REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE

VIRTUE

Today is a time for Americans to look at their motivations to act in ways that diminish human flourishing and happiness. They need to decide whether they are choosing to be evil and act out of malice to do evil things.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Open Socrates (The Case for a Philosophical Life)

By: Agnes Callard

Narrated By: Agnes Callard

Agnes Callard (Author, American philosopher, associate professor of philosophy at the University of Chicago.)

“Open Socrates” is not an easy listen but offers insight to the philosophy of Socrates as perceived by a tenured Philosophy professor at the University of Chicago.One of Socrates famous sayings is “Οἶδα τι οὐδὲν οἶδα”, “I know something that I know nothing”. The daunting meaning of the phrase is explained by Callard as something that is found through conversational engagement with others. Socrates believed what truth there is in the world is revealed through public engagement which is difficult for introverts because we fear having our ignorance exposed.

Callard notes that Socrates is an interrogator who elicits others to understand the meaning of human life.

There is a human desire to have meaning in our lives, but we don’t know where to begin or what questions to ask. Callard notes how Tolstoy is contemplating suicide despite his great fame and success as a writer because he does not believe there is any meaning to his life. Callard argues Socrates would say Tolstoy fails to ask questions in conversation with others that would offer the answer he seeks. As a listener/reader one might understand Tolstoy’s reluctance to ask others for their opinion because it exposes his vulnerability. Collard argues one must be willing to admit their errors to get to meaningful conversations with others about what they are discussing. However, few have the strength of character to expose themselves in a way that will continue further conversation.

Collard is preparing listeners for an understanding of the Socratic method, a cooperative dialogue, i.e. asking and answering questions to make one think about underlying assumptions and ideas to uncover inconsistencies to try to discover truth.

One wonders in this exercise, if Socrates is pursuing understanding or building a case to undermine human understanding. The result of a dialog with Socrates seems at best a pursuit of knowledge without finding a definitive answer. At times it seems the Socratic method only reveals the truth of human ignorance.

Collard notes that sophists as reflected in the Platonic and Aristotelian writings about Socrates were often incensed by the Socratic method because Socrates’ interrogations often made them look ignorant and uninformed. However, Socrates offers some definitions of important human characteristics like virtue and knowledge that are as relevant today as they were in ancient times.

Socrates defines virtue as a form of knowledge of right and wrong and those that use that knowledge will act virtuously.

Collard notes Alcibiades who lived in the time of Socrates. He was relentlessly interrogated by Socrates in an effort to elicit a better understanding of himself as Alcibiades, a politician and leader. Alcibiades made many political enemies because of shifting allegiances and political actions. He betrayed Athens in their fight with Sparta. After the fall of Athens, he is considered a threat to its new rulers.

Alcibiades (450BC-404BC, died at age 45 or 46, Athenian statesman and general.)

Alcibiades is known for his ambition, desire for power, and hedonistic lifestyle. He came into conflict with Socrates over belief in the values of wisdom and virtue. Though Alcibiades is noted in Plato’s “Symposium” to have admired and respected, Socrates, Collard notes he fundamentally disagreed with much of what Socrates reveals to him as his lack of wisdom and virtue. Alcibiades lacked self-discipline and moral integrity.

Socrates defines good as that which brings about human flourishing and happiness for one to live a fulfilling life.

Socrates argues evil is based on ignorance that compels human beings to act out of malice to do evil things.

A UKRAINE BOMB SHELL

Though Yovanovitch had nothing to do with Poroshenko’s defeat by Zelensky, it seems clear that her tenure as Ambassador to Ukraine set the table for a change in direction for Ukraine.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Lessons from the Edge (A Memoir)

By: Marie Yovanovitch

Narrated By: Marie Yovanovitch

Marie Yovanovitch (Canadian-American Author, retired senior member of the US Foreign Service.)

Marie Yovanovitch is retired from the US Foreign Service but as is widely known she was fired in the first Trump administration as US Ambassador to Ukraine in 2019. A reported reason for her firing is she is said to have resisted Trump’s effort to pressure Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden. One suspects that is partially true, but Yovanovitch shows she was a believer in equal rights for women and a supporter of Hilliary Clinton which may be additional reasons for Trump’s action to fire her. “Lessons from the Edge” is a memoir of Yovanovitch’s career as an American diplomat.

“Lessons from the Edge” is interesting because it reveals the history of how one becomes an American diplomat and what his/her role is as a representative of America. One may wonder what qualifies one to be a diplomat when some are appointed because of political connection rather than educational accomplishment or training.

Yovanovitch became a diplomat because of her education and personal ambition. Because of her background as the daughter of a Russian born father, she chooses to take classes in Russian which leads to her eventual assignment in Ukraine. Her memoir explains how her journey began and how it ended. It is a highly personal memoir that is enlightening. However, this mild journey explodes at its end. Yovanovitch comes across as a decent person caught up in the events of history, not as a giant of diplomacy but an honest and hard-working diplomat.

Marie Yovanovitch earned a BA in History and Russian Studies at Princeton. During her career she studied at the Pushkin Institute of Moscow and acquired a Master of Science in National Security Strategy from the National War College. Her background certainly qualified her for diplomatic posts. Her early assignments were in Africa which eventually led to Russian speaking countries like Russia, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, and Ukraine.

Russian speaking countries.

An example of the difficulty of her job is when America wishes to maintain the American Kyrgyzstan’ Air Force base because of America’s role in Afghanistan in 2009. Kyrgyzstan offers closer logistic support for the American military.

The Kyger’ President demands an increase from a $17.4 million-dollar annual rent payment (Yovanovich indicated the rent payment was $2,000,000/yr) to $200,000,000 per year for the continuation of Kyrgyzstan’s American military base. Yovanovich implies Kyrgyzstan’s President, Mr. Bakiyev, demand for higher rent would be to line his pockets with stolen revenue, not help the citizens of Kyrgyzstan.

A final settlement increased annual rent to $60 million per year with additional payments of $37 million and $30 million for new aircraft slots and additional land for location of a new American navigation system.

Kyrgyzstan’s American Air Force Base.

Many questions come to mind in listening/reading Yovanovitch’s book. How important are the presence of American military bases around the world? What is the difference between isolationism and internationalism? Should America remain isolated from other nations or engage and collaborate with other countries of the world? Where is the line to be drawn between American influence and the cost of that influence? This last question is answered in the last chapters of “Lessons from the Edge”.

Yovanovich takes on the complicated role of American Ambassador to Armenia from 2008 to 2011.

Armenia and Azerbaijan are a source of political and territorial tension. There is a dispute over a region called Nagorno-Karabakh that is under the control of Armenia with a majority Armenian population. Turkey supports Azerbaijan while Armenia has a close relationship with Russia. Armenia and Turkey’s relationship is strained because of a WWI Armenian Genocide perpetrated by Turkey. An estimated 600,000 to 1.5 million Armenians were killed between 1915 and 1917. Turkey refuses to identify it as genocide which aggravates Turkey’s relationship with Armenia. Russia has a military base in Armenia and has tried to mediate the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict without much success. Because of energy projects and trade relations, Russia has managed a balanced relationship with Azerbaijan.

Yovanovitch decides to return to the U.S. because of her aging mother and an offer to take the role of Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs. However, as Ukraine becomes embroiled in a conflict with Russia and her previous assignment and knowledge of Ukraine, she returns as America’s Ambassador. Her mother’s decision to accompany her made the opportunity worth taking.

When Ukraine became independent of the U.S.S.R. in 1991, its transition to a market economy was marked by widespread corruption in the same way as alleged in Russia.

The assets of the country fell into the hands of Ukraine’s leaders who became wealthy oligarchs at the expense of the general population. Election to the leadership of Ukraine gave Presidents like Viktor Yanukovych, who served from 2010 to 2014, license to embezzle state funds. Compounding that corruption were Ukrainian bank owners who were equally corrupt. The fifth president of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko faces allegations of corruption with his ownership of the International Investment Bank (IIB).

Rudy Giuliani (American politician, former NY mayor, former U.S. Associate Attorney General–now a disbarred lawyer.)

As if Rudy Giuliani needs no further damage to his reputation than his lies about election fraud, Yovanovitch reveals his role in discrediting her reputation with false accusations about badmouthing Trump as the new President of the United States. Judging from Yovanovitch’s book, Trump is unlikely to have been someone she admired. However, as an experienced diplomat, it is inconceivable that she would have undermined Trump or any U.S. President’s reputation. Trump ordered Yovanovitch’s removal. She is recalled in May 2019.

Volodymyr Zelensky became the President of Ukraine in May of 2019.

Zelensky soundly defeated the corrupt Vasily Poroshenko with 73% of the vote.

Though Yovanovitch had nothing to do with Poroshenko’s defeat by Zelensky, it seems clear that her tenure as Ambassador to Ukraine set the table for a change in direction for Ukraine. This is a very personal memoir of Yovanovitch’s career that is somewhat marred by a plaintive melancholy about life and an aging mother but “Lessons from the Edge” is highly informative about what it takes to be an American diplomat.

America makes a mistake if it chooses to isolate itself from allied countries that have similar economic and political aspirations. It may be time to reset America’s international relations, but isolation is not a rational alternative for an interdependent ecological and economic world.

WELL BEING

Dr. Gawande’s fundamental point in “Being Mortal” is to provide the elderly or medically challenged the help to live based on a person’s dignity, purpose for living, and as much autonomy as their conditions allow.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End

By: Atul Gawande

Narrated By: Robert Petkoff

Atul Gawande (Author, physician-administrator-of-the-u.s.-agency-for-international-development-for-global-health.)

One who has been fortunate enough to have lived long will appreciate Doctor Atul Gawande’s explanation and experience with people of a certain age and the terminally ill of any age. He explains “…What Matters in the End” when one is nearing death is quality of life, not survival that matters.

Quality of life is defined by Gawande as dignity, purpose, and autonomy in one’s last days.

When one is nearing the end of their life, Dr. Gawande has found in his many surgical procedures and interviews that those who have time left to them can be helped by others who assist them as best they can to achieve dignity, purpose, and autonomy. As a physician, Gawande asks what a dying person’s fears are to know what might be done to help them work through those fears. Gawande explains the trade-offs from what care an older person or terminal patient may be given to achieve what is most important to them in their remaining life.

Whether healthy or unhealthy, rational people realize death is part of life.

What “Being Mortal” explains is that the aged or medically challenged wish for as much independence as can be provided by their care. Desired independence is the gold standard for the remaining days or years of one’s life. Whether old or young, healthy or ill, the thought of incontinence, mental confusion, medical or physical limitation makes one fear loss of independence. Each of these maladies can be remedied by family members or properly organized assisted living facilities. Of course, the rub is in the cost of that assistance.

When a family member can no longer be cared for by family members, the medically or age challenged are left with two choices. One is to be institutionalized. The other is to die.

What Gawande explains is that the first alternative can be better and the second is dependent upon family research, financial commitment, religious beliefs, and States’ laws. Gawande notes his choice in the case of his physician-father is a family commitment to offer care as needed with the goal of giving as much autonomy as his aged father can handle. That is a laudable commitment but not what many struggling American families have time or willingness to do.

America has institutionalized elder and medically challenged people’s care to reduce the burden on families.

Gawande recounts the history of institutionalized care in the United States. From family aid to hospitalization to assisted living to hospice to State sanctioned euthanasia, care has evolved for the elderly and medically challenged. What Dr. Gawande explains is that any of these ways of caring must offer dignity, purpose, and as much autonomy as possible to the dying and terminally ill.

Every family has its care limitations, either temporal or financial (sometimes both).

Gawande shows research and preparation is needed to help families adjust to the physical and mental care of a significant other who is too old or too sick to take care of themselves. If a family cannot provide the dignity, purpose, and an appropriate level of autonomy to an aged or ill loved one than the job becomes the work of finding an institutional facility that can. This is where the tire hits the road because there is a cost for that service. Gawande notes there are institutions that can offer the services that are needed but family research and investigation is required.

Once an acceptable care facility is found, the next task is finding how it can be financed.

Gawande does not address cost but infers there are care facilities that are affordable. Dr. Gawande’s fundamental point in “Being Mortal” is to provide the elderly or medically challenged the help to live based on a person’s dignity, purpose for living, and as much autonomy as their conditions allow.

HITLER/STALIN

Alan Bullock reflects on Hitler and Stalin’s differences which in some ways are greater than their similarities.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Hitler and Stalin

By: Alan Bullock

Alan Bullock (1914-2004, Author, British historian, died at age 89.)

Alan Bullock was one of Britain’s leading historians. His most renowned work was “Hitler: A Study in Tyranny”, published in 1952. At a book sale, Bullock’s “Hitler and Stalin” is purchased because of a recently reviewed history of Stalin and an interest in Bullock’s comparison of Stalin to Hitler.

Bullock reflects on the two dictators’ differences which in some ways are greater than their similarities. Bullock’s history is an informative history of WWII and the failed alliance of two of the most reviled leaders of the 20th century. Stalin and the Russian military are justifiably praised by Roosevelt and the Allied powers for his contribution to Nazi Germany’s defeat. Later in the twentieth century, the West’s view of Stalin changes.

At first glance, Hitler and Stalin are more different than alike in Bullock’s characterization.

Hitler is a master orator that enlivens Germany with a preternatural ability to influence and motivate his audience. Stalin is a communist influencer but holds his opinions to himself in addressing an audience or convincing the Communist Polit bureau of his legitimacy and intent. Stalin rules the Communist Party with an iron fist by exiling or executing anyone who becomes an influencer of the Party. Stalin creates fear among Party members while creating an image of strong leadership and infallibility among the Russian people.

Both Roosevelt and Harry Truman are initially impressed by Stalin’s personality, if not his leadership. Stalin is not a dynamic speaker who motivates an audience of followers. However, as Russia becomes an ally of the West, he develops a personable relationship with both WWII’ American Presidents. Churchill has reservations about Stalin’s political objectives but becomes reconciled to Stalin’s influence on Roosevelt to smooth the relationship among the three national leaders.

Truman eventually comes to understand Stalin’s true nature as Churchill’s “iron curtain” speech is given in 1946.

When Roosevelt dies, just before the end of the war, Stalin endears himself to Truman. Truman responded to Stalin’s insistence on splitting Germany by authorizing the Berlin Airlift in 1948. With the help of the UK and France 2.3 million tons of supplies are delivered to West Berlin between 1948 and 49. Germany is split between two spheres of interest, the U.S.S.R. and Europe, in 1949 that lasts until 1990.

Hitler has Nazi Party members as his enforcers.

Bullock explains how both Hitler and Stalin depend on a cadre of enforcers that align with their leadership. Hitler has Nazi Party members while Stalin has Communist party members. Both have military leaders in their respective parties. In contrast to Stalin, Hitler gains the support of industrialist and business leaders while Stalin relies on the intelligentsia and workers. Both used propagandas to support their positions but Stalin backs up propaganda with constant disruption of party leadership with often false accusations that end with exile or assassination. Hitler uses the SS for his enforcement but limits leader disruption while creating a cult of personality by presenting himself as the savior of Germany. Stalin is highly paranoid about usurpers of power while Hitler becomes more paranoid as the war begins to turn against him. Neither leader plans for leadership succession.

Hitler’s industrial and business leaders willingly choose to support rearmament of the military.

Because of Germany’s weakened condition after WWI’s punishing demands for war reparations, Hitler’s industrial and business leaders willingly choose to support rearmament of the military. In contrast, Stalin’s close association and identification with Leninist Communism garners support of non-professional Russian citizens who commit themselves to industrialization of Russia.

A cult of personality helps both Hitler and Stalin but the basis upon which the cult is formed is different. Hitler’s cult is internalized by industrial and business leaders who, along with Hitler, believe Germany has been unfairly treated by reparations and poorly ruled after WWI. In contrast, Stalin’s cult is based on Russian peasant beliefs in the ideals of communism by a leader who is perceived as a Leninist successor. Stalin systematically exiles or murders any Party leaders who are intent on rising in the Party.

Both Hitler and Stalin exercise centralized control.

Both Hitler and Stalin exercise centralized control, but the internal motivation of their citizens is different. Germany’s citizens identify with the unfairness of reparations and the rearmament of the country. Russian citizens identify with modernization and improved productivity based on the ideals of communism. Most citizens of both countries seem to internalize motivation to industrialize and modernize their countries but for different reasons.

Bullock shows both Hitler and Stalin are antisemitic.

The nature of failure is to have someone to blame. The only difference in these leaders’ antisemitism is that Hitler more systematically than Stalin incarcerated and murdered Jews. Hitler codifies his antisemitism in “Mein Kamph” and chooses to use his power and influence to create the holocaust. As the war ends, Stalin looks for excuses for the hardship of Russian citizens and uses antisemitism as an excuse for communism’s failures. The atrocious treatment of Jews is an unforgivable guilt for humanity which explains why the Balfour recommendation is made by the UK. The ramification of that decision lives in the world today.

Germany’s invasion of Russia is a surprise to Stalin because of their non-aggression pact.

Bullock does not spend much time with a report of Stalin’s reaction. However, some historians suggest Stalin retired to his Dacha when the invasion became known and only returned to lead Russia when a delegation of Party members came to ask him to return.

The author suggests Lavrentiy Beria, a brutal enforcer of Stalin’s dictatorship, is at his side when he dies and expresses disgust with Stalin’s leadership while leaving the room with intent to seize power. Beria was executed by the Soviet Union on December 23, 1953.

As is well known, Hitler committed suicide in his underground bunker on April 30, 1945. Bullock suggests Hitler’s remains were found by the Russian Army and taken back to Russia. Since Bullock’s book, forensic evidence confirms Hitler’s remains were taken to Moscow. The last days of Stalin were in 1953. Bullock notes Stalin had a stroke but had for months, if not years, lost much of his memory and forceful personality.

MICROCOSM

Islands are a microcosm of the world environment and a perfect example of what is wrong with the ecology and economics of the world.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Dark Laboratory

By: Tao Leigh Goffe

Narrated By: Tao Leigh Goffe

Tao Leigh Goffe (Author, PhD from Yale, award-winning writer, theorist, and interdisciplinary artist, raised between the UK and New York City with a UK citizenship.)

Goffe has written a book about the complexity of discrimination and global warming with the risks they entail for humanity. She offers a sociological and environmental perspective.

Goffe’s book is an introduction to what she envisions as “The Dark Laboratory” to address inequality and global warming.

Puerto Rico

Stories of mongooses and marijuana confuse the clarity of Goffe’s subject. She addresses immersive technologies like virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) to help people understand the impacts of climate change and inequality. The hope is that books like hers and education of the public will change human behavior. She writes of a mongoose introduction to Puerto Rico which becomes an invasive species. She also writes of colonial exploitation of island natives who plant, harvest, sell, and distribute legalized marijuana.

The analogies she chooses are marginally relevant, but they are a distraction. The fundamental points of unintended consequences of an invasive species on the environment and colonial enslavement can be more impactfully explained with concrete evidence of ecological damage and employment inequality in native lives.

The introduction of the author’s book is disappointingly vague, but Goffe’s life experience, her advanced education and perspective are shaming and anxiety producing. The shaming and anxiety come from knowing that being white gives one advantage in life. That advantage has admittedly been squandered by human inequality and pursuit of wealth and power at the expense of the environment.

Listener/readers are introduced to slang for minorities by Goffe that are not widely known.

Commonly known and despicable derogatory names are wetback, chink, gook, redskin, and the “N-word” for people who do not appear white. However, Goffe notes names like maroon and eleven-o’clock minorities are less known. A maroon is a member of a community of runaway enslaved Africans in Jamaica. An Eleven-O’clock minority is someone who is considered an incomplete person because he/she is 1 hour short of 12.

The earth’s environment is in crises.

The earth’s environment is in crises while many foolishly diminish human equality while ignorantly pursuing self-interests. The irony and incongruity of environmental destruction and inequality is that we are all in the same boat, living on spaceship earth. Goffe’s point is that society chooses to despoil earth for ephemeral profit while causing global warming and discriminating against minorities only because people are different. The “Dark Laboratory” is about the world climate crises and race relations.

Puerto Rico is a petri dish of Goffe’s “Dark Laboratory”. It shows how earth’s environment is being destroyed and how neglect of human equality has impoverished native island cultures.

Goffe argues (and hopes) with the help of storytelling (education) about human equality, technological innovation, and ecological care, the world can become a sustainable haven for humanity. However, Goffe takes two digressions that confuse, if not diminish, the importance of environmental degradation and human inequality.

Goff shows how islands are a microcosm of the world environment and a perfect example of what is wrong with the ecology and economics of the world.

COLOMBIA

Márquez offers a vivid picture of Colombia’s twentieth century culture in “One Hundred Years of Solitude” but to this reviewer his failure to address Colombia’s lucrative cultural and world’ damaging drug industry is disappointing.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

One Hundred Years of Solitude

By: Gabriel García Márquez

Narrated By: John Lee

Gabriel García Márquez, (Author, Colombian writer and journalist.)

“One Hundred Years of Solitude” is a fictional representation of the early history and 20th century modernization of Colombia. Those who are not particularly interested in Colombia’s history will listen/read Gabriel García Márquez’s story because of the author’s skillful storytelling and the intimacies of Colombian culture, its political turmoil, violence during a civil war, and its consequent growth as a modern nation. In some ways it is like the story of America.

Márquez begins his book with the founding of Macondo, a fictional name for a village during the colonial period when the Spanish settled Colombia. Beginning as a small town, Macondo grows to become a city. Macondo represents the journey from isolation as a small town to a city that becomes a part of a vibrant South American country.

Macondo, a fictional village in Colombia.

The modernization of Colombia is addressed with the arrival of the railroad in Macondo that illustrates industrialization and the advance of Colombia’s economy. Macondo becomes a banana producing community that wrestles with the consequences of a civil war, unionization, and a growing economy. The brutality of industrialization is exemplified by the Colombian army’s killing of striking banana plantation workers in 1928. Of course, this is not unlike America’s 1932 Detroit’ Ford manufacturing plant killing of four workers by security guards and the Michigan police.

Colombia’s 50-year long civil war.

Colombia’s growth as a nation evolves with a mid-twentieth century civil war between liberals and conservatives. Márquez creates characters representing both sides of the civil war and their personal, as well as military lives. As is true of all wars, many innocents, as well as participant citizens, are indiscriminately and violently killed. Undoubtedly, a part of what makes the author’s story appealing to listener/readers is the sexuality of his characters. Sex in the novel ranges from close relatives’ intimacy to older women seductions of young men and young men’s seductions of both older and younger women, some of which are incestuous.

Colombian drug cartels are not addressed in Márquez’s story.

On the other hand, what author would want to take the risk of reporting on an industry noted for murdering those who expose its workings?

AI REGULATION

As Suleyman and Bhaskar infer, ignoring the threat of AI because of the difficulty of regulation is no reason to abandon the effort.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Coming Wave

By: Mustafa Suleyman with Michael Bhaskar

Narrated By: Mustafa Suleyman

Mustafa Suleyman (British entrepreneur, CEO Microsoft AI)

This is a startling book about AI because it is written by an AI entrepreneur who is the founder and former head of applied AI at DeepMind. He is also the CEO of Microsoft AI. What the authors argue is not understood by many who discount the threat of AI. They explain AI can collate information that creates societal solutions, as well as threats, that are beyond the thought and reasoning ability of human beings.

“The Coming Wave” is startling because it is written by two authors who have an intimate understanding of the science of AI.

They argue it is critically important for AI research and development to be internationally regulated with the same seriousness that accompanied the research and use of the atom bomb.

If AI has the monumental risk Suleyman and Bhaskar describe, it remains the responsibility of humanity to manage it wisely.

Those who have read this blog know the perspective of this writer is that AI, whether it has greater risk than the atom bomb or not is a tool, not a controller, of humanity. The AI’ threat example given by Suleyman and Bhaskar is that AI has the potential for invention of a genetic modification that could as easily destroy as improve humanity. Recognizing AI’s danger is commendable but like the atom bomb, there will always be a threat of miscreant nations or radicals that have the use of a nuclear device or AI to initiate Armagedón. Obviously, if AI is the threat they suggest, there needs to be an antidote. The last chapters of “The Coming Wave” offer their solution. The authors suggest a 10-step program to regulate or ameliorate the threat of AI’s misuse.

Like alcoholism and nuclear bomb deterrence, Suleyman’s program will be as effective as those who choose to follow the rules.

There are no simple solutions for regulation of AI and as history shows neither Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) nor the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) has been completely successful.

Suleyman suggests the first step in regulating AI begins with creating safeguards for the vast LLM capabilities of Artificial Intelligence.

This will require the hiring of technicians to monitor and adjust incorrect or misleading information accumulated and distributed by AI users. The concern of many will be the restriction on “freedom of speech”. Additionally, two concerns are the cost of such a bureaucracy and who monitors the monitors. Who draws the line between fact and fiction? When does information deletion become a distortion of fact? This bureaucracy will be responsible for auditing AI models to understand what their capabilities are and what limitations they have.

A second step is to slow the process of AI development by controlling the sale and distribution of the hardware components of AI to provide more time for reviewing new development impacts.

With lucrative incentives for new AI capabilities in a capitalist system there is likely to be a lot of resistance by aggressive entrepreneurs, free-trade and free-speech believers. Leaders in authoritarian countries will be equally incensed by interference in their right to rule.

Transparency is a critical part of the vetting process for AI development.

Suleyman suggests critics need to be involved in new developments to balance greed and power against utilitarian value. There has to be an ethical examination of AI that goes beyond profitability for individuals or control by governments. The bureaucracies for development, review, and regulation should be designed to adapt, reform, and implement regulations to manage AI technologies responsibly. These regulations should be established through global treaties and alliances among all nations of the world.

Suleyman acknowledges this is a big ask and notes there will be many failures in getting cooperation or adherence to AI regulation.

That is and was true of nuclear armament and so far, there has been no use of nuclear weapons to attack other countries. The authors note there will be failures in trying to institute these guidelines but with the help of public awareness and grassroots support, there is hope for the greater good that can come from AI.

As Suleyman and Bhaskar infer, ignoring the threat of AI because of the difficulty of regulation is no reason to abandon the effort.

THE DISMAL SCIENCE

It appears to this listener/reader, the rise of authoritarianism in the world today lays at the feet of Marx and, to a lesser extent, von Mises’ economic theories.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Human Action: A Treatise on Economics

By: Ludwig von Mises

Narrated By: Jeff Riggenbach

Ludwig von Mises (Austrian-American economist, logician, sociologist, and philosopher. 1881-1973, died at age 92.)

Economics is defined as a social science that studies how individuals, businesses, governments, and societies allocate resources to satisfy the needs and desires of a community of people. Historically, one of the greatest explainers of this social science is Ludwig von Mises. Maturing at a time of the communist revolution, the advance of capitalism and both world wars, von-Mises offers one of the greatest books about economics since Adam Smith. The only economist of greater significance is Adam Smith (1723-1790) because of his origination of the principles of economics. Close behind are Karl Marx (1818-1883), and John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946).

KARL MARX (BORN TRIER, GERMANY 1818-DIED LONDON, ENGLAND 1883)

Of course, all economists are beholding to Adam Smith with his original conception of the dismal science. Smith conceived of the “invisible hand” of economics that postulated self-interest as the primary contributor to the overall good of society. Von Mises seems to guardedly agree but suggests self-interest’ market pricing can artificially distort distribution of economic resources. Von Mises infers the “invisible hand” is inefficient at the least and may artificially distort prices in the hands of authoritarian governments and business monopolies. Karl Marx suggests the invisible hand would evolve into a production system that would be owned by the public to ensure equality of distribution in an evolutionary economy that passes from capitalism to socialism, and finally communism. Marx argues self-interest will evolve into a common interest for all. Marx’s idea of change in the nature of human beings beggars the imagination.

Smith supported limited government intervention to maintain justice, defense, and public works.

Both Smith and Marx believed in a “labor theory of value” which argues the value of a commodity is determined by the labor required to produce it. Where Smith and Marx depart is in government enforcement of a balance between labor and the cost of goods. Von Mises opposed most forms of governmental intervention in the economy. However, Keynes argues government intervention is necessary during economic downturns. After WWII, Keynes theory became an important part of the American government’s support of European reconstruction.

Von Mises believed in human individualism which carries the risk of authoritarian domination.

Von Mises believed in human individualism while Smith and Keynes support limited government intervention. Marx argues human nature could be shaped by a melding of government dictatorship with societal pressures to support communal goals.

None of the economists seem to fully understand human nature will always get in the way of economic growth.

At extremes, von Mises endorses individualism and Marx endorses dictatorship. The middle ground seems held by Adam Smith and John Maynard Keynes that endorse limited government intervention. It appears to this listener/reader, the rise of authoritarianism in the world today lays at the feet of Marx and, to a lesser extent, von Mises’ economic theories.

The length and value of von Mises’ book overwhelms a non-economist listener with his esoteric statistical and lengthy explanations of economic theory. However, comparison with a dilatant’s understanding of other renown economists is enlightening.

DYING

One may ask oneself is hospice the only humane thing to do for a dying parent. If a parent is able to make a rational decision about continuation of life, would he/she choose to be treated in a hospice or choose to end life on their own terms?

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Dying

By: Cory Taylor (A Memoir)

Narrated By: Larissa Gallagher

Cory Taylor (Australian author, died at age 61 on July 15, 2016, born in 1955.)

Dying: A Memoir author Cory Taylor passes away, aged 61 | The Australian

Cory Taylor confronts the complicated question of what to do when a person knows they are nearing the end of their life. Taylor is diagnosed with terminal brain cancer in 2005. Living with that diagnosis, Taylor recounts her life, religious beliefs, and a commemoration of her family relationships. She thinks of what her life means to herself and others. She waivers between living with her physical and mental deterioration or volitionally ending her life.

Taylor, though raised in a Christian household, identifies herself as agnostic.

In the 20th century, it is estimated that 200 to 240 million people identify themselves as atheists or agnostics. In 2013, that number increased to 450 to 500 million, about seven percent of the world population. Taylor chooses medically assisted death.

Having personally experienced a parent’s death and a parent’s physical and mental deterioration, a listener/reader will either condemn or condone a choice of assisted death.

Those with strong religious beliefs are likely to blame a person for killing themselves, while those who are agnostic or atheist are likely to have a different opinion. To some, life is hardship that is a human being’s obligation to either suffer or grow from, with conscious awareness of death’s inevitability. The fundamental question is–does one have the right to choose whether to live or die?

Seeing a parent’s life deteriorate despite the care of an attentive family member is heartbreaking.

An example is a son whose mother is dutifully cared for by her husband but recognizes the husband is too aged to handle the mother’s incapacities. What should a son or extended family do? There are hospice alternatives for the mother, but should she have a voice in deciding how she is to be treated? The husband realizes, a care facility is the only practical alternative for her needed care. The son or daughter is married and is consumed by their employment and making a living for their own career and family. The mother may or may not be able to express her opinion. The table is set for institutionalization.

The mother’s response may be to curl up in her new bed, refuse to eat and waste away in the eyes of a loving husband and a career consumed son or daughter.

AUTHORITARIANISM

Whether an idealist or humanist, the historical truth is that rising authoritarians believe power is all that matters. Today, the world seems at the threshold of authoritarianism.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Bronshtein in the Bronx

By: Robert Littell

Narrated By: Adam Grupper

Robert Littell (American author, former journalist in France.)

Robert Littell researches and imagines the 10 days of Leon Trotsky’s visit to New York City in 1917, just before the Russian revolution. His story offers humanizing and demeaning aspects of Trotsky’s personal and political life as a revolutionary.

Lev Davidovich Bronstein aka Leon Trotsky (1879-1940, Russian revolutionary, politician, political theorist, revolutionary military leader.)

Littell explains Trotsky travels with his two young sons and a female companion (the mother of their two boys) to New York. His first wife is exiled in Siberia for helping him spread leaflets about terrible factory conditions in Czarist Russia. Trotsky escaped to England while leaving his first wife and their two young girls in Siberia. (Trotsky divorces his first wife and marries the woman that Littel calls his airplane companion, either before or after the trip to New York. This is not made clear in Littell’s story.)

Trotsky in New York, 1917 | Kenneth Ackerman

Littell explains Trotsky is a kind of celebrity in New York because of his association with socialist beliefs and his involvement in the failed 1905 Russian Revolution.

Trotsky is in his early twenties when he arrives in New York. Littell characterizes Trotsky as a libertine by introducing a female reporter in New York who becomes his lover. Littell reinforces that libertinism at the end of his story by suggesting Trotsky and Frida Kahlo had an affair while his second wife and he were exiled in Mexico.

Aside from Trotsky’s picadilloes, Littell shows how committed Trotsky was to his belief in Marxism and the plight of the working poor.

Trotsky gave several speeches that appealed to New York laborers and their families. An interesting sidelight is appended to Littell’s story when a Jewish industrialist meets with Trotsky after the 1917 revolution in Russia. Naturally, Trotsky is anxious to return to support Lenin and the Bolsheviks in the revolution. However, Trotsky is broke and doesn’t have the money to return to Russia. The industrialist offers an envelope with the money needed for the trip. Neither the industrialist nor Trotsky are believers in the Jewish faith but believe in the power of socialism and its benefit to society.

The political point being made by Littell is that the ideal of communism supersedes religious beliefs.

Trotsky is Jewish but not a believer in God. He is a political idealist. Littell notes Trotsky becomes a military leader in the communist movement. Littell infers Trotsky’s idealism gets in the way of humanism when he orders one in ten prisoners be shot for their opposition to the communist revolution. This is undoubtedly an apocryphal story but a way of explaining how a committed idealist can become a murderous tyrant.

Littell ends his story with a brief and somewhat inaccurate history of the Trotsky’ children. The two girls with his first wife died before they were 30. Zinada had mental health issues and died by suicide in 1933. Nina died at age 26 without any detailed information about her cause of death.

Rather than two boys noted in Littell’s story of the trip to New York, one was a girl named Zinaida. Zinaida, like her half-sister, died by suicide at age 32. Lev, born in 1906, is believed to have been poisoned by Stalinist agents in 1938. As some know, Trotsky was murdered by Stalin’s agents in Mexico City. In contrast to his children, Trotsky, the political idealist, is murdered as an exile at the age of 60. All-in-all, a tragic family history.

Whether an idealist or humanist, the historical truth is that rising authoritarians believe power is all that matters. Today, the world seems at the threshold of authoritarianism.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: