"They were the first generation to be raised permissively, the first reared on television and subject to its developmental harms, and the only living group raised in an era of seemingly effortless prosperity," Gibney says.
"Can too much license, TV, and unearned wealth distort personalities? May I suggest looking south toward 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?"
While you're stagnating in a barista's job or your parents' basement, think about this, Ms. Millennial: Boomers didn't save the world; but they also didn't make it. The album's cover proves that.
If you want to blame society's present ills on anyone, blame them any of the 66 people depicted, from Karl Marx to Carl Jung, Albert Einstein to Aldous Huxley, T.E. Lawrence to Stan Laurel, Mae West to Marlon Brando.
Four in 10 marketers (41%) named blogs the best content for lead generation (their second choice was white papers (14%)).
If blogs are indeed the best content for lead generation, shouldn't you learn how to blog effectively?
I'd suggest you begin by choosing a form. Two schools of thought prevail:
Long form. Andy Crestodina recommends 1,200 to 1,800 word posts. Google likes long posts, and readers are more apt to share them than they are their short cousins.
Short form. Seth Godin recommends "microcopy," because we live in "the age of the glance."
The choice between the two comes down to your goal:
Are you aiming to be perceived as an authority? Then long is your best bet.
Are you aiming to bolster awareness? Then short's your best bet.
Whichever form you choose, I'd suggest you next decide on your beat. What subjects should you cover?
The choice is obviously most influenced by whatever you sell, but should also take into account competitors' and trade publishers' blogs (you want to be distinctive). And you should be able to crystallize your beat readily:
We simplify fire-science breakthroughs
We go inside SaaS marketing
We promote faster LMS adoption
Lastly—whatever beat you choose—learn how to write readable posts.
Every post you write should be succinct, useful, insightful, startling, newsworthy, and entertaining. Every post should aim to change readers' lives; or their preconceptions, anyway. And every post should omit puffery. Save that for sales calls.
Envy—one of the seven deadly sins—is irrational, imprudent, unseemly, vicious, and irredeemably wrong.
"Envy is pain at the good fortune of others," Aristotle said. It aims “to destroy the good fortune of another person,” Kant believed, and is "that passion which views with malignant dislike the superiority of those who are really entitled to all the superiority they possess," Adam Smith said.
Champions of wealth redistribution—those venal "socialists"—base their arguments for it on fairness. But libertarians will have none of it: socialists are simply craven and judgmental; and the people they want to help are just lazy bums and losers.
Nietzsche saw envy in the right light. He believed it was a good thing, because it signals, from deep down, what we really want in life. And we suppress it at our peril, because envy is powerful and will overwhelm us.
Philosopher John Rawls also warned that envy could overwhelm the envious—and society along with it.
When the economic differences between the haves and have-nots become so insuperable the disadvantaged lose heart, society will crumble.
At a Harvard symposium on John F. Kennedy last month, the school's president, historian Drew Faust, lamented today's war on expertise. "Kennedy's appeal for recognition of what he called the mutual dependence of the worlds of intellectuals and politicians, his call for a central role for learning and expertise, these are all too timely today," she said. I too miss a leader who relishes learning.
"Leadership and learning," JFK said, "are indispensable to each other."
Right now we're led by an inarticulate and unhinged narcissist who is bent on destroying all trust in science, economics, statesmanship, politics, rhetoric, reporting, truth-telling, governing, and the arts, and who has less sense of history than a crayfish.
Trump's world: no spot for happily-ever-altering. Honk if you miss JFK.
"P.O. Box 1142" was the code name Army intelligence gave a top-secret prison camp outside Washington during World War II; a site devoted throughout the war to interning 3,400 German, Japanese and Italian prisoners of war.
A sequestered section of Fort Hunt, in Alexandria, Virginia, P.O. Box 1142 remained top secret until 2006, when Brandon Bies, a ranger with the National Park Service, uncovered it.
Eyewitnesses—now mostly deceased—told Bies that P.O. Box 1142 was indeed a prison camp, and that the interrogators who worked there persuaded enemy POWs to reveal their governments' closest-held military secrets—including Nazi Germany's rocket and atomic bomb programs. Interrogators' notes, written reports and photographs, archived in the Pentagon, verified their stories.
Right after the war, P.O. Box 1142 was bulldozed, the records sealed, and the eyewitnesses sworn to secrecy.
But the Pentagon missed one: my mother.
She served during World War II as a Woman Marine in the Pentagon. When I was a kid, she told me a story about P.O. Box 1142.
She told me it was the Pentagon's habit to send Women Marines from her barracks at nearby Henderson Hall to guard POWs at P.O. Box 1142—until amore put a stop to it.
It seems some of the Women Marines fell in love with the enemy prisoners—the Italian ones, in particular; some pledged to marry them; some became pregnant by them.
I asked Brandon Bies if he could confirm my mother's story.
"Putting it in the larger context of what I've learned about 1142, I would put this in the tall-tale category," he said. "I have never heard any evidence of Women Marines being at P.O. Box 1142. We do have evidence of a handful of WACs who were stationed there in 1945, as well as a handful of civilian typists, who served officers late- and immediately post-war.
"Furthermore, while we don't have exact numbers, the number of Italian prisoners was likely very low—my guess is that they made up about 1-2 percent of the total prisoner population. Maybe a dozen or so over the course of the war.
"Finally, while 1142 did 'relax' the rules from time to time in order to get information out of a prisoner, it is very hard for me to believe that they would have allowed women to guard prisoners, let alone present them with opportunities to spend intimate time together."
Matt Virta, also with the National Park Service, told me he couldn't confirm the story, either. "I can find no information in the Fort Hunt records I have access to, nor can staff member Layesanna Rivera, regarding any female Marine guards at Fort Hunt and their potential links to Italian POWs," he said. So is my mother's story unfounded? Maybe not.
Tales of "POW coddling" in fact abounded during World War II, including tales of "too affectionate" Italians. When newspapers and magazines began to report them, Congress demanded a committee investigation.
While the Congressional committee found no evidence of coddling, you know what Italians say: Non c'รจ fumo senza arrosto. No smoke without fire. Maybe "POW cuddling" should have been investigated.
PS: Have a safe and pleasant Memorial Day—and take time to remember our fallen warriors.
