Tag Archives: American people

A Disciplined Freedom

Posted on by

The future of the United States is rooted in a storied past. When the first European settlers came to North America and dispersed into the forests and across the open plains, they had only their own initiative, ingenuity, and self-reliance to depend upon. No one was there to counsel them about the requirements for survival.

The meaning of freedom and responsibility were determined by harsh realities. Intrepid settlers also relied on one another as neighbors, so long as each took responsibility for themselves. Self-reliance and the acceptance of personal responsibility lead to mutual respect, and ultimately to self-respect. Whining and complaint don’t fly, however tough the circumstances.

We now find ourselves coming full circle to a time when some of the requirements of the early American frontier may become necessary once again. The physical circumstances look different, but the challenges will increasingly resemble those of an earlier time – when we were forced to stand on our own feet, depending on inventiveness, cooperation, and reliability in the context of community.

Most of us have become accustomed to the culture of dependence that easy credit and a well-funded government have engendered. But, this cannot possibly continue. Government will rapidly lose its capacity to function in the coming years. A depressed and heavily indebted economy will not support the government services we are used to, and this is likely to be with us for a long time.

As the Government finds itself unable to deliver promised commitments without devaluing the currency, our standard of living will deteriorate significantly. We will be called upon to learn the lessons of self-reliance and social responsibility demonstrated by those earlier Americans in the past who taught us a wisdom borne of hardship and hard work.

The individualism encouraged in the past by the relative freedom of unlimited physical frontiers must now be disciplined and refocused: Disciplined by the necessity to maintain our balance as we navigate through multiple crises, and refocused by the need to develop practical responses to complex material problems.

Maintaining stability will become a major concern because without it we cannot keep our families safe, and because cooperation and constructive effort cannot take place in chaos.

Some argue that creative change is born of instability, because it overcomes natural resistance to changing outdated customs. While this may be true, I don’t think we need to go looking for instability. We are not going to be able to avoid it. Good ideas and promising endeavors will be both born and destroyed in the coming days. I fear there will be no absence of opportunity for injury and trauma to our families. The ground is shifting beneath our feet.

We will have to fight for stability to get it back. If we seek to build a world where prosperity is possible, where our children can be safe and personal freedoms are respected, it will be necessary to create a stable environment for addressing problems, resolving conflict, and building capacity.

What will matter first and foremost will be our ability to work together, rising above our differences to build the foundations for safe communities, food security, and a functioning local economy.

In the coming weeks we will be thinking about how the Constitution of the United States has made such a diverse, strong-willed and combative nation possible for 200 years, and then go on to consider the social history and ideas influencing our national character.

This will be important for two reasons: It will assist us to approach the present difficulties with a balanced historical perspective, and to focus our best thinking on seeking a future we can respect and feel good about.

What are the ultimate outcomes we wish to seek?

Tom Harriman

Next week: Freedom and Stability, Finding the Balance.

The Challenge We Must Rise To

Posted on by

Last week I introduced you to James Surowiecki’s observations regarding democratic decision-making in his book, The Wisdom of Crowds. Offering convincing evidence that wisdom can be found in large groups if we know how to look for it, Mr. Surowiecki challenges our understanding of democracy.

None of us would expect the citizens of a democratic republic to make objective decisions when they have individual interests at stake. However, he reports startling results when aggregating the thinking of unrelated groups of strangers.

Importantly, Mr. Surowiecki emphasizes the necessity for both diversity of viewpoints and independence in thinking.

I would suggest that wisdom can also be found more intentionally, and intelligently, when we are fully committed to seeking the greater good. And this is most effective when we are committed to the safety and well-being of our friends and neighbors.

Such commonality of intention has certain basic requirements of course. Local initiatives will always depend on shared purpose, and to a large extent on shared values. And, this can only happen when we rise above our differences to appreciate the diversity of our knowledge, our varied experience and unique ways of seeing things.

Unity cannot exist in a state of sameness. It only comes into being with the embrace of differences. Living with diversity presents us with the necessity for learning how to engage with one another in practical ways. Nothing will be possible otherwise.

In Chapter One, American Crucible, I quote Peggy Noonan’s heartfelt call to the American people in her little book, Patriotic Grace, What It Is and Why We Need It Now. In it she urges us to rise above our differences, however significant they may be, to reaffirm “what it is to be an American.”

Rarely has there been a time in the past of this extraordinary country when it has been more important to consider and to reaffirm what it is to be an American.

Peggy Noonan puts it to us like this:

“Politics is a great fight and must be a fight; that is its purpose. We are a great democratic republic, and we struggle with great questions. One group believes A must be law, the other Z. Each side must battle it through, and the answer will not always be in the middle. The answer is not always M.

“But we can approach things in a new way, see in a new way, speak in a new way. We can fight honorably and in good faith, while—and this is the hard one—both summoning and assuming good faith on the other side.

“To me it is not quite a matter of ‘rising above partisanship,’ though that can be a very good thing. It’s more a matter of remembering our responsibilities and reaffirming what it is to be an American.

“…And so I came to think this: What we need most right now, at this moment, is a kind of patriotic grace—a grace that takes the long view, apprehends the moment we are in, comes up with ways of dealing with it, and eschews the politically cheap and manipulative. That admits affection and respect. That encourages them. That acknowledges the small things that divide us are not worthy of the moment; that agrees that the things that can be done to ease the stresses we feel as a nation should be encouraged, while those that encourage our cohesion as a nation should be supported.

“I’ve come to think that this really is our Normandy Beach, …the key area in which we have to prevail if the whole enterprise is to succeed. The challenge we must rise to.”

Some readers will recoil from the suggestion that “small things… divide us.” Some feel strongly that very substantial thing divide us. I am quite sure that Peggy Noonan would not want to minimize the significance of our concerns.

But, she has a point. We can acknowledge the things that divide us, address them in a respectful manner, and unite to strengthen the nation to protect the civil order that allows us our freedoms. Or, we can let it all come to naught.

I never said it would be easy. I said we have no choice.

Tom

Next week: A Disciplined Freedom

For myself, alone…

Posted on by

Tree 4

“It is not for me to judge another man’s life. I must judge, I must choose, I must spurn, purely for myself. For myself, alone.”

–Hermann Hesse

Unexpected Wisdom

Posted on by

How has the American identity formed itself amid conflicting ideas, beliefs, and perspectives? How has the clash of differing opinions contributed to strength?

The idea that unity is strengthened by diversity may sound counter-intuitive at first, but it is measurable and irrefutable.

In his book, The Wisdom of Crowds, James Surowiecki describes compelling evidence that large groups of people possess an extraordinary power to solve problems when their judgment is aggregated, and that the more diverse the crowd, the more efficient the solutions.

Citing a variety of examples, author Surowiecki presents a fascinating description of the conditions in which democratic decision-making does and does not work.

In his introduction to The Wisdom of Crowds, we hear of the surprise of scientist Francis Galton when 787 participants in a raffle at a county fair submitted guesses at what the weight of a large ox would be after it had been slaughtered and dressed.

“The analogy to a democracy, in which people of radically different abilities and interests each get one vote, had suggested itself to Galton immediately. ‘The average competitor was probably as well fitted for making a just estimate of the dressed weight of an ox, as an average voter is of judging the merits of most political issues on which he votes,’ he wrote.”

Galton, who wished to support his view that “the average voter” was capable of very little good judgment, borrowed the tickets from the organizers following the competition. He then ran a series of statistical tests on them. Among other things, he added all the contestants’ estimates and calculated the average.

The crowd had guessed that the ox, after it had been slaughtered and dressed, would weigh 1,197 pounds. In fact, it weighed 1,198 pounds.

Another example described by Surowiecki is the story of the 1968 loss of the United States submarine Scorpion, which disappeared in the mid-Atlantic Ocean. The Navy had no idea what happened to the vessel, where it was, or how fast it had been traveling.

Mr. Surowiecki recounts the story as told by Sherry Sontag and Christopher Drew in their book Blind Man’s Bluff, about how a naval officer named John Craven assembled a group of people – mathematicians, submarine specialists, and salvage men – provided them with a number of varied scenarios, and asked them to offer their best guesses without benefit of discussion each other. All they knew was the sub’s last reported location.

The group laid wagers on why the submarine ran into trouble, on its speed as it headed for the ocean floor and on the steepness of descent, among other things.

Craven built a composite picture of what happened and calculated the group’s collective estimate of where the submarine was. The location he came up with was not a location suggested by any members of the group. But, that is where it was.

The Navy found the wreck 220 yards from where Craven’s people said it would be.

Mr. Surowiecki proceeds to demonstrate the surprising consistency of this outcome in widely varied circumstances. And, he explains how groups work well in some circumstances better than others.

As we all know, there are times when aggregating individual judgments produces a collective decision that is disastrous; a riot, for example, or a stock market bubble.

Interestingly, he writes: “Diversity and independence are important because the best collective decisions are the product of disagreement and contest, not consensus or compromise.

“An intelligent group, especially when confronted with cognition problems, does not ask its members to modify their positions in order to let the group reach a decision everyone can be happy with. Instead, it figures out how to use mechanisms – like market prices, or intelligent voting systems – to aggregate and produce collective judgments that represent not what any one person in the group thinks but rather, in some sense, what they all think.

“Paradoxically, the best way for a group to be smart is for each person in it to think and act as independently as possible.”

Later in the present project, we will look at practical methods by which groups with diverse viewpoints can engage in creative problem-solving and decision-making in a manner that transcends consensus, even when face-to-face, to reach unexpected and mutually satisfying outcomes.

Tom

Next week: The challenge we must rise to

Finding Our Strength

Posted on by

The choice is ours. We can acknowledge our differences, address one another with dignity, and unite in our communities to address local needs and resolve local problems. Or, we can accept a world of hostility, disorder, and ultimate collapse as our children’s inheritance – and let the vision and the treasure of the American idea slip away.

Some may say that it is too late. Or, that their principles are too important to be compromised.

I say that the United States was conceived in controversy and that the powerful vision of the founders came with recognition that strength in unity can only be founded upon diversity.

Indeed, it will be argued here that diversity is the foundation for strength, and that the United States Constitution is a visionary assertion of this belief. They gave us structure. It is our responsibility to give it character.

Given our great diversity, what exactly does it mean to be an American? The answer that we choose as a nation will determine the shape of our future. We will be returning to this question again and again throughout the forthcoming book.

We find ourselves confronted today by one of the great tests of history, a direct challenge to both the intent enshrined in the Constitution and the coherence of the American vision that has been gradually maturing for more than two hundred years.

Perhaps we have lost our way for periods of time, stumbled, gotten sloppy. But now it is time to pull together. And, in all practicality this can only take place in the context of our local communities – the home of democracy and seat of civil order.

In a free society, stability cannot be imposed from above. The kind of strength we seek is grounded in trust, and the dependability of personal relationships.

I am not writing about a “recovery” from crisis in the normal sense. Rather, I submit that we stand at the threshold of an unprecedented turning point, one that offers us a window of opportunity to reaffirm and assert our exceptional and multifaceted identity.

In considering our approach to new and unexpected challenges in a rapidly changing world, we are positioned to make positive changes, both pragmatic and ethical, that would have been impossible otherwise. I believe a creative process is now underway that would not otherwise have been possible.

A tough lesson like this can correct weaknesses and imbalances that have led to these crises, but success can only be built on the time-tested principles that have made America an attractive model for the world.

We will go on to consider the foresight of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 that led to the system of protections, the checks and balances that makes this nation what it is. First, however, let’s examine the reasons that diversity has ensured American strength – not as a nice idea, but as a pragmatic necessity.

When, as individuals or groups, we address a problem or plan a project, the more varied the perspective and experience that is brought to bear, the more creative and effective will be the solutions found. This is an irrefutable truism.

In many institutions, and particularly in government, people are often afflicted with a condition called ‘group-think’. Everyone thinks the same way and listens only to those they most respect or fear. Consequently, groups often ignore obvious fallacies and misperceptions. Not only that, they tend to scorn perceptive critics as trouble-makers.

Our resistance to accepting diversity is often based in our discomfort with those we perceive as “outsiders”, who look or think differently than we do, or who come from unfamiliar cultural backgrounds. Yet, differences constitute the essence of diversity, and they can sometimes stimulate our thinking in ways we can ill afford to live without.

Why are we afraid of new and different ways of thinking? No one is asking us to change our minds.

Aristotle said that “it is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”

The opportunity to explore the world through the eyes of other people is a blessing and a gift. A life filled with diversity is an adventure that never stops giving.

Tom

Next week: Unexpected Wisdom

Good Neighbors Are Earned

Posted on by

Where to begin? If local communities are to serve as the foundation for healing the American spirit and reclaiming our sense of purpose, we must learn to make them strong – dependable, trustworthy, and resilient.

Many of us are not well acquainted with our immediate neighbors, much less those around the corner or down the road. If we want good people to depend on in a serious crisis, this has to change. Many problems are more easily resolved when we team up with others. Think food security, or friends we can trust when the banks close or the power goes out.

I have shared my concerns with you about the critical role of local communities. I have explained why I believe local communities and networks of communities will become the essential platform on which Americans reorganize themselves to identify common values, plan a common future, and forge a common purpose.

Building on the solid ground we foster in neighborly relationships, community is the only place in these extreme days where we have both the ability and the opportunity to control our destiny.

As each of us looks around and assesses our circumstances, how can we begin?

Those of you who are naturally outgoing will find this discussion simplistic. But for others the challenge of reaching out to strangers and proposing a common endeavor will be imposing.

There are several kinds of challenges to consider. These include: 1) getting acquainted with strangers and developing friendships, 2) explaining our motives honestly and our ideas effectively, 3) cooperation in addressing local needs, and 4) proposing more ambitious endeavors.

Community-wide efforts can include a wide array of possibilities. For example, these might include local security considerations, growing and preserving food, educating children, initiating small business enterprises, and troubleshooting technical problems that require creative thinking or specialized skills, such as electrical power, safe drinking water, and waste disposal.

All these possibilities can be placed on the table when we are first getting acquainted. Hearing a range of possible benefits for engaging in mutual assistance can jump-start resistant minds.

However, it is probably best not to try to fix all the ills of the world on the first visit. Unless you already know someone well, the first step will be to get acquainted and to find reasons to spend more time together. A warm, friendly first visit can be the basis for later, more substantive engagement.

Always begin interactions by inviting people to share their feelings and views before you do. This will provide you with a basis for effective engagement, and it will make them more receptive to you. Do not pry or press. But, if you can get another person talking, you will find them far more open to hearing from you.

Once new acquaintances begin to warm to you, invite them to think with you about ways the community can be improved. Invite ideas, and then suggest some of your own. If you find an opening, share your hope.

Try to avoid or downplay the more serious political or emotional issues, if possible, until you have secured a stronger positive connection.

If you meet unreceptive people, don’t push. Be friendly, stay in touch, and make yourself useful. As time passes, watch for ways to demonstrate the practical benefits of a mutually supportive community.

Soon we can begin to introduce people to each other. Small social gatherings can help people get acquainted. While remaining informal, we can introduce ideas by floating questions. What problems or unmet needs do we know of? Who has skills? What skills would be we like to learn? How can we assist one another?

As we come to know one another better, we can begin to discuss our willingness to rise above our differences when needs are great or the stakes are high.

First we are human, then we are neighbors, and, finally, we are Americans who care. As individuals we can be none of these things in isolation.

The future is of immense importance – but reality begins at home.

Tom

Next week: Finding our strengths.

The American Idea

Posted on by

Coast 1

The integrity of the American Idea is founded upon honesty and the strength of diversity. This nobility is the desire of the world. It will live on – generous, tolerant, and fair – long after foolishness and irresponsibility have been left to the dregs of memory.

–Tom Harriman

Lessons From a Painful Past

Posted on by

The 20th Century brought an immense wealth of marvelous advances into the world – scientific, intellectual, cultural. Yet it was a century of appalling violence, the most destructive in all of human history. An estimated 167 million to 188 million people died at human hands.

The century that produced communism, facism, and nationalism also saw the invention of highly efficient weaponry, and a willingness to direct it against civilian populations on a massive scale.

Perhaps it would be wise for us to look at our current problems in historical context. Will we, as Americans still enjoying the relative isolation afforded by two great oceans, recognize how easy it is for terrible things to happen?

A balanced perspective would lend wisdom to our endeavors and offer important lessons. At the present historic turning point humankind can least afford to repeat the horrifying errors of the past. And how easy it would be to do.

In his 2006 book, The War of the World: Twentieth-Century Conflict and the Descent of the West, the historian Niall Ferguson, who I have introduced to you previously, wrote that “the hundred years after 1900 were without question the bloodiest century in modern history, far more violent in relative as well as absolute terms than any previous era. . . . There was not a single year before, between or after the world wars that did not see large-scale violence in one part of the world or another.”

I believe Niall Ferguson’s analysis is of value to us because he departs from the typical explanations blaming weaponry and fascist governments, as significant as these were, and instead identifies ethnic conflict, economic volatility, and declining empires as the true causes.

In short, he reminds us of our human vulnerability to emotional insecurity, fear, and tribalism.

The “confluence of crises” I am writing about involves elements of all these things, but also a range of newly emerging concerns that have become apparent more recently, and are related more or less to the material limits of population growth, environmental and resource sustainability, and the capability of technology to maintain critical systems or mitigate major problems.

In every case, regardless of the particular nature of oncoming crises, the challenges we face as individuals and families come into focus as we respond to immediate threats. And, as Dr. Ferguson points out, it is the overreaction of people under pressure that leads to the most terrible violence.

It is my view, as most readers know, that our local communities are the only place where we have the capability and reasonable hope of controlling our lives going forward.

The difference between a violent past and a civilized future will depend entirely on the manner in which we relate to one another, approach problems, and organize our local affairs. In a word, the distinction between past and future will be our attitude.

Community-building is the context in which we can best respond, creatively and constructively, to the degradation taking place around us. It can provide us with the means to build trust with friends and neighbors and to take responsibility for meeting local needs and addressing local problems.

Here it is that we can undertake to work together for the greater good as loyal compatriots. Here it is that the real needs of real lives can be identified and addressed.

And, it is in the process of problem-solving and working shoulder-to-shoulder that we can begin to know, understand, and influence one another.

We must be realistic. Great numbers of people remain under the influence of ingrained prejudices of ethnicity, gender, religion and class. This will only change as we rise above our differences to address the felt-needs we face together in a difficult world.

Patience and determination make many things possible, but necessity brings everything sharply into focus. Interpersonal alienation wanes as we identify common concerns and develop a deepening sense of unity around common purpose.

Tom

Next week: Seeing the end in the beginning

A note to readers: You may find related chapter drafts posted on this site of some interest. See especially Chapter Six: The Ground of Freedom, and Chapter Nine: The Individual in Society.

Indulgence, pride, a lack of shame…

Posted on by

City 3 NYC

“Self-centered indulgence, pride, and a lack of shame over sin are now emblems of the American lifestyle.”
–Billy Graham

“Liberty cannot be established without morality, nor morality without faith.”
–Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America (1840)

The Bedrock of Ethics

Posted on by

During the past week we learned that the website AshleyMadison, which caters to cheating spouses, faces threats by hackers to reveal the names and personal details of as many as 37 million customers if the site is not taken down.

Soon after these revelations were made public it became apparent that popular opinion supports AshleyMadison and views the web-based service as a victim of injustice.

Here we have a classic example of the deeper, underlying crisis I wrote about a week ago.  I submitted to you, dear readers, that we are witnessing a stunning loss of personal integrity – a broad failure of honesty, trustworthiness, responsibility on a societal scale.

I suggested that this is a deepening quagmire that influences our institutions, our government, and our lives at every level, and will certainly play a key role in every one of the diverse, oncoming crises that presently loom before us.

Clearly, there has been a loss of ethical grounding to such a degree that no amount of righteous exhortation will have any useful effect.

In my view, the institution of marriage plays an irreplaceable role in securing the foundations for social stability and well-being.

While marriage may not be for everyone, it is impossible to imagine how civil order could be maintained in a productive society without the values and virtues and civilizing influences that are inculcated in each generation by stable marriages and responsible, caring parents.

Marriage is not easy. It is the hardest thing many of us ever do. But, when we understand the importance of it we persevere, and seek the profoundly personal rewards of an integrity that comes with age.

What exactly do the clients of AshleyMadison and their sympathizers not understand? Can they not imagine the strength and resilience of that stronghold of safety and well-being that is a true and honest marriage? Do they believe themselves incapable of this? Or, does the shame and sorrow of infidelity simply represent a fleeting capitulation to personal failure?

Clearly they fail to understand how and why a civilized world must depend on trust and responsibility, or to recognize the integrating role of marriage when it is woven into the fabric of life.

What utter devastation there is in the emotional wasteland of a socially disintegrating world!

How will we address this problem?

One cannot put out a fire by aiming a fire extinguisher at the flames as they flicker in the air. A fire can only be extinguished at the site that is burning.

Attacking the flames will accomplish nothing. People do not respond well to preaching or finger-wagging, especially when their perspective feels good to them and seems quite rational.

It is for this reason that I have drawn your attention to the potential safety and dependability of our own communities – if and when we do the basic work of opening communication, inviting cooperation to address local needs, and building trust.

In my view, community-building is the only context where honest listening and learning and soulful change can take place on a meaningful scale.

We must learn how to make this happen. I do not believe it can happen anywhere else.

Until the wayward and the lost discover that their lives and well-being depend on the security and stability of their local communities; until they recognize the necessity for trust and responsibility in their own comfort or survival, the wisdom of values and virtues will be lost on them.

These great lessons will not be learned and understood by our friends and neighbors without a struggle. We will have to engage patiently, intimately, to work through the hardships of survival and community development together one step at a time.

Principled truth can only be introduced gradually, honestly, effectively, in the context of the tests we are subjected to as loyal compatriots.

No, it will not be easy. Discipline is never easy on the threshold of change. But with an understanding of purpose comes true freedom, and the struggle to get there will be at least as rewarding for the teacher as for the taught.

Tom

Next week: Seeing the end in the beginning

A note to readers: Please note the chapter drafts available on this site, especially Chapter Six: The Ground of Freedom, and Chapter Nine: The Individual in Society.

Our greatest glory…

Posted on by

People 16

“Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail.”

–Ralph Waldo Emerson

The Deeper Crisis

Posted on by

We live in extraordinary times. Having entered a period of successive and interacting crises, we are challenged to pull together as a people, to clarify our purposes for safeguarding the integrity of our nation as a democratic republic, and to determine effective means for doing so.

I have commented here that we face a range of diverse crises, all emerging into view at virtually the same time. We have reviewed a number of them very briefly on this blog, and several at greater depth.

Some, like the continuing financial crisis, have impending implications. Others, like the unrecognized instability of complexity in today’s digitized world, remain hidden, but may well provide the trigger that sends things into freefall.

(See blog posts: February 6, “Why the Bankers are Trapped”; February 13, “Insolvency and Devaluation”; February 20, “A New Kind of Crisis”; and March 13, “The Hidden Dangers of Complexity.”)

I have placed emphasis on the coming financial storm because it hangs over us now, waiting for a trigger.

The too-big-to-fail banks are now bigger than they were before they helped bring down the economy in 2008. The federal debt has risen by 83% since that time. We see an increase of low-paying service sector jobs while our economy continues to lose higher-paying jobs.

The stock market has shot upward with no foundation in economic reality, and has now reached irrational valuations not seen since just before the 1929 panic and the dotcom crash of 2000.

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS), which is the central banker to the world’s central banks, announced recently that central bankers will be out of options when the next crisis hits.

Essentially confirming my points in the February blog posts referenced above, the BIS suggests that the major central banks have mismanaged the situation to a large extent because they don’t understand it. Previously “unthinkable risks,” they said, are coming to be “perceived as the new normal.”

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) also released a report recently, stating that “key fault lines” are growing across the US financial landscape, and that “new pockets of vulnerabilities have emerged.” The largest and most interconnected banks, the IMF concludes, “dominate the system even more than before.”

As imposing as this unfolding drama appears, in my view there is a more fundamental crisis. And, it is clearly visible behind all the others.

I have written here, (as recently as June 26), of the stunning loss of personal integrity – honesty, trustworthiness, responsibility – we have witnessed in recent years. A profound collapse of moral standards has taken place on a broad, societal scale.

This is the deeper crisis, and it may ultimately be responsible for the general deterioration that is dragging civilization to its knees. I say this because trust and responsibility are the basis for the sound functioning of human affairs, and lack of them has led to crippling disorientation and disorder.

Why has this happened to such a broad extent? Certainly we have lost the ethical and intellectual foundations that have contributed to stability in the past. But, why? We are intelligent people. What happened to good judgment? Where is common sense?

Have we walked away from responsibility believing that honesty and fairness limit our freedom? Has the daily bludgeoning of mass media warped our minds and stunted our capacity to think for ourselves?

Whatever the reasons, we are now reaping the whirlwind. For a world where many young people have grown up with little effective parenting, and many of their elders have lost any meaningful grounding in values or virtues, there will be no guidance available in the chaotic upheavals that lie ahead.

Analyzing and explaining the prospective dangers we face is beyond the scope of this blog and book. Rather, I seek to gather Americans around a constructive response that is rooted in our local communities, irrespective of unpredictable events.

Tests that require us to pull ourselves together and rise to our full potential might actually be the only antidote to the toxic cocktail of partisan negativity that is poisoning the American soul.

Stability requires and integrity demands a rational and compassionate response to the downward spiral of social and economic deterioration.

Tom

Next week: Responsibility, personal and practical