"Trust"

 Watching Biden’s press conference on Wednesday afternoon, I felt sorry for the man, anger at those responsible for him and embarrassed for our country. Perhaps it is my age, and apologies to all millennials, but, with few exceptions, most of the reporters struck me as children.

 

Fortunately, we are a large and diverse nation, with a deep bench of competent people, so I believe we will get through this period. But, like Job, we are being tried.

 

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

 

Thought of the Day

“Trust”

January 21, 2022

 

“Trust dies, but mistrust blossoms.”

                                                                                                                Attributed to Sophocles (c. 496BC – 406BC)

 

Like all species (or, at least, those of which I am aware), man is born with an innate trust for the female who gave him birth. We would not survive, without the care and feeding by she who gave us life. As we age, caution grows. As Sophocles said, “mistrust blossoms.” Nature has instilled in most animals a sense of wariness of danger, be it predators, fire or some other peril. This allows the rabbit to avoid the coyote, the mole to avoid the fox, or the deer to run from man. We have the same instincts. It is why the hair on the back of our neck stands up when unseen hazards lurk, or why we become suspicious when someone says, “trust me.”

 

Trust is akin to a sixth sense, like echolocation that allows bats to fly in the dark. It is defined as a belief in the reliability of someone or something, be it a spouse or an automobile. It reflects both emotion and reasoning, as in the faithfulness of a relationship, or the trust we have for an old car. Trust in the business world, according to a December 2021 article in The Atlantic, is about two things: competence and character. Once lost, it is hard to re-build. The article suggests three steps to help recover lost trust: the use of humor, sharing one’s vulnerabilities and promoting transparency – lessons for those who govern us.  

 

A September 2021 Gallup Poll found trust in government near record lows. It mimicked a Pew Research Center survey published last May. The Pew poll saw trust in government at 24% as of April 2021. That could be compared to trust in government at 68% during the height of the anti-War movement in 1968. The Gallup poll showed that a lack of trust in government extends to all branches; it is lowest in the legislative branch and highest in local governments. In the Gallup poll, a mere 7% of respondents had a great deal of trust in the media. As recently as September 2018, that number stood at 14%. Distrust in government and the media may manifest wisdom on the part of the people, but it reflects poorly on those judged. 

 

It is ironic that in the mid 1960s, amid Civil Rights and the early stages of the anti-war movement, left-wing rioters protested a government more trusted than today’s. Then, the establishment was the enemy. Today, those weed-smoking, long-haired, unwashed hippies of the ‘60s have become the establishment – in academia and Washington. They still profess to be of the left yet are now elites who champion conformity and dependence and have become censors of what they dislike. Can we trust them to select and train the best future leaders of this country based on an equitable distribution of race, ethnicity and gender? What does it mean for the United States if they ignore traits that built this nation, like character and merit?

 

Trust among individuals is pervasive or should be. Love of a spouse is based on trust. We learn to trust that our children have learned and adopted the values we taught them. We trust that our computers will start when turned on, that the mailman will deliver our Christmas cards and that the supermarket will stock the milk we want. When approaching an intersection, with the green light in our favor, we trust that unseen traffic coming at right angles will obey the red light they face. But trust without skepticism, leavened with common sense, permits scammers, con-artists and swindlers to work their magic. In his 1991 horror novel Needful Things, Stephen King wrote: “The trust of the innocent is the liar’s most useful tool.” But his next three sentences – all questions – put his observation into better perspective: “So, is it wrong to love from the bottom of one’s heart? Is trust now forbidden because cheats and liars are on the prowl? What if we were all too wise to trust anymore?” Good questions not easily answered.

 

Trust can be good or bad, depending on the situation. In dealing with the Soviets in the mid 1980s, President Reagan borrowed an old, commonsensical Russian expression, doveral, no proveral, “trust, but verify.” On March 3^rd, 1865, Abraham Lincoln signed a bill that allowed James Pollack, Director of the U.S. Mint (who apparently did not trust mortals for the health of the U.S. currency), to place the words “In God We Trust” on all gold and silver coins. Given our current crop of politicians and bureaucrats, it was a sensible decision. 

 

Trust must be earned, whether one is speaking of individuals or institutions. We cannot live civilized lives without trust, but neither can we exist as naïfs. In Ideas and Opinions, his 1954 collection of essays and letters, Albert Einstein wrote: “Every kind of peaceful cooperation among men is primarily based on mutual trust, and only secondarily on institutions such as courts of justice and police.” But those institutions, too, only function when they radiate trust. Trust is critical to happiness, yet it must be accompanied with agnosticism. A combat soldier is naturally anxious of the enemy and the unknown, but he must trust his comrades, his instincts and his weapon. The United States has survived as a democratic republic because the people have had trust in its institutions and for the individuals that work within them. However, when a political party chooses to rule, not govern, trust is lost. In 1775, it was distrust of the British government that allowed revolutionaries to sow seeds of independence, fight for liberty and let freedom flower. Trust is critical to our survival, but so are caution, common sense and wisdom.

"The COVID-19 Pandemic - Some Random Thoughts"

Sydney M. Williams

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

Thought of the Day

“The COVID-19 Pandemic – Random Thoughts”

March 18, 2020

“Fear cannot be banished, but it can be calm and without panic;

it can be mitigated by reason and evaluation.”

                                                                                                Vannevar Bush (1890-1975)

                                                                                                Scientist, Educator, Inventor

Sensible advice has been offered by many: Scrub your hands, socially distant yourself; isolate yourself if sick. Nevertheless, manifestations of fear and panic are all around us. Restaurants, bars and casinos have closed in the part of the Country where I live. Colleges have sent students home. Schools have been closed, while grocery stores cannot keep up with demand for toilet paper, hand-wipes, latex gloves, disinfectants and many other household and food products. ‘Social distancing’ is nowhere to be seen when it comes to filling one’s larder or closet. Yet, with the exception of products directly related to coronavirus, like hand-wipes and latex gloves, final demand for items like toilet paper and frozen foods will grow in terms of population expansion, or about 0.5 percent. (In Connecticut, population growth will probably decline about 0.2 percent, as it did in 2019.) Understocked shelves will become overstocked.

“Any man’s death diminishes me,” John Donne wrote, and all deaths are, indeed, to be regretted. But perspective should be maintained. The question we all struggle with: Is the fear we exhibit rational? We don’t know, but containment and mitigation seem to be working, at least in China and South Korea. According to their numbers, since last November China has had 190,000 individuals infected with COVID-19 (out of a population of 1.39 billion). Just under 7,500 have died, implying a mortality rate of 3.9 percent. Keep in mind, numbers from China are suspect and between 30,000 and 40,000 people die every day in their Country. South Korea’s statistics are likely more accurate. Their first case was noted on January 20. As of March 16, two hundred and twenty thousand people had been tested in South Korea, out of a population of 51.4 million, 8,320 cases had been confirmed and 81 had died, or just under one percent. Health officials in Seoul claimed on March 9 that their Country had passed the peak of the contagion. They credit their “trace, test and treat” system, where an individual can drive to a testing site and have samples taken from the back of one’s throat and nose. A few hours later, the individual will get a call if the test is positive or a text if it is negative.

The world was slow to take note of the seriousness of the crisis. China, a Communist dictatorship, delayed informing the outside world for a month and a half. More than three weeks after China did, and with the contagion already having infected half a dozen countries, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared, on January 23, that the coronavirus did not constitute a public emergency of international concern. (It would be March 11 before they declared it a pandemic.) Early on, the President was ahead of the curve. He formed a White House task force for coronavirus on January 29, led by Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Alexander Azar, and he shut down flights from China on January 31. On February 27, he placed Vice President Mike Pence in charge of the Task Force. Contrary to some reports, the White House did not “gut” the National Security Council’s counter pandemic effort. But he was slow in promoting tests for the virus and urging the search for a vaccine. He was not alone. The press was more interested in impeachment than in informing their readers and viewers of the virus China had exported, which was beginning to contaminate the world.

Throughout most of February and early March, the U.S., President Trump appeared to minimize the health impact of COVID-19, while he emphasized the need for calm. It was not surprising, and he was not alone. As a businessman, he knew what fear and panic do to an economy – creating artificial shortages, while negatively impacting economic growth. Keep in mind, every day the U.S. economy generates roughly $60 billion in national income. Shutting down commerce will have serious consequences for individuals, many of whom will be laid off, even if temporarily. Government will step in to help – the House passed an $850 billion stimulus bill yesterday – but we should not forget that we are already carrying the largest amount of debt, relative to GDP, since World War II. Adding another trillion is important now, but even low-cost debt must be repaid. When (not if) interest rates move back up, the pain is going to be severe – for governments, corporations and consumers. Neither should we forget that an economic system that preserves uneconomic businesses for “humanitarian” purposes is neither compassionate nor financially viable.

The closing of restaurants, gyms, casinos, schools, colleges and churches is critical and will limit the spread of the virus. While there is much that is unknown about COVID-19, it is known to have a high R0 (R naught), a mathematical determination of its contagion properties. Questions remain: Will healthcare be rationed? Will further restrictions be imposed? However, we cannot ignore its effect on the economy, the education of our youth and the social and spiritual well-being of us all. While we cannot return to normal, we must be alert to unintended consequences.

As well, we should be wary of hyperbole, of those who see a crisis as something for personal advantage. Last Sunday, Goldman Sachs, according to Zero Hedge journalist Tyler Durden, spoke to 1500 clients and told them 50% of Americans will contract the virus and that mortality rates could reach two percent. Perhaps they will be right, but that would contrast with less than one tenth of one percent of South Koreans and Chinese who have contracted the disease. In Italy, the 30,000 cases thus far represent about 0.05% of their population. In the U.S., the disease will become more widespread before it abates, but one wonders if Goldman was pandering to hedge funds that were short the market. If they were, they had happy clients on Monday, when the market dropped thirteen percent. It is only to be expected that Democrat Presidential candidates will use the virus against Mr. Trump. (Republicans would do the same were roles reversed.) We should also note the pandemic has brought a cease-fire – probably temporary – in the partisanship that has marked our politics. Both Governor Gavin Newsom of California and Andrew Cuomo of New York have praised the President for his response to the crisis. (A cynic might say they were looking for federal funds). However, Governor Cuomo complained on Monday that “the federal government has been behind on this crisis from day one.” Still, praise is praise.

In a recent column, Peggy Noonan wrote that telling people not to panic is bad advice. I disagree. People should be told to be wary, especially around the elderly and the vulnerable: to wash their hands regularly and vigorously, to avoid unnecessary personal contact, to sneeze or cough into a Kleenex or handkerchief, to use handwipes and surgical gloves when in stores, and to stay home, especially when a fever or cold persists. But we should not panic. “Panic,” as Stephen King once wrote, “is highly contagious, especially when nothing is known, and everything is in flux,” as it is now. Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote, “…panic is the terror of ignorance, surrendered to the imagination.” “Fear,” as Vannevar Bush is quoted in the rubric above, “cannot be banished,” but it can be rationalized. During the depths of the Depression, Franklin Roosevelt said, in a fireside chat, when so many were fearful: “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” Our hospitals and healthcare are second to none. Containment and mitigation will conquer COVID-19, so long as we comply with basic rules of hygiene and common sense. We cannot and should not, let fear and panic catapult us into a recession or worse – a situation where Constitutional rights are abrogated.

Burrowing into Books - "Lord of the Flies"

Sydney M. Williams

swtotd.blogspot.com

Burrowing into Books

Reviews of Selective Readings

                                                                                                                        September 11, 2018

“Lord of the Flies”

William Golding

“Evening was come, not with calm beauty but with the threat of violence.”

                                                                                                            Lord of the Flies, 1954

                                                                                                            William Golding (1911-1993)

It behooves us all, from time to time, to re-read those books we read when young, to see if they still hold our attention as they once did, to discover if their words still have their power, if lessons garnered today are different from ones learned as adolescents. An additional benefit, for those with children and grandchildren, is that doing so allows a connection with youth, for many of these books are included on summer reading lists.  Over the past five years I have read, or rather re-read, Moby Dick, Huckleberry Finn, The Lord of the Ringstrilogy and two of the Narnia Novels, along with half a dozen Dickens’ and other classics, like Lewis Carroll and A.A. Milne. Golding’s 1954 novel is another such example.

The story is disturbing, but apt at a time when bullying has become, if not more frequent, at least more discussed and when children are coddled, delaying the rigors and rules of adulthood. “Safe places” protect youths from uncomfortable words, but they leave them ill-prepared for the harshness and reality of adulthood. And we have all known children like Piggy who are teased without remorse; the quiet and illusive Simon; Ralph, who commands respect, and bullies like Jack. We have all been witness – adult and adolescent alike – to emotions that devolve into mass hatred. It is a sense of “there, but for the grace of God, go I” that makes this story so personally compelling.

William Golding – born in England in 1911 and Oxford educated – is the anti Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the 18^thCentury French philosopher who believed that a child was born with an immaculate spirit, untouched by culture and society. He wasmankind before tempted in the Garden of Eden. Golding wanted to correct that image – to show how young boys would behave when alone, without the influence of adults or any societal guidance. He based the story on an unsentimental understanding of what he had been like at the age of twelve or thirteen – that he could be kind and decent, but that he could also be monstrous: That evil is not learned, it is inherent – that devilish traits remain hidden behind a façade of rules necessary to live in civilized company. In his book, 12 Rules for Life, Jordan Peterson wrote: “Bullying at the sheer and often terrible intensity of the schoolyard rarely manifests itself in grown-up society. William Golding’s dark and anachronistic Lord of the Fliesis a classic for a reason.”

Lord of the Fliesis the story of boys surviving alone, amidst chaos, division and friendship, for a few weeks on an uninhabited island in the south Pacific. The plane, which had carried the boys, crashed. No adults survived, only a few dozen boys aged six to about thirteen. Ralph and Jack became leaders, reflecting opposing and conflicting traits: “Ralph,” as Stephen King wrote in the introduction of my copy, “embodied the values of civilization and Jack’s embrace of savagery and sacrifice represented the ease with which those values could be swept away.” Jack asks: “Who cares about rules?” Ralph responds he does: “Because rules are the only thing we’ve got.” A conch shell is used to assemble the boys. But a conch cannot substitute for the discipline of adults. While most young readers identify with Ralph, Piggy is the most memorable. Perhaps, because his character is more fully developed. Perhaps because the reader understands his physical vulnerability, despite his intelligence, condemns him to a tragic end.

The boys are eventually found. Smoke from an out-of-control fire alerts a passing British naval cruiser. Golding leaves us with these words: “Ralph wept for the end of innocence, the darkness of man’s heart, and the fall through the air of the true, wise friend called Piggy.” 

World War II, which had concluded less than a decade earlier, had shown the brutality of totalitarianism. Its opposite, anarchy, is also barbaric, which is what Golding wanted readers to understand. Civilization depends upon navigating the straits between the Scylla of the former and the Charybdis of the latter. What is wanted is a society that relies on common-sensical rules (laws), ones that reflect the will of the people, are binding and judiciously enforced, so that liberty is ensured and chaos avoided. What the boys learned (and hopefully what readers will as well)was what James Madison wrote in“Federalist 51”: “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.” But they are not, so it is.