Talent

 

                                                           Buddha

 

This afternoon I was looking at the stuff stuck to the refrigerator by my wife, Sarah. We both like to post wise sayings. The frig is her domain. “Dust Bunnies Killed My Cleaning Fairy” is a favorite of mine, but the one that really started me thinking was, “He is able who thinks he is able,” by the Buddha. It has been up there as long as I can remember, and I never thought much about it. I suppose it’s authentic, or at least as authentic as a 2500 year old saying can be, but it doesn’t sound like the kind of thing Buddha would say. He sounds almost like a capitalist. I would imagine a more Buddha like saying would be, ‘Don’t worry about losing your cleaning fairy. Just go with the flow.’ It makes me think that a capitalist took Buddha’s words and altered them to go along with more ‘modern’ thinking. 

The idea that anyone can become successful, rich, or famous, that anyone can make a significant contribution to society, is baked into our culture. I remember believing that since childhood. It inspired me to study harder, to practice long hours on my violin. When I didn’t get an A or wasn’t the best at something, I just attributed it to lack of effort. 

This attitude worked pretty well through college. I didn’t get straight A’s but I was always in the top 15 or 20% of the class, and I managed to win first chair in the All-state Orchestra in high school, and in the University of Oklahoma orchestra too. On top of that, I read books by really smart authors like Asimov, even Camus, and I cultivated friendships with really smart people, thinking that if I could understand them and if they accepted me, that would put me on their level. The fact that I couldn’t understand integral calculus, or learn to speak German didn’t put me off. I just needed to find my niche. 

I think my first suspicion that I couldn’t be the best just by thinking I was, like Buddha supposedly said, or by working hard, came after my first year in medical school. I went there intending to be among the best in my class. I thought, ‘this is going to be my profession, my life’s work, so I’m going to work hard and be successful.' I studied the material for long hours. I even started smoking a pipe because someone told me it would help me to stay alert when I was tired, but I found that wasn’t enough. In med school everyone was smart. Everyone was working hard. I couldn’t be the best no matter how hard I tried. I was making C’s. I had never been a C student, never in my life. 

So I made a decision. I marched into the dean’s office and told him that I hadn’t learned the material well enough, and that I needed to repeat the first year. He didn’t seem upset. He didn’t kick me out of school like I half expected he would. He just reassured me. He said that nobody remembers all that stuff, that all you have to do is get familiar with the subject. If you need to refresh your mind about the details, you know where to look it up. He said that what it takes to be a good doctor is the humility to realize your limitations and the interest to keep learning.  So I  stayed in school, and tried to accept the fact that I wasn’t going to be at the top of my class. 

It was the same with my violin playing. I love to play and I’ve continued to play in my spare time all my life. Sometimes I have played in amateur orchestras and chamber groups, and occasionally for small groups as a soloist. But mainly, I just play for myself. It’s a time when I can relax and reflect. During my last years in medical practice I started playing at nursing homes, and I started transcribing and arranging popular pieces. The classical solo pieces for the violin were flashy but difficult to play and so I tried to play tunes that were easier and more familiar to the patients, popular tunes from the 30’s and 40’s. Gradually I’ve come to realize that I’m just a mediocre violinist. The reason I used to think I was exceptional was because there wasn’t much competition. I was only competing against people my age, mainly in just my home town, and when I won first chair in the state orchestra it was in Oklahoma, a small state. Recently I auditioned for a seat in our community orchestra, one of several in the city of Denver. I made the cut but when I started playing with them I was surprised to find that they were all as good or better than I. I still play, but it’s only because I enjoy it. I get better with practice, but no matter how hard I try I’ll never  be exceptional. 

I have had to fight this misconception all my life, that I’m just as smart or capable as anyone. The media reinforces this idea. They interview successful people and almost without exception the story they tell is one of hard work, determination, overcoming obstacles. The truth, in my opinion, is that they just have exceptional abilities. If you interview people who are average, I think you would get similar stories. Some people are just smarter or more talented than others. 

I think it is a dangerous delusion to accept the notion that we are all equal, that anyone can be successful with hard work and determination. It makes us take on tasks or responsibilities that are beyond us. It makes us discount the opinions of experts, and credit the opinions of those with little knowledge or background. It makes people disbelieve well established scientific facts, like human induced climate change, or evolution. It enables charlatans to create followings on the strength of their personalities without any facts to support them. 

So what’s a conscientious person to do? No matter how smart you are there are millions smarter, more educated, more talented than you. Should you just give up and let others make the decisions? That obviously doesn’t work. Smart people don’t all agree. They make decisions based on ambition, prejudice, status, expectations, and the smarter they are, the better they are at rationalizing their decisions. On a societal level decisions are made by the most vocal, usually a minority - think Nazis in Germany, the Taliban in Afghanistan, Communists in Russia and China. 

What would my wise cousin Steve say? (I’ll find out as soon as I publish this post) First he’d say, “earn your oxygen.” Do things that benefit your family, friends and society. Then he’d say, “be open minded.” Listen to people on both sides of every issue, and try to understand their point of view. Most of them are just as smart as you, and they have reasons for their viewpoints, no matter how foolish they may seem, and then share your opinions. 

Wisdom

 

                                         Rodin's The Thinker

Wisdom is not what it’s cracked up to be, especially in times of change. According to my hero, Eric Hoffer (see my post of Aug. 27, 2024), “In a time of drastic change it is the learners who inherit the future. The learned usually find themselves equipped to live in a world that no longer exists.”

It’s not that wisdom isn’t important. It is the way we understand the world around us, but you have to be careful whom to believe. There are a lot of smart, educated, ‘wise’ people in the world, and whatever your opinion, you can find some of them who agree with you, and can make your case much better than you. Groups of people with similar views banding together and getting their “news” from the same sources is especially common in this age of polarization.

 I’m just as guilty as the next person. I have my favorites: Rachel Maddow, Larry Summers, Josh Brown, and my wise cousin Steve.  It makes me feel smart when I can find a really smart person that agrees with me. Occasionally I accidentally hear or read something by a smart person that totally disagrees with me. My immediate response is to try and pick holes in his/her argument, or assume that he’s making stuff up, but that doesn’t always work. What’s an arrogant egotist to do?

I think too often we come to conclusions first and later think of reasons to justify them.  Finding a smart person who agrees with you is just icing on the cake. It should be the other way around. Gathering information should come first, and then the conclusion.

It starts early in life. We start out with a set of beliefs given to us by our parents, by our culture, and then, as we grow older we learn to rationalize those beliefs, and we find smart people who support them. This process explains most of our traditions. It explains why most Americans are Christian, and most Arabs are Muslim. It explains why most Americans are capitalists and most Europeans are socialists.

It seems to me that there is a lot of criticism of capitalism these days. We’re taught in school that capitalism rewards those who work hard, and it enables us to find the most efficient way to do things. It’s supposed to go together with democracy: life, liberty and “The pursuit of happiness,” but just during my lifetime, communist China – Russia, not so much – has gotten about as good at capitalism as we are, without granting the other two rights stated in our Declaration of Independence.

The trouble with capitalism is that it fosters competition and a “winner takes all” culture. What’s wrong with competition, you say? Well, it leads to resentment and hostility, preventing cooperation between the people who work together. It rewards greed and punishes altruism. When there’s competition, there has to be a winner, and in a corporation the winners rise to the top, make all the decisions and more money, whereas studies have shown that a team approach leads to more innovation and diversity.

On a society level you end up with a small group of people who control the country, and become immensely wealthy, while the needs of the rest are disregarded. That is why in America, medical science is arguably the most advanced in the world, while the level of health care overall is among the worst.

In America we glorify capitalism and attribute to it our success as a country. Why? Because that’s what we were taught. It’s part of our culture. We accept it without question.     

Back to wisdom.

This way of backward thinking, where we make conclusions and then rationalize them, works on a personal level too. A sad but true expression is “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.” I have made some terrible decisions in my life which seemed to make sense at the time, but in looking back, I performed the same kind of backward logic of making a decision and then justifying it. Rationalization is a dangerous mistake.

The other problem with backward thinking is the future. As Yogi Berra once said: “making predictions is hard, especially about the future.” No one, no matter how smart, can predict the future, but we have to try. We have to make plans, decisions. Knowledge helps. As one of my professors said, “You can either learn from the mistakes of others or you can make them all yourselves,” but unexpected events, and new discoveries can change the course of events. Think of artificial intelligence. Changes need to be integrated into our view of the world, our expectations for the future.

I’ve been lucky in life to know some truly wise people who have questioned some of my poorly thought out conclusions. First was my dad. I talked with him a lot, and he always patiently listened to my ideas. Once I decided that all behavior was selfish. Whether you decide to help someone or steal something, you do it because you think it will make you feel better. Helping will give you satisfaction, and hocking stolen goods will make you richer. His response was, “If you’re playing basketball (he was an outstanding athlete in high school and college) and you steal the ball, then run down the court and pass the ball to one of your teammates to make the score, you can’t convince me that’s selfish.” From that I learned not to make conclusions by manipulating semantics. And he taught me much more.

Then there was my lifelong friend, Harlan. Once I got interested in Albert Schweitzer. He was a doctor, philosopher, musician and a missionary in Africa. He was also recognized as a biblical scholar, and a psychologist. I was telling Harlan how much I admired Schweitzer, when he reminded me that he had a patronizing attitude toward the Africans. Harlan knew a little bit about everything. He was gentle but ruthless in his logic. He taught me to look at things from a broader perspective.

Then there is my wise cousin Steve. We’ve been discussing things since childhood. Now we’re getting older, declining mentally and physically. We deal with it each in our own way. He organizes genealogy and photos for his kids and grandkids on Excel. He must be one of the world’s authorities on Excel. I manage our investments and play the violin. I’ve learned many things from Steve, whether it’s earning your oxygen (see blog post of 11/23/23),  or being ambivalent (see post of 11/8/23), or the scientific method (see post of 6/10/24), to which he attributes most advances in science. We can’t get together anymore, but we talk by phone for about two hours every other week. Last week I was telling him how disappointed I was that my wife Sarah and I couldn’t travel anymore. He seemed concerned that I was getting depressed, and started reeling off all the things that we can still do. He finished by telling me to remember Pollyanna, who always found something good in everything and everyone. Steve watches the movie “Pollyanna” over and over. What can be more useful than always looking on the bright side?

I’ve been truly blessed.   

 

 

 

 

Where Have All the Democrats Gone?

 

From "Trumpty Dumpty Wanted a Crown" by John Lithgow

Last week I watched an interview with Ruy Teixeira, one of the authors of the book, “Where Have all the Democrats Gone?” on the Daily Show, with Jon Stewart. His main point was that the Democratic Party has gone from a party of the working class under FDR, to a party of intellectuals championing liberal causes and minorities, a party that doesn’t get much done. In the meantime, the unions have lost power due to globalization and immigration, and it’s the Republicans who have become the populist party, favoring nationalism, isolation, law and order, and religious fundamentalism, at least they say they do. 

Jon Stewart made the point that the Democrats were thought of as weak, because of their adherence to the rules of the system, which is making it hard for them to get anything done. He made fun of Obama for not pushing through Merrick Garland’s nomination as a Supreme Court justice, and Joe Biden’s dropping of immigration reform from his economics’ bill because of a parliamentarian’s ruling, while the Trump Republicans don’t have any qualms about pushing through their justices, and blocking said immigration bill just so they could use it as a campaign issue. 

While president, Trump trashed the nuclear deal with Iran, and threatened to leave NATO. He intends to conduct unprecedented deportation, using the military against not only illegal immigrants, but also against demonstrators who oppose him. While president, Trump used the Department of Justice as his own personal legal defense team. He disregarded the advice of experts on climate change, and on the effects and management of the COVID pandemic. He plans to eliminate regulations on industry and even eliminate large departments within the government. He’s even threatened to take away licensing from news outlets that oppose him. 

The interview seemed to conclude that the Democrats’ failure is due to their adherence to laws and tradition. Trump and the Republicans, on the other hand, are intent on getting their policies through, regardless of law and even Constitutional barriers. They now control the Supreme Court, and Trump seems well on the way to controlling both houses of Congress. Many seem to favor Trump, in spite of his scandals and frankly illegal behavior, just because he gets things done, and doesn't let laws, regulations, or science get in his way.  

Jon and the author, Mr. Tiexiera, seemed to think that the Democrats should “fight fire with fire,” to be more like the Republicans, and to fight for their policies, but I think the problem goes far beyond leadership or strategy. People are actually losing faith in our system of government. The Democrats are following the rules and the Republicans aren’t, and that couldn’t happen if people believed in the system. 

I’ve always assumed that our Constitution, our complex system of laws and regulations, and the bureaucracy that’s been built to enforce them, are what keeps our country strong, and guarantees the survival of our form of government, but that’s not it at all. It’s our belief in the system that keeps it going. Without that, the whole edifice will crumble to the ground. 

This discussion is akin to something my wise cousin Steve and I have talked about. He believes in gradual change, allowing society time to adapt. I’ve not been so patient. I’d like to see changes happen quicker, so that those who are suffering, or exploited can live long enough to see their lives improve. 

Right now there are a lot of people clamoring for change, rapid radical change. I'm not sure whether we need a change in government or just a change in attitude, but here's what Alex Hoffer (see post of August 27) said about change: “-the people who clamor for change are, on the whole, usually hostile to authority, --- Actually, in all the outstanding instances of rapid, drastic change we know of – successful rapid changes, drastic changes – occurred in an authoritarian atmosphere.” This is what scares me. Now that we’re losing patience with our system of government , we are looking for a leader. maybe it will be Trump, maybe somebody else, who will trash our republic and replace it with something else, who knows what. 

We have a choice to make, if it’s not too late: radical vs. gradual change, possibly even autocracy vs democracy. I side with cousin Steve this time, and chose the latter.

 

 

Donald and Fidel

 

                     Castro and Putin, another Trump Supporter

Fidel Castro led a popular revolution which took over Cuba in 1959. I was in high school at the time. When it became clear that Castro was a communist, many of the more affluent Cubans migrated to America. One of these was a friend of my mother’s. When she got back to the States she told my mother about how Cuba had changed under Castro. 

What struck me was what she said about the people he put into leadership positions. She said that they were the least competent, the least qualified people he could have picked. 

As Donald Trump makes his cabinet and other appointments known, I think you could describe them in the same way. From Mike Huckabee, the new Ambassador to Israel, a fundamentalist Christian who believes the Bible gives Israel the right to occupy the West Bank and Gaza, to Tom Homan, new Director of Immigration Enforcement, and author of the cruel family separation policy of Trump’s first term. From Matt Gaetz, Trump’s new Attorney General, under investigation for sexual misconduct by the House of Representatives, to Pete Hegseth, a political commentator on Fox News, now appointed Secretary of Defense, to Dan Scavino, Trump’s former golf caddie, now deputy White House Chief of Staff.    

What do these misfits have in common? They are loyal to Trump and dependent on him for their prominent positions. I suspect Castro’s appointees had the same qualifications.

 

Arab Lives Matter

                                                                   Gaza City

I’m really getting tired of the Israelis killing Palestinians and Lebanese, and now it looks like they’re getting ready to kill some Iranians. After they blew up Hezbollah’s pagers and walkie-talkies, killing or injuring thousands, not only Hezbollah’s members but also whatever Lebanese civilians happened to be close by, my first response was that Israel is now the world’s biggest sponsor of terrorism. Now they’re planning a ground invasion of Lebanon, and who knows what in Iran. 

This is after they’ve spent a year killing Palestinians, over 40,000 of them, both in Gaza and the West Bank, in what really amounts to genocide, after the Hamas staged an invasion of Israel, killing a little over a thousand Israelis, and taking 250 hostages.   

Iran supports Hamas and Hezbollah and has sent two barrages of missiles toward Israel after Israel killed several Iranian and Hezbollah military leaders. It amounted to a protest, since most of the missiles were intercepted and few Israelis were injured.  Now Israel is planning a major attack on Iranian military and infrastructure. 

I’m no expert, but it seems to me that the Arab nations, especially the Palestinians, have a legitimate grievance against Israel. Israel’s very existence is illegal, since their land was originally Palestine. The Israelis have continued to encroach on the areas left to the Palestinians by building settlements there. The Palestinians have fought and lobbied for independence in the world court. They don’t have the military power to win independence, but they have won their legal battles. I can understand why the Palestinians have resorted to terrorism and why the other Arab states have supported them, because they can’t win a war. 

I have been sympathetic to Israel’s desire for a homeland, a refuge from the antisemitism around the world, but I can’t condone their continued slaughter of Arabs in the countries surrounding them. 

It’s as though they are playing a game: “If you kill one of ours, we’ll kill ten of yours.” So they continue to attack and kill Arabs, as if to say, “That’ll teach you.” Of course, they’ve proved over and over that responding to terror attacks just enrages Arab victims and inspires more to become terrorists. 

The result is more and more killing, weighted more toward Arab casualties, and in Gaza it really does seem like a war of genocide.

My response is that “Arab lives matter!” What I don’t understand is why casualties, deaths don’t seem to enter into Israeli, or Arab calculations. There have been a few programs to develop understanding and personal relationships between Arabs and Israelis, but, while successful on a small scale, these programs seem to be outweighed by the decisions of militant leaders. 

The punch line to this tragic conundrum is that the enabler of all this hostility and killing is us. We support Israel with money, weapons, and if necessary, military backup. They have pursued their genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, their attacks in Lebanon, and possibly a war with Iran knowing that we will support them, no matter what. They’re betting their very existence on our support. Biden can urge a cease fire, negotiations, and limited responses to Arab protests, but his words are meaningless as he continues to provide Israel with huge bombs and high tech defensive systems, and to surround the area with aircraft carriers for Israel’s “defense.” 

I’m not Arab or Israeli, and I don’t understand the complicated relations between the Arab nations, or Israeli politics. I just think everyone needs to consider the lives and suffering of the people involved.    

The Maga Movement

 

                                                                  Proud Boys

 

I do make an effort to be evenhanded and nonjudgemental.  That is why I try to see different perspectives.  Hooray for me.

But –

I have zero tolerance for Bullies and Liars.  I am judgmental on people who are judgmental.

Trump is perhaps the biggest bully in a position of power in this country, at least in our lifetimes.

Trump is the worst liar, at least the most prolific.  Santos was bad, but didn’t talk 24-7.

Trump portrays himself is vastly superior to everyone else.

Trump portrays himself as the most popular person on the planet.  Loved by all (that aren’t evil and stupid).

Most of the people that do love him fall into the judgmental category.

Cousin Steve

I’m still trying to figure out how Donald Trump has taken control of the Republican Party. He’s not charismatic – see blog of August 18, 2024. He’s rich, but he hasn’t been that successful in business. He’s actually gone bankrupt 5 or 6 times. I forget which. He hasn’t been a successful executive. His money is in real estate, and it seems like many of his business ventures are crooked. His “Trump  University” was a scam and he had to pay a fine for cheating his students. He used money from his “charity” for personal expenses and had to pay a fine for that. He has avoided paying income tax by underestimating the value of his properties and has gotten loans and insurance by overestimating those same properties. The only thing he has succeeded at has been his TV show, “The Apprentice.”

 

It seems Trump can get away with anything, winning a presidential election after bragging about fondling women. As president, he funneled money to himself by holding official events at his resorts, requiring that government personnel stay at his hotels, and even accepting money from foreign governments for favors, contracts and grants.

 

Now, after all Trump’s scandals, he is in control of the Republican party. His daughter in law is now chair of the party, and Republican candidates can’t get on the ballot without an endorsement from him.  He caused a bipartisan immigration bill to be killed in the House of Representatives just so it would remain an issue he could  run for reelection on. He is currently running neck and neck with  Kamila Harris in the race for president, polling just under 50% among registered voters. How can this be?

 

Trump’s followers seem to have blind faith in whatever he tells them. They believed he won the presidential election of 2019 without any evidence, and then mobbed the capital on January 6, 2020 in an effort to keep him in power. He has claimed that the current administration is targeting him with law suits and his followers have made death threats against politicians, attorneys, government officials who have opposed him. At the same time he has threatened to prosecute officials in power now if he regains power, and to try for treason military officers who stood up to him.

 

Trump seems to be trying to create a mass movement such as Eric Hoffer describes in his book, The True Believer. According to Hoffer, mass movements, whether religious, revolutionary, or nationalistic have many things in common. They attract followers by a frustration with the present, and unite them by a desire for change. They need a leader who kindles enthusiasm for a cause, whether it be untold riches, radical societal reform, a common fear, or the coming of a Heavenly Kingdom, and they need a source of power. Mass movements all attract the same type of individuals: the poor, the misfits, the outcasts, the sinners, those who view their lives as ruined, those who want to replace their meaningless lives with a holy cause. Mass movements, regardless of their purpose, all breed fanaticism, violence and chaos, and their early followers, even though they may be in the minority, shape the character of the movement.

 

In my opinion, Trump’s MAGA Republicans check all these boxes. They share a fear and hatred for immigrants and foreigners, and they  favor change: change in government institutions, the “deep state” as they like to call it, change in international relations, the traditional alliances, free trade, even our constitution and election system. Many of Trump’s followers, such as politicians, have gone along with him in order to stay in power, and many supporters, such as wealthy businessmen and foreign leaders support him because of promised favors or financial gain, but his base, those who cheer at his rallies and those who stormed the Capital on January 6, come from the lower classes of society, those with no respect for the current system such as the “Proud boys,” the “skinheads,” Neo-nazis and other fanatical groups supporting white supremacy, Misogyny, antisemitism, gun rights, etc. These groups have the potential to produce violence and  chaos.

 

Whether the MAGA movement gains the power to develop into a  full blown mass movement depends on whether the moderate majority summons the courage to fight to preserve our system.

Eric Hoffer

 

Eric Hoffer

I ‘ve always enjoyed living vicariously. It started when I was a child. I was surrounded by fascinating, almost magical people. Maybe all children see adults this way, but I felt a sense of excitement around my aunts and uncles. They were funny; they told exciting stories, and they -especially my aunts- had a way of making a little boy feel special. When they all got together I was spellbound listening to them reminisce and talk about who they had known and what they had done. One of my uncles was a lawyer and judge, another was a construction worker who had worked all over the world. And that was just my mother’s family. My dad didn’t talk much, but he actually told the best stories, about growing up on the farm, about his experiences as a tough kid, and as a high school and college athlete. After I retired I got to spend hours listening to my mother’s recollections about her life and her family, some of which I included in the book, Wenonah’s Story. 

I’ve always sought out and valued friends that I admired: my wise cousin I’ve mentioned before, my best friend from childhood, my partner in medical practice. 

I’ve always enjoyed reading, and am usually in the middle of one book or several. I enjoy fantasizing about fictional characters who are able to do amazing things, but also historical figures. I know now that real events and real people are more amazing than anything a fiction writer can imagine. 

Reading a book by an amazing person makes you feel on a level with them, as if reading about their adventures and understanding their thoughts somehow allows you to share their experiences and possess in a small way their ideas. 

I’ve recently been rereading a little book by one of my heroes, Eric Hoffer.  His ideas are pretty universal, but they seem especially relevant in today’s political climate. 

Hoffer spent much of his life as a tramp, riding on boxcars from one place to another doing odd jobs to make money to live. After being turned down for military service during WWII, he went to work as a longshoreman on the docks of San Francisco where he spent the next 20 years. Hoffer was self taught and was an avid reader and learner all his life. Every place he went, he got library cards and spent most of his time in libraries reading whatever interested him. He told the story that once he was working at a nursery repotting plants. He began to wonder why the roots grew down and the stems grew up, so he quit his job, hopped on a boxcar and headed for the nearest town with a library where he checked out a book on botany. 

At one point Hoffer decided to mine for gold. He took with him a book by the French philosopher, Michel de Montaigne, which he read and reread. Later, when he returned to his itinerant lifestyle, he would frequently quote Montaigne in discussions with other vagrants, so much that they would often ask him, “what does Montaigne have to say about that?” He said, “I always believed that there must be several hundred hobos up and down San Joaquin Valley still quoting Montaigne.” 

It was when he settled down near the docks in San Francisco that he began to write seriously. He would work on the docks for a few weeks and then write until he ran out of money. When he received a telegram from Harper’s accepting his first book, The True Believer, Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements, he threw the little yellow paper away thinking it was an ad. He said, “I never had a telegram in my life.” 

The True Believer was published in 1951 and became a best seller in 1956 when President Eisenhower mentioned Hoffer as his favorite author. Hoffer wrote ten books as well as numerous articles and memoirs. He was consulted by several presidents on national affairs; he received several honorary doctorates, was made an adjunct professor at UC Berkeley, and in 1983 was awarded the Medal of Freedom by President Ronald Reagan. 

Eric Hoffer was obviously a genius, but I think he stands out even among geniuses. How many great men are totally self taught, refuse wealth, and become recognized as one of the great thinkers of their time? 

Like I said before, Eric Hoffer is one of my heroes, and I thought I should give a little background about him in case I want to refer to some of his ideas in future posts.

 

https://www.hoover.org/research/eric-hoffer-genius-and-enigma