Wednesday, December 31, 2008

Healing is better than fighting ...

If you take the time to read or listen beyond the primary U.S. press, you will gain a perspective of both sides of the Hamas/Israeli conflict. This deeper research is necessary to gain a broad and neutral understanding of the Middle East conflicts, because the U.S. press leans exclusively to the U.S. political position, which currently supports Israel. Perspective from the other side of the conflict is largely ignored, sometimes inaccurate and always incomplete.

It is important sometimes to bring to light something that is hard to face. When there is a conflict of any kind, but especially a conflict as grave as war, we tend to take sides. It is natural to align yourself with or against a belief or a position. Relative to the Middle East, the overwhelming alignment of Americans is with the Israeli's. The intent of this piece is not to dispute that or attempt to change your alignment, it is merely to give a voice to the other side. Each side of the conflict is made up of equally passionate convictions and equally valuable human life. It is important that we acknowledge and respect the entire conflict,and its aspirations.

What you will discover, as you dig deeper, is that Israel, in this particular conflict, is the bad guy. You will learn from Wallace Shawn in his article "Israel in Gaza: Irrationality"
[http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090112/shawn] that there is a large consensus among Israeli and American Jews of modern times, who harbor and in fact nurture the pain of the Holocaust to justify virtually all of their military actions, and unlawful occupations. Israel is guilty of war crimes. Many of them. The recent air strikes on the Gaza Strip, although retaliatory, represent severe and massive violations of international humanitarian law as defined in the Geneva Convention.
[http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090112/falk?rel=rightsideaccordian]

Shawn insightfully and compassionately gives us this : "Jews, historically, have been irrationally feared, hated and killed. Given that background, it's not surprising that the irrationality which surrounded them for so long, the fire of irrationality in which they were almost extinguished, has jumped across and taken hold of the soul of many Jews and indeed dominates the thinking of today's Israeli leaders and their American supporters". "The logical consequences of this view of the world is that in the face of such massive and eternal opposition, Jews are morally justified in taking any measures they can think of to protect themselves."

For many of us, Jews and gentiles, the Holocaust is the most vivid of brutal human atrocities. Ethnic Cleansing, Genocide...has and is happening in regions around the world. Many of the brutal images we see today, are seen through a memory of the Holocaust. There is nothing more painful to acknowledge. Its emotional and physical destruction is enduring and should never be diminished or forgotten. But the Holocaust or any similarly vile human tragedy, should never be used to carry on or justify further destruction. To do so is weak and irrational. Worse, it is cruel. My intent is not to blanketly or exclusively condemn Israel for the bloodshed in the Middle East. Two sides are obviously always engaged in a conflict. Each side having been both the aggressor and the defender...Arabs and Israeli's share blame. Each has committed war crimes, to be sure. But in each conflict, it is worth considering the prevailing motives to fight, definitions of success and recognition as well as cost of victory.

The reality in the conflict, between Palestine and Israel is that the Palestinians have been brutally victimized by the Israeli's for a long long time. They are fighting over dirt, and the right to live in, and peacefully occupy an independent state. Although threatened, Israel has this, Palestine wants it and Israel keeps infringing upon and constricting the Palestinian territory. In doing so, people are dying. It is ironic that the Israeli's in this conflict, are inflicting the very same pain and suffering they have endured, and are compelled to overcome. They are compassionate people, If the Israeli Jews stopped long enough to feel this pain again, and committed themselves to healing vs seeking perpetual revenge than the brutal attacks might stop, at least long enough to question the motive and weigh the value of a tragic outcome Vs a peaceful outcome.

Jews feel threatened, compelled to defend their rights .. for many this is a way of life. They know nothing else, so they gravitate to their suffering. They seem comfortable there. What happened to the Jews is grossly indescribable, unthinkable, horrible .. but dwelling on the hate gives it more power. Using it to justify modern acts of aggression, gives it purpose. Allowing it to influence your mind, gives it presence. Admittedly, it is easy for me to say, let it go... But letting it go is the only way to defeat hatred, once and for all.

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Is it useful to think and question without creating a solution ?

With the news this morning that GM - perhaps the most poorly managed of the big three auto manufacturers - is being allowed, in fact, encouraged to double dip into the tax payers pocket, with an additional "endowment" of $6B to help GMAC increase lending, I rolled my eyes. Apparently we have not yet learned "one" lesson from the sub prime mortgage bazaar. The idea as stated by Paulsen and team, is to make lending more accessible, and flexible, so that GM can finance more cars. I am floored. So in addition to defaults on mortgages, we will create a flurry of defaults on car loans. Good move..

I am growing weary of the financial crises, and switching to Israel.

Can anyone, please, help me understand why virtually all of the regions surrounding Israel want to brutally destroy it? Remove it, completely. I read a great piece by Benny Morris today in the NYT, which explains why Israel feels threatened. I learned, finally - that much of the Arab and Islamic nations do not and likely will not ever accept "the existence of Israel."

Although it goes back much further - centuries in fact, Morris explained the conflict in 1967, in which Israel retaliated against Egypt, Syria and Jordan, who isolated Israel and moved in several troops, armored and infantry divisions to Israel's border on the West bank. Arab nations, at that time, publicly declared a commitment to the destruction of Israel. Iran (to the East), known to have nuclear weapons, continues to make public threats to Israel, with a promise to destroy it. The Lebanese (to the North)- specifically the Hezbollah organization is closely tied to Iran and Syria, has a common aggression to destroy Israel. And the current conflict from the Islamist Hamas movement on the Gaza Strip (to the south) - arbitrarily launched rockets into Israel to mark the end of the weak, and tenuous 6 month peace treaty.

I know too, of the recurring conflicts between Palestine and Israel. The blame for these conflicts seems to be leaning more convincingly toward Israel. Within Israel itself, the Arab citizen base is embracing Palestinian "national aims". And the demography of the Israeli state is changing. More Arab-Israeli families are emerging, than are Israeli Jewish families. So, the conflicts soon will be internal as well as external.

Do the Israeli Jews deserve all of this hatred? I can't imagine that any human being, with even the slightest sensitivity could honestly answer that question with a "yes". No matter what your belief structure, at some point don't we all have an obligation to figure out how to co-exist? I was raised a Catholic. I married a Jew. I have a dear friend who was born in Germany. You can forgive mistakes from the past, or at least not hold hatred in modern times, to atrocities that happened in ancient times. We don't have to agree. We don't have to govern alike. We can argue. We can fight, and we should defend freedom. But at some point, we need to commit to resolution and stop short of killing massively. Throughout history, each race, faction, religious sect, secular sect, has fought and killed over something. In some situations, a case can be made for the sacrifice. But when violent conflicts go on for centuries, with no real momentum to resolution, should we not stop, at least long enough to question?

So violent, senseless,chaos continues in the Middle East...Are these people literally fighting over dirt, or are there deeply rooted religious issues that are driving this violence? They are not fighting for freedom, because if it was freedom they were after, they would stop killing, and let people worship and live as they please. Is the fictitious God of the Palestinians, Egyptians, Syrians, Jordanians, Iranians, Islamists all that different from the fictitious God of the Jews in Israel?

This is one of the reasons why religion is so distasteful to me. How do people justify killing, in the name of "A God"...! How can "religion" be so powerful a force that it literally takes over a person's intellect with an emotional belief structure that is strong enough to make them "kill"? This is amazing to me.. and profoundly sad.

Aside from religion, I wonder what would happen if we started to distribute maps, without lines or boundaries. Just continents, countries, states and city names? Maybe it would help people visualize unity and come to realize that war is completely irrational, destructive and so painfully wasteful. Maybe a map without boundaries would help people cross the line without realizing they are in enemy territory, and allow them to acknowledge the peaceful feeling they have in their hearts, as they look at that child, or man, or woman on the "other side" that looks and feels just like they do .. If you take away the boundaries, the confusion might lead to compassion..Perhaps that is the religion they have all been seeking for centuries...

Ok - now I am pontificating... but I've got to say, as hard as I try, I just don't get it, which makes me want to ignore it. And that is dangerous, because people are suffering. People are dying.

Friday, December 19, 2008

Diversity of a different color ..

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Failure is not bad .. if we don't repeat our mistakes


Does anyone else have an image like this one in their mind when it comes to the bail out ? No this does not represent the employees of failed companies, waiting in the unemployment line, it doesn't take much of an imagination to envision that. This represents the CEO's of failed companies standing on line at the White House, waiting for their chance to make a case for a bail out check. If banks can get government capital, backed by taxpayer funds for as little as 5% annually, why shouldn't the automakers, retailers, media groups, real estate conglomerates, CPG manufacturers, etc, etc, etc, hope to get the same level of assistance. This is a damn good deal. 5% ! wow...capital has not been this inexpensive in decades.... especially when you consider that the funds will be awarded with little to no conditions attached to them.

Relief in the form of a bail out, similar to what 12 primary financial institutions have received to date, has stalled for the automakers. Their timing is off, much as it has been in their business models.

I have been consistent in my view of the bail out(s). I am against them, philosophically. They are politically motivated, more than they are genuinely corrective. The TARP funds have been misappropriated from the very first $. Our panic to save livelihoods is not inappropriate, but our solution has been chronically misguided. The lessons here: 1. Do not expect comprehensive understanding of economic impact, if your advisories are narrow in their expertise, and powerful enough to push through a self serving agenda. 2. Do not distribute financial aid to secure a vote unless that aid will actually help the voter.

Our financial markets are in dire straits due almost entirely to deregulation enabled by government. The SEC has been rendered powerless by its own forceful compliance and support of deregulation. It has willingly given up its responsibility of oversight...made abundantly clear by the recent Madoff ponzi scheme, which went unrecognized or deliberately overlooked for at least a decade. We have serious problems within our financial institutions that have burled their way deep down into the very basic SOP's of healthy business principals. Simple concepts such as weighted risk thresholds to protect solvency have been completely ignored. So yes, we need to plug the hole in the dam, stop the bleeding, and fix. REALLY FIX! To date we have not appropriated assistance with the intent to fix. We have only thrown out a champagne filled life boat, to the crew on the sinking ship, and left the passengers on that ship to fend for themselves.

Should we really do this for the auto manufacturers as well? To what end? If anything, lets try the reverse this time. I suggest we use relief funds to send Cadillacs and Chevy Tahoe's to the autoworkers and transport them to their next job, in a new vibrant industry, like sourcing, harvesting and deploying alternative energy sources. Use relief funds to pay them competitive wages, in new industries that America needs to prosper and become more self sufficient. This time, let's leave the CEO's in the dust of their mismanagement, narrow mindedness, failed and stagnant business models, facing backward.

Don't get me wrong. Government needs to help..significantly and abundantly. But the aid should be focused on the workforce as well as supporting vital new growth. If we don't focus our borrowed financial might in this direction, it will be increasingly difficult for America to lead globally.

It is important to recognize that products, services and entire industries can become obsolete over time. Markets change. Innovation advances and creates new power for the consumer. America is great because it allows markets to change, prosper and fail. If we continue to support failing industries, we will do it at the expense of innovation. This is not to say that the automobile is obsolete. Far from it. But we may not need 3 major domestic auto manufacturers. Perhaps two or even one with the most vibrant, nimble and efficient production will be more than adequate to serve consumer demand. I don't know the answer to this question. I don't know how many cars need to be competitively produced annually to serve consumer demand at a profitable rate, but bankruptcy and forced reorganization will clarify, at least some of these issues. I don't know why people are frozen, in fear of bankruptcy filings. Many industries, most notably the airlines, have used bankruptcy to successfully adjust business models to current and future markets. What is so wrong with this? It is a great option. If the government concentrates on workforce aid, financial relief can be allocated and adjusted based on bankruptcy discovery and manufacturing adjustments. It can be used to keep displaced employees in their homes, and moderately spending until their new job is ready for them. You know all of the able bodied railroad workers found new jobs. GM autoworkers will find new jobs, too. The government needs to generously bridge them, while we are funding new industries. Think of it as a transition plan, not a perpetual loss of jobs.

It is scary, but it is necessary. We have got to stop thinking like wimps. Instead we need to stand tall. Take the hit. Commit to helping each other and move forward with strength, bravery and conviction. We can't really regain power as a people or a nation, if we are protecting the forts that don't matter anymore. We have to build new forts that are invaluable and thus worth our proactive support and aggressive protection moving forward.

Tuesday, December 9, 2008

It's important to be right, if you're telling me something I don't know...

I am discovering, today, that the traditional media I have been relying on to deliver unbiased, correct record of the national and international news, are often unreliable. Everyone makes mistakes, corrections are printed, but I am increasingly getting the feeling that the bias of the reporter, impacts his/her commitment to accuracy.

The "unbiased" part I discovered long ago. I strongly disagree with the notion that media should be allowed to lean toward a particular philosophy or political party in its reporting. I'd rather they just report. But the "incorrect" part is disillusioning to say the least. The last time I felt like this, was during the Enron collapse and deceit. Up to that point I was fairly active in the market, and although I was not naive to think that corporations would self govern at an ethical level, I thought that our inability to look inside every corporation to confirm ethical business practices would be mitigated by spreading my savings among multiple corporations...playing the odds structured for me in my 401K plan.....

But then, Enron happened. I believe wholeheartedly in capitalism, but I don't trust corporate America. So I invest and save on my terms, which will render potentially less financial gain in the the long run, but it may also keep me solvent. At the very least, it is less stressful than participating blindly on the recommendations of the money managers who supposedly pontificate in the media with complete neutrality and objectivity. These guys recommend stocks according to what will serve their personal investment portfolio.. for a long time I hoped that this veiled bias was just not happening, but on several occasions, I was brutally enlightened.

Beyond financial news, not being able to trust the mainstream news media, i.e. NYT and Washington Post...two of the most respected newspapers in the country, is really disheartening to me. Each has been inaccurate on several occasions during the financial meltdown of 2008. How do people and organizations get away with continually botching up their entire business model ? How do they survive at this level of mediocrity? As a mid level manager in corporate America, I am "never" allowed to botch up my business model...I Can't miss my projections. If I want to keep my job, I can't merely perform at an average level. I can't make mistakes, often. I certainly can't steal, lie or misrepresent the facts.


News organizations and journalists, have a worthwhile purpose in merely reporting the news, accurately, as it happens. There is no public mandate to report with a bias or opinion, although there is an obvious consumer appetite to hear the news and a view of the news, from our journalists. I wonder why we need to have our opinions guided by the journalist. Shouldn't we be able to form our opinions ourselves, once we are given the facts, unadorned ?

What I am referring to, specifically, is the recent, chronic and almost universal misrepresentation of the UAW - and its inflated wages and inflexible policies that are being blamed for the the failure of the auto industry. Are you kidding me? Aside from this being completely inaccurate and accusatory....why does the media feel a need to blame the work force? Are corporations, even those that are failing, so powerful in this country that they control the media by feeding it information that is self serving and misleading to protect their stock price? Is the media so complicit, and irresponsible, that they will report news in a way that is compliant with its advertisers? What is that? It is almost as vile as disregarding and violating the brilliance of separation between church and state. The media is anti union. It has been for a long time. Aside from this being strange and random, should the news organizations be anti or pro anything? I know journalists are human, with valuable view points, but there are plenty of public forums in which view points are expressed and debated. Should there not be a sacred place in media where we simply report? The highest standard being accuracy, neutrality and comprehensive perspective. I can draw my own conclusions, thank you. If I want help, I will turn to the opinion page.


Also disturbing, don't you think, is that the media is anti union...that is to say anti worker. Let's bring one simple fact to the forefront regarding unions. They were created out of a need to protect workers' rights. If corporations had demonstrated an ability and/or willingness to do this on their own, we wouldn't need unions...So explain the logic that supports the demonizing of unions, while blindly supporting corporate management. If nothing more, unions should be praised for creating a system of check and balance in corporate America. This is of utmost importance to all of us in American government, why should it be non-existent in American capitalism?

Through this discovery....it is important to realize that you are responsible for yourself... at every level. You can be as broadly or narrowly informed as you choose to be. But if you are not going to reach beyond your morning paper, or evening news don't be the first to claim victim of circumstance. We have to protect ourselves, and the best way to do that is to be widely and deeply informed about the things that are important to us.

Feed your brain. Life is much more interesting, when your brain is hungry, even when your body is tired, and your spirit broken.

Friday, December 5, 2008

Go on...Get out and picket

A couple of things to talk about ...

Justice_________________________________
Today was a bad day for OJ Simpson! Sentenced to a minimum of 9 years for armed robbery, but mostly for stupidity, arrogance and deceit. This guy is vile. But I must say it is refreshing to see justice wind its way through the maze of evil mastery .. and actually prevail. Yes it was the lesser of two evils, 13 years later, that it latched onto - but justice grasped and held the prior evasion of truth by the neck, and did not let it go... This is redemption, and proof that what goes around comes around.... Ah ... consequence for an illegal, unkind, violent, act.... Yes ! Finally !

Activism_________________________________
In his article entitled "Is There Truth in Obama's Advertising", Chomsky explores the apathy lurking in the profound, historical election of a "left - to - center" black man....prevailing first in a primary against a female candidate. Both running for president...and the black left guy ultimately defeating, mightily, the white right guy. His piece published in www.alternet.org points to the lasting affect of the civil rights movements of the 60's. Lauding them as being passionate enough to bring about real, long term change relative to civil liberties. In the 60's the 20 somethings were fighting for the unwavering recognition of equality among gender and race. We were fighting for the freedom of peaceful individuality and coexistence. We hated war, aggressively apposed it and loudly questioned our participation in it. It was a great time in America. We tested the limits of free speech. Our activism was focused, heart felt, correct and effective. We suffered in our attempt to bring about change. And we were successful in our endeavor.

Chomsky claims, that it was this activism that led to the victory on 11/4/2008. A long fought battle, that delivered permanent philosophical change in America. We have seen this before....in the abolition of slavery, the defeat of Hitler, the creation of the United Nations and other active and effective human rights initiatives. We are not getting it right 100% of the time, especially if you consider the brutal human rights offenses, hunger and genocide that still exist - but globally, we are philosophically aligned, with respect to human rights. In America, we have organized around the concept of equality, and although we can't force everyone to enthusiastically agree, or believe in their hearts, that a black woman is as important, and as valuable as a white man....we have made it extremely difficult from a policy perspective, to facilitate or legally carry out this level of discrimination.

Chomsky goes on to say that "Changes and progress very rarely are gifts from above. They come out of struggles from below." His point, is that without modern activism, at the street level, we will not really be able to bring about "change we can believe in" the cornerstone of Obama's advertising message. It is clear that Americans want change, what is unclear is how much we are willing to sacrifice to bring it about...permanently and philosophically. The fight in the 60's was deeply routed in emotional issues of pride and respect. The predominant demographics of the protesters, Adults 18-34, generally had no "things" to loose, less to risk...Still in this fight, failure was not an option, as we were fighting for basic human rights.

The fight in 2009 and beyond is about financial solvency. Our ability to maintain the lifestyle to which we have become accustomed...regardless of whether we are borrowing to achieve it or we actually are on the road to owning it. We are fighting to maintain the comfort - in life, for which we have worked. Is that something to rally around? Is that something for which we should passionately fight? Is that something that we will not give up...regardless of the struggle required to regain it? Chomsky urges us to aggressively demand financial stability, from below, in the ranks of the public. To fight for change to ensure our solvency. But he is not sure if this goal is as worthy as those we fought for in the raw, passionate, 60's.

It is interesting to ponder.


All demographics seem to agree that America needs to change direction. Bush has an 82% disapproval rating...he is one of the least popular presidents in history. Certainly a yawner when it comes to inspiration. But I can't help noticing that the "20" somethings in 2008 lack the passion of those of us in the 60's...Perhaps the stakes were higher then. But it feels like the demographic that wants to picket today, is 55 years old. We are the same people that burned our bra's. Relentlessly organized and attended rallies to chant for our right to be unencumbered individuals. Do we want to recreate the energy of the 60's...because it was meaningful then...thus we believe we can make it meaningful now? This is not all bad, but I hope at some point we can transfer our passion to the younger generation. They need to feel that same great sense of accomplishment we felt when women began to get respected professional positions. Black men were not spit upon...constantly, and white men could grow their hair longer while maintaining their intellect. These are gestures...but they were powerful then, and they have prevailed. What is interesting to me, is that we seem to be as passionate at 60 as we were at 20. The difference is that we have "things" to loose now. College to pay for. Mortgages to retire. Health care issues. Our life lessons have made us slightly more risk averse. Yes we will picket, but only after we have paid our bills, and checked our email. This is our reality. Less romantic, more sedate. Rather than completely loose our passion, we need to transfer it to the 20 somethings...because if we don't teach them to stand up for what they believe in, if we don't guide them to having confidence in their convictions, if we don't make them feel passionate to pursue the goal, then we have lost an important battle, with generational consequences...

It is up to us, then to get excited! Speak up. Question. Enthusiastically demand what is rightfully ours .. but ultimately we need to let the young ones move to the front of the line. They can ride this bike... It really is more their journey now, than it is ours...

Monday, December 1, 2008

Is a personal win really a victory ..

An excerpt from - "The Five Most Wanted Rip-off Artists from Wall Street and Washington"
By: Jim Hightower
http://www.alternet.org/
________________________
Deregulation was nothing more than self serving. Laissez-faire ideology is a crock. It failed. Americans are not being told the blunt truth, which is that the financial mess we're in today is a direct result of the laissez-faire fraud that Wall Street and Washington willfully imposed on our nation. CEOs and banking lobbyists, presidents and treasury secretaries, regulators and lawmakers (of both parties) failed to protect America from money-grubbing bankers, hedge-fund speculators, and other big players.

As we've learned in the past few weeks, there is no "free" market. Indeed, it's quite pricey when it trips and falls over the inevitable outcroppings of greed. That's why strong, vigilant, and aggressive public regulation is essential. Don't be fooled by claims that just throwing money at the hucksters will fix the problem. The only way to make America's financial system trustworthy is to return to the sound fundamentals of public oversight--starting with the bailout itself.
______________________________

If it makes you feel better to point your finger, point it at these five individuals: Alan Greenspan - Federal Reserve Chairman 1987-2006. Chris Cox - SEC Chair 2004. William Donaldson - SEC Chair 2005. Henry Paulson - Secretary of the Treasury 2006 - 2008. Phil Gramm - Head of the Senate Banking Committee 1999.

Although they did not act alone, these 5 vigorously spearheaded the deregulation of financial institutions. 4 of the 5 amassed tremendous wealth as private citizens, working within financial markets prior to accepting posts in the Clinton or Bush administrations. For that I do not begrudge them. But, greed drove their decisions and policies. In public office, they continued to work exclusively for the network of wealthy elite, just as they had done in the private sector. It is difficult to identify any level of "public service" commitment, on their part, during their tenure as public servants.

You know I am really trying to let go of these injustices of the past. But I am so angered by them that they are infecting the otherwise positive and forward looking core of my character. Part of who I am is due to my willingness and ability to trust people. To search for the good, the silver lining, the humor. To tolerate the faults because the virtues are much more powerful. I am paralyzed to a degree, waiting for someone to do the right thing....anyone. I am disillusioned, frightened frankly, that these acts which have caused catastrophic financial suffering will go without consequences. If we accept this form of greed in the face of its deception, how do we really prevent it moving forward? Millions of people have lost their life savings. Money they have earned through hard work, day after day - year after year - is gone. I have never seen war first hand. Clearly that suffering is far more significant. This hardship, however is debilitating in its own right. I long for some level of justice, but I don't really expect to see it. I only hope and strive t0 maintain my private standards, of human character, respect and decency. Ultimately finding the personal fortitude to rise above the disdain I feel for those who comfortably act with regard for no one other than themselves
.

They don't have the power to change the person I am. They don't have the power to change the way I connect with or treat other people. They don't have the power to change the standards to which I hold myself accountable...

I guess that is a victory in and of itself.