WAR – REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE

CHINA YESTERDAY

Winchester’s biography of Needham offers valuable insight to scientific discovery and its intersection with socio/political structure of government. Government bureaucracy can either aid or impede nation-state’ discovery and innovation.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Man Who Loved China (The Fantastic Story of the Eccentric Scientist Who Unlocked the Mysteries of the Middle Kingdom)

Author: Simon Winchester

Narration by: Simon Winchester

Simon Winchester (Author, historian, British American author, journalist, and broadcaster.)

Having traveled to China a few years ago, it is interesting to listen to Simon Winchester’s biography of Joseph Needham, who is considered one of the foremost historians of Chinese science and technology.

Noel Joseph Terence Montgomery Needham (1900-1995, British biochemist, historian of science and sinologist who wrote a history of Chinese science and technology based on his British education and experience in China during the 1940s.)

Discovery of the new can improve or impede society. In listening to this biography of Joseph Needham, one wonders how farther ahead science might be if it was more widely shared between countries of the world. Needham is characterized as a polymath who became educated as a biochemist at Cambridge. Needham is a freethinking eccentric, a nudist, a folk dancer, and a thoroughly unconventional human being.

Dorothy Moyle Needham (English biochemist.)

Needham meets a fellow student at Cambridge with whom he pursues a scientific/intellectual partnership and an “open” marriage that lasts until the death of his wife in 1987. Needham’s first wife, Dorothy Moyle Needham, offers stability to his life while accepting a second woman, Lu Gwei-djen, as an intimate in Needham’s life during their marriage. Dr. Gwei-djen was also a biochemist who studied at Cambridge. When Needham’s wife dies in 1987, after 63 years of marriage, he marries Lu Gwei-djen.

Japan creates what is misogynistically characterized as “comfort women” in their attack and domination of China in the early years of WWII.

As WWII began and the Japanese were attacking China, Needham is engaged by the Sino-British Science Cooperation Office to document scientific manuscripts, meet Chinese scholars, and build a record of China’s scientific networks. His wife joins Needham in 1944 just before Needham’s return to Great Britain. Needham’s separation from his wife gave him time to become an important historian of Chinese Science. His grasp of the Chinese language from his association with Lu Gwei-djen is a great aid to his accumulation of China’s extraordinary advances in science that created many discoveries–long before the rest of the world.

Mao at the time of Needham’s travels in China.

Needham fell in love with China and became acquainted with the war years of China and its communist movement. Needham looked favorably on the communist philosophical movement. However, his political leanings were inconsequential because his primary focus is on China’s scientific history.

Early discoveries in China.

Needam’s research results in a book titled “Science and Civilization in China”. With the help of Lu Gwei-djen, his book became a societal corrective to the West’s bias about China’s technological backwardness. Needam reveals amazing discoveries made by China long before the rest of the world. He found papermaking is developed in the 2nd century BCE, the magnetic compass was used in China in the 11th century, gunpowder is discovered in the 9th century, and printing began in the 7th century. Adding to these discoveries are the many engineering and mechanical innovations of China. They discovered the value of differential gears to aid vehicle function, the idea of a sternpost to guide ships, water power to aid clockworks with escapements for timekeeping.

Agricultural invention in early China.

Needham discovers the agricultural and industrial breakthroughs of China. They used multi-tube seed drills and advanced iron plows to improve agricultural yields centuries before European innovations. Between the 5th and 3rd century BCE, China had developed blast furnaces and iron-working innovations that were not discovered in the west until the medieval period. The Song dynasty in the 10th century pioneered the use of paper money backed by the government.

Silk making in early China.

In the science of chemistry, silk production began thousands of years before the west understood its value. Porcelain innovation with hardening through a high-temperature process was used long before its discovery in Europe in the 18th century. Natural gas drilling was discovered with the invention of bamboo derricks and piping for industrial use. Chinese gas drilling dated back to when Roman legions were invading Europe.

China’s centralized bureaucracy.

What is puzzling about Needham’s book is not only how early these discoveries were made in China, but why these remarkable innovation capabilities did not continue through the twentieth century. He argues the foundation of their advances is its powerful, centralized bureaucratic state, a culture that valued practical knowledge, and a worldview that is comfortable with pattern, process, and observation of nature.

Management of China’s waterways is critical for agriculture and flood risk to those who lived near rivers. Life experience with the threats and benefits of water demanded Chinese attention. Literacy and standardized examinations in China created a cadre of technically motivated officials. With systematic observation of nature, these technocrats harnessed the power of water. So why has there been nothing like the scientific revolution that happened in Europe. To this reviewer, something changed with the rise of communism.

China’s education system.

Needham’s book argues the bureaucracy of China became too conservative and discouraged independent initiatives while emphasizing stability through exam-driven education. Conformity became more important than innovation. Needham infers the scientific revolution went into hibernation in China while blossoming in Europe. One may speculate that is partly due to emphasis on communism, a socio/political rather than a science/nature focused view of life, i.e. a view toward social stability more than one of curious exploration,

CHINA

IRAN’S COLLAPSE

One’s heart goes out to the citizens of Iran and wonders what hope there is for their future. Iran seems trapped between rock and a hard place, a choice between the bombs of war and religious fundamentalism.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

King of Kings (The Iranian Revolution: A Story of Hubris, Delusion and Catastrophic Miscalculation)

Author: Scott Anderson

Narration by: Malcolm Hillgartner & 1 more

Scott Anderson is a novelist and veteran war correspondent. His previous novels include Moonlight Hotel and The Man Who Tried to Save the World.

“King of Kings” is an informative historical account of the collapse of Iran as a former monarchy and current theocracy. The hubris of the King and the Ayatollahs have no one to blame but themselves for their government’s failure. What Anderson shows is that what royal and theological leaders have in common. Both neglect the wellbeing of the Iranian people. The King squandered the wealth created by the oil industry to buy a false sense of security. The “King of Kings” made excessive investments in weapons and a spy service called SVAK rather than invest in Iran’s economy for the betterment of its citizens. The King’s SVAK turned into MOIS in the Ayatollah’ regimes. Neither regime invested in the people’s welfare. Both secret services were designed to spy on Iran’s citizens and reinforce the delusion of serving the people when in fact they were designed to preserve their governments’ power and control.

Iran’s leadership as a monarchy and theocracy have failed its people.

Anderson shows the “King of Kings” initially improves the general welfare of Iran’s citizens but because of inept leadership and the privileges of power, the Shah failed the Iranian people. The Shah’s incompetence as a manager of Iran’s great oil wealth is a wasted opportunity that could have provided a better life for its citizens. Rather than encouraging economic growth, the Shah chose to invest in weaponry and other countries products to sustain Iran’s economy.

The Iranian people were not farming or creating their own industries to sustain and grow their economy.

The King’s failure to invest oil revenues in the economy and Ayatollahs who cared little about economic investment, impoverished the Iranian people. When other countries like Saudi Arabia flooded the market with oil, the economy of Iran collapsed. That loss of oil income impoverished the people of Iran. Iran had become dependent on other countries produce rather than the work of their own farmers and industrialists to support their lives and families. That impoverishment drove many back to the ideal of a Muslim religion that believes hardships of life are only preparation for heaven.

The rule of the Ayatollahs seems as incompetent as the Shah’s.

The Ayatollahs fail to improve the economy and rely on a secret service that victimizes all who criticize their rule. It seems they believe the hardship of life is no concern because heaven awaits all those who believe in the Ayatollah’s governance. Anyone who fails to support the Shia Muslim autocracy is murdered or imprisoned based on the Ayatollahs’ belief in the hereafter. Iranians may believe in the Ayatollahs’ teaching and are willing to support their government, but a substantial portion of the Iranian people are discontented with their poverty and hunger.

Iranian oil fields supported the wealth of Iran before Saudi Arabia’s entry into the market.

Anderson explains how Iran became a troubled country. Neither rule as a monarchy or theocracy offered a solution to poverty and hunger. The answer may not be capitalism or democracy, but the present and past Iranian governments have not served the needs of its people. One’s heart goes out to the citizens of Iran and wonders what hope there is for their future. Iran seems trapped between rock and a hard place, a choice between the bombs of war and religious fundamentalism.

BOMBING IRAN

America’s self-interest is to see Iran as an independent State that does not murder Americans. Regime change may be a small step toward that goal or a step into quicksand that will only swallow more American lives.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

King of Kings (The Iranian Revolution: A Story of Hubris, Delusion and Catastrophic Miscalculation)

Author: Scott Anderson

Narration by: Malcolm Hillgartner & 1 more

Scott Anderson (Author, novelist, non-fiction writer, war correspondent who has written for the New York Times Magazine, GQ, Esquire, and Vanity Fair. Was raised in Taiwan and Korea, received an M.F.A. in creative writing from University of Iowa Writer’s Workshop.)

This review is only a glimpse of Anderson’s book, but the bombing of Iran gives this reviewer a sense of urgency about President Trump’s decision to bomb and kill the current leader of Iran.

Anderson, having been raised in a non-American culture, has written an interesting history of Iran that offers some perspective on Iran’s Persian culture and its tumultuous transition from royal leadership to an Islamic Republic. Iran’s monarchy had survived for 2500 years. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini deposed the “King of Kings”, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, in 1979.

In 2024, President Trump directed America’s bombing of Iran that killed Iran’s second leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The purported reason for the bombing is to save the Iranian people from the tyranny of its current leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Khamenei had become Iran’s leader after the death of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Anderson infers Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, though a Shia Muslim himself, was too detached from the Muslim religion practiced by a majority of Iranian society. The Shah pursued modernization without bringing Iran’s Shia Muslim believers into the “Sturm and Drang” of modernity. Despite improving the economic condition of Iran’s citizens, the Shah ignored the importance of a religion that reaches back to 651 CE with the Arab Muslim conquest of Persia. Even though the economic benefit of modernization is documentable, the gap between rich and poor, along with belief in a religion that emphasizes an afterlife, made too many citizens of Iran unhappy with the Shah.

Sunni and Shite Muslim Difference.

Muslimism began in the early 7th century and spread across the Arabian Peninsula. An estimated 68 million Iranians, approximately 89% of the country, are Shia Muslim believers. Anderson believes the Shah’s failure to understand the importance of his own religion led to the 1979 revolution that toppled the “King of Kings”. Anderson suggests too little effort was made to bring religion into the Shah’s management of the Iranian people. Putting aside that failure, one wonders could any leader bring his people to believe in life today when their religion emphasizes an afterlife is the only goal of existence. Whether any leader of Iran could have ameliorated citizen discontent in Iran is hard to argue. Because of America’s decision to kill Iran’s leader, that speculation is moot.

It is not a matter of being or not being Religious but a matter of having a pragmatic and compassionate understanding of humanity.

Now, America is faced with the Shah of Iran’s dilemma of bringing religion into the administration of Iran’s government. Americans have solved that problem with the separation of church and state. Is that possible in Iran? That separation is something Anderson suggests is the mistake made by the Shah. Is America more or less likely to solve that problem than an Iranian? President Trump believes he should have the power to approve the next leader of Iran. Problem solved???????

The Shah of Iran is fascinated by American military hardware. In that infatuation, the Shah fails to serve the domestic needs of Iran’s citizens.

AMERICAN IDENTITY

One can appreciate Vuong’s picture of two immigrant Americans lives but his story is too maudlin for this listener.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Emperor of Gladness

Author: Ocean Vuong

Narration by: James Aaron Oh

Vương Quốc Vinh (Author, poet, professor at NYU and the University of Massachusetts, born and raised in rural Vietnam who is now an American citizen.)

“The Emperor of Gladness” is like “Alice in Wonderland”. The author’s story draws one down into a rabbit hole of personal experience and imagination. It tells what life is like for people who become lost to themselves because of advanced age or youthful experiment with drugs and addiction. It begins with a young addict who is teetering on suicide and is rescued by an old woman nearing senile dementia. It is largely the backstory of two immigrants and their lives in America.

American immigrants.

The old woman is from Lithuania. The young boy is a Vietnam immigrant brought to the United States by his family near the end of America’s misbegotten war. Both live in poverty in America. Their stories tell how they survive the grief and trauma of their lives. The elderly woman has lost her husband, lives alone, and had a social services person visit her for a time but is never replaced. Some of the trauma that occurs in the boys and aged mother of a daughter is brought on by themselves, particularly with the young boy. For the elderly woman, it seems brought on by living in poverty in a country that has great wealth but is unable to offer adequate care for the elderly poor.

Story of Stalin’s occupation of Lithuania.

One who has traveled to Lithuania has some understanding of the tragedy of Stalin’s dictatorial control and displacement of the Lithuanian people. That is partly what draws one to stay in the story. However, it is not enough to maintain this listener’s interest in the story. The young boy is raised in poverty and succumbs to addiction which is hard for some to understand because they have not fallen into that addictive trap. The author does a fine job of showing how these two characters meet each other and become a family that cares for each other. The growing dementia of the old woman is managed by the young boy in a way that is endearing and insightful for those who do not have the patience to deal with infirmity and elderly dementia.

There are lessons about being poor in America in Vuong’s story.

Vuong notes immigrants who have reached a certain age in their native countries are faced with learning a new language and culture when they arrive in a foreign country. All human beings gain understanding from the experience of living, but post-infancy immigrants are faced with translating language and experience understood in their home countries that are different in American culture. That by itself is a struggle.

Immigrants often grow up in silence because they are unsure of unaccustomed experiences that native-born children take for granted. Translation seems a matter of survival for an immigrant whereas a native feels experience is just part of living life that one runs from or towards.

The details of being a poor immigrant in America seem the same as a natives’ views of life but Vuong explains why they are not. To those who have been born and raised in a white privileged but economically challenged society, discrimination associated with being an immigrant minority or drug user is too unrelatable. The underlying message by the author is that in the age of “Make America Great Again”, being an immigrant makes one feel even more of an outsider.

Orwell & A.I.

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

GEORGE ORWELL (Author, 1903-1950)

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

Francisco Franco with his soldiers in 1936.

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

Anarchy and human nature.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Differences of opinion.

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

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

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

In the pre-A.I. age, democratic socialism is unachievable, but A.I. may resurrect its potential. However, it is the risk of a “Brave New World” or “1984” rather than a hoped-for democratic socialism.

PEACE IN ISRAEL

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

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

BEING JEWISH AFTER THE DESTRUCTION OF GAZA (A Reckoning)

Author: Peter Beinart

Narration by: Malcolm Gladwell

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

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

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

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

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

Empathy.

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

Pursuit of peace is not easy.

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

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.

PREJUDICE

Unless or until our prejudices are eradicated, man’s inhumanity to man will continue. The truth is that “The World After Gaza” will be the same as “the world before Gaza” but with a different order of prejudice.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The World After Gaza (A History)

Author: Pakaj Mishra

Narrated By: Mikhail Sen

Pakaj Mishra (Author, Indian essayist. He wrote “Age of Anger” reviewed in this blog.)

As pointed out in a previous review of Mishra’s book “Age of Anger”, “…unless or until human beings see themselves as part of the same society, the world will end in the Armageddon of biblical imagination.”

Leadership prejudice.

Mishra is born in a prosperous Brahmin family that becomes poor after India’s land distribution in 1947 which was meant to reform feudal landholding practices in India. Undoubtedly, the harshness of that reform has some influence on Mishra’s expressed views in “The World After Gaza”. Mishra’s father has a Brahmin Hindu background which suggests his son is raised in an upper caste in Hindu society that falls into hard times.

“The World After Gaza” is categorized by Mishra as a history.

Mishra recalls the horrendous past of Germany’s holocaust where 6,000,000 Jews were murdered by Hitler’s followers. He infers that horrendous event is reminiscent of what Israel is doing to Palestinians in Gaza. His point is not to vilify Israel but to suggest societies are inherently prejudiced and inclined to discriminate against those who are not a part of their belief system. In essence, Mishra offers a view of history that corroborates Mark Twain’s belief that “History never repeats itself, but it does rhyme”.

Whether one agrees with Mishra’s view of Israel’s actions in Gaza or not, prejudice is an undeniable truth of human societies.

There are many Jews who are undoubtedly appalled by what is happening in Gaza but there are Israeli’ leaders who believe what they are doing is in the best interest of their country. One may associate Israel’s, America’s, or any country’s leadership as either right or wrong from a personal perspective, but the nature of humanity is what it is. Prejudice is an equal opportunity exploiter of human’ equality. Unless or until our prejudices are eradicated, man’s inhumanity to man will continue. The truth is that “The World After Gaza” will be the same as “the world before Gaza” but with a different order of prejudice.

DICTATORSHIP

The importance of freedom in book publication and for those who read them is the message Charlie English gives the public in “The CIA Book Club”. It is too bad America’s current President chooses not to read because this book reminds one of how important books are in the world.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The CIA Book Club (The Secret Mission to Win the Cold War with Forbidden Literature)

Author: Charlie English

Narrated By: Michael David Axtell

Charlie English (Author, British non-fiction author, former head of international news at the Guardian.)

“The CIA Book Club” is a reminder of the former USSR and today’s Russian invasion of Ukraine and what is at stake for Ukraine’s citizens that may, once again, come under the repressive return of a dictatorial leader. Putin has adopted many of the same characteristics of Joseph Stalin, a leader who believed in dictatorial control over the media, and isolating or murdering anyone who challenges his leadership. The scale of Putin’s use of gulags, and mass executions is much smaller than Stalin’s but his cultivation of a cadre of followers, rewarded by the power of association and lure of wealth, create a similar dictatorship.

What Charlie English reminds listener/readers of is how Poland suffered under Stalin and what it will mean to Ukrainians when much of their land is taken to settle the Ukrainian war.

Without solid opposition of all Western powers, concession of Ukrainian land seems inevitable. Trump’s waffling opposition to Putin and the fear of nuclear confrontation reduce the likelihood of Russia’s peaceful withdrawal from Ukraine.

Like the repressive actions of the USSR in the Baltics, English explains how brutal Hitler, Stalin, and Stalin’s successors were to Poland even after Stalin’s death.

Strick control over publishing continued after Stalin’s death. Orwell, Koestler, and Solzhenitsyn were banned, and western books were blocked at the border. Polish citizens like Miroslaw Chojecki risked imprisonment for smuggling and/or re-printing forbidden works. The KGB monitored dissidents, writers, and students. English notes that phones were tapped and homes raided. However, a CIA program continued to provide copies of banned books to Polish dissidents. Polish citizens became partners in covert activities to smuggle and re-print books for their countrymen and women. A Solidarity movement against censorship and discrimination is formed by Polish patriots. This reminds one of the resistances one hears when visiting today’s Baltic countries and stories of citizens whose families were jailed, tortured, and sometimes killed during Stalin’s occupation.

Poland, a spectacularly beautiful country.

Poland is an important trade and agricultural producer at the crossroad of Europe. It has no natural land barriers between itself and the great powers on their borders. Its strategic value to European aggressors has made it a victim of a history of foreign occupation. In the 13th, 17th, 18th, and 20th centuries Poland was occupied by Mongols, Prussians, Germans, and Russians. Poland’s diverse population seems to have been unable to create a strong centralized authority that could successfully resist their powerful neighbors who confiscated their riches and occupied their land. Charlie English’s book reminds reader/listeners of what makes Poland a great nation. It is its diversity and its pursuit of intellectual development. Sadly, its geographic location has threatened its existence for millenniums. America is blessed by its geographic location and shows how it could survive as a free democratic nation. Through clandestine operations and support by the CIA, Polish patriots were able to reproduce banned books during the cold war that aided the intellectual growth of Poland despite Stalin’s repression.

America’s current President impedes the influence of freedom in Europe by dismantling surveillance oversight, undermining the EU-U.S. Data privacy framework, and by shutting down the GEC (Global Engagement Center) which is designed to counter foreign disinformation.

Trump’s intent is to save money. The author notes the same thing nearly happened with the CIA book publishing support of Poland when some of America’s leaders tried to cut its funding. The CIA prevailed and the financial support continued.

NO WINNERS

Black America is not liberated by the Civil War. Neither will the Russians or Ukrainians be liberated by whichever side wins. There are no winners. There is only death and destruction as evidenced by the tragedy unfolding in Gaza.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

How to Dodge a Cannon Ball (A Novel)

Author: Denard Dayle

Narrated By: William DeMeritt

Denard Dayle (Author, Jamaican-American writer, graduate of Princeton with an MFA from Columbia University.)

The central character in Denard Dayle’s novel is Anders. Anders is a light skinned Black soldier in the American Civil War. He begins as a Confederate and escapes to become a Union soldier as a Flag carrier. The author’s story is tedious and a mess, but it reflects the many conflicts among Americans fighting in the Civil War. The bizarre happenings in Dayle’s story are meant to be satirical with a bite but with so many twists in ideas about race, nationalism, gender, and the history of the war that one is inclined to put the book down. One may soldier on with a hope to understand Dayle’s point.

America’s Civil War.

After listening to “How to Dodge a Cannonball” for several hours, one gathers Dayle’s point is to show the complexity of America’s Civil War and what it means to be an American. The absurdity of all wars is revealed in America’s Civil War contradictions and hypocrisies. There are many, some of which are uniquely about civil wars, but also about every war.

In fighting a civil war for freedom in America, governments deny freedom to both sides of the conflict.

In fighting a war of conquest like that in Ukraine, both the aggressor and defender nations equally deny freedom to their citizens. Dayle shows race, gender, and nationality make little difference in who loses their freedom when war is declared. Black America is not liberated by the Civil War. Neither will the Russians or Ukrainians be liberated by whichever side wins. There are no winners. There is only death and destruction as evidenced by the tragedy unfolding in Gaza.

Dayle makes his point, but the story becomes too repetitive and tiresome for this listener/reader who quits the book before its ending.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: