Ridgewood panelists seek to define civility
JANUARY 22, 2015 LAST UPDATED: THURSDAY, JANUARY 22, 2015, 2:40 PM
BY DARIUS AMOS
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
In drafting a working definition for the term “civility,” participants of Tuesday’s Civility Roundtable discussion harkened back to the sermon of this week’s Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day celebration.
“It’s OK to be angry, but do not sin,” said the Rev. Thomas Johnson, pastor at Mt. Bethel Baptist Church, repeating the biblical verse quoted by the Rev. James Forbes Jr. on Monday.
“To sin,” added Robin Ritter, program coordinator at the Ridgewood Library, “that’s the disrespectful behavior. If we look at it that way, what’s the appropriate response? I’m angry, we’re talking about it, how do we have that dialogue?”
Finding the answer to Ritter’s question is the roundtable’s overriding goal, to create more civil behavior in Ridgewood’s public discourse. During their conversation this week, the panel members took the next step in promoting civility by recognizing what goes into civil discourse.
“Civility is not only the right thing to do and the decent thing, it’s the smart thing to do,” said Mayor Paul Aronsohn. “[By being more civil] this enriches the conversation and probably helps us to get to where we need to be.”
https://www.northjersey.com/community-news/ridgewood-panelists-seek-to-define-civility-1.1233772
I do not wish to learn about sin from some religious professional who should never have been invited to the table on this. It’s deeply offensive and against the Constitution to join government and clergy on any such matter. The mayor should be ashamed of himself–he makes me sick.
Civility is wonderful.
Its Blasphemy to speak out against our Mayor.
Well first we have Rev Al on the council who hold the hands of people that are about to pass over and now we have Rev. Robin Ritter who is a Program Director at the Library. WOW Rdgewood is getting religion. Next we have a Rev. at the Sewer Plant to give a blessing as the sewage pass over.
“Civility is not only the right thing to do and the decent thing, it’s the smart thing to do,” said Mayor Paul Aronsohn. “[By being more civil] this enriches the conversation and probably helps us to get to where we need to be.” I GUESS THAT DIDN”T APPLY TO HIM AND THE OTHER TWO FOR THE PASS 3 YEARS.
Oh I forgot we are moving “Forward” so we can Double Down on our next election We need to Drill Down to the residents that we are the good guys and all that speak out against us are the bad ones.
That some cast in the picture. Most on the Mayor’s short list.
Based on the photograph of the event, it looks as if it was attended by women only. And forgive me for saying this, but they neither look very happy themselves, nor do they look as if they are particularly concerned on a day-to-day basis with making anyone else happy, least of all…men…or, for example, any particular man that may or may not happen to be in their lives…not that there is anything wrong with that!
Was Jesus ‘civil’ to the moneychangers in the temple?
What place does righteous indignation play in public discourse?
I love the previous comment. At the risk of being uncivil I must express my shock and dismay at the language used today by our “leaders.” Yes, Drill Down and Takeaway, both common NEW expressions.
I highly recommended that our leaders read at least the first SHORT STORY, so it won’t take too much of their valuable time, of Richard Ford’s Let Me Be Frank With You, one of New York Time’s noted books of 2014. He makes fun of these phrases and more by putting them into quotes. The novel, interconnected short stories, takes place in New Jersey after hurricane Sandy. It shouldn’t be missed. Highly recommended for our “leaders.” By the way, Richard Ford is an American Pulitizer Prize winner writer.
Hey, Foytlin, it’s me again. I spoke to you at civility meeting. Is it hey, to be au courant or will the old fashioned Hi do as well?
Forgot to sign my comment, so not sure if it went through.
I love the above comment. At the risk of sounding uncivil , I must confess to shock and dismay at the language used by our “leaders,” such as the above quoted expression “DRILL DOWN” and another in common parlance by our “leaders” TAKEAWAY.
I highly recommend to first story of Richard Ford’s 2014 collection: Let Me Be Frank With You.(New York Times noted book of 2014) He satirizes these expressions, putting them in quotes. The interconnected stories take place in New Jersey after Hurricane Sandy. .Richard Ford is an American Pulitzer Prize winning novelist.
Hi James, or should I say Hey James to be au courant. Remember me. I spoke to you at civility meeting. Ms. Anonymous.
Using the Delphi Technique to Achieve Consensus — November 1998 Education Reporter
http://www.eagleforum.org
The Delphi Technique and consensus building are both founded in the same principle – the Hegelian dialectic of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, with synthesis becoming the new thesis. The goal is a continual evolution to “oneness of mind” (consensus means solidarity of belief) -the collective mind, the wholistic society, the wholistic earth, etc. In thesis and antithesis, opinions or views are presented on a subject to establish views and opposing views. In synthesis, opposites are brought together to form the new thesis. All participants in the process are then to accept ownership of the new thesis and support it, changing their views to align with the new thesis. Through a continual process of evolution, “oneness of mind” will supposedly occur.
In group settings, the Delphi Technique is an unethical method of achieving consensus on controversial topics. It requires well-trained professionals, known as “facilitators” or “change agents,” who deliberately escalate tension among group members, pitting one faction against another to make a preordained viewpoint appear “sensible,” while making opposing views appear ridiculous.
In her book Educating for the New World Order, author and educator Beverly Eakman makes numerous references to the need of those in power to preserve the illusion that there is “community participation in decision-making processes, while in fact lay citizens are being squeezed out.”
The setting or type of group is immaterial for the success of the technique. The point is that, when people are in groups that tend to share a particular knowledge base, they display certain identifiable characteristics, known as group dynamics, which allows the facilitator to apply the basic strategy.
The facilitators or change agents encourage each person in a group to express concerns about the programs, projects, or policies in question. They listen attentively, elicit input from group members, form “task forces,” urge participants to make lists, and in going through these motions, learn about each member of a group. They are trained to identify the “leaders,” the “loud mouths,” the “weak or non-committal members,” and those who are apt to change sides frequently during an argument.
Suddenly, the amiable facilitators become professional agitators and “devil’s advocates.” Using the “divide and conquer” principle, they manipulate one opinion against another, making those who are out of step appear “ridiculous, unknowledgeable, inarticulate, or dogmatic.” They attempt to anger certain participants, thereby accelerating tensions. The facilitators are well trained in psychological manipulation. They are able to predict the reactions of each member in a group. Individuals in opposition to the desired policy or program will be shut out.
The Delphi Technique works. It is very effective with parents, teachers, school children, and community groups. The “targets” rarely, if ever, realize that they are being manipulated. If they do suspect what is happening, they do not know how to end the process. The facilitator seeks to polarize the group in order to become an accepted member of the group and of the process. The desired idea is then placed on the table and individual opinions are sought during discussion. Soon, associates from the divided group begin to adopt the idea as if it were their own, and they pressure the entire group to accept their proposition.
How the Delphi Technique Works
Consistent use of this technique to control public participation in our political system is causing alarm among people who cherish the form of government established by our Founding Fathers. Efforts in education and other areas have brought the emerging picture into focus.
In the not-too-distant past, the city of Spokane, in Washington state, hired a consultant to the tune of $47,000 to facilitate the direction of city government. This development brought a hue and cry from the local population. The ensuing course of action holds an eerie similarity to what is happening in education reform. A newspaper editorial described how groups of disenfranchised citizens were brought together to “discuss” what they felt needed to be changed at the local government level. A compilation of the outcomes of those “discussions” influenced the writing of the city/county charter.
That sounds innocuous. But what actually happened in Spokane is happening in communities and school districts all across the country. Let’s review the process that occurs in these meetings.
First, a facilitator is hired. While his job is supposedly neutral and non-judgmental, the opposite is actually true. The facilitator is there to direct the meeting to a preset conclusion.
The facilitator begins by working the crowd to establish a good-guy-bad-guy scenario. Anyone disagreeing with the facilitator must be made to appear as the bad guy, with the facilitator appearing as the good guy. To accomplish this, the facilitator seeks out those who disagree and makes them look foolish, inept, or aggressive, which sends a clear message to the rest of the audience that, if they don’t want the same treatment, they must keep quiet. When the opposition has been identified and alienated, the facilitator becomes the good guy – a friend – and the agenda and direction of the meeting are established without the audience ever realizing what has happened.
Next, the attendees are broken up into smaller groups of seven or eight people. Each group has its own facilitator. The group facilitators steer participants to discuss preset issues, employing the same tactics as the lead facilitator.
Participants are encouraged to put their ideas and disagreements on paper, with the results to be compiled later. Who does the compiling? If you ask participants, you typically hear: “Those running the meeting compiled the results.” Oh-h! The next question is: “How do you know that what you wrote on your sheet of paper was incorporated into the final outcome?” The typical answer is: “Well, I’ve wondered about that, because what I wrote doesn’t seem to be reflected. I guess my views were in the minority.”
That is the crux of the situation. If 50 people write down their ideas individually, to be compiled later into a final outcome, no one knows what anyone else has written. That the final outcome of such a meeting reflects anyone’s input at all is highly questionable, and the same holds true when the facilitator records the group’s comments on paper. But participants in these types of meetings usually don’t question the process.
Why hold such meetings at all if the outcomes are already established? The answer is because it is imperative for the acceptance of the School-to-Work agenda, or the environmental agenda, or whatever the agenda, that ordinary people assume ownership of the preset outcomes. If people believe an idea is theirs, they’ll support it. If they believe an idea is being forced on them, they’ll resist.
The Delphi Technique is being used very effectively to change our government from a representative form in which elected individuals represent the people, to a “participatory democracy” in which citizens selected at large are facilitated into ownership of preset outcomes. These citizens believe that their input is important to the result, whereas the reality is that the outcome was already established by people not apparent to the participants.
How to Diffuse the Delphi Technique
Three steps can diffuse the Delphi Technique as facilitators attempt to steer a meeting in a specific direction.
Always be charming, courteous, and pleasant. Smile. Moderate your voice so as not to come across as belligerent or aggressive.
Stay focused. If possible, jot down your thoughts or questions. When facilitators are asked questions they don’t want to answer, they often digress from the issue that was raised and try instead to put the questioner on the defensive. Do not fall for this tactic. Courteously bring the facilitator back to your original question. If he rephrases it so that it becomes an accusatory statement (a popular tactic), simply say, “That is not what I asked. What I asked was . . .” and repeat your question.
Be persistent. If putting you on the defensive doesn’t work, facilitators often resort to long monologues that drag on for several minutes. During that time, the group usually forgets the question that was asked, which is the intent. Let the facilitator finish. Then with polite persistence state: “But you didn’t answer my question. My question was . . .” and repeat your question.
Never become angry under any circumstances. Anger directed at the facilitator will immediately make the facilitator the victim. This defeats the purpose. The goal of facilitators is to make the majority of the group members like them, and to alienate anyone who might pose a threat to the realization of their agenda. People with firm, fixed beliefs, who are not afraid to stand up for what they believe in, are obvious threats. If a participant becomes a victim, the facilitator loses face and favor with the crowd. This is why crowds are broken up into groups of seven or eight, and why objections are written on paper rather than voiced aloud where they can be open to public discussion and debate. It’s called crowd control.
At a meeting, have two or three people who know the Delphi Technique dispersed through the crowd so that, when the facilitator digresses from a question, they can stand up and politely say: “But you didn’t answer that lady/gentleman’s question.” Even if the facilitator suspects certain group members are working together, he will not want to alienate the crowd by making accusations. Occasionally, it takes only one incident of this type for the crowd to figure out what’s going on.
Establish a plan of action before a meeting. Everyone on your team should know his part. Later, analyze what went right, what went wrong and why, and what needs to happen the next time. Never strategize during a meeting.
A popular tactic of facilitators, if a session is meeting with resistance, is to call a recess. During the recess, the facilitator and his spotters (people who observe the crowd during the course of a meeting) watch the crowd to see who congregates where, especially those who have offered resistance. If the resistors congregate in one place, a spotter will gravitate to that group and join in the conversation, reporting what was said to the facilitator. When the meeting resumes, the facilitator will steer clear of the resistors. Do not congregate. Instead gravitate to where the facilitators or spotters are. Stay away from your team members.
This strategy also works in a face-to-face, one-on-one meeting with anyone trained to use the Delphi Technique.
Lynn Stuter is an education researcher in Washington state. Her web site address is www.learn-usa.com/
The grain is in the wood. Albert, Paul, and Gwenn have nasty tempers and they will go nuts on anyone who gets in their way. They have done it in public meetings, in closed session meetings, on the telephone, on telephone answering machines, in hallways on cell phones, and even in houses of worship. A number of these horrific displays of incivility have been caught on tape or saved on people’s private emails. I have a real gem of a nasty, dismissive email from one of the aforementioned three. They can drill down and double down and wipe themselves with windex for transparency, they can do and say what they want, but we all know that THE GRAIN IS IN THE WOOD. Their basic genetic makeups are such that they are not civil people, even though they are trying really hard to act so right now. Has anyone told them that the Academy Award nominations are already announced? – no need for these three lowlifes to keep on acting like the civil people that they are not. How dare they preach to us?
PJ:
I think we are “drilling down” on why our mayor and our most senior Board of Education Trustee are arranging and attending these very strange quasi-public meetings and how they are used to manipulate opinions and achieve predetermined outcomes.
The following is from an early critique of the tactics of the Obama administration and seems eerily similar to what is happening in Ridgewood today:
https://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message740164/pg1
03/02/2009 07:23 PM
WHAT ARE “THE DELPHI AND ALINSKY TECHNIQUES” ???
By Jack Ward
I was very curious when President Obama held a ‘Fiscal Responsibility Summit’ less than a week after signing a budget busting Stimulus Bill. Obama asked summit participants to break up into groups and to report back in a few hours with recommendations. The groups submitted their inputs but the results of the recommendations would come a few days later. Expecting serious responses within this short time period made the process suspicious.
The very next day the House of Representatives passed a $410 billion pork laden spending bill that contained 8878 ‘earmarks’. Either Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi didn’t get the word about ‘fiscal responsibility’ or Obama was speaking with forked tongue. After reviewing the inputs from the previously mentioned ‘Fiscal Responsibility Summit’, Obama submitted his $3.55 trillion budget for fiscal year 2010. This was done under the guise of ‘A New Era of Fiscal Responsibility’. Obama had promised to reduce the deficit and eliminate ‘earmarks’. But neither of those things happened. Saying one thing and doing another is common with politicians but this is so blatant I wonder how long it will fool the people. Manipulating small groups of people has been common place, but now we are seeing manipulation on a nationwide scale. Where would someone learn the techniques for such mass manipulation?
Knowing that Obama had spend considerable time as a ‘community organizer’ in the home town of Saul Alinsky , I was suspicious that the Delphi / Alinsky techniques to manipulate groups of people were being used. I am aware of these techniques because I have used these techniques and have been in groups where they were used.
The RAND Corporation developed the Delphi Technique for the U.S. Department of Defense as a psychological warfare weapon in the 50s and 60s. Saul Alinsky, noted Leftist and spiritual mentor of the youthful Barack Obama, noted the advantages of controlling the masses and adapted special techniques for teachers – it was called the ‘Alinsky Method’. Alinsky promoted his methods in his 1971 book called ‘Rules for Radicals’. ‘Rules’ has become the handbook for community organizers, change agents, and fellow travelers.
Bev Eakman wrote in ‘In Educating for the New World Order’ that the advantage of the Delphi / Alinsky techniques was to preserve the illusion that there is community participation and agreement in the decision making process. Eakman pointed out that these techniques are used to manipulate groups of people to agree to something they oppose. This slight of hand technique is used by many government agencies to defuse opposition. As a result, the Delphi or Alinsky techniques have become common when group ‘consensus’ is desired.
Richard Poe wrote that the youthful Obama was “trained by Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation,” and that “Obama spent years teaching workshops on the Alinsky method.” “In 1985 (Obama) began a four-year stint as a community organizer in Chicago, working for an Alinskyite group called the Developing Communities Project.” “Later, Obama worked with ACORN and its offshoot Project Vote, both creations of the Alinsky network.”
So it is apparent that Obama had more experience as a community organizer and the Alinsky techniques of manipulating the masses than he does as a politician. It is only natural for Obama to fall back on what he knows and is comfortable with when faced with monumental challenges. So it not unexpected that Obama would revert to using his community organizing skills when addressing national problems.
Obama has mastered “the Delphi and Alinsky techniques” and it is apparent to me that these techniques will guide him throughout his presidency. Therefore, to understand President Obama and what guides him, I suggest that you read the works of Saul Alinsky.
1. Using the Delphi Technique to Achieve Consensus 02/10/10
2. The Delphi Technique 05/08/14
3. Is OBAMA employing the “DELPHI” Technique against America?11/14/12
4. Exposing the DELPHI TECHNIQUE in Public Meetings 03/28/12
5. Topics Discussed: “The Delphi Technique”, Clinton’s connections with the and the Bush’s,IQ play between Bush Jr. and Hillary 01/10/08
People in power always want to control the narrative. They use language to retain their power over others. Aronsohn gets a group of people together, manipulates them with snake oil and invokes the religious. Most un democratic.
M’s Sedon and Knudsen must be shaking their respective heads non-stop at all this nonsense!
Shaking their head? I would expect more them?
What more can Mike and Sue really do at this point? The terrible threesome have made it abundantly clear that they will vote in lockstep on every issue, no matter how minor. They share one brain. Mike and Sue have few options until the triumvirate is shattered next year on election day.