The Curmudgeon Speaks

Commentary on Martin Gurri – Revolt of the public and the crisis of authority in the new millennium

“What we have here is a failure of the relationship between the public and the elites” would be my alternate title for this book. Gurri offers an explanation of the present state of our world (without the pandemic) mostly focused on politics because he claims that this is his personal interest but also relevant to other areas such as science and education. The book was first published a few years ago, but now updated shortly after the 2016 election because I assume the author thought his analysis would offer insights into the rise of Trumpsters, the decline in the acceptance of science, dissatisfaction with education, and related examples of relationships between the public and traditional sources of authority. 

Gurri defines a human hierarchy of a type consisting of the elites, the public, and the people. The public is defined as those individuals interested in a topic (e.g., government). Gurri argues that online social media has created a great change in the relationship among these groups in what used to be a hierarchy. Social media has offered the public multiple sources of information and a platform for discussion and comment such that on any topic there is far too much information to process. I would add cable television and talk radio to this argument as a way to focus on a perspective on an issue. What the overabundance of information encourages is a focus on consumption that makes careful analysis impossible.  Gone are the days of everyone reading an authoritative newspaper or a given news program as a common basis for conversation. 

Elites (government officials, academics, economists, etc.) deal with complex issues and probably know the difficulty of using their knowledge to produce change within this complexity. As an academic, I would explain this to others by noting that nearly every research study published ends with some variant of a request for additional research. To note this is a kind of joke to some, but also a reflection of the limits of carefully controlled research in suggesting generalities that work in other environments. I am making the assumption that other “elites” working in other domains face the same reality. What happens with a public addressing recommendations to what might be described as “informed” trial and error is that it is very easy to find fault when informed recommendations don’t work out. A little knowledge makes criticism quite easy and the mass of criticism when passed on to the general population makes it appear that the qualifications of the elites are useless. Why listen to expertise when everyone has an opinion and it might seem that one opinion is no different from any other?

Gurri speculates that politicians are in this situation and over promise even when they know their insights are only good guesses. This creates a higher level of dissatisfaction because of the higher failure rate and what you get are elections bouncing control back and forth between one party and the other. 

Gurri proposes that the public is far better at destruction than the generation of proposals that are legitimate alternatives. The danger is that a country sink into a nihilistic state focused on pessimism and rejection of any form of expertise.

A couple of other arguments from the book – Gurri had far more to say about Obama than Trump due to the times (the most recent version is after about a year into the Trump Presidency). Gurri claimed that Obama’s expertise was as an organizer and as such was better prepared to criticize the lack of solutions to obvious problems. When his expertise as a leader was shown inadequate (Gurri focuses on the failure of the bailout following the financial crisis Obama inherited), his reaction was to resort to his expertise as a critic. What I think Gurri misses in his analysis is the impossible situation Obama found himself in with the leader of the Senate openly claiming that Obama would be prevented from getting anything done. In this situation, about all you can do is complain.

So much of the support for Trump struck me as illogical. To me (not necessarily Gurri), the support of a public for someone who would seem not to be working in their best interest (health care, increasing income disparity) can only be explained by a burn it all down sentiment (nihilism). 

Gurri does make some attempt to offer suggestions for improvement, but to me they require a willingness to change on the part of the elites (be more honest about the limits of experience/expertise in addressing great complexity) and the public (understand that improvement requires a certain amount of informed trial and error). How do you create such circumstances? No actual recommendations from Gurri. I would suggest this is part of what education is for.

Another review [https://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2019/02/book-review-revolt-of-public-by-martin.html]

Wouldn’t it be nice if political conversations could focus on issues facing the country. Why can’t issues of health care, income inequality, policing, the role of the United States in the world, environmental decline, and even net neutrality be the focus of our discussions. I know attention to these important issues must be deferred. Until the rule of a racist, misogynist, egotist who is unable to appreciate the facts of science and a Senate leader manipulating the political process by unilaterally blocking votes on bills brought forward for consideration can be removed, we have fundamental flaws in leadership degrading our country. First things first.

Having the freedom and resources to travel have been the great advantage of retirement and I suppose to a lesser extent most of our lives. I think you learn so much from escaping your own circumstances and exploring other places and people. I started documenting our experiences in a travel blog beginning in 2016, but I was including posts since I began writing online on these experiences in other blogs. Lately, there just haven’t been the opportunities to write on travel because of the pandemic and related health vulnerabilities. It was our 50th anniversary a week or so ago and we had planned to celebrate with one of those European river tours and also visit a friend at her home. All of this has been shut down for the time being. At our age, it feels like we are losing opportunities.

We bought a pig. Cindy read the Facebook story of a Minnesota hog farmer who was not able to send his pigs to market because of the closing of processing plants. He was going to have to euthanize his animals and just bury the carcasses. He decided to use his Facebook account to sell his animals for $150 and help those purchasing find somewhere to process the animal. After thinking about the situation for a while and seeing if our kids and their families would take some of the meat, we added our name to those wanting to make a purchase. The delay put us well down the list and the farmer had to scour the area for small operations able to butcher his animals and prepare the meat. We finally were able to pick up the 150 pounds of pork yesterday.

I realized that the 130 mile drive to Cadott, WI, was the longest trip we had taken in months and I decided this might be the best opportunity for a Grabe Travels post for some time to come. It had all of the elements of an adventure – unfamiliar territory, uncertainty of circumstances, unique learning opportunities, and pictures of food. 

We spend quite a bit of time in Wisconsin and are familiar with local meat and cheese shops. Cadott was in a different area and the countryside of Wisconsin is beautiful. Nearly wiped out a white tail deer who decided to dart across the road. My finely tuned reflexes and keen ability to spot wildlife saved both the deer and our car. Some of the trip took us through Amish country and we would normally have stopped to have something to eat in another time. Interesting people.

The meat shop was impressive even given our experience with such establishments. One-hundred fifty pounds of pork is a lot. We would not have had the storage capacity and offloading some of the haul to the freezers of our kids. When you purchase an entire animal, you acquire delicacies you tend not purchase in the grocery store. We passed on the heart and the tongue so I am not certain what happened to these sources of protein. Perhaps they were ground into the sausage or brats or were sold to customers interested in these delicacies. Here is a recipe for ham hocks just in case you wonder how you might consume pig knuckles. The ham hock and collard greens slow cooker dish sounds great and I think I may have eaten something like this before. It sounds like the type of thing I now enjoy.

We used three coolers of this size and a couple of smaller coolers to get everything home.

I did promise a food picture. We had bacon and eggs for breakfast. 

Online social media providers (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter) have come under free speech and appropriateness scrutiny recently and have responded in different ways. At issue is the transmission of factually inaccurate content by prominent individuals (e.g., President Trump). Twitter has tagged a few tweets as factually inaccurately setting off a firestorm regarding free speech. Twitter does not block the false claims, it just attaches a label. Facebook has decided not to get involved in the accuracy issue.

I understand that these platforms are in a very difficult situation and could not possibly fact check all posts. The platforms protect themselves by claiming that those adding content must be responsible for the legitimacy of what is posted. This is the platform argument. The publishing argument acknowledges some responsibility for what appears.

Here is an issue I think is important and not acknowledged by Facebook. What I as an individual experience is not what has been posted by those I follow. The algorithms Facebook employs make decisions about what I see and the algorithms are designed to encourage greater attention to Facebook content. By definition, this negates the argument Facebook makes that it is a neutral party. It is suspected that a way to encourage greater attention (more time spent on the site increasing ad views) is through the display of more content intended to generate an emotional response.

In a way, Twitter is more neutral than either YouTube or Facebook because it does not control or recommend what you should see.

Twitter is experimenting with a new feature (Android only) that would ask users to read articles before posting a link. I like the idea and I have offered a similar recommendation for Facebook. With Facebook, I would like to see a feature that requires a personal statement to accompany any post rather than just sharing or adding a meme link.

I am mostly an Apple user so I won’t be able to try the new Twitter feature, but this isn’t the way I use Twitter anyway. I tend to share a link from the source to Twitter. When you share from the source, you have the document open in the first place. The Twitter idea of a request to read is a useful reminder, but there is unlikely a way to actually verify that a posted resource has been read.

The recent jobs report brought a ray of hope. In the midst of a global pandemic, a pandemic-related economic collapse, and then the police killing of George Floyd spurring national and international righteous protests of injustice, it just appeared that employment was improving rather than decreasing. The stock market responded to the jobs report with an 800+ point improvement (DJA). Lost in the enthusiasm was the caution that the improvement failed to include the number of workers on furlough meaning they were not actually drawing an income, but that is not central to the point I want to make.

What is it we look to as variables indicating greatness? Trump seems to have focused on the stock market and now this upturn in the employment data. Even if we limit our focus to economics and not other areas nations might value are we assessing greatness appropriately. For example, employment numbers do not reflect that amount of money earned and whether this income offers a level allowing for adequate food, housing, and health care. For example, we have recently had much attention focused on a $15/hr minimum wage. Reich notes that 40% of working Americans make less than $15. Note that a 5 day, 8 hour week, for 50 weeks results in an annual income of $30,000. 

I have tried to fact check the Reich statement and find the position is fairly close to what I can find elsewhere. Slate reports that 42% make 15 or less so there is additional evidence for this position.

What about the rising stock market as an indicator of greatness? Yes, the stock market has improved since the financial crisis of 2008. However, there is an important issue of how many actually benefit from the market and hence how well the level of the market is a useful indicator of the general situation in the country.

A couple of sources for insight into stock holdings as a useful variable. It appears that a focus on the market ignores the economic plight of many Americans.

… “despite the fact that almost half of all households owned stock shares either directly or indirectly through mutual funds, trusts, or various pension accounts, the richest 10 percent of households controlled 84 percent of the total value of these stocks in 2016.” [https://www.nber.org/papers/w24085]

Gallup reports that 54% own stocks [https://news.gallup.com/poll/211052/stock-ownership-down-among-older-higher-income.aspx]

Finally, there is this reflection on what might seem a disconnect between the present statement of the market and the economy. 

Jim Cramer (Mad Money raises an issue that had occurred to me. The businesses facing the greatest hardships right now are small businesses. Many of them may be unable to survive an extended period of no or very limited income. The long-term consequences may be to shift greater advantages to larger businesses. These businesses are more likely to offer stocks and will benefit from a lower level of competition. Large businesses also use downturns to “right size” using the stress of a downturn to reduce the number of employees. 

Perhaps a useful indicator could be fashioned from a combination of annual wage and employment. What proportion of those over 21 wanting to work are presently employed at an annual income of $45,000.

Don’t ask your black friends about racism, but listen carefully when they share how their experiences differ from your own.

I admit that I might think asking my black friends about racism was a logical thing to do. I admit to doing this when much younger. I had very little, actually no, exposure to black people growing up. This changed in college and in the military. The military changed my life experiences more in this regard than going to college as the people in the military were different from me on more dimensions than the people in an Iowa University. For example, my roommate in AIT (the training for specialization that follows basic training) could not read. I had never met an adult who seemed like a person of functional intelligence who could not read. I read his letters from relatives to him. My drill Sargeant in basic training liked me and made me platoon leader. This was not my experience with other drill sergeants with one inviting me to a fight in the woods. My tendency to smile at people who challenge me in this way is not particularly adaptive, but it is a reaction I cannot seem to control.

Anyway, the Sargeant I was assigned to was fascinated with my university experiences because he wanted to go to college when he left the military. He had already been to Vietnam and was riding out his time and he knew he would now have support he could use to go to college. We talked some about his background, but not racism. Thinking back, I don’t think I thought to bring it up. Later, I became more aware of issues of the time and became more aware of the issues brought to public attention because of inequities in military service and who ended doing what in the military. I remember one particular night on guard duty of some type riding around with a black guy who played football for a small Iowa college. So, we had some commonality in being connected to Iowa at least for the college years. I did ask about his experiences and he was quite open. Now, this was many years ago (50 years or so) and so much has changed since then. I was far more naive at the time and don’t apologize for what was then understandable ignorance.

I don’t ask black friends about racism now. Somehow, I have figured out that there are some things I should know. Still, our conversations do touch on our own day to day lives and despite the commonality in our education and work, there are glimpses of a reality I do not face. I guess the insight for me here has been that the differences are not simply a matter of economic inequities. I tend to think that education and the greater opportunities as a result will solve most problems. I guess not completely.

This brings me to one concrete suggestion. There are things anyone can read or watch that increase awareness. I regularly watch technology-oriented online video content. A panelist on one of these podcasts (Baratunde Thurstone) I have listened to enough that I feel some sense of knowing him. I eventually learned that he wrote about his own experiences and more recently that he had given a TED talk on the same topic.

Baratunde is funny and this may make his reality more approachable for many. I suggest the TED talk (no cost) and then maybe the book.

P.S. – a more recent video from the tech channel with Baratunde.

Robert Reich – Saving capitalism: For the many not the few.

[My one-paragraph summary] Our nation is not engaged in a fight between democracy and socialism, it is engaged in a fight between democracy and oligarchy. There are important differences in the positions of the political parties, but both bear some responsibility for allowing the rules to be manipulated by those with the greatest wealth. Little will change until politicians shape the rules of the economy to benefit all and not the ultra-wealthy. 

I have read several critiques and the negative take on Reich is that he keeps promoting the same old arguments and lacks concrete recommendations for remedies. Not how I read his books at all. Yes, his complaints are consistent across the several books I have read. However, he is quite concrete in explaining what has to change. He explains that it is the rules of the game that are established by politicians to shape the economy and the control of politicians through pressure from the wealthy that is allowed by some of these rules. For example, rules which control political contributions and who are allowed as lobbyists. His suggestions for laws focused on the leadership of publicly held companies, worker unionization, wealth inheritance, the finance of political campaigns, monopolistic practices and related oversight, and several other areas under the control of the rule-makers are quite specific.

Solutions

• Limit inheritance
• Prevent ex-office holders from lobbying
• Get rid of large corporations as source of funding for elections (Citizens United)
• Modify board makeup of board of directors for publicly held companies so that employees of that company are included. Boards reward company execs to limit the focus to profit margin to engorge stock values limiting returns to those who do the work. 
• Limit salaries of company executives so they are not rewarded for focusing on stock buy-packs as a mechanism for raising stock values 

Since, I have already generated a post based on an earlier book, I thought I would focus this effort on some enlightening statistics. For those wanting to check my source for any given claim, I would suggest you purchase the Reich book as all claims are carefully referenced. These statistics focus on the concentration of wealth and the role of great wealth in political influence.

The total wealth of the richest .1% of American households (160,000 people) rose from less than <10% to more than 20% of the total wealth of the country since 1980. The bottom half owns 1.3% of the wealth.

Since 1980, the wealth of the richest 1% has doubled while the earnings of the bottom 90% remained roughly stagnant. CEO pay increased by 940% while worker pay increased 12%. 

So much has been made of setting the minimum wage to $15 an hour. Forty percent of American workers made less than this amount. 

Sixty % of household wealth is inherited rather than earned.

CEOs are increasingly pressured to maximize stock valuations at the expense of funds spent on employees. Pressure can be brought by hostile takeovers. In the 1970s there were 13 takeovers of companies valued at a billion or more. During the decade of the 1980s entrepreneurs attempted more than 2000 leveraged buyouts. Who benefits from the pressure to maximize stock valuations. The top 10% of citizens by wealth own 80% of the stock.

The richest .01% (about 25,000) of the population made 40% of contributions to campaigns. In 1980, this same percentage of the rich made 15% of contributions. 

In 1970, approximately 3% of politicians became lobbyists when leaving office. This figure is now about 40%.

About 6.4% of American  workers are unionized. The values for other countries are 25% United Kingdom, 26% Canada, 37% Italy, and 67% Sweden.

Educators sometimes use an instructional tactic they describe as think, pair, share. The idea is to get everyone to think about a topic, describe it to a partner, and after discussion share the combination of insights with everyone. The benefits of this approach are individual engagement and processing and eventually global awareness.

Collect, gather, share is my disease-based model of these same core elements. This is also what schools enable. Each student goes into the community and collects germs, viruses, etc and then returns to a school to share what they have collected with everyone else. Like the model for assuring everyone is involved and influenced in terms of learning it works the same way with illness. Collect and share with each other and then back to the environment outside of school.

I think we have to think very carefully about opening up schools and what the consequences will likely be. We can’t delay education indefinitely as students begin to lose what they have learned making students advancing more difficult. What students learn in school is essential and serves multiple functions in society – shared culture and values, lifelong skills (reading, writing, basic math, information location, self-guided learning, etc.) and vocational exploration. Realistically, education also involves caring for children. In many cases, this care and supervision allows parents to be employed. In some cases, this care provides things some children don’t always receive at home – nutrition, safety, supervision.

We are expecting the educational system to do a lot and I hope our expectations are not unrealistic. Schools everywhere are cutting back in personnel and resources at a time when demands for attention, supervision, and safety are increasing. All of this on top of the educational expectations. At some point doing more with less is just not realistic. Simple observation should indicate that students struggle with the expectations of personal safety. I walk though a local park daily and I see adolescents playing basketball and hanging out around the courts. Taking the requirements for safe interaction seriously simply does not work for those who believe they are impervious to risk and who are too impulsive to maintain what simply isn’t cool under peer pressure. Do we also assume that your average second-grader understands disease transmission and related safety protocols? What will they touch in the lunch room and the rest room? Will they also remain in their assigned desk and not touch other things in the room?

I don’t see a model yet for face to face instruction. What I can imagine would require a reduction in how frequently students spend time in school to allow space in classrooms, buses, and lunchrooms. Those rotating through face to face experiences would also be required to interact with educators and with each other online at other times. This might work, but it would require more educators. I would assume additional personal would be required to clean surfaces more frequently – I mean constantly in lunch rooms, classrooms, and other settings that students inhabit. This is what restaurants must do and it would seem this would be even more important with younger children. What I imagine seems impractical without additional and not fewer resources.

I started thinking about this yesterday after listening to Rand Paul’s frustration with Anthony Fauci’s go slow position on opening the economy and schools. Paul’s concerns with the lagging economy and the multiple roles face to face education play seems a simple matter of stating the obvious. What is not obvious is how the real challenges will be addressed.

I am not particularly interested in history and I don’t read many books on the history of much of anything but the history of digital technology. I am a fan of Jon Meachum and I follow what he has to say.

Meachum has generated a 5 part podcast series called Hope, through history. It is offered to bolster Americans in this time of threat. It is well worth your time as Meachum is a great storyteller and the content is embellished with sound from the people and events described.

Episode one tells the story of Franklin Roosevelt and the Great Depression. Roosevelt grew up wealthy. Meachum suggests his ability to convey compassion and his tenacity were a function of his struggle with polio and continued efforts to find a way to walk. Roosevelt was a strong leader and unlike his predecessor (Hoover), he was able to instill hope in people through his capacity for empathy.