Why did an agenda that looked unstoppable a few months back run into a brick wall? It has to do tactics meant for insurgents attempting to run the system.
Yes, insightful about the strengths and limitations of insurgent strategy and tactics.
Yes, doubling down on the old approaches that the insurgency defeated isn't viable.
The remaining question is how such a successful tactician could be sticking with such a self-defeating approach. Principled, brilliant, in denial, self-defeating, or something else?
I think it's pretty common to all successful people when they get into a new circumstance. Everyone doubles down on what worked for them before, without realizing that the strategy wasn't universal but depended on the unique situation they were in.
I agree. It's remarkable when those who had adapted well to contemporary opportunities and obstacles then persist with inferences that no longer apply or maybe never did.
Also relevant may be research about how those most resistant to accurate correction tend to be the most educated, most highly credentialed, or most successful in an specific area. How's that for a sobering paradox? The power of subjectivity to distort thinking appears to be stealthy and underestimated.
All of this highlights the need for decision making cultures that value variations of thought and perspective among decision makers and advisors. When the courage of one's convictions isn't balanced with humility about one's limitations, the results can be damaging and self-defeating.
Living systems folk talk about balancing individuality and togetherness. The greater the anxiety, the greater the push toward group-think, solidarity, closing ranks, etc. However, what's felt to be necessary for survival actiually may increase the risks of failure. It takes a lot of serenity and confidence to pursue a different path.
For one, I think there is more to dive into with “Invisible doors”. It’s an interesting theory that seems to have merit on its face.
Would be interesting to test it a little. Also explore what other invisible doors Trump may try to open and what may be effective to improve the system and make the invisible visible and functional.
I think a lot of life is about those invisible doors. It's what most innovators and entrepreneurs are looking for, the neglected issues and opportunities that conventional wisdom ignores and so you can't learn them from other people or books. You just have to get into the ship and sail to the other end of the world and risk it to find them. The most interesting thing to me is how relentless he is about pushing on every possible wall to find them, and his willingness to violate any norm, and then get away with it.
I can give you some examples of limits he’s already testing:
* “We should send our bad guys to El Salvador” ie imprison American criminals in a foreign prison.
* He keeps saying he’s going to run for a third term. I think he is testing whether the system will actually stop him from trying.
* “We’re gonna get Greenland” - again he’s testing boundaries here. I think he really would take Greenland by force… If he thought he’d actually be allowed to do so and the rest of the government and the country would go along with it.
This is what he does. He says outrageous things as trial balloons. Most of the time he gets immediate pushback, but sometimes this reveals weaknesses in the opposition, issues on which they’re not really united or that turn out to be surprisingly popular with the public.
Very intelligent insights. I consider myself a middle-of-the-road kind of guy, and I'll bet there are a whole lot of others like me who have become disenchanted with the Democratic Party. Trump seems to be doing a few things us middle-people like, but also some horrendous things, too. What's up with that? I think the transgender ideology dogma is injuring people, especially young people, and Trump seems to be trying to do something about that. But then he not just deports people, but sends them to a notorious gulag prison in El Salvadore. What's up with that,too? The Democrats or, maybe, even a new Party, needs to start paying attention to we middle-of-the-road people who appear consevative about some things and liberal about others. Isn't that the definition of Americanism?
Trump's tactics do seem to be an insurgent strategy. Like all reactionaries, the only arrow in his quiver is to work against an existing system without a proactive plan. Now that he is the system, all he comprehends is that (in his mind) the S.Ct. has told him he is above the law. So now he is on a mission to find where the new boundaries are. Since Trump has not had meaningful constraints so far, he is simply indulging his greed and his meglomania with no regard for logic, consistency or the well-being of his MAGA base.
Since Trump doesn't have to seek re-election because he imagines he will have a third term or because of the term limit, he is no longer constrained by the fear his MAGA base will bring the hammer down on him electorally. So, he just wakes up every morning and thinks "what can I get away with today?"
The interesting insight in what you said is he's implicitly looking to find the new constraints, but there are none to find. Which naturally creates uncertainty and chaos.
It’s much easier to destroy than build.
Yes, insightful about the strengths and limitations of insurgent strategy and tactics.
Yes, doubling down on the old approaches that the insurgency defeated isn't viable.
The remaining question is how such a successful tactician could be sticking with such a self-defeating approach. Principled, brilliant, in denial, self-defeating, or something else?
I think it's pretty common to all successful people when they get into a new circumstance. Everyone doubles down on what worked for them before, without realizing that the strategy wasn't universal but depended on the unique situation they were in.
I agree. It's remarkable when those who had adapted well to contemporary opportunities and obstacles then persist with inferences that no longer apply or maybe never did.
Also relevant may be research about how those most resistant to accurate correction tend to be the most educated, most highly credentialed, or most successful in an specific area. How's that for a sobering paradox? The power of subjectivity to distort thinking appears to be stealthy and underestimated.
All of this highlights the need for decision making cultures that value variations of thought and perspective among decision makers and advisors. When the courage of one's convictions isn't balanced with humility about one's limitations, the results can be damaging and self-defeating.
Living systems folk talk about balancing individuality and togetherness. The greater the anxiety, the greater the push toward group-think, solidarity, closing ranks, etc. However, what's felt to be necessary for survival actiually may increase the risks of failure. It takes a lot of serenity and confidence to pursue a different path.
Great insight. Seems like there is so much more to explore and flesh out and test this hypothesis.
What are you thinking?
For one, I think there is more to dive into with “Invisible doors”. It’s an interesting theory that seems to have merit on its face.
Would be interesting to test it a little. Also explore what other invisible doors Trump may try to open and what may be effective to improve the system and make the invisible visible and functional.
I think a lot of life is about those invisible doors. It's what most innovators and entrepreneurs are looking for, the neglected issues and opportunities that conventional wisdom ignores and so you can't learn them from other people or books. You just have to get into the ship and sail to the other end of the world and risk it to find them. The most interesting thing to me is how relentless he is about pushing on every possible wall to find them, and his willingness to violate any norm, and then get away with it.
I can give you some examples of limits he’s already testing:
* “We should send our bad guys to El Salvador” ie imprison American criminals in a foreign prison.
* He keeps saying he’s going to run for a third term. I think he is testing whether the system will actually stop him from trying.
* “We’re gonna get Greenland” - again he’s testing boundaries here. I think he really would take Greenland by force… If he thought he’d actually be allowed to do so and the rest of the government and the country would go along with it.
This is what he does. He says outrageous things as trial balloons. Most of the time he gets immediate pushback, but sometimes this reveals weaknesses in the opposition, issues on which they’re not really united or that turn out to be surprisingly popular with the public.
But did they?
Very intelligent insights. I consider myself a middle-of-the-road kind of guy, and I'll bet there are a whole lot of others like me who have become disenchanted with the Democratic Party. Trump seems to be doing a few things us middle-people like, but also some horrendous things, too. What's up with that? I think the transgender ideology dogma is injuring people, especially young people, and Trump seems to be trying to do something about that. But then he not just deports people, but sends them to a notorious gulag prison in El Salvadore. What's up with that,too? The Democrats or, maybe, even a new Party, needs to start paying attention to we middle-of-the-road people who appear consevative about some things and liberal about others. Isn't that the definition of Americanism?
Trump's tactics do seem to be an insurgent strategy. Like all reactionaries, the only arrow in his quiver is to work against an existing system without a proactive plan. Now that he is the system, all he comprehends is that (in his mind) the S.Ct. has told him he is above the law. So now he is on a mission to find where the new boundaries are. Since Trump has not had meaningful constraints so far, he is simply indulging his greed and his meglomania with no regard for logic, consistency or the well-being of his MAGA base.
Since Trump doesn't have to seek re-election because he imagines he will have a third term or because of the term limit, he is no longer constrained by the fear his MAGA base will bring the hammer down on him electorally. So, he just wakes up every morning and thinks "what can I get away with today?"
The interesting insight in what you said is he's implicitly looking to find the new constraints, but there are none to find. Which naturally creates uncertainty and chaos.