I have to be careful in this post. Parts of it will sound distasteful so some. But the basic idea is the same as witness protection programs for criminals. As a society we have decided that at times we will protect criminals for their cooperation to achieve more important outcomes. North Korea’s decision-makers are not criminals (everything they do is probably legal). I’m just using the analogy to explain. I[…] Keep reading →

One place I could see changing things in North Korea is its relationship with China. I’m sure the lack of knowledge I show in this post will make me look ignorant, but I’ll share anyway. Most of what I know about relations between China and North Korea come from three sites The Council on Foreign Relations’ report The China-North Korea Relationship The Council on Foreign Relations’ report The Six-Party Talks[…] Keep reading →

I’ve described a system where when all actors act in their interests, everybody loses, except perhaps a few dozen decision-makers in North Korea. I’ve described what I think won’t substantively change the situation in North Korea. Yesterday I wrote about what wouldn’t change things. One of the greatest lessons I learned in business school applies here, as well as to all so-called moral problems: If the system leads to only[…] Keep reading →

I have found people outside North Korea quick to express feelings of moral outrage, indignation, and injustice by judging North Korean leaders. They call them monsters, bad, evil, and so on. I have found such judgment counterproductive to influencing others (as well as my own well-being). If you don’t like what’s happening there and want to change it, expressing judgment may make you feel better, but you sacrifice ability to[…] Keep reading →

Last post I pointed out the stakes to individual North Korean decision-makers. That perspective implies North Korean decision-makers are part of a larger system they have little control over and have little choice not to follow their roles within it without grave risk to themselves and everything they care about. With so little choice, what do they want? What do they pursue? Of course they want material prosperity and security,[…] Keep reading →

Continuing yesterdays’ post… In the examples above, the categorization schemes worked because they categorized something with an underlying structure — the photon and its wavelength, the atom and its nucleus and electrons, natural selection and DNA, the (so far) fundamental particles and the laws governing their interactions. But not everything with patterns has an underlying structure. Let’s look at anatomy, for example. As we’ll see, it will reveal a lot[…] Keep reading →

Discovering the periodic table of the elements told us wonders about chemistry and pointed the way toward understanding atoms. Figuring it out pointed the way toward tremendous understanding and improving our lives. We found similar structures that revealed underlying structure in the spectrum of light, life’s family tree, the standard model of particle physics, and others. Wouldn’t it be great to find such a structure for our emotions and motivations?[…] Keep reading →

A friend and reader, es, commented Your posts about North Korea remind me of some parts from Amartya Sen’s “Identity and Violence” and “the Idea of Justice”. Over-generalization, exclusion, multiple identities, basic norms existing in each society and universal norms that should transcend them. Narrow views on North Korea can be attributed to people only focusing on one aspect of North Koreans’ identities through the lens of basic norms in[…] Keep reading →

April 5 and 7, 6-10pm at the New York Academy of Sciences I will be giving my seminar on Leadership and Personal Success — the best seminar you’ll ever attend. It’s similar to the leadership seminar at Columbia Business School in December, but more science-y and less business-y. Here’s the background from the NYAS web page (where you can register): Leadership and personal success through self-awareness and emotional intelligence are[…] Keep reading →