IMPERIAL ELITE

Kaplan’s last chapters make a powerful statement about what America should do to meet today’s and tomorrow’s challenges.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“Earning the Rockies” (How Geography Shapes America’s Role in the World)

By: Robert D. Kaplan

Narrated by: William Dufris

Robert Kaplan (American Author, freelance journalist and foreign correspondent.)

The first chapters of Robert Kaplan’s “Earning the Rockies” are a travel memoir about America’s growth from 13 colonies to 50 states, but the last two chapters are a considered view of America’s turbulent history and what its role should be in the world.

Kaplan explains he comes from a working-class family born in New York City.

Kaplan was raised on the East Coast. His father was a local truck driver. However, his son became a world traveler who served in the Israeli Army and worked as a freelance writer for major publications. His travels and professional reporting experience undoubtedly influence his opinions about America’s role in the world.

Kaplan’s book begins with memories of his beloved father who talked to him about many things, one of which is a belief that “Earning the Rockies” requires one to work to make a living before traveling across the country.

Kaplan writes an apocryphal story of traveling from the east to west coast of America. In reflecting on his journey, he recalls the history of America’s growth as a nation state. He writes of white settler’s displacement of Indian tribes, a journey to the northwest by leaders of the Mormon church, and America’s growth and assembly of 50 states.

In his travels, Kaplan recalls:

1) America’s territorial growth with the Louisiana purchase,

2) confrontation with Mexico to expand America’s southwestern border,

3) Civil War for union rather than separation, and

4) Mormon and other pioneer travels on the Oregon Trail to see and settle the Northwest.

America becomes an economic giant, protected from foreign interference by two oceans.

In the creation of this American geographic giant, many territorial, political, and economic conflicts were resolved. Kaplan’s suggests America’s economic growth is based on force and compromise, the keys to America’s future in the world.

Kaplan’s American heroes are George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and George H.W. Bush. He adds the extraordinary insight of Ambassador George Kennan in his analysis of Russia. Kaplan notes other great leaders, but these four Presidents and one diplomat are examples of how American leaders use force and compromise to enhance the power and prestige of democracy in the world.

Kaplan explains prudent use of force and compromise is how the west was won and how America became an economic hegemon, a power and influence in the world.

Union of America’s States was perpetuated with force, while compromise continues to ameliorate the wrongs done to Indians and Blacks in America. Those wrongs will never be removed but compromise inures to the benefit of future generations.

Kaplan argues there is an imperial elite in America, similar to what were the elite and influential intellectuals of ancient Greece.

Many of these elites graduated from Harvard or other ivy league schools. (There is an “echo chamber” risk when too many leaders are educated in the same ivy league school.) Along with this imperial elite, he suggests America’s sea power is as important today as it was for the Greeks in antiquity. Sea power widened the influence of Greece just as it widens the influence of America today.

China is working toward a similar goal with its expansion of aircraft carrier and warship production.

Prudent use of power and compromise will expand the influence of every country that has hegemonic ambition. The operative word is “prudent”, i.e., navigating life with a thoughtful eye toward the future. Of course, there is a difference between China’s and America’s political prudence, but each is able to draw on resources that can change the course of history. The question becomes which has a system of government that can prudently use force and compromise to achieve peace and prosperity?

China’s and Russia’s education system leans toward communism which has not had the same level of success as capitalism.

America’s imperial elite is largely educated in American’ ivy league schools. Kaplan suggests, to the extent that these elitists grasp the importance of using force and compromise through democratic capitalism, the world has a chance for peace and prosperity.

Kaplan notes there is less geographic advantage for America today because of technological interconnectedness.

However, interconnectedness cuts both ways. Force and compromise have wider influence with technological interconnectedness. Whether today’s imperial elitists are prudent in their use of force and compromise is most important. Kaplan strongly suggests America should build the Navy to be a symbol of force and presence around the world. However, leadership of the many as opposed to the one as in in China, Russia, or any autocracy seems equally important.

Kaplan’s last chapters make a powerful statement about what America should do to meet today’s and tomorrow’s challenges.

UNIONIZATION

Nolan clearly illustrates how important political power is in balancing corporate owner/managers’ disproportionate incomes and privileges with labor.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“The Hammer” (Power, Inequality, and the Struggle for the Soul of Labor)

By: Hamilton Nolan

Narrated by: Franklin Pierson

Hamilton Nolan (Author and free-lance Journalist)

“The Hammer” is a paean to unionization. Unions lost much of their political power in the early 1970s. Political power of labor was diminished by State governments, poor labor union management, and a diminishing number of labor union members. Nolan’s argument is workers have to reestablish political power to change their unfair and inequitable relationship with business.

The widening gap between rich and poor is traced to the era of President Reagan when the first deep cuts in corporate taxes occur.

Reagan fought unionization by firing air traffic controllers that sought better wages. Reagan’s supporters believed government social programs were out of control and their cost diminished the power of free enterprise. Much of the American public either agreed or were apathetic. However, as the gap between rich and poor accelerated, Americans began to complain about inequality. With extraordinary income increases for business owners and CEOs, and repressed wages for workers, the need for unionized political power became self-evident. Nolan introduces his book about unionization with a brief biography of Sara Nelson.

Sara Nelson (AFA president of the Association of Flight Attendants.)

Nolan writes about Sara Nelson who became a union member when she worked for United Airlines as a stewardess. Nelson was born and lived in Corvallis, Oregon. She applies for a job with United Airlines in St. Louis. She gets the job but her first paycheck is late. She couldn’t pay her rent. A check is given to her by a union employee to tide her over until her first check is delivered. From that day forward, according to Nolan, Nelson became a supporter of unions. Eventually Nelson becomes the president of the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA).

Liz Shuler (President of the AFL-CIO since 8/5/21.)

Ironically, the first woman President of the AFL-CIO is also from Oregon. Liz Shuler received a bachelor’s degree in journalism from U of O in Eugene, Oregon. She became a union activist after college and worked to organize clerical workers at Portland General Electric. She is elected as the President of the AFL-CIO in 2021 after serving as the first woman Secretary-Treasurer of the organization.

Nolan’s book addresses State conflicts with unionizers and family-income for low-income workers. The first states he addresses are South Carolina and California. Nolan notes South Carolina has become a haven for businesses wishing to avoid unions. South Carolina’ State laws discourage unionization which appeals to businesses wishing to relocate. Nolan notes South Carolina attracts businesses looking to improve profits by reducing labor costs. The consequence of business’s lower labor cost is to reduce South Carolina workers’ standard of living. South Carolina’s workers are among the lowest (19th out of 50 States) paid workers in the U.S. Nolan implies South Carolina’s income inequality is a consequence of the State’s policy of discouraging unionization.

California has the fourth largest income inequality in the U.S.

Nolan notes the cascading negative of unfair compensation for domestic labor. Though California now allows childcare servers to be unionized, their unionization efforts are discouraged by government regulation, as well as the fragmentation of its poorly compensated workers. The consequence of State government regulation keeps wages low and discourages entrepreneurs from starting childcare’ businesses. A compounding negative is created when users of childcare’ service, women in particular, are unable to work in regular work-day jobs. Workers are compelled to stay home to take care of their children, reducing family income and further impoverishing low-income childcare’ workers. It becomes a vicious cycle, hurting entrepreneurs trying to start a childcare service, employees wishing to increase family income, and employers needing more workers.

Nolan expands his argument by noting how service industries in Las Vegas, the State of Florida, New Orleans, and Mississippi are benefited by unionization.

Vacation and gambling meccas like Las Vegas, Florida, New Orleans and Mississippi need service industry employees. These vacation and gambling meccas depend on service quality for visiting tourists. Lack of representation for service employees diminishes employee’ standards of living which indirectly damages the reputation of the entertainment and vacation industry.

In Las Vegas, where Nolan lived for twenty years, the service industry is protected by the Culinary Union.

Nolan notes how strong the Culinary Union has become in Las Vegas and disparages casino owners like the Fertitta’s who have fought unionization. Numerous examples are given to show how union actions have improved the lives of Casino workers, many of which are immigrants from other countries.

Nolan’s argument for the value of unionization is compelling but his encomium for the union movement ignores America’s immigration crises.

The vast need for immigration reform is not being forcefully addressed by unions. Compensation inequity is a noble fight carried out by unionization, but it needs to broaden its role in immigration. Unions need to use their power and influence to change immigration policies to equitably treat a labor force that is sorely needed in America. Unions need to help educate and house legal immigrants, so they do not become a part of America’s growing homelessness. Additionally, unions could use their recruiting expertise to get Americans off the street by providing job training services and gainful employment.

Public perception of unions could be monumentally improved with a program to recruit and indoctrinate the homeless with training for jobs in the 21st century.

There is so much that unions could do to far exceed the minimalist goal noted in Liz Shuler’s plan to add a million union members over the next 10 years. Nolan pitches for Sara Nelson as a more dynamic leader for the union movement. Maybe Nelson would be better than Shuler, but growth, value, and public perception of union members could be monumentally improved with a program to recruit and indoctrinate the homeless with training and jobs for the 21st century.

Whomever the leaders of unionization may be in the future, Nolan clearly illustrates how important political power is in balancing corporate owner/managers’ disproportionate incomes and privileges with labor.

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.

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.

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.

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.

RICH AND POOR

Contrary to Leonhardt’s optimism, whether the American power structure continues to shift toward a more equitable treatment of the poor remains to be seen.

Blog: awalkingdelight

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“Ours Was the Shining Future”

By: David Leonhardt

Narrated by: Dan John Miller

David Leonhardt (Author, journalist and columnist, writes “The Morning” newsletter for the “New York Times”, received a BS from Yale in applied mathematics in 1994.)

David Leonhardt writes an encomium to Democratic Capitalism in “Ours Was the Shining Future”. Some of what Leonhardt writes will make conservative Americans gag while liberals will tend to praise his view of American history. The hot button issues of 21st century America are immigration and the rising gap between rich and poor.

“Dallas, Texas, United States – May 1, 2010 a large group of demonstrators carry banners and wave flags during a pro-immigration march on May Day.”

Leonhardt’s selected historical facts argue that immigration has a cost to America that is mitigated by its contribution to the economy by second and later generation immigrants. He resurrects John F. Kennedy’s oft quoted phase about America as “A Nation of Immigrants”. Leonhardt argues the rising gap between rich and poor accelerated with the election of Ronald Reagan and subsequent tax and spend decisions made by later government administrations.

The difficulty one may have with Leonhardt’s reporting is that historical facts do not speak for themselves.

It is the power of Leonhardt’s persuasion rather than the facts of history (and one’s own prejudices) that make a credible argument for

(1) the benefit of unionization in America,

(2) the benefit of intervention by the Franklin Roosevelt administration during the depression,

(3) the aggressive tax reduction for high income earners with government overspending (beginning with Ronald Reagan) that negatively affected the American economy and disproportionately increased the gap between the rich and poor, and

(4) the monumental economic benefits from second generation immigrants like Sundar Pichai (CEO of Google), Indra Nooyi (former CEO of PepsiCo), Elaine Chao (the U.S. Secretary of Transportation under Trump), and Lin-Manuel Miranda (the creator of the Broadway musicals “Hamilton” and “In the Heights”), and others.

Leonhardt recounts the history of the union movement in America that evolved into a political power that improved the income and lives of the working poor.

He touches on the corruption of the union movement but on balance suggests more good than bad came from its representation of labor. Leonhardt argues the decline of unionization and tax policy changes in the late 20th century increased the gap between rich and poor.

Leonhardt argues immigration needs reform and infers it should begin with acceptance of an estimated 340,000 children (dreamers) born in the U.S. to unauthorized immigrants.

He suggests new immigration should be limited to immediate relatives of legal immigrants that presently live in the U.S. He reiterates the value of second-generation immigrants while acknowledging the burden borne by the economy with first generation immigrants. New immigrants generally have a language deficiency, greater education needs, and a willingness to work at jobs for lower pay than non-immigrant workers who also need jobs.

Leonhardt suggests the gap between rich and poor is a function of an unequal distribution of political power.

Leonhard believes improvement is coming from a resurgent union movement and an evolving recognition by both conservatives and liberals of the consequence of inequitable tax treatment that favors the rich.

There is some evidence to support Leonhardt’s belief in a power shift with the recent union actions in automobile, teacher. and nursing services strikes that increased their income. Minimum wages have risen in 22 states that have affected an estimated 10 million workers. The highest are in California ($16), Massachusetts ($15.75), and Washington ($15.50).

However, one is inclined to be skeptical about income gap reduction with Trump’s Presidency that further reduced taxes on the rich and Biden’s reluctance to act on tax inequality.

Leonhardt receives a Pulitzer Prize for Commentary, the Gerald Loeb Award for excellence in reporting on business, finance, and the economy, a New York Time Book Review Editors’ Choice award, and The Atlantic’s Ten Best Books of the Year for the most notable and influential book of the year. These are nice academic rewards but whether Leonhardt’s arguments are anything more than a finger in a dike, near a breaking point, is yet to be revealed.

Contrary to Leonhardt’s optimism, whether the American power structure continues to shift toward a more equitable treatment of the poor remains to be seen. The continued popularity of Trump among conservatives is disheartening and suggests otherwise.

PRICE OF FREEDOM

Mandela’s biography and today’s conflict between Hamas and Israel makes one ask oneself–Is a tenuous and ephemeral peace worth the death of innocents?

Audio-book Review
By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Long Walk to Freedom

By: Nelson Mandela

Narrated by: Michael Boatman

Nelson Mandela, (1918-2013, Died at age 95, South African anti-apartheid activist and politician, President of South Africa 1994-1999)

Nelson Mandela’s autobiography details the life of a remarkable and important leader of South Africa’s revolt against apartheid. Mandela began as a pacifist resister of white repression. However, his autobiography shows a change in belief from passive resistance to violence. (Mandela’s evolution from pacifist to belief in violence for social change is a reminder of the evolution of Malcolm X , the rise of the Black Panthers in America, and the Hamas and Israeli conflict in Palestine and Israel.)

Factions of the world today, like Mandela’s thought and action in the mid-20th century, believe in the utility of violence and terror for social change. The state of Israel, the territory of Gaza, and many countries of the world, like India, Lebanon, Iran, Hong Kong, Sudan, Libya, America, and others have political factions that believe they can change their societies with violence and terror. The conundrum of violence and terror is whether they proffer social gain or loss. The truth of gain or loss from violence and terror is being tested by the Hamas faction of Palestine and the conservative followers of Netanyahu in Israel.

The likelihood of a young African boy raised in a small village becoming President of South Africa beggars the imagination.

Mandela’s autobiography explains how it happened. There are 11 officially recognized tribes in South Africa. Mandela was born into the Thembu royal family, a subgroup of the Xhosa people. He explains his father, though not literate or formally educated, is a leader in his village. Mandela notes that his father had four wives and travelled between villages to spend time with each wife. When his father was away, his birth mother took care of him, but his father, as well as his mother, seem to have had great influence on his life. Mandela tells of walks with his father and the conversations his father has with other village members that mold Mandela’s beliefs and ambition in life.

Mandela notes his mother guides him to an important change in his life. When his father dies, his mother moves to a bigger village where he comes under the care of a regent of the Thembu tribe.

Mandela is effectively adopted into the royal Thembu family and moves into their palace. His ambition seems stimulated by that association and inspires him to become a formally educated South African.

Mandela receives a BA degree from Fort Hare in Alice, South Africa in 1943. He studied law at the University of Witwatersrand in Johannesburg. At that time, Mandela did not receive a law degree but was able to practice law because of a two-year diploma in law as an add-on to his BA. (When imprisoned, he studies, passes his University of South Africa’ law classes, and receives an LLB in 1989.) Mandela chooses to use his two-year diploma in law to become an advocate for Black liberation in South Africa. After graduation and his beginning practice of law, he is counseled by some to abandon politics to avoid arrest and intimidation by the government. However, Mandela chooses to join the African National Congress (ANC) in 1943. He becomes the co-founder of the youth league of ANC in 1944.

In his early ANC years, Mandela emphasized passive resistance like that practiced by Mahatma Gandhi in India. ANC had been formed in 1912 as a South African native congress but grew to become a multi-racial organization including all races and ethnic groups in South Africa. Mandela notes that the communist party was interested in being part of ANC’s role in liberating South Africans from apartheid. Mandela expresses reservation about the CPSA (the Communist Party of South Africa) but acknowledges its help in raising funds for an ANC army that was to be organized by Mandela as a militant resistance force to overcome apartheid. CPSA influence and ANC association became a part of the movement.

As a politician, Mandela had no experience in armed resistance. It is interesting that he is chosen to form the first ANC terrorist cell.

Mandela grows to believe political recognition requires violent resistance but also a personal ability to persuade others to join the ANC’ movement either financially or physically. Mandela is trained in Ethiopia by Col Fekadu Wakene on how to plant explosives and manage a volunteer army.

Col Fekadu Wakene taught South African political activist Nelson Mandela the tricks of guerrilla warfare – including how to plant explosives before slipping quietly away into the night. (BBC Africa by Penny Dale)

Ironically, Mandela is arrested in 1961 after only one action by his gathered volunteer army in December 1961. Whether the action is at the order of Mandela is not revealed but the resistance blows up an electricity sub-station. Mandela is arrested and serves 27+ years in prison for organizing the volunteer army which became known as Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation). Three years of trial led to a guilty verdict.

Mandela was arrested and charged with high treason along with his collaborators. The Rivonia Trial turned Mandela into a symbol of the struggle against apartheid.

The last chapters of Mandela’s autobiography is about his incarceration on Robben Island and Pollsmoor Prison and the conditions of his imprisonment. While in prison, Mandela continues his education to become a licensed attorney.

In the first two years at Robben Island, Mandela and his co-conspirators are restricted to their cells. Methodist religious services were eventually allowed but sermonizing about reconciliation offended Mandela and his fellow prisoners. Though much of what some ministers preached were offensive to the imprisoned, Mandela approves of one minister who looks at his religion through the lens of science as well as faith.

Mandela and his co-conspirators remain at Robben Island for 18 years before being transferred to Pollsmoor Prison in Cape Town. This is a significant improvement in their incarceration because of cell accommodations and food quality. However, his co-conspirators are separated from Mandela. Mandela is released in 1990, over 29 years after arrest.

Mandela explains a door is opened to the government of South Africa by Kobie Coetsee (1931-2000, died at age 69), the South African minister of justice and prisons.

In 1985, Botha was President of South Africa. Botha offered release to Mandela if he would unconditionally renounce violence against the government. Mandela refused and Botha denied Mandela’s release.

When F. W. de-Klerk became President of South Africa, after being Minister of National Education, a possibility for Mandela’s release was reopened.

Later, Mandela negotiated with de-Klerk to have his co-conspirators released from Robben Island and Pollsmoor. Further, Mandela negotiated with de-Klerk to have South Africa’s apartheid policies eliminated. President de-Klerk agreed, and Mandela was released in 1990. Both de-Klerk and Mandela receive the Nobel Peace prize for their negotiated peace agreement.

The last three-hour section of Mandela’s autobiography is about freedom and Mandela’s election as President of South Africa. The price of peace is high because violence seems a requirement for good-faith negotiation between opposing parties. Mandela’s biography and today’s conflict between Hamas and Israel makes one ask oneself–Is a tenuous and ephemeral peace worth the death of innocents?

(There is a brief interview with the author who aided Mandela in completion of his autobiography. It took two years of interviews and research to complete Mandela’s story.)

SEPARATE NOT EQUAL

Reflecting on “Blood Brothers”, a listener understands America is a long way from the ideal of equality. Being equal does not mean everyone can be the greatest heavy-weight boxer in the world. Equality means every citizen can choose to be the best version of themselves without being repressed by the society in which they live.

Audio-book Review
By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Blood Brothers (The Fatal Friendship Between Muhammad Ali and Malcolm X)

By: Randy Roberts Johnny Smith

Narrated by: David Drummond

Randy Roberts and Johnny Smith offer a nuanced and well-written view of Muhammed Ali, his fame, his skill as a heavy weight boxing champion, and figure head for the Nation of Islam (NOI). The author’s juxtapose Ali and Malcolm X as “Blood Brothers” who shed light on the unquestionable value and horrendous harm religious belief can impose on society.

Roberts and Smith show human nature is an unconquerable beast that both leads and misleads humanity. The maturity and personal growth of Muhammed Ali and Malcolm X is revealed in “Blood Brothers”. They both become members of NOI, an American faction of Islam, that preaches Black America can only be equal through separation from non-black people. Elijah Muhammed, a self-proclaimed Messenger of Allah, creates a fellowship of Black Muslims (NOI) who insist on a Black American nation, independent of American governance. Elijah Muhammed insists–in order to become democratically free and equal to non-Black American citizens, an independent Black American nation must be formed.

What Roberts’ and Smith’s history shows is NOI’s flaw is in belief that separate can ever be equal based on race, religion, or color.

Though self-worth and pride can be immeasurably enhanced by exclusionary race, religion, or difference what is missed is the truth of human nature. Human nature is riven with self-interest based on money, power, and/or prestige. Elijah Muhammed and other leaders of religion are human. Religious leader’s self-interest drains the life out of Divinities force. In one sense, NOI offers a sense of pride and equality for Black Americans but in another, it creates further discrimination and inequality with separation and distinction from others.

Roberts’ and Smith’s story of Malcolm X, and to a lesser extent, Muhammed Ali’s friendship, show how religion can bring people together, but also tear them apart. Malcolm X evolves from an intelligent street punk to an insightful leader of the Muslim religion. Malcolm becomes a favorite of NOI until he challenges its leader (Elijah Muhammed) for abandoning what he believes is a fundamental tenant of the faith, marriage chastity. Malcolm X exposes extra-marital affairs of Elijah Muhammed as evidence of the leader’s fall from faith. As his disaffection grows, Malcolm X begins to believe separate cannot be equal and that NOI’s belief in separation of the races is a violation of a faith that says Allah or God created all humankind.

Elijah Muhammad (Leader of NOI 1934-1975, Born in 1897 as Elijah Robert Poole, Died at age 77 in 1975.)

Malcolm X is a teacher of Ali before his break with the leader of NOI. Malcolm X appeals to Ali’s innate ability as a fighter and doggerel actor for truth and justice. Ali is put in the position of following Malcolm’s differences with Elijah Muhammed or staying within the Nation of Islam. The authors infer Ali looks at Elijah Muhammed as the father he wishes he had while Malcolm X as a brother who has been led astray.

To the authors, the assassination of Malcolm X by NOI’s followers is inferred by Ali to be a threat to his life if he forsakes NOI’ beliefs. When Elijah Muhammed dies, some years after Malcolm’s assassination, Ali revises his view of NOI and leans more toward the teachings of his former friend, Malcolm X. Ali moderates NOI’s anti-white sentiment.

Reflecting on “Blood Brothers”, a listener understands America is a long way from the ideal of equality. Being equal does not mean everyone can be the greatest heavy-weight boxer in the world. Equality means every citizen can choose to be the best version of themselves without being repressed by the society in which they live.

GREEK TRAGEDY

Detroit manages to restructure their debt with the help of its citizens. Greece is caught in the grips of E.U.’ and IMF’ bureaucracy that only increases its debt.

Audio-book Review
 By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Adults in the Room (My Battle with the European and American Deep Establishment)

By: Yanis Varoufakis

Narrated by: Leighton Pugh

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 gives listeners a glimpse of decisions made when a national government is compelled to declare a national debt crisis. To fairly understand “Adults in the Room”, one will struggle with Varoufakis long story. His story is about restructuring rather than refinancing the debt owed the E.U. and IMF for a national debt crisis. Restructuring debt changes terms of repayment based on an original debt, while refinancing increases the debtor’s burden.

It is helpful to have listened to a book about Detroit’s bankruptcy. Detroit’s harrowing experience gives some idea of how difficult it is for a government entity to repay creditors for profligate government economic management. Detroit manages to restructure their debt with the help of its citizens. Greece is caught in the grips of E.U.’ and IMF’ bureaucracy that only increases its debt.

Varoufakis’ argument for understanding the plight of society’s poor is highly relevant in this era of democracies’ homelessness and economic inequality.

Varoufakis acknowledges socialist beliefs while inferring a negative opinion about capitalism. Varoufakis professes strong belief in democracy with a pronounced lean toward socialism, i.e., a belief similar to America’s Bernie Sanders who is mentioned in “Adults in the Room”.

Varoufakis notes that Greek, like American society, is unequal with rich and poor being disproportionately benefited by intended and unintended government and economic policy.

Greek government’s effort to compensate for inequality seems couched in an economic system meant to equalize citizen inequity with a pension system designed to compensate the poor for economic inequality. A poorly managed national economy and a weakly enforced tax collection system compounds Greek government failure to live within its means.

When Greece declares a sovereign debt crisis, the European Union and the IMF (International Monetary Fund) provide a credit lifeline of $9.5 billion to avoid a default on a previous bailout.

This so-called lifeline is contrary to what is requested by Varoufakis who becomes the Minister of Finance for Greece. The benefit of restructuring the debt provides liquidity to the Greek banking system without theoretically damaging credit worthiness of either the E.U. or IMF. On its face, it seems a win-win solution for Greece’s debtors and Greece’s citizens. However, the E.U. sees it as a dangerous alternative that fails to address the root causes of Greece’s profligate behavior. The E.U. demands control of all economic expenditures of the Greek government in return for a bail-out of past debt with a larger tranche of new debt. Financial control of Greece’s use of the new funds is to be exercised by a triumvirate representing the debt holders.

Varoufakis asks that Greece’s original bailout debt be restructured as a long-term bond with reduced payments over a long period of time, with payment size largely determined by Greece’s liquidity in a recovering economy.

In contrast, the demands of the E.U. and IMF are that salaries and pensions be cut, government employees’ pensions frozen, and retirement age raised. Those measures disproportionately hit the poor, destroy jobs, do nothing to improve tax receipts, and make it more difficult for Greece to pay its debt; not to mention the strict control of all expenditures by an external triumvirate of debt holders.

With these draconian rules, Varoufakis notes unemployment improves. However, the economy is estimated to be 25% smaller; not to mention the impact of the external triumvirates’ control reduces living standards, pensions, and salaries of the working poor.

The point of Varoufakis’ story is that the E.U. and I.M.F.’s mandated terms victimizes the most vulnerable Greek citizens trying to make a living.

Varoufakis resigns after 7 months in office after unsuccessfully fighting the onerous and inequitable demands of the E.U. and IMF. In some listener’s opinion, some may suggest Varoufakis abandons the poor, but his story suggests the decision of the controlling triumvirate of the E.U. and IMF rendered his continued role as Minister of Finance a virtual joke. Varoufakis is unable to change the E.U. and IMF board’s inflexible rules. Greece’s Minister of Finance cannot achieve a delay in their demand for restructuring the Greek’s debt to correct a poorly managed tax system and weak economy that victimizes the most vulnerable citizens of Greece.

For listeners of “Adults in the Room”, one wonders where wealthy Greek citizens were when Varoufakis tries to pull Greece out of its financial ditch.

Unlike the book about Detroit’s bankruptcy, there seems no appeal to rich citizens of Greece and a method for using Greece’s historical art and artifacts to collateralize a more equitable bail out for its people. Where were the Greeks who could afford to pay their taxes? Where were the art and antiquity foundations that could have aided in the negotiations with the E.U. and the I.M.F.? The historic art and monuments of Greece are an international treasure, particularly for western culture.

In retrospect, Varoufakis’s idea of restructuring the debt seems brilliant but there seems no time is allowed for Varoufakis to organize a response that could change the mindset of the members of the E.U. and IMF decision makers. As a “Monday morning quarterback”, Varoufakis’s idea would have carried more weight if he had gathered support from wealthy Greek merchants and art foundation entities that could have created a repayment sweetener to seal his loan restructuring idea. However, it appears there was not enough time for Varoufakis to gather enough support to make a case for debt restructuring. The triumvirate controlling the purse strings of the bailout would not wait.

Listeners owe a debt to writers like Varoufakis who are willing to tell their stories, whether right or wrong. In fairness to Varoufakis, it is easy to retrospectively review his actions to save the Greek economy.

At best, one concludes, restructuring Greece’s debt was a great idea that could have achieved a decent compromise for its lenders. On the other hand, one wonders what the leaders of Greece were doing when the repayment crises first began to show itself.

There were undoubtedly some powerful and rich Greek leaders who could have come to the aid of their country in this 21st century “time of need”. One is reminded of the heroic defense of Greek citizens in Crete when Nazis invaded their strategically located island. Where were the descendants of the many great Greek heroes of antiquity?

U.S. AND ISRAEL

What seems glaringly obvious in Mead’s “too long” story is the immense contribution Jews have made to the United States.

Audio-book Review
 By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight)
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Arc of a Covenant

By: Walter Russell Mead

Narrated by: Josh Bloomberg

Walter Russell Mead (American Author, Professor of Foreign Affairs and Humanities at Bard College, taught American foreign policy at Yale.)

Walter Russell Mead hardens the consequence of race and creed in the history of the modern world. Mead offers a biblically influenced history of human progress in “The Arc of a Covenant”. One cannot diminish the value of human diversity, but Mead implies millions who were murdered, maimed, or imprisoned in history have paid a price for human progress. Mead suggests the greatest price paid is by Jews who were largely abandoned by Franklin Roosevelt’s America and imprisoned, gassed, and murdered in WWII.

Despite America’s decisive role in WWII, largely orchestrated by Franklin Roosevelt, Mead suggests President Truman’s actions to end the war and gain the peace shine as brightly as the social programs created by his predecessor.

As is widely known, the Ark of the Covenant carried two stone tablets that were given to Moses by God that contain the Ten Commandments.

Mead implies these commandments were adhered to by Truman more than any President before or after his presidency. He notes that despite Truman’s lack of a college degree and inexperience as a politician, he utilized the universal values of the ten commandments to guide America out of war into a peace meant to reinforce the “…Covenant” given to Moses by God. It is clear from Mead’s history, that Truman did not do it alone, but he led the effort with the support of his predecessors, direct reports, and successors.

As the 33rd President, Truman re-engaged the U.S. in internationalist foreign policy, adopted Kennan’s recommendation of containment of U.S.S.R. during the Cold War, passed the Truman Doctrine that helped eliminate the communist threat in Greece and Turkey, responded to the Berlin Wall crises with the Berlin Airlift, and passed the $13 billion dollar Marshall Plan to aid Western European recovery after WWII. Truman also ended racial segregation in the Armed Services, and established the NSC, the CIA, and the NSA.

In America, Henry Cabot Lodge and evangelist, William Blackstone, were two predecessors to Truman that martialed American opinion to support the Balfour proposition of Englishman Arthur Balfour who recommended support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. To an evangelist, one presumes the motivation is biblical belief in the prophecy of Armageddon that is to occur in the Middle east with the return of Jesus Christ to save believers in the faith. Lodge supports Zionism (a 19th century plan for a Jewish homeland in Palestine) as the Chairman of the Senate Republican Conference from 1918 to 1924.

In 1946, Palestinians refuse to agree to a separate Jewish homeland in their country. They would only agree based on a one state solution where Jews would be a minority in a Palestinian controlled state. The consequence of that refusal is to diminish the territorial control of the Palestinian people.

Mead notes the British walked a fine line between their need for oil from the Middle East and their effort to fulfill the promise of the Balfour agreement.

The conflict between Jews and Palestinians is initially controlled by the British military when the Jewish settlements first came to Israel. In the end, the British need for oil is greater than their continuing act as arbitrator for the Palestinian/Jewish conflicts.

The British decide to turn the conflict over to the United Nations which was formed in 1945 as a replacement for the League of Nations.

Though this body is meant to resolve international conflicts, it has five permanent members that have veto powers over its policies. They are China, France, Russia, the UK, and the US. Russia for a short time supports an independent Jewish State but becomes a notorious abuser and murderer of Russian Jews during the Stalinist years.

By a slim margin, with Stalin’s real-politic support, a UN resolution is passed to create a Jewish state in Palestine.

Stalin’s goal is to drive a wedge between Western powers like the UK and the US by supporting the resolution. The UK needs Arab oil even at the expense of the Balfour plan and the UN resolution. In enforcing the partition, Mead notes Truman is caught between the jaws of Cerberus guarding what is the hell between Arab states and a boundary line for Israel.

Mead explains Eleanor Roosevelt is a major force in politics of the U.S., particularly after the death of President Roosevelt.

She supports the UN resolution and expects the American government to enforce its implementation. In 1948, Mead notes Truman plans to enforce the UN resolution with the American military, if necessary, which is not popular with some American leaders and U.S. voters.

Mead illustrates how America aided Israel in its early formation, but notes Israel grew strong on its own. After the end of the Cold War, the world enters a Cold Peace. Mead drops a cultural bomb on his readers by noting America’s role as western world savior morphs into western world goat. Mead infers that transmogrification is the base upon which Donald Trump is elected. He suggests the fall of the U.S.S.R. seemingly created a bed of roses but turned into a crown of thorns.

Mead suggests America in in a post-cold-war era. America’s left-wing support of Israel is now Right-wing support.

Deregulated growth of the economy is a causal factor in the widening gap between rich and poor. 9/11 destroyed America’s self-confidence by suggesting America cannot protect itself, let alone spread democratic values in the world. American power emulates authoritarian government with slogans like “Make America Great” with an underlying disregard for foreign relations and world peace. Mead suggests there is a growing loss of faith in American government.

It is sad to think how vilified and unfair history has been to such a small ethnic minority.

What seems glaringly obvious in Mead’s “too long” story is the immense contribution Jews have made to the United States. As a small minority, their contribution to the world outstrips any ethnic group in this dilatant’s flawed memory. Mead gives some perspective to that realization.

DEFINING FREEDOM

Audio-book Review
 By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight)
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

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

By: Gary Gerstle

Narrated by: Keith Sellon-Wright

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

COVID19’S LESSONS

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

Audio-book Review
 By Chet Yarbrough

Blog: awalkingdelight)
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Post Corona (From Crises to Opportunity)

By: Scott Galloway

Narrated by: Scott Galloway

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

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

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

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

Galloway argues covid19 accelerated restructuring of the business world.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Re-education classes for the unemployed.

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

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

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

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