Gongol.com Archives: July 2025
| July 2025 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |||
July 1, 2025
Steadiness is one of the most vital but unloved virtues. The whole structure of civilization quietly depends upon institutions that fulfill expected roles with consistency and without complaint for an indefinite period of service. ■ Imagine, for a moment, a world in which the Mayo Clinic gave up on its position as the medical destination of last resort and instead became a spa for hair transplants and cosmetic surgery. There is no law, statute, or even binding contractual obligation requiring Mayo to remain altriustically focused on care for difficult cases. Yet its steadiness in this regard is invaluable. ■ We miss steadiness when it is gone. When vital institutions wobble from the inside -- or when they are mortally wounded by external forces -- the world is injured by their absence. But it is hard to rise to their defense in a crisis because we often have little or no practice in doing so. Why would we? ■ What we can do is stand for steadiness categorically: Not by being unrepentant defenders of the status quo merely for its own sake, but by appreciating the many complex ways in which things interact and insisting on caution whenever anyone tries to slash and burn their way through institutions (public or private) merely for disruption's sake. ■ A temperamental conservatism (that is, a preservative sense of caution) is necessary far more often than not, as is a respect for good custodianship. Just like accounting and finance and marketing are recognized as disciplines within the realm of business and nonprofit management, so too should we recognize the steady maintenance of useful institutions as a unique discipline. ■ If there can be degrees in innovation and entrepreneurship, there ought to be comparable degrees in responsible custodianship. If some are going to study environmental sustainability in public policy, shouldn't others concentrate on institutional sustainability in public service? A chronic eagerness to change, whether by growth or by cutbacks, isn't a symptom of systemic health.
July 3, 2025
An account filing war dispatches under the username Kate from Kharkiv reveals a moment of deep frustration over a reversal of American promises to send defensive missiles to Ukraine: "I'm expected to be polite. Nice. Tamed. Because technically, my anger won't help us. It won't convince more people or governments to support Ukraine. But know this: war comes when you least expect it. We didn't believe it would come for us. There was no point in it, but it came." ■ There is no owner's manual for life, but wisdom lies in training around pattern recognition. That's always been one of our species's evolutionary advantages, and it's a skill that our brains are well-primed to develop. That training can come from many different disciplines -- there are useful patterns to be discovered in math, language, music, and elsewhere. But it should be obvious that human history is one of the most wealthy sources. ■ During the early stages of World War II, Winston Churchill offered this admonition: "An effort must be made to shake off the mental and moral prostration to the will and initiative of the enemy from which we suffer." A threat had long been visible to anyone who was willing to see it, and finally it came for Britain (and later, for the United States). Looking away didn't deny the threat its power. ■ It would be stupid to look away once more: Not because Russia poses the same threat as the one that endangered Britain in 1940, but because it's undeniably part of a pattern that echoes the old one. Lives of innocent people are being sacrificed because there are madmen in the world, and no amount of looking away will deprive them of their power. ■ "Kate from Kharkhiv" is trying to send us a contemporaneous warning. Churchill sends a warning from the past. It is up to us in the present to have the wisdom to recognize patterns before it is too late.
July 4, 2025
Independence Day is the year every good American should re-read the Declaration of Independence in its entirety: At around 1,300 words, it's shorter than some people take to share a sourdough recipe on their cooking blogs. ■ The Declaration is worth an annual re-reading if for no other reason than to remind us that the most important word between a person and their government is the word "No". Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, Livingston, and Sherman didn't draft a statement complaining of material things they wanted from England. They instead wrote mainly of things the Royal government did to them, unjustly, which they wanted to stop. ■ It's a laundry list that remains easy to read in plain English even today: "He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power." "He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither". "He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people." "For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world". "For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences". ■ The very first Congress had one word in mind above all others: "No." The government in power was doing them wrong, and they withdrew their consent. Government doesn't exist to extend the benefits of the privileged. "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed", to secure "certain unalienable Rights", including "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness". ■ Security means saying "no" to those who would take those things away. It means saying "no" to behavior that echoes the offenses of King George III. And it means unapologetically saying "no" to encroachments on life, liberty, and the treasured pursuit of happiness.
July 5, 2025
An enormous flash flood in central Texas has led to a heartbreaking number of deaths, numbering at least in the dozens and including children lost from summer camps along a river basin. ■ Much of the shock follows the nearly unthinkable rate of rise on the Guadalupe River. One atmospheric scientist identifies the rainfall behind the flooding as a once-in-1,000-year event. ■ A scientist at the Weather Prediction Center of the National Weather Service, who issued one of the forecasts the day before warning of flash flooding to come, has already begun unpacking what happened meteorologically and how they attempted to offer advance notice to the public, but it's evident that intensification took place that almost certainly goes beyond what could have been warned with precision. ■ We would be in grave error to ignore the signs that storms over land may be subject to similar kinds of rapid intensification already widely recognized as a problem for hurricane forecasting. It's not a problem for tropical locations alone, either: A storm over southern Iowa caused a dangerous 6" rain total not even two weeks ago. ■ Much more scientific research is in order -- research that has few likely sources of funding other than the public. And the same goes for timely warning systems: We need an institution dedicated to advising and protecting the public, no matter where and without regard as to whether the advice can be monetized. ■ That's what we are supposed to get from NOAA and its various offices and services. Those duties are quite certain to become even more important for the foreseeable future, not less, and if we as the public expect those duties to be fulfilled, we had better realize our part in furnishing the resources to pay for them.
July 6, 2025
Dramatic cuts to portions of the Federal government -- like a likely 40% reduction in the IRS workforce and nearly 20% reductions at NOAA -- have been implemented via both executive actions and the passage of a large tax bill through Congress. Whether those cuts will prove to be prudent or foolhardy remains to be seen. Likewise, whether they prove to be lasting remains to be seen. They are, however, generally here to stay for at least a year or more to come. ■ Under these conditions, it becomes more important than at any time in living memory for people of goodwill and good intentions to join, identify with, and engage in the professional (and quasi-professional) organizations within their areas of expertise. Nearly everyone has at least some subject matter on which they are specialized and can speak with some degree of authority. ■ Workforce reductions at the Federal level are likely to provoke a coming absence of regulatory and statutory guidance on important matters. On some of those matters, state and local governments will still need to know what represents the state of the art. Private-sector actors, like businesses and non-profit organizations, will also need access to the best possible advice. ■ As a country, we have grown accustomed to much of this guidance coming from the Federal government. In some cases, we may have become too reliant. In others, we may come to regret its absence. But in either case, good people need to step forward in a professional or semi-professional capacity to help advise the public as to what's best. ■ We will need expertise from technology experts and engineers, accountants and economists, transportation planners and air traffic controllers. This input has always been useful, but across many domains, the need for thoughtful input from societies dedicated to educational and research activities has almost certainly never been greater. ■ Not every occupation is a profession -- professionals, to be precise, have specialized knowledge and subscribe to some form of ethical code that requires them to put the public interest ahead of self-interest, as when dentists encourage the use of fluoride (a clear case of argument against self-interest). ■ But many occupations have organizations that act mainly to advance the state of the art rather than to line the pockets of their members, and these are the organizations needed most right now. We may even benefit most from a robust set of overlapping and sometimes even competitive organizations (like the American Meteorological Society and the National Weather Association), since competition often has a sharpening effect, and because the resulting joint statements among them often strengthen the cases being made. ■ The ecosystem for good institutions should be lively and well-populated. Increasing complexity is an irreversible factor in most disciplines, and our private activities ought to reflect the importance of honing expert opinions in all of those fields. The first step is for as many good people as possible to get involved wherever they have the best judgment to offer.