Running of Mind

So, it’s March and this is the season of doctor appointments. You know, the kind that doctors schedule to review your status. Complicated these days by age, doctors often have much to look at and find. Year after year these appointments are scheduled and met with very little emerging. And then one time or two something puzzling pops up and more tests are done, more diagnoses developed, and even more drugs prescribed. A new condition exists and is now treated.

And monitored. Yet another annual appointment to schedule.

The other day it was general health. OK for a near-74 year old. Monday was the cardiologist. Then a test to determine status on Tuesday. The results suspected a nefarious condition. I learned more in the afternoon. Possible blockage of an artery. Angiogram scheduled for Thursday. If blockage does exist, then they will do an immediate angioplasty.

Tuesday morning, meanwhile, I had an annual appointment with the pulmonologist (lungs and emphysema, you know). One wonders what he will find? Perhaps he and the cardiologist ought to get together? They practically share the same office space. I’ll suggest that! (he found nothing new)

Dental progress is being made. The partial plate on the lower jaw has been adjusted, an upper left tooth has been filled, an upper right tooth has been removed. We await a cleaning, and a fitting for a false tooth to fill the void caused by the extraction. And then the mouth should be pain-free and better functioning. Just in time for some other medical emergence!

The mind races for comprehension. Is this what the rest of life is about? The running around to doctors, dentists, oral surgeons, spinal pain clinics, pharmacies and medical labs? Poked and prodded, probed and swabbed. Such regimen! Procedure and conclusions. A whole industry of effort to tell us one inescapable fact: we are all aging and this is what it looks like.

Of course one prepares for the eventual end of it all. It is what we learn to do as human beings. We are born and we die. What we do with the time in between is what we call life. How well we live that life is up to each of us. If we feel burdened, that life is not well lived, I think. If we feel unburdened and free, then I think the life is well lived.

I have not always felt this way. Time and effort and exploration and discovery have broadened my mind and narrowed by expectations. It is a surprising fact, that last statement. Re-read it. “Broadened mind and narrowed expectations.”

This is a healthy view. It proves preparedness of mind and soul. And it yields peace.

Come what may, it is all good. As it should be. And it offers stark contrast for what is opposite. And that, good folks, is another stunning truth to ponder.

All is good. All is illuminating if we allow it to be so. Avoiding the process does no good and often results in added pain and suffering.

I seek peace instead. Might you as well?

March 9, 2017

  

Constitutional Crisis?

No matter who you supported in the last election surely you didn’t wish the chaos of recent weeks to be the result? I’m one of those orderly people who like procedures, process and rules to guide us through complicated matters. Governance is complicated. It must provide for all of the people within a jurisdiction, not just some. And certainly the needs of the few cannot be ignored by the wants of the many.

That’s what makes public policy so difficult to manage. In solving one problem one doesn’t wish to create another one. Unintended consequences are apt to appear at any moment. Then they must be managed in addition to the original target of attention.

Policy attempts to smooth things out, to make things orderly. Such effort builds reliability in our expectations. Life is better and more easily managed as a result. So, if public policy is to maximize accessibility of children to educational resources, for example, we must organize programs to do just that. Some kids, of course, will not be as ready as others, while some will be advanced and ready for much more. Ranking, sorting and channeling students into the right educational channel is critical in managing for excellent outcomes.

But that is not always what happens. Because children are ever present in the local schools, public officials (elected or not) have placed requirements on schools to carry out their social policy and programs. That often leads to complicated routines and unwieldy procedures. Education is thus forced a bit into the background. Efficiency of schools is thwarted. Intentional or not, this is the result. Our public schools have become a huge testing ground of sociological experiment and quick-fix schemes. All at the expense of schools, teacher time and results.

So that’s policy, and it takes care, finesse and discernment to get it right.

Look to the White House today, however. Do you see clear thinking? Clear logic? Discernment or any attempt to explain the basis of decisions? Are they making law, adjusting law, or eliminating law? And what role and right does the White House have in such matters. Executive function is implementation of laws and administration of the programs the laws have created. Congress makes the laws, not the White House.

In a chaotic milieu policy formation doesn’t have much of a chance. It is that simple.

So another look at the situation forms the question – Why is all of this going on?

Although many will answer that question with their own political bent, from conspiracy defense to New Federalism, to New Republic life – the reality is no one is in control of the situation. And that has me worried.

The President flies off the handle. He rants, raves and twitters. In moments of state he has someone write a speech for him; he changes it as he will; then he reads it off a teleprompter. Trouble is, the speech said nothing new, offered no explanation for recent actions, and certainly did not offer reasoning for what is going to happen in the future. What is the intent of the White House and this President? No one knows.

Worse than that, it is increasingly clear that no one is in control of the White House either.

In my world of order, that is a constitutional crisis. And it needs attention by those who are charged with knowing and working with the Constitution. The Department of Justice has this role and function. So does the Supreme Court. Congressional leaders have some responsibility but they are distracted by ideological conspiracies to have any grip on Constitutional matters evidently.

So what do we do? The Free Press is doing what it can. Freedoms of assembly appear to be in question. Freedom of Religion is being redefined. And the chaos continues perhaps as strategy.

I smell the distinct aroma of Steve Bannon in all of this. He is like Karl Rove on steroids. And with much the worse humor.

I want my senators and congressman to do their job as it is spelled out in the law and the Constitution. If they don’t, then I guess we will have to remove them en masse to gain control of the chaos.

Order? Chaos? Or Constitution? Which will it be? I know in the long run what it has to be. But who will help bring this about sooner rather than later?

Yes, this is a Constitutional Crisis of the first order.

March 8, 2017

Parallel Universe

What do I know? What do I not know? Same for you?

I’ve said this before – we don’t know what we don’t know. Until, that is, we encounter gaps that ache to be defined and known. That is the allure of research. To fill in gaps of knowledge and build toward fuller understanding, of anything. Anything at all.

Through the ages wise men have shared their wisdom. Perhaps the greatest piece of wisdom is ‘knowledge is power.’ Conversations pivot around facts and ideas. Those with more knowledge of those ideas and facts generally are more interesting. People gather around such a person. And they come to rely on them for more information in the future.

What then happens when people in positions of power do not treat others to honest reports of ideas, activities and facts? When interviews and position papers and press conferences represent what is not true, what then do we rely upon? How are we to know what our government is doing and why? What makes them believable? Who moderates the flow of such information? And how do we measure them for honesty, truth and accuracy?

When we speak of history, upon what bases of fact are we relying?

It is all confidence in sources, isn’t it?

Think about that a bit. You listen to someone and you instinctively believe him or her. You go on to think ideas based on those bits and pieces of information. This is how we create and grow our conscious universe. We live in that universe. We share that universe with others. We grow our universes together and expand our futures accordingly.

When an alternate universe is introduced to this scenario, we blink, pause, and reassess our previous thinking. How does this alternate universe change our thinking and conclusions? Ought it change our thinking?

Or is this a fresh challenge to renew our thinking and values and factual basis that aided our construct of our universe in the first place?

I guess the first thought that comes to mind is questioning why there is an alternate universe being presented? What reason has caused the new universe to be talked about? What is the benefit of it? Why now? Who benefits and who doesn’t?

Testing my previous conclusions becomes automatic. It is not a defense of my thinking but a testing of it. New questions are raised and research helps change my past conclusions or add to them, or reassert their value and steadfastness. The process helps me alter my universe as new information arrives on the scene and change in knowledge adds to my understanding of the world around me.

If the alternate view – the alternate universe – clashes and does not fit with whatever construct results of my universe with added thinking, then I would question the accuracy and appropriateness of that alternate universe.

That is what I’m experiencing today. There is the trump universe and my universe. Certainly there is your universe, and universes ad infinitum for each and every person on the planet. The combined weight of these universes, however, eventually form a norm of universes that bring the whole matter into focus.

Is that formation of history, then? And is that why history seems to shift with time as it is weighed with so many different changing elements? Our understanding of the past changes as we learn more from historical records and facts. As we become more reliant on past facts, we understand that past as historical underpinnings of our present. That is how we come to know and understand what is happening right now.

We are presented, however, with ‘alternate facts’ and alternate universes. We are told these are real when no evidence is shared to make the argument whole. We are stunned to be presented the alternatives. Ours is that trusting of a society.

This is when we come to doubt our underpinnings and realize just how propaganda works. It questions the real with the false, the made-up. With repetition it somehow becomes more real until one day we don’t know what is real and what is made up.

Good, logical, educated minds will hopefully protect and defend us from this scourge.

If not them, who? Are you and I so sure we know?

March 7, 2017

I Suppose

'Anti administrative government' is the core message of Steve Bannon as he advises Trump on strategy. It is his belief that the Federal Government has become a huge collective of administrative detail with embedded expertise in the persons of career government employees. He believes these employees have taken the place of government and made it unrepresentative of ‘the people’.

Well, I can understand his point of view without agreeing with it; but I suppose it is important to ask how we got to this place in history if in fact we have arrived there at all.

Regard this factotum: the Affordable Care Act was created by the Congress in an environment of deep political division. Many elected officials did not want the legislation to go through, let alone become enacted. So ‘poison pills’ were written into the legislation to deliberately weaken the ACA. The hope of detractors was that the bill would not be enacted, and if it was, then it would surely fail of its own weight.

The critical key here is embedded poison pills to cause the ACA to fail.

It didn’t. In fact it was quite popular even in its flawed state. So the flaws were rhetorically magnified to make a case to replace the ACA or at least remove it entirely. Mark it down to a failed administrative attempt to govern the people. The truth is quite different, isn’t it?

I suppose we can review much of Washington DC with these administrative eyes and find all sorts of flaws. The question is how deliberate were these flaws?

I suppose the administrative machinery of federal education programs could be viewed as flawed, eh? You know the drill: load the existing administrative channels with tons of additional tasks and programs so nothing works efficiently anymore, then accuse the system of self managing the nation’s future!

What rot.

I suppose we are to believe this? Bannon is playing to a mixed crowd at best; at worst the audience sees right through him. And Trump as well.

Instead of inserting ones own ideology and bias into our governance system, why not seek intelligent inputs before making such decisions? Why not ask for advice and counsel from experts to determine what is workable and what is not. I suppose such ‘due diligence’ is the better method to pursue? But is it?

No; not at all. It appears that expertise is suspect these days in Washington.

I suppose someone wants there own ideas to prevail. Regardless of impact or projected results. Shouldn’t we be asking what their objectives are? Ours is still a democracy isn’t it where the consent of the governed is required before assuming what that consent is?

Or is the Alt-right and Bannonism/Trumpism a new form of government we the people had no voice in?

The Constitution remains the law of the land. It holds sway over Congress, the White House and the Courts. The Constitution rules, not man.

I suppose we can ignore this and let the children play their games until we see better what it is they are proposing. But I recall much damage from allowing children unfettered freedoms in this manner. I dread the cleanup required by us to restore normalcy once we see what they have done.

I suppose we could save ourselves a great deal of time, effort and money if we maintained a reasonable control and oversight so the extracurricular shenanigans don’t get carried away in the first place.

Do you suppose they don’t think we will notice?  Just what is it they suppose?

More and more I get the feeling the fox is in the hen house and we chickens are marked for extinction. How about you?

What do you suppose?

March 6, 2017

Our Future?

What lies ahead for you is not determined. Nor is it for me. Or any of us.

No, the future will unfold as long as there are tomorrows. What we do with it is another question. Open to wonder, isn’t it? What will tomorrow be like, what will my life become, how will we live with one another, and so many other questions to ponder.

It is fun to do so. Imagine what could be. Then imagine my own life and its borders and reaches. What will I touch? What will I feel? What kind of person will I be then? Will I know the influences that will shape me? Will I be in control of that? or any part of it?

Most likely not. We respond to something. It is almost automatic, without thinking. And the cause of the reaction is not in our control at all, either. It happens. IT. Whatever it is. And we roll with the pulses. If we are prepared for the event – the ‘it’ – then we might react with more finesse and polish; but most likely we are not prepared.

The future is like that. So are our reactions to the future. Sort of like ‘que sera, sera’, whatever will be will be. The Doris Day song of the 1950’s. A world then in stark change from World War II to whatever we all hoped it would become. The Cold War, though, took the fun out of it all. First the hope, then the fear, then the work to protect and defend, and then the despair, and then the wonder. Only wonder, not knowing.

We fear the unknown. We tie the bungee cord to our legs and leap into space, not knowing where we will land, crash, or bounce. Or even the trajectory – only that it is down, down, down. Reassurance when the cord reaches its extension and pulls the body upward, clear of the ground and a nasty landing. The cord worked. Someone’s calculations worked. The jumper is alive and exhilarated by the experience.

That alone informs us, and the jumper. But does it do more than just that? Does it teach us anything?

Perhaps we learn that a risk taken leads us over the edge of the known and survival and doubt provides a lesson only we who experience it can perceive. Just like so many other instances in life. Do something different and experience the difference. Like skiing for the first time, or zip lining through an equatorial jungle, or eating a strange cuisine. What awaits our action? Our daring?

Seems to me much of this is informational but not instructional. What might be worth much more of our time and effort is imagining what we want from life. Not the riches or the experiences, but the characteristics of a life well lived. What is that like? How is it defined? What clear objectives come into focus. Do we do this imagining often enough and with discipline that helps us discern what is important in life?

The world is a noisy place. Filled with visions, colors, happenings, and movement. Like the turning on of a well connected TV with 400 cable channels. Each channel switch comes with images, colors, motion and sound. Dizzying arrays of all of that – and more. Noise. Confusion. Distraction.

Yes we experience all of that, but it keeps us from concluding anything. Well, for me, I turn it off or hit the mute button! I can’t stand the overload of noise – both visual and audio. Too much stimulation; not enough discernment. What it means should be important. It isn’t, because it is too much. Scattered attention. No focus.

Like drugs, I guess. An addict takes chemicals into the body to detach from reality and escape from the noise. No conclusions there, either; unless, of course, too much is indulged and death results. Maybe not a conclusion, just an end. An untimely dead end at that.

Rather, I think we should think about what we want in our future that is of value. Not just for you, or me, but all of us. The common good of all of us on the planet. What would be of value to us all. How much of this thinking is common to us? How much agreement can we reach?

Here’s a start on some objectives: 

1. Clean abundant supply of water
2. Adequate supply of healthy food and diet
3. Shelter from weather, and natural elements of the outdoors
4. Clothing to cover and protect our body
5. Access to medical care to maintain health
6. Safety from immediate threats
7. Order to keep peace and cooperation among many
8. Freedom to pursue happiness as defined by each person 

Each objective has its role. Each is necessary for the person and the society. Each builds on a common platform that sustains an orderly life yet allows freedom to reach into the future. These are the building blocks of freedom and happiness. Each person will benefit from these. Together we can make it all happen.

As social complexity develops – as certainly it will, and has – the objectives may be altered or added to. But I bet most of those objectives will conform to the 8 listed.

At any rate, these are my objectives; perhaps yours are different? Give it a try and let’s compare. Nice beginning! And so easy to do. Why can’t this work for everyone?

March 3, 2017

Unreliable Times

The most unsettling thing about America these days is its unreliable nature. I thought I understood my neighbors, family and friends. But when discussion turns to news items it is clear not all of us are of the same mind. No, far from it!

The brother of one of my in laws – funny and quirky – but now I learn he is a Trump supporter. The truly odd thing is that he is a third first generation Hispanic born here of parents who were born in native lands – one Mexico, the other Cuba.

I suspect his perspective may be driven by stagnant career opportunities, but there are a number of ways to address that. Besides, his present circumstances are comfortable and he has a very happy life as far as I know of it. I don’t get why he would be so supportive of a person like Trump who so far has done nothing to change or even address the ‘needs’ of my relation. In fact the opposite is most likely going to happen: what he fears will worsen under Trump.

Look, I think the primary issues are these:

1. People fear that what America once was will be lost forever
2. Others fear Trump will actually make the loss more real 

Both sides are right. America of the 1950’s and 1960’s is gone forever. And good riddance. Those may have been simpler times and nostalgia is always a pleasant trip down memory lane, but often the trip is not realistic. It is overblown by emotions and attachments with others who are no longer with us; that is part of what we lost. But the social mores changed to better. The past was fearful of communists, conspiracies, Cold War destruction, the Bomb, and so much more. Our society was deep into racism and denial of that very same racism. It was also sexist. Male chauvinism was rampant, all in the name of polite society. Yes, Ma’am. No, Ma’am. Yes, sir! Let me hold that door for you. Oh please, take my seat!

Polite hid the fact that women were second class. They were to allow men to be held in higher esteem and assume leadership positions in everything – the church, society, politics, employers, schools and careers. It was the natural social order of the day. Period. And any woman who stated the opposite was an outsider and a firebrand. She was ostracized, too and labeled a hussy! Ooh, those were mean days.

We didn't talk nicely about others to their face; we did so behind their backs. Gossip was an industry. Not a proud one but it had stamina and staying power.

Education in those days was open to two groups – one with money to pay high tuition and fees, and another who had ability to succeed in the studies. No one else need apply. Scholarship was touted but not rewarded even then. Athletics were and still are.

Yes, those were the days. One car in most garages. Women stayed home to keep house and raise the kids. To say society was male dominated would be an understatement. Money was scarce for most families and vacations were simple affairs. One didn’t travel to exotic places unless the family had wealth. Job opportunities were also scarce. And to keep social order, we were constantly reminded the world was a harsh and cruel place where other nations were out to defeat us or destroy us. Bomb shelters were suggested as something we should all plan for. We didn’t because they were too costly and, in the end, thought to be futile anyway.

Yes I have nostalgia for those days but the good feelings were from my inevitable journey of maturation and coming of age. The process is scary but oddly rewarding and deeply felt. It is unique to each of us. Fondness of past memories of this time in our life is natural. Scratch the surface just a little and suddenly the ugly appears.

No; the past is past and we have come a long way to better times. The present is much better than the past. Certainly we are living in the best of times and the worst of times. Each age can claim the same for itself. It is inevitable to do so. Even proper.

Today has its beauty and ugly.

And we are the ugly if we allow it to remain. If we say Trump embodies what we fear, then what is it you wish for? What are your developed thoughts on that? I’m excited and anxious to hear what it is you feel is the desired outcome of your hopes.

So far all I can see is the downside of Trump. And that scares me. Please assure me my fears are unfounded. So far immigrants are not feeling safe; neither are transgenders; or women; gays; educated; aspiring thinkers and artists. So you see there are many who hunger for hopeful signs from you and your fellow Trumpeters.

We await your wisdom and messages of hope.

When might we expect to hear from you on this?

March 2, 2017

The Sides of Debate

I have always detested debate. On its surface it is meant to illuminate discussion so parties may come to a broader agreement on terms, facts and intent. My experience, however, has been quite the opposite.

Debates in America tend to be argumentative and manipulative. It tends to be all about ‘winning’ and not persuading. Especially if the persuading is based on fact, logic and truth.

What I want in a ‘debate’ is a logical array of the terms under discussion. I also need to know the expertise demonstrated by the debaters. If a speaker doesn’t have the credentials to make his points, then the argument is flawed. I prefer a lack of histrionics. Please; no emotional arguments that disguise the illogic of your argument.

Debates are supposed to be informative. An issue is defined for discussion. Its terms and boundaries are laid out. Sides step up to elucidate the points in favor of one side or the other. At the end of the debate, the audience is free to make up their own minds based on the logic and facts of the presentations. At the end, the audience has the goods available to understand the issue well and to decide how that issue figures into their minds, logic and conclusions pertaining to the many issues we live with on a daily basis.

However, this is not how debate is used in our nation. Rather, debate is used as a tool of propaganda.  Now, let’s turn to a definition of that term:   Propaganda: the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person; ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also :  a public action having such an effect  (Merriam-Webster)

You see the point: the purpose of propaganda is to mislead others.

History is filled with lessons to learn. The Soviet Union was huge on propaganda. Russia today continues that tradition. Public media is controlled by the government so the messages consumed by the public are of one voice and bent. Without facts and logic, such information is propaganda. The Nazis’ were also masters of propaganda.

In America we need look no farther than political parties. It is their job, after all, to gather supporters of a cause or point of view so they can turn that into votes and power in the political arena. It is this struggle for power and influence that has turned our political system into a debate with little value or truth. Government process thus is deflected and distorted. Left alone it might accomplish the public’s tasks and work. Interference, however, holds process hostage and progress is stopped dead in its tracks.

Witness gridlock in Congress. Witness a divided Supreme Court with 8 justices and a gaping vacancy. The list of damages to our system of governance goes on and on.

Today we have republicans, democrats, independents, libertarians, alt-right, and an army of disaffected. The arena is rife with struggle and conflicting messages. And thus the time is ripe for propaganda. Church and theology have crept into our political discourse in recent decades and have not helped illuminate healthy discourse. Ideology and its twisted logic has not been of help, either.

Worse, today we have a decidedly illogical presence in our news, press conferences, and government decisions. Today we have a repudiation of education, expertise, and logic. The argument goes: If you have a specific expertise to offer in our discussion, it is suspect as to its fairness. You are therefore not allowed to participate in our discussion.

How else can you explain the following:

1. Public education is a major building block of an educated citizenry; but now it is felt that educators have an ax to grind and cannot be trusted; thus private schools should be favored in education; and public dollars should pay for it via vouchers; public schools will need to find their own resources
2. Global warming is science run amok; eliminate the EPA and tell the White House staff who the EPA staffers are who have supported the global warming position these past several years
3. Oil does not pollute the soil, water or air. Only ideologues argue against drilling for oil in wilderness areas, oceans and populated areas. Rescind restrictions on oil well drilling and boost oil production
4. Scientists tell us alternative energy is possible and probable; but this will destroy the value of oil companies; ignore the scientists and support the hegemony of oil as the globe’s primary energy source 

I won’t go into other issues. You get the point. If the ends are not served by an expert’s well researched argument, then destroy the scientist and his science. Go with what makes you feel good.

The problem, of course, is that this is a power issue. And sharing power is not in the mix. Decidedly not! Power is only power if one party has more of it than the other party; else there is no ‘true’ power, right? Someone has to win; therefore someone has to lose.

My question is: Who are the true losers of this debate?

I shudder to think where we will be four years from now. If America’s promise is yet in her future, then we must all resist.

Resist!

March 1, 2017