Politics · Uncategorized

The Western Fall

We analyzed the Arab Spring…Now let’s talk about the next revolution we all have courtside seats for…. The Western Fall.

Here in the US, we’ve had an unprecedented presidential primary season. We’ve had two anti- establishment candidates, one from each of the major political parties, rise to national acclaim. One of them is the presumptive republican nominee

Political pundits, historians, statisticians, failed in their predictions. Most are blaming miscalculations on changes in the media technology and how celebrities push forecasters further from accuracy.

They’ve brought out segments of the US population that feel disenfranchised, slighted, and that traditional political allegiances have not served their needs. Anti-establishment voter sentiment is not just exclusive to the United States.

Meet Norbert Hofer, former presidential candidate, of the far-right Freedom Party of Austria. The party wanted to provide more referendums, directly elect the federal president, significantly reduce the number of ministries, and devolve power to the federal states and local councils. While Hofer eventually ended up losing, he managed to get 49% of votes during the election.

The far left also has its share of rising political figures. In Greece, for example, Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras’ left-wing Syriza party is leading an unlikely coalition government with the right-wing populist Independent Greek party.

Across the West, we see a rise in conversations around immigration, economic integration, austerity measures , size of government, and a move away from “centrist” candidates and platforms. Why now and most importantly, what are the implications of a more populist West? Are we in a new normal?

Why Now?

There are a couple of major trends play a key role in the Western Fall. I believe the social liberalization is a major driver.

The World Values Survey shows that Western societies have been getting gradually more liberal on many social issues, especially among the younger generation and well-educated middle class. That includes egalitarian attitudes toward sex roles, tolerance of fluid gender identities and LGBT rights, support for same-sex marriage, tolerance of diversity, and more secular values, as well as what political scientists call emancipative values, engagement in directly assertive forms of democratic participation, and cosmopolitan support for agencies of global governance.

This long-term generational shift threatens many traditionalists’ cultural values. Less educated and older citizens fear becoming marginalized and left behind within their own countries.

Another key driver is the rise in income inequality. Western countries, who were greatly impacted by the global financial crisis, have rebounded for the most part, but inequality between the wealthy and the poor has continued to increase. While income inequality has increased amongst populations, there is also a larger discrepancy between richer and poorer countries in the EU.

Globalization and the advent of technology replacing low wage jobs creates some context as well. From retail to finance to healthcare and education, the jobs available particularly for low-skilled workers, are diminishing. One study from the Oxford Martin School published in 2014, estimates the 49% of all jobs are in jeopardy of technological disruption over the next 20 years. Low wage workers are feeling the bern already and it’s translating to isolationist rhetoric.

What are the implications?

What we’ve already started to see is a large shift toward isolationism. #Brexit is a great example of what is to come. Citizens who feel immigration is the cause of their country’s woes will close their borders and make it more difficult for immigrants to visit and and gain residency. They’ll want to block themselves off from their neighbors and go it alone. This is especially worrisome for the European Union as we’ll start to see more right and left leaning parties bring similar referendums to the people.

I also believe we’ll see the demise of the two party System in the United States. At this time, the Democratic and GOP platforms are too centrist for the ultra conservatives and the left liberals. It may not happen this election cycle, but we’ll see a fragmentation of the major parties in the next 5 years.

* I’d be interested in hearing more implications in the comments section. I’m just going to wrap up because I have to start making dinner.

To conclude, I do believe we are in a new normal. We’ve seen this coming for a long time. On the US side, the Tea Party was the predecessor of what we see now. The big question is how political systems will operate as a result of the new norm. I have a feeling that the process will sort itself out but it will take some deliberate steering. We are in an era where we have to deal with global problems collectively. Isolationism will serve as a hinderance to major challenges like climate change, water and food shortages to come. I haven’t even asked what this means for China on the worlds stage. What about emerging countries? Is this a chance for others to step up where other countries will attempt to focus more on internal development?

music · Politics

Flying to Nigeria with my Woes

I’ve been getting a lot of emails, texts, tweets from my friends asking me to explain what’s going on in Nigeria. I don’t really have all the answers but I think I have an okay understanding. Here’s my response to one of my friends about the recent growth adjustment discussed here.

A couple of things…..
  1. It’s bad but it isn’t as bad as this guy makes it sound
  2. It’s a mix of history and current situations biting Nigeria in the butt
  3. This is probably the best situation Nigeria can be in.
It’s bad but it isn’t as bad as this guy makes it sound… A lot of things aren’t happening right now because of the currency restrictions the Nigerian government has put on commerce and consumers. The policy is in place as ant-corruption +  protection driven strategy to prevent rapid inflation. I need to find some articles to better explain it but that’s one major part of whats going on. There are things still happening but the industries that aren’t driven by import and currency arbitrage seem to be doing okay. Totally forgot to mention the fuel scarcity… maybe its pretty bad, but Nigerians always make the pretty bad seem bearable for some reason.
It’s a mix of history and current situations biting Nigeria in the butt.  The major challenge with the Nigerian economy was that it was so dependent on oil revenues as a government. As supply increased, the Nigerian government was over exposed to the decreased prices and it ruined the 2015 and 2016 budget. Now everyone internally is screaming diversification but its a tad late. If you look at Angola, Saudi Arabia, Libya….They all have ridiculous sovereign wealth funds that have been at work to invest oil profit in other industries and other areas of the world. Nigeria has been squandering its oil profits through corruption and living the high life.
This is probably the best situation Nigeria can be in.. I think this is forcing a lot of difficult conversations that should have been had 20 or 30 years ago. It could be severely worst…. Imagine a currency diving into a tail spin. That would suck. Nigeria still has a things going for it… a ton of natural resources, low labor costs, improving infrastructure…. There’s still a lot of work to do but  I think Nigeria is still in a decent position…
business · Kanye West · Leadership · Politics · Uncategorized

How the FBI Hacked Into the Iphone

This took a lot to post, but I’m not afraid anymore.

For a long time, our government has tried to stay ahead of us. What we’ve seen in reality is the people always catch up.

A couple of my colleagues and I have taken the last couple of weeks to identify the vulnerability the FBI is using to hack the Iphone.

We made a video about it here. We believe it should be shared with the world.

Cheers.

Politics · product · Technology · Why?

Kobayashi and the Leader of the Free World

***Disclaimer…. I’m a huge Star Trek fan. I’ve tried to simplify a little bit so you don’t have to know as much about Star Trek to understand what I’m trying to say.***

Kobayashi Maru is a star fleet training exercise that is used to evaluate a commander’s character and fortitude. The simulation in the Star Trek universe allows the cadet to command a federation star ship, and sends them to aid another Federation vessel, the Kobayashi Maru. The disabled ship is adrift in the Klingon neutral zone, and the ship commanded by the cadet entering the zone will be in violation of a treaty and liable to attack.

The cadet has to decide whether to rescue the stranded ship, creating an opportunity for an all-out war with the Klingons and jeopardizing his or her own vessel and crew-mates’ lives in the process, or leave the Kobayashi Maru to eventual destruction. If the cadet attempts to save the vessel, the simulation is programmed to guarantee that his or her own ship will be destroyed. Not only will he be unsuccessful in saving the Kobayashi Maru, but everyone else will die as well.

The object is to test the cadet’s character and presence of mind in the face of large-scale disaster and certain death. The creation of the Kobayashi Maru isn’t discussed as much in Star Trek cannon, although in the most recent reboot, it’s shown that Spock was the preliminary designer of the test. His Vulcan sense of logic proved to be very helpful in constructing the no win scenario.

When deciding on leaders, humans traditionally follow our gut and how we feel about a person. The mental models an heuristics used to make snap decisions on who to follow are legacy from our early days when we had to be very cautious about who we were hunting and gathering with. We decide leaders based on what they say but even more on how we perceive them. Don’t believe me?  Take a read about JFK VS Nixon here.

While we can never get rid of the human perspective, shouldn’t we be responsible for aiding better decisions in who should be leaders? We should have our own Kobayashi Maru that we use to vet leaders where we can objectively see their character and fortitude. To be more specific, the president of the United States should be put through more than just public opinion to become president. We have the history of the world and technology to create all possible and future scenarios to test a candidate’s decision making skills. It’s not a heavy lift at all. Here are the steps:

  1. Recognize that we are currently incapable of making the best decisions without more information.
  2. Develop a Kobayashi Maru equivalent that runs through a week of various possible scenarios (domestic disasters, economic collapse, political brinkmanship,etc).
  3. Have the potential president pick their team.
  4. Run the simulations… Evaluate the results.

The hardest step is 1. Everything else is super doable. Our armed forces train just like this. I don’t think its too much to ask a potential Commander in Chief to go through similar training and evaluation.

There’s a lot of responsibility involved with picking the next leader of the free world . Citizens should look at a Kobayashi Maru like exam as an opportunity to improve our decision making by exposing the decision making process of our future leaders in life- like situations.

Or we can just watch them play The Sims.

 

 

 

Politics · Uncategorized

Donald Trump and George Orwell Walk into a Bar…

Most liberal arts majors are familiar with the essay “Politics and the English Language” by George Orwell. For those who haven’t read it, here’s the link to the short essay here. It’s not that long but for those who don’t want to read… Here are some of the key rules he discussed in his short essay.

  1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print
  2. Never use a long word where a short one will do.
  3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
  4. Never use the passive where you can use the active
  5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
  6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

Orwell thought complexity and obtuse language equated to smoke and mirrors, hiding the reader or listener from the real point at hand. “The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.” His essay was an attempt to provide a set of guidelines to increase the accessibility of  topics discussed in political discourse.

As an undergrad, I was a total champion of Orwell and his teachings. I thought academic writing was too complex, policy wonks used technical jargon to keep their jobs, and simplicity was the ultimate measure of intelligence. In all honesty, a majority of my resentment for complexity and complicated stemmed from my hatred of the unreasonably long research papers I had to read and write…But I digress. In theory, yes, less is more in the political sphere, but what we’ve seen in recent years is the deliberate use of simplistic thoughts and talking points to create false and sometimes dangerous arguments for political benefit.

To be clear, both sides of the political isle use simplistic frameworks, analogies, plain talking points, and basic language to shape and frame their positions. This election cycle, we’re exposed to a great case study of how simple language can be detrimental to political discourse.

Exhibit A:

At 4:02- Donald Trump begins to discuss one of the central parts of his immigration policy…building a wall between Mexico and the Southern Boarder of the United States. Politics and practicality aside, listen for the words he uses. “We’re going to build a big wall… and its going to be beautiful.” Using Orwell’s set of rules, this passes for great rhetoric. He uses short and straight to the point words to define that he’s building a wall. Its going to be a big wall and it will be beautiful. From a listeners point of view, it leaves a lot to interpretation but it also assures the listener that it will cover their requirements… Big and beautiful. Take a step back for a moment at the implications. How many states does the wall go through? What is its height? How beautiful are we talking about here? I used this as an elementary example of Mr. Trumps word selection in policy and his speech. They are simple words but they leave leeway for creativity when put in the position to execute.

 

Exhibit B:

Bernie Sanders is known for his progressive politics and hard line stance on Wall Street. Politics aside…Listen to around 1:18…

“We bailed out Wall Street”

A couple of things to think about here. Who are Mr. and Mrs Street and why did they name their child Wall? Is wall street an established entity? If so, can we go talk to them about how they feel about being bailed out? The truth of the matter is that Wall Street and similar labels simplify the complexity of parties involved and the outcomes. Labels make it easier to vilify people or groups and create an us vs them mentality. We all know its way more complicated than we bailed out “Wall Street” but we allow and celebrate rhetoric that makes us feel like we are on the “right” side.

 

I could go on and on. There’s a lot of even better examples that happen everyday on CNN, MSNBC and Fox. We do ourselves a disservice by allowing elected officials (or those aspiring for it) to simplify complex issues so it can fit into sound bite or to hide the actual challenges involved. If Orwell is one extreme on a continuum and politicians today are all the way on the other end, I’m sure everyone would agree we need to move toward the middle ground where we respect the complexity of the issues we face.