Category: leadership

Inspiring Civility

tomkapostasy8 Comments

https://www.cml.org/home/topics-key-issues/civility-starts-here

Our Situation

The practice of civility is declining. But we must be hopeful! The grass roots counter-revolution to rebuild Civility has begun. We must not be discouraged. The United States started 250 years ago as an experiment in representative democracy based on universal ideals. It has succeeded against long odds. At the 1787 constitutional convention, Ben Franklin was asked what form of government was being formed. He replied, “a republic, if you can keep it”. In 1852 as the nation battled over slavery and “states’ rights”, Wendell Phillips noted that “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty”.

The US was formed after religious wars had ripped Europe apart and the central rule of kings, landed wealth, nobles and state churches proved inadequate to the challenges and aspirations of modern men and women. It was founded on new principles of individual rights and limited central power. It was not based on history, religion, military power, race, soil, elites, class or wealth. This abstract foundation has been a great asset through time, but it requires citizens to understand and fill their key roles.

Christianity, western culture, New England myths, cultural and educational institutions, patriotism, American exceptionalism, local governments, inertia, mass media and public intellectuals all encouraged Americans to fulfill their citizenship duties: to vote, monitor politics, set and enforce candidate expectations, uphold the constitution and rule of law, obey the laws, pay taxes, serve in the military, sacrifice for the nation, serve on juries, and conduct themselves in a Civil manner.

The cultural revolution of the 1960’s and the Reagan revolution of the 1980’s undercut these forces. Each individual was encouraged to think and act for himself. Individuals welcomed the new freedom to “express yourself”. Civic duties and civility declined through time. Left and right argued about the causes of the very apparent decay of civilization but no new solutions or Civility norms emerged.

Cole Porter’s 1934 “Anything Goes” viewpoint ruled. If we couldn’t agree on political issues, then we could at least agree to be tolerant of all different viewpoints. This was the modern way. Liberals elevated “tolerance” to become a supreme virtue. Liberal intellectuals confirmed that no central values, virtues, character or opinions were needed to support the political state. The fear of conservative, religious, or wealthy domination of culture, economics and politics reinforced this position. Main Street and Wall Street conservatives accepted the more socially moderate/liberal positions of the modern world. They celebrated economic growth, capitalism and the consumer society.

Philosophical and religious conservatives disagreed. The perceived slide towards tolerance, radical subjectivity and atheism was unacceptable. Social and religious conservatives doubled down on traditional views. They became more radical and non-tolerant. They embraced and then captured the Republican party. Small town, rural, working class, economically at-risk Americans saw a meritocratic, global, elitist nation that conspired against their interests. They also embraced the Republican party as the Democratic party proclaimed universal values and prioritized new special interests.

In 1990 Newt Gingrich demonstrated that polarized politics was very effective in the modern age. Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama tried to find a “third way” to triangulate and recapture the center but while they could win elections, they could not really change the polarized culture. Donald Trump embraced the polarized model with great success. The need for “Civility” was not part of his world view. Many in this newly defined party agreed with his win/lose, realpolitik, scorched earth view of politics.

Despite this political situation, most Americans continue to believe in civility. The threats to our system have prompted many people to become more active in politics and to support the core values and behaviors of Civility.

Inspired Civility

The counter-revolution to restore Civility as a core American value and set of behaviors is now well under way. Will it work? Why will it work?

Civility is a set of behaviors that recognizes differences and builds mutual respect. Civility is based upon the 7 commonly held values of human dignity, respect, accepting others, responsibility, public spirit, intentionality and constructiveness.

Civility is a social norm that influences behavior. It is a set of practices, skills, habits and behaviors. Civility requires self-awareness, self-management, social awareness and relationship management skills. It also requires communications, personal growth and problem-solving skills. This is a very heavy package of skills requiring a lifetime of personal investments. Yet, it is required for our representative democracy. Why would any individual choose to make this investment?

Passionate Humans

1 Corinthians 13. If I speak in tongues of men or angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging symbol.

Civility as a purely abstract, technical, secular, efficient, professional, dry, thin concept cannot win in the modern world. Civility must spring from the hearts of men and women. The values, education, steps, content and behavior of Civility alone are simply not enough. What will attract and engage modern individuals into making Civility a passionate priority? Why will the Civility counter-revolution win?

Humans are motivated by self-interest and specific situations but mainly by a passionate sense of duty.

Self-interest

In modern America, self-interest may be first!

  1. Personal benefits

Practicing Civility provides 15 benefits, primarily improved communications and conflict resolution skills, better personal and professional relations and personal well-being.

Civility: What’s In It for Me?

2. Personal growth. Civility’s focus on self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship management, communications, growth and problem-solving drives personal growth. It is a great fit for the implicit modern philosophy of self-expression and Maslow’s top-level goal of self-actualization.

3.Local environment. Civility values and behaviors can help individuals to make their local environments more productive, effective and Civil. One individual can use these tools to improve their local environment.

4. Benevolent self-interest. Civility has inherent spillover or externality effects. Individuals who invest in civility sometimes aim to influence others and local communities to become more Civil for the good of the community. Individuals feel good about promoting these changes.

Situation

Sometimes the situation alone calls for an obvious response. We have such a situation today. Our society is at risk, and we fear the consequences of a downward spiral. We have the tools, knowledge and agency to prevent this. We must respond.

  1. Opportunity. Civility tools are widely accessible. The cognitive and behavioral sciences have grown tremendously in the last half century. Individuals learn and apply various Civility tools at all stages of their lives.
Civility: Cognitive Science to the Rescue

2. Consequence of Failure. Americans know about the “Decline and Fall of Rome”. They witnessed two world wars, a nuclear cold war and its end. They learned that Francis Fukayama’s proclamation of the end of history in 1992 was premature. Civilization is a precious thing. It faces many threats today. Combatting the possible failure of Western civilization is a worthwhile endeavor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_History_of_the_Decline_and_Fall_of_the_Roman_Empire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last_Man

3. Generational Responsibility. “The Greatest Generation” has earned its rest. The “Baby Boomers” have dominated the last 75 years. We received “Western Civilization”, won the “cold war”, embraced individualism and expanded rights and freedoms. But we abandoned the cultural norms of civility. We have an opportunity to restore them in a better form with greater effectiveness without restricting individual freedoms.

4. Agency. We inhabit a “mass society” where global trade, banking systems, the United Nations, judges, lobbyists, politicians, the media, advertising, corporations, lawyers, banks, insurance companies, universities, computers, systems, processes and artificial intelligence seem to rule. Yet, we prize our individuality, independence, freedom, agency, identities and souls. Civility can be practiced and improved by each individual. No permission is required. We can teach others through our own actions and through education and changes to small communities like families, book clubs, prayer groups and work units. Small changes can have large impacts.

Duty

Civility rests upon 7 values. Human dignity, respect, acceptance and responsibility are broadly supported. Public spirit, intentionality and constructiveness attract less interest from some comprehensive value systems. People embrace, apply and grow such values when they feel a sense of duty., which can come from a variety of sources. Fortunately, Civility can be supported from any of 7 sources of duty.

Our society doesn’t require everyone to have the same religious or political beliefs. It doesn’t require everyone to actively practice Civility. It requires a “critical mass” of individuals who actively practice, improve themselves and promote Civility. We live in a time when we need to be very intentional about growing Civility.

  1. Civic Duty – Many citizens deeply understand the benefits of living in a democratic society. They support Civility because they understand it is necessary. Civility enables constructive dialogue, supports self-governance, builds trust and social cohesion, promotes effective governance and manages conflicts peacefully.
  2. Patriotic Duty – Americans are proud of their country’s history of establishing and maintaining a representative democracy as an example for the world. They practice civility to preserve democracy, uphold its founding principles, ensure social stability, and foster national unity and trust.
  3. Cultural Duty – Individuals live in communities and follow the norms of those communities. The history of Civility sets expectations for continuing to act in a Civil manner. Even in highly individualistic communities, we accept that informal norms, expectations and manners are required to avoid stronger laws, administration and enforcement that would reduce our freedoms. Most individuals are proud of their cultural history and happy to comply. Conservatives naturally honor such history. Many American liberals are also quite proud of the achievements of our society.
  4. Religious Duty – Many religions support at least some of the 7 Civility core values. Those who believe humans are created in God’s image emphasize human dignity, respect and acceptance. Many religious and ethical traditions teach the “Golden Rule”—to treat others as one wishes to be treated. This principle serves as a direct guide for civil behavior, encouraging empathy, courtesy, and kindness in all interactions. Many religions ask members to “love your neighbor”, and support the welfare of others, including strangers and those who are different. Religious texts and teachings often provide a moral framework that promotes virtues like patience, kindness, generosity, gentleness, self-control, and humility. Cultivating these virtues is considered part of a faithful life, which naturally leads to more civil interactions. A sense of humility, derived from the belief that only God can make the final judgment, encourages individuals to tolerate differing views and avoid a condescending attitude toward others.
  5. Philosophical Duty – Philosophers have always address the core challenge of forming community and governing even though individuals have different views, needs and interests. Hence, they outline governance structures that work to bridge that gap, often overlapping with the values of Civility. Humanism, secular humanism and philosophies of personal growth and expression emphasize the importance of human dignity, the need to give and receive respect and the importance of accepting or celebrating differences. Many philosophies are compatible with the “golden rule” which emphasizes the mutual respect and forbearance required for a healthy society.
  6. Personality. Individuals with a strong preference for “feeling” versus “thinking” behaviors naturally embrace the Civility values. This can be combined with either a “perceiving”/flexible or “judging”/inflexible approach to the world. Some individuals naturally prioritize responsibility/intentionality or positivity/constructiveness or public spiritedness/belonging.
Civil Personality Types

7. Personal Identity. Many individuals today want to find, define, develop and refine their personal identities. They wish to consciously optimize their human potential. This includes being self-aware, managing themselves, being socially aware and managing relationships, the first 4 Civility behaviors. Individuals who build a secure personal identity are able to interact with others and accept their differences without feeling threatened or the need to resolve such differences. Individuals who have consciously made life choices and experienced personal growth understand that there are different options and views to be considered.

Summary

The practice of Civility is based upon core values like human dignity, respect, acceptance and responsibility. These values are supported by our worldviews. Civility is consistent with the 9 sources of strongly held beliefs. Each can actively and passionately support Civility. We need to rebuild the skills, habits and expectations of Civility. We can confidently look to self-interest, our current situation and the call of duty to make this happen.

Civility and DEI

tomkapostasy5 Comments

https://civilitypartners.com/navigating-the-era-of-quiet-dei/

DEI History (Google AI Says …)

Civil rights.

Affirmative action.

Corporate training, legal, initiatives.

Reactions after George Floyd.

.https://urbanandracialequity.org/deitimeline/

https://insights.grcglobalgroup.com/the-history-and-growth-of-the-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-profession/#:~:text=Although%20a%20limelight%20has%20been,longer%20than%20a%20couple%20days.

https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20240304-us-corporate-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-programme-controversy

DEI Politicized

As DEI programs grew in number, intensity, claims and impact, some individuals identified and objected to their perceived political agendas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusion#:~:text=In%20the%20United%20States%2C%20diversity,based%20on%20identity%20or%20disability.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-radical-and-wasteful-government-dei-programs-and-preferencing/

https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/22/us/dei-diversity-equity-inclusion-explained

DEI Criticisms

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/most-common-arguments-against-dei-how-respond-felicity-menzies-ehwcc/

The common criticisms are not overly persuasive. The real issue is that this became part of the “culture wars”. Corporations didn’t invest in DEI because they suddenly became “woke”, they did so because DEI was beneficial for recruiting, retention and marketing. We live in a diverse world. Commercial enterprises recognized this and adjusted their activities accordingly.

Affirmative action is a step beyond “equal opportunity”. It says that our society systematically discriminates against minority groups and individuals and that we should take steps to offset this. This is a political issue that “Civility” chooses to not address in order to be actively nonpartisan.

Also missing above is the claim by postmodernists, professors, influencers, politicians and many progressives that society is inherently unfair, dominated by incumbent powerful forces, requiring revolutionary insight and reaction to overcome their power. Critics say that DEI is used as a political tool. Many disagree with the critics. “Civility” does not take a stance on this dispute. It is “above our paygrade”.

Definitions of Diversity

The presence of differences within a group, which can include race, gender, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, religion, physical ability, and other aspects of social identity. 

Embracing the differences everyone brings to the table, while acknowledging the benefit of the multiple perspectives, ideas, and solutions provided when individuals with different backgrounds, identities, and views collaborate and are heard. 

The presence and participation of individuals with varying backgrounds and perspectives, including those who have been traditionally underrepresented.

Embracing the differences everyone brings to the table, whether those are someone’s race, age, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, physical ability or other aspects of social identity.

Diversity ensures that a variety of perspectives are represented, whether they come from different races, genders, ages, sexual orientations, or cultural backgrounds.

https://naacp.org/campaigns/diversity-equity-and-inclusion#:~:text=Diversity%2C%20equity%2C%20and%20inclusion%20are,%2C%20genders%2C%20and%20sexual%20orientations.

https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/what-is-dei#:~:text=DEI%20can%20be%20broken%20down%20into%20three,integrated%20into%20your%20organization’s%20culture%20and%20operations

https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/22/us/dei-diversity-equity-inclusion-explained

Civility Supports Diversity

Definitions of Inclusion

  • Creating an environment where every individual feels respected, supported, and has a strong sense of belonging.
  • Encouraging all people to express their ideas and perspectives freely. 

Creating an environment where people of all backgrounds can thrive and contribute to their fullest potential.

A sense of belonging in an environment where all feel welcomed, accepted, and respected.

Respecting everyone’s voice and creating a culture in which people from all backgrounds feel encouraged to express their ideas and perspectives.

Civility Supports Inclusion (Acceptance)

Diversity and inclusion fit into the Civility value labelled “accepting” or “acceptance”. They are clear priority components of Civility.

Definitions of Equity

  • Providing fair and just treatment to all individuals, regardless of their differences.
  • Ensuring everyone has the resources and opportunities needed to succeed, rather than giving everyone the exact same thing. 

Treating everyone fairly and providing opportunities for everyone to succeed, considering their traits, including resources, support, and potential accommodations to help those with disabilities thrive in the workplace. 

Equal access to opportunities and fair, just, and impartial treatment.

Treating everyone fairly and providing equal opportunities.

Civility Supports Equity (Partially)

Equity is not exactly one of the 8 core values of Civility. Civility is based upon human dignity, respect for each other, responsibility, public-spiritedness, acceptance, intentionality, interactivity and constructiveness. Equity is a form of the value “fairness”. According to Jonathan Haidt, fairness is a widely held political value, but it is described in different ways by different people and considered much more important by liberals than by conservatives. “Civility” is not opposed to “equity”, but “equity” is not essential for the practice of “Civility”.

Home

Is Equity Essential for DEI?

The highly influential human resources professional society SHRM removed “equity” from their historical support of DEI programming. Many opposed this change, arguing that equity is an essential component of DEI.

Not Without Equity
Equity Out, Civility In?

.https://www.inclusiongeeks.com/the-unexpected-consequence-of-workplace-civility/

DEI Program Components

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusion#:~:text=In%20the%20United%20States%2C%20diversity,based%20on%20identity%20or%20disability.

“Typical” DEI programs lean left. Civility, per se, does not support the more partisan views. “Unconscious bias” may be important, but it is not a civility value, behavior or skill. Civility does not take a stance on activist “equitable” HR processes. Every person has human dignity and is worthy of respect, check. Extra investment in mentorship and sponsorship of “underrepresented” employees is also optional from a Civility perspective.

Corporate Human Resources Professionals Generally Lean Left and Strongly Support DEI

https://www.shrm.org/executive-network/insights/impact-of-civility-on-organizational-success

Fostering Civility in the Workplace: A Key to Accessibility and Inclusion

https://neuroleadership.com/your-brain-at-work/workplace-civility-through-a-dei-lens#:~:text=Civility%20is%20about%20acting%20politely%20and%20adhering,Open%20dialogue%20*%20Everyone’s%20ability%20to%20contribute

Summary

Diversity and inclusion are part of the key Civility value of acceptance. Each person has human dignity and should be respected and accepted by others in their individuality. Civility is based upon commonly held values and promotes personal development and responsibility for being a good person, interacting with others and considering community needs. Like DEI, it promotes a subset of values to make our lives together safer, more pleasant and more effective. It focuses on how we interact with each other constructively, despite our differences.

Civility’s nonpartisan stance takes no position on the stronger claims of DEI providers or their critics. Civility recommends that they both engage in meaningful dialogue to better understand where they can work together and where they must accept that they have different social, political and moral perspectives that cannot be reconciled today. Civility actively opposes the angry outbursts, attacks, emotional appeals, insults, blaming, bullying, shaming, disrespect, blind loyalty, ignorance, prejudging, stonewalling and demonization sometimes seen in these interactions.

Civility Taboos
Civility: Can’t We All Just Get Along?

Civility: Cognitive Science to the Rescue

tomkapostasy6 Comments

History

It’s difficult to describe the complete revolution in the behavioral sciences that occurred around 1956 as practitioners began to experience a “paradigm shift” 6 years before Thomas Kuhn’s wildly influential “philosophy of science” description of this phenomenon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm_shift

Psychology was dominated by the behaviorist approach of BF Skinner. Only observable scientific results mattered. In second place were Freud’s insights into the differences between the conscious mind and the unconscious struggles between the id, ego and superego. Psychologists, social psychologists, communications theorists, philosophers, linguists, and computer scientists rejected BOTH the philosophy-free behaviorist approach and the philosophy-entangled Freudian approaches. The “cognitive scientists” recognized that the mind, mental, consciousness, rationality, perception, memory, attention, will, drives, social influences, choice, morality, feelings, fears, instincts and many other constructs were “real” in some sense. Non-material concepts and structures were important complements to the material and observable world.

They embraced the scientific method to investigate these concepts. They began to combine experimental psychology, information theory and biology. Their work led to many breakthroughs in theory and in practical advice for how humans behave, where they fail/struggle and what they can do to improve. These scientifically based theories have accumulated to the great benefit of mankind in the last 70 years.

I want to highlight the key cognitive science / behavioral science breakthroughs that are relevant to practicing civility. I will limit references to a single work for each category.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_revolution

Communications Skills

Emotional Intelligence

Empathy

Conflict Resolution

Teamwork

Critical Thinking

Decision-Making

Strategic Thinking

Creative Thinking

Observational Skills

Behavioral Design

Behavioral Skills Training

Change Management

Time Management

Personal Development

Resilience

Summary

This above list only scratches the surface. Consider corporate organizational development, counseling, cognitive behavioral theory, college residential life, community development, neutral DEI programs, listening, peer counseling, couples counseling, co-dependency, adult children of alcoholics, anxiety, negotiating, facilitation skills, strategic planning, game theory, risk management, project management, influence, thinking hats, personality styles, talents, etc. The list is almost endless.

We now understand how humans behave. We are imperfect and amazing. We have the ability to balance the individual and the other, the individual and the community, the individual and spirit/God.

Civility is based upon the human dignity of each individual. The modern “cognitive science” approach embraces this insight. It offers tools to make our lives more effective, meaningful and satisfying. Civil individuals should invest time to master these subjects.

Civility is Nonpartisan

tomkapostasy11 Comments

Our preferred definition of Civility is “a common values-based problem-solving process to make group decisions when individuals have differences”. A review of 5 dimensions indicates that Civility has no bias towards or against the left or the right.

Philosophically

Conservatism “conserves” history, culture, religion, norms, land, assets, classes, privileges, religion, power and institutions. It opposes risk-taking, conflict, rapid change and revolution. Civility is rooted in human dignity and concern for the “public good”.

Liberalism elevates the individual, rationality, progress, liberty, science and rights. It opposes unjustified power, wealth and cultural claims on the individual. Liberal political systems seek to balance individual rights with the “public good”.

Technically

Civility based problem-solving and relationship management emphasize the use of modern business, education and counseling techniques such as active listening, dialogue, objective evidence, separation of facts and values, common interests, devil’s advocate, process review, independent facilitators, strategic planning, values clarification, I/you statements, cognitive behavioral therapy, crucial conversations, shared accountability, win/win options, disclosed preferences, long-term perspective, walk-away option, rational incentives, aligned incentives, multiple rounds of negotiation, I’m OK/You’re OK, brainstorming, multiple intelligences, 6 thinking hats, supplier partnerships, shared administrative services, outsourced services, specific corporate culture, mission, vision and values. Corporate, not-for-profit, educational, counselling, government, religious and privately owned organizations have adopted these social science techniques because they are effective tools for translating resources into outputs in support of goals.

Different organizations emphasize different tools that best match their values, history and objectives. There is no clear left versus right emphasis. Solid tools help organizations manage their planning, workforce, resources, suppliers, customers and beneficiaries.

Values

  1. Respecting each other and our views. Respect for position and roles is a core conservative principle. Respect for individual freedom and agency has been a core conservative principle since the American Revolution. Liberals emphasize human rights, caring and fairness. Respect for each individual is central.
  2. Human dignity. Christian theology emphasizes the value of each person created by God in his image and called by name. Secular humanist philosophy takes a similarly very high view of the importance of each individual.
  3. Being open to understanding differences. Liberals have emphasized human rights, equality, care, progress and “others”. Religious conservatives embrace the Judeo-Christian call to protect the poor, the widow, the orphan and the alien. Most Americans support the American political system that limits centralized power and protects minority rights. Many conservatives recognize the diversity of religious denominations. Most Americans have learned to accept the legal and social rights of different groups, including many that were not accepted before. We have arguments about DEI today because it can be used as a political tool by the far left, even though large corporations have effectively used the nonpartisan core of DEI to be more effective firms for 25 years.
  4. Each individual’s choices matter. Liberals and conservatives in individualist America agree.
  5. We’re responsible for our choices and interactions. Conservatives emphasize responsibility, including responsibility to social groups and the state. Liberals focus on the individual, per se, and highlight their responsibility to society as essential for the public good determined by the political process.
  6. We consider the public good in our choices. Liberals tend to take the broader perspective today, sometimes to a fault. Classical conservatives naturally focus on the overall public good as the end goal of society, perhaps emphasizing the existing interests. As representatives of the wealthier and more powerful groups, conservatives look to the overall health of society, politics and the economy as vital.
  7. We share responsibility for our choices. Conservatives naturally see an organic society, based on tradition, norms, institutions and trust. Although elites influence decisions, true support from all of society is essential. All sectors must support the legitimacy of big choices. Liberals promote shared power as the fair way, in principle. They sometimes criticize decisions and processes when they don’t win.
  8. We think and act constructively. Liberals embrace modernity, science, progress, education and rationality. Conservatives embrace hard choices, reality, real politic, trade-offs, common sense, business methods, and balanced budgets.

Issues

19 issues have appeared in the “top 10” most important issues lists since 1948. Civility can be neutral on all of these issues.

  1. Inflation. Republicans emphasize this. OK.
  2. Jobs. Democrats emphasize this.
  3. Balanced budget. Republicans promote this. Democrats pursue this.
  4. The economy. Everyone favors expansion and growth.
  5. International aid/UN/global organizations. Democrats support this.
  6. Hot wars. Republicans favor more active strategies.
  7. War on terror. Republicans favor more active policies.
  8. Crime. Republicans favor greater investments.
  9. Gun rights. Republicans favor greater rights.
  10. Traditional culture. Republicans favor tradition.
  11. Drugs. Republicans favor greater enforcement and consequences.
  12. Education. Republicans favor local control and greater traditional values.
  13. Immigration. Republicans favor less legal and illegal immigration.
  14. Poverty. Democrats favor greater support.
  15. Health care. Democrats favor greater public support.
  16. Racial rights. Democrats favor greater actions for minority groups.
  17. Environment. Democrats favor greater public investment and regulation.
  18. Unifying the country/rule of law. Historically, Republicans emphasized this. In the Trump era, Democrats are more concerned.
  19. Role of government. Republicans favor less government, until recent Trump changes.
Framing What Matters Most in America: 2023

Moral Foundations Theory

Home
  1. Care. Primary liberal value. Conservatives rate it highly too.
  2. Fairness. Primary liberal value, focusing on results. Conservatives emphasize process fairness.
  3. Loyalty. Conservative priority. Secondary liberal value. Civility emphasizes loyalty to society, the political system and the common good.
  4. Authority. Conservative priority. Liberals accept “legitimate” authority. Civility emphasizes the importance of each individual.
  5. Purity. Conservative priority supporting traditional values. Liberals emphasize different dimensions emphasizing individual rights.
  6. Equality. Equal treatment of individuals. Left and right agree.
  7. Proportionality. Conservatives emphasize proper rewards for efforts and results. Liberals accept this principle but give it lesser emphasis. Civility does not take a stance.
The Righteous Mind – Part 2
The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion – 2012 (Part 1)
Moral Foundations Theory of Politics

Summary

Civility is supported by left and right in America’s political history. Modern techniques for most effective group interactions and negotiations are neutral. The values that support Civility are neutral. Civility takes no stand on modern political issues. The latest attempt to define the “righteous” bases for politics provides no dimension opposed to civility. Civility can be used as a bipartisan base for our democracy and our day-to-day interactions.

Causes of Increased Political Polarization

tomkapostasy4 Comments

Political polarization is one of the main causes of the decline in civility. There are structural and historical causes for the tremendous decline in civility from 1960 to 2025.

High Level Changes

  1. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 obliterated the Democratic party and provided the Republican party with a growth strategy.
  2. The “cultural revolution” of the 1960’s contrasted traditional social practices with a tolerance or embrace of “anything goes” behavior. Politicians have continued to exploit these deeply felt divisions.
  3. Political parties embraced a single, simple right versus left, conservative versus liberal, framework as Ronald Reagan skillfully knit together the various “conservative” factions between 1968 and 1980. Republicans began to embrace the virtues of a “big tent” through the end of the century.
  4. The Republican party embraced fundamentalist Christians, and religion was merged with politics. Democrats increasingly became home for the secular, agnostic and “none of the above” religious affiliations.
  5. Ideology based parties are inherently more righteous, adopting right/wrong, good/evil views of the world.
  6. The American economy has continued to grow throughout the post WWII era, greatly increasing the value of politics for those with economic interests to protect.
  7. Americans have increasingly sorted by “rural versus urban” and “left versus right” residences. The rural counties are right, the urban counties are left, the suburban counties are mixed.
  8. The rise of individual expression as the premier life goal highlight’s individual identity. Political views reflect a person’s identity. There is pressure to “be” left or right.
  9. Structural changes like gerrymandering or restrictive changes in voting rules are used to control political power at the state level.
  10. Political parties have lost power. Historically, they were able to filter out extreme or risky candidates or issues. Voters, candidates and special interest groups have more power today.
  11. Our two-party system incentivizes extreme candidates, supporters and views on issues. This is a self-reinforcing tendency.
  12. Once individuals see the world as political, in a single ideological dimension, as right versus wrong, human nature reinforces the polarized views. Dislike of the other party becomes highly motivating. In-group biases grow. Fear of the “other” grows. Perceived harmful, unfair, disloyal, unspeakable, sacrilegious actions by the “other” party assume mythic evil status. This is also a self-reinforcing tendency.
  13. Experience with civil, constructive, problem-solving politicians and parties has declined, lowering expectations. This is also a self-reinforcing tendency.
  14. Polarization is in the interests of some politicians and the industries supported by political spending. It acts as an ethical and communications skills barrier to entry.

Media Changes

  1. Technological changes allowed journalism and opinion expression to be economically viable at the part-time individual level, down from financially stable organizations of at least 100 people.
  2. The “Fairness Doctrine” of 1949 was effectively ended in 1987, allowing political media to flourish.
  3. The merger of individual identity with politics and religion with politics created greater demand for political journalism.
  4. With television, perceptions of “presidential”, powerful, honest, effective, charismatic, leadership, common sense, relatability, etc. made media image more important than content, knowledge, experience or character.
  5. The internet allowed previously fringe groups to effectively organize and communicate.
  6. Cable TV and the internet created hundreds and thousands of broadcasting options, encouraging individuals to find exactly the content that they desire.
  7. Highly partisan commentators/entertainers began to provide the people with what they want. A simple reinforcement of their existing beliefs.
  8. The internet and social media provided the tools for content providers to find and feed their customers, even at very small scales.
  9. The loss of classified ads to the internet undermined local newspapers and radio. They lost their ability to effectively cover local news. This reinforced the trend to embracing partisan sources for all news and opinion.
  10. The growth of effective communications sources allowed national politicians to move the “center of gravity” in politics from “state and local” to the national level. All issues are now seen through the lens of ideological national politics.
  11. The increased number of channels on cable TV provided room for outlets that appealed to small fractions of the viewing audience. There was room for partisanship. There was room for sensationalism.
  12. Television and radio networks found ways to attract, reinforce and monetize polarization.
  13. In a world of hundreds or thousands of news and opinion sources, clear, consistent, emotional, effective branding became necessary for survival. Everyone is competing for clicks and eyeballs. Only the winners survive. Sources increasingly cater to the “least common denominator” of human interests.
  14. The internet and social media provide confidential cover for individuals to share their most negative thoughts without fear of being held accountable.
  15. The internet and social media avoid any filters for accuracy or legitimacy. Fake news spreads quickly.
  16. The “viral” nature of the internet and social media undercut traditional sources and views of objective, scientific, professional, mainstream legitimacy. Every fact becomes an opinion.
  17. Trust in objective journalism is undermined by the politically informed options, even as bias evaluators improve their effectiveness.
  18. The repeated claim of “fake news” undermines trust in any objective journalism.
  19. In a highly competitive media market, sensationalism wins. In-depth stories, human interest stories, good news, analysis and education lose.
  20. https://sites.bu.edu/pardeeatlas/research-and-policy/back2school/how-the-american-media-landscape-is-polarizing-the-country/#:~:text=The%20divisive%20tone%20of%20cable,in%20a%20less%20outrageous%20manner
  21. https://tomkapostasy.com/2023/07/15/one-page-why-were-polarized-klein-2020/
  22. https://tomkapostasy.com/2023/04/10/why-were-polarized-2020/

The Republican Party Moved Far Right

  1. Reagan provided “conservative” as a respectable term for a variety of political subgroups, ranging from moderate to extreme.
  2. Fundamentalist Christians, southerners and rural residents joined the party, angry about social and cultural changes.
  3. Buckley and Goldwater legitimized philosophical conservatives, including the extreme versions.
  4. Economic libertarians found a home in the party, as Austrian and supply side economics were adopted. Innovations like the Laffer Curve, monetarism and “rational expectations” were digested.
  5. “Free market” economics, descended from laissez faire, is intrinsically extreme, elevating markets as morally “good” and any opposition as “bad”. Analysis, judgment and compromise are discouraged.
  6. Economic growth is good. “Small is beautiful” is mere virtue signalling.
  7. Taxation is theft. Drown the government in a bathtub.
  8. Gun rights, taking your guns, weak on crime.
  9. Woke mob, cancel culture, fake news.
  10. Global warming is “fake news”; drill baby, drill.
  11. Communist, pink, socialist agenda, radical left.
  12. Christian nationalism; not separation of church and state.
  13. Anti-race, nationality, immigrant, religion, sexual orientation.
  14. Racial “dog whistles”, crime, security, welfare queens.
  15. Gingrich strategy of polarization, extreme positioning, framing, ends justifies the means.
  16. Patriotism, national purity, open borders, rapists and muggers, terrorists.
  17. RINO’s ejected from the party.
  18. Funding for more “conservative” candidates to challenge incumbents in primaries.
  19. Acceptance of extremist, militant, subversive, racist, conspiracist, radical supporters.

The Democratic Party Responded and Became Righteous

  1. Per Johnathan Haidt, only care and fairness matter to Democratic politicians. They disregard or criticize loyalty, authority, purity and liberty. Ouch.
  2. https://righteousmind.com/liberals-are-weirder-than-conservatives/
  3. Western culture is imperfect, maybe oppressive. Pure secularism is best.
  4. Religion is the opiate of the masses. Religious organizations are politically suspect.
  5. Affirmative action is more important than individual rights.
  6. Abortion rights are basic; no limits or compromises.
  7. Sexual orientation is personally defined aside from biological or cultural influences.
  8. Free speech is not as important as protecting feelings. Cancel culture.
  9. Environmental goals and policies disregard cost/benefit analyses.
  10. “Defund the police” because they are an illegitimate institution.
  11. Government employees, teachers, professors, media and artists leaned further left and lost the ability and interest to transmit neutral, broadly held social values.
  12. Extreme positions on free speech, assembly, press, religion, human rights and globalism.
  13. Oppressed group interests are primary. Not equal opportunity, safety net, fair taxes.
  14. Complete individual choice in consumption, production, expression, and relations.
  15. Opposition to school vouchers as an inherently unfair threat to public education.
  16. Reparations for historical injustices.
  17. Strictly global solutions without respect for national interests.
  18. Global warming is an immediate threat to the survival of humanity.
  19. Disregard of the “deplorables”.
  20. Loyalty oaths to institutional values.
  21. Virtue signaling as an art form.
  22. Postmodernist elevation of “powerful oppressors” as the only framework.
  23. Pure, certain support of John Rawls’ theory of justice, economic redistribution.
  24. Library rights to all books and programs for all ages.
  25. Superiority of abstract, global principles versus local interests.
  26. Individual creative expression as the supreme value; and tolerance; except for some views!
  27. Superiority of coastal culture, economics and politics versus sunbelt or “flyover country”.
  28. Protection of upper middle-class housing, education, safety, travel, professional, tax, networking, investment, trust, and administrative interests.
  29. Welcoming socialists, globalists, and intolerant interest groups in the party.
  30. The centrist pragmatism of FDR, Truman, Kennedy, LBJ, Clinton and Obama are dominated by the “far left” in the Democratic Party at the national level today. Partly by party programs and presidential positions (Biden), but mostly by “safe seat” politicians and the university, media and cultural influencers and thought leaders.
  31. These extreme left positions serve some Democratic politicians, their Republican opponents, and the globally dominant metro areas.
  32. Even though a majority of Democrats and Democratic leaning independents don’t support these “far left” positions or the caricatures wisely promoted by Republicans, the support by some Democrats and clever Republicans helps to position the Democratic party as much further left in the public mind. This reinforces the idea of a single ideological dimension for all issues and polarized yes/no, right/wrong. good/evil, win/loss positions by both parties.
  33. “The Squad” of far-left congresswomen is a convenient foil for the Republicans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squad_(U.S._Congress)
  34. The lack of highly effective Democratic national leadership for 50 years has encouraged leftward leaning Gen X, millennials and Gen Z to adopt further left positions because the center-left version is apparently ineffective..

Summary

  1. A single ideological “left versus right” politics frame emerged after 1964.
  2. In 1995 Gingrich demonstrated that polarization is effective and good for incumbent politicians.
  3. Polarization is a self-reinforcing process. Consider the Irish Troubles or the Middle East.
  4. Politics, media and society also interact to grow polarization.
  5. Religion and identity have merged with politics, making it more ideological and polarized.
  6. The historical countervailing forces of the mainstream media, self-interested political parties, regional elites, the responsibility of noblesse oblige, business elites, religious elites, intellectuals, thought leaders, university presidents, military leaders, state leaders, global leaders, local politicians, civic group leaders, teachers’ unions, League of Women Voters, ABA and scouts have not found their moderating voice in the current media environment.
  7. The media facilitates polarization for profit.
  8. The Republican party moved right and then further right.
  9. The Democratic party “occupied the center” with Clinton and Obama, but this did not satisfy its further left supporters, and it convinced many Republicans that all Democrats are really “radical socialists”. The party has not found a new framework to effectively compete with Trump’s hybrid conservative/populist frame and policies.
  10. A wide variety of groups have attempted to reframe the center as a good political place to live. None have yet succeeded. Perhaps the Carmel civility project will win. https://www.projectcivility.com/

Reasons for Hope

https://www.projectcivility.com/

Home
We Have More in Common Than You Think
Words for Who We Are in Common
Index of 100 Good News Posts

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Better_Angels_of_Our_Nature

Do You Believe in Magic? “No Labels” Proposes a Centrist Third Party
The Road to Character – 2015
The Soul of America – Jon Meachem (2018)

https://www.jimmycartertribute.org/index.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_optimism

https://www.amazon.com/The-Rational-Optimist-audiobook/dp/B003MY7RGG/?encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_w=lrR8k&content-id=amzn1.sym.a7785aa2-ac28-4769-b3eb-cff7b9738627&pf_rd_p=a7785aa2-ac28-4769-b3eb-cff7b9738627&pf_rd_r=140-0488079-4728935&pd_rd_wg=wdYs0&pd_rd_r=daf5c4ba-0e70-4878-9189-99eec5a73f79&ref=aufs_ap_sc_dsk

Facing Our Political Situation: How Do You Solve a Problem Like Maria?
Dream the Impossible Dream

Palantir/Alexander Karp Speak

tomkapostasyLeave a comment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palantir_Technologies

Palantir was founded in 2003. It has 4,000 employees and $3B of revenues using technology to make the military more effective. It is valued at more than $300B, the 30th most valuable company in the world! Yes, 100X revenues (not 8X or 25X) and $75M per employee (not $3M-10M). The founder, Alexander Karp, has written a book about what’s wrong with the US and what to do about it, in his spare time. The book jacket says he earned his doctorate in “social theory” from Goethe University in Frankfurt.

The 218-page book is rambling, with an extra 66 note pages. The bottom line is that everyone should be like the author, a hard charging owner engineer, focused on technical results AND deeply interested in the social, political and economic success of the nation. Hence, it crosses political boundaries!!!! A majority of the book castigates “the left”. About a quarter criticizes the shallow market right. However, the author raises great questions about what is required for success by the US that should not be discounted by either side of the political spectrum, IMO.

On specific policy questions, the author wants freedom for his firm to grow and succeed. Define some guardrails for AI. Don’t worry about personal freedom versus facial recognition. Invest in science. Prioritize science and technology. Honor leaders and leadership. Support the founder and ownership culture. Value science above finance and consulting. Adopt hard power, hawkish, deterrence foreign policies. Prioritize economic growth. Embrace best business practices. Validate rational trade-offs.

Crush “The Left”, It is Destroying Civilization

Karp claims that the “vampire squid” left is:

  1. Anti-nation, post-nation, completely, irrevocably, unapologetically.
  2. Without ideals, goals or ends.
  3. Skeptical, opposing any beliefs, deconstructing all.
  4. Opposing any national, community or political identity!
  5. Uninterested in defining “the good life”.
  6. Opposing the use of technology in support of the goals of the state or society.
  7. Opposing the legitimization of the state via economic growth.
  8. Uninterested in using the capabilities of technology for key industries.
  9. Promoting neutral, rudderless values in the nation’s elites.
  10. Prioritizing “woke” AI controls.
  11. Restricting free speech.
  12. Complacent about international threats.
  13. Seduced by the lure of global peace, values and organizations.
  14. Overly idealistic, unable to consider pragmatic trade-offs.
  15. Unwilling to hold allies accountable.
  16. Enamored with the role of trade alone in preventing national disputes.
  17. Lost in the controlling ideology of “the oppressor vs. oppressed”.
  18. Bereft of core values.
  19. Vindictive, punishing opponents.
  20. Unwisely emphasizing the pure moral character and actions of public office holders.
  21. Ignorant of the role of culture in managing society.
  22. Prioritizing individual rights at the expense of community.
  23. Anti-Western culture and civilization.
  24. Anti-community, of any kind.
  25. Anti-shared, objective values or morality, especially by society’s elites.
  26. Universalist, idealist, cosmopolitan opposed to practical and local values.
  27. Anti-religious.
  28. Unworried that the “separation of church and state” undermines belief.
  29. Promoting tolerance and pluralism in order to undermine any objective truth.
  30. Highlighting legal compliance and individual rights at the expense of “the good” and true justice.
  31. Defining a realm of acceptable “liberal” values and prohibiting other values.
  32. Opposing any benefits from historical civilizations.
  33. Mostly interested in reviewing the oppressive roles of colonial empires.
  34. Uninterested in objective physical or moral truths.
  35. Uninterested in problem solving.
  36. Certain of its moral superiority versus political and class opponents.
  37. Opposed to conventional, objective, scientific knowledge.
  38. OK with a “thin” moral world of market efficiency and legal freedoms.
  39. Mostly interested in “performative discourse” instead of critical thinking.
  40. Committed to a martyr’s idealism in political performance.
  41. Opposed to recognizing the key role of great leaders.
  42. Uninterested in the moral dimension of life.
  43. Actively opposed to the moral and practical advances of Western Civilization.
  44. Ambivalent regarding any objective notion of objective truth or beauty.
  45. Opposed to the “great man” concept of history, replacing it with social pressures alone.
  46. Committed to the self-evident progress of man through science, alone.

The extreme claims are mostly self-refuted by any neutral reader. Karp inappropriately commingles postmodernism, classical liberalism, liberal institutions, interest groups, the Democratic Party and its supporters. It is unclear whether he is an advocate employing the strawman technique or really doesn’t understand the differences between the many groups in the leftist coalition. He generally defines the most extreme, exaggerated, indefensible examples for criticism. He ignores the differences between philosophers and real people. He does quite a bit of name calling. He portrays his opponents as simpletons, unaware of tradeoffs. He generalizes leftists as pure feeling, intuitive beings rather than mixed constructive thinkers. He fails to recognize any of Jonathan Haidt’s morality flavors as being essentially important to left and right.

The Right is Not Blameless

  1. The market pays finance/consulting folks more than engineers.
  2. In the end, idealism is more important than pragmatism!
  3. The neoliberal philosophy that elevates the market above religion is clearly wrong.
  4. The pure market, pragmatic philosophy undermines any ultimate ends.
  5. The commercial world is uninterested in “the good life”.
  6. Criticism of “the state” undermines its valid role and what technology can do.
  7. The state must be perceived as legitimate. An extreme distribution of wealth and income must be addressed in the political process.
  8. A meritocratic, secular world alone cannot generate consensus values.
  9. Growing international trade alone is not enough to avoid conflicts.
  10. A commercial society does not require its managerial elites to engage in the political process.
  11. The “productization” of life, the rise of instrumental logic, places humanity at risk and threatens any sense of cultural community or values.
  12. The default hierarchical structure of large bureaucratic organizations is inherently less efficient and effective in the long run.
  13. The most valuable, effective employees require freedom from rules and obedience.
  14. Key government roles are valuable and should be compensated accordingly.
  15. Inclusivity is required for firm effectiveness.
  16. Firms are artificial entities. Like citizens, they should be obligated to support the nation.

Real Problems/Challenges/Opportunities

  1. As a nation, we don’t have generally agreed upon priorities, values, and ideals.
  2. Since we don’t have priorities, we don’t effectively apply our rich resources as a nation.
  3. We don’t have a consensus that other values trump market values.
  4. We don’t appreciate the critical role of the nation. We have lost our patriotism.
  5. We don’t have a dream, story, history, myth, image of a great nation. Without some constructive narrative we won’t have a civilization.
  6. Lacking a national identity, we are rootless, anxious, listless, worried, adrift.
  7. Nationalism is replaced by globalism or secularism as an organizing structure.
  8. In post-Vietnam, Watergate, 1960’s world, skepticism is the default world view, undercutting the development, acquisition, promotion or application of any serious moral, social, cultural, religious or political belief.
  9. Skepticism is a self-reinforcing worldview. The lack of “belief” undermines interpersonal trust, institutions, community, politics and patriotism.
  10. Skepticism undermines belief in objective moral, physical and aesthetic truths. A relativist, subjective philosophy elevates tolerance, social distance, safety, and conflict avoidance as leading social values.
  11. The neo-liberal market philosophy has resulted in economic efficiency, market values and instrumental logic quietly dominating moral, social, cultural, religious and political views for many. Results matter but can be overdone.
  12. Criticism of government roles and performance has undermined the core expectation and demand that government deliver results, respond to citizens and operate effectively and efficiently. Government and science are not enemies. Government and industry are not enemies.
  13. We observe the positive results that can be delivered by entrepreneurial, founder, owner, responsible organizations but have not found solid ways to ensure that this approach impacts all industries, especially the government sector. Results matter but can be overdone.
  14. The neoliberal “free market” political philosophy of Milton Friedman justifies corporations to ignore the nation or community as a valid stakeholder. It encourages corporations to treat all decisions as opportunities to maximize economic returns, undermining other valid political, social and moral responsibilities. Results matter but can be overdone.
  15. Effective organizations relentlessly focus on final results, structuring their plans, systems, and resources with reinforcing feedback loops and expectations. Less effective organizations and industries waste resources. Global or local market competition, anti-trust regulation, tax structures, industrial policy, education, effectiveness audits, best practices sharing, outsourcing, benchmarking, etc. can be used to improve. Results matter but can be overdone.
  16. All industries contribute to a healthy economy and society. None should be allowed to be ineffective.
  17. Lacking a national culture, mass media, effective political parties, or shared religious views, the socialization of students and young adults is critical. Education matters. In a meritocracy, the role of suburban high schools and leading universities is essential.
  18. Solid and exceptional talents and leadership matter to organizations and nations. Our political systems mostly fail to use these capabilities. We apply idealistic “oughts” to our political processes rather than reasonable incentives for participation and results.
  19. We apply unrealistic ideals to political candidates instead of evaluating their effectiveness. This attracts “talking heads” and repels effective candidates. We should judge politicians as we judge other professionals, managers and leaders. Politics and governing are messy businesses, like sales, purchasing, negotiations, mergers and acquisitions in business. We need to set proper expectations and ignore how the sausage is made.
  20. Cultural and social expectations matter. They should not be set by politicians. Historically, social, economic, intellectual and leadership elites informally shaped, refined and enforced these commonly held views. In our radically individualistic culture, we have not found an effective replacement for the old approaches.
  21. In national and international politics, we need to evaluate both hard and soft power approaches. We need to consider ideals and pragmatic factors. Trade-offs are often required.
  22. Leadership matters. In a complex world, firm and political leaders require great skills to be effective.

Karp’s Solutions

  1. A stronger central government to make better choices.
  2. Industrial policies and government funding.
  3. Overhaul political incentive systems to get better candidates.
  4. Revise laws to align corporations with national priorities.
  5. Provide incentives to better use the founder/ownership model for firms.
  6. Fund scientific research.
  7. Defeat the “far left” views and policies of “progressive”, new left, postmodernist Democrats.
  8. Elevate the nation as the primary social/community vehicle for society.
  9. Promote the Teddy Roosevelt “man in the arena” view of society, politics, institutions and leadership.
  10. Promote the Teddy Roosevelt “speak softly and carry a big stick” view of international relations. Increase hard power, especially for technological areas.
  11. Use the resources of science, technology, IT and business to improve society.

Summary

Karp argues that “the technological republic” can address the problems he has identified. His primary solutions are technocratic ones. I think that the “neutral” problems he has identified are important. I don’t think his “solutions” really fix them. The solutions are mainly focused on using firms and talents like his in supporting the government’s military capabilities.

Greater nationalism is one approach to the core problems, but strong nationalism has a mixed history and may not be a widely supported solution in the modern or postmodern world. Individualism is too strong. Religious and political views are diverse. Racial, ethnic, regional and class groups are diverse.

The Worst Dealer, Ever!

tomkapostasy1 Comment

The Wrong Bottom Line

Trump focuses only on win/lose. If the US earns $1 trillion from trade and the rest of the world (ROW) earns $1.2 trillion, he sees this as a $200 billion loss. The ROW is winning, taking advantage of the USA and its unenlightened deal makers. If the US earns $500 billion from trade and the ROW earns only $400 billion then we are winning by $100 billion. Trump sees the second scenario as far superior to the first. Relative winnings (win/lose) are the bottom line rather than actual winnings (win/win). This is a fundamental flaw.

The Wrong Measure

Trump only sees costs; he doesn’t consider benefits. Net benefits, benefits minus costs is the right measure.

The Wrong Timeframe

Trump only looks at the short-run. He ignores the long-run. He believes that he can always renegotiate any situation.

International Relations is Complicated

Trump only sees dollar signs. The trade balance can be measured. It is positive or negative. The cost of defense can be measured. Either we pay or others pay. We trade goods and services. Defense/security benefits matter. We care about immigration, crime, taxes, personal security, climate, health, economic development, investments, rule of law, intellectual property, labor, the environment, etc. Other countries care about all of these dimensions. We must too.

International Relations is Irrational

Citizens have an irrational commitment to their nations. They are willing to die for them. Nations have sovereignty. Each has certain minimal rights. Politicians respond to these irrational beliefs. Ignoring this reality is irrational, even though it is very frustrating.

Alliances are Cheaper than Empires

The US learned from European, Japanese and American experiences. Empires are very costly to establish and maintain. Nations can be enticed into becoming reliable allies at a fraction of the cost. They are rationally willing to evaluate costs and benefits, risks and rewards, short-term and long-term, labor and capital, sovereignty and influence, security and opportunity. Trump is right to negotiate, but wrong to discount this basic approach.

Global Agencies are Cheaper than Individual Deals

The US has greatly benefited from the post-1945 system of global governance, finance, economic development, health and trade. Global deals designed by the global leaders provide a framework for low-cost transactions. Trump believes that the strongest nations can extract even more net value through individual deals. Too many countries. Too much complexity to negotiate all of these topics effectively.

Single Deal or Repeated Deals?

Trump comes from the real estate world where each deal is “one off”. International relations and trade are repeated deals. The optimal strategy is different when the “tit for tat” strategy can be used. Firms and nations will punish any bully, even at a significant cost to themselves. The strongest players must consider the weaker players’ strategies. When firms or nations find that they cannot trust someone the total costs go up significantly.

Playing Chicken

There are many strategies in the game of chicken. The strongest player does not automatically win. Bluffing matters. Posturing matters. Resources matter. The ability to endure losses and pain matter. Allies matter. Insurance matters. Flexible resources matter. Capacity matters. Creativity matters. Credibility matters. Non-negotiable factors matter. Trump seems to confuse simple economic might with certain winning.

Comparative Advantage

Trump does not understand David Ricardo’s theory of comparative advantage from 200 years ago. You can be better than someone else in everything, at least in theory. You cannot have a comparative advantage in every production process. Between any two individuals, firms, states or nations, there will be differences in relative productivity. This is the basis for trade and specialization. The U.S. cannot be better in every industry. We can be relatively better in many industries, but not in all. As our incomes and standard of living increase, we will be relatively less competitive in those activities that can use lower cost labor. This is an unavoidable fact. We can choose to subsidize low skilled manufacturing employment, but we are fighting against very strong market forces.

Dealmaking Strategy

Trump focuses on simple short-term one-time win/lose. The best negotiators know that the greatest value comes from “growing the pie” in the long-run (win/win). They don’t assume a fixed-sum game. They cooperate to grow the pie, perhaps at the expense of suppliers, competitors, labor, investors or customers. They exploit comparative advantages to lower overall costs, lower risks and increase benefits. They share or signal their relative priorities. They fulfill their commitments. They create incentives for sustained cooperation. They cooperate to build market power. They manage customer expectations. They under promise and over deliver. They manage the government. They build shared cultural expectations and priorities. They build personal relationships. They manage large risks. They manage and coordinate supply chains. Modern business is complex. The real winners understand and deal accordingly.

Summary

Trump’s dealmaking approach fails on every critical dimension. It is a losing approach for almost all firms and for all countries. His supporters need to understand that he cannot win with his approach and force him to change. His opponents need to highlight these failures. The United States has too much at risk from Trump’s losing strategies.

Trump in a Box

tomkapostasy4 Comments

We’re still dealing with him. What box does he fit in?

Showman

Circus, PT Barnum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There%27s_a_sucker_born_every_minute

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Time_Wrestling_(Detroit)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WWE

Schemer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Madoff

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-level_marketing

Top Auto Dealership And Car Sales Movies

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glengarry_Glen_Ross_(film)

Cult Preacher

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Bakker

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tammy_Faye_Messner

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_Graham

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Falwell

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Robertson

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Swaggart

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elmer_Gantry_(film)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Koresh

Global Populist

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Franco

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benito_Mussolini

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josip_Broz_Tito

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Per%C3%B3n

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Orb%C3%A1n

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recep_Tayyip_Erdo%C4%9Fan

American Populist

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Jackson

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Jennings_Bryan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Coughlin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huey_Long

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_McCarthy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Wallace

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Perot

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Buchanan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

Summary

Not a pretty picture. Trump is all about spin and sophistry. Plato, Huxley, Orwell and Eisenhower warned us. We have failed to invest in the education, regulation and leadership required for our complex civilization. Let’s get going.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophist_(dialogue)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_New_World

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Orwell

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwight_D._Eisenhower%27s_farewell_address

Trump Index

tomkapostasy5 Comments

https://kids.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/donald-trump

The Trade War is Just Another Distraction
The Worst Dealer, Ever!
Trump in a Box
We Always Have a Choice
Don’t Be a Political Victim (Right)
Don’t Be a Political Victim (Left)
Not a Trump Election Mandate
Trump: The Anti-Conservative
Not Your Father’s Oldsmobile: Trump
Trump’s Tiny Tent: Foreign Policy
Trump’s International Policy
Biden versus Trump Economies
Trump Presidency Accomplishments
Hey Joe, Hey Joe … Reverse the Trump Tariffs
The US is a Very Low Trade Nation
Who Will Defend Democracy?
The New American Right, Daniel Bell, 1955
Serve the American People
The Janesville Plan: Economic Opportunity for All
The US Economy is Already Great: No Tariffs Required
Politics Ain’t Beanbag: Diagnosing the 2024 Presidential Election
The Paradox of Great Wealth in a Democracy
R-E-S-P-E-C-T
R-E-S-P-E-C-T-2
Mostly Good News Since the 2008 Great Recession
Framing What Matters Most in America: 2023
Why We’re Polarized 2020
One Page: Why We’re Polarized – Klein (2020)

Who Will Defend Democracy?

tomkapostasy3 Comments

Many sources claim that President Trump threatens democracy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/01/28/trump-first-week-liberalism-democracy/

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/trump-assault-american-democracy

https://odi.org/en/insights/can-american-democracy-withstand-trump/

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/20/trump-threat-democracy-precedents

https://zeteo.com/p/this-week-in-democracy-week-2-chaos-trump

https://www.vox.com/on-the-right-newsletter/397120/trump-federal-spending-grant-pause-cutoff-democracy

‘https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5111241-murphy-trump-executive-actions-democracy/

‘https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/30/briefing/trump-democracy-2024-election.html

https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2024/11/trump-authoritarian-strongman-govern-signs?lang=en

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5yveml59jlo

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/12/18/majority-americans-oppose-trumps-proposals-test-democracys-limits/

Some of the commentary is merely “sour grapes” after losing the election. For some articles, you can “consider the source” and disregard them. However, it is very clear, IMHO that President Trump, this time, is going to fulfill his election promises, including implementing the whole Project 2025 agenda, retribution on his “enemies”, and a complete disregard for legal and political “checks and balances”. He views the election as a mandate and believes he has the right to implement all of his policies as if he won victory in a “winner takes all” parliamentary system. President Trump does not support our historical system of government that greatly limits the impact of any one actor, even one who earned just 49.8% of the votes and just 31.6% of eligible voters. Non-voters won the race with a 36.6% share. Vice president Harris came in third with 30.7%.

https://www.cookpolitical.com/vote-tracker/2024/electoral-college

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-11-15/how-many-people-didnt-vote-in-the-2024-election

Federal Government Institutions

Military generals, career civil service, FBI, DOJ, inspector generals, independent agencies. These agencies have a distinguished track record of fighting for their independent roles. The first month indicates that Trump understands they are a formidable opponent to be undermined.

Federal Judiciary

Lawyers belong to a proud and left-leaning profession. Federal judges belong to a two-century legacy of judicial independence. Most “conservative” judges use the originalist theory to limit the application of laws that restrict the free market or traditional cultural actions. Many of President Trump’s initiatives fall outside of these two areas. Federal judges may use their powers to retain the commonsense version of existing laws and reinforce the principle of maintaining precedents.

Supreme Court

https://www.axios.com/2019/06/01/supreme-court-justices-ideology

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/06/02/supreme-court-justice-math-00152188

Brett Cavanaugh is less conservative than he is perceived to be. Supreme Court justices treasure their independence. Chief Justice John Roberts is relatively neutral and strongly supports the independence of the court and his legacy.

Congress

‘https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/house/3220665/house-republicans-kept-seats-biden-districts/

https://ballotpedia.org/U.S._House_districts_represented_by_a_Republican_in_2024_and_won_by_Joe_Biden_in_2020

There are two dozen congressional seats held by Republicans in districts where they have a real chance of facing a competitive Democratic opponent. These individuals face strong pressures from Trump, national, state and local Republicans to fully support the president on all matters. They can have their funding cut off, lose congressional assignments and lose party staff support, but they don’t have to worry much about being “primaried” from the right.

Senate

Louisiana senator Bill Cassidy, Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski and Maine senator Susan Collins voted to impeach Trump. The other 4 Republican senators who did so are no longer in the Senate (Romney, Sasse, Burr and Toomey). Pennsylvania senator Dave McCormack and Wisconsin senator Ron Johnson join Collins as representing states with mixed party senators. In addition to Murkowski, 5 senators have a history of bipartisan activities: John Cornyn (TX), Jerry Moran (KS), Todd Young (IN), (the ageless) Chuck Grassley (IA), and Shelley Capito (WV). That makes 10 Republican senators who are more likely to consider the good of the country than their own or their party’s if “push comes to shove” on preserving our democracy. Mitch McConnell would never undermine the power of the Republican Party that he built over 4 decades, but he will not tolerate foolishness from President Trump. The U.S. Senate also has a long tradition of independence from the other branches of government. Each senator sees themselves as a base of power, representing their state, their party and the nation. Senators face political pressure to conform to their party and their party’s President, but they face elections only every 6 years and have a long history of personal support in their states.

.https://mccourt.georgetown.edu/news/bipartisan-index-2023-118th-congress/

https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-trial-live-updates/2021/02/15/967878039/7-gop-senators-voted-to-convict-trump-only-1-faces-voters-next-year

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_senators

A Single Congressional Voice

Sometimes a speech, a question, an op-ed, a campaign slogan, a court brief, a story, an analogy can change the frame of reference for public opinion. When Joe McCarthy was asked “Have you no sense of decency?” he was finished.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/joseph-mccarthy-meets-his-match

Sovereign Nations

Canada, Mexico and the EU are not going to accept Trump’s unilateral threats. They will respond strategically, irrationally, emotionally, patriotically, politically, even at a net economic cost to their people in order to protect their sovereignty. This will provide political pressure on Trump from his domestic supporters.

Big Business

American business has done very well for the last 75 years with free trade, globalization, international institutions and American dominance through alliances. Trump’s promise of lower taxes and regulation and threats of intervention for non-supporters will lead many to accept his approach, but some corporations and industries will be devastated by his trade wars. These corporations and others may see that the threat to the whole system is too large to ignore.

Governors

5 of 27 Republican governors have strong reasons to oppose any overreach by President Trump. Brian Kemp (GA), Kelly Ayotte (NH), Mike DeWine (OH), Phil Scott (VT) and Glenn Youngkin (VA). 7 of the 23 Democratic governors have national aspirations and will use their powers to aggressively thwart anti-democratic measures. Gavin Newsom (CA), Jared Polis (CO), Andy Beshear (KY), Wes Moore (MD), Gretchen Whitmer (MI), Kathy Hochul (NY), and Josh Shapiro (PA).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_governors

Mainstream and Independent Media

Trump was good for business in his first term. He will be great for business in his second term. Journalists and media firms have lost their interest in providing “balanced” coverage and stretching to find a way to interpret Trump policies, actions and statements within traditional frameworks. They are more willing to directly and repeatedly say that he is lying, that his actions break the law and norms, that his actions are inconsistent with American history. They more quickly fact check and place his actions within the context of US and global history. They challenge his wording and stories. They attempt to prioritize the news of the day and not become distracted by all of his noise.

Churches

Evangelical Christians have supported President Trump because he has delivered on his promise to appoint judges who oppose abortion and support socially conservative positions. They have rationalized that his imperfect personal character is a case of God using him for good purposes. Younger and idealistic people are leaving these churches because of this strange alliance. Some leaders now speak out against Trump. Trump has “punted” on national abortion policies, arguing that they should be resolved in each state. Actions which threaten historical American norms on politics may be “the straw which breaks the camel’s back”. Liberal churches have chosen to stay out of national politics for many decades. Trump’s cold-hearted approach to issues may lead them to oppose him from the pulpit. Protestant churches generally agree to “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”, but the generally unchallenged German Nazi situation remains as a stain on their conscience. Churches are much less influential than they once were, but certain transgressions may spring them into action.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-christians-evangelicals-refugees-immigration-migrants-2021716

https://nationalcouncilofchurches.us/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barmen_Declaration

The American People

Although we are polarized politically, there is a large middle one-third of Americans that consider themselves “independent”. They may lean left or right, but they pride themselves on being pragmatic and not buying into the unfounded claims of politicians on either side. The American people, even most diehard Republicans, will not accept actions that undermine our government or society. Trump is expendable. There is a Republican vice president who can take his place, as necessary.

Summary

President Trump’s first 2 weeks indicate that he will test the limits of our democracy. He strongly believes that his personal views are right, and that the country has provided him with a mandate to implement them quickly and permanently. Our political system provides the president with well-defined limited powers. He will “cross the line”. There are a dozen institutions that can and will push back.