October 24, 2007

The World is Flat
A Brief History of the 21st Century
Thomas L. Friedman – ISBN – 9780312425074

O.K. . . . I’m sorry !!! A customer recently made the innocent inquiry: “Have you read The World is Flat?” My rejoinder was a little surly, even for me. Ever since Friedman became a raving liberal lunatic I wouldn’t trust anything he said, so I had not read it, nor did I plan to. But a friend loaned me his copy and insisted that I at least skim it. I did, and I’m glad. It was worthwhile.

Being Friedman, he spends far too much time dropping names of his contacts around the planet to let us know how important he is and all of the places he’s been. Being a world recognized Pulitzer Prize winning journalist would have been sufficient for most of us.

He’s loquacious, and his style here reminds one of a conversation not a book. He does a first-rate job of documenting statistically what every reasonably well informed person already knows, and his “gotcha games” with the great powers were to me offensive.

A good editor—permitted--could eliminate half the book without omitting anything of importance. With those caveats, however, he is masterful in explaining his observations and conclusions.

My grandkids often use the button on the VCR to “fast forward thru the boring parts.” Do the same; it is a good book to skim.

He makes the point that recent technology has made it necessary to view the world as an integral unit. Flat is the term he uses; thus modern tools are flattening the world. (He reassures us that he doesn’t really believe the world is flat. Thanks, Tom, we were worried.)

Global crossing, while bankrupting itself laying cable all around the world, set the stage for universal digital communications at affordable prices. Consequentially the modern web is capable of incredible feats and has encouraged the genius of myriad individuals who have authored numberless programs to facilitate the organization and movement of the information which Google and Yahoo direct us to.

Entire libraries and archives are being digitized by high quality, low cost labor in India and other places which would be impossible without this technology. Banks, hospitals and others can outsource bookkeeping, data entry and management around the world, providing inexpensive services and lower prices while creating wealth in these developing countries.

Information on UPS services is fascinating, as are collaborative efforts of Papa John’s, Nike and Jockey. Large and small companies outsource to professionals whose primary function is niche management or marketing. “Smalls” can thus compete globally with “Bigs,” and nobody even knows.

He emphasizes that many jobs are not going “over there.” Rather, they are being eliminated by new technology. China, India and the Asian Tigers are not racing the U.S. and Europe to the bottom with low wage labor; they are racing us to the top with effort and ingenuity. Now even they are outsourcing to lower wage countries. If we don’t soon recognize and correct this they will win!

The U.S. still has many of the finest schools, but a majority of the relevant advanced degrees are being earned here by foreigners. Worse, technology now permits them to return home on completion to societies which they prefer. Immigration is no longer necessary. Further, some of their schools are improving such that they will soon be as good as ours. As a nation we are losing high-tech skills because of societal sloth. All of us are aware that our educational systems are bad. Learn here more about just how bad.

The man has a lot to say, and a lot of it is right, but he seems to ignore the politics of the situation. Sure it takes leadership, but the current environment has prevented handling social security, immigration, education, and more. He ends, as liberals always do, with a heaping portion of pious pabulum piled on a paper plate. We have to be nice, play fair, have dreams, eliminate fear, trust everyone, etc. Bah! Humbug.

Using the information provided, along with common sense, we have to get off our butts, discipline and educate our kids and encourage people to educate themselves in useful endeavors. For those incapable or uninterested in that life course we have to emphasize and provide training in manual jobs which cannot be outsourced, and control immigration so that the wages paid to those on the lower rungs are able to live well.

I well remember an old saw from my youth. There’s very little difference between people. But that little difference makes a big difference. The little difference is attitude; the big difference is whether it’s good or bad. We currently have a bad attitude about lots of things, married to an over-aching sense of superiority and entitlement. For the past century we have been unchallenged. No longer, and we are increasingly behind the curve.

While this is a dissertation on business and globalization he does include some of the societal impact—good and bad. He also omits a number, a few of which I mentioned above.

He does point up many factors which are cogent, and a few are endearing. A selection of these:

• By furthering education we move a larger portion of the population up a notch into a higher wage group, which leaves fewer in the bottom portion, thus raising wages there as well, but only if we control immigration! (A liberal who supports immigration control . . . wow!)

• Leadership positions in China are primarily filled by engineers. In America "leadership" is overwhelmed by lawyers. That is a problem!

• Economic stability in this flat world is not going to happen. Get used to it.

• Everyone wants economic growth, but no one wants to change.

And my favorite:

• In China today Bill Gates is Britney Spears. In America Britney is Britney Spears—that is a serious problem!

And finally he reminds that Will Rogers once said: “Even if you’re on the right track you’ll get run over if you just sit there.”

Posted by respeto at 1:02 PM

November 29, 2005

Because He Could
Dick Morris – ISBN 0060792138

As with his book redirecting and challenging Hillary’s book Living History, Morris undertakes to confront and correct Bill Clinton’s book My Life. I have enjoyed and recommend both because of his insights originating in his having advised the Clintons for two decades.

“Most political leaders draw on the reservoir of their own life experience to shape their understanding of problems and their ideas for solutions.” Bill Clinton has no experience in life outside of politics. He’s never owned a house, and has never been without the largess of his offices: chauffeurs, nannies, entertainment budgets, Air Force One, etc. He doesn’t understand what it is like to be responsible for those things we take for granted..

Clinton’s childhood is explained differently. It bears little resemblance to the reporting in either The Man from Hope, or My Life. He moved from Hope at age one, to a 400 acre farm and later to a two story, five bedroom house with a four stall garage on a hilltop in Hot Springs. The son of a successful nurse anesthetist, and step-son of a comfortably well off Buick dealer, he did not experience the difficulties implied in his descriptions of living in a place in the boon-docks with an outhouse.

“Factoids” aside, however, Morris discusses Clinton’s marital relationship, presidency, interactions with political cronies and adversaries in detail, giving credit where it is due and correcting the record when it is not. He offers detailed insights into how Clinton’s mind works, information I found both helpful and interesting.

He uses humor—or at least candor—as he observes that Bill Clinton “learns from his mistakes [while] Hillary doesn’t make any.”

I learned more about Clinton and his presidency from this book than all of the other things I have read on the subject, have a greater appreciation of it, and have altered my opinion more than a little. What he accomplished was overwritten by his personal gaffes and inadequacies . . . not to mention his prevarication and obfuscation.

I cannot improve on the summary on the back of the cover: “Full of compelling insider anecdotes . . . [this] is a probing portrait of one of the most fascinating and polarizing figures of our time.” Those who approve of Clinton will not be offended by this book. Indeed, they might learn something. And those who loathe him really ought to read it.

Posted by respeto at 9:53 AM

January 7, 2007

1491

New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus
Charles C. Mann – ISBN – 9781400032051

This “sweeping portrait” of human life long before Columbus found (?) the New World catalogues and explores a wealth of information in one volume. For two or three decades I have been reading such materials, and most of that information is included in this volume. Twenty years ago some of these data were not accepted by archaeologists. Even now some of it is not, along with several (in my opinion) glaring omissions.

In 1491 the Incas ruled an empire far more vast than Ming China, Ivan’s Russia, the Ottoman Empire, and the Aztec empire which was itself larger than any European state: “a thriving, stunningly diverse place, a tumult of languages, trade and culture.” All ended with Columbus, most without any contact with the old world invaders.

Over a thousand years ago there were cities in the Americas which dwarfed the population centers of Europe, and probably Asia. Very sophisticated cultures existed which often depended upon sciences and farming techniques which have yet to be explored, explained or understood. For instance, hundreds of thousands, and perhaps several million people lived in South America’s tropical rain forests, sustained by sophisticated agriculture in an area that now can barely support groups of 50 "aboriginals." These folk are obviously descended from them, but have no idea of prior cultures or their technologies. Neither do we!

It is estimated that at least 9 of 10 people in the Americas died within little more than a century of discovery . . . the vast majority from European diseases. Indeed, DeSoto described the Mississippi region as teeming with cities. A century later, with the first re-exploration by whites, they were met by . . . nothing! Only wilderness with a few scattered troops of natives.

I recommend this read because of its inclusion of volumes of information, well written and organized. However, I have several issues with the author.

• One is his fawning interpretation of the freedoms “learned” by the colonists, accustomed to the "overarching tyranny” of European elites—he alleges—which colonists were able to “get away” from their masters, having observed how liberated were the Amerinds. He appears to be one of those who honestly believe that American society was founded upon the principles of the Iroquois nation, overlooking English history from well before the Magna Carta, and totally eliminating the Celts from consideration.

• Another is his knee-jerk acceptance of the about to be overturned notion that the Amerinds all arrived via the Bering Strait, failing as it does to account for primitive remains in California, and even southern South America which predate the land route between the glaciers by 20,000 to as much as 100,000 years.

• As well, he avoids the suggestion that at least one ancient dig off the California coast is felt by some to exceed 500,000 years . . . and may even represent the site of origin of Homo Sapiens, rather than Africa. I find the latter issue particularly interesting, inasmuch as the so called "Clovis Points" found in New Mexico are not only identical to those found amongst the Cro-Magnons in Spain but predate them by over 25,000 years!! Cro-Magnon is considered to be the first modern homosapien to appear on the continent after the ice age, and no one knows where he came from!

I wonder . . . do you?

Posted by respeto at 1:01 PM

January 7, 2008

1776

David McCullough – ISBN – 9780743226721

This masterful book is by McCullough. What more needs be said? It chronicles the year 1776, detailing the initiation of the American Revolution with his expected, colorfully accurate and riveting descriptions of the times, the people and the events.

He deals adroitly with the principals: Washington, Greene, Knox, etal, as well as the British commanders. The drama unfolds with descriptions of the combatants: farmers, schoolteachers, shoemakers, ne’er-do-wells, and the “Red Coats,” of course. The events are graphically depicted, from the (sort of) battle for Fort Ticonderoga and subsequent movement of the cannon over impossible terrain, thru the evacuation of New York, to the brilliant battle for Trenton--the paramount victory of that year.

Trevelyan, a British Statesman, later wrote of the small band of men and their leader (at Trenton): “It may be doubted whether so small a number of men ever employed so short a space of time with greater and more lasting effects upon the history of the world.” In the end, while support from the French and the Dutch played a part in the outcome, it was Washington and the army that won the war for American independence.

His descriptions of George Washington are inspiring, and make the case that the battle could not have been enjoined, forget won, without this most important man of the era: first, best, and justifiably worshipped patriot; General, first President, . . . and honorable gentleman! What he and his followers endured is all but unimaginable. Yet they did, and they prevailed. Because of that we have a country!

Writes McCullough: “The Continental Army was the key to victory, and it was Washington who held the army together and gave it ‘spirit’ through the most desperate times. . . . Washington never forgot what was at stake, and he never gave up.”

I was especially struck by report of the handling of Lord Howe, commander of British forces. He had been dispatched by King George III to--and only to--grant pardons. Washington’s retorted that he had come to the wrong place. He had no faith in any peace overtures made by the British. And there is this memorable quote of July 2nd, 1776: “The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army.” Ahoy there unattached secularists and members of the ACLU, note and ponder that “under God” part!

The conundrum for the British is marvelously elaborated, with the factions detailed and explained: those who supported a separate peace and those who favored humiliating the Americans by defeating them. Recall that Ben Franklin wanted to be a part of the empire; he did not, initially, favor independence.

Even then, as with the world in modern times, the English were struck by the affluence of the colonies, which achievement they attributed to America’s parasitic existence at the expense of Great Britain. The old zero sum game has quite a lineage!

Fellow citizens, I encourage you to reflect upon that revolutionary time, inasmuch as it is unapparent for just how long we will have this wonderful country if we do not--and soon--seriously consider our present situation, its gravity, and our approach to it. As was WWII, this is another war for survival . . . and the independence we claim to value.

Posted by respeto at 3:08 PM

January 29, 2006

1968: The Year That Rocked the World

Mark Kurlansky - ISBN - 0345455827

Kurlansky, author of both Salt and Cod does it again, so to speak. He covers the year of 1968 in extraordinary detail, reminding of just how seminal that year was in the history of the 20th century. It was the year of the assassinations of MKL and Robert Kennedy, the Chicago Seven, Prague Spring, the founding of “Black Power” and a myriad other events.

Those of us who lived thru them will hark back to those times, and get a fresh new look thru the eyes of Kurlansky. Indeed, while he “files” an appropriate disclaimer in his introduction, his liberal bias (and distortion) of some of the events was a little over the top and off base. (Not least is his assertion that centralization results in the dictatorship of Communism, as capitalism is the dictatorship of the rich. Neither is reformable and both are evil—while he’s not quite so blunt.) Still the revisit is engaging and worthwhile.

He explores happenings from all over the globe, their short and long-term impact, and does so in spellbinding detail having researched the many events quite carefully. Included are a host of events from youth and music to politics and war, economics, the media, the Black Panthers and Richard Nixon.

Overall a good read for those of us old enough to remember and a good history for those who are not.

Posted by respeto at 2:53 PM

April 17, 2005

The Death of Right and Wrong

(An exposition of the Left’s chilling assault on our culture and values.)
Tammy Bruce - ISBN – 1400052947

(For those who do not know Tammy, she is a lesbian feminist, former director of the Los Angeles chapter of NOW, who has come to understand the left, and now attacks its agenda. She is a lucid writer who is “right on.” She’s been there, done that, and understands the Left, its agenda, and how it all works.)

The thrust is the Left’s degeneracy and its absence of moral clarity. In an enlightened, self-deprecating, auto-analytic realization she notes that: “I created [for myself] a worldview replete with moral relativism, paranoia and cynicism which kept me from looking at politics, the people with whom I dealt, and other parts of life with no values-based perspective. When your life dos not incorporate these things . . . you do not seek them out or to expect them from others. I was forced to change.”

She uses the metaphor of Carroll’s “looking glass” (Alice in Wonderland) in exposing the warped world view of the Left, noting that their world is one “without judgment, conclusions, morality, rules or personal responsibility.” Neither guilt nor innocence exists. To achieve this draconian world, restriction of individual freedom of thought and deed is required, in order to destroy any concept of judgment, and to undermine near universal notions of right and wrong.

The left has been very successful in causing an acceptance of diversity, but--still unhappy--it continues to push on the boundaries of what is considered right . . . there are to be no boundaries at all. The result is a philosophy devoid of values, and since no one outside any specific interest group can understand or appreciate the specific dilemma there exists no right to judge.

“Murder, lying, cheating, betrayal—who can argue with the admonition that these things are bad? Yet we as a society are becoming increasingly uncomfortable with making judgments about issues as obvious as these. Everything, you see, is relative.” The commonly accepted cardinal virtues require effort beyond us and serious consideration of others. This aspect of reality threatens the concept which drives the left-wing “intellectuals.”

Using Serrano (the “artist” of “Piss Christ”) she exposes the “dead heart” of the Left Elite, emphasizing the moral vacuum in which they function. She catalogues the freedom enjoyed by women in America, noting that nowhere else on the planet, at this or any other time, have such freedoms existed. She adds a challenge: “How dare the so-called feminists still claim that ours is a ‘patriarchal, oppressive society’” when it is largely due to the actions of men that women have the freedom and equity women enjoy today.

She discusses the depravity of having gender altering surgery, noting that it simply victimizes the mentally ill. For this, she coins the expression “malignant narcissism.” She also relates an incident wherein AIDS-positive gay EMT volunteers lie about their HIV status. To admit HIV positivity would result in their being removed “unfairly,” and they cannot then continue their “good works.” Will they not understand the documented risk to the people they claim to wish to help? Can they really be that crass? YES!

Thru her looking glass Tammy notes that 97% of college students are confident that their college studies have prepared them to behave ethically in their lives, yet these same students believe that their professors are teaching that there are no real ethical standards. Still these same Leftist intellectuals make a plea for more money for better education, which they do not deliver. Almost nowhere in the academy are American history, values, or even the basics of judgment still taught: nothing of beneficence or iniquity. Compare Pol Pot to Winston Churchill and you can readily understand evil and good. But: “The complete picture of history obliterates the lies of the Left about the goodness, for all its flaws, of the Western world.” Hence it isn’t taught. “As long as the university is in the hands of the malignant narcissists of the Left, the truth of history will be the enemy, to be suppressed at all costs. History . . . rewritten, heroes . . . killed . . . the truth [is to be] kept dead.”

As for lawyers, “trials are no longer about freeing the innocent, punishing the guilty, and making restitution to the injured. They have devolved into a contest over who will win. The legal system is now filled with people who will not discriminate between right and wrong. “Vigorous defense” includes lying to, and deliberate misleading of, juries. For an attorney to deliberately go into a courtroom and lie to a jury to gain acquittal is quite simply and clearly wrong. Still, attorneys are rarely held personally responsible for their clearly unethical tactics. After all, they make the rules.

Finally, we have arrived at the point where we are discussing the permissibility, even the advantage, of inter-generational sex. This modern euphemism replaces terms like statutory rape, pedophilia and ephebophilia. Since other cultures think sex with kids is o.k., we are obliged to agree? Nothing good can come from this!

Is the legacy of the Left to be the right to molest children? And does the expectation of a modicum of decency and morality in one’s life really qualify someone as a Neanderthal remnant?

This is a challenging book—to all, and especially to the Left, which ought to be humbled and detached from its hubris. It should really be read in its entirety by anyone interested in civilization as we know it. It is a coherent, “pleasantly unpleasant” read which ought to challenge all who do care to get up off of their A—es and do something about it. The Left might learn just how damaging is their agenda--assuming that they care--and the rest of us might again recall that: The absence of righteous anger is devastating to our culture!

I also recommend her prior book, The New Thought Police. It is equally devastating in demonstrating the malignancy of the Leftist/Feminist movement. Both are available in paperback.

Posted by respeto at 10:54 AM

July 25, 2010

A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity

Bill O'Reilly - ISBN - 9780767928830

Just out in paper, O'Reilly's memoir is as anticipated: effusive, informative and helpful, on point and with the expected attempt to mask his hubris. He refers repeatedly and almost reverentially to his attempt not to appear, shall we say (to be nice), "self-indulgent." But he is. Will Rogers once commented that "if you're as good as you say you are it ain't braggin'." So, maybe it's O.K. for Bill to just belly-up to the truth, but he always offers the caveat that at heart he's really a humble person. Balderdash.

But the book is good. The man came from nowhere, and has achieved more than the vast majority of people ever do. He has done it honestly, with hard work and little grousing. He is amongst cable TV's most prominent figures, counsels wisely, contributes mightily to honest reportage along with the rectification of human error and evil, and he donates heavily to charity.

In this tome he relates how he did it, how he does it, and what he recommends to aspirants, but admirably shies away from virtually anything to do with his personal life. It is not a how-to manual. Rather, as in his book for kids, he uses himself as an example of what, and what not to do: his personal manifesto, chockablock full of relevant personal experiences, what he learned from them, what he might have done it differently, what he avoided and why.

Raised Catholic, he still adheres to the dogma of the church and does not apologize. He apologizes for little, and appears to have little need, in any event. He recommends a life of sobriety, hard work, felicity to one's origins and maintenance of contact with old friends this to keep you sane, humble and honest. And he seems to have achieved this . . . or at least two out of three, which ain't bad.

It's a worthwhile read for the interested, and maybe even for those who think they're uninterested; ya might actually learn sumthin'. His fans have no doubt read it in hardback. I waited for the issuance of the paperback . . . "cheeeap!"

Posted by Curmudgeon at 10:18 AM

April 12, 2008

A Bound Man

Why We Are Excited About Obama And Why He Can’t Win
Shelby Steele – ISBN – 9781416559177

This essay is in keeping with, and a specific expansion upon his book White Guilt (published in 2006, a review of which is available on this site.)

Here Steele elaborates upon those same observations, but applies them specifically to Barack Obama in his quest for “blackness” and the presidency. The pair might have been published together with the title “Black vs. White in America, Fostering Greater Understanding.”

He notes that in order to advantageously position themselves in America blacks have had two options: challenging (currently Jackson or Sharpton, and previously the Panthers: Newton, Carmichael & Brown), or bargaining (Winfrey or Obama, and previously Poitier or Cosby). With the former there are implicit threats to--and demands upon—whites; the latter accept and trust that fair treatment will be accorded in exchange for mutual pleasantries pursuant the negotiation. Challengers get no gratitude, but do achieve power and money; bargainers gain affection and love, and commonly money as well as power, albeit of a different sort. Moreover, they are likely to be acknowledged as equals. A person can be one or the other persona but not both.

As an example he observes that for years Cosby was a bargainer, but his recent change is viewed by other blacks as hostile. He has become a challenger, and worse, since he challenges blacks. He now voices the rational societal rules which require discipline and responsibility for success, insisting that blacks have to improve themselves instead of depending upon whites to alleviate their problems. Now he is seen as being in the enemy camp, no longer a hero to his race.

Obama risks black wrath when bargaining, which is necessary to gain white acceptance, as he risks white rejection if he challenges. He cannot do both. Like Prometheus he is bound (hence the title.)

Barack has largely rejected his manifest ability to join mainstream society in questing to be black, and seems to be attempting to be in both camps, as he attempts to be all to everyone.

Steele sights numerous quotations from Obama’s prior writing to support that observation. Amongst myriad others, an early love of his life, also of mixed race, challenged Barack to explain why she had to choose to be black, noting:

• “It’s not white people who are making me choose. Maybe it used to be that way, but now they’re willing to treat me like a person. No—it’s black people who always have to make everything racial. They’re the ones making me choose. They’re the ones who are telling me I can’t be who I am.”

• “The chance to be yourself, racial self-acceptance—is not with blackness; it is in the same American mainstream [from whence you came.]”

She emphasized her trust in mainstream America more than black America to respect her for who she is and wishes to be.

Barack, intent on establishing his black “credentials” has chosen to disassociate himself from this mainstream position, diligently working to fit within black society and radical bastions, making it virtually impossible for him to be a bridge candidate and a healer of divisions. He has become just another liberal politician. Indeed, the most liberal in the Senate. While potentially an Icon, he is squandering his real potential as a candidate, and denying himself the opportunity to be who he really is—or is capable of being.

The rest you’ll have to read . . . and you definitely should, since it is as much about the black dilemma in America as it is about Obama himself.

It is enlightening, expository, insightful, and extremely well written.

Posted by respeto at 4:13 PM

April 20, 2010

A Devil of a Whipping

The Battle of Cowpens
Lawrence E. Babits - ISBN - 9780807849262

As the second most important battle in the Revolutionary War, Cowpens deserved another look and a better book. This is the definitive volume, unlikely to be improved upon; sometimes a little too detailed for my taste, but complete and well written. Babits spent considerable time reviewing other writings, but offers for the first time the study of reports from the many minor participants in the battle.

In the 1830's, federal pensions were granted for living survivors of the war, amongst them hundreds of men who had fought at Cowpens. They were caused to record specific details to corroborate their participation, and Babits reviewed their interviews, commenting that they were surprisingly consistent when compared with each other. This permitted him to recreate the battle in far more detail than anyone has before--or is likely to again (a 158 page narrative with 58 more pages of notes!)

You'll recall that the American commander was the brilliant and battle tested Daniel Morgan His adversary was the ruthless Banastre Tarleton who, at the (nearby) battle of Waxhaws, had annihilated the continentals even as they surrendered. This led to the expression: Tarleton's quarter. He offered none. Not a few of the participants at Cowpens were amongst the survivors at Waxhaws, and far more had friends or relatives slaughtered there. They were out for revenge . . . and got it. "Tarleton's Quarter!"

Morgan was a tactical genius who picked the battle site and laid out a plan which anticipated the arrogance of Tarleton and his troops. Babits reviews it all in detail. As well he describes and explains contemporary weaponry utilized in the battle; interesting, indeed. Amongst the myths he explodes is the popular belief that the musketman of the era could not deliver fire accurately, nor could he fire rapidly . . . not true. Properly trained men could "hit a man-sized target eighty yards away with five out of six shots in one minute." Most of the Americans were expert hunters with experience; many of them were using their own, often customized weapons with which they were intimately familiar.

The withering fire of the irregular militia, compounded by the accuracy of the skirmishers took a heavy toll. Early in the battle up to "two-thirds of the British infantry officers had fallen, along with a like number of privates." As the British charged into the maw, the militiamen, by prior agreement, retreated rapidly to an area behind the regulars. As anticipated by Morgan, the Kings men assumed they were in a cowardly retreat and plunged headlong into the bloody fire of the massed Continentals lying prone amongst the tree cover atop the leading edge of a swale. The American cavalry support was outstanding, as Tarleton had unwisely left a number of his troops in reserve, including some of his best cavalry. The changing tactics amidst the battle, attested to by the archived interview materials, helped the author to better understand the flow of the battle.

"Mounted operations are a major key to understanding Morgan's victory, even though they were the least orchestrated by his tactical planning." While American mounted strength was less than half that of the British, they performed brilliantly. They were lead by another tactical genius, Lt. Col. Wm Washington, who judiciously selected when and where to use his dragoons.

Babits goes on to discuss wounds, management, survival, etc. It is interesting to see his assessment of how specific wounds lend themselves to determining how they were wrought, and where the combatants were at the time they were inflicted. He comments that most of the American officers were wounded or killed because they led their troops "from the front," while British officers, generally, were picked off by snipers.

It was a horrific battle with many casualties on both sides. Those trapped by the Continentals were slaughtered. The British survivors broke and ran; survivors were gathered after the battle, having been wounded or trapped by exhaustion, and ready pickings for American cavalry. Altogether it is a stirring report of one of the most important battles in American history.

The Continentals eventually won the war by staying on the field. "The British lost the south, and ultimately the Revolutionary War, largely because [the American combatants] never gave up. Most of their battles were lost, but not this one, which passed into legend and history along with Ticonderoga, Saratoga and the final British loss at Yorktown where the French were in critical support. If you like Revolutionary history, you'll like this book.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 2:08 PM

February 6, 2009

A Man in Full

Tom Wolfe – ISBN – 9780553381337

Wolfe (Bonfire of the Vanities; The Right Stuff) recently wrote what “critics” have deemed his masterpiece. That’s saying quite a bit, in that much of his work would so qualify. But it is indeed a beautifully written, powerful novel with a complex plot, which in a peculiar way is also humorous.

The multifaceted plot basically explores men; who they are, what they do, how they succeed and how they fail; their strengths and weaknesses. White and Black politicians, lawyers, business moguls, prime athletes and effete snobs are all welcome to a plot based in Atlanta, but involving characters from as far away as California; all brought together ingeniously by Wolfe, into the context of his aims. Every permutation of maleness is included amongst the characters: suave/slimy, brilliant/dull, naive/corrupt, sensitive/indifferent, tactful/thoughtless.

Cap’m Charlie Crocker is his “main man;” a flabby, overweight, over 60, former college football mega-star who has made it big in real estate development in Atlanta. He’s a boorish back-country “good-old-boy” who owns a magnificent home (having deeded millions of dollars and his first home to the wife he dumped for his trophy bride), a plantation—named Turp’m’tine, with a full staff of black folk--used as a hunting reserve, a national frozen food company, a pricey Gulfstream jet. His “baby,” however, is his namesake Crocker Center on the outskirts of town, which he conceived as becoming the premier business center of Greater Atlanta. Charlie has everything an aspirant to splendor might want . . . but his showpiece is over-built, over budget, over-extended, under-occupied, financed with a personal pledge of several hundred million of his own money. . . . and it is bankrupting him.

The book offers insights into people you’ve never known; in places you’ve never been, doing things of which you’d rather not be aware. Yet it is a gigantic slice of life in the fast lane and a colorful description of the ups and downs of power as it explores the panoply of human behavior in an environment where “your honor” is the things you own; where everything, and nothing, matters except $$$. He puts you “there,” be it in a warehouse, a conference room, at a glitzy museum fund raiser, the country club, or hunting at Turp’m’tine with the boys—even, for a spell, in prison. He manages to include a brief essay on the sick rationale of the 60’s hippies in their Haight-Asbury holes.

There’s testosterone a-plenty, chutzpah by the ton, weakness, lust, power, success, intimidation, failure, pomp, humility, even an exploration of the philosophy of the stoic, Epictetus.

Wow. “Ever-thin-ya-cuud-ass-fer, don-cha-no?” Good read. Fun analytic, declarative and informative at the same time.

Posted by respeto at 3:11 PM

March 15, 2006

A Question of Loyalty

(the court-martial of Billy Mitchell)
Douglas Wallar - ISBN # 0060505478

Published in late 2004, this book--as interesting as it might have been in 1923--is further enhanced by the predictions of this legendary figure. It is adequately comprehensive, entirely balanced, and a breezy read which never bores, and will captivate anyone interested in air power from the time of WW I to the present.

Thruout, Waller laces the narrative with “thumbnails” of Mitchell’s life outside of his military career, but dedicates most of the book to the court-martial itself.

For those of you unfamiliar with Gen’l Mitchell, he was a decorated combat pilot/leader in the early air services of the military who grated on the governmental powers of the era, both military and civilian, because he was dedicated to, and convinced that, air power was to be the principal determinant in future combat. Most notably, he proved that air-power could support ground troops, sink battleships (which brought the Admirals to tears, literally), and predicted that Pearl Harbor would be attacked from the air, by the Japanese (18 years before they did!), that planes would ferry men who would jump from them into combat. As well, that planes would fly trans-continentally, carry passengers and military ordinance across vast oceans—in mere hours--and fly faster than the speed of sound. All of this was considered irrational, at best, by most of the command structure of the military, and the public as well.

While his crystal ball wasn’t always as accurate or retrospectively intriguing, he has been proven forward-looking, if not comprehensively clairvoyant, by history, as we all know now.

The personalities of the participants of the court-martial are well described, as well as the attitudes of the prosecution, defense and the jury. Again, it is a completely fair appraisal of all sides and participants. The trial of nearly five weeks was riveting, involved the entire country, and was covered in detail by all of the newspapers of the era. The public was, with unusual exception, favorable to Billy, considered him a hero (which in fact he was), and respected his abrasive bravado as much as the military disdained it. Today he is as respected in most quarters, including the military, as he was at the time. The debate is about whether he assisted or retarded the recognition and implementation of the potential of aircraft.

“He deserves a place in history. [His personal flaws notwithstanding] he was a brilliant and innovative officer . . . a brave and daring commander . . . an inspiration to his men . . . [and] a visionary willing to challenge the status quo. [An opportunist, perhaps, but one who in the end, laid] his military career and his reputation on the line for what he believed in. He had the courage of his convictions.”

In the end he was judged guilty of insubordination, severely chastened, and resigned from the Army shortly after the court-martial. All were results which he anticipated, yet he proceeded in order to expose the dismal state of the aerial combat strength (or, rather, the lack thereof) of the U.S. military.

Posted by respeto at 12:28 PM

July 6, 2007

A Thousand Splendid Suns

Khaled Hosseini – 9781594489501

The long awaited second novel by the author of The Kite Runner is here; a year later than planned, it arrives to broad acclimation.

I admit that it is as beautifully crafted as was “Runner,” which I recommended as the best book of its kind which I had read in 5 years, but this one is so exhausting with its inexorable gloom that even the relatively--and implicitly transient--upbeat climax doesn’t rescue it.

It accurately portrays the horrors of Afghanistan (and for that matter the Middle East) almost from time immemorial, and especially since the Russian invasion and the takeover by the warlords, then displaced by the Taliban. It emphasizes some of the majesty of humanity, occasional reason, friendship and love in the face of absolute evil, but it is so-o-o-o raw that it remorselessly buries the reader. Whereas I could not put his first novel down, I had to force myself repeatedly to pick this one up! I kept hoping for a tiny flicker of redemption. It never arrived.

I am no apologist for radical Islam, or for Islam itself, as those of you who read my entries with any regularity. While often sordid and troublesome, even these people--most at least--have many redeeming qualities which are hardly mentioned. Maybe I missed it, but I don't think so. It seems that this obviously displaced, upper-class Afghani Muslim is on his own special rant.

The plot wanders thru a web of human sorrow and destruction, trust and friendship . . . with a certain grandeur in the face of overwhelming odds, yet each time there is an ephemeral flash of light or hope he promptly razes it with a sadistic or tragic event—sometimes both—which deflates the reader all over again. He’s basically observing that that’s the way it is in that part of the world! It brings to mind Thomas Hobbes memorable quote that "war of every man against every man [creates life which is] solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”

What it demonstrates to this reader is the unrelenting savagery in the wholly irrational world of the murderous, patriarchal Middle East with its Muslim religion and its masochistic, misogynistic beliefs; a circumstance from which there is absolutely no deliverance without a total cultural change . . . one which at least approaches civilization as we in the West understand and define it.

If they just left the rest of the world alone--stayed miserable in their own place on earth--it would be insupportable and unacceptable, but not menacing. Since this is what they plan to impose on the rest of us it is objectionable in the extreme. It must be defeated, or at least humbled and pushed back into its own wretched corner of the planet.

For that reason alone I would recommend—nay, would oblige if I could--the tolerant and understanding multiculturalist souls amongst us read this manuscript, in concert with any three or four of the following: The Kite Runner, The Bookseller of Kabul, Infidel, Because They Hate, Why I Am Not a Muslim, The Rage and the Pride, Londonistan, The Sword of the Prophet, The Caged Virgin, and What Went Wrong, in no particular order.

Perhaps in the performance of this mission those who do not believe would finally and fully understand that this is not a war between civilizations. It is a war about civilization! They prefer the medieval, barbaric 7th century. We (at least I hope it is we) prefer the relatively enlightened 21st.

For those who do understand, and have already achieved a morally justifiable intellectual intolerance, I’d recommend spending your time and money reading one of the many (almost any) other book in print which you think you might enjoy.

Posted by respeto at 12:30 PM

April 26, 2011

A Treasury of Deception

Liars, Misleaders, Hoodwinkers etc.
Michael Farquhar

Any tract which leads by wholly discrediting Nostradamus has my attention; he was, after all, the "master of avoiding specifics," and a still quoted fraud who has endured for the ages. His end of the world predictions first went awry in the 1800s, but they're renewable thru 7000 A.D.

This volume is one of four such written by Farquhar on related things; all are absorbing. In it he exposes and explains varietal "humbugs" and their equally varietal chicanery, some serious and some just April Fool's jokes.

Operation Mincemeat, one of the greatest deceptions of WW II is reviewed, balanced by the lies and fraud of the Third Reich. On a lighter note there is a description of the housewife who gave birth to bunnies. (Well, of course, not really.)

Snake-oil salesmen in the age of medical quackery? Included. Medieval hucksters selling pieces of "the true cross"?, yep. So's the shroud of Turin. Of course the Piltdown man receives an honorable mention.

There is an excellent discussion of the witch craze in Europe in which he observes that over half of all executions took place in Germany alone. One village was left with only one woman; another eliminated an entire family; still another burned forty-one children. Perhaps this was a dress rehearsal for the Nazis?

Then there's the lie's of Lenin (not Lennon folks) and his distrust of Stalin. Shame old Vlad didn't have "Uncle Joe" shot before he became the chief. There are mentions of creative escapes from military prisons in the age of the Greeks, from the Tower of London, and from the Nazi fortress of Colditz. All if them intriguing.

He wraps it up with a series of 10s.
• 10 "tricksters" from scripture
• 10 deceptions from Greek mythology
• 10 liars in literature
and lastly:
• 10 egregious examples of modern American doublespeak; this without even mentioning Nixon's "I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."

Read it. It's a hoot. And informative, though more within the framework of Trivial Pursuit.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 3:26 PM

January 18, 2010

A Voyage Long and Strange

Rediscovering the New World
Tony Horwitz - ISBN - 9780805076035

As in his other books, he gives the subject a new and refreshing look, with his usual sense of excitement. He apologetically identifies himself as "expensively educated at a private school and university--a history major, no less!--[who had] matriculated to middle age with a third grader's grasp of early America." He stole the title from Columbus' original notes.

Like reading Mayflower (reviewed earlier on this site), you will likely feel the same. Most ever'thin' ya thought-cha knew ain't true. As well, there's a world of stuff out there that you didn't know; a veritable avalanche of facts and stories. It is informative, breezy, off beat, honest, critical and long on analysis. He compresses much history into a few pages without being flip, dry or equivocal, all the while making it delightfully readable while exhibiting verbal parsimony. His periodic levity in anecdotes is both interesting and charming.

He glides quickly thru the landing of the Vikings, which impacted the locals not at all, then begins with 1492. Columbus, a "knight-errant," sailed believing that Asia was about where he found America (though he was 8,000 miles off) and thereby changed the world because he was wrong. While recognized as the discoverer of the New World he neither knew nor accepted that he wasn't somewhere near China. Time is spent on Columbus, reviewing his other trips here before being wholly disgraced and lost to history.

We've been told that he had to repeatedly rag on the Spanish Crown to fund his expedition, when in fact it was for other reasons they'd refused. The cost of the eventual mission was but a thirteenth of what Ferdinand and Isabella spent on their daughter's wedding. And thus goes the remainder of this fascinating tale.

He begins with the Indian cultures of the Southwest, and emphasizes that the earliest exploratory efforts were made by Spaniards who are seldom mentioned. DeVaca sailed from Vera Cruz to Tampa Bay, hiked up and across the Florida panhandle, sailed west to Galveston, then marched again across nearly to the Gulf of California before returning south and east back to Vera Cruz; a thousand miles by water and thousands more on foot. Never heard of him, didja? Coronado similarly explored the desert southwest and Mexico nearly two centuries before an Englishman got anywhere near it. He found irrigation systems of immense complexity, and fertile land with crops he'd never seen. He brought horses, but the immense herds of buffalo had him "buffaloed."

The Spaniards kept very good records of their atrocities, thus establishing that while germs killed a lot of natives, thousands were murdered, too. They were nothing if not resilient: "Hunger, heat, harsh winters, a steady diet of buffalo meat--none of this deterred them from their mission. . . . I started to wonder if the Spaniards weren't so much dogged as possessed. Greed and desperation I could grasp . . . but [their recorded exploits are] evidence of a tenacity that bordered on derangement."

Some became very wealthy; DeSoto's share of Peru's gold and silver came to more than ten million dollars in today's currency, yet he blew it all on additional ventures. He financed a venture on foot from Tampa thru Georgia, the Carolinas, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, and down the Mississippi River to the Gulf, then back and around Texas; uncharted country, endless swamps, deserts and ordeals unimaginable. He left behind a devastated country with myriad destroyed cultures. The dead of the massacre at Mavila alone rivals Antietam as the deadliest day in combat on U.S. soil. The leftovers from these disintegrated city-states coalesced over time into the Creek and Choctaw tribes. Few have heard of DeSoto, but, then, he wasn't a Yankee. (Oh, yea, there was that Chrysler product some centuries later.)

Moving from the southwest back thru the southeast, then north along the Atlantic the author gives similar narratives of the discovery and destruction from St. Augustine to Plymouth. Along the way he does include discussions of the Huguenots--French Protestants--massacred in Jacksonville, FL by the Catholic Spaniards of St. Augustine; so it wasn't just the natives who "bought the farm."

The cold, stony, unforgiving region Sir Francis Drake hoped to sell to his countrymen he poetically named Nova Albion: New England. For centuries most every historian has bashed Roanoke as wholly failed and omitted discussion of Jamestown altogether, "eager to anoint Plymouth as the birthplace of America." He explains wryly that most historians from the 18th thru the early 20th century were historians from Massachusetts who held that the founder of Jamestown was a disgrace and a colossal liar. Actually, in Tony's 42 page discussion of Jamestown he says more, better than the entire book on Jamestown which I reviewed here some months ago. His canvas is not unlimited, but he paints well.

In one rather sad interview he discusses the disappearance of Indian ways; that with a modern Algonquian who really does want modernity, but with the serenity of Indian life. His discussion of Plymouth is short but interesting, and he ends with the observation that there is history and then there is myth (playing on the line from Who Shot Liberty Valance: "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.")

He has corrected that. Good read.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 12:20 PM

January 5, 2007

A War Like No Other

How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War
Victor Davis Hanson – 9780812969702

In classical literature/history this is the most studied war of all time . . . not least because it is the oldest and most famous in the ancient Western world. Thucydides and others amongst the ancients, and Strauss and others amongst the current, have reported in detail on the war and/or individual battles therein, but in this narrative Dr. Hanson undertakes the discussion in an altogether new fashion, integrating the war as fought on sea and land, city and countryside noting, chronologically, the relevance (or lack there of) of various battles within the war and their impact upon Greek civilization of the era.

He describes the civilization of the time, the logic behind and the manner in which battles were fought, the changing alliances within the adversarial camps. As well, he integrates the impact of various concomitant occurrences such as the plague epidemic early in the war, why it happened, and the carnage it wrought. A Gestaltist approach, you might say.

Pericles died of the plague, which certainly affected the war’s outcome. Most of the noble families of Athens were devastated by the war, a majority of them perishing in combat or of the plague, leaving Athens without a ruling coterie, and which resulted in the ultimate destruction of Athens while setting the stage for conquest of all of Greece by Alexander.

Adjusting for population at the time, he observes that a similar ration of deaths would require that 40 million Americans perish in WWII, including the majority of its leaders and prominent citizens. In this vein he comments how different war is now than at the time, conceptually and destructively. He contemporizes that war with current war making.

This is a monumental and unique work which lends itself to a more comprehensive understanding of the West’s first battle of all against all, and well worth a read. Whatever you have read about this conflict . . . is different.

Posted by respeto at 3:24 PM

December 11, 2009

AMERICANISM

The Fourth Great Western Religion
David Gelernter 9780385513128

No matter how convinced you are about the secular foundation of America, if you still believe that on completion of this tome it will have been accomplished by willful misunderstanding of the facts as exposed by Gelernter!

Gelernter was one of the first victims of the Unabomber, and suffered grievous wounds which left him badly crippled, but he has resurrected himself from the awful consequences of that act to become a well recognized writer, as he continues to be a noteworthy professor of computer technology. This is one of his best books; clear, concise, well written and meaningful. He refuses to apologize for the America most of us love, which pleased me immensely.

This Jewish man begins with a message for the Christians of America: "You built America and Americanism. In so doing you gave mankind one of the greatest gifts it has ever received. Do not allow yourselves to be spiritually disposed in your own homes! This country will never have an established, official religion; it will never abandon religious freedom. But neither should it be allowed to abandon its history and origins, or lie about them. Christians are (rightly) prohibited to preach Christianity in public schools; secularists should be prohibited to preach secularism, too!" (Emphasis in the original)

While we are used to hearing that the basis of any Creed is philosophical, our creed is, at root, religious. "The intensity of belief in the [American] Creed among people who have never heard a philosophical argument in their lives belies the assertion that these ideas are 'philosophical.'" In his Gettysburg Address Lincoln "built out of words a sacred shrine" for our fundamental tenets, and it is "one of the most beautiful shrines mankind has ever seen, and one of the holiest."

Those of us who accept Americanism simply believe her principles to be true, not because anyone argued philosophically that this is so. He continues by showing how the Bible and Puritanism molded America, including the south--Anglicans notwithstanding. Indeed, as modern Puritan country becomes more liberal, the south stands strong. Further, contrary to received wisdom, America was founded by religious fanatics. The Puritans were zealously dedicated to their God, but quite different from modern Islamic fanatics who murder as they claim to be doing God's work--"a slander on every religious believer who ever lived."

Others are proud of their countries, but few are able to recite the principles upon which their nations were founded . . . because there are none. Other countries are based upon shared descent or ethnicity, or were cobbled together by conquest or decree. America is more, and she is a biblical, not secular republic.

Liberty, equality and democracy were ordained by God for all mankind; Americanism is humane in the best sense. While you can believe in Americanism without believing in God, you cannot, without believing in man. And you must not neglect the fact that America grew on "a strong Judeo-Christian stem, rooted in the rich, deep soil of the Bible."

These and other facts are argued persuasively between the covers of this brilliant book, emphasizing that one of the all-important missing ingredients in American intellectuals' worldview today--and far too many of our young--is chivalry (in its largest sense.) Chivalry itself is biblical and worthy of armed defense. Valor, honor, bravery and heroism are Godly causes, though most American intellectuals draw a blank when you mention these things." (See my relevant review of the book Honor, a History)

Traditional business, commerce and hard work are more reputable in America than in Europe--or in most of the rest of the world for that matter. Having learned at Plymouth Plantation that socialism didn't work, personal responsibility was found to encourage all hands to be industrious. Property, comfort, even honor were to be earned, not passed along by progenitors as was the case in Europe.

Most think the Declaration of Independence and the Revolution were rational, secular and "Enlightenment" in spirit. Not so. The cousins, Puritanism and American Zionism, were crucial. The first written constitution of modern democracy was inspired not by democratic Athens, or republican Rome, or Enlightenment philosophy or British commercial practice, but by a Puritan (Thomas Hooker of Hartford, CT in 1638) preacher's interpretation of a verse in the Hebrew Bible: "The choice of public magistrate belongs unto the people by God's own allowance . . . The foundation of authority is laid, firstly, in the free consent of the people."

He lectures on the religion of the founders as well as Lincoln, indicating that Lincoln's second Inaugural Address is the incandescent core of the American Religion. Abe "transformed Americanism into a full-fledged, mature religion--not by causing America to embody its noble ideals, but by teaching the nation that it ought to embody them. "In the Gettysburg Address and the Second Inaugural, Lincoln produced the two greatest sacred narratives in the English language (outside of the English Bible itself.)" He was inspired by the Puritan message, and delivered it in the language of Americanism, marking the evolution of one to the other. Lincoln achieved the completion of the creation of Americanism which exceeds mere patriotism and philosophic doctrine. He didn't Christianize America; rather, he Americanized Christianity. His martyrdom was catastrophic, politically and in human terms, but in religions terms it sealed his achievement. He deserves to be remembered as the most important religions figure America has ever produced.

At Gettysburg he commented on the new birth of America. In actuality it was the third birth:
• The first was the arrival of Puritans in the new world
• The second was the revolution and independence
• The third was the freeing of the slaves
Each was a monumental event in world history, and illuminated the biblical text: let my people go.

Gelernter goes on to review in some detail subsequent history, noting that the First World War authored the modern world, as it cemented American dominance of the world thereafter. As well it confirmed modern Americanism and with it, modern anti-Americanism.

European nations tended to feel guilty, drifted toward pacifism and appeasement. They learned that war was unthinkably awful, pacifism was mandatory, nationalism was dangerous and that world organizations like the League of Nations and the UN were mankind's only hope. Americans had no such crisis of conscience--"a hugely important fact that continues to shape world politics to this day." America had done nothing to start or fuel the war and had not rejoiced when it started. We helped the Allies to win, then came home to forget about it. Most Americans, he comments, remember WW I -the "war to end all wars" -- only because there was a WW II.

And the end of the Cold War with the dissolution of the USSR, in fact, represented the long delayed end of WW II. That war was, in reality, the "semi-finals in a long match for world domination." While America and the allies contributed mightily to winning the war, it must be acknowledged that the USSR was the main player, and it transformed the USSR from a staggering ex-empire to a superpower with only one serious rival on earth.

"Europe today is essentially the Europe that emerged from the First World War." The similarity is amazing, with its love of self-determination and its loathing of imperialism and war; its liberal Germany and its weak, shrunken Russia; its map crammed with small states; its causal, endemic anti-Semitism; its politically, financially and masochistically rewarding fascination with Muslim states that despise it; its undertone of self hatred and guile, and of course its contempt for America.

Europe's passion for appeasement, born of WW I, is now back in vogue. Rather than challenge or defeat one's enemies, placate them and make them your friends. More than a little of their disdain for America is that the American mainstream, with equal passion, studiously--even contemptuously--rejects appeasement.

To understand the Vietnam War's effect on the U.S. one needs recognize that it was our WW I. American intellectuals responded by preaching appeasement and pacifism. They still do. Conservative Americans still believe in Americanism. Liberals do not. Their attitudes are dominated by four falsehoods

• We were wrong to fight the communists in the first place since they only wanted what was best for their country
• The war was unwinnable and we had no business sending our men to a war they were bound to lose.
• As the people learned the facts they turned against the war and forced our withdrawal from Vietnam
• The real heroes of Vietnam were the protesters and draft resisters who forced America to give up a disastrously wrong policy

He deals with each of these "falsehoods" in sufficient detail to justify the fact that they are false, as he emphasizes that they weren't necessarily wrongheaded during the war, but it now requires a mighty act of will to maintain such pristine ignorance.

Americans continue overwhelmingly to believe in God, much to the bemusement and frustration of the intellectual and secular classes. The founders believed that a religious public was necessary for our way of government/life. Ultimately morality can get no purchase without religion. Without divinity to hold on to, morality is like a first-time roller skater trying but failing to avoid falling. Secularists have left morality behind. They foresee a society where human rights replace human duties, where only the state has obligations as the bovine citizenry relaxes and permits the government to take care of everything. Secular ethics suggests that we must be "careful, and mature, and imaginative, and fair and nice, and lucky." Nothing there is inspiring, noble or even difficult. Nothing exhorts us to be generous or just, decent, honest or kind; gracious or merciful, patriotic or brave; loving or good. All of that is biblical, and part of the American Creed

Someday soon someone will remind this whole nation that tolerance is American but secularism is not. Absolute religious freedom is American but contempt for religion is not. Religious doubt is American but religious indifference is not. Heated religious debate is American but cold academic disdain is not. Chivalry is American but complacency is not.

Six cheers and a 42 gun salute for and to "Americanism." This is a profoundly moving book which properly dispels any notion that America is wrong, or evil, or in need of the changes to be wrought by secularism and the modernity proposed by the left.

Read it. Enjoy it. Think on it. It is well worth the time, the effort and the indulgence. If you are not already so inclined you might even be moved to again love our country. And be willing to fight for it, by debate or by force of arms. America is indisputably worth it!

PS: sorry this review is so long, but it was necessary to properly address this masterpiece.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 3:47 PM

July 12, 2008

Adopted Son

Washington, Lafayette, and the Friendship that Saved the Revolution
David A. Clary – ISBN – 9780553383454

In reading this book I came to fully realize the difference between history written for historians and that read for the generally interested public—never mind the casually inclined. This is a thoroughgoing explication of a truly fascinating relationship which I had never undertaken to study. While engaging, it includes extravagant discussions of minutiae which are not necessarily unimportant, but are much more pointedly directed at the thoroughgoing academic. Nonetheless, I enjoyed it, though I admit that I skimmed a lot of the middle of the book; even skipped pages from time to time. Too much detail for me.

Even so, the information supplied by Clary explores the enormous importance of Lafayette to Washington, and thus to all of us who benefited from his/their endeavor. As well it points up how very much Lafayette actually did for the Revolutionary War; things I had never realized, which further enhance the value of reading such a tome. He was truly a remarkable man and extremely important to our freedom.

Being one of the richest and most important French aristocrats, his very participation and influence were crucial to his country’s critical support of the Revolution. Further, Lafayette bankrupted himself paying his army’s expenses, and loaning our government money which he was never repaid. While the debt was eventually settled decades later thru land grants in the U.S., he went home almost pauperized.

The book deals with many of the battles and the details involved therein, and is especially clear on how important Lafayette—in command of his own army—was to final victory at Yorktown. It is, nonetheless, primarily about the relationship, communications, and deep emotional attachment which cemented the two principals throughout the war and subsequent presidency, and continued up until Washington’s death. Lafayette strove to pattern his life around Washington’s, which was critical to his impact on the French Revolution.

The book ends as the author explores how Lafayette shaped the French Revolution. He was imprisoned, and nearly executed by the Jacobins, which was likewise newsworthy to this reviewer. It makes the sad adventure of the French Revolution a more easily understood event, and sheds a little light on the current conundrum in the middle-east.

I recommend the book with those caveats. I believe my time to have been well spent, but cannot recommend it to the “casually interested.”

Posted by respeto at 2:17 PM

November 17, 2008

Agent Zigzag

A True Story of Nazi Espionage, Love and Betrayal
Ben Macintyre – ISBN 9780307353412

This is the next to the best spy story ever written; next, that is, to A Man Called Intrepid. Newly issued in paperback, it is written by one of my recently discovered, most favored writers. My problem with him is that he hasn’t written enough. As with Intrepid, Zigzag is a true story, so bizarre that it could never be conceived as a fictional plot, and if written no one would consider it believable!

I’ve reviewed most of Macintyre’s books before on this site: The Englishman’s Daughter; The Napoleon of Crime, and The Man Who Would Be King. This book is every bit as good as any of them. You’ll recall that he is a journalist who, in his various travels and assignments, discovers unusual people, often largely unknown, and spends years researching them before writing some of the most riveting and perfect prose you will ever read . . . always biographic history.

Zigzag was one of the foremost British double agents of WWII, having infiltrated the upper levels of Nazi intelligence, and was trusted by all, including Hitler. Near the end of the war the Germans were giving him unbelievable assignments which clearly could not be accomplished, but they assigned them to him anyway, desperate as they were for success in the waning days of the Third Reich.

His British managers carefully arranged for some of his assignments to appear to have been completed successfully, adding to Zigzag’s credibility. Foremost of these was the sabotage of the “Mosquito” factory in Britain--the Mosquito being one of the most unusual and feared bombers of WWII. It wreaked havoc on the Germans, and they wanted it neutralized—removed from manufacture. An elaborate ruse was required in order to make it appear to Luftwaffe aerial reconnaissance that the factory had, indeed been “decommissioned,” which façade, itself, was an incredible achievement.

Moreover, Eddie Chapman—Zigzag—was a common criminal (actually a very uncommon one) who was attracted to risk, danger, notoriety and fame. He was fearless, and imagined himself going down in flames by assassinating Hitler. His most important asset was his ability to memorize most anything, and stick rigidly to any story concocted to “out him.” As well, he would explore military installations, memorize the layout, and then duplicate it accurately months later.

While in Norway, training for a Nazi spy mission, he so thoroughly managed the situation that he became a lifelong friend and admirer of his German manager/trainer. Indeed, on more than one occasion the man interceded to save him from undue harassment when the SS was trying to break him. Many years later—both presuming the other to be dead—they resurrected their friendship.

As an amorous and high testosterone male he had many affairs, not unlike 007. He was friends with the devilishly clever Baron Rothschild—British bomb maker and expert, who was the model for the creative genius “Q” in the James Bond genre. Fleming likely stole a little from Zigzag when modeling 007 himself.

Suffice it to say that this is one hell of a book; one noted by a reviewer for the Boston Globe to be “The best book ever written.” (I don’t agree with that bit of hyperbole, since Intrepid is at least as good, and there are others—The Odessa File comes to mind—as well as other genres between which there is intrinsically no way to compare.)

Nonetheless, it is sheer fun to read.

Posted by respeto at 10:45 AM

May 7, 2010

Agincourt

Bernard Cornwell - 9780061578908

New in paper, the title announces quite well the subject: the surprising victory of Henry V of England over the French in 1415. It was one of the more important battles of the 100 year war because a substantial number of French aristocrats were killed or captured on the field even though the French outnumbered the English by as many as 4:1 on the field

The French had long memories of defeat by the long-bowmen beginning with Crecy in 1346. There, as at Agincourt, the English were outnumbered and the French lost miserably . . . attributable to the English long bow; likewise at Poitiers, ten years later, when the French king was captured. The "Frogs" were ready for a smashing victory over the "Goddamns"--the French epithet for the English. Still they feared them greatly . . . with cause.

Victory was due in large measure, again, to the English bowmen, though Henry's brilliant tactics and French hubris were important features. Further, the French King was marginal and probably insane, so the French were led by a committee of nobles; never a good plan. The English army had just finished a prolonged siege at Harfleur, was sick from weeks in back-country, tired from a long and tortuous march, short on food, and deprived of all physical comfort. The French force, estimated at 30,000 men, appeared certain to overwhelm their hungry, exhausted opponent fielding a piddling 7,000.

As anticipated, Cornwell's narrative is outstanding. As the "reigning king of historical fiction" he never disappoints. The history is accurate, the research in depth, and the descriptions of battle and interaction of the combatants are superb. One comes close to feeling present at the scene, which is always this author's forte. As a stand alone volume it is nice to be done with the story in one sitting. (It is frustrating to wait a year between volumes, especially so with his most recent series on Alfred the Great, a multi-volume series begun in 2004, now at volume five, and as yet incomplete. I'd rather wait until he finishes a series before I begin to read it.)

He tells the tale thru the experiences and the eyes of the archer. His principal protagonist is an extremely skilled peasant archer who moves up thru the ranks based upon that skill; a talented, muscular man whom you'd prefer to fight next to, rather than in opposition.

His after-word is unusually interesting this time because he includes a Q & A by a journalist regarding the book; especially so because of a discussion of the long bow. It took years to master the art of handling such a weapon, and most armies simply could not produce such yeoman archers in sufficient numbers to matter. The decline of the armored Knight is attributable in considerable measure to this formidable weapon. The bow was so powerful it could drive an arrow thru armor and/or unhorse the rider, putting him at an extreme disadvantage being on foot with 60 or more pounds of armor and fighting blinded by his visor.

Great read; interesting history; and we enter the book knowing who won, but the trip down history's lane is fascinating. Sehr Gut !!

Posted by Curmudgeon at 12:57 PM

July 23, 2007

Alexander Hamilton, American

Richard Brookhiser – ISBN – 9780684839196

This book is a stunning achievement. In little more than 200 pages Brookhiser chronicles the life and contributions of Hamilton, ranking him amongst the most important of the founding fathers. Oft overlooked and unappreciated, the author undertakes to correct that, and does it very well.

More than any of his contemporaries Hamilton was responsible for the emergence of the country as the most important economic and military power on the globe. As well, he contributed to the abolition of slavery. Without a doubt his life’s contributions would have been greater had he not been killed in a duel, and perhaps his reputation and contributions would have been better recognized.

In recent years a number of biographies have been written. I believe this to be one of the best because it is succinct, well drawn, and complete with interpretations which help the reader to know and appreciate Hamilton.

His greatness was much related to the plainness of his ideation. He was, of course, brilliant. “Madison’s thoughts at their best [were] brilliant constructs. Jefferson’s [were] visions.” Madison was a well schooled man, Jefferson an autodidact. “Hamilton was driven by problems. Madison by theories.” Both were dazzling politicians and orators.

One of the better sections of the monograph is Brookhiser’s discussion of Hamilton’s brilliance exhibited in the founding of America’s first bank as well as the thoughtful construction managing the Revolutionary War’s debts. Functioning as the first Secretary of the Treasury these were his most important contributions.

Hamilton was adamant about honor (which is what got him killed), and of honoring debt fully. He almost single-handedly created modern entrepreneurial capitalism, though it was not then known as such. Being creative himself he recognized that in a community of individuals it was proper, possible and appropriate for each individual to find his element, and to “call into activity the whole vigor of his nature.” No one need necessarily be plugged into a trade or activity he loathed, or for which he was unsuited. Options were encouraged.

Though having grown up in one of the world’s most beautiful spots (the Island of Nevus in the Caribbean), Hamilton was surrounded by abject poverty. This caused him to seriously consider alternative approaches to prosperity. Having raised himself from poverty he never forgot that economies are about the people who work in them. Being the spawn of a ne’er do well he recognized that men were shaped by their environment and could easily drift into obscurity and mediocrity. This promulgated his thoughts about labor and industry which were more dynamic, detailed and creative.

His misgivings about the French Revolution are explored, along with his activities in our own revolution; especially interesting is how they demonstrate his character development. Principally, he was a successful lawyer who argued many important cases. Many helped shape the laws in this country. In these endeavors he was anything but moderate. He worked at being an American, and better defined what he thought that to be than many others, and throughout his life he remained an idealist.

Three cheers and twenty-one guns for Alex. I encourage you to read this rewarding and brief bio.

Posted by respeto at 1:07 PM

March 7, 2007

America Alone

The End of the World as We Know It
Mark Steyn – ISBN – 9780895260789

Perhaps the most telling comment about this book is that made by Prince Turki al-Faisal, long-time ambassador to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia: “The arrogance of Mark Steyn knows no bounds.”

Or perhaps you’d prefer Michelle Malkin: “His new book provides a powerful, abrasive, high-velocity assault on . . . the threat of Islamic imperialism. Do we in the West have the will to prevail? Steyn strips away intellectual rust and PC rot to uncover the writing on the wall. America Alone will open your eyes. You can’t afford to look away.” Hard improve on that!

Now the best known, busiest “conservative” commentator on the planet, writing for myriad sources, Steyn delivers a razor sharp commentary with a wit unequaled by anyone writing regularly today. The book is equal parts enlightening and frightening, with humor and horror; an oft anamnestic peroration on our cultural amnesia.

P.J. O’Rourke is similarly amusing, and Florence King equally lacerating, but Steyn combines the two in this often droll dissertation. It is the West’s wake-up call . . . is anyone listening? Matt Parris, writing for the (U.K.) Spectator, observed that, in the end it will be America against the rest of the world, then asked: “whose side will you be on?”

The U.S. is the “who’s on first” position. She’s vital. When the world has a problem it dials 1-800-UNCLESAM. Problems in Darfur? The Balkins? Kuwait, maybe? That’s the number. Problems in a hospital in Oakland? Call the CDC! (That would be the Centers for Disease Control, in Atlanta.) Same for hospitals in Toronto, Delhi, Beijing or Stockholm for that matter. Call the WHO (World Health Organization) and they fast forward the call to the CDC.

So, who will they call if we lose? And why are our compatriots not supportive—or even understanding—of the mistakenly named “War on Terror?” Most of the West demands that the U.S. “join the real world.” Wouldn’t it be more appropriate if they did?

Demographically he shows that Muslims are rapidly colonizing Europe. With them comes Islam--and with that, Wahhabist radical Islam. Remember the van Gogh murder a couple of years ago? And the Dutch cartoon brouhaha or the conflagrations in the bidonvilles of France last year? Here’s the partial answer:

While it may or may not be true that the Muslim population of France is “only 10%,” there are cities in France which are already 45% Muslim, and I’ve read that in Marseilles it is 75%. Further, in the under-20 subset of French residents over 30% are Muslim. The Europeans are under-breeding themselves out of existence with averages of 1.14 children per female in Italy to 1.89 in France, where 1/3 of them are Muslims, not Europeans. Every generation of continentals is little over half of the prior, with the Muslims nearly doubling their cadre. How long will this go on before they are the majority? And, do they really need to be the majority to sway the populations of Italy, Germany, France, Sweden and the low countries? Or England? Certainly they impacted Spain, Denmark and Holland where Muslim immigrants are less numerous.

While Europe decays Russia is dying at a much faster rate. There appears to be a question as to which Muslim country will be first to get the bomb? Will it be Iran? . . . or Russia? . . . or France? Muslims refuse to integrate, preferring their own to Western culture. Islam and Jihad are political forces in ways that Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism never were. Denish D’Souza, an American conservative intellectual (from India) once observed that: “It is impossible to ‘practice’ Islam within a secular framework.” While the Inquisition wasn’t exactly a Christmas Party, it was responsible for fewer deaths in 150 years than Islamic Jihad is annually

There’s much, much more. All of it fascinating and well presented. I can only plead with you to read it. It isn’t about politics, per se. Liberal or conservative, left or right, it’s about learning that it won’t matter if we don’t survive. Some once thought it’d be better Red than Dead. It’s that kind of question. Western multiculturalists parrot that all cultures are equal, but find me one who would choose to live anywhere outside the West. When France falls some can move to Canada or the U.S. The Dutch are already moving to New Zealand and Australia or the U.S.

But where will they move if we fail? And where shall we in the U.S. move?

And we can fail !!

Posted by respeto at 1:40 PM

November 7, 2006

American Courage

(True stories of gallant people who have made this country great.)
Herbert W. Warden III – ISBN 9780060782405

An interesting book, this; what I generally refer to as a “bathroom read.” There are 46 stories, each a few pages long, each reported by participants and/or researched by the author, covering snapshots of our history from the Mayflower landing to the present.

All are about uncommon valor under trying--even devastating circumstances. All are well told. There are vignettes from King Phillips war and the carnage in little towns like Deerfield, MA; Washington’s victories at Trenton and Princeton (noted by Fredrick the Great as “the most brilliant campaign of the century”), Davy Crockett and the Alamo, the 49ers, Pickett’s Charge, the San Francisco Quake, Sergeant York, D-Day, Vietnam, Moon landings, and finally Flight 93 on 9/11.

I was not aware that the Boston Tea Party was a quite pacific affair, uneventful except for the outcome, and I was particularly taken by the loquacity, elegance and sophistication of the writings of Daniel Boone—always considered, by me at least, to be quite a rustic.

It is a remarkable and captivating book best read in short, quiet times to better absorb and enjoy the recanting of one or two of the events which helped make us who we are, and of the heroic people in our history.

Posted by respeto at 3:58 PM

April 18, 2006

American Genesis

Jeffrey Goodman, Ph.D. ISBN – 0425051730

It's time to review an old book again; one which might well interest you. This one is no longer in print, but can be found online for a dollar or two.

It is a seminal treatise, both concise and comprehensive in that Goodman discusses the subject in lay terms, with brevity and interest, without encumbering the dialog with myriad and confusing details.

His hypothesis, as well documented as possible, is that Homo sapiens sapiens actually evolved in the Americas—probably California—and spread around the globe from there. Further, he indicates that our species is much older than is generally supposed, and supports this conclusion by itemizing “digs” in the Americas which have been documented to be 40,000 to 150,000 years old, with some considered to be 250,000 years, and suspect of being as much as 500,000 years in age. All of which suggests that we may be over 1,000,000 years old as a species, not the 100,000 years or less which is commonly supposed. And we didn’t come from Africa. That seems certain.

This is breathtaking in light of the fact that man is “widely known” to have evolved in Africa and came here across the Bering Strait 12,000 years ago. He is bemused by how unrelenting the “experts” are in denying that man might have moved the other way across the Bering Strait. Apparently it was the world’s first one way street! It reminds of the now defeated argument that no European came to the Americas before Columbus . . . N(body)B(efore)C(olumbus) as the acronym reads. Now, of course, we know that Norsemen were here, and there is strong belief that others came in earlier times. But that’s another story.

His arguments are solid, and the “establishment” is reluctantly coming to agree that just maybe the old conclusions are wrong.

Most interesting is the datum offered that Cro-Magnon had very exquisite and distinctive flint points and other tools when they appeared suddenly, from nowhere, in Spain at the end of the last ice age. “No one knows from whence they came.” That’s gospel. Strange that points and tools have been found in the American Southwest which are identical to those of Cro-Magnon, and 35-70,000 years older. As well, Cro-Magnon skeletons look a lot like modern day Southwestern Indians!

Another fascinating discussion is Hopi Indian legend involving their three past worlds, destroyed first by fire (volcanos), they by ice (glaciers) and finally by water (flooding); strangely consistent with what now appears to be worth serious consideration. The scenario is, however, geologically impossible if their civilization is not at least 250,000 years old. Their legend also states that they came from afar, from a land in the Pacific which is now submerged. Huh?

The most interesting discussions by far deal with the domestication of animals, the development of agriculture, and their advanced medical skills. Much derided until recently, the Amerinds now appear clearly to have been grinding grain (which one presumes they cultivated) at least 100,000 years ago, hybridized maize (corn) so long ago that no natural related plant now exists, freeze dried vegetables tens of thousands of years before this was done in Eurasia, rode horses before they became extinct in the Americas (10,000 years ago,) and practiced holistic medicine which included antibiotics for infections, digitalis for heart disease, quinine for malaria, Vitamin C for scurvy, aspirin for pain, cocaine for hypesthesia, splinted fractures, performed trephination, removed cataracts, and even practiced psychiatry, after a fashion, by recognizing and treating psychosomatic illnesses.

I found especially remarkable the fact that they had hybridized amaranth, and grew it in sufficient quantities to feed hundreds of thousands of people before the Spanish made them quit. Recently we have rediscovered this cereal grain and it offers the possibility of resolving malnutrition worldwide. It is hardy, drought resistant, grows nearly everywhere, and has just about all of the things humans need to stay healthy. It is especially interesting to me because Indians in the South American rainforests are only recently known to have developed elevated farm plots in these miserable soils. They are not yet understood, but they involved "charcoaling" certain plants with fire, which, when mixed with the soils, retains nutrients for a century. These vast acreages also supported millions of people where only a few now eke out an existence--because it is a forgotten technology.

Apparently when the Conquistadors discovered these Amerinds, they annihilated them with battle, disease, etc., and their technological mastery disappeared with them. We are just about to learn how millions of “savages” worked out a survival plan for jungle life . . . perhaps tens of thousands of year ago!

Read the book . . . it is brief, captivating, informative, and well worth the time.

Posted by respeto at 3:00 PM

November 26, 2008

America’s Three Regimes

A New Political History
Morton Keller – ISBN – 9780195325027

A new approach to history, indeed. Keller neatly separates our political history into three categories, distinct from one another, and distinctly different. The founders were driven to avoid the imperialism of England, establishing a deferential-republican period, long on independence and short on central control. This prevailed until Andrew Jackson’s presidency, whence followed the party-democratic period from 1830-1930. Finally, the great depression and FDR authored the populist-bureaucratic period, which continues to the present day (and is about to be invigorated “in no-trump,” I suspect.)

Old world revolutions were bloody carnage, with religious intolerance, intrigue, poisonings, treason, and executions—even kings. The miserable life predicated upon this was amongst the important reasons the colonists came to America in the first place, to escape overpopulation, poverty, crowded cities, disease, aristocratic conspiracies, oppression and death for any number of reasons. America offered an opportunity for a new life to both rich and poor.

Over 175 years Englishmen (and others) became American, and a new world was founded upon freedom and responsible democracy. The contrast instructed our founding intellects what to avoid. The rational tumult was also informed by understandings of market economics--formalized by Adam Smith--and the recognition of the rights of man, by others. The U.S. was indeed unique. Sherman, of Connecticut, noted that the arguments over the constitution were not “what rights naturally belong to man, but how they may be most effectually guarded in society.” While parties were not initially very potent, the founders were nonetheless ferocious partisans. Jefferson and Adams were at sword’s point on many issues, and the Federalists and Republicans disagreed robustly.

He does, however, differentiate between early politics . . . men who did what they did from a sense of duty, obligation, and responsibility—people who’s public persona was an ideal of honor and dignity—distinct from “politicos” of the modern stripe. Further, he concludes that the power of the later party system, and the requirements of mass politics, mitigated against the selection of the best and the brightest for office (which is increasingly apparent in recent years!)

The history of each period is covered comprehensively. At the end of the first period Tocqueville spent several years observing and many more writing about the country, explaining to Europeans—and Americans—what had been wrought..

As the U.S. became more industrialized, populous and complex, “Jeffersonian Democracy” (which it seldom really was) evolved into the “Jacksonian” variety, with clearly defined ideas, platforms and rigorous voting blocks. He observes that by the middle of the 19th century the American character type was recognized internationally: brazen, assertive, individualistic, and defined by the vibrant present and not by an imagined past. Not incidentally, along the way the problem of slavery was confronted with a bloody if definitive resolution, yet it hardly impacted upon governance.

A century later we entered the “New Deal:” the answer to the presumed need for a powerful government to apply bureaucratic notions of solutions to the calamitous depression . . . though bureaucracy had been authored by Wilson during WW I (which shriveled thereafter until the 30’s.) The sheer scale of the financial, human, material, and organizational demands required at least some of this, though the battle between [real] conservatives and progressives remains, and isn’t likely to depart any time soon.

Throughout, there is a fulsome discussion of the body and tangents of these concepts and divisions. Nonetheless it is done in a non-academic and informative way which reads comfortably, without an overindulgence in esoteric facts. Still, it’s not a “leisure” read. It is history, after all, and worth the read for those inclined.

Posted by respeto at 1:07 PM

September 7, 2006

America’s Victories

(Why the U.S. wins wars and will win the war on terror)
Larry Schweikart – ISBN - 978-1595230218

Co-author of A Patriot’s History of the United States, Schweikart now explains his premise included in the title: historic review of activities and attitudes of the U.S. military thruout it’s 230 years. He, like many on the right, strongly favors the war in Iraq. His attitude might bother some, but it is not a reason to avoid this historically significant and interesting book, written for the average reader.

He begins by reviewing not only the attitudes of our military, but their origins, and further emphasizes that our armies have always reflected our population, as do its casualties. This is contrary to popular mythology and altogether unlike the rest of the world’s armies, past or present. Even Northeast sent its best to war until the 20th century, and Hollywood sent its best until Viet Nam.

Our military’s views are shaped by our Judeo-Christian heritage. Life, charity and human worth are represented differently than in most. We never trade the lives of our military for positive press. We do our best to avoid “collateral damage.” We never leave casualties behind on the battlefield. We rescue our POW’s when possible. Did you know (I didn’t!) that we invaded the Philippines solely free the Philippine and American prisoners--as a matter of honor? The Philippines were insignificant militarily.

He reviews the Vietnam and Iraq wars quite differently than you will read most places, and opines that we could, and should have won in Viet Nam. Even with our departure the South Vietnamese could have prevailed had congress not defunded them. That’s now worth remembering. That and what happened in Viet Nam and Cambodia after we abandoned them.

The despised and mistrusted “Military-Industrial Complex” is explored as he demonstrates the major role of the private sector in providing the physical means by which we win wars: R&D, high technology, with more and better weapons. The book is full of vignettes of battle which explain the value of our sophisticated weaponry as well as the training, skill and independence (private enterprise) of the men who use them.

He is harsh on the anti-war demonstrators, noting that their violence is hardly pacific, and observes that this carping drives our military to be even more cautious, more lethal, and more protective of ourselves and innocent life on the other side; precisely the opposite of the intention.

As for the “brutality” of the American troops, he compares ladies underpants on the head of a terrorist to videotaped beheadings. Of course there is some cruelty. It is, after all, war, and every war includes some. The difference is that we prosecute those who violate our rules while our adversaries don’t. In fact, they have no rules to break and are held to no visible standard. Barbarism is accepted. In the “shame and honor” culture of our current opponents, even simple supervision by a female is humiliating. Still, if you were a prisoner would you rather be beheaded, or held on a leash by a female Non-Com? Ironically it is apparent that they prefer beheading. Death before dishonor has a peculiar, non-Western ring amongst Muslims.

His critique of the opposition to the “Star Wars” missile defense is withering. He demolishes the Left by documenting that the Soviets feared it above all else. They were confident that we would succeed, and since the best weapon is the one you never have to use, Star Wars reigns supreme in that it was a technology which hadn’t even been deployed!

Determinate attitudes of Americans which prohibit losing wars are explicated. We abhor war, want it to be over quickly, value all human life, and are prepared to do what we must to win . . . as quickly as possible. Ernie Pyle wrote that “[most] of us wanted terribly, [if] only academically, for the war to be over. The front line soldier wanted it to be terminated by the physical process of his destroying enough Germans to end it. He was truly at war.”

“It took a warrior ethos of courage and decisiveness to invade Iraq . . . [and] it will take even greater heroism to defeat Iran and Syria and crush Islamofascist fundamentalism once and for all.” That comment will mystify some and anger others, but the military is ready and willing . . . and more than able! Are we?

Eisenhower once commented that Hitler should be wary of an enraged democracy. We did not muster a response to the bombings in Beirut, the Trade Center in 1993, the African embassies or the attack on the USS Cole. It took 9/11 to get our attention. Now we seem to have forgotten. He feels it will require another attack far more deadly than 9/11 to unleash our willingness and alloy it to our ability.

But, we will do it, and we will win, once we have decided we’ve had enough.

I sincerely hope that he is correct. I am not confident that the West has the will to validate itself, thus to prevail. The collective we is insufficiently vocal about the value of our culture, and increasingly irresolute recently. That has to change before we can rise to our defense.

Posted by respeto at 9:00 AM

April 4, 2005

Anti Americanism

Jean Francois Revel - ISBN # 1-893554-856

A wonderfully written (all of Revel’s works are) and enlightening book which all Americans, ought to read . . . and send copies to the Europeans in order that they might understand themselves. G-d it’s great to be an American. Don’t believe it, just ask Revel !

For those who question just how the French can “sometimes be so unreasonable,” I offer you this review . . . but highly recommend that you read the entire book. At a little over 150 pages, even a lengthy report would still fail to cover much of the ground. And who better to explain the French to an American than an enlightened Frenchman who loves America?

He begins: “The mystery of anti-Americanism is not the disinformation—reliable information on the United States has always been easy to obtain—but people’s willingness to be disinformed.” Europeans want to believe that the U.S. is vile and devious, so they do.

The continental conviction of inherent French (and European) sophistication and superiority is vigorously debunked as he emphasizes that the evil, criminal ideologies of the 20th century were all invented entirely within Europe, and required the U.S. to intervene twice in less than 40 years to stop the carnage. He reminds that: “America largely owes her unique superpower status today to Europe’s mistakes.”As Europeans recoil at America’s world markets and influence, they completely overlook the fact that European capital, technology, language (and people) spread over the entire globe long before America was a power. . . . Oh, well . . . !

French political activists have become: “Revolutionaries without a revolution. . . . By yelling slogans, they afford themselves the illusion of thought, and by trashing cities and striving to stymie international gatherings, they provide themselves with the illusion of action.” Long years ago French intellectuals were convinced that the U.S. was more dangerous than the Nazis or the Communists, and Revel emphasizes that such “clever minds” as these are the ones now advocating negotiation with Saddam and Bin Laden. Unfortunately, much of the American Left agrees!

A lengthy discussion of the situation with Islamic terror, and its relevance to his subject is included in this book. He summarizes the opinions of numerous authorities who repudiate the myth of moderate Islam, and goes on to point out that the bulk of Muslims approve of terrorism. Recall with him Salman Rushdie’s book and the furor in England over it. Muslim support for the fatwa was near universal, even in Britain and France.

The day after 9/11 all of the free world was “American”, which changed promptly, however, and especially in France. They believe, for the most part, that the attack was deserved because of America’s “unilateralism.” The relevant question ought to have been whether the destruction of the tallest American skyscrapers was the proper response to this allegation.

Also included is a rather amusing anecdotal discussion of how the French refuse to incorporate proven American methods to control crime because they don’t want to “act American.” To them it is unacceptable: “[the French] do well, it seems, in rejecting the American model, even if [the] choice leads to shipwreck.” While crime in France is “worse than in America,” the French are pleased above all that their approach isn’t American. Americans are well outside of their mainstream, but one might question how can anyone outside of al-Qa’ida can be that irrational?

In the 19th century “[the French] alternately described American society as a mass of rootless, isolated individuals struggling against each other in Darwinian competition . . . [and simultaneously] as a conformist, easily led herd, where the individual can neither think nor act for himself.” Notice any contradiction? They seem not to.

All cultures are equal, it seems, but France is the appropriate source and model for the world. As in The Animal Farm, they are more equal than others. (And anticipating becoming the pigs?)
The European inability to formulate a strategy to fight explains their attitudes about American unilateralism. They believe that democracies, rightfully, can neither criticize nor contain totalitarian regimes. These same sophists refuse to accept that this is a battle for civilization, and will not acknowledge the inherent superiority of Western civilization.

Pummeling the U.S. is a favorite sport of the French intelligentsia. As they identify America to be barbaric, they refuse to recognize billions of dollars spent on universities, research, libraries and other cultural entities, all the while vitriolic about American “cultural imperialism.” “Americans can never be right, no matter what they do.”

Revel offers a litany of “really nutty” French ideas and actions to reinforce his declaration that such attitudes disqualify them from serious geopolitical debate. By refusing to deal with reality the Continentals leave the U.S. with no choice but to undertake necessary actions unilaterally, and then grouse about our unilaterality.
Americans have been--and are today--useful to Europe as a calming explication of its failures. The belief that America always does less well than they do is comforting to them. And, of course, whatever goes wrong over there is America’s fault. Always!

Posted by respeto at 10:50 AM

December 13, 2010

At Home

A Short History of Private Life
Bill Bryson - ISBN - 9780767919388

As is his usual, this is a most readable book; clever, informed and interesting. Critics have observed that he often misses his own points and/or provides information not relative to the subject. Of that he is guilty--and misleading from time to time as well, but it is still a satisfying and knowledgeable tour.

The idea promulgated is that, as he walks thru his house--built in the early 19th century as a church rectory--he identifies each room and relates activities which occur therein. He offers historic facts and observations relevant to each room visited; trouble is, he often digresses into wildly tangential discussions which bear no relevance to the room being toured, and some are only vaguely concerned with the subject of home. Said disquisitions are, however, well researched and captivating, as is his exploration of the comforts of the rural pastorate at the time of construction of his home. One if his most interesting forays into the unrelated is the notation that ancient parish churches are often several feet below ambient ground level. Have they sunk? No, he muses. There have been many thousands of people buried in the same confined area over hundreds of years, and the cumulative detritus of these multiple burials has raised ground level.

In The Scullery and Larder he mentions that in addition to distilling spirits and brewing, most all of the household items were manufactured on site: inks, weed killers, soap, toothpaste, candles, waxes, vinegars, pickles, cold creams, cosmetics, poisons, flea powders, shampoos, medicines, starches, etc. It is hard to imagine an age when none of these were available commercially.

When discussing electricity he comments that it came to the rich much later than to the middling classes. (Incidentally, the middle classes did not exist until the mid-18th century.) The rich had servants to tend the lamps, trim the wicks and clean the chimneys, etc., so it didn't concern them. "Servants constituted a class of humans whose existences were fundamentally devoted to making certain that another class of humans would find everything they desired within arm's reach."

The Cellar necessarily (?) begins with a discussion of New York after the revolution, graduates too the movement of produce down the Mississippi to New Orleans, from whence to other ports; this as he works his way to the Erie Canal, where he opines on the American invention of hydraulic cement which made the canal possible. (Keep in mind he's discussing his home, located in Great Britain.) While not irrelevant--produce, that is--he omits any and all discussion the "cellaring" of root vegetables or the storage of other such items in the cellar. That along with most other things for which a cellar is used.

His discussion of stairs is fascinating, as is his diversion into the invention and uses of wallpaper at the time. Such papers contained significant quantities of arsenic, making manufacture and hanging of it an occupational hazard. The most expensive color was verdigris, "made by hanging copper strips over a vat of horse dung and vinegar and then scraping off the oxidized copper which resulted." (He also manages to expound upon Karl Scheele, discoverer of chlorine, fluorine, manganese, barium, molybdenum, tungsten, nitrogen and oxygen, all without crediting him.)

He quite often detours into the arcane: "Christianity" he opines "was always curiously ill at ease with cleanliness . . . and early on developed an odd tradition of equating holiness with dirtiness. When Thomas Becket . . . died in 1170, those who laid him out noted approvingly that his undergarments were 'seething with lice.'" He humorously recalls Thackeray's coined phrase which is not without cause: "the great unwashed."

Obviously, any discussion of The Attic would be incomplete without explaining estate and death taxes, which began at eight percent on estates valued at over one million pounds. By WW II they were up to sixty percent, which explains why there are few large estates remaining. At one time even Stonehenge was sold for 6600 British pounds (the equivalent of 300,000 pounds today, a century later; ouch, that's a 4500% devaluation.) Eventually Stonehenge was saved and preserved, but it was almost leveled for its rocks and surrounding fields. Imagine.

Discussions of The Bathroom and related hygienic topics are especially fruitful. "Washing for the sake merely of being clean and smelling nice was remarkably slow in coming." (John Wesley, in observing cleanliness as next to Godliness, was commenting upon clean clothing.) "What really got the Victorians to turn to bathing, however, was the realization that it could be gloriously punishing." (All that brush scrubbing could be quite arduous and uncomfortable.) In 1861 an English physician actually wrote a book on how to bathe. Even now the English--indeed Europeans--are not all that keen on bathing; their toilet paper is kin to pages of a Sears catalogue if not as slick and shiny. And he manages to get into an absorbing discussion of the invention of modern porcelain . . . itself a real feat.

The Dressing Room is introduced by a several page discussion of the famous 5000 year old, frozen corpse which emerged from a melting glacier and became famous as "The Iceman." It is intriguing, and does deal with his clothing, but seems a bit removed from this tour. Obviously the discussion brought up the subject of cotton and, thus, Whitney's gin which reinvigorated slavery in America's south, paving the way to the Civil War. Not much about wool, or moths, or styles, or means of storage/hanging, but, hey, what the hell? It's interesting nonetheless.

And so it goes; it's altogether fascinating if not always, or even commonly, on course.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 10:24 AM

June 20, 2007

Because They Hate

A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America
Brigitte Gabriel – ISBN – 9780312358372

This exquisitely compelling first person account is written by a Lebanese Christian whose country was overtaken by Islam when she was ten. She lived thru the Muslim conquest of her country . . . the first subjugated by Islam in modern history. After having been buried alive by the authoring shots of that war she and her family lived in a claustrophobic dugout bomb shelter with no amenities for 7 years, sometimes eating boiled grass to survive.

“As a Maronite [Christian] growing up in once predominantly Christian Lebanon, I witnessed the genocide of my people by the Palestinians and the rest of the Muslim community, who came from all over the Muslim world to fight the Christians.”

Now she shares the experience . . . LISTEN UP !!

Lebanon, she reminds, was a beneficent and beautiful place; peaceful, westernized and multi-cultural with a well balanced democratic government divided between Christians and the several Islamic sects. Beirut was considered Paris in the Middle-East. Eventually, however, the Islamic sects joined together for their version of the holocaust. Those Christians who survived were driven to emigrate. What’s left is the disaster which represents “modern,” Islamic Lebanon, which is now broaching civil war between these several Islamic sects.

As an American, now, she points up the parallels and insists that it is clear that we are next . . . or at least high on the list. A commonly expressed Arabic adage: “First comes Saturday then comes Sunday;” Saturday being the Sabbath of Israel, and Sunday being that of the Christians—meaning us. They are aware than when America falls, so will the Western world.

Only the willfully blind can disagree. How can one be so sure? Just take them at their word. Disabuse yourself of logic and the liberal propensity to believe that no one can be that evil! They can . . . and they are.

She lists the areas of Islamic terror from “A-Z” (literally, Algeria to Zaire) and reviews the current activities around the world, all sponsored by Al Qaeda and its affiliates, financed primarily by Iran and the Saudis (Shias and Sunnis.) Once these enemies succeed they’ll have their own war for dominance! Iraq, anyone? Iran?

She documents the fact that CAIR (foremost amongst the American Muslim “civil rights” groups) vigorously supports and encourages terrorist activities. Their counter-claim is that they abhor violence, but when was the last CAIR sponsored million Muslim march to protest terror? And why does the chairman openly state that “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”

More curiously, why does he get by with this? Why is he never challenged; always excused and/or explained? Connecting the dots isn’t that difficult. (Maybe if Bush and the liberals read this book they’d change their mind? Doubt it, but maybe.)

A particularly intense chapter is that titled Societies are Not Created Equal. Here, and throughout the book, she goes to extraordinary lengths to emphasize reality.

• While much of the world advances, Arabic culture has been declining for centuries.
• While they have enormous wealth from oil, the GNP of all 22 Arabic countries (population over 300 million) is approximately that of Spain (population 40 million) and the GNP of the Muslim world (population 1 billion) is approximately half Germany’s 2.5 trillion (population 90 million.)
• If you eliminated oil--not incidentally discovered, developed and used primarily by the West--the major export of Arab countries is “grief, suicide bombers and terrorism”
• Illiteracy in the Arab world . . . is higher most developing countries. They invest little in real schools, and almost nothing into industry. Most of the money is in the hands of the royal families and their cronies. What they don’t squander they invest around the world, avoiding their own back yards, and their countrymen.
• “The Middle East is lagging behind not because Arab Muslims are not created equal as human beings . . . [but] because of social and religious values.”
• In her opinion (and mine, if it matters), the problem is Islam. It kills self-expression, self-improvement, and empowerment, eliminates 51% of the population from consideration, and demands that Islam be the center of one’s life and existence by dictating how to live . . . indeed how to be.
• As a result of lies, obtuse thinking (if it qualifies as thought), and repetitious anti-Jewish and anti-American diatribes, there exists “a generation of Arab youth incapable of thinking in a civilized manner.” A white lie to them is a permissible prevarication which fosters their ultimate goal of conquest, and terror a legitimate approach.
• Virtually all terror around the world in the past half-century has been perpetrated by Muslims.
• Wahhabi Islam is not the only extreme form of Islam. Suicide bombers include Egyptians, Lebanese, Palestinians, Syrians, Iraqis and Iranians. “The common thread [is the Koran]. They are simply practicing Muslims. They are not the extreme, they are the mainstream.” Gabriel shares Oriana Fallaci’s belief there is neither moderate nor radical Islam . . . there is only Islam!
• Finally, “if Muslims are unwilling to relinquish the right to lie and kill in the name of Allah, how can they be considered moderate?” By whom and for what reason?

The use of political correctness is now so abused that anyone expressing a contrary opinion is labeled as a racist and/or a bigot. “How handy for the Islamo-facists, the American-hating, Jew-killing, Israel-destroying, women-abusing, multi-religious-intolerant Muslims. Oh! Excuse me, did I say something not quite PC?”

And finally she notes that if Arabs would accept Israel’s right to exist, “Israel would help them make their deserts bloom. Instead, the Arab world has chosen to fertilize the land with the blood of Israeli children. Could anything be more barbaric and depraved?”

Well, as a matter of fact . . . yes !! “First the Palestinians gave their children stones to throw. Now they wrap their children in dynamite and nails and send them to blow themselves up.”

Why isn’t everyone in the West ready to say that enough is enough?

Read this book. In past years I have recommended The Sword of the Prophet as the single best book to read on the subject. With the appearance of this offering I have changed my recommendation.

As a foil I recommend Three Cups of Tea, recently reviewed. That book demonstrates that modern education is mandatory if the West is to survive and prevail. This book graphically demonstrates that we must first defeat, or at least severely compromise them before they can be meaningfully educated on a mass scale.

When I was in the army during the Viet Nam war, the 7th Psychological Operations Group motto was: “You can’t kill them all. You have to convert some of them.” In debates with its commander I usually insisted that you first had to kill a bunch of them, including their leaders, to get the attention of the rest. I still believe that!

Posted by respeto at 1:01 PM

November 20, 2010

Behind Enemy Lines

Civil War Spies, Raiders and Guerrillas
Wilmer L. Jones, PhD. - ISBN - 9780878331918

This is an interesting, "fun read," highlighting several well known Civil War combatants beside a larger group of lesser lights: people prominent locally or regionally perhaps, but people outside the purview of the average reader. Further, it deals with activities not widely reported. As such there is remarkable information which, while not trivial, is certainly beyond the awareness of most of us, and likely more than a few Civil War buffs.

It was curious to find chapters about the Southern cavalry greats Mosby and Stuart, and lesser knowns including Ashby and Gilmor, with nary a mention of Sheridan or any northern horsemen. Perhaps those Yankees never made it to the south? Or "behind enemy lines?"

Reminiscent of the New York Times in recent decades, Jones comments that "Had Confederate commanders placed spies on the staffs of their adversaries, they probably would not have had any better information than that supplied by the Northern press." (In fairness, the press at the time was not malicious. Rather, it just distributed news fit to print; comprehensively, albeit imprudently.) As well, he informs that early in that era spying was considered ungentlemanly and beneath the dignity of honest combatants, though that position changed later in the war. The first to implement "all out war" were the Confederates, having determined it would require this compromising step to have any chance of winning.

His discussions of the irregulars and the guerrillas emphasize that these combatants were incredibly vicious--well beyond the pale at times--and strenuously criticized by both Confederate and Union commanders. Indeed, many were derided and decommissioned, though they seldom quit fighting and couldn't really be disciplined.

Along the way there are discussions of support by the citizenry, many of whom suffered as a result of their support, though many were driven to it by the activities of the adversaries: burning and looting, even rape and murder of non-combatants, including women and children. Several chapters are devoted to the recantation of the activities of the most famous of these brigands.

Discussions of the Pinkertons--already prominent as a result of their railroad activities--are also of interest. They became quite famous as a result of their war contributions; even more so after the war with the blossoming of the Quantrill, James and Younger "gangs" of robbers. These, too, along with a few additional miscreants are discussed in interesting if abbreviated detail.

The book is well written and rather unusual. While it's not about seminal details, neither does it dabble in the arcane.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 4:06 PM

October 27, 2005

Benjamin Franklin (Bio.)

Edmund S. Morgan – 0300101627

This little book is brilliantly and lovingly written, and a light while informative work which everyone ought to read.

While biographical, it deals more heavily with the latter years of Dr. Franklin’s life: the period of decades when he was, in effect, ambassador to the European Western world, molder of opinions about America, and chief financier of the Revolutionary War. There is sufficient detail about his activities (pre-and post-revolutionary) to inform the reader of just how pivotal he was, and it offers sufficient personal information about him in order for the reader to become familiar with Franklin, the man: his nature, scientific proclivities, love of people and camaraderie, thoughts, concepts of the country he loved and served, and the evolution of his attitudes toward revolution.

I, for one, was not aware of how much Franklin believed in the British Empire, how much he felt himself to be a “British American”, and how hard he tried to influence the English parliament to accede to American requests for autonomy within the empire, before finally concluding that revolution was the only answer . . . at which time he worked mightily to support and finance it, and later to contribute to the founding of the American democratic republic. Also interesting are the unfulfilled ideas which Franklin had about how the union ought to be: a union of the people, not just of the states, and one more oriented to the general welfare, albeit within a capitalist system. (e.g.: he usually gave his inventions over to public domain, without patenting them, for their general use.)

I’m certain there are more voluminous and comprehensive biographies of Franklin—or at least tomes which are much longer--but it is difficult for me to imagine one which is more wonderfully crafted and pleasurable to read.

One of America’s most distinguished historians has indeed written one of the best books on the greatest statesman of his—or any--age.

“Superb. . . . The best short biography of Franklin ever written.” Gordon Wood, New York Review of Books.

‘Nough said. Read it!! It is well worth the several hours it will require.

Posted by respeto at 11:45 AM

July 31, 2006

Black Rednecks and White Liberals

Thomas Sowell – ISBN – 1594031436\

Sowell is beyond all doubt my favorite living philosopher/scholar/author/columnist. He is highly regarded by most everyone (except the Library Journal), including most of his adversaries. He writes knowledgeably, with incredible clarity—not to mention wisdom and wit.

This volume is a panoply of his breadth and skill, and recalls in part writings in others of his books. In the chapter “Are Jews Generic” one is reminded of portions of Migrations and Cultures wherein he describes varieties of culture and attitudes transplanted globally, noting that the middle-man culture is the same whether Chinese, Jewish, Ibo or Armenian. Identical approaches, which propel them to success in adopted cultures, make then anathema in all. It isn’t the race or culture, but the function and successes which others disapprove of and envy, even though the “others” would be unable to get along without them. Similarly so the chapter on “Germans and History.”

Another chapter, “Black Education,” recalls Education: Assumptions vs. History, in which he dispels the myth that black education is necessarily second rate. Numerous examples in historic times and places are recanted wherein blacks have not only succeeded but excelled in black schools--even in Washington D.C—but in another time (e.g.: Dunbar High School, then as now a ghetto school.) That was before liberals took over the establishment and began making damaging changes while offering ridiculous excuses. At one time Dunbar graduates were not required to take entrance examinations at Dartmouth, Harvard and other selective colleges.

A study done in 1970 demonstrated that of all PhD’s held by blacks at that time, more of them had graduated from Dunbar than any other black high school in the country. The first black graduate of Annapolis and the first black enlisted man to rise to a commissioned officer also came from Dunbar as did the first black female PhD, the first black full professor at a major American university, the first black federal judge, the first black general, the first black Cabinet member, the first black senator, the doctor who pioneered the use of plasma, historian Carter Woodson, author/poet Sterling Brown, musician Duke Ellington, etc. These are stunning data which liberals succeed in burying as information regarding the historic success of (some) black institutions. It can be done. It has been done! But the rules were “old fashioned” and quite different; values were instilled and success was expected, along with hard, disciplined work.

In “The Real History of Slavery” he dispels the notion that those nasty Southern gentlemen (Washington, Jefferson, etal.) were cavalier about it. In fact, they were opposed, and struggled with the conundrum of how to rid the U.S. of slavery without producing myriad other problems. What to do, for instance, with four million unemployed, illiterate blacks with few survival skills and nothing to sustain them if they were suddenly “free”? (overlooking homeless!) Should slave owners be compensated; if so, by whom? Could the two races live together compatibly? Emigration was a consideration but should it be voluntary or mandatory?

Slavery was a centuries old wrong which could not easily be righted. Numerous tangents are considered. He enquires into the rather bizarre fact that moral questions about slavery are almost exclusively Western moral questions, yet the West is always the one savaged because of their history of slavery. Non-Western societies had (and still have) little moral concern about slavery. He emphasizes that it was Western imperialism which suppressed slavery around the world.

“History vs. Visions” reminds of A Conflict of Visions, The Search for Cosmic Justice, and The Vision of the Anointed, in which he masterfully refutes the prevailing liberal myths. Things are not always as they seem, nor can they always be as you wish, and “visions” usually defy the facts on the ground. There are those omnipresent little problems, such as human nature . . . and reality; things which the liberally inclined always overlook whilst fantasizing and fashioning the “ideal society” of their visions.

Finally (best for last), the first chapter, “Black Rednecks and White Liberals” attacks the myth of black culture, demonstrating that what we now consider black culture is the cracker culture. From time immemorial it has been backward, dismissive of education, prone to violence, sexually permissive, improvident, drunken, reckless and totally lacking in entrepreneurship. If you doubt, or offended by these observations, read the book! He confirms this in spades!

What liberals wish to encourage and sustain in modern blacks is, in fact, indigenous white culture imported into the South from Europe, and which had existed for centuries before their migration. Even the terms “redneck” and “cracker” came over on the boat. “The disparities found between Southern whites and Northern whites in the past are today taken as proof of racial discrimination. [These disparities are now] found between the black and white populations of the country. [Some] have taken such disparities as signs of genetic deficiencies. Yet clearly neither racial discrimination nor racial inferiority can explain similar differences between whites in the North and the South in earlier centuries . . . which should at least raise questions about such explanations when applied to blacks of a later era who inherited the culture of white Southerners.”

The questions are not raised, of course, since they would challenge the liberal vision.

This is a fascinating tome and a great introduction to Thomas Sowell for those of you unfamiliar with genius of this man (who, by the way, is black and completely self-made.)

Posted by respeto at 12:03 PM

June 24, 2007

Blink

The power of thinking without thinking.
Malcolm Gladwell – ISBN 9780316010665
(author of Tipping Point, previously reviewed.)

This is a particularly fascinating book; better, I think, and most certainly different from Tipping Point.

As the title suggests, he elaborates upon the things we do--in the blink of an eye, so to speak--which are based upon experience rather than thought. He calls those based upon thoughtful consideration paralysis by analysis. As a consequence of too much data we often confuse information with understanding. “The key to good decision making is not knowledge [or data] . . . but understanding.” There are times when haste does not make waste, when snap judgments and first impressions can offer a better means of making sense of the world. Judgment is often better than cautious deliberation. There are times when we demand an explanation when it really isn’t possible.

He reviews the activities of a brilliant General of the Marine Corps charged with leading the “Red Team” (always the adversary of the good guys on the “Blue Team.”) Ostensibly staged as a war game based in the Middle East, he went way outside what was expected by the Blue’s, and walloped them severely. As in an episode of JAG, and Kelsey Grammer’s movie spoof, those in command of the Pentagon demanded that the game be rerun because the Red leader hadn’t “played by the rules” (as if there are rules in war.) That it is precisely what got us into trouble in the Middle East!!!

For example: When you study a chessboard there isn’t anything you can’t see . . . except what the other guy is thinking! “More and more, commanders want to know everything and they get imprisoned by that idea. . . . [But] you can never know everything.” As in Gulliver’s Travels, the big guy gets tied down by the little rules and the little guys run around doing exactly as they wish.

I have had similar experiences in medicine, wherein too much information is brought to bear upon a problem. Confusion, indecision and error result. Frequently the true expert notices not just what is happening, but more importantly what is not! Been there too. Indeed, I was once derisively accused (I was flattered!) by an academic colleague of “being the most right, the most often, with the least amount of knowledge.” I was pleased to emphasize that being right is what matters.

He demonstrates that the true expert at reading body language can often determine things the subject is trying to hide. This section of the book is particularly absorbing. The expression on your face is more than a signal of what’s going in your mind. It is what is going on in your mind, and completely involuntary. “Whenever we experience a basic emotion, that emotion is automatically expressed by the muscles of the face.”

He reviews what is known of autism, noting that such individuals have no insight into themselves or others. To them everything is an object. In times of crisis normal people are programmed to objectify risks. He terms this “temporary autism,” and gives examples of how it works.

A truly brilliant discussion follows, using the Dialo case, in which the NYPD officers shot and killed an innocent black immigrant. He describes what a “heightened awareness of threat” does to the mind, which focuses only on those things necessary for survival and shuts out all other input. It fosters survival, but is dangerous if permitted to apply in situations where it shouldn’t. One can learn to avoid such errant, dangerous behavior.

He then reviews symphony orchestral auditions. In recent years the performer sits behind a screen, forcing the auditors to listen to the performance. Before this was instituted, fewer than 5% of orchestra members were women. (Male musicians just knew that women simply weren’t as good.) Now the distribution is 50/50!

I love his observations in that regard: Before screens, what might we have proposed for women in the musical world?

“I think we would have talked about awareness programs for gender bias, and how to teach female musicians to be more assertive in making the case for their own ability. We would have had long discussions about social discrimination. . . . Our suggestions for change would have been fairly global and long term. . . . [and] at the end of long days of meetings we would have thrown up our hands and said that we would just have to wait until the current generation of [irredeemably bigoted] maestros . . . was replaced by a younger and more open-minded set of conductors.” Instead, the context was examined; screens were put up and the problem was resolved then and there. Philosophy free!

In summary he observes that following the acquisitions of a lifetime of learning we acquire judgment. With the knowledge accrued, and knowing how the mind works, we should then be able to act responsibly. He heartily recommends that we do so.

If we combined all of the little things we know, making appropriate changes based upon knowledge and insight, the world would be different and better. He has a point, and makes it very well.

Posted by respeto at 10:07 AM

May 27, 2007

Blood and Fire

Gettysburg
Joshua L. Chamberlain – ISBN – 1879664178

This little monograph (29 narrative pp and another 30 pp of pictures and copies of Chamberlain’s notes) is one of the best little-known “secrets” on the Civil War. For those who require a reminder, Chamberlain was the professor become soldier whose regiment, the 20th Maine, shouldered the defense of Little Round Top on the second day of the battle at Gettysburg.

He achieved the rank of General, was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for his activities there, and was at Appomattox to accept the surrender of the Southern Army under Robert E. Lee, in which situation he was both heroic and noble, having his troops salute those surrendering, while his band play “Dixie.” He encouraged the “Rebs” to maintain their dignity in defeat . . . and permitted it!

This is his description of the brilliant battle for Little Round Top, the indisputable turning point of the Civil War.

It is brief, gripping—indeed exhilarating—and well worth the few minutes it takes to read. For the buffs there is no need to describe the battle, though it is worth reading in the first person, and for the uninitiated it is a brief and definitive treatise on the subject. As such it ought to be read.

Read it!

Posted by respeto at 12:07 PM

December 24, 2008

Boomsday

Christopher Buckley – ISBN – 9780446697972

As usual Buckley’s plot is zany and contorted, with more curves than a slalom course. But, also as usual, he is entertaining and savagely funny. This time he skewers politicians—justly deserved—with the primary plot involving the need to correct the bankrupting deficiencies of the Social Security system.

The principal protagonist is a smart, beautiful young woman who, after an early life of academic excellence is accepted into an Ivy League school, only to find that her father has raided her college fund “for business.” She is compelled to join the Army so that she can eventually get her education.

The other is a filthy rich “trust baby,” Ivy educated, and a cosmopolitan senator who has bought his seat, which he uses to attract attention and broads, with the ultimate goal of becoming president. To this end he manipulates every situation offered.

On a visit to “the troops” in the Middle-East, while hitting on the afore mentioned soldier, he manages to drive them into a mine-field where he totals a humvee he is not supposed to be driving, injures his companion and loses his leg in the explosion. She is “invited to resign” rather than face court martial, while the senator becomes a hero because of his sacrifice; this he plays to advantage.

He uses his influence to get her a job with a lobbyist, and she becomes an advocate for many things, principal amongst them the dissolution—or at least the alteration--of Social Security. Along the way she gives up further education as she begins an affair with him. So wends the tale, thru lobbying, politics, intrigue, skullduggery, manipulation, sabotage and the extramarital affair.

The only caveat I offer regarding this particular novel is that he seems unable to end the tome cleanly and interestingly as he usually does. In the final lines he simply “wraps it up” with an explanation of what happens to everyone. Not as satisfying as his usual fare, but funny nonetheless.

Posted by respeto at 2:50 PM

April 5, 2005

Born Fighting

(How the Scots-Irish shaped America)
James Webb – ISBN 0767916883

This is another fascinating, instructive and well written book. Webb is an author, filmmaker, journalist, professor, decorated Marine, former Ass’t Sec’y of Defense . . . and as you might surmise, a Scots-Irishman.

As much as I think I know about history, from Albion’s Seed to How the Irish Saved Civilization, I was unaware of just how much the Scots-Irish have defined what we all (or most all) think of ourselves as we pronounce ourselves “Americans.”

Beginning as “barbaric” Celts, driven from Europe by the Romans into what is now Scotland, then being driven about by the English--and finally out--to Ireland from whence they immigrated to what now is the U.S., they authored and represent a lot of what we honor in America—at least those of us who still love and honor America: dedication to the obligations of duty, an unforgiving code of honor and loyalty to country, all wrought within their native Celtic culture and refined by their acquired Christian beliefs.

These noble folk were encouraged to immigrate first into Northern Ireland, where they were detested by the Catholics (authoring the still raging conundrum there), and thereafter into the hills bordering the coastal settlements of “English civilization” in America. They claimed lands no Englishman wanted, and served as a buffer between the original settlers and the (understandably hostile) Indian population. Fiercely independent and deeply religious, they bent their knee and bowed their head to no one but their God. Unacceptable to settled America--the elites had and wanted little contact with this culture--they preferred to be isolated amongst their own kind (think Daniel Boone and Davy Crockett—and whilst thinking thus “remember the Alamo!”)

With a broad brush, often exquisitely detailing with one containing but a single hair, Webb paints the picture of the defining attitudes and values of the military and, more, of working-class America, including the “peculiarly populist form of American democracy itself.” It’s all here, elaborately spelled out, including brief discussions of the dozen or so presidents from this stock: notably Andrew Jackson, U.S. Grant and Ronald Reagan; and fierce warriors of the same breed: William Wallace (the “Braveheart” of history) and George Patton for those of us aware of the 20th century. Wallace, Jackson, Grant and Patton all earned renown by winning the allegiance of their countrymen thru their insistence upon unquestioned equality, loyalty and their leadership and performance on the battlefield.

The Abbot of Arbroath, Robert the Bruce’s chancellor, once wrote:
“For so long as one hundred of us shall remain alive we shall never in any wise consent to submit to the rule of the English. For it is not for glory we fight, for riches, or for honors, but for freedom alone, which no good man loses but with his life.”

No review can do this book justice. To be sure there are and have been other notable personages, including Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, etal; Lincoln and FDR as well . . . and then there are those magnificent Celts who have done so much to forge the nobility and the steel that is America. Read it and you will better understand the origins of the humility of our seriously religious population, and the fierce American independence we cherish. It is a riveting and exciting book to read; one well worth the time. I have reread it already!

Posted by respeto at 10:59 AM

July 11, 2007

Brunellieschi’s Dome

How a Renaissance Genius Reinvented Architecture
Ross King – ISBN – 9780142000151

This is an extremely interesting book of which I would have been unaware had it not been given to me by a customer and friend.

Filipo Brunellieschi was a 15th century goldsmith who invigorated architecture and almost single-handedly brought architects from the status of mere day-laborer to the level of respected artisan; indeed, the only European architect of his time to gain fame in his own lifetime, which fame has endured to the present because of his incredible genius. It was this recognition which permitted subsequent architects such as Christopher Wren to be honorable. Along the way this capomaestro rediscovered Roman mortar and recreated lost building techniques, while adding a host of his own creations to the craft.

The dome of the Florentine cathedral Santa Maria del Fiore (which you’ve seen if you saw the movie Room with a View) is the source of that fame, and he alone is honored by burial in that cathedral along with its Patron Saint Zenobius. In fact, his grave was lost beneath the paved central aisle for over 500 years until rediscovered in 1972.

A dreamer drew an idealized sketch for this almost impossible octagonal dome, and against all odds Filipo was able to render it buildable, and built it, taking over 25 years to do so, dying only a year or so before the cupola was completed.

In so doing he constructed the largest masonry dome of its--and all--time. It remains the largest free-span dome in the world. Only with modernity, new building materials, techniques and equipment has it been surpassed by the superdome(s). It is larger than St. Peter’s in Rome, larger than the Capitol Building in D.C.: a radius of 70+ feet at its base and but 10 ft. at its apex. At the top the angle is 30 degrees from perpendicular, despite which it was built without centering (scaffolding to support it while under construction.) This alone was ingenious . . . and necessary because it would have been all but impossible to construct scaffolding that high. Overall this was an achievement at least equal to Roebling’s Brooklyn Bridge four centuries later, and at a time when far less was known about engineering.

When an elderly Michelangelo was designing the dome for St. Peters he carefully studied Filipo’s work and noted that he could equal this dome but never surpass it. Most don’t feel he even equaled it: it is narrower and, “arguably, much less graceful and striking” (there, Mike, take that!), while Wren’s St. Paul’s Cathedral in London is smaller in diameter by 30 feet.

The base of Brunelleschi’s dome was 180 ft. off of the ground and over 300 ft. to its apex, with a 30 ft. cupola (also known as a lantern.) The dome is estimated to have taken 37,000 tons of stone, brick and mortar, and the lantern itself adds another 500 tons. Atop all of that was a huge bronze ball with a Christian cross. He had to revolutionize architecture to accomplish this. Furthermore, he had to design and build wooden machine cranes 300 ft. high to get the materials to the height needed; machines precise enough to seat them exactlywhere needed. Worse, this had to be done when navies were going abroad to find 120 ft. logs to be used as masts.

Masons had to climb 42 stories of steps just to get to work at the top! (Must have been in great shape.) And they took their lunch along with them in the morning—no great surprise there.

He forgot nothing. As he was building the dome he left iron rings in the mortar so that the fresco which he knew would follow had moorings for the scaffolding which would be required.

King laces the entire narrative with anecdotes about the builder and his friends (and enemies) which make the story more interesting, and he emphasizes that the height and openness of this magnificent dome were critical to the mathematical studies made by another sage in pursuit if improving the accuracy of determinations of longitude and latitude which made sailing in the open ocean safe, and indirectly resulted in the discovery of the (admittedly not lost) new world only a few years later.

For those with an interest in art or architecture this is a wonderful read.

Posted by respeto at 1:17 PM

July 10, 2010

Building a Bridge to the 18th Century

How the Past Can Improve Our Future
Neil Postman - ISBN - 9780375701276

Neil Postman was a humanist, professor, media theorist, cultural critic and dynamic author for over forty years, and most famous for Amusing Ourselves to Death--a critique of television. But he also wrote numerous other tracts, my favorite of which is here introduced. He adamantly observed in Technopoly, that "new technology can never substitute for human values." His most dynamic reinforcement of this belief, however, is in his study of how and why the 18th century was the pinnacle of achievement, and how it might guide us in the 21st century if we would but explore, understand and implement the wisdom of those who made it so.

He is certainly one of the most astute and knowledgeable social commentators of this or any era. I submit the following quotations from this man as evidence, and an entrée into this informative little tome:

• "We live in a world of too much information, confusing specialized knowledge and far too little wisdom."
• "Knowledge is organized information. Wisdom is the capacity to know what body of knowledge is relevant to the solution of significant problems."
• "Any fool can have an opinion; to know what one needs to know to have an opinion is wisdom."
• "The problem to be solved in the 21st century is how to transform information into knowledge, and knowledge into wisdom."

This is an example of my re-exploration of a book which I devoured a decade ago. I read it again recently, and recommend it highly. Brilliant and incisive, he is a critic in the best sense, and not one to grouse so much as to describe what he sees and convince the reader that it is so. I believe that his writings--all of them--should be required reading for everyone at the college level, and certainly by everyone who feels compelled to pursue any activity within the public sphere. I often treat myself to such a volume from the past which I remember as fulsome, if not why; to re-explore how my attitudes have been molded in ways which I cannot specifically recall. If you have read this tome in the past I encourage you to do so again. If you haven't, I'd like to introduce you to one of the most important people of the 20th century . . . in my never-to-be-humble opinion.

His opening quote is subtly savage: "Soon we will know everything the 18th century didn't know, and nothing it did, and it will be hard to live with us." We will, he emphasizes, overwhelm 18th century knowledge with new information about which we shall crow in insolent delight as we overlook the proverbial forest because the damned trees are in our way. On nearly every page is an observation, theorem, quote or statement sufficient to produce a gasp from the reader. One is often thunderstruck into silence and reflection.

History's purpose is "to remind us about our better dreams." It was in the 18th century we discovered a humane course into the future; "ideas [to be carried] with confidence and dignity across the bridge to the 21st century." Enlightenment: the provocateur of ideas of how to approach reality and to rediscover truth--even that there is such a thing as truth. He suggests not that we return to that century, but that we study and use it for "what it is worth and for all that it is worth." Adopt its principles, not its details.

To be sure, during the period known as the enlightenment--the age of reason--we were (especially early on) still burning witches, using torture, embracing slavery, oppressing women and benefiting from child labor . . . BUT the very idea that these things were wrong emerged during this period as well.

Contrary to received modern wisdom the rationalists of the era were not God haters; rather, they rightfully mistrusted organized religion because of what the churches had become. They stripped the world of superstition and were unafraid of the articles taught to be alien and dangerous. Christianity, they believed, offered valuable lessons, raised serious moral questions and delivered most of the answers! In this they represented nothing less than "radical reorientation" in the way we thought about the world. Still, they maintained their humanity. Shelley commented that "reason, unaided and untempered by poetic insight and humane feeling, turns ugly and dangerous."

We have become a people without Gods to serve . . . hollow, empty and anxious. We distrust language, are uncertain about the most obvious features of reality, and lack conviction as we doubt the existence of truth. We are so utterly lost that we lack even the suspicion that we might have gone astray. His attack on 20th century hacks who dissemble is scholarly but unrelenting and almost vicious as he quotes some humorous and wonderfully imbecilic paragraphs to make his point. He is not one to suffer fools, gladly or otherwise. In exposing modern deconstructionism for what it really is, Postman opines that, "Derrida, in defending deMan, is saying that telling the truth should be avoided because it is time consuming."

It is a thought provoking read; especially so in this current period of radical change . . . without much apparent hope, in my opinion. I encourage you to do so ASAP.

You're welcome !!

Posted by Curmudgeon at 3:46 PM

March 30, 2005

Carnage and Culture

Carnage & Culture
Victor Davis Hanson
ISBN – 0-385-72038-6 $16.00 (paperback)

Here, in a brilliant exposition of the inherent superiority of Western armies—and, not incidentally, the superiority of Western culture--you will read one of the best such discussions in print. The book is one which ought to be required reading of anyone interested in understanding survival in this, or any other world. In addition, those on the left might better appreciate our cultural heritage and be more active in protecting it.

Popular mythology has it that cultural--including military--dynamism is dictated by the availability of natural resources, not culture, per se. Were this so, the Aztecs, amongst others, who sat upon an entire subcontinent replete the raw materials of gunpowder, bronze and steel should have explored and conquered the world. It was the lack of a systematic approach to abstract learning and science, not the dearth of ores or minerals that doomed them. The Aztecs, indeed, were even without wheel-based vehicles and tools (except, interestingly, for toys).

Societies have always engaged in activity designed to improve their lives and to enhance warfare, but the Greeks were the first to debate knowledge in the abstract, and to devise ways of adapting theoretical breakthroughs for practical use. In total, these capacities explain the dominance of the West.

While courage on the battlefield is a human characteristic, the ability to craft weapons through mass production to offset such bravery is a cultural phenomenon. Since the Greeks, Western captains have usually annihilated their numerically superior foes, not because their soldiers were necessarily better, but because their traditions of free inquiry, rationalism, and science were. Further, the (cultural) value given the life of every Western soldier since Greece, is unheard of in the non-Western world.

Muslim intellectuals and mullahs did (and do) not see war as innately wrong. There is nothing at all comparable to the Western interest in pacifism or “just war” theory. No Islamic treatise or philosophy suggests that war itself is somehow intrinsically evil and ought to be waged under the narrowest moral circumstances. In a word, Islam is not a religion of peace. It is, and has always been a religion of war and conquest. Despite near constant internecine wars in Europe after the fall of Rome, there was unified Western resistance to Muslim incursions during their attempt at military hegemony.

Likewise, the Samurai traditions of the Japanese rendered them largely unable to wage battles of total annihilation and relentless war. Or even to understand it. They killed thousands on the battlefield and were willing to sacrifice even more of their own, but their ferocity was not the same as the Western ability to wage continual and sustained encounter until one was victorious or annihilated. In Japanese, as in the Islamic way of war, surprise, sudden attack, battlefield calamity and disgrace are presumed to force an opponent to the bargaining table to discuss concessions. (e.g.: the Pearl Harbor attack left America defenseless but they failed to follow thru. After the initial assault they promptly sailed home, leaving American to recover.)

Since Xerxe’s invasion of Greece, it has been the custom of non-Western armies to assume that democracies are timid. They fail to understand that, while slow to anger, the West, when forced into battle, fights wars of total annihilation. (Wiping the Melians off the map of the Aegean, sowing the ground of Carthage with salt, turning Ireland into a wasteland, leveling Jerusalem before reoccupying it, driving an entire culture of Native Americans onto reservations, firebombing Dresden, Berlin and Tokyo, and atomizing Hiroshima and Nagasaki are but a few examples.)

The root cause of Japan’s defeat lay deep in the Japanese national character: its irrationality and impulsiveness. The American faith in individuality rather than group consensus, spontaneity rather than rote, and informality rather than hierarchy provided decisive in Midway and thereafter. For example, after the Yorktown was disabled at Midway Admiral Fletcher transferred to Admiral Spruance key decisions for launching the fleet’s planes--an act of selfless integrity and patriotism in action. By contrast, the exalted warlord Yamamoto drew up his formal plan, ordered his subordinates to follow it, and then in relative isolation and silence cruised out to battle in the huge, ostentations and mostly irrelevant Yamato.

Western “pacifism”, and doubt about its cultural superiority make us unduly and unwisely sensitive. The great, unsung tragedy of the antiwar movement(s) have been its own lack of credibility and fairness, and a fondness for hyperbole. It impairs credible combat. “No American army in 1944 would have fought the Germans in France without permission to cross the Rhine or to bomb Berlin at will. Japan would have won WWII had the U.S. simply fought in the jungles and occupied towns of the Japanese empire, promising not to bomb Tokyo, mine its harbors, attack its sanctuaries, or invade its native possessions, while journalists and critics visited Tokyo and broadcast to American troops from Japanese radio stations. Neither Truman nor Roosevelt would have offered to negotiate with Hitler or Stalin after the successful Normandy landings or the devastating bombing campaign over Tokyo. GIs in WWII were killed in pursuit of victory, not in order to defeat or to pressure totalitarian governments to discuss armistice.” In war it is insane not to employ the full extent of one’s military power or to guarantee to the enemy that there are sanctuaries for retreat, targets that are off limits, and a willingness to cease operations at any time, even for the pretext of negotiations “to begin.”

“The freedom among citizens to criticize wars and warriors openly and profligately has no pedigree outside the European tradition. . . . Western civilization has given mankind the only economic system that works, a rationalist tradition that alone allows us material and technological progress, the sole political structure that ensures the freedom of the individual, a system of ethics and a religion that brings out the best in humankind—and the most lethal practice of arms conceivable.

“Let us hope that we at last understand this legacy. It is a weighty and sometimes ominous heritage that we must neither deny nor feel ashamed about—but insist that our deadly manner of war serves, rather than buries, our civilization.”

Posted by respeto at 2:22 PM

November 17, 2006

Cedar Key, Florida

An Illustrated History
Kevin M. McCarthy (Professor Emeritus, UF)

At last, a comprehensive history of Cedar Key. And well done, too. It is much better than any prior rendering, and a treasure trove of information. Overall it is detailed, if brief, and a “spot-on” history of the city and its environs, which has been very well researched. Other publications date from the early 1990’s, and while interesting they are considerably more limited than this new book.

The 280 pictures are wonderfully revealing, interesting in themselves and complimentary to the narrative. One is especially impressed by photos from Dock Street in the 1970’s, which demonstrate considerable development—and improvement—without becoming “South Florida” (or central, coastal or north!) The character of this tiny community has been preserved and enhanced, though its natives might not wholly agree. Change is difficult and poorly accepted, if nonetheless necessary.

One vignette dealing with the high school basketball championship won in 1965 by this small group of dedicated athletes was déjà vu for me, inasmuch as a tiny town in Illinois performed a similar feat at about the same time—a “dream team” from a school with but nine boys won The Sweet Sixteen, with the whole state rooting for them. I trust the State of Florida exhibited such enthusiasm.

The mention of the impact of Title IX upon sports at Cedar Key High School (which almost had to close!) was of interest to me as well, since I have opposed this particular bit of Government interference since its inception. That and the dedication of its alums when a fire again threatened the existence of CKHS, which also saved it from oblivion.

The highlighted comments of Lindon Lindsey, a native, add further. Since I introduced the two gentlemen I was particularly gratified that Lindon was so featured.

The only thing I found trying was the choppy read of the material, based upon the fact that the author chose to break the history down decade by decade, necessitating early references to “more on that later,” later references to “see page x for information,” and seemingly unnecessary repetitiveness as if expecting that one would read only small sections. (I can suggest no alternative approach and probably ought not complain, but I am a curmudgeon, after all.) There is also one mislabeled picture, but there is always an oversight.

Throughout its history Cedar Key as been repeatedly threatened with non-existence . . . annihilation, which has engendered a stoic “resiliency, adaptation to changing times, survival.” But the town is still here.

This is a fine addition to the history of small towns, seldom written because there is no market and the author has to undertake the task simply for love. Congratulations are due Dr. McCarthy for a great service to our community, and for providing this information to current residents and myriad, inquisitive visitors.

Well worth the read!

Posted by respeto at 3:52 PM

January 25, 2010

Churchill's Hour

A Novel of Defiance
Michael Dobbs - ISBN - 978-1402213922

Dobbs is nothing if not a fantastic writer. This is a novel, but only just. It is historic fiction at its best, and covers one of the darkest periods in 20th century history. Another reviewer described it as "Churchill as nature intended: Dobbs captures his famous subject with artistry. With every stroke of his brush, he etches the character deeper into the memory. It is beautifully done." Hard to improve upon that. I've read a lot about Churchill, but this gives one a real understanding of what motivated this historic giant.

The early chapters are about Winston's desperate attempts to rouse the Parliament to face Hitler, as he knew must be done. Later he was elected Prime Minister, whereafter he exercised comparable effort to motivate the U.S. to enter the conflict.

Along the way he remarkably observed to his daughter-in-law that "after the war is over, whoever holds the reins of authority, it will not be Britain." It would be a new world; a young world. Britain's days in command would be over. Pamela asks whom he would choose. His answer was "America." Better them than Russia or Germany. "Even though at times they [Americans] totter around like blind men . . . [and] they don't understand that all men are not as they are. Even when they stumble over the truth they pick themselves up and carry on as if nothing has happened." And they are optimists, believing they can achieve whatever they decide to undertake.

Dobbs explores the depths of Germany's depravity, with its declaration of war against their ally, Stalin. He describes the terror and destruction of England--especially London--by the Nazi bombers as he chronicles the stoic heroism of the English. All of this in real life terms with clarity that helps the uninitiated understand just how awful war is, and how it must be endured when necessary. Churchill, without doubt, was responsible for the sustenance which kept Britain and its people sane and engaged. The sacrifices were numerous, challenging and costly.

Aware that he must succeed, Winston posited that had he failed at Trafalgar, Nelson would have been tried and convicted. His future was no less at risk. So he involved Averill Harriman, sent by Roosevelt to work with him in the effort. Harriman became caught up in an affair with Pamela (who later became Pamela Harriman, you might recall) and Winston had the dilemma of using both, or perhaps losing the war. How much, and what would he sacrifice to save his country?

The "fiction" in this passionate work involves Dobbs' conjecture over events in life which go unmentioned; emotions, inspirations and ambitions; the "inner events" which motivate us all. It is in this area that Dobbs shines, writing a gripping narrative of events, conversations and encounters equal to those in Killer Angels, and most anything that Bernard Cornwell writes.

And it is fantastic history as well; far better than reading dry history books about the war. Enjoy!

Posted by Curmudgeon at 1:38 PM

June 29, 2005

Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality?

Thomas Sowell – 0-688062695

This book is no less relevant today than when first published, and in some ways a little more prophetic than it was at the time.

Sowell emphasizes the history and explores the intentions of the original civil rights efforts, and what has transpired in the interval, with leaders of the movement now going off tangentially in the attempt to stay relevant, and in power. Written 20 years after the original Civil Rights Act (enacted-1964) he discusses in detail what was accomplished, and that civil rights, per se, have been achieved, i.e.: equality under the law is an established fact, and in large measure “equal opportunity” is a reality. He reminds that “while the Constitution prohibits segregation, it does not require integration.”

“[H]onest convictions of the initial civil rights advocates meant less in the long run than the implicit logic of the civil rights vision as it unfolded over time.” The altogether predictable offshoots of affirmative action: set asides, quotas, school bussing, and later the inclusion of other minorities into the ideation of civil rights—not excluding women, who aren’t even a minority—have entirely distorted the picture.

“[unasked is] whether assumptions are to be accepted for their plausibility and their conformity to a larger social vision, or whether even the most plausible and satisfying assumptions must nevertheless be forced to confront actual facts.” He discusses at some length Brown and Green in which the Supremes, for laudable reasons, so distorted logic and fact, that they were, in truth, quite erratic and inadvertently laid the groundwork for a number of subsequent decisions with which we now must all live.

Being a highly respected and productive economist, philosopher and author, he underpins all of his arguments with solid facts, often offering a global dimension. He points out the intentional imprecision of the agendized cognoscenti, and their ignorance and/or distortion of widely studied areas of human endeavor and interaction, while abominable, are generally accepted as fact. There is absolutely no corroboration of any of these theories, and some outcomes are inversely related to intentions. Those who benefit from being in charge of the civil rights activities, with the help of the press, prevail despite the reality that little of what they say is true . . . it is presumed “common knowledge.” Incorrect, and undebatably not knowledge, but accepted nonetheless. The powers that be simply have too much at stake to alter their approach, and they have nothing to do if civil rights, as it should, becomes a non-issue, hence searching for decisive factors in advancement is buried by “common belief.”

His wide-ranging experience and knowledge of planetary migrations and cultural history and attitudes assists in his explanations because he is able to decant into the discussion, for example, facts about the Chinese predominance in certain fields in all countries and Japanese dominance in others. He notes Jewish successes and those of Blacks as well . . . and he draws from information which separates the performance and successes of West Indian Blacks (of whom he is one) from American Blacks. “Cultural differences are real, and cannot be talked away by using pejorative terms such as ‘stereotypes’ or ‘racism.’”

Emphasizing the fact that none of his arguments necessarily disprove the existence of discrimination--not his purpose—he asks whether or not the statistical differences offered by the ideologues add up to discrimination, or “whether there are innumerable demographic, cultural and geographic differences that make [these] crucial automatic inference[s] highly questionable.” He also expounds upon the fact that within the minority communities it is the advantaged who have benefited from affirmative action, and the disadvantaged who are further disadvantaged, thus serving as a negative rather than a positive effect.

Of great interest is the discussion--and factual corroboration--that trends of normalization and inclusion of blacks long predate any of the civil rights activities of the 60’s, in nearly all parameters from education to employment. Significantly he observes that in South Africa apartheid had to be enforced by law to prevent whites from employing blacks.

Overall this is a quick, very informative and thought-provoking read and I recommend it highly. This review is based upon my third re-reading of this tract over 20 years.

Posted by respeto at 1:27 PM

July 25, 2008

Cod

A Biography of the Fish that Changed the World
Mark Kurlansky – ISBN – 9780140275018

As usual, this elegantly crafted little treatise--on a very important fish--is readable, entertaining, and chock-a-block full of information and interesting asides, all of which are Kurlansky hallmarks. It marries the politics and economics of the subject, and is one of his earliest offerings (1998); likely the book which “put him on the map.” He has become one of my favorite writers. I’m working my way thru all of his books--having already reviewed on this site Salt, The Big Oyster, 1968. You may soon hear about some of t’others.

As with the narratives on salt and oysters, he travels the world to explain the importance of life altering/sustaining products. Into this maritime history he weaves facts about feeding Caribbean slaves, and the Yankee trading of their salted fish for the Caribbean molasses, from which New Englanders brewed the preferred drink of the era: rum. He slips in an aside about how George Washington, in his earliest campaign for the House of Burgesses, supplied gallons of rum and rum punch to a mere handful of voters. Along with this factoid he emphasizes that the hectoring by the British Crown--by forbidding the trade in molasses--one might conclude that the Brits were intentionally “trying to rally Massachusetts around its radicals.” The revolution wasn’t over just the Tea Tax, of which we were taught in grammar school (at least those of us who were actually educated in our government schools.)

He discloses the little known fact that Basque fishermen were fishing their own secret sea (off-shore Canada) for over 400 years before Columbus “found” America, suggesting that Columbus may have known more about where he was going than is commonly supposed. He elaborates on the dangers of fishing, leaning heavily on the history of Gloucester, MA (not incidentally the subject of his recent book, The Last Fish Tale, as previously he wrote The Basque History of the World.

Discussions of the technology of fishing are comprehensive, as he explains that these “improvements” have resulted in the disaster which over-fishing has become in the 20th century. Despite “expert” determinations that nature’s bounty could not be overcome, we’ve succeeded. While we wish to see nature and evolution as separate from human activities, the natural world encompasses all.

Brits have determined that 70% of species in their waters are over-fished. American Cod are all but extinct (at least in commercial quantities) and “substitute” species are now being harvested with abandon. We are encouraging a host of not-so-great, but more adaptable, species as nature “doggedly searches for something which works; but as the cockroach demonstrates, what works best in nature does not always appeal to us.”

As well, we are approaching a time when there will be little “natural food” available for consumption. Much of the fish we now consume is farmed as, increasingly, are shellfish. Cow hunting became ranching, as ranching evolved into feed-lot production for cattle, as well as pork and fowl.

“There is a big difference” he observes, “between living in a society that hunts whales, and living in one that views them. Nature is being reduced to precious demonstrations for entertainment and education. . . . Are we headed for a world where nothing is left of nature but parks?” Having over hunted mammals, we preserve wild ones as best we can, as we farm our food. While it is harder to kill off fish than mammals, after a millennium of hunting the Atlantic cod, we’ve done it.

Beyond the environmental issues, the book is a wonderful read from the standpoint of history and adventure. As he always does, Kurlansky the gourmand provides us with numerous recipes, historic and modern, for this tasty fish . . . should you be able to find one to cook.

Posted by respeto at 12:05 PM

April 1, 2006

Collapse

(how societies choose to fail or succeed)
Jared Diamond – ISBN 0143036556

This book is brilliant. Collapse is a comprehensive, provocative, well researched book, and very readable. Diamond reviews carefully selected cultures which best make the points he wishes to emphasize. Included are the ancient Mayans, the Greenland and Iceland Norse (and Inuits), the Easter and several other Pacific Islanders, the American desert southwest, and perhaps more interestingly, contemporary Australia, China and the Southeast Asians who are moving toward first world culture. Along the way he includes Rwanda, Hispaniola, and others as examples of specific problems.

Unlike Guns, Germs & Steel, he barely reveals his liberal, anti-capitalist, religion avoiding assessments wherein culture and nurture were largely eliminated from consideration. Collapse simply avoids these subjects: more easily done than in “Guns.”

He reviews in appropriate detail the failures and successes as measured by societal survival, and is specific about the causes of same, using voluminous data, much of it recently mined from historic and archaeologic materials, as well as in depth interviews on personal visits, which he has conducted over decades.

From deforestation to salinization of soils, thru over fishing and farming to ritual excesses he details the problems as best they are interpretable. He explores population density, population controls, necessary enlightenment as regards resource management and generally what it will take to achieve sustainability. In this he does a masterfully balanced job of presenting the facts, and in so doing is very persuasive as regards the difficulties, and is generally hopeful about the future.

I found his wide-ranging discussion of contemporary Australia to be of particular interest because it is contemporary, and Western as well. While time and space prevent encyclopedic dialogue, he does detail the environmental calamity which is modern Australia, and masterfully uses it as an example of its cultural values being opposed to environmental reality. In this, Australia is “the canary in the mine shaft” for Western culture, and in no small measure the emerging 1st world cultures of India, China and the Asian “tigers.”

Primitive “slash and burn” cultures, along with modern “rape and run” proclivities are appropriately discussed. Surprisingly, he emphasizes that only the people (meaning all of us) can exert controls and demand the change of attitudes. In this he is particular emphatic. Simply bemoaning the realities of modern environmental catastrophes is not enough. He gives numerous and explicit examples of how an environmental consciousness can be imposed upon industry thru public activism. What needs be done is to become informed and involved in these activities.

While one can’t materially influence the local lumber yard regarding poor harvesting and replenishing techniques, the “Big Guys”--Home Depot and Lowe’s--can be pressured into insisting that they will not market products cultivated in environmentally unfriendly ways. Whereas tuna fishermen formerly noted that it wasn’t possible to deliver the product without killing turtles, dolphins, and myriad other fish species, it is now established that they can and must, or “we” won’t buy their product. And so it goes with oil, coal, and increasingly with metals, by influencing corporations like DuPont. While not specifically mining the metals, DuPont provides them to industry and can ill afford to be tarred by the bad reputation of the “hard mining” industries.

People can make a difference. They must! Indeed it is the only practical answer. Interestingly, while discussing these factors he never uses the term “market forces,” presumably because it is a capitalist term. Capitalism works. The problem with it is selected “capitalists” (Ken Lay and his ilk come to mind.) They must be hoist on their own petard, avoided and/or disciplined by the market (and the courts.) Even Diamond disallows government as the answer . . . thus leaving only the market.

Churchill once observed: Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others. It is clear to me, if not to Diamond, that so it is with Capitalism. Hernando DeSoto stated that it is the only system capable of “providing us with the tools required to create massive surplus value.” Without that massive surplus one cannot hope to address environmental concerns, human welfare, and all the rest, not excluding human survival.

People need to get involved. The future is in our hands. With that I can agree!

Posted by respeto at 4:11 PM

February 3, 2008

Cool It !

The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide to Global Warming
Bjorn Lomborg - ISBN – 9780307266927

A decade ago Lomborg authored his first “attack” on environmentalism gone amok. Inasmuch as he was one of the founders of Green Peace it carried considerable weight. Predictably, the environmental wackos savaged him mercilessly.

Amongst other things, as I recall, he observed that he had himself been preaching for several decades that the rainforests were being diminished by 5-10% annually. In flying over them at the time he was struck by the fact that despite the alleged 100-200% destruction, 95% remained. How, he posited, could this possibly be correct? How could “they” have been so wrong? This began his quest, and I recommend reading the end result: his treatise on the subject, published as The Skeptical Environmentalist.

He returns now with a similarly bold and brilliant dissection of the recommendations of the wackos. Again, he is being attacked by establishment figures including, but by no means limited to Al Gore; no great surprise there.

While he is an acolyte of the man made global warming hypothesis—with which I vigorously disagree, as is advised by the vast majority of experts who are real climatologists, not just PhD’s, JD’s, MD’s, BA’s and even musicians and academic dropouts—he makes numerous incisive observations and recommendations which deserve serious consideration. Amongst them, addressing the economics of such insane notions as Kyoto and Carbon Credits, he observes that if we are indeed concerned with the earth’s population, instead of just making political points, there are myriad undertakings which would be immediately, as well as ultimately more beneficial at vastly lower costs.

He demonstrates that:

• more people die from cold than heat - so is warming really so bad?

• past centuries have already accommodated temperature increases which exceed those (realistically) predicted for the next.

• planting vegetation, increasing reflectivity, and creating “water features” in urban environments would dramatically decrease temperatures in cities; e.g., Los Angeles would experience a reduction of mean temperature of five degrees F. by planting 11 million trees, re-roofing and repaving in lighter colors, for a one time cost of $1 billion. L.A. would then reap annual savings of $170 million in air-conditioning expenditures and $360 million in smog-reduction costs, not to mention the aesthetic benefits. Oh, yea . . . the temperature in the city of angels is predicted to increase just five degrees over the next century without Kyoto and Carbon Credits, at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars. Another oh, yea . . . it’ll happen anyway in spite of those programs!

• speaking of Kyoto, even the signatories haven’t even tried to accomplish what they promised. Rather, they pile up on the U.S. for not signing. It has “become the symbol of opposition to the United States!” The U.S. isn’t trying (nya-na-nya-na-nya-na.) I submit that the whole program is “trying,” a term my mother used to use when I was behaving like a snot.

• the poor die from floods in hugely disproportionate numbers because they are too poor to protect themselves - so why not encourage global economic growth so there is money enough to manage the problems? Kyoto and Carbon Credits will destroy the world’s economies.

• we have dealt with the addition of 12 inches of ocean water in the past century. Even the worst (and demonstrably overstated) rise now predicted is less than that.

• the Arctic is melting a little, but has done so in the recent past and rebounded. Meanwhile the Antarctic is adding considerably more ice, more than balancing the Arctic losses.

• polar bears are not becoming extinct. In one small, easily accessible Canadian colony the numbers have been reduced by 300 in the past 20 years, but 40 years ago the colony was half the size it is now. If the suggested programs work, there will be an increase in population by 0.06 bears per annum . . . extraordinary when one considers that 49 bears are killed annually by legal hunters. Everywhere else the colonies have doubled, or more!

• storms and flooding are not becoming worse; just more destructive because of what we have built in the way. In Florida’s Dade and Broward counties alone, the population now exceeds the coastal population from Brownsville, TX to Washington, D.C. 75 years ago. More and more expensive stuff, more people, more damage. Imagine that!

• after Katrina an insurance company found that where loss prevention methods had been properly implemented the losses were remarkably few. No surprise there either, but the numbers are flabbergasting: In one area, at a cost of $2.5 million, $500 million in damages was prevented! The costs of Kyoto, to reduce damage by 0.5 %, would run into the trillions “whereas the protective measures would be multiple orders of magnitude lower.” The real lesson of Katrina is that New Orleans wasn’t ready. Whodathunkit? Ya mean it wasn’t Bush’s fault? Nah!

• by reducing the farm subsidies in rich countries we could massively increase farming in poor ones, not to mention saving “rich countries” billions annually . . . the better to afford to help the poor, maybe?

• while true that in sub-Saharan Africa the predicted warming will desertify additional land, increased rain in other areas will considerably increase crop yields by producing more productive land in other places. The problem is getting people to go move to where it rains.

• if Kyoto were implemented—estimated cost, $180 billion annually--it would reduce malnutrition by 2 million persons by 2080. By investing in improved soil health, water management and technological research, coupled with school meals and nutrient fortification that number could be increased to 229 million by 2015. The cost? $10 billion a year. Lunch Money !!

• Kyoto is anticipated to reduce death from malaria by 140,000 by 2110. At 1/60th the cost we can tackle malaria directly and avoid 85,000,000 million deaths . . . a lot sooner.

I could go on . . . but I’ll stop. Suffice it to say that he totally annihilates the wacko/Gore scenarios, one and all, showing that they are exaggerations on stilts . . . and steroids too.

As I have for years, he emphasizes that the wackos are bent on feeling good, not doing good. They may be well intentioned, but they put the em-PHA-sis on the wrong syl-LA-ble. For many it “lifts them out of the tedious bickering of distributional politics and instead allows them to position themselves as humanitarians and statesmen concerned with the grandest issue of the planet’s survival.” (that’s Lomborg’s quote, not mine.)

Fortunately, climate change is not an imminent planetary emergency that will bring down civilization. It is but one of many problems, and not even the most important. There are no short term solutions to this problem. We need support “across parties, continents and generations.” We must cease with “debilitating scares and create a sensible and unbiased dialogue” over goals, means, costs and benefits to this and other of the world’s challenges.

“A world without fossil fuels [even in the midterm] is a world gone medieval.”

SO . . . COOL IT !

Posted by respeto at 11:26 AM

March 6, 2009

Crazies to the Left of Me; Wimps to the Right

How one side lost its mind and the other lost its nerve
Bernard Goldberg - ISBN - 9780061252570

As expected, Goldberg is diligent, insightful, humorous and acerbic as he nails the subjects of this tome to the wall. It's a rollicking good read! For this review I'll just itemize some of his best ruminations:

• "Anyone who can't decide between the liberal and the conservative a week before a presidential election, isn't a moderate. He's a clueless."

• "If people around the world think we're no different than our enemies, these are people who should not be taken seriously. . . . When I start worrying about what the French and other Western European wimps think, please shoot me!

• "Liberals have convinced themselves that all religions and cultures are of equal value--except maybe Christianity and the United States."

• "Muslims should march not to prove their innocence but to let the terrorists know that good Muslims will not support them--or even try to understand them--simply because they share the same religion." He then proceeds to the famous quote by Golda Meir: "There will be no peace in the Middle East until the Arabs love their children more than they hate the Jews."

• and, "If only we behaved differently, then they wouldn't want to kill us." Yeah . . . Right!

• "Being a liberal means never having to say you're sorry. It means you can slander Ronald Reagan as a crazy cowboy [but never mention that he won the cold war.] . . . You can fight welfare reform [but never acknowledge that it has restored the dignity of millions of poor Americans.] . . . You can not excuse, but actually embrace . . . Fidel Castro, then look the other way when he jails anyone who disagrees with him. . . . You can leave a whole lot of wreckage along the side of the road and never peek into the rear-view mirror because your intentions are good and your heart is in the right place"

• Bush, when addressing the NAACP, should have "taken pains" to remind them that for "life to come to fruition for black Americans, the black civil rights establishment needs to snap out of it, stop playing the victim card, and start living in the 21st century. That would have taken a certain amount of courage, and that is one thing that the Republicans seem to have lost."

• "So, in the wake of Katrina, while Jesse Jackson and his cronies are focusing on what the government did wrong, shouldn't we also ask a few uncomfortable questions about what the victims of the hurricane have been doing wrong for years, which left them so vulnerable? After all, it wasn't just rich white folks who made it out of town before Katrina hit. Middle-class blacks escaped, too."

• "Bush is caught in a kind of catch-22. If we are attacked, liberals will point to his 'reckless' policies in Iraq . . . which 'emboldened' the terrorists . . . and if we're not attacked . . . how dare that SOB spy on us and take away our civil liberties? . . . [and] if there is another 9/11 liberals will insist, 'we were just trying to protect everybody's constitutional rights.' Expect no mea culpas from the left . . . [they] are virtuous by definition."

• But: "If a liberal Democrat had taken us into war not just to find weapons of mass destruction, but also to create a democracy in a foreign country, and if that liberal Democrat had argued that all of this somehow would make Americans safer, Republicans would smack him silly."

• Rush Limbaugh has observed that "You can always count on the Democrats, at some point, to revive conservativism in this country by being who they are." He adds that "the real question is: Will Republicans get back to being who they're supposed to be--principled and conservative. . . . Ronald Reagan built a Republican coalition that lasted thirty years, until pandering became the party's guiding principle and the coalition unraveled."

• "Conservatives [as distinct from Republicans] aren't against immigration. They're against illegal immigration. And they're for assimilation. . . . [They want people to aspire] to become Americans and not just foreigners who are living here. That can't happen if we continue to let Mexico export its poverty to the United States."

• Goldberg reminds that in his inaugural address Kennedy said "Let every nation know whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." Adding, then, "I cannot think of a single prominent Democrat today who would subscribe to a single word of that."

I do take serious issue with one chapter/theme of his book, however, and that is on teaching Darwinian evolutionary theory and not intelligent design. Creationism is not the same thing, and it is true that creationism "is not science." (In fact it is flatly counter-factual.) However, he displays his ignorance in using the terms interchangeably, and defines both as "divine magic, rather than empirically testable laws."

Unfortunately, as I have commented before on numerous occasions, it takes infinitely more faith to believe in Darwinian evolution than it does God, the Creator, the force; whatever you prefer to call it/Him(Her?) I prefer guided evolution, and it is scientific; fully supported by statistics in ways infinitely more important and significant than Darwin's hypothesis. Darwinism is statistically impossible. There is neither science nor paleontological evidence to corroborate inter-species evolution as advanced by Darwin, yet is taught as scientific fact. Children need to be taught both . . . and correctly! The valid concerns about Darwin's theory should be discussed, emphasizing it was and is a theory, now invalidated by fact,. It most certainly can't pretend to be "empirically testable."

With that caveat, it is a thought provoking evocation of what's wrong with America.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 10:40 AM

November 5, 2006

Culture Warrior

Bill O’Reilly – ISBN – 9780767920926

To those of you, few I hope, who can’t stand O’Reilly, there is nothing to say. But for the rational rest, this is another good book . . . possibly his best. Certainly if you exclude his book The O’Reilly Factor for Kids, it is his best, and that was an entirely different kind of book.

He describes the culture war which is going on, despite the denials of many. The “Secular-Progressives (S-P’s) drive on a one-way street all the time. If you don’t agree with them totally, you are the enemy.” They launch attack and smear those who disagree. This is a searing accusation which he sets out to prove. And prove it he does, to anyone inclined to listen (or to read.)

While traditionalists (a vast majority) reject the attitudes of the “S-P’s,” they do not understand, or do not wish to consider the situation. They stay on the sidelines, disengaged.

The S-P’s are completely laissez faire. Everything is relative, there is neither right nor wrong. Drugs, sex, abortion (even infanticide), euthanasia, etc. should be left unregulated. These are simply matters of personal choice. No system is better. Indeed, ours is worse (or worst.) They believe America is, and has been, an evil country. Consider the rantings of Ward Churchill, Michael Moore, Susan Sarandon, Alec Baldwin and George Clooney. Then there is George Lakoff and What’s the Matter with Kansas (a book I reviewed long ago.) A world run by Kofi Annan is their fallback position. They, of course, could do much better.

They are encouraged and represented by the ACLU, an organization supported in turn by millions in S-P contributions. (George Soros and Peter Lewis come to mind.) They are compromising our laws and traditions. Mull over the conflict about Christmas, the Ten Commandments, NAMBLA and the attacks on the Boy Scouts over their handing of gay scoutmasters.

Other aspects of their philosophy come in the form of ludicrous attitudes such as the failure to charge the co-conspirators in the events which led to the capture, rape and murder of a child in FL, or the sentence by the judge in VT who decided that a man convicted of raping a 10 year old girl multiple times over 4 years need spend only 60 days in jail. That is “Restorative Justice.” The fault lies somewhere within society, and needs to be addressed thru therapy, not punishment. “They’re sick.” (They sure as hell are—except for the evil ones--and all ought to be locked up . . . though I have no quarrel with therapy during their incarceration, however little good it does.)

The S-P’s are entrenched on college campuses, and making inroads into primary and secondary schools—with insufficient opposition. Witness conflicts over what will be taught and how, from sex-ed to evolution (or “inspired design.”) Their modus operandi is that practiced by totalitarian regimes throughout history: separate the children from their parents, then proselytize and “brain wash.” In this they are anything but subtle. Government schools are a disaster, but protected by the S-P’s and their minions.

They oppose ID’s at polling stations to enhance the “right” of ineligibles and illegals to vote. They impose their ideas of a education, whether or not we, the unwashed, agree with them. They oppose achievement standards, but having lost the battle over “no child left behind” they now engage in lowering those standards. They oppose proficiency tests for teachers. They oppose permitting poor children to attend private schools, even though their schools are deficient.

Children must be taught to perform, not coddled by “nurturing” environments. But, if impeded, how will they instill “progressive values?”

On their best days they feel that a controlling government ought to force society to be generous and fair, which vision would, of course, require totalitarianism, and that they claim to abhor. Are they that naïve, or do they think the rest of us are?

One can’t debate or reason with them. They are committed to living in a “no traditionalist zone.” A decision must be made by the majority American constituency. Will traditional society prevail or not? This battle must be engaged soon, before it is too late. The question is when, or whether, the great unwashed will finally become involved!

The S-P’s desire a huge government to dispense their ideas of “economic justice” and “nurturing:” the creation of total dependence, which utopian dream is both ridiculous and unattainable. Utopian warriors like Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi etal. are very engaged, but . . . “on the wrong side.”

“There is a right and a wrong in this world. There is justice and fairness. And, finally, there is a strong, binding tradition that has made America the most successful country the world has ever seen.”

There is an alternative to their “Brave New World.” You don’t have to agree with O’Reilly completely, but you simply must read his “rant” to understand the S-P agenda. And then become engaged in doing something about it! If you care.

Posted by respeto at 2:33 PM

July 30, 2008

Culture and Conflict in the Middle East

Philip Carl Salzman – ISBN – 9781591025870

This two-hundred page tome is worth far more its thirty-five dollar price. A Mideast scholar said it was one of the most important books of the last four decades. It is an easily read disquisition because of the author’s crisp style and avoidance of trivia which commonly bury the casual reader. Most of us know that something is wrong with Islam; he circumspectly explains what . . . and why.

Salzman is an anthropologist, but the text embraces history and psychology along with culture, and he contextualizes all of this as he outlines his unique explanation of Islam’s problems. It is Islam he discusses . . . in ways consistent with the facts as he emphasizes that he is not being judgmental. Rather, he delivers information as he interprets it, as did Bernard Lewis in What Went Wrong. The bibliography is long, and includes myriad expert tracts.

His section on the Rise of Islam (fewer than 50 pages) is stunning. Amongst the things he dispels forever is the much-touted maxim that Islam is a religion of peace. It is not, never has been . . . and he persuasively documents it using Muslim sources. During their conquests from the 7th to the 11th century, millions were slaughtered, more millions enslaved, and the survivors of their holocaust were reduced to dhimmitude: expropriated, suppressed and degraded. The hallmark of Arab Empires was the enslavement of conquered peoples—except for those murdered, of course. Even men who converted to Islam were stripped of their belongings, their wives and their children. In the era of Muslim dominance most of the world functioned the same way, but they were exceptional in that they were more cruel.

“We have repeatedly been told of the tolerance that existed in the Muslim world, and of the flourishing of minorities under the enlightened guidance of Islamic law and Muslim rulers. But the historical evidence for a darker picture is overwhelming and irrefutable.”

His critical observation is that Arabic—and therefore Islamic—culture is composed of balanced opposition between like groups, which served their early culture optimally. It established “a substantial degree of order and security” necessary for survival in their desert environment. Balanced opposition results in individual and group independence, encourages freedom and courage along with equality and responsibility, but it also lends itself to bellicosity and friction. It breeds specific loyalties and a rigid honor culture. We’ve all heard this described as my kin against yours, our tribe against others, Sunni against Shia, and all Muslims against the world (especially religions other than Islam.)

At each level of affiliation there is an enemy. For each act the relevant question is: who acted and who is closest to me? All parties agree about what they are against, but never upon what they are for. This negativity and rigid honor (see below) precludes the development of a state as the West understands it; one of law and order, objectified by things upon which we all agree and delegate to government. Thus we concede to the state those things which we cannot do, or do so well alone. They do not. They move thru a chain of affiliations seeking resolution. There is no law, per se, except that prescribed in the Koran . . . or by the sword (now the Kalashnikov or the homicide bomber.)

Huntington (in The Clash of Civilizations) observed that neither “rule of law” nor “constitutionalism” have ever existed in the Arab Mideast because of this commitment to the group. There is no recognizance of abstract, universally applicable rules, and law has never been a factor in political order. The ultimate goal is winning, not acceding to a rule.

In their world, state authorities have always used the peasantry to provide income. For 4,000 years of history the tax collectors, police and the army have been tools of population control. There is no beneficence. Urban areas produce little or nothing, as they depend on the hinterlands for those materials necessary for consumption and trade.

Remote tribes have always had the power to avoid many state sanctions, and have often warred against it. They war for independence and/or the purpose of becoming the state, so that their tribe controls the largess. There is the potential for a war of all against all, which is controlled in some measure by intra-family or tribal balance. This provides space to live with a level of security, predictability, and understanding.

One is honor bound to provide whatever is needed by the balanced group to which he belongs. In turn he lives with the assurance that if in need he will be assisted. Honor thus becomes all. It is earned by victory and lost in defeat. Victims are despised, not celebrated. Honor is more important than any measurable form of success; even life itself. Notwithstanding, success is sought and measured by how much chattel or territory is controlled. It is honorable to do whatever is necessary to prevail. “Winner-take-all” is the only rule: might makes right. Right and wrong are questions never considered. Morality demands that one strive, always, to advantage one’s own group and disadvantage the adversary. Nothing is more common in the history of tribes than battles between them over territory, livestock, watering holes and women. Even marriages arranged for the purpose of retaining asset control, and women, as chattel, are traded and assigned as such.

In the U.S. it has been sarcastically noted that “winning isn’t everything; it’s the only thing.” We use that maxim in sports, but they honor it in all parameters at all times. They regularly lie, cheat and steal; they fight to the death rather than surrender, despite overwhelming odds. Islam teaches that surrender isn’t an option. Recall that before “Charlie Wilson’s War” Afghans fought Hind Helicopters with Enfield rifles while children threw rocks. A truce is allowable if it serves a purpose: recovery from battle, rearming, or reconnoitering, but resumption of conflict is required victory is assured. It is dishonorable and verboten to leave the field. Hence there is unending conflict, and this has prohibited progress in their societies for centuries. They are constantly at war with someone.

• In the world of the past half century or so, two-thirds of global conflicts involve Islamic countries, either against other Islamic countries or the rest of the world. Eighty 80 percent of those conflicts are violent, and half are full scale wars. Quietude exists only when it is imposed by a dominant regime (e.g. Hussein, Mubarak, or the Saudis)
• Illiteracy in the Muslim world is nearly 50%, and most of the educated are taught in the West. When they return home they seldom find employment outside government since there is no industry. Average output of the Arab world per million inhabitants is 2% of that in industrialized nations.
• The GNP of the entire Muslim Mideast is about equal to that of South Korea, and most of that is derived from oil, found by the West, processed by Western technology, and used in large measure by the West, with Western supervision. The incredible sums taken in by the sale of oil are used by the state to suppress the peasantry, reward the brethren, and make war on each other and the world.
• Rather than study and correct the problems, they seek someone to blame; usually the West.
• The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not over land! Muslims believe Allah has ordained Islamic rule, and it is the duty of Muslims to enforce that principle. A secular, pragmatic solution has no appeal; similarly so with the rest of the world.

There have, indeed, been periods of European imperial disruption, but these have come and gone without displacing tribal society and its balanced opposition. “It is to the [culture] that we must look to understand the current circumstances and difficulties of the Arab Middle East. The lesson is that in the Arab world, [as everywhere else], culture matters” . . . multiculturalist beliefs notwithstanding.

I could go on, but ‘twould be more rewarding and informative if you just read the book. Highly recommended!

Posted by respeto at 12:13 PM

January 23, 2009

Dancing Under the Red Star

The Extraordinary Story of the Only American Woman to Survive Stalin's Gulag
Karl Tobien - ISBN - 9781400070787

This book is riveting as it simultaneously damns, appalls, inspires and enlightens one of the darker periods in U.S. and world history, exposing a chapter which is hardly known to us common folk. But, then, neither Ford nor the U.S. government really wants to discuss it. Tobien's book demonstrates why.

Margaret Werner (Tobein) went with her parents to Russia 1932. Her father Carl, a master mechanic and employee of the Ford Motor Company, was encouraged by Ford to move there, along with 450 others, to implement production in a factory sold to Stalin to produce automobiles. Carl, a true (if only transient) believer in communism, left America in the midst of the Depression to move his reluctant family to the USSR, believing he was entering the new, new world.

That it was a mistake was immediately apparent, but he could not admit it. The families were promptly disenfranchised and assigned to live in their own bleak American compound (read ghetto.) Carl labored under the dismal conditions with a reluctant Russian workforce, criticism of which was unacceptable. Stalin's five year plan proceeded despite dismal quality control and incompetent workmanship, about which Carl complained bitterly. This resulted in his arrest and incarceration as an "enemy of the state." He died in prison within a few years, unbeknownst to his wife and daughter. For those several years, and many following, his family was kept within their compound with little upon which to depend, and no knowledge of the disposition of Carl, though they had their suspicions. Their search for information was constant and unrewarding.

Margaret was a good athlete, bright student, and committed American who was nevertheless "invited" into the Communist Youth Organization, a requirement of which was to renounce her father for his "treason." This she vehemently refused to do. This was not the acceptable, and she was thereafter barred and ostracized. Her name, no doubt, was recorded in a little black book. Had she known that her father was dead her course of action might have been very different.

After WW II her "crime" was resurrected. She was framed, convicted and sent to a labor camp for ten years. Her mother was left alone in this strange and bitter land. By then most of the American labor force had simply disappeared. Mom survived doing menial labor, keeping in contact with her daughter as best she could. There were often years between visits, and she sometimes traveled hundreds of miles by primitive rail just to glimpse Margaret. They once met in a foul latrine in order not to be seen on what was a clandestine visit. Mom had to stay there for hours before and afterward, to avoid capture.

For part of her incarceration Margaret was invited to become a part of a camp dance troupe, which was led by a Russian ballerina, also a prisoner. The dancers entertained their captors, their families and sometimes the prisoners (and offered the title of the book.)

Upon her release she married a recently released German prisoner who fathered their son, Karl. In 1958, thru stealth and trickery, at enormous risk, she was able to escape to West Germany along with her husband, their son and her mother. There her husband abandoned them, and they were again trapped, this time in the West.

The horror of her experience notwithstanding, the American Embassy would not assist her in returning to the U.S. because she was now, against her wishes and express intent, a "citizen of the USSR." Thus she was "ineligible" to return to her homeland; likewise her mother and her son, born to a German in Russia. (Jeez, it makes one proud of our country's bureaucrats!)

Finally she made it, after waiting in West Germany for three long years--thirty years after the beginning of this ordeal. She made a new life in her native land, and survived there as she had in the Gulag, by personal integrity, grit, determination, and an unfailing faith in God.

Even more abysmal than the actions of our State Department was that of the Ford Motor Company. Ford denied the entire series of events. Neither it, nor Washington, ever made an attempt to assist these people, or even to admit complicity. Few made it back to the U.S., though it is doubtful that it was for lack of trying. One man who did make it attempted to obtain compensation from Ford and was denied. Ford would not--and was not compelled to--acknowledge its role in these events. It is difficult to imagine a time when such events could be swept away, discarded and kept from the public.

Margaret and her mother were amongst the very few Americans who ever made it back. Margaret was the only American woman imprisoned in the Gulag who lived to tell about it. And she didn't really do that; her son wrote the book some years after her death as a testament to his mother and grandmother, not incidentally indicting the American Government and the Ford Motor Company.

The book is well written. The story is compelling. The treachery, deceit and abandonment of those unfortunate people was a universe removed from being merely despicable. It is a triumphant and moving story--damning as well--and it needed to be told.

I have not read anything as gripping in a very long time. Read it and weep! I did.

Posted by respeto at 11:20 AM

May 30, 2007

Deja Reviews

Florence King All Over Again
ISBN – 9781933859163

Another winner! Like STET Damnit, this is an anthology of King’s writings--most of them book reviews--most from National Review or the Spectator.

As with everything she writes, it is a joy to read: first because she writes so damned well, second because she is funny as hell, and third because she reviews the selection of books included with acerbicism and a scalding wit—her forte. Some she deems good, some bad, some mediocre, all handled with aplomb.

Her review entitled The Noble Whiteman, Mark Twain’s collected sketches, speeches and essays, is alone worth the price of admission. In the review she admits that she grew up with the opinion that Clemens wasn’t worth the trouble to read. She changed her mind overnight when she reviewed this collection. (No doubt she found that he was of like mind and every bit as good a writer as is she.)

She also reviews Brookhiser’s biography: Rediscovering George Washington, written when the left was making war upon this unconscionably amoral, Virginia slaveholder. She observes that this book succeeded in being superbly restorative while simultaneously annihilating Washington’s detractors. Imagine . . . the father of our country being a schmuck. Not so!

Another, Onward and Downward, deals with Dumbing Down: Essays on the Strip-Mining of American Culture, which she remarks is “refreshingly cynical” in its assessment, “breaking the smile button” with its savagely witty essays; again, consistent with her take on the situation.

Her comments on the cell phone: “I talk, therefore I am.” Beautifully descriptive and right on (!) as she observes that (Andrew Ferguson observed in his book Fool’s Names, Fool’s Faces) “yuppies with portable phones attached to their ears, [are] stopping traffic, tripping over hydrants, bumping into lampposts.” My take exactly. And the wholly insane text messaging hadn’t yet been invented.

Needless to say she excoriates other books with characteristic candor: The Education of a Woman; the Life of Gloria Steinem, A Woman’s Place: the Freshmen Women Who Change the Face of Congress, and Bitch: in Praise of Difficult Women.

Like STET, this is what I refer to as a bathroom read; brief discussions without linear context, which can be read at random when you have a few minutes and are in the mood to be amused . . . and caused to think.

And this one, unlike STET, is available on line, or at your average local bookstore, though they may have to order it for you.

Publisher’s Weekly observed: “King expresses her opinions with the subtlety—and effectiveness—of a flamethrower . . . savagely funny.”

Laugh out loud funny! She sings . . . and it sounds awfully much like an aboriginal war chant.

Posted by respeto at 3:23 PM

April 5, 2010

Delta Force

The Army's Elite Counterterrorist Unit
Col. Charlie A. Beckwith (Ret.) - ISBN - 9780380809394

This book, by the founder and first commanding officer of Delta Force is quite interesting; not especially well written or edited, it is still worthwhile for those curious about Delta. His candor adds considerably to the book, and his honorable reportage is beyond reproach.

He covers a lot of territory, beginning with the Green Berets and his "learning tour of duty" with the precedent setting force, SAS (the British Special Air Service Regiment; the first dedicated counterterrorism unit in the world.) This is followed by his decade long effort to establish a comparable entity within the U.S. Army. The discussion wanders, and includes considerable activity, some of it trivial and of no particular interest to the average reader.

Still, he gives the complete story, including the disastrous Carter administration policy--implemented by retired Admiral Stansfield Turner, who, as director, gutted the CIA and in large measure authored the still extant problems we have with critical, foreign intelligence. He removed "spies" from the equation, and forbid dealing with "corrupt people." (Of course his program still permitted CIA agents to deal with honorable, pleasant, reliable, "nice" people amongst the cadre of leaders and acolytes of the most vile countries in the world.) Needless to say this led to the complete lack of accurate and timely intelligence for the entire U.S. military and foreign policy establishments. Brilliant ! Especially so when it came, not much later, to Operation Eagle Claw, which was designed to extract the embassy hostages from Iran. But I'm getting ahead of myself.

After butting heads for a very long time he was finally permitted to begin the establishment of Delta, but was still stiff-armed by the other forces within the military, most notably the Navy Seals, the Army Rangers. They made the claim that Delta was a duplication of efforts within their purview, which was not true. Just a turf battle. When overruled they prevented any of the men within their units from applying for Delta. When overruled again they complied . . . but reluctantly.

Eventually, however, the force was established, trained and ready. Their first assignment was Eagle Claw, which was a catastrophic failure. Beckwith deals with the intricacies of the planning, practice and mis-execution of the mission. He discusses both the reasons for failure and the implementation of the correctives which followed. He retired shortly thereafter, ending a military career of over 30 years.

He did, however, go on to discuss the Mogadishu disaster, and provides a similarly informative postmortem. Unit function was superb, but a combination of intelligence failure and a chicken-s**t cop out by Bill Clinton authored tragic events reminiscent of Kennedy's failure to support the Bay of Pigs invasion decades before. This time there were 18 Americans dead (their corpses dragged thru the streets--on international T.V!), 84 wounded, and hundreds of Somalis killed; civilians and terrorists alike. This failure ignited even more terrorism, inasmuch as the U.S. appeared spineless and cowardly. (This was, you'll recall, the predecessor of the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole--also on Clinton's watch--which emphasized our unwillingness to deal with terrorists.)

Finally, with problems ironed out, interagency dilemmas and disagreements resolved, Delta went on to become a cutting-edge organization; probably the best anti-terrorism unit in the world. Inasmuch as their "black-ops" are under everyone's radar, little additional information can be discussed, but his legacy (he died in 1994) lives on in the formidable force he shepherded into existence; a superlative force in the armamentarium of the United States military.

Unfortunately, the CIA situation hasn't improved very much. We still have huge holes in our intelligence network, thanks to reprehensibly cautious Washington liberals, and the continuing residuum of the disastrous Carter presidency . . . soon to be displaced as the worst in history by that of King Barack.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 1:39 PM

June 20, 2011

Devils Night

And other true tales of Detroit
Ze'ev Chafets - ISBN - 9780394585253

Given the world situation, from the Mid-East thru Greece and on to England, it seemed not inappropriate to reread this 20 year old book (long out of print but easily and cheaply available as a used book.) It was written by an Israeli journalist who spent his youth in Detroit, and revisited it in 1988-89, where he interviewed hundreds of residents. He renders reflections of their life and opinions in a failing city which is now an utter ruin. (Copy and paste this link and witness the disaster of present day Detroit. See where more of America is headed)

(http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=ruins+of+detroit+photos&aq=1&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=ruins+of+Detroi)

The book explores the downfall of Detroit, beginning with the riots of 1967-68, and progressing thru the time of its publication, when Halloween was ritually celebrated by torching buildings by the hundreds, leaving but a shell of the formerly famous and wealthy city. It's a wake-up call for those who will listen.

He begins by describing the macabre game called "King of the Corner:" stand on any downtown corner and look in every direction. Seeing no one qualified you as King of the only metropolis where one can walk a downtown block during business hours without passing anyone. Many of its suburbs are prosperous, but the cultural and emotional divide between them is "as wide as any which divides hostile nations." And that was 20 years ago. It's far worse now. Detroit has become a decrepit slum, 83% black, badly governed and dangerous.

Formerly dubbed the Arsenal of Democracy, its population has now shrunk from 1.8 million to just over 700 thousand, one third of whom live below the poverty line. For over 5 decades it has been governed by liberal Democrat administrations, using their "progressive" agenda. Coleman Young, the (first black) mayor at the time (1974-93) originally reined in the largely white police department, appropriately integrated it, then promptly lost control. With his ideologically "liberal principles" he intentionally authored "a gentle police force." Too placid. Robbery, a crime in most of the country, is an occupation in Detroit.

Ironically, race became more of a subject that it had ever been. One of Chafets' confidants explained to him that there were four types of blacks: Afro-Americans, blacks, colored folks and niggers. At vacation time an Afro goes to the Bahamas, a black to Harlem; the colored go south to visit kin folk, and the niggers don't go anywhere. They wait for the others to leave so their homes can be burglarized. "The longer I stayed in Detroit, the more accustomed I became to the local habit of immediately classifying everyone by color."

Schools, horrendous; drop out rates, catastrophic; illiteracy, near universal, even amongst those who graduate. Unwed motherhood is the rule and drugs are ubiquitous. One mother observed that while the children had more opportunity than before, "they've been raised without any values." Seems a rather hollow trade, but she was then certain that, while Detroit was the first to experience all of this, it would be the city to find the solutions for such problems. It has failed, and now there's no opportunity either. For most non-whites (and many blacks) the problem isn't racism, it's fear. "People don't see every black as bad. But the image of Detroit is of a decaying, crime-ridden city headed by a mayor who [made] racist remarks. . . . The values of people in Detroit are completely foreign. . . . The language is different and the way people think there is different . . . [the feeling is] that anybody coming from Detroit is going to cause problems."

Until the mid 60s "Detroit prided itself on being in the vanguard of American liberalism; today, the term has become an epithet." Now it's a poster child for how not to do things, while for the philosopher it demonstrates why that is so. "Young genuinely [saw] the world in racial terms. . . . [he didn't see] black folks as oppressive . . . so [he didn't] consider that blacks [were] capable of racism." Chafets' extended dissertation on Young masterfully explains how his level of corruption was worse than any before. Young was confident that blacks would solve their own problems--as well they might have with different leadership.

One of Young's entourage later observed that "we asked for control of this city. Well, now we're in control and everything is out of control. We don't build anything, not even a grocery store. The mayor has been in office fifteen years an only two blacks own anything downtown. Why? Because we don't hold [Young] accountable. What we have is a group of blacks running a black plantation."

He concludes that, by almost any measure, Young, Dinkins and Wilder (other historic black mayors) were "yesterday, not tomorrow." His wrap up is prophetic and alone worth the read. Though 20 years old, it is a picture of where we are headed if things do not change. Racism is sharply attenuated, but corruption is rampant. Blacks who listened to people like Young and Wilder are, more recently, conditioned to looking to the likes of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, and currently to academics like Cornell West. Even the media--even Fox--interviews these people as they enhance their celebrity. It isn't pretty. And it isn't wise.

But the book is a good read, and a reminder of the beginnings of American decline, and its likely end should we not heed the implicit warning.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 4:04 PM

December 5, 2008

Dewey

Vicki Myron – ISBN – 9780446407410

This is a fetching tale (and a current mega-best seller) about a tough little kitten, stuffed into the book return of a local library and rescued the following morning nearly frozen to death. He managed to survive and became the mascot of that library, surviving within its walls for 18 years. During that time Dewey became an inspiration to the library staff and patrons, a model of survival for the entire town of Spencer, Iowa, and world famous (though I dmit I’d never heard about him.)

Initially, one is drawn into the story by the very nature of survival (town and cat.) It is an interestingly told tale, written by Bret Witter as shared with him by Ms. Myron, the librarian who salvaged the kitten and became his best friend for life. As well there are poignant insights into small town and farm life . . . and death. "Corn country," especially, is being run over by commercial, mega-farms. Towns are being razed to expand farming. People are forced to move on, altering that life forever. (All that is left of the author's early life is "four feet of driveway" leading to a cornfield!)

Problem is that about a third of the way thru the book begins to die, and while it improves toward the end it never fully recovers.

I was reminded of a book, written in the mid ‘70’s by Robert Ardrey: The Hunting Hypothesis. He wove a really good tale, giving explicit examples of animal behavior corroborating his hypothesis, and then went on, and on . . . and on, example after example. He'd made his point, wrote a fascinating book, but he just couldn’t quit. As I’ve observed in other reviews, there are simply “too many notes.”

Same here. There are so many anecdotes, and there is so much about the librarian/rescuer and her life story that one begins to wonder whether the tract is about the the cat, or if it was also autobiographical of the savior . . . and how long it’ll be until it’s over. It drags.

For those interested it is really both soul snagging and informative. If inclined, I’d suggest that one read the first third or so, skim or skip the middle, and go to the end.

Being an inveterate capitalist, however, I just have to note that one of the side stories mentions—indeed emphasizes—a basic tenant of the capitalist system. When the town was dying, as have so many remote farming communities, Wal-Mart decided to rescue it. The townsfolk were up in arms, with the principal surviving retailers unwilling to “turn over what they had invested in . . . to a national competitor.”

A hired consultant advised that “Wal-Mart will be the best thing ever to happen to the businesses in Spencer. If you try to compete with them you will lose. But if you find a niche they aren’t serving . . . you will win. Why? Because Wal-Mart will bring many more customers to town. It’s that simple.”

It did. They did, and proved the consultant right. The downtown business increased exponentially, as Spencer became the regional retail town. So there!

Posted by respeto at 12:17 PM

November 10, 2006

Do As I Say (Not As I Do)

Peter Schweizer – ISBN – 9780767919029

This best seller exposes the hypocrisy of the political left, using examples of powerful and representative people. It catalogues events and attitudes while carefully avoiding ad hominem attacks (unlike those on the left!) For those on the left it ought to give at least some cause for pause--if only they’d read it.

If you think you know about liberal hypocrisy, wait until you read this!

“Do-as-I-say liberals don’t actually trust their ideas enough to apply them at home.”

Michael Moore, champion of black employment, for example, has hired 134 principals, of whom only 3 were black. The same applies in to many of the others. Al Franken: zero.

Conspicuous consumption is a problem which applies to other people. Streisand’s residence--for 2--includes 5 separate homes and a 12,000 sq. ft., air-conditioned barn for her business artifacts. But give Barbra her due . . . at least her charitable foundations actually give away 25% of the assets annually. The others run them as a personal bank.

Ted Kennedy and George Soros demand that the rich be heavily taxed, yet both (and most of the others) have instituted numerous trusts, private foundations and off shore accounts to avoid taxes. Kennedy “fights for the little guy’ and demands that the rich pay their fair share. Of course he avoids them himself.

Soros has made most of his money trading currencies, most of which currencies he influences to precipitate his profits. He has “no moral position” about destroying the British Pound, for instance: just business! “It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of God, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” His penchant for “offshore accounts” authored the craze.

Hillary received over $300,000 worth of gifts before exiting the White House--all before she became a senator, thus to avoid rules which preclude this. Not content, she took $360,000 in White House property as well. And the Whitewater stuff you heard about is only a fraction of what they did to screw the “little folk.”

While Hillary sees herself as the liberator of children, Chelsea was rigidly supervised; not permitted what Hillary advocates for the rest of our children, who are supposed to become “masters of their own destiny.”

Nader is a creep. Much of what Schweizer has to say has been said before. But not all! He has millions in more or less secret accounts, and invests in most of the industries he condemns . . . sometimes just before he condemns them, the better to profit by selling short.

Pelosi is vocally supportive of unions and minimum wage, but in her far-flung empire (the wealthiest person in the House) she runs a totally union-free shop and seldom pays minimum wage to her hundreds of employees. She’s an acolyte of Hugo Chavez’s farm workers union, but employs only immigrant, non-union (legal and illegal) Mexican labor in her vineyards and hotels. To hell with “workers of the world unite.”

Chomsky? Well, he is confident that he has discovered the truth and expects us all to follow his precepts. The fact that he doesn’t seems not to concern him. He’s a genuine “capitalist pig.”

Steinem? After a lifetime of advising women to stay single she up and gets married. Great that she finally found love and commitment, but how about the thousands of young women who passed it up on her recommendation?

And the viciously anti-capitalist Cornell West, the race-baiting “Black Studies Professor?” Surprise: he makes a fortune in real estate, the markets, and by charging huge fees for his lectures. He capitalizes on his “blackness” and even makes rap records when he’s supposed to be teaching at Harvard . . . or Princeton . . . or wherever he has negotiated his most recent lucrative contract. But teach at a Black College . . . never. Pay’s too little.

In the left’s moral universe, their motives and intentions are always pure. Their adversaries, however, are always animated by greed: a conservative disease from which they are spared.

Like the conservatives they denounce, they hire only the best people to manage their affair, not those who confirm to some idyllic quota system. The ideas they profess to take seriously are not those by which they live.

So why can’t they stop affixing sinister labels—racist, greedy, polluter—to people who are doing exactly the same thing without the hypocrisy? Answer: Liberals enjoy the moral satisfaction that comes with the knowledge that they, unlike the rest of us, are committed to fighting racism, oppression, inequality and pollution.

“It’s time for the free ride to end.” It’d be nice if the next time one of them is interviewed the questioner would ask: “yes, but do you really live your life that way?”

Posted by respeto at 1:04 PM

December 16, 2006

Dogs of God

Columbus, the Inquisition, and the Defeat of the Moors
James Reston, Jr. – ISBN – 9781400031917

This is a truly enjoyable read, vividly written, factual to a fault--but brief--and productive of increased understanding of that era and its impact on the future of the world. Unless you viscerally hate history, this is unquestionably worth the time.

As the title states, the book covers a brief but critical period in Spanish—hence world—history. It begins with a very concise review of prior Spanish history, notably the historic Moorish (Muslim) culture. He then proceeds in relative depth to chronicle the period from about 1480 to 1500, during which time the Inquisition was begun, the Jews were forced to “convert or leave,” the Moors were finally defeated and driven from the Iberian Peninsula, the Portuguese rounded Africa and Columbus “discovered” the New World.

Ferdinand--one of the important “princes” described by Machiavelli—subjugated the minor royalty, regularized the laws and instituted controlled taxation, thus centralizing power in the crown. Spain thus became the first “modern” nation. Meanwhile Isabella, the esteemed queen, enhanced the arts, music and education. The first major university in the world, Salamanca (founded 20 years before Oxford) became a magnet for scholars from around the Mediterranean.

After 800 years of Muslim dominance, Ferdinand was the warrior who completed the 500 year Reconquista, in large measure thru the firepower of “modern” cannons—which, though primitive, were destructive. In so doing the age of the armored knight passed into history. Further, he set in motion the Spanish Inquisition. The Inquisition and the subsequent expulsions were opposed by Isabella inasmuch as religion was the cover for a vast land grab to enrich the crown and the church, and a violent means of political control (which Machiavelli thought brilliant.) Property was confiscated even when owners weren’t exiled or executed; an exercise ostensibly in the interest of “purifying” the “Christian country.”

The emigration of both Moors and Jews nearly ruined the economy. They had been counselors to the crown, the finest teachers and doctors, poets and philosophers, and the principal merchants and artisans. Much of Spain was owned by them, which explains Ferdinand’s interest in removing them. Overnight the principal cities became stagnant backwaters without intellectual energy or financial capability.

Reston discusses the recent deconstruction of the period, noting that the Inquisition and expulsions were “not really so bad.” They were, however, evil incarnate. In fact, the elevation of the totally corrupt Spanish Cardinal Borgia to the papacy precipitated the Reformation.

Still, the terror of the Inquisition was accompanied by an expanded sense of personal liberty in the intellectual classes at Salamanca’s University, which in turn authored the Spanish Renaissance, already blossoming in Italy.

The reconciliation of the Spanish/Portuguese conflict, the unification of the Spanish nation, the (Portuguese) establishment of sea passage to India, and the territorial expansion which Columbus’s discoveries provided, authored the era of colonialism--and colonial conflict.)

With the arrival of Jewish refugees in Italy the need for a form of political international law was more important than ever, and the only available authority was the Roman Catholic Church. This, in turn, ultimately led to the arguments over the “separation of the church and the state.”

Read it! Great book!

Posted by respeto at 11:21 AM

January 31, 2006

Dream Palace of the Arabs

Fouad Ajami – ISBN 0375704744

A well known writer/columnist/chronicler of Arab Politics, Ajami explores numerous avenues which afford considerable insight into the foundations and functioning of the Arab mind, including Arab politics. While the book dates from 1998 it is, if possible, more relevant now than when published. Certainly general interested should be greater.

He aptly explores the strengths and weaknesses of Arab civilization, noting that their old world was compromised in the 50’s, broken in the 70’s, all without a reestablishment of its ways and rhythms. Wealth shifted as their economies changed from 3rd world marginality to oil wealth, and their politics from tribal to (more) cosmopolitan, and local to regional and international.

He informs on the tribal loyalties and the rift between the sects of Islam, which are not all that different from those divisions in European Christendom when the Protestants and the Catholics were at each other’s throats, and each of the Protestant sects felt it had the proper information regarding the “right ways.”

The Arab/Palestinian/Israeli conflicts are used to note the continuing strife, and the damage done to Arab sense of security when they were wiped out by the 6 day war. Ist was to have pushed the Jews into the sea, but ended with Israel controlling Arab/Muslim territory.

“There was a time, in the high Middle Ages, when Persian civilization and language served as the elite culture of the Muslim world from Indonesia to Morocco, but in the modern world this is no longer the case.” As Iran tries to reassert its relevance and its right to guide the region it is no longer accepted.

Strong traditions and history continue to isolate them from the world, and to create angst over Western domination, which is especially relevant with the current Iranian crisis over nukes. The revolutionary spirit of Khomeini persists, yet the revolution has done naught for the stability of Iran or the Middle East. It was to have created a theocratic utopia, a paradise on earth, which dovetails with the fantasy of a “golden age” (which never existed) in the remote past. Indeed, during recent times the “Muslim sword” has beheaded far more Muslims than nonbelievers.

About the first Gulf War, he comments that: “On pain of extinction, cultures often stubbornly refuse to look into themselves. They retreat into the nooks and crannies of their history, fall back on the consolations they know.” The West destroyed the supposedly superb army of Hussein in less than a week, and the ripples continue . . . especially since Gulf War II.

Thus the disappointment, even rage, and the resolve to revisit that fair age. Persisting in societies--everywhere and in all ages--is the need to locate order and meaning in some lost, beloved past. “From the time of Alexander until the rule of Nasser, Egyptians lived on the dream of change and improvement.” Egypt is still waiting, having fruitlessly tried Egyptian nationalism, then pan-Arabism, followed by liberalism, military dictatorship, a multiparty system, one party rule, capitalism, socialism, and alliances with the East followed by alliances with the West. Nothing has been successful.

Political history is littered with unrealized dreams, and with pragmatists who appreciate the limits of what can be done. “Rational” intellectuals--advisors to Sadat who were ready to work with Israel for peace (at least after the ‘67 war)--are aged or gone. Their impact is minuscule, leaving the radicals in ascent. Thwarted plans generate hate and rage, and someone other than themselves must be blamed. Their old world is gone, yet they are not released from its grasp. The unbending politics of opposition to peace with Israel and the world prevents normal traffic with the 20th century, never mind the 21st.
A deep ailment afflicts Arab culture. Only Arabs/Muslims can address it, yet they seem unwilling to approach the problem. They can’t go back, and won’t go forward.

Posted by respeto at 12:27 PM

June 11, 2010

Driving Like Crazy

P.J. O'Rourke - ISBN - 9780802144799

I'm a great fan of this man; he's funny, witty, and on occasion flabbergasting. My favorite of his books, as I've noted previously, include A Parliament of Whores (his best by far), Give War a Chance, and Holidays in Hell.

His newest, "driving," is just out in paperback, and is a bit of a disappointment, though it is still quite funny on occasion. I suspect that if I had been a more typical young male during the era of America's preeminence in auto manufacture I might have liked it more. (Back then, like most American boys, I could identify virtually every American car: make, model and year--and the small handful of imports; but I was never a fanatic about it, and horsepower, stroke volume, cams, valves and mufflers interested me not at all. I found such data boring, which may be why I did not enjoy the book as much as many others will.)

For years he was a freelance correspondent, and one of his subjects was motor vehicles: cars, trucks and motorcycles. For 30 years he covered events from NASCAR to the Baja (California) road races. He has revisited many of his original articles, rewritten some and added modern commentary to the texts. An early chapter, in page after page of bi-polarism, reports a drive from Florida to L.A. in a '56 Buick, which escapade reminds one of Dean Martin's "Ain't it a kick in the head?" Another bears the title The Rolling Organ Donors Motorcycle Club. The chapter on NASCAR is alone worth the price of admission.

He inserts his signature cracks and witticisms, sometimes laugh out loud funny:

• On one adventure, driving thru a wilderness, he comments that "As dusk gathers, critters are everywhere . . . Mainly it's the moose and deer that kill you. The deer if you swerve to avoid hitting them and go into the ditch, the moose if you don't."

• "The motorcycle is a device created by a team of God and Darwin to rid the world of useless young males."

• "Reporters are famous instant experts. And with any ordinarily arcane sport a weekend would have sufficed for me to argue all the fine points of the game . . . but there was something about [a NASCAR mechanic's wise, comprehensive and informed] tutorial that made me think I wasn't anywhere near smart enough to play dumb."

• "[Watching] the pit crews . . . refueling the car and changing four tires in less than half a minute [is] like five hulking Baryshnikov's in fast forward. And the cars themselves: words flunk description." (He became and remains an ardent fan of the organization and its races.)

• On a remote Baja excursion, packing for every eventuality: "The Jeeps were so full that we had to leave a lot of things behind, but only the things we'd be needing."

• On another jaunt across Nevada: "Everywhere the trace of man was visible you wished it weren't. The entire state was obviously temporary. As soon as the locals got their cars fixed they'd be moving to California. Much as I love the roadside sprawl of freedom, Nevada was littered, ugly [and] vile." Obviously he wasn't a fan.

He gets in his political licks as well, lamenting the passage of the "car era" in America as he catalogues the calamity and causes thereof. In a rant about unions and car executives he comments:

• "They no more deserve our sympathy than the malevolent trolls under the Capitol dome. But pity the poor American car when Congress and the White House get through with it--a lightweight vehicle with a small carbon footprint, using alternative energy and renewable resources to operate in a sustainable way. When I was a kid we called it a Schwinn."

• "The only people that could possibly be worse at running a car company than the current crop of car executives--who have proven themselves to be plenty bad--would be politicians."

• "The problem with making a hybrid that works is, it's going to be a heavy vehicle, and it's going to be expensive to build, and is it gonna net out to be more efficient? It kinda depends upon how you do the math on making the batteries, and how much battery power it carries, [and] how you dispose of the batteries when done. It's tricky . . . [and] since Bolivia is the key source of Lithium . . . [can it be progress to] trade the Saudis for the Bolivians?"

So, P.J. with the future of cars and journalism both in doubt, where does that leave you? His answer: "Clint Eastwood has done it all with 'Gran Torino.' I've been channeling that character ever since I saw the movie. I've decided that my motto in life is 'Get off my lawn'. It's the right answer to everything."

After all, "I live in New Hampshire. . . . Eleven hundred more feet of sea-level rises [and] I've got beach front property. [You say' 'By the end of the century New York City could be underwater' and [I] say: 'your point is?'"

The feminists grabbed our women,
The liberals banned our guns.
The health cops snuffed our cigarettes,
The bailout has our funds.
The laws of Breathalyzing
Put an end to our roadside bars,
Circle the Fords and Chevys, boys
THEY'RE COMING TO TAKE OUR CARS!

Posted by Curmudgeon at 12:40 PM

September 20, 2007

Dumbing Down

Essays on the Strip-mining of American Culture
Washburn/Thornton, ed. – 9780393317237

This gem is no longer in print, but can be easily found (ABEBOOKS) used, for $4-8, and it’s very much worthwhile to purchase one. It is a reasoned and eloquent attack on the ferocious process of our cultural decline. Neil Postman’s assessment is that it provides “the best picture we have of the declining and embarrassing condition of discourse in America.”

There are 22 separate essays, all by sage and illuminating, critical commentators dealing with subjects for which they are noted. Amongst the essays are those on:

• education in its deteriorative state, and its cultural impact
• the dangerous change from written to aural culture
• the disappearance of “betters” (that is, true role models)
• the decline of the arts and science within the broader culture, with a discussion of the vanishing of high culture and meaningful museum displays, amongst other things
• the difficulties wrought by egalitarianism and diversity
• the “malling of America,” and what it is doing to our culture by eliminating the public square
• the universalization of fast and prepared foods as the ability and willingness to cook, or even to understand cooking, disappears, along with the appreciation of fine food
• the disappearance of the eros and mystique of sex

I ran across a review of this book in random reading and felt it appropriate to apprise you of its existence. I’ll leave the discoveries to you, but amongst the comments there are a few made which I found especially electric.

One realizes that there has been a collapse of the social pyramid in which high-brow condescended to low-brow, while the two joined hands in taking pot-shots at the middle.

• we end up with Madonna, Britney, Paris and Lindsay joining illiterate athletes in being today’s role models in our era of fame by notoriety
• movie moguls who used to control studios and offer an amalgam of talent and experience are now gone, along with most of the seriousness of times past; movies and TV. no longer reflect historic American values or those of the civilized world
• the desertion of authority—it’s no longer of consequence. Everyone is entitled his opinion about everything, while taste, decorum and value are trivialized, individualized and debauched
• museums dumb down exhibits so that those with a sound-bite mentality are not bored--not having fun--and worse, many scientists are now of the opinion that science is in fact opinion, not subject to reality checks; true science is disappearing, and what we consider science is often incoherent
• then there’s voodoo science: the social construction of reality
• the masses actually believe that pulp fiction and writers such as Maya Angelou are talented, and that rock groups produce fine music as commendable as Bach, Beethoven, Mozart or Tchaikovsky
• social sciences are supporting ridiculous hypotheses based upon what they feel ought to be the case, the evidence be damned
• the misdirection of self-esteem from something earned to something simply awarded because you’ve been born, and its impact upon culture—nay, civilization
• gone is “the willingness to defer judgment until we had enough experience and breadth of knowledge to [actually] make a judgment.” Of course, that would be judgmental, and isn’t permitted
• somehow Andy Warhol’s art is equated to Michelangelo and Ruben
• NEA funding of “piss-Christ” and chocolate art is considered of value along with talentless poets and writers with anti-capitalist, anti-middle class, anti-American “whole-earth” cultural antinomianism; since they cannot survive within the honest market, yet they “want to seem cutting edge [and] insist the government they despise should pay for the scissors.”
• there is a dearth of critics, who are superfluous or unwelcome; who’s to judge in this era of no standards?
• there’s even a dissertation on the ubiquity of the “F” word which is quite reflective

The material included is best summarized by George F. Kennan, who “gives a spirited defense of why we must not let equality before the law be forcibly extended into arenas where a natural aristocracy of merit can produce far more creative governances than opinion polling of ‘the public.’” This comment is relevant to all of the subjects discussed.

Matthew Arnold once observed “a man’s life of each day depends for its solidity and value on whether he reads, and far more still on what he reads.” So read this book!

And reread it—reflect upon it and commiserate with the essayists included herein over the decline of the U.S., and of the West in general. I’m not sure what we can do about it, but if enough people try to figure it out someone might come up with a bright answer.

Posted by respeto at 3:34 PM

August 21, 2007

Economics in One Lesson

Henry Hazlitt – ISBN – 9780517548233

This is an accidental review . . . sort of. For several years I have been having ad hoc discussions—more correctly described as pleasant arguments—with a little old lady who frequents my shop. Sooner or later they revolve around economics, or rather her total ignorance of it. In her late 80’s she remains an inveterate if wholly uninformed altruist who makes decisions and forms opinions altogether without foundation. Woman’s intuition don-cha-no?

Hence I finally became frustrated enough to purchase the book as a gift for her with the proviso that she actually read it. Having not read it myself for at least two decades I decided to do that first.

It was then that I decided that all of you should be reminded to read it as well! Without doubt it is the best primer of economics ever written and remains in print 50 years after initial publication and 30 years after last updated. Adjust the dollar values of his examples and it remains a treatise which best explains the essence of economics to any lay reader with an I.Q. near ideal refrigerator temperature.

Throughout he challenges the willing role of government in areas it is neither needed nor has expertise. He explains that much of government means only increased taxes taken from more productive uses within the economy. The principal difficulty with individual understanding of this and other problems, he notes, is what is forgone . . . what is not done with the funds extorted by government for its own and usually unwise purposes.

His favorite all purpose example is the “broken window”: a shopkeeper with a window broken by a malefactor. While not good, per se, it is nevertheless results in economic activity for the sand pit operator, glass maker, transporter and glazier, all of whom profit by the replacement of the window. What is always overlooked is that the money spent to replace the window would not simply disappear. Had the shopkeeper the money he would have used it to buy a sweater. groceries, or something else of comparable value—perhaps even saved--thus providing profit for others. In the latter case(s) it would have been more productive than simply replacing what had already existed. Were the former case logical, then a state of perpetual destruction of the extant would provide wealth to all. Continuous wars, anyone?

Most all of his examples are that clear, including positions against minimum wages, equal pay, credit, rent control, tariffs, governmentally fixed prices, etc. His arguments are devastatingly accurate and logically uninfringeable, which is why the book is so phenomenally caustic for received wisdom. He literally destroys the myths of “beneficial” government pensions, subsidies, make work projects, government welfare and monopolies, amongst many others.

He disputes the postulate that labor unions have raised wages, except perhaps temporarily for members, and insists and explains that the primary cause of increased wages and improved working conditions has been the creation of capital, and the increase in productivity. Even child labor was eliminated by the increased wages which permitted a man to support his family by himself. While he is not against unions, he rails against violence perpetrated by unions to enforce strikes or to intimidate employers and recalcitrant union members. To the extent that wages are increased they are cancelled out by the inflation they cause, inflation being just another form of taxation.

Only increased productivity increases wages. Profits are produced by the introduction of economies and efficiencies which reduce production costs and the largest profits inure to those firms which have achieved the lowest cost of production. Not incidentally they also pay the highest wages . . . without unions!

Virtually all of the wealth of the modern world, and everything that distinguishes it from the pre-industrial world of the 17th century consists of its accumulated capital. The steady reduction of unit costs of production by the addition of new capital reduces the costs of goods to consumers and/or increases the wages of the labor that employs the new equipment by increasing the productive power of that labor.

The section on governmental loans and subsidies emphasizes that government undertakes to support those activities “which private markets will not.” In so doing the government heavily taxes successful private businesses to support failing ones. Private capital is not nutty enough to risk these loans because of the all but certain loss of capital. As a result the country’s economy is lessened by that capital wasted by government risking the inane or the unproductive.

Another nugget is his clarification on saving, explained as just another format for spending. What is put in the bank or otherwise invested is used by others to generate additional capital (see above) and repaid with interest, providing ample passive return as profit to the investor. Spendthrifts, it’s true, provide employment and comfort for so long as their funds last, but savers provide ever increasing capital flows to the economy in perpetuity.

He offers clear explanations of profit margins as opposed to gross profit—currently a big debate with high oil prices—and indicates that the term profiteer is a pejorative term, but, has anyone ever heard of a wageer? In what way are they different? Somehow wages are acceptable but profits are not. Profits, after all, are the primary determining factor in guiding production: what and how much, indeed, even if! (Unless it is demanded by government.)

Government, he remarks, “always and everywhere tends to assume that production will go on automatically, no matter what is done to discourage it.” Untrue!

Would that he were still alive to dispute the current buzz encouraging “government investments” in the future, or mandates for health insurance which price it out of the reach of so many Americans. I’d find irresistible his predictably disparaging discussion of corn based ethanol and government support of this feeble-minded approach to our energy problems.

Arguments against governmental folly, no matter how logical, are derided because, as the old saw goes: My mind is made up. Don’t bother me with the facts.

Virtually all government attempts to redistribute wealth tend to smother productive incentives and lead toward general impoverishment. It is the proper sphere of government to create and enforce the framework of law which prohibits force and fraud, but it must refrain from specific economic intervention. The primary problem, he emphasizes, is not economic but political.

“When Alexander the Great visited the philosopher Diogenes and asked whether he could do anything for him, Diogenes is said to have replied: ‘Yes, stand a little less between me and the sun.’ It is what every citizen is entitled to ask of his government.”

It is a breezy read, easily understood, and ought to be required reading for every high school student along with anyone else who hasn’t read it.

Posted by respeto at 11:23 AM

April 8, 2008

Empire of the Sun

J.G. Ballard – ISBN – 9780743265232

Immediately after Pearl Harbor the Japanese launched all out war in the Pacific, beginning in the Philippines and in Shanghai where Ballard’s family were English merchants. This novel encapsulates the experiences of its English author, an adolescent prisoner in a Japanese prison camp in China during WWII. It is a first person narrative embroidered with reliable hearsay into a metered exposition of the horrors of China itself, the war, the loss of fear in some situations, and the longing for death in other circumstances, when incarcerated and alone, as he was at the time.

He begins by describing the life of the expatriate communities (representing virtually all western countries), and does so largely in flash-backs. As well, he provides graphic descriptions of the ghastly life of the Chinese peasants of the era. This is an enlightening discussion of the “facts on the ground,” woven into a personal narrative of survival in an era and in a culture which most of us have never known much about, and never explored. It is informative, colorful, eloquent, fulsome, and engrossing. Much of the account describes the savage nature of Japanese occupation and the inherently punishing culture of the Chinese.

While not always an easy read, he explores the consequences of twentieth century technology in relating the flashes from the explosions at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as he lays the groundwork for an understanding of the fact that, co-extant with WW II was the internecine war amongst the Chinese. He explains that as WW II war ended, the Chinese immediately began their separate war between Mao Tse Tung’s Communists and Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalists.

It is a worthwhile read, and reminds of Give Us This Day (ISBN - 9780393319217), Sidney Stewart’s non-fiction account of experiences in Japanese camps and ships after his survival of the Bataan Death March.

Incidentally, I heartily endorse the latter book, the better to understand the horrifying experiences of American prisoners of Japan during that conflict. Reading both expands one’s historic appreciation of the grisly nature of the mid 20th century which is now being repeated in the Middle East. It is obligatory and productive to understand the nature of the enemy now as then.

Posted by respeto at 12:57 PM

December 22, 2008

English History

Made Brief, Irreverent, and Pleasurable
Lacey Baldwin Smith – ISBN 9780897335478

A most apt title is this. It is, indeed, brief, irreverent and pleasurable. Its author clearly has a command of English history, else she could not summarize so readably and well. She canters through history with thumbnails of events, personages and periods with explanations sufficient to her intent. She disposes of minor—and not a few major—people and happenings in a paragraph or two. Nowhere does she dwell inordinately on anything. She is so skilled and concise, and so much fun to read that one overlooks what has to be missing in the sheer enjoyment of what is not. And she’s witty.

For instance, she initiates her brief discussion of the period from 410 to 1066 by observing that the Celts and Anglo-Saxons eventually “learned to tolerate, not exterminate, one another . . . [and though not certain they were a nation] they still liked to insult each other.” And James II is described as stodgy, stubborn and stupid; even his brother thought that James’s mistresses were so ugly and stultifying that they must have been assigned “by his priest for penance.”

She opines that the treasured American picture of God-fearing pilgrims “in black plug hats,” grimly determined to found a Puritan paradise is “not exactly true. . . . God’s people were clothed in the height of Stuart fashion” and came seeking profit as well as the welfare of their souls. Settlements were extremely expensive. For instance, Jamestown cost 100,000 pounds sterling in the first fifteen years. Not until the introduction of Indian tobacco, and the English acquisition of the habit of smoking it, did the colony become profitable.

The continental wars of 1739 and thereafter (the French and Indian War amongst them) were really conflicts between the English, Spanish and French, in which “the Frogs gravely miscalculated.” As a result France ceded Canada, Cape Breton, and her claims to lands between the Allegheny Mountains and the Mississippi River to Britain. She gave over New Orleans and the vast Louisiana territory to the Spanish, who, in turn, ceded Florida to England, leaving Britain the dominant power, leading eventually to her suzerainty over much of North America.

Enlightenment thoughts were spawned by Smith, Bentham, Ricardo, Malthus and others, which cascaded thru literate society, emerging from the old order of landed gentry, which led to vast changes in government. These changes resulted in the loss of wealth and power by said gentry. Contributing to this downfall was the growing “farm power” of the Americas from Canada to Argentina, which had become the breadbaskets of the world.

Franklin warned that obedience of the colonies “depended far less upon ‘forts, citadels, garrisons or armies’ than upon affection.” King and cabinet so scorned Franklin for this that he gave up on the empire and joined the revolutionary movement, whereupon he became the principal architect of its finance by France. Though having lost, Britain was shorn of responsibility for defending and administering the colonies. This facilitated the expansion of empire as England went on to “discover” Australia and New Zealand, firm her control of Canada and India, and promulgate the Industrial Revolution.

Her heady jaunt thru the industrial revolution notes that the “filthy sewers [where lived the peasants of the industrial centers] poured pure gold,” providing the wealth and power needed to finally defeat Napoleon, after which Britain was the unquestioned—and largely unchallenged--world power for the next century. The population grew immensely, providing the “new industrial slums,” which, in turn, transformed the spiritual landscape, brought hell-fire religion into these slums, and became the underpinnings for Victorian morality in the home, factories and in politics.

She gallops thru the African colonial endeavors: contests with France, Germany and Italy which efforts underpinned a European rush for allies. This promoted treaties and guarantees of support which set the stage for WW I. Having paid the price for the Industrial Revolution, Britain reaped its “dragon seeds.” Having financed the revolution the world over, she was now required to compete against those industrial giants—Germany, Japan the Americas, most notably the U.S.—which she had spawned. She lost her edge.

Reasons are not simple, but as “the U.S. leapt from the oil lamp to electricity, Britain remained with the gaslight age, largely because of the power of the gas companies.” Old habits and established powers assisted in her ruination. Coal mines became less productive, but failed to modernize; similarly so with other industries. As well there was a collective refusal to develop aggressive sales. English custom could not accommodate “cheek” (which Yanks referred to as their “can do spirit.”) And their industrial policy overlooked the fact that a ready supply of spare parts was just as important as the quality of the original equipment in keeping customers happy. They fell behind in the educational race, refusing to school her work force or maintain the connections between scientist and engineer. They bought into the concept of “effortless superiority;” they rested on their laurels and were overrun by the rest of the world.

The historic British social ideal was the landed country gentleman, never the engineer, scientist or industrialist. Gentlemen weren’t supposed to work. Rather, they dedicated themselves to the humanities, giving time to public service and ultimately authoring the socialist state. She thus became enamored of Empire, slipped into complacence and became second rate.

After the “war to end all wars” was over, the world advanced, but not so Britain; and after WW II technological improvements were rampant, but Britain was stuck in the past by attitude, proclivity, unions and state control. America, alone in having been undamaged by the war, had developed massive industrial capacity. Germany and Japan were destroyed, but offered a new beginning with wholly modern industry. England was hidebound, and intransigent.

“Deprived of its 19th century industrial head start and struggling to adjust to diminished world status, but still beset by out-of-date memories of Empire and economic hegemony, the Kingdom lurched from one humiliation and crisis to the next.”

She ends with a fair and balanced review of “Thatcherism,” with the resurrection of England, now in the process of failing again, it would seem. Too complacent? Who knows. But there are lessons for not only Britain but America and the world as well.

I strongly recommend a read. I expect to reread this little gem to further digest this phenomenal “outline of British history.”

Posted by respeto at 1:51 PM

January 3, 2008

Ever Wonder Why?

And Other Controversial Essays
Thomas Sowell – ISBN – 9780817947521

As one would suspect, this compendium of essays is luminous, insightful and damaging to those who do not consider the effects (often predictable) of societal policies regarding legal, social, racial, educational and economic issues reflected in the culture war now in progress in the U.S. It is a Philippic, of sorts, but Sowell does have the soul of Demosthenes.

For those unfamiliar with this scholar I encourage you to introduce yourself; for those already initiated you will have read some of these observations before. Both groups, however, will find this a brisk and challenging read. Thinking is required! I thought I’d found my new “bathroom read,” but I was mistaken. I read it thru from beginning to end with regret: at 460 I ran out of pages.

As before, I believe the best way to represent this kind of anthology is listing the better quotes within:

• The welfare state is not really about the welfare of the masses. It’s about the egos of the elites.
• California has long had more than its share of busybodies with a vision of the world in which it is necessary for them to force other people to do Good Things . . . a very flattering vision which they are unlikely to give up for anything so mundane as facts or logic.
• Good Things have costs, often costs all out of proportion to whatever good they might do. But notions like trade-offs and diminishing returns seldom deter zealots, whose own egos are served by their zealotry in imposing their vision, however costly or counterproductive it may be for others.
• The vision of zealots is not just a vision of the world. It is a vision of themselves as special people in that world. (You’ll see the term zealot used frequently . . . and justifiably!)
• Someone once defined a social problem as a situation in which the real world differs from the theories of intellectuals. . . . the real world is wrong and needs to change.
• The U.S. has always been diverse [but] . . . it has always been understood by all that they came here to become Americans—not to remain foreign. . . . Today our “citizen of the world types” [so] all they can to keep foreigners foreign and domestic minorities riled up over grievances, past and present, real and imaginary.
• The free market is a daily assault on the vision of the anointed. Just think of all those millions of people out there buying whatever they want, whether or not the anointed think it is good for them. . . . People who decry the fact that businesses are in business “just to make money” [ignore the fact that] you make money by doing what other people want, not what you want.
• [Just imagine] people earning whatever incomes they get from producing goods or services for other people, with the anointed cut out of the loop, standing on the sidelines in helpless frustration, unable to impose their particular vision of “social justice.”
• Instead of trying to propagandize children to hug trees and recycle garbage, our schools would be put to better use teaching them how to analyze and test what is said by people who advocate tree hugging and recycling.
• Guns are completely inappropriate for the kind of sheep like people the anointed envision, or the orderly, prepackaged world in which they are to live. When you are in mortal danger you are supposed to dial 911, so that the police can arrive on the scene sometime later, identify your body and file reports in triplicate.
• In much of the liberal media, large-scale confrontations between police and people who are breaking the law are usually reported in one of two ways. Either the police “used excessive force” or they “let the situation get out of hand.” Any enforcement sufficient to prevent the situation from getting out of hand will be called “excessive,” and if the police arrive in large enough numbers to squelch disorder without having to use any force at all, then sending in so many cops will be called “over reacting.”
• Whether the one sided reporting of the war in Vietnam was a factor in defeat, there used to be a controversy, but in recent years high officials in the Communist government have themselves admitted they lost the war on the battlefields but won it in the U.S. media and on the streets of America, where political pressures from the anti-war movement threw away the victory for which thousands of American lives had been sacrificed.
• The realities of life force most of us to grow up, whether we want to or not. But for people unprotected from realities by being born rich, or by having lifetime tenure as academics or federal judges, maturity is optional. (One wishes he had added movie and pop stars who rake in zillions for little effort and simultaneously harbor both guilt and a sense of superiority; and do so within the free-market environment which permits this while they fail to understand, and visit it with limitless vitriol.)
• They say you can’t teach an old dog new tricks. But maybe the old dog already knows about tricks that only seem new to the young—and doesn’t think much of those tricks.

Give or take a couple of quotes you are up to about page 50 !!

Posted by respeto at 1:46 PM

December 30, 2009

Extreme Measures

Vince Flynn - ISBN - 978-1416505044

I am generally disinclined to read books of this genre, and I never write reviews on them; at least until now. It is too often said "this is a page turner." I've said it myself. But after reading this book I will be more cautious with that observation. This really is a page turner.

Flynn's plot is elaborate but tight, and he really does keep you on the edge of your chair, figuratively, for the entire read. There is passion, threat, violence, profanity, all you'd expect--and a lot you wouldn't. There are no sex scenes. They're unnecessary.

This episode again involves Mitch Rapp, a 20 year veteran of the CIA. He's an unbelievably tough, dedicated, competent man involved with terrorists for much of his career. His second is Mike Nash, a former U.S. Marine and an agent for 10 years.

The CIA has begun surveillance of Muslim mosques in Washington, D.C. because the FBI will not. The CIA is forbidden to operate within the U.S., which invites trouble. They have discovered a terrorist plot, but haven't sufficient detail to act. One cell leads to a related second cell. Both have been wrapped up, but it is rumored that there is a third cell under the same al-Qaeda command.

The story begins at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, moves from remote training camps, thru Cuba and finally on to Washington. The well integrated sub-plot is the Washington establishment, which is out to get Rapp and others. They've been after him for years. Nasty senate hearings are proceeding in the attempt to crucify the recalcitrants since they don't play nice. They "torture" and violate the rules, including those of the Geneva Convention. (We hear it all the time.) But this time the Harry Reid of the Senate (a lady indistinguishable from Nancy Pelosi, except that she's smart) seems about to succeed. The judiciary committee is stacked with kindred souls who hate Rapp, the legend and the person. The long knives are unsheathed.

As now, 9/11 is all but forgotten. Back then anything done was o.k. Just gettum. But no longer. The fact that America treats terrorists better than its own citizens never seems to occur to them. Everyone gets a N.Y. trial, right? These disastrous "crimes" can be handled thru the courts. But terror attacks are not disasters. Hurricane, floods, and earthquakes are disasters. "You can't stop God or Mother Nature." But terrorists can be stopped, just not while playing by Mickey Mouse rules.

Rapp is finally adamant. He takes congress on. "We've spent the last six years avoiding this fight. I mean to end this s**t right here. . . . We've avoided the problem . . . We spend every day looking over our shoulders wondering if our government is going to ambush us." The fight is unavoidable, so he wants to pick the time and the place. He's convinced that an immediate strike is coming and observes that no senator has ever asked him why he would take gamble by running an illegal surveillance operation. Why would he risk losing his career, his pension, and risk spending decades in prison?

Rapp accepted long ago that most of the players intend no harm, but they downplay or ignore the threats. Most think the letter of the law is the most important thing; that we are a nation of laws and mustn't lower ourselves to "their" level. The first sentiment is naïve, the second is impractical. "Politicians are like parents." They adopt an issue--it's like their child--they lose all objectivity. Enough of this "we are a nation of laws." And "we can't just have the CIA running around doing whatever it wants." Just so!

Until the third cell strikes. Washington is devastated, important people are killed, the operations center is almost destroyed, panic and havoc reign. What went wrong? How did we not know? Who is to blame? Is there evidence of nuclear contamination? Will there be follow-up attacks? What's to be done?

What will Washington do? Will congress finally get the message? It is a riveting read and a far more than passable way to spend a few hours. It's entertainment, sure . . . but it's also very real, and likely a variant of what will happen after the next attack.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 1:52 PM

June 30, 2010

FDR's Folly

How Roosevelt and his New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression
Jim Powell - ISBN - 9781400054770

With the current administration this title becomes immensely relevant. All should read it; especially those on the left. The author begins with a memorable observation:

"It is remarkable [that] respected historians, writing about the most important economic event of 20th century American history, could disregard [all of the] economic literature which challenges their vision. . . . I believe the evidence is overwhelming that the Great Depression as we know it was avoidable."

He then follows up with Walter Lippman [a prominent, skeptical, moderate-left intellectual and newspaper columnist of the era] who opined that "New Deal reformers would rather not have recovery if the revival of private initiative means a resumption of private control in the management of corporate business."

Powell then opens this barnburner; brilliant, succinct, accurate and devastating. It is a deft rendering of FDR's plans and efforts to control, while obfuscating with bald faced lies . . . delivered with a smile. White House conversations often graduated to discussions of "how can we sell this to the public?" He meticulously debunks arguments presented by acolytes. It is a vigorous testament to the folly of anyone convinced that a government committee can somehow improve on "market forces."

New Dealers undertook to compare actual capitalism with idealizedgovernment and their own Utopian goals. Officials were certain that those serving the public interest were more pure than capitalists serving their private interest, and that the economy could be vastly improved upon by establishing bureaucracies and issuing commands. Never was it considered that more power might magnify the harm done by human error or corruption. But of course these sagacious public servants never erred, and corruption was a fault limited to capitalists.

He writes brief chapters with titles identifying what he plans to dismember:
• Why Was So Much New Deal Relief and Public Works Money Channeled Away from the Poorest People? (most notably black folks)
• Why did New Dealers Make Everything Cost More in the Depression?
• Why Did the New Dealers Destroy All That Food When People Were Hungry?

He asks not how, but why. Roosevelt is exposed for intentionally attacking capitalism to establish a progressive government responsible "for" the people rather than "to" them. It was all about governmental power. Few in his administration were well intentioned; fewer still understood economics. The authors of most of the programs were progressives, ill intended from the outset. They ardently pursued their goals, consequences be damned. (Sound familiar?)

Later he deals with
• How Did Social Security Contribute to Higher Unemployment?
• How Did FDR's Supreme Court Subvert Individual Liberty?
• How Did the Tennessee Valley Authority Depress the Tennessee Economy?

These mentions include but a few of the brief chapters in which he "smart-bombs" the New Deal, demonstrating that its policies were clearly deleterious to America's welfare, yet were continued despite their harmful fallout.

Much of the programming was conceived as symbolically important; gestures meant to confirm their noble intent. The left is always most concerned with image as it attempts good things; yet anyone who disagrees is thought to be insensitive, racist, greedy, stupid or worse. And, of course, facts and actual outcomes don't matter; only good intentions. Most of the New Dealers were lawyers, and few amongst them had any real world experience. Being arrogant and inexperienced they were certain that their superior intellect, when combined with political power, would facilitate their therapeutic plans for the world. They were convinced that by issuing executive orders, passing laws, raising taxes, and redistributing money, they could vastly improve society. FDR issued more executive orders than all subsequent presidents; more in a dozen years than did everyone else in the next 63!

This could have been just a diatribe on FDR (who deserves it), but it is not. Powell is clear, straightforward, and discusses not an agenda but how the New Deal was promulgated and why it failed. One will find more than a few comparables to the Obama administration--no surprise since they sing from the same hymnal! Obama has probably done more damage in 15 months than did Roosevelt in 13 years, but America is a very different place now, in considerable measure because of FDR, not to overlook LBJ.

Roosevelt was not a bad man, and did some necessary and honorable things in pursuit of the war against fascism, but his economic program was a disaster (and, itself fascistic), and set the stage for many of our current systemic problems. This little monograph puts to rest, forever, the debate over the New Deal. It was disastrous for the country.

In a better world the book would be required reading for all voters.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 2:08 PM

March 15, 2008

Fair Tax: The Truth

Answering the Critics
Neal Boortz & John Linder – ISBN - 9780061540462

This is the capstone to their prior book suggesting and explaining the Fair Tax. Ever since the release of that book there has been excessive controversy based upon ignorance of their carefully studied program. In this volume, as is suggested by the title, they take on the critics and explain the malaprops, misunderstandings, misrepresentations and outright lies of the opponents of this proposal . . . to the satisfaction of all but the committed opponents, most of whom willingly suspend logic in order to attack the Fair Tax.

Their proposal is so logical, so simple, so uncomplicated and so right that one has to wonder how there can be any logical opposition. A cadre of tax attorneys and accountants might oppose it because they might become unemployed. Politicians might oppose it because they see that such a tax will emasculate them in some considerable measure. With no tax code, per se, they will be unable to dole out favors to contributing constituents searching favors. Not a few businesses benefit from said favors, and might also be expected to oppose the tax for obvious reasons. But make no mistake, the opponents—almost without exception—are in dire opposition for specific, parochial self-interest.

Imagine eliminating the impact of the IRS and FICA from your life: no income or payroll taxes, no records to keep, no audits, no bank searches, no invasion of your life and privacy! No 1040’s, or short-forms either. No deductions because there are no taxes (of the historic kind.) Imagine receiving your full pay check at week's end. No deductions.

Instead you pay a one-time tax . . . a sales tax, more or less, which is applied only to new goods and services. Buy an old car, a “used” house, whatever: no tax. And for all citizens that tax which would be assessed to essentials up to the poverty limit will be pre-reimbursed so that the poor—and the rest of us—will pay no tax upon purchased goods up to, say, $30-40,000. And imagine no underground economy. All will pay the tax. Only citizens (and legal residents) will receive the reimbursement, know as a prebate. The primary investigations will involve those who try to avoid charging or paying the tax, but they will be few because the penalties are severe.

Since every product purchased already has imbedded taxes, the 20+% end-tax will be largely, and in most cases completely, offset by the elimination of the imbedded taxes. Thus the cost of goods and services will change little, or not at all.

Most rational, however, in addition to those facts mentioned above, the Fair Tax will eliminate over 300 billion dollars in compliance costs to industry and citizens. Imagine what that would do for the economy. That's a hell of a lot of "found money," even in an 11 trillion dollar economy. And even that doesn't include the endless hours of aggravation and pain, or the paper, ink, chemicals and trees spared.

It all sounds complicated, but it isn’t if you carefully read, or re-read the first book and follow-up with the second. I recommend both.

IMAGINE! NO APRIL 15TH !
The time has come!!

Posted by respeto at 4:19 PM

June 25, 2010

Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World

From Marathon to Waterloo
Edward Shepherd Creasy - ISBNs below

Beyond doubt, this is the most famous work of military history written in the nineteenth century (published in 1852.) My copy (ISBN - 0880291486) was a re-release by the Military Heritage Press years ago. It was republished in 2008 by Barnes and Noble (9780486461700) and by Nabu press (9781146922531) in 2010. (I'd encourage you to see if you can find a good copy, used, before you ante-up for the new versions, since the Nabu press version appears to be the best, and it is $33 in paperback! A quick "used" search yields at least 6 copies for $1-2 and a handful more for <$7.)

Creasy is a renowned military historian, and this particular work, his best, is diligently researched. His choice of battles upon which to report, and the strength of his narrative is what makes the book such a classic. I decided to reread it recently, and would encourage you to consider it the topic interests you. There is no finer work of this genre. It obviously omits important battles after Waterloo, though it would be interesting to know which battles, aside from Midway, he would choose as changing the course of more modern history, and what he might think of Reagan's "win" of the Cold War.

He is able to skillfully take you into the historic period, and forthwith into the battle details which make for such a wonderful read. Following each battle he gives a thumbnail sketch of happenings up until the next important encounter.

In retrospect, his introduction is unduly hopeful: "It is an honorable characteristic of the spirit of this age [Waterloo in 1815, to 1852] that projects of violence and warfare are regarded among civilized states with gradually increasing aversion." Oops! Me thinks he spoke too soon, maybe?

He describes human courage, honor and nobility along with the agony and destruction of war. As well, he reviews advances in military technology. Mostly, however, he gives the conflicts historic context, explaining who and how, and what impact these events had on the future history of the world.

What, for instance, would the world be like had the Greeks been strangled in their crib by the Persians--an incident prevented by the Greek victory at Marathon? And what of the German "barbarians"--Celts and Teutons who influenced the Saxons, and along with the Normandian Vikings became modern England--if Arminius (Herman the German) had not prevailed over the Romans in 9 A.D. Same so at Orleans, when St. Joan prevailed over the English; the British defeat of the Spanish Armada, and finally the several battles which "settled" the British Empire and set the stage for modern Europe. Granted there is an undercurrent of Britain, the victor, but Creasy was English, and from 1600 on, the Brits were the people to beat, notwithstanding their loss at Saratoga . . . without which, of course, the United States probably would not be.

Unlike more modern "What ifs," Creasy doesn't go too far into alternate realities. He simply reports upon what didn't take place, having set the stage for what might have.

Amongst my favorite passages of the book is his radical insight into "Oriental" (middle and far east) civilizations, which bears mightily upon our current conundrum: "A monotonous uniformity pervades the histories of nearly all Oriental empires. . . . They are characterized by the rapidity of their early conquests, by the immense extent of the dominions comprised in them, . . . by an invariable and speedy degeneracy in the princes of the royal house, the effeminate nurslings of the seraglio succeeding the warrior sovereigns reared in the camp, and by the internal anarchy and insurrections which indicate and accelerate the decline and fall of these unwieldy and ill-organized fabrics of power. It is also a striking fact that the governments of all the great Asiatic empires have in all ages been absolute despotisms. . . . the paternal government of every household was corrupted by polygamy . . . Fathers, being converted into domestic despots are ready to pay the same abject obedience to their sovereign which they exact from their family."

He goes on to opine that "Had Persia beaten Athens at Marathon . . . the infant energies of Europe would have been trodden out beneath universal conquest, and the history of the world, like the history of Asia, have become a mere record of the rise and fall of despotic dynasties, of the incursions of barbarous hordes, and of the mental and political prostration of millions beneath the diadem, the tiara, and the sword.

Keep that insight in mind when you consider the "unimportance" of modern Persia . . . Iran! They are capable of great menace . . . and malice. And they're back for another go-round in their ancient conflict. They haven't forgotten. Have we?

There is no such thing as compromise with these people!

Posted by Curmudgeon at 12:45 PM

January 29, 2010

Finn

Jon Clinch - ISBN - 9780812977141

Clinch undertakes the development of Huckleberry Finn's father, sketched only briefly by Twain in his 1884 classic. The book is fascinating, and could well stand alone, but is more interesting as a long awaited sequel. The language is elaborate and colorful, almost poetic. He paints "Finn" with infinite grace. I've never read a novel so well constructed and linguistically sophisticated, yet nothing is sacrificed by the erudition. Scarlett, it most definitely is not!

One becomes engrossed after but a page or two as he begins to draw his characters. The plot is wickedly serpentine, but easy to follow as he weaves thru numerous tangents, all in the furtherance of plot. Finn's grandfather and father were talented individuals, high up the regional pyramid, and respected, or at least feared. His brother is a wimp, but assists Finn in many ways, usually with neither knowledge nor consent of their bigoted, racist father, against whom Finn has rebelled his entire life.

He's a clever if cruel drunk; a tormented man who acquires what he possesses thru theft, manipulation, fraud and disingenuity. Amongst his chattels is a slave woman whom he acquires thru blackmail, and moves her to his horrible, previously abandoned riverside hovel. He provides for them as a "river man," largely by fishing, and collecting river-born debris to sell to interested locals. Most of his petty earnings are spent on whiskey.

Finn demonstrates occasional flourishes of hidden kindnesses, but even those are usually self-serving. By and large he is a nasty, irredeemable lout. With Mary, his captured "wife," he sires Huckleberry, who by fate or good fortune is born nearly white, and can "pass." Both mother and son are abused, Mary sometimes viciously. Huck disappears to places unknown.

When Huck and Tom Sawyer find a fortune in gold, Finn undertakes to claim "his" fortune to ease his life and provide himself with better whiskey. In this, as in all endeavors, he is truculent, shifty, and irremediably evil. He influences Huck to return, but eventually Mary and Huck leave. Finn eventually coerces her to return as a trade, of sorts--for leaving Huck alone.

Eventually he murders Mary and is in turn murdered. You'll recollect from the original story that Huck finds his dead father in the remnant of his house, floating down the Mississippi River. Clinch explains all.

The book explores familial damage done to the young by tyrannical fathers; as well the stain of slavery and color, even for freed blacks; and specifically the shame of several generations of the Finn family.

There are characters similar to Finn, along with noble personages and interesting people of all stripes between those poles. The women who undertakes to "mother" Huck--the widow Douglas, you'll remember--is considerate and compassionate, as is his mother Mary, despite her origins and travails.

The descriptions of life on the river in the era are fulsome, interesting, and as captivating as Clemens originals. It won't be confused with a "delightful" novel, but it is powerful, explosive, and memorable. Read it!

Posted by Curmudgeon at 2:22 PM

July 7, 2008

Fleeced

(about government, media, corporations, lobbyists and others scamming us)
Dick Morris – ISBN – 9780061547751

Close on the heels of Outrage comes a new offering, which is vaguely Naderesque, except that Morris--unlike Ralph Nader--is not a loose cannon with “tweaked” information and vendetta in mind.

The authors outline endemic corruption, elaborating upon the related issues and possible solutions. These are thoroughly researched, carefully thought thru, simply presented and on the mark. You may not agree with their corrective suggestions, but the expose is damning. As is common recently, he takes a few well deserved shots at the Clintons, which he painstakingly documents.

In the introduction, he reinforces that in our democracy one cannot make all people equal, but government should strain mightily to eliminate artificial inequalities. They explain by whom, and why, it is not being done.

Hedge fund managers are some of the wealthiest amongst us. They manipulate the system to pay only capital gains taxes on their labors (as opposed to their investments), while the rest of us pay ordinary income taxes on such earnings. Congress refuses to close this loophole because these folks donate huge sums of money to campaigns, especially to Democrats. The top 25 fund director’s incomes totaled $14 billion dollars last year, upon which they paid 15% taxes. Had they been properly taxed they would have paid more than twice that amount--for the mathematically challenged, that amounts to almost $300 million in tax savings for just 25 people!

He documents that Senator Schumer (D-N.Y.) raised $2 million from such executives in 2007. In turn, legislation to change the rules was sabotaged . . . by Schumer and associates.

Lobbying firms are multiplying like rats, influencing the legislature mightily, directing multi-billion dollar contracts to their clients and altering legislation in their favor. He names many and elaborates on their activities.

Recently, a $40-100 billion contract went to Airbus—a European company—instead of Boeing, thus sending jobs overseas along with our money. Since the contract is for refueling tankers for our military aircraft, we are outsourcing national security as well. Boeing was previously caught amidst corrupt practices, but the guilty have been punished and they’ve cleaned up their act. Need they suffer more? And why do we have to forgo jobs, send tax money to Europe, and risk national security? Because a few sanctimonious senators and a handful of lobbyists says so.

Numerous American companies work for/with Iran—declared a terrorist nation by our government—yet congress will do nothing to reproach these companies. (Morris recommends that all American investors divest themselves of stock, which will severely impact their stock prices. This was done with South Africa to force the end of apartheid, and it worked. Why not now?) Further, the World Bank, funded heavily by the U.S., continues to lend Iran enormous sums with no strings . . . our tax money going to a terrorist nation some feel we will attack soon, but nothing is done to pressure the bank to cease; at the U.N. it’s no different.

Foreign nationals and governments routinely employ “retired” high level U.S. government officials to plead their cases for special treatment from our government. Why do we permit lobbyists to represent foreign interests? Why do we allow former insiders to represent them in the halls of the bureaucracy with which they are so familiar? This revolving door policy has been discussed for decades, but nothing is ever done, because it involves people who feather their nests after their elected service is over. No one in Washington is going to interfere because it is their retirement plan as well . . . it’s something financially rewarding to do, to screw the public after their careers in government . . . screwing the public.

Being the cynic that I am, I’d suggest that many run for office primarily to get their pension on their way to becoming lobbyists. While President Truman retired to his rocker on a modest pension, Clinton has “earned” over $100 million he has acknowledged. But he has myriad irons in the fire around the globe, some of which activities Morris explores in depth, and a lot of it is sleazy and/or corrupt. Who’s surprised?

Colombia, Morris notes, employs Clinton-linked lobbyists, no doubt picked randomly from the yellow pages.?! After his recent visit to Taiwan they changed lobbyists . . . from Dole-linked to Clinton-linked. Happy accident, that? Note that both linkages relate to former high government officials. The incest is wide-spread, bipartisan, damaging, malicious and rampant.

Customer pillage by credit card companies comes in for special derision from Morris, who notes that despite verbiage to the contrary, nothing is ever done because of huge contributions to our legislators from these banks. Members of the House Financial Services Committee, alone, receive over $12 million annually. Of course there is no quid pro quo! They deny it, and why would you suggest such a thing?

Government subsidized flood insurance repeatedly pays out huge amounts for shorefront losses from predictable hurricanes, and in places with recurring floods. Those who benefit are frequently wealthy, since average folk rarely live in the high-rent districts. Why do middling taxpayers subsidize trophy house replacements on barrier islands and in flood plains? Because the government permits it. Then again, remember that many in government own these McMansions—most of them second homes--and they don’t want to pay the full freight to insure their properties. Better that we do it. It’s another benefit of making the rules.

Government is supposed to reward whistle-blowers who point out corrupt practices and wasteful spending . . . Right? Instead it demotes, hounds, replaces, and even prosecutes them. Why? And why are cinema and T.V.—even child oriented, G. and P.G. genre shows--presenting smokers again, after years in which smoking in film was discouraged? He explains.

These and many more areas are dissected, and I can assure you will be royally p-ss-d off as you read. But devour it; you should! It’s time for changes, and only public indignation will produce it.

Posted by respeto at 11:20 AM

December 3, 2008

Florence of Arabia

Christopher Buckley – ISBN – 9780812972269

This is yet another clever, intelligent, entertaining and madcap novel by one of the masters of the genre: a political satire on Saudi Arabia, the French and the Middle East, including not incidentally French Intelligence, clandestine U.S. organizations and venture capitalists.

Florence (or Flor-enzz) Farfalleti, a well intentioned, dedicated American of Italian extraction undertakes the emancipation of Muslim women with the help of “Uncle Sam”—an American whose identity is not revealed until the last page—and a handful of peculiarly brilliant if snarky and furtive Americans including a shady lobbyist, a defrocked CIA agent and a struggling public relations man.

The nation of Wasabi (not, of course, Wahhabi) is an oil rich country intentionally land-locked in 1922 by the order of Winston Churchill, to even a score with its Sheikh. All of its oil must be piped thru the small country of Matar (pronounced mutter—as in Qatar), which borders the Persian Gulf. Matar’s only source of revenue is the Churchill fee for said access.

Wasabi is a violent, radical Muslim nation noted for beheadings, caning, stoning, and otherwise intimidating its population, especially its women, while Matar is deemed the Switzerland of the Middle-East, where drinking, carousing, and gambling—to mention only a few vices—are encouraged, and whose Emir is a dedicated--actually pathologic--libertine.

The Sheika (Laila) is a beautiful Englishwoman, who had been a successful T.V. personality. They have one son, whom she insists become the Emir. She has required that her husband have no other wives, thus to avoid other legitimate heirs. Consequently he has a harem of lacivious and beautiful women in a separate palace where he spends most of his time doing . . . oh, well, you figure it out. Laila will no longer have relations unless he has a blood test, which he refuses to do, resulting in a stand-off.

Florence moves forth to interest Laila in a T.V. station with programming oriented toward the emancipation of women. They agree. The Emir reluctantly agrees because of the enormous revenue it generates. The target audience is the Muslim women, most specifically those from Wasabi, in order to destabilize it, which situation is desired by Uncle Sam and whomsoever he represents.

It works, of course. The Wasabi powers are enraged and, with French assistance stage a coup. The Emir “disappears” and is replaced by his dull-witted brother, permitting the Wasabi notables to take over effective governance. The support staff is secreted out of Matar and Laila is arrested. Florence is sought, but refuses to leave without freeing her friend.

She offers to exchange herself for the Sheika, but is not to be bamboozled, either. When the Wasabis, the French and the new Emir try to entrap her she goes underground and begins to photograph and report upon the new regime, sending video tapes of executions and the mayhem wrought by the administrative change, which infuriates (some of) the world.

Rather than be enraged, the Europeans—predictably—rail against the events being aired on TV.

As noted, it’s a madcap story, but it’s enormously creative and entertaining . . . and while I won’t give away the important stuff, it does end well, as do Buckley’s other novels.

Posted by respeto at 3:29 PM

August 31, 2007

Florida, a Short History

Michael Gannon – 9780813026800

What did you say? Four years after the re-release of this little volume you [meaning me] finally got around to reading it. Yep. Thaz-rite!

Now I know why . . . or at least I have an excuse. It is indeed short, but it is primarily a review of demographics and politics with a few little vignettes thrown in, such as orange grove freezes, hurricanes, etc. It occurs to me that the “Dean of Florida History” could have done considerably better.

Disappointing would be a kind word for this work. Further, for such a brief digest he manages to repeatedly mention how dismally blacks were treated without mentioning how much things have improved; how blacks were kept out of all save one college during a time when this was universal across the south; how they were re-enslaved in the turpentine camps and other trades and mentions the mini-pogrom in Rosewood in 1923, along with another.

Now, I have no objection to this history being revisited repeatedly to remind of how unjust the U.S. was prior to the peaceful, sensitizing mini-revolt led by Martin Luther King, but it seems to me over the top to dwell on this type of event to the exclusion of all others.

He minimizes some factoids regarding blacks, slipping them in between other data: e.g. over 50% of blacks owned their own farms beginning shortly after the civil war, and continuing thereafter. It seems fair to have been given a little more prominence, especially since the incidence of white ownership was only 10% higher.

I almost forget to mention--but then he did, too--the Seminole War(s). In what he describes as one of the “darkest chapters” of Florida history he recants the second war (no mention of the first and third). This war of genocide warrants two whole paragraphs, occupying nearly two-thirds of a page. In fairness, however, he did include a full page picture of Osceola!

Anyway, if you’re a political junkie it’s probably worth the hour or two it takes. But if you’re interested in more interesting historic vignettes I’d recommend the three volume series: Florida’s Past, by Gene Burnett. It is an anthology of his columns written over 30 years; a great bathroom read encompassing 500 word columns about the lumbering trades, crooked bankers and miscreant land developers, inventors and other noteworthy Floridians, making cigars in Tampa, hunting alligators in the swamp, etc. Put it down any time, pick it up again and open it anywhere. Continuity isn’t intended. It’s just fun to read, and especially for things about which you’d never willingly read more than 500 words, and it might suggest to you subjects you’d wish to explore in greater detail.

Equally good are Jeff Klinkenberg’s columns, also archived in three separate books over the years, the most recent being Seasons of Real Florida; and don’t forget Carl Hiaasen, whose most recent accrual is Kick Ass.

Posted by respeto at 10:49 AM

June 12, 2007

Fools’ Names, Fools’ Faces

Andrew Ferguson – ISBN 0871136511

I would not have been aware of this book had I not read Deja Reviews, recently reviewed on this site. It is no longer in print, but I found several at ABEBOOKS.com for $2 plus postage, and it is very much worth the miniscule effort to get it.

Ferguson, like Florence King, is a pundit and “political assassin.” And, also like King, is an equal opportunity basher, lacerating grand poobahs from Nixon to Clinton, “the Donald” to Bill Moyers, Gennifer Flowers to Imus and Gorbachev to Newt Gingrich. Enjoy !!!

Ferguson is a master at dropping you to your knees in laughter as you wet your pants, as he inserts the unexpected or improbable into his commentary. By way of enticing you to read this book, my review will be limited to just a few such parts of his narrative.

Once, while sharing the stage with Gennifer Flowers during her 15 minutes of fame, the fact that Andrew was on her side in this encounter occasioned her remark: “Thank God. . . . I’ll tell you, whoever said the truth will set you free was full of shit.” Ferguson: “I think that was Jesus.”

While “Babs” was doing her encore: Somewhere, (“Hold my hand and I’ll take you there”) he comments: “Of course she will. . . . Artist as Artist: over the hill. Barbra isn’t merely the defender of modern liberalism. She is its symbol.”

After the Gingrich sweep in ’94: “This sudden turnabout hits the Democrats where they live. For the first time in fifty years they’re behind the curve. Gingrich and his colleagues have mastered the latest dance craze, slamming in the mosh pit to the hottest CDs. . . . And poor Gephardt and Bonior [are] off in the corner, in baggy lime-green leisure suits with lemon-yellow piping, fussing with the eight-track and trying to learn the Hustle.”

“The ultimate trophy is the fax machine [remember, this book is from 1995] . . . but the more commonplace [is the] cellular phone. You see [boomers] walking down the boulevards of every major city, these yuppies with the portable phones attached to their ears, stopping traffic, tripping over hydrants, bumping into lampposts. There are 25 million [of them, and they] display an infantile yearning for incessant stimulation, a pathetic play for self validation a quest for identity in quicksand: I talk on the phone, therefore I am.”

“. . . the central irony of the Information Age: As our means of communication accelerate there are fewer things of interest to talk about and fewer interesting people to talk about them with. . . . so little to say, so many ways to say it. See the businessman on the transatlantic flight with $4,000 of micro-cosmic hardware resting in his lap, plugging in his fax modem with trembling fingers so he can access . . . at the speed of light! In maxicolor liquid crystal display! . . . the New York Times op-ed page.”

“I remember the moment when my disenchantment with the Information Age became irreversible. I had flipped on AOL one night and joined a celebrity forum. The special guests were Shari Lewis and Lamb Chop. The questions from out in cyberspace came fast and furious, for both guests, and the reality of the thing hit me all at once: from coast to coast, people with the intelligence to operate computers were actually sitting at home and conversing with a hand puppet. . . . This is the revenge of the nerds!

“For years, commentators speculated on Gorbachev’s intellectual development, as he worked his way through the classics of Western political thought: from Aristotle to the Declaration of Independence and the Federalist Papers, through Lincoln and even to Hayek. He has finally come to rest, on the Whole Earth Catalog.”

And my personal favorite: “At the kickoff dinner of the State of the World Forum [there was] a distinguished company including retired diplomats (George Shultz and Zbigniew Brzezinski), Nobel laureates (Guatemala’s Rigoberta Menchu and the Bell Labs physicist Arno Penzias), science popularizers (Carl Sagan and Fritjof Capra), movie stars (Jane Fonda and Shirley MacLaine), rich guys (Ted Turner and David Packard), New Age gurus (Sam Keen and Deepak Chopra), and many more—five hundred in all, leading lights from business, politic, religion and the arts. Such an extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge and spiritual insight has not been seen in a single room since Bill Moyers dined alone.”

But I’ll leave some of the best for you to discover on your own, and encourage you mightily to do so . . . ASAP.

Posted by respeto at 1:38 PM

October 25, 2006

For One More Day

Mitch Albom – ISBN-13 – 978-1401303273

Again, the author of Tuesdays with Morrie, and The Five People You Meet in Heaven writes a poignant book. Pretty good, but it appears to me that after his blockbuster, and the (lesser) follow-on, he might consider going back to sports writing.

In this epistle he reviews the life of a washed-up, rather unsuccessful, alcoholic ex-minor league baseball player who attempts to commit suicide, only to reconnect with his deceased mother, a loving person and forgiving person who always set him straight. She does so—again, as it were--but the plot line too carefully follows that in “five people,” and is spotty and seemingly not as authentic as his two prior successes.

As is his forte, he plucks the heart-strings, and has occasions when he “gets you where you live,” but doesn't begin to achieve the effect he has had before.

Mom has had a hard life, filled with sacrifice, and has coped with it heroically. Sonny is, by almost any measure, a failure. Nonetheless he does recoup, sober up, reconnect with his estranged daughter and develop a tolerable relationship with his ex-wife.

Borrow it from a neighbor or the library and save your $22. Snow Flower and the Secret Fan, or Never Let Me Go, while lengthier are not only better, but cheaper, inasmuch as they are now available in paperback.

Posted by respeto at 1:10 PM

October 18, 2008

For the Glory of God

How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-hunts and the End of Slavery
Rodney Stark - ISBN – 9780691119502

Stark is well qualified as a sociologist (of religion) to discuss this subject, and this text is wonderfully complete, though his scientific style and turgid prose takes a little getting used to. (A collaborator might have been helpful.) Notwithstanding, it is worth the time . . . and it will take time, because one can only read 20-30 pages at a sitting, and the book weighs in at 375 pages (of 10 point TNR script with not a lot of white space for margins)

He is unforgiving of historians and scientists as a group, noting that they--habitually and by discipline--are reluctant to accept, let alone discuss how religion is responsible for anything good. They teach that Newton was much too sophisticated to believe in God, yet he was a devout Christian and the quintessential student of God’s handiwork. Enlightened, they say, are far above superstition and thus couldn’t possibly be religious. No one intelligent could be. Nonsense!

He reviews the history of religion(s), amplifying how people, acting “for the glory of God” have been responsible for their cultures from time long past, and that monotheism has set the course for modernity for Judeo-Christianity, but not for Islam. He explains that Islam is taught to accept the world is as it is and live in it under the dictates of an irrational, unpredictable, ruthless Allah. Contrariwise, Judeo-Christianity posits God as rational, responsive, dependable and predictable. His world is thus understandable, by applying reason, study and science. It awaits only human comprehension. Christianity developed science because there was belief that it could be done. In so doing birthed the university as an offshoot of the cathedral schools, peopled by speculative thinkers. Christian thinkers gained fame thru innovation, while other cultures teach only received knowledge—often adding to it in non-scientific ways.

While the ancient Greeks,and others, contributed mightily to the store of knowledge, they never created science. Likewise with the Chinese, Indians, Romans, and Muslims--the religion of each is explained in turn. All had highly developed alchemy, yet never developed chemistry as did Christian Europe; similarly so with astrology’s graduation to astronomy. “Christian theology was essential for the rise of science in the West, just as surely as non-Christian theologies stifled the scientific quest everywhere else.” Science is not an extension of classical learning. Rather, it is an outgrowth of Christian attitudes including the intelligent quest for God’s immutable principles.

Contrary to received wisdom Christianity didn’t “plunge” Europe into an era of ignorance. So much technical progress took place from the 6th century forward, that by 13th century European technology surpassed anything anywhere in the world. (It appears the “dark ages” weren’t so dark after all.) This was the result of speculative and innovative progress of quizzical and querulous minds. It is taught that a “scientific revolution” was possible due primarily to a weakening of Christian control, andthat this limitation resulted in the recovery of classical learning. This is as false as those certainties concerning Columbus and his courage in challenging the flat earth. It's all bunkum.

The Renaissance and the flowering of European science in the 1500’s was a direct consequence of the theology of the age, but it also led to witch-hunting by many otherwise sober people (who were not part of the middle-ages, but rather of the “Enlightenment.”) Similarly this concept of God resulted in the Christian denunciation of slavery as an abomination. Interestingly, some of the most notorious of the witch burners were vigorous participants in the abolition movements. It was the Christian Scholastics--not the Greeks, Romans, Muslims or Chinese--who based their studies upon science.

He does explore in detail the persisting arguments over Darwin’s hypothesis, quoting amongst others Richard Dawkins. He eviscerates the arguments against intelligent design as he observes that Dawkins “knows the many serious problems that beset purely materialistic evolutionary theory, but asserts that no one except true believers in evolution can be allowed into the discussion, [and that these discussions must] be held in secret.” As well, he emphasizes out that a majority of modern scientists in all disciplines consider themselves religious.

We all tend to refer to the Spanish inquisition and witch trials. In fact, Spain was far more quiescent than much of the rest of Europe, since it had a much stronger government than anywhere else, and governments generally suppressed these activities, unlike more remote villages in what is now France and Germany. Moderns, he notes with some amusement, tend to blame blind fanaticism of these ancient prosecutors for their failure to see that they were manufacturing accusations. Missing is their awareness of current prosecutors “rolling up” cases with much the same vigor (the Duke Lacrosse team comes to mind.)

Interestingly, witch-hunts did not occur in Islamic cultures, in part because magic is imbedded in Islam, and was not a threat to Islamic power structures.

Slavery has been an institution since the advent of civilization. Indeed is universal inasmuch as it is a function of human productivity. It is not intrinsic to more sophisticated cultures. The concept of owning someone to produce for you ain’t so bad . . . unless you’re the “ownee.” Stark first elaborates on the history of slavery, then delves into the morality, and the critical relevance of Christianity to the abolition of slavery. He observes that slavery was a Muslim business centuries before Europeans discovered the New World, and debunks the prevailing attitude that serfdom and slavery were much the same thing. Abolition, he emphasizes, is not inherent in Christian scripture, but was the only possible conclusion--ultimately reached under favorable circumstances, thru a long and complex series of political crises leading ultimately to the civil war in the U.S.

One could go on indefinitely, but this should be enough to interest (or disinterest) y’all.

Consider it. It’s worth the time to labor through it.

Posted by respeto at 1:52 PM

December 20, 2008

Forgotten Fatherland

The Search for Elisabeth Nietzsche
Ben Macintyre – 9780060975616

This is the last of the Ben Macintyre books . . . actually, his first, but from the title the least interesting. But, surprise, it’s quite good; altogether is in keeping with my opinion of Macintyre’s talents.

Elisabeth Nietzsche was the sister of the philosopher who is credited with providing the basis of Nazism. In fact, not unlike Jackie Kennedy’s creation of Camelot, Elisabeth warped her brother’s philosophy to make it fit hers, with her nihilism, anti-Semitism, etc. Freidrich was way off the planet in many regards, and became insane at an early age, but a Nazi he was not! His sister took care of him during his last years, and misused his fame and notoriety to wholly mischaracterize his philosophy. This is Macintyre’s quest, and he deals with it quite satisfactorily, disabusing the reader of most everything “Nazish” we’ve learned about Nietzsche. His mini-bios of both characters and their supporting casts is interesting and informative of the individuals, and that period in German history.

What I found most interesting, however, was the back-story of the book; the founding of an obscure German colony in the Paraguayan jungle in the mid-1880’s. Known to most of us is the fact that Paraguay was a hotbed of Nazi sympathizers and Nazi war criminals after WW II, but the little known tale of Nueva Germania is fascinating.

That Elisabeth and her husband--a virulent anti-Semite--undertook to entice and partly subsidize a colony of “pure Germans” is fascinating in itself. The thrust of their effort was to isolate the most Germanic of those interested in participating in this endeavor, thus to breed a “Jew (and commerce) Free” colony of progressively more pure Aryans. At the time Germany was in a serious recession, and many of its peasants were leaving--amongst them my great-great-grandfather. Some emigrated to the United States; others to South America, and some to Paraguay, which had just experienced a depopulating civil war and was encouraging immigrants by selling land cheaply.

Nueva Germania was conceived and executed, but was immediately in trouble. Elisabeth and husband grossly mischaracterized the endeavor, presenting it as a Utopia. It was not, and as this became known subscription dwindled and settlers left, if not for the homeland, at least for the cities of Paraguay. Soon a departing soul wrote a book exposing the settlement as a complete fraud, which all but terminated what remained of interest in settling there.

In the summarizing chapter Macintyre describes in detail his rather harrowing search for the jungle colony in 1992, a century after its founding. He describes the colony in vivid detail and the saga is absorbing. There are a handful of pure Germans there, indeed. These were the struggling offspring of those from generations past who were too poor to emigrate even from their colony. Those who have isolated themselves from the native populations are increasingly physically irregular or mentally retarded because of five generations of inbreeding. Others have begun to integrate with the natives, such that there is a population of dark-skinned, blue-eyed people who care not at all about Germanic ideation or customs.

During the post-war period a few famous Nazis were thought to have spent time there because of its isolation; amongst them Joseph Mengele, though there is no hard proof.

It is a tale of hubris and the ultimate survival of a lost race, the result of near hysterically motivated insistence on purity which has culminated in a forlorn, unknown disaster, except where it is disappearing. An interesting read for those inclined toward such a subject.

Posted by respeto at 4:14 PM

June 13, 2011

Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries

Science and Pseudoscience in Archaeology
Kenneth Feder - 9780072869484

Feder does a good job of discrediting myriad myths and mythmakers, from ancients to Erich von Daniken. The book is well researched and written to deliver a breezy read for the average layman, offering explanations which are logical and readily understood. He joyfully buries von Daniken's hypotheses in Chariots of the Gods, which is particularly offensive drivel, and his other writings which intend to make credible his theories about ancient visits from foreign astronauts who were seminal (literally) in fostering improved human evolution and culture. Nah!

He begins with the millennial Atlantis legends, and explores them sequentially thru the ages. As well he pursues biblical and other flood mythology, though I felt him inadequately laudatory of the works of Ryan and Pittman ( Noah's Flood ), and he didn't even mention Oppenheimer ( Eden in the East ) He discusses English stone circles (e.g. Stonehenge), the several Pharaoh's tomb curses, the Piltdown and Cardiff men, along with more recent hypotheses such as Barry Fell's tracts on the population of the Americas by Celts and others in antiquity; and he destroys "psychic archaeology." I admit to having been a fan of Fell since his book America B.C., published coincident with America's bicentennial. Feder finally convinced me that Fell was a fraud, despite what I feel was Fell's honest intent.

He does allow that some of the people pursuing these would be--and actual--myths are well intentioned, though many are intentionally deceptive, most commonly with a profit motive.

He explains the Viking episodes in "Vinland," and mentions that their sagas describe the availability of wine grapes, while allowing that the habitation sites which have been found are altogether too far north to accommodate the "Vin" part, so he accepts that it is likely that Vikings made it much further south, but won't draw any conclusion, since no artifacts have been found. Archaeology, he opines, is a fascinating field which has suffered because of its popularity, but is responsible to the same rules as other sciences.

He reviews the mound cultures, and explores Cahokia in some very interesting detail. I found it disappointing, however, that there was nary a mention of Koster--in southern Illinois, 70 miles away--which is arguably the most important treasure in North American archaeology, having been fully excavated, exposing 26 levels of habitation over a time period of nearly 10,000 years, with the discovery of myriad fascinating facts about life at the site, not to mention that the lead archaeologist, Stuart Struever, single handedly invented modern archaeology at that site. This is an unforgivable oversight ! Perhaps it is because there are no myths associated with the site, but, really, it deserved mention at least.

While I can hardly compare my working knowledge of many of these subjects to his, and while he is careful to acknowledge that accepted facts are constantly being updated and added, he too often pooh-poohs suggestions contrary to received wisdom within the community of dedicated archaeologists. For instance, he allows that the Vikings did, indeed, make it at least as far as Newfoundland, and probably Massachusetts, but he omits consideration of the fact that prior to the 1950s the community was adamant that there had been no one here--other than Indians--before Columbus. That is patently false, and archaeologists have reluctantly accepted that. But they are human, too, and have pegged their lives and reputations on their opinions. They are regularly obdurate when their theories are challenged, which leads to overlooking observations which challenge their own pet hypotheses.

There are evidences that man has been here since well before the trek across the Bering Strait from Asia during the recent ice age (if, in fact, they did get here that way, which in my opinion is still conjectural.) They have been in central and south America for as long as 40,000 years; and there are genetic and linguistic studies that suggest that man has arrived in the New World at various times, and by various means; that all of the Indians are not so neatly related as current "understandings" would suggest. The fact that the archaeological community is unwilling to accept that aboriginals may have arrived by boat as much as 20,000 years before they are presumed to have walked across the Bering Strait does not rule out that possibility, and especially since that community is confident that aboriginals hadn't the skills to so do, ignoring that the Australian aboriginals arrived there over 40,000 years ago, and were isolated until Cook "discovered" the place in 1770. They are similar to African blacks, but no one really knows from whence they came.

"But we've always known that . . . . fill in the blank." Archaeology as a science is not yet 200 years old; there is much we do not know, and while it is prudent not to get carried away with fanciful theories built upon bizarre dreams and opinions, it is likewise imprudent to determine that "such and such" is agreed upon fact, and settled science. There is no such thing. Not in any scientific field, so why should we worship at the shrine of some dead (or living) archaeologist? Having practiced medicine for years, I learned long ago that almost nothing is settled science, and new information always requires new, if tentative, conclusions and an altered modus operandi. A little humility is in order, me thinks. Damned little is certain.

It's well to keep in mind that famous old Keynesian quote: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" Many, in any scientific community, doggedly resist a change of mind even when faced with irrefutable facts, because they have a lifetime investment in what they believe and don't want to have their pet theories overturned, or see their work devalued.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 2:15 PM

November 22, 2005

Galileo, Darwin and Hawking

(the interplay of science, reason and religion)
Phil Dowe – ISBN 0802826962

Written by an Australian philosopher, the book explores the tension between religion and science, reason and faith, the harmony and disharmony between these endeavors thruout history.

He expresses a subtle nihilism in dealing with the faith of religion, and is too optimistic in glossing over “faithful” positivity in science—which is always factual while religion is opinion. While often true it is not always so.

Religion and science are deemed complementary and perhaps interdependent, but I object to his minimization of faith in unresolved (and unresolvable!) science: creation and life itself come to mind.

Using the principals mentioned in the title, the broad (and many individual) fields of science and religion are carefully explored and explained in a fashion understandable and interesting to the average reader. Science, the exercise of reason and the scientific method, he believes (or implies) will eventually provide all answers. He tends, generally, to champion Hawking and Darwin, minimizing the deep Catholicism of Galileo.

I remain bemused by philosophers and scientists who walk us thru the rational human mind of quantum physics, mathematics, cosmology, randomization, etc., all the way back to “the big bang,” without allowing that some incomprehensible force or power just might (and in my opinion had to) have been involved in creating that unimaginably dense little golf-ball sized hunk of matter that went bang in the first place.

And why, with the myriad possible permutations of that explosion, did we end up with this perfectly balanced universe?

Hmmmmm! Still, an interesting read for content and explication.

Posted by respeto at 1:40 PM

May 25, 2008

Good Germs, Bad Germs

Health and Survival in a Bacterial World
Jessica Snyder Sachs – ISBN – 9780809050635
(due out in paperback in September)

Sounds deep and dreary, but hers is an incredibly informative book written in such a manner that laymen can easily understand it. The operational observation is that this is, and has always been a bacterial world--they being the oldest inhabitants of the planet--while the rest of us have to deal with them.

Nonetheless, most bacteria “inhabiting” the human body are either of the saprophytic variety, or actually function in ways which are beneficial to us and to them. Man’s ancestors evolved with bacteria, as they in turn have evolved within required parameters for their own existence. Indeed, it is becoming very apparent that much of our RNA is viral particles incorporated into our genome millions of years ago.

An increasing number of microbiologists now appreciate the often profound importance of these facts, and studies are now in hot pursuit of finding other means of controlling the “bad germs” which get out of hand and produce severe illnesses: those debilitating—or even fatal.

By now we’ve all developed a conversational knowledge of bacterial resistance--immunity to newer, heavy-duty antibiotics colloquially known as gorillacillins. These agents, in addition to killing everything in reach, are noted to regularly have serious side effects, too. The time has come to seriously look for other approaches: re-colonization with beneficial bugs, developing “attack” bugs, implementing dietary augmentation and the like. Further, it is time to assess the net effect of raising our food stock (animals and some vegetables) by using antibiotics to keep them from getting sick, since this exposes us to the antibiotic as well as the more resistant microbes which are sub-cultured by such use.

In prior times we all lived in a more “dirty” environment, from which we acquired a resistance to various bugs in much the same way as vaccines produce immunity to minor variants of lethal bugs. Now, there is nothing wrong with cleanliness, but in our ever-so-clean modern environment we are depriving ourselves, and more importantly our children, of exposure to these bugs, which leaves us extremely vulnerable. Further, there is evidence that numerous allergies, asthma, diabetes, varietal inflammatory diseases, and a host of other ailments including Alzheimer’s are in part produced by this environmental manipulation. It is becoming more apparent that even anxiety and depression may be related to these same phenomena. It ain’t that good to kill all the bugs, a naïve concept in the first place, since we can’t! They have survived for billions of years in environments more hostile than any we can create. G-d has provided animals, including man, with the ability to cope with such exposure.

Sachs elaborates upon the immunological result of our “clean fetish,” and explains how this is seriously altering our quality of life. We need to begin paying serious attention. She delves into these varietal conundrums in such a way that she maintains interest as she patiently explains the problems.

“Since the dawn of civilization, the demon of pestilence has been a part of our lives and fears. Sanitation and antibiotics gave us our first powerful weapons against this great foe . . . [and] we have wielded them crudely, without appreciation either for the role that bacteria play in maintaining our health or for their infinite capacity to adapt to whatever poisons we throw at them.”

“As naïve as it may sound in a day when killer superbugs dominate our headlines, a growing scientific consensus is forming that it’s time to move beyond our escalating war on microbes and look for ways to foster a truce in what will always be a bacterial world.”

Posted by respeto at 11:33 AM

July 28, 2008

Good Night, Mr. Tom

Michelle Magorian – ISBN 9780064401746

This is not my usual fare. I stumbled on to it in random reading, and present it only because it is a wonderful book for adolescents, and interesting for adults. Published in 1982 by a “one book” author, it won a children’s book award in England. It is a classic of sorts, and still in print. Also a movie available from NetFlix.

The plot line is that of early WW II in England, and children were being evacuated to the countryside for their safety. Mr. Tom, a widower of many years, condescends to take in a young refugee—Willie—from the slums of London. Willie is a shy, abused, mousy little creature afraid of everything and convinced that he is worthless, friendless and irredeemable. Mr. Tom changes all of that, with a wonderful assist from the villagers of remote L’il Weirwold.

Willie becomes Will, has friends and a future, though he experiences a number of calamities along the way, including a brief return to his abusive mother.

The horrors of Will’s life are overwhelmed by the loving care of Mr. Tom and the Weirwoldians. Along the way Will learns many things about the world outside of the slums, and teaches many life lessons applicable to all young readers, as it reminds us old codgers of their continued importance.

This would be a wonderful gift for adolescent grandkids. Cheap, too.

Posted by respeto at 11:42 AM

January 12, 2007

Great American Scandals

Tantalizing, true tales of historic misbehavior by the Founding Fathers and others.
Michael Farquhar – ISBN – 9780142001929

This book has been a resident on my shelves since the store was opened, but only recently did I read it. It is pleasuresome, informative, often risqué, and sometimes downright awful in its revelations . . .and entertaining from page one to the end.

Farquhar chronicles the misadventures of a important people, malignant political campaigns, “sexocapades,” dueling, murder and mayhem, the “not so civil war,” alcoholism, notorious traitors, Dred Scott, Joe McCarthy, and assassins, as he reviews the Salem Witch Trials, Teapot Dome, the “adventures” of Meriwether Lewis and J. Edgar Hoover “in drag,” along with a hose of others.

Did you know that Lincoln was disinterred 12 times before his final resting place? Or that John Paul Jones was pickled in alcohol and disappeared beneath the streets of Paris for over a century before being rediscovered, entombed and deservedly honored at the Naval Academy at Annapolis—where the midshipman promptly identified him as the only one there who didn’t work? Or that Thomas Paine died in obscurity, was disinterred, sold in pieces, boiled to the bones . . . said bones having then disappeared without a trace? Buried nowhere. Neither did I.

Which Presidents were assassinated? Kennedy . . . and Lincoln . . . and, a . . . and, a . . . I forget! Remember ? . . . oh, yea . . . Garfield and McKinley. Who participated in the floor fights and canings in the House of Representatives? Who shot whom in duels?

You young whippersnappers won’t remember . . . and have almost certainly have not read about Althea Hall, Fannie Fox, the “Tidal Basin Bombshell” (and Wilbur Mills), or Elizabeth Ray (and Wayne Hays).

His end notes are interesting, as well. He lists all the Presidents from Washington to Bush 43, identifying birth date and place, death, election, terms served, and “distinctions.”
• Lincoln was the tallest and Madison the smallest, as well as being the longest surviving signer of the Declaration of Independence.
• Martin VanBuren was the first president born an American.
• William Howard Taft was the first to open baseball season by tossing the first pitch. As well he was the fattest.
• Hoover was the first to have a phone on his desk, the first to appear on T.V., and longest lived after his term ended.
• Truman was the first to travel in a submarine.
• Kennedy was the only Catholic president, the youngest ever elected, first to be born in the 20th century, and the only one survived by both parents.
• Reagan the first divorced president, the oldest elected to his first term, and the oldest at death (until Ford, last week.)

And, finally he reviews seminal, and some trivial events, year by year (skipping quite a few early years), from the landing of Leif Eriksson in 1000 A.D. to the Senate investigations of Billy Carter in 1980.

It’s a decent sourcebook for designing your own version of Trivial Pursuit

And he notes that in 1859, following a Washington scandal, Harpers Weekly asserted that “no capital in the world is more rotten than ours.” Sigh . . . The more things change, the more they stay the same!

Posted by respeto at 1:06 PM

October 29, 2008

Hell Hath No Fury

True Stories of Women at War from Antiquity to Iraq
Rosalind Miles and Robin Cross – ISBN 9780307346377

Ostensibly this book provides biographies of the most important “Battle Axes” in world history. Sounds like it’d be great fun. Unfortunately it wasn’t. It is poorly written, and is essentially synoptic of other writings, most of them of little consequence . . . rather like the Biography Channel using People Magazine as a source for their presentations. Indeed, a disproportionate number of the women included are gleaned from one other source, which original may or may not be better than is this book.

It also includes such entries as “Rosie the Riveter,” who wasn’t a warrior at all, and existed only as a fictional representative of women working in war time factories, and Helen Kirkpatrick and Christiane Amanpour were both war correspondents, and Tokyo Rose broadcast to American troops in the Pacific during WW II, etc.

I got bored and skimmed the last half of the first half, and flipped thru the remainder, reading at random.

Save your money, and spend your time reading something--anything--else.

Posted by respeto at 3:31 PM

May 16, 2010

Heroes

From Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar to Churchill and De Gaulle
Paul Johnson - 9780061143168

Johnson's prior works in this series are Intellectuals and Creators. Both are outstanding and informative. I'm a great fan, and in his newest work he does not disappoint.

He defines heroes and heroines as people who are independent of mind, and--having made up their mind--act consistently, with resolution; they ignore or reject what is thrown at them and hew to their course, finally acting with personal courage at all times, regardless of consequences. Tough list to make, that.

As usual he writes with an encyclopedic knowledge, distilled eloquently into brief essays which serve his purpose. His judgment of characters about whom to write is interesting. He picks--for the most part--prominent people from history: Sampson and David; Alexander and Caesar; Boudica and Joan of Arc; Thomas More, Lady Gray and Mary, Queen of Scots; on to Elizabeth I, Raleigh, Wellington, Nelson and Washington; he includes Byron, Dickinson then Lincoln and Lee, working toward his finale with Churchill, De Gaulle, adding last Mae West, Marilyn Monroe, Reagan, Thatcher and John Paul II. His essays are thought provoking, informative and a delight to read as he points out things of import which are well known and others which are not. Along the way he salts his stories with a lot of fringe characters who fit nicely into his narrative.

He observes that many are worshipped as gods by some, some by many; others are present in living memory, their future to be determined by unknown events; many are studied historically as still others are largely forgotten. He makes a point to include many who are neither politicians nor warriors, indicating that hero status must not be limited to those who compete only in those arenas; many, indeed, are not especially heroic because of their debauchery in said endeavors, even if they prevailed.

His characters are "creatures, recognizably human but of great capacity and accomplishment, who stood halfway between deities and the rest . . . people recognized as powerful individuals doing challenging things in difficult times."

Some characters, he opines, have improved with age, while others haven't weathered well. Genghis Khan was reviled for a millennium but is now resurrected in Central Asia; Lincoln was considered a bumpkin in his time, yet is now revered; Wilson was a hero in his time, but his image is currently under attack as he shrinks by the day. Clive of India, Cecil Rhodes and Lawrence of Arabia are also suspect. Such is the pantheon he portrays with his own special aura in Heroes.

As with the afore mentioned books in the series, his style is superb, his delivery variably hilarious or indignant as he lauds and dissects his subjects, pointing out pomposity, malice, hubris as well as competence, compassion, accomplishment and more. It is an informative, entertaining, insightful, and wholly delightful book . . . as you'd expect from this writer!

Posted by Curmudgeon at 11:21 AM

March 30, 2010

Holidays in Hell

P. J. O'Rourke

If you've never read anything by this man you have missed a lot of humor, candor, and laugh-out-loud anecdotes accompanied by interpretations of them. For years he was a foreign correspondent, covering wars and disasters. In this tome he describes, chapter by chapter, some of the worst places on earth: Lebanon, Seoul, Panama, Warsaw, Russia (and Chernobyl), the Philippines, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Mexico, the Holy Land ("God's Monkey House"), and offers commentary on "Darkest American" sites: Epcot Center, Heritage America, a stint at the America's Cup yacht race, and Harvard's 350th Anniversary. It's a real hoot! Mayhem, riots and violence are graphically, yet wryly reported. The discussion of El Salvador (Christmas, 1985) is alone worth the price of the book. And Harvard's 350th is a howler. It's zany, but full of facts . . . many of them gut-wrenching.

He begins by emphasizing that "Civilization is an enormous improvement on the lack thereof;" then describes wildly corrupt and dangerous places to prove his point. "Western Civilization provides a bit of life, a pinch of liberty, and the occasional pursuance of happiness; it's also the only [society] that's ever tried to. . . . We are fools when we fail to defend [it]. . . . War will exist as long as there's a food chain. No amount of mushy essaying . . . and no number of noisy, ill-kempt women sitting in at Greenham Common will change this. . . . Better we study to conduct war as decently as possible and as little as necessary. . . . We think war is a John Wane movie. We think life is a John Wayne movie--with good guys and bad guys; as simple as that." After months of dealing with "Euro-Weenies:" Well, it is not, "Mister Limey Poofter," you say WE BE BAD. We don't all agree on that !! (Though far to many of us do!)

As for Central and South America . . . no one, least of all us, is wrecking them. They "came pre-wrecked." Why is Mexico so poor? C'mon, wake up! It isn't just squalid homes, but squalid industry, squalid infrastructure and squalid corporate poverty, intellectual and otherwise. "The whole country looks like it's run by slum lords. Especially the bathrooms."

At dawn in Jerusalem, "you could be in any century," but by mid-day you know exactly. You're in the twelfth, where "everybody is bashing everybody over the head about God." The universal hatred seems incredibly out of keeping in the Holy Land. It had never occurred to him that God, or hatred, could permeate (mostly Palestinian) people this way.

And after a night on the town (in Poland), including some nudity: "To grasp the true meaning of socialism, imagine a world where everything is designed by the post office, even the sleaze." The root of socialist problems is boredom, according to P.J. Our sixties generation (of which he's a member) rebelled against boring commercialism and boring materialism. The socialists rebel from the lack thereof. While the Evil Empire starves and executes people by the thousands, "mostly it bores them to death." (On the serious side, consider the incidence of alcoholism, etc.)

Suffice it to say that, while quite informative, and more than occasionally quite serious--sometimes gravely so--it is also a rollicking run thru chaotic parts of the world; good history, and immensely entertaining.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 2:39 PM

November 29, 2009

Honor, a History

James Bowman - ISBN - 978159401984

This is an elegant discussion of honor from the inception of civilization to the dawn of 20th century. From the outset, in virtually all cultures throughout the world, honor has been inseparable from the story of civilization. But it has now disappeared in the West.

The book is a bold and soul-searching. It is a serious indictment of progressivism in which self-esteem--awarded free, as a birthright--has been substituted with disastrous results for honor. Loyalty, honor and patriotism are being severely compromised by the left, and proving fatal to that which we used to hold dear. The deficit is destroying our civilization.

The appeal of the code of honor is precisely that it isn't about morality. Public business is not conducted by saints. A boundary must separate public from private life. The removal of honor results in merging of these spheres.

Instead we have a culture of celebrity. Those wishing to be "stars" are required to join in the "feelings derby," if only to reassure that they have no ambitions to the "greatness" associated with honor (in which culture celebrity is dishonorable.) Worse, absent an honor culture generations are now taught to be ashamed of whom they are. The self-hatred is consuming. It has not been long since the dawn of the era of myriad millionaire celebrities: news anchors, professional athletes, movie stars and businessmen; a culture in which there is no honor, only profit . . . that and being politically correct, multicultural and all that folderol.

"You could say that the most important survival of honor in the West--that by which we separate our intellectual, moral and social elites from the rest--lies in this sense of exclusivity on the part of the enlightened and progressive-minded honor group who regard themselves as being above the demands of honor."

Discussion follows the history of war, and many of his chapters discuss the implications of honor in that effort. Conceptually it is stark: fight or run; hero or coward; honor or dishonor. In this and other permutations, the concept is at odds with the spirit of our therapeutic age of analytical non-"judgmentalism." We are now "charmed" by nuance, irony and ambiguity.

At the time of WW I psychology wasn't established. There was no pernicious jargon to cloud simple issues. "Right was right and wrong was wrong and the Ten Commandments were an admirable guide. . . . Frugality, austerity and self-control were perfectly acceptable. We believed in honor, patriotism, self-sacrifice and duty and we clearly understood what was meant by a 'gentleman.'" (Whereas we now hear terrorists being referred to as gentlemen.)

Thereafter we initiated a process which, by century's end had made the "heroic sufferer" the only recognized form of hero, and the policy of appeasement in the 1930s came to accept war as avoidable simply by a refusal to fight.

Honor, word and concept, are arcane today except in situations where meaning is essentially stripped from the recitation (duty-honor-country; on my honor I will do my best.) Honor has become a dirty word. Those who lead us, informed by Wilsonian idealists and their radical successors, have come to regard all fighting--even fighting back--as deplorable and shameful. "There's a better way."

Yet the only rational response to war is war. The alternative simply encourages the adversary. A great many intelligent people believe that by behaving in a friendly and accommodating way we will show our attackers that they have nothing to fear from us. That such conduct is taken by a ruthless enemy as a sign of weakness is as foreign to progressives as is the idea of honor itself.

"The long view of human history suggests that our choice is eventually going to be not between the liberal, unisex, pacifistic society of the feminist ideal and some throwback to caveman honor, but between some throwback to caveman honor and some more civilized variant of the long-dormant Western variety. . . . The honor-crazed Muslim fanatics who are blowing up women and children along with themselves are . . . equally stark in the alternative they pose to Western ways. Unless those ways include and are understood by all to include, honorable ways of making war on that alternative, the alternative must triumph." (Please re-read this quotation again, carefully.)

Our culture has its own distinctive, idiosyncratic history. Western concepts of honor have always differed from the rest. Being informed by Judeo-Christian philosophy, it emphasizes individual morality, sincerity and authenticity in private as well as personal life. He frames the historic background which a proper understanding of the Clash of Civilizations requires.

It is a difficult book to review. It is of a piece from the front to the back cover, betwixt which are 324 pages (excluding end notes) of information and carefully reasoned explanations. It is a ponderous read, not because of inelegant prose, but because the data is so comprehensive and the analysis so tight that study and rumination are required, page by page. In the end, however, there is little more to be said. He adroitly makes his case, which is a damning one for the cultural trends of the West.

The book should be read by all. Weighty and demanding it is, but very much worth the time and challenge.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 1:09 PM

November 18, 2011

How Civilizations Die

(and why Islam is dying too)
David P. Goldman - ISBN - 9781596982734

This is one of the most challenging and seminal works of recent issue; the equal--or better--of Huntington's Clash of Civilizations (reviewed on this site over five years ago.) He gives new meaning to critical events, ancient and recent. While primarily about the modern world, specifically Europe and Islam, he does delve into the history of most all "dead" civilizations of the past as exemplary of some aspect of his subject.

Explaining Europe's "Thirty Years War" (1618-1648)*, he renders the emigration of the pilgrims to the new world a more profound event.*** He also explains why this war began the descent of Christian European civilization, and its responsibility for the repeated wars which culminated in WW I and II (1914-1945), described by Churchill as the Second Thirty Years War. Bookends, they issued the death warrant to European civilization, which demise we are now witnessing. Europe as we have known it for the past 400 years will be gone within a century. It's not quite over, but the fat lady is in the wings.

He adds a different dimension to Mark Steyn's America Alone (reviewed several years ago.) Whereas Steyn's construal is that Muslim fecundity will overwhelm Europe in the next several generations, resulting in an Islamic "Eurabia," Goldman observes that Muslim fertility is dropping so dramatically that many of the most important Muslim countries are disappearing. While it may temporarily occupy, even rule Europe, Islam "cannot survive outside the cocoon of traditional society, which has led to despair resulting in Muslim society being on the brink of the fastest population decline in recorded history. . . . Muslim civilization is choosing decline and death," he ventures, as he cautions against being reassured, since it may take the world down with it. European culture has decided that no purpose is served by war, and so curls up to die; Islam has determined that there is nothing to lose by war, and will fight to the death.

In Iran, fewer than two percent of adults attend mosque services on Fridays; fertility, in one generation, has dropped to 1.3 per woman, the lowest in the world; prostitution and drug addiction are rampant, and far greater than in the West. He opines that a nation is never really beaten until it sells its women, and is truly damned when women sell themselves. 90% of Iranian prostitutes have passed college entrance exams, and 30% are active students; 80% of "sex workers" do so voluntarily, and girls as young as 12 are selling themselves. Things are not all that different in Turkey (now making common cause with Iran) and other Muslim states.

Illiteracy is rampant--well over 50% in Pakistan and Egypt; college degrees are awarded to people neither educated nor skilled at anything, and who are largely unemployable. Only Turkey has passable higher education, yet insufficient jobs are created to employ graduates. Egypt and other poor Muslim countries are on the brink of starvation, and will soon be driven over the edge as China and prosperous Asians drive the price of food beyond their reach. "Arab Spring" will prove to be a disaster. "There is no such thing as rational self-interest for people who believe that they have nothing to lose."

The recent great transformation has left the Muslim world almost untouched. Excepting fossil fuels, the total export of the Arab world is less than that of Finland, a nation of but five million people. Not a single scientific discovery of note, innovative firm of international importance, or contribution to universal culture has come from the Muslim world in the past century. During that period, only 133 patents were filed in Muslim-majority lands (a billion people), while Israel (7 million people) produced ten-fold more, which total also exceeds those of India, Russia and Singapore combined (another billion+ people.)

For the first time in recorded history, most of the world's peoples are forgoing their desire to live. America's most important allies--the European nations--will lose their importance as they wither away; not much later the Muslim nations will suffer the consequences of their demographic implosion, and the drastically shrunken generation that follows will prove too feeble to support the burden of elderly dependents.

The absence of the very concept of individual rights renders Islam incompatible with the legal principles of modern democracy, and Sharia cannot be adapted to western civilization. Wife beating--a pagan holdover--is a prominent issue in Muslim society; discussed in detail in the Koran. "Honor killings," while not mentioned therein, are honored within Sharia law. Neither is acceptable to the modern world, just as female genital mutilation and cousin marriages are rejected. The Koran is "frozen in time," and is open to neither debate nor interpretation. Islam is thereby forced to adopt an openly irrational stance as scholars are forbidden to search for truth.

The unique religious history and culture of America, he posits, exempts it from the life and death cycle of nations, as Islam's very different theology explains the Muslim world's extreme vulnerability to the demographic effects of modernization. (The Islamic Allah and the Judeo-Christian Yahweh/God are not at all the same. Again, he explains in detail, often using as his source the observations of modern Muslims.) The Ayatollah Khomeini proclaimed that he/they would stand against the world: "either we all become free (i.e. Islamic), or we will go to the greater freedom which is martyrdom."

Contrary to present operational strategy, the most likely way to avoid war in the Middle East is not to reach out to Iran but to humiliate it.**** We cannot engage it. "We shall have to ruin it."

In but two generations, our foreign policy has passed from adolescence--the Wilsonian misapprehension that America could remake the world in its own image--to senescent repudiation of world leadership, having omitted maturity. The Obama doctrine is the self-liquidation of American influence, an unprecedented and astonishing gesture from an American leader. America has neither the means nor the moral obligation to transform failing Muslim states into entities compatible with our civil preferences.

In 1948, Truman gambled American policy on his religious belief that the Jewish people had a sacred purpose in returning to their homeland, and allied us with what now is the most stable state in the Middle East. Obama now gambles American policy on support for inherently unstable and potentially hostile regimes: the most detrimental foreign policy decision taken by an American president in living memory.

America has the potential to be the last man standing for the Western world, though an alliance with India and other emerging democracies may rescue the driving forces of Christian, Western civilizations. At least we may pray so. Even Israel, he suggests, will likely survive.

Footnotes
* Rival versions of Christianity fought to the death in that war. But it was not, as we have been taught, a Catholic-Protestant war.** "It was a war between Christianity and neo-pagan national idolatry, and Christianity lost." WW II defeated national idolatry--the ongoing argument of which nation was the chosen replacement for Israel--thus destroying Europe's civilization (while it explains European anti-Semitism.)

** It was a Catholic war between France, Spain and the Hapsburgs battling, using Protestant allies as proxies. The Catholic Church--as Empire--lost.

*** A year after the Mayflower sailed, Spain invaded Holland. While ultimately defeated by the Dutch, Goldman emphasizes, had the Pilgrims stayed, and Spain prevailed, they almost certainly would have been burned at the stake as heretics. (Bet you didn't learn that in school!)

**** He takes to task American foreign policy, especially that of George W. Bush, noting that the naïve idea that America imposed democracy on the defeated countries after WW II, and should liberate free Muslim dictatorships in the same way for the same reason. The world and all its citizens hanker for democracy. It might appear "to be a positive outcome if not for one snag--the fact that all of the vanquished countries are dying."

Posted by Curmudgeon at 1:33 PM

July 2, 2005

How Should We Then Live?

Francis A. Schaeffer – ISBN 158345364

This weighty tome assesses Christian impact on Western civilization and the subsequent decline of Western thought and culture. He treats his subject over amply in my judgment.

Early, he delves heavily—and seemingly inappropriately—into Christian art, and later music, making it seem his thrust is to display his knowledge. Later he ties it up, but his inclusion of near infinite details beclouds the point(s) he is making. The book could have been clarified and edited to half its length without compromising his goal: the elucidation of the importance of Christianity to the Western world, and how this has been jeopardized and diluted over the millennia. Nonetheless the book deserves to be read.

He emphasizes that Christian morals and beliefs are anathema to totalitarians. He explores Renaissance Humanism and what it did to compromise Western thought, “de-Deifying” religion and over-individualizing the concepts which originated in the “word of God;” and how during the Enlightenment intellectuals rationalized things in a way that left man starting from himself alone, which offers no final way of “saying [that] certain things are right and other things are wrong.” In this he is extremely effective.

DaVinci noted its coming centuries ago. Starting from man alone, he said, mathematics leads us to particulars, which lead only to mechanics. Humanism affords no way to the universal in areas of meaning and values. Rousseau, in contrast, advocated freedom from God--and all other restraints --and made man the center of the universe.

The Reformation removed the “humanistic distortions which had entered the church.” Erasmus, etal, were principally trying to reestablish authentic Catholicism, that is, a return to biblical teaching, restoration of freedom without chaos, eradication of corruption within the Church, and reestablishment of the concept that all individuals were answerable to God. Not incidentally, it authored the Protestantism of Luther and Calvin.

Early scientists were unsurprised to discover truisms about nature and the universe using reason. While not necessarily Christian, these scientists accepted the concept of God, which humanism undercuts. Darwin complicated the matter by describing the origins of life without even a hypothesis regarding how things actually work, or commenting upon how pure chance could result in ongoing and increasing complexity. (See my initial blog on Darwin vs. Intelligent Design.)

He quotes one George Wald who, in a serious lecture, noted that humanism insists that: “Four hundred years ago there was a collection of molecules named Shakespeare which produced Hamlet.” In making himself autonomous, then, man becomes nothing more than a collection of molecules. The final value, then, is continuity in the human race. The man actually believed this! The author asks: “If this is the only final value, one is left wondering why this then has importance.”

As for the search for a non-rational explanation of life--the very reason Eastern religions so captivate moderns—he notes that it was initiated by Goethe and Wagner, expounded by Huxley, and popularized by Pink Floyd, Jefferson Airplane and the Grateful Dead . . . sex, drugs and rock and roll. I was perplexed that he omitted Scientism. As in (pantheistic) Hinduism, everything which exists is part of “God.” No morality or immorality, no cruel and non-cruel, no beginning, no end and no purpose. Don’t enquire into the big questions such as why things exist at all.

Having eliminated God, people have adopted the values of personal peace and affluence. There is no meaning for man, and no meaning for education, except that money enhances peace and prosperity. It comes as no surprise that much of the younger generation is apathetic, undereducated and narcissistic.

We are witnessing the morning (or ought it be mourning?) of a society in which crucial decisions are made by government, informed by the scientific community it funds. These decisions are increasingly sophisticated, requiring an elite technocracy to run the apparatus. These possess no transcendent ethic and are absent a moral belief system. “Men can be remade, their behavior conditioned, or their consciousness altered. [Past] constraints will vanish” . . . and Galbraith’s vision (or 1984) will become reality.

Frighteningly, it is predictable that the silent majority will remain silent despite their loss of liberty for so long as their life style is not challenged, and personal peace and prosperity are delivered. Politics is no longer a matter of ideals such as liberty and truth, simply serenity and affluence.

We are taught that man is little more than a machine, and PETA, amongst others believe he is immaterially different from the other animals.

We have come a long way since Rome. Now we are on the return trip to the specter described by Gibbon. Bread and circuses!

Crick (the man who identified DNA) felt that modern medicine was a menace since it left the weak alive to breed the next generation. A former governor of Colorado deemed it the responsibility of the old and the sick to die. We have recently executed a brain dead woman on no life support. We are on the edge of the abyss of genetic engineering and few—including none who are in charge--ask if there aren’t at least a few moral considerations.

So . . . who will control the controllers? What will happen in a society without absolutes? What happens when we are so in awe what can be done, that we fail to question whether it should to be done?

Not altogether unlike democracy, Christianity may or not be the only way to achieve goals, satisfy deep needs, and secure peace and dignity with or without a hereafter, but neither the West, nor any other society has found a better way to date. The West is, afterall, of Christian origin! We'd best get serious about considering that.

Posted by respeto at 4:50 PM

November 7, 2010

How the States Got Their Shapes

Mark Stein - 9780061431395

I originally shelved this book--carelessly it appears--because Mark Steyn wrote it . . . well . . . not really. Mark Stein wrote it! Reviews claimed it to be "splendid," "witty," etc. It is, sort of, but not so much as it would have been had it been done by Mark Steyn--still better: Bill Bryson.

Mark Stein is a "playwright and screen writer." I do hope he's better at that than he is at nonfiction. The work is rather sophomoric. Still, it is not uninteresting.

Having been an amateur geographer since early childhood, I found it remarkable in its bringing to the table factoids of which I've never been aware. The landscape is littered with jots and tittles heretofore overlooked by most all of us. Not the Oklahoma panhandle, the more miniscule Connecticut western extension or the vast extension of southern Alaska (none of which, according to Wikipedia, are "jots" or "tittles" in any event.) For example:

• The northern border of Delaware is a hemispheric line, not straight
• The border between Alabama and Mississippi angles a few degrees about half-way up (to make more equal the area of both states.)
• While Illinois is largely defined by river courses, the straight line separating it from Indiana is contrived to avoid isolated "river islands" on the wrong side of the border (when crossing a major river presented potential troubles with governance.)
• Michigan's upper peninsula was subtracted from what might have been Wisconsin because Michigan was deprived of Toledo when Ohio was politically bigger'n Michigan and Toledo was a valued port city. Wisconsin was deprived because it was littler'n Michigan when it came to a fight over the UP.

All manner of territorial disputes were settled in similarly arcane situations. Of course, many were not so esoteric when the decisions were made; a time when it mattered greatly on which side of the river or mountain range you were.

• Texas had to give up a lot of territory in its northern extremity in order to be admitted as a "slave" state. It would have been in the south's interest to divide Texas into 4 or 5 smaller states to balance the more numerous "free states," but Texas had been its own nation before it applied for statehood and would not make that concession. One huge state. No argument! Similarly so with California, though the rationale was different
• Several of the west-central states gave up valuable territories when gold was discovered within what had been their province. Not so smart-cha-say. Well, they gladly did so to get rid of the administrative headaches of the lawlessness of the inhabitants of those territories. The gold wasn't worth it, but California kept its gold, which explains the straight line which are its eastern border.
• The northern border separating us from Canada west of the great lakes was a concession to Britain before any of the area was officially incorporated; this to conserve the water front and harbor areas of south-western Canada for England's fur trade, making it clear to both French and Spanish that the area was British. Only later did it, and the border, become "American."

And so it goes; which is what makes it all rather interesting, though it makes a better "bathroom read." Leave it laying around and pick it up to read a chapter or two when you're killing time. Other than the introduction and some generalities, the book is divided into very brief chapters, state by state. If you have any interest in this sort of mysterious information it is a worthwhile read.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 3:00 PM

April 22, 2006

In Our Hands

Charles Murray – ISBN 0844742236

Murray has done it again: another wise and interesting exploration of our current welfare problem. Or, rather, the problem of our welfare! His solution is Alexandrian. Instead of trying to untie the Gordian knot, he cuts thru it! This time he has an historic and riveting conclusion, and recommendations. His first work, Losing Ground was published in 1984. In it he explored our welfare system, reviewed its history, and pointed out its faults and appropriate remedies. In the 10th anniversary edition he acknowledged that little progress had been made, but that some of his suggestions were at least being discussed. Not insignificant strides have been taken since, culminating in the recent (Clinton administration) welfare reform bill which has nearly halved the number of people receiving welfare.

In his newest rendering he expands to include Welfare, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, health insurance, corporate welfare, etc. Essentially all government “wealth redistribution” programs would be eliminated and replaced by his plan. He explores all in relative depth considering the brevity of the book. He notes that government redistribution now approaches 1.5 trillion dollars annually; a staggering sum which is rising sharply, and will reach 2.6 trillion by 2020. That simply isn’t possible, even with our incredible economy. We are going bankrupt, and it’s time to actually do something about it. As before the current incentives are all wrong, except for a few recent changes which have impacted mightily. His plan outlines a near total renovation of incentives, and a creative approach to “redistribution.”

Debate has raged (literally) in the halls of congress over revamping Social Security and Medicare, and has now ceased because the parties will not agree. With leading Democrats in favor of continuing the same bankrupting program, and cowardly Republicans unwilling to bite the bullet, nothing will be done any time soon. The weakness is said to be that the government must guarantee ends, and not permit private investment. Most alternate calculations are made with the supposition that citizens will contribute like funds to private accounts, with yields calculated at 4% compound annually. This is neither good enough, nor safe enough, say the opponents. Murray points out, however, that if the stock market doesn’t yield the 4%, the government can’t meet the demand either. Thus to argue for “security” is a faux argument.

Instead, he suggests, explains and justifies “the plan,” which entails a distribution to every adult citizen (i.e. over 21) a sum of $10,000 per annum, in monthly aliquots deposited in their checking account, with the presumption that the first $3,000 will be set aside for health expenses, including insurance, which everyone will be required to have. And he has a revolutionary approach to insurance, as well.

Thus a minimum wage worker will have a take-home pay of at least $7,000 more than he would otherwise; a working couple would have twice that. For average working families, the plan would have a similar impact, since there is no adjustment to the $10,000 until each worker makes $25,000. Then it is incrementally adjusted by 20%. It never becomes less than a $5,000 distribution. (For many, the additional monies would permit one spouse to quit working, or work part time, thus augmenting child care and family time.)

You say that we can’t afford it? Look again. In less than four years the projected outlays of the current system will exceed those required for his plan. And the excess increases geometrically thereafter, while “the plan” is a near horizontal line with minimal incremental increases. The truth is that we can’t afford not to do it.

You’ll have to read the book to fully comprehend “the plan,” but I believe you will agree with it. Imagine this coupled with The Fair Tax!! Of course nothing will happen with either until a significant proportion of the voting public demands it. I’m not hopeful, though he is optimistic.

About the only counter-argument would be that free choice is involved, and its weakness is the governmental (yea, societal) tendency to cover the butts of even those who make dismal decisions and end up broke . . . still even then they would have $10,000 per year on which to exist, hopefully having learned a few lessons,

Chapter 8: “The Pursuit of Happiness in Advanced Societies,” is, alone, worth the purchase price of the book. Introducing the subject he notes that “The real problem advanced societies face has nothing to do with poverty, retirement, health care, or the underclass. . . . [it is] how to live a meaningful lives in an age of plenty and security."

For most all of man’s history just staying alive was the principal problem, followed by having and properly maintaining a family to, in turn, maintain you in your dotage. Sudden death was an all encompassing situation requiring attention to spiritual issues. Life now requires none of those things. This has left one with “a few friends, serial sex partners, earning a good living, having a good time, and dying in old age with no reason to think that one has done anything more significant than while away the time."

Small wonder that today the main question seems to be: "Is this all that there is?" He explores the importance of transcendental meaning in life, and its absence in the "advanced" European welfare states/societies. Brilliant! As is the next chapter wherein he gives voice to the importance of Vocation: the central satisfaction of doing something worthwhile . . . and well, and how nearly impossible that is in a European welfare state, questioning whether or not we really want to go there.

Posted by respeto at 12:17 PM

August 27, 2005

In Praise of Nepotism

(A history of Family Enterprise from King David to George W. Bush)
Adam Bellow – 0385493894

“Nepotism works, it feels good, and it is generally the right thing to do. It has its origins in nature, has played a vital role in human social life, and boasts a record of impressive contributions to the progress of civilization. Nor, despite our best efforts over hundreds of years, have we succeeded in stamping it out.”

As the subtitle informs, it is expository of nepotism from ancient Israel to modern America, exploring the subject in all permutations and discussing the strengths and weaknesses of each. It is everywhere balanced, revealing data without specifically passing judgment. The family anecdotes woven into the discussion make for interesting reading, and include stories about Pericles and Charlemagne, thru Napoleon and Lincoln to the Bush’s, while perusing subjects from monogamy to the Morrill Act.

This is a breezy work filled with nuggets of history mined from extensive research. His stated goal is to stimulate consideration and debate of this heretofore overlooked subject, as he justifies his summary statement that Western/European nepotism authored the modern world by effecting the substitution of related groups and national pluralism for rigid kinship, while maintaining effective families.

He discusses the good wrought thru nepotism--an activity frequently viewed as immoral or at least divisive—pointing out that the foundation of all civilization from time immemorial depended upon it as a default position. The right kind of nepotism is necessary to human progress and has its rightful place within civilization. “Nepotism is nothing if not an aspect of the family . . . and is not really a cultural construct, but a hardwired biological given—as basic as sex and aggression.”

“Nepotistic concern for the welfare of children is the engine of the capitalist system: take that away and you destroy the main incentives for innovation and the creation of wealth. . . . Meritocracy unleavened by personal ties is inhumane, as ample evidence [shows].”

His recurring reviews of elements of D.H. Fisher’s work Albion’s Seed (a phenomenal book, by the way) is especially interesting, as is his exploration of the Rothschild family’s creation of world banking and Teddy Roosevelt’s impact upon American civilization. His lengthy exposition of the Kennedy dynasty is absorbing, as is his discourse on the baby boom generation.

All in all, this is one of the most enjoyable books I have read recently. Try it. It’s worth the time.

Posted by respeto at 3:18 PM

January 12, 2008

In Praise of Prejudice

The Necessity of Preconceived Ideas
Theodore Dalrymple – ISBN - 9781594032028

“Americans are presently longing for high moral standards and the security they bestow, but our love affair with freedom and individualism gets in the way. We are unwilling or unable to see that such standards require a mentality that accepts and derives comfort from iron-clad rules that make no sense, and explanations like ‘just because.’”
Florence King

Right on . . . but explicative of many things which seem to “make no sense” is Dalrymple’s new treatise in which he delivers a brilliant, provocative tome-- a must read for everyone. Re-read and reflect, as well!

This manuscript is the epitome of reason and debate, though he leaves almost no room for the latter. He simply states his positions, demonstrates that they are true, and quietly defies anyone to logically refute them. He observes that discrimination was once a word associated with aestheticism, morality and pedagogy. The most important task of educators in times past was the quest to instill the ability to rationally discriminate. Now both discrimination and prejudice are pejorative terms: despicable, wicked and intolerable. Reason doesn’t enter the equation.

He uses the unstated logic of the hippies (something oxymoronic about that—maybe it’s just moronic) that since nothing from the past matters, and morality is individually decided, if it feels good, do it! He makes the case that this position was conceived in the 17th century by Descartes, nurtured for 200 years by the intelligentsia of Europe, enhanced (if unintentionally) by such luminaries as J.S. Mill, and later A.N. Whitehead, mid-wifed and delivered by the 60’s generation into our present, full blown Cartesian culture of radical individualism. More recently, these attitudes have been passed along, intentionally and illogically, by authors such as James Baldwin, and atheistic, scientific authoritarians like Peter Singer and Richard Dawkins, who often lace their prose with moral indignation and challenge the God--that would be the one they refuse to acknowledge--as capricious, arbitrary, unjust, bad-tempered and unreasonable.

“The popularity of the Cartesian method is not the consequence of a desire to remove metaphysical doubt and find certainty, but precisely the opposite: to cast doubt on everything, and thereby increase the scope of personal license by destroying in advance any philosophical basis for the limitation of our own appetites. . . . The radical skeptic, nowadays at least, is in search not so much of truth, as of liberty—that is to say, of liberty conceived of the largest field imaginable for the satisfaction of his whims.”

One of the great mistakes of contemporary social thought has been that the environment into which children are born, material & economic, is considered most important, while deprivation, moral squalor and emotional instability are attributed to material poverty alone. Indeed, if one is morally required to jettison nonsense from the past, he is then required to support the concept that nothing ought to be conveyed to one’s progeny. We thereby vest in children authority over their lives, and a child constantly catered to learns that life is to be ruled by his preferences and his prejudices which are in turn harmful to him and society.

He relates, anecdotally, having recently attended a comedy from the 50’s in which a middleclass male impregnated a working class female, whose father demanded justice. Justice/responsibility was accepted. He married the woman. The audience was consumed by laughter at the archaic suggestion that conception of a child created an obligation for the father, thus demonstrating that while we may rid society of a particular prejudice regarding a given question, it is impossible to have no prejudice.

It can be altered but never eliminated, so the relevant question is whether we are better off with the new than the old prejudice. No one seems to inquire any more, as motion/change is equated with progress. Indeed, the fact that prejudice is involved is usually denied.

Burke observed that the only thing necessary for evil triumph is for good men to do nothing. The idea was not that all men would become evil; rather, that the evil ones dominate the rest. Dalrymple interjects that Burke “might have added that evil would triumph if men ceased to believe in the distinction between good and evil,” then posits two parallel, opposing, syllogisms:
• All prejudice is wrong.
• The distinction between good and evil can be based only upon prejudice.
Therefore, distinguishing between good and evil is wrong.
• The distinction between good and evil is both inevitable and necessary for the exercise of virtue.
• The distinction between good and evil can be based only upon prejudice.
Therefore prejudice is necessary for the exercise of virtue.

Indeed . . . prejudice is necessary for the maintenance of elementary decency. It takes judgment to know which prejudice should be maintained and which abandoned. Prejudices, like friendships, should be kept in good repair; they are what give men character and hold them together. We cannot be without them.

At last he demonstrates how unguided, a-historic, radical individualism is paradoxical in that it begins as a search for total individualism yet ultimately defers to increased governmental power over individuals as it becomes the sole arbiter of what is acceptable and legal. Having eliminated history, family, church, social organizations, and culturally prescribed customs. there is no other authority to consult.

It isn’t reasonable, or even possible, to make everything up, daily, along the path of life. Radical individualism results in an omnipotent totalitarian government by eliminating logical and reasoned individual choice, which in turn determines the nature of culture.

Posted by respeto at 2:40 PM

July 21, 2006

In Praise of Slowness

Carl Honore – ISBN – 006054578X

This is a terrific book, and really ought to be read a chapter a day to allow for reflection on its content.

In our high speed, near apoplectic society—one in which instant gratification no longer seems fast enough—there is neither time to be nor time to enjoy. “Take time to smell the roses” as goes the old saw.

Honore, a (former) type A’ personality, who is a journalist by trade, was stimulated to reflect upon the conundrum and eventually write this book. What “stopped [him] in his tracks” was a book he saw rushing thru an airport store. The title: The One-Minute Bedtime Story (various authors having condensed classic fairy tales into sixty-second sound bites.) Tempting for the first minute or so, by which time he was brought up short in reflecting whether life was really that short, and time so valuable that you had to read to your kid, allowing only a minute at bedtime.

Thus he launches into (too) longwinded reviews of everything from working speeds, family time, cooking and eating—work and leisure in general, and makes some profound observations which are better when savored, as mentioned up front.

My problem with the book is that he reminds of Robert Ardrey (African Genesis, The Hunting Hypothesis, and The Social Contract, all published in the early to mid-1960’s.) He makes his point, and then makes it again and again . . . and again. A good editor could have made the book half the length without leaving out anything important. (But maybe my A’ personality should take a few lessons . . . that is a possibility.)

In any event, he does make his points well, ventures into much territory which he notes is being explored with increasing frequency in the West. More people are practicing “slowness” and finding life more precious and more satisfying.

Chapter titles include, among others: doctors and patience; the importance of being at rest, raising an unhurried child and slow is beautiful.

It really is a good read, and the concepts are more than worthy of consideration. I’d recommend it highly, though I found myself reading carefully for the first half of each chapter and skimming what remained up till the summary paragraph.

Posted by respeto at 4:38 PM

April 17, 2010

Incredible Victory

The Battle of Midway, June 4th, 1942
Walter Lord - ISBN - 9780060923600

(The ISBN given is for the paperback version. I purchased the original hardbound volume for $3.00. Neither is in print. It is well worth the time and minimal effort to purchase and read.)

By any standard, this is a marvelous book; the first and best recounting of the battle of Midway (1942). I found it exciting to read, though I've known much of the history of that day for most of my life. It was a spectacular victory. The Japanese plot was to lure the remaining vessels of the U.S. Pacific Fleet into a battle for supremacy, which logic dictated the Japanese would win; but it became America's Trafalgar. It remains the most decisive single naval battle in U.S. history. Even as I write this review I get a "tingle down my leg" (but over something magnificent, and incredibly important, unlike the infamous MSNBC commentator and recognized air-head who experienced his while listening to an oration by Emperor Obama.)

The book begins stirringly: "They had no right to win. Yet they did, and in doing so they changed the course of a war. More than that, they added a new name--Midway--to that small list that inspires men by example . . . like Marathon, the Armada, the Marne [he might have noted the stunning clash of the 300 at Thermopylae in 480 BC]. Even against the greatest of odds, there is something in the human spirit--a magic blend of skill, faith and valor--that can lift men from certain defeat to Incredible Victory."

Lord first explores the intelligence underlying the victory, without which the battle would have been lost. History lay in the hands of U.S. command. If they were able to keep secret their knowledge of the Japanese attack plan, and the location of the Pacific Fleet, a surprise attack might once more make the U.S. supreme in the Pacific; but if the plan became known, and/or the battle lost, the Japanese would "walk in to take Midway; Pearl [Harbor, Hawaii, would] be almost neutralized and in dire danger . . . the fate of our nation [was] in our hands."

The U.S. had no battleships, the Japanese eleven; we, eight cruisers, the enemy, twenty-three; we had three air-craft carriers--one crippled--they had eight; our shore defenses were composed largely of guns from the turn of the century manned by a relative handful of men, while their invasion force alone included many thousands of experienced soldiers with modern weapons. Our men were, almost without exception, new to war; theirs, experienced from many battles since the invasion of Manchuria in 1931. They had the most experienced pilots flying the best airplanes on the planet, while ours were just out of flight school, many flying planes made of wood with canvas coverings. Some of our "dive bombers" couldn't dive--the fabric came off of the wings. Our torpedoes were slow and unreliable, and the torpedo planes were even worse. Our military men were exhausted, theirs well rested. It is impossible to envisage worse odds.

Of our torpedo squadrons virtually all of the men were killed without inflicting damage on the Japanese. Our fighters did little better: one squadron lost 21 of 27 planes and crews. He details the events hour by hour, including many interesting asides. Under usual circumstances I might have commented that there was too much information, but somehow his expert synthesis kept the narrative fascinating. His colorful and exceptional descriptions of the pandemonium of combat are especially riveting.

He spent several years interviewing survivors of the battle on both sides of the Pacific. They are absorbing. As well there are a few previously unpublished pictures from the Japanese archives. He delves into the weaknesses of the Japanese plan, noting that they expected the Americans to respond in a given way, and when they did not they were flummoxed. Yamamoto, the Japanese commander, "frittered away" his incredible advantage by not properly concentrating his ships. Hubris and the overconfidence based upon prior battles resulted in "victory disease," and this was compromised further by their "dangerous contempt" for the enemy, whom they had presumed to be cowards. He mentions but fails to pursue another point about which I have read previously: when the commanding Admiral Fletcher found himself aboard the sinking carrier flagship Yorktown he immediately transferred command to Admiral Spruance aboard the carrier Enterprise, because Spruance was now in a better position to command. Neither power nor fame--let alone ego--mattered. Winning was the only consideration. That is something no Japanese admiral would ever do. As well he gives little attention to the fact that Yorktown was near mortally damaged at the Battle of the Coral Sea only a month before. When she limped into Pearl it was determined that it would take months to repair the damage. It could not wait; time was of the essence, and while not up to par she was rendered combat ready within 72 hours. (Only In America!) She played a major role at Midway before finally being sunk by the Japanese.

Winston Churchill observed: "This memorable American victory was of cardinal importance, not only to the United States, but to the whole Allied cause. . . . At one stroke, the dominant position of Japan in the Pacific was reversed. . . . The annals of war at sea present no more intense, heart-shaking shock . . . the qualities of the United States Navy and Air Force and the American race shone forth in splendour."

As Lord reviews the history of the events he emphasizes that "In ticking off the things that weren't done, it is easy to forget the big thing that was done. . . . At 10:22 A.M. . . . the crack Japanese carriers Akagi, Kaga and Soryu were heading proudly for the battle that was to finish the U.S. Pacific Fleet. By 10:28 A.M. all three were blazing wrecks." Yes, the Yorktown and a destroyer were sunk, but the Yanks won! They inflicted disastrous losses upon the Japanese navy and its empire, and reversed the momentum of the war "in one swell foop."

Wonderful read . . . makes everyone proud to be American (the execrable Tom Hanks and his ilk excepted--Hanks, you may not be aware, recently opined that our war with Japan was purely "racist.")

Posted by Curmudgeon at 3:10 PM

November 15, 2009

Infamous Scribblers

The Founding Fathers and the Rowdy Beginnings of American Journalism
Eric Burns - ISBN - 97815864883340

This tome is a revelatory treat; aucourant as well, with present attitudes of and about the press and its scoundrels. Doubt-cha knew the journalists of our early history put the present pack of miscreants to shame. Like today, these were people who ritually tilted the balance of truth toward their favored parties, and were proficient at prevarication when need arose. They were passionate and ferocious, even vulgar in print. They attacked each other viciously with ink and fists--even weapons on occasion. Sometimes partisans invaded shops, destroyed materials and occasionally the printing presses themselves.

The scarcity of both paper and ink added to expense; sometimes even prohibiting publication. Most were one man operations since few could employ help. Production was slow, hard work, and circulations were tiny by most any standard, but copy was read by myriad people, thus increasing their influence.

Burns is a graceful writer who delivers a narrative which is as agreeable as it is informative. He chronicles the important papers and emphasizes their serial ups and downs. He engagingly describes the era and its people--inclusive from 1710 thru the end of the Jefferson administration. The characters range from Ben Franklin's brother and grandson, to the Adamses, Jefferson, Paine, and Hamilton. Ben himself was one of the founding journalists in America, and was said to make his readers smile more than any other journalist at the time.

The early press was almost exclusively partisans, in large measure supported by politicians, parties and their myrmidons who had a message to deliver. Principals, often rendered in history as a unit of agreeable gentlemen, were in fact quite intolerant of each other. Hamilton and Jefferson were notoriously tireless adversaries, always at verbal fisticuffs.

His middle chapters give one a fulsome understanding of the times, attitudes and principals of that era. During, and particularly after the revolution the Federalists controlled 85% of the press, but by the end of the Jefferson administration the Republicans had reversed that equation, controlling over 60%, which reflected evolutionary governmental change. Following Hamilton's death there was a notable diminution in contentiousness, which attenuation persists to the present.

The era also resulted in the first use of jury nullification in a case tried, with Hamilton defending. The era promulgated the first sex scandal as well. This, too, involved Hamilton, who was humiliated and excoriated for his illicit affair. In addition it birthed the first political cartoon: a snake cut into sections to emphasize the colonies separated and dysfunctional, which threatened the ability to handle the adversary.

Over time "news" was introduced, but it was scarce and usually months late due to communications. Even within the continental area such intercourse was slow. In fact it was slower overland than by ship from either Europe or the Caribbean.

There was particular fire over the Stamp Act and other imposed taxes. Events such as the Boston Massacre and later the Tea Party were widely reported and largely misrepresented by people like Sam Adams--known as "the Grand Incendiary"-- was by far the most aggressive and vitriolic of his time. Paine's original missals were widely published, as were the Federalist Papers. Pseudonymous columns were popular, and while writers, though seldom unrecognized, tried to obfuscate their identities. Franklin often wrote to himself under a pseudonym in order to give pose situations and give answers which would increase his circulation, or permit him to comment upon an issue.

Burns elaborates upon the constitutional debates, covered in the papers only after the conferences, observing that the 1790's were passionate decades. The nation's journalism could not help but reflect that heat, and he emphasizes that when Americans ceased combat with the British they immediately started skirmishing with each other.

I sometimes comment that there are "too many notes;" that narratives are too long, or suggest that one might want to "fast forward thru the boring parts." In this book there are, at minimum, just the right number of notes, and probably too few. There are no parts one wishes to fast forward thru. It is an incandescent and lustrous tome which one hates to end. I highly recommended it!

(Footnote: As a physician I found it particularly interesting that Cotton Mather became aware of American Indians inoculating themselves for Smallpox in 1702; he published the facts and technique in 1720. Instead of being lauded he was ridiculed by contemporaries. A Boston physician inoculated his own son and 286 others, using trace amounts of fluid from the pox pustules. Of the thousands of other Bostonians who contracted smallpox during the next epidemic 14% died; of the vaccinated group only 2% did. Still, no one believed. This datum was overlooked until Jenner "discovered" vaccination almost a century later.)

Posted by Curmudgeon at 1:25 PM

April 25, 2007

Infidel

Ayaan Hirsi Ali – ISBN - 9780743289689

By any standard this is a marvelous book: a well written autobiography of one of the leading Islamic writers of the present; a Somali Muslim who escaped an arranged marriage by immigrating to Holland, lived and studied there for a decade and became a member of parliament before being forced to leave the country. She is now in New York at The American Enterprise Institute where she lives under constant death threats. She will not be dissuaded from exposing Islam to the world for what it is. This is a riveting read and ought to be studied by everyone . . . without exception.

Lots you ought to know about Islam—and a lot that some of you would rather not know—is here. She reviews its persecution of women, its bizarre fixation on sex, its pre-medieval philosophy, its vicious history and its current irrelevance to modernity . . . except as a threat to civilization. Not culture! Civilization!

She explores her gradually unfolding understanding of, and her incremental distancing from, the prescriptions of the Koran, indicating that those who consider Islam to be a “Religion of Peace” are ignoring what their holy book says in plain Arabic which is little understood by the masses—even the literate amongst them.

In studying the Koran “we didn’t understand more than the bare gist of it. Apparently, understanding wasn’t the point.” Those who practice Islam as a compassionate, rational religion have altered it to suit their needs or their personal philosophy. They are not following the specific dictates of the Koran. Frighteningly, the masses are being gradually infused with and frightened into what is referred to as “Radical Islam,” which is funded largely by Saudi Arabian money.

“The Koran lists Hell’s torments in vivid detail . . . [which] details overpower you, ensuring that you will obey . . . [even as a child] I could never comprehend the downright unfairness of the rules, especially for women. How could a just God—a God so just that almost every page of the Koran praises His fairness—desire that women be treated so unfairly? . . . Why, if God was merciful, did he demand that His creatures be hanged in public? If He was compassionate, why did unbelievers have to go to hell? If Allah was almighty and powerful, why didn’t He just make believers out of the unbelievers and have them all go to Paradise?”

Included, as well, are her initial—and ultimately more judgmental—impressions of the West. In Holland she initially lived with a number of other Somali immigrants. There she observed that the infidels somehow managed to have a country better led, better run, and, overall, provided a far superior place to live. Their system was more consistent and honest, gave more people more happiness than that in which the Somalis had been raised. A Somali friend commented that the “whole country is filthy.” In point of fact none of them had ever lived in a place so clean. It was just that the Dutch philosophy was incongruent with Islam . . . and therefore was rejected by those who had come to Holland to escape. Go figure !? (And ya better understand what’s behind this! Listen up!)

Unlike adherents to Islam, “People in Holland agree that violence is bad . . . and . . . teach their children to channel aggression and resolve disputes verbally.” Western culture is simply superior to Islamic culture! She offers the caveat, however, that Holland’s respect for Islam isn’t working. Being tolerant for the sake of consensus is empty because there is no cooperation on the part of Muslims.

She did comment upon the peculiar attitudes of her Dutch friends. When Ayaan was finally granted citizenship she had a party to celebrate. “I told everyone I’m Dutch!” No one reacted except to study her “strangely”--not because she was black, but because “being Dutch meant absolutely nothing to these people.” Nobody was proud of being Dutch.”

On her arrival in California she was shocked by her ludicrous preconceptions of America. “I was expecting rednecks and fat people, with lots of guns, very aggressive police, and overt racism—a caricature of a caricature. In reality, of course, I saw people living perfectly well-ordered lives, jogging and drinking coffee.”

Liberation of Muslims, and especially the women, must be preceded by liberation of the mind from this rigid, dogmatic obedience to Allah’s dictates. While Allah is constantly referred to as “the most compassionate, the most merciful,” He also says that he has given us a will of our own. If so, how could He mind a little debate? To accept subordination and abuse because Allah willed it is self-hatred. Compassion, tolerance and freedom are not the characteristics of Islam, whatever the (mis)representation. “I look at . . . real cultures and see that it simply isn’t so.” She also explains that people in the West do not examine the religions or cultures of minorities for fear of being called racist. Values matter! Amongst the premier ones is honesty.

As for Muslim’s adaptivity . . . “People who never sat on chairs before can learn to drive cars . . . they master skills quickly. Muslims don’t have to take six hundred years to go through a reformation in the way they think about equality and individual rights.

The film Submission (over which Van Gogh was murdered) was said to be too aggressive. “Tell me, how much more painful is it to be [this culture and] these women, trapped in that cage?”

About the only negative comment I have on this book is that the author seems to view everything with very prismatic vision. As a child she was rigidly Islamic. Now having reached enlightenment she is rigidly atheistic. She still has some need to grow, but she has come a long way in less than two decades, and exhibits a survivor’s flexibility. She is impacting the discussion on Islam, and will continue to do so. It is impossible not to hear. Just pray that we also listen carefully and do something about it.

Posted by respeto at 4:39 PM

May 11, 2011

Intellectuals and Society

Thomas Sowell - ISBN - 978-0465019489

"Intellect is not wisdom." Thus the master begins his latest tract on the deleterious effects of "intellectuals" on society. As in A Conflict of Visions, and The Vision of the Anointed, his lacerating observations are plainly explained in his characteristically acerbic style, and with such clarity that there can really be no argument with his conclusions--at least none that is rational.

He characterizes intellectuals (for the purposes of this book) as people whose work "begins and ends with ideas." Thus scientists, engineers, physicians, etc. are eliminated from the discussion: people who are subject to definitive proof of the effectiveness of their discipline and its facts. The principal difference is the intellectual's approach to virtually all problems. There are discussions of opinions, observations and feelings: conclusions are drawn from the groups of individuals who are privy to the determination. Scientific verification is never a consideration.

He discriminates between "notions" and facts; explains the necessity of studying the results of attitudes and policies in order to determine their impact, worth and relevance. Facts are determined by a scientific approach to problems, and are not subject to "feelings," "attitudes," or "hopes;" thus do they become notions. As well, these notions are oriented toward making the originator(s) seem more noble, moral, intelligent or creative. "The great problem . . . with purely internal criteria is that they can easily become sealed off from feedback from the external world of reality, and remain circular in their methods of validation. . . . If they are simply people who are like-minded . . . then the consensus of the group about a particular new idea depends on what that group already believes--and says nothing about the empirical validity of that idea in the external world."

People are considered knowledgeable when they have some special grasp of specific knowledge. More mundane crafts--auto repair, golf, plumbing--are not associated with knowledge by the intellectuals since what they don't know is not considered knowledge. Or even worthwhile. Yet there are many hidden truths in those things intellectuals cannot be bothered to know. And they impact in the real world. "The ignorance, prejudices and groupthink of an educated elite are still ignorance, prejudice and groupthink."

Intellectuals, having no other place to go and nothing else to do beyond creating ideas, are inclined toward careers in the media, academia and government, and not rarely in that order. Since they have few other skills, they are predisposed to rationalize that lack by delegitimizing, at least in their own minds, those without the facility to masterfully challenge such ideas with bonafide, real world experience. Worse, and unlike intelligent beings more fully engaged in their own particular professions (again, engineering, medicine, chemistry, etc.) they have no real world experience to prevent them from generalizing their knowledge of the arcane into a respect for those who do other things well. When a professional masters his real world craft he comes to understand how difficult it is to perform within his own sphere, and imputes to other specialists the knowledge they have accumulated to master their own field. This tends not to be so with intellectuals. They presume that their knowledge endows them with superior powers in all fields. Since their areas of expertise are rarely challenged by real world experience, they have nothing whatsoever to dissuade them from their presumed exactitude, even if they were so inclined.

With this background Sowell explores the reality of impact of the intellectuals upon government, war, philosophy, science (e.g. Gore on global warming), and a host of other spheres where their influence can be, and often is cataclysmic. Their "vision of society" is that there are many "problems" to be considered and "solved." This they do without the slightest nod to human nature, human experience, history or common sense. Those with the anointed visions simply declare how things are or ought to be, and prescribe the solution. They never inquire whether or not their ideas work. Consequently erroneous paths are repeated regularly, with the same results.

Take peace. It is presumed that war is the unspeakable atrocity. No one wants war! Hence we must just accept that we are to sit down and discuss our differences and work out a solution. Alternative opinions, even if supported by the facts, are not admitted into conversations. Worse, people who hold these positions are considered inferior, immoral, unfit, and even stupid.
• Bill Buckley opined decades ago that such people feel everyone has a right to his opinion, only to be shocked that there are opinions which differ from their own. Who knew ? !
• Several decades ago the New York Times headlined that even as crime in the city was declining, criminals continued to be incarcerated. Duh !
• One might now include the assassination of OBL in the discussion. It's altogether right and fitting that he was trapped and shot in the head: this is war! Yet water-boarding in the same endeavor is criminal and non-reflective of "our values." Go figure.

The book is a recitation of exactly where, when and why intellectuals have been wrong for decades--nay, centuries. They never consult history or common sense, and since the rest of the world is occupied with reality and survival, intellectuals have been left, unchallenged, to ponder what they will. They have taken over education at all levels and impact heavily on the media, government and politics, including intelligence agencies, police and prisons. Their nostrums survive by virtue of ineffective counter-forces, and the inherent willingness of many of the unwashed to accept and believe what they hope for, as wonderfully expressed by the anointed, rather than seeing things as they are. Worse, they've been "teaching" our young for several generations. As the world has become more prosperous there are more such intellectuals, and they are creating even more problems than they did in prior times.

It's not necessarily that the intelligentsia are mistaken or ill-informed on particular issues, though that is not unusually the case, but: "The more fundamental point is that, by thinking in terms of abstract people in an abstract world, intellectuals evade the responsibility and the arduous work of learning the real facts about real people in the real world--facts which often explain the discrepancies between what intellectuals see and what they would prefer to see." That is, their filtering and slanting can create fictitious facts and people, and when their story fits the vision, they do not always find it necessary to check whether it also fits the facts.

Read the book. It is fascinating as well as all-encompassing. Sowell is the greatest living philosopher-essayist; he writes with unsurpassed concision.

Posted by Curmudgeon at 2:34 PM

July 17, 2010

Interview with History

Oriana Fallaci - ISBN - 0395252237

Fallaci was, without doubt, the greatest political interviewer of modern times, and thought of as one of the most gifted, determined interviewers of all time.

She came of age working in the Italian resistance during WWII, an organization in which her parents were active. Thereafter she became a journalist. During her long career she is said to have interviewed anyone and everyone "who mattered." Because of her fame and uncanny abilities, she could--and did--approach the powerful and gain access to them. She was intrepid.

She was a fully emancipated and successful woman in the man's world of political journalism, and antagonized many feminists (my kind of woman) by her championship of motherhood and her idolization of heroic manhood. She was a believer in historic European civilization, and deeply moral, though a-religious (she referred to herself as an "Atheist Christian".)

Her critics felt that she outraged the conventions of interviewing and reporting; she didn't care. From her experiences she concluded: "Whether it comes from a despotic sovereign or an elected president, from a murderous general or a beloved leader, I see power as an inhuman and hateful phenomenon. I have always looked on disobedience toward the oppressive as the only way to use the miracle of having been born." She trusted no authority. She was most adept at influencing prominent people to say things during her interviews which they wished ever after they had not said. Many would plead with her to edit their statements, or forgo publication of them. She always refused. Hence she leaves a record of incredible interviews with the most important people in the world from the 60's into the 90's. So famous is she, that her writings have been translated into 21 languages.

She is particularly well known for an interview with Henry Kissinger in which he agreed that the Vietnam War was a "useless war" and compared himself to "the cowboy who leads the wagon train by riding ahead alone on his horse." He later grumbled that it was "the single most disastrous conversation I have ever had with any member of the press."

The book, Interview with History, is an anthology of her best and most important interviews, led off with the infamous Kissinger tract. It is sensational both in style and content. She brings to the table, from preparatory research, a formidable knowledge of history, and demonstrates in classic fashion why the world is a mess, painting word portraits of famous people who have made it so. While no longer in print it is available, used, from $2-100. (Try ABE books)

The Islamic attack on the U.S. so enraged her that she emerged from retirement to write three books viciously critical of Islam and, most explicitly, Islamic extremists. The first--The Rage and The Pride--was written in 4 days, beginning on Sept. 11th, without a break; no sleep, just coffee and cigarettes. It is a masterpiece of both rage over wanton destruction by a barbaric culture, and pride in western civilization from the time of the Greeks to the 20th century. Not long after that, she completed The Force of Reason. Both became mega-best sellers and have been translated into many languages, including English. I'm still hoping for the third. The first two are indeed superb, and I have reviewed them on this site long ago.

I recommended, and still do, that those two books be read critically by all westerners who value civilization, and especially by those who cannot--or refuse to--discriminate between good and evil. I also recommend "Interview" for the sheer pleasure of reading an heroic journalist in her prime, insisting upon answers from the powerful, to critical questions most journalists would not have the cajones to ask . . . then or now.

She died several years ago from breast cancer. RIP !!

Posted by Curmudgeon at 1:56 PM

January 17, 2008

Jefferson’s War

America’s First War on Terror – 1801 – 1805
Joseph Wheelan - ISBN – 9780786714049

This new book revisits The Pirate Coast (see my review of Nov. 2006). Of a sudden the Barbary Wars are being re-explored. I have always wondered about them, but “pirates” didn’t get me there. Unfortunately this one isn’t a lot better. There’s less minutiae, but still too much. Whatever happened to great editing?

He does observe that Jefferson felt it better to “dictate peace thru the expedient of war,” unlike the sniveling continentals who bribed their way into safety for their shipping. Strangely, the Brits, with the most powerful navy in the world, wouldn’t take on the smarmy, corrupt Muslim pirates, but the Americans whupped them rather decisively in a couple of years with half a dozen ships. Like most American wars, the reason it took 4 years is the ineptitude and incompetence of the first pair of naval commodores. Jefferson finally found a leader who would do what was necessary, after which it was done quickly.

Amongst the things I find most frustrating in both books is that the essence of the conflict is lost within the smothering trivia. Lord Horatio Nelson—formidable English commander and victor at Trafalgar—stated that Stephen Decatur, in his (casualty free) attack upon Tripoli, had accomplished the most daring raid of the era. Still the author provides but a page and a half on the battle before plunging into a lengthy dissertation on Decatur’s welcome home as a hero.

He drones endlessly about Eaton’s capture of Derna, including the number the shots fired, the cannon used, the deployment of troops, the response of the Mustafa, and . . . and letters to and from commanders, presidents, representatives, pashas, envoys, dilettantes . . . and most everyone. As well he discloses minute details about individual ransom costs, numbers of captives, detail about the captivity and slavery imposed, etc. “Tedious” fails to cover it. Eventually he describes the results and implications in a couple of pages.

To Wheelan’s credit he eventually discusses the ultimate benefit to the American fleet. Government finally determined that we could not survive without competent blue-water power, and the Barbary Wars honed the navy to an effective fighting force.

The U.S. navy demonstrated that you buy trouble at considerable cost when menacing America. We were different from continentals. Still are, most of the time. America hadn’t paid obeisance to English kings, and it certainly wouldn’t bow to penny-ante Islamic pashas who extorted tribute and filled their dungeons with “Christian dogs” for slaves and ransom. Further, facing down terror worked.

While things were never fully and truly settled, the Barbary pirates left us alone and Europe respected us. We should remind ourselves of that. While the continentals aren’t impressed this time around, the terrorists will be if we prevail, as we did 200 years ago.

Posted by respeto at 1:42 PM

September 5, 2005

Just War Against Terror

Jean Bethke Elshtain ISBN - 0465019102
(Rockefeller professor of Social and Political Ethics, University of Chicago)

Martin Luther observed that,
On this earth, if the lion lies down with the lamb, the lamb must be replaced . . . . . frequently.

Elshtain observes that
“Peace should not be universally lauded even as war is universally condemned. Each must be evaluated critically.”

While herself an academic, Elshtain is devastating when exposing the academic left and its allies. There are worse things than war! Consider it demonstrated by the 20th century death camps and gulags. “For pacifists, the reigning word is peace. For realists, the reigning word is power. For just war thinkers, the reigning word is justice. Peace may be served by the just use of force, even as power is most certainly involved. (Power is also involved in peace politics in ways that many pacifists ignore.)” Just warriors consider both aims and means. The level of force must match the nature of the threat, and one must differentiate between combatants and noncombatants. Collateral damage is acceptable, but a necessary consideration.

In academia, she notes, it has become necessary to be against it, whatever it is; and “it is difficult to make a case that facts are being distorted if one’s opponent believes there is no such thing as facts.” According to many intellectuals, demonstrating that casualties in Afghanistan exceed the number who died in the atrocities of 9/11 proves the injustice of the war. There is a willful denial of the moral distinction between the intentional killing by the terrorists, and the unintended killing by the Americans. She reminds that Justice Robert Jackson noted: “the Bill of Rights is not a suicide pact.”

Hannah Arendt sagely observed that to be a “citizen of the world” is to strip citizenship of any concrete meaning, and Niebuhr noted that “Christian moralism requires discriminate judgments between conflicting claims;” that Christian idealism admits that, “pure moral suasion” cannot solve every social problem. Are not Christians obliged to respond, even if they get their hands dirty?

“To suppose that Islamic faith, or Arab culture, or poverty and the experience of oppression somehow lead young men . . . [to] fly an airliner full of passengers into a building crowded with unsuspecting civilians is deeply denigrating to Muslims, to Arabs, and to the poor and oppressed . . . I would suggest that this is a dangerous line of thought, however humanely motivated it may initially be.”

The basic aspiration for peace is the absence of open warfare, which requires other ways of settling disputes offering legitimacy in the eyes of all persons and all states. In contrast moral restraint in the Islamic world is the warrior’s honor rather than to a soldier’s sense of justice. The intentional slaughter of civilians is dishonorable, but within Islamist fundamentalism, this slaughter is a noble act.

Europeans believe they have left behind their nationalism, but it has, in fact, been displaced by often virulent anti-Americanism! “Indeed, anti-Americanism is the form that nationalism takes in many European countries.”

“Whereas classic warfare is the continuation of politics by other means, terrorism is the destruction of politics by all possible means.

Without political accountability there is neither justice nor a legitimate structure of power, authority, and law. “True international justice is defined as the equal claim of all persons, whatever their political location or condition, to having coercive force deployed in their behalf if they are victims of one of the many horrors attendant upon radical political instability.”

Liberal and neo-liberal internationalist entities are unable to deal with these ruthless and determined forces, as Amnesty International can neither say nor condemn terrorism.

The time for serious, inventive thought is here. When folks in Afghanistan return to their homes, and civic peace is in the making, it cannot be overlooked that “floppy hatted” Americans or someone else must guarantee it. St. Augustine taught that evil is a turning of one’s back on the good. It is depletion and cannot generate. It can only destroy. Like a fungus spreading, it is going all over, but it has no depth. It must be stopped. Nothing cherished by humans can flourish absent societal peace and security.

While skyscrapers reflect power, they’re also about freedom, ingenuity, beauty, and reaching for the sky. They’re about cooperation between people and about reaching the stars. Totalitarians build squat prisons and block houses. They build execution walls. Their aim is low, and considerations of cooperation and common good are absent.

Philosophy matters. The animating philosophy of the radical Islamicist movement is its contempt for human life, and its view the world as a life-and-death struggle between believers and infidels denies the equal dignity of all, betrays religion and rejects the foundation of civilized life and the possibility of peace amongst nations.

Theoretically the required endeavor should, perhaps, involve the participation and/or supervision by some international body, but it is virtually impossible for such as the U.N. to be considered the best final judge of when and under what conditions a particular resort to arms is justified. Their situational incompetence has been repeatedly demonstrated, and the membership is in total disarray over the very principles of Just War.

“Just War Principles” include: It is debatable whether an international body such as the U.N. is in a position to be the best final judge of when, and under what conditions, a particular resort to arms is justified; or whether the attempt by that body to make and enforce such judgments would inevitably compromise its primary mission of humanitarian work.
 Violence that is free-lance . . . is never morally acceptable: In just war theory, the main goal of the legitimate authority requirement is to prevent the anarchy of private warfare and warlords—an anarchy that exists today I some parts of the world (notably those from which the attackers of 9/11 launched their attacks)
 Just war principles insist that legitimate warfare must be motivated by the intention of enhancing the likelihood of peace and reducing the likelihood of violence and destruction.
 In addition to murders of 9/11, those radical Islamicist organizations are responsible for numerous other attacks, using murder to advance their objectives.
 Pre-modern jihad and just war traditions could legitimate wars aimed at advancing religion, but in the modern world only jihad has retained its confessional component: protect and propagate Islam as a religion.
 As we confront the new millennium, the emerging crisis of “non-state terrorism,” made possible by the “privatization of the means of destruction,” . . . independent of public authorities . . . and demonstrating an increasing willingness to wreak “violence and wreckage anywhere on the globe,” puts the problem outside of any governmental agency, and any responsible authority with whom to deal.

The book is referenced, with a huge appendix and varietal sources for further suggested reading, and is a must read for anyone interested in a scholarly but approachable discussion of the subject.

Posted by respeto at 12:17 PM

March 21, 2010

Koster

Americans in Search of Their Prehistoric Past
Stuart Streuver, PhD

This book is long out of print, but if you're interested in North American Archaeology it is one of the most interesting books.

Koster is an ancient site in the lower Illinois River valley which was thoroughly excavated in the 1970s. It is the oldest and most complex excavation site in the entire U.S.; a site uniquely attractive to Amerinds over millennia. The dig ultimately involved sixteen identifiable levels. The lowest was 32 feet below present ground level (because of downwash over time), and has been dated at >7,500 B.C.; the most important site for research and development of what is now called "new archaeology."

Instead of treasure hunting, for which historic archaeology is noted, a variety of new modalities of study were invented, which permitted the acquisition of information which uncovered the life style of the various generations of ancients who had lived there thru the ages.

That is why the book is fascinating. With the techniques discovered, they found that when fish grow they add rings (like trees) to their scales, rather than adding more scales. The rings are laid down in a sufficiently unique fashion that it was possible to determine the age of the fish, and whether they were caught in the spring or fall. The natives ate only "keepers." Mussel shells gave them more useful information. The excavation collected huge quantities of pollen and charred nut shells--amazingly durable--from which they could not only determine what grew in the area over the millennia, but what the natives chose to gather as food.

"To our surprise, the Early Archaic people had learned how to exploit the wild-food resources in their environment so skillfully that they could go out and replenish their staples on a seasonal basis year in and year out with almost as much confidence as we drive to the super market for ours." Pollen from a large variety of medicinal plants was also found on site. The plethora of food was such that these folks rarely moved beyond a three-mile radius of their villages to find all they could want. Populations remained stable--and healthy--suggesting that there was sufficient space between settlements that the growing population voluntarily moved away to found other, similar sites removed enough to allow for their prosperity. There was no great flowering of culture. Abundance was such that it delayed the development of agriculture for thousands of years. The Amerinds lived in the area for over 12,000 years, but only in the last 1,000 years did they develop serious agriculture. Such was the bounty in their environment.

Bones could be studied, indicating which animals were hunted; other artifacts gave clues to how and with what they were hunted and butchered. The bones also indicated that they brought only the meaty portions of the game back from the hunt. Fragments of charred, woven clothing materials were found, which confirmed textile manufacture long before it had previously been recognized.

Astonishingly, it was discovered that they lived in substantial, permanent housing constructed of wattle and daub--with perimeter drainage ditches!--in 5,000 B.C., six thousand years before previously thought. They had substantial fire pits and large grinding stones hollowed out like modern pestles, further confirming their settled lifestyle.

Artifacts were found which confirmed trade with northern Michigan, over 500 miles away--before 6,000 B.C. Burials indicated that the early "primitives" weren't primitive at all. They didn't struggle to survive. Many lived into their 70's, most had perfect teeth and some were obviously severely crippled. These people lived a life of leisure and plenty, and were able to care for their compromised elders. Interestingly, it was determined that the dog was domesticated several thousand years before the widely accepted date.

The gospel of anthropology had been that settled communities permitted the development and arts, but it was clear that that was not true. These people spent their time in "the pursuit of happiness," rather than indulging in such activities. Competition seems to have favored the arts.

There was no habitation on site after about 1,000 A.D. since the site would have been indefensible against attacks from the warring cultures of that era, but the study of genetic traits established biological continuity in the region from ancient times. They evolved into the mound people of Cahokia (600-1400 A.D.), the most famous mound builders, and the most populous and successful North American culture. Monks Mound, alone, covers 14 acres, rises 100 feet, and was topped by a massive 5,000 square-foot building another 50 feet high. The population, at its peak, is estimated at 40,000, surrounded by more people living in outlying farming villages. In 1250, its population was larger than London.

Humorously he includes a report of a cadre of Japanese tourists who asked how much the young people (called "arkies") were paid for their intense excavating labor. When told that they paid for the opportunity they were flabbergasted. The man who owned the farm upon which the dig was proceeding ("Teed" Koster) observed: "No poor man's kid ever dug in that hole."

In closing the book Streuver commented: "There are no monumental ruins at Koster, no elaborate artifacts. . . . only the silent record, trampled into earth by feet, covered by soft dust, wind-blown or washed down the slope of the bluffs by rains over the centuries. In the ground are fragments of charred seeds, nutshells, pieces of animal and fish bones, mussel shells, and the tools of housewives, toolmakers, and hunters. In the small cemeteries people quietly sleep away the centuries. From these multitudinous fragments of evidence we are gaining an intimate glimpse of life as it was lived . . . over a period of more than eight thousand years . . . [giving] a new perspective on the America's first people."

Posted by Curmudgeon at 11:36 AM

August 14, 2006

Lamb

Christopher Moore – ISBN-13 – 978-0380813810

This book is a laugh a minute, but only if your reading speed is slow.

Levi, also known as Biff, is Joshua’s childhood friend, and Joshua (Jehovah in Greek) is Jesus Christ. Biff is resurrected by the angel of death to return in the 21st century to reveal to the world the life of Josh in the 30 years between his birth and his ministry, and is accompanied by Maggie (Mary Magdalene), tasked the same, for another “take.”

Of course, the whole thing is a spoof, and I can imagine Jerry Falwell being incensed, but there is a chuckle on virtually every page and a guffaw on not a few.. For instance, he explains how Joshua practiced miracles. Resurrections were the most difficult and confusing: “To be fair, . . . resurrections weren’t that uncommon [then]. Jews were quick to get their dead into the ground, and with speed there’s bound to be errors. Occasionally some poor soul would fall unconscious during a fever and wake to find himself being wrapped in linen . . . but no one complained, except perhaps those people who didn’t wake before they were buried, and if they complained—well, I’m sure God heard them.”

And, who knew:
• That at age 13 Josh and Biff journeyed to the Afghani cave castle of Balthazar, a black African wizard (yes, he of the Myrrh), to study Confucius, Tao, Feng Shui, and other disciplines and philosophies?
• That Joshua challenged God when he first tasted bacon? Forbidding fornication, killing, stealing, coveting and all that made sense, but being deprived of bacon had to be a mistake!
• That after nine years they traveled to a mountain top in China were they sojourned with an Indian sage, Gaspar (yep, another Wiseman), where they studied Buddhism, Kung Fu and Jew-Do? Here Josh learned to “turn the other cheek” (from a Yeti, no less) and of the Golden Rule, etc., while Biff mastered the martial arts which would assist him in protecting Josh for the rest of his life. Josh, you’ll recall, was totally non-violent! Wouldn’t even protect himself.
• The ends to which Biff went to inform Josh of the carnal truths which he was to be deprived of for life?
• That after years with Gaspar they moved on to India to study with his brother—you guessed it, Melchior—where Joshua lived in a cave, practiced extreme asceticism, learned to turn water into wine and to multiply loaves and fishes, later “to feed the multitudes?” Biff learned little, but used Josh’s new found talents to support himself (selling the stuff) and “studying the Kama Sutra” with a sex worker.
• That there were really 13 disciples? “Thomas twin” was really two people: Thomas (a bit of a nut) and his imaginary, invisible twin who was always near.
• That the content of the sermon on the Beatitudes was debated amongst the disciples for weeks, determining who/what should be included, who inherited the earth, who went heaven, etc.?
• That the Sermon on the Mount didn’t happen quite as it is recorded?

And in the epilogue you will finally learn what the “H.” stands for in Jesus H. Christ.

There is, perhaps, a bit too much idle profanity and occasional scatological talk, and the book drags near the end, but it is quite an amusing read. For those who will not read it, there is little to say. For the doubters, you might wish to read the last chapter (pp 438-444) first. Here Moore explains the considerable research which he did before beginning the book.

Posted by respeto at 10:50 AM

September 25, 2007

Land Remembered

Patrick D. Smith – 9781561641161

After sitting on my shelves for four years I finally decided to read this Florida classic and found it better described as an American classic which just happens to occur in, and chronicle the lives of, frontier settlers in that state. With drought instead of hurricanes, skeeters replaced by locusts, greed for land rather than gold—Miami or Immokalee for California and Sutter’s Mill--it could have been another of myriad American stories.

It reflects courage, resilience, pride, intrepidity, will and determination in the face of overwhelming odds; family, love, friendship and loyalty; wanton greed and misplaced goals with the destruction of irreplaceable assets and natural (and retrospectively necessary and appropriate) landscapes and the displacement if indigenous cultures by that of the invaders.

In this case it is the chronicle of three generations of the fictitious MacIvey family; crackers who migrated from Georgia to Alachua just before the Civil War to escape abject poverty and to begin a new life. Hardships are many, but they survive and prosper to a wholly unexpected level because the founder of the dynasty preserved his hard earned cash. Believing that the land belonged to everyone, he stored his money for future security. His son saw the need to preserve the land, which required ownership, and he eventually purchased vast tracts of wilderness. He changed the cow hunting business into ranching, and cultivated enormous orange groves on hundreds of acres of his land.

In turn, with a prosperous cattle and orange business, his grandson again purchased even larger tracts of land, much further south, which he eventually developed into a garden vegetable empire, along with another land empire in the Miami environs.

There was no fourth generation. Sol, the last survivor of the clan died alone—by choice—reluctantly admitting that he had destroyed everything he touched, and reflected upon the destruction of the natural environment which had been Florida . . . forever and irrevocably authored something he despised.

Throughout this great yarn are multiple vignettes, many tragic, which cement the unified whole into a wonderfully readable tract reminiscent of The Yearling and Huckleberry Finn; a rich history of Florida’s pioneer spirit and the natural world in which they strove for survival to become land barons who participated in exploitation of the environment far beyond human need.

Posted by respeto at 5:24 PM

March 11, 2006

Legacy

(paying the price for the Clinton years)
Rich Lowry – ISBN 0-895260492

Not altogether unlike 1968 (reviewed in January), wherein Kurlansky resurrects the happenings of that year, Lowry reviews, and reminds us of the Clinton years. It is, indeed, the antidote to the misrepresentations and spin of that era. And it is much more!

A hard hitting, witty, acerbic and critical appraisal of the Clinton presidency, he offers the best yet summing of that period. History, while best studied some 50 years after the fact, is still based upon contemporary reports, and Lowry goes a long way into laying the groundwork for those who will use it as a source 50 years hence. Published in 2003, it was issued in paperback in 2005.

Thruout, I was reminded of the comment made early in the Clinton administration by the columnist George Will, that some seek the presidency to do something . . . others to be someone. Legacy speaks volumes about that, without ever mentioning it.

Lowry expands upon Morris’ Because He Could (reviewed in November.) His “take” on the subject is more comprehensive--and less complimentary--but Lowry does “allow” that Clinton was not a total disaster. He shares with Morris the sense that he could have been far better. Indeed, as a centrist Democrat Clinton could have made a very real difference if not for his character faults and his “mindless excesses” which compromised his effectiveness. Perhaps the most unfortunate fact, in the end, is that Clinton didn’t matter nearly as much as he might have. “He sought to bury his personal failings beneath his own inconsequence. Mission accomplished.”

Beyond his inability to achieve much domestically—and most of that forced upon him by Gingrich and the “94 Republicans”--his reluctance to seriously engage the foreign policy issues set the stage for the current problems with Iran, North Korea, and terrorism, to mention but a few. None, to be sure, were Clinton’s fault, but by kicking the can down the road he left us with the serious problems which we now face.

Lowry carefully reviews the details of myriad failings, including the first Twin Tower bombing, Rwanda, immigration control, airport security, etc. Nonetheless he gives credit where due, with Bosnia: dealt with belatedly, but at least dealt with. “Peace deals,” Arafat, missed opportunities to capture bin Laden, the “final days”, including pardons and the rest are dissected.

Of course he deals with Hillary, but beyond direct impact she is not the primary subject of the book. He does, however, emphasize the relevance of Clinton to the recent decade’s “feminization” of the military and America, and upon the rampant sexualization of our culture. Again, he is not the proximate cause, but is the near-perfect representative thereof.

“In December 1997 Clinton complained to the New York Times about how history seemed determined to rob him of a great crisis from which he could gain a great legacy. . . . [yet] A terrorist network had nearly leveled two American embassies simultaneously. He responded with a whimper.” As well, he was offered bin Laden by the Sudan, but couldn’t imagine a “legal way” to claim that capture, and the USS Cole was attacked on his watch, an act of war over which he did nothing. What Clinton accomplished is dwarfed by what he avoided.

Overall a good read, especially when paired with Morris. Good reportage by both.

Posted by respeto at 9:29 AM

December 31, 2008

Liar’s Poker

Rising Through the Wreckage on Wall Street
Michael Lewis – ISBN – uncertain: use only title and author and you will find it
(no longer in print, but thousands are available, used, on line, for as little as $3)

I owned it years ago but never read it; gave it away when I moved to Florida, and forgot about it. Recent events caused me to order a copy. Published in 1989, you will find it not only a fulsome, but a frightening read today--prescient as well. “Spot on” when undertaking to understand what has happened to Wall Street and to Investment Banks. I recommend it!

The author was employed for several years by Salomon Brothers in both New York and London. In his introduction he indicates that as a graduate of Princeton and the London School of Economics he was sought out by Salomon, went thru their training program and became a bond trader; an endeavor he knew absolutely nothing about, was never very good at, but still managed to earn a six figure income despite his inadequacies.

“Economic theory which is, after all, what economics students were supposed to know) serves almost no function in an investment bank.” Bankers simply use the degree to vet applicants for “general intelligence.” It showed!

He discusses why the Federal Reserve was greatly responsible for the Savings and Loan failure in the 80’s, as well as the present calamity. The present one has been in abirthing since the S&L collapse. He explains things in a fashion understandable to most readers, and he’s easy to read. For instance:
• “Why”, he asks, “did investment banking pay so many people with so little experience so much money? Answer: When attached to a telephone, they could produce even more money.
• How could they produce money without experience? Answer: Producing in an investment bank was less a matter of skill and more a matter of intangibles—flair, persistence and luck.”

The reader is, or at least ought to be, appalled by the cavalier approach to investment: the lies told, the absence of conscience in recommending to clients “issues” which management wanted sold, without concern for the buyer . . . only the commissions to the company. Virtually all of the salesmen worked exclusively for the money, and spent little time learning about their products. Sales techniques were all that mattered to them. What is exposed is abysmal, to say the least.

Midway thru he gets into a discussion of Michael Milken, junk bonds, and the origins of the mortgage disaster which now haunts us, and is almost singularly responsible for the Trillion Dollar Meltdown we are amidst. (That book, by Charles Morris, is also a great read.) Lewis explains in quite simple terms the evolution (up to 1989) of the marketing of mortgage portfolios as if they really were bonds. Prior to the S&L collapse mortgage loans had been local and well managed. Offered opportunity, Wall Street created new avenues of finance which were disingenuous and begged numerous intermediaries to lie, cheat and steal . . . for which we are now paying.

I won’t go into the details since I want to emphasize that in his memoir Lewis exposes the chicanery of these masters of manipulative investing, solely for their own profit. With rare exception they are all moral cretins. While he is dealing expressly with his own employer—Salomon Bros.—he includes the rest of the players, indicting them all for similar, reprehensible behavior which was at least negligent and at worst approached criminality.

While junk bonds originally made sense, and were singularly responsible for much of the financing of the information age and the Reagan economic boom. Milken understood that the market for finance was outmoded, even archaic, and devised a totally new means of raising capital: bonds, not loans. Thus he introduced a wholly new kind of finance. But eventually there were so many offerings, and so much money chasing them for their promised high yields, that greed overtook both sellers and buyers and “real junk” was sold to the unsuspecting, the naïve and the greedy—by people who knew it. Wall Street made outrageous profits thru misrepresentation.

Arbitrage, was a euphemism “for what we did with other people’s money.” It meant “trading risklessly for profit.” Riskless, that was, to the sellers, not to buyers. The banks would orchestrate an offering, make it look good, sell bonds out the whazoo, collect their commissions—often in the millions—and vamoose. The whole point of the activity was to sell to a public unable to assess the risk; dependent on the offering and rating agencies for advice, which was disingenuous and wholly directed at their profits.

He sagely observes that “when an investment banker starts talking about principles, he is usually defending his interests.” And later adds a note to members of all governments: “be wary of Wall Streeters threatening crashes. They are tempted to do this whenever you encroach on their turf. But they can’t cause a crash any more than they can prevent one.”

He also confirms a suspicion I have had for years, that “Most of the time when markets move, no one has any idea why. A man who can tell a goods story can make a good living as a broker. It was the job of people like me to make up reasons, to spin a plausible yarn. And it’s amazing what people will believe.”

He was fortunate to become good friends with several truly talented men who gave him (and his clients) good advice, but quit early--leaving his “surest way to becoming a millionaire”--because he could not endure the stench of the activities.

His father’s generation (mine!), he summarizes, “grew up with certain beliefs. One of those beliefs is that the amount of money one earns is a rough guide to one’s contribution to the welfare and prosperity of our society. . . . [I was close to, and learned from my father] . . . It took watching his son being paid 225 grand at the age of twenty-seven, after two years on the job, to shake his faith in money. He has only recently recovered from the shock.”

“I haven’t!” When you sit at the center of the most absurd money game ever, and benefit out of all proportion to your value to society, when myriad other equally undeserving people are raking it in faster than they can count, something happens to your money belief. . . . Or at least ought to. They take their funny money seriously and it becomes their “guiding light.” It is tempting to believe that they will get their comeuppance eventually, but they don’t. They just get richer and die fatter and happier.

He couldn’t do it, so he quit and wrote this riveting, expository memoir. Read and reflect upon the immorality of what has been begotten. It really is worth it to understand that capitalism works only when the capitalists are grounded in morality, honesty and fairness. It has been lost, and we’d best get together and organize a search party.

And while reflecting, read my quote dated Dec. 26th, 2008: The pope was right.

You might also want to link to this:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JL25Dj02.html

(you'll have to copy and paste) This man is absolutely brilliant, and I recommend you consult his primary site often:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/others/spengler.html

Posted by respeto at 2:45 PM

July 3, 2008

Liberal Fascism

The Secret History of the American Left from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning
Jonah Goldberg – ISBN – 9780385511841

It is insufficient to say this incredible tome deserves to be read by people of all political persuasions. The title will offend Liberals, who should read it for historic information. Conservatives will be enamored by the title, but Goldberg will deflate them as well as he notes that while American fascism is best represented by liberal doctrine and practice, conservatives tolerate and often cooperate with its nostrums because they don’t fully consider what they mean. No one is spared. This inadequate review intends only to encourage you to read it . . . before the election this fall. As well, I’d recommend—and will review very soon—Dick Morris’ new book Fleeced. Though the choice is dismal, there is a choice. A very important one!

The book is so full of information that it is difficult to represent even a fraction of the content. It would be well for people to understand just who “progressives” really are in order to choose between the two lesser on the ballot.

The first revolution of a fascistic nature was authored by Rousseau and the French Jacobins. It wholly undercut the ancien regime and destroyed the country, ending with its principals dead and the Europe shattering folly of Napoleon. All totalitarianisms promise to create a new society from scratch, burying all that is past. In these societies one is promised achievement of life’s deepest meaning and destiny simply by living in them. It cannot be done, and were it possible it would be tyranny, however benign. It doesn’t work, because it can’t. Goldberg reminds that American founding documents touted the pursuit of happiness. We’ve evolved. We no longer pursue it, Goldberg observes. We expect it to be delivered, along with the pizza.

He