For The Love Of Animals

I read this incredible story in the Jerusalem Post about Denmark prohibiting Shechita (the Jewish kosher way to slaughter animals for food). 

What is amazing about this is:

1) Shechita is known as one of the most humane ways to slaughter animals for food. It involves a single rapid uninterrupted stroke across the throat with a super sharp knife. One of the reasons this method is used is precisely so that the animal does not feel any pain. This is unlike other common practices for slaughtering animals which include clubbing, electrifying, shooting, suffocation, and more. 

2) Denmark while prohibiting Shechita, permits bestiality/Zoophilia (human sex with animals). So bestiality, a very pagan-like practice, is legal in Denmark, even though it is prohibited under the penalty of death (for the person and the animal) in the Bible. 

So animal rape is okay in Denmark. And Judeo Christian laws and beliefs are not, especially when they actually protect the animals. Uh, something is rotten in the barn here. Or put another way:

Animals in the bedroom--Oh, no, no, no.

Animals ritually slaughtered for dinner--moo, moo, moo.  ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Ed Schipul)

For The Love Of Animals

Fighting Someone Who Doesn't Care

Today, an editorial by Daniel Henninger in the Wall Street Journal said it outright about Putin's land grab of Crimea and his view of others' reactions to it, "He doesn't care what they think."

This comes to the point of the whole matter, which is how do you fight an adversary that just doesn't give a [you know what]?

If one side is arguing what's right based on international laws, mores, and the ethics of human rights and freedom, how does that stack up with an adversary that disseminates misinformation [oh, are those our troops on the ground?] and thumbs their nose at the world to get what they want?

Maybe fighting fair is wonderful from a legal standpoint, but it sure looks challenging on the ground. 

Putin is daring anyone to do anything...heck, he's got thermonuclear ICBMs and a veto at the U.N. Security Council. 

BTW, if a security council member is the one doing something wrong, why in those matters, do they still get a veto???

Anyway, this is a very dangerous game of cat and mouse, and if everyone fought this way, the doomsday clock would be ticking very close to midnight, indeed.

Many times in history, a Goliath has swung a big ugly sword, but even a David--and we are not a David, but a world superpower--came to the fight with a sligshot and still won. 

Notice though, David still came to the fight!

We can win by doing the right thing, but we cannot run away, because as Hitler showed us--appeasement does not work!

Give a finger and next goes the hand, arm, and torso.

Now already are reports that Putin is threatening to derail the P5+1 negotiations with Iran as well. 

Yesterday, I read in Businessweek about overspending, that it's better to get a haircut now, than have a beheading later.

Perhaps, this applies to national security matters as well?

We can't be the policeman/woman of the world, but Snowden is snug in "Mother Russia" and now so is Crimea. 

(Source Photo: here)

Fighting Someone Who Doesn't Care

From Memorization To Thinking

Our education system continues to suffer as we rank somewhere between 17th and 20th globally. 

This means that our economy will assuredly suffer in the future from the global competition that strangles us.

Some prominent experts in the field, like Walter Isaacson, say that innovation occurs at the intersection of arts and humanities meeting science and math--and I really like that. 

Personally, this inspires me to think about whether education reform is perhaps focused too much on the teachers, tests, and core curriculum, and less on changing the way we are approaching education in the first place. 

For as long as I can remember (i.e. even when I was in school way back when), we based our education on lots of memorization--multiplication tables, periodic tables, vocabulary, history, and much more. 

For those with great short term memory, you could do very well to memorize, spit it out, and forget it, so you can start all over again with the next great wave of facts and figures. 

The emphasis on memorization of basics, is important in getting a foundation of knowledge, but seems to me to come at the expense of critical thinking and problem solving skills. 

From my own experience and watching my kids in school, I often see boredom at raw facts, and excitement and self-satisfaction at figuring something out. 

Yet, too often students are asked to do rote memorization and test accordingly, rather than really think. 

You can't memorize innovation, but rather you need to be able to apply learning. 

In this day and age, where facts are but a Google search away, memorization is less important and real analytical, reasoning, problem solving, and communication skills (all anchored in solid core values) are more relevant to our national and personal success. 

Yet, have our school caught up with this?

Unfortunately, it seems most have not, and perhaps that is one reason that many of our preeminent innovators are dropouts--from Steve Jobs to Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison, Michael Dell, Henry Ford, Walt Disney, Richard Branson, Ted Turner, etc. 

Will we ever get away completely from memorizing the basics? Certainly not. Do we need to spend so much of K-12 education and even college years playing instant recall? What a waste!

The best experience that I remember from my younger daughter in school was her activities in the Ethics Bowl, where schools competed in analyzing ethically challenging situations and arguing the merits of the various sides. They learned to think and articulate their reasoning and conclusions and that is the best education that I can imagine. 

Until we stop using education techniques from the dinosaur age--memorizing species and trying to recall where the eggs are buried, I fear we are doomed to subpar educational performance--in a boring, memorizing, and non-thinking way. 

No wonder the kids want to develop the next great iPhone app and use their textbooks as a handy-dandy booster seat. ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Lansing Public Library)

From Memorization To Thinking

Work Life IMBALance

Mental, emotional, and physical health often feeds off of maintaining a good balance in life. 

Yet, the financial services industry has been notorious for making people work unearthly hours, but also paying them unG-dly sums of money, especially in end-of-year bonuses. 

I remember reading the other year that the average bonus at Goldman Sachs was something like $750,000!

The price people pay for this is work, work, and more work (and like in the film, Wall Street, often some very unscrupulous behavior as well).

Many people get apartments down by Wall Street, so when they stroll out of the office at 1 am (maybe that's a good night), they can get to their place and clock a few hours of sleep before it's back to the office--in record time. 

Does the wealth accumulation and perhaps early retirement make it worth it--I guess to some people it does. 

Today, the New York Times reported how financial firms like Bank of America (BOA) Merrill Lynch is perhaps seeing the ill effects of this misguided "human capital strategy."

Finally, they are now encouraging people to "take four days off a month" and we're taking about weekends. 

That still leaves you with 6 days a week of work and typically 90 hours per week in the office!

Anyway, this is what they call being "committed to making the work experience better."

This is coming off the heels of a 21-year old intern at BOA that died last Summer in the office "after working three consecutive nights" even though they attributed the death to epilepsy. 

Work is good and healthy, except when it's extreme and not. Work-a-holism is a disease and money is at the root cause. 

It's great to be committed to the organization, mission, people and to doing your best, but it's another to sacrifice your soul, health, family and friends, and other interests that make you a well-rounded person. 

Ambition is healthy, greed is deadly--and if you have to come up with three lemons to see that, then it may be too late. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Work Life IMBALance

Imprisoned and Reeducated

China always seems like such a beautiful and mystical land to me. 

The innate beauty of this huge, yet sort of remote country, a homogenous people who have a raw brilliance yet type of innocence about them, and the ancient practices of natural medicine and martial arts, and a meditative demonstration of inner tranquility. 

In contrast to this image, I have read about forced labor and tough punishment on people in various Asian countries, with a poignant focus on the North Korean camps with untold horrors. But recently, there seems to be more information being shared about forced labor camps in China as well. 

First, I read about the notion by China's ruling elite that the individual is nothing, and the State is everything. Therefore, the sacrifice of one or tens of millions of individuals for the sake of the greater country and those in power is acceptable, perhaps even desirable. This aligns with an extreme of utilitarianism--the greatest good for the greatest number, but irregardless of the effects on the individual. 

This is very different than Western Countries, which have a tremendous value that is put on each individual--their voices and opinions, their rights and freedoms, and the protection and safeguarding of each person's life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. There is emphasis on the individual and the social contract that exists between them and their government. In this system, the whole (State) is greater because of the sum of it's parts (of individuals), not in spite of it. 

Last Friday, I read about the consequences of these differences in political philosophy in an article in the Washington Post about the grim conditions in Chinese labor and reeducation camps. 

What struck me the most was the opening of the article that described one of the Chinese reeducation camps.

"For the first weeks, Shen Yongmei was told to sit on a rough plastic stool from 6 a.m. to 8. p.m., her back absolutely straight, her hands on her knees, and stare in silence at three sentences painted on a wall.  

- What is this place?
- Why are you here?
- What attitude are you going to employee in order to comply with the police?"

The 55-year old women was told to contemplate on these and any slackening could result in a beating. 

After this, the women went through months of "reeducation through labor"--screwing on the plastic plugs on ballpoint pens--a quota of 12,000 a day. 

All this to wash clean her "disobedient thoughts"!

In Judaism, there is a teaching that we don't really get punished for thoughts, but for actions. A person can't fully control where their thoughts stray, although we can take steps to control our wondering eyes, mischievous speech, gluttonous eating, and so on. 

Similarly, in America, we are not punished for having a bad thought, but for committing a criminal act. 

Yet, in China just being suspected of harboring disobedient thoughts can get you (and your family) into a whole lot of trouble and necessitate your rehabilitation through coercion. 

For the last week, I have not been able to stop thinking about the image of the lady on the stool for 14-hours a day starting at those three questions in order to reform her. 

Treating people like misbehaving children who are put in a quiet corner of the classroom for a short time and told to think about what they did and when they are ready, they can come back and join the rest of the class. 

But these are not misbehaving, they are not children, they are not in a classroom, and it is not contemplative for a short time, but punitive and threatening of much worse to come if they don't comply. 

There are so many horrors out there that can be inflicted on human beings--not even for doing something wrong and violent, but for simply not agreeing with those in power. 

Of course the state is important. But perhaps it is not a state, but a prison, if the people are forced to consent both in body and mind?

I would suggest that we can learn from the Chinese that a hedonistic, near-constant focus on the "I" and immediate gratification does not achieve long-term, well being for the "us". And that there is an important place for individual self-sacrifice for the greater good.

This reminds me of the Jewish saying from Ethics of Our Fathers, where Hillel says that "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? And if I am only for myself what am I?"

Perhaps, a balance of looking after oneself and giving generously to others and the Nation can provide for both personal growth and satisfaction as well as a higher, long-term, purpose for the survival and advancement of the collective. 

My belief: Education and not reeducation is the answer. Good jobs with fair pay and benefits and not labor camps is the answer. Self-determination and sacrifice and not State protectionism is the answer. 

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Imprisoned and Reeducated

Adaptability And Integrity In The Face Of Catastrophe

The Walking Dead is the #1 TV show--and this past Sunday was just amazing not only in terms of the plot, but the lessons it provided.

The big question raised was can people change?

The Governor went through a seeming metamorphosis after the destruction of his prior town and murder of his people (by his own hand) and now he has a newfound family and tribe. 

When he comes to attack Rick and the prison to take it for the protection of his own people, Rick says let's just share it, it will be hard to overcome old rivalries, but we can do it--we can change!

But the Governor, yells in a blood curdling voice, "Liar!" and proceeds in a craze to chop off Hershel's head. 

What is particularly dramatics about this--aside from their opposing views of change--is that Hershel is the doctor who not only takes care of the physical health of his people, but also is the conscience of his group seeing that they don't lose their moral way. 

The Governor is a cold killer that truly can never change--and he not only executes Hershel, but screams "Kill them all!"

He also kills his newly adopted daughter after she is bitten by one of the walkers..he shoots her right in the face. 

At first, this seems like the Governor has changed, he can kill a Walker even if it's from his new family, as opposed to his own real daughter that he kept (unwilling to let her go) until Michonne kills her. 

But this was not real change for the Governor, because as he told Hershel about attacking and killing someone else's children to survive, "they aren't mine!"

The Governor is all about himself and will do anything selfishly to survive without consideration of others--this does not change. 

On the other hand, Rick and others survive by their ability to change and grow--they kill when they must, they have empathy when they can, they live by a code of right and wrong--in every situation, they adapt. 

For example, in a prior episode, Carol is forced to leave Rick's group because she brutally killed and burnt two of people in the prison when they got sick and were a threat of spreading the disease. However, Rick understood that this was wrong and banished her for what she did. Not all killing is justified, even if it helps you survive.

The Governor (and his new cohorts) are finally killed off in this episode, and although the safety of the prison is gone, and Rick and the others must leave and wander again, they continue to survive another day--changing with ever new challenges and adhering to an informal code of conduct that they maintain, even in the face of a world catastrophe.

(Source Photo: Dannielle Blumenthal)

Adaptability And Integrity In The Face Of Catastrophe

Six Dimensions of Personal Health

There was a wonderful interview in the Washington Post with leadership expert, Bob Rosen. 

One of the things that Rosen says is that there are six dimensions of personal and professional health that are vital to leadership.

These six dimensions of the person can also be associated with one's own personal architecture to ensure continuous health and maturity in each of these areas. 

I have taken these and created with my own photos, a little graphic to remind me of them. 

The six dimensions (with my definitions) are:

1. Spiritual - Serving G-d and doing what is right.
2. Emotional - Your feelings and ability to manage your state of mind, especially in trying situations.
3. Social - Interacting with other people in loving, caring, and sharing ways.
4. Physical - Taking care of your body through good nutrition, exercise, and healthcare.
5. Professional - Working and contributing to the world by serving a purposeful mission.
6. Intellectual - Learning and growing mentally by gaining knowledge and the ability to apply it.

I like how each of these is a a distinct contributing element of one's overall health, but also come together to form a coherent whole of human health. 

When all six dimensions are in good health, then a person has the foundations to live and excel. 

However, when one or more elements are not being properly taken care of or are out of balance with the others, then a person will not have the ability to maintain or advance themselves.  

Self-awareness and a commitment to doing your best in all six areas will help you grow as a person and leader. 

Together, these six areas can be associated with one's own personal architecture, whereby one plans and strives for health and maturity in each of them over time. 

(Source Graphic and Photos: Andy Blumenthal)

Six Dimensions of Personal Health

Nasty Flu Shot

I took my daughter for a flu shot last evening. 

We went through the typical drawn-out paperwork and long wait to get something so routine. 

When the medical practitioner finally arrived with the flu shot, there was a little baggy with all the acoutrements including alcohol wipe, band-aid, cotton, etc. 

As the lady starts taking out the items to get ready for giving the shot, she drops the cotton on the floor. 

She picks it up quickly, and pretending we didn't see, she quickly throws it back on the medical tray. 

Now I am watching...

She open the band-aid and places it at the ready on the side.

Then she get the syringe AND the cotton that had just fallen on the floor, ready in hand. 

As she is about to give the shot, I say, "You're not going to use the cotton on my daughter that just fell on the floor, are you?"

Her eyes look askance and she throws the cotton back down on the tray, and says, "Oh, of course not."

I spoke with my daughter afterwards about this as it was hard to understand how a medical practitioner could on one hand, be administering a helpful medicine to a patient, and at the same time, was about to use a dirty cotton on the wound afterwards.

What happened to people actually caring about people and taking pride in the jobs they do, rather than just being in it for the paycheck only?

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Sun Dazed)

Nasty Flu Shot

Hold The Pickles, Hold The Lettuce--BABIES!

Remember, the catchy old Burger King commercial about "Have it your way"(where you can order the burger any way you want, no problem!)?

Now, we are reaching the point with DNA testing, where we can have it your way and order up babies the way you want them.

According to the Wall Street Journal, by getting genetic profiles of egg or sperm donors, you can search for a match with the genetic profile of the would-be parent to have a higher likelihood of desired traits (e.g. blue eyes) or lower likelihood of undesirable ones (e.g. heart disease). 

23andMe, a DNA company (Note: humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes) that sells home testing kits for $99, has patented a process for analyzing DNA and providing information on health and ancestry, and this could be used for system screening of egg or sperm donors through a tool called a "Family Traits Inheritance calculator."

Calculating better babies by choosing desired matches at fertility clinics is only steps away from actually making marriage decisions based on genetic make-up--in that scenario love is only one factor in choosing a mate and maybe not the primary any longer. 

The idea being to screen potential couples before marriage to yield "the best" potential children--smartest, athletic, good-looking, etc. 

There are already genetic banks for screening and capturing genetic information on potential couples to avoid genetic diseases such as Tay-Sachs and others. 

While bioengineering children for better health is one thing, creating a blue-eye and blond-haired race was the Nazi's concept of an Aryan nation as a superior race that would dominate the world. 

The ethical questions of how to screen out illness without creating a situation like in China under a one-child policy, where male offspring are considered superior and so we proverbially tilt the odds in favor of what we think is best even if it may not really be. 

Neither a homogeneous superior race, nor a customized bioengineered baby is the answer--rather, we need to value healthy diversity in children, where each is a miracle and a blessing in their own right. ;-)

Hold The Pickles, Hold The Lettuce--BABIES!

The Nomination Effect

For some people they say that flattery gets you everywhere and it can be true.

Who doesn’t like to hear good things about themselves and their work?

It fills the WIIFM need in all of us (What’s In It For me)—by providing for recognition and seeming purpose. 

Some people know how to use this --how to take advantage of others by “cozying up to them” and telling them how wonderful they are.

As they say, “You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar!”

This is one of the marketing techniques--not really ethical--being used by some “event planners” to lure people to their conferences, meetings, and events. 

They do this by not only showcasing the events great speakers, relevant and important topics, beautiful venue etc., but also by telling people they’ve been nominated for some prestigious award. 

And it’s hard to tell which are real and which are fake.

The Nomination Effect (my term) is when event planners tell multiple people that they have been nominated for an award simply as a way to get them to come to an event they otherwise would not necessarily attend.

This plays to the ego of some execs by saying “somebody nominated you”—but there are few or no specifics.

And because so many execs get beaten up all the time at work, it’s certainly great to hear something positive. Plus it could be an easy way for some to add a nice credential to their resumes. 

It’s all fine and good when it’s true and deserved for a job well done!

But some event planners misuse this to lure people to events and try to get a “30 minute call” with you to pick your brains for the event—what topics are hot, who are some good speakers, do you know any vendors that would like to sponsor it?

But when it's just an "in" with people who may never otherwise give them “the time of day,” because of the important work they do, their genuinely busy schedules, and frankly because they are people they just don’t even know.  

But the idea of The Nomination Effect is to tell execs that they can win an award at the event and how great they are so hopefully they will be putty in their hands and shell out money, time, and information to perhaps unreliable people.

Part of the scam is that the award winners aren’t announced until the event itself, so you must come—and pay first!

They tell the same line to the other nominees—maybe 5, 10, 25, 50 other people—or everyone they want to sign up—who knows.

This social phenomenon is enough to reel in many to pay for and attend events that may not be all that intellectually or socially enticing otherwise. 

Here are the things I look for:

- People that seem genuine and not like car salesmen.
- Those with an affiliation to a well-established organization in the field.
- Nominations for actual contributions or achievements, rather than vague undertakings.
- Something on LinkedIn and/or the web that shows credentials and successful events prior tied to advancing the field, and not just making money.

A well-deserved award for hard-working professionals is something for all of us to celebrate.

But that’s different than promotional events and false—yet flattering kudos to manipulate lots of busy people. ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to PennStateNews)

The Nomination Effect

What Will Do You For Cake?

I remember a joke the guys use to tell back in college...about how you can't have you Kate and Edith too.

Cake and eat it too...get it? 

Here is a link to my article in Public CIO Magazine called "How Hungry Are You?"

It's about how some people will literally sacrifice their souls for success, while others put their humanity and decency above it. 

Hope you enjoy!

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

What Will Do You For Cake?

Targeting The Opposition?

As I would imagine most of you felt this week, I was really surprised by news that individuals in the IRS targeted certain political opposition groups. 

I thought to myself what country are we living in?

I couldn't help wondering about disturbing stories from Russia, Iran, and others where political dissidents have been known to be jailed, shot, or otherwise disposed of.

Are we getting to the point (hopefully not) where our government institutions could likewise be used to unfair political advantage?

In the Watergate scandal in 1972, the Republicans broke into the National Democratic Headquarters to install microphones and copy documents unfairly and illegally. 

Forty years later--is this an IRSgate 2012?

Both Democrats and Republicans have their political opinions--and everyone is entitled to believe what they do and feel an affinity to and vote for who they want--or if you don't like either, vote for a 3rd party Independent--this is what makes America great.

We have freedom to believe what we will, to vote as we will, and to do so without interference or undue influence by either side or anyone. 

If we cross the line into intimidation or oppression of those who peacefully choose a different position, then we have lost the best of our national identity and the human rights that we so justly uphold. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Targeting The Opposition?

Factory Floor Servitude

As a kid, I was all too familiar with factory settings--my dad worked in one. 

Dad is an incredibly persistent hard worker who went to the factory every day--tuna sandwich in tow--worked hard and was the voice of reason in advancing the business--and worked his way up to manage the place.  My dad is a modern-day success story!

He worked in everything figuring out how to design products, make them, sell them, and ensure the business stayed afloat. A lot of people depended on him in the factory to keep production humming, put bread on their tables, and most importantly to be treated fairly and like human beings. 

My dad never became arrogant as he advanced himself, he always believed that we only have what the Almighty above grants to us. 

What a contrast between the way my dad managed a factory and the decrepit working conditions that led to the factory collapse two weeks ago in Bangladesh that has now left at least 1,038 dead. 

The collapse has raised ethical questions again about the horrific working conditions in factories overseas--where low wages and hazardous conditions is the rule--low wages lead to growing outsourcing and hence, a $18 billion garment industry in Bangladesh that has tripled in size between 2005 and 2010 and is expected to triple again by 2020. 

The average monthly pay in 2009--$47!

By 2010, Bangladesh had 5,000 garment factories--2nd only to China.

Now most of the factories are gone from the U.S. moving overseas to the cheapest providers, with jobs in manufacturing decreasing almost in half from nearly 20 million in the U.S. in 1979 to less than 12 million in 2010.

Bloomberg BusinessWeek (9 May 2010) chronicles the ten years of stagnant wages and horrible working conditions there--verbal abuse, sexual abuse, physical punishment and humiliations for not meeting quotas (like having to forcibly stand on tables for hours and undress in front of workers), rare bathroom breaks to filthy and overflowing toilets, and much more. 

When the Savar building developed cracks on April 23, one man begged his wife not to go to work the next day, but when she called in and asked for the day off, she was told she would be docked a whole months salary if she didn't show up--she went to work and the building collapsed on April 24--leaving her buried under the rubble. Eventually, when the rescuers could not free her, they chopped off her legs!

Cheap labor means cheap goods--that's a draw for us getting more branded goods for less. In a large sense, our insatiable demand fuels the cruel, servile conditions overseas. 

This is also a broken market, where people sell their labor just to provide subsistence living for their families, while big corporations increase profits, investors smile all the way to the bank, and we get our boatloads of stuff cheap, cheap, cheap. 

There is nothing wrong with making money or saving money--it's an incentive-based system, but the only measure of success is not money. 

We need global standards of ethical conduct in the labor market, and this should be part of every organization's financial reporting, disclosure, and audit requirements.

People and organizations should not just be penalized for cooking the books or insider-trading, but for how they treat their people. 

Those organizations and leaders that balance making money with treating people decently have a leg up on those that don't--not that they will necessarily do better in the marketplace (maybe they won't), but that they make their money with their integrity intact and that's something money cannot buy. ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Ronn "Blue" Aldaman)

Factory Floor Servitude

Dastardly Bastards

I sit here this morning filled with indignation for the victims of a series of brutal monsters who have committed horrific acts against children (and adults). 

Last week we had the horrible terrorist attack at the Boston Marathon which left 3 dead (including an innocent 8-year old boy), almost two hundred wounded, and13 people who lost limbs (including leg amputations below the knee of a husband and wife recently married just last August ). 

Then yesterday, in the Wall Street Journal, two more news events about:

1) The raping of a 5-year old girl (YES, five) in India--4 months after the gang rape on the bus that left a young women tortured and dead.  This 5-year old was beaten and raped and found screaming for help and in pain with devices left inside her!  The suspect a 30-something man is left on the run. 

2) The trial of a late-term abortion doctor, Kermit Gosnell, charged among other things with murdering 7 infants who SURVIVED (initially) abortions he performed.  This doctor or staff is said to routinely "gouge the infant's neck with scissors to sever the spinal cord" (a method he called "snipping").  His offices were a horror lab with "blood on the floor," urine in the air, and "fetal remains haphazardly stored throughout the clinic--in bags, milk jugs, orange-juice cartons, and even in cat-food containers."  -- This is one sick person!!

While there are many people who are good, what loose nut or evil inclination drives others to terrible inhumane acts is a question that haunts us throughout the ages. 

I remember learning in Jewish day school that some people act worse than animals, because while a wild animal kills for food or to protect themselves, people kill and torture for the sake of it. 

Leon Kass in the article on Gosnell points out from his readings that "as science [and technology] advances, morals don't necessarily improve; [and moreover] that the opposite might well be the case" as people's faith in science above all else and belief in materialism as a cure of all ills replaces belief in G-d and the true mission of our souls in life. 

What punishment can these people get that will really fit their crimes--when the children are left snipped, beaten, raped, and dead? 

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Dastardly Bastards

Academic Assignments In Hate

According to the New York Times (12 April 2013) a high school English teacher in Albany, New York on Monday asked students to write a persuasive essay on why Jews are evil and the source of our problems. 

The assignment stated: "You do not have a choice in your position: you must argue that Jews are evil, and...convince me of your loyalty to the Third Reich!"

This assignment echoed a similar assignment given to students in Georgia and New York City earlier this year instructing students to calculate math problems by using number of slave whippings and killings. 

Yes, these school assignments--to our children--are shocking and appalling. 

Although they call these teachers giving these assignments, these are not real educators, but rather bigots given a classroom pulpit.

Marguerite Vanden Wyngaard, the school district superintendent, said: "Obviously, we have a severe lack of judgement and a horrible level of insensitivity."

But this "apology" does not go far enough--in fact, there is no apology--just excuses and calls for sensitivity training. 

Wyngaard should've called this behavior for what it is--discrimination, anti-Semitism, bigotry, and hatred, and announced the firing of the teacher--who shouldn't be teaching anyone, anything!

With the Holocaust Remembrance Day this past Monday, April 8--this teacher added insult to injury in making such an assignment.

While teaching students how to write persuasively and argue different points of view can mean that sometimes you have to argue "the other side"; it crosses the line to assign students to write about why a whole race of people are evil, and on top of it to force them all to take that position.

According to CNews, a third of the students stood up and refused to complete the assignment--thankfully, there are some good and decent people left in this world.

Excuses are not apologies. Sensitivity training is not removal of a hateful bigot. And this school superintendent should've had the ethical backbone and courage to join the students who stood against this wrong. 

These "teachers" and school superintendent have at least six million reasons to do better, much better.

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Academic Assignments In Hate

We Don't Accept You Here

A number of years ago I had received an interesting job offer--not actually for a job I had applied to, but for "something else", and apparently the job was supposed to come without any questions asked. 

Because when I asked about the typical things that you like to agree on before you start a job, I found that it wasn't going to work out then for this executive because of "cultural fit."

At the time, it was quite clear that cultural fit was just another term used to discriminate not those that could do the job well from those that couldn't, but rather those who would be too thoughtful, innovative, or even challenging to the (failing) status quo. 

In this particular case, the leadership was highly corrupt (in more ways than one) and it came out in front-page investigations and findings not long after, with the actual sacking of many of the head honcho bunch.

When it comes to hiring, it is challenging for many leaders to not just punch the checklist for diversity, but too really embrace it, and this stems from many reasons including fear, bias and hatred of cultures that are different than our own, but also the need for highly insecure leaders to singularly "rule the roost" without any challenge of opinion. 

These leaders think that if everyone fits their mold and subordinates themselves to them alone, then they are by default always right--regardless of the actual consequences of their decision-making.

The problem is that there is no one to vet issues with, play devil's advocate or give an alternate viewpoint--and the insecure leadership with their minion of look-alike, think-alike followers will often drive the train over the cliff--without anyone so much as saying a boo. 

This last week, when a record number of women Senators (20) and congresswomen (82)--were sworn in to the 113th Congress, there was hope of their bringing to the old political mix a new sense and style of collaboration that could help the nation resolve the many issues that we are embroiled in heated negotiation and impasse (e.g. the debt ceiling, the national deficit, the budget, immigration, and more).

Similarly, Bloomberg BusinessWeek (3 January 2013) published an article called "Only BFFs Need Apply"--about how job applicant's cultural fit often trumps their actual qualifications.

BusinessWeek sums up the dilemma with hiring based on cultural fit: While it "may summon up obnoxious images of old boys clubs and social connections...a cooperative, creative atmosphere can make workdays more tolerable and head off problems before they begin." Put another way: the "American ideals about team diversity collide with the reality of building a cohesive, practical staff."

However, the problem with relying on cultural fit is not only that you don't often get the best candidates, but that it is used not just to describe common values and work ethics, but rather inappropriately "as an excuse for feelings interviewers aren't comfortable expressing" such as not being able to accept a person's accent or that they cover they head for religious reasons. 

While hiring lackeys may have a short-term benefit of cohesion, in the long-term, the lack of diversity may result in groupthink and even that "the one person who has a different thought could have saved a business."

Of course, there is also legal prohibitions against discrimination in hiring and personnel management, as well as the ethical issue of hiring unfairly and what that does to the moral fiber of the organization and its people--it's corrosive to their values and capabilities and will lead to the revulsion and loss of good employees, customers, stockholders, and others over time.

Here's the enterprise architecture slant on this topic: "you have to decide if you're hiring for the culture you have or the culture you want." ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Tobucil and Klabs)

We Don't Accept You Here

The Future In Good Hands

I had the distinct honor to attend the first Washington D.C. High School Ethics Bowl at American University.

There were eight teams competing from local schools in the D.C., Maryland, and Virginia areas.

My daughter's team won 2nd place!

(Note: the trophys were identical except for the engraving of first, second, and third places.)

I was so proud to see that the schools are educating our students in ethics--both the theory and the practice.

The student teams prepared and competed using 10 case study scenarios that covered everything from oil drilling in Alaska to the death penalty. 

In lieu of the education of yesteryear that relied all too heavily on rote memorization, it was awesome instead to see the students analyzing real life scenarios, using critical thinking, debating ethical and philosophical considerations, and making policy recommendations. 

The students were sensitive to and discussed the impact of things like income inequality on college admission testing, the environmental effects of offshore drilling versus the importance of energy independence, the influence of race of criminal sentencing, and the moral implications of the Red Cross teaching first aid to named terrorist groups like the Taliban. 

I was truly impressed at how these high school students worked together as a team, developed their positions, and presented them to the moderator, judges and audience--and they did it in a way that could inspire how we all discuss, vet, and decide on issues in our organizations today.

- They didn't yell (except a few that were truly passionate about their positions and raised their voices in the moment), instead they maturely and professionally discussed the issues.

- They didn't get personal with each other--no insults, put-downs, digs, or other swipes (with the exception of when one team member called his opponents in a good natured gest, "the rivals"), instead they leveraged the diversity of their members to strengthen their evaluation of the issues.

- They didn't push an agenda in a winner takes all approach--instead they evaluated the positions of the competing teams, acknowledged good points, and refined their own positions accordingly to come up with even better proposals. 

- They didn't walk away from the debate bitter--but instead not only shook hands with their opponents, but I actually heard them exchange appreciation of how good each other did and what they respected about each other.

I'll tell you, these kids--young adults--taught me something about ethics, teamwork, critical thinking, presentation, and debate, and I truly valued it and actually am enthusiastic about this next generation coming up behind us to take the reins. 

With the many challenges facing us, we need these smart and committed kids to carry the flag forward--from what I saw today, there is indeed hope with our children. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

The Future In Good Hands

Heaven and Hell

Someone hung this sticky note off the wall in the Metro. 

It asks: "Do you want heaven or hell?"

Two incidents with some neighbors this weekend reminded me of this message: 

The first--there were some boxes put out for donation to Hurricane Sandy victims, and we saw one of the neighbors actually take stuff out of the charity boxes. Was he needy too--I don't really know. But I do wonder whether he'll enjoy his new jacket, at the expense of someone perhaps homeless and who lost everything in the Superstorm.

The second--I was hauling a really big box--it was extremely heavy and I come to find out that the wheels on the dolly were flat. It was nearly impossible to move on the the bare metal. All of a sudden, a wonderful person comes over--a stranger--and says "here, let me help you!" He accompanied me, pushing with me all the way to my destination. This guy was like an angel. 

Heaven or hell--we are tested everyday in our actions--some choose one, while some seem to gravitate to the other. 

Finally, I can't say again how grateful I am to the neighbor who went out of his way to help me--and in a difficult situation--I hope that I can learn from him!

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Heaven and Hell

Existential Threats--Real or Imagined?

Should we worry about something that hasn't happened to us yet?

Wired Magazine (Sept. 2012) has an interesting article called Apocalypse Not.

Its thesis is that "people freak out over end-of-the world scenarios" and they should know better because despite all the fear and predictions of catastrophe, nothing ever really happens.

It categorizes the doomsday cataclysms into 4 types:

1) Chemicals--these come form things like pesticides (like DDT), smoking, and CFCs, and result in air pollution, acid rain, ozone depletion, and climate change.

2) Disease--recent fears of pandemics were associated with bird flu, swine flu, SARS, AIDS, ebola, and mad cow disease.

3) People--we can cause our own hell through population explosion and famine and although it didn't mention this, I would assume the brutality and wars that can wipe entire races out.

4) Resources--Peak oil theory, metals and minerals, and other resource constraints have been causes of consternation leading us to look for alternative energy sources and even recently consider mining minerals on asteroids.

The article goes so far as to poke fun at those who are concerned about these things even stating that "The one thing we'll never run out of is imbeciles."

Wired does acknowledge that while "over the past half-century, none of our threatened eco-pocalypses have played out as predicted. Some came partly true; some were averted by action; [and still] some were wholly chimerical."

What the author, Matt Ridley, has missed here in his logic are a few main things:

- Smaller things add to big things--While each individual issue may not have reached the catastrophic tipping point been yet, these issues can certainly progress and even more so, in the aggregate, pose dangerous situations that we may be unable to contain. So you can choose to live with blinders on for today, but the consequences of our choices are inescapable and may only be around the next bend.

-Recognizing the future--just because things like death and final judgement haven't happened to us yet, doesn't mean that they aren't in store for us in the future. This sort of reminds me of this Jewish joke that no one leaves this world alive.

- Destructive powers are multiplying--many destructive forces were traditionally local events, but are now becoming existential threats to whole civilizations. For example, how many people globally can we kill with weaponized pathogens and how many times over now are we able to destroy the world with our thermonuclear stockpile.

- Learn from the past--Apocalypses and terrible events have already befallen humankind, whether the bubonic plague in the middle ages, the destruction of the ice age, the flood in biblical times, and even more recently the Holocaust and the World Wars in the 20th century.

Unfortunately, there is no shortage of bad things that can happen to people--individuals or many people--and if we are not conscious of the things we are doing, their potential impacts, and generally act smart and ethical, then bad things can and will most-definitely happen.

Wired ends by saying that things like policy, technology, and innovation can solve the day. However, while these can surely help and we must always try our best to have a positive impact, some things are also out of our control--they are in G-d hands.

Finally, while not every event is an existential threat, some surely can be--and whether it's the impact of an asteroid, the death toll from the next horrible plague, natural disaster, cyberwar, or weapon of mass destruction, or even possibly when aliens finally come knocking at your door, it would be awfully stupid to think that bad things can't happen.

(Source Photo: here with attribution to tanakawho)

Existential Threats--Real or Imagined?

From Coworker to Killer

People are people, but there are some who walk a fine and dangerous line. 

Some are stable, rational people--those, that we hope we can depend on. 

Others are prime time wack jobs--they are not "safe" and everyone knows to beware of them.

Finally, there are those who are like firecrackers, one step away from explosion--and these can pose a nasty surprise. 

These last two perhaps invoke the fear of someone in the workplace "going postal"--a reference to the 1986 killing by a postal worker of 14 people and then himself. 

In light of the workplace shooting this week in front the Empire State Building, Newsweek (3 September 2012) asks "How to Spot a Workplace Crazy?"

Their default answer--see the Department of Homeland Security's Active Shooter Booklet, which includes a list of 16 "indicators of potential violence by an employee" (page 10) from addiction to depression, over reactions to mood swings, unprovoked rage to paranoia, and more. 

Perhaps, their more genuine answer is that anybody can be the next workplace shooter--and that it is hard to really tell what demons lay in wait inside a person's head or heart or what can set them off.  

They reference  the book, Going Postal: Rage, Murder, and Rebellion, which states: "it can be anybody who's getting completely screwed in the workplace--so that's most workers in this country." 

When people feel a "perceived injustice" or they are "grievance collectors"--harboring hurt and anger at their mistreatment day-in and -out, they may be one step away from dangerous. 

As leaders and managers, we cannot control for everything that people feel or for all their personal struggles and life's circumstances, but we can do our best to treat others fairly, with compassion, to listen to them, and try to accomodate genuine needs.  

I was reminded of this again, recently, when I went with my daughter to a car dealership.  At one point in negotiating for a new automobile, I asked a question about the current odometer reading.  

The Manager yells over to a worker and tells him harshly to get on it and quickly.  It wasn't what he said per se, but how he said it--ordering his subordinate around like a thing, not like a person.  

My daughter turns to me and she is clearly uncomfortable with what she saw.  I asked her about it.  And she whispers to me, "Did you see how they treated the worker? It's not right." 

I couldn't agree with her more. And when the man came back with the information--we thanked him so much for helping us and told him what a good job he was doing getting everything ready--the paperwork and the vehicle.  

Is he going to "go postal" today, tomorrow, or never...I don't know--he seemed nice enough, but if people get pushed too far and their mental state is frayed, anything is possible, and we shouldn't tempt fate--more importantly, we should treat everyone with respect and dignity. 

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Charlie Essers)

From Coworker to Killer