What a great "Coffee Klatch!" Perhaps all of us should take a day out of our week to have one with others too. Dr. Reich really did shut down Graham during his testimony, he denied him the opportunity to deflect away from the serious issues of the day. Watching it found me clapping at the computer! "Public Exposure" I hope it shows in other states or at a minimum on a streaming platform, I'd love to see it! This klatch was a great way to start the weekend :)
Secretary Reich, you are an American treasure, and icon. We're so pleased that you love work and share your talents, knowledge so creatively. Thank you for speaking truth to power. Graham's as wishy-washy as a kite in a hurricane. Great job of calling him out on trying to shift the narrative, 'don't pay attention to what's going on behind the curtain' hogwash.
My coffee was so much more enjoyable this morning thanks to you and Heather.
My name is David Schlein. I am a former BLS labor economist and served as National Vice President of the American Federation of Government Employees while you were Secretary of Labor. What’s your view of the current state Labor and the future for the Labor Union movement.
My first of at least two comments: These are indeed stressful times, and my nearing-70 self seems to feel a persistent low level of dread -- like a constant hum. That said, you have greatly succeeded (with me) in making this morning coffee get-together friendly and personal. I really appreciated the time, and look forward to the next one!
A coffee klatsch is a time for telling stories. John Hurt was a sharecropper in Leland, Mississippi in the first half of the 20th century. The owners of the farm he worked allowed him to listen to music on their radio each Saturday night. He was listening to two instruments but thought they were one, a bass and a guitar. And so, he taught himself to both the base and the melody at the same time on his guitar. They say that when Carlos Montoya first heard his recording, he asked who was playing the other guitar? John Hurts style has been emulated ever since.
"Maxwell House, good to the last drop" It is a beautiful story with lessons for us today.
Dear Robert, I think you gave the solution to stopping "demagoguery", without recognizing it, as such. Conflict resolution is my field. The real challenge is not one of leadership, but of citizens in the decent center supporting one another in reclaiming the civic square from those who seek to destroy it for their own ends. I welcome a conversation. Paul Johanson
The reason why the decent centre has not reclaimed the civic square is that it is too darned preoccupied with fixing the damage caused by the demagogue in power, whether in plugging the gaps in health or social care or education or civil administration caused partly by spending cuts to fund tax breaks for the rich.The need for charismatic but hard thinking centrist leaders to emerge in the USA or Europe has never been more apparent than in these times of crises. Reasoned debate and transparency of civil administration have been 'carpet bombed' by the darker forces of discretely funded special interests and the unregulated Internet.
You were onto something, in my opinion, when you alluded to "work as therapy." It recalled for me "The Human Condition" by Hannah Arendt, and her categorizing the range of human endeavor as "labor," "work," or "activity." Depending on where the endeavor falls on the scale, one can feel enslaved or liberated.
I believe that many, like myself (who is a grandparent), are looking for sources of sustainable hope, and building a reason for hope for our young people. (A review of the "Eightfold Path" might be helpful here too.) A 2-minute video by Chana Weisberg called "What is the Role of an Educator?" -- (at Chabad.org's website) -- suggested something really awesome, if we expand the role of educator to the entire village.
I've been puzzled by Lindsey Graham's behavior since John McCain died. Who or what is he really?
He seems to be rational and even make sense sometimes, for instance, when he roundly disparaged Candidate Trump: “You know how you make America great again? Tell Donald Trump to go to hell. He’s a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot. He doesn’t represent my party. He doesn’t represent the values that the men and women who wear the uniform are fighting for. … He’s the ISIL man of the year." (December 2015) Senator Graham made eleven (11) other equally disparaging comments about Trump in that period.
Yet after Trump became president, Graham became his golf buddy and full-throated supporter. He even said much later, after the election, that the Republican Party cannot move forward without Donald Trump. Puzzling. So what's Graham's playbook based on exactly? Pragmatism? Payola? Perversion? Blackmail? What's the dynamic here in this astounding flip-flop? Graham went from crucifying Trump to sanctifying him. Fascinating psychologically; depressing politically.
Graham's not stupid; he makes sense sometimes, but I guess that's only a small part of his psyche, the subordinate part. His main mind fully supports Donald Trump, which I can't imagine any intelligent, decent, honest person doing, because Trump is all bad, all the time, in every way. (And I'm not happy saying that; just the opposite: I wish that all our leaders were statesmen. Why wouldn't I?)
Dr. Reich says that Graham has no ethics at all. That's a terribly damning charge, yet I have to wonder if the shoe fits.
Graham and almost all elected Republicans are primarily opportunistic people who will say and do pretty much anything, and that they think they can get away with, in order to self-promote and to advance themselves in the short-term. They are mostly unaware of the potential negative consequences of anything they say or do and/or they don't care about any such fallout because they believe they can get away with anything, which too often they can.
All of their behavior is part of an ego-based mind-game they are continuously playing. And a mind can justify, at least for itself, anything it becomes attached to. Their lack of ethics is the result of little or no development of heart quality, and it is from heart quality that any real sense of morality arises. Ethics is simply a codified statement about what a well-developed heart would inspire and guide a person to naturally do. Unfortunately, most politicians seem to lack in heart quality – they are all busy playing ego-based mind-games, Republicans more than Democrats or Independents. One of the great exceptions was our late Senator Paul Wellstone from Minnesota. Senator Bernie Sanders also exemplifies a great deal of heart quality.
Great comment. And you may well be correct. My mother, a farm girl, used to say of mean people that they had "no feelings." And maybe ethical behavior can be achieved and maintained through the heart or through feelings.
There is another way, though: Philosophers have seen the worth and value of behaving ethically because it's in your own best interests: You live in a society, outnumbered many, many times by people more powerful than you. If everyone behaved beastly, life would indeed be nasty, brutish, and short. We all want to be happy, at least sometimes; the best way for that to happen is to live in a just and fair society. So we need a social contract, written or implied. To thrive, we must live in societies.
Certainly, many people have discovered that you can feather your own nest in many ways by breaking the rules, norms, or laws. We all do it sometimes. And some of us do it chronically; they are criminals, enemies of the state. As you imply, many Republicans fit that description. It's puzzling to me, though, that a "statesman" would act so undemocratically, so selfishly, so outrageously. To them, the rewards must justify all their misdeeds. And if they have no conscience or "heart," then they probably sleep well at night. Nonetheless, they are, by definition, sociopaths, so we must control and contain them lest they destroy our nation.
We, I think, fully realize that now. Bothsiderism is a nonstarter; one political party in America is antidemocratic; it wants to see our government fail and corporations maximize their profits, profits our public officials benefit in directly.
Aristotle said that democracy requires constant vigilance. He was right. And it also requires action: We must rid ourselves of these office-holding jackanapes by voting them out.
Please notice that I said that "it is from heart quality that any real sense of morality arises." The key word here is "real." Philosophers play many mind games as they try to juggle ideas about thoughts, feelings and actions, and they come to many mind-based conclusions. But what they conclude at best are rules that, as I noted, are statements "about what a well-developed heart would inspire and guide a person to naturally do." Another way to think of this is that true moral behavior arises from a felt sense of empathy with others.
Yes, a person can act morally based upon a learned ethic, whether it comes from parents, authority figures, committee statements, religious organizations or philosophers. But none of these lessons are as clear, unambiguous and compelling as are the inspirations and motivations that arise from one's heart. It is at the heart level where we can know and feel and be inspired and guided by a true sense of interconnectedness and interdependence with all others. The source of this inspiration and guidance is Love. A learned ethic may be embraced as something that feels right, but it is often somewhat grudgingly adhered to only out of fear of getting caught and ending up in trouble.
The inspiration and motivation behind statements of ethics tends to be primarily fear-based and, as such, closely connected to promises or threats of gains and losses. Such an ethic is, in effect, imposed upon a person rather than embraced. If one is calculating (mind-based) one's political career, "best interests" are typically viewed in a short-term context such as election cycles and monetary gain where one wins while others lose, rather than as a lifetime arc of enjoying rewarding relationships, fulfillment and inner peace within a community wherein everyone has an opportunity and support to enable them to thrive together.
Few really know what is in their "best interests." There is a serious lack of real understanding of what "survival of the fittest" means in the long-term. Short-term gains, regardless of what the costs might be, to one's self or to others, might seem to be best served by doing whatever one can get away with to gain whatever one desires in the moment. Long-term gains, however, are really best served by whatever serves everyone best, through harmonious cooperation with each other as well as with Mother Nature. This latter view is the only "survival of the fittest" approach that can ultimately help serve the survival of humanity.
Interesting personal philosophy, but wholly subjective, thus believable and convincing only to you and perhaps your inner circle, if you have one. To persuade many others, if you ever want to do that, you'll need to either use logic or scientific experiments. Yes, your conclusions in this matter feel correct and sound right to you, because you understand how you're defining such cosmic, nebulous concepts as love. Most of us think our definition of it is perfectly accurate. For instance, the Bible claims that God is love; however, the parents of those Egyptian babies who the angels of the Lord slew might disagree.
To successfully sell your ideas in the marketplace of ideas, you must enter the arena of objectivity, not subjectivity. In short, your philosophy or viewpoint or set of beliefs, at least as stated here, convinces only you. Which is fine and probably necessary: Who can search out, explain, and define all aspects of life in its infinite, ever-changing details and endless complexity? It would take a god to succeed at that. Humans are left with probabilities, educated guesses, and comforting guiding fictions. But a humble person need not lose sleep over being limited, fallible, and largely clueless on the big issues of life: It's an amazing trip, no two moments exactly alike, with more questions than answers, especially answers that work for everyone. It rather adds zest to living and repels boredom.
Yes, Robert there is much stress. Especially if you are poor, or even middle class, a minority race, and female, to name a few. How about the long withheld ERA and what it could do to help women? Passing at least the billionaire (almost) fair tax portion of the budget bill would help. However, lobbying contributions reform and plugging up the gaping hole in democracy’s boat a/k/a Citizen’s United has to be done. We cannot keep our democracy without plugging that vast dark money hole. It’s ridiculous. We are undoubtedly getting flooded right now with laundered dark money coming from enemies within and without.
I’m forlorn at a time when our family should be joyous with the birth of a new grandchild. I am terrified for his future. And, I think that future will include the probability of direct war, and no doubt the multiple challenges of climate change.
So, to Lindsey (swear word adjective withheld) Graham...may he reap what he sows. And thank you, Mr. Secretary, Professor, and friend Robert for fighting the good fight and cheering us up a bit.
So many good points! I only wish some of your commenters were my neighbors. I live in rural Magaville . Virtually everybody here 'knows' exactly what is going on and what to do to get things back to normal and America great again. As they see it it is mainly teeming city folk, libtards and similar idiots who keep complaining about global warming, environmental disasters, big corporations, and just 'normal' business, economic and farm expansion and such anti-American stuff. My neighbors thoroughly approve of all the far-right pols, newsmen and spokesmen and business as usual. They want only that things are run by 'their people, the real 'Muricans', sensible libertarians , Trumps, etc so that everything can run smoothly and not intrude on their lives at all. Autocrats or whatever, is fine, as long as their people run the show. It is really all about the last century and how, if only these current idiot dems, and libs and such, could be quashed (by money, preferably). They feel entirely empowered by their mentality.
Thank you so much for the great effort you have made bringing this substack community together. We need this so much & I appreciate the positive & reliable input. You are so clear and believable I want more people to know about you! I'll do what I can. But one thing I am having trouble getting over are people chanting "more Democrats, more Democrats," as if that in itself is magic pixie dust. It's the way I feel about media with it's constant incantations of "stock market, stock market, stock market" as if it's an omnipresent entity we just have to accept. I personally like to see a 3rd party but realize now may not be the time to entertain more elements. Or is it? My 1st vote was in '72 against Richard Nixon, not for anyone in particular. I couldn't even remember who it was. I had to go look Mondale. Too many of my votes have been like this, tho mostly always a Democratic. They're not solidly populist. I wouldn't mind seeing something like a "Crisis Intervention Party" for those disillusioned with most of what there current stand for but not too cynical to care. I found Dr. Wilson's concept of Anti-racism Action Orientation enlightening. How do we inspire more people to action? You've been doing that for me for a long time. Thank you most sincerely.
Hello Archangel, My wife is allowing me to borrow her account as I'm the one who spends 90% of my time testing and dwelling on this material.
Yes, you hit the nail on the head, decent people are focusing on fixing the damage done and improving laws, governance, markets, environment etc. I think the more useful perspective is an arsonist one. Rather than put out fires we need to become more effective at dealing with the "arsonists". Arsonists are on the extreme "left" and extreme "right" and can be identified by an unwillingness to consider the legitimate needs of those on the other "side". Their focus is amplified by social media because social media (aka advertising) thrives on strife and drama. Individual responses are generally ineffective in this environment even by the most skilled practitioners. The skill set needed is coordinated collaboration to identify and restrain those doing harm and support those involved in decent dialog. I've hammered out a lot of the tactical and transactional methods. Braver Angels is a good example of a mass movement that is gaining traction. If you want to discuss, let me know. It works better in conversation vs. email.
What a great "Coffee Klatch!" Perhaps all of us should take a day out of our week to have one with others too. Dr. Reich really did shut down Graham during his testimony, he denied him the opportunity to deflect away from the serious issues of the day. Watching it found me clapping at the computer! "Public Exposure" I hope it shows in other states or at a minimum on a streaming platform, I'd love to see it! This klatch was a great way to start the weekend :)
I, too, clapped at the graham shut down. MASTERFULLY done!!
Dr. Reich . . . my first Coffee Klatch. What a great interlocutor you have chosen in Heather Lofthouse!
Secretary Reich, you are an American treasure, and icon. We're so pleased that you love work and share your talents, knowledge so creatively. Thank you for speaking truth to power. Graham's as wishy-washy as a kite in a hurricane. Great job of calling him out on trying to shift the narrative, 'don't pay attention to what's going on behind the curtain' hogwash.
My coffee was so much more enjoyable this morning thanks to you and Heather.
Cheers!
Hi Secretary Reich
My name is David Schlein. I am a former BLS labor economist and served as National Vice President of the American Federation of Government Employees while you were Secretary of Labor. What’s your view of the current state Labor and the future for the Labor Union movement.
My first of at least two comments: These are indeed stressful times, and my nearing-70 self seems to feel a persistent low level of dread -- like a constant hum. That said, you have greatly succeeded (with me) in making this morning coffee get-together friendly and personal. I really appreciated the time, and look forward to the next one!
"Coffee Klatsch" "Coffee Blues" Mississippi John Hurt
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=coffee+blues+mississippi+john+hurt&&view=detail&mid=CA9EB531404F47043E42CA9EB531404F47043E42&&FORM=VRDGAR
A coffee klatsch is a time for telling stories. John Hurt was a sharecropper in Leland, Mississippi in the first half of the 20th century. The owners of the farm he worked allowed him to listen to music on their radio each Saturday night. He was listening to two instruments but thought they were one, a bass and a guitar. And so, he taught himself to both the base and the melody at the same time on his guitar. They say that when Carlos Montoya first heard his recording, he asked who was playing the other guitar? John Hurts style has been emulated ever since.
"Maxwell House, good to the last drop" It is a beautiful story with lessons for us today.
Dear Robert, I think you gave the solution to stopping "demagoguery", without recognizing it, as such. Conflict resolution is my field. The real challenge is not one of leadership, but of citizens in the decent center supporting one another in reclaiming the civic square from those who seek to destroy it for their own ends. I welcome a conversation. Paul Johanson
Yes! I love this. Thank you for bringing it up.
The reason why the decent centre has not reclaimed the civic square is that it is too darned preoccupied with fixing the damage caused by the demagogue in power, whether in plugging the gaps in health or social care or education or civil administration caused partly by spending cuts to fund tax breaks for the rich.The need for charismatic but hard thinking centrist leaders to emerge in the USA or Europe has never been more apparent than in these times of crises. Reasoned debate and transparency of civil administration have been 'carpet bombed' by the darker forces of discretely funded special interests and the unregulated Internet.
You were onto something, in my opinion, when you alluded to "work as therapy." It recalled for me "The Human Condition" by Hannah Arendt, and her categorizing the range of human endeavor as "labor," "work," or "activity." Depending on where the endeavor falls on the scale, one can feel enslaved or liberated.
I believe that many, like myself (who is a grandparent), are looking for sources of sustainable hope, and building a reason for hope for our young people. (A review of the "Eightfold Path" might be helpful here too.) A 2-minute video by Chana Weisberg called "What is the Role of an Educator?" -- (at Chabad.org's website) -- suggested something really awesome, if we expand the role of educator to the entire village.
I had a little trouble finding the video, Thomas. Here is a link: https://www.chabad.org/multimedia/video_cdo/aid/5396102/jewish/What-is-the-Role-of-an-Educator.htm. What she says reminds me of the sculptor who removes the excess stone to reveal the work of art it hides. Thank you.
I would have liked to have heard more real comments. You both said you had many questions to ask each other. What were they? Thanks.
I've been puzzled by Lindsey Graham's behavior since John McCain died. Who or what is he really?
He seems to be rational and even make sense sometimes, for instance, when he roundly disparaged Candidate Trump: “You know how you make America great again? Tell Donald Trump to go to hell. He’s a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot. He doesn’t represent my party. He doesn’t represent the values that the men and women who wear the uniform are fighting for. … He’s the ISIL man of the year." (December 2015) Senator Graham made eleven (11) other equally disparaging comments about Trump in that period.
Yet after Trump became president, Graham became his golf buddy and full-throated supporter. He even said much later, after the election, that the Republican Party cannot move forward without Donald Trump. Puzzling. So what's Graham's playbook based on exactly? Pragmatism? Payola? Perversion? Blackmail? What's the dynamic here in this astounding flip-flop? Graham went from crucifying Trump to sanctifying him. Fascinating psychologically; depressing politically.
Graham's not stupid; he makes sense sometimes, but I guess that's only a small part of his psyche, the subordinate part. His main mind fully supports Donald Trump, which I can't imagine any intelligent, decent, honest person doing, because Trump is all bad, all the time, in every way. (And I'm not happy saying that; just the opposite: I wish that all our leaders were statesmen. Why wouldn't I?)
Dr. Reich says that Graham has no ethics at all. That's a terribly damning charge, yet I have to wonder if the shoe fits.
Self-interest, pure and simple.
Graham and almost all elected Republicans are primarily opportunistic people who will say and do pretty much anything, and that they think they can get away with, in order to self-promote and to advance themselves in the short-term. They are mostly unaware of the potential negative consequences of anything they say or do and/or they don't care about any such fallout because they believe they can get away with anything, which too often they can.
All of their behavior is part of an ego-based mind-game they are continuously playing. And a mind can justify, at least for itself, anything it becomes attached to. Their lack of ethics is the result of little or no development of heart quality, and it is from heart quality that any real sense of morality arises. Ethics is simply a codified statement about what a well-developed heart would inspire and guide a person to naturally do. Unfortunately, most politicians seem to lack in heart quality – they are all busy playing ego-based mind-games, Republicans more than Democrats or Independents. One of the great exceptions was our late Senator Paul Wellstone from Minnesota. Senator Bernie Sanders also exemplifies a great deal of heart quality.
Great comment. And you may well be correct. My mother, a farm girl, used to say of mean people that they had "no feelings." And maybe ethical behavior can be achieved and maintained through the heart or through feelings.
There is another way, though: Philosophers have seen the worth and value of behaving ethically because it's in your own best interests: You live in a society, outnumbered many, many times by people more powerful than you. If everyone behaved beastly, life would indeed be nasty, brutish, and short. We all want to be happy, at least sometimes; the best way for that to happen is to live in a just and fair society. So we need a social contract, written or implied. To thrive, we must live in societies.
Certainly, many people have discovered that you can feather your own nest in many ways by breaking the rules, norms, or laws. We all do it sometimes. And some of us do it chronically; they are criminals, enemies of the state. As you imply, many Republicans fit that description. It's puzzling to me, though, that a "statesman" would act so undemocratically, so selfishly, so outrageously. To them, the rewards must justify all their misdeeds. And if they have no conscience or "heart," then they probably sleep well at night. Nonetheless, they are, by definition, sociopaths, so we must control and contain them lest they destroy our nation.
We, I think, fully realize that now. Bothsiderism is a nonstarter; one political party in America is antidemocratic; it wants to see our government fail and corporations maximize their profits, profits our public officials benefit in directly.
Aristotle said that democracy requires constant vigilance. He was right. And it also requires action: We must rid ourselves of these office-holding jackanapes by voting them out.
Please notice that I said that "it is from heart quality that any real sense of morality arises." The key word here is "real." Philosophers play many mind games as they try to juggle ideas about thoughts, feelings and actions, and they come to many mind-based conclusions. But what they conclude at best are rules that, as I noted, are statements "about what a well-developed heart would inspire and guide a person to naturally do." Another way to think of this is that true moral behavior arises from a felt sense of empathy with others.
Yes, a person can act morally based upon a learned ethic, whether it comes from parents, authority figures, committee statements, religious organizations or philosophers. But none of these lessons are as clear, unambiguous and compelling as are the inspirations and motivations that arise from one's heart. It is at the heart level where we can know and feel and be inspired and guided by a true sense of interconnectedness and interdependence with all others. The source of this inspiration and guidance is Love. A learned ethic may be embraced as something that feels right, but it is often somewhat grudgingly adhered to only out of fear of getting caught and ending up in trouble.
The inspiration and motivation behind statements of ethics tends to be primarily fear-based and, as such, closely connected to promises or threats of gains and losses. Such an ethic is, in effect, imposed upon a person rather than embraced. If one is calculating (mind-based) one's political career, "best interests" are typically viewed in a short-term context such as election cycles and monetary gain where one wins while others lose, rather than as a lifetime arc of enjoying rewarding relationships, fulfillment and inner peace within a community wherein everyone has an opportunity and support to enable them to thrive together.
Few really know what is in their "best interests." There is a serious lack of real understanding of what "survival of the fittest" means in the long-term. Short-term gains, regardless of what the costs might be, to one's self or to others, might seem to be best served by doing whatever one can get away with to gain whatever one desires in the moment. Long-term gains, however, are really best served by whatever serves everyone best, through harmonious cooperation with each other as well as with Mother Nature. This latter view is the only "survival of the fittest" approach that can ultimately help serve the survival of humanity.
Interesting personal philosophy, but wholly subjective, thus believable and convincing only to you and perhaps your inner circle, if you have one. To persuade many others, if you ever want to do that, you'll need to either use logic or scientific experiments. Yes, your conclusions in this matter feel correct and sound right to you, because you understand how you're defining such cosmic, nebulous concepts as love. Most of us think our definition of it is perfectly accurate. For instance, the Bible claims that God is love; however, the parents of those Egyptian babies who the angels of the Lord slew might disagree.
To successfully sell your ideas in the marketplace of ideas, you must enter the arena of objectivity, not subjectivity. In short, your philosophy or viewpoint or set of beliefs, at least as stated here, convinces only you. Which is fine and probably necessary: Who can search out, explain, and define all aspects of life in its infinite, ever-changing details and endless complexity? It would take a god to succeed at that. Humans are left with probabilities, educated guesses, and comforting guiding fictions. But a humble person need not lose sleep over being limited, fallible, and largely clueless on the big issues of life: It's an amazing trip, no two moments exactly alike, with more questions than answers, especially answers that work for everyone. It rather adds zest to living and repels boredom.
Yes, Robert there is much stress. Especially if you are poor, or even middle class, a minority race, and female, to name a few. How about the long withheld ERA and what it could do to help women? Passing at least the billionaire (almost) fair tax portion of the budget bill would help. However, lobbying contributions reform and plugging up the gaping hole in democracy’s boat a/k/a Citizen’s United has to be done. We cannot keep our democracy without plugging that vast dark money hole. It’s ridiculous. We are undoubtedly getting flooded right now with laundered dark money coming from enemies within and without.
I’m forlorn at a time when our family should be joyous with the birth of a new grandchild. I am terrified for his future. And, I think that future will include the probability of direct war, and no doubt the multiple challenges of climate change.
So, to Lindsey (swear word adjective withheld) Graham...may he reap what he sows. And thank you, Mr. Secretary, Professor, and friend Robert for fighting the good fight and cheering us up a bit.
So many good points! I only wish some of your commenters were my neighbors. I live in rural Magaville . Virtually everybody here 'knows' exactly what is going on and what to do to get things back to normal and America great again. As they see it it is mainly teeming city folk, libtards and similar idiots who keep complaining about global warming, environmental disasters, big corporations, and just 'normal' business, economic and farm expansion and such anti-American stuff. My neighbors thoroughly approve of all the far-right pols, newsmen and spokesmen and business as usual. They want only that things are run by 'their people, the real 'Muricans', sensible libertarians , Trumps, etc so that everything can run smoothly and not intrude on their lives at all. Autocrats or whatever, is fine, as long as their people run the show. It is really all about the last century and how, if only these current idiot dems, and libs and such, could be quashed (by money, preferably). They feel entirely empowered by their mentality.
Hi - you mentioned suggestions for other topics to cover. I vote to include discussions of climate change, the most important issue of all.
Thank you so much for the great effort you have made bringing this substack community together. We need this so much & I appreciate the positive & reliable input. You are so clear and believable I want more people to know about you! I'll do what I can. But one thing I am having trouble getting over are people chanting "more Democrats, more Democrats," as if that in itself is magic pixie dust. It's the way I feel about media with it's constant incantations of "stock market, stock market, stock market" as if it's an omnipresent entity we just have to accept. I personally like to see a 3rd party but realize now may not be the time to entertain more elements. Or is it? My 1st vote was in '72 against Richard Nixon, not for anyone in particular. I couldn't even remember who it was. I had to go look Mondale. Too many of my votes have been like this, tho mostly always a Democratic. They're not solidly populist. I wouldn't mind seeing something like a "Crisis Intervention Party" for those disillusioned with most of what there current stand for but not too cynical to care. I found Dr. Wilson's concept of Anti-racism Action Orientation enlightening. How do we inspire more people to action? You've been doing that for me for a long time. Thank you most sincerely.
Could you lead an in-depth analysis of QanNon?
Hello Archangel, My wife is allowing me to borrow her account as I'm the one who spends 90% of my time testing and dwelling on this material.
Yes, you hit the nail on the head, decent people are focusing on fixing the damage done and improving laws, governance, markets, environment etc. I think the more useful perspective is an arsonist one. Rather than put out fires we need to become more effective at dealing with the "arsonists". Arsonists are on the extreme "left" and extreme "right" and can be identified by an unwillingness to consider the legitimate needs of those on the other "side". Their focus is amplified by social media because social media (aka advertising) thrives on strife and drama. Individual responses are generally ineffective in this environment even by the most skilled practitioners. The skill set needed is coordinated collaboration to identify and restrain those doing harm and support those involved in decent dialog. I've hammered out a lot of the tactical and transactional methods. Braver Angels is a good example of a mass movement that is gaining traction. If you want to discuss, let me know. It works better in conversation vs. email.