US War Crime Violation

 This essay was sent to the Henderson County Democratic Party as strategic tool for engaging its members by providing a means for taking a personal action. This essay may be adapted for use in any county or precinct in the country.

 Facts (science) and knowledge (education) are the foundations for human progress

 

A US Violation of International Law 

President Trump issued a profanity-laden social media post on Sunday morning, warning Iran about the Strait of Hormuz, as the conflict continued to escalate. NPR, 4/5/2026

In the Truth Social post, Trump threatened Iran over the strategic waterway, writing: "Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran," and adding, "Open the F***in' Strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in Hell - JUST WATCH!"

“WASHINGTON—Negotiators are pessimistic Iran will bend to meet President Trump’s demand to reopen the Strait of Hormuz before his Tuesday-night deadline, paving the way for the U.S. to target Iranian bridges and power plants in a fresh escalation of the war.”  WSJ, April 6, 2026

Civilian infrastructure is protected by international law. If the United States carries out these threats under orders from Trump, our country will be violating international law and our President guilty of committing war crimes. This is not the example our country should be setting for world.

What You Can Do Now

·         Share this e-mail with a friend.

·         Post on Social Media

·         Join your neighbors in (Precinct Name) to help make a difference

o   (Precinct e-mail address link)

o   Phone or text (Full name and phone number)

·         Copy the letter below and e-mail the letter to our elected representatives (their addresses are listed below).

Do not allow the United States to violate international humanitarian standards. Assert Congressional authority over Trump’s unauthorized war by specifically prohibiting the President of the United States from targeting Iranian bridges, power plants, and civilian infrastructure as required by international law.

Here’s how you can contact each of your federal representatives from North Carolina: Each of the links below takes you to a secure web form where you can email a copy of the letter directly, or phone or mail a copy to:

📬 Senator Thom Tillis

·         Email Contact Form: Email Senator Tillis

·         Phone: (202) 224-6342

·         Mailing Address: 185 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510

📬 Senator Ted Budd

·         Email Contact Form: Email Senator Budd

·         Phone: (202) 224-3154

·         Mailing Address: 217 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510

📬 Representative Chuck Edwards

·         Email Contact Form: Email Congressman Edwards

·         Phone: (202) 225-6401

·         Mailing Address: 1505 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515

 

An Explanation of the purpose of the "call for action" as a strategic tool

The “Call to Action” proposal has two functions:

·         The Primary one is as a tool for eliciting engagement and participation

·         The Secondary one content – to provide information

Sending the “Call to Action” as one of a stand-alone series serves both functions. It is the first step of a series, e.g. one a week for 4 weeks or more.

·         The 4 options for the receiver of sharing, posting, responding, or sending a letter are to get the person to do something that is quick and easy, now! Read and respond in 2 minutes.

·         We (the County or Precinct) code whether the e-mails are opened.

·         Individuals who have received a series of calls for action, or who have responded directly, are then contacted by phone to find out what kinds of issues they are most concerned about, what the Party (or Precinct) is trying to do, and if someone who shares their concerns could phone them to talk to about what those of us in our precinct are trying to do.

·         For those who agree to be phoned, the person who will phone them sends them a text about what would be a good time to talk – makes an appointment.

When this happens, the person has already made 3 small commitments. That is the way you get (nudge) volunteers to man the phone banks, watch the polls, etc. For example: Finding 5 people to help a project leader implement a sequential plan to create “Democratic Cells” in gated and closed communities. Most people the leader gets to talk to in detail about an issue that is of personal concern will get involved about what they can do and will volunteer to help.

 

The Power of Balance

The political, social, and economic forces of change are dependent, interactive, and simultaneous. They are not independent, hierarchical, and sequential.

 Source: Originally published by Z, March 31, 2026.  Feel free to share widely.

The Power of Balance

 Edward Renner

The distinction between a conservative Republican and a liberal Democratic Party is no longer useful. Both are using singular political ideological perspectives which oversimplify the complexity of our current social issues. This has left the nation without clear positive alternatives to deal with the disruption of rapid change. In addition, the takeover of the Republican Party by Trump and the right-wing MAGA movement has elevated political power at the expense of essential economic and social constraints. There is now a choice before us – either create a functional democracy that is relevant to modern life in the 21^st Century or default into an authoritarian style of dysfunctional government.

Complexity Not Simplicity 

The significant social issues of our time all have political, social and economic elements that must be considered simultaneously. A recent example was the politicization of COVID management that rejected a mandatory mask or vaccine mandate because it was an infringement on personal freedom. This is a singular political perspective that overrides the social and economic elements of the pandemic and failed to identify the most appropriate comprehensive set of management practices when all three elements are simultaneously considered. 

Likewise with the current stalemate in response to climate change, the political, social, and economic elements are interactive and must be reconciled with each other simultaneously. Science has shown us that we are consuming our global resources faster than the earth can regenerate them. We know we are killing the very planet we need to sustain ourselves. The environmental collapse resulting from climate change can only be addressed by global cooperation and agreements, which have political, social, and economic components.

Such objective, definable “social issues” only appear to be intractable because they are complex, and because the relationship between their three components must be reconciled. The three elements are all exponential, not linear, functions.  An exponential function is a rate of change which gets larger (or smaller) over a series of steps. While a linear function adds a fixed amount at every step, an exponential function multiplies by a fixed amount at every step. An example is wealth and income disparities in the United States in which the bottom percentages of people have little money, while the upper 1% have huge amounts of wealth.

Such complex social problems cannot be solved if we continue to treat them, from either a simple liberal or conservative ideology, as if the three element are independent, hierarchical, and successive. The required task is to account for the complex interplay between these three elements as dependent, interactive, and simultaneous.

Dependent, Interactive, and Simultaneous

 The political, social, and economic elements are components of a single entity. This requires the resolution of three vectors in three-dimensional space defined by the three elements, not a linear projection from a single primary political, social, or economic perspective. In plain language, the value of each of the three depends on the value of the other two; they combine to form the whole package (i.e., unity, 100%).

If the goal is to maximize the positive value of each of the political, economic, and social elements, then the resulting consequence is that as one element increases toward its own upper limit, the corresponding values of the other two elements must decrease to maintain the overall balance. This relationship illustrates that the value of any single element is not independent; rather, its exponential value is determined by its relation to the other two. Thus, any efforts to maximize one element will inevitably require even larger concessions in the others, demonstrating the dependent, interactive, and simultaneous nature of the three elements.

A Graphic Example

In practical terms this translates into a situation in which any one of the factors can increase its relative weight only at the expense of reducing the relative weight of either one, or both, of the remaining two. Because the function is exponential rather than linear, there is a balance point in which the sum of the three is maximized; but, if any one of the factors approaches the limit, the value of the other two approach zero. The attached graphic illustrates the principle that balance has greater utility than even a small increase in the role of any one of the three elements.

 In the context of the current concern over the shift toward authoritarianism in the US, the graphic illustrates how marginal increase of political power, beyond the balance level, can be achieved only at a cost of extreme reductions in economic and/or social institutions and their stability. Changing the balance among the three elements by increasing political authority is therefore extremely disruptive to the integrity of the democratic process.

The Utility of Balance, illustrated by the graphic, goes well beyond the specific illustration of the abuse of authoritarian power in a democracy, such as the negative social consequence of greater economic inequalities.

For example, holding the political element constant at the balanced value, relatively small additional increases in the concertation of wealth above the balanced level will produce significantly larger decreases in the strength and effectiveness of social institutions and services as illustrated in the second figure. This application of the model illustrates the exponential effect of diminishing marginal utility: An extra $100 for a billionaire has no social or personal value, but for a destitute person, a meal and warm bed have many more times of social and personal value.

Raw Political Power

Contemporary examples of the excessive exercise of political power in the United States are detailed by Joseph O’Neill in Trump’s exercise of raw power. These include such items as his efforts at annexing Greenland, rupturing NATO, transforming the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security into political security forces, ICE abducting children and breaking into homes without a judicial warrant, and in Minneapolis, shooting of a peaceful protester. His conclusion was:

 “Trump and the Republican Party have embarked on a new stage of authoritarianism: an imperialistic foreign policy, extrajudicial murders on the high seas, and the mass deployment of Border Patrol and ICE agents into Democratic cities…(as) an unprecedented spectacle of democratic implosion.”

Left unchecked, the imbalance illustrated in the graphic example could become a reality for the United States as it has in other authoritarian nations, such as Putin’s Russia. The ineffectiveness of the Democratic Party to meet this challenge is as large of a problem as the effectiveness of the Republican Party. There is no viable future if we anchor our beliefs, values, and actions on Nationalism, Prohibitions and Censorship, and Privatization as Trump and the Republican Party are now doing; those authoritarian policies are not compatible with living successfully in the globalized modern world.

Two Principles

First, the significant challenges of our time, such as environmental collapse and international law and order, are like a complex mobile -- messing with any single part ruins the whole piece. Our current ideological political divide is messing with one part of our urgent challenges, while the whole package has three parts that must be considered simultaneously. The three elements are not independent, hierarchical, and sequential. Singular ideological political perspectives are not only a distraction, but they are also dangerous.

Second, increasingly we need to move toward relying on the greater utility (power) of balance rather than striving to achieve the balance of (political) power. This is the exact opposite of MAGA and America First. The greater utility of the “power of balance” rather than owning the “balance of power” applies not only to the relationship among nations and the effects of economic inequalities, but also to the relationships between individuals for a peaceful and more cooperative world.

 

This “Call to Action” was sent to the Henderson County Democratic Party as strategic communication tool for engaging its members by providing a means for taking an immediate personal action. This is Public Domain material that may be adapted for local use.

Facts (science) and knowledge (education) are the foundations for human progress.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Tariffs 

“Mr. Trump is the first president to claim that a 1970s emergency statute, which does not mention the word “tariffs,” allowed him to unilaterally impose the duties without congressional approval…on imported goods from more than 100 countries…The (Supreme Court) ruling eliminated Mr. Trump’s primary tool for imposing tariffs, but he moved to work around the court by imposing levies using other trade powers. He cited Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act in setting the (new)10 percent (global) tariff…” (NYT, Feb. 20, 2026) 

No president before him has ever invoked these provisions to establish tariffs. The new 10% tariffs, like the use of the Emergency Act ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, also will be challenged in the courts starting a new round of economic uncertainty, and which are particularly offensive to our allies. 

As noted in The Atlantic, “One institution could put an end to all of this at any time: Congress. The Constitution gives the legislative branch the power to regulate international trade; the only reason Trump is able to levy tariffs at all is because of previous laws passed by Congress that (may) have given him that authority. Congress could decide to take that authority away.”

What You Can Do

Tell Congress to reclaim its Constitutional authority over tariffs by passing a resolution revoking Sections 122 and 300 of the 1974 Trade Act, neither of which explicitly includes the power to arbitrarily set global tariff rates.

·         Share this e-mail with a friend.

·         Post on Social Media

·         Copy the letter below and e-mail the letter to our elected representatives (their addresses are listed below).

End the new global tariff imposed by Trump by passing a resolution revoking Sections 122 and 300 of the 1974 Trade Act. This will allow the United States to normalize our trade relationship with our allies through mutually beneficial bilaterial agreements approved by Congress.

Here’s how you can contact each of your federal representatives from North Carolina: Each of the links below takes you to a secure web form where you can email a copy of the letter directly, or phone or mail a copy to:

📬 Senator Thom Tillis

·         Email Contact Form: Email Senator Tillis

·         Phone: (202) 224-6342

·         Mailing Address: 185 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510

📬 Senator Ted Budd

·         Email Contact Form: Email Senator Budd

·         Phone: (202) 224-3154

·         Mailing Address: 217 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510

📬 Representative Chuck Edwards

·         Email Contact Form: Email Congressman Edwards

·         Phone: (202) 225-6401

·         Mailing Address: 1505 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515

 

This “Call to Action” was sent to the Henderson County Democratic Party as strategic communication tool for engaging its members by providing a means for taking an immediate personal action. This is Public Domain material that may be adapted for local use.

Facts (science) and knowledge (education) are the foundations for human progress.

Trump Revokes Clean Air Act 

“On Thursday, the Trump administration rescinded the central scientific finding that underpins much of the nation's climate pollution rules, its most aggressive action yet to halt initiatives that address planetary warming.

The 2009 Environmental Protection Agency endangerment finding was a determination that pollutants from developing and burning fossil fuels, such as methane and carbon dioxide, can be regulated under the Clean Air Act. The EPA now argues that the Clean Air Act does not give it the legal authority to regulate greenhouse gases.” (Feb.  12, NPR)

As reported in Forbes, “A rapidly warming climate, resulting from excessive use of fossil fuels, is an intensifying threat to humanity that requires dramatic action. That would seem to be a sufficiently persuasive argument, but there’s another: Clean energy and electric vehicles are booming businesses. In 2025, the world spent $2.3 trillion on wind, solar and other forms of renewable energy … renewable energy is by far the fastest-growing source both in the U.S. and globally. And as Trump focuses on getting more power from oil, gas and coal, China has surged past the U.S. as the top supplier of clean energy tech that’s in far greater demand globally.”

Tell Congress to pass a resolution confirming the regulatory authority of the EPA over greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.

 Support This Congressional Action

·         Share this e-mail with a friend.

·         Post on Social Media

·         Copy the letter below and e-mail the letter to our elected representatives (their addresses are listed below).

A rapidly warming climate, resulting from excessive use of fossil fuels, is an intensifying threat to humanity that requires dramatic action. The Trump administration asserted that the Clean Air Act does not give the EPA the legal authority to regulate greenhouse gases. Pass a resolution confirming the regulatory authority of the EPA over greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.

Here’s how you can contact each of your federal representatives from North Carolina: Each of the links below takes you to a secure web form where you can email a copy of the letter directly, or phone or mail a copy to:

📬 Senator Thom Tillis

·         Email Contact Form: Email Senator Tillis

·         Phone: (202) 224-6342

·         Mailing Address: 185 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510

📬 Senator Ted Budd

·         Email Contact Form: Email Senator Budd

·         Phone: (202) 224-3154

·         Mailing Address: 217 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510

📬 Representative Chuck Edwards

·         Email Contact Form: Email Congressman Edwards

·         Phone: (202) 225-6401

·         Mailing Address: 1505 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515

 

This essay was sent to the Henderson County Democratic Party as a way to engage its members by providing a means for taking a personal action. As Public Domain material this essay may be adapted for use in any county or precinct in the country.

Edward Renner

Facts (science) and knowledge (education) are the foundations for human progress.

A Presidential Memorandum 

On January 7, 2026 Donald Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum directing all government agencies, and particularly the Secretary of State, to take immediate steps to withdraw the United States from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

“The UNFCCC treaty forms the bedrock for international cooperation to deal with the climate crisis, and it has been agreed to by every country in the world since its inception 34 years ago.  The US Senate ratified the treaty in October 1992” (The Guardian).

 Science has shown us that we are consuming our global resources faster than the earth can regenerate them. We know we are killing the very planet we need to sustain ourselves. The environmental collapse resulting from climate change can only be addressed by global cooperation and agreements. One rogue nation, the size of the US, has the capacity to undermine the processes required to ensure not only our own future health and safety, but also that of the rest of the world. The President of the US does not have the moral right nor the legitimate authority to do so. Every person and nation has an ethical responsibility and the legitimate obligation to revoke the enactment of this Memorandum.

Congress ratified the treaty and Congress must now reassert its authority by confirming the US continued participation in the UNFCCC.

Support This Congressional Action

·         Share this e-mail with a friend.

·         Post on Social Media

·         Copy the letter below and e-mail the letter to our elected representatives (their addresses are listed below).

We do not live in a fact-free world. An executive action cannot erase established scientific information or override Congressional authority. Congress must reassert its authority by confirming the US continued participation in the UNFCCC. The President of the US does not have the moral right nor the legitimate authority with a Presidential Memorandum to remove the United States from this treaty ratified by Congress in 1992.

Here’s how you can contact each of your federal representatives from North Carolina: Each of the links below takes you to a secure web form where you can email a copy of the letter directly, or phone or mail a copy to:

 

📬 Senator Thom Tillis

·         Email Contact Form: Email Senator Tillis

·         Phone: (202) 224-6342

·         Mailing Address: 185 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510

📬 Senator Ted Budd

·         Email Contact Form: Email Senator Budd

·         Phone: (202) 224-3154

·         Mailing Address: 217 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510

📬 Representative Chuck Edwards

·         Email Contact Form: Email Congressman Edwards

·         Phone: (202) 225-6401

·         Mailing Address: 1505 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515

 

 

 

The Democratic Challenge

The Republican Party has falsely claim ownership of Patriotism (by defining it as America First), Freedom (by defining it as deregulation of essential constraints) and Universal Public Services (by defining efficiency as its standard).

The Democratic Challenge 

Edward Renner

The distinction between a conservative Republican and a liberal Democratic Party is no longer useful. The takeover of the Republican Party by Trump and the right-wing MAGA movement has left the nation without a clear positive alternative. The stakes are totally different now. There is a choice before us – either create a functional democracy that is relevant to life in the 21^st Century or default into an alternative authoritarian style of government.

We as a nation, as individuals, and our essential institutions – education, science, and technology – need to move forward into a new and challenging future by focusing our beliefs, values, and actions on true Patriotism, Freedom, and Public Services. There is no viable future if we anchor our beliefs, values, and actions on Nationalism, Prohibitions and Censorship, and Privatization as the Republican Party is now doing; those policies are not compatible with living successfully in the globalized modern world.

True Patriotism Not Extreme Nationalism

True American patriotism dictates policies based on national values and beliefs – such as democratic processes --to achieve political, economic, and social ends. In contrast, extreme Nationalism seeks power, economic advantage, and social influence by any means; my country right or wrong is false patriotism. It is the difference between character and integrity verses self-serving indifference. Extreme Nationalism is incompatible with the patriotic values that make America a good neighbor and the envy of the world. Patriotic citizens take pride when the United States provides leadership in maintaining a global world order in which all countries can thrive cooperatively together.

Democracies are supposed to reflect the character and values of their citizens. In contrast, authoritarian countries typically reflect the personal character of their leader – such as Putin’s Russia. In the world’s view, the United States is becoming more like Russia, than the Uncle Sam they used to know. It is time to turn our back on the self-serving character of Trump and reclaim the national character of the best of us.

As a simple example, Trump’s tariffs, which targeted Canada, stimulated Canadian proposals to open a seaport on the Hudson Bay’s western shores, extend an oil pipeline to it, and mine rare minerals in the Ring of Fire north of Thunder Bay, all aimed at an Asian alternative to the US market. Economically, this would be disruptively expensive for Canada, but in the long-term feed a transition from the US being their good neighbor to the south to those people next door.

The isolation that results from extreme nationalism undermines the political, economic, and social beliefs and values that define America’s character.

Freedom, Not Prohibitions and Censorship, Based Government

Personal freedoms require a transparent democratic process to establish regulations that protect the freedom of everyone. We are not free to drive our car at any speed, anytime, in any place, because we may harm others. Freedom carries with it many limitations and responsibilities. Political freedom ensures the ability to criticize elected officials but also requires absolute restrictions against retribution. Economic freedom allows for corporations to determine production conditions but also includes constraints – like speed limits – such as a minimum wage standard and the right for workers to form a union for collective bargaining. Social freedom permits the right to practice whatever religion you wish, or none, but also requires the complete separation of church and state. The call for “deregulation” is often a form of “unfreedom” when it results in the elimination of essential constraints for protecting freedom.

 Prohibitions and censorship reverse the order by telling you what you cannot or must do, and freedom becomes a residual without reference to whether the prohibitions and orders needlessly infringe on the rights and freedoms of others. Prohibitions and censorships reflect authoritarian power to do as I say, not as you wish within transparent responsible constraints.

Universal Public Services Not Privatization

The revenue to make the government work comes largely from taxes. Tax cuts benefit the wealthy at the expense of ordinary people who rely daily on access to many public services to function within their own resources – roads, airports, communication, commerce, schools, science, education, healthcare – to name some of the most essential. The loss of free school lunches or Medicaid for their children does not have an impact on the wealthy whose children go to a private school and whose employer provides premium healthcare benefits. Tax-cuts return comparatively small amounts of money to the average person – not enough to cover the additional costs of privatization of essential universal public services, from National Parks to old age security. Tax cuts do return large amounts of money to the wealthy who are using their political power to increase their own wealth at the expense of others.

Over the course of our modern history, our government has accounted for about 20% of the GDP to keep all the moving parts in synchrony. Although the constitution had nothing to say about air traffic controllers or the regulation of radio waves, as the world became more complex, so did governmental responsibilities at a parallel rate. We are now in the emerging era of artificial Intelligence which discards human roles and occupations, and with them, the personal identity of individuals. Our security, freedom and identity now require our government to provide a coherent new system in which to function, and the means for individuals to thrive in a new era, free of the costs of privatization of the blooming benefits of modern scientific and technological progress.

A Positive Agenda for Going Forward

As a Nation we need to put Nationalism, Prohibitions and Censorship, and Privatization in the rearview mirror, and create a new day of true Patriotism, Freedom, and Public Service as the means to meet the new urgent challenges of the modern world. There is a clear positive legislative and policy alternative for creating a functional democracy that is relevant to life in the 21^st Century, rather than defaulting into an alternative authoritarian style of government.

 Can a functional democracy emerge from the current chaos; can education survive the direct attacks on the very foundations of a democratic society; and will the relinquishment by the Democratic Party of true patriotism, freedom, and public service mark the day American Democracy died?

_________________________________________________________________________

Also see the “Disruptions of Change” and the process of “Forums for a Future” by Edward Renner for meeting the challenges of life in the 2st Century.

 

 

Originally Published by Z as open source. Feel free to share. https://znetwork.org/znetarticle/the-challenge-of-our-time/

“Forums for a Future” are a means for personally and socially confronting the challenge of our time: Finding ways to live peacefully and sustainably on a crowded planet in the 21^st Century.

 The Challenge of Our Time 

Edward Renner

Rapid technological and social change is a powerfully disruptive force – a wave of creative destruction -- leaving in its wake a residue of vulnerable people. People are losing a sense of control over their life. They are becoming insecure about how to retain their place and purpose. These creative disruptions of change are not about liberal or conservative political ideologies; rather, they are deeply felt personal psychological issues.

“Forums for a Future” are a personal and social process for restoring civic discussion and reducing divisive political polarization. The substance of the Forums – the significant social issues of our time – only appear to be intractable because they are complex and because there are no simple solutions. The changes that must be made to live in the future all have political, economic, and social elements which need to be reconciled with each other. To move beyond our current political polarization, the requirement is to account for the complex interplay between these three elements: they are interactive, simultaneous, and interdependent. They are not independent, hierarchical, and sequential.

Most people, from all walks of life, and all educational levels, will need to discover new ways of thinking to restore a sense of purpose and direction to living, and to retain a personal identity suitable for an uncertain future. This paper describes a tested methodology that can serve as an example of how we can begin the process of thinking about the future as disruptive events that are defining a new reality – not about competing political ideologies.

Format for Forums for a Future

Forums for a Future are for use with any established group of people -- such as students in a high school or college class, a discussion club, or any established group who share a common connection. They have general applicability to a wide range of divisive social issues. The Forums are not debates over who is right or wrong, nor are they designed to reach a group consensus. Rather, to identify different perspectives and the fundamental beliefs and values on which they are they based.

For each discussion the participants read an essay on a specific topic to provide a common reference point and to establish a factual focus for the discussion. The moderator is responsible for ensuring that a situation does not unfold where some participants are basing their perspective on one set of facts, and others as if the opposite is true. If essential facts are unknown, there is no reasonable discussion to be had.

Before starting any discussion, each participant fills out an opinion questionnaire by selecting either strongly agree, agree, mildly agree, mildly disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree with an assertion about the topic of the forum (e.g., “A person should have the right to choose whether to receive the COVID vaccine, versus government authorized vaccine mandates”). Those who agree sit on one side of the room, facing those who disagree.

Another task of the moderator is to facilitate the order of speakers. After a person has spoken, they cannot speak again when anyone else is waiting their turn; this is necessary to avoid two-way dialogues.  When there is full participation and when one person cannot dominate, individuals become thoughtful before taking their turn to speak.

 There are no arguments. If a person on the other side says something that one disagrees with, the only permittable response is to say, “l think about it differently, for these reasons….” The goal is to learn how others are thinking about the question, and why. Listening to another’s explanation offers the opportunity for self-reflection and self-directed change. Each person owns their own identity.

I have moderated many such Forums. It is a rewarding experience to observe a diverse group of people sort through clusters of competing personal values to come to broader individual perspectives. From session to session, the two sides keep reconstituting themselves; the person sitting beside you this time was on the opposite side of the room the last time. Participants see each as more complex rather than simply “them” and “us.”

Forums do not result in absolute answers – a product -- on what living in the foreseeable future should or would be like. Rather, each Forum is a unique process; different people reach thoughtful and respectful conclusions at different times, on different issues, in personal ways. In part, this is a psychological process that helps an individual to develop a personal identity.

An Illustrative Forum on: “The Challenge of our Time”

My illustrative Forum on “The Challenge of Our Time” -- of living peacefully and sustainably on a crowded planet in the 21^st Century – asks three questions:

1.      How to Establish and Maintain a Peaceful and Cooperative World Order

2.      How to Live Sustainably, Inclusively, and Equitably on a Diverse and Crowed Planet

3.      How to use the power of 21^st Century Science, Technology, and Artificial Intelligence to Advance Human Well Being and Social Progress.

 Each of three questions for discovering how to live in the future requires the simultaneous integration of four elements into a coherent sense of direction and common purpose. Each of the four are inter-dependent and simultaneous; they are not hierarchical or sequential:

1.      The Political

2.      The Social

3.      The Economic

4.      The Psychological (i.e., Personal)

The three questions and the four perspectives create a 12-cell discussion matrix for a single “Forums for a Future.” There are multiple examples of specific current disruptions that fit in each of the 12 cells; thus, there are an infinite number of possible Forums, each with 12 sessions to complete a full series on a given topic, as illustrated in the template below:

The Challenges of our Time	A  Political Elements	B  Social Elements	C Economic Elements	D Psychological Elements
I.  How to Establish and Maintain a Peaceful and Cooperative World Order	I.  A	I.  B	I.  C	I.  D
II.  How to Live Sustainably, Inclusively, and Equitably on a Diverse and Crowed Planet	II.  A	II.  B	II.  C	II.  D
III. How to use the power of 21st Century Science, Technology, and Artificial Intelligence to Advance Human Well Being and Social Progress	III.  A	III.  B	III.  C	III.  D

 Each of the cells has a link to a reading that defines a perspective on a specific issue. After reading the reference piece, each participant (a) rates on a six -point scale whether they agree or disagree with an assertion about the issue, (b) writes and shares with the group an explanation of their thinking and reasoning, (c) considers and discusses the explanations written by others, and (d) then arrives at a thoughtful and respectful written final personal conclusion and repeats the six-point rating scale.

The six-point rating scale provides a quantitative, before and after, empirical metric for identifying where changes of thinking occurred, and the content of the individual material provides the basis for a qualitative analysis. At the end of the 12-week series, the individual task is to better understand their personal cognitive changes and the principles of the process.  At the national level, we need to discover new roles and methods for life-long learning. Ideally, misinformation and conspiracy theories are best corrected through personal civic engagement, not through content regulation of social media or educational institutions.

For my illustrative example on The Challenge of Our Time, I have created a sample matrix with suggested readings for each discussion, that can be freely used or revised. As a generalized methodology, the matrix can be modified to address other divisive topics – such as reproductive rights or transgender issues as examples – by redefining the rows and selecting appropriate reference material for the cells of the matrix. I have 100s of potential reference articles in my Forums for a Future Library for alternative matrixes. Suitable material is not hard to find.

We need to focus on the disruptions of technological and social change, and on the future – rather than political ideologies – as one antidote to the polarizing effect of selective news and social media channels.

____________________________________________________________________________

Edward Renner is a retired Professor of Psychology who has taught at the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Illinois, and the University of South Florida.