HISTORY – Page 18 – REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE

TIKTOK ENERGY

America and every nation must believe in themselves until, like all changes in society, the proof of an energy’s value becomes self-evident

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“Energy” (A Human History)

By: Richard Rhodes

Narrated by: Jacques Roy

Richard Rhodes (American journalist, historian, and author.)

Richard Rhodes explains the many forms of “Energy” that have changed the course of history. The one constant is human ingenuity. The source of energy evolves over centuries of civilization. The source of energy has changed from human hands to fuel burning machines to atomic fission to fusion to information. The back and forth of human thought and action have used sources of energy to remake the world. Rhodes’ history shows progress is not always forward. Change is often resisted until results outweigh failures.

Having just gone through the first chapters of Rhode’s excellent history of energy, this review was prematurely completed because of the TikTok controversy noted in the news.

It is important to complete Rhodes’ history to have some understanding of why information is the energy of modern times. Citizens of the world are facing many of the same obstacles Rhodes wrote about in his book. That energy is information may seem incongruous to some but, Rhodes’ history about wood, coal, oil, electricity, nuclear power, and the current state of renewables is like the energy crises of information today. Rhodes does not consider what some argue is tomorrow’s energy source. Tomorrow’s energy source is information. The many trials, the fits and starts, of the energy sources Rhodes explains are the same trials facing today’s world with information as the most current iteration of “Energy”.

Energy is fuel for doing work. Its early forms are those noted in Rhodes’ history. Earlier forms of energy are still relevant, but their utility is being challenged by the immense growth of information and how information drives the future.

There are lessons to be learned about the challenges of information as energy from the experiences noted in Rhodes’ history. This is a bumpy time that shares the trials and tribulations of wood, coal, oil, electricity, nuclear power, and renewable energy of the past. Each energy source has improved the lives of its users but not without trial and error. The world is in the midst of a transition from the industrial age just as the industrial age transitioned from the agricultural age. The world is entering the information age.

The energy change today is information, most recently multiplied by artificial intelligence.

The paranoia of today is that foreign governments will use information to disrupt the progress of nations that have their own forms of government. The controversy of TikTok is a case in point. On the one hand TikTok is being used by small entrepreneurs in America to conduct their businesses. On the other, TikTok’ popularity is spreading the equivalent of porn to the public, distorting the perception and education of children. There is the added threat of influencing the public to overthrow governments. The question is would TikTok be any less a threat if it were owned and restricted to one country or another? Facebook offers the same potential as TikTok. Facebook, Google, and Amazon are energy sources for distorting truth and influencing the public in the same way as TikTok. Domestic ownership does not cure the negative potential of information distortion or abhorrent political influence.

Is TikTok going to change democratic capitalism or is it going to change Chinese communism? One suspects, it will change both. The information highway cannot be blocked. Information energy, like water, will find its own way through cracks in its environment.

The fundamental point made in the last two chapters of Rhode’s excellent history is that the world, and America, need to increase the number of nuclear energy plants based on the need to curb environmental pollution. His argument is based on learning from the nuclear accidents that have occurred, and designing nuclear power plants to mitigate the consequence of failure. He notes no energy source in the world has succeeded without learning from producer’s mistakes. Our mistakes at Chernobyl, 3-Mile Island, and Fukushima are correctable. Environmental degradation is the crises of the 21st century that threatens human existence.

America and every nation must believe in themselves until, like all changes in society, the proof of an energy’s value becomes self-evident.

OCCUPATION

“Apeirogon” is a little too repetitive for this reviewer, but it is cleverly written and shows why political and military occupation is a fool’s leadership style.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“Apeirogon” (A Novel)

By: Colum McCann

Narrated by: Colum McCann

Colum McCann (Author, Irish writer living in New York.)

At first the idea of an Irish author writing a book about Israel seems incongruous. After the first few paragraphs, one realizes Colum McCann grasps a truth about religious conflict that is far better than most because of Ireland’s “Troubles” between the 1960s and 1990s.

“Apeirogon” is timely novel in regard to Israel’s response to the October 7 Hamas attack in Gaza. A little history helps one understand the complexity and terrible consequence of the slaughter of innocents.

An estimated 30,228 people have been killed in Gaza, 12,000 of which are thought to be Hamas combatants.

Gaza dates back to Egyptian times, populated by Canaanites who share an ancestral connection to Israelites. Gaza later became part of the Assyrian Empire in 730 BC. Assyrians intermixed with Canaanites, Israelites, Philistines and undoubtedly Palestinians. History shows historical connection between ancient Assyrians and Palestinians just as there were with Israelites. However, Israelites were forcibly relocated to Assyria from the Kingdom of Israel. Because the Israelites were descendants of the Canaanites, they predated Palestinian settlement in Gaza. Ethnic precedent and the want of land area is a part of what complicates the idea of a separate Palestinian state. Where is a homeland for a Palestinian state going to come from?

McCann chose a perfect title for his novel. An apeirogon is a geometric shape that has an infinite number of sides; just like the many sides of Israeli/Palestinian arguments for a homeland. Column McCann cleverly explores these arguments in his novel. He creates a series of Israeli/Palestinian incidents that show how each ethnic culture believes and acts in their perceived self-interests. Every chapter is titled as a series of numbers that begin with the number 1, jumps from 500 to the number 1001; then jumps back to 500 and descends to number 1 to end his story. Revelation comes in 1001. Occupation is an evil that cannot stand.

America’s civil war carries some parallels to what is happening in Israel and Gaza.

What is revelatory about McCann’s novel is its similarities to America’s civil war that ended the lives of too many Americans. Today’s conflict in Gaza is instigated by Hamas just as the Civil War was instigated by southern slave holders. America eventually forgave southern slave holders, but Black Americans continue to suffer from institutional racism. Can a one state solution as demanded by Israel’s conservatives serve Palestinians any better than white America has served Black Americans? America’s civil war ended in 1865-1866, some 158 years later, Black Americans are still discriminated against. Can Palestinians wait more than 158 years to have equal rights in an Israeli nation?

McCann’s novel repeats, too many times, the unfairness of Israel’s occupation of Gaza. Hamas has its rebellious leaders like America had John Brown who killed one Marine, wounded another, and killed six civilians. Neither Brown nor the Hamas leaders can justify their murders though both argue with righteous conviction. The United States could have split between abolitionist and non-abolitionist states, or they could move toward reconciliation. Obviously, the U.S. government prevailed with reconciliation. It seems imperative for Israeli and Palestinian leaders to take the same road as Abraham Lincoln. Hamas is a splinter group like that led by America’s John Brown. Their objective is as horribly misguided as Brown’s. Hamas’s hostage taking and murder of Jewish settlers is as reprehensible as Brown’s murders of a Marine and six civilians.

As difficult as it may be, a two-state solution seems unlikely. What American history suggests is as difficult as America has found reconciliation to be for white America’s murder and unjust treatment of Black Americans. That reconciliation remains a work in progress. However, only union offers a way toward peace. America is not there yet but it is making progress.

Two political factions, bound by both religion and ethnicity, must learn to live with each other for peace to be achieved.

There is no other land for Palestinians. Israel may have the older of the two cultures, and both Israelites and Palestinians have a much longer history of religious and ethnic difference than America. America is founded on religious freedom and equality, though not perfect in either principle. In contrast, religion is a primary determinant in Palestinian and Israeli cultures while equality seems a less prominent concern. Peace will not come without hardship, but a beginning is dependent on Israel’s abandonment of occupation. It will be one country’s leaders’ imperative to provide equal opportunity for all its citizens. The struggle will be long as is shown by America’s history but what realistic alternative is there for the Israeli and Palestinian people? What neighboring country is likely to give up their land to create a two state solution?

“Apeirogon” is a little too repetitive for this reviewer, but it is cleverly written and shows why political and military occupation is a fool’s leadership style. Israel, like white America, needs to do better in reconciling ethnic differences.

CAPITALIST’ LESSONS

Capitalism is not a partisan issue but a social imperative for both Republicans and Democrats to work together to benefit all Americans.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“Capitalism in America” (A History)

By: Alan Greenspan, Adrian Wooldridge

Narrated by: Ray Porter

As one would expect, “Capitalism in America” begins with the British economist, Adam Smith, who defined capitalism in 1776 with “An inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations”.

Alan Greenspan (on the left) is an American economist who was chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1987-2006. Adrin Wooldridge (on the right) is a British economist and journalist who wrote for “The Economist”. Wooldridge has a doctorate in philosophy and has co-written several books with Richard Micklethwait, the editor-and-chief of Bloomberg News. One might argue Greenspan has a conservative bias but Wooldridge’s experience as a British journalist gives one a sense of balance in this informative and well-written history of American capitalism.

Smith’s concept of capitalism advocated leaving economic decisions to market forces, tempered by individual economic decision makers. What Greenspan and Wooldridge infer is that decision-makers’ discretion and interference are what roils capitalism’s history.

“Capitalism in America” reveals tumultuous times for the American economy but with positive forward momentum. The public in all countries have experienced hard times from market forces. Some countries, like Israel, India, and the U.K. have experimented with socialism as an alternative to capitalism. Communist countries like Russia and China flirt with capitalism and one may argue–benefited from its market results. The author’s history shows capitalism as the primary reason for America’s economic growth and success. However, that’s getting ahead of their story.

The authors begin at beginning with the story of Jefferson’s desire to emphasize agriculture as the primary driver of economic growth in America. In contrast, Alexander Hamilton believes the industrial revolution demands a broader view of economic policy. The key to tapping into the industrial revolution required capital which Hamilton clearly recognizes. Hamilton recommends the creation of a national bank. Hamilton is inspired by Great Britain’s Bank of England. It offered private capital and paper credit to businesses and entrepreneurs.

Hamilton, as Secretary of the Treasury, presented a “Report on a National Bank” to President Washinton and the House of representatives in 1790. This report notes that Congress, with its authority to collect taxes, could fund the bank and lend money to the government to pay foreign creditors, public services, and private businesses to grow the economy. Jefferson opposed the idea, but Hamilton’s broad interpretation of the Constitution allowed his idea of a national bank to be created. In 1791 the First Bank of the United States is established in Philadelphia and remained chartered for 20 years. This became a giant step for America’s economic growth.

Several future Presidents opposed an American national bank. Of course, Jefferson was one because of his belief in an agrarian future for America. Jefferson’s friend and future President, Madison (the 4th President of the U.S.) opposed the idea of a national bank, and Andrew Jackson (the 7th President of the U.S.) used his power as President to oppose the “Second Bank of the United States” in 1833.

The authors note the successful industrialists of the 19th century capitalized on Hamiltonian creation of an American banking system. They became known as the robber barons of America. Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, and J.P. Morgan used capital to produce oil, expand rail transportation, make steel, and provide bank capital to grow the economy.

And then, WWI drew America into events that roil the course of its economic history.

An American economic boom occurs in the first two years of the war with America choosing neutrality. Exports surged from $2.4 billion to $6.2 billion in 1917. Everything from cotton, to wheat, to automobiles, to food, to machines were exported during those years. After joining the war, 3 million Americans were mobilized. When the war was over, the world and the American economy faltered. Recession (1918-1921) hit the world after the war, though America showed it had become a major world power.

As America recovered from WWI, their prowess as a producer of goods and services led to the roaring 20s and a runaway stock market that eventually crashed at the beginning of the Great Depression (1929-1939).

The authors note President Roosevelt is a great salesman who provides relief to many Americans with government employment programs during the depression. However, the authors note Roosevelt’s inept management delays America’s recovery by instituting price controls that distort market forces. Overt price control is a recurring mistake of national economies. The authors are not saying that price control is a singular cause of America’s continuing economic crisis, but it makes market recovery more difficult and longer to achieve.

The authors explain reparations for WWI’s winners helped set the table for WWII.

Germany’s inability to pay reparations, the growth of Antisemitism, and German inflation led to the rise of Hitler. Though not addressed by the authors, Japan felt threatened by American, Chinese, and Russian influence in Asia that led to Pearl Harbor and America’s entry into WWII.

The point is made that America’s depression before the war is not cured by Roosevelt’s economic intervention. The advent of war mobilized American industry.

The authors suggest market interference delayed recovery from the Great Depression. On the other hand, Roosevelt gave hope to the country with his speeches and employment programs. Citizens underlying faith in America’s ability to overcome hardship, and their response to Pearl Harbor reinvigorated the economy. Industries were retooled to meet the demands of war.

The authors argue mistakes in America’s capitalist history have been made by both Democratic and Republican Presidents who interfered with naturally occurring market forces. From Roosevelt to Nixon to Reagan to Obama to Trump, Presidents who institute price controls and/or tariffs interfere with free trade. America’s capitalist economy suffers from those actions. This is not to argue all legislation and federal action on the economy constitutes capitalist interference. Fundamental human rights that ensure freedom to vote, speak one’s mind, practice one’s own religion, work in industries one chooses, while seeking peaceful resolution of differences, are interferences that sustain capitalism.

Freedom to compete is the hallmark of capitalism.

When natural market forces are interfered with by business leaders and public legislators, capitalism suffers. An inference one may draw from the authors is that legislated programs that aid Americans who are unable or unwilling to participate in the capitalist economy are an interference with capitalism. That raises legislated issues of emigration, social security, health insurance, education, defense, transportation, veteran’s benefits, housing, environmental protection, occupational safety, and other public benefit programs. This is where there is continuing disagreement among Americans. These are not party issues because both Republican and Democratic leaders have both positive and negative arguments for and against these policies.

There is the law of unintended consequences that plague government policies. Some argue Reagan reinvigorated the American capitalist economy by reducing taxes, cutting government programs, reducing government employment, and busting union strikes. He did those things and government debt skyrocketed to a level greater than ever in the history of America. The gap between rich and poor was set on a path that beggared the poor and enriched business managers without comparable enrichment of labor. Like Roosevelt, Reagan sold ideas that had unintended consequences that were not in the long-term interest of Americans.

How can one measure the success of capitalism versus other economic systems? The author’s history of capitalism offers no answer but reveals what has benefitted and damaged American society since 1776. They illustrate failure of capitalism is in the hands of American leaders. Capitalism’s improvement is not a partisan issue but a social imperative for both Republicans and Democrats to work together to benefit all Americans.

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.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: