1

Hillary Clinton’s Concession Speech

amh-hillaryHaving made calls and canvassed for Hillary Clinton over the weekend (and joked about her seeming a bit stiff –like cardboard–in the photo to the left),  I’m saddened, confused and a bit shocked by her loss to Donald Trump. I’ll be writing more about this in days to come, but for now, thought I’d share her concession speech, which I received in an email from her campaign, so that you could read it in its entirety. I found it eloquent and inspirational.

–Anita M. Harris

 

Thank you.

Last night, I congratulated Donald Trump and offered to work with him on behalf of our country. I hope that he will be a successful president for all Americans.

This is not the outcome we wanted or we worked so hard for, and I’m sorry we did not win this election for the values we share and the vision we hold for our country.

But I feel pride and gratitude for this wonderful campaign that we built together –- this vast, diverse, creative, unruly, energized campaign. You represent the best of America, and being your candidate has been one of the greatest honors of my life.

I know how disappointed you feel, because I feel it too. And so do tens of millions of Americans who invested their hopes and dreams in this effort. This is painful, and it will be for a long time. But I want you to remember this: Our campaign was never about one person or even one election. It was about the country we love — and about building an America that’s hopeful, inclusive, and big-hearted.

We have seen that our nation is more deeply divided than we thought. But I still believe in America –- and I always will. And if you do, too, then we must accept this result -– and then look to the future.

Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead.

Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power, and we don’t just respect that, we cherish it. It also enshrines other things –- the rule of law, the principle that we’re all equal in rights and dignity, and the freedom of worship and expression. We respect and cherish these things too — and we must defend them.

And let me add: Our constitutional democracy demands our participation, not just every four years, but all the time. So let’s do all we can to keep advancing the causes and values we all hold dear: making our economy work for everyone, not just those at the top; protecting our country and protecting our planet; and breaking down all the barriers that hold anyone back from achieving their dreams.

We’ve spent a year and a half bringing together millions of people from every corner of our country to say with one voice that we believe that the American Dream is big enough for everyone — for people of all races and religions, for men and women, for immigrants, for LGBT people, and people with disabilities.

Our responsibility as citizens is to keep doing our part to build that better, stronger, fairer America we seek. And I know you will.

I am so grateful to stand with all of you.

I want to thank Tim Kaine and Anne Holton for being our partners on this journey. It gives me great hope and comfort to know that Tim will remain on the front-lines of our democracy, representing Virginia in the Senate.

To Barack and Michelle Obama: Our country owes you an enormous debt of gratitude for your graceful, determined leadership, and so do I.

To Bill, Chelsea, Marc, Charlotte, Aidan, our brothers, and our entire family, my love for you means more than I can ever express.

You crisscrossed this country on my behalf and lifted me up when I needed it most –- even four-month old Aidan traveling with his mom.

I will always be grateful to the creative, talented, dedicated men and women at our headquarters in Brooklyn and across our country who poured their hearts into this campaign. For you veterans, this was a campaign after a campaign — for some of you, this was your first campaign ever. I want each of you to know that you were the best campaign anyone has had.

To all the volunteers, community leaders, activists, and union organizers who knocked on doors, talked to neighbors, posted on Facebook – even in secret or in private: Thank you.

To everyone who sent in contributions as small as $5 and kept us going, thank you.

And to all the young people in particular, I want you to hear this. I’ve spent my entire adult life fighting for what I believe in. I’ve had successes and I’ve had setbacks -– sometimes really painful ones. Many of you are at the beginning of your careers. You will have successes and setbacks, too.

This loss hurts. But please, please never stop believing that fighting for what’s right is worth it. It’s always worth it. And we need you keep up these fights now and for the rest of your lives.

To all the women, and especially the young women, who put their faith in this campaign and in me, I want you to know that nothing has made me prouder than to be your champion.

I know that we still have not shattered that highest glass ceiling. But some day someone will -– hopefully sooner than we might think right now.

And to all the little girls watching right now, never doubt that you are valuable and powerful and deserving of every chance and opportunity in the world.

Finally, I am grateful to our country for all it has given me.

I count my blessings every day that I am an American. And I still believe, as deeply as I ever have, that if we stand together and work together, with respect for our differences, strength in our convictions, and love for this nation -– our best days are still ahead of us.

You know I believe we are stronger together and will go forward together. And you should never be sorry that you fought for that.

Scripture tells us: “Let us not grow weary in doing good, for in due season, we shall reap, if we do not lose heart.”

My friends, let us have faith in each other. Let us not grow weary. Let us not lose heart. For there are more seasons to come and there is more work to do.

I am incredibly honored and grateful to have had this chance to represent all of you in this consequential election. May God bless you and god bless the United States of America.

Hillary

 

Anita M. Harris, a writer and communications consultant, is the author of Broken Patterns, Professional Women and the Quest for a New Feminine Identity. Broken Patterns is about women of the baby-boom generation in relation to their mothers and grandmothers. It presents a spiral theory of change, which, Harris believes, goes far in explaining the current election results.

New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group, based in Cambridge, MA.




Guest Post: Could Trump Be Even Worse Than You Think?

Trump saluteIn early 1933, delegations of rank-and-file workers from all over Germany descended on the headquarters of the German Communist Party in Berlin. They were demanding that their leaders call a general strike to topple the newly appointed chancellor, Adolf Hitler. That tactic had worked in Russia, when the Bolsheviks organized a successful general strike to prevent the proto-Fascist general Kornilov from marching on the capital and overthrowing the liberal Kerensky government.

The Bolsheviks did not like Kerensky, but they knew that for them, Kornilov would be so much worse. German workers were familiar with Nazis and their brutality from their neighborhoods and workplaces, so they knew that Hitler in power would also be really bad news. To their amazement and dismay, the delegations met with only derisive dismissal. Hitler was nothing to worry about, their leaders told them. He would last no longer than any of his recent predecessors had. He would fall within weeks.

Hitler did not fall. During his first few months in office, he suspended the constitution, disbanded the parliament, imprisoned his political opponents, and forced all military officers to retake their oaths of office, this time to him personally, rather than to the constitution. The last of these became the primary impediment that prevented generals like Rommel from taking the action that they soon realized would be necessary until it was much too late.

Disgruntled Democrats and love-struck Republicans who still hold out hope that they can make a silk president out of a sow’s Trump are committing the same naïve blunder as those German Communists. They are thinking inside the proverbial box. The Fuhrer did not live inside that box, and neither does The Donald.

Hitler promised to “restore Germany to its proper place of glory among the nations.” He rose to power with the support of the SA, a private army of thugs and hooligans who reveled in the legitimacy they had suddenly acquired by being associated with a major political figure. Then, he bolstered his power with the support of the SS, a private army of disenfranchised young aristocrats who yearned to get back at least a semblance of the former titles and privileges they had lost as a result of Germany’s defeat in World War I.
Trump MilitiaTrump promises to “make America great again.” He is supported by dozens of armed militias and biker gangs waiting in the wings for their leader to call them to action. The Rolling Stones learned what havoc biker gangs can wreak, when they naively hired the Hell’s Angels to provide “security” for their music festival in 1969.  What they had intended to be the West Coast equivalent of Woodstock was turned instead into a fatal orgy of beating and stabbing. All it would take to deputize these thugs as an official SA/SS-type Presidential Guard, accountable only to Trump, would be an executive order.

Bikers for TrumpGiven Trump’s complaints that the election is being rigged against him, his declaration that he can lose only if the election is rigged, and his call to his followers to monitor polling venues in problematic neighborhoods on election day, we can expect to see action from these people even if he loses.

Hitler never received more than 40% of the vote the several times he ran for president, usually much less, but the man who defeated him eventually appointed him chancellor, because there was no one else left, and his storm troopers were causing so much trouble. Benito Mussolini, for whom Trump has expressed some admiration, became prime minister of Italy in a similar way. Even without Trump’s winning the presidency, try to imagine some future president having to appoint Trump secretary of state, defense, or treasury just to shut him up. (By the way, how will Trump’s “observers” know whether someone is “voting five times,” since for them, all of “those people” look alike?)

When reporters asked Al Gore what he intended to do after the Supreme Court gave the 2000 election to George W. Bush, he replied that he would do nothing, because the only recourse in our system to such a decision would be violent revolution, and that sort of thing did not interest him. Trump is not Gore. As he keeps reminding us about himself, “I do not lose.” His suggestion that potential Clinton judicial appointments might be neutralized by “the second amendment people” was not an assassination threat, nor was it sarcastic or a joke. It was a heads-up to his troops.

President Obama’s characterization of Trump as “unfit to do this job” was, characteristically, graciously understated. Trump’s recent behavior, most notably his attack on the Khan family and his claim that Obama was the founder of ISIS, has begun to resemble that of the Roman emperor, Caligula, even more than that of Hitler.

Roman Senate image

Roman Senate, Wikipedia, Public Domain

Roman emperors were nominally required to seek Senatorial approval for their decisions, but the Senate had long since become a rubber stamp. The U. S. Congress has a similar history of powerlessness in the face of certain kinds of presidential faits accomplis.

 

Harry_S._Truman

Harris S Truman http://www.trumanlibrary.org/photographs/view.php?id=2267 Credit: Frank Gatteri, United States Army Signal Corps

Harry Truman embarked on a major war entirely on his own, without receiving or even seeking the constitutionally mandated congressional declaration of war. Ronald Reagan violated the constitutional prohibition of granting special status to one religion over others by becoming the first U.S. president to appoint an ambassador to the headquarters of the Roman Catholic Church.

Would any president appoint an ambassador to the Christian Science Mother Church in Boston or the main Mormon Temple in Salt Lake City? In neither Truman’s nor Reagan’s case did anyone in Congress raise even a peep of objection out of fear of alienating important electoral constituencies. Constitutional requirements simply vanished without a whimper, let alone a constitutional amendment. With Trump in the White House, Congressional impotence will be complete, not so much because of electoral constituencies, even assuming that elections will still matter, but because of Trump’s militias.

Trump’s declaration that Hilary Clinton “is the devil” is similarly Caligulesque. Roman emperors typically looked forward to achieving godhood through an apotheosis that they expected to take place at their deaths. Caligula believed that he was already a god during his lifetime. In Trump’s case, if Clinton is the devil, and Trump is her nemesis, then Trump must be –– well, you figure it out.

Outside of the context of a presidential election, it might actually be amusing, in this connection, to take note of the fact that the Jewish Gematria  value for The Donald is 282, the same as the value for Satan (http://www.gematrix.org/), and that the value for Donald J. Trump is 1,189, the same as the value for both The Fool Is The Devil and The Destruction Of The Planet. (Wikipedia defines Gematria as “an  Assyro-Babylonian-Greek system of alphanumeric code/cipher later adopted into Jewish culture that assigns numerical value to a word/name/phrase in the belief that words or phrases with identical numerical values bear some relation to each other or …to the number itself as it may apply to Nature, a person’s age, the calendar year, or the like.”)

To be fair, it must also be noted that the Gematria value for Hilary Rodham Clinton is 953, the same as the value for both Multitude Of Sins and Fraudulent Concealment, but it is definitely not the value of The Devil, which is 851. Bernie Sanders, by the way, scores 451, the value of As Dead as a Doornail. This is metaphorically accurate right now, but is likely to become literally true, if Trump gets presidential power.

Believers in reincarnation might find it significant that Trump was born just over a year (June 14, 1946) after Hitler committed the sin of suicide (April 30, 1945). Believers in the Book of Revelation might find this helpful in explaining why Trump has been making himself look increasingly like the most qualified candidate for Antichrist that the world has seen in seventy years.

Trump is correct, contra Clinton, that this country “is going to Hell.”

Who would be better to make that determination than Gematria 282? On the other hand, this is not the fault of immigrants, legal or illegal, but is more a result of the persistent efforts of people like Trump to avoid paying appropriate taxes. The seven billion dollars that Trump’s family alone would save from Trump’s proposed elimination of the estate tax would make a good down payment on his wall, or, lest we forget, toward rebuilding schools, hospitals, highways and bridges. These are, after all the aspects of the country that are indeed “going to Hell.”

Despite scoffers, Trump will certainly be able to build his wall, and he will be able to make Mexico pay for it. At least, he will start. All it will take is an executive order seizing all Mexican assets in the United States for what the president will have decided is an essential governmental purpose.

Trump has a history of getting away with invoking eminent domain for personal gain, and he has made it clear that he will run his political empire exactly as he has run his financial one.

Like Trump University, the wall will likely never be finished, because the money will run out, as a result of budget overruns and kickbacks for Trump-connected construction companies and Trump-appointed inspectors. Mexico will be no more able to prevent this seizure than Austria (or more recently Crimea) was to prevent the Anschluss. Any Supreme Court that would declare Trump’s action unconstitutional will likely have ceased to exist by the time it gets to hear the case. The United Nations might wring its hands and express its outrage, but it will be as helpless to do anything meaningful as the League of Nations was when Mussolini took Ethiopia.

Goldwater for president image

By Goldwater for President 1964 – https://campaignrhetoric.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/goldwater.jpg, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=50332089

Trump has been compared to Barry Goldwater, and there is some truth to that. Goldwater embraced the far-right John Birch Society, while Trump has accepted support from the Ku Klux Klan and recently appointed a modern-day equivalent of Joseph Goebbels as the CEO for his campaign. Hearing the head of The Trump Organization call the Clinton State Department “a criminal organization of pay to play,” just because she might have been overly gracious in thanking people for donating to a charity, would have brought an admiring smile of approval to the lips of the Nazi propaganda minister. It’s like Al Capone calling Eliot Ness a gangster, just because he might have inadvertently conducted a couple of wiretaps without a warrant.

On the other hand, Goldwater had a coherent political ideology that he remained more or less loyal to throughout his political career. Hitler also had a consistent lifelong ideology, but without the deep commitment to constitutionality that Goldwater professed, replacing it with “the will of the leader” as the source of legal legitimacy. Trump has shown no ideological consistency whatsoever, as shown by his recent apparent about-face-(but-not-really) on immigration just because his poll numbers were down, and he has expressed his contempt for any kind of “tradition” in favor of his own narcissistic notion of what he calls “common sense” as his sole guiding principle. In other words, Trump is loyal to nothing but Trump. As the proverbial twentieth-century General Motors executive might say now, “What’s good for Trump is good for Trump. Forget the USA.”

putin on a bike

Putin on a bike

Consider Trump’s alleged on-again off-again “relationship” with Vladimir Putin. Trump was confidently asserting that Clinton’s emails had been hacked well before it was officially revealed that they had indeed been hacked by the Russians. How could he have known? Bush said that he had looked into Putin’s eyes and seen his soul. John McCain said that he had looked into Putin’s eyes and seen three letters, K-G-B. When Trump looks into Putin’s eyes, or anyone else’s, he sees only dollar signs.  It would not be beyond the limits of a Trump-type deal to trade U. S. membership in NATO for a string of Trump golf courses across Russia. Business is business. Trump’s daughter recently vacationed in Croatia with Putin’s girlfriend. Perhaps, it was just a social visit.

Nobody took Hitler seriously when he wrote in Mein Kampf that he would like to gas thousands of Jews. How could this have been anything but rhetoric? Trump shrugs and smiles when his supporters yell out at rallies or tell interviewers that Clinton and other current government officials should be imprisoned or killed. He says he wants to keep Muslims and Mexicans out of the country, and that those who are already here are criminals and terrorists. What does one do when one has large populations of criminals and terrorists, too many to deport,  a mostly built wall that can help to keep them from leaving voluntarily, and a “deportation force” of armed hooligans eager to kick butt?

Trump says he will reinstate water boarding and worse, because “torture works.” His recently former top campaign aide lobbied for foreign torturers for decades, most notably the pro-Putin former president of Ukraine. And then there is the admiration that Trump has expressed toward the mafia. Like torturers, “They get things done.” Based on his professed values and his actual business practices, in fact, Trump has shown himself to be not a businessman, but a gangster, Whitey Bulger in a suit. Bulger would have sent his thugs after the Khans. Trump is polished just enough to have realized that at least for now, he had to settle for insults and insinuations. Trump is what Bulger would have become, if he had inherited $40 million.

Clinton, of course, is everything the pre-endorsement Sanders said she is. A Clinton presidency would indeed be business as usual, with emphasis on both business and, in contrast to Trump, as usual. However, she is no more hypocritical than, say, McCain, who owns six mansions, but despite his war-hero status, refuses, like Trump, to pay his fair share of taxes to fund a war that he vehemently promotes. It is to Clinton’s credit, and it is not insignificant in this election, that she has never encouraged anyone to call her The Hilary.

Forget about Clinton’s emails, which would have been just as insecure on a government server as on her own, since anything on the network can be hacked, and just for the moment, put Benghazi aside as well. Of course, she lied.

Eisenhower image

Dwight D. Eisenhower, Courtesy of the Eisenhower Presidential Library, Abilene, Kansas

So did Republican president and war hero Dwight D. Eisenhower, when he assured the American people on national television in 1959 that the United States did not send spy planes over the Soviet Union. That was exposed as a lie the very next day, when the Soviets showed captured American spy plane pilot Gary Francis Powers on their national television, thereby setting the stage for the anti-“establishment” cynicism of the 1960s. The idea that a president would lie to the public was still shocking to many people in those pre-Ellsberg, pre-Nixon days, but surely not today.

Rare indeed is the politician (or businessman, or parent, or spouse) who can get through life without ever telling a lie. However, most politicians are not pathological liars and compulsive career conmen who cannot distinguish true from false or right from wrong, the legal definition of insanity. In regard to credibility and trustworthiness, does a presidential candidate who refuses to release his tax forms, even though the IRS has said it would be okay, have the right to cast a stone?

The general strike that didn’t happen was the last chance the world had to prevent World War II, the Holocaust, and the need to invent nuclear weapons as a deterrent. The last chance the world will have to stop Trump and his consequences, if he wins the election, will be the moment after Mike Pence is sworn in as vice-president.

What a wonder it would be to behold, the entire United States Supreme Court going on strike, because they cannot in good conscience administer the oath of office to a lunatic. The justices are sworn, after all, to protect the constitution against its enemies, foreign and domestic, in whatever form they might appear. No one else is empowered to administer the presidential oath. Technically, Obama might still be president, but temperamentally, like Gore, he would be unlikely to press that claim in such a circumstance, nor is anyone who matters likely to take him seriously, if he did. Conservatives would actually get one of their own as president, and everyone else could breathe a sigh of relief that for at least another four years, there would be no mushroom cloud. The ongoing need to deal with Trump’s storm troopers would perhaps be one thing the two parties can agree on, and that would at least be a start.

Of course, all of the pieces would have to fall into place for this scenario to work out. A simpler and less risky path for Republicans, as some seem to have begun to realize,  would be simply to let or even help Clinton win and then work to control her from Congress, as they have been doing more or less successfully with Obama. Taking everything into account, they will never be able to do that with Trump.

Given his enormous wealth, the demonstrated competence of his friend Putin’s hackers, and the apparent persistent willingness of top Republican leaders to put up with anything from Trump as long as he promises them tax cuts, Trump can actually win this election, regardless of what the polls might tell us. If he does win, and if he actually gets to hold office, hold on to your hat. The rollercoaster will be out of control and, “Believe me,” as in 1933, things will begin happening “fast.”

Trump recently told a largely white audience, aiming his question at the few black people there, that “58% of your youth are unemployed. And asked, “What do you have to lose?” The obvious answer, of course, is “the other 42%.”

Sure, you can’t trust Clinton to tell you the truth about everything she does. Of course, not.  However, in contrast to Trump, you definitely can trust her not to fly off the handle  and launch nuclear missiles in a fit of pique, just because some two-bit mini-Trump in some other country has made some offhand remark that she’s decided to consider insulting.

If you are one of those people who are still considering joining the ranks of those German Communists in repeating a world-historical blunder that you might not live long enough to know you should regret, then ask yourself three questions. Would you entrust Bernie Madoff with the password to your bank account? Would you entrust Bill Clinton with the keys to your teen-age daughter’s bedroom? Do you really want to entrust the likes of Donald Trump with the keys to the nation’s nuclear codes? Then, in Trump’s words, let “common sense” prevail, and as Ted Cruz said at the Republican convention, vote your conscience.

 

Steven Cushing Photo

Steven Cushing

Guest author Steven Cushing is an internationally respected writer, consultant and educator on language, logic, and communication. His many publications include Fatal Words: Communication Clashes and Aircraft Crashes, Critique of Puerile Reason: A Pragmatic Look at J. P. Moreland’s The Creation Hypothesis,” and How You and Your Computer Think Alike–and Don’t: An Exploration into the Nature of Mind. Like Bernie Sanders, he is a veteran of many of the progressive struggles of the 1960s and ‘70s, and he has also contributed to numerous government-sponsored projects involving most notably civil defense, aviation safety, computer security, and cryptography. He currently teaches in Cambridge, MA and can be reached most readily at stevencushing@alum.mit.edu. 

His views do not necessarily reflect those of the publisher.

 




Convergence Science Transforming Biomedicine, MIT Report says

We thought our readers would like to know about “Convergence and the Future of Health,” a  report released today by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (Slightly self-serving full disclosure: New Cambridge Observer‘s Anita Harris was one of the writers).  

MIT Graphic, Convergence Report 2016

MIT Graphic, Convergence Report 2016

CAMBRIDGE, MA — What if lost limbs could be regrown? Cancers detected early with blood or urine tests, instead of invasive biopsies? Drugs delivered via nanoparticles to specific tissues or even cells, minimizing unwanted side effects? While such breakthroughs may sound futuristic, scientists are already exploring these and other promising techniques.

But the realization of these transformative advances is not guaranteed. The key to bringing them to fruition, a landmark new report argues, will be strategic and sustained support for “convergence”: the merging of approaches and insights from historically distinct disciplines such as engineering, physics, computer science, chemistry, mathematics, and the life sciences.

The report, “Convergence: The Future of Health,” was co-chaired by Tyler Jacks, the David H. Koch Professor of Biology and director of MIT’s Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer ResearchSusan Hockfield, noted neuroscientist and president emerita of MIT; and Phillip Sharp, Institute Professor at MIT and Nobel laureate, and will be presented at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in Washington on June 24.Convergence Image

The report, available at http://www.convergencerevolution.net/2016-report draws on insights from several dozen expert participants at two workshops, as well as input from scientists and researchers across academia, industry, and government. Their efforts have produced a wide range of recommendations for advancing convergence research, but the report emphasizes one critical barrier above all: the shortage of federal funding for convergence fields.

“Convergence science has advanced across many fronts, from nanotechnology to regenerative tissue,” says Sharp. “Although the promise has been recognized, the funding allocated for convergence research in biomedical science is small and needs to be expanded. In fact, there is no federal agency with the responsibility to fund convergence in biomedical research.”

National Insitutes of Health

National Insitutes of Health

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) are the primary source of research funding for biomedical science in the United States. In 2015, only 3 percent of all principal investigators funded by NIH were from departments of engineering, bioengineering, physics, biophysics, or mathematics. Accordingly, the report’s authors call for increasing NIH funding for convergence research to at least 20 percent of the agency’s budget.

Progress and potential

MIT Dome, Convergence ReportIn 2011, MIT released a white paper that outlined the concept of convergence. More than just interdisciplinary research, convergence entails the active integration of these diverse modes of inquiry into a unified pursuit of advances that will transform health and other sectors, from agriculture to energy.

The new report lays out a more comprehensive vision of what convergence-based research could achieve, as well as the concrete steps required to enable these advances.

“The 2011 report argued that convergence was the next revolution in health research, following molecular biology and genomics,” says Jacks. “That report helped identify the importance and growing centrality of convergence for health research. This report is different. It starts us off on a true strategy for convergence-based research in health.”

The report released today makes clear that, despite such obstacles, this “third revolution” is already well underway. Convergence-based research has become standard practice at MIT, most notably at the Koch Institute and the Institute for Medical Engineering and Science. dna

“About a third of all MIT engineers are involved in some aspect of convergence,” says Sharp. “These faculty are having an enormous impact on biomedical science and this will only grow in the future. Other universities are beginning to evolve along similar paths.”

Indeed, convergence-based approaches are becoming more common at many other pioneering university programs, including the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering at Harvard University, and the University of Chicago’s new Institute for Molecular Engineering, among others.

The report also points to several new federal initiatives that are harnessing the convergence research model to solve some of society’s most pressing health challenges.

For example, the Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative, launched by the Obama administration in 2013, seeks to improve our understanding of how individual cells and neural circuits interact, in order to develop new ways to treat and prevent brain disorders. And the National Cancer Moonshot Initiative, launched earlier this year to accelerate research to develop cancer vaccines and early detection methods and genomic tumor analysis, will also operate largely using convergence tools and approaches.Brain-Initiative

But the integration of new technologies and methods from genomics, information science, nanotechnology, and molecular biology could take us even farther.

The report outlines three major disease areas — brain disorders, infectious diseases and immunology, and cancer — and promising convergence-based approaches to tackling them. It also presents case studies of four emerging technology categories: advanced imaging in the body, nanotechnology for drug and therapy delivery, regenerative engineering, and big data and health information technology.

A sampling gives a sense of their transformative potential. Convergence techniques could enable rewiring the genes of mosquitoes to eliminate Zika, dengue, and malaria. They could help solve the emerging threat of drug-resistant bacterial strains, which infect over two million people in the U.S. every year. Convergence-based immunotherapy could activate a person’s immune system to fight cancer, reprogramming a person’s T-cells or antibodies to find and attack tumor cells. Big-data techniques could be used to generate and analyze huge amounts of data on people’s exposures to industrial chemicals, environmental toxins, and infectious agents, creating a new field of “chemistry of nurture,” to complement the “chemistry of nature” developed by the documentation of the human genome.

“Convergence might come just in time,” says Hockfield, “given our rapidly aging population, increasing levels of chronic disease, and mounting healthcare costs due to demographic trends throughout the developed world. But we must overcome significant barriers to get to convergence.”

Cultivating convergence

Realizing the full potential of the convergence revolution will require much more ambitious and strategic coordination and collaboration across industry, government, and academia, the report argues.

The report accordingly calls for a concerted joint effort by federal agencies, universities, and industry to develop a new strategic roadmap to support convergence-based research. As a concrete next step, the report’s authors recommend establishing an interagency working group on convergence with participation from NIH, the National Science Foundation, and other federal agencies involved in funding scientific research, such as the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Energy.

Other pressing challenges include grant review processes based on narrow, outdated disciplinary structures, which limit the availability of resources for cross-functional research teams. The report also proposes new practices to foster “cultures of convergence” within academic institutions: cross-department hiring and tenure review, convergence “cluster hiring” and career grants, and new PhD programs wherein students design their own degree programs across disciplinary boundaries.

If the potential of convergence is great, so are the stakes.

“Convergence has grown from a little seedling to a sprouting plant, but to become a great tree and orchard yielding fruit for decades into the future, it needs to be nourished, expanded, and cultivated now,” says Sharp. “Students need to be educated, collaborations need to be encouraged, and resources need to be committed to make sure convergence thrives.”

“This integration is important to deal with the great challenges of the future: continued growth in the accessibility and quality of healthcare, growth of the economy, and providing resources for future populations.”

Funding for the report was provided by the Raymond and Beverly Sackler Foundation, The Kavli Foundation, and the Burroughs Wellcome Fund.

The report is available at http://www.convergencerevolution.net/2016-report

###

Written by Jonathan Mingle, MIT News correspondent

New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group, a Cambridge, MA, PR & marketing firm specializing in health, science and technology.




Vote for National Convergence Idea Challenge Winner by Thurs, 6/23/2016

MIT, Convergence Idea Challenge

MIT, Convergence Idea Challenge

For the  last few months, I’ve had the opportunity to work on an amazing national report about the Convergence of technologies in the life sciences. The goal of the report–which will be launched this coming Friday at the National Academy of Sciences, in Washington, DC– is to encourage  increased  funding for engineers, mathematicians, physicists, chemists, and information technologists for work in health and life science fields.  More on the report and Convergence later this week.

For now, I want to let you know that Nobel Prize winning scientist Phil Sharp of the MIT Koch Institute  has offered a $3000 award for the best Convergence idea submitted by students across the US–and that the public is invited to help choose  a second, $1000 “community” winner—-by “liking”  ideas submitted via on Facebook.  The goal is to challenge  emerging researchers to combine the life/physical sciences, information technology, social sciences, and engineering to improve human health.The voting deadline is 6 pm on Thursday, June 23, 2016.

Here’s a list of the submissions–which come from researchers across the US.  More info on each idea–and “like” options– are available at https://www.facebook.com/ConvergenceIdeas/

13307400_1143079699064985_7165305801858688715_n

  • Hex House; a rapidly deployable, dignified home
  • A Multi-disciplinary Approach to Tackling Childhood Poverty
  • Biomarkers and Neural Circuits Underlying Resilience to Stress
  • Neuroprosthetics in Nerve Reanimation: Implantation of Intraneural Building
  • Beyond Biology Breast milk – mine of potential therapies
  • Getting VacSeen-ated Mobile Screening and Diagnostics
  • Engineering Pro-Regenerative Immunotherapies
  • Empowering HIV-positive Youth in Swaziland, Africa: A Novel Digital Mentorship Experience
  • Development of minimally invasive assessment of placenta across gestation
  • An Epidemiological Cellular Automata Model of Gun Violence
  • Transforming Clinical Data Into Field-Deployable Medical Apps
  • Engineering a Flexible Organic Photovoltaic Cell as an Artificial Retina to Restore Sight: A Promising Vision in Bio-nanoelectronics
  • Accelerating translation from bio-discovery to engineered applications by single cell niche sequencing
  • Using Nature’s Fundamental Choice Against it
  • Drinking Water Health – Intermittent Water Supply in Developing Countries
  • “Brain train” – optogenetic cognitive-conditioning for neuropsychiatric disorders
  • Sparsh- Sleeping Bag
  • Quantified ethology decreases time to diagnosis of infection
  • Interlocking culture system for resolvable three-dimensional cell arrangements
  • A New Treatment for Depression through Modification of Semantic Networks in the Brain Using a Computer Game

 

–Anita M. Harris
New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group, a marketing and communications firm based in Kendall Square, Cambridge, MA.




An Open Secret—the movie you’ll probably never get to see

An Open Secret

An Open Secret

The documentary movie “An Open Secret” does a wonderful job of exposing the sexual abuse of children in Hollywood. But you’ll probably never see it– not because of the difficult subject matter, but because almost no commercial theaters are willing to screen the film.

Written by  Amy Berg, Lorien Hayes and Billy McMillin and directed by Berg, the 2014 film shows that abuse of child actors is pervasive in Hollywood and that most people in the industry know about it. Either they’ve been personally touched by it (pun intended) or know someone who has been. Many powerful people in Hollywood who could ruin the careers of anyone who pushes for justice on this issue are involved.

I applaud the subjects who were willing to share their painful stories and especially the teenager who actually went to court against his agent/abuser. The abuser got only six months in jail and is still in the industry despite solid proof of the exploitation.

Questions:
It’s a big story, so why isn’t anyone willing to distribute the film? Why has it been pulled from film festivals?  Why after seeing the film have network executives refused to have the film on their networks? Why did the Screen Actor’s Guild unsuccessfully sue the filmmakers after seeing the film in which the head of their Young Performers Committee was implicated in the scandal?

Answer:

The topic is too hot to handle and hits too close to home.

Who can speak out for the innocent victims? In “Spotlight”, Hollywood is happy to pay homage to the reporters who uncovered sex abuse in the Catholic Church a number of years ago, but unwilling to acknowledge it in their midst.

In the past, I’ve attributed problems of child actors to their inability to handle fame and fortune and an acquired sense of entitlement. Now I wonder whether their spiraling out of control has far more nefarious roots.

I thank the Boston Globe for sponsoring the screening of this movie in its documentary series along with a Q&A session with the producer. I wish that others had the courage to take on this difficult topic and not bow to the powerful perpetrators, but who’s to take up the mantle? Newspapers are too financially strapped to take on such financially powerful interests so others such as documentary filmmakers or even comedians (like those who exposed Bill Cosby) need to raise our awareness and lead us to take action.

See the movie if you can and be outraged by the subject matter (child sexual abuse) and by the story behind the story (the unwillingness to deal with the “open secret”).

-Sheila Green

Initial release: November 14, 2014
Director: Amy J. Berg
Cast: Evan Henzi, Michael Egan III, Joey Coleman, Nick Stojanovich,Mark Ryan, Michael Harrah, John Connolly
Screenplay: Amy J. Berg, Lorien Haynes, Billy McMillin
Music composed by: Johnny McDaid, Gary Lightbody
Producers: Amy J. Berg, Katelyn Howes, Matthew Valentinas ,
Co-Producers: Peter Clune, Alex Riguero
Executive Producer/Producer Gabe Hoffmann Matthew Valentinas



CDSC TO CELEBRATE 3 COMMUNITY PEACEMAKERS IN CAMBRIDGE ON OCTOBER 14th

(Cambridge, MA) The Community Dispute Settlement Center (CDSC) will be honoring three community peacemakers for their work in the courts, at-risk young adults, and high school students. The public is invited to join us in celebrating with community mediators, educators, lawyers and community leaders at the Venture Café in the Cambridge Innovation Center on Wednesday, October 14th. Tickets to the event need to be purchased in advance on CDSC’s web site: www.communitydispute.org

Cambridge Dispute Resolution Center

Cambridge Dispute Resolution Center

At the event CDSC will be recognizing the work of: Hon. John Cratsley (ret.), a leader in alternative dispute resolution standards and implementation in the Massachusetts courts; Jon Feinman, the founder of InnerCity Weightlifting of Cambridge, an innovative program that uses fitness training as a tool to reduce violence and promote professional, personal and academic achievement among urban youth; and The Cambridge Rindge and Latin School Mediation Team, a resource for the school’s students to develop skills and resolve interpersonal issues fully and peacefully.
CDSC, established in 1979, is a private non-profit mediation and training center, dedicated to providing an alternative and affordable forum for resolving conflict. CDSC promotes better ways to understand and deal with conflict through skilled teams of volunteer mediators, training programs in mediation and conflict management, and broad community outreach. It also collaborates with local schools to create peer mediation programs and skill-building workshops that help youth deal with conflict.
For more information about CDSC or to arrange a training workshop for a school, youth group or organization, please call 617-876-5376, emailcdscinfo@communitydispute.org, or visit the CDSC’s website at: http://www.communitydispute.org.

New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group, an award-winning PR and marketing firm based at the Cambridge Innovation Center in Cambridge, MA.




Corita Kent and Pop Art at Harvard Fogg is a must-see

20150903_172747Having just published a book on the late 1960s, and having driven past the famed Corita Kent gas tanks on route 93 South of Boston hundreds of times, I wondered, on entering the wonderful new exhibit “Corita Kent and the Language of Pop” at the Harvard Fogg Museum how I could possibly have missed Kent’s amazing presence in the Pop Art scene.

The show juxtaposes some 60 works by Kent–who was born in 1918 and became a nun in 1936–with approximately the same number of works by  known pop figures such as Andy Warhol,  Jim Dine,  Edward Ruscha, Roy Lichtenstein, Robert Indiana, and others.  It examines Kent’s screen prints; that 1971 bold “rainbow swash” design for the Boston Gas tank, as well as films, books, and other works.

20150903_170824

But in a talk after the September 3 opening, Susan Dackerman, consultative curator of prints at the Harvard Art Museums, said that she herself had  not known much about Kent’s  work until she met another curator’s sister–Mary Anne Karia (née Mikulka), a former student of Kent’s at Immaculate Heart College in Los Angeles, and a long-time friend of Kent’s. Mikulka showed Dackerman the notes, papers and prints saved from her student and later days. That introduction, in 2010, turned into a multi-year research project in which a team of Harvard art historians and graduate students began to place Kent–who left the convent and moved to Boston in 1968– in the artistic and cultural movements of her time.

Kent#1

The exhibition explores how Kent’s work both responded to and advanced the concerns of Vatican II, a movement to modernize the Catholic Church and make it more relevant to contemporary society. The church advocated conducting the Mass in English. Kent, like her pop art contemporaries, simultaneously turned to vernacular texts for inclusion in her vibrant prints, drawing from such colloquial sources as product slogans, street signs, and Beatles lyrics. Vatican II also  advocated having priests turning to face their congregants–a theme shown in the reversals of words in various Kent prints which20150903_170755 require viewers to commune or relate to the work in new ways, as pointed out by Elizabeth Cary Agassiz Professor of the Humanities. While Kent questioned the authority of the Church, she also took up  the church’s fight against poverty as an artistic theme. 

20150903_172207By bringing “Wonder Bread” into her work,  according to American studies graduate student Eva Payne Kent, Kent pointed out the need for food and  the leavening qualities of bread–as well as the symbolism of the communion wafer, and the sharing of bread as a means of communion among everyday people.

Kent thus emphasized the egalitarian rather than the authoritarian, and, unlike the implied messages of recognized pop artists,  her messages made her art not purely critique of the commercial world but brought out the importance of quotidian life.

In 1968, a year after she was featured as the new nun on cover of Newsweek Magazine, Kent left the convent and her teaching position and moved to Boston.

At this point, as sixties political protests escalated, Kent began to include news photo images of war, racial struggles, political figures in her prints– perhaps relying less on words to express emotion.  I fo20150903_173306und these works less vivid–but they packed a punch-. I was especially taken by an anti-war print that included a photo of Daniel and PHilip Berrigan, friends of hers who were priests and antiwar activists with whom I interacted at Cornell and later, during the Trial of the Harrisburg 8.

Asked in Q&A why Kent had not been considered important to the Pop Art, Dackerman pointed out that a center of the movement had been the Ferris Art Gallery, in Los Angeles–and that the recognized pop artists were often referred to as the “Ferris Studs.”  Not only was she a woman, Dackerman said, but she was, of all things “a nun.”. Another speaker mentioned that unlike her male counterparts, Kent, then called “Sister Mary Corita,” might have been considered “too cheery” and positive about the Church, possib20150903_171222ilities for communion, and the egalitarian nature of the commercial world.

All in all–the show is a must-see for anyone interested in the 1960s, pop art, female artists or the relationship of art, religion, politics and social change.,

Anita M. Harris
Anita Harris is the author of Ithaca Diaries, Coming of Age in the 1960s and of Broken Patterns, Professional Women and the Quest for a New Feminine Identity.
Print and e-versions of both books are available on Amazon or Kindle.
New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group, an award-winning PR and marketing firm in Cambridge, MA.

 

 




Back to college; rape culture concerns; Ithaca Diaries update