What Should We Do About the Filibuster?

We will cover the following core questions:

1. What is the practical consequences of the filibuster?
2. Why are people hesitant?
3. Why would we want to get rid of it?
4. What should we do about it?

Practically, the filibuster is a tool that allows a minority (typically the Confederate states, less than 37% of the population) to prevent any legislation they don't like: Civil Rights, Voting Rights, Health Care, Taxes, etc. Bills go to the Senate to die. The goal has been to disregard federal laws, to do whatever they wish and not be compelled to cooperate. This is the motivation for most state's rights claims: they wish to discriminate and they don't want to provide for public infrastructure and common welfare. They want to be selfish, deny the morality of empathy and try to deny the fundamental rights of all human beings. They want to enable and enact an illiberal democracy where some people are more equal than others. This is why they gerrymander, why they want to take power from the House, which is more representative of the voters and why they want more power in the Senate, which is highly skewed to give them more power per voter.

We are hesitant, because without the filibuster, the Republican's would have to be responsible and not pass outrageous legislation, such as The 'SAVE' act, Nationwide Abortion Ban, Outlawing Gays and Trans Rights, Eliminating Social Security and Medicare, which they would be unable to resist because they can no longer blame the filibuster. That would be dangerous. However, anything they really want to do, they have eliminated the filibuster for (tax scams, judges, presidential appointees, etc.)  The Democrats should take the same tack. Anything they want, they can defilibuster, but deny they are eliminating the filibuster by doing so. Effectively gutting it as the Republicans have, but allowing them to continue to cowardly hide behind it to save their sanity. So I oppose a complete filibuster revocation until they come to their senses.

The history of refusal to enforce civil rights and the attempt to institute illiberal democracy in these United States.

To bring our country into existence, to unionize the states together, the Confederate states refused to join unless slavery (the ultimate illiberal democracy) was enshrined in the constitution for 40 years. These states would only join the Union if no laws were allowed to stop their illiberal democracy. This was the agreement they made to give up absolute state's rights (in the Articles of Confederation) to move to the Federal Constitution. And this motivation hasn't changed since, they have fought, by any means possible, legal or illegal, and continue to fight, to subvert the fundamental promises of the Declaration of Independence. America fundamentally disagrees and we must bring this fight to a permanent close.

America changed the Constitution to prevent illiberal democracy after the civil war: abolishing slavery, forcing states to enforce the bill of rights and outlawing discrimination of who could vote.

• 13th Amendment (1865): Abolished slavery and involuntary servitude nationwide, except as a punishment for a convicted crime (A peculiar American travesty, insisted upon by the Confederacy, so they have some excuse for their behavior.)

• 14th Amendment (1868): Established birthright citizenship, ensuring that all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. are citizens. Crucially, it prohibits states from denying any person "due process of law" or "equal protection of the laws".

• 15th Amendment (1870):  Prohibited the federal and state governments from denying a citizen the right to vote based on "race, color, or previous condition of servitude".

The 17th, 19th, 24th and 26th amendment continued this thread: Senators are elected by the people, women's suffrage, no poll taxes and the voting age is set to 18. Extending citizenship and its inherent right to vote to all Americans.

The Confederate states have always objected to this deal. They first attempted nullification [1], the idea that state laws superseded federal laws. That was antithetical to the entire point of the Constitution, that states give up certain rights to the federal government (and the Confederacy knew this.) It's been a sticking point ever since. Not only for the Confederacy, for liberal states too. (Marijuana laws, immigration enforcement.) The conservatives have had a problem with federal laws for abortion and other health care and have worked hard to give this power back to the states.

The next tactic to prevent any new laws from being passed, such as the 1837 Civil Rights Act, the 1857  Civil Rights [2], the integration of the armed forces, and the 1950's civil rights law was to blatantly allow filibustering by partisan machinations. The senate debate was unending if the Confederates didn't want a law, and cut off if they did. When the partisanship went they other way, they decided to change the rule.

Aaron Burr (traitor) proposed the changes to allow filibustering by eliminating a simple majority vote to allow the 'previous question' rule, which forced a simple majority vote to stop the debate and delay and force a vote on a bill (the infamous Rule 22.) In my opinion, this was not an accident. It was purposeful to allow minority rule and block the enforcement of the law of the land.

The practical consequences of this rule where not used until many years later when the confederates insisted on blocking civil rights laws. First, the delay was entirely partisan based.  Then, when they couldn't prevent it in the Congress, even with the filibuster, they started the Civil War rather than give up slavery. They insisted on the endless debate in the Senate exactly because it could negate any bill, but used it almost exclusively to stop civil rights laws. The filibuster was put into place, formally, by the excuse that 'debate must be attended to', but in actuality, it is not there to induce persuasion, it is only there to negate legislation, it has nothing to do with debate at all, it's entirely a minority veto.

This tool of minority negation must end. The majority, who support liberal democracy as stated in the Declaration of Independence: All men are created equal; must win the battle or we will be ruled by a minority that claim the rights of royalty to do anything they wish, regardless of voice of the people and their legislation. There is a reason they wish to diminish the power of the House of Representatives: it reflects the votes of the people every two years and is a danger to their agenda. They have the Courts packed, which take lifetimes to unpack if everything continues as today. And they are willing to trade the Presidency and gut agencies' enforcement of the law, instituting a new spoils system (created by the confederate Andrew Jackson in 1828 and outlawed in 1883 by Chester Arthur) if, in return, they can stop legislation and enforcement of Civil Rights by the filibuster in the senate.

There is a reason they hate the agencies that Congress has created. This was the way FDR attempted to stop the executive from ignoring the law: by building agencies that were empowered to enforce the law. To insist on human rights over property rights. This is why they have invented the "major question" doctrine, which just says that the courts can take any power away from the agencies if they decide they don't like the way Congress specified it. From forbidding FDR to appoint new agencies' heads without cause, to allowing Reagan's EPA to reinterpret the law in any way they chose, to allowing Trump to appoint agency's head without cause, to instituting the "major question" requirement, a conservative SCOTUS has relentlessly pushed a partisan agenda for illiberal democracy for over a century. It is time to put a stop to this travesty.

Why were agencies protected from removal of their appointed head and presidential control? In FDR's time, SCOTUS ruled that he could not replace agency heads except for cause as they wished their agency heads would continue and stifle the attempt of the president to institute and enforce the laws pertaining to Social Security, banking and other New Deal ideas. Later, the conservatives were insistent that when under Reagan's appointee the EPA must be respected, even when it defies the actual laws Congress passed. Now that a Republican wishes to ignore them, they have flipped the rules and insisted that the Judiciary has the power to decide all "major questions" and not the agencies themselves. It's got nothing to do with what the Constitution says, it's a raw power move and it's been ongoing since the founding of our country.

The argument that the laws passed by Congress overwhelmingly to enforce the civil rights laws were 'just not needed' so they were declared unconstitutional is the most blatant act of white supremacy since the Dred-Scot decision which declared blacks could never be citizens. (This is the gutting of the Voting Rights Laws by fiat led by our chief justice John Roberts in several decisions.) [3] And even after the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments were passed, to specifically overturn this odious intention, the Confederacy has resisted every way they could, forcing progressives to pass the 24th amendment outlawing poll taxes. Could the intent of the Confederate state's be any clearer?

The filibuster is just one method to prevent liberal democracy and allow illiberal democracy where only a certain set of people actually have civil rights, protection of law and due process. We passed the amendments outlawing illiberal democracy, it's in the Constitution, there is no denying, in good faith, that it is the law of the land. How do we enforce it and how do we change the laws? How do we force unfettered voting and the requirement to treat all men as created equal, without endangering our republic and pushing it to imperial presidencies and authoritarianism? 

The filibuster must be changed, but it should be changed so that the least amount of mischief can be done to our quest for liberal democracy. The Democrats should revoke the filibuster for any signature legislation., allowing the Republicans to hide behind it as much as they want to. So, eliminate it? No. Actively ignore it? Yes.

Thanks for reading,

 -Dr. Mike

4 July 2026

The Effect of Electricity on the Average Level of Services and Accouterments Delivered to Britons.

In this piece we take a single drawing-room scene from Dickens's "Bleak House," a wealthy Victorian's parlor at the height of pre-electric opulence, and read it like an inventory: Tiled ceilings, elaborate wallpaper, hand-painted ancestor portraits, printed books, hand-blown glass, ornate clothes, steel and glass windows and a maid and a lawyer. All the best of the best available, all reserved for the one percent of the one percent of the one percent.

Then we jump fifty years forward, after electricity, and ask what the average Brit now had. The list turns out to be much larger than the rich man's inventory. That is the punchline: electricity did not merely elevate the rich, it moved the floor, replacing more things done by hand with things manufactured. Those things that can't be manufactured, yet — the maid, the lawyer, the oil paintings — are still scarce. We close by turning the same lens on ourselves — dishwashers that still cannot load themselves, cars that still cannot drive themselves — and on the strange fact that a hundred times more productivity per person has not made us the same as the British upper-class, but it has given us a hundred times more stuff that's made us hundreds of times more capable. Then we extrapolate this over the next 50 years. The results are startling.

Remember that this is the top one percent of one percent of one percent before electricity.

The illustration above accompanies the novel *Bleak House* by Charles Dickens, published in the mid-1800s, contemporaneously.  This room is the office, library and parlor of a rich man meeting with his lawyer. The background is fascinating. This is the best that the British could do. They had tens of thousands of sailing ships moving trade goods between continents. They had colonies in every time zone in the world. They were just about to build a world wide telegraph network and laying cables between New York and London. They ran the world. That pesky colony, that had rebelled from England a century ago, was just about to suffer a devastating civil war. Better to be rid of those thugs who couldn't even manage their own colonies.

But enough of the philosophizing. Let's examine this room in detail. Start at the very top, the ceiling. It appears to be some elaborate wood or metal tiles. Manufactured tiles. Stamped. But individually installed. In a high ceilinged room, with lots of extra space not needed, but exploited for cultural reasons. Extravagance. What's next? As you proceed downward from the ceiling, you get crown molding, more extravagance, to make the environment look 'interesting.' 

Next we get to the walls. These walls are about 12' high, 50% higher than typical walls today. Another sign of opulence. And what do we see hanging from these walls, covering them completely? Hand painted portraits of their ancestors. Very expensive portraits. And there is a minimum of 20 portraits around the room. So ten generations of ancestors, documenting hundreds of years of stewardship of the surrounding lands. 

The wall is covered in an expensive wall paper, with elaborate medallions in it (between the paintings, or that might be a gas light?) Next we encounter several vases and statues on another line of crown molding. Probably some are hand made and some are from the new factories of companies like Wedgwood, that were industrializing the production of fine English ceramics, creamware and jasperware, while over in Saxony, Meissen had already cracked the Chinese-porcelain code a century earlier. The room probably contains a mix of both.

This drawing appears as if it is lit by the sun coming through windows on the opposite side of the room. Another sign of extravagance, it looks like large windows, maybe on a wintry day. Built of glass and steel. A new technology that was just being rolled out into solariums across England, allowing them to grow fruits and vegetables year round. Eventually to be rolled out to the world allowing the construction of buildings over ten stories (not possible before this invention, and only feasible with the invention of electricity to power elevators. A steampunk elevator would be very complicated.)

What do we see next on the walls? Books. The industrialization of information. Books. Hundreds of books. About the world, about accounting, about architecture, about farming, about politics, about history. The rich used to have their books copied by hand to get into their libraries. Now, they could purchase them from book printers. Dickens himself made a living selling books. He may have sold more books than any author living up to that time.

There's some more statues (hand made or mass produced stone ware?) on pedestals. There's other furniture in the room, a few ornate chairs, a table with what appears to be a candle on it. and several books, hard to tell. And there's some device to the left of the picture, maybe a safe door? or a stove? And standing behind it, fading into the background, is a maid-servant.

 

Normally, the lighting at this time would be gas and candles. Maybe rugs from the orient to cover the floors. Their clothes are ornate, built with delicate, complicated details using automated looms in large factories, which rapidly brought down the price of clothing in the coming decades. And, of course, they are meeting with an expensive lawyer. Never a good sign, lawyers are expensive. Another extravagance. 

1853 (top 0.0001%)         1903 (average Briton)

------------------------         ---------------------------

Castle                               Condo

Gas + candlelight            Electric light

Hand-carted water           Indoor plumbing

Fireplaces per room        Central heating

Hand-painted portraits    Color prints

Weekly post                    Daily papers + telegram

Lawyers                          Lawyers

Servant                           Services

Fifty years later, after the introduction of electricity into England, what was missing from the average household compared to this picture? Two story drawing rooms in castles with hand painted portraits of your ancestors? Yes, but they still had lawyers (who are still expensive) and they don't all have maids, but they have... books and light, better light, cheaper light, carpets and wall paper, heating and indoor plumbing, color prints, photographs, cars, trucks and tractors, daily papers, mail service and phone systems in the big cities! A telegram will come right to your door! It's a different game now. Electricity made a change in what was possible for everyone to do. And it's still going on.

 

Fifteen years ago, after watching the progress in self-driving cars at the DARPA trials, I vowed that the next car I bought would be self-driving. And I’m still not there. [1] Again, I won't buy another dishwasher until it can actually gather the dishes to wash. Electricity was invented one-third of the way between us and these Britishers. The changes have always been much more glacial than expected in the short term and so much more profound in the long term as to be utterly unbelievable. Progress is just as slow as it was then, but the changes in the long run are profound. An average 3% change in productivity every year since then means we can produce 100 times as much of the same stuff; but we don’t, we produce 100 times more different things: Radios, TVs, computers, smart phones, self-driving cars and rockets to mars, industrialized junk mail and dick pics. [2] Dickens wouldn’t recognize what we think of as common. And it continues skyrocketing into the future. What will my future self say looking back on today in 150 years? The changes coming up in the next 50 years are unpredictable in detail, but they will come.

The promise of AGI and robotics, the industrialization of intelligence, of humans, is the end of the Industrial Revolution (what else is there to industrialize?) The coming age of abundant intelligence will have more of an effect during the next 50 years than the entire industrial revolution has had in the past 500 years. It's a cliche to say that the singularity is on its way, but we're actually near the end of the singularity that started with the with the printing press , the industrialization of information, 600 years ago. And that was near the end of the singularity that started with the invention of literacy 5000 years ago. And that was near the end of the singularity that started with the invention of language 300,000 years ago. And that was near the end of the singularity that started with the invention of stone tools 3,000,000 years ago.

In the short term the singularity always moves glacially; in the long term, we have a new paradigm: what worked before does not work afterwards. Nothing is the same. Our lineage has been in a singularity for longer than they have existed as the current species, homo sapiens.

What will my future self say looking back on today in 150 years? Will my future self still be a human?

Thanks for reading!

-Dr. Mike

23 July 2026

The Fate of Humanity. It's up to you.

So the President of the United States is threatening Iran to play nice with him OR ELSE! [1]

That worked so well in the recent past. *Sigh* He really is this clueless. Our only hope of not technically starting WWIII is that Russia collapses before China blockades Taiwan. Technically.[0] In reality, Trump will be known forever more as one of the instigators of WWIII. 

Any historians out there want to comment?

Anyone have a name for this ongoing economic apocalypse? 

Is there a chance that WWIII will be successfully won by the Democracies of this world and we have a Final Great Awakening?[2] Or is America going to stay in its current Dark Ages where we are ruled by techno-Lords and their attempt to reimpose Feudalism? [9]

WWIII isn't inevitable, but with our current narcissistic head of state, I don’t see how we avoid it unless he’s impeached and convicted. The odds of that seem slim or non-existent, although I have been known to be too pessimistic and wrong in the past! Let’s hope so. Actually, let’s all pray so.

At least WWIII might shock us enough to pull us out of the Second Great Depression (just as many farms are being eradicated today as in the 1930s.) Or it may end the Second Gilded Age (wealth inequality is at a record level, higher than the 1890s.) Or maybe the AI Apocalypse won’t eclipse the dot.com boom (even though it’s ten times larger.) Will the Roaring 20s end as badly as they did last time?

The Industrial Age of Humanity is coming to an end. Who would have thought that the ability to print a book would lead the human race to its current fate? We’ve industrialized everything in the last 700 years. And I do mean everything. Energy. Manufacturing. Information. We’re well on our way to industrializing intelligence with AI, we’re almost finished industrializing corruption with Citizens United, and we’re bringing back Feudalism with the industrialization of scarcity. What else is left to industrialize? Sex? Done.

We should be in the Age of Abundance,[6] but we seem to be in the Second Dark Ages for some reason. That reason is fear, and the immediate response is greed. Instead of sharing the riches with everyone, our techno-Lords would rather get a few pennies more of profit by extracting all of the wealth from humanity and damning us all to hell. This will not end well.[3]

They would end up with more for themselves if they shared, but that tiny thought that they might be slightly at risk not to be in charge makes them defensive, greedy and drives them to enshittify society in the hopes it will make them safer.

It won’t.

Let’s avoid the French solution to Royalty or the Italian solution to Fascism if we can.

“The rich won’t stop until they are afraid,” says Emeritus Professor of Geographical History, Jared Diamond of UCLA, in his latest book “Upheaval.” [4] The scary part is he knows what he’s talking about. He’s seen this scenario play itself out over and over again at a smaller scale. His real fear is discussed in his book “Collapse.” He’s of the opinion that the World of Humanity may soon go the way of many ancient civilizations and just tragically collapse into dust and disappear because of a climate induced apocalypse. The Fascism in America is just a minor glitch in history, but definitely not moving us in the right direction.

It’s time for humanity to come to its senses.

The coming Crazy Years [5] aren’t inevitable. Humanity really could wake up. We really could have a Final Great Awakening and start on a glorious future where we all share in the cleverness, industriousness and cooperate to bring about the Age of Abundance. Nothing is holding us back but ourselves.

It’s up to us. Are we going to keep our eyes open and clearly see what we could accomplish or are we going to close our eyes, let them bring down the darkness and lead us to ruin?

It really is up to us. Be prepared to seize the day. The journey will be long and stocked with peril. If we don’t persist, our society will vanish and it may never resurrect itself. The Great Filter[7] is upon us and I pray humanity has the wisdom to emerge on the other side; otherwise, we will be just one more failure in the attempt of the universe to become aware of itself and to propagate life, intelligence and love everywhere.

It really is up to us. Humanity can have a Final Great Awakening of Enlightenment or we can plunge back into an unending Dark Age of Oppression and Misery. Which is it going to be?

You decide. You can make it happen. It’s up to you. Don’t let the Dark Ages engulf humanity again.

Awaken and seize your destiny. Ad Astra! [8]

thanks for reading!

-Dr.Mike

21st of June 2026

The Beginning of Enshitification via the "Greed Doctrine" of Milton Friedman

A commentary on Milton Friedman's declaration that "Greed is Good:"  Friedman Ruins the Economy 

The reference above is the original opinion editorial in the NYTimes where Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winning economist, ensconced the idea of the "Greed Doctrine" into the psyche of the conservative mind. It specifically claims that, for corporations, only greed is good and not only gives license to enshittification, but declares that every company must enshittify its services to maximize its profits or it is being immoral [100% wrong, by the way, as pointed out in the overlaying comments.] He made the argument that greed is the only legal goal of a corporation. Reagan bought into this big time and proceeded to not only recommend corporations be greedy, but tacitly promised to prosecute those that were not.

See "Capitalism is not inherently bad, unethical or immoral. Limited Liability Companies? They are the engines that pollute the world" (2023) for more thoughts on what is wrong with capitalism.

In other words, Milton Friedman implicitly implies that the behavior we see in Meta, where Zuckerberg "promises" to stop sharing your information with others for money, but then continues to steal your information, sell it and dare the government to fine him,[1] is the correct and moral stance to take. I call bullshit. Not only does this enshittify the service, it enshittifies society and makes the world a poorer and measurably worse place to be in.

Encouraging companies to break the law, if the profit is more than the fine, is not a moral stance, it is a license to harm society so the techno-Lords can make a few pennies more of profit. It is inherently illegal, immoral and unethical. The government must stop this corrosive practice. Just like we ended the rapacious behavior of monopolies after the Gilded Age, we must eliminate them in the present era and let the "invisible hand" actually have a chance to succeed and increase the wealth of our country and the world and not allow the continued enshittification[2] of society due to the unbridled greed of a small group of techno-Lords. This mistaken assumption of grabbing unmitigated power so that you can become more powerful was a serious and dangerous mistake, will always be a mistake and must be outlawed for ever more. Enshittification is forcing the world to be a more miserable place, a poorer place, a shittier place to live in. It must stop.

Lina Khan, the previous Chair of the Federal Trade Commission (2021 to 2025), proved that the current spate of monopolization efforts and predatory pricing by large companies actually harms the country's consumers, even thought the 'price' they pay could be argued to be less than before the monopolization actions took place. Monopolies are inherently bad for society and must be broken up to let the invisible hand work its magic using brutal capitalistic competition. The right/conservative view that monopolies are good, that "Greed is Good" and that the brutal capitalistic competition must be avoided at all costs is lazy, immoral, unethical and illegal and makes us poorer and unhappier.

The argument in the courts stemming from Friedman's thesis and Bork's scholarship[3] that recommended the Greed Doctrine and the two ensuing SCOTUS decisions: Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986) and Reiter v. Sonotone Corp., 442 U.S. 330 (1979) were wrong, was based on unsound economic thinking. It ignores the ability of predatory pricing to charge feudal rents due to monopoly markets on everyone, forcing them to use a shabbier interface, with worse results for businesses and consumers in the short term. This illegally restricts trade and gives the company monopoly power to control the market for private profit over consumer good.

I conjecture that the same mathematics that Nobel prize winning economist Paul Krugman[4] used to prove that international trade improved the overall wealth of every country can be used to show that enshittification decreases the wealth of any country. In the former case trade has been politically toxic because a single group of people are definitely harmed, the fact that the rest of the country is better off altogether has not been enough to push the agenda through Congress to help us all. The squeaky wheel gets the grease in politics. That the current governments refuse to use the surplus to take care of those damaged by trade (and leaving the smaller surplus to benefit the average person in the country) is a political problem that our greedy current system is unwilling and unable to handle correctly, thus making the world a poorer place to live in. There is no reason that the harm from international trade could not be completely repaired while still benefitting the entire country. That the current system fails in that endeavor is a sign that we should change the system, not reduce international trade. 

I am working on a redefinition of the variables in Paul's groundbreaking work that will show, without the benefit of a doubt, that the process of enshittification has exactly the  opposite effects on a country than international trade. While international trade advantages the country more than it harms a small group effected by the competition, enshittification harms the entire country more than it advantages a small group of people. This "Greed Doctrine" must be recognized for the immoral and unethical justification that it is and the real and present harm and danger it brings to the world economy.

Expect a short mathematical (wonky) discussion of this point in an upcoming post that will prove my conjecture.

 Thanks for reading,

 -Dr Mike

14th of June, 2026

Upheaval: Turning Points for Nations in Crisis - Study Guide

"Upheaval" study guide.

This is a short discussion guide for Jared Dianomd's book (2019) "Upheaval") and how it pertains to the present crises in the United States.

Who is Jared Diamond and what has he written?

Jared (84 years old in 2026) is a brilliant historian who stated out as a biologist, who picks up languages (7+) like I like to read books, including Finnish (probably the hardest language to learn on this earth.)

He was top of his class at Harvard, got a PhD from Cambridge and is now a Professor at UCLA. He's published several best sellers related to History on a grand scale. I first learned about him by reading his book "The Third Chimpanzee" (1992) about the evolution of humans. Why are we different, a fascinating book.

"Why is Sex Fun?" (1997) basically these first two books are Jared's attempt to compliment Darwin, the first about Evolution by Natural Selection, the second about Sexual Selection.

Also in 1997 he published his most famous book: "Guns, Germs and Steel" which explained the last 500 years of human history as due to geography, population density and technology. A fascinating take on what actually causes history.

He published "Collapse" in 2005. It's about how climate change and devastation has occurred many times for many civilizations and there are definitely lessons to be learned from these failed ancient civilizations and applied to the current state of the world.

In 2010 he published "Natural Experiments of History" which I haven't read, but I'm pretty sure he  explains how to use science: theory, experiment, predictions, error feedback loop where you can't control the experiment, but just have to observe it. An extremely fascinating topic. It's definitely on my lists of books to read this summer.

In 2012 he published "The World until Yesterday", which I also haven't read but is about what we can learn from ancient civilizations and traditional societies.

In 2019 He published "Upheaval". Jared is extremely worried about where America is heading. He raises the alarm halfway through Trump's first term. It spent six years working on this book and it picked out the issues that Trump surfed to power and explains the underlying causes and recommendations of how to reduce the suffering and increase the well being of peole by taking lessons from other crisis in other nations.

He's next book is due out in (2025) and is called "Profits, Prophets, Coaches and Kings: Do Leaders Matter? When and Why.)". It's scheduled to be published on September 1st, and it's on my list to read immediately. He foreshadows the book in "Upheaval" that we are discussing today.

His books almost always are motivated by personal experience, in the case of "Upheaval", his wife was a psychologist in the 60's and helped to develop the protocol for dealing with intense trauma. How can we help people recover from crises? They happened to be living near the "Cocoanut Grove" night club when it burned down and killed almost 500 people. For "Upheaval" he takes the lessons learned on how to deal with personal crisis and adapts them to apply to nations in crises. These protocols have been tested and proved to help individuals, he explores how they can be used with nations. This is his distillation of the protocol for nations.

What are the top dozen factors that affect a nation's crisis' depth, length, savageness, misery, democracy, economy and liberty?

1. National Consensus that one's nation is in a crisis.
2. Acceptance of National Responsibility to do something.
3. Building a Fence around the national problems needing to be solved.
4. Getting Material and Financial Help from other Nations.
5. Using Other Nations as Models of how to solve problems..
6. National Identity (What's not up for discussion, what we all agree on.)
7. Honest National Self-appraisal.
8. Historic Experience of Previous National Crises.
9. Dealing with Previous National Failures.
10. Situation Specific National Flexibility.
11. National Core Values.
12. Freedom from Geopolitical Constraints.

He applies this framework to the United States (of 2019)

   Strengths

1.  Wealth
2.  Geography
3.  Democracy

  Problems

1. Polarization (Most impactful)
2. Elections: voter registrations and gerrymandering
3. Inequality and social mobility
4. Decreasing investment by government in the future 

Each of these topics can be seen through the lens of the dozen factors of national crises listed above.

There are three kinds of national crises:

1. Invasions (Finalnd by Russia, Japan by the west)
2. Coups (Chile (1972) and Indonesia (1962)
3. Gradual decay (Germany reunification and Australia's split from England)

The last one is us. Let's hope we don't move into one of the other types...

United State's Crises in the past

The US has been in a serious crisis about every fifty to a hundred years (typical for national crises):

1. The American Revolution
2. The Civil War
3. The Gilded Age, the Progressive Era and the Great Depression
4. WWII
5. Cold War
6. Globalization

What is our current crisis?

There is an attempt to change the core identity of the United States, an attempt to change our form of government. An attempt to disavow the principles of the Declaration of Independence of equality, government by consent and civil rights.

From: A multi-cultural liberal Democracy (where government protects all individuals under rule of law.) The Founding Fathers ideal as stated in the Declaration of Independence, FDR's New Deal and Johnson's Great Society. Where all men are created equal in the eyes of the law.

To: A White Christian Nationalism illiberal Democracy (where government protects only certain groups of people and punishes others.) And all the trappings of a modern version of Fascism.

This is not the first time that Fascism has reared it's ugly head and cropped up to hijack a Democracy. It seems that every time that there is a new media, Fascism attempts to use a new form of propaganda and the same old threat of violence to gain control. We can learn how to stop this by extrapolating from previous crisis.

How can we use this framework?

Which factors can minimize the crisis affect on the nation?[1]

• Decrease the crisis' length
• Decrease crisis' savageness
• Increase Democracy
• Decrease Misery
• Increase Economy and Well being

Here are the questions we will want to answer:

• Why is this a crisis now?
• What caused it?
• What help do we have?
• What can you do?
• What can you change?
• What can't you change?
• What must you change?
• How do you make change happen?

National Issues: Things to think about.

• National politics and economics
• China
• Leader's role
• Questions about group decisions
• Changes through peaceful resolution or violent revolution
• All at once or piecemeal
• Internal or external causes
• Achieving reconciliation

Why is this crisis acute? Why now? [2}

• Trump's capture of the Republican party
• Trump's autocratic tendencies to implement Fascism

Jared Diamond wrote in 2019, "I still have to agree: the current decade is the one offering the most cause for anxiety."

What is happening?

• Blatant corruption
• Manipulation of voter registration and certification
• Stacking of the courts
• Using "law enforcement" to suppress political opposition
• Media censorship
• Monopolies and enshittification
• Increasing inequality [3]
• Increasing partisanship in politics
• Increasing isolation and partisanship in society

Plan for discussion

10 minute discussion on each of 12  factors.

One minute summary

Individual evaluations

Thoughts and Prayers

Plans for Action

Strengths

Largest economy and most modern technologies

Project power with 10 (9?) nuclear powered aircraft carriers

Oceans isolate us from the world, no threat from national neighbors: Canada or Mexico

250 years of increasingly liberal democracy

Previous crises

Diminishment of Free Speech

Democracy reduces the risk of civil war

Voting makes government invest in all citizens futures

Federal system of 50 states

Civilian control of military

Low overt corruption in society

Literate electorate

National identity

American Dream

Science and Technology

Immigration

Weaknesses

Accelerating deterioration of political compromise.

Filibuster let's minorities refuse to compromise

Disrespect of norms, following rules, legitimacy of opposition

Radicalism and primaries push the center

Election expenses increasing allows the rich to hold democracy hostage to their riches

Reduction of social contact

Gerrymandering encourages polarization

Fractured news bubbles (enshittification by the Algorithm)

Polarization of society from the rise of indirect communication and diminishment of face to face discussion

Widespread gun ownership increases possibilities of violence

Low voter turnout

Restriction of voter registration

Partisan control of voting procedure

Gutting of Voting and Civil Rights Acts

Censorship of Free Press

Money in politics

Sound bytes versus meaningful debates

Inequality

Lack of social/economic mobility

Declining public investment in infrastructure and education

Prisons over health care

Factors to Successfully Navigate a Crisis

#1 Acknowledge We Are In a Crisis

• Denial
• Acknowledgement of only part of the crisis
• Downplay its seriousness

Undeniable triggers for an acute crisis would be:

• Collapse of Democracy (2020, mid-terms, 2028)
• WWIII (China blockades Taiwan)
• Civil War or Constitutional Convention

How can we ignore the following?

• Political polarization
• Low voter turnout
• Obstacles to voter registration and gerrymandering
• Increasing inequality and limited socio-economic mobility
• Decreasing support of public infrastructure and education

#2 Accept Responsibility

• Avoid claiming victimization
• Self pity
• Blaming Others

Detailed denials

• Both parties claim to be the victim
• Much whining and complaining
• Blame everyone but ourselves
• China
• Immigrants
• Minorities
• Technology
• Politicians
• Each other
• Pre-surrendering of businesses and media denies the crisis

#3 Build Fences: Selective Change

Change or Fix

1. Polarization
1. Meet your neighbors
2. Control you news bubbles and social media
3. Civic participation
2. Democracy
1. Voting Rights Act
2. Civil Rights Act
3. Inequality of representation
4. Corruption
5. Free speech
1. Sound bytes
2. Propaganda
3. Censor ship
3. Infrastructure investment
1. Public transportation
2. Public education
3. Universal Healthcare
4. Technology and Research
5. Environmental protection
4. Inequaity
1. Redistribution of wealth
2. Public service
3. Selfishness, empathy, compassion

What to keep

1. Rule of law
2. Democracy
3. Identity
4. American Dream
5. Economic engine
6. Technology/Science/Education

#4 Help from Other Nations

Accept Help

•     International voting audits and observations (EU)
•     Immigration (Canada)
•     Race relations (South Africa)
•     Government modifications and restructuring (EU)
•     International Criminal Court
•     Social Media (Australia/France)
•     Drones (Ukraine)
•     Chip manufacturing (Taiwan)
•     Solar and Batteries (China)
•     Bullet Trains (China)
•     Public Transportation (EU)

Work with others

• NATO/SEATO/Miliitary entanglement
• Paris agreements
• UN and other collective actions
• Free trade and capital
• Free passage of the seas
• Economic forums

Return the Favor

• Humanitarian aid
• Military aid
• Enforce international law
• Share Science and technology

Howard Freedman's book: "The Measure of a Nation" can tell us where we lag or lead.

#5 Use Other Nations as Models

1. Healthcare (Canada)
2. Education (Japan)
3. Childcare (France)
4. Public Investment (China)
5. Voter Registration (Australia/EU)
6. Misogyny (Sweden)
7. Immigration (Canada)
8. Social Mobility (EU)
9. Inequality (Nordic countries/EU)
10. Arts/Society (EU)
11. Democracy/Government (UK)
12. Military Drones (Ukraine)
13. Race Relations (South Africa)
14. Social Media (Austrailia/EU)
15. Economics/Regulation (EU)
16. Life/Work balance (EU)

#6 National Identity

Shared pride in admirable things that characterize one's nation and make it unique.

• American Dream
• MAGA/antifa: subgenre identity is transcendent, not national identity
• Example: Lewis & Clarke are celebrated as opening up the west
•     versus not the killing and displacement of Indians and enslavement of African.
• Flawed Democracy
• New Deal in response to the Great Depression and the Gilded Age
• Blood for Freedom
• Opportunity
• All men are created equal (all humans)
• Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness

Left Liberty and Democracy versus Religion, Family and Control

Multicultural Liberal Democracy versus Illiberal White Democracy

#7 Honest Self-Appraisal

A nation must process accurate information.
    No self -deception, evaluate knowledge honestly.
Our leader isn't honest and lies about reality. And many in this historically gullible  nation celebrate this.
We don't take our current problems seriously.
    Blaming other countries rather than ourselves.
    Skepticism about science is increasingly wide spread in the US (positive still at 70%)
The rich must realize they don't have to be so selfish (to the end result of their ruin.)
Monopolies need customers (You can only enshittify yourself so far before collapse.)
    Republicans aren't stopping them, rather they are disbanding Congress.
Corruption is in the open and celebrated (for spite?)
    DJT crypto company built for bribes
    Gifted $1B jet from Qatar
    Insider trading
    Bribes for pardons
Ignoring the Rule of Law blatantly in public
    Impoundment
    Pardoning Criminals for bribes
    1776 Fund stolen from the government to finance a militia
    Cuba blockade, Iran war
    Blatant war crimes on the open seas (over 100 boats sunk, over 150 people killed)
    Ignoring War Powers Act
    Weaponization of the DOJ

#8 Historical Experience of Previous National Crisis

What have we learned? What do we ignore?

The Previous Crises

    Survived the Civil War

    Survived the Revolution

    Conquest of the Continent

    Gilded Age

    Great Depression

    WWII

    Cold War

    Inflation of the 1980s and 2020s

    Race Riots: Watts, Rodney King, George Floyd

No Crushing Defeat or Occupation 

Plenty of stalemates and Muddling Through

    Korean War

    Vietnam War

    Afghanistan

    Islamic Terrorism: Lebanon Marine barracks, 9/11

    Iraq and Iran

This is where we are heading if we don't change our ways

• Second Gilded Age
• Second (actually third) Great Depression
• WWIII

#9 Patience With National Failure

National problems don't lend themselves to quick solutions

    Must try a series of possible solutions before identifying one that works

Need patience and compromise

Struggling with complex internal social, economic and political problems

    None of them lend themselves to quick solutions

History of crises

    1609: 175 years of colonialization

    1776: 8 years of Revolution

    1784: 5 years to a Nation State

    1801: 12 years to Thomas Jefferson instilling 'winner take all' and beginning polarization

    1861: 50 years of conquering the the continent

    1865: 4 years of Civil War

        100 years of Jim Crow

        60 years of Civil Rights

    1901: Thirty years of Gilded Aged

    1929: 28 years of Progressivism

    1941: 12 years of Great Depression

    1945: 4 years of WWII

    1984: 41 years of the Cold war

    2010: 36 years of World Wide increase in Democracy

    Now: 16 years of sliding into Fascism

How do we stop it?

• Win midterms
• Peaceful protest
• Impeachment/conviction
• Reform Government
• Reconciliation

    

#10 Situation Specific National Flexibility

Flexibility versus rigidity

    Consider different new approaches to a problem

    Americans are flexible: move on average every five years

Signs of National flexibility

    Frequent transitions of federal government between major political parties

    Co-opting programs of nascent new parties into the major parties platforms

Increasing Refusal to Compromise

    Not a good sign for implementing solutions\

#11 National core Values

What are you willing to almost die for?

Declaration of Independence

    All men are created equal

    Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness

    Liberal DEMOCRACY

    No Kings: The Rule of Law

    No taxation without representation

    Social Contract: Governments govern only with the people's consent

    Freedom of Speech

    Multicultural Liberal Democracy: All men are created equal, Government protects the individual

What is the alternative?

     'Moral Hierarchy' and Illiberal Democracy [4]

     Religion (With Lies): Evangelical Conservative Christianity

     Family Values (Led by the Husband)

     Control of America (by Them)

#12 Freedom From Geopolitical Constraints

The US has been outstandingly unconstrained (like Rome)

• Two oceans
• Large borders with unthreatening neighbors
• Large fertile land able to feed itself
• Energy Independent
• Large population
• Immense Wealth

Free to do as it pleases

Constraints

• Major exporter and importer
• Chip manufacturing
• Phones/Computers/Solar
• Manufacturing of Consumer Goods
• Rare Earths
• Other Physical Constraints
• Immigration
• Trade Wars
• Real wars
• Inflation
• Disease/Plagues
• Investments
• Brain Drain
• Debt

Summary Questions

Do countries require a crisis to motivate them to act or

Do nations ever act in anticipation of problems?

Does this Upheaval Framework allow you to make a difference?

What does the Framwork say about the likely path of the US?

Why do Quick Solutions Devolve into Stalemates or Don't: 

• Invasion of Afghanistan after 9/11 devolves into a decades long occupation
• Korea, Vietnam
• Response to Iraq WMDs and invasion of Bahrain
• Panama Canal, Venezuela
• Cuba, Iran

Do Leaders Make a Difference? [5]

    Do they screw themselves and their countries?

• Hitler
• Benito Mussolini
• Mao
• Frederick The Great
• King Leoplold
• Lenin/Stalin
• Vladimir Putin
• Cornwell
• Sukharno
• Pol Pot
• Idi Amin
• Ferdinand Marcos
• Francois Duvalier
• Muammar Khadaffi
• Robert Mugabe
• Bashar Al Assad
• Kim Jong Un
• Augusto Pinochet
• Syngman Rhee (1948-1960), Park Chung-hee (1961-1979), Chun Doo-hwan (1961-1979)

    Or do they help their country?

• George Washingoton
• Churchill
• Lincoln
• FDR
• Johnson
• Nelson Mandela
• Adolfo Suarez
• Seretse Khama
• Raul Alfonsin
• Patricia Aylwin
• Mikhail Gorbachev
• Lee Teng-hui
• Kin Dae Jung
• Vaclav Havel
• Arpad Goncz
• Corazon Acquino
• Olusegun Obasanjo
• Boris Trajkovski
• Tunku Abdul Rahman
• Jambyn Batmonkh (1984-1990), Punsalmaagiin Ochirbat (1990-1997)
• King Juan Carlos
• Lech Walesa
• Ricardo Lagos
• Ernesto Dedillo
• Alaksandr Kwasniewski