“Better way to describe it: Paris is us,” The Colorado Springs Business Journal, January 23-29, 2015, 23.

PARIS IS US

What does the callous murder of journalists and Jews in Paris have to do with Colorado business? Why should we, so far away from what happened, care?

Let me answer these questions by analogy, one that was famous in the 1950s and may have been forgotten by now. It was a Protestant Pastor in Germany, Martin Niemöller (1892–1984), who famously said (there are different versions):

“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”

What may seem remote at one point, the singling out of one minority group, becomes extremely relevant and personal at another. Lest we forget, there is some connectivity between all of humanity, and more specifically, between all the social, economic, political, and moral variables that guide us.

It’s inappropriate to compare what happened in Nazi Germany to what happened in Paris to a small satirical magazine with 60,000 circulation and to a kosher storefront. Unlike the German government who persecuted Jews and gays, socialists and Catholics, and others, the French government is sending police officers and troops to protect its minorities.

But the reason so many marched in Paris with signs that read “I am Charlie,” is that they didn’t simply want to show solidarity, but more importantly, they demonstrated that when something is morally objectionable, it cannot be contained; it spills over to every facet of the community.

When Wall Street misbehaves, Main Street is affected. When a so-called rogue trader throws off the balance of trades or “corners the market” in oil futures, for example, it’s not exclusively his affair.

His company’s reputation suffers, and it may even incur some fines. Wall Street gets a black eye as well, and regulators are seen as lax. Eventually, we can expect that the markets in general will be affected. Why should we care what happens to the case of the rogue trader, like the infamous “whale”?

As employees and employers, we have money invested in the markets, in the virtual safes of Wall Street, either through money market or pension funds. Likewise, interest rates—for cars and homes, business loans and credit cards—somehow are still dependent on what the giant Wall Street investment banks want us to pay. The Treasury Department responds to Wall Street, after all, in case you ever forget who has been heading it for decades.

In other words, “we are Wall Street” just as much as “we are Charlie.” You can pretend that financial or journalistic variables are separate from each other, but they are not! You can even claim that you don’t read French and that except for French Fries, you have no relation to France or its problems with extreme Muslims and their journalistic and Jewish victims.

But what will you say when this happens in New York? Still too far for you to identify with the problem there, on the East Coast? When the office of the NAACP was bombed here not long ago, was that close enough? Do you have to be African-American to be affected?

You may not care now, as Pastor Niemöller reminds us, because you aren’t a Jew or a journalist, black or financial maven, but when they come for you—who will speak out on your behalf?

When I see electricians changing wall-pack bulbs in below-freezing temperatures and the drivers who struggle in the snow to roll dumpsters to their truck for unloading—are they me?

When the guys in overalls come to empty 1,500 gallons of our grease-trap so early in the morning so as not to upset neighbors with the noxious odors of their work—are they you?

When the line-cook prepares your meal and the server brings it to your table—do you identify with their work, their diligence, their prayer for a good tip because they pay their own college tuition?

What the horrible incident in Paris should remind us all is that when catastrophes happen elsewhere, it’s only by random chance that they occur where and when they do. The idea that it cannot happen to you is preposterous, even fool-hardy.

The solidarity shown in Paris should remind us to feel sympathy and empathy with those around us, the people who serve and work for us, who teach and protect us, who lead and entertain us, and who might be victimized for no fault of their own.

Raphael Sassower is professor of philosophy at UCCS. He can be reached at rsassower@gmail.com See previous articles at sassower.blogspot.com

---

 [SG1]Care

“Wish for 2015: mindful common sense,” The Colorado Springs Business Journal, January 2-8, 2015, 15.

ONE WISH FOR 2015: MINDFUL COMMON SENSE

When CBS’ “60 Minutes” covers the benefits of meditation for business creativity and productivity (at Google), we know mindfulness has gone mainstream. So much so, that on every self-respecting urban corner you can find a yoga studio or meditation center.

The Americanization of Eastern practices comes at a price. Gone are the philosophical commitments and the aspiration to transcendental other-worldliness that accompany these practices. In their stead, a heavy pragmatic diet of market-driven “measured outcomes” is offered in hourly sessions, with or without sweating.

Can you measure the benefits of mindfulness? It’s as ludicrous as measuring the outcome of college education. In both cases, only on one’s deathbed can one fully appreciate the benefits, the gifts that come with being mindful and/or educated.

The business-minded critic laughs at the thought of waiting till the dusk of life to reflect on one’s quality of life. He who has the most toys wins, no? Income and wealth are likewise easy ways of measuring and comparing oneself to others.

What would it look like to measure one’s quality of life in terms of mindfulness and education, that is, enlightenment? The cynic would answer: just see how long it takes for you to answer a question or make a decision; the longer the time interval, the more contemplative.

But of course this measurement is flawed because slowness in itself connotes nothing more than being slow: some are slow because they really think deeply before answering a question or making a decision, while others are just cognitively slow. How can we tell the difference?

Perhaps testimonies could do the trick: just ask the person what kind of slowness is being practiced. But as the psychologist Daniel Kahneman reminds us, we are prone to self-deception. In short, we can’t be trusted.

Maybe we don’t have to wait till we are on our deathbed to be reflective. Why can’t we actually practice mindfulness daily, and every time we are expected to answer a question or make a decision, we can become self-conscious of the fact that we are being mindful in the process.

Instead of taking stock of our life only once before we part from this world, we can do it all the time. Some meditate, some pray for the same reason—to stop the hustle and bustle of the daily grind and detach from small annoyances (and big ones) so as to see the big picture more clearly.

No wonder that we are prone to make New Year resolutions, promise to change our life. These promises are usually prompted by reflecting on what we did wrong in the past year, what we think is changeable, and what deserves our attention in the future.

Our reflection on past experiences is a sort of mindfulness that forces us to be honest with ourselves, self-police ourselves. Even when family and loved ones correct us, it’s up to us to act. This kind of mindfulness we cannot delegate or outsource; we can’t pay a yoga instructor to do what only we can accomplish.

Since political economists and businesspeople alike have historically claimed that their theories and principles are based on common-sense rather than speculation, they can endorse the kind of mindfulness advocated here. They believe that how we act and what we do in fact reflect on who we are.

You can’t be a “good guy,” as is commonly said about clients and vendors, partners and fellow-workers, unless you show it or prove it in your everyday work-ethic. Talk is cheap, and actions speak louder than words, right?

If this is so, then mindful common-sense should be easy to accomplish. It’s not about Americanizing meditation practices, or turning board-meeting and sale-calls into awkward moments of silence.

Instead, mindfulness forces you to anticipate your own reactions and those of others, allows you to anticipate unintended consequences, and ensures that you see a continuous thread running from your past to your future, where the present is the only place you really occupy.

It makes sense to slow down, to think more carefully and critically about what you are about to say or do; it makes sense to retract a statement if wrong, and to compliment others when they say something smart or do something well. It also makes sense for you to be kind to yourself and count your blessings—they are all too many to recount.

As 2015 is about to begin, I implore everyone to be more philosophically-minded. It’s easier to do than you think; it’s more rewarding than anything else you regularly do; and if you practice it often enough, it’ll become second nature. Happy New Year! 

Raphael Sassower is professor of philosophy at UCCS. He can be reached at rsassower@gmail.com See previous articles at sassower.blogspot.com

“What we really need in America is moral consistency,” The Colorado Springs Business Journal, December 12-18, 2014, 21.

TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE

President Obama suggests that the federal government pay for 50,000 new lapel-size cameras for police officers as part of the response to the killing of an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Missouri.

University of Virginia president Sullivan closes fraternities till the spring semester and suggests a coordinated police action against underage drinking on campus as a response to the prevalence of rapes on campus.

The New York Times reported on 11/3/14 that “Hyundai and Kia would pay a combined $300 million penalty for overstating vehicle fuel economy standards on 1.2 million vehicles, a violation of the Clean Air Act.” 

General Motors’ recalls in the past two years have been in response to several deaths because of faulty parts.

Bank of America, among other financial institutions, has been fined billions of dollars in 2014 for mortgage fraud which contributed to the Great Recession of 2008-2012 with millions of people losing their homes to foreclosure.

And the list goes on. 

Seemingly unrelated on one level, because of the diverse issues they deal with—racism, misogyny, greed, and fraud, on another level all of these cases illustrate that what underlies questions of legal culpability are moral failures.

If all we do is act after the fact or simply fine this or that criminal activity, we’ll never be able to root out such behavior from our midst. To be clear: it won’t be easy to eliminate these moral hazards because we’ll have to dig deeper than we are used to.

The moral expectation of the marketplace was that crime doesn’t pay, that trust is built into the system, and that self-policing is the way to go. As the standard refrain from fifty years ago went: what’s good for GM is good for America.

That refrain wasn’t as arrogant as it sounds nowadays since it tied the good fortunes of corporate America with the country as a whole. It was in line with Henry Ford’s dictum about paying his employees high enough wages to be able to buy the cars they produced.

The “good old days” when business leaders felt responsible for the nation as a whole are gone. They show their contempt for the country and its laws by seeking tax havens in Ireland and Luxemburg (as the latest scandals remind us).

As self-policing becomes limited if not obsolete, we turn to local police forces and federal agencies, the ones our taxes pay for. Obama’s brilliant idea about cameras will be as fruitful as the one administered by our city leaders when they installed surveillance cameras downtown on Tejon street. Has behavior around the same night clubs radically changed? 

Cameras record, they don’t prevent crimes. Camera footage can be used after the fact if and when courts agree to such use. But they offer a band aid for open wounds that require drastic treatment, perhaps even surgery.

What we saw in Ferguson and Staten Island reflect racial and socio-economic issues as well the militarization of police departments. When citizens are viewed as “enemies” rather than members of one’s community, cameras worn by officers will not change anything—cameras will be off (deliberately or accidently) in crucial moments.

I still recall like yesterday when I was stopped twenty years ago by a police officer who demanded to know where my accent was from. Relevance? When I was stopped three years ago by a very young deputy-sheriff, his contempt and condescension flowed so naturally as if I were a criminal. Do I look like one, given my age? I’m not trying to compare my experiences with those of young African-Americans, only to indicate the prevalence of officers’ cultural deftness.

Yes, people of color are more likely to be profiled, arrested, and found guilty than Caucasians; but much of that also depends on the attitude that police officers convey. Where is the humility that comes with the responsibility of maintaining the peace and serving one’s community?

Campus rape must be stopped by any possible means. Drinking may enhance a twisted mindset, but it doesn’t necessarily cause it. What causes misogynistic behavior has as much to do with telling young girls that they can’t be scientists as with wage disparity and domestic violence. The web is tangled, the remedies must be broad-based.

If drinking were lowered to 18, driving licenses raised to 18, adulthood could be defined simply. This would be consistent with military service, voting, and a variety of other legal restrictions and privileges. Would this help expecting students to be responsible adults. 

As for the marketplace, fining banks and manufacturers after the fact becomes their “cost of doing business” rather than a lesson to eliminate greed. There is a fine line between competition and greed—it’s a moral line that shouldn’t be crossed!

Raphael Sassower is professor of philosophy at UCCS. He can be reached at rsassower@gmail.com See previous articles at sassower.blogspot.com