Consequence & Probability

What’s the riskiest thing you did this week?

Maybe you crossed the street when the sign read, “Do not walk.” Risky? Technically. But if you judged the moment, it probably wasn’t a big deal.

That’s the essence of risk. It’s not just what could go wrong, but how bad it would be and how likely. Risk is the intersection of consequence and probability.

Think about an old boiler keeping your building warm in winter. It hums along quietly. Seems fine. But if it fails, the impact is massive. Low probability, yes, but high consequence.

It’s helpful to think of risk on an XY axis. You generally want to operate in life in the low-probability, low-consequence quadrant. Unless you’re doing it intentionally, you want to avoid high-probability, high-consequence. But the real problem is in mistaking one quadrant for another.

Because we confuse consequence with likelihood. And that confusion can be expensive.

Like when a handful of critics triggers a disproportionate response. You assume catastrophe. So you spend time, energy, and credibility neutralizing a threat that truly might have dramatic consequences… but with a miniscule chance of materializing.

This is fear overwhelming inquiry and analysis. Thus the key point is missed. Could those critics even pull off what would indeed be a worst-case scenario? If the probability is tiny, then no, and you’ve just spent valuable leadership capital on a paper tiger.

Calculate risk. Don’t assume it.

Get into the habit of evaluating risk. It’ll save you time, money, energy, and anxiety.

👇 Less than a minute on how to think clearly about risk, so you can lead better.

Artificial or Intelligent?

AI may soon render facts obsolete. Not because they cease to exist, but because, increasingly, they don’t hold the power they once did.

First, we stopped remembering. Search engines could answer any fleeting curiosity. Then came algorithmic echo chambers with customized news cycles, so we stopped questioning. Now, with AI, we may stop understanding altogether.

If we take the phrase "artificial intelligence” literally, as meaning intelligence that is not real but artificial, then maybe we open a new way of considering what it means for the future.

AI is shrinking the space between knowledge and information. So rather than generating new and better results, it may blur the essential distinction between the two—and that would, of course, be a loss from which we might never recover.

AI can pull up every answer. But not every answer matters. If you can surface any factoid in seconds, whether it’s right or wrong, do you ever really know it?

In very general terms, we are being trained to trust the confident voice of a machine, regardless of whether it’s right. And in doing so, we risk replacing discernment with dependence and facts with convenience.

But reality isn’t going anywhere. If someone stands on a skyscraper and says, “I believe I can fly,” I’m still betting on gravity every single time.

Leaders can no longer assume facts will speak for themselves or that truth will hold on its own. They must take deliberate action to ground their organizations (and themselves) in what is real.

Because facts are going to bend more than they ever have, and it’s up to today’s leaders to make sure the truth doesn’t break in the process.

Get the Question Right

Sending a survey without a clear purpose won’t clarify anything. But it’ll probably confirm that you weren't ready to field a stakeholder survey. I’ve seen organizations waste time analyzing data that doesn’t mean anything—mostly because folks started drafting questions before defining their challenge. If you don’t know what you’re trying to learn about your stakeholders, a survey won’t magically tell you.

Before you send another survey, take five minutes to read my article below. It breaks down what useful stakeholder research actually looks like—and how to avoid wasting everyone’s time (including your own).

With Appreciation

As we close out 2025, I’d like to thank the following people and organizations for continuing to lead with determination, creativity, and spirit—fighting for sustainability, a stable climate, and democracy at a moment in history when all are profoundly at risk.

Thank you, Brandon Kramer and Lance Kramer, for directing and producing “Holding Liat”—a film short-listed for an Oscar that tells a deeply human story through the difficult, unbearable reality of a couple taken hostage by Hamas militants in Gaza. And thank you to the courageous Beinin/Atzili family for inviting filmmakers into their lives during such a harrowing time.

Thank you to Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, California Governor Gavin Newsom, and Ceres CEO Mindy Lubber for standing firm—for being smart, strategic, and unflinching in the face of personal and institutional attacks. Your leadership defends not just policies, but the very principles of democracy and social progress.

Thank you to Peter O'Driscoll and the team at the Equitable Food Initiative (EFI) for conceiving, designing, implementing, and now taking internationally a systemic change in how we compensate farmers who grow specialty crops—and doing so in ways that is a win-win for farmers, for the retailers who sell their harvest, and for all of us who eat fruits and vegetables.

Thank you to George Mason University President Gregory Washington, who has stood strong and determined in the face of repeated and relentless attacks by the Trump Administration, and who continues to stand firm in defense of academic freedom and social justice.

“Thank you” seems like such an easy thing to say or write. But speaking it out loud evokes powerful emotions. When we find ourselves wondering, “What in the world can I, as one person, possibly do?,” make a list of three people. Write to them, text them, or call them. Tell them why you’re grateful. Be sure to tell them that you see what they’re doing and how it's making the world a better place. It will help them—and you.

That View Has Value

Have you ever wondered about the value of a clear day over the Grand Canyon?

That view you’re enjoying isn’t just beautiful. It’s a public good. And something like pollution from a nearby power plant would impede your enjoyment. The irresponsible commercial or industrial culprit should be penalized, no?

Public goods are meant to be shared. By definition, one person enjoying a public good doesn’t diminish another’s ability to do the same. Think of streetlights, public parks, the air we breathe, and, yes, the view from a canyon rim in a national park.

So when narrow-minded corporate actors distort or diminish the value of those shared resources—and don’t pay for their respective damage—it’s theft.

When new skyscrapers block a long-standing view, developers pay for air rights. Since big trucks wear down public roads at a much higher rate, they pay the Federal Heavy Vehicle Use Tax. That’s how we acknowledge disproportionate impact and preserve equity.

Yet too often, companies with a reductionist view of their social responsibility extract value from public goods without paying for it. And when we permit or encourage the privatization of a public good, it's essentially a corporate gift. And that is, simply put, stupid and wrong.

So while the transaction may be invisible, the impact certainly isn’t. And by the time we tally the true cost, it’s usually too late.

Watch the video to see what I mean.

Loving Karma

What a welcome break from the cascade of bad news!

Honored to have been invited to a screening of “Loving Karma,” the soon-to-be-released film from Andrew Hinton and Johnny Burke, who brought us the Emmy-winning documentary, “Tashi and the Monk.” And to have a chance to see and talk with the Monk himself, Lobsang Phuntsok!

The film poses a profound question that is also perfect for this moment: "What happens when suffering meets compassion?”

If you have the chance to see “Loving Karma,” I highly recommend that you do.

Trumpian Revenge

As if further evidence was needed of Trump’s vengeful character, his latest target is the 40+ million American citizens who don’t know where they’re going to get their next meal. The Trump administration has warned that the SNAP program will run out of money this week, because he wants to use it as a bargaining chip for negotiations on the government shutdown.

Most people on SNAP are seniors, kids, or people with disabilities. Could you survive on $6/day? Take 3 seconds to think about that. The average ‘benefit’ is $6/day. And we need a new ballroom at The White House?

Here’s a short explainer we made some years ago with the producers of "A Place at The Table."

NYU Center for Sustainability Business

In a moment when many institutions are drifting, one is staying the course. That’s because one leader had the insight and determination to build it right, including gathering a team and partners with both talent and diverse experience.

I’m in New York this week to honor a special kind of leader. Tomorrow marks the final Advisors meeting for the NYU Stern Center for Sustainable Business (CSB) under Founding Director Tensie Whelan.

Without diminishing at all the institutional support from NYU leaders, it’s fair to say that Tensie built the Center from scratch. No small feat in an era when sustainability is too often a slogan rather than a strategy. But Tensie’s always been the real deal. We first met in 2008 (I think), in Bangalore, India, as part of a meeting of the Unilever Sustainability Advisory Council. She was then about halfway through her time as President of the Rainforest Alliance.

When she stepped down in 2015, she invited me to serve on the CSB advisory board and I’ve seen how she and her team have turned a vision into a durable and respected institution—one now poised to continue undertaking first-class research and making the business case for sustainability under its new leader, Amy Skoczlas Cole.

All of this is happening against a darker national backdrop. While some companies retreat, and others reduce their voices to a whisper, the urgency of sustainability only grows.

Sustainability demands vision, commitment, transparency, and accountability. Thanks, Tensie, for all you’ve done and for showing us what leadership looks like.

Climate Emotions

#ClimateWeek is behind us. Now what? Everyone agrees the current climate narrative isn’t working. That has to change. And we’re on it.

The Multisensory Climate Center is a bold and exciting project we’re developing with Orfield Laboratories, Inc. The goal is to detect and scientifically measure how people feel about climate change, not just what we *think* we feel or know.

Because we don’t live through facts alone. We experience the world with all five senses—and with emotions we often can’t name, let alone explain. And while science is critical, emotions that are often unconscious drive behavior.

We know this. We feel this. We’ve seen it. We’ve lived it. Despite billions spent, award-winning films, and decades of reports, Earth still has a fever. The data hasn’t moved us—not at scale, not deeply enough.

Orfield Labs has spent more than five decades measuring people’s unconscious sentiments, the feelings our brains don’t detect but that powerfully influence our behaviors. Pause and read that again! Orfield operates a suite of custom-built labs to do this, including the “quietest place on earth.” No joke.

We’re currently laying the groundwork to design the first research space dedicated to measuring people's emotional responses to the climate crisis—before the brain can edit or rationalize the feeling. Because our brains often misread our emotions.

Our goal for the Center is to be immersive, educational, and, yes, entertaining and stimulating. It will enable us to generate and measure real, sensory-based insights into what actually moves people—across age, background, and belief.

Those insights could be the foundation for an entirely new kind of climate engagement, a narrative that's grounded not only in science but also in core feelings that can inspire action.

Awareness is not enough. We need to build a narrative that touches us at our core—if we aim to save our planet and ensure a livable future.

Explore our Multisensory Climate Center:
https://lnkd.in/ewmkW6KC

The Future is Coming, Like it or Not

We don’t lack climate science. We lack emotional understanding and narrative clarity. We need to listen to and understand the signals the future is sending us.

For more than a century, scientists and strategists have sounded the alarm. Millions are working toward a better future. The real question is whether we’re communicating and engaging effectively—and fast enough.

I dig into all this in my latest piece. Take a look.

Look Between The Boxes

Can you find yourself on your company’s org chart? Can you even find the org chart at the nonprofit you’ve worked at for years?

Most people don’t find them very useful because they don’t capture what really matters. The challenge for most organizations isn’t what’s happening inside the nicely organized little boxes, with those crisp, straight connective lines.

How well a sales or development office operates is obviously vital. Basic lines of reporting clearly need to be articulated. But for most organizations we’ve worked with, it’s what happens in the uncharted, in-between spaces that really tells the tale.

Power often stems as much from relationships and reputations as it does from positions on an org chart. Cross-functional teams, dotted-line reporting, and cross-training can be valuable.

We use org charts less to demarcate functions, reporting, or areas of responsibility and more to see what’s missing. Organizations recognize the importance of stakeholders, whether members of a community near a manufacturing facility, parents at a school, or a nonprofit working to level the playing field.

Yet responsibility for relationships with key stakeholders often bounces back and forth between marketing, government affairs, communications, or development.

Similarly, many foundations working to drive systems change lack expertise in defining critical elements of systems and how and why they function as they do. Various program officers or executives contribute bits and pieces of solid experience to the effort, but that’s not a systematic way to approach systems change.

Try this: Ask a few of the most experienced leaders in your organization, those who have been there for a very long time, to individually draw a basic org chart. Simultaneously, ask your most recent hire to do the same thing. If you then assess them, I’d wager you’ll learn a lot about the in-betweens—that white space that needs attention.

Would love to hear your results if you run the experiment!

Water & Externalities

AI is thirsty. By 2027, according to the World Economic Forum, AI could account for 1.1 to 1.7 trillion gallons of water withdrawal—a staggering figure that’s more than four to six times Denmark’s annual water withdrawal.

Communities near AI data centers are already feeling the strain. Families. Farmers. Local ecosystems. When AI data centers send the costs of water usage to other users, they are sending ‘externalities’ downstream, shifting costs to others who enjoy none of the benefits. Because many of the data centers force others to absorb one of the costs of a system designed without them in mind.

The idea here isn’t to slow innovation, but rather a call to lead it—responsibly, strategically, and with foresight. Because once trust dries up (much like the water), it’s hard to get back.

The moment demands corporate responsibility and accountability. As we build the future, we need to ensure we’re not draining the present.

Leadership & Playfulness

I’ve often rolled my eyes when people talk about listening to their inner child. But during the first evening session at Goals House during hashtag#ClimateWeek, I didn't.

Such wonderful insights from people actively and successfully engaging with children—such as Steve Burns, creator and host of “Blue's Clues”; Ellen Doherty, CCO of Fred Rogers Productions; Suzie Hicks, author and creator of “The Climate Chick”; and moderator Sage Lenier, founder of Futureline.

Each of them stressed how important empathy and a sense of wonder are if you’re going to be a leader—especially now, as we work our way through the overlapping political and climate crises.

The conversation brought back to mind one of the most fun (and perhaps strangest) connections I’ve ever helped make—creating the opportunity for “Ulitsa Sezam,” the Russian version of “Sesame Street.” We worked with the Children's Television Workshop to connect them with some of the world’s most talented claymation artists.

As an exercise in bridging differences, finding common ground, and listening carefully, it was a challenge. And it was joyful. And strategic.

Lots of meetings on serious topics have taken place in the gilded halls of the Kremlin. But never before had Big Bird pencils been given in return for red pencils emblazoned with the word ‘Kremlin.’ A fair trade of pencils for pencils.

A big part of being a leader is being able to inspire, to generate enthusiasm, and to show what can be accomplished. And that needs more than a spreadsheet. Sometimes, the best way to lead through complexity is to remember how to play.

Arguing with a Rock

If you measure business success only on a quarterly basis, you’re working with a calendar that is itself becoming outdated. Sustainability demands a different kind of timekeeping.

Deloitte, EY, and others are experimenting with scenarios that look 50 or 70 years ahead, asking what the future might say back to us now—if we could listen. That’s a useful exercise for leaders running organizations that don’t have expiration dates.

Yet, traditional Wall Street investment metrics still orient around 90-day increments, choosing short-term earnings over long-term ecosystem sustainability. That may work for a while for The Street. But it doesn’t work for the planet. Traditional investor expectations and mindsets cut against making progress on stabilizing the climate and planet.

Nature doesn’t function on a quarterly basis. Trees don’t grow on a schedule set by analysts. Forests regenerate across decades, not fiscal years. And climate systems aren’t interested in our deadlines.

Paul Polman understood this as CEO of Unilever. He pulled the plug on quarterly earnings calls. He refused to be evaluated on a timescale that had nothing to do with sustainability or long-term value creation for stockholders and stakeholders. He made the long-term visible—operational, not theoretical.

To me, the most powerful definition of sustainability is also its simplest: “Take only what you need. Leave the rest.” It’s a principle that acknowledges interdependence across generations—and the importance of restraint.

Meanwhile, the deniers are still debating whether climate change is “real.” They might as well be arguing with a rock. Geological time doesn’t care what we think. It will continue, with or without us. The only thing we can influence is how we act—and how our actions shape the world around us.

We won’t bend nature to meet our quarterly goals. We either align with its reality, or we pay the price.

Extraction is a Dead End

Finance and soil have more in common than we think.

On Sunday, I attended a small, fascinating conversation during hashtag#ClimateWeek on how to redirect financial flows into regenerative agriculture—and the many challenges of doing so.

The panel was organized by Kat Taylor, Chair of the Board of Directors for TomKat Ranch Educational Foundation and Beneficial State Bank; and it featured Zachary Ducheneaux, former USDA Farm Service Agency administrator; Philip Taylor, Ph.D., founder of Mad Agriculture; and Charley Cummings, CEO for Walden Mutual Bank; and it was wonderfully moderated by Jose Corona, Chief Agricultural Business Officer for the Agricultural Platform Collective and the Office of Kat Taylor.

It became clear to me over the course of the morning that traditional finance is extractive. Just like conventional agriculture.

Loans are structured to penalize, not support. Miss a payment? You’re out. Ask for forbearance from a traditional lender, over the slow months when revenues inevitably decline? Nope. Have your interest rate lowered when you show success over time, so you can continue to grow? Not likely. The structure doesn’t set recipients up to thrive.

Industrial agriculture too often does the same. It mines the soil for nutrients instead of farming in a way that replenishes and regenerates. It depletes rather than provides.

How do we pick up the pace in building regenerative systems, both financial and agricultural?

And maybe we don’t have to dispense with capitalism entirely, but we can reimagine it. Early entrants in this space are designing financial tools to mimic regenerative food systems—supportive, relational, and adaptive. We can redirect capital flows so that all the stakeholders in our food and agriculture systems share both the risks and rewards.

Climate Change Narrative Ain't Working

In New York City for hashtag#ClimateWeek and especially glad to be here with Emma Orfield Johnston of Orfield Laboratories, Inc. Unique in the world, Orfield Labs measures unconscious emotions across the sensory spectrum, and they’ve been perfecting the methodology for five decades.

I’ll admit, I’ve had mixed feelings about hashtag#ClimateWeek in the past. The climate crisis isn’t a once-a-year theme—and I know important climate conversations are happening every day—but talk is the first step. It can build trust, lead to ‘ah ha’ moments, generate ideas, and so forth.

Under Trump’s second regime, we know policy is heading south. Fighting for policy change now is a Sisyphean task. But it’s also an opportune moment to rethink our message and narrative.

We have to engage the public in wholly different ways to have a chance of maintaining a stable climate. And time is not our friend.

I keep seeing the gap between what we know and how we communicate—about food, agriculture, climate, and other supremely complex systems. We desperately need a new climate narrative. We need to speak to people’s emotions and tell powerful, memorable stories.

We still have a chance to recalibrate. If you want to help design this new narrative, let me know.

Act Now. It Matters.

Harry Rhodes asked a good question about what we can do to stop the slide into a police state. If an election, the traditional remedy in democracy, is no longer likely to resolve the challenge, then your essential question remains. While there is no single answer, some thoughts below.

First, we must be sure we diagnose the problem accurately. Just as Tylenol is not an appropriate response to a cancer diagnosis, neither is hoping that the 2026 election will stop the dismantling of democracy in America.

At an individual level, we each must adopt or revive a mindset of empowerment. We must push back against the propaganda that would have us see ourselves as powerless. In our own heads and hearts, we must believe that we have efficacy. Because we do.

With the privilege many of us enjoy comes power. Many of us are educated, articulate, and connected in myriad ways to tens, hundreds, or thousands of people. Whether through an alumni group or our Facebook followers, whether at a work meeting or a cocktail party, we cannot be mute. Words matter. We must speak the truth as we understand it. There is vast space between silence and argument.

Silence begets silence. Sharing creates relationships.

At the level of community, we must remind ourselves of the groups of which we are already members. That goes well beyond geographic communities, property associations, and so forth. But it does also include the police precincts within which we live. Go visit the local police station, empathize with the challenges they face. Make clear that we support local policing, not federal power grabs. Lots of police stations have community relations officers.

Most of us work, have professional affiliations, and are maybe part of a society or an association. Go to a meeting. Express your thoughts and feelings about how what is happening politically is going to affect work, life, and culture. Wear a t-shirt, hold a sign, get a bumper sticker.

Of course, none of those individual actions will matter; that’s true. But collectively, citizens showing other citizens that they have each other’s backs is incredibly important. It is the power of citizens groups that change the world. In Boston, “we the people” had a Tea Party. In Selma, “we the people” marched across the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

And still, that is not enough, I know. Times are different; the media ecosystem is not what it was. Will the second ‘No Kings’ march planned for October 18 fix the problem? Of course not. But facing united state and city leadership, strong legal push back, and citizens preparing to unwelcome federal agents, Trump did back off sending troops into Chicago. At least for now.

While many of us may be largely insulated from the day-to-day horror of ICE snatching people off the street, make no mistake that our world is changing minute by minute. The culture, the arts, the public spaces we take as a given, like the national parks; how we teach, where we travel, the stories we tell our children; our mental health and sense of security are all in flux.

And this is only the beginning. Decisions in years past about whether to get a flu shot are going to look namby-pamby as we witness the disintegration of the entire scientific basis for public health. The violence done to language, the hateful speech that echoes across society, the intentional lying, extortion, and gaslighting surely affects us all.

So, there is not one thing to do, but if every one of us did one thing, it would make a difference. Would it ‘fix’ the problem? No, but it could mitigate some of the damage.

If you’re an accountant, volunteer to help a local nonprofit work its way through the collapse of traditional funding sources.

If you’re a zoologist, host a monthly potluck to share what you know about how other species manage isolation, and what we know about the importance of communications.

If you’re an arborist, make sure you read the most recent scientific literature on communications between trees and share it across your company or with your clients.

You get the point.

What’s your profession or passion or special skill?

Clarity in Communication

Our refreshed website is amazing, perfect, and phenomenal! Ok, well, that’s a bit much. But I’d love to know what you think.

A bit like the cobbler not noticing that his children’s shoes look worse than those of his customers, a few months back we had to reflect and ask ourselves: “Are we communicating clearly about the communication services we offer?

The newly refreshed site describes not just the suite of services we offer to mission- and purpose-driven organizations, but also the frameworks that make what we offer different from other strategy and communications shops.

Part of that difference comes from the perspective we gained in the USSR and former Soviet Union, helping companies for 17 years find their way forward amidst historically disruptive changes.

Whether here or there, there’s no one-size-fits-all solution. But change is inevitable. And leaders and organizations need to accept that business as usual is a form of denial.

Are you going to lean into the change and derive energy, innovation, and new successes from that? Or are you resisting, being drained by the relentlessness of the changes, and letting opportunities slip away?

For one organizational example, Resources for the Future realized some years back that its tremendous research and insights were not enough. As part of creating its first-ever comms team, we devised ways to help RFF present analysis of extremely complex issues in straightforward ways. We also managed the refresh of its website.

On the issue of climate change, for another example, we executive produced the film “Hope in a Changing Climate” and set up discussion groups around the world to spread the message that agriculture had to be part of the solution to this global threat. And that is becoming ever more clear today.

Whether working with the Equitable Food Initiative (EFI) to demonstrate the power of its transformative and systemic approach to empowering farmworkers or with Greyston Bakery in Yonkers to share its Open Hiring™ practice, the connective thread that runs through our work is helping organizations see change clearly and successfully navigate through uncharted territory while staying on mission.

We have changed the look of our digital entryway, but not our focus on change. If we can be a resource for you today, let’s talk.
https://lnkd.in/eNijuBjK

Is this Rain or ROIT?

Many organizations act as if communications is just about delivering the right message. Say it clearly, say it confidently, repeat it enough, and the job is done.

But communication isn’t a broadcast. It's about building a connection.

Take the concept of “risk.”

To a financial analyst, risk might mean volatility in the markets. To a farmer, it’s weather, drought, and disease. Same word. Completely different meaning. If you want to invest in regenerative agriculture, or organic farming or AgTech, you need to bridge this gap really fast—or your transaction costs are going to go through the roof.

Step one is accepting that the gap is real. You and your partners or stakeholders may really be speaking different languages. And it’s not like you can just hire an interpreter as if you needed help going from Chinese to Spanish.

Successful communications are sticky. When we guide communications folks, we often ask, “What’s the most important part of effective communications? What is the key to making a message stick like Velcro?”

Tell us what you think and we’ll share back what we hear.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics

You know that feeling when you’re leaning back in a chair, it seems to be almost magically balanced on just two legs—and then there’s the flash of panic when you realize it’s not?

I’ve been feeling that a lot recently—a profound cognitive dissonance, living between two worlds which seem utterly incompatible. The leaders we work with also report being caught in a balancing act between “staying the course” and feeling like there’s nothing usual about business and work today.

• Although Washington, DC, has less total crime per capita than places like Detroit, Memphis, and Houston, we need National Guard troops from West Virginia and South Carolina to keep our streets safe? Make no mistake, this is a practice run to demonstrate and normalize President Trump sending guard units from Republican-lead states to intimidate Democratic leaders in other states.

• For most folks, watching paint dry is more interesting than reading Bureau of Labor Statistics reports, yet the leader of an agency—trusted and relied upon by leaders across the political spectrum—was fired because July’s monthly employment numbers didn’t follow Trump’s narrative. Killing this messenger bodes ill for those of us in the real world who have grown accustomed to believing that we don’t live in a house made of sand.

• World-class research is being stifled at the Environmental Protection Agency, National Institutes of Health, and myriad other agencies; findings from which have girded our lifestyle, culture, and economy—from the food we eat to the medicines we produce, from weather forecasting to maintaining our national parks.

Facts are the enemies of fraudsters. But whether you’re leading a business, running a foundation, or guiding a nonprofit through turbulent times, your mission, your strategy, and your day-to-day decisions are grounded in a fundamental understanding of reality. Like gravity, core facts just are. They’re not political.

Emotions count too—a lot, actually. But without real data, accurate statistics, and honest analysis, we’re awash in meaningless numbers.

And that’s the goal.

When everything is political, when no facts can be trusted, we lose our grip on reality. Can’t happen here? It’s an exaggeration?

Maybe. But maybe not. I was in the Soviet Union when high school history exams were cancelled across the country. Because they didn’t know how to grade them, having smothered historical truths with propaganda and lies.

And today it’s not just about history, but about our common future. Like a king, Trump believes he has the right to override constitutional parameters set for the Census and order a new one. He wants to lay a national curator at the Smithsonian Institution because it’s “OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our country is, how bad slavery was.” And he wants the right to rig congressional elections because he won the presidency.

It’s hard but we need to stay balanced on the see-saw between fact and fiction. We need to remember what normal is amidst a massive effort to normalize the outrageous. We need to really support each other—and those who may not be part of our inner circle but are also experiencing profound cognitive dissonance or worse. We need to guard against creeping self-censorship.

We need to speak the truth. A lie is a lie. What is illegal is illegal. Extortion is extortion. We can support the Smithsonian and make clear that if forced to engage in a historic cover-up, they will do so not by removing objects or materials but by covering them up. Literally, with canvas. Or maybe with a tapestry of American flags.

Photo by Andrew Harnik