The Need to Universalize Our Institutions: A Case of Hate In Higher Ed. and Law Enforcement

If you have been reading my blog for a while you will becoming keenly aware that my family and I have been targeted by a local group of sports bullies (with hate based seasoning). While they don't see themselves that way they exist within the border between highly "in/out group" aggressiveness and racial/religious bigotry infused into a distorted sports culture. This is something we see at various places within our society from different types of groups (Pick an ideology and pick a group.). We will need to tackle these hometown hate issues in order to develop our national human capital and in turn our future prospects (Much of human capital development is based in the environments in which we live and the signals we receive from society.). 

Let me say that not everyone in the "super cool" group are bad people. They are mostly good people. However, from a social dynamic standpoint there are lower levels of healthy boundaries within that group and in turn there is rigid social adherence based upon false (i.e. childhood) misperceptions of life/self that should have been discarded long time ago. In other words, because they are highly homogeneous and relatively unexposed to other types of people their thought processes haven't changed much since highschool (on a social level)

The group likes to spread rumors against people they don't like, are different, and or their "leadership" tells them they must hate (Lack of critical thinking and healthy boundaries/objectivity). They may not have any real problem with the target(s), or bad experiences, or can claim that the targets harmed them in any way. Yet, they persist because they were expected to persist and racial/religious differences were high on their interest list (Remember I was told why they were targeting us and it was obvious laws were being broken. There have been other incidents of people concerned about where my kids came from, skin color, culture, religion, and other issues related to their backgrounds. Not to mention the "nigga baby" jokes and other aggressive behaviors in front of kids. i.e. yelling out that someone's dad is a "bitch" or group coordinated attempts to pick fights. Its not a single incident but a series of incidents that show intentionality, coordination, association.)

The immaturity of this group has now impacted two different local institutions (Maybe 3 but at this point it looks like 2). We have the local community college who said I was more than qualified and then ghosted me once they found out I was the "crazy Muslim guy" with Black kids some of their friends/social network didn't like. As well as a few officers (Looks like 2 but with another up to 5 on a different undefined problem) that are associated/central to this group began to target and circumvent basic Constitutional protections. (At this point they didn't succeed but I believe they are still motivated to violate the law and are more than willing to do it once the coast is clear. Following home, false information, pulling over kids in unmarked car, parking outside house, etc... Other community complaints by other people of serious behaviors have gone uninvestigated. These aren't my complaints, they are others offered organically without solicitation. In one case I asked for a little more info because they mentioned someone/something specific. Yet the mentioning was organic and unsolicited. That indicates there may be a wider issue involved and a concerning pre-existing pattern that has impacted people enough to get them talking about different incidents at different times. Smoke vs. fire issues. Like I said prior, these were pre-existing problems but my "perceived" differences based on religion, kid's race, etc. helped highlight those issues. Putting in place boundaries for distorted behaviors didn't cause the problem, it was symptomatic to an existing problem.)

As of yet, it appears that they were told not to persist in such behaviors but for the most part I'm not sure if there was a level of accountability (Telling them to not persist for their own sake and telling them not to persist for society's sake are different but beneficial to both.). Stopping bad behaviors and being accountable are two different constructs. For example, should a local institution hire their friends (good old boy networks), reject qualified candidates because of racial/religious reasons, or be allowed to use tax payer dollars for personal, political, group hate, vendettas, clan support, etc.? (In first world nations the answers would be "no". In third world nations we find that all mixed up with different justifications that end up creating separate societies. We are debating if we are one or two societies now with different rules for each. I advocate universalizing and ensuring solidarity of American values and principles. Ensuring our institutions are protecting the needs of a collective "whole" of society. )

The same can be said for law enforcement. While I support law enforcement and civil rights (they are not mutual exclusive) 100%, I do not believe using official position for personal, social, racial, religious reasons/gain is justified (One cannot say I haven't throughout my life supported law enforcement as there are many other instances outside of this instance where I can show I have. However, bad behaviors is bad behavior and that doesn't get my support no matter which way the political winds blow or who we select as our leader {i.e. why selecting leadership based on best and brightest versus the "most connected" is important to national development}. I have my own value systems as an imperfect person and it seems some of that is beneficial for understanding this particular situation.). Unaccounted bad behaviors damage trust in our institutions and we can see the result of some of the inability to hold to account blatant bad behaviors working its way throughout our society (Each situation has its own merit but often follows similar strains.) 

Personally, I don't think we will succeed fully as a nation if we "normalize" certain bad behaviors as acceptable as long as they are against the "right" targets/people. Accountability doesn't always mean jail time. It does mean ensuring these behaviors don't happen again, learning from them (i.e. training and policy improvement) and ensuring such groups are not unduly manipulating local officials through clan like behaviors (i.e. lower versions of societal development). Without change, someday the acceptance of similar dark behaviors will lead to an unamendable break in society based on necessity and self preservation (This may not have anything to do with this situation but the 100's of 1000s of similar situations that people may have experienced across the country spanning many different years/generations. If there is a large percentage of society that feels a certain way, we might want to spend a few moments thinking about societal trust and strategic change. Be proactive and not reactive to large scale societal trends! These trends create pressure to make us better and more advanced as a democracy. Each situation is a step forward, stand still, or step back and adds up to macro results. So "no" its not truly just a local issue but an issue real Americans are facing everyday.)

I don't advocate for minorities, majorities, or anyone else but only for there to be fair treatment across all of society (Other stuff will be decided at a later date through a sequence of societal decision making.). My belief is that the thing we can do now is universalize our institutions to ensure that we maintain trust in a diverse society (The diversity we need to compete in the near future as a strategic advantage many countries that are not democratic lack). We hold to account with truth, moral conscious, and wisdom bad behaviors with the right kind of tools (Its not always about punishment). However, allowing such behaviors to continue and rewarding those behaviors would seem unjustified and perhaps reckless. We must find a solution to mend society's artificial differences/boundaries we have created for our own self interest. (What is my strategy with this group? Be kind, polite, engaging, visible, open to apologies/amends, unable to be intimidated, and willing to walk in the middle of a crowd of people who hate me and say "Hi. How are you? I hope your having an awesome day!". What I won't do is sugar coat bad behaviors simply because its convenient as that won't lead to improvement or change. It may lead to future targets and victims as bad behavior is empowered and emulated. Placating bad behaviors is not improvement...it just calms it down until the next time by letting distorted personalities feel falsely justified. Whether local or national, there are similarities. I know! I know! Don't listen to me....I have a Muslim sounding name. 🤷)

Tudor Dixon Accepts GOP Nomination for Governor

Tudor Dixon (R) has won the GOP nomination for Governor. She will now face Gretchen Whitmer (D) for governorship.  I'm curious about what the election will bring as we have two matched challengers and certain perceptual issues won't have as much influence (It will neutralize factors like female, age, facial structure, height, etc... demographics. Thus perceptions of skills, competence, experience, party affiliation will be a little more pronounced as some factors can be mitigated.) 

What I am interested in are the way in which people will vote. How many Republicans and Democrats will vote their straight party (I'm talking percentages) and how many can be persuaded (Where the actual debate is happening after the primaries.)? I want to see if the middle of the road groups have grown (The percentage of people that can swing either right or left depending on the problem.)  

(We can talk about things like political parties, values, patriotism, duties, walking the talk, ethics, abortion, rights, guns or anything else and we can do it from a divergent perspective. While I may have my own preferences, I realize that much of that is subjective and in turn my opinions may or may not be better than anyone else. The only caveat is the logic, depth, and environmental awareness of contributing factors. That is how we should be engaging in politics. Looking at what is really being said and offered before making a decision. Where there are holes in the logic used by people/speakers/leaders/politicians, there should be lots of room for borrowing ideas from both sides.

 Democracy is about the art of influence and compromise. Stop compromising at some point and you have left  democratic values behind and turned toward unilateral outcomes that only reflects the reality of a fraction of society. Ideally politicians can stay faithful to their values and supporters while still building lots of room to make bi-partisan deals that reflect the best of what both sides have to offer. It isn't all bad or good just because its a party I like or don't like. Not specific to either Democrats or Republicans. 

Centralists don't have that tunnel vision problem on a high level. They can seem indecisive as they figure out what makes the most sense for everyone/themselves within their own ethical perspective. The environment is changing and our political pressures will change with it thereby creating new ways approaching old problems. 

For example, Michigan is a leading state strategically located, manufacturing infrastructure, shipping {need more ports and innovation clusters. i.e. DC Model), great universities, and ideally located for the next era of challenges from a climate and manufacturing perspective. That would require a ball park accurate market projection, a vision, political-business-scientific/academic stakeholder interest, and the alignment of resources to get there. Sometimes our "politics as usual" and ideological staunchness obscures our view to new paths and opportunities.

No matter who wins, both leaders should keep their eyes on the bigger competitive picture as it relates to people/human capital development and  future of our nation. {Am I qualified to give insight or advice. Not really...maybe a little more than average....but that depends who who is judging and who is being judged. I do have a Muslim sounding name. 🤷)

LIVE: Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear shares the latest eastern Kentucky flood conditions

We never know what situation we might find ourselves in. One minute people are sleeping and the next they are immersed in water. Natural disaster can quickly change our environment and often hard to predict. We adapt and we learn from each situation. As our environment changes we will need to change with it. Our world as we knew it would change and in many ways that is natural as a system.

It appears there has been some changes in our environment that has been supported by science. While one can't say 100% or not 100% something is actually occurring it would be reasonable to believe that Global Warming is an important and thus far a plausible risk to concern ourselves with. Risks are something you mitigate through adjusting your thought processes and strategies (Even if it isn't true it wouldn't hurt to make changes and improvements where we think they are reasonable and helpful to do so.). 

There are other changes we will likely have now when we build homes, better natural resource management, and of course more need for first responders and trained volunteers. 

Who Is Going to be the Republican Leading Candidate in Michigan?

Its going to be interesting to watch what happens in Michigan this election cycle. So far we have a strong Democrat leading governor and we have Republicans putting together a line up from the primaries. Likely what will happen, based on availability, is that Dixon will become the leading GOP candidate (Maybe...maybe not....Let us see how things unfold.)

A chaotic GOP primary could cost the party in battleground Michigan

While I lean light right I'm not opposed to our current governor. There are good things I agree with and there are things I might disagree with from a policy standpoint. There is plenty of room for discussion and debate on any of these issues (I'm not sure if that makes me a RINO or not. I'm just more middle of the road.). 

(Listening and then seeking to understand different perspectives can lead to greater insight into bipartisan cooperation and solutions.)

What I am concerned about is what is available from the R side of things. Old Guard Republicans bring a lot of wisdom and debate to our national policies and have done so for a long time. They have a history of working to help resolve important issues and different presidents.  Both parties have fulfilled needs on a national level at different times in our history and that pushes the system forward. (When we step back and take a divergent look.). 

However, politics has changed hasn't it? Its different now and we are at present in a slightly different world than 3 years ago. Things are changing, the ground is shifting, and I think we will likely have some confusion on where we should place our feet today, and where we might step tomorrow.

 It appears there is some scrambling so you never really know how things can unfold when there is lots of commotion and fuss.

 For now, I'm just going to get a bag of popcorn and sort of watch how things unfold. 

Kosovo-Serbia Conflict Heat Up Again: What we should learn in the U.S.?

 Kosovo-Serbia heat up again and some have argued it is from a tertiary conflict with Russia. What I hope for is peace. People should stop and think about what they are doing and not be drawn into conflict (i.e. blind followership). It makes no difference if one is Muslim or Christian (or anything else). Both religions honor peace and should encourage it before tensions break out. It will be devastating for everyone involved if conflict spirals out of control. 

We should learn from these examples about how universalizing our values and institutions can help us develop our own human capital (and avoid conflict). Some of these international conflicts are based in disparate treatment among different peoples, clans, and religions. Likewise in the U.S. we recently experienced our capital being sacked by extremists and have not yet fully grasped why we must stand for some very basic American principles (Some are still heckling officers who defended the capital.).

The Bill of Rights and the Constitution apply to all Americans and we should support those fundamental values. That means we universalize, encourage trust, work in a bi-partisan manner, listen to people who have been treated unfairly, and really work towards building our nation as a unified peoples (outside the box of our toxic politics). There is some movement in a positive direction....but not everyone.

I do have a Muslim sounding name and that will likely throw some for a loop as they try and figure out whether Americans can have Muslim sounding names or not (No...seriously...there are people who debate this. There are some who don't even believe they have rights and easily circumvent them with impunity.). I have Muslim, Christian, and Jewish friends it is precisely people like me who care enough about our communities and countries to stand up to hate, disparate treatment, and stand for reasonableness in all of our affairs (Not just one race, religion, or clan.). 

How do I do that and how should you do that?

By showing kindness, empathy, and understanding to each other (The Golden Rule). To reach out to your neighbors, reach across your political isles, start solving problems, hold to account bad actors trying to cause problems (You can still show empathy while recognizing the bad behavior.), and keep our eyes on our horizon which provides an opportunity to push toward national development (As a democracy with shared values and as an economic and military powerhouse. We will not be able to maintain our top spot without universalization and development of human capital across a broad section of society. Innovation and development is an environmental issue. ). 

There are those who try and exploit hate and there are those who try to bring people together (Bringing people together is part of both Christian and Muslim traditions. It just radicals that exploit them for self gain.). Which are you? While it may be a personal choice most of us have said the Pledge of Allegiance and made oaths to support our nation. Sometimes the best way for people to do that is simply to get others to think through the positive and negative of their options and opinions (i.e. Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion). 

California Fire Expands: How Do We Approach These Issues?

 Let us say that global warming is a real thing and people are going to experience some hardship from it (It makes no difference if one believes it or not...its important to protect our environment.). I think there are going to be bigger changes coming from global carbon policies, resource allocation, exit routes from dangerous areas, and insurance adjustments. We will probably start to coordinate more on different government and business levels to clean up our environments (i.e. Great Lakes and pollution). 

Russia Navy Day and Hypersonic Missile Use and Navy Strategy Shift

Peter the Great was brought up again and it seems that Russia has motivations to making its way back on the global market (You can read from a historical perspective why he is important to Russian legend and symbolism. HERE). Russia acknowledged its inferior naval strength and seems to be pushing for greater naval bases and positioning. One concerning thing they mentioned was their hypersonic missile and how they see the U.S. as their primary threat. We can expect them to use more of this missile in their mobile/navy arsenals. 

Russia is not our primary threat but certainly a thorn in side (Long term China is more our threat at this point in history.) The hypersonic missile does bring up the need to create new innovations across the U.S. market. Our military must play its A game by being the most innovative we can so we can stay on top of the market from a defense and offence perspective (Its possible to create faster military innovations while also encouraging wider market innovations through butterfly effects. Likewise, industry-govt. research can go a long way in create real manufacturing and military adaptations.). 

Pushing our society upwards means we have to consider not only some of our recent infrastructure investments but also human capital development. While a rapid innovation system cluster model I have been working on could have some benefits (I'm rewriting it to wrap it but it is sound and supported). You can read that HERE. (Long term future national based advancement would mean enhancing our human capital nationally and that requires thinking about inclusiveness and universalization of certain values.). It is an unfinished theory but you can kind of get the picture on how such macro innovations occur.

On Navy Day, Putin says United States is main threat to Russia