Ukrainian Independence

Trofimov argues Ukraine will survive Russia’s invasion and remain a sovereign nation, but it will remain a long struggle. Considering the age of Putin, i.e., he is 73, and growing discontent of some Russian oligarchs, the war may be ended sooner rather than later.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Our Enemies Will Vanish (The Russian Invasion and Ukraine’s War of Independence) 

Author: Yaroslav Trofimoy

Narration by: David Furr

Yaroslav Trofimov (Author, Ukrainian-born Italian author and journalist, foreign correspondent.)

“Our Enemies Will Vanish” is a brutal eyewitness account of the beginning of Russia’s invasion and war in Ukraine. Yaroslav Trofimov explains why Putin fails to achieve a takeover and annexation of Ukraine despite having an overwhelming military and economic advantage. Putin had a well provisioned and professional military force. Trofimov’s book is an insightful follow up on Karatnycky’s history of Ukraine’s leadership in “Battleground Ukraine”. Trofimov reminds one of the role Viktor Yanukovchy played in surreptitiously aiding Russia’s takeover of Crimea. Yanukovchy had fled to Russia and was waiting to return to the Presidency of Ukraine when and if Russia won the war. Having read “Battleground…” Ukraine’s resistance owes a debt to former President Yuschenko’s role in reinforcing a pro-Western leaning of Ukraine’s citizens. At the same time, Petro Proshenko (President of Ukraine before Zelensky) is shown to be equally important for having begun the rebuilding of Ukraine’s military.

Frenemies are defined as people who look friendly on the surface but contain underlying rivalry, and distrust.

Trofimov clearly explains why Putin fails to takeover Ukraine. He underestimated the capabilities of Ukrainian resistance. Putin’s predilection for complete control of the invasion created ground action confusion that could not adapt to circumstances of Ukrainian resistance. Russia’s ground forces could not effectively coordinate their actions because of Putin’s insistence on direct command and control. In contrast, the Ukrainian leadership made decisions based on ground circumstances rather than centralized command and control. Putin clearly underestimated Ukraine’s national awakening. The early atrocities of Bucha and Irpin where 400 civilians were murdered and many were imprisoned and tortured are examples of Russia’s brutal tactics. The heavy shelling of Irpin destroyed neighborhoods, homes, and schools. Satellite imagery and eyewitness accounts reinforced Ukraine’s moral and political resolve to defend their country.

Access to drugs for infection are a concern for Ukranian fighters.

Trofimov characterizes Russia’s attack of Mariupol as an attempt to “wipe a city off the face of the earth”. He vivifies the scale of destruction with a view of residential districts that are flattened, civilians are left without food, water, or heat and hospitals, theaters, and shelters are bombed. If one is wounded in combat, Ukrainians have no access to drugs to treat infection. A relatively minor wound could become a death sentence. Nevertheless, Mariupol became a heroic last stand and a symbol of Ukraine’s resolve to remain free of Russian occupation.

The brutality and slaughter of war is clearly brought to a reader/listener’s attention by Trofimov. The atrocity in Bucha occurs early in the Russian invasion. Families hide in basements without heat or electricity. People are shot with their bodies left in the street as Russians begin moving house to house to take food, phones, and whatever they wanted. Men who were captured were interrogated and tortured. Citizens were executed at checkpoints for being suspected of helping local Ukrainians. Door to door killings and summary executions were made on all who were viewed as enemies of Russia. Russian troops were spreading systemic terror to control the population. The immorality of war is brought home in Russia’s Bucha campaign. In Trofimov’s opinion, Bucha is an example of why Putin will fail to remake Ukraine a part of Russia.

Trofimov suggests Zelensky’s wartime leadership became critically important for the survival of Ukraine.

Trofimov argues Zelensky’s personal bravery changed the course of the war. One remembers the video of Zelensky on American TV standing with fellow Ukrainians saying, “we are all here” in Kyiv. He believes Zelensky united Ukrainian society against Putin’s invasion. He rejects evacuation offers, maintains government continuity, and enlists the Western world in resistance to Russia’s invasion. Trofimov feels Zelensky’s leadership became critically important for the survival of Ukraine as an independent nation.

Kraken fighters in Ukraine.

The creation of what becomes known as the Kraken fighters illustrates the ferocity, professionalization, and psychology of volunteer Ukrainian fighters in comparison to Russian conscripts. The Kraken unit’s utilization of urban combat and high-risk operations contribute to many of Ukraine’s territorial reversals of Russian land confiscations. Ukraine’s military competence grows with the Kraken’s successes. Though the Kraken were not the largest Ukrainian warrior group, they were a unit from Kharkiv that motivated frontline fighters.

Mariupol occupation by Russia.

Trofimov does not ignore the territorial gains made by Russia in their invasion of Ukraine. Their early success in Southern Ukraine is stalled despite their gains. They did capture Mariupol, but it became a symbol of Russia’s brutality that hardened Ukrainian resistance. The Russians capture Severodonetsk and Lysychansk in 2022 and inflict a great deal of damage on Ukrainian infrastructure. However, Trofimov argues these were tactical, not strategic successes. Importantly, Trofimov notes Kyiv is not captured, Ukrainian morale has been maintained, and the West’s support remains strong. He believes Ukraine will ultimately retain its independence.

Ukraine’s fight for independence.

Trofimov argues Ukraine will survive Russia’s invasion and remain a sovereign nation, but it will remain a long struggle. Considering the age of Putin, i.e., he is 73, and growing discontent of some Russian oligarchs, the war may be ended sooner rather than later. Men like Andrey Meinichenko, one of Russia’s richest men, and several others complain about high interest rates and the war’s economic strain on Russia. It is not that they are anti-Putin, but they have economic interests that are being challenged by the war. One wonders how long Putin will last if the Ukraine war continues.

Chinese and American Youth

To this book reviewer, the flaw in American democracy is the rising gap between rich and poor. Dychtwald implies the flaw in China is its reliance on a singular leader’s actions to improve the daily lives of its citizens.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Young China (How the Restless Generation Will Change Their Country and the World) 

Author: Zak Dychtwald

Narration by: Zak Dychtwald

Zak Dychtwald (Author, public speaker, fluent Mandarin speaker, world traveler, graduate of Columbia University who moved to China and spent 4 years interviewing local Chinese.)

“Young China” is a fascinating comparison of a world traveler’s perception of the difference between young Americans and Chinese youths. A reservation one has in listening to Dychtwald’s explanation of Chinese youth is whether a 4-year immersion in a foreign culture constitutes a society’s truth or just a topical view of an intelligent observer who gravitates to students of similar ambition.

America’s Achilles heel.

Not knowing the author’s life experience, one assumes he has not lived the life of most American college students of his generation. As a graduate of Columbia, his decision to learn Mandarin Chinese, and choice to travel to China for a four year stay suggests he is not a typical American youth. Further, as the meaning of the saying “Birds of a feather flock together”, one presumes his choice of interviewees is not likely to be typical Chinese college students but those who excel in intelligence and academic pursuit.

Contrast of lives in China.

The main Chinese youths whom the author interviews and becomes acquainted with are Ben, Vivian, Chen, Liu, and Mei. Ben–who is a striver who has a rural background. Vivian is a young professional woman who speaks English and comes from the middle class. Chen is a university student who embraces nationalist beliefs of young Chinese. Liu is a young teenager who experiences the meritocratic pressure of academic achievement in China. And finally, Mei is a young Chinese college student dealing with job aspirations, dating, marriage pressure, and career ambitions.

Education is the great strength of China.

In some sense, these characters have American student similarities. One can find similar Americans in each of the broad categories of these five Chinese students. However, Dychtwald sees Chinese students as “dreamers and strivers” while his experience is that American students are skeptical about the value of education and their future. Dychtwald finds Chinese college students take their performance on college exams more seriously than American college students. High academic achievement is a critical goal to a Chinese student while to an American graduating with a degree is the primary goal and finding a career is more important than achieving high scores on college exams. Chinese youths see themselves as a part of a national achievement for China while Americans see themselves as cogs in a capitalist machine that may or may not turn into successful careers.

College is a pressure cooker for Chinese students while it’s more of a cultural experience and stage of life for most American students.

Finally, Dychtwald notes Chinese students are globally curious, Western influenced, while being confident in the superiority of their own country. In contrast, American students care less about other countries, know few languages beyond English, and see their country as just one of many cultures in the world. Dychwald is an outlier in that he does not view China as a threat to American hegemony, but a country focusing on improving the lives of their citizens.

The risks of singular leadership.

Admittedly, this review is a narrow interpretation of Dychtwald’s fascinating book. Only an extraordinary intellect would move to China after graduating from college and learn fluent Mandarin during a 4 year stay in China. It makes we who are old wish we had the privilege of Dychtwald’s intelligence to live life over again.

To this book reviewer, the flaw in American democracy is the rising gap between rich and poor. Dychtwald implies the flaw in China is its reliance on a singular leader’s actions to improve the daily lives of its citizens. America has the advantage of 4-year democratic change in leadership while China is dependent on an authoritarian’s health and judgement as a singular leader.

BATTLEGROUND UKRAINE

A reader/listener of “Battleground Ukraine” infers Putin will fail because of Russia’s flagging economy and weakening military. The Ukraine war may go on for many more months, but its economic devastation and human deaths will end with Ukraine as a sovereign country, and presumably, a Russia with a different President.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Battleground Ukraine (From Independence to the War with Russia) 

Author: Adrian Karatnycky

Narration by: Daniel Henning

Adrian Karatnycky (Author, Ukrainian American political analyst.)

“Battleground Ukraine” is an important history of the transition of Ukraine from being part of the U.S.S.R. to an independent nation-state. The author offers a chronological political history of Ukraine’s drive for independence after glasnost. Karatnycky outlines the achievements and setbacks of three decades and six leadership changes in Ukraine’s Government. He shows nation-building is no easy task for a country that is split between desire for independence and a history of Soviet Union domination.

In researching the qualification of Adrian Karatnycky, one finds he is considered a leading analyst who has written about Ukraine in publications like Foreign Policy, The Wall Street Journal, Foreign Affairs, The Atlantic, and National Review.

Adrian Karatnycky is characterized as a Ukrainian American political analyst, and a democracy advocate for Ukraine. He is a managing partner of a consulting firm representing clients with interests in Ukraine. He co-founded a cultural initiative to promote positive relations between Ukrainians and Jews and has studied Russian Ukrainian’ relations, written a number of articles about Ukrainian human rights, political freedoms, and its development as a civil society. He understands and speaks English and Ukrainian, and presumably Russian.

Leonid Kraychuk (1991-1994, First President of Ukraine)

His book is informative but complicated because of unfamiliarity with most of the six leaders of Ukraine after its separation from the U.S.S.R. The first president of independent Ukraine is Leonid Kravchuk (1991-1994). Kravchuk presided over the breakup and helped establish the independent nation of Ukraine. According to this history, Kravchuk seems reluctant to create a decisive break with the Soviet-era experience. The authoritarian habits of administration led to the blossoming of oligarchic networks in Ukraine that resemble the oligarchs who control the Russian economy under Putin today. The growth of Ukraine as a relatively free capitalist country is sidelined by Kravchuk’s rule. Nevertheless, Kravchuk’s administration appears to have accomplished the break from the U.S.S.R. without civil war.

Leonid Kuchma (1994-2004, Second President of Ukraine.)

The second leader of Ukraine is Leonid Kuchma (1994-2004). The author notes Kuchma accepted the growth and corruption of oligarchs in Ukraine. In some sense, the economy stabilized under Kuchma’s rule while improving ties with Russia and even the West. However, authoritarianism is reinforced by a cadre of oligarchs that corrupt Ukrainian society and enrich themselves while reinforcing attachment to Russia.

Viktor Yushchenko (2005-2010, Third President of Ukraine.)

The third leader is Viktor Yushchenko (2005-2010). In 2004, the Orange Revolution begins in Ukraine with nationwide protests, civil disobedience, and political mobilization against oligarchic rule in Ukraine. Kuchma is replaced by Yushchenko as a result of a Ukrainian Supreme Court ruling that demands a new vote. That vote results in the election of Yushchenko. Yushchenko is characterized by Karatnycky as a pro-Western democrat. He allows Ukraine media to remain free by not repressing its citizens. However, Yushchenko is characterized as a political failure who, at best, creates space for the growth of democracy in Ukraine. Though Crimea is not lost during Yushchenko’s rule because he resisted Russian military expansion, he fails to move his country toward democracy.

Crimea’s annexation by Russia in March 2014.

Russia had a base in Crimea but its role in the invasion and confiscation of Crimean territory expanded with the next Ukrainian President’s administration. At worst, Yushchenko’s political ineptness and weak governance paved the way for a more kleptocratic Ukrainian President named Viktor Yanukovych (2010-2014). As Yushchenko leaves office, Russia lays plans for the invasion of Donbas in 2014.

Viktor Yanukovych (2010-2014, Fourth President of Ukraine.)

Karatnycky views Yanukovych as the latest pro-Russian ruler of Ukraine. Yanukovych uses his position as President to enrich his family and allow Russian intelligence service to infiltrate the Ukrainian government. In the author’s opinion, Yanukovych opened the door to Russian aggression which led Russia to surreptitiously invade Donbas and annex Crimea. Karatnycky infers Putin launches the Donbas incursion as a result of a power vacuum created by Yanukovych who flees Kyiv on February 22, 2014. Crimea is annexed by Russia on February 23, 2014. The Donbas incursion begins in April 2014.

Ukrainian corruption during the Yanukovych presidency.

By a slim margin of 3.5% Yanukovych won the Ukrainian presidency in 2010. He escapes to Russia in February 2014 after ordering a violent crackdown on Ukrainian protesters. Karatnycky’s assessment of Yanukovych is highly negative. He argues Yanukovych centralized Presidential power, weakened independent institutions, persecuted political opponents, and drew the government closer to Putin’s Russia. He defeated Uylia Tymoshenko, a pro-Western leader, who is imprisoned in 2011 during the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. Yanukovych remains in Russia today and is convicted in absentia for treason in aiding Russia during his term in office.

Petro Poroshenko (2014-2019, Fifth President of Ukraine.)

After Russia’s incursion in Donbas, Ukraine elects Petro Poroshenko (2014-2019). Karatnycky suggests Poroshenko recognizes Ukraine’s military has to be rebuilt because of Yanukovych’s neglect. Poroshenko turns to the West for support in the battles occurring in Donbas. His appeal is answered with U.S. and EU backing that secures sanctions against Russia. Ukraine increases NATO cooperation to make Ukraine a frontline for democracy. As a delaying tactic, in Karatnycky’s opinion, ceasefires were agreed to by Poroshenko in order to give Ukraine more time to rebuild its military. In the author’s opinion, Porshenko did not break Ukraine’s oligarchic power, but he secured Western support of Ukraine and rebuilt the army which strengthens Ukraine’s national identity. Karatnycky characterizes Poroshenko’s rule as a true beginning transition of Ukraine from authoritarian to democratic government. However, Kartnycky notes the judicial system and established oligarch’ influence continues to obstruct democratic ideals. Further, Russia’s Donbas battles with Ukraine continue through his administration.

Russia’s Donbas battles with Ukraine continue through Poroshenko’s administration.

Finally, we get to the election of Volodymry Zelensky in 2019. Karatnycky sees Zelensky as a pre-war and wartime President. Zelensky’s successful election is shocking considering the author’s assessment of Poroshenko’s successes in transitioning Ukraine to a world recognized democratic rather than authoritarian government. Zelensky, a comic actor, soundly defeats Poroshenko in the election of 2019. Zelensky appears completely out of his element in becoming President of Ukraine. He struggles with political reform and shows an ineptitude in dealing with political infighting. Karatnycky describes Zelensky as “…well-intentioned but inexperienced naïve in his first two years as President. However, as Russia chooses to invade Ukraine, the wartime Zelensky becomes a unifying national leader. His experience as an actor/comedian makes him a master communicator. Zelensky becomes a wartime decision maker that gathers Western support for the defense of his country. Zelensky overcomes his political shortcomings in the face of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Zelensky manages to unite Ukraine against a much larger enemy despite the economic stagnation of the Ukrainian economy.

Volodymry Zelensky (President of Ukraine 2019-?)

It Karatnycky’s opinion, Ukraine will survive Russia’s invasion and will remain a sovereign country. A reader/listener of “Battleground Ukraine” infers Putin will fail because of Russia’s flagging economy and weakening military. The Ukraine war may go on for many more months, but its economic devastation and human deaths will end with Ukraine as a sovereign country, and presumably, a Russia with a different President.

TOO LATE

Van der Kolk outlines some of today’s psychiatric breakthroughs. New psychiatric discoveries have helped reveal childhood abuse memories and war’s traumatic events to give survivors some peace of mind.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Body Keeps the Score (Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of) 

Author: Bessel van der Kolk M.D.

Narration by: Sean Pratt

Bessel van der Kolk (Author, Boston-based Dutch American psychiatrist.)

As a parent, “The Body Keeps the Score” is a difficult book to read or listen to because of fear about mistakes a parent may have made in raising their children. The trauma of war is well documented as a cause of psychological imbalance and the truth of “The Body Keeps the Score”. What makes van der Kolk’s book even more concerning is the realization that our behavior as parents can leave scars on our children’s minds. It is not just because of an abhorrent parent or priest who has molested or seriously distorted a child’s view of the world but on more subtle missteps by parents that may have had lasting effects on their children’s growth to adulthood. Every family has differences. Some have one parent who is absent from the day to day lives of their children because of their job. Another parent may fail to show enough respect or affection for their child’s accomplishments. Some parents (usually women) are left by their husbands or mates to raise children on their own. In single parent families, a parent is faced with having to make a living while caring for a child who has no idea of how stressful life can be when their mother is on her own. On the other side of a child care spectrum, there is the doting mother and father who overwhelms their children with meaningless praise and falsely grandiloquent appreciation of their behavior. Van der Kolk’s point is the mistakes parents make in raising their children can have lasting effects on their children as they grow into adulthood.

Child abuse is an abhorrent reality in America and other cultures.

The events that Dr. Kolk addresses are serious and harmful adult actions toward their children, but the concern any reader/listener may have is in the responsibility they have in raising their children to be decent emotionally centered human beings. Americans live in a society that highly regards wealth, physical and emotional maturity as important characteristics of adulthood. The pressure of making a living often interferes with the attention husbands, wives, or caregivers provide for children’s healthy emotional and physical growth. Kolk’s focus is on abusive or neglectful people who interact with children in ways that leave psychological scars that cause behavioral dysfunction. What is troubling to reader/listeners of “The Body Keeps the Score” is the pressure and trauma that American parents feel in their lives that affects the social and psychological health of their children.

Employment.

On the one hand, van der Kolk explains how parents may inadvertently distress their children by verbal or physical behaviors that are related to the pressures and expectations of a working life. Those pressures can cause parental meltdowns between parents and children. The consequences can have an emotional and consequential impact on the lives of the children for which adults are responsible. The effect on family members can range from a rageful response to a child’s moodiness to fear or lasting resentment that may create emotional scars that affect a child’s later behavior. A parent’s meltdown can become an indelible scar on a child’s mind. Van der Kolk calls them the injuries of American culture; not because it is only in America, but that it occurs in all cultures.

Social inequality in American culture.

A reality in American life is that it is fed by wealth, poverty, and unequal opportunity. Inequality of opportunity creates pockets of poverty reinforced by racism, family instability, and societal breakdown. All of these social impacts bare down on the development of children and future generations. Working families often do not have time or inclination to take care of their children because of their jobs. These are fundamental issues that have broader consequence to children than the horrendous stories of child abuse that van der Kolk recounts. Of course, it is appalling to know of priests that molest children or fathers who rape their daughters, but it is the general observation that adult behavior toward children can negatively affect children’s lives. Horrendous acts like child molestation undoubtedly have immense impact on the future of those who bare them. However, the realization that day to day experiences of parents’ lives can also have negative consequences in their child’s lives. What is of more concern is a culture riven with poverty, sexual infidelity, and divorce that sets a table for future generations of broken lives.

“The Body Keeps the Score” infers much about the weaknesses of American capitalism. It recognizes suffering in American society and shows how trauma in one generation passes on to the next. Bad behavior has consequences beyond the perpetrator and victim. It offers some solutions to the mistakes parent’s and society make in raising their children.

Van der Kolk outlines some of today’s psychiatric breakthroughs. New psychiatric discoveries have helped reveal childhood abuse memories and war’s traumatic events to give survivors some peace of mind. Trauma is a neurobiological event that can come from the violence of war or parental upbringing. It affects human behavior because trauma changes brain structure, hormonal regulation, and human feelings. Traumatic events become encoded in memory and affect humans’ future. Van der Kolk explains how psychiatric science has evolved to treat the consequences of life’s experience of traumatic events.

THE MIDDLE WAY

As every American, particularly white people of conscience know, ethnic minorities are faced with hardship, violence, and social discrimination until ruling majorities realize that all human beings are entitled to equality of opportunity in the society in which they live.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Voice for the Voiceless (Over Seven Decades of Struggle with China for My Land and My People.) 

Author: Dalai Lama

Narration by: Edoardo Ballerini

Dalai Lama (Author, born in 1935 is presently 91 years old. He is the spirtual head of Tibetan Buddhism.)

“Voice for the Voiceless” is the wish of every minority in the world. State supremacy over the individual in communism sharply contrasts with democracy in degrees of un-freedom revealed by what a citizen can be and do. Competition and descent, suppression of minority voices, control of information, collective identity, and human rights are insisted upon by communist leadership according to “Voice of the Voiceless” by the Dalai Lama.

American government checks and balances.

In a democratic government, there are multiple societally expressed interests like legal protection for dissent, creation of non-government organizations, guarantee of free speech, and institutional checks and balance on the power of its leaders. It is not that America or any democracy is perfect in its makeup but in the China that the Dalai Lama describes, communism is designed to prevent any form of opposition to its leadership. In the Dalai Lama’s view, no compassion exists in China’s government.

The infamous and unidentified “tank man” who stood in the way of the Tiananmen Square crackdown.

The most prominent historical evidence of a lack of government compassion is shown by the Tiananmen Square massacre during the Deng administration. The Dalai Lama’s opinion is reinforced by a Chinese guide who closes the doors of a private meeting room in which several Americans are informed of China’s reaction to the Tiananmen massacre. Chinese students and citizens who demonstrated at Tiananmen Square were asking for communist party reform, a reasonable level of leadership accountability, and elimination of corrupt Chinese government leaders.

The Dalai Lama writes “Voice for the Voiceless” to challenge China’s political system which denies rule of Tibet by the Dalai Lama as its head of state. His demand reminds one of histories of displacement of native tribal leaders in America in the 17th and 18th centuries. Recognizing the fates of proud native leaders in America, the Dalai Lama (who has been exiled to India since the 1950s) is asking the communist government to allow him to be the leader of his “tribe” in Tibet. In America, more than two hundred years passed before genuine recognition and opportunity were seriously offered America’s natives. It has taken nearly 200 years for America to offer equal opportunity for tribal natives to pursue their interests as recognized ethnic minorities. What the Dali Lama wishes for Tibetan people in China is in many ways the experience of minorities in a democracy, let alone a communist autocracy.

Natives of America grew together as common ancestors that could choose life in a system of government that came to understand the importance of tribal self-determination. Natives of America had land rights, and a concept of cultural difference; accompanied by jurisdictional authority to pursue economic development as a distinct ethnic minority. The Dalai Lama clearly shows Tibetan people have a similar ethnic origin and desire for freedom and self-determination. Only time and ethnic solidarity offer hope for them to realize their goals.

Barbara Demick gives listeners a picture of Tibet with a darkness that rivals the narrative she creates for North Korea in “Nothing to Envy”. 

Communist China is not America. However, the Dalai Lama appears to want a level of independence to protect a Tibetan way of life for Buddhists to preserve their cultural identity and language without violent resistance by the Chinese system of government. This is a reminder of native American’s struggle in democratic America. The Dalai Lama seems only to wish for human and religious freedom, not nation-state hegemonic control. He notes Tibetans have no institutional power, no representation in the Chinese government, and no legal way to challenge state’ government policies.

The Dali Lama’s book surprisingly notes the initial relationship with Chinese communism that proposed a “Seventeen-Point Agreement” which offered a framework for Tibet to have the recognition requested by the Tibetan culture. However, the tenor of the “…Agreement” is violated with Tibet being occupied by Mao’s government. Mao orders his administration to keep the Dalai Lama from fleeing and pressured Tibetan leaders to negotiate subservience to the Chinese Communist Party. Mao’s goal is to unify Tibet with China, not provide Tibetan autonomy within the structure of Chinese suzerainty. There was to be no self-determination of Tibetans, no interest in preserving Tibetan institutions, no role for the Dalai Lama, and no Tibetan’ autonomy. Mao demanded integration, not reconciliation.

As the Dalai Lama grew to understand what Mao and future leaders of the CCP really wanted, he chose to leave Tibet in the late 1950s. He exiled himself to India, the origin of Buddhism’s creation. Buddhism teaches liberation from suffering through compassion, wisdom, and meditation. These were not a part of the Communist ideals of Mao or his successors. The core belief of communism is that truth comes from the party whereas Buddhist believe truth is from inner realization. Every Buddhist is a sentient being that has compassion for individual suffering while a CCP member subordinates their feelings to the needs of the state and national unity. All religions are a potential threat to state control which is the basis and practice of communism and, to a lesser extent, all forms of government.

The Dalai Lama represents a threat to communism because he is a global moral figure, a symbol of Tibetan identity, and a spiritual authority independent of the state. Buddhist belief in inner freedom, compassion, and spiritual autonomy directly conflict with the ideals of communism because of its belief in the collective rather than the individual. An interesting irony in that communism is a form of government that endorses a collective concept. Of course, a communist collective is external to one’s inner self while Buddhism believes a collective is formed through an inner understanding of the self. China insists on centralized government authority, conformity to its edicts, and personal identification with the state’s government. One’s heart goes out to the Tibetan people and the discrimination they are suffering. Only time offers hope for their future.

As every American, particularly white people of conscience know, ethnic minorities are faced with hardship, violence, and social discrimination until ruling majorities realize that all human beings are entitled to equality of opportunity in the society in which they live.

SECOND LOOK REVIEWS SINCE 2025

SECOND LOOK BOOK REVIEWS.

BOOK LOVERS https://wp.me/p9ps3k-6FW

COLOMBIA https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/02/13/colombia/

PARENTING https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/02/25/parenting-2/

MICHELANGELO https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/03/03/michelangelo/

TIPPING POINT https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/03/10/tipping-point/

LIFES LOTTERY https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/04/03/lifes-lottery-2/

FUTURE AI https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/05/04/future-a-i/

AGI https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/05/16/agi/

GOVERNMENT https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/05/23/government/

INTELLIGENCE https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/06/08/intelligence-2/

MADNESS https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/06/10/madness/

THEORY & TRUTH https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/06/11/theory-truth/

LANGUAGE https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/06/20/language/

WITTGENSTEIN https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/06/25/wittgenstein/

RELATIONSHIP EVOLUTION https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/06/26/relationship-evolution/

GOTHIC TALE https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/07/05/gothic-tale/

VANISHING WORLD https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/07/09/vanishing-world/

BECOMING GOD LIKE https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/07/14/becoming-god-like/

LIFE IS LIQUID https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/08/25/life-is-liquid/

HISTORY https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/10/28/31919/

CHILD ABUSE https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/11/08/32186/

SUICIDE https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/12/05/suicide/

GENDER INEQUALITY https://chetyarbrough.blog/2025/10/13/gender-inequality/ AND https://chetyarbrough.blog/2026/04/14/gender-inequality-2/

MONEY’S VALUE https://chetyarbrough.blog/2026/07/10/moneys-value/

COLD WAR ORIGINS

Hannah Lucinda Smith’s “Hinterlands” is an eye opener for the uniformed but it’s a bit of a slog for non-historians to absorb.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Hinterlands (The New Cold War Brewing at the Peripheries of the West.) 

Author: Hannah Lucinda Smith

Narration by: Hannah Lucinda Smith

Hannah Lucinda Smith (Author, British journalist based in Istanbul, Turkey. Published in The Times, The Atlantic, Foreign Policy, and wrote “Erdogan Rising”, presumably about the President of Turkey.

Smith has written a complicated book about what she calls “a new cold war”. It is complicated because most people’s knowledge of some of the territories she writes about like Transnistria, Respublika Srpska, and Nagorno-Karabakh are not known by the general public. Of course, she would not have titled her book “Hinterlands” if it only addresses major nations or organizations like Russia, Turkey, China, the EU, NATO, or the U.S.

Today’s conflicts between Russia/Ukraine and America/Iran may turn into world conflagrations. The same might be said of the following countries that make up Smith’s “Hinterlands”. “Hinterlands” is a reminder that there are other conflicts, less well known, that have the same disastrous potential. Smith identifies six low-visibility conflicts that may rise to the level of the Russia/Ukraine and American/Iran wars or worse. They are as follows:

Nagorno‑Karbala

Nagorno-Karabakh became an independent nation between Azerbaijan and Armenia which is just south of Russia, north of Iran, and between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Russia, Turkey, and Iran have dogs in Nagorno-Karabakh’s fight. Nagorno-Karabakh is mostly populated by ethnic Armenians who declared independence which is settled by a war that ended in 1994. The conflict is fed by interference from Russia, Turkey, and Iran that have their own agendas for the people who live in this territory. Russia plays the role of peacekeeper while ironically supplying arms to its citizens. Turkey is an ally of Azerbaijan that reluctantly allowed Nagorno/Karabakh’s independence. The author notes Iran has interest in the territory’s independence because of an Azeri ethnic population in Iran that is larger than the Armenian population in Nagorno Karabakh. Nagorno Karbakh’s independence creates a kind of jealousy about its ethnic independence versus a larger Azeri minority in the adjacent country of Iran. Of course, this is confusing because it seems more a concern for Iran’s leadership than Nagorno Karabakh’s independence from Azerbaijan. The threat seems that Iran may worry more about an independence drive by Azeri’s in Iranian territory because of the example set by the Azeri’ Armenians in Azerbaijan.

Respublika Srpska (Northern part of Bosnia and Herzegovina.)

Bosnia (Respublika Srpska)

Having traveled to the former Yugoslavia, the ravages of its dismantling may be seen in pockmarked buildings from battles that occurred during Yugoslavia’s dismantling. As Smith notes, there is a Serbian majority inside Bosnia. It identifies itself as Respublika Srpska (RS). This faction wants independence from Bosnia, but the Bosnia constitution forbids it. Russia supports the RS desire for independence. According to Smith, Russia is simply pursuing its desire to see the weakening of Western Institutions which RS’ independence would engender. The RS leader Milorad Dodik is pushing for a referendum for independence. The U.S. pushes for constitutional reform which in one sense puts U.S. on the fence rather than being for or against independence. Serbia supports RS ambitions. The EU is not unified in an opinion either for or against independence. Turkey supports Bosnia’s RS’ desire because of their Muslim religion and Erdojan’s hope for Putin’s continued economic support of Turkey. This seems resolvable but it has the makings for a hot war if independence is denied by Bosnia’s government. If independence is achieved, the concern will be for the minorities that choose to remain in a newly independent Serbian country. (As noted, this is an example of Smith’s complicated history.)

Kosovo.

Kosovo

The fight for independence is always a potential flashpoint for unrest that can widen into war between internal as well as outside nation-state interference. Outside interference can be based on economic, religious, or strategic interests of outside nation-state powers. Russia, Turkey, and Iran as immediate neighbors may call on any of these reasons to interfere and spark a wider confrontation and consequence in their region of interest.

Transnistria

Transnistria is a little-known de facto breakaway from Moldova that is not recognized by the international community.

Smith explains Transnistria is a region that broke away from Moldova when the USSR collapsed. Smith notes Russia protects its independence as a Russian client territory. She notes Russian troops are stationed in Transnistria while its existence is subsidized by the Russian government. It is a strategic foothold for Russia in their plan to takeover Ukraine. It is a conflict zone that remains a part of the nation of Moldova, under the control of Putin with Transnistria’s own government made up of a president, parliament, and military. It is a potential flashpoint in the Russian/Ukraine war.

Crimea / broader Ukraine conflict

Crimea annexation by Russia from the nation-state of Ukraine.

Crimea remains un unresolved border problem in Smith’s view of Soviet occupation. When the USSR dissolved, Crimea became a part of an independent Ukraine. Smith notes Russia has made immense financial investments in Crimea to lure its citizens to become a part of Putin’s Russia. Obviously, Crimea is a potential conflict in the making because of its former existence as a part of Ukraine. One wonders how Russian influence will affect Crimea’s interest in being a part of Russia or Ukraine in the future.

Turkey–Kurdish regions (Syria/Iraq)

There is concern about the influence of a Kurdish separatist movement that might spread from Syria and Iraq to Turkey.

Turkey has already created a military footprint in Syria and Iraq. Turkey has had several violent conflicts with the PKK, a Kurdish militant group that is classified as a terrorist organization that has caused thousands of deaths and conducted military operations in southeastern Turkey beginning in 2015 and continuing through 2016. That terrorism began long before the election of Erdogan. The Kurds seek their own nation-state, which was proposed back in 1920, after WWI. However, the disparate beliefs of Kurd’ factions make nation building and independence a tough objective to achieve. They allege a wish for autonomy, local democracy, pluralism, and decentralized governance whether living in Syria, Iraq, or Turkey. Of course, they are not the only ethnic group in each of these countries and the PKK’s objectives conflict with existing territorial governments. For various reasons ranging from different Kurdish beliefs to the existence of existing governments, the Kurds remain stateless and a threat to Syria’s, Iraq’s, and Turkey’s governments.

In the end reward is destroyed by the selfishness of each against the other.

Hannah Lucinda Smith’s “Hinterlands” is an eye opener for the uniformed but it’s a bit of a slog for non-historians to absorb.

WEALTH IN AMERICA

American democracy is like a giant ship at sea. It takes time to turn a giant ship impeded by brief storms until the return of calmer seas. America is weathering a Trumpian storm today but there is reason to believe there is another Lincolnesque or Rooseveltian leader in America’s future.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Country of Lords (Neo-Aristocrats, Social Darwinists, Tech Utopians, and the Long Fight against Equality in America.) 

Author: Kim Phillips-Fein

Narration by: Sarah Welborn

Kim Phillips-Fein (Author, American historian, Professor of History at Columbia University.)

Kim Phillips-Fein argues the widening gap between the ultra-rich and everyone else in America is because of American culture’s anti-egalitarian beliefs and tradition. Beginning with the Founding Fathers of America; i.e., John Adams, Alexander Hamiliton, and Thomas Jefferson, Phillips-Fein’s argues these 3 men set the table for America to become anti-egalitarian. In part, she has a point because these three were elitists with university educations. However, she neglects to mention that George Washington was largely self-educated and seems unlikely to have been anti-egalitarian. However, despite Washington’s limited education and his role as a military leader, he is unlikely to have disagreed with Adams, Hamilton, or Jefferson.

As the author points out Adams, Hamilton, and Jefferson believed in a “natural aristocracy” that would improve society. Of course, this idea comes from white American Founders that gave little weight to non-white races, believed in slavery, and white male superiority. Phillips-Fein explains these foundational beliefs held great influence in American society. The growth of industry labor biases is magnified by intellectual distortions of Darwinian evolution. The author goes on to explain influential Americans like Willam Sumner (an influential American social theorist in the 19th century) opposed welfare because of belief in Darwin’s discovery of natural selection and the concept of “survival of the fittest”. American economic growth and the rise of personal white male wealth diminish the status of laborers, women, and non-white Americans.

Andrew Carnegie (Scottish American, industrialist, and philanthropist 1835-1919.)

Andrew Carnegie (a steel magnate who created America’s first billion-dollar corporation) writes an essay titled “The Gospel of Wealth” in 1889 which argues the rich should rule because their wealth came from their natural superiority. Henry Ford creates his fortune in the automobile industry with a rigid hierarchy based on paternalistic control of workers’ labor and domestic lives. The outgrowth of industrial success in America leads authors like Madison Grant to racialize society with a belief that the white race is biologically superior. People like Charles Davenport (an American biologist who died in 1944) espoused a eugenics movement with a belief that poverty and crime are based on heredity which reinforces illogical beliefs of leaders like Adolph Hitler.

The author explains distortions of science and the advance of IQ testing have led to the rise of technocrats and corporate hierarchies based on preferential promotion and ascension of mostly white American men. Corporations grew to become quasi-governments that reinforced anti-egalitarianism. A meritocracy grows with sociologically biased IQ testing as a way to reinforce inequality based on cognitive difference rather than experience, proven, and/or innate ability.

Consequence of inequality of opportunity. Octavia Butler (a highly regarded American writer who died in 2006) shows an evolution of cities into silos of cultural difference rather than communities of common interest.

The irony of Phillips-Fein’s history of American thinkers and elites is that because people are not equal, they should not have equal opportunities. She notes people like John Adams believed too much egalitarianism is dangerous because it would empower the wrong people; i.e. presumably poorly educated Americans (ironically people like George Washington). The growth of racism and belief in eugenics by people like Lothrop Stoddard (a Harvard educated historian who died in 1950) argue that equal opportunity is foolish because laborers and particularly non-whites are less educated and equal to people who have acquired great wealth. The effects of that belief reinforce the false belief that wealth is a measure of human worth. That false belief becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy that creates a perennial underclass that is denied an equal opportunity to improve their lives.

Charles Darwin (1809-1882) FOUNDER OF THE THEORY OF THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES.

After this depressing history, Phillips-Fein suggests anti-egalitarianism in not a permanent, unchangeable characteristic of American democracy. Social Darwinism is collapsing as its distortions of evolution are better understood. The proof of Jewish contribution to society will never offset the horror of Adolph Hitler’s holocaust but few rational human beings can fail to see how important Jewish culture has been to science and the advance of civilization. The movements of abolitionists, labor, civil rights, feminists, immigrant and disability rights in the 20th and 21st centuries encourage egalitarian beliefs.

American democracy is like a giant ship at sea. It takes time to turn a giant ship impeded by brief storms until the return of calmer seas. America is weathering a Trumpian storm today but there is reason to believe there is another Lincolnesque or Rooseveltian leader in America’s future.

POWER

As Oscar Wilde’s dialogue between two people said in “The Picture of Dorian Gray”–“Young people, nowadays, imagine that money is everything.” The response is “Yes, and when they grow older they know it.” That was written in 1891. Baker infers not much has changed in the 21st century.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

How to Rule the World (An Education in Power at Stanford University.) 

Author: Theo Baker

Narration by: Theo Baker

Theo Baker – Next Level Talent

Theo Baker (Author, former student journalist for “The Stanford Daily”.)

Theo Baker wrote for “The Stanford Daily” newspaper at Stanford University and received the George Polk Award for his reporting. His writing contributed to the resignation of the Stanford University President, Marc Tessier-Lavigne. Theo Baker, as the son of two journalist (Peter Baker and Susan Glasser) appears to have learned something about research and newspaper reporting from his parents. Theo Baker enrolled at Stanford at the age of 17 in 2022 and graduated in 2026 with a degree in history. To have joined Stanford at 17 years of age says something about his intellect, and pre-college academic achievement.

The value of education.

Personally, as a graduate of no-name universities in America, the picture Baker creates of Stanford makes one envious of the opportunities offered by a highly regarded University. On the one hand, most young students interested in college cannot afford the tuitions of Ivy-plus schools and many may not have either the education, or privileges of wealth that good preparatory schools provide. The added benefit of being a Stanford student is its being located in Silicon Valley, the best area of the country for those who pursue programming skills. Though Baker is more tech savvy about programming than past generations, his chosen field of study is history.

Influence.

What Baker interestingly points out is that classroom learning is less important than networking and raising entrepreneurial capital at Stanford. What is a little off-putting in Baker’s story is it implies Stanford’s culture of entrepreneurship is more important than scholarship. The focus of students seems not on education but in the goal of becoming gob-smacking rich. Having recently read a book about the Founding Father’s of America, one wonders what would have become of America if the Founders had focused more on personal wealth than the future of the country. This is, of course, sour grapes of a book-reviewer because the reality is Ivy-plus Universities have trained many students who have become great contributors to American government and America’s way of life, without becoming gazillionaires.

Technology research.

Baker refers to student’ millionaires while at Stanford because of their inordinate wealth and early success in tech-fund raising and creative computer programing. He implies the student culture of Stanford measures achievement on entrepreneurial networking more than academic achievement. A startup founder who raises the most money is elevated above high academic achievement in Stanford’s student culture. Getting good academic grades is important but it takes a back seat to a student’s ability to raise start-up capital, sell their programming, and/or create stock market start-ups. Those who are good at raising capital become among the institutionally privileged at Stanford. Academic success is primarily important as it relates to an entrepreneurial end rather than an educational achievement. Baker is not saying Stanford academic success is not real, but it is overshadowed by social networking, entrepreneurship, and financial reward. It reminds one of a book about the history of Reddit’s early recruits and a skilled programmer who commits suicide. Aaron Schwatz went to Stanford in 2004. Ironically, he like Baker is only 17. However, he left after a year. He joined Reddit and became a millionaire, but his wealth seems to have meant little to him in regard to what he believed or what he hoped to achieve in life.

American universities.

In any case, the Stanford President resignation is only a part of Theo Baker’s book. Ivy-League and Ivy-plus schools in America are inferred to be networks of inherited privilege and social connection with Stanford student’s primary goal of becoming filthy rich more than broadly educated. Though no mention is made of Aaron Schwartz’s death, wealth seems a weakness rather than goal for either students or faculty at Stanford.

For a person to say they graduated from Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Columbia, Cornell, or the University of Chicago is highly regarded by the public. When an Ivy-plus University like Stanford makes networking and making money more important than public service or academic achievement, one becomes somewhat disillusioned.

Silicon Valley,

Stanford definitely has advantage over other Ivy League and Ivy-plus schools because of Silicon Valley. One suspects the power of networking is generally much greater in Ivy League universities because of the average wealth of families who live in well-funded school districts, can pay expensive tuitions, and have either funded or been educated themselves in Ivy League or Ivy-plus universities. Becoming wealthy is a genuine achievement in life but real value should (but does not) come from equal opportunity. Without equal opportunity, society becomes less civil and inclined to believe human value is based on wealth, not character. The power of wealth creates a land of the “haves” and “have nots”.

Marc Trevor Tessier-Lavigne (Canadian-American neuroscientist. President of Stanford 2016-2023.)

Baker’s reporting is central to Tessier-Lavigne’s resignation from Stanford. Discovered irregularities of Tessier-Lavigne’s research on an Alzheimer’s cure reported by Baker in the Stanford paper led the Stanford Board of Trustees to launch an investigation into their President. The Board concluded Tessier-Lavigne’s research papers were flawed by manipulated data that induced Genetech to recruit him in 2003 when he was then President of Rockefeller University and later Stanford. In the end, the President of Stanford is not found guilty of any crime because the research manipulations were considered oversight failures that were retracted before any harm to the public. After his resignation, Tessier-Lavigne went on to become co-founder and chair of Xaira Therapeutics, an AI-biotech company.

Past and present generations.

Putting aside Baker’s good fortune in entering Stanford and working for the Stanford paper, he reveals the motivation of many young Americans today. The fate of Stanford’s President, Tessier-Lavigne, introduces a part of the theme of Baker’s book. Tessier-Lavigne is compelled to resign, in part, because of research and writing by this 17-year-old student in Stanford’s local paper. It is a story of the power of truth and the deleterious effects of seeing position or wealth as a measure of one’s value in society. Whether President of the United States, a newspaper journalist, or President of an Ivy-plus university, real power is ultimately in the truth.

As Oscar Wilde’s dialogue between two people said in “The Picture of Dorian Gray”–“Young people, nowadays, imagine that money is everything.” The response is “Yes, and when they grow older they know it.” That was written in 1891. Baker infers not much has changed in the 21st century.

AMERICA

Despite President Trump’s words and deeds, America is and always will be a haven for those who seek freedom and equality of opportunity.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

First Principles (What America’s Founders Learned from the Greeks and Romans and How That Shaped Our Country.) 

Author: Thomas E Ricks

Narration by: James Lurie

Thomas Edwin Ricks (Author, American journalist. Pulitzer Prize winner for National Reporting for the WSJ and Washington Post.)

Thomas Ricks has written an enlightening view of the founders of America’s government. In his opinion, the founders established a republic ruled by an American government based on ancient Greek and Roman political ideas. He argues the self-taught education of George Washington, and college educations of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were steeped in knowledge of Greek and Roman beliefs reinforced by Scottish intellects who studied the classical ideas of Greek and Roman society. Ricks notes Roman and Greek writings about virtue, law, deliberation, political structure, and social restraint are important sources of America’s government organization.

Ricks argues Greece’s Aristotle, Plato, Epicurus, Xenophon, and Homer were read by important framers of the American Constitution. Particularly, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and James Madison were influenced by Greek writers and famous Romans like Cicero, Plutarch, Polybius, Cato the younger, Cataline, and Caesar. Even the unschooled George Washington read the works of Cicero, Cato the Younger, and Plutarch. Ricks writes that the Greek and Roman authors were the curriculum basis of the Scottish enlightenment of the 17th century.

Jefferson absorbed the beliefs of Scottish writers like Francis Hutcheson, Thomas Reid, and Adam Smith to form a moral philosophy and belief in the natural rights of humanity. Adams adopted the civic virtues propagated by Scottish intellectuals like Hutcheson, Hume, and Smith. He admired the moral vocabulary of virtue and grasped a realistic view of human nature with a belief in mixed government that required checks and balances; i.e., not a pure unconstrained democracy. Madison relies on the Scottish Hume, and Smith to understand how human nature requires administrative regulation to mitigate factionalism in a government based on separation of powers. Madison became the synthesizer of enlightenment beliefs promulgated by Scottish intellectuals.

George Washington (1732-1799.)

George Washington is not characterized as a deep thinker about philosophy, but Ricks suggests he had read Plutarch’s Lives and revered the lives of Cato and Cincinnatus who were known for civic virtue, sacrifice, and public duty. Cato the Younger is noted for stoic discipline and moral seriousness while Cincinnatus voluntarily relinquishes his power after successfully defending and saving the Roman Republic from the Aequi (a militant mountain tribe living near Rome). Cincinnatus defeated the Aequi in a 16-day defensive war for the Roman Republic. He could have crowned himself as King as a result of his success.

Cato the Younger, as a Roman statesman became famous for his emotional restraint, moral rigor, personal austerity, and commitment to virtue. Washington emulated Cincinnatus’s actions after America’s revolutionary war when he could have used his fame to take command of a fractured continental congress. He exhibited Cato the Younger’s statesmanship throughout his career as leader of the American miliary and later as the first popularly elected President of the United States. The soon to be summoned military commander returned to his farm in Virginia after the end of America’s war with Great Britain.

George Washington’s Farm near Fredericksburg, Virginia.

Washington had no college education and limited formal education. He had learned to read and write but relied on self-education through practical experience. He joined the Virginia militia at age 21 as a major. He entered the military service during the French and Indian War with orders to convince the French to leave the Ohio valley. However, he failed. He is defeated by the French in 1754. What he learned is that overconfidence, poor preparation, and logistic mistakes could only be overcome with discipline and clarity.

British General Baraddock.

Washinghton went on to serve under British General Braddock in 1755 and learned the importance of discipline, and military organization while fulfilling his duties in battle. Washington found the British underestimated Indian tribes that parlayed and fought together against America’s colonists taking of Tribal lands. Washington shows his personal courage in a battle in which two horses are shot from under him while a bullet passes through his coat. His commander, General Braddock, is killed. Washington learns discipline, order, and humility while in the military. He matures to recognize the importance of reputation in leading others.

Thomas Jefferson.

Jefferson is in someways shown to be a bon-vivant who seduces other men’s wives. However, Ricks shows Jefferson to be a brilliant omnivorous consumer of political philosophy. His beliefs are shaped by a blend of Greek, Roman, and Scottish Enlightenment ideas. His studies of the Greek philosophy of Epicurus and Aristotle fed his belief in agrarian republicanism reinforced by reading Cicero and Virgil. His reading of Scottish writers like Hutcheson, Reid, and Smith make him a philosopher-statesman who understood the principles required for government organization. He owned slaves and held a tortured, contradictory, and harmful view of slavery. He knew slavery was morally wrong and noted it in writing. However, he viewed slavery as an indispensable practice, believing Black people were inferior. He feared emancipation more than slavery. In regard to slavery, Ricks writes Jefferson is a moral philosopher who fails morally. Slavery is recognized by Washington, Jefferson, Adams, and Madison as a societal fault that would lead to civil unrest and probable war.

John Adams (Second President of the United States.)

Ricks argues John Adams’ government beliefs revealed solid connections between American government creation and Roman and Greek thought. Adams spent much of his time reading Greek and Roman classics. However, Ricks characterizes Adams as thin-skinned, irritable, self-righteous, and prone to hurt or hostile feelings. Despite these character flaws, Ricks shows Adams to be the intellectual heavyweight of the Founding fathers of the Constitution. His reading of Plato and Aristotle gave him a clear understanding of the importance of virtue, education, and the inherent instability of pure democracy. In reading Polybius, he recognized the importance of mixed government. With Cicero, he understood the importance of rule of law. His research in Roman history gave him an appreciation of the risk of corruption, factionalism and its potential for government harm. Ricks notes Adams’ character could lead to excessive moralizing and hectoring of his subordinates which often made him temperamentally unsuitable for the give and take of politics. Adams’ pessimism is noted to have come from Plato’s warnings about demagoguery that led to the collapse of Rome. On balance, Ricks seems to find Adams to be a tragic intellectual unsuited for the Presidency despite his contribution to the founding of America’s government.

James Madison (the 4th President of the United States is considered the “Father of the Constitution”, author of the Bill of Rights, and co-author of the Federalist Papers.)

Ricks assessment of James Madison is the most positive of the Founding fathers of American government. Madison coalesced the many elements of classical and Scottish thinkers of the past to create the American Constitution. He seems the least charismatic but most effective of the Founding fathers of the Constitution. His introversion made him highly intellectual but not a natural leader. He neither had Washington’s gravitas, Jeffeson’s elegance, or Adams’ fire but he had the mind for institutional design. Madison understood power and a Republic’s risks of corruption, factionalism, and its potential for failure and collapse. His realistic grasp of human nature turned classical theories of the ancients into a flexible and durable democratic government. America has survived despite John Adams Alien and Sedition Acts, Andrew Jackson’s defiance of the Supreme Court, Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus, Woodrow Wilson’s 1918 Sedition Act, Nixon’s Watergate, George W. Bush’s use of torture and warrantless surveillance, and the first 4 years of the Trump administration.

Thomas Ricks reminds Americans of how far we have come and how imperfect American Democracy has been. Many Presidents have challenged America’s Constitution without fundamentally changing the republic’s self-government. America’s rule of law, government checks and balances, freedom of Speech and Press, its peaceful transfers of power, and citizens’ drive for civic equality, are part of America’s past, present, and foreseeable future. Despite President Trump’s words and deeds, America is and always will be a haven for those who seek freedom and equality of opportunity. America owes a great deal to its Founders of the Constitution and their study of the ancients and Scottish teachings in the 17th century.