HISTORY – Page 17 – REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE

CAPITALISM’S DEATH?

Democratic capitalism is the most likely form of government to assuage our worry and find a rational solution for our right to privacy.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“TECHNO-FEUDALISM” (What Killed Capitalism)

By: Yanis Varoufakis

Narrated by: Yanis Varoufakis

Yanis Varoufakis (Author, Greek economist and politician, Minister of Finance of Greece for 7 months in 2015, launched Diem25, the “Democracy in Europe Movement 2025” in February 2016.)

Yanis Varoufakis’s “Techno-Feudalism” argues the advance of technology is killing capitalism. Varoufakis’s argument is that democratic capitalism is either dying or dead. He suggests a survival plan in the last chapter of his book. This misguided book reminds one of Mark Twain’s response to news of his illness, i.e., “The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated”.

Varoufakis argues the advance of technology and its intrusion into private lives of citizens will destroy freedom of the individual and result in a government ruled by authoritarian, undemocratic, feudal oligarchs.

Varoufakis infers technology is the cause of the rise of new robber barons that have struck it rich in the internet era. He largely disparages the great wealth accumulation by the founders of Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Apple, and other tech leaders in the 21st century. His argument is based on belief that these new robber barons became rich without the hard work of laborers like those during the industrial revolution. The error in his argument is that labor is adjusting from work with one’s hands to work with one’s mind.

Freedom is the keystone of democracy.

Freedom and democracy have been limited and abused over the centuries but have ultimately led to the wealthiest countries in the world. When freedom is overregulated by democratic leadership, economic progress is diminished. Democracy has historically mitigated mistakes of overregulation with human nature’s desire for freedom. There is no reason to believe human nature will change.

In one sense, Varoufakis’s argument is correct. There is a greater risk of loss of freedom with the advance of technology, i.e., particularly with the rise of artificial intelligence. The evidence of that risk is seen in China and North Korea’s surveillance capabilities today.

Authoritarian leadership has always been a risk to society.

As inferred by Varoufakis, authoritarian risk is greater in the 21st century because of surveillance technology and the predictive power of artificial intelligence. Surveillance does not change the nature of humankind. Democratic government only becomes more important. The juggernaut of technology will not be stopped, and our lives will be more intimately understood by strangers than ever before. That truth only means democracy, freedom of choice, and equal opportunity are made more consciously recognized as important.

The fact that the 21st century has new robber barons, business leaders with great wealth and power, is nothing new.

All forms of government have winners and losers. What democracy does is level the playing field. It is a raucous governing system that leaves some out of success, but it beats any known alternative for broader human opportunity. Democracy will always be a work in progress. America needs better health care for all citizens. America needs improvement in equal rights and opportunity for all citizens. No Americans should be homeless or hungry. Few countries, if any, have adequate health care, equal rights, and opportunities for all its citizens. Most realize, America must do better.

The resurgence of labor unions in America is a good sign for American peace and prosperity.

Varoufakis suggests democracy can be saved by bringing it down to an individual level within companies that generate wealth for the country. In one sense, he is right but his idea of giving one vote to every employee in determining wages, and the direction of a company are a step too far. Labor is a critical part of yesterday’s, today’s, and tomorrow’s economic prosperity. Owners and managers of companies need to include union representation in their corporate decisions. Neither labor nor management have all the answers, but all have money, commitment, and labor in the game. Each should have their say. That is a part of Democracy’s success in the world.

The intimate knowledge of personal behavior is a valid concern in the modern world. In the hands of authoritarians, the risks of surveillance technology are multiplied. In democracy, risks are not eliminated but can be judiciously regulated. Democracy has the best chance of determining how a surveillance economy needs to be handled. Democracy will continue to make mistakes, but historically, its successes outweigh its failures.

Citizens should worry about what others know about their personal lives, but the advance of technology will not be stopped. Democratic capitalism is the most likely form of government to assuage our worry and find a rational solution for our right to privacy. Varoufakis’s “Techno-Feudalism” is more wrong than right, but he makes one think about our future.

POWER & INTRIGUE

Lessons may be drawn into the 21st century by the power and intrigue of the 16th century.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“The Mirror and the Light” (Seven Hundred Years of Humanist Freethinking, Inquiry, and Optimism)

By: Hilary Mantel

Narrated by: Ben Miles

Hilary Mantel (1952-2022, British author, Booker Prize winner acclaimed for historical fiction like the Thomas Cromwell trilogy. Died at the age of 70.)

Historical fiction is a valuable tool when combined with a research-driven imagination. Hiliary Mantel’s trilogy, “Wolf Hall”, “Bring Up the Bodies”, and “The Mirror and the Light”, offer a fascinating picture of Thomas Cromwell.

Thomas Cromwell (1485-1540. English statesman, and lawyer, died at age 54 or 55.)

Thomas Cromwell has been labeled as a dictator by some and a hero of liberty by others. He gained a reputation as a consummate power broker and political advisor, but some consider his protestant religious convictions bordered on zealotry. The famous Winston Churchill disparaged Cromwell’s role in England’s 16th century as a dictator. Winston Churchill was an aristocrat from a wealthy family. One is inclined to think Churchill would have been one of many noblemen in King Henry’s time that would have disparaged Cromwell for being the son of a blacksmith. Mantel’s historical fiction envisions Cromwell as a brilliant political tactician who initiated democratization of England’s government. (By democratization, one must recognize Cromwell believed the King’s decisions were paramount, but that monarchy is limited by dependence on consent.) Far from being a dictator, Mantel shows Cromwell was an astute leader of men superior to him in rank but beneath him in ability.

Henry VIII (1491-1547, King of England from 1509-1547, died at the age of 55.)

Many views of Henry VIII and Thomas Cromwell have been offered by historians. One is that the King was a great sportsman who enjoyed participating in violent competitions like jousting. Mantel mentions one of those events when the King is unhorsed and appears dead from the impact of an opponent’s lance. The King is unconscious for some time and is pounded on the chest by an attendant that brings him back to consciousness. This is later in his reign, possibly after the beheading of Anne Boleyn. One wonders if his many marriages are in part because of something more than want of a male heir. There is little doubt that a male heir was extremely important, but six wives seem extreme and his decision to execute Cromwell unjust.

Some fundamental truths about King Henry VIII’s era make Mantel’s fictionalized history easier to follow.

King Henry needed money to expand and sustain his monarchy. His greatest opportunity to gain wealth was in confiscation of assets held by the papist Church in England. The King and Cromwell opposed the idea of the Roman Catholic Church’s influence on England’s affairs. Papal opposition was reinforced by Cromwell’s Calvinist beliefs, aligned with England’s Puritan radicals who offered support for history’s course of events. The King needed money. Cromwell’s Puritan and political beliefs coincided with the monarchy’s needs.

Anne Boleyn (Born 1501 or 1507, beheaded in 1536 at age 29 or 35.)

A second fundamental truth is that Anne Boleyn was unable to give the King a surviving male heir. One might question Boleyn’s alleged affairs, but her motives were obscured by history. Maybe Boleyn simply exercised her libido in the same way men often did and still do. On the other hand, if King Henry could not sire a male heir, maybe Boleyn believed a secret conjugal partner would provide an heir. A male heir may have insured Boleyn’s life as long as secrets are kept.

(The great number of historical characters in “The Mirror and the Light” distract from Mantel’s view of King Henry’s time. One often has to look-up the characters she has introduced to keep track of the story. Thirty to forty characters are too many for a casual reader to appreciate the context of an historical novel’s era.)

Human nature’s faults, like desire for money, power, and prestige were the same then as they are now.

The King’s prestige was dealt a blow when Boleyn’s affairs become public. Like today, a cuckolded husband rarely forgives a wife’s extramarital affairs. With the King’s need for a male heir, accusation, trial, and execution were justification for getting rid of Henry’s second wife. She was beheaded by a sword’s blade alluded to in the title of Mantel’s novel. Cromwell provided the evidence, which is to this day, questioned by historians.

Martin Luther (1481-1546)

Cromwell lived in the time of Martin Luther’s attack on the Catholic church and the printing of the Tyndale Bible in Germany.

The middle of “The Mirror and the Light” gives its listeners a view of the religious evolution of Thomas Cromwell. The King’s desire for the wealth of Papal holdings in England seems enough to motivate the King. One wonders if Cromwell’s experience with “royal power” or protestant belief are the primary motivation for his actions.

Cardinal Thomas Wolsey (1473-1530, English statesman and Catholic cardinal.)

Cardinal Wolsey resisted King Henry’s desire to divorce Catherine of Aragon to marry Anne Boleyn. Wolsey was dismissed by the King. Ironically, Cromwell owed his rise in parliament to Wolsey and remained loyal to Wolsey despite the King’s dismissal. Despite Wolsey’s resistance and dismissal by the King, he died of natural causes. Cromwell’s abilities and skill as a go-between came to the attention of King Henry. However, Mantel suggests Cromwell is never forgiven by Wolsey’s children for the King’s demotion of their father. What remains in Mantel’s story is how the King loses faith in Cromwell as his advisor.

Holbein portrait of Anne of Cleaves (1515-1557, the fourth wife of King Henry VIII.)

The proximate cause of Cromwell’s conviction for treason and heresy was his negotiation and recommendation to King Henry for marriage to the Duke of Cleaves’ sister.

Thomas Cromwell was executed for treason and heresy in 1540. Cromwell’s intent was to provide an alliance with the Duke of Cleaves against the Holy Roman Empire. Hans Holbein’s painting of Anne was said to have unfairly enhanced her looks. The Duke of Cleaves alliance did not appreciably improve England’s defense and the questionable value of the alliance was laid at the feet of Cromwell. King Henry declared his six-month marriage to Anne of Cleaves was unconsummated. Cromwell’s English aristocratic enemies used the King’s discontent as grounds for the accusation of treason and heresy for which he was executed.

The power and intrigue of King Henry VIII and Thomas Cromell are munificently rendered by Hilliary Mantel in her trilogy. Lessons may be drawn into the 21st century by the power and intrigue of the 16th century.

GODLESS

Sartre seemed right when he wrote “hell is other people” in “No Exit”. Neither belief in humanism nor God seem to hold an answer for humanity’s future.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“Humanly Possible” (Seven Hundred Years of Humanist Freethinking, Inquiry, and Optimism)

By: Sarah Bakewell

Narrated by: Antonia Beamish

Sarah Bakewell (British author and professor, received the Windham-Campbell Literature Prize for non-fiction in 2018.

Sarah Bakewell provides a detailed history of humanism. To many, Bakewell’s story is a history of society falling away from God. Bakewell puts religion aside while explaining why and how humanists challenge religious belief and lean toward science as an explanation of life.

Bakewell notes humanism reaches back to the 5th century BCE with the Greek philosopher Protagoras. He was a teacher identified by Plato in a dialogue titled “Protagoras”. Through Plato’s dialogue, one finds Protagoras taught the importance of literature, and art that infers a set of moral principles to guide human behavior. Several centuries later, Diogenes Laertius writes “Lives of the Philosophers” that adds to history’s knowledge of Protagoras’s beliefs. Protagoras taught public speaking, poetry criticism, citizenship, and grammar.

Protagoras (490-420 BCE, Bakewell suggests Protagoras set the foundation for the humanist movement.)

Francesco Petrarch (1304-1374) takes up the humanist movement during the Italian Renaissance. Petrarch became internationally known as a humanist. He traveled extensively, looking for Classical manuscripts and ancient texts to recover the knowledge of Greek and Roman writers. He discovered letters that told of Cicero’s personal life–what it was like in the late Roman Republic (106-43 BCE). Cicero’s observations showed the importance of human character in the way one lives life.

Francesco Petracco (1304-1374, Italian scholar and poet and one of the earliest students and promoters of humanism.)

Collection of ancient manuscripts by Petrarch and Coluccio Salutati (1331-1406) of Florence expanded the humanist movement. Giovanni Boccaccio writes “The Decameron”, a collection of short stories that reinforces the principles of human worth and dignity, belief in reason and human ethics, and the value of critical thinking, i.e., humanist ideals.

GIOVANNI BOCCACCIO (1313-1375, ITALIAN WRITER, POET, AND HUMANIST)

The humanist mantle is picked up in England and the wider part of continental Europe after the early 15th century. Erasmus, Sir Thomas More, and William Shakespeare, reinforce the movement. Desiderius Erasmus is a Dutch humanist. He attacks the excessive powers of the papacy. He values human liberty more than orthodoxy. He inspires the Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Counter-Reformation. He emphasizes the study of classics over medieval tradition. Erasmus has great impact on the Renaissance and its religious and intellectual climate with an eye for life on earth, more than an afterlife. He wrote “The Praise of Folly”, satirizing religious practices based on superstition and impiety. Though he hoped for divine mercy, Erasmus emphasized faith and good deeds in life, humanist ideals.

Bakewell notes Sir Thomas More writes “Utopia”, published in 1516, that describes an ideal society that addresses penology, state-controlled education, religious pluralism, divorce, euthanasia, and surprisingly, women’s rights.

Shakespeare’s plays introduce psychological realism and depth to human thought and action. Much of what he writes is secular rather than religious. Shakespeare implies life on earth is more than preparation for an afterlife.

Shakespeare suggests life on earth is more than preparation for an afterlife. Death is viewed as final, a humanist view of life and death.

Bakewell goes on to write of Denis Diderot, David Hume, Kant, Adam Smith, and Voltaire. They become leaders of humanism in the 17th and 18th centuries. Diderot emphasizes critical thinking, education, and secular values. Hume writes “A Treatise of Human Nature” to explain human morality. Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations” reflects on national economic growth and how the principle of “raising all boats” comes from free enterprise and free trade, humanity in action.

Denis Diderot (French philosopher 1743-1784)

The idea of humanism is rocketed into American thought by Charles Darwin’s “Origin of Species”.

CHARLES DARWIN (1809-1882) FOUNDER OF THE THEORY OF THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES.

Natural selection became a science-based explanation for the origin of species, including human beings. Its impact is evident in the personal transition of Darwin (the son of a medical doctor and grandson of a botanist), who planned to join the clergy, but became a person who identifies himself as an agnostic. Thomas Henry Huxley publicly endorses Darwin’s theory and coins the term “agnosticism” in 1869. Many of the scientific community joined that endorsement during Darwin’s life.

As Bakewell advances her history into the twentieth century, Thomas Mann and Bertrand Rusell carry the torch of humanism. The interesting point made about humanism by Mann is that a humanist must guard against the tendency to reason too much. The rise of Nazism in Mann’s home country and the repressiveness of Stalin’s (and now Putin’s) communism are examples of what concerned Mann. On the one hand, Mann recognizes the “unbearable pity for the sufferings of mankind” but also the danger of accepting authoritarian leaders who preach nationalist socialism or communism while promoting nationalist hegemony, forced labor, racial discrimination, ethnic cleansing, and gender inequality. The rise of Nazism and Putin’s invasion of Ukraine show how authoritarian reasoning can magnify the sufferings of humanity.

Paul Thomas Mann (1875-1955, German novelist, won Nobel Prize in literature 1929, wrote “Buddenbrooks “and “The Magic Mountain”)

Bertrand Russell, a British philosopher, mathematician, logician, historian, and humanist activist, warned against superstition and preached the importance of education. Both Mann and Russell advance the ideals of humanism. One still reserves judgement about humanist’ rejection of God when both religion and science have a mixed history for humanity.

Bakewell does not end with just a history of humanism. She speculates on where humanism may go from here.

She acknowledges her own beliefs as a humanist. She notes humanism has been noted in the past as a fragile vessel for transporting humanity into a future. The vessel’s fragility is in the nature of human beings.

Few can doubt we are self-interested animals that have to come to grips with what is ultimately in our self-interest.

Human self-interest must change from greed for money and/or power for humanism to work. If self-interest rests anywhere, it needs to be in the prestige that is earned by being engaged with the welfare of humanity. In light of history, human pursuit of societal welfare seems only to appear when annihilation is nigh. The war in Ukraine and human history are evidence of humanity’s failures. When perceived threats to peace and happiness disappear, humanity returns to the destructive self-interest of money and power.

Sartre seemed right when he wrote “hell is other people” in “No Exit”. Neither belief in humanism nor God seem to hold an answer for humanity’s future.

AMERICAN PRESIDENTS

“Confront and Conceal” is a depressing examination of the American Presidency.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“Confront and Conceal“

By: David Sanger

David Sanger (Author, American journalist for the New York Times, Harvard graduate. Co-winner of 3 Pulitzer Prizes.)

David Sanger offers a journalist eye view of the first four years of the Obama Administration in “Confront and Conceal”. The most impactful impression a reader gets of a U.S. presidential office is that it is a difficult and complex job. Sanger’s observations imply the best a voter can hope for in electing a President is that he/she is a good student of the politics of life and government. Sanger shows Obama has the skill of both while the President who follows only understands the first and cares nothing about the second. This is not to suggest Sanger shows Obama as a perfect President but that his skill in governing far exceeds his successor.

Obama eschewed American intervention in foreign governments but inherited American presence in Iraq and Afghanistan.

At the same time, the American economy was in free fall. A mortgage crisis was born from the greed of human nature. The cure for the mortgage crisis is initiated by the Bush administration. However, like many Presidents before, American foreign government intervention plagues Obama throughout his tenure.

The horrible consequence and resolution of the mortgage crises fell largely on the poor in America.

The rich generally escaped its devastating impact because they had the resources to cash out debts carrying rising interest rates. An estimated 861,664 families lost their homes to foreclosure. The lending institution’ managers who approved loans to the poor on false pretenses were largely forgiven for their greed. Obama’s administration succeeded in stabilizing the American economy, but the fairness of the process is grossly inequitable.

With the exception of the first Bush’s invasion of Iraq, American military intervention in foreign governments has been a failure in every circumstance since WWII.

One might argue this is less true in the case of Korea but the continued belligerence of North Korea and foreign relations conflicts with China and Russia are a direct result of past American military interventions. Obama attempts to improve relations with China but is unsuccessful. Sanger shows that lack of success is because of suspicion of America’s past history and because of a belief that Obama is simply trying to isolate China’s influence in the world. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine speaks for itself. It will ultimately fail but at the consequence of many lost Russian and Ukrainian lives.

“Confront and Conceal” is no pean to the Obama administration. It is a revealing examination of a well-educated and prudent President who wishes to do what is best for America but is trapped by history and human nature.

Obama, like all 21st century Presidents, has the power to kill individual human beings by remote control and direct covert actions that can and do have unintended consequences. Obama is the first President to wheel the power of drone death to eliminate enemy combatants. Even though Obama martials western powers to participate in the overthrow of the Libyan government, Quaddaffi is not given a trial but murdered by rebel Libyan forces. Libya remains a failed government in search of stability. The idea of an incompetent and revengeful elected President of the United States with the power of drone murder is frightening.

“Confront and Conceal” is a depressing examination of the American Presidency because it shows a decent and intelligent President is only slightly better than an incompetent, dishonest, and poorly educated human being like Donald Trump. President Obama’s biggest contribution to America is in providing better health care for the poor but even that is being challenged by his successors.

WHO’S LAUGHING

Appelbaum infers no American President has found the magic formula for balancing the needs of its citizens with the concept of Adam Smith’s free enterprise.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“The Economists’ Hour: False Prophets, Free Markets, and the Fracture of Society“

By: Binyamin Appelbaum

Narrated by: Dan Bittner

Binyamin Appelbaum (Author, winner of a George Polk Award and a finalist for the 2008 Pulitzer Prize, lead writer on economics and business for The New York Times Editorial Board)

Binyamin Appelbaum has written an interesting summary of a difficult but immensely important subject. Economic policy and theory are boring, but they touch every aspect of life. Appelbaum shows economic policy magnifies or diminishes the welfare of every American, let alone every economy in the world.

Adam Smith’s foundational theory of economics.

Though only briefly mentioned by Appelbaum, American economic policy begins with Adam Smith (1723-1790), the Scottish philosopher who wrote “The Wealth of Nations”. Smith advocated free trade and argued against parochial maximization of exports and imports that is manipulated by strict governmental regulation meant only to accumulate gold and silver.

JOHN MAYNARD KEYNES (1883-1946, CONSIDERED FOR NOBEL 3 TIMES FOR DIPLOMACY BUT NEVER AWARDED.)

Appelbaum illustrates how American policy violated the entrepreneurial freedom that Adam Smith advocated. In contrast to Smith, John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946) advocates government intervention whenever there is an economic downturn. Equally interventionist is Milton Freidman’s (1912-2006) belief that government should increase or decrease the money supply for national economic stability. The point seems to be that every economist thinks they have a magic bullet that will cure the ills of a faltering economy.

To be fair, Friedman did believe in free enterprise in regard to nation-state currencies. He argued for a floating currency rate that ultimately led to President Nixon’s abandonment of the gold standard. However, the nature of human beings led to speculation and manipulation of nation-state’ currencies that exacerbated trade tariffs and defeated the policy’s free-enterprise objective.

FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT (32ND PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, INTHE DEPRESSION, BANKS FAILED, UNEMPLOYMENT AND POVERTY SKYROCKEDTED.

One concludes from “The Economists’ Hour…”, there is no magic solution for an economy in crises. Neither Franklin Roosevelt, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, or any American President cured what ails an American economy that succumbs to economic crises. Adam Smith would argue an economic crisis is caused by a governments’ interference with free enterprise.

Applebaum explains how every 20th and 21st century President of the United States placed their faith in economists’ economic assessments of their day. All Presidents have found intervention by the government has unintended consequences.

President Nixon adopted Freidman’s monetary policy by imposing a freeze on prices and wages that squeezed the life out of the business economy and beggared the wage-earning public with job loss.

A decade of stagflation (high inflation and slow growth) followed Nixon’s administration. Stagflation is attacked by the Reagan administration with mixed results. A myth from economists like Arthur Laffer grew in 1974. Laffer believes taxation is either too high or too low for any benefit to society. Laffer argued zero tax and maximum taxation are equally harmful and produce economic stagnation and/or collapse.

ARTHUR LAFFER (American economist and author, served on President Reagan’s Economic Policy Advisory Board 1981-1989, Here illustrating the “Laffer Curve”.)

Laffer argued every government that reduces tax revenue decreases the stimulative effect of government spending. On the other hand, he suggested every tax cut increases income for taxpayers that will stimulate business and increase employment while encouraging higher production. He laughably created the “Laffer curve” to imply there is an optimum balance of tax reduction that would stimulate economic growth with proportionate increases in government revenue to provide for better government services. That balance has never been found. President Ronald Reagan experimented with Laffer’s idea, but it fails from unintended consequences. The principal consequence is to increase the gap between rich and poor.

BENEFIT OF TAX REDUCTION

Reagan accelerated a movement for government tax reduction that ultimately reduced income taxes from 70% to 28%. The result of government tax reduction during the Reagan years increased the U.S. budget deficit from $78.9 billion to $1.412 trillion. The benefit of that tax reduction went to the wealthy while school lunches were cut, subsidized housing declined by 8%, and poor families lost $64 a month in welfare payments. In 2023, the budget deficit stood at $1.70 trillion, an imbalance that shows why the “Laffer curve” is sardonically laughable.

President Reagan’s administration (1981-1989) was influenced by Laffer’s curve.

The joke is “There is no perfect balance on the curve because of the nature of human beings.”

Roosevelt, George W. Bush, and Obama choose to follow Keynesian policy. Roosevelt bloated government employment. All three increased the government deficit.

Some suggest the idea of
“Cost benefit analysis” (CBA) is recommended to the federal government by two law professors, Michael Livermore and Richard Revesz during the George H. Bush administration but Reagan initiated it with an Executive Order in 1981.

Appelbaum notes that “cost benefit analysis” for government is first used during the administration of Ronald Reagan. However, Bill Clinton reifies its use with an Executive Order in 1993 that required covered agencies to do a CBA on “economically significant” government regulations. Ironically, Clinton was the first President in the post 19th century to balance the budget. Andrew Jackson manages to do it in his term between 1829 and 1837.

An irony of using “cost benefit analysis” is that it required a determination of of a human life’s value. Presidents Nixon, Ford, Carter, and future Presidents use value per statistical life during their administrations. High-income earners were worth $10 million to $15 million, middle-income earners $1 million to $2 million, and low-income earners $100,00 to $200,000. Of course, these values were always litigable. The point is that CBA became a tool for government to regulate the costs of government policies, ranging from military expense to the health, safety, and welfare of American citizens.

The remainder of Appelbaum’s book reflects on the experience of America, Chile, and Taiwan in the 20th century. The implication of his review of economic policy is that those countries that align with the free enterprise beliefs of Adam Smith have made mistakes. However, America’s, Chile’s, and Taiwan’s economic policies seem to have had more economic success when following Smith’s beliefs.

**No American President has found the magic formula for balancing the needs of its citizens with the concept of Adam Smith’s free enterprise.**

Along with CBA, Appelbaum notes the ongoing controversy is about regulation by government when it tries to balance American health, education, and welfare with Adam Smith’s concept of free enterprise. Appelbaum infers no American President has found the magic formula for balancing the needs of its citizens with the concept of Adam Smith’s free enterprise.

DEATH ROW

The question raised by “The Sun Does Shine”–is death row a necessary function of society? Anthony Ray Hinton’s life story challenges its efficacy.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“The Sun Does Shine“

By: Anthony Ray Hinton with Lara Love Hardin

Narrated by: Kevine R. Free

Anthony Ray Hinton’s life experience argues the death penalty for any crime should be abolished. Hinton states 1 in 10 people on death row have been wrongfully convicted. He spent 28 years on death row for crimes he could not have committed. His legal representation is poorly executed, in part, because he did not have enough money to pay for his defense.

Anthony Ray Hinton

Hinton’s 1 in 10 ratio of wrongful conviction is questioned but not denied by:

The “Death Penalty Information Center”
DNA evidence that has exonerated sentenced death row prisoners, and
statistical studies that show 1 in 25 criminal defendants sentenced to death have been found innocent.

Hinton’s “The Sun Does Shine” tells of his conviction by an Alabama court for robbery and murder of two fast-food restaurant managers in Birmingham, Alabama.

Appointment of a defense attorney is required by law, but their compensation and the accused’s poverty deny an adequate defense. Hinton’s story shows how the State of Alabama’s law enforcement and judicial system manufactured false evidence to convict and put him on death row.

Hinton’s mother, childhood friend, and religious belief support him through his false imprisonment and pending death by electrocution. His electrocution is postponed because of repeated challenges, but he remains on death row for 28 years. Hinton’s imagination and good will sustain him through his ordeal. He imagines traveling the world, marrying and divorcing beautiful women, and meeting the Queen of England.

**Hinton gains the respect of his jailers and fellow death row prisoners. He mentally catalogues the many executions that occur in his 30 years of incarceration.**

He remembers the blinking electric lights and smell of burning human flesh when each prisoner is electrocuted. He recalls the first woman to be electrocuted. He acknowledges many of the death-row’ prisoners committed horrible crimes but suggests they are victims of society because of their upbringing, and/or untreated or incurable mental dysfunctions. Hinton does not believe the guilty deserve execution for what he believes are societies’ failures.

It is the Executive Director of the Equal Justice Initiative, attorney Bryan Stevenson, who comes to Hinton’s aid and eventually gets his case before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2014. Stevenson works on Hinton’s case for over 20 years with numerous blocks thrown up by the Alabama legal system. The original judge in the case insists throughout his life that Hinton was guilty even though falsified evidence convicted him of the crime.

After release, Hinton becomes a world-wide celebrity, acquainted with famous people like President Obama, Queen Elizabeth II, Nelson Mandela, and Oprah Winfrey.

His book suggests he was entertained by some famous actors and billionaires who wished to have his story told to audiences that presumably might affect a change in the American judicial system.

The question raised by “The Sun Does Shine”–is death row a necessary function of society? Anthony Ray Hinton’s life story challenges its efficacy.

EQUALITY

The Craft’s story is an inspiration for the anti-slavery movement before and after the civil war. Their story reinforces the principle of equality of opportunity for all.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“Master, Slave, Husband, Wife“

By: Ilyon Woo

Narrated by: Janina Edwards & Leon Nixon

Ilyon Woo (American author, Received BA in Humanities from Yale College and has a PhD in English from Columbia University.)

“Master, Slave, Husband, Wife” will disabuse any listener who may think the American Civil War was not about slavery. Ilyon Woo’s detailed research of Ellen and William Craft reveals the many reasons why no one can deny the fundamental cause of the Civil War in America, i.e. it was slavery.

Ellen and William Craft

Ellen and William Craft were slaves until escape from their slave master in 1848. William was enslaved by a white land holder named Robert Collins who held a half interest in Craft’s ownership with another southerner. Ellen was the child of a white owner and black slave that gave her a fair-skinned white racial appearance. However, Ellen was classified as a slave because of her mixed racial parentage. Her mother was a slave to a white slaveholder who was her putative father. At the age of eleven, Ellen was gifted as a valued piece of property to a sister who later became Collin’s wife.

Ellen missed her birth mother but only after years of being on the run, did she manage to re-unite with her mother, Maria Smith.

In 1846, Ellen reached the age of 20 and agreed to marry William who was a skilled cabinet maker.

William was allowed to work for a portion of his wages in return for a cut of his income to be paid to his owners. In 1848, with the money William saved from his outside work, the married slaves planned an escape from Collin’s household. The plan was for Ellen to dress herself as a white man with William as her slave on a journey to Philadelphia, Boston, and possibly Canada.

Ellen Craft dressed as a white man with an accompanying slave who is actually her husband.

The fugitives succeed in their escape, but their success is challenged. The challenge came from the morally misguided attempt by the American government to avoid a war between the North and South by passing the “Fugitive Slave Act of 1850”.

That act would allow capture and return of runaway slaves to their putative owners. The Act was a compromise between the north and south, supported by President Millard Fillmore, who was willing to sacrifice black Americans to slavery in order to preserve the Union. Storied and respected leaders of America like Daniel Webster, who had freed his slaves, supported the “Fugitive Slave Act”. Webster believed, like the majority of a white Congress, that union was more important than human equality.

Woo’s detailed research reveals how Ellen and William had both black and white supporters who recognized the iniquity of slavery and helped them escape bounty hunters hired by Robert Collins to return the Crafts to slavery. Ellen and William were in Boston. They were helped to escape by Boston’s anti-slavery Americans of conscience.

The anti-slavery movement extended into some of the city of Boston’s government officials. Some local government officials refused to cooperate with bounty hunters trying to fulfill the legal requirements for recovery of escaped slaves. Woo infers Boston boiled with demonstrations against the “Fugitive Slave Act”.

The danger of recapture remained palpable because some officials were concerned more about preservation of the union than the iniquity of slavery. Ellen and William chose to flee to England. Their escape is aided by Quakers and the support of famous black Americans like Fredrick Douglass and William Wells Brown. Douglas publicized the story of the Crafts. William Wells Brown, an equally famous slave escapee, supported the Crafts by using them in traveling presentations that spoke of the iniquity of slavery and how they escaped its clutches. Ellen and William remained in England for 18 years. With the support of Lady Byron and Harriet Martineau, the Crafts learned how to read and write.

The Crafts spent three years at Ockham School in Surrey, England where they taught handicrafts and carpentry.

The Crafts respected each other in ways that defy simple explanation. Though they strongly supported each other, they were often separated for long periods of time. William and Ellen became self-educated writers and teachers who started schools. William traveled to Africa on his own and started a school without his wife. He was gone for months at a time but never broke with his wife who stayed in England.

After 18 years, Ellen and William return to the U.S. The civil war was over. They had five children together with two who remained in England. The Crafts started Woodville Cooperative Farm School in Bryan County, Georgia. The school failed but they continued to farm and wrote a book about their lives titled “Running a Thousand Miles for Freedom…” which became popular in both England and the U.S.

The Craft family’s story of their flight to freedom.

Ellen Craft died in 1891. She was buried in Bryan County, Georgia. William Craft died in 1900 but was denied burial in Bryan County next to his wife. William was buried in Charleston, South Carolina. Though separated in death, they seem as tied to each other as they were in life. The Craft’s story is an inspiration for the anti-slavery movement before and after the civil war. Their story reinforces the principle of equality of opportunity for all.

NUCLEAR RISK & REWARD

The two edges of nuclear physics that may save or destroy the world is still with us. The best humanity can hope for is balance between human nature and science.

Blog: awalkingdelight

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“American Prometheus” The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer

By: Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin

Narrated by: Jeff Cummings

Kai Bird (American author and columnist who wrote about the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Born in 1951.)

Kai Bird and Martin Sherwin tell the story of America’s “god of fire”. Like the myth of Prometheus who reveals Olympian gods’ knowledge of fire, J. Robert Oppenheimer reveals physicists’ secrets of nuclear fission that give atomic power to humanity. Their history tells listeners of the risk entailed in research and production of nuclear bombs.

J. Robert Oppenheimer (1904-1967, Died at the age of 62.)

Bird and Sherwin offer an intimate and revealing story of J. Robert Oppenheimer that reveals his genius, his human frailty, his growth as a project manager, and the abysmal way American government treated his historic achievements.

Like Promethius’s fire, the heat of atomic power can destroy or benefit humanity.

Every student of history knows of atomic powers potential to destroy.

NEVER AGAIN?

Though Bird’s and Sherwin’s history is more about Oppenheimer’s life than his discoveries, it seems prudent to note Oppenheimer discovered the Born-Oppenheimer molecular wave functions about how electrons and positrons work. Oppenheimer also worked with fellow physicist William Phillips on the Oppenheimer-Phillips process in nuclear fusion with work on what is called quantum tunneling. Though Oppenheimer was nominated for a Nobel Prize three times, he never won. Phillips and Steven Chu receive the Nobel in 1997.

Max Born (German/British physicist, 1882-1970)

The great controversy surrounding Oppenheimer is his association with communism. Bird and Sherwin clearly acknowledge the association but convincingly argue Oppenheimer was an American patriot who contributed to communist social welfare programs without being a card-carrying member of the CP.

“American Promethius” illustrates Oppenheimer’s growth as a consummate manager of a complex organization that could successfully develop a weapon of mass destruction, an atomic bomb that can end war. However, as history shows, the atom bomb may end a world war, but nuclear bombs become a threat to human existence by any nation that acquires the same technology.

Los Alamos National Laboratory entrance located a short distance NW of Santa Fe, NM

The first atomic bomb exploded on July 16, 1945 in Alamogordo, New Mexico.

The authors show Oppenheimer’s understanding of an atom bomb’s threat by quoting the Bhagavad Gita. “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.” Oppenheimer refuses to continue research on Edward Teller’s plan to create a fusion bomb of even greater destructive potential. Teller succeeds in creating that bomb. Oppenheimer recognizes any small or large nation that gains fusion bomb technology increases a threat to humanity.

The second atomic bomb test at Bikini Atoll was a fusion bomb released on July 25, 1946. The Marshall Islands, where Bikini is located, is suing the U.S. for what it calls a violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Edward Teller was a leading physicist who worked on the Los Alamos project. Teller’s difficult interpersonal relations and volatile personality made him an important influencer, and defamer of Oppenheimer. Oppenheimer refuses to continue research on a fusion bomb because of its destructive potential and its potential influence in an arms race.

Edward Teller (1908-2003) Hungarian American, theoretical physicist who was the principal inventor of the hydrogen bomb based on the principle of fusion. It’s destructive potential from heat and light are substantially greater than the two nuclear bombs dropped on Japan.)

Teller and an American German physicist, Hans Bethe a team leader, come to lager heads when Bethe agrees with Oppenheimer’s’ focus on a fission rather than fusion bomb. Teller fell out with his team leader, as well as Oppenheimer, over the disagreement.

Hans Bethe (1906-2005, received a Nobel Prize in 1967 for the theory of stellar nucleosynthesis.)

The arrival of Niels Bohr (1885-1962) at Los Alamos in 1943 raises a fundamental concern about creation of a weapon of mass destruction. Bohr’s concern is a nation’s failure to share nuclear physics technology about the bomb with allied forces, particularly Russia, to avoid an international arms race.

Bohr believes scientific cooperation would reduce the probability of an arms race. Bohr’s view seems idealistic in light of today’s history, but the idea is adopted by Oppenheimer. Nuclear weapons have become widely coveted by weaker economic nations of the world because of their political systems failure to improve the lives of their citizens.

Human nature is not overcome by technological sharing because of differences in fundamental religious and political beliefs.

Pursuit of the bomb is just another tool to accelerate national leaders’ political or religious beliefs. Niels Bohr’s noble idea and Oppenheimer’s acknowledgement of the value of sharing science is victim to national leaders’ beliefs and human nature.

A nation like North Korea covets the bomb because it gives them the ability to punch (negotiate or fight) above their weight. A nation like Iran is led by a religious leader who only views the modern world in light of a beneficent afterlife.

Katherine Oppenheimer. Robert’s wife (1910-1972, German American biologist, botanist, and member of the Communist Party.)

A disturbing note about Oppenheimer is his marriage to his wife, Katherine “Kitty” Puening whom he married in 1940. Kitty became pregnant before they married. They had two children, a boy and girl. This is Kitty’s fourth marriage. Neither parent seems to show much interest in their children. Kitty is shown to be a free spirit, beautiful and charming who generally supports Oppenheimer in his job at Los Alamos. One wonders how their children were affected by their parents’ neglect. Their daughter committed suicide in 1977. The boy still lives in New Mexico and makes a living as a carpenter.

In 1947, Oppenheimer is recruited by Princeton to head a new organization that is called the Institute for Advanced Study. Because of frequent trips to Washington D.C. and the attraction of running a broad organization for the study of science and humanities, Oppenheimer chooses to take the position. His team management experience at Los Alamos and his broad interest in the humanities make Oppenheimer a perfect match for the position. With millions of dollars set aside for the Institute, Oppenheimer attracts the best and brightest science and humanities luminaries from around the world. Einstein, Kurt Godel, John von Neumann, George Kennan, T.S. Eliot, and too many more to mention, were recruited by Oppenheimer. Some were at the height of their professions and became Nobel Prize winners.

The last chapters of “American Prometheus” address the investigation of Oppenheimer’s communist associations during the McCarthy era.

His greatest initial concern was for his brother, Frank, who had joined the communist party. However, the wide range of the investigation and the zealous pursuit of Lewis Strauss, a former shoe salesman who chaired the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), results in Oppenheimer’s security clearance being stripped. His reputation is unfairly diminished by overzealous politicians and investigators ranging from the FBI director to the AEC chairman.

One leaves this history with a feeling of shame about how Oppenheimer is treated by some and over-praised by others. No human being is without faults, regardless of their intelligence and ability. Oppenheimer was an American patriot who served America with what it needed in the circumstances of his time.

J. Robert Oppenheimer (center) receives the 1963 Enrico Fermi Award from President Lyndon B. Johnson at a White House ceremony on December 2, 1963, as then AEC chairman Glenn Seaborg (left) looks on. (Photo: DOE). He died at age 62 in 1967.

The two edges of nuclear physics that may save or destroy the world is still with us. The best humanity can hope for is balance between human nature and science.

HISTORY’S RHYME

One leaves this novel hoping Russia leaves Ukraine in peace, Palestine and Israel with an acceptable agreement for both countries, and a war that does not widen.

Blog: awalkingdelight

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“The Winter Soldier” A Novel

By: Daniel Mason

Narrated by: Laurence Dobiesz

Daniel Mason (Author, physician, winner of 2021 Guggenheim Fellowship, the Joyce Carol Oates Prize.)

Daniel Mason’s “The Winter Soldier” is a reminder of WWI and the heartbreak of war. It is a love story created out of the horror of injuries, desperation of commanders for recruits, and the collateral damage of civilians. All of this is a reminder of what is happening today in Israel/Palestine, Ukraine, and Russia. Told from the losing side of war, it makes one think of WWI’s history and the aftermath of today’s military actions.

The well-known triggering incident that led to WWI was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary.

There are many other fundamental reasons for the war ranging from mutual defense alliances to imperialism to national security and disputed borders but as in all wars there are no winners, only losers. The losers are disabled combatants, children, and the survivors who cannot forget what they have been through. For the dead, life is simply over.

Mason’s story is about an Austro-Hungarian’ medical student from an aristocratic family who is thrown into the maelstrom of war. By circumstance, he is recruited into a field hospital in Poland because he is the only academically trained medical person. He is still a student, but his sketchy understanding of medicine and the human body give him some guidance on how to amputate limbs and treat life threatening diseases. The field hospital is in a former church that is managed by a nun who worked with former doctors and had some practical knowledge of medical treatment. Lucius, the hero, a 22-year-old is introduced to Margareta, a nun who is one year older. She has much more firsthand experience with war’s casualties. Her judgment sustains much of what Lucius does that tempers his novitiate understanding of medical practice.

It is a “…Winter Soldier” who survives the war that offers a surprising ending to Mason’s imaginative and well-written novel.

The precursor to the story’s surprising ending is that Lucius falls in love with Margareta, but they are separated by the invasion of Russian soldiers. They find each other after Lucius marriage and pending divorce to another woman. Lucius travels back to where Margareta lived and finds she has moved to another town. He travels to the new town and finds Margareta at a local hospital. This is not the end of the story. A surprise remains.

Mason’s story is an entertaining novel of particular interest today because of the truth of Mark Twain’s observation: “History never repeat itself, but it does often rhyme”. One leaves this novel hoping Russia leaves Ukraine in peace, Palestine and Israel with an acceptable agreement for both countries, and a war that does not widen.

NORTH KOREAN LEADERSHIP

Like the longevity of Putin, and Assad, Kim Jung-Un is as likely to stay in power as long as the people who protect him are living better lives than the majority of their country’s citizens.

Blog: awalkingdelight

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“The Great Successor”

“The Divinely Perfect Destiny of Brilliant Comrade Kim Jung Un”

By: Anna Fifield

Anna Fifield (Author, Asia-Pacific editor at The Washington Post.)

PYONGYANG, NORTH KOREA: This file picture dated 15 April 1992 shows North Korean President Kim Il-Sung waving during the celebration marking his 80th birthday at Kim Il-Sung stadium in Pyongyang. The Chinese government announced last week it would not send “anyone” to attend Il-Sung’s 92nd anniversary in response to North Korea’s refusal of international nuclear inspections. (Photo credit should read JIJI PRESS/AFP/Getty Images)

Anna Fifield offers a cloudy picture of today’s authoritarian leader of North Korea in “The Great Successor”. The reclusive and secretive nature of North Korea’s leadership makes Fifield’s analysis of Kim Jung-Un somewhat compromised. Her analysis is based on interviews of estranged North Korean’ exiles, other book writers, and news reporters about a regime that is notoriously opaque.

Despite the potential bias of secondhand information, Fifield shows a leader who exercises despotic control over 26 million people.

Kim Jung-Un (Supreme leader of North Korea.)

Fifield argues that North Korea’s government control is based on a cadre of carefully screened and highly benefited sycophants that obey Kim Jung-Un’s orders. At the age of 28 or 29, on December 17, 2011, Kim Jong-Un became the leader of North Korea after the death of his father, Kim Jong-il.

Kim’s most definitive action after appointment is to discredit his uncle, Jang Song-thaek who had government power and great influence in North Korea’s relationship with China and other sympathetic countries.

Fifield suggests Kim Jong-Un’s youth required assertiveness for him to show leadership legitimacy. The 67-year-old, Jang Song-thaek is accused by Kim of attempting to overthrow the state. He is executed on December 11, 2013, two years after Kim’s ascension. Fifield argues this action by Kim sent a message to his government employees and the public that he is in charge of North Korea.

**Though the North Korean economy is nearer third world standards, the underground economy helps the poor raise their standard of living.**

Fifield notes two critical factors that aid Kim Jong-Un’s control of North Korea. One is the fear created by his governments control of surveillance and propaganda. The other is his tolerance for an underground capitalist movement that bribes public officials while providing citizens added income.

**Kim Jong-Un’s successful drive for a nuclear bomb gave him a position in the world of nuclear threat that tempers any nation-state’ action against his regime.**

Fifield infers Kim Jong-Un is smart, his actions calculated, and his control of the country formidable. A primary example of Kim’s calculation is the story Fifield tells of his negotiation with President Trump. Kim manages to be the first leader of North Korea to meet with a President of the United States. Trump complimented Kim as a “strong guy”, a “great negotiator” and that he had a “very good relationship with him”. Fifield explains Kim’s success with the nuclear bomb program encouraged him to redirect his focus to modernizing the country and its economy.

Kim praised President Trump while leaving the idea of nuclear disarmament as a possible negotiable issue in return for American help with the economy. Fifield suggests Kim has no intention of abandoning his nuclear bomb program.

Fifield suggests Kim’s focus became the economy with an increased incentive to normalize relations with America. (In 2023, Kim’s failure to improve relations seems to have reignited his nuclear bomb ambitions with more testing and further rocket delivery tests.)

Very little was known about Kim Jung-Un before his ascendence to leadership. He received his early education in North Korea and Switzerland. He was strongly supported by his mother who promoted him to the then leader of North Korea, Kim il Sung, who wanted continuation of the Sung dynasty, the Mount Paektu bloodline, of which Kin Jun-Un represents.

Kim Jung-Un has two sisters, one half-brother, and one brother. The younger brother, born in 1981, Kim Jong-chul (on the lower right), lives a low-profile life in Pyongyang with no interest in government. The half-brother, Kim Jon-nam, was assassinated in Malaysia in 2017. The older sister, Kim Sul-song (upper left) is a worker in the propaganda department that supports Kim Jong-Un and his leadership but has more recently been sidelined. A sister who is younger than Kim Jung-Un is characterized as a publicity diplomat. She appears accommodating within the limits of Kim Jun-Un’s influence and control.

Fifield’s book is interesting but not particularly enlightening. Kim Jung-Un may be on the world stage for a long time. The Ukraine invasion by Russia, along with China’s support gives North Korea added weight in world affairs. Like the longevity of Putin, and Assad, Kim Jung-Un is as likely to stay in power as long as the people who protect him are living better lives than the majority of their country’s citizens.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: