January 1, 2021 

Dear Interested Readers,

 

A Hearty Welcome to 2021! 

 

We made it! We have turned the page on 2020. Congratulation to us all. If you are reading these words that were written on the morning of New Year’s Day you are entitled to a T-shirt that proclaims “I Survived 2020,” and you deserve a “finisher’s” medal! That’s not all! In his column in the New York Times today, Paul Krugman has announced that despite what he expects from Republicans in the form of continued resistance to attempts to make progress on a reasonable agenda for repairing the nation’s economic problems, there are good reasons to have hope that 2021 will be a much better year for almost everybody. He writes:

 

The next few months will be hell in terms of politics, epidemiology and economics. But at some point in 2021 things will start getting better. And there’s good reason to believe that once the good news starts, the improvement in our condition will be much faster and continue much longer than many people expect.

OK, one thing that probably won’t get better is the political scene. Day after day, Republicans — it’s not just Donald Trump — keep demonstrating that they’re worse than you could possibly have imagined, even when you tried to take into account the fact that they’re worse than you could possibly have imagined. One of our two major political parties no longer accepts the legitimacy of elections it loses, which bodes ill for the fate of the Republic.

But on other fronts there’s a clear case for optimism. Science has come to our rescue, big time, with the miraculously fast development of vaccines against the coronavirus. True, the United States is botching the initial rollout, which should surprise nobody. But this is probably just a temporary hitch, especially because in less than three weeks we’ll have a president actually interested in doing his job.

And once we’ve achieved widespread vaccination, the economy will bounce back. 

 

I share Krugman’s enthusiasm for a better 2021. My enthusiasm includes a positive outlook for improved healthcare for the nation. Don’t get me wrong. I doubt that we will see a piece of sweeping legislation that will give every person living within our borders easy access to the care they need. And it is also true that the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that almost all of the problems that we knew we had are worse than we previously admitted or appreciated. Our eyes have been further opened to the inequality of resource distribution to the poor of all ethnicities in rural America, and the impoverished urban neighborhoods where so many minorities live. More healthcare professionals now understand the importance of managing problems for a population as well as for the individual. Dr. Robert Ebert’s admonition pointing out the importance of a population approach to the “deficiencies in healthcare,” and the importance of reliable operating systems and finance mechanisms have been tragically proven during the pandemic to be correct once again. Remember that he told us in 1965 that:

 

“The existing deficiencies in health care cannot be corrected simply by supplying more personnel, more facilities, and more money. These problems can only be solved by organizing the personnel, facilities, and financing into a conceptual framework and operating system that will provide optimally for the health needs of the population.”

 

Supply chains to deliver necessary resources and systems that equitably distribute testing, PPE, vaccinations, and adequate essential workforces require levels of organization across the nation that we did not have prior to the pandemic. Now we have a much clearer concept of what makes us vulnerable. I hope that Joe Biden will be able to lead us to the resolution of many of our deficiencies through the powers that currently exist within the executive branch of government since the passing of additional legislation will likely be difficult even if the Democrats are fortunate enough to win in Georgia and regain the Senate by the slimmest of margins. 

 

I would be negligent if I did not point out that our problem is not a shortage of assets or scientific expertise, nor is it a deficiency in the commitment to service from our providers of care. The heroic efforts of medical professionals, the rapid development of the new vaccines, and the amazingly quick understanding of the characteristics of the virus and how to improve the treatment of those who contract it demonstrate that our problem is not a lack of knowledge or commitment. Our problem is in the effective production and distribution of the benefits of our knowledge and expertise. Assuming that Joe and team are going to try to improve the distribution of resources, improve the access of all Americans to services by any administrative means possible, and continue to find the resources necessary to continue the advancement of science and our understanding of the threats that will surely continue to develop, what should you and I be doing? 

 

“What should I do?.” is a question that each of us should be asking. The collective answer to that question will determine the future of America and the world as much as anything our government tries to do for us. It is a good question to ask at the beginning of a new year and at the beginning of a new presidency. One of my frequent questions to myself is, “What part of the problem am I?” With the answer to that question, it is easy then to ask, “How can I do my part to solve the problem?” A group of my friends and neighbors in little New London, New Hampshire have been asking ourselves for the past four years whether we were part of the nation’s collective problem and what might we do in our little corner of the world to make a difference. One thing that has evolved from the collective exercise has been the rapid evolution of a new nonprofit organization that we have named Kearsarge Neighborhood Partners. You can learn more about us by clicking on the previous link to our website or by visiting our FaceBook page. We now have more than a hundred and fifty volunteers and contributors who have offered their services and tens of thousands of dollars to try to make a difference in the escalation of need that has occurred during the pandemic. 

 

The members of the community of participants continue to stimulate each other in study groups. We have grown individually and collectively through a multitude of ZOOM meetings where we have continued the work that we did through social gatherings in our homes prior to the pandemic. Recently we have studied Isabel Wilkerson’s great book Caste: The Origins of Our Discontent. Many of us completed a seminar called “Seeking Shalom” almost two years ago and have read or participated in a book and seminar teaching techniques of helping called Bridges Out of Poverty. Currently, some of us have been studying our biases using a series of podcasts from Richard Rohr’s Center For Contemplation and Action entitled “Learning How to See” as our text.  

 

Our country’s greatest barrier to a better future is not the pandemic or even the gross inequalities that exist and harm our health and hold so many back from full participation. Our greatest threat, the biggest cloud that hangs over us all is the widening divisions that compromise the potential of our great experiment in pluralism. For many years I have been fascinated by the biases that have been described in the literature of “behavioral economics.” I have gobbled up the work of Daniel Kahneman, Richard Thaler, Dan Ariely, Cass Sunstein, and others that describe the biases that drive so many of our behaviors as they determine the outcomes of our attempt to live in the world together. When I ask myself “What part of the problem am I,” I must admit that I wear a “blue” shirt and have many biases against those who wear a “red shirt” as I know that the red shirts are biased against the blue shirts. 

 

Having determined that I am part of the problem, the question becomes “What am I going to do about it?” I love making New Year’s resolutions. I have mixed results in keeping the resolutions I make, but I am convinced that my resolutions which generally fall into the category of “personal improvement” do serve some benefit to me and those who must be in the near vicinity to me. My major resolution for the year is to be more aware of my biases and make attempts to recognize them in such a way that I am contributing a little bit to the effort to narrow the divides that rob us all of the full potential of our democracy. I want to share with you the biases gleaned from the ongoing study by our little group of “Learning How to See.” I present them in italics because they are the work of someone else although I am not quite sure who collated the list and who added the explanations. My best guess is that the principal author is Brian McLaren, the moderator of the “Learning How to See” podcast. The author has chosen to name each bias with a word that begins with “c.”

 

1. Confirmation bias, that the human brain welcomes information that confirms what it

already thinks and resists information that disturbs or contradicts what it already thinks.

 

2. Complexity bias, that the human brain prefers a simple lie to a complex truth.

 

3. Community bias, that our brains find it hard to see anything that will get us in trouble with

the group that we belong to and that we cherish.

 

4. Complementary bias, that if people are nice to us, then we’ll be open to what they say,

and if we don’t perceive them as liking us or being nice to us, then we’ll be biased

against anything they say.

 

5. Contact bias, that if you lack contact with someone, that you will not be able to see what

they see.

 

6. Conservative/liberal (political) bias, that our brains like to see what our party sees, and we flock to those who see as we do.

 

7. Consciousness bias, that we can only see from a location, from our own level of maturity

or consciousness

 

8. Competency bias, that our brains like to think of ourselves as above average. As a

result, we often underestimate both our incompetence and sometimes our competence as well.

 

9. Confidence bias, that we prefer a confident lie to a hesitant truth.

 

10. Conspiracy bias, that when we feel shame, we’re vulnerable to stories that cast us as

victims of some evil conspiracy.

 

11. Comfort bias, that we welcome data that lets us just relax.

 

12. Catastrophe bias, that we are prone to see things that seem immediately and

disastrously dangerous, but the slow coming change we find easy to ignore.

 

13. Cash bias, we see what brings in the money and if something might cost us something

or not be financially profitable, it’s very easy for us to discount it.

 

I must admit that I suffer from every one of these biases. I have a lot of work to do. After I had decided to let you know about my intention of working on my biases as a New Year’s resolution, I was delighted to discover that David Brooks’ year-end column yesterday said a lot about biases. The column is entitled “2020 Taught Us How to Fix This: Our current model of social change isn’t working.” Here are a few highlights from the piece. Notice his mention of bias.

 

This is the year that broke the truth. This is the year when millions of Americans — and not just your political opponents — seemed impervious to evidence, willing to believe the most outlandish things if it suited their biases, and eager to develop fervid animosities based on crude stereotypes.

 

A little further down the page, he writes:

 

…this was the year that showed that our models for how we change minds or change behavior are deeply flawed. It turns out that if you tell someone their facts are wrong, you don’t usually win them over; you just entrench false belief.

 

That sounds like a “confirmation bias” to me. Brooks goes on to point out that recent studies show that “diversity training” programs in business and education have been mostly ineffective. I was very enthusiastic about the diversity initiatives of the mid-nineties at Harvard Pilgrim Health Care  and became a “diversity trainer.” He explains:

 

These programs are obviously well intended, and they often describe systemic racism accurately, but the bulk of the evidence, though not all of it, suggests they don’t reduce discrimination. Firms that use such courses see no increase in managerial diversity. Sometimes they see an increase — not a decrease — in minority employee turnover.

Frank Dobbin and Alexandra Kalev offered a clear summary of the research in a 2018 essay in Anthropology Now. One meta-analysis of 985 studies of anti-bias interventions found little evidence that these programs reduced bias. Other studies sometimes do find a short-term change in attitudes, but very few find a widespread change in actual behavior.

 

He goes on to report what has been identified as the reasons for failure:

 

• First, “short-term educational interventions in general do not change people.” This is as true for worker safety courses as it is for efforts to combat racism. 

 

• Second, some researchers argue that the training activates stereotypes in people’s minds rather than eliminates them. 

 

• Third, training can make people complacent, thinking that because they went through the program they’ve solved the problem.

 

• Fourth, the mandatory training makes many white participants feel left out, angry and resentful, actually decreasing their support for workplace diversity. 

 

• Fifth, people don’t like to be told what to think, and may rebel if they feel that they’re being pressured to think a certain way.

 

I see complexity bias, confirmation bias, and community bias at work on that list. I would not argue with you if you saw other biases like contact bias, political bias, and almost any other bias as an explanation for why our attempts to improve diversity have been relatively ineffective. Functioning without bias is a tall order and takes a lot of commitment for small gains. 

 

Brooks names a bias, “implicit bias,” that is not implicitly present on my list. (LOL) By “implicit” biases Brooks means literally, hidden biases. Well, all biases are usually hidden from us since we are usually blinded from seeing our own biases. He quotes a somewhat cynical expert on the whole subject of efforts to eliminate discrimination:

 

“I see most implicit bias training as window dressing that looks good both internally to an organization and externally as if you’re concerned and trying to do something. But it can be deployed without actually achieving anything, which makes it in fact counterproductive.”

 

Brooks’ conclusion is that the best way to eliminate bias is through interpersonal contact. 

 

Real change seems to involve putting bodies from different groups in the same room, on the same team and in the same neighborhood. That’s national service programs. That’s residential integration programs across all lines of difference. That’s workplace diversity, equity and inclusion — permanent physical integration, not training.

This points to a more fundamental vision of social change, but it is a hard-won lesson from a bitterly divisive year.

 

I would agree. I see my children and their friends who grew up in a much more diverse environment than I did in the Jim Crow South as being fundamentally less biased than my generation. That is hopeful and suggests that trying to get to know people, or at least trying to interact more with people who are different and have different ideas about how the world should work would be a good place to begin this year as I try to practice my awareness of my biases. 

 

I wish you a happy New Year and hope that if you have any resolutions for the year that you achieve great success. I expect that Joe Biden has been thinking about his own resolutions for this year and the next four. I hope that whatever you and I chose to do won’t undermine his efforts to help us all move forward together. 

 

Let It Snow Again, A lot!

 

The weather over the last two weeks has been a real disappointment.  After we got over three feet of snow in mid-December, I was fooled into thinking that this would be a December to remember and the kick-off for the best winter in the last decade. I momentarily forgot about the wild swings in temperature that are part of the experience of global warming. Global warming has not only raised the average temperature everywhere, but it has also increased the violence and the variation in weather. A few days after we had a whiteout of snow falling at more than 5 inches per hour the temperature was in the sixties and we were getting 2 inches of rain. The warming and the rain cost us  90% of our snow. 

 

You can imagine my collapsing spirit while I looked out at the “gully washer” of a storm that was wiping out my snow. I love to take current pictures of what is happening around me, but who is uplifted by images of melting snow? My neighbor and photographer extraordinaire, Peter Bloch came to my rescue. He is a drone photographer who captures much of what the rest of us miss. He sees beauty where most of us see only the ordinary. He recently photographed one of the first snowstorms of the season in slow motion. The snow he captured fell on the day before election day, the day before I arrived home from my cross country RV trek. His piece is entitled “Slo-Mo-Snow.” Coupled with the music he has chosen, it is mesmerizing. I lifted today’s header as a “screenshot.”

 

I love the first hour or so of falling snow. You can watch all of the inadequacies and imperfections of the ordinary world become ethereal and magnificent over a very short period of time as a thin layer of white develops into a glorious blanket of white that hides all ugliness. The beauty of the falling snow is ephemeral. It may last a few minutes, or it may grow over hours to a magnificent transformation of everything you can see, but it is always true that it will not last long so we are compelled to rush out and enjoy it while we can.

 

I am in a great mood because the seven-day forecast suggests that there is a good chance for snow on four of the next seven days, and five of the next eight. If the forecast turns out to be true, I will be a happy guy. Wherever you are, I hope that 2021 gets off to a great start for you.

 

Be well,

Gene