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 Public Service (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.

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 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 marked 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.

 

 

Managing Change

Originally published in Z as open source. Feel free to share. https://znetwork.org/znetarticle/managing-the-disruptions-of-change-in-the-foreseeable-future/

“Powerless in the hands of disruptive change – informational technologies, environmental collapse, breakdown of international order, global waves of migration -- we stand at future’s gate, uncertain of our fate.”

 Managing the Disruptions of Change

In the Foreseeable Future 

Edward Renner

When my grandfather was born there were neither cars, airplanes, nor phones. Yet, before he died, man had walked on the moon. We now live in the Post-Modern World, with technological progress happening at an even faster rate.

 Rapid change is a powerfully disruptive force – a wave of creative destruction -- leaving in its wake a residue of vulnerable people. Illustrated by a strategy celebrated in the film “Money Ball,” a machine and a statistician can do a better job of making baseball decisions than a scout or manager. Now, a beginning surgeon can practice on an image, rather than a live patient. There are autonomous taxis to drive us and autonomous weapons to protect us, both without human intervention. They are all examples of human progress, of an emerging era of Artificial Intelligence which discards human roles and occupations, and with them, the personal identity of the individuals.

 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; they are deeply felt personal psychological issues.

Disruptive Changes

The magnitude and nature of change has dramatically shifted through history. For 5,000 years people lived in the past tense. Yesterday was the best predictor of their tomorrow. For the next 500 years – the Modern Era of science and technology, roughly from 1500 to 2000 – people lived in the present tense. Today could be whatever we wanted it to be. Now, for the next 50 years – roughly 2000 to 2050 – we must learn to live in the future tense. We must learn how to live today as if it were tomorrow, or there will not be a tomorrow worth living.

The rate of change is now so fast that individuals must make the transition from one historical era – the present to the autonomous future -- all within one lifetime. The magnitude of change we are facing has never been experienced before in the history of human existence. These are uncharted times that require adopting new ways of thinking.

In the distant the past, most of the events that impacted a person’s life were physically and temporally close at hand; but today the effects of change are increasingly external and arbitrary, and their mechanisms are largely distant and invisible. Our neighborhood is no longer the families on our block, or those on the other side of our town, city or even region. Our neighborhood now includes nations and people on the other side of the globe – who we have never seen nor spoken to – but who’s actions, beliefs, and values affect our daily lives in essential ways.

When people lose their personal sense of place, purpose, and control over their own fate, they become vulnerable to exploitation by opportunists offering solutions that promise to restore their lost identity.

The Opportunist

Opportunists give the vulnerable someone to be angry at. In the US today it is often immigrants or the 1%. “Us” versus “them” restores an identity, albeit a dysfunctional one. Human displacements and global migrations are here to stay for the foreseeable future, and the 1% are not going to relinquish their wealth and power within the current political and economic structures. In such situations, there is no middle ground between “us” and “them.” Both Conservatives and Progressives have propositions, with opposing alternatives, that are unacceptable to the other and unattainable.

In her book, There Is Nothing for You Here (2021), Fiona Hill, who is a specialist in Russian affairs and was an adviser to Presidents George Bush and Barack Obama, and Presidents Trump’s assistant on the National Security Council for Russian affairs, suggested that the political, social and economic situations in the US are becoming so severe – “there is nothing for you here” -- that they are undermining the foundations of our democracy, making us, similar to Russia, vulnerable to authoritarian appeals, which are responsible for our political divide between the left and the right.

The personal challenge today for the vulnerable – who will soon be the majority -- is to resist the opportunist who offers the simple political ideological solutions of left versus right. It is our mind that allows us to be fooled by the opportunist who plays on our fears of vulnerability – the loss of personal identity. 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, to retain a personal identity suitable for an uncertain future.

The End of Living in the Present Tense

The Modern Era gave us a sense of certainty. Science and knowledge advanced to such a degree that facts replaced faith and fate from the past, as the basis for daily living. We know that the heavens and the earth were not created in seven days, that humans evolved over thousands of years, and that space and the stars are an unknown infinite expanse. Because we understand causal relationships, events, such as the weather, have become largely predictable. Socially, we can reliably communicate with others at any time or place. Politically, we know about every nation on the planet and the people who live there. Economically we have the financial means and transportation necessary for global commerce.

 Science and technology have now taken us to the limits of the Modern Era. As our clearest example, we have the power to understand we are killing the very planet we need to sustain ourselves. History books are full of accounts of previous societies that collapsed because they depleted their local natural resources. Science has shown us that we are consuming our global resources faster than the earth can regenerate them, and that our consumption rate is increasing. By living as we do in the present tense, we are in the process of extinguishing ourselves. 

Collectively, humankind has no choice but to drastically change some of our most fundamental beliefs and values or become the authors of our own demise within our own lifetime. The future can no longer be an extension of the present; rather, the foreseeable future must now dictate the present.

 Living in the Future Tense

 At this moment, the most important challenge we face as individuals – making the transition from one historical era to the next, all within one lifetime – is a unique human experience. There are no guidelines for learning how to live today (the present tense) as if it were tomorrow (the future tense). Yet, if we are to have a worthwhile future for ourselves, we must create it ourselves in how we live today, in the present.

Living in the future tense means renegotiating our present values and behaviors to purposefully create a future we would consider worth living for. It will require a process of embracing complexity and adopting a perspective of time.

Embracing Complexity. Using singular political ideological perspectives – as we are now doing -- oversimplifies the complexity of our current social issues, resulting in seemingly irreconcilable differences. A recent example was the politicization of COVID management. To reject a mandatory mask or vaccine mandate because it is an infringement on personal freedom is a singular political perspective that over-rides the social and economic elements of the pandemic and fails 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.

These objective, definable “social issues” only appear to be intractable because they are complex and because there are no simple solutions. The changes that must made to live in the future tense all have political, economic, and social elements which need to be reconciled with each other. The new role for our individual perspectives is to account for the complex interplay between these three elements; they are interactive, simultaneous, and interdependent.

The singular political ideology of conservative vs liberal has divided the nation and paralyzed our transition from the Present Era to the New Post-Modern Future we must create within our lifetime. The immutable flow of the creative destructions of scientific and technological change does not follow the dictates of our political ideologies. It is time to get off the left versus right ideological merry-go-around, which is going nowhere in the present, and to get on the bullet train of time into the future. Time is the principal axis, and our political, social, and economic ideologies are simply perspectives and tools for adapting to (not degerming) the disruptions of change from scientific and technological innovations.

Adopting the Perspective of Time. We need to understand our current social issues through the comparative mental perspectives of distinguishing between thinking in the past, present, and future tense. For example, long in the past, severe weather was seen as the wrath of the Gods. Later, knowledge of the mechanics of the weather allowed us to predict and track hurricanes. Now, with a geological understanding of climate change we know that our children’s life will not be sustainable without significant disruptions to our current ways of thinking and living.

Just as the statues erected in the past to appease the anger of the Gods were ineffective in tempering the weather, so too are the institutions of today ineffective for solving the disruptive challenges we can anticipate. Complex issues rest on political, social, and economic values which at any moment are in a natural state of tension – they are dependent on each other, interactive and simultaneous. When a significant number of people can be persuaded that any one of the three – such a political ideology -- is an overarching hierarchical value, it is a prescription for falling into the “intractable problem” trap: Cheap fossil fuel will support economic growth, until we suffocate; a pandemic will subside only when enough people have developed a natural or vaccine-based immunity.

Only the passage of time tells the full story. Time is the water-like process that dissolves (resolves) the competing political, economic, and social values of any issue into a final all-inclusive solution (resolution). We need to personally reject appeals to any singular overarching value and embrace the complex disruptions of change over time as our primary perspective. The future used to be about other people’s fate, now it is about our own.

If we believe building our future is an ongoing, collaborative, and participatory process, then embracing complexity and adopting a perspective of time to solve our current and pressing issues is a difficult but not impossible challenge. In some ways, it’s like taking a trip, except instead of downloading maps or packing our bags, our preparation must be psychological and personal. We know what our destination is, but we don’t know exactly what will happen or who we will meet along the way. Shifting our collective mindset from the past and present tenses into Living in the Future Tense is to begin a wide-eyed, open-end adventure. What an exciting – and challenging -- time to be alive!

Living in the future tense is an essential, ongoing, interpersonal, cooperative, and self-reflective process. No one knows the answers. No one has ever been in this situation before. As individuals we cannot afford to relinquish our identity to opportunists; we need to own our personal coherent sense of the foreseeable future to shape our present behaviors. To do otherwise is to be powerless in the hands of disruptive change, standing at future’s gate, uncertain of our fate.

 ______________________________________________________________________

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.