tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-359901262024-03-07T19:11:07.333-07:00Dana's Journal and Miscellaneous MusingsThe ramblings of a corporate manager, a father, a husband, a psychologist, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, an Iraq war veteran and North Carolina Army National Guard officer. The views expressed herein represent my thoughts and opinions only and do not represent the views of: schools at which I have taught, been a student, the military, my religion, companies with which I have worked, Bob the Tomato, or Larry the Cucumber.Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.comBlogger374125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-29986127477022791462021-10-25T14:01:00.004-06:002021-10-25T14:01:49.369-06:00I prefer folks who have actually served their country rather than themselves.<p>Personal opinion, not representing any organization with which I am affiliated:</p><p>In one corner, there is a former President who continues to tell lies about free and fair elections. A former president who referred to sexual escapades as his own personal Vietnam, while avoiding the draft due to a questionable health deferral. Maybe those bone spurs were acting up as he hobbled down the ramp after the West Point graduation.</p><p>In the other corner, we have folks like former Secretary of State Colin Powell, former SECDEFs Mattis and Gates, and Senator McCain.</p><p>They have each spoken very clearly about the danger the former President poses to our Republic. Each of them, due to their long years of service, have made decisions, comments and issued directives that can be criticized. But nothing they have said or done has come close to the dishonor and damage to our country the former president has inflicted upon this great country.</p><p>Unfortunately, we have a minority, but still a significant portion of the population, who'd rather listen to the angry, self-aggrandizing lies of a man with a track record that speaks for itself relative to </p><p>-his attitudes about honesty in business dealings, or government dealings</p><p>-treating allies poorly and autocratic dictators with reverence, </p><p>-treating women as unworthy of respect, </p><p>-wanting credit for a vaccine while simultaneously downplaying the tragedy of hundreds of thousands dead from a contagious disease, and </p><p>-a chillingly effective attack on the free press.</p><p>If the warning words of great men like Powell, Mattis, Gates and McCain continue to be ignored, the damage from 6 Jan 2021 will look like child's play as the actions of the misguided in thrall to this terrible man escalate.</p>Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-55126237657623615822021-06-17T13:47:00.000-06:002021-06-17T13:47:22.504-06:00The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion, by Jonathan Haidt<p> Commentary and thoughts</p><p class="MsoNormal">The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics
and Religion<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>by Jonathan Haidt<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I have been trying to make sense of how anyone with any
morals could support the former President after 1) the horrific response to COVID
19, followed by 2) the shredding of democratic values of faith in a free and
fair election which didn’t even culminate after the insurrectionist attack on
Congress on Jan 6, and 3) the non-stop self-serving lies, bullying, misogyny, racism
and other personal character flaws this man has exhibited all his life. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I came across this title and went right after it. A shout
out to our local Mooresville, NC library for having this book in old school
paper, as well as audio or electronic versions. I went old school this time.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Haidt tackles this from a non-believer’s standpoint, and a generally
leaning left standpoint, but acknowledges that from a moral development
standpoint, he sees the attractiveness of a conservative approach (in the liberals
vs conservatives framework).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In short, he has built out a Moral Foundations Theory to get
at some shared underlying moral framework that can describe the facets of moral
foundations across humans/societies in much the same way that Costa and McCrae
developed a 5 factor model for personality at the individual person level, but
this text also shares a lot of history and sociology to explain how he got
there, versus an almost exclusively empirical factor modeling approach.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The model that Haidt and fellow researchers landed on had
the following six dimensions:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Care/harm<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Liberty/oppression<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Fairness/cheating<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">4.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Loyalty/betrayal<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">5.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Authority/subversion<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">6.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Sanctity/degradation<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">He argues that Democrats have a hard time resonating with
the general public because liberals over-index on just a few of these
dimensions at the expense of others, whereas Republicans tend to message to all
6 of these dimensions. Libertarians currently identify most with Republicans,
but share some common interests with Democrats.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">He describes the liberal moral matrix as heavily indexing on
Care/harm, almost to the exclusion of all other dimensions, but also some
weight to Liberty/oppression and Fairness/cheating. Highlights the most sacred
value for liberals as care for victims of oppression. Minimal focus on the
other 3 dimensions.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">He acknowledges he identifies with liberals generally, and
keys into 2 points that he feels liberals get right that he shares:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> 1. </span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Governments can and should restrain corporate
superorganisms.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> 2. </span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Some problems really can be solved by
regulation.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">He describes the libertarian moral matrix having the most
sacred value of individual liberty, as most heavily indexed on
Liberty/oppression dimension (but more on the liberty side than the reducing oppression
focus of liberals). To a lesser degree, libertarians also focused on fairness
cheating, and weaker ties to the other 4 dimensions.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">He identifies a counterpoint from the libertarian
perspective against the 2 liberal points:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> 1. </span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Markets are miraculous. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast">Just as there are some problems that government
and regulation can address, there are others that markets seem to do a better
job. He highlights healthcare in this space, which interestingly is also used
by liberals as a rallying cry for oppression as those who can afford seem to
get better care, and those who can’t afford have to choose whether to pursue
health at the risk of financial ruin.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In turning to the social conservative moral matrix, he
highlights their most sacred value as preserving the institutions and traditions
that sustain a moral community. He describes the matrix as tapping into all 6 of
the dimensions mentioned earlier. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In other words, the advantage conservatives have over
liberals from these domains is that they tap into all 6 dimensions, whereas the
liberals tap into only 3 of the dimensions.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">His second counterpart to the liberal perspective comes from
the conservative viewpoint versus the first counterpoint from the libertarian
perspective.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> 2. </span></span></span><!--[endif]-->You can’t help the bees by destroying the hive.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast">If we identify humans as bees- a metaphor Haidt
uses to refer to humans “groupiness” or ties to social collaboration, movements
like BLM, who have as part of their charter the invalidation of traditional family
structures, are going to cause damage while they intend to increase care and
reduce harm. In other words, there is a counterproductive element to liberal approaches
which tear at the fabric of traditional institutions.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I really enjoyed the read. I still have not come to fully
understand, however, how to make sense of the specter of the Trump Republican,
who in my mind is not even a social conservative, as there seems to be a
willingness to excuse any and all malfeasance by one specific individual. I don’t
understand his many false fear-based messages, and am saddened as I see a
willingness by some to excuse insurrection and embrace anti-democracy perspectives.
They sow mistrust in public institutions. They excuse lying and bullying. The
way the former President scrambled messages about the virus that has now killed
600k fellow Americans, dismissed the more clear-eyed science advisors and
embraced sham science, the way he both excused and tried to blame China for the
virus, leading to a poor embrace of preventive measures and now even to the
anti-vax misinformation campaign which leaves a substantial portion of the U.S.
population vulnerable to this virus. I just don’t get it. I’ll go through each
of the dimensions:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Care/harm- COVID….<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Liberty/oppression- believes that it is zero
sum- if underprivileged people are lifted up, somehow others are harmed- takes
the hive destruction theory above and exaggerates what most groups are trying
to achieve- the boogey man on steroids-<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Fairness/cheating- uses the message that “the
other” is cheating, despite the never ending misinformation about last year’s
election, the 60+ court cases finding no fraud or cheating of any scale likely
to impact his loss, statements of free and fair elections by his own CISA and
DOJ leadership teams, etc. And of course, his past history in business…<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">4.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Loyalty/betrayal- wow- he’s managed to convince
people to march behind flags with his image and name rather than the U.S. flag,
and attack the capital. He’s managed to convince his followers to root for Russia
over the U.S. if he’s not the leader of the U.S. Loyalty to person and party
over country. Congratulations or something.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">5.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Authority/subversion- I encourage all to take a
look at the role of inspectors general, and then look at how the former
President did all in his power to keep these watchdogs not just on a leash, but
starved or even sent to the pound. Look at how he used acting cabinet members
versus Congressionally approved staff so he could ignore the checks and balances
that process involves. He got impeached for abuse of power when he tried to get
Ukraine to announce investigations of a political rival, and then got impeached
again when he set the conditions for the insurrection on Jan 6. He seemed to be
hell-bent on destroying the institutions he was charged to lead and represent.
Not a conservative value that I am aware of.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">6.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Sanctity/degradation. His Lafayette Square
stroll through protestors to hold a Bible he’s completely unfamiliar with in
front of a church he’s never actually visited is the perfect symbol. His
multiple wives that he discards as he goes to the next one, before closing out
the previous relationship, and payoffs to porn stars and porn models suggest
some room for improvement and a curious ideal for evangelicals. For him, the
only thing holy is his brand/name. His affiliations with child predators like
Epstein and Maxwell (“I wish her well”), his responses to questions about
morality and his “favorite scripture,” all show someone who’s either abandoned
any sense of the sacred or never got there in the first place.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">With a publication date of 2012, this text precedes the 4
year Trump presidency, so I don’t know how Haidt would break Trump and his
followers down within his framework, but you just got my analysis!<o:p></o:p></p>Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-8968594187529570972021-06-04T13:00:00.002-06:002021-06-04T13:00:21.133-06:00Early morning walks and law enforcement interactionsNeeded to write this back when it happened- Nov 16, 2020.<div><br /></div><div>Things seem to always be busy between family, church, work and military. And with COVID, I suspended my trips to my current fitness center of choice, Planet Fitness- can't beat $10/month, but even that stops when COVID rages.<div>So I started doing early morning walks around the neighborhood before the work from home day started. Sometimes I would ramp it up and add in a ruck sack with a bit of weight in it, the actual amount depending on my ambition and the feel in my shredded knees and arthritic ankles, back aches, etc.</div></div><div><br /></div><div>So this early Monday morning, as I walked along with my ruck, headphones in, listening to one audiobook or another, I was coming out of one of the sub-neighborhoods and I see 2 SUVs coming down the road. I move to the side to avoid getting run over, and as one passes, I notice it is local PD. And the other angles in front of me. I check behind me and the other has angled behind me.</div><div><br /></div><div>OK, I'm the person of interest here in the dark early morning hours. I remove my sweatshirt hood, pull my headphones and keep my hands out wide to keep folks happy.</div><div><br /></div><div>One female officer and one male officer, I would guess she was in her 30s, him in his 20s, both white, him with a short military style haircut. They tell me they got a call from someone in the neighborhood about a prowler, asked for my name and address, which I provided. The young man then indicated it seemed obvious to him that I was out on a ruck walk. I think the fact that I had a military rucksack on my back and was wearing combat boots may have tipped him off. I also shared with him that I'd been doing these walks for months by this point, so that neighbor had missed out on my potential prowling many times prior to that.</div><div><br /></div><div>I would have considered it all unremarkable, excepting that this past year has had much in the media about various less successful citizen-police engagements. I have rarely ever felt targeted, and even in this case, they quickly worked to put me at ease, as I did with them. Being an MP myself hasn't been a big factor, I don't identify as law enforcement, but I do know a large number in the Guard and Reserve who are also civilian police. We've had some good discussions over this past year.</div><div><br /></div><div>Glad this engagement was one in which the peace was protected and preserved for all involved.</div>Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-76398107233555867212020-11-02T18:43:00.004-07:002020-11-02T18:52:41.261-07:00Additional reading<p><a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4578671-deadly-revenge" target="_blank">Deadly Revenge, by R.E. (Mike) Patterson. </a>A police suspense type book. Interesting enough story, needing some careful proofreading and editing, though. Had the feel of a self-published book. A used paperback pickup for pennies from <a href="https://ahec.armywarcollege.edu/" target="_blank">the USAHEC book store.</a> Good for a bit of reading on a couple of nights. Great diversion from the last two days prior to election on Nov 3 this year. </p><p><a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/37298.Mind_Prey" target="_blank">Mind Prey, John Sandford. </a>Also a police mystery type book, much better written, listened to as an audio book during my early morning ruck marches. Hoopla lend through the Mooresville Public Library. Language and some scenes not for the faint of heart or those preferring "clean" literature. </p><p><a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/40135029-the-geometry-of-wealth?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=ISoSQ2d590&rank=1" target="_blank">The Geometry of Wealth, Brian Portnoy.</a> I enjoyed this one as I enjoy many books on behavioral finance. It is the intersection for me of my background in psychology, and then more recently the business background. I plan to retire early and am still figuring out what I retire to. There are many stories where military folks I know just don't live very long after they retire, and I hope to not just survive in retirement but also find some form of what Portnoy refers to as "funded contentment". New paperback copy, I think from Amazon.</p>Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-50167532178068536102020-10-18T13:43:00.000-06:002020-10-18T13:43:02.178-06:00More Books Read- helping me keep track<p>The pandemic and working from home has freed up commuting time, less time out and about, and not working out at the gym has also been replaced by long walks during which audio books have helped me keep plowing along.</p><p><b><u>Mind Hacking, </u></b>Sir John Hargrave. Enjoyed this take on looking at yourself and your mind from the 3rd person perspective- you are not your mind and you can control it. A good complement to the idea that your are not your emotions and you can control them. A different way to think about the elephant-path-rider from Jonathan Haidt.</p><p><b><u>The Next Millionaire Next Door,</u></b> Thomas J. Stanley. Part of his continuing work from The Millionaire Next Door- more on "how they get there." I like it- helping remind me of the differences between spending, income and wealth and how they don't determine each other.</p><p><b><u>The Millionaire Mind, </u></b>Thomas J. Stanley, Also part of the ongoing work. Good stuff. For example, a preference to budget and be frugal- living rich/acting rich don't get you where you need to go, most millionaires live relatively frugally.</p><p><b><u>Surrounded by Idiots,</u></b> Thomas Erikson. A breakdown of different personality styles that can be used to understand behavior patterns. I like it generally, but always balk at overgeneralization. </p><p><b><u>Me Talk Pretty One Day,</u></b> David Sedaris. At times very funny, at times a bit sad, a bunch of short stories of David's life. Audio book read by the author, with some of the segments clearly presented before live audiences. Enjoyed it.</p><p><b><u>The Compound Effect, </u></b>Darren Hardy. The idea that you can make little changes and then they just build over time- not just financial, but behavioral habits, etc.</p><p><b><u>Everyday Millionaires,</u></b> Chris Hogan. A colleague of Dave Ramsey, a positive viewpoint that wealth-building is something everyone can achieve, with thoughts about how to get there. I appreciated his can-do attitude and advocacy for hard work and persistence in the face of adversity.</p><p><b><u>Boundaries,</u></b> Henry Cloud. A combination of psychologist viewpoints and Christian-based behavior therapy and counseling. The part that was probably most personally relevant was about self-boundaries and setting limits for myself. We need to be able to know when and how to say no and feel good about it, just as we need to know when and how to say yes and feel good about that.</p><p><b><u>The Devil's Financial Dictionary,</u></b> Jason Zweig. A mostly very funny set of snarky definitions for financial terms that reflect an appreciation that the terms can obscure nefarious behavior, ill will or incompetence in the financial industry.</p><p><b><u>The Intelligent Investor, </u></b>Benjamin Graham. A classic in the investing world. And good pointers for me to think about how to be more defensive and take less risk. Suggested to me that I'm taking too much risk, and a good thing to think about at this stage in my life. I've been blessed to have happened to have good earning periods that corresponded with good market conditions, and not been gashed as many have during some rough markets.</p><p><b><u>A Noob's Guide to Riches, </u></b>David Allen. A bit light, but nothing offensive in terms of recommendations on how to save, how to earn money in different ways, etc. Takes work, but can be done. </p><p><b><u>A History of the United States in Five Crashes, </u></b>Scott Nations. A great complement to The Intelligent Investor to address my hubris in investing. Goes through precursors to market crashes, the events and the aftermath. I've lived through some of it, but have frankly not experienced the learning that comes with pain and suffering that strikes many in those crashes.</p><p><b><u>The Power of Vulnerability,</u></b> Brene Brown. Audio "book"- a collection of seminar presentations that build on each other- like a recording of a multi-day or multi-session workshop. Well done. She has a great sense of humor that comes through, she's a real interesting character. Glad to have come across this one.</p><p><b><u>The End is Always Near, </u></b>Dan Carlin. Also listened to. A real world complement to the History of the U.S. in Five Crashes. I don't think that I see that we're more close or more far to an apocalyptic ending, but it is good to know that we've worked through other times that were clearly more challenging than today. A great response that I learned to think about during the Army War College, as we noted that there's a "present tense" bias in assessing threats, risk, instability, or the VUCA world. </p><p><b><u>Nine Lies About Work, </u></b>Marcus Buckingham. I enjoyed this one like I enjoy most, if not all, of Buckingham's pieces.</p><p><b><u>What Makes Love Last, </u></b>Nan Silver & John Gottman. Good reminders of do's and don'ts for my most important relationships.</p><p><b><u>The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work, </u></b>John Gottman. Another book that helps me see how much work I still need to do in my most important relationship.</p><p><br /></p>Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-88087356054693165182020-09-16T16:24:00.004-06:002020-09-16T16:26:17.919-06:00On Night's Shore by Randall Silvis<p> Another Ollie's Outlets bargain book.</p><p><br /></p><p>Really enjoyed it. Providing an escape from today's political nightmare where we have folks who have made it a badge of courage to mock and belittle people trying to stay safe and keep others safe from a virus that has killed close to 200k in the U.S. right now.</p><p><br /></p><p>I can't help but reflect on how we memorialized 3k dead and many others injured from Sep 11 last Friday, and we can't get behind an all-court press to address something that has taken out what- 200/3... 66xs the number killed, not to mention those suffering but not dying. We have a significant portion of the population following the lead of folks who sometimes say this is a scourge, a plague and wearing a mask is patriotic, and then on the other side minimize, downplay and dismiss the virus. For a few reasons, including debilitating cognitive dissonance, the followers choose to listen to the down-playing and anti-mask portions and ignore the warnings and encouragement to follow best medical and scientific advice.</p><p><br /></p><p>So here's a good escape from that nonsense, good for an evening or two of quiet entertainment- no commercials and no current affairs!</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2328356.On_Night_s_Shore?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=33ocCpPsF2&rank=1">https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2328356.On_Night_s_Shore?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=33ocCpPsF2&rank=1</a></p><p><br /></p>Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-17520439178769794472020-07-25T16:10:00.001-06:002020-07-25T16:10:27.480-06:00Tiger, by William RichterThis was another Ollie's Outlets purchase, and a "light" read compared to some of my other stuff in financial management or military and other non-fiction stuff that I read to learn. Written by a Hollywoood screenwriter, is apparently a sequel to another book I haven't read. If I come across the previous book, I'll read it, but won't necessarily seek it out. I have too many books sitting around either physically or electronically, and I'm being pressured to reduce some of the clutter. <div><br /></div><div>Got<a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15811574-tiger" target="_blank"> decent, but not great ratings</a> on GoodReads.</div><div><br /></div><div>One sign that I'm getting old: this one has a decent bit of thriller stuff going on- explosions, killing, chase scenes, etc- and I like quiet so much, I prefer reading it than watching it. </div><div><br /></div><div>Or maybe not being old, I've always enjoyed the quiet of reading.</div>Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-9639017664995026232020-07-19T18:17:00.002-06:002020-07-19T18:17:32.032-06:00Blackout, by Marc ElsbergI enjoyed this one for a couple of reasons. The first was that it was a fiction piece that took on what was one of our Carlisle Scholar's Program group assignments- identify some event that could be considered a strategic shock and then walk through some of the impacts to national security.<br />
<br />
In this case, the strategic shock is a deliberate and persistent, not temporary, takedown of the electric grid for all of the European Union. Later in the book it spreads to the U.S., but the book focuses on a story in the EU.<br />
<br />
So this was a whole book about one potential strategic shock. For the book, it was done by some anarchy/new world order type terrorists. What we looked at in our Carlisle Scholar's program, was regardless of the shock, what were impacts to national security- so what would other nation states do when other nation states were dealing with such shocks.<br />
<br />
Which brings me to the second reason I found it interesting. We are dealing with what might be considered a strategic shock right now with the COVID-19 pandemic, the associated economic shock, and the U.S. failure to get on top of the problem relative to most other countries.<br />
<br />
And what do other nation states do while we are focused inward?<br />
<br />
Russia continues to "meddle"- violate our sovereignty and that of other countries- because they know we're not really in a position to do much about it (not just because of COVID-19, but it is a factor), as indicated by recent reports of their continued efforts at influencing our elections through divisive disinformation campaigns as well as technology warfare relative to our COVID-19 research:<br />
<a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/07/16/891834251/u-s-says-russian-hackers-are-trying-to-steal-covid-19-vaccine-research">https://www.npr.org/2020/07/16/891834251/u-s-says-russian-hackers-are-trying-to-steal-covid-19-vaccine-research</a><br />
<br />
China feels emboldened also to accelerate their process of increasing control over Hong Kong, and other signs of increasing aggression or shows of power, knowing we're really not in a position to do much about it.<br />
<a href="https://theweek.com/articles/925903/chinas-growing-belligerence">https://theweek.com/articles/925903/chinas-growing-belligerence</a><br />
<br />
Was proud to hear that some work that I had participated in relative to the U.S. Army and how it should be positioned in the INDOPACOM region <a href="https://publications.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/3731.pdf" target="_blank">was recently published,</a> a major part of which were considerations about how to best address potential threats from China as a rising major power.<br />
<br />
Most<a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/33369264-blackout?ac=1&from_search=true&qid=qIK3no8qOV&rank=1" target="_blank"> reviews of Blackout on Goodreads </a>were fairly positive. I read through a few of the negative ones, with the primary criticisms being about the 800 pages being too much (my version, bought at the local Ollie's for $2 was just over 300 pages, and was to me an enjoyable read); and that it moved too slowly, wasn't "thriller" enough. I was fine with the pace, I'm not trying to feel like everything is a Jason Bourne speed rush.Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-4657186335814336072020-07-12T13:26:00.001-06:002020-07-12T13:26:10.666-06:0030 Lessons For Living, by Karl PillemerListened to this on audiobook from our local library. <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11376196-30-lessons-for-living" target="_blank">Gets a 4.08 on Goodreads.</a><br />
<br />
A nice mix of story telling and recommendations from a gerontologist sharing his research. He recounts what he's learned from seniors in interviews and other study. He endearingly refers to his interviewees as the experts, due to their experience, some of which reflects success, and some of which reflects learning the hard way. Also enjoyed the self-reflection that Pillemer weaves in from time to time as he contemplates his own aging.Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-28852783405888018552020-07-11T13:51:00.000-06:002020-07-11T13:51:39.658-06:00FIRE- Financial Independence Retire Early, by David JacobsAn Audible free book offer, it was fine, I already subscribe to some of the principles, others not so much. I've never had a bent for sales or entrepreneurial activities, but there are plenty of other ideas in this book by David Jacobs to help people go after the goal of early retirement.<br />
<br />
Did not see other reviews for it<a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/53399793-fire?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=g9SYUZoAYy&rank=9" target="_blank"> on Goodreads.</a>Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-78081816161528391592020-07-11T13:43:00.001-06:002020-07-11T13:43:17.503-06:00Financial Independence- Retire Early- 2 for 1 book by Richard Sodin<span style="background-color: white; color: #181818; font-family: Merriweather, Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px;">Listened to this on Audible. Some good principles, but it feels like it was either written in another language and poorly interpreted, or someone took a thesaurus and replaced all the appropriate words with other words that weren't quite right. I was wondering if maybe it was more for another English-speaking country, but references to Social Security and other U.S. financial legislation suggested that no, this was for the U.S.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #181818; font-family: Merriweather, Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #181818; font-family: Merriweather, Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px;"><a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/53976046-financial-independence-retire-early" target="_blank">Had not been reviewed on GoodReads, </a>didn't seem like a good read to me, apologies, Richard.</span>Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-62404893626247299012020-07-11T13:37:00.002-06:002020-07-11T13:37:31.384-06:00Kill Devil, by Mike DellossoThis was a fiction piece for entertainment versus more of my books to learn about stuff. Got a 4.21 out of 5 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/28075692-kill-devil?ac=1&from_search=true&qid=Qo8D1qy3Ww&rank=1" target="_blank">on Goodreads.</a> An interesting mix of adventure/suspense and something I don't usually come across, with a bit of Christian faith thrown in as well. One of my "Ollie's Outlets" finds, enjoyed the read. Also interesting that parts of it are set in places I have experience or exposure to, including the area of North Carolina where the Wright brothers got their plane off the ground. "First in Flight"Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-44963257824861282112020-06-25T06:43:00.004-06:002020-06-25T06:44:03.300-06:00Quirky: The remarkable story of the traits, foibles, and genius of breakthrough innovators who changed the world, by Melissa SchillingThis was a book on the list for the Army War College's Commandant's Reading Program this past academic year that I enjoyed quite a bit, reading from the lens of a recent focus in the public arena on diversity topics.<div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/35397862-quirky?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=fUWJdIkQVr&rank=2" target="_blank">Goodreads link:</a></div><div><br /></div><div>Schilling does a deep dive into 8 hyper, or prolific or breakthrough innovators: Albert Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, Elon Musk, Dean Kamen, Nikola Tesla, Marie Curie, Thomas Edison, and Steve Jobs.</div><div><br /></div><div>Read in the context of diversity and my psychology background, these are folks that are far out on the tail ends of many different bell curves. It was interesting to see how those different characteristics, such as high intelligence, self confidence, extreme effort, goal directedness, idealism, a willingness to be and think unconventionally, came together for these people, and I appreciated how she also highlighted context- access to or privation from resources, network effects of people around them, and some 'right place, right time' aspects as well. She also points out the trade-offs- while some of these folks had spouses and children, most of them were quite distant and socially isolated. Their work came first and second and third.</div><div><br /></div><div>Read from the context of the military, folks like this just plainly won't fit in most formations, but the military absolutely would benefit from innovators like this. Does DARPA provide a "safe space" to create the right conditions, or would these super innovators chafe at the environment there? Futures Command? I could see the bureaucracy of our large organization being a real turn-off- moving too slow and not even understanding some of the possibilities offered by such innovations.</div><div><br /></div><div>From outside the military, I could see some being concerned about what terrible things could come from an uber-innovator supporting an organization who's mission is to fight and win wars.</div><div><br /></div><div>Interesting to think as well about how to create conditions for innovation at the smaller scale most of us more "normal" types are capable of. How do we nurture and support those who are admittedly different and get that creativity to contribute to success in the workplace, the home and in public life? I'm thinking of Liz Wiseman's "Multipliers", Zenger and Folkman's "Extraordinary Leader" and other thought leaders' input and this text's appreciation for the quirky among us as complementary ways of thinking about how to help bring out the best in all of us.</div><div><br /></div>Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-20181163898517467122020-05-25T06:40:00.001-06:002020-05-25T06:40:34.725-06:00Shattered Bone by Chris StewartThis was an interesting fiction piece in that even though published in 1997, there was a timeliness to some of the geopolitics involved given the recent impeachment of the President for his illegally withholding Congressionally-appropriated funds to support Ukraine in their efforts at self-defense against Russia.<div><br /></div><div>Unless the author had a guest writer, I'm very impressed as this was his first (only? I don't know) book.</div><div><br /></div><div>A sleeper from old Russia, but with closer ties to "the Ukraine", the main character is now a pilot for the U.S. Air Force. He's hoping that his past is behind him with the dissolution of the U.S.S.R., but alas, it is not to be.</div><div><br /></div><div>Some interesting stuff for us Army ground pounder types, learning about the B1 Bomber. A jacket cover description of the book refers to is as a "technothriller."</div><div><br /></div><div>I recommend it for entertainment if you like military-themed thrillers. Not super heavy on gore and violence relative to many others, which was fine by me.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-4216314777556481872020-05-23T14:31:00.000-06:002020-05-23T14:31:11.265-06:00Prisoners of Geography, Tim Marshall<a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25135194-prisoners-of-geography?ac=1&from_search=true&qid=EXcoudaYFO&rank=2" target="_blank">Prisoners of Geography: Ten Maps That Tell You Everything You Need to Know About Global Politics, by Tim Marshall.</a><br />
<br />
Enjoyed reading this one as encouraged by a colleague from my Army War College experience. We had participated in the Commandant's Reading Program, and he had set up a similar seminar-type reading and discussion group with his Air Force team. Thankfully, he invited me and a few others to participate. I unfortunately was not able to make the Zoom chat with the author due to work engagements, but enjoyed the read.<br />
<br />
Biggest point: understanding the size of Africa.<br />
Second biggest point for me: understanding the dynamics of the Arctic- with things literally melting down up there, geopolitics are interesting, and it is not that big a deal that we don't have as many icebreakers up there- there are many factors to consider.Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-63785556874712954262020-03-28T12:43:00.002-06:002020-03-28T12:43:45.777-06:00Commentary: The Hell of Good Intentions, Stephen M. Walt<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Commentary: <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/37941858-the-hell-of-good-intentions?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=VL1g8OUVYd&rank=1">The
Hell of Good Intentions, Stephen M. Walt</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Read this along at the same time as Duty, Robert M. Gates,
and an interesting complement to it. Thoroughly enjoyed the read.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I got to this book as it was on the Army War College Commandant’s
Reading course list for this year. I took the course last year, enjoyed the selections, and given I love to read, will probably keep asking for their reading list so I can read books like this.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Walt makes an argument against a longstanding foreign policy
approach termed liberal hegemony.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is
the rational version of the “let’s pull back, we’re trying to do too much and
push our liberal democracy concepts on other countries and we need to do more
about minding our own business, and being more selective in asserting our power
internationally in support of specific and achievable national interests.” This
is in contrast to the less rational isolationist rhetoric about other countries
are cheating us, robbing us, etc and we are going to “win” by doing things
differently than previous administrations. He even points out how the current
administration has talked a good game and recommended some good changes to
foreign policy, but their rationale for doing so often gets lost- doing the
right things for the wrong reasons- and beyond that, as “the establishment”
pushes back, the administration falls back into line and ultimately ends up
embracing, rather than rejecting, liberal hegemony.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
His thesis is presented as radical and outside the mainstream (of the foreign policy elite, that is), but I’m
not so sure it is.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There are quite a few
people in the military and out, that have been calling for a less militarized
foreign policy, for one that is more restrained in objectives, that embraces a
more realist perspective and approach.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A good deal of the argument is counterfactual in nature, and
the author acknowledges successes in U.S. foreign policy and also that some
failures might also have happened even without a liberal hegemony approach. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The text allocates the vast majority of content in explaining
and providing examples of the how and why of the problem Walt describes and
unfortunately, only the last chapter really gets after his vision of what right
would look like. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I did find myself asking whether I would identify more with ‘the
establishment’ or with his more reserved approach, labeled "offshore balancing," which grossly simplified is preventing hegemons in other parts of the world who could challenge U.S. supremacy in the international arena. I would wholeheartedly agree
with de-emphasizing the M in the DIME and investing more in the other elements
of national power (diplomatic, information, economic) in executing foreign
policy. I would argue differently, though, in that I don’t think we’re spending
too much and too engaged with both allies and adversaries. I think the problem
is more in the messages and objectives- the mixed messages – that we are sending to allies as
we challenge them and insult them far more than we need to, and for some reason
are ignoring and excusing the bad behavior of traditional adversaries and
embracing them as they continue to do those same things that we previously
condemned them for. We’re just confusing other countries right now and they’re
waiting to see how this next election turns out to see if we’ll keep doing what
we’ve been doing the past 3 years, return to more ‘business as usual’ or go in
some other direction.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-19352736649547260032020-03-26T05:58:00.000-06:002020-03-26T05:58:14.133-06:00Book commentary: Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War, Robert M. Gates<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18490752-duty" target="_blank">Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War, Robert M. Gates</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This one took a long time to read through. Lots of detail
and lots of thoughts about that detail. And while such books often come across
as self-serving, and that holds true in this one as well, I still think about how well we would be served by having
leaders like this former SECDEF working today as a bulwark against
hyperpartisan leaders who can only serve one party or another versus serving
the country regardless of party.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He highlights that character matters, which oddly, some
folks try to argue is no longer relevant.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He highlights the critical roles that the press and Congress
play, even when he has felt he doesn’t enjoy working with them from time to
time.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He highlights how personally upset he felt when senior
military and civilian leaders did not seem to take the current wars he was overseeing
(Afghanistan and Iraq) as important and urgent. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And he highlighted how he was inspired every time he got to
talk to the service-members out in the field, in combat environments, or in the
hospitals recovering from combat-related injuries.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The other book I just finished was critical of U.S. foreign
policy and was critical of both civilian and military leaders in execution of
that foreign policy. One of the themes was that the DIME (diplomatic,
information, military, economic) whole of government foreign policy strategy
had really devolved to a Military heavy strategy with just a smidge of the D,I,
and the E thrown in. Gates argues along similar lines suggesting the military should
be the last resort, not the first, and questions, as many in the military do,
whether the military is the solution to the problems that the military is handed
and asked to address. Gates and others rightly point out that when the other
instruments of national power have been defunded and disregarded and become
essentially powerless, the default is to turn to the military as the only
answer- even if it is absolutely the wrong answer for the problem.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even though I have never been terribly focused on who the SecDef was
during my 27 years in the military, more focused on the jobs or tasks at hand,
I’m glad we had Sec Gates at the helm for the years he served under Bush and
Obama. I felt in reading this text, again with the caveat of this being his
version of what happened, that this was a man of honor, who served with the
best interest of the service-member and the nation in mind.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Would that we could have that same trust in leadership at
all times. We as citizens should be asking this of all our elected and
appointed officials. That they be people of character and honor first. That
they put service and country before self. <o:p></o:p></div>
<br />Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-62243221753885700202020-02-16T18:35:00.000-07:002020-02-16T18:35:08.609-07:00Like War, the weaponization of social media, P.W. Singer and Emerson T. BrookingFinished <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/38242140-likewar?from_search=true&qid=NLegNstwSO&rank=1" target="_blank">LikeWar</a> about about a month ago. Articulates some of what I've found so upsetting over the past 4 years or so.<br />
<br />
On the inside fold: "Two defense experts explore the collision of war, politics, and social media, where the most important battles are now only a click away."<br />
<br />
We work to be the best in the world at fighting conventional war. It naturally pushes others to ask how they can achieve their objectives without engaging in that conventional war. Grey zone competition, cold war, economic warfare, and really, this book covers information warfare.<br />
<br />
I don't get exercised that other countries do this. It is what one would expect. When the revolutionaries in North America fought the British, we didn't play by their rules either. Underdogs look to compete in ways that blunt the advantage that a superior force has. Why play the game according to the rules of the dominant power?<br />
<br />
So as the U.S. has come to dominance, we've pushed for a rules-based world order and it has served us and arguably much of the world extremely well since WWII. It has been to our advantage, as we are to a large extent either writing the rules, or at a minimum have a seat at the table and strong influence.<br />
<br />
But now I feel that we are taking a wrecking ball to this as we embrace enemies and dictators and insult, scold and bully our allies. Other friendly countries watch with a mixture of confusion and dismay as the shining light on the hill claims that this light is just for us. Get your own light, you free-loaders. And we're not going to follow your stupid rules (the rules that we wrote, by the way).<br />
<br />
Part of this is based on pure misinformation and lies that we are putting out to our own citizens in divisive partisan politics. So this risk to our national security and well-being is as much an internal issue- the enemies within- as it is of other foreign nation states and non-state actors such as violent extremist organizations.<br />
<br />
For just one specific example from the book, the Russian government and military interfering in our election in 2016 wasn't a hoax. Their interest in pointing the finger at Ukraine and others is not because they love the U.S. and have our best interest at heart.<br />
<br />
As Dr. Hill testified, we have many of our own leaders repeating Russian propaganda lines. I think a direct quote from that testimony is 'fictional narrative.' I see no purpose for doing so that truly reflects acting in the interest of our national security.<br />
<br />
Yes, I lose sleep over this. A society that not only tolerates, but cheers on and advocates such behavior will ultimately suffer the consequences of a wholesale repudiation of values and integrity. It is hard to win the fight if you have lost the moral high ground.<br />
<br />
America was great, and is great. But it is doing severe damage to itself right now.Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-2502018663485225942020-02-15T19:22:00.003-07:002020-02-15T19:25:57.825-07:00Another leadership nugget from a Charlotte Veterans Network luncheon- Charlotte Checkers coach Ryan WarsofskyBack working at Lowe's Store Support Center (aka the Home Office, corporate, formerly known as the Customer Support Center), so I missed the luncheon this week, but as I cleaned out my pile of papers that accumulates as I go from one thing to another, came across a couple of notes from an earlier visit by <a href="http://gocheckers.com/front-office/2546-ryan-warsofsky" target="_blank">Ryan Warsofsky,</a> the 31 year old coach of <a href="http://gocheckers.com/" target="_blank">the Charlotte Checkers</a>, an AHL hockey team that has been performing well under his leadership. The following is one of the things he shared with us, that I really liked as a quote:<br />
<br />
<h2>
<i>"You don't need a letter on your jersey to be a leader."</i></h2>
<br />
I may be wrong on this as a casual hockey fan, but I believe the letter on the jersey is a reference to letter "C" for the team captain. In other words, you can be a leader even without positional authority.<br />
<br />
Coach W. gets to work with up and coming players as well as those past their prime trying to get back to the NHL. He seems to be figuring out how to help them play "the right way" while they still have individual goals and motives.Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-50015533495880641782019-12-23T16:22:00.000-07:002019-12-23T16:22:10.750-07:00Yuval Noah Harari, 21 Lessons for the 21st CenturyAn interesting read, recommended by someone I spent time with at the Army War College earlier this year.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/38820046-21-lessons-for-the-21st-century" target="_blank">Goodreads link to Yuval Noah Harari, 21 Lessons for the 21st Century.</a><br />
<br />
I have mixed feelings about it as I had initially expected a view of perhaps a bit of "here's what I see for the future" and how we should approach and think about the changes we will confront going forward.<br />
<br />
There is some of that. There is also some fairly broad assertions and generalizations. Perhaps the part I found of most value was the chapter on terrorism and how we don't think rationally about terror attacks versus car accidents and other events that are much more likely to cause us harm from a statistical standpoint. I was aware of this, but he does a good job of pointing out governmental and societal impacts- how it impacts decision making, resource allocation, messaging and communications, etc.<br />
<br />
What at times drove me to distraction were his attacks on religion and nationalism. He espouses secularism, but defines it in a way that as I did a little more digging, sounded more like secular humanism, not secularism. In his view, the benefits and positive aspects of religions of all kinds are far outweighed by all the negative aspects, and spends considerable time covering the sins of religion. I don't dispute many of those reviews. While he acknowledges elements of religion that are good, he really de-emphasizes them relative to those problems.<br />
<br />
Defining secularism as a focus on reducing suffering of all kinds, rather than as simply the separation of church and state (without taking a position on the value of one, or all, religions) was the part that caused me to reflect. What is it about secularism that allows it to claim reduction suffering as a goal, but religions cannot? I'm not a secularism scholar, so my thinking here is not very mature, and wikipedia did not move me forward in this regard, with suffering not mentioned once on that page.<br />
<br />
I agree generally with his critiques of nationalism. I am perfectly content to sing the praises of my country, salute the flag, and given my military duties, die and order others into dangerous activity in defense of my country. The danger comes when nationalism turns from "I love my country," to "my country is better than any other country" and therefore a human being from my country is more important and valuable than a human being from any other country. In Yuval's mind, this is an awareness of a global need to reduce suffering, an awareness which comes from rejection of the many lies of religion and nationalism. For me, this idea that we are all equally valuable brothers and sisters came from my faith and upbringing, the same faith that he criticizes as a fiction. Further, while nations are not always consistent in their collective behavior, there are some that do more than pay lip service to the reduction of suffering. So there's that.<br />
<br />
And I don't think he fully acknowledges there are governments of countries that deny even the existence of human rights and differentiate those governments from countries/governments that do acknowledge and espouse, albeit imperfectly human rights and similar values.<br />
<br />
I feel like he conflates technology, social science and artificial intelligence. Many algorithms, which he points to as the future sources of control in society, are devised and revised by people, not machines. I don't think of those necessarily as artificial intelligence at all. And many algorithms and advertising campaigns draw from social science, developed by humans, not machines. To go back to his earlier arguments about the sins of religion and nationalism, math and science are being exploited in algorithms and advertising, not necessarily religion and nationalism- or that they are being used one in service of another. I would point towards power and money being the motivating factors for much of the damage being done today, and religion and nationalism are simply the fronts for those with malevolent intent.<br />
<br />
Interesting to me how much of an influence Disney has been in his life. I just think of the company as in investment, the current owner of the Star Wars franchise, and the company that forces me to pay large sums of money to create memories for my family standing in line in the Florida heat for things I don't find amusing in the least bit personally. I did make my family pay last time, however, singing at the top of my lungs, slightly off-key and off time at the Frozen sing along, drawing concerned glances from the Disney characters up on stage, and red faces from the family. Serves 'em right for making me come along.<br />
<br />
A few quotes that I found relevant and timely as we view a recent impeachment and the seeming complete abandonment of any efforts to tell the truth by Republican leaders:<br />
<br />
p. 242: from Joseph Goebbels, "A lie told once remains a lie, but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth."- in the words of the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/10/meet-bottomless-pinocchio-new-rating-false-claim-repeated-over-over-again/" target="_blank">Washington Post, we call this the "bottomless Pinocchio</a>" with some prominent figures being multiple time recipients of this esteemed award.<br />
<br />
From my psychology training at the Master's and Doctorate level, I remember courses in social psychology in which research was shared that over time people forget the source of what is said, and as they do so, they also tend to think less critically about the content of the message, such that they forget the liar and that it is even a lie. "People are saying" can be used to mask the fact that the individual saying it is, in fact, those "people" for example.<br />
<br />
Again from p 242, from <i>Mein Kampf,</i> "The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly- it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over." Yes, that is Hitler.<br />
<br />
A couple of pages later, p. 244: "In fact, false stories have an intrinsic advantage over the truth when it comes to uniting people. If you want to gauge group loyalty, requiring people to believe an absurdity is a far better test than asking them to believe the truth."<br />
<br />
Back to the religion and secularism considerations, p. 303: "In itself, the universe is only a meaningless hodge-podge of atoms." In the authors telling, again, p. 303, "<i>I</i> give meaning to the universe." The meaning he assigns suggests a constructivist viewpoint, but I'm not sure it entitles the argument that one assigned meaning is to be privileged over another, and not sure that secularism entitles that argument either.<br />
<br />
Interesting to think about and I appreciated the recommendation to read it.Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-17323395065694400452019-12-14T06:19:00.001-07:002019-12-14T06:19:45.654-07:00The Imperial Presidency, Drift and The Infinity WarAs I think of friends in the Middle East, Africa and Afghanistan and others who are no longer with us, I occasionally come across articles and/or books that resonate with personal observations.<br />
<br />
Spending last year at the Army War College, was able to think about the nature and character of war, and reflect from time to time on that nature/character question relative to Iraq, Afghanistan and now Syria and our involvement. A recent article in the WaPo (free online subscription for us military types!) wrote about our <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/12/13/infinity-war/?arc404=true" target="_blank">"Infinity War".</a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1mzER1FSeWg/XfTfw4YefDI/AAAAAAAAS7E/GaHiWcOeJLwgLOUdm64MS7xZD97WRF4QQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/infinity.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="208" data-original-width="402" height="165" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1mzER1FSeWg/XfTfw4YefDI/AAAAAAAAS7E/GaHiWcOeJLwgLOUdm64MS7xZD97WRF4QQCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/infinity.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
And that reminded me of another War College experience, reading <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12143200-drift" target="_blank">Rachel Maddow's "Drift"</a>, and then our reading group (and spouses!) getting to meet and talk with her in NYC. For someone not in the military and for whom the military is not a primary focus, she did an extraordinary job of articulating some concerns about the political-military-industrial complex and how the military activity (and military spending) has somehow become separate from the rest of society (the recent WaPo series of articles they are calling "the Afghanistan Papers" is perhaps a counterpoint). She also showed a tremendous amount of respect to our War College group, having prepared for our meeting by learning a bit about each of us before we met. She admitted it can be a bit intimidating meeting with military officers given that she took on writing on the military despite not having a deep military background, so that preparation was not just respect but her wanting to be prepared from a sense of showing she does her homework.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OjzWcBm1s00/XfTg6AjkIsI/AAAAAAAAS7Q/h7CqGXMIfEA0bVW-W_H7GCnKECfh-k8SwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Annotation%2B2019-12-14%2B081622.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="819" data-original-width="598" height="200" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OjzWcBm1s00/XfTg6AjkIsI/AAAAAAAAS7Q/h7CqGXMIfEA0bVW-W_H7GCnKECfh-k8SwCLcBGAsYHQ/s200/Annotation%2B2019-12-14%2B081622.jpg" width="145" /></a></div>
<br />
She and others have pointed things out such as the frequent use of the military without going through steps designed Constitutionally to limit the use of the military- like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Clause" target="_blank">de</a><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Clause" target="_blank">claring war</a> (last time? 1942). Now, we have "authorized use of military force," but even that is open to debate about what exactly that authorizes- conditions, terms, magnitude, purpose, etc.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJ3ihPOPKvfsDUKAxfBcpjqAf_BGKpMd8gEAH61rz1muUnqzTelXm8D0R7OPayuHrspHIaQM22q_OXOXzXtRyL5JeV9EB2k2klXr_xiG0zy5OX7t9HFjfUIaThoHT9MadTFItS/s1600/Congress-Declares-War.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="816" data-original-width="1600" height="163" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJ3ihPOPKvfsDUKAxfBcpjqAf_BGKpMd8gEAH61rz1muUnqzTelXm8D0R7OPayuHrspHIaQM22q_OXOXzXtRyL5JeV9EB2k2klXr_xiG0zy5OX7t9HFjfUIaThoHT9MadTFItS/s320/Congress-Declares-War.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
The use of the military is tied in some respects to the desired application of military power by the Commander in Chief, and both the left and the right have accused sitting presidents of abusing that power (including current impeachment proceedings). As I studied the problem over the past year at War College, I came to see the increasing power of the President not just as a power grab by the executive branch, but also as a function of a Congress that has been willing to cede power. That willingness in my estimation is partly inadvertent or unconscious, other times is has been cowardice or cold political calculation that the President, not Congress, would bear the burden for things going wrong. But it is by no means a new phenomenon, and I recommend the following to those who argue that Congress is too powerful as it fights back against the powers of the executive branch- <a href="https://www.govexec.com/federal-news/2006/02/imperial-presidency-has-long-history/21214/" target="_blank">Paul Starobin's article back in 2006</a> and <a href="https://www.govexec.com/federal-news/2006/02/imperial-presidency-has-long-history/21214/" target="_blank">Schlesinger's "The Imperial Presidency"</a> from 1973.Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-15451477696704369642019-11-18T16:30:00.000-07:002019-11-18T16:30:38.256-07:00Admiring those who have served- Veteran's Day related thoughtsWas blessed to attend a Charlotte Veterans Network/ <a href="https://veteransbridgehome.org/" target="_blank">Charlotte Bridge Home</a> luncheon last Weds, 15 Nov. This is a monthly event that provides the veteran community in Charlotte a chance to get together. Saw some old friends and visited with others that I was getting to know.<br />
<br />
They usually have a guest speaker, and this month was one that left quite an impression. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phVKF2XbX4o" target="_blank">MSG Cedric King</a> spoke with us. He shared some inspirational thoughts, acknowledged the challenges he faced as he recovered from devastating injuries from an IED. He shared scriptures that came to mind as he reflected on the blessings in his life and encouraged us all to keep pushing forward.<br />
<br />
I wrote down just a few of the quotes that I enjoyed from his presentation.<br />
<br />
"Life is happening <i>for</i> us."<br />
"Bad things happen to good people to make them great."<br />
"Running was an exercise in failure." (learning to run after losing his legs)<br />
<br />
I am proud to count myself as a service member and proud of fellow service members like MSG King. Those like him have dealt with much more than I have had to even contemplate, and I applaud their grit and resilience in the face of daunting obstacles.Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-4544940244839849542019-10-31T16:23:00.002-06:002019-10-31T16:23:32.526-06:00Duty, Memoirs of a Secretary at War, by Robert M. GatesHaven't finished yet (Oct 31, 2019), but as we have a vote on impeachment procedures in the House, I mourn for an America that seems to in some ways have lost its way. When I'm more optimistic, I believe we'll come through this, but even then, I wonder how much work and time it will take to recover from the damage being done.<br />
<br />
A quote from the Gates text, which is itself a quote from a speech Secretary Gates gave- commencement address at the Naval Academy, May 25, 2007:<br />
<br />
"Today I want to encourage you always to remember the importance of two pillars of our freedom under the Constitution- the Congress and the press. Both surely try our patience from time to time, but they are the surest guarantees of the liberty of the American people. The Congress is a coequal branch of government that under the Constitution raises armies and provides for navies. Members of both parties now serving in Congress have long been supporters of the Department of Defense, and of our men and women in uniform. As officers, you will have a responsibility to communicate to those below you that the American military must be nonpolitical and recognize the obligation we owe the Congress to be honest and true in our reporting to them. Especially if it involves admitting mistakes or problems.<br />
<br />
The same is true with the press, in my view a critically important guarantor of our freedom. When it identifies a problem... the response of senior leaders should be to find out if the allegations are true... and if so, say so, and then act to remedy the problem. If untrue, then be able to document that fact. The press is not the enemy, and to treat is as such is self-defeating." (pp. 90-91)<br />
<br />
Well said, Secretary Gates!<br />
<br />
*********************Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-26404301529707227092019-10-31T15:03:00.000-06:002019-10-31T15:03:20.900-06:00Indistractable, by Nir EyalSo Nir has his<a href="https://www.nirandfar.com/indistractable/" target="_blank"> own website </a>to complement the book and the book has a very hands-on kind of feel to it. Ironically, I would be distracted from reading while I'd go check out stuff he'd suggested, or take actions such as those suggested (deleting apps that have no value and/or take up time and headspace).<br />
<br />
I enjoyed the read, even if I didn't agree with everything Nir had to say- especially around motivations, but not a big deal on the disagreements. It reminded me of a good course I took while at Lowe's corporate a number of years ago called "Take Back Your Life", which primarily focused on maximizing your use of productivity tools in Microsoft Office- especially calendar, email, chat, etc, but Eyal's book is adapted to a world now where we are always connected via smartphones, which was not the case when I was taking the Microsoft course.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/44595007-indistractable" target="_blank">3.94 out of 5 on Goodreads</a><br />
<br />
While authors using self-disclosure often works for me in connecting with the material, in this case every once in a while I'd find myself judging him, thinking, "man, this guy gets distracted way too easily." I then tell myself I must just be one of an older generation, because I am more than happy, when I want to unplug, to do just that. I have always been happy to go find a quiet place to work away from my desk if the desk is where I get interrupted. My phone's "do not disturb" button is almost always on, unless I am expecting some important communication to come through.<br />
<br />
As I write this, Christine points out to me we're in a tornado watch. How about that? I missed that. I don't know that I'm always indistractable, as much as oblivious, but I find joy sometimes in either of those states!Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35990126.post-41055280788075884852019-10-21T14:16:00.002-06:002019-10-21T14:16:40.281-06:00Pay Any Price, by James RisenPay Any Price: Greed, Power, and Endless War, by James Risen<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/19484530-pay-any-price?from_search=true" target="_blank">Got a 4.09 out of 5 rating on Goodreads.</a><br />
<br />
This was an interesting one in that I spent a good deal of the time I was reading checking in with myself. There was a bit of a "conspiracy" tone at times, and so I was asking how much of it I should take at face value, how it fit with my experiences in the military.<br />
<br />
Part of the internal dialogue was thinking about "war" and how declaring a fairly abstract war on terror has impacted the use of the military and other instruments of national security. For example, with all of the current controversy about removing a relatively small number of troops from northern Syria (which I personally think is a mistake), were they participating in a "war", or when you have special operators doing very targeted work against a non-state actor, can you call that war? What are the implications for legal and financial pieces? Congress has right to declare war, but hasn't exercised that Constitutionally-designated power since 1942, and it is argued <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war" target="_blank">by some that declaring war is no longer a useful convention.</a> As part of a set of thoughts about Congress over time yielding more and more power to the chief executive, it could be argued that the use of military force in modern settings doesn't necessarily conform to what the founding fathers intended, and updates are needed.<br />
<br />
Another internal dialogue was the whistleblower components of the text. I mentioned the conspiracy focus of the book, and Risen covers whistleblowers that tried to make noise and effect change both within government entities and those that broke the rules and went outside the system. As a journalist, he sees himself as a whistleblower, rather than a person reporting on the whistleblowers, and articulates how the government has targeted him. With the current news cycle about a whistleblower reporting a national security issue with using the government's money and power to push Ukraine to provide negative information about a political rival, this book from 2014 remains timely. In today's case, I find it shameful that government officials are going after the whistleblower, as it appears the whistleblower followed all the rules. The primary arguments within the complaint have in many cases been supported and the only disproven pieces are minor details. Seeking to reveal the whistleblower's identity is problematic to me in two ways:<br />
1. the rhetoric and political environment are so heated that he or she is at real risk of physical harm, doxxing, and other acts by those opposed to the findings<br />
2. the focus on the whistleblower is in many ways a distraction from the problems laid out in the complaint- some argue that the complaint isn't valid if it comes from a partisan. Well, that is what investigation of a complaint is for- to validate the complaint or to dismiss it. If a crime is committed, the crime is the issue, even if the key witness has a shady background (not saying that is the case here).<br />
But how should I feel about whistleblowers that clearly break the rules and take classified information and release it publicly? On first blush, easily it is wrong. On second thought, I have often been frustrated by the overclassification of material that simply doesn't need to be classified, which is part of the complaint for the Ukraine whistleblower. Bad behavior, that is not classified for national security reasons, should not be classified simply to hide inconvenient, inappropriate or even illegal behavior. I have never had to deal with this issue personally, thankfully. I have had to deal with folks working from desktops where they simply didn't want to switch from classified to unclassified in their communications, and I was in a situation and location where I had more limited or challenging access to the required resources/facilities. This has been more of a higher headquarters / lower headquarters (or even field) problem than anything else, however.<br />
What Risen tackles is more fraught with peril- values of the U.S. about individual privacy versus national security, conflicts of interest within and across government agencies and private entities with financial stakes, and similar problems. <br />
<br />
I don't think there are any easy answers on this. I don't think any one individual can play "savior" and fix these sticky problems for us, contrary to some proclamations by senior leaders with delusions of grandeur (beware anyone who bellows "I alone can fix it"). Nor do I think the problems will ever be completely solved. But I do believe we can do better, and that it must be done by well-meaning leaders across government, industry (defense, technology, etc) and other domains such as education, getting past our frustrating political divides.<br />
<br />
My year of learning at the Army War College brought clearly to my understanding how fragile and yet robust our experiment in democracy has been. There was really nothing like it before when one factors in the environment and historical context, and there's no guarantee it endures. It is up to us to take action to preserve the essence of it while making necessary updates, such as Lincoln's decision to resolve the slavery question left unanswered originally, and other civil rights progress made since then.<br />
<br />
Rule of law, individual freedoms, property rights, balance of power across legislative, executive and judicial branches with competing interests and checks. A fascinating and glorious experiment. I fear we are tossing the whole thing into the bunsen burner.Danahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06346219935839239058noreply@blogger.com0