Alternative Energy
Global Ethics
People Uniting the Globe
A growing number of influential people advocate a new global ethics that could unify people under a common set of values and beliefs. Religions are largely based on common moral principles, corporations profess adherence to ethical codes, and most individuals believe in some set of universal values, ethics and morals. This would be highly significant because religion and spirituality are the most powerful forces governing life, irrespective of geography. A system of global ethics could help to unify the world.
Numerous organizations, websites, forums, blogs, and publications are devoted to the message of harmony and peace. Examples include the Institute for Global Ethics and the School of Life, which is a global secular organization dedicated to developing emotional intelligence. Religions for Peace is one of the first organizations to form a large alliance of religious leaders to fight poverty, save nature, and prevent war. The International Association of Religious Freedom is a century-old organization that meets annually to integrate religious thought and practice. The World Council of Religious Leaders announced a “Commitment to Global Peace” intended to counter conflict, poverty, and protect the environment.[i]
Major world leaders, including the United Nations and the Dalai Lama, have shown support for rights and freedoms that should be universally observed. His Holiness, the Dalai Lama, declared, “All major religious traditions carry basically the same message of love, compassion, and forgiveness … that should be part of our daily lives. But grounding ethics in religion is no longer adequate. This is why I am increasingly convinced that the time has come to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether.”
Pope Benedict XVI declared that globalization requires a “common code of ethics,” based not only in agreements but in natural law, to combat poverty and ensure peace. UN Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson has stated ‘No-one left behind’ is the underlying moral code for the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda, which has been adopted unanimously by 193 Heads of State. [ii]
Developing a broadly accepted ethical code may not be as difficult as it appears. Bioethicist David Resnik identified eight basic ethical principles accepted by most of the world’s societies: [iii]
- Non-maleficence: Do not harm yourself or other people.
- Beneficence: Help yourself and other people.
- Autonomy: Allow rational individuals to make free and informed choices.
- Justice: Treat people fairly: treat equals equally, unequals unequally.
- Utility: Maximize the ratio of benefits to harms for all people.
- Fidelity: Keep your promises and agreements.
- Honesty: Do not lie, defraud, deceive, or mislead.
- Privacy: Respect personal privacy and confidentiality.
Human Nature Poses Obstacles
The greatest obstacle to developing a global ethical code is human nature.Many individuals are determined to find faults in other religions out of the belief that theirs is the one true path to salvation. Politicians, and even some religious leaders, often seek to build their own power by playing on their constituents’ fears about other religions. Illiteracy encourages superstition, narrow mindedness, blind faith, and perhaps even terrorism.
It’s also possible that a common ethical code would constrict individual thoughts and beliefs. It would mean little if not enforced. A universal code might conceivably invite the rise of absolutism on a much wider scale than is now possible. The spread of a global ethical code could inspire opposition by people who feel it threatens their beliefs or positions. This could encourage political instability and growing violence.
Most Likely Forecast
With little to guide a forecast, it is useful to recognize that Bill Halal’s new book, Beyond Knowledge. Bill finds that a “mental/spiritual revolution” to some form of global ethics is almost inevitable if the world hopes to survive the global crises that threaten the planet. A strong majority of the public is fearful that climate change, mass unemployment and other elements of the Global Mega Crisis are heading toward disaster unless the world makes major change in mindset.
TechCast’s experts suggest that 30 percent of the world’s people will adhere to a common set of ethical principles around 2030, and they have high confidence that this will have a very positive social impact. This seems a reasonable forecast but it could also happen earlier.
Strategic Implications: A More Peaceful World
A common global ethics would create the foundation for a functioning world system that contains conflict and promotes well-being.Without a sense of worthy goals and purpose, no community can evolve and survive. Development of a global ethical system may help to provide them.A higher level of global consciousness would make it easier to meet the enormous intersecting crises of climate change, sustainable energy, financial instability, conflict, and war.
[i]Institute for Global Ethics, Sep 4, 2017. School of Life, Sep 4, 2017. Religions for Peace, Sep 4, 2017. International Association of Religious Freedom, Sep 4, 2017.
[ii]Catholic News Agency, Jul 4, 2016. UN, Jan 13, 2016.
[iii]“Some Definitions of Key Ethics Concepts“
China Falls
Will China Collapse Like the USSR?
Although China has been one of the world’s fastest-growing economies, averaging 10 percent growth in GDP for nearly three decades, it began losing momentum in 2012. As a result of emphasizing manufacturing and exports rather than consumption, poor quality control, and lax banking practices, China is now experiencing a housing bubble, high unemployment, severe pollution, and growing social unrest. These have caused a ripple effect throughout the economy. Could China—once called the next superpower—collapse? James Fallows reports that “China is less free, less open, and more belligerent that it was five years ago, or even ten.” [i]
On the other hand, China is also implementing its “One belt one road” policy that carries forward the growth momentum to establish trading partners around the world. It is cracking down on internal dissent and corruption as well as espousing globalization and a leader in taking steps to reduce global warming. Its leaders plan to eliminate absolute poverty by 2020 and become the dominant developed country by 2035.
Signs of Decline
The signs of trouble in China are serious: slowing growth, mounting risk and debt, poor quality, increasing unemployment, environmental pollution.The central bank chief has recently warned of ‘Sudden, Contagious and Hazardous’ financial risks that the Chinese financial system is facing due to easy credit and high levels of debt. [ii]
More than 13 million tons of crops harvested each year are contaminated with heavy metals, and 22 million acres of farmland are contaminated by pesticides. Although no scientific proof is available, it is suspected that numerous cancer deaths are linked to industrial waste in the food chain. Some 400 cities in northern China suffer water scarcity. More than half the region’s groundwater is so polluted it should not be allowed to contact human skin.[iii]
The existing oversupply of peasant and college-educated manufacturing labor is being worsened by automation. Foxconn, an electronics manufacturer, aims to replace 1 million workers with robots in this decade, and robotics are projected to expand at over 18 percent annually in the coming years. These changes will save money and reduce waste but will eliminate many jobs.
China became the world’s leading car manufacturer with the purchase of Volvo from Ford in 2010. However, to reduce congestion and air pollution, the government is limiting car registrations in Chinese cities, which will further slow economic growth.
The ratio of old to young in China is decreasing from 5 to 1 to 1.6 to 1, making this one of the oldest societies in the world. The preponderance of old people is decreasing savings and economic growth.
China’s Strengths
But the Chinese economy has great strengths that could withstand crisis. Economists estimate 10 to 20 percent of China’s economy is off the books. Many companies keep three sets of accounting records—one for official purposes, one for investors, and one for themselves. Private consumption in China continues to rise, reflecting the increasing affluence of the households. While growth has moderated in recent years, consumption expenditure per capita continues to grow at nearly 7 percent per annum.[iv]
China is the world’s largest exporter, with the highest revenues in textiles, electronic equipment, agriculture, and chemicals. It is also the world’s second largest importer. Recent estimates suggest the new consumer-led economy could generate 36 trillion renminbi (US$5.6 trillion) of additional GDP by 2030, compared with continuing the present export path.
Five-Year Plans have brought over 500 million people out of poverty since 1980. Large-scale surveys indicate a majority of Chinese people support the government, which has stoked nationalism to promote unity and inhibit dissent. The government also owns much of the land, which has the largest reserves of precious metals in the world.
Most Likely Forecast
There a few guides to estimating a highly uncertain event like the fall of a superpower. The best example is that nobody foresaw the collapse of the USSR. It is clear thatChina’s GDP growth has been below 7 percent recently, with further weakening to 6.4 percent forecasted by 2019. [v]
Such conditions of high uncertainty are exactly where the TechCast system of collective intelligence excels. Pooling the judgment of our Global Brain Trust of experts over this issue produces the following a consensus. They collectively estimate a low probability of China’s collapse over the next few decades, about 15 percent. Of course, that could change as conditions develop, and we could be surprised by a sudden catastrophic tumble anytime. In the event of a China collapse, the impact is thought to be serious, -3 on a ten-point scale.
Strategic Implications
The cost in world economic growth could be considerable. The economies of China’s largest trading partners—the US, Europe, Korea, Japan, Russia, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Peru, and South Africa—would also suffer from lost export revenues.
China has gone from receiving aid to providing needed loans to the US and Europe. An insolvent China would hinder global recovery from future economic downturns, increase the cost of borrowing money, and inhibit the world’s economic growth for years to come.
Regime change would alleviate much of the social unrest by the lower class and emerging educated middle-class dissidents. Economic and political reforms could result in more personal freedoms and democracy within China.
Another Trip to the Future
My wife and I recently took a vacation in New Orleans for Mardi-Gras, and it turned out to be another “trip into the future.” Like our recent trip to Brooklyn that illuminated the tech revolution and millennial harmony, this time New Orleans showed the way to racial and ethnic peace.
After a few days of feasting on Gulf Coast seafood, endless wild parades, and frolicking people, the last night of Mardi Gras took us to Brennen’s restaurant for a late dinner. Somehow, we were invited to tour the newly renovated building, discovering a dozen or so lovely dining rooms and leaving us basking in the warmth of Southern hospitality. The lovely meal, gracious service, beautiful setting, and the jubilant city pulsing into our table was uplifting, to say nothing of a wonderful mint julip. The walk back to our hotel seemed to float somewhere about 6 feet above ground, and it became clear we weren’t in Kansas anymore.
The gritty streets and rowdy crowds faded from consciousness and the city seemed to rise into the air, like a mirage of joy and hope. New Orleans is known for its crime, corruption, and racial tension, but that was all gone. We wandered aimlessly through celebrating crowds dancing in the streets to spontaneous jazz groups. I marveled at the harmony among blacks, Asians, Hispanics, whites, and foreign visitors. There was no conflict or confusion. The all-too-common angst in race relations, for instance yielded to a gentle tolerance and sense of community. It made me think of Jonathan Kolber’s book, A Celebration Society, proposing that everyday celebrations are vital for healthy societies.
Our invitation to tour Brennen’s was the first sign that something was happening. My wife and I think of these unusual events as adventures—moments when you seem to have entered a softer, more ethereal realm where things surprise you. Some psychologists call it a state of flow, while Christians would think of it as grace or an epiphany. Everything is exactly where it belongs. Each action, each word, seems right. Time stands still. Simply being alive is enough. What was confusing instantly becomes crystal clear. This was the main lesson I revisited in New Orleans: the power of shifts in consciousness.
For instance, seeing the strength and dignity of such diverse people from all over the globe, I realized that many Americans have racial and immigration issues profoundly wrong. Those who are fearful of foreign faces fail to see them as a vast human resource that is rapidly gaining dominance, even in the US. Yes, we have to get past decades of old wars, slavery, hurtful stereotypes, and collective guilt. But our diverse population has enormous strengths we have barely begun to recognize. I left New Orleans with little doubt the US will benefit greatly from all of its many talented and industrious people in years to come.
We also met some Russians who were visiting, and I wondered what they thought of American democracy? In contrast to Putin and his accomplices who control Russia with an iron fist, here was a society that celebrated freedom and openness. Are Russians envious? Resentful? Will they outgrow their Cold War defensiveness and join the modern world? What would it take for Russians to make this mental shift?
We live in a changing world of exploding complexity, struggling to adapt to a confluence of crises like climate change, energy, financial instability, political gridlock, terrorism, etc.. Today’s institutions, living habits, educational systems—and the very ideas, values, and beliefs that support all this—are increasingly outmoded. The key to making the transition to a sustainable world lies in such small, everyday shifts in individual consciousness, and a few big shifts too
My Trip to the Future: Technology, Diversity, and Community
I spent a week in Brooklyn recently for my daughter’s wedding, and I came back thinking I had seen the future.
Brooklyn is not an easy place to live. My wife and I found a loft that was a bit gritty, but we wanted to share the life of my daughter and her new husband who live in a loft. It turned out to be quite interesting. One may have to face concrete floors, but oriental rugs give them a comfortable look. Exposed plumbing and heating, and walls of uncertain shape and color can be off-putting — until one realizes it’s a metaphor for the messy nature of modern life. One is forced to learn how to float serenely above the rubble.
The most striking aspect of my visit was to see how millennials like my daughter have formed a life of diversity. The wedding was a rich mélange of wildly different lifestyles, clothing, races, genders, occupations, and anything else one might imagine. There was a lovely young woman in a flowing gown, a black man with dreadlocks in a white suit and red tie, unshaven men wearing cargo shorts, people in business clothes, all manner of hair and sexual orientations. This community of the young got along so well that it seemed perfectly normal. No conflict, no cliques, no stress. This looked like the future, and it gave me hope.
One reason for this blissful coexistence is widespread information. They live in a rarified world where smart phones connect everyone together constantly. Travel by Uber-like car services is called up on demand. Places to stay are arranged on the spot using AirBnB. Any question answered with Google. Destination mapped with GPS systems. Food and groceries are just an email away. Texting is like breathing. They sleep with their phones, take them into the bath, and even to bed. One wonders what to expect when the next generation of IT beyond smart phones comes along?
There are many different Brooklyns, with wildly varying cultures, so it is hard to generalize. The Brooklyn of my daughter’s millennial crowd is just one element in this rich mix, but I think it’s the Brooklyn of the future, the America of the future, and even the world of the future. It’s a world of constant contact with everyone and everything, celebrated by a wild mixture of cultures, and held together by strong pockets of community, hopefully merging into a global whole.
Not an easy task, and there will always be conflict and brutality. But I think the world is coming together, and I was fortunate to get a glimpse of the future in Brooklyn.
The Struggle between Left and Right in Italy
My wife and took a glorious week in Rome, Tuscany and Umbria recently, savoring the glories of Western thought and life at its height in the Renaissance. Apart from the wonderful sights and food, of course, I was struck by how vividly the central issues of our times can be seen in visiting Italy, and most of the EU.
Our guiding principles of democracy and free enterprise were firmly established in Florence during the Renaissance and have now spread throughout the world, with some exceptions like China. The comfortable lives of Italians and most modern people today are a result of this “liberal” culture favoring knowledge, science, human values. While Western culture has been a great historic success, the unresolved clash between left- and right-wing politics remains fierce.
I have lived the France and travelled throughout Europe, and I find that life in most of the EU is roughly as good as in the US. Italian roads, transportation, government services, and most aspects of public life are excellent, for instance. With some exceptions, Italians generally live well with little poverty and crime in lovely environments. This makes it very difficult for anti-government critics to condemn “European Socialism.” Considering all aspects of life quality, EU nations usually excel, with the US down the list with less advanced nations.
This euphoria was punctured when checking into the airport at Rome to return to DC. We faced a harrowing 5 hour ordeal of struggling through a labyrinthine snake line of thousands backed up behind a wall of confused security agents. Our flight had to be delayed almost 2 hours to get passengers aboard, which then cascaded down to hundreds of missed connections.
This is just a single incident, of course, but it show how it is possible to accept such horrible service as something that one has to endure. It highlights the pervasive problem of bureaucracy that permeates all societies. The agents were struggling to get each passenger to unload their bags to gather all “electronics” (hair dryers, cell phones, attachments, cords, etc) into a single plastic bag. While all this attention is focused on such relatively minor details, studies on tests of airport security show a strong majority of attempts to pass guns and knifes are successful.
I am happy to report that this problem of excessive bureaucracy was in sharp contrast to our reception at US security coming home. As I told one of the TSA agents when arriving at Reagan National Airport in DC, “Italian airport security makes you look good.” Bright and alert, well-trained and competent, they whisked us through, highlighting the entrepreneurial spirit that Americans strive to cultivate. The irony is that Italians are masters of enterprise at the business level. The nations is flooded with thriving shops, small companies, and large global corporations.
That’s the main point to be made by this little anecdote. We live our daily lives balancing the costs of excessive market freedom advocated by conservatives against the costs of excessive government bureaucracy from liberal programs. Europeans enjoy the comfortable lives of social democracy, but they suffer a loss of freedom, innovation and bureaucratic governments. American society rightly celebrates this entrepreneurial dimension (think Steve Jobs), but we are horrible at public services and sound regulation. The US remains alone in not providing universal health care, child support, parental leave, and other common services.
One of the greatest challenges of our time is to reconcile the conflict between left and right to the benefit of both political wings. In the US, Republicans are once again peddling their snake oil of more tax cuts and slashing government. In the Reagan and Bush eras, this exploded the national debt, emptied out the middle class, and produced market failures like the 2008 financial collapse. The Democrats are again proposing government actions to revitalize the middle class with better education, tax breaks, infrastructure spending, and the like. Well-intended, but this flies in the face of ultra conservatives who are now holding governments hostage.
This polarization of left and right is emblematic of our time, with similar conflicts common in the EU, UK, Israel, and many nations, It is usually thought to be unavoidable, but I think a deeper understanding shows unusual potential. Left and right orientations are like poles on a magnet or battery – the sharp differences are a form of energy that can be harnessed to create power. That’s why collaboration now represents the major source of progress today.
A simple example can be found in the stalemate over the Keystone Pipeline project. A constructive approach would be to “internalize” the social costs of mining into oil prices and let the market sort out supply and demand. The project might then simply fail on its own merits or survive as an honest venture providing net social value. This is only one possibility, but it illustrates the ability of collaborative solutions to serve both right and left wing interests.
There is a huge and growing body of knowledge and practice that illustrates the mutual gains that collaboration can produce for both sides of such conflicts. But one wonders if serious political change is possible in American institutions. For instance, TechCast forecasts the trend toward “Democratic Enterprise” – a synthesis of free enterprise and democratic community — but the odds are slim. Our experts think there is only a 30% chance the US will make this concept widely acceptable, even though they agree it would represent a big gain with very positive social impacts. Time will tell.
What If Lincoln Had Let the South Go? A Counterfactual Thought Experiment
Although Americans are justly proud of the heroic way President Lincoln kept the South in the United States, it is interesting to speculate on what would the nation look like today if he had let the rebels secede from the Union? Think of this as a thought experiment that attempts to explore an alternate path of US development.
The first difference would be that the lives of many millions of men who died in the Civil War would be spared.
Yes, the Southern slaves would not have been freed. But how much longer could slavery persist after seeing the North free their slaves and with the nation modernizing in the Industrial Age that was taking off then?
The major difference would be to divide the United States into two very different nations stressing very different values. The “Northern States of America” (NSA) would likely have been distinguished by their adherence to democratic ideals of community, human welfare, and the role of government, much like the Democratic Party today. The “Southern States of America” (SSA) would have valued the right of property, free markets, and limited government, like the Republican Party. These 2 cultures may not be quite so neatly divided, but please bear with me as I use this distinction to make an important point.
The two nations could have worked together on common issues, possibly, and they might have fought occasionally, but they could have co-existed rather nicely out of necessity.
The interesting question is, how would the paths taken by the NSA and the SSA have taken these nations in different directions and to different places?
The NSA could have created a more equitable and just society that works together well. They probably would have taken better care of women, the young, and other needy groups, and they would have addressed the climate change crisis. Favoring the use of government to pursue these goals, would the NSA have grown over controlled by Federal regulations and mounting debt, as conservatives warn? Or would they learn to temper the need for control to allow enterprise to thrive?
The SSA would have thrived economically for some time with cheap slave labor, and they likely would have been inventive in their freedom to be entrepreneurial with minimal government restrictions. The social costs of this laissez-faire capitalism would likely have fomented slave rebellions, and social decay would have taken a heavy toll. With no interest in dealing with climate change, the South would likely have become near uninhabitable due to drought, sea level rise, and extreme weather.
There are other paths that could be explored, but I suggest this little thought experiment illustrates the perils of ignoring the concerns of either the left or the right wings of politics. Both positions alone would lead to extremism, and they need each other to provide balance and tempered policy. When we become tired of the endless debate, the specter of either an extreme NSA or SSA would be a valuable lesson to remember.
What the Pope Should Tell Congress: Americans Should Strive to Realize Their Ideals
As a scholar, forecaster, strategist, businessman, American Catholic, and all-around know-it-all, I wondered what I would advise the Pontiff to say in his speech to the US Congress. I give talks myself, and I think I would suggest the following to help Americans realize their potential.
——————————————————-
Dear American Friends:
I am delighted by the warm embrace I have received from Americans, and honored to be with you in this seat of great power. This is especially fitting because I wish to speak with you about the use of American power.
America is a great nation because it professes ideals of democracy, freedom, human welfare, and other virtues that move us toward the transcendent. Your marvelous technological ingenuity, creativeness, zest for knowledge and adventure, and economic advancement are holy attributes that express the sacred power of life and carry it forward.
I must caution you that there are signs of illness in the American spirit that do not live up to your God-given ideals. The gap between your wealthy and ordinary citizens is beyond reasonable standards, and it harms your society gravely for many reasons. The extravagance of American life and the market push for consumption is a serious failing when much of the world struggles with poverty, and while the planet’s life itself is threatened.
I understand many of you do what you can to alleviate these harms, but I think the basic problem is that American institutions celebrate self-interest and money rather than the society they should serve. Your business corporations are dominated by Wall Street and the bottom line, while your political parties are supported by the moneyed class.
Money is an essential part of any economic system, of course, but it cannot be the dominate purpose of a society. I urge you to reframe your political system, business corporations, government agencies, and other institutions to serve others. You will be rewarded manifold.
Take your great American spirit and use it for good. Please free your politicians from the burden of raising campaign funds so they can do their jobs and do them honestly. Ask your business leaders to include their employees in the conduct and rewards of their work. And please also ask them to work for the welfare of their communities. American business can help the developing nations prosper, and they will be rewarded in turn. Saving the Earth from climate change will challenge us all for decades, so addressing this problem will produce a large and sophisticated green economic sector with good jobs and solid returns on investment.
I humble advise you that this is the path to the fulfillment of your great American ideals. Turning your energy to others is what we all need to find the Lord’s peace. That is what I am inviting you do with me. Let us recreate our institutions to serve others, and thereby help us all find a better measure of happiness. I know this is very difficult to do, and I am asking much of you. That is why I also ask you to do this by working together.
Your conservatives and liberals have polarized the nation, but this can be resolved with honest collaboration to satisfy both sets of interests. Nobody today doubts the creativity of free markets, and we all know how essential strong communities and governments are to a healthy society. Other nations are exploring how they can integrate both philosophies into a more powerful whole, and I know you can lead the way. The same polarization of societies is happening around the world, and America was born to take us into a new global era.
May the Lord bless you all. Francis
Why the GOP Loves Trump and the Odds of His Election
The amazing rise of Donald Trump to lead the Republican race for president is a highly symbolic event, and I think it signifies that American conservativism is in crisis.
At a time when trickle-down capitalism has failed and the wealth gap dries up market demand from a squeezed middle class, why would the GOP support a multi-billionaire who advocates more of the same pro-business policies?
With climate change threatening the planet, a hyper-consumer who brags about his extravagant lifestyle seems exactly wrong in an age of limited global resources and mounting environmental costs.
And now that the Nation supports gay marriage and cultural diversity, an aging white male who insults anyone he dislikes sounds like a prescription for political disaster.
Trump has great strengths, mainly his ability to take on big real estate projects successfully, and he has support among rank and file Republicans. A recent focus group thought him “one of us,” “tells the truth,” and is “like Reagan.” But the odds are strongly against him winning a general election, so this rage for Trump doesn’t make much sense, and one wonders what’s really going on?
I study economic cycles to better forecast change, and I think the Reagan Revolution of 1980 has run its course. The deregulation, privatization, and business tax breaks that stimulated the boom of the 90’s are over and Reaganism is in decline.
The overhyped booms and busts of 2000 and 2008 lost Americans trillions of dollars and still spook markets around the globe. Middle-class wages have been flat for decades while the 1% thrive, ironically fulfilling Marx’s prediction about the “immiseration” of the working class. In a world growing to 9 billion people, the single-minded focus on money is almost blind to the exploding need for good jobs, community services, environmental damage and climate change. These disparities in wealth in the face of mounting social concerns provoked Pope Francis to call capitalism immoral.
In the face of such daunting limitations, one would think new principles are in order. But the lure of “a self-organizing market economy with minimal government” is so great that the GOP can’t forsake Reagan’s legacy. Yes, Trump draws on the public’s anger at politics, but it’s a lot more than that. They like Trump because he exemplifies their free market ideals, even though he’s a caricature of a rich capitalist.
By celebrating this outdated ideology, Trumpmania could produce a conservative disaster. It gives Trump great appeal for the nomination but a likely defeat in the general election. Yet a “President Trump” is entirely possible. Remember, Reagan was considered a buffoon up until he took office,
Let’s strategize this issue using scenarios. The three most interesting possible outcomes are outlined below, along with my estimate of the probabilities:
Normalcy Returns – 60% Trump blows it by becoming too insulting on a sensitive issue, so Bush or another normal Republican run against Hillary Clinton.
Trump Wins GOP Nomination – 40% Trumpmania gets the Donald over the top, and Trump runs against Hillary or other Democrats.
Trump Wins the Presidency – 40% X 30% = 12% Trump convinces conservatives, independents, and angry democrats that he can be presidential, while Hillary implodes.
Trump Loses the Presidency – 40% x 70% = 28% Trump can’t pull it off, and is revealed as incapable of being an effective politician.
These are just my estimates of course, and I invite you to provide your own and do the math. You are likely to come up with roughly similar numbers. If Trump were nominated (40% probability), I think there is a 70% chance he could not beat a Democratic, so the probability of losing the electron would be 24%. To win, Trump has to beat a Democrat (30% probability), producing a 12% probability of winning the election.
A Trump Presidency may be a wild card, but it is entirely possible, and even plausible. By supporting a comic capitalist who appeals to their outmoded ideology, the GOP is likely to suffer a historic defeat that ends Reaganism. And there is a small but realistic possibility that Americans would have to accept Donald Trump as president.
Dystopias like the great movie “Idiocracy” are fun to watch, but reality often beats fiction. It could happen here in the Good Old USA.
A Poke in the Eye and the SONY Hack: How Will Americans Handle the Clash between Freedom and Violence?
The North Korean attack on SONY raised the issue of America’s vaunted “freedom of expression” to dizzying heights as the company withdrew the offending film. There is intense concern over yielding to this cyber-attack because that would encourage other attacks, and they could become more frequent and damaging. If a backward nation like N. Korea can bring down a major corporation, we are in new territory of “cyber-feedback” where angered leaders can impose damage on enemies at will.
While it may be reasonable for Americans to see this as an assault on basic freedoms, it can appear very different from a broader perspective. At the symbolic level where we all impute meaning, the offending movie is seen as a poke in the eye of N. Korea. Yes, the movie’s criticism may be valid, and comedy has always been used to promote change. But that’s not how N. Koreans see it, and the result is to provoke conflict.
Americans have a habit of speaking truth to power, and our independence is the source of robust creativity and enterprise. But we often overdo it badly. When Westerners mock the Prophet Mohammed, for instance, this incites violence among Muslims around the globe. If we really want to insist on total freedom of expression, we should also expect a lot more retaliatory violence.
From this broader perspective, America seems more like a rowdy teenager than a global colossus. Issuing offensive media in an increasingly emotional and connected world looks not too different from the way teens attack one another on Facebook. What’s worse, those who favor showing the offending movie are like parents who tell their child it’s OK to continue the eye poking.
Americans face a tough choice. If we continue pushing the freedom to say anything, regardless of how hurtful it may be, we should not be surprised if people fight back. Or we could temper our indulgence in being candid to avoid provoking conflict, and become a little more mature. After all, most adults usually withhold gratuitous insults simply because they want to avoid confrontations.