Trying to figure out the interface of these two characteristics is challenging; so often, there is an overlap. At what might be considered one extreme, William F. Buckley, Jr. once commented that he would rather trust the creation of public policy to the first column of names in the Boston phonebook than to the faculty of Harvard University.

For sure, this has been an “interesting” year for so-called experts. Both pollsters and the intelligentsia have been proven wrong, at least predictively, in really big spots: Brexit, Santos (Colombia), and Trump.  People, shockingly to the media, are voting confidentially in their polling places, not sharing their thoughts with the survey-takers, who many times are construed as working for the “system” anyway.  Of course, if you flipped this picture, the experts would argue that given honest answers, they would have been more on-target in their predictions.  At the same time, their implicit arrogance blinded them from even contemplating what to others was obvious: if Trump could blast McCain and not drop in the polls, some other factor was clearly at play.

Not to be oblivious, there is another explanation behind the election and poll discrepancy: racism is both completely pervasive and normally exercised relatively quietly, i.e. not put in the face of a pollster, unless empowered, as is apparent now, by the unique context which is evident in our society.

Moving right along, as they say, stunningly to those mapping campaign strategy for the odds-on favorite to win the presidential election, this country has many people who are not enamored with the bicoastal media elites –for the latter Trump was a wet dream. More than a few of the elites have made themselves wealthy by playing a system which cares little about the daily lives of those they conveniently fly over or see only as a bunch of digits on their computer screens.

The arrogance of the Democratic National Committee clearly fogged its vision. The DNC was not listening when Charlie Munger, Warren Buffet’s partner, made this point at the Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting, “if you do not know your opponent’s argument, you do not know your own.”

It is similarly true that “It is hard to understand something when your paycheck (or your fund-raising) is dependent on not understanding.” Case in point, the NAACP totally misses the message that minority parents have endorsed high-performing charter schools and instead, reflecting its budgetary dependency on the teachers union, comes out with an anti-charter statement.

A broader truth, a psychological or real step taken by virtually everybody without typically noting it, is  that if there is a problem perceived as extremely difficult to resolve, the last place a person, especially an arrogant individual, looks is inside. They find an external source, a scapegoat. Lots of that going around, as Stewie from “Family Guy” would put it.

Yes, I have a problem with arrogance, especially that demonstrated by those individuals who attempt to use the credentials on their business cards — or the digital version thereof — not their expertise, to make their case when discussing an issue.

Years back, on meeting a school official for the first time, I called her by her first name. When she coldly responded, “that’s Dr. XYZ,” reflecting her Ph.D status, I knew she was not somebody with whom I would be successfully discussing educational policy. Some time later, when a staff person attempted to end our discussion by noting her high-level academic credential – implying that the questioner must be an idiot not to see the logic of her position – I quietly informed her that “I was too old to genuflect at the altar of Ph.D –holders.” (My best run on Wall Street was at a place that hired only individuals characterized as Ps.D: poor, smart, and driven.)

In truth, the best people I know have wonderful combinations of high-level intelligence, heart, passion, energy … and humility. They do not put down people with whom they disagree by calling them names. They do not match hateful, and irrational, messages with their own brand of venom.

Meanwhile, three interesting, maybe even positive and relevant, thoughts come to mind, lest I get totally depressed at the state of the world, as can easily happen.

*Longer-term, demographics will win out. Right now, there is virtually an even split between the number of whites under five years of age and the number of minorities.  Most of both categories are going to live for many years, making the future composition of the population highly predictable. Power at all levels of society inevitably will be transferred; let’s pray it is accomplished in a somewhat more peaceful manner than is indicated by what is taking place today.

*If, according to surveys done by the Pew Research Center,  74% of registered voters say “undocumented immigrants who meet certain requirements should be allowed to stay legally,” does not this percentage rise if Trump deports bona fide criminals?

*A 26 year-old immigration advocate of my acquaintance and a 69 year-old social service organization leader whom I have known for a quarter-century both come at the pending Trump presidency the same way, after they pulled the blankets back and climbed out of their respective beds of depression, that is. Before, they were fighting for social justice … and, simply put, that fight certainly continues.

As a final note, can there be any debate that, collectively this is THE ISSUE of our times: being able to say “I do not understand, please help me,”  being emotionally prepared to sit down and discuss a particular topic with somebody holding an opposite viewpoint, and being able to employ the Japanese proverb – “to find out the real reason, ask why seven times” without anybody storming out the room, cursing the other person’s lack of expertise and/or unwarranted arrogance.

 

 

The seven year-old girl lay prone on the patient table in the cardiologist’s office.  Unsurprisingly for anybody who knew this delightful young lady, she peppered the doctor with questions. His replies conveyed about as much sensitivity as that of the blinking machine he was studying. When, without any preparatory commentary, the doctor turned his patient over to his assistant to administer an EKG, the normally strong-willed girl began to cry. Only when the wires were calmly connected did she relax.

Perhaps she was really reacting to the loss of personal control, a circumstance which bothers most people, whether in a medical facility or in ordinary, daily life.

In our current high-stress environment, exacerbated by daily outbreaks of senseless loss of lives, the issue of the undulating sands of control is evident wherever one looks.

Who, I thought, feels more devoid of control (a partial list for sure, and in no order of importance):

A policeman trying to balance his job requirements with the environment in which he/she functions

All of us devoid of ideas for making more headway on racism

A minimum wage participant in the service economy

An undereducated, father-free, 18 year-old African American male

A middle-aged white male unemployed for the first time ever

An affluent parent attempting to explain that an attitude of entitlement is not appropriate

An undocumented Hispanic immigrant

A parent trying to keep social media in proper perspective for her/his children

An Asian with high SATs, rejected by an Ivy League college which already has enough Asians

A striving woman in a large corporation

The New York Times editorial board after the election

A gay person who has yet to leave the closet

A Sanders acolyte

A parent attempting to interact with the typical urban school leader

A CEO whose job is dependent on his quarterly earnings report

A farmer whose income is importantly driven by the weather

A cab driver with no regular customers

A college student walking into an all-or-nothing final exam

A single parent filling out paperwork in a welfare office

A person shunning the ethic of consumption and attempting to live off the grid

An economist trying to discourse logically about 1%ers, which cut across all demographic lines

 

Or –a writer befuddled by the task of putting down his thoughts in a clearly articulated manner!

Note: Our heroine has a strong heart, accompanied by a mild case of PAC:  premature arrhythmic contraction, basically an occasional extra heartbeat. She has no restrictions on activity, which includes running in 2,000 meter races, and the PAC diagnosis will be revisited in six months. We love her.