The Narcissus favorite word This is a word that they will use When they are in a very bad situation Where there are options and ability to act are limited and constrained When they have no way out It defines how the relationship functions Within the world that they've created for you. You might have heard them say this word before Or maybe they just implied it In every interaction or conversation you have with them You will feel like this is what they're thinking of you Especially when there's an argument or disagreement This is a word that they are deeply afraid of They don't want anyone to see them in this way Which is why they will be so quick to use this word against you Because deep down they know that what they do falls under the words definition The Narcissus favorite word Is crazy They may call you crazy Or they will call someone else crazy It's something they will use in a hopeless situation When they feel vulnerable or at risk of being exposed When they feel like something undesirable will occur When you question or confront the narcissist on something they've said or done Something that they know is not good Something that they know would make them look bad They have to imply that you are crazy And they may even say that you are Whenever they feel like they're being confronted on something It has to be because someone is mentally ill or mentally unstable It has to be because someone is having a nervous breakdown There has to be something wrong with them Of course they don't really believe that They just use it to explain and justify everything they've done to you And they won't always say that word They might just imply it Or they might call you a narcissist or a psychopath They will use it whenever it suits them Whenever they feel like they are under attack Whenever they feel like they are at fault But when you are doing whatever they want you to do When you are validating their false self And the illusion that they are trying to portray They won't call you crazy then And they won't imply it as much Because you are going along with their agenda The narcissist's favourite word is crazy They always want to make you feel like you're crazy For questioning or confronting them You're crazy for doubting them You're crazy for having a different opinion or perspective A different idea or preference Even if they don't actually say the word They always imply it They indicate it by suggestion If they're in a bad situation And they don't have any ways out If they feel trapped or cornered They will suggest that you are crazy Regardless of whatever logical conversation you are trying to have with them Regardless of the facts They have to stay in denial to protect themselves It's a defence mechanism They refuse to acknowledge an unacceptable truth or motion They refuse to admit it into consciousness Because they don't want to deal with the shame They don't want to deal with the consequences of their actions So they try to shift the blame onto you They try to make you think there's something wrong with you When there's a problem or difficulty They see it as though someone has to be to blame Someone caused this event to take place Someone is responsible And they may be fully aware that they are the cause of it But rather than taking responsibility for their actions They will imply that you are crazy Because it's either you or them And they don't care about the truth or reality of the situation All they care about is their feelings And they don't want to deal with the feelings That come along with accepting that they are a fault This is something that every narcissist will do They won't always come out and say it But they will always imply it They will always imply that you are crazy They will always imply that something is wrong with you Because you have a different opinion or perspective You have an idea or preference that is unfavorable to them They want you to feel like who you are as a person is bad or wrong They want to deny or invalidate Your qualities, beliefs, personality or appearance They want to destroy yourself, image, self-esteem and individuality Whatever makes you feel like who you are Whatever makes you feel like you belong somewhere That's where they're going to target Because that's how they're going to control you When they are applying that you are crazy It's not always something they're doing consciously It can often be instinctual It can be a part of a fixed pattern of behavior It's a survival mechanism It's something they do automatically In order to survive a dangerous or unpleasant situation The narcissist has to see it as though you're crazy Something is wrong with everyone else all of the time This is how narcissists feel There's something wrong with everything in the world Because they expect everything to cater to them Everything has to work around them Everything has to be what they want it to be So that they can be happy But they never get what they want Because it's unreasonable It's beyond the limits of acceptability and fairness Because it's always something that you have to do You always have to make them happy To make things perfect It's like if only they had that one thing they're missing Then suddenly everything would be great But they never have what they want They never get it So that's why they're unhappy That's why there's always a problem And the problem Is something that they're going to take advantage of To get attention To get supply And while the problem could be a fault or mistake that you have made They can also create the problem Or they can push and provoke you Until you produce the problem So they're behind all of it They're the cause of it But they're not responsible for it That is the most favorable position for them to be in Where they can be behind the scenes Causing all of this chaos and destruction Without taking responsibility for any of it They create a problem that makes their process easier It makes something more likely to happen Which then facilitates whatever they want to believe And validates their illusion But no one can see that they are behind it No one can see that they are responsible So in their minds They're not responsible for it And then it just continues And sustains itself For as long as they need it to Which is usually until one of you dies The question is Why is the narcissist so quick to call you crazy Why are they so quick to imply something like that about you And the reason for that Is because that's what they fear the most They fear being called crazy They fear being seen as strange or foolish Because that's exactly what they are They are crazy And at some level they are aware of it But they're trying to battle it out with you They have to see it as though whatever behaviour they're engaged in Or whatever emotions they feel It's the result or effect Of something that you're doing You are the cause of it It's something that you are responsible for And you are supposed to fix it Because in their minds They don't have any control over it They can't make a choice of decision about it They think it's your problem They think it's your responsibility Which is why they will do whatever it takes To make you feel responsible They have these feelings that they choose not to deal with They express it in a way Where you are forced to feel like it belongs to you Where you are forced to feel like you are responsible for it And you accept it You take responsibility for it Which then takes the weight off of their shoulders And then you are left to resolve it It becomes your problem Which really is the definition of crazy And deep down they know this They know that they are the ones who are mentally and emotionally unstable But they will push and provoke you Until you begin to feel that way So that it relieves those feelings within themselves Because when you accept what they're throwing at you It relieves them of the burden It relieves them of their troubles and worries All they're really doing is dodging responsibility for their actions They're trying to avoid reflecting on their emotions And they're looking for an escape They're looking for a distraction from their miserable reality They're looking for a distraction from how they really feel about themselves Thank you for watching I hope this video has interviewed you Please like, comment, share and subscribe If you would like to donate My PayPal link is in the video description Coaching Choirs, you can email me at coachingatnarksviver.uk Thank you for watching and I'll talk to you soon


Okay, everyone, here we go. My name is Andrew Champagne. I'm the host of the Burlington Democrats live at 525. We're running a few minutes late, my apologies. Busy day for everyone. I would like to thank Megan and Daniel and Kevin and Jordan and Laura and all the staff of Channel 17 for their kindness in producing the show and allowing me to host it. We just changed over from a half hour to 45 minutes and I'm going to need every bit of it from my special guest here today, former producer of this show, former state representative, state senator involved in government for over 40 years, my friend Judy Stephanie Hearn. Good afternoon, everybody, and I hope that you have all enjoyed a brilliant sunshine that we were able to enjoy today and hopefully tomorrow bring more of the same. Thanks, Andrew. Okay, now, okay, full disclosure, Judy, about, I don't know, five years ago, I think, maybe five or six, she was the one that asked me to come on to the show and I think we talked about voting and she had produced the show for a while and so I took it over from her and I appreciate it. Before we get into your career, I would just, I would be remiss if I didn't do a couple things. First of all, everyone, we all need your help to get vaccinated. Every one of you, I ask you from the bottom of my heart, it's funny, I just got the booster shot in this building, 294 North Manuski Avenue where we are, so I'd like to thank the landlord and all the kind people that provided that booster shot and there's also shots being given at community health and all over Burlington and Shinton County and they're absolutely free, a lot of them are walk-in. Now I was talking to Speaker Jill Kroinski and she suggested if anyone needs some help with questions about the virus or some questions about social services because we've been in a COVID type crisis for 22 months now and the government has a lot of programs to aid and assist people and she suggested, you can go online, sure, but if you're not comfortable with that, she suggested you just call 211, that's the state number to give help and guidance. So I'm asking you, I'm asking everyone who's watching this show, please get the vaccine. It's painless, sure, maybe you're a little tired the next day, but the side effects are few and we really cannot move forward as a country until we get this handled. We're stuck. We have about 20% of people that just don't know or are confused about the virus. So okay, thanks again to 294 North Winooski Avenue, please get vaccinated. Okay, a couple other things we're going to get to Judy. We are hoping to do a full hour on Senator Leahy's career, 45 minutes. That's coming up, but about three weeks ago he announced from Montpelier that he's not going to run again. And I would just like to thank Senator Leahy, Mrs. Leahy, John Tracy, Carolyn Dwyer, John Goudreau, J.P. Dowd, all the legions of people that have worked for him, Ed Pagano, Luke Albee. I can go on and on. And I've been fortunate enough to work on Senator Leahy's campaigns a couple times and meet him and speak with him and he's really a wonderful person. And we're going to miss him. I'd like to thank him. We also have some news with Congressman Welch running for that seat. And I would like, I'm going to endorse him on the air today. That's how proud I am of him. I got a Christmas card from a holiday card from him yesterday. I think he's fantastic. I'd like to say hello to his staff and Margaret, his wife and Peter and all the great crew in Burlington. I think Congressman Welch is fantastic. He's been in this building on TV here many times. So very quickly, the bond issues were a bit of a mixed bag last Tuesday.  We can talk about that. One passed about the electric grid, which I actually voted for both. So and then, and then the improvements, including improvements to Memorial Auditorium didn't make it. And unfortunately, that bond had to be a two-thirds vote. You knew that, right? It's a general obligation bond, pledging the full faith and credit of the city and requires a two-third vote. Whereas the Burlington Electric bond is called a revenue bond, which is the principle is paid back from the revenue BED generates. And so that only required a majority. So the risk is considered so great that they feel that it's got a pass. Two-thirds is very tough, Judy, for anything. It is, but on a lot of money bills, certainly in states and localities throughout the country. When you're pledging the full faith and credit of a municipality, there's a higher threshold. Now, I'm on the Burlington Board of Tax Appeals, and we just heard several hundred hearings. And I have to be honest, I think there might be a little bit of tax fatigue here that on this, I think people are feeling a little stressed. The assessment was the first one since 2007, so obviously it went up quite a bit. And so I supported the second. I supported the second one. I particularly wanted to save Memorial Auditorium, where I've worked many, many, many times and I've gone to so many concerts. But unfortunately, unless we can come up with some kind of program with federal government, I think Memorial might be done. What's your thoughts on that? I don't know enough about it to comment, other than to say the bond issue itself. I live in the New North End of Burlington, where I have lived for a long time and represented the New North End in the Vermont Legislature and the House. And what I was hearing was there was a lot of anger over the repraisal coupled with a drumbeat of very positive news of how much money we were getting from the federal government, both for COVID relief as well as the infrastructure dollars. And many people said to me, if we're getting so much money, why do we need to do even more here in Burlington after we just had our taxes go up so substantially? So those were the two issues that I was hearing in the New North End. Right. They can make a break in election up there. They the two wards up there, four and seven are big, big wards. And the percentage of turnout is always extraordinary. You know, I forgot to thank President Biden for all his good work in getting this stimulus and getting these packages through. And I think sometimes the president gets, you know, with this 24 hour news cycle, it's a tough situation. And I just think that President Biden is doing an excellent job. And also, you know, I didn't I didn't I always this is a democratic show. So we're always plugging Dems. But I need to thanks Senator Sanders for his unbelievable work on the on the budget committee getting this stuff through. And he might be doing the most. He might he he is he's just great at the at the details. And so Senator Sanders and his family would like to say hello to you. And thank you so much. There's a there's a man who never forgets Burlington, just like you, Judy. OK, so we're here with Judy Stephanie Herne, as I said, former producer of the show. And I believe I guess the story starts now. We were talking off air. You grew up in Queens in New York City. I did. Right. The wonderful borough of Queens. And you lived in order to make this kind of funny. You lived near the Trumps. You lived in Jamaica, a mile or so. Yep. And that's funny. Now, what now? Where did you where did you go to school? What tell us how you got to Burlington? My ex-husband was offered a position at the University of Vermont out of graduate school. And we moved to Burlington. Now, where did you go to school? I went to school at Lemoine College in Syracuse, New York. Oh, yeah. They beat Syracuse in the basketball game a couple of years ago. I remember that unbelievable upset.  Right. To beat the Orange men is something. So you're so you're you move up here with your husband. He was a teacher at UVM. And now where were you first living in Burlington? And what year was that? We lived at University Heights. Oh, you were three months and then bought our home in the New North End. Keith Pillsbury's lived in University Heights for about 45 years, a friend of mine. Oh, not that University Heights. No, this was rental housing that was built after World War two for the house. The G.I.s as they were coming back after their service to our nation. And then it was turned over to the university and the university used it for housing for faculty and staff. OK, OK. So you're you're you're new to Vermont. You get involved with the Democratic Committee. You know, you're quickly active. How did that go? No, I was asked to run for the Burlington School Board in 1974. OK. And I had never declared myself one way or the other as a Democrat, Republican or as an independent. And I when I was asked to run, it was at a time when school board elections were done along a party line. So the Republicans are on a candidate, the Democrats are on a candidate and anybody could run as an independent as well. And I was asked to run for the Burlington School Board. And I knew well enough. I'd only been in the city six years or so. I had filed in kindergarten, one third grade and one in fourth grade that I was probably the hundredth person that they asked to run. And I was the first warm body who said that would be interesting. My kid's education is really important to me. And so I was asked to run. But before I did commit, I called a faculty wife, my husband. I'm taught in the English department. And at the time, one of his colleagues, wife was executive director of the Democratic Party. And what was her name? Henry was Ruth Pope. OK. She was also a state representative. Is that right, Senator? No. OK. I've seen that name in some old documents. So OK. So I called her for a very specific question. I do not commit to voting a straight Democratic ticket ever. A straight anything ticket. I mean, can I run if I know that there will come a time at some point where a Republican will be running against a Democrat? And for whatever reason, I find the Republican candidate preferable. And she gave me very good advice. And like many of you, as I progressed throughout my life, I've benefited from the advice and suggestions of others and and tried to provide the same type of encouragement to those coming afterwards. But I asked her and she said, unless it's a matter of faith or morals, where whoever the Democrat would happen through morals, I like that was, you know, certainly not a person you would encourage anybody to vote for. All you need to do is just say when asked, I send out the candidates of my party. You don't name any specific candidates. You don't have to work for them. You don't have to have to go out and knock on doors and hand out pamphlets and send out letters. You just respond, I support the candidates of my party. And at the time, I thought it was really good advice. It's and I ran. It's truthful. So again, to all the people who are on the school board then and now, it's really a thankless job. If everything goes well, then ho hum. If there's a problem, my God. Also the pay on, we're just having a little technical difficulty, yes? Oh, the microphone? Yeah, it's rubbing on. My shirt or hers? Okay. So I'm going to keep talking while we fix the microphone. Thank you, Daniel.  And so in 1974, you get elected. So then we come to 1976. Well, no, I don't get elected. I lose. Well, how close? It was actually, I think it was 80 votes. It was, you know, relatively. I'm going to, I'm going to. Just close enough. I'm going to speak and I'm going to keep talking. And Daniel's going to fix the mic. Beauty, Slapel. Okay. So, so here we are. You run your first race and you don't win.  Am I good? Okay. Yeah, you're good. Okay. We got, we've, I just, again, thanks, thanks to the crew here today, and we appreciate them coming. So now how close, how many votes was it? I cannot, I can honestly not remember. I think it was 80 votes, maybe a little bit more. And it was all a board for, which was at that time, everything north of Burlington High School. Okay. So it was a lot of votes and the person who won was a very prominent, um, Burlington attorney from a very prominent, um, family, um, really good guy. He made an outstanding school commissioner and, um, in 1976, a legislative seat opened and several people approached me to run. Okay. And I did. Now, okay, so I'm trying to put things in historical context with 76. By then, unbelievably enough, there had never been a Democratic governor or senator or congressman from Vermont. Is that correct? I believe till. There had been a governor. Governor Phil Hoff was elected in 1962. And again, in 1972, Tom Salmon from Rockingham was elected governor. And Bellows Falls, yeah. So Governor Salmon runs for, we have this, unfortunately, we still have the two year term in, in Vermont for governor, which I don't support. I'd like a four year, 48 of the states have four year and only New Hampshire and Vermont have the two. So anyway, um, Tom Salmon, who's a popular governor, moderate, wins in 76, Senator Leahy had gone to Washington in that fabled class of 1974, the Watergate class. We just stepped back. Yeah, sure. Um, in 74 was the Watergate class. It was when Gerald Ford became president, a lot of very good government processes were put in place post Watergate. And Patrick Leahy ran for the Senate. And surprising, most political pundits was elected. Um, the U.S. Senator, Senator Aiken decided he wasn't going to run. Senator Aiken didn't run. And a man by the name of Dick Mallory, who had served in the, was serving in the U.S. House, announced his candidacy and it was expected that he would just slide into the Senate seat. And Senator Leahy surprised him and, uh, all of us with great joy and was elected in 1976, um, former governor Salmon or, yeah, he was still governor when he ran. His term expired in 76. He ran, um, for the Senate as well. And he was, um, he was beaten by Robert Stafford, who was a sitting member of the House and he slotted into the Senate seat in 1976. So Senator Stafford, who's gone now and is a Republican, he was like Attorney General, Lieutenant Governor, Governor, Congressman, Senator, he, he was kind of a, he was a moderate Republican. He was, um, a key, key supporter and mover of the American with Disabilities Act. Oh, the ADA. He was, um, a key supporter and mover of, of major environmental legislation. So he has, um, a very, um, strong reputation in leading Vermont in the Senate on environmental issues and issues around people with disabilities. And I forgot to say, he was also in the state legislature. He, he really, he, yeah, those kind of, those kind of Republicans seem like they're gone, Judy. Um, when I was first in the House within a year or two of being in the House, um, I remember saying to a colleague who was a Republican, just in passing, I said, you know, you're really an ethnic Republican. Okay. He said, what do you mean by that? I said, well, you were a Republican because your family were Republicans and their family before them. And it's just what you did. When, um, I called Ruth Poger, whom I mentioned earlier about supporting Democrats, um, at the time, um, Democrats were primarily, um, the children of Roosevelt Democrats. Right. They tended to be in Vermont, um, Irish American, Italian American, French Canadian American and the old Yankee classes in the more, more rural areas, um, tended to be Republican. Right. And for years, the, um, contests, um, among people like Bob Stafford, George Aiken, um, Ernest Gibson were all internal primary. So the election was, if, if you could get through the Republican primary, you were looking really good. You were looking good. And Phil Hoff broke that. Governor, oh, he was such an amazing man. The Democratic Party has a Curtis Hoff awards, and I got to meet him and, and, and you knew him. He, he, he, that great, he was one of the greatest or the greatest generation. He, he, he was, he, he listened to people. They, what did they call him, the king of Winooski or something, right? Because I think Winooski put him over the top that night. Winooski put him over the top on that night in, uh, November of 62. Now, it wasn't until 1992 where Vermont first voted Democrat for president. I believe. So in 1976, now tell us about your campaign. It's your first, it's my first serious campaign for legislature. Well, it was my second serious campaign. Right, okay. But one, I hoped I'd win this, this second time around. Okay. And I did what, what people did then. You knocked, you went door to door and knocked on doors. You introduced yourself, um, asked people what their concerns were and asked for their vote. And I was given some very good advice about how to campaign by people who were not pleased that I was the candidate. Okay. Because at the time, Burlington was very transitional. Okay. And that transition became fully realized in 1981 when Bernie Sanders was elected the mayor of Burlington. But prior to that, um, and the issue around running as a Democrat versus as anything else was that in Burlington, Democrats of Irish, Italian, French, Canadian heritage ran the city. And they were more conservative. They were more conservative on social issues. Yellow dog, Republicans. Then in fact, um, the Republicans were, they were much, the Republicans were more liberal on social issues. Oh, wow. But they were conservative on fiscal issues. The Democrats were labor Democrats. Yes. So get out the vote, Democrats. They, you know, did not see me at the time as being in my young thirties as the person who should be representing them. But they weren't sure about anybody else at that point. And so, um, I ran, they helped me. And I had a map of my legislative district. Yeah. So where, now what, what, so where was that? New North end, basically? It was in the New North end on the west side, um, from... What we call Ward 4. No, from the shopping center north on the west side. And at the time on the east side from Gas Court north. Okay. So on both sides of the avenue. So it was a far north end. Right. Those, those, those wards are... I tell people if you live on the left side of the avenue now, you vote one place and if you vote on the right, you vote on another. Is that right? The senior center and then St. Mark's church. No. Those are the basic things. Okay. They're funny carved out, but that's the basic thing. But the legislative districts are different than the Ward. Okay. So that night, I was 13 years old. I remember and I had gone to see Jimmy Carter at a rally and my, my parents were very involved in democratic. They were big time Democrats. They loved it. And so I remember, I don't know if I stayed up, but my mother stayed up very, very late. And then the race... President Ford, a good man, got saddled with the whole Nixon thing. A tough economy. He pardoned the president, which probably in retrospect was the thing to do. And, and Jimmy Carter was once in a generation candidate, governor, one-term governor of, of, of Georgia and a state senator. And he just ran like, he ran, he was an amazing, God bless him. He's 97 years old. He spoke at my college commencement, but he was an, he was quite a man. Did he come to Vermont that year? All he came to Vermont and I had the pleasure of meeting him. In the late Senator Ed Granite's living room. Oh wow. Along with a lot of other peoples. And that evening, he spent the night, as was part of his campaigning, at people, at people's homes rather than hotels. And he stayed at the home of the late Senator Esther Surrell. Oh, that was on Hickok, on Hickok Place. On Hickok Place. And he would carry his own bags and he, Jimmy Carter is always true to himself. And he, an amazing man. So that night, now who, your Republican opponent, how tough were they? Two member district. Okay. And one, two seats. One was I would say definitely tough. And the other, not so tough, but there was also an incumbent Democrat running too. Okay. So, and with all of the discussion now about redistricting the legislative seats, both in the house and the redistricting the Senate districts, the discussion is around single member legislative districts. And where that will end up, the legislature will decide this year. There's 44 two seat districts as we speak. Right now, the legislative district I represented has changed slightly, but it's still primarily the far north end of Burlington. Okay. And that was at the time as well, so. So is that a single seat now? No. Okay. It's never been a single seat. Now, you know, that's another topic for another 45 minutes, the reapportionment in that whole process.  It wasn't like that. Really? So it's changed. Okay.   I had three school-aged children. I had a son in kindergarten, a daughter in third grade and a son in fourth grade. So I was up getting them to school that morning. So did you think you were going to win that day? I have a sense, but you know, it was a sense and you just hope your voters are out and you've identified them and people try to get them out. And I'm sure many of, certainly your older viewers, remember getting those phone calls from a friend or a neighbor saying, we've noticed you haven't voted yet. A fact checker. Do you need a ride to the polls? Right. And I pick you up type of thing. Now from what I gather, it's all done by robo-calls. So, okay, there was no early balloting. There was. There was a fewer sick. Okay, but I believe you had a doctor's note. Yeah, I have a note. There was no same-day registration. You know, I've said on this show many times that Vermont's voting laws, I've looked at all 15, I think they're the best. So moving forward, that was a heck of a night. President Carter wins. I remember how happy my mother and father were. And so you're off to the legislature. So talk about that. You've got to get up the crack of dawn, get your kids up, fed, go to school, and then sometimes those committee meetings would start at 8 a.m., is that correct? Not then. Okay. By and large on occasion. Yeah. But you're only on one committee. Okay. And so- The speaker picks that for you. The speaker makes the assignments with the advice and encouragement of the party leaders. Right. So the speaker made the assignment for me, and I was placed on the judiciary committee. Oh, that's a nice committee, yeah. Which I enjoyed very, very much. And I had, I mean, as I said earlier, so much to learn. And I had a friend who had served in the legislature actually representing the New North and a number of years before that. And he gave me two bits of advice. And I'm young and I'm new, and I know I know nothing. And he said to me, two bits of advice. Number one, never sit with your friends. And number two, within the first month of, you know, arriving in Montpelier, memorize the name and face of every member of the House and then do the same for the Senate. So I would sit during boring housekeeping types of discussions in the House and I would pick a section and I would see, I would go from, you know, seat 141 to seat 148. 150 people. 150 people. And I'd sit there and I'd say, Joe Jones, Mary Smith. Rutland, from Bennington, right? And I did. I thought that was very good advice. However, the best piece of advice he gave me, and I have over the years given to others who've asked me if I had any advice about the legislature, was never sit with your friends.  It all sorts itself out. What you don't know is all of those other folks, and he said to me, he was very honest about it. He said, let me be really clear.  You need to break down those walls. And so for the first couple of months, I would get my tray and I'd look around for a table with an empty seat with people whom I didn't know. Republicans, probably. Primarily, Republicans. You know, kind of took a deep breath and went over and introduced myself. I'm Judy. Yeah. And I didn't know the term at the time. I since learned it. But had I known it, I would have used it. And I'm sure many of your viewers have heard the term. You know, I'm from Chittenden County. It's really close to Vermont. Burlington is even more so. I can't stand that. And so by a couple of months, I pretty much knew, have met, I shouldn't say I knew them. I had met and made the acquaintance of every member of the house. And at the time, I was elected a number of young women were elected, primarily Democratic, but there were a couple of Republican women as well. And prior to my election, Madeline Cunan had been elected in 1972, along with a woman named Judy Rosenstreich, who has been active in the Burlington Democrats for years. She was elected then as Republican. Right. And they both had families, but there was not a critical mass. And the year I was elected, this kind of post-watergate, opening up this, and remember, this is within a decade, of both the Vietnam protests, the war protests, as well as the rise of the women's movement. Now, okay, a lot of the Republicans were retired farmers. Isn't that correct? Many of them were. Yeah. Or shopkeepers or bankers. Right. So. And that greatest generation was in full force then. So a lot of these, a lot of the men had come from the World War II and were Republicans. And, you know, until 1965, I don't want to get off on a tangent. But for example, you, if you lived in Danville, you had one rep, and you lived in Burlington, you had one. And Governor Hoff was kind of responsible for changing that. Is that correct? Well, it was also a federal amendment, one person, one vote. Right. And so.  Well, it certainly did. And when I was first elected, there were any number of people serving in the legislature who had served in a pre-1965 legislature representing their town. Governor Hoff was the representative from Burlington prior to reapportionment. So there's always a rep that has stayed for 15, 18, 20 terms. So you're elected in 1976. There's a chance that a couple of those reps were in the state house in the 1930s and the 1940s. I don't remember that being the case. Okay. Certainly the 1950s. Yo, yeah. Oh, yeah. Certainly the 1950s. But when I was elected, as I said, there were a number of young women, younger women. There were women in the legislature, certainly one when I got there, but they tended to be older. Yeah. And we were the young women. And there were, let me share, two funny anecdotes. Sure. First was, it wasn't funny at the time, but I was so flustered. It is in retrospect because it really shows the difference that has taken place societally and culturally when I was in the ladies room at one point and one of the wives of one of the male legislators came into the ladies room as well. And at that time, a significant number of wives came to Montpelier with their husbands for the week and they stayed in a hotel where they rented an apartment.  Geez, I'm cruel. And I looked at her and I said, no, I don't. And I walked out. And so... You had a lot on your plate then. So there was a lot, and it wasn't just me, it was all of them. These many of them. Madeleine too, yeah. Yes, Madeleine had become chair of the Appropriations Committee, the first woman to do so. So because we don't have that much time, I could talk with you for two hours on this stuff. So Governor Cunin is elected and we'd like, I don't know if she sees the show, but she might, she's out in Shelburne. We'd like to say hello to her. Always hello to her. You're the best. There's a Democrat for you. She is elected governor. And as you told me as we were speaking, you were brought along as senior staff.  Did you not run? Did you unfortunately lose? I resigned my house seat in 1983. Okay. To run against the one-term mayor of Burlington at that point, Bernie Sanders. Now, so Senator Sanders' first term had been very tough because he won a very close election, but the Democrats, I hate to say this, they didn't realize we're all in it together. They gave him a very rough time, didn't they? Everybody gave him a rough time. Okay. And he gave back well, too. Yeah. Now, so, now would you, you would debate Bernie or go to, you would go to events when he was there and how was that? We were all invited and there was also a Republican candidate, so it was a three-way race. And Bernie, now, how was the campaigning against him? Did you get along with him? Did, was it, was it, you're a congenial person, so I know it was congenial. Yes, you are, Judy.  What was your platform?  It wasn't a complete platform, but it was primarily a different way of doing business. Okay. Tended to agree on the issues themselves, but a different way of making that policy happen. He was very brash at that time. He was young and he was, he was quite brash. He had a lot and he still does have a lot of energy. Yep. And we would be at forums and things and we would, you know, talk about the issues and what our, what our proposals were for the future, for Burlington, et cetera, et cetera. And ironically, a year or two after he was elected, for the second term, there was a proposal to build a hotel on the waterfront. Oh, wow. That doesn't sound good. And at the time, the oddest coalition of Democrats, very, very left progressives fought the hotel and the development of the waterfront down near the ferry dock. And it was Republicans along wanted it and they supported Bernie. And it was quite a mishmash. And also the bike path at that time, Rick Sharp, Bernie, I know Governor Dean was involved in the bike path. Governor Dean was Rick Sharp, activist still. Still an activist, I mean. In Milton. Yep. And they started the cleanup and then there was a major suit having to do with the bike path and access to the bike path and private land versus public land. And I want to give a shout out to a man, the late Joe Handy, who was a major insurance agent in Burlington and a very, very active Republican and shared the. From the Handy family. From one of the Handy families, their cousins and things. Sure. But he lived in the new North End and he was a Republican chairman out there. And I certainly never assumed he ever voted for me. There would be no reason for him to. But in 1981 or 82, he was and became very active in preserving and building the bike path. Hey, here's a shout out to a boy, the Handys. They've been around. They've they've been in Burlington for a hundred years. I was just talking to Tony Handy, a friend of mine. And they've added a lot to Burlington. And so. So Joe Handy came down and there was a lot of controversy around the bill and the legislature because. Oh, they had to approve it. There were there. No, there were people suing the state. Okay. The city and it's rare that a legislature interferes in a lawsuit. Right. And we did. And and Joe Handy to me is really the father of it all. He pressured, pressured the Republican Senate at the time to support it. Now, okay. So Bernie wins the election.  I did some consulting for a while. And then in 1984 and 1986, Governor Cunin ran and won for the first time in 1984. She had run two years prior to that. And then in 1986, she asked me to join her staff. So all of a sudden and for people who don't know Vermont, for example, I used to work in Connecticut and politics in the state house, for example, every legislator has like an aide, a staff person. So the governor staff at that time was very bare bones. They were, you were working not in the governor's ceremonial office, but you were working in the fifth floor. We were working in both offices. Okay. Legislators did not then nor today do they have personal staff in Vermont. Right. There are, there's a kind of a pool of staff and legislators go to those people in the pool to ask for advice, ask them to draft legislation, etc. But they don't have personal staff. So the governor's senior staff numbered about 10 or 11, as well as agency secretaries and commissioners of various state departments. Now, did you find working more on the policy end was more interesting for you than the electoral stuff? Or, you know, you're kind of implementing policy there. Well, yes and no. I was the governor's legislative liaison. Right. So I worked with members of the legislature to promote the governor's agenda. You were at the state house every day, weren't you? I was when the legislature was in session. I was at the state house every day. Yeah. And the governor was there many days as well in her ceremony. The ceremony, let's talk about the ceremony office for people who don't know. Now, I believe that every Tuesday the governor still goes over there. And I believe you can make an appointment to see him. Let's talk about the ceremonial office because the office where they do the business is down the street by the, by the pavilion. Is that right? The fifth floor. That's the major, the major offices are on the fifth floor of the pavilion. Right. And so the governor's ceremonial office has been there forever. And what, what we, I do believe we need in, in Vermont is what we have in Connecticut. We need a legislative office building because I think the state house is just too old and small to really do the business of the people these days. What do you think? Not, it will never be torn down. But for example, in Connecticut, they have underground and you can take a, a walk through and go to the, where the offices are. So you can be in the Capitol and not go outside to go where the offices are. It's, it's, it's interesting. There are plans that are being floated as we speak about building an addition to the state house. I'm not sure what the configuration of the addition would or wouldn't be, but they certainly have spoken about things like public space, like the cafeteria. Oh, the, the committee rooms are tiny. And the committee rooms are small. And I think that, let me just explain perhaps why. Vermont was the best, Ron had the best preserved state house in the country. And they underwent major restoration. As did the pavilion. The 1980s. And the pavilion was not, didn't carry the historic significance of the state house, obviously. And what they found when they did the restoration was incredible. Things in the dome of the state house, the big golden dome, there were light fixtures from the 1880s and they're in the 1850s. They just put everything in storage. And the one thing that they had done, which turned out to be so effective in preserving everything was during the, there was a major energy crisis in the seven. Right. They put up asbestos or some type of ceiling tiles to lower the ceilings. So the air wasn't going up and the heat wasn't going up. And so they still had perfectly restored ceilings and things of that nature. Did you ever get to go up there? Yes, I did. Wow. So you're working on Governor, I'm not sure how much time we have. I'm guessing about 10 minutes or so. So you're working on Governor Keenan's staff. And then, you know, like on a resume, tell me about the Senate, state Senate seat opening. Did someone retire or not run? Somebody retired. Someone retired. And Governor Dean appointed me to build the house. Oh, wow. Now, Governor Dean, there's a good Burlington Democrat. He's been in this building many, many times. Five-term governor, he was an excellent governor. He and Madeline were both excellent governors. They really cared. They worked hard, honest people. Now, tell me about the Senate. So you go from 150 people to 30. And so at that time, what did you think? Did you think you were able to get more accomplished in the House or the Senate? Probably not an accurate question. My last three years in the House, I served as the House Democratic Leader, the Minority Leader. So the whip or just the leader, the whip was my assistant. So what came to the floor for the Democrats you were responsible for? No, Vermont doesn't work that way. Okay. Then what comes to the floor, and I think it's probably still true, is what the Speaker determines should go through the floor. How was your relationship with the Speaker? It was a Republican Speaker. Oh, wow. So I had served with on the judiciary committee when I was first elected, and my relationship was fine. And I believe I was the first Democratic woman to serve as a floor leader in the House. Consuelo Bailey was able to serve in the 50s. She was Lieutenant Governor too, is that correct? Lieutenant Governor, and prior to that, she was Speaker of the House. So Consuelo Northrup Bailey. So you're in the Senate and you're there till, so what year did Governor Dean appoint you? 1993. So you're home one day and you get a call from Governor Dean? You want to come down and talk? No, the vacancy occurred and any number of people expressed interest. And the way in which vacancies are filled for unexpired legislative seats, whether it's the House or the Senate, is traditionally the Governor will send a letter to the chairperson of the committee in which that person resides. So if it's the state Senate, and today it's all of Chitton County, if it's the legislative district, it's the Democratic members of that legislative district. And so I was asked to run and gave it consideration and did. And at a county caucus, I was nominated along with two other people because the Governor requests that three names be sent. Right. Because the Governor makes the choice, no matter who you send, it still and always will be the Governor's choice. And I was one of the three, I was the top vote getter and was sent to Governor Dean and he called me and I take it back. We interviewed, he interviewed all three candidates. So you went down to the fifth floor again? No, he came to, we did in Burlington at the State Office building. Wow. And so you get to call your back in the Senate. And you served there for, did you run again? I did and I lost. Oh, geez. Joe Barry, who was a very prominent... Radio guy, right? Radio and Vermont Public Television had retired and he decided to run in. He was a fine senator. He was one of those people, like Tom Mesmer, everyone knows that guy. That's true. Yeah. And he just retired? Really? He did. He retired last week. How old is he? I have no idea. Wow. He was on WDEV, is that right? Tom Mesmer. Oh, Tom, I thought you were talking about Joe Barry. I was like, wow, he must be 100 years old. Oh, no, I thought you meant Tom Mesmer. Tom Mesmer, what a good guy. The thing about him, when you talk to him and on the air, it's the same guy. I mean, maybe that's the secret of his success. We are getting down here. I don't know how much time we have. Do you have any idea? I don't, but I think if you looked at the booth, somebody might give you a sense. I again like to thank our crew. They've been very helpful. The time has really flown by. We're just trying to figure out how much time we have left so I can wrap up. I think I'd be remiss. We've gone deep, deep into nostalgia. Jimmy Carter, the 70s, Queens. I think I'd be remiss if I didn't talk to you about the future.  I hope you're an optimist. I am an optimist. I'm a half full glass kind of person. Where do you see, okay, we have so many, we have some new candidates coming up now. Talk about President Biden. I worked hard to elect him. I was a delegate for him. The convention wasn't held, but I think he's excellent. And I'm trying to help him as much as I can. I'm very worried about the midterm elections. I have to be honest with you. I think history has shown that by and large, the party for which the president belongs is beaten at the midterm elections. It's happened with most of our most recent presidents. I think that this year there may well be changes in that. I think as we hear about the things that happened on January 6th and prior to January 6th, the new information that is coming out from the people who are actively involved in the January 6th things, along with an economy which I believe will be by next summer thriving and growing. I think inflation will be relatively under control. And if the economy is good, I think the midterm elections. And we're not at war for the first time in 20 years. We're not in war. Well, we have about a minute left. I would like to thank you. You got me into this racket, and you're a great guest. And if I'm ever, if I'm in Hawaii or Paris or something, and I need a substitute host, would you come and do it? What that you're going to say, will you come to Hawaii or Paris with me? I don't think anyone's going anywhere right now. I, we can't thank Channel 17. They've been so kind. They expanded our program from 30 to 45 minutes. They're always so glad to see us. Thanks, Megan, for the snacks. I want to wish everyone a happy holiday. Again, if you have questions about COVID or anything about any government programs, 2-1-1 is a good place to call. Now, if anyone has also questions about the vaccine or if they need to register to vote, I'll tell you what, if you call me, I'll go with you to the vaccine. It's so, so easy. Help me out here in the last 30 seconds, about what we can do to get more people vaccinated. I think having this conversation, I consider the show a conversation. What can we do about this? I think we can do as we've been doing, is just encourage our family, our friends, not with guilt, but with positive energy. With love. How, how much they can do for others. And I would encourage all of you, if you've got questions about what's happening in your state legislature, you've got six senators and you've got representatives all over Burlington, please give them a call. They're waiting to hear from you. They want to hear from you. They serve you and they want to know what it is that's on your mind and what you would like them to be doing. So, a shout out to our state legislators. So here's a quick question for you. When you go to our very impressive state house and see the Abraham Lincoln statue and walk around, it really must bring back memories of, you know, as you said you were, you know, 45 years ago and really must bring back some interesting, there was so many colorful characters at the, in the legislature. What's it like, but final, I think we're down about 30 seconds. When you walk in the Golden Dome, how does it feel these days? Feels like I had such an opportunity and was so honored to have been a part of small, some small bit of what's happened over the history of Vermont. It just tickles me that I had that opportunity and the voters of Burlington gave me that opportunity.  And again, I'd like to thank everyone. I think we're getting close to out of time. I want to wish you happy holidays.  We have eight different wards. We'll be electing city councilors. So the mayor will be working very hard on that. I'd also like to thank the mayor's office. Judy, I want to thank you. So again, Judy Stephanie Hearn, former state legislator, former state senator, former senior advisor to Governor Cunin. And also we'll have to talk about you helping to implement the 911 telephone system. But that's for another time. I'd like to thank everybody. Have a great night. Bye bye, everyone.


According to the UNHCR, over one million migrants have arrived in Europe in 2015. Their journey is fraught with danger and some of those risks prove fatal. It is estimated that 3,600 people died or went missing in the Mediterranean during 2015. Their families are still waiting for news of them. One of the roles of the Red Cross is to help these families find out what has happened to their missing relatives. We are in the cemetery of Metilini in Lesbos Island where, as you can see, we have a lot of dead bodies unidentified which have been collected at sea. Most of the time by the coast guard, but often also bodies have been washed to the shore and they are buried here with the tombs with no mark. It's written in Coneyton on them. The day before crossing or sometimes the hour just before crossing, there is always a call to the family. I'm making it today. Family, if few hour later, one day, two days after, they don't hear anything about their relatives, who promised to call once on the right side. Then they start wondering, it's okay, maybe something wrong happened. And then direct themselves naturally to the National Red Cross of their country or to the ICRC closer delegation and they make what is called the tracing request. My son has disappeared. I'm afraid that he would have died while crossing the Mediterranean Sea and sometimes that's the first hint that we have which lead us to start investigating with the forensic authorities in this island or another place. When we have a tracing request about someone, let's say a migrant who is in Samos. Most of the time, as I said, thankfully, he is alive and he can be found but sometimes he's dead. He's drowned. Most of the time he's drowned. So what I do is get in contact with the local pathologists, get the information from them. Do you have a body such and such and compare it with the information in the tracing request. But when it's an obvious case or an incident or a CPREC, for example, we are not waiting for a tracing request but we are trying to get information who was there, how you identified them, how many you have not identified, how many are missing. It's a good building up of information which might be useful pretty soon. Usually it is useful. Greek coast guards are often the first on the scene when a refugee boat sinks. So working with the Central Police DNA Laboratory in Athens, Dr. Kouveris has been training personnel of the Hellenic Coast Guard to collect and record personal information from such sources as clothing, jewelry or tattoos. As medical consultant, he also maintains close contact with pathologists like Dr. Pavlos Pavlidis. Dr. Pavlidis works in northern Greece where many migrants have died trying to cross the river Everos, which forms a natural border with Turkey. I have respect from these dead people and I want the families to take the body in their country. For these people I work in the last 15 years, from 2000. All these years we have about 334 dead bodies. My work is to find the reason of death and I make identification from these people because from all these people we have documents, we have nothing. This is our problem, identification. Dr. Pavlos Pavlidis collects the belongings and DNA of all deceased migrants in the hope of being able to identify them one day. He shares all this data with the ICRC and the Hellenic Red Cross. Cross-checking has made it possible to identify around one-third of the 334 bodies under Dr. Pavlidis' care. Most of the dead were from Syria, Afghanistan or Pakistan. For me, the International Electric Cross will have contact with these families. It's very important for me to have a close contact with the International Electric Cross because people, they don't know me but they know the International Electric Cross. I give information, they give me information and we have a result. For insects and fortunate cases don't usually go together. When we have a successful, let's say, case it means we can prove that someone is indeed dead and buried there, for example. It's not a happy ending but it is an ending. I think the family can start mourning, they can have closure. It's better than the alternative which is not knowing ever what happened to your family. Without this mourning process, the family have to live other life with what is called, this is a concept developed by Pauline Bose, the ambiguous loss. Not being sure that your relative is dead, is dead or is here alive is to live between two realities, the reality of thinking that this person will never come back but still hoping that he will maybe come back, like two universes parallel. This is very painful, very difficult for the families and which is why we are pushing so much to develop all this technique of having a common comparison of post-mortem data and anti-mortem data to maximize the possibility of getting matches, results between family looking for relative presumed dead and dead body unidentified such as those here behind me.


Okay, we're back. This is Dave Vellante, and this is theCUBE. We're here live at the MIT Media Lab. We're exploring cyberspace and the gaps in cyberspace governance and international relations. We're here at the ECIR workshop, which is hosted by MIT. Erin Fitzgerald is here. She is a program director at the Minerva Research Initiative, which is the sponsor of this event. And also Michael Sumire is here. He's a senior policy advisor for the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Defense for Cyber Policy. Folks, welcome to theCUBE. Thanks for coming on. Thank you. Thanks a lot. So Erin, let's start with you. First of all, thank you for sponsoring this event, and thanks for having us here. We're really excited to be able to come to events like this and what we say, extract the signal from the noise and share with our audience some of the developments that are going on. But why don't you talk about your organization and your role, and we'll get into some of your research and the relationship between you and the DOD. Sure. No, I'd be happy to. So as you mentioned, I direct the Minerva Research Initiative. This is actually a DOD sponsored program. It was actually, in 2008, then former Secretary of Defense Gates started this program. So it's pretty unusual to have a secretary of defense starting a research program. But the idea of this research program is in general having, building a fundamental understanding of what are the social and cultural forces that shape regions of strategic interest. So what is it that causes social and human behavior and motivations to happen? And Minerva covers everything from looking at sort of terrorism, terrorist ideologies, to looking at energy and environmental security, to looking at economic security, all the way over to cyber, sort of the human side of cyber. And the Minerva program has been funding the Explorations in Cyber-International Relations project for the last almost five years and are happy to be sponsoring this project. So talk a little bit more about the team that does the research, how you go about gathering the information. Sure. Well, so Minerva funds currently about 40 active university-led projects. And they run everywhere from single investigator projects to large team projects, a million dollars or so a year, which for social science, you can get a lot of mileage out of that type of investment. But Minerva's unique as a basic research program because not only is it very focused on fundamental understanding building and research, but it actually started as a policy initiative at DOD. So I work closely with colleagues like Michael who are a part of OSD policy to make sure when we're selecting the projects that not only are they high in scientific merit, but also in relevance, also in sort of the impact that may come from the project, et cetera. So what I do in my role is everything from managing all the research projects that we have to trying to understand what are the new research topics that we should invest in. So should we have more projects looking at cyber international relations? What about governance? What about security? Or is there another component of sort of cyber relations or other sort of non-conventional deterrence theory that we might wanna invest in more? Helping to select the projects. And I work with different, the Office of Naval Research and the Army and the Air Force to help choose what has the best scientific merit. And I work with policy to make sure that we're asking the right questions and selecting the projects that are going to be the most important. So I manage the projects and then I try to do a lot of outreach to make sure that as the teams develop the insights that come out of this investment with these brilliant researchers that they're not just doing this in a vacuum but that we're connecting it to the people who can benefit from the answers to these questions. So part of your job is connecting the dots across the research initiatives where it's relevant and then connecting it to applying it actually. Right, absolutely. So making sure that we have an ongoing relationship and engagement between the researchers and the policy, the community, the intelligence community, other parts of the government who are involved in national security issues. So roughly how many projects do you run per annum? I mean, if that's the right metric. Right, so most of the projects are three to five year projects. We start about eight or nine new projects a year, generally. And that depends, of course, on budget cycle and Congress and everything else. But given the structure we have, the portfolio, we try to have a good balance between topics. So I mentioned we have some projects that are in the cyber realm but we have a number of projects that are more looking at belief formation and propagation through a network, for example, or looking at different types of governance structure or more broadly just the changing role of the state in a globalizing world. So we have projects across that gamut and we try to have a combination of large projects, small projects, more qualitative projects and quantitative projects. And in general, some projects that might pan out and be useful immediately and others that might have 10-year long-term benefits. So, Mike, I wonder if you could talk a little bit about talking off camera about the missions of the department. I wonder if you could talk about that and then maybe Erin can maybe tie into it some of the research, how some of the research has supported those missions. Absolutely, thanks for having me. And you were able to capture the title that I currently have in the Cyber Policy Office very well. And so as background, it's a good first rule of Washington to always remember that the longer the title, the least important, the guy. So my apologies you are stuck with me, but at least I am able to talk a little bit about what our office does and the overarching missions of the American Department of Defense when it comes to Cyber Policy. We're part of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, an institution within the Department of Defense that was created in 1947 as part of a way to ensure civilian oversight. Systematic civilian oversight of the military. The historians in the audience will remember that World War II was usually was fought essentially with the Army, the War Department, doing one set of actions, the Navy Department, doing another set of actions, and after the war there was a decision to unify. So we are part of the civilian organization that tries to unify military policy, specifically as someone employed in the Cyber Policy Office. We spend a lot of time thinking about civilian oversight of the military with regard to cyber policy. So that's the background on our part of the organization. Erin is a great colleague in the acquisition technology logistics side of Office of the Secretary of Defense and doing the work that she does that she just told you about. In the policy side of thinking about cyber and how the military plays, it's taken the department a little while, but I think we're able to articulate three primary missions at this point. The Defense Department is an operational organization, and so we think in terms of missions. And these missions were articulated really by our former Deputy Secretary of Defense, Ash Carter, at a speech not too long ago in Aspen. And there he spoke about a mission to defend Defense Department networks. He spoke about a mission to ensure that cyber capabilities are available to support contingencies. And he spoke about a mission to make sure that the department can defend the nation, and that's a sort of proper noun, defend the nation in quotes, defend the nation in the event of a very serious cyber attack coming against the United States. A word on each of those very briefly, and then we'll go back. To defend DOD networks, you'll find people tend to start with that mission first because if DOD's networks are problematic and compromised, it's very difficult to do the other two. Not impossible, but it's very important to begin with defending our own DOD networks. The second, in terms of contingencies, just like any standard military operation, you wanna make sure you've got the full range of options available to the senior most decision makers when they need to be able to use them. And third, for defend the nation, this is really an example of terrific whole of government interagency support across the U.S. government to make sure that all your government is working together to make sure that the nation is secure from cyber attack. It's not, don't think of it as your military out in front doing everything all the time for everyone. Think of it more as we're making sure we're working with the Department of Homeland Security, we're working with the FBI, we're working with justice in general to make sure that the nation is secure from a cyber attack. So we heard this morning actually, sort of the premise is we don't wanna fork the internet, we don't have a China internet, the German internet, and the U.S. internet, et cetera, but maybe different militaries will have their own networks. So that kinda makes sense. Have you done research on that and maybe you can share some of the findings with us? Sure, well, maybe not research directly in that area, but certainly looking at the cultural components of internet governance and cyber governance and governance really in general, what are the norms of, what is the normative behavior of sharing information, of privacy, of being able to track information sources? So by kind of looking across the board at different cultures and trying to distill out where are compromises possible, where are they not possible? This is some of the investigations that we have ongoing right now. Most of the Minerva research is really looking to inform strategy rather than tactics or more immediate policy. So it's meant to try to look at big picture questions that Michael's boss and those with the shorter and shorter titles can help to make their strategic plans based on. But in terms of looking at specific countries and their normative effects, we've heard a lot today about the idea that really the government or that the internet, we wanna have a unified internet, but the idea of having a centralized, single party-led internet is also not feasible and in fact may lose legitimacy in the eyes of many of the other parties as we have sort of strengthening parties in other ways. So that again leads to a non-cyber question, but something else that my program might look at of how does power projection work for states? How do states sort of show themselves to be a growing power versus someone who's willing to let someone else take the lead? And those types of lessons can also help inform decisions that we might make for cyber policy at DOD and the other parts of the government and national security agencies. So I mean from a purely U.S. perspective, having this sort of whether perceived or real, and I think part of it is real, this U.S. controlled internet, not necessarily such a bad thing for the U.S. military. So you've gotta project forward what the impacts of sort of a more multi-stakeholder adjudicated internet would mean from a defense standpoint. What can you share with us as you look forward in terms of what research is indicating? Well, I think that the discussion that we've had today, first of all, workshops like this are not only to bring out some of the results from research, but it's really to help inform what are the questions that the researchers should continue looking at. So I think today we've brought up a lot of questions that hopefully the researchers at MIT and Harvard and other researchers in this area might look at in terms of again, what is in the U.S. best interest, the immediate gut reaction might be the more we control, the more it is in our interest. But again, there's that question of the loss of legitimacy that may move parties to look at entirely different governance structures other than those that we control, which may in the long run potentially weaken our position or not. So how can we look at sort of the large system of systems in international relations, both cyber and more broadly? And I think those are questions that we'll definitely be looking more at now, but in terms of trying to identify what are the levers that will define a successful U.S. program and a program where U.S. can help to control the outputs in the future. Understanding what is connected to what will help us achieve those goals. Well, in a way, it's somewhat easy for the department because you could be myopic. I mean, you've stated that three missions are pretty clear. You know, economic gain for corporations is not one of the missions. You don't have to worry about that, even though that's tugging on a lot of things, Erin, that you have to research. So, okay, so what are some of the other burning questions that you want to see addressed? By the specific group or more broadly? So this group, as I mentioned, have been funded for almost five years. So they're coming sort of to the end of the investment that they have. And in the meantime, this is a project that I'm not sure if you've discussed it. It's, you know, we're at MIT today, but it's a project that's multidisciplinary. So it's MIT's political science group, MIT's business school, Sloan School, MIT's sea sales and the computer science, and also at Harvard Kennedy School, their Belfer Center, looking specifically, especially at science and technology policy. So this is, you know, four very different perspectives all on specific issues. So the Belfer Center people have been looking specifically at policy issues and how to distill out lessons from specific cases in history so that we can generate inputs. The Sloan School people and the computer scientists are actually building models based on data that we have based on reported cyber attacks in different areas, based on sort of the growth of user bases in different countries to try to better model and understand whether or not we have the right parameter set or the right vision of what really is connected to what in terms of building a more secure network and enterprise. So I think as those groups move forward towards converging, I know there's a lot of people in Michael's group and others who will be very excited to see sort of the final conclusions of this five-year project. Excellent. So what's next for you? I wonder if you could share with us sort of, you know, what you see, you know, looking for a crystal ball a little bit, but you're working five-year stints, so you've got to have a long horizon. So bring out the telescope. What do you see? And that's a tricky part of basic research in general. If we're only looking at the problems, you know, if we only focus right now on cyber governance issues mediating between the U.S. and China in five years, that may not be what's important and it may be Brazil that's a larger player and maybe if we weren't careful, the questions won't generalize to help us inform those larger questions. So I think definitely having a good balance between specificity and generalizability in our investments will help us to have sort of the most broad and robust set of insights that might come out. But in the cyber realm, cybers, you know, it's been brought up several times today, cybers really one part of a larger system and is less and less of a standalone system now. So the idea of cross-domain deterrence is something that the department has talked very much about. So this is looking at an increasingly multi-polar world where you have more and more mechanisms of incentivizing and deterring specific types of behavior, you know. So no longer do we have sort of a kinetic or warfare types of levers and economic levers. We also have cyber both cyber controls and cyber attacks. We have, you know, what is the space realm that we're going to include? And when we have multi, you know, more and more players who have real strength in the world and we're not sure, you know, if an economic attack happens, you know, should we increase, you know, our cyber attacks by a certain amount or at what point do we start to escalate out of control or have sort of, you know, proportional responses across different domains. So I think that's one of the largest questions we have going forward in the cyber realm and beyond just how do these outputs really compare to each other and how can we have a better understanding of the escalatory dynamics that can help us keep the nation safe and secure and in control. Cool. A lot of interesting challenges you have ahead. So no shortage of things to research, right? Cool job. Well, Aaron, thanks very much for coming on, Michael, to appreciate it and good luck going forward. Thank you very much. All right, keep it right there. Everybody will be right back. We're live at MIT's Media Lab. This is theCUBE, right back. Thanks.