Writing the Big Lie

johnson.image_2

The eighth circle of Hell in Dante’s Inferno is for the sin of fraud. Generally, this includes counterfeiting, hypocrisy, lying, stealing, and more.

 What is the punishment in circle 8?

Circle 8 of Hell in Dante’s Inferno has ten different areas for fraudsters. Dante describes these as separate ditches or trenches within the circle. In the first ditch, demons whip pimps and seducers. In the second, flatterers are buried in sewage and feces. In the third, “simonists” – those who abuse church power – are buried upside down and their feet are burned. In the fourth, sorcerers or fortune tellers are forced to walk around with their heads on backwards. In the fifth, the politically corrupt are buried in boiling tar. In the sixth, religious hypocrites are forced to wear torturously heavy church robes. In the seventh, snakes bind thieves’ hands behind their backs and torture them in various other ways. In the eighth, those who lied for personal gain are turned into living flames. In the ninth, people who sowed division walk in a circle. When they pass a certain demon, it chops their head or limbs off – their wounds slowly heal as they walk around again, and the demon chops them again when they come back around. In the tenth and final ditch, counterfeiters are punished with various afflictions like scabies, itching, or thirst.  —- From Study.Com by Angie Armendariz, Arielle Windham, and Jenna Clayton.                         

Christians believe that everyone is a sinner.  That is why every week at a Christian church you will hear an aisle full of practitioners asking forgiveness for their sins.  The times I accompany my spouse to church, I am reluctant to confess any sins or to ask for any forgiveness.  I can’t help but wonder what I should ask forgiveness for.  Many the day I regret something I have said or done but seldom do I think this makes me a sinner.  When they say that Christ died for my sins, I wonder how he could have known the stupid and sometimes malicious things I actually have done?  Perhaps this is an example of a Big Lie.

Writers all lie.  Some more than others.  There are lies of omission.  There are lies of commission.  There is hyperbole.  There is obfuscation.  Writers of course are not the only ones who lie.  The government lies.  The army lies.  The CIA lies.  Even your parents probably lied to you more than you think.  Sometimes we lie to get our point across.  Sometimes we lie to protect another.  Sometimes we lie to protect ourselves.  Sometimes we lie because of erroneous beliefs, common but false tropes, misinformation, and disinformation.

The media today is one big melting pot of lies.  CNN, MSNBC, FOX News, Breitbart and all the other major networks are cesspools of daily lies.  Left wing, right wing, Democrats, Independents, Republicans, John Birchers all lie.  Studies show that average people also lie fairly regularly.  “Do as I say and not as I do” is one form of lying.  The biggest lies we engage in are lies to ourselves.  Self-talk is full of lies.  “I would never do that.”  “I get better every day.”  “I get enough exercise.”  “I am a follower of Jesus Christ.”  Some studies such as noted below show that the assumption that most people are liars is not exactly true.  Many people are opportunistic liars.

“People also have good and bad lie days, when they tell more or fewer lies than is typical for them, Levine says.  People do not lie for the most part, he says, a few pathological liars aside. Also, for the most part, people do not lie unless they have a reason to.  Our daily communication demands are a big driver for most of us on how honest or dishonest we are,” Levine said.New research shows most people are honestby Shannon Thomason

On the subject of writers as liars, I include advertisers, marketers, political speech writers, media script writers and even blog writers.  We are all guilty of Big Lies.  The following quote is attributed to the Nazis Joseph Goebbels, but it was also written in Hitler’s Mein Kampf:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

Upon reading the above quote, it might give you some pause when it comes to believing anything that comes out of the mouth of a press secretary or any other official State representative.  To repeat “The Truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” My father once said, “Believe nothing of what you hear and half of what you see.”  This might have been the best advice that I have ever received.  This is why all teachers today say that they believe Critical Thinking skills are the most important tools we can teach students.  Unfortunately, this is also a Big Lie.  It is something that might be believed but it is not practiced.

I call a Big Lie something that is truly and wonderfully believed either by the writer or speaker.  Unfortunately, they may not adhere to it in practice or in their daily lives.  They talk and write a good game, but they do not deliver.  As Martin Luther King said about the “Declaration of Independence”,

“When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men — yes, Black men as well as White men — would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked insufficient funds.”

9780996883252_p0_v1_s1200x630Our Founding Fathers wrote a Big Lie and African Americans have been paying for it ever since.  Women and other minorities were not even mentioned in the Big Lie, but it applied to them as well.  Lies can be committed because people believe things that do not mesh with reality.  Lies are a coverup for many government actions that our politicians do not see as palatable for the public.  The Gulf of Tonkin incident, the overthrow of Salvador Allende, the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq are only a few of the lies that have been fed to the American people.  Of course, our politicians would have us believe it is for our own good.  The really sad part is that the media is always complicit in these lies by reporting them with little or no verification of their truthfulness.  Some of these lies fall into what I call the “Realm of Taboos.”  Taboos are a good place to look for Big Lies.

A Taboo is defined by the Online Oxford dictionary as, “A social or religious custom prohibiting or forbidding discussion of a particular practice or forbidding association with a particular person, place, or thing.”  Taboos arise when reality clashes with Big Lies.   For instance, it is a Big Lie to think that Americans always fight a virtuous war.  Our government wants us to believe that any war we fight is to protect the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.  It would not do any good to let the public know that most of our wars have been wars of aggrandizement.  Wars fought to protect our economic interests.  Thus, we develop Taboos that prohibit subjects from being discussed.  This saves government and politicians from being exposed as Big Liars.

One particularly egregious lie is that someone is never too old to hold public office.  We have a plethora of “old” politicians and judges who would be better retired.  The average age of senators in the 118th Congress is 64 years old.  There are 54 senators older than 65.  I am 77 years old in two weeks and my days have dwindled down to about four to five ENERGY hours per day.  The rest of my day is spent napping, reading, watching TV, or just enjoying a good Bourbon.  Many of the politicians holding office probably cannot say that they could do any better than I could.  But no one has yet disputed their right to run for office.

“American society on the whole fears aging. It is a culture that works overtime to stave off death, even while having one of the lowest life expectancies in the world compared to the amount spent on health care every year. It is considered taboo to bring up age in a variety of contexts, including whether or not someone is still hardy enough for the rigors of public service after more than eight decades on the planet.” — Aug. 31, 2023, by Hayes Brown, MSNBC Opinion Writer/Editor

imagesSo, we tell a Big Lie that age does not matter.  And we have no one willing to challenge that lie.  However, it is not only physical aging that puts people at a disadvantage, but mental aging as well.  Many older people are stuck in a past generation of ideas and values that are no longer relevant today.  Values and cultures change over time and people born in the 40’s and 50’s are less likely to understand and adapt to the changes that daily life brings.  If you can only see the “Good Old Days”, you may be suffering from old age.  The average age of Nobel Prize winners when they conducted their prize-winning research is 44.1 years.  As for writing, “According to experts, we start becoming more creative and prolific in whatever field of art or study we work, around the age of 25.  Most people reach their peak after the age of 35 or in their 40s. This is when they produce their most valuable work.  After the age of 45, most artists’ prolificity starts slowly declining.” — The Adroit Journal

Conclusions:

  • Big Lies are part of reality.
  • People often do not want to know the truth.
  • Politicians believe that people cannot handle the truth.
  • Big Lies are told to conceal realities that will adversely impact governments.
  • We all lie sometimes. Some of us more than others.
  • Writers have a responsibility to tell the truth as much as possible.
  • We cannot always see the culture of lies that we are caught in.
  • Follow my father’s advice: “Believe nothing of what you hear and half of what you see.”
  • When you do not believe something, gain insights from 360 Degree Thinking.

360 Degree Thinking can be defined as, “being cognizant of ideas and insights coming from a variety of sources, both internally and externally, and understanding the critical interconnectedness of these ideas.” It is about your ability to view ideas and information coming from all sides and on all levels in all timeframes (for example, short, medium and long-term priorities).   —- Ideas for Action

The Four Most Important Searches in Our Lives — The Search for Authenticity

authenticity2

Authenticity is being true to yourself.  It is being who you really are versus who others want you to be.  It is being true to a set of values, morals or principles that define a good life.  It is defining oneself and not letting others define you.  “In existentialism, authenticity is the degree to which a person’s actions are congruent with their values and desires, despite external pressures to social conformity.”Wikipedia

What do you want your life to be like?  What will you stand up for?  What is worth living for and dying for?  These questions frame a Search for Authenticity which will continue our entire lives.  It is not that we never find authenticity, it is that as our roles change in life, the meaning of authenticity will change.  We must continually redefine ourselves in terms of being authentic.

It will not matter whether you are rich or poor, whether you are educated or uneducated.  It will not matter who you know or what you know.   Authenticity comes from the heart and soul and not from the brain.  You cannot buy authenticity.  You cannot acquire authenticity by fame or fortune.  Knowing celebrities and being a celebrity are no guarantees of authenticity.  You cannot go to school and get a degree in authenticity.  Think for a minute.  Who is the most authentic person you know?  What makes them authentic?

authenticity-2

Two things have escaped me in my life.  When I was young, I wanted to be rich and famous.  Often, I still dream of it.  Not an unusual desire given American values.  Over the years, I have read many books about famous people.  I have read most of the great philosophers.  I studied a Harvard Business course on the histories of the richest entrepreneurs like Getty, Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Mellon.  These were the predecessors of Gate, Musk, and Buffett.  The results would show that I am nowhere near successful in my twin goals.  Neither fortune nor fame has cast its shadow over my life.  Perhaps I am blessed because of this.  Knowing how immature and ungrateful that I have often been, either the money or fame would have been squandered or it would have destroyed me.

Today, I am happier than I have ever been.  I have more than some people and less than others.  I have good friends and a loving wife and sister.  My ex-relationship with my daughter is not wonderful but it is no longer on rocky grounds.  What does my life have to do with authenticity?  Why my story here?  Well, over the years I have pondered the reasons that my goals of fame and fortune were never attained.  My answer lies in what it means to be authentic.

I have never chosen money over knowledge.  Money has never been as important to me as learning and education.  I would sooner spend an afternoon in a library as in an office.  I have never chosen money over ethics.  My clients always knew that I would tell them the truth, even if it was not always tactfully done.  I never dreamed of getting ahead in business by developing a network of influential friends or meeting clients on the golf course.  In fact, I purposely never learned to play golf.  I wanted to be respected for what I knew and not who I knew.  This is a major mistake in the world of commerce.  When my boss at the consulting firm asked me where my list of contacts was for networking, I was befuddled.  I had to go back into his office and ask him to explain networking to me.

Being a rich successful businessperson was not in my genes.  I came to accept that fact over time.  The answer for how you get to Carnegie Hall is “Practice, practice, practice.”  I was never willing to take the time to be a businessperson.  I would rather do other things like travel and meet new people, see new places and explore new ideas.  I would not practice the skills needed to succeed in business.  I valued time more than money.

I also was not willing to take the risks needed to be an entrepreneur.  I remember reading a biography of the great African American entrepreneur John Johnson who founded Ebony Magazine.  When he needed money to meet a deadline for publishing an issue of Ebony, he pawned his mom’s furniture.  He had already invested his last cent in the business.  It would be interesting to know what his mom said when she came home and found her furniture gone.  I was never a risk taker when it came to money.  I still have never bought a lottery ticket.  I cannot imagine hocking my furniture much less my mom’s furniture.

download

Being authentic means being true to who you are in spirit.  Integrity and authenticity go hand in hand.  Integrity is upholding those unique values and virtues that make you authentic.  Oxford Online dictionary defines integrity as: “the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.”  If you say that you value honesty, then you must practice honesty.  If you say that you value truth, then you must practice truthfulness.  If you say that you value democracy, then you must support democratic values and principles.  First though, you must ask yourself what it is that makes you alive?  What makes you human?  What is truly meaningful to you?  The answers to these questions will determine your integrity.  People with little or no integrity can be authentic.  There are authentically “bad” people.  However, I believe that authenticity must always be allied with good character development and that means authenticity must meld with integrity.  Unfortunately, it seems that sometimes the two do not find each other.

Today we are faced with a tsunami of public figures who seem to have no integrity.  Lawyers lie and spin devious schemes to protect their clients and themselves.  Politicians take oaths and contributions from PACs which ensure that they will ignore the will of the majority.  Sports figures use their influence to take advantage of others.  Celebrities have no qualms about ethics and will do anything to continue their celebrity status.  So called journalists are more interested in advertising revenue than in the veracity or merits of any news.

Being authentic only has merit if you also have integrity.  Father Stokhal of Demontreville used to say that if you do bad actions, you can tell yourself all day long that you are a good person, but you will never be good until you stop the bad actions.  If you have grievous character defects such as lying and cheating others, being true to yourself has no merits or value to the world.  Jesus said that if the salt loses its flavor, what good is it.  Socrates believed that the ultimate goal of human existence was not just to live but to live a good, meaningful, and virtuous life.  A good life was guided by virtue and moral principles.  Being authentic means to find the virtues and morals that will help you to lead a good life.  Integrity is sticking to those virtues and morals that you believe in through thick and thin.  You do what is right regardless of what others may think or how much you may or may not profit by your actions.  Here is an example of the lack of authenticity and integrity that plagues politics today.  This concerns the upcoming Republican debate.

KNDebates

Yesterday, I was reading the following story on several different news outlets.  One headline on the N.Y. Times read “Defend Trump and ‘Hammer’ Ramaswamy: DeSantis Allies Reveal Debate Strategy.”  The principal points that the coaches suggested to DeSantis were as follows:

  • Take a sledgehammer to Vivek Ramaswamy, the political newcomer who is rising in the polls.
  • Defend Donald Trump when Chris Christie inevitably attacks the former president.
  • Attack Joe Biden and the media no less than three to five times.

If the guidance above does not smell to you as garbage, then I apologize.  But please don’t tell us that “Well, this is politics.”  I hope we all expect more of our politicians than people who ignore authenticity and integrity to score cheap points in a debate.  Nevertheless, this is what politics in America has become.  Now there always was and always will be devious and unethical methods used to get elected.  Study the history of Thomas Jefferson and you can see the media at work two hundred and fifty years ago to smear his name because of his alleged affair with a slave named Sally Hemings.  But if we don’t start expecting more, when will things change?

We may be at a crossroads in America.  A large percentage of people no longer respect politicians and lawyers (they seem to go together).  Many people are clamoring for less government.  Governmental agencies have lost a great deal of their former influences due to the actions of our leaders.

A study on respect for government found the following:

A Pew Research Center survey finds that just 20% of Americans say they trust the federal government just about always or most of the time. — Dec 5, 2021

Two studies on feelings towards lawyers in the USA found:

In a Gallup poll from 2015, only 4% of respondents rated the “honesty and ethical standards” of lawyers as “very high.” In that same poll, more than one-third (34%) rated attorneys’ honesty and ethical standards as low (25%) or very low (9%).

A landmark study for the American Bar Association found even harsher truths underlying the popular perception of attorneys:

74% of those surveyed agreed that “lawyers are more interested in winning than in seeing that justice is served.”

69% believed “lawyers are more interested in making money than in serving their clients.”

These studies were done eight years ago.  I would bet you a 100 to 1 that feelings towards lawyers today are even worse than they were eight years ago.  Former Vice President Pence recently referred to “Trump’s gaggle of crack pot lawyers.”  Trump and eighteen other cohorts have now been indicted in respect to his scheme to overthrow the 2020 presidential election.  Seven of those indicted were lawyers.  If you ever believed that lawyers follow a “Code of Ethics” you may well wonder where Trump’s lawyers went to school.

download (1)

You might wonder if authenticity and integrity are just for the average person.  It certainly seems that “above” average people including the rich and famous do not subscribe to the same playbook that is recommended for the rest of us.  Why then worry about a “Search for Authenticity?”  Will it keep you happy?  Will it make a difference in your life?  Here is what some other people and religions have to say about it.

“Authenticity is a collection of choices that we have to make every day. It’s about the choice to show up and be real. The choice to be honest. The choice to let our true selves be seen.”  ― Brene Brown, The Gifts of Imperfection

“If you don’t know who you truly are, you’ll never know what you really want.”  ― Roy T. Bennett

“Only the truth of who you are, if realized, will set you free.”  ― Eckhart Tolle

“But above all, my brothers, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let your “yes” be yes and your “no” be no, so that you may not fall under condemnation.” — James 5:12 ESV

“The objective of Islamic ethics is to illuminate the virtues that enable a person to perfect his or her humanity.” — Omar Qureshi, Finding the Authentic Self

“In Buddhism, living authentically means living with honesty and being willing to look at your own illusions and self-deceptions. It also means questioning your self-images and self-limiting identities, and examining the stories you weave about yourself.” — Tricycle, The Buddhist Review

Conclusions:

  • Do not believe what I am telling you. Search for your own authenticity.
  • Find out what it means to “Be Yourself.” What is yourself?
  • Find a mentor, partner or someone who will be honest with you. Do an authenticity check with them every so often.  Ask them if you are an authentic person.
  • Who do you most admire? Are they authentic?  Do they have integrity?  If not, why do you admire them?
  • Are you voting for and supporting people who are authentic and have integrity? Why not?
  • What barriers exist in your life to being authentic?

Next week we will look at Man/Woman’s Search for Love.

I doubt that a person ever existed who did not want or search for love.  Love is older than the Greek gods, older than the Bible, older than the universe.  Everyone knows what love is and no one knows what love is.  Everyone wants love but few really know how to give love.  Love may be the most frequently used word in any language.   It is probably the most frequently misused word in any language as well.  We search for love and many of us will never find it.  Some of us will find it at a very old age and some will find it while very young.  No amount of arguing will ever stop anyone from looking for love.

  1. Arabic: حب (habb)
  2. Chinese: 爱 (ài)
  3. Filipino: Pag-ibig
  4. Swahili: upendo
  5. Hindi — मोहब्बत (mohabbat)
  6. Indonesian: cinta
  7. Japanese: 愛 (ai)
  8. Persian: عشق (ishq)
  9. Punjabi: ਪਿਆਰ (pyaar)
  10. Russian: любовь (lyubov’)
  11. Spanish: Amor

PS:

At the first Republican debate Wednesday night, Seven of the eight Republican presidential candidates on the debate stage raised their hands to confirm that they would support former President Trump as the 2024 GOP nominee, even if Trump is convicted in a court of law. Former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson was the only candidate to keep his hand down.  Some readers have commented that one or the other of these candidates have set themselves apart from Trump and are no longer sycophants.  I think these raised hands are enough evidence to prove that there is little or no integrity in the Republican Leadership today. 

 

 

Free Speech in the Public Arena

free speech

This is part 4 of my series on Free Speech.  In my third part, I talked about the issue of free speech in academia.  Here I would like to discuss how I see the First Amendment playing out in the public sector.  By public sector, I am referring to the street, store, bank, airplane, bus, park, library or any public building or public office space, where you might find yourself standing or sitting.  The First Amendment provides that:

“Congress make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting its free exercise.  It protects freedom of speech, the press, assembly, and the right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

downloadAs with any of the constitutional amendments there is a certain, indeed I would say “high” degree of ambiguity as to the limits of what the Founding Fathers meant by their words.  We know for instance that they did not mean that you could slander or libel anyone with your words.  We know that they did not mean that you could yell “fire” in a crowded theater.  We also know that there are many instances of what the Founding Fathers did not have a clue would become an interpretation for “Free Speech.”  For instance, the Citizens United decision by the US Supreme Court says that the right to make political contributions is a form of free speech.  This will probably go down in history as one of the most egregious interpretations of what the Founding Fathers meant.  The only interpretations that seem more egregious concern several earlier court decisions regarding slavery and the buying and selling of human beings.

Another famous saying is a parody of the “Golden Rule.”  This parody says that “He/She who has the gold makes the rules.”  In terms of free speech, this parody is quite apt.  Corporations have a lot of money, so they decide what free speech is and is not.  The more money or power you have, the more free speech you can ostensibly command.  If you are a US Senator, you will have a greater audience willing to listen to you than you or I would have.

Bernadette Dohrn, the now retired law professor and once upon a time leftist radical, said that “In America, you can say anything you want, until someone starts listening to you.”  This truism seems to have become aggravated by the sheer numbers of lawyers and courts that are willing to hear any type of case regardless of what it is about.  Don’t think for a second that they are doing this to further truth, justice, and the American way of life.  If you have enough money, you can get your day in court.  If you do not, you better have a case that the media finds “sensational.”  Have you ever wondered why some cases get tried much sooner than others?  High profile politicians have the right to a speedy access in appeal courts and even the US Supreme Court considerably faster than you or I ever would.

The Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution says that Americans have the right to “fair and speedy” trial.

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed,”

imagesRecently, I read of the case of an eleven-year-old convicted of killing his stepmother.  His appeal took three and a half years to come to court and then found him not guilty.  On the other hand, Kari Lake, the big lie advocate and loser in the Arizona Governor’s race this past year had appeal after appeal and each one seemed to take less than two or three weeks.  It takes three and a half years to get justice for an eleven-year-old wrongly convicted of murder, but Lake got trial after trial for her baseless and politically motivated claims that they “stole” the election from her.  This same scenario has played out repeatedly in the past few years.  Poor people with no money wait years to get a “fair hearing” while rich bottom feeders like Lake walk in and out of court on an almost daily basis.

This is an excerpt from a talk that Chris Hedges gave on April 4th at the Independent National Convention in Austin, Texas.  He called it “Reclaiming our Country.”

“It is one of the great ironies that the corporate state needs the abilities of the educated, intellectuals and artists to maintain power, yet the moment any begin to think independently they are silenced.  The relentless assault on culture, journalism, education, the arts and critical thinking, has left those who speak in the language of class warfare marginalized, frantic Cassandras who are viewed as slightly unhinged and depressingly apocalyptic.  Those with the courage to shine a light into the inner workings of the machinery, such as Noam Chomsky, are turned into pariahs, or, like Julian Assange, relentlessly persecuted.”

It does not really take much to run afoul of those who want to stifle free speech and free expressions in America.  Here are some examples from my own life.  I give these modestly because they are nowhere near as egregious as some.

  • Told while working for the Metropolitan Council in Minnesota that I had better back the Democratic candidate for Governor or my career would be short-lived. I backed Jesse Ventura instead.
  • Told by the VA Director while working for the VA as a Claims Examiner 7 that I would need to shave my beard off, or that I would never get a promotion.
  • Apparently, a complaint (from someone unknown) about my teaching a unit on current social issues necessitated a security person from the school to burst into my classroom, demanding to see my lesson plans, and wanting to know “who approved these plans?” I informed him that they were part of the regular curriculum, to which he ordered me to not pursue these lesson plans any further.  This happened in a local high school about 4 years ago when I was filling in for the regular teacher who was out for the week.

FH_FOTP2017_WhoTHreatensThePress_infographic_titles_subs_FINAL_1000px-1024x777

In recent years, we have seen more and more examples of speech being stifled by both right and left-wing extremists.  Each side does not want the other side to have a right to speak their piece.  A key cornerstone of our democracy has become so politicized today that agitators feel they have the right to speak but you and I do not.  Lawyers twist the words and definitions to fit the needs of corporations and rich clients but not to find truth and justice.  As Humpty Dumpty said to Alice:

humpty-dumpty-on-wall-with-alice-martin-davey

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

Gold makes the rules, and the Master defines the words.  He who has both the gold and the power decides what is the truth and what lies may be told.

“I can walk into a bookshop and point out a number of books that I find very unattractive in what they say.  But it doesn’t occur to me to burn the bookshop down. If you don’t like a book, read another book.  If you start reading a book and you decide you don’t like it, nobody is telling you to finish it.”   — Salman Rushdie

Libraries, once a bastion of intellectual thought and free speech, have come under attack all over the USA.  State legislatures governed by Republican majorities have drawn up lists of hundreds of books to be removed from public libraries, school libraries and college libraries.  In one state a high school principal was recently fired for allowing a teacher to use a textbook for art appreciation which depicted the famous statue of David.  Book bans have occurred in 138 school districts in 32 states. These districts represent 5,049 schools with a combined enrollment of nearly 4 million students.  — Banned in the USA: Rising School Book Bans Threaten Free Expression and Students’ First Amendment Rights (April 2022),

School-Book-Bans-by-State-e1663182860955

Truth is now routinely perverted by both the media and the so-called justice system in America.  The narratives that you are bombarded with every day and that deign to pass as Free Speech are seldom anything but gross distortions of reality.  Think of the documents you sign for an insurance policy or a mortgage or buying a new car.  Dozens of pages of legal sounding words that have no meaning to the average person.  Even a lawyer would be hard put to explain what you are about to sign.  There is a good chance that you will later find that they covered every loophole needed to protect themselves at your expense.  I give you one example from many in my life.

A few years ago, I purchased a new RV.  The dealer talked me into signing an extended warranty policy for about 2000 dollars.  In less than ten thousand miles, a wheel broke off.  It did not come off because of loose nuts.  The hub and brake assembly all broke off with part of the axel.  It tore through the underbody of the RV causing almost 7000 thousand dollars of damage.  When I called the warranty company, they told me I had no claim.  Their policy covered “defect” not “damage” and that I should read page 32 for an explanation.  Every auto person I talked to said it was a defective hub and wheel.  “NO” said the warranty company.  If I did not agree, I could hire a lawyer, but they added they had fought this battle many times and they “would win.”

I am sure that everyone reading this can find a similar example of signing some long legal sounding document and later finding that the words were crafted to “give you the shaft.”  These legal distortions further the ends of an elite that does not believe in Democracy.  They are like wolves in sheep’s clothing.  Their façade keeps the public passive until they are ready to pounce.  There are many in America today for which Democracy is nothing but a convenient façade.  It is brought out when needed to further their ends.  Ends which as my good friend Dick always said you will find when you “follow the money.”

“Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked.  So was Stalin.  If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise.  Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech.”  — Noam Chomsky

kaliedscope

Free speech is like anything else that someone tells you is free.  It is never free.  There are no free lunches.  If you understand that “Freedom” is never free but is always purchased with the blood of heroes and martyrs, what makes you think that Free Speech is “FREE.”  Free Speech is purchased with the courage to pursue convictions, speaking up when in the minority, and most of all an acceptance of hearing things you don’t want to hear and understanding that truth is like a kaleidoscope.  Each twist of a kaleidoscope brings a different reality into view.

free-speech-week-logo-main

Consider participating in “Free Speech Week” this October 16-22, 2023

FREE SPEECH WEEK

Created in 2005 and originally called National Freedom of Speech Week, Free Speech Week (FSW) takes place the third week of October annually.  Its purpose is to raise public awareness of the importance of freedom of speech and of a free press in our democracy – and to celebrate that freedom.  This non-partisan, non-ideological event is intended to be a unifying celebration.

PS:  Check out the latest Jim Hightower Thoughts on Book Banning.

https://open.substack.com/pub/jimhightower/p/how-perverse-is-the-gops-book-banning?r=zfnvi&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

Can a Lying Elected Politician Keep Their $174,000 dollars a Year Job? 

  santos

‘Twas several nights after Christmas and a few nights before the New Year of 2023 when I first heard the news about George Santos.  A recently elected Representative from NY to a very narrow Republican Majority in the US House of Representatives.  Santos has been caught in a series of lies regarding his background and credentials.  Tulsi Gabbard conducted an interview with him on the Tucker Carlson show this past Tuesday night (12-27-22).  The transcript of this interview was published in “The Hill” by Emily Brooks on 12-27-2022.  I would like to add my commentary to the views that were published regarding this interview.  First, I must give my congratulations to Ms. Gabbard for her interview.  She asked some hard questions and literally kept the lying Santo’s feet to the fire. 

tulsi-gabbard-george-santos-republicans-lies-congress

My prologue to this interview is simply this.  Lying starting with Trump has become endemic in the Republican Party.  They seem to have no qualms or shame when it comes to telling lies.  They will do little or nothing to sanction Santos for two reasons.  First, because lying is the norm for Republicans today, and it is not illegal.  Second, because they do not want to risk losing Santo’s seat in the house.  With this preliminary insight out of the way, I want to add my comments to the following transcript.  I shall try to make my comments obvious by bolding my opinions and viewpoints.

I have one caveat to make before I start.  I am not kicking a sleeping dog.  This dog refuses to stop biting.  He is not giving up his seat and he refuses to accept any responsibility for his lies.  Instead, he says he is ready to serve his constituents and wants the world to just forget his transgressions. 

Tulsi Gabbard tears into George Santos during Fox interview: ‘Do you have no shame?’  —  BY EMILY BROOKS – 12/27/22 9:38 PM ET

Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) ripped into Rep.-elect George Santos (R-N.Y.) over his embellishments and fabrications about his background, asking him point-blank, “Do you have no shame?”

“If I were one of those in New York’s 3rd District right now, now that the election is over, and I’m finding out all of these lies that you’ve told, not just one little lie or one little embellishment — these are blatant lies — my question is, do you have no shame?” Gabbard asked while filling in for Fox News host Tucker Carlson in an interview with Santos on Tuesday evening. “Do you have no shame? And the people who are now, you’re asking to trust you to go and be their voice for them, their families and their kids in Washington?”

“Tulsi, I can say the same thing about the Democrats,” Santos responded. “Look at Joe Biden. Joe Biden has been lying to the American people for 40 years. He’s the president of the United States.  Democrats resoundingly support him.  Do they have no shame?”

Here we have the time-honored way of deflecting the blame by attacking someone else.  It is a version of the philosophical “Ad Hominem” fallacy, where you attack another person to avoid taking any responsibility for your own problems.  Santos attacks Biden and avoids answering the question regarding his lack thereof of any shame.  If he was going to mention a President who lied, he should have mentioned Trump who undoubtedly broke all records for lying to the American people. 

Gabbard interjected, saying that her question was not about the Democrats.

Three cheers for Gabbard who stepped on his strategy.

Santos has emerged from days of silence following reports from The New York Times and other outlets this month that revealed misrepresentations, fabrications and lies about his personal background.

In various interviews with the New York Post and elsewhere this week, Santos has admitted to “embellishing” his resume, including saying that he did not graduate from college and that he did not work directly for financial giants Citigroup and Goldman Sachs.

I love this.  He did not graduate from college.  He did not work for one of the major financial giants.  But he just calls adding these lies to his resume an “embellishment”.  I wonder if you went in for a job interview with lies like this on your resume whether the interviewer would see it as a simple embellishment?   If they found out after you were hired, do you think they would keep you on the job?  Where else in the world can you lie repeatedly and keep your job except for the US House of Representative and US Senate.  The present salary for a US Representative is $174,000 a year.  

Santos says a poor choice of words led to confusion about his work history, insisting that he did business with both companies and helped make “capital introductions” through “limited partnerships.” He relayed some of that explanation in the interview with Gabbard.

I did not lie says Santos, I merely chose my words poorly.  Like me saying that Santos is a lying sack of putrid excrement instead of a lying sack of shit.  Sorry, I just chose my worlds poorly.  I hope I did not offend anyone.  I promise I will choose my words more carefully in the future.

He has also come under fire for representing himself as an “American Jew” and saying that his maternal grandparents fled Europe during World War II, even though reports have emerged that those grandparents were born in Brazil before the war.

This is truly unbelievable.  He is on record and on video as lying to a Jewish assembly about his religion and heritage.  He claims he is culturally Jewish but was raised as a Catholic.  I was raised as a Catholic but was culturally Italian since my father was Italian.  I cannot see how any Catholic could be culturally Jewish.  As many Jewish people will tell you, for many years, Catholicism treated Jews as “Those killers of Christ.”  I remember being told that it was a mortal sin to step into a synagogue.  I am sure my Catholic priest would have had a heart attack if he found out that I attended a “Seder” or Passover rite with some Jewish friends.   

Gabbard pressed Santos on those points.

“My heritage is Jewish. I’ve always identified as Jewish. I was raised as a practicing Catholic,” Santos said. “Not being raised a practicing Jew, I’ve always joked with friends and circles, even within the campaign, I’d say, guys, I’m ‘Jew-ish.’ Remember, I was raised Catholic.”

This sounds like some sort of Orwellian Double Speak.  “Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.” — George Orwell. 1984. Part 1, Chapter 5. 

Santos uses some convoluted thought to try to convince us that deep down he is Jewish.  I suppose if he were running in Alabama, he would be a Baptist and in Utah, he would be a Mormon. 

“So, look, I understand everybody wants to nitpick at me. I’m gonna reassure this once and for all. I’m not a facade. I’m not a persona. I have an extensive career that I worked really hard to achieve. And I’m going to deliver from my experience because I remain committed in delivering results for the American people,” Santos said.

Boohoo.  Please feel sorry for me.  Santos must have picked this shtick up from Nixon.  He needs a small dog in his lap while giving us this speech before I can feel sorry for him.  Yes, I know he has a mother who loves him. 

“Congressman-elect Santos, we’ve given you a lot of time. I think the time that is owed is to the people of New York’s 3rd. It’s hard to imagine how they could possibly trust your explanations when you’re not really even willing to admit the depth of your deception to them,” Gabbard said.

This coming from a Tucker Carlson show host really surprised me.  Gabbard skewered him mercilessly.  She must have forgotten that she switched parties and was now a Republican.  I would not be surprised to see a rebuttal from the Republican party concerning her remarks. 

Gabbard is the second former Democratic member of Congress to interview Santos this week. He also spoke with former Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.), who resigned in 2011 after the revelation of sexually explicit messages he sent to a minor, on WABC radio this week.

My guess is that Weiner and Santos have a lot in common and it is not their Jewishness.  You might remember Weiner as the man who sent a picture of his penis through a text to one of his girl friends while he was married.  Birds of a feather flock together. 

I have nothing more to add folks.  As they say, actions speak louder than words.  When are we going to demand some level of truthfulness in our politicians and trouble them for their lying ads and words?  Even now, I hear people saying “Well, he did not do anything illegal.”  Whatever happened to unethical and immoral?  Are we willing to tolerate deceit and falsehoods regardless of the circumstances because they are not illegal. 

There is a difference between justice and the law.  Justice demands that people we elect are honest and ethical and moral.  Any less should disqualify a person from holding a public office.

How Do You Know if You Know Anything?

truthHow do you know if you know anything?  You have two paths to answer this question.  The first path involves your belief that you do know something.  You can choose this path if you are fairly certain that you know something.  It may surprise you, but this is not a path of science.  This is a Faith-Based path.  No matter what anyone tells you, science relies on faith almost as much as religion relies on faith.

Consider the Heisenberg Principle of Uncertainty and Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems.  Both theories show that ultimately, we can never be certain of anything, and that the fundamental bedrock of even science must then be a degree of faith.  Formulated by Werner Heisenberg, Nobel Prize winning physicist in 1927, the Uncertainty Principle states that we cannot know both the position and speed of a particle, such as a photon or electron, with perfect accuracy; the more we nail down the particle’s position, the less we know about its speed and vice versa. 

Godel’s first incompleteness theorem states that “No consistent system of axioms whose theorems can be listed by an effective procedure (i.e., an algorithm) is capable of proving all truths about the arithmetic of natural numbers.  For any such consistent formal system, there will always be statements about natural numbers that are true, but that are unprovable within the system.  The second incompleteness theorem, an extension of the first, shows that the system cannot demonstrate its own consistency.” — Wikipedia

trust

Let me provide a simple example of what these theories tell us.  For instance, you may say, “I know the earth is round.”  I challenge you to prove this.  The only way that you can prove it is by relying or trusting on the wisdom of experts who say that the earth is round.  Even if you have a picture of the round earth, how do you know that it is real?  In essence, you are relying on faith.  It is your faith in someone you trust whom you believe has more knowledge than you do.  You cannot prove the earth is round so your belief is based on faith.  This explains why climate change deniers are so difficult to argue with.  They refuse to accept any evidence from experts on climate whom they disagree with.  Instead, they find the inevitable expert who disagrees with many other scientists.  Most of us have faith in the majority.  But history has countless examples of where the majority were wrong. 

8d0e042d12f274260bd38c8f1d0bebeb

The second path you can take is what I call the Path of the Atheist.  In this path, you accept what Socrates did that you know nothing.  Socrates was called the wisest man in the world because he believed that “I know that I know nothing.”  The atheist does not believe anything unless it can be proved to them personally.  Since it is impossible that anyone can ever prove anything to you beyond a shadow of a doubt, you must conclude that knowledge (like God) is impossible to know or prove.  The atheist concludes that all possibility of ever conclusively proving anything is impossible.  Thus no one can really know anything. 

The Path of the Atheist diverges from the Faith Based path since with faith we believe things.  We believe that there are facts and there is an ultimate truth.  Even if we cannot find them ourselves.   The scientist’s belief is tempered by realistic probabilities based on experiments and history.  The Path of the Atheist does not believe that there is any ultimate truth.  Truth is only a process that gets us closer to some approximation that we are finally willing to settle for.  The Atheist says, “Show me an ultimate truth that is unvarying and that you can prove will be forever true.”  You might argue that the sun will come up tomorrow, but you only have history to rely on for this.  The dinosaurs might have believed that they would live forever but all it took was one large asteroid to wipe out millions of years of evolution. 

As we go through life, we sometimes choose one path and sometimes the other.  Given whatever circumstances we are confronted with, we select the path that provides the most comfort and certainty for us.  Even the Path of the Atheist is comforting since the atheist does not expect any irrefutable truth.  This gives the atheist the ability to ignore whatever fads and foibles society is following in search of a truth that does not exist, or at least for the atheist does not exist.   

truth as factual

What is the meaning of all this?  Are we arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of the pin?  Are we engaging in the same logic that Bishop Berkeley did.  A man who denied that there is a reality of matter apart from what the mind perceived.  Some philosophers have argued that we cannot prove or ever know if we are living or dreaming.  I would guess that most of you reading this blog persist in the idea that you are truly alive and not dreaming now. 

What then is the value of discussing truth?  In this age of misinformation, disinformation, false facts, and fake news, it is a matter that we all need to take more seriously.  For generations and centuries, humans have searched for the truth.  We are told that the “Truth will set us free” and that truth is a value even more important than honesty.  But as Sara Gran said ““Most people wouldn’t know the truth if it bit them in the ass and paid for the privilege.”  Could it be that to paraphrase Colonel Nathan R. Jessup in a “Few Good Men”, “You don’t want the truth because you can’t handle the truth.” 

truth will set you free

Truth is a great deal more complicated than we realize.  It is one of those “holy grails” which if we find may give us eternal life.  Problem is that no one has found either the Holy Grail or the Truth.  It is said that you have your truth and I have my truth.  Dr. Deming, an expert on quality insisted that nothing could be accomplished without an operational definition of any concept that was going to be studied.  He said “An operational definition is a procedure agreed upon for translation of a concept into measurement of some kind.”   The science of an operational definition lay in the measurement of the concept but the starting point for measurement lay in the agreement between two “reasonable” people as to what measurement procedure would be used.  Without an agreement there was no starting or ending point. 

We may meet someone on the street or at a party or it may be a friend or relative and they advance some theory or ideas which contradicts the facts as we know them.  A popular controversy these days among some is whether Trump really won the election and if it was not stolen from him.  If you believe it was stolen, you will have a set of ideas about what constitutes a “fair” election. 

trumpThe Faith Based Path could lead one to accept that hundreds of systems across America could not all have been wrong and that the tallies were accurate because someone you trust told you they were.  If you do not trust the poll counters, you will reject the decisions made by election boards and cling to the idea that Trump was cheated by liars and scoundrels.  Either way it is a matter of faith.

If you follow the Path of the Atheist, you may reject the vote tallies because you do not believe any voting procedure could be foolproof.  You accept that there is error in any system and the deciding factor for you lies in the degree of error that you are willing to accept.  Given your proclivity to accept a certain amount of error, you will either accept of reject any election results based on the voting tallies.

I chose the Faith Based path and accepted that fifty state election boards cannot all be wrong.  On the other hand, I followed the Path of the Atheist since I know that error exists in any procedure, and I do not trust that any election process can rule out all the errors in the system.  I accept the errors in life just as I accept the risk of dying on the road tomorrow when I drive someplace.  It is not a matter of faith; it is a matter of statistical probability.  Tallies like life will never be perfect.

truth 2

What do we do?  First stop looking for an ultimate truth.  Truth is like beauty and is in the eye of the beholder.  Second, ask others what they base their truth on.  See if you can come up with an operational definition for establishing truth that you are both willing to accept.  Third, agree on a way to measure the outcome of whatever you are measuring or looking at.  Accept that error will always exist and that predictability for any ultimate truth is near zero. 

The best we can achieve in life is a “useful” truth that we may find to make life easier and happier for all of us.    

 

Let’s All Kill Buddha!

download

Years ago, I spent some time studying Zen Buddhism.  Some of this was the “fad” of the day during the sixties and seventies.  Zen was so different than the Christianity or Catholicism that I had grown up with.  Zen spoke in koans and paradoxes.  A koan is a paradoxical anecdote or riddle, used in Zen Buddhism to demonstrate the inadequacy of logical reasoning and to provoke enlightenment.  For instance, “what is the sound of one hand clapping?”  Christianity has its parables and well renowned truths, but Zen teaches one to be skeptical of everything.   

Perhaps the most famous “truth” of Christianity is that Jesus was God incarnate.  In other words, Jesus was born a man but was actually a God.  This claim is indisputable among followers of Christianity.  Buddha never claimed to be a God.  Buddha never claimed to have any absolute truths.  One of the most famous lines that I have used many times was “If you meet the Buddha on the road, Kill Him!”  This message might seem bizarre to some people, but it makes absolute sense to many Zen followers.  Even Buddha’s message is not to be taken as “gospel” truth but instead examined and questioned with an open mind. 

quote-question-everything-learn-something-answer-nothing-euripides-9-13-07

I think about “Killing Buddha” quite frequently.  In this day of lies, misinformation, disinformation, and deliberately confusing legalese, we see more and more people taking sides about issues that they have seldom spent much time thinking or questioning about.  Emotions rule conversations today rather than facts, data, or logic.  We believe doctors, salespeople, lawyers, reporters, and politicians despite the fact that they have a vested interest in making money off of us.  Doctors with their often-needless surgeries, reporters more interested in advertising revenue than the truth, politicians trying to be reelected for life, lawyers with few or no ethics dedicated to winning at all costs, and salespeople trying to make as much money as they can on each sale.  They all want you to think that they know the absolute truth.  Jesus said, “The Truth will set you free”, but where will you find the truth?  Ask a politician.  Ask a doctor,  Ask a lawyer.  Only if you are delirious.

maxresdefault

Can you imagine if I said, “When you meet a politician or lawyer on the road, kill him or her.”  On the contrary, the public keeps re-electing politicians to office.  It does not seem to matter to people that Congressional approval ratings are some of the lowest they have been in history; they keep electing the same liars back to office.  The reelection rate of incumbents is nearly ninety percent.

Congressional stagnation is an American political theory that attempts to explain the high rate of incumbency re-election to the United States House of Representatives.  In recent years this rate has been well over 90 per cent, with rarely more than 5-10 incumbents losing their House seats every election cycle.”Wikipedia

207579

We have some very interesting challenges ahead of us.  Climate change, excessive militarization, corporate capitalism, assaults on democracy and the obfuscation of legitimate information in favor of bias and distortion.  I have not even mentioned sexism, homophobia, racism, xenophobia and the decline of education and the media.  Many of the people I know think that these problems are insurmountable and that they herald the decline of America.  Some believe that they represent the decline of humanity and civilization.  Optimist or pessimist or realist, I doubt very much that we can overcome these problems if we do not have the will or desire to start dialogues that question everything.  A quote by Einstein that I much admire goes:

“We cannot solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them.”

EintsteinQuestionEverythingI have often been accused of being a pessimist but there is nothing about this quote that is pessimistic.  It is simply a fact that we must use our imaginations to see a different world and to believe that a different world can exist.  As long as we are stuck in the same thinking that generated our problems, we are not free to consider alternative realities.  We need more thinking about possibilities and the future.  We are bogged down with what Dr. Deming called the “problems of today.”  Deming said, “We must balance the problems of today with the problems of tomorrow.”

What if we taught our children in school to “Kill Buddha?”  What would tests look like?  What would a successful student look like?  What would schools look like?  Can you imagine students going around and killing Buddhas all over the place?  Imagine for a second if all the lawyers, doctors, politicians, and salespeople were challenged.  I suppose there are many who would be horrified at this idea.  Isn’t the role of education to teach facts and knowledge?  How would students get a job if all they knew how to do was “kill” Buddha? 

maxresdefault (1)

Hope springs eternal in the human breast.  But what is hope without a plan?  We need positive direction from our leaders, but we also need more transparency and innovation on the part of our leaders.  Supporters and leaders should be in a dance together.  A dance of rhythm and harmony.  Leaders must be open and honest with their supporters and supporters must be willing to challenge their leaders at every turn and nuance that life puts forward.  There is too little dancing together today.  Demagoguery is not dancing nor are spell binding speeches excoriating the opposition. 

One has only to watch or read the political advertising to see the worst of American politics.  Political ads one after another spewing lies and misinformation about the opposition.  No one can tell what any politician stands for or what their plans are because they are so busy bashing their opponents.  Benjamin Franklin once said, ”We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”  I will paraphrase Franklin by saying, “Either Americans will all join together to destroy the problems facing us or we will all be destroyed together by these problems.”   That is the simple truth. 

 

The Biggest Lie That I Ever Told

download

The other day, we were having a discussion in my writing class and someone suggested we all write a piece on “The biggest lie that we ever told.”  At first, this sounded like a fun exercise.  Before starting it, you quickly realize that it makes one feel very vulnerable.  To open our consciences and share with others something that we may not be proud of.  In fact, something that we may have kept hidden for many years.  This is a very challenging and scary thing to do.  If you don’t think so, than I suggest you try this activity.  Here was my contribution to the effort.

How do I start or even write on this subject when I have never ever told a lie in my entire life.  Some of the things I did, I don’t think count as lying.

There was the time that I chopped the cherry tree down and my dad asked me who did it.  I simply told him that I did not remember.  I think someone must have done it but I could not remember who.

Then there was the time that I blew the three houses down and ate all the juicy fat pigs.  When they took me to court, I plead the 5th Amendment against self-incrimination.

The only other possible time that anyone could accuse me of lying was when I slept in the three bears’ beds and ate their porridge.  I ran so fast that even the bears could not catch me.

Oh, I almost forgot the time that  I stole the goose that laid the golden eggs.  The big old ogre did not need the goose anyway.  I fixed his butt when he tried to climb down the bean stalk after me.

So that’s it folks.  I have lived a life of honesty and would never ever lie, steal, or not tell the truth.  So help me God!

download (1)

Why You Should Believe Nothing You Read or Hear in the News!

news-icons (1)I want to make an argument as to why most of what you hear or read is biased, prejudiced and based on narrow minded thinking.  Most of what you read will not lead you to the truth but will take you down a path away from the truth.  My argument will also apply to what you are about to read.  I am biased, narrow minded and prejudiced.  So why should you read or listen to what I am about to write?  Well, let’s start at the beginning.

Like many of you reading this, I consider myself somewhat of a truth seeker.  Although, I believe few if any “absolute” truths actually exist.  Nevertheless, I read a wide variety of books and magazines.  I listen to many different sources including TV, Radio, Podcasts, TED Talks, documentaries, and YouTube videos.  I attend training sessions, conferences, and talks by noted experts whenever possible.  I also scan many different news sources each day to find a variety of perspectives concerning political events and popular news.  My friends consider me well informed and very knowledgeable on a wide range of subjects.

maxresdefaultI have been seeking the truth or what might pass as “truth” for most of my 75 years on this earth.  I was considered the “smartest” guy in the room in many of my high school and college classes.  The authorities or those that are supposed to be good judges of truth and knowledge gave me two undergraduate degrees, one master’s degree and a Ph.D. Degree.  Once upon a time, I belonged to many different professional associations and was also a member of MENSA, the so-called high IQ society.  None of my qualifications or associations prepared me any better than anyone else upon this earth to find the TRUTH.  Like most of you, I am still looking and hoping that the “Truth will set me free.”  If only, I can find it.

Fake news-01

A few days ago, I noticed seven different editorials on Google News concerning the Ukrainian War.  Each of the editorials was written by a professional journalist and each espoused some very critical ideas.  Some of these ideas would carry weight with readers and no doubt influence public opinion for good or bad.  Six of the journalists’ names were listed and one was not.  Now most stories we get in the news whether on TV or print are written by journalists.  Less frequently it will be some “policy” expert or high-ranking government official who will be doing an opinion piece or some type of interview.

I started to ask myself a few questions:

  • What are their professional qualifications?
  • How much influence or weight do these journalists carry?
  • How much slant or bias do these journalists carry?
  • Are journalists and the media really qualified to tell us what we should or should not be doing?

I looked up each of the journalists to see what their qualifications were.  Basically, they were professionally trained journalists and most of them had extensive experience in foreign relations.  Neither of these attributes makes them an expert on the Ukraine but it is conceivable that they might have more knowledge in some areas of foreign policy than the general public.  Again, more knowledge does not mean less biases. Here are the news sources and brief bios for the six journalists I researched:

The Washington Post- Liz Sly and Dan Lamothe

Liz Sly (born in the United Kingdom) is a British journalist based in Beirut.  She is currently a correspondent with The Washington Post covering Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and other countries of the Middle East.   She graduated from the University of Cambridge.

Dan Lamothe is an award-winning military journalist and war correspondent.  He has written for Marine Corps Times and the Military Times newspaper chain since 2008, traveling the world and writing extensively about the Afghanistan war both from Washington and the war zone.  He also has reported from Norway, Spain, Germany, the Republic of Georgia and while underway with the U.S. Navy.

NPR – Greg Myre

Greg Myre is an American journalist and an NPR national security correspondent with a focus on the intelligence community.  Before joining NPR, he was a foreign correspondent for the Associated Press and The New York Times for 20 years.  He reported from more than 50 countries and covered a dozen wars and conflicts.

The Wall Street Journal – David Henninger

Mr. Henninger was a finalist for a Pulitzer Prize in editorial writing in 1987 and 1996 and shared in the Journal’s Pulitzer Prize in 2002 for the paper’s coverage of the attacks on September 11. In 2004, he won the Eric Breindel Journalism Award for his weekly column.  He has won the Gerald Loeb Award for commentary, the Scripps Howard Foundation’s Walker Stone Award for editorial writing and the American Society of Newspaper Editors’ Distinguished Writing Award for editorial writing.  He is a weekly panelist on the “Journal Editorial Report” on Fox News.

The Atlantic – Eliot Cohen

Eliot Asher Cohen (born April 3, 1956, in Boston, Massachusetts) is an American political scientist. He was a counselor in the United States Department of State under Condoleezza Rice from 2007 to 2009.  In 2019, Cohen was named the 9th Dean of the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at Johns Hopkins University, succeeding the former dean, Vali Nasr.  Before his time as dean, he directed the Strategic Studies Program at SAIS.

Cohen was one of the first neoconservatives to publicly advocate war against Iran and Iraq.  In a November 2001 op-ed for The Wall Street Journal, Cohen identified what he called World War IV and advocated the overthrow of Iran’s government as a possible next step for the Bush Administration. Cohen claimed “regime change” in Iran could be accomplished with a focus on “pro-Western and anticlerical forces” in the Middle East and suggested that such an action would be “wise, moral and unpopular (among some of our allies)”

The New York Times – Cora Engelbrecht

Cora Engelbrecht is a contributor to the RIGHTS blog.  She recently received her BA in nonfiction writing from Wesleyan University, and now works in New York as a freelance writer, researcher, and graphic artist.  Her interest for human rights and global conflict stems from her time spent researching and writing abroad in Tanzania and South Africa.

rathom-trench-fb

I next turned to the question of how much influence do journalists carry?  The story of John Revelstoke Rathom (1868–1923) is very informative in this regard.  He was a journalist, editor, and author based in Rhode Island at the height of his career. In the years before World War I, he was a prominent advocate of American participation in the war against Germany.

c9713250-e5eb-46c7-8ea9-2810435084fa-9781643139364“Rathom campaigned for the U.S. to enter World War I in support of the British.  Under his management, the Providence Journal produced a series of exposés of German espionage and propaganda in the U.S.  In 2004, that same newspaper reported that much of Rathom’s coverage was a fraud: ‘In truth, the Providence Journal had acquired numerous inside scoops on German activities, mostly from British intelligence sources who used Rathom to plant anti-German stories in the American media.’” –  Wikipedia

It seems logical to assume that since we did enter the war and since the Brits did go out of their way to bias American policy that the efforts of Rathom and others had a major influence on our decision to enter the war on England’s side. America was persuaded by the media that we should enter the war when there was substantial public opinion to stay out of the mess that Europe was in.  My own reading of WW I shows a totally different scenario than from WW II.  I have little doubt that we should have entered the war against Hitler.  However, the picture from WW I is quite different.  I think that each side had equal claims to legitimacy for their war efforts.  But the media heavily influenced our eventual entry into the war.

Next I wanted to see if anyone had opinions about the bias or prejudices that the typical journalist might have.  I found the following comment in a recent article by Politico, “Why Journalists Love War”, by Jack Shafer  03/17/2022

“NBC News reporter Richard Engel, a veteran foreign war correspondent, dropped a tweet a few days after the war began that appeared to lament that U.S. forces hadn’t strafed the huge Russian convoy approaching Kyiv, seemingly unimpressed that such a strike might launch World War III.  Reporters didn’t call in bombers at White House press secretary Jen Psaki’s Monday briefing, but the tone of their repeated questions almost made it sound like they were advocating a no-fly zone and fresh jets for Ukraine.  And the New York Post left no ambiguity about where they stood with its super-partisan “Fight Like Zel” cover headline.”

“The overwhelming majority of U.S. journalists have taken a more subdued position on the war, identifying with Ukraine against the aggressor Russians, but stopping just short of cheerleading. Even so, journalists can’t hide the seductive draw of the bloodworks.  They can’t help themselves. They love war.”

Photojournalist,Documenting,War,And,Conflict

Of course, this is only one opinion.  However, it fit well with my observations.  I have noticed every day calls by journalists for increased efforts to support Ukraine that might well lead to a Nuclear War.  As I read these brash comments, I sit wondering where were the calls to intervene in Nigeria, Rhodesia, Yemen, and Cambodia?  Why are the news outlets pushing a narrative that implies world disaster if the Ukraine falls to Russia?

Listen please!  I would like to see the Ukrainians kick all the Russian asses back to Siberia or some other cold place.  However, I am not willing to start a Nuclear War over the Ukraine.  There have been too many missed opportunities by the West during the past five years that would have avoided the present war.  What is it that brings out the desire to have a nuclear confrontation with Russia?  Nothing I can see except a Democratic Party that needs to look tough and a cadre of journalists pushing a narrative for more and more support by our country for a nation that we do not even have a treaty with.

“The link between safety and ethics may not be immediately obvious, but the same ambitions and economic factors that pressure inexperienced and poorly prepared freelance journalists to enter battle zones also pressure journalists to present the news as they think that their paymasters most want to hear it.”  — https://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/ethics-safety-solidarity-journalism — Originally published as a chapter of “Conflict reporting in the smartphone era – from budget constraints to information warfare”

A book that I am reading is “The Science of Fear” (2008) by Daniel Gardner.  The following  insight by Gardner is quite pertinent to this discussion.

9780226567198“The media are among those that profit by marketing fear – nothing gives a boost to circulation and ratings like a good panic – but the media also promote unreasonable fears for subtler and more compelling reasons.  The most profound is the simple love of stories and storytelling.  For the media, the most essential ingredient of a good story is the same as that of a good movie, play or tale told by a campfire.  It has to be about people and emotions, not numbers and reason.  Thus, the particularly tragic death of a single child will be reported around the world while a massive and continuing decline in child mortality rates is hardly noticed.” — Pg. 294

Ever since the decline of print news and the rise of the internet, the media has become a cesspool of click bait headlines, gross news reports about inane subjects, media celebrities touted as royalty and increasingly bizarre stories designed to spread fear.  There is no more morality or ethics in the news than there is in a cartel, mafia, or mega-corporation.  It is all about the money and there never seems to be enough these days.  Is the media biased is actually a very stupid question.  Right, left, central it does not matter.  They all have one agenda and that is to sell advertising for their corporate sponsors

My final question was, “Are journalists and the media really qualified to tell us what we should or should not be doing?”  My answer is that they are no more qualified than anyone else on the street or even one of your friends or relatives.  A study done several years ago and published in a book called “Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know?” (2005) by Philip E. Tetloc examined the link between experts’ opinions and how often they were right.

Im-an-expert-600x412

Tetloc in his heavily researched study found that experts are often no better at making predictions than most other people, and how when they are wrong, they are rarely held accountable.  Kahneman and Tversky in their book “Judgment Under Uncertainty” (1982) identify dozens of cognitive biases that impact the thinking ability of human beings.  They both later won a Nobel Prize for their work in behavioral economics.  It is often the most highly educated people who suffer from these biases the most.

Thomas Kuhn’s “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” (1962) dealt with the biases that the scientific community held regarding theories and principles.  Kuhn showed how difficult it was for the scientific community to let go of “old paradigms” and adopt new paradigms.  This was true even when all the evidence showed that the new paradigms did a better job of explaining the subject under study than the old paradigm.  Science history is full of many theories that took fifty or more years to be accepted simply due to the biases and resistance to change that is prevalent among scientists.  This is as true of scientists as it is of journalists, politicians, and the average person.

What is the answer:

A friend of mine said that the most important thing we have to do is to teach our children to question everything.  To question is the heart and soul of critical thinking.  However, we must be cautious lest we raise a nation or world of nihilists.  There is a difference between rejecting everything and questioning everything.

I am not a nihilist though I see a fine line between my thinking and nihilism.  I do not believe in absolute truth, but I think there are approximate truths.  As we learn more and more about anything, our truths get closer to the absolute, but we can never reach it.  I think the same way about meaning in life.  Meaning exists but only in our minds.  It will change many times during our lives.  The same is true for morality and values.  They exist but only in our minds.  Like the Velveteen Rabbit, they become real when we make them so.

Purchasing-Power-of-the-US-Dollar

I used to hold up a dollar bill and ask my students how much was it worth?   They typically replied one dollar.  I asked them why it was worth a dollar?  Answers varied, but the truth or close to it is that it is because people believe that it is worth a dollar.  In terms of labor, ink, and paper, it costs the Federal government 6.2 cents to print a dollar.  In terms of buying value, a dollar in 1926 is worth only 15.58 cents today.  However, this is not an absolute either since the current value of a dollar actually varies from state to state.  The value of a dollar varies about 30 cents from the lowest to the highest state across the USA.  In Mississippi, a dollar is worth $1.16, while in Hawaii, the dollar is only worth 84.39 cents.

So, seeing is believing or is believing seeing?  Is there a difference between perception and reality or are they the same?  Can we ever escape the Rashomon effect?  The biases in perception created by our own desires to protect our egos or the egos of others.

1200-610551-47762564-39573934

There is little I have learned in my life that supports my willingness to accept anything as 100 percent factual, 100 percent truthful or 100 percent valid and reliable.  The solution is to question everything.  Do not accept anything as absolute.  When it comes to politicians, lawyers, salespeople, and journalists, we all need to be on guard.  Their built-in bias is not for the truth but for the dollar or at least 84 cents on the dollar.

quote-the-media-has-enormous-power-the-media-is-undergoing-huge-changes-now-it-seemed-like-thomas-hunt-morgan-67-60-81

 Update:  4/29/22

Just read the following on CNBC.  This “brilliant” analysis by a guy who writes regularly for a variety of news outlets and is listed as a “Tutor” notes the following:

“I think it’s outside the realm of possibility right now that there’s going to be a nuclear war or World War III that really spills over that far beyond Ukraine’s borders,” Samuel Ramani, a geopolitical analyst and associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, told CNBC.

Dr. Samuel Ramani’s credentials for this brilliant piece of optimistic analysis is that he is a tutor of politics and international relations at the University of Oxford, where he received his doctorate in March 2021. Somehow this makes him an expert in what Russia will do next in the Ukraine.  His “beyond optimism” comes at a time when Putin is starting to get more and more desperate in his bid to defeat the Ukraine.  Putin is becoming a cornered rat and NATO is pushing him into more and more of a corner.  Despite this, the genius who is less than two years since he finished his Ph.D. degree says “it is “OUTSIDE” the realm of possibility that Putin will launch a nuclear strike.  It would only be “OUTSIDE” if Nuclear weapons did not exist.  Questions I have are:

  • Why is CNBC relying on the credentials of someone with so little expertise to give us such an analysis?
  • How could anyone in their right mind say that something is impossible when that something already exists?
  • What is the “narrative” behind the focus by the Western news?
  • Why is NATO supporting a war when we have no treaty with the Ukraine.

 

Who Speaks for Integrity?

download

When I wrote my series of blogs on the Seven Most Important Virtues, I neglected to add Integrity.  Limiting myself to seven, I felt that the seven I identified were more important than any other virtues.  This was simply a judgement call.  I have been challenged on it several times and indeed I challenge myself on the list.  There is hardly a day goes by that I wonder if I should not have numbered Integrity among the Seven.  Well, as they say, that is water under the dam.  What I would like to do in this blog is discuss Integrity.  What is Integrity?  Why is Integrity so important?  How do we get Integrity?  Finally, how do we sustain Integrity?

What is Integrity?

download (1)Integrity is everything to lose and nothing to gain, except your self-respect.  Integrity is standing up for what you believe is right even when everyone is against you.  Integrity is the ability to put compassion and kindness ahead of self-interest.  Integrity cannot co-exist with greed.  It cannot co-exist with lust.  It cannot co-exist with a thirst for power.  It cannot co-exist with a drive for money, fame, or fortune.  All of these elements are like Kryptonite to Integrity.  Kryptonite was the one thing that could rob Superman of his powers.  Lust, greed, money, fame, and power all have the ability to rob one of his/her integrity.

One example of a man without integrity was Goethe’s Faust.  Faust was considered the smartest man alive.  He was a genius and a consummate intellectual.  There was little that he did not know about or could not speak intelligently about.  Yet, Faust was unhappy.  Old age had creeped up on him.  His desire for youth and sex overcame his ability to think with the maturity befitting his status.  He sold his soul to Satan and in the bargain sold his integrity.  His lack of integrity lead to the death of another human being and to his own banishment to hell.

82d6d633-d7ce-4e27-959e-37dab25c0c24__1_

There are many examples of men and women with integrity.  I think of the whistleblowers who sacrifice their careers and sometime their lives to report issues that might be dangerous to others.  I think of the journalists in countries like Mexico who risk their lives every day to report injustices.  I think of the prosecutors and law enforcement officers in countries where criminals have the ability to enact retribution and death when they are charged with a crime.  In all these examples, there is nothing for these courageous people to gain and everything to lose by their standing up for what they believe is right.  This is integrity.

Why is Integrity Important?

I believe that it is fair to say that never before in the history of America has there been so little integrity shown by our political leaders.  Right, Left, Democrat, Republican, Independent, it does not matter.  There are too many political leaders who are driven by greed and a desire for power.  You may argue with this analysis but when I see even a third of our elected officials calling for term limits, I will recant my assertion.  When I see a third of our elected officials with a plan to eliminate paid lobbyists, I will recant my assertion.

Political_Integrity_-_iStock.com-Bobboz_resizedPolitics is a sham in America today.  We have men and women who are elected for life and spend more time campaigning then they do in serving their constituents.  Public servants who start collecting money to run their next campaigns within days of winning their present office.  We have a system of government where money is the most important factor in who gets elected and who gets reelected.  Our politicians are more worried about losing votes than they are in the constitution or in protecting our democracy.  What Integrity is there in supporting a riot to overthrow a fair election that every court and every state in America found was fairly conducted?  The media seized on the outrageousness of the Big Lie to sell news.  The losing party seized on the credibility of millions of gullible supporters to buy the Big Lie and try to maintain their power.

imagesThe media in America has become another hallowed institution gutted by greed and a desire for more and more money.  Reporters, writers, and journalists in America today are more interested in selling advertising than they are in balanced objective reporting.  You can divide the news up by whether they lean Right or Left, Liberal or Conservative, Democrat or Republican.  Each side has a mirror image on the other side of the political spectrum.  CNN is opposed by Fox News.  The New York Times is opposed by The New York Post and the Washington Post is opposed by the Washington Times.  One side supports the Right and the other side supports the left.  This is not balanced reporting, and no truth comes out of the dynamic between the two sides.  What both sides have in common are reporters who will report the most useless, tasteless, uninformative stories if they perceive that these stories will sell advertising or if they can figure out a clickbait title that will attract readers and thereby expose them to paid commercials.

I see few solutions to the problems I have noted above except to start holding our leaders and media to standards of Integrity that do not seem to exist.  This brings us to the issue of where Integrity comes from.

How Do We Get Integrity?

I do not believe humans are born with Integrity.  I do not think that there is a gene or DNA for Integrity.  Humans learn Integrity like they learn to speak.  The morals, ethics and traditions of any society become part of the fabric of learning that a child goes through.  Integrity is a virtue.  It may be valued more in some families and cultures more than others.  There is an Index of Public Integrity that measures five factors that the developers link to Integrity and is used to assess a countries capacity to control corruption and ensure that public resources are spent honestly.   The six scales used in this index include:

  1. Judicial Independence
  2. Administrative Burden
  3. Trade Openness
  4. Budget-Transparencies
  5. E-Citizenship
  6. Freedom of the Press

Idownload (3)f you want more of a description of each scale you can follow the hyperlink above.  The USA ties for 10th place with Great Britain on this index.  I can see some correlation with Integrity, but I can see many differences.  I think honesty is one component of Integrity, but Integrity is more complex than being simply honest.  An honest person can still lack integrity if they are unwilling to stand up for what they believe.  Cowardice and Integrity are incompatible.

Professor Stephen L. Carter of Yale Law School points out in his book “Integrity,” one cannot have integrity without being honest, but one can be honest and yet lack integrity. … Integrity in its bare-bones essence means adherence to principles.

You cannot buy Integrity.  You cannot inherit Integrity.  Fortunately, Integrity does not have a price tag.  It is open to everyone.  Young people, old people, women, men, and people from different ethnic backgrounds all can find Integrity.  I use the work “Find” because you must seek Integrity.  It is a treasure, and you must look for it.  You can acquire Integrity, but you can also lose Integrity.  However, you cannot give it away and no one can steal it from you.  It is one of the most unique treasures in the world.  So, where do we find this treasure?  There are three rules for finding Integrity.

  1. It must be something you value personally
  2. You must value it more than your life, your career or anything else that you might ever possess.
  3. You must not expect applause or accolades. It is more likely you will be criticized and condemned. 

If you can accept these three rules, then finding Integrity is easy.  Simply establish a set of morals, virtues, and ethics that you believe in and start standing up for them.  When they are challenged, you must speak out.  Your actions and behaviors must reflect our values.  Do not preach one thing and do another.  Do what you say you will do.  When you feel like taking the easy way out, you must take the road that leads to consistency with your actions and values.  The simple formula to remember is that:

Integrity = Morals + Behavior + Consistency

How do We Sustain Integrity?

Integrity can be lost as well as found.  There are many examples of people who once were exemplars of shining Integrity but who succumbed to temptations for greed and power.  It takes a great deal of fortitude and courage to maintain a life of Integrity.  I think of people like Jesus Christ who was not tempted by the devil and went to his death for what he preached.  Pilate gave him opportunities to recant but Jesus refused.  Socrates went to his death also after refusing to recant his beliefs.  I would like to share the example of one more recent person of great Integrity.

85557

“María Santos Gorrostieta Salazar (1976 – 2012) was a Mexican physician and politician of the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD).  From 2008 to 2011, she served as mayor of Tiquicheo, a small town in the Mexican state of Michoacán.  In spite of three failed assassination attempts during her tenure as mayor, Gorrostieta Salazar continued to be outspoken in the fight against organized crime.  In a fourth attack, Gorrostieta Salazar was kidnapped and assassinated by suspected drug traffickers on 15 November 2012.” – Wikipedia

To this date, there has been no one charged and tried in connection with her murder.  How many people do you know who would stand up to a drug cartel after even one attempt on their lives?  Maria was a physician.  She could have lived a life of relative ease and prosperity simply by ignoring the crimes going on around her.  Instead she stood up for the law and standing up cost Maria her life.  Who is saying her name today?

integrity in the workplace - integrity-traits-integrity-in-the-workplace

Like any skill or talent, you must practice it.  Practice is one means of sustaining Integrity.  Part of practice is an honest self-reflection.  Each day or week you need to ask yourself if you have been a person of Integrity.  What did you do that showed Integrity?  What did you do or say that allowed you to stand up for your values and ethics?  What did you do that was not consistent with your values?  How could you be more consistent with your values and behaviors?

There is a popular meme that says, “How do you get to Carnegie Hall?  Practice!  Practice! Practice!”  There can be no Integrity without practice, action, and reflection.  Stand up for your values and morals and you will be a Person of Integrity.  Every person who can say that they are a Person of Integrity is one more person that will help to change the world for the better.

“The supreme quality for leadership is unquestionably integrity. Without it, no real success is possible, no matter whether it is on a section gang, a football field, in an army, or in an office.”- Dwight D. Eisenhower

“The greatness of a man is not in how much wealth he acquires, but in his integrity and his ability to affect those around him positively.”- Bob Marley

 

Optimist, Pessimist or Realist

1280-difference-between-pessimist-optimist-realist

Are you an optimist, pessimist, or realist?  I have a good friend who always says that he leans towards being a “guy whose glass is half-full.”  I guess he is a pessimist.  I know I am married to an optimist, because whenever I say anything negative about anyone, she will provide a contrasting optimistic perspective.  I tend to believe that I lean towards pessimism.  I like to think that I am a realist.  When someone asks me if my glass is half-full or half-empty my answer will depend on whether my glass is being filled up or emptied.  Nevertheless, I suspect many would find that my blogs reflect a rather negative view of life and humanity.

optimist-quote

Climate Change:

Pessimist: “The end is near; the end is near.  We have destroyed the world with carbon pollution, and it is too late to do anything about it.  Nature magazine published a study which shows that Global Warming stated as early as 1830 CE.”

Optimist: “There is still time to do something about climate change.  Humanity has faced disasters before, and we always overcome them.  They thought that we would destroy ourselves with nuclear weapons, but we learned to use other strategies to deal with our differences.”

Realist: “Maybe we have just been lucky.”

quote-both-optimists-and-pessimists-contribute-to-society-the-optimist-invents-the-aeroplane-george-bernard-shaw-39-34-36

Corrupt Government:

Pessimist:  Politicians since the days of Plato and Socrates have always been corrupt.  There is no such thing as an honest politician.  Lying comes naturally to all politicians and the truth is only an inconvenience for most of them.  Politicians have become worse and worse over the years in terms of lacking morality and ethics.  They will always do what is expedient and they are all amoral.”

Optimist: “How can you make such a blanket generalization?  There have been many good politicians and many or them are very honest and moral.  Look at Marcus Aurelius, Rómulo Betancourt, Thomas Sankara, Nelson Mandela, Lee Kuan Yew, Jimmy Carter, and Muhammadu Buhari.  These men were all honest leaders who fought for the welfare of their people and did it selflessly.  They were capable, incorruptible leaders who made a real difference in the lives of their followers.

Realist: “You win some and you lose some.  On the whole, it would seem that we have more leaders like Trump than we do leaders like Gandhi.”

download

Education:

Pessimist: “Pouring money into education is a waste of time.  Kids are learning less today than they did in the early days of public education.  Half the kids in school are bored.  Teacher turnover is at an all time high and classrooms are chaotic.  Parents do not support teacher discipline anymore.  Schools have become jails for most students who would rather be home.  Kids today do not see the value in education because parents do not.  Schools are just factories for the more privileged to come out and get the high paying jobs in society while the rest of the pack will work for Walmart or McDonalds.”

Optimist: “We live in a more educated society today then even twenty years ago.  Education has been responsible for raising the standard of living the world over.  People are living longer than ever because of scientific advances in hygiene, medicine, and public health.  Without education, we would still be dying in our mid-forties instead of in our mid-seventies.  Kids today learn different things then when we were in school.  They are more visually literate, and computers have been a new tool that students today are using to change the world for the better.”

Realist: “We seem to take two steps forward and one back.  For every pro about education today, there is a con.  For every pro about technology there is a con.  We need to have a broader perspective on change that will enable us to embrace new ideas and let go of old ideas that no longer work.”  We simply keep adding pages to school textbooks without taking any out.”

9b5c1a93d55455e007ee15be31b6bbae

I could go on and on with examples of the quite different outlooks that life provides us.  Who is right?  I doubt that we will ever really know.  Many of the old sayings exist to provide us with some direction on how to live.  A friend of mine tried to convince me that writing should be positive and inspirational.  His motto was, “You catch more flies with sugar than with vinegar.”  According to my friend, people will ignore writing that is too dismal and negative.  It is his opinion that writers should provide a path forward to growth and development.  I told another friend the other day that “hope without action is hopeless.”  It is not enough to just hope for change, you need to do something about it.  I like to think that my writings provide a path forward.

Nevertheless, we are all familiar with the concept of being too “Pollyannish.”  Someone who is too Pollyannish always sees the positive in everything.  Pushing the envelope on optimism they become extremists who see a bright spot in every dark endeavor.  We sometimes refer to these people as wearing “rose colored” glasses.  A realist would argue that sometimes a bright spot does not exist.

quotes-about-optimism-relishquotes

My writing instructor, Dr. Wedin informed our class a few weeks ago that the story of Pollyanna, a 1913 novel written by American author Eleanor H. Porter, has been grossly misrepresented.  In common usage, a Pollyannish person is someone who is too unrealistic about life and its difficulties.  I decided to watch one of the many movies based on the novel and found a quite different interpretation of young Miss Pollyanna.  One that I assume was more in line with the novel.  In the movie, Pollyanna is a young girl who faces her share of joys and unhappiness.  However, remembering what her father told her, she always tries to find a bright spot in life regardless of how difficult things may be going for her.  Pollyanna’s philosophy of life centers on what she calls “The Glad Game,” an optimistic and positive attitude she learned from her father.

As a man who has leaned strongly towards pessimism for most of my life, I found myself admiring Pollyanna’s attitude and efforts.  They say pessimists live longer lives but optimists live happier lives.  There is something about pessimism that wears one down and tires others out.  Friends, family, spouses, siblings, and children all have a difficult time being around someone who is relentlessly pessimistic.  Just as hope without action is useless, pessimism without a plan to change things is depressing, gloomy and dreary.  Would you rather be around a pessimist or an optimist?

385043974-life-quote-complain

But what about our third choice?  Would you want to choose a realist for a life partner?  Is this the Golden Mean that the Greeks worshipped?  I think not.  The problem with being a so-called realist is twofold.  The first problem is that realism must be based on a foundation of facts and evidence.  Herein, you can immediately understand the problem.  It is difficult if not impossible to obtain evidence that will prove irrefutable and reliable.  Life is full of lies, half-truths, unsubstantiated facts and impossible to find evidence.

The second problem with realism is that it is not useful without a path forward or some means of making sense out of reality.  Knowing reality is meaningless if you cannot do something about it.  Finding the best path forward always involves a number of decisions that go beyond the facts.  For instance, if I decide that my car needs a new engine, will it be more cost effective to purchase a replacement engine or buy a new car?  You might be able to work out an equation to make this decision, but I guarantee you that there will be several unknowns in your equation.  Every unknown impacts the outcome of your decision making.  Then of course, there are what we call “unintended consequences.”  Charting the unknown, even realists must go into mysterious territory.

So we arrive back to where we started.  Would you rather be an optimist, pessimist, or realist?  I would love to hear your comments on this question.  Please feel free to send me a reply.

Only send optimistic comments though.  😊

Previous Older Entries