Writing Is Great For The Mind—And So Is The Process Of Revision

• by: Ellen Feld & Reynard Loki

grammar-lion.com

07-20-26 ~ Principles from writing instruction, journalism, and professional editorial practice illuminate how revision clarifies ideas, strengthens critical thinking, improves communication, and transforms first drafts into stronger writing.

Most people think that a strong first draft reflects good writing skills. In practice, this is rarely true. First drafts are often messy, uneven, and incomplete because initial drafting is where thinking begins to travel from the brain to the page. Writing, at its core, is a process of discovery. Revision is where that discovery comes into focus.

To revise is not simply to polish what is already there. It is to reshape ideas, test assumptions, and reorganize meaning. In the classroom, students often want to complete an assignment by trying to “get it right” the first time. As revision becomes part of the writing process, students begin to see that clarity usually emerges through iteration. In journalism and editorial work, the revision process is even more explicit. Drafts are expected to change, sometimes dramatically, as arguments sharpen and become more structured.

Seen this way, rewriting is not a secondary step; instead, revision is as essential as creating the first draft. As Ernest Hemingway famously put it, “The only kind of writing is rewriting.” The point is not stylistic perfection; it’s that clarity and meaning emerge through revision, not despite it.

Once we let go of the expectation that first drafts should be polished, a different question emerges: What is a first draft actually for? In reality, experienced writers often produce faster—but not cleaner—initial drafts. They understand that the first draft serves a different purpose: it captures ideas that are still being fully formed. Through revision, writers deepen their understanding of both their subject and their readers as ideas become clearer, thinking becomes more precise, and meaning takes shape on the page.

Professional editorial work depends on revision to ensure clarity, coherence, and impact. Editors rarely expect a first draft to be publication-ready. Instead, they ask whether the piece fulfills its purpose: Is the argument clear? Does the structure guide readers naturally from one idea to the next? Has unnecessary complexity been removed? Each round of revision brings the writing closer to serving the reader, which is the ultimate measure of effective communication.

Why First Drafts Are Supposed to Be Imperfect
Writers often assume that strong work begins cleanly, but as Anne Lamott writes in her New York Times bestselling 1995 classic Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life, “Almost all good writing begins with terrible first efforts.” What matters is not the quality of the first draft, but what happens after it. The first draft is not a finished product—it’s a record of thinking in motion. Ideas arrive unevenly. Some are overdeveloped, others only hinted at. Transitions are rough and arguments incomplete. That’s not failure; it’s the raw material for eventual clarity.

Drafting, in this sense, is a way of getting thoughts out of a writer’s head and onto the page, where they’re transformed into concrete elements that can be worked with, as a sculptor works with clay. On the page, we can question, rearrange, and refine our words. Without that first lump of clay or that initial, imperfect written expression, there’s nothing to give shape to.

In journalism, early drafts often act as scaffolding. A reporter might begin with a loose structure—key facts, fragments of narrative, partial analysis—and only later recognize what the story is really about. The lede—traditionally, the introductory sentence or paragraph, comparable to the thesis in an essay—might change entirely. The angle might shift. What begins as one story often evolves into another through revision.

As media and communication specialist Adrian Dearnell writes in Forbes, “Experienced communications professionals know that first drafts can never be final. They need editing.” This reflects a broader understanding: Early drafts are not meant to be finalized—they are meant to be revised.

Likewise, the thesis of an essay—the main idea to be discussed and proved—as conceived and written in a first draft, might need reshaping as the revision process brings new light to the original statement.

Writers who feel comfortable with the drafting process accept mistakes as part of the work. Those mistakes may range from spelling and grammar to major shifts in structure, organization, and ideas.

For developing writers, the goal may be to start and finish with a single excellent, complete first draft. But only rarely does a writer achieve that. More likely, this goal inhibits rather than encourages writing.

Writing involves composing (writing) and editing (revising), two related, complex cognitive functions. That may sound evident, but it is important for writers to allow themselves to separate and then recombine these cognitive functions. They can accomplish this by writing first and editing second.

Expecting perfection too early shifts attention from generating ideas to judging them. We get stuck trying to find the perfect word rather than writing the next paragraph, or endlessly rewriting one sentence instead of moving on.

Setting out to compose a draft rather than a finished product helps get ideas onto the page and provides a foundation to work with. This is especially useful for student writers or any writer who freezes at the start of a project.

Writing Outside the Lines
One practical way to cultivate this mindset is through freewriting, an exercise that allows and even encourages “messy” drafts. With or without an assigned topic, writers put their pens to the page or fingertips to the keyboard and write nonstop for a predetermined number of minutes (10 to 20 minutes works well). During this time, they keep the writing flow going, with no backtracking or self-editing permitted.

When the time is up, they stop writing and read what they wrote. Though much of the writing may be “trash” to be discarded, the freewriting process, inherently free to make mistakes, successfully halts inhibitory self-editing.

Getting a first draft onto the page is a major milestone. Once ideas exist in written form, they can be explored, expanded, reorganized, and refined. That shift—from expecting perfection to expecting revision—allows writers to keep moving forward. Read more

Why House Members Came Together To Pass The Bipartisan Workers’ Bill

• by: Roxanne D. Brown

Roxanne D. Brown ~ Photo: USW.org

07-19-2026 ~Terry Stickles supported the successful union drive at JSW Steel in Mingo Junction, Ohio, in 2025, then went to the bargaining table eager to hammer out his first contract with the company and set a course for the future.

His coworkers, also new members of the United Steelworkers (USW), felt the same urgency. But JSW chose to play around instead, offering few meeting dates to union negotiators, taking hours to review even basic contract proposals, and cutting bargaining sessions short for no good reason.

“It’s almost like kids’ games,” Terry, an Army veteran and millwright, explained of a bargaining process that continues to drag on because of the company’s stonewalling.

This kind of dithering is how spoiled-brat executives retaliate against hardworking people for exercising their labor rights. It’s why it takes workers, on average, almost 500 days to negotiate their first contract after joining a union.

Negotiations over health care coverage, workplace safety, and related issues are no place for juvenile antics—and that’s exactly why Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. House joined forces recently to pass the Faster Labor Contracts Act.

The legislation, now before the Senate, promises to fix a broken system that allows employers to flout labor law and run roughshod over workers’ rights.

It would require companies to begin negotiations within 10 days of workers’ vote to form a union and require mediation if the two sides prove unable to reach a contract within three months. If mediation also fails to bring consensus, a panel of arbitrators would step in and set the terms of the first contract.

The legislation forces a company’s negotiators to roll up their sleeves and get down to business. That makes perfect sense to working people. It’s what we do every day.

“Show up,” Terry said, referring to JSW’s negotiators. “Let’s do our job. Let’s get this over with.”

Sadly, many executives view empowered workers as a threat. Read more

Albania’s Flamingo Revolution Tests The New Western Order

• by: John P. Ruehl

07-17-2026 ~ A major investment project has left Albania caught between diverging US and European interests. The increasingly autonomous protest networks that the West spent decades building in the Balkans are further complicating matters.

After Miami-based firm Affinity Partners secured their first building permit for major developments on Albania’s coast on April 29, outrage in the small Balkan country has steadily grown.

Within weeks, a video of a protestor being beaten and dragged away by private security guards went viral, helping ignite what has become known as Albania’s “Flamingo Revolution.” On July 4, tens of thousands of Albanians marched in the capital, Tirana, with other demonstrations taking place across the country.

The movement is driven by two planned projects: a $1.7 billion luxury resort on Sazan Island and a $4.6 billion development around the Zvërnec Peninsula and Vjosë-Nartë wetlands. Similar developments have triggered protests elsewhere in the Balkans in recent years, often tapping into wider economic and corruption concerns.

The Flamingo Revolution has no single organizer. It draws from a loose network of environmental groups, anti-corruption activists, and ordinary citizens, many connected to civic organizations that Western governments helped build over three decades— but now operate independently of their original sponsors.

The primary financiers of the two projects have especially made these demonstrations notable. Both are being led by Affinity Partners, headed by Jared Kushner, son-in-law of US President Donald Trump and his informal adviser. Since its founding in 2021, the firm has been backed largely by sovereign wealth from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Qatar.

Gulf states have increasingly been investing in large tourism projects over the last several years to diversify beyond hydrocarbons. But sovereign wealth investments are “more frequently also used to extend political reach,” states political economist Karen E. Young. Designed to cement relationships with foreign governments and business elites, Affinity Partners now acts as an informal bridge between Middle Eastern capitals and the White House.

For investors, Albania’s path toward EU membership would dramatically increase the value of planned tourism and other infrastructure developments. Sazan is, meanwhile, located in a strategically important position at the entrance to the Adriatic Sea, and new ports, marinas, and other developments could have dual-use applications for security purposes in a crucial area.

But as relations between Brussels and Washington have deteriorated during Trump’s second term, Albania’s EU ambitions have made the projects increasingly sensitive. On June 17, the European Parliament condemned the 2024 amendments to Albania’s Law on Protected Areas, which cleared the way for the development of these projects, and asked that they be withdrawn. It also called for construction to be suspended in protected areas and compliance with EU nature protection standards. Several EU parliament members also warned that Albania’s accession could be jeopardized if the projects proceed.

The EU has strong reasons to defend its standards in a candidate country. Failing to do so would weaken its credibility and encourage future projects by foreign powers approved through questionable means. Yet Brussels has stopped short of joining calls by many protestors for Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama to resign. Many demonstrators also reject the mainstream opposition, suggesting political instability could remain regardless of who governs the country, complicating the EU’s wider expansion plans in the Balkans.

Albania’s EU ambitions now conflict with expanding American commercial and security interests, as well as investment from Gulf states. As divisions have grown in the Western alliance, countries that previously sat comfortably in its orbit have become areas of competition and instability.

The Serbian Precedent
Albania’s protests have also highlighted the growing autonomy of the transnational civil society network that the West spent more than three decades building in the Balkans. NGOs, such as the European Endowment for Democracy, and agencies like USAID helped strengthen local institutions, watchdogs, and media networks to encourage integration with NATO and the EU. When institution-building failed, Western support also extended to protest movements to promote leadership change.

Serbia, another EU candidate, became the first proving ground for the “color revolution” model—widespread public protests seeking revolutionary political change—despite the term becoming more closely associated with former Soviet states. During the 2000 overthrow of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milošević, USAID’s Office of Transition Initiatives explained how it sought to “fund programs and media outlets that could disseminate messages pushing immediate political change.”

After Milošević was toppled, the number of Western NGOs in Serbia rose dramatically in the 2000s, building local civic capacity. A 2015 article in the Law Explorer, however, pointed out how contrary to the beliefs that these nonprofits were “a major progressive force countering the crude nationalism of the general public and leading Serbia on the road to eventual European Union membership. … much of the sector has in fact played a compromised, coopted, and at times destructive role in preparing the ground for and reinforcing neoliberal restructuring.”

Although relations with many Western governments deteriorated after Kosovo’s independence was recognized in 2008, the nonprofit networks remained. They resurfaced during anti-government protests in 2011 in Belgrade, and again in demonstrations against the UAE-backed Belgrade Waterfront redevelopment from 2015, foreshadowing Albania’s current movement. Protests against Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić have meanwhile erupted repeatedly since 2017. Read more

Building An Economy That Works For Working Americans

• by: Gerald Epstein & C.J. Polychroniou

Prof.dr. Gerald Epstein

07-13-2026 ~ The United States is a plutocracy. Its economy works for the wealthy and powerful at the expense of working people. It is a broken politico-economic system in need of major repairs, but as leading progressive economist Gerald Epstein points out in the interview that follows, there is indeed an arsenal of bold policies to “defeat fascism, preserve democracy, and help create a greener, stronger and fairer economy for American workers.” Epstein is professor of  economics and a founding co-director of the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

C. J. Polychroniou: It’s often been said that progressives are good in offering stinging critiques of the status quo and even making appealing policy proposals, but there is still a short supply of game changing strategies. I take it that this is the aim of Game Changers: Economic Polices for a Working America, an exciting new project from the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. You conceived of the project and serve as its director, so tell us more about it. Why now the launching of such a project, what are the major issues covered, and what do you  hope will be achieved? 

Gerald Epstein: I launched the Game Changers project, along with my colleagues James Boyce of the University of Massachusetts Amherst and Juliet Schor of Boston College, because of the emerging perception that progressives in the United States could not gain political power and defeat the fascists and MAGA simply by leveling criticisms and epithets against Trump and his associates. Working people in the United States are hurting and angry after decades of neoliberal economic policies  implemented, with some exceptions, by both Republican and Democratic administrations. Looking for answers to their legitimate problems, many American voters either simply sit out elections, or pull the lever for extreme candidates that seek to manipulate them by identifying scapegoats — such as immigrants — as the source of their problems.

So, we launched Game Changers to be a positive source of real answers to real problems facing working Americans. The idea is to offer activists, political candidates, and government officials with policy ideas that bridge the gulf between the transformative and the practical, ideas that can envisage the way to an economy that is fairer, greener, more productive and more democratic. These are ideas, we believe, that are also practical enough to offer hope to those who want to  help to mobilize the political forces that can help bring them into fruition.

Importantly, though, we are not intending to offer a comprehensive program for the American left. We felt that would be presumptuous for us to do and beyond our competence and standing. Ours is more of a menu of ideas that can be picked up by those who need them and who want to mobilize on their behalf.

We geared the timing of this project so that the policy ideas would be ready by the Congressional elections in November of 2026. In fact, we are launching policy proposals this month of July 2026. They can be found at https://gamechangerspolicy.org . Some of these ideas might be taken up by candidates. If they win, they might be taken up when they serve in Congress. Some of these ideas may percolate and emerge in future campaigns and legislative actions, as well as be taken up by progressive organizations. That is our hope, anyway.

The Game Changers project consists of 9 teams of experts and practitioners, (about 45 people in total) working on a range of subjects: Care, Finance and Financial Regulation, Health Care, Housing, Immigration, Macroeconomics, Trade and Labor, and Work and Jobs. All in all, these teams have developed about 25 different policy proposals.

The range of policies is striking. They include: “The Wealth of Welcome: Immigration Reform that Works for America”; “America’s Workers Deserve a Four Day Week”; A Universal Basic Income for Children”; “Medicare for All”; “Polluters Pay – The Extreme Weather Superfund”; “Democratize North American Trade”; “Housing as a Human Right”; “National Rent Control”; “Public Banking”; “No More Bailouts”. (For the whole list, see GameChangersPolicy.org).

C. J. Polychroniou: Since the project is about advancing progressive economic alternatives to the problems and challenges facing the US economy, one would assume that the economists invited to be part of the project represent a common tradition in the discipline. If so, how would you define this tradition, and is it important that there is a consensus among them as to what constitutes  progressive economic policies over key issues? We know that the Left has always been divided over ideology and policymaking. It is divided over the scope of government intervention in capitalist economies, and there is even disagreement over several specific issues, such as the Universal Basic Income, how to reduce inequality, and how to combat the climate crisis.

Gerald Epstein: What unites the economists and other experts involved in Game Changers is a commitment to defeat fascism, preserve democracy, and help create a greener, stronger and fairer economy for American workers. We did not invite experts based on a theoretical, methodological or ideological litmus test. Indeed, I would say that is one of the strengths of our project. The left often has great difficulties uniting sufficiently to engage in practical tasks like winning elections, or even achieving small practical goals, because they are riven by ideological, theoretical or methodological differences. We are not subject to that problem. Big egos are also a problem in politics -left, right and center and, for sure, in academia. Thankfully, we have avoided that problem as well. For us, the litmus test was a commitment to the ideals of Game Changers, expertise in their subject areas, and, for the most part, a willingness to volunteer their time.

C. J. Polychroniou: The 1930s posed the biggest and most severe challenge in US economic history. The New Deal was a response to the calamity of the Great Depression and reshaped the United States in a major and profound way. But the New Deal ultimately gave way to the neoliberal order and the results have been nothing but catastrophic for working-class people. Is the US today in a similar state of affairs as it was in the 1930s in the sense that the system is badly broken? Is this the message behind the launching of Game Changers? If so, can different issues still be addressed separately, or does the entire system need restructuring before anything meaningful can be done?   

Gerald Epstein: You are certainly correct that the neoliberal order wreaked havoc on America’s workers, but now things are even worse. In the US, we are facing a particularly pernicious form of capitalism, an authoritarian, and profoundly corrupt version that is dominated by a self-seeking Presidential family and a lethal coalition of techno-fossil-fuel-financialized capitalists. While our specific issues and policy proposals stand on their own terms, we see them as part of a broader vision of what our economy needs to overcome this lethal form of capitalism. The antidote is to recognize the equal dignity of every human being and work to guarantee their right to economic security, the opportunity to thrive, a livable planet, a world free of racism, and democratic governance of our lives, societies, and economies.

More specifically, Game Changers is posing a set of policies to help defeat this form of capitalism by “changing the game,” based on three principles.

Changing the game means (1) investing in each other through public provisioning of care, healthcare and other critical services; (2) securing our future by, for example, breaking the power of the fossil fuel capitalists and addressing climate change; and (3) righting the rules, by ending reckless and predatory financial practices, changing tax policies so that the super-rich have less wealth and contribute a bigger share for the operations of our government, preventing capitalists from firing workers arbitrarily and without just cause.

At one level, these, of course, are not revolutionary demands in a traditional sense. But if widely implemented, they would bring about a revolutionary improvement in the lives of working people, not only in the short term but in the longer term as well. Read more

How Stories Change The Human Brain, Empathy, Memory, And Behavior

• by: Katherine Dolan

Katherine Dolan – Photo: Facebook

07-12-2026 ~ Psychology and neuroscience help explain why stories shape how we think, feel, remember, and connect with others.

Story, a spoken or written account of connected events, is one of the main ways we communicate with other people. Whether it’s reading a picture book with a child, watching a movie, listening to a podcast, gossiping over a cup of coffee, or daydreaming about a vacation, we participate in storytelling in some way every day.

Although stories have frequently been dismissed as “leisure” or “escapism,” they serve a basic human need. After all, every society has its stories that are passed down from one generation to the next. But what exactly is happening to us when we dive into a story?

Research in psychology and neuroscience suggests that stories are far more than entertainment. They are one of the primary ways human beings learn, connect, and make sense of themselves and one another. Stories allow us to simulate experiences, understand other minds, regulate emotions, and strengthen the social bonds on which societies depend. A recurring finding is that stories exercise our social brain. They strengthen parts of the brain we use to relate to and connect with others, especially the cognitive systems responsible for empathy, theory of mind, and emotional regulation. As neuroscience PhD and science writer Aditi Subramaniam observes, fiction in particular “is a kind of cognitive simulation that allows us to practice social and emotional skills in a low-risk environment.” Essayist Susan Cushman argues that this might also be true of literary or narrative nonfiction, which is often told as a vivid story.

By contrast, expository nonfiction, whose goal is to inform without forming a narrative or eliciting an emotional response, offers a chance to exercise a wide range of skills that help build social connection more indirectly by enhancing general knowledge, improving analytical thinking, and building self-esteem.

How Stories Organize and Share Meaning
The human brain has evolved to sift, sort, and integrate a massive amount of information to prioritize survival. It registers sensory input, evaluates the relative importance of that input, and integrates it into an existing archive of memory and consciousness. Of key importance in this process is Superior Pattern Processing, which allows us to detect small changes in the environment and to ascribe meaning to those changes. Neuroscientist Mark Mattson argues that this is the basis of most of what makes the human brain unique (“intelligence, language, imagination, invention, and the belief in imaginary entities such as ghosts and gods”).

The brain is also overwhelmingly motivated by a need for social connection; our species is sometimes termed “ultrasocial” for the way large groups of unrelated individuals cooperate—a tendency also seen in some insects but in very few mammals. One of the ways we connect is through language and, by extension, story, which not only organizes our thoughts but also sends them to other brains. Story is like a delivery service that packs and transports a world of facts, emotions, ideas, sensations, and beliefs from one brain to another.

The Default Mode Network and the Social Brain
To understand why stories are such effective vehicles for transmitting ideas and experiences, it helps to look at one of the brain’s core networks for constructing meaning and imagining other perspectives: the Default Mode Network.

Since neurologist Marcus E. Raichle coined the term “default mode” in 2001, research on how our brains respond to story has incorporated a growing understanding of the default mode network (DMN). This is a system of connected brain regions that is inactive when we are focused on external stimuli but gets very busy when we are inwardly focused, for example, when daydreaming, thinking about the past, planning, or getting lost in a work of fiction.

In the words of Vinod Menon, director of the Stanford Cognitive and Systems Neuroscience Laboratory, the DMN “integrates and broadcasts memory, language, and semantic representations to create a coherent ‘internal narrative’ reflecting our individual experiences.” This internal narrative, he says, is central to our sense of self; it shapes how we perceive ourselves and how we interact with others.

In fact, one of the regions most active in the DMN is the dorsal medial prefrontal cortex, which is involved in making predictions and in thinking about the thoughts and feelings of others.

Social neuroscientist Taylor Guthrie, of the “Sense of Mind” podcast, describes the utility of making predictions and imagining scenarios about social interaction:

In these social environments, there’s a lot of cost from damaging relationships. If a relationship is really providing us sustenance, is providing us a means of eating, of feeling safe and all of these things, then we need to make sure we’re not just reactive in the moment, that maybe we’re angry and we just say a bunch of things that we shouldn’t have said. Instead, it’s a lot more beneficial for us to be able to play out these scenarios. ‘If I said this, what would they maybe say?’ And ‘How could they maybe be thinking about this?’ and ‘What is their perspective? I know they have a mind of their own, they have emotions of their own.’ Read more

How Unions Pave The Way To The American Dream

• by: Roxanne D. Brown

Roxanne D. Brown ~ Photo: USW.org

07-09-2026 ~ Marcelo Assis recalled how his family arrived in the United States about 35 years ago, “poor as hell”—yet certain that America offered the path forward that they’d never find in their native Brazil or anywhere else.

The following years brought ups and downs, with Marcelo serving as a combat medic in the Army and then falling disillusioned with low-paying nonunion work that held him back instead of helping him move ahead.

But Marcelo ultimately landed back-to-back union jobs that catapulted him into the middle class and firmly anchored him there. Just as he clearly recalls his arrival in this country, Marcelo vividly remembers the moment years later when he looked around his newly purchased home, thought about the good life he provided to his family, and realized for the first time that he’d made it.

“This is the American dream,” he said to himself.

Marcelo’s experience shows how unions pave the way to a brighter future. That’s true even now—a time when the majority of working people feel as though the American dream has slipped out of reach because of rampant economic inequality, skyrocketing costs, and the callous indifference of the greedy rich.

In all, nearly 70 percent of Americans no longer see the country promising mobility or financial security to those who work hard and strive to get ahead, according to a January 2024 ABC News/Ipsos poll.

A separate survey, conducted in conjunction with the nation’s 250th birthday by AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, found that half of respondents lost faith in the American dream. Many see America working for the wealthy, not people like them.

But Marcelo, president of United Steelworkers (USW) Local 12000 and a mechanic at Southern Connecticut Gas, will be the first to say it doesn’t have to be this way. After helping him fulfill the American dream, the union now enables him to hold on to it.