I am back! I need your responses to continue!

Dear friends,

I am back. I do not apologize to you my followers for being absent and not posting. I was busy. I spoke at UCLA and at universities in Spain, Italy, Germany and Greece. In Spain and Italy I spoke about behavioural economy, how to create jobs (few professors listened). In Germany and Greece I spoke about my cancer, how to cure it with the Gorter Model (more professors listened. Done). It should be obvious to all by now that my views and values lead to more successful decision making than the views or values of some “experts” in the fields of economics and medicine! I have been called arrogant. I am not more arrogant than Dr. Daniel kahneman who teaches us in ThinkingFast and Slow (Double Day, Canada, 2011) how to make better decisions!

I need your responses to continue. I came as an immigrant from Israel in 1960 to fine tune myself. I was a high school drop-out, had no money and didn’t speak English when I arrived in New York. Next month I will be 81 and I had a great life in Canada, Texas and California. I took advantage of the USA’s manifest destiny and I benefited from it’s constitution and the educational and employment opportunity it provides immigrants. I have a smart and beautiful Canadian wife who is a leader in her community. I have 4 grown up kids (2 in the US and 2 in Canada), a beautiful house in Canada that won awards, a PhD from USC in California and about 20 close smart and creative friends around the world that know how to have fun. I cured my prostate and bone cancer (4 MRI’s, no tumor).

My blogs and website are designed to help individuals, families, communities and governments make decisions that work: Let’s talk about what is in this blog: If you understand and accept the truth of many postings in this blog, you’d be able to solve many of your interpersonal problems and sharpen your useful views. Let’s take the situation in Charlottesville: There were a few side events there, but by far the main event was 2-3 extreme right groups fought 2-3 extreme left groups while the police didn’t stop the carnage, a job they were paid to do! And the news media, they took sides and spread fake news, neither the police or the news media were objective in their behaviour which aggravated the physical and psychological carnage! The extreme right tried to present themselves as moderate homogenized patriotic Americans (Which they are not because they do not support the American constitutional rule of law) and the extreme left tried to present themselves as the people, compassionate moderate diversified globalistic Americans (Which they are not because they do not support the American constitutional rule of law either). Think, if the fascist right takes over (small chance) you get to live in a Nazi Germany again and if the fascist left takes over (big chance) you get to live in Stalin’s Soviet Union Gulag!

The issue is: Should society remove a symbol that offend a changed community? The best answer is NO! If you transfer the statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee from a public display to a museum because he was a slave owner, you’d have to remove the statue of George Washington also. He was a slave owner too. Museums are not well visited. A society that denies exposure to it’s bad past is doomed to repeat it according to Socrates: life unexamined is not worth living! The worse answer is YES! That is why I stated above that there is a bigger chance that American society is moving toward a disctatorship of the fascist left than it is moving toward a dictatorship of the fascist right. History always tries to create a balance of evil! Caveat emptor!

The Compromise: If you said NO or YES to the issue I presented, the best alternative acceptable answer is a constitutional amendment that says, “Any US community that wants to remove a symbol that the majority in the community consider unacceptable the community must build a museum of acceptable and unacceptable statues or symbols and require all schools in the community to visit the museum and take value classes in American history!

 

 

 

Your education: China versus Google!

Whether you want to face it or not, in the short run China will win against Google because China intend on building a stable society and doesn’t need disruption, but in the long run google will return because freedom is marching on all over the world. The internet is changing the world as we know it. Knowledge and fun become more important to people than politics when a country is stable and people have decent jobs.

We are destined for a lot of pain and destruction in the process of birth of a new order. Google’s Page and Brim do not understand that China must limit Western freedom and influence for now. A complete freedom to disseminate Western information in China, will undermine the building of a prosperous and peaceful Chinese civilization. There will be enough disruptive elements entering Chinese minds that will sap the energy of the Chinese people away from economic development into political discourse vows worse than the health care debate violence in the US Congress, with its peaceful traditions going back 200 years!. On the other hand, without Google later on China will be behind in advancing ‘good’ knowledge, democracy and freedom of choice.

My suggestion to both  China and Google is to compromise, get together and decide on what should be censured for 10 years and what should not. I know Google refuses to do that because Brim and Page do not have empathy for China’s dilemma, only for Google’s. You can’t have a billion people each picking up from Google “filth” they like,  starting to do their own thing. OK, Chinese society will not collapse but China’s progress will slow down. Google, with all its brilliance, has not adjusted to each country’s situation as it moves in to disseminate knowledge. The only areas where Google should not give in is in the areas of human rights.

Human Rights in the developing world is different from human rights in the developed world. What should be human rights in a changing society like China? The right to be free of gender discrimination, not the right to meddle in transsexual identity problems. The right to be free of racial discrimination, not the right to know about racial aspirations, ethnic separation, and demographic political freedoms. The right to be free of “filth,” not the “right” to have to handle in Chinese homes via Google all the filth that is also on the internet. China does not need internet violence, pornography, animal and human cruelty, child abuse, ridicule and satire of political leaders, the glorification of crimes, in other words, half the internet should be evoked out of China. Compromise will happen the moment China and Google understand how to separate short-term benefits from long-term solutions.

Please, my readers, time to get sophisticated and serious about understanding the world we live in. Ask yourself, if you were planet Earth, would you be happy to host most of the people you know? You know the answer!