State of the Union at Lakota: The compliment of silance
I know a great deal about human behavior and would happily argue with the most respected minds in the fields of psychology and psychiatry regarding their theories wherever they came from in the world. I learned what I know because I’ve been around the block so many times that I have every brick, and crack memorized around that block. On my blog postings I openly invite comments, but there often isn’t any. This isn’t because people aren’t reading—they are. Just watch the daily counter off on the sidebar. However, in the world of strategy, silence is the best compliment. When “they” can’t beat you—whoever “they” may be, the only tactical option available to them is to ignore you and hope that social castigation will dislodge a deep-seated insecurity taking you out-of-the-way of “their” objectives.
Over the summer while on vacation in Florida my nephews and I had an intelligent conversation about human nature while throwing football in the condo swimming pool. One of my highly educated nephews argued that human beings are social creatures and needed to be brought together in optimal ways to manage peace and harmony in society, even if those instances are sometimes coerced by government. Of course I disagreed vehemently with that statement, not because he was wrong, but because that is only part of the issue. He is right; human beings are a social species. They learn from babies to mimic others and this is how we all start in life. 99.99999999999999999999999% of all human beings continue that destructive practice well into their adulthood—so he is right, humans are a social species. But my argument is that humans are destined at some point in their life to graduate from this way of thinking as the mind takes over what the social connections cannot provide and becomes a freely functioning entity of its own. I am this kind of person. I do not need the approval of anybody to make a decision, and this is a radical concept to most. I am able to function without social input based on the product of my own thinking. I do not need to consul, collaborate, or gain assurances about my decisions about my private life. It is a learned trait that I would argue every human being should strive for—but it takes courage—like a child learning to walk on their own for the first time. Human beings need to be able to function off the products of their own mind—but often they don’t. Instead, they gather together in clumps of social organisms like our primitive ancestors around a fire and wait for some village chieftain to instruct them what to do next. This is how we get into the political messes we are currently in.
The reason for this elaborate introduction is to explain this next phase in the Lakota school district levy fights and why things are the way they are. It might be noticed that the newspapers and I have very little to say to each other these days. I have thoroughly insulted the press and would not expect them to solicit my thoughts, but at this point it no longer matters. I have made my decisions based on the observed conditions, and the strategy of current was formulated on those observations. With that said, I offer this small article as an explanation for those curious. It gets back to me what Lakota administrators say when they think the doors are closed and the phone lines are secure. I know they are frustrated with me for being a “bomb thrower” and working from the outside instead of partaking in their structured manner, so this is more directed at them than my normal readers so that they can understand what is happening and why.
In past levy attempts I tried to work with Lakota in the traditional way. I came to the school board meetings and allowed compliance of their silly two-minute rule where the board members pretend to be in control of a courtroom setting by “allowing” members of the community to speak to them as though they were royal nobles of some sort. When I was acting as a spokesman for No Lakota Levy I put up with this behavior to respect the wishes of the members who wanted to see the levy defeated without fracturing their social relationships with Lakota. I did not like the social schmoozing that went on in the early days of my involvement. I also took note that as I began to go on the radio and television to argue the case of No Lakota Levy, those members did not want to sit near me at the school board meetings as they feared members of the Lakota community recognizing that we were all on the same team. They enjoyed the benefits of my tactics but wanted to maintain their social status with the same people from the other side of the political aisle. After a couple of levy defeats under my strategy, those fears began to relax a bit. People were less resistant to acknowledge their association with me as I had several victories under my belt at that time—and people love a winner. So people began to sit next to me at meetings and say hello in public. But not until then.
I went out of my way to speak with people from the other side like Ron Spurlock who was the acting superintendent until Mantia came along, Jenni Logan, the treasurer, and Linda O’Conner. I was happy to speak to them in a civil manner even though we agreed on very little. But I knew it wouldn’t last because the behavior wasn’t changing which put them in trouble. As nice of a man as Ron Spurlock was, he felt woefully slack during handshakes and he looked away a lot when I spoke to him. This was because he was in internal conflict.
At this point everyone in town was trying to advocate that I run for school board and become politically active. They still suggest the same when it comes to trustee spots and other high-profile political offices locally. Yet the strategy to the kind of victory I am after cannot be obtained in that fashion, so I never had any intention of indulging in that activity which frustrated people who want changes to the system within the system. When Mantia was hired essentially by Linda after all the discussions we had, I saw the direction that the school board was going. They hired a political divider who would come in and play all ends against the middle where Lakota would control the strategic high ground. Immediately that is what Mantia went on to do leaving Ron Spurlock to retire and stay on at Lakota as a consultant. Mantia came to a late night meeting with the key people of No Lakota Levy assuring us that she would do one thing if the levy failed, then she did another when that reality presented itself. Within a month of the levy failure Lakota was in full political mode. Mantia did not perform as a business mind, but as a progressive radical politician, and went straight to the type of levy passing tactics that was taught at the OSBA’s Levy University.
I came to one of the meetings announcing Lakota’s cuts and as Channel 19 was interviewing me in the main hallway at Lakota East, Mantia stood off to the side like she wanted to speak to me. When I made eye contact after the interview she looked away and hustled into the auditorium. It was a strange engagement that I noted for later. Then I saw Ron Spurlock who was approaching a man who was well-known at Lakota in the band circles—a popular guy who was well-respected. That man had come to the meeting with me, which I had known would cause trouble—which is why I did it. I wanted to confirm the moral position that I suspected about the school. After my television interview this “respected man” stepped next to me and Ron, who had been working his way through the crowd to a warm greeting, immediately stopped and turned away. Out of all the bad things that were said about me behind the scenes at Lakota, the much discussed Lakota Kroger Survey, the Letters to the Editor in the Pulse Journal, it was this event that bothered me the most. I liked Spurlock. I thought of him as a good man. But he was so terrified of the internal politics at Lakota, even though he was officially retired, that he didn’t want anybody of any authority at the school to see him even shaking hands with me. It was at that moment when I knew what Lakota was all about, and that the path to fixing it would not be by running for school board, or any other “respected” position. More extremes would be necessary.
A month later my group started Yes to Lakota Kids under tremendous pressure from community groups to bring No Lakota Levy away from being such a negative social influence on the community. I agreed to the charity group creation because it was a kind of checkmate against Lakota. This was confirmed when I organized a press conference. We were giving a $10,000 check to Lakota to help pay for student participation in sports. Both sides were talking and were going to be present to issue and receive the money. I brought the media. Nobody from Lakota showed up, instead excuses were provided as to why they couldn’t come. Anticipating this, we staged the press conference within walking distance of Lakota East where many officials especially from the athletic department were. Even better, the board of education was literally four miles down the road. It was a 15 minute drive for them, yet nobody showed. Channel 5 was there, Channel 19, The Cincinnati Enquirer, The Pulse Journal, but there wasn’t any Lakota representatives.
This didn’t surprise me at all. It simply exposed what was already known. Lakota couldn’t take a donation from their enemy No Lakota Levy, even to help children and they knew it. They needed the extortion of children to execute their demands, and would not stand for losing that emotional leverage against the community by my group. Lakota did exactly what I expected; they went on a full court press to smear me personally because they knew they would never pass a levy as long as I was intimately involved in the process. If I had been the kind of person who needed group reassurance as the foundations of my thinking, some of the moves made against me at this time might have destroyed me for life. This appears to certainly be their intention. They did not care who they hurt, or to what extent they executed their plans, as long as they preserved their strategic objectives, which was a tax increase. Mantia and others put a lot of pressure on the other No Lakota Levy people to publicly pull away from any association from me. The reason was that it was believed that in so doing I would feel the bite of being an out-cast and either change my behavior, or be ignored by the public.
Little did they know but I was choking under the “in” crowd and desperately wanted those shackles off so that I could be an out-cast once again, to have the freedoms that come with such a position. That is where the best strategy is, and what I desired. I did not want to be a school board member and fuss with people who constantly played things both ways every day of their lives for some perceived “greater good” and at the point I had arrived at, there was no desire to see public education preserved in any fashion. It’s a bad idea that should have never been implemented, and that is the direction I wanted to argue. I did not want the burden of being a spokesman for a system I think is destroying our youth even in protest against taxation.
Peer groups are learned in public schools primarily. The kids who are “in” and “out” are designated quickly. Kids who are “in” have something to bring the “greater good,” of whatever group is involved. Kids who are “out” do not. When I was in school I was certainly on the “out” group because I did not want to be in service to any group. I enjoyed thoroughly being on the “out” because there are many more opportunities for a colorful life outside of group comfort, which is what I’ve always strived for. Of course back then nobody really understood what I was rebelling against. My parents encouraged me to buy a class ring which they said would mean something to me later in life. It doesn’t. I never wore it, but simply gave it to whatever girlfriend I had at the time. They also told me I needed a school jacket, which I never wore—favoring my leather jacket instead. They also told me I needed to go to my five-year-reunion that was at Coney Island. So I did and while there they had the usual contests, who had been married the longest, who had the most children, who had the oldest children and that kind of thing. Out of the five categories in the contest I won three of them, I had been married the longest, (four years at that time), I had two children, three and two years old, clearly the oldest of the participants. In fact my children were running around playing tag around the podium where the Class President was speaking from. Yet I didn’t win a single category formally. I was sitting in plain view of everyone, my wife was there, my kids playing and screaming in delight running around the tables which everyone could see, yet I was as invisible to them all as a ghost on Christmas morning. Apparently it was frowned upon to bring children and spouses to the Class Reunion and socially I was supposed to know that. But I wasn’t about to go to Coney Island without taking my children. I never did things like that without them. So I brought them without asking if I could.
My wife and I laughed about that event for years. It was a clear example of the social need for groups of pack mentality to preserve their thinking on an issue in order to maintain a pre-conceived notion. The evidence of who had the most and oldest children was running around the podium during the award presentation, yet I did not win a single category. That was because I was an outcast even then, and very proud of it. The only retaliation they had to offer to me was to hope being castigated from their group would make me feel some level of shame, and desire to comply socially. Of course that concept is horrendously preposterous to anyone who knows me. Just yesterday I was having a nice lunch by myself taking some time to read a book and enjoy my day. Another man dressed in business attire sat down next to me, first asking if I was dining with anyone. I said no. So he sat down and started talking about the upcoming Bengal season, the quality of the food, the weather, about anything and everything. The guy was a real chatterbox. I was trying to be polite, but there was a reason I was eating lunch alone. I wanted to read my book. Nothing the guy said was of any value to me, and it was really getting on my nerves. After about five minutes I told the guy as politely as possible, “You know, it’s hard to read a book and have a conversation.” He looked at me as if I threw Holy Water upon his forehead. “Sorry, I just thought you wanted some conversation. I saw you sitting here by yourself and thought you wanted company. I guess you don’t…….right?” I replied as nicely as possible, “that’s right. I don’t want any company.” He got up in uncomfortable silence and took his food with him and disappeared into the restaurant. I was so happy that he left and for the next hour and a half I was alone with just my book, my food and the nice outside air of a late summer August day. When I was ready to leave, that guy was inside the restaurant sitting at the bar talking to the bartender and anybody nearby who would listen. Three businessmen were comparing Fantasy Football picks with him and they were all happy as sluts at a navel port gabbing at each other with much fanfare. The man didn’t look at me even though I had to pay the remainder of my bill with the bartender. It was easier not to acknowledge each other, and I was grateful that he felt that way.
That same mentality was present when Ron Spurlock turned away from me in the halls of Lakota East to preserve his position in the social structure of Lakota. Well before I called the levy supporters at Lakota “Latte sipping prostitutes with asses the size of car tires and diamond rings to match” in the Cincinnati Enquirer the wheels of castigation were well in place. I had tried to work with the Lakota school board and the superintendents to bring down their costs. I worked with the media nicely to give them entertainment within the context of their acceptability, and I was gloriously successful at it. I even played the charity game to make my friends happy who stood against the tax increases, but still wanted to maintain relationships with members of the Lakota administration. But none of them wanted to stand by the truth and deal with the severity of the situation in the manner it called for. They all separated into their various groups and expected me to facilitate myself to their whims, which simply wasn’t going to happen. When I didn’t, not even good people like Ron Spurlock wanted to be seen speaking with me in public out of fear that it would put him socially on the “out.” People fear more than most anything in the world being rejected from their respective “groups.”
I learned a long, long time ago that these groups are more destructive to the human psyche than all the mental deficiencies available to insanity. They are as my nephew argued part of the human condition generated upon the human mind during childhood when dependency is the only option. Good parents never allow their children to feel the bite of this dependency so that as maturity sets in, those individuals grown into self-driven entities reliant on their own thoughts and motivations and cast away group participation like a snake sheds its skin. The human race cannot survive with the mode of thinking that drove Ron Spurlock to walk the other way under the Mantia regime at Lakota, or the class president ignoring my children as they ran around playing at her feet.
When groups of people are at wit’s end and cannot strategically deal with the impact of an individual, they attempt to look everywhere that they aren’t. They attempt to ignore such people so to preserve their own thoughts and feelings without a challenger. Shortly after No Lakota Levy and I parted ways after the events described above, I received the following note from a radical levy supporter at Lakota. The contents are particularly revealing as it confirms everything stated:
richhoffmanhateskids@gmail.com
Submitted on 2012/03/19 at 4:40 pm
That letter writer was an adult who holds a very responsible position within the Lakota school system, and provides insight into the kind of mentality that Ron Spurlock feared so much on a cold February evening at Lakota East. As mature and sophisticated the participants of the education profession pretend to be, they are still functioning human beings that are deficient of self-reliant thinking, and as far as I’m concerned, behind the evolutionary curve. The money they ask for with tax increases is to cover the gaps of their thinking and mask their internal neurosis. It has nothing to do with reality, but only the primal need for group behavior to separate social tasks into blocks of consensus building. The very foundations that they have built their institutions upon is set to sink in the sand during high tide as it has no philosophical foundation to plant roots of thought. All they can do when such a reality is presented to them is to ignore the facts to preserve their warped illusions.
That is why this next levy attempt of 2013 will be different. I will not try to solve the problem from the inside, because it clearly will not work under any condition. This is a problem that must be solved from the outside—in, because the root of the problem is on the inside and must be starved out of existence. They cannot see the problem because they refuse to look at it and nobody on a school board or through the mechanism of politics can solve the problem in that insider fashion. So my new tactic will be to launch the attack from the outside in, to famish the antagonists from within their own walls by starving out their supply chain. Such strategies brought down the rule of the Mongols in China, and it brought down the Roman Empire. It can bring down little ol’ Lakota, which is what I intend. It’s not against education that I rebel; it is the institutionalism of individual minds that I despise. I love education. I just can’t stand the process that is currently accepted, and I don’t like the politics connected to it.
As it should be clear by now, at no point in my life did I care to be on the “inside.” I have been at times when groups wanted to use my talents, but I do not volunteer to go. They come to me. And they can go away just as well, but my position does not change, as it has been built upon the foundations of logic and my personal observations. I will not surrender that position to the illogical perspective of group consensus to preserve the neurosis of established thinking if that thinking is wrong. My nephew was right from an academic standpoint, human beings are a social species. They need each other, and seek to speak, touch and interact with others of their kind. But I am right too, that such behavior is for the human race equivalent to a small child learning to walk for the first time afraid to let go of what props them up. A human mind needs to learn to walk on its own, free of emotional shackles to inferior intellects and it must grow from there perpetually over a lifetime. What Lakota does, and other institutions like them is artificially constrain thinking so to preserve political beliefs forged by group consensus, and that is a recipe for disaster that I cannot, and will not support—but will fight as though it was the most corrosive organism in existence—because it is.
Now, if anybody who has read this wish to argue with me, feel free to leave a comment below. I won’t chastise or belittle you for trying. I like the mental exercise. But if you don’t, your silence will confirm all that I have said above. So have at it……………….
Rich Hoffman
Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!
