Category: INEQUALITY

Orwell & A.I.

In the pre-A.I. age, democratic socialism is unachievable, but A.I. may resurrect its potential. However, as Orwell noted, the risk is a “Brave New World” rather than a hoped-for democratic socialism.

GEORGE ORWELL (Author, 1903-1950)

In Norm Chomsky’ ‘s and Nathan Schneider’s book, “On Anarchy”, George Orwell’s book “Homage to Catalonia” is called one of Chomsky’s favorite books. “On Anarchy” infers Orwell believed in anarchy because of his role in the war (1936-1939) against the Franco government. Though Orwell’s risk of life in Spain’s war is inconceivable to me, it seems prudent to listen to his story and point to the significant difference between what Chomsky and Schneider infer about Orwell’s belief in “…Anarchism” and what Orwell really wrote and believed. Though Orwell takes anarchism seriously as a political working-class movement, he believes it is impractical and that democratic socialism (with “1984” reservations) is what he believes could be the best form of government. The idea of abolishing all forms of coercive authority and hierarchy with a government anarchy is impractical because of the nature of human beings.

Francisco Franco with his soldiers in 1936.

Because of Orwell’s belief in democracy and equality he chooses to join the fight against Franco’s fascism. He joins the resistance at the age of 33 because of his belief in democratic socialism. He felt he needed to join the ideological struggle against Franco’s regime. It is a remarkable decision considering he is married, and relatively unknown. He is oddly driven by his moral belief in democracy and equality. Presumably, he entered the war to understand what it means to fight a war against a government he felt was immoral and totalitarian. Orwell served for approximately six months beginning in December 1936. He was shot in the throat and nearly died.

Anarchy and human nature.

It seems inconceivable that anarchism is a reasonable way of governing human nature. It is interesting to contrast what Orwell believes and what anarchists argue. This is particularly relevant in the 21st century because of the inevitable change in society that is occurring with artificial intelligence. A.I. has an immense potential for creating Orwell’s “Brave New World”. However, his writings reject the ideal of “Anarchy” espoused by Chomsky and Schneider because of its impracticality. Orwell shows that human nature contains both heroism and weakness tied to the material world. Even though human nature is basically decent, it is easily corrupted. That corruption makes humans hope and fear human decisions designed by consensus. It is not to say democratic socialism would be infallible, but it offers a structure for regulation of different governments at chosen intervals of time.

“The Laws of Human Nature” is a tour deforce of what one learns in life.

Human nature will not change. Human nature is a set of relatively stable psychological, biological, and social tendencies that are shared by all human beings. These tendencies shape how humans think, feel, and act even as culture and governance changes. Artificial intelligence will only intensify the strengths and weaknesses of human nature. The principles of anarchy in an A.I. world is frightening:

  • No centralized government, police, or standing armies.
  • Society organized through federations of communes, cooperatives, or councils.
  • Emphasis on direct democracy, mutual aid, and local autonomy.
  • Suspicion of any coercive authority — even democratic majorities.
  • Change often imagined as revolutionary, not incremental.

A more rational alternative to Anarchy is Democratic Socialism believed by Orwell and espoused by MLK.

  • The state remains, but becomes more egalitarian and accountable.
  • Markets may still exist, but are regulated or supplemented by public ownership.
  • Political parties and electoral competition are central.
  • Emphasis on universal programs: healthcare, education, housing, worker protections.
  • Change is gradual, through reforms, not revolution.

Differences of opinion.

There are obvious differences between Chomsky’s and Orwell’s beliefs. Both have social weaknesses. Human nature gets in the way of both forms of governance. Orwell seems to have recognized the weaknesses of his belief in democratic socialism in his writing of “Brave New World”. In contrast, Chomsky’s and Schneider’s pollyannish view of anarchy as “…a better form of government where power is decentralized and citizens can and should collectively manage their own affairs through direct democracy and cooperative organizations” is absurd. The difference is that Orwell foresees the dangers of his idea in “Brave New World” which anticipates something like A.I. that has the potential for society’s destruction. “On Anarchy” ignores the truth of human nature, “Brave New World” does not.

Franciso Franco (1936-1975, died in office.)

Orwell’s decision to join opposition to Franco’s dictatorship fails. Their right-wing beliefs in authoritarianism, anti-communism, and pro-Catholicism prevails. Spain’s 1930s opposition leaders (Manuel Azaña, Largo Caballero, and Juan Negrín) were pro-democracy with anti-fascist, socialists, communists, anarchists, trade unions, urban workers, and peasants who Orwell joined to support democratic socialism, not anarchy.

In the pre-A.I. age, democratic socialism is unachievable, but A.I. may resurrect its potential. However, as Orwell noted, the risk is a “Brave New World” rather than a hoped-for democratic socialism.

PEACE IN ISRAEL

Like America’s Civil War and the issues of slavery and independence, peace will only come to Israel with a political and territorial agreement based on human equality.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

BEING JEWISH AFTER THE DESTRUCTION OF GAZA (A Reckoning)

Author: Peter Beinart

Narration by: Malcolm Gladwell

Peter Beinart (Author, journalist, political commentator, professor, former editor of the New Republic, born in Cambridge, Mass. to Jewish immigrants from S. Africa.)

This is a surprising Jewish author’s analysis of Israel’s response to the horror of Hamas’ murders/rapes of 1200 people and the taking of 251 Jewish hostages on October 7, 2023. Peter Beinart appears to be a devout Jew and journalist who criticizes Israel’s response to Hamas’s brutal attack and hostage taking. He believes, as current news reports confirm, Hamas will return to control and influence Gaza and West Bank Palestinians after Israel’s brutal response to the Hamas’ atrocity.

NYT’s Picture of Grief over the Hamas attack on October 7th, 2023.

Without reservation, Beinart condemns Hamas for their war crime on October 7th. However, his book equally condemns Netanyahu’s response. Beinart points to the Israeli government’s destruction, murder, and starvation of thousands of Palestinian men, women, and children who had nothing to do with the planning or execution of the Hamas horror of October 7th. The author argues Israel must focus on a political, non-military solution to Palestinian human rights. He believes Netanyahu’s actions only perpetuate a cycle of violence in Israel which will not achieve security for either the Israeli or Palestinian people.

One wonders how unpopular Beinart’s opinion may be among Israel’s Jewish population. As a blogger who received written comments from a devout Jewish person who supports Trump and Netanyahu’s actions in Israel, it is surprising to hear Beinart’s analysis of the Gaza war and his criticism of Israel’s actions. As the reviewer of this book who admittedly has little respect for religion and its history of atrocities, it is encouraging to hear from one who believes in their religion and condemns those who have no empathy for other religions. God is a universal concept with religions that worship His existence in different ways. Beinart makes one wonder why there is so little room for a “let it be” attitude toward different religious beliefs.

Empathy.

Beinart argues for Jewish empathy toward Palestinians while condemning Hamas’ actions in Israel. He believes long-term peace requires political compromise and a recognition of Palestinian rights. Military actions only guarantee rather than deter future violence and injustice. Beinart’s plan is to end Israeli’ occupation of Gaza and expand the rights of Palestinians to control Gaza and the West Bank. He argues it can be either a one-state or two-state solution. Beinart argues ground invasion by Israel in Gaza must stop. He recommends forthrightly engaging the humanitarian crises in Gaza by providing aid and rebuilding what has been destroyed.

Pursuit of peace is not easy.

None of this is easy because of the enmity that remains. The complications of political opposition, and security are ongoing concerns for Israelites and Palestinians, but Beinart believes the risks of a negotiated political, religious, and territorial settlement is worth it. Human equality is a work in progress for all nations in the world. Beinart persuasively argues a political and territorial agreement between Palestinians and Israelites is the only possible path to peace. Like America’s Civil War and the issues of slavery and independence, peace will only come to Israel with a political and territorial agreement based on human equality. Of course, the drive for equality remains a work in progress for America. That will be true in Israel for generations to come, but peace can be restored with pursuit of equality for Palestinians and Jews.

A WRITER’S LIFE

Bogg’s biography of James Baldwin shows human beings should not be judged by their racial identity or sexual orientation.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

BALDWIN (A Love Story)

Author: Nicholas Boggs

Narration by: Ron Butler

Nicholas Boggs (Author, born in Washington D.C., a civil rights activist, raised in Cleveland as the son of a civil rights lawyer who was also a music teacher. Received a BA from Yale and PhD in English from Columbia University.)

Nicholas Boggs shows why his biography of James Baldwin is “A Love Story”. Baldwin’s difficult life as a young Black American raised in Harlem offers speculative insight to homosexuality and racism. Baldwin grew up with a stepfather he feared. His stepfather was a stern, authoritarian, and abusive man who worked as a Pentecostal preacher who “raised” James from the age of two or three. His stepfather is said to have beaten him, told Baldwin he was ugly and would never amount to anything. His stepfather died in 1943 when James Baldwin was 19 years old, James became caregiver for his mother and eight siblings.

Treavor Noah’s autobiography writes of his abusive stepfather.

As a voracious reader of books and early sexual liaisons, Baldwin leaves Harlem to go to Paris.

As a 24-year-old, Baldwin scrapes enough money together to travel to Paris where he grew to become a great writer, not just another Black American. Despite a stepfather who disliked white people, James grew to overcome physical and mental abuse through belief in God in his youth and belief in humanity as an adult.

In Paris, the 24-year-old Baldwin falls in love with a white 17-year-old youngster who influences his life with experiences that lead to his success as a writer. Lucian Happersberger and Baldwin become life-long friends.

Lucien Happersberger and James Baldwin in their youth.

Having lived in the household of a Pentecostal Preacher, James initially chose to become a preacher. But, at the age of 17, he left the pulpit and rejected belief in God. Boggs infers Baldwin’s pursuit of literature replaced his belief in God because Christianity sanctifies rather than condemns racism. He felt the church was limiting and dogmatic. His stepfather embodied a religion of fear and bitterness that his stepson would not accept.

The themes of “Go Tell It on the Mountain”, Baldwin’s first published book, is about faith, religion, sin, morality, race, racism, gender, patriarchy, and one’s search for identity.

“Go Tell It on the Mountain” is an autobiographical view of life and growth to manhood as a child raised in Harlem. It took ten years to write “…the Mountain”. It released him from the ghost of his stepfather’s cruelty and set the stage for his exploration of race, religion, sexuality, and personal identity.

Beaufort Delaney (Artist who befriended and became a mentor to James Baldwin.)

Boggs identifies four men that had the greatest influence on Baldwin’s life. His mentor becomes Beauford Delaney, a gay Black American painter he met when he was 16 years old. Delaney was 39 when he met Baldwin. Delaney became a major figure in American modernist painting and the Harlem Renaissance in the 1930s and 40s. He introduced Baldwin to life and encouraged him to become an artist. Delany’s homosexuality helped Baldwin deal with his race and sexual orientation. He helped Baldwin believe in himself and put him on a path toward becoming a literary artist. They were friends for forty years when Delaney died in 1979. Baldwin died 8 years later, acknowledging Delaney as his mentor and guide through his tumultuous life.

Lucien Happersberger (On the far left of James Baldwin.)

The success of “Go Tell It on the Mountain” confirmed Baldwin’s reputation as a writer. Baldwin found truth in the books he read and the life he began to live in Paris. At the age of 24, Baldwin left his family in Harlem to become a writer in Paris. In Paris he falls in love with Lucien Happersberger, a 17-year-old white bisexual who became more relevant to his life than the fire and brimstone of religion. Baldwin grew to believe in the underlying equality of all human beings regardless of the color of their skin or their sexual orientation. His journey to this understanding is what makes the biography the “…Love Story” of Baldwin’s life. Though Lucien and Baldwin remain lifelong friends, Lucien chooses to marry an actress in 1964 which ends Baldwin’s romantic relationship but not Lucien’s outsized influence on his life.

An ironic vignette in Boggs story is Baldwin meeting Richard Wright in America, and later in Paris. Wright’s published book “Native Son” made him famous. “Native Son” is published in the 1940s. The main character in Wright’s book is Bigger Thomas, an impoverished, unemployed, African American, 20-year-old living in a 1930’s Chicago ghetto.  He lives with his mother, sister, and brother in a rat infested one room tenement, owned by a wealthy family that is about to offer him a job. Though Baldwin admired Wright’s achievement, he felt “Native Son” identified Bigger Thomas (Wright’s main character) as a symbol of oppression rather than a fully realized human being. This is an interesting insight to what Baldwin does in “Go Tell It on the Mountain”. Baldwin introduces more complexity to the Black experience of life. I’m not sure either Boggs or Baldwin are offering a fair assessment of “Native Son” because Wright clearly shows the environment in which Bigger Thomas lives. Any human being raised in Bigger Thomas’s circumstance is likely to be emotionally challenged and unbalanced.

Richard Wright (Author of “Native Son”)

History shows a rift is created between Wright and Baldwin because of Baldwin’s criticism. To this reader/listener, both are great writers of what is wrong with white or any dominant sexually or racially dominant society.

Baldwin’s abusive domineering stepfather and submissive mother.

Boggs explains why Baldwin’s biography is “A Love Story”. The cruelty of his stepfather drove Baldwin away from belief in God to a love for humanity. One wonders what his stepfather’s cruelty may have had to do with Baldwin’s sexual orientation. The artist, Beaufort Delaney, offers a refuge to Baldwin from his stepfather’s cruelty and helps him reconcile to his sexual identity and a belief in all humans’ equal rights. Lucien helped Baldwin understand love, intimacy, and the equality of human beings. Lucien decides to marry an actress in 1964 but remains a lifelong friend to Baldwin.

Boggs’ biography of Baldwin shows sexual orientation is not, and should never be, a crime. One cannot know what makes a person homosexual, bisexual, asexual, or heterosexual. Bogg’s biography of James Baldwin shows human beings should not be judged by their racial identity or sexual orientation.

EVIL’S PERSONIFICATION

One asks oneself, what leaders in the world today have remorse for the incarcerations, torture, and killings for which they are responsible? What remorse is there in Putin’s, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s, and even our American President’s thoughts?

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

CONFRONTING EVIL (Assessing the Worst of the Worst)

Author: Bill O’Reilly, Josh Hammer

Narrated By: Robert Petkoff

Bill O’Reilly, American conservative commentator, journalist, author, and television host. Josh Hammer, American conservative commentator, attorney, co-author, and columnist.

History taken out of the context of its time often distorts the reality of the past.

“Confronting Evil” is an interesting if not nuanced history of the most notorious leaders in the world. They were responsible for the torture, incarceration, and death of millions. As is true of most if not all histories of famous and infamous leaders, historians and pundits choose facts that reinforce their view of world’ history. Even the best historian is influenced by the time in which they write and their choice of facts.

Nathan Bedford Forest (1821-1877, General in the Confederate States of America during the Civil War.)

One is appalled by the truth of Nathan Bedford Forest’s view of slavery during America’s Civil War. Forest directed the slaughter of people based on the color of their skin. Forest condoned the murder of all who believed in equality of human beings. Forest is considered a hero to some but with the passage of time and a growing belief in human equality, Forest is recognized as a despicable human being by those who know the history of his life and profession. The evidence of science and human accomplishment show that the color of one’s skin is no measure of intelligence or capability. Forest’s mistreatment of slaves and the wealth he created from trading in slaves is reported in this history. By many measures, Forest is shown as an evil person by O’Reilly and Hammer.

The rule of Genghis Kahn is said to have caused the death of 40 million people, an estimated 11% of the global population at his time in history.

Presumed image of Genghis Kahn (1162-1227, Founder and first Khan of the Mongol Empire.)

By some measures, Mao doubled that 40 million number with his “Great Leap Forward”, the “Cultural Revolution”, his labor camp creations, and political purges. Hitler is estimated to have caused the death of 17 million with his genocidal policies while casualties from WWII are estimated at 85 million. Hitler’s antisemitism is born of the same stupidity exhibited by Nathan Bedford Forest in America’s Civil War. The contribution of Jewish society to the world is incalculable.

Mao Zedong (1893-1976) Father of the Peoples Republic of China)

Mao’s great leap forward is estimated to have caused the death of 35 to 45 million citizens. The rule of Stalin is estimated to have caused the death of 20 to 60 million U.S.S.R.’ citizens. Stalin’s takeover of Poland, and the Baltics after WWII and his cruelty is remembered by survivors of his rule.

There are many other evil characters in “Confronting Evil”. In the mind of westerners, the current leaders of Iran and Russia are evil. The leader of Iran, Ruhollah Khomeini is estimated to have ordered deaths of Iranians that exceed 250,000 since his takeover in 1979. Though he has passed, the succession of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has carried on with tens of thousands who have died in Iran’s involvement with Hamas in Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Lebanon. The predecessor of the religious leaders of Iran was Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi who reigned from 1941-1970. Pahlavi is estimated to have murdered 3,000 to 20,000 during his reign. These leaders ruled over an impoverished state but incomes per capita fell from $34,660 during the Shah’s reign to $3,150 under Khomeini’s rule. An irony is that income inequality hugely increased in Iran during Khomeini’s rule. Nuanced reality is that poverty and victimization of Iranians is more widely spread under Khomeini than under the former Shah. On an economic scale it appears Khomeini’s evil as a leader exceeds the Shah’s rule. Added to the economic difference is the religious zealotry of Khomeini which widened the gap of sexual inequality in Iran.

Ruhollah Khomeini (1st Supreme Leader of Iran, 1979-1989)

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (Current leader of Iran.)

The authors address the illicit drug industry and the evil of Pablo Escobar in Columbia and “El Chapo” Guzmán in Mexico. Escobar was killed in 1993 when pursued by drug enforcement officers while Guzmán is serving a life sentence in the U.S. The drug industry continues to thrive despite the harm it is doing to America and the world. The leaders of the criminal drug industry care nothing for the consequence of their actions because of the wealth and power the illicit trade offers.

Pablo Escobar (now deceased) noted on the left with “El Chapo”(arrested and imprisoned in America) on the right.

The last two chapters of “Confronting Evil” offer a pithy definition of evil. Evil is defined as doing harm without remorse. One doubts any of the leaders noted by the authors have or had any remorse for the atrocities they have committed. Whether they rationalize their behavior for the good of their people, their religion, or their country—they are evil by O’Reilly and Hammer’s definition. One doubts any of the leaders noted in “Confronting Evil” are remorseful.

One asks oneself, what leaders in the world today have remorse for the incarcerations, torture, and killings for which they are responsible? What remorse is there in Putin’s, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s, and even our American President’s thoughts?

THE WEST

Though Mahbubani’s book is quite provocative, it is short and interesting. “How the West Lost It” is certainly worth reading/listening to, but few Presidents of the United States have reversed the admittedly slow improvement of “equality of opportunity” in America.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

How the West Lost It (A Provocation)

Author: Kishore Mahbubani

Narrated By: Jonathan Keeble

Kishore Mahbubani (Author, Singaporean diplomat and geopolitical consultant, former Fellow at Harvard University’s Center for International Relations, formally served as the United Nations Security Council President.)

Mr. Mahbubani’s short book suggests the highly provocative belief that the West’s dominance of the world is giving way to Asia, particularly China and India. To mitigate the West’s decline, Mahbubani argues–the West needs to develop a more “coherent and competitive global strategy”. Paul Kennedy of Yale University praises Mahbubani’s assessment. The public commentator Fareed Zakaria endorses Mahbubani’s belief, and Hilton Root of “The Independent Review” acknowledges Mahbubani’s inference that “the West’s overperformance was a historical aberration and the East’s rise reflects a rebalancing of history”. Despite Root’s measured support of Mahbubani’s book, his analysis is nuanced. Root argues the decline of the West is oversimplified and that Mahbubani underestimates the resilience of Western economies.

Mahbubani argues Great Britain’s Brexit and Trump’s re-election are reactions to the West’s economic decline.

Edwad Luce argues Western liberalism needs to be reinvented by investment in a technological revolution for all Americans, not just those who have benefited from the industrial revolution. However, China seems to have read the future better than the West by building up their reserves of rare metals needed for advanced computer chips. In contrast, President Trump chooses to antagonize allies as well as competitors with a foolish trade war.

Root believes the innovative capacity and adaptability of the West will make adjustments to remain competitive, if not the dominant economic power of the world. Trump’s trade war suggests otherwise. Trump’s attitude is to ignore the years of built-up trust with Western allies and attack the world with destructive economic tariffs meant to right wrongs that are figments of real-politic’ imagination. However, some believe Mahbubani discounts political freedom and the drive of both the West and East to improve citizens’ living standards. That seems somewhat plausible, but Trump is attacking Americas most highly regarded universities with specious concerns with what he considers overactive recruitment of immigrants and minorities. The truth is American education for immigrants aids the strength and influence of Democracy in the world.

Yale University (American education for immigrants aids the strength and influence of Democracy in the world.)

The long cultural, educational, and technological influence of the West may be diminished by some of today’s political leaders but the trend over the last 200 years is unlikely to be reversed by Trump’s misguided authoritarianism. Trump’s significant risks are partially mitigated by publicly ingrained western democratic values. Though democracy is messy, it has demonstrated long-term stability and innovation that equals or exceeds the worst of what Trump’s authoritarianism is doing to the American economy and its institutions. Three more years of Trump’s presidency will not erase America’s legacy or destroy its future.

Though Mahbubani’s book is quite provocative, it is short, impactful, and interesting. “How the West Lost It” is certainly worth reading/listening to, but few Presidents of the United States have reversed the admittedly slow improvement of “equality of opportunity” in America. Mahbubani argues for a more diplomatic American policy with rising nations in the East because he believes China will ultimately replace America as the leading economy in the world.

The interpretation of the Constitution has changed over the last 200 years, but it stands for continuity for America’s present and future.

The direction of American society remains true to the fundamental beliefs of liberty, equality, sovereignty, rule of law, separation of powers, federalism, checks and balances, and individual rights. Trump is challenging some of those rights, but balance of power and term limits will ultimately rescue America from his misbegotten domestic and international blunders. These rights have been challenged at different times in America’s history but never permanently reversed.

BALANCE

It is ironic that Trump has suffered so much from America’s legal system and is unable to see NIMBY mentality and a return to the past will not “Make America Great”.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Breakneck (China’s Quest to Engineer the Future)

Author: Dan Wang

Narrated By:  Jonathan Yen

Feng Chen Wang aka Dan Wang (Author, Canadian technology analyst and writer, visiting scholar at Yale Law School.)

Dan Wang is a highly credible author of the 21st century economies of China and the United States. Mr. Wang’s mother and father were born in China when the one child policy was the law of the land. Mr. Wang was born in Canada in either 1991 or 1992. Though Mr. Wang may be an only child, his parents advised him that living in China was challenging because of its state control and family planning that restricted their human rights.

Dan Wang has lived in Canada, America, and China.

From 2017 to 2023 he worked as a technology analyst in Hong Kong, Beijing, and Shanghai. As a young man, Wang bicycled across China with young friends. Having been educated in Canada and the United States, growing up in Toronto and Ottawa and going to high school in Philadelphia, he has a broad understanding of the economies of all three nations. Of course, his specialty is technology which gives him a unique understanding of what is happening in America and China today. He graduated from the University of Rochester in 2014, studying philosophy and economics.

Trump’s apparent view of Xi.

After listening to Wang’s book, one begins to understand why President Trump’s perspective is that the world, with emphasis on China, has taken advantage of America’s economic wealth by eviscerating its industrial industries with less expensive product made in other countries. Wang presumes as a person who has an economics education that Adam Smith (the Father of Economics) and Donald Trump are right when they argue tariffs are justified in areas of national defense, or for retaliation. On the other hand, Adam Smith, noted “It is the maxim of every prudent master of a family, never to attempt to make at home what it will cost him more to make than to buy.”

Adam Smith (Father of Economic Theory)

Smith argued if another nation can provide the same product for less cost, a prudent buyer should buy the cheaper product and use money saved to produce a different product. Wang and Trump disagree with Smith because the revenue producer that America turns to is the service industry rather than product development. What is missed by Wang and Trump is that America is the third largest agricultural producer in the world with China and India being the largest. Of course, the difference is that America has 1/3rd the population of China and India, respectively. Lower population and high agricultural production in the United States hugely benefits its economy. More significantly, food, like water, is an essential need of life. The point is that non-food product production is not necessary for living life.

Loss of industrial production to China.

Wang’s and Trump’s argument is that America’s loss of industrial production has made it too dependent on other countries. They either infer or say Americans are forgetting how to manufacture product. They argue American industries are closing because of America’s inability to compete with other nations because of labor and material cost differences. History shows America fails to expand its industries because production of things is provided by other nations at a lower cost. And as Adam Smith noted, “It is the maxim of every prudent master of a family, never to attempt to make at home what it will cost him more to make than to buy.”

Wang decries America’s movement toward a service industry as the basis for economic growth.

America is the richest country in the world, but America has failed to eliminate poverty, house the homeless, feed the malnourished, and provide for the infrastructure needed to improve America lives. One may ask oneself-what is wrong with becoming a service industry nation? Why does America have to return to its past. As Adam Smith noted: “It is the maxim of every prudent master of a family, never to attempt to make at home what it will cost him more to make than to buy.” The future is about being healthy, being housed, fed, and clothed. It should not be about being the richest and fattest minority in the world, particularly when there is an inordinate gap between the rich and poor.

Wang argues America’s economy is diminished, not by reduced industrialization, but by its growth of legalism that reinforces nimby (not in my backyard) litigation.

Delays in public improvements in America are restrained by lawsuits that protect the rich and victimize the poor. An example is the long delays in mass transportation improvements which become more costly with every year that passes before completion. The delays are caused by litigation. When China can build rapid transit in 3 years while it takes 15 or more years in America, one wonders why. The huge investments China has made in massive infrastructure improvements have vastly improved their economy. In contrast, America wastes investment resources litigating mass transportation improvements in California, Washington, and other states by increasing costs from delays caused by litigation. It is like throwing the baby out with the bath water because the number of people who benefit from infrastructure improvement are largely discounted or ignored. Equally appalling is homelessness in America because of NIMBY’ objection to low-cost multifamily housing that could get the homeless off the street. Cost benefit analysis should prevail, not litigation based on interest group objection. In Wang’s terms, American infrastructure decisions should be based on science and engineering like, what he argues, China bases their infrastructure decisions upon.

President Eisenhower.

The fundamental point is that America has lost sight of the importance of a balance between benefit to the public and individual rights. Equality of opportunity is split between the rich and poor with the middle class being too complacent while the rich reap unconscionable reward. Where are the Eisenhower-like Presidents who promoted an Interstate Highway System that created a 421,000-mile interstate highway system?

Trump is no Eisenhower because he wishes to return America to a past rather than look to its future. It is ironic that Trump has suffered so much from America’s legal system and is unable to see NIMBY mentality and a return to the past will not “Make America Great”. Wang’s book explains how China has succeeded in improving their economy while America’s economy is failing.

EMIGREE

“The Sun is Also a Star” is a nicely written book that will keep reader/listeners interested in knowing what happens to two young lovers. One is left in suspense until its last chapters.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Sun is Also a Star 

Author: Nicola Yoon

Narrated By: Bahni Turpin & 2 more

Nicola Yoon (Author, Jamaican American, NYT’s bestselling author, National Book Award finalist, electrical engineering undergraduate at Cornell, graduated from Emerson College with a Master of Creative Writing.)

Nicolo Yoon, the author, worked as a programmer in investment management for 20 years before publishing her first book, “Everything Everything”. It became a best seller. “The Sun is Also a Star” is her second published book which also became a best seller. Interestingly, the Jamaican born writer’s husband is a Korean American graphic designer. One presumes her book partly reveals her life experience in America. The credibility of her love story lies in the truth of the saying that “birds of a feather flock together”, an apocryphal Biblical saying that reaches back to the “Book of Ecclesiasticus” in the first century. Her hero and heroine are highly intelligent teenagers of immigrant parents who are influenced by their parent’s native cultures. Being children of immigrants, highly intelligent, high performers in academics, and living in America are why one thinks of the “birds of a feather…” analogy.

JAMAICA, SOUTH OF CUBA, OFF OF THE FLORIDA COAST.

“The Sun is Also a Star” is about a Jamaican girl, a South Korean boy, and the girl’s parents who are being deported because of their illegal immigration status. The heroine’s father comes to America illegally to pursue a career. His wife and daughter follow later in presumably the same illegal way. The girl’s father struggles as an unsuccessful aspiring actor. He and the girl’s mother work at menial jobs for the families’ survival. They are within a day of being deported by the American government. Their daughter loves her mother and is ambivalent about her father. She is a bright high school student nearing graduation. The daughter is seeking help from an immigration attorney to delay and hopefully stop their deportation. On her way to an immigration lawyer’s office, she meets a handsome South Korean boy near her age who is interviewing with an Ivy League school in the same building in which the lawyer practices his profession. They serendipitously meet and their lives become intertwined.

Over 200,000 immigrant arrests in America have been made as of August of 2025.

This is a fairy tale story that offers a truth about the iniquity of arbitrary enforcement and forced ejection of purported illegal immigrants in America. The second term of the Trump’ presidency shows how wrong it is to deport alleged illegal immigrants without judicial review. Obviously, if a legal review shows an immigrant is a criminal there is justification for immediate deportation. If the legal review shows an immigrant has always been a productive and law-abiding citizen of America, some may reasonably argue they should be directed to a program that allows them to eventually become legal residents of the United States.

Without legal review, a valuable source of American productivity is unnecessarily lost. To argue that loss is justified by jobs that will be filled by citizens of the United States is weak because many of the jobs taken are not taken by American citizens because the wages are too low, the physical demands too high, and the hospitality needs of much of America are unmet. It is true that many in America are unemployed because they have chosen to not get a good education and choose to remain unemployed by being unwilling to work for low wages. Their unemployment is not because of illegal immigrants but because of the choices they have made in their lives. Construction, agriculture, hospitality, retail, healthcare, and small businesses have been negatively impacted by the deportation of immigrant labor. In some industries, up to 40% of the workforce has been impacted by deportation.

Yoon’s story is a fairy tale of young love between an illegal and legal immigrant living in America.

Nicolo Yoon explains how love between two people occurs when they have similar life experiences and relate to those experiences with shared intelligence. The young girl and boy have similar life experiences in America. Both choose to educate themselves. The two young teenagers have parents that love them who have their own prejudices and life experiences in ways that influence their children to be ambivalent about the love they have for each parent.

Most parent’s, regardless of their culture, want a better life for their children.

Yoon illustrates the motivations and consequences of people who decide to emigrate. Whether emigrating legally or illegally, emigrees are faced with the difficulty of adjusting to a different culture that conflicts in good and bad ways with the culture they have left. Emigree’ parents wish well for their children but many fail to grasp the freedom offered by American culture to choose their own path in life. Even though life choices are influenced by one’s intellect, emotions, and (in America) a white majorities’ discrimination, most young people are able to choose their own path in life.

“The Sun is Also a Star” is a nicely written book that will keep reader/listeners interested in knowing what happens to two young lovers. One is left in suspense until its last chapters.

LIFE’S JOURNEY

Millman’s Socratic story is about human patience and knowledge. He addresses knowledge as something of the greatest value that can keep one from resorting to violence. This is a message that resonates with those who are appalled by today’s international and domestic conflicts.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Journeys of Socrates

Author: Dan Millman

Narrated By: Sam Tsoutsouvas

Dan Millman (Author, world champion athlete, martial arts instructor, and college professor.)

Dan Millman’s reasons for the title of his book “The Journeys of Socrates” is difficult to understand. The known facts of Socrates life do not seem remotely related to the life of a Jewish immigrant who lived in 19th century Russia. The story is almost too horrific to believe because of the tragic life of its hero Sergei Ivanov, a Jew in Tsarist Russia being raised in a camp of Cossack warriors. The only parallels one may make is that Socrates is characterized in ancient writings as a man who sought virtue and wisdom in his journey through life.

Socrates was known as a warrior in the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta (431-404 BCE). He is better known as a teacher and student of the philosophy of life.

Socrates had gained a reputation for bravery, endurance, and moral fortitude in war, while a mentor of young men like Alcibiades who wanders through life with little self-understanding. (It is the ancient writings of Plato, Xenophon, and Aristophanes that reveal some of what is told of Socrates life.) This seems a slender thread of association with the title of Millman’s book. The story of Sergei Ivanov is of a man who introspectively examines the meaning of life after experiencing horrific violence. This is a Socratic interrogation of a Jew’s life in pre-1917, revolutionary Russia and Ukraine.

Hiding one’s identity as a Jew has been told many times by many authors. Ethnicity and religious belief, like the color of one’s skin, marks one as different.

Ethnicity is a marker of human beings as the “other”, i.e., someone different than themselves. Unlike the color of one’s skin, ethnicity is easier to hide. Sergei Ivanov becomes known as a Jew in a Cossack training camp. He decides to escape that life but is followed by a fellow trainee who catches him. They fight and Sergi’s antagonist is knocked unconscious and appears dead. Sergi escapes and plans to find what he believes is a treasure buried by his grandfather that will give him enough money to get passage to America from his grandfather’s Ukranian homeland.

Buried treasure.

Sergi finds the treasure that had been buried by his grandfather, but it was only a clock and five gold pieces, not enough for passage to America. However, there is an address on the clock that leads him to his grandfather’s house. What he finds is an aunt that he thought was dead. She has a daughter for whom he falls in love and asks for her hand in marriage. They are married and Sergi’s plan is to take his now pregnant wife to America when he has earned enough money for passage. However, fate intervenes.

The man Sergi thought he had killed when he escaped the training camp was alive and had become a leader of a Cossack gang that terrorized the country with a special hatred for Jews.

The gang comes across Sergi and his pregnant wife when they are out for a walk before their planned trip to America. His former enemy and his followers murder Sergi’s wife, rip the baby out of her womb and leave her husband unconscious on the ground after trying to defend his pregnant wife. The gang leader chooses to leave Sergi alive to remember the grief he would have for his wife and baby’s loss of life because he could not save them. Sergi recovers and prepares himself for revenge on his former training camp antagonist.

Deaths inevitability.

At this point, one presumes this is to remind listeners of Socrates reported bravery, endurance, and moral belief despite hardship in life and one’s inevitable death. However, this is only a small part of the author’s intent. What one draws from the story is how ethnic or racial discrimination exists in every nation in the world. Human nature is often brutish and violent despite a rational person’s search for truth and peaceful coexistence. One asks oneself why humans wage war, why we murder innocents, and why does revenge only begat more death.

Sergi recovers from his injuries and is counseled and educated by a believer of a different faith.

As one finishes Millman’s story, listener/readers realize Sergi’s teacher is educating him about human patience, ethnic understanding, and knowledge that can break the repeating cycle of discrimination and violence caused by racial, gender, and ethnic difference. It requires patience, preparation, and knowledge. Sergi spends many years with his teacher and gains great strength to prepare him for what is to happen next in his life. Knowledge of what happened when he was struck down after his wife was murdered is not clear to him. As the story develops, one finds his wife had two children in her womb and only one died in the confrontation. What happens when Sergi meets his wife’s murderer is the denouement and fundamental meaning of Millman’s story.

Millman’s Socratic story is about human patience and knowledge. He addresses knowledge as something of the greatest value that can keep one from resorting to violence. This is a message that resonates with those who are appalled by today’s international and domestic conflicts.

GENDER MATTERS

All gender differences beyond women’s birth of children seem more culturally than naturally determined. Gender does matter but not because of inherent qualities but because of cultural influences.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Why Gender Matters (What Parents and Teachers Need to Know About the Emerging Science of Sex Differences) 

Author: Leonard Sax MD PhD

Narrated By: Keith Sellon-Wright

Leonard Sax (Author, psychologist and family physician, graduate of MIT and the University of Pennsylvania.)

After listening to Sayaka Murata’s satire about gender differences and a future that minimizes the differences between males and females, one may wish to read/hear what a physician writes about gender and why difference matters. In listening/reading Doctor Sax’s book, this review is somewhat skeptical of his judgement about gender differences. Having been raised by a single parent, some of what he claims seems formulaic and based on weak evidence.

Gender differences.

Though Dr. Sax cites studies that support stereotypes of girls who are less inclined to pursue math and science, it seems impossible to separate acculturation from gender bias. One wonders if his opinion is not influenced by his own gender. As is true of all human judgements, we have a tendency to conflate correlation with causation.

Whether there is a direct relationship between two variables like gender and one’s potential in science or math may be culturally reinforced rather than intellectually adduced.

There may be some truth in gender difference based on women giving birth that naturally induces a more nurturing requirement for women than men. The fact that women bare children and traditionally take on the role of caregiving suggests a cultural as well as gender driven characteristic. Inequality of the sexes is well documented by numerous studies that show women are paid less for the same work done by men. Unequal pay has nothing to do with biology.

Gender difference.

It is economic and social circumstance that limits women’s potential. The question becomes whether a woman would run a business any differently than a man based on gender. One might believe women who have given birth may manage differently because of their experience as nurturers of early life. Why else, if education and intelligence are similar, would there be any difference between a woman or man who manages others?

Though most humans wish to be part of something greater than themselves, the shaming in this cell-phone age seems significantly more impactful on women than on men.

On the other hand, there are some observations about gender differences that seem true when one thinks about their own life experience. Though social acceptance is important to both sexes, it seems boys are less likely to be as stressed about not being part of the “in group” than girls. Though even that is challengeable in that males also have a desire to be a part of something greater than themselves.

On balance, this listener/readers’ opinion is that Doctor Sax’s explanation of innate gender difference is suspect with the caveat that women are different from men in that they give birth.

All gender differences beyond women’s birth of children seem more culturally than naturally determined. Gender does matter but not because of inherent qualities but because of cultural influences.

ANARCHY

In reading/listening to Chomsky some will conclude he is wrong about there ever being a nation-state that will be successfully governed as an Anarchy because of the nature of human beings.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

On Anarchisn 

Author: Noam Chomsky, Nathan Schneider

Narrated By: Eric Jason Martin

Norm Chomsky
Nathan Schneider

When one thinks of a political system called Anarchism, the first thing that comes to mind is a vision of rampant disorganization where there is no sense of direction or social cohesion.

Noam Chomsky is a polarizing figure who is admired as an anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist who fiercely criticizes U.S. and Israeli foreign policy. He views Israel as a client state of the U.S. that relies on authoritarianism to manage their countries roles in the world. He notes America’s interventions in Vietnam, Central America, Iraq, and Afghanistan as evidence of America’s failure as a democracy. He views Israeli foreign policy in regard to Gaza as infected with hypocrisy and violence with a narrow view of territorial expansion. He feels both America and Israel are driven by strategic and economic interests, not by the idealism of democracy.

Chomsky is a fierce critic of capitalism and imperialism because both marginalize citizens’ freedom of thought and action.

Chomsky’s view is that anarcho-syndicalism is a better form of government where power is decentralized and citizens can and should collectively manage their own affairs through direct democracy and cooperative organizations. He argues for participatory democracy by voluntary associations that are freely formed into cooperative communities. There should be no centralized authority with all workplaces and production controlled by the workers themselves. He believes in libertarian socialism because he sees it as the most humane and rational extension of Enlightenment ideals in society. Any authority exercised by a government entity in a libertarian socialist country, in Chomsky’s opinion, is the most humane and rational extension of the ideals of the Enlightenment.

The Age of Enlightenment or sometimes called the Age of Reason was a movement in the late 17th century that extended into the 19th century.

It emphasized the power of reason, science, and individual liberty as the tools for the reform of society. The tools of reason, science, and liberty were believed to be the natural rights of humanity, and the possibility of improving society through education and reform based on science.

Francisco Franco (Spain’s dictator 1939-1975.)

Chomsky argues those tools were engaged by Spanish revolutionaries during Franco’s dictatorship in Spain. Chomsky notes workers took control of factories and farms in Catalonia and Aragon that were run collectively and democratically by workers. He believes voluntary cooperation thrived. He believes the anarchist movement grew through three generations based on education and considered organization of Spanish interest groups. However, Franco’s forces with the help of England, Germany, and Italy defeated the movement.

Republican factions fought against Franco’s government in the 1930s.

Chomsky believes revolutionaries against Franco were practical visionaries that showed how anarchy could be a legitimate and superior way of governing a nation.

Surprisingly, there are several examples besides Spain’s revolution that were collectivist organizations that could be classified as anarchies. From 1918-1921, the free territory of Ukraine was led by Nestor Makhno during Russia’s Civil War. It was ended by Russian communism after its ascension in 1917. Modern communes were set up in Mexico’s Zapatista territories with autonomous zones that had collective farming and indigenous self-rule. Of course, in ancient times there were hunter-gatherer societies that shared norms, and governance through consensus decision-making and resource sharing. However, there is a history of atrocity, failure, and disruption by governing bodies that have tried Anarchy. Spain’s effort fell apart in 1939. Freetown Christiania in Denmark, in a neighborhood in Copenhagen has struggled with Anarchy since 1971. A number of legal battles have been fought over commercial ownership and control. By some measures, the kibbutz movement in Israel has been successful. However, even Chomsky notes friction comes within kibbutz communities over disagreement with elected leaders. Research shows that some kibbutzim are privatizing and paying differential wages for communal services. Collectivism is becoming harder to maintain.

Chomsky is considered by some to be the most important intellectual alive today. He is highly respected for theories on the understanding of language based on modern cognitive science.

Chomsky has shaped how we think of human capabilities. He is famous for his dissents which are naturally about government control and media manipulation. He was against the Vietnam war and opposed Israeli occupation because of his libertarian socialism, a form of anarchy or a collective that is purely democratically determined. He is reported to be an excellent lecturer and capable of going toe to toe with experts in linguistics, philosophy, political science, and education. His opinions have global reach with translations in many languages.

In reading/listening to Chomsky some will conclude he is wrong about there ever being a nation-state that will be successfully governed as an Anarchy because of the nature of human beings. Whether one believes in Hobbes’ view of selfish humans, Rousseau’s belief in people being corrupted by society, Kant’s belief in rationality, or Sartre’s belief in human choices and actions, there will always be dominant personalities who will victimize those whom they commune. Human nature as defined by Hobbes, Rousseau, Kant, Sartre, and other brilliant philosophers infer there will always be miscreate leaders that will destroy egalitarianism, the foundational principle of anarchy. Human nature, as it exists today, is unlikely to change.