How To Fix The World! Really!

I have been using this phrase:  "I want to change the world" now for a decade or more.  I think it started on our first trip to Africa, when I began to realize that poverty around the world is not just an accident of geography - but there is an element which we can change - culture and world views.  That trip and subsequent ones to Asia and Nicaragua, and a lot of reading, have set me on this pursuit - how to change the world!  A better phrase might be - "how to fix the world".  If there is any dominant characteristic of the culture of the U.S., it is that we are set on "fixing the world".  The amazing this is that we think we can do it!

Why fix the world?  Well, it is in sorry shape and seems to be getting worse.  We have billions in poverty, who live a life like most of human kind before the industrial revolution.  Back then, most everyone's life was short, dark and brutal.  Nowadays, some of us live here in Disney World, while the vast majority of the world is still struggling along.  That costs us all - we lose their contribution, their ideas, their genius, their art, their support, their discoveries. Our potential is enormous.  If you think the last 50 years have been amazing - since we invented things like computers and electronics - you ain't seen nothing yet. Nanotechnology, genomics, biology have only scratched the surface of what humans can do.  But we need everyone on board with this - everyone.  My buddy Ned once had the second smartest kid in all of Tanzania living in his town.  This kid could not afford to go to the "free" public school.  So Ned helped him.  Now he is a contributing member of his society - and he is smart as a tack.  We will all benefit from that kid, what he learns and what he does.

Up to now, the U.S. has been trying to fix the world with a bit of money and a lot of force.  The investment in the force part - war - amounts to trillions.  The investment in the money part is on the order of billions.  But neither works very well.  It is really IDEAS that matter.  So just how does one do that part?

It feels like a hopeless task.  I have found a few kindred souls here and there who are laboring about this.  But they are all doing a few things - good things - but just a few things. I really appreciate what they are doing - and I try to help.  But I want to CHANGE THE WORLD - not just fiddle around at the edges.  I want a new movement, a new "religion", a new group I can join or support or create, to move all of us down the road here a bit.

I just found a bit of insight.  I have this clever little APP called Zite (http://zite.com/) on my iPad and iPod that gives me articles that I am probably interested in.  You rate things as you read, and it follows up with related or similar materials.  It just fed me a blog from the Harvard Business Review that is focused on "fixing the world", by Umair Haque.  You can check him out here:  Wikipedia Entry.  He writes for Harvard Business Review, so he is not a fringe type.  The entry that got my attention is this one:
http://blogs.hbr.org/haque/2012/11/how_to_fix_your_soul.htmll

He says it is "how to fix your soul", but he is really out to fix the world. Turns out they are related!  Who knew? He is a major capitalist leaning sort of dude - so no "socialism" or "libertarianism" here.  He is very much into behavioral economics and the like.  He is trying to change the world, but he thinks that the change is already under way.  It is NOT a movement, not an 'occupy', not a new fanaticism like our friends at the "tea party".  It is a million small revolutions.  And you take part in it by fixing you own soul!

I don't know about you, but outside of a few more bucks, I have mostly every material thing that I have ever wanted.  I could get bigger, faster gadgets, I guess.  But I don't really NEED anything.  So what do we work toward now?  How about meaning and purpose?  How about hope in human kind - that we can do better at this living business?

He espouses things like broader measures for economic success, much as Michael Porter does.  But he is very hopeful about it.  I guess that is what I like.  The Christian tradition would call it "faith".  I have a great "hope" that we can figure this out and make it work.  IHe thinks it is already under way!  The kingdom is at hand.  What was the other choice anyway?

Read the piece. Let me know what you think.  I'm going to go read the rest of his stuff.  Thanks.

Helping the Poor - the Four Stages

As anyone following along here would realize by now, I have this preoccupation with poverty and economics and culture.  I am persuaded that our human reality is a social one - that we are intertwined with others for our values and happiness and well being.  And I think that inter-dependency extends to the economic realm as well.  Our well being, our full development as persons is tied to the poorest among us. 

And I have been flopping around here reading and writing stuff for a decade or more that leans toward DOING SOMETHING about poverty on the planet.  I have learned a bit - I have tried to share some of it in this Blog.

I just stumbled on a little gem by one of my favorite authors.  The Rev. Albert Nolan, the author of Jesus Before Christianity, has a little monograph on the four stages of Christians helping the poor.  He calls them stages of "spiritual growth".  That terms is a tad vague for me - but you get the point.  If you want to read a bit more about this book, I have posted a bit of a summary here:
 https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://scheiders.com/temp/Jesus%20Before%20Christianity%20Notes.pdf
That is probably more information than you want, so just keep reading here!
This piece by Nolan is here:

  http://www.catholiccincinnati.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/FourStages_SpiritualGrowth_by_Nolan.pdf

I think he describes pretty well the stages that concerned Christians go through when they encounter poverty.  It's helpful to reflect on that as we try to figure out what we are about.

Stage 1 Compassion

We send people off to expose them to poverty.  We build compassion - it IS my problem.

This leads to action - relief work, simplifying our lives, etc.

Nolan doesn't point this out, but this is the charity phase.  It's a good thing to do - but it is palliative at best, and creates dependencies at the worst.

Stage 2 Realization that poverty is a structural problem.

We want to change the system.  We move to preventive actions, political action.

I think he puts a little too much evil in the rich, but that's just me.

The structural problems are clearly there and they are NOT HELPING.  That is true.

Stage 3 - the Poor have to help themselves, and they CAN help themselves.

And they don't need us to do it for them, thank you very much.

He rejects even the idea that we can teach them to help themselves.

The poor know better than we do what needs to be done.

The book, Economics of Poverty, makes an excellent point of that  See my blog entry on that:

http://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2011/11/poor-economics-book-review-and-few.html

This is where we are now - I think a good understanding of the impact of culture helps with this.

See my blog entry on this:  

http://carlscheider.blogspot.com/2011/01/culture-and-developing-nations.html

Turns out we need them!  We are in this together - we are not in charge of this either.

BUT - don't romanticize the poor.

This step takes quite a bit of development and there are not a whole lot of organizations or people up to this level.  Sustainable development is a good step - but it is still helping from the outside.

Stage 4 - we are disillusioned with the poor.

They make mistakes.  They are selfish.  They waste money.

They are human beings too.  The book Poor Economics makes this case well also.

The enlightenment stage is that we join with them to oppose the structural problems, and the injustices that exist.  We work together.  That is real empowerment.

================================

That said - I still don't know what to do to get people more engaged in this.  It feels like an insurmountable problem to move the political will of even a few members of our parish, let alone the state of MN, or the nation, or the planet.

Well - a step forward is better than one backwards!

What do you think?

--

Carl Scheider

----------------------
"Remember, I'm pulling for ya. We're all in this together!" 

Red Green

Take the High Road - a call for political civility, please

My friend, Krista Tippet, had a forum not so long ago, calling on political leaders to exercise more civility - please, thank you very much.

In the face of the extreme Conservative attacks on civility and reasonableness - which seem to work, by the way - this author is calling on the Liberals to not descend to that same place of bickering - but to rather take the high road.

http://thebreakthrough.org/journal/issue-3/the-polarization-paradox/

This is an excellent piece - but a bit long.  It calls for centrist moderation from the liberal left - not the liberal extreme reaction that many are pursuing. Some of the length comes from the exceptional research that went into this - it makes perfect sense - do read it.

OH - if you are of the conservative bent - you should read this too - it's all your fault, after all.

Here's one small quote:
  "In the aftermath of a 2012 election that is likely to be among the most brutal campaigns in history, liberals would be well served to turn more attention and resources to rebuilding our civic culture, reconstructing a vital center in American politics, rather than investing ever more heavily in the liberal message machine. Reforming our civic and political institutions in ways that create some possibility for moderation, deliberation, and crosscutting discourse should be a high priority for liberals, who must recognize that without a functioning civic culture, there can be no progressive governance."

How To Fix Citizens United

I know I post quite a few things here that I say are VERY important. Well - this one really is It's a video - it's about how to change our electoral system so that corporations have a lot lessinfluence - Citizens United! Watch it - please. Let me know what you think.

Thanks!

I Hate Elections

I hate elections.  I know they are important, and I am always an election judge - but I hate the things.  I've been thinking about this - why does this process disturb me so much?  Well - it's because of all the idiots out there that do not agree with me.  How can they be that stupid!  If they took a little bit of effort, they would understand the facts and agree with me - but they don't!  And these ads - they are unbelievably stupid.  Who would ever believe the things they are saying.  If they are not outright lies - they are totally misleading. What a waste of time and money.

And the negative ads drive me berzerk.  Tell me what YOU think, what YOU stand for - not what you think the other guy is doing wrong.  That is the easiest type of criticism to make.  Give us a few ideas supportive of the common good - even if it is not going to HURT the other candidate!  We all might actually learn something.

The FAST Brain is the Problem
I have been reading the book, Thinking, Fast and Slow, and it gave me a bit of understanding about how people make decisions.  A few millennia of evolution have tuned our "fast" brain to make instant decisions.  We go with our gut, because it protected us when the enemy appeared, or things just did not seem right.  But our "slow" brain takes a lot of time and energy, and we generally do not use it much without some great effort. Turns out, MOST people are not making "rational" decisions most of the time, including me.  We are making emotional ones - gut calls.  And that is what screws things up with elections.  And the people we elect are the same.  They are not making good, rational decisions - they are doing gut calls virtually all the time.  And economics is the same - people make lousy decisions all the time.  There has to be a way to fix this!

Our Fast Brain Works Well - for some things.
The thing is, our "fast" brain is not bad or broken or evil, or anything.  It is a wonderfully tuned and sophisticated gadget for what it does well.  For example, some of the finest things in our lives come from the fact that we make emotional, gut calls, that use our fast brain very, very well.  When I met my wife, my fast brain told me immediately that I loved her.  When I met my children for the first time - the same thing happened.  And it worked even better for grandchildren.  I love them all - how could you not?  And my fast brain would protect them all - in an instant.  I don't need to think about it - I can't even think about it.  It's not rational - it just is.  Music, art, architecture - it is not a rational process.

For Others - not so well.
And when we make election decisions, the same type of thing goes on.  I immediately LIKE this person, or I don't.  I can work on the rationale for that immediate like or dislike, but most of the time, most of us just work to explain that first gut call.  If I learn things that seem to be counter to that gut instinct, I discount them.  If I hear things that support it, I tend to believe them uncritically.  That is simply how things work - it is not broken - it is just not designed to select political leaders in a complex world.  It is better designed to select leaders who will defend us in the upcoming battle!  We want the big strong guy who can swing a club.  For example, in the book cited above, the authors describe an experiment where people are shown pictures of candidates running for office, and they are asked which one they think won the election.  The pictures appear rapidly - seconds or less.  The people select the actual winner of the election with 70% accuracy - based solely on their picture. What tends to win is a square jaw, and a confident smile.  We want that guy who can beat those other people!  Period.  That is the fast brain talking.

For Elections?
But elections should NOT be beauty contests, or contests to select the strongest face, the most confident person.  They should not be decided by public spectacle like debates or five minute photo ops.  They should not go to the one with the biggest or most signs - Lord help me.  They should be about the issues, about problems and complex things that take a lot of effort to determine.  But that requires our slow brain to kick into gear - and it is too much work most of the time.  We go with what we like, what we are comfortable with, with our peers, our co-workers, the crowd around us.  Making a truly independent decision is a lot of work, and we rarely can get our head around that much work.

Election Example
I was an election judge for the primary.  A woman got her ballot from me.  I explained that she can only vote in one party, and she went to fill out the ballot.  She brings her ballot to the voting machine - and it is rejected.  She brings it back and asks what is wrong.  Well, she voted for ALL of the Republican candidates.  I tell her she has to choose ONE in each race.  OH, she says, and seems confused.  She does not know any of them.  She asks me which ones are the endorsed candidates - I inform her that I cannot tell her that.  I am a non partisan election judge.  I cannot tell her how to vote, or even tell her who the endorsed candidates are.  And, if it were just up to me, I would personally prefer that she not vote, thank you very much.  If she is that uninformed, we would be better off if she sits this one out.  But I can't tell her that.  Many people vote a straight party ticket, with no idea of who the people are that are running, or what the issues are.  They seem confused when we tell them that city and county races do not have any party designation.  They do not know what to do.  I would like to tell them to simply NOT vote for those - but they feel compelled to somehow select a candidate from their ignorance, so that they are doing their civic duty.

Politicians Too
And the politicians are no help.  They are just as irrational.  They are all fighting to be king of the hill - to defeat the other guy.  Nowadays they regularly lie, cheat and steal to get elected - and no one seems to care.  They can put out any untruth they want - and even when it is detected and pointed out - no one cares!  One of our recent presidential candidates has been caught lying numerous times - with absolutely no impact on his popularity.  What's with that?!  No one seems to be worried about the thing we used to call "the common good".  They just want to beat the other one - at all costs. One of our local US Representatives has won the "pants on fire" award numerous times - but she continues to be re-elected - 8 terms now.

Once elected, our representatives are not even polite or civil to one another.  They never talk. They never work together to solve a problem.  They do not even sit near each other!  They seem focused on making the other party look bad.

There Must Be a Better Way.
We are intelligent beings in part of our brain.  Can't we come up with a better system than this one?
What about the following ideas?

Citizenshp test?
Driving a car - owning a gun - those should have a competency test.  Why not voting?  Instead of a photo id, how about a "secret" civics question on the ballot?  The hard part is in the details!  How do we keep it from being discriminatory?  How many years is a term in the US Senate?  In the State Senate - in normal years?  How many justices sit on the U.S. Supreme Court?  Who gets to be President if both the President and Vice President are not able to serve?  Who actually elects the President - the people, or the electoral college, the House or the Senate?  What happens if the electoral college is a tie!  Who selects the president then?  What percentage of the U.S. budget goes to foreign aid?  To defense?

What do you think?  If you don't get the multiple choice answer right, your vote does not count!  Sorry.

Indirect elections?  
When we started out with this democracy stuff, not everyone had a vote!  You had to own land - and be male!  Towns were small - most voters knew the local candidates personally.  We could adopt something similar.  We could have small groups - precincts - who meet a few times early in the year.  They would have some education agenda, and be open to candidates who want to be elected.  After they meet a few times, they choose ONE of their members to go to the next tier.  That group meets a few times, and they choose ONE member, and so on.   Think about it - people voting for people they actually know and meet.  We could elect a city council at one tier up, I think.  Our state reps at 3 tiers max.  And maybe 4 for US House and Senate.  We could let the popular vote go for Governor and President.  How much harm can they do anyway!?

And recall would be as simple as a 2/3rd majority of the group that selected you. It might be the death of political parties - and wouldn't that be nice. It would sure put a dent in advertising.  No one is going to advertise to persuade a group of 30 to 50 people that they could meet with once a month!  They'll just TALK to them - such an idea!  And the group might just treat each other civilly, once they get to know each other.  These are your neighbors - not your enemies.  We're all in this together!

OPT IN is automatic.
Another thing, since we know that people do not make real rational decisions - make it easier on them.  Make the default the right thing to do as decided by some impartial, educated, reasonable panel.  For example, we do not let people choose whether or not to support Social Security or Medicare - they have to take part - otherwise we are all going to be picking them up off the street. Same for motorcycle helmets, air bags, etc.  You cannot save money on your car by buying one with no air bags or seat belts.  It costs the rest of us too much when you show up in the emergency room and we all pick up the cost.

Forced Civility?
What about making it a crime to be caught lying in a political campaign?  With required jail time - no plea deals!

We could make it a requirement that elected members of Congress and state legislatures have to spend a WEEK in the same room getting to know each other and their beliefs and families?  Research has shown that people who really get to know each other have a tough time trying to hurt each other - even if they disagree.  See M. Scott Peck, A Different Drum, for thoughts on that.

Your thoughts?
----------------------------------------------------
Added 2016.07.24

For just a bit more on this topic, it is worth reading this piece:
https://georgelakoff.com/2016/07/23/understanding-trump-2/

This author, George Lakoff, has written a fine little book - Don't Think of an Elephant. It's about how our brain works, and how we can use that to persuade people by focusing on the 98?% of the brain that is not really THINKING. He applies his research to Donald Trump - and even provides a few ideas on how to counter this "mind control". Hopefully a few other people besides The Donald will figure out how to do this. So far advertisers and Trump and Fox News seem to be the only ones that grasp this. Say it, say it again, say it loud,yell it - it doesn't have to be true or real - just a lot and loud.  And NEVER mention the other side - their name, their ideas - NADA. Focus on values, positives, future.

Got that? Let me know how you are applying it, ok?