By Rich Kozlovich
See things in their simplest possible terms. Focus on the root of the problem. All problems are simple and have simple solutions. Like branches of a tree it’s the ancillary problems that keep getting attached to the primary problem that make it seem complicated. Destroy the root and the tree dies. The ancillary problems fall to the ground and take root as separate problems, which can then be easily overcome. Don’t let your ego or personal problems get in the way.
The mind follows the heart, so the search for truth, and the defense of truth, is an unending task that must be a lifelong effort for those who write about issues, and my goal was has always been to search out what's true, publicize it, and be prepared to stand against the slings and arrows of the liars and corrupt self promoters, but, I never trained to be a writer.
I was a bugman for 40 years, who not only wasn't trained to be a writer, as I'm an autodidact, and beyond high school, where I was a lousy student, I have no formal training about any of the many issues I write about, whether it involves history, science, economics, domestic policy or, foreign affairs.
When I started writing so many years ago I dealt with issues involving the structural pest control industry, challenging the claims, lies, and tyranny of the environmental movement
and their catspaws in government against the use of pesticides, most of
which only appeared in the newsletter I created for our local pest
control association called Nuf Ced, which was sent out to the members, along with an e-newsletter I called Green Notes to a broader industry base.
I created Paradigms and Demographics in order to be able to expound on these issues more fully, and continued my efforts to defend the pest control industry's use of pesticides and the use of fertilizers by agriculture. Here are my commentaries on DDT, pesticides, the Endangered Species Act, and the list goes on, but P&D was still at that time foundationally a "green only issues" blog.
Once again I expanded deciding P&D should be a pro-humanity blog . It was increasingly obvious I couldn't discuss green issues without discussing leftism, as "green" is a sect of the secular religion we call leftism, which I've demonstrated in my commentaries. Being anti-green is being pro-humanity, since to be green is to be irrational, misanthropic and morally defective.
In
the beginning, and for some time, I struggled dotting every "i"
and crossing every "t", spelling, grammar, etc, all the things writers are
trained for. While I lacked those skills sufficiently at the beginning,
there were
skills I excelled in. What I didn't lack was the ability to see
patterns, and see them more quickly than most. To understand, logically
define, and explain those patterns. Those are all personal qualities,
but all that only works if you know the historical importance behind
those patterns, and that takes work called reading.
Also, along with good intrinsic analytical skills, I spoke well.
A
great many professional writers fail in all those
skills, and entirely too many are infected in ideologies that prevent
them from acquiring those skills. Talent without character is wasted
talent. And I'm convinced the vast majority of them never read a history
book. Writing skills can be learned, that's
mechanical. But the rest require integrity, and the willingness to
follow the facts no matter where they may lead.
Speaking and
writing go hand in hand, and yet they're not the same. Speaking well
only requires having good information and the ability to present it logically. Writing requires
skill, so, I've worked hard to get as good at it as I can, and I'm happy to say I've been
complimented on my clarity of thought and how well I present
information. An old and good friend recently commented, "you really are
an organized thinker". I found that particularly pleasant is he's a
nationally known entomologist who I've known and admired for a large part of my
life, who watched my "editorial" struggle.
I've often said
over the years I see farther, deeper, and wider than most everyone
else. Not because I'm so much smarter than everyone else, but because I
read so much more than everyone else. When you've taken advantage of
reading the many writers who are really brilliant, and the many writers
who are really dumb, you get a much broader perspective. And you have
to read the dumb ones as well as the brilliant ones because you can't
find out who the idiots are unless you read them, and you can't overcome
their idiocy unless you know what idiocy they're promoting.
Furthermore, you need to keep reading the idiots because the
foundational sand of their logic is always shifting, not to mention
their "facts". That's a truly unpleasant task in perseverance, and I
hate it, but it is what it is.
Much of my writing is devoted to trying to see below the surface and behind the curtain all the while maintaining a 30,000 foot perspective on issues. Not only for my readers, but also for myself. If I can't do that, I have nothing to say worth reading. That's time consuming, and it's not easy.
My approach to writing has been molded by some brilliant people. Thomas Sowell for one, who I consider one of the finest thinkers in the world today. His ability to take amazingly complex problems and simplify them so that anyone can understand them is absolutely brilliant. He's in his 90's now, and his passing will diminish the world.
He once observed in 2005:
"Some ideas seem so plausible that they can fail nine times in a row
and still be believed the tenth time. Other ideas seem so implausible
that they can succeed nine times in a row and still not be believed the
tenth time. Government controls in the economy are among the first kinds
of ideas and the operation of a free market is among the second kinds
of ideas."
Defining capitalism versus socialism, and tyranny versus freedom in one paragraph. How brilliant is that?
I read a lot of history, and I find a great many really good historians aren't really good story tellers. Victor Davis Hanson, who not only has a great depth of understanding regarding historical events and people, he also has the ability to present information in a way that's not only informative, it's interesting. Here's an excellent example.
He
understands history is the story of mankind, and must be presented as a
story, not as an audit of a ledger sheet. I strive to do that with the
understanding that you can't make an impact on people's minds unless
you can touch their hearts. If the heart believes, the mind will find a
way to justify that belief.
Conservatives win the battle
of
facts, we always have. Leftists win the battle of emotion, they always
have. To win the war you must win the battle of facts and the battle of
emotion. History is everything, as time and truth are on the same side. That's foundational, not ideological! If you keep tying past events into the issues impacting people's lives now, the war will be won.
Read a lot, and take to time to read history books, think about what you read, and work to correlate that information with what we see going on in the world, as the patterns repeat over and over again.
I've often quoted Ben Franklin who said truth will very patiently wait for us. That seems perfectly reasonable and rational to me, but not to everyone. One past president of our state association challenged me with that unendingly irritating canard, "what's truth"? I had a respectable answer, but it wasn't definitive enough to prevent some kind of seemingly rational response. That's one of the many things over the years that haunted the back of my mind unconscionably gathering, collating, and correlating bits of information to develop answers, and I have the irrefutable definition of what's truth.
"Truth is the sublime convergence of history and reality. Everything we're told has a historical foundation and context, and everything we're told should bear some resemblance to what we're seeing going on in reality. If what's presented to us fails in either category, it's wrong, and all that's left to do is to develop the intellectual response to explain why it's wrong."
There's no rational come back to that. Either the history is accurate, or it's not. Either the information is accurate, or it's not. It's really that simple. So, what's the complication?
The unwillingness for so many to accept truth over fantasy! And that's a bigger problem than is realized, as the enemies of truth are legion. The enemies of truth engage in an unending conspiracy to prevent the truth from being told by way of logical fallacies, projection, lies of commission, lies of omission, gaslighting, misdirection, twisted use of language, speculation, and unfounded scares. Much of this corruption is promoted by government, academic, and the media.
Articles are great, but a writer can only put so much in an article, understanding requires reading books. Articles are great at pointing you in the direction to which books to read, and that's necessary if you really want depth of understanding, and the ability to define and defend truth.
