CHILD ABUSE

The complexity of Freida McFadden’s character relationships diminishes its appeal, but the point of the story is that child abuse takes many forms which often repeat themselves in future generations.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

THE INTRUDER 

Author: Freida McFadden

Narration by: Joe Hempel, Patricia Santomasso, Tina Wolstencroft

Freida McFadden (Author, practicing physician, specializing in brain injury.)

Freida McFadden’s book is a mess. The story is burdened by too many relationship complications. On the other hand, it reveals the hardship children face when raised by parents who lose control of their minds. The base story is about a 12- or 13-year-old girl named Ella. She is being raised by her mother who is a hoarder struggling to cope with life. As a single mother with a young girl, her hoarding complicates her daughter’s life. The house in which they live is a pigsty because of the hoarding. The odor of spoiled fruits and food permeates the clothing that Ella wears to school. Her mother often locks her daughter in a closet when she leaves the house. The closet is dark, cramped, and smelly from the mother’s hoarding mania. She punishes her child with the lit end of a cigarette when her daughter complains about anything.

Child abuse statistics.

Ella dreams of escaping to a better life while coping with school and hiding the trauma she endures with her mother’s mental instability. Ella fantasizes the idea of finding her father who she does not know. She makes friends with a young boy of her age who has anger issues because his father drinks too much and is abusive toward his son and wife. As Ella and the boy become closer, a serious assault incident at school results in the boy being permanently expelled. Ella has lost the support of her best friend and is faced with the instability of her mother’s behavior. Ella wishes for a better life and searches for evidence of her father as a way of escaping and improving her life. That search appears to be a dead end.

Ella’s mother hooks up with a man who becomes a boyfriend with a violent temper.

A fight between the two leads to Ella’s mother being stabbed. Blood from her wounds splatters her daughter from head to foot. Ella sets the house on fire and runs to the woods near her neighborhood where she cowers in a shed. The shed is next to a house rented by a teacher who has been fired by the school that had hired her. There is a storm brewing as Ella cowers in the shed next to the former teacher’s house. The former teacher named Casey, sees a light in the shed and cautiously approaches it to find Ella, a bloody mess lying on the shed floor. Ella is the intruder of McFadden’s story.

The value of this story lies in the reality of children being raised in families that abuse their children through neglect, psychological, or physical abuse.

McFadden’s story is of a neglectful and deranged mother who is incapable of caring for herself, let alone a child. Every child that survives their childhood is impacted by parents whether sane or mentally unbalanced. Most children are raised by single or married parents. Others are taken away by State sponsored childcare facilities or escape abusive parents to live on the street.

How a child responds to their parents or the way they deal with life is like the predictive quality of quantum physics.

How a child responds to how they are raised is unpredictable. That is the substantive meaning of “The Intruder”, a story that keeps one in suspense but does not appear likely to end well. It is a story that many children live in America and presumably in other countries of the world. The complexity of McFadden’s character relationships diminishes its appeal, but the point of the story is that child abuse takes many forms which often repeat themselves in future generations.

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?

MEDIA PLATFORMS

Cory Doctorow shows how the American public is being taken advantage of by today’s major private media owners and manipulators.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Enshittification

AuthorCory Doctorow

Narrated By: Martin Sheen

Cory Doctorow (Author, Canadian-British blogger, journalist)

Despite the poor choice of titles for Cory Doctorow’s book, his theme of internet corruption is inevitable because of the nature of human beings. The corruption of which Doctorow writes is evident in most mega-corporations and governments. The only difference is in their motivation, i.e. whether it is money, power, or both in world organizations.

Elon Musk (Businessman, billionaire, entrepreneur, leader of Tesla, SpaceX, Twitter, and xAI.)

The first part of Doctorow’s book is an evisceration of the famous Elon Musk. Not surprisingly, Doctorow is not a fan of Elon Musk. Musk is an example of the theme of Doctorow’s book. Musk’s acquisition and decimation of a widely used communication platform known as Twitter exemplifies “Enshittification”. Doctorow infers Musk’s desire to have a free speech forum is actually a betrayal of the principle of free speech. The reality is that Musk has only created a Megaphone for his personal biased beliefs. Musk’s first action in the Twitter acquisition is to fire essential employees to reduce costs of operation. One presumes from Doctorow’s theme that Musk’s first step results in “Enshittification” of Twitter. Twitter’s new name is “X”. “X”s value has plummeted just as the American government’s service to the poor has fallen. With Musk’s singular focus on reducing cost, without consideration of effectiveness, enshittification is virtually guaranteed by Musk’s actions.

(Though not mentioned by Doctorow, it seems to this critic, that Musk’s firing of government employees under Trump, is similar to the dismantling of Twitter. The firing of government employees results in citizen-service’ losses equivalent to Twitter’s loss of advertisers.)

Traditional media is a one-way broadcast of information whereas the Internet is two-way interactive communication. Anyone can publish on the internet while singular corporations or institutions that own traditional media have only a one-way form of communication. The internet is global, instant, and decentralized while traditional media is scheduled for delivery and centralized. Access with on-demand, 24/7 internet are not time-bound like traditional media. The cost of using the internet is low and often free while traditional media entails infrastructure costs.

Trouble arises with the internet because of its ubiquitous availability while traditional media is singularly targeted.

The internet is immediate while publications are period based. It is possible to precisely and instantaneously measure internet responses based on clicks, views, and engagement while traditional media relies on third party analysis by publishers or by hired companies like Nielsen. Doctorow shows how differences between internet and traditional media exacerbate loss of privacy and increase potential for massive societal disruption. The internet can immediately influence and potentially control social beliefs. In less capitalist and more authoritarian governments the danger of the internet is direct influence and control of its citizens.

In American capitalism, the danger lies more in the drive for profitability than the control of social and political belief.

Doctorow argues America’s social norms are being corrupted by disparate industries that are creating tech platforms to monopolize product consumption only for economic gain, not service to its users. The consequence erodes trust of the public, distorts accountability, and thwarts free choice. The ruling classes of American society can evade traditional checks and balances. The utility of the internet can be used to distort the truth. Corporate objective is to make more money, not to benefit public discourse, improve product, reduce product cost, or improve service, but to monopolize consumption.

On the one hand, Doctorow acknowledges social media platforms optimize engagement. However, these platforms become forums for outrage, and misinformation that tribalizes society.

Rather than improving connections between people, algorithms are created by users of a media platform to exacerbate outrage, foster conspiracy theories, stir up and ultimately exhaust the public. The objective is increase clicks to make buyers of advertising to purchase time on their platform. As a free society, Doctorow suggests Democracy can mitigate the “Enshittification” by regulating the internet. He argues that one’s use of a platform should not monopolize personal information by restricting one’s right to take their information with them if they become unhappy. Platforms should not be prisons that restrict users legal right to their personal information if they choose to change platform providers. He argues for a breakup of major providers like Amazon, Facebook, Google, X, and Adobe.

Doctorow argues for more transparency in the algorithms being used by media platforms.

The public should be informed about how a platform’s algorithms are being used to steer the public. Individuals should be given the opportunity to opt out of algorithmic categories if they wish. Regulatory agencies should be created with the right to enforce consumer protections. He notes the EU’s move to require platform accountability. In general, Doctorow argues that the internet should return to its roots as a space for mutual aid, free expression, and innovation.

Internet Moguls: CEO Google Pichai, CEO Meta Zuckerberg, CEO Apple Cook, Executive Chairman of Amazon Bezos

Doctorow is not the first to propose reform of the internet.

Some time back, Tim Wu, a Columbia law professor, notes that Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google had shifted from serving users to extracting value from them. He argued for antitrust enforcement, regulation, and restrictions on content and infrastructure. American Democracy is a safer environment for public media than what is being experienced in countries like China and Russia where all media is tightly controlled by the government. However, Doctorow shows how the American public is being taken advantage of by today’s major private media owners and manipulators.

Doctorow argues for the breakup of internet companies that have become too big. He believes returning the internet to the service of society requires a more level playing field to equitably serve the public.

LIFE’S JOURNEY

The ending of Emily Henry’s story is a surprise to most who are absorbed and entertained by her tale. Life is complicated because it is filled with luck, achievement, purpose, and loss whether one is rich or poor.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Great Big Beautiful Life

AuthorEmily Henry

Narrated By: Julia Whelan

Emily Henry (Author, American writer of NYT’s bestselling romance novels.)

Emily Henry is an entertaining writer who seems to live her own “Great Big Beautiful Life”. Her book is about writers like herself being interviewed by a wealthy American who is searching for a biographer to memorialize an extraordinarily famous family’s life. Henry’s twist is that she has competition with a fellow writer who is a more experienced and successful writer.

The two writers in Henry’s story are in the prime of their lives.

One has been married before, and the other appears to have been intimately acquainted with another writer. Neither potential biographer knows they are being interviewed for the same job. The surprise is that their famous subject hires both writers to compete for the job with a presumption that one will be chosen. The story is partly to tell of a famous and extraordinarily rich families’ complicated lives. “Great Big Beautiful Life” is an imaginative story about family relationship, love, and life’s complexity.

The cleverness of Henry’s story is that one becomes interested in the person being biographed while being drawn into what becomes an intimate relationship of the writers.

Listener/readers become interested in both story lines. The incredibly rich heiress’s family history is a contrast to the middleclass lives of the writers. What Henry shows in “Great Big Beautiful Life” is every human being, whether rich or middleclass face the joys and tragedies of life. The author is not addressing poverty or the poor, but one presumes the difference is qualitative because love, loss, and sorrow is part of every human life.

The passion of the two authors is artfully expressed and reminds one of every human’s experience of love and loss.

Joy and tragedy play a part in every sentient human being’s life. Familial, emotional, social, and ethical relationships are vivified in Henry’s story. Alice is the main character who is the woman writer telling her story of the competition and relationship between her and Hayden in seeking the right to tell the story of Margaret Grace’s “Tabloid Princess” life. Margaret sets the table for the story with a competition for the right to tell her family’s life story. Alice and Hayden begin as competitors, evolve into lovers. and become intertwined with Margaret’s storied life.

Alice and Hayden are ambitious professionals, but both have emotional vulnerabilities that are intensified by the competition for Margaret’s biography. Scandal, family secrets and how they are dealt with in Margaret’s life are part of the story. Alice’s insecurity contrasts with Hayden’s Pulitzer Prize-winning reputation as a biographer.

The approaches of the two hopeful writers of Margaret’s biography are contrasted by the author.

Alice has a human-centered approach to the biography whereas Haden drives for detached objectivity. Alice is concerned with Margaret’s exposure while Hayden seems more driven by belief in accuracy, structure, and verifiability.

The ending of Emily Henry’s story is a surprise to most who are absorbed and entertained by her tale. Life is complicated because it is filled with luck, achievement, purpose, and loss whether one is rich or poor. “Great Big Beautiful Life” is entertainment at its best.

TYRANNY

Arresting people based on their appearance without judicial review puts America on the slippery slope of authoritarian tyranny.

Opinion Page
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Chet Yarbrough

Today, the idea of Aryan endorses the absurd belief in white, Anglo-Saxon supremacy. Research shows a French aristocrat (de Gobineau), and a British-German philosopher named Chamberlain, defined Aryans as a superior white race.

However, there are many ideas and speculations revealed by the Durants’ history of civilization.

In the Durrants’ research, the word Aryan was originally used as a descriptive word for the Brahmin class in ancient India. The Durants noted the word Aryan in their history of civilization meant “noble” or “distinguished”. The criteria of India’s Brahmin class are reprehensible to one who believes in “equality of opportunity” professed by America but not practiced by Americans.

Class identity in ancient India does deny the truth of equal opportunity but not based on the color of one’s skin, but on ritual status, occupation, and social custom.

ICE’s accosting citizens because of the difference in the color of their skin is reprehensible. Of course, that has been the criteria for American Blacks before and after the Civil War.

Emigrant injustice is compounded by the failure to adjudicate immigration status before deportation.

The Administration’s use of force is a reminder of Nazi Germany when Jewish German citizens were being rounded up for believed difference and/or opposition to the government.

This is a picture of the beginning of Jewish discrimination in Nazi Germany with broken windows of businesses owned by Jews.

ICE arrests in America based on his non-white appearance.

Being able to easily identify difference based on physical appearance amplifies the probability of discrimination.

THREE ASIAN AMERICANS BRUTALLIZED IN 2025 BY AMERICAN RACISTS.

What has happened to the principle of “separation of powers” meant to provide a system of checks and balances on the Legislative and Executive branches of the American government? Have we abandoned Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances, power sharing between federal and state governments, the Bill of Rights, Judicial Review, and Electoral Safeguards? The idea of our Constitution is to stop a single branch of the government from dominating our system of government. Have we become a third world country? Today’s “NO KINGS” turn-out offers hope that others agree with the sentiment of this disappointed supporter of American Democracy.

Where is the Supreme Court in this injustice?

Arresting people based on their appearance without judicial review puts America on the slippery slope of authoritarian tyranny.

GENDER INEQUALITY

“Betraying Big Brother” is not wrong about gender inequality but the author’s anger and personal choices cloud the author’s message. Gender inequality is real everywhere in the world. Education is a beginning, but practice is the end.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Betraying Big Brother (The Feminist Awakening in China)

AuthorLeta Hong Fincher

Narrated By: Emily Woo Zeller

Leta Hong Fincher (Author, American journalist, feminist and writer, first American to receive a Ph.D from Tsinghua University’s Department of Sociology in Bejing., graduated from Harvard with a BA and a master’s degree in East Asian Studies from Stanford.)

The education and experience of Leta Hong Fincher is somewhat betrayed by her anger in “Betraying Big Brother”. Misogyny is an international reality that defies the truth of human equality. This reviewer’s prejudice, like the author’s biases are suspect because of their respective life experiences. This book reviewer was raised by a single parent mother who worked to keep two sons with a roof over their head and food on the table. How women survive inequality is made of the same stuff as that which plagues minorities around the world. The difference is that women are not a minority.

She writes of being a 15-year-old girl who is physically and emotionally abused by two boys who are friends of an older male friend that takes her to a get together of young acquaintances. That event burns a memory into Fincher’s mind that sets her on a journey thru life. One reading/listening to “Betraying Big Brother” recognizes the truth of what the author writes is reinforced by her life experiences. Of course, that is true of all human beings, but anger diminishes the impact of what Fincher says and writes.

Leadership?

Whether living in a democracy or autocracy, sexual inequality is present. Gender discrimination is universal. America and China talk the talk but fail to walk the walk. Fincher writes of Mao’s saying that “women hold up half the sky” implying he believed in gender equality. Mao spoke of marriage reform and labor participation but patriarchal norms were adhered to with women workers not being paid the same as men nor offered similar positions of power.

Xi speaks of gender equality, but no women are on the 24-member Politburo.

Xi also speaks of gender equality, but no women are on the 24-member Politburo while pay and promotions lag behind men. Fincher writes of Big Brother censorship, surveillance, and detention of women in China. (One presumes that is also true of everyone in China.) Like Trump, Xi promotes women’s roles in domestic stability, and their childbearing responsibilities. America has yet to elect a woman as President. Equal pay for equal work is improving in America, but a gap still exists with lower starting salaries, performance evaluation biases, and fewer high-profile assignments or promotions.

“Betraying Big Brother” is not wrong about gender inequality but the author’s anger and personal choices cloud the author’s message. Gender inequality is real everywhere in the world. Education is a beginning, but practice is the end.

HOUSING

Didion reminds one of Yeats Poem to warn society of civilization’s collapse. Yeats wrote “The Second Coming” after WWI and the Spanish Flu. Seems similar to today’s political war and the Covid pandemic.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Slouching Toward Bethlehem 

AuthorJoan Didion

Narrated By: Diane Keaton

Joan Didion (Author, American writer and journalist, published in The Saturday Evening Post, National Review, Life, Esquire, and The New Yorker. She also wrote screenplays for “The Panic in Needle Park”, “A Star is Born”, and “Upclose and Personal” as well as receiving a National Book Critics Circle Award and a Pulitzer. 1934-2021.)

Diane Keaton (Actor, Academy Award winner, BAFTA recipient, two-time Golden Globe, and Tony Award winner. 1946-2025.)

Diane Keaton died yesterday.

Several years ago, I purchased “Slouching Toward Bethlehem” without reading it until Keaton had done an audiobook’ narration of it. “Slouching Toward Bethlehem” illustrates Didion’s skill as an essayist and writer while Keaton’s many acclaimed movies show how accomplished both women have been in their lives.

“Slouching Toward Bethlehem” is interesting because it offers an interpretation of why homelessness is so much more obvious in America than other countries.

Having lived in different areas of the United States, the appearance of homelessness in the big cities of America is disgraceful. Visiting the Baltics, Norway, Finland, China, and Japan in the last few years illustrates how badly America is handling homelessness. With the exception of Norway, per capita incomes in the United States are more than twice the incomes of the aforementioned countries. Norway’s per capita income is $87,925 while America’s is $82,769. China’s per capita income is $13,122 but walking through major Chinese cities, there are no people sleeping on the streets. The Baltics per capita incomes range from $22,000 to a little more than $30,000. There is poverty in all these countries, but their leaders and societies have found a way to keep their citizens housed. This is not to argue their poor are not faced with hardship but to show how poorly American society is treating its homeless.

There seems a generational divide in Didion’s “Slouching Toward Bethlehem”.

The beat generation of the 1960s for which Timothy Leary coined the phrase “Turn on, tune in, drop out” alluded to in Didion’s essays may offer a partial explanation. Many of us experimented with drugs in the 60s but there has to be more than that to explain what has happened to big cities in America. Part of the answer is the change in income for the middle-class. In the 1960s middle-class incomes were strong and broadly shared. In the 21st century, middle class incomes have stagnated. CEO’s income in the ’60s made 20 times middle class earners but in the 21st century the ratio rose to 300-1. The rich got richer and the middleclass got poorer. Power shifted from a voting middle class to a richer upper-class that accelerated income gaps that changed election results with an income class bias.

Housing costs accelerated to new highs in the 21st century. The 1960s price-to-income ratios were 2:1 while today they are 5:1 or higher. The effort during the Obama administration to weaken standards for home buyer qualification exacerbated the greed of mortgage companies which led to a near economic collapse of the finance industry. Instead of bailing out homebuyers that could not pay their mortgages, the Obama administration bailed out mortgage companies and their owners while endorsing eviction of buyers who could not afford their mortgage payments.

“Slouching Toward Bethlehem” writes of famous successful people like John Wayne, Howard Hughes, Joan Baez, and herself as symbols of the 1960s. She is effectively glorifying them and herself while showing how they mythologized success to a generation of young people who were turning on, tuning in, and dropping out. Image became more important than substance. Working to be great at acting, becoming wealthy by investing wisely, singing about peace, justice and non-violence to make money, and writing about societal dysfunction were money makers. Capitalizing on dysfunction of society did nothing to ameliorate it. John Wayne is only a symbol of justice in the movies and Howard Hughes inherited his wealth that allowed him to invest, sometimes unwisely and with poor personal management skills. He began investing in Las Vegas because management could be left to others. To be fair, Didion and Baez try to return something to society for their success but their efforts pale in comparison to America’s decline. Artists report facts of life but rarely offer solutions.

William Butler Yeats (1865-1939, Irish poet, dramatist, writer and literary critic.

W. B. Yeats Poem summarizes and exemplifies what Didion alludes to in her book.

Turning and turning in the widening gyre  
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;  
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;  
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,  
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere  
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;  
The best lack all conviction, while the worst  
Are full of passionate intensity.  

Surely some revelation is at hand;  
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.  
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out  
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi  
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert  
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,  
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,  
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it  
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.  

The darkness drops again; but now I know  
That twenty centuries of stony sleep  
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,  
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,  
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Didion reminds one of Yeats Poem to warn society of civilization’s collapse. Yeats wrote “The Second Coming” after WWI and the Spanish Flu. Seems similar to today’s political war and the Covid pandemic.

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)

AuthorKishore 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.

POLITICAL EVOLUTION

Karoline Kan’s story is very personal, but it offers insight to China that is more informative than many history and political polemics that fail to show what it is to be a Chinese citizen in the 21st century.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Under Red Skies (Three Generations of Life, Loss, and Hope in China)

AuthorKaroline Kan

Narrated By: Allison Hiroto

Karoline Kan (Author, reporter at Bloomberg, has published in the New York Times, and worked in radio broadcasting, studied at Beijing International Studies University focusing on journalism and writing.)

“Under Red Skies” is a story about Karoline Kan and her life from childhood to adulthood in China. She is based in Beijing, China. Kan writes about life in China before her birth and the change in China after Mao’s death. She provides a rewarding view of China from Mao’s to Deng’s to Xi’s leadership. In ways her story makes one somewhat fearful for her life and freedom, as well as China’s economic miracle and growth as the second most powerful nation in the world. The story of her life presents the puzzle of China’s changing relationship with America and the world. She is subtlety critical of Mao’s rule of China while a beneficiary of the changes wrought by Deng and now Xi in the growing power, economic improvement, and influence of her homeland. She appears to view America positively while being proud of her heritage and particularly appreciative of her mother’s role in her family during great changes in China. She reflects on societal change in respect to the life she lives and what her perceptions are of changes in political leadership wrought by Mao, Deng, and Xi.

The power and importance of mothers is exhibited by a presentation of this “Circle of Life” exhibit in Norway. To this observer, the statue illustrates the great importance of women in nurturing and educating the world’s future generations. The author’s story reinforces that belief.

Ms. Kan’s mother appears to be a formidable objector to some of Mao’s cutural beliefs by being unwilling to kowtow to government policies that conflict with her personal beliefs. Kan’s mother is the driving force behind the move from rural China to a larger community to improve her family’s lives. Karoline is born when the one child policy is enforced in the early 1980s to the 2000s. Karoline is the second child born to her mother. Her mother faced the financial penalties for having a second child and resisted forced sterilization that became the law of the land during her child-baring years. Karoline Kan’s mother appears a force to be reckoned with by traditional male standards in China and a patriarchal bias that exists in most of the world. By that measure “Under Red Skies” seems like an encomium to Karoline’s mother and a tribute to Kan’s bravery in writing a history of her early life and experience as a Chinese citizen.

Our Chinese guide for a 2o18′ tour of China is noted in the essay titled “70% Leadership“. This young guide reminds me of the author, Karoline Kan.

Kan reflects on ambivalent feelings some Chinese citizens have toward America. She expresses surprise that there seems more dislike by China of America than China should have for Japan. History shows conflicts were much greater with Japan than America. Chinese hate of Japan would presumably be more visceral because of deaths from wars and invasions of China by Japan, i.e., the first in the 1894-1895 Sino-Japanese war; then the invasion by Japan in Manchuria in 1931, a second Sino-Japanese war in 1937-1945, and the Nanjing Massacre that killed an estimated 200,000 to 300,000 imprisoned Chinese citizens. The estimate of Chinese casualties from Japan in these conflicts is 15-22 million. Of course, America fought the Chinese in the Korean war in the 1950s but the casualties were 400,000, with the possibility of as many as a million who died from injury, disease, and exposure. More likely, the hate of America is from the context of China’s ambition to be “second to none” in power and influence in the world. In the end, “ambivalence” is not the same as hate. Having traveled to China just after Xi’s rise to power, my wife and I felt very welcome by most Chinese citizens and businesses.

Communism is a political system that does not believe in God. Of course, neither do Buddhist or Taoist traditions which are the human practices and belief in personal truthfulness, compassion, and forbearance, i.e., spiritual beliefs about living life on earth because that’s all there is to life. There is no after life or heaven to a Buddhist or Taoist. These two spiritual beliefs are practiced widely in Japan and some places in China, like Tibet. Falun Gong, a Buddhist-like religion, arose in 1990s’ China. In the beginning, China accepted its practice, but the Communist Party eventually fought against its growth and labeled it a “heretical organization”. The Party obviously felt Falun Gong interfered with communist ideals. Additionally, there is the ongoing conflict between the Dali Llama and Tibetan belief (a branch of Buddhism) that is also reviled by China’s political leadership. The point is that communism demands fealty to belief in a classless, stateless society, not controlled or influenced by any social or economic belief other than those of the communist’ party. (One cannot help but reflect on Lord Acton’s phrase about “power” that is at the heart of all forms of government in history.)

Kan’s best friend, who finishes high school at the same time as Kan takes a different path, i.e., either because of her work in school, the poverty of her family, or the “bump” that changes her life.

The last chapters of Kan’s story are the personal journey of women in China. Kan is accepted at a University in Bejing. Marriage has evolved in China but still has many of the same matrimonial customs. Marriages of the past were highly arranged and had little to do with love or attraction. In modern China, marriages have become less determined by family arrangement but more by circumstances of a child’s experience. Like children around the world, parents influence but have limited control over a child’s libidinal impulses. The author’s closest friend becomes pregnant from the son of a poor family that is unable to compensate the daughter’s family in a way that some arranged marriages would provide. The lower dowry implies Kan’s friend is destined to live a life of poverty. Kan shows her to become a factory worker to supplement the family’s income. Her work is hard and highly repetitive but the income from both parents working helps them live better lives. With a husband, wife, and one child, her friend decides to have an abortion because another child would be too expensive for them to live a decent life.

Beijing International Studies University is the school Kan attends and receives a degree.

In contrast to Kan’s friend’s life, Kan goes to college where she is housed with women she does not know but are of her age. Kan’s family is presumably able to help her with expenses, and she goes on to become a journalist and writer. Interestingly, all women (and presumably men) are obligated to serve 2 to 4 weeks of military service before beginning a career-related’ education. The implication of this type of regimentation for all college students implies China has wider international ambitions.

The change in China’s culture with the leadership of Deng and Xi is revealed in Kan’s story. It shows the strengths and weaknesses of capitalism and communism. China’s dramatic economic growth is a result of the endorsement of capitalism with a communist autocratic influence. Interestingly, Kan shows China seems on a road to become more American while America seems to become more Chinese.

Kan’s story is very personal, but it offers insight to China that is more informative than many history and political polemics that fail to show what it is to be a Chinese citizen in the 21st century. Kan shows how both China and America have less than perfect systems of government.

HOSTAGE NEGOTIATIONS

The disturbing message of “Swap” is that human beings are currency, i.e., nothing more than a dollar bill, a euro, a yen, a pound, a franc, or a renminbi. Like a hot war, the Cold War monetizes human lives.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Swap (A Secret History of the New Cold War)

Author: Drew Hinshaw, Joe Parkinson

Narrated By: Keith Brown

Drew Hinshaw (on the left) is a senior reporter at The Wall Street Journal.

Joe Parkinson is also a reporter at The Wall Street Journal. Both are Pulitzer Prize finalists and nominees.

Human life is viewed in this new Cold War’ era as economic transaction.

“Swap” is a detailed explanation of how human beings are just bargaining chips. Hinshaw and Parkinson argue that the Cold War has been resurrected by Russia. Russia uses accusations, sometimes lies, and unreasonable charges against foreign travelers and native dissidents to gain leverage in a blood sport that convicts, incarcerates, imprisons, or murders alleged internal spies, dissidents, and foreign citizens. The authors of “Swap” have researched the 2024 hostage exchanges between Russia and the U.S. to illustrate how crude and transactional hostage-taking has become in a new Cold War.

Hinshaw and Parkinson note that 24 prisoners and 2 children were swapped in what is called the “Rubik’s Cube” hostage exchange of 2024.

“Rubik’s Cube” is meant to describe the complexity of a 2024′ human exchange of prisoners between the West and Russia. The most publicly known hostage release from Putin’s Russia was Brittney Griner (the WNBA star) who was the first to be released when Paul Whelan (a former U.S. Marine), Trevor Reed (also a U.S. Marine), Evan Gershkovich (a Wall Street Journal reporter), and Alsu Kurmasheva (an American journalist visiting her family in Russia) were also hostages but later released in a complicated exchange between many nations’ leaders. This later group was released through the work of the American State Department during the Biden administration which had been criticized by some because of Griner’s celebrity being more important than others. Whether true or not, Hinshaw and Parkinson explain the political reality of hostage taking and exchange has evolved since the earlier Cold War.

Vadim Krasikov (a Russian assassin convicted in Germany), several Russian spies, smugglers, and hackers were released to Russia in exchange for a mega-swap of Americans after Griner’s exchange. The mega-swap was highly complicated and a dramatic example of what negotiated hostage exchanges really mean in the 21st century.

Paul Whelan (Canadian-born U.S. Marine arrested in Russia in 2018.)

This complicated “Rubik Cube” transaction began in 2018 when Paul Whelan had been jailed and convicted in a Russian court for alleged spying. (Interestingly, Whelan had been dishonorably discharged from the Marines for bad conduct related to larceny in 2008.) Along with Whelan’s arrest, Trevor Reed’s conviction and incarceration was in 2019, Brittney Griner in 2022, and Evan Gershkovich in 2023. Each arrest was for different alleged transgressions which added to the negotiation difficulties.

Evan Gershkovich (American journalist and reporter for The Wall Street Journal.)

Brittney Griner (American professional basketball player.)

It was the Wall Street Journal’s hostage (Evan Gershkovich) and the WNBA player (Brittney Griner) that intensified negotiations and public awareness of hostage exchange. The authors of “Swap” explain why awareness is only the beginning of understanding. Whelan’s twin brother is identified as one of the most relentless advocates for Paul Whelan’s release. Whelan’s entire family became “accidental diplomats” by injecting themselves into the American government’s ponderous efforts to get Paul Whelan released. The family injected themselves into the American government’s process by becoming squeaky wheels in the negotiating offices of the government.

Several different countries participated in a multiple hostage swap after Griner’s release. Germany, UK, France, Netherlands, Poland, Lithuania, and the Czech Republic were persuaded by the U.S. government to exchange a convicted assassin and several alleged Russian cyber operatives and spies to gain release of Whelan, Reed, Kurmasheva, and Gershkovich.

This negotiated human exchange is a complicated transaction that involved many governments’ participation and agreement. It required coordinated release of eight Russian operatives, one of which was a convicted assassin, and seven others, either proven or suspected spies or smugglers, to be exchanged for Russia’s imprisoned hostages. Along with the U.S., Germany agreed to release a convicted assassin, while the UK, France, Netherlands, Poland, Lithuania, and Czech Republic agreed to return several alleged Russian cyber operatives and spies. The releases were coordinated by the CIA and MI6 with the transaction to take place in Turkey. This was an amazing operation that required agreement and coordination by 8 nations to secure an agreement with the President of Russia.

The disturbing message of “Swap” is that human beings are currency, i.e., nothing more than a dollar bill, a euro, a yen, a pound, a franc, or a renminbi. Like a hot war, the Cold War monetizes human lives.

Hostage taking has changed human beings into a commodity like money. War and now hostage release dehumanize society.