America’s Arc of Moral Madness (and Hope)

The path of human progress is random, chaotic, and often maddening. Taming humanity—organizing ourselves for the common good—has been a fool’s errand since antiquity; cajoling and coping with humanity are perhaps the best we can do. Yet there is also a spirit in each of us that never surrenders. That in the face of what seems insane and insurmountable in the moment, we find a sliver of light through which we squeeze ourselves and dare to meet the challenge; through which we emerge again to restore ourselves and renew hope. Most Americans rise each day with the expectation that the day is theirs; that they will be left to their own desires and devices, as long as they treat others as they wish to be treated.

This fundamental right of self-determination governed by the norm of reciprocity has been with us since our nation’s inception that we are, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, “endowed with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”  Life, liberty, and happiness. Throughout our history, we Americans have respected and protected—often with our lives—these freedoms fostered within the norm of reciprocity. At its essence, this is the magic of America—of an experiment that has (thus far) prevailed regardless of the enemy (external or internal) who might wish to shatter the persistent dreams and aspirations of Americans who are inherently in charge of their destiny. Today, we are facing one of those daunting moments when those we have chosen to represent our interests have, at best, a dubious commitment to our interests over their own.

The last seventy-five-or-so years have produced incredible gains in human welfare as The United States ascended to its throne as the world’s lone superpower. Compared to our parents and grandparents, our lives are a cakewalk. The affluence we enjoy is unprecedented in human history. The question today is are better-off humans better humans? Moreover, is what it means to be human due for a major overhaul? The late French philosopher, Michel Foucault argued humans are a curated composition of intellectual and moral architecture that if revised or discarded “would be erased, like a face drawn in sand at the edge of the sea.” Foucault was suggesting we humans are a constellation of cognitive illusions which durability relies on our collective subscription—of our willingness to play along. That what it means to be human is dynamic and impermanent, which is as the Buddha further argued, the nature of everything.

On the last day of March, 1968, Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke at the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C. during which he sought to assure us that justice was always on the horizon, that “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.” For those who remember 1968, or have studied that period in American history, our society was as fraught with division (if not more so) than it is today. The Viet Nam War, racial conflict, generational animus, severe air and water pollution, and a stagnant inflationary economy made us feel as if we had entered a dark tunnel that was sure to collapse before we ever got to any light at the other end. And, like today, there was plenty of violence in our streets, more often waged with bombs than with guns.

Our victorious euphoria that ended the long period of crisis that began with the stock market crash in 1929 and ran through Word War II, and which subsequently gave rise to large American families living in tidy idyllic suburban neighborhoods in the 1950s, would reach its climax in 1969 when we landed a man on the moon. During this period, “America is good” was our moral mantra. Four days after King’s assurance of justice at the National Cathedral, he was gunned down on the balcony of The Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee. As the tumultuous decade of the 1960s ended, the future suddenly looked bleak. The paint was peeling off the post-World War II America. Unbeknownst to any of us at the time, King’s “arc of the moral universe” had achieved its apex. It would prove to be a bridge to moral peril more than an arc—maybe even a bridge to moral collapse.

We then entered what became the malaise decade of the 1970s with double-digit inflation, a dishonest law-breaking president in Richard Nixon, and an ever-present threat of nuclear annihilation posed by the Soviet Union. With the Viet Nam War winding down in the shame of defeat, and the mess of Nixon’s Watergate scandal destroying what had been a stellar run for our federal government through the 1950s and much of the 1960s, the best President Carter could do was offer us redemption; if we would only turn down the thermostat, put on a cardigan sweater, and sacrifice more, Carter’s evangelical sensibilities believed we would be born again into greatness. He came to epitomize the decade with what presidential historians still refer to as the “malaise presidency.”

Then, a sunny smiling actor-turned-politician from California, Ronald Reagan, arrived on the scene to offer Americans absolution. We weren’t the problem; government was the problem. Our civil religion flipped from Carter’s jeremiads to a re-inspired version of the late 19th century prosperity gospel. Reagan was here to liberate us—to lift the cloud of malaise. In 1980, Reagan beat Carter in a landslide with 489 electoral college votes to Carter’s 49; a 10X drubbing. Then, suddenly, we embraced an ethos of entrepreneurial zealotry in pursuit of prosperity. Among other shifts, the best and brightest no longer sought a role in our federal government as they had after World War II. They became lawyers, investment bankers, and technologists who embraced investor Carl Icahn’s new ‘morality’ conveyed by the character, Gordon Gekko, in the 1987 movie Wall Street that “Greed is good!” The nouveau riche were back in style for the first time since the Roaring Twenties. Heavily starched shirts, suspenders, and mousse-laden hair for men, and leg warmers for women who swarmed the new Jane Fonda-fueled craze of aerobics became uniform staples of the 1980s. (I still have my suspenders by Hermes and my hair eventually recovered.)

In the period’s cultural observer, George Gilder’s, 1984 book The Spirit of Enterprise, he romanticized this new spirit of America in the 1980s as reflected in its newly-minted entrepreneurs.

Some are scientists, some are artists, some are craftsmen; most are in business. Although they act as individual men and women, they are nearly always driven by familial roles and obligations. They are not always temperate. Rarely elegant or tall, only occasionally glib or manifestly leaders of men. By fleeing their homes and families to go to far-off lands, may inflict and suffer a trauma of loss—and fight to justify and overcome it. As immigrants, many seek an orphan’s fate, and toil to launch a dynasty. Ugly, they wreak beauty; rude and ruthless they redeem the good and true. Mostly outcasts, exiles, mother’s boys, rejects, warriors, they early learn the lessons of life, the knowledge of pain, the ecstasy of struggle.

This spirit of enterprise, as Gilder called it, was accompanied by a new spirit of victory with the collapse of the Soviet Union during the Christmas holiday in 1991. The subsequent peace dividend was characterized by a sudden increase in both political and economic power for America. The United States was now the world’s lone superpower. The thesis of American exceptionalism that began with John Winthrop’s (1630) “A Model of Christian Charity” in which he suggested “we shall be as a city upon a hill [and] the eyes of the world are upon us” to settlers in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and later invoked by many politicians including Kennedy and Reagan, made its transition from setting the humble example for the world to the neocon dream of reshaping the world in the image of America. We had won the Cold War and quickly dispensed with humility in favor of hubris. Winning is its own intoxicant.

An era of politics as blood sport was ushered in by the congressman and Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich from Georgia in 1994 whose “Contract with America” began our precipitous descent into the dysfunction we see in Washington D.C., today. Gekko’s “greed is good” became Gingrich’s “gridlock is good.” Destroying the institutions of our democracy was picked up by the Tea Party in the early 2000s and is the core of the MAGA movement thirty years after Gingrich’s so-called contract. The late 1990s caught another huge tailwind after the end of the Cold War with the coming of the Digital Age. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs completely transformed the economy from bricks and mortar to 1s and 0s. We survived the fearful doomsday transition we imagined in “Y2K” as we rang in the new millennium and our moral orientation shifted again. “Digital is good” as the next moral mantra was born.

Americans were entranced with digital technologies in all aspects of their lives: work, play, and love. Meanwhile, in a cultural fit of delusions of grandeur, we lost sight of the virtues and values that created the greatest empire in the history of the world. Initially and dramatically, following the attacks of 9/11, with the lies of weapons of mass destruction and al Qaeda in Iraq to justify the Bush/Cheney aspirations of an American exceptionalism on steroids. We had been poked with a painful stick and it was time America showed the world what it meant to be a superpower, or at least how we could spend trillions of dollars, kill tens of thousands of people, and destabilize an entire region of the world.

However, our greatest delusion may have been believing that linking human beings on a filter-free platform through Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook would somehow propel humanity forward. Social media promised to be an elixir for everything from the proliferation of democracy (remember the Arab Spring of 2010?) to solving all our issues related to human connection by friending and liking at the click of a button rather than a handshake or a hug. But like a toxic solvent, the ether of the Internet dissolved America’s social fabric. Within ten years, sharing cute pictures of grandma’s cats morphed into a laboratory of disinformation including an incubator of suicide for our youth. Contrary to what initially seemed to improve our lives, social media made us vulnerable, narrow-minded, depressed, and dangerous.

The Age of Deceit that began with Bush/Cheney has subsequently achieved its pinnacle of expression with the second election of Donald Trump. We experienced a moment of potential moral reset during the period of Barack Obama’s “hope and change,” but alas, a black man in our White House was more than too many Americans could tolerate. “Deceit is good” is today’s perverted moral mantra. If nothing else, Trump has demonstrated that lies have no consequences, at least no negative consequences for him. It is hard to find King’s “moral universe” anywhere in American life, today.

Many believe that the institutions we have built over two-and-one-half centuries will survive the wrecking ball of Trump and the MAGAs. As one scholar recently suggested to me in a retort to my concern that we now have a virtue-free president, while our founders believed wholeheartedly in the importance of virtues, our institutions are strong enough to survive regardless of who might occupy the Oval. In other words, virtues-in-leadership no longer matters. This seems like a specious—plausible but wrong—argument to me. I suspect it may even prove to be the ultimate expression of American exceptionalist hubris. At the very least, it is an extremely risky proposition. Alas, such is the life and inevitable death of empires; on this point history speaks with great clarity. Our city upon a hill may be reduced to rubble sooner, rather than later.

Recently, I attended the new Broadway show, McNeal, at Lincoln Center in New York City. It stars Robert Downey, Jr. as an aging Nobel prize winning writer faced with the many dilemmas of artificial intelligence (AI). Downey’s natural irascible nature was a perfect fit for his character, Jacob McNeal, who is a near-perfect writ-large reflection of the American character in 2024. Often intoxicated, but never wrong, never apologetic, and never in doubt. “AI is good” as our next moral mantra appears to be a certainty. Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, is our new Gekko, Gingrich, Jobs, Gates, Zuckerberg, and Trump.

To be clear, I am not advocating for the end of the development of new technologies. Technology has been essential to advancing human welfare. I am simply asking that we heed our mistakes—like those we have experienced with social media—and consider carefully how we apply technology in our lives. To pick our moral compass up off the floor and put it back on the table. Today, the arc King idealized in 1968 is a nearly unfathomable, random, chaotic, and maddening black hole into which algorithmic equations and quantum computing are sucking humanity into the abyss at astonishing speed. Notwithstanding the promise of improving human welfare, we risk allowing AI to extinguish the human spirit; to suppress volition and homogenize our lives. To prove Foucault’s thesis.

As creativity advocate, Kirby Ferguson has illustrated, we are experiencing a crisis of sameness produced by technology. AI doesn’t create thought; it flattens it into an average of everything. It wrenches the spirit out of the human. It turns both poor writers and great ones into mediocre writers. But, as Ferguson points out, conformity and repression often lead to rebellion and rebirth. Anyone up for the next Renaissance? Are you, or your child, the next Leonardo da Vinci?

Unfortunately, the endgame of AI may be to replace American exceptionalism-on-steroids with nihilism-on-steroids.  From humility to hubris to nihilism may be the signposts which tomorrow’s historians use to define America’s final descent. Taming humanity—let alone assuring justice—is becoming a quaint notion, indeed. Humanity itself may be an irrelevant locus of focus. But, no, it doesn’t have to be that way.

What comes next in the cycles of American history is anyone’s guess. Rebirth, or a descent into an entropic collapse are both possibilities, as are other variations between the two. Our task remains, however, the same: look for that sliver of light to squeeze through to fortify and restore our humanity—to bring hope back into our lives. We made our history what it was: a messy and inelegant march into the future. But, march we did and we remain (mostly) upright today. As Franklin Delano Roosevelt argued during another period of great uncertainty in America, “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.”

For many, Trump is a blessing: a savior who will restore them to what they view as their historic and rightful place in social, political, and economic order. To produce a sort of retrotopia. Others view him as a curse whose deceitful, cruel, and sleazy manner is not just an existential threat to American democracy, but also to their own lives. Either way, our best hope—however perversely accomplished—is to get Americans back on track to moral goodness where truth, self-determination, and reciprocity snap America back to its potential as that city upon a hill. At our essence is something no technology or demagogue can defeat: a flame of resilience and ingenuity that resides deep within our souls. Not even a Blackwell chip from Nvidia can generate this spirit.

Our founder Thomas Paine wrote at the time of our nation’s birth, “We have it in our power to begin the world over again.” He also acknowledged, however, that

Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.

In other words, we need look no further than into a mirror to point the finger of blame for the government we endure.

In my lifetime, the four most inspirational leaders were Kennedy, King, Reagan, and Obama. Theirs are the faces that should be on our Mt. Rushmore of today. They each had very different political perspectives and extraordinarily different personal backgrounds. However, they had one thing absolutely in common: they all made Americans feel good about being Americans. They believed in the American experiment that began in 1776. They lifted us up and made us reach for what Abraham Lincoln called our “better angels.” Like Lincoln, the first two were assassinated; the third nearly assassinated; and the fourth, spared. (The optimism of unity is threatening to those who seek power through animus.) Their courage resided deeply in the core of their being and their belief in the unlimited capacity of the human spirit. They personified hope. In their honor, it is our duty to stand in opposition to divisive forces and to avert America’s moral collapse.

We are better off today, but are we better humans? The Latin-based word nihilism in its literal translation means nothing-ism: the rejection of moral principles where cynicism reigns and life is meaningless. Based on America’s current trajectory, we need to face the possibility that nihilism may become the defining character of the next America. Although our institutions may hold, they remain the object of human leadership. As columnist David Brooks observed, MAGA is perhaps most accurately considered as an inversion of morality made up of “performative arsonists.”

Destroying things is easy, building things is hard. I think we all believe (and expect) that soon-to-be empowered MAGA loyalists can destroy, but can they build? As we learned with our attempt at regime change in Iraq, being able to do the first and not the second can result in long term instability and expanded regional conflicts with no end in sight. Is that really what we want for America?

For the moment, as Americans we still enjoy most of our rights of self-determination. Being human still matters. All of these developments over the last seven-plus decades have been, as they always have been: up to us. Individually and collectively, we need to act to direct the future of our lives, our communities, country, and world. Notwithstanding the headwinds of Trump’s authoritarian nationalism devoid of any subscription to virtues, in America the people still decide. We have the power.

It is an evident truth that without darkness there can be no light. The spiritual parallel is that without suffering there can be no enlightenment; without despair transcendence is unachievable. That the only way out is through. Therein lies the path forward. It is time to stand again; to honor our voices; to move on from this moment with humility and determination. To make our presence known and, moreover, felt. To open, to release, and to rise.

 

By |2024-12-07T23:21:20+00:00December 7th, 2024|American Identity, Current, General, The New Realities|0 Comments
Read More

A Conceit of Contempt

In the human journey to create the most peaceful, stable, and perfect society, the ancients considered many issues, conditions, and regimes to govern themselves. In Book IV of The Republic of Plato, Socrates, while brainstorming a perfect society with his students, suggests that if virtues like wisdom, moderation, and courage were established in a city there would be no need for laws. Further, that if each man pursued his particular and unique skills to the best of his ability to affect what economists later termed “division of labor” and “economic specialization” while taking care to manage his appetites by his commitments to reason and goodness, that a natural harmony—a state of justice—would prevail.

More than two thousand years later, our founders had a more skeptical view and laid down a Declaration and Constitution to provide a framework within which laws would be made to guide and guard our pursuit of living in peace and harmony. Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson both maintained lists of virtues they frequently reviewed to assess their compliance and self-govern their characters. These lists and the founding documents of our nation were strongly influenced by the ancients (in particular Cicero) as well as English and Scottish philosophers of the Enlightenment.

Franklin suggested the founders had given us a “republic if you can keep it” at the time of our nation’s birth. In our nearly two-and-a-half centuries of the American experiment we have kept it. In the election of 2024, a majority of us selected a leader who, unlike the ancients and our founders, has no apparent subscription to any virtues (let alone a discernible conscience) and believes norms and laws—in addition to serving in our military—are for “suckers and losers.” My, how far we have fallen.

Trump’s conceit of contempt targets virtues and laws in the nature of elitist arrogance that holds he is above following any rules meant for people lesser than he, what the Greeks called the hoi poloi, meaning the masses. As a result, whether or not our republic makes it to a third century is now a serious concern. A rogue virtue-free leader may appeal to America’s maverick mythology, but also risks all we have built as the exemplar of freedom in the world. In the next four years, we may look more like Victor Orban’s Hungary than the United States of America. One might feel that our founders would be extremely disappointed, but I expect they would also be surprised the republic lasted this long; late-life correspondence between Jefferson and John Adams shows that founders didn’t believe the republic would make it out of the 19th century.

However, in the election of 2024, this conceit of contempt was not only expressed by Trump. It was at the core of the losing campaign by Harris and the Democrats, albeit of a different nature with different targets. Their conceit of contempt was an elitist form of judgment deployed with the blame ‘n shame game, which can be an effective form of manipulation (commonly deployed by organized religions), but not a successful method of persuasion. Their targets were not virtues and laws, they were voters. Trump certainly also aims his contempt at people—his enemies—but not at his supporters. He brings his supporters alongside his own (baseless) victimhood as their protector. He forms a duplicitous yet sturdy bond with them. His contempt acted to attract voters, while Harris’s acted to repel voters.

In my last post, the Sunday before the election, I suggested that “Trump could win—maybe even by a large electoral margin” due in no small part to Harris’s mistakes. Many of my Democrat readers let me know how much they did not like my prediction. Fair enough, but I am compelled by my own center of gravity to write things as I see them—as they are, rather than the way I might wish them to be. I also suggested that “Four more years of Trump will be devastating for our country and the world.” If we consider ourselves proper guardians of our republic, we must understand how to appeal to people in a persuasive manner. Understanding this is really fairly simple; it is based in the nature of how humans support and curate their egos. Then we have to give them a reason to identify (in a healthy way) with better candidates.

At the essence of human flourishing is a healthy sense of self-worth. If this essential element of personhood is not established early in life, destructive behaviors to one’s self and others are inevitable; all in a twisted and nearly-always futile attempt to fill the void where worthiness belongs. In relationships, those lacking a strong sense of self have little hope of ever forming an intimate, authentic, and strong bond with another human. Those so afflicted are like human wrecking balls in social structures, especially families.

Among Americans today, who we are and why we are—our sense of worth—is in abject jeopardy. It is a borderline epidemic and insidious human tragedy; especially tragic (and perplexing) considering that we live in an age of abundance. From anxious to angry to chronically depressed, many Americans feel like victims; they feel unworthy. “Woe is me” is not conducive to a healthy mindset. These people are always looking for external affirmation inasmuch as self-affirmation is difficult to impossible. Incidentally, this condition frames the fundamental appeal of cults, which a number of sociologists have suggested fits the MAGA movement, referring to it as a “cult of personality.”

All humans strive to feel good about themselves. Those with fragile egos often seek psychic nourishment beyond their immediate social support system by a referent. Referents come in many forms through the processes of self-identification that shape and continually curate the ego. They are those things—usually persons or ideas or beliefs—that without acknowledging and understanding make it impossible to completely consider who someone is, or at least who they would like us to believe they are.

Trump (who himself struggles with a fragile ego) has become a referent for many Americans who are fed up with the conceit of contempt many political movements and campaigns—including too often Harris’s—used to target them. Trump identified with voter’s sense of victimhood and offered them absolution through him in much the same manner Jesus Christ offered absolution to his followers. It was a slick con. His supporters will learn soon enough that, unlike Christ, he couldn’t care less about them. He is, and always will be, concerned only with himself. Disgruntled Americans (most bizarrely many evangelicals) might have chosen a deity with a durable track record, like Christ, but opted for a con-man from Queens.

The blame ‘n shame game has been central to many political movements like the environmental/climate change movement, Occupy Wall Street, Me Too, calls for reparations, Black Lives Matter, and others. Mostly considered Liberal movements, or movements of the Democratic Party. Similarly, as we saw in the later stages of Harris’s campaign, the Obamas in particular were dispatched to shame men—particularly black men—to vote for her. Women were also targeted with a sense of gender-allegiant guilt (as they were in Hillary Clinton’s failed campaign) to vote for Harris. These movements and campaigns have another thing in common other than being somewhere between less-than-successful and outright failures: they each prove that a conceit of contempt is no way to affect persuasion in human beings.

This is the subtle yet deep and instructive lesson of the 2024 election. Notwithstanding the proclaimed brilliance of party loyalists, pundits, columnists, and pollsters who have been making their many and varied claims of election omniscience after the fact, none of them I have read have a clue when it comes to this lesson that actually produced the election results this year.  None recognize that this conceit of contempt in America is endemic and toxic—across both political parties and all segments of our society. They apparently are blind and/or numb to its pervasive rampancy.

If you have followed my posts over the last few years, you know I continually advocate for lifting people up to persuade them to follow a virtues-founded course in life. The ancients did get that part right, and while our founders worried about the prospect of divisive “factions,” they also recognized the extraordinary opportunity for a union in a free land characterized by abundant resources. In the political realm, I have recommended Reagan’s “Morning in America” campaign of 1984 as a model for politicians to follow forty years later. Alas, what we face now is mourning for America.

In life, we often toggle between enjoy (to be in-joy) and endure (in this usage to be in-suffering). This conceit of contempt—regardless who deploys it—is responsible for much of the social, economic, and political destruction we must now endure. I would say shame on us, but I recognize blame ‘n shame does not put anyone on a path to en-joy.

America today is a sad society. The barbarians are at the gate, although they are not arriving from beyond our borders, they are from within the republic. Socrates would probably call us “feverish” and “unhealthy,” which are inherently unstable and ungovernable conditions. We seem locked-in to our preferences for contempt over respect, suspicion over trust, falsehood over truth, and delusion over reality. Further, we cannot deal with anything except very short-term issues, leaving the substantial but longer-term issues of our national debt and climate change beyond our capacity to consider.

A superpower must lead to maintain its relative power in the international system. In today’s America, we are stuck in a cycle of reactivity swinging our fists at each other and perceived boogeymen that are like ghosts lurking in the shadows. Not exactly enlightened or reliable leadership. We need to get our act together and soon. Our allies are deeply concerned and our adversaries can’t wait to see us fall.

The stakes are high and there is much work to do. We must work on ourselves first—we must heal our own dispositions—then work with each other. Above all else, we need to set aside our contempt for each other. There is no better time to begin repairing and restoring ourselves and our society than in the present moment—regardless of who is president. Waiting four more years may render our republic beyond any prospect of restoration.

By |2024-12-07T23:01:38+00:00November 17th, 2024|General, Recent, The New Realities|0 Comments
Read More

Rebooting American Dynamism

Every day and all day our world, dominated by online media, demands that we stare at our feet. Especially the flames at our feet that politicians, pundits, influencers, family, and friends warn us are ready to consume us all. Most of these folks fan the flames rather than attempt to extinguish them in a twisted attempt to get attention at the expense of our well-being. Fear mongers have become endemic in our society in the last several years. “World War III is imminent!” “Our democracy is about to collapse!” “Immigrants are rapists, drug mules, and murderers!”

Of course, most often what the fear mongers are saying is “Look at me!” to feed their vanity and to influence those they wish to manipulate. And while doomsayers can cause expectations to spin up into manifestation—the proverbial self-fulfilling prophecy—generally all they actually accomplish is increasing our anxiety to the point of our exhaustion. Their claims, while possible, are not probable based on facts and reason. These fear mongers are political and social parasites gnawing at the feathers of our better-angel wings. Their pessimism promotes peril at the expense of prosperity.

We live in an open society by choice with limited guardrails as a democratic republic. Openness, which is also known as (small “l”) liberal, is what our founders wanted for us after escaping the tyranny of religion and monarchies in Europe. Self-determination, which is a concept born of the Protestant Reformation when the Calvinist notion of pre-destination was set aside in favor of the notion that any person could become worthy of a heavenly afterlife through their own volition and perfection, together with individualism born of the same Reformation that allowed a direct relationship between people and God (without, in particular, papal intermediation), became two of the pillars of liberalism.

The ideal of a self-directed destiny is the most fundamental value in our founding documents as well as the foundation of the American Dream. Writers in the 19th century, from Charles Dickens, to Alexis de Tocqueville, to Frederick Jackson Turner, all lauded the spirit of Americans who they considered as curious, intriguing, and at times, inspirational. As the journalist, John O’Sullivan wrote in 1845, it was Americans “manifest destiny to overspread the whole of the continent.”[1] Americans are, after all, an irascible bunch of high achievers.

In America, we decided to embrace capitalism as our economic system and democracy as our political system. Both have served us extraordinarily well. Together with some other basic structural advantages like being on a continent protected from most foreign threats by large bodies of water, and the only industrial capacity left in the world after World War II, The United States under capitalism and democracy became a superpower. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, a lone superpower. We were actually granted the unusual and perhaps unprecedented opportunity to quit staring at our feet to instead look out at a horizon of promise to set the example for the world and affect the advancement of humanity both at home and abroad.

For most of the 1990s and into the early 2000s, we Americans did look at the horizon more than at our feet and ushered in the digital age and the age of affluence which, among other things, marked the transition worldwide from the perpetual condition of scarcity that had been with us since the beginning of time, to the condition of abundance in terms of resources and wealth never before achieved in the history of humankind. It is amazing what you can achieve once you stop staring at your feet.

But then, we traded self-determination for self-absorption. (Affluence does have deleterious effects.) In what I have termed the “Age of Deceit,” Americans sacrificed three founding values in the last twenty years. We abandoned individualism for narcissism; perfectibility (making things better) for entitlement; and, exemplar exceptionalism (setting the humble example) for hubris. This period of crisis, now twenty years old, was marked by the War on Terror, the Great Recession, the pandemic, and now punctuated by a nearly completely dysfunctional federal government. The through-line thread has been our embrace of deceit amplified most shamelessly and hideously by the most prolific liar in American presidential history, Donald Trump.

Great crises do, however, produce great opportunities. By its nature, evolutionary change is a slow process whether you are observing genes, or social norms, or the broader operating systems of civilizations. However, the response to crises can create a moment in time when progress can accelerate faster than what Charles Darwin hypothesized in The Origin of Species. Lifting one’s eyes toward the horizon in the context of new realities and rethinking legacy norms and systems are essential to the advancement of humanity.

Two types of events in American history illustrate how these accelerated periods of progress can occur: awakenings and foundings. The first impacts the character of the citizenry and the second impacts the structures and systems by which those citizens govern themselves. Both are necessary to affect the rebirth of any society and today are necessary to save us Americans from our current selves; to restore American dynamism. Frankly, in America, we are overdue for both a re-awakening and a re-founding.

America’s two so-called “great” awakenings (early 18th and 19th centuries) were based in religious revivalist events. At their essence, however, their effect was to restore and reinvigorate the American character. While organized religion has, at best, a dubious track record (especially among leaders) at representing high moral character, the popularity of these awakenings does illustrate the nature of Americans who, at their core, want to be people of good character. Our prevalent and natural disposition is to achieve consonance between our behaviors and common virtues like honesty, humility, discipline, and hard work. Frankly, in this regard, the Age of Deceit in the last twenty years has been exceptional rather than normative. Although we have recently been exploited by some really bad actors, our history is full of better examples of leadership in all sectors of our society.

These first two awakenings also illustrate the ebb and flow of religion in America by and between the private, public, and political spheres of our society.  When religion peaks, it is in all three spheres as it last did most recently in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Then, it retreats as it is doing today never leaving the private sphere, but back from the public and political spheres.

Although the religious right claims a third period of awakening in the 1980s, this period was not about reinvigorating virtues-based character; that claim is a ruse. It was about politicizing religion to gain power and attract financial support for Bible-pounding evangelists and a cadre of televangelists who preferred Gucci loafers and private jets to Florsheim shoes and Greyhound buses, let alone the sandals and walking staff of Jesus Christ. Their wallets were much more important to them as they swindled the souls of Americans.

Today, the question is where shall we turn to guide us to better behaviors and better days? How can we make a better America?

As for our national character, inasmuch as we are in a period of waning religiosity today, religious texts and preachings may not resonate. Thankfully, we do have a clear option. Our founding documents should suffice when considered together with the inspirations our founders took from classical literature and moral philosophy from ancient philosophers as well as philosophers from the period of Enlightenment (18th century). Cicero, Seneca, Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, and Epictetus are among the ancients they studied (especially Cicero’s Tusculan Disputations). And, John Locke, David Hume, Edmund Burke, Henry St. John (Lord Bolingbroke), and Henry Home (Lord Kames) were among the British and Scottish philosophers our founders often cited from the Enlightenment period.

Although I will leave it up to our adult population to reestablish their own footings of character today, I do believe we need to demand that civics and moral philosophy return to the classroom as requirements for our children and young adults. Think of what I am suggesting as a second period of enlightenment, al la Locke, Hume et al. We might also include the works of more recent people like William James, Reinhold Niebuhr, Martin Luther King, Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, and poets like T.S. Elliot, Mary Oliver, and Langston Hughes, among many others.

Further, to bind our students to America in a meaningful and authentic manner, I would also suggest (as others have) that we require two years of national/community service of our high school graduates that would qualify them for a four-year college scholarship following their service. Not only would their service help bind them to their country and communities, it would undoubtedly make their subsequent college education much more meaningful and fulfilling. Whether we call it an awakening or enlightenment is not important; our national character most certainly needs a reboot.

On the structural issues, America also needs a reboot in the form of a third founding. After the Civil War, we had our second founding that was aimed principally at achieving a closer semblance to the founder’s aim held in the ideal that “all men are created equal.” In effect, we were recognizing that in the context of that postbellum era we could craft new amendments, laws, and policies to actualize an ideal. In particular, the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments (abolishing slavery, establishing due process for all, and voting rights for all citizens, respectively) were directly intended to actualize that ideal that “all men are created equal.” Although these so-called “Reconstruction Amendments” were passed, they were subsequently attacked by certain justices in the Supreme Court and diluted repeatedly by what became collectively known as Jim Crow laws. While not yet fully realized today, they are largely intact; progress is, after all, marked by steps forward and steps backward, which is to say, irregular and ragged.

In all, since the Bill of Rights ten amendments in 1791, we have enacted seventeen more amendments. The point is, dynamism must be embraced to meet the conditions of the day. The First Amendment provides “the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”[2] We should exercise that right.  Without amendments to our Constitution, revisions of law, and the evolution of norms, it is unlikely our Constitution and republic would have survived. Indeed, I expect our founders would be astonished that our republic has survived as long as it has.

In my opinion, we must recognize that our federal government has become locked into an abysmal state of inefficaciousness. Its scope must be dramatically narrowed with authority and resources returned to the states to deal with many issues we have (inappropriately) put on the back of our federal government. At both the federal and state level, we must also consider allowing the private sector to turn some of our issues into their opportunities. I recognize that suggestion is like touching the third rail for many of my leftward leaning friends, but we must all be open to new ideas. In addition, partisanship that has been institutionalized through gerrymandering must be reformed, and an electoral college that does not assure a fair and certain election must follow the lead of Maine and Nebraska to award electors proportionally to the popular vote (which can be done without an amendment to the Constitution).

I am sure others can think of further reforms to revitalize our federal government and heal the union. At some point, all sides will reach a level of frustration and fatigue to motivate them to entertain these discussions. That point may come sooner rather than later as we face election chaos in the next few months that while deeply concerning may also—finally—cause enough of us to demand fundamental changes to our structures and systems of governance.

I acknowledge that these are troubling times for many reasons and that the flames at our feet require our attention. I also know, however, that if we ignore the horizon, progress and greater well-being for humanity will remain perpetually beyond our reach. As long as we are focused on the short term, we will continue to be a victim of circumstance in the long term. Long-held and highly regarded virtues must be placed back on the table to be embraced with fidelity. The usage of “probity,” which the Cambridge Dictionary defines as “the quality of being honest and behaving correctly,” has dropped so low as to be considered archaic, today.[3] Perhaps TikTok can restore its use. Finally, we must ignore the fear mongers in our midst. Like anger and violence, stress and anxiety do not help solve problems; in most cases they make them worse. Lifting our eyes, embracing virtues, and ignoring the doomsayers will also lift our hearts and spirit.

It is our duty as adults and parents to assure that every future generation has the tools to build their own spine of character, and to build an appropriate and effective societal infrastructure through our constitutional, legal, and normative commitments so that they may thrive on their own terms.

If we accomplish this, the American beacon of hope that was once the light of the world will shine brightly again.

 

[1] Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States, (New York: HarperCollins, 2005), p. 151. Manifest Destiny and its contribution to new imaginings of America in the late 1800s are also explored in Patricia Limerick Nelson, The Legacy of Conquest: The Unbroken Past of the American West, (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1987).

[2] See the Bill of Rights here: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript.

[3] To see the usage of “probity” since 1800, see Google NGram Viewer, https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=7&case_insensitive=on&content=probity.

By |2024-10-20T12:49:33+00:00October 6th, 2024|General, Recent, The New Realities|0 Comments
Read More

The Election as Reflection

If humankind survives, someday historians and eventually, archaeologists, will look back at today to wonder how a society that had largely achieved all of its ambitions—that successfully achieved an abundance of prosperity—went to war with itself. That some external threat or cataclysmic event did not do them in; rather, that they defeated themselves. They will study how the greatest empire in the then-modern era—the United States of America—imploded. Jared Diamond’s, Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed (2005), that covered the last 15,000 years of history may be followed by Stupidity: How the Smartest Society in the Anthropocene Epoch Imploded.

Each weekday, I rise and turn on the financial markets as reported by Bloomberg Television. I am interested in financial markets, but the real reason I tune in is that it is the only news outlet where the actual news is told without being coated in bias and deceit. All they care about is how the actual news impacts capital markets. They are realists in the spirit of Niccolo Machiavelli as opposed to spin artists pursuing eyeballs and ears with righteous ideological blather. Fox, MSNBC, CNN, Facebook, X, et al, which have far larger audiences will, no doubt, be one factor cited in future cultural analysts’ assessments as prime contributors to the implosion. Financial news outlets are not, however, completely innocent. They are simply assisting wealthy folks and institutional investors in their exploitation of market inefficiencies. Financial opportunity exists in both functional and dysfunctional societies.

As financiers and traders hope, the upcoming election will produce gridlock in Washington D.C. People who make money for a living in capital markets know that the market manipulations, represented by Trump and Harris including his macho “tariff man” bluster and her anti-free market “price gouging” controls, are economically unsound. Capitalists want a congress addled by pettiness to get none of these market manipulations passed. They recognize the benefits of political constipation.

Capitalists also know that a U.S. deficit that is approaching $40 trillion dollars in 2025 is only sustainable as long as the U.S. dollar is the world’s reserve currency. The dollar’s days as such will not last forever. I first studied and wrote about moving to a single global currency in 2008, well before cryptocurrency. My analysis showed that notwithstanding the risk to the U.S. of a non-dollar single global currency, the benefits to both world security and economic stability far outweighed protecting the dollar. My argument then (and now) is that the U.S. needs to embrace the idea to affect a soft landing for the dollar; to manage the transition rather than risking its inevitability. Today, we have cryptocurrency that is the obvious instrument to affect this transition. While much maligned by traditional bankers and politicians, it has the potential to deliver a legitimate global currency beyond the reach of central bank manipulation making it a more stable medium of exchange than the dollar.

Allowing our debt to ratchet higher—in spite of all of our other sources of power—will compromise America’s hegemony and allow the endemic deceit-driven negativity and avarice of our society to tip the U.S. toward implosion. Of course, the solution for the deficit is simple: raise taxes and reduce expenses for decades to come. But we don’t have the character and attendant will power for anything that is simple and clear. We are too immersed in delusion while staring at our loveliest selves on our social media feeds. Omphalos syndrome— the belief that a place of geopolitical power and its currency is the most important place in the world—is our most fundamental delusion. In Greek mythology omphalos represented the naval of the earth. In other words, as a syndrome, naval-gazing is not a particularly healthy condition for world leadership, especially when your own house is not in order.

As the saying goes, “in a democracy you get the government you deserve.” This election, as illustrated through the partisan avatars of Trump and Harris, is actually a reflection of who we are as a people today: profoundly selfish and divided against ourselves. Our allies grimace while our enemies drool. Indeed, as another old saying goes, “we have met the enemy and he is us.”

Largely because of our social media ideosphere and corrupt/deficient/compromised political leaders, reasonable fact-based discourse that favors consensus-driven problem solving that is both inclusive and optimistic has been set aside for fear, hate, violent, and shame-based rhetoric. This rhetoric is aimed at manipulation in the interest of swindlers rather than persuasion meant to serve the common interests and purposes of a stronghold society. Our founding fathers, in particular Alexander Hamilton and James Madison in The Federalist Papers (Federalist no. 9 & 10, respectively), repeatedly warned us of the danger of factions who prefer passion over reason; in today’s vernacular, bullshit over reality.[i] But few of us study these cornerstones of civics and moral philosophy anymore. It has now been decades since they were required courses in student curricula. Optimism and high-mindedness that defined America’s character through the 20th century has been set aside in favor of deceit-driven negativity and avarice in the 21st century.

The manner in which we conduct our lives is so far from the character that produced the most powerful society in the history of the world that it will not take future historians or archaeologists long to write the story of the great implosion—as another chapter in the long history of how empires fail.

However, it is not too late to reclaim the moral high-ground. There is hope. What we can’t foresee may save us, but only if we add integrity of character back into the mix. The unforeseeable always drives history, and in our nation’s first two centuries, the unforeseeable has tilted in our favor. The reason it did was the American character.

My maternal grandfather was born in 1890. In his earliest days on the prairies of South Dakota, his family lived in a windowless sod house. He fought in World War I, raised a family during the Great Depression and World War II, and just three months after his death we landed a man on the moon—the rocket engines for which my father helped engineer. Was any of that foreseeable? Hardly. In my lifetime, the arc of history continued with advances in science and technology that produced enormous increases in the well-being of humankind. From basic vaccines to digital technologies to now the promise of quantum computing, artificial intelligence, and fusion-based sources of new energy—a trifecta of extraordinary potential. Just two generations after a sod house, we stand at the edge of unfathomable frontiers of human progress. None of it, foreseeable.

Americans have done amazing things, and can do amazing things again. In spite of ourselves, the quiet diligent explorers, inventors, and innovators of tomorrow may offer us a way out—to save us from ourselves. But we have to add back the advantage that our founders established in the late 18th century, that Tocqueville documented in the 19th century, and that 20th century generations actualized together with dramatic advances in science and technology. We must restore our character. The Roman playwright, Terence, adapted by the Roman poet, Virgil, argued that “Fortune Favors the Bold.” They were only partially correct. Substantial and sustainable prosperity favors those who are bold, but who also have high character. Who honor virtues with integrity.

Regardless of any potential breakthrough solutions, my plea today is that we must drop the mongering—of fear, hate, violence, and shame—to have a chance of doing the right thing together in unison. If we don’t shed these debilitating modalities, the unforeseeable will flip from hope to implosion. Further, that until we start thinking of each other instead of just ourselves, it is unlikely we will be little more than fodder for those future historians and archaeologists.

In their late-life correspondence, John Adams wrote to Thomas Jefferson questioning whether any great society could recover from its curse of prosperity and lost character. He asked, “Have you ever found in history one single example of a Nation thoroughly Corrupted—that was afterwards resorted to Virtue?”[ii] He pointed to Rome which in his assessment had been a “vast empire until it was felled by riches and luxury.”[iii] My sense is that America is at its tipping point and we will soon know if we can right our own ship, or fail as the Roman empire did. Our founders doubt us from the grave.

While we wring our hands and argue over the war between Russia and Ukraine and the future of NATO, or the conflicts between Israel and Iran, or the potential invasion of Taiwan by China, or the many other concerns beyond our borders, the most pressing issue is here at home: the collapse of the American character and the impending implosion of the greatest empire in the history of humankind, the United States of America. If we don’t focus on fixing ourselves all the other issues do not matter. We will have no influence over them, anyway.

In a few weeks we will (hopefully) all vote. Many of us may be holding our noses as we do so, but not voting is simply unacceptable for those of us who claim to be citizens. To be clear, we need look no further than a mirror to see who is responsible for both today and tomorrow. It is not just the politicians—including Trump and Harris—it is principally us. What emerges is our doing. What comes next is unforeseeable, but can once again save us as long as we couple extraordinary developments with a humble, compassionate, and determined sense of character.

 

[i] Hamilton, Madison & Jay, The Federalist Papers (New York: Penguin Group, First Signet Classic Printing 2003), p. 66-79.

[ii] John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, December 21, 1819, Founders Online National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-7287.

[iii] Jeffrey Rosen, The Pursuit of Happiness: How Classical Writers on Virtue Inspired the Lives of the Founders and Defined America (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2024), p. 214.

By |2024-10-06T13:26:17+00:00September 22nd, 2024|General, Recent, The New Realities|0 Comments
Read More

How America Wins Again

Historians like to look back in time to identify moments when everything changes in such a dramatic fashion that the structure and direction of societies and our civilization is forever altered. The week that followed the assassination attempt on Donald Trump could have been one of those moments when a week changes decades to come. But it wasn’t. The collapse of Biden’s campaign and the assassination attempt of Trump offered Trump an opportunity to close out the election of 2024 in July. His golf ball was teed up as big as a beach ball, but he whiffed. (Even though I am certain he claimed a hole-in-one on his scorecard.)

All Trump had to do was take a humble unifying tone to gather millions of newly available voters under his tent. To speak positively and optimistically about America’s future to assure Americans and allies that America had regained its footing—that he would unite us to, once again, respect the values of our founders and to set the example for the world. To claim, as Reagan once did, that it was “Morning in America, again.”

Like a toddler driven by impulse, however, Trump is imprisoned by self-indulgence. His many deficiencies of character overwhelmed the opportunity. His angry, mean, true self prevailed. His messianic delusions of being both victim and savior in an attempt to claim the gilded throne of the second coming drove him into the ditch.

All of which once again proved the centuries-old Stoic dictum that what matters is not what happens; rather, what matters is how one responds to what happens. Pivotal moments in history don’t find their pivot if those who face the opportunity do not respond appropriately. They become buried in the footnotes of history rather than driving the narrative.

By failing to address the opportunity, Trump unwittingly put that beach ball back on the tee for the Democratic Party. To their credit, the Democrats got past their stubborn old guy first. Most Americans want neither Trump nor Biden. We may be finally past the two-old-white-guys malaise many Americans feel about our national politics. The Democrats now have an opportunity to address that desire. It’s too soon to know whether they will hit the ball, or whiff like Trump. The Democrats don’t have a great track record in strategic thinking, let alone effective execution thereof. But this much is certain, as I wrote a month ago (“A Loud Silence,” June 30, 2024), “It looks like it will be an intriguing (maybe even exciting) election year after all.”

That said, what Americans want in 2024 is not much different than we did in 2020: stability, calm, and optimism about tomorrow. We thought Biden would bring that and for awhile he did. Covid was in retreat and Trump was sent to Mar-a- Lago to scream about a stolen election, show off stolen documents to his sycophants, and fight subpoenas. Then, inflation accelerated, Putin invaded Ukraine, the Supreme Court went rogue, our border was trampled, Israel and Iranian proxies decided to fight for real, and Trump proved fear and anger remained a powerful political lever of coercive attraction while Biden’s capacities entered precipitous decline. On Biden, it was painful to take grandpa’s car keys away, but thankfully it got done before anyone got hurt.

So, what do we do now to achieve stability, calm, and optimism at home and restore America on the world stage?

Below are some initiatives—some fundamental dispositions—we can pursue as individuals and that those seeking our support in this year’s election would be wise to embrace. Things I believe could put America back on track to win again. These are the things we can do to restore America in spite of political chaos. After all, a government “of the people” begins and ends with the values and behaviors of the people. The people can control their destiny, or abdicate it to vainglorious demagogues. For the moment, it remains our choice.

Consider committing yourself to the following six initiatives:

  1. Reverse the lens. Instead of pursuing American prowess from the top, down, do it from the bottom, up. We must set aside our fixation on the loud dysfunctional national political scene and focus instead on our own local, county, and state governance. To spend our energies and resources on making our communities strongholds of human well-being. As I wrote in Saving America in the Age of Deceit (2020), “stronghold communities mean a shared place that is largely self-sustaining and foundationally resilient; which looks no further than its common interests to guide its application of power and resources; and, which seeks to achieve a sense of virtuous humanity where every member holds both the responsibility and opportunity of participation in achieving the objectives of the community.”

For the moment and to the greatest extent possible, we need to decouple ourselves from our federal government. To take back what authority and financial resources we can and assume greater responsibility for our future in as many strategic result areas as we can.

  1. Embrace an optimistic ethos of dynamism and abundance grounded in accountability. Notwithstanding all of our hand-wringing, we live in the greatest era of abundance in the history of humankind and America remains the greatest nation in the world to realize one’s dreams. After centuries of living in a state of scarcity, we now have the capacity to achieve well-being for every human on earth. Now is not the time to pull our heads back into our shells as turtles do when feeling threatened. Further, we must embrace dynamism over stasis, and reject the Trumpian impulse to restore the mid-20th century when white men ruled while everyone else served them. We must not be seduced by Trump’s fantasy of a retro-topia. We must lean into the future. The great irony of today in America is that we behaved better—embracing dynamism in pursuit of abundance—in the late 20th century during a period of prolonged scarcity. We can and must behave better.

We also need to honor consequences again—both the good ones and bad ones. Debt forgiveness should remain the purview of bankruptcy    court, not for a president trying to buy votes from every student who over-indulged in a college they couldn’t afford. Bailouts should be eliminated for banks that pursue higher stock prices and executive bonuses while risking solvency. Consequences teach us how to manage risk, they are essential to our development of judgment. In an age of abundance, it is easy to shield ourselves from the effects of bad decision making. Doing so disrupts our ability to learn and capacity to fail our way to success, which is a fundamental human condition. We need to stand up with strength and humility, take responsibility for our actions, and behave in a manner consistent with our historical ideals that “all men are created equal” and each of us should have the opportunity to enjoy “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

  1. We must seek power not through coercion; rather, through our service to others. This applies to both domestic and foreign initiatives. It is based on a concept I developed years ago in graduate school while pursuing my PhD in diplomatic history. I called it enlightened altruism. It’s based in part on the 1977 book by Robert Greenleaf, Servant Leadership: a Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Many may recognize it as a Christian concept from the time before American Christianities were hijacked by televangelists and right-wing politicians who corrupted the Word of God into a fear-based form of extortion and coercion. Enlightened altruism embraces the idea of referent power where people bestow authority upon you in reference to your service to their well-being that empowers their lives. It is much easier to affect service to others today in an age of abundance than it was when Christ walked the earth, or even when Greenleaf wrote his book. We would be wise, and all of us better off, if we were to apply this ethic at home and abroad. Empowering others is the ultimate expression of the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Power through inspiration rather than coercion and destruction.
  1. We must reconsider our focus on growth—on increasing wealth—in favor of improving the distribution of the wealth we have. No, this is not a scary socialist or communist scheme. Soften your reflexive resistance, take a breath, and read on. It acknowledges that capitalism is the greatest system in the world for the creation of wealth while also recognizing its downside: that it also results in the concentration of wealth that threatens democracy and the objective of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” for all. We have already seen how the concentration of wealth results in the concentration of power that compromises our government “of the people.” (See, for example, the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010).) We have also seen how income inequality and related inequities foment conflict between Americans. Now we need to understand that if we want stability, calm, and optimism, and if we want our children and their children to enjoy the same, we need to re-embrace policies that lift all boats as opposed to a few basking on the decks of super yachts while others drown in overloaded dinghies.  It won’t be easy to affect the appropriate policies, but we ignore this reality at our growing peril.
  1. The right of self-determination is at the heart of America’s greatness and must be protected now and forever. For the first time ever, we now have a Supreme Court and a political party—MAGA/Trump—who believe our many and varied rights of self-determination, which have been at the core of our greatness since the American Revolution and have always been our competitive advantage when doing everything from creating business enterprise to fighting tyranny throughout the world, are suddenly theirs to modify and/or cancel to fit their ideological whims and racist misogynist predilections. Their continued attack must be stopped if America is to win again. Ask any immigrant why they are here—why they sacrificed everything to be here. They will look you straight in the eye and recount the fact that they believe America offers them an opportunity to realize their highest ambitions. That our freedoms—our rights of self-determination—must never be compromised in any manner whatsoever. If we allow this idiocy to continue, America’s decline as an empire will be assured.
  1. We must restore our reverence for Mother Nature before she selects against us. In the 20th century, we became inebriated by the promise of science and industry. We believed that through our many inventions and innovations that we could bend everyone and everything to our will, including nature and its many diverse ecosystems. We were wrong then and we are wrong now. Climate change is Mother Nature’s way of disabusing us of our arrogance. We must not only learn to live with each other through our service (#3, above), we must learn to similarly learn to respect and to serve our natural world so that we all (including all organisms both animate and inanimate) may thrive. “Drill, baby, drill,” which Trump promised in his nomination acceptance speech to achieve again on “day one” is just plain stupid. The evidence of our arrogance is overwhelming. The good news is that we are absolutely smart enough to correct our course, but time is quickly slipping away to save ourselves from ourselves. Come on, folks. Wake the f*ck up.

When we look in the mirror in the morning, we must summon courage to conquer fear, we must select love over anger and understand that power comes to those who serve others. We must reject the zero-sum, us vs. them mentality of scarcity, and realize we can all be better off if we compete to cooperate with each other, rather than compete to defeat each other. We must seek to lift each other up rather than being mean to demean.

In America, we still have the capacity (and more means than ever) to remake our communities, country, and world. We must simply demand better of ourselves, our leaders, and each other.

By |2024-08-11T12:17:40+00:00July 28th, 2024|General, Recent, The New Realities|0 Comments
Read More

Wrangling Intelligence

Like the nuclear era before it, today’s era of artificial intelligence (AI) has been welcomed throughout the world with wonder and equal parts of enthusiasm and trepidation. No doubt, it is a once-in-a-century game-changer. The questions I have are, will we succeed in applying the lessons from the development and deployment of nuclear fission, or someday be viewing the AI version of “Oppenheimer” at the 2090 Academy Awards? Will we summon the discipline to moderate AI to truly advance humankind, or will it be weaponized to destroy our civilization?

Today, both seem like distinct possibilities. Reality will likely be a mixed bag. Probably at best a mixed bag. There are, however, tools from the softer social sciences and philosophy that we can apply to tilt the scales in favor of advancing humankind instead of destroying it. We must put as much energy into the application of those tools today as we are into the mad rush with which technology companies are pursuing more robust and more capable versions of AI. Philosophy is often ridiculed for its lack of production, especially when compared to science and technology. Its job, however, is not to produce breakthroughs for the advancement of humanity; it is to keep those of science and technology from becoming madness. In the nuclear era, Einstein knew this as Oppenheimer eventually did, too. But not before it was too late.

Capitalism does a magnificent job of creating wealth in a direct and observable manner, but only an indirect and often uneven job of furthering the well-being of all humanity. For that, we need the more layered and nuanced application of wisdom that was seldom found in the ego-driven mania of Los Alamos during the nuclear age, or Silicon Valley, or Redmond, Washington of today’s burgeoning age of AI. We must be heedful of those among us who know that the truly wealthy are those who want what they already have; who have left their egos behind to sit in the seat of the soul where eternal wisdom resides. Those who focus on thriving rather than striving.

As a young executive/entrepreneur, I often argued that success was dependent on whether you prevailed in two of three factors—resources, intelligence, and intensity—as long as one of the two was intensity. I now understand that this troika needs tweaking. The reason is quite basic: we have transitioned from a perpetual state of scarcity to one of abundance in the United States and many other parts of the developed world.[i] Today, zero-sum win/lose thinking is largely obsolete due to abundance. As such, resources as a factor have declined in importance, or at least in the highly contested pursuit thereof. Intelligence remains important and is obviously developing rapidly with AI. It is the critical factor of intensity that needs to be reconsidered in the age of abundance.

Intensity in the old troika meant to consider the level of ambition, passion, and will power—the energy of commitment. It’s what Ukraine has as its principal edge in fighting Putin’s Russia. As mentioned above, it was the one domain you must dominate to succeed. There is a better, more wholistic, way to consider intensity in an age of abundance, and that is within the realm of intention. Intention in this rendering includes the energy of commitment as well as other considerations like purpose and meaning. It is the gateway in the troika for morality and wisdom. Intention becomes the rudder on the ship; the navigational guardrails to prevent invention and innovation from tipping into madness.

Intelligence, whether natural or artificial, organic or generative, must be moderated by intention to avoid peril. Intention that is founded in the fundamental values of humankind—our virtues. In much the same way as the theologian Paul Tillich argued about another troika: that social justice is power moderated by love; human progress is intelligence, moderated by intention, supported by resources. Intention is not, however, a traditional locus of assessment in Western culture. In the West, we are much more focused on outcomes as a measure of success than we are intention. In Eastern culture, it is the opposite: intention is more important than outcomes. Hence, we Westerners embrace the unfortunate maxim, “the ends justify the means.” We need to think long and hard about this orientation if we are to succeed in moderating AI.

In a functioning democracy, government usually provides the guardrails to protect society from the often-perilous effects of ambitious enterprise. Unfortunately, in America today, this leadership must come from elsewhere. Moral leadership that informs the tools of restraint might otherwise come from American religious institutions, who were instrumental in human and civil rights issues in the 1960s, but today have been hollowed out by leadership that is more inclined to internal power struggles and political aggrandizement that have left their moral voice mute.        Further, it does not appear, especially since observing the power struggle earlier this year at OpenAI, that the tech industry has any hope of self-moderation. There are glimmers of hope, however, in teams who focus on the application of AI rather than its creation, and who draw on just enough academic/philosophical influences to tame the beast for the benefit of humanity.

One example is Moses Ma of FutureLab Consulting. Ma is a contributor to “The Tao of Innovation” for Psychology Today and I first encountered him at the Conference on World Affairs this spring at the University of Colorado. He was the proverbial rudder on the ship of a number of panels considering AI in world/human affairs. He suggested in “How to Fix OpenAI” that we take instruction from Nobel economist Elinor Ostrom whose work focused on “the equitable management of the commons” to support new leadership regimes (as opposed to regulatory regimes) that dealt with “coordination challenges” including things like well-defined boundaries in applications, monitoring, procedures for conflict resolution, and local autonomy (among others). The goal is that “member groups become so cooperative that the group becomes a higher-level organism in its own right.”[ii] Decentralized non-hierarchical organizations always have challenges with cohesion that can drift into chaos and anarchy, but the notion of moral leadership fostered by organizations that compete to cooperate is worth consideration in this age of abundance.

We can learn from the past if we commit to do so. In our capitalist society, competition is fostered more than cooperation, which historically has produced big benefits. In the collision of our current state of abundance and AI, however, we have an opportunity to do things differently than we did in the nuclear era. Big Tech is unlikely to lead on this issue. The fact is they have little incentive to do so. It will be up to scholars and philosophers who have sensibilities that run to higher objectives and longer time horizons—like Moses Ma—to shine the light on different options to both preserve and advance our civilization.

 

[i] See William Steding, “The Tragedy of Abundance,” February 16, 2022 here: https://ameritecture.com/the-tragedy-of-abundance/ .

[ii] See Moses Ma, “How to Fix OpenAI,” January 14, 2024 here: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-tao-of-innovation/202312/how-to-fix-openai

By |2024-05-23T13:06:41+00:00May 12th, 2024|General, The New Realities|0 Comments
Read More

Get Out of Your Box

As the humorist Dave Barry recently described a woman’s reaction toward the coming presidential election, she had “the facial expression of a person who has just opened the door to a port-a-potty on the last day of a midsummer chili festival.” Notwithstanding the aversion most Americans have toward a hyper-divided America, and the abject apathy we feel toward the current two geriatric presidential candidates, many continue to forecast a coming civil war between red and blue as fantasized in the recent release of Alex Garland’s dystopian “Civil War.” The movie may be a hit, but the local cinema is likely the closest we will come to any civil war. The vast majority of Americans, whom our collective media ignores, remain hiding inside their boxes where their weariness creates little more than disgust, let alone the energy to pursue violence. Even MAGA zealots are showing signs of fatigue.

The old guard of our two-party system very much wants to keep us there—in our boxes. More specifically, in our three-dimensional boxes with two-dimensional binary choices. This or that. Him or him. Us versus them. Pick one without thinking too much. Settle for the least-worst choice. Set your brain aside. The brain that would like its human to scream, “Bullshit!”, but has been silenced by intensely partisan institutions that want to preserve themselves rather than solve problems, leaving the few remaining screamers hoarse. The Republican leader, Speaker Mike Johnson, seems to spend more time with his comb than his gavel. Meanwhile, Democrats are busy playing their favorite game they learned from the religious right: “Shame on you!”

Sick and tired? Me too.

Depression is at an all-time high in America across nearly all demographic groups—especially our teens who have had the development of their autonomy severely compromised. Consequences have been avoided to their profound detriment. First, by helicopter parenting and more recently by social media and online gaming. As a result, teens and young adults have not learned to properly manage risk in order to make the decisions that make possible the glorious uplifting autonomy they naturally crave. Their sense of self is a mirage. Worse, they know it. They look in the mirror and see a fraud. Depression and anxiety have become both inevitable and pervasive.

Meanwhile, many adults have also abdicated their agency and the responsibility that goes with it. It’s the same problem: without a sense of autonomy based in a healthy embrace of self-determination, we feel lost. Things happen to us instead of because of us. Many have made victimhood their pathetic ambition. Woe is me. Woe be us. It is a twisted way to try to feel good, but like autonomy, aspiration also dies with the abdication of responsibility.

We got here innocently enough. Hoodwinked by the orange one and then buried by the malaise of the pandemic, all of which coincided with our surrender to social media silos that narrowed our world to echo chambers of intellectual incest and, for some, psychological collapse. Between politicians and the media, we’ve been gaslighted so many times the vapors have fogged our sense of who we are, or once were, as Americans. It has left us feeling collectively unworthy, suffering from what I can only describe as societal loathing. Many Americans feel alone and abandoned. Moreover, they take no pride in calling themselves Americans anymore.

These days must end. There is no reason to put up with this nonsense any longer. A soon-to-be convicted felon and sociopath, or a well-meaning grandpa who can barely make it to his helicopter. These are the choices of the most powerful and wealthy nation in the world? Spare me. This nation is loaded with bright young people who know better and can do better. Enough already. Remaining in our boxes is not the answer. It is time to emerge. To kick the political provocateurs and dullards to the curb and take control of our future. We need to do it for ourselves and a free world that craves American leadership, but currently sees us as a frail and confused shell of our former selves.

I won’t beat you up with the remembrances of an old man, but the hard reality (and present opportunity) must be considered if we are to reset America. Yes, America was once a great nation and can be again. I remember when Americans wouldn’t even consider, let alone embrace, victimhood or failure. To be sure, we failed, but we learned from failure and tried again; without recrimination or abdication. We failed our way to success. We saw the future as a promising horizon of opportunity, not a venue for victimhood. We understood that the path to success was not paved with the stones of grievance. Furthermore, we took responsibility, individually and collectively. Consequences—for better and worse—were like oxygen. We needed them to live. Moreover, outcomes were the foundation of our self-worth. Taking responsibility for them, which has become something we urgently and often creatively try to avoid today, was critical to our well-being. It was (and is) at the core of self-determination, which has been an essential American value since Thomas Jefferson put quill to parchment.

So, what can you/we do?

To those of you with more gray hair, or none at all, your job is to mentor. To extend the hand of wisdom to lift younger leaders up. Those who need and want to succeed for the benefit of us all. To get out of their way and cheer them on. No, seventy is not the new fifty, it’s seventy. Shed yourself of your old ego and find satisfaction—self-worth—in helping others succeed. Focus on having the deep word, not the last word. Your country needs you now more than ever, but not in the manner it once did. Enable, mentor, inspire. Nudge, don’t shove, and I’ll say it again: get out of the way!

To those who have all their hair and energy to match it, you are not your social media feed. You are human and have responsibility for yourself, your family, your country and world. That may seem daunting, but it is also your great opportunity to find both your purpose and meaning. It is your path to greatness. Find your way with humility and grace. Embrace failure and learn from it. You can do it. Your ancestors did and so can you. Yes, things are different today; arguably easier. Put your phone down and look at the horizon. All of that world out there is yours. Go and get it!

This American reset will take time. We need to balance our ambition with patience. Be both relentless and deliberate. Above all else, we need to respect ourselves and each other. Shut up and listen. Consider the fact that every person you encounter knows something you don’t know and can do something better than you can do it. And, you have the same to offer. Working together brings all possibilities to the table to assure our mutual success. To make tomorrow better than today. To lead the world once again.

By |2024-05-05T12:49:38+00:00April 21st, 2024|General, Recent, The New Realities|0 Comments
Read More

Enlightenment II: Our Next-world Operating System

In the long history of the world—with and without humans—issues both simple and complex have been solved in due course by Nature. Prior to the current era of the scientific human, one looked only to Nature to find a solution since it had surely solved the exigent dilemma (however unfamiliar in the moment) many times before.[1] In our modern enthusiasm for identifying dependent and independent variables to make causal findings and promote Nature-defying alternatives, we humans attempted—often successfully—to subvert the laws of Nature. In the last couple of hundred years during which the scientification of everything has been underway, human welfare has flourished. Life spans have increased dramatically and the generation of wealth and welfare increased at increasing rates.

During this same period of time, the operating system that enabled humans to flourish together which had once been tribal, then monarchical and religious, was the nation-state. Since the Peace at Westphalia in 1648, when the nation-state system was born to solve trenchant conflicts by and between monarchs and religious leaders that killed around eight million people in what is now Europe, the concept of sovereignty applied to a geographically bordered area became predominant. And, notwithstanding the anarchical nature of the new nation-state system that provides no highest or central authority to oversee the system allowing conflicts to persist, this international system has prevailed for nearly four centuries. Every human on earth belongs to a nation-state that has geographic borders and sovereign governments that, at least ostensibly, exist to serve the interests of their members.

The time has come, however, to recognize that the international system is past its sell-by date. The very notion of sovereignty that served to foster the security and development of nations now appears to support more conflict and impediments to cooperation when we need it most. Current realities require new organizing principles and new systems to serve the interests of humans and, for that matter, all beings and Nature. The international system is not only unsustainable, it is nearing obsolescence. As more resources and efforts are inserted into the system today, total human welfare is now tipping towards decline. In the terms of an economist, incremental costs are exceeding incremental benefits suggesting a point of diminishing returns. Due to climate change, authoritarian regimes that insist on a zero-sum mindset, and capitalist regimes that while extremely efficient at creating wealth, but also equally proficient in its concentration, the growth that once lifted all boats is now putting the entire human flotilla at risk of sinking.

The good news is that technology now offers alternatives to reimagine a new operating system. The bad news is we cannot look to, or rely upon, today’s leaders of society—including political, business, and spiritual—to affect a transformation. Nevertheless, it is time to reinvent the world as we have now known it since 1648. I know it sounds impossible, but so seemed the Peace at Westphalia in 1648, which included some nine hundred warring factions. As the design wizard Buckminster Fuller argued, “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”

In the contemporary era, many thought the world had its best chance to enjoy global peace and prosperity after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War in 1991. Pax Americana and the promise of liberty and justice for all was expected to sweep the world beyond the Americas after the failure of communism and authoritarianism more generally. The American scholar Francis Fukuyama (now infamously) called it “the end of history.” In the decade that followed, the world did, indeed, become a relatively peaceful place notwithstanding the Yugoslav/Balkan Wars and the Rwandan Civil War. Then, technology also stepped in to offer a boost to prosperity with the shift from analog to digital technologies. As New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman predicted in his book The World is Flat (2005), the digital economy and globalization would lead to an even playing field between industrial powers and emerging economies. Surely, a new global egalitarianism would result.

However, the hierarchies endemic to the nation-state system proved more stubborn than the rapid technological advantages offered by the transition from MS-DOS to Windows to iOS. Unsurprisingly, it turns out that the leaders of society, who stand at the top of the power/wealth hierarchy, are quite reluctant to diminish their relative position for the benefit of others. A borderless flat world never got much further than graduate level seminars in schools of international relations, or the salon in the Bethesda, Maryland mansion of Thomas Friedman. This was further complicated by the hubris of neoconservatives in the Bush/Cheney administration who enthusiastically and recklessly sought to remake the world in the image of America. Although the world does prefer Levi’s and Coca-Cola, it was not ready to give up its own cultures, traditions, and sovereignty. The result: the United States squandered its superpower status slowly imploding and devolving to the low point when President Trump puckered up to kiss the backside of the Russian tyrant Vladimir Putin in Helsinki in 2018. In that moment, the hegemony of the United States ended, and with it the opportunity for global peace and prosperity in the international system contemplated under the thesis of Pax Americana.

So, where do we go from here?

In light of the peril facing the world today, five new principles must be recognized and incorporated as fundamental tenets in any new operating system. Those principles include:

  1. Existential threats to humanity are no longer confined to national or regional effects; they are transnational. The pandemic was a huge wake-up call to this reality. Global contagions do not respect borders, let alone sovereignty. The nation-state system proved not only incapable of dealing with the pandemic, in many ways it exacerbated it. Further, to believe that it will be another hundred years before we see a pandemic again is simply foolish. The interconnected reality of our world today assures a recurrence of something similar to Covid-19, or worse. Then, of course, there is climate change. A more gradually unfolding disaster, but it too is transnational. We have also seen how ineffectual our ostensibly common-good international institutions—controlled by nation-states and more recently the fossil fuel industry—have been to affect a solution to climate change.
  2. We do not need more wealth in the world, what we need are better distribution systems to get the fruits of wealth in the hands of all humanity. Although my younger capitalist self would have recoiled in horror at that statement, I have come to understand that the principal driver to the existential threat of climate change is our addiction to growth to create new wealth. In other words, it is actually now the interest of wealthy capitalists and oligarchs everywhere (as it is for the rest of humanity) to immediately transition to focusing on the distribution of food, energy, goods and services in as broad as possible manner to drastically reduce our addiction to growth and the fossil fuels it requires.[2] It turns out that sharing the wealth and the power that goes with it—today and for the foreseeable future—is our best hope to save all of us regardless of stature. I have written before about the transition from scarcity to abundance that occurred in the 1990s and our failure to realize its effects to change our ways.[3] This reality begets this new principle. Empowerment must replace coercion as a primary modality of governance. Plus-sum thinking must replace the traditional zero-sum (for every winner there is a loser) model.
  3. As humans, we are not independent from Nature; we are simply a small but important part of Nature. One of the effects of the scientification of everything that began in earnest in the late 19th century during the ramp-up to industrialization is that it drove the separation of our sense of self from being inextricably linked to Nature to being a wholly independent agent.[4] We were, therefore, able to disconnect the consequences of our actions from the consideration of anything other than other humans. (And, in even that we failed.) Nature became, simply and tragically, a resource pool to exploit for the benefit of humans alone. Subsequently, we aligned all human incentives accordingly, from which we have arrived in our current state of climate peril. In time, one way or another, Nature always prevails. In her consideration of humanity, it seems clear she is preparing the earth to cleanse it of us. With a sense of humility, we must realize that she gets to play the long game and that the presence of Homo Sapiens is little more than a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a split-second in universe time.
  4. We must re-think our concept of democracy from one-person, one-vote, to every person must act. As I mentioned above, existing leaders of society have no interest in seeing their power or wealth decline, even if only in relative terms. They will fight hard to maintain the status quo even while continuing to extol their undying and patently false commitment to our well-being. The nation-state system has been corrupted over its four centuries to protect their desires over our interests. Exhibit #1 is our own federal government that is completely out-of-step with the needs and desires of Americans everywhere. Does anyone really believe that politicians like Trump, Putin, and Xi, or business elites like Zuckerberg, Musk and Bezos, have any interest in anyone but themselves? Even Biden, who probably does genuinely care about Americans, faces tremendous obstacles in the Supreme Court, Congress, and the MAGA domestic terrorist organization more broadly, who have collectively hijacked our republic. In the future, to claim to be an American will require much more than voting once each year, or two, or four. We must each become active participants in solving both big and small problems to assure not just our prosperity, but our survival.
  5. We need to make technology our best friend while subduing its application for destructive effects. The promises Freidman envisioned for a “flat world” still exist and can be greatly enhanced by artificial intelligence (AI). However, as with all sources of power, they can be used for both good and ill. We have observed this phenomenon twice before with the development and deployment of nuclear power and also with social media. Hopefully, we have learned from both their great benefits and the equally devastating effects they can produce. Unfortunately, our biggest technology companies have every incentive to race to dominance and will do—in spite of their assurances to the contrary—whatever they have to do to establish the predominance of their particular AI offerings first. Safety be damned. Neither will industry associations nor our hapless federal government protect us from peril even while efforts will garner much media attention for political purposes (as they already have). As with much of the data security industry innovations that have occurred in the last two decades, I expect it will be dark-hacker actors in good-guy capes who will protect us best. Warnings aside, the connectivity of the Internet and the integration of AI holds extraordinary promise for enabling new power structures to replace the nation-state system.

These new principles must look to Nature for a solution. Structures to affect collective action for the production of public goods must be nimble, organic, durable, and fast. Moreover, they must not be susceptible to being corrupted by legacy hierarchies; they must stay as flat as possible. They must view the world as borderless and be amenable to being layered beneath and between each other aimed at specific objectives. The structure I found that best illustrates this comes from Nature in the form of neural networks. In effect, the development of objective-specific networks targeted at particular public goods where the participants who form the network include human actors and associations (public or private) to participate in and negotiate for desired outcomes. Collectively, they form a brain or operating system for our next world. In the spirit of Buckminster Fuller, a new model to force the obsolescence and ultimately displace the nation-state system.

Beyond Nature, there are a few real-world examples today that come close to the new power structures I am suggesting. Organizations/networks that are designed to circumvent traditional authority and affect connections for the development and distribution of resources to achieve a desired outcome. If we look to organized crime, cartels, terrorist and para-military organizations we will see what are, in effect, neural networks that are indeed nimble, organic, durable, and fast. All we must do is flip the objective from criminal, coercive, and destructive to empowering people for the common good. After all, as in the brain, neural networks can support both sanity and insanity. With proper connections and purposes, anything is possible.

Maybe John Lennon had it right in 1971 when the Beatles released “Imagine” even though those in power ignored him. In part, he sang:

Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too

Imagine all the people
Livin’ life in peace

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will be as one …

Today, maybe it’s finally time to heed Lennon’s plea. But to save ourselves we will need more than imagination. We need to seriously consider new principles and new power structures and pursue them with smart determination. We were able to transform our world in the 17th century to the nation-state system and to the value of reason in the Age of Enlightenment. We need the modern-day Voltaires, Rousseaus, Lockes, Kants, and Humes—the philosophers and poets—to guide us toward an Age of Enlightenment II.  It is time to make the world new again. We must assure that the edge of light we see on the horizon is that of a glimmer of hope, rather than the reflective rim of the edge of a cliff. We have a choice, but time’s a wasting.

 

[1] Occasionally, we do look to Nature to solve current problems. An inspiring example is how an office building in Houston adopted principles from the Bayou ecosystem in its design. See https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2023-07-22/houston-endowment-headquarters-models-sustainable-design

[2] Just look at the air quality in China from 2019 to 2020 during the pandemic lookdown of industry there. https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/blog/effect-lockdown-restrictions-air-quality-china.

[3] See “The Tragedy of Abundance,” February 16, 2022, https://ameritecture.com/the-tragedy-of-abundance//

[4] See Robin Wall Kimmerer’s Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge, and the Teachings of Plants (2013).

By |2023-08-27T13:06:51+00:00July 30th, 2023|General, Recent, The New Realities|0 Comments
Read More

It’s About Stability, Stupid!

The allegory of the fish in the tank seems appropriate here. You see, the fish swimming in the tank of water has little to no effect on the nature of the water, but the water’s effect on the fish can be profound, even existential. Will it allow the fish to survive and prosper, or not? We are the fish, and the key to our future is more dependent on the water in which we swim than we may be willing to admit.

If history repeats, or at least rhymes, the water Americans will be swimming in for the next fifteen to twenty years is different than any since 1945 to 1961 and, the fact is, only the eldest among us have any recollection of that era. The vast majority of us have no clue what that water was like unless, of course, you are a student of history. And, no, you can’t learn this on TikTok.

We are entering the fourth post-crisis era in the history of America, which I illustrated more fully in Saving America in the Age of Deceit, called the “objectivism” phase. The last three periods of objectivism were the periods following the American Revolutionary War for Independence, the American Civil War, and the Great Depression/World War II. Today, we are emerging from the crisis which began in 2002 (which I call the “Age of Deceit”) marked by the War on Terror, Great Recession, the Covid pandemic, and a whole lotta lies.

Periods of objectivism are times in American history when we value stability, predictability, reliability and, most of all, a return to what we perceive as normal. What is decidedly out-of-favor is anything that rocks the boat—anything that includes upheaval or radical change. Collectively, we’ve had enough of that. Fatigue has taken its toll.

If you are in the persuasion business, which one way or another includes all of us, the next several years will require a keen understanding of these values and resulting trends. From politicians, to fashion designers, to filmmakers, to investors, to homebuilders, to ministers, and even actuaries, the water we are swimming in will affect both strategic and tactical decisions.

As a group, the first thing to notice about these values are that they are quite conservative. Like 1945-61, during the presidencies of Truman and Eisenhower, boring displaced exciting (unless one considered television’s The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet an actual adventure). Notwithstanding the “Red Scare” manufactured by the Catholic firebrand Father Charles Coughlin, the young Reverend Billy Graham, and Senator Joe McCarthy, Americans spent most of their attention on getting back on their feet following America’s third crisis establishing new households, neighborhoods, churches and communities with little upheaval or excitement other than the birth of lots and lots of kids—the Boomer generation. Making babies and mowing lawns was excitement enough. In fact, other than the Midwest roots shared by Missouri’s Truman and Kansas’ Eisenhower, the characteristic both men shared most obviously was the fact they were, indeed, boring!

In consideration of the forthcoming presidential election, both major parties and all candidates should study Truman and Eisenhower. Perhaps instead of Make America Great Again (MAGA), it should be Make America Work Again (MAWA). “Shit don’ work!” has become an unfortunate mantra in America as our fourth period of crisis ends. Planes don’t fly when scheduled, trains fall off their tracks, housing, childcare, and healthcare are a nightmare for many, nutjobs are roaming our streets with assault rifles, and children are behaving like adults while adults are behaving like children. It’s enough to wear a person out.

Before my Republican readers get too confident about these new waters, it is important to understand that the conservative label here is in the traditional sense of the term, the root of which is to conserve. Not the bastardized whackadoodle version of conservatism the red-cappers promote. After all, Trump is definitely no Eisenhower. That said, I wonder how long traditional conservatives—like the boring Mitt Romney—will continue to sit back and watch their party implode at the hands of a narcissistic maniac? The water is now flowing in their favor. At some point, the shame is not on the orange one, it’s on them.

It is time to return to basic American values based in the fundamental tenet of self-determination and a renewed sense of personal responsibility for ourselves and each other. It is time to CONSERVE our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Although a Democrat, Biden is probably best positioned to capture this hill of values, as long as he sets aside the impulse to engage in rhetoric that is perceived as too left-leaning in the direction of progressive idealism and can keep his feet beneath him on the campaign trail. He is, after all, Truman-like boring and actually has enough of a record on several of the relevant issues to argue for building on that record in a second term. Issues like climate change can (and must) be repositioned as a ­conserve-ative issue. Who knows, maybe even make our federal government relevant again. To my liberal friends, fear not: progressive idealism’s time will return someday. (Note that Kennedy followed Eisenhower.) However, that time is not today.

Despite Biden’s perceived advantage, don’t count Trump out. He could pivot from MAGA to MAWA (assuming he can stay out of a prison jumpsuit) and these periods do have room for the appeal of conservative authoritarianism. That’s what the Red Scare folks in the 1950s were all about. Lurking boogeymen will still be promoted by fearmongers. But, also as in the 1950s, scare tactics may get tiresome too. Trump may go the way of Joe McCarthy. Yet, conservatism does include a preference for tighter controls and clear unambiguous guardrails. Some—perhaps many—will prefer authoritarianism to reestablish a sense of stability and calm that could include oppressive and regressive regimes. Like the Germans in their post-crisis era after World War I who took a shine to a young political brawler in Munich named Adolph. America today is not the Germany of the late 1920s and early 1930s, but the natural attraction of authoritarianism among otherwise well-intentioned people should never be passively dismissed.

A related argument for a lean toward conservatism is well developed by the University of Notre Dame’s Patrick Deneen in his latest book, Regime Change: ­­­­­­Toward a Postliberal Future. Deneen’s argument is that we in the West would be better off replacing the current liberal elite with a new conservative elite to reestablish traditions and institutions to affect a more genuine populism like that he fondly recalls from his own childhood growing up in Windsor, Connecticut. In his view, progress and dynamism have indeed proven disruptive but, on net, also too destructive of social, economic, and political order. The outrage of many progressive reviewers indicate Deneen has certainly touched a nerve, and while I can find holes in his analysis, and expect that his predicted destination of conservative authoritarianism will never occur, history suggests his compass is pointing in the proper direction.

For anyone who has studied the history of human progress for more than a minute, one thing inevitably becomes crystal clear. Progress is not linear, nor is it predictable. It proceeds in fits and starts; two steps forward, one back. Surge then purge. It is random and chaotic, reflecting the array of human dispositions that characterize our civilization.  What the cycles of American history affirm is that during certain periods of time, progress for the sake of progress is not preferred. There are times when good-ol’ stability becomes fashionable. The foreseeable future is one of those times. For this moment in our history, folks will likely prefer stability to change, unless it’s a change back to normal.

To co-opt Bill Clinton campaign strategist, James Carville’s, admonition in 1992 that, “It’s the economy, stupid!” Today, our history suggests, it’s about stability, stupid! The next fifteen to twenty years won’t be exactly like 1945-61, but they may be more alike than different. Who knows, Netflix may even bring back Ozzie and Harriet. Or, not.

By |2023-07-02T13:11:42+00:00June 18th, 2023|Recent, The New Realities|0 Comments
Read More

Excavating Happiness

The great promise of meditative mindfulness is that peace and tranquility already exist; that they are within you right now and in every prior and future now. At first, I met this claim with curious skepticism. If they are already here, why can’t I feel them? If I am so full of goodness and beauty, why do I often feel like crap? After hundreds of hours of contemplation, the answer appears to reside in a simple yet powerful truth: we are living in an artificial world under the illusion of connection in violation of natural truth resulting in chronic moral suffering. We know what is right, but we are living wrong. The good news is we are in complete control and, therefore, can change all of it. We can move from what the writer, historian, and activist Rebecca Solnit calls moral injury to moral beauty.

First, we must recognize the problem. As many, like Harvard’s Steven Pinker argues, the data suggests things have never been better. Measurements of wealth and welfare nearly all support the argument that because of our rapidly expanding capabilities over the last few hundred years, the lives we lead are longer, healthier, and more productive than any lived by our ancestors. Common sense suggests we should, therefore, be happier. But, by many other measures we aren’t nearly as content as those in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries whose daily lives were much more difficult. In the Happiness Index that ranks countries around the world, none of the wealthiest countries ranks in the top ten. Number 1? Finland. The fundamental problem is that our pursuit of success—measured in traditional terms—has limited positive impact on our happiness and, in many respects, may even be detrimental.

As Solnit observes,

Look closely, and you can see that by measures other than goods and money, we are impoverished. Even the affluent live in a world where confidence in the future, and in the society and institutions around us, is fading—and where a sense of security, social connectedness, mental and physical health, and other measures of well-being are often dismal.

To address the problem, we must first realize that we have created this world. The incentives we have structured in our marketplace of success and the feel-good receptors we have allowed to define our egos are born from the same psychic infrastructure that favors exploitation over altruism, isolation over connection, and conflict over cooperation. Of course, inasmuch as we created this world, we can un-create it, too. In other words, as I often remind my children, the second rule of life applies: it is up to us. (The first rule is: shit happens.)

Exploitation rose naturally from the reality of scarcity. Survival meant realizing that there were only so many pieces of pie to go around. Under the condition of scarcity, us vs. them, and zero-sum game theory were prevalent and legitimate constructs. But things changed in the late 20th century. This is where we must heed Pinker’s argument of greater welfare. The fundamental shift that occurred was from scarcity to abundance. The culmination of the productivity of the industrial era and the transition from an analog world to a digital world meant that win-lose could become win-win.

This is when we should have shifted our thinking from exploitation to altruism, but we didn’t. We should have transitioned from coercive power to referential power where we accumulate power by the extent to which we serve the interests of others. If we had, we would all be better off and be able to meet the challenges of the day, like poverty, the pandemic, and climate change. Instead, we stayed the course allowing both power and wealth to intensify in their concentration within a small percentage of the population. The shame belongs not on the heads of the have-nots (as many politicians would assert), it belongs on the heads of the haves. And, please note: the exploitation I speak of is not confined (as some may quickly judge) to capitalism. There is just as much if not more exploitation in socialist and authoritarian regimes. If anything, capitalist democracies hurdled scarcity first making way for the benefits of abundance. Regardless, none of us were wise enough to fully understand the implications of this shift. In that moment, we missed an enormous opportunity to reshape our world.

We have also become hostage to our preference for isolation. America is a country that has always celebrated independence. After all, it is called the Declaration of Independence and the Fourth of July is known as Independence Day for good reason. Our most fundamental birthright is the right to self-determination. Unity has always been subverted by our preference for independence—for separation from each other—for isolation. In fact, it is only under dire circumstances that we ever come together, usually when attacked by a foreign actor, as in 9/11. Most recently, even a deadly pandemic that put everyone’s life at risk regardless of social, political, or economic standing, became a divisive event that produced profound disunity. We Americans much prefer, “you be you and I’ll be me” and, moreover, leave me the hell alone. This is the quintessential American.

Our penchant for independence and individualism served us well until it didn’t. A curious and unfortunate coincidence occurred at the time of our shift from scarcity to abundance. As I argued in Saving America in the Age of Deceit, in the late twentieth century, in particular after the collapse of the Soviet Union, “individualism, or the notion that Americans were possessed of free will and took responsibility for its expression thereof, was replaced by narcissism.” Our hyper-individualism turned us into churlish prigs. So full of triumphalism, we even stopped taking pictures of others and landscapes in favor of our own headshots to celebrate our self-perceived magnificence. Selfies became exhibit number one of our many narcissisms. This is where socialist democracies did indeed have an advantage over capitalist democracies (see quasi-socialist #1 Finland, above).

However, our isolationist tendencies expressed as hyper-individualism has proven most damaging in our separation from the natural world. As I have argued before, perceiving ourselves as separate from nature may prove to be the proximate cause of the collapse of Homo Sapiens. One of the by-products of the industrial age is that through the -ification and -ization of everything, humans have placed systems of subjugation between themselves and nature in a perverted master-slave relationship. Make no mistake, this relationship, if pursued to its ends will result in the end of humanity. It is, as many prophets, gurus, sages, and gods have claimed over the millennia, a noble truth that nature rewards harmony and punishes dissonance. If humans remain dissonant, we will (to use Charles Darwin’s phrase) be “selected against.”

Another teaching of meditative mindfulness is the toxicity of conflict. Virtually all spiritual teachers, regardless of tradition or heritage agree that things like desire and attendant conflict are the root of all suffering. Humanity has been burdened by conflict since inception. This, too, is partially a product of scarcity, yet the greatest civilizations would have never become great without the implementation of cooperation. From the hunter-gatherers to the industrial age, specialization and the division of labor has proven far superior to going it alone. Of this, both Adam Smith and Karl Marx agree. Among other things, this practice resides at the core of the strength of capitalism which, notwithstanding its propensity to concentrate power and wealth, is undoubtedly the most efficient system to organize and deploy capital and labor for the production of wealth. Capitalism excels at production. Where it falls short is distribution, which threatens other important principles including the basic norms of democracies.

Again, somewhat ironically, our shift from scarcity to abundance was accompanied not just by the ascendence of narcissism, but also by the rise of hubris. We doubled down on conflict and competition right when we should have shifted to higher modes of cooperation. And, not just by and between nations, but by and between races, political parties, religious traditions, and even gender. Our preference for exploitation, isolation, and conflict is tearing us apart both internally and externally; it is why we often feel like crap. Moral suffering has become an endemic condition in America and much of the world even while we live in the first era of abundance in the history of humankind. How stupid is that?

To move from the condition of suffering to happiness—from Solnit’s contemplation of moral injury to moral beauty—is, therefore, within our grasp. Win-win and plus-sum game theory must become prominent modalities. Coercion must give way to altruism. We must choose harmony over dissonance between ourselves and with nature. Only then can we achieve both internal and external consonance. Only then will we switch to right from wrong. Only then can the peace and tranquility that has been buried beneath our egos be excavated to assure both our happiness and our survival.

The first rule of life still applies: shit happens. But the second rule also holds: the rest of everything else is up to us.

By |2023-12-01T15:39:57+00:00March 19th, 2023|American Identity, General, Recent, Spiritual, The New Realities|0 Comments
Read More
Go to Top