Popular Posts

Thursday, October 24, 2019

What everyone knows to be true is not necessarily so!


What everyone knows to be true is not necessarily so!



James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© October 24, 2019

 

Abstract



It occurred to me, given the upset and anxiety expressed by some of my correspondents, that they consider free will and individualism of little consequence.   To them, it is now all about social, political and economic injustices in the United States.  We have become a society obsessed with “the big picture” when our lives, now as always, have revolved only about “the little picture.” We can cherry pick a role for ourselves on a grand scale believing American society resembles Hell in a basket but that changes nothing.  Everything begins and ends in how we handle our own specific existence. The conclusion of DEVLIN epitomizes this assumption.  It is why it is shared with you here.


Cruelty is, perhaps, the worst kind of sin.  Intellectual cruelty is certainly the worst kind of cruelty.

G. K. Chesterton, All things Considered

The Devlin Intrigue Continues (from DEVLIN, the novel)


Devlin felt strange in America.  A willful blankness had overcome him as he saw his family off at JFK to Florida.  He roamed the United Air Lines Terminal looking into myriad kiosks, restaurants, bars, gift shops, newsstands and book venders idling his time away until he boarded his 7:35 p.m. flight for Chicago. 

The commercialism had all been there when he left fourteen months before, but somehow it seemed more sinister.  He wondered why.  Had he changed?  Obviously, he was older and carried more psychological baggage than when he departed, but that was to be expected.  But had he changed? 

He stopped at a restaurant and ordered coffee.  His waiter seemed to take umbrage when he ordered only a beverage.  He expected his second cup of coffee would be free, but he was wrong.   He was charged for two cups of coffee at $1.20 each or $2.40.  He left a dollar tip hoping that would assuage his waiter’s resentment.  He wanted to yell, “Hey, I’m on your side,” but he didn’t.

While he drank his coffee, and watched the constant flow of people pass by, people of all sizes and descriptions, races and nationalities, dress codes and hair styles, none of them relaxed or smiling, all in a hurry to get to somewhere else, somewhere, he suspected, that they would have to again wait in disgust. 

The only exceptions were the children.  They smiled, laughed, cried, and refused to go any further or faster, provoking their parents who insisted on dragging them on anyway.  Many saw Devlin looking at them, some smiled, some stuck out their tongues, some laughed joyously, and some stretched out their arms to him as if he were there to extricate them from their plight.  He wondered if he had been like that as a child, and decided he hadn’t, as he was of The Great Depression Generation, which had not enjoyed that luxury.   

He could tell by the newspapers left on chairs at the departure check-in stations that all wasn’t right in America.  The Vietnam War, which he had not followed in South Africa, had created great divisions in American society between the young and the old, especially young white college aged students, who were fleeing to Canada to avoid the draft, while apparently young under educated blacks were fighting this misbegotten war. 

Nixon was the new president, whereas Johnson had been president when he left.  Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert Kennedy had been assassinated in the interim.  Reading between the lines, it seemed America was an armed camp with one group against the other, while the new president boasted he was for “law and order.”  America didn’t seem that much different than the South Africa he had just left.

Perusing the books in a newsstand, he was delighted with the colorful titles of two books in particular by a Tom Wolfe, whom he had not read before, The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test and The Pump House Gang.  The words fairly jumped off the covers in an outrage of what he suspected was inside lingo. If this was the current diet of American culture, Devlin felt he was about a century behind as a reader.  With a name like Wolfe, he had expected to find something like Thomas Wolfe’s Look Homeward Angel or You Can’t Go Home Again, biographical novels written in traditional American language that he understood. Tom Wolfe seemed to address a culture which he knew nothing about, a culture that seemed consumed in angst, but exciting and free as well.   Scanning the prose style before making the purchase, which was his habit, it seemed the author’s efforts were directed at readers suffering from some attention deficit disorder. A fast reader, Devlin expected he would have them both read before he got to Chicago.  He looked at his watch.  God! He’d better get a move on, his plane was scheduled to leave in twenty minutes!

*     *     *

Once aboard the 747, out of breath, and in his first-class seat on the aisle for his long legs, he took a deep sigh of relief.  What would he have done if he had missed the plane?  Blame it on Tom Wolfe?  He smiled at the thought as he continued to read the iconoclastic author.  One book had a picture of the author in a white suit, which Mark Twain had made famous.  He suspected the author was a consummate self-promoter.  He used language like a weapon whereas Mark Twain used it like a tickling feather. 

As he read, the author kept getting in the way of his words with his imageries and metaphors.  Devlin had read Ken Kesey’s Sometimes A Great Notion and was moved by it.  Kesey and his Merry Pranksters were the subject of one of the books.  He hadn’t known Kesey was an acidhead.  That was a universe far removed from his own world.  Yet he found Tom Wolfe’s books entertaining, but self-consciously written as the heart of the sentence was mainly the subject, not the verb, and least of all, the object.  Wolfe knew his subject well, but he suspected as an observer more than a player as was true of much of his own work.  Neither he nor Wolfe appeared to be participants.  Oscar Wilde warned in Picture of Dorian Gray that spectators to life reject life’s battles and therefore are more deeply wounded as victims of life’s verisimilitudes than those who actively participate in life.  Was that his problem?

Perhaps he should table the idea of becoming a writer.  He was not flamboyant, not an exhibitionist, not into shocking the reader with word images, but hopefully making the reader think as was true in his own case.  He was not a psychologist, but Wolfe’s ego was palpable, and demanded to be fed, but for what: for celebrity, for acclaim, for wealth, for notoriety?  If so, what could be crasser? 

His heavy lids had almost closed, as he realized he was quite tired.  He was sitting upright as the plane taxied down the runway.  His head fell forward with his chin nearly resting on his chest.

A pretty airline stewardess woke him when she attempted to prop up his head with a small pillow.  “You look tired,” she said.  “Had a rough night?”

“More like a long 36-hour night.”

“That bad?”

He said nothing. 

“Mystery man,” she said.  “Where were you thirty-six hours ago?”

“South Africa, but I should explain I spent two days in Rome, deplaning again in London, and then on to New York City, and so it has been a series of cat naps.” 

“Can I say something?”

“Yes,” he said looking at her curiously.

“You had to correct yourself, so I would get something of the complete picture, am I right?”

“Yes, I guess I talk like that, please forgive me.”

“No forgiving is necessary,” she smiled warmly, “what were you doing in South Africa?”

“Working.”

“Well, there is work and then there is work.  You don’t look like a laborer.  You could be a professor, but you don’t dress like a professor.  I’d say you are an executive.”

“Something like that.”

“How long were you in South Africa?”

“A little over a year.”

“I see you’re wearing a wedding ring.  Married, or trying to keep curious women from asking questions?”

“Yes, I am married.”

“Any children?”

Devlin smiled at her warmly.  “I don’t mean to dominate your time.”

“This is my job,” she informed him, “you pay for this service.” 

There was a little edginess to her voice.  “You still haven’t answered my question.”

“Yes, I have children, four, two boys and two girls.”

“That’s not possible.  Are they your own?”

“Yes.”

“How old are you?”

“Thirty-one.”

“You could pass for much younger.”

“I know.  That has been my bane.”

“I meant it as a compliment.”

“May I ask you how old you are?”

“Twenty-six.”

“My name is Dirk Devlin.  People call me Devlin,” he said as he held out his hand.

“Mr. Devlin, I know who you are.  It is on the manifest.”

“I see by your name tag that you are Siobhan (Shiv – awn) Murphy, a good Irish name, Siobhan.  My name is Seamus (Shay muss), which everyone mispronounces so I don’t use it.  How about your given name, do people get it right?”

“Never.”  And they both laughed. 

“You have a little lilt to your voice.”

“You noticed that?”

“Were you born in Ireland?”

“No, but I grew up in Dublin, and went to college there.”

“And now you’re an American.”

“I have a dual citizenship, Irish and American.”  A bell rang.  “I must go.  We will be serving dinner soon.  Can I get you something to drink, wine, a Jack Daniels?”

“I’d love a cup of coffee, cream and sugar.”

“Then coffee it is.”

After the meal was served and cleared away, Siobhan returned.  “So what are you going to do now that you are back in the States?”

“That is the 64,000 dollar question.  I don’t know.”

“How is that possible, I mean, given your job?”

“I’m going to take a sabbatical from work for a while.”  Seeing the puzzled look on her face, “I’m leaving the company.”

“It may seem impertinent, but can you afford to do that with a wife and four children?”

He wanted to say, I can’t afford not to, but said only, “I can for a little while.”

“But what will you do, I mean, travel, garden, paint, write, go back to school, what?”

He showed her the two books he was reading.  “I’ll read.  I might write.  I’ll play tennis, and I suppose vegetate.”

“You don’t look like the type to vegetate, the tennis I can imagine, but writing, have you ever published?”

“Yes, in South Africa, a company book.”

She left him again, and served her customers with desserts, aperitifs, soft drinks, wine and whiskey, but Devlin, only with coffee.  “You drink a lot of coffee, but you eat like a bird.  Are you in training for something like the marathon?”

“No, hardly, I’ve never developed an interest in stimulants other than coffee."

“You’re disciplined!”

“Some might call me robotic.”  He smiled broadly.

“You have a nice smile.  You should smile more often.”

“Thank you,” Devlin said, “but it doesn’t match your smile.”

She smiled broadly, “It’s part of the gig.”  They both laughed.

She left him again and didn’t come back until shortly before the plane was ready to land. 

“Where are you staying?” she asked.

“At the Palmer House.”

“I have a flat downtown not far from there.  Here is my number.  Give me a call if you’d like to talk some more and have a cup of coffee.  I make a special brew.”  Then she went forward and strapped herself in for the landing.

Devlin took her number with no intentions of calling.  She had no idea what baggage he carried.  How could he tell her he would like to just roll up and disappear?  If he had learned anything in his short life, it was that everyone lives in quiet desperation.  Did he want to complicate her life?  No way! 

The same persistent deceits, the same brilliant breakthroughs go on in perpetuity.  Power leads to betrayal at the personal level as well as at the corporate level.  The evil that stood before him was a puzzling variable. He was coming back to America, which amounted stepping into the future, disarmed, disadvantaged, speechless, and betrayed. It was as if his whole life had been fought against the wrong enemy.  He had been living in a world in which the right people always lose, and the wrong people always win.  He still had to face Polychem’s corporate piranha tomorrow.  He didn’t need hell tonight.  It was already going on midnight when he reached his room.  No, Siobhan doesn’t need a dose of me.  It would be worse than a sexually transmitted disease.

After he got out of the shower, and was in his pajamas, the phone rang.  “Devlin, this is Siobhan.”

“Hi, I was meaning to call you,” he lied, “we’ll have to get together sometime soon.’

“How about now?”

“Now?”

“Yes.”

“But I’m in my pajamas.”

“That’s okay.  I’m downstairs in the lobby.  I brought you my special brewed coffee with me.  Can I come up?”

Downtown Chicago, Friday June 13, 1969 – Late Evening


Father Anthony Dressler had listened to this young man for more than two hours, and was tempted to ask what happened with Siobhan Murphy, but was too shattered by this misplaced Marquis de Sade with the open face and shameless conscience to descend into that amoral abyss.  He wondered if St. Augustine was like this young man before his conversion.  Women seemed to be attracted to him like iron filings to a magnet.  All he could offer was, “You are a troubled young man, my son.”

“Yes, Father, you said that before.”

“It seems you have lost your faith in God, in Catholicism, and in the Church.”

“Is that how you would summarize my story?” Devlin asked trying to hide his annoyance. 

How often had he encountered that bromide to his misery?  That explanation only suspended the natural order of life.   Pull away the curtain of confusion and the natural order would be restored, ticking away, clockwise and preordained.  But to him there seemed to be no normal state of things.  Life was a muddle and God, Catholicism and the Church were part of the muddle.

“In broad terms, my son, yes I would.”

“Well, then I’m disappointed.  Corporate speak seems to be the preferable language in your world as in mine.  If there is a God, and I believe there is, we must amuse Him or Her.  I don’t think God is too concerned about Catholicism or the Church.  The natural order of things is not about a church or a religion.  It is about us the living.  We exist and are supported by our spirituality.  We don’t exist for a church or a religion.  Somehow that has gotten lost in Corporate speak.   

“My sense is that the church fails to understand this.  When I went to South Africa, God and the church were thought by me to be one.  Now, the church doesn’t make sense to me, as it seems more interested in its survival than its mission. 

“The God I have seen in my travels has many faces.  No epistemology or eschatology is province of a single church or religion.  Given this set of circumstances, are we meant to submit to the church as the lone infallible authority to what constitutes the nature of the human condition?  If so, I find that bizarre.”

The young man’s views, the priest noted, bordered on apostasy, but there is a kind of integrity about him.  He’s put off by paradox.  For most people, there are a dozen reasons for doing nothing.  He appears to be made the other way around.  Apparently, there is only one reason for doing anything and that is because it is right.  It also seems apparent that no certainties guide him, only misgivings.  He lives in the mist where there are few distinctions, or where there is everything and nothing at all.  The priest decided it was best he change the subject.  “What will you do now that you have left your employment?”

“I am heading for the land of Ponce de Leon.  It is called Florida, not to look for my lost youth but to find a place to lose it.”  Then he looked at the priest seriously.  “I thank you, Father, for your patience, and for listening to me.  I will carry your kindness forward as a gift that shows the best face of the Roman Catholic Church.  By listening to me, allowing me to tell you my story without judging me, at least not verbally, Father, you have renewed my spirit enough to go forward.”

“But, my son, nothing has been resolved.  Yes, I have listened to you, but you carry a burden that cannot be ignored.”

“Father, it is no greater than your own.  This is 1969.  How would you describe America at this moment in the wake of its recent history?”

“My son, I think you are avoiding the issue.  I don’t think you can look at problems in general and find personal resolution.”

“You see them separate, Father?” Devlin asked.  “I see the general and specific part of the same thing.”

“Well, of course, they are connected, but clearly, you cannot see them as the same,” the priest insisted.

A hundred twisted threads were running through Devlin’s mind.  “Fourteen months ago, Father, prior to South Africa, I would have agreed with you because that is how I had been programmed.  In South Africa,

"I saw how powerful a system could be in repressing a people, and how that people would take out their anger on each other.  Ninety percent of Bantu murders are by other Bantus, not by police or any other group. 

“A colonial culture of privilege is more profoundly decadent than anything I have ever experienced or read about in literature.  Being exposed to this decadence, Father, eventually gets under your skin, and then finds its way to the very marrow of your being, silently, until you are a puppet without a will.  What would shame you in another life, Father, becomes normal fare. 

“You see, Father, that is my problem.  I suffer from a condition you have not experienced therefore cannot understand.  You did listen to my story, but I fear without appreciating the operational word.”  The priest moved to speak. 

“No, no, Father, hear me out.  I was in South Africa.  Now South Africa is in me.  As I influenced the country in my work, South Africa has changed me, and I suspect, for the rest of my life.”

“You’re speaking again of apartheid, am I correct?”

“Apartheid is only part of that image, Father.  The operational word is trust.  I have lost trust in the system, in my culture, and therefore in myself.  Stated another way, my trust has been shattered by the failure of my anchors to support me in my drowning confusion.”

“What anchors?”

“My beliefs and values have been challenged and they have disintegrated in my hands.”

“This has happened to you?”

“Yes, Father, precisely so.  That is what I’ve been trying to say.  A system imposes its culture on you.  This predisposes you to trust that culture to be real and supportive.  When it is not, you are shocked awake, and in my case, taken for a ride on the wild side ultimately collapsing into boredom as nothing makes any sense to you anymore.” 

The priest moved to get up.  “Before you go, Father, however disturbed you think I am, how much you believe me to be unhinged, I have attempted to look at my dark side with open eyes, can the church say the same?”

“Yes, my son, I think it can.”

“Then explain to me why the Roman Catholic Church in the 1940s ignored the massive extermination of Jews in Europe, especially in Germany and Poland.  I’m familiar with the rationale of Pope Pius XII, who was the Supreme Pontiff at the time.  I’m not faulting the pope or the church but trying to understand the church’s motivation.  I experienced the same problem with my church in South Africa, Father, when it was clear the church’s policy was that of non-interference with Afrikaner apartheid.  The church makes no sense to me when it is not a voice for moral authority.”

“I don’t see your point.”

“I think you do.  Scratch the lofty idealism of the church, and underneath you discover an anti-Semitic institution predisposed to believe, as Tolstoy did, that the flaw in Christianity, and therefore the tragedy of Western man, comes from the racial incompatibility between Christ, who he claimed was not a Jew, and the rationale that since the Jews were killers of Christ, let them burn.  If this was not the commission of the church, it was surely its omission as nothing of any significance was done to prevent the Holocaust.

“Now a generation after WWII, the Afrikaner government gives the Roman Catholic Church a free pass in the richest country in Africa as long as the church doesn’t upset the ethnic and cultural balance.  I had the temerity to ask my pastor why there were no African priests in South Africa.  You would have thought I had sworn in church.

“Diplomats use the word ‘rapprochement’ to establish cordial relations with the state whatever its practices.  That you see, Father, is my problem.  I leave you with that, my final thoughts.”  He started to leave the confessional.

“Don’t you want to know your penance?”

“Father, life is my penance.”

With that, Devlin left the confessional and the church, walked out into the clamor and cacophony of Michigan Avenue in downtown Chicago, looking for the refuge of a good bookstore.  He wondered if Brentano’s was opened at this late hour.

Devlin may be out of Africa, but now he was entering limbo, not the purgatory of the afterlife, but the real world of chaos in his fading youth and equally fading idealism, no longer employed while returning to a collapsing marriage with an equally collapsing American economy of runaway inflation and unemployment.  Meanwhile, his four children were going speedily through puberty without the guidance of a father who was about to retreat into Nowhere Land as Nowhere Man

George Orwell in “Nineteen Eighty-Four” and Aldous Huxley in “Brave New World” wrote about his plight as fiction, but Devlin was entering that dystopian world as his reality.  One of the blessings of life is its uncertainty and Devlin knew a lot about uncertainty and was destined to learn much more in the future.    

*     *     *



Wednesday, October 23, 2019

The Peripatetic Philosopher discusses FREE WILL & INDIVIDUALISM


THAT ELUSIVE FREE WILL

&

OUR NOTABLE RETREAT FROM INDIVIDUALISM

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© October 23, 2019


We criticize all society when people are passive.

Yevgeny Yevtushenko, The Face Behind the Face (1987)


AUTHOR CHARLES D. HAYES writes:

For several days I’ve been thinking about The Meritocracy Trap: How America’s Foundational Myth Feeds Inequality, Dismantles the Middle Class, and Devours the Elite, by Yale Law Professor Daniel Markovits. The book is just a different way of looking at an old problem. For me, it’s like perspective on steroids.

Markovits offers the very case that his subtitle suggests. I find his arguments mostly compelling and I take my change in perspective as evidence of how lethargic my conventional thinking can become over time. For example, no one can be against merit, merit is like sunshine, but in time the brightness can obscure the fact that merit has been overwritten and oversold having become the opposite of what was intended, as the rungs on the ladder of economic success are becoming fewer and much farther between.

Markovits argues that elite education is so much more capable of giving children of the rich a decisive economic advantage that in effect students from average public schools cannot compete, not to mention children from inner cities and rural communities. And even the intellectually gifted lack the connections to break the social barriers.

On page 268 he writes, “Meritocratic inequality is wrong on account of meritocracy itself—even and indeed especially when fully realized—and the concept of merit is the taproot of the wrong. What is conventionally called merit is actually an ideological conceit, constructed to launder a fundamentally unjust allocation of advantage. Meritocracy is merely the most recent instance of the iron law of oligarchy.”
Years ago, the focus was on the idle rich, these days they have been replaced by the working rich whom Markovits calls superordinate workers. These people have been subject to education and training from birth that is far superior to what is offered by public schooling and in many cases, it includes graduate school and many years of advanced schooling.

Page 26, “The elite’s massive investments in education succeed. The academic gap between rich and poor students now exceeds the gap between white and black students in 1954, the year in which the Supreme Court decided Brown v. Education. Economic inequality today produces greater educational inequality than American apartheid once did.”

The competition though for the number of jobs with stratospheric compensation is fierce as Markovits writes, “Meritocracy traps elites in an all-encompassing, never-ending struggle. Every colleague is a competitor. At every stage, the alternative to victory is elimination.” P35. I have friends facing this reality.

In effect, the working rich have become analogous to their own version of human capital in the flesh, stalked incessantly by the threat of being replaced by automation or someone with greater expertise. Now I have only noted a little of the arguments in this book. Digital automation is ratcheting up the pressure on rich and poor alike. We are in my view metaphorically at low tide in an algorithmically oriented future and high tide changes are coming.

My generation is going to be toast soon, most of us aren’t going to live to see the decimation of employment that’s going to leave an egregiously hollow middle class with respect to “good paying jobs,” but possible economic catastrophe aside that may change this—this unemployment reality is inevitable. No doubt there is still going to be lots of things that need to be done, the trick is being adequately compensated for doing them when one is simply a sidekick assistant to an app.

To compensate for what’s to come, we need a real makeover, a little bit of traditional tweaking is not going to cut it. The notion that we can’t really afford a just society is the con of the century. We can’t afford a deficit in the stratosphere so the superrich can have tax cuts either, but that’s what we’ve got.

I’ve seen several instances lately by both liberals and conservatives of characterizing Elizabeth Warren as being “uber-left.” When I consider what Warren describes as her political agenda, as difficult as it will be to achieve, what comes to mind is something closely akin to a just society. Assuming a just society is uber-left, in my view, is evidence that one has been uber-influenced by too much wingnut Kool-Aid disguised as meritocracy. That we are so far removed from a truly just society, is precisely why we wound up with the political angst that caused so many disillusioned people to take a chance on the orange imbecile in 2016.

If we retake the White House and the Senate and keep the House in 2020 and we don’t make profound economic changes, that dramatically increase our ability to cope with the oncoming effects of the digital technological tide of evolving algorithms , then 2024, or 2028 will likely be a repeat of 2016.

The stress on rich and poor alike is going to increase exponentially and we desperately need to acknowledge that our economic system is not more important, than the need for having an economic system in the first place. In other words, if we can’t agree to treat our citizens as ends in themselves, and not simply as a means to an end, it may actually be the end.

Politically, what I fear most is a clamoring for moderation, which results in a few feeble economic tweaks—as the mediocrity and coming up short of the goals that’s sure to follow does too little too late to address our growing inequality, except to increase the number of people wearing MAGA hats. With the worst economic inequality since the 1920s, we are too far out of kilter to expect that a few moderate changes are going to address the existential social threats, positioned like an iceberg dead ahead, if we don’t right the ship of state. Thoughts?

Charles D. Hayes


http://amazon.com/author/charlesdhayes


http://www.autodidactic.com/


http://www.septemberuniversity.org/


http://self-university.blogspot.com/


http://septemberuniversity.blogspot.com/


MY RESPONSE:

I read with interest these words of yours and know you believe them.

What happen to American individualism; to free will?

What happened is that they no longer exist. Oh, I hear background noise proclaiming that there is no such thing as “free will!”

Then what was going on when I resigned from Nalco Chemical Company in my mid-30s in the midst of a sparkling executive career with a wife and four pre-teen age children to support?

I write in my semi-autobiographical novel, DEVLIN, that the corporation controlled me and that the Roman Catholic Church owned me. I walked away from them both. The novel ends with Devlin leaving the church’s confessional with the priest asking:

“Don’t you want to know your penance?”

“Father, life is my penance.”

With that, Devlin left the confessional and the church, walked out into the clamorous cacophony of Michigan Avenue in downtown Chicago, looking for refuge in a good bookstore. He wondered if Brentano’s was opened at this late hour.

Devlin may have been out of South Africa, but now he was entering limbo, not the purgatory of the afterlife, but the real world of chaos in his fading youth and equally fading idealism, no longer employed while returning to the United States in a collapsing marriage and into an equally collapsing American economy of runaway inflation and unemployment. Meanwhile, his four children were going speedily through puberty without the guidance of a father who was about to retreat into Nowhere Land as Nowhere Man.

George Orwell in “Nineteen Eighty-Four” and Aldous Huxley in “Brave New World” wrote about his plight as fiction, but Devlin was entering that dystopia world as his reality. One of the blessings of life is its uncertainty and Devlin knew a lot about uncertainty and was destined to learn much more in the future.

* * *

Markovits writes about the collapse of “the middle class” while “devouring the elite.” That is precious. Since The Great Depression, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt has established a welfare state national economy, and since WWII, Corporate America’s economy has enjoyed that same welfare status. Alas, the venerated “middle class” of which Markovits refers, does not exist. It is a mythology, but HYPE (Harvard, Yale, and Princeton Elite) does exist, managing always to take care of their own.

Professor Markowits apparently sees (I have not read his book) meritocracy (if his long title is any indication) falling into the hand of the precious few. Well, as I point out in my writing, since the 17th century, the distribution of wealth and privilege, translated “clout,” has not changed appreciably in these United States.

Moreover, as I have alluded to in a series of books on the burgeoning professional class, it is afraid of freedom; afraid of failure; afraid of not belonging; afraid of accountability. It wants the perks, the privileges and the status of clout without the messy concomitant responsibilities. It wants its cake and to be able to eat it, too.

There is a section in Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s novel, “The Brother Karamazov” (1880), which on a totally different theme seems however quite apropos. Brother Ivan wants to recite a prose poem he has concocted to his brother Alyosha. It bears the title, “The Grand Inquisitor.” Ivan is a rationalist and atheist disaffected from both heaven and earth. Today, he might pass for an existentialist who is totally disgusted with life. Alyosha, on the other hand, embodies goodness, purpose and good with simple uncomplicated Christian faith.

The scene is Seville at the height of the Spanish Inquisition, on the day after an auto-da-fé in which 100 heretics have been burned. Christ appears. He is immediately recognized by everyone. The people fall to their knees and worship him. He brings a little girl back to life, and cures an old man of his blindness. Christ is no phantom or illusion. The old Cardinal Inquisitor appears. He too recognizes the Christ and has him arrested and imprisoned to face an auto-da-fé the next day.

That night the Grand Inquisitor goes to Christ’s cell, and berates him for what he has done, not only for reappearing but for what he has done to Man. Throughout the rebuking, while Christ remains silent, the Inquisitor charges Christ with making Man afraid of freedom:

No science will give them bread as long as they remain free. In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet, and say to us, “Make us your slaves, but feed us” They will understand themselves, at last, that freedom and bread enough for all are inconceivable together, but never, never will they be able to share between them! They will be convinced, too, that they can never be free, for they are weak, vicious, worthless, and rebellious. Thou didst promise them the bread of Heaven, but, I repeat again, can it compare with earthly bread in the eyes of the weak, ever sinful and ignoble race of Man?

Read Book V of “The Brothers Karamazov” and draw your own conclusions. Christianity, specifically, Roman Catholicism and its autocratic style and governance is often a theme of Dostoyevsky’s with a particular animus towards Jesuits. Where the Russian novelist’s disposition registers with me is the current passivity of the professional class of workers who display an equivalent fear of freedom expressed by the Grand Inquisitor. Granted this is a rhetorical exercise by Dostoyevsky, but with relevance beyond the hypothetical.

* * *

Being reared in an Irish Roman Catholic family, I know a lot about passivity. I was told by relatives and family friends that the largest public high school in my area would not play me in basketball, “Because you are a Catholic boy,” yet I won three major letters and went to the State Regional Tournament as a freshman with the varsity team. I was told by my high school and university counselors that I would go nowhere in the business community with my arrogant personality, yet I rose to corporate executive status with two Fortune 500 companies with my land grant university education and proprietary ways.

Since a boy, I knew teachers and coaches, managers and executives who were motivated primarily by self-interest and looked to those who could realize that advantage for them. In both instances where I rose to executive status, I was threatened with being fired, given marginal accounts to service and to look for other employment after only two months on the job. In the other instance, I was told if I didn’t find a receptive clientele in a 4,000 personnel high-tech facility within six weeks I was toast.

Seeing it would make little difference, I was allowed to call on major competitive accounts. I was an R&D chemist with a new company with no training in sales. Yet within that first six weeks period, I sold the largest account in the district in many years by telling the plant superintendent I was there to “save his job.”

In the second occasion, the troops from hourly workers to engineers and program managers of this hi-tech facility soon discovered that I was a listener and not a teller; a learner and not a knower, and there to serve them, not act as a management ploy (all of this is covered in my books).

Finally, Professor Markovits and I see this problem from opposite ends of the telescope. Where he sees crisis, I see the wisdom of insecurity; where he sees classical disruption, I see another interaction of transition and transformation (again, I write about in my books). Indeed, when we see ourselves in the cross hairs with no escape, it is all about “us” and not at all about “them.” What follows is a segment of an essay on my blog.

No One Promises You a Living, No One Owes You a Job! 

(https://peripateticphilosopher.blogspot.com – from Job Security in an Uncertain World – June 16, 2014)

In an uncertain world, where job security is vital to our self-interests, we often do all the wrong things to put ourselves back together again. Instead, we panic or become traumatized when made redundant; when our place of work closes; when the skills we have that once were in demand are no longer; when we are asked to take a 10, 20 or 30 percent cut in wages and benefits for the company’s survival and are barely making it on our current income. How could this happen to us when we’ve done nothing wrong? Turns out we’ve done a lot wrong, starting with waiting for someone to rescue us from our predicament and from ourselves.

Author Alan W. Watts sees us in such circumstances consumed with the Law of Anxiety looking at nature backwards:

"When we try to stay on the surface of the water, we sink; but when we try to sink we float; likewise, when we try desperately to save our job, we lose it." 

Insecurity, Watts maintains, is the result of trying to be secure in a topsy-turvy world in which the normal order of things seems to be completely out of order. Everything is the reverse of common sense turned inside out and upside down. Suddenly, circumstances have forced us to be in charge of our lives and no one has prepared us for that ordeal, leastwise ourselves.

We think we live in a time of unusual insecurity. This is not the case at all. In the past hundred years, or throughout the past twentieth century, long established traditions have broken down continuously: the traditional family, social life, government, economic order, religious beliefs, values, ethics, and most notable of all, morality.

We have seen society stagger out of the Industrial Age only to be caught in a breathless dance in the Information Age, as manufacturing assembly lines have become a shadow of their former status. This watershed moment of the early 20th century was the backbone of the spirited working middle class, now replaced in the 21st century by quick minds and fingers on computer keyboards and automation all but obliterating the blue-collar working class.

There is no longer certainty. Actually, certainty has never existed. It is a myth perpetuated by a society deep in denial. Institutions deny reality by failing to pay attention stubbornly plowing ahead with antiquated grammar, high school and college curriculum; workers deny reality by failing to learn new skills; and companies deny reality by failing to press for change as the metamorphosis of the workforce has changed from blue-collar to college trained white collar.

Meanwhile, schools and universities continued to teach as if locked in 1945 nostalgia, even as private and public workplaces appear colorblind to the changing color of workers’ collars. If blame is the game, there is more than enough to go around, but that doesn’t get us off the dime.

For far too long the majority have been willing to put up with doing jobs that were boring and inconsequential, content to seek relief from tedium with periodic respites of drinking and partying, or going on shopping sprees with reckless abandon. Saving for a rainy day was not part of their DNA as the weather ahead was full of sunshine and promise with no dark clouds. Neither workers nor employers were looking ahead. It wasn’t anybody’s job!

We often refer to assembly line blue-collar working jobs as boring. Nothing can compare to the boredom of managers and administrators who spend 50 to 75 percent of their working day in inconsequential meetings. These meetings take away from meaningful work, and consistently have no purpose other than they are scheduled. Meeting for meeting’s sake is a corporate disease that has been institutionalized to produce a report that few are likely to read.

A survey of a monthly sales report went out to affiliates and manufacturing facilities in 13 countries involving some 14,000 employees. When asked, first, if they were aware of the report, second, if they had read it, and third, if it was useful, most confessed they didn’t even know the report existed. Yet, several people spent a good deal of time each month preparing it. Further inquiries found that the report was redundant as all the information was accessible on a daily basis electronically to these same operations.

Sad as this is, nothing is more egregious than performance appraisal meetings. These are designed to bring managers and workers together to assess performance and create a developmental roadmap for workers to build on their assets and to manage their liabilities. Any organization has 15 percent hard chargers, who manage themselves, 70 percent followers who are management dependent, and 15 percent who are foot draggers, or essentially beyond salvation.

In this one instance with which I am familiar, some 4,000 professional workers and 350 managers dedicated several hundred hours to the semi-annual performance appraisal process. Six workers were found to be declining in rating, and four were designated to need improvement. All others received automatic merit increases.

Given the normal bell curve breakdown of the working population, at least some 600, or 15 percent of the workforce should have been confronted with poor performance and treated accordingly. This cavalier disregard for the obvious is the endemic disease of the Culture of Comfort, which results in complacency in a company which can ultimately derail a company and eventually lead to economic implosion in the process.

Performance Appraisal did these workers no favors. That was 2005 and the company is only a shadow of its former self today. Hundreds of these workers, once well paid and comfortably employed in ostensibly lifetime employment jobs, are now out of work. Unfortunate as this is, no company promises workers a living or owes workers a job. That is socialism, and we know how that has worked on a grand scale.

In an ideal world, workers, engineers, administrators and managers would acknowledge the facts of the situation, and take charge. Unfortunately, today, they have little incentive to do so. Poor as they might perform, they choose to believe they have job security and that their income is not in jeopardy. Incredibly, in many cases, 20 percent of the workforce is doing 80 percent of the productive work, yet they register nary a single protest against the foot draggers. Nobody wants to make waves or be labeled a snitch when the tsunami has not yet hit the shore.

Alas, we don’t live in an ideal world. Workers have come to be dependent on the company to do for them what they should best do for themselves. When the company fails, workers derive satisfaction accusing the company of failing in its function, unwilling to see their tacit complicity in the act. It has amazed me when a company is struggling and needs the full support and cooperation of its workers so often they call in sick, or go on strike literally cutting off the hand that feeds them.

In the 1950s, after World War II, many General Motors’ blue-collar workers earned as much as practicing physicians in the medical field. I was often a guest in these Detroit workers’ homes, and played baseball with their kids during my summer visits to my uncle’s home who was a professor at the University of Detroit. In many households, both parents worked for GM, Ford or Chrysler, and spent as much as they made. It was evident in their fine brick homes with new automobiles in their driveways or garages. Their children expected to follow being employed by the “Big Three” automakers right out of high school with no break in the continuum.

Then came the late 1960s. , The Rising Sun of Japam, Inc.  entered the auto market and cut deeply into these automakers’ customer base and profits, producing better, cheaper and smaller automobiles.

Tom Brokaw hosted an NBC television program in 1980 with the program’s crying complaint, “Japan Can! Why Can’t We?” Japan was using American technology that American manufacturers scoffed at as too costly and not necessary. What was the technology? It was statistical quality control with production workers operating in decision-making teams, identifying and solving chronic work related manufacturing problems.


Detroit’s economic hemorrhaging forty years later has still not stopped despite using these new quality control tools. Little note was made of the differing cultures of Japan and the United States: Japan is a group-think oriented society and the US is individualistic. Moreover, 80-90 percent of Japanese workers in the 1960s were blue-collar while only 20-30 percent of American workers were. The hysteria generated by NBC’s proclamation resulted in cosmetic change while the auto industry’s workers and managers continue to lock step to the mindset of 1945 when the US held all the cards and could do nothing wrong.

Brett Farve, former NFL quarterback for the Green Bay Packer has it about right: “We get paid for practicing all week, playing on Sunday should be for free.” Yet, one of the main complaints of professional athletes is the reverse of this: they hate practice, don’t think they need it, and believe they get paid for Sunday’s performance only.

Many workers in other professions display a similar attitude. They acquire a quality degree that speaks for itself. They think, why do we have to take orders from someone “less qualified” than we are? These professionally trained workers don’t want a job; they want a position, and an automatic pass to the good life and a satisfying career. After all, what other reason would they have for busting their butts in college for four, six or eight years? The reality of experience, of course, proves that they are likely to fall far short of the mark.

Thank you for tolerating my views knowing they probably differ somewhat with your own.

Always with respect, I remain

Jim

Friday, October 18, 2019

The Peripatetic Philosopher profiles a Dutch and an American Youth



SEPARATED IN TWO DIFFERENT WWII WORLDS

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© October 18, 2019

HENRY WROTE

Jim, 

You have done a lot of reading, many times as much as I have. I wonder if your reading ever included the history of Nazi Germany by Shrider. That book strikes me as factual. I also read about Trump before his 2016 campaign really became a contentious issue. Trump, as strikes me is his habit, threatened to sue the author. But the author went ahead because, as he said, his facts were verifiable and hence any lawsuit would fail. Trump refrained from suing.

I could go on, but there is no need for that.

I very much respect you and the example you have set by not following suit with your employer’s South African enterprise. Also as a fantastically prolific writer. But having lived under the Nazis and much of my life ruined by them, I am fearful of what America, and thereby the world is facing.

In friendship,

Henry

MY RESPONSE


Ever since I received this e-mail from you (September 30), I’ve meant to respond.  I think the American author you are referring to is William L. Shirer, and his book is “The Rise & Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany” (1960).  I read it when it first came out, still in my twenties, and was amazed that none of my Nalco colleagues displayed any interest in the book, while it made a deep impression on me.  So much so that over the next several decades I would read much on Adolf Hitler and Nazism as I will soon indicate here. 

Regarding Trump and his accuser, I’m not sure I know what book you’re referring to.  Moreover, I never threatened to sue Nalco Chemical Company.  I simply resigned.  Employment made no sense to me no matter how much money they threw at me.  My masters never understood that logic because it wasn’t logical.  It was personal.

Years later, I ghost wrote a book for a consultant with a contract in five figures.  I completed the contract in less than two months with him holding my last quarter payment.  He had given me a huge box of his papers having found it impossible to turn this material into a book.   

It proved an easy assignment because there were only eight themes to his writing.  While his writing was actually quite horrible, the themes were not.  I’ve often wondered how people who write so poorly can be so successful.  Again, I didn’t sue. 

It happened later with a public institution with newspaper and magazine investigative journalists calling me all hours of the day to get my reaction to the director’s underpaying me several thousands of dollars.  The director was the cause of the organization’s dysfunction which was clearly documented in my assessment. 

A syndicated Tampa Bay Times columnist was brutal to this director in his columns.  So brutal that I never read his columns again.  But my reason for not giving these reporters a story was personal.  I didn’t want to get the person who hired me in trouble.

IT CAN HAPPEN HERE

To put our very different experiences as children in perspective, yours from Holland and mine from Middle America, I might mention while in high school, trolling through the Clinton County (Iowa) Library, I came across “It Can’t Happen Here!” (1935) by the 1930 Nobel Laureate for Literature, Sinclair Lewis (1885 – 1951).

The book, published in the heyday of the rise of Hitler’s fascism in Germany, describes the fictitious rise of “Buzz” Windrip who is elected President of the United States, promising drastic economic and social reforms while promoting patriotism and traditional values. 

After his election, however, Windrip takes complete control of the government and imposes totalitarian rule in the same manner as Hitler did in Germany and Mussolini in Italy. 

Reviewers of the book, compared the fascist rise of these two European dictators in Europe to the 1934 socialistic presidential campaign of Louisiana politician Huey Long whose slogan was “Share Our Wealth.”  Today, at the opposite end of the political spectrum no doubt Donald Trump would be the target of this comparison if you go by the rhetoric.  Incidentally, Huey Long was assassinated in 1935, a year before the presidential election.   

THE GERM OF AN IDEA OR AN OBSESSION?

There is no clear logic to explain this, but over the last sixty years I have been reading about those WWII years, especially regarding Hitler and Nazi Germany and that interface with Roman Catholicism and the Vatican.  This has been an attempt to understand the time of my youth, Hitler, the Holocaust, totalitarianism, the Catholic Church, and why the Jews were the target of the “Final Solution.”  Jews have always been the curve setters in college, and the ablest people in my experience.  

My mother once said to me, “Jimmy, if we weren’t Catholic, I preferred we be Jewish because they have a drive for excellence.”  She was always about excellence when it came to me.  One day I complained.  “Why all the pressure on me?  Why not some on Jackie (my little brother).”  She took a drag on her constant cigarette with that notable little chuckle of hers, and said, “It’s simply a matter of horsepower.”

In all my reading, I’ve never come close to an answer to my dilemma.  Yet, by the accident of circumstances, I’ve lived and worked extensively in Europe, first for Nalco Chemical Company, and then Honeywell while living in Brussels, visited your Netherlands every month to call on Honeywell subsidiaries.    

In the back of my mind, I’ve thought I might one day write a book on the Sinclair Lewis theme “It Can’t Happen Here,” but alas, that is unlikely.  Still, here are the books I’ve read on this subject in my library, but in no particular order:

Hitler’s Charisma – Kaurence Rees; Hitler’s Pope: The Secret History of Pope Pius XII – John Cornwell; Hitler’s Willing Executioners – David Goldhagen; Unholy Trinity: Vatican, Nazis, Swiss Bank – Mark Aarons/John Loftus; Breaking Faith – John Cornwell; Hitler & The Final Solution – Gerald Fleming;  Hitler & The Vatican – Peter Godman;  Anti-Semitism – Paul Goodman/Edwin Halperin; Siegfried – Harry Mulisch; The Secret Diaries of Hitler’s Doctor – David Irving; Blood & Iron: From Bismarch to Hitler & Von Moltke Family – Otto Friedrich; The Hitler of History – John Lukacs; The Man Who Invented Hitler –David Lewis; The Mind of Adolf Hitler – Walter anger; The Birth of the Nazis – Nigel Jones/Michael Burleigh; Hitler: Study in Tyranny – Alan Bullock; The Hidden Hitler: Explaining Hitler – Ron Rosenblum;  Hitler: Diagnosis of a Destructive Prophet – Fritz Redlich; The Last Days of Hitler – Hugh Trevor-Roper; Third Reich Memories – Albert Speer; Albert Speer: His Battle with Truth – Gitta Sereny; Hitler’s Vienna – Brigitte Haman;  Hitler in Vienna: 1907-1913 -- J. S. Sidney Jones; The Rise & Fall of the Third Reich – William L. Shirer; The Trial of Hitler – David King; The Death of Hitler – Lev Bezymenski; Hitler’s Thirty Days to Power: January 1933 – Henry Ashby Turner, Jr.; The Good Nazi: The Life & Lies of Albert Spear –Dan van der Vat; Hitler & the Holocaust – Robert S. Distich; The Pope’s Jews – Gordon Thomas; Hitler – Joachim C. Fest; The Year That Made Hitler: 1924 – Peter Ross Range.

What I’ve gathered from this is that we are always vulnerable to a demi-god.  The horror for me was remote; for you it was real.  You lived in the crucible of daily terror as a boy with the Nazis in your homeland.  That is still difficult to fathom.    

If you can imagine, my hometown of Clinton, Iowa was in the middle of the United States in the middle of the century and in the middle of the farm belt in a community of 33,000.  It was a working class neighborhood “In the Shadow of the Courthouse” (the title of my 2003 memoir written as a novel). 

There was no television, no mega sports, no big new automobiles or manicured lawns.  There was radio, movies, high school sports, the Clinton Industrial Baseball League where men too young, or too old for military service played for the fun of it.  Clintonians had victory gardens, drove old jalopies, took the bus to work, or rode their bicycles. 

Clinton, situated on the banks of the Mississippi River, was a vibrant industrial town operating 24/7 providing supplies for the war.  We kids were pre-teens during the war years living mainly with two parent families few of whom had gotten beyond grammar school.  But the majority of their sons and daughters would earn college degrees.   

It was also a time when kids created their own play as parents were too busy working or simply too tired to pay them much mind.  Clinton children would never again know such Darwinian freedom, or its accompanying brutality.  They were on their own. 

HENRY AGAIN

Good morning, Jim

About 30 years ago I wrote a story named “Lesson from Leo”:


It so happened that I just read it again and then my thoughts dwelled on what’s happening today - in the US, in European countries, now also in Canada.


Yesterday I came across a story about people scared to express their views out of unadulterated fear. “Treacherous waters.”  Then I thought of the final lines of the U.S.’s anthem.


Compare and contrast.


How can this possibly be rectified?


Nonplussed,


Henry

MY RESPONSE

Your modesty is always a bit overwhelming.  I must get through it each time I read one of your “My-2-cents.”  This was one of the most moving, perhaps because it is my current focus and attention, then again it might simply be because of your prevailing sincerity.  Like Hemingway, so much of the meaning of this essay is subtle and between the words, such as:

“One day, Leo came over to my house to say he was going on vacation, by train through Germany to the East.  My father wished him well and gave him a dime.  I felt envy.  Why did he have all the luck?”    

We know where Leo was going.

THE MYSTICAL ANNE FRANK

We read Anne Frank’s Diary, saw her story in a film, and then visited the Anne Frank House at Prinsengracht 263 in Amsterdam when we lived in Brussels, which is now a museum.  It was here that she lived with her family in the daily terror for two years of one day being discovered by the Nazi Gestapo, which finally did occur.  During this time, Anne Frank dutifully kept her diary without angst but in a spirit of hope riding on her vivid imagination.   Her diary shows that she was in every sense a typical young lady with the dreams and aspirations of youth. 

She is mentioned here because, like Henry’s “My-2-cents,” there is no room for the possibility of defeat from within.  Individualism and “free will,” now under something of a cloud, will eventually surface because human nature as Rousseau has shown is indomitable.    

Following the arrest of the Frank family in October or November 1944. Anne and her sister Margot were transferred from Auschwitz to Bergen-Belsen concentration camp where the two girls died a few weeks later, probably of typhus.  Anne was 15.

Call it Catholic guide if you must, but I’ve never been able to get my mind around Hitler or the Holocaust, despite reading dystopian novels such as Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World,” which I read at sea in the Mediterranean as a corpsman on the flagship of the Sixth Fleet, the USS Salem (CA-139).

I hope readers will open your essay and ponder it along with these remarks.  We are not in a safe place in our culture at the moment.  And it is not a specific ethnic or German problem – a people I’ve always quite admired; nor a religion or theology problem much as religion is a convenient scapegoat to our confusion, but a humanity society problem of civilization.             

Be continuing wise,

Jim






Tuesday, October 15, 2019

The Peripatetic Philosopher says, Oh hum! Now its meritocracy, is it?


  
 Oh hum! Now Its Meritocracy, is it? 

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© October 15, 2019

MY DEAR FRIEND, CHARLES, WRITES

The Markovits book is less political than an astute analysis of what is occurring in today’s workplace. His perspective catches me by surprise, but I think he nails a lot of what is going on. Some have characterized the book as a sociological masterpiece and I’m sympathetic with that view after my first read. I usually cool down and become more skeptical over time when I find a work this interesting, time will tell. But I have first-hand knowledge of what he is talking about with managers feeling that the competition for their jobs is so competitive that they feel they are being stalked by replacements. There is more microscope here than telescope.


MY RESPONSE

Meritocracy – a ruling or influential class of educated or skilled people, or "the relentless advance of the meritocracy."   Google



2019: The Meritocracy Trap (Penguin Press


THE MERITOCRACY TRAP: HOW AMERICA’S FOUNDATIONAL MYTH FEEDS INEQUALITY, DISMANTLES THE MIDDLE CLASS, AND DEVOURS THE ELITE by Daniel Markovits. 

“Meritocracy now constitutes a modern-day aristocracy, one might even say, purpose-built for a world in which the greatest source of wealth is not land or factories but human capital, the free labor of skilled workers.”  Daniel Markovits’s Wikipedia


Sarah Leonard writes in The New Republic (September 5, 2019)

In 1958, sociologist Michael Young wrote a dark satire called The Rise of the Meritocracy. The term “meritocracy” was Young’s own coining, and he chose it to denote a new aristocracy based on expertise and test-taking instead of breeding and titles. In Young’s book, set in 2034, Britain is forced to evolve by international economic competition. The elevation of IQ over birth first serves as a democratizing force championed by socialists, but ultimately results in a rigid caste system. 


The state uses universal testing to identify and elevate meritocrats, leaving most of England’s citizens poor and demoralized, without even a legitimate grievance, since, after all, who could argue that the wise should not rule? Eventually, a populist movement emerges. The story ends in bloody revolt and the assassination of the fictional author before he can review his page proofs. 


This focus on meritocratic elites is apt at a time when those in charge of finance, tech, and politics have been widely discredited and disavowed by the electorate. Markovits’s dissection of elite culture and behavior (obsession with Ivy League credentials, competitive workaholism, exceptional wealth) is precise and unsparing. But perhaps just as revealing are his book’s weaknesses, not least its innocence of the realities of class struggle in the United States today—and of which fights will make society fairer and more equal.


Dear Charles,

Sarah Lawrence has got it right. The “spoiled brat” generation has wealth, prestige, entitlement, but that is not enough. They want it all. And Professor Markovits is telling them they are working too hard and the system is against them. 

Now, how is that possible? When they are the system! The nepotistic system of management is passé.  Small wonder middle management is acting like a bull in a China shop. They are atavistic and management is anachronistic as we know it. 

What would you expect managers  to do or how would you expect them to behave when under seige? 

My sense is that Markovits’s commencement address at Yale was delivered to the choir. These obliging students and their brothers and sisters in industry, commerce, government, education, and politics sit on their IQ’s and wait for a miraculous system to show up to relieve them of the absurdity of their discomfiture. 


Incidentally, the United States has always fed inequality, a kind of survival of the fittest or the best connected. 


I addressed this very issue when invited to Toronto in 2002. This is the introduction to my syllabus: 

The Conference Board of Canada
Toronto, Canada


February 22, 2002


 Intellectual Capital and the Power of People –
The Next Competitive Advantage

Presentation of this Theme
James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© February 22, 2002


“The Power of Organizational Development –
A View from the Efficacy of Practical Experience”


Overview


Novelist Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. once said his wife might have become a good writer, but college writing courses ruined her.  The same might be said about organizational development, or OD.

OD has been promoted to the ranks of a profession, in fact an academic discipline, with a daunting curriculum at several major colleges and universities.  The curriculum depends on behavioral and social sciences, computer science, Aristotelian logic, and the goodness of fit of Socratic sophistry. 

Yet OD is not nearly as much a cognitive science as an intuitive process, where a posteriori or inductive reasoning (particular to the general) is more effective than a priori or deductive reasoning (general to the particular) as broad conclusions are inferred from individual observations.

OD practitioners have become increasingly in vogue as the Machine Age mechanistic organization structure continues to fail to generate the response time and the economies of purpose desired to maintain the rhythm and resonance of competition.  

An assortment of professions from business, management, computer systems, engineering, finance, psychology, even mathematics and physics have attempted to seize control and mastery of the social dynamics of enterprise without notable success.  This failure, in the main, also applies to OD. 

OD practitioners, like these other adventurers, have failed to disengage the dominance of the 80-20 rule from its stranglehold on organization, that is, 80 percent of the productive work in most organizations is still accomplished by 20 percent of the workforce.  In other words, the activities of 80 percent of the workers in any organization are likely to have a cumulative impact on the bottom line of 20 percent.

There are exceptions to this rule, no doubt, and they are often a product of unconscious ODism carried out by astute managers, or through the contracted services of alert OD practitioners.  Whatever the case, OD displays these attributes:

(1)    OD practitioners accept and are comfortable with the fact that the relationship of OD to the client is always that of an inside-outsider. 


(2)    OD practitioners don’t need to produce camera-ready cinematic recommendations, which both entertain and reassure the client, but they do need to produce intellectual and operational challenges when the biases and status quo stance of management are the inertia producing culprits.


(3)    OD practitioners are observers as if filming history.  Their camera zooms in on dolly tracks, and then cuts from close-ups to long shots, and back again, assembling thousands of bits of visual and auditory information into a montage that with spectacular accuracy records the experience and registers the central essence of the organization.  Consequently, social engineering acumen is never enough when it comes to OD.


(4)    OD practitioners are intuitive hunch players, and follow their hunches when others see no sense to their wondering, exploring, and conceptualizing until the flash of insight connects with everything.


(5)    OD practitioners have no vested interest in operations, no ax to grind, no advocacy to protect.  Wherever OD leads them is where they go, and they often don’t know where that is until they get there

(6)    OD practitioners are not guided by logic, chronological schemes, comparing operations with what worked elsewhere.  OD goes forward and backward in time, or steps outside of time (outside the box) as it suits them in pursuit of what is happening and why.  Once this understanding is sensed, the work of OD is essentially over and it is up to operational personnel (meaning management and professionals) to make the most of the new insights.

The director of the CONFERENCE BOARD OF CANADA had read several published pieces of mine on the disappearing managerial class and the reluctance of the professional class to “take charge” and fill the void.  [Those present didn’t want to hear that, so it was a wasted effort on my part.

God! I am tired of sociologists, psychologists, educators and the whole elite system.  “Houston, we have a problem!”  Of course we do!  And it is not a liberal or conservative problem, not a problem that will get anywhere close to a solution by spiking the fear of the underclass, the middle class much less the professional class.  Meritocracy, indeed!     

Nothing changes until and unless those complaining, including the good professor realize that they are part of the problem.

Always be well,

Jim



Sunday, October 13, 2019

The Peripatetic Philosopher looks at today's workforce:




Today’s Workplace from Opposite Ends of the Telescope


James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© October 13, 2019

A Reader Writes:

Jim,

I highly recommend that you read The Meritocracy Trap: How America’s Foundational Myth Feeds Inequality, Dismantles the Middle Class, and Devours the Elite, by Yale Law Professor Daniel Markovits.

My reading of your work very often suggests you are still living in the 70s. I left corporate America in 2011 and I’m also a bit behind in the reality this book explores. Markovits makes a case worthy of much reflection and rethinking that runs counter to your recent thesis.

Charles D. Hayes

http://amazon.com/author/charlesdhayes

http://www.autodidactic.com/

http://www.septemberuniversity.org/

http://self-university.blogspot.com/

http://septemberuniversity.blogspot.com/


My Response:

Charles,

It is always a delight to hear from you although we seem to look at things from opposite ends of the telescope.

My entire career, once I left R&D as a chemist, has been in management and/or consulting both as an outside/inside consultant.

I admit to being a conservative in terms of the complex organization and a liberal in terms of environmental issues, which puts me at loggerheads with those of both persuasions on any given situation.

That said, all the way back to “Confident Selling” (1971) to “Work Without Managers” (1991), “The Worker, Alone!” (1995), and up to and beyond “The Post-Modern Worker Exposed!” (2019), I’ve advocated what professor Markovits is saying, but from the other end of the telescope. Small wonder his thesis is counter to my own.

The problem is not the lack of meritocracy; the problem is professionals are not ready to “take charge” and suffer the glory of victory and the shame of defeat that management has endured for the past 100 plus years.

Management, as is true of the church, has the will but no longer controls the way.

Your reference to my being stuck in the 1970s is interesting. I have been wailing since then about the "spoiled brat" mentality dominating the professional class. Incidentally, the original manuscript title of “Time Out for Sanity” was “Our Chronic Culture Viewed from the 1970s.”

It fascinates me that many of these opinionated academics read such people as me without acknowledgement. When “Work Without Managers” came out, it was reviewed on NPR, featured in Industry Week and The Wall Street Journal magazine, Across the Board, while Fortune magazine blared with a cover story of WORK WITHOUT MANAGERS, but not a word about my effort. I wrote to FORTUNE, but never received a reply.

One day, when I am gone, some historian like Jacques Barzun will redress the oversight, of that I am certain.

Meanwhile, and this is why I have a problem with academics, they can push for change outside the arena but you must be inside the arena to appreciate its dysfunction.

In "The Worker, Alone!" (1995), I advocated professionals "go against the grain" of corpocracy.  It fell on deaf ears. Admirable as academia's intentions, professionals in 2019 remain worriedly apprehensive in the closet of their despair waiting to be rescued. It is unlikely to happen.

Management is not bad. Management has simply run out of gas!

Ever in admiration of your incredible career as a thinker and writer, I remain

Jim