Revolutionary Misfit

Dare to be Inspirational

  • Impact Mindfulness
    • The Movement
    • Impact over Interest
    • The Big US
    • Removing Impact Blinders
    • People Planet Universe
    • Revolutionary Misfit Creed
  • The Blog & Podcast
    • Blog Archive
    • World Changers Expat Podcast
    • The LA County Jail Series
    • Costa Rica Expat Tours
    • About the Author
  • Books
    • The Rev Misfit Manifesto
    • The Impact Revolution
    • Expat Mindfulness – The Book
    • Definitive Guide to CR Expat Living

Agenda-based Science in the Age of COVID-19

April 24, 2020 by costaricaguy Leave a Comment

Agenda-based Science in the Age of COVID-19

When did we stop trusting in science?

Those of the fundamentalist religious persuasion stopped trusting around the time of the Scopes Monkey Trial in 1925. And as far as that crowd goes, things haven’t changed a whole lot since then…

But how about the rest of us, who consider ourselves a bit more even-keeled?

It seems these days a healthy trust in, versus skepticism of, science always breaks down along political lines. The democrats seem to be much more accepting of the prognostications of science than are the republicans.

Why is that?

It seems to have something to do with the now decades long “controversy” surrounding climate change. Although, I believe the real reason goes a bit deeper than just that.

Climate change is accepted science…period. I’m not going to waste any effort here trying to argue that point. You can do your own research…just do it in the right places and avoid the crackpots. And these days there’s no shortage of those!

Acceptance of climate change breaks down along political lines, more-so than perhaps any scientific topic in modern history. You might have to go back to the Copernican revolution to find a more hotly debated topic surrounding settled science.

According to Pew Research, 90% of democrats believe the government is doing too little to combat climate change, versus 39% of republicans.

Why is climate change so hard for republicans to accept?

Well, one could point to the leadership, or lack thereof, by our current president. He is a staunch climate change denier (or, at best, skeptic) and he influences millions of his die-hard supporters to believe likewise…

And he has Fox News constantly backing him up!

Republicans tend to believe that the whole climate change issue is wrapped up in agenda-based science, or science in pursuit of a political agenda…

And what is that agenda, exactly?

According to republicans, it is to turn the U.S.A. into a socialist, or even communist, state. Republicans distrust big government…such distrust is the very sine quo non of conservatism…

Never-mind that in many ways Donald Trump has expanded government far beyond his predecessor(s). One need only look at the current federal deficit for proof of that.

When civilization is faced with big non-economic problems, like an alien invasion (of the “outer-space” variety), meteor strike, an out of control climate, or a world-wide pandemic, it’s usually science that comes to the rescue.

Science supplies us with the facts and the actions we need to take based on those facts. Then it takes collective action, i.e. government action, to execute those scientific-based solutions…

COVID-19 presents one of these instances where humanity must turn to science for answers, perhaps like none other in recent generations. That’s not to downplay the effect of climate change, but climate change is a creeping problem, whereas COVID-19 has jumped up and bit us in the ass overnight…to the tune of over 50,000 deaths in the U.S. alone, and counting.

Nevertheless, we have some out there, mostly on the right, who’re playing politics with a freaking virus, as if it could possibly be cognizant of political affiliation.

The truth is that science and politics, like religion and politics, make for strange bedfellows. In fact, there should be a wall of separation between them…

Oh wait, there is a wall between church and state…

How about between science and state?

It should not be up to republicans, or the republican president, to decide which science they (or he) will support. And the same, of course, goes with democrats. If science tells us that the only way to defeat COVID-19 is by collective action that will have economic repercussions, then that’s the solution we’re all faced with accepting, period.

Our capitalistic economic system is not science and neither is it decreed by the almighty. It’s just an economic theory that proposes a market solution to pretty much everything. But there’s not a market solution to COVID-19. Capitalism won’t save us here. Conservatism, with its belief in limited (or no) government, won’t save us here.

In fact, this crisis is dramatically exposing how capitalism, at least the kind that has run amok in the last few decades, is failing society.

The U.S.A. has surpassed all other countries in the world in virtually all statistics (i.e., the negative ones) related to COVID-19. The U.S.A. has the most cases, the most deaths, and one of the highest fatality rates.

This little bug has made a shambles of the mighty American market and of so-called American exceptionalism.

We must all immediately stop the madness of allowing political division to get in the way of doing the right thing. And that means doing the thing(s) science tells us to do, no matter how painful, or inconsistent with your political beliefs, it might be.

I’m afraid COVID-19 presents us with this stark choice between science and politics like nothing ever has, at least in my lifetime. This crisis is presenting us with hard choices. I can understand the tendency towards skepticism. But skepticism won’t serve us here. Playing politics with a pathogen won’t serve us here.

This tendency towards agenda-based science in the age of COVID-19 is going to show us how destructive the political division really can be…

Perhaps that’s the “agenda” of this virus?

Filed Under: Removing Impact Blinders Tagged With: Agenda-based Science, COVID-19

The Cruelty of COVID-19

April 5, 2020 by costaricaguy Leave a Comment

The Cruelty of COVID-19

Something that has dawned upon me as of late is the cruelty of COVID-19. I’m not talking about the fact that it’s a virus that makes us sick, as all those suckers do. I’m talking about this cynical and downright insidious cruelty that’s putting the human race squarely upon the horns of a moral dilemma.

Let’s put this disease in perspective. If you’ll remember, when the news of COVID-19 first broke out, many were comparing it to the common flu. In a previous post I introduced a statistic called the reproduction number (or R0). The R0 of the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 (the disease that results from infection) is estimated at around 2.2, versus 1.3 for the flu. If you read my post, you’d know that R0 is the average number of people a given person with the virus will infect. So, it appears that COVID-19 is significantly more contagious than the flu.

It’s also far more deadly. It’s still uncertain, but most experts put the COVID-19 fatality rate at between 1 and 2%. The fatality rate for the flu is well-known to be .1%, so COVID-19 is anywhere from 10 to 20 times more deadly.

Now, we don’t put the brakes on the entire economy due to the flu. And granted there are virus-borne diseases out there, like Ebola, that are far more deadly than COVID-19. So, why are we eager to inflict so much damage to ourselves over COVID-19?

Consider what the results would be if we just let COVID-19 run its course. How many people would be infected? Well, the flu infects around 9% of the world population annually. We already established that COVID-19 is more contagious, so let’s say that if we just stepped aside and did nothing, 10% of the world would get infected and 1.5% of those infected would die. There are approximately 7.8 billion people on our planet, so if COVID-19 infected 10% of them, that would mean 780,000,000 infected and at a fatality rate of 1.5%, about 117 million people dead!

If what I just wrote seems outlandish to you, consider that the Spanish Flu of 1918 killed between 17 and 50 million (with some estimates as high as 100 million).

As alarming as the numbers I just presented are, the dilemma posed by the cruelty of COVID-19 nevertheless remains…

Why do we need to destroy the economy and do so much damage to practically everyone, when only a small minority actually get infected by COVID-19 and an even smaller percentage dies?

It’s the age-old utilitarian argument of John Stuart Mill versus the moral imperative of Immanuel Kant.

If you think about it, capitalism is largely justified by the utilitarian argument. That is, at least in the U.S. and other democratic regimes, we choose the utilitarian benefits of a capitalistic economy that flow to society at large, even though a smaller portion of the populace is damaged by it. And now you have Trump, a staunch capitalist, trying to make that same argument when it comes to COVID-19. He does this by arguing that we should open the economy back up even when doing so probably means a much larger percentage of the population will become infected and many more deaths will occur as a result.

Now, I’m no hard-core capitalist and certainly no fan of Donald Trump. But even for me this is a hard one. I’ve already been affected by this thing economically and I’m afraid more damage is yet to be personally experienced.

In Costa Rica 90% of the infections have occurred in the metropolitan area around the capital city of San Jose. In Perez Zeledon where I live, there have only been 3 confirmed cases and it’s been that way for going on 3 weeks now. So, why does the economy of the entire country have to be shut down? Why can’t I go to my favorite watering hole for a beer? Why can’t I drive my car on the highway today? Why are my real estate customers being denied entry into the country?

Why? Why? Why?

It just doesn’t seem fair!

The moral argument of Kant, his “categorical imperative”, tells me that I should judge a certain personal behavior as moral only if its universal application (that is, by everyone) would render an acceptable result. In other words, whether or not I should just go about my daily living as if this COVID-19 thing never happened, depends on the result that could occur if everyone did the same thing. And I believe we know the answer to that question…

The whole concept of social-distancing falls in line with Kant’s categorical imperative and is diametrically opposed to the anti-altruism espoused by the likes of Ayn Rand (the godmother of modern-day neoliberal capitalism). Rand was no fan of Kant, by the way.

COVID-19 presents a moral challenge for us. Do we go the more well-worn capitalistic utilitarian route, even if many of the older and weaker among us die as a result, or do we act, not so much for our own benefit, but for the universal benefit of the human race writ large?

I said before that this disease is going to test us and test our systems, especially those that are built around that Mill utilitarian argument…

I guess it really comes down to whether or not there’s some benefit to being compassionate that outweighs the benefit of being comfortable, materially speaking…

What do you think?

I’m pretty sure that viruses aren’t conscious, but this little bugger sure as hell seems to know exactly what it’s doing…

to US.

Image Credit: Siouxsie Wiles and Toby Morris / CC BY-SA

Filed Under: The Big US Tagged With: coronavirus, COVID-19

COVID-19: Are We Really All In This Together?

March 26, 2020 by costaricaguy Leave a Comment

COVID-19: Are We Really All In This Together?

If you’ve ever perused much of what is posted in this blog you’ve read about impact mindfulness. That’s a concept that I coined some years ago. It has three foundational pillars or principles…

  1. Impact Over (self) Interest
  2. The Big US (or we’re all in this together)
  3. Removing Impact Blinders

I’m hearing the phrase “we’re all in this [mess?] together” a lot these days in the midst of this COVID-19 epidemic…

But are we…really?

And why did it take a worldwide pandemic for us to figure that one out?

Here’s a blurb from a post I wrote long ago about the concept of the Big US…

I’ve repeatedly posted about impact mindfulness using a “we’re all in this boat together” metaphor. I still like the metaphor, but recently a more relevant one dawned upon me. One that involves a sinking ship…enter the Titanic…

In my metaphor, the ship represents the Planet, the crew and passengers, well, People, of course, and the ocean upon which they are afloat, the Universe.

Yea you got it, People – Planet – Universe, or to the handful that pay any attention to this blog, aka, my three dots…

Now isn’t it true that the silly things that divide us, like nationality, economic status, religion, looks, talent, fame, fortune, etc., tend to matter much less, or evaporate altogether, in distressful situations? When the proverbial shit hits the fan, all that stuff seems to decrease in importance, doesn’t it? The thing that unites us, our instinct for survival, tends to take over.

We’ve sort of arrived at one of those moments in 2020 with COVID-19, haven’t we?…

At the outset of the voyage, the Titanic was a steaming cauldron of division. You had the the wealthiest, then just the wealthy, then the servants of the wealthy, and then the rest who had to huddle down in the lower levels, so as not to be seen nor smelt by those above them.

That is, until the Universe decided to throw a tiny iceberg in their path. Then all of a sudden all that seemingly ordered division turned chaotic. In the flash of a moment what mattered more was survival than societal class difference.

Right now our world is being stressed to the breaking point. And we’re learning that, similar to the situation on the Titanic, there are precious few lifeboats.

What the “Big US” proposes is for us to look past what divides us and embrace what unites us, our humanity…before it’s too late.

Prior to the iceberg incident, the Titanic was an invincible ship, at least in the minds of some. She was unsinkable, remember?

I believe there are a few suffering from that same illusion when it comes to our planetary ship. That the smartest among us have it all under control. But even though the Universe seems willing to allow the illusion of such control for a time, when it is good and ready that “control” can be suddenly revoked…even by a microscopic virus.

We’re actually not in control at all. We can all humble ourselves to that fact, or remain puffed up with division until that small impediment (be it a virus, or a tiny increase in the percentage of carbon in the atmosphere) does us in.

Bottom line, the practice of impact mindfulness requires that we disregard division and focus our impacts for the good of People and Planet in general, that is, the Big US.

It would be refreshing if we could make this shift in mindset, from me to we, before the towers fall, the cities flood, or the world gets sick…

Aside from COVID-19, there seems to be a sickness that has taken hold preventing us from seeing things that way. This most recent disaster could be a wake-up call. We’re being called to act for the greater good like never before…

Are we up for the challenge?

When I see people hoarding hand-gel and toilet paper, well, it does make me wonder.

Impact mindfulness has always been about this higher calling. To make living for something greater than oneself a point of mindfulness. Something we just do, habitually.

Bob Dylan wrote that “the answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind.” Yea it is, in tiny droplets of spit that stay suspended for 30 minutes to a few hours. The answer is that, compared to many, we are a soft and vulnerable species. And even more vulnerable the more divided and ruggedly individualistic we pretend to be.

But we are also a resilient and intelligent species. Hopefully those qualities will see us through this one without too much permanent damage…

Hopefully we can learn from our mistakes, especially those of the recent past. The mistake of thinking we can abuse our planet without consequence. The mistake of thinking it OK for mass wealth to be concentrated in so few hands, while so many go without food, or adequate health care. The mistake of not knowing or caring about our neighbors, especially if they are of a different race, religion, or political party.

Yes, COVID-19 might just have a few lessons to teach us before it goes the way of the measles, mumps and smallpox…

If COVID-19 can really motivate us to live by that adage, “we’re all in this together”…

Well, it might’ve just done us the biggest favor imaginable.

Filed Under: The Big US Tagged With: COVID-19

The Hardest Thing About COVID-19: Uncertainty

March 21, 2020 by costaricaguy 2 Comments

The Hardest Thing About COVID-19

We humans have a love/hate relationship with uncertainty. We like a certain degree of it in our lives. We like to say that “variety is the spice of life.”

But, too much of it can paralyze us with fear…

That seems to be about where we are right now with this pandemic. The hardest thing about COVID-19 is the uncertainty.

Here are a few facts about this disease that might help you face the uncertainty…

An important thing to understand about this highly contagious disease is its basic reproduction number, or R-naught (R0). In epidemiology, the basic reproduction number of an infection can be thought of as the expected number of cases directly generated by one case in a population where all individuals are susceptible to infection. All individuals (at least all of those who haven’t already caught it and recovered) are susceptible to COVID-19. There is no vaccine for COVID-19, nor any human immunity.

Scientists have estimated COVID-19’s R0 as between 1.5 and 3. Compare that to the measles, which has an R0 of 12 – 18. The higher the R0 is, the harder it is to control an outbreak. The goal of all the social distancing, hand-washing and testing being mandated is to bring the R0 down to under 1. Once it’s under 1, the spreading will decrease (the curve will flatten and begin to show a downward trend), hopefully long enough to develop a vaccine and kill the damn thing off once and for all!

The other thing we sort of have a handle on with COVID-19 is its fatality rate. It seems to be around 2%, even though in some places, like Italy, the experience has been almost double that (Italy has a much older general population that the U.S.). Compare that rate to the fatality rate of the common flu (around .1%) or ebola (from 25 to 90%). While it’s much worse than the flu, it’s still not that high. Most who get sick will recover and develop an immunity against it, which will also make the rate of spread go down.

I am no expert, but I’ve certainly been trying to understand all the hoopla concerning this virus. The statistics above give me cause for both concern and hope.

The R0 of this infection is not insurmountable. We can get on top of it, as we have with other infectious viruses with similar R0’s (SARS and MERS come immediately to mind). The question is how fast and how much damage will it do in the meantime. The answer is quite a lot, although judging by the fatality rate for this virus, the vast majority of those who succumb to it will recover. Even so, it’s alarming to think that 2% of the potentially millions infected could die from this, if we don’t get a handle on it quick and reduce that R0.

Even though there’s uncertainty in the health risk posed by COVID-19, that risk doesn’t worry me as much as the risk of the havoc it will wreak on healthy lives, especially economic havoc, while we take drastic and economically paralyzing measures to deal with said health risk.

I sell real estate in Costa Rica…to foreigners, for the most part. Will the real estate market here be affected by this? It already is. When a country completely closes its borders to entry of all foreigners, it tends to greatly decrease my customer base!

So, the short-term negative effect is a certainty. The uncertainty is, how short (or long) will short-term be?

I can, at least, fantasize some silver-linings in this cloud over the longer term. But I don’t know when, if ever, they might actually materialize to my economic benefit.

However, this is not a post about COVID-19’s impact on the real estate market in Costa Rica. It’s being written to help me and you deal with the hardest thing about COVID-19…the uncertainty it has inspired. The stock market has gone down almost 20% due to that uncertainty.

So, how best can we cope with the hardest thing about COVID-19?

Well, being factually informed helps. Turning off the TV helps. Meditation helps. Stepping back and surveying the big picture helps…

And looking at this as a chance to make a positive impact on your species, certainly helps…

One sure way not to do that is to become overwhelmed with worry, either about getting sick, or about how this event might affect your pocket-book. A self-centered retreat, reflected in actions like hoarding toilet paper, will not help you reduce the mental anguish of uncertainty, I don’t believe.

My last post was entitled COVID-19: A Viral Perspective. In that one I discussed how COVID-19 is sharpening our focus concerning the risks posed by things like Globalization, Capitalism Run Amok, the ascent of Fake News, and the presidency of Donald J. Trump…

COVID-19 might be humanity’s chance at getting some things right that have gone awfully wrong in the last few decades. I have written in the past on how I feel that greed is at the root of many of our problems. What I mean by greed is the tendency for humans to prioritize self-interest over selfless impact…

For example, it will be interesting to see how the pharmaceutical industry reacts to this, as the race for a vaccine is well under way. Will they react out of compassion, or greed?

Stay tuned…

You see, as a result of this microscopic parasite we’re all of a sudden being asked to dramatically alter our lifestyle…for the good of others.

And that’s exactly what this blog’s been about for the last, ah, six odd years. In a nutshell, what we’re being collectively faced with is the need for impact mindfulness. We can either embrace it, or go on living a purely self-interested way (hoarding toilet paper) and millions will probably die.

So, it’s pretty much completely up to us, as far as the health impacts go…

Yes, COVID-19 will most likely lighten our wallets, reduce our portfolios, and may even force us to skip a fancy dinner or two…

But that might be a small price to pay for the enlightenment that can potentially come via our adopting impact mindfulness as a habit in our daily lives.

As I also said in my previous post, habits, especially life-style altering ones, are hard to instill. It always helps to have a darn good reason…

Our salvation just might qualify as one…

What do you think?

Filed Under: Impact over Interest Tagged With: COVID-19

COVID-19: A Viral Perspective

March 15, 2020 by costaricaguy 2 Comments

COVID-19: A Viral Perspective

Just in case you haven’t heard, there’s a bug going round…

Oh ok, I guess you have heard…

One thing about this particular virus (at least for me) is that it’s encouraging a viral perspective of our world and place within it…

I’m especially referring to the following 5 areas of focus…

Globalization

Viruses have always been avid world travelers. Even way back in 1918, before the advent of air travel, the Spanish Flu infected 500 million people around the world, or about 27% of the then world population of between 1.8 and 1.9 billion.

But these days, just one of these little bugs can hitch a jet ride from Wuhan (China) to Wilmington (N.C. or Delaware) inside the mucous membrane of an unsuspecting airline passenger and arrive within hours, allowing an infection to jump from continent to continent, riding first class at 500 mph!

We have to face the fact that our interconnectedness, commercially and socially, has put US (the big one, that is) at greater risk, even as it has lifted our quality of life.

For the past several years there’s been a backlash against globalization, primarily in the form of right-wing anti-immigration movements. Does COVID-19 bolster their case?

In a way, I guess, but I don’t believe globalization is going to go the way of the buggy whip anytime soon. Better to learn to live with it, even at some risk to our health, than attempt to fight the inevitable. Hopefully, COVID-19 will teach us a thing or two about how to reduce the risk for the future.

Capitalism

At the same time that right-wingers are decrying globalism, left-wingers are sounding the alarm against “capitalism run amok.”

Speaking of capitalism run amok, I read today that Donald Trump might be trying to buy exclusive rights to a future COVID-19 vaccine from a German firm, so that Americans would have access to it at the exclusion of everyone else.

Do I really need to ask if you can see what might be wrong with that idea?

[Note: The story referred to is not verified. Source was The Guardian. I posted it for illustrative purposes only…for all you out there ready to fake-news-shame me.]

But that’s sort of how capitalism works, right? It looks at life as a zero-sum contest where every transaction has a winner and a loser. And with the brand of capitalism that has come to dominate the world in the last, say, 50 years, there are precious few winners (around 1%) and a whole lot of losers (the rest of us).

A bright side of COVID-19 (if I may be so bold) could be that it will shine a spotlight on the failures of the current out-of-control capitalistic system and the neoliberal world order that has taken hold to foment it.

Scientific and Mathematic Truth

Lately every news item that’s detrimental to a particular political opinion is decried by the opposing side as fake news. Our very president has basically undermined the entire free press in the U.S. (at least any part of it other than Fox News and the few radio and TV talking heads that say nice things about him) as such. This has given rise to a dangerous phenomenon in which Americans can’t even agree on things that should be viewed as universal fact, or truth. Take the settled science of global warming, as a for instance.

And now even the existence of this virus is being labeled by some on the hard-right as a democratic (meaning communist) plot to derail the chances for Donald Trump to be elected to a second term.

Denying the existence of known threats to humanity, for political, religious, or idealogical reasons is, well, downright insanity.

And it is very dangerous to our national collective health.

Donald Trump

Donald Trump has seemed fairly invulnerable, until now. Hillary Clinton couldn’t defeat him (even after pussy-grabber-gate), the Special Counsel couldn’t nail him, and the Senate wouldn’t remove him (even though he was impeached by the House). He is the real and undisputed “teflon Don.” Well, that was until he addressed the nation the other night to outline his attack on this microscopic bug called COVID-19. His attempt to assuage the masses (and the markets) didn’t work. And his mighty “Trump economy” is currently at risk of failing as a direct and immediate result.

There’s not a whole lot Trump can point to proudly, other than the economy. So, if his economy goes down, it’s highly likely that Trump will go with it.

COVID-19 might just end up being what finally brings down the Donald.

Impact Mindfulness

We’re hearing a lot about “social distancing” these days. Basically, that means altering your habits to avoid too much direct human interaction. But old habits are hard to break, unless you have a really compelling reason to break them…

COVID-19 is providing that reason…to save others.

But if you’re not at risk of catching this thing (or, at least, dying from it), why should you limit your daily activities to binge watching Netflix?

Well, you’re being asked to right now. It’s not often that we’re called to so high a duty as to seriously alter our life-styles for the benefit of society as a whole.

That’s a level of altruism that’s probably making Ayn Rand roll around in her grave!

Moreover it’s just not consistent with the self-interested, small-us thinking that usually prevails in our dog-eat-dog, hard-core, capitalist, society.

And that might be the number 1 silver lining in this dark cloud we suddenly find ourselves under. Humans being generally mindful of their impacts on others AND in the U.S. even…who would’ve thunk it?

That might be a reason for us to say…

Hey thanks, COVID-19!

And that’s just a viral perspective of this COVID-19 pandemic…

Be safe out there (and wash your hands!).

Filed Under: Impact over Interest, Removing Impact Blinders, The Big US Tagged With: COVID-19

What About Whataboutism?

February 16, 2020 by costaricaguy Leave a Comment

What About Whataboutism?

There’s a bit of wisdom in that old saying that…

two wrongs don’t make a right…

However, these days, in the current political climate, it’s become nothing more than a cliche that no one really pays much attention to.

I’m going to try not to take sides in this post, because both sides are guilty as sin, when it comes to whataboutism.

It has become the method of choice used to explain away even the most corrupt and contemptible behavior by politicians, especially the one who looms large over our lives…

Yes, I’m talking about Donald J. Trump.

After all, whataboutism makes for great (and aruably funny) Facebook and Instagram memes, doesn’t it?

My feeds are full of examples.

Let’s apply this way of rationalizing away evil to our personal lives. Let’s apply it to the realm of parenthood…

What would you do if your kid was caught in the act of some dastardly deed, like lying through his teeth about something important…and he says…

But (brother) Billy did it too (or did x, which certainly is just as bad, or worse)…shouldn’t that let me off the hook?

I don’t know about you, but that excuse wouldn’t fly very far with me.

Nevertheless, when it comes to the leader of the free world, it flies…boy oh boy does it ever fly…

His beloved base seems capable of forgiving anything on the grounds that the Clintons, or the Bidens, or the Obamas surely did much worse…

What if we let our kids get by based on the whataboutism defense? What might be the ramifications going forward?

Would that dissuade the next lie?

Would that be a good way to teach our kids right from wrong?

When it comes to Trump…do you think letting him off the hook, because some democrat at some point in the past did x, do you really think that will dissuade the next lie, or the next attempt to rig the election in his favor, or the next meddling into our supposedly impartial criminal justice system, to make it work in his favor and against his enemies?

Do you really think so?

I don’t.

It makes me cringe a little each time I see these examples of whataboutism. And lately there’s no shortage of them.

I also worry about what this form of thinking is doing to the country at large. We seem ready, willing and able these days to look the other way at just about anything our side does, as long as we can point to something we feel is equally as bad on the other side…

And this just perpetuates a cycle of corruption that is spiraling out of control…

And even threatening our democratic freedoms.

In my opinion whataboutism is nothing more than a rank intellectual copout. It’s taking the easy road. The road most traveled.

I realize that in this age of polarization, politics is viewed as something of a team sport. But the truth is that it’s more, much more…

It’s what protects our freedoms and to a large extent governs our daily lives. In short, whether you’re engaged in politics, or not, it is certainly engaged in you!

Whataboutism often defies logic. It calls for trials without witnesses or documentary evidence. It sees everything “we” do as right and everything “they” do as wrong, regardless of clear logical inconsistencies.

It is sewing deeper divisions in an already deeply divided society.

I am sure back in the days before the civil war, chattel slavery was often rationalized with whataboutism…

What about those corrupt Yankee aristocrats, looking down their noses at our way of life, while they exploit the northern working class? Are they really any better?

However, it’s simply not a question of “are they any better?” No, they aren’t and neither are we…

Wrong is wrong.

Regardless of whether you can find what in your opinion are immoral equivalents.

Whataboutism is not going to get us out of the mess we’re in. It’s only going to help us dig a deeper hole.

So, how’s about we go about getting rid of whataboutism, once and for all?

What about that?

Filed Under: uncategorized

This World Does Not Need Billionaires

February 3, 2019 by costaricaguy Leave a Comment

There are a record 2,208 billionaires in the world, up from 2,043 in 2017, according to Forbes. And the average wealth of the billionaires is $4.1 billion, a record high.

Taken together, the billionaires of the world are worth $9.1 trillion, up from $7.7 trillion last year, Forbes reports.

What country has the most?

The U.S., of course, with 585 billionaires.

In 1987, when the Forbes 400 list was first issued, Forbes found 140 billionaires, including 96 outside of the U.S.

There’s no doubt that the reason for this exponential rise in the number of billionaires is an expanding free market around the world. In his most recent Washington Post column, Fareed Zakaria points out that this global expansion of the market has not just been good to billionaires, but for the poor and downtrodden as well. Fareed writes that “since 1990, more than 1 billion people have moved out of extreme poverty. The share of the global population living in these dire conditions has gone from 36 percent to 10 percent, the lowest in recorded history.”

Nevertheless, the pitchforks of populism have been raised against the billionaire elite class.

But is that really fair?

Perhaps an even better question to be asked is, are these elite billionaires essential to the success of free markets, or are they just an out-of-control symptom of that success?

And, moreover, now that we have seen such dramatic success in global free markets, shouldn’t “we” check to make sure that this success is not being funneled more and more narrowly to the enjoyment of a privileged few?

Fareed makes the point that on a world-wide scale, inequality has actually dropped over the last few decades. But that fact belies what is happening in individual markets of most western countries. In the U.S. inequality is now at levels not seen since the 1920’s. And that’s what is sparking the rise of populism on the left and right.

Of course, there are stark differences in the opinions of populists on the left and right about how to fix the inequality problem. Those on the right point to government by the elite as the problem, while those on the left look to government for solutions.

On the right we’ve seen the rise of Donald Trump. He claims to be a billionaire himself and his governing approach seems wholly market driven and transactional, a get government out of the way, trickle-down approach. He came into office saying that he would “drain the swamp”, but during his first two years it seems the swamp has only become “swampier.”

The left-leaning populists, led by the likes of Bernie Sanders and the newly minted, 29-year-old, congresswoman, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), want to take some of the wealth concentrated at the top and spread it around for the benefit of those in the middle to bottom rungs of the economic ladder.

Who’s right?

I’ve never really understood how voters were conned into believing that a billionaire, who benefits from inequality, could be trusted to do anything about it. And so far Trump has accomplished zero that one could reasonably argue is against the economic self-interest of the billionaire class, which he claims to be a member of.

Truth be told, no one really needs to be a billionaire. That’s more money than any person can ever expect to spend in one, or even several, lifetimes. So, what happens is that all that wealth gets handed over to succeeding generations of billionaires and that’s how inequality is perpetuated over the decades.

Would it really do great damage to the free market for there to be less, or even no, billionaires?

The argument that staunch free-marketers usually make is that if you take away wealth from billionaires, you’ll also take away their incentive to achieve those phenomenal business successes that, admittedly, inure to the benefit of society at large.

But does the disincentive argument really hold water?

If the highest net worth I could ever expect to achieve in my lifetime was one dollar short of a billion, would I just throw my hands up and run off to Costa Rica to live a stress-free life in the jungle? Well, I sort of did do that, but it certainly wasn’t a result of my disillusionment about never being able to become a billionaire.

I think it’s just downright silly to suggest that the world would take a turn towards the dark ages if “we” refused to allow a tiny (and growing) group of elites to continue to control more wealth than 90% of the world’s population.

The premise behind the free-market argument in support of the billionaire class is that they worked hard for their money, so they deserve to keep it.

But do billionaires really “work harder” than, say, brick-layers?

Billionaires achieve such incredible degrees of wealth because they take very intelligent advantage of markets in a way that’s consistent with the following Noam Chomsky quote…

A basic principle of modern state capitalism is that costs and risks are socialized to the extent possible, while profit is privatized.

One of the largest categories of billionaires is that of the so-called tech giants, like Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg. But where would those guys be without the internet? And where did we get the internet? From the John Q. Taxpayer funded government, that’s where.

Billionaires are interesting characters, that’s for sure. Life would certainly be more boring without them. They are more than just super successful businesspeople. They’re celebrities. We love to read about them. We inspire to be like them. We hang on their every eccentric move.

So, I guess in that sense, the existence of this odd creature called the billionaire does add some positive entertainment to our world. The problem is that this entertainment value comes at a great societal cost as inequality spins wildly out of control with the birth of each newly minted billionaire.

In my opinion, this world does not need billionaires…

when the people of Flint, Michigan still don’t have clean water…

when over 20% of children in the richest country on earth live in poverty and go to bed hungry…

when the wealthiest 1 percent of households owns 40% of the entire country’s wealth.

As the notorious AOC was quoted recently as saying…

Every billionaire is a policy failure.

Filed Under: Removing Impact Blinders Tagged With: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, Flint Michigan

A Purpose for Consciousness

December 4, 2018 by costaricaguy Leave a Comment

A Purpose for Consciousness

Yuval Noah Harari, whose writings I referenced in my last post, entitled, A Philosophy of Everything, tells us that technological advances in infotech and biotech are driving a de-coupling between consciousness and intelligence.

That sounds odd because we tend to think that the two, intelligence and consciousness, are one and the same, or at least closely linked.

Ah, but you see, they really aren’t.

The reason we tend to believe that they are is because thinking generally accompanies feeling, and vice versa. Even though we don’t really need the feeling, or emotion, of fear (or anger) for the intelligence of our brains to make our legs (or fists) move, we always seem to have that feeling anytime we come across some external stimuli that inspires a fight or flight response.

The geniuses of Silicon Valley are well aware of this de-coupling. They are well aware that intelligence can exist, and does in fact exist in the form of AI (artificial intelligence), completely divorced from the consciousness that seems only capable of being experienced by organic beings.

So, what’s the purpose of consciousness? Does it have any redeeming purpose whatsoever, or is just like background noise? Does the brain really need consciousness in order to do its work? The fact that there are millions of intelligent operations going on inside your body every moment, controlled by your brain, but without your being the least bit conscious of them, tends to suggest that it doesn’t.

In my post, A Philosophy of Everything, I offered the following vague statement of purpose for consciousness…

The philosophy of everything that I’m alluding to is one in which this higher level of consciousness, as the root of objective reality, is that which gives meaning to our existence. It is the tie that binds everything together, regardless of which stories we might have individually bought into. At this unifying level of consciousness we feel compassionate towards our fellow humans. We do not allow stories to distract us from our inherent commonality.

I also alluded to the fact that the obvious way most of us experience consciousness on a day-to-day basis is at the level of the ego, or the self. We become conscious at a very early age that we are separate from everything around us…of the dual role between subject and object.

But is that really what our consciousness exists to do? That is, to separate us? My philosophy of everything suggests not and I wanted to delve a little deeper into that idea with this post.

Of course it is true, as Harari tells us, that science hasn’t the foggiest idea what consciousness is and even less why it is. So, anything I suggest in this post is, of course, completely unscientific…

Well, almost…

There are some weird things, some “spooky action at a distance”, if you will, that science has discovered about reality, that appears to perhaps be a function of consciousness. Some of this weird stuff even goes so far as to suggest that consciousness is the root of all reality.

You’ve probably heard about the famous “double-slit” experiment. But, if not, here’s a brief (and unscientifically crude) explanation…

Scientists fire particles (photons in the form of a beam) at a barrier with two vertical slits. Some of the particles go through one slit and some go through the other. This should project an expected stacked particle pattern onto the backdrop. However, the weird thing is that the resulting pattern is instead what is called an “interference pattern”, which is indicative of a wave function. It seems that the individual particles somehow go through both slits, as if they were waves rather than particles.

Now, if that weren’t weird enough, it gets even weirder. When the scientists place a detector in front of the barrier to monitor which slit the particles enter, the pattern changes. It becomes the normal pattern one would expect particles to exhibit, rather than the strange wave pattern.

Why in the world does this happen? Why would the act of measurement, requiring a conscious observer, cause the wave pattern to collapse?

No one has a clue…

The implication, however, is clear. The act of conscious observation seems to cause the particles to choose a certain form. And the implications of that are fairly profound for the role consciousness could play in the existence of our universe.

Not long ago a theoretical physicist turned surfer dude named Garrett Lisi came up with an alternative to “String Theory” he calls e8 Theory. Lisi strongly believes his e8 Theory to be a better candidate for a theory of everything that finally unites general relativity and quantum physics. Rather than attempt another crude explanation, I’ll suffice it to say for our purposes that others, specifically a group called the Quantum Gravity Research Group, have taken Lisi’s theory much deeper with their “Emergence Theory”, which suggests that consciousness could play the key role in forming the building blocks of reality.

Now, neither of these theories are anywhere close to being considered acceptable science, but the fact remains that science is more and more looking at the role consciousness plays in our reality.

However, it doesn’t seem to me that this role would simply be one of self-consciousness, ego-driven separation and the duality of subject and object. I am led to believe that something quite the opposite might be going on…

My last post suggested, based largely on what Harari says in his books, that it’s the fictional layer of reality comprised of the stories we make up that’s motivating the ego to do its dirty work of separation (usually for self-preservation). And dirty it is as this separation has certainly caused much of the strife in our world.

And yet there seems to be this higher level of consciousness in which the duality of subject and object melts away. Many have experienced this higher level though psychedelic drugs, while others have achieved it via an intense practice of meditation.

The universal way consciousness tends to be felt by organic species is via pain and pleasure. In fact, we are buffeted about during our entire lives between these two polar opposites of consciousness…that is, until we discover that there is a way to rise above it. And maybe that’s exactly what consciousness beckons us to do.

I heard Ram Dass once say that “the purpose behind an incarnation is the elimination of suffering”, or something along those lines.

You might be asking, how can I sit here and conjecture that consciousness could have such a purpose, or really any purpose at all?

I don’t know…and in fact I’m really just thinking out loud (and trying to inspire you to do that same) with these crazy posts…

However, it’s evident to me that consciousness does indeed permeate our reality. It is something we share. It is something that connects us and on that higher level of connection (what Ram Dass calls “loving awareness”) motivates profound compassion, one incarnate being towards another.

Perhaps then we should not be trying to ascribe a purpose for consciousness, but rather try to better understand the purpose and meaning it ascribes to us.

I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.

Max Planck

Filed Under: Impact over Interest, Removing Impact Blinders, The Big US Tagged With: consciousness, double-slit experiment, e8 theory, garrett lisi, ram dass, Yuval Noah Harari

A Philosophy of Everything

November 28, 2018 by costaricaguy 1 Comment

A Philosophy of Everything

The greatest scientific quest of the 21st century has been (and continues to be) a “theory of everything” that ties general relativity and quantum mechanics together. The missing link between the two is a quantum description of the gravitation force that we are all very familiar with.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about a similar notion of a “philosophy of everything.” That is, a common philosophy that encompasses economics, politics, and science, and melds it all into a general meaning for our existence on this microscopically small revolving blue rock in the middle of a vast universe.

It seems that the “tie that binds” it all together is consciousness. I know that might sound weird, but more and more that’s what “they” are saying. By they I mean many of the current notable philosophical and spiritual thinkers (and even some scientists). After all, one of the greatest mysteries in science, in addition to quantum gravity, is the nature of consciousness…what exactly is it and where did it come from? The conundrum of consciousness is akin to the what came first, chicken or egg, riddle. That is, does the mind (i.e., our biological brain) produce consciousness, or vice versa. In fact, there is growing evidence that the root of reality is indeed, consciousness.

The spiritual, philosophical and scientific thinkers that I’m referring to are the likes of neuroscientist, Sam Harris, spiritual guru, Baba Ram Dass, historian and philosopher, Yuval Noah Harari, among others.

Particularly illuminating to me as of late has been the trilogy of books by Yuval Noah Harari. Those are, in order of their publication, Sapiens, Homo Deus, and his latest book, 21 Lessons for the 21st Century. If you haven’t read them, you certainly should.

Harari tell us that humans now live in a dual reality. Actually, we’ve sort of been living in one since the dawning of civilization, which encompasses only 1/3 of 1% of the 1.5 million year history of our species. There’s the objective reality of the things we can see, touch, taste, hear and smell. And then there’s this fictional layer of reality that has been superimposed by us over that objective reality. The fictional layer is comprised of made-up stories…yea that’s right, fairy tales, more or less.

Now, even though these stories are not really real, they nevertheless have had enormous impacts upon our species. In fact, Harari tells us that these stories are what has allowed mass human cooperation, which has elevated our species above the 9 million or so others that share space with us on planet Earth. Of course, one of the main categories of stories has to do with religion, but there are many others as well…such as democracy, capitalism, socialism, human rights and even money. All these have no objective existence apart from the stories that we’ve made up and that have become widely accepted.

And that’s not necessarily a bad thing…to a point.

Of course, the story of money has been a great benefit to humankind. Even though these small scraps of paper, generally adorned with grainy images of dead notables, do not have any intrinsic value in and of themselves…well, perhaps to light a fire, or substitute for Scott tissue versus dried leaves on an ill-equipped camping trip…they have facilitated widespread economic cooperation that has had great benefits to human society writ large.

However, it pays to remember that these stories, including the one about money, are, in fact, just stories. We made them up and we can un-make them up.

But here’s the thing, the stories have now taken on such an elevated and integrated role in human society that in many ways they now command objective reality itself. Take the capitalist economic story that led to the great industrial revolution that swept across the globe and elevated the quality of life for billions. We have come to realize, through science, that this story and the cooperative action it has spawned across the human race is now actually commanding the objective reality of our planet’s climate…to the potential risk of our very extinction!

Political and religious stories have been both good and bad. While they have given birth to nations and inspired the exploration of new geographic frontiers, they have also given rise to massive and completely unnecessary wars, death and mayhem.

These stories are so powerful that not only do they command the objective “exterior” reality of our day-to-day existence, they command the “interior” as well. In other words, they are so powerful as to effect consciousness itself.

On the level of the ego, which is the level of consciousness where most of us mere mortals live on a day-to-day basis, these stories reign supreme. They deeply influence our almost every conscious thought and thus command the actions flowing from those thoughts.

In short, these stories are powerful things, both for good and for bad.

However, the ego level is only one lower level of consciousness. There are higher ones. I know that might sound a little “out there” for some who could be reading this. But if you’ve ever tried meditation you’ll quickly learn that you’re really not in control of your thoughts at all. The stories are in control, as well as parts of your brain that have evolved over million of years and still harbor fight or flight notions that dominated the consciousness of our distant cave-dwelling ancestors. The goal of meditation is to quiet all that down and reach a higher level of consciousness where the stories in fact do NOT reign supreme. And that is inherently achievable, as millions of meditators do it quite successfully as a daily practice.

The philosophy of everything that I’m alluding to is one in which this higher level of consciousness, as the root of objective reality, is that which gives meaning to our existence. It is the tie that binds everything together, regardless of which stories we might have individually bought into. At this unifying level of consciousness we feel compassionate towards our fellow humans. We do not allow stories to distract us from our inherent commonality.

The stories are currently causing widespread division in American society and an alarming lack of compassion between those clinging to these competing fictions, such as democrat and republican.

The point is that we need not cling to the stories. We can choose to use them for our benefit and discard, or modify, them when they no longer serve us well.

We can seek a higher level of consciousness in which these stories do not command our inner, nor our outer, objective realities.

We may be at a point where our future existence depends on a philosophy of everything that leads us to do just that.

Filed Under: Impact over Interest, Removing Impact Blinders, The Big US Tagged With: Baba Ram Dass, Philosophy of Everything, Sam Harris, Theory of Everything, Yuval Noah Harari

The Problem with Trump’s Nationalism

October 24, 2018 by costaricaguy Leave a Comment

Trump's Nationalism

I have expressed my concern many times in this blog about the concept, embraced by most on the right, of American Exceptionalism. I have long been fearful about what that sentiment could morph into.

Yesterday we had the President of the U.S., Donald Trump, lay claim to the ideological moniker of “nationalist.”

Now, many quickly came to his defense claiming that what he meant was simply that he was a patriot who cared deeply about his country.

However, there is a difference between what patriotism has always been understood to mean and what nationalism has actually and historically meant.

Here’s the way George Orwell drew the distinction in his famous 1945 essay, Notes on Nationalism…

By “nationalism” I mean first of all the habit of assuming that human beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions or tens of millions of people can be confidently labelled “good” or “bad.”

But secondly — and this is much more important — I mean the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than that of advancing its interests.

Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism.

Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved.

By “patriotism” I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.

Of course, historically so-called nationalists have wreaked havoc almost everywhere they’ve claimed the label. And, yes, that includes both Hitler in Germany and Mussolini in Italy, but there are many other examples as well.

So, it should alarm any historically educated thinking person to hear a sitting President of the U.S. claim to be a nationalist and even praise the term and encourage its use. Perhaps Trump has never read Orwell’s essay, or perhaps he is even unaware of the historical baggage associated with the term. I hope that’s true.

Then there’s also the common way the term nationalist tends to be used in the U.S.A., at least in recent years. Here I’m talking about the pejorative term of “white nationalist.” There are some claiming that Trump’s nationalism was actually a “dog whistle” to groups that claim to be white nationalists. I don’t know if that’s true and neither does anyone else.

Even so, anyone reading the above should be able to come to the conclusion that Trump’s expressed affinity for nationalism wasn’t cool.

Nevertheless, it doesn’t surprise me in the least that he did so.

As I said, the whole notion of american exceptionalism has always sounded a bit too nationalistic to my progressive ears. Even before his election Trump was an outspoken leader among the exceptionalism crowd, along with the white evangelicals who now wholeheartedly support him.

What truth is there to the claim in the first place? In what ways is America exceptional, meaning better than all the rest?

One could quickly answer, well, militarily and economically. Oh sure, in terms of military or economic might, no country can match the U.S.A, at least not quite yet. There are a few fast on our heels, but we’re still at least winning by a head in those regards.

However, to claim exceptionalism based on power alone seems to me to be falling right into the nationalistic trap that Orwell lays out in the quote above. Power alone does not make one better than another. If that were the case, the bully would be considered a paragon of virtue, rather than an object of scorn and ridicule.

However, that is exactly what the nationalist does. He claims to be better and desires to demonstrate that to others via aggressive exertions of raw military and/or economic power. The result is often alienation, much like the playground bully who no one wants to play with. Trump’s entire presidency seems to be about doing just that. In that sense I guess he really is a nationalist, but not in any way that is morally laudable as he seemed to allude to in that regretful speech.

As I was embarking upon my meditation this morning using the app called HeadSpace, the message conveyed at the beginning of the guided session resonated with me and I believe is consistent with the underlying message of this post. And that is…

whether we think we’re the best in the world, or the worst…both ideas are nothing more than concepts of the mind. Neither possesses any real objective standing, or truth.

The truth is that we’re all in this boat together and none is more valuable in any basic human sense than any other. We’re going to have to face that fact sooner or later.

The problem with Trump’s nationalism is that the world is changing. Ideas like nationalism, or even exceptionalism, just aren’t going to have a place in the world to come. That is, if humans are expecting to survive as a species to enjoy it.

We’ve all got to learn to get along in this rapidly shrinking (and expanding) world. We’ve all got to learn to respect one another’s basic right to human dignity, regardless of place of birth, color of skin, or professed faith.

Trump’s nationalism, which foments the idea that “we” are inherently better than “them”, just won’t cut the mustard.

Filed Under: The Big US Tagged With: American Exceptionalism, Donald Trumo, Nationalism

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • …
  • 28
  • Next Page »

Connect with RM

Revolutionary Misfit social media connections...

  • Facebook
  • Pinterest
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter
  • Impact Mindfulness
  • The Blog & Podcast
  • Books

Copyright © 2025 · Parallax Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in