Adonis Diaries

Archive for the ‘Essays’ Category

Daydream project? Restructuring medical profession and health care providers

Daydream project: Restructuring medical  profession and health care providers systems

My daydreaming started by recollecting that nurses are the ones who took care of me, smiled to me, and had compassion to my predicament after each surgery: Surgeons spent less than a minute after their job was done, if they ever found it necessary or had time to visit their patients.

The entire health care system is fundamentally run by nurses, carried on the shoulders of nurses…

For example, Philippinas  (from the Philippine) in the US constitute the vast majority of nurses (at least a decade ago).

Eduardo Galeano wrote this story:

“It is 1984, in the prison of Lurigancho at Lima (Chili).  Luis Nino is inspecting the prison for the count of a human rights organization.  Luis is crossing sick prisoners, vomiting blood, agonizing, open wounds, with fever…

Luis meets the chief medical staff and ask why the physicians are not making any routine health rounds…The physician replies: “We, physicians, intervene at the calls of nurses…”

And where are the nurses? The chief retorts: “The budget for the prison didn’t allocate funds for nurses…”

I got into thinking:

“If I ever come into big money, or get in a position of power, I will take care of the nurses, improve their standard of living,  extend material values and dignity to their hard work, get engaged with Occupy Health Care protests

I will rent buildings close to hospitals and rent affordable rooms to nurses, and let the nurses run the building…

And install a modern facility in the building for continuing education and provide vans and affordable transport system for the nurses who can barely make ends meet…”

My daydreaming ideas went wild and I got into thinking:

“The entire medical system and health care providers need restructuring in order for nurses to receive their fair share in the gratitude of patients and return on the huge profit and…”

I saved the post as a draft, with the intention to publish it as my daydreaming project is complete, and then I said: “This project is hardly ever going to be complete. Publish whatever you have and let readers be inspired and finish it for you…”

The project is not meant to abolish current health institutions, medical schools and health services, but to establish an alternative system, funded by States until the new alternative institutions start generating followers and fund-raisers and…

The idea is that students in all medical fields (nurse, dietetics, massage provider, biologist, veterinarian, dentist, Red Cross volunteer, hospital administration, hospital manager, pharmacist, psychologist, psychiatrist, medical students, Ergonomics designers, medical equipment designers and operators…) share nursing practices in the first couple of years, get paid from year one, and are of practical service to the communities, particularly in rural areas, poorer districts, and in time of catastrophic events.

The University program and curriculum are reviewed so that practical initiations with patients and health institutions are offered in tandem with theoretical and general knowledge are focused on.

All students enrolled in one of the medical fields mentioned above have to learn and work as nurses for the first two years, and earn their living.

Year One:

Medical students, in all fields mentioned above, work in hospital and learn to deliver first aides services (like Red Cross volunteer courses), how to communicate with patients, get initiated with hospital administration and procedures…

Practical initiation: trauma cases, drug cases, vaccination procedures, types of contagious diseases, curable diseases

Formal courses: Physiology, musculoskeletal disorders, introduction to Human Factors issues, health and safety in hospital and workplaces, experimental design, statistical analysis…

Year Two:

Medical students learn to be exposed to surgery room practices and procedures, anesthesiology room, pharmacy section, and hospital administration…

Practical initiation: blood testing procedures, urine testing procedures, tropical diseases diagnostics, injection, administering medication,

Formal courses in Anatomy, designing surveys and collecting data, analysing and interpreting peer-reviewed scientific research and sorting out valid experiments, introduction to pharmacology,…

Year Three:

Students targeting fields in (medical equipment design and operation, hospital management and administration, dietetics, massage provider, biologist, and psychology) part from the other students into specialized universities and sections.

The remaining students get skills in small skin surgery, dialysis procedures, intensive care units, hard to cure diseases…

Formal course in neurology, in-depth reading of peer-review scientific research articles, designing and performing controlled experiments,…

Year Four:

The students in the medical fields part ways.

Except for the general physician practitioners, dentists, pharmacists, psychoanalysts, the other students should be ready to graduate in their preferred subject of interest.

At worse, a couple of courses might be needed to achieve their requirements.

Rationales for this alternative system:

1. The “psychological” divide between physicians and nurses is “physically and mentally” reduced

2. Physicians will be readier to empathize with patients

3. Physicians will be initiated with the “physical understanding” of the job of nurses, and will feel readier to support nurses demands and syndicates for continuing education and resume the study to becoming full-fledged physicians…

4. Communities will enjoy a much larger pool of health providers in the events of catastrophes, war, economic downturn…

5. Earning a living from year one and feeling confident as a valued citizen

6. Efficient interactions and interrelations among health institutions

7. Nurses playing vaster roles as communicators and transmitters links among patients and specialized physicians, particularly for remote patients, neglected patients in residences, uncovered patients with any health insurance…

8.  How about you forward me with all your rationales, suggestions, and developed comments?

Note: It is becoming evident that modern schooling system is principally a big detention center for the youth in order to keep them “away from the streets”.

Kids do Not need 13 years of formal schooling before going to universities or learning practical skills and talents to earn a living by the age of 15. It is not knowledge that they are learning, but regurgitation of consensus information.

Reflective learning and self-learning are not appreciated on the ground that kids are not “ready to discuss, ponder and ask the right questions…”

Kids have to earn a living from skilled maintenance professions before considering higher education in fields of their interests…

In general, in almost every society, you have about 15% of the population deemed unnecessary for producing and contributing to the development of the” system”: They are confined in ghetto quarters to fend for their survival and are basically the ones incarcerated in order to show “statistically” that the police force is doing its job…

Re-inventing Public Health: Covid-19 inequity

COVID-19 and inequity — public health needs a third revolution

For many Americans, George Floyd’s murder ignited a new level of momentum to confront police violence against people of color.

The COVID-19 pandemic — which is killing black Americans at nearly two and a half times the rate of whites — has put a spotlight on our nation’s shameful racial divide in public health.

While the first and second public health revolutions vastly extended life expectancy by making strides against communicable disease (cholera, typhoid and dysentery) and chronic illness (heart disease and diabetes), racial gaps (and minority ethnic groups) remain a persistent contributor to negative health outcomes.

In a nation with growing economic disparities, scarred by centuries of systemic racism, the third revolution in public health must address the root causes of our remaining pervasive health inequities — poverty, pollution, housing, food security and other basic needs.

Since our systems have resulted in these issues disproportionately impacting communities of color, we need to conceive, develop and implement solutions that prioritize the wellbeing of people and communities that have been overlooked for far too long.

COVID-19 and inequity — public health needs a third revolution

It’s a daunting task, to be sure. But, with an approach I call precision community health, we can target our limited resources to be effective at addressing the most urgent public health inequities, while also supporting the eradication of racism throughout our society.

Investment is needed in public health systems, including state-of-the-art data collection and communications tools.

With these we can collect granular data on everything from asthma rates to housing conditions and police violence, broken down by race and income.

That data can then be transformed into knowledge to guide decision-making.

We can leverage social media and other communications strategies to deliver precisely targeted messages to ensure people have information they need, when and where they need it, to make informed decisions for themselves and their loved ones.

We can also invest in people by creating a national Public Health Corps, similar to AmeriCorps.

Recruitment could start with our country’s community health workers, our invaluable set of frontline public health workers who are already trusted members of the communities we serve today.

But importantly, these workers’ expertise and training can also build equity in communities today, by linking people to resources on housing, food security, employment and more.

Community health workers are also uniquely positioned to have an immediate impact on the spread of COVID-19 by performing the critical task of contact tracing — reaching out to those who test positive for COVID-19, helping them identify others they may have been exposed, then supporting them through quarantine and testing.

For any of our efforts to succeed, we must account for and honestly confront the distrust many people feel in our public institutions.

In this time of massive societal upheaval, we have a tremendous opportunity to shift our focus and resources to fully embrace public health solutions. But our field will need to reckon with our own painful history of systemic racism to realize our full potential.

If we are to continue making the breakthroughs that improve and extend lives as public health has done for decades, we must embrace the moment we are in.

It’s time to rethink public health by understanding the inequities that are making people sick and targeting resources where they are needed most.

Bechara Choucair, a family physician by training, was commissioner of the Chicago Department of Public Health from 2009 to 2014.

He is currently senior vice president and chief health officer at Kaiser Permanente and author of “Precision Community Health: Four Innovations for Well-being.”

Note: My Daydreaming health re-structuring project https://adonis49.wordpress.com/2011/12/17/daydream-project-restructuring-medical-and-health-care-providers/

 

A repeat of 1915 famine? Lebanon economic situation

‘People will die within months’:

Is Lebanon heading for famine as Corona pandemic accelerates hunger?

And as the colonial powers, headed by USA, sanctioning Lebanon and Syria economy and financial weak conditions?

Hit by its worst economic crisis in modern history, there are fears the country is about to repeat the 1915-18 famine

Note: Hassan Nasrallah, general secretary of Hezbollah, promised that the organization will never let famine set in. Hezbollah maybe the only organization bringing in dollars into Lebanon. I trust in the promises of Hassan.

Greek former finance minister Yanis Varoufakis said:  Lebanese must have the courage to nationalize the banks and restructure the Central Bank, issue a new currency and desist from seeking IMF money…” We have a pseudo-State and a pseudo “citizen” 

The following description of the situation could be accurate from the Pseudo-State perspective of managing the helplessness morale of the 90% of the “citizens”

Mohamad barely looks surprised when his phone vibrates with an update on the devaluation of the Lebanese pound.  

“Great, now my salary is worth $60,” the 30-year-old Syrian economics teacher turned refugee said, shaking his head.

In the past week alone, the Lebanese pound has lost over 40% of its value.

Millions of people are watching their savings and salaries disappear as food inflation hits nearly 200%.

(For example, my retirement monthly wage with the Engineer Order is supposed to be $900. The bank where the money of retirement is deposited is still valued as 1, 350,000 Lira. Practically, with one $ worth 8,000 Lira, my net check is barely $160 today and being devalued repeatedly. Basically, I am receiving 1/6 th of what is my due)

Mohamad stood in the market in Beirut’s Shatila refugee camp, trying to calculate how much food he could afford for himself, his wife and two children.

In the end, he decides on potatoes for dinner: three potatoes sliced up, with half a red pepper and some cucumbers on the side. That would have to be dinner for four.

“Before the dollar crisis, my monthly salary as a freelance accounting assistant would last 15-20 days. Now it’s only enough for five days. I think they will probably make us all leave our jobs at the end of July… my family are already past the minimum that we can survive on. We borrow from the market to eat for the rest of the month.”

Hit by its worst economic crisis in modern history, the Lebanese pound has lost over 80% of its value since October, when nationwide anti-corruption protests began to rock the country.

Despite a decades-long peg of 1,500 to the dollar, people now widely use the black market value of the pound as a reference of the currency’s real worth.

(The Exchange syndicate, legit or not,  is in cohort with the Central Bank and the Banks: They receive the orders and supplies for the exchange rate that devalued to 8,000 Lira to the $)

According to a recent UN report, by the end of April over half of the country was struggling to put the most basic produce on the table as food prices had risen by 56% since October. Preliminary results show that between mid-March and May, they rose by another 50%.

(Actually, all produces and product have more than tripled in price, and the locally prod

Workers wearing protective face masks serve a large crowd of customers at the counter inside a local bakery in Beirut, Lebanon
Workers wearing protective face masks serve a large crowd of customers at the counter inside a local bakery in Beirut, Lebanon CREDIT: Hasan Shaaban /Bloomberg

Accelerated by the pandemic, unemployment is soaring, the value of wages are plummeting and prices continue to skyrocket. Lebanon is also host to around 1.5 million refugees – the most per capita in the world.

And it is no longer refugees and other vulnerable people who are concerned about being able to feed their families as Lebanon’s economic turmoil continues to spiral out of control.

“From aid given by the WFP, refugees could afford some food in the past,” said Martin Keulertz, Assistant Professor in the Food Security Programme at the American University of Beirut.

“They were able to consume some lentils, some labneh and so on, but rarely vegetables. Fruits were difficult and meat was out of the question. What is very concerning is now the majority of Lebanese people are on a similar trajectory,” he said.

Could Lebanon be heading to a repeat of the 1915-18 famine in which the country lost half of the population? “Absolutely,” said Dr Keulertz.

(Germany and Turkey imposed a stop to any import to Lebanon during WWI and hoarded what was still available in foodstuff. Lebanese were forced to go with their mules and donkeys to Syria (Houran province) in order to bring wheat and basic foodstuff)

“By the end of the year, we will see 75% of the population on food handouts, but the question is whether there will be food to hand out.”

“Surely in the new few months we will see a very grave scenario in which people will be starving and people will die from hunger and the knock-on effects of starvation.”

Mohamad Chreim in his butcher's shop
A kilogram of meat in Mohamad Chreim’s butcher’s shop used to cost the equivalent of $11, but now costs $33 as he has been forced to almost triple his prices since October. CREDIT: Abbie Cheeseman

The prospect of widespread hunger in Lebanon also raises increased fears over a second wave of coronavirus, Dr Keulertz explained, as people with compromised immune systems are far more likely to die.

Mohamad is among the more fortunate Syrian refugees in Lebanon in that he still has some work.

According to a survey published last week by the UN World Food Programme (WFP), 3 out of 4 Syrians in Lebanon have lost their job or have no income.

Abdullah Al-Wardat, WFP country director for Lebanon, told the Telegraph that WFP now estimates 83 per cent of the estimated 1.5 million Syrians here are surviving on less than $2.90 per day, the minimum needed for physical survival and a category that is aligned with abject poverty.

After paying rent, Mohamad has the equivalent of $66 to spend on food for his family.

Milk for his children cost $18 before the dollar-crisis began, now even after choosing a lower-quality option, the cheapest he can buy it for is $33. A bag of rice is now $10, sugar is $8. The basic staples he used to be able to buy for those $66 would last his family ten days, now they last two.

Much like the economic collapse, Lebanon has been sliding towards food insecurity for decades.

Crumbling infrastructure, a lack of state investment and political mismanagement have left the agriculture sector contributing just 3% to the annual GDP, despite providing jobs for a quarter of the national workforce.

Like every sector in Lebanon, agriculture is riddled with corruption and powerful traders exploiting both farmers and consumers. Now, coronavirus and the economic crisis have brought Lebanon’s unsustainable approach towards almost every part of its economy crashing down.

The result is that Lebanon imports up to 80% of its food, leaving it vulnerable to price fluctuations and now the collapse of its own currency.

The struggle for food importers is only set to get worse as they are now forced to buy around 80 per cent of their foreign currency for imports on the ever-increasing black market rate, aside from a list of 30 essentials that are subsidised by the government.

There are two initial pillars of food security, explained an official at the UN’s World Food Programme.

Firstly, having enough food in the country and secondly, people having the purchasing power to access it.

Lebanon is facing a double whammy with a hit to both pillars at the same time.

Imports have already dropped by an estimated 50 per cent on last year, said Hani Boshali, president of the Syndicate of Importers of Foodstuffs, Consumer Products and Drinks.

The struggle for food importers is only set to get worse as they are now forced to buy around 80 per cent of their foreign currency for imports on the ever-increasing black market rate.

According to Dr Keulertz, Lebanon needs around $500 million per year for food imports, particularly as only 13 per cent of its land is arable.

“If you do the maths, Lebanon can only feed around 130,000 people per year. The food crisis needs foreign intervention – it is a lot cheaper to save this country than it will be to allow a country that has done Europe a service by hosting refugees to collapse,” the AUB professor said.

Crowds queue to buy bread at a local bakery in Beirut, Lebanon
Crowds queue to buy bread at a local bakery in Beirut, Lebanon CREDIT: Bloomberg

In all corners of the tiny Mediterranean country, the middle class are becoming poor and the poor are sliding into destitution, as food prices are pushed beyond the means of most people.

Sixty-year-old Mohamad Chreim has owned a butcher’s shop in central Beirut for over 40 years. “I was doing well before the crisis, making at least one or two million pounds. I was so busy I wouldn’t stop all day”.

Now Mr Chreim is paying 200,000 pounds per day out of his pocket just to keep his business open. “People who used to buy in kilograms cannot afford meat anymore, so when they come in they buy in the grams.”

A kilogram of meat from Mr Chreim’s shop used to cost the equivalent of $11, but now costs $33 as he has been forced to almost triple his prices since October.

“If the economic crisis continues, who knows, I may not be able to open tomorrow. I am paying out of my own pocket to stay open because I’ll be depressed if I stay at home”.

Like everyone living off their savings, Mr Chreim is unsure how long he will be able to survive this way.

While restaurants went empty, the queues for bakeries stretched over the weekend amid news that bread would stop being distributed to supermarkets and shops in light of the collapsing currency.

(Cost of flour is supposed to be mostly shouldered by the State, but it is Not correct. Anyway, fancy bakeries and sweets are forcing the traditional bread bakery to increase the price of 900 g of bread to 2,000 Lira)

The sight of people searching through bins for food and long queues for aid distribution have become commonplace in a city that was not too long ago a playground for the rich and famous.

As cash runs out and the purchasing power of the average Lebanese continues to plummet, a barter economy is emerging. (Lebanese have no tradition in business barter, just bartering in ceremonies)

With commodities reaching almost triple their original prices, Facebook is slowly filling with posts of people trying to trade their personal belongings for basic necessities.

“Trading for a bag of Oui Oui diapers and a bag of Kleo milk”, one post read with a picture of a set of drinking glasses attached.

  • Additional reporting: Angie Mrad

They are exhausting: Legitimate, Temporary, and Necessary. And all are faked terms

Note: Re-edit of “Legitimate, Temporary, and Necessary. June 5, 2009″

It is the temporary term that is the most frustrating: it means for ever.

And basically, nothing was legitimate since the “independence” of this pseudo-State in 1943.

 On June 7, 2009, the Lebanese will vote for a new Parliament.

Two groups of citizens will vote; the group constituted of the patriotic, secular, and reformists and the group of an amalgam of confessionals, feudalists, isolationists, statue quo,  and “colonial minded” mentalities.

The “colonial minded” citizens follow leaders who invariably rely on foreign interventions to balance a broken alliance among confessional castes system and perpetrate the conditions for weak central governments.

A brief current history might elucidate this drastic splitting among the Lebanese citizens. I

n May 24, 2000, Ehud Barak PM of Israel withdrew from most of south Lebanon with no preconditions, the first ever in Israel 61 years history of colonial implantation in our midst.

The joint strategy of Lebanon President Lahoud and Bashar Assad of Syria enabled Hezbollah a resounding victory.

The Arab League decided to hold its annual meeting in Beirut in August 2002 as a good gesture for its acknowledgment of the victory in 2000 of this tiny State.

In 2003, Syria had plans for partial withdrawal to the Bekaa Valley but the vehement rhetoric from the Druze leader Walid Jumblatt and the Patriarch of the Maronite Christian sect slowed down the execution process.

Before the assassination of late Rafic Hariri in February 14, 2005 the Bush Jr. Administration and Jacque Chirac of France issued the UN resolution 1559 for the retreat of the Syrian forces from Lebanon and the dismantling of Hezbollah’s military wing and the return of its heavy armament.

The withdrawal of the Syrian troops was not the main objective because the international community and the main “Arabic” States wanted and kept high hopes that Syria will ultimately be pressured to do the dirty work of taming Hezbollah.

The Syrian government factored in many variables to oppose the frequent lures and pressures of what is expected of her to do in order to remain in Lebanon.

The targeting Rafic Hariri for assassination by the US, France, Saudi Arabia, and mainly Israel was not one of the variables considered and Syria strategy was shaken violently.

In fact, Rafic Hariri received so many encouragements and acted in such confidence that the Syrian government forgot to contemplate such an evil and drastic eventuality by foreign colonial powers.

The mass demonstration on February 14 was not a threat to Syria; General Aoun was still in exile in France and was pressured by the French government Not to return to Lebanon.

What Syria comprehended the loudest was the mass demonstration by Hezbollah on March 8, 2005.  Hezbollah thanked Syria for its sacrifices, which meant “Now it is time for your complete withdrawal

Hezbollah was always nervous of the Syrian presence in Lebanon because it was the only power capable of restraining its activities.

Hezbollah was sending the message to Bashar Assad “We can take care of ourselves and still continue the resistance against Israel if you definitely put an end to the international pressures for getting out of Lebanon”

The mass demonstration in March 14, fortified by the supporters of General Aoun (The Tayyar Horr), was not even a threat to Syria.  It was the realization of Syria that its continued presence in Lebanon will ultimately confront its army directly as the Lebanese government lost control over events and cowered under uncertainties.

Syria withdrew quickly to the frustration of the US and France who realized that they wasted Hariri for naught: Hariri could still be of great benefit to their policies in the Middle East region alive rather than dead.

The International Community, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia had to fall back to plan B: rekindling the civil war in Lebanon.  They initiated a series of bombing in Christian quarters hoping that the Christian will side en mass with the Sunni/Hariri clan.  Plan B petered.

Israel/Saudi Kingdom came back with more vigorous scare tactics by assassinating Christian personalities.  Samir Kassir, George Hawi, and Jubran Tweiny were marked as potentially Not reliable allies and could shift sides because they were independent minded and honest characters.

This wave of select assassination backfired because General Aoun signed a pact with Hezbollah and de-activated a potential civil war targeting the Christians.

Plan C also failed and civil war did not flare out.

Thus, direct intervention from outside was considered and Israel trained its forces for incursion into Lebanon with the US total aids and support in all phases.

Hezbollah, intentionally or by coincidence, preempted the completion of the plan in June 12, 2006.  Israel launched its offensive for 33 days and failed miserably in all the goals.  The attack backfired and the stature of Hezbollah ballooned and overflowed to all the Arab and Muslim populations.

The International Community, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia did not desist.

Plan D was to re-enforce the Sunnis with a military wing of extremist salafists called “Jund Al Sham” and financed by Bandar Bib Sultan of Saudi Arabia.

In the summer of 2007, a few ignorant and violent Sunni extremists preempted the timing by slaughtering Lebanese soldiers; the army pride and dignity reacted with an all out attack and crushed this insurrection in Nahr Al Bared Palestinian camp after many months and many martyrs.

The International Community, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia studied for two years to dismantle Hezbollah secured communication lines and to start a mini civil war in Beirut between the Shia and Sunnis.

Plan E backfired again on May 8, 2008 as Hezbollah occupied all the Israeli secret intelligence centers in Beirut, as well as the quarters of the so-called security organizations.

The Lebanese leaders had to meet in Dawha and agree on the election of a President to the Republic, an election law for Parliament, and the constitution of a national government.

Lebanon has suffered for 4 years of an incompetent and illegitimate government; the Lebanese lived in a totally insecure political vacuum; the economy was farmed out to the size of the Hariri clan and the financial debt skyrocketed to $60 billions.

This “political” debt is intended to pressure the Lebanese government into accepting the settling of the 400,000 Palestinian refugees in Lebanon in return for debt cancellation.

We need to compare 4 categories of leaders along the two dimensions of principled leaders and pragmatists.

In the dimension of principled leaders we can discriminate the hate monger isolationist leaders versus the principled for the public and State good.

In the pragmatic dimension we have the individual interest oriented and the public/State pragmatists.

For example: Walid Jumblatt, Marwan Hamadeh, Amine Gemayel, Samir Geagea, and the Patriarch of the Christian Maronite sect can be categorized in the isolationist, confessional, and personal minded leaders.

Ex-President Emile Lahoud, General Michel Aoun, Hassan Nasrallah and the ancient secular parties (Communists and Syria National Social Party) could be classified as the principled and public/State object oriented pragmatists.

The classification of the remainder of the semi-leaders I leave it to the readers as exercises.

The Mufti of Beirut is a non entity: he is the bugle of Saad Hariri.  Saad Hariri is a non entity: he re-edited the slogan of the chairman of General Motors to say “What is good for the Saudi Monarchs is good for Lebanon”.  General Motors has declared bankruptcy; the Hariri/Seniora clan will declare bankruptcy on June 8, 2009.

With the exception of General Aoun who refused any kind of occupations, all leaders welcomed the mandate of Syria for 20 years; they kept repeating the mantra “The presence of Syria in Lebanon is “Legitimate, Temporary, and Necessary”.

Marwan Hamadeh and all the actual ministers were the ones repeating this mantra to the nauseating public for 20 years.

The Maronite Patriarch Sfeir was against the Syrian presence but was pretty cool regarding Israel’s occupation.

The members of the Seniora PM government did not voice out their refusal of Israel’s occupation of part of south Lebanon and constantly conspired to weaken the resistance forces against the Israeli occupiers on the basis that only international diplomacy can pressure Israel!

Only President Lahoud stood steadfast with Hezbollah and refused to deploy the army in areas of the resistance’s operations.

Thanks to Hassan Nasrallah and President Lahoud Lebanon managed to secure its integrity and unify its army.  Thanks to Hassan Nasr Allah and General Michel Aoun Lebanon buried any likelihood for the resurgence of a civil war.

My spirit went to statesman General Aoun who said once the Syrian troops crossed the borders “Syria is now out of Lebanon.  I have no qualms with Syria anymore. This is the time to open a new page in our relations”.

This position stands in contrast to those who begged Syria for crumbs and privileges for 20 years and once Syria withdrew they refrained from normalizing relations with Syria; the fictitious excuses to antagonize Syria were dictated by Saudi Arabia and Egypt.  What kind of state leadership is that?

The election results of June 7, 2009 should fortify Lebanon as a Nation and project the image of a solid central government with serious reforms and changes to the archaic political system.

That are my wishes but I know the struggle will be long and protracted.  Sweet revolutions need time to mature in this diversified Lebanon.

Note: All parliament elections in Lebanon bring in sectarian and feudal candidate. In 2020, Lebanese were left with a totally bankrupt State economically and financially. We are to suffer many years of “famine” conditions and no realistic hope in the future for any change or economic development.

Rise of Default Man And its fall

White blob, middle-class, heterosexual, middle-aged Silent Majority man

Note: Re-edit of “The rise and fall of Default Man. November 2, 2014″

Paddle your canoe up the River Thames and you will come round the bend and see a forest of huge totems jutting into the sky.

Great shiny monoliths in various phallic shapes, they are the wondrous cultural artifacts of a remarkable tribe.

We all know someone from this powerful tribe but we very rarely, if ever, ascribe their power to the fact that they have a particular tribal identity.

Grayson Perry in The rise and fall of Default Man, October 8, 2014

How did the straight, white, middle-class Default Man take control of our society?

And how can he be dethroned?

I think this tribe, a small minority of our native population, needs closer examination.

In the UK, its members probably make up about 10% of the population (see infographic below); globally, probably less than 1%.

Attack of the clones: Default Man is so entrenched in society that he is “like a Death Star hiding behind the moon”. Artwork by Grayson Perry

Grayson Perry’s guest-edited issue of the New Statesman is on sale on Thursday 9 October. Visit newstatesman.com/subscribe to get a copy

They dominate the upper echelons of our society, imposing, unconsciously or otherwise, their values and preferences on the rest of the population.

With their colourful textile phallus hanging round their necks, they make up an overwhelming majority in government, in boardrooms and also in the media.

They are, of course, white, middle-class, heterosexual men, usually middle-aged.

And every component of that description has historically played a part in making this tribe a group that punches far, far above its weight.

I have struggled to find a name for this identity that will trip off the tongue, or that doesn’t clutter the page with unpronounceable acronyms such as WMCMAHM.

“The White Blob” was a strong contender but in the end I opted to call him Default Man.

I like the word “default”, for not only does it mean “the result of not making an active choice”, but two of its synonyms are “failure to pay” and “evasion”, which seems incredibly appropriate, considering the group I wish to talk about.

Today, in politically correct 21st-century Britain, you might think things would have changed but somehow the Great White Male has thrived and continues to colonise the high-status, high-earning, high-power roles

(93% of executive directors in the UK are white men; 77% of parliament is male).

The Great White Male’s combination of good education, manners, charm, confidence and sexual attractiveness (or “money”, as I like to call it) means he has a strong grip on the keys to power.

Of course, the main reason he has those qualities in the first place is what he is, not what he has achieved.

John Scalzi, in his blog Whatever, thought that being a straight white male was like playing the computer game called Life with the difficulty setting on “Easy”.

If you are a Default Man you look like power.

I must confess that I qualify in many ways to be a Default Man myself but I feel that by coming from a working-class background and being an artist and a transvestite, I have enough cultural distance from the towers of power. I have space to turn round and get a fairly good look at the edifice.

In the course of making my documentary series about identity, Who Are You?, for Channel 4, the identity I found hardest to talk about, the most elusive, was Default Man’s.

Somehow, his world-view, his take on society, now so overlaps with the dominant narrative that it is like a Death Star hiding behind the moon.

We cannot unpick his thoughts and feelings from the “proper, right-thinking” attitudes of our society. It is like in the past, when people who spoke in cut-glass, RP, BBC tones would insist they did not have an accent, only northerners and poor people had one of those.

We live and breathe in a Default Male world: no wonder he succeeds, for much of our society operates on his terms.

Chris Huhne (60, Westminster, PPE Mag­dalen, self-destructively heterosexual), the Default Man we chose to interview for our series, pooh-poohed any suggestion when asked if he benefited from membership or if he represented this group.

Lone Default Man will never admit to, or be fully aware of, the tribal advantages of his identity. They are, naturally, full subscribers to that glorious capitalist project, they are individuals!

This adherence to being individuals is the nub of the matter. Being “individual” means that if they achieve something good, it is down to their own efforts.

They got the job because they are brilliant, not because they are a Default Man, and they are also presumed more competent by other Default Men.

If they do something bad it is also down to the individual and not to do with their gender, race or class.

If a Default Man commits a crime it is not because fraud or sexual harassment, say, are endemic in his tribe (coughs), it is because he is a wrong ’un.

If a Default Man gets emotional it is because he is a “passionate” individual, whereas if he were a woman it would often be blamed on her sex.

When we talk of identity, we often think of groups such as black Muslim lesbians in wheelchairs. This is because identity only seems to become an issue when it is challenged or under threat.

Our classic Default Man is rarely under existential threat; consequently, his identity remains unexamined. It ambles along blithely, never having to stand up for its rights or to defend its homeland.

When talking about identity groups, the word “community” often crops up. The working class, gay people, black people or Muslims are always represented by a “community leader”.

We rarely, if ever, hear of the white middle-class community. “Communities” are defined in the eye of Default Man.

Community seems to be a euphemism for the vulnerable lower orders. Community is “other”.

Communities usually seem to be embattled, separate from society.

“Society” is what Default Man belongs to.

In news stories such as the alleged “Trojan Horse” plot in Birmingham schools and the recent child-abuse scandal in Rotherham, the central involvement of an ethnic or faith “community” skews the attitudes of police, social services and the media.

The Muslim or Pakistani heritage of those accused becomes the focus.

I’m not saying that faith and ethnic groups don’t have their particular problems but the recipe for such trouble is made up of more than one spicy, foreign ingredient.

I would say it involves more than a few handfuls of common-or-garden education/class issues, poor mental health and, of course, the essential ingredient in nearly all nasty or violent problems, men.

Yeah, men – bit like them Default Men but without suits on.

In her essay “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema”, published in 1975, Laura Mulvey coined the term “the male gaze”. She was writing about how the gaze of the movie camera reflected the heterosexual male viewpoint of the directors (a viewpoint very much still with us, considering that only 9% of the top 250 Hollywood films in 2012 were directed by women and only 2% of the cinematographers were female).

The Default Male gaze does not just dominate cinema, it looks down on society like the eye on Sauron’s tower in The Lord of the Rings.

Every other identity group is “othered” by it. It is the gaze of the expensively nondescript corporate leader watching consumers adorn themselves with his company’s products the better to get his attention.

Default Man feels he is the reference point from which all other values and cultures are judged. Default Man is the zero longitude of identities.

He has forged a society very much in his own image, to the point where now much of what other groups think and feel is the same. They take on the attitudes of Default Man because they are the attitudes of our elders, our education, our government, our media.

If Default Men approve of something it must be good, and if they disapprove it must be bad, so people end up hating themselves, because their internalised Default Man is berating them for being female, gay, black, silly or wild.

I often hear women approvingly describe themselves or other women as feisty.

Feisty, I feel, has sexist implications, as if standing up for yourself was exceptional in a woman. It sounds like a word that a raffish Lothario would use about a difficult conquest.

I once gave a talk on kinky sex and during the questions afterwards a gay woman floated an interesting thought: “Is the legalising of gay marriage an attempt to neutralise the otherness of homosexuals?” she asked. Was the subversive alternative being neutered by allowing gays to marry and ape a hetero lifestyle?

Many gay people might have enjoyed their dangerous outsider status. Had Default Man implanted a desire to be just like him?

Is the fact that we think like Default Man the reason why a black female Doctor Who has not happened, that it might seem “wrong” or clunky? In my experience, when I go to the doctor I am more likely to see a non-white woman than a Default Man.

It is difficult to tweezer out the effect of Default Man on our culture, so ingrained is it after centuries of their rules.

A friend was once on a flight from Egypt. As it came in to land at Heathrow he looked down at the rows of mock-Tudor stockbroker-belt houses in west London. Pointing them out, he said to the Egyptian man sitting next to him: “Oh well, back to boring old England.” The Egyptian replied, “Ah, but to me this is very exotic.” And he was right.

To much of the world the Default Englishman is a funny foreign folk icon, with his bowler hat, his Savile Row suit and Hugh Grant accent, living like Reggie Perrin in one of those polite suburban semis.

All the same, his tribal costume and rituals have probably clothed and informed the global power elite more than any other culture. Leaders wear his clothes, talk his language and subscribe to some version of his model of how society “should be”.

When I was at art college in the late Seventies/early Eighties, one of the slogans the feminists used was: “Objectivity is Male Subjectivity.”

This brilliantly encapsulates how male power nestles in our very language, exerting influence at the most fundamental level. Men, especially Default Men, have put forward their biased, highly emotional views as somehow “rational”, more considered, more “calm down, dear”.

Women and “exotic” minorities are framed as “passionate” or “emotional” as if they, the Default Men, had this unique ability to somehow look round the side of that most interior lens, the lens that is always distorted by our feelings.

Default Man somehow had a dispassionate, empirical, objective vision of the world as a birthright, and everyone else was at the mercy of turbulent, uncontrolled feelings. That explained why the “others” often held views that were at such odds with their supposedly cool, analytic vision of the world.

Recently, footage of the UN spokesman Chris Gunness breaking down in tears as he spoke of the horrors occurring in Gaza went viral.

It was newsworthy because reporters and such spokespeople are supposed to be dispassionate and impartial. To show such feelings was to be “unprofessional”. And lo! The inherited mental health issues of Default Man are cast as a necessity for serious employment.

I think Default Man should be made aware of the costs and increasing obsolescence of this trait, celebrated as “a stiff upper lip”.

This habit of denying, recasting or suppressing emotion may give him the veneer of “professionalism” but, as David Hume put it: “Reason is a slave of the passions.”

To be unaware of or unwilling to examine feelings means those feelings have free rein to influence behaviour unconsciously. Unchecked, they can motivate Default Man covertly, unacknowledged, often wreaking havoc.

Even if rooted in long-past events in the deep unconscious, these emotions still fester, churning in the dark at the bottom of the well. Who knows what unconscious, screwed-up “personal journeys” are being played out on the nation by emotionally illiterate Default Men?

Being male and middle class and being from a generation that still valued the stiff upper lip means our Default Man is an ideal candidate for low emotional awareness. He sits in a gender/ class/age nexus marked “Unexploded Emotional Time Bomb”.

These people have been in charge of our world for a long time.

Things may be changing.

Women are often stereotyped as the emotional ones, and men as rational. But, after the 2008 crash, the picture looked different, as Hanna Rosin wrote in an article in the Atlantic titled “The End of Men”:

Researchers have started looking into the relationship between testosterone and excessive risk, and wondering if groups of men, in some basic hormonal way, spur each other to make reckless decisions.

The picture emerging is a mirror image of the traditional gender map: men and markets on the side of the irrational and overemotional, and women on the side of the cool and level-headed.

Over the centuries, empirical, clear thinking has become branded with the image of Default Men. They were the ones granted the opportunity, the education, the leisure, the power to put their thoughts out into the world. In people’s minds, what do professors look like?

What do judges should look like? What do leaders look like?

The very aesthetic of seriousness has been monopolised by Default Man. Practically every person on the globe who wants to be taken seriously in politics, business and the media dresses up in some way like a Default Man, in a grey, western, two-piece business suit.

Not for nothing is it referred to as “power dressing”.

We’ve all seen those photo ops of world leaders: colour and pattern shriek out as anachronistic. Consequently, many women have adopted this armour of the unremarkable.

Angela Merkel, the most powerful woman in the world, wears a predictable unfussy, feminised version of the male look. Hillary Clinton has adopted a similar style. Some businesswomen describe this need to tone down their feminine appearance as “taking on the third gender”.

Peter Jones on Dragons’ Den was once referred to as “eccentric” for wearing brightly coloured stripy socks. So rigid is the Default Man look that men’s suit fashions pivot on tiny changes of detail at a glacial pace. US politicians wear such a narrow version of the Default Man look that you rarely see one wearing a tie that is not plain or striped.

Suits you, sir: Grayson Perry as Default Man.
Photo: Kalpesh Lathigra/New Statesman

One tactic that men use to disguise their subjectively restricted clothing choices is the justification of spurious function.

As if they need a watch that splits lap times and works 300 feet underwater, or a Himalayan mountaineer’s jacket for a walk in the park. The rufty-tufty army/hunter camouflage pattern is now to boys as pink is to girls. Curiously, I think the real function of the sober business suit is not to look smart but as camouflage.

A person in a grey suit is invisible, in the way burglars often wear hi-vis jackets to pass as unremarkable “workmen”.

The business suit is the uniform of those who do the looking, the appraising.

It rebuffs comment by its sheer ubiquity. Many office workers loathe dress-down Fridays because they can no longer hide behind a suit. They might have to expose something of their messy selves through their “casual” clothes.

Modern, over-professionalised politicians, having spent too long in the besuited tribal compound, find casual dress very difficult to get right convincingly.

David Cameron, while ruining Converse basketball shoes for the rest of us, never seemed to me as if he belonged in a pair.

When I am out and about in an eye-catching frock, men often remark to me, “Oh, I wish I could dress like you and did not have to wear a boring suit.” Have to!

The male role is heavily policed from birth, by parents, peers and bosses. Politicians in particular are harshly kept in line by a media that seems to uphold more bizarrely rigid standards of conformity than those held by any citizen.

Each component of the Default Male role – his gender, his class, his age and his sexuality – confines him to an ever narrower set of behaviours, until riding a bicycle or growing a beard, having messy hair or enjoying a pint are seen as ker-azy eccentricity.

The fashionable members’ club Shoreditch House, the kind of place where “creatives” with two iPhones and three bicycles hang out, has a “No Suits” rule. How much of this is a pseudo-rebellious pose and how much is in recognition of the pernicious effect of the overgrown schoolboy’s uniform, I do not know.

I dwell on the suit because I feel it exemplifies how the upholders of Default Male values hide in plain sight. Imagine if, by democratic decree, the business suit was banned, like certain items of Islamic dress have been banned in some countries. Default Men would flounder and complain that they were not being treated with “respect”.

The most pervasive aspect of the Default Man identity is that it masquerades very efficiently as “normal” – and “normal”, along with “natural”, is a dangerous word, often at the root of hateful prejudice.

As Sherrie Bourg Carter, author of High-Octane Women, writes:

Women in today’s workforce . . . are experiencing a much more camouflaged foe – second-generation gender biases . . . “work cultures and practices that appear neutral and natural on their face”, yet they reflect masculine values and life situations of men.

Personally, working in the arts, I do not often encounter Default Man en masse, but when I do it is a shock. I occasionally get invited to formal dinners in the City of London and on arrival, I am met, in my lurid cocktail dress, with a sea of dinner jackets; my expectations of a satisfying conversation drop.

I feel rude mentioning the black-clad elephant in the room. I sense that I am the anthropologist allowed in to the tribal ritual.

This weird minority, these curiously dominant white males, are anything but normal. “Normal,” as Carl Jung said, “is the ideal aim for the unsuccessful.” They like to keep their abnormal power low-key: the higher the power, the duller the suit and tie, a Mercedes rather than a Rolls, just another old man chatting casually to prime ministers at the wedding of a tabloid editor.

Revolution is happening. I am loath to use the R word because bearded young men usually characterise it as sudden and violent. But that is just another unhelpful cliché.

I feel real revolutions happen thoughtfully in peacetime. A move away from the dominance of Default Man is happening, but way too slowly.

Such changes in society seem to happen at a pace set by incremental shifts in the animal spirits of the population. I have heard many of the “rational” (ie, male) arguments against quotas and positive discrimination but I feel it is a necessary fudge to enable just change to happen in the foreseeable future. At the present rate of change it will take more than a hundred years before the UK parliament is 50% female.

The outcry against positive discrimination is the wail of someone who is having their privilege taken away. For talented black, female and working-class people to take their just place in the limited seats of power, some of those Default Men are going to have to give up their seats.

Perhaps Default Man needs to step down from some of his most celebrated roles. I’d happily watch a gay black James Bond and an all-female Top GearQI or Have I Got News for You.

Jeremy Paxman should have been replaced by a woman on Newsnight. More importantly, we need a quota of MPs who (shock) have not been to university but have worked on the shop floor of key industries; have had life experiences that reflect their constituents’; who actually represent the country rather than just a narrow idea of what a politician looks like.

The ridiculousness of objections to quotas would become clear if you were to suggest that, instead of calling it affirmative action, we adopted “Proportionate Default Man Quotas” for government and business. We are wasting talent. Women make up a majority of graduates in such relevant fields as law.

Default Man seems to be the embodiment of George Bernard Shaw unreasonable man: “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to make the world adapt to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”

Default Man’s days may be numbered; a lot of his habits are seen at best as old-fashioned or quaint and at worst as redundant, dangerous or criminal. He carries a raft of unhelpful habits and attitudes gifted to him from history – adrenaline addiction, a need for certainty, snobbery, emotional constipation and an overdeveloped sense of entitlement – which have often proved disastrous for society and can also stop poor Default Man from leading a fulfilling life.

Earlier this year, at the Being A Man festival at the Southbank Centre in London, I gave a talk on masculinity called: “Men, Sit Down for your Rights!”. A jokey title, yes, but one making a serious point: that perhaps, if men were to loosen their grip on power, there might be some benefits for them.

The straitjacket of the Default Man identity is not necessarily one happily donned by all members of the tribe: many struggle with the bad fit of being leader, provider, status hunter, sexual predator, respectable and dignified symbol of straight achievement.

Maybe the “invisible weightless backpack” that the US feminist Peggy McIntosh uses to describe white privilege, full of “special provisions, maps, passports, codebooks, visas, clothes, tools and blank checks”, does weight rather a lot after all.

In a phrase used more often in association with Operation Yewtree, they are among us and hide in plain sight.

When was that you Day Dreamed a Utopian Project?

Note: Re-edit of “Did you Day Dream a Utopian Project?.  May 20, 2009

Did you Daydream a Utopian Project? (May 19, 2009)

Have you day dreamt of a utopian project?  I have so many times day dreamt of projects that were to be ideal in profitability, organization, equitability, fairness,…

Projects that encourages and promotes individual creativities, and leaving plenty of free time for individual accomplishment and continuing education.

There are moments in any one of these projects where the more utopian you strive for the more variables you have to contend with.

Every detail generates its own set of variability, and quickly the interactions are too many for the mind to coordinate and analyze.

Suddenly, you end it as abruptly as in happy movies.

Yes, it is complicated but everybody should be living happily ever after.

Then you are carried by curiosity: you want to take the dreamt up project further to its ultimate glory.

The more you resolve complicated interactions among people, the more your solutions revert to totalitarian solutions and the more your answers smack of a one party regime reactions to diversities.

Then I realize that, fundamentally, I am No better than any dictator who managed to amass enough power to exercise coercions at will.

Utopias are dangerous exercises of the mind and they sting potently the trust in our potentials to fairness and equitability.  

The only utility to dreaming up utopia is to vent up the bottled up anger of helplessness to act and change.

Utopias are far more dangerous when a restricted and select caste of elites assemble to apply and enforce their sick view of an ideal society.

Utopias are not the solution and never will improve human conditions.

Read any samples of Utopias from Plato, to Thomas Moore, and to the Zionist ideology and you will realize that the end product is a subdivision of society by caste systems where people rule and the lower strata produce and serve. The end product is a huge set of rules and regulations that can put to shame the gigantic daily constraints of the Jewish Pharisee sect.

Study the Utopias of those who managed to horde power from Napoleon, to Bismarck, to Hitler, to Mussolini, to Lenin, to Stalin, to Mao Tse Tong, and finally to Bush Jr./Cheney and the end product was destruction, utter humiliation of the people, hate crimes, and genocides.

There are other kinds of utopias.

You have those forecasting the future, fifty years from now, in all sorts of topics such as political systems, emergence of new superpowers, technological breakthrough, social conditions, trends of how fast people will die of famine, and the increase in social divides among the wealthy and the dregs.

Sure, those forecasters inevitably claim that they are analyzing current trends if all conditions remain controlled, though they have no idea what are those conditions and how they are controlled. 

Forecasting the future is another way of thinking aloud individual utopia because no one is forecasting without strong biases as to his present mind set.

It is important to have a strategy in any planning for the long duration: It is the means to elaborate short-term projects that should converge to the grand idea for a fairer and equitable society at all levels of human rights and economic sustenance.

If the “tactical” short-term projects of less than a year to execute, evaluate and get acceptance by the community are Not carried out seriously, then the strategy will end up in catastrophic consequences to the society. Many of these strategies cornered communities into state of famine, violence and indignities…

Particularly, when the people in power and institutions are immuable figures that never relinquish their positions and are unable to change their biased mind set.

So far, the only valid forecasting time line is of six months; it is adopted by the analysts of market and fashion trends of the adapters in the age category of 20 to 30 years.

Actually, people do Not remember much of their desires and wants once a certain period has elapsed. People need to be frequently reminded of their intentions during previous evaluations and referendums.

The Nordic States in Europe have confidence in the educated opinions of their people and don’t mind to arrange for frequent referendum on any subject matter that divide the communities and to act upon. And this is “democracy” at work.

There is no doubt in my mind that promotional tactics biase people in believing that they are setting the trend by surfing the internet and disseminating their interests; but that’s how democracy should be at work.

Democratic systems should expose programs and disseminate them and then evaluate what people selected after a period of six months of diffusion among the active population.

What category of Sins have you decided to Confess lately?

Do you recall any sins that you were pressured to confess before the age of 12?

Kind of extending to you a list of potential sins that must select to satisfy the logic of confession.

Most probably, the confessor is never interested in your kinds of sins and must be snoozing and then punish you with a couple of Ave and other prayers that you must have memorized for that situation.

Did you feel humiliated for Not having any sins to share with the rest of the people?

As you grow older, to do feel this indignity to confess what could take you to prison, deny you the right to vote, to find another job…?

Do you know that 3 million of incarcerated Blacks in the US southern States are denied the right to vote? And you are still wondering why these States are electing racist candidates?

I felt to relay a section in the tale of Anatole France “Le livre de mon ami”, a collection of memories of his earlier life.

“La premiere difficulte’ etait de trouver les peches (sins). On m’avait donne’ un petit livre qui contenait tous les peches.

Il y a avait des peches obscure que je ne connaissais pas le sens, sur le larcin, la simonie, la prevarication, la fornication, la concupiscence…

Comme “je m’accuse d’avoir désespéré”, d’avoir entendu de mauvaises conversations…

“Je m’accuse d’avoir des distractions a l’office, au repas, dans les assembles…

 

Deep State? Global Reset? Deactivation of before Covid-19 institutional myths?

It is becoming an evidence that those influential members in the Elite Classes have never been elected in any democracy. Only their shadow powers are advanced forward.

I tend to believe that there is a “Club” for the Elite classes of deep pockets and vast network of connection, that appoint a “Sub Club” of think tank members to draw plans on how to punish States that refuse to negotiate the level of suffering and sanctions to be levied on them.

Note: It requires a high level of general knowledge to differentiate between factual stories and fake news. You have got to do your due diligence if you care about fairness and equity in societies and be determined to face-off to all kinds of indignities and injustices levied on most communities.

La « Réinitialisation mondiale » (« Global Reset ») – Désactivée. « L’État profond ».

Imaginez, vous vivez dans un monde dans lequel on vous dit qu’il est une démocratie – et vous pouvez même le croire – mais en fait votre vie et votre destin sont entre les mains de quelques oligarques ultra-riches, ultra-puissants et ultra-inhumains.

Ils peuvent être appelés État profond, ou simplement « la Bête », ou n’importe quoi d’autre d’obscur ou d’introuvable – peu importe. Ils sont inférieurs à 0,0001%.

Faute d’une meilleure expression, appelons-les pour l’instant les « individus obscurs » (“obscure individuals”, obscure influential members in the Elite Classes).

Ces « individus obscurs » qui prétendent diriger notre monde n’ont jamais été élus.

Nous n’avons pas besoin de les nommer. Vous découvrirez qui ils sont, et pourquoi ils sont célèbres, et certains d’entre eux totalement invisibles.

Ils ont créé des structures, ou des organismes sans aucun format légal.

Ils agissent totalement hors de la légalité internationale. Ils sont à l’avant-garde de « la Bête ». Il y a peut-être plusieurs « bêtes » en concurrence. Mais elles ont le même objectif : Un nouvel ordre mondial ou un seul ordre mondial (NWO, ou OWO).

Ces « individus obscurs » dirigent, par exemple, le Forum économique mondial (FEM – représentant la Grande industrie, la Grande finance et de Grande renommée), le Groupe des 7 – G7, le Groupe des 20 – G20 (les dirigeants des nations les plus « fortes » économiquement).

Il existe également quelques entités de moindre importance, appelées la Société Bilderberg, le Conseil des relations étrangères (Council on Foreign Relations, CFR), Chatham House et d’autres encore.

Les membres de toutes ces entités se chevauchent. Et même ce front élargi représente moins de 0,001 %.

Ils se sont tous superposés à des gouvernements nationaux souverains élus et constitutionnels, et à LA multinationale mondiale, les Nations unies, l’ONU.

En fait, ils ont coopté l’ONU pour faire leur travail.

Les directeurs généraux de l’ONU, ainsi que les directeurs généraux des multiples sous-organisations de l’ONU, sont choisis pour la plupart par les États-Unis, avec le consentement de leurs vassaux européens – en fonction du profil politique et psychologique du candidat.

Si sa « performance » à la tête de l’ONU ou de l’une de ses sous-organisations échoue, ses jours sont comptés.

L’Union européenne, les organisations de Bretton Woods, la Banque mondiale et le FMI, ainsi que l’Organisation mondiale du commerce (OMC)…

Et la Cour pénale internationale (CPI) de La Haye, ont également été cooptés ou créés par la ou les « Bête(s) ». Elle n’a pas de pouvoir réel. Uniquement pour s’assurer que la loi est toujours du côté des hors-la-loi.

Outre les principales institutions financières internationales, la Banque mondiale et le FMI, il existe ce que l’on appelle les banques régionales de développement et autres institutions financières similaires, qui contrôlent les pays de leurs régions respectives.

En fin de compte, c’est l’économie financière ou de la dette qui contrôle tout.

Le banditisme néolibéral occidental a créé un système dans lequel la désobéissance politique peut être punie par l’oppression économique ou le vol pur et simple des biens nationaux dans les territoires internationaux. Le dénominateur commun de ce système est le dollar US (toujours) omniprésent.

Les « individus non élues »

La suprématie de ces « individus obscurs » non élus est de plus en plus évidente.

Nous, « le Peuple », considérons qu’il est « normal » qu’ils prennent les décisions, et non pas ce que nous appelons – ou étions autrefois fiers d’appeler – nos nations souveraines et nos gouvernements souverainement élus.

Ils sont devenus un troupeau de moutons obéissants. « La Bête » a progressivement et tranquillement pris le dessus. Nous n’avons pas remarqué. C’est la tactique du salami : vous le coupez tranche par tranche et quand le salami a disparu, vous vous rendez compte qu’il ne vous reste plus rien, que votre liberté, vos droits civils et humains ont disparu.

À ce moment-là, il est trop tard. Le Patriot Act étasunien en est un bon exemple. Il a été préparé bien avant le 11 septembre. Une fois le 11 septembre « arrivé », le Patriot Act a été adopté par le Congrès en un rien de temps – pour la protection future du peuple – les gens l’ont réclamé par peur – et – bingo, le Patriot Act a privé environ 90% de la population étasunienne de sa liberté et de ses droits civils. Pour de bon.

Nous sommes devenus esclaves de « la Bête ».

« La Bête » décide de l’essor ou de l’effondrement de nos économies, de qui devrait être endetté, quand et où une pandémie devrait éclater, et des conditions de survie à la pandémie, par exemple le confinement social.

Et pour couronner le tout, les instruments que « la Bête » utilise, très astucieusement, sont un minuscule ennemi invisible, appelé virus, et un monstre énorme mais aussi invisible, appelé LA PEUR.

Cela nous empêche d’aller dans la rue, de retrouver nos amis, d’aller au théâtre, de faire du sport ou de pique-niquer dans le parc.

Bientôt, « la Bête » décidera qui vivra et qui mourra, littéralement – si nous la laissons faire.

Ce n’est peut-être pas si loin. Une autre vague de pandémie et les gens pourraient ainsi supplier, crier et hurler pour obtenir un vaccin, pour sonner le glas et pour le super profit des grandes sociétés pharmaceutiques – et pour atteindre les objectifs des eugénistes qui parcourent ouvertement le monde – voyez ceci.

Il est encore temps de dire NON collectivement. Collectivement et solidairement.

Prenez le dernier cas d’imposture flagrante.

Comme par hasard, après le passage de la première vague de Covid-19, au moins dans le « Nord global », où se prennent les grandes décisions mondiales, au début du mois de juin 2020, le président non élu du FEM, Klaus Schwab, a annoncé « La grande Réinitialisation » (“The Great Reset”).

Profitant de l’effondrement économique – le choc de la crise, comme dans « La doctrine du choc » – M. Schwab, un des leaders de « la Bête », annonce ouvertement ce que le FEM va discuter et décider pour le monde à venir lors de son prochain Forum de Davos en janvier 2021. Pour plus de détails, voir ceci.

Nous, le peuple, accepterons-nous l’ordre du jour des individus du FEM non élus ?

Le FEM se concentrera de manière opportune sur la protection de ce qui reste de la Terre Mère ; évidemment, au centre se trouvera le « Réchauffement climatique », basé sur le CO2 produit par l’humain.

L’instrument de cette protection de la nature et de l’humanité sera l’Agenda 2030 des Nations unies – qui équivaut aux Objectifs de développement durable (ODD) des Nations unies. Il sera axé sur la manière de reconstruire l’économie mondiale délibérément détruite, tout en respectant les principes (« verts ») des 17 ODD.

Mais attention, tout est relié.

Il n’y a pas de coïncidences. Le tristement célèbre Agenda 2021, qui coïncide avec et complète le soi-disant Agenda 2030 des Nations unies, sera dûment inauguré par la déclaration officielle du FEM de « The Great Reset », en janvier 2021.

De même, la mise en œuvre de l’agenda de « The Great Reset » a commencé en janvier 2020, avec le déclenchement de la pandémie de coronavirus – prévue depuis des décennies, les derniers événements visibles étant le rapport Rockfeller de 2010 avec son « Lockstep Scénario » (le Scénario du verrouillage), et l’événement 2010, du 18 octobre à New York qui a simulé par ordinateur une pandémie de coronavirus, laissant en 18 mois 65 millions de morts et une économie en ruine.

Cela a été programmée quelques semaines seulement avant le lancement de la véritable pandémie de COVID-19. Voir COVID-19, We Are Now Living the « Lock Step Scenario », voir en français La farce et l’agenda diabolique d’un «verrouillage universel» et ceci et ceci (et en français ceci).

Les émeutes raciales

Des émeutes raciales, initiées par le mouvement Black Lives Matter (financé par la Fondation Ford et l’Open Society Foundation de Soros), à la suite de l’assassinat brutal de l’Afro-Américain George Floyd par une bande de policiers de Minneapolis se sont répandues comme un feu de brousse en un rien de temps dans plus de 160 villes dans le monde, d’abord aux États-Unis, puis en Europe.

Ces émeutes ne sont pas seulement liées à l’agenda de « la Bête », mais elles constituent une déviation bien commode de la catastrophe humaine provoquée par la  pandémie Covid-19. Voir aussi ceci.

Le plan infâme de « la Bête » pour mettre en œuvre ce qui se cache réellement derrière l’Agenda 2030 des Nations unies est l’Agenda ID2020 qui demeure méconnue du grand public. Voir La pandémie du coronavirus COVID-19 : Le vrai danger est « l’Agenda ID2020 ».

Cet agenda a été créé et financé par le gourou de la vaccination Bill Gates, tout comme la GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations), l’association des grandes entreprises pharmaceutiques – qui a participé à la création des vaccins coronavirus et qui finance avec la Fondation Bill et Melinda Gates (BMGF) une part importante du budget de l’OMS

La « Grande réinitialisation » (« Great Reset »), telle qu’annoncée par Klaus Schwab du FEM, est censée être mise en œuvre par l’Agenda ID2020.

C’est plus que ce que l’on pourrait croire.

L’Agenda ID2020 est même intégré aux SDG, puisque la SDG 16.9 « d’ici 2030, fournira une identité légale [numérique] pour tous, y compris l’enregistrement gratuit des naissances« . Cela s’inscrit parfaitement dans l’objectif global de la SDG 16 : « Promouvoir des sociétés pacifiques et inclusives pour un développement durable, fournir un accès à la justice pour tous et mettre en place des institutions efficaces, responsables et inclusives à tous les niveaux« .

Suivant la voie officielle de l’Agenda 2030 des Nations unies pour la réalisation des SDG, l’Agenda ID2020 « mise en oeuvre » – qui est actuellement testé sur des écoliers au Bangladesh – fournira des cartes d’identité numérisées, éventuellement sous la forme de nano-puces implantées en même temps que les programmes de vaccination obligatoires, encouragera la numérisation de l’argent et le déploiement des 5G – qui seraient nécessaires pour télécharger et contrôler les données personnelles sur les nanopuces et pour contrôler la population.

L’Agenda ID2020 inclura très probablement aussi des « programmes » – par la vaccination ? – de réduction significative de la population mondiale.

L’eugénisme est une composante importante du contrôle de la population mondiale future dans le cadre d’un NOW / OWO – voir aussi Georgia Guidestones, mystérieusement construit en 1980.

L’élite dirigeante a utilisé le confinement comme instrument pour mener à bien ce programme. Sa mise en œuvre se heurterait naturellement à des protestations massives, organisées et financées selon les mêmes modalités que les protestations et manifestations du BLM. Il se peut qu’elles ne soient pas pacifiques – et qu’elles ne soient pas planifiées comme telles.

En effet, pour contrôler la population aux États-Unis et en Europe, où l’on s’attendrait à la plupart des manifestations de la société civile, une militarisation totale de la population est nécessaire. Cela est en cours de préparation.

Dans son essai « The Big Plantation« , John Steppling rapporte, à partir d’un article de NYT, que

« Depuis 2006, un minimum de 93, 763 mitrailleuses, 180 ,718 cartouches de chargeur, des centaines de silencieux et un nombre inconnu de lance-grenades ont été fournis aux services de police d’État et locaux aux États-Unis.

Cela s’ajoute à au moins 533 avions et hélicoptères, et 432 MRAP – véhicules blindés de 9 pieds de haut, de 30 tonnes, protégés contre les embuscades et dotés de tourelles à canon et de plus de 44, 900 pièces d’équipement de vision nocturne, régulièrement utilisés lors de raids nocturnes en Afghanistan et en Irak ».

Il ajoute que cette militarisation s’inscrit dans une plus vaste tendance. Depuis la fin des années 1990, environ 89 % des services de police étasuniens desservant des populations de 50 000 personnes ou plus disposaient d’une PPU (unité paramilitaire de police), soit près du double de ce qui existait au milieu des années 1980. Il appelle ces polices militarisées la nouvelle Gestapo.

Même avant la pandémie COVID-19, environ 15 à 20 % de la population se trouvait sur ou sous le seuil de pauvreté aux États-Unis.

L’anéantissement économique post-covidien va au moins doubler ce pourcentage – et augmenter proportionnellement le risque de révoltes civiles et d’affrontements avec les autorités – ce qui renforce encore le raisonnement en faveur d’une force de police militarisée.

Le Crypto RMB chinois

Bien entendu, aucun de ces scénarios ne sera présenté au public par le FEM en janvier 2021. Il s’agit de décisions prises à huis clos par les acteurs clés de « la Bête ».

Cependant, ce plan grandiose de la « Grande Réinitialisation » (« Great Reset ») ne va pas nécessairement se réaliser. La moitié au moins de la population mondiale et certains des pays les plus puissants, économiquement et militairement – comme la Chine et la Russie – y sont opposés.

« Reset » peut-être oui, mais pas dans ces termes occidentaux. En fait, une réinitialisation de ce type est déjà en cours, la Chine étant sur le point de lancer une nouvelle monnaie cryptographique basée sur une chaîne de blocs, le RMB cryptographique, ou yuan. Il ne s’agit pas seulement d’une monnaie forte basée sur une économie solide, elle est également soutenue par l’or.

Alors que le président Trump continue de fustiger la Chine pour ses pratiques commerciales déloyales, pour sa mauvaise gestion de la pandémie de grippe (COVID-19), pour avoir volé des droits de propriété – une campagne sans fin contre la Chine -, pour avoir affirmé que la Chine dépend des États-Unis et que ces derniers vont couper les liens commerciaux avec la Chine – ou les couper complètement – la Chine appelle cela du bluff.

La Chine se réoriente discrètement vers les pays de l’ANASE plus le Japon (oui, le Japon !) et la Corée du Sud, où le commerce représente déjà aujourd’hui environ 15 % de l’ensemble des échanges commerciaux de la Chine et devrait doubler au cours des cinq prochaines années.

Malgré le verrouillage et la perturbation des échanges commerciaux, les exportations globales de la Chine se sont rétablies avec une augmentation de 3,2 % en avril (par rapport à avril 2019). Cette performance globale des exportations chinoises s’est néanmoins accompagnée d’une baisse spectaculaire des échanges commerciaux entre les États-Unis et la Chine. Les exportations chinoises vers les États-Unis ont diminué de 7,9 % en avril (par rapport à avril 2019).

Il est clair que la grande majorité des industries étasuniennes ne pourraient pas survivre sans les chaînes d’approvisionnement chinoises.

La dépendance occidentale à l’égard des fournitures médicales chinoises est particulièrement importante. Sans parler de la dépendance de la Chine à l’égard des consommateurs étasuniens.

En 2019, la consommation totale des États-Unis, soit environ 70 % du PIB, s’élevait à 13,3 billions de dollars, dont une bonne partie est directement importée de Chine ou dépend des ingrédients provenant de Chine.

Les maîtres du FEM sont confrontés à un véritable dilemme. Leur plan dépend beaucoup de la suprématie du dollar qui continuerait à permettre l’application de sanctions et la confiscation des actifs des pays qui s’opposent à la domination des États-Unis ; une hégémonie du dollar qui permettrait d’imposer les composantes du programme « The Great Reset » (la Grande réinitialisation), comme décrit ci-dessus.

À l’heure actuelle, le dollar est une monnaie fiduciaire, une dette créée de toutes pièces.

Le $ ne bénéficie d’aucun soutien. Par conséquent, sa valeur en tant que monnaie de réserve se dégrade de plus en plus, en particulier vis-à-vis du nouveau crypto-yuan de Chine.

Afin de concurrencer le yuan chinois, le gouvernement étasunien devrait s’éloigner de son système monétaire Ponzi, en se séparant du Federal Reserve Act de 1913 et en imprimant sa propre monnaie de l’économie étasunienne et éventuellement de l’or (crypto) – et non pas de la monnaie fiduciaire de la FED, comme c’est le cas aujourd’hui.

Cela impliquerait de couper les liens plus que centenaires avec la FED, propriété du clan Rothschild et Cie, et de créer une véritable banque centrale appartenant aux citoyens. Ce n’est pas impossible, mais grandement improbable.

Ici, deux « bêtes » pourraient s’affronter, car une puissance mondiale est en jeu.

Pendant ce temps, la Chine, avec sa philosophie de création sans fin, continuerait d’avancer de façon imparable avec son gigantesque plan de développement socio-économique du 21e siècle, l’Initiative ceinture et route (la Nouvelle route de la soie) reliant la Chine au reste du monde avec des infrastructures de transport terrestre et maritime, avec des projets de recherche et industriels communs, des échanges culturels – et surtout, un commerce multinational (multinational trade) avec des caractéristiques « gagnant-gagnant », l’égalité pour tous les partenaires – vers un monde multipolaire, vers un monde avec un avenir commun pour l’humanité.

Aujourd’hui déjà, plus de 120 pays sont associés à l’ICR – et le projet en chantier est libre pour que d’autres pays s’y joignent – et pour défier, démasquer et « désactiver » la Grande réinitialisation (Great Reset) de l’Occident.

Peter Koenig

Article original en anglais :

Conspiracy Theory

The Global Reset – Unplugged. “The Deep State”, publié le 17 juin 2020.

Traduit par Maya pour Mondialisation

Note aux lecteurs : veuillez cliquer sur les boutons de partage ci-dessus ou ci-dessous. Faites suivre cet article à vos listes de diffusion. Publiez cet article sur votre site de blog, vos forums Internet, etc.

Peter Koenig est économiste et analyste géopolitique. Il est également spécialiste des ressources en eau et de l’environnement.

Il a travaillé pendant plus de 30 ans à la Banque mondiale et à l’Organisation mondiale de la santé dans le monde entier dans les domaines de l’environnement et de l’eau.

Il donne des conférences dans des universités aux États-Unis, en Europe et en Amérique du Sud. Il écrit régulièrement pour Global Research, ICH, New Eastern Outlook (NEO), RT, Countercurrents, Sputnik, PressTV, The 21st Century, Greanville Post, Defend Democracy Press, The Saker Blog, et d’autres sites Internet.

Il est l’auteur de Implosion – Un thriller économique sur la guerre, la destruction de l’environnement et la cupidité des entreprises – une fiction basée sur des faits et sur 30 ans d’expérience de la Banque mondiale dans le monde entier. Il est également co-auteur de The World Order and Revolution ! – Essais de la Résistance. Il est associé de recherche au Centre de recherche sur la mondialisation.

Have you decided whom you want to Witness your success life?

Do we need Him a witness? 

I raised an army and defeated people, entered cities, slaughtered, hanged, maimed, terrified, and ruled; I need a God to witness my deeds.

I split the atom, generated nuclear energy, searched the stars, and landed on planets; I need a God to witness my intelligence and perseverance.

I joined the resistance against occupiers and was ready to fall a martyr and I need a God to witness that I was steadfast in my dignity.

I am living in a desolate region; I am dying of thirst, famine, and curable diseases; I need a God to witness my suffering.

I am an aristocrat and I inherited a fortune; I need a God to witness my self-sufficiency.

I am an ascetic; I joined a sect that provides me with food and cares for my health; I need a God to witness the hard life that I consecrated to meditation and repeating his 99 names.

I was lucky to live long enough and ask “why I got to exist”.

I was lucky to survive long enough through hazardous risks and dangers while others were not born, stillborn dead, died prematurely, and died too young to worry about death. I need a God to witness that I am thankful

I was lucky to care for imminent departures, dare look death in the eyes, converse with the universe, search for a point of application to move part of the world, to change, to redirect interests…

I was lucky to gain new relationships, to find the courage to confess, to confide bottled up emotions, verbalize uneasiness, to express frustrations clearly,

I was lucky to see nature grow, witness the existence of other living forms, to hang on to my garden, to get cozy in my quarter of solitude, to appreciate my rights as an individual and fight for them, and to get convinced that diversity is good and necessary.

I need a God to witness that I did my best to value exotic tendencies, conformist attitudes, conservative behaviors, revolutionary zeal, simple pleasures, a walk in nature, creating a void around me, and inviting boisterous neighbors.

I need a God to witness that I laughed at my limitations, allowed others to make fun of my idiosyncrasies, and showed off my capabilities.

I need a God to witness that I discovered new cultures, customs, and traditions;

That I started collecting artifacts, relics, manuscripts of dying civilizations;

That I battled for species on the verge of extinction, minority and ethnic races swept aside by globalization;

That I have gone to war for clean air and fresh potable water;

That I demonstrated for parcels of wild prairies and virgin forests.

I don’t need a Creator, all Compassionate, all Vengeful, all Knowledge; it is irrelevant.

I am good, evil, mean, cruel, benevolent, and respectful; who I am is also irrelevant.

When all is said and done I need a God who never dies and remembers everything.

I need a God to witness that I was a survivor;

That once upon a time I did exist.

Can you remember engaging in a great Conversation? It was about what?

Note 1: Re-edit “How a great conversation is like a game of catch? August 16, 2016″

Note 2: An acquaintance of mine during university years considered me inconsequential and Not that serious in relationships. And she was correct at the time. At the end of a semester for graduation we met at a coffee shop around campus. I asked about her thesis and I listened intently without interruption. With my newly trained experimental mind I asked pertinent questions and she replied clearly and confidently. It was kind of an exercise for presenting her work to the jury.

At the end of the long “conversation” she said: “Man, if we had this conversation long time ago I would have been your best friend”.

Any person who work on a subject matter that interest him and do his due diligence in research will answer your questions confidently, clearly and with excitement.

Sort that she appreciate your attempt at sharing with her toil and achievement.

As a radio host, Celeste Headlee has engaged in her fair share of discussions, and she’s thought a lot about how to bring out the best in a conversational counterpart.

ideas.ted. TED. Jul 19, 2016

A good conversation is like a game of catch.

When you play catch, you have to do an equal number of catches and throws, right?

It’s not possible to play catch with somebody and throw more than you catch, for the most part.

Because then you’d just be throwing baseballs at them, which is not nice. This is the exact same ratio as a healthy conversation — you’re going to catch as much as you throw.

you’re going to talk 50% and listen 50% of the time — and we don’t generally have that balance in our conversations. (Supposedly we were actually listening?)

Here’s the best way to start a conversation that you’re worried might end in an argument:

There’s a great study out of Harvard in which researchers discovered that talking about yourself actually activates the same pleasure centers in your brain as sex and cocaine.

That means it’s very pleasurable to us to talk about ourselves and what we like. You could walk away from a conversation like that and feel fantastic about it.

But remember — talking about yourself makes you feel fantastic. So you may have just walked away from a conversation in which you talked about yourself — that was awesome! — and the other person is walking away going, “Good god, that person would not stop talking about themselves.”

It’s a totally different perception, so you’ve got to remember you’re playing catch — find the balance.

How do you go beyond small talk to have a meaningful conversation with somebody?

Not every single conversation that you have is going to be in-depth and serious. And that’s okay! You should relax. Eventually, while you’re sitting there talking small talk, something’s going to pique your interest, or something’s going to catch their interest, or they’re going to say, “Wait, what did you just say?” Or, “Why is it that way?”

And someone’s going to ask a question, and it’s going to lead you further into deeper subject matter. So it will happen, if there’s something there to talk about. Otherwise, be on your way — let it go.

What about that awkward silence when you don’t know what to say next?

By the time that you’re thirsty, you’re already dehydrated. So by the time you’ve reached an awkward silence, something’s already gone wrong. But it’s not too late!

Very often, an awkward silence comes because either you weren’t listening or they weren’t listening, and therefore, you guys have kind of meandered off-topic to where you’re at the opposite ends of a football field.

The way to fix that is to say, “You know what, I’m sorry, I got totally distracted. Where did we start? Can you help me out here? I was just following a train of thought about Cheetos, and I got totally lost.”

What should you do when it is very clear from body language that the other person is not listening?

End it. Again with the game of catch.

That’s the equivalent of me taking a ball and throwing it over my shoulder instead of to you. Why would you want to keep playing? You have to have an equal partner in a conversation. Otherwise, walk away.

You make the case that all experiences are not equal. Are you saying that empathy is not useful in a conversation? What should people do instead?

People always push back on this topic. Now, I’m not a psychiatrist or a psychologist, but I believe that most of us are motivated by empathy. You’re with your friend, and you want to say, “Oh, I do understand you, because I’ve been through something similar.”

But the truth is, you haven’t — you haven’t been through something the same.

You maybe have gone through something kind of similar, but the fact of the matter is that you’re a different person from your friend — so even if it was the exact same experience, even if you both almost went down on the Titanic, the way you experienced that is completely different. And these situations are most likely totally different.

So although it feels to you like you’re reaching out and giving empathy, what’s happening is that you’re talking about yourself again.

So you shouldn’t say, “I know how you feel”?

That’s the worst. You don’t know how they feel. They’re confiding in you, and all they want you to do is listen to them and say, “Wow, that sounds awful. There’s no way for me to understand what you’re going through, but you tell me what you need.”

What do you think is stopping people from having better, more meaningful conversations?

The elephant in the room is obviously polarization, and this is true not just in the United States, but I think Brexit and the migrant crisis in Europe tell us that it’s happening all over the world.

Oftentimes we’ll enter into a conversation, and somebody will say, “I’m voting for Trump in the fall.” Conversation over.

You immediately say, “Nothing this person says is something I want to listen to, they have nothing to teach me,” and you end the conversation. And if the conversation does continue, you’re not actually listening to them.

That’s what is often ending conversations now.

We have stopped talking to people that we disagree with.

We basically want to be able to curate and edit our conversations the same way that we curate and edit our social media. If we’re talking to somebody that we don’t want to hear from, we want to unfollow them like we do on Twitter.

The problem with that is that everybody knows something that you don’t.

And so if you are stopping all of those conversations and only speaking with people who have similar experiences and opinions, you’re not going to grow, ever, and you won’t change your mind or your opinion.

They used to tell us, don’t talk about religion and politics. The problem today is that everything is religion and politics. (If you are disconnected from politics, others will decide for you, and you cannot blame but yourself)

So what’s the best approach to start a conversation that you know might end up in an argument?

First of all, a lot of conversations end in arguments these days. But when I’m sitting down with somebody, especially somebody with whom I absolutely don’t agree, I sit down and I think through, “Okay, what if they’re right?”

Let’s think about what would change, and how my mind would change, if they are right and I am wrong.

And as they start to tell me things, as long as they’re not completely made-up facts, I ask myself what it would mean if they’re right. And then I ask them too. I say, “Okay, let’s say you’re right. What does that mean?” And try to get inside what they’re thinking.

For instance, a lot of people ask me how to talk to Donald Trump supporters. It is a great question.

But here’s the thing: there’s an anger there among people — not just people who support Trump, but people who support Bernie Sanders, or the people who voted for Britain to leave the EU.

There is an anger there, and it could be fascinating and engaging and compelling to figure out where that is coming from. That’s not always going to be the case, and there are going to be conversations you have to walk away from.

But if you’re going to have an argument with someone, the best way to do it is with an open mind, assuming that that person can teach you something, and that you’re not there to teach them.

What should you say if you unintentionally offend someone during a conversation?

You say, “I’m really sorry, I did not in any way, shape, or form intend to offend you. I may be inarticulate, but let me try to explain what I thought I was saying, and then you tell me what you think I’m saying, and maybe we can understand one another.” That’s it, that’s all that you say. Be honest.

Is there a quick way to help a friend to stop obsessing about a negative topic?

It’s difficult to address specific situations, since context is so important. In broad strokes, though, people often repeat themselves when they feel as though they haven’t been heard. For example, when we tell our kids something important and they don’t acknowledge that they’ve heard, we’ll keep repeating it until they say, “Okay! I got it, Mom!”

The same things happen often in the workplace.

So, try telling your friend that you think you understand what he or she is saying: “Let me tell you what I’m hearing and you tell me if I’m getting it wrong.”

Then you can offer to brainstorm to find solutions. If he or she’s not open to that, then be honest. Say, “You’re telling me the same things over and over. I can tell you’re very upset, but we can also move forward from here.”

How can you turn a one-way conversation into a dialogue?

You can’t, really. There’s a couple of reasons for a one-way conversation. Sometimes it’s that the person is shy, and in that case, that’s totally fixable, you can draw somebody out, usually by finding out what they like, or self-deprecation is good.

I usually tell a joke or a story about something I’ve done that was really stupid — and I have a wealth of those examples. But if somebody isn’t in the mood to talk, you can’t fix that.

And here’s the thing that people are always surprised that I say: it is totally okay to Not have a conversation.

Having a real conversation takes energy, and it takes focus, and sometimes you just don’t have that kind of energy to give. That’s totally fine — don’t have the conversation, enjoy the silence.

So if you’re feeling like you really want to have a conversation and the other person isn’t matching that energy, you just need to let them have their time, and find somebody else who is ready.

What about when people really don’t seem to want to listen, but just want to talk about themselves and their experiences?

I’ve found that it’s good to very kindly address this head-on. Say, “It’s so great to hear all that. Can I tell you a little about what I’ve been doing?” Or any version of that.

Don’t assume that person is just trying to dominate the conversation. Give them the benefit of the doubt, because we all talk about ourselves too much.

If you try to improve the conversation and they are resistant, then just accept that your conversations with that person will be brief and unsatisfying. Just like a game of catch, you need two participants who are willing to take turns.

How do you get others to open up as much as you are opening up?

You can’t, really. For instance, when you’re opening up, is it mostly because you’re telling them about your experiences? Are you talking a lot about yourself, and not giving them an opening to talk about themselves?

Are you in any way, shape or form shutting down the conversation? In other words, does that person say, “Oh, you know, I had something similar happen to me the other day, it was really, really interesting,” and you say, “Oh, no, no, no, it wasn’t like that,” and then you go back to what it was you were talking about.

There are a million reasons why the person that you’re talking to may not be opening up. But often, it’s because you’ve shut the door in one way or another. The fact of the matter is it’s probably not them, it’s probably you.

So what if a conversation has run its course? How do you gracefully exit a conversation?

You gracefully exit by saying, “I need to go; it’s been so great to talk to you, and I’ll see you in a couple days.” Or you say, “You know what? I have too much on my mind, I’m really sorry, it’s been great to talk to you, and I’ll see you again in a couple weeks, but I’m going to head back.”

Or — what happens to me, because I have adult ADD all the time — “I can’t keep my mind on this conversation, I am so sorry, it has nothing to do with you, but I’m going to go sit in my office and try to gather my thoughts.” Don’t lie. No white lies! Just be honest, and gracious and nice, not condescending, and just end the conversation.

This is an edited version of a conversation took place at TEDSummit 2017 (see below). Moderated by TED’s Janet Lee, it includes questions from Facebook and from commenters on Celeste’s TED Talk, 10 ways to have a better conversation.


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

July 2020
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Blog Stats

  • 1,398,156 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 744 other followers

%d bloggers like this: