Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts

Square One


Who’s got kids? Some of you do, some don’t. For those who don’t, are you at least familiar with the general concept of children? You know, they start very small and, over the course of several years, get bigger and amass more knowledge and eventually become adults.

Well that’s a grand arch, isn’t it? We’re definitely glossing over some details here.

Not accounting for biology, what happens in between childhood and adulthood? Most of it could be characterized as choices and learning.

For those of you with kids, particularly toddlers, you’ve probably noticed that they periodically regress or disintegrate or fall apart. It could be an illness or temper tantrums or moodiness or withdrawal. It’s perfectly natural. Kids grow fast, so fast that you can watch this phenomenon unfold. An attitude or biological attribute or mental state no longer serves the child and they naturally shed it for a more appropriate form. Whatever inner structure was propping them up previously simply goes away and with no support, things fall apart. This passes and parents are relieved at the return of their little bundle of joy.

This concept is applicable to so many things--political maturation, families, organizations and businesses, governments and societies, etc. This is the basis for spirals (this link can take you to a few different spiral examples). Check out THEE’s version of this metaphor if you like.

Most period-->transition-->period-->transition-->period cycles don’t happen as fast as they do in children so they aren’t as directly observable. And of course, there are differences. When a society falls apart, there is no parent figure to catch it and coax it to a state of stability. That’s up to the members of that society.

But THEE doesn’t begin with spirals. Actually, spirals are quite deep in THEE and a lot has to be discovered before any spirals can be formulated. This blog, you, and I got started somewhere in the middle of THEE--or maybe even closer to the end. You see, I started this blog talking about The Spiral of Political Maturation because I, personally, am interested in this stuff and like many, many people, I am quite flabbergasted at the current political/social paradigm. Essentially, I thought I could hook some readers while exploring my own interests. And if that isn’t enough for you, please feel free to send me an email or post a comment and we can discuss anything posted in the blog in more detail. And who knows? Maybe I’ll make my way back to the Spiral of Political Maturation (and there is actually quite a bit before and after the Spiral of Political Maturation in the Politics framework).

Starting next week, we’re starting from the very beginning--you. We’re going back to childhood, if you will, so we can break ourselves down and see what’s at the core. What happens to you when you decide to do something? What happens to the world around you when you decide to do something? How do you make the best possible decision? Are you free, constrained, or both?

If you follow long enough, hopefully, I’ll be able to illustrate how the answers to these questions are connected to the social and political events that seem so much larger than our individual selves. There is a connection, and not a metaphorical one--a real-world connection. I’ll give you one clue: at the origin and destination of any society and any government, there lies the individual. A group doesn’t choose. A lot of individuals choose.

But I have to stop there.

Tune in next week for a blog about you.

Reflections On the Political Framework

“Any change, even a change for the better, is always accompanied by drawbacks and discomforts.”
-    Arnold Bennett (British novelist, playwright, critic, and essayist, 1867-1931)

In the last few blogs, we’ve been discussing political maturation in the West. It’s been a crazy ride! It’s sometimes a fun exercise to contemplate the course history has taken this particular culture and what’s in store, a little brain candy. And of course, this blog and THEE tend to avoid details but rather, they focus on the larger scope, the grand arch of social and political motion through history--hence the name, “The Big Picture.”

When we left, the West had made the transition from Plutocratic Pluralism to Conventionalism. After Conventionalism comes Transcendentalism, then Communalism, and finally Participative Pluralism. I considered continuing this series to include these socio-political modes but decided against it as they are quite speculative and still but a distant glimmer in the West’s future, close enough to imagine but likely nothing anyone reading this will ever experience. However, I highly encourage anyone who is interested in learning more about what characterizes these modes and what they may look like to explore them further here on the THEE website.

Instead, I thought I would just decompress, debrief a bit about how my thinking and writing about this topic has affected me. It has definitely had an influence, and that’s great. I consider it very encouraging that I can notice a shift in myself and my way of thinking. Any honest inquiry can only be undertaken with true openness and willingness to put aside one’s pre-conceived notions, biases, and prejudices.

THEE has a way of speaking to you. It might not say something specifically, but will plant a seed with far-reaching implications in your mind. WK, THEE’s creator once wrote me in regards to THEE inquiries, “It is possible you will find certain topics uncongenial/difficult for some inner reason… It is a feature of THEE.  Working on it is a bit like looking into a mirror.”

I did indeed find things that were disagreeable initially. As an American with strong ties to Europe, I had always thought of the next step in our political maturation as something towards a more developed social welfare state. I thought that humanities ills were only curable with strong oversight. I thought that the role of government was to take care of its people. This is blind idealism. It would be nice, in a perfect world, I suppose.

This particular THEE inquiry has made real for me the old saying, “Power corrupts, and ultimate power corrupts ultimately.” We cannot even fault our politicians for their corrupt ways. What else would anyone do in their position? They have numerous incentives to continue their corruption and increasing their powers in the name of “social welfare” only gives a larger, more complex, and less transparent mechanisms with which to practice their corruption.

I saw recommendations in THEE such as dissolving central banks and I thought in horror, “How would we regulate our currency? How will we compete globally? What about my economy and my place in it? We’ll be slaves to the amount of gold we can extract from our mountains!” Then I came across this: “Psychosocial Reality is in Control: When values and institutions of a particular mode have not yet emerged within a society, it is almost unthinkable that they could ever exist.” Follow the link for more context, but the point is this:

All of this is going to change--and probably sooner than later. This society that we all depend on, that we all work so hard in to succeed and advance, is transient. We tend to think that everything goes on the same forever even though all of history says otherwise. I recently read that the Mayans predicted that in the year 4772 AD, people would be celebrating the anniversary of the coronation of their great king Pakal. Who’s that?

Our monetary system may fall apart, our government may collapse, and our global economic position may slide to one notch above Zimbabwe. Who knows about specifics? One thing is certain: the current state of the West will not, cannot continue as is. But through it all, people will just carry on. They will weather this social/political transition just as their ancestors have weathered every social/political transition in history (and there have been many). So in a strange and frightening way, it’s all going to be OK.

Ideology: The Red Herring

I was killing time on Facebook (as so many of us do). I have quite a few politically-minded “friends” and I was following a rather long thread of a heated debate on ideology. There was a lot of back and forth about how Republicans in the U.S. would, if elected to power, destroy the country or that President Obama wasn’t really a Democrat but actually a moderate Republican. Someone wrote: “Libertarianism is the stupidest thing since Nazi fascism.”

To many who read this, none of it will make sense. That’s ok. It doesn’t make sense anyway.

It struck me at how this very conversation was actually an outstanding example of one of the most fundamental and defining characteristics of Western society. As we have discussed, plutocratic pluralism is a society of numerous groups, many of them in conflict with each other for the power and resources of a society.

The western democracies are masters of ideological manipulation. This is nothing new of course. Every regime change, coup, revolution, or cultural paradigm shift comes with it some ideology. The human race is quite familiar with ideology and it seems that its persistence would imply that it has some use. I think it does.

If we go back to 400 BC or so, Plato was talking about “forms.” A form could be truth or justice or virtue or freedom or some other ultimate value. Many of his discussions were an attempt to define an ultimate value with what now seem like cliché questions such as: What is beauty? What is truth?

If they do indeed seem cliché, it’s somewhat paradoxical. All of these ideologies--libertarianism, socialism, communism, capitalism, etc.--might as well be a Socratic line of inquiry. They are all the pursuit of an ultimate value. One might think that the only pathway to economic justice would be socialism. Others might think that we can’t find truth except through Islam. Still others say there is no freedom until libertarianism prevails.

I shrug my shoulders. Look at the set of values and institutions generally found in privileged pluralism. The next page, privileged pluralist ethos, sums up the point I am trying to make: “…I am not interested in the particular intellectual garb that existing political elites may inherit or choose to wear at any point in time or in any particular culture.”

Incidentally, every stage in the spiral of political maturation outlines the values and institutions of that stage.

Still, as many of us are currently starting to understand the fundamental problems of plutocratic pluralism, we wish to see it changed. In our desperation, we look to what we perceive as a different ideology. In the U.S., Democrats/liberals/progressives view the country as hard-core free market capitalism that needs more regulation, more oversight, and more government control. They look to socialism. Republicans/conservatives/Tea Partiers view the country as already too socialist with far too much government intervention and a skewed sense of morals. They look to religion or maybe libertarianism.

Which is it?

Both, neither. The problem is not ideology it is our political institutions: i.e. plutocratic pluralism just now. If we are frustrated and we want to see a change, it would be more useful (though perhaps not as intellectually or emotionally satisfying) to look to the next stage of social development which, at this time in history, would be conventionalism.

Conventionalism will not be a triumph of any ideology, old or new. It would, like every other manifestation of society, indicate that certain values and institutions were emerging and changing our politics. A short list of those is: moderation, equality, an emphasis on social consensus, and an acceptance of public choice.

I am not going to sway any passionate believers here. I know that. However, I highly encourage any readers to take some time to look into the spiral of political maturation. If you have already, take another look. Its scope is staggering. With brilliant simplicity, it manages to put aside the biases of history and any particular culture and actually examine, objectively, societies and their evolution over time. You will find that there really is understanding and truth here.

The Future of the West

What does the future hold? We can deduce and we can imagine.

In the last few blogs, we examined social realities in our political life. Using the spiral of political maturation we named them and classified them and identified that the West is embarking on a transition--from Plutocratic Pluralism to Conventionalism.

What exactly the next stage of the West’s development will look like is largely speculative, but there are some modern societies from which we can draw inferences and many characteristics that we can safely assume will mark a conventionalist society.

In the end-stages of Plutocratic Pluralism, the people have grown weary of their government’s lack of concern for their well-being; they won’t stand for the widespread corruption and self-serving public policies that ultimately bankrupt their countries. The people finally realize that democracy is a buzzword with no real meaning in their society and that politicians and the elite, in their lust for money and power, have ushered in a cataclysmic, systemic crash.

The crash, hopefully, reveals government for what it really is--an entity of the people, a projection of, created by and for the people, with no power and no money and no legitimacy without the consent of the people. This realization comes with it both hope and despair. With it, people realize that there is no one to blame for their social ills but themselves, as they knew the nature of their government all along and only stood up for change after everything had fallen apart. Still, a new society and a new future await, the nature of which has the potential to force policies for overall good.

To use a Hegelian model, if Plutocratic Pluralism is the thesis, Conventionalism is the anti-thesis. Where decisions were made in a top-down fashion, the lack of trust in politicians, the prevalence of accessible communication technology, and a new outlook towards democracy could result in the opposite--a bottom-up decision process.

Rather than policy coming from the halls of power in capital cities, they will come from living rooms and café patios as psycho-social reality becomes one where widespread political participation is an accepted and reinforced social convention.

We can see examples of modern societies where this is, on a small scale, already the case. In Switzerland, referendums may be held for even the smallest and seemingly most insignificant decisions. Recently, the Swiss people just voted to expel foreign criminals from their country. However, in most Western democracies, despite paying lip-service to democratic ideals, the political elite prefer for most decisions to be made centrally and without consulting the citizenry.

This is, of course and, as the article points out, extremely frustrating to the political elite in surrounding European countries who are affected by Swiss popular decisions and probably cry out to their Swiss counterparts, “You know, you can just tell them what to do!” There is evidence of this in the fact that when referendums are held in EU countries that do not amount to the benefit of the political elite, they are held again until, after much rhetoric and mass media-supported propaganda, the desired result is achieved.

Iceland is attempting to become a Conventionalist society. After complete economic collapse in 2008, Iceland was under pressure to take the route traveled later by some fellow European countries (Ireland, Greece) and privatize their banking industry, take massive IMF bailouts, impose crippling austerity measures, and essentially put their people on the hook for enormous debts accrued by financial and political elites. Icelanders wouldn’t have it, though, and nearly the entire country took to the streets until officials had no choice but to reject outside pressures and now, a new Icelandic constitution is being written online by the people themselves. It is possible, and even likely, that Iceland will ultimately cave to these outside pressures, but we can at least observe a twinkle in the distance of the West’s move towards Conventionalism.

Participation will be key in a Conventionalist society. Determining the course of a nation is a tireless endeavor and politics is messy and incredibly inefficient. People may find themselves exhausted by the constant, relentless decisions that confront them. The urge to return allowing others to make decisions will likely be strong, risking a return to the existence of political elite who, by nature, will serve themselves before they serve the greater society.

Other problems arise in Conventionalism beyond democratic exhaustion: we may see a tyranny of the masses when referendums after referendum are decided by the majority, minority groups become consistently marginalized.

This serves to illustrate that no system is perfect. The spiral and societies are in constant motion, ever-evolving and building on the lessons of previous generations. We are an endlessly fascinating, inherently flawed yet intrinsically beautiful species whose history and future are equally exciting.

A Transition

At the end of our last blog, we talked about the Western democracies being on the cusp of a transition from a society of plutocratic pluralism to conventionalism.

Let’s examine a bit more what that transition will look like, what to expect, and why it is needed.

In truth, it’s already begun. One of the tell-tale signs is the public’s general distrust and dissatisfaction with their political system. This has already been going on for quite some time. Some argue that in the United States, this began with the Vietnam War and President Nixon’s infamous Watergate scandal. However, it is becoming markedly more concentrated. The general public in the Western democracies tends to view their government as the antagonist in a socio-political drama, keeping secrets and acting in contrast to the will of the people and in its own self-interest. This is not paranoia, it’s true.

Much of Europe, for example, has been racked with sustained protests, particularly in Greece, Britain, Portugal, Italy, and Spain. The Greek and British protests have been especially violent. They protest what they see as a government that is misrepresenting what it can offer to the people.

The public was told that they would receive a wide array of benefits from health care to retirement or even cash and food if required. However, policies mandated by international institutions and globally-centralized banking organizations have resulted in
sweeping austerity measures. People can’t afford to address their health concerns, their homes are taken from them, and they go hungry--and all of this in the “developed world.”
It is no wonder people are protesting or even revolting. (Refer to the previous blog, “What it is That People Want” for a discussion of the public’s mistake in these matters. Don’t fall into the trap of pointing fingers.)

Governments and similar institutions, much like living organisms, are instilled with a strong survival imperative. If they feel threatened, they will fight back. An economic calamity and the subsequent popular uprising (and we’re talking millions of people taking to the streets) will only result in more and more desperate attempts by government officials to retain power. On one hand, they will pass sweeping legislation in hopes of appeasing the people, probably overcompensating. An example might be where there was little regulation over financial institutions; these institutions would quickly become over-regulated to the point of paralysis. On the other hand, they will take desperate measures to control the population. This is already happening, of course. Examples in the U.S. include the Patriot Act and now, legislation has been passed that will give the U.S. military carte blanche to detain citizens indefinitely without access to due process if they are considered “terrorists.” Unsurprisingly, the definition of what is and what is not a terrorist is quite vague. American totalitarianism is not a metaphor.

It will go far beyond this though. A short list of likely actions: increasing invasion of privacy, identity control, restriction on movement, censorship, limitation of the press, a banning of public demonstration, the creation of special police forces with ever-increasing power leading eventually to martial law, hyperinflation, forceful prevention of access to banks, and much more. This becomes even scarier when one realizes the range and scope of information technology.

Perhaps counter-intuitively, the public will also fight against a collapse of their government despite the fact that it is clearly not working and their governments are antagonizing them outright. (For more, refer again to the previous blog, “What it is that people want”) The reason for this is that all endeavors exist within the current psycho-social reality. Everyone’s hard work (or lack of hard work) is based on the existence and functioning of their socio-political system. If it collapses, then what? Essentially, everybody wants a piece of the pie and how do we get it if there is no pie? Beyond that, people fear change, they fear the unknown. A transition is both of these things. By this point, however, the events unfolding are beyond anyone’s control.

The only thing that will effectively give the public and the politicians the incentive to realize the need for real change is an epic socio-political-economic disaster. This is indeed a frightening prospect for all but is absolutely a necessity--and it will surely be a dark period in human history. However, when the people working in the (then-failed) government’s enforcement agencies realize that they too have been hoodwinked, when they realize that they are in the same boat as the people that they find themselves at odds with and the smoke clears, Western democracies will find themselves in Stage 5: Conventionalism…….

Social Stages: An Introduction

We live in interesting times, for sure. No dull moments here.

The average person generally sees themselves as little more than an observer of the larger political, economic, and social events unfolding around them. They hope for the best, of course, as these events will no doubt affect every individual in some way or another. But so many of us, regardless of our philosophical leanings, probably accept a certain amount of determinism when it comes to macroeconomics, macro-politics, and the larger society of which we are a part of and think very little about our place in ever-evolving social stages.

The purpose of this blog, and the next two, are to show that this is not at all the case. We, as a body of people, very much have control over the course of our own political and social development.

A THEE inquiry into the overall advancement of political developments has uncovered certain social stages. These stages effectively describe the ongoing relationship between people and their governments.



It all begins with pluralism, the first socio-political structure in which a certain, relatively small group of people find themselves in control of a society’s resources--wealth, land, divine rights, etc. Plural refers to the fact that many groups vie for power and wealth in society. For some, the struggle is successful--be it the monarchy or the military or the church. These elites consider themselves separate and greater than the “unwashed masses.”

This first stage of pluralism, or privileged pluralism as it is identified in THEE, can be found in many societies today such as Egypt’s military government, but to offer a few well-known historical examples, there is feudal Europe, the priesthood-theocracy of ancient Egypt, and communist Russia. Unless you found yourself among the elite in any of these societies, it would not likely be a pleasant time in which to live out one’s life.

In all political endeavor--which is essentially the drive and action to gain access to a society’s wealth and power--there is exploitation. In privileged pluralism, the elite classes are generally the least productive. They see themselves as the administrators of a society’s wealth where non-elites are the actual producers, be they farmers or artisans or laborers or merchants, and this administrative position entitles them to the bulk of the wealth.

For those vocal protestors who see through the inherent unfairness of the system, there is always an infrastructure ready to quash their voice (police, paramilitary forces, military, etc.). History is rife with examples of this. Google “Tiananmen Square Tank Man” for a particularly disturbing example of this. The elites justify their actions with the need to keep social order and/or their self-proclaimed right to power.

To further maintain their place in power, the elites control information. An historical example would be the Council of Nicaea in the 2nd century in which Catholic officials decided what would go in and what would stay out of the Bible.

Does any of this sound familiar?

Check out this recent example of what I'm talking about--or the fact that if you fly to Beijing and Google “Tiananmen Square Tank Man,” nothing comes up. If you think that the later of the two examples doesn’t happen in Western democracies, fly to Switzerland and Google “Abu Ghraib,” note the number of search results, then compare that to the same number of Google search results in the United States. It’s shocking and the implications are quite disturbing.

Obviously, we don’t live in communist Russia or feudal Europe but many of us live under Chinese party rule, or in Middle Eastern regimes. Western society has advanced through the series of political and social stages. Science, the Enlightenment, and many hard-won battles for human and civil rights, among other things, have brought us out of this primitive pluralism and seen humanity produce some of her most beautiful and admirable institutions and accomplishments to date. We will not go backwards.

However, the spiral circles back around to a new form of pluralism. The only significant differences are that the elite, responding to a population more demanding of their hard-fought rights, have devised more sophisticated, deceptive, and arguably dangerous methods for maintaining power. Western society currently finds itself deeply entrenched in this new form of pluralism. Rather than the elite being composed of feudal lords, a dominant military, secret police or religious authorities, they are now politicians, financiers, regulators, CEO’s, bureaucrats and the like.

The current unsustainable nature of our economic system and the subsequent popular reactions to it are throwing back the curtain and exposing the everyday citizen to the existence of a truly powerful elite and their exploitation of the world’s citizens and resources. We find ourselves in the midst of a transition, with all of the classic markings--the public’s widespread distrust and disenfranchisement, desperate political and economic reactions, money buying power and power buying money, and an impending, inevitable systemic crash.

Tune in next week for what’s coming.

What Do People Want?

What do people want?

As a group, they are not such a demanding lot. They want a sense of security, a distance from the fear that something or someone isn’t going to come along and hurt them or take what’s theirs. They want food and water and shelter and to feel productive. They want to feel that they have a say in what goes on in their and their loved one’s lives. Beyond that, they want to have fun, to hang out with friends, read a book, or enjoy a coffee at their favorite café.

What do people want? Well, if people are largely allowed to go about their business, they will tolerate any number of atrocities from oppressive governments to war to the perpetration of horrific human rights violations--as long as they are directed elsewhere.

Regarding what it is that people want, the teeming masses of the western world were told that their governments would provide these things for them. They would be equipped with a national security infrastructure, an economy that provided for their need to be productive and the means with which to feed, house, and clothe themselves and their families.

These democratic governments did provide these things for many generations, but as this unsustainable system has begun to collapse around us, governments no longer have the means to provide these things.

And where did they get the means to do so in the first place? The people. Governments, by themselves, do not have any money. They have no power. They have only promises and the mechanisms with which to collect and acquire money and power. Their new-found inability to provide their people with their small list of expectations using the people’s own resources is a result of gross misuse of those resources and a political system that has finally succumbed to the consequences of corruption.

As governmental, economic, and social institutions begin to fail, the people who have been administered by these institutions begin to feel that their small list of expectations is not being met. They worry that they will wake up one day and the bold moves of financiers in faraway cities will have devalued their money to the point of worthlessness. They will lose their jobs--no more sense of productivity and no more means to provide what is necessary to survive. They will lose their homes--no more shelter. They will struggle against an entrenched political system that, in truth, does not concern itself with the will of the people, dissolving any sense that they have a say in their own reality.

They will take to the streets, demanding what was promised to them. Governments, fearing that their grip on power may be compromised, will respond violently. But as things get worse, there is nothing that can be done to “handle” millions in the streets.


What’s next? Well, it’s up to the people. It will require a new way of thinking. Rather than demanding what they want from their government which, honestly, is nothing more than a projection of the people anyway, people will have to begin looking inwards and coming to some tough realizations.

First, we knew that our governments have been lying to us--and we let them. We knew that our elected officials were corrupt--and we allowed it. We knew that our political system was circling the drain, that the world was changing and we were not appropriately responding to it. We knew that our economic structures built fortunes for a few on the backs of the many. We knew we were being distracted, deflected, taken for fools. We watched this entire catastrophe unfold before our eyes, we listened as our elders pointed to times in history when similar, if not identical, events took place. And as we went about our business, ever struggling, we thought: “Someone else will handle it, it’s not our fault.” But it is.

We have manufactured every brick for every economic, social, and political structure that has been built around us. We allowed these things to come about and we encouraged their growth every step of the way, either consciously or as a result of inaction. Everything that is, we created.

This understanding must pave the way for a new world. We can no longer consider our position as “us” and “them.” Everything is “us”--our government, our economy, our interaction with others, everything.

We can wake up from this dream and build a new world if we are willing. We can create something that takes into account personal responsibility, accountability, and self-awareness, something that is reactive and flexible to our ever-changing, ever-evolving world.

It is no longer viable to consider the role of nation-states as separate from the rest of the world--as capitalism in competition with communism, as Christianity in competition with Islam, as the West in competition with the East. What’s good for one must be considered what’s good for all--and not in terms of some ideology like socialism or libertarianism or capitalism. These ideologies are espoused, but never fully adhered to and perverted so that their benefits are rarely--if ever--realized.

There will always be struggle and strife, pain and death, loss and sorrow. Governments will always be tempted to take for granted their citizen-derived powers. There will always be greed and heartlessness. But if people begin to take responsibility for themselves, their communities, their governments, and their world, there will always be a light to shine on their efforts.

A Resource

Hello. Welcome to The Big Picture.

For this post, I just want to introduce readers to a resource that I am going to be using to examine, analyze, and question the world around us.

As members of the human race, we all have questions about the big picture. For some, the answers lie in religion or faith of some kind. For others, science is the key to ultimate truth. Some just say common sense is all you need to navigate our world.

As a race, we have consciously set up these institutions: religious institutions, political institutions, philosophical/ideological institutions, communicative institutions and the like. They have become, in a sense, the set of rules we all live by to get on. And we all have an innate sense of our relationship to these institutions and the relationships within and between these institutions. It is these relationships that define, in a way, our existence and define our responses to our existence.

The resource for exploring these relationships that The Big Picture will focus on is a website, much like any other website, except for a significant difference--this one attempts, and quite successfully I think, to order these institutions and our relationships to these institutions in a rational and useful manner. It is a taxonomy, much like the periodic table of elements or the taxonomic order of biological life are taxonomies, officially called The Taxonomy of Human Elements in Endeavor (THEE).

THEE is far from complete, as it deals with some of the most complex, subtle, and important aspects of what it is to be human, much is left to be explored and entered. However, what has been completed offers a fascinating insight into the ever-evolving world around us and points out the many constants in human endeavor.

You can visit thee-online.com here.

To view the bulk of THEE's content, you have to register, but it is free and THEE asks nothing of you except your inquiry--no financial commitment, no information mining, no emails you don't ask for, etc.

However, participation on the THEE website and in this blog is highly encouraged.

Thank you and enjoy!