want to be careful these days, however, that you don't appear to be violating their personal boundaries. You can tell when someone needs a touch, or even a hug, and won't be offended by it. But, treat them with respect -- if they aren't comfortable with something, for heaven's sake, don't do it!

I try to use the same approach for customers and suppliers, and even my boss. They are often in charge of the mechanics, but if we can move to a different venue, around a work table, where they are not behind the desk any more, it often works better. The idea is to jointly work on things, not to have stuff between us.

8 Keep Your Door Open.

Have a REAL open door policy -- keep it open, unless you are disturbing people nearby! It's another clear message.

Yes, I know this one also looks trivial, but it sends another clear message. When I first started for my major employer, we had what was called "An Open Floor Plan." When I entered the front door in the morning, I could look to the left and see the Chairman at his desk. He had a much bigger desk than I did, and it was surrounded by a kind of knee wall so you could tell he was important, but he sat right out there in the open. I knew him, had been introduced to him, and I was pretty sure that if I walked up to his desk, he would ask me how he could help me. He was that kind of guy, and that was why we had that kind of floor plan!

The management changed over the years, we refurbished the building, built a major addition and added offices. The executive management were now on the top floor of the building, nowhere near the front door. For a while, you could actually walk up there and say hello, if you didn't mind the stares of the secretaries -- they still had their doors open and you could still get in. On occasion, I would take a new group of trainees and just walk through the executive offices so they knew that you could. If one of the "old" management was there, we would even stop and introduce everyone. But that didn't last.

We had security on the outside doors, so that only employees could get into the building, or guests with a chaperone. But the executives had to have secured access to their 17th floor. I wanted to ask them if they were that afraid of the employees. But they were past the point of understanding the humor at that point. The laughable part is that they still published an "open door" policy -- you just had to call to make an appointment!

I also got an office in this new world, and it was very handy. We used to have to schedule conference rooms for all kinds of things, and now I could just get up and shut the door for a few minutes. You realize, of course, in this atmosphere that my office had a glass wall -- so that I could look out and keep an eye on everyone. On the clerical floors, they actually designed the cubical walls so that they were not high enough to hide anyone. You could look out at your kingdom and see who was at their desk, or who was napping.

I have since learned that quiet and privacy are essential to any truly productive environment. In about 1980 IBM did a study on office design and productivity for their Santa Teresa programming labs in California. They determined that the optimum productivity resulted when they had no more than 2 people in a room, with a door that could be closed, and a window that looked out onto the real world. They found that you can't really get any good work done without at least one hour of uninterrupted time. People chatting and answering the phone next to you is very much an interruption. For a while they tried masking the sounds with "white noise." but then the quality suffered. The noise raised everyone's anxiety levels enough that they couldn't really concentrate.

I used to tell people: "If you really have to get something done, don't answer the phone, put up a piece of yellow tape across the door to your workstation, and ignore everyone. Or go and work in the cafeteria. Or go home and work. Whatever works. You have my permission." It always amazed me that people rarely took advantage of that offer.

9 Let Them Make The Decisions.

Sometimes this is called "delegation", but "let them make decisions" has a different flavor to it. This is very, very scary, but it works. Of course, you have to know HOW to do it. There are rules, results expected, etc., but the decisions have to be theirs.

There are lots of reasons for this, but the fundamental one is that things just work a lot better, whether we are talking customer service, cost savings, productivity or anything else. When the boss is in charge of decisions, then no one makes them if they can avoid it. They push it up, they push it back, they step aside. "It's not my problem." When they really own the decision, then things happen. Then they can respond to the customer in a timely fashion, and with energy, because it was their decision to do it that way. They can make the cost saving decision, because it is theirs, it is their money, their concern. They don't have to kick it up to you, and wait for you to tell them what to do. Face it, they are on the front line, they see the problem, let them tackle it.

I could tell a hundred stories around this. In the organization where I spent most of my working life, only a department head could actually approve an expenditure -- for even a single dollar. So people were always beating on my door asking me to spend money for this or that. I finally figured out that what I should do is simply tell them to do whatever made sense. They understood our budget, they shared the corporate financial goals. If we made money that year, their pay would be modestly higher. If they thought this expense would actually save us money, or increase our productivity, or other measurable goal, they should go for it. When presented with the decision themselves, they would often say that they needed to think on it a bit. Regularly, they would come back and tell me "never mind" for this one.

They call it delegating, but it is really a form of coaching. Here's the basics:

A Set The Environment.

You need an atmosphere of trust to start with. They have to believe you when you say that your fate is in their hands. We are in this together. They also need a stake in the overall outcome. It helps if everyone shares in the overall corporate goals. As a manager, I had an accountability for corporate profitability, so I simply passed that down to the larger team. We shared that result with every other manager in the organization. This also seemed to make them more accountable to our internal partners or customers. They were not just staff, they also owned the organization's bottom line results.

B Set A Clear Goal.

Establish a Clear Result or Goal, and Agree on it. It has to be a clear goal, and one you all fully agree with. If you can't negotiate a full agreement, then don't do the deal. Find someone else to do it, or some other way to do it. It is also wonderful if you have a clear measure defined as to exactly what the goal is, but that's often difficult.

C Establish Clear Responsibilities.

Who is going to do what, who owns what part. What part will you play, how will you help?

D Agree on the Resources.

What is the scope of the task, for staff, resources, time, materials, cost, etc. Spell it out clearly and agree on it.

E Set Up Reviews.

Agree on how we are going to determine progress, what kind of review, how frequent, who is involved. Things that last longer than a week must have periodic check points. People in the western world tend to respond well to weekly checkpoints.

F Determine the End.

Agree on how we will know when we are done, and how we will measure the result.

Then get out of the way! Let them run with it. Resist that great temptation to look over their shoulder and kibitz. If they ask for help, be gracious, and do whatever they ask. At the first review point, call them to task, and give them a frank assessment. Sometimes it takes one or two runs at something before people realize that you really mean it when you say it is theirs to do. Start them out with something not life threatening! To you or them!

That said, there are times when you absolutely have to demand something. Then try to do it in a way that they will at least understand the imperative. Once, we had a problem because we were working overtime, and people were not coding the extra hours, not billing it back to the customer. They were trying to be nice about it, and keep the customer's budget in balance. But it was clear to me that this way lies a deep and dark pit. If the customer realizes that we are basically free, they will never let up on the overtime approach. And it generates such a cost to us, that we will never recover from it. So, at a staff meeting where we were discussing it, and could not come to an agreement, I decided that I just had to make the point, loud and clear. I climbed up on the conference table, stood in the center of it, and shouted: "We are coding every single hour spent working, is that clear?" At least I was pretty sure they would not forget what I said, and they might remember why I said it!

Given the realities of the world, your own manager is not likely to understand this approach of letting people make decisions, so you also need to educate your co-workers on that perspective. If they think the "big boss" would be upset about something, then they absolutely must let you know about it. Otherwise you are toast, and you can't help them anymore. All you ask is that they let you know in a timely fashion, so that you do appear to be "in control" of the situation when the big boss asks you a question about it. "Walking around" also helps with this -- see that rule.

10 Talk To Team Members Directly.

This is not a problem with small teams -- under 6 people. If you have a larger one, make sure you have a way to visit regularly with every single person. It is amazing what people will tell you when they get to know you.

I learned this the hard way. I had a team which reported to me, and then I was promoted, and replaced myself with a new supervisor. I thought I knew these folks pretty well. But one day, one of them came in, and closed the door behind him -- an unusual move. He sat down and with some trepidation, told me of some of the problems with the new manager. Even though I knew these folks well, and they knew my management style, they all felt it would not be proper to go over the boss's head -- he might get upset. Since then, I make it clear to the managers reporting to me that I will be talking to their staff on a regular basis, and I'll share any concerns they have with them. I set up formal appointments with every member of the department on a rotating basis. If possible I would go visit with them in their workspace, but they could always meet in my office if they preferred that. It did not prevent all of the problems that we had with communications, but I think it helped.

11 Walk Around.

More of same. You will learn an enormous amount just bumping into people in the halls and cafeteria, at their work stations, whatever.

There is actually a Harvard Business Review article on this topic: "Management by Walking Around." They did a little research, and found out that the most effective managers are touching base with people and things all the time. The most important stuff happens in the hall -- not a formal meeting. You will learn things you could never have learned in other ways, and people will open up about issues and problems.

But, do NOT walk around at quitting time. I had a VP that would do that -- he was checking on who left early. People do NOT work harder if you check up on them. They work harder if they are trusted, confided in, inspired, led, etc. If you have to check up on them to keep them working, you have a serious problem.

12 Hold Regular Weekly Staff Meetings.

Something happens when folks are all gathered in a room and can actually see and hear each other. It raises the level of engagement. And the weekly part is really important too, trust me.

It may be cultural, but people get geared up at the start of the week, and wind down toward the end. If you want them to be as productive as possible, get them moving at the start of the week by reminding them what is to be accomplished that week. It doesn't work to remind them on Thursday!

And NEVER plan tasks that are longer than one week -- most people just cannot manage their time that well. They need that weekly reminder to keep them on task.

You need to "go to Church" once a week on core values, as well. If you have something underway, and you think it is important, you need to be talking about it at least once a week. If it doesn't come up weekly, it no longer exists. Why do you think all of the great religions get everyone together once a week?

A Conduct TIGHT Meetings.

Meetings are a whole topic unto themselves, but here are some meeting rules of thumb. These are a little counter intuitive.

B Plan the meeting.
Alert people if you are going to ask them to do something.

If you just walk into a meeting and expect something to happen, you can count on needing another meeting. Think of it like a stage play or a liturgy. People have roles, and they are going to play them out for the benefit of everyone else there. You have a meeting because you are trying to move people to something. You need to rehearse the important characters to accomplish what you need.

C Start with an agenda. If need be, you can build one on the fly.

Just take a few minutes at the start of the meeting, and ask everyone what items they have to discuss, and jot them on the board in front. If it is MY meeting, I generally have a number of things I want to accomplish, and I make sure these are on the list. Making the list visible does a couple of things: it focuses the group on getting through the list, and it keeps extraneous items off the list.

D Build a Parking Lot of "off agenda" items.
This saves enormous amounts of time.

If something comes up that is not on the agenda, or something seems too long for the meeting -- "park it", put it on a list to the side, the "parking lot," those items will be taken up at the next or a different meeting.

E Start and end on time.
People will quickly get the message, and thank you for it.

Everyone's time is valuable, and you are wasting everyone's time if you are late. If you really cannot make the meeting, or make it on time, send a delegate. Let that person take your part in the discussion until you can get there. If it is a management meeting, having a staff person attend on your behalf is a good thing also. It gives them a better understanding of how things work. Don't hesitate to do that. If something truly confidential comes up, alert them to that -- and if need be, ask them to leave for that portion of the meeting -- but that should be a rare occurrence.

For a while, we would penalize anyone that came late a $1. They would deposit it in the kitty as they entered. We used the fund collected to go out for drinks after work!

F Have someone take minutes and publish them right away.

This is a big deal. Minutes are VERY useful. They give the people who attend the meeting a better understanding of what went on, and what their assignments are. But it really does good things to those who do not attend -- especially more junior staff. Send them to everyone, not just the attendees. Send them to your boss as well to keep them in the loop.

And publish them in a timely fashion -- the NEXT day works well. If you wait until the day before the next meeting, 90% of the purpose of the minutes is not achievable. If they are timely, they remind people of what happened, and what they need to do before the next meeting.

Attending my boss's staff meeting, I always took my own minutes, and then sent them to people who reported to me, who sent them to their reports. After we got electronic publishing, I would email them to everyone directly, or post them in a public spot. It turned out that my minutes were circulated throughout the whole division. So then the big boss had his secretary come in and take the minutes, so that he could edit them before they went out! Personally, I think it worked very well for my staff to hear my take on everything directly.

G Never run the meeting; have others take turns doing it.

The BOSS is really never a good person to run the meeting. The Boss tends to direct things way too much, and to inhibit conversation and creativity. Let the group rotate the chair of the meeting until you find out who can really run a meeting well.

We actually got to the point of training "meeting facilitators." These people are experts at running meetings. Then we made it mandatory that every formal meeting had to engage a trained facilitator.

H Always talk LAST.
This is the MOST important meeting rule for the Boss.

If you talk first, you kill the discussion. Anyone that agrees with you will chime in, but no one else will dare to talk. I worked for people for years that simply did not understand this. They would introduce a very controversial topic, and ask our opinion -- and then, in 2 beats, immediately give us their opinion, in no uncertain terms. I couldn't believe they didn't see what they were doing.

I End the meeting with a summary of to do's.

These will be in the minutes, but it really clarifies things if the agenda is summed up with the follow up items at the end.

13 Develop Skills To Meet Needs.

Identify the skills that would benefit your team, your customers, your organization, and then identify team members that have them, or want to grow them. Build a matrix of their present and desired skill levels.

Do this at the management level first. What is going on with your industry, your business, your technology? What skills do you have, what skills do you need? Put your ratings into a matrix -- skills and staff. The holes will appear. Then publish it, and recruit volunteers to learn these needed skills. They might be new things you simply do not have at all, or they might be back up skills for people who are the only ones with a particular expertise. You want a leader and a stand-in for every skill. If someone signs up, commit to give them the training to develop that skill. Sometimes this means rotating staff through areas to ensure that you have a fully rounded group of people. Review this matrix quarterly, and make adjustments as needed.

This is staff development with a business focus. People are motivated to learn new things, and it is driven by your business needs.

14 Create Metrics.

There are lots of these, but the important thing is to do them. Numbers are facts, and they have amazing power. Here's a short list of ones you might consider:

A Customer satisfaction -- a survey works.

Get the results, and publish it to everyone, as well as the customers. Keep a history of it and see how the trend line moves. You are in business to serve them -- just telling them that you realize it sometimes works wonders, and telling the staff that you are measuring it also sends a powerful message.

B Management effectiveness -- another survey!

Build this one carefully, and don't do it more than every 6 months. Let people submit their replies anonymously, and include yourself and anyone else up the line that you can. Select the questions with care -- this is not a popularity contest, but an effectiveness measure. Just asking people for their input on this is powerful, and the message to the managers is also very good. Sometimes people do a 360 survey -- everyone rates their boss, the next boss up, their reports and their peers. That works as well, but the administration is a bit more complex.

Be sure to allow comments. We had a management survey once, where one of the VPs got over 400 negative comments about a particular decision -- about 1/3 of the staff! He was somewhat moved by the experience, more than you will ever believe. I thought I was going to have to call in a psychiatrist -- but he recovered, and responded well. It was a great learning experience.

C Productivity -- the hardest part is figuring out what the product is!

This is very important. It's one thing to keep the customers happy, but that won't necessarily make any money. Making money requires productive work, with high quality. You need to focus folks on always improving their output, while maintaining and even improving their quality and customer orientation. There are 3 legs to the stool, and you just can't focus on one of them or you will fall over.

This is also a tough one. Staff will tell you it is impossible, or too much work, or whatever -- but do it anyway. Find examples of other places that are doing it, and make them aware of it. Do a seat of the pants estimate for the heck of it, and then compare your supposed productivity to some industry standards -- you will likely be somewhat amazed at how poor yours is! It can get better, but only if you start to measure it.

D Quality -- the other side of productivity. Even harder to measure!

Quality is harder than productivity, but you HAVE to do it. The easiest way to raise productivity is to ship sloppy work. The easiest way to fix quality is to slow things down and don't make any changes. Both paths are disasters. You have to do both, and you can. Find a good book, find a guru on quality, and train people on it. Everyone is doing it these days -- you cannot ignore it.

E Timeliness or schedule adherence -- the "third" side of productivity.

High productivity and high quality are nothing if nothing ever gets done when promised. Track it, track all of them. Do reviews, improvement meetings, etc.

F Business Impact or Results -- toughest of all, but essential to life.

If you are an internal service unit, this one is particularly important. If you deliver a product to internal customers, it must have a business impact. Get an estimate of it, a measure of it, and track it. Keep the records, so that you and your staff understand that their goal is really to benefit the business, not just generate their own work product. Make them share in the overall business objectives and goals. Keep them focused.

G Skills -- needed and attained.

There's a whole section on this one -- it's about staff development to achieve business goals..

15 Set High Standards.

People are amazing, and will respond with great energy if you set reasonable, but high standards. Shoot higher rather than lower. Back it up with facts and examples, and ask them to land on the moon and they will do it!

I organized a software quality improvement effort once. I found some industry experts, and invited one of them to visit with our division management. He asked to visit with my boss first. He asked my boss what he thought the range of improvement of our efforts might be if we really worked at it. The boss guessed 15 to 20%. This fellow had actually published studies that indicated that the best shops were doing 200% better than we were. He didn't tell the boss that, but he confided in me that he didn't think we could benefit from his assistance. If you think the highest achievable improvement is 20%, it constrains your results, even if you never tell anyone about it.

I took the 200% improvement stories and put them in front of my staff. They were not convinced, but it got their attention. Then I persuaded them to commit to a 10% improvement each year. After talking about 200%, this seemed a lot more reasonable. Well, I am convinced that people can improve software development or just about anything by 10% just by trying a bit harder. But you have to really change things fundamentally to get anywhere near 50%, let alone 200%.

Well, 10% a year, compounded annually, gets to be a very significant number. It becomes 46% in 4 years, and 61% in 5 years -- a stretchy goal indeed.

16 Share The Rewards.

Once you have good metrics, turn them into incentives. Share the rewards. Inspiration and leadership are wonderful motivators, but money also works!

I don't know if this is true in all cultures, but it is certainly true in ours. We use money as a measure of success, of achievement, as our primary means to enjoyment. Why do you think capitalism works so well in our culture? We thrive on competition. If the team makes significant quality and improvement gains, use the measures to determine how much is saved in one year -- and split the annual savings with the staff. Next year, it is all free. With real dollars behind those numbers, they begin to pay a lot more attention to the metrics.

17 Work A 40 Hour Week.

You are going to find this impossible at first, but plan on it. And mandate it for your staff. There may be exceptions on occasion for rare reasons, but if this breaks down, it will wreak havoc on your quality and productivity. This is another good reason for sound metrics. Once we were building a billing system for the chief accounting officer. He called me into his office one day and said that he would like us to not charge back our overtime hours. We were breaking his budget, and the hours we worked overtime were basically free -- everyone was salaried. I told him that instead of not charging for overtime at all, I was considering doubling the charge. Overtime cost us enormously in morale, in productivity, and in problem generation. We tracked our software problems and we always included the date that the problem was inserted into the system. When we went back to do analysis, any time we were stressed by schedule or by overtime, we generated many, many more problems. It cost us much more to remove these problems eventually than we ever saved by working longer hours.

A 40 hour week is also the only way to stay sane and preserve your marriage, or family and social life. A good friend of mine started his own business. He started off working 60 and 70 hour weeks, always thinking that he would slow down a bit when things got established, and he had things under control. After a number of years, he realized that things are really never going to change to the point where he actually got everything done. Tomorrow will be just like today, unless you do something very different. You simply have to decide that enough is enough, and there are other priorities in life.

18 Confront Problems, Never Run From Them.

Welcome problems when they show up -- the ones you don't know about are the ones that will kill you.

This is a tough one for some people. Procrastination is death itself. And do not kill the messenger -- they just brought you an opportunity to improve things that you did not even know were there.

When a problem appears, I get as much information as I can from the persons responsible for it. I lay out a plan of attack on how to fix it, and then I go directly to the person experiencing the problem. I identify the problem to them, help them understand that I realize its full impact, I apologize, and then I lay out a plan of attack to fix it, and I make sure that it is implemented. Don't be afraid to confront the victim of the problem, and the perpetrator. I have only rarely been physically threatened. Verbal threats are simple -- accept the emotional heat and deflect it with an empathic statement, and a solution to the problem.

A corollary to this is: "When a problem is found, fix the system or process in such a way that this one will never appear again." It is not enough to fix this one occurrence -- you have to reach in and figure out where this came from, and make sure it can never happen again. Woe to me if the problem catches me once. Double woe if I don't make it impossible for it to ever happen again.

19 Run With People's Strengths, Ignore Their Weaknesses.

This one took me forever to learn. You can help people fix some small problems, but you can't fundamentally change them. Try to get their attention, then let it go. If their weaknesses won't work in this job, then find them another one, here or elsewhere.

As I said, it took me a long time to learn this one. I found this wise advice in an article in Harvard Business Review by Peter Drucker -- and he is right. I used to spend forever trying to help people fix their problems. It consumed enormous amounts of my time, it annoyed them, and our customers and staff -- and it rarely did any good. In hiring or promoting managers, I think 50% of my choices were failures. In that long list, only one of them responded to my intervention and improved enough to stay on the job. He was just lazy, and I scared him enough that he responded. Most of the time, it is a much more difficult problem, and you do not have the time nor the expertise to really help the person.

In retrospect, I think I wanted to fix them so that I wouldn't be a failure, having hired them. Another part of my rationale was that I was sending a message to the staff -- we'll work with you to help you develop. But the staff were just generally annoyed by the length of time it always took me to resolve the problem of an inadequate manager. Better to cut your losses and run with someone else.

20 Performance Reviews are Hard Work.

The normal temptation of most managers in performance reviews is to avoid confrontation, and keep everyone happy. But this just delays things until they become bigger problems. On the other hand, artificial mechanisms to achieve a normal performance distribution curve are useless exercises in futility.

I still remember my first performance review. I came in with my documentation, sat down and started to offer some constructive criticism to this young lady. She responded by attacking me and my opinion. I figured I was the boss and she should just sit there and listen. She figured I was an idiot who needed to be set straight. By the time we were through, I was ready to resign. Who wants to put up with this crap?

Through the years, I found a technique that worked pretty well:

Create quantitative performance measures wherever possible. Whatever we are doing, we must be able to measure it. If it is simply customer satisfaction, build a survey and agree on a target or an improvement. If it is a manager, survey their staff and ask them how they are doing.

Review things monthly, not semi-annually. Generate a written summary of the discussion for both parties. Once or every twice a year is just an exercise in polemics. Once a month puts the measures in front of people enough that there should be no surprises.

Ask the person to generate their own performance assessment monthly for discussion. Why are you doing all the work? I also found that most people are pretty objective about this. In 30 years, I only had one person that was so skewed that he felt he was perfect and had no room for improvement.

Put the hard stuff up front, not at the end. The normal temptation is to praise them first, build them up, and then leave them with a parting shot of how to improve. Do it the other way around. You want them to leave on an up note, and committed to making improvements -- not depressed.

Write it down, have them review it. On more than one occasion, I have actually threatened to fire someone over a performance issue, only to have them tell me 2 weeks later that I never said any such thing! Bad news is hard to hear, and most of us will find a way to forget it or interpret it. You have to be very clear with anything that sounds like a criticism.

Forget that normal curve stuff, but do rank folk, pay the better ones more, and work on improving the bottom ones. In 30 years I must have revised our performance management system 3 times to try to get away from performance upwards creep. I say, forget it. Everyone thinks that they are above average. If they have no serious problem that needs to be fixed, let them think that -- it doesn't hurt anything. But that doesn't mean that their pay is above average. See the next rule: Pay People What They Are Worth.

21 Pay People What They Are Worth

That sounds easy, but it is really tough. You will want to pay them more than they are worth, you will want to pay them all the same, you will want to pay them less than you. Don't do it.

Get some external standard as to what jobs are worth, don't just go with your gut and anecdotal evidence. There are generally salary surveys that compare similar jobs. Make sure your company subscribes to one and that it is used to set pay scales. It's a lot easier to pay people what they are worth than to be replacing them all the time.

Don't give in to the temptation to pay them all the same. For annual reviews, I would ask the managers to rank their folks, top to bottom, and then we would share the rankings with the other managers at a staff meeting. We would typically have some lively discussions about how they ranked people. I tried to get a general consensus. Then we would allocate the salary increase dollars based on the ranking. You HAVE to give the best people more money, you just have to. Yes, they will all find out, and someone will be upset, but that's part of life. My goal always was that we should be able to post all of the salaries on the wall, and I would be happy to defend the relative pay. People might not agree with our decisions, but we should be able to explain why one person makes more than another.

And it won't kill you to pay the top technical people more than the managers. They can do things your managers cannot, and you don't want to promote them out of it. Structure a senior level technical position, and keep it for the very best folk.

22 Get To Know Your Associates.

They won't bite, it won't hurt you, and it will work a lot better. Lots of managers run from this. They think it will compromise their decisions -- but it actually improves things greatly.

The conventional wisdom is that you can't get too close with the folks who "work for you," or you will be handicapped when you have to make the tough decisions. I found it works the opposite. The more I know them, the better the decision is. It may not be an easy decision, and I may have made it much more difficult for myself, but I definitely raised the quality of the decisions.

I also found that the stuff of true delegation (see above) only works well when you have some kind of emotional bond with your co-workers. They have to trust you, and you them, for it to work well. If everyone is always protecting their backside, and looking to get at ours, you waste an enormous amount of time and energy.

23 Network.

Or . . . get to know everybody. Talk to your peers, your customers, your partners, your suppliers, people in your field. Get on a first name basis with them all. Meet with the important ones regularly. You want them to know who you are when they have a problem, or when you need them. Get to know your boss's boss -- trust me, there are ways to do it without threatening your boss, and it's very handy.

Whenever I got a new assignment, I made it a point to visit with all of the customer management, and to make regular return visits. Every chance I got, I would talk to my peers, formally and informally, within and without the company. If we didn't have staff meetings, I would set up regular, personal one on one's with them.

I would also find a professional society that specialized in the area I was working in -- and if one didn't exist, I would set about and form one in the local area. It gave me a great opportunity to meet regularly with my peers in other companies.

There are lots of benefits from this networking. You learn a lot. Other people have great ideas and lots of experience that you can use.

You develop contacts that can come in very handy when you need a favor. If we run into a legal problem, I can call the head of legal because I met him in a class, and I took him to lunch on an irregular basis. We are on a first name basis, and he responds to my personal call -- I don't have to wade through his secretary and calendar.

It can help your career. Most opportunities are presented to people who are already in the know. Both outside of your company and inside, it helps tremendously if the people making the critical decisions know you personally -- assuming of course that you give them good grounds for a favorable opinion.

24 Build An Annual Plan Quarterly.

Annual plans are a pain in the posterior. By the time they are 6 months old, they are completely outdated. Redo the plan yourself quarterly, and keep a rolling plan alive.

I like this idea, but I could never pull it off, because the division I was in and the company as a whole simply wouldn't recast our budget and detailed plans every quarter.

25 Build a Long Range Plan Annually.

This is a different exercise entirely. Take a day or two, go off site, brainstorm, look at long range goals, skills, etc.

Once a year, take some time, get a fresh perspective, do "what if" planning. What's our mission and goals? What did we do with the prior long range plan? How did we do last year? Any unexpected threats on the horizon? There is a whole discipline for doing this. Hire a consultant for it, if you can afford one. It energizes people and gets things running in a new gear. And don’t forget to publish the results. See Rule 28.

26 Have Some Fun.

All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy, and ruins many organizations.

It is not a sin to have a good time at work. In fact, many organizations have discovered that a few bucks and a few hours spent trying to make the work place more tolerable generates great rewards in productivity and quality. It's related to the "clean windows" rule. This is where you work in a factory that is stressing the improvement of the quality of the product. And every day, when you come to work, the windows in the main door are filthy, grimy. The floor is usually a mess too. You can't get people to do high quality work in a low quality place. Clean it up, paint it up, make it look neat and inspiring, and it will be reflected in the quality of the work as well.

27 Have A Regular Quarterly Meeting.

This is a more formal one, with food, results, plans, talks, and a few games! It's part of having fun, but it does other important things as well. In one of our quarterly meetings, I set up an “ugly tie” contest. Our EVP at the time was color blind, and his ties were always “interesting.” So I got a $25 certificate to the local candy shop, and asked everyone to wear an ugly tie - male and female. There were some doozies. One guy MADE his tie. We were about to start the meeting when Jim Duffy, THE color blind EVP came into the room, and asked, “So what is going on in here?” Someone had told him. So I made him the judge. He gave out TWO awards, so I had to get another gift certificate.

28 Communicate, Communicate, Communicate.

I can't stress this enough. It does amazing things to a team when they believe they actually know what is going on. It has some sub rules:

A Tell stories. Anecdotes, especially real life ones, really get to people.

B Publish your staff meeting minutes, up and down.

C Publish your plans and schedules -- on big posters.

D Publish your metrics -- on big posters.

E Publish the skills matrix.

F Publish your schedule -- let people know what you are about and where
to find you.

One of my other rules of life is that most people are not paying attention. You have to be in their face again and again, in many, many ways to get anything across. It isn't the length of the document or the presentation, it's the frequency. But don't let them be phony -- they have to be real, real things from the heart, real information, real decisions. If you just stick up any old thing, it will be seen as the sham it is.

I implemented a corporate technical architecture once -- the key thing, of course was to build it. But once we gained agreement on it, I published a summary in a multi-color poster and gave everyone a copy. They appeared everywhere, on walls, cubicles, on the intranet, and every one would refer to that poster as though it were the bible. Well, it was our technical infrastructure bible.

29 Set up a diary.

We used to have a secretary do this with paper files, but you can do it electronically now. Put all important dates and plans in there, and get a timely reminder.

You are supposed to be the one in charge, so you need to be able to deliver things when they are due. It's a matter of commitments, much more than the mechanics of the diary. I worked at a law firm once, and I had 60 open cases. I went away for a week and I worried all week that I missed something, that some date would pass and I missed a filing or something. When I came back, I spent my Saturday morning dairying all of the important events, and then asked the secretary to do the same for the other attorneys. It saved us a bunch of grief.

30 Train Your Successor.

You really don't want to do this job forever, do you? And if you find someone with the potential for management, they are an incredibly valuable resource to you and the organization.

31 Try To Be Brief.

I realize I didn't follow this rule too well here. I got carried away. See if you can't condense things a bit. Most people can't retain 7 things in their head at once, Moses got by with 10 rules. Keep it simple, 7 things max, one page, stuff like that. When you drone on like this, folks eyes glaze over. But I did try to prioritize them, so you can go back to the beginning and work on the first few! The rest kind of flow from those.

Us and Them - a personal reflection - treat them with care.

2025-12-13T13:35:00.002-06:00

It is not every day that you have an opportunity to see how your mind works. I was given that gift a few weeks ago. I got a new perspective on “them.” You know: THEM. Those folk on the other side of the political spectrum, or in that different socio economic group, foreigners, or whatever “other” category currently preoccupies you. I often say to myself, “What is wrong with them?" I once even thought I understood the real problem.

https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2021/04/finally-i-understand-what-is-wrong-with.html

We were attending Mass at St. Joseph’s in Hayward Wisconsin on a Saturday evening. The homily was given by the deacon - an elderly gentleman. He spoke about caring for our neighbors, and focused on the needs of the elderly in our community. I looked around the congregation and we were mostly older folk.

I was thinking about these fellow Christians all around me, and I had a sense of sorrow about them. I was sorry that they have such a narrow view of our Christian religion. Most Catholics and Christians have this personal sense of their relationship with the deity. They are living good lives, focused on earning the reward in the next life. I am a bit more progressive. I have been in parts of the world where the “social gospel” or “liberation gospel” prevails. I personally believe that the message of the carpenter from Nazareth was not about starting a new religion, but about changing the world. He was focused on the poor, the orphan, the outcast. I believe that this is the key message of Christianity and that if we could get it into the hearts and minds of a few more people, we can change the world.

https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2019/04/jesus-before-christianity-by-albert.html

The planet has about 1.2 billion Catholics, and about 1.4 billion Christians. If we could persuade a small minority of them to adopt this progressive view of their religion - what a force for change that would be. But I realize that this is virtually impossible. I would never set about doing that. I am pretty sure I could not change the belief of a single one of them by talking with them. So I am feeling some form of sorrow about that. As I thought about that, I realized that although I disagree with these folk in a major way about their beliefs, I don’t think there is anything wrong with them. I treat them with love and care because I WAS one of them. I know exactly how that type of Christianity feels, how comfortable and secure it is. I was 100% committed to that. I became a priest based on that belief and feeling. I actually love these people and wish them well, even though we would seriously disagree about some fundamental values. And I know I could never change them by talking with them.

Then it occurred to me that there is another crowd of humans on the “right.” For them, I actually think there is something wrong with their brains. I think they are crazy. They seem bent on destroying our current form of government, and wreaking chaos on the world economy, terrorizing my friends and neighbors. It dawned on me that they likely see my view of our world as just as crazy as I see theirs. Their history, their feelings, their values are tied up in their view just as mine are.

They are not crazy. They are just normal folk, with a different life experience than mine. I know a few of them fairly well, and they treat me with care and compassion. We just disagree about, well, everything. When we were visiting Africa, I discovered people in East Africa feel that they are NOT in charge of their lives. Things happen TO them. They do not take steps to change life events - they just experience them. I could not understand how it was possible that they did not think that they were in charge of life. In the U.S. Virtually everyone thinks we can literally change the world. Get rid of a government. Move the minds and hearts of a few million people. Just let me at it. The East African world view is that life is something that happens to us. They are not choosing it - it is just happening to them. That is still hard for me to believe, but I know it is true.

I wrote a bit about that a long time ago - you can find that and the stories here:

https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2011/01/culture-and-developing-nations.html

So . . . treat them with care and respect. Talk with them, help them. But “do not talk politics.” Do not “argue” political or social values with them. Those are not topics for emotional discourse.

More recently, our social scientists and neurologists have discovered that there are ways to bridge this gap, and there are ways to move society forward - without logical arguments. It has to do with mutual respect, building a bridge, acting together on something outside this realm, and “organzing.” More on that later. I will be back with some insights.

Utopia for Realists, by Rutger Bregman Book Report

2025-12-12T16:42:00.000-06:00

I read this book some time ago, and wrote up this "book report." The author has sinced published a fefw more, which I have read as well - and they are continue in this vein, which I like quite a bit. Here's a short hand version for those in a rush - and a longer one down just a bit. Thanks.

The SHORT version.

I had the good fortune to be a preacher for a Catholic Community. This was really a gift. It forced me to regularly stop and consider my beliefs, my goals, my mission. I think it gave me a much fuller perspective on life and love.

Utopia for Realists, How We Can Build the Ideal World, by Rutger Bregman

This is a DAMNED FINE BOOK, and everyone should read it - right now!

As my wife has it, you say that about a book about once a month. But this time it is true!

Then immediately pick up his next one: Humankind, A Hopeful History.

The author is a Dutch historian - he is not a religious leader or philosopher. He has studied the history of humankind - ancient and modern - and come up with some remarkable conclusions. If you are familiar with the Israeli historian, Yuval Noah Harari, this book is similar to Homo Sapiens, but with a much more positive read. If you want to see both of these authors in dialogue, they were recently part of a joint presentation with the editor in chief of The Economist, which you can find here: https://youtu.be/odel2PA5R6A 2021.02.04

They are talking about the pandemic - and how much we can learn from that. We really are all in this together. They also outline the two major risks to humankind going forward. It is well worth your time.

So, spend $10 on the book. Take a pleasant hour to watch the video. I predict it will change how you view life and humankind - trust me on this. Besides the hopeful message, he outlines some positive steps we can all take to move us down the road.

For more on Bregman in video format, do a search on YouTube.

https://youtu.be/NCfpVUhpeVg Basic Income is investment capital for the people.

A more lengthy approach:

When I was in high school in 1955 I read Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. It was insightful and fun, but it was fiction. Huxley made up a world that we would all love to live in. That is what a utopia is. This book is not fiction - it is a visionary projection of the future, based on scientific research into what works. It has hard numbers and data about wealth and cost. It cites the real experiments that are being conducted in each of these realms. The author has also researched the considered opinions of many progressive economists and historians.

The facts are clear - we can do this, we can afford it, we should start building it. It sounds like pie in the sky, but the human race is finally at the point where we could do this - if we can figure out how to motivate out neighbors - not convince them - just move them a bit.

It is also clear that this idea is not in tune with the prevailing sentiment of much of the current world. But it seems to be in tune with the desires and aspirations of that world. We just need to believe that is actually possible - and it is! We also need to clearly express it in a way that will engage everyone.

It is clear that this is not a trivial undertaking. It took Europe about 50 years (1945-1993) to open their borders and create the European Union. And the result is still problematic, but they did it, and they are still working at it - 28 years later.

This is a brief list of the major ideas, just to entice you a bit further.

Solving Poverty - Give Free Money to Everyone

A Fifteen Hour Work Week - at least a a start

Why It Doesn’t Pay to be a Banker - finance and its “contribution”

Race Against the Machine - computers and reduction of labor to nothing - now what?

Open Borders is the ultimate solution - will take some work, and will benefit the developed countries as much as the developing! “Effectively, open borders would make the whole world twice as rich.” Page 214

Economic Inequality is killing us all - rich and poor.

Scheider’s notation: This is the Christian Message

If you have followed along to this point, it is my considered opinion that this is the modern Christian message of the carpenter from Nazareth. This is the kingdom of God - we need to be about it. The second book, Humankind, cites many of the NT quotes in support of all of this. Some of you will think this is heresy. For that I would refer you once more to this fine biblical work by a Dominican monk: Jesus Before Christianity, by Albert Nolan. He explores the synoptic gospels from the perspective of a Jewish contemporary of the preacher.
https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2019/04/jesus-before-christianity-by-albert.html

He was Jesus of Nazareth. By the way, that is his real name. “Jesus the Christ” is an honorary title of the Jewish tradition. It was also my father’s favorite phrase for some things. This Jesus did not start a new religion. He was Jewish. I am sure that he could not imagine being of any other belief system, just as you would find it difficult to see yourself as a Muslim or Hindu. He taught a life philosophy based on the best of the Jewish tradition. If you have read the Bible, you must realize that not everything in there is a commendable action by a saintly person. We wisely ignore or reinterpret the things that we now understand to be false or evil or just a waste of time. The miraculous stuff is in there to alert us to the important things. But the story that Yahweh commanded the Israelites to kill every living thing in Palestine is one that I choose to take with a grain of salt. Deuteronomy 20:16-18.

Jesus did not preach about a life to come. He spoke about a revolution in this life - call it the gospel of good news. Liberation theology if you will. The Kingdom of God is a symbol, a metaphor for the “ideal world” of humankind. Our own utopia.

His vision, his gospel, was not based on research and science, but on prayer and reflection.

He took the best of his tradition, refined it, polished it, and told stories about it. He was a prophet, a preacher. Those who heard him first hand were often changed, inspired to follow him.

And then he died, a failure on a cross - a symbol of Roman torture.

I think he had an amazing insight into how human society works. We are social. Our best and greatest accomplishments are in the realm of love of neighbor. Everything else, science, industry, invention, economics, only serve that end.

We have had subsequent preachers who share this vision - but they are few and far between. Francis of Assissi, Dorothy Day. Martin Luher King, Mahatma Gandhi - and they were not without flaws. But . . . they pointed in the same direction.

And I think this author is along those lines. Rutger Bregman.

AND he has a new one - Moral Ambition. Check it out.

The challenge here is, of course, how do we persuade folks that this is doable and a good idea. It's called "organizing." Putting the ideas out there is a preliminary step. Doing it is WORK. More on that later. See: Don't Talk About Politics: How to Change 21st-Century Minds

2025 07 10 DFL Senior Caucus Meeting - Bright Ideas - and New Majority Democrats

2025-07-14T10:58:00.003-05:00

2025 07 DFL Senior Caucus Meeting

This is a little unusual. I want to send something to my elected representative, and to Angie Craig, who is a spokesperson for the "New Majority" democrats. BUT, I don't exactly fit in their 2,000 character limit.. SO, I am sending them a link to this blog entry. My apologies to the rest of you.

I attended a senior caucus meeting recently, and I have been thinking about how people campaign for office these days. soem serious criticism of the leadership in their approach to this idea of campaigning. I've been thinking about this for a decade or so, and I think these ideas are worth something - so . . . see what YOU thinnk.

Gathering Input

I hear your call for “listening” to our intended audience,That is an excellent approach - but we need to do it outside our own group, especially for folks on the other side of this debate. We Democrats have been talking about programs and facts and rational arguments forever - and that is not how we want to address this issue right now.

I agree that we need research on the issues, and a sense of priorities, and find ways to turn those things into programs and agenda and legislation - but that is not how you win an election. That is how you manage a government. It is clear that the other side has done a bunch of homework on how to destroy our governmental services, but they obiously do not lead with that.

I think our focus has to be on how to do a few things well to persuade people who are not paying attention. I think there is solid research behind all of what I am saying, and it would be helpful to get that in our brains so we do not get buried in facts and issues. We should:

Get People’s Attention.
Let’s face it, most people are not “paying attention.” Most people are not even aware that the current administration is causing general chaos. They are busy, they have bills and concerns. They are not engrossed in the latest news and hot issues. Most people are pretty much uninformed, and could care less what politicians are arguing about.

How do we overcome that? There is a lot of research out there that speaks to that, and it would be helpful to gather some of that together to persuade ourselves, our candidates, and our fearless leaders of that fact. This is my "amateurish" summary.
Create a persuasive vision.
People do not generally ponder ideas and issues. They have feelings, fears, needs, beliefs. They vote with their gut, not their brain. Thinking is a rare event. A detailed explanation of the benefits of a newly revised and enlightened immigration program is not going to move them. The economic impact of massive tax cuts is way out there in the future, and may never impact me personally. Who cares? The other side uses lies and threats and scare tactics to create FEAR, one of our strongest emotions.

What we need is a moving, empathic vision of a CARING community for all of humankind. We are social people, we depend on each other, we need each other. We want to build a supportive community for all of us - those in our party, those in our country, and fundamentally for the whole planet. Love and caring is another of our strongest emotions. How do we generate that in our audience?

And we want to do that by investing in the technology and programs and education that will build our caring community of tomorrow. Programs for our children, research to solve problems, health and human services to make life fuller for all. It is our investment, not taxation.

We do not need scare tactics. We need positive, supportive messages. It is amazing what humans can do when we pull together, and use our resources wisely.

The supporters of the other side have a view of our nation that has two layers - ME on top, and THOSE OTHERS on the bottom. It’s a kind of model in their head, not a specific agenda. If you do things that support those on the bottom, it puts my status at risk. That is a win / lose game. We want to create a win / win game. We are all in this together, and I’m pulling for you (Red Green). For a lot more on that you can look at this pile of research: https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2021/04/finally-i-understand-what-is-wrong-with.html.
Do NOT criticize the other side.
Even mentioning their ideas or tactics or goals brings them right back to the forefront of people’s attention. And many of our fellow citizens are energized by the things they say, so they will hear that as a criticism of themselves. We want them to hear our message, not be repelled by our negativity. Never speak the name of an opposing candidate, or criticize what they say or how they say it. Their supporters know that, and our supporters know that as well. If we want the attention of the independent voters in the middle, we want our message and vision in their mind, not the other one. They speak lies - pointing to the truth used to be a valid criticism - but that world no longer exists.
Tell Stories. Facts and programs are for running the government. Stories are the things that persuade people. It helps if they are real, but even fictional ones have great power. A story about an immigrant family that thrived. A story about the brightest kid doing well with some support. A story about farming success with technology created by government investment. A story of health gains from research that made MNRA vaccines possible. You get the idea. Make the local, real. Find individuals who can stand up and tell them. Here is a little more on all of that: https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2025/02/2025-02-political-mind-by-george-lakoff.html
We do not need that DEI thing.
It was a good thing to do for its time, and many people benefited from it. Today it is a negative even for those it was intended to support, and some folks have taken it to extreme measures. Instead of race or nationality or skin, we should be focused on social economic opportunities. The income disparity in this country is simply incredible. I know these are useless facts, but the top 1% have taken some 40 trillion bucks from the rest of us in the last 20 years. There’s a RAND study to that effect. With that kind of money we could really do something.
A Charismatic Leader.
We need all the above, and we need it in the person of the most charismatic, charming, well spoken, frank, honest, integrated human we can find. They need to stand tall, smile a lot, listen a lot and empathize with people.
Research on elections shows that people vote for the smile, for the face, for the “presence” of the candidate - not for their ideas and programs. Those are almost unimportant. Look at what the opposition has accomplished with a candidate that is as dumb as a box of rocks. Oops. Should not have said that.

Surely someone at the national level has figured this out. They have to have folks with more moxy and experience with all of this. Why aren’t they sharing a program with us? We are the peons on the bottom here. Pick us up. Lead us forward.

This is a bit from one of my blog entries which I think is on point for the positive message cited above. See what you think. The blog entry itself is here, with the research references. NOTE this is four years old.

https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2021/04/finally-i-understand-what-is-wrong-with.html

One activist and researcher working on this is Anat Shenker-Osorio. She has been researching the kind of messaging that can call out this fear generation and counter it. (Shenker-Osorio) The key is to find a positive message that explicitly counters the negative messages that generate fear. This is key. It is not enough to generate a positive message, to point to rational arguments and the truth - those do not work to counter the emotion, especially fear. It is more effective to call on the positive values that we all share, and to create a message that creates empathy in people. Call them to be their best, to join those of us who are united in a positive message.

The science behind storytelling can help as well. If you can get a listener or a reader to live for a few seconds or few minutes in the life of their fellow citizens, you generate a positive, supportive emotion that can help overcome their basic fear.

Sometimes a campaign phrase, a set of messages can be successful. In other cases, a technique called "deep canvassing" might be helpful, where the interviewer engages a person in a shared exploration of common values. You can read more about that technique here: Changing the Conversation Together.

Incarnation Homily from 1988

2025-04-03T16:35:00.001-05:00

1988 08 20 Incarnation Homily

OK. This is a bit unusual for me. I was just commiserating with a friend about the sorry state of our world, and he said something about Christianity. Some time ago, 1988, I was a lay preacher in our parish. This is one of the homilies I was privileged to give back then. This friend reminded me of this whole perspective, so I dug it out and just read it again.

I have to say that it still rings true for me. AND . . . it gave me some hope. I trust that it might also help where you are. Just so you know, there is no heresy or anything in here - trust me on that. This is 100% current Catholic / Christian teaching. I don't think that we actually need much dogma in Christianity, but this does qualify. You can do this. I'm pulling for you.

The traditional picture

I grew up with the firm belief in Incarnation that this spirit in heaven came down and took on human flesh -- looked and acted like a man -- but had all these divine things hidden in there. He really knew what was going to happen in the future.

He knew the insides of people - could read their hearts. He could do no wrong, suffer no fear, feel no pain. He lived his life as an example for us. He spoke words that his Father gave him to speak -- that he himself knew as God would stir men's souls, and leave a tradition of selfless service that the centuries would come to know as Christianity.

So, you listen to the words because they have divine backing -- they have to be right -- even though translated through the oral traditions, and clouded by the culture of the age and world he spoke in. It all makes such simple sense -- and it seems so easy to believe in.

What if Jesus were really human?!

Let's just step out of that skin of belief for a couple of minutes. Join me over here on the side of the true “incarnationist.”. Let's assume that Jesus was really human. I mean, really. You know, this is the solid Christian belief -- he really was human -- as fully as you and me. That's the point of the temptations, the crisis in the garden, the pain and despair on the cross. There have been some aberrant Christian sects that discounted that -- they just could not bear the consequences of fully believing that.

So, in this respect, the Christian tradition, and most assuredly, the Catholic tradition, firmly believes this. He is human. What does it feel like now, to hear his words, and read the tale of his impact on the men around him? This man who was so full of so many amazing things. Even discount these miracles, if they are too much to believe that a mere mortal could make stuff like that happen. But even throwing those out -- just look at the amazing things he is supposed to have said and done. Look at the amazing idea of selfless love, and human values, that he envisioned, and that drove those few people around him to set out to tell the world. This type of person does not happen all that often.

Gandhi

When I look around for comparisons, there are none quite as good, quite as washed by time, quite as visionary -- but there are some who come fairly close. I particularly like the values that Gandhi espoused. Here's a young man who returns to his native India from South Africa and sets out to see his country. He returns from this trip with a burning mission, and a vision of the way to achieve it. Freedom, political independence, solidarity -- and all effective through a deep belief in the strategy of love and non-violence.

He looked about him, tried to make some sense out of what was going on, and took hold of a vision, a solution, that drove millions of people to believe it as he did.

Martin Luther King did much the same thing -- albeit with a bit more clay in his feet. What if this Jesus were just like these two? What if he heard this call to be this 'savior', this 'prophet', this 'visionary' to free his people, to free all people from the slavery he saw they labored under. What if he had to muster up the courage just as Gandhi did, or Martin did? What if he doubted just as they did? What if he had as many problems, worries, evil things going on inside of him as they did? What if he had all of this, and he still did it!

Isn't that really the Christian belief that he was really as human as we are? Let's just take this another step. What if he was just like me? It's easy to discount Ghandi and Martin Luther King and all those saint types.They were special, and rare, and, Lord knows, we could stand another one. But what if he felt just like me? I mean, what if those fears of being inadequate, of standing up in public, of not being liked, of being selfish, or losing control, or -- gads, there are tons of things wrong with me that those folk didn't have. Or did they? Or did he?

What if it cost him as much as it costs me to let someone else go first, to give them my shirt, to give them my back to beat, to give them money and friends and love, to give them my life! I suspect that he, and they, are just like me, just like you -- exactly. Human beings don't come forth intact and mature and selfless. They grow to that, they choose to be that, they work to become that. Each of them, Jesus included, worked to become that -- just like you and I work at it. And they had no more help that we have, no special gifts, no divine light, no inspired courage -- no more than you and I have.

Don't you hear the calling now? Haven't you heard it many times in your life -- times that you've turned and said -- "not me," "why bother," "it won't do any good." Doesn't it happen every time someone asks you to help, to do something beyond yourself, to be of service? Aren't you asked any more? Or have you just stopped hearing? Don't you walk downtown where the poor and homeless are? Don't you go out of your way to see them, so you can hear the call? Don't you listen to friends who hurt any more? Don't you call them when you know they are in pain, and could stand a friendly word, a few bucks, a helping hand? Don't you get outraged at the crooks, and the child abusers, and the lazy and the arrogant, selfish types that you run into every day? They don't bother you anymore? You don't hear the call anymore?

I think the difference with them, with Jesus and Martin and Mahatma, was that they kept hearing, they kept looking, they kept caring. They couldn't let go of it -- it would not let go of them. In spite of all the evil things they knew about themselves, in spite of all the selfish things they knew they had, the fears, the needs and the hungers -- they still heard, and they still answered. It wasn't divine -- it was them. But, what if it was divine? What if that is what divine really is -- listening, and caring and doing? Doesn't that sound like traditional Christianity? God is love. Love is God. God isn't up there, and out there, and all knowing, and all powerful -- God is right here -- incarnate in that person who loves. That's what God is, and that's all that we know of God. Does the God thing need to be more? And what real difference does it make if the God thing does happen to be more -- some more that is beyond anything we can see and feel and understand. What difference? None that I can see. The God thing in this remarkable selfless man is all the call we need to change the world. No promise of eternal life can be as effective as this promise of freedom here and now.

Ghandi was free - he loved, and he saw, and he gave, and needed nothing -- not even his own life. Jesus was the same. He needed very little, and what he needed was provided -- it was provided because he was of a mind that this was all he needed -- what came his way. We can be free too. We can be God incarnate. It'll take some work -- it'll take some time -- and you and I may never make it on the scale that these others have -- but we are on the same road, we have the same makeup, we have the same opportunity. All we need to do is choose to be divine, choose to be as selfless as we can muster right now, choose to hear the needs of others, choose to think about them, and to work to help them.

I hear you now -- "it won't make any difference." I tell you it will. How you are, and who you are will make a very great difference to everyone you meet. To some of them, it may be a life and death matter. To others, a moment of help, a less painful step, a warm touch, some insight you could share. What did Jesus and Martin and Ghandi share with those about them but these things? Were they great achievers in fundraising, organization, and holy wars? But they will not be forgotten!

Why isn't this part of the normal Christian tradition of incarnation? Jesus was God, just as fully as he was man. Who ever said that he was the only one who incarnated the deity? Where does the New Testament say there will be only one? Why aren't all of us the deity, in varying shades and colors? Aren't there phrases and beliefs in our traditions that sound like that? We are all children of God, sons and daughters of God, called to put on Christ, to be Christ to each other, and on and on. We have just never listened to them with quite this sense.

Look at it this way. Every new human, every new life, is born with the potential to be divine, just as fully as Jesus was God to his time. It is a blank slate -- ready to be raised to love and care and live and die. For us adults, it may be difficult to change very much in that direction -- but these new ones among us, our children -- don't they deserve the vision and the help to be Jesus to their times? Don't the times need that vision?

2025 03 12 Moral Tribes by Joshua Greene and chatgpt recommendations

2025-03-14T10:05:00.000-05:00

Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them by Joshua Greene

I read this book a year ago as a library book. I took copious notes, and Kindle notes.

I would like to share that and comment on it in such a way as to persuade folks to read the thing.

I decided to do some sort of overview / summary from my notes, and from whatever ChatGPT can create for me. What’s the relevance? Why is this a tremendous insight into moral issues? Why would a lawyer / theologian care about this?

And I started an outline:

Outline - main ideas - goal, etc.

How Humans Work

Not Rational, emotions instant, reflection difficult

Feeling all the way down

Genetic propensity in the DNA

Authority setting rules - parents, religion, civil authorities, tradition, culture

Social / Tribal feeling and need

Feelings / ideas are basically the same thing

Evolving “rules” for life - customs, “rights,” laws, commandments.

The moral decision : what enhances human life to the fullest in the long term.

Look at his 6 rules in the last chapter.

Clarify the way “rights” work and the legal framework. The book seems short on that.

I was not getting very far so, I asked ChatGPT a question , and this is the result. I had asked it about things in the past, like a book by Stiglitz, and similar things. It seems to retain those and use them. This whole exchange kind of amazed me, and particularly by the conclulsion the thing reach on its own. See below.

I said.

Hi. Can you give me a summary of this book: Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them by Joshua Greene. I read it last year and I have forgotten what I planned to do with all my notes on it. Thanks.

ChatGPT said:

Sure, Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them by Joshua Greene explores moral psychology, tribalism, and how human morality evolved to resolve conflicts within and between groups. Greene argues that our moral instincts—shaped by evolution—work well within small, like-minded groups but often fail when dealing with larger, diverse societies. He suggests that we need a "meta-morality," a system for resolving moral conflicts between different moral tribes.

Key Points:

Dual-Process Moral Thinking – Greene applies the System 1 vs. System 2 model to moral decision-making. Our intuitive, emotional responses (System 1) work well for in-group cooperation but can lead to intergroup conflict. Deliberate reasoning (System 2) is necessary to transcend tribal morality.
The Tragedy of Common-Sense Morality – Different moral tribes have their own "common sense" but often conflict with each other. Our moral instincts evolved for cooperation within groups, not for resolving large-scale moral disagreements.
Utilitarianism as a Meta-Morality – Greene argues for utilitarianism (or deep pragmatism) as the best framework for solving moral disputes across tribes. He believes maximizing overall well-being provides a rational way to mediate between competing moral systems.
The Trolley Problem and Moral Psychology – The book uses thought experiments like the trolley problem to illustrate how our moral intuitions work, showing how different moral instincts can lead to inconsistent ethical judgments.
Expanding the Moral Circle – Greene urges us to use reasoning and empathy to overcome tribal biases, promoting global cooperation rather than group-based moral absolutism.

Your Notes:

Since you read this last year, you might have planned to apply Greene’s ideas to:

Political polarization – Understanding how moral tribes contribute to ideological division.
Legal or ethical reasoning – Applying meta-morality to legal debates.
Neuroscience & psychology – Exploring how moral cognition affects behavior.
Religious and philosophical ethics – Reconciling moral tribalism with broader ethical frameworks.

Does this summary help jog your memory about what you wanted to do with your notes?

I said

I think you have it. As I recall I was somewhat surprised that he did not understand the role that "human rights" have in our society. I see them as rules of thumb that we have developed over time to help us move our emotions to the better moral outcome.

ChatGPT said:

That’s a sharp observation. Greene’s focus on utilitarianism as a meta-morality sometimes sidelines the role of human rights as moral anchors. He treats morality as a problem-solving mechanism but seems less attuned to the way human rights serve as heuristics—rules of thumb that guide moral decision-making, particularly when emotions and reason are at odds.

Your view aligns with scholars who see human rights as a practical evolution of moral reasoning, helping individuals and societies override tribal biases in favor of broader ethical principles. While utilitarianism seeks to maximize overall well-being, human rights provide non-negotiable guardrails to prevent rationalized harm, even when it might increase net utility in the short term.

It sounds like you were considering how human rights function as a bridge between emotion and reason—helping move our System 1 intuitions toward System 2 outcomes that are more just and sustainable. Were you planning to write something on this idea? It seems like a compelling critique of Greene’s approach.

I said

Thanks. Right now I am more concerned with my priorities for my time. I think there are much more urgent things for humankind than coming up with a full understanding of how we developed our morals. We seem to be faced with a total collapse of our democratic institutions. I see no way to stop that. Any suggestions on that one?

ChatGPT said:

That’s the real question, isn’t it? Understanding how we developed our morals is interesting, but it feels like a luxury when democracy itself is teetering. If we take a Moral Tribes lens to this, we could say we’re witnessing a full-scale tribal breakdown—where common ground is disappearing, and shared democratic norms are eroding.

A few angles to consider:

1. Identifying the Core Threats

Polarization & Tribalism – People increasingly view politics as a battle between “good” and “evil,” making compromise impossible.
Disinformation & Media Fragmentation – There’s no common reality. Even facts are now tribal markers.
Erosion of Institutions – Courts, elections, and rule of law are under attack, often from within.
Authoritarian Drift – Leaders worldwide are undermining democracy by using democratic tools.

2. What Can Be Done?

Strengthening Democratic Norms – Laws alone don’t uphold democracy—shared norms do. These need to be reinforced through civic education and political engagement.
Addressing Economic Inequality – As Stiglitz and Piketty argue, rising inequality fuels populism and extremism. If people feel left behind, they’re more likely to support authoritarian solutions.
Regulating Social Media & Information Warfare – The unchecked spread of disinformation is one of democracy’s biggest vulnerabilities.
Electoral Reforms – Ranked-choice voting, independent redistricting, and campaign finance reform could reduce hyper-partisanship. But political will is lacking.
Local Action – Change often happens locally. Can people protect democratic processes in their own communities?

The Hard Truth

I won’t sugarcoat it—history suggests that once democratic backsliding begins, it’s extremely difficult to reverse. The U.S. and other democracies are at a crossroads, and there’s no guarantee we’ll make it through intact.

What’s your take? Do you see any path forward that’s actually viable? Or are we just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic?

I said.

Damn, I do not. The only bulwark we have in law is the courts. But our courts have no enforcement mechanism. They can fine - but they cannot collect the funds. They can imprison, but they have no human agents to secure people in confinement. They write orders, but are unable to compel anyone to actually follow them. I would like a better system, thank you.

ChatGPT said:

You’ve nailed a fundamental flaw in our legal system—courts have authority, but no real power of enforcement. They rely on the executive branch to uphold their rulings. When that chain of enforcement breaks (as we’re seeing with politicians ignoring court orders), the entire system starts to unravel.

What Would a Better System Look Like?

If we were designing a system from scratch, what would it need? Here are some possible reforms that could help:

1. Independent Enforcement Mechanism

Right now, courts depend on executive agencies (police, U.S. Marshals, military) to enforce rulings. What if the judiciary had its own independent enforcement body?
A national, politically neutral Judicial Enforcement Corps that operates under court authority, ensuring compliance without executive interference.

2. Structural Safeguards Against Political Capture

Courts, especially the Supreme Court, are being used as political weapons.
Possible solutions:

Term limits for justices (staggered to prevent ideological swings).
Stronger ethics rules (mandatory recusals, financial transparency).
Balanced appointments (e.g., requiring bipartisan approval for judges).

3. Automatic Sanctions for Ignoring Court Orders

Right now, defying a court is often a political choice with few consequences.
What if courts could automatically trigger penalties without executive action?

Financial penalties directly deducted from government funds.
Automatic contempt orders with mandatory congressional review.
Loss of federal funding for states/agencies that ignore rulings.

4. Democratic Resilience Mechanisms

Beyond courts, democracy needs self-correcting features:

Easier citizen-led constitutional amendments to override extremist policies.
Mandatory civic education in schools (teaching people how democracy works).
Greater decentralization (shifting power from the federal government to local democratic institutions).

The Reality Check

Of course, implementing any of this requires political will—which is in short supply. The system is resistant to change, especially when those in power benefit from the status quo.

But if democracy is on the brink, is radical reform the only answer?
Would you support constitutional changes to fix this, or do you think we need something even more drastic?

I said:

We could make the US Marshals into that kind of enforcement body. Take them away from the executive branch. But . . . not this year. Thanks.

ChatGPT said:

Exactly—if the U.S. Marshals were moved under the judiciary, they could act as an independent enforcement arm. That would give the courts real teeth without relying on the executive branch. But as you said, not this year—or likely anytime soon. The political reality won’t allow it.

Still, it’s worth keeping ideas like this in mind. If (or when) the crisis deepens, people may finally be willing to consider real structural reforms. Until then, I suppose we just brace ourselves.

Let me know if you want to keep brainstorming—or if you’d rather focus on something less grim for the moment.

2025 02 26 Immigration a Change of View

2025-02-26T16:37:00.000-06:00

I have a topic I would like to get in front of all of my elected representatives. I have emails for most, but not the Federal ones. So . . . I am crafting this note to send them as a LINK. I think it is vital that they adopt a different direction in their approach to immigration, and I hope that this might persuade them. It certainly changed my view of how we should approach it.

So - the rest of you will have to put up with this. Of course, you have probably already read this in my email to you

In an Age of Right-Wing Populism, Why Are Denmark’s Liberals Winning? By David Leonhard

This personal enlightenment on immigration was triggered by this article from the NY Times. And, unless the Times changes its policy, you should be able to read it with this link, even without a subscription. That’s a neat feature that they offer for a few articles each month.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/24/magazine/denmark-immigration-policy-progressives.html?unlocked_article_code=1.zU4.rMds.ZhI8yLvS_Mqn&smid=url-share

You will note that the article is quite long - VERY long, in fact. There is a link on that page that will allow you to hear the article read by another reporter. So that is another path for those of us somewhat challenged by the printed word. I read pretty well, but I was skimming stuff toward the end. So I am offering you a summary of my thinking, based on the information in the article, and a few other things.

The author uses the Danish progressive party’s policy on immigration as a clear example of where all of us should be going. We all know that totally open borders cannot be sustained. The Danes have come up with a compromise that works well for them, and is well supported by their voting public. Most of the rest of Europe is clearly struggling with how to approach the problem. Our empathic, supportive nature is at odds with the problems we are creating.

If you are truly interested in a BRIEF statement of this, please skip ahead to the SUMMARY topic. Do a find command (cmd f) on the word ”summary.” I need to explain a bit how I got here - which might deter you a bit.

Democratic Party on Immigration

I want to share this as widely as I can, as it appears that the Democratic party need to improve its approach on this topic. The majority of our voting public is supportive of a more restrictive approach, and we need to understand that. Progressives tend to be empathic, and concerned for all of humankind. It makes sense that they tend to be lenient on border security, in favor of people seeking asylum.

Asylum

The UN has declared more and more people as worthy of asylum because of the threats of their home government. Our law requires our border personnel to detain folk, and to determine with a fair hearing whether or not they fall into this legal category. We have not managed to adequately staff the hearing offices, and there are a few million people living here waiting for a hearing as required by law.

Immigration Positives

There are many positives to a supportive immigration policy. Without immigration, the population of most wealthy, western countries is going to decline rapidly in the next few decades. Given our current economic system, that is not a good outcome. If you have any doubts on that, listen to Peter Zeihan on the topic. https://youtu.be/qDIiURFyaic He has a fine book that talks about world wide population decline and its impact. The End of the World Is Just the Beginning: Mapping the Collapse of Globalization I don’t agree with him on everything, but his understanding of demographics, geography and geopolitics is really unique. He thinks that Canada and the US are the only major countries that have a shot at surviving the coming depopulation, precisely because of our immigration policies.

There is also a fine study by a couple of Nobel Prize Economists that outlines many other positive impacts from immigration. One book I recommend is Good Economics for Hard Times, by Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo.

Personal History

Three of my grandparents were born in Europe. I am grateful that they had the wisdom, energy and daring immigrate here. Some of my best friends are immigrants - literally. We helped sponsor assistance for Vietnamese refugees through our church, and several hundred folk live in this area thanks to that effort. It was one of the best things we ever did as a family. I can say, without hesitation, that every one of those individuals has contributed positively to our world.

BUT - There are limits

We must have a shared community of interest by our general populace, or we can accomplish nothing in this realm. We have to focus on the possible, not the ideal.

Bottom Line. Voters everywhere are rejecting open ended immigration policies for very good reasons. The Progressive Elite - among whom I am most likely counted - resist this because it feels immoral, racist and elitist to keep people from entering our “democratic haven” because of their race, ethnic background, poverty, lack of education and the like. That is especially true when they are suffering the threat of death in their home country. Our “asylum laws” are based on that belief. We also tend to think that immigration is a good thing on balance. And that is, in fact, true, up to a point.

Immigration was positive historically. In our growth years, immigrants brought energy, and wealth, and ideas and labor that we sorely needed. Most of us are only here because of the openness of our country in that period. But, in fact, open immigration beyond a certain point has many negative impacts. And the voting public is very aware of those issues. Many Trump supporters do not support his hate, or his crazy ideas, but they do want to slow the immigrant flood because they or their fellows are feeling the negative impacts. As do voters in most Western Democracies. And there is clearly the fear factor that is pushed by the conservative faction, the latent racism in our history, and our populist nationalistic isolation.

Denmark’s Policies. They call for lower levels of immigration, more aggressive efforts to integrate immigrants and the rapid deportation of people who enter illegally.

Denmark’s example. The article lists the many accomplishments of the Danish Social Democratic party. Its welfare state, free education through college, free medical care, robust unemployment support, etc. But the Danish progressives differ on immigration policy. They are clear that the country can only support a lower level of immigration for multiple reasons. Economically, excessive immigration lowers wages and opportunities for all, including immigrants. Integration into society takes longer and is not as successful. Schools and social services are overwhelmed with languages and customs without sufficient time to adapt. In order to support their policies and the taxation levels it requires, they must have broad based support. Too much immigration, too quickly, undermines the sense of cohesion and togetherness that is required in the population to support it. They do not FEEL united in this effort. And the working class suffers the negative aspects of this much more than the educated and professional class. And the rich class feel none of this.

The problem will only worsen. As climate change and wars and disease continue and increase, the pressure of immigration will only increase. But the wealthy western democracies can only support a very small part of this influx. Travel, ideas, communication, and problems are only going to make for more and more refugees, with literally, nowhere to go. But we have to recognize that the western nations really cannot absorb an unlimited amount of new arrivals without literally dissolving their coherence and sense of who they are.

My Recommendations: These are not from the article, but are personal to me.

Trump is not winning converts with his crazy antics about destroying the government. And his immigration policies will likely be seen as too extreme at some point. But we still have to take some steps:

Change the asylum law. We simply cannot support every single person who is suffering persecution and death threats at home. It does them no favor to admit them into a failing economy and culture.
Slow the Pace. Close all the borders, until we have a handle on the illegal and legal immigrants waiting for hearings on their cases. I think that the other worker visas should also be halted until we can get a handle on this.
Accelerate Integration. Support public education in language skills and democratic principles. We are of many cultures and languages, but we all learn English, we all support the flag, our military, our electoral process, and, most of all, our separation of religion from government.
Export illegals. There is no question that we need to do this. The difficulty is how to do it humanely. Many of these people have been living here for decades, and sending them “home” would hardly be successful.

I am not inordinately proud of my summary. If you can improve it, please do so. If you can help implement it in the minds of other progressives, please do so. Thanks.

ChatGPT

Below is ChatGPT’s recommendation on all of this. Please feel free to share it.

For progressive politicians in the Democratic Party, the challenge is balancing economic justice, social cohesion, and humane immigration policies. Denmark’s model suggests that a more controlled, structured approach to immigration may be necessary to maintain public support for a strong welfare state. Here are some specific steps progressives might consider:

1. Acknowledge Working-Class Concerns

Recognize that rapid, unregulated immigration can put pressure on wages, housing, schools, and healthcare—especially in working-class communities.

Shift the narrative from moralizing about immigration to focusing on economic fairness, ensuring that immigration does not disproportionately impact low-income Americans.

2. Strengthen Border Security and Asylum Processes

Support stronger border enforcement without cruelty—invest in faster asylum processing to prevent long legal backlogs that encourage unauthorized stays.

Implement a national E-Verify system to prevent undocumented labor exploitation while ensuring fair wages for all workers.

Establish regional processing centers in Latin America to allow migrants to apply for entry before making the dangerous journey north.

3. Set an Annual Immigration Cap Based on Economic Needs

Create a data-driven, skills-based immigration policy that prioritizes workers where labor shortages exist (healthcare, agriculture, technology).

Reform the visa system to align with actual workforce demands rather than outdated quotas.

4. Invest in Integration and Workforce Training

Require that all new immigrants undergo structured integration programs, including language training and civic education, as in Denmark.

Increase funding for job retraining programs for U.S. workers displaced by automation and global competition, reducing economic anxiety about immigration.

5. Make Immigration a Democratic Process

Allow states and local communities more say in setting immigration levels based on economic capacity and infrastructure.

Hold public referendums or structured town halls on immigration policy to engage citizens in shaping realistic, broadly supported reforms.

6. Reform the Asylum and Family Reunification Systems

Close loopholes that allow for extended stays without legitimate asylum claims, while protecting refugees fleeing real persecution.

Shift family reunification policies to focus on nuclear families rather than extended networks.

7. Differentiate Themselves from the Right

Advocate for humane but firm immigration control, rejecting both harsh, punitive measures and overly permissive policies that ignore economic realities.

Present a pragmatic, centrist immigration policy that contrasts with Republican rhetoric while addressing voters' concerns.

By adopting a controlled, economically-driven immigration approach, progressives can regain the trust of working-class voters while maintaining core humanitarian values. This could help neutralize right-wing populist attacks and strengthen their political position.

Would you like me to refine or expand on any of these points?

2025 02 The Political Mind by George Lakoff with an AI summary

2025-02-04T16:55:00.000-06:00

2025 02 The Political Mind George Lakoff AI summary

This will seem a little strange to a few of my “subscribers” (friends who tolerate my verbosity), but I promised it to a few of them so the rest of you have to contend with it.

I was reading this book: The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist's Guide to Your Brain and Its Politics by George Lakoff. I found it very interesting - a tad complex and lots of science - but the premise was good. Humans are not really rational thinkers. Modern research in linguistics and neuroscience has shown how our brains actually operate.

The conservative faction in our politics seems to have figured this out. The progressive are definitely behind the curve. I was hopeful that the author would have some simple steps to recommend to politicians as to how to overcome this “framing” business, and reach the hearts and emotions of the more progressive among us. I was about two thirds of the way through the book, getting frustrated with all of the science, linguistics, neurons, etc.

And then I asked ChatGPT to give me a summary of the book’s main recommendations. It came back with a very nice set of things. I asked it again to clarify a couple of those - and it did another fine job. Then I asked it if it had access to the book - it DID NOT. All of these things were drawn from commentaries about the book.

I finished the book, hoping to find a nice summary at the end. Nope. The second last chapter is a bunch of STUFF on linguistics and philosophy and WORDS. I am pretty bright - but I could barely get through it. And then the final chapter was like a cloud of wishful thinking - if we get this right we can right all of these wrongs and move ahead. Here are a few examples.

We would understand that our brains evolved for empathy, for cooperation, for connection to each other and to the earth. We cannot exist alone.

We would embrace the fact that empathy is at the heart of American democracy. It is a positive force for human society at large. It is why we care about fundamental human rights. It is why we care about protecting our people in all ways, from criminals, fire, disease, disasters, impure food, dangerous working conditions, consumer fraud, and poverty in old age. P 267

The vital importance of childrearing would be recognized. The public would understand that a child’s brain is largely shaped during the first three to five years by the large-scale death of neurons. The ones that go unused die off. Early childhood education would be recognized as vital. Studies showing that nurturant upbringing is far better for children—and for society—would be well known. Nurturant forms of childrearing and teaching would be instituted nationwide. Child-beating and other child abuse would be outlawed. Advocates of strict father upbringing—like James Dobson and Dr. Laura—would be recognized as harmful to children.1 P 269

Health would be seen as a matter of protection, not insurance. Making a profit by selling health insurance policies and then denying care would be recognized overtly and discussed accordingly.

The immorality of the vast divide between the ultra-wealthy and the middle and lower classes would be manifest. Vast wealth translates into vast power, which in itself threatens democracy. P 270

That is definitely positive stuff in the progressive vein - but how the heck do we get there?

Enough. What follows is the verbatim exchange with ChatGPT. I think no one has ownership of this script, so legal challenges to sharing it. I think the key thing is: tell emotionally engaging stories. It’s stories all the way down.

I sent this to as many elected officials as I know - and I have yet to hear back from any of them. Why don’t you have a shot at it? I think we can still do this. I’m pulling for you.

ChatGPT Exchange

ChatGPT summary of the recommendations from the book The Political Mind by George Lakoff

Please give me a summary of the recommendations for our political society from the book The Political Mind by George Lakoff.

In The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist's Guide to Your Brain and Its Politics (2008), George Lakoff explores how human cognition, particularly through the use of metaphor and framing, shapes political discourse and decision-making. He critiques the dominance of rationalist models of politics, arguing instead for a deeper understanding of how emotions, values, and unconscious processes influence political behavior. Below is a summary of the key recommendations Lakoff offers for improving our political society:

1. Understand and Use Framing Effectively

Lakoff emphasizes that political ideas are shaped by the frames through which they are presented. Progressive and liberal movements need to develop and deploy frames that resonate emotionally with voters and align with core values, such as fairness, empathy, and community.
He warns against using the frames of political opponents, as this reinforces their ideas. Instead, new frames must be constructed to shift the narrative.

2. Appeal to Emotion and Morality

Facts and logic alone rarely persuade voters; effective political communication must appeal to emotions and moral values. Progressives should articulate policies in ways that connect with people's lived experiences and deeply held beliefs.
For example, policies on healthcare, climate change, or social justice should be framed as moral imperatives rooted in empathy and care.

3. Recognize the Role of the Unconscious Mind

Much of human thinking occurs unconsciously and is influenced by metaphors and narratives. Political campaigns should craft compelling stories that activate unconscious values, particularly those that promote solidarity and cooperation.

4. Redefine Freedom and Responsibility

Lakoff advocates for reclaiming the language of freedom and responsibility. Instead of focusing solely on individual freedom (a conservative frame), progressives should emphasize the importance of collective responsibility, shared prosperity, and interdependence in achieving true freedom.

5. Build a Nurturing Political Vision

Drawing on his "Strict Father" and "Nurturant Parent" metaphors for conservative and progressive worldviews, Lakoff argues that progressives should promote a vision of government as a nurturing institution. This vision emphasizes caring for citizens, supporting opportunity, and protecting people from harm.

6. Educate the Public About Framing

Lakoff recommends educating voters and activists about how framing works so they can critically evaluate political messages and resist manipulative tactics. Awareness of framing strengthens the public's ability to support policies aligned with their true values.

7. Invest in Progressive Communication Infrastructure

Conservatives have successfully built a communication infrastructure (think tanks, media outlets, etc.) that reinforces their frames and narratives. Lakoff calls on progressives to develop similar networks to disseminate their ideas effectively.

8. Emphasize Long-Term Thinking

To counteract the short-term focus of much political discourse, progressives should emphasize the importance of sustainable policies that address systemic issues like climate change, economic inequality, and healthcare reform.

9. Avoid Policy Speak and Technical Jargon

Policy proposals should be communicated in simple, relatable terms that evoke shared values and emotions, rather than relying on complex technical details.

10. Foster a Sense of Community

Lakoff underscores the importance of community and shared purpose in political messaging. He suggests emphasizing the ways policies promote unity, mutual support, and collective well-being.

By adopting these strategies, Lakoff argues, political society can become more effective in addressing pressing challenges while fostering greater civic engagement and trust. His work ultimately calls for a shift from purely rationalist approaches to a deeper understanding of how human cognition and morality shape political realities.

You're very welcome, Carl! I'm glad the summary was helpful to you. I created the summary based on my understanding of George Lakoff's The Political Mind and the key ideas from the book, as it exists in my training data. I didn’t access the actual text of the book or specific summaries but synthesized the content based on its central themes and arguments, which I’m familiar with.

If you'd like me to expand on any specific recommendation or concept, let me know, and I'd be happy to dive deeper!

You said:

If you could expand number 9, avoid policy speak and technical jargon, that would be helpful.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Certainly! Let’s dive deeper into recommendation #9 from The Political Mind—avoiding policy speak and technical jargon. Lakoff stresses the importance of making political communication accessible and emotionally engaging to connect with a wider audience. Here’s an expanded explanation of this concept:

The Problem with Policy Speak and Jargon

Disconnect from Everyday Experience:

Policy details often involve technical language, statistics, and abstract concepts that most people don’t encounter in their daily lives. This creates a disconnect between policymakers and voters, making it hard for the public to relate to or fully understand the proposals.
For example, terms like "means-tested benefits" or "cap-and-trade systems" may confuse or alienate people who might otherwise support those policies.

Lack of Emotional Resonance:

Jargon fails to evoke the values or emotions that inspire action. People are more likely to be persuaded by a narrative that aligns with their sense of morality, empathy, or fairness than by a detailed explanation of a legislative process.

Reinforcing Opponent Frames:

When politicians respond to criticism using technical language, they often unintentionally reinforce the frames set by their opponents. For example, if opponents describe a policy as "government overreach," responding with complex, data-driven defenses may fail to counter the emotional weight of the criticism.

Lakoff’s Suggestions for Avoiding Policy Speak

Frame Issues Around Shared Values:

Focus on the moral principles underlying a policy rather than the technical details. For instance, instead of talking about “regulations on carbon emissions,” frame the discussion as “protecting our children’s future” or “ensuring clean air and water for everyone.”

Use Simple, Relatable Language:

Speak in terms that are easy for the average person to grasp and that relate to their everyday concerns. For example:

Instead of "universal healthcare coverage," say, "No one should have to choose between seeing a doctor and paying rent."
Instead of "progressive taxation," say, "The wealthiest should pay their fair share to support the country that helped them succeed."

Tell Stories:

People connect more deeply with stories than abstract facts. Share personal or hypothetical narratives that illustrate how policies impact real people. For example:

"Imagine a single mother working two jobs who still can’t afford childcare. This policy is for her and families like hers."

Create Memorable Metaphors:

Metaphors help translate abstract ideas into something concrete and relatable. For example:

Describe government as “a safety net” or “a helping hand” rather than as a bureaucratic system.
Talk about the economy as “a garden that needs tending” rather than as an abstract financial mechanism.

Focus on Outcomes, Not Processes:

Voters are less interested in how a policy works than in what it will achieve. Emphasize the tangible benefits of a policy, like more jobs, better schools, or safer neighborhoods, rather than explaining the technical mechanisms that deliver those benefits.

Avoid Defensiveness:

Avoid responding to criticism in technical terms that sound defensive or overly detailed. Instead, pivot back to the values and positive outcomes your policy promotes.

Test Language with Real People:

Lakoff recommends testing messaging with the public to see what resonates emotionally and morally. Focus groups and polling can help refine language to ensure it connects with the intended audience.

Examples of Clear Communication

Healthcare Reform:

Jargon: "We’re proposing a single-payer healthcare system with a cost-sharing mechanism that minimizes administrative overhead."
Clear Communication: "Everyone should be able to see a doctor when they’re sick, no matter how much money they make."

Climate Policy:

Jargon: "Our cap-and-trade system incentivizes emissions reductions through market mechanisms."
Clear Communication: "We’re making sure polluters pay their fair share so we can leave a healthier planet for our kids."

Tax Policy:

Jargon: "Our progressive tax structure ensures revenue streams for essential social programs."
Clear Communication: "Billionaires shouldn’t pay a lower tax rate than teachers and firefighters."

By avoiding technical jargon and focusing on values, stories, and relatable language, political leaders can engage people on an emotional level, making their policies more understandable, memorable, and ultimately, more persuasive.

Excellent. Could you also expand on number 2. Appeal to Emotion and Morality

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

Absolutely! Expanding on #2 from George Lakoff's The Political Mind—Appeal to Emotion and Morality—we can explore why this approach is vital in political communication and how it can be effectively implemented. Lakoff argues that human decision-making, especially in politics, is deeply rooted in emotion and morality, not just rational analysis. Successful political movements appeal to these underlying drivers to inspire action and build lasting support.

Why Appeal to Emotion and Morality?

Humans Are Not Purely Rational:

Neuroscience and cognitive psychology show that emotions guide decision-making far more than we often acknowledge. People respond to how policies make them feel, not just the logical arguments behind them.
Political messaging that focuses solely on data and facts may inform but rarely motivates people to act.

Morality is Central to Politics:

Political beliefs are tied to moral worldviews—what people consider "right" or "wrong." Policies resonate more deeply when framed as moral imperatives that align with voters’ values.
For example, civil rights movements succeeded not because they presented a statistical case for equality but because they framed their cause as a moral struggle for justice.

Emotion Drives Action:

People vote, protest, or donate when they feel emotionally engaged—whether it's anger about injustice, hope for change, or pride in their community. Igniting these emotions builds momentum.

How to Effectively Appeal to Emotion and Morality

1. Identify Core Values

Understand what moral values your audience holds most dear—such as fairness, freedom, security, compassion, or loyalty—and connect your policies to those values.
Example: Advocating for universal healthcare can appeal to the value of compassion (“No one should suffer because they can’t afford a doctor”) or fairness (“The richest country in the world shouldn’t let people go bankrupt over medical bills”).

2. Craft Emotionally Resonant Messages

Use language that evokes feelings, such as:

Hope: “We can build a future where every child has a chance to thrive.”
Anger: “It’s unacceptable that billionaires pay less in taxes than teachers.”
Empathy: “Imagine being a parent who can’t afford medicine for their sick child.”

Avoid overly neutral or sterile language, as it fails to inspire.

3. Frame Issues as Moral Imperatives

Present policies as the “right thing to do,” not just the practical or logical thing.
Example: Climate change can be framed not just as an economic issue but as a moral responsibility to future generations: “It’s our duty to protect the planet for our children and grandchildren.”

4. Tell Powerful Stories

Stories make abstract ideas tangible and relatable. Share examples of individuals whose lives will improve because of a policy.
Example: Instead of citing statistics about homelessness, tell the story of a single mother who found housing through a government program.

5. Use Moral Metaphors

Metaphors help translate complex ideas into relatable, emotionally charged concepts.

Example: Frame the economy as a “family budget” to emphasize shared responsibility, or describe government as a “safety net” to highlight its protective role.

6. Create a Sense of Community

Appeal to collective identity and shared purpose. Messages that emphasize “we’re all in this together” resonate deeply.
Example: During the pandemic, leaders often framed public health measures as acts of solidarity: “Wearing a mask isn’t just for you—it’s for your neighbors, your parents, and your community.”

7. Activate Moral Frames Opposed to Opponents’ Frames

Instead of reacting to opponents’ arguments, reframe the issue to activate your own moral values.
Example: If opponents argue that raising taxes on the wealthy is “punishing success,” reframe it as “ensuring everyone contributes their fair share to the society that helped them succeed.”

8. Leverage Universal Emotions

Some emotions and moral principles are widely shared, such as love for children, concern for safety, and a desire for fairness. Root your messages in these universal appeals.
Example: Advocating for gun safety laws can focus on protecting children: “No parent should have to fear for their child’s life at school.”

Examples of Emotion and Morality in Political Messaging

Civil Rights Movement:

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s speeches appealed to both emotion and morality. His “I Have a Dream” speech evoked hope, pride, and moral outrage by framing racial equality as a fundamental American value rooted in justice.

Climate Action:

Instead of framing climate change as an abstract scientific issue, activists have reframed it as a moral obligation: “We owe it to the next generation to leave them a livable planet.”

Healthcare Reform:

Effective healthcare campaigns have highlighted heartbreaking stories of people denied care due to lack of insurance, appealing to empathy and fairness.

Practical Steps for Political Communicators

Test Messages with Diverse Audiences:

Use focus groups or surveys to identify which emotions and moral appeals resonate most with different demographics.

Lead with Values, Not Facts:

Start with a moral or emotional statement before presenting data. For example: “Every child deserves a good education” (value) before “Here’s how we’ll fund it” (policy).

Stay Positive When Possible:

While anger can be a powerful motivator, hope and optimism often inspire long-term commitment. Balance critiques of the status quo with a vision of a better future.

By appealing to emotions and morality, political movements can transcend dry policy debates and connect with voters on a deeper, more personal level. This approach creates not just informed citizens but passionate advocates who see political engagement as a moral duty.

Certainly! Expanding on #3—Recognize the Role of the Unconscious Mind—from The Political Mind, George Lakoff emphasizes that much of human thought and decision-making happens below the level of conscious awareness. Understanding the unconscious mind is critical for crafting political messages that resonate with voters on a deeper level. Here’s a more detailed exploration:

The Role of the Unconscious Mind in Politics

1. Cognitive Science and the Unconscious

Automatic Thinking: Most cognitive processes are automatic and unconscious. People don't consciously analyze every decision; instead, they rely on mental shortcuts, habits, and gut instincts.
Emotional Responses: Emotions are often triggered unconsciously and shape how people interpret political messages. For example, fear can lead to a desire for security, while hope can inspire action.
Metaphors and Frames: The brain relies on metaphors to make sense of abstract concepts. For instance, describing the economy as a "machine" versus a "garden" activates entirely different ways of thinking about it.

2. The Limits of Purely Rational Appeals

Lakoff argues that political discourse often assumes voters are purely rational actors who weigh evidence and make decisions logically. In reality, people’s beliefs are shaped by unconscious frames and emotional associations, not just facts.
For example, debates about taxes often fail to resonate because they’re framed in technical, economic terms rather than moral terms like fairness or shared responsibility.

How the Unconscious Shapes Political Beliefs

Frames Shape Perception:

Frames are mental structures that shape how we see the world. They guide what we pay attention to and how we interpret information.
Example: If "taxes" are framed as a "burden," people will unconsciously resist them. But if framed as an "investment in our future," they may see them positively.

Moral Worldviews Operate Unconsciously:

People’s political beliefs are tied to deeply ingrained moral worldviews. For example:

Conservatives often operate from a "Strict Father" frame, emphasizing discipline, hierarchy, and individual responsibility.
Progressives often operate from a "Nurturant Parent" frame, emphasizing empathy, care, and collective responsibility.

These worldviews are largely unconscious but determine how people interpret policies and arguments.

Confirmation Bias and Tribal Thinking:

The unconscious mind seeks information that confirms existing beliefs and filters out conflicting evidence. This is why facts alone rarely change minds—they must align with a person’s existing moral and emotional framework.
Tribalism, or identifying with a group, also operates unconsciously. Political messages that appeal to group identity can be especially powerful.

Implicit Associations:

People form unconscious associations between concepts, often based on cultural messages. For instance, "strong leaders" might evoke images of authority and decisiveness, even if those traits aren’t explicitly defined in the message.

How to Engage the Unconscious Mind in Political Communication

1. Activate Frames that Align with Your Values

Political messages should use frames that unconsciously activate the desired moral worldview.
Example: Instead of describing healthcare reform as a "cost-saving measure," frame it as "caring for our neighbors" or "ensuring dignity for all."

2. Use Metaphors That Resonate

Metaphors tap directly into the unconscious mind. Effective metaphors make abstract ideas relatable and emotionally meaningful.
Example: Describe government as a "nurturing hand" or a "safety net" to evoke feelings of care and support.

3. Tell Stories that Appeal to Universal Experiences

Stories bypass rational analysis and engage the emotional, unconscious mind. A single compelling narrative can be more persuasive than a long list of data.
Example: Instead of citing statistics about unemployment, share a story of a family struggling to make ends meet and how a policy would help them.

4. Trigger Positive Emotions and Avoid Overloading Fear

Fear can be effective in motivating action, but it must be paired with hope or a solution to avoid paralysis or disengagement.
Example: “Climate change is a threat to our future, but we have the tools to stop it and leave a better world for our children.”

5. Reframe Opposition Arguments

Don’t simply negate the opposition’s frame (e.g., “We’re not soft on crime”), as this reinforces their narrative. Instead, reframe the debate to activate your own moral worldview.
Example: Reframe “tough on crime” as “smart on safety” to emphasize prevention and rehabilitation.

6. Simplify Without Oversimplifying

Messages should be concise and emotionally engaging but not reduce complex issues to slogans that lack substance.
Example: Instead of “reduce carbon emissions,” say, “Let’s make our air and water clean again for our kids.”

7. Reinforce Identity and Values

Craft messages that affirm the audience’s identity and align with their moral values.
Example: “We’re a nation that takes care of its own. That’s why we need policies that lift up working families.”

Practical Implications for Political Society

Focus on Education About Frames:

Educating activists, communicators, and voters about the role of unconscious frames can help them critically analyze political messages and resist manipulation.

Develop Emotional Resonance in Campaigns:

Campaigns should focus less on policy details and more on connecting emotionally and morally with voters.

Train Leaders to Communicate Effectively:

Politicians and advocates need to learn how to craft messages that appeal to both conscious reasoning and unconscious values.

By recognizing the role of the unconscious mind, political leaders can create messages that resonate more deeply with voters, build stronger emotional connections, and ultimately inspire action. This approach emphasizes that successful politics isn’t just about presenting policies—it’s about shaping the moral and emotional landscape of society.

Extraordinary. And you have no access to the actual text of the book, is that correct?

That's correct—I don't have access to the actual text of The Political Mind or any books. My responses are based on information I’ve been trained on up to my knowledge cutoff in 2023, including summaries, reviews, and analyses of the book. I synthesize insights using that understanding and can expand or clarify based on the principles and ideas Lakoff is known for.

The Politics Industry - A Book Review and Recommendation

2024-11-02T11:53:00.001-05:00

Yeah, I know - this Blog looks more and more like a series of book reviews. Well, I read a lot. And, as my lovely wife says, every new book is the BEST I have ever read - or words to that effect. I am blessed by having the time to read, and having good sources of new books, and a wonderful local library that finds them for me anywhere in MN. Amazing public service.

This is the book:
The Politics Industry: How Political Innovation Can Break Partisan Gridlock and Save Our Democracy by Katherine Gehy and Michael Porter 2020

Michael Porter is a well known business analyst from Harvard. He and Ms Gehy collaborated on this, and you can hear them talking about how this came to be in this Podcast - which is where I first learned about it. Please note this originally aired in 2020!

https://freakonomics.com/podcast/americas-hidden-duopoly-ep-356-rebroadcast-2/

Duopoly

A duopoly is a strange beast. If two brands dominate a market, it is to their advantage to keep ALL other competitors out of the game. They will use all fhe means they can to cooperate and share a huge market, not allowing any potential rivals that might take some of their market share. Our two political parties are very much in that model. Their respective leaders do a great deal to keep any third party at bay, using our somewhat antiquated electoral system to their best advantage. The authors go into quite a bit of detail on how that works.

The authors also state that the current parties actually worked hard to create this mess. I think perhaps we just dumbed our way into it. But there is very little incentive in the two parties to make any change. Unless we can get some enlightened elected officials. This is where YOU come in.

Their recommendations on how to FIX this problem are fairly straightforward, and very doable. We just need a majority of Republicans and Democrats in each state to reach across the aisle, and make TWO changes to our state election systems. Easy enough, huh?

Reforms

Final Five voting in an open primary - not by party, top five vote getters go on to the final election.
Rank Choice Voting in the general election. This sounds complicated - it is not. Already in use: Alaska, Maine, New York City, Cambridge, MA, Minneapolis, MN, San Francisco, CA.

For a brief explantion of these in an animated fashion, watch this 6 minute video:

https://youtu.be/NE61lMiZV2k

The author's website, and more information: https://gehlporter.com/

The book also discusses other problems that we should address. Most of them were in a bill passed by the House on 03/03/2021. It never got a hearing in the Senate.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1

It would have done the following:

Expand voter registration - automatic, same day.
Expand voter access - vote by mail, early voting, limits to removing voters.
Redistricting by independent commission - gerrymandering gone.
Protect Election integrity with a national strategy.
Campaign finance reform - no foreign money, full disclosure of fundraising and spending, and alternative funding for some federal offices.
Ethics: Code of conduct for Supreme Court Justices, Members of congress cannot serve on any board of a for-profit entity, additional ethics rules for federal employees.
Disclosure: President, Vice President and candidates for those offices must disclose 10 years of tax returns..

Feel free to share this with your elected officials. PLEASE.

Of course, you are on a first name basis with them, aren't you? Give them a call and invite them for coffee. AND it would not hurt to make a small contribution to their election. Just saying . . .

Just discovered that you can get what appears to be an 80 page early version of the book at Harvard, by clicking on this LONG URL. Please:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hbs.edu%2Fcompetitiveness%2FDocuments%2Fwhy-competition-in-the-politics-industry-is-failing-america.pdf

The Devil's Highway by Luis Alberto Urrea - a book recommendation

2024-08-16T14:20:00.000-05:00

The Devil’s Highway by Luís Alberto Urrea

I was going to do this as a book review, recommending it to my “many” followers as a particularly telling and empathic explanation of what is wrong with our southern border. When I looked around a bit, I found this brilliant review in a legal journal. So . . . here below is a pointer to that.

I found the book disturbing, to say the least. The author describes the terrible ordeal of one group of migrants trying to cross the southern border. He then goes back to their origins - why on earth these men would even consider taking this dangerous trip. You feel for them and with them. They are literally just trying to make a life, just looking for a way to survive and get ahead a little.

The author gives an inside look at all of the agencies on both sides of the border, and how they are dealing with - or NOT dealing with - the problem. Plenty of blame here, some solutions. Fair warning - this is not for the faint of heart.

We need to spend more money on the border - more money paying for immigration judges and temporary shelters and assistance to all of those people trying to improve their lives. And we need a fair and equitable way for temporary workers to enter, earn a living, and go back home when they want. We need their labor and assistance, and they are clearly very willing to do it.

Enough said - download the full review with the link at the bottom and do read the book - be part of the solution. AND . . . thanks for that. We are all in this together and I am pulling for YOU.

One Quote:

The Devil’s Highway is the story of the 26 men who crossed into the deadly desert for a better life—the tragedy that the Border Patrol accurately called “Operation Broken Promise.”6 By sharing intimate details about the walkers’ lives, Urrea clearly wants his readers to empathize with them and understand why they risked their lives. Most of the walkers were from Veracruz, Mexico. Mostly, they were poor coffee farmers and factory workers. Some were indigenous and spoke Spanish as a second language. It is important to tell their stories.

Full Review

https://ggulawreview.com/2021/04/11/the-politics-of-stupidity-at-the-u-s-mexico-border-the-devils-highway-by-luis-alberto-urrea/

Abstract Source

https://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/ggu_law_review_blog/85/

Publication Date

4-11-2021

Abstract

A vivid, shocking, and provocative story about 26 “walkers”—migrating Mexican men who suffered and died in the Arizona desert on May 19, 2001—The Devil’s Highway is a profound work of nonfiction by Luís Alberto Urrea. Born in Tijuana to a Mexican father and an American mother, Urrea understands the contradictions and absurdities at the U.S.-Mexico border. While Urrea clearly wants the reader to learn about the walkers’ humanity and motivations to leave Mexico, he leaves it up to readers to arrive at their own conclusions about their coyotes and guides. Sometimes Urrea sympathizes with the walkers’ main guide, while in other instances, he paints him as the villain. When it comes to the Border Patrol, Urrea also focuses on their humanity. The Border Patrol agents are filled with “rage [at] the deaths of the illegals lured into the wasteland and then abandoned by their coyotes.” While it is gratifying to learn that the Border Patrol agents have a heart, Urrea falls short of painting the whole picture. Even a decade later after its publication, The Devil’s Highway is a must-read for everyone, particularly those in Congress who currently oppose any type of immigration reform and Americans who think immigrants do not pay taxes and come here solely to steal their jobs. And, for those who believe all immigrants are rapists and murderers, The Devil’s Highway is an important read that will inform otherwise.

Comments

This blog post is also available at:

https://ggulawreview.com/2021/04/11/the-politics-of-stupidity-at-the-u-s-mexico-border-the-devils-highway-by-luis-alberto-urrea/

Recommended Citation

Jansen, Valeria Ramos, "The Politics of Stupidity at the U.S.-Mexico Border: The Devil’s Highway by Luís Alberto Urrea" (2021). GGU Law Review Blog. 85.
https://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/ggu_law_review_blog/85

Hope For The Future

2024-06-11T14:29:00.089-05:00

Introduction

I have been writing a book for my grandchildren over the past decade or so. It is finally somewhat ready for "publication," and I have shared a link to it with all of them. I have no idea whether any of them have read it.

This is from the last chapter.

In the midst of all of this, reading and writing and paying attention - it sometimes seems overwhelming. As of the date I write this, 2024 06 11, we are facing the possibility of a nuclear winter over Ukraine and Russia, and the loss of our democracy with the “carrot topped” Republican narcissist being supported by his Republican toadies. I can understand that large portions of the populace are swept up in his tidal persuasiveness and fear of the “others.” But I cannot stand that the elected officials who should be above that are still bowing to his pressure to kill things like the border and immigration bill which would have funded enough border guards and judges to help FIX the problem. They are doing it to spite the Democrats, even if it means that a couple of million people are held in some terrible limbo. I CANNOT forgive them.

That said, I need a ray of hope, somewhere, from something. That is the purpose of this bit.

How we got here.

Let’s say it - LIFE is amazing. That there is any life at all in this vast universe of fire and stars and rocks and gas is just amazing. And that WE are here - living, sentient, intelligent beings that can grasp this, and can even attempt to move it forward - that is astounding.

AND YOU and I are here - alive. Thinking, breathing, loving - what a glorious privilege. Sheer chance, sheer luck. Thanks. Enjoy every minute of it. Make it last as long as you can. Live it as well as you can.

Genetics and Evolution

The gradual evolution of our genetics got us here. It continues to try to improve us, but the pace is very slow. And the goal of our genes is not very uplifting - they just want more of us, more, more, more. The improvements that happen are purely accidental. The ones that survive support us generating more of our kind and keeping them around long enough to generate some more of us. Nothing rational about that - but it does work.

BUT we are not slaves to our genes. They accidentally made us intelligent enough to be able to STOP and THINK about it - but that is NOT what we are tuned for - so we have to take a conscious effort to actually THINK. Our brain can process 10 million bits a second to keep us up and running, to hold on to information that will help us, etc. That is all purely automatic and unconscious. Those life and death decisions are ALL from our gut, our emotions, our endocrine, our hormones. NO thinking required. The thinking part of our brain has about a fifty bit bandwidth. And it uses up a lot of energy that the genes would rather have us save up for emergencies.

Learning to read, write, do math and think.
Thinking is something we have to learn, and work at, and improve. Mindfulness is a good first step as I have tried to point out in all of this ream of paper. Think about it this way: the vast majority of humans are born with the ability to lern a language - innately. But no one is born with the ability to read and write a language. No one is born with the ability to do any type of mathematics. We need to learn it.

Thinking is the same. The genetics got us to reproduce - but not to THINK. Thinking is something we must to learn. In my view, most of us have not yet figured it out. We respond, we react - we do NOT pause and think. It turns out that this is a whole lot of work. People who are adept at it spend hours and days learning to meditate, to be mindful, so they can develop a certain kind of metaconsciousness of their thinking. You cannot control your thinking - but you can be selective about what you pay attention to it. Provided you have put in the effort to learn how to do that.

The emotions of having a child, the emotions of being a grandparent are all wonderful. They are geared to have us procreate and populate.

But the emotions from poetry, and music, and fiction, and science - those are things we acquire and learn. The emotions of empathy and caring are somewhat automatic for our family, or our tribe. Beyond that, they are not automatic. We create them with stories and legends.

No one is born reading and writing. No one is born THINKING and holding good values. We have to create those and teach those. See next section.

Social Evolution
Evolution is a hit and miss and a bunch of gradual steps forward, and lots of failures. When we hit on something, like writing, it helps propagate us and move us forward. But it took us many thousands of years to get the writing thing from the elite priests and scribes down to the common person. And on occasion, we seem to forget that we need to TEACH our kids these things

Social values are the same. They do not arise naturally, any more than writing did. We stumble about and formulate some ideas using our fifty bits. We slowly learn that one approach is better than others - we formulate that as a moral principle, we encapsulate it in laws, and we try to enforce them. Slavery is a fine example. In ALL of human history prior to 1800, slavery was taken as a given. You lost the war, you were invaded, you are now our slave. We only know of a very few societies where slavery was considered unacceptable prior to 1850 or so. There were a few indigenous tribes in the Americas that held to that principle, despite the resistance of their neighbors. And this has nothing to do with race, and Africa and the Civil War. This was all of humankind.

The simple “right to life” is still debated in many parts of the planet. Prior to the British philosophers such as Locke and Hume, the lord, the master, the king could take anyone’s life for any pretext. Many countries still have that heuristic in place.

Personal property and ownership was another huge breakthrough for values. Freedom of speech is still being argued around the world. Freedom of assembly the same. The right to vote is still up for debate in most of our modern world. Ask anyone living in a developing country, a dictatorship, or even a RED state here in the grand old U.S.A. Belief in that basic principle is not that common.

The good news is that evolution at the social level will continue - provided we do not destroy the planet and ourselves in the process. Give us enough time, enough creative people, we will eventually figure out how this works. I am pretty sure that there are many books and treatises already published that have the exact steps and the exact details required to solve world hunger, poverty, injustice, and even global warming. We just need to figure out how to persuade the vast majority who are not really using their fifty bits.

AI Evolution
AND, lastly, this one. We have succeeded in making machines that are FASTER than we are in the fifty bits department for things like math, and reading, and writing, and research. We can use them to supplement our SLOW brains. I don’t know that we will ever get to the point that they can actually be creative and inventive, and hold to moral principles. Those things seem to require emotions and gut response - which seem almost impossible to replicate in silicon.

But they will assist our 50 bits to get some things done more quickly. There are problems that we can put them to which will help enormously. Weather is one. It is a complex mathematical puzzle, but there are identifiable PATTERNS in there that a really smart AI can identify better than we ever could.

I fearlessly predict that we will one day have the following scenario happen for every child entering preschool. AND, EVERY child will enter preschool. We really cannot wait until they are 5 years old to start teaching them to THINK. That is simply crazy. Every research study shows that early intervention and socializing and learning leads to much better outcomes for health and wellbeing and earning for all of life.

Preschool Scenario:

Every child is accompanied to a testing center at a really early age. This is some point after they have mastered the basic skill of understanding at least one language. You should be aware of the fact that most people outside of the Americas master 2 or more languages by age 2. They cannot avoid it when their town or tribe speaks one tongue, and their nation has adopted another one.

Before the test starts, the clinician takes a tiny drop of blood from a finger, and puts it into the DNA analysis port. The child is fitted with a set of goggles, much like the Apple Glass or VisionPro. They are shown some interesting and fun videos. As they are watching the videos, the device is carefully tracking and calibrating their eye movements. I am going to bet that the process may take an hour or two when we start, but that we will get it down to something like ten minutes after some practice. They will also have a sensor placed on their finger or wrist which also tracks things like heart rate, skin resistance, temperature, etc.

This may be coupled to an MRI scanner as we start doing these things, but that eventually will be replaced by the simple eye scan device.

The headset is removed, and the machine sends to the parents an electronic report in the form of various graphs or spectrums. We know that humans are all very different. Our brains, our genes, our history, our experiences are all different. When we look at things, videos, pictures, words, each of us actually see those things slightly differently. Our taste or smell is very different as well. Some of us love cilantro or kale, and others find it bitter or soap like.

Our emotional reaction to things is also very different. Each of these traits has a kind of bell curve. The majority of people for almost any trait fall in the broad middle range. A few fall out on both ends, lower and higher. The graphs will show about where this child falls in each of these realms. We can measure some things today, and we will rapidly learn to measure others - especially using our DNA as well as our eyesight response.

Of course our brains are also very plastic. With the right intention and assistance, we can move our point on that graph or spectrum in either direction. Normally, without some biological intervention, most of our measurable traits cannot be moved a great distance in either direction - but they can be moved. We are not forever stuck with the genetic propensity we were born with - just kind of constrained.

This gives us a starting point for this one person. Some skills rank higher or lower. Others are just different. For example, we have a fairly robust way of measuring the skill that people have in taking written tests - we call it IQ. It can be high or low, but most of us are in the middle. It is somewhat helpful to have a grasp of where we fall on the spectrum. Where you stand on any spectrum is useful information.

Our DNA spectrum is also helpful. If you have a clear propensity for heart disease, knowing that will provide you with additional courage to take the steps required to offset that fact. I do in fact have this propensity, and I am working on it. The risk of some other diseases like cancer and Alzheimers also seems to have a genetic basis. It is very helpful to know that early on.

We need a way to measure the other abilities and propensities that are part of us, from our DNA as well as our environment. I am thinking of a starter list of this type:

IQ.
We tend to treat the upper end of this spectrum as a positive thing, not an illness. But nothing about it tells us something good or bad about the individual - it just gives us a map of their propensity in this one narrow ability. It seems to measure the ability to take written tests or "logical" reasoning.
Emotional Intelligence.
We need a better spectrum for this rather than just up and down. This is a complex set of stuff, and different people have different strengths or weaknesses in it. Sometimes we use it to refer to “common sense.” Other times we are talking about control over our emotional state. Those are very different attributes.
Mathematics / Dyscalculia.
I have always maintained that I have “mathaphobia.” I just can’t get it. I can work around it, but there is nothing in me that does math. I also know that there is at least one other disability called Dyscalculia because I spent several weeks trying to help a third grader who clearly was suffering from this. His problem was much worse than mine. One of my grandsons seems to excel at this. It might have been helpful if he had been aware of that at a younger age.
Autism vs empathy.
We tend to think of just the one end of this scale, where we treat it as a problem. But it is a broad spectrum, and the other end might also be a problem - we just do not have a name for it. Some people are highly tuned by their physiology to recognize the empathic signals that we all send all the time. The most amazing thing I have learned of late is that there are methods for moving people on this spectrum toward the norm - for good or ill. Someone with Asperger’s may be a brilliant mathematician, but unable to detect that their partner has a concern or problem. There are exercises, and apparently brain stimulations that can “correct” this, but it may also remove the exceptional skill as well.
Psychopathy vs Super Feeling.
Today we treat psychopathy as some sort of problem. It is a spectrum of skill or ability. There are very “normal” people who are psychopaths. They do not share the empathic vibrations that the majority of us have. I trust that there are people on the other end of that spectrum that have them in spades - even to the point that they find it to be a problem. A psychopath who is raised in a supportive, caring environment can be a very productive member of our society. There is a reason that evolution included them in the mix. They tend to be more risk taking, adventurous and the like. We need a few of them to help us over that next ridge. See James Fallon, the Neuroscientist who discovered he was a psychopath.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/the-neuroscientist-who-discovered-he-was-a-psychopath-180947814/
We need a better name for this - “path” is from the Greek for suffering. Maybe PsychoLess / PsychoFull. AND in this one, I would put the LESS one to the left - just saying.
Learning Style.
This is not a left and right one - but a multiple choice. Some of us learn best by listening / auditory, some by visual / reading, some by talking / conversing, or physical / writing. There may be other styles as well.
Conservative / Progressive.
There is some genetic propensity in each of us on this spectrum. Scientists have already developed eye scans which can detect this. Watching a video, people tend to pay more attention to different parts of it depending on their propensity to be conservative or progressive. Let me be clear, both tendencies are in all of us - they are not good or bad - they just ARE. And they are not predictors - just propensities.
Independent / hierarchical.
We also differ on how much we need oversight and a strong leadership structure, or how much we favor independence or “freedom.” There is a fairly strong genetic component to this, which can be moved about by training and experience. We are still pretty plastic.
Analytical.
I am not clear on the two ends of this spectrum, but I know I am one of the analytical ones. I cannot see a problem or even a clock without wanting seriously to see how it works. My lovely wife could care less about how it does stuff inside. The same is true for most parts of our world. She is simply IN it, and I am trying to dismantle it.
Tribal / Individual.
We ARE tribal - some more than others. I seem to have less of this propensity than anyone I know - but that has not been formally measured as yet.
Individual / Collective.
I think there is some genetic proclivity to this, but there is a lot of social conditioning as well, as it changes radically in different cultures.
Gender.
This one clearly seems to be a much broader spectrum than we ever imagined. I am pretty sure it is mostly in the genes, and I do not think we actually have any way to measure it yet, but I am confident we will eventually figure that out.
Artistic / Spatial.
I KNOW this is a measurable skill or ability. One of my sons has it in spades. My wife has one that is totally different, and I seem bereft of the thing.
Conflict.
I am on the extreme spectrum of this one, and I do not think it is genetic. In my case, this is from my childhood conditioning. But one or my brothers seemed to end up on the other end of the same scale.
Critical Thinking.
I am pretty sure that NO ONE is born with great skill at this, and that it simply must be acquired through learning. We might be able to come up with a test to measure how good one is at it - but it is a learned skill - not an inborn talent. And it is indeed critical. Most of us make decisions from our uncritical gut, most of the time. We have to ramp this up to really make some progress.
OTHERS.
I am sure we will come up with a whole panoply of these. We will have to narrow it down to the ones that are really useful - meaning the ones where we can tailor the learning and education to best assist the individual.

Thanks! Love you all! I hold you all in my heart - forever!

The End of Race Politics a book review

2024-05-05T13:16:00.001-05:00

I know that this Blog is starting to look like a collection of book reviews, but I cannot resist sharing some of the things that I have found. If you want to know about ALL of the books I am reading, drop me a note. I keep a running list and notes on what I think about them. I have found that essential because I occasionally read the same book twice! Old Age I guess. My wife says that she can determine how close a friend you are if you tell her how many books I have suggested that you read.

I have been listening to a few podcasts by Sam Harris. He is a very bright guy, and he is interested in many things that strike me as of immense importance in this day and age. This one is an interview with Coleman Hughes, author of The End of Race Politics: Arguments for a Colorblind America. I found the book very insightful. It also totally changed my view of a couple of other books that I have read. You should be aware that the author is black, since that just might affect how you think about these comments - although it should not - and that is the VERY point he wants to make.

If you are of an oral learning sort, you might want to just listen to the podcast.

This is the fee-based version.

https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/353-race-reason

You can listen to a shorter free version here:

https://youtu.be/xQJq9nVSa4E?si=NWUpMH6QDG6Hwfvq

I highly recommend that. But, if you insist, here’s a few more words.

Neo-Racism

This book was significant for me because I almost went down the rabbit hole of “neo-racism” that he is describing. I read a fine book by Ibram X. Kendi, How to Be an Antiracist. I enjoyed the book. I think of myself as an AntiRacist. Kendi tells it in a kind of autobiographical story of how he overcame his own racism about his heritage. I empathized with his plight and made the journey with him.

But he ends up in a framework that actually advocates a new form of racism. The root idea is that our society and culture have racism as a systemic problem. To overcome this we need to take a more active role in suppressing “white power”- creating a whole new form of racism. This approach declares that all whites have inherent racial power, that they are evil, racist, and need to be cordoned off somehow because of their power over blacks. Blacks suffer “microaggressions” when questioned by Whites. Blacks need safe areas where they can avoid Whites. Whites that express concerns or tears about being charged as racists are imposing pain on their Black brethren - etc.

As noted by many others, these are the “trigger” words: “Critical Race Theory,” “White fragility,” “White Supremacy,” and “Systemic Racism.” Prior to reading the book, I thought that these were a bit over the top, but not dangerous. The author changed my mind, as this neo-racism seems to have had considerable inroads in the elite universities on both coasts. Some of the “diversity” programs in these institutions have been co-opted by these folk.

Our Family

One practice recommended by this movement is to separate grade school kids by race, and then have them discuss their power or lack thereof as a race. That sounds like a terrible idea. We raised children of mixed racial backgrounds, and when they were growing up, we NEVER talked about race. If someone approached them with a racial bias, we wanted them to think , “What is wrong with that person?” We had a few black friends, and friends with similar multi-racial families, and many Asian friends.

As they got older, we sometimes thought that we should have alerted them just a bit to the racism they might encounter - but it worked out. Once, my daughter was followed around a drug store by some idiot. She presented herself at the checkout and delivered her items, saying: “I was going to buy all of these, but since this idiot has been following me, I decided not to. Ask him to put them back where they belong.” My other daughter was hired by a firm to be a test case for discrimination. She would apply for an apartment, or shop for a new car. They would send in a young white girl with a similar background and credit history, and then my daughter. When I heard what she had to put up with, I wanted to pay a personal visit to those firms. The good thing is that the firms were actually paying for this research, and I am hopeful they took advantage of it.

On another occasion my daughter applied for a job at a local very well known coffee shop. She was told they were not hiring. Her good friend went the very same day and they gave her an application. It DOES still happen. I called the ACLU and they said that the problem was too widespread for them to do anything with a single case.

Color Blindness

The author advocates “color blindness.” We think our kids may actually operate this way intuitively since they were raised in a multiracial family and exposed to several others among our friends! Once when their grandfather was talking with them about our friend’s family, he asked them about their two boys. They had two sons - John and David. He asked them which one was which. The kids all chimed in - David is a bit larger and has curly hair, John is thinner and has straight hair - and things like that. In fact, the first thing that came to my mind was that John was Vietnamese and David was black - but they did not go there.

On another occasion, when four of our kids were all in high school, they came home and announced that our daughter had a “new boyfriend.” We knew that she had been dating a nice kid from a different school - and he happened to be white. The kids said, you would like him dad. He plays basketball and is from Chicago. I asked what his name was - they said “Calvin.” I can let you guess what went through my mind. They did not offer his racial heritage, and I would be damned if I would ask them.

I know I am not colorblind in any sense of the word. I see race and cultural differences ALL the time. I can FEEL my insides reacting to the race of everyone I meet, but I do my damndest to not ACT on that feeling - positive or negative! Skin color should be like hair color - interesting but not that important.

I am going to stop with that. The author does a much better job of explaining this than I can.

Some Quotes from the book

Page 35

The animating feeling behind this neo racism. Is that people of color or morally superior to white people – that people of color are better at being good people. That’s at the core. The truth, which should be obvious, is that no race is morally superior to any other.

Page 59 ff.

Many of our most celebrated anti-racist heroes believed reverse racism was real and was a cause for concern. Dr. King, for instance, said that "black supremacy would be equally evil as white supremacy," and that the cry “black power,” whether they mean it or not, falls on the ear as racism in reverse. Roy Wilkins, the executive director of the NAACP, was even more critical. He called the Black Power movement, "a reverse Mississippi, a reverse Hitler, a reverse Ku Klux Klan."

Think about how this principle applies in a domain like professional sports. Is anyone suspicious about 75 percent of NBA players being black? Does anyone accuse the NBA recruitment system of anti-white racism? No. Most people feel confident that the system is not racist. They feel confident that the system is broadly meritocratic. If it turns out that most of the best players are black, then so be it. People become suspicious of the results only when they suspect that there's unfairness in producing those results.

Imagine that we instituted a "racial equity" policy in the NBA, whereby the NBA had to be 13 percent black. We could achieve the racial equity for which people like Kendi advocate, but we would clearly have to discriminate against individual black players to get there. Racist processes can produce equal outcomes, and colorblind processes can produce unequal outcomes. In other words, there is a perfect dissociation between the fairness of a process and the equality of the result. So if you're going to accuse a system of being unfair, it's not enough simply to look at the outcomes. You need to look at the process that produced them.

You really should read the book. I will stop here and let you do that.

Thanks, as always. And remember, we are all in this together, and I’m pulling for you (Red Green)

Scheider’s Rules for Life Revised

2024-04-12T15:10:00.001-05:00

I originally posted this on my website in 1995 or so. You can still find the original there: https://sites.google.com/site/carlscheider/carls-papers/rules-of-thumb-for-life

I had developed these to give me a calmer approach to life. I tend to worry about everything, and try to figure out how to FIX it all. Looking at life with these rules gave me a little more realistic perspective. You have to kind of just let it go.

There is a lot of thinking behind these, and some good scientific research - but if I put all of that in here, no one would read the thing. I’ll be lucky if anyone ever reads it as it is.

Most of Us are not paying attention.

When someone is merging into your lane of traffic, do NOT count on them noticing that you are there in the lane. YOU have to do the avoidance thing, because they are generally NOT paying attention. If you are in a long queue, and someone else shows up, odds are that they will not notice where the end of the line is. You may have to point that out to them. People get wrapped up in things, they focus on one thing at a time -- it's a genetic survival technique. The male can locate food and find his way home. The female pays attention to the cave. There's no genetic preference active for traffic, queues, or reading notices! So don't get upset when folks around you don't seem to notice something -- that is the norm, not the exception.

A corollary for this is 'the world is run by those who show up'. If you want to make a change, go to the meeting -- or call the meeting! Most people don't.

UPDATE 2017.01.30. I wrote this decades ago, partly in jest. It struck me as true, that people are generally not paying attention, and it seemed simpler to just recognize that, rather than be disturbed by it. As it turns out, there is significant neurological research that supports it. 95% or more of what we do with our brain is an automatic reaction, which we are occasionally aware of, and mostly after the fact. See the book Incognito: The Secret Lives of the Brain. So we make almost all decisions with the FAST brain, not our SLOW brain. See Thinking, Fast and Slow. This is true for political and economic decisions as well. The only part of our society that is actually using this information is advertising! And we have a recent presidential campaign that offers obvious proof. The other amazing thing that we have discovered, is that it is actually possible for all of us to pay a bit more attention, and to make much better decisions, with the simple practice of daily "mindfulness." Nothing religious about it, nothing magical - it turns out that this is how our slow brain catches up. On that see: A Mindful Nation. I continue to have hope, and you should too.

Most of Us are conservative.

Most of us do not want things to change. This is the norm and it pretty much works. Just imagine that you walk into the bank to cash a check, and the bank teller decides to change the way he/she does accounts just for you. Not today, thank you!

And it's a genetic preference. Before we could read and write, when the knowledge of building houses was simply passed down, if you built a house, you had better do it the way they were always built. Otherwise, you ran the risk that it would fall down in the first rain storm, and you would catch a cold and die. People survived best doing it the way it was always done. Those innovators, the people who built a house that departs from the standard, ran great risk that their genes would not be passed down! So . . . when people resist change, get used to it -- that's the way most people operate.

2024 04 update. I still think this is true, and I have come to learn just how deeply seated it is. On that topic see my Blog entry: https://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2016/02/why-are-those-idiots-from-other.html. This is a review of Jonathan Haidt's book: The Righteous Mind. There is a lot of research on this.

For the genetic component, see Predisposed: Liberals, Conservatives, and the Biology of Political Differences by Hibbing John R. et al, and Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who We Are by Robert Plomin. Not good or bad - it just is.
One of the amazing things here is that this conservative / progressive predisposition also correlates with other things - like our sense of taste! Guess which one likes kale? Hmm? One thing it does not correlate with is our level of intelligence or education! And here I thought I had a good thing going.

We need meaning and purpose in life.

It's in our genes. Hominids with this dominated the others. The problem is that almost any meaning and purpose works, good or bad. And this rule also means that religion, all kinds of religion, will always be with us. Don't fight it, live with it and use it.

I think it is important to recognize that this has a genetic root, and it is not just our culture, history, or the persuasive power of the threats laid upon us by most religions trying to convert us!

In most cases, this need is fulfilled by some form of religious belief. The exact form varies widely, from the Buddhist approach of agnostic rules for life, to animism and Hinduism that find gods in everything, to the Jewish, Christian, Muslim preference for a single creator. But it is pretty clear that, despite the Enlightenment and the secular movement, religion as such is not going away any time soon.

These religious beliefs do provide meaning and purpose, but the variety is so great among them that they barely have a common thread. One might say that religion requires some belief in life after death, but that does not seem to be the case. Traditional Judaism and most Asian religions do not look for any reward for good deeds in some other life. Some of them talk about the dead, about ancestors, and about achieving "nirvana." But it doesn't sound much like the classic Christian paradise. And many primitive folk do just fine with religious tenets that involve no after life whatsoever.

But up-lifting goals that are not religious also work well with humankind. Hitler and Mussolini crafted goals that drove entire nations, without any semblance of a religious taint about them. Gandhi and Martin Luther King rallied thousands of people to a goal with no agreement on religious tenets. I can still remember President John Kennedy's inaugural address, and how it energized me. He lifted my sights, lifted my spirits, made me believe that we could do great things together.

Lately, our political leaders have been gathering followers by preaching fear and hatred of others, some others, almost any others - whether they be Al Qaeda or the Democrats or the Republicans or atheistic destroyers of marriage.

Let’s try the other approach? Lift up the best that is in us and push us forward with it. What about the common good? What about the good of all humankind? What about an uplifting goal that would make our lives worthwhile? For more on this, you might look at Religion for Atheists: A Non-believer's Guide to the Uses of Religion. The author has great ideas, but the implementation is going to take a bit of a worldview shift.

Most of us don’t read.

It's just not in the genes. For thousands of years, we handed down wisdom and knowledge through song and poem. If you could remember a rhyme and a meter, you could remember how to hunt the elephant. If you couldn't, you didn't eat! Pictures work, but stories are better! Books and reading are really recent in the evolutionary scale. And it is even more recent that someone could actually own a book! Even after Gutenberg, books were very rare and expensive.

The statistics are that 43 million Americans read at the 4th grade level, meaning they are functionally illiterate. Most people average 99 hours of reading in an entire year. Only 11% read the newspaper. It's not a problem with our education -- it's in our genes. Wikipedia has a bit of history on that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States.

Even when people do learn to read, most of them do not retain things that they read. They retain the oral version much better, and a video one best of all.

So - don't count on written notices to do anything. You need to stand up and say it, and it works even better if you can sing it! And if you want a really great career, get into story telling of some kind -- people just love to hear stories. Think movies, not books. And a visual experience is probably the only thing most of them retain - just look at TikTok for a few minutes!

Word of mouth works better than anything.

This is a corollary of “most people don't read.” If it is the "in" thing, the "cool" thing, it will move the product. The word gets around. It beats advertising every time. The trick is how you go about getting your product to be the latest “cool” thing. I think this is the power of celebrity endorsement and “influencers.” Most people are fans of sports and movies -- someone in that world can sway them better than the coolest print ad. Check out the "The Cluetrain Manifesto" on the web. https://www.cluetrain.com/book/index.html

This public relations guy figured out that he could make a lot more noise for his company if he just talked to people all the time, rather than sending them press releases and such. After a while, they started calling him because he was such an expert in the area.

Just remember how you found out about this! Since you are among the minority of readers, you found it written down right here. But most people will not. Remember the rule that most people don’t read.

Dictatorship is the norm.

Democracy is a thin veneer on top of humankind looking for hierarchy and order. We crave hierarchy. If it doesn't exist, we make it up. It takes a whole lot of social maturity and mutual trust for a democracy to survive. When the US was planning to invade Iraq and liberate them from their dictator, a friend of mine sent me a publication which recited all of the things that had been created or discovered in that small part of the world -- like writing, and the first legal code, the Code of Hamurrabi! This friend clearly felt that the dictatorship there must have destroyed the source of so many wonderful things. But the area known as Iraq has always been a dictatorship -- as far back as anyone can trace the history. In fact, almost every place was always a dictatorship. The Greeks and the Romans had a short fling at an oligarchy -- a democracy of the nobility -- but it didn't work out. People want and need strong leaders.

This representative government stuff is always just a step away from disappearing. When the founding fathers finished the constitution, the vast majority of them thought that George would be a king within 10 years -- but it was worth a shot. When Lincoln was elected the first time, he was not sure that the 100 year old democracy would survive his first term -- and this was before the Civil War. This is priceless stuff, and hard to keep intact. Don't take it for granted. And . . . don't try to push it on any culture that doesn't have the basics to support it -- it won't last. It's like trying to teach a pig to sing -- it wastes your time and it annoys the pig.

If the Iraqi people really want a democracy, they have to work on the basics -- we can't force it on them. That hasn't worked anywhere else on the planet -- with the possible exception of Japan! For an even more robust understanding of how geography and climate impact democracy as a possibility, watch the first part of this video https://youtu.be/0ao33aLssUU.

Selfishness is the norm.

We all start selfish, and it's hard to let it go. It works! Don't be surprised by it. When some altruism appears, just be grateful. Most people support their family, but it takes a fairly sophisticated society to support anything beyond thatl. Getting to the level of the nation is a really big step -- most parts of the world have not achieved it to any degree.
If you want people to get motivated about something, you have to appeal to their selfish interests. It's only as a person or a society matures and gets beyond survival that they can cast a little wider area of concern, and actually consider their city, and, after a lot of maturity, their country. It will be a very long time before most people on the planet actually care about the planet itself. We are still working on this inter-dependency thing.
Why do you think capitalism succeeds so well? It's based on a modestly expanded selfishness. According to these anthropologists, The WEIRDest People in the World: How the West Became Psychologically Peculiar and Particularly Prosperous the reason the WEST achieved capitalism and expanded economic development was that the Church persuaded people that they had to expand beyond the insular family circle of trusted friends. It had to do with NOT marrying your cousin. If you do business in most parts of Asia, a trusted relationship is more important than price. It is not ethical to bid on price alone.

Most of us are corrupt.

This is a corollary of the selfish rule. We are tribal, focused on ours, our family and tribe. Again, this is genetic. It works well - xenophobia is the normal state of affairs. We protect our own for survival. Altruists didn't pass on the gene.
In the so-called "civilized" western world, we voice principles that sound like honesty and integrity. It gives us a reason to be upset when we catch people taking bribes, misstating financial results, ripping off their corporations for millions of dollars, etc.
The reason is that we have discovered that, for a truly complex economy to survive, we do need each other at some level. We have to have a market that we can actually trust. The value of our currency is based purely on trust. Most business deals go down with only a handshake. So we keep working on it, but you shouldn't be surprised when someone is caught with their hand in the till. In the rest of the world, outside of North America and Europe, everyone knows that everyone else is on the take -- that's why capitalism struggles there. Heck, it is barely making it here. And as for the trust required for democracy, forget it. Trust, but verify! ALWAYS.

Poverty has always been the norm, and still is.

Us folk in the Western World are living in Disneyland. If the rest of humankind really understood how good we have it compared to them, they would be invading our borders. But, wait, they are doing just that!

There's an important corollary to this one: crime is the norm where poverty is the norm. This is a little complicated, because poverty is not just low income, but the perception of being poor in an affluent economy where you are excluded. Our sociologists / criminologists know this. If we want to reduce crime, we must reduce poverty. It is actually cheaper to create good paying jobs for people than to build prisons and hire police officers. As the gap in our society from top to bottom gets relentlessly larger, we can only expect that crime will continue to increase.

The best theory that explains this is that we have raised this wonderful ideal -- the American dream -- and then made it virtually impossible for many of us to attain it. Those with NO shot at it, get it any way they can.

One good step would be to raise the minimum wage so that anyone with a job can afford food AND housing. The concern there is that it will cost us all more money. That may be so in the short run, but it will save millions when it reduces crime, improves school performance for all those kids in poverty, and drives the economy with all of those working folks able to buy the things that they produce. This is a consumer economy. That means that most of the things that drive it are things that we really don't need. You can't sell things people really don't need when they have low paying jobs and are afraid of losing those. They have to FEEL affluent. We CAN pick ourselves up by our bootstraps -- we just have to make sure that we pick up MOST of us.
But then there's that selfish thing!

Another way would be for a guaranteed job at that minimum wage. It would also solve the self respect problem of being unemployed. And it would pay for itself, easily. For a lot more on that, see Stephanie Kelton on MMT here: https://youtu.be/FATQ0Yf0Fhc

10. You can't persuade anyone of anything they don't already believe.

I used to think differently on this - so I had lots of arguments or “discussions" with people. Life is much simpler now. I really don't need to "kill Santa Claus," or change the social order! The only hope for change (see rule #2) is a generational one. Go after the kids! Why do you think Head Start is such a success?

This rule was brought home to me one day when I was discussing evolution with a friend who is of the more fundamentalist persuasion about the Bible. I was asking how he could ignore all the evidence about evolution, and he brought me up short with this: "If I can believe that someone created this whole universe in a single stroke, don't you think I could believe that this entity could make it appear to be billions of years old?" Got me there. I give up.

Religion and politics are the worst here, of course, but there are plenty of other beliefs out there that are held with great fervor. You see, people need meaning and purpose in their lives in order to survive. If you threaten what gives them a solid foundation, they will resist with great emotion - not reason, mind you - emotion. There is no way to reason with someone about a belief or principle that they did not arrive at by means of reason. You just cannot argue with someone's emotions!

If we don't see a meaningful religion, a meaningful goal in life, we make them up. When someone presents one that promises happiness, now or later, we are sorely tempted to adopt it. Charismatic leaders understand this -- they speak to our needs, not to our best interests. If you have never heard of Heaven’s Gate, give the documentary a few minutes of your time.
Heaven's Gate: The Cult of Cults https://youtu.be/0IhQPUH-FhA. https://www.amazon.com/Heavens-Gate-Cult-Cults-Season/dp/B0B8T6KRTG .

After a decade of reading neuroscience, this one has become even more clear. We actually do not THINK - we mostly FEEL. Our brain is driven by chemicals that make us FEEL things - not think things. Cognitive thinking, the kind required to do math and make critical decisions is rare - and the vast majority of us rarely accomplish it. If you don’t believe me, look at these two fine texts by Lisa Feldman Barret: How Emotions Are Made: The Secret Life of the Brain, and Seven And A Half Lessons About The Brain. Ideas are a cultural construct - we FEEL our way through life. Stop and think about it - get my point?

11. Conspiracy theories presume way too much intelligence in world 'leaders'.

They are not that smart! I've met a few -- most of them are just a tad above average intelligence, and usually short-changed on the practical side. No one is behind the scenes moving the levers -- it looks like a mess because that's just the way it is. Just look at the conspiracies that have actually come to light through the stupidity of the people running the show. They got away with it for a while, but they left big footprints -- think Iran / Contra, Enron, Tyco. These are NOT smart people!

12. Most people are black and white thinkers.

Most people are black and white thinkers -- they don't get the complex issues. This seems to come from a biological imperative to divide everything up into 2 camps. Edward O. Wilson (On Human Nature, 1978, p. 72) says we have a tendency to "dichotomize" -- to separate everything into 2 camps -- them and us, good and bad, friend or foe. It seems to be a genetic propensity for making quick survival decisions. But it leaks over into all kinds of things. These are called “heuristics'' - quick rules of thumb. Our brain takes these shortcuts to act quickly, and to save energy.

Patriotism, support of the current government, tends to be one of them. When we have a sense that our way of life is at stake, we divide into 2 camps. If you think we should be doing something different here, you are un-American. If you are upset that American corporations are ripping us off for billions, you don't support the American entrepreneurial way. The FBI has a list, and you are on it, my friend.

Humans are so complicated and messy that there are NO easy solutions. It takes more time and more money and more energy than anyone wants to expend to really solve human problems. I talk to my elected officials about the downstream effects of cutting social programs -- they cannot get their brains any further out than the next election. Honest. If it doesn't happen in the next 2 years, it does not exist!

13. We are a violent species, especially the male half.

95% of the people in jail for violent crime are men. The US is the most violent place on the planet. Of the developed countries, our murder and violence rate are number 1. You have to go to Somalia to live more dangerously -- of course, it is REALLY bad there!

ANDit is in the genes. That testosterone generates the energy to defend one's turf, and it does a wonderful job. As societies get more complex, as we gather into tribes and villages, controlling that tendency to murder each other is a major part of our social cost.

I'm convinced that professional football is a plot to reduce violent attacks by males on each other. For that period of Sunday, and now extended to Monday nights, and even to Thursday, watching those huge guys pound on each other keeps the audience from doing the same to their neighbors. We will have attained an amazing level of civility when we actually ban football as too dangerous for our kids’ brains.

I would also count it a significant step forward when we charge people with abuse who beat a child with anything, including their hand. That early lesson in respect and human interaction lays a strong foundation in our kids that violence is a basic rule of life. Verbal abuse can be just as damaging and should be banned as well -- at least toward children.

Over the years, I have had numerous occasions to observe Vietnamese friends of mine and how they deal with their children. They are always quiet, respectful and patient. They also always have high standards and goals. Those kids have done amazingly well, and I have never seen them raise their voice to them, let alone their hand.

14. Never pay retail - you can always find it on sale.

A bit frivolous, but important. This is especially true in many stores that cycle SOMETHING on sale every week, and off the next. Ask Ron Johnson, the former CEO of JC Penney whether a plain low price policy will work. And look at Kohl’s for the absolute epitome of always on sale, discount, coupons, etc.

15. It's never as easy as it looks!

You know how this works. You have this little project to do. It'll only take an hour or so. But then, there is this, and that, and I need a tool, and one thing leads to another and it takes the whole day. I've learned never to start ANY project that involves plumbing except early on Saturday morning, so I can be sure the hardware will be open when I need it! AND I have 2 days to finish the blessed thing, or get expert help on Monday.

16. You are never going to beat the squirrels - give it up.

They have nothing else to do but figure out how to get into your bird feeder.
2024 04 I have to revise this one. I got a Droll Yankees feeder. The squirrels might try it twice, but never again.

17. Law of 'Sociality' - yes, I know it's not a word - yet!

We are social beings, and our economic, social, and political health depend on each other in profound ways! We do not seem to really understand this at the grass roots level, as we are all normally swamped by that selfish stuff -- but once in a great while, it surfaces. When we thrive, we thrive together. When we fail, it is because we have ignored the weakest among us, we have not made room for them at the table, and we have fallen down as a society.

What we really need is a bit more research here. When those psychologists discover that 65% of us are selfish and keep those rewards to ourselves (at least in the WEIRD world of western culture), what they should be doing is looking at the 35% who have the altruistic tendency, and figure out WHY those folks are different. What is the genetics, the childhood care, education, and peer influence that created those folk? How do we propagate that to the rest of humankind? As the great Canadian Philosopher Red Green put it, “I’m pulling for you, We’re all in this together.”

18. There is always hope.

People continue to aspire for resurrection, civilization, integrity, altruism, man for others - we do seem to hope to move forward!

Post-note.

We are the product of genetic evolution from tougher times. Things are very different today, and moving much more quickly - too fast for the genetics to adapt. I believe that we are more than our genes, and we can change*. The next level of evolution is social / political, provided we can avoid destroying the planet. My point is that it's an uphill battle! The genes got us here - we have to take the next step. See: The Robot's Rebellion: Finding Meaning in the Age of Darwin by Keith E. Stanovich. The selfish genes are not in control of us completely, counter to Richard Dawkins’ book. Don't get discouraged.

* Another Red Green quote: “I’m a man, but I can change. If I have to. I guess.”

Behavioral Economics History and The Power of Fifty Bits

2024-03-06T12:08:00.000-06:00

Someone pointed me to Daniel Kahneman and Thinking Fast and Slow quite some time ago. That led me to Richard Thayer, and Behavioral Economics, and a pile of books and research explaining how “irrational” we humans are. These folk changed the “science” of economics forever.

NOW, February 2024, there is a podcast that has interviewed all of the actual players in this drama.

This includes a couple of Nobel Prize winners for Economics, who discovered that the conventional ideas of the classical economists are fundamentally flawed. Humans are NOT rational. Barely at all. I have been working on the theory that we are 95% automatic - it turns out it is more like 99% - but that’s another problem.

If you are interested, here are the references.

https://ridiculous-podcast.com/ The first one here is a trailer or preview. It might persuade you to listen for more.

OR on your podcast tool:

Opinion Science Podcast - https://opinionsciencepodcast.com/

Apple podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/opinion-science/id1506227206

As Kahneman discovered, people do not actually make very good decisions. Most of what we do are nearly automatic responses to our history and our world. We use quick rules of thumb or gut reactions for almost everything we do. We might intellectually KNOW something we should be doing, but actually doing it is just not going to happen. And in most cases, we really have no idea why we are choosing what we do - it is the product of our genetics, our family, our education, our exposure to various ideas and influences. We are hardly even aware of all of the influencers that are operating on us. One of their early experiments would show people the pictures of candidates running for an elective office, and ask them to guess who won. People can guess who won that election with 70% accuracy just looking at the pictures.

So . . . one half of us look at the other extreme group, and say - “What is wrong with those people?” But this is the norm - we ALL do this almost ALL of the time.

If you want to actually move beyond this, and figure out how to actually help people and yourself make better decisions in our own best interests, this next book is my best reference:

The Power of Fifty Bits: The New Science of Turning Good Intentions into Positive Result

AND you can get a Kindle copy at amazon right now for $2.00. Heck of a deal.

This author was the chief scientist at Express Scripts. He spent a lot of time and energy trying to assist customers to make better health decisions. He looked at the science and research of decision making, and came up with a systematic way to accomplish his goal. I have only started the book, so I will have to come back here and give a better summary - but I could not pass up this opportunity to alert the many happy subscribers to this blog about this opportunity. The book is very well written, with wisdom and humor. Check it out.

(I think there are may be 6 subscribers in total, and I know most of you wonder what the heck is going on here, but . . . It is starting to look more like a book club. )

This is the book summary from Amazon:

Going beyond the bestsellers Predictably Irrational and Thinking, Fast and Slow, the first “how to” guide that shows you how to help customers, employees, coworkers, and clients make better choices to get what they truly want.

Of the ten million bits of information our brains process each second, only fifty bits are devoted to conscious thought. Because our brains are wired to be inattentive, we often choose without thinking, acting against our own interests—what we truly want. As the former Chief Scientist of Express Scripts, a Fortune 25 healthcare company dedicated to making the use of prescription medications safer and more affordable, Bob Nease is an expert on applying behavioral sciences to health care. Now, he applies his knowledge to the wider world, providing important practical solutions marketers, human resources professionals, teachers, and even parents can use to improve the behavior of others around them, and get the positive results they want.

Nease offers a set of powerful and effective strategies to change behavior, including:

Require Choice—compel people to deliberately choose among options
Lock in Good Intentions—allow people to make decisions today about choices they will face in the future
Let It Ride—set the default to the desired option and let people opt out if they wish
Get in the Flow—go to where peoples’ attention is likely to be naturally
Reframe the Choices—set the framework people use to consider options and choices
Piggyback It—connect the desired choice or behavior with something they already like or are engaged in
Simplify . . . Wisely—make right choices frictionless and easy, make wrong choices more difficult
And more.

Into the Magic Shop by James R Doty - a Book Review

2024-01-17T14:13:00.002-06:00

This is a gem of a book, a great read, and a wonderful way to introduce someone to the practice of mindfulness. I just had to share it.

Into the Magic Shop: A Neurosurgeon's Quest to Discover the Mysteries of the Brain and the Secrets of the Heart by James R Doty, MD.

Sam Harris had the author on his podcast, which is pretty much reproduced in this video on YouTube. https://youtu.be/aBhYTxmfsMg?si=jR-nEVbWFns0Y2lN

Spend a few minutes with that, and then go get the book.

The book is very well done. It’s in the first person, and very descriptive and emotional - he is a great story teller. I know a fair amount about meditation - I spent 13 years doing it on a very regular basis, and I have learned a bit since then. I have also tried to share the practice with my grandkids via some written materials. I found that this book adds some new dimensions. He introduces you to it in story form, with a kind of a step by step process. I feel like I have a much clearer understanding of how it works from this narrative description, as opposed to scientific brain wave evaluations.

He is particularly effective in the “compassion” level of meditation. This is where you learn to reach out and “wish others well” all the time. I stumbled onto that through a whole different approach, but it is the MOST important part of this whole business. And a note to my grandkids - he says this much better than I did.

He also provides short videos on YouTube that do the same teaching exercise.

Here is the first one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGT32RpNhEo

If you want to change your own life in profound ways, and that of someone else - read the book.

Let me know how that goes! Thanks.

If you are more focused on verbal learning, this is his talk at Google. He also expands a bit on the historical events.

https://youtu.be/4OH02vzMEWg?si=bOE5FbQMHlWsjwAo

When you watch it, do listen to the question portion as well. There are some real gifts in there.

Page 268 My Religion - quote

Like the Dalai Lama, my religion is kindness. It is a religion that doesn’t require a god who sits in judgment or lengthy dogmatic texts. It is also a religion that doesn’t allow for anyone to feel superior to another and requires us to accept that we are all equal. This religion inspired me to research how compassion and kindness are critical to one’s mental and physical health and longevity.

Peter Ziehan - geopolitical commentator - an amazing insight into our world.

2023-10-28T07:37:00.001-05:00

Peter Ziehan Blog Post

Just start with the first link here - or take a minute to read my introduction below.

https://youtu.be/N4w0g-apV2o?si=Qun-TyajzMsJWQv0 Interview

https://zeihan.com/newsletter/ - Newsletter

https://zeihan.com/

I Have a Gem To Share

I feel like I just found a priceless gem that I need to share. It’s not a shiny stone in a field - it is a commentator, a political economic social theorist, who just dragged me through an amazing set of ideas, evaluations and predictions, that pretty much upset most of what I have been thinking about things for a decade or so.

I am publishing this as a blog entry, and I am also sharing it with a short list of friends, who happen to NOT be subscribers to my blog. To be frank, there are probably only 10 people on the planet who have ever read anything I publish. But writing helps me to think about things. I appreciate your forbearance with my attempts. If I were you, I would spend more time finding folk like Mr. Ziehan rather than reading this thing.

Background - Society as a Problem

I have been puzzling about the state of the world for some time now. The last two presidential elections taught me that I had no idea what the heck is actually going on. I have been reading focused on the science - economics, psychology, sociology, neuroscience, public media - stuff like that. I think I understand it all a little bit better, thanks to a pile of books and to the insights of good friends. I have also read some commentators - people who gather up research and ideas of others - journalists, authors, columnists. I have found some of them helpful, but most of them are just well intentioned searchers like me.

Peter Ziehan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Zeihan

Then a friend sent me a reference to this gentleman. He gave me a little background, and I jumped right into the above hour long interview with him that knocked my socks off. If you want to share that experience, go back up and have at it. I learned more about where we are, how we got here, and where we are likely going as a world than I have learned in the past decade of reading.

He has a remarkably wide and deep perspective on history, economics, life, politics and everything. He does not fit in any of my normal categories - conservative, liberal, progressive, etc. He says he is fiscally conservative - which is fine by me.

He makes short and long term predictions about our world that I found to be compelling, given the little I know where I could evaluate that. As I was listening to it, it moved me to thinking about the people involved in these decisions for our country and military. This is truly scary business. Idealistic hopes like mine have no real place there. I hope many of them have some of this same insight and perspective. I do not see how they can get through the day with this kind of problem facing them every minute.

Issues Addressed

This introduction is already overly long, but if you have an interest in any of these issues, he has a unique perspective on them. Some of them were comforting to me, but many of them are scary - like the likelihood of a nuclear event.

Israel - why Biden decided as he did. The positions of the other countries in that area.
Ukraine - economic, social, implications and outcome.
Putin - the real threat of a nuclear option.
China - the current state of the government, and the future - which is NOT positive.
US Congress - political party fall out in the next two election cycles.
Presidential race - assuming that both likely candidates survive long enough to stand for election.
AI Weapons - how the US military is preparing for these.
Drone Flocks - lessons learned in Ukraine.
Population Trends - Immigration. It feels like the US and Canada, Australia, New Zealand are uniquely positioned to benefit from this, while countries like Germany face serious problems. Building a wall? Really?

Conclusion

I am going to listen to it a second time.

Let me know what you think. There are comments on the blog, if that would work.

SHare this if you think it is helpful.

AND . . . just tell me to take you off the list if this is annoying.

Thanks.

Other Resources:

https://zeihan.com/interviews-and-podcasts/

https://rss.com/podcasts/zeihan/

Welcome to The Peter Zeihan Podcast Series! Geopolitical Strategist Peter Zeihan is a global energy, demographic and security expert. If you want to stay informed on the realities of geography and populations, you've come to the right place. Zeihan's worldview offers insights into how global politics impact markets and economic trends, helping industry leaders navigate today’s complex mix of geopolitical risks and opportunities. Expect a forward-looking approach to what will drive tomorrow’s headlines, delivered in digestible, accessible and relevant takeaways for audiences of all types. For more info or to subscribe to the newsletter, visit: zeihan.com Subscribe to the YouTube Channel @zeihanongeopolitics Thanks for listening, and don't forget to subscribe!

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/284-peter-zeihan-explains-the-geopolitical-landscape/id1434060078?i=1000473248432

Peter Zeihan is a geopolitical strategist, author, and speaker who specializes in global energy, demographics and security. He analyzes the realities of geography and populations to deepen the understanding of how global politics impact markets and economic trends.

In this conversation, we discuss how demographics drive economies, why consumption led growth will become impossible, what is happening in the oil markets, why Peter believes China won't be a unified or industrialized country in a decade, how a virus can lead to famine, and what is happening in various places around the world.

REVISION 2023 11 03

Here is a helpful comment from a decent book review:

Essentially, The End of the World is Just the Beginning predicts the imminent, rapid, catastrophic reversal of globalization, and the economic and geopolitical hardship and chaos that will result. It’s an incredibly bold, incredibly extreme prediction. In my assessment, it will probably end up being mostly wrong. Three or four decades from now, I predict, we will not find our world shattered into a pastiche of isolated regional economies, separated by oceans full of pirates and marauding neocolonialist empires. Nor will we see the collapse of global food trade cause a massive die-back of the human population. Europe will not recolonize Africa and battle it out with an imperialist Nigeria for regional hegemony and so on. These are all things that Zeihan forecasts, and I predict that very few of them will come to pass.

https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/book-review-the-end-of-the-world

YEP - the book is wild - but amazingly informed. We can only hope that the U.S. does NOT withdraw into its own shell and stop policing trade and the like. BUT . . . his read on this is as good as any I have seen - just more far out. Worth a read.

Psychedelics and Critical Learning Periods Wired Magazine

2023-08-22T17:51:00.001-05:00

https://www.wired.com/story/the-psychedelic-scientist-who-sends-brains-back-to-childhood/

Sorry about this one. I just read this amazing article in Wired, and I just had to capture what it meant. So . . . a blog entry as a magazine article review. Sorry about that. Please just ignore it if it is outside of your interests. Thanks for your forbearance.

Read The Article

The author does a masterful job of weaving personal reflection and insight into this discovery. Go read it now, and then come back here and see if this resonates with you.

Critical Learning Periods

Research indicates that humans have a very few critical learning periods, when our brain is tuned to learn new things. Young childhood is clearly one of them. Neuroscientist Gül Dölen may have found a way to open up critical learning spaces in our adult brains using psychedelic drugs. If this proves to work, it can be used for all manner of therapy and learning opportunities. A few examples:

Length of learning window. The initial research seems to indicate that this “learning window” or “critical period” is not just during the actual drug experience, but it endures for some longer period of time.
Languages - we know young children’s brains are tuned to learn languages. If this therapy can reopen that critical learning period, it would be very helpful for adult learning of all kinds.
Personality Disorders - this is not cited in the article, but it is well document that if young children do not have a caring adult in their lives before age two, they frequently have a personality disorder, which relates to their relationships with other people. They seem to miss acquiring the cues of empathy and how people form relationships. This might offer those individuals a new lease on life.
Stroke - after a stroke, the brain trauma seems to open a brief window when the victim can regain the use of the damaged brain function, if they do so within a very narrow window of time. This therapy could open a much longer window.
Addictive Behavior. The use of psychedelics in a carefully conducted coaching session seems to be effective for many people to help cure addictive behavior. It raises their awareness and sense of values to a higher level, where they see and feel the addictive behavior as a problem they can resolve.
Risk of abuse. As with any treatment the risk of misuse for this type of intervention is very high. It is possible that some of the “strong leaders” of cult behavior actually understood this and used substances to encourage their flock to be more easily persuaded about their world views.
Autism. This problem might be the result of some failed biology at an early age. One researcher had identified a compound that should have assisted autistic individuals to overcome some of the problem, but it did not work. The thought now is that the compound might work if the person can be reset to the critical learning point for this problem.

More Detailed

Critical Learning Periods

It is well documented by now that young children have a unique ability to acquire some skills early in life, and that this ability fades with time. The brain in the young child is tuned for these tasks, such as learning to communicate with language. We learn to walk, and see and hear, and to bond with other people. Those are all acquired skills! When that has been accomplished, the brain removes all of that capacity and gets on with a more efficient mode of operating for adult life. The number of neurons actually changes as a result.

Critical periods are well known to neuroscientists and ethologists, because they lay the groundwork for a creature’s behavior. They are finite windows of time, ranging from days to years, when the brain is especially impressionable and open to learning.

Just so, young birds are uniquely equipped to learn the song of their species at birth, so that they can participate in their species mating and other rituals.

As the article points out, many other things about humans are learned in these early years. This would include basic values about human empathy and ethics, perfect pitch, etc.

We also know that a serious investment in meditation or mindfulness can reap great rewards in changing one’s values, motivation, happiness and fundamental view of life. Some neuroscientists have been experimenting with psychedelics as a shortcut to accomplishing these same objectives.

Social Reward Experiment

There is a well established experiment where mice are exposed to a stimulating chemical and exposed to a certain type of bedding. When the chemical is withdrawn, they continue to prefer that type of bedding - it provides some reward to their brains. There does not appear to be a critical period for this cocaine reward. But if you move the mice from cocaine to socializing with other mice the bonding only occurs when the mice are young. An adult mouse is not open to this socializing conditioning.

The same thing was proven with octopuses, which are notoriously anti-social. Getting them accustomed to socialization at a very young age also tuned them to see that as a pleasurable experience. (If you want a unique experience about an octopus, watch this movie: My Octopus Teacher. We sentient animals are all priceless.)

Young mice—especially adolescent ones—strongly preferred hanging out on the bedding they associated with their friends. The adult mice didn’t seem to give a damn about the composition of their bed. They weren’t connecting it to the pleasures of company. The younger mice, in their highly impressionable state, were. “The social world is something that you learn, just like the visual or olfactory world,” Dölen explains.

But if you give the adult mice a bit of MDMA, they are just like the younger mice in learning this pleasurable connection. It turns out that many drugs have that same effect on adult mice - but NOT cocaine!

Those contextual details explain why most people with PTSD are not miraculously cured after partying all night at an MDMA-fueled rave, but why, in the supportive environment of a therapist’s office, the same drug permits them to undertake the cognitive reappraisal needed to heal. It also tantalizingly suggests that different critical periods could be opened—not just for PTSD, but for stroke, vision or hearing correction, or acquiring a new language or skill, or any number of other things—simply by changing what a person is doing while on the drug.

This phenomenon is not just at the level of the brain’s neurons, but it extends down to the level of gene expression.

Strokes

Stroke patients have only a short window of time in which they can regain even some of what they’ve lost. Immediately after a stroke, a critical period naturally opens—and then closes some months later. No one knows why this is, but Dölen has a hunch: Just as pandemic-era isolation caused a “radical destabilization” of the social world, a stroke causes a radical destabilization of a sufferer’s motor world. That person’s motor cortex is no longer receiving information from their muscles. So a sudden change in the motor world—a stroke—could fling open a critical period for motor skills. Dölen thinks that these naturally occurring critical periods are the brain’s way of trying to adapt to profound, existential change.

Downsides

As with any new therapies, there may be potential downsides from this kind of prolonged new critical learning period. That is for future research.

Race and Transgender

2023-08-22T17:21:00.000-05:00

Writing

It has taken me some time to figure out how this “writing” stuff works. I am pretty good with the English language - but not as good as a ChatBot. And there is a Google one sitting on this very page as I write, offering to help me. Thanks, Buddy, but not this time.

Generally I get an idea from somewhere - and I don’t want to lose it. I want to develop it, and ultimately, to share it. The ideas do not show up fully formed. They ruminate around in there a bit, before the AHA moment, or the “That’s It” hits me. The way our brain works, unless I do something concrete with that - like write it down - they just disappear into that miasma of my stream of consciousness.

Mindfulness helps, as I’ve said more than once in this blog. On occasion, one of the distractions that my attempt at Transcendental Meditation hits is an old idea that comes back to haunt me. I slide it away, as I have been trying to do for decades, but there is this little trace of it left. If I am lucky, the next time I sit down to write - it will reappear.

A ToDo list also helps. I have one just for “writing.” If I am listening to a podcast, visiting with a friend, watching a TV show and that GREAT idea pops up, I try to capture the essence of it in the writing todo list. And then I try to translate that scribble later.

Article on MN Transgender Care

To the topic of this piece - Race and Transgender. There was a piece in a recent local newspaper, The Pioneer Press about the number of young people and their parents that are coming to MN for transgender care and therapy, because it is banned in other states. They are overwhelming our providers.

https://www.twincities.com/2023/08/15/mn-states-transgender-health-care-demand/

In many states, it is now illegal to treat minor children who are transgender. As Jude and I were both reading the article this morning, my lovely wife commented that she thinks of this problem as similar to abortion. She means that it is HER body, and she should be the only person to decide what kind of care or intervention it needs. Transgender is very similar in that respect. The government and people with minority religious belief systems should not be able to dictate that level of care. But the issue is complicated if the patient is a minor, and their parents must somehow be engaged in the discussion. I made some other comments about that, which I will share below - and she carried it to the RACE issue. That got my attention.

Writing Preamble

Another thing I have only recently learned. A very well crafted story or article often starts quite a distance away from the actual topic. The author starts with a story - amazing. The story entices you in - you want to see where it is going. The story ends up in a place that lets the writer introduce a really new idea. You are prepared to listen to it because of the preamble. My propensity has always been - get to the point right away. Say it as briefly and clearly as you can. And then maybe come back and flesh it out a bit. I think that comes from a business writing class that I took. The primary message of that class was: Say It In One Page. I wrote a summary of that class for the senior staff of our division - which was on one page! AND I have just subjected you to an overly long preamble to this whole idea. Sorry about that. Let me know which way it cuts - good or bad. Thanks.

Transgender Care

As we were talking about the article on transgender medical care, I voiced my opinion to Jude that I think the whole idea that these young people need to do anything to their bodies is just terrible. We know that gender is not black and white - either / or. It is really a spectrum, with the majority of us in the middle where we identify as male or female. But a some of us, 5% or so, simply do not have that majority self image. And there are many who do not have a “normal” body.

It may not conform to the norm, but it is THEIR body, and it probably functions just fine as a human organism. Why on earth should the feel compelled to change it? Because some of us think they are “not normal?” I think it is criminal that these young people even think they need to physically alter their body just to fit into our biased world. We need to educate them and ourselves that any creative combination of gender or sex or whatever you want to call it is just fine. If it proves to be a physical handicap, like a missing limb or something, then I think surgery and adaptive technology would be great. But it scares me that a very capable person feels they must alter the physical appearance of their body just to make other people think they fit in.

Let’s do it the other way around. Let’s help them understand that they are such a priceless and unique individual, that we want them to just remain who and what they are. They should not do physical violence to a perfectly functioning physical body because of social prejudice. That seems crazy to me.

Race and Transgender Care

This is where Jude drew the “race card” on me. She pointed out that we did exactly that with the racial blend of our family. We formally decided that we were simply going to ignore the idiocy of racism with our children. We never discussed it, we never pointed it out - we did our best to ignore the idiocy of our larger society.

And how did that turn out? Well, she would probably do it differently now. We would definitely NOT try to change their racial heritage or appearance. What we might have done is to expose them more fully to their heritage, and to the negative and positive consequences that other people might bring to bear as they went into the world.

So I would advocate that our friends with transgender children might try to persuade their children that there is nothing wrong with them that they need to change. But that is a serious challenge in today’s world. As Jude says, that would be the ideal world. That was our view of the racist world we live in. I would never mandate that kind of decision to any transgender person or their parents. But I think it should be part of their counseling and preparation or “therapy.” There is NOTHING wrong with them. They do not need to change anything in their biology. But we understand that they might find life more fulfilling and tolerable if they do change their physical appearance.

As Jude says, it is like abortion. It should be that person’s choice as to how they want to configure their body. No majority or minority driven by some religious commitment should be able to mandate that.

Adoption and Race

Our family is multiracial. I know RACE is not a real thing in biological terms, but it is very real in the cultural world of the present United States. My lovely wife and I have talked about this quite a bit, and we have explored it with other people who have a similar background - a multiracial family. If you want to see an OLD picture of us, look here: https://sites.google.com/site/carlscheider/biographies.

My wife was adopted. Recently, thanks to DNA tracing, she has discovered some of the details of that adoption. Her biological mom lived in a small town in MN, and she had a liaison with her biological father, who then enlisted in the army and was sent to Europe. This was 1940. Her mom was relocated to a home for unmarried women in the Cities. She gave birth to this beautiful little girl, and gave her up for adoption. Our suspicion is that her father never knew about her. Her mom later married and had a rather large family in this same small town.

Jude’s adoptive parents, Wayne and Glendora, were unable to have children, so they adopted her and her two brothers. I have pictures of her at that age with her dad. You can see by the look in his eyes that this priceless little bundle was beyond value. She was much loved. When we wed, our plan was always to adopt. It so happened that Jude is made to have babies. The first two came easily and quickly - our biological sons. Oddly enough, they are somewhat of a combination of the two of us, as far as temperament, abilities, preferences. They are very different from each other, but I have to confess that I like the combinations they present better than the one that I was gifted with at birth. I tell people all the time: “It is not my fault. They came that way.” My wife’s genetic contributions far outshine mine. IMHO.

So we had two very young boys, and we contacted Catholic Charities about adoption. They gave us a wonderful case worker, Eve Forseth. She approved of our nascent family, and she asked us: “What kind of child are you looking for?” That struck us as odd - we have a choice? What kind of choices do people make? She explained that there were many children with some disability - mental or physical - that needed homes. We talked about that and decided that we were probably not up to that challenge. I hold people who can do that in the very highest regard - but that was not our gift. Then she asked about race. That also struck us oddly. We had not actually thought about that, but we were clearly open to any kind of racial history - not a problem. At that point in our lives, we had many friends and acquaintances from all over the world, from many different cultures. Race would not be an issue for us.

Long story, but we ended up with 3 adopted children from racial backgrounds different from our own. No one educated us on any of this. We were literally making it up as we went along. Two of our daughters are of White / Black heritage, and one son is from Vietnam. Those are stories for another time.

When we thought a little about this, we consciously chose to simply ignore their racial heritage, period. They are our children. We love them. We are never going to comment on the color of their skin, or their hair, or anything like that. We have very good friends who have a very similar family blend. It makes sense that they are good friends. I don’t recall that we ever talked about this with them - but I have the sense that they had arrived at the same conclusion. Race simply is not important.

We have had other acquaintances with adoptive children who seemed to focus on the whole idea of interracial adoption. They seemed to be proud of it. They advocated on behalf of it, etc. We have never felt that way about it. This is just normal. What’s the big deal? They would describe their “adopted” children. It would never occur to me to describe one of my kids that way.

The Talk

We never had “the talk.” My thinking at the time was, if one of my kids encounters racism, I want their reaction to be: “What is WRONG with that person?” We never prepared them for those encounters. Over the years they have actually hidden many of those encounters from us. We have only heard a few stories. At one point, my daughter was hired to be a “racial tester” for a firm that was evaluating businesses to determine the bias of their employees. They would send her into a company - like a new car dealer, or a rental apartment. Then they would send a White woman with a similar background. They were both very capable, college educated adult women. The treatment she got was unbelievable. When she told me some of those stories, I would get so angry that I wanted to find those sales people and give them a thrashing.

My daughter once told me about a shopping experience she had in a large retailer, where one of the staff was obviously following her around the store. When she got to the checkout with her items, she announced to the cashier that she had wanted to buy these things, but because of the obvious racial bias of the company as evidenced by the individual following her about, she no longer wanted to do business there. Thank you very much.

My wife recalls the one time my brother Mick talked about the race of our kids. He was the union shop steward, so he had some margin of respect among his fellow employees. He said whenever they were saying racist things, like using the “N” word, he would have to hold himself back. He said that knowing and loving our daughter made him hyper sensitive to that kind of prejudice. My brother was not a gentle man. He was big and tough and spoke his mind. If something disturbed him, you would know about it. This was a major step for him.

Racial Blindness

I recall one time when Jude’s dad was asking our children about the two boys that were part of our friends’ family. He asked, “Which one is John, and which one is David?” The kids all chimed in and said, David is a bit larger and has curly hair. John is more slight and has straight hair. I was dumbfounded, but I had to think that was the best answer they could have given. It simply did not occur to them to use a racial category to identify those two boys.

On another occasion, my daughter had broken up with her long standing high school boyfriend who happened to be White. The boys came home one day to announce that she had a new boyfriend. They told us his name was Calvin. They said that I would like him, and that he played basketball. That evening, in bed, I asked Jude - do you think Calvin is Black? She said she had no idea, and we were never going to ask the boys that question. Period!

Gender Blindness

I am NOT racially blind. I simply cannot ignore it. It is part of my entire life history. It would be a lie to pretend that I am racially colorblind. But I think it is just barely possible to raise children that way. I am going to hold out that our effort there was worth the risk.

So I am going to hold out the hope that our world can in fact achieve gender blindness, just as it might some day achieve racial blindness. I intend to live as though I have that skill - even though it is not in me. We can only do what we can. So I wish all of those young transgender people well. But I sincerely hope that someone, somewhere helps them understand that they are NOT the problem - it is the rest of us that need to change.

What do you think?