Category Archives: Blog

Blog, Politics

For And Against Trump: A Bitter Dialectic That Is Literally Tearing Us Apart

Originally published February 7, 2017 on the Huffington Post

We are caught in the throes of the fiercest dialectic imaginable. It not only shows no signs of letting up, but of getting worse everyday. In a word, it’s literally tearing us apart.

Let me state both sides as briefly and as strongly as I can.

For Trump
Those who support President Trump generally feel harassed if not threatened by those who say they are liberals and thereby supposedly tolerate different points of view, but really don’t. At best, they are liberals in name only. Basically, they are hypocrites. They are constantly complaining about everything that doesn’t go their way. They are hysterical whiners who can’t accept the fact that they lost the election fair and square. They are unwilling and unable to give Trump a fair chance. As a result, they are lacking in fundamental fairness. They deserve to be feared, if not loathed altogether. They are incapable of understanding that those of us who voted for Trump did so in spite of his bluster and coarse language, which we often wish he didn’t do and use because it gets in the way of his basic message. We voted for him because of his demonstrated business successes. We took him at his word to Make America Great Again! Who else can drain the swamp in Washington and bring back good paying American jobs? Hillary? No way! The Clintons are interested only in themselves! They cannot be trusted!

Against Trump
Trump’s constant denigration of women, Hispanics, blacks, Muslims, Secretary Clinton, shrill bombastic tone, offensive attitudes, threats against other countries and those who don’t agree with him are cause not to give him a chance. Indeed, he’s already blown it. In short, he fills us liberals with fear and loathing. His early actions against Muslims only confirm our fears. In addition, the threat of war and violence are all-too-real and constant. All of the above are grounds for impeachment. Trump is supremely unfit to be president because of his temperament and lack of qualifications. Indeed, he suffers from serious mental illnesses. His constant shifting back and forth between whatever reality suits him at the moment is strong evidence of psychosis. And, narcissistic personality disorder doesn’t even begin to describe what ails him. Who else tweets at 3am when he or she is most alone and therefore most afraid of being ignored? Who else but a sociopath feels no guilt about stiffing his workers?

Any Way Out?
As they are stated, it’s impossible for the diehard proponents of either side to come together. But then the basic purpose of a dialectic is not for either of the two highly antagonistic positions. It’s for those who can extract a kernel of truth, or understanding, however small, from either side. Thus, even though I am heavily in the Against Trump side of the dialectic, the For Trump side helps me not just to understand but to feel the intense anger of those who voted for Trump have towards a system that has not only ignored them, but humiliated them continually in the worst ways imaginable. They are treated as if they were than nothing more the punch lines of poor jokes.

I blame myself and my fellow Democrats for abandoning our commitment to working people. We certainly don’t have to agree with everything that they say and do, let alone any group, but we do have to understand their pain. Without this, we are truly lost.

Standard
Blog, Politics

A Serious Exercise In Damage Control: Protecting Ourselves From The Crisis Prone President

Originally published January 27, 2017 on the Huffington Post

By virtue of his endless stream of hateful tirades, constant campaigning, pettiness, deep character flaws, repeated refusals to share his tax returns, and to separate himself clearly from his countless businesses, President Trump has earned the dubious distinction of being The Crisis Prone President. And, this is only his first week in office! The major question is, “What we can do to protect ourselves from the never-ending crises he’s capable of fomenting?”

Damage Control Mechanisms are generally acknowledged as one of the most important parts of Crisis Management. Nevertheless, a great deal of misunderstanding surrounds them, the prime one being that they exist primarily to contain the damage after a major crisis has occurred. While it’s certainly true that damage containment is one of their main purposes, more importantly, Damage Control Mechanisms basically exist to prevent major crises from occurring in the first place. This is precisely why they must be invented far in advance. It’s also why creating them in the heat of battle is self-defeating.

The classic example is BP’s oil spill in the Gulf. Millions of gallons of crude spewed before the well was finally capped. Sadly, the environment continued to suffer damage long afterwards. The disaster revealed the folly of not having well-tested and maintained Damage Control Mechanisms prior to being allowed to operate in highly sensitive areas of the world.

Given their extreme importance, how do President Trump and his advisors fare with respect to Damage Control? Are they acting in accordance with best principles, or are they instead in violation of them?

Physical Containment is one of the major forms of Damage Control. One creates an actual physical barrier that walls off and thus keeps a crisis such as a massive uncontrolled fire or oil spill from spreading and doing damage to other unaffected parts of an organization, sensitive regions, and even whole societies. In President Trump’s case, his repeated failures to “build a wall” between his far flung business interests and the Presidency is not only in direct violation of the whole idea of Physical Containment, but it actually increases the chances of a major crisis due to direct conflicts of interest. What’s particularly onerous is that the particular type of crisis is already well known. There is thus no excuse for not preparing well in advance.

Another major form of Damage Control is Dilution or Dispersion. In this case, one deliberately takes steps to decrease the concentration of a toxic chemical, or more generally, neutralize a potentially dangerous situation. It also includes Deflecting a crisis onto another part of the environment or party. Trump constantly uses this tactic. He is constantly shifting blame for his own self-created problems (berating the intelligence agencies, treating women and minorities with derision, etc.) onto others such as the “crooked news media.”

One of the more important and positive forms of Damage Control is Openness and Transparency. It preempts a crisis before it takes root. In Trump’s case, he would have to reveal his tax returns, which he adamantly refuses to do, thus adding to the perception that he has serious issues to hide.

Finally, Admitting Mistakes, Accepting Blame, and Responsibility are also critical. They are key in establishing and restoring trust. But then Trump rarely if ever apologizes for anything. And of course, his base doesn’t want him to apologize for that would mean that he’s not the all-powerful superman they need him to be.

In short, the best Damage Control is preventative, proactive in the best sense. It is not reactive, or after the fact.

Against this, what does Trump consistently do? First, he’s heavily (“bigly”) into denial. Instead of acknowledging facts, he constantly makes up whatever suits him, never mind that it conflicts what he just said a moment ago. Denial thus leaves no room for Openness and Transparency, Admitting Mistakes, Accepting Responsibility, etc. He also constantly attacks, bullies, demonizes, insults, mocks, and threatens his enemies real and imagined. He thereby constantly makes crises for himself and others. To protect his overly fragile ego, he uses the most primitive defense mechanisms such as sharply dividing the world into good and bad guys. And, God help you if you’re a bad guy.

In sum, Trump is a living, breathing veritable “swamp” of crises. Our only protection is to engage in pre-emptive Damage Control.

Of course The Constitution is our ultimate safeguard and form of Damage Control. But as always, it’s people who enforce The Constitution. That’s why the women’s marches across America are only a beginning. There need to be mass protests every day. For instance, ordinary citizens who are in serious danger of losing health care need to make their faces and bodies known. They need to besiege the halls of Congress wearing signs, “Without Health Care, I am certain to die! Is that what you want to do to me?”

And yes, the Democratic Party must relearn how to reach out to a broader base with a more inclusive message. It must demonstrate sincerely that it not only cares about the harsh lives of those who voted for Trump, but that it can truly help them.

In short, we have to do everything in our power to Neutralize Trump.

Standard
Blog, Media + Politics

Fake News: The Product Of Fake Inquiry

Originally published 12/16/2016 on the Huffington Post

Fake news is due primarily to the serious loss of trust in established institutions. Far too many have abandoned traditional ways of arriving at the “truth.” Since “truth” is fundamental to the issue, let me analyze fake news from a philosophical perspective.

One of the preeminent ways of acquiring valid knowledge is by means of expert consensus (historically known as empiricism). “Truth” is that with which a group of independent, well-qualified experts agree. More generally, it’s the average of independent data, observations, etc. The tighter the agreement between the data, experts, etc., the more that the average is regarded as the “best approximation of the truth.”

For example, the “body of ‘reputable scientists worldwide’” is in strong agreement that human activities are largely responsible for global warming. Thus, that humans are responsible for global warming is essentially settled.

Those who are susceptible to fake news—especially conspiracy theories—generally start with a set of “preconceived truths such as “one can’t trust the biased news media, etc.” These “truths” are so strongly held that they are incontrovertible. One then works backwards to find sources that unequivocally support one’s predetermined views. Instead of using independent journalists who are experts in seeking out facts and counter checking them meticulously, one gravitates—indeed, seeks out— instead towards groups of partisan advocates, i.e., “favored experts.”

Well-known cognitive biases are paramount in both forming and in confirming one’s favored beliefs. Confirmation bias—deliberately searching out those sources that support one’s favored conclusions—is predominant. So is cognitive closure. One’s preferred truths are impervious to modification.

With the growth of social media, one cannot counter fake news merely by presenting scientific evidence and engaging in reasoned argument. Scientific evidence and reasoned arguments are generally rejected. Instead, one needs friendly, trusted faces that can embed scientific evidence in compelling stories.

If social media were truly responsible, it would deliberately develop sites that were devoted to countering fake news. It would also hire editors to ferret out fake news. In addition, it would employ reputable scholars to test what’s most effective in countering fake news.

We’re naïve if we think that “scientific facts” alone will counter fake news. It wouldn’t exist if it didn’t fulfill deep emotional needs.

To respond to such needs, we need to bring Jon Stewart out of retirement to host a new show along the lines of Fake News Exposes! Stephen Colbert is expert enough to take on the job as well!

In the end, fake news is anything but a joke.

Standard
Blog, Crisis Management, Politics

The Crisis Prone Presidency

Originally published 12/15/16 of the Huffington Post

Those of us who study corporate crises distinguish between Crisis Prone versus Crisis Prepared individuals and organizations. Crisis Prone individuals and organizations put their primary energies into all kinds of faulty rationalizations that allow them to persist in the false belief that they will never have a crisis: “we’re too big and powerful to have major crises;” “crises only happen to others;” “if a crisis happens, someone will come to our rescue,” “there’s no need to prepare for what’ll never happen.” They are prime cases of denial writ large.

In sharp contrast, Crisis Prepared individuals are constantly probing themselves and their organizations for dangerous rationalizations that keep them from preparing for worst-case scenarios. They accept that all crises are preceded by a steady stream of early warning signals that show that a major crisis is highly likely. As a result, they do all they can to put in place specific procedures that will pick up early warning signals. In this way, they hopefully head off major crises before they actually happen, the best form of Crisis Management. Nonetheless, since even with the best of preparations crises still occur, they constantly work to improve and maintain Damage Containment mechanisms. They know that the worst time to set up Damage Containment is during the heat of actual crises. As a result, they are absolutely ruthless in rooting dangerous rationalizations that prevent them from being Crisis Prepared.

My colleagues and I have shown that Crisis Prepared organizations experience significantly fewer crises, are substantially more profitable, have fewer lawsuits and injuries, and lose fewer days in resuming operations than Crisis Prone Organizations. In short, Proactive Crisis Management is not only the right ethical thing to do, but it’s good for business.

Against this backdrop, President Elect Trump fares extremely poorly. In failing to set up a true blind trust, he’s setting himself up for major political conflicts of interest. From the standpoint of Crisis Management, a blind trust is one of the major forms of Damage Containment for potential financial and personal crises. It helps ensure that one’s political office will not be used for financial gain. But then, in order to set up a blind trust, President Elect Trump would have to own up to the very real possibilities of major conflicts of interest. In a word, he would have to stop engaging in denial, which given his personality is one of the most difficult things for him to do.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t stop there. Too many of his cabinet appointments have already set off hailstorms of protest. They are sure to be embroiled in crises for years.

Trump’s constant use of Twitter is nothing but sorry form of preemptive Damage Control. Instead of heading off crises, it only exacerbates them. So do all his preposterous claims, for instance that he actually won the popular vote because of all the illegal votes that were cast for Hillary.

I expect Trump to stumble from one crisis to others again and again. (China?) Of course, none of this really matters to his base. If anything, they want him to create major crises in order to “drain the Washington swamp.” But what happens if all his promises to bring back jobs and help the middle class only end up helping him and his business cronies? Do we really expect the case of Carrier to be easily replicated?

Are we prepared to confront the crisis when so many downtrodden workers realized that they have been royally betrayed?

Standard
Blog, Politics, Psychology

Where are all the adults?

Originally Published 12/14/16 on Nation of Change

The election of someone so unfit as Trump to be President not only opens up, but relives old traumas. No wonder why Trump arouses such intense feelings.

An important concept from General Psychology, the Parentified Child, is key to understanding why so many are suffering from feelings that everything is completely falling apart. In a word, many are not only overwhelmed by, but alternate between intense feelings of anger, hopelessness, and despair.

Parentified Children are children who early in life had to assume the role of a parent because their actual parents were unable to function as adults. Whether the parents suffered from debilitating mental illness, serious alcohol or drug addiction, were generally incompetent, or were unavailable emotionally, the basic roles between parents and children were fundamentally reversed.

Because the parents weren’t dependable, or fully present, the children had no alternative but to step in and keep things running as best they could. Thus, the children often prepared meals, dressed younger kids for school, etc. But as a result, the children had no childhoods themselves. This not only produced major bouts of depression later in life (normal disappointments and setbacks were magnified), but lifelong feelings of intense anger towards the parents, and adults in general.

I know all of this for a fact for I was a Parentified Child. My mother suffered from a chronic, debilitating form of depression and my father drove a cab at nights to get away from a sick wife and two young kids. My brother and I were thereby essentially left on our own to care for our mother and ourselves as best we could, which was difficult since there was barely enough money for food and rent for the run-down flats in which we lived.

However, I was blessed with brains. Since I didn’t want to live like my parents, and I did extremely well in school, I embraced education with a fierce passion. It was my ticket out of poverty. I not only ended up getting a PhD, but became a professor and a student for life. In short, those who have the character to survive bad, if not lost, childhoods have also developed the fortitude and will that are necessary for success later in life.

As a result of both my background and education, I understand perfectly what many are feeling, namely where are all the adults who are supposed to help take care of us? Just when the office of the Presidency calls for the most mature, healthy-minded, and highly functioning adult, we’ve elected someone who at best is nothing more than a highly disturbed child, and clearly, an out-and-out demagogue. This not only angers me greatly, but absolutely scares me to hell. My worst nightmare has come to life. Once again the children are put in the position of acting as grownups.

The election of someone so unfit as Trump to be President not only opens up, but relives old traumas. No wonder why Trump arouses such intense feelings.

If in addition, we add what’s going on in the world around us, then truly a dark cloud of bitter hopelessness has descended upon us: Civility has all but vanished. We’re assaulted daily by rudeness everywhere we turn. Dangerous driving has reached epidemic proportions. Madmen are in control of crazy so-called nation states. We live under a perpetual cloud of terrorism. Before and after Trump’s election, there’s been a dangerous surge in hate crimes. The one-percent continue to enrich themselves at the literal expense of everyone else. Callous unfeeling madmen do indeed run the world. They have to be carefully monitored and checked assiduously every day.

If there is a saving grace, and I believe there is, Parentified Children also live with an abiding sense of hope that things will ultimately get better, that somewhere, somehow, adults will eventually come to the rescue. I have never given up the hope that things will get better. After all, they did for me.

But for real hope to exist, we first have to recognize and accept that we are going through what Parentified Children suffered early in life.

Standard
Blog, Politics, Psychology

The Parentized Child Presidency

Originally published 12/09/16 on Nation of Change

Those of us who didn’t vote for Trump–the cast-off, disadvantaged children–will have to monitor Trump very closely.

A central concept from Psychoanalysis, the Parentized Child, is key to understanding why Donald Trump was elected in the first place, and secondly, what must be done to preserve the nation from the damage he will surely wreck.

Parentized Children are children who early in life had to assume the role of a parent because their actual parents were not up to the task of acting as adults. Whether the parents suffered from debilitating mental illness, serious alcohol or drug addiction, or were generally incompetent, the basic roles between parents and children were fundamentally reversed. Because the parents weren’t dependable, the children had no alternative but to step in and keep things running as best they could. Thus, the children prepared meals, dressed younger kids for school, etc. But as a result, the children had no childhood. This not only produced major bouts of depression later in life, but lifelong anger.

Of course, I don’t know what Trump’s childhood was actually like, but it’s clear that we’ve put someone who is not fully developed—a highly disturbed child—into a role that calls for an extremely competent, healthy adult. I suspect that a major factor for this is the fact that Hillary was viewed as extremely flawed parent who couldn’t be trusted. Therefore, a seriously undeveloped child was viewed, at least by those who voted for him, as the only sensible alternative. In effect, were those who voted for Trump acting as Parentized Children in expressing their intense hatred of Hillary? Was “Lock Her Up!” really a barely disguised call to “Lock Up the Bad Parent?”

Here’s precisely where another fundamental role reversal is called for. Those of us who didn’t vote for Trump–the cast-off, disadvantaged children–will have to monitor Trump very closely because a child acting in the role that calls for a healthy, well-developed adult cannot be trusted for one nanosecond to head the biggest “family” in the world. In short, are we cast into the role of Parentized Children?

Standard
Blog, Politics

The Trump Presidency: A Bitter Dialectic

Originally published 12/09/2016 on the Huffington Post

I am caught on the poles of a bitter dialectic. It’s every bit as bitter as the divide that separates us.

On the one side of dialectic, I desperately want President Elect Trump to succeed for our sake, not his. Unlike Senator Mitch McConnell who said when Obama was first elected, “We must do everything in our power to make this President fail,” I don’t wish Trump to fail, for if he fails, then we fail as a nation even more. I want to give him every chance to succeed.

I want President Elect Trump to display the qualities he did during his 60 Minutes interview. He was articulate, mostly sensible, and more coherent than I’ve ever seen him before. I want him to act as he did when he met with President Obama. He was not only respectful, but genuine in his praise for the President. He was clearly awed, if not overwhelmed by the job he was to undertake.

I’m heartened that he doesn’t necessarily want to do away with every aspect of Obama Care, or so he said during his interview. I want him to heal this bitterly divided nation. I want him to pass a jobs bill so that those who’ve been hurt most by the Great Recession can be put back to work. I hope fervently that he can help us to stop demonizing one another.

On the other side of the dialectic, I’m still smarting from Trump’s god-awful insults and rhetoric during the campaign. It was the worst that I’ve ever witnessed in my lifetime. I’m appalled that he still wants to ban Muslims and build a wall with Mexico. But most of all, I’m deeply frightened that he’s chosen someone like Steve Bannon to be his Chief Strategist. Bannon is undeniably a racist. Rudi Giullani scares me no less. I’m left with the overpowering feeling that The Rats Are Coming Onboard The Ship of State. God-awful indeed!

So where does that leave me? I still want Trump to succeed, but I feel we have to monitor him closely every step of the way. Maybe he’ll resign or be impeached as some are prophesying, but that would leave us with the arguably even worse prospect of Mike Pence and his horribly restricted, punitive world-view.

Hope for the best but be extremely vigilant is the best with which I’m left. I am hopeful but afraid!

Standard
Blog, Politics

Is A Trump Presidency Fundamentally Capable Of Success?

Originally Published November 23, 2016 on the Huffington Post

With every passing day, I am tipping towards one side of a bitter dialectic

On the one hand, I would like President-Elect Trump to succeed for all our sakes. Unlike Senator Mitch McConnell, who said when Obama was first elected, “We must do everything in our power to make this President fail,” I don’t fundamentally want Trump to fail, for if he fails, then we all do. I want to give him every chance to succeed.

I want President-Elect Trump to display the qualities he did during his 60 Minutes interview. He was articulate, sensible, and far more coherent than I’ve ever seen him. I want him to act as he did when he met with President Obama. He was not only respectful but genuine in his praise for the President. He was clearly awed, if not overwhelmed by the job he was to undertake.

I’m heartened that he doesn’t want to do away with every aspect of Obamacare, or so he said during his interview. I want him to heal this bitterly divided nation. I want him to pass a jobs bill so that those who’ve been hurt most by the Great Recession can be put back to work. I hope fervently that he can help us to stop demonizing one another.

On the other side of the dialectic, I’m still smarting from Trump’s god-awful insults and rhetoric during the campaign. It was the worst that I’ve ever witnessed in my lifetime. But most of all, I’m deeply frightened that he’s chosen someone like Steve Bannon to be his Chief Strategist. Bannon is undeniably a racist. Rudy Giuliani scares me no less. And, Jeff Sessions as Attorney General? The rats are coming onboard, not leaving, the ship of state!

Trump has time to tweet about Vice President-Elect Mike Pence’s affront by the cast of Hamilton, but he doesn’t have any time to disavow the worst White Supremacist hate groups that hail him with Hitler-like salutes.

He also tweets that his conflicts of interest with his far-flung businesses are due to the “crooked media.” He just can’t be civil. He can’t let things go.

So where does that leave me? I would still like Trump to succeed, but I’m more dubious than ever that he is capable of doing so with every passing day. Maybe he’ll resign or be impeached as some are prophesying, but that would leave us with the arguably even worse prospect of Mike Pence and his horribly restricted, punitive worldview.

I’m afraid that we’re headed towards a Constitutional crisis. Trump clearly has no intention of divesting his numerous properties that is necessary to place them in a blind trust. It makes a complete mockery of the Clinton Foundation’s supposedly “pay for play.”

Try as I would like to give Trump every chance to succeed, he makes me angrier and more afraid every day.

Dialectic over!

Standard
Blog, Politics

More Fearful Than Ever

Originally published November 16, 2017 on the Huffington Post

While Donald Trump’s recent appearance on 60 Minutes may have calmed some of my fears, he has not put all of them to rest. Indeed, he’s even exacerbated them.

Given the low bar that he’s set repeatedly, he was more articulate, calm, and coherent than I had any reason to expect. But his past inflammatory comments are real cause for widespread demonstrations. His repeated inability/refusal to acknowledge the legitimate anxieties and fears of the protesters, and that they are not “professionals,” is highly disconcerting. But worst of all is his selection of Steve Bannon as his Chief Strategist. The choice of an out-and-out declared racist belies any desire to heal and to bring us together.

Rudy Giuliani scares me as much, if not more. He would be Secretary of State or Defense? He would be that close to the Big Bad Button? These are the actual and potential cabinet choices that are supposed to heal a highly fractured country?

I find myself caught between wanting to give Donald Trump every chance to succeed and watching his every move and statements with acute apprehension.

However, as much as I’m angry at the election of Donald Trump, I’m even more so with my fellow Democrats. How could we have selected such a flawed candidate who couldn’t really get in touch with the deep anger of the electorate and thus couldn’t truly connect emotionally with their pain?

Standard
Blog, Politics

“Make America Intelligent and Sane Again!”

Originally published October 25th, 2016 on The Huffington Post

“Make America Intelligent and Sane Again!”
Hillary has been criticized, among many things, for not having a punchy, one-liner that defines her campaign. I have one: “Make America Intelligent and Sane Again!”

But beyond one-liners, the most daunting task facing Hillary, assuming of course that she wins—which seems very likely—is what she can do to heal the rift that threatens to plunge us into an even deeper cultural war, one from which we may never recover.

For a starter, she needs to travel weekly to the Hill to meet with both Republican and Democratic lawmakers. They should not travel to her. That sends the wrong signal.

Much more important, she needs to appoint prominent Republicans to major Cabinet posts. Given their heavy criticism, a Republican as The Head off Veterans Affairs makes perfect sense. More significantly, given the even more intense criticism and bitter opposition to the Affordable Care Act, appointing a “sensible” Republican as the Head of Health and Human Services also makes sense. By “sensible,” I mean someone who wants to make good health care affordable and accessible to all, and not just rip the Affordable Care Act to shreds. Because it’s so daunting is precisely why it needs to be done.

Finally, I don’t know what to call it, but we desperately need to foster dialogue through a nation-wide series of associations, clubs, forums, etc. that will bring us together by discussing what we share in common, however little it may be.

In sum, we need to “Make America Intelligent and Sane Again!”

Standard