The Cost of Balkanization

By Dr. Lawrence Kuznar, Ph.D., Indiana University – Purdue University, Fort Wayne

The last FAPITCA Platform post on Public Service was particularly poignant, given current events in American politics and the tragic inability of Iraq to stem the advance of ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham).

Iraq is a nation of approximately 32 million people, with an active army of over 270,000 and reserves of over half a million. As of this point, it is being overrun by ISIS, a force barely 1/10^th, and probably much less, its size. Furthermore, the vast majority of Iraqis oppose ISIS on secular and religious grounds, and in utter fear at the horrific acts this group is committing.

These acts include forced conversion, genocide, mass killing, torture, crucifixion, and the kidnapping, rape and forced marriage of hundreds of women. There can be no doubt that no matter what faction of Iraqi society one belongs to (except a tiny minority of Islamic radicals of the most extreme kind), defeat at the hands of ISIS means utter loss and humiliation, if not outright death and destruction.

Yet, the response of the Iraqi government is political infighting, markedly demonstrated by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s initial refusal to step down as the Iraqi government announces his successor.

The tribalism and balkanization of Iraqi politics is stunning, considering the ruin virtually all Iraqis will suffer because of it. For the sake of personal interest, Iraqi politicians actually are undermining their own interests and sealing their constituents’ fates. They failed to find Benjamin Franklin’s wisdom about disinterested politics as Carl and Chuck noted last week.

The situation should appear surreal to most outside observers, but the seeds of such destructive self-interest are easy to find, even here at home.

In light of the dire situation in Iraq, US politicians were eager to mount the airwaves, in part to condemn the horrific actions of ISIS, but first and foremost to condemn our President. It is one thing to dispute the wisdom of the President’s foreign policy, but their arguments were peppered with needless ad hominem attacks designed to denigrate the President and foment division in our political system. Alas, where is the loyal opposition?

Perhaps the most publicized example came from Representative Peter King (R – NY), who referred to the President as “weak,” and accused him of a “shameful abdication of American leadership.” [1] Wasn’t this the same president who gave the order to take a significant risk on getting bin Laden? How could he be seen as weak and abdicating leadership shamefully?

If Representative King’s statements were an isolated incident of a politician understandably frustrated and horrified by events that could threaten our security, it could be forgiven. However, this is typical of the balkanizing rhetoric that stands for political “debate” in our system today. Only days before, Republicans initiated a lawsuit against the President due to their disagreements over the Affordable Care Act, while others clamored for the President’s impeachment.

Moreover, the rhetoric employed by pundits that support the extreme opposition have no qualms about labeling the President a “tyrant,” “lawless,” or “Gestapo.” [2] In an especially egregious lapse this year, Representative Jim Bridenstine (R – OK) merely demurred when a constituent suggested President Obama was an “enemy-combatant” who “should be executed.” [3]

This level of rhetoric is dangerous. Words matter. Successful extremists begin their campaigns by increasingly demonizing and dehumanizing their opponents. [4] This is something different than opposing others’ views: this is about robbing opponents of their humanity, rendering them expendable, morally bereft and unworthy of existence.

John Locke’s “Two Treatises of Government” – 1690. Source: Wikipedia

We should all be reminded that, while our nation was founded on the principle of competing self-interest, it was supposed to be an enlightened self-interest, balancing myopic self-interest with the realization that we are all on the same team and need one another to realize our interests…this goes back to John Locke and his influence on the British form of government that inspired our own. [5] The Iraqi government has utterly failed to appreciate this principle, and I fear Americans are losing that faith as well.

While I think that American political trends could in fact foreshadow an Iraq-like balkanization, I have a more practical and immediate concern to address. ISIS is clearly gaining ground, and if current US airstrikes and support of the Kurdish Peshmerga are not enough to defeat ISIS, ISIS will, as they have stated, strike at the West. Recently, ISIS spokesman Nidal Nuseiri stated that they have a systematic plan that includes attacking the American homeland before even attacking their hated Israel. [6]

As Americans, we have to ask ourselves: will we have set aside our differences and be united enough as a nation to prevent an ISIS attack? And if we are attacked, what will be our response? Will we devolve into an orgy of finger pointing and blame, allowing our real enemies to take liberty with, and from, us? These are the questions our citizens, our pundits and our public servants must take up now. Please try to think like Americans while you address these questions!

Originally posted by Carl Hunt, on behalf of Dr. Lawrence Kuznar, on 8/14/2014.

Editors Note: The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect those of the primary authors of this Blog (Carl and Chuck Hunt), but we deeply appreciate the candor and perspectives of Dr. Kuznar as an honored guest blogger with FAPITCA. Thanks for your willingness to call it like you see it, Larry!

Notes:

[1]  Meet the Press Transcript – August 10, 2014 , “Meet The Press” — Sunday, August 10, 2014 hosted by David Gregory

[2]  Obeidallah, Dean, The Right’s Dangerous Rhetoric: Obama as an ‘Enemy Combatant’, The Daily Beast.com, 2/10.2014.

[3]  According to the cited Daily Beast article, “This statement was made to Republican Congressman Jim Bridenstine at a recent town hall meeting.  What’s even more disturbing was Bridenstine’s response to this outrageous remark. He didn’t object to it. Instead, he simply laughed and then told the person: ‘Look, everybody knows the lawlessness of this president. He picks and chooses which laws he’s going to enforce or not enforce. He does it by decree…’”

[4]  Trommler, Frank (1992) “Between Normality and Resistance: Catastrophic Gradualism in Nazi Germany,” The Journal of Modern History, Vol. 64, Supplement: Resistance Against the Third Reich., pp. S82-S101; Thompson, Allen, ed. (2007) The Media and the Rwandan Genocide. London: Pluto Press.

[5] Locke, J., Second Treatise on Government, 1690.

[6] Halevi, D. and Soffer, A., ISIS Spokesman Explains Why ‘Islamic State’ Not Supporting Hamas, Israeli National News.com, 7/10/2014.

The Platform, Part VI: The Honor of Public Service

This final post on the FAPITCA Platform comes “straight from the heart.” Both of us have worked for government throughout our career. Carl started as a Houston, Texas police officer at age 19, while Chuck began his service to the nation as a Presidential Management Intern for the US Bureau of Land Management  at age 24. Carl completed a 30-year career in the United States Army in 2006 and Chuck continues to work in the federal sector after almost 30 years of service. Our sister served 20 years in the US Air Force and is still a public high school teacher.

Fortunately, in spite of politically-driven attacks on American governance (often by so-called government servants of the more “conservative” party), many still serve America working for the various levels of government: our nation is better as a result. Americans working on behalf of America, providing services to other Americans and foreign visitors makes our nation stronger and more representative of who we are. To be sure, we can always work for America more efficiently and more objectively, but Americans working for America is a good thing.

Representing Americans as elected leaders in office is also a great service, and even though we’ve been critical of our federal legislators in this blog, we also honor their service when performed in the intended role rather than exploitation of the profession for personal power or gain. While helping to draft the United States Constitution, Benjamin Franklin talked about “the classical republican ideal of ‘disinterested public service’”…and hoping that “‘every member of Congress’ (would) consider himself rather as a representative of the whole, than as an agent for the interests of a particular state.” Franklin, also foreseeing the role of political parties, knew how important public service on behalf of all Americans was, having been in that capacity for much of his professional life. [1]

Our nation and our citizens require and should demand honorable public service to make America great. This service may take place in many forms, including government, academia and industry that supports our economic growth and fairly promotes access to equal opportunity for all qualified to serve. [2] Without this level of service, our nation would likely fall into the ruin of corporate greed and corrupt political “leadership” that far exceeds what we consider problematic today. We’d be a lot worse off without dedicated service to our nation.

There are threats to effective public service, however. Most of these threats are politically motivated in an attempt to define what is acceptable governance and public service. Since the Reagan era, conservative politics claim government is too big, too inefficient and too generous to Americans and immigrants who are unemployed, homeless or who do not have access to a reasonable level of education. This side tends to favor lower taxes and less government interference in Americans’ lives. [3]

Liberal politics tend to support collection of more and “fairer” taxes, the creation of more opportunities for education and employment, and a government of sufficient size that it can adequately oversee what should be a balance of receipts (of taxes) and expenditures (legislatively approved obligations). Of course, conservatives also claim they want balance in the budget, as well, as long as that balance includes intense scrutiny of public servants and the funds they discharge. We agree…it’s hard not to agree with the idea of reasonable scrutiny and oversight.  It takes capable, inspired Americans to manage the day-to-day delivery of critical government services: clean water, safe drugs, social security payments, national and border security, etc., and provide daily internal scrutiny and oversight.

Both sides say they want balance eventually, but rarely accomplish this balance as there’s always some emergency like a war or recession that demands the budget objectives be delayed “temporarily.” This condition in America is no longer an “emergency” however, but more the way of life in an America that is fighting to be competitive in a globally rising community that includes, among others, China and India.

If this is the case, however, it seems as though we need more and better trained public servants to govern in this new normal, however, not less. We need our best involved in government and service to America!

The budget and fair administration of receipts and expenditures is really only one part of good public service. Another part is good old fashioned “customer service,” whether accomplished by sworn government officials or not; this involves dedication to our nation and concern for our fellow citizens, including fair access to equal opportunities to succeed as Americans and legal immigrants.

This is where things seem to be falling apart these days. As a nation of Americans we’ve quit worrying about the opportunity and income gaps and the advantages of closing those gaps on behalf of our nation. Instead, we’ve been thinking largely about ourselves and what’s in it for us. Service, unless it has an immediate benefit to us as individuals, is for someone else to worry about and to deliver.

Here’s the bottom line: if we are constantly condemning public service and those who dedicate themselves to it; if we fail to take care of our fellow citizens and ensure they have opportunity to compete and even become great public servants, academicians or business people; and if we fail to challenge the growing gaps between the wealthy and the rest of us, how can we ever hope to remain a great nation and a meaningful example to the rest of the world?

Public Service is an honorable profession. In many cases, our governments hire the best, not just those who can’t do anything else. This is equally true among the Millennial generation. [4] These servants don’t seek wealth but rather fair access to opportunity…they deserve our respect and support.

Our government services may not pay as well as the commercial and academic worlds perhaps, but government service offers the chance to serve our great nation in ways that are not possible any other way. If some among great Americans (our best presidents and leaders, members of the military, teachers and many others) had declined to serve, this nation would likely have failed long ago. They were there for us, and we need to be there for our future generations.

Please think about that the next time you are tempted to complain about the “evils of government” that happens when some politically-driven claim attempts to garner votes…that kind of claim really needs to be critically tested. Americans know how to think better than that.  Americans must once again learn to discern and embrace good government, and reject extremist calls for zero…or excessive… government.

Originally posted by Carl and Chuck Hunt, 8/10/2014.

NOTES:

[1] Beeman, R., Plain Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution, Random House, NY, 2009, page 151. Also, back in February, 2014, we posted Thomas Paine on Honor and the Congress, in which we recounted Paine’s essay “Reflections on Titles,” a piece in which he commented on the honor of those who served in the Continental Congress and drafted and signed the Declaration of Independence. We refer the reader to those pieces for more reflections on honorable public service as an elected official.

[2] In fact, we also honor the “public” service of businesses that do in fact support the American way of life, furthering access to economic and social opportunity…we could not have succeeded in either war or peace without their support (e.g., the accomplishments of industry in World War II). We have a more difficult time “honoring” businesses that hide behind the need to serve their stockholders BEFORE the nation that makes it possible for businesses to exist. To be sure, stockholders provide investment (for their own personal gain), but without the protections that objective, effective government provides, business would have a much more difficult environment in which to thrive as they have in America throughout its history. Businesses which put loyalty to stockholders before the nation that nurtures their growth should really consider their priorities. This is particularly true in the case of businesses that seek to move their headquarters oversees to avoid the responsibility of paying taxes to support our nation. This so-called process of “inversion” strips America of needed support and creation of increased opportunity within our own borders.

[3] This does not seem to apply to many conservative seniors who still want their social security payments and Medicare access, but who says you can’t have your cake and want to eat it, too?

[4] See for example:  Lavigna, B. and Flato, J. January, 2014 blog post: “Millennials Are Attracted to Public Service, But Government Needs to Deliver.” This article noted that “federal agencies were among the most preferred employers for students across main fields of study: the FBI, National Institutes of Health, NASA, Department of State, and Peace Corps all ranked among the top ten, alongside companies like Google, Walt Disney Company, Apple, and Microsoft. Government employers are particularly popular with humanities and natural science students.” Also see: Fournier, R. “The Outsiders: How Can Millennials Change Washington If They Hate It?” which in spite of the name of the article documents how Millennials “in general, are fiercely committed to community service” but they “don’t see politics or government as a way to improve their communities, their country, or the world.” Sigh…again, edge-driven politics are jeopardizing our nation’s future. Fournier’s August, 2013 Atlantic Magazine study indicated that Millennials are increasingly less likely to enter into politics and government, a trend we must all somehow contribute to reversing to ensure our nation’s future. For one bit of recent bright news, see Millennial authors Eric Zenisek and Mike Stinnett in their Fortune Magazine piece, Why millennials should ditch corporate jobs for public service…their conclusion: “It’s going to take a renewed commitment to service to repair our country. Millennials are up for the task.”

 

Rethinking the American Narrative

by Chuck Hunt [1]

For some time, I have been questioning when the American narrative actually began. From reading the popular histories today, it seems we are fixated on the late 1700s, when our foundational documents and institutions begin to emerge. The period leading up to July of 1776 seems a popular date.

This question resurfaced recently when I started reflecting on the differences between Americans and Europeans. After having spent over five years in Europe, mostly in France, representing the people of the United States, I began to appreciate the differences between the outlooks of Europeans and Americans. The optimism and the “can do” orientation of many Americans I knew stood in contrast to the pragmatism, realism and at times cynicism of many Europeans.

These experiences led me to question how the American narrative diverged from European perspectives and cultures. Many Americans today are descended from Europeans who arrived here on the shores of America hundreds of years ago bringing with them European belief systems and values. How did we so quickly (in European terms) transform from “subjects” of monarchs to citizens seeking self-governance and freedom that comes with independence?

I believe the answer to this question is that the American Narrative only has a portion of its roots in Europe, as well as Africa and Asia. At the root of the American Narrative is a story of the coevolution of many different influences from throughout the world, including those who lived here when the Europeans first arrived.

American Indians were here long before the Europeans – they were the original American sources of influence on the Europeans. Whether we were cognizant of it or not, from the earliest days of Western colonization American Indians shaped our narrative. When we consider the basic structure of our government and its founding documents, the way we would come to wage war, the way we nourished ourselves, or even our quest for freedom, it’s very likely that American Indians played a fundamental, even original role in shaping what has become the American Narrative. [2]

Sadly, due to a variety of forces ranging from ignorance to arrogance to racism, we seemed to have systematically minimized these influences. There are times in our history when we even demonized the contributions of our native peoples, forcibly taking their land and driving their cultures into near-obscurity.

My self-questions suggested that it is perhaps time we go back and begin to celebrate these influences as distinctly American…perhaps we would benefit today from embracing our American Indian history. In others words, maybe it’s time we start thinking of our American Narrative as beginning to emerge thousands of years ago. We might even consider deleting the word “Indian” in the previous sentence and declare that we should “embrace our American history.”

I use the word “embrace” instead of pride in the foregoing paragraph because it’s a mixture of things in which we can take pride, but also honestly acknowledges where we have fallen short of embracing values so eloquently expressed in core documents from the revolutionary era and beyond. Notice I didn’t use the term “founding documents” because perhaps we should revisit the notion of “the founding.” Perhaps some of the initial founding concepts began to emerge well before Europeans even arrived in what would become America.

Just as we likely embraced wisdom based on thousands of years of reflection by native peoples as we designed our government, maybe it is time we do likewise in figuring out how to come back together as a nation and create a more sustainable future for each other that our native forbearers envisioned.

Recently, I had the honor of visiting the leadership of the Onondaga Nation in New York [3]. I had an epiphany as I sat in their rustic but elegant longhouse. As I listened to their leaders, Sid Hill and Oren Lyons, among others, it hit me that they were sharing with me wisdom gained from perhaps thousands of years of experience and reflection. I was there as a representative of a government that was only 238 years old and it struck me that we have much to learn from these people who have lived in this part of the world far longer than my nation and even European nations have existed. My Native American hosts spoke with a passion for peace and protecting the environment that was so thoughtful and sincere that it transcended any of the childlike politics that currently plague mainstream America.

For example, Oren Lyons introduced me to the concept of “One spoon, one dish.” At the risk of butchering his wisdom, I perceived he meant that we all have one spoon, but we share the bowl (earth) and we are to take just what we need and keep it clean. It’s a simple way to acknowledge concern for your fellow being, conservation of what nature has given us, and avoidance of greed. Oren Lyons also stressed the importance of making decisions based on the welfare of the next seven generations. Wouldn’t the current generations of young Americans like to know that Boomers were thinking like that when they started having children?

Unquestionably, some of what was shared with me would be labeled by some of our edge-driven countrymen as socialistic or environmental extremism. I would urge them to stop applying 20^th Century philosophical concepts to profound, centuries-old ways of thinking. What could be more authentically American than the voice of this tribal leader based on the teachings of people living in this land well before any Europeans arrived?

This recent experience in New York leads me to start thinking about an American Narrative that embraces thousands of years of wisdom. I’m ready to proudly embrace the roots of our nation’s heritage and give credit where it is due. Most importantly, just as we did a couple of hundred years ago, we need to listen to our native, indigenous wisdom to chart a revised course for our nation to get out of this poisonous political cul-de-sac in which we find ourselves and start taking better care of each other and our environment.

For your own inspiration (and perhaps epiphany), watch this short video of Oren Lyons explaining his awakening concerning the environment and wisdom passed on to him by his uncle:

Originally posted by Chuck Hunt, 7/26/2014.

Notes:

[1] We’re taking a brief departure from the FAPITCA Platform series to post this special piece on the “American Narrative,” a topic that will be incorporated from time-to-time in future posts. This proposal about rethinking our nation’s narrative is not precisely related to the National Strategic Narrative we’ve discussed in previous posts, but may have a bearing on that work as well.

[2] For a visual background on America before the mass arrival of Europeans, see Native America before European Colonization.

[3] The Onondaga Nation is a member of the Haudenosaunee (“People of the Long House”), an alliance of native nations united for hundreds of years by traditions, beliefs and cultural values. Also referred to as the Iroquois confederacy or Six Nations, the Haudenosaunee consist of the Mohawk, Oneida, Cayuga, Seneca, Onondaga Nations and Tuscarora Nations.

The Platform, Part III: Transforming Consumption, Section B

In the last post, we wrote about the challenges that today’s Consumption-Production-Marketing (and Investment) model present to us in creating a sustainable American economy and access to opportunity. We’ve repeated that model in the graphic below to help us refer to the processes and interrelationships of the processes.

High-level model suggesting relationships of key components related to “Acquiring Stuff” within the American capitalist-based economy.

In this post, we want to consider how we might start to transform these processes, particularly the one that every American can control: Consumption. We want to talk a bit about assessing and exploiting the information that this model generates and how we might use Connected Age technologies to create more value and an eventual solution-based approach to smarter consumption and production. Most importantly, we want to tie this model to creating greater access to opportunity to Fulfill the American Promise.

Value

Note that none of the data native to or generated by the loop in the above model offers any informational insight about the quality or value of the stuff produced or consumed (either goods or services). In our current economy, the pertinent information has to do with the financial gain that can accrue to the Producer, Marketer or Investor; while it’s true that money can also be a source of information, this is not the kind information flow that best depicts the American economy.

Today, the Consumer, who ultimately funds the cycle and is the ultimate source of return on investment, has the least input into the process in terms of identifying value or generating information. The Consumer, who should be on a level playing field in terms of information flow, could provide much more useful information for the entire system if we better harness the connecting technologies we have available to us today. Big Data analysis won’t be nearly as useful to knowledge generation about our economy if all it’s concerned with is tracking how much stuff Consumers buy!

The Consumer, who should be creating both the demand and the means of identifying value, actually has only a small role in this loop, other than to acquire stuff. In the graphic above, note how the solid arrows point one way. Apart from tracking what stuff consumers buy, where is the information flow on behalf of the Consumer?

This loop affects how the American Promise might be fulfilled in a big way! New technologies and the resulting gadgets we can buy because of new inventions and innovations have subtly changed the way we look at opportunity and value in America. We’ve forgotten the interdependent responsibilities of buying and selling, the basis of a value-creating capitalistic culture. We’ve become ill-informed Consumers of goods and services in this great nation, and it’s past time we transformed that part of American life.

That’s right: both Producers and Consumers have a complementary responsibility to help drive the cycle of Production, Marketing and Consumption (and thus effectively influence Investment). The model today is Production and Marketing driving Consumption, whereas the market should really be Consumption driving Production (and Marketing as needed in the case of value creation that has not yet been adequately promoted). Investment will chase after either model as long as the information flows are there.

Consumers must influence Producers to make and deliver sustainable goods and services that account for long-term value, not the whims of today’s hottest craze. This was also a lesson that former City of Lewes, DE Mayor Jim Ford imparted in a recent post.

Solutions?

So, what do we do to bring about more value-driven Consumer behaviors? How do we make our stuff tell a better story about our lives as individuals, communities and as a nation committed to a long-term, sustainable economic future?

One way to begin Consumer behavior change is to start using the transformational power of our information technology to inform ourselves about what has happened to the United States in the last 40-50 years as far as politics and budgets are concerned. We need to overcome the political influence that some have sought to leverage in distorting the use of IT to separate us from each other. The gulf that edge-driven politics has created using IT today also inhibits bringing about a sustainable economy through generation of maximum opportunity to participate in that economy.

Fixing these kinds of problems requires individual responsibility and even an individual change in the way we Consume and Produce goods and services in the United States and abroad. Producing, selling and buying simply to make money can no longer be the primary rationale for the American Connected Age form of capitalism.

Production and Consumption requires more intelligence than that in a globally Connected Age. We need to harness IT innovation and change our political infrastructure to leverage these new opportunities to succeed as a people – we need to create better access to opportunity for all to participate in these new economies. Buying and selling and making money is inherent to capitalism and is great as long as Producers deliver real value and not just bottom lines. It’s even greater if everyone has an equal shot at participating in the opportunities we create as a nation.

Perhaps the most important responsibility we need to take on as Americans is to transform ourselves away from the compulsion to acquire stuff. We all need to contribute to reassigning value to what America Produces and Consumes through the “Stuff Acquisition” model. This is how we ensure Producers produce good and meaningful stuff that helps us sustain a good environment and infrastructure that America needs to prosper. Consumers can and must drive this!

We are a connected people in this country and we need to start using that connectivity to become The United States once again. Our nation can once again reflect concern for our future generations by transforming the way we buy and use stuff. We can live up to the important and relevant responsibilities we’ve taken upon ourselves to lead the rest of the world in supporting societies that embrace freer and more open forms of government and care for the environment in which we all live together.

If there’s one place innovative thinking could be introduced with the prospect of good return on investment, it’s in the development of an adaptive model of American capitalism that embraces smarter Production, Investment, Marketing and Consumption. We welcome the discussion of what that model looks like as we move forward with FAPITCA! The graphic above is the “as-is” model but what we need is the “to-be” model, as engineers call them. Please join in this critical discussion to help our nation design this model!

Our next post in this series on Building a Platform will look at protecting and securing our environment and infrastructure, two deeply interconnected challenges for America which have a significant role to play in how we use, consume and ultimately dispose of our stuff!

Originally posted by Carl and Chuck Hunt, 6/12/2014.

The Platform, Part III: Transforming Consumption, Section A

Consumption and Production: A Model

Life in the Connected Age can be as simple or as complex as we want it to be. Fulfilling our Needs and Wants in today’s super-connected world almost ensures complexity and the emergence of unforeseen consequences. This complexity guarantees we “discover” sources of “stuff” we don’t really need or want, but for some reason keep buying…that’s a potential challenge for America that we want to examine in our Platform.

The odds are good that we actually contribute to making our lives more complex and even confusing in our quest to satisfy desires for more stuff. Even though our brains probably use the same thinking mechanisms to satisfy Needs or Wants, neuroscience indicates that using one thinking process to deal with the two distinct issues of both Needs and Wants leads us to acquire a lot of “stuff” we don’t actually require to live happily.

We may subconsciously get confused about what’s really a “Need” and what’s really just a “Want” or even extraneous. This causes additional challenges for the economy, the environment and access to opportunity. Our intuition about acquiring stuff influences us in ways we don’t always realize and stuff kind of sneaks into our lives before we know it, whether the stuff has real value to us or not.

This passion for more stuff, whether a Need or a Want, affects a lot more than our overstuffed closets and garages that no can longer hold cars. Consumption of goods and services directly affects Production, Marketing and even Investment in companies that serve our Consumption zeal. All four processes are deeply interconnected and as we claimed at the closing of the last post, also affect our economy, our government systems and by extension, access to opportunity.

At a very high-level, we’ll look at the interactive, interdependent nature of Consumption, Production, Marketing and Investment in this post and start to see how this affects our individual and collective ability to Fulfill the American Promise in the Connected Age. This high-level examination begins with a very simple model:

High-level model suggesting relationships of key components related to “Acquiring Stuff” within the American capitalist-based economy.

The simple “Stuff Acquisition” model above suggests these four processes and their relationship. Note the unidirectional nature of the arrows and the ultimate target for Investment, Production and Marketing: Consumption (better known as the “Consumer”). Production and Marketing share both a direct and indirect relationship and often influence each other.

Note also what the objectives of these three processes are in targeting Consumption: Acquiring Stuff! The two broad categories of Wants that we acquire are planned and impulse, where impulse acquisition is most aggravated by the Connected Age technologies we mention below. This is also the one area that we could favorably impact on behalf of our nation if we can only harness these same connecting technologies to become more enlightened Consumers. We’ll discuss that below and in Section B.

It really doesn’t matter to the Producers and Marketers (and all too often, the Investors) whether the stuff is a Need or a Want, as long as we Consumers acquire it. After all, that’s how capitalism works and that’s fine as long as we realize our role as Consumers in this model and how the choices we make affect America. We need to understand that we (all Americans) are the central focus of this Consumption process and be smarter about the role we play.

Thoughts about Consumption Today

There’s a lot of research about why we acquire stuff in our lives, but we’ll only talk about a couple of simple explanations in this post. In their 2012 book, The Stuff Cure, Betty and Mike Sproule propose several ways to simplify life and live happily in less clutter. The book examines ways to make our lives less of a burden to ourselves and to others. It suggests how we put sustainable economic growth at risk. The Sproule book reveals how far we’ve drifted from simple, elegant and productive lifestyles that are as much about our families, communities and our nation as they are about our individual selves.

The Sproules suggest that we likely “attribute meaning to obsolete objects,” and we acquire so much stuff because these things reflect “the story of our lives. Material objects conjure up feelings that, together, constitute our humanity. When looked at, or thought about, the items that we keep enable us to clarify what our experiences of living add up to.” Bottom line: our stuff tends to tell our story and that’s something hard to give up.

For the past seven years or so, Annie Leonard, creator of The Story of Stuff, has been a chief proponent of satisfying the competing interests of our need to have stuff and our need to protect our environment. As we mentioned previously, her online movies help us visualize both problems and solutions related to acquisition of the things we feel compelled to acquire and consume. Her stories tell us a great deal about the relationships of Consumption and Production.

In large part, we have become a nation of Producers, Marketers and Consumers because that’s what great nations do: they make stuff, they sell it and they use it. As we mentioned above, and subtly demonstrated in the graphic of our model, Investment also plays a role because success in capitalism tends to attract more investment.

This model, while essentially valid in any economy, has enjoyed almost no meaningful refinement in the Connected Age, except to enhance Production and Consumption. Search engines help us find stuff more quickly, including “serendipitous discovery” which leads to acquitting more stuff! Companies like Amazon know how to exploit this to the max!

But here’s the key for FAPITCA: how we think about and ask questions concerning new ways to build, consume and market the things we need and want are critical to the way our nation’s future will unfold. Will we be a smart global leader that uses resources, including technologies like search engines and online markets, wisely and efficiently or will we consume everything in sight as we practically have since the blending of the Industrial Age and the Connected Age in America?

We’ve built for ourselves an almost never-ending loop where producers deliver goods and services in anticipation of being able to sell practically anything to someone as long as it can be marketed effectively enough to gain some attention somewhere. Niche products abound and are more easily discoverable through Connected Age technologies. Technologies like “3-D Printing” will make it even simpler to satisfy wants in the near future (and produce more stuff!).

Producers drive markets as much as Consumers do, building stuff consumers never knew they “needed” before they saw it in a store, online or on TV. It doesn’t matter how useful the stuff is as long as Marketers can create a craving or demand so that someone will buy the stuff. This Production-Marketing-Consumption “loop” is a magnet for Investors who are looking for someplace to make more money.

In Section B of this post on Transforming Consumption, we’ll look more closely at how we define and create value in the Production-Consumption model as well as the real-life contributions we can make as smarter consumers to Fulfilling the American Promise in the Connected Age. Until next time…

Originally posted by Carl and Chuck Hunt, 6/6/2014.

 

Chatting with a Small-Town Mayor

In the best of small-town politics, “Politics” really don’t even enter the picture all that much. In effective small-town government, elected leaders set their egos and personal ambitions aside and do what’s right for the community—solutions are for people and community first rather than for some political party. That’s the way it is in my hometown anyway…that’s the way it is in Lewes, Delaware.

To be sure, small-town governments are usually modest, on a scale with the population and needs of the residents. There actually is no need for a political party in this kind of government environment because elected officials know their community and the community usually knows their elected officials. Party politics would only add a barrier between the community and the elected leaders and add very little value, if any, to the community.

While there are small-town politics (small “p”) here in Lewes, they’re not the kind of Politics (big “P”) we find in Congress where people won’t even dare to cooperate with each other because of rigid political ideals. A lot of the success and freedom from party politics Lewes has enjoyed for the last decade, though, is because one man—the mayor—wouldn’t allow it. Fortunately, Lewes has also had a City Council that agrees with that perspective.

James L. Ford, III, known to most Lewes residents as Jim, served as the Mayor of Lewes 10 years before retiring this month. Prior to that, Jim served Lewes on the City Council for 12 years and five years on the Lewes Planning Commission. As is the case in many small towns, these positions are unpaid and offer opportunities to serve from the best of motivations: care and concern for one’s community. Jim stepped down at the “top of his game” as they say about sports figures, and judging from the turnout for “Mayor Jim Ford Appreciation Day” last weekend, almost everyone in Lewes will miss him.

Former Lewes Mayor Jim Ford (center) leads the “Zumba Break” with Kelly Serpico, Lewes Zumba and fitness guru (left) during “Mayor Jim Ford Appreciation Day, 5/18/2014, in Lewes, DE.

“Mayor Jim Ford Appreciation Day!” When’s the last time you’ve seen that kind of event in your hometown? Lewes is just that kind of community as most who visit here will confirm. Those who live here aren’t surprised in the least because that’s why they live here: that’s the sort of town Lewes is! That’s what good “little p” politics can achieve. “Little p” politics is about people, or as former Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill used to quip “all politics is local.” Judging from the turnout at his “Appreciation Day,” Jim Ford got that right, along with most everything else a small town needs to thrive. Jim even showed he could lead a mass Zumba event!

Jim and I had lunch this week after his retirement and I asked him about a number of things that related to his experiences, but two important issues emerged that are relevant to Fulfilling the American Promise in the Connected Age: overcoming barriers between political parties, people and good government; and transforming production and consumption in America, the topic of an essay Chuck and I are writing for the FAPTICA website.

Speaking of barriers to good governance, Jim emphasized a thought that I discussed in an earlier blog post that quoted Delaware Senator Chris Coons. Jim said the “biggest barrier now seems to be the party structure that is composed of so many factions, and the influence of lobbyists,” a point also made by Senator Coons. In debates that took place in Lewes City Council meetings “we always asked ‘what’s right for Lewes’” before taking votes and setting ordinances or policy. Jim and the Lewes City Council worked hard to eliminate barriers.

That’s missing in Congress these days, Jim pointed out, as debates seem more about preserving party ties and influence than about asking what’s best for America first. It should be about the nation first and the state or local community next long before considering lobbies or contributors, Jim agreed. Lewes succeeds, Jim said, “because we always had a balanced call for action” and Council activities were open and inclusive of the entire community. Jim and I agreed that it might be difficult to scale from local governmental effectiveness to national leadership, but we really need to examine what must happen to make that work.

Jim also had an interesting insight about the essay Chuck and I are doing on America taking the lead in transforming production and consumption. We want to preserve the great spirit of innovation and discovery the United States promotes, Jim said, but we do need to lead in developing “values-based consumption that is based less on marketing and more on personal values.” The idea of better incorporating personal values in the marketplace rather than relying on the production and marketing components of American commerce is a concept worth pursuing. We’ll explore that in our coming essay.

It was personally satisfying to break bread with Jim Ford and be the beneficiary of his great insights about governance at the local level and how important it is to keep searching for ways to scale good “little p politics” to good “Big P Politics” at the national level. After all, that is a major part of how we can move forward in Fulfilling the American Promise in the Connected Age!”

Originally posted by Carl Hunt, 5/25/2014.

Building a Platform, Part I

While we’ve been working on the essay, “Renewing American Vigor: Transforming Consumption in Public and Private Life,” it’s become apparent to us that we needed to permeate the essay with an ecological perspective. This perspective should demonstrate the holistic nature of good governance, similar to the way our Constitution does. It should also set up a dialogue about design and function of government in the Connected Age.

In other words, to approach Center-driven government and move away from the edges, we need a tool from today’s “political” campaign, in a manner of speaking. To compete in the current culture, we need a “platform,” as the political parties call them, that provides a foundation and a framework that empowers Americans to Fulfill the American Promise in the Connected Age. This platform should be simple, interconnected like an ecology, and easy to implement through the existing political process.

Our colleagues working on A National Strategic Narrative have a “storyline” to integrate their proposals for America…so we’ll borrow and adapt that approach to FAPITCA. This is evolution, not revolution. The platform will help us grow our narrative.

Today’s post lays out five initial categories or “planks” that would make up a platform on which the Center can design and build our nation’s future. The platform and its planks do not try to reach out to any particular political constituency, but rather seek to offer a workable, “good enough” approach to Fulfill the American Promise. Some of the planks may better appeal to conservative ideals while some may seem to lean more toward progressive principles. To be sure, we don’t propose this platform as our own approach to a “political movement” but rather to inform the evolution of existing platforms.

After all, America has room for more than one perspective; in fact, it requires more than one perspective to remain a diverse and resilient home for freedom, security and prosperity.

This hopefully impartial, neutral bias is by design since we generally view FAPITCA to support and balance socially progressive thinking with fiscally conservative restraint. We propose this balanced state all while positioning America to be a leader and inspiration to the rest of the world. We look to move forward as a nation while minimizing and mitigating the financial burdens we face today.

The platform builds on a couple of main themes: 1), Individuals at all levels have roles and Governments at all levels have roles: America can’t succeed otherwise; and 2), government, business and academia must all work together to open up and build opportunity for all Americans, individually and collectively. Underlying all of this is the fact that our Constitution guarantees to our citizens the freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly, and other important rights critical to the function of our freedoms – these must be preserved. All of this is fundamental to the platform.

In introductory form, the following broad categories compose our platform. These five categories are the planks upon which we’ll build in future posts, consistent with the Principles of FAPITCA. All of these planks are active in the American political environment at some level of maturity today, although some have not been referenced in the halls of Congress for a while.

1. Ensure Equal Access to Opportunity: The United States is a capitalist-based economy that is supported by democratically-elected servants of the electorate to oversee fair and open competition for access to opportunity and resources to succeed. This does not imply a guarantee of success in competition, but does guarantee all Americans will have access to the same basic entry points for fair and open competition at the beginning. This must include equal access to a baseline income that provides a foundation to support the “pursuit of happiness” as our Declaration of Independence proclaims. This baseline income should offset practical living expenses while making it possible to pay reasonable taxes and to loosen ties to government support. Individuals must all have a level playing field to enter, whether they take advantage of that playing field or not. This is the first definition of the American Promise: “our people have freedom of access to an equal opportunity to succeed (or to fail).”
2. Transform Production and Consumption: We must not leave our children the tab for all that we’ve produced, consumed and wasted. Covered in more detail in the aforementioned essay, this includes addressing how we value material and intellectual goods and services, how we produce and market these goods and services and how we consume and dispose of them. It also includes developing an understanding of the relationship between “values-based” production, marketing and consumption in the light of changing demographics and resource bases. This emphasis on the transformation of production and consumption is also at the heart of any new or modified “social contract” between America and its citizens. This plank addresses one of the Principles of FAPITCA: We are borrowing this land, culture and governance system from our progeny; what we pay back to them reflects on our legacy and lays the foundation for their legacy.
3. Protect and Secure our Environment and Infrastructure: America is a rich ecosystem of diverse, interacting parts. Humans are the stewards of this ecosystem although all too often we fail to exercise that responsibility. Two of the most important interacting parts of our ecosystem are our environment, provided by nature, and our national infrastructure, designed and built by all of us: both need care and foresight to continue to nurture and serve Americans. Both must coevolve with each other in ways that protect their distinctive contributions to America so that they help provide maximum security to our way of life and economy. By security, in addition to national defense, we also mean “freedom from anxiety” in the words of our colleague Captain Wayne Porter of the National Strategic Narrative project. Equally important, we must protect and secure our environment and infrastructure for our posterity as our Constitution’s Preamble demands in order “to promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty…”
4. Sustain and Advance American Culture, Science and Education: Three of the richest interacting components of America that offer the deepest impact upon our future way of life are our amazingly diverse culture, our contributions to science and our educational systems. Clearly, these distinct but highly interconnected areas go through ups and downs in terms of local, national and global contributions, but they are at the center of all that makes America so great. These three areas deserve constant attention and investment to sustain our future as a nation. Both our citizens and our governments at all levels must work together to build these elements on behalf of America and indeed the world. This is our “seed corn” and must be protected for all future generations.
5. Restore Recognition for Public Service: America is indeed a capitalist-based economy, but it thrives because for the most part, American governance works and acts effectively as a “silent-partner” to commerce and industry. After all, who else protects intellectual property, maintains law and order, provides national security, builds and maintains our infrastructure and educates future leaders and workers? Government and other forms of public service are critical components of this partnership. We must restore and both improve and streamline the services governments at all levels perform on behalf of Fulfilling the American Promise in the Connected Age. Most importantly, we must restore the image of government and public service as desirable training grounds and potential career pursuits. We should also consider ways to incorporate public service as a supporting and sustaining entry point into any career pursuit regardless of sector; we should find ways to use this initial service as an investment opportunity for education and employment training, much like the GI Bill did for many veterans of military service. Finding success in restoring the image of public service may be one of the best ways to assist our younger generations in both the near- and long-term as they search for new careers and find themselves as Americans. Those that do choose public service careers must understand and feel good about themselves in their service and their contributions to building and sustaining the American Promise.

We’ll explore more about each of these planks in future posts, seeking to refine them into actionable objectives that could inform future policy-making and elections in our nation. Until next time…

Originally posted by Carl and Chuck Hunt, 5/23/2014.

 

 

A Narrative for our Nation and our Promise

In 2010, I had the privilege of participating in the first of two Highlands Forum meetings I attended that year. This first meeting was in Newport, RI, and hosted a small group of remarkable thinkers and professionals from diverse industry, academic and government organizations. You won’t find much about the Highlands Forum from the official website, but there is a publically accessible site that talks about its background and purpose when it was first established.[1]

One of the government folks I met in Newport was Captain Wayne Porter, United States Navy. At the time, Wayne was serving as a personal advisor to Admiral Mike Mullen, then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I had several intimate chats with Wayne, including a marvelous breakfast in which we shared our thoughts about the effects of cyberspace and emergence on the nation and the rest of the world. During breakfast, Wayne shared with me some of the initial thoughts he and his office mate, Colonel Mark “Puck” Mykleby, United States Marine Corps, were working on in a paper they were crafting for the Chairman.

The title of the paper Wayne and Puck created was illuminating. Wayne called it “A National Strategic Narrative.” He explained that they decided to call it a narrative rather than a “strategy” because the nation had plenty of strategy documents (e.g., National Security Strategy, National Military Strategy, and a host of others). What America really needed, Wayne said, was a narrative (a coherent story) that served to remind us of who we were and how we should think about going forward in the future as a “whole of nation” (or government) to maintain the essence of what made America great.

Wayne’s ideas really resonated with me at the time and thanks to a new project to which I’ve been invited to participate, it’s more meaningful than ever. Add to that the work in which Chuck and I collaborate with Fulfilling the American Promise in the Connected Age, and the narrative becomes greatly relevant and compelling.

The “final” version of A National Strategic Narrative is available on the web, along with other supporting information about the project, but I’m reserving the remainder of this post to describe the priorities of the effort and compare it to some of the objectives of FAPITCA as we’ve presented them in this blog.

Wayne and Puck, originally writing under the pseudonym of “Mr. Y” (in memory of George Kennan),[2] assert that their foundation is “built upon the premise that we must sustain our enduring national interests – prosperity and security – within a ‘strategic ecosystem,’ at home and abroad….” This notion of a strategic ecosystem is also compelling and forms the basis of the remaining narrative. An ecosystem, as we’ve mentioned in a previous blog post, is energized by coevolution and emergence, and is another appealing way of expressing FAPITCA.

The Narrative proposes three “Investment Priorities” that align with FAPITCA. The first priority is “intellectual capital and a sustainable infrastructure of education, health and social services to provide for the continuing development and growth of America’s youth.” This priority is perfectly matched to the basis for achieving the American Promise: “freedom of access to an equal opportunity to succeed (or to fail).”[3] Investing in the social “infrastructure” of America empowers greater access to opportunity.

The second priority of the Narrative is “ensuring the nation’s sustainable security – on our own soil and wherever Americans and their interests take them.” According to Wayne and Puck, this requires us to think about American “power” as more than just defense and security, although these are vitally important areas. We should also think about America as a source of inspiration to our nation and the world for “domestic and foreign trade, agriculture and energy, science and technology, immigration and education, public health and crisis response….” This enables us to also observe national security through the lenses of our economy, the environment, our willingness to help other people and nations, and indeed our social fabric. This perspective can also link the Center of America to the rest of our world through Connected Age technologies.[4]

Finally, the third priority of the Narrative is to “develop a plan for the sustainable access to, and cultivation and use of the natural resources we need for our continued wellbeing, prosperity and economic growth in the world marketplace.” This priority has a clear connection to the second priority and speaks to sustaining a global ecosystem of natural resources that supports not only America but the whole world. In this way, America reemphasizes its role as a truly exceptional nation both in terms of leadership and stewardship of human and natural resources. This is consistent with one of FAPITCA’s key principles: “We are borrowing this land, culture and governance system from our progeny; what we pay back to them reflects on our legacy and lays the foundation for their legacy.”[5]

There’s quite a bit more to A National Strategic Narrative that deserves mention in this blog, and we’ll revisit it from time-to-time. Having the privilege of chatting with Wayne and Puck in years past makes this Narrative more personally meaningful as Chuck and I undertake our work with FAPITCA. I’m glad I recently rediscovered it and have a chance to cite it as an additional source for our effort. If the FAPTICA project makes sense to you, please read the National Strategic Narrative and understand where it could take us in Fulfilling the American Promise in the Connected Age.

Originally posted by Carl Hunt, 4/24/2014.

 

[1] The Highlands Forum is a remarkable effort that has informed the development of US strategy, research and development for over a decade, and is superbly managed by Dick O’Neill, Captain, US Navy (ret.). Some of the presentations at Highlands Forum meetings are also available on the public website.

[2] As a National War College alumnus, I appreciate the nod to George Kennan, who was a professor at NWC in the mid-1940s when he was forming thought about maintaining a balance of power with the Soviet Union, a paper called “The Sources of Soviet Power” which he authored in Foreign Affairs in July 1947, under the pseudonym of Mr. X.

[3] As quoted from the Principles of FAPITCA.

[4] As proposed in the FAPITCA Principles.

[5] As articulated in the FAPITCA Principles.

Reflections on Normandy

A few years ago, I had an epiphany of sorts that helped lead me to want to collaborate on a project like Fulfilling the American Promise in the Connected Age. It was a beautiful spring morning in Normandy. It was brisk, but the rising sun cast a warm glow across the Normandy countryside and on Omaha Beach (yes, that Omaha Beach).

I was at the Memorial in the Normandy American Cemetery doing my morning routine before the cemetery opened. As usual, I was all alone. I walked the perimeter of the cemetery plots to make sure all was in order—grass perfect, headstones clean and no limbs or–heaven forbid, trash–and then tested the carillon to make sure it was functioning properly by playing the National Anthem of our country.

As the Star-Spangled Banner was playing, I stepped out from the basement of the Memorial, stood at attention, facing our nation’s flag and then looked down upon the beach and the seemingly endless crosses and Stars of David before me. It was just me and the remains of 9,387 Americans, many of whom died on the beach below in June, 1944.

As the sun began to illuminate the beautiful chapel which sits in the middle of the cemetery in its warm but soft yellow glow, something hit me pretty hard. It was an image of our nation, strong and incredibly magnetic, pulling my very being into its grasp even more than it ever has before. I deeply felt how my nation is so important to me. I intimately felt what it stands for and that no election or policy would ever break that bond, that allegiance, that love that I hold for America.

It was just as the Affordable Care Act was creating a stir and a few people had raised the notion of seceding from the United States based on opposition to the Act and the federal overreach they perceived it to be.  I realized then how far some Americans had gone astray.  As a native Texan, I was concerned that some people in my home state would dare to suggest secession for any reason, much less their belief that somehow America wasn’t worth holding onto and holding together. Worse, the Governor of Texas had used a bit of reckless language which was further inspiring others to feel that secession was worthy of consideration.

In the humbling presence of thousands of our war dead, I self-affirmed that there were very few things that could ever lead me to wish to seriously question my allegiance to the union that is America. These wonderful brave soldiers died on this beach in 1944 to ensure America could stand in the future, in the face of any threat, foreign or domestic. I pondered what would tip me over that very precarious edge to even hint that a state of this nation withdraw from America.

The only things that came to mind that morning were material damage to the sanctity of our elections, pervasive violations of our right to freedom of speech or religion, or perhaps significant censorship of the press or acts of violence on the part of the government to innocent citizens. Perhaps these or other concerns would raise to this level if I thought more about it…but disagreements about tax policy or healthcare?  How could anyone, particularly an elected official, make this suggestion, even in jest?  How could people even suggest that Texas be a party to ripping apart the greatest, most glorious experiment of self-governance over a difference in how to approach healthcare?

I wanted the people advocating this extremist approach to come and stand before these men and women buried in this cemetery and to explain why these soldiers’ sacrifice was great but not great enough to deal with disagreement over our nation’s healthcare system. It might seem to some that there was an expiration date on the value of the blood spilled here, but I knew that couldn’t be the case. That would mean these soldiers’ deaths would only be worthy of inspiring us for a few decades. That would mean that now that the expiration date had apparently passed; we were free to disassemble our nation over differing opinions over healthcare or other policy differences.

Perhaps the advocates of this extreme approach were just letting off steam, but as I stood overlooking that beach in Normandy, it was alarming.

Have some of our citizens lost faith in their fellow Americans to use the system our forefathers gave us? To his credit, unlike many leaders in our nation, this Governor honorably served our nation’s military as a pilot in the United States Air Force and has widely recognized the value of our “great union,” but it would be helpful if he and others could more carefully exercise their leadership role.

We need our leaders to help Americans come together and embrace the truth that our system is strong and resilient enough to temporarily indulge or tolerate inopportune policy. We must recognize, providing we maintain confidence and competiveness in our electoral system, that a policy will either succeed or fail and that free elections will either result in continuance, improvement or discontinuance of the policy.  We even survived prohibition!

To be sure, both political extremes can fall prey to this…recall the many Americans who threatened to leave America after President George W. Bush was elected?

But here’s the essence of the American approach: it’s still an experiment. Play by the rules, the “ruling party” makes its best and most considered policy on behalf of the American people, and we all see what happens. The side that is closest to right will ultimately succeed…we have elections to ensure that happens. Perhaps the Connected Age technologies we’ve been talking about in this blog will help us make more sense of the electoral process as we continue with the American experiment, but in the meantime we’re doing pretty well honoring the commitment and sacrifices so many Americans have made throughout our history.

As I looked out over our fallen American heroes, I realized that advocates of this “my way or the highway” approach must be either reckless, ignorant, or just plain “not thinking.” They fail to appreciate and respect the history of the founding of our nation. Many unfortunate policies have been adopted, but we corrected them without rendering asunder the nation (with one obvious, thankfully temporary exception).

The new American Center needs to always listen and respond to legitimate concerns, but guide extremist solutions to the margins so we can devote our energy and creativity to responsible solutions that have the potential to unite us rather than divide us. We owe this to the men and women I had the honor of safeguarding that beautiful morning in Normandy.

Originally posted by Chuck Hunt, 3/18/2014.

Editor’s Note: From time to time, we will post pieces that reflect deeply personal experiences that demonstrate why we feel it is so important to take on the effort embodied by Fulfilling the American Promise in the Connected Age. This post is one of those pieces. The comments in this post specifically discuss the author’s perspectives and are not intended to convey those of any organization with which he is affiliated.

Fresh Look, Younger Perspectives

This post heralds a new look for Fulfilling the American Promise in the Connected Age. Carl redesigned the former look after his 22-year-old son told him he half expected to see images of a cigar in an ashtray and a glass of single-malt scotch accompanying the stodgy leather notebook motif of the original site. He was right – it’s time to freshen up.

Fresh new looks don’t imply we didn’t believe in what we’re doing, however. All the things we wrote about our current Congress, political extremes, equal access to education and opportunity, and the effects of the information age are still relevant. The implementation of our governance system is still broken and it needs freshening up too.

As previously, the New American Center will be the principle focus of our project and we’ll still emphasize leadership, opportunity and the connections that both bind and separate us. Just as a brief review of our definition, the New American Center is “the core of America that distances itself from extreme outlooks of ‘right’ or ‘left’ and embraces competition and compromise as normal ways to get things done.” That’s still our position as we go forward with the new look.

Enough of our readers have expressed in personal emails that we must continue to address the benefits of integrating compromise and competition, just as the Founders did. We’ll take that advice but we’ll try to more frequently look at our topics through the lens of the upcoming generations…those young Americans who did not really have a role in creating the current narrow-minded, walled-off environment.

Many of our readers may be familiar with what may be a very old quote: “We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.” This statement has been claimed by many, including Native Americans, Australian politicians, and a host of others you’ll discover if you do a web search for its origins. Anthropologist/ethnologist Jane Goodall was quoted a few years ago as saying that we don’t even appear to be borrowing it any longer…we’re stealing it, since it seems we have no intent to pay it back.

Any parent, whether a member of a governing body like our Congress or not, should be concerned with the role our older generations have in paying back the future debt we owe our children. Our words claim we do worry about it…a significant portion of political speeches reference the burden we’re placing on our future generations. Yet from the “actions” that come forth from our legislative bodies, these are just words designed to make the speaker feel good. Somehow, these words don’t seem to inspire any kind of collaborative effort, however. That sad state of affairs is what drove us when we talked about the pathetic state of legislative leadership in past posts.

Our blog posts in the future will capitalize on the original FAPITCA themes as presented in the Principles but we will try, based on feedback from some younger readers, to present them in a more encouraging light that better reflects the perspectives of the so-called Generation Y and the Millennials. They are our future and they have children to consider now also. We should support these younger generations and leave to them a system of effective governance, access to opportunity and a bountiful natural environment that’s even better than what our forefathers left to us, not worse.

We must find ways to lead from the Center in ways that minimize conflict between political, commercial and academic worlds so they can focus on preserving and conserving an America for which our children will praise their elders rather than condemn them. You may notice a shift in tone and style from time to time as we seek to share a message that also resonates with a younger generation, for they are the future of our Republic.

We want to help ensure we pay back our lenders the best possible return and provide them an even better nation to borrow from their children.

Originally posted by Carl and Chuck Hunt, 3/8/2014

Editors Note: We updated the Principles of FAPITCA on 3/8/2014 to reflect the new perspectives addressed in this post. This is in keeping with our intent for the Principles and Objectives to be dynamic and to mirror the Values we set forth.