Parts, Structures, Systems and Outcomes

This is another post that's taken, even required, some thought and our focus is on the fundamental question we left on the table at the end of the last post (Reflections & Remembrances: Memorial Day, D-Day, Today). What lessons can we take from the sacrifices of the veterans and how can we bring it into our lives, private and public ? People join the service for many reasons but a major one is in service of our core ideals: government of, by and for the people. Without exception that we know of veterans endure what they endure for the sake of their brothers, and now, sisters. Major Dick Winter, the real life hero of Band of Brothers, tells the story that he wasn't a hero himself but he served with a company of them. They all say the real heroes are the ones left behind. A Hero is someone who sacrifices themselves, in whatever form, for the betterment of us all. Ultimately they are motivated by COMPASSION, the ability to see the other as themselves. We argued that for those of us not there the best we can imagine is from movies and TV but in some ways an even better source are the works of the artists who were there, as this drawing from the Navy's Combat Art Collection shows. If that's not the most profound love of one's fellow man on the faces of these Marines, watching their fallen comrade to see if the plasma will save him, we have no clue as to human nature.

Hero's Virtues and Ordinary Lives

One of my favorite artists is Norman Rockwell, even if it's customary to sneer at him more often than not these days, because of the bedrock virtues of ordinary life. A favorite Rockwell painting (to the best of my recollection) is the umpire glowering down at the tiny batter arguing with him about a call, "You're OUT ! Now PLAY BALL !!". Unfortunately we couldn't find that one and have substituted another that still speaks to the same message. I'm sure we've all been there, done that or seen it. But, especially when Rockwell drew them the chances that the umps had in fact been veterans of one sort or another were pretty good, in fact so good as to be likely. My dad flew C-47s in combat, my math teacher P-51s and the science teacher was a ball turret gunner on a B-17 while both another teacher and a family friend had lost arms as infantrymen. Some of the prices were daily reminders for us then. Yet here is the man, who may have been to hell and back, arguing - if not calmly then civilly - about a call according the book of rules everybody had agreed to play by. Rami Khouri, the editor of the Beirut Daily Star lived in this country and become a baseball nut. He tells the story during a Rose interview about one of the reasons he loves the game. It's because it didn't matter who you were, the rules were the rules and no matter who your father was you were out if the ump said so. That respect for playing by the rules of the game and the voluntary support of a civil society is at the root of our society. In fact we argue, and have argued (Peace, Stability and Prosperity: the Nature of Good Government), that it is the root of the long-term stability and success of all prosperous societies.

Welcome to Notre Dame

Which brings us to our core question - how do we take the willingness to serve others into our normal lives and especially the public sphere ? Slighly over a month ago Pres. Obama gave the commencement address at Notre Dame. The invitation and actual event provoked outrage, debate and critiscism among a wide range of commentators. We can applaud his courage for stepping into the lion's den, but then that's his job just as on another day it was the job of the Rangers to go up the cliffs of Pont du Hoc. Better that we applaud the courage of Notre Dame for inviting him, even though they clearly had disagreements. Most of the commentariat recognized a (typical ?) great speech but didn't pay much attention to the substance of the arguments. As for the demonstrators and objectors, well....we suspect they are so trapped in their own viewpoints that the issue didn't even come up. Shall we consider what he actually said ?

Every one of you should be proud of what you have achieved at this institution. One hundred and sixty three classes of Notre Dame graduates have sat where you are today. Some were here during years that simply rolled into the next without much notice or fanfare - periods of relative peace and prosperity that required little by way of sacrifice or struggle. You, however, are not getting off that easy. Your class has come of age at a moment of great consequence for our nation and the world - a rare inflection point in history where the size and scope of the challenges before us require that we remake our world to renew its promise; that we align our deepest values and commitments to the demands of a new age. It is a privilege and a responsibility afforded to few generations - and a task that you are now called to fulfill.This is the generation that must find a path back to prosperity and decide how we respond to a global economy that left millions behind even before this crisis hit - an economy where greed and short-term thinking were too often rewarded at the expense of fairness, and diligence, and an honest day's work.... we must find a way to reconcile our ever-shrinking world with its ever-growing diversity - diversity of thought, of culture, and of belief. In short, we must find a way to live together as one human family.

Unfortunately, finding that common ground - recognizing that our fates are tied up, as Dr. King said, in a "single garment of destiny" - is not easy. Part of the problem, of course, lies in the imperfections of man - our selfishness, our pride, our stubbornness, our acquisitiveness, our insecurities, our egos; all the cruelties large and small that those of us in the Christian tradition understand to be rooted in original sin. We too often seek advantage over others. We cling to outworn prejudice and fear those who are unfamiliar. Too many of us view life only through the lens of immediate self-interest and crass materialism; in which the world is necessarily a zero-sum game. The strong too often dominate the weak, and too many of those with wealth and with power find all manner of justification for their own privilege in the face of poverty and injustice. And so, for all our technology and scientific advances, we see around the globe violence and want and strife that would seem sadly familiar to those in ancient times.

I said a prayer that night that I might extend the same presumption of good faith to others that the doctor had extended to me. Because when we do that - when we open our hearts and our minds to those who may not think like we do or believe what we do - that's when we discover at least the possibility of common ground. That's when we begin to say, "Maybe we won't agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this is a heart-wrenching decision for any woman to make, with both moral and spiritual dimensions. So let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term. Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women." Understand - I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away. No matter how much we may want to fudge it - indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory - the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable. Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction. But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature. Open hearts. Open minds. Fair-minded words.

Freedom Is Not Free

Two small hopes and a big one though. I hope it's more than a sentiment, or just a sentiment. We're all "moved", or at least give lip service to their sacrifices. I think it's because we all recognize it's for us all and not self-serving. The same way we applaud the righteous who risked their lives to stand for decency and help the Jews during the Holocaust. They act for the best that is in us.
 
My big hope is that we can all learn, in some small way, to learn that sacrifice for the other is not limited just to war but that we each can and do do it in small and large ways in every day of our lives.
 
And contrawise when we act out of narrow interests, hate or anger we do so for the worst of us. Especially when it's not just in the heat of the moment but a sustained or deliberate act of damage.

As We Speak: the Posturing Inquisition

Last fall, literally, Western Civilization almost collapsed. Two men were primarily responsible for saving it - Hank Paulsen and Ben Bernanke. If they had failed to arrest the collapse of the credit markets, restore order and get things moving again our chances of having a Great Depression again were near certainty. Given the scope and magnitudes of the potential breakdowns the downsides were so much worse that the GD might have looked like a walk in the park. Yet despite being under enormous pressures 24 X 7, dealing with unprecendented events that nobody had faced in years, if ever, they managed to right the ship and save us all from disaster. And their rewards have been an almost un-ending stream of critiscisms from all points of the compass.

There behavior in the crisis was truly heroic. There is nothing so difficult as keeping you head in a crisis, especially when everyone around you is loosing theirs. To do it day after day under a drumbeat of one damm thing after another is extraordinary. To do when the answers aren't clear yet you must remain calm, collected and decisive is more extraordinary. As Gen. Peter Pace pointed out in his commencement address to the cadets of VMI it often takes more moral courage to support an unpopular position, let alone carry it, in the meeting room than it does to command in combat. It's all to easy to give in to the common wisdom, even when you know it'll lead to disaster.

To conduct yourself in such a manner subject to so much critiscism is more difficult yet. When that critisicsm is both ignorant and largely motivated by narrow self-interest the challenges are beyond my imagination. Yet day after day during the crisis, and as I write, these guys were civil, calm, intelligent and right.

As the President pointed out at Notre Dame, and many times before and since, we face challenging and difficult times that call for new solutions. They do NOT call for the continued search for partisan advantage. To act in that way, seeking a scapegoat to sacrifice to the political gods, is a violation of everything that we should have learned from the veterans.

In my book we don't deserve such public servants, do everything we can to drive them away, and we can only wonder that they do serve. Truly heroic in every sense of the word IOHO !

Continue reading "Frontline Lessons Brought Home: Others, Selfs and Manners" »

Posted by dblwyo at 07:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Obviously Memorial Day was Memorial Day and we've passed it by without comment but with a lot of thought and reflection. The weekend after was the 65th Anniversary of D-Day in Normandy but we let that one slide as well. Now that was partly due to poor discipline or lack of energy, technical problems (we've been offair for over a week with a fried DSL modem) but mostly it was caused by a pause for reflection. That reflection was a search for something to share and say beyond the obvious or trite - not that our gratitudes shouldn't be expressed and certainly not that they are not beyond well deserved. But others said them last year and again this - as they should for now and forever, amen - and we took our shot at last year as well (). In fact we think this composite set of oped cartoons captures things as well as anything does. BtW - on that last panel and courtesy of our friends at YouTube some of the color film from WW2 and Iwo is now being shared. Here's a vidclip of the Iwo Flag Raising for real and in color.

If you haven't been in combat, and I haven't, it's impossible to truly grasp what it means to have your life at risk that way. Let alone constantly, under strains and pressures all the time and when somebody's not shooting at you to have no sleep, poor or non-existent food, worn out clothes, to live in the mud and rain. The old joke that's not before you volunteer dig a hole in the backyard, fill it with water, go spend a few days and hire tha neighborhood maniac to take a shot at you now and again. Yet these people do it and they do it our name. Interestingly enough perhaps the best efforts to convey the chaos, fear, sudden death and general discomfort some recent Hollywood movies may capture it best (Saving Private Ryan, We Were Soldiers, Band of Brothers, others). The scene on Omaha Beech from Private Ryan is one of the best, along with the D-Day jumps from Band of Brothers. Take a minute and refresh your memory. I've been in situations where my life or well-being was at risk, and multiple times. But never multiple times a minute or over multiple days in a row. If you haven't been there it's almost impossible to imagine. To the extent it can be conveyed by re-telling the story, and remembering that these calm and quiet recountings are in the hell here are some other heroes:

• Corpman G.E. Whalen, MOH, Iwo; Tibor Rubin, concentration camp survivor and Korean infantryman
• Sgt. Hoxie, wounded and crippled Iraq veteran; James Lockhard, civilian engineer and posthumous honoree

Going in Harm's Way 

These veterans pay a terrible price, though as they all point out, not as high as the real heroes they left behind. Why do they do it ? Well for some it's an escape, for others an adenture or a chance to make something of themselves. Sometimes it's even from boredom...at least at the start. But that's really two questions - both of them deep and profound but very different. The first one is why do they sign up. And once they are in the game why do they fight ? And for whom ? Every combat veteran we've ever heard doesn't talk about love of country, high ideals or principles or anything like that. They talk about their brothers, their family in and of arms.

We Were Soldiers is about a battalion of the 7th Calvary (yes, that 7th Calvary) that made the first helicopter assault in history and was cut off, surrounded and attacked by almost two divisions of North Vietnamese regulars in the Ia Drang Valley in 1965. When the landing zone got to hot Hal Moore, the CO, closed it with the obvious risk that his battalion would suffer Custer's fate as well. What saved them was the pilots of the helicopter company who returned, under fire and in the darkness to keep bringing in food, ammo, water and take out the wounded. More specifically it was Bruce (Snake) Crandall and Ed (Too Tall) Freeman. Both of whom were, years later, eventually awarded the MOH for going far beyond and beyond the call of duty. But let's let Snake and Too Tall tell - again in the laconic, laid-back fashion of the veteran. If you want to know what it was "really" like go watch the movie.

They went, prepared to sacrifice their lives, to save their family. Greater love hath no man than a mother cat prepared to die to protect her kittens. Greater love hath no man...

And if you want a little YT on how some folks think about it...Gary Owen: the 7th at Ia Drang or the 7th: Frontier to Baghdad.

Signing Up

Like we said, there's being there and going there. Why do they go ? You can list the reasons as we've done and be as cynical as you like. And thruout history being a soldier has often been a cynical thing to be for many reasons. But still...and especially in our system people don't fight for loot or because the king said so or to ransack a city. They fight because they see it as part of their duty to the nation. Time filmed the crew of the Lincoln repeating the greatest words ever said about the purposes of the nation.

When we fought the Civil War the survival of the US was at stake but so to was the entire notion of democracy. That a government of the people, by the people and for the people could survive, work and eventually prosper.[If the Time server is malfunctioning you can either search for USS Lincoln or try this URL].

When the crew of the Lincoln goes to see the are putting themselves in harms' way for the same principles that their forefathers spent three of the bloodiest days in American history fighting for, with the issue in doubt. The Republic almost died in those three days and is a tribute to the courage, tenacity and dedication of all our veterans that we can watch our Memorial Day picnics. If you haven't read Lincoln's Gettysburg Address recently we urge you to; years ago we gave the Memorial Day recital in a role as CO of the local NJROTC unit (since Dad was a decorated veteran himself he set it up thru the Legion). One of my great regrets in life is that then I didn't know what I was saying.

I and Thou: Love of the Other

One of the side-benefits of stopping to reflect on the real meaning of our veterans sacrifices was a chance to re-review Joseph Campbell's "Power of Myth". He makes the startling, but on contemplation, proundly true observation that when a soldier sacrifices his life for his brothers and for his country he does it because it reflects his deepest commitment to the welfare of the Other. They see the Other as Themselves, as a Thou. Bill Moyer's offers a great observation when he ads the story of an acquaintence who talks about taking the subway to work every morning and dying a little bit every day.

It's not just soldiers in war touching the deepest and most profound wellsprings of humanity. It's every one who ever acted, in small or large ways, for the betterment of someone else.  When my neighbors go out of their way to host their annual Christmas party, at serious expense and an enormous amount of work, they do it to make the neighborhood a better place. When a policeman saves a suicide at risk of his own or those firemen went back into the Towers they did it for the best that's in us.

Each and every one of us can do the same. In ways that are large or small.

It's what makes us human, makes the world a better place and let's us touch that small spark of Divinity that we each carry around with us. A spark that needs nurturing to flame up but is there, potentially, in every one.

Perhaps the best memorial to what our veterans have done for us is to do for our friends, family, neighbors, colleagues and fellow citizens the best we can for them. Not just for ourselves. And to remember what they have done and are doing.

Continue reading "Reflections & Remembrances: Memorial Day, D-Day, Today" »

Posted by dblwyo at 12:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

An existential crisis is one that threatens the existence of the entity in questions - the Hudson plane crash was that for the passengers, WW2 and the Cold War were such for the US and the world order as know and love it. By those standards the current multi-part crisii aren't quite existential but in each domain (Economic, Foreign Policy and Domestic) we are faced with disruptive threats to the structure of the system as it exists. In other words if/when/as we get thru all this the nature and structure of the US and World economies will be radically different than what's evolved over the last 3-5 decades, the world system is being re-architected as we watch and key domestic policy issues (Education, Healthcare, Energy) that have been allowed to metastasize into systemic, disruptive threats by willful neglect have all reached cusp points. As existential as we care to get. Yet, by and large, in a few weeks a lot has been done to address them. The prior three posts were wrap-up and summary assessments for each of the three and were preceded by series exploring each. With the release of the new Star Trek movie everybody and their siblings have been using it to re-visit history, the culture wars and current events. Newsweek for example gifted us with this Star Wars vs Trek poster, which is both amusing and rings true (or truish). Jon Meachem, the managing editor, was on Charlie Rose the other night and gave his impressions of Barry after the first 100 Days. [A conversation with Jon Meacham] Pretty inside baseball stuff and it misses some of the key points which are critically important. Not least of which is not just the speed, force, magnitude and scope/number of major policy initiatives being put into place, nor how well the process is being managed or even - so far - how decently they are being implemented. What Meachem and the rest of the beltway observers are missing is the processes that are being used to apply rigor, logic, experience, multiple points of view and consensus building to arrive at pragmatic, workable and implementable solutions.

Revisiting the Policy Blueprint

 This particular graphic evolved to try and compress and represent the fundamental themes we face as a nation. It's genesis begins back in 2004 and it was put together almost three years ago. The point was that these were and are the changes in philosophy, policy and values needed to meet the existential challenges we faced... and still face. If you skim back over the prior readings you'll find that each one is being tackled, being tackled with a strategic policy that meets the test of being the best thinking that has evolved over the last three decades and is, therefore, the "right" thing to do. The readings provide current updates coupled with structural graphics illustrating each area in all of the major policy areas, politics and value development. While each deserives it's own series consider two key examples - mileage standards and Healthcare. The US auto industry has fought standards for years because it's profit-dynamics favored large vehicles while it gave ground to the Japanese. What's been needed is a set of national standards that reduce consumption, decrease pollution and avoid the expense of a single company trying to invest in multiple standards from many states. This legislation was put together over several months and is a consensus among the stakeholders, especially including the manufacturers, on how to proceed collectively. Similarly the biggest momenturm for HC Reform since 1992 has been built up and, as shown by recent industry payors and other players, it too represents a coalescing consensus that's been carefully built up in the public square. As opposed to be crafted by a small team in a backroom and forced down the throats of the polity, of Congress and the stakeholders. On all these fronts we have the best chances we've had to do something reasonable and constructive we've had in two generations. If they fail it won't be because the best we can think isn't being put on the table. Nor will it be because the right steps to building political support and putting workable implementation are being put in place. It'll be because narrow interests can't help themselves or because we haven't yet come up with the right mechanisms for implementation.

Making It So: Policy From Vision to Selling It

To get a new idea from vision to implementation there are several components that have to be put in place. First is the overall Vision - what principles, values and directions are suited to the time, which direction do we need to head, how do we judge ? Next is Leadership - or character, integrity, explanations (Voice) and delivery (making it happen; approach). Finally there are the wonkish specifics - what, where, when, why and how ? Especially mechanism ! Over the course of the last two years Barry started out focused on the Vision Thing while John-boy had some old principles lying around but was mainly focused on specific policies. As the election evolved Barry got more and more into details and strategies (his acceptence speech, his victory speech, his inaugural and every subsequent major policy speech could almost be a single book as they are consistent from beginning to end). Meanwhile JB retreted more and more to vituperative specifics based on old philosophies and shibboleths that were and are out-dated. Though he redeemd himself with a noble and public-spirited concession speech, as fine as anyone could make. His party on the other hand is turning out to be a bunch of angry, old white mean, I mean men, who are getting angrier and angrier about narrower and narrower concerns. Concerns where they are not only losing on each issue but are proving to be wrong, which is more important.

The Agora and Civitas:

Tolerance, Civility, Open-Mindedness & Public Responsibility

Having a different point of view is all well and good but it should come with two critical characterisitcs. A willingness to dsiplay tolerance for alternative perspectives and to reason together in resolving disagreemetns. And a commitment to abiding by the decisions reached in the public square - the Agora. At the end of the day we all benefit from a functioning public square and it is healthy if and only if we all exhibit civility, manners, tolerance and a commitment to it's health. Each of the last two administrations, in their own ways, contributed to the disruption of the Agora. Clinton by chasing after the latest polls and swinging with the wind, looking not for the right thing to do but the thing that would win. Bush by trying to force what he and his people "knew" was right and govern not for the good of the majority but trying to find the 50 + .01% that would allow them to force a decision. If you actually listen to President Obama's Notre Dame speech he's not insisting that he's right. Rather he asks for open minds and a willingness to tackle collectively difficult and divisive issues. And live with the collective decision.

So, at the end of the day, the pundits are missing the two most important things that are happening.

1) Each major policy decision is being arrived at by open dispute among the involved parties until the issues and alternatives are clear when a decision is arrived at.

2) The Administration is treating the public and it's opponents as adults who are open to discussing complex issues with difficult answers. And who are also willing to govern themselves with Civitas - that is with a sense of public responsiblity. MUCH more importantly we can slowly see the tenor of the debates change and evolve more toward a sense of Civitas - tolerance, open-mindedness and a willingness to roll up our sleeves.

Continue reading "Existential Crisis IV: the Agora, Civitas, Values and Futures" »

Posted by dblwyo at 09:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The last two posts were, in some senses, wrap-ups on the economic and international situations; they were couched in terms of the Agora - the public square and how it functions. A major purpose of the Agora is free exchange, that is trade and the economy, and the public square exists within the context of the relationships among states, hence the international part. Now we want to shift our attention to the third major aspect of the Agora - the behavior and rest of the lives of the citizens. In other words what goes on in the Agora besides "just" being a marketplace, or what is going on with Domestic Policy. Now that's a topic we've covered, in some depth before for it's own sake, as well as in the context of the role of key policies for the health of the economy (changing the game with regard to Education, Healthcare and Energy are sine qua nons of reaching a new plateau of healthy economic growth that's sustainable for example). But we have serious problems with these policies that will take serious people to solve them.

Why You Care: Long-running Structural Problems

Necessarily we all focus on our own day to day concerns and affairs, hopefully with a weather eye to how the winds and currents are blowing. Letting today's emergencies swamp all concern for the weather leaves us extremely vulnerable to boiled frog syndrome. Ignoring them entirely and taking a comfortable state of affairs for granted (that's not a lukewarm bath it the soup water warming up slowly) guarantees it. As we've hopefully made clear in the prior two posts we are crossing major cusp points in the economy and in the world that will shape the next decades as much as anything that's happened in the last six. One way or another they cannot be ignored - our only choice is cope or drift. Let's descend into wonkishness for a minute and consider another of the major structural trends, and remember this is just one of several major structural challenges we face. The top part shows the cumulative growth in the economy, consumption, investment and saving since 1948. The key thing to note is that when credit-driven consumption led to the relative demise of savings; in other words when immediate gratification became the dominant driver of our socionomic health. At the end of the day growth is jobs, income, prosperity and the well-being of our descendants. You can see the debt vs consumption link more clearly in the second sub-chart while the third comes full-circle back to growth, investment and savings. Growth has been gradually slowing down for many years until it went cliff-diving recently (NB: as badly as it's done in those six decades !). If we want to create a prosperous new future we need to return to being a nation of ants, not of grasshoppers.

Domestic Policy and Future Prosperities

Our first post on the health of the Agora took a fairly deep dive on long-term economic prospects, what it'll take from an economic policy point of view and what it'll take for those policies to work in terms of re-factoring crucial domestic policies in Education, Energy and Healthcare. In other words our future prosperity is utterly dependent on getting them right and making them work. There's a giant meme that's set into our politico-cultural DNA that government should keep hands off on everything, which is something of a natural reaction to the failed social engineering policies of the '60s. It also is neither realistic nor reflects the vital roles that are mandatory for government to play if we are to have a healthy society; it's also appallingly ignorant of history. Each of these topics require not just a post but books to properly dissect and, unfortunately we're still feeling our way thru on some key ones. Nonetheless government has a traditional role to play in defense and public safety as well as the creation and maintenance of civil society - which we've known about since the First Cities and continue to work on. A lot of folks think free markets came down from on high thru the immaculate conception but in fact they are a recent invention in human history and require their own institutional infrastructure. Government has also played a role in public investment that's vital to the health of any society from roads and bridges to China's Great Canal. For example modern capital markets were created by the Dutch and adopted and grown by the English. The entire notion of reliable financial markets (ahem) and public finance owes a great deal to England, Issac Newton, David Hume and others. The US government has played a vital historical role in jump-shifting US economic growth in investing in all our modes of transportation. And did you know that the entirety of our post-WW2 prosperity, over which we're now haggling, was based on federal investment in pre-war inventions that turned then into major new products, industries and jobs ? Markets don't work well for these sorts of good and are also prone to other systemic (that is self-caused) breakdowns as well as market failures. The classic example is pollution where no one company can afford to clean itself up if everyone doesn't. On a macro-scale modern economies are vulnerable to Black Swan breakdowns where the entire system implodes. We experienced one during the Great Depression and are in the middle of another, who's worst potential consequences appear to have been avoided. Another example is the role of publicly funded education - without the widespread adoption of free public high-schools the industrialization of our economy wouldn't have worked very well. And without extensive public health programs the urbanization that drove it was also infeasible. At the end of the day government is indeed vital - the question is finding the proper balances between public, private and civic policies and the mechanisms to implement them.

Getting It Right: Policy Mechanism

Many of the public initiatives listed in our shopping list are things that we've been working away at for centuries, even millenia and we've gotten to the point where we understand what needs to be done and how to do it pretty well. The area where we thought government could do everything led to a rather hubristic set of social engineering policies in the sixties that didn't go at all well however. And led to the Reagan Backlash as the limits of government intervention were reached and tested beyond workability. Now we've gone to far in the other direction, with obvious penalties. Friedrich Hayek arrived at the telling criticism of socialism and communism - if you attempted to determine policy across a large and complex society the efforts at data collection, decision-making, implementation, monitoring, control and enforcement quickly swamp your coordination capabilities and led to a rigid and ossified public policy. That's also what, IOHO at least, made the social engineering projects of the '60s unworkable. Yet the painful burns we've acquired by refusing to do what we've known needs to be done in Education, Healthcare and Energy, where we've literally been talking about fixes for three decades or more, makes clear that the ARE NOT SELF-CORRECTING problems. Which gets us to the fundamental challenge of implementation. In other words we need to set national policy congruent with our long-term goals and find the appropriate mechanisms to get people moving in the right direction voluntarily. Creating such incentives for individual decision-making is how markets work, when they work. Here we know they do not. What may be required - remember we're still feeling our way thru these new challenges - is national standards and funding combined with localized implementation and customization. If you look at the Big Three programs rolling out in D.C. you'll find that this is indeed the path they are taking. We'll be picking up on that thesis in the future with detailed dives into each. In the meantime we suggest you put to bed the "socialism" meme that partisan politics attempted to exploit to win points.

It's Time For Every Person

Horatio Lord Nelson's final general signal to his fleet at Trafalgar, which saved England and the modern world as we know it by their victory, was that "England expects every man to do his duty". Since we started with an Aaron Sorkin allusion we'll end with one as well. Here Ainsley Hayes, newly appointed to the White House Office of the Counsel is challenged on her motives.

"Is it so hard to believe in this day and age that some one would roll up their sleeves, set aside partisanship and ask, what can I do ?

What's your answer ? Whatever it might be let's hope the people in D.C., or at least the White House, agree with Miss Ainsley. Clearly many do not and put partisan victory ahead of duty to country. And duty to country is NOT blind - it doesn't require blind acquisence. It requires coming up with the best answers of which one is capable and makng one's best efforts to shape public policy. It then requires doing one's best to make the decisions reached  effective and successful - not continuing a constant search for advantage at the expense of the country.

Continue reading "Existential Crisis OF the Agora III: Fixing Things Around Home" »

Posted by dblwyo at 02:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The point we implied in the last post (Existential Crisis in the Agora I: Economy, Policy and US Strategic Outlook (Addons)) was that we're facing major, multi-part crisis and challenges which must address key questions that are at cusp points that will define our futures. Last post we focused on the strategic economic situation and pointed back to almost the entire collection of related postings. But more than the US faces these challenges on a shared basis - it's a world wide phenomenon. Key questions include: 1) how will we organize our economies and the socio-political structures that support them, 2) what institutional and governance frameworks will each country build to sustain itself and become a member of the international community and 3) how will we re-structure the architecture of the international system by evolving the old to something more inclusive, adaptive and connected ? Last time the primary focus was on the first question, now we're going to focus on the next two by looking at selected individual country stories and some shared challenges. The last post on International Affairs (Brave New World: the Emerging Balance, Pluralities, & Non-zero Sums) summarized a series and inventoried all the prior analysis and surveys as well as wrapped up the most recent series with a checklist that blueprints the things that are happening, and need to happen, for a satisfactory resolution.

The central question we're wrestling with is whether or not a plurality of the world's nations realize that this is a non-zero sum world where they are each better off with a stable and prosperous world order and act to support it's continued emergence. Or whether they pursue the zero-sum, opportunistic strategies that are the historical norm. Fortunately more seem inclined to be collaborative than not, despite some opportunism - which is natural and inescapable. But on balance the early signs are encouraging. And make no mistake, these changes are well underway, having already brought more people farther out of poverty than at any time in history. Contemplate the accompanying graphic which traces out population and income/capita over the last 200 years and notice how key players are crossing the knee of the development curve. The chart was built using Hans Rosling's Gapminder World tool to look at the US,Russia, China and India. But besides just looking watch these two videos from Hans that take a quick dive into these changes: 200 Years That Changed the World and Yes they can! - which'll give you a perspective on bit the changes are and how fast they're happening.

Refreshing the Framework: Governance and the International Architecture

Back in the 1830's a Frenchman named Alexis de Tocqueville visited the US and wrote one of the most astute assessments of American character, institutions and outlooks every concieved. One of the point he made was that in a 100 years or less the two dominant world powers would be the US and Russia. And in a way he got it dead on. Why ? Because he was extrapolating potentials based on resources, trends, character and outlook. This was at a time when the US had a population of 13 million people and a vast, unpopulated continent that was a wilderness to deal with. Prescient indeed. The population, resources, wealth, power and economic influence of the other three "powers" were all out of proportion. So what happened ? Our explanation in the prior Foreign Affairs post was R X P X H X C X I = Power. Or in words the power and wealth of a country is determined not just by raw resources but by Resources, Population to develop them, Human Capital, Economic Capital and Institutions. Tiny little Holland defeated the world's mightiest empire in the 150-1600's because it was more efficient and effective than Spain. In other words because of it's institutions and governance. As societies become more complex and sophisticated the need for inclusive institutions that act for the betterment of the whole society, not just the priveleged powerholders. There is a tradeoff between complexity, form of government and the amount of resources that is effective and legitimate for government to collect. When a government is exploitative, that is it extracts more than it gives back, and/or the form is mis-aligned with the history and culture it will collapse.

The second major institutional challenge we must deal with is getting each of these governments to be a proactive, constructive and relatively non-opportunisitic stakeholder in the world system. One can never expect any nation to act against it's own strategic interests but you can reasonably expect them to trade-off intelligently between national advantage and world effectiveness from which they benefit in a non-zero world. To the extent that more and more governments see it as in their interests to support the emergence of a constructive international institutional framework the world will establish the kind of foundation needed to keep things on an even keel. And meet the major challenges of today as well the bigger ones we know are coming tomorrow. Right now the early evidence is that we are collectively opting to move toward and onto the green path toward a more stable and prosperous world. Certainly measured by post-WW2 norms a lot of progress is being made. And measured by prior historical experience there is literally no comparison - we are living thru a fundemantal re-think unique in human history. The emergence of a new, pluralistic international framework evolved from the old and adapting to the new. Interesting times indeed !

Stories From Around the World

In the readings after the break you'll find sections updating you on current US responses, selected country stories from key players, a list of some key emerging issues and a final section of the future of Capitalism. The graphic is the 10-point checklist we developed to summarize what we think is going on at the end of the last series of foreign affairs postings. As we go thru the readings we'd like to keep it in mind as measuring indicator along with the two concepts of the "brave new world" framework.

A. US Update -

... starts with a really fascinating CSpan video of David Kilcullen discussing his conclusions about what we learned in Iraq (Kilcullen was one of the principal architects), how it applies in Afghanistan and Pakistan and broader lessons. Key ones include the fact that military force is a small part of it and the real requirement is for nation-building. There are three other CSpan clips of Clinton or Obama. They're included because a) the enthusiastic reception of the State, CIA and military for them is indicative of the kind of relationship they've already got, as well as for details on our approaches. But, in a few short days, we've already under-taken major new initiatives and established a level of interest and cooperation on a worldwide basis we haven't seen in two decades.

B. Country Stories

1. Japan is struggline mightily to start addressing the re-factoring of it's economy. Something it's put off for two decades but with the most severe downturn in a long time can no longer avoid.
2. Europe - as the result of the crisis blind free-market capitalism is loosing a lot of credibility in Europe and the European countries are re-thinking their approaches. At the same time there's been a distinct shift rightward in politics.
3. Eastern Europe was a major beneficiary of globalization, the EU and the eastward march of NATO but a lot of that is coming under threat.
4. Russia is beginning to face the fact that in twenty years it's gone nowhere, the recent commodity and energy boom helped but the necessary investments in futures wasn't made and malfeasant government and corruption are disrupting attempts to adapt.
5. India on the other hand is doing reasonably well while...
6. China has had a severe drop but relative to the rest of the world is doing very well, has responded quickly and forcefully and is in a position to become the US's major partner in crafting this new world.
7. Islamic World - is large, complex and convoluted. But nonetheless it's becoming clearer that major steps are underway to start dealing with and adapting to the modern world. This won't be easy but it's both encouraging and in all our best interests.

C. Key Future Challenges

1. The mainstream media has finally noticed that CyberWar is a rapidly escalating challenge though folks like StrategPage have been covering it for years (as have you - just check your spam)
2. The US coasted thru the '90s and let it's foreign affairs, defense and security and international development capabilities wither away with the result that we got caught flat-footed. There's been a major re-direction and re-development of Security and obviously of Defense capabilities. Now it's beginning to happen on civilian side of the house.
3. Nonetheless America, as we've pointed out before, is not in terminal decline. In fact it'll reamin the major military, economic and political power for decades. As a result it must continue to develop and provide leadership. At the same it must also encourage (hence the section above) the growing roles and responsibilities of serious stakeholders.

 D. Future of Capitalism

We spent untold millions of lives and billions of $ testing the question of what was the best way to organize the economic and socio-political structure of our societies in the 20thC. In a way the modern version of the European Wars of Religion - literally. The result was pretty clear - there is no more effective organizing principle than market-supporting economies. The problem was in that in settling that issue we went to far and forget that markets themselves must live in institutional frameworks to function. Now the worldwide debate, which will determine the worldwide fate, is on just what form the future of Capitalism will take and how best to govern it. IOHO this is one of the 4/5 most critical questions facing us.

Continue reading "Existential Crisis Around the Agora II: New World Stories" »

Posted by dblwyo at 02:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

If the news over the last few months hasn't made it crystal clear to you last Friday's bankruptcy filing by Chrysler, with GM likely to soon follow, should make it clear that we are in the eye of the biggest economic storms in over sixty years. We're facing fundamental changes in the structure, nature and direction of the US economy which will define the limits of policy and prosperity for decades to come. The good news is that the Administration is doing extremely well in putting the right policies in place quickly and implementing them about as well as could be expected. The bad news is two-fold. First we've got a long way to go before this is over and we reach a growing economy again. The worse news is that longer-term growth prospects are extremely poor and will be potentially lower than at any time in the post-war period. Now that's big picture stuff but presumably you've all heard about growing income inequality, businesses and industries disappearing forever and all the rest of the symptoms of underlying structural flaws that have been accumulating since 1980. If we'd like to return to a modicum of growth we need to get the economy and society on a new footing. The good news is that not only does the administration realize this but it's already putting in place the necessary programs and investments that stand a reasonable chance of making it happen. We've heard no better summary of this existential crisis than this Rose interview with Lionel Barber, editor of the Financial Times. Memorize it and use it as a checklist !

Addons and Extensions:

We just put up a major survey of the structure of the US economy which is complementary background reading for how the economy works. In fact we'd almost say mandatory: It can be found here: Real Data Interlude I: Econ-ecostructure (GDP to Trade)

Economic Alternatives: Stagnation vs Re-structure

We've been covering the economic news for quite a while here, going back to early '08 at least so we won't dive into the details of the cycle, policies and politics as well as budgets. You can check back to skim over all that in the archive and/or we've listed some of the prior postings in the readings excerpts (NB: you'll also find a very extensive collection on the current situation, the long-term prospects for low growth, specific policy areas (Taxes, Regulation, Housing & Autos) and fundamental shifts in strategic policy which represent the biggest shift since 1980. Judging by the most recent poll results (discussed in the last post:Peace in the Public Square: the 100 Days and Re-emergence of Civitas (Updates) ) the public trusts the President and the Administration but still hasn't grasped the implications and is particularly angry about the on-going rescue of the Finance Industry. While the Administration has clearly laid out it's policies and how the pieces all work together the explanations are also still lacking something. We're going to take a shot at framing the discussion using three variations on a conceptual chart to try and read you into the context. No guarantees but let's see what we can do.

The chart shows the possible alternative timepaths that the economy could end up following - in fact the likely ones. The red line is a sustained "Great Recession" which would be as close to disaster as we'd ever want. Fortunately fast and heavy action by this and the preceding Administration and the Fed have likely avoided that, barring some catastrophe. The real danger, and a real one because of the structural flaws, is that we get trapped into a long-term L-shaped recovery like Japan since the 1990s. The best available alternative is a gradual U-shaped recovery which is what current policy is aimed at creating, unfortunately followed by a very weak recovery with low growth, very low new job creation and a continued deterioration in incomes, well-being and the overall health of society. To get onto the path (green line) of a higher, sustained and self-reinforcing growth path requires that those structural flaws be fixed.

 From Crisis to Recovery: Phases, Policies and Risks

For even a weak recovery a lot of things have to go right and at each major cusp point there will be serious downside risks that could abort the recovery. In a normal economic cycle growth in consumer spending causes business to invest in new capital equipment and hire more workers. The post Tech Bust saw the lowest post-war job creating economy because growth prospects were so poor. In fact the only thing that held up the economy at all was the Housing ATM; without it we'd have the kind of recovery we're now facing again. When both consumer and business spending are low there's NO source of demand but government spending. Once the pump gets turning over after the priming it hopefully becomes self-sustaining, organic if you will. Given the cyclic and structural weaknesses we're facing that will require continued government spending for several years or we'll fall back into recession. To get to the higher growth path and make it self-sustaining we need a more efficient economy where infrastructure is not a bottleneck, where we aren't vulnerable to surges in energy prices and healthcare isn't an exponentiating drain on business and the rest of society. More importantly it also requires new jobs to be created which result from innovation in technology and business that lead to new industries. Finally the potential new jobs have to have the right kind of workers - a real set of inter-connected and complex dependencies. But stop me when you think you haven't heard the rationale for new policy strategies in Education, Energy and Healthcare as vital to our long-term well-being. We've been deferring these issues - which we've known what to do about for at least 30 years. (Oil and Other System Shocks: Beyond Iraq & Georgia, 911 Memorial: Fix the Problem Don't Repeat the Crash") Now we no longer have that luxury.

Long-term Economic Policy: From Stimulus to Investment

One of the knocks on current policy - actually a twofer - is that we're going to pile up a bunch of debt and trigger a major inflation. Both are basically unfounded nonsense that don't understand how things will work out for several reasons. First, on debt, the faster the economy grows the easier it will be to repay any debts and reduce the burden. Investing in that growth is a sensible decision. Government spending that subsidizes consumption in the long-run would create problems but government spending that puts the economy on a new base will grow the economy as a whole. Associated with that is that over the last two decades businesses and consumers have run up huge debts of their own but they are changing to more rational, conservative and prudent savers which will reduce the overall debt levels of society, leave plenty of cash flow for funding constructive investments and put us on that healthier path. As for inflation that will be a risk only if the massive injections of funds by the Fed are left in the system as the economy recovers. Right now the amount of sloshing funds (call it Liquidity) is enormously less than the talking heads tell you because it's not moving as fast. Think of it this way Liquidity = Money Supply (M) times the speed of circulation (Velocity). Right now M has gone up hugely but V has dropped even more; it'll take years to repair the damages done to the financial system but when we get there it'll be just as easy for the Fed to withdraw the excess funds as it was to inject them. Let's hope we manage to get to where that's a problem. The real danger is that too many opstrepterous orothodxies will force something premature and do to our economy what the ECB has done to Europe in the downturn; making a bad situation worse. BtW - we got out of the Great Depression because of WW2 spending but didn't have to because the New Deal policies were working until they were aborted in the mid-30s and re-started the Depression. Let's settle for once-burned thrice-shy please ! Whether we manage to do the right things gets back to the question of can we get the economy on a self-sustaining feedback loop !

The short-term emergency spending is designed to arrest a collapse and won't do that, neither will the short/intermediate-term stimulus spending. Even the current scheduled follow-on spending is likely to lead to an anemic recovery (which is btw the long-term forecast of the Fed, the CBO, OECD and the IMF; sounds like a consensus to me). A prosperous future that's sustainable comes about only from the strategic policies in the key areas. And one that makes a better life for the next generation comes about only from fundamental change.

THAT's the challenges we're facing !

Continue reading "Existential Crisis in the Agora I: Economy, Policy and US Strategic Outlook (Addons)" »

Posted by dblwyo at 03:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Welcome to the "Brave New World", or as we like to call the land of reset. If you listened to the 100-day press conference we think the President did a decent job but not a great one, unlike his economic situation and policy review. Nonetheless, excepting the die-hard ideologues, this is a remarkable performance. And, in our judgment, an effort to find centrist, pragmatic and workable policies domestically, economically and internationally. In each of these areas thoughtful, informed, bold and potentially revolutionary policies have been put forth. An assessment put forth by a wide range of pundits (some of whom you'll find in the readings). We're going to try and take that apart a bit and look at what went on (though there's too much to review in ANY detail), what some of the assessments are and, our typical schtick, what the context and consequences are and how things will play out structurally. Setting aside partisan posturings the three major critiscisms that have been voiced (many by David Brooks initially and then picked up by others) are: 1) too much, to quick, 2) workability and execution (not in so many words but it is THE issue now that we're moving beyond ideological posturings) and 3) a radical shift in the line between the public and private spheres. All of them are legitimate, raise serious concerns and need to be addressed. But the bottomline here is that we're seen a remarkable 100 Days where critical markers have been laid down that set the tone, direction and strategies for most of the rest of the term and beyond. We are in fact engaged in an audacious reset at the most fundamental levels that will frame our outlook for decades. Perhaps most importantly we "Coach Carter" treating the voters like responsible adults and a slow shift in how they respond: from poll-driven policy-faking to principle-based decisions that try to balance what's best with with what's feasible and saleable. Now it's time to execute, execute, execute.

A 100-Day Assessment: Brooks, et.al.

In the readings you'll find selected excerpts and URL links to some of the more thoughtful pundits but so far the doyen and dean of reasonably balanced commentary is Mr. Brooks. Who, despite being a moderate conservative and a Burckian who worries about disrupting complex socionomic systems and unintended consequences, has applauded many of the decisions. For example calling the new Afghanistan policy bold but the war winnable or describing the economics speech as stunningly good or being dazzled and amazed at the sheer managerial competence of the Administration and how much they've managed to get done on so many fronts. We strongly suggest you invest the 30 min. required in watching the interview and taking notes because he covers an immense amount of ground quickly but insightfully. Some of the those major points deserve long essays in response. On the workability question we'll pursue some critical aspects later in policy focused posts but what Brooks and the others are missing is the repeated application of a systematic and systemic decision-solving methodology that seems to permeate each issue:gather the best people and ideas, pull them together, put a framework down, work out the details, start working the legislative process and selling to the voters. Review, revise,verify and extend as circumstances evolve.

Policy, Politics, Lizard-brains and the Disruptive Opposition

Let's get a little more analytical about some of the things swirling around. The accompanying graphic is a little busy but instead of building it up we compress several key ideas to that you can see how they all work together. Policy and politics have at least three key dimensions that must be addressed to be effective: what's the right policy, what constituencies does it impact and how do they react (the Political Spectrum) and how do you persuade sufficient support (the Mental Spectrum). Political interest combines the moderate and centrist leanings of the polity with the tendencies of party activists to retreat to the extremes while selling a policy has to balance the depth and density of information with the appeals to the hindbrain where decisions are really made. Clinton sold to the polls and told us what we wanted to hear - he got away with it because the times were good. Bush II told us what he thought we ought to hear based on his own ideologies. Obama is telling us what we must hear and not sugar-coating it. We'll see if the polity evolves itself enough to continue to respond constructively - so far there's more faith in the President than in his policies. We first used this chart during the elections and have modified to show how a centrist candidate (Barry) sold his intent while a wannabe centrist (McCain) retreated to the right and more and more appealed to the hindbrain. Now President Obama has gotten even more information-rich and is doing a fabulous job explaining things. It's not clear he's selling them - which is in fact one of the two major weaknesses he's got so far. That's not a problem that goes away until more pudding is eaten for proof however. On the other hand the Rips are retreating faster and faster into pure hindbrain appeals and bad policies. It's all very well and good to be "sincere" but right counts first and foremost and they're pushing shibboleths that were appropriate in Reagan's day, had a positive impact for a while but are badly outdated and deeply flawed. But instead of re-thinking themselves the True Believers are getting increasingly self-destructive. Too bad for them and ultimately for the country - a set of observations that roughly Brooks agrees with btw ! Ironically (cf. the readings, especially the assessment by Matt Miller) Obama's major initiatives in Healthcare, Education and Energy are closer to a combination of a) what Bush tabled in several State of the Union speeches (on Energy for example what's emerging is pretty close to his 2001 National Energy Strategy) and b) what other moderate Republicans have proposed over the last 20+ years. The Republicans, as opposed to the Rips, should be getting behind these instead of pursuing power and advantage at the cost of what's best for the country.

The Public Square: What Makes the Agora Work

Any society consists of a private sphere where people conduct their lives and make a living, a public sphere where the society makes decisions for everyone and a civic sphere where culture, religion and values define the ecology of the private and public sphere. If you go to almost any city in the world you'll find a public square which typically has shoppers strolling around, shops and commerce, public buildings and civic institutions (libraries, schools and churches for example). In Ancient Greece the called it the Agora - where all the myriad facets of the life of the city-state came together into one organic whole. Have you ever stopped to wonder what makes the public square work ? Like our mutual agreement that we have to have rules of the road so that we can operate our highways safely and efficiently we have to have rules that govern the Agora. Key among which is the agreement to abide by the rules, a recognition that they are necessary, tolerance for anybody who follows the rules to have the right to come to the square and be heard and a willingness to cooperate in it's creation, maintenance and safety. The public square has defined Civilization for millenia and, in it's modern, complex and gigantic form, it still does.

We've spent the last two or more decades abusing the rules necessary for the long-term health of the public square and damaged both the private and civic spheres as a result. Largely thru the opportunistic pursuit of various interest groups of their own advantages and interests at the expense of the general health and well-being. Now the question is will we all be citizens together and act in our collective self-interest to return the square to health or not ?

 Changes in Attitude: Paco vs the Consumer

This might be an odd sort of source to look at but Paco Underhill, who is one of the best consultatns and strategists in the world when it comes to retail and consumer behavior, was interviewed on the Newshour last week. He had a lot to say that was "ostensibly" about change in consumer behavior. But his critical observations and insights were really about whether or not we can continue to sustain our old behaviors. This economic crisis is forcing major and radical changes in shopping but Paco think the changes in attitudes are going to be permanent. We happen to agree. As points out - we can no longer afford to consume beyond our means. More importantly, fundamentally and even philosphically, we don't need to. Perhaps his most startling observation is that people need to learn, and are learning, that the next car or house or vacation is not only unnecessary. IT's NOT SATISFYING ! Now that's a SEE-change in our books. And when it comes from a guy who makes his living getting you to buy more and he's calling for changes in basic attitudes somethings up.

UPDATES: the Difference Between Pundits and Executive Responsibility

Here's the link for the CSpan: Obama 100 Day Press Conference and the post-conference Rose panel that discussed it. We were struck in the first case by how closely our assessment of things mirrored the President's directional intent while at the same time was reinforced by the pundits. BUT that's NOT the most important thing - THE important things are that the pundits don't talk at all about 1) whether the policies are right (which we've argued at length that they are), 2) what it takes to implement them (the question never came up among them) and 3) what it takes to explain and sell them to motivate the country in support of them. Yet as a matter of fact those are the central questions that must concern the Administration. The difference is between outside observers who've never stepped in front of the gun, even in a small way and the people who see dealing with all the elbow jostlers as just another part of their job but who's primary concern is getting it done, and getting it done right, workably and sustainably.

Continue reading "Peace in the Public Square: the 100 Days and Re-emergence of Civitas (Updates)" »

Posted by dblwyo at 09:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)