This Sustainable Life

The notes I read from:Missing messages on the environment we can learn from Churchill. I'll read from some of his most famous speeches, during WWII, then I'll play the close of one, from June 4, 1940 “We shall never surrender.”Some points:It's bad. It's as bad as it's ever been. There's no escape. Your life is in peril.It's huge. Nations have been wiped off the map. The world is at stake.We are dying. Many of us will die.We must act, ourselves. You, me, everyone. We must put ourselves on the line.We can't delegate or pass this off.We can make it. We must join together.We have done it before. We are a great people.We are humble. “We” are just an island.We have a purpose, not just defense.I will give it to you straight. No lies. No dancing around the issues.I'm in it with you.Despite the depth of our misfortune, we have the means to make it our finest hour. We will. Those who give the most will feel the greatest reward.You know what to do—everything you can.You help yourself by helping everyone.Churchill's contextMost of WWII as we know it hasn't happened yet and they don't know what to expect. Do they expect more, less, or what, we don't know.He's 65.He knows every person in the UK will listen to his speeches, as will probably nearly everyone who speaks English in the US, Canada, Australia, and the commonwealth.The King will. Roosevelt and Stalin will. Hitler will. Mussolini will.Nearly everyone remembers WWI and the tens of millions lost then.England once held the largest empire ever. Now they were an island. The Axis powers had destroyed most of Europe. Who knew if help might come from the US, Australia, India, or any place. Hitler was dominating with strategies, tactics, and equipment nobody knew how to defend against.Excerpts‘Blood, toil, tears and sweat’13 May 1940. House of CommonsChurchill's first speech in office“I would say to the House, as I said to those who have joined this Government: I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I can say: It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. This is our policy. You ask, what is our aim?I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be, for without victory, there is no survival.”‘We shall never surrender’4 June 1940. House of CommonsAfter Dunkirk.“Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous states have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.”‘Their finest hour’18 June 1940. House of CommonsTo the pilots of the RAF.“The battle of France is over. I expect that the Battle of Britain is about to begin. Upon this battle depends the survival of Christian civilisation. Upon it depends our own British life, and the long continuity of our institutions and our Empire. The whole fury and might of the enemy must very soon be turned upon us. Hitler knows that he will have to break us in this island or lose the war.If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science. Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will still say, ‘This was their finest hour.’”‘The few’20 August 1940. House of CommonsTo the RAF pilots.“The gratitude of every home in our Island, in our Empire, and indeed throughout the world, except in the abodes of the guilty, goes out to the British airmen who, undaunted by odds, unwearied in their constant challenge and mortal danger, are turning the tide of the World War by their prowess and by their devotion. Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.”Our contextNow consider our context regarding the environment. How many of these points sound true and how many has anyone shared with you? It's bad. It's as bad as it's ever been. There's no escape. Your life is in peril.It's huge. Nations have been wiped off the map. The world is at stake.We are dying. Many of us will die.We must act, ourselves. You, me, everyone. We must put ourselves on the line.We can't delegate or pass this off.We can make it. We must join together.We have done it before. We are a great people.We are humble. “We” are just an island.We have a purpose, not just defense.I will give it to you straight. No lies. No dancing around the issues.I'm in it with you.Despite the depth of our misfortune, we have the means to make it our finest hour. We will. Those who give the most will feel the greatest reward.You know what to do—everything you can.You help yourself by helping everyone. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Here is my second episode with guest Dan McPherson of Leaders Must Lead on race. Probably one more after this one.Say someone doesn't know something about race but wants to. If that person sees others talking about the subject get chastised and even fired, how can that person learn? If anything, won't they learn not to ask? If so, won't they remain ignorant? Doesn't ignorance contribute to racism.Dan and I discuss these questions and more. He shares some surprising personal stories of being attacked and more, as do I. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Everyone gets we have to change system, which means global economy. They think we have to start huge. If it's not big enough, it's not worth doing.History suggests otherwise, in particular Edwards Deming's results transforming Japan in the 50s, or the U.S. war efforts before that, or several American companies since.Kevin runs the Deming Institute, which trains people in the Deming philosophy and practice. Kevin speaks from experience as the grandson of Dr. Deming. They didn't start by doing big huge things. They started with a systemic perspective, understanding where and how to act. Kevin's personal project of changing light bulbs in his house illustrates how leading this way leads to results beyond what we see with just going big from the start.I won't like that I often felt slack-jawed at Kevin saying exactly what I've tried to share with others but they never get, but Kevin speaks with decades of experience. Actually generations. I also can't wait to start working with leaders and people in organizations who have approached and solved problems systemically, and who saw that they had to change industries and a nation for their personal benefit.What we need to to to reverse our environmental course!Call me crazy, but I see combining my sustainability experience and perspective with Deming company and leadership experience getting results like Japan did in the 50s and beyond.If Japan Can Why Can't We? is the name of the show that restarted Deming's influence in the US. I see the question as poignant today. I believe we can turn around as fast as they did, this time on sustainability.Let's do this.The Deming Institute Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Here are my notes I read from for this episode:Just say nodrugs winningTry telling smoker that cigarettes cause lung cancer and see if it stops.Doesn't. It takes work but rewardingTry giving more and more facts. They heard already.Now imagine Nancy Reagan was a smoker or cocaine user while saying just say noImagine she smoked or did drugs while saying not to.That's Al Gore, DiCaprio, everyone!The problem isn't hypocrisy. I can't stand people making environment into moral issue. I'm not good for not polluting. You live by your values as much as I live by mine. If you don't value stewardship I'm not good by your values. If you value it as much as I do, then fix your problem.The point is effectiveness. It doesn't work to lead Alcoholics Anonymous sessions with a fifth of gin half finished in your hand or weight watchers full of doof.DiCaprio, flying your whole film crew around the world when you lack snow because of global warming, can you see how you're leading AA while drunk? With your notoriety, you should have a legacy to last millennia. Instead, you undermine it. Al Gore and all the rest, same thing.Muhammad Ali as a conscientious objector. Now there's a man who acted with integrity, transcended sport, and become one of the greatest not athletes but humans of all time. We can learn from him. He knew standing tall meant getting on your knees, not flying first class and hiding it.I know, most don't want to change the world. You just want your 401k to clear. I didn't ask for back-to-back 500-year hurricanes. You didn't ask the science to predict 2 billion climate refugees this century and more. But those are our times.I didn't ask that we can do something about it, or decline, but we can.More smokers telling us not to smoke won't help, nor more alcoholics telling us to stop drinking, or polluters telling us to stop polluting.If you want to stand tall, you have to get on your knees. If you want to reach the mountain top, you have to climb, which means getting your knees dirty, meaning dropping the addiction to polluting.Because only from the mountain top can you see the promised land, a world I've seen where stewardship of nature and other people trumps self-serving excuses that you have no choice or baseless accusations that someone who acts has more time, money, resources, or privilege than you. Look deep and you'll see you have all the means you need, as does any addict to overcome their habits.I'm calling on you to lead yourself, not manage like Nancy Reagan. To lead, to find it within yourself, to dig deep, to see that how you lead others will be your greatest legacy. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A few months ago I hadn't heard the names William Wilberforce or Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Now they rank among my greatest influences. Eric Metaxas's biographies of these two men were among the main reasons. Once I read them, I had to meet Eric and bring his view here.Read the books, learn about the men, what they did, and the environments in which they did it.Few who spend time with me would expect me to find inspiration from a man whom I heard describe himself as a "Jesus freak" or strongly promote President Trump, whose policies I haven't seen increasing Earth's ability to sustain life and society, but those who know me well know my intense curiosity for people with unfamiliar views. Those who know me very well will find deep values of mine that resonate with Eric's beyond taking inspiration from Wilberforce and Bonhoeffer.I recorded a longer introduction than usual to recount my discovering Eric's work so you can hear more background there. Recording shortly before the election limited our recording time, meaning we covered only a fraction of what we could have. I hope this episode was the first of many.Eric Metaxas's home pageHis radio show Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

J. B. MacKinnon's book The Once and Future World influenced my view of nature as much as anyone's. I thought I knew what nature was, what we were trying to conserve or preserve, but I wasn't even close. I found his writing gripping and colorful. I'll link to a couple recordings I made that quoted the book at length.We've been talking about our work, his new book he's nearly finished, my book I've just started, and how he was thinking of acting on hisresearch personally.He was sharing so personally about the challenge he was considering for himself, impromptu, I asked if he would consider recording a podcast episode. We just jumped into it. Here's both of us unrehearsed, unprepared.I loved getting to learn the backgrounds of wildlife, Hawaii, all the things I read from Once and Future World, and how and why he foundout about them. I hope you're all also on your path to discover variety in food, clothing, community, and so on that our culture obscures and makes us feel backward about.Partly I'm impressed with myself at remembering those parts of his book unaided, but really that recall illustrates the power of the book and sadly what we've done to our world. But hopefully what we can restore. I'm always impressed with how fast nature rewilds when we take our foot off the gas. And how much we enjoy the surprising discovery of simple, sustainable living.J. B.'s home pageMy first video essay on Once and Future WorldMy second video essay on Once and Future World Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

No, it's not just a piece of cloth• Context◦ Mark Meadows and Ben Carson tested positive◦ US is spreading virus maybe most in world. White House more infections than Vietnam◦ In fact there are more people in Ben Carson with covid than in Vietnam.◦ Masks halt spread.◦ People say tragic that it's become political, but even so, it's just a piece of cloth. Just wear it.◦ "A mask is not a political statement, but it is a good way to start bringing America back together," Biden said on Monday. "The goal is to get back to normal as fast as possible."◦ From leadership perspective, couldn't be more counterproductive or for that matter insensitive and insulting◦ Leading people, influence, and persuasion depend on the person being led. You have to go where they are, not where you think they should be, where you are, where others are.◦ Requires empathy, which saying just a piece of cloth shows none of. On the contrary, generally shows the opposite -- you imposing your values on them despite not knowing theirs. Nobody likes their values misunderstood and then told what to do against those values.◦ Let's consider someone who views them as freedom issue. Have you considered their perspective?• Science◦ They know science works to some degree. They drive ICE cars and use computers.◦ They also know scientists make mistakes, that scientists and their results have been used for nefarious purposes, and that people retract their results. Even when right, scientists change opinions and regret past decisions.◦ Whatever your confidence in science, I have PhD in physics, several patents, I helped launch a satellite, and I work on sustainability. I like science.◦ I also know its limits. It doesn't give you answers. It gives you inputs that inform your decision-making process based on your values. Math and logic take you from your starting points, your axioms, to conclusions, but those starting points start outside science and math. Euclid started with a few axioms about points and lines. He can't prove them. He only shows what they generate. In fact, when they thought to change one, they got non-Euclidean geometry, one of the great advances of math.◦ My point is that you are using science as an input to your decision, but ultimately you're acting on your values. So are they. If you act like it's just science, you're neglecting that you are trying to impose your values on them.◦ Let's look at some things science has gotten wrong. Again, you may think now is different, but the scientists at the time didn't.◦ There's eugenics that supported racism, phrenology, thinking the earth was flat, thinking the earth was at the center of the universe. Even someone who rejects evolution knows that evolution evolved from Lamarck, which was wrong.◦ Einstein regretted that his work helped create the atomic bomb. Many scientists regretted or at least had second thoughts about contributing to the Manhattan Project. Even fighting Hitler and Imperial Japan, they got swept up to do something beyond what they realized.◦ This "beyond what they realized" is important. Many scientists and engineers don't consider the consequences of their work.◦ This neglecting to realize unintended side effect is a major thrust of my sustainability work. Most efforts at efficiency are net increasing pollution and waste.• Their perspective◦ I consider it a totally fair starting point, even if someone agrees with the science, to say "I see the science, but that's not the final word. It's an input to a decision-making process. Let's see where it leads."◦ From that perspective, someone saying it's just a piece of cloth sounds ignorant.◦ Where could it lead? If I don't empathize I get nowhere. If I empathize I see many concerns. One is that leftists want power. They don't do themselves what they tell others to do, even on science, so they probably have ulterior motives. Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio fly and pollute more than almost anyone while telling me to sacrifice. They don't believe it.◦ They may not realize it, but they're trying to concentrate power in the state and we've seen over and over where that leads -- Stalinism and all it results in. The people who started communism and all we fought in the cold war thought they were creating a utopia. They were naive and didn't see what they were creating.◦ Individual freedom protects us from such outcomes.• Your belief◦ You may disagree. I disagree, but if you want to lead, you have to meet them where they are. You think, "but they're wrong"? Do you want to influence them or not? They're human like you. You say it's just cloth, even if they disagree they should just wear it.◦ Well, just going where they are is less material than a piece of cloth. If you believe them wearing the cloth will save lives, then you empathizing will save lives. Imagine their world.◦ How do you address their concern that concentrating power, even if it saves lives, might result in a political outcome they fear?◦ If you don't, you're dismissing their values. From their perspective, they're considering more than you, not less. You sound ignorant.◦ How do you know they're wrong? Is it possible they're right? Did Marx expect Stalin?• How you sound◦ From their perspective, to say it's just a piece of cloth conjures up saying a yellow star or pink triangle was just a piece of cloth. They were just pieces of cloth.◦ You don't think you deserve comparison to Nazis? You don't think they've been compared to Nazis from people who sound just like you? Have you compared people you disagree with to Nazis? Even if you haven't, have you condemned people you agree with who did? If not, how is their comparison less warranted or less immune from condemnation -- from their perspective?◦ I'm not saying you have to agree with them, but if you want to influence them, show some empathy and compassion. Recognize that you may sound to them like an ignorant person who hasn't learned from an abundance of history, a tool of powerful forces or just naivete but who may be right in this one part but could be wrong and even if right may be sleepwalking into an often repeated historical blunder.◦ I don't see it that way, but at least I understand it.• You and science◦ Now let's look at you and your acting on science.◦ The science is overwhelmingly clear that Americans pollute and emit greenhouse gases far beyond sustainable limits. You almost certainly are polluting more than sustainable and you almost certainly communicate that people should pollute less.◦ Yet you aren't, yet you want industries to stop that mean huge sacrifices to others' lives but you aren't sacrificing.◦ From my perspective, your pollution is like not wearing a mask. What does it sound like to you if I say your flying for vacation is like not wearing a mask? You could go some place by train or even bicycle. When did you last order takeout or something from Amazon you knew would entail unnecessary packaging you paid for? When did you last buy a bottled beverage, yet humans lived on nothing but water (after mother's milk) for hundreds of thousands of years.◦ You probably push back and say things are necessary, a part of life.◦ You consider those changes too big for you, the domain of government and corporations, yet your action still make a nonzero difference. You can save lives, but you haven't acted.◦ My core message also says that when you change you'll find you like it more, but you don't believe me, otherwise you'd fly less than I do and create less garbage than I do, or pick up more litter than I do.◦ But you keep not wearing your mask and probably right now you're justifying in your mind why not to act.◦ For you to want to change your behavior, you first have to change your beliefs, your community because if you changed more than they did, you'd have to explain why you didn't visit your mom on the west coast or decline coffee or whatever beverage someone offered you in disposable bottles or cups.◦ I'm beyond saying it's just a piece of cloth. I'm telling you from experience of myself and everyone who has acted that you will love the change but you don't do it. You have your excuses that if I understood I would finally shut up about being so high and mighty, misunderstanding that it may be easy for me but it's harder for you.◦ Now you know what it feels like for them.• Your choice◦ Here's your choice◦ Option one: remain inconsistent. We all are in many ways. You can say they should follow your values when you want them to but you don't follow your own values when you feel it's too much burden.◦ Option two: you can accept that putting a mask on one's face is more than just a piece of cloth for them, just as reducing your environmental impact is more to you than what I say, and drop the pretense that science is all there is to it.◦ Option three: you can apply the values you apply to them about saving lives and if you think they should believe you, that you should believe me. I just decided one day to try a year without flying when I thought my life required it just as much as you think yours does. Same with avoiding packaged food.◦ You think you have it harder? You think it was any easier for me? Up yours! Acknowledge it's not just a piece of cloth from their perspective or follow the science yourself, dropping your arguments keeping you from doing what I do◦ Or keep telling others to do what you don't and push away the people you're trying to enlist to save lives. You're a part of this pattern too. Want to save lives? Empathize with people you disagree with.• The opportunity◦ The opportunity is to achieve both: developing the skill of empathizing with people you disagree with and to change your behavior to increase sustainability◦ Changing your beliefs is hard. You have to change a lot. When you do, regarding stewardship of nature, you'll find you like the change. Our ancestors lived in nature, not jet planes and plastic factories or dumps. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Michael Moss had already risked his life as a reporter in Baghdad, where he interviewed Islamic militants and exposing that US marines lacked body armor. He had also already won a Pulitzer prize for reporting on food. Then he wrote Salt Sugar Fat, which has become one of the core books on the field of the food and doof industries. For me, the title has become one word, SaltSugarFat, to which I often add convenience, SaltSugarFatConvenience.The book shows how the system evolved its incentives and motivations. They lead all players to create products and behavior that take advantage of our reward systems to induce craving, temporarily satisfy that craving while re-creating it, and continuing that loop.The book pulls you along with detailed stories, often insiders where you can't imagine how he learned the details. They combine to a greater story of our industrial food and doof system. The book was a number 1 NY Times bestseller and won awards including a James Beard award.In our conversation, he shared some back story not in the book, and we spoke about the environment and his values. I don't have to tell you how food touches everything in our lives. I see our beliefs and behavior toward food and doof as parallel to our beliefs and behavior toward the environment.Michael's book intrigues and fascinates at the sentence level. All the characters in the book rang true. Their stories were compelling. The results outraged me, but they also motivated me to keep away from their insidious work. Most of all it pointed to a playing field with incentives that motivate overproducing and getting people to eat more cheap products.Each person is doing what he or she thinks is best. No one intends it, but they create obesity, disease, helplessness, addiction. Beyond those easily measurable results, it leads the people targeted, to protect their identities, to promote their lifestyles as if they were born that way, attacking people who disagree as if they were attacking accidents of birth, like racism or sexism.But we aren't helpless, however effective doof engineers have become at manipulating and controlling us. SaltSugarFat helps us prepare. You'll also enjoy reading it. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From a leadership standpoint, acting on sustainability and the pandemic overlap.You probably see Ashish's name everywhere too. He's in the thick of it at the highest national level. He shares an inside view of the political happenings on responding to the pandemic. He also shares the emotional experience---the frustration at seeing people dying unnecessarily. I think you can tell that despite the numbers, he cares. You may hear me realized I spoke too glibly in stating the number of American depths.Most of our conversation covered the leadership vacuum responding to the pandemic as well as the environment in general. I believe you'll hear we're moving toward talking leadership strategy, the emotional challenge of leadership, and finding what works besides management.We coverAvoiding political polarization and engaging leadership from other areas than politics seem challenging.What opportunities exist for voices to get out there, either on the pandemic or the environment?How have we abdicated or lost our alternatives to lead to Washington DC or state or local government?I don't just mean exercising authority. Leadership doesn't require authority. We can lead in other ways than political representation.Ashish talked about debate. I've come to equate debate with provoking argument, as I alluded to. Instead, what stories can we tell? What images can we evoke? Is there a way to reach people to hear views they aren't in a way they'll appreciate after?This is the challenge. I focus on it in the context of sustainability. It applies equally in the pandemic response. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Why do I act on sustainability when everyone around me says there's no point?Faith.This episode shares a few words about faith. If you lack it, I think you'll prefer living with it, especially about things you care about. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.