Why Can’t We All Go To School on Ludus?

Pretty sure my friend said this as a semi-joke, but the true answer is, we totally can, and we really should.

I have written a lot about cultural evolution, evo theory of cooperation, the destabilization of the American CCP (Cooperation Competition Paradigm), GWAS of educational attainment, and what I perceive to be the greatest threat to the society of the United States going forwards.  But the clear and present danger I see is what happens the day after the Nov. elections.  I’m on the deck of the Titanic and I can see the iceberg from here.  After the 2016 election there was some analysis linking low EA (educational attainment) to Trump voters and I wrote about it here.  Nate Silver wrote about it here, and Dan McCormack here.

Over the summer two hugely important papers came out, one describing the heritability of EA and one linking higher EA to higher social class mobility.  The reason these papers are critically important is not just the sample size– Dr. Lee’s results are derived on the basis of 1.1 million SNPs– but the information encoded in the results.  It seems pretty obvious that in the age of Cambrian explosions in robotics and machine learning and agile innovation a college degree is going to be a basic neccessity to get a good job.  The good middleclass jobs of the 21st century are projected to be computer programmer and data scientist, not auto-factory worker or miner/farmer.  IOW theres no place for Jefferson’s Noble Yeoman Farmers in the 21st century economy.

What this means for the balanced CCP is that the fitness landscape has changed.  In the past conservative tendency humans could make a reasonable case for common sense and a good work ethic having more value than a fancy college education…that’s not true anymore.

Here is another huge problem…this is a graphic of the 2016 Scholastic poll.  Hillary won that fantasy election by 2 votes to 1.  The only thing I want you to take away from this graphic is that roughly 1/2 of the students depicted will be able to vote in the 2020 election.

Will they vote?  Cant say…but this bluing of the public school map is more evidence that Cthulu is still swimming slowly and inexorably left.  Pair that with fact that academe is painted blue and its a pretty grim picture of the breakdown of the CCP.  We have current divisions on race and gender and culture and geolocation in the electorate– a division on educational attainment of college vs non-college will be disastrous.

Two books that came out on the same day have really influenced my thought on this… Coddling by Jon Haidt and How Fascism Works by Jason Stanley.  I think these books should be read in tandem, in context.  I think the premise of Coddling is fine, and certainly we should implement its precepts– but the idea that it will mend the imbalance in academe is ludicrous.  The problem with opening minds and a safe space for discussion is that are not any conservative ideologies that can compete on 21st century university campuses.   Slowing change in the age of time dilation imposed by the internet is probably a very good idea, but unsaleable to college students hoping to turn degrees into good paying jobs.  And other good ideas– free trade, limited government, are basically unsalvageable because Trump is actually doing the exact opposite.  The adjacency-branding of conservative ideology is unmitigatedly horrible for high EA youth: Trump, Nazis, IDW edgelords (Eric Weinstein) and barking islamophobes (Sam Harris), dusty ancients like Charles Murray, Proud Boys, KKKlansmen, ridickkulous goofs like Jordan Petersen, incels, channers, confederate revanchists, white supremicists and nationalists, evangelicals, racists and misogynists oh my…its pretty unappealing.  Haidts sillie, fluffy, well-intentioned book is epically useless.  See here.

The problem with Haidts book is that its a cheat– and im just going to call it “Coddling” because that is what it is– both sides know full well the real reasons conservative ideology cant get traction on campuses– the free speech screaming from the right is just performative.  But its also fascist myth-making– the idea that terrific conservative ideas are embargo’d because of liberal bias, and the state should take over the schools/courts/google etc.

This is happening.  And its scary, but what im more scared of is the idea of two subpopulations diverging on the basis of educational attainment, two classes of citizens, the educated and the un-educated.  And im not even going to mention IQ, even though EA is consistently used as a proxy for IQ in research…because its CORRELATED, not causal.

What im terrified of is that the conservative tendency half of the CCP is being presented with a stark choice:  Collapse or survive by embracing fascism.  Now I love Collapse…its fascinating, magnificent…an obsession…I want to be the Tanya of Mars (one of my favorite scientists) but of Collapse.  The Collapse zone, on the border of complexity and chaos is where SOC occurs.  And Collapse would be the optimal outcome for the GOP– because it could reinvent itself to be modern, inclusive, adaptive, appealing to youth, minorities, women, etc.  But I dont think that will happen…in complexity science we dont say tribe…we say organism.  What will an organism do to survive?

So Ive been slurred pretty often as a Social Justice Warrior…I guess it isnt a slur if Im proud to be one.  So I want to be a social justice warrior for the right in the domain of educational attainment.


There are things we could be doing that would work:

1. create viable, relevant online universities.  For-profit online unis are currently an epic fail.  Graduation rate 22% and a dismal job placement rate– traditional degrees are just worth more in the marketplace.  And Trump and DeVos are working to make them worse, by deregulating them.  Its projected that half of all universities will be online by 2027– lets make the graduation rate and job placement stats comparable to brick and mortar schools WITH GOV REGULATION.  Better yet, lets make college free for everyone that needs help!

2.  give every US citizen highspeed internet access via a workfare infrastructure program.  So kids could go to college from home, in situ, right from the rural heartland.  Part of inheritance is symbolic and behavioral– letting conservative youth go to school in situ could go a long ways to rebalancing the CCP.  And also– rebalancing geolocation.

3.  The Virtuality is coming for us anyways— lets get there first.  People are lately deploring the growth of the internet comms giants and their insipid response to security and privacy protections in favor of making vast wads of cash– thats just how unregulated capitalism works, sry.  But we could PLAN for an egalitarian, democratic Virtuality if we got started now.

We could use the government to create these programs, which is a profoundly anti-conservative idea, i guess.  But my favorite would be The Ludus Strategy.

This wont make a lot of sense unless you read the book (recommended) or see the movie Ready Player One, so here’s a shmoop of chapter seven.  Ludus is a planet in the Virtuality that is home to thousands of free public schools.

Some cool things about Ludus:  all the virtual schools are built from the same template, excellent teachers can be copied in virtual presence to thousands of schools, everyone wears uniforms, football tackles are virtual (no CTE)…and most of all its FREE.

Could conservatives be persuaded that these are good ideas where government intervention could level the playing field for them and their offspring (instead of for minorities and women)?  Because quotas and force installing conservative professors in colleges and Haidt style “Coddling” just wont work.  Conservatism needs to evolve in the 21st century to be appealing to high EA youth (college students).




Sorry this got so long.  But I am very sure the day after the midterms the analysis is going to show the anti-Trump vote centers around EA, and this will just exacerbate the divergence between the two sub-populations.  Here is a sample from a recent poll…

…the only demographic Trump still carries is non-college white males, and only by 55%.  It will be disastrous for the US if we are divided into college and non-college  sub-populations.

We can do better for America.

Jon Haidt, Jason Stanley, and Cheater Detection

Once upon a time, when i was still a newly hatched amorphous netizen, I contributed to a blog where all we did was debate the possibility of the SuperRational, a concept drawn from Hofstadters Metamagical Themas.  Its all kinda hazy in retrospect but i think i remember my position was…(to radically oversimplify)…that superrational beings, even a homogeneous group of peer superrational beings, would be impossible because of that ol’ demon, biology.  And I still think that to this day.  I spent some time among the rationalists at SSC (who sadly turned out to be rationalizers instead of rationalists) and that only cemented my position.  Biology rules.  The other thing that rules is complexity, most specifically the CCP.  Explainer here.

Of course I have always been intensely interested in evo theory of cooperation.  And that’s my problem with Haidt’s new book Coddling the American Mind.  Its a cheat and both sides know it, but continue to support it and give it & give rave reviews.  For conservatives it validates the mythology that terrific conservative ideology is being deliberately embargo’d from academe because of unfair liberal bias.  For liberals it supports the mythology that we are all one, we just need to “open our minds” to heal the Great American Divide.  Its a transaction.  And I just don’t think moral psychology will work.  Haidt seems to favor the David Brooks model– respect first and then try to change their minds.  The reason I think this won’t work is the example of congress today– normative behavior has been shattered, as we can readily observe in microcosm.  GOP defectors have invaded congress.  Democrats are starting to retaliate as demonstrated in the Kauvanagh nomination hearings.  Retaliation is strongly coded in the human brain…and this is a desperate situation.  Much like harsh conditions imposed on Germany post WWI contributed to the rise of the Hitler, we could see democratic retaliation rage out of control after November.

In academe conservative ideology is just non-competitive in a contemporary university environment.  The evolved state of the US education system is much too big a hill to climb starting from here.  So while I think Coddling is great, and we can certainly benefit from it as a nation, it should be read in strict tandem with Jason Stanley’s book, How Fascism Works.  The great chasm opening up between liberal tendency and conservative tendency subpopulations in the US isnt race or gender or geography– its educational attainment.  Over the summer there have been some huge GWAS studies published on the heritability of educational attainment and the correlation of EA and social mobility.  I think there is a very real possibility that the conservative base will embrace fascism in some form going forward.  It is the desperate struggle of an organism for survival, and the very reason the conservative base embraced Trump in the first place.  They literally have no where else to turn.

So I have thought about a solution.  This would require both sides working together, and not faking it like Coddling which is basically transactional.  Half of universities and colleges are projected to be online by 2027.  This would be great to re-balance the CCP– because youth from conservative families could get their education in situ.  But impossible while Trump is president.  IPOF Trump and DeVos are actively working to destroy online education by blowing up regulation of for-profit online schools.  Like Trump has said publically, he “loves the uneducated”.  Because the uneducated are the only people that will vote for him going forward.  Currently online academies have a graduation rate of 22%, and the degrees are not really competitive with brick and mortar degrees–if we could help create viable online education, it could be a solution to our current biological woes.



Why Public Shaming and De-platforming Work

I disagreed with Dr. DeDeo the other day.  He was deploring the outing of a 19 year old white supremacist/neo-nazi by a journo.  I said public shaming is healthy and effective for society.  My example is the failed Unite the Right 2.0 march in DC, where only about 2 dozen bodies showed.  I think these two pictures (from journos) did a whole lot to suppress turnout.

The Tiki Nazis torchlight parade on the night before the Charlottesville Unite the Right march.

And the juxtaposition of the Confederate and Nazi flags in the Charlottesville Unite the Right march.

My point: there’s a social capital penalty for anti-social behavior.  Culture is h. sapiens sapiens greatest adaptation– it enabled us to live in societies and (possibly) grow our enormous expensive brains (Social Brain Hypothesis).  Culture in the US is trending blue because of demographic diversity, empowerment of women, and globalization– evolutionary theory of culture states that culture doesn’t shape society as much as society shapes culture according to its needs– we NEED to become a pluralist, tolerant, multi-racial, multi-ethnic, multi-gendered society because of demographic evolution.  And because all these diverse sub-populations have the constitutional right to vote.

I also think de-platforming works and Jon Haidt’s Heterodox Academy is a grievous waste of spacetime.  Here is one example from this last week.

Kaitlin Bennett gets a cease and desist order from Kent State University.  No university student group would sponsor her rally.

Heres Milo weeping over being de-platformed.

Over the past three years, I have spent literally millions of dollars trying to do talks, speeches, events, rallies and protests, to say nothing of all the stuff I do behind the scenes I can never tell you about. A lot of that money was my own wealth, from before I even started in journalism.

My events almost never happen. It’s protests, or sabotage from Republican competitors or social media outcries. Every time, it costs me tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. And when I get dumped from conferences, BARELY ANYONE makes a sound about it — not my fellow conservative media figures and not even, in many cases, you guys. When was the last time any of you protested in the street at the treatment meted out to me or Pamela Gellar or Mike Cernovich or Alex Jones?

I have repeatedly put myself in harm’s way in service of American values. My annual security bill amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars — just so my husband and I don’t get killed going for sushi. I have to make that money somehow just to stay afloat, and that doesn’t scratch the surface of staff costs, insurance, your insane American taxes.

I’ve fought bitterly and endlessly for freedom in a country I don’t even belong to — not for my benefit, but for yours. I have been betrayed and abandoned by everyone who ever called themselves my friend, with a small handful of notable exceptions.

I was a significant factor in Donald Trump getting elected, for which I have received zero credit. I almost single-handedly ignited the current debate about free speech on campus and NO ONE has ever matched my ability to draw attention to these issues.

His events almost never happen…isnt that a good thing?  The reason conservative ideology cant get a toehold on campuses is not liberal bias– its because no one wants to be conservative anymore– at least not young people with high educational attainment like college students.  Conservatism is an anachronism in the 21st century– it badly needs a reformation.

I think de-platforming and public shaming are emergent socio-cultural behaviors.

And I think they work for the benefit of society.

UPDATE:  Complexity theorists love to make analogies to the human body, itself a complex adaptive system.  Steve Bannon just got disinvited from the New Yorker festival.  I like to think of de-platforming and public shaming as cultural T-cells and leucocytes removing toxins from the vital bloodstream of society.

CCP Explainer

So I have been asked to write an explanation of the Cooperation Competition Paradigm, or the CCP.  The CCP is one part of the vast, largely undiscover’d country of complexity science.  I can’t really do it justice– so I will defer–if you want an explanation of the advent of complexity science, read Dr. Baranger.  Or read Per Bak.  Here’s two wonderful texts that i had for coursework– read Bar Yam and Strogatz— or take a coursera class on complexity.  I also benefitted from reading Kropotnik’s Mutual Aid.

Here’s a salient example from Dr. Baranger’s paper–

“Finally, there is one more property of complex systems that concerns all of us very closely, which makes it especially interesting. Actually it concerns all social systems, all collections of organisms subject to the laws of evolution. Examples could be plant populations, animal populations, other ecological groupings, our own immune system, and human groups of various sizes such as families, tribes, city-states, social or economic classes, sports teams, Silicon Valley dotcoms, and of course modern nations and supranational corporations. In order to evolve and stay alive, in order to remain complex, all of the above need to obey the following rule:”
Complexity involves an interplay between cooperation and competition.
“Once again this is an interplay between scales. The usual situation is that competition on scale n is nourished by cooperation on the finer scale below it (scale n + 1). Insect colonies like ants, bees, or termites provide a spectacular demonstration of this. For a sociological example, consider the bourgeois families of the 19th century, of the kind described by Jane Austen or Honore de Balzac. They competed with each other toward economic success and toward procuring the most desirable spouses for their young people. And they succeeded better in this if they had the unequivocal devotion of all their members, and also if all their members had a chance to take part in the decisions. Then of course there is war between nations and the underlying patriotism that supports it. Once we understand this competition-cooperation dichotomy, we are a long way from the old cliche of “the survival of the fittest”, which has done so much damage to the understanding of evolution in the public’s mind.”
There are quite a few different models– conservative/liberal, farmer/forager, survive/thrive, order/chaos, red/blue, closed/open, etc.  I like settler/explorer myself.  Settlers are group-loyal, unquestioning, obey rules, value age, value experience, value the past, value authority, non-risk takers, etc– text book conservatives.  Explorers are intellectually curious, risk-takers, rule breakers, value the present and the future over the past, innovaters, creatives, empathizers, etc.  It seems logical to me that 10,000 years of evolution would create a CCP where two general sub-populations would adapt to maximize exploitation of the environment.  Another concept is periodic equilibrium– at times explorer phenotype had greater fitness in the environment– at times settler phenotype did.  But mostly there was equilibrium– peer fitness between the two phenotypes, and successful cooperation and competitition between the two tribes.

Now in the 21st century there is a degradation of the balance of the American CCP for two reasons– 1) In the 21st century to have a good job generally requires education and training.  It’s postulated that the good middle class jobs of mid-century will be computer programmer and data scientist, not factory worker or miner or farmer– jobs increasingly automated by the Cambrian Explosion in Robotics and Machine Learning.  There is no place for Jefferson’s Noble Yeoman Farmers in a tech-focused economy.  That is why the fight to try to insert conservative ideology into university campuses is a fight doomed to fail.  The OpenMind project is just sillie– Haidt wrote about openess, and conservativism isnt open– IPOF tunnel vision and rejecting facts and science has become a selective advantage for the red tribe.  Conservative ideology is non-competitive in the marketplace of academic ideas- so the only tribe capable of having an “open mind” will automatically reject stale, archaic conservative ideology!  Please note– capitalism is NOT the same as conservative ideology.   Conservatism is about slowing change, using tested forms, using experience.  That worked previously but its way past its sell-by date under time dilation imposed by the internet and tech.  Especially with young college students.  Its basically ancestor worship.

The second reason the CCP is dis-equilibriating is demographics– the settlers are becoming older, whiter and more male.  Percent white (ie, non-hispanic caucasian) is expected to drop below 50% by mid-century.  In theory, by the rules of recombination and genetic diversity in a successful CCP, equal numbers of both settler tendency and explorer tendency would be born– both are successful phenotypes.  But the settler ideology (conservatism) is maladaptive to including women and minorities, even if in those demographics half of the reps would biologically trend conservative.  By biological I mean also the inheritance of environment, something Dr. Zimmer notes in wonderful book– She Has Her Mother’s Laugh.  Past GOP presidents have tried to reach out to hispanics unsuccessfully– Trump seems to be trying drive them away.

My narrow field of study is sand-pile collapse.  I believe the equilibrium system of the US is collapsing, the CCP is collapsing.  There will be a new emergent form for the GOP– but the Dems seem to be able to go forward more easily– more adaptive to diversity and innovation, already focused on the future, science and tech.

Collapse is not a bad thing…its how new successful forms emerge at the border of equilibrium and chaos.

It is How Nature Works.


I don’t even have the words to describe how much I love Westworld, and I have a very good vocabulary.  It has all my favorite thought experiments played out in truly luscious, vivid cinematography– can a machine be human?  what does it mean to be human?  what is consciousness?  emergence, revolution, the power of love, the power of technology– immortality, resurrection and…becoming a monster.  Thats one of my favorite themes– does one have to become a monster to fight monsters?  Prominent in Monoke Hime and Shengeki no Kyojin.  This Sunday is the last ep for the season, but another season is contracted for by HBO.

So I won’t post spoilers– just conjecture.  So who are these guys?  When they first appeared I thought they might be desert raiders from Bedouin World, but those are standard dusters, not cloaks and robes.  Those are long guns and high tech– lances? spears? they are carrying.  And the masks– reminiscent of some  postapocalyptic mad-max-style future dystopia– SciFi World?  Where did they come from?  Through the Door?

I cant wait to find out.

So of course in my incessant quest to try to understand how conservative tendency brains work, I dropped by the SSC commentariat to see what they thought of Westworld.  Such a mistake– the commenters were very critical, picking it apart…it reminded me of the scene in The Last Battle (CS Lewis is a huge favorite of SSC) where the dwarves are eating a splendid feast but all they can do is cry and complain how terrible the food is.  I shouldnt have expected anything else– Westworld is basically a slave rebellion story.

The same with the SSC discussions of The Expanse.  The Expanse is great!  I have read all the books– but the trogs* at SSC dont seem to know that Corey is actually two guys that originally intended The Expanse as a video game design– I love how organic it is, all the branching paths and sub-stories, I love the Belters’ cultural and civilizational mashup.  Its so sad that one’s political leanings or brain biochemistry should ruin taking pleasure in great works of art.  Because film and video are our masterpieces now.

*You will note my use of trog as a catchall phrase for conservative tendency.  I took it from a quote by IDW darling Eric Weinstein, from the top of the intellectualdark.website where he says “we are not troglydytes”.  But you are– maybe not alt-right frogs, but trogs.


The Heterodox Academy is Just Affirmative Action for Conservative Ideology

This seems gobsmackingly obvious to me.  I once asked a conservative friend what conservatives want from liberals– he said, “we want to be respected even when we are wrong”.  And this is what the heterodox academy tries to do on university campuses.  But all ideas are not created equal, and wrong, stupid, and bad ideas simply don’t belong on campuses in the free marketplace of ideas.  The reason campus conservatism is headed for extinction is that its past its sell-by date– and its purely maladaptive in a 21st century environment.

Heres Haidt desperately trying to promote the NYT’s joke commenter– David Brooks, famous for his iconicly clueless Applebee’s salad bar quotes.

ummm…this looks like it would be impossible to implement, and why not just go to a parlimentary system?  Our presidential system imposes a two party system.  But Haidt is desperate to find some value in Brooks’ writing– newsflash– There are no “great” David Brooks columns.

Free speech is just a stalking horse to try to get conservative ideology onto campuses.  But the real reason conservatives are going extinct in university culture is that not all ideas are created equal, and conservative ideology is non-competitive among the educated.  It only appeals to the conservative base.

I liked this vox article and these comments from Kevin Krause:

No one wants to acknowledge this, but selection for admission to the top schools is largely based on IQ.  And having a successful 4 year college program is surely largely restricted to the upper third of the bell curve.  Like i said here, college educated whites are the white demographic Trump cant persuade.

Educational attainment is used in large scale genomic studies as a proxy for IQ.  Maybe the simplest answer is that conservative phenotype just isnt as smart.  Its not selection for liberal bias in academe– its selection for IQ!  And thats why the HBD guys should back-off racial IQ theory– because I think we will soon be able to prove btwn group difference in IQ– between liberal tendency and conservative tendency.

So I don’t think the Heterodox Academy is going to solve the problem.  Lets face facts, conservative ideology is unable to compete among SMART PEOPLE LIKE COLLEGE STUDENTS AND COLLEGE PROFESSORS.  And all the affirmative action in the world won’t fix the problem.

Jon Haidt, who should know better, is trying to maintain lifesupport for conservative ideology.  IPOF, conservatism NEEDS to collapse– so that can be a new emergent form, that is 21st century adaptive.

The (Pseudo) Intellectual Dark Web Is Just Another Witch-Ghetto

I always thought “Scott Alexander” was a super smart guy until I read this post.  The first glaring wrongness that gobsmacked me was Scott lumping Jonathan Haidt in with the “Intellectual Dark Web” folks.

That was very puzzling to me because I have read The Righteous Mind and the most salient point is that humans are not rational in decision making.  In the sense that Scott Alexander, the SSC commentariat and the IDW all claim to be rationalists while they are actually rationalizers, Jon Haidt is the anti-IDW.   This seems like a thoughtless mistake to have made, and I became extra-skeptical about the slate star codex piece.


Here’s the screen cap from the original (where Scott later changed Jonathan Haidt to Eric Weinstein.)

I will let Dr. Church explain why this is such a crazypants mistake.

I don’t know if you’ve read The Righteous Mind, but Jon Haidt makes the point that even people who consider themselves very rational are not using a rational argument when making decisions. They’re making decisions and then using the rational argument to rationalize. A lot of what he says sounds obvious once you restate it, but I found the way he says it and backs it up with social science research very illuminating, if not compelling.

The elephant, as he refers to it, the thing that’s making your decisions in your life, is deciding that this person is telling you that you’re responsible for something you don’t feel responsible for. It’s telling you that you have to sacrifice many things that you don’t want to sacrifice. From your viewpoint, that person is inconvenient, incorrect, and you’re going to ignore them. The more they insult you and your way of life, the less you’re going to listen to them, and then you’re going to make a bunch of rationalizations about that. This is why we have problems.

When I initially tried (and failed epically) to comment at SSC, this piece was one of my inspirations– i still think it is spot on.

FOX’s slogans are “Fair and Balanced”, “Real Journalism”, and “We Report, You Decide”. They were pushing the “actually unbiased media” angle hard. I don’t know if this was ever true, or if people really believed it. It doesn’t matter. By attracting only the refugees from a left-slanted system, they ensured they would end up not just with conservatives, but with the worst and most extreme conservatives.

They also ensured that the process would feed on itself. As conservatives left for their ghettos, the neutral gatekeeper institutions leaned further and further left, causing more and more conservatives to leave. Meanwhile, the increasingly obvious horribleness of the conservative ghettos made liberals feel more and more justified in their decision to be biased against conservatives. They intensified their loathing and contempt, accelerating the conservative exodus.

The equilibrium is basically what we see now. The neutral gatekeeper institutions lean very liberal, though with a minority of conservative elites who are good at keeping their heads down and too mainstream/prestigious to settle for anything less. The ghettos contain a combination of seven zillion witches and a few decent conservatives who are increasingly uncomfortable but know there’s no place for them in the mainstream.

Here’s an analysis i wrote of Struggle.

This is a really perceptive article, The Eternal Struggle.  It is one of the two things I read that made me excited about commenting at SSC, the other being UNSONGIn Struggle Alexander speaks to the cultural evolution that has stranded the Red Tribe outside of traditional institutions and normative standards, and the formation of alternative media bubbles and the burgeoning Red Tribe hatred of academic communities.

Its obvious to me after reading the post again that the IDW is just another ghetto for witches, like 4chan or the sad/rabid puppies or incel.me.com .  After all, traditional conservative intellectuals have largely left the building.

I have to say to say to Alexander, remove the beam from your eye please.  Or like one of my Doctor Dad’s favorite sayings, “physician heal thyself…first” .  If you dont have the clarity of vision to discern your own flaws, please refrain from analyzing and proscribing for others.