Insight and Commentary
By Joan Watts
Joan Watts on Her Father's Birthday and the Other Anniversary This Day Now Shares
(Photo: Alan’s birthplace in Chislehurst, Kent, England)
By Jessica Jahns
The Power of "We"
America is an “I” country. I did this, I’m good at that. Me, me, ME! Everyone wants to talk about what they know, and oneself is the limit to what one can ever know, really. And how many of us REALLY know ourselves? Very few, I would say. So how helpful is this self-focus, anyway?
In order to get a job, you have to talk about what your experience is, you have to sell yourself, puff up your contributions to the team, really dig into the marketing of you. This is, quite possibly, the least comfortable thing I can think of having to do. And I believe this expectation of shameless self-promotion has escalated so much in the job market over the last ten years or so, that it’s nearly impossible to get a job without slipping from marketing into the white lie category here and there; it’s basically incentivized. I’m not sure whether this is a common autistic trait or whether it is just me, but talking about my accomplishments independent of others is an enormous struggle.
On any performance self-reviews, I completely stress out and procrastinate severely, often to the point of pacing around the house the day before it is due. Even if I understand what I have contributed to the whole set of department accomplishments for the year, it is impossible for me to pick out what I was able to accomplish independently. All our work is co-dependent, and not in a bad way. Sure, I could come up with some metrics about how much data I processed or how many client support tickets I helped to find the root cause on, but none of it would be possible without others testing or executing or answering the questions I posed to get from point A to point B. I know this is true for everyone as we are all interdependent with others; I would just ALWAYS default to sharing credit, or even straight up giving credit to others whenever possible. Wait, isn’t that a leadership trait?
This is also true whenever I open up my resume to tinker with it, or rewrite it completely. The truth is, I have some mad skills, and some things I don’t do as well. Since my role in the department and my department’s role in the company are multidisciplinary, I am never actually completing a task or project on my own. I can say what I have contributed to without lying or fudging the facts, but did I singlehandedly do XYZ? Probably not. We accomplished things. We made progress. We worked together.
Sharing credit should be seen as a positive attribute. I am most proud of myself when I am part of a successful team activity, not when I do something on my own. And most people want to be recognized as part of a successful team, even if they might also want to be seen for their individual contributions as well. The best scenario would be for the recognition to go first to the “we,” and then to each of the “I’s.”
The real reason “we” is so important is that it is inspiring. People want to act in service of others. If “we” are tackling a problem together, each of us is less likely to call it quits before the problem is resolved. We don’t want to let the other down! Not everyone is motivated by competition, but I believe everyone is motivated by the “we.”
I just traveled via air for the first time in nearly two years recently. I was a bit covid-nervous. My family and I have done so much for the last 18 months, altering many of our routines and sacrificing for our own and others’ safety. I was fearful that other people in the airport or worse, on the plane, would not be taking the rules seriously and would not follow the mask instructions. But I was pleasantly surprised, primarily with the flight attendants and the pilots.
First, the announcement was that there was a mask mandate on the plane and they would be relying on each of us to comply, with the exception of when we were actively eating or drinking. Fair enough. Then, they announced that if they had to remind someone more than twice to comply with this policy, they would be blacklisted from the airline for the remaining duration of the pandemic. Woohoo, nice; now we’re getting somewhere. Then the pilot came on to say that while they all understand people not being excited about it, the airline staff also has to wear their masks, all day, sometimes for 16 hours a day, and that if they can do it, they would appreciate our working together, as a team, to lower the risk for all of us by complying with the mask rules and keeping them on for the duration of the 5 hour flight.
I did not witness one violation. That’s the power of “we.”
By Jim Murray
The Art of Giving a Little Bit
I’ve been an interested observer of the American culture for more years than most of the people reading this have been alive. I’ve seen governments come and go. Left and Right. Democrat & Republican.
But just up until a few years ago, you never really got the sense that people who had ideological differences really hated each other. They just disagreed. Even Archie Bunker, one of the great right wing characters of all time, had a grudging respect for the Meathead.
And you know, that’s what I came to see America as representing. Different points of view. but all more or less getting along. Oh sure there was always a lunatic fringe, probably on both sides. But in these past few years, this very much appears to have erupted into a full blown war of ideologies.
And what’s being trampled almost to death in this fracas is the real spirit of the country. My personal belief is that in 2016 you all elected someone who was a little too far right and a little too inexperienced to really make the right decisions at the right time. It just goes to show how delicate a balance having a free country is these days. One guy with enough influence can tip the scales and knock everything out of whack. Which I believe is what happened.
The solution, like most solutions to big challenges, lies in each side giving a little, talking more to each other than at each other. Finding whatever common ground remains, no matter how small and building on that.
You really are only one country. Right now it feels like there are two. Ideological differences have been allowed to escalate to support or resist the vision that the guy you made boss has been putting out there.
A divided country is always going to be more vulnerable to the economic and political pressures of the larger world. But a country like the US, acting as one country undivided, is the best role model for democracy at the world can have. All you have to do is move a little closer to each other. You may find that you have much more in common than you think.
By Thomas Jackson
Attention Span Busted: Stop Underestimating Young Professionals
I was blocked again. This time it was by a nice lady. Evidently my dislike of the word “Content” causes some to give me the death penalty. Besides losing another married woman who says “You’re not alone” as if there is any comfort in the struggle; she created a challenge to write short posts.
Fair enough. Implying the kids of today have short attention spans? This made the challenge seem pandering. “You cannot grasp more than small bites so that is what we shall give.”
That led other old heads to Tik Tok. They would rather uses the bells and whistles over there that everyone uses to seem “Unique” and then stopped communicating. Why talk to the audience when you can use effects?
There is a place for short posts. I felt ripped off when a connection had a newsletter and her article was a title and one line. If the setup were a joke and the article was a punchline? That might have been interesting.
Allegedly young people have no attention spans. Maybe because you are boring. They have no problem watching too many series. Not one episode per week like their parents and grandparents did. They can stay up all night to watch a season.
What was the biggest moneymaking movie of 2019? Avengers: Endgame. Out of one side of adult’s mouths they say people don’t have attention spans. Out the other side they go to a three hour movie with no intermission.
No Time To Die of Old Age is nearly three hours long. Hopefully it will be so long that the next film can be complete and the seventh actor will begin work on his second adventure in the iconic role. Perchance to dream. Movies have gotten longer over the years. Are they better?
No good movie is too long and no bad movie is short enough. That applies to anything: articles, posts, dinner parties- you name it. I wish there were more dinner parties. When adults were adults they had dinner parties. It’s not like there are not many who drink wine and can bring a side dish.
Too bad I don’t have friends. Actually? I have as many friends as there are readers of articles. There once were many and now? I could buy a round of drinks and have change from a twenty.
By Janis Zingaro
Critical Race Theory, The Waning Anglo Population Majority, & Why The White Patriarchy is FREAKING OUT
I fully expect to be excoriated by my fellow Caucasian Americans but I really don’t care. I’ve been an enemy of the status quo for as long as I can remember. But I’d like to take a moment to discuss just exactly why the powers-that-be are having figurative cows about the teaching of Critical Race Theory in America.
It’s no secret that the white population based majority has been dwindling in the past decades and it is set to be overtaken within the next 25 years and end the civilization long era of Anglo populace dominance. It’s more than just being outnumbered by sheer headcount that has the world’s white leadership quaking in their custom tailored boots. It’s more than that.
Regardless of what anyone tries to tell you, we all know systemic racism is real and there is absolutely no dispute throughout the history of the United States. Our government has done everything within their power to limit success for Black Americans in their pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness.
But the reason they’re freaking out so much now has a lot to do with the fact they have tried everything possible, often using legal means or clandestine agreements in law enforcement and sometimes even worse to prevent Black Americans from realizing the American dream. And what we’ve seen is despite that, in spite of that, Black Americans have not been prevented from great success in a myriad of arenas. Most notably black Americans have dominated the US for centuries in the entertainment and sports industries, both arenas which require inherent talent and are independent of Legacy inclusion. Which means in order to excel and succeed they had to earn their positions without the assistance of their grandfather’s grandfather’s grandfather having been enrolled at a certain Ivy League school precipitating their acceptance. Super shade intended.
Those are just two of the most easily visualized industries but far from the most impressive. Black Americans have made some of the most insane innovative discoveries in science, math, space exploration, you name it there’s no corner of American industrialism which Black Americans did not provide profound assistance in helping develop all while receiving negligent recognition and at the same time facing an unending barrage of traditionalized socially accepted abuse, rejection, lynchings & disproportionate unjust rates of incarceration.
So the reason white people are freaking out right now is because they are thinking —We have done EVERYTHING we could to hold these people back and they have not been deterred; they have persevered! They have defeated us on many levels. What will happen if we just allow them to be? They know it will be the end once and for all for this bullshit ridiculous notion of white supremacy which has never been proven and has been disproven so often it’s not even worth mentioning.
And while it pains me how this tomfuckery continues to go on, and I vow to work until my dying day to dismantle this scourge in my country, I just want to tell my Black American friends, in a very weird way you might take this all as a compliment. Because when you have motherfuckers running scared like white America is, after they’ve done everything they can to try to defeat you and failed, this last push towards holding onto their power should make you all realize they know EXACTLY how great you are and that’s what scares the shit out of them.
The winds of change are blowing. We are far from being out of the storm just yet but I for one look forward to the day many of you will be our captains like it always should have been and like it always will be in the future.
By Janis Zingaro
Would You Vote for a Dominionist? Have You Ever Before?
Dominionism in the basest of terms describes an ideology which has prevailed throughout history, illustrated by the ancient Greeks’ attitude towards anyone who did not belong to the elite ruling class. A modern version of dominionism is very much present today.
Not to be confused with, but not entirely separate from, the movement is accredited to Genesis in the Bible. Dominionists believe whoever the ruling class is, is divinely gifted dominion (complete control & stewardship) over the entire planet. This includes the hunting of animals even to extinction, the concept of imminent domain (the legal right to annex private land), and most invasively the belief they alone have the right and sole authority to control, dictate to, and use the entirety of all the resources this planet offers however they see fit.
It is this ideology which allowed philosophically minded men to accept, promote and excuse the morally reprehensible practice of slavery. Worse yet, dominionism is the root of the type of psychopathy which potentially develops into extreme sexual deviances such as violent misogyny rape, sadism, & pædophilia.
It’s not uncommon for Dominionists to present themselves as spiritual or religious leaders or bastions of moral superiority. They see no contradiction in condemning homosexuality or the mixing of races as an affront to God while simultaneously molesting/sexually assaulting/preying on men, women, and children from every color and creed. In their minds, everything on this planet is theirs to use however they see fit. Nothing they ever do is a crime, wrong, or improper. It is the ultimate sense of entitlement and, I believe, it is abused more than the world will ever know.
This is the underlying ideology in much of the extreme right-wing of GOP Republicanism. Undeniably, it is an ideology which allowed our Founding Fathers to come and kill thousands if not millions of First Nation citizens and take their land without blinking an eye; all while asserting their disdain for oppression in the land they fled from before settling in an already occupied continent.
Have no doubt, these are the principles that founded this nation. So, I’m never surprised when I see fanatical Christians get hemmed up in some kind of pedophile ring or predatory activity. They genuinely don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. They think everyone here is here specifically for them to use and throw away. And if they are not removed from power, they will do just that until we’re all gone.
By Radical Rhymes
A Reflection on Teaching
As someone who has taught in higher education and as a cricket coach, I can talk about the role and responsibility of teaching from both perspectives, but here I want to reflect on what I’ve experienced as a learner.
The picture I placed at the head of this post is a selection of work from my school years. At that stage I wanted to go to art college and become an artist. It wasn’t to be, and teaching was to a very large extent responsible. I had a bad experience with a teacher who was indifferent towards me and, at times, was deeply discouraging. And yet, my experience with art education demonstrates the complexity of teaching itself.
A teacher helped to destroy that dream, but another teacher lit the original flame. He saw something in me, he believed I had ability, a flare. One afternoon in his class he completely turned my world upside down. Until he took my picture and showed it to my classmates I’d simply been a sportsman, too stupid and uncultured for any other subjrct. That teacher had a profound impact on me and the fire he started still burns to this day.
And those two instances demonstrate the importance of relationships – that teaching is about more than conveying information, it is about belief, it is forged in the furnace of inspiration.
When I was a child I regarded teachers as the enemy. They weren’t people to inform and inspire they were jailers. They were unbridled, sometimes arbitrary, holders of authority. It was defined by repression and boredom. And there were many teachers that gloried in their power. Teachers who would humiliate and even hit you, or launch a board rubber, a heavy, wooden board rubber across a room as a potentially lethal missile.
But as an adult I now realise that my ability to recognise this was never very refined. We had a history teacher called Miss W who terrorised us. She was a spinster in late middle age who held the class completely in thrall. Even the scariest kids in my year, and we had some very troubled individuals, didn’t mess with Miss W. My relationship with her was especially difficult because she’d loved my sister and she constantly made me feel inadequate, as if i was betraying some family heritage. I got it into my head that she hated me and I did all I could to fight back.
Only years later did I begin to see how limited my comprehension had been. I was working on my PHd, and I’d been asked by the local library to write a piece about its importance to me, how i’d used it as a resource. So I did. Then one morning while I was taking my mum shopping, Miss W approached us. She’d read my piece about the library. She told me that she’d always known that I had it in me, that she’d tried different ways to reach me, and that she was proud of me. It reduced me and my mum to tears.
Not disappointment, certainly not hatred, but a loving frustration. That came as a huge shock, and I felt ashamed of my resistance, fear and anger. My ability to comprehend teachers and teaching had been so very blunt.
I can see now that several teachers tried to help me, that they’d wanted to inspire me, but I was unreachable.
At university I began to see it. Two lecturers, Paul and Mark, in particular took it upon themselves to encourage me. They – and several others – taught and inspired me, and, they gave me models to follow. I am eternally grateful for all of them, for what they taught me and what they taught me to be.
How important is teaching? It simply cannot be quantified. This is a thank you to all those dedicated educators who shrug off indifferent kids, angry parents, undermining governments and ungrateful societies to help other people to see the best in themselves and to pull out their potential and hone self belief.
THANK YOU…
By Janis Zingaro
The Gypsy on Politics and Religion
Janis Zingaro is "The Gypsy," an influential blogger and new contributor to Zen Sammich
I am neither Democrat nor Republican. I am neither Liberal nor Conservative. I find that every faction be it religion, political party or philosophy that labels itself, limits itself. These terms do not describe my disposition in their entirety. It is for that reason I coined the term: Convertibal. I am Liberal in terms of education, compassion, helping others and Conservative when it comes to killin’ folks (i.e. war, abortion, death penalty).
The thing that bothers me more than any is group think. All sides are guilty. It’s not enough to know what you think, you need to know why you think it, else you will never convince anyone of your point of view. Talking points annoy me. Logic is our salvation. So don’t be offended if I demand it, because especially in politics, that is what I am all about.
And Religion?
I find it humorous when people who do not like what I have to say accuse me of being a poor excuse for a Buddhist in their expert opinions. I have never once claimed to be a spokesperson, representative or otherwise of Buddhism. Ever. I defy the classification. I practice Buddhism, but I am not a Buddhist. I never implied that my practice makes me perfect nor a perfect example of how to behave. Everyone has their own path.
So that is that. I am not so much a religious Buddhist, although I do meditate. I know that it is in man’s nature to need to quantify every bit of data they take in, so for those of you who wish you understand my religious leanings, I would encourage you to learn all you can about the Bhagavad Gita as this can be seen as the most profound spiritual guide I have discovered in my quest. A quest that has spanned over 20 years, a search for the ultimate truth.
In essence, I believe I was born into the dharma of public service. It is not always pleasant, but it is a necessary job. My dedication to the truth stems from a belief that every conflict begins with a misunderstanding. The only way to clear up a misunderstanding is to get to the truth. Some people like to dance around this process. I am not one of those people. I will not apologize as a practicing buddhist for being true to my Kshatriya dharma. I find it possible, nay, inevitable that the two concepts are not separate. I understand people like to wallow in the mire of misunderstanding rather than face an unpleasant truth. My view is that it is not compassionate to stand by and allow that to happen without at least saying something. (And that regardless of how detrimental or damaging their actions have potential to be, people do not always appreciate reasonable input.) What I say may change no one’s mind. I only can plant seeds, I cannot tell them how to grow. But I fail to see the compassion in allowing another fellow human being make a huge mistake with out at least trying to reason with them, regardless of how uncomfortable it is.
By Rob Kreitlein
American Politics: Violent Edition
Part One
For the last year, my Facebook feed has been riddled with memes depicting images of armed individuals declaring their eagerness for the “boogaloo” (a not-so-cryptic codeword for civil war or armed rebellion) or showing screen captures of news channels with accompanying captions about his or her group being prepared and ready for a “civil war” or decrying and laughing about how decidedly unprepared their perceived adversaries would be for a civil war. This might be unremarkable in a conservative, anarchist or extreme left echo chamber of a feed but I follow both conservative and progressive groups and have friends on both sides of the spectrum.
Perhaps even more remarkable is that speculation of a “modern civil war” or “new civil war” is rampant even on mainstream media sites and channels like CNN, Washington Post, etc. If you don’t believe me, simply google some variation of “american modern civil war” and see what pops up. (For added fun, actually read some of the analysis pieces: the predictions are all over the map with some dismissing the speculation derisively as if it belongs on the same list of conspiracy theories with things like a flat Earth and fake moon landings and others practically guaranteeing it will happen.)
Of course, it’s not like context for this speculation is nonexistent. A bombastic, loquacious President, protests, counter-protests and riots, a pandemic. Gun sales at all-time highs, ammunition running scarce amid rampant hoarding (if you are not a gun owner and don’t have first-hand knowledge of these facts, you can google this, too, or just ask a gun-owning friend or family member. Their attitude in answering the question on a scale from “smug, knowing look” coupled with a terse “none of your business” to cursing and ranting about “hoarding assholes” will tell you everything you need to know about the relative size of their ammunition stockpile).
In the midst of this context, NPR.org published an article on 11 February 2021 entitled “A ‘Scary’ Survey Finding: 4 in 10 Republicans Say Political Violence May Be Necessary”. The article was a reporting on the findings of a recent survey conducted by the American Enterprise Institute about political attitudes of Americans after the 2020 national elections.
This article was posted to Facebook by Zen Sammich’s Mark Reid and a robust discussion ensued. This discussion then became the subject of a wide-ranging Zen Sammich podcast episode featuring Reid, Andrew Rickles and this author. The reader is encouraged to view the podcast (episode 22, parts 1 & 2) at https://redcircle.com/shows/b6c352f0-8ba1-4291-a06f-73f4b2fb7299/episodes/6035f2db-3365-4b1a-865a-f7214bd8464e?fbclid=IwAR0TA7X04pqXKjZ9xMiugMbnj4_pQjxwRo__Nwj-D6qTD2eyCA7x0WtwH_Y
and read the NPR article at https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/966498544/a-scary-survey-finding-4-in-10-republicans-say-political-violence-may-be-necessa?fbclid=IwAR0kXFC_BC6myBgnL1dMP7lft8EtfC1o7v7nFkyC8vFu1Cgnz_CVtxKOdig
In discussing these survey results on the podcast, I asked (rhetorically) whether or not we were assuming these survey results were a good or bad thing. The consensus was generally that violence = bad and therefore the threat or contemplation of violence is bad, as well. As we further drilled down on these ideas, Mark expressed the belief that the idea that citizens of America could stand up to the government and the US military for any length of time was not very realistic.
If you have viewed the podcast, you obviously know I vehemently disagreed with Mark’s analysis, however, it is worth noting here that he is in good company. As second amendment advocates frequently cite one of the central purposes behind citizen-owned arms as a “protection against tyranny by our government”, critics of this expansive view of the second amendment cite the impossibility of citizens being successful against the might of the American military.
California congressman Eric Swalwell once cited America’s nuclear arms as the central reason why armed citizens would be no match for the US military. Even our current President has weighed in on this debate. President Biden once famously said, “The fact is, if you’re going to take on the US government, you’d need an F-15 with hellfire missiles.”
Which brings us to the two-pronged thesis of this article: One, is violence (or the threat of it) always bad? And two, is the idea of American citizens standing up to the government and military a laughable concept, as our elected leaders and podcast hosts would have us believe?*
This second question is a fairly loaded question and involves some heavy-duty analysis. It is also heavily contingent on which groups are doing the revolting and under what circumstances. Accordingly, for reasons of brevity and the author’s rampant ADD, this article will be divided into multiple parts with this piece (Part 1) dealing solely with the first question in our thesis, whether violence is an acceptable form of behavior and, to a lesser degree, an acceptable form of politics.
Part 2 will be a general analysis of the legal framework under which the federal military might be utilized in an insurgency and the general question of whether or not the technological imbalance between the government and its people represents an insurmountable obstacle as a threshold question.
Further chapters are necessary to examine the specific groups who might possibly engage in an insurgency since the likely success of an insurgency movement in the United States would vary greatly, depending upon who the insurgents are. Accordingly, Parts 3-5 will analyze specific groups and situations, such as an Anarchist/Communist/Antifa variety insurgency (Part 3), a right-wing extremist/Boogaloo Boys type insurgency (Part 4) and then an issue-specific type insurgency such as one involving gun owners in the face of severe government restrictions or outright gun bans (Part 5).
“Violence Isn’t the Answer”
–Your mom, probably
If you grew up in America, Europe, Japan or some other developed, stable country, you’ve likely been conditioned to believe that violence or the threat of violence is nearly always a negative. Perhaps while growing up you encountered that old saw, “Violence isn’t the answer.” Possibly even from your mother, or a schoolteacher, perhaps. Or maybe you’re just a human being. Fear of violence or human aggression is one of the most common fears found in human beings. It’s so universal, in fact, that you will not find it listed in most psychology texts as a “phobia”, yet it is found in approximately 98% of the population. After all, there’s no point in diagnosing someone with something that nearly everyone suffers from.
Given that violence typically spurs a phobic response (increased heart and respiration rates, adrenal gland stimulation, etc.) and most people in the developed world have also been intellectually conditioned to abhor it, it’s no wonder that violence tends to be a media obsession or that NPR would label contemplation of violence to be “scary”, as they mentioned in their headline. But is violence always bad and is it truly never the answer?
It’s puzzling, indeed, that American citizens would regard violence thusly. Our very existence as a country is based on a violent insurrection. The abolition of men and women being held in involuntary servitude and the continued unity of our republic is based on violent acts. In other parts of the world, fascism, genocide, theft of natural resources and violations of state sovereignty have all been rectified-or, at least, ameliorated-by violence or the threat of it. Israel’s continued existence is protected by the threat of violence since several of its neighbors have repeatedly vowed to “drive them into the sea” and several invasions have been repelled since the 1940’s. Even in cases where a full “regime change” isn’t realized, many violent demonstrations and riots have resulted in government and institutional concessions, social and political changes and the formalization of rights and protections for certain groups or activities.
When presented with these facts and this history, most would agree that, sure, violence has a place. Sometimes. Probably very rarely. And only when we agree with the reasons for its use. Which brings us to the final point here about violence and its uses. Violence is a contingency. It’s the remedy to its own disease. Faced with violence, there is no other option available to prevent its use against you. If someone physically assaults you, talking to them-to the extent that you’re able to do so while being pounded-will not likely save you. Violence is the only reliable recourse available to stop violence. And it’s also the only reliable recourse available when you have no power or you’ve exhausted all other means to rectify your situation.
Sitting down and refusing to work was not a viable strategy for slaves to obtain their freedom. They had no power over their masters or the system that created their condition. Their plantations were rural, far-flung from one another and they had no access to communication with others similarly situated. They would simply be tortured or killed if they rebelled. Those who sought to help were likewise powerless to end that “peculiar institution” through legislation, social shame or rhetoric. Our forefathers in the original colonies had exhausted the legitimate means of legal redress and formal protest. Violence is a “break glass in the event no other legitimate, legal means are available” option.
Of course, many people point out the relative success rate of non-violent, peaceful protests in bringing about social and political change. Martin Luther King, Jr., Gandhi, Nelson Mandela are all examples of protest leaders who successfully utilized non-violent forms of protest. Indeed, history suggests non-violent protests are almost guaranteed success if a critical mass of participation in the protest is reached (3.5%, according to one recent study).
The answer to this argument is that not all situations lend themselves to non-violent protest. First, these methods of protest are only viable in somewhat free societies to begin with. In countries with strict totalitarian controls in place, large gatherings are impossible and groups are intercepted or arrested before this critical mass can be reached. Second, swift, brutal violence early on in peaceful protests can render them impotent and suppress further efforts at building support. In either of these situations, violent action is often all that is left by way of options. For an example of peaceful protests being rendered impotent by overwhelming violence, one need look no further than the Tiananmen Square protests in Beijing in 1989. The Chinese government pulled back local troops who were reluctant to engage the peaceful protestors and brought in far-flung units who were more amenable to the orders being given and the protest was successfully broken up.
Our founding fathers here in America viewed violence as a political necessity, burdened as they were by an empire that felt like their input was largely unnecessary in their governance. And after the dust settled they also realized that, despite the institutions they’d created and the mechanisms they had invented to check federal (and state) power, tyrants could never truly be prevented. Therefore, in their minds, ready access to arms would serve as a handy check against a tyrannical government deciding that peaceful protest could simply be stifled.
This point brings us to the second question of our thesis, is it possible for American citizens to stand up to the government and military? This question will be considered in Part 2, coming soon.
By Caroline Exum
Smelling Flowers Through The Mask
Encouraging Words for 2021
Here we are. A brand new year. I know some of us didn’t think we’d make it. But, we did. Against the odds and only a little worse for the wear.
I know 2020 did not go as planned for a lot of folks, but I think in some ways, we learned to stop and smell the flowers a bit. As much as you could smell the flowers through a mask, due to the pandemic, we are still powering our way through in the New Year. But, I feel confident we will see the other side.
Or we won’t. Honestly, I don’t know anymore. What I do know, I am proud of a lot of us. We stood brave and strong with each coming disaster 2020 – or life in general – tried to throw at us. We proved that we have things worth fighting for and we will fight for them. Make no doubt about that. We will fight tirelessly with humor, resolve, and grace. We will go forth into this new year and hold onto the things we fought for: our humanity and gratitude.
As Lizzo said, each and every one of you is a survivor. And you will still be a survivor in 2021. Because that’s who you are. 2020 has made you stronger, smarter, more aware, and resilient.
You don’t even need resolutions. Those will get broken and you’ll be disappointed in yourself. You just need to do what Maya Angelou said, ’“Stand up straight and realize who you are, that you tower over your circumstances.”
A lot of new days ahead. Be mindful. Be aware. Be Humble. Be honest. Be open and most importantly, be strong. As 2020 has forced us to realize, we really don’t know what’s coming. But we can prepare for everything.
By Mark Reid
The Two Japanese Words Everyone Should Learn
Forget Konnichiwa and Arigato, Kaizen and Ikigai Are the Most Useful to You
When I read online articles and blogs I am frequently disappointed by how much dillydally goes on before telling me what I am looking for. So, I won’t do that here. The two words you should know are “kaizen” and “ikigai.” They are more useful to you because they can literally change your life for the better.
Google either one of these words and you are likely to find countless articles laying out the “elements” of kaizen or some Venn diagram trying to define ikigai. Indeed, it might be well worth your time to investigate both concepts further, but here I will get you started with the fundamental precepts of both. Kaizen means “constant and never-ending improvement.” Ikigai is your “life’s purpose.” Neither translate directly into English. We simply don’t have one word that carries the equivalent weight of either. So, it is worth exploring the depth of meaning implied to each. In so doing, you might get just a little better each day and have a sense of fulfillment while doing it.
You will find kaizen comes up a lot in business. It was popularized by Toyota many years ago and is undoubtedly why that company’s cars are often considered some of the most reliable on the market. They created a space for every employee to suggest improvements to the company – from manufacturing to marketing – no matter how small. The company even encourages it. But kaizen is also a philosophy of life. The essence is, that even if there is something in life you do well or that is going well, you can always make or do things better. Seems simple: try to be a little better everyday than you were yesterday, and hopefully improve on that tomorrow. Let’s say you feel overweight or unhealthy, it can be intimidating to see some exercise nut jogging or biking down the road, right? But what if today you just did one push-up or took a walk down the block? And the next day you did two push-ups or walked two blocks. You see where this is going. With an element of patience and a mindset of daily improvement, your physical and mental gains are almost limitless.
Ikigai has been associated with Japan’s long life expectancy for many years (check out a book called Blue Zones: Lessons on Living Longer from the People Who’ve Lived the Longest). Sociologists, scientists and journalists have researched the phenomenon and derived many conclusions as to why this seems to be the case. I think it boils down to a sense of duty and fulfillment (which, in turn, generates happiness and a will to live). When I previously studied about ikigai, I recall reading a story of a fisherman in Okinawa who, at over 90 years old, continued to get up everyday and go fishing to provide food for his family. The family had other means of providing food, but for him, it was his life’s purpose. His life’s enjoyment. Whatever your life’s enjoyment, get up and do it everyday. Cultivate a sense of “this is my life’s purpose” from that thing that you do, whatever it is. You will be glad you did and probably live longer too.
By Mark Reid
Assessing Probability of Truth
It is time we revisit the fundamentals of how we reason what is true or false
We all disagree. On a lot of stuff. Politics. Religion. Which tastes better Italian or Thai food? Clearly the vast majority of what we take to be “true” is subjective. Then, why do we so often share our opinions in the form of absolutes?
I want to share a perspective I learned recently called Bayesian reasoning. I will spare the reader the detailed history of its origins in science and get right to the meat of what it is and how you can and should apply it to virtually every aspect of your life: Bayesian reasoning is the application of probability theory to what you hear and mentally digest. This is my definition, not wikipedia’s.
The essence of it goes like this. In general, someone tells you a good idea – maybe you hear a political pundit on tv make what seems to be a reasonably sound point – and the usual thing people will do is say “that sounds right… it’s true” or “that sounds wrong… it’s false.” What Bayesian reasoning says it that you say to every possibility “Maybe it’s true, maybe it’s false.” Thus, I will assign a probability to it being true or false. Then I will go collect data and ask “What would the world be like if this were true?”
Let’s be clear, this principle should apply to everything from going through your everyday life and in personal relationships to being an actual professional scientist. Outside of things like gravity or the sun coming up, there isn’t much truly objective truth out there. So, look, go read a Deepak Chopra book, or watch Fox or MSNBC, and if you are tempted to believe what you read or hear on tv, then test it. Figure out, if x were true then the following things would happen…
To put this into context, if I were to tell you that the sun will come up tomorrow or that gravity will operate in the same way as it did today, based on your knowledge and experience, you assess the probability of that to be 99.99999…% true. I mean, of course, the sun will come up and gravity will work tomorrow, but you can’t actually know that. So, if I tell you that “Capitalism is the best economic system in the world” or that “Democratic Socialism is the next step in the historical evolution of effective governance” or that “hey, I think that pretty woman over there likes you”; rather than wholeheartedly accepting or outright dismissing any of those points of view as true or false, perhaps it is more productive, more beneficial, to assign a probability of truth to either statement and test it out. If we all thought and reasoned more this way, perhaps, just perhaps, we might have more meaningful discourse and get more done. I don’t know though. What probability of truth do you give that idea?