BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR

 

We all know that the idiom “be careful what you wish for” is used as a type of warning to people who are wishing for one thing, but might not realize all the negative consequences that could accompany obtaining that wish.  Sometimes it is instructive to look around and think about the ramifications of change on our lives and in the world at large.

For example, Washington and Greene counties are undergoing an economic revival of revolutionary proportions.  Unemployment is low, housing sales are improving and our backyards are literally the foundation of a new national industry.  My birthplace in Hunterdon County New Jersey went through a similar transformation in the 1970’s. A rural county of dairy farms with a homogeneous population of mostly white middle class residents exploded overnight with the completion of interstate 78 into New York City.  Within a few years Exxon, AT&T and Merck set up their headquarters in the cornfields and my favorite hunting spots sprouted wealthy subdivisions.  Now, I could not afford to go home and live in my hometown.

In Washington and Greene counties, along with growth and a larger tax base, we will begin to see more crime, more congestion and if the detractors of fracking are correct, more pollution.  The country hamlets and wide open spaces will never be the same.  Some of us will be questioning what we wished for.

Another “Be Careful” issue is taking shape in our Country at large that will have widespread implications.  Those among us wishing for immediate and significant debt reduction may not win the day immediately, but as the economy recovers there is no question that public retirement plans and the Social Security and Medicare Programs will undergo reduction. Because it is impossible to reduce present entitlements already in pay status, a line will be drawn in the sand.  We will in effect have two classes of retirees, those before and those after debt reduction.  The unlucky “afters” will be expected to work longer for less monetary and medical benefits.  I actually pity the unlucky republican congressman who must explain to his forty year old constituents why he was so eager to let this genie out of the bottle and get his wish answered.  Moreover, those of us with disabled family members or other economic challenges will be fighting to stuff the genie back in the bottle.

            On the international front the “Be Careful” issue is democracy in developing countries.  While the uprisings of the last two years have represented a significant affront to authoritarian rule in the Arab world, it has also reminded us how messy democracy is.  Being more democratic is not equating with being pro American.  It is somewhat ironic that those who insist the United States is a Christian democracy are horrified that an Arab country would want to become an Islamic democracy.  The Asian model for democracy, first economic and later political, looks nothing like our own experience.  In Latin America, the Spanish influence on democracy has continued to produce banana republics as opposed to stable institutions.

            I am not suggesting that any one of the three examples above is a bad result to wish for.  Perhaps the answer lies in moderation.  Like Midas turning everything he touched to gold, too much local development, debt reduction or international democracy may not be a wise result for any of us, at least in the short run.  Strong local governments which anticipate rather than react to change will help with the first issue. Thoughtful, measured plans to lower the deficit rather than sharp cuts will help with the second.  America offering moral support but otherwise staying out of the way as emerging democracies find their way will help with the third.

 

If I Could Only Remember…

 

I cannot stop obsessing about memory.  How it affects me, my family, the history of civilization, science, philosophy, and everything I read each day in newspapers, novels and on the internet.  I was not always so preoccupied, but as I get older, memory becomes more of an enigma.  Why am I recalling certain episodes in my life with vivid certainty?  Why does my sister inform me it never happened the way I recalled?  Why am I sometimes overcome with insights that did not exist only hours before?

In truth, two events took place that brought my full attention to the importance of memory.  First, on a trip to the Southwest, on the back of a horse in the Senora desert, a family member lost most of her memory for 24 hours.  The diagnosis was global transient amnesia, which is an outlier event that almost never reoccurs.   She remembered her immediate family, but little else.  Observing her circuits reconnect was an eye opening experience.  Second, I recently read The Sense Of An Ending, the winner of the 2011 Man Booker Prize, by Julian Barnes.  A novel written by a 60 year old, with a 60 year old protagonist……. about memory.  Among other dilemmas, the book leaves us with the question: What if memory deceives us and we are not who we think we are?

Now, everywhere I turn the limits of human memory smack me in the face and middle age writers are giving their opinion…on memory. (see: Speak, Memory by professor of neurology Oliver Sacks in NYRB February 21, 2013)  If the experiences that I have lived through are not the same as the experiences I remember, and this is true for all humans, how can any history be trusted?  Adding this dilemma on top of the known fact that the “winners” throughout time revise and slant recorded history to favor their position, what truth is remaining?  Should we ignore all empirical history that deals in the thoughts and motives of historical figures?  How could anything in the biblical canon be historically accurate?  Are Lincoln’s true motives for emancipation unknowable? 

I have my own answer to the problem of memory in the historical context which may or may not be a solution for others.  I treat history like I evaluate the financial markets.  There is a web site realclearmarkets.com, that scans all of the financial media and presents, side by side, every position with an opposing view on what the market will do.  I now treat history the same way.  With my personal history, I check with my siblings and other childhood friends who were present at the event.  (I am still not convinced the collective memories of Woodstock are correct, given the clouded minds in attendance)  In reading or researching history, I read as many views as possible.  I find that the large stack of books on Lincoln is inconvenient but necessary to form an opinion.  Moreover, more ancient history is being continuously revised, as the archeological record becomes more complete and lost writings are uncovered.

History aside, there are many other problems that memory presents.  As a lawyer, I have listened to hundreds of individuals recite eye witness accounts with certainty that later were shown to be inaccurate.  Even in biblical times, the accuser was expected to find at least two witnesses before pursuing allegations of a felony nature. DNA evidence has done more to further justice than any other forensic tool by correcting these inaccuracies.

Lastly, I want to present a defense to the always maligned mental disease of plagiarism that afflicts journalists everywhere there are opinions to be formed and articles to be written.  I am not alluding to conscious copying of another’s work product. It is often difficult for a writer to determine whether an idea came from within, or from somewhere else.  When one understands anything about memory, it becomes obvious that the human mind is first and foremost a thief.  No thought within the brain’s grey matter is original.  The greater the intellect and more broadly read the journalist the more integration of purloined snippets of information is taking place.  Putting together the puzzle in a slightly different format is more often than not, progress not plagiarism.  To hold journalists to a higher standard than the creative arts is unfair and could stifle some truly original results.

 “We as human beings are landed with memory systems that have fallibilities, frailties and imperfections - but also great flexibility and creativity.” (see: Speak, Memory above).  In the last analysis, it is important to understand the imperfections and to encourage the creativity.

 

 

 

 

LEADING BY EXAMPLE

 

As I listen to President Obama roll out his new immigration policy, it feels good to be an American. The recent explosion of civil rights: gender, race, sexual and now the rights of resident aliens is a breath of fresh air.  This country is finally regaining its purchase as a democratic republic to be emulated because of its values and not simply a nation to be feared because of its strength.

In foreign policy this is no small advantage. In 1939, the Roosevelt State Department found it difficult to criticize Nazi Germany’s treatment of Jews, when the American South was lynching black Americans.  More recently, Foreign Powers would find it amusing when we criticized border conflicts and treatment of immigrants in other regions, when we made no attempt to address our own outdated and unfair immigration policy. Lastly, many of the world’s leaders continue to question the civilized nature of an American Society that consumes the greatest percentage of illegal drugs and permits gun mayhem to run riot.

The importance of leading by example can never be overstated. The next test for the President and our fractious political leadership will be to show the world a new paradigm for American capitalism that will provide a beacon to the world for the next century.  This new model will not sit well with white males who were far and away the primary beneficiaries of the old economic system. But as demographics change, policies change, providing a more fertile ground for equality in America.

 Like civil rights, the Obama lead fiscal and monetary explosion will broaden participation across class and gender lines to ensure greater sharing of limited resources.  Being the last democratic nation to adopt universal health care is a start.  Adopting progressive revenue and education policies must follow.  As our Country settles down and narrows the gap between rich and poor, it will begin to feel more confident and secure.  Perhaps at that juncture, the drug and gun issues will be resolved as well.

 

 

A SMALL VICTORY FOR FAIR PLAY

  I was surprised last week, when the local Radio Shack clerk asked me to donate a dollar to Lance Armstrong’s charity, LIVESTRONG, at the end of my purchase.  Apparently the charity has not reached the same level of scorn as its founder.  Mr. Armstrong has lost all of his millions in endorsements and this week will ask for forgiveness before the public confession booth known as the Oprah Winfrey show.  For years he has maintained that there was no blood doping or ingestion of banned substances involved in his numerous cycling achievements. Now that the statute of limitations for perjury has run out, the truth will be told.

Winning at any cost and the ends justifying the means are well ensconced goals in our society.  Untrue commercials for political gain are the norm.  Accountants and tax lawyers spend their professional lives trying to beat the system for clients who can afford to pay.  Marketing experts spend their professional lives trying to sell us products we do not need that do not perform as advertized. Writers plagiarize or worse yet make up auto biographical stories to sell their material.  We all know of numerous other examples, spread throughout our daily lives.

Human nature aside, sports competition is supposed to be different.  Despite all the money at stake at the top of the pyramid, our sports heroes, no matter what their personal flaws, are to compete on an equal playing field with only their God given physical attributes.  The more cynical among us would say we need this norm to support the betting industry.  The more enlightened would argue it is important to maintain this sense of fair play to inspire our youth.

Somehow the Lance Armstrong mea culpa feels like a small victory for the importance of playing fair.  Not letting the steroid crowd enter Cooperstown feels like another.  Soccer Mothers across the land have been given some traction when explaining to their children that losing within the rules is more gratifying than winning with a lie.  Now if they could only get rid of that dreaded Sports Illustrated Swim Suit issue, which no doubt has provoked family conversations of a different kind, some of the innocence of playing and following sports could return.

 

 

A NEW (OLD) PROPOSAL FOR HELPING OTHERS

 

 

An interesting fact of life has become more apparent to me in recent weeks.  It has broad implications that somehow slipped my liberal, big government mindset. The point is this:  The closer one human being is in time and space to another human being in solving a problem, the more effective the solution will be.

            I saw this principal at work during my involvement with the presidential campaign.  The Obama strategy of hands on, grass roots person to person contact, between volunteer and voter was worth more than any million dollar commercial.  As another example, following the perfect storm, Sandy, local outreach groups from churches and the revamped “Occupy Wall Street” organization, operating in New York City, did more immediate good than the National Red Cross or FEMA.  Third, the commentator Nicholas Kristof, told the audience at his recent lecture at W&J, that Bangladesh does a much better job of feeding its poor than India with its much more sophisticated governmental network, by simply empowering women in the local villages. Fourth, I have no doubt that our local City Mission and half way houses have rehabilitated more men in Washington County than Pennsylvania’s welfare system.  Finally, is the photo that went viral on the internet, of the NYC police officer, placing a new pair of shoes purchased minutes before on the feet of a barefoot homeless man.

            When national bureaucracies and middle men are not in charge, the slow motion reaction in solving a problem appears to magically disappear.  I could not help but think about the way we helped less fortunate people before the new deal in the 30s.  Each town of consequence had an orphanage and charitable organizations to address the neighborhood poor.

 

 The industrial revolution and prevalence of alcohol brought changes to the system.  At the local level it was obvious that booze was a major culprit and temperance organizations flourished.  The town fathers believed that there would be fewer jails, fewer orphans and fewer broken homes if alcohol were abolished.  To address the crisis they were willing to give up local control.  Unfortunately the national solution, which created bath tub gin, was worse than the problem.  After this experiment, instead of returning to and funding local self help, we began to nationalize the solutions to most of society’s ills.

            It is difficult for my liberal bones to admit that big government is often not the best solution for local disasters, personal hardships and inequalities.  While I am not advocating that fewer dollars be spent, it seems a compromise is in order.  Why not identify local groups, faith based or otherwise, in a national register.  These proven “social first responders” could be funded immediately, without red tape, when disaster strikes or a local social problem is identified.  Let the federal programs solve what they do best, systemic problems that cross local and state boarders and infrastructure too vast for the locals to resolve.

            Of course there are problems with this proposal.  The federal government and the courts are concerned with equal access to funds and with regulations to see that the dispersals are made within predetermined parameters.  For this system to work, strict rules would have to take a back seat to expediency and practical local wisdom.  Sometimes, “one bare foot at a time” is a better approach than a thousand pair of shoes locked up in a warehouse. This is certainly a new (old) paradigm for helping those people who need it most.

 

WHICH GENERATION IS MORE SELFISH?

 

I read the recent letter to the editor “Young lose their sense of morality” and was reminded of similar claims in the 1960s.  At that time the “moral majority” was convinced that the drug, music and sexual culture of the young would bring the country to its knees.  One could certainly argue that we baby boomers have brought irreparable harm to the American polity, but for quite different reasons.  Most of us cashed in our radical chips and took our turn at running things.  The result has not been all that spectacular.

I believe that the cultural tension between our youth and adults has always been a positive force in our nation’s history. In the 60s this tension lead to the end of an unjust war, an expansion of civil rights and the increased role of women in society.  Today, young people are leading the charge in social media, sexual equality and globalization.

 On a personal level, my parents were as horrified of Woodstock as I am of tattoos and body piercing. Our youth will outgrow their hedonistic and selfish tendencies, hopefully with more grace than we did.  If we old folks can tear ourselves away from the Viagra and Botox commercials, maybe we can provide a great example of unselfishness to the younger generation.  How?  By supporting the higher taxes and lower entitlements necessary to level the playing field as they begin to clash with their own children.  Generational inequality is a much larger problem facing our society than the moral indiscretions of our youth will ever be.

FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS

 

One of the great rewards of high school football is the interesting matchups during the playoffs.  For example, the recent WPIAL class AA playoff football game between Washington High School and Shady Side Academy brought together two groups of athletes from opposite ends of the educational and economic spectrum.  After the Prexies won the contest in convincing fashion, sending the prep boys back to make their early Thanksgiving plans to exotic locales, I started thinking about the inequalities of secondary education in Pennsylvania.

Small city high schools along with cities like Washington are dying institutions.  The tax bases are shrinking and home buyers want to live where their children can attend well funded suburban schools.  The older and poorer tax payers in small cities fight tax increases which would provide adequate education. Counties like Washington insure that troubled and/or special education students (who cost more to educate and bring down success rates) will proliferate in city schools by cramming public housing and other welfare resources within its urban areas.

On the other hand, Shady Side Academy represents the most privileged students in our society.  According to its web site: “virtually 100% of our students attend four year colleges and universities.”  Prep scholarships are offered, often to large, bright students who have a fondness for football.

I am told that until recently Washington had no official weight room. Shady Side has facilities that are among the best.  Washington has disadvantages in staffing, transportation, equipment and alumni support.  Yet, somehow, with similar sized student bodies, Washington was ranked #3 ahead of Shady Side, #14 coming into this playoff game.

Some would say that it is not fair to compare Washington’s resources next to an elite private school.  The truth is I could substitute Shady Side for public schools like Fox Chapel or Upper Saint Clair and make the same argument.  Ironically, only the underfunded city schools, parochial schools and wealthy private schools have comparable student populations to compete against each other.

Football and basketball have always been leveling fields for disadvantaged athletes and small disadvantaged public schools. This has been particularly true in Western Pennsylvania, in places like Washington and Aliquippa.  In sports, a small city school can make up a lot of ground with good coaching and a dedicated group of upper classmen. There is a great sense of community pride in seeing these kids succeed and be the best despite economic disadvantages. 

However we must not lose sight of the larger, more significant issue.  Inequalities in academics are not as easy to overcome as those in sporting programs.  All public school students deserve equal educational opportunities, across the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, regardless of where they live.