news – REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE

INDIVIDUAL POWER

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. President Trump exemplifies that truth.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

48 Laws of Power

Author: Robert Greene

Narration by: Richard Poe

Robert Greene (American author, wrote seven international bestsellers, received his degree from University of Wisconsin-Madison in classical studies.)

This is a long book that shows a breadth of understanding about the history of power. How power and influence is acquired and wielded by human beings. Power and influence ranges from idealism to pragmatism to nihilism. In some sense, the “48 Laws of Power” is a study of emperors, courtiers, generals, con artists, and others who acquired power over others in history. What Greene reflects on is the social and human art of gaining and wielding power over other human beings. Whether one is low or high in the hierarchy of humanity, the general key to having power according to Greene is “never outshine superiors” but “always court attention that gains either respect, influence, or control of others”.

MAO ZEDONG (1893-1976)ING FATHER OF PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA)

Greene brilliantly summarizes many characteristics of leaders in history to support his fundamental beliefs about power. He suggests all humans are primarily self-interested. One may disagree with that belief as a universal truth because there are many examples of social cooperation to achieve a common good or a stable system of governance. However, there is always a prime mover, a powerful person behind the scenes who drives the effort to succeed or fail.

Greene argues power is the result of interpersonal relationships. There is a great deal of truth in Greene’s analysis of power but from an institutional or organizational point of view, power is spread among departments’ leaders who report to a single leader. This is not to contradict Greene’s examples of interpersonal power but to temper belief that all power rests with one wielder of power. There is a great deal more to power than individual human manipulation. Organizations of the modern world are built around individual departments with singular powers beyond singular organizational leaders.

American Capital.

To give an example: regardless of who is President of the United States, there are Constitutional and legal systems that constrain his/her power. The bureaucracy of governance operates within rules set by law and precedent. In the case of business enterprise, shareholders, boards, and regulatory frameworks diminish the power of its executives. Further, even in the marketplace of business, capital limitation, supply chains, national platforms like Google, Amazon, and credit card companies have major influences on power exercised by any singular entity. Power in every human organization is also influenced by religions, social myths, and societal norms.

In this increasingly interconnected world, power has become impersonal, sometimes structural and emergent in ways that are non-intentional but significantly more powerful than one individual.

The weakness of the “48 Laws of Power” is that it fails to address institutionalized power that multiplies the power of individuals. A leader of a government or corporation works within a framework of historically developed departments that have their own powers and influences on public and private functions. The dynamics of power Greene explains apply within departments of government and corporations that go beyond the power of one leader.

This often leads to unintended consequences. ICE and Trump’s power are a current example of unintended consequence because of the murder of two Minneapolis American citizens who demonstrated against the President’s immigration policy. One doubts that the President of the United States wishes for the murder of American citizens who disagree with his immigration policies. However, power of the individual still matters as is demonstrated by today’s American President. Greene precisely explains how one person gains power over another despite a modern world that complicates individual power.

ICE murder of American citizens in Minneapolis who are protesting Trump immigration policy.

President Trump demonstrates his power over education, government employment, health and human services, birth control, and immigration policy. However, both good and bad government policy is magnified by Departments of Government that report to the President, i.e., bad policy coming from a President’s power is only made worse through implementation by subordinates who create their own power structures.

It is not that Greene’s analysis of power is wrong but that it applies to individual relationships without addressing distortions of power exercised by departments of business and government that have developed their own hierarchies of power.

One doubts any President of the United States who orders elimination of illegal immigration wishes to have ICE agents murder American citizens. This is not to absolve President Trump but to suggest the ICE employees on the ground bare the weight of two unjustified murders in Minneapolis.

Greene’s explanation of power is spot on, but it is about every person’s rise to power, not the reality of one leader’s power. Organizations are made up of many other managers using the same laws of power as their presumed superior. The end result is a level of unintended consequence. Or as Lord Acton noted: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. President Trump exemplifies that truth.

JESUS SAYS

Fugelsang preaches to the choir in writing about Trump’s ignorant Immigration policy. It is not a matter of being or not being Christian but a matter of having a pragmatic and compassionate immigration policy that serves the needs of America’s future.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Separation Church and Hate (A Sane Person’s Guide to Taking Back the Bible from Fundamentalists, Fascists, and Flock-Fleecing Frauds)

Author: John Fugelsang

Narration by: John Fugelsang

John Fugelsang (Author, American actor, comedian, television host, political commentator.)

John Fugelsang argues President Trump’s immigration policies are unjust, hypocritic, and unchristian. Fugelsang, as the son of a mother and father who have deep religious backgrounds, appears to have carefully read the Bible. In his Christian’ beliefs about humanity, Fugelsang argues Trump distorts Christian teaching, has no compassion for immigrants, and pursues an immoral immigration policy that exemplifies a false relationship between “…Church and Hate”.

Good government, not religion, is what is needed to solve America’s immigration problem.

As one who is not raised with any particular religious beliefs, much of what Fugelsang argues makes sense. The gestapo tactics of the Trump administration are appalling. Whether one is a Christian or not, the terrorism created by Trump’s policy of home, school, and street attacks on people who may or may not be immigrants is un-American and, according to Fuigelsang, contrary to the teachings of Jesus. Where Fugelsang is off the mark in his criticism is in attacking presumed motives of the President as opposed to the substantive reasons for managing illegal immigration. Trump’s methodology is cruel and unjust. The point of being Christian is superfluous. Fugelsang’s knowledge of the Bible is exemplary but who cares? It is not whether one is following Christian beliefs but whether one with power is acting with compassion and good judgement in addressing what is wrong with America’s immigration policy.

America needs immigration reform.

It is easy to agree with much of what Fugelsang has to say but it is not addressing the complexity of the problem of immigrants’ desire to have a better life. Trump is making the same mistakes past Presidents have made with native Americans. Rather than addressing the reasonable needs of human beings, past American Presidents made deals for Indian land, broke promises, murdered native populations and rejected inherent human rights. Trump is doing the same with today’s immigrants.

The starting point for correcting the problem of illegal immigration is in the creation of a fair, compassionate, and workable immigration policy.

Money is being wasted on gestapo-like actions by our government that terrorizes the public with armed ICE officers who continue to send the wrong message to the world about American democracy. We are not a police state. We are the nation that said, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”.

Trying to turn back time is a waste of American revenue and manpower.

Trump, Congress, and the Judiciary need to back-off from a show of power. Our government needs to get to work on practical solutions that help American gain control of immigration. A show of power will not solve illegal immigration. It is only Trump’s theatrical way of making it look like he is doing something about illegal immigration. What he is doing is making America look like Hitler’s Germany. This is not America or what it stands for.

Fugelsang may be right from a Christian’s perspective about Trump’s lack of Christian belief but that is the easy part. The hard part is creating a compassionate solution by the American government for immigrants that have entered the country illegally. America needs an immigration policy that works for the future. Immigrants made America. American power and prosperity will decline without the help of immigrants. Modernization and a falling birth rate in America will reduce available labor for its future.

American Leadership

Without a competent Chief of Staff, democracies are subject to authoritarian tyranny.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Gatekeepers (How the White House Chiefs of Staff Define Every Presidency)

Author: Chris Whipple

Narration by: Mark Bramhall

Chris Whipple (Author, political analyst, documentary film maker, journalist.)

Democratic government is complicated and messy, but decisions are made based on an understanding of the interests of many as opposed to the dictate and judgement of one.

“The Gatekeepers” may be viewed by most as an historical account of White House Chiefs of Staff based on many interviews of former government officials. However, one is inclined to see this history as a chronical of American government effectiveness. The facts and incidents reported give reader/listeners a view of America’s government function. Whipple details a series of relatively prudent and sometimes bad decisions made by late twentieth and twenty-first century presidents. Whipple’s history suggests the decision-maker for pursuit of government policy is America’s elected President. However, the road to policy approval or rejection is paved by White House’ Chiefs of Staff.

Whipple covers Nixon’s, Ford’s, Carter’s, Reagan’s, both Bush’s, Clinton’s, Obama’s, and Trump’s first administration. It does not address Biden’s Presidency or the Chief of Staff for Trump’s second term. The many interviews Whipple bases his history on offer a credible and enlightening history of American government. It is H. R. Haldeman, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Baker, Panetta, Card, and Rahm Emanuel that are the most prominent examples of effective and consequential Chiefs of Staff in Nixon’s, Ford’s, Reagan’s, Clinton’s, first and second Bush’s, and Obama’s administrations. The definition of effective is their ability to achieve a desired result whether good or bad for America. This is where one’s personal political beliefs come into question. It is always easy to see the errors of the past retrospectively. Whipple is careful to report facts and results without much judgement about their consequences.

H.R. Halderman (1926-1993, former Chief of Staff for President Nixon.)

Haldeman was Nixon’s Chief of Staff. There is no evidence that he had anything to do with the planned or ordered Watergate break-in, but Whipple shows he participated in a Watergate cover-up. Though Haldeman’s actions after the Watergate scandal are reprehensible, the point made by Whipple is that Haldeman set the table for what an effective Chief of Staff should be for a President. Haldeman acts as a consummate gatekeeper. One can criticize Haldeman’s bad decision to try and coverup Watergate, but he defined the role of a President’s Chief of Staff. Whipple shows Haldeman manages access to the President, understands where the power of government lies, has a good understanding of staff members surrounding the President, protects the President’s time, and balances a President’s policies with the politics of his party.

Donald Rumsfeld (1932-2021, Secretary of Defense and former Chief of Staff for President Ford.)

President Ford’s Chief of Staff is Donald Rumsfeld with Dick Cheney as Deputy Chief of Staff. Rumsfeld is characterized as a mentor to Cheney. They had a close relationship according to Whipple. Ford’s political decision to give a full pardon to Nixon and clemency for Vietnam draft dodgers were hot potato issues that were abetted (if not endorsed) by Rumsfeld and Cheney. Most significantly Ford ended America’s war in Vietnam. Ford endorses tax increases to reduce inflation while supporting tax cuts to stimulate the economy. Ford increases congress’s role in foreign policy.

Dick Cheney (1921-2025, second Chief of Staff for President Ford.)

In a cabinet reorganization Cheney becomes the Chief of Staff and Rumsfeld switches to Secretary of Defense. Rumsfeld and Cheney, in their roles as Chiefs of Staff, control access to President Ford, coordinate policy actions, shape internal decision-making, and advise Ford on strategy to influence people who accomplish these acts. The two Chiefs influenced Ford to replace Kissinger as National Security Advisor, promote George Bush as CIA Director, and prepare Ford for the next election which is ultimately lost to Jimmy Carter.

Hamilton Jordan (1944-2008, Chief of Staff of President Carter.)

When elected, President Carter felt he did not need a Chief of Staff. However, he relented in 1979, when he found the job was needed. Carter hired Hamilton Jordan who had been his campaign strategist when he ran for President. Whipple notes that appointment became a mistake because of Jordan’s lack of discipline. Though the Ford administration fought the idea of promoting Reagan for President, the public felt otherwise.

James Baker (1930-, Chief of Staff for President George H.W. Bush.)

After Carter, when Reagan is elected, he chooses James Baker as his Chief of Staff. Whipple suggests Baker is the quintessential model of a great Chief of Staff which all could be measured against. Baker is characterized by Whipple as an expert at managing the White House, the press, and Capitol Hill. Baker understood the process, the politics, communication, and presidential management requirements of the job. He never confused himself with the power of the President. He became manager of what is called the Reagan Revolution. The political and social movement revolves around ideas of smaller government, deregulation, cutting taxes, and endorsement of free enterprise. Whipple infers the success of the Reagan Revolution is largely due to the skill of James Baker.

Leon Panetta (1938-, Chief of Staff for President Clinton.)

One may argue Reagan caused America’s 1990-91 recession. Unemployment had risen to 7.8%. This set the table for a Democratic President named Bill Clinton. The initial Chief of Staff for Clinton is John Podesta who served from 1998-2001 and is replaced by Leon Panetta who, in the author’s opinion, rivals James Baker as a great Chief of Staff. Whipple infers that, without Panetta, Clinton would not have been reelected after the Monica Lewinsky affair. Panetta brought discipline and structure to the Clinton White House. Panetta could say “no” to the President, at least, in private. Panetta gained a reputation for being an honest broker as a negotiator for the President.

Andrew Card on the left. Joshua Bolten on the right.

George W. Bush, the next President, is noted to have two Chief’s of Staff during his two terms as President. It appears both Andrew Card and Joshua Bolten were more soldiers than Chiefs of Staff for George W. Bush. The policy decider is certainly George W. Bush but the influence of Dick Cheney as Bush’s V.P. seem a major influence on George W.’s decisions. Bush’s two Chief’s of Staff may have been effective as screeners but not as Chiefs of Staff that could say no to a President influenced by his cabinet and personal opinions. The entry to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq suggests Card and Bolten were unduly influenced by others in the administration.

No one seems inclined to say no to President Bush in private. In retrospect, President Bush seems let down by his Chief’s of Staff and the research and judgement of his Department Heads. Both Afghanistan’s and Iraq’s invasions by the American military are retrospectively shown by most (if not all) histories as American mistakes, if not tragedies.

Rahm Emanuel (1959-, Chief of Staff for President Obama.)

The final chapters address Chief’s of Staff for Obama and Trump. Obama became President when the American economy is in an economic crisis that threatens the financial industry, the general economy, and the mortgage market for many American homeowners. He asks Rahm Emanuel to become his Chief of Staff. Emanuel is a tough Chicago politician who recognizes the pressure of the office and has some level of fear about the future of the American economy. He understood the gravity of the job he is being asked to take. However, his reputation as a tart tongued fighter for what he believed as right made him the best Chief of Staff that could be found. His role as gatekeeper gave Obama the support needed to pass the Obama Health Care plan and work through the economic crisis that nearly bankrupted America.

Reince Priebus (1972-, Chief of Staff for President Trump.)

Trump’s choice of Reince Priebus as his first Chief of Staff is short lived and lasts for less than 8 months. His short tenure is not evaluated, and history shows he is replaced three times in the remaining years of Trump’s first term. A pro-Trump person will have one opinion about those facts while an anti-Trump person will have another.

Whipple convinces reader/listeners that a competent Chief of Staff is critically important for any organization that approaches the complexity of a nation-state government. Without a competent Chief of Staff, democracies are subject to authoritarian tyranny.

POLITICAL REPRESENTATION

Despite John Kennedy’s anti-liberal leaning and conservative populism, his autobiography will make one pay more attention to what he says as a Senator of the United States.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

HOW TO TEST NEGATIVE FOR STUPID (And Why Washington Never Will)

Author: John Kennedy

Narration by: John Kennedy

Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana

“How to Test Negative for Stupid” is an excellent autobiography of Senator John Kennedy. Not the John Kennedy who became President of the United States but a southerner who represents the great state of Louisiana. Having worked and lived for a couple years in New Orleans, experience reminds me of the extraordinary people I met who were as friendly as any strangers I have met around the world. Celebrating a Mardi Gras, seeing Elizabeth Taylor in a local theatre performance, and listening to Al Hirt live at a local bar were experiences one could not forget.

In my mind, Louisiana is an unusual State for Kennedy to represent as a Senator because of its colorful and diverse history.

In the 17th century it was claimed by France but ceded to the Spanish in the 18th century after the Seven Years’ War. France never really left Louisiana with some settling in New Orleans which became a vital port and, at least in my mind, a cultural representative of the State.

Half the state is enslaved by 1860. It joins the Confederacy at the beginning of the Civil War. After the Civil War, Louisiana endures Reconstruction and military occupation, while endorsing Jim Crow Laws that represent legalized segregation. This history is not to vilify or disrespect John Kennedy, but to give some context to the complex society John Kennedy ably represents in Congress.

Louisiana Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 declares the Confederate states “forever free”.

John Kennedy shows himself to be a well-educated, intelligent academic, and honest forthright politician. He is an erudite representative of the Louisiana’ Republican Party. This autobiography is a pleasure to listen to with one great reservation which is his defense of Donald Trump. Trump, like Senator Kennedy, represents a diverse constituency but, to this voter, President Trump is a risk to the health and welfare of America.

Trump’s anti-immigration policies are being enforced in legally suspect ways that should be and are being challenged by the judiciary.

Kennedy is reluctant to criticize Trump because of his belief that when one is elected to office in the United States, the position should be respected because of the election process. The absurdity of that belief is that Kennedy writes of the dishonesty and crookedness of some Louisiana Governors that got away with their corruption like it was just part of life in Louisiana.

Unfair political campaigning.

Kennedy is right about the Democratic Party unfairly vilifying Trump with false stories about Russian interference with electoral process and false reports of sexual activity (the Steele report) in Russia for which he could be blackmailed. False accusations have always been a part of the American election process. Every election for President has had true and false accusations made by opposing parties. None of these accusations kept Trump from being elected.

Presidents of the U.S.

Trump will be our President for the next three years of his second term. He is not the first or last President to abuse the office of the Presidency. His conflicts of interest are in his bond buying spree in 2025, his links to cryptocurrency, his appointments of cabinet members and advisors that have corporate ties, his use of the Presidency for personal branding, his gifts received like a $400 million plane from Qatar as Air Force One, and his personal empire building while being President of the United States.

Trump is not the first President to be accused of conflicts of interest.

George Washington had vast land holdings as the western parts of America that were being acquired by the government. Jefferson supported agriculture while being a large plantation owner dependent on slave labor. Bill and Hilliary Clinton were invested in the Whitewater real estate collapse in Arkansas, meant to sell vacation homes to the public. It went bankrupt and cost taxpayers an estimated $73 million. George Bush’s ties to the oil industry and his V.P.s recommendation to use Cheney’s former employer, Halliburton, to contract for work in Iraq seem questionable.

Migration is the movement of people to new areas of the world for work, better living conditions, and safety. In that process the world economy and American industry are arguably strengthened, not damaged.

Trump’s unadjudicated arrests and deportation of alleged immigrants is appalling. Trump’s anti-immigration policies are being enforced in legally suspect ways that should be and are being challenged by the judiciary. He is not the only President to have instituted policies that are contrary to the interests of America’s citizens. Many opposed Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal with history vindicating many of those decisions as appropriate for the circumstances of that time. Like Roosevelt, Trump tests the limits of his authority. What is appalling about Trump’s supported policies are issues like denying subsidized health care for the poor while maintaining tax reduction for the rich. Of course, history will be the final arbiter of Trump’s presidency.

Despite disagreeing with Kennedy’s support of Trump, the story of John Kennedy’s life is entertaining and enlightening. One comes away with admiration for a person who speaks his mind and who acts in the interests of his constituency and the country with honesty about what he believes to be right or wrong.

Despite John Kennedy’s anti-liberal leaning and conservative populism, his autobiography will make one pay more attention to what he says as a Senator of the United States.

VICE PRESIDENTS

Harris’s tough mindedness and potential are well illustrated in “107 Days”. America is ready for a woman to be President, but Ms. Harris may have too much baggage to be a successful candidate for President in 2028.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

107 DAYS

Author: Kamala Harris

Narration by: Kamala Harris

Kamala Harris (Author, former V.P. of the United States and former California attorney general.)

The obvious message of Kamala Harris’s book “107 Days” is that the Democratic Party lost the presidency because of the compressed time for Harris to mount her campaign. There are many reasons noted for Harris’s failure to get elected as President of the United States. She notes Biden’s weak candidacy, party disorganization, misinformation and disinformation, foreign policy controversies and protests, polarization and turnout problems, and cultural/generational messaging gaps. “107 Days” is a well written and narrated story of the difficulties that Harris had in her political race against Donald Trump. Her book is a compelling argument. However, it seems her most likely cause of defeat is time.

Donald Trump (President of the U.S., politician, media personality, born into a wealthy New York City family, has a B.A. in Economics from University of Pennsylvania.)

Retrospectively, Harris’s story makes many think she would have been a better President than Donald Trump. The story of her book reinforces that belief. However, that is misleading in the sense that Harris is faced with two burdens that are difficult, if not impossible, to overcome. One, America has never had a woman President and two, Harris is too closely associated with the administrations cover-up of Biden’s intellectual decline. There are many causes one can give to understand why Harris is defeated but time to know who she is seems the most crucial.

Vice President Harry Truman became President with the death of Franklin Roosevelt.

It seems most Vice Presidents of the United States are viewed as figure heads or pawns to increase votes for the person who is running for President. The duties of a Vice President today seem more like “gopher” jobs that give little visibility to the character of the person chosen to be Vice President. Only when that person becomes President, does the world find out who the Vice President is and what capabilities he (before Harris, they were all men) brings to the office. (For example, Trump’s successor, if it was his V.P., is unknown and unpredictable.) Harry Truman, retrospectively, is one of the great Presidents of the United States but no one thought a part owner and proprietor of a grocery store could be a competent President of the United States.

Five V.P.’s in history became Presidents of the United States.

Though there have been several Vice Presidents (John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Martin Van Buren, Richard Nixon, and Biden) who have successfully become Presidents of the United States their election was determined by campaigning. Regardless of whether time was the determining factor in Harris’s loss of the Presidency, her book shows she has the intelligence and ability to be America’s President. What that means to her and the future of America is unknown. One presumes Harris will consider running for President, but one suspects the burden of her loss to Trump is likely to diminish her chance of getting enough political support for her candidacy.

Presidents of the United States.

SOCIETY

The broad theme of Flournoy’s story implies being an identifiable minority means navigating social discrimination, gender difference, and physical violence in America.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

THE WILDERNESS (A Novel)

Author: Angela Flournoy

Narration by: Angela Flournoy & 2 more

Angela Flournoy (Author, American writer won the First Novelist Award for “The Turner House” in 2015 and was shortlisted for the National Book Award for fiction.)

As a white person, “The Wilderness” offers a glimpse of what it is like to be a Black American woman in the prime of her life in today’s America. Flournoy creates a story of five adult Black women in their twenties in the years from 2000 though 2022. She reflects on their irreverent and tumultuous lives that show how friendships grow and fall apart between young Black Americans who are underestimated and face societal inequality. The friendships of these five women are a kind of bulwark against the experience of living in America as a racial minority.

American life.

Everyone faces challenges living in America, but friendship seems less important to white Americans because they are a majority of the population with assumed privilege that depends less on friendship than on economic opportunity. White American economic opportunity is taken for granted. A white listener/reader’s interest may make Flournoy’s story less interesting because it is singularly based on a minority. One might make the mistake of returning Flournoy’s story, rather than sticking with it, because it is different from its reader/listener’s life. Flournoy offers a view of life seen through the eyes of a person who lives as a minority in a white majority.

Friendship of women.

Desiree’s, Danielle’s, Monique’s, Nakia’s, and January’s stories are of 5 twenty something, well educated, Black American women and their lives through 20 years of friendship. Their friendship is a bulwark against the harshness of American life. Friendship is characterized as it is, i.e. not as smooth and unchanging but on again, off again, and renewable based on common experiences of being Black in America. Flournoy shows how these five friends balance their ambitions and relationships in a society that often gets in the way of their drive for economic success and/or happiness. When faced with discrimination, their friendships becomes an island of consolation. This island is not necessarily peaceful because of their different lives and personal circumstances, but it is a refuge from American discrimination.

Added to American police discrimination toward minorities is gender violence which is a problem for both white and Black American women.

Violence is endemic in America, but racism and inequality underlie greater vulnerability for Black Americans. Too many assumptions are made by police who racially profile Black Americans without justification. That profiling leads to unjustified police brutality based on the color of one’s skin. Sexual relationships may seem “ok” to an outside observer, but Flournoy shows it sometimes hides the reality of physical or psychological abuse between mated partners. January’s story is an example of coercion, instability, and harm that can occur in an intimate relationship.

The depth and horror of discrimination in American history.

The broad theme of Flournoy’s story implies being an identifiable minority means navigating social discrimination, gender difference, and physical violence in America. Flournoy’s opinion is that friendship is the bulwark upon which Black women protect themselves. The reality of Flournoy’s story is that social discrimination, gender difference, and violence exist in every country of the world. The way people deal with discrimination, gender difference, and violence ranges from adaptation, reluctant acceptance, or revolt. Her point is important, but her story is too long.

GENDER INEQUALITY

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

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Betraying Big Brother (The Feminist Awakening in China)

Author: Leta Hong Fincher

Narrated By: Emily Woo Zeller

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

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

Fincher’s anger is justified by her life experiences.

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

Leadership?

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

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

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

HOSTAGE NEGOTIATIONS

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

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Swap (A Secret History of the New Cold War)

Author: Drew Hinshaw, Joe Parkinson

Narrated By: Keith Brown

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Brittney Griner (American professional basketball player.)

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

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

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

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

TWO OLD MEN

Age is an existential risk that can only be managed by the checks and balances of others which is why America’s government has survived and prospered despite good and ethically or morally corrupt Presidents.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Original Sin (President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again)

Author: Jake Tapper, Alex Thompson

Narrated By: Jake Tapper

Jake Tapper (Washington anchor for CNN.)

“Original Sin” is a hard-hitting expose by two tough minded reporters that convincingly explain President Biden did not have the cognitive ability to be America’s President in the last two years of his Presidency. This is a particularly hard pill to swallow because the current President of the United States is old while being at the opposite end of the political spectrum. At 74, this book reviewer is old. Age undoubtedly has an impact on this reviewer’s cognitive abilities and the cogency of what he thinks and writes. President Trump is 79 years old. The difference is that what a critic writes means nothing in respect to governance of the United States and the impact it has on American citizens and world events.

Trump’s decisions and actions have had great impact on U.S. relationship with other countries, American public policy, and the economic future of Americans.

Trump has directed the firing of thousands of government employees. Because of Trump’s authoritarian characteristics, he surrounds himself with sycophants who are more interested in pleasing him than managing the government’s responsibility for America’s welfare and role in the world. Authoritarianism is untrue of Biden who throughout his public career has been a consensus builder, not an autocrat. This is not to suggest Biden is not fundamentally wrong in not immediately supporting an alternative candidate for the Presidency. The authors of “Original Sin” clearly explain Biden fails America by waffling on his candidacy for a second term.

Old age is a risk for every manager of other people’s lives and opportunities.

Biden is not at fault for getting old but people who worked with him are guilty of negligence in their service to the American people. Tapper and Thompson offer numerous examples of Biden’s intellectual decline. The importance of their assessment of Biden’s failing capabilities is a warning to all managers of other people’s lives, employment, and family responsibilities. Age is a life circumstance that affects every human being. One who is losing their cognitive ability cannot see it in themselves. It is the responsibility of others to help older people relinquish responsibility for those things they can no longer handle.

Relinquishment by a man or woman who has great responsibility is a hard thing to accept. Age effects people in different ways. The catch 22 is that loss of cognitive ability is unseen by the person who loses it. It is the responsibility of those who rely on one who is losing their reasoning ability to manage the circumstance of that decline.

Putting politics of government aside, President Trump is old. The concern one has is the risk of relying on those who work for Trump, like many who worked for Biden, may see loyalty as more important than the public interest of America. Age is an existential risk that can only be managed by the checks and balances of others which is why America’s government has survived and prospered despite good and ethically or morally corrupt Presidents.

America will survive Trump but it will take time to reset America’s relationship with the world. America has had good and bad Presidents in both political parties but its foundation of checks and balances have kept it on course for the betterment of society. It is nations with leaders that have no checks and balances that threaten social and economic equality.

INEPTITUDE

“The Mission” is a depressing view of American ineptitude that reminds one of the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and 9/11.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Mission (The CIA in the 21st Century)

Author: Tim Weiner

Narrated By: Stefan Rudnicki

Tim Weiner (Author, American reporter, awarded Pulitzer Prize and National Book Award for books on espionage, national security and foreign policy.)

This is a tough book to read/listen to because of its damning assessment of the American CIA. Weiner is not the only American writer to reveal failed operations of the CIA but his access to their files seems like America’s attempt to understand and improve CIA operations’ management. That is the best face one can put on Weiner’s highly critical assessment of CIA operations. The CIA’s official response is that Weiner is biased, and his research of CIA files misrepresents the complexity of intelligence work. Some historians suggest Weiner cites CIA’ failures without enough context to balance the need for a covert intelligence agency.

The more troubling concern inferred by Weiner is the Trump Presidency and his authoritarian character and tolerance for leaders like Putin who think “might makes right”. What use will Trump make of the CIA’s covert power?

As the Turkish proverb says, “fish stinks first at the head”. Weiner notes, along with the huge escalation of drone assassinations by a liberal Democrat like Obama, one wonders what Trump may do in his second term.

Weiner explains the second Bush administration uses the CIA to push for evidence of WMD in their desire for justification to invade Iraq. The facts did not matter because the President wanted action. Under the Bush administration, the CIA adopts “enhanced interrogation techniques” (brutal torture) of political prisoners kept at Bagram Air Base. Weiner argues the CIA mission of covert intelligence is distorted in a drift toward paramilitary operations causing civilian casualties. One gets a sense that the second Bush administration is reacting to the horrendous 9/11 attack because of his administration’s failure to acknowledge CIA’s evidence that Bin Laden planned an attack on the U.S. The evidence of an attack’s imminence is clearly reported to the President by CIA leadership. This is a tough pill to swallow because the intelligence purpose of the CIA seems subordinated by both Democrats and Republicans to political interest rather than nation-state security.

Weiner vilifies CIA leaders like George Tenet, Porter Goss, and Leon Panetta. Tenet assures President Bush of Iraq’s possession of WMD. Goss, a Republican appointed by Bush, and Panetta, appointed by Obama, transformed the CIA into a paramilitary force after 9/11. Obama authorized use of drones in covert killings of over 500 foreign agents based on CIA’ espionage and analysis of their activities. Weiner notes Michael Hayden authorized torture programs by the CIA. Wiener argues torture programs and authorized assassinations damaged CIA’s credibility and effectiveness. To Wiener, the CIA’s leadership decline reaches back to Allen Dulles’s Cold War and William Casey’s Iran-Contra entanglement during the Reagan years. Covert action became more important than intelligence gathering.

“The Mission” is a depressing view of American ineptitude that reminds one of the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and 9/11. Wiener offers a dim view of both Democratic and Republican leadership in America. One hopes America can be better than what Wiener reveals in “The Mission”. The jury may still be out, but Trump’s administration seems likely to continue America’s international decline.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: