PPPPhilanthopy and Misanthropy (Four P's #190)
Charity, Camp Tours, the Constitution, and Conflicting Information
Before falling asleep one night last week, my son told me that he’d made a decision. He wanted to donate a portion of his birthday gift money to charity. Naturally, I was quite proud of this decision (and offered to match + triple anything he gave)… that is, until information overload and decision paralysis set in.
His challenge... which charity? He wasn’t sure which organization would most benefit from his support, and grew frustrated as I rattled off a list of worthy causes. There were too many, and all of them needed it. From helping underprivileged children to cancer research, climate change, gun safety, DonorsChoose, and his aunt's non-profit organization called TRIAD, he couldn’t decide, and it threatened to derail the entire project.
How can there be such a large gap in need? And we hadn’t even covered climate change, animal rights, or mental health initiatives. But one lesson he did take away is that if/when he grows up and makes a lot of money, he is going to contribute a much larger percentage of his enormous wealth back to charity. So even if I’ve done nothing else right as a parent, he will end up more like Gates than Bezos or Musk.
Something Personal: The Beginning of a Beautiful Era
How we turn out as adults is rooted entirely in what we learn and experience as children. And parents can only instill so many values. Peers and other role models play an important part as well, which is why I believe strongly in the importance of summer camp.
Last weekend, we packed up the family station wagon (okay, it was an SUV), drove out to where highways met dirt roads and waded west into the verdant, lake-strewn mountains of America. Or more specifically, southeast New York.
For as glorious as this mid-summer sojourn sounds, our objective was to visit and tour camps that my daughter might attend a full year from now. Those who grew up going away to sleepaway know how foundational and formational the experiences are for children in their pre-teen to post-pubescent years. Those who never went can never truly understand what it means... the lifelong lessons in friendship, independence, courage, sportsmanship, and overall personal maturation.
I've written about my summers on the shores of Lake Winnipesaukee and what they meant to me. I often dream about it and still yearn for those simpler times. And I'm beyond thrilled that my daughter will have her own experiences away. Just being in similar-looking settings triggered neurons and evoked memories that had been dormant for decades. The mountain air, tree-lined lakes, the sound of pleasure cruisers and speed boats motoring from one direction to another... They all triggered another thought: to someday work at or own a camp. I missed the counselor window while I was in college, but there is another way back in. Now all I have to do is convince my physician wife to sign up to be a camp doctor for a few weeks each year while I get to play (and save considerably on camp tuition costs!).
Something Political: The End of a Virtuous Error
We can all admit that America is far from perfect. Yet somehow acknowledging that the constitution is an imperfect document has become taboo among a large portion of our citizenry.
Ever since my constitutional rant on Twitter during July 4th weekend several weeks back, I've been thinking a lot about the Founding Fathers, and how they'd evaluate the modern iteration of their democratic experiment. My 11th-grade American history teacher, Mrs. Sesso, hated that term, instead calling them our National Framers. She may have been onto something, because "Founding Fathers” has become a historical paradox. I alluded to it in my last post -- how our best chance to maintain our standing as a country, as a society, is to acknowledge that the Constitution needs to be re-thought. This is not anti-American. It may be the most "American" idea since the turn of the 18th century.
Thanks to modern-day storytellers like Lin-Manuel Miranda and researchers like David McCullough, we know that statesmen like Hamilton, Franklin, Madison, and Jefferson were intelligent and passionate, but also deeply flawed. They attempted a far-sighted view when forming the United States, making predictions, assumptions, and educated guesses that followed lessons of successful and failed nation-states from even before their time. They readily acknowledged at the time that the chances of failure were high, that they had only one chance to get it right.
They were making it up as they went along, one cantankerous clash and conciliatory compromise at a time. That they succeeded is not evidence of god-like genius, but their deeply human determination. And desperation. The amazing accomplishment of the founding framers was not any document they produced, but the fact that they were able to produce something of value despite bitter differences of opinion. Despite their white-male-aristocratic similarities, they also shared a singular belief that they could create something better than they currently had. A republic is a state in which citizens exercise self-rule (by electing representatives). In theory, they can replace their government. That idea was so paramount because the absolutist monarchy cannot be replaced; it must simply be obeyed. So why did previous attempts at democratic republics inevitably collapse into absolutism? Their belief in virtue.
With republics, representatives had to win and keep the loyalty of citizens. If they don’t treat all equally, follow their laws, or act in the common interest, citizens have a right to replace them – either by election or revolution. But a republic’s citizens must also be virtuous. If they are too selfish or corrupt, they’ll favor their interests above those of their neighbors and break the bonds of trust that sustain power-sharing. The result: civil war and the death of the republic. That outcome can only be prevented if fellow citizens strike compromises and place the interests of the common good above personal selfishness.
Hamilton, the original federalist, pushed for a strong central government that plays an active role in managing the economy because individuals could not be trusted. Madison didn't want the debts of one state to burden other states. Franklin believed that slavery and sectionalism could ruin the American experiment. They all agreed that republics are dependent on the people’s moral character, and their willingness to compromise preserved the unity of our nation in those early days. Interestingly, Thomas Jefferson initially believed in generational sovereignty, advocating that laws should expire after 20 years. Perhaps he was onto something. Congress is unable to pass laws, elections require a massive amount of private funding, and the United States is as divided as ever. The Founders/Framers' belief in the virtue of both the electorate and their representatives was their biggest gamble, and it seems like they may have lost. This set a dangerous precedent that we continue to dig out from today.
Something Professional: Doubling Down on the Future
Last week, the good people at VaynerNFT (now since renamed Vayner3) put on a web3 demo day for vendors, platforms, marketplaces, blockchains, and more. Yet one topic that didn't come up during the 8 hours of programming is the question I hear most throughout my week: "With an impending recession and this 'crypto winter,' is the future of NFTs at risk?"
And my answer is always the same: "Stop listening to people who don't know what they are talking about." Fortunately for you in reading this, you're hearing from someone who does... And web3 technology powered for marketers and brands by the blockchain is just getting started and is already changing so much for the better.
The most valuable NFTs will not/are not tied to crypto, and may not even need to be bought and sold. Yes, the use of tokens and NFTs for purposes like collectibles and digital art is subsiding. On many platforms, a large devaluation of artwork has occurred in tandem with the devaluation of crypto. Until now, the NFT market has been highly speculative, but we're already wading into a future where the true, longstanding value of NFTs is tied to utility, consumer value exchange, access, rewards, loyalty, membership, and proof of ownership.
So for my brand marketers friends, let's please stick with what we already know and understand. This is the new consumer retention play. The marketing playbook remains steadfast and tied to strategy. Let's focus on the promise of what NFTs provide and become the best versions of ourselves in digital all over again.
Something Practical: The War on Science
While undergoing my annual physical exam this week, my doctor shared a bit about what he thought the next COVID vaccine booster would and wouldn't protect against, and also warned me against doing too much of my research (little does he know I am married to THE expert on this stuff). Fortunately, his advice is not because he thinks I'm a moron, but because, in his words, "There is a war on science and facts out there by non-experts, and I just don't want anyone giving them oxygen."
Although disagreements about expertise are nothing new, they have been increasing in the internet age. The conflict between experts and laypeople has gotten wildly out of hand. Yes, the internet has made it possible to find a source to support any opinion under the sun, no matter how outrageously unscientific it might be, and it also has people feeling more empowered than ever to voice their opinions. Once people start ganging up and attacking established knowledge, years of scientific progress are endangered and people’s lives can be put at risk (This is certainly the case with the anti-vaccine movement, and has been reinforced throughout the ongoing COVID pandemic).
With an infinite amount of information just waiting to be scrolled through, countless people are joining debates on everything from Fast and the Furious movies to medical science. It's absurd. Yet having no formal education on a subject does nothing to weaken people’s confidence in their ability to read a few articles and believe they have a full grasp of a subject.
And despite it all, there remain very few safeguards to prevent anyone from posting anything on the internet, which has caused it to become a place infested with inaccurate and fake information. At this point, so many false news stories have been posted that they now function as a “source” for even more misleading articles to base themselves on. The introduction of the internet may have increased the number of available sources but it has decreased the quality of the content. More news outlets also mean an increased demand for content – and for journalists to generate that content – and being completely inexperienced isn’t exactly a deal breaker. So it should come as no surprise that a rise in inexperienced journalists has led to an overall drop in the quality of news on display. The need for content has also resulted in outlets being flooded with fake news stories – but even a great deal of real news stories are being published with errors and inaccuracies. Revenue is determined by interactivity. Profitability is driven by stories that are designed to be clickable and shareable. News sites encourage readers to share and comment on social media, which opens the door for ordinary people to feel entitled and to start dissecting complicated matters without any of the necessary insight.
But the biggest paradox of all is that the people who are most susceptible to this are least likely to understand it. Dunning and Kruger revealed that having less skill at a specific task can make someone less likely to recognize their own incompetence. Due to a lack of metacognition, which is the awareness of our thought processes and the trait that allows someone to recognize their limitations.
So to follow the advice of my physician, stop giving these people space to breathe, press coverage, or even your attention.