January 30, 2011 · 6:07 pm

Deception 101: Pulling off a massive fraud


Want to pull off a grand deception of mass proportions and in so doing rule a people? Look no further than King Leopold II and his colonizing efforts in the Congo. He was able to destroy a country while all the time convince others that he only wished to be father protector for the country.

Yes, it helps to have lots of money to buy opinions outright. However, Leopold didn’t need to spend much money to get the opinions he wanted. Why? Most of us are easily “bought off” by being associated with wealth and fame. It is also good to have an attractive exterior (and by attractive I don’t mean beauty as much as I mean desirable). But money and attraction alone will not be enough. You must consider doing the following:

1.      Find any number of people who will vouch for you. In order to pull off a grand deception you need emissaries who will secure the trust of important gatekeepers. These emissaries tend to be easily persuaded because they have a particular Achilles heel for fame or money. They are fame mongers.

2.      Buy some airtime and print space in order to advance the notion that you may be the most humble person with only the most philanthropic intentions for the place or the people you want to control. Be sure to focus on existing evils that you wish to bring to an end by your tireless sacrifices.

3.      Convene think tanks of those with expertise or interests in the area—those who might want to get in on the action be also those who really do want to address the evils (see #2) you say you want to stop. It is essential that these folks have solid ability to strategize and make decisions. Further, they should be quite assured that they are the most gifted individuals who can solve pesky problems. Flattery helps!

4.      By all means, do not tell these individuals your true intentions. Instead,

5.      Get these very energetic folks to start making decisions about how to care for the poor saps who haven’t enough wits to help themselves. They needn’t have any significant expertise in the area. Just give them some maps and let them start deciding what resources they think are needed, who should be in charge, who should do the work, and how to best do all of this without getting the rest of the world needlessly involved or suspicious—you know, to avoid red tape that will only slow down altruistic efforts.

6.      Make sure the think tanks recognize your great desire to do good and get them to vote you to head the efforts. You need to have power, remember. But don’t look too eager…agree to let someone else lead the newly formed committee next year. And send them home with gifts and ready to spread your good name to all who will listen.

7.      Be sure to give none of them any real power. When you convene the group next time, only invite those most loyal to you. Of course you’ll keep leading the group.

8.      Questions will arise from those not involved. Be very perceptive. What is their concern? Tell each person what they want to hear. Say it with passion and clarity. Get them to agree that you are the right person for the job and to say it publicly.

9.      Now that you have your “permissions”, start working two plans. The first plan is some small efforts to fix problems you said you would fix. Do it very publicly. Pay for journalists if you must. The “real” plan must also begin now. Do this quietly and without fanfare…someplace where you will not get much attention. If anyone complains, have ready a very realistic excuse. Admit to some problems but make sure it looks like you had nothing to do with the problem.

And there you have it. You have pulled on your grad deception. If you want to read how King Leopold II did this for real…read chapters 3-5 of Adam Hochschild’s King Leopold’s Ghost. It is an excellent example of deception and using the cover of kindness to get what you want. Even Christian missionary movements sung his praises and gave him money because they bought his story.

Now, most of us have no plans to create a colony but I suspect that we all have moments where we try to look more honorable than we really are. The difference between us and Leopold is the scope of our intention.

Leave a comment

Filed under deception, Democratic Republic of Congo

Tagged as , ,

January 27, 2011 · 11:52 pm

2011 Pastor Couple Retreat


This is our 2nd annual pastor couple retreat run at the Haft in the Poconos. If you know of a pastor couple looking for a retreat with other pastor couples to retool or take the time to think about the stresses of ministry and how to prevent burnout…then consider telling them about our retreat. Dates are in April and are listed on the 2011 flyer.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

January 26, 2011 · 5:28 am

State of the (Marital) Union: A time to review


Just prior to President Obama’s State of the Union address last night I thought of the above blog title and that it probably makes sense to every married couple to have their own state of the union review. Then I had fun imagining the similarities that such an occasion might have with the political review before the 2 other branches of power and the rest of the American public. First, the more dominant spouse speaks to what is going well with either cheers and/or ice-cold silence from the other spouse. Then the dominant spouse goes on to outline what they want to see happen in the following year. Afterward, the minority spouse rebuts and/or counter proposes his or her plans for the coming year. Since there is no media present to breakdown and critique the arguments, each spouse takes the role of reporter  to give a replay of the key points and also that of pundit by debating the merits of said points.

Sounds like most couple fights. I guess we don’t need a special night for this!

All kidding aside, it is good for couples to do an annual “take stock of our marriage” review. Here are some ideas that might be more constructive:

  1. Start with remembering why you got married and what you really like about each other. Too often we focus on the negative and allow those issues to skew the picture. Remind each other of their strengths and of their value to the marriage.
  2. Take time to listen to the dreams and concerns of each other. Take the lead in seeking out the mind of your spouse. What are their dreams and concerns? Don’t debate the merits of these dreams and concerns…and don’t problem solve to make them happen just yet. Just listen and validate everything you can! Oh, and if you are sharing your concerns…make sure you do two things: share them in a way that doesn’t accuse and attack (“I’m concerned that you don’t love me” may not help as much as “I’m concerned about how little time we spend together.”) and be sure to return the favor by asking about their dreams and concerns.
  3. Acknowledge your own weaknesses and ways you know you need to improve (could be anything from eating better to giving more compliments). And when your spouse does admit the need for improvement, resist piling on or adding to their list. Be bold. Ask for and extend forgiveness!
  4. Name the hot spots or threats to your marriage (external, internal, controllable, uncontrollable). See if you can’t find agreement on a couple. During this time, don’t go too deep into the complexities or get into problem-solving. Just name them in a matter-of-fact way.
  5. Set one goal and a simple means to start moving. Goals need to be something you can control. “Get our kids to respect us” isn’t one either of you can control. It also helps to be specific. “Spend more time together” is pretty vague. Try, “spend 2 hours one night per week together doing something other than talking about kids or watching television.” Then consider what barriers might block you from meeting the goal. Keep your efforts simple, doable, easy to repeat. This doesn’t mean you are setting the bar low but that you are trying to be faithful in the little things and trusting God for the bigger things.

One last thing: don’t wait til the following year to review. Otherwise you might have a mutiny at the next mid-term elections and get voted out of (dominant spouse) office.

4 Comments

Filed under Communication, love, marriage, Uncategorized

Tagged as ,

January 25, 2011 · 5:45 am

Free Career Counseling Clinic!


Every year our postgrad students run a free career counseling advice clinic. This year it is going to be run on 1/31/11 from 7:30 to 10 pm. You can partake of this in two ways

  1. Come to campus (200 N. Main Street, Hatfield, PA 19440) and meet face to face
  2. Call in (great if you don’t live in this area!)

If you are stuck and need a jump start on your career options and/or want to have your resume evaluated, this is a great opportunity at no cost to you. And you don’t just get a student, you get a student being supervised by our professors who have a ton of career counseling experience.

Call NOW for an appointment time that works for you. This is only 1 week away and space is limited! For more info, click the link above.

Leave a comment

Filed under Biblical Seminary, counseling

Tagged as ,

January 23, 2011 · 9:50 pm

Can one person do anything about mass rape?


Cover of "King Leopold's Ghost: A Story o...

Cover via Amazon

Ever notice how we can feel quite helpless when we hear about evil on a mass level? We’ve all had times when we’d rather turn away from systemic evil because we can’t stand to look at what we cannot change.

But check out the story of one Edmund Dene Morel as told in King Leopold’s Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial Africa (by Adam Hochschild, Houghton Mifflin, 1998). Most likely you’ve never heard of him or the mass destruction of 5-8 million Congolese during the reign of Leopold II, Belgian King who “owned” the Congo during the turn of the 20th century.

Instead of my summarizing this story, click the link above and read the story yourself (link goes to Amazon’s search inside, p. 1). You will see that one person who saw the problem of slavery and raping a country and did not turn away. Rather, he made it is work to tell the world and cause Americans and Europeans to rise up and force the government of Belgium to take control of that area away from their king.

Once again, the Congo is facing the destruction of some of its population–the women. The main method is not slavery but rape. The instigators are warring groups, Congolese and outsiders. The goal is to destroy by destroying families, spreading HIV and fear. Many women are raped multiple times.

What will we do?

Consider writing to your congressmen or the president or Sec Clinton to speak out about this problem. Also, you might consider giving to groups that are working in the area to care for these women and/or trying to change culture. Doctors without Borders (MSF), Amnesty International, American Bible Society, and many others are working in the area. And start with talking to your friends about this problem.

Unknown people can do much when we are willing to speak the truth.

3 Comments

Filed under Abuse, church and culture, Democratic Republic of Congo

Tagged as , ,

January 21, 2011 · 5:47 pm

rape counseling programs?


I have the pleasure of serving the American Bible Society as a volunteer these days. They have launched the project, “She’s My Sister” to work to care for rape trauma victims in the Democratic Republic of Congo and other countries in the “Great Lakes” region of Africa. But unlike most projects that want to help the needy, a central feature of the project is to change you and I so that we together work to value women more and protect their dignity and lives.

As part of an advisory council for the ABS, I’m looking to find any rape or trauma recovery programs that are in use now in Africa. If you know of anyone who has (a) lived in the region of Central Africa, or (b) has worked in Africa and had to deal with traumas (genocide, war, rape, etc.) will you ask them if they know of ANY rape or trauma programs being used. They can be good or bad, Christian or non-christian, big or small.

The ABS has a good plan already but we are looking to make it even more successful and we especially want to know what does or doesn’t work.

Feel free to pass on names or contacts who could help us!

9 Comments

Filed under Abuse, Congo, ptsd, Rwanda

Tagged as

January 18, 2011 · 7:48 pm

Adult Asperger’s?


DSM-IV-TR, the current DSM edition

Image via Wikipedia

In last night’s Psychopathology class I was discussing the significant changes throughout the history and editions of the Diagnostic & Statistical Manual (I-VI), especially in regard to the growth of mental health diagnoses. That led us to talk about a couple of diagnoses, once added, that have become “popular.” By popular I don’t mean en vogue or fun or the like. What I mean is that there has been a significant increase in the usage of that diagnosis.

What diagnosis? Asperger’s Syndrome.

Why? Some feel it is because the diagnosis is known and now those who went undiagnosed now are more likely to receive a correct diagnosis. Others feel that therapists are over diagnosing–lumping in every kid who has any hint of a social quirk.

It will be interesting to see what happens to the numbers being diagnosed when DSM5 comes out (2013?) and Asperger’s is subsumed into a generic Autistic Spectrum Disorder. I’d be willing to bet that fewer people will get the diagnosis because of stigma alone.

Whether over or under used, there are adults who meet criteria for this diagnosis and who might be helped (along with their spouses) if they had some hooks to use to understand what was happening in their relationships. If you are involved in counseling folks who meet criteria for this diagnosis…or think you might, check out the this website.

Click the link “tests” and check out a couple of the free adult forms you might use in the diagnostic process. They may not be quite as robust in their statistical properties, but they do give you a good way to narrow the conversation with your clients.

6 Comments

Filed under counseling, counseling science, Psychology

Tagged as , ,

January 17, 2011 · 12:03 pm

Interesting take on the DSM 5


A student of mine (thanks Andrew!) pointed out this essay about the future DSM in Wired magazine. Sometime in the next 2 years the American Psychiatric Association hopes to release version 5 to replace version IV-TR. Yes, they are doing away with roman numerals.

For those of you not in the counseling world, the DSM is what professionals use to diagnose mental health disorders. The original DSM was first published in 1952 and totaled 132 pages including appendices. Version IV-TR totals a whopping 942 pages. In it’s best form, the document enables professionals to communicate to each other about the symptoms of their clients. Further, individuals with a combination of symptoms may find that diagnostic criteria helps them understand that others have similar problems and can give some hope to finding effective treatments. From an economic standpoint, receiving an axis one diagnosis enables those with insurance benefits to receive some financial assistance in their treatment.

And while this document is founded upon scientific research and years of clinical expertise, the DSM is in no way free from politics. When the DSM moved from a psychodynamic view of illness (illnesses were couched in terms of their “reactions” from problems) to a supposed atheoretical, descriptive view of illness, certain diagnostic labels were kept. In the words of Theodore Millon (said at a seminar I attended), labels such as Borderline Personality Disorder were kept because, “We’d taken everything else from the analysts and so we kept that unfortunate label so they wouldn’t feel so bad.”

So, with the above in mind, take a read of the current political controversies surrounding new diagnoses and the problems with pediatric bipolar diagnoses. If you haven’t time to read the whole article, be sure to skip to the bottom and start reading after the photo of artistic renderings of heads. Read from there to the bottom. It gives you a view of the controversy.

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , ,

January 10, 2011 · 10:04 am

Thoughts on causation and tolerating complex answers


Three things have me thinking about causation: a comment on autism my wife heard on the radio…the Arizona shooting…and the ending of my Congo book (mentioned in the previous post). We love to know WHY something has happened. Why autism or any other illness? Why a senseless shooting? Why so much corruption and unrest in central Africa?

Why is a good essential question. Might it be part of being an image bearer of God? It is hard to have dominion over our world if we don’t have the capacity to understand cause and effect. But, being human and therefore limited hands us a challenge. How do we understand complex facets of problems. Too often we mistake correlations for causes. And even more often we limit the cause to one simplistic answer.

Simple works for us. It is more efficient. We consider a problem, conclude an answer, and move on to other subjects. If we couldn’t move on, we might bog down and lose traction in our lives. Simple also works for us humans when we want to lay the blame for something that has happened at someone else’s feet.

Here’s what I notice in many of these kinds of conversations. If you try to single out a particular causal facet for focused discussion, there will be others who say, “yes, but, you also need to consider…”. It is extremely hard to play out one part of the cause/effect without being accused of being biased.  And if you try to develop a laundry list of causes…the conversation often loses traction and some hear you as letting others (e.g., vaccine manufacturers, Sara Palin, Mobutu, etc.) off the hook.

Try this experiment!

So, try to have a conversation today where you either (a) try to single out a particular cause for some widely discussed situation, or (b) try to list the complexities of the situation…and see what happens. Would love to hear your experience! What happens when you single out a possible cause? What happens when you try to include all of the possible causes?

Not sure what to talk about? Try one of these:

Consider autism. Why does it happen and why does it seem to start happening soon after a vaccine? There are known neurotoxins in vaccines…child seems to develop them after being vaccinated…thus it is the fault of companies who make them (and the medical establishment that promote them). See if you can talk about the relationship between the two without getting into an argument. Or you might decide to discuss the fact that autism is higher in subsequently born children if they arrive within one year of their older sibling. (Of course, if this were true then we should be able to document higher autism rates in Catholic families from the previous century!)

Consider the Arizona shooting. Why would someone shoot so many people and have so little disregard for human life? Sounds like the shooter was delusional and probably suffering from paranoid schizophrenia (armchair diagnosis). Try discussing the possible causes of this behavior? Schizophrenia? Over the top political fighting language? Failure of the educational system to get him to treatment?

Consider the Congo. Why is there so much corruption and unrest? African culture? The sad effects of so many decades of European rule and racism? Greed over the countries natural resources?

 

5 Comments

Filed under Cultural Anthropology, News and politics

Tagged as , ,

January 7, 2011 · 5:48 pm

Obsession with race and classification


Cover of "The Troubled Heart of Africa: A...

Cover via Amazon

Why are we obsessed with the race or heritage of those we meet? Seems like we are overly interested in ethnicity…as is “”what are you?” kinds of questions that we ask those who seem exotic, different, or not clearly defined.

Am reading two books at once: Robert Edgerton’s book on Congo history, “The Troubled Heart of Africa” and Jean-Pierre Chretien’s “The Great Lakes of Africa: Two Thousand Years of History.” This obsession with lineage and ethnicity is not new. Both have numerous quotes from Europeans during explorations in the 1800s. Rwandan Hutus and Tutsis are variously described and “nilotic” (from the Nile), Semitic, Negroid, Greek in facial features, etc. Certain Congolese are described as Macaques (Monkeys) and those who hare “civilized” are described as “evolved.” Of course many described them as “hamitic” as in the tribe of Ham.

I know we are beyond (mostly) those dark days of abject, unabashed racism, but seems we still want to classify people. I’ve been asked, “What are they?” in regards to my kids (who are clearly African American). I imagine biracial folks get these questions in spades.

Why is it so important to know? What do we gain from asking? I think we ask for a couple of reasons.

  • Curiosity is probably one key reason. Some of us are attracted to different
  • Connection is probably another motivation. We’ve met someone who looks like this and want to feel close to this new person
  • Categorizing via racialization. We may want to know how to think about someone. “Are you Italian? Oh, so that explains why I think you are…” This is the biggest reason I think. It gives us clues (shortcuts and stereotypes) as to how we want to think about and respond to others. The ugly side of this is that we categorize in order to develop stratification or castes.

Are there other reasons we do this? Good ones?

9 Comments

Filed under Cultural Anthropology, Race, Rwanda

Tagged as , , ,