MOST INTERESTING ESSAYS 12/4/25: THEORY & TRUTH, MEMORY & INTELLIGENCE, PSYCHIATRY, WRITING, EGYPT IN 2019, LIVE OR DIE, GARDEN OF EDEN, SOCIAL DYSFUNCTION, DEATH ROW, RIGHT & WRONG, FRANTZ FANON, TRUTHINESS, CONSPIRACY, LIBERALITY, LIFE IS LIQUID, BECOMING god-LIKE, TIPPING POINT, VANISHING WORLD
Trump’s purposefully uninformed knowledge of history will become a greater source of conflict in the world because he has a second term’ understanding of how the American government works and how it can be subverted with loyal followers.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Underground Empire (How America Weaponized the World Economy)
By: Henry Farrell, Abraham Newman
Narrated By: L. J. Ganser
Henry Farrell (Professor at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, editor at the Washington Post.)Abraham L. Newman (Professor, School of Foreign Service and Government Dept. at Georgetown University.)
“Underground Empire” is not a surprising revelation in today’s media-savvy era. Every person in the world is being surveilled by someone because of the power and influence of government. Whether a democracy that believes in freedom or an autocracy that believes in absolute control, Farrell and Newman explain how “Big Brother” is watching and acting in ways that affect your life.
The potential for ubiquitous surveillance was known and wished for by some government bureaucrats. Wide social surveillance was resisted by many in the American government until 9/11. After 9/11 that resistance weakened and surveillance of the world, more fully including American citizens, became indispensable. The creation of an “Underground Empire” has weaponized privacy and the fuel of money that can heat, cool, burn or freeze national economies.
The empire’s objective is to be in charge of the future. One may take issue with the word “…Empire”. The scale of an “Underground Empire” varies from nations like America, China, the UK, the EU, Russia, and others to a group of Al Qaeda’ terrorists, or a disparate group of Syrian freedom fighters. The common denominator is technological connection, i.e. the basis of “Underground…” organization for coordinated action that changes the world.
Ferrell and Newman’s primary focus becomes the use of surveillance to influence world policy.
Particularly, the surveillance of money, the source of power and prestige, is shown by the authors to be key to understanding what other countries and interests are planning and doing that affects society. They speculate that 9/11 could have been exposed before it happened with more surveillance of the money that was being accumulated by Al Qaeda and used by the terrorists who attacked the world trade center in New York. That might be true but there is a wider consequence of that level of surveillance. Surveillance has become a weapon in the hands of political leaders. Surveillance of the flow of money, the source of power and prestige, may make “America Great” as inferred by the pending second term President. The EU, NATO, and other international organizations are looked at differently by Trump than by former post-world war’ Presidents. Trump views the EU and NATO as users of American wealth without equivalent contribution to world defense.
On the one hand, Trump objects to NATO because of its disproportionate financial burden to the United States which pleases Putin and changes the perspective of America’s role in the world. On the other hand, the authors note Trump opposed Putin when it came to the Nord Stream 2 oil pipeline to the E.U. The difference has to do with the Trump’s transactional view of the world. Because of America’s vast gas supplies from fracking, Trump sided with Texas politicians who vociferously objected to the second Nord stream pipeline to Europe.
The “Underground Empire” is not exclusively focused on money, but the use of money is based on knowledge of what people are thinking, doing, and wanting. Accumulating information becomes actionable with money. The inference by the authors is that the government’s decision to track money, as well as private information, informs one of what will happen in the future. The problem with this narrow reasoning is that national interests of countries do not always line up with each other. The formation of the EU with its own currency becomes a competitor for America, not just a useful tool for exchange of goods between nations.
Today’s playing field is not limited to major powers. As the spread of technology is mastered by the public, anyone as small as an interest group or as large as an international alliance can influence and potentially change the world. Farrell and Newman offer important understanding of that invisible war. Obvious examples are 9/11, Ukraine’s invasion, and most recently, the overthrow and exile of Bashar al-Assad in Syria. But they also reveal another front for conflict between the U.S. and countries that have traditionally been allied with America.
Histories carriers of belief in information transparency are people like Edward Snowden, Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea Manning, Mark Felt, and Reality Winner. Snowden, a former NSA contractor, leaked classified information about global surveillance, Ellsberg exposed the lies of Vietnam, Manning exposed the WikiLeaks, Felt exposed the Watergate scandal, and Winner exposed presidential election interference in 2016. Secrets frequently kill the truth.
Ferrell’s and Newman’s book will make many even more concerned about the Trump presidency. Trump’s purposefully uninformed knowledge of history will become a greater source of conflict in the world because he has a second term’ understanding of how the American government works and how it can be subverted with loyal followers.
To make the point clearer, Trump views the world transactionally. The measure of value is most easily understood as wealth and the influence of money. Appointing wealthy sycophants to the government ensure victimization of the poor.
The tragedy of cultural conflict fills the pages of Frazer’s history of the Mayflower adventure. Listeners are numbed by the many mistakes made by both Americanized English and indigenous natives in an interminable cultural war, a war that is still being played and paid for today.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Hollywood Park: The Mayflower
By: Rebecca Fraser
Narrated By: Kate Reading
Rebecca Fraser (Author, British writer and broadcaster, former president of the Bronte Society.)
In the early years of the 17th century, Puritans fled to America to escape persecution by King James I of England and his mother, Mary Queen of Scots. Though King James was not as much of a doctrinarian as his mother, it was dangerous for non-Catholics to live in England or Scotland. Fraser explains many English Puritans sought refuge in Holland. “The Mayflower” is a history of the first years of the Kingdom of England’s and Scottland’s Puritan settlements in America. Three of the most famous Mayflower’ passengers were William Bradford, Myles Standish, and William Brewster. Both Bradford and Brewster sailed from the Netherlands to England to board the Mayflower. Bradford became the first governor of the Plymouth Colony in America. Myles Standish became the military leader of the settlers. William Brewster was the spiritual leader of Puritan followers.
William Bradford (1590-1657)Myles Standish (1584-1656)William Brewster (1566-1644)
Fraser explains how Standish became important in the Mayflower’s cramped quarters, rough seas, and limited food. Standish maintained a level of discipline while Brewster provided spiritual support to the Pilgrims and non-religious separatists. The author reveals how shoddy the accommodations were on the Mayflower and how poorly prepared the ship was for such a perilous voyage. Provisioning was inadequate and the ship became overloaded when their sister ship had to return to England because of its unseaworthiness. More passengers were added to the Mayflower when the sister ship headed back to England. There were no doctors on board. A baby was born with the help of a mid-wife. Fraser gives one a picture of a two-month voyage that was hellish. Five of 102 passengers died at sea.
Upon arrival, survivors were faced with November winter conditions.
Forty-five of the 102 passengers died from a lack of shelter, poor rationing, and cold temperatures. The Mayflower was used as a shelter for much of the winter. No Native Americans greeted the travelers when they landed. It was March before an English-speaking Native named Samoset from the Wampanoag tribe met and talked to the settlers. Samoset introduced another English-speaking Native named Tisquantum, aka Squanto. Squanto taught the newcomers how to grow corn, catch fish, and find edible plants. Without that help, one doubts even these 57 settlers would have survived.
Fraser reveals the complicated relationship between settlers and indigenous natives.
As Fraser continues her history of America’s newcomers, differences in cultural beliefs, whether religious or secular, show why all nations in the world are challenged by difference.
Two indigenous natives, Samoset and Squanto, opened the door of communication between cultures. Squanto learned English because of his capture by John Smith’s men in 1614-15 with the intent of enslavement. Squanto escapes and returns to his native land. Because he could speak English, despite his kidnapping, he used what he learned to help settlers know how to plant corn, fish, and hunt beaver for survival.
Indigenous native cultures evolve with the influence of the Puritan settlers. They adopt a conception of Kings that rule over others.
Two Indian brothers rose to the level of kings in the Wampanoag tribe of New England. They were the sons of chief Massasoit who saved the pilgrims from starvation by helping them understand how to cultivate the land and fish for survival. As the pilgrims multiplied, human nature led to conflicts between indigenous natives and themselves. Though the initial source of value exchange began as wampum (shell bead), it evolved to printed currency which changed the nature of life, labor, and trade.
Human nature is freighted with the desire for money, power, and prestige.
Those desires lead to conflicts between native cultures and the Pilgrims. The desire for land began to infringe on the culture of native tribes. Soon, these conflicts escalated to war between English settlers and leaders of native tribes. Fraser details the rise of King Alexander and King Phillip of the Wampanoag tribe that began to organize against the settler’s encroachment on native lands. Alexander is killed but his brother becomes a great leader among many indigenous natives and begins what seems an interminable and savage war against the settlers. The savagery on both sides escalates with scalping, dismemberment, and pilloried heads on spikes.
The tragedy of cultural conflict fills the pages of Frazer’s history of the Mayflower adventure. Listeners are numbed by the many mistakes made by both Americanized English and indigenous natives in an interminable cultural war, a war that is still being played and paid for today.
Purnell’s biography implies the drive to succeed for women is based on intimacy rather than inherent human equality. Though that is not the intent of Purnell, intimacy has historically been the avenue women have had to take in society to open opportunity’s door.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Kingmaker (Pamela Harriman’s Astonishing Life of Power, Seduction, and Intrigue)
By: Sonia Purnell
Narrated By: Louise Brealey
Sonia Purnell (Author, British journalist, worked at the news magazine “The Economist”)
Every writer is influenced by the country in which they were born. Sonia Purnell writes an interesting biography of Pamela (Digby-Churchill) Harriman in “Kingmaker” but from the perspective of a British journalist. This is not to argue Purnell’s interesting perspective is wrong but that there is a spin that is nationalist, more than objective, about Pamela Harriman’s life.
During the beginning years of WWII, America avoided the war until Pearl Harbor when it became clear that a policy of isolationism would not work.
The reluctance of many American businessmen and industrialists like Joseph Kennedy and Henry Ford would not see Hitler for what he was, a fascist racist planning to dominate as much of Europe as Germany’s war machine would allow. Some in the American government, like Franklin Roosevelt, understood Hitler was a threat to all of Europe if not America. Roosevelt maneuvered the government to support England with a Lend/Lease program to defend themselves against German aggression, despite a political majority’s desire for isolationism.
Getting back to Purnell’s history of Pamela Harriman, Purnell explains the important role Pamela played, before Pearl Harbor, that mobilized America’s entry into the war. Pamela Harriman is unquestionably an English patriot. Her close relationship with Winston made her an ideal conduit and influencer in smoothing the relationship between America and the British government. The intimate relationship she developed with Harriman is a tribute to her contribution to the formation of an allied force to defeat Germany.
The massive Lend-Lease program is created in the late 1930s because of the Neutrality Acts that kept America out of direct engagement in the early days of WWII.
The program began in 1939 as a cash and carry program that evolved into a Lend-Lease program in 1941. American could lend or lease military equipment and supplies to any country that allies themselves with the U.S. if it were to enter into the war. The United Kingdom, Russia, and China were considered crucial to any alliance that might be created to defeat Germany. The complexity and logistics of Lend-Lease required astute management by American managers. Harry Hopkins was its first administrator, but Averill Harriman was needed to become a diplomatic political expediter for the process.
Purnell argues the political process in the American/United Kingdom relationship was smoothed and improved by Pamela Digby Harriman who was married to the son of Winston Churchill, Randolph Churchill.
Randolph has at best, a mixed reputation. He was a heavy drinker, reckless, and rude. He was married and divorced twice and had gambling problems that were a constant debt problem that disrupted Pamela’s life. She became closer to Winston Churchill than to her husband and became much more politically involved and astute than her husband in government affairs. That experience made her a perfect match for building a closer relationship with Avrill Harriman that became an affair between two married adults. Harriman was twenty-eight years older than Pamela but had a reputation as a suave ladies’ man.
Purnell reflects on the many affairs of Pamela Churchill Harriman beginning with Averell Harriman, then Edward R. Murrow, and proceeding to John Hay Whitney, Prince Aly Khan, Gianni Agnelli, Alfonso de Portago, Baron Elie de Rothschild, Frederick L. Anderson, Sir Charles Portal, and William S. Paley. The story becomes stale.
There is a cloying sense of unfairness in “Kingmaker ” because Pamela’s skill seems trivialized by her sexuality.
Pamela simply wanted an equal opportunity to succeed in the pursuit of money, power, and prestige, i.e. all the secular objectives men take for granted. Purnell’s biography implies the drive to succeed for women is based on intimacy rather than inherent human equality. Though that is not the intent of Purnell, intimacy has historically been the avenue women have had to take in society to open opportunity’s door.
Andrew Leigh’s brief history of economics reminds listeners of a threat America faces in the next four years.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
How Economics Explains the World (A Short History of Humanity)
By: Andrew Leigh
Narrated By: Stephen Graybill
Andrew Leigh (Author, Australian politician, lawyer, former professor of economics at the Australian National University, currently serving as Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury and Assistant Minister for Employment in Australia.)
Andrew Leigh offers a bird’s eye view of the history of economics. He provocatively explains why the European continent, rather than Africa (the birthplace of the human race) came to dominate the world. He suggests it is because of economics and the dynamics of the agricultural revolution.
Because Africa offered a more conducive environment for natural food production, Leigh infers natives could live off the fruits and nuts of nature. He infers farming and agricultural innovations (like the plow) were of little interest to Africans.
One may be skeptical of that reasoning and suggest the primary cause is sparse arable land for early African inhabitants. Without arable land, there was little advantage from the agricultural revolution.
Nevertheless, Leigh’s history is a wonderful reminder of great economic theories that improved the lives of an estimated 8.2 billion people on this planet. He touches on the lives of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, John Maynard Keynes, and Milton Friedman. Each made great contributions to the history of western economics.
Adam Smith is considered the father of modern economics. (1723-1790)
Leigh notes Smith was a deep thinker who sometimes neglected the world he lived in by forgetting to properly dress himself or falling into a hole while thinking about economic theories. Some of his key theories were “Division of Labor”, the “Invisible Hand”, “Labour Theory of Value”, “Free Markets and Competition”, and “Capital Accumulation”; all of which remain relevant today. One that seems so important today is “Free Markets and Competition” and the disastrous idea of tariffs that are being promoted by the pending Trump administration.
Smith notes natural resources are not equally distributed in the world. Some countries have more raw material than others, more available labor at a lower cost, and can produce product at lower prices. With free trade, all citizens of the world are benefited by lower costs of goods. With tariffs, product costs are artificially increased when they could reflect actual costs of production. Of course, the producer can increase costs, but the market will find an alternative if the costs become too high.
David Ricardo (1772-1823)
Ricardo’s theory of competitive advantage suggests some countries can produce product at less cost than others. This reinforces the critical importance of free trade. Free trade flies in the face of both the Biden’s passing administration and Trump’s future administration; both of which believe tariffs protect jobs in America. They don’t; because tariffs artificially increase product costs while protecting labor inefficiency that increases consumer prices. Tariffs are a lose-lose proposition. It may affect jobs in the short term but there are many jobs that can be created by government and private companies in human and public service industries. Those investments would offset inefficient product production and ensure future jobs.
John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946)
Leigh notes that Keynes was bisexual and a pivotal figure in modern economics. He believed in the theory of Aggregate Demand meaning that “…spending in an economy is the primary driver of economic growth.” He advocated government intervention when demand was low, and that government should increase spending and cut taxes to increase demand when a recession or depression threatens the health and welfare of the public. Interestingly, Trump believes in reducing taxes but objects to government spending that improves employment. The effect of reducing taxes only increases income inequality and does little for employment because the rich are wary of investing in a weakening economy.
Milton Friedman (1912-2006)
Both Keynes and Friedman believe in government intervention, but Friedman exclusively believes in using only monetarism as a tool. Keynes agrees but had the added dimension of government spending that creates jobs. In contrast, Friedman argues there is a natural rate of unemployment and when government intervenes it creates inflation. He strongly agreed with free markets which suggests he would be against tariffs but at the expense of higher unemployment. The cloying part of that argument is it increases income inequality by making the rich richer, the unemployed and middle-class worker poorer.
Leigh’s book is a brief review of western economics. It glosses over much of the science, but it is highly entertaining and worth listening to more than once. Additionally, Andrew Leigh’s brief history of economics reminds listeners of a threat America faces in the next four years.
Eubanks is wrong to think digitization ensures a future that will create a permanent underclass. The next four years may not show much progress in welfare, but American history has shown resilience in the face of adversity.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Automating Inequality (How Hich-tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor
By: Virginia Eubanks
Narrated By: Teri Schnaubelt
Virginia Eubanks (Author, American political scientist, professor at the University at Albany, New York.)
At the risk of sounding like a “bleeding heart” liberal, Virginia Eubanks assesses the inefficient and harmful effects of technology on welfare, childcare services, and homelessness in America. Eubanks illustrates how technology largely reduced the cost of Indiana’s welfare. However, cost reduction came from removing rather than aiding Americans in need of help. She shows southern California is better organized in the 2000s than Indiana in their welfare reform movement in the 1990s. However, the fundamental needs of the poor and homeless are shown to be poorly served in both jurisdictions.
In the last chapters of the book, Eubanks looks at Pennsylvania’s childcare services (CCW). She argues her research shows digitization of personal information, societal prejudice, and inadequate financial investment as fundamental causes of America’s failure to help abused children. Eubanks implies the cause of that failure is the high-tech tools of the information age.
Eubanks offers a distressing evaluation of Indiana’s, California’s, and Pennsylvania’s effort to improve state welfare programs.
The diagnosis and cure for welfare are hard pills to swallow but Eubank’s research shows welfare’s faults without clarifying a cure. She clearly identifies symptoms of inequality and how it persists in America. Eubank infers America’s politicians cannot continue to ignore homelessness and inequality. America needs to reinforce its reputation as the land of opportunity and freedom. Eubank implies technology is the enemy of a more equal society by using collected information to influence Americans to be more than self-interested seekers of money, power, and prestige.
Eubank explains how Indiana welfare recipients were systematically enrolled in an information technology program meant to identify who receives welfare, why they are unemployed, and how they spend their money.
She argues this detailed information is not just used to categorize welfare recipients’ qualifications for being on welfare. The purported reason for gathering the information is to help those on welfare to get off welfare and become contributors to the American economy. What Eubank finds is the gathered information is used to justify taking citizens off of welfare, not improve its delivery. Poorly documented information became grounds for denying welfare payments. If someone failed to complete a form correctly, their welfare payments were stopped. The view from government policy makers was that welfare costs went down because of the State’s information gathering improvements. In reality welfare costs went down because recipients were rejected based on poorly understood rules of registration. Indiana did not have enough trained management personnel to educate or help applicants. Welfare applicants needed help to understand how forms were to be completed and what criteria qualified them for aid.
From Indiana State’s perspective, information technology reduced their cost of welfare. From the perspective of Americans who genuinely needed welfare, technology only made help harder to receive.
Eubank notes there are three points that had to be understood to correct Indiana’s welfare mistakes:
information algorithms qualifying one for welfare must be truthful, fair, and accurate,
the information must reflect reality, and
training is required for welfare managers and receivers on the change in welfare policies.
Another point made by Eubank is the danger of computer algorithms that are consciously or subconsciously biased. A biased programmer can create an algorithm that unfairly discriminates against welfare applicants that clearly need help. This seems a legitimate concern, but Eubank misses the point of more clearly understanding the need of welfare for some because of the nature of American capitalism and the consequence of human self-interest. Contrary to Eubank’s argument, digitalization of information about the poor offers a road to its cure not a wreck to be avoided.
WELFARE CATEGORY ELIGIBILITY PERCENTAGES IN INDIANA
Eubank tells the story of a number of Indiana residents that had obvious medical problems making them unemployable but clearly eligible for welfare payments. They are taken off welfare because of mistakes made by government employees’ or welfare recipient’ misunderstandings of forms that had to be completed. From the government’s standpoint Indiana’ welfare costs went down, but many who needed and deserved help were denied welfare benefits. The rare but widely publicized welfare cheats became a cause celeb during the Reagan years that aggravated the truth of the need for welfare in America. The truth, contrary to Eubanks opinion, becomes evident with the digitization of information as a basis for legislative correction.
Eubank notes Skid Row in Los Angeles lost many of its welfare clients with gentrification of the neighborhood. The poor were moved out by rich Californians who rebuilt parts of Skid Row into expensive residences.
Eubank explains a different set of problems in the Los Angeles, California welfare system. The technological organization of the LA welfare system is better but still fails to fairly meet the needs of many citizens. The reasons are similar to Indiana’s in that algorithms that categorize information were often misleading. However, the data-gathering, management, and use of information is better. The more fundamental problem is in resources (money and housing) available to provide for the needs of those who qualify for welfare. It is not the digitization of the public that is causing the problem. Contrary to the author’s opinion, digitization of reality crystalizes welfare problems and offers an opportunity for correction.
Homelessness is complex because of its many causes. However, having affordable housing is a resource that is inadequately funded and often blocked by middle class neighborhoods in America. Even if the technological information is well organized and understood, the resources needed are not available. Here is where the social psychology of human beings comes into play. Those in the middle class make a living in some way. They ask why can’t everyone make a living like they have? Why is it different for any other healthy human being in America? Here is where the rubber meets the road and why homelessness remains an unsolved problem in America.
People are naturally self-interested. One person’s self-interest may be to get high on drugs, another to steal what they want, others to not care about how they smell, where they sleep, look, live, or die. Others have chosen to clean themselves up and get on with their life. Why should their taxes be used to help someone who chooses not to help themselves? Understanding the poor through digitization is the foundation from which a solution may be found.
Traveling around the world, one sees many things. In India, the extraordinary number of people contributes to homelessness. In France, it is reported that 300 of every 100,000 people are homeless. Even in Finland, though there are fewer homeless, they still exist.
It is a complex problem, but it seems solvable with the example of what Los Angles is trying to do. It begins with technology that works by offering a clear understanding of the circumstances of homelessness. A detailed profile is made of every person that is living on the street. They are graded on a scale of 1 to 17 based on the things they have done in their lives. That grade determines what help they may receive. Some may be disqualified because of a low number but the potential of others, higher on the scale, have an opportunity to break the cycle of poverty with help from welfare. It is the resources that are unavailable and social prejudice, not gathered personal digital information, that constrain solutions.
With informational understanding of a welfare applicant, it principally requires political will and economic commitment by welfare providers. There is no perfect solution but there are satisficing solutions that can significantly reduce the population of those who need a helping hand. American is among the richest countries in the world. Some of that wealth needs to be directed toward administrative management, housing, mental health, and gainful employment.
Like all countries of the world, as technological digitization improves, human services will grow to become a major employment industry in the world.
America, as an advanced technology leader, has the tools to create a service economy that is capable of melding industrial might with improved social services.
Eubanks travels to Pennsylvania to look at their child services program.
What Eubanks finds in Pennsylvania is similar to what she found in LA and, to a degree, Indiana. Children who are at risk of being abandoned, abused, or neglected are categorized in a data bank that informs “Child Services” of children who need help. The problem is bigger than what public services can handle but the structure of reporting offers hope to many children that are at risk. Like LA, it is a resource problem. But also, it is a problem that only cataloging information begins to address.
Parents abuse their children in ways that are often too complicated for a standardized report to reveal. Details are important and digitization of personal information helps define what is wrong and offers a basis for pragmatic response.
Computerized reports, even with A.I., are only a tip of the reality in which a child lives. This is not to argue child-services should be abandoned or that reports should not be made but society has an obligation to do the best it can to ensure equality of opportunity for all. Every society’s responsibility begins with childhood, extends through adulthood and old age–only ending with death. Understanding the problems of the poor is made clearer by digitization. Without digital visibility, nothing will be done.
Eubanks gives America a better understanding of where welfare is in America. She is wrong to think digitization ensures a future that will create a permanent underclass. The next four years may not show much progress in welfare, but American history has shown resilience in the face of adversity.
Much may be learned in Adam Zamoyski’s biography of Napoleon Bonaparte but too much detail makes it a slog for non-historians.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Napoleon (A Life)
By: Adam Zamoyski
Narrated By: Leighton Pugh
Adam Zamoyski (Author, British historian, descendant of Polish nobility.)
Adam Zamoyski overwhelms reader/listeners with Napoleon’s military campaign details which tempt amateur history buffs to put his book aside. Yes, there was the French revolution but understanding the role of Napoleon’s many military campaigns is too complex for an amateur’s understanding of France’s history. Napoleon’s relationship with famous movers and shakers of his time are important, but Zamoyski’s military campaign details are too much. Napoleon’s break with Paoli and Corsica’s ambivalent relationship with France is interesting but Paoli is a largely unknown person to the general public. International relations between France, Great Britain, Poland, Germany, Prussia, and Russia are left to history buff’s inadequate knowledge of history.
In a number of ways, Zamoyski’s biography of Napoleon is disappointing. It is a definitive biography of a legend, but Zamoyski’s history of Napoleon’s life is too complex for a lay audience.
To a historian, Zamoyski’s book is undoubtedly important but to an amateur it is too detailed. For a dilatant of history, the best one gets from the author is that Napoleon was a tactical genius, a great leader who oddly eschews domestic or war-related violence, while becoming among the greatest conquerors of nations in history. After his many campaigns, he turns his genius into a micro-manager of household concerns, international relations, and France’s disorganized governance. Without a military campaign, his tactical brilliance is wasted on vendettas, extra-marital liaisons, and personal expenditures. On the other hand, Napoleon creates a French financial system that supports a massive miliary force with over 60% of its national budget while reorganizing its government’ inefficiencies.
Napoleon descends from a royal family that endeavors to confirm its paternal and landed interests in Corsica. Not clearly coming from royalty is an obsession that follows Napoleon throughout his life. Since, 1769, Corsica is recognized as a region of France, but it is geographically closer to Italy with a rich history of Italian influence.
There is much in Zamoyski’s biography that one learns about Napoleon Bonapart. The young Napoleon is noted as well-educated self-confident, shy-with-women’ person who has interest and understanding of mathematics and a genius for military tactical plans and maneuvers. Napoleon eventually overcomes his shyness with women but only after becoming a leader of men. His extramarital affairs are noted throughout Zamoyski’s book.
At the age of 9, Zamoyski notes Napoleon is sent to a military academy at Brienne-le-Chateau, and later to the Ecole Milita ire in Paris. In his younger years, Napoleon is characterized as a Corsican patriot who admired Paoli, a leader of Corsican independence from France. However, he chooses to follow France and eventually breaks with Paoli and the history of Corsica. Paoli never gives much attention or respect to Napoleon despite his effort to endear himself.
Pasquale Paoli (1725-1807, Corsican patriot, statesman, and military leader who flees to London after failing to rid Corsica of French rule.)
Bonaparte first develops a relationship with the Robespierre brothers (Maximilien and Augustin) in 1793. Great Britain and Spain were allied with French rebels in southern France and Bonaparte met the brothers in opposition to Royalist rebels. Bonaparte’s tactical brilliance routs southern France rebels and forces the Anglo-Spanish fleet to depart. This became the beginning of Napoleon’s rise to prominence in the French military. He is 24 years of age.
Maximilien Robespierre, a friend of Napoleon. (1758-1794, leader of the Jacobin republican movement in France, is condemned and beheaded on July 28, 1794,)
The Robespierre’ brothers, of which Maximilien is the best known, are associated with the Jacobins, an extreme egalitarian group that fomented a French revolution in 1793-94. Maximillian Robespierre instituted the Reign of Terror with mass executions for which he is eventually guillotined in 1794. With the seeds of rebellion planted by the Jacobins, the French Revolution occurs in 1789 through 1799. Napoleon distances himself from the brothers and the Jacobin movement in 1794. He became a “blue-blooded” Frenchman and abandoned his Corsican roots.
Charles Maurice Camille de Talleyrand-Périgord (1754-1938, French clergyman, statesman, and leading diplomat. Died at age 84.)
Another interesting relationship noted by the author is between Napoleon and Charle Maurice de Talleyrand-Perigord, more commonly known as Talleyrand. Talleyrand and Napoleon had a close relationship between 1799 and 1807. Talleyrand acts as France’s Foreign Minister negotiating many treaties that increased Napoleon’s power in both France and Europe. However, Talleyrand becomes critical of Napoleon’s aggressive expansionist policies. He is eventually removed from his ministerial position in 1807.
Czar Alexander I (1777-1825)
In 1805, Czar Alexander joins Russia with Austria in the battles of Austerlitz against Napoleon. However, he switches sides to join Napoleon after Napoleon’s success in Austerlitz. He switches sides again to defeat Napoleon with the British at Waterloo in 1815.
The author notes Talleyrand speaks to Czar Alexander about his concern over Napoleon’s ambition and is alleged to have said he would collude with the Czar to defeat Napoleon. Talleyrand by any measure is a traitor to Napoleon, if not his country. Not surprisingly, Talleyrand (though he remains in Napoleon’s government) had a role in the Bourbon restoration in France after Napoleon’s abdication in 1814.
The diminutive Napoleon next to Czar Alexander I.
One might argue Napoleon did not restore a traditional monarchy but created the First French Empire in 1804. However, this Empire led to the return of the Bourbon monarchy in 1814. Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte, Napoleon’s nephew, became Emperor Napoleon III in 1852, and remained so, until his defeat in the Prussian War of 1870. France did not truly become a Republic until 1870.
Considering the origin of the Bonaparte family, it comes as little surprise that Napoleon decides to return France to monarchy by another name by becoming an emperor.
Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte (1808-1873, initially became the first president of France in 1848 but became its second Emperor in 1852. He was deposed in 1870.)
Despite Napoleon’s predilection for royalty, Zamoyski notes numerous improvements made by Napoleon’s new role in the governance of France. He established the Napoleonic Code that provided a government framework designed to ensure equal treatment by law, protection of property rights, and individual freedom. He centralized government functions within departments to streamline governance. He instituted educational reforms by establishing secondary schools to train future government employees and military officers. He established a banking system to stabilize the economy. Though Napoleon detained the Pope for interfering with French governance, he liberalized control of church appointments by allowing the state some control.
One comes away from Zamoyski’s Napoleon biography with a deep appreciation of a legend in his time and for all time. As a tactical genius, Napoleon sometimes failed to look beyond an immediate problem, but when it came to understanding what is needed to manage a huge organization, Zamoyski shows Napoleon to be a visionary.
As is well known, Napoleon is defeated at the Battle of Waterloo in 1815. Zamoyski notes Napoleon is exiled to Elba where he escapes and is then interned on Saint Helena where he dies in exile from what is believed to be stomach cancer. He died at the age of 51. Napoleon’s confinement at Saint Helena is a sad end to an incredibly brilliant life.
Much knowledge is provided by Adam Zamoyski’s biography of Napoleon Bonaparte, but too much detail about specific battles makes the book much too long for non-historians.
Harari explains why bureaucracy and A.I. can mislead as easily as inform. A.I. should never be considered a decision maker but a tool for human understanding of a complex world.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Nexus (A Brief History of Information Networks from the Stone Age to AI)
By: Yuval Noah Harari
Narrated By: Vidish Athavale
Yuval Noah Harari (Author, Israeli medievalist, historian, and public intellectual serving as a professor in the Department of History at Hebrew University of Jerusalem)
Yuval Noah Harari’s “Nexus” is a perspective on information networks and how they evolve from neanderthal grunts to the fundamental link of society. Harari dissects human history and information networks with an eye toward the existence and future of Artificial Intelligence. Harari’s point is that information networks create, control, and compel change. Civilization began with verbal, then written, then video, and finally digital information that brings human beings together into larger and larger groups.
Networked information creates interest groups. Harari explains these interest groups rise from the evolution of information networks.
With written documents and invention of the printing press, the influence of information spreads across the world. Reproduced documents like government Constitutions, the Bible, Quran, The Torah, The Vedas, The Tripitaka, The Guru Granth Shib, The Tao Te Ching, and The Bhagavad Gita create followers whose understanding of society is reenforced by bureaucratic organizations. Villages, towns, cities, and nations grow from religious organizations and government bureaucracies.
Harari notes how information network’s compel obeisance to group think.
Human conflicts may be based on the desire for money, power, and prestige, but Harari’s point is that the agency of change is the information network. Without cohesiveness of an information network, governments, rebellions, and invasions fail. Successful governments, whether formed from rebellions, or invasions succeed or fail based on bureaucracies that use information networks to influence and indoctrinate citizens of established or acquired territories. The power of information networks is exponentially increased by A.I.
The crux of Harari’s concern is the difference between autocracy and democracy and the harmful potential of a digital age that uses information networks to weaponize and control society with the addition of A.I.
The next great economic revolution, after the Agricultural and Industrial Revolutions is today’s Information Age. I would argue America nearly lost control of the great wealth it created by making the rich richer and the poor unchanged. American democracy’s inequality of opportunity remains a work in process.
America’s failure to provide income equality.
Providing equal economic opportunity is a complicated achievement because it begins with the birth of newborns, acceptance of legal immigration and an education system that fairly serves the needs of society. America is among the wealthiest nations in the world but unlike the Nordic countries and its northern neighbor, Canada, it ranks below the middle for income equality. America’s economic tide is not raising all boats. The Information Age provides an opportunity for America to get its economy right by using A.I. to create a more equal income opportunity for its citizens.
Harari’s book is erudite, enlightening, and worth one’s time to read and understand. He advises of many things beyond what is mentioned in this brief review. Harari explains why bureaucracy is both a good and bad thing and that A.I. can mislead as easily as inform. A.I. should never be considered a decision maker but a tool for human understanding of a complex world.
Darznik’s novel is based on a woman who believed and acted on a conviction that men and women are created equal.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Song of a Captive Bird
By: Jasmin Darznik
Narrated By: Mozhan Marno
Jasmin Darznik (Iranian born American author with a BA from the University of California and a PhD in English literature from Princeton.)
“…Captive Bird” is classified as a novel. However, it is loosely based on the life of Iranian poet, Forugh Farrokhzad, who defied the traditions of mid-twentieth century Iranian culture. Today’s Iranian culture would undoubtedly be as anti-Farrokhzad as the 1950’s culture in which she lived.
Forugh Farrokhzad
Iranian poet and painter born in Tehran in 1934, died at age 32 from a car accident in 1967.
If even a small part of Darznik’s novel is based on true events, Forugh Farrokhzad was an extraordinary human being who symbolized the truth of sexual equality. In one of the most patriarchal countries in the world, Ms. Farrokhzad rebelled against a conservative and myopic view of women’s rights.
Jasmin Darznik characterizes Farrokhzad as a trailblazer who believed and lived a life of sexual equality.
The story Darznik tells is of a human being choosing to livelife in whatever way her mind and emotions led. Darznik’s heroine fought the restrictions of women’s inequality in a country riven with militant patriarchy. Farrokhzad’s history is one of rebellion against her father, a colonel in the Iranian army, and the societal taboos of Iran, many of which are resurrected in today’s Iranian government.
Darznik’s story is of a woman who acts like a free man, chooses her sexual partners, leaves her husband and only child, and seeks fame as a poet in a land renowned for poetry.
Like a man or any human being, Farrokhzad has sexual desires and ambitions to be something more than a footnote in history. Like husbands who leave their children through divorce or separation, Farrokhzad leaves her son. It is the same habit of many absent fathers who may love their children, but choose, like Farrokhzad, to pursue life beyond being a mother or father.
The world is beginning to understand women and men are 99.9 percent the same with fractional differences for conception, and strength.
The desire for sex, money, power and/or prestige are the same for all human beings. What is remarkable about Farrokhzad life is that she seems to have recognized that belief in one of the most patriarchal countries in the world. The way Farrokhzad lived her life, as reflected by the author, shows why men and women should be treated equally.
What is not mentioned in Darsnik’s novel is that Farrkhzad was also an artist.
This is a painting done by Farrokhzad despite her principal feminist reputation as a poet in the conservative culture of Iran in the 1950s.
The author’s story suggests Farrokhzad’s father commits her to an asylum after estrangement from her family and her rejection of female inequality. In the asylum, Farrokhzad is heavily sedated and subjected to shock treatments that make her catatonic. She is rescued with her father’s decision to allow her to leave the asylum in the care of a rich Iranian woman. This benefactress is a fellow traveler in Farrokhzad’s belief about women. Farrokhzad eventually recovers from her catatonia and continues her liberated life.
Though the dates Farrokhzad’s real life do not match historical events in Iran, Darznik captures the essence of a remarkable Iranian woman.
The shah of Iran, Mohammad Pahlavi is deposed in 1979. The author conflates the history of the oil industry’s unfair monopolization by Great Britain, the King’s departure and Farrokhzad’s storied life. She tragically dies in a car accident in 1967 at the age of 32. (Some suggest the car accident is suspicious.)
Darznik’s novel is a compelling argument for sexual equality. It is based on a woman who believed and acted on a conviction that men and women are created equal. The author’s story is particularly impactful because the woman she alludes to is born in a country that is among the most patriarchal in the world.
How close is the world to its next world war? The character of today’s leaders seems as threatening as Stalin and as unpredictable as Churchill.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
The Stalin Affair (The Impossible Alliance That Won the War)
By: Giles Milton
Narrated By: Giles Milton
Giles Milton (Author, British writer and historian.)
Giles Milton offers a fascinating and well written account of the dynamics of the relationship between Churchill and Stalin with a brief analysis of Franklin Roosevelt that shows a difference of opinion about Stalin. There are some surprises in Milton’s history of the beginning and ending of WWII and the role of Joseph Stalin.
As is well known, Stalin and Hitler made a pact at the beginning of the war that made them allies with a plan to divide Europe between their two countries.
The pact falls apart when Hitler chooses to invade Russia on June 22, 1941. Germany made rapid progress and was nearing Moscow when winter struck, and Germany’s wheels of war were stuck in the mud. Stalin was psychologically paralyzed by Germany’s decision to turn against Russia. He hid in his dacha, his second home in the Russian countryside. A delegation of Russians went to the Stalin’s dacha and pleaded with him to direct the defense of Russia against Germany’s onslaught. Stalin is surprised that the delegation wanted him to return to the leadership of Russia in Milton’s telling of the story. One presumes that reluctance is because of Stalin’s mistake in believing Hitler could be a reliable ally in their mutual desire to expand their territories.
Milton’s history has a particular interest to me because of a planned personal visit to the Baltics next month.
In reading a book about the Baltics during WWII, there seems some confusion among the Baltic countries because their sovereignty is being usurped by Russia while the instigator of WWII is Germany. The guide on the trip suggests we read “between shades of gray”, a book written by Rusa Sepetys, a Lithuanian born American writer. Sepetys story is of Lithuania intellectuals being arrested by Stalin’s troops and carted off to Siberia. Brief mention of the Germans is mentioned but implies the Germans were not the enemy but an opposing force of the Russian attack on the Baltics. Having visited Finland last year, it is interesting to find the Finns allied themselves to Germany during WWII because of their fear of Russia’s aggression. Now, having read Sepetys novel of Russian aggression in early 1941, one begins to understand the complexity of which side of the war the Baltics chose to be on.
Ruta Sepetys (Lithuanian born American writer.)
It tells the story of Russia’s invasion of the Baltics soon after Hitler’s decision to attack Russia.
WWII in the Baltics is not Milton’s history, but Sepetys offers a footnote on its consequence in the Baltics.
Milton makes one feel they are in the room when decisions are made about the progress and ending of WWII. It is a fascinating story. Stalin is a villain in sheep’s clothing. His lust for power is unquenchable. Winston Chruchill is shown to be more aware of Stalin’s intent than Franklin Roosevelt. At Yalta, where the peace plan is agreed to and signed, Milton explains Roosevelt is feeble. The Yalta conference took place in February 1945. Roosevelt dies in April, two months later. Stalin’s ambition is the expansion of the U.S.S.R. and anything that gets in the way of that ambition is an obstacle to be overcome or removed.
Milton’s access to historical documents, reveals the many important roles of government leaders during WWII and after.
Of course, the most obviously impactful leaders are Churchill and Stalin, but the author notes the roles of lesser-known participants like Averell Harriman, Kathy Harriman, and Vyacheslav Molotov. There is also the role of Lavrentiy Beria, Stalin’s head of the NKVD (the Soviet secret police).
W. Averell Harriman (1891-1986, American politician, businessman, and diplomat.)
Averell Harriman, as the son of a wealthy railroad baron, becomes the founder of Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., an investment company. He became one of the richest men in America.
Harriman is asked by Roosevelt to become the America’s diplomatic contact with Great Britain to manage the Lend-Lease Program before America enters the war. As a personal envoy, he strengthens the alliance between Britain and America. Later he becomes Ambassador to the Soviet Union after Hitler’s betrayal of Stalin. Milton touches on the married Harriman’s attraction to women and his extramarital affairs. However, Harriman was revered by Churchill, and later Stalin, for the aid he coordinated for both countries during the war.
Kathleen Harriman (1917-2011, died at age 93.)
A lesser-known role is of Harriman’s daughter, Kathy Harriman. In the first years of contact between her father and Stalin, Ms. Harriman smooths America’s relationship with the Russian administration.
Ms. Harriman leaned to speak Russian and aided her father in his diplomatic contact with Soviet officials. She became a correspondent for the International News Service and Newsweek during her time in Russia. In 1944, Ms. Harriman exposes the mass murder of 22,000 Polish officers by the NKVD, at the order of Stalin. She plays a role in the Yalta Conference in assisting the American delegation with logistics and management.
Milton makes a listener feel like they are in the room at a dinner table with Stalin and Churchill when they exchange harsh words about the creation of a western front to aid the Russian army in the fight with German soldiers.
Stalin demeans the British army for their early failures in the war when they were outnumbered and outgunned by the Germans. Churchill is deeply offended by the disparagement and is on the verge of canceling a dinner with Stalin before leaving Russia. His anger is quelled by Harriman. Churchill changes his tone with the Russian leader and mends their relationship over cigars and alcohol. However, there is little doubt about their continued acrimony and Churchill’s unshaken belief in Stalin’s intent to expand his empire.
Milton offers the same “in the room” understanding of what happens at the Yalta Conference.
Germany is divided into four occupation zones which ended up being East and West Germany. The groundwork for the United Nations is formed with the aid of promoting international cooperation and prevention of future conflicts. A zone of influence is created between Eastern European Countries which were added to the U.S.S.R., to expand a buffer zone between Russia and the Western Powers. This iron curtain results in the cold war. The table is set at Yalta for the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi and Japanese leaders and for future reparations to rebuild Europe.
“The Stalin Affair” is an excellent reminder of WWII that makes one think about what is happening today with Russia in Ukraine and Israel in Gaza. How close is the world to its next world war? The character of today’s leaders seems as threatening as Stalin and as unpredictable as Churchill.
No one can kill an idea. Ideas come from human beings who believe, rightly or wrongly, they are being victimized.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Homeland (The War on Terror in American Life)
By: Richard Beck
Narrated By: Patrick Harrison
Richard Beck (Born in 1987, received a BA from Harvard in 2009, Masters Degree in music from the University of North Texas, and Doctorate in performance and pedagogy from University of Iowa.)
On September 11, 2001, Richard Beck was 14 years old, living in a suburb of Philadelphia. In remembering life before 9/11, Beck looks at that tragedy as a reminder of life and America’s struggle to become a free and independent nation. “Homeland” uses the tragedy of 9/11 as an introduction to what might be interpreted as American Cowboyism.
Beck suggests the myth of American cowboys exemplifies who and what American society has been and will always be.
His recollection of 9/11’s news coverage is a distortion of reality. The reaction of the fire department, rather than heroic, is characterized as a matter of clean-up and ducking from falling debris and bodies, not of climbing stairs or entering buildings engulphed in fire and nearing collapse. Beck suggests like the myth of cowboys ridding America of Indian savages, expanding, and conquering the West, that firemen and rescuers did little to save workers in the towers collapse.
Beck’s history smacks of not being there but watching tv, reading echo chamber books, and listening to and watching news of the 9/11 tragedy.
Heroism is being there when the planes hit the towers, when smoke and debris were choking firefighters and police trying to cordon the area from surrounding businesses and people. This is the same fault Beck has of writing of unreasonably lionized frontiersmen and later leaders of America and the mistakes made by America’s leaders in the Civil War, Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan. Horrible things have happened in America’s history that have been caused by humans who are not gods but fallible, self-interested strivers for a better life. The meaning of life in America evolves just as it does in every country of the world. No society is proud of their failures, but failures are part of being human. Obviously, it is how we overcome failures that makes society.
Beck’s inference that Martin Luther King’s “…arc of the moral universe is long but bends towards justice” as a false observation breaks a listener’s heart.
Many would disagree because life for native Americans, women, non-white minorities, and the white majority have improved over the years since the founding of American democracy. This is not to say, there are not miles to go for America to realize equality-of-opportunity for all its citizens.
Beck uses the great tragedy of Gaza and Israel’s occupation and murder of innocents as a primary example of American Democracy’s failure.
There is little to argue that Israel is crossing a Rubicon of regret for their slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza. Palestine has as much right to exist as the nation of Israel.
America’s position has been to support Israel because they are a bastion against systems of government that have little to no interest in equality of opportunity for all. The author fails to appreciate America’s guilt for turning away Jewish immigrants fleeing Europe during WWII when six million Jewish people were slaughtered in concentration camps.
Beck’s history disregards and diminishes the history of Jewish ethnicity that has given so much to societies’ advance of science, literature, and political theory.
This is not to argue Israel is right in thinking that ridding Hamas or Hezbollah leaders can be accomplished with ethnic cleansing while murdering innocent bystanders. No one can kill an idea. Ideas come from human beings who believe, rightly or wrongly, they are being victimized. Israel is making the same mistake Nazi’s made when they began exterminating Jews in WWII.
REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE 