Edit of 20 May 2007 to drop one link (reduntant to Master Gray) and add instead General Zinni's book on waging peace, our counterpart to the author of this book in terms of intellect, morality, and strategic gravitas.
I defer to the other reviewers on the bulk of the book. It can and should be required reading for some time to come.
Here is the one recommendation in the conclusion that really matters, and I paraphrase:
FROM THE BEGINNING, the national interests and desired outcomes must be considered by a fully integrated team of military and civilian experts with deep strategic, historical, cultural, geographic, and related knowledge, and the use of force must be planned in the context of the desired OUTCOME. The same and related teams must plan for the peace and see the entire program through to the desired END.
This is of course sensible, and not what the Americans did. General Shinseki's correct appreciation was over-turned by Paul Wolfowitz, a world-class liar living in a fantasy world. General Zinni was called a traitor. General Gavin was dismissed early because Haliburton was not done looting, and preppie Paul Bremer sent in to lose another $20 billion.
I imagine General Patraeus will have his own book one day. It's a pity all the flag officers (both US and UK) drank the kool-aid and let Cheney and his merry band of liars and dim-wits destroy the US Army first–for the price of a good tea, any one of us could have told them the lesson the British Army and other Armies have learned since time immemorial: it takes a big war force two years (for slow learners, five years) to re-learn counter-insurgency–by the time they do so, they have been hollowed out and neither the force nor its equipment is suitable for big war absent a complete re-build–but then, that would be the logical “end state” for Dick Cheney and the military-industrial complex: the White House has gotten the outcome it wanted, never mind blood, treasure, and spirit nor international legitimacy, the insolvency of the nation, and the deepening recession. For those that “matter,” the profits have been properly banked in Dubai and elsewhere. So the final lesson from General Smith's book is this one: the planning must be open, public, and endorsed by national referendum. The utility of force, in my view, can no longer be entrusted to elites–the case must be made to the public, and only the public may validate the utlity of force. Mind the gap….
Solid, Insightful, Relevant, Useful, Pointed, a Pleasure to Read,March 29, 2008
Ronald Dworkin
I bought this book on the basis of the title, with no idea of the author's deep history of accomplishments. This is a lovely book, largely an essay. The author opens by telling us he is concerned about the lack of political argument (dialog) in the USA, including substantive coherent dialog about core issues such as:
1. Nature and role of human rights in defining legitimate behavior by both individuals and governments
2. Role of religion in politics and governance
3. Distribution of community's economic wealth
I bring back from page 125 the following superb quote: “But our national politics fails the standard of even a decent junior high school debate.”
And on page 127: “So Americans are horribly misinformed and ignorant about the most important issues.” This is true. What he does not tell us, which we learn in the following book, is that all of our politicians and their so-called “advisors” are equally ignorant. See: Security Studies for the 21st Century
I was in error when I first thought the author was a conservative, forming that impression from the index and the endnotes, where I usually start a book. He is rather a very educated and philosophically well-grounded person of liberal to centrist perspective, and I found this book to be sensible, easy to read, and compelling.
The book could not be more timely for me (published in 2006) as I wathc Senators Clinton and Obama behave like children and avoid substantive policy backed up by a balanced budget they are both incapable of producing, while Senator McCain gets a “bye” and is not asked any tough questions at all (for 52 tough questions and transpartisan “starter” answers, visit the 501c3 Public Charity, Earth Intelligence Network).
The author, with a deep legal understanding and much work previous to this book, probes how character and forms of governance and politics shape the decisions we make.
He labels partisanship destructive, and puts forward his view that despite the superficial divide between “red” and “blue” he believes we can still come together at a deeper level of understanding such that we can overcome partisanship. I urge one and all to visit Reuniting America and especially their page on transpartisanship, it is consistent with what this author presents to all of us for consideration.
He specifically labels campaign rhetoric from 2004 to be shallow, as shallow as any since the last substantive debates in America, between Lincoln and Douglas (he says, I agree although Kennedy and Nixon I thought did well).
The author identifies his agenda in two parts: to explore how we might find shared principals, and to explore how such might lead to good outcomes for the Nation as a whole.
He puts forward three propositions early on:
1. Equal rights for all, meaning that both US citizens and foreigners (e.g. the ones in Guantanamo) should be treated equally, i.e. human rights should prevail here and both groups have equal right to dignity and justice and equality.
2. No television advertisements for political campaigns in the months leading up to an election.
3. Poor merit special protection and consideration as part of establishing the legitimacy of government and the equality of all (e.g. the poor cannot insure themselves the way the wealthy can). At a stratgeic level, there is no finer book than Max Manwaring (ed)'s The Search for Security: A U.S. Grand Strategy for the Twenty-First Century.
The author lists and discusses two dimensions of human dignity:
1. Human life as having special intrinsic value
2. Each person bears responsibility for themselves
He suggests that in discussion political versus human rights, the latter is the more stringent test, and I agree, as one of those who signed the letter to Senator McCain opposing torture by CIA or the US military. The author clearly states that to treat the “enemy combatants” as we have is to declare them to be less than human.
He suggests that the religious clash in America is not about the more fundamental issue of faith and the value of faith, but rather about the role of religion in national life. The author leans toward the belief that we should (as the founding fathers intended, see Founding Faith: Providence, Politics, and the Birth of Religious Freedom in America, be tolerant with selected unitarian references to God (e.g. in the Pledge of Allegiance, in coin) but not–as most extreme right fundamentalists would have, as a “Christian Nation.” As the author of Founding Faith makes clear, the latter is simply not an option.
The author states that we need to have a faith-based dialog between left and right, and I agree, while also noting we need to do this at an international level, where we are long overdue for a global Truth and Reconciliation Commission on what damages America has wrought “in our name” but against our public moral faith. A couple books worth close scrutiny (or at least read my reviews:
The author addresses liberty as not just being freedom, and defines it rirectly as the right to do what you want with the resources that are rightfully yours. That last bit is of course subject to long discourse: is Exxon entitled to $40 billion in profit while externalizing $12 in costs to the planet and future generations? Is Wal-Mart entitled to profits and the abuse of most of its employees while destroying small busiunesses for 150 miles around each Wal-Mart, and destroying the South Pacific off the coast of Chile so as to produce cheap fish while killing all life on the ocean bottom there? See my many lists.
The author specifically confronts and rejects the “culture of life” as being a compulsory sort of paternalistic and judgemental intrusion into our liberty. He defends abortion by pointing out that the fetus, while undeniably alive (so is a cancer) has no mind and hence no intersts. I for one place higher status on the mother's desires and needs in the first tri-mester.
He strongly supports gay “marriage” as a loving contract, and demands scientific proof before being willing to consider “intelligent design” (in passing I note that Germany has declared Scientology to be a cult, and outlawed it. I am reminded of the excellent book, Forbidden Knowledge: From Prometheus to Pornography.
He provides an excellent discussion of how legitimacy in political authority stems from shared morality and balanced equality, and on this basis believes that the poor merit special consideration. He does not address how corporations should be deprived of their abuse of the personality privilege.
He tells us that a big reason the conservatives want to cut taxes is their desire to end the “welfare” state. From where I sit, we do need a smaller government but until labor unions are restored, and the Secretary of the Treasury starts to do his job instead of fronting for Wall Street against the public interest, I believe the author is on target and merits our respectful attention.
I completely agree with him on the indefensability of the gap between rich and poor in America, and elsewhere.
The book draws to a close with two contrasting views of what comprises a democracy, the one being majoritarian, the other in which We the People are full partners and the majority cannot impose its views on the minority, whose rights and views must be treated with respect and protectied. Here I point the reader to the formidably scathing Running On Empty: How The Democratic and Republican Parties Are Bankrupting Our Future and What Americans Can Do About It. BOTH parties are nothing more than two branches of a single organized-crime family, and both should be forced to pass the Electoral Reform Act before November 2008, or every incumbent dismissed and the two parties vanquished by Independents, Greens, Reforms, Libertarians, moderate Fiscal Conservatives, and conservative Southern Democrats.
He closes the book calling for equality for all, and dramatically increased self-government. He says we MUST do better in Education (I am reminded of Thomas Jefferson, “A Nation's best defense is an educated citizenry”), and calls for public election channels, the regulation of private networking (to which I would add Open Spectrum), the Right of Comment (e.g. on Jack Cafferty saying “Ralph Nader should be batted away like a fly”), and on term-limits for Supreme Court justices, he suggests 10 years.
As I contemplate the existence of 27 secessionist movements in the United States; the collapse of the Federal government whose ineptness is virtually complete, the criminality in the White House, hijacked by Dick Cheney, I have to come down strongly in favor of a public demand for a Constitutional Convention in 2009, making that the litmus test for any candidate. NONE of the three is qualified to govern in their present condition. We may yet need a third party candidate with a transpartisan cabinet, a balanced budget, a commitment to both Electoral Reform and a Consttutional Convention (see also Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution Goes Wrong (And How We the People Can Correct It))
My review does not do this author justice. His book is elegant, thoughtful, philosophical, balanced, not at all confrontational, and the best thing I can say of this book is that I had to read it and think about it. This is a first-class piece of work, one the Founding Fathers would have found worthy.
Almost Did Not Buy, Reviews Too Negative–This Was Worth My Time, March 29, 2008
Dan Ariely
I almost did not buy this book as I sought to explore the new literature on behavioral and cognitive science. The negative review are too negative. You get from this book what you bring to it in open mindedness, in my opinion.
My truth-teller, off-setting the reality that this is a double-spaced book that inflates 120 pages of thought into 240 pages of easy to digest presentation, is the author's unique provision in the end-notes of both direct references to seminal works that each chapter is based on, with additional references suggested, AND his recognition of 17 collaborators, each with a long paragraph of biographic information. This is in short a worthy work, it was worthy of my time, and I do not agree with those who are dismissive or cavalier about this book.
As with Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness and other works of this ilk, they seem to be blessed with an immaculate conception that fails to recognize the work of the 1960's and 1970's (e.g. Herbert Simon, “satisficing,” but I no longer mark this down–this is a new generation thinking new thoughts, and I have decided it is too much to expect them to go back more than 20 years.
The opening of the book is impressive. The author was burned on 70% of his body by a magnesium flare, and his probing of his own pain and how the nurse's had settled on fast painful ripping off of the bandages (with no medication.
Key point early in the book: most people don't know what they want until they see it in context. This is one reason I am planning an edited work in 2009 on Cultural Intelligence. As Howard Bloom teaches us in Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century, we (and our policy makers) know nothing of “the other,” and I have concluded that peace starts in kindergarten and we have to separate the Israelis and the Palestians, and literally baby sit two new generations from birth to the age of 35.
The rest of the book is easy to read, has excellent real-world examples, and each chapter generally ends with a short appendix with real results. This is not a fluff book, it is a serious book that the light reader will mistake for fluff.
+ Relatively and “bracketing” matter (sell what you want by bracketing it with a more expensive option above and a trashy cheap thing below)
+ Decoys matter (e.g. a middle option that makes the “combined option” a “no brainer”)
+ Publishing salaries actually sets off ego wars at the top and churn at the bottom that leads to more turnover and more wasteful employees costs.
+ Imprinting is used by the author to explain “anchoring” (e.g. black pearls anchored in setting of most expensive diamonds, this is an example of how the SELLER is setting the price, not the buyer).
+ “Free” is never really free. It can blind rational choice and it can “cost” time, choice, and a higher value that is obscured (e.g. my cotton socks disintegrate within months, whereas the cotton socks I inherited from an earlier era are still lasting forever).
+ HOWEVER, I especially liked the way the author explored “free” as a device for policy furtherance, e.g. make vehicle registration “free” if you own a hybrid car.
+ Social versus market norms are discussed. The author does not discuss Open Money (see my comment for a link to my keytone at Gnomedex) or Yochai Benckler's [[ASIN:0300125771 The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom].
+ I especially like the way the author discussed how the poorly-paid border patrol and coast guard employees have made their own peace with the drug dealers–they have the same understanding the CIA clandestine service has with the KGB and local counter-intelligence services: we do not kill, kidnap, or even embarrass each other, we all just present to bedoing our job and the only people fooled are Congress and the taxpayers. Similar, the drug dealers understand that if they do not shoot to kill, neither will we….
+ One chapter offers a fascinating study on the impact of sexual arousal (a marker for passion). This quote from page 97 is priceless:
“Prevention, protection, conservatism, and morality disappeared completely from the radar screen. They were simply unable to predict the degree to which passion would change them.”
+ The author discusses Smart Cards and their ability to impose a restraining influence with emails, I urge one and all to dump their existing ursurous cards and turn to Interra and other similar community-based cards with high social value.
+ We over-value what we own or possess. (I would add, we also over-value credentialing and under-estimate how painfol our rote school system is, which kills creativity by the seventh grade in some of our brightest kids.)
+ Stereotypes influence behavior on both sides of the viewpoint.
+ Placebo effect is real, something the American Medical Association absolutely does not want you to know (see also Alternative Cures: The Most Effective Natural Home Remedies for 160 Health Problems among many excellent works in this area.
+ Options can confuse and divert.
+ There is a pricing effect (very high priced menu item drives folks toward the second most expensive, which they would not have chosen absent the “higher” bracket item)
+ Character costs. USA loses $525 million a year to robberies, and $600 BILLION a year to employee theft (this does not count procrastination and government issues, such as every second IRS employee a complete loser while the others do twice the work).
+ Harvard MBA students participated in a series of tests that conclusively demonstrated that people will cheat if given an opportunity to do so; they will cheat twice as much with “in kind” versus cash opportunities, but they will not cheat “wildly” even if assured of not being caught. See also The Cheating Culture: Why More Americans Are Doing Wrong to Get Ahead
+ Religion DOES have a good moral effect, as do honor codes and reminding people of the Ten Commandments from time to time. See Founding Faith: Providence, Politics, and the Birth of Religious Freedom in America for the Founding Father's deliberate mix of securlar tolerant government with a desire for a strong religious aspect to community for precisely this reason.
I can see how some might feel this book is less than they were expecting, but I do not agree. This book may be well-marketed and not the deep social science research that some buyers might have been hoping for, but I for one find it completely satisfactory and well worth my time. The author's crediting of 17 collaborators, and the unique goodness of the end-notes carry the day with me.
My earlier lists (the first ten or so out of 70) focus on strategy, intelligence, information, and offer many other pointers to useful books somewhat related to the larger universe of cognitive science and decision support.
Solid Five for Good Sense, Elegance, and Timing, March 26, 2008
Sanford Levinson
This is one of those critical books where even a top reviewer is well advised to carfefully consider all extant reviews by others, and I have done so. They all have something important, less the fellow that cannot handle brilliance in others. Having considered all the other reviews, I continue in my own belief that this book is a solid FIVE for good sense, elegance in presentation, and timeliness.
Although I have recently lauded State of the Unions: How Labor Can Strengthen the Middle Class, Improve Our Economy, and Regain Political Influence as perhaps the most important book in 2008, I confess that while I still believe that in terms of restoring democracy in November, this author has provided all of us with a compelling intelligent case for demanding a constitution convention in 2008, both through a nation-wide petition to all serving Members, and through direct controntation with our three candidates (two kids and an old guy–Bloomberg is looking better and better).
My flyleaf notes begin with INSPIRING! Coinfirms we need a new constitutional convention, ably distinguishing between then and now.
I would endorse the above conclusion, arguments unseen (yet) by pointinig out that there are 27 active secessionist movements in the USA today, with the third annual meeting of these groups coming up in October 2008. They are led by Kirkpatrick Sale, author of Human Scale and I judge most of their grievances and demands to be LEGITIMATE. When combined with the reality that Congress has gerrymandered a third of the population into irrelevance, and made it impossible for another third, the Working Poor, to vote without trade-offs with work (I refer to those who walk, bike, or bus to work), I am absolutely won over by this book's premise.
The author takes issue with seven tiny state populations having the same two Senators, and notes in passing that Senators were supposed to be elected by their legislatures rather than the people. That was changed many many years after the original was signed.
He discusses the problems with the Electoral College, with Executive power, with the Supreme Court being appointed for life, and with 13 states being able to block the rest if and when a constitutional amendment is proposed.
The author notes that 14 states offer their citizens a vote on whether a new constitutional review is needed, and I reiterate, if we have 27 secessionist movements, we have 27 major groups whose existence by definition DEMANDS a Constititional Convention.
The author notes that the Preamble is THE most important part of the Constitution, and it is at this point that I have a note: Joins Lessig and Sunstein as one of my top three lawyers (see also my list on judging Dick Cheney's impeachability).
The author goes on to note that the US Constitition is THE most difficult Constitution on the planet to amend, and further observes that Congress excells at passing pork while failing always to pass substantive legislation. I agree–we cannot even get Senators Obama, Clinton, and McCain to *acknowledge* our public request that they introduce the eight-point Electoral Reform Act prior to 3 July 2008 (to read the outline of the Act, based on Ralph Nader's recommendations and refined by Jim Turner and Robert Steele, visit Earth Intelligence Network and look for it in the top menu). As the books I linked to above document, there are two kinds of corruption in Washington: financial bribery, and party line abdication. Congress is supposed to balance the power of a “reackless and arrogant” Presidency, to quote the estimable Senator Byrd, the only one with a spine in that body.
The author proposes a tricameral situation where the President is just one of three bodies that can veto anything, and where two of the three (the others being the Senate and House, as well as the President) can over-ride the third.
He mentions DC not being represented (one reason all DC license plates have “Taxation Without Representation” on them), discusses the need for extended terms (I agree–with longevity, it makes sense to increase the House to four years, the President to six years, and the Senate to eight years).
Other highlights I note:
Death and disability in the House are not properly addressed.
The people do NOT rule America, and two thirds of them lack confidence in Congress (the percentage is probably higher today).
He spends some excellent time discussing how hard it is to replace an incompetent President (to which I would add, and how easy for an irresponsible Congress to impeach a President and spend $50 million on a minor sexual act between consenting adults (yes, there is marriage, but there is also the flagrant extra-curricular activity of the wife, so let's call it even).
He notes how dreadful our Presidential selection process is, and I for one can only agree most forcefully. I have stopped watching the barnyard brawl between Clinton and Obama, both children and neither offering serious programs in the context of a balanced budget, and I have also written off John McCain, who is an honorable pig-headed man with no idea of how to create a grand strategy that shapes our inter-agency capabilities and policies while resurrecting multinational alliances. In this regard, I will mention four ideas a number of us have had since 2000:
1. Presidential candidates should be required to name a transition Cabinet in advance of the election, and
2. have at least three (Attorney General, Defense, and State) participate in Cabinet level debates–America is too complicated to elect one person who then picks their cronies from one party (see Transpartisan at Wikipedia or at Reuniting America).
3. The Transpartisan Cabinet should be announced on New Year's Day of the Election Year, and be required to present a balanced budget for online deliberative dialog as well as face to face town hall meetings, by 4 July of Election Year. David Walker, former Comptroller General, resinged in year nine of a 15 year appointment because he declared the US insolvent, and not a single Member, INCLUDING Senators Obama, Clinton, and McCain, paid heed. Today David Walker runs the Peterson Foundation, and his job is to inform all of us–we care, we are ahead of the jerks in Congress–so that we can demand a restoration of a balanced budget and an end to the corruption and wasteful spending of what Davy Crockett learned was “not his to give.”
4. At the same time that we end the Cabinet being all from one party, we must end the winner take all leadership of Congress, and move to proportioinal representation, where all Libertarians in any one state count, and tightly drawn districts are allocated accordingly (See the eight-point Electoral Reform Act).
The author winds down by noting there is no point to the delay between election and inauguration, that pardon power is too loose (I for one would forbid Presidents from pardoning their own staff who get caught doing illegal things on behalf of the President–such as Scooter Libby).
The author surprises me, but I have to agree, with the suggestion that the Vice President NOT be automatically elevated to the Presidency if the President dies. Given the nakedly amoral Vice President we have now, a man that is a combination of war criminal, closet dictator, thief, and perverted in his own secret ways (see, among many other books, Vice: Dick Cheney and the Hijacking of the American Presidency) this is not only a sensible point of view, but an urgent one.
The author is against qualification for office such as age, citizenship, and time in state, and Arnold the Terminator as well as all of his Austrian friends will clearly love the author's view that even the Presidency should be open to non-native Americans. I am inclined to agree, with the caveat that we have cheapened our citizenship, both with corporate personality and with gratuitous welcoming of millions who got here illegally, who have not learned to speak English, and who more often than not are more loyal to Israel or to a religion than they are to America. This whole thing needs work.
The author ends with “what is to be done” and suggests a nation-wide petition to every Member demanding a Constitutional Convention be called. He also notes with favor the value of real referendums, and of deliberative polling. In Denmark, important questions are decided by a citizen's jury that can call witnesses, grill them, supeona them, and so on. The only qualification is that the citizen know nothing of the issue and have a completely clear and open mind. For other good ideas, see Tom Atlee's superb book, The Tao of Democracy: Using Co-Intelligence to Create a World That Works for All.
I put the book down with admiration for the author, and a real concern that Americans will remain apathetic sheep. We should all be signing recall petitions now, and not waiting to vote out the incumbents. We should have the incumbents, each and every one less Senator Byrd, scared to within an inch of their life. Otherwise, we will suffer the same fate and the 25+ kids at Virginia Polytechnic who instead of “rushing and crushing” the mentally ill person killing them one at a time, stood still while he reloaded and methodically shot each of them. Congress is killing each and every one of us by allowing Cheney and Bush to run amok unchecked. The country is bankrupt. The infrastucture, schools, health system, labor unions–all in the toilet. What does it take to make us MAD? I do not know. If and when we do get mad, this author and this book must be among the serious works that guide our citizen leaders as we restore the Republic.
Innovative, Helpful, Relevant: Opening Shot in Science of Choice, March 26, 2008
Richard H. Thaler
This is one of several books on decision-making and choice I have ordered, the first to arrive. I had no idea when I ordered it, based on the title, that the first author was Distinguished Professor of Behavioral Science and Economics as well as the Director of the Center for Decision Research at the University of Chicago, and the second author was Cass Sunstein, one of three lawyers I would not automatically sentence to exile.
I really liked this book. It can be read fast or slow. I went fast, if one accepts the authors' propositions at face value, the details are not as necessary. These guys are heavy hitters with a very serious case to present. Although I did not see references to predecessors in this area, such as Herb Simon's “satisficing,” the one word I remember from my MPA finished in 1987, the bibliography and notes are excellent and I have the feeling the authors and their research assistants have been thorough with the recent literature (last 15 years).
The book opens with a compelling example: a cafeteria manager discovers that she can seriously influence students by how the food is placed, arranged, and displayed, moving an entire student body toward healthier choices (or not).
The authors term such a person a “choice architect” and say that like physical architecture, there is no such thing as a “neutral” choice. They go on to discuss the emerging science of choice. I love this, in part because I just published a book, Collective Intelligence: Creating a Prosperous World at Peace (free online at Earth Intelligence Network) intended to force acceptance of Collective Intelligence as a sub-discipline within Cognitive Science. We succeeded.
The authors coined the term NUDGE from the ardiously broken down:
iNcentives
Understand mapping
Defaults matter
Give Feedback
Expect Error
Structure complex choices
Corney, but no worse than my own United Nations Open-Source Decision-Support Information Network (UNODIN). This is an important book, and the last one, “structure complex choices,” is in my view the critical one because we are in an era when our politically-elected leaders know nothing of the real world and are surrounded by advisors that are hacks who are terrified of anyone with a brain gaining access to “their” candidate. No one now running for President of the USA is qualified to date, for this very reason. Not one of them can appoint a transpartisan cabinet, produce a balanced budget, name the ten threats to humanity, list the twelve core policies from agriculture to water, or explain why we have less than six years to create a sustainable model that we can present to Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Iran, Russia, Venezuela, and Wild Cards like the Congo, which is as big as the USA.
The authors distinguish between Automatic Mind and Reflective Mind, and I cannot help but tie this to the truly elegant essay The Future of the Internet–And How to Stop It in which the urgency of preserving generative freedom to innovate at the edge of the network is retained. I see such a convergence among all the books I am reading, and am reminded now of Kevin Kelly's unigue Out of Control: The New Biology of Machines, Social Systems, & the Economic World. The problem we face is that government and all other organizations are pyramidal, secretive, selfish, and generally corrupt–and busy trying to “lock down” the appliances, one reason I will never buy an iPhone or an XBox.
I agree with their discussion of the bias toward the status quo and truly appreciated their discussion of social influences (herd mentality). This is different from wisdom of the crowds, smart mobs, etc.
They have four chapters on money (savings, investing, credit, and social security), and the bottom line for all four is this: 1) it is possible to structure complex choices so people have freedom but err on the side of wisdom; and b) defaults matter.
In the section on health they discuss prescriptions, organ donation, and the environment. Here I would simply note that we know how to cut Medicare prescription costs to 1% of their existing and projected costs, but Congress is both gutless and totally lacking in ethics. I will also note that in another book I reviewed recently, the Chinese have discovered that they are losing TEN PERCENT of the Gross Domestic Product to envrionmentally-related loss of work productivity. This is serious!
They end with a dozen “example” nudges that I will not list here, in part because I do like this book, it is an easy read, and it is worthy of your time and money. Do not expect a scholarly tome with lots of pretentious mathematics. This is a good book for real people, and all the more valuable because the science of choice, like services sciences and collective intelligence as a cognitive-socio-economic ideo-cultural techno-demographic force, is going to make a very positive contribution to how we self-organize and how we respond to those who would be Epoch B leaders rather than dictators that take We the People for granted.
Buy this book–it might not improve your own decisions, but it will assuredly help you think about what to look for in a leader.
I like this book very much, in part because after 20 years of thinking of myself as a reformist beating his head against the idiot secret world, I now realize I am a social entrepreneur who has turned his back on secrets and is focused on creating public intelligence in the public interest.
The authors made me smile with their early explanation that most social entrepreneurs can be so unreasonable as to be called lunatic. This is precisely what happened to me when I published “E3i: Ethics, Ecology, Evolution, and Intelligence” in the Fall 1992 edition of the Whole Earth Review–for having the temerity to suggest that we should emphasize open sources of information instead of spying, and sharing instead of hoarding, I was told that Sandra Cruzman, the top woman at CIA at the time, said “this confirms Steele's place on the lunatic fringe.” So forgive me for this sidebar, but this book speaks to me in very personal as well as socially meaningful terms, it resonates with me, and I strongly recommend it to anyone who wants to think about ways of doing good while doing well enough.
I always look for whether authors are respecting those that came before or have made adjacent contributions, and on that score this book is completely satisfactory. It is also blessed by the authors' broad range of examples, carefully selected from what is clearly a universe they know better than anyone else.
Citing George Bernard Shaw, they explain early on that “unreasonable people” are seen so for their seeking to abandon outmoded thoughts, mindsets, or practices. Amen, brother!
This is not a feel-good book in intent, although it achieves that effect. It is a serious book that methodically reviews new business models, leadership styles, and thinking about value creation. It held my total attention over two evenings of reading.
The authors offer esteem to social entrepreneurs with the observation that corporations are noticing and hiring such individuals for three reasons:
1. They see the future sooner than the average cubicle resident
2. They help retain talent by making the business challenging
3. They bring love and fun into the office environment
The authors caution that social entrepreneurs fail more often than not, but they persist and ultimately find means of making a difference while making a living.
They suggest that immature markets are best explored by non-profits while noting that hybrids with blended values are the most interesting forms.
Page 5 is suitable for scaling up and framing for the office. The ten characteristics of social entrepreneurs (severely abbreviated here):
1. Shrug off ideology and discipline
2. Focus on practical solutions
3. Innvoate
4. Do social value creation and SHARE
5. Jump in without waiting for back-up
6. Have unwavering beliefs in innate capacity of others
7. Dogged determination
8. Passion for change
9. Have a great deal to teach change makers in other sectors
0. Healthy impatience (don't do well in bureaucracies)
They tell the reader that confusion is a normal circumstance for social entrepreneurs, whom they define as those that take “direct action that generates a paradigm shift” while attacking an “unsatisfactory equilibrium.”
They see a deep and lasting need for social entrepreneurs because coming decades will require unprecedented levels of system change (I add, and will have unprecedented and often unanticipated disasters, many turning into catastrophes for lack of planning, preparation, or responsiveness)
The authors tell us that the best of the charitable foundations are shifting from plain grant-making to sequential investments and deeper continuing relations with those being funded. At the same time they tell us that corporation and private equity firms are beginning to notice the value options in this space. [I think to myself, this is great, just at a time when corporations are also understanding green to gold, sustainable design, ecology of commerce, and true cost accounting.]
I am totally impressed with one page that describes how China has developed new green accounting methods and now realizes that environmentally-related work loss is no less than 10% of their newly-understood green Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
They provide a fine overview of new measures of merit including the double bottom line, the triple bottom line, the Social Return on Investment (SROI), and the “blended value proposition.”
On page 20 I see a quote worth posting: social entrepreneurs “bring together natural, social, human, intellectual, and cultural forms of capital.”
LEVERAGE is a key concept for these authors, and one I take very serioiusly as they describe how small investments can leverage indigenous capabilities (such as hard work from people who are poor but not stupid), philanthropic and other support, business partnerships, and income from previously untapped markets (at the Base of the Pyramid, like my Seattle friends they are clearly not comfortable with C. K. Prahalad's choice of title in The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: Eradicating Poverty Through Profits (Wharton School Publishing Paperbacks).
The middle section of the book discusses three models and examples of each:
1. The leveraged non-profit, which is hard to scale, dependent on hand-outs, focuses on public goods and being a change catalyst
2. The hybrid non-profit that combines non-profit and revenue generating activities, with a focus on outcome generation, empowering the people at the base, community-centric, focused on low cost long term, and on driving the market or pulling more traditional providers into the market.
3. The social business, which focuses on both social and financial returns, scales much more easily because it can assume both debt and equity. We learn that Whole Foods is an example, that it drove the organic market and leverages voluntary cooperation among many networks. Another example combines sustainable organic agriculture, rural employment of the uneducated but willing, price security for farmers, and transparent information.
I want to emphasize the latter: transparent information. I have been persuaded by numerous books on the wealth of knowledge as well as my own 30+ years as an intelligence professional that shared information and transparent decision support is a wealth creation process that scales fast and inexpensively.
The authors go on to discuss ten markets that lend themselves to social entrepreneurship, and I will list them with tiny examples–the book is absolutely a gem that merits buying a reading from end to end.
1. Demographic: condoms, aging, disadvantages
2. Financial: child knowledge of finances, simple technologies, helping poor self-organize for leverage
3. Nutritiional: duck rice, food bank, food waste elevated to tasty and nutritious near zero cost consumables
4. Resources: energy, energy, energy (I would add water, and throw a respectful salute the the George Mason University professor born in Bangladesh who created a virtually free means of removing arsenic from water using a combination of charcoal and steel filings (from the ships torn apart there, see The Outlaw Sea : A World of Freedom, Chaos, and Crime
5. Environment: educatae, plant trees
6. Health: high volume low cost (or free), cateract cures, telephone centers to help poor remotely
7. Gender (best ROI ever is on educating women, see A Half Penny on the Federal Dollar: The Future of Development Aid)
8. Educational: end rote learning, cross-pollinate, barefoot college that trains doctors and engineers narrowly and without years of credentialing (my own idea is call centers to education “one cell call at a time,” I would love to see India do this sooner than later)
9. Digital: embrace and empower poor as citizens
0. Security: redefine as jobs for everyone rather than high-end military
The last third of the book covers
1. helping those at the base of the pyramid with access (e.g. curing neglected diseases); price (slash to 10%); and quality (e.g. $100 laptops).
2. Democratizing technology (four clusters: basic building blocks, motorcycles and free neutral air in and out of disaster zones; media and media technology; and genetics and biology.
3. Changing the rules of the game (search for my “New Rules for the New Craft of Intelligence” free on the Internet). They emphasize transparency; accountability; certification; land reform; emission trading; and value & valuation.
4. Scaling solutions, with examples covering true costs, clean toilets for tens of millions, and General Electric's commitment to 17 clean technoloogies, sustainability attracting the best and the brightest of the social entrepreneurs.
5. Lessons for leaders (below does not do the section justice–buy the book and read the whole thing):
– Focus on scalable entrepreneurial solutions
– Tackle apparently insolvable problems
– Be prepared to fail–but learn from failures
– Experiment with new business models
– Close the pay gap
– Join forces
– Seed tomorrow's markets
– Fuel growing expectations
– Help democratize technology
– Work to change the system
– Figure out how to scale and replicate
– Within reason, cultivate the art of being unreasonable
I put the book down extremely pleased with the content and the presentation. This is a very serious book for serious people, not just social entrepreneurs, but Second and Third World policy makers, bankers, investors, international and non-governmental leaders, and so on.
As I see it, social networks and collaboration among what I call the “ten tribes” (government, military, law enforcement, academia, business, media, non-governmental, labor, religion, and civil society) are in their very infancy. The Internet has not been matched by easily available information sharing and decision support tools (DARPA STRONG ANGEL and TOOZL is a start), and governments persist is wasting tens of billions waging war and stealing secrets, instead of waging peace and nurturing open sources of information in 183 languages.
This book continued the inspiration that I have been getting from others, and here I list a few others including the first book from Earth Intelligence Network (free at the website):
Superb, Engrossing, Useful, Relevant, Alarming, March 25, 2008
Jonathan Zittrain
I ordered this book on the strength of the title, and on receiving it, discovered that the author is the Professor of Internet Governance and Regulation at Oxford University, and co-founder of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at the Harvard Law School (they hate it when we just say “Harvard”–must be a culture thing). So right off I know this is at least as serious a book as I hoped for.
The book is instructive without being tedious, alarming without being hysterical. It is balanced, informed, and most relevant to all of us.
The entire book focuses on the transformation of the Internet from one in which the innovation could be done at the edges, with generative innovation that built on the provided software or hardware, to one in which we are allowed to buy tethered appliances like iPhone or X-Box that are “locked down.”
Even PCs are being locked down today, and with this and other examples the author has my total attention.
He suggests that the end point matters, and that the confrontation between flexibility and openness, versus security and perfect reliability (and later, perfect enforcement) is one that requires more creative thinking rather than knee jerk mandates one way or the other.
He notes that historically IBM tried to bundle everything, and they were forced by anti-trust to unbundle, just as AT&T was, as Microsoft was, and as Google will be if the USG Government ever gets either honest or informed–either will do. Look for my book review of “Google 2.0: The Calculating Predator” to understand this suprnational unsupervised threat to multiple sectors, never mind privacy and copyright.
In a nutshell, he frames the challenge as that of modularity within which the end-user can innovate, versus walled gardens that are locked down.
In passing the author vindicates both Morris, and the manner in which justice was applied. Morris intended to count the computers on the Internet, and screwed up the code. The judge intended to punish him but not end his promising career. All good.
The author discusses what Vint Cerf and others have, the degree to which bots have taken over tens of millions of computers, using broadband connections left on at all times to create a subrosa network that does evil.
On page 63, three important principles from the author on generativity:
1. Our information technology ecosystem functions best with generative technology (i.e. NOT with locked down appliances hard-wired to a center)
2. Generativity instigates a pattern both within and beyond the technological layers of the information technology ecosystem (i.e. content collaboration and social collaboration and value-added)
3. Proponents of generative systems ignore the drawbacks attendant to generativity success at their peril.
This is followed by a great discussion of features of a generative system as they would be hoped for by the author:
– Leverage
– Adaptability
– Base of mastery
– Accessibility
– Transferability
He cites benefits of a generative system as including:
– Non-profit social innovation
– Disruptive innovation
– Broad participation
– Generative systems from generative building blocks
– Recursion (of value) to content and then to society
The scary chapter in the book–the author is elegant but one needs little help to imagine the worst–discusses how tethered appliances enable “perfect enforcement” to include GPS devices turned on remotely to serve as audio surveillance on demand, and so on.
Turning to solutions, the author distinguishes between flexibility needed at the content level (he is laudatory about Wikipedia) and the technology layer. He discusses one possible solution, a Green-Red split system in which the Green system is locked down and totally reliable, and the Red system is open to innovation but also treated with caution.
He calls for better easier security tools for group and individual use, but as one who could never ever find a coder willing to document their code, and as one completely fed up with the pig code that comes out of Microsoft and Norton–pig in the sense of way too much crap and way too big a footprint–I fear that only an open source conversion experience will do. I note with interest a chart that shows that Sun Open Systems are the LAST to plug security holes, Not good.
The author suggests a “least harm” protocol.
He calls for a very large conversation among end-users, coders, manufacturers, regulators, and so on, and what I hear him saying is that the “system of systems” is on auto-pilot, the government is out of brakes (or brains, I would add), and if we don't all do a collective “STOP, We Want to Discuss This,” we are destined to suffer the same fate as the sheep at Virginia Polytechnic who stood still while a moron killed 20+ of them–stood still while he reloaded. Had the sheep “rushed and crushed,” no more than one or at most two would have died. I am harsh here, because information technology can either be our cage or our liberation, and the author is very well qualified to present the case for concern.
I learn for the first time on page 174 of the National Science Foundation's FIND initiative, and that alone is worth the price of the book.
Turning to protections, the author discusses data portability, network neutrality and generativity (I can assure all readers, Google is neither neutral nor generative), Application Program Interface (API) neutrality; privacy, individual liability versus technical mandates, and collective character (digital shunning combined with reputation bankruptcy and a clean sheet fresh start).
He discusses privacy 2.0 and problems such as code, patent, and content thickets. I like very much his reminding us that the Constitution provides for anonymity to encourage unpopular opinions. He naturally discusses data genealogy (what I call data provenance, like an art work), and reputation.
In passing, I love the brutal critique by Gene Spaford of the $100 laptop. He likens its projected impact–exposing millions to the bright side while not fixing their poverty, water, and disease–to subsidizing pet rats for every household just prior to the Black Death plague. My friend Lee Felsenstein is an equally virulent opponent of the $100 laptop, for different reasons. Me personally, I think the cell phone (but not the iPhone) is the only way to educate 5 billion people fast and with day to day relevance to their needs.
I put the book down feeling pensive, and wondering why CISCO CEO John Chambers, who has been asked in writing via Federal Express three times, continues to refuse to create a router-server that is both recyclable (or even better, updatable remotely without having to flip boxes) and that will provide data at rest encryption and Application Oriented Network (AON) features at the point of creation–in other words, every creator can control the privacy, content routing, access, sharing, and so on, and by implementing something like Grub Search on the same box, we can put paid to programmable search engines patented by Google that will only show you what the highest bidder has paid to “allow” you to see, and to the Googleplex, which “confiscates” everything it touches and then claims to “own” it–including your medical records.
This is a great and important book, if you care about the global role of the Internet is creating wealth and consequently peace.
My bottom line: as we all press toward localized resilience in community, I for one would be happy to shun all tethered appliances and rely solely on collective human intelligence in community. I really like the work of Naomi Klein (No Log, Disaster Capitalism) and Paul Hawken (Blessed Unrest, Natural Capital, Ecology of Commerce). We are all long overdue for a massive boycott of all that is not in our interest, and we can start by evaluating the true costs of fuel, long-distance food and clothing, and perverted uses of water that we are running out of.
One Major Recommendation, March 30, 2008
