POLITICS – REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE

Ukrainian Independence

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Our Enemies Will Vanish (The Russian Invasion and Ukraine’s War of Independence)

Author: Yaroslav Trofimoy

Narration by: David Furr

Yaroslav Trofimov (Author, Ukrainian-born Italian author and journalist, foreign correspondent.)

“Our Enemies Will Vanish” is a brutal eyewitness account of the beginning of Russia’s invasion and war in Ukraine. Yaroslav Trofimov explains why Putin fails to achieve a takeover and annexation of Ukraine despite having an overwhelming military and economic advantage. Putin had a well provisioned and professional military force. Trofimov’s book is an insightful follow up on Karatnycky’s history of Ukraine’s leadership in “Battleground Ukraine”. Trofimov reminds one of the role Viktor Yanukovchy played in surreptitiously aiding Russia’s takeover of Crimea. Yanukovchy had fled to Russia and was waiting to return to the Presidency of Ukraine when and if Russia won the war. Having read “Battleground…” Ukraine’s resistance owes a debt to former President Yuschenko’s role in reinforcing a pro-Western leaning of Ukraine’s citizens. At the same time, Petro Proshenko (President of Ukraine before Zelensky) is shown to be equally important for having begun the rebuilding of Ukraine’s military.

Frenemies are defined as people who look friendly on the surface but contain underlying rivalry, and distrust.

Trofimov clearly explains why Putin fails to takeover Ukraine. He underestimated the capabilities of Ukrainian resistance. Putin’s predilection for complete control of the invasion created ground action confusion that could not adapt to circumstances of Ukrainian resistance. Russia’s ground forces could not effectively coordinate their actions because of Putin’s insistence on direct command and control. In contrast, the Ukrainian leadership made decisions based on ground circumstances rather than centralized command and control. Putin clearly underestimated Ukraine’s national awakening. The early atrocities of Bucha and Irpin where 400 civilians were murdered and many were imprisoned and tortured are examples of Russia’s brutal tactics. The heavy shelling of Irpin destroyed neighborhoods, homes, and schools. Satellite imagery and eyewitness accounts reinforced Ukraine’s moral and political resolve to defend their country.

Access to drugs for infection are a concern for Ukranian fighters.

Trofimov characterizes Russia’s attack of Mariupol as an attempt to “wipe a city off the face of the earth”. He vivifies the scale of destruction with a view of residential districts that are flattened, civilians are left without food, water, or heat and hospitals, theaters, and shelters are bombed. If one is wounded in combat, Ukrainians have no access to drugs to treat infection. A relatively minor wound could become a death sentence. Nevertheless, Mariupol became a heroic last stand and a symbol of Ukraine’s resolve to remain free of Russian occupation.

The brutality and slaughter of war is clearly brought to a reader/listener’s attention by Trofimov. The atrocity in Bucha occurs early in the Russian invasion. Families hide in basements without heat or electricity. People are shot with their bodies left in the street as Russians begin moving house to house to take food, phones, and whatever they wanted. Men who were captured were interrogated and tortured. Citizens were executed at checkpoints for being suspected of helping local Ukrainians. Door to door killings and summary executions were made on all who were viewed as enemies of Russia. Russian troops were spreading systemic terror to control the population. The immorality of war is brought home in Russia’s Bucha campaign. In Trofimov’s opinion, Bucha is an example of why Putin will fail to remake Ukraine a part of Russia.

Trofimov suggests Zelensky’s wartime leadership became critically important for the survival of Ukraine.

Trofimov argues Zelensky’s personal bravery changed the course of the war. One remembers the video of Zelensky on American TV standing with fellow Ukrainians saying, “we are all here” in Kyiv. He believes Zelensky united Ukrainian society against Putin’s invasion. He rejects evacuation offers, maintains government continuity, and enlists the Western world in resistance to Russia’s invasion. Trofimov feels Zelensky’s leadership became critically important for the survival of Ukraine as an independent nation.

Kraken fighters in Ukraine.

The creation of what becomes known as the Kraken fighters illustrates the ferocity, professionalization, and psychology of volunteer Ukrainian fighters in comparison to Russian conscripts. The Kraken unit’s utilization of urban combat and high-risk operations contribute to many of Ukraine’s territorial reversals of Russian land confiscations. Ukraine’s military competence grows with the Kraken’s successes. Though the Kraken were not the largest Ukrainian warrior group, they were a unit from Kharkiv that motivated frontline fighters.

Mariupol occupation by Russia.

Trofimov does not ignore the territorial gains made by Russia in their invasion of Ukraine. Their early success in Eastern Ukraine is stalled despite their gains. They did capture Mariupol, but it became a symbol of Russia’s brutality that hardened Ukrainian resistance. The Russians capture Severodonetsk and Lysychansk in 2022 and inflict a great deal of damage on Ukrainian infrastructure. However, Trofimov argues these were tactical, not strategic successes. Importantly, Trofimov notes Kyiv is not captured, Ukrainian morale has been maintained, and the West’s support remains strong. He believes Ukraine will ultimately retain its independence.

Ukraine’s fight for independence.

Trofimov argues Ukraine will survive Russia’s invasion and remain a sovereign nation, but it will remain a long struggle. Considering the age of Putin, i.e., he is 73, and growing discontent of some Russian oligarchs, the war may be ended sooner rather than later. Men like Andrey Meinichenko, one of Russia’s richest men, and several others complain about high interest rates and the war’s economic strain on Russia. It is not that they are anti-Putin, but they have economic interests that are being challenged by the war. One wonders how long Putin will last if the Ukraine war continues.

Chinese and American Youth

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Young China (How the Restless Generation Will Change Their Country and the World)

Author: Zak Dychtwald

Narration by: Zak Dychtwald

Zak Dychtwald (Author, public speaker, fluent Mandarin speaker, world traveler, graduate of Columbia University who moved to China and spent 4 years interviewing local Chinese.)

“Young China” is a fascinating comparison of a world traveler’s perception of the difference between young Americans and Chinese youths. A reservation one has in listening to Dychtwald’s explanation of Chinese youth is whether a 4-year immersion in a foreign culture constitutes a society’s truth or just a topical view of an intelligent observer who gravitates to students of similar ambition.

America’s Achilles heel.

Not knowing the author’s life experience, one assumes he has not lived the life of most American college students of his generation. As a graduate of Columbia, his decision to learn Mandarin Chinese, and choice to travel to China for a four year stay suggests he is not a typical American youth. Further, as the meaning of the saying “Birds of a feather flock together”, one presumes his choice of interviewees is not likely to be typical Chinese college students but those who excel in intelligence and academic pursuit.

Contrast of lives in China.

The main Chinese youths whom the author interviews and becomes acquainted with are Ben, Vivian, Chen, Liu, and Mei. Ben–who is a striver who has a rural background. Vivian is a young professional woman who speaks English and comes from the middle class. Chen is a university student who embraces nationalist beliefs of young Chinese. Liu is a young teenager who experiences the meritocratic pressure of academic achievement in China. And finally, Mei is a young Chinese college student dealing with job aspirations, dating, marriage pressure, and career ambitions.

Education is the great strength of China.

In some sense, these characters have American student similarities. One can find similar Americans in each of the broad categories of these five Chinese students. However, Dychtwald sees Chinese students as “dreamers and strivers” while his experience is that American students are skeptical about the value of education and their future. Dychtwald finds Chinese college students take their performance on college exams more seriously than American college students. High academic achievement is a critical goal to a Chinese student while to an American graduating with a degree is the primary goal and finding a career is more important than achieving high scores on college exams. Chinese youths see themselves as a part of a national achievement for China while Americans see themselves as cogs in a capitalist machine that may or may not turn into successful careers.

College is a pressure cooker for Chinese students while it’s more of a cultural experience and stage of life for most American students.

Finally, Dychtwald notes Chinese students are globally curious, Western influenced, while being confident in the superiority of their own country. In contrast, American students care less about other countries, know few languages beyond English, and see their country as just one of many cultures in the world. Dychwald is an outlier in that he does not view China as a threat to American hegemony, but a country focusing on improving the lives of their citizens.

The risks of singular leadership.

Admittedly, this review is a narrow interpretation of Dychtwald’s fascinating book. Only an extraordinary intellect would move to China after graduating from college and learn fluent Mandarin during a 4 year stay in China. It makes we who are old wish we had the privilege of Dychtwald’s intelligence to live life over again.

To this book reviewer, the flaw in American democracy is the rising gap between rich and poor. Dychtwald implies the flaw in China is its reliance on a singular leader’s actions to improve the daily lives of its citizens. America has the advantage of 4-year democratic change in leadership while China is dependent on an authoritarian’s health and judgement as a singular leader.

BATTLEGROUND UKRAINE

A reader/listener of “Battleground Ukraine” infers Putin will fail because of Russia’s flagging economy and weakening military. The Ukraine war may go on for many more months, but its economic devastation and human deaths will end with Ukraine as a sovereign country, and presumably, a Russia with a different President.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Battleground Ukraine (From Independence to the War with Russia)

Author: Adrian Karatnycky

Narration by: Daniel Henning

Adrian Karatnycky (Author, Ukrainian American political analyst.)

“Battleground Ukraine” is an important history of the transition of Ukraine from being part of the U.S.S.R. to an independent nation-state. The author offers a chronological political history of Ukraine’s drive for independence after glasnost. Karatnycky outlines the achievements and setbacks of three decades and six leadership changes in Ukraine’s Government. He shows nation-building is no easy task for a country that is split between desire for independence and a history of Soviet Union domination.

In researching the qualification of Adrian Karatnycky, one finds he is considered a leading analyst who has written about Ukraine in publications like Foreign Policy, The Wall Street Journal, Foreign Affairs, The Atlantic, and National Review.

Adrian Karatnycky is characterized as a Ukrainian American political analyst, and a democracy advocate for Ukraine. He is a managing partner of a consulting firm representing clients with interests in Ukraine. He co-founded a cultural initiative to promote positive relations between Ukrainians and Jews and has studied Russian Ukrainian’ relations, written a number of articles about Ukrainian human rights, political freedoms, and its development as a civil society. He understands and speaks English and Ukrainian, and presumably Russian.

Leonid Kraychuk (1991-1994, First President of Ukraine)

His book is informative but complicated because of unfamiliarity with most of the six leaders of Ukraine after its separation from the U.S.S.R. The first president of independent Ukraine is Leonid Kravchuk (1991-1994). Kravchuk presided over the breakup and helped establish the independent nation of Ukraine. According to this history, Kravchuk seems reluctant to create a decisive break with the Soviet-era experience. The authoritarian habits of administration led to the blossoming of oligarchic networks in Ukraine that resemble the oligarchs who control the Russian economy under Putin today. The growth of Ukraine as a relatively free capitalist country is sidelined by Kravchuk’s rule. Nevertheless, Kravchuk’s administration appears to have accomplished the break from the U.S.S.R. without civil war.

Leonid Kuchma (1994-2004, Second President of Ukraine.)

The second leader of Ukraine is Leonid Kuchma (1994-2004). The author notes Kuchma accepted the growth and corruption of oligarchs in Ukraine. In some sense, the economy stabilized under Kuchma’s rule while improving ties with Russia and even the West. However, authoritarianism is reinforced by a cadre of oligarchs that corrupt Ukrainian society and enrich themselves while reinforcing attachment to Russia.

Viktor Yushchenko (2005-2010, Third President of Ukraine.)

The third leader is Viktor Yushchenko (2005-2010). In 2004, the Orange Revolution begins in Ukraine with nationwide protests, civil disobedience, and political mobilization against oligarchic rule in Ukraine. Kuchma is replaced by Yushchenko as a result of a Ukrainian Supreme Court ruling that demands a new vote. That vote results in the election of Yushchenko. Yushchenko is characterized by Karatnycky as a pro-Western democrat. He allows Ukraine media to remain free by not repressing its citizens. However, Yushchenko is characterized as a political failure who, at best, creates space for the growth of democracy in Ukraine. Though Crimea is not lost during Yushchenko’s rule because he resisted Russian military expansion, he fails to move his country toward democracy.

Crimea’s annexation by Russia in March 2014.

Russia had a base in Crimea but its role in the invasion and confiscation of Crimean territory expanded with the next Ukrainian President’s administration. At worst, Yushchenko’s political ineptness and weak governance paved the way for a more kleptocratic Ukrainian President named Viktor Yanukovych (2010-2014). As Yushchenko leaves office, Russia lays plans for the invasion of Donbas in 2014.

Viktor Yanukovych (2010-2014, Fourth President of Ukraine.)

Karatnycky views Yanukovych as the latest pro-Russian ruler of Ukraine. Yanukovych uses his position as President to enrich his family and allow Russian intelligence service to infiltrate the Ukrainian government. In the author’s opinion, Yanukovych opened the door to Russian aggression which led Russia to surreptitiously invade Donbas and annex Crimea. Karatnycky infers Putin launches the Donbas incursion as a result of a power vacuum created by Yanukovych who flees Kyiv on February 22, 2014. Crimea is annexed by Russia on February 23, 2014. The Donbas incursion begins in April 2014.

Ukrainian corruption during the Yanukovych presidency.

By a slim margin of 3.5% Yanukovych won the Ukrainian presidency in 2010. He escapes to Russia in February 2014 after ordering a violent crackdown on Ukrainian protesters. Karatnycky’s assessment of Yanukovych is highly negative. He argues Yanukovych centralized Presidential power, weakened independent institutions, persecuted political opponents, and drew the government closer to Putin’s Russia. He defeated Uylia Tymoshenko, a pro-Western leader, who is imprisoned in 2011 during the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. Yanukovych remains in Russia today and is convicted in absentia for treason in aiding Russia during his term in office.

Petro Poroshenko (2014-2019, Fifth President of Ukraine.)

After Russia’s incursion in Donbas, Ukraine elects Petro Poroshenko (2014-2019). Karatnycky suggests Poroshenko recognizes Ukraine’s military has to be rebuilt because of Yanukovych’s neglect. Poroshenko turns to the West for support in the battles occurring in Donbas. His appeal is answered with U.S. and EU backing that secures sanctions against Russia. Ukraine increases NATO cooperation to make Ukraine a frontline for democracy. As a delaying tactic, in Karatnycky’s opinion, ceasefires were agreed to by Poroshenko in order to give Ukraine more time to rebuild its military. In the author’s opinion, Porshenko did not break Ukraine’s oligarchic power, but he secured Western support of Ukraine and rebuilt the army which strengthens Ukraine’s national identity. Karatnycky characterizes Poroshenko’s rule as a true beginning transition of Ukraine from authoritarian to democratic government. However, Kartnycky notes the judicial system and established oligarch’ influence continues to obstruct democratic ideals. Further, Russia’s Donbas battles with Ukraine continue through his administration.

Russia’s Donbas battles with Ukraine continue through Poroshenko’s administration.

Finally, we get to the election of Volodymry Zelensky in 2019. Karatnycky sees Zelensky as a pre-war and wartime President. Zelensky’s successful election is shocking considering the author’s assessment of Poroshenko’s successes in transitioning Ukraine to a world recognized democratic rather than authoritarian government. Zelensky, a comic actor, soundly defeats Poroshenko in the election of 2019. Zelensky appears completely out of his element in becoming President of Ukraine. He struggles with political reform and shows an ineptitude in dealing with political infighting. Karatnycky describes Zelensky as “…well-intentioned but inexperienced naïve in his first two years as President. However, as Russia chooses to invade Ukraine, the wartime Zelensky becomes a unifying national leader. His experience as an actor/comedian makes him a master communicator. Zelensky becomes a wartime decision maker that gathers Western support for the defense of his country. Zelensky overcomes his political shortcomings in the face of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Zelensky manages to unite Ukraine against a much larger enemy despite the economic stagnation of the Ukrainian economy.

Volodymry Zelensky (President of Ukraine 2019-?)

It Karatnycky’s opinion, Ukraine will survive Russia’s invasion and will remain a sovereign country. A reader/listener of “Battleground Ukraine” infers Putin will fail because of Russia’s flagging economy and weakening military. The Ukraine war may go on for many more months, but its economic devastation and human deaths will end with Ukraine as a sovereign country, and presumably, a Russia with a different President.

COLD WAR ORIGINS

Hannah Lucinda Smith’s “Hinterlands” is an eye opener for the uniformed but it’s a bit of a slog for non-historians to absorb.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Hinterlands (The New Cold War Brewing at the Peripheries of the West.)

Author: Hannah Lucinda Smith

Narration by: Hannah Lucinda Smith

Hannah Lucinda Smith (Author, British journalist based in Istanbul, Turkey. Published in The Times, The Atlantic, Foreign Policy, and wrote “Erdogan Rising”, presumably about the President of Turkey.

Smith has written a complicated book about what she calls “a new cold war”. It is complicated because most people’s knowledge of some of the territories she writes about like Transnistria, Respublika Srpska, and Nagorno-Karabakh are not known by the general public. Of course, she would not have titled her book “Hinterlands” if it only addresses major nations or organizations like Russia, Turkey, China, the EU, NATO, or the U.S.

Today’s conflicts between Russia/Ukraine and America/Iran may turn into world conflagrations. The same might be said of the following countries that make up Smith’s “Hinterlands”. “Hinterlands” is a reminder that there are other conflicts, less well known, that have the same disastrous potential. Smith identifies six low-visibility conflicts that may rise to the level of the Russia/Ukraine and American/Iran wars or worse. They are as follows:

Nagorno‑Karbala

Nagorno-Karabakh became an independent nation between Azerbaijan and Armenia which is just south of Russia, north of Iran, and between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Russia, Turkey, and Iran have dogs in Nagorno-Karabakh’s fight. Nagorno-Karabakh is mostly populated by ethnic Armenians who declared independence which is settled by a war that ended in 1994. The conflict is fed by interference from Russia, Turkey, and Iran that have their own agendas for the people who live in this territory. Russia plays the role of peacekeeper while ironically supplying arms to its citizens. Turkey is an ally of Azerbaijan that reluctantly allowed Nagorno/Karabakh’s independence. The author notes Iran has interest in the territory’s independence because of an Azeri ethnic population in Iran that is larger than the Armenian population in Nagorno Karabakh. Nagorno Karbakh’s independence creates a kind of jealousy about its ethnic independence versus a larger Azeri minority in the adjacent country of Iran. Of course, this is confusing because it seems more a concern for Iran’s leadership than Nagorno Karabakh’s independence from Azerbaijan. The threat seems that Iran may worry more about an independence drive by Azeri’s in Iranian territory because of the example set by the Azeri’ Armenians in Azerbaijan.

Respublika Srpska (Northern part of Bosnia and Herzegovina.)

Bosnia (Respublika Srpska)

Having traveled to the former Yugoslavia, the ravages of its dismantling may be seen in pockmarked buildings from battles that occurred during Yugoslavia’s dismantling. As Smith notes, there is a Serbian majority inside Bosnia. It identifies itself as Respublika Srpska (RS). This faction wants independence from Bosnia, but the Bosnia constitution forbids it. Russia supports the RS desire for independence. According to Smith, Russia is simply pursuing its desire to see the weakening of Western Institutions which RS’ independence would engender. The RS leader Milorad Dodik is pushing for a referendum for independence. The U.S. pushes for constitutional reform which in one sense puts U.S. on the fence rather than being for or against independence. Serbia supports RS ambitions. The EU is not unified in an opinion either for or against independence. Turkey supports Bosnia’s RS’ desire because of their Muslim religion and Erdojan’s hope for Putin’s continued economic support of Turkey. This seems resolvable but it has the makings for a hot war if independence is denied by Bosnia’s government. If independence is achieved, the concern will be for the minorities that choose to remain in a newly independent Serbian country. (As noted, this is an example of Smith’s complicated history.)

Kosovo.

Kosovo

The fight for independence is always a potential flashpoint for unrest that can widen into war between internal as well as outside nation-state interference. Outside interference can be based on economic, religious, or strategic interests of outside nation-state powers. Russia, Turkey, and Iran as immediate neighbors may call on any of these reasons to interfere and spark a wider confrontation and consequence in their region of interest.

Transnistria

Transnistria is a little-known de facto breakaway from Moldova that is not recognized by the international community.

Smith explains Transnistria is a region that broke away from Moldova when the USSR collapsed. Smith notes Russia protects its independence as a Russian client territory. She notes Russian troops are stationed in Transnistria while its existence is subsidized by the Russian government. It is a strategic foothold for Russia in their plan to takeover Ukraine. It is a conflict zone that remains a part of the nation of Moldova, under the control of Putin with Transnistria’s own government made up of a president, parliament, and military. It is a potential flashpoint in the Russian/Ukraine war.

Crimea / broader Ukraine conflict

Crimea annexation by Russia from the nation-state of Ukraine.

Crimea remains un unresolved border problem in Smith’s view of Soviet occupation. When the USSR dissolved, Crimea became a part of an independent Ukraine. Smith notes Russia has made immense financial investments in Crimea to lure its citizens to become a part of Putin’s Russia. Obviously, Crimea is a potential conflict in the making because of its former existence as a part of Ukraine. One wonders how Russian influence will affect Crimea’s interest in being a part of Russia or Ukraine in the future.

Turkey–Kurdish regions (Syria/Iraq)

There is concern about the influence of a Kurdish separatist movement that might spread from Syria and Iraq to Turkey.

Turkey has already created a military footprint in Syria and Iraq. Turkey has had several violent conflicts with the PKK, a Kurdish militant group that is classified as a terrorist organization that has caused thousands of deaths and conducted military operations in southeastern Turkey beginning in 2015 and continuing through 2016. That terrorism began long before the election of Erdogan. The Kurds seek their own nation-state, which was proposed back in 1920, after WWI. However, the disparate beliefs of Kurd’ factions make nation building and independence a tough objective to achieve. They allege a wish for autonomy, local democracy, pluralism, and decentralized governance whether living in Syria, Iraq, or Turkey. Of course, they are not the only ethnic group in each of these countries and the PKK’s objectives conflict with existing territorial governments. For various reasons ranging from different Kurdish beliefs to the existence of existing governments, the Kurds remain stateless and a threat to Syria’s, Iraq’s, and Turkey’s governments.

In the end reward is destroyed by the selfishness of each against the other.

Hannah Lucinda Smith’s “Hinterlands” is an eye opener for the uniformed but it’s a bit of a slog for non-historians to absorb.

WEALTH IN AMERICA

American democracy is like a giant ship at sea. It takes time to turn a giant ship impeded by brief storms until the return of calmer seas. America is weathering a Trumpian storm today but there is reason to believe there is another Lincolnesque or Rooseveltian leader in America’s future.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Country of Lords (Neo-Aristocrats, Social Darwinists, Tech Utopians, and the Long Fight against Equality in America.)

Author: Kim Phillips-Fein

Narration by: Sarah Welborn

Kim Phillips-Fein (Author, American historian, Professor of History at Columbia University.)

Kim Phillips-Fein argues the widening gap between the ultra-rich and everyone else in America is because of American culture’s anti-egalitarian beliefs and tradition. Beginning with the Founding Fathers of America; i.e., John Adams, Alexander Hamiliton, and Thomas Jefferson, Phillips-Fein’s argues these 3 men set the table for America to become anti-egalitarian. In part, she has a point because these three were elitists with university educations. However, she neglects to mention that George Washington was largely self-educated and seems unlikely to have been anti-egalitarian. However, despite Washington’s limited education and his role as a military leader, he is unlikely to have disagreed with Adams, Hamilton, or Jefferson.

As the author points out Adams, Hamilton, and Jefferson believed in a “natural aristocracy” that would improve society. Of course, this idea comes from white American Founders that gave little weight to non-white races, believed in slavery, and white male superiority. Phillips-Fein explains these foundational beliefs held great influence in American society. The growth of industry labor biases is magnified by intellectual distortions of Darwinian evolution. The author goes on to explain influential Americans like Willam Sumner (an influential American social theorist in the 19th century) opposed welfare because of belief in Darwin’s discovery of natural selection and the concept of “survival of the fittest”. American economic growth and the rise of personal white male wealth diminish the status of laborers, women, and non-white Americans.

Andrew Carnegie (Scottish American, industrialist, and philanthropist 1835-1919.)

Andrew Carnegie (a steel magnate who created America’s first billion-dollar corporation) writes an essay titled “The Gospel of Wealth” in 1889 which argues the rich should rule because their wealth came from their natural superiority. Henry Ford creates his fortune in the automobile industry with a rigid hierarchy based on paternalistic control of workers’ labor and domestic lives. The outgrowth of industrial success in America leads authors like Madison Grant to racialize society with a belief that the white race is biologically superior. People like Charles Davenport (an American biologist who died in 1944) espoused a eugenics movement with a belief that poverty and crime are based on heredity which reinforces illogical beliefs of leaders like Adolph Hitler.

One may ask oneself how good a job has individual wealth done in setting standards for society? Are authoritarian multi-millionaires like Vladimir Putin, and Donald Trump benefiting or diminishing the modern world?

The author explains distortions of science and the advance of IQ testing have led to the rise of technocrats and corporate hierarchies based on preferential promotion and ascension of mostly white American men. Corporations grew to become quasi-governments that reinforced anti-egalitarianism. A meritocracy grows with sociologically biased IQ testing as a way to reinforce inequality based on cognitive difference rather than experience, proven, and/or innate ability.

Consequence of inequality of opportunity. Octavia Butler (a highly regarded American writer who died in 2006) shows an evolution of cities into silos of cultural difference rather than communities of common interest.

The irony of Phillips-Fein’s history of American thinkers and elites is that because people are not equal, they should not have equal opportunities. She notes people like John Adams believed too much egalitarianism is dangerous because it would empower the wrong people; i.e. presumably poorly educated Americans (ironically people like George Washington). The growth of racism and belief in eugenics by people like Lothrop Stoddard (a Harvard educated historian who died in 1950) argue that equal opportunity is foolish because laborers and particularly non-whites are less educated and equal to people who have acquired great wealth. The effects of that belief reinforce the false belief that wealth is a measure of human worth. That false belief becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy that creates a perennial underclass that is denied an equal opportunity to improve their lives.

Charles Darwin (1809-1882) FOUNDER OF THE THEORY OF THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES.

After this depressing history, Phillips-Fein suggests anti-egalitarianism in not a permanent, unchangeable characteristic of American democracy. Social Darwinism is collapsing as its distortions of evolution are better understood. The proof of Jewish contribution to society will never offset the horror of Adolph Hitler’s holocaust but few rational human beings can fail to see how important Jewish culture has been to science and the advance of civilization. The movements of abolitionists, labor, civil rights, feminists, immigrant and disability rights in the 20th and 21st centuries encourage egalitarian beliefs.

AMERICA

Despite President Trump’s words and deeds, America is and always will be a haven for those who seek freedom and equality of opportunity.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

First Principles (What America’s Founders Learned from the Greeks and Romans and How That Shaped Our Country.)

Author: Thomas E Ricks

Narration by: James Lurie

Thomas Edwin Ricks (Author, American journalist. Pulitzer Prize winner for National Reporting for the WSJ and Washington Post.)

Thomas Ricks has written an enlightening view of the founders of America’s government. In his opinion, the founders established a republic ruled by an American government based on ancient Greek and Roman political ideas. He argues the self-taught education of George Washington, and college educations of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were steeped in knowledge of Greek and Roman beliefs reinforced by Scottish intellects who studied the classical ideas of Greek and Roman society. Ricks notes Roman and Greek writings about virtue, law, deliberation, political structure, and social restraint are important sources of America’s government organization.

Ricks argues Greece’s Aristotle, Plato, Epicurus, Xenophon, and Homer were read by important framers of the American Constitution. Particularly, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and James Madison were influenced by Greek writers and famous Romans like Cicero, Plutarch, Polybius, Cato the younger, Cataline, and Caesar. Even the unschooled George Washington read the works of Cicero, Cato the Younger, and Plutarch. Ricks writes that the Greek and Roman authors were the curriculum basis of the Scottish enlightenment of the 17th century.

Cato the Younger (95 BC-46BC, Roman senator.)

Jefferson absorbed the beliefs of Scottish writers like Francis Hutcheson, Thomas Reid, and Adam Smith to form a moral philosophy and belief in the natural rights of humanity. Adams adopted the civic virtues propagated by Scottish intellectuals like Hutcheson, Hume, and Smith. He admired the moral vocabulary of virtue and grasped a realistic view of human nature with a belief in mixed government that required checks and balances; i.e., not a pure unconstrained democracy. Madison relies on the Scottish Hume, and Smith to understand how human nature requires administrative regulation to mitigate factionalism in a government based on separation of powers. Madison became the synthesizer of enlightenment beliefs promulgated by Scottish intellectuals.

George Washington (1732-1799.)

George Washington is not characterized as a deep thinker about philosophy, but Ricks suggests he had read Plutarch’s Lives and revered the lives of Cato and Cincinnatus who were known for civic virtue, sacrifice, and public duty. Cato the Younger is noted for stoic discipline and moral seriousness while Cincinnatus voluntarily relinquishes his power after successfully defending and saving the Roman Republic from the Aequi (a militant mountain tribe living near Rome). Cincinnatus defeated the Aequi in a 16-day defensive war for the Roman Republic. He could have crowned himself as King as a result of his success.

Cato the Younger, as a Roman statesman became famous for his emotional restraint, moral rigor, personal austerity, and commitment to virtue. Washington emulated Cincinnatus’s actions after America’s revolutionary war when he could have used his fame to take command of a fractured continental congress. He exhibited Cato the Younger’s statesmanship throughout his career as leader of the American miliary and later as the first popularly elected President of the United States. The soon to be summoned military commander returned to his farm in Virginia after the end of America’s war with Great Britain.

George Washington’s Farm near Fredericksburg, Virginia.

Washington had no college education and limited formal education. He had learned to read and write but relied on self-education through practical experience. He joined the Virginia militia at age 21 as a major. He entered the military service during the French and Indian War with orders to convince the French to leave the Ohio valley. However, he failed. He is defeated by the French in 1754. What he learned is that overconfidence, poor preparation, and logistic mistakes could only be overcome with discipline and clarity.

British General Baraddock.

Washinghton went on to serve under British General Braddock in 1755 and learned the importance of discipline, and military organization while fulfilling his duties in battle. Washington found the British underestimated Indian tribes that parlayed and fought together against America’s colonists taking of Tribal lands. Washington shows his personal courage in a battle in which two horses are shot from under him while a bullet passes through his coat. His commander, General Braddock, is killed. Washington learns discipline, order, and humility while in the military. He matures to recognize the importance of reputation in leading others.

Thomas Jefferson.

Jefferson is in someways shown to be a bon-vivant who seduces other men’s wives. However, Ricks shows Jefferson to be a brilliant omnivorous consumer of political philosophy. His beliefs are shaped by a blend of Greek, Roman, and Scottish Enlightenment ideas. His studies of the Greek philosophy of Epicurus and Aristotle fed his belief in agrarian republicanism reinforced by reading Cicero and Virgil. His reading of Scottish writers like Hutcheson, Reid, and Smith make him a philosopher-statesman who understood the principles required for government organization. He owned slaves and held a tortured, contradictory, and harmful view of slavery. He knew slavery was morally wrong and noted it in writing. However, he viewed slavery as an indispensable practice, believing Black people were inferior. He feared emancipation more than slavery. In regard to slavery, Ricks writes Jefferson is a moral philosopher who fails morally. Slavery is recognized by Washington, Jefferson, Adams, and Madison as a societal fault that would lead to civil unrest and probable war.

John Adams (Second President of the United States.)

Ricks argues John Adams’ government beliefs revealed solid connections between American government creation and Roman and Greek thought. Adams spent much of his time reading Greek and Roman classics. However, Ricks characterizes Adams as thin-skinned, irritable, self-righteous, and prone to hurt or hostile feelings. Despite these character flaws, Ricks shows Adams to be the intellectual heavyweight of the Founding fathers of the Constitution. His reading of Plato and Aristotle gave him a clear understanding of the importance of virtue, education, and the inherent instability of pure democracy. In reading Polybius, he recognized the importance of mixed government. With Cicero, he understood the importance of rule of law. His research in Roman history gave him an appreciation of the risk of corruption, factionalism and its potential for government harm. Ricks notes Adams’ character could lead to excessive moralizing and hectoring of his subordinates which often made him temperamentally unsuitable for the give and take of politics. Adams’ pessimism is noted to have come from Plato’s warnings about demagoguery that led to the collapse of Rome. On balance, Ricks seems to find Adams to be a tragic intellectual unsuited for the Presidency despite his contribution to the founding of America’s government.

James Madison (the 4th President of the United States is considered the “Father of the Constitution”, author of the Bill of Rights, and co-author of the Federalist Papers.)

Ricks assessment of James Madison is the most positive of the Founding fathers of American government. Madison coalesced the many elements of classical and Scottish thinkers of the past to create the American Constitution. He seems the least charismatic but most effective of the Founding fathers of the Constitution. His introversion made him highly intellectual but not a natural leader. He neither had Washington’s gravitas, Jeffeson’s elegance, or Adams’ fire but he had the mind for institutional design. Madison understood power and a Republic’s risks of corruption, factionalism, and its potential for failure and collapse. His realistic grasp of human nature turned classical theories of the ancients into a flexible and durable democratic government. America has survived despite John Adams Alien and Sedition Acts, Andrew Jackson’s defiance of the Supreme Court, Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus, Woodrow Wilson’s 1918 Sedition Act, Nixon’s Watergate, George W. Bush’s use of torture and warrantless surveillance, and the first 4 years of the Trump administration.

In American democracy, freedom is the holy grail of its success.

Thomas Ricks reminds Americans of how far we have come and how imperfect American Democracy has been. Many Presidents have challenged America’s Constitution without fundamentally changing the republic’s self-government. America’s rule of law, government checks and balances, freedom of Speech and Press, its peaceful transfers of power, and citizens’ drive for civic equality, are part of America’s past, present, and foreseeable future. Despite President Trump’s words and deeds, America is and always will be a haven for those who seek freedom and equality of opportunity. America owes a great deal to its Founders of the Constitution and their study of the ancients and Scottish teachings in the 17th century.

MONEY’S VALUE

Ahamad suggests the public needs to oppose policies based on economic and political leaders’ singular judgements. Public input to government decision-making is an essential strength of democracy and the great weakness of autocracy.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

1873 (The Rothschilds, the First Great Depression, and the Making of the Modern World)

Author: Liaquat Ahamed

Narration by: George Newbern

Liaquat Ahamed (Author, American financial historian.)

Liaquat Ahamed’s book, “1873”, has been somewhat anxiously awaited for by the public because of his previous book “Lords of Finance” which reported central bankers’ roles in the Great Depression. Talk of depression swirls around the public today. What parallels are there between “1873” and the current world financial market? Liaquat Ahamed explains the impact of railroad expansion and world trade that exploded in the 19th century. He suggests that explosion seems parallel to today’s impact of transformative technology like A.I. which has shown potential for productivity increase around the world. That expectation magnifies the amount of capital being invested in a changing paradigm in society that Ahamad argues is similar while different from railroad introduction in the 19th century.

Globalization of information technology.

Globalization makes change more impactful today because of the world wide web and a potential for spreading useful and harmful information. Ahamed suggests the vast investment in railroads has parallels to communication technology’s introduction in today’s economy. The rush to create datacenters requires large capital investments with the creation of data centers that challenge today’s energy availability. Corruption became common in the 19th century with schemes designed to lure nations and investors into impractical investments. Ahamed recounts grifter’ pitches in the 19th century similar to crypto bubble makers of the 21st century. In the 19th century, mostly banks, governments, and wealthy risk takers were making foolish investment risks for hoped-for wealth. Today, crypto bubble makers reach into the pockets of the poor and middleclass.

Crypto investment.

As the public today becomes skeptical about tech investments, the banks of the 19th century belatedly turned skeptical about transportation system expansion. The growing malaise of recession turned into a depression in the 19th century. Ahamed argues today is similar to what caused the 19th century economy to slip into recession and depression. Ahamed suggests the political polarization occurring in the 19th century is evident in today’s political climate. The split between Trump supporters and detractors is widespread in America. Trump’s attacks on global cooperation seem similar to what occurred in the 19th century. Like the farmers of 1873, factions of America resent their loss of jobs and manufacturing income to other countries. The geopolitical shocks of the Ukraine war, America’s bombing of Iran, Russia’s Ukraine war, and growing tensions with China magnify inflation and create capital reallocations that harm respective economies and increase potential for world-wide financial collapse.

Ahamed’s book outlines similarities and differences between the past and present, foretelling a possible future.

Ahamed suggests that America needs to avoid a rigid monetary policy based on “who’s ox is gored”. Further, investment in technology needs to be reined in by reducing the hype about loss of jobs with a realistic judgement of employment impact and technologies’ benefits. Political and business leadership need more transparency and public oversight to improve societal decisions on technological investment. Investment opportunities need to be reasonably evaluated to avoid bubbles that distort capital flows. Ahamed suggests power brokers, whether private or public, need to avoid over reaction to inflation by being wary, but not overly punitive, toward investment in new technology.

Breadlines in the 1929 economic crash.

Ahamed offers several individual examples of con men who created hype-driven market manipulation that fueled 19th century fraud with over-optimism, and self-promotion based on new railroad building schemes. One listens to the methodology of these con men and will recall news articles today about technology fraudsters. Though only 3 to 4 percent of SpaceX shares are owned publicly, it reminds one of the over-optimism and self-promotion of Elon Musk. This is not to say Musk is a con man, but it reflects how over confidence in technology is similar to the over confidence in railway expansion in the 19th century. Additionally, search of the news of crypto scammers in the 21st century show there are three Thai suspects, 22 accused scammers in Palau, 82 accused scammers in Eswatini, and an astounding 15,260 suspects worldwide.

Truth is left to historians, and society’s judgement.

Liaquat Ahamed suggests the U.S. presidential elections are directly distorted by the financial crisis surrounding 1873. Ulysses Grant’s administration is undermined by the loss of public confidence in the federal government. The civil rights movement is stalled because northern voters were less willing to support federal intervention in the South. The Republican Party lost the political will to continue Reconstruction policies. Voters punished incumbents because of the economic crisis of the 1870s. Ahamed argues the economic collapse destabilized all governments and empowered reactionary forces that weakened government reforms. Conspiracy theories blossomed with scapegoating of all who had been elected to govern in the western world.

People are being arrested based on the color of their skin with the presumption that they are not citizens of America and are deported without legal recourse.

Today’s American government has stalled support of fundamental rights written in the Constitution. People are being arrested based on the color of their skin with the presumption that they are not citizens of America and should be deported. A majority of American voters elected a President who empowers the government to destabilize its relationship with former allies of democracy. Conspiracy theories abound on causes of global warming to support beliefs that it is a natural event that cannot be mitigated by reducing fossil fuel use and accelerating wind, water, and solar energy uses. Belief in a “deep state” conspiracy has created government and political distrust. QAnon like cabals have grown to spew allegations of secret wars being waged by special interests. Distrust of the United Nations is increasingly viewed as a body plotting to replace nation-state government. That view grows and feeds America’s “go it alone” belief as the only way to sustain democracy.

Where unemployment is created by new technology, America needs to support those who are displaced.

Despite Liaquat Ahamed’s argument that today’s America has similarities to America’s 19th century circumstances, he suggests there are reasons to believe 19th century mistakes can be avoided. Where unemployment is created by new technology, America needs to support those who are displaced. When faced with inflation and economic threat, rather than depending on singular leadership decisions, government should support flexible polices by the central banks of America. Public input to government decision-making is an essential strength of democracy. When public expertise is ignored, judgement is degraded and America becomes less democratic and more likely to fail.

Rothschild Family Tree

As one nears the end of Ahamed’s book, one wonders why the Rothchild’s are prominently noted in its subtitle. His point is that the Rothschilds were the only global financial institution that successfully survived the ups and downs of the banking industry in the 19th century. Their success influenced unjust anti-Semitic growth in the world. The Rothschilds embodied the tension between stability and speculation with their long-term stability as a lending institution. The Rothchild’s stability became a symbol of global finance that influenced political actions around the world. The price paid by the Rothchild families’ success fed the worst in human nature exemplified by the Holocaust of WWII.

No leader is infallible but those who listen and act on the basis of others expertise are more likely to make the right decisions. That is Ahamed’s solution to avoid economic depressions like those of 1873 and 1929. Proof of this opinion is in the financial crises of 2008 and the world’s recovery. This is not to argue that many citizens were not harmed and unfairly treated in the 2008 crisis, but the spread of a world economic collapse was avoided.

IRAN

Torbati believes ordinary Iranians, especially Gen Z women, will change Iran’s history. One is reminded of the Yiddish expression “From your lips to God’s ears” because Torbati’s history of Iran is far from encouraging.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Stolen Revolution (Betrayal and Hope in Modern Iran)

Author: Yeganeh Torbati & 1 more

Narration by: Nikki Massoud

Yeganeh Torbati (American author, award winning journalist who is fluent in Farsi, Spanish, and English, earned a BA in political science and Middle Eastern studies from Yale.)

In listening to “Stolen Revolution” one wonders about the objectivity of its author. Because Ms. Torbati is born in America; one is reserved about her objectivity about Iran’s transition from an autocratic country ruled by a king to one that became a theocratic republic ruled by an equally autocratic Muslim cleric. It is difficult for we who are born in America to understand what the truth may be about the true feelings of people who have lived all their life in Iran.

The influence of religion on government.

Though America is not considered a Christian nation, it is deeply influenced by belief in a Christian God. Of course, America is founded on the importance of separation of Church and State which makes cultural influence of theocratic leadership unlikely if not impossible. The influence of one raised in America challenges one’s objectivity in analyzing the history of a country led by a theocratic autocrat. However, Ms. Torbati, in contrast to most Americans, knows the language of the country on which she reports. Further, her Iranian ancestry undoubtedly gives her a better understanding of Iran’s culture.

In recognition of the author’s reporting of Iranian opposition to Ayatollah leadership, a reader/listener is bound to give respect to her evidence of citizen resistance. Her reporting reinforces much of what we read and hear from news reports about Iran’s opposition to women’s rights and freedom of movement. The complaints of voter fraud have been noted by other writers about Iran’s Green Movement in 2009 and later public protests. Torbati’s profile of Hila Sedighi, a poet and activist in Iran, shows her poetry reflects on the shattered hopes and dreams of many Iranians in an election campaign that undermined women’s rights. Tobarti outlines two egregious voter frauds in the two terms of office for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a shill for the Ayatollah.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (Elected twice under suspicious voter fraud allegations.)

With the undoubted help of the Supreme Leader’s manipulation of the 2005 and 2009 elections there were more voters for Ahmadinejad than there were people to vote in respective districts. Election competitors like Mehdi Karroubi turned against the Ayatollahs’ leadership because of obvious voter misrepresentations. It became impossible for an independent to be elected.

Autocracy may evolve in any form of government.

With reservations, this book review of “Stolen Revolution” is unlikely to be objective. America is presently being led by an autocrat who is marginally constrained by the checks and balances of America’s government. America’s current President chooses to act as though checks and balances are challengeable by one person’s judgement. The bombing of Iran shows the weakness of an autocrat’s decision; i.e. a fault apparent in Iran as well as America.

America’s bombing of Iran’s Qasim Island water plant on March 7, 2026.

Here stands America as the instigator of a war with a country it cannot or chooses not to understand. The Ayatollahs who replaced Iran’s autocratic king, have not succeeded in establishing a viable economic theocracy. The discontent and poverty of a large part of the Iranian population is revealed by Torbati’s history. How much of that poverty is caused by the Western world’s rejection of Iran is not clearly explained by Torbati’s history. She implies it is largely because of the rule of the Ayatollahs and their theocratic beliefs. She argues Iran is driven by clerical crony capitalism with clerical elites enriching themselves and the military by discouraging private enterprise.

Iran’s military.

Torbati infers Iran’s military has become a construction arm of Iran supported by the Ayatollahs. Citizen taxation is used as a bludgeon to discourage private enterprise while enriching the government and the military. Through personal clerical corruption and favoritism, with the use and support of the military, Iran has failed its citizens. Leadership of Iran confiscated private companies, restricted access to foreign expertise, and created fear and paranoia among its people. The Ayatollahs cultivated a military state by using it as a stabilizing force to repress the public while being the backbone of employment and construction activity as a substitute for private business growth. Torbati argues the government of Iran is more interested in self-preservation than the welfare of its citizens.

Ali Khamenei (Supreme leader of Iran Killed by American bombing on February 28, 2026)

Torbati’s history of Iran is not encouraging. She suggests the Islamic Republic will remain focused on preserving itself with military support more than improving the lives of the majority of its citizens. Torbati implies foreign intervention will not break Iran’s system of government. Iran’s leadership will only change if ordinary citizens, not just the elites of government, are able to influence the course of their economy. She argues Gen Z women, reformist activists, and discontented businessmen will eventually change Iranian leadership. Torbati implies external intervention will not determine Iran’s future.

An estimated 326 Iranians were killed in Iran’s November 2022 protest.

As history suggests the road to success is not a path you find, but a trail you blaze. Iran’s future is dependent upon the citizens of Iran; i.e., not foreign impositions, wars, or demands of foreign governments. Torbati believes ordinary Iranians, especially Gen Z women, will change Iran’s history. One is reminded of the Yiddish expression “From your lips to God’s ears” because Torbati’s history of Iran is far from encouraging.

CULTURAL DECLINE

Americans need to come to grips with their history, mend its fences, and use its cultural diversity as a means for acceptance of difference and rebirth of its founder’s principles. Empathy is a relatively minor part of America’s institutional, economic, and moral decline.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Suicidal Empathy (Dying to Be Kind)

Author: Gad Saad

Narration by: Gad Saad

Gad Saad (Author, Canadian professor of marketing and evolutionary behavioral scientist.)

Gad Saad has written an interesting book about human empathy. He describes empathy as a biological, socially beneficial, and important characteristic of human cooperation. However, he notes empathy has the potential for societal harm that can be destructive with long-term negative consequences. He suggests empathy can distort the harm done by criminals against victims and compound ethnic differences that are a detriment to society. He argues empathy is an emotion that can lead to harmful decisions, and poor social policies that create moral distortion and confusion. His examples carry some weight.

A definition of empathy.

Criminal defenders sometimes frame an argument that violent offenders are products of their life circumstances and should be empathized with, rather than punished, for their actions. However, with empathy as a treatment, victims of personal crimes become victimized twice. Once by the actions of the criminal and a second time by leniency toward a criminals’ actions. An argument is made by a criminal defender that poverty and systemic faults of a legal system or society are the fault of others, including the victims of the perpetrators’ crime. Empathy for the defender gets in the way of justice for society and the individual is victimized twice in the guise of empathy. Violent offenders are released or given reduced sentences that offer opportunity for a repeat of violent crimes. Saad extends this argument to society that empathizes with terrorists, radicalized individuals, and ideologically driven attackers.

Robert Wright suggests every human action in life is determined by evolution.

Saad suggests too much empathy creates an atmosphere of moral relativism, and identity-based hate groups that reinforces an “us-them” mentality that diminishes social difference. One can easily agree with Saad’s observation, but history shows difference of one’s group identity is both good and bad. The contributions of Jewish group identity have been a great boon to society. Jewish identity is a prime example of the value of group difference. The educational and identity-based tenants of Judaism have made immense contributions to science and industry. Of course, at the other extreme, moral relativism and identity-based hate led to the holocaust by the Nazis.

As an American moral philosopher and cultural commentator who lives in Germany, Neiman offers an analysis of race and evil.

The troubling part of Saad’s argument is his selective focus on empathy as a cause of cultural decline. Corruption, politicization, self-dealing elitism, and societies’ failure to deliver justice, safety, and education to the public are the fundamental causes of cultural decline. Whether Jew, Gentile, or other, it is not empathy that has caused the widening wealth gap, loss of group identity, labor displacement, collapse of local industries, and/or the erosion of intergenerational opportunity.

Cultural decline cannot be reduced to a single cause as inferred by Gad Saad.

Cultural decline cannot be reduced to a single cause as inferred by Gad Saad. It is cultural destruction of group differences beginning with the diminishment of native Americans, through America’s history of slavery, and today’s loss of civic trust in government that is harming America. Americans need to come to grips with their history, mend its fences, and use its cultural diversity as a means for acceptance of difference and rebirth of its founder’s principles. Empathy is a relatively minor part of America’s institutional, economic, and moral decline.

Türkiye

As a tourist to Turkey, one does not see an authoritarian’s impact on their society. Hansen lives in Istanbul for ten years to offer her insight to Erdoğan’s reorganization of Turkish society. Her experience reminds one of Trump’s authoritarianisms and its potential reaction to public discontent.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

From Life Itself (Turkey, Istanbul, and a Neighborhood in the Age of Erdoğan)

Author: Suzy Hansen

Narration by: Suzy Hansen

Suzy Hansen (American journalist and author.)

Suzy Hansen was born in New Jersey and earned a B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania. She became a journalist and moved to Istanbul in 2007 for ten years. The move is motivated by receiving a fellowship from the Institute of Current World Affairs. She is offered the fellowship to study and write about a two-year cultural immersion in a foreign society. “From Life Itself” is a compilation of her research and experiences in Istanbul that enlighten those who have visited Turkey but only as a tourist, not as an educated journalist.

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Turkey.

Hansen’s book is revelatory in explaining Turkey’s more recent history and the rise of its Prime Minister and current President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan who has been in office since 2003. The growth and reconstruction of Istanbul is part of Hansen’s history of Turkey. She interestingly explains her view of Erdogan’s rise to power and how the political system of Turkey’s capital has been shaped by history and the rise of Erdoğan.

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Donald Trump are authoritarians.

Erdoğan is characterized by Hansen as a powerful authoritarian. That authority, in Hansen’s opinion, has led to corruption, questionable elections, and a reshaping of public institutions, public life, and the personal lives of Turkish citizens. Hansen suggests Erdoğan’s rule fits within the long history of Turkish autocracy. She reflects on Turkey’s political history of discrimination against non-Turkish residents from different cultures like Syria and other middle eastern countries.

Muhtar influence by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

Hansen notes how village leaders, called muhtars, become sources of both cohesion and disruption of Turkish communities. They are elected by local villages or urban neighborhoods. These muhtars are information sources for newly arrived immigrants who transform communities. Muhtars aid newcomers to understand differences from their cultures and historic Turkish traditions. As immigration increases, tensions rise, immigrants are rounded up, abused, sometimes murdered, and forced to move to other neighborhoods or countries. Erdoğan’s authoritarianism reinforces a kind of fascism that rises from local Turkish citizens. Hansen argues local leadership corruption, questionable elections, and institutional leadership change are methods used by Erdoğan in his authoritarian rule.

Authoritarinism.

Reflecting on Turkey’s history, its Ottoman Empire precursors, and world history Hansen argues Erdoğan fits in with Turkey’s long experience of autocracy. The broader point made by Hansen is that authoritarianism is growing around the world. What Turkey’s citizens are experiencing today are happening in many parts of the world; i.e., including the United States. Her observations carry weight in light of changing immigration policy in America and the election of Donald Trump. Everyday life is changing in Turkey, just as it is in America. Democracy seems to be waning in the face of authoritarianism.

Public Health Agencies in America.

Hansen explains how local service organizations in Turkey are being politized or shut down by elimination or placement of government loyalists that control government and non-government institutions. (This seems similar to President Trump’s appointments at OAS, NSB, Dept. of Defense, Dept. of Education and various public health agency organizations in America.) These new appointments and reorganizations exacerbate social division. Newly appointed leaders by an authoritarian change original institutional purpose. Hansen argues Erdoğan is demographically reengineering Turkish society. Democracy is undermined by authoritarianism. Life becomes less free.

Hansen notes an attempted coup in Turkey in 2016 and the reaction of Erdoğan. Her experience reminds a life-long resident of America of Trump’s authoritarianism and its potential reaction to citizen discontent.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: