Category: GOVERNMENT

DEFINING FREEDOM

Audio-book Review
 By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight)
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order (America and the World in the Free Market Era)

By: Gary Gerstle

Narrated by: Keith Sellon-Wright

Gary Gerstle (Author, Professor of American History and Fellow in History at Sidney Sussex College, University of Cambridge.)

Gary Gerstle’s history of the “…Neoliberal Order” is tiresome to listen to but gives weight to American belief and practice of freedom regardless of political affiliation or interest group association. Gerstle’s history is tiresome because of its labeling, not because of its historical accuracy. Whether one is a conservative, liberal, or neoliberal is superfluous.

Americans pride themselves on being beacons of freedom when in truth they are opinionated advocates of self-interest hiding behind political labels.

Gerstle’s history shows every President of the United States has been elected by the prevailing sentiment of the time. (To date, Presidents of the United States have always been men because of humanity’s history of misogyny.) The common thread of America’s leaders is their belief in freedom. In America, that freedom is limited by “rule of law” created by two branches of a popularly elected legislature. Sadly, as shown by Gerstle’s history, America’s “rule of law” has historically victimized the powerless and poor.

Belief in freedom has justified slavery, led to a civil war, given America the emancipation proclamation, voting rights for women, and created vituperative media manipulators like Rush Limbaugh, trolls like Alex Jones, and media conglomerates like Fox News.

The difficulty of American democracy is in knowing where to draw the line between freedom and rule of law that regulates excesses and treats all citizens equally. Guilt finally rose to the level for the emancipation proclamation to free slaves, and voting rights for women in 1920, but Black Americans and women are still seeking equal rights.

Gerstle accurately reveals America’s adaptation to the will of an ethnic majority to circumstances of different eras, whether it is enrichment of the rich, preparation for war, recovery from economic depression, or adjustment to the threat of global warming.

The strength of America democracy is its flexibility in dealing with societal change, with the caveat that government tends to protect the status quo.

Communal self-interest changes with the circumstances of its time. Self-interest is immutable in one sense and highly fungible in another. The power of money influences elections and government policy that aids the moneyed, often at the expense of the powerless and poor. Communal self-interest is reenforced by the right to vote but the economic advantage of government policy goes to the rich and middle class because that is where the money is that supports election campaigns.

Gerstle notes that in the 21st century, particularly with the ubiquity of media, the challenge for the public is to know the difference between propaganda, lies, and truth.

Gerstle infers history shows America takes the course of moneyed interests in elections whether it is one or the other of the three challenges to the public. Sadly, propaganda and lies are often believed by the public to be truth.

Gerstle recalls how the flood gate of media technology opens and its flood takes hold of America during the second term of the Clinton administration. Clinton chose to eliminate the Glass-Steagall Act that was designed in 1933 to prevent another Depression.

Clinton recognizes the world is at the precipice of the tech revolution. During the industrial revolution, banks were steered away from volatile equity markets by the Glass-Steagall Act. Clinton, with the help of Republicans like Newt Gingrich, wanted to loosen the chains of investment banks so the technology revolution could blossom. Neither Democratic nor Republic Presidents reversed that decision after the Clinton presidency.

In part, one might argue the near banking collapse in 2008 could have been avoided if the Glass-Stegall Act had been left in force.

Worse, in the 2008 financial debacle, stockholders in at risk banks were bailed out by the Obama government while overstretched homeowners were left with mortgages they could not pay. The rich were bailed out while the poor were bankrupted.

The three banks that failed in May and March of 2023 are arguably a consequence of the volatile investments made in technology companies, a second threat to the banking industry in the 21st century.

The choice of the government in 2023 is to replace depositors’ funds in excess of FDIC limits to avoid the loss of their businesses from the profligate investments by these three banks. The difference between the 2008 bailout and the 2023 government response is bank’ stockholders were not bailed out by the government while other banks took over their portfolios.

Gerstle’s history clearly shows American Democracy’s failures are non-partisan. Both Republican and Democratic leaders fail the poor and powerless populations of America.

That failure is not because of a failure of democracy but because of poorly regulated capitalism. Karl Marx explained democracy is a first step toward communism. One can disagree with that conclusion by noting self-interest is a part of life that makes the ideal of communism unattainable. What is attainable is a democracy that improves public education and mandates business legislation that ensures and enforces social equality and equal opportunity.

American Democracy needs to erase lobbyist, industry, and individual financial donors’ influence on government political campaigns.

Democracy is a work in progress, but it is the best form of government known today. Capitalism is the engine of economic growth that works in all forms of government. In today’s world, capitalism offers the greatest opportunity for humanity in any form of government, but particularly in Democracy.

In the 21st century, it seems democracy is evolving to meld the best of socialism with the self-interest of capitalism.

Democracy struggles with the principles of regulated freedom. Gerstle’s history shows democratic freedom, limited by rule of law, remains at the heart of what can truly make America Great. What gets in the way is the greed of moneyed interests that elect leaders who become dependent on a minority of American society.

Gerstle’s recounts the history of the second Bush’s administration’s misguided and disastrous invasion of Iraq.

The bloody toll of America’s invasion and failed reconstruction of Iraq illustrates the hubris of American belief that democratic freedom works for all nations of the world.

The invasion and reconstruction of Iraq is shown to be an American failure by any measure of societal improvement.

Gerstle shows the election of Donald Trump is a triumph of the disaster of believing American Democratic elections are in the best interest of its citizens. Trump’s administration mocks the ideals of American Democratic government and freedom. Rule of law is a joke to Trump as evidenced by the many indictments and denials of America’s former President. Gerstle notes how unprepared Trump was to become President of the United States.

By any measure, Trump is shown by Gerstle to have damaged America’s image in the world.

Gerstle’s history shows Democracy needs to be regulated by rule of law. Self-interest is unlikely to disappear from human nature which puts all societies at risk. Any form of government can become autocratic but taking the influence of money out of elections leaves hope that citizens of Democratic nations will have a chance to live well, and in peace.

COVID19’S LESSONS

Business competition and innovation create winners and losers but if the field of play is level, society benefits.

Audio-book Review
 By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight)
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Post Corona (From Crises to Opportunity)

By: Scott Galloway

Narrated by: Scott Galloway

Scott Galloway (Author, Professor of Marketing at NYU Stem School of Business, founder of several businesses.)

Scott Galloway is a professor of Marketing at NYU’s business school. He uses his experience and education to explain what happened in America during the Covid19 crises and what it revealed about 21st century capitalism. Galloway briefly writes of his boyhood raised by a divorced mother who profoundly influences his life.

Galloway is a self-professed introvert who is both an entrepreneur and business consultant who believes there is a need for government to revise its relationship with business.

Galloway notes the great power of capitalism is based on freedom to innovate and compete in the world of business. Business produces product and service for the public in return for the cost of doing business and the hope for profit. Galloway’s primary focus is on technology companies that grew from an entrepreneur’s idea to marketplace behemoths. Galloway’s education and experience suggest American government needs to redirect publicly held businesses to change their corporate focus from protecting stockholders to protecting workers.

Galloway argues covid19 accelerated restructuring of the business world.

Business has evolved from face-to-face transaction to internet ordering and delivery. Retail and services industries were gob-smacked by loss of customers who changed their social and purchasing habits because of the contact threat from exposure to the Corona virus that killed over 1,000,000 Americans.

Storied companies like J.C. Penney filed for bankruptcy because they could not adjust to changed social and business environment caused by Covid19. The world is still adjusting to the consequences of the pandemic.

The commercial real estate industry is undoubtedly the next crises for the economy. Having an office or a business away from home became less important with the advent of technology. The internet reduces the requirement of human presence in a central location.

Businesses traditionally driven by touch and feel relationships were made less safe by covid19. With the internet of things and people, it became more convenient for customers to buy product on the internet and work from home. As the threat of covid19 diminished, service industries revived, particularly restaurant and entertainment industries, but on-site retail sales continued to struggle. Exceptions are box stores that offer lower prices or retailers that have mastered the art of internet sales and delivery.

Galloway goes on to note the gap between rich and poor that diminishes human value while increasing wealth of stockholders at the expense of workers.

The median annual income of white families in America in 2019 was $188,200, Black families $24,100 and Hispanic families $36,100. Galloway suggests this unconscionable gap is caused by the failure of government to protect workers rather than stockholders as the business environment changed. Galloway suggests inept regulation by government politicians of the free enterprise economy accelerated the gap between rich and poor.

The election process is unfairly weighted away from public interest toward special interests that contribute huge amounts of money to get people elected that are beholden to their financial supporters.

Government lobbyists paid by energy producers, internet scions, automobile manufacturers, and banks were bailed out with government protection of stockholders with little help for workers who became unemployed.

Covid19 benefited tech companies that have changed the face of business commerce in America. Galloway addresses the technological revolution that was accelerated by covid19. Their stock value accelerated at a faster rate than businesses of the industrial revolution. The tech revolution’s change in commerce was equivalent, if not greater than the agricultural and industrial revolutions of the past. The rate of change for business has been greater and more accelerated by covid19.

Amazon, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and to a lesser extent, Tesla, Netflix, and Twitter (at least prior to Elon Musk’s acquisition) hugely benefited from social isolation caused by covid19.

Galloway optimistically suggests the high cost of education can be reduced by technology. (Maybe, but one wonders about the effectiveness of home schooling during the pandemic. Students fell behind during the pandemic.)

Galloway’s two highlighted potentials of the technology revolution that are not fully realized are education and business. Galloway argues remote learning will improve, and the cost of education will become more competitive and available to the general public. Businesses will become better managed and responsive to the needs of society as better government regulation of the tech age is realized.

The fundamental point made by Galloway is that government needs to change its focus to protection of workers rather than stockholders to realign the gap between rich and poor in the world.

Re-education classes for the unemployed.

Stockholders deserve their fate whether they win or lose the value of their investments, but workers are the driver of business success. Without protection of workers, the American economy will decline, and the influence of democratic capitalism will be diminished. Galloway infers free enterprise in a capitalist society will not regulate itself, but it will improve with prudent government regulation that serves workers first.

Galloway suggests the benefits of socialism will be best served by prudent government regulation of capitalism. Competition and innovation remain the blood and bone of improved economic equality, but workers are undervalued cells of that business foundation.

Galloway acknowledges the benefits of socialism but insists capitalism is the avenue for realization of the best socialism can offer a nation’s citizens. The conjunction of the pandemic and growth of technology have reduced social contact and created harmful media networks that distort truth, attack cultural difference, and exacerbate division and social conflict.

Business competition and innovation create winners and losers but if the field of play is level, society benefits. Moving fast and breaking things is the mantra of the tech world. It is up to government to regulate business to level the playing field. Galloway argues protection of workers, eliminating money’s influence on elections, and allowing stockholders to lose their investment when businesses fail are keys to improving American capitalism.

POLITICAL EVOLUTION

The evolution of political governance offers a kernel of hope for world peace.

Audio-book Review
 By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight)
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Long Game: China’s Grand Strategy to Displace American Order

By: Rush Doshi

Narrated by: Kyle Tait

Rush Doshi (Author, founding director of the Brookings China Strategy Initiative and a fellow in Brookings Foreign Policy, fellow at Yale’s Paul Tsai China Center.

Rush Doshi’s review of China’s history in “The Long Game” is enlightening. One cannot deny the truth and logic of Doshi’s explanation of China’s commitment and success in returning to international prominence. Doshi’s proficiency in Mandarin Chinese and his thorough review of China’s history give credibility and gravitas to his assessment.

Doshi explains China’s socialist belief is grounded in Leninist communist theory. Lenin believed in the Marxist principles of history and society that show materialism leads to human exploitation.

As the Marxist/Leninist argument goes, exploitation (materialist self-interest) will alienate the majority of society which will revolt against a capitalist ruling class. The belief is that a different form of leadership will rise from the ashes of a revolution that will more fairly distribute the riches of life. In China’s history, Mao is the leader of that revolution. The key to Mao’s, and now President Xi’s belief, is top-down leadership by an enlightened ruling class will raise China’s role in the world. Doshi infers President Xi and his 20th century predecessors believe a communist party’s domination will be the basis upon which a fair distribution of life’s riches can be achieved.

Doshi implies the fundamental conflict between China and the U.S. is political.

China believes in Leninist communism. America believes in democracy. The irony is that human self-interest defeats the idealist intent of both political beliefs. Top-down management of a communist party is potentially as damaging to the public as a democratically elected representative government because of self-interest. No communist or democratic government in the history of the world has resisted the lure of money, power, and prestige that accompanies political leadership. This is not to diminish the relevance and importance of Doshi’s book but to disabuse listeners of an undeserved idealization of any form of government.

Doshi gives a clear explanation of why China is suspicious and wary of American power and influence in the world.

Doshi identifies a trifecta of world events in the twentieth century that influence China/American relations; making it unlikely they will ever become allies. The trifecta is the Tiananmen Square massacre, the collapse of the U.S.S.R., and the invasion of Iraq.

Tiananmen Square is widely condemned by the western world and nowhere more loudly than by the American public.

Deng Xiaoping was the Chairman of the Central Military Commission at the time. A secret mission by Brent Scowcroft, President George H.W. Bush’s National Security Advisor, made an effort to calm China/American relations but Doshi explains it failed. China objected to America’s interference and public rebuke of China in their response to the Tiananmen square demonstration.

The second blow to America’s relationship with China is the collapse of the U.S.S.R.

Doshi notes that China and America secretly cooperated in America’s U.S.S.R.’ containment policy that was recommended by American diplomat George Kennan in 1947. When the U.S.S.R. collapsed in 1991, China reassessed their relationship with America. Without a common enemy, China perceived America’s intent is to be hegemon of the world, not just the West. Doshi explains, China’s view of America becomes an imminent threat to its sphere of influence.

With President George W. Bush’s defeat of Saddam Hussein’s army in less than a month and a half, China recognizes how far they were from being the hegemon they wished to be. Doshi suggests this became the third blow of the trifecta that China perceived as an imminent threat to China’s position as hegemon of Asia, if not sole hegemon, of the world.

The irony of Doshi’s history is that no form of government has been found that fairly mitigates self-interest inherent in human beings.

Just as American leaders who have put their personal interest above the interests of their country, Chinese communist leaders have been found to be corrupt and more concerned about themselves than the lives of their country’s people. Both China and America have a history of discrimination and unfair treatment of their citizens.

History has many examples of the graft and corruption that exists in both communist and democratic forms of government.

China’s history and society is unique and much older than America’s. However, each country is struggling with their governments to be better stewards of their citizens. What all national governments of the world forget is that we live on one space ship. Without better international relations, the ship is headed for oblivion. Governments can continue to argue and fight over who is captaining the ship but no government seems to know how to steer.

Sadly, Doshi ends his scholarly work with details of how America can use the same methods as China to block its hegemonic ambition. Perceived self-interest, once again, chooses opposition over cooperation to achieve comity, not peace.

The evolution of political governance offers a kernel of hope for world peace. Until a form of government equitably manages human self-interest, periodic wars and social unrest will continue. Neither China nor America have found an answer. The answer is neither “Big Brother” nor unregulated freedom.

FOSSIL FUELS

Audio-book Review
 By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight)
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Windfall (How the New Energy Abundance Upends Global Politics and Strengthens American Power.)

By: Meghan L. O’Sullivan

Narrated by: Eliza Foss

Meghan L. O’Sullivan (Author, Harvard professor, Former deputy national security adviser on Iraq and Afghanistan, worked in the George Bush administration.)

Meghan O’Sullivan offers an intelligent but flawed view of today’s world. It is true that energy is critical for economic growth and improved human life. It is also true that energy need and development cause international conflicts in the post-industrial world. O’Sullivan does a masterful job explaining the role of energy, noting its cost while explaining fossil fuels are at a turning point in history.

Fossil fuel prices fluctuated dramatically in the 20th century but O’Sullivan suggests the trend in the 21st century, despite the rise between 2000 and 2008, will trend downward for three reasons.

One is the recognition of energy’s environmental consequence and conservationists’ political response; two, energy’s extraction is becoming less costly for most fossil fuels. And three, technological advancement offers alternative sources of energy.

What O’Sullivan correctly notes is that energy will remain a driving force behind international relations.

However, her argument is flawed by suggesting governmental restrictions on discovery and growth of fossil fuels should be weakened. Even in the few years since publication of O’Sullivan’s book, the science of fossil fuel pollution is showing accelerating global warming with potential for a “no-return” human’ consequence. Global warming seems self-evident. That evidence does not change O’Sullivan’s insight to the outsize role energy plays in the real-politic world of today, yesterday, and tomorrow.

O’Sullivan loses a bet with a colleague that Russia would challenge world peace within five years of 2013. She was right, but it took a couple years longer for Russia’s re-invasion of Ukraine.

O’Sullivan correctly foretold Putin’s kleptocratic government’s intent to re-establish Russia’s place in the world by using its fossil fuel abundance to lure Europe and Asia with their need for energy. Putin’s drive to offer oil and/or gas pipelines to Germany, China, and Turkiye are meant to assuage their opposition to Ukraine’s invasion. Though China is somewhat supportive of Putin, it has little to do with its energy need but more to do with China’s opposition to U.S. involvement in their sphere of influence. In response to the Ukraine invasion, Germany found alternative sources for Putin’s pipelined energy with imported LNG (liquified natural gas). To some extent, Putin’s energy ploy worked. China, India, and Turkiye continue to buy oil from Russia despite its invasion of Ukraine. Their national interests outweigh their concern about Russia’s invasion, just as Putin undoubtedly calculated.

Energy’s role in the modern world is well documented by O’Sullivan. She notes the history and future of energy and how it will continue to roil international relations.

The cost of energy influences world leaders to exploit the environment despite its harm to society.

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill.

Coal continues to be burned for energy around the world because it is the least expensive.

Malaysia coal fire plant.

Technological innovation is decreasing natural gas costs which, though less environmental damaging than oil or coal, is becoming more widely used. Natural gas remains a pollutant. It is estimated to be 50-60 percent less polluting than coal and 20-30 percent less polluting than oil. (A caveat to the less pollution from natural gas is that it is being used in newer and more efficient energy producing facilities.) This argument does not change O’Sullivan’s flawed argument that restrictions should be removed, weakened, or moderated for further fossil fuel technological development and extraction.

Weather around the world, forest fires, and northern arctic warming are dramatic 21st century proof of continuing global warming. Science and nature tells us the world is warming. That warming is, at the least, greater because of fossil fuel use.

O’Sullivan remains correct in noting how energy is key to peace in the world. The vast natural gas find by Israel, called the Leviathan Reservoir, makes Israel’s influence in the Middle East much greater. Israelis use their natural gas’ find to improve their relationship with Middle East powers. On the other hand, it seems to give license to Israel to repress dislocated Palestinians as irreconcilable enemies.

Energy is both a weapon and tool of peace.

Where O’Sullivan’s book is less convincing is in its inference that the energy industry should be given free rein to continue developing fossil fuels. Even if energy is critical to the sovereign right of every country in the world, degradation of today’s environment makes fools of us all.

NO GIANTS AMONG US

Audio-book Review
 By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight

Website: chetyarbrough.blog

When Women Ruled the World

The Chancellor

By: Maureen Quilligan By: Kati Marton

Narrated by: Suzanne Torne Narrated by: Alex Allwine, Kati Marton

Maureen Quilligan and Kati Marton illustrate how mistaken society is in forsaking women as leaders of the world. Quilligan argues four famous women “…Ruled the World” in the 16th century. “The Chancellor” addresses one woman who “…Ruled the World” in this century.

Quilligan explains an overriding conflict in the 16th century is a schism in the church. In 1517, Martin Luther posts the 95 Thesis that accuses the Catholic Church of selling indulgences to forgive sin to pave the way to heaven.

During Henry VIII’s reign (1509-1547) his first marriage to Catherine of Aragon does not produce a male heir to the throne. Henry wishes to dissolve his marriage to Catherine and marry Anne Boleyn. However, he needs an annulment from the Pope to marry Boleyn. The Pope resists.

Henry the VIII takes advantage of the growing schism in the church, exemplified by the 95 thesis. At the same time, as some historians note, Henry wishes to confiscate Catholic property in England to replenish the royal treasury. Henry the VIII creates the “Church of England” in 1534 as an alternative to the Papal Church in Rome. The Church of England annuls Henry VIII’s marriage to Catherine and the confiscation of Catholic Church property begins.

With the formation of the Anglican Church, England becomes Protestant which is the faith of Elizabeth I, the daughter of King Henry and Anne Boleyn.

Still, even after the marriage to Boleyn, there is no male heir. Catherine of Aragon remains Catholic, along with her daughter who becomes Queen Mary I of England after Henry’s death. Mary I, as a Catholic, is half sister to Elizabeth I who is Protestant. Mary I rules as a Catholic despite her half sister’s insistence on remaining Protestant.

Quilligan recounts the religious differences between Queen Mary I and Elizabeth, but Quilligan suggests they remain close, bound by their father and their sisterhood.

Queen Mary I of England (1516-1558)

Upon the death of Mary I, Elizabeth I ascends the throne as a Protestant Queen replacing England’s Catholic Queen. Quilligan explains religious differences were important but Mary I and Elizabeth I maintain a sister to sister relationship despite there religious difference. Quilligan implies Elizabeth I knew that maintaining a good relationship with Mary meant she would one day become Queen of England.

Quilligan then turns to Scotland’s monarch. Scotland’s history shows Mary Queen of Scots is a committed Catholic leader. She brutally persecutes Protestants during her reign and becomes known as “bloody Mary”.

Mary Queen of Scots (1542-1587)

Quilligan characterizes the relationship between Mary Queen of Scots, and Elizabeth I as friendly (almost sisterly), but a plot to assassinate Elizabeth I leads to the beheading of Mary Queen of Scots. The irony of that act is that Elizabeth paves the way for Prince James, the son of Mary Queen of Scots, to become James I, King of England after Elizabeth’s death.

The beheading of Mary Queen of Scots is said to have required two strokes with the first not completely severing her head. To some, Mary Queen of Scots became a martyr.

Elizabeth is known as the virgin queen but her sister-like relationship with the beheaded Scottish Queen gave Elizabeth a somewhat motherly relationship with James. However, Elizabeth (after her long reign) refuses to identify an heir at her death. Other historians note that James I ascends the throne by presumption and selection by remaining leaders of England, after Elizabeth’s death. Quilligan notes James I is a committed Protestant rather than a Catholic like his mother.

Maureen Quilligan’s history is less convincing about women who ruled the world because it relies on recollected details from scant original documents and facts proffered by other historians.

Quilligan’s book about women that ruled the 16th century world seems hyperbolic and only marginally convincing. Quillian’s argument for at least one woman of the 16th century who ruled the world is credible–based on Elizabeth I’s long reign and her acclaim by most historians.

Quilligan explains Elizabeth I, Mary I, Mary Queen of Scots of (bloody Mary), and Queen Catherine de’ Medici of France are world leaders.

Queen Catherine de’ Medici (1519-1589)

They were leaders in the 16th century but the author’s reported facts only fit the book’s catchy title. Quilligan’s history fails to convince listener/readers that women ruled the 16th century world. Spain is noted as the strongest world power of the 16th century. Spain was largely ruled by Kings with only one Queen (Queen Isabella) who ruled for four years of the 16th century.

In contrast to Quilligan’s the gathered historical facts of 16th century leadership by women, Kati Marton has the good fortune of first person interviews of Angela Merkel’s leadership in the 21st century.

There are boat loads of original source material that confirm Merkel is a great ruler of the world. Merkel serves Germany while 3 Presidents (George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump) are elected in the U.S. Marton convincedly explains why Merkel is a great woman leader of the 21st century world. Marton explains how Merkel comes to power in Germany. Merkel’s remarkable rise beggars imagination.

The fall of the Berlin wall in 1989 reunites Germany.

Merkel is raised in East Germany as a scientist, fluent in Russian and German, and then as an English speaker, when she chooses to become a national politician. In 16 years Merkel, an unknown quantum chemist, becomes leader of the third wealthiest country in the world with only the U.S. and Japan having higher GNPs.

Marton notes Helmut Kohl is Chancellor of West Germany when the Berlin Wall is taken down. Kohl became Chancellor of the entire country in 1990 (originally elected in 1982) and remained Chancellor until 1998.

Kohl recognized the political value of Merkel early in her political career. She represented East Germany’s zeitgeist because she lived the life of an East German. When Kohl loses the Chancellorship to Gerhard Schroeder, the table is set for Merkel to challenge Schroder for Germany’s seat of power.

Kohl’s last race is against Schroeder. Kohl is expected to be reelected. An exposed financial scandal ruins Kohl’s chance. He is beaten by Gerhard Schroeder.

Gerhard Schroeder (Former Chancellor of Germany.)

Marton explains what you see is what you get with Angela Merkel. Though much of Merkel’s rise in politics is due to Helmut Kohl’s support and sponsorship, she forthrightly and publicly criticizes Kohl for using an intricate web of secret bank accounts to illicitly finance the party that had got him elected. Schroeder beats Kohl but is challenged by Merkel for Chancellor in 2005. Schroder loses re-election and Merkel becomes the first woman in history to become Chancellor of Germany.

Marton explains how Merkel abjures the macho machinations of Vladimir Putin and directly confronts Putin’s lies about Russia’s Ukraine incursion in 2014.

Marton shows Merkel is not a glib politician but a highly intelligent leader, with immense energy, who does what she believes has to be done. Merkel is shown to be an independent thinker who represses her emotions when confronted with the exigencies of political conflict.

Marton goes on to explain her admiration of George H.W. Bush, and Mikhail Gorbachev and their support of independence. In the beginning of Obama’s administration, Merkel initially feels Obama talks a good game but she reserves judgement until she sees positive results. Merkel grows to respect Obama’s intelligence and what he accomplishes but nearly breaks with him when she finds her personal cell phone had been tapped by the U.S.

Marton shows the humanity of Merkel by noting her decision to accept 1,000,000 Muslim refugees from the war torn Middle East in 2015.

Thousands of German citizens welcomed the refugees and offered clothes, food, and support. At the same time there is German opposition to Muslim immigration. Merkel notes the human need of her action but also explains the value of the refugees to an ageing German population that needs more young workers.

Marton’s book reveals a concern that Merkel has about the hardening of German opposition to non-German immigrants. Merkel’s concern is the rise of a right wing party like that which brought Hitler to power.

Marton reveals one of Merkel’s speeches in Israel that addresses the Holocaust. Marton implies it is the first speech by a German Chancellor in Israel since WWII.

Marton implies Merkel views Trump as trouble for American democratic values.

Marton gives some insight to reader/listeners on Merkel’s perception of Trump. Trump reinforces beliefs of right wing Germans by denigrating immigrants and supporting right wing authoritarians like Putin in Russia and Pen in France.

One comes away from Marton’s book with admiration for Angela Merkel. Merkel appears to be one of the few politicians in the world that have a “superior perception of reality”, a phrase made famous by the American political strategist Lee Atwater. (One may like the phrase but Atwater is considered by some as the most devious campaign strategist in America. He played a role in electing Republicans Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Atwater died in 1991 at the age of 40.)

What both Quilligan and Marton make clear is that the world loses half the world’s intelligence and capability by not recognizing women are equals of men. There are no giants among us. We are all human, neither omniscient nor unerringly correct.

HUMANE WAR

Audio-book Review
 By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight)
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Humane (How the United States Abandoned Peace and Reinvented War)

By: Samuel Moyn

Narrated by: Stephen R. Thorne

Samuel Moyn (Author, Chancellor Kent Professor of Law and History at Yale University.)

Sameul Moyn’s “Humane” shows America is one of many passengers on a train bound for Armageddon. The idea of a humane war is oxymoronic. War cannot, by definition be humane. There is no denying America’s war against Indians, Filipinos, Japanese, and Germans, with a history of mass violence against Blacks and other American minorities, is inhumane. The reasons for war’s violence range from defense of country to racism, to self-interest, to greed, i.e., the ingredients of human nature. From the crusades of Catholics against Muslims to persecution of Jews through the ages, to today’s Palistinian/Israli mayhem, inhumanity seems an integral part of the human condition.

Though Samuel Moyn makes war’s atrocity clear, it is odd to suggest America has reinvented the definition of war. The definition of war has never changed.

War is a conflict between power elites and the powerless. Though Moyn suggests President Obama revises nation-state war to be more humane, the tools of surreptitious killing by drone is just another weapon of war. It can as easily kill or injure the innocent as a WWI propeller driven dirigible dropping a bomb on an alleged enemy combatant. There will always be collateral damage. War boils down to a government leaders’ political strength whether he/she is President of Russia, America, China, or some other military power. Mistakes will always be made. Misjudgment and misperception are part of being human. Innocents will always die in war.

In accusation, Moyn’s history is an excellent reminder of war’s brutality. It is valuable to be reminded of war’s atrocity and stupidity, particularly in the face of Putin’s Ukraine invasion and attempt to recreate the U.S.S.R.

The galling part of Moyn’s reference to President Obama is to imply America is a lesser villain than other nation-states leaders by reinventing war, subject to rule-of-law. As the election of Trump proves, rational intelligent leadership is never guaranteed in democracy. The idea of targeted strikes in the hands of a Trump rather than an Obama is hard evidence of the ridiculous belief in humaneness of war.

War was designed by human nature to become more lethal with the science of many nations.

There is no reinvention of a humane war by any nation-state, let alone America. The only change in war is in scale, i.e., weapons of mass destruction have geometrically increased the number of human beings that can be murdered, wounded, or victimized by war’s execution. Science has added to potential world destruction with bigger nuclear bombs and viral research that could end life on earth, with many nations’ culpability. The point is America is just another player among nations that carry the risk of corruption of power, not to be an inventor of humane wars but to become hegemons of what they believe is their world. War is never humane.

Moyn recalls the history of George W. Bush’s decision to start a war on terror in response to the destruction of the World Trade Center.

Few Americans, if any, can forget or forgive those who perpetrated that heinous act. To prepare a response, the Bush Administration promoted the USA PATRIOT ACT. To some, that ACT violated American civil rights.

Considering Moyn’s history of the creation and legal defense of the USA PATRIOT ACT, rule-of-law is merely a matter of picking the right attorney to get the result a President wants.

That is what the Department of Justice leader John Ashcroft did in choosing John Yoo. Moyn explains Yoo’s family came from Korea, with their son having become a Harvard graduate and lawyer working for the government. Moyn implies Yoo’s success in America and his family’s knowledge of North Korean repression influenced John Yoo’s legal opinion of the PATRIOT ACT. Legal opinion is a fungible skill based on the biases of its writers.

Being humane is in the eye of the beholder whether the beholder is moral or amoral.

Government leaders may represent a nation or a faction of people, but unless one believes in “the arc of the moral universe” as originated by Theodore Parker in the 19th century (made modern by Martin Luther King in the 20th century), the world will continue to have wars; all of which become inhumane.

The Anti-Christian

Audio-book Review  By Chet Yarbrough

 

Blog: awalkingdelight) Website: chetyarbrough.blog

 

The Four Books

By: Yan Lianke, Translated by Carlos Rojas

Narrated by: George Backman

Yan Lianke (Chinese author of novels and short stories based in Beijing. Received the Franz Kafka Prize in 2014. Winner of the Man Booker International Prize twice.)
“The Four Books” is a satire exposing the fallibility of belief in a Christian God. Yan Lianke is a Chinese author living in Beijing whose books and short stories are banned by the government.
Lianke’s book satirizes most religions and government leaders.
The main character in Lianke’s story is called “Author” who is charged with responsibility for two of “The Four Books”. Two books are titled “criminal records” and “secret reports” written by “Author” for a camp commandant to know who and what everyone is thinking and doing in a prison camp. The other two books are less clearly identified but there is the “Scholar’s” book and presumably, the Christian Bible. The main characters in Lianke’s book are the “Boy”, the “Scholar”, the “Musician”, and the “Author”.
The character named “Author” reports thoughts and actions of fellow re-education prisoners in return for special privileges. The “Boy” is the camp commandant. The “Scholar”, “Musician”, and “Author” are college educated prisoners, along with other city intellectuals, who are sent to re-education camps in the country. Their jobs are to farm the land and manufacture steel from black sand deposits in the country. The idea is to re-educate scholars on the importance of serving the economic advancement of their country with labor, rather than thought.
The setting of Lianke’s story is the Chinese famine during the “Great Leap Forward” which occurred between 1958 and 1962.
Neither the “Great Leap Forward” nor Mao are mentioned in Lianke’s book. Undoubtedly it is because of personal risk that such mention might have for Lianke. However, “The Four Books” universal appeal goes beyond Mao’s mistakes in China.
Most, if not all, religions and governments fail to provide an economic and social environment in which prosperity and peace can be equitably maintained.
Lianke chooses one period in China’s history as an example of religions’ and governments’ failure to peacefully guide or manage society. Undoubtedly, Lianke chooses China’s story because that is the culture he most intimately understands.
Lianke shows how religion and government ineptly handle human nature.
Whether one is rich, poor, formally educated, or uneducated–the masculine, feminine, neuter, and common person is motivated by self-interest. Religions and governments have tried to deal with human nature by preaching belief in something greater than the individual. Religions have threatened, cajoled, and forgiven society in a vain attempt to control human self-interest. Governments have done the same with similar mixed and failed results. “The Four Books” uses the history of the “Great Leap Forward” because human nature is at its worst in times of great upheaval.
What Lianke reveals is the reality of human nature when neither religion nor government forthrightly deals with human nature under stress. The philosophy of leadership in “The Four Books” is to mandate economic development at whatever cost society is compelled or willing to bear. The choice of China’s leadership is to turn all formally educated urban citizens into rural workers by moving them from whatever jobs they may have had to jobs needed by leadership to rapidly advance China’s economic growth. Little consideration is given to the self-interest of individuals by government leaders’ preaching “the good of the country”.
What Lianke’s story shows is that government uses the same tools as organized religion to advance institutional rather than the self-interests of its people.
Religion preaches heaven, like government preaches economic growth. Religion and government do not deal with realities of today but with a future to be realized. Human beings are viewed as means to an end rather than ends in themselves.
There is no supreme God or deity in Buddhist’ teaching.
Is it possible to serve society with a belief system that equitably treats individual self-interest? Lianke implies Christian religion, other religions, and government cannot offer a solution. However, Lianke implies Buddhism may be a solution. A Buddhist, in contrast to other religions or governments, seeks enlightenment in this world through an individual’s search for inner peace and wisdom. Lianke’s answer to individual self-interest is Buddhist belief in achievement of inner peace and wisdom.
The weakness in Lianke’s argument is that self-interest is an individual human characteristic. Self-interest is unlikely to be erased by Buddhism, Taoism, any religion, or government. Buddhist and Taoist beliefs do not ameliorate aberrant self-interests (most common in human beings) that deviate from those wishing and trying to seek peace and wisdom through Buddhism or Taoism. It may be that there are two types of self-interest, one hostile and the other enlightened. Of course, the weakness of the second is the same as the first. Can human nature, any religion, or government elicit enlightenment?
Self-interest can generate great economic wealth but when unregulated it diminishes peace and often leads to unwise choices and ends. History shows neither government, deistic religion, or contemplation of the “Way” moderates nor contains individual self-interest. A governing system of checks and balances may be a step in moderating and containing self-interest, but it (at best) is a work in progress.
Lianke shows in a famine, self-interest offers two choices. Either one gives up or fights for survival. There is no middle ground.
Self-interest in a famine leads some to prostitute themselves, murder their equals, inferiors or superiors, and become cannibalistic or some combination thereof. No widely accepted religion or government seems to have found a solution to equitably treat individuals’ self-interest. Lianke believes Buddhism may be an answer, but one wonders how an individual’s search for peace and wisdom will feed the hungry.

GOVERNMENT IDEALISM

Audio-book Review 
By Chet Yarbrough 

Blog: awalkingdelight) 
Website: chetyarbrough.blog 

Cuba (An American History) 

By: Ada Ferrer 

Narrated by: Alma Cuervo, Ada Ferrer- prologue. 

Ada Ferrer (Author, historian, winner of the Pulitzer Prize for her American History of Cuba.)

Ada Ferrer’s “Cuba” offers an insightful history of Cuba. She reveals how this island nation became a Spanish and American obsession and explains its complicated relationship with the world and America. In Cuba, Columbus finds three Indigenous inhabitants, the Tainos, the Ciboneys, and the Guanajatabeyes. Though Columbus may have tasted the sweetness of sugarcane, he was looking for gold and failed to appreciate sugar’s commercial value.  

The Italian explorer, Christopher Columbus, lands in Cuba on his historic and misguided exploration of the Western world in 1492.

Ferrer notes Spanish conquistador, Diego Cuellar, arrives in 1511 to establish a Spanish settlement in Baracoa, Cuba.

Spain becomes the de facto ruler of this island, less than four hundred miles off Florida’s coast. With Cuba’s declaration of independence in 1868, Spain’s control is challenged by years of Cuban rebellion until American intervention in 1898. Spain had colonized and controlled Cuba for over three hundred years. In 1898, America declares war on Spain and ejects Spain’s suzerainty in the Spanish-American War. However, Cuba fails to become truly independent until 1902 when the U.S. ends its military occupation. Ferrer notes in the years between 1898 and 1902, American leaders like John Quincy Adams covet American assimilation of Cuba. However, Cubans had other ideas.  

Ferrer infers Cubans felt the same about America’s control of Cuba as they did of Spain’s. With liberation of Cuba in 1898, America chose to appoint the same Spanish bureaucrats to manage the country as when Spain controlled Cuba.

America influences election of a President of Cuba’s new Republic by supporting Thomas Palma. Palma lasts for 4 years. In general, Ferrer implies Cubans were glad to see America withdraw in 1909. However, American withdrawal is tempered by the Platt Amendment that would allow American military intervention if American leadership believed Cuban independence was at risk. 

Cuba neglected to form a government that could or would govern the inherent self-interest of human beings.

Failure to understand human self-interest exacerbates the economic challenge of the Great Depression. The first act of one of Cuba’s kleptocrats in the early 1930s is to pilfer the treasury, escape to America, and build what became known as “Little Havana” in Florida; leaving Cuba without funds to govern their newly formed government. 

Meyer Lansky (1902-1983) Organized Crime Figure specialized in Gambling
Lucky Luciano (1897-1962) Mafia Crime Boss

Cuba’s kleptocratic government copes through the years of the depression to become fertile ground for the American mob, led by Lucky Luciano and Myer Lansky. Lansky meets with Batista and hands over suitcases of money to cement a relationship between the mob and the Cuban government. Lansky establishes a Cuban gambling industry and makes Cuba a transportation hub for illegal drug distribution. 

Ferrer notes at times in history, the conflict between Black and white citizens becomes as violent in Cuba as in America.  

In subsequent years, Cuba writes a new constitution that theoretically guarantees social equality but fails to enforce its idealistic intentions. Considering Ferrer’s studied and detailed history of Cuba’s government struggles, a reader/listener recognizes the wisdom of America’s founding fathers in creating a government of checks and balances. One realizes Cuba runs through several Presidents that fail to achieve the ideals of their Constitution. The ideal of equality among men and women of all races and creeds, though preached in both Cuba and America, is not achieved in either country.

Ferrer recounts the story of Lucky Luciano carrying suitcases filled with money to corrupt Batista’s government to transform Havana into a mecca for gambling and prostitution. 

Fulgencio Batista (1901-1973) U.S. backed dictator of Cuba.

After a series of difficulties in the economy, Fulgencio Batista becomes President in 1940 and again in 1955 after a seven-year interregnum with two other Cuban Presidents.

Ferrer notes Cuba in later days of Batista and during the depression is a kleptocratic state. The failure to establish a government that serves its people rather than its corrupt leaders, and Batista’s cruel administration set the table for citizen’s discontent and rebellion. That discontent led to Fidel Castro’s rise to power in 1976. 

Fidel Castro (1926-2016) Photograph in 1959. Castro served as President and then Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba but always considered himself a Socialist.

Ferrer clearly explains Castro was a committed revolutionary socialist, not a communist. Castro makes the same mistake China and Russia are making in understanding the economics of Karl Marx. This is not to say Marx is right about the evolution of government but that the ideal of a socialist’s or communist’s success is dependent upon economic growth. Without wealth, there is no equity to equally distribute.  

Ferrer shows Castro to be an idealist, a person committed to the equality of humanity but unable to create the economic viability needed for socialism to work.

Fidel Castro is both revered and reviled by Cubans, let alone many Americans. The inherent self-interest of humanity makes socialism and communism an ideal, not a reality. Neither China, Russia, nor Cuba, seem to understand, as Marx infers–to become either a socialist or communist state, a state must begin with capitalism.  

Self-interest will always interfere with the idealism of socialism and communism. The missing requirement of all forms of government is the perfection of checks and balances that can fairly mitigate inherent human self-interest. 

“Cuba” is an excellent historical account that illustrates the strength and weakness of autocratic leaders and government idealism.  Ferrer’s work deserved the Pulitzer Prize.

RISK OF DEMOCRACY

Audio-book Review
 By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight)
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Hubert Humphrey (The Conscience of the Country)

By: Arnold A. Offner

Narrated by: Jonathan Yen

Arnold A. Offner (Author, American historian, president of the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations.)

Arnold Offner offers a biography of Hubert Humphrey, a former Minneapolis, Minnesota Mayor, U.S. Senator, and Vice President of the United States. Offner notes Humphrey ran for President in 1960 but was defeated by John F. Kennedy.

Hubert Humphrey (1911-1978, died at age 66, V.P. 1965-1969, Senator 1971-78)

What makes this biography interesting is that few American V.P.s are remembered, let alone biographized. The V.P.s who are remembered are only those who become Presidents. Even then, most American Vice Presidents are not remembered. Three exceptions are Theodore Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and Lyndon Johnson.

There are 16 V.P.s to become Presidents of the United States. Out of 46 Presidents, 16 V.P.s (approximately 34%) became President. Eight became President because of a President’s death in office.

  1. John Tyler-Only 1 month as V.P. when William Harrison died from an illness contracted at his inauguration.
  2. Millard Fillmore became President after the death 1.5 years into Zachary Taylor’s presidency.
  3. Andrew Johnson replaced Abraham Lincoln.
  4. Chester A. Arthur replaced James Garfield after he was assassinated by Charles Guiteau, only 6 months after serving as President.
  5. Theodore Roosevelt replaced William McKinley in his second term when he was assassinated by an anarchist.
  6. Calvin Coolidge replaced Warren Harding who died halfway through in first term.
  7. Harry S. Truman replaced Franklin Roosevelt after he had served 3 months in his 3rd term.
  8. Lyndon B. Johnson replaced John Kennedy after his assassination.

The strength of democracy is in a candidates’ skill in representing the will of his/her supporters. The weakness of democracy is in a candidates’ dependence on the wealth of special interests that contribute to their candidacy.

Humphrey’s biography is an interesting example of the strength and weakness of American Democracy. On the one hand, one person can change the course of democratic government.  On the other hand, a candidate for President cannot be elected without the support of people and businesses that contribute a lot of money.

Money comes with strings. The influence of special interests and the power of elected representatives distort objectivity.

Offner shows the choice of running mates for Vice President in an American democracy is based on two qualities. The first is how a V.P. candidate increases voter base for the prospective President. The second is the skill that a V.P. may have in rallying political support for the President’s ticket. V.P.s in their positions as possible President replacements have little visibility to the public. Vice Presidents are forgotten in public memory unless they become President. Even as Presidents, if they fail to become impactful, they are forgotten.

Offner shows Humphrey wished to be President, but he had little chance of achieving that goal for two reasons.

One, he did not come from a wealthy family and two, his political base came from his experience as a mayor of Minneapolis, Minnesota and as a relatively new Senator for the State. Though Offner shows Humphrey had great political skill, his only realistic avenue to the Presidency is by being Vice President.

Offner shows Humphrey as a prime mover in civil rights.

Fight for civil rights is not shown as a singular political maneuver but a lifelong pursuit by Humphrey. Offner shows how Humphrey became a civil rights leader in his home State. After becoming Vice President, Humphrey successfully pushed for the greatest civil rights legislation since Reconstruction after the civil war.

The importance of money in American elections is made clear when Humphrey runs for President against John Kennedy. The wealth of the Kennedy family doomed Humphrey’s chances.

Humphrey is characterized as an indefatigable debater and negotiator in a Congress held hostage by a 2/3’s cloture rule that gave civil rights legislation little chance of passage because of southern opposition. With the help of Mike Mansfield, the Democratic Senate Majority Leader, Humphrey maneuvers the Senate to approve the Civil Rights Act of 1964 despite the 2/3s cloture rule. It prohibited discrimination in public places, provided for integration of schools and other public facilities. It also made employment discrimination illegal.  

Then Offner’s subject becomes the great escalation of American involvement in Vietnam. Offner explains Lyndon Johnson made the decision to turn America’s military role into a pro-active rather than defensive action. Johnson deployed over 23,000 soldiers to Vietnam.

American involvement in Vietnam did not begin with Johnson. America’s entry into Vietnam began soon after WWII because of America’s paranoia over Russian Communist infiltration in Asia and the 1950s growth of the Viet Minh’ guerillas. The Viet Minh were a guerrilla force led by Ho Chi Minh to contest French colonization of Vietnam. The Viet Minh were supported by both Stalin and Mao and their respective communist beliefs.

After Johnson’s American expansion into North Vietnam, Offner notes Ho Chi Minh demanded total withdrawal of America, the right of South Vietnam to vote on whether they wished to be a part of one country, and Vietnam to be left to govern their own territory.

Ho Chi Minh (1890-1969, died at age 79, President of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.)

These terms were unacceptable to Johnson. Retrospectively, that would have been the best, least costly, and most diplomatic action that could have been taken by America.

Offner explains President Johnson requires his Vice President, above all, to be loyal. Offner shows Humphrey was loyal, at least until 1965, when he sent a memorandum to Johnson recommending an exit strategy. Johnson ignores Humphrey’s memorandum. The rest is history. Therein lies the risk of Democracy in America.

The checks and balances of Democracy fail to protect America from the mistakes of Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan because money and power influence Democratic elections, policies, and Presidents. This is the risk both Republican and Democratic Presidents have noted. (Dwight Eisenhower’s comments about the Military/Industrial Complex, and Barack Obama’s address to the Senate on campaign finance reform.)

The last chapters of Offner’s book recount the race for the Presidency after Johnson’s speech saying he will not run for another term. Humphrey chooses to run for President with Muskie as his choice for V.P. In the end, Humphrey and Muskie are defeated with the return to political office of Richard Nixon and his soon to be revealed corrupt V.P., Spiro Agnew.

As Churchill noted in 1947, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”

HINDSIGHT (G.W.’S LEGACY)

Audio-book Review
 By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight)
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Landfall (A Novel)

By: Thomas Mallon

Narrated by: Robert Petkoff

Thomas Mallon (Author, novelist, essayist, and critic.)

Thomas Mallon’s book is a fictionalized account of George W. Bush’s administration. Mallon cleverly includes a fictional love story that adds some drama to his story. What one should be wary of is Mallon’s political bias and how it might color the story.

In listening to a book of fiction that uses the names of the known, it is difficult to separate fact from fiction.

Fictionalizing history-making characters is particularly difficult when it is written about events of the near past. What helps is the knowledge that all history books are partly fictionalized by choice of an author’s facts. Revisionist history is why past Presidents have both risen and fallen in the eyes of historians and the public.

George W. Bush makes some bad decisions as a young man, but more importantly and significantly, as a two-term President.

The son of former President H. W. Bush comes across as a decent and flawed human being. America’s consequence from Iraq and Afghanistan invasions and George W.s response to Katrina show American government hubris and failure. Mallon’s story shows American’s fallibility as a democratic government. Both Republican and Democratic parties in America have made good and bad domestic and international decisions; some of which have been reversed, others not.

Mallon writes of the difficulty of working through America’s deadly mistakes in Iraq.

Mallon chooses to write a fictional account of the bad decisions made by President George W. Bush. Some of us have short memories but Mallon reminds listeners of the last four years of George W.’s Presidency. Some in Bush’s administration reluctantly suggest America must withdraw from the mess America created by removing Iraq’s autocratic and brutal dictator, Saddam Hussein. Some of George W.’s leaders were misled (or lied to themselves) about Iraq’s threat of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). No one in George W.’s administration manages to persuade policy makers that American nation-building in foreign cultures is a fool’s errand.  

Autocratic governments know little about what it means to be free, or at least free within the rule of law.

Mallon creates a story that implies there is a great deal of descension in the second term of George W.’s administration. This is particularly evident in the intellectual conflict between the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, and Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice. There is a growing recognition by leaders in the administration, that America could not re-build Iraq’s government. Rumsfeld may have suggested immediate withdrawal of American troops from Iraq with political spin that infers America’s job is done.  The President and Secretary of State Rice realize the Presidency and American resolve is tarnished by withdrawal, whether it is militarily or diplomatically accomplished. Mallon’s novel concludes G.W.’s legacy is the Iraq debacle and the mishandling of the Katrina disaster in Louisiana.

Katrina disaster in Louisiana

As time passes and history is rewritten, Mallon’s conclusions are likely to be repeated. Neither George W. Bush, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, nor Secretary Rice will be remembered as great leaders. It is not judgement about their patriotism or their desire to make America safer or better, but a consequence of political mistakes.

George W’s administration fails to understand nation-building is folly, and natural disasters are not about the dead but about quick and organized aid to survivors. Mallon’s book is a reminder of how difficult it is for any organization’s leader to become great in the eyes of history.