A Political Economy Externality that Should Be Taught in Every ‘Principals of Economics’ Course

‘Principals of Economics’ (or ‘Principals of Microeconomics’) is the first economics course for many students. Three key concepts for Principals of Economics are (a) externalities, (b) inequality and (c) political economy. One example of great practical importance combines all three:

Because only those already living in an area vote in local elections there, the interests of those who would like to live in that locality but who do not now live there are underrepresented. Thus, from the point of view of higher levels of government, local governments tend to ignore a potential externality—the effect of their housing policies on those elsewhere who might like to move to that area.

The importance of addressing that political economy externality suggests that state governments (or provincial government) and possibly the national government should take some role in housing policy.

Inequality is implicated because a key objective of much local housing policy is to keep poor people out of rich neighborhoods. Rich folks often don’t want their kids going to school with poor kids. And they may have other reasons for not wanting poor folks as neighbors. This is both understandable and vile. For some privileged folks, there may also be a motivation to keep out less privileged folks who are “other” in some other dimension besides poverty.

(Let me say clearly that may be perfectly reasonable to worry about crime and so to want more police protection and clear school discipline as part of the bargain for allowing poor folks to live next door. Of course, unequal enforcement of the laws can then be a problem; the rich folks may want the police to come down more heavily on a poor person than a rich person given the very same infraction. Drug use penalties are an important example of an area where many rich people want unequal enforcement.

To qualify what I said above, it is only reasonable to worry about more crime and school discipline problems when more poor people move into the neighborhood if crime and school discipline problems are in fact correlated with poverty.)

For some of why this issue is so important, see:

Evaluating Sweden's Food Guidelines

Julia Belluz’s article “The US food guidelines are way too complicated. There's a better way” contrasts the US and Swedish dietary guidelines. She makes a good case that the US dietary guidelines are likely to be almost incomprehensible to the supposedly intended audience. That is too bad, because speaking a bit metaphorically, the Standard American Diet can be thought of as close to a global minimum among relevant diets. See: “How to Summarize a Big Chunk of Nutrition Research: Almost Anything You Are Likely to Think Of Is Better Than the Standard American Diet.”

The Swedish dietary guidelines, on the other hand, are clear enough to evaluate. Let me give my views; I think the Swedish dietary guidelines are partly right and partly wrong. (This post is thus analogous to my post “The Keto Food Pyramid,” which evaluates similarly clear “Keto” recommendation.)

Here are the points I wholeheartedly agree with, followed by links to relevant posts:

  1. less sugar

  2. less alcohol

  3. more non-starchy vegetables

  4. more nuts

  5. more exercise

Some of the other recommendations are dicier:

6. Some kinds of fish and shellfish stimulate a lot of insulin which takes a toll; other kinds are low on the insulin index.

7. Fruit combines much that is nutritionally valuable with a lot of sugar. Fruit juice, by subtracting the fiber is a considerably worse deal. Unfortunately, most of the fruit available in the modern supermarket has been bred to have a higher sugar content. Fruit is a better deal nutritionally when you choose either commercial varieties or “heirloom” varieties that have lower sugar content. See:

8. Wholegrain is generally quite high on the insulin index. In my view, it has a much healthier reputation than it deserves. Among common foods, oatmeal is the biggest exception. (The less processed the oatmeal is, the more I trust it.) See:

9. On healthy fats, there is broad agreement that transfats are bad and a fair amount of agreement that monounsaturated fats—as found in olive oil, avocados, and nuts—are good. I see a lot of disagreement about whether saturated fats are good or bad and about whether polyunsaturated fats are good or bad. On balance, I treat all fats other than transfats as good. Moreover, given the importance of reducing easily digestible carbohydrates (sugar and many starches) that are very common in processed food, and the dangers of too much protein, getting enough calories will usually require increasing the consumption of dietary fats, which in my view are quite healthy by comparison. See:

10. I totally disagree with the claimed virtues of lowfat dairy products. Although there may be reason to avoid dairy entirely, if you are going to have dairy, full fat is better in my view. It is even more important to avoid milk with the A1 protein. Because most tests of the health effects of milk involve A1 milk, it is difficult to know how much of the observed problems with milk consumption would still be there if A2 milk were used. See:

11. I worry about too much meat. But contrary to the conventional view, I seem it as problematic because of its protein, not because of its fat. Certain types of meat are also high on the insulin index. Overall, the story for meat is complex. My advice is to eat meat sparingly, and to lean toward fattier cuts in order to avoid eating too much protein when you do eat meat. (This applies to fish, too.) See:

12. I am quite skeptical of the idea that too much dietary salt is a big problem. For those with high blood pressure, salt deprivation to get to an abnormally low level of salt in one’s system may be an appropriate treatment—though it seems likely to have a relatively small effect in reducing blood pressure and could have a side effect of leaving one feeling weak (judging from how sodium deficiency feels for me when I forget to take spoonfuls of salt while fasting as detailed in “Fasting Tips”). On the high side of salt intake, I suspect that healthy individuals will naturally excrete salt to keep it from going above the normal level. See:

Note however, that avoiding salt may get people to avoid highly processed foods, which would a very big boon to health. Of course avoiding sugar would do even more in this direction. (In my view, sugar is both very bad in itself and a good marker for highly processed food, which is often bad not only because of its sugar content, but for other reasons as well.) The bottom-line for most people: worry about avoiding sugar, not about avoiding salt. If avoiding sugar leads to less salt intake, great. See:

Conclusion:

Overall, the Swedish food guidelines are a big step up from the US dietary guidelines. But they should be considered far from the last word on what foods are healthy and what foods are not so healthy. In addition to my disagreements about healthy and unhealthy foods, I also have to complain that the Swedish food guidelines are only about exercise and what to eat, and don’t address the hugely important issue of when to eat. See:

All of these links and more can be found organized in “Miles Kimball on Diet and Health: A Reader's Guide.”

The Federalist Papers #29: State Militias such as the National Guard are Not Attractive Tools for Tyrants—Alexander Hamilton

The opponents of the US Constitution were quite suspicious of any military authority held by the proposed federal government. In the Federalist Papers #29, Alexander Hamilton argues that these suspicions are especially unreasonable when directed at the proposed federal government’s authority to set uniform standards for the state militias—what we now call the National Guard. All quotations below are from the Federalist Papers #29.

Although, as Alexander Hamilton argues, it would be expensive to have everyone fully trained in the militia, even a select corps of fighters would not be an attractive tool for a tyrant. First, the Constitution provided for a high level of local influence on the state militias:

Where in the name of common-sense, are our fears to end if we may not trust our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow-citizens? What shadow of danger can there be from men who are daily mingling with the rest of their countrymen and who participate with them in the same feelings, sentiments, habits and interests? What reasonable cause of apprehension can be inferred from a power in the Union to prescribe regulations for the militia, and to command its services when necessary, while the particular States are to have the SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE APPOINTMENT OF THE OFFICERS? If it were possible seriously to indulge a jealousy of the militia upon any conceivable establishment under the federal government, the circumstance of the officers being in the appointment of the States ought at once to extinguish it. There can be no doubt that this circumstance will always secure to them a preponderating influence over the militia.

Furthermore, a tyrant would have to worry about mutiny against that tyranny by a state militia:

If there should be an army to be made use of as the engine of despotism, what need of the militia? If there should be no army, whither would the militia, irritated by being called upon to undertake a distant and hopeless expedition, for the purpose of riveting the chains of slavery upon a part of their countrymen, direct their course, but to the seat of the tyrants, who had meditated so foolish as well as so wicked a project, to crush them in their imagined intrenchments of power, and to make them an example of the just vengeance of an abused and incensed people? Is this the way in which usurpers stride to dominion over a numerous and enlightened nation? Do they begin by exciting the detestation of the very instruments of their intended usurpations? Do they usually commence their career by wanton and disgustful acts of power, calculated to answer no end, but to draw upon themselves universal hatred and execration? Are suppositions of this sort the sober admonitions of discerning patriots to a discerning people? Or are they the inflammatory ravings of incendiaries or distempered enthusiasts? If we were even to suppose the national rulers actuated by the most ungovernable ambition, it is impossible to believe that they would employ such preposterous means to accomplish their designs.

On the other hand, there are very valuable proper uses the federal government could make of state militias—uses better served if it has been able to insist on some quality control measures for the state militias. Here are some of those valuable proper uses:

In times of insurrection, or invasion, it would be natural and proper that the militia of a neighboring State should be marched into another, to resist a common enemy, or to guard the republic against the violence of faction or sedition. This was frequently the case, in respect to the first object, in the course of the late war; and this mutual succor is, indeed, a principal end of our political association. If the power of affording it be placed under the direction of the Union, there will be no danger of a supine and listless inattention to the dangers of a neighbor, till its near approach had superadded the incitements of selfpreservation to the too feeble impulses of duty and sympathy.

In the Federalist Papers #29, Alexander Hamilton also addresses the more general claim that the proposed Constitution over-militarized the federal government, arguing that the federal government was allowed to call for armed help in the least institutionalized way that would suit the needs of the moment. In particular, he argued that, just as a sheriff can call for a posse of armed individuals to help enforce the law, the federal government could as well under the “necessary and proper” clause:

… a right to pass all laws NECESSARY AND PROPER to execute its declared powers …

If the federal government can call on state militias, there would be less need for a standing army. And since the federal government can call for a posse of irregulars just as a local sheriff can, there would be that much less need to call on state militias.

To see all of these points in context, below I have the full text of the Federalist Papers #29. In my opinion, other than the quotations given above, it is one of the less well-written of Alexander Hamilton’s numbers in the Federalist Papers. At points he lapses into sentences of exasperation at the opponents of the proposed constitution that are not that effective in communicating persuasive arguments.

FEDERALIST NO. 29

Concerning the Militia

From the Daily Advertiser
Thursday, January 10, 1788

Author: Alexander Hamilton

To the People of the State of New York:

THE power of regulating the militia, and of commanding its services in times of insurrection and invasion are natural incidents to the duties of superintending the common defense, and of watching over the internal peace of the Confederacy.

It requires no skill in the science of war to discern that uniformity in the organization and discipline of the militia would be attended with the most beneficial effects, whenever they were called into service for the public defense. It would enable them to discharge the duties of the camp and of the field with mutual intelligence and concert an advantage of peculiar moment in the operations of an army; and it would fit them much sooner to acquire the degree of proficiency in military functions which would be essential to their usefulness. This desirable uniformity can only be accomplished by confiding the regulation of the militia to the direction of the national authority. It is, therefore, with the most evident propriety, that the plan of the convention proposes to empower the Union "to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, RESERVING TO THE STATES RESPECTIVELY THE APPOINTMENT OF THE OFFICERS, AND THE AUTHORITY OF TRAINING THE MILITIA ACCORDING TO THE DISCIPLINE PRESCRIBED BY CONGRESS."

Of the different grounds which have been taken in opposition to the plan of the convention, there is none that was so little to have been expected, or is so untenable in itself, as the one from which this particular provision has been attacked. If a well-regulated militia be the most natural defense of a free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security. If standing armies are dangerous to liberty, an efficacious power over the militia, in the body to whose care the protection of the State is committed, ought, as far as possible, to take away the inducement and the pretext to such unfriendly institutions. If the federal government can command the aid of the militia in those emergencies which call for the military arm in support of the civil magistrate, it can the better dispense with the employment of a different kind of force. If it cannot avail itself of the former, it will be obliged to recur to the latter. To render an army unnecessary, will be a more certain method of preventing its existence than a thousand prohibitions upon paper.

In order to cast an odium upon the power of calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, it has been remarked that there is nowhere any provision in the proposed Constitution for calling out the POSSE COMITATUS, to assist the magistrate in the execution of his duty, whence it has been inferred, that military force was intended to be his only auxiliary. There is a striking incoherence in the objections which have appeared, and sometimes even from the same quarter, not much calculated to inspire a very favorable opinion of the sincerity or fair dealing of their authors. The same persons who tell us in one breath, that the powers of the federal government will be despotic and unlimited, inform us in the next, that it has not authority sufficient even to call out the POSSE COMITATUS. The latter, fortunately, is as much short of the truth as the former exceeds it. It would be as absurd to doubt, that a right to pass all laws NECESSARY AND PROPER to execute its declared powers, would include that of requiring the assistance of the citizens to the officers who may be intrusted with the execution of those laws, as it would be to believe, that a right to enact laws necessary and proper for the imposition and collection of taxes would involve that of varying the rules of descent and of the alienation of landed property, or of abolishing the trial by jury in cases relating to it. It being therefore evident that the supposition of a want of power to require the aid of the POSSE COMITATUS is entirely destitute of color, it will follow, that the conclusion which has been drawn from it, in its application to the authority of the federal government over the militia, is as uncandid as it is illogical. What reason could there be to infer, that force was intended to be the sole instrument of authority, merely because there is a power to make use of it when necessary? What shall we think of the motives which could induce men of sense to reason in this manner? How shall we prevent a conflict between charity and judgment?

By a curious refinement upon the spirit of republican jealousy, we are even taught to apprehend danger from the militia itself, in the hands of the federal government. It is observed that select corps may be formed, composed of the young and ardent, who may be rendered subservient to the views of arbitrary power. What plan for the regulation of the militia may be pursued by the national government, is impossible to be foreseen. But so far from viewing the matter in the same light with those who object to select corps as dangerous, were the Constitution ratified, and were I to deliver my sentiments to a member of the federal legislature from this State on the subject of a militia establishment, I should hold to him, in substance, the following discourse:

"The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss. It would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country, to an amount which, calculating upon the present numbers of the people, would not fall far short of the whole expense of the civil establishments of all the States. To attempt a thing which would abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be unwise: and the experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured. Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.

"But though the scheme of disciplining the whole nation must be abandoned as mischievous or impracticable; yet it is a matter of the utmost importance that a well-digested plan should, as soon as possible, be adopted for the proper establishment of the militia. The attention of the government ought particularly to be directed to the formation of a select corps of moderate extent, upon such principles as will really fit them for service in case of need. By thus circumscribing the plan, it will be possible to have an excellent body of well-trained militia, ready to take the field whenever the defense of the State shall require it. This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."

Thus differently from the adversaries of the proposed Constitution should I reason on the same subject, deducing arguments of safety from the very sources which they represent as fraught with danger and perdition. But how the national legislature may reason on the point, is a thing which neither they nor I can foresee.

There is something so far-fetched and so extravagant in the idea of danger to liberty from the militia, that one is at a loss whether to treat it with gravity or with raillery; whether to consider it as a mere trial of skill, like the paradoxes of rhetoricians; as a disingenuous artifice to instil prejudices at any price; or as the serious offspring of political fanaticism. Where in the name of common-sense, are our fears to end if we may not trust our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow-citizens? What shadow of danger can there be from men who are daily mingling with the rest of their countrymen and who participate with them in the same feelings, sentiments, habits and interests? What reasonable cause of apprehension can be inferred from a power in the Union to prescribe regulations for the militia, and to command its services when necessary, while the particular States are to have the SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE APPOINTMENT OF THE OFFICERS? If it were possible seriously to indulge a jealousy of the militia upon any conceivable establishment under the federal government, the circumstance of the officers being in the appointment of the States ought at once to extinguish it. There can be no doubt that this circumstance will always secure to them a preponderating influence over the militia.

In reading many of the publications against the Constitution, a man is apt to imagine that he is perusing some ill-written tale or romance, which instead of natural and agreeable images, exhibits to the mind nothing but frightful and distorted shapes "Gorgons, hydras, and chimeras dire"; discoloring and disfiguring whatever it represents, and transforming everything it touches into a monster.

A sample of this is to be observed in the exaggerated and improbable suggestions which have taken place respecting the power of calling for the services of the militia. That of New Hampshire is to be marched to Georgia, of Georgia to New Hampshire, of New York to Kentucky, and of Kentucky to Lake Champlain. Nay, the debts due to the French and Dutch are to be paid in militiamen instead of louis d'ors and ducats. At one moment there is to be a large army to lay prostrate the liberties of the people; at another moment the militia of Virginia are to be dragged from their homes five or six hundred miles, to tame the republican contumacy of Massachusetts; and that of Massachusetts is to be transported an equal distance to subdue the refractory haughtiness of the aristocratic Virginians. Do the persons who rave at this rate imagine that their art or their eloquence can impose any conceits or absurdities upon the people of America for infallible truths?

If there should be an army to be made use of as the engine of despotism, what need of the militia? If there should be no army, whither would the militia, irritated by being called upon to undertake a distant and hopeless expedition, for the purpose of riveting the chains of slavery upon a part of their countrymen, direct their course, but to the seat of the tyrants, who had meditated so foolish as well as so wicked a project, to crush them in their imagined intrenchments of power, and to make them an example of the just vengeance of an abused and incensed people? Is this the way in which usurpers stride to dominion over a numerous and enlightened nation? Do they begin by exciting the detestation of the very instruments of their intended usurpations? Do they usually commence their career by wanton and disgustful acts of power, calculated to answer no end, but to draw upon themselves universal hatred and execration? Are suppositions of this sort the sober admonitions of discerning patriots to a discerning people? Or are they the inflammatory ravings of incendiaries or distempered enthusiasts? If we were even to suppose the national rulers actuated by the most ungovernable ambition, it is impossible to believe that they would employ such preposterous means to accomplish their designs.

In times of insurrection, or invasion, it would be natural and proper that the militia of a neighboring State should be marched into another, to resist a common enemy, or to guard the republic against the violence of faction or sedition. This was frequently the case, in respect to the first object, in the course of the late war; and this mutual succor is, indeed, a principal end of our political association. If the power of affording it be placed under the direction of the Union, there will be no danger of a supine and listless inattention to the dangers of a neighbor, till its near approach had superadded the incitements of selfpreservation to the too feeble impulses of duty and sympathy.

PUBLIUS.

Links to my other posts on The Federalist Papers so far:

Larry Summers Should Not Be Critical of Price-Level Targeting that Allows Inflation Above Target If It has been Below Target for a While →

If a central bank makes the mistake of avoiding negative interest rates, one of the next best ways to try to ensure enough aggregate demand is to raise expectations of future inflation by promising “catch-up” inflation to get the price level back onto its targeted track. Larry Summers has said some positive things about negative interest rate policy in the past. (See “Peter Sands and Larry Summers Say Deep Negative Interest Rates Are Feasible from a Technical Point of View” and ) But unless he is headed toward being more vocal in support of negative interest rate policy, it could be harmful to the economy for Larry Summers to be speaking against the catch-up inflation in price-level targeting.

To learn more about negative interest policy, see my bibliographic post “How and Why to Eliminate the Zero Lower Bound: A Reader’s Guide.”

Reactions to Miles’s Program For Enhancing Economists’ Scientific Creativity, Engagement and Impact

CPCC certificate.png

I begin my post “How Economists Can Enhance Their Scientific Creativity, Engagement and Impact”:

I have always thought of my blog’s target audience as economists who are still curious and open to changing their minds. For economists who meet that test, I am offering a six-week program (on Zoom) to enhance your personal scientific creativity, engagement and impact in economics.

That post, “How Economists Can Enhance Their Scientific Creativity, Engagement and Impact,”offers the details.

I am one of the few economists who is certified as a co-active coach. (See “Co-Active Coaching as a Tool for Maximizing Utility—Getting Where You Want in Life.”) Because I love economics and hope to make our discipline better, I am offering the program free to economists and their families. At least every 7 weeks I am starting a new “Positive Intelligence Circle,” or “PQ pod” for short. Typically there are nine participants and two co-leaders each time. Bex Bassin, John Belge and my wife Gail Kimball have been co-leaders of these Positive Intelligence Circles with me.

With John Belge, I have co-led Positive Intelligence Circles for economics graduate students at the University of Colorado Boulder. This is an extension of our department’s official coaching program; John Belge is our department coach.

I say more about the Positive Intelligence approach in my post “On Human Potential.” In brief, as I write in “How Economists Can Enhance Their Scientific Creativity, Engagement and Impact”:

If you want creativity, engagement and impact, getting to an optimal brain state is crucial. Creativity requires holding the intensely critical side of you at least temporarily at bay so that ultimately promising ideas are not prematurely killed. Engagement—having the work you do flow and feel surprisingly low-effort—requires silencing or at least quieting distracting, self-destructive mind-chatter. Impact requires being in touch with what really matters—both what matters to you and what matters for the world.

Below, participants in the program speak for themselves. (Some of them speak of internal “saboteurs” they learned to recognize. The image at the top gives examples.)

I really enjoyed the Positive Intelligence program with Miles, Bex, and my fellow ‘Atlantic Pod’-members. I found it especially helpful to explore the saboteurs. I feel like I’m judging other people and myself way less already. The best part every week was the weekly meeting with the whole Pod; just discussing one’s own progress and listening to other Pod-members talk about their saboteurs and progress on them was really motivating. Our Pod plans to continue these meetings after the program (without Miles and Bex, as they’ll introduce new people into the Positive Intelligence framework)."

—Dominic Kassirra

Ongoing battles I have in my head have consistently marred my quality of life. The Positive Intelligence Program gave me the language to describe the actors in these skirmishes, and the tools I needed to begin taming the fires within. I’m optimistic that the simple practices I have learned will become habitual, and ultimately a part of my daily life. 

—Tushar Kundu

I am generally quite skeptical of self-help programs, which often seem faddish and not founded in sound science, but this program is better. While Shirzad Chamine oversells it somewhat, I found the Positive Intelligence program to have a solid empirical foundation and it had real benefits for me. I found the mutual support of the weekly pod sessions to be especially valuable.

—Patrick Julius

The Positive Intelligence program has been hugely helpful for me. During the six-week practice, I learned techniques that can help me think better in as little as ten seconds. Perhaps more importantly, the program helped me discover the deep sources of my fears and gave me tools to loosen their grip on me. It also provides a rare opportunity to connect with other economists (and their families) through the non-economics part of their lives. One of my big takeaways from the program was that life is difficult, not just for me, but for everyone, even the super successful economists.

—Jiannan Zhou

On a personal level, I have found the PQ program helpful in giving me tools to disrupt negative thought patterns and identify positive ones. This is had a noticeable effect on my mood and time management. I have also enjoyed the camaraderie of the pod.

—Matt Burgess

My life is full of challenges and there is nothing to cherish about it; that was the feeling I had before joining the PQ program. After a six-week intensive training, I learnt to defeat my internal fears and internalize, especially my powerful judge and victim. It helped me learn how I can transform my bad experiences into good, how I can improve collaboration with my colleagues without compromising my self-esteem, and beat my worst enemies seated deep inside with the power of self-control and laser-focused approach. It boosted my confidence and the courage in me which will forever stay with me. It gave me a chance to explore my good-self which I am confident would help me set the direction of my life towards the paths of happiness and success.

—Lubna Naz

I have found that the PQ program offers simple and effective tools to overcome imposter syndrome, a common affliction of academic economists.

—Martin Boileau

The positive intelligence course was a powerful experience for me. I have never been good at meditation before, but have found the short 'PQ rep' to be an effective tool at keeping my mind healthy. Miles and Gail led the pod session each week, and I found this space to be a safe environment to explore who I am and how I can become more who I want to be.

—Edmund Crawley

The positive intelligence course not only set a framework for identifying unhealthy/counterproductive behavior, it also equipped me with tools to change the behavior. The concepts of the judge and other saboteurs felt intuitive. The meditation techniques have also been helpful in resetting my mind during a busy day, and stay focused and more positive during tough conversations. I really enjoyed the six week intensive course, including the daily practices, weekly videos, and the weekly "pod" sessions with other students. It provided a good balance between individual, introspective exercises with social engagement to share ones' experiences.

—Christine Graham

I joined the 6-week Positive Intelligence program with Miles and Gail from Dec 2020-Jan 2021. I learned many new things about the brain, emotions through this program. As many of us might know, meditation has a significant positive impact on our lives, but it is hard to find time and space to do. Through this program, I learned how to meditate in the midst of a busy day without being noticed and without the need for a meditation room.

—Sakshi Bhardwaj

I highly recommend taking the 6-week Positive Intelligence course. The Saboteur-Sage framework was enlightening to me. It's helped me to be happier and more productive in all areas of my life.

—Andrea Atencio

What a gift to learn how to operate from a creative, curious, and empathic stance while letting go of worries and stress! The impact of this learning has been tremendous on both my professional and personal life. Thank you, Miles and Bex, for this opportunity. I am forever grateful.

—Lodovica Guidarelli

This program was a great opportunity to focus on various aspects of life that can easily slip through the cracks with a busy schedule. Even when I was skeptical of the methods we discussed, the opportunity to think about and discuss things like procrastination, self doubt, and work/life balance was a valuable one. It makes for an experience that I would recommend to anyone looking for a new perspective of professional life and interpersonal relationships.

—Vincent Mastantuno

I am extremely grateful that I was able to join the positive intelligence circle hosted by Miles and John. It provided the kickstart I needed to begin reinvesting in myself in a deeper, more meaningful way. In my mind, positive intelligence is about identifying the voices in your life that are constructive and empowering them, while quieting the distractions. By focusing on the positive, we not only feel less anxious and more content, but we can become laser-focused on our conscious objectives. In other words, we spend more productive time doing the things we want to be doing. I think everyone should commit to joining a group like this at least once in their lives, and I cannot imagine a better tandem to work with than Miles and John.

—Jordan Lenger

I used to think that I need to constantly achieve something or I will be useless and my life will be a failure. I somehow knew that that does not give me long-lasting happiness because this attitude and thought have made me frustrated and stressed out whenever I am stuck in challenging situations research-wise or I make mistakes while giving lectures. But I just couldn’t give it away because I did not know how else I could think. The PQ Pod allowed me to label my negative beliefs, and thus helped how I can view the world and myself in a more positive way without compromising needs for achievement. During the six-week practice, I learned very simple but effective techniques and found out that using them right before and after my lectures dramatically affected my confidence and performance in class. I also often went out on a walk and practiced the techniques anytime I felt stuck in something on my research, which turned out to be the fastest way for me to get my fresh mind back on track. I appreciate that I was able to have an opportunity to join the PQ Pod and I will keep practicing to make them my mental routines for coping challenges and stress. 

—Jieun Lee

The approach of the PQ program was surprisingly straightforward - we build self defenses over our lives that end up sabotaging ourselves later on, and through a combination of self-reflection and mindfulness we can learn to disentangle those defenses from what we are really attempting to achieve. The shared experience of carrying out the program as a team also gives the methodology its life. What am I left with at the end? For one, a better understanding of myself and my goals as well as a renewed capacity to listen. More importantly, I was left with a sense of the world not only as a site for personal joy and curiosity, but also as a place for building friendships and mutual support. I walked into the program reluctant, but I am very happy that I joined.

—Payne Hennigan

When Miles first told me about the Positive Intelligence program I was skeptical. I mostly did it because he's on my committee and I didn't want him thinking that I was dismissing one of his passions. But after going through the program I understand why he's such a fan of it.

The most challenging part of graduate school is thinking you're the only person struggling. That you aren't smart enough to get through everything. That you won't have any good ideas or be able to write a research paper. But the truth is everyone that comes into the program can easily get through it. It's really not that difficult. For myself and most people simply getting out of your own way is the most challenging part. Seeing how you self-sabotage and learning how to get yourself back on track is an invaluable skill that is well worth the time to do.

I would recommend that every first and second year who hasn't done the program do it. It can really help get through the grind that is those first two years when a lot of doubt creeps into everyone's mind about what they can do. The most valuable part of the program is learning how to differentiate between the stress and worries and doubts that are coming from a real problem versus those that are coming from yourself for no good reason—the aptly named saboteurs. If that's the only part of the program that you take away after going through it, it's enough to justify the time spent doing it.

But I also think that it's a useful program beyond that. I find myself being more aware of when I'm off track mentally and able to get back to being focused on what I want to accomplish. I'm a lot less frustrated as I see how many of my frustrations come from a place of impatience to do the next thing. The days that I focus on the program are far more productive than the days I don't. It's useful for outside of school as well. My biggest saboteur is restlessness and a big challenge personally is showing people that I'm as interested in them/what they're saying or doing as I am. I've found that really focusing on why I'm always wanting to do something else has helped me to be more present and has helped to make people see clearer how I feel about them and what they have to say. I found the PQ exercises, as silly as they seem, to be tremendously helpful. It was shocking to see what a difference they make.

—Joshua Schabla

For me, this wasn't quite the "be all, end all, changed my life, I'll never be sad again" experience that I think many of us secretly hope for. But taken for what it was, it moved my life forward. I gained some practical insight and experience with routines that keep me more productive throughout the day. It also helped me identify when my "inner voice" is not helping me, and how to practice ignoring it when that happens. Worth the time and effort.

—Scott Stornetta

The Positive Intelligence program with Miles and John helped me develop skills and techniques to quiet the ever-doubting, ever-judging voice in my head and amplify the voice that is empathetic and optimistic. One of my favorite aspects of the program is that the exercises can be done anytime, anywhere, and represent a small but meaningful commitment in the course of your busy day. I highly recommend this program to anyone who wishes to reduce the white noise in their mind and improve their perceptions and reactions to life's challenges.

—Austin Kennedy

The Positive Intelligence training has been a great joy, and a time of learning invaluable skills with ease. Through reading, guided discussions and exercises, I have discovered new perspectives on areas of my mind and personality, and this in the superb company of fellow economists and their loved ones. The programme gives one the tools for understanding various inner forces, overcoming those that hinder, and liberating those that move one forward. The techniques of fostering the positive forces are surprisingly and relievingly handy and effective. This kind of self-knowledge, self-care and self-help is worth suspending judgements, and carving out time for.

– Zsófia Hajnal

The program helped me become very aware of how and why I think, and have thought, through many different situations in my life and how this thinking has been helpful, or not, to achieve goals I set for myself. This is very interesting because the program made me realize that one can be convinced that one is doing everything necessary to achieve a goal and, specifically, thinking in the "right way to do so," but the opposite might actually be true. These opposite situations trace back to, as the program puts it, "saboteurs" taking the lead in how one thinks, which is just counterproductive. Saboteur ways of thinking aren't easily recognizable, since, again, they actually have a really good ability to disguise themselves as productive ways of thinking. I think that the program does a great job in guiding one to figure out when one's saboteurs are taking over and, in that case, understanding how to avoid that. The PQ reps are very helpful, and I also think that participating in a pod really helps everything come together. The guidance of Miles and Bex was really great!

—Emi Epstein

In 2020 someone I follow on Twitter recommended Miles’ Positive Intelligence coaching sessions and applied immediately. I am very glad I did. The seven week course has shifted my perspective in so many profound ways, and I now find myself using the tools we learnt from Shirzad’s book, the daily use of the app, and from the honest, thoughtful reflections of others in the pod every day. (Still a work in progress, though!) I learnt to recognize my key saboteurs and to pre-empt them with simple exercises, to communicate more effectively, to look at challenges as gifts in disguise. Most of all, I learnt to empathize with myself and others, and to be kind. As our coaches, Miles and Bex modelled this kindness and empathy constantly, engaging with and providing advice to our pod and making our weekly meetings something to really look forward to. I couldn’t recommend these sessions more highly to anyone – economist or not! - who is looking to develop a more fulfilling personal and/or professional life.

—Kalyani Raghunathan

The 6-week positive intelligence program in the Lake Tahoe pod was extremely helpful for me in providing a sense community and belonging in a confidential environment. I enjoyed interacting with others who have experienced similar concerns and was able to share more freely without fear of judgment or recrimination. Since then, The PQ reps has become a crucial part of my life and have been effective in calming me down before important meetings or presentation. I am grateful to Miles and Bex for inspiring, caring, listening, and guiding us during the 6 weeks of our course. The pod discussions were fun and helped me discover things about my personality that I didn’t know before. I hope to continue with these useful practices and perspectives in my future as well.

—Priya Ghosh

Miles and Bex are amazing. They bring good people together, and they make all of us around them better. This was a delightful and powerful experience. Highly recommended!

—Willa Friedman

In just six weeks, this program has had a profoundly positive effect on my daily mood and on my ability to enjoy (rather than being thrown by) each day's little distractions and challenges. It also gave me the ability to separate work from the rest of my life and no longer feel constant guilt for not having worked hard enough or long enough. The program helped me understand the sources of my anxiety and gave practical, easily implementable tools. What I liked most is that the program doesn't just throw a 100 ideas at you but instead it evolves slowly, allowing each nugget of advice and its accompanying daily exercise to become a habit. When some of the advice didn't seem applicable or evoked my usual cynicism, the weekly coaching team of Miles, Gail, and Bex showed a way to make the advice relevant and effective for me. While I found a couple of Shirzad Chamine's videos a little cringe (apparently factor analysis is a panacea and the key to enlightenment), that's easy to forgive when each week you learn several tools that are simultaneously simple and life-changing.

—Mike Shor

The Positive Intelligence course is an intuitive and comprehensive way to improve oneself. It has practical applications and daily accountability that helps set it apart. In six short weeks I already feel a heightened peace in my personal relationships. I highly recommend it and look forward to continuing the PQ practice in my daily life.

—Mike Blancke

Miles and Gail did a great job coaching and making it clear how we could get the most out of the program. The positive intelligence training is a great integration of mindfulness and meditation, concepts from cognitive behavioral therapy, and Stoicism. It also adds new tools to help you improve your emotional resilience. Compared to other practices I’ve tried, I like how the program is systematic (daily, quantifiable goals), which helped me stay on track. Even during the first 6 weeks of the program, I’ve noticed a greater sense of calm and happiness - the training was well worth my time.

—Jeffrey Ohl

It's a rewarding experience! I can literally see my change before and after the 6-week training sessions. I am more emotionally stable and respond more positively to challenges in life. Positive intelligence offers a scientific perspective to identify and deal with negative emotions. I really enjoyed sharing and learning with a group of nice and intelligent people and we stay in contact even after the training. Thanks Miles and Gail for leading the way to this.

—Junya Zhou

I greatly enjoyed participating in the Positive Intelligence program with Miles & Gail Kimball. While there is certainly a wealth of resources related to Positive Intelligence spanning the application, modules and reading materials, getting to be part of a discussion group helped me dive deeper into the content and spend more focused time reflecting on my progress through the exercises with peers. Miles and Gail are the consummate guides for this program of self exploration and growth, they lead thoughtful discourse and cultivate a judgement-free environment to unpack and break through the disrupting tendencies of our saboteurs. While the official program has ended, I am continuing to deploy the strategies I learned in the program to strengthen my mental fitness and put my best foot forward personally and professionally.

—Madeline Krebs

The strength of the Positive Intelligence program is providing you with a framework to understand how you might be "getting in your own way". Is it an accurate framework? Maybe, maybe not, but if you haven't much experience with mindfulness and related practices, it is certainly a helpful place to start. I was quite skeptical of some of Shirzad Chamine's claims and the way he framed things was not always to my taste, but the core principles I still found to be useful and the program was a much needed reminder to myself about the importance of going to the "mental gym". To their credit, the organizers stress that you don't have to buy into everything Shirzad says. The group sessions were also helpful in seeing how other people were dealing with and taking on problems of their own, and just getting to know a wider swath of the profession.

—Wei Yang Tham

I loved being able to do a 6-week Positive Intelligence program with Miles and Gail. It helped me be more aware of the negative inner voice that sabotages my ability to get deep work done and also to have strategies to get myself going again when I hear that inner judge. I got more done on some tricky projects during the six weeks of the program than I had in years prior.

—Christopher Palmer

Since I started incorporating PQ reps in my daily routine, my sleep quality has improved significantly; the practice helps to lessen the intensity of anxiety, which is the main driver of insomnia in my case. I like the straightforward approach to mindfulness taught by Shirzad. I was raised in Buddhist culture in Japan. Now having been exposed to Positive Intelligence, it seems that the ways Japanese people learn mindfulness are more complicated by their various sociocultural norms and formalities than what is actually necessary.

—Kenji Yano

As life became more challenging, my motivations no longer helped me to handle my difficulties. It turned out to be that I was sabotaging myself, believing it was the foundation to make my life more satisfactory. Six weeks of training helped me to form a habit of overcoming my biased patterns. It was much easier than I expected, and the pod meeting enabled me to stop procrastinating on the practices. I also learned from my pod about understanding other people's struggles and learning their enlightenments, which helped me to appreciate the people around me as well. I am happy I challenged myself to join the program and moved a tiny step forward in my personal internal growth.

—Hyoyoung Han

The Positive Intelligence program gave me a useful language to describe the frictions limiting my happiness, and helped me develop some functional low-cost practices for dealing with recurrent negative thoughts and emotions. For me, the practices and the opportunity to discuss these struggles with my fellow pod members were the most helpful aspects of the program. Shirzad’s weekly videos sometimes felt a bit long and like Shirzad was overselling, though they also gave me useful reflection points and thought exercises. Overall, I looked forward to the Positive Intelligence circles with Miles, Gail, and the “Mississippi River” pod every week and would recommend it to others interested in exploring techniques to improve their thinking.

—Akhil Rao

This program truly made a huge difference in identifying and overcoming my significant saboteurs. I have learnt to deal with stress and anxiety in a much better way, after the program. There were also a couple of fun activities we did - which gave me new perspectives on my strengths. The apps are a good motivation for me to continue practicing what I have learnt in these 6 weeks. I am grateful to Miles and Gail for their amazing way of conducting the program.

—Anomita Ghosh

The positive intelligence sessions have helped me greatly - far more than I expected. I was initially a bit skeptical but it very naturally extended my routine of mindfulness. I got a lot of insights into my own mind and behavior and I really hope that I continue with a lot of the habits I have built up during the course!

—Hariharan Jayashankar

Spending 6 weeks with Gail and Miles, along with my pod members, has been very impactful. The act of realigning myself throughout the day has allowed me to better manage my actions and emotions. The pod environment sparked active listening, support, and discussion from the group. I am thankful to have been apart of the program and look forward to my continued training.

—Sam Williams

I loved the program. I learned a lot, and I am trying to keep up with it -- this program really is about practice in my experience. Gail and Miles have been amazing. The most inspiring aspect of the whole class is their commitment to helping others grow. They patiently and openly guide you through the program, step by step and week by week, with the only goal of making a positive impact on your life. 

—Florian Trouvain

It‘s been two months already. It was one of the more or even most enlightening self-improvement courses that helped me understand myself and the people around me in a whole different way. I liked the biographic elements of factor analysis. The intra-day habits for remaining focused and balanced. And how the overall framework guides my thinking now. Less judging. More discernment.

And higher empathy. What was puzzling and mysterious in some conflict situations before became more clear. Seeing differences and challenges turned into recognizing opportunities to learn and grow from and appreciate the psychological make-up of others. I feel the program helped me to remain more calm in stressful situations. More open and able in engaging different personality types. And I can see how it enabled me to improve my coaching and conflict navigation skills at work and in my personal life. I constantly see the saboteurs in the world around me and wish more people would enjoy the privilege of taking part in the course. Can strongly recommend. 

—Norman Scherer

The Positive Intelligence program made me see the subtle mechanisms I use to get in my own way and how I rationalize those mechanisms. More importantly, the program equipped me with the tools to sidestep those subtle mechanisms to attain the goals I set for myself. For many people, the Positive Intelligence program has the possibility of being a game changer.

—Marc Bellemare

Miles and Gail are offering a 7-week program designed to help you understand and change your behavior when dealing with new and challenging situations. The program combines cognitive-science insights into behavioral patterns, self-assessment, and what type of "saboteurs" shape your behavior, with breathing and mindfulness exercises that aim to help you fight those saboteurs and shift your perspective and behavior. You can approach the program with the goal to improve your performance, enhance your relationships with loved ones and colleagues, lead a happier and more peaceful life, or else. 

For those who have never considered their mental fitness, the program can be life-changing. As someone who has been to therapy, trained into related techniques, but who is also skeptical of the "quantified self" and "I-found-the-ultimate-method" wellness gurus’ approaches, I found the program to be an opportunity to rebuild and expand my foundations. Although Chamine oversells the program's pathbreaking character, he provides simple and interesting cognitive science-based narratives to reflect on, and a straightforward tool-based approach to meditation that has improved my ability to focus

However, the most significant gift of the program is not the PQ program itself, but rather the weekly 1-hour meeting with a small group of economists and economists' relatives led by Miles and Gail. These meeting provided an opportunity to recognize how common our struggles are with our disciplinary incentives system and how differently we react to it.  By sharing their own journey and helping each participant listen to oneself and to the other pod members, Miles and Gail create a safe and nurturing environment to reflect on our ingrained behaviors, ingrained behaviors, barriers, scripts, and narratives. They helped each of us build a toolbox consistent with our own worldview and understand our colleagues' toolboxes and worldviews better.

—Beatrice Cherrier

I would like to thank Gail and Miles for their inspiration, valuable insights, and guidance during our pod meetings, and in general for their selfless commitment to serving and coaching economists globally.

I have become a big fan of Shirzad Chamine's "Positive Intelligence" coaching concept. In my opinion, Chamine effectively renders many potent traditional techniques for enhancing our consciousness (such as e.g. mindfulness and visualization) more accessible to our rational Western society and compatible with our present lifestyle.

Despite having tried various self-awareness methods in the past, I gained many new insights. It was astonishing to realize that my two primary saboteurs were responsible for most of the stress I experience in my daily life. Even now, this framework provides me with substantial guidance in numerous situations.

I wholeheartedly recommend their program and relished the exchange of ideas in our pod group. It is a unique opportunity to receive coaching from Gail and Miles while also enjoying free access to the app for an entire year.

I sincerely hope they continue their remarkable work!

—Lien Pham Dao

I ended my year 2022 with a resolution to change a few things about my personal and professional life that changed since my starting as a faculty. Since my starting as a faculty coincided with covid and our child's birth, it took me a while to realize that I am performing sub-par even after accounting for all these life changes. That is when I met Anahid Bauer in Paris and came across your wonderful service to academics and economists. I sent you an email right away to get into the waitlist.

Fast forward to April 2023, I feel much lighter and better. I also changed a few other things along with attending our weekly pods (such as attending an academic writing workshop, altering my sleep schedule to get at least 7 hours of sleep, dedicating a 2-3 hour block every day to write "something"). But I think that Positive Intelligence has enhanced the effects of these changes. Our 6 weeks exercise has (I believe) helped improve my family situation. I have learned to label my saboteurs. I also believe "the other person is at least 10% right" is an awesome formula. I am trying to keep up with the PQ reps and master the other techniques, such as “treat everything as a gift”.

—Raveesh Mayya

I had no clue what to expect, I was twenty, experiencing life changing revelations about myself everyday... yet everything was still so confusing. I would get angry when it felt like people were distractions to what I wanted to accomplish. I wanted to isolate myself and hide out in my room because it seemed like that was the only place where I could really work hard to accomplish the goals I had set for myself. Only a month before I began the PQ pod, I was bawling to a professor about that .06% increase for that GPA goal.

The PQ pod happened at the beginning of second semester and changed my life completely; I don't know where I would be without having gone through the pod meetings. I can say that now after taking a final and receiving a B+... and frankly I am still in the process of acceptance. Nonetheless, I feel relieved. This is when I remember success is not a destination, it's a journey. The PQ pod provided me clarity in a world with such uncertainty.

—Kelly Wheeler

Gail and Miles have developed a very thoughtful and constructive program that will help you overcome your negative karma with the positive energy inside you. The program encourages active engagement from all participants. You will find this refreshing and energizing.

—Sanjai Bhagat

I've come to understand myself better over the past six weeks. Doing PQ reps as my daily routine would prevent me from being influenced by the Judge and Saboteurs.

—Kyoung-Gon Kim

This program is very engaging and helpful for anyone working in or coming off a high stress environment. You will learn to have a greater command of some of the negative feelings in your life and learn to see past them in ways that were much more difficult before. Miles and Gail have put together a great companion program to Shirzad’s works and the pod meetings are very engaging. Especially for those professionals just entering a very busy world, this training will help you slow down and take stock of everything around you and help you make your best decisions with clarity and focus.

—Alexander Imhof

It is such a great program that focuses on the inner self. I learned to recognize my ‘bad’ self (Judge and Saboteurs), ways to reduce their magnitudes, and to listen instead to my ‘good’ self (Sage). The method is not heavy on strategic insights, but instead focuses on building mental muscles through simple daily practices and weekly sharing sessions. It is hands-on exercise for my mental fitness, and I truly feel the benefit of the program!

—Aditya Rachmanto

Practices and techniques from the PQ program help upgrade my coping strategies in potentially stressful situations during the Ph.D. program.

—Dongkyu Yang

This program has been incredibly useful and has had a significantly positive effect on me. After engaging in the easy and interesting training sessions and practices, I had a profound realization that the saboteurs within me were the main source of my negative emotions. I must admit, initially, I had doubts about whether the training could genuinely help me. However, it has proven to be astonishingly helpful, exceeding my expectations.

I have noticed a considerable reduction in the frequency of self-judgment, judgment of others, and judgment of circumstances. I'm excited about the positive changes it has already brought into my life, and I'm eager to see the progress I will make as I keep working on myself.

—Pan Chen

The basic ideas and approach seem very useful and healthy. I learned a lot and started growing in some good directions hopefully. Miles and Gail are delightful guides.

—Aaron Sojourner

My experience with the Positive Intelligence program has been rather impactful in subtle, yet salient, ways. I’ve begun to notice myself being able to name what saboteurs are attempting to control my emotions, thus helping me alleviate the negative feelings they create. I also have noticed myself being able to understand the behaviors of other people more and being able to provide advice for those close to me.

—Tsering Sherpa

I've been through the 6-week Positive Intelligence program, and I can tell that it gradually transformed my life in a very good way. Now I see things that I used to believe were bad or unfortunate as gifts and opportunities. This new mindset that I'm now equipped with helps me to stick to hard things despite their difficulty and remain productive. Also, PQ reps have been very helpful in correcting my maladaptive thoughts made by my Saboteurs. Overall, I'd love to recommend this program to anyone who wants to improve his/her life but doesn't know how to do it.

—Jaeha Lee

The last six weeks have been a very illuminating experience as part of Miles and Gail's PQ program. I have learned so much about myself and am starting to see everything that happens to me as a gift and opportunity.

I highly recommend the book and program to all my economist friends and family. We waste too much time limiting ourselves. This program helps you do yourself a favor by limiting unproductive and unhappy time. Please reach out (via email, twitter, etc.) if you'd like to talk more.

—Sarah Bana

This program has been a game-changer for me, both personally and professionally. It gave me the confidence to do things I used to be afraid of, like reaching out to people and asking for help. What's cool is that it's not just about learning theories but also getting tools I can actually use in my everyday life. And now, I've got a group of friends from different life stages, and we all help each other out. It's not just learning stuff, it's about making my life better, and I really appreciate that.

—Jieqiong Jin

I participated in the program together with my wife Naewon and it was a game changer for us! It not only helped us with our individual issues but also offered a common platform where we could better communicate about deep, sensitive and extremely personal problems. I would highly recommend this program to anyone, but especially to those considering joining with significant others. It not only enriched my everyday experiences but also deepened my relationship with Naewon. For this I will forever be grateful to Miles and Gail.

—DongIk Kang

It is fascinating how simple mental exercises can affect the brain so deeply that the result is visible even on an MRI. I have learned how to deal with anxious thoughts and how to awaken my positive thinking and creativity whenever I need it. I figured out how to catch situations where my instinctive response is probably suboptimal, pause and think for a few seconds, and come up with a better solution. I learned to see the best in people, including myself. I believe that the Positive Intelligence program makes the world a better place to live, not only for the participants but also for their families, friends, and colleagues. 

—Nikolay Arefyev

Going through the 6-week Positive Intelligence program has been nothing short of revolutionary for my mental health. My productivity has improved, and I feel passion for my research I feared I'd lost. But most importantly, I am a much happier person now than I previously was, and that is truly invaluable.

—David Leather

You do not need to have been born a optimist, you can learn to become one with this training!

—Oscarine Vonk

A typical life advice is to stay positive. I always had a hard time implementing it because there was no process that I could easily follow to get to stay positive. Positive Intelligence program gave me this process. I am taking advantage of it and saving some energy from getting stuck in negative thoughts, and use this energy to pursue my dreams.

—Alina Arefeva

The 6-week program is an incredible transformation for my mindset. The Pod meeting provides community support that helps me grow with my cohorts through in-depth discussions and PQ reqs. This program is the beginning of a better version of myself with boosted positive intelligence.

—Tongyang Yang

I was initially skeptical about the program, but I'm glad I participated. Through the program, I've learned to identify and reframe negative feelings into more positive and constructive thoughts. As a hyper-achiever, I often focus excessively on final outcomes, neglecting to enjoy the process. This mindset has generated significant stress and anxiety, driving me to achieve more but in an unsustainable manner. I've struggled to find ways to motivate myself with more positive feelings. However, the pod meetings provided me with a valuable framework to move in the direction I prefer. They have reduced my stress and helped me perform better in a more enjoyable way.

—XinXin Lyu

This program has helped me be more aware of my emotions in the moment. This allows me to process the situation and transition to a frame of mind which is more in line with the outcomes I want to achieve. Many times, even responses that appear logical can be driven by deeper patterns that act as saboteurs and are unhelpful. Now, I pick up on reactionary thoughts and behaviors more quickly and intentionally activate the type of thinking that supports positive outcomes. This is a great training. Doing it with the support of Miles, Gail, and the members of my pod made all the difference in me sticking through with the practice! I have already recommended the 6-week Positive Intelligence program to friends and colleagues, and I encourage you to sign up!

—Bethel Cole-Smith

Overall, it was a great experience that allowed me to work on my mental fitness and learn some different techniques to deal with life. Too often, I focus on my physical health and neglect the equally important mental fitness. Miles and Gail were excellent discussion leaders who facilitated discussions within our group. Overall, the training and the book provide a framework for improving your mental fitness, and it gave some great tools for dealing with the negative aspects of your mind, which the class/book calls saboteurs. I recommend this 6-week training to anyone. If you are a mindfulness expert or someone who has never done any mental fitness training, you will receive some benefits. At worst, it can be seen as a “commitment device” to meet regularly and do homework regarding mental fitness and mindfulness.

—Enrique Valdes

The Positive Intelligence Program was a great opportunity for me to look back on myself. It allowed me to gain a deeper understanding of who I am and what truly matters to me. I also learned many valuable tools for managing my saboteurs through this program. I highly recommend joining the program and experiencing its life-changing impact for yourself.

—Seungmin Baek

This is a (long-ish) text of gratitude and appreciation to Miles Kimball for the Positive Intelligence (PQ) coaching.

When Miles, one of my all-time favorite economists, first told me about the PQ I thought “hell, yeah!”; I was sure something positive would come out of it; but it turned out to be much better than I imagined, enriching and dare I say “transformative”.

I have been searching spiritually in various places since a long time, in a variety of traditions, from the far east to the middle and near. It has helped me through great distress; without exaggeration, it probably saved me. All while being mindful of the risk of “spiritual materialism”, so aptly labelled by Chögyam Trungpa, a master of one of these traditions (some may know him as Pema Chödrön’s teacher).

All these traditions have a common core, and each has very useful elements to incorporate in one’s life, to have a better life (e.g. meditation, qi gong, yoga, some martial art, etc.). Loads of heterogeneity there, what works for me may not work for you.

Enter PQ and Miles’ 7-week coaching sessions together with another excellent coach, aimed at a small group (“pod”) of economists and family/friends. This has felt fresh, modern, accounting for current neuroscience and psychology research, BUT also somehow anchored and tapping into this ancestral wisdom that is the common core of all spirituality forms that at least I have encountered. There is a set of insights that feels both “true” and familiar, but here’s the thing. The truly novel thing is that insight is easy, exercise/practice is hard.

So then there are these very simple exercises, that once you have the insight you understand the role of, that bring you to the present moment, to your body, to your life in every moment. And the more you do it, the easier it gets – but you need to keep doing it.

It gives you practical tools, teaches you techniques that eventually make it easier to navigate these sometimes turbulent waters (aka "life"). There is a lot of variety: breathing, tactile, seeing, labeling sensations, tensing and releasing your muscles, etc.

The idea is that you find those exercises that work for you, where you get the highest payoff with the lowest cost (could not resist a little econ there). And you use these as weapons to fight back (smartly and compassionately) ... the Saboteurs!

Oh, the Saboteurs ... the internal enemies that you unwittingly fed over decades and prevent you from living a full life, from actually being there in your life.

“Saboteur” (how do you say it in French? Pardon my French … joke). Those of us who teach macro, when we get to labor markets & unions tell students the story of workers throwing “sabots” (wooden shoes) into machines to disrupt production, the (disputed) early 20th-century origin of “sabotage”.

Self-sabotage, raise your hand if you (don’t) do it. But in this context there is an even cooler connection.Do you know “Savate”? It also comes from “sabot” (and all its Romance language cousins zapato, zapata, sabato, sapata, ciabatta, etc.) and it is a … combat sport! Aka French *kick*boxing, Marseille harbor meets Parisian suburbs. There is something quite poetic about finding the Saboteurs who've been literally kicking your butt over a lifetime, and learning the techniques to "kick their butt" back.

That’s what PQ training gives you.

Miles does this for fellow (PhD) economists with incredible generosity, dedication, and skill. Thus making this profession (and hence a little bit the world) a better place.

—Florin Bilbiie

Interested in an enriching small group experience with other economists (+ some partners) learning about tools that help with mental health, mindfulness, communication, and relationships? Definitely sign up with @mileskimball + Bex Bassin who are leading these “pods” for free.

The source material for the pods is Chamine’s book “Positive Intelligence” and an app that facilitates practice with the concepts. Skeptical? I hear you. Chamine excitedly makes overly bold claims and discusses the tools as a part of a system of beliefs that may not fit with your own worldview (though I’d say my own worldview is very similar to his in many ways). In any case, there are tremendously useful skills to be learned from the content even if you don’t buy into Chamine’s worldview. Call them skills, tools, hacks, or whatever. I suspect that many will be useful for many people if they practice using them.

You will probably also benefit tremendously from being in a “pod” with extremely thoughtful people who are similarly interested in improving their lives. And who open up in an amazingly vulnerable and touching way because of the tone set by the awesome coaches.

You start by taking a personality assessment to gain insight into personality traits that may cause problems for you. I think of this as a “mindfulness shortcut” whereby you can use the results as a starting point instead of starting from scratch as you explore your mind.

Then you work on being aware of + taming your judge, which I think about as the lizard part of our brain that focuses on threats (amygdala). It’s waaay overactive (thanks evolution!) and causes lots of problems bc it makes us perceive threats that aren’t really a big deal.

You then work on your “saboteurs,” or other habitual behaviors that are more varied across different people. They include problems associated with being controlling, hyper-vigilant, restless, hyper-rational, and with desires to hyper-achieve, please, avoid, etc.

You then work on your “sages,” or habits that will help you to be compassionate, to see opportunities in difficult times, and to communicate effectively with others.

Throughout the program, you are encouraged to work on being present through “PQ reps” and through other exercises. This is great mindfulness practice. You are also encouraged to be compassionate towards yourself and others. Wonderful practice.

You also learn “tricks” to help you do these things, some of which may or may not work well for you. As a beginner who has been learning about mindfulness, meditation, and other (secular) Buddhist practices over the past year, the variety makes it approachable and engaging.

There are many practices that I will try hard to continue after the program concludes, even as my own worldview differs somewhat from the one described in the program. I have also benefited *tremendously* from getting to know Coach Miles, Coach Bex, and my awesome podmates. 

—Jason Lindo

I am reaching out to express my sincere gratitude for the recently completed 6-week Positive Intelligence course. The experience was truly life-changing, and I wanted to share some of the positive outcomes and key learnings I gained during the program.

Firstly, I would like to acknowledge the well-organized course content and the engaging activities included. The combination of theoretical understanding and practical application allowed me to delve deeper into the concepts of positive intelligence while experiencing their real-world benefits.

One of the most significant takeaways from the program was learning to recognize and manage my Saboteurs. This understanding has greatly impacted my mental well-being and resilience.

Moreover, the introduction of Sage powers has revolutionized my approach to decision-making and problem-solving. Harnessing my Sage capabilities has made me more resourceful, compassionate, and innovative, leading to heightened productivity and work satisfaction.

A notable aspect of the program was the daily mindfulness exercises. Incorporating these practices into my daily life has allowed me to be more focused and attentive, reducing stress and improving my overall well-being.

Lastly, I would like to express my thankfulness for your guidance and support throughout the course. Your expertise and enthusiasm for positive intelligence were truly motivational, and your skill in fostering a safe and supportive learning environment made the experience even more rewarding.

In summary, the 6-week Positive Intelligence course has left a lasting impact on my life, and I am eager to continue utilizing the strategies and techniques I have acquired.

Thank you once again for offering such a meaningful experience. I will definitely recommend more people to get involved in it.

—Yaxuan Liu

Finally, Matt Burgess, Scott Cunningham and Tyler Ransom offer testimonials on Twitter:

Matt Burgess:

  • https://twitter.com/matthewgburgess/status/1331375758548332551

Scott Cunningham:

Tyler Ransom:

  • https://twitter.com/tyleransom/status/1514716752273240064

If you are intrigued, check out my post:

I also have a blog series on related topics. The latest of those posts, which has links to all of the earlier posts in the series is:





How to Summarize a Big Chunk of Nutrition Research: Almost Anything You Are Likely to Think Of Is Better Than the Standard American Diet

The acronym SAD is almost irresistible for bad things. One such bad SAD thing is Seasonal Affective Disorder. Another is the Standard American Diet.

Because people need to eat to live, nutrition research is bedeviled by not being able to say whether a particular food is good or bad in itself. A key question is always “Compared to what?” By and large, convenience in running experiments or doing epidemiological analysis means the answer will be “Compared to the Standard American Diet.” And the simple fact is that the Standard American Diet is so bad that almost anything else is an improvement—with the main exception being food that causes problems over a fairly short time horizon.

To put it another way, when a food is called “healthy,” notice that it is usually an indicator of doing something other than the Standard American Diet. When a food is called “unhealthy,” notice that it is usually an indicator of following the Standard American Diet reasonably closely.

As an approximation, think of the Standard American Diet as a sort of global minimum. Any vector with its tail at that global minimum is going to be pointed up, no matter where on the surface the head of the vector is placed.

There is an important message here. If you are eating in a way similar to the way most Americans eat, stop! Do something else. If you are making a modest change in a direction that seems plausible, it will probably be an improvement. If you are making a big change, it will be more important that you choose a good direction.

I have many suggestions on improving your diet (both what you eat and when you eat) in my Tuesday diet and health posts. (See the link below.) But the Standard American Diet is so bad, the chances that you can blindly fumble your way to something better than the Standard American Diet even without high-quality advice are pretty good. Inaction is one or your worst enemies here.

Note: This post is inspired by a comment Peter Attia made on his podcast The Drive. For insight into nutrition and other issues of enhancing health, I highly recommend his podcast.

For annotated links to other posts on diet and health, see:

The Devil of Getting Criticized

“Untitled (Devil)” by Jean-Michel Basquiat. Link to the Wikipedia article on “Untitled (Devil)” painting

“Untitled (Devil)” by Jean-Michel Basquiat.

Link to the Wikipedia article on “Untitled (Devil)” painting

For most people, criticism is hard to take. I find myself wishing sometimes that I could impose a rule on the universe that no one ever gets to criticize me about anything.

I find the anonymous criticism in referee reports and from student evaluations especially difficult to take. If I knew who was saying the criticism, I might be able to see how little authority that criticism had. But anonymous sentences on a page seem like scripture—as if they were the word of God.

A big part of the reason criticism hurts so much is that most of us internally amplify the criticism we hear, when there are many reasons to take even the level of criticism actually proffered with a grain of salt. (It is not uncommon for someone to seem as if criticism is sliding off them without any effect, but who take it hard internally.)

Here are some of the reasons almost all criticism should be treated as at best a source of partial truths:

  • Many people offering criticism are simply off-base or mistaken in their criticism.

  • Often, criticism is a true statement of what someone sees, but what they see tells a lot more about them than the person being criticized.

  • Often, the one criticizing knows that something bothers them, but don’t know what it is. That is, even if there is a good reason for given less than a five-star rating, they may misdiagnose what was wrong.

  • Sometimes those criticizing are even more inarticulate, making it very difficult to get useful feedback from what they are saying.

  • Even when someone has something useful to say in criticism, they are often emotionally clueless in how they deliver the information.

  • People often give criticism when angry, which may make them want to wound with the criticism. Then whatever useful feedback there might be is tinged with emotional poison.

Inside your own mind, rather than apply all of these caveats to criticism you receive, it is likely you amplify criticism:

  • It is common to focus on negative information and ignore positive information. If there are ten bits of praise and one criticism, guess which one you will remember.

  • Rumination can keep the words of criticism (or images of nonverbal signals you take to be critical) running in an endless loop in your brain.

  • Your brain may well rummage around for odds and ends in your memory that seem to provide evidence for the criticism.

  • You may well catastrophize and simply imagine something several times worse than what was said—even if you can’t find a lot of supporting evidence in your memory banks.

  • You may imagine not only that the truth about you is worse than what was said, but also that the potential consequences are much worse than they really are. If you have an flaws, surely that means the world will end, doesn’t it? :(

  • The criticism may remind you of some past trauma or past fear.

It isn’t pretty. But good luck getting people to stop criticizing you. The only reliable way to avoid an awful experience is to take criticism with a grain of salt rather than amplifying it. That will require seeing things clearly and having a high level of mental fitness. My hope is that some of the blog posts flagged below will be helpful in getting you to a higher level of mental fitness.

Preparing the Ground for Mathematical Creativity

Link to the ungated article shown above

Link to the ungated article shown above

Let me share my own experience with—and advice for—mathematical creativity. Mathematical creativity is usually required in order to develop a proof, to figure out how to mathematically model something of a type that has never been mathematically modeled before, or to figure out what kins of statistical method will work in an analysis unlike previous analyses.

The first piece of advice based on my own experience—backed up by scholarly work such as that in the paper “The Characteristics of Mathematical Creativity” is that you really want to get your subsconscious in gear working on the math problem. In the workings of our brains, consciousness is a tiny window on a large mansion. Simply because the throughput in consciousness is so small, most of the activity of the brain is unconscious. So getting the rest of your brain to work on a problem is a key to mathematical creativity. (Call it the subconscious, the unconscious or the nonconscious—for this discussion it is all the same.)

But how do you get your subconscious working on a math problem? That answer: it takes a lot of hard work on a math problem before your subconscious takes the hint that it should work away at the problem. A lot of that conscious hard work may feel like banging your head against a wall, but it credibly communicates the urgency of the problem to your subconscious. This is analogous to the memory principle that it is those things which you make an effort to remember (and in large part, only those) that your brain assumes are worth storing in long-term memory—a principle I discuss in “The Most Effective Memory Methods are Difficult—and That's Why They Work.”

The second piece of advice is that it helps to develop your ability to think productively about a math problem without a piece of paper in front of you. This makes it easier for both your conscious and unconscious mind to think about the problem when you are at your most creative. Also, simply trying to keep track of a math problem without a piece of paper in front of you requires continually going back to the basics and trying to remember what the overall objective and intermediate objectives were. That is, not having a piece of paper in front of you forces you to focus on the forest, rather than on the trees.

One of the times I am most creative is when I am on a walk. That is true for at least two reasons. One is that most people are smarter during exercise. The other is that exercise and interesting surroundings can calm the mind.

In order to think about a math problem while on a walk, it is helpful to do preprocessing of the problem to strip off the fundamentally easy but distracting parts of the problem from the hard kernel of the math problem. Then thinking about a math problem on a walk requires persistence and patience. I lose my thread of thought many times as I think about a problem in this way, but every time I pick up of the thread after losing it strengthens my mathematical ability a little bit.

The third piece of advice is to strengthen one’s mental muscles for thinking about a problem in different ways. For me that often means practicing thinking geometrically. See my post “Why Thinking Geometrically and Graphically is Such a Powerful Way to Do Math.”

The third piece of advice is that after getting some picture in your head of the kernel of how to do a math problem, you then need to sit down with a piece of paper or computer screen in front of you and begin to work out the details. An alternative is to get someone to try to explain the solution idea to. However you begin working through the details, you will often discover new things in that process of working out the details.

Overall, in my experience, the path for mathematical creativity is conscious—>subconscious—>conscious. (Sometimes there are many more alternations between conscious and subconscious than that.)

The fourth and final piece of advice is to revisit math problems from time to time, even long after you originally found a solution that seemed reasonably satisfying at the time. Once you have gotten your subconscious working on a problem, it often doesn’t stop, even after you have accomplished whatever your immediate goal was in working on the problem. And the passage of months and years often leads you to bump into ideas that can help with a deeper solution to the problem. The bottom line is that, if you are like me, you will often have a deeper insight into an old problem if you think about it again months or years later.

Mathematical creativity is a lot of fun. And it is more learnable than most people think. I have a favorite book to recommend for those who want to build their mathematical creativity: George Polya’s How to Solve It:

Don’t buy into the idea that mathematical ability is mostly determined by what you were born with. Instead, read “There's One Key Difference Between Kids Who Excel at Math and Those Who Don't” and “How to Turn Every Child into a 'Math Person'.”

I have links to many other posts on math in my post “Gabriela D'Souza on Failure in Learning Math”

On calming the mind, which can enhance creativity, see “Judson Brewer, Elizabeth Bernstein and Mitchell Kaplan on Finding Inner Calm” and the links at the bottom of that post.

EdX: Introduction to Biology—The Secret of Life →

Hans Taparia gives the following recommendation for the EdX course of this post’s title in his New York Times op-ed “The Future of College Is Online, and It’s Cheaper”:

Most biology professors, for instance, would find themselves hard pressed to match the pedagogical quality, production values and inspirational nature of Eric Lander’s online Introduction to Biology course at M.I.T. That free course currently has over 134,000 students enrolled this semester.

Hans also mentions Georgia Tech’s inexpensive online MBA:

Georgia Tech, a top engineering school, launched an online masters in computer science in 2014. The degree costs just $7,000 (one-sixth the cost of its in-person program), and the school now has nearly 10,000 students enrolled, making it the largest computer science program in the country. Notably, the online degree has not cannibalized its on-campus revenue stream. Instead, it has opened up a prestigious degree program to a different population, mostly midcareer applicants looking for a meaningful skills upgrade.

How to Make Ramadan Fasting—or Any Other Religious Fasting—Easier

This is the first full day of Ramadan this year. During Ramadan, Muslims are not supposed to eat or drink anything between sunrise and sunset. That includes coffee. Raja Abdulrahim’s April 7, 2021 Wall Street Journal article “Could You Go for a Month Without Coffee?” tells of the careful preparations some Muslims go to to avoid caffeine withdrawal during Ramadan with its no-coffee stretches longer than 12 hours.

What would make Ramadan fasting even easier is preparing to avoid carb withdrawal during Ramadan. If the body is adapted to sugar and other easily digested carbs, going without food for over 12 hours can be very hard. But if the body is adapted to a high-fat low-carb diet, then going without food for over 12 hours can be quite easy.

My knowledge of Islam is only second-hand, but the Ramadan meals before sunrise and after sunset seem to have important social and religious significance. For example, the Wikipedia article “Suhur” (the pre-dawn meal) reports ""The Prophet said, 'take suhur as there is a blessing in it.'" So a full fast—or eating only one meal a day during Ramadan—may not be acceptable. But it should be religiously acceptable to make one’s meals during Ramadan (and ideally for a week or two beforehand) low-carb and high fat. For example, the pre-dawn meal could be scrambled eggs and a whole avocado. Then, even if the evening meal is a big social gathering, it might be possible to eat more meat and avoid the bread, pastry, rice and sugary treats.

For other food options that should make fasting easier, look at the list of low-insulin-index foods in “Forget Calorie Counting; It's the Insulin Index, Stupid,” supplemented by the information in “Using the Glycemic Index as a Supplement to the Insulin Index.” (Also, note that both the insulin index and the glycemic index give effects per 100 calories of food consumed. For most non-starchy vegetables, 100 calories worth looks like quite a big serving.)

A similar approach could work for those celebrating the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur and for Mormons doing their fast ending on the first Sunday of each month.

And a similar approach can work if one is making fasting a regular part of one’s health regimen. The one difference between a religiously motivated fast and a fast for health is that a fast for health should ideally allow the drinking of water, while many religious fasts require abstaining from water.

Anyone who physically suffers during fasting now would be well advised to try preparing for fasting by surrounding the fast by low-carb eating. I’d be interested to hear about people’s experiences trying this.

For annotated links to other posts on diet and health, see:

The Federalist Papers #28: The Federal Government and States Can Check One Another’s Power, Reducing the Chance of Abuses—Alexander Hamilton

Alexander Hamilton’s key argument in the Federalist Papers #28 is in this passage:

Power being almost always the rival of power, the general government will at all times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments, and these will have the same disposition towards the general government. The people, by throwing themselves into either scale, will infallibly make it preponderate.

He contrasts the difficulty of dealing with an evil federal government with the difficult of dealing with an evil state government if a state was a nation unto itself. If a state was a nation unto itself, it is hard to defeat tyrants running the state:

In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair. The usurpers, clothed with the forms of legal authority, can too often crush the opposition in embryo. The smaller the extent of the territory, the more difficult will it be for the people to form a regular or systematic plan of opposition, and the more easy will it be to defeat their early efforts. Intelligence can be more speedily obtained of their preparations and movements, and the military force in the possession of the usurpers can be more rapidly directed against the part where the opposition has begun. In this situation there must be a peculiar coincidence of circumstances to insure success to the popular resistance.

By contrast, states have many resources to deal with an evil federal government. Alexander Hamilton overstates the case somewhat in this passage, but his basic idea is sound:

State governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority. Projects of usurpation cannot be masked under pretenses so likely to escape the penetration of select bodies of men, as of the people at large. The legislatures will have better means of information. They can discover the danger at a distance; and possessing all the organs of civil power, and the confidence of the people, they can at once adopt a regular plan of opposition, in which they can combine all the resources of the community. They can readily communicate with each other in the different States, and unite their common forces for the protection of their common liberty.

Alexander Hamilton also argues that the geographical extent of the Union will afford an advantage to states vis a vis the federal government should it turn tyrannical:

The great extent of the country is a further security. We have already experienced its utility against the attacks of a foreign power. And it would have precisely the same effect against the enterprises of ambitious rulers in the national councils. If the federal army should be able to quell the resistance of one State, the distant States would have it in their power to make head with fresh forces. The advantages obtained in one place must be abandoned to subdue the opposition in others; and the moment the part which had been reduced to submission was left to itself, its efforts would be renewed, and its resistance revive.

I view the American Civil War as a good test of Alexander Hamilton’s claims. It was indeed easy for a group of states to organize against the federal government. Had their cause been just, they probably would have prevailed—perhaps most likely by a different result in the 1864 presidential election. The injustice of the cause Confederacy tipped the balance against it; therefore the Confederacy lost. It is not as if this equation is absolute, but democratic traditions and organized governments on both sides of a conflict tend to give an advantage to the side that has more right on its side, at least in the eyes of the majority of the people.

Much of the rest of Alexander Hamilton’s argument boils down pointing out that the arguments of critics of the power of a federal government to raise an army apply at least equally to the states. But the states did in fact raise armies to quell rebellions within themselves, and most people could see the necessity of that.

Below is the full text of the Federalist Papers #28, to give the full context. (I have put the content of the footnote in square brackets at the location where it appears.)

FEDERALIST NO. 28

The Same Subject Continued: The Idea of Restraining the Legislative Authority in Regard to the Common Defense Considered

For the Independent Journal.

Author: Alexander Hamilton

To the People of the State of New York:

THAT there may happen cases in which the national government may be necessitated to resort to force, cannot be denied. Our own experience has corroborated the lessons taught by the examples of other nations; that emergencies of this sort will sometimes arise in all societies, however constituted; that seditions and insurrections are, unhappily, maladies as inseparable from the body politic as tumors and eruptions from the natural body; that the idea of governing at all times by the simple force of law (which we have been told is the only admissible principle of republican government), has no place but in the reveries of those political doctors whose sagacity disdains the admonitions of experimental instruction.

Should such emergencies at any time happen under the national government, there could be no remedy but force. The means to be employed must be proportioned to the extent of the mischief. If it should be a slight commotion in a small part of a State, the militia of the residue would be adequate to its suppression; and the national presumption is that they would be ready to do their duty. An insurrection, whatever may be its immediate cause, eventually endangers all government. Regard to the public peace, if not to the rights of the Union, would engage the citizens to whom the contagion had not communicated itself to oppose the insurgents; and if the general government should be found in practice conducive to the prosperity and felicity of the people, it were irrational to believe that they would be disinclined to its support.

If, on the contrary, the insurrection should pervade a whole State, or a principal part of it, the employment of a different kind of force might become unavoidable. It appears that Massachusetts found it necessary to raise troops for repressing the disorders within that State; that Pennsylvania, from the mere apprehension of commotions among a part of her citizens, has thought proper to have recourse to the same measure. Suppose the State of New York had been inclined to re-establish her lost jurisdiction over the inhabitants of Vermont, could she have hoped for success in such an enterprise from the efforts of the militia alone? Would she not have been compelled to raise and to maintain a more regular force for the execution of her design? If it must then be admitted that the necessity of recurring to a force different from the militia, in cases of this extraordinary nature, is applicable to the State governments themselves, why should the possibility, that the national government might be under a like necessity, in similar extremities, be made an objection to its existence? Is it not surprising that men who declare an attachment to the Union in the abstract, should urge as an objection to the proposed Constitution what applies with tenfold weight to the plan for which they contend; and what, as far as it has any foundation in truth, is an inevitable consequence of civil society upon an enlarged scale? Who would not prefer that possibility to the unceasing agitations and frequent revolutions which are the continual scourges of petty republics?

Let us pursue this examination in another light. Suppose, in lieu of one general system, two, or three, or even four Confederacies were to be formed, would not the same difficulty oppose itself to the operations of either of these Confederacies? Would not each of them be exposed to the same casualties; and when these happened, be obliged to have recourse to the same expedients for upholding its authority which are objected to in a government for all the States? Would the militia, in this supposition, be more ready or more able to support the federal authority than in the case of a general union? All candid and intelligent men must, upon due consideration, acknowledge that the principle of the objection is equally applicable to either of the two cases; and that whether we have one government for all the States, or different governments for different parcels of them, or even if there should be an entire separation of the States, there might sometimes be a necessity to make use of a force constituted differently from the militia, to preserve the peace of the community and to maintain the just authority of the laws against those violent invasions of them which amount to insurrections and rebellions.

Independent of all other reasonings upon the subject, it is a full answer to those who require a more peremptory provision against military establishments in time of peace, to say that the whole power of the proposed government is to be in the hands of the representatives of the people. This is the essential, and, after all, only efficacious security for the rights and privileges of the people, which is attainable in civil society.[Its full efficacy will be examined hereafter.]

If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair. The usurpers, clothed with the forms of legal authority, can too often crush the opposition in embryo. The smaller the extent of the territory, the more difficult will it be for the people to form a regular or systematic plan of opposition, and the more easy will it be to defeat their early efforts. Intelligence can be more speedily obtained of their preparations and movements, and the military force in the possession of the usurpers can be more rapidly directed against the part where the opposition has begun. In this situation there must be a peculiar coincidence of circumstances to insure success to the popular resistance.

The obstacles to usurpation and the facilities of resistance increase with the increased extent of the state, provided the citizens understand their rights and are disposed to defend them. The natural strength of the people in a large community, in proportion to the artificial strength of the government, is greater than in a small, and of course more competent to a struggle with the attempts of the government to establish a tyranny. But in a confederacy the people, without exaggeration, may be said to be entirely the masters of their own fate. Power being almost always the rival of power, the general government will at all times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments, and these will have the same disposition towards the general government. The people, by throwing themselves into either scale, will infallibly make it preponderate. If their rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other as the instrument of redress. How wise will it be in them by cherishing the union to preserve to themselves an advantage which can never be too highly prized!

It may safely be received as an axiom in our political system, that the State governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority. Projects of usurpation cannot be masked under pretenses so likely to escape the penetration of select bodies of men, as of the people at large. The legislatures will have better means of information. They can discover the danger at a distance; and possessing all the organs of civil power, and the confidence of the people, they can at once adopt a regular plan of opposition, in which they can combine all the resources of the community. They can readily communicate with each other in the different States, and unite their common forces for the protection of their common liberty.

The great extent of the country is a further security. We have already experienced its utility against the attacks of a foreign power. And it would have precisely the same effect against the enterprises of ambitious rulers in the national councils. If the federal army should be able to quell the resistance of one State, the distant States would have it in their power to make head with fresh forces. The advantages obtained in one place must be abandoned to subdue the opposition in others; and the moment the part which had been reduced to submission was left to itself, its efforts would be renewed, and its resistance revive.

We should recollect that the extent of the military force must, at all events, be regulated by the resources of the country. For a long time to come, it will not be possible to maintain a large army; and as the means of doing this increase, the population and natural strength of the community will proportionably increase. When will the time arrive that the federal government can raise and maintain an army capable of erecting a despotism over the great body of the people of an immense empire, who are in a situation, through the medium of their State governments, to take measures for their own defense, with all the celerity, regularity, and system of independent nations? The apprehension may be considered as a disease, for which there can be found no cure in the resources of argument and reasoning.

PUBLIUS.

Links to my other posts on The Federalist Papers so far: