Creative Senior Moments Page 5

  “Not at all, she said, it just that it is the first black man I ever saw. I will get used to it.” Then she looked at me and added: “What I am afraid of is the Mongols.” Well, well, I had to smile, but it made sense. In Europe, we are all afraid of somebody to our east, who invaded us in the past, and it cascades more and more east to the Chinese who fear Japan.

  Of course Hungary was once a small part of the Hun territory (and the Huns invaded the future Belgium and France, as I am sure you all know). The name of the little town where I come from, Hannut, means denuded, sacked by the Huns (Hun nudum). With time, however, the people who lived in the Belgian and Northern France territories came to nickname “Huns” a more recent eastern invader, the Germans.

  So Belgians are not afraid any more of Huns and other Mongols, though Attila’s rapists left deep traces in our population. Many children in Belgium and Northern France, probably between 1 and 5 per cent, but it varies from town to town, are born with a blue mark on their lower back called the mongoloid spot, attesting a long lost Asian origin. The spot disappears in the first years of life, as it does for most Asian and American Indian children. One more reminder that being “white” is not a race, it is an inherited characteristic of people who once lived where there is little sun, as compared to people who lived closer to the equator and have a darker skin.

  Bad People

  I met on a French train this handsome, impressive, charming American and he was so interesting to talk with. He asked me what I thought of president Carter, who had just been elected. I answered that it was not going to work: president Carter was too naïve and honest. The man in front of me, who was a Republican, nevertheless raised his hands in frustration and said: “But why not? Why not? All Europeans tell me the same thing, it is so cynical!” I did not know what to say, but I have been thinking about it for a few decades more, and I think I found out why Carterism does not work.

  Some people are bad people, and you cannot expect them to play the game. Take Hitler: I think that Chamberlain really believed that Hitler could and would keep his word. Chamberlain, like most Englishmen of his time, expected diplomacy to be in the hands of gentlemen. Learning the truth is probably what killed him.

  I once read the memoirs of the British ambassador in Germany before WWII, the poor man was all lost in protocol details and the proper rules of cricket: it was a very sad reading.

  I am convinced that Roosevelt made similar mistakes, first with Japan, then with Stalin. He thought that they would follow the rules of war and respect treaties, and it is not what happened. It is pretty hard to have an inbred sense of honor but to expect some other leaders to have no honor at all.

  It does not mean that we should answer in kind: are you going to refuse to help any man with his arm in a cast because a criminal named Ted Bundy trapped young women with a false cast?

  At one point, however, we have to face the truth: some people are bad people, It is a mystery why we never seem able to see them for what they are, no more in public life than in private life. Think of all these tyrants: Stalin, Hitler, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Saddam. Ceausescu, Pinochet: the list is endless of people who would have better fit a mental hospital than an official position.

  It is hard to manage such people for any country, because a country is usually one person with a bunch of advisors who disagree with each other. There always were in the United States war people and peace people, Hawks and Doves, so we always have both sides represented, which is the way it should be. We mainly sorely lack people who understand other countries.

  President Kennedy had such a man in Tommy Thompson who, because he understood the mind of Krushev, avoided for all of us a third world war. Kissinger also was very good at understanding people: this explains why he was successful with women in his youth: small-time predators understand women. Kissinger’s descriptions of characters in his memoirs are on the spot, with very few exceptions.

  President Reagan was surprised to learn that the Russians were convinced that America envisioned a first-strike nuclear war against them. Most Americans and Europeans took president Reagan’s rhetoric against the Soviets as political statements or acts of faith, not as declarations of war. The Soviets had their doubts about what the discourse entailed; at one time, they thought they might be invaded. They did not understand the American mind any more than American politics.

  Another example of poor understanding of people, but there are hundreds, is the CIA supporting the extreme rightwing in France before President Mitterand’s election. It was a mistake, first because it made honest democrats turn against America, second because in France, there is no border, no real difference between the extreme right and the communists or the extreme left. The French have a high percentage of permanently discontent population, 15 to 20 %. They always vote for extremists, it does not matter to them which side these extremists claim to be, and you never know what the leaders will do to get their votes. So giving any of them money is destabilizing for the country. The set up is likely to end up in the wrong hands.

  Bad people are bad people: they are never “on our side”. It has been a long-standing mistake of the United States in general and the CIA in particular, to think that we can win bad people or win with bad people.

  The United States is of course not the only country who made the mistake of believing that the wolf can be tamed with money, weapons, and a good word, we just have more money, more weapons and more good words to throw around.

  Humiliation

  I am sure that Saddam had a lot of fun playing the nuclear inspectors for fools, it gave him a sense of control and power and it probably also pleased his population. Saddam just had no idea how Western minds are working: we were all convinced that he had something to hide; then he suffered the consequences. On the other end, I think that we went in Iraq without a good plan and without any understanding of the Muslim world.

  It is said that the CIA has a psychological analysis of all heads of state, which I expect is terrifying to read. I am wondering if their description of Saddam was accurate and how many cultural traits were described. Saddam came with his cultural characteristics just as Savannah plumbers have a mind of their own. These traits, we should learn to know. I also hope that the psychologists of the CIA never describe anybody without giving some advice on how to handle the person: let them take a risk. I am wondering about that because, if they do, why is it that we have only one policy: the policy of humiliation?

  I remember some official specialist, saying this on ABC News the day Saddam was arrested: they were going to humiliate him. As if Saddam was going to talk if he was humiliated! I would have thought he was more likely to talk if he were given some illusion of a negotiation; what you get from humiliating people is only temporary basic compliance. Humiliation is the general policy we have in our jails, and how does that work?

  Well, I am not a politician, nor am I a specialist in all this, but I live in Savannah where I have seen plenty of young soldiers every day, and I heard the planes leave for Iraq and Afghanistan. I feel as if these young people were my own kids.

  I would like to make sure that the guys who do not go to war but stay here in the administration are at the top of their competence.

  Jails

  The Cost

  In Georgia, 7.2 million adults support half a million people under correctional supervision, people in prison, in jail, on probation and on parole. Is this reasonable? The system does cost of over a billion dollars a year. It means that if nobody committed crimes, we would be one billion more rich! I know you will not believe this, so here is the cost page.

  GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

  FY2010 ALLOCATION OF COST TO INMATES, PROBATIONERS, ETC.

  Note 1 - Total Costs: Includes proration of Central Office costs, i.e., Commissioner’s Office, Accounting, Payroll, Personnel, Inmate and Probationer record keeping, etc. Total costs were used in calculations except in the “(STATE ONLY)” columns.

  Note 2 -
County and Jail Subsidies: We paid $20.00 per day per inmate assigned to a County Correctional Institution and $22.00 per day per sentenced inmate awaiting pick-up in county jails.

  Note 3 - Bainbridge PSATC: This facility is a specialized, one of a kind Probation Substance Abuse Treatment Center (PSATC).

  Non-State Funds that are included in the above total (except for the columns labeled “(STATE ONLY)”.)

  - Federal Funds (SFSF, SCAAP, workplace & community training, Child Nutrition, etc.): 103,121,661 - Sick Call, Escape/Search, and Inmate Fees: 1,424,931

  - Inmate Store: 4,751,659 and Central Project Telephone Funds: 7,393,063

  - Construction Projects: 32,245,290 and Insurance Recoveries: 686,631

  - Details (DOT, county, city): 12,223,794

  - Employee Payments (utility, rent collections, etc.): 397,307

  - Miscellaneous (family violence, payroll admin fees, CD data sales, special education, recycling, miscellaneous, etc.): 1,662,965

  Non-State Funds NOT included in totals above (remitted directly to State Treasury, or Criminal Justice Coordinating Council): 17,247,533

  - Probation Office Fees ( Probation Fees - 8,845,528; Victim’s Fee - 3,811,634): 12,657,162. - Transitional Centers (room and board): 4,572,914.

  - Miscellaneous : 17,457.

  ***

  By comparison, we only spend 300 million on technical college education. Does it make sense to you? It does not make much sense to me.

  Punishment

  Is punishment a useful concept? Look at this.

  I have a simple mind. For me, the figure means that we do not have a good system.

  From my visits to jail, I have observed that many prisoners develop new bad skills instead of acquiring good skills. For instance they get new “prison language” and general behavior traits that makes them unlikely to find a job, if they look for one. We have programs of “rehab,” we do not have programs that correct what is wrong with small offenders.

  Things small offenders have in common, according to my own observations are:

  1. A lack of capacity for self-discipline (on parole, they would go to a movie with a friend rather than keep an appointment with a parole officer).

  2. The inability to consider delayed gratification or to envision what is going to happen next week.

  3. A low self-esteem.

  4. As a consequence of these problems, they do not like to work or they cannot keep a job.

  ***

  I don’t know what to do with violent offenders and predators. I tend to think like everybody else: too many of them are set free. But they remain a minority in the prison plague.

  What do we do with the rest?

  I am not a great believer in punishment, in rehab for the rehab’s sake, in boot camps, or even in literacy programs (literacy is only useful when you want to read). I believe that education in life matters is lacking and many small things as the ones I just listed can be corrected at a low price. I do know, however, that it is difficult to convince the system that it is the right thing to do: I once proposed to answer some science questions to inmates in Savannah, and was told by the County authority that the only volunteers they accept are religious personalities. Good luck with that! We have here a church per two hundred inhabitants, over a thousand Christian churches in our small town. If they cannot prevent young people to go to jail, how can they be doing such a good job inside the jail?

  Money

  The Art of Poverty

  There is a saying about getting rich: “It is not about what you earn, it is all about what you spend.” The richest people from the gold rush were not the gold diggers; it was the guys who sold the shovels. The reason is that the gold diggers spent all their money as soon as they made it. Over the years, I have seen that it was true: money that comes fast goes fast. It is why you see drug dealers spending money, but you never see them getting rich (only the big lords get rich, and they are too smart to work the street). It explains how too many lottery winners who win tens of millions of dollars (much more than most of us in a lifetime) can lose it all in two or three years despite the counseling provided by the lottery organizers. It is how so many investors have gone down in 2008-2009.

  I am old enough to have been poor several times. Here is what I think. When you talk about money, a lot of it is in your attitude. Use your imagination to find work when there is no job: what is it that your neighbors need? Somebody to mow the lawn, to wash the windows, to clean the driveway, to wax the car, to walk the dog, to go to the store for them, to watch the kids when they go shopping, to read a book to their aging grandma, to clean the kitchen? Once you find an angle, think about how people will know that they can trust you with the job. How hard do you work? Do you still wake up early? Do you look the part? Do you show up on time? Do you keep notes of what you have to do? Do you remember your promises? Are you honest? How does your asking price compare to the competition? Tough times call for tough decisions.

  1. Take your time to get rich and spend less than you earn.

  2. When you work, work hard.

  3. When you have some money, be careful with it. Two or three times in a good life, you will find yourself earning less: you are very lucky if you escape this. I happens to many people: they lose a job for a while, they get sick, they divorce, they move to a town with less possibilities, they got to take care of more family members.

  4. Not many young people make good money, always for the same reason: they come around when they need the money, not when people need them.

  Young Brandon asked if he could mow my backyard, which he did. As I paid him he asked: “Can I come every two weeks to do it?” Brandon was making customers, not just money. I was impressed. By contrast, one of my neighbors has had a gardener for over ten years. He comes when she calls. The guy is over 60 years old and does not know how to run his business. Count with me: she gives him 30 dollars every three weeks or so, when she notices that the grass grows up. If he were smart enough to have an agreement with her and come automatically every two weeks, she would be pleased and he would make 30 dollars times 22 weeks equal: 660 dollars instead of 30 dollars times 17 weeks equal: 510 dollars. In other words, he loses about 20% of the money he could make. With his 30 customers, he could make 4,500 dollars more every year. And the difference is more than that, because sometimes he does not answer the phone and my neighbor uses somebody else.

  Michael’s Jackson’s money

  Nobody has said yet what I think about Michael’s untimely death. I just think: “another famous black guy who dies without a cent.”

  It is hard enough for each of us to spend wisely the little money we have, it is extremely hard to handle tens of millions and hundreds of millions when you have no financial education. Agatha Christie had that problem, I remember her saying that there was a moment when the money ceases to be pleasant enough to get and becomes a real hassle.

  British actor Michael Caine recently said that when he told his mother that he was earning one million pounds per film, she asked “How much is that?”

  Sportsmen are supposed to have some financial education, though sometimes you wonder: I remember baseball player Ricky Henderson who framed a check of one million dollars and let it hang on his wall instead of endorsing it.

  Usually it is less funny: very friendly sharks will steal the money from under your feet.

  You get talented kids? Send them first to a business school.

  Old Money

  The press reported that a pastel by Degas was stolen from a Museum in France. It was worth over a million dollars. It reminded me of a small Degas I saw hanging on the wall of the powder room, in the house of a notable French couple. I was surprised that it was not displayed more prominently. I bluntly asked to the lady of the house if it was genuine. “I would think so,” replied the lady dryly. Then I asked why on earth she did exhibit it in the John.

  “I just don’t like it,” she said.

  That is the difference betwee
n old money and new money.

  Old money, you can’t fake it.

  Cultural Literacy

  The children of poor people do not do as well as the children of rich people, except of course if they are exceptional. The way out is to increase your culture, do better in school to get a great job. You may like school or not, but it is the way out.

  Cultural literacy is a more important factor than poverty. The correlation poverty/lack of achievement of the children is not about the lack of money in the house, it is about the lack of culture in the house. Social, political, religious, musical, mathematical, artistic knots are creating the fabric of success for children. The more involved you are, the more curious you are, the better you and your children will be.

  Obesity

  Everybody knows that the Midwest culture is different from the California culture and that Texas has a mind of its own. But do you know that obesity is local? Obesity affected 18.5 per cent of the adult population in Colorado in 2008, but 31.4 per cent of the adults in Alabama (cdc.gov obesity maps).

  Sex

  A History of Sex

  The ways we are having sex do not change with time, but the ways we interpret it vary with time and place. For instance, the President of France, Francois Mitterand, wanted to be buried in presence of both his wife and his mistress, and it is how the two women presided the official ceremony in 1996. I heard of Presidents of the USA who had a double life, but I doubt very much that a scene like this would be appreciated by the American voters: different places, different point of views.

  Similar differences can be observed in the past. A history of sex should be mandatory for US historians, because they fail to understand the simplest cultural factors of the past. I was listening to professor Brands re-telling to a fascinated audience that Eleanor Roosevelt warned her daughter, on the eve of her marriage, that sex was an ordeal to be borne.

  What does it mean? That Mrs. Roosevelt did not like sex? That she was a lesbian? That her husband was unkind? I am not sure. The one thing I know for certain is that four or five great aunts and old cousins of mine, all born in the 1880s like Mrs. Roosevelt, told me the exact same thing when I got married. Women born in the 1880s in the bourgeoisie all had the same Victorian education (Queen Victoria died in 1901.)