"Diplomacy, Or Telling it Like it is?"

 It is October 1^st, and the government has shut down. It makes one yearn for term limits, with an elected government that really has the people’s interests.

 

.....................................................................

 

Not apropos of today’s topic, this article by Roger Lowenstein, financial journalist and author, which appeared in Monday’s WSJ, “How – and Why – U.S. Capitalism is Unlike Any Other,” should be read by everyone interested in why the United States is unique in the annals of nations.

 

https://www.wsj.com/economy/us-capitalism-differences-eaecd208?mod=Searchresults&pos=1&page=1

 

 

.....................................................................

 

 

As for today’s subject, America’s politics over their 250 years have given us a long list of unique personages. While obviously liked by their Parties, all had political opponents. But collectively they served our nation well. No one Party has had a lock on national politics. Domination of the Executive branch has changed almost equally since the end of World War II. Leadership in Congress has also changed, and because the Executive and legislative branch have changed, so has the Judicial branch. Mr. Trump, to put it politely, has been controversial. But who among us would say that controversy cannot be for the good? Western Europe was shocked by Mr. Trump’s recent speech. You may well disagree with his language, tone and even his message, but I felt, regardless of the language, it was the medicine needed. 

 

.......................................................................

 

As for the two attached photos –  one I took with my iPhone at the end of August of the moon rising over Mud Swamp in Essex. The other is of a painting, inspired by my photo, done by a good friend and fellow resident here at Essex Meadows,

 

Sydney M. Williams

 

Thought of the Day

“Diplomacy, Or Telling it Like it is?”

October 1, 2025

 

“Diplomacy and virtue do not make easy companions.”

                                                                                                                Iain Pears (1955-)

                                                                                                                British art historian and novelist

                                                                                                                The Dream of Scipio, 2002

 

“Your countries are going to hell,” said President Donald Trump to the UN on September 23. “...you want to be politically correct and you are destroying your heritage.” While he was speaking to the General Assembly, his words were aimed at long-time allies in Western Europe. Post-war Presidents have prided themselves on their diplomacy. Even President Reagan, while demanding that Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev “tear down this wall,” did so without a hint of acrimony in his voice. While I suspect Mr. Trump has never read H.L. Mencken’s Prejudices: First Series, he, nevertheless, followed his admonition: “Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”

 

Diplomacy is the art of having people understand and accept your position. In the halls of government power, words are usually best understood when backed by strength. President Theodore Roosvelt advised American Presidents to “...speak softly and carry a big stick.” Will Rogers, American humorist and social commentator, put it differently: “Diplomacy is the art of saying ‘nice doggie’ until you can find a rock.” The American journalist and author Isaac Goldberg wrote in 1927 that diplomacy is the art “to do and say the nastiest things in the nicest way.” At times it is more diplomatic to leave certain things unsaid. Nixon’s Secretary of State Henry Kissinger once said: diplomacy, “is the art of restraining power.” In the end it is the ability to get people to see and do things your way.  

 

Donald Trump, for all his qualities, is not a diplomat.[1] To his acolytes that makes him a hero. On the other hand his bluntness and coarseness can be off-putting. He went beyond just Europe when he asked what the more delicate would have hesitated to ask: “What is the purpose of the United Nations?” According to its Mission Statement, its core mission is to “Maintain Peace and Security – to prevent and remove threats to peace and to suppress acts of aggression through peaceful and just means.” Forty years ago Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Reagan’s Ambassador to the UN, condemned the UN for the “bizarre reversal” of its founding intent to resolve conflicts. Has there been an improvement in the last four decades? In March 2014, Russia annexed Crimea, In February 2022, Putin’s armies invaded Ukraine. On October 7, 2023, Hamas militants slew 1,200 Israelis. Sudan’s civil war (April 2023-present) has killed 150,000 and displaced an estimated 14 million, in a country of under 50 million. Today, what in different circumstances would seem black humor, the military junta that governs Sudan is a member of the UN’s Human Rights Council. Amazing! Why are critics of Israel, including the UN, silent on Sudan?

 

In his attack on Western governments, President Trump, in his immutable way, focused on what he called a double-tailed monster: “Immigration and the high cost of so-called green energy is destroying a large part of the free world and a large part of our planet. Countries that cherish freedom are fading fast because of their policies on these two subjects. Both immigration and their suicidal energy ideas will be the death of Western Europe.” 

 

Selective immigration and satisfying rising energy demands without depleting resources are critical to the survival of any nation that wants to be prosperous and remain free. But Europe has hewed far to the Left: open borders and demanding that all energy consumption comes from renewables within an unrealistic timeframe. They have gone beyond those two factors. Growth and the freedom that comes with a dynamic economy, have been hampered by an aging population, an unaffordable welfare system, and an emphasis on social justice and identity politics, where equal outcomes score higher than equal opportunities. One consequence is that individual creativity is curbed. They have impeded free speech by calling oppositional speech hateful. All of the above have limited GDP output and increased national debt.

 

In its February 2024 report, Freedom House noted that, while Europe remains the most-free region in the world, 14 European countries received score declines, while 6 saw score improvements. Globally, freedom declined for the 19^th year in a row. Where has the UN been? Economic growth in Europe has been hampered by expanding entitlement benefits, an aging population, and shrinking population growth. Since 1960, the TFR (total fertility rate) in Europe has been halved, while the average age has increased by eleven years to 42.8, despite a growing influx of younger Muslims. According to the World Bank, GDP growth, from 2008 to 2023, in the European Union expanded 13.%, from $16.37 trillion to $18.59 trillion. During those same fifteen years, GDP growth in the U.S. rose 87 percent, from $14.77 trillion to $27.72 trillion. A course correction in Europe is needed.

 

So, was President Trump correct in telling Europe that their countries are “going to hell?” Europe was home to the expansion of Christianity and to the Judeo-Christian heritage that produced some of the world’s greatest art, music and literature; it was the origin of the Enlightenment, of basic human rights like free speech; it was where free-market capitalism was first defined and first practiced; Europe was where many of the democratic institutions we enjoy today were founded. To forgo that heritage and history, those achievements and values, to which all Europeans are fortunate to be heirs, would be shameful.

 

President Trump is often coarse in speech and arrogant and churlish in behavior. In his search for the “art of the deal,” hyperbole has always been a well-used instrument in his elocution toolbox, with tact often absent. But he is not alone in pointing the finger at Europe. Writing in the September 26, 2025 edition of The European Conservative, Sven Larson wrote: “Europe is drifting into disintegration and demise.” In his speech, Mr. Trump also spoke of his love for Europe and its people: “I love Europe. I love the people of Europe.” Europe, especially European leaders, needed to hear his tough words. While Mr. Trump might have employed a more diplomatic tone, it is hard to disagree with his diagnosis.  

 

The irony is that Donald Trump might understand better than his elitist, and often hypocritical, critics what was meant by Iain Pears in the quote that heads this essay.

 

 

 

---

---

[1] Having written that, I could be proven wrong. If Mr. Trump is able to convince Europe to up its game against Russia in Ukraine, and is able to gain a peace between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, as now look possible, he will have given diplomacy a new lease on life. In fact, Walter Russell Mead wrote on Tuesday in The Wall Street Journal, that if Mr. Trump is successful with these two endeavors: “If diplomacy were ballet, Mr. Trump would be a Nijinsky.”

"Age and the Passing of the Torch"

 

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Age and the Passing of the Torch”

September 23, 2023

 

“At twenty a man is a peacock, at thirty a lion, at forty a camel,

at fifty a serpent, at sixty a dog, at seventy an ape, at eighty a nothing at all.”

                                                                                                                                Baltasar Gracián (1601-1658)

                                                                                                                                Spanish writer and philosopher

                                                                                                                                The Art of Worldly Wisdom, 1647

 

For Queen Elizabeth, 1992 was her annus horribilis. I had my own – far less significant – diem horribilis last Sunday. Unlike Elizabeth’s year, some of what happened to me was, surely, age related. I had tested positive for Covid that morning. Then, feeling groggy and with slurred speech, I fell twice. Apart from a bumped head, bruised hip and ego, no damage was done. Nevertheless after the second fall, we called health services. Shortly thereafter I was taken by ambulance to a clinic and later to Middlesex Hospital. Tests showed no signs of a stroke or brain injury, and on Tuesday I came home, with a cane but that was because of the bruised hip.

 

The effects of age are not necessarily chronological, and they differ greatly from one individual to another. My father died at 58, while his father died one day shy of 90 and his mother at 92. While they became physically frail, both had their wits until they died. Cancer, heart disease, and senility are more common as one ages. Muscles lose tone and bones become brittle. But there are those like Henry Kissinger who are physically able and mentally alert at 100. Many people don’t let age stop them.  The Wall Street Journal, last June 25^th, published an article, “Why High-Powered People are Working in Their 80s.” In it they quoted data from the Census Bureau that roughly 650,000 Americans over 80 were working last year. My younger brother who turns 81 in October continues to work as a partner in an investment firm. My father-in-law went to work most every day as an admiralty lawyer, until he died at 77. Old age, mental acuity, and employment are not incompatible. For some, but not for all.

 

While Republicans have been vocal about the President’s physical and mental failings – based on visible evidence of dementia – the question of age has now been raised by Independents and Democrats. An August CNN poll conducted by SSRS found that “roughly three-quarters of Americans say they’re seriously concerned that Biden’s age might negatively affect his current level of physical and mental competence…” On the other hand, Alex Keyssar of the Harvard Kennedy School takes a more nuanced view. According to the July 17, 2023 issue of the Harvard Gazette, he “believes Democrats who cite age as a major election concern are probably really expressing ‘a desire for energetic leadership, a force for new ideas, new spirit, and new energy.’” Perhaps. But it seems more likely that the Democrat leadership is concerned that fibs, gaffes, and stumbles now define Mr. Biden – not good for his re-election chances, especially when his Vice President’s approval numbers are lower than his.

 

With Donald Trump currently leading the battle for his Party’s nomination, Republicans are caught in the same vise; thus a rising, bipartisan, interest in younger leaders. At his January 21, 1960 inauguration, John F. Kennedy spoke of “passing the torch” to a new generation. That happened. Eisenhower was the last President born in the 19^th Century. Franklin Roosevelt was fifty when he was elected in 1932, the first President younger than my grandfather. Kennedy was elected at age forty-three, the first President younger than my father. Bill Clinton was the first President elected younger than me. My grandfather, father and I were all in our 50s when the nation first elected Presidents younger than we were. Today, our three children are all in their 50s.  It is time to pass the torch. Following a recent TV interview in which President Biden touted his ‘wisdom’ and ‘experience’ as reasons to vote for him, Bonnie Wong, director of the neuropsychology program at Mass. General, allowed that there is some validity to the idea that with age comes wisdom. On the other hand, there are those who feel differently: H. L. Mencken (1880-1956) wrote in his 1919 book Prejudices: Third Series, “The older I grow, the more I distrust the familiar doctrine that age brings wisdom.” Age does bring perspective, but drifting minds are not compatible with wisdom. Nevertheless, it now appears that the 2024 election will consist of two, deeply flawed, old men, both accused of corruption and neither wise. We can picture them “yodeling,” as Lance Morrow wrote in Thursday’s The Wall Street Journal, “across the valley at one another: ‘Not guilty! Not guilty!’” Or, as P.G. Wodehouse more colorfully put it in The Inimitable Jeeves, the prospect resembles “…when Aunt is calling Aunt, like mastodons bellowing across primeval swamps...” This is not a prospect most Americans want.

 

It is not just the last two Presidents – both running for re-election – who are old. The average age in the U.S. Senate today is 65. Political leadership in Washington resembles the Soviet Union’s Politburo of 1982 when the average age was 70. But age, alone, is not the issue. We all know octogenarians and even nonagenarians who are mentally alert and physically spry. While he was writing of women, Ralph Waldo Emerson’s words are universally applicable: “The best tunes are played on the oldest fiddles.” Having cognizant-alert, elderly advisors has merit, as they can provide a sense of continuity and, despite Mencken’s warning, offer wisdom to new generations of more energetic politicians who will listen to, respond to and be honest with the people.

 

We who are older must adapt to life’s challenges. As J. Alfred Prufrock says, in T.S. Eliot’s eponymous poem: “I grow old…I grow old. / I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.” But that does not mean that our political parties should make the American people choose between one old man who is riven by an oversized personal ego and who speaks hatefully of those who cross him, and a second, even older man who trips boarding airplanes, who cannot speak without a teleprompter, and who utters non sequiturs that baffle his audience and his advisors.

 

Watching President Biden makes one wonder what it would have been like to observe President Woodrow Wilson after his October 1919 stroke? That was not permitted, as his wife and doctor kept him hidden from prying reporters. That cannot be done today. However, the White House keeps the President’s appearances to a minimum, and mainstream media, out of deference to the office, remains mute about Mr. Biden’s deteriorating mental capabilities. But our allies and enemies are aware of what is happening. Not a good look for the most powerful nation on earth. Age matters, but what is most important is how one ages. In the U.S. today, it is time to pass the porch.

"Hatred and the Curse of Identity Politics"

 Today is President’s Day. In 1971, as part of the Uniform Monday Holiday Act, we ceased celebrating February 12 as Lincoln’s birthday and the 22^nd as Washington’s birthday. Instead, the holiday was moved to the third Monday of the month. While working, I admit to liking three-day weekends, but I feel we have lost something when we don’t celebrate the actual days of Washington’s and Lincoln’s birth. Of course, there are forty-four other Presidents, and forty-two of them were not born during this month. (The two others that were born in February are William Henry Harrison on February 9,  1773, and Ronald Reagan on February 6, 1911.)

 

Enough complaining. Enjoy the day, and, I hope, the essay.

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Hatred and the Curse of Identity Politics”

February 20, 2023

 

“Hatred is the most accessible and comprehensive of all the unifying agents. Mass movements

can rise and spread without belief in a god, but never without a belief in the devil.”

                                                                                 Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)

                                                                                 American author and social philosopher

                                                                                 The True Believer: Thoughts of the Nature of Mass Movements

 

Alice Roosevelt Longworth, Theodore Roosevelt’s rebellious daughter, is supposed to have quipped: “If you haven’t anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me.” Regardless of the quote’s validity, most of us were taught that “speech is silver, but silence is golden” and that “love conquers hate.” However, Vanessa Van Edwards, the behavioral scientist and author of Captivate: The Science of Succeeding with People, says her research suggests that Alice may have been on to something. People form stronger bonds when they talk about someone they hate rather than someone with whom they have positive feelings. 

 

Hatred, often coupled with tribalism, has been prominent throughout history and has led to millions being killed. Hatred of Native Americans, as well as desire for more land, was a motivating factor in opening North America to European settlers. Hatred for blacks in southern U.S. states led to an estimated 4,400 of them being lynched between Reconstruction and World War II.

 

Hatred is universal and has killed millions. Estimates are that up to 20 million people were killed by Stalin in the Soviet Union, most in the 1930s, including five million Ukrainians who were deliberately starved between 1931 and 1934. Hatred of Jews by the Nazis led to their genocide in Europe, with an estimated six million killed. Nobody knows for sure, but probably 30 million Chinese were killed or starved during the Cultural Revolution, between 1966 and 1976. Communist guerillas killed somewhere between two and three million Cambodians between 1975 and 1979. Islamic terrorists, driven by hate for the West, killed more than 3,000 people in the U.S. on 9/11. In the last fourteen years, an estimated 75,000 Christians have been slaughtered in Nigeria. Tens of thousands of Uyghurs have been detained and/or killed in China’s northwest. There are hundreds of other examples. 

 

Hatred, though, can rally a nation against its enemies, as it has in time of war: American colonists against the British in 1775; the South versus the North in 1861; the Spanish in 1898, after the explosion of the USS Maine; the “Hun” in 1917; Nazis and Japanese in 1941; Communists in Korea and later in Vietnam, and Islamic extremists following 9/11. All were called derogatory names. 

 

Paul Eckman, the American psychologist and professor emeritus at the University of California, has said that we have six basic emotions, two of which, anger and disgust, can lead to hatred. Our government once emphasized what we have in common – E pluribus unum (out of many, one). It appealed to our patriotism, to our exceptionalism as a sovereign nation, to what binds us as a people. We are a country of immigrants, and new immigrants tend to stick together, so the emphasis was to enfold them into the fabric that comprises America. And, over time – one, two, or three generations – that is what happened. Immigrants were no longer Italian Americans, Polish Americans, German Americans, or Irish Americans. They were Americans, living in “the land of opportunity,” a meritocracy where aspiration, diligence, and talent could lead one out of poverty and into the middle class. 

 

The Left, however, has determined that identity politics is a legitimate means of achieving and maintaining political power, so they have reverted to a new form of tribal segregation: dividing us by ethnicity, race, gender, sexual orientation, religious, and socio-economic backgrounds – all of which provide fertile ground for hatred to germinate. We are divided into victims and oppressors, with the implication that the only way to restore equity is for government to mandate equal outcomes. Institutionalized by the Left, identity politics has legitimized what Peruvian author Mario Vargas Llosa has called “the inextinguishable call of the tribe.”

 

Traditional values like diligence and strong family ties are seen as qualities of the oppressor class, thus not encouraged. In their efforts, the Left has been aided by the media, cultural icons, and technology, the latter which can be manipulated to achieve preferred goals that create further divisiveness. Technology has made us more knowledgeable, but not wiser, and has done little to ameliorate natural differences between people. In his book, Leadership, Henry Kissinger wrote: “Architects of the internet thought of their invention as an ingenious means of connecting the world; in reality, it has also yielded a new way to divide humanity into warring tribes.”

 

Some may think my concerns exaggerated – that we have been more divided in the past, with hatred more ubiquitous. We probably were in 1861, but still I worry. A case in point: The reaction to Donald Trump’s candidacy and Presidency by his political enemies was not based on reason. It was unadulterated hate. Some may have felt it was deserved, as Mr. Trump could be nasty to those who crossed him. Nevertheless, that does not absolve those who fought him. The 2016 Russian collusion story was fabricated by the Clinton campaign, with assists from the intelligence community and mainstream media. It resulted in the $30 million Mueller investigation, which hampered his Presidency for three years and came to naught. The same thing happened in 2020 with Hunter Biden’s laptop. Fifty existing and former intelligence officers, urged on by the media, claimed it was Russian disinformation. It was not. That hatred for Trump was not unique. Governor Ron DeSantis is now a target, as can be seen in Molly Jong-Fast’s recent article in Vanity Fair. Some may argue that, regarding Trump, ends justified means, that getting rid of him was worth any price. But that is a slippery slope, which adds to polarization and, thus, to hatred. Our democracy only works if the press, in reporting the news, remains politically agnostic, and if the intelligence community does not take sides. With the exception of opinion pages, the media and the intelligence communities should remain neutral when it comes to political candidates. Let politicians debate, then let the people decide.

 

Tribalism is natural. Based on emotion, it ignores reason. It can be a positive force: loyalty to one’s school, allegiance to one’s teammates, faithfulness to one’s comrades, public-spiritedness within one’s community, and patriotism to one’s country.  Apart from the recluse or hermit, most people want to be with others who are like-minded. Man is a social animal. It is why we have fraternities and sororities, social clubs and eating clubs. But in a diverse, multi-cultured country, like the United States, we must learn to live with those whose ideas and beliefs differ from ours. Identity politics, however, pushed by the Left, serves to keep us apart. This is where tribalism becomes a negative force. Diversity is demanded by the Left, but not in ideas. In protecting students from “hateful” words, colleges keep students intellectually isolated. Is that wise? In a recent essay for Geopolitical Futures, George Friedman wrote: “Simply put, you will learn little from someone with whom you agree. You will learn the most from someone with whom you disagree.” That means one must engage with and listen to those whose opinions differ from one’s own.

 

Man is perhaps the only species that kills and destroys its own kind out of pure hatred. The President, as leader of the federal government and responsible to all the people, should work to unite a fractured people, not pursue identity politics that deepen division and fuel hatred. More important, we, individually and responsible to and for ourselves, should let our better angels prevail.

"We Are All Americans"

Sydney M. Williams

Thought of the Day

“We Are All Americans”

February 11, 2023

 

“America was not built on fear. America was built on courage,

on imagination and an unbeatable determination to do the job at hand.”

                                                                                                                                President Harry Truman

                                                                                                                                Message to Congress

                                                                                                                                January 8, 1947

 

Public debates, be they high school, college or Presidential, are aimed at diminishing one’s opponent and convincing the audience of one’s superior argument. It is rhetoric, the art of persuasion. Like political campaigns, its goal is to win. In contrast, debates in the classroom – at least in years past – and in legislative bodies – at least when no press is present – are to test one’s argument, to listen to one’s opponent. The purpose is to learn and to come to a consensus. When I was young, I argued with my father; only later did I realize I was trying to understand why he believed as he did. 

 

…………………………………………………………….

 

In a polyglot society, such as the United States, individual identities are natural and differences in ideas are to be expected. The latter should be encouraged, for it is through respectful debate that common ground is found. On the other hand, the political exploitation of group identifications has caused a widening divide among an already fractionated people. Factionalism was a concern of the Founding Fathers. In “Federalist 10,” James Madison warned that it could lead to “…instability, injustice, and confusion…the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished.”

 

Yet politicians today have found that splitting the electorate into manageable pieces makes it easier to campaign and win on specific issues. Thus, we have been divided into victims and assailants. This division makes the insulting assumption that certain races are incapable of competing on merit; so different standards are used for Asians, blacks, and whites in college admissions and jobs. We have been divided by cultural preferences, where gender is seen as a matter of choice, not biology. Dependency on government has come at the expense of individual responsibility and accountability; the concept of equal opportunity has been subordinated to a demand for equal outcomes, and the dignity of work seems an abandoned philosophy. Diversity and inclusion, the battle cry of the Woke, does not include diversity of ideas or the inclusion of those who dare challenge conventional thought.

 

The people of the United States represent most every nation on the planet. We speak hundreds of languages and dialects. We represent virtually every religion. In those senses, we are unique as a nation. We are born equal in our basic rights and before the law, but we are not born equal in mental abilities or physical attributes, nor do we all aspire to the same heights. No amount of political talk and promises can change that fact. We are of different economic classes, races, religions, and ethnicities. We must play the cards we were dealt. In his critically acclaimed novel, Trust, Hernan Diaz wrote: “Whatever the past may have handed us, it is up to each one of us to chisel our present out of the shapeless block of the future.” There is no question that a white child born in a suburb has a head start over a black child born in an inner city. Similarly, a black child born in suburbia has an easier start on life than a white one born dirt-poor in Appalachia. The promise of the United States is not the impossible gift of equity, but the real gift of opportunity – access to the social and economic ladder, the ascent of which is limited only by personal ambition and talent. Fundamental to climbing that ladder is education, which is why good schools are critical. 

 

We have reached an odd place – where our unique culture is at risk, where stories of deprivation and racism are not offset by stories of the success of men and women overcoming enormous odds, where values are muted or deemed relative, and where good and evil are not contrasted. It is not just politicians who have placed us in this spot. It is also the proliferation of a biased media. The news, whether on-line, TV or paper, has become little more than political propaganda. It is our universities where students are protected against “harmful” words and where truth has succumbed to ideology. It is social media, which has invaded our privacy with the tenacity of a four-year-old screaming for his popped balloon. Shared values become scarcer when individuals adopt the questionable memes of internet “influencers,” rather than the virtues gathered from classical literature, traditions, and customs.

 

What the people of the United States need are debates, not rhetorical flourishes designed for political campaign-style harangues; but debates with straight talk, to help citizens understand the problems we face and the opportunities we have. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are an example. No one wants to cut payments to retirees, or not provide healthcare to the needy. But we must face the fact that unless something is done money will run out. There are policies we could pursue: Raising retirement age, means-testing benefits, and/or increasing the minimum taxable wage from $160,000. I am sure there are other ideas. But to pretend that the problem does not exist, as was the message from both sides during last Tuesday’s State of the Union, insults the intelligence of the American people. 

 

The United States is fortunate. It is laden with natural resources and uniquely positioned geographically. We are fortunate to be citizens of a nation of laws not men, a nation without an aristocracy, a nation whose men and women comprise myriad ethnicities, races, religions, and sexual orientations – a nation where a black man and a black woman sit on the highest court. “Vive la différence,” is a well-known French expression, generally used to celebrate the differences between the sexes. We, too, should laud our differences. But we cannot let them smother what we have in common – “a government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

 

But democracy is work. Without attention, it collapses. As Jesus said, a house divided against itself cannot stand. We cannot let differences destroy the symmetry history has given us. In his recent book Leadership, Henry

Kissinger wrote that we cannot let sectarian passions overwhelm traditional structures.[1]It is a challenge that must be met, else society unravels. We must not forget that what we have in common is individual freedom: free to pray, to speak, and to assemble; free to use the special gifts God gave each of us, to succeed or fail. We are all Americans.

"AI in the Age of Wokeness & Expanded Government"

 Peggy Noonan was right in her weekend column in The Wall Street Journal, “George Santos Has Got to Go.” He should not be in Congress. While he fits in with that august body of liars from both Parties, he is an embarrassment to the American people. But Ms. Noonan failed to address the most disturbing questions. How did he become the Republican nominee? Why did the Republican Party not fact-check him? Why did mainstream and social media fail to investigate him? Why weren’t voters in his district more skeptical? One cannot help but suspect that Republican leaders did not want to peer too closely at someone who looked he might claim a Democrat seat, and it is my guess that New York’s left-wing media gurus knew of Mr. Santos’ transgressions, but they preferred to disclose them after the election, when embarrassment to the Party would be more keenly felt. 

 

We are reminded once again of the wisdom of Mark Twain: “There is no distinctly native criminal class except Congress.” At any rate, today we start the Chinese year of the rabbit, a happy omen for what we all wish will be a good and productive year.

 

Sydney M. Williams

http://swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“AI in the Age of Wokeness & Expanded Government”

January 24, 2023

 

“Technology is a useful servant, but a dangerous master.”

                                                                                                                Christian Lous Lange (1869-1938)

                                                                                                                Norwegian historian

                                                                                                                Nobel lecture, December 13, 1921

 

Over a hundred years have passed since Professor Lange gave his speech upon winning the Nobel Peace Prize in 1921. A few years later, Albert Einstein, made a similar observation: “It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.” Both men – Lange in response to the trench warfare of World War I and Einstein to the devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki – had in mind the destructive nature of modern weapons. Yet technology, generally, has been a force for good: from medicine, communications, factories, publishing, heating, and air conditioning, to transportation, information, food processing, agriculture, entertainment, sports, etc. Technology has increased productivity, enhanced living standards, and reduced poverty. It is not so much that technology represents a threat, it is how it can be used and manipulated.

 

Just as technology has become ubiquitous in our lives, so has government. We may disagree on how big government should be, but it has grown larger over time. According to data from the St. Louis Federal Reserve, in 1940, before the U.S. entered the War, U.S. federal spending, as a percent of GDP, was 9.2%. During the War years, it topped 40%. After the War, factories that produced tanks and machine guns reverted to making cars and washing machines. Government spending fell. Following the Johnson and Nixon years, it rose to the low teens. Under both parties, it has since drifted higher, reaching 31% of GDP in the recession year of 2020. With the economy recovering, the ratio declined modestly, but the trend toward higher spending remains. This increase in federal (as well as in state and local) spending has inhibited private investment. From 1950 to 2000, U.S. GDP growth averaged just over 3%, while, for the first twenty-two years of the 21^st Century, GDP growth has averaged just over 2%. The increase in government spending is not the only cause for slowing economic growth, but it is one reason, and perhaps the principal cause. (Other factors would include an increase in the average age of Americans, from 29.5 in 1960 to 38.8 in 2021, and labor participation rates, which have fallen from 67% in 2000 to 62.2% in 2021.) 

 

As the tentacles of government reach deeper into our lives, the role of artificial intelligence (AI) should concern us. It has powers we are just beginning to appreciate. In the current issue of National Review, Vahaken Mouradian wrote, “Don’t Rage Against the Machine: AI can create something beautiful by identifying and replicating the features that constitute beauty, such as smoothness, rhythm, elegance…, and symmetry…It cannot, however, obtain the sublime, because it does not have feelings; it does not have faith; it does not have the ability to think independently…AI cannot reproduce a humanlike psyche or develop one of its own.” Bots (robots) have a “brain,” which allows them to take in, retain, digest, and regurgitate data, in accordance with instructions dictated by whomever controls the input. An artist might use a Prisma Labs’ Lensa to convert a photograph into a work of art, or a writer might use Chat GPT to complete an essay. AI computers may be able to express through writings religious beliefs, music, poetry, love, hate, or fear, but they cannot feel them. They have what might be considered a brain; they do not have a mind that allows them to think independently.

 

While AI is limited to what has been inputted into its “brain,” it can be manipulated as to what output will reach its target audience, reminding one of dystopian novels, like George Orwell’s 1984 and H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine. The ability to control human behavior was a concern expressed by theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking in an interview on BBC in December 2014: “If you try to create a thinking machine, then it will pose a threat to our existence.” Two years ago, Henry Kissinger, Eric Schmidt, and Daniel Huttenlocher of MIT wrote The Age of AI and Our Human Future, which introduces the reader to the promises and perils of artificial intelligence. In a review, Kevin Roose of The New York Times posted his first few paragraphs into Sudowrite and asked it to finish his review.  “…within a few minutes,” Mr. Roose wrote, “the A.I. was coming up with impressively cogent paragraphs of analysis – some, frankly, better than what I could have generated on my own.” Computers have already defeated the world’s best chess players, flown drones, and launched missiles. They soon will drive cars and diagnose diseases. But will they be used in schools and universities to indoctrinate youth with a preferred ideology? If we believe that wokeism is infecting our schools now, think what is possible with AI in the wrong hands.

 

We must continue to innovative; however, we must ensure individuals remain free to think, to argue and debate, to read and opine on whatever they choose. Democracy and freedom depend more on diversity of thought and expression than on such wokeisms as DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) and ESG (environmental, social, and corporate governance). These policies, promote discrimination by physical traits, and they prefer identities over merit, even as the latter is blind regarding race and gender. LinkedIn ranked diversity and inclusion managers the second-fastest growing jobs over the past five years. We saw this elitism in the arrogant, platitude-filled speeches that dominated the World Economic Forum in Davos last week. We see this antidemocratic attitude in the requirement of signed “loyalty” oaths at cultural events (such as the ones at this year’s Sundance Film Festival, so humorously described by Gary Geipel in last Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal), and in the cancellation of conservative speakers and the shutting down of debate on college campuses.

 

Artificial intelligence can (and will) enhance our lives. But in the wrong hands, it aids those who wish to control what we do and how we think, whether the perpetrator is government, an organization, or an individual.  It is a threat that should not be dismissed. Combined with recent growth in government, it portends “Big Brother.” How to respond? Families should instill in their children values that have stood the test of time. And schools and universities should instruct students in the art of skepticism – to investigate and question, to think independently. Don’t trust AI’s formulaic answer to the question.

"Whither Wisdom?"

 

2022 was quite a year. The stock market put in its worst performance since 2008. Interest rates returned (painfully) to more normal levels. Cyber currencies experienced a dose of realism. 

 

Internationally, Ukraine showed that people will fight for freedom, while both Russia and China suffered for a lack of the same.

 

Domestically, political extremism continues to command soapboxes, while political correctness continues to dominate educational and cultural institutions, but the air feels a little fresher. The old guard of political leaders are showing their age. It is my prediction that, in both parties, Generation Xers (1964-1980) will replace Boomers (1946-1964) in the next Presidential race. 

 

Sydney M. Williams

https://swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Whither Wisdom?”

January 2, 2023

 

“Wisdom is not a product of schooling, but of the lifelong attempt to acquire it.”

                                                                                         Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

                                                                                         Albert Einstein, the Human Side: from his Archives, 1981

                                                                                         Editors, Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman

 

When sixteen, with a new license in my wallet, I took my father for a drive. He cautioned me about driving too fast. I replied, “My reflexes are faster than yours.” “Yes,” he responded, “but you lack judgment.” His words were wise, while mine, which may have retained a scintilla of truth, were foolish.

 

Having good judgement means having the ability to see things from all sides, the ability to make a choice based on logic, experience, reason, and good sense. Good judgement is related to wisdom, which can be defined as having insight, understanding, perception, and common sense. Mimicking Einstein’s words in the rubric above, the four sources of wisdom, according to the Book of Proverbs, are: observation and experience, instruction based on experience, learning from mistakes, and revelation. The latter refers to the fact that the Bible teaches us that God is the ultimate source of wisdom. 

 

But today wisdom has yielded to wokeness, which is defined as the state of being aware of social problems: racism, inequality, sustainability, and injustice. Everyone agrees that racism and injustice should be combatted wherever found. We all agree that equality before the law is critical to a democracy, and that equal opportunities should be offered to all. But we are not equal in abilities or aspiration, so outcomes will never be equal. In his new book, Leadership: Six Studies in World Strategies, Henry Kissinger wrote of “the natural inequalities of endowments,” which should be harnessed “for the public good.” Individually, we should play to our strengths, be they academic, athletic, mechanical, or artistic. We should strive to do what we are best at: teaching, building homes, playing the Cello, investing, or plumbing. It is what makes a strong community. And while we should agree that care for the environment is a sacred trust, it would be foolish to let the quest for sustainability destroy our capitalist system, which has raised living standards, reduced poverty, and made life more bearable for the world’s poorest. We can and should do both.

 

In our desire for social justice, is it wise to eliminate merit as a requirement for admission to selective, public schools. In their zeal to call out inequality in economic outcomes, the woke fail to acknowledge that work provides dignity. In a Wall Street Journal review of The Myth of American Inequality by Phil Gramm, Robert Ekelund, and John Early, Charles Calomiris noted that in the bottom quintile of income earners only 36% of the people work, versus 92% of those in the middle quintile. While some of the poor cannot work, is not there a lesson in those statistics? And what about climate warriors? Approximately 79% of energy consumed in the U.S. comes from fossil fuels – coal, gas, and oil. While that percentage has declined, is it wise to sacrifice this energy source in a bid to get to “net zero” emissions by a set date, like 2050? – a goal called for by the President, but which the Electric Power Research Institute says is unrealistic.

 

On international tests, our public schools (K-12) perform poorly, especially when one considers the amount of money spent annually on a per student basis – the fifth highest of all countries, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. Yet the results are subpar. The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) conducts tests every three years for fifteen-year-olds. The most recent one from 2018, and released in December 2019, showed the United States 13 in reading, 18 in science, and 38 in math. (PISA tests for 2021 were postponed until 2022.) With such poor results, is it wise to offer a course on transgender studies when that time could be spent more productively, for example even reading Aesop’s Fables, each with its moral lesson? After all, Aesop was a former African slave who lived on the Greek Island of Samos 2,600 years ago, and the lessons his stories teach are timeless. Has social media made youth wiser, or has it made them more fragile, raising levels of anxiety? Is it wise for them to spend hours on Instagram or Tik Tok, subjecting themselves to taunts? They should be accountable, accept responsibility for their words and actions, not hide behind anonymous devices. They should rid themselves from making half-assed excuses for failure, like claiming victimhood. As well, the unwise suppression of speech by universities and media outlets – decisions justified with claims of hate, disinformation, and a failure to “follow the science.” 

 

Is it wise for a government with $31 trillion in national debt and almost a hundred trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities for Medicare and Social Security – about $400,000 for every man, woman, and child – to continue to add to its debt? Will not those obligations, combined with tighter regulations and higher taxes, cause interest rates to rise and negatively impact future economic growth? Did not the Federal Reserve decision to keep Fed Funds below two percent for fifty-one of the last fifty-six quarters discourage savings and encourage asset speculation?

 

An absence of wisdom defines our nation. Has it been wise to leave our southern border essentially open? Was it wise to weaponize the FBI and the Justice Department to combat political enemies? Has it been wise for media – both traditional and social – to suppress news that does not comply with political ideologies, like the Hunter Biden Laptop story? Is it wise to test people for Covid who enter the U.S. from China, but not test those, including ones from China, who illegally cross into the U.S. from Mexico?

 

Political wisdom is rare, for most politicians are focused on the next election. But our schools, universities, and news outlets should be founts of practical wisdom, for their concern should be the molding of people to think freely and independently, not to create puppets spewing back ideologies. Our nation depends on an educated and informed citizen. In J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Two Towers Sam Gamgee speaks to Frodo Baggins: “It’s a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don’t keep your feet, there’s no telling where you might be swept off to.” Every day we step out our doors, and when foolishness leads the world becomes dangerous. We must ensure that we are intellectually and emotionally prepared, so that our democratic republic survives attacks, from both without and within. 

 

We live in a time of extraordinary technological change, especially in the fields of communication and social media, giving us little time to reflect and absorb. Thirty-five years ago, in Isaac Asimov’s Book of Science and Nature, Professor Asimov was quoted: “The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society can gather wisdom.” Today the world is changing even faster than it was in 1988. However, over two hundred years ago, in Literary Remains, Samuel Taylor Coleridge wrote, “Common sense, in an uncommon degree, is what the world calls wisdom.” Wise words. So, we don’t have to be Solomons, Aristotles, or Coleridges. We should be both curious and cautious; we should read and question; we should reason, and we should take time away from our devices to quietly think. 

 

Where has wisdom gone? Into the vapors of political correctness? Perhaps. The common-sensical wisdom which I mourn is more natural than its contrived woke replacement. My wish for 2023 is to see its return – something to consider as 2023 unfolds.