I’m loving this musical offering by Max Richter (performed by Hilary Hahn and C. Smythe). So short, sweet and deep.
Craig Newmark is the introvert who founded Craig’s List. Now he is turning his attention to the needs of organizations seeking to do excellent news reporting and fact checking. The story appeared in NiemanLab:
In recent weeks, Newmark’s foundation has given $1 million gift to the Poynter Institute for a chair in ethics and a $500,000 donation to Wikipedia for its anti-harassment Community Health Initiative, after giving Wikipedia $1 million last June. Those gifts look like they be might be just a start of his news/information-centric philanthropy; Newmark now tells me he is committing to give away, at this phase of his philanthropy, another $3.5 million. Those further gifts — to companies in the news and information sphere — will be announced over the next weeks and months. Taken together, we’ve got to be impressed with this renewed spurt of news-oriented philanthropy and the big subscription upticks we’ve seen post-election.
Fascinating conversation: I just listened to a discussion on Donald Trump involving long time conservative David Frum and Sam Harris. What did Trump do that resonated deeply, according to Frum? A) The pain felt by rural America, B) That America’s trade policy is not working well for most Americans, and C) Immigration does impose often invisible economic and cultural costs on many Americans in the bottom 30-40% of Americans.
None of this suggests that Trump should be President. He is massively incompetent and disorganized, and has failed to make appointments. The U.S. has great power to end human life through it’s nuclear arsenal. Trump is erratic and therefore dangerous. It’s like being in a car with a hopelessly drunk driver. Trump is not a strategic visionary. He makes impulsive bad decisions, and digging out of his messes by blaming others. Trump is not Hitler. He is filled with bitterness and rage. His advisors are filled with rage–none of them are fully functioning people. Millions of people filled with rage are delighted to see Trump be rude to the snobs out there. His followers don’t care about detrimental effects to themselves.
I stumbled across this detailed article on twenty techniques used by Narcissists (and other malfunctioning types of people) in personal relationships — or is it an article about Donald Trump? The full title: “20 Diversion Tactics Highly Manipulative Narcissists, Sociopaths And Psychopaths Use To Silence You.”
The bottom line caveat: “If you think you’re going to have a thoughtful discussion with someone who is toxic, be prepared for epic mindfuckery rather than conversational mindfulness.” In short, conversations are often attacks that only look like conversations.
In the hands of a malignant narcissist or sociopath, your differing opinions, legitimate emotions and lived experiences get translated into character flaws and evidence of your irrationality.
Narcissism is the main focus of the article, however, and Narcissists tend to be . . . well … narcissistic:
Narcissists, sociopaths, psychopaths and otherwise toxic people do this because they wish to divert attention back to themselves and how you’re going to please them. If there is anything outside of them that may threaten their control over your life, they seek to destroy it. They need to be the center of attention at all times. In the idealization phase, you were once the center of a narcissist’s world – now the narcissist becomes the center of yours.
Narcissists are also naturally pathologically envious and don’t want anything to come in between them and their influence over you. Your happiness represents everything they feel they cannot have in their emotionally shallow lives. After all, if you learn that you can get validation, respect and love from other sources besides the toxic person, what’s to keep you from leaving them?
Chapters include Gaslighting, Projection, “Moving the goalposts,” “Changing the Subject,” Threats (including covert threats), Aggressive Jabs Disguised as Jokes and Shaming.
There are many illegitimate reasons for the U.S. to have begun killing people in the Middle East. They include bigotry, control of oil and a Middle East country’s resistance to U.S. imperialism. Lee Camp offers another reason, the dominance of the U.S. dollar. He argues that this factor has been behind the U.S. attacks of Libya and Iraq, and it is the reason the U.S. is now posturing to attack Iran. See the first 11 minutes of a recent episode of Lee Camp’s Redacted Tonight.
One might wonder how difficult it would be to drum up a fake excuse to start a war in the U.S. It’s not difficult, once the President decides to go to war behind closed doors. This is a time-tested prescription, addressed in the video “War Made Easy.” Chris Hedges discusses the intoxicating attraction of war:
The enduring attraction of war is this: Even with its destruction and carnage it can give us what we long for in life. It can give us purpose, meaning, a reason for living. Only when we are in the midst of conflict does the shallowness and vapidness of much of our lives become apparent. Trivia dominates our conversations and increasingly our airwaves. And war is an enticing elixir. It gives us resolve, a cause. It allows us to be noble.
Therefore, it’s not going to be difficult for the U.S. to publicly justify a war with Iran, especially given the detached electorate, given the U.S. public’s distaste for all things Muslim and the warmongers President Trump has gathered as his primary advisors.
So much hypocrisy in the air, as Bill Maher points out:
Are there emotions other than the commonly discussed ones? This article by BBC presents many others. Most of them have names in other languages, and I did not recognize any of these names. I did, however, recognize many of the feelings described in the article. Hence, the title of the article, “The Untranslatable Emotions,” doesn’t quite work for me, because I do recognize many of these emotions. Here are a few examples presented, and there are many others I enjoyed reading about in the article:
Natsukashii (Japanese) – a nostalgic longing for the past, with happiness for the fond memory, yet sadness that it is no longer
Wabi-sabi (Japanese) – a “dark, desolate sublimity” centred on transience and imperfection in beauty
Saudade (Portuguese) – a melancholic longing or nostalgia for a person, place or thing that is far away either spatially or in time – a vague, dreaming wistfulness for phenomena that may not even exist
Sehnsucht (German) – “life-longings”, an intense desire for alternative states and realisations of life, even if they are unattainable
Psychologist Michal Kosinski developed a method to size up who a person based on their FB activity.
If you would like to get a small taste for what companies can do with Big Data, follow this link to Kosinski’s own website (found in the above article). I did this, and I was impressed. Based on 60 of your FB “likes,” a company can get a impressive read on who you are.
This is not just a parlor trick. This type of analytics can swing a tight presidential election.
This article in the Atlantic, “The Simple Psychological Trick to Political Persuasion,” urges us to consider the values of those to whom we direct our arguments in order to be effective.
Feinberg and his co-author, Stanford University sociologist Robb Willer, have extensively studied how it is that liberals and conservatives—two groups that now seem further apart than ever on their policy preferences—can convert people from the other side to their way of seeing things. One reason this is so hard to do, they explain, is that people tend to present their arguments in a way that appeals to the ethical code of their own side, rather than that of their opponents.