HISTORY LESSON

There is an irony in Higginbotham’s “Midnight in Chernobyl”. It is ironic to see what is happening in the 21st century with the revisionism of Presidents Trump and Putin. Their ideas of openness (glasnost) and system reform (perestroika) are a return to the past rather than the future.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Midnight in Chernobyl (The Story of the World’s Greatest Nuclear Disaster)

Author: Adam Higginbotham

Narration by: Jacques Roy

Adam Higginbotham (Author, British journalist, contributing writer for The New Yorker, Wired, and The New York Times.)

Adam Higginbotham reminds reader/listeners of the terrifying consequences of nuclear power mistakes in “Midnight in Chernobyl”. Over 400,000 people are evacuated from the area of Pripyat, a carefully planned Soviet city of 50,000 people, near four nuclear reactors. One of four reactors explodes on April 26, 1986, at 1.23 A.M. There were actually two explosions. The first was a massive steam explosion while a second explosion blew a 1,000-ton concrete lid into the air. The core of the reactor is destroyed. The building surrounding the reactor blew apart and radioactive fuel and graphite filled the early morning night sky. Fires were ignited on the roof and surrounding structures.

Higginbotham explains the explosion occurs because of a safety test that is botched by the operators of the plant. The nuclear reactor is set into a low-power state that disables an automatic shutdown system. By setting the reactor into a low-power state, control rods lowered into the reactor cause cooling water displacement and a spike in radioactive activity. This is noted as a design flaw that Higgenbotham argues is known by Soviet leaders before the disaster. In less than a second, the reactor surges to more than 100 times its normal power level. This massive energy surge generates runaway fission that destroys the reactor in two explosions. Chernobyl becomes a highly radioactive death trap for workers and residents of the surrounding area.

The total number of people affected by the Chernobyl accident may never be known because of Soviet obfuscation and historical indeterminacies, but Higgenbotham suggests it reaches 5 to 8.4 million people living in Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia. According to archival records, all residents of Pripyat are evacuated and an additional 300,000 are resettled. Twenty-eight people die within three months of the accident, 134 develop acute radiation syndrome. The estimate of cleanup workers is 600,000 made up of firefighters, soldiers, engineers, and volunteers.

As Higgenbotham ends his history, he notes a Russian worker’s death in the 21st century from leukemia. Was his death a consequence of the Chernobyl disaster in 1986? Who knows? The point is representative of the consequence of uncountable deaths that may be related to erasure of truth in any country.

The Chernobyl accident reaches 5 to 8.4 million people living in Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia.

Higginbotham argues Chernobyl is a proximate cause of the unraveling of the Soviet Union. He suggests it accelerates the collapse of Soviet authority. This is an interesting supposition. He argues that Soviet leadership believes their system of government had a level of technological and administrative capability that illustrates a level of competence and achievement that is superior to all other forms of governance. The Chernobyl disaster challenges that self-perception. Hierarchal state control fails to train and manage the complicated nuclear industry. A rigid managerial hierarchy hides incompetence. It also breeds corruption and bureaucratic paralysis with top-down management because of information obfuscation and concealment at lower management levels. Fear of criticism by leadership leads to distortion of the truth at lower levels of government. Higgenbotham’s interviews of Russian investigators of the disaster reveals the incompetent training of lower-level employees who operated the facility. Their inclination is to cover-up mistakes rather than reveal them to their direct reports.

The economic cost of the Chernobyl disaster exposes the USSR’s Communist Party’s failure as a system of government.

Presidents Gorbachev and Reagan signing the nuclear non-proliferation agreement.

Higgenbotham notes environmental movements, and Russian anti-nuclear activists grew to express anger with Moscow and its leaders. The disaster undermined Soviet scientific and technological belief in Russia’s superiority. In 1986 and 1987 speeches Gorbachev notes in a Politburo address that the Chernobyl meltdown is a harbinger of the Soviet Union’s need to change. In a 2006 speech Gorbachev speaks of the need for apparatchiks to tell truth to power, to reduce soviet secrecy, and accept glasnost and perestroika as solutions for improvement of Russian leadership.

Donald Trump

There is an irony in Higginbotham’s “Midnight in Chernobyl”. It is ironic to see what is happening in the 21st century with the revisionism of Presidents Trump and Putin. Their ideas of openness (glasnost) and system reform (perestroika) are a return to the past rather than the future.

DIVORCE

Burden clearly explains the emotional impact of divorce in America, but her wealth diminishes the scope and reality of divorce to the majority of women who have children and are left by their partners.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Strangers (A Memoir of Marriage)

Author: Belle Burden

Narration by: Belle Burden

Belle Burden (Author, former attorney, urban planner, socilite, and descendant of the Vanderbilts.)

In some respects, “Strangers” is an unrelatable example of the trauma of divorce. In other ways, it is a testament to divorces’ hardship for women and societies’ inequality. The unrelatable parts are in the difference between divorce for those who are wealthy and those who are not. What is brilliantly revealed is the trauma of divorce and its disproportionate effect on wives and mothers.

Having been married for 20 years and facing divorce is a traumatic experience whether one is rich or poor.

However, women who are not rich face a different experience when their husbands leave a marriage. In most cases, the burden of coping with divorce is more impactful for children and a wife than a husband. Often, as in the case of Belle Burden, a mother faces having to return to a work environment that discriminates against women in ways that diminish their value in society. Women often retire from the workforce when they become pregnant because of the consuming responsibility of raising a child.

As a woman, regardless of wealth, job prospects are challenged by sexual discrimination.

It is worse for women who are poor and less educated than Ms. Burden. The point that Burden makes clear (regardless of her wealth and education) is women sacrifice much of their lives raising their children while husbands are freer to explore economic success. The wealth of Ms. Burden and her education exempt her from the trials of most women in the world. Burden clearly explains the emotional impact of divorce whether one is wealthy or not. Her wealth does little to reduce feelings of betrayal and failure.

Belle Burden exemplifies the emotional toll of divorce.

Twenty years of marriage creates a bond never completely broken. For husbands the reliance they have on a wife’s care of children makes it difficult to offer the care and understanding that children need from both parents. Husbands are often inadequately prepared for relationship building that a mother has with their children. The consequence is a father’s failure to understand how to help their children deal with their parent’s separation. Those who share raising their children are less likely to have that problem, but social convention leaves most American men in the dark about how to take parental responsibility.

Divorce rates in America may be in decline but the emotional impact on parents and their children is the same.

Burden clearly explains the emotional impact of divorce in America, but her wealth diminishes the scope and reality of divorce to the majority of women who have children and are left by their partners. That is not a criticism of Burden’s book but of sexual inequality that exists in most countries of the world.

WHO’S CHOKING

Economic chokepoints illustrated by Fishman are real, but their effectiveness is problematic.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Chokepoints (American Power in the Age of Economic Warfare)

Author: Edward Fishman

Narration by: Robert Petkoff

Edward Fishman (American author, international relations scholar, former diplomat at the Council on Foreign Relations, professor of Public Affairs at Columbia, University.)

Edward Fishman offers a detailed history of economic “Chokepoints” that have become a tool of war between nation-states. He reminds readers of Trump’s first term as President of the United States. Trump did not change from policies he believed in his first term. He only became more effective in carrying out his beliefs in his second term.

Trump’s beliefs.

Fishman shows how Trump combines the tactics of warfare with economic chokepoints to decimate Iranian cities while starving its citizens of their right to believe and live. Trump is convinced of the potential of Iran’s current leadership to use weapons of nuclear war to destroy civilization because of religious belief. Trump chooses to bomb Iran while expanding economic policies instituted by both Democratic and Republican administrations to choke petroleum revenues from a country that provides 20% of the world’s oil needs.

Like the bombing of Dresden in WWII, today’s America is senselessly bombing Iran.

Trump is waging a war on the singular belief that he can force Iran to abandon research for a nuclear bomb. The consequence is to embroil America in a war of attrition and destruction based on Trump’s belief that Iran’s leadership is willing to use nuclear war to end life on earth for a place in heaven. Trump’s actions are deluded idea of a “bully in a school yard”. Denying nuclear bomb development by force is a fool’s errand. North Korea, Russia, China, and America are as likely to instigate a nuclear war as Iran. Religious belief is Trump’s excuse; not a cause for war.

Iranian citizen protest.

It is the citizens of Iran that bare the consequence of America’s chokepoint decisions.

Fishman explains how economic chokepoints have becomes as devastating as war. The Iranian people have been impoverished by American allies’ cooperation in restricting their economy. It may be, like the physical war against Germany and Japan in WWII, economic chokepoints will make Iran bend its knee. On the other hand, it may continue a “forever war” that only diminishes humanity. Chokepoints are a war by other means that offer compromise, or dictatorship. Chokepoint effects are poverty, death, or compromise. Religion, like political belief, is a personal choice that cannot be eradicated by force.

Effects of human descent.

Economic chokepoints illustrated by Fishman are real, but their effectiveness is problematic. First, one must identify the economic target that is affective. Second, there must be unity and credibility among nations that can enforce a chokepoint. Even with a chosen chokepoint, the target may make citizens willing to sacrifice everything for belief in sovereignty.

WISDOM

Levi makes we who follow rather than lead ashamed. “Theo of Golden” shows human value is in the kindnesses we offer other people.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Theo of Golden (A Novel)

Author: Allen Levi

Narration by: David Morse

Allen Levi (Author, songwriter, blogger, former lawyer, University of Georgia graduate.)

“Theo of Golden” offers a view of human society. It seems based on a conversationally gifted businessperson who reaches an age of maturity that encourages reader/listeners to contemplate belief in God and heaven. Allen Levi creates Theo, a name undoubtedly chosen because of its Greek language equivalent to God. The chosen name shows where the author and his main character stand in their beliefs.

“Theo of Golden” is about the value of life.

Theo is an independently wealthy octogenarian who has lost his wife and beloved child in an auto accident. After working through the grief of his personal loss, he chooses to use his wealth and remaining life to influence others by simple measures of kindness. Theo believes in the value of the life people live and the importance of small kindnesses they extend to others. Levi’s story illustrates a belief that even small kindnesses are a powerful influence on society. At the same time, he is setting a table for societal belief in God, heaven, and presumably an afterlife.

American immigrants.

In the age of Trumpism immigrants are treated poorly, bombing another country is acceptable, and wealth is considered a measure of human value. Levi’s story condemns the Trump-s, Putin-s, and Xi-s of the world. The power of national leaders multiplies the strength and weakness of societies. The leaders of America, Russia, and China are in the same age group as Mr. Levi but their impact on society is immense in comparison. Levi makes we who follow rather than lead ashamed. “Theo of Golden” shows human value is in the kindnesses we offer other people.

MOUNTAIN CLIMBING

This is a well written and fascinating story. On the one hand, it shows the adventurous nature of human beings. On the other hand, it shows the absurdity of a human goal that can kill you with no value beyond personal achievement.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Into Thin Air (A Personal Account of the Mt. Everest Disaster)

Author: Jon Krakauer

Narration by: Philip Franklin

Jon Krakauer (Author, American writer, journalist, and mountaineer. Raised in Corvallis, Or., lives in Boulder Co.)

Human beings test themselves in many ways, some of which make little sense. Jon Krakauer is a mountain climber. Why does one choose to climb a mountain? Well, he is a writer and a magazine offers to pay the $65,000 fee required by an expedition leader to climb Mt. Everest in Tibet. At least, Krakauer has a purpose which undoubtedly is to have an adventure to write about that might offer monetary reward. It appears others have other motives but at least Krakauer took the trip for a reason that makes some logical sense. Considering the reward, one comes away from his book with the feeling that no amount of money is worth the trial he experienced and the lives lost in a climb to the pinnacle of Mt. Everest.

Mt. Everest is 29,032 feet high, located in the Himalayas of Nepal and Tibet.

Krakauer writes that he idolizes mountain climbers. He believes the opportunity of climbing the tallest mountain in the world seems worth the risk. Mount Everest is 29,032 feet high, located in the Himalayas of Nepal and Tibet. Krakauer introduces reader/listeners to Rob Hall, the expedition leader and guide who heads the adventure. Hall, a New Zealander, had created a company that offers mountain climbing expeditions. Andy Harris, who also comes from New Zealand, is Hall’s employee and an additional guide.

Rob Hall (1961-1996, New Zealand mountaineer, led the Mt. Everest climb in 1996 where he and two clients died.)

Scott Fischer, an entrepreneur and guide with his own company has another Everest climbing group. Fischer dies on a descent during the same time as Krakauer’s group climbs Everest. This is a brutal reminder of the great risk being taken by Krakauer.

Yasuko Namba (1949-1996, the second Japanese woman to climb the Seven Summits, the tallest mountains in the world.)

Yasuko Namba, a Japanese climber joins the Krakauer group. Namba is motivated to join the group because of her interest in completing the climbs of the seven tallest mountains in the world. She is 47 years old. Though not as strong as some of the younger climbers, Mt. Everest is the last of the Seven Summits she is determined to conquer. Hall, Harris, Namba, and Fischer die from the climb, either from the exertion, a storm, or their descent from Everest.

Campsites on Mt. Everest.

It is interesting to find there are many Mt. Everest expeditions that occur at the same with different companies. They camp in the same areas as they attempt their ascent. Krakauer writes of Scott Fischer’s Mountain Madness group, a Taiwanese National Expedition, an IMAX Filming Expedition, a South African Expedition, and their Sherpa support teams who aid all of the climbing groups. Krakauer notes how coveted the Sherpa are by companies that are dependent on their skills.

Comhlacht Doug Hansen Everest

Doug Hansen, an American postal worker who joins the Hall expedition

Doug Hansen, an American postal worker joins the Hall expedition. Hansen dies in a storm before reaching the summit and had to be carried by the group to the summit at the insistence of Hall. Hansen had attempted to climb the peak the year before with a Hall group. Surprisingly, the group leader Hall dies on this 1996 climb from altitude sickness which confuses his sense of direction. He loses his way as they descend from the South Summit. In the descent from Everest, Harris and Fischer die during another mountain storm. The only woman on the trip, Yasuko Namba dies on the descent because of exhaustion and exposure that had killed Hall. Beck Weathers, an American climber survives after appearing to die twice. Weather’s experience leaves him with severe frostbite and requires major surgery after the climb.

Sandra Pittman

The oddest adventurer that Krakauer writes about is Sandy Pittman who is in the Mountain Madness group. Pittman is a New York socialite who is known in the fashion world. In Krakauer’s telling, Ms. Pittman seems representative of the commercialization of mountain climbing. Pittman manages to make the mountain top and survives the storm that kills some of Krakauer’s group. However, Pittman became exhausted during the descent. She requires rescue. She survives but became a symbol of privilege and wealth to some who are offended by those who can afford the extravagance she represents in climbing famous mountains. Krakhauer does not criticize her despite her wealth and privilege because he sees her as no better or worse than every person looking for adventure.

This is a well written and fascinating story. On the one hand, it shows the adventurous nature of human beings. On the other hand, it shows the absurdity of a human goal that can kill you with no value beyond personal achievement, and of course, survival.

LOVE

True love is made of many parts; none of which make us better than what we are, i.e., love can be unconditional, but it can also be a path to self-destruction.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Idiot 

Author: Fyodor Dostoyevsky

Narration by: Various Actors

Fyodor Dostoyevsky (Russian author.)

This L.A. Theater representation of Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s “The Idiot” is less entertaining than the book because it is incomplete. However, it gives one a sense of the author’s characterization of human relationship. The main character of “The Idiot” is Prince Myshkin, a recovering epileptic who has just been released from a treatment center in Russia. In some ways, the dramatization gives structure to what is a difficult book to follow. However, it diminishes the beauty and clarification of Dostoyevsky’s writing.

Compassion.

The main character, Prince Myshkin, is a vulnerable and compassionate young Russian who has inherited wealth from his family. He is released from an asylum meant to cure his ills. One of the first people he meets on a train as he leaves the asylum is Rogozhin, a passionate Russian who can become unruly and violent toward those around him. Rogozhin represents a divided soul; not unlike that which exists in Myshkin but in different and significant ways. Myshkin shows compassion, humility, and spiritual benevolence while Rogozhin is passionate, confrontational, and driven by emotion. They are kindred spirits with one who has reserved emotions and actions while the other fully expresses emotions and often acts in their fulfillment.

Eve Babitz as an example of a beauty like Natasya or Aglaya.

Myshkin meets a Russian beauty named Natasya Filippovna whom he loves in a self-sacrificial way. That acquaintance leads to a tragedy. The tragedy comes from the love he feels for Aglaya Yapanchina, an equally beautiful young woman. The irony is that Myshkin’s emotions attach him to Nastasya out of compassion. That compassion keeps him from expressing his underlying feelings for Aglaya. He cannot abandon Nastasya because of his compassion, even though a more fulfilling love appears likely with Aglaya.

Characteristics of outsiders.

Both Myshkin and Rogozhin are social outsiders. Myshkin because of his epilepsy and social isolation. Rogozhin because of his poverty and emotional instability. Both love Nastasya but in different ways and for different reasons. Myshkin loves Nastasya out of compassion and self-sacrifice while Rogozhin is obsessed with her beauty and sees her as his possession. Both are in love with Nastasya in different but committed ways. Myshkin loves out of goodness while Rogozhin loves out of passion.

Believing in yourself.

Nastasya is drawn to both men but feels she is not good enough for Myshkin. Rogzhin’s attention and love of Nastasya is based on being the object of one’s desire, i.e. a feeling she has felt from all men she has met in her life. The tragedy of Dostoevsky’s story is that Rogozhin murders Nastasya. Rogozhin is sent to prison and Myshkin collapses from the soul crushing murder. Myshkin returns to the asylum as a broken man. Dostoevsky is showing that pure goodness in life is a fiction. True love is made of many parts; none of which make us better than what we are, i.e., love can be unconditional, but it can also be a path to self-destruction.

A COLD WORLD

This is a harrowing story of a terrible expedition. Having visited the Antarctic, it is inconceivable to have stayed there for more than a few hours without an interior heat source when temperatures fell below -50 degrees Fahrenheit.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Worst Journey in the World 

Author: Apsley Cherry-Garrard

Narration by: Simon Vance

Apsley Cherry-Garrard (1886-1959, Author who survive a 1911 voyage to Antarctica and wrote the history of the voyage, what he experienced, and the death of many of his fellow voyagers.)

Apsley Cherry-Garrard, as an assistant biologist, accompanied a group of scientists to voyage to, and live on Antarctica for two years. It is an amazing story to one who has traveled to Antarctica. The thought of the trials Cherry-Garrard explains of his 1911 trip are extraordinary, 100% believable, and horribly tragic.

This is the route Apsley Cherryl-Garrard took in his voyage to Antarctica. Our trip to Antarctica also began in Ushuaia.

The terrible crossing from Ushuaia to Antarctica has not changed since the story told by Cherry-Garrard. The difference is–his mates were in a 1911 vessel while we traveled on a sleek science research vessel built in the 21st century. The rough sea of the Drake Passage made us seasick in a ship that was undoubtedly larger and more comfortable than his. The turbulence Cherry-Garrard writes of must have been terrifying in a craft of his time. Their vessel is filled with horses, dogs, and other animals to sustain their 2-year expedition. It is unimaginable to think of what it must have been like with water sloshing into their hold and nearly sinking their vessel. The sight of Antarctica’s land must have been calming after their rough passage. Their stop might have been near where we took a smaller craft to the icy land. It is fascinating to think how the penguins reacted to their arrival, particularly with dogs that are hungry.

One of the disturbing things about the story the author tells is how many dogs and horses were lost because of breaking ice flows that stranded their animals and either required killing them with an axe blow or seeing them die from isolation or a plunge into the sea.

The penguins initially waddled up to the strangers in curiosity but were greeted with the bared teeth of liberated and hungry dogs.

We did not see any killer whales when we were there. Cherry-Garrard reminds readers of the intelligence of these whales as they contemplate how they might dine on some of the animals near the shore. He explains a pod of killer whales that dive under an ice flow and break a 2-foot-thick ice sheet to get closer to a possible meal. They miss the meal, but it must have been an astounding view of the whales’ strength and intelligence. It is surprising to find Cherry-Garrard views the Orcas as dangerous. It is also interesting to note that when they first arrived, the sun is shining and the climate is moderately comfortable. That is the same experience we had in 2020.

Cherry-Garrard surprisingly notes aggressive eating habits of Killer Whales.

As the animals they brought with them were brought to land, they adapted to their environment. Some of the animals were tired from their long voyage, but most were useful in exploring the vast land of their icy home for the next 2 years. Craftsman on board began building their base camp. In contrast, what fellow travelers in our 21st century’ voyage did is set up field goals to play a game of soccer while others climbed a hill to see what was on the other side.

Image result for trek on antarctica for apsley cherry-garrard

Horses accompanying the expedition.

Cherry-Garrad explains the purpose of their expedition is for scientific discovery, geographic exploration and national prestige. The science included collecting emperor penguin eggs to test evolutionary theories. In 1912 Robert Scott (the expedition leader), Edward Wilson, Henry Bowers, Lawrence Oates, and Edgar Evans were lost on the expedition. Though Cherry-Garrad respected Scott, he believed the expedition is poorly planned and overly complex. He felt the rationing was inadequate for the expedition and the equipment did not meet the requirements needed for the severe weather. He feels some sense of guilt in not having tried to reach Scott and his companions when he was an 11-day march away from them. However, he was following orders to return to his base camp. Retrospectively, most believe he could not have saved the lost men if he had taken the 11-day march.

This is a harrowing story of a terrible expedition. Having visited the Antarctic, it is inconceivable to have stayed there for more than a few hours without an interior heat source when temperatures fell below -50 degrees Fahrenheit.

AMERICAN AMBITION

Keefe shows Arthur Sackler raised himself in America through grit and determination, i.e., little seems handed to him on a silver plate. This is not to suggest the drug industry or the Sackler’s of the world carry no responsibility for addiction but opportunity and a way to succeed in an American life is a choice.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Empire of Pain (The Secret History of the Sackler Dynasty)

Author: Patrick Radden Keefe

Narration by: Patrick Radden Keefe

Patrick Radden Keefe (Author, investigative journalist, staff writer for The New Yorker.)

Patrick Radden Keefe’s book is a detailed examination of the Sackler family, and more specifically, the dynasty that grew after the life and death of Arthur Mitchell Sackler who died in 1987. Arthur Sackler was a trained physician who specialized in biological psychiatry. Through hard work, he built a family fortune with a company specializing in medical advertising and pharmaceutical marketing. With wealth created by advertising, the Sackler patriarch acquired interests in specific drugs that added to the wealth of the Sackler empire. One of those investments is made by the sons of Arthur Sackler. It became known as OxyContin which became a huge revenue producer controlled by Arthur’s heirs. Dr. Paul Goldenheim and Dr. Robert Kaico were the scientists who invented OxyContin while working for Purdue Pharma, a company owned by Arthur’s brothers. Arthur Sackler is characterized by Keefe as secretive about his ownership interests while becoming a very rich man. The structure of his business interests and its conflicts of interest are passed on to his heirs.

Arthur M. Sackler (American psychiatrist and marketer of pharmaceuticals.)

Arthur dies nine years before OxyContin exists. Despite the difficult life Arthur Sadler had with the bankruptcy of his father, he works his way through school, becomes a licensed physician and starts a pharmaceutical advertising company. He worked as a physician, a medical researcher, and owner of a company that advertised his and other medically researched and discovered drugs. This opened the door to profiteering from drug promotions and conflicts of interest in groundbreaking and potentially harmful drugs. As a physician, it put Arthur and other research physicians in position to market drugs and influence prescriptions for drugs that may or may not be safe or effective. As an advertiser of a physician/scientists’ own drugs, they could skirt independent judgement of their effectiveness or possible side effects. The FDA is created to avoid that possibility, but Keefe illustrates how that roadblock is compromised. Keefe recounts how a leader of the FDA is compromised by his relationship with the drug industry.

The Family That Built an Empire of Pain - Strength and Hope

Arthur’s wealth and investment interests are inherited by his divorced wife, his new wife, and his brothers, i.e., Ramond, Mortimer, and Richard who led the company after Arthur’s death. The brothers sell their patent on OxyContin to Purdue Pharma. The brothers start two branches of their business, one of which retains control of OxyContin’s manufacture, marketing, sale, and profit. Patent law is a legal ownership “smoke” screen that protects company owners from liability for harm from patents a company holds. A company may own a patent independently, without recourse to its company’s owners. Purdue Pharma grows and uses its wealth to influence politicians, government officials and doctors to endorse drugs like OxyContin.

OxyContin dosages.

As is known by many Americans, OxyContin has had a catastrophic impact on America. It its launch in 1996, OxyContin is considered by some to be a gateway to addictive drugs like heroin and fentanyl. In 2026, it is estimated that 200 deaths per day were happening from fentanyl overdoses. What Keefe argues is that when the structural conflicts of interest were introduced by the Sackler family (especially with the creation of Purdue Pharma) the lines between drug efficacy and profits were breached by the medical profession.

What Keefe reveals in his research is that pharmaceutical-physician relationships cross the line of conflicts of interest.

Doctors receiving “speaker fees”, continuing-education events, consulting positions, and industry-funded clinical guidelines are being lured into prescribing drugs that may or may not be safe or effective. Funding for medical research frequently comes from companies more interested in profit then drug efficacy. Government regulators are influence by lobbyist for a drug industry that is mired in potential conflicts of interest. Keefe notes there is a revolving door between the FDA and pharma employment. Keefe notes marketing has become a part of medical education. He infers philanthropy by the drug industry may be a bribe to influence public acceptance of drug treatments that are not effective.

Coming away from Keefe’s analysis of the drug industry, one is troubled by its corruption vulnerabilities in a society that prides itself on freedom and rule-of-law.

In one sense, Arthur Sackler is a tribute to how America became one of the wealthiest and most powerful countries in the world. One doubts that the Sackler family planned to create a drug that would addict and kill so many Americans. The Sackler family played a role but how many Americans have made mistakes in their drive for success. Keefe shows Arthur Sackler raised himself in America through grit and determination, i.e., little seems handed to him on a silver plate. This is not to suggest the drug industry or the Sackler’s of the world carry no responsibility for addiction but opportunity and a way to succeed in an American life is a choice.

A MANAGER’S JOB

One sees Blankfein growing as a manager in “Streetwise”. He realizes it is necessary to make an investment in the people that report to him and to focus on the synergy of different expertise in the complex world of investment.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Streetwise (Getting to and Through Goldman Sachs)

Author: Lloyd Blankfein

Narration by: Lloyd Blankfein

Lloyd Blankfein (American business executive and former chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs.)

Lloyd Blankfein believes being the smartest person in the room is a mixed blessing. “Streetwise” is a biography of his life. He is educated as a lawyer but becomes an employee of Goldman Sachs when a firm he works for is acquired.

A machine’s ability to recall billions of facts and historical precedence cannot be matched by the human brain.

One gathers from Blankfein that he believes he is usually the smartest person in the room. Considering his accomplishments, one is inclined to believe he understands his intelligence. However, he realizes being smart is not enough for him to be a good manager. Blankfein finds his intelligence and wit can undermine the effectiveness of his direct reports. As a manager of an organization, Blankfein grows to understand success in any company is based on performance of people who report to you.

The interdependence of cultures.

Every company has a culture. The growing success of Goldman is not because of any singular leader. It is the hiring of people who are ambitious and believe that they can do anything their employment requires. One who is hired by an aggressive company like Goldman has the expectation that they can add to the competitive advantage of its growth as a multinational investment and financial services company. Blankfein recognizes he is among managers that held abilities and ideas that often contradicted each other. The culture requires consensus building for the company to act on decisions to either continue or withdraw from corporate actions. Blankfein realizes persuasion rather than command is what has made Goldman successful. It is not one person’s sense of direction that makes a company a success. A good manager focuses on relationship-building to get the best results from the people who report to him or her.

Relationships are always a work in progress.

Blankfein finds he depends on the persuasive abilities of the people who work in the firm. He argues that being anxious about other’s opinions helps him make considered decisions about the direction of the firm. His role in the company became multifaceted with his recognition of different investments as complementary tools for successful growth. Blankfein realizes he does not know everything and that his style of management is to read people well, not to take his position as an entitlement, and to spot talent in others who have a positive track record in their discipline. One can imagine Blankfein’s personality violates those beliefs in his tenure, but what manager of others is perfect.

One suspects, Blankfein was a difficult person to work for but one who benefited the growth and survival of Goldman Sachs. Goldman Sachs and Blankfein, like many American companies and people, lived through the 2001 Trade Center disaster and the 2008 financial crises because of managers like Blankfein.

The importance of government, as well as corporate leadership.

One sees Blankfein growing as a manager in “Streetwise”. He appears to manage a hyper-vigilant temperament without killing messengers who fail by balancing their successes and potential against failure. He realizes it is necessary to make an investment in the people that report to him and to focus on the synergy of different expertise in the complex world of investment.

AMERICA’S JOURNEY

Today, it seems America has taken a step backward from human equality, but every 4 years gives America another opportunity to step forward. That step forward welcomes equality of opportunity for all who choose to become American.

America has come a long way since 1776, but it is far from the goals that it set for itself in the Constitution.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

American Grammer (Race, Education, and the Building of a Nation)

Author: Jarvis R. Givens

Narration by: Bill Andrew Quinn

Jarvis Givens (Professor and scholar of Education at Harvard)

“American Grammar” is a reminder of America’s past which shows the hard truths of what really made America great. In the 19th and 20th centuries, American government attempts to erase the cultural heritage of tribal nations. At the same time, America disingenuously encourages human slavery based on false claims of racial and gender inequality. This history lives on in America today with faltering efforts to compensate tribes for their cultural and economic losses, and its failure to provide equal opportunity for all.

Too many people fail to read or understand history. Not knowing history makes repeating it a likelihood.

America has become one of the most powerful nations in the world. Beyond the natural abundance of its land, Jarvis Givens explains the decision of America’s leadership to create an educational system to ensure white America’s political and economic success.

An educational system is a key to the door of American political and economic success.

Common education, focused on grammar, melds disparate cultures, races, and genders into one nation. The title of Givens’ book “American Grammar” is a testament to the method America uses to create an independent nation. Educational institutions became indoctrination centers designed to teach citizens a common language and the importance of conforming to a primarily white male system of governance.

American inequality.

All people, as implied by the American Constitution, deserve to have equal opportunity based on their innate ability, I.e., regardless of ethnicity, race, or gender. Givens shows how the wealth of native lands that were stolen, support of slavery, and gender inequality became culturally acceptable in America with an education system designed to indoctrinate the public. Givens’ history reminds listeners that building a great nation is a work in progress for every country. America’s Constitution recognizes the importance of human equality, and its leaders have made some progress toward that goal. However, America is far from the goal of equal opportunity for all.

America steps back and forward toward the goal of equality of opportunity in every political election.

Today, it seems America has taken a step backward from human equality, but every 4 years gives America another opportunity to step forward. That step forward welcomes equality of opportunity for all who choose to become American.