Where are we currently in the pursuit of justice? Not Really Sure

Justice is important. Its one of those things that people come to expect and its one of those things that is required by democracies that want to survive into the next era but also the ability to bump up to the next economic platform. They can do that by having stronger human capital management, professional administration of societal issues, and increased trust. 

Here are a few observations thus far.....

I should mention the background first. A Muslim family with Black kids was targeted by a fairly large group of people based on what appeared to be racial and religious motivations mixed with a good old boy network. Most of the officers from various departments learned that the information was false/manipulative/misleading (Whatever that information was. I'm still trying to figure it out. No one has actually told me anything other than it was well known that the targeting occurred because we were Muslim. That is the message the clan leader sent to me through one of their associates and supporters.). 

Most of the people who did this didn't know they were violating Federal laws (Assuming they function in that way.). It was blatant, obvious, potentially violent, and corrupt. Lots of paper trail and lots of witnesses as people (Maybe 100+) from that ex sports group that got themselves involved. In my mind, there are limits as to what should be acceptable by society. You can't just cleans your community of the "icky" people (i.e. meaning if they don't fit within a particular cult or clan.).

The behaviors have opened up a can of worms. It was a problem because there was pre-existing bias in the heuristic quick reactions, opened up indication of potential corruption, other uninvestigated serious community complaints came forward, and a few within that persisting department after it was no longer reasonable to do so indicated potential for future targeting (Most of those law enforcement members are great people but it looks like they have an embedded group that may not be willing to follow the law!). 

At present, I can say it appears someone told them they can't continue to be aggressive or violent. It appears most of the other departments have come to understand that someone was trying to triangulate them into targeting minorities within their community. I believe most of the officers within that initiating department have also come to understand that as well but the need for reform and further protections would be helpful. 

The hate narrative still exists of course. Everyone loves to spread rumors!  I have seen a few of the  initiators of hate post chaos and you can tell they are stuck in their own story. They continue to spread their story as a vindication of poor behaviors, have enriched themselves from false police complaints and targeting (If you read the other posts you will notice that there are some open questions of missing money prior and a new opportunity presented itself to enrich again. It appears they repeated a pattern.) and don't really feel any serious level of remorse over their behaviors or the potential harm it could have caused others.

Furthermore, I should add an important factor. The vast majority, save those closest to the initiating group, have rejected the hate narrative and have been wonderful and warm people. The "clan" continues its process of ostracization as expected. A few members have continued to cause issues through rumors, talking louder when they see us, and ensuring they put in place society dividing rules such as , "Anyone who is nice to "those people" is not allowed to talk to us!".  (Classy, mature and definitely a sign of innocence! It could also be signs of hate targeting as a method of dehumanizing the victims, spreading false information, and ostracizing to ensure they have no recourse. That is the way it started anyway.) 

I have advocated for what I felt was the best way to handle it so that all of the justice systems can function with integrity and focus on their essential purpose in a way that various community stakeholders can support (Remember there are numerous complaints against some of the members of the "clan" from various backgrounds so there is a lower level of trust in general by some community members; these are not minorities. These were for the most part, except in one case, unsolicited. The only time I asked specifically is because it appear this person was in the know of one of the members and they were voicing concerns. I just wanted to make sure that we were discussing apples to apples. It doesn't mean any of it is true. I really hope none of it is true. Its just an indication that not everything is rosy for everyone.)

My suggestions seem to be a little bit too much for some to swallow but I think they are helpful and necessary. The goal isn't to get people in trouble. It's actually the opposite. Help where help is possible. Its also purposeful in debunking the intentionally spread hate narrative that increases the long term risk of "lone wolf" fights and further acts of intimidation (In this case, not truly lone because the goal was to sort of get people to pick fights with the family.). It is also to help the mental health suffering of those who started the problem in the first place (one is diagnosed and the others need an assessment.), address community complaints through an investigation (some people feel there isn't accountability), and reform the department that doesn't have enough internal controls to self manage (I will discuss my thoughts on how that department can do that in the future. They are just thoughts but I have some knowledge of management that would apply here. There are others who have more knowledge on such departments and that can be good or bad so mine are just for exploratory understanding of essential needs of reform. In other words, what would make sense in other places.)

Where are we at right now? Yes someone told them they can't act like that and for the most part the participating clan isn't maintaining the level of aggression first realized. Many members of the clan have backed off and become wiser to the flying monkey manipulations of their leaders. There are still some whom I believe will persist as soon as they are given a green light of coast is clear from clan associates within the initiating department (The one in which fraternization and community association rules should be implemented to ensure their social networks aren't creating incentives for corruption and other inappropriate behaviors.)

It opens up a few questions that I think will eventually be answered. Its important to answer them. Right now the answers are a mixed bag. It could be that someone is fact checking and collecting evidence and it also could be that there has been a settled upon internal solution. What I can say is that for the most part I'm ok. I'm upset that we were put in this situation because of the dysfunction of others and I'm upset that other Americans have to deal with these issues with little recourse. 

1.) Are there different rules for different people? We should all be under the same banner.

2.) When corruption does happen is there any mechanism within the system to reform it and bring it back in line with American values? (The need for some changes within that department to protect the public. There are some indications that it does happen after lots of chaos but can it also happen proactively, when it makes sense, and when it sort of does as a consistent learning organization.)

3.) Do some officials feel their primary focus is to help only some races and religions? (Try not to get political here as this isn't the goal. i.e. a potential sign of extremism leaning sentiment within the ranks of some members of that department. 

Considering what appears to be a weak state of internal affairs many of the officers that work with the initiating clan members should ask themselves, "Do these officers really have the personality to be trusted to not use grey areas of the law to help themselves or their friends?" 

If they know something, heard something, or part of something they may want to report it to federal or state authorities in line with their oaths. Breaking the Blue Code is difficult and dangerous but its important. My complaints are never against good officers, I'm very forgiving of genuine mistakes, but am concerned about the intentional "mistakes" and their likelihood of repeat when the circumstances present themselves again.)

4.) Is there a willingness and are there mechanisms in place to help those with mental health? Extreme hate, rage, manipulation, and dishonesty are mental health issues. It was an issue that could have ended in people killed, harmed, arrested, hurt, and damaged young lives for decades/perhaps generations through intentional trauma creation. (involvement and targeting). 

We have come to accept that and the dangers as long as they are projected on the "wrong/unAmerican" type of people (i.e. those of minorities and people "worthy" of hate. Not actually defined by merit, history, or loyalties. Defined by very surface judgements that have nothing to do with being American/"American".)

It is not fair to focus only on the potentially negative as there could be some good information in there as well. I'm happy that we are talking about these issues on a national level and we have had the opportunity to see extremism for what it is. Its is about time and it has been brewing for the past 15 years I suspect. 

We have seen the dangers of mental health and its impact on society (Extremism can come from any political party, race, religion or ideology when the logic defaults back to a very poor root assumption.) We still don't have a strong method for dealing with things like corruption, hate/racism, and mental health manipulations but we can continue to work toward future solutions. 

So I'm putting my 2 cents in there in case in history someone looks back and says, "You know...even though that guy had a Muslim sounding name......he may have been correct. Impossible!"🤔. Of course that doesn't mean I'm actually correct but it does mean that my input could be helpful (I know very little but have seen a lot. Sorry...to "see" or see. See/"see" below. 🤓). 

When it comes down to the "proof in pudding" arguments we should be assured that the system maintains the ability to correct itself toward its stated goals and mission (In other words, we should ensure our actions are in line with our Constitution, protections and other social contracts.) and whether hate is given a free pass. 

(Indicating two different systems of justice at work, as a reflection of two different societies. Not official society but one in which there are two versions of America/"America" and two versions of Americans/"Americans" with two semi-associated operating systems and rules. We can also look at examples in history to see if these divergent shadow societies with different social networks contribute to social upheaval. Those examples might also tell us what we can do to reintegrate members of society around shared American principles; assuming that is everyone's goal.🤷 )

The next time you take an oath of allegiance to the flag consider the deeper and often unseen/not understood meanings. To me, "my Flag" represents the United States. That "flag" also include its Constitution and my perception of God. i.e. for "God and country". I rally around that banner and no other banner. If my name confuses some people so be it! 

I might be a liberal R (I'm a little more Republican) or a conservative D, but my loyalties lie with my nation, God, and family. Then look at our pledge "one nation, indivisible" indicating we should have the same rules (except differences on merit) that apply to everyone. 

The words "liberty and justice for all" indicates to me we should be seeking universal justice in a universal society. You cannot have liberty without freedom to be born as God (racial, religious, cognitive differences, etc..) made us and in turn we cannot have justice if officials entrusted public power is used for clan or personal gain.

Let's ponder our oaths and see sort of where we should fit with it to be true to ourselves and true to our oaths. 

"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."  (Notice no exclusions for race, religion or clan have been presented within the oath. I'm a little confused at people's ability to just put it in there and then call it nationalism and patriotism. Must be a different Constitution. 🤔)

Contrary to popular current political values, there are still merits and honor in staying loyal to those principles. They supersede our parties and our grievances (Where rationality and critical thinking exist). If you ever want to understand where I am on these types of issues, I can say that I fall where I think it is the most helpful in fulfilling that oath.  I cannot tell you where others stand....that is an individual choice. 

*We might want to explore the concept of shadow society and shadow markets. There is research that supports how official rules and application of such rules disparately through society creates different rules for different people. They are not judged on their individual merit but on social class, clan, race, religion or really anything else that differentiates them. A shadow society, their social networks, businesses, law makers, etc. is not good or evil. It is a result of different application of rules and the need for self preservation. i.e. ending segregation but keeping the networks in place that maintain divisions by limiting access. The only way to merge the two is through a single vision and consistent equity in treatment. 

Failure to bump up to the next universal (civic and economic) society runs risks that at some point in history the shadow societies will clash for resources. Can I say any of that is true? Nope. I have seen some studies that indicate the possibility but how many studies support that would be sort of interesting and I will keep it in my idea list. Right now I'm preoccupied with economic clusters and bringing new opportunities to my community despite our family being rejected by a core clan as "icky people" and "not the right type" that should not have any protections under the law (especially if they want something or the religion and skin color are embarrassing to be around). 

** These articles are to get people to think. They are meant to be thought inspiring. These are not "facts". These are "truths". Don't get caught up in what all that means right now. There is truth and "truth" depending on the capacity of one to see and one to understand. Seeing as a capacity to understanding and not the actual stimuli. To "see" one must critically examine and understand the situation based not only on personal experience but also through the scientific observations of others as based in scientific literature. This is where science and the current practice of law may be different. There must be a middle ground between societal issues such as allowing violent criminals free and misusing the law to support one's ethnic/social/religious clan. They are very wide goal posts. 

George Santos for Congress? Vetting and Deeper Critical Thinking

George Santos is in a difficult situation and of course we are shocked! 😮😱Yet, we really shouldn't be so horrified when people have been doing this in politics for a long time. That doesn't mean I don't think some level of action should be taken if found guilty of gross dishonesty. It is more of a comment on the importance for Democrats, Republicans and citizens in general to have the highest standards for those who will be making decisions over our nation and lives. 

Our parties might want to put in place some basic vetting and checks for accuracy (Even if there are accidental mistakes) so as to ensure their candidates are worthy (I don't mean this in a negative way but just that there are standards for support) of the support. Likewise, some basic level of vetting and fact checking will help serve voters because they can search out these candidates and obtain accurate information for accurate decision making (Its hard to understand the candidates now and it would be impossible if everyone lied!). 

Let us see what happens. I think he won't get a free pass. People feel a little sensitive that it was very blatant. It wasn't as though he had the wrong date or misspelled a word. Its an issue of ethics at this point. Ethics and Leadership

Riverside Officer Shot and Suspect Killed: Guns and Criminals

This is a sad event. We want our officers to be safe and we want them to be effective. When people have access to guns when they shouldn't, we often run into situations like this (As its investigate we will hear more.). Our society has a violent underside and we should consider ways in which we can live safer (Why I support police 100%,...). We should feel respectful for the sacrifice of that fallen officer and his family. 

Crime is destructive to everyone and it is as much a community affair as a police affair. As a point, it is primarily a community affair and we entrust our police to fulfill that function. When officers fall in the line of duty we should bestow our respects and honor. 

I think the officers handled this situation the correct way. They didn't need to get involved in shooting volleys and they didn't need to chase the car through busy streets (There are probably times when that is absolutely necessary for the safety of the public and when a safe opportunity presents itself.). 

According to a statement by the Riverside Co Sherriff the person had a history of violence and should have been prevented. Kidnapping and assault with deadly weapon would indicate a level historic aggressive behaviors during multiple times and incidents.  

The pursuing officers successfully cleared the area and allowed an armored vehicle to end the chase.

If you feel motivated to donate please do so to at 

Riverside County Sherriff Organization (Please review for yourself) 

Riverside Police Officers Association. (Please review for yourself.)

The first video is of the stop and the other is of the live procession. 

Cutting another 20 Seconds Off of My Rowing: Off Office Chair and Into Row Boat

Rowing is serious business and requires a fairly high level of conditioning to do well. In the past year I have started rowing again, not that I was that good in the past, but I am rowing more regularly now. My starting numbers for the 500 meters were pretty high and then I dropped 20 seconds quickly based on some body mechanic advice. This morning I dropped another 10 playing around with some movements. That puts me above the bottom numbers of the team's/groups slowest rower (i.e. meaning its not me!). I have to still drop about 20 seconds more to go before I really fell good in a way where I would be on the upper half.

Anyway.....this sport has some benefits that I like that include....

1. Short and long muscle fiber. Using bursts of power leads to muscle growth and the cardio aspects of rowing lead to endurance. 

2. It requires a level of discipline. I like things that require one to sort of get on track and stay consistent because you can monitor the results. 

3. Its on the water. You can't beat being on the water.

4. Group work. Getting into a group makes a difference in maintaining fitness levels.

Another motivating rowing video (I will need to switch around with some other sports I think.). Good health is helpful so you should consider getting involved in a sport or two to get away from your desk and focus on something else for a while. 

This one is from an investment firm/bank so its actually kind of a commercial. 

What Do We Tell the Next Victims? How We Handle Hometown Hate Is An Issue of Integrity!

We have a responsibility to continuously improve our institutions and systems to make them more effective for a modern world. It is in the best interest of society for our systems and institutions to reasonably update based upon modern thinking and certain core national values. That willingness to change when it is needed leads to institutional relevance and future trust among the American population. That can have a positive effect on society (Failure to change and update will likely have a negative impact on society as we have seen in recent civil unrest, acceptance of domestic extremism, and other issues.)

As some of you know my family and I have been targeted by those who had something to gain by exploiting bigotry and hate in a way that created dangerous situations (In more than one instance) that could under the wrong circumstances led to serious death or harm. Yet this isn't really as much about me as it is about our value system as a society and how we apply our core social contracts and rights equitably (In some ways indicating whether we are a nation of universal peoples with a single purpose or two large nations thinly connected by window dressing. I advocate for a single nation with shared purpose but there are those that are intentionally trying to create separations in our communities and on a national level by exploiting hate for personal gain.)

Its not so much that there are individuals out there that hate those with Muslim sounding names and Black kids because they have always been there in one form or another lurking in the corners (The targets of hate done matter and can include Asians, Jews, Mexicans, Whites, etc.. Anyone can hate! Its easy. Just project everything you feel frustrated about life onto some poor suspecting soul that is trying to take care of/protect his family, or buy groceries, or perhaps just driving to work.). The concern is that they (They is an important distinction here. What does "they" mean? An embedded network?) are willing to do it on a coordinated level, with approval of some local officials, within an existing narrative of hate (language) and within a social context of support (group supported hate). 

We sort of run into a situation where if I'm only a tiny, small, sliver 10% correct that still comprises real risks for others. There are higher risks for future targets and victims (In history I'm usually closer to correct then wrong but that doesn't mean I am right. The data indicate that there is more going on here then just poor values and bad manners.). From what I can tell these behaviors didn't just get invented/learned in this situation because the observed reaction had a different root. They existed prior, they were good at it, and they knew just how to engage in a campaign to delegitimize and dehumanize others (Likely this group has gotten away with bullying, stepping on the rights of others, and setting up their own local good old boy networks for some time. It would also be an indication that such behaviors were not addressed prior because of lack of knowledge, fear, malaise or something else. The social benefits of being "super cool" and connected to sympathizers and supporters!)

There has been an atmosphere among some local ex-sports groups and socially associated local officials that is ripe for these behaviors to continue to occur without being addressed adequately (There is lots of research on patterned behaviors.) Its a context that I believe most of their members are not fully aware of how their behaviors are impacting others and are caught in a self-justifying hate narrative and likely to continue down the same/similar path  (...of course by ensuring the victims are as much responsibility for their behavior as they can make them. That becomes increasingly more disdainful if any closely associated officials acted like a legal counselor in support of that friend network. That would be another indication that such behaviors were willful and there is a good chance there are lots of other people who may have experienced something similar. The perceived morality of using official authority and powers entrusted by the community to 1. help ones friends financial gain, 2. set up racial/religious stratification, and 3. circumvent the intention of law.)

 A study in the Journal of Governance helps us better understand the dangers of permissive attitudes and lack of accountability and its inherent dangers. "Corruption is associated with permissive attitudes to violence even after controlling for the perceived legitimacy of the police and courts." (Fillanders & van der Werf, 2021). The study uses a concept called Moral Foundations Theory which tries to explain the social foundations of some values and perceptions (This is related to "Moral Conscious" of systems I talked about prior. Meaning we always try and do what is best, fair, and right.). It is one study and isn't the whole story. However, its findings are interesting and it has rung somewhat true in other areas (i.e. corruption around Detroit and associated markers of that corruption.). The problem is inherent within the disparate treatment itself (I cannot vouch for the study and just searched it out. It does sort of raise a hair on my neck. People in our world justify all types of behaviors but they don't always think of what the long term goal is. )

Here is one essential issue. I want to be clear that my goal isn't to put anyone in jail, ruin anyone's career, or make some anti-police comment (I support police 100% and civil rights 110%. Unless someone comes up with a better system then I continue to support in general the institution of policing as long as it has the capacity to correct itself when blatant violations of purpose occur. That may include training, policy changes, community adjustments, removing "bad apples" or any thing else.)

(As a side note: The mending of perspective through adequate problem solving and resolution on policing is something our politicians haven't figure out yet. Its a problem that is hard to solve because of the highly skewed and often combative nature of American politics that sometimes feels less about serving the American people and more about promoting one's political position through "yes sir" and "yes ma'am" integrity of individual thought. In other words, its likely the problem will linger for some time until their is a change of heart.....)

Anyway....

Here are my morning thoughts while I'm having coffee. The next time someone is hurt, has a complaint, or some other calamity should happen then upon whose shoulders should that fall on morally? (The standard approach of blaming the victim is contributing to the problem.) We talk a lot about community but then sort of fail to take into account the long-term health of that community by having systems based on shared values instead of good old boy networks with racial and religious exclusionary overtones (BTW there is some research to support that good old boy networks like this could be one explanation why some localities are not growing as much as expected. Seriously, there is studies on it. ). If we are a community, then we should be a single community (Someone has already said we are not a single community and the reason why my kids are being put in harms way is because we are Muslim. They say that with little knowledge of who we are and even less knowledge of who they themselves have become. Community is important so lets not split it based on shallow loyalties and shallower values!)

There is a path through this racial and religious mess on a local and national scale. It is a path that I believe allows for healthier social learning of appropriate transcendental generation-to-generation values, better ensures that certain elements within the community (..and its institutions. i.e. local college hiring practices and local policing practices of at least one department.) are redirected toward their stated purposes (While I understand that those who caused the problem might not be gleeful that the free train ride of doing what they want to whomever they want is coming to a close it is a necessity in a system that seeks to increase public trust.)

Here are a few suggestions. Of course there are likely other solutions, ideas, thoughts and comments by others. 

1.) The initial perpetrators have mental health review and counseling. They have shown they are a risk to others and willing to coordinate targeted behaviors. Its not about jail, its about accountability and helping them in the long run to deal with the underlining issues that led to hate (Contrary to modern legal opinion, while someone may have the choice to deal with mental health issues "when they feel ready" that should change when you put your mental health issues on others in a harmful way. If that projection is little they still have an obligation to deal with it but if they are highly manipulative in a way that seeks to cause harm to others I no longer believe they should get help "when they feel like it". i.e. MI Track and Solve. The problem is such people often avoid accountability and they are unlikely to ever "feel like it" but still pose a risk. The more they don't feel like it, the more they might need to go.  Variance of opinion isn't an issue, it is aggression that needs mental health help. 🙊)

2.) The departments that were initially misled but corrected should draw as many improvement lessons as they can from the situation. The department that persisted in supporting their friends and engaging in seriously dangerous and questionable behavior should go through a series of reforms to protect public interest. I'm making a leap of faith assumption that societal stakeholders have a vested interest in ensuring institutions function in accordance with our first world constitutional standards versus third world clannish mannerisms.

3.) An audit of the financial incentives of hate. I have said this prior about local and national hate. Those who promote it not only likely have mental health issues but also there are other incentives. Financial incentives often being an obvious one. There are those who blindly rage their hate on others and there are those who are strategic and/or subtle about their hate. The strategic hater being the more dangerous of the two. The raging hater can be detected and helped. The strategic hater hides their values for fear of being publicly chastised but then misuse their positions to make decisions that harm many people systemically over many years (Systemic bigotry).

4.) The local college that based hiring decisions on these good old boy networks, hate narratives through rumors, and what appears to be highly discriminatory practices (From what I can tell the school initially called to hire me for a adjunct position teaching Business Law but once they found out I was the "Muslim guy" with Black kids their friends didn't like, they ghosted me. No one has told me any different and it looks like that is a leading explanation. I followed up through email to the president and HR department but like many minorities "stone wall" is the method of choice. Its funny, most of the people who have known me for years find me to be a pretty nice guy. While I'm upset people can blatantly violate our laws and norms with impunity, my goal is to help improve the functioning of the system from future defaults. I'm saddened that we can't walk the talk in our values and that we are limiting the future of our youth and college students because some of the administrators have hiring preferences that have little to do with qualifications.  I don't even really care about the position but I do care by how they handled it and what decision led to an abrupt 360 degree change and how that might be harming other applications and in turn their student population. It shows a serious lack of professionalism and appears to be associated in tertiary with a wider psuedo-cleansing campaign. Let us not fail in correcting that for other future faculty that may be abruptly discarded based on superficial and illegal criteria. Its a solid enough explanation for a good look. 🤷)

5. Review of other community complaints. There are some pretty serious community complaints and issues as it relates to some associated members of this clan. I think its important not to force a hand over victim's mouths and smother their voice just because we don't want to take a cursory look into the problem (I cannot tell you if they are true or not. I can only say some of them sound plausible.). 

The law is the law but the moral question remains, "Is this ok"? Whether or not they actually succeed is a different argument. It is an issue that they tried to cause harm and they were within a social network of people who supported such behaviors without question (Showing their own values and capacities.) That same network acted on misinformation and didn't stop to think about the targets in anyway (They even got kids intentionally involved). More important, some of these people were officials with duties and that led to the default of more than one institution and possibly tainted the long-term value of a third.

There are no legitimate laws, in the spirit they were created, that would allow such behaviors to be sanctioned and normalized. There cannot be different rules for different people (i.e. minorities know they sometimes get short sticked on justice. Not every time but enough poor decisions to create collective conscious awareness of the occasional misuse of some of our institutions. Don't believe me? Get out of the homogeneous world in which you live and go talk to some "other" people; the other half of society. Just listen.). What also bother me is that the kid they involved in harmful behavior is a black genius and it was their racism and bigotry that nearly derailed that because they wanted something selfish and low (They discounted his life with the tacit approval of some officials and then covered it up by double down on cleansing behaviors and delegitimization of the concerned parent. Delegitimization is such a common strategy in whistleblower and fights against corruption.). The law is a tool. It is a written codification of our values in tool form (carrot or hammer). How we use those laws to either build a more inclusive society or reinforce the exclusive ones of the past is a long term legal and social negotiation. For example, one might end segregation officially on a legal level but two systems may continue to function in shadow of each other (i.e. one indication might be the recent civil unrest during the last protests based on slightly different expectations of justice.). I advocate for the law to be married with wisdom, moral conscious and truth to ensure its compass always points true north. People trust things that consistently tell the truth and try and do the right thing (They trust it because it values them. Watch when people argue about race and religion and you always see "better than though" insults being thrown. )

What I can tell the next victim is likely different then what others can tell that victim (If they dropped the ball when poor behaviors were obvious would any of them have any real moral authority to counsel anyone or make decisions over these issues? Think about it...from an integrity standpoint. Mistake can sometimes be corrected but an intentional mistakes does not go unnoticed by society.). I believe I can tell that person I understand their pain, have been there myself, and have used a good portion of my life fighting for things I believe in. If it upsets you, and you don't feel its fair, then don't let them gag you. There are likely others and you have a responsibility to society to brush off the dirt and get back in there! You have a responsibility to society to ensure they come into alignment with our professed American values and social contracts. Its risky to have values in some environments. Chances are that you will likely lose because the forces are often way more powerful than most victims can handle, you will lose many things for truth. From financial to reputation they are going to throw everything they can at you and anyone who supports you to further that culture of fear. Even with such a heavy burden your choice on which path to take (submit or challenge) will determine who you are and your contribution to the advancement of society (Because they are most likely to lose is one of the reasons why they were chosen to be the designated victims of hate in the first place. Some of it does come down to general access to influence decision making. That is also why ostracization, hate narratives, and misuse of official power are tools to maintain separations in society and thus access to decision making. Access to new ideas information leads to better informed decisions and that means those who manipulate the system will be exposed.). As target, you can put up a large red stop sign and speed bump to warn the drivers of hate speeding down the same road through self reflecting back to them a more accurate version of their behavior (versus parking in front of people's homes, following them home, pulling over kids, blocking opportunities or anything else design to establish alpha positions. Some of it does come from a primal desire to dominate people outside one's tribe/clan/hate network so as to maintain positions of dominance. This is where corruption becomes likely when the law becomes a kind of clan promoting enforcement tool with no conception of the wider purpose for it). It is a duty to challenge those things that are not functioning and blatantly wrong (and praise those who did it the right way). People can do that by solving problems, talking about it, creating shared perspectives, forgiving, accountability and improvement. It is how we improve the entire system through challenge and growth. I can tell that person that "doing the right thing" comes with lots of risks. Check in with yourself to be sure your ready to take the road less traveled as a truer measure of choice and character.

What is the right thing to do here? Not so easy to answer when its American and "American" so lets be sure we keep drawing people together and tackling outbursts of coordinated hate when they occur. Let's make decisions for the future (over the horizon) and in the best interest of society (the long term interests). However, I think finding a pathway through situations like this is important because they create new trends or contribute to the existence of poor trends.  I think people will need to figure out for themselves what they believe and why it is so important to create shared perspectives (So we are all rowing in the same direction with trust, integrity and honor). That is how you build great nations! Especially a nation on the cusp of adapting up to higher social, economic, and political platform that may offer opportunities never presented before (Maybe not. 🤷).

........page turn........

Gillanders, R. & van der Werf, L. (January 26th, 2021). Corruption experiences and attitudes to political, interpersonal, and domestic violence. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/gove.12570

*The articles are important because it not only helps people think but also try and find solutions where others have failed to think. It is just a piece of the social conversation of where we go from the here as we ponder the possibilities of a brighter future. If you disagree with something its ok because I might actually agree with you as well. Yet....hopefully it still got you to think. What is the answer?

Things Still Moving Ahead Escanaba City Council Meeting (December 15th, 2022)

This was an important meeting even though one might not initially see that. While it isn't jam packed full of information, action nail biting suspense, or hip hip hoorays of financial triumph it was one that touched on some key topics. There are important activities buzzing in the area such as DDA changes, possible new city manager, body cams, city waterfront development projects moving forward (Anything to do with ship building in the area is cool.), marketing of local businesses and much more. In its own way its pretty exciting to watch!

A couple of thoughts on development..... 

Tourism is helpful to the area based on existing assets and that can be matched with other activities to draw in new wealth. Ship building is a solid anchor industry that we should support because it has many other possibilities for the future.  Wood development is a natural resource that also acts as an anchor industry that will likely have high future interest for specialty e-commerce product packaging and shipping. We want to add specific industries with future market potential because it is a method of updating a town's global competitiveness (i.e. adding a new innovative paper machine). 

Tourism, ship building, wood products, SME manufacturing, and perhaps entrepreneurs with exportable products (I was thinking outdoor/tourism products, design firms, and/or distribution but it could be anything related.) are potentially good cluster industries (We want them to share competencies and knowledge to encourage transactional subfactors whenever possible. i.e. "cluster community".). As one market declines it could potentially be hedged by other markets/industries helping ensure that jobs are retained during economic shifts. See Transactional Subfactors, Attracting MNC, DC MultiCluster, Tourism Micro.

Delta County MI is rural small locality that is ripe for investment and development and we are watching in near live time the changes. How it develops, whether it continues down the path of development or what industries it might attract are up to the many choices people make and the vision they can create for themselves. I'm feed back looping a theory based on changes in the market to see if they continue to explain events and activities as they occur. If your interested in Delta County you can check out a few of the websites Delta County, Escanaba, Gladstone, DC Chamber of Commerce, DDA, Build Back Better Esky

Escanaba Agenda December 15th, 2022 

The Next Generation of Conservative Will Look a Little Different (Quality Leather on New Boots)

Our nation is changing and the way we approach politics may change as well. The next generation of conservative will likely be more culturally open then the conservatives of the past (global manufacturing influence). In some ways I also believe the pendulum has moved for enough so that the new conservative looks more like an old Guard Republican but with a more modern flare with modern issues (quality leather on new boots). They will be more open to differences because we are in a world of differences and can't manage a country focused on limited demographics (The U.S. is a diverse society and those who don't embrace that will be rubbing increasingly against the general public will.)

The new conservative should be more focused on solving problems then fighting with opposing teams on relatively nonessential concerns. 

The new conservative should bring a renewed sense of professionalism to government and institutions (Not playing games with institutions of power, treating people fairly, looking at the bigger principles of democracy.). 

Socrates and politics. One of the first 
champions for democracy and first of victims.
Source: The Philosophy of Socrates.

A principled person a conservative should draw on the strengths of religion, ethics, and general societal values to make decisions (They see value in maximizing human capital from the lessons of history and our generational transcendental values. They don't just double down on their specific religion as the single cure for all of societies ills regardless of whether they actually understand the deeper values of that religion and or how to ensure those values can be practically applied in a universal way. Interestingly enough universalism has some of its roots in the universalism of values as taught be a number of global religious. i.e. Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, etc. sorry if I missed any. 🙏 ). 

A humanist that cares beyond cold hard numbers and instead manages for the long-term (Knowing which government activities are likely to create the greatest benefit to the nation and its principles. Let me be clear, the principles and the spirit of democracy are more important that the social structure of that democracy. This is why democracy must continue to change and rejuvenate. Institutions have a responsibility to update to ensure they are meeting the long term principles of democracy. Societies must become learning societies and be open to reasonable change or it will become a non-learning society and in turn be someday toppled by its inability to bend to waves of social movements. Palm Tree and Ocean Wave.)

Like the conservatives of the past, the new version will be concerned not only with debt but also with adding the components that raise national revenue (Reducing the deficit is important and raising long term value in a sustainable way is also important. i.e. returning manufacturing, updating infrastructure, strategically aligned treaties, etc.). 

The new conservative are likely those who can work across the isle because they know endless fighting solves nothing (This will be important for both sides to either solve problems or create them with a sense of purpose.). 

Differentiating between gun rights and human rights. Gun ownership by lawful citizens that know how to use, protect, and store such weapons is acceptable but giving easy access to everyone is very risky  (In other words, we don't want specials like buy "2 packs of cigs, a bottle of booze and a free box of bullets" to become a popular sales pitch at our neighborhood corner stores. I support gun ownership for hunting, sportsmanship, and self defense. We have to take a hard look objectively at who is misusing guns from a scientific perspective and design policies that restricts the more harmful elements while keeping it open to those who use them well. I don't understand why its so hard. Its people making it hard! Just look at all of the incidents, review the profiles of the shooters, and then design 5 or 10 year expiration policies with options for amending. Its evidence based management. This leads to the next....)

Supporting our constitution and pushing our institutions to reform (I have seen systems default in hate and violence spread like it was the latest fad. {I'm not sure which spread faster, hate or COVID? 🤔 One is disease of the respiratory system and the other is the disease mind.} Hate crimes in rural communities are not reported as often as they should and rights are sometimes discarded for racial/religious distortions, good old boy networks, and as a general purpose of harming some in support of one's clan members [i.e. a third world problem has now become in part our problem!}. I suspect less than half of hate crimes are reported likely leading to miscued information for policy makers. Likewise, some of our courts, judges, and systems have lost focus on their duties and oaths. To me its always dangerous when institutions 1.) don't focus on the Constitution and its rights and 2.) have become politicized and easily misused. For example, I support police 100% and want them to get really good at catching bad guys and protecting our Constitutional rights 110% because the police should always be working for the American people {We should not be confused about the agreement! I don't agree with defund police as a viable option but I agree with the sentiment of social contract and funding. It was an argument of principle and not in actual application. That doesn't mean it couldn't be practical but its not really developed as a theory in how one might manage a large population that way. That is why it wasn't really sold to politicians and stakeholders. Best use of resources is a fairly normal debate. Right now that is to me to train and improve the system. If someone else has a better idea, I think they should share it. Sorry, I digress....}. The lower values are a sign of institutional disease and create serious long term risks in institutional trust and in some ways the longevity of our nation. For the most part, I believe the simple majority of people within those institutions want to do the right thing, but there is a growing willingness to misuse institutions for disparity and gain. There are not enough checks to correct when aspects of the systems derail or default. We are dealing with people's lives so the institution should seek to ensure our laws are trying to emulate "moral conscious". If moral conscious begins to be defined by the twisted logical of legal orators then as conservatives we should raise an eyebrow. Its a value thing!)

The next generation of conservative leaders should have the skills to accept differences of opinions without moving into political bullying or political violence (this applies to both parties and their maturity level). If you can't understand differences, find common ground between them, then you really shouldn't be in politics. People who can't negotiate or compromise are not politicians they are political extremists (Making a distinction between holding to one's essential values based on principle and not specific form.) One must have the art of influence and good character to be an exceptional leader. Simply yelling and screaming, bashing, and purposely being ignorant is harmful to our democracy (It makes you wonder who supported and voted for these toxic souls. Did they ever expect anything to get done beyond heighten political conflict? Applies to both parties.) 

New conservatives might focus on things like strong military, international business, appropriate government size/influence/scope, global presence and international influence, and so many other things. Most of the traditional values, beliefs, and stuff doesn't change. Let us continue.....

(I dislike politics but also am a little fascinated by how we vote, change each other's behaviors, act on a social level. There are some serious long-term concerns for our nation that I can see from a sociological perspective. I've met great local candidates but I'm not seeing the same strength in some of our long-term national prospects {It could be a sign of a disconnect}. Perhaps we know it on one level and have started an internal debate on what the future of conservativism looks like.)

A conservative should be forward thinking, hedging the diverse strengths of this nation to create competitive advantages, focused on the essential principles of democracy, willing to make changes when systems are not functioning properly and/or defaulted and able to look back at the religious, ethical, and moral sentiments of  society that leads to choices that resonate within the hearts and minds of the American populace. 

That is what I believe as a digital era universal democracy supporting conservative that we must think about building a great nation of a diverse people with a single shared sense of purpose. That purpose moves beyond individual leaders and the flavor of the day politics and into long-term prospects through professional management of government and its systems (By professional I don't necessarily mean always life-long politicians. Democracy needs fresh ideas and new ways of doing things to stay relevant. Some old for balance and some new for change.) As a nation we suffer from some social class (include racial and religious preferences as construct cojoining of social class in this conversation) issues, over concentration of wealth (Its becoming difficult for small business and the common man/woman to get ahead), violating social contracts when its politically convenient (managing for the day versus the decade or century), and blocking beneficial voices of change (...suppressing wisdom in support of ignorance. i.e. intentionally pulling the wool over one's own eyes.).

Where my fellow conservatives go is up to them but I'm walking in this direction (Independence of thought is not much wanted or rewarded in society. That doesn't mean it isn't needed! Pretty much in history we sort of just hemlock poisoned most of the free thinkers {Socrates as an ancient wrong in the fight for the health of democracy!) that were actually capable of making change. i.e.  I guess that is something some fear and perhaps why its also why change should be constant. ) The path is small today but with more feet on the ground it could someday turn into a major throughway. While I may be a conservative light R, I have no problem with Democrats that want to hike those paths for a while as well just to get a feel for how two parties can find common ground to help politicians find meaningful focus and work so as to maximize our tax payer dollars. We hired and paid them so we should expect professional management of our larger systems (I'm only lightly into politics now but the last few years sort of had me step back and make sure my personal principles and professed conservative principles resonate; its an attempt at integrity of words and action {Politicians should believe in what they say. Some things I didn't believe in and didn't know if it was going to put me at odds/conflict or not. Those issues and initial misdirection appear to be in the process of being resolved.}. The political landscape has changed and I suspect it was likely unsustainable in its most recent prior form.)

“All I know is that I know nothing, while others think they know what they do not know.” - Socrates

(These articles are help you to think through the different choices, options and view points that may or may not be a herd approach.)