Far from Father's Day today and thinking again about my Dad. He used to recite all kinds of poems and songs, and was reminded about several today as I searched for an old document of jokes. This was a favorite. Take a minute, If you have, to read it - and imagine it in meter, while driving on some long trip... and a smile at the end, from the irony of the story. Happy Saturday!


Ivan Skavinsky Skavar


The sons of the Prophet are brave men and bold
and quite unaccustomed to fear,
But the bravest by far in the ranks of the shah,
Was Abdul Abulbul Amir.


If you wanted a man to encourage the van,
Or harass the foe from the rear,
Storm fort or redoubt, you had only to shout
for Abdul Abulbul Amir.


Now the heroes were plenty and well known to fame
in the troops that were led by the Czar,
And the bravest of these was a man by the name
of Ivan Skavinsky Skavar.


One day this bold Russian, he shouldered his gun
and donned his most truculent sneer,
Downtown he did go where he tred on the sheet
of Abdul Abulbul Amir.


"Young man," quote Abdul,"has life grown so dull
That you wish to end your career?
Vile infidel know, you have trod on the toe
Of Abdul Abulbul Amir.


So take your last look at the sunshine and brook
And send your regrets to the Czar
For by this I imply, you are going to die,
Count Ivan Skavinsky Skavar."


Then this bold Mameluke drew his trusty skibouk,
Singing, "Allah! Il Allah! Al-lah!"
And with murderous intent he ferociously went
for Ivan Skavinsky Skavar.


They parried and thrust, they side-stepped and cussed,
Of blood they spilled a great part;
The philologist blokes, who seldom crack jokes,
Say that hash was first made on the spot.


They fought all that night neath the pale yellow moon;
The din, it was heard from afar,
And huge multitudes came, so great was the fame,
of Abdul and Ivan Skavar.


As Abdul's long knife was extracting the life,
In fact he was shouting, "Huzzah!"
He felt himself struck by that wily Calmuck,
Count Ivan Skavinsky Skavar.


The Sultan drove by in his red-breasted fly,
Expecting the victor to cheer,
But he only drew nigh to hear the last sigh,
Of Abdul Abulbul Amir.


There's a tomb rises up where the Blue Danube rolls,
And graved there in characters clear,
Is, "Stranger, when passing, oh pray for the soul
Of Abdul Abulbul Amir."


A splash in the Black Sea one dark moonless night
Caused ripples to spread wide and far,
It was made by a sack fitting close to the back,
of Ivan Skavinsky Skavar.


A Muscovite maiden her lone vigil keeps,
Neath the light of the cold northern star,


[Now slow for effect]


And the name that she repeats…


as a ghost tugs the sheets…


is Ivan Skavinsky Skavar.

Father's Day

My Dad, who passed abruptly in 1999 at 63, would have had a hard time with the world as it is today. Part of my reasoning is not knowing how he might evolve over 22 additional years, but he was progressive for his time, so I'd like to think he would likely be horrified by some of the backwards steps we've taken - and delight by some of the advancements. I'm less than a decade away from 63 and I'm there myself. 

My parents encouraged my music at a young age and my dad individually did a lot towards that, funding my first electrics, building an amp for me with a rewired stereo (and buying my Fender Princeton when the homemade amp fried my first electric). He bought me and Ibanez - which I still have - and recently worked back into playing shape - and a Les Paul Jr. that was lost in a loan to a family friend (My Buddy, Adam Sachs gifted me a replacement Junior a number of years ago which is happily in use to this day). 

 

My Dad built his Glass studio, pursuing his dreams, from stained glass to lamp work, to classes at Cleveland State and then the Glass Piper, which was a passion driven feat. He pursued it to the exclusion of his own long-term interest. He taught me to follow my passions, but he also taught me to look for balance - which he frequently talked about but discovered a little too late through hard lessons. 

 

I'm incredibly privileged to have my loving family, friends, and life. I'm passionate about them and about guitar, music and writing. All gifts from my parents in one way or another. I'm in frequent awe that I get to live it - lots of good points (certainly some rough and tough spots too).

 

I am fortunate enough to know he loved me - and to have been able to tell him the same - and to have thanked him. I wish he was still here to share in it a bit more. I feel his presence still, in thoughts and actions and in the retelling of his jokes. 

 

I'm also fortunate enough to be a dad, of a wonderful, caring, and talented child. Gabriel, if you're reading, I want you to know I love you and am proud of you. And if you're not hope to catch up with you at some point today. 

 

And to all of those fathers and children of fathers today, take time to think and celebrate - and maybe more than once a year. Happy Father’s Day all.

 

Memorial Day

In memory of those who served and lost their lives. I honor your service and sacrifice – it is beyond anything my thanks is worthy of – but you have it.

I do this in many cases, without honoring the root cause of your death. You did not die, ultimately, because of your bravery and valor. Your sacrifices included saving the lives of your friends. But this was not the cause. Your service, and ultimately life, was likely called into need because of war.

War is not a noble thing. There are no just wars, only intractable positions. Yes, some end up being necessary. WWII is the example I will always use. Stopping the Nazi machine was one of the most important things to ever happen.

The world needed the US in the conflict. It was a battle of good an evil. Many wars before and since have turned out to be for gain – for land, oil and other reasons which hold no justification for the violence that ensued. WWII was a war against Genocide and the potential slavery of the planet. So it was necessary. But even then, War is not noble.

But volunteering to put one’s life on the line in the service of others – in serving and protecting during peacetime and wartime is noble. For those that lost their life in the service of our country, I thank you for your sacrifice and I honor your memory. I am sorry that decisions were made that ended up requiring that sacrifice. I promise to never vote intentionally for those who would squander that sacrifice for gain, for show. It is too great a cost to bear even when the cause is honorable, let alone, when it is war.

Expediency

One of the giant fears I have is the short term, small picture, expedient view our leadership and many Americans have. Everything is in faster cycles now, 6 month product cycles in technology, Wall Street’s preoccupation with the present cycle.

Speed, when it sacrifices process, where process is necessary to the outcome, is a problem. That's the definition of expedience. I don't want expedient. I want efficient (for things) and effective (for people).

Slowness, when process isn't complex or is ubiquitous is also problem.

But it is important we differentiate when each of these is the case. It requires critical thinking.

During Covid, process was highlighted in vaccine approval. They went as fast as they could but they determined essential process, given the risks, and moved forward. It was not expedient, despite the political pressure for expedience. One of the problems is that many Americans saw the political push for expedience and subsequently related that to the vaccine development and approval process, which was not the case.

Something in a similar vein is happening with re-opening. 

There's been a constant push to re-open when the science didn't support it and because it was such a fight for public health a conservative stance by the CDC developed - because any little hint that things were getting better was construed as the ability to abandon public health measures.

The political pressure to allow "no mask" between vaccinated individuals was heavy, but when finally announced was so sudden it seemed like it was expediency, not based in science, but based on buckling to the political pressure, when in fact as part of the conservative stance it was held back until the number of vaccinations started diminishing and the hope was (and is, seeing this is relatively recent) that this would incent additional individuals to vaccinate. That has yet to be seen. 

Expediency occurs for several reasons, most of them at least morally corrupt if not logically;

To produce what looks like due process but skipping the steps to actually be due process in an effort to placate process while r ushing an outcome. Willful indifference to the impact of skipping the steps.
In ignorance of the proper steps - or in oversimplification (intentional or due to misunderstanding) of those steps, skipping due process or involving fewer stakeholders than needed for due process, in order to speed things along.
A wish for something other than reality, which can at times, be slow, painful and a lot of work. Hint: Reality always wins in the end.

There are tons of variations and other reasons, but most of the impedance comes for a wish for speed. Understandable - as human beings, we have an urge for immediate gratification, physically (sex, food, other bodily functions) to economic philosophy, speed is frequently seen as the desirable attribute. 

Our ability to master ourselves is limited and in the face of pressure (in business for instance) gives way to pressure on due process. 

And this folks, is why business cannot dictate things like healthcare, welfare and education. Business will build amazing things and services - which survive just as long as they can resist expedience in development, manufacture, in service. And then, like a show whose ratings have dropped, they are eliminated in favor of some new hope for profit. Problem is people get discarded in that process and that cannot happen in people support systems. 

In people systems, process matters. Nuance matters. And in fact, frequently, speed manners which necessitates things like advanced planning, risk assessment and even, gulp, inventory - all of which push against the expedient.

Stephen Covey said this - and also indicated that you cannot be efficient with people, you need to strive for efficiency with things, effectiveness with people.

Efficiency can also be the enemy in people systems. What seems like a proper paring down to minimum essentials can lock a people system up. People systems frequently need lubrication - like forgiveness, time, second and third chances, a bit more than is expected. 

People systems need to be effective. Which is why government and non-profits are where people systems live. Because their goal is not to be profitable. It’s to be effective.

Which is also why, when we try to run these things like for-profit business, we often fail to deliver - and why those who would rather not spend money on helping people will use examples of inefficiency as reasons to cancel programs altogether. That should not be the default.

Certainly these systems must maintain effectiveness. They need to be thrifty where they can. But if your remove money or any resource without due process, the system can be caused to be ineffective or to fail altogether. 

We should look at people systems with an eye for the effective, with a nod to efficiency and completely eliminating expedience. And even in business, when looking from an HR perspective, we should use this as at least one perspective, along with efficiency.

We have to make sure not to confuse expedience with effective or efficient. It is neither - it is an illusion of both, without the good result.

Cancel Culture

Cancel Culture is a term that is used by propagandists to dismiss any change in the current cultural narrative they don't agree with.

Those propagandists and people who either choose to ignore others or are unaware, tend to state that concerns raised about cultural issues are just groups or individuals being offended, unreasonably or are taking advantage of outrage for personal recognition or gain.

But what using a term - a label like "Cancel Culture" or "Woke" does is ignore the reason people are asking for help, removal, apology, or retraction. It generally isn't just because they find something offensive. It's because it perpetuates a cultural "norm" that is harmful to members of our mutual culture.

Beyond being dismissive - labels like this moves the focus from the issue at hand to the opposite of your requested action, skipping the issue altogether.

A person of color asking the state they live in to remove the confederate flag from their statehouse brings cries of cancellation. Of "Woke" culture trying to cancel (erase) history. It shifts the emphasis from the person who has called out the inappropriate and makes the offender appear to be a victim. Which they clearly are not. It's used to emphasize a divide, to fight change.

The idea doesn't even have to be ethnic, sexual preference, religion, age or gender oriented - that I want others to wear masks in public places or get vaccinated until determined by the CDC they are not needed is not centered in my wish to take away someone's "Freedom" or cancel them. It's rooted in the idea that the science shows it reduces the danger and mortality rate of this disease.

Some pundits are saying that we are trying to change to fast - that "woke culture" (I hate this term too) will result in the alienation of half of the country. But guess what…

… this has been a tune that's been played for 100 years or more. Labels have been used to propagandize change points and make the offenders look like victims for a long time.

White people, being called racists because they are racists, hide behind the label of victim because immigrants and people of color are generalized as violent criminals.

Straight people persecuting LGBTQ+ persons hide behind the label of religious freedom, claiming to be victims, having to accept these people as human and equal.

The terms Cancel Culture and Woke Culture generalize and twist in this same way. They make sure the issue itself isn't dealt with. They promote stagnation. And this is where freedom actually gets subjugated. This is where it gets lost. When we fail to recognize real boundaries and infringe upon others we fail to recognize "me first" as the tool of hate and oppression it is.

This is the Orwellian truth from 1984. Not someone forcing you to wear a mask. But someone getting you to think you're a victim and actively hate those asking for change. This is drinking victory gin and ignoring the dreams and ambitions of whole groups of people, because they threaten to change us.

The only way we become better is to recognize our differences and acknowledge that some things we do might not be good for others - and that in agreeing to live in society. our freedoms are limited to the exact point before we infringe upon others freedoms. When we choose to acknowledge each other, we are all free.

America First is code for "my right to hate"

The Republican Party's America First "Anglo Saxon" platform is code for "my right to hate". 

We live in a nation that is 70% white, and is based in the idea that "All men are created equal". We've known in the past that this is an ideal and certainly not prompted in it's entirety by even the individuals that composed the idea.

But that's the thing. Ideals, while not reality until they are, are goals held out to understand where we need to be. In this case, we need to acknowledge that this ideal comes with the idea of diversity built in. It does not say "All white men are created equal". It ignores race. It ignores sex (although even that took a long time for us to acknowledge). It ignores sexual preference, gender identity, age, religion or any other differentiator under the sun.

So it's sad that we see yet again, a "Conservative" (in quotes because real conservatives, who value our constitutional ideals, don't shrug off the meaning) are pushing an idea that the white man is being attacked by foreigners, by other races and religions, merely by their existing in this country. A country that already sees our minorities underprivileged and dying at much higher rates, imprisoned at hire rates, impoverished and under the thumb of the white majority.

Look - I'm a white male. I have come to terms with the privilege I have and understand that I don't have the same struggles as others with different color skin, a different sex, a different orientation or religion. Yes, I still have struggles (every human does) but I can understand that mine are not rooted in someone equal trying to be understood that way by a society that doesn't.

This "America first caucus" is a fear driven narrative, counting on the idea that Americans are not self aware. It will speak of white people being "canceled" by narratives of diversity. It will speak of "religion" being under attack by not allowing prayer in schools, it will speak of "equality" already being achieved and simultaneously try to play minorities out as leeches and criminals, as inferior and present equal opportunity initiatives as "reverse discrimination". It will push the false narrative that opportunity for others takes away opportunity from "us".

It is another example of a hate narrative and a very old set of arguments for keeping others under the thumb. And it needs to be stopped. It needs to be exposed. And these people need to be seen for the evil they are. And they are.

They are the Joseph McCarthy's, Nazi's, KKK's of the world. They are wrong. The last administration was evil and tiring - the propaganda and hate. This is an attempt to extend that mission.

Our great opportunity as privileged society is to get where we are going by helping others get where they are going, understanding our success as a country is based on the success of all of our people, not the "majority".

We have to do better. Their message will resonate with some, perhaps even many. We need to tear away the propaganda and expose the devil that drives the narrative. We need to elect representatives that value everyone. We need to teach our children to value their fellow humans. We need to continue to fight.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/gop-s-new-america-first-caucus-follows-some-blatantly-white-n1264361?icid=msd_topgrid

We need to stop pretending voter suppression is an opinon.

A little less sensationalism and a little more straight talk. A little simplification of process and a less money. Our participative democratic process needs reform. Because it’s designed to not allow participation.

 

A brief disclaimer: When I talk about Republicans in this piece, I am talking about politicians – to be clear, I’m not talking about individuals who tie themselves to the party, unless they support gerrymandering, racism and white supremacy. So if you’re a Republican and an un-biased, good human, please don’t feel I’m talking about you.

 

~~~

 

One of the problems with the media is the sensationalized handling of information. Another is the constant “if the facts prove out” approach to things where the facts are already there. 

 

Sensationalism sells. But it’s overamplification ends up obliterating important aspects of the information or even other stories. And the treatment of issues like racism as “yet to be proven” is troubling.

 

We consider, by law, individuals as innocent until proven guilty, which is fair. There are lawyers and an absolute chance to tell the story in front of as reasonably an impartial audience as can be found.

 

I think that should be the case in media handling of news. But when an issue like a Republican State Assembly closing 50% of the voting centers in minority communities only, just before a vote and the news says it “might be done to suppress minority voting” when there are no ifs about it. Objectivity is valuable when there is a real question.

 

Certainly, some will start down the road of “it’s a matter of opinion” and therefore, is still subject to a brand-new inquiry into proof. But that is a fallacy – the issue is not brand new, in fact these practices trend back to the post-Civil War south.

 

Additionally, Republican politicians and operatives have already confirmed suppression, gerrymandering and intimidation as techniques they use routinely. This isn’t a question. It’s fact. So why do we – and the media, treat something that is in plain sight as yet to be proven, let alone let the GOP go on about voter fraud as if it is something that really exists – sensationalized to the point where a large number of people are convinced that it – not the oppression of minorities, is a problem. That the election was thrown by illegitimate votes, when the facts reveal that suppression, through a number of means, not fraud, is our biggest voting issue.

 

The problem is complex. The mainstream media, in an effort to remain objective, treat these facts as tentative, when they’re not. The biased media factories for the right generate propaganda to spin the opposite (there’s so much voter fraud, the election isn’t valid” without any proof and the voice of reason is canceled because it’s speaking at a normal volume. 

 

Closing voting centers, limiting registration (making college or church assisted registration illegal, for instance), requiring lengthy and costly processes for burden of proof of identity (if your state requires everyone to have an official ID then your state should be funding a push to get that done for every resident) – any attempt to limit someone’s legitimate right to vote is in all ways anti-democracy. Voting should not be a middle class and up privilege. It should not be a white privilege.  By making it expensive either in time spent away from work or in fees or in transportation, we turn it into a privileged activity. 

 

Making registration easier doesn’t improve the chance of fraud. It just improves the number of ways a person can prove they are who they say they are. And, if you think identify theft, which is monetarily motivated, not politically is a big problem in your state, you should be looking for ways to help people prove their identity, not make it more daunting a process. If a teenager can get a credit card, the elderly, the poor should be able to get state identification without having to take off of work, without having to stand in line for hours, without having to go to a central office, without having to pay a large fee – and without it taking weeks or months.

 

There are also issues with campaign funding – Citizens United essentially allowed unlimited campaign financing and limited accountability. We need legislation that reduces third party money in the game and allows voters voices to once again be amplified at least on par and hopefully above those of business and special interests. 

 

Right now, lies can be sensationalized and pushed above the truth, through media – and those purveyors – from television to Social Media have largely claimed that they must remain objective and allow and equal voice for “opinions” – because those opinions are paying customers. But there needs to be accountability – where does the money come from and what is the agenda behind it - and there needs to be a limit on what can be spent to push a lie.

 

Which is why HR1, the “For the people act” is so important. It is setting at least some of this to right. Every Republican politician in the house of representatives voted against it. Because even though it is the right thing to do for our representative democracy, it reduces their ability to win. And here’s my advice to them:

 

If you cannot win on your platform – on the basis of what you plan to do, then maybe you should change that plan. If you win using gerrymandering and counting on voters not showing to the polls, you are not representing the will of the people. You are in fact trying to subvert it.

 

If you cannot successfully and convincingly argue your point, then either you are not a good proponent, or your point is invalid or non-inclusive. 

 

Those are rules both parties, in a level field have to play to. Forget party. If you have good, honest ideas that the people subscribe to, and you can effectively represent your voters, then you should be elected. It shouldn’t be up to the $$ spent or the twisting of facts or the moving of lines to the improving of party outcomes. 

 

So – tell your Senators that HR1 needs to be passed. It does not ignore the minority – not if their ideas are valid. It helps us ignore those that would sell our democracy for money and power.

 

*Aside from the link to HR1 the following are informational and a sample of articles – there is exhaustive evidence of voter suppression and racism in the process. 

 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/03/us/politics/house-voting-rights-bill.html

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/leaked-audio-trump-adviser-republicans-rely-voter-suppression-justin-clark-2019-12

 

https://www.teenvogue.com/story/for-the-people-act-voter-suppression-bills

 

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/23/659784277/republican-voter-suppression-efforts-are-targeting-minorities-journalist-says

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-campaign-2020-voter-suppression-consent-decree-1028988/