Hodgepodge – Wordy, Redundant, Disorganized – Page 2

Breakneck

[Please note: The word “Featured” on the left side above was NOT inserted by this blogger, but apparently was inserted by WordPress, and it cannot be removed. NO post in this blog is sponsored.]

WARNING: LONG POST

The Book of the Week is “Breakneck, China’s Quest to Engineer the Future” by Dan Wang, published in 2025. In this hodgepodge of a volume whose language is awkward in spots, the author made vast generalizations in comparing China to the United States, sometimes oversimplifying things.

The author contended that China’s economy has grown in leaps and bounds economically in the last few decades because its government has thrown vast resources into engineering.

The author argued that the United States is in political and economic decline: due to its obstructionist legal system, and for failing to stop the offshoring of its factories to lower-cost facilities in China.

Capitalism involves profit-seeking. Communism involves a government that steals the economic surplus of the profit-seekers. Socialism is a collective, non-profit-seeking effort to provide essential services that fulfill basic human needs such as food and shelter. Some believe that the government is obligated to provide these essential services to the people.

Historically, business start-ups in the capitalist economic system have been forced to rely on mostly private funding. In the United States, when a business becomes monster-sized and politically entrenched, it gets government assistance in terms of tax breaks and legislative favoritism. The United States government sometimes makes taxpayers pay for a corporate bailout after executives have bankrupted their employer.

China’s Communist system grants a revolving credit facility to all businesses that start to show profitability, taking a financial interest in them. Some businesses still go bankrupt later on, due to a proliferation of fierce competitors engaged in price wars, because they jump into making products unrelated to their core competencies. Those failed companies don’t get bailed out. There is creative destruction.

Economics 101 says a nation needs to have a healthy, well-educated workforce to stay in good economic shape. Both China and the United States sabotage themselves in this regard in different ways.

China has become capitalistic of late– rewarding entrepreneurs who build hospitals rather than their staffs who dispense their medical expertise, resulting in engineers with robust financial health, and patients with poor physical health.

In the United States, whenever the government tries to be socialistic– say, by passing laws that financially benefit consumers who are patients, students or tenants– the medical providers, schools and landlords whose bottom lines are adversely affected, simply pass the extra costs onto those consumers by raising prices!

The bright spot in America’s selling out its manufacturing is: worldwide economic incestuousness has given rise to co-dependence, and thus forced cooperation among rivalrous nations. All the countries heavily involved on the world stage must sit down at the bargaining table now, or their own people will face severe economic hardships.

Of course, there have been world leaders in the recent past whose heartlessness sparked peasant revolts. The current leaders know that, and in order to stay in power, they keep their populations just fat and happy enough, amid their saber-rattling at their (phony) enemies.

The author commented that Boeing lost its way. It used to have a knowledge base– had a reputation for institutional memory– learning from mistakes. Its products inevitably would improve because it paid attention to process. Now China is the country obsessed with process rather than product.

A stupid employer has workers meet to discuss a recently failed project, but whose list of suggestions of how to do better in the future is shoved in a drawer, never to be seen again. A wise employer will add the list to its knowledge-base so no one has to reinvent the wheel. China currently has the latter bent.

Other factors at play in the current situation include: China has one-Party rule while America’s two political parties are in a constant tug-of-war over how to deal with its fragmented and complex economic issues. True, America’s production of consumer goods has drastically declined in recent decades, while all kinds of services now drive its economy. Its attorneys are obstructionist; however, the glacial pace of construction of infrastructure is also due to the politicians’ goal to stay in power.

No voters want politicians to raise taxes to pay for infrastructure. So the politicians don’t raise taxes; so, no infrastructure. Besides, ground-breaking ceremonies are long forgotten at re-election time. Politicians know that campaigns are more likely to succeed through mudslinging rather than through (usually empty) bragging about accomplishments.

The author asks a question for the ages: “Should it [the United States] really go all in on artificial intelligence, cryptocurrencies, and other things that the Communist Party mocks as fictitious economy?”

Read the book to learn about additional issues facing China and America, their histories, and about their quest to dominate the world while they have been reversing their roles of late, politically and economically.

One last telling quote: “His reign was characterized by regulatory forbearance, perhaps because he was a personal beneficiary of the sector’s growth.” – written about Lu Wei, director of the Cyberspace Administration in China, the chief internet regulator prior to 2018. Sounds familiar.

ENDNOTE: The author failed to mention that, prior to this writing, the United States had illegal immigrants making significant contributions to its GDP, while China’s sex industry makes significant contributions to its GDP. Sexual issues in China are linked to its “underground” economy, while sexual issues in the United States are a whole different ball of wax.

Speaking of such issues in the United States, two assumptions apply in connection with unwanted sexual advances.

The crimes were more evil when the victims were under eighteen years of age.
If the alleged perpetrator was punished through jail time, job loss or fining, he was guilty.

That is not to say the alleged perpetrator wasn’t guilty if he wasn’t punished, but mere accusations are less conclusive indicators of guilt than actual punishment. And yes, lack of punishment can also indicate how powerful the alleged perpetrator was when the allegations surfaced.

Here’s an alphabetical list of the most famous American alleged perpetrators of unwanted sexual advances:

Roger Ailes, Woody Allen, Mario Batali, Michael Bloomberg, Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby, Louis C.K., John Conyers, Jr., P. Diddy, Jeffrey Epstein, Mark Foley, Al Franken, Matt Gaetz, Dennis Hastert, Michael Jackson, Brett Kavanaugh, R. Kelly, Matt Lauer, Roy Moore, Larry Nassar, Billy O’Reilly, Bob Packwood, Kevin Spacey, Jerry Sandusky, Clarence Thomas, Strom Thurmond, John Tower, Donald Trump, George Tyndall, Mike Tyson, Anthony Weiner, Harvey Weinstein.

In the United States, the causes of sex crimes are of course, complex and fraught with political, cultural and social hysteria.

The ongoing hysteria is more lucrative than prevention. Sex crimes create business for: lawyers, therapists, the media (including social media), the medical industry, the justice system, law enforcement, and politicians. Also, who is still largely in charge of these parties? And what is the gender of all of the alleged perpetrators listed above? Arguably, preventing sex crimes threatens America’s paternalistic society.

A German Generation

The Book of the Week is “A German Generation, An Experimental History of the Twentieth Century” by Thomas A. Kohut, published in 2012. This hodgepodge of a volume alternated essays with personal stories of Germans coming of age during the Nazi Era.

After WWI, the German government brainwashed people into thinking the Versailles Treat was outrageously unfair to Germany. The government pushed extreme nationalism to make Germany (the “fatherland”) great again by trying to take back the territories (in Denmark, Czechoslovakia and Poland) it had occupied during the war. The Weimar Republic (1919 – early 1933) was chaotic, with lack of strong leadership to quell rioting and appease striking workers in Berlin amid sky-high inflation in 1923.

The Third Reich (early 1933 – May 1945)– father figures– encouraged kids, and former soldiers who were politically right-wing, rabidly anti-union and anti-socialist to join youth and social groups in which ability to withstand hardships would prove their masculinity.

All through the 1920’s, and 1930’s, both boys and girls in those groups, mostly middle class, went hiking and camping together, but shunned sex, alcohol and tobacco. The groups sang mostly military and hunting songs, played games and danced. Every couple of years, numerous groups got together, marching in uniforms, flying flags. They thought of themselves as self-starters, but nonpartisan. However, in 1932, all bets were off, as the Hitler Youth swallowed up all the other youth groups. Some people quit their group, as they recognized what a power-hungry megalomaniac Hitler really was, and didn’t like him.

There were various political factions, each with a different ideology: the two major factions wore brown (Nazis) or red (Communists). The National Socialist (Nazi) Party initially encouraged the cooperation of economic classes, and rewarded people pursuant to their accomplishments rather than pursuant to their good luck when they were “to the manor born.”

People volunteered to live communally, doing farm or household chores at work collectives in the countryside for a few months at a time. Teenage boys who had completed apprenticeships but couldn’t find work were sent there to keep them off the streets and out of trouble. Eventually, a stint in a collective became mandatory for everyone until 1933, when the collectives were disbanded. The Hitler Youth encouraged fierce competition in sports, music and work, and demanded blind obedience to rigid rules in a tattle-tale environment. There was extreme societal pressure to join the Hitler Youth, and when one got older, the Nazi Party.

In the first half of the twentieth century, there were paradoxes with regard to females’ roles in German society. They got the vote in 1919. In the mid-1930’s, they took on domestic responsibilities of the men who were drafted into the military. But the women were still expected to do housework and child-rearing. Through the 1930’s, the Nazi Party gave monetary incentives to encourage Aryan Germans to get married and have children, to help perpetuate the “master race.”

“The Gestapo strategy of focusing on target groups and leaving ordinary Germans alone continued during the war, although the pressure on ‘enemies of the people’ and on ‘community aliens,’ especially Jews, was increased.” Sounds familiar.

Read the book to learn many more details about: the experiences and mentalities of the Germans from the 1920’s onward; the yawning generation gap after the war; how the Germans were brainwashed by propaganda into cooperating among themselves while behaving fiercely competitively toward their perceived enemies (which included specific individuals in their own communities!), to coming together again, while rationalizing away their lack of courage in communication and action to stem the hatreds in their society.

The Fifties

The Book of the Week is “The Fifties” by David Halberstam, published in 1993. This slightly sloppily edited hodgepodge of a volume consisted of a compilation of the author’s journalism entries. As usual, there is nothing new under the sun. The decade was characterized by alpha males with hubris syndrome, egos pushing and shoving, in all areas of American life.

“He delighted in control of the political apparatus, and he started each day by meeting with a trusted aide from the secret police, who brought him up to date on gossip gathered from wiretaps.”

Actually, the above was written about Cuban leader Fulgencio Batista. For most of the 1950’s, he was the CIA’s friend. Until he wasn’t.

In connection with the Korean War, Douglas MacArthur exhibited “arrogance, foolishness, and vainglory… taking a small war that was already winding down and expanding it” to fight against Communist superpower China, so the war dragged on for two additional years; “he was to damage profoundly America’s relations with China…”

Matthew Ridgway helped save a few American soldiers’ lives by personally visiting all of them in South Korea to boost their morale, while MacArthur stayed in Tokyo, thinking of himself as king of the world. MacArthur thought it was Truman who was irrational. As is well known, about twenty years later, president Richard Nixon repaired America’s relationship with China, but prolonged the Vietnam War.

By the mid-1950’s, the evolution of the American labor movement had taken an ironic, hypocritical turn: Unions allowed Wall Street to invest their pension funds in the securities markets on their behalf.

In December 1955, the arrest of Rosa Parks was the last straw– prompting the Montgomery bus boycott. A bunch of factors came together, one thing led to another, spurring great political changes. Just a few included:

Parks was so emotionally tired of the oppression she and her fellow dark-skinned people suffered, she felt she had nothing to lose by rebelling.
Parks had friends in high places in the Civil Rights Movement.
Approximately three-quarters of Montgomery, Alabama public-bus riders were black, and of those, most were women who took buses across town to get to their jobs as servants in the white community.
The white community refused to enforce the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court ruling.
The articulate Martin Luther King, Jr. became the public-relations leader of the Movement, which was nonviolent, and his religious crowd had more money than other groups in the black community.

The blacks outsmarted the whites in an end-run around taking public buses, by carpooling. Donations allowed the purchasing of new vehicles. White Montgomery officials had no clue about how fed up the blacks were with the conditions of apartheid, voter suppression, etc., so they didn’t know what to do when dissatisfaction reached critical mass.

In January 1956, police began arresting carpool drivers. The blacks shed their fears that they themselves would suffer retaliation for protesting, and owned their fighting-back as a point of pride. The Montgomery Advertiser newspaper was used as the local white politicians’ disinformation outlet. Nevertheless, after a while, the whole world was watching, as the boycott story spread like wildfire among hundreds of media outlets– mostly newspapers and TV stations.

The major influencers of the initial incident– Rosa Parks, MLK, Jr., and Ralph Abernathy– continued to behave in a mature manner, so the media sympathized with them. MLK Jr., remained a thorn in the side of the white community because he took a licking and kept on ticking. He was the recipient of a ton of hate mail, doxxing, death threats, fire-bombing of his residence, etc.

Anyway, another pivotal historical event occurred in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1957. Governor Orval Faubus refused to allow segregation of a high school there in order to ensure his reelection. The orgy of hatred he unleashed, taught Southern politicians– George Wallace especially, “how to manipulate the anger with the South, how to divide a state by class and race, and how to make the enemy seem to be the media.”

Just as legislation is a tool that can be used to spread hatred, technology is a tool that can be used for nefarious purposes, too.

“Do you get the funny sort of sense that, so far, at least, there are no human candidates in this campaign?”

The above was written by Dean Acheson, addressing Harry Truman, about the 1960 presidential race, packaged by consultants. JFK won because he had the nicer-looking TV image. Nowadays, the candidates can be replaced by AI software, created by consultants.

Read the book to learn much more about both disturbing and progressive, seminal historical events, and the people who made them happen.

Red Carpet

The Book of the Week is “Red Carpet, Hollywood, China, and the Global Battle for Cultural Supremacy” by Erich Schwartzel, published in 2022. In this hodgepodge of a volume, the author described the interactions between the United States and China in connection with their movie and television industries, beginning in the 1990’s.

America seeks to profit in everything it does.

The Chinese government’s number one goal is to boost its national pride when selling video entertainment to end-users. The government therefore keeps a tight rein on the optics of its products– limits the stories of its public-private partnership’s shows to:

glorifying itself and its Communist Party history;
recounting its victimization at the hands of evil, Western powers and Japan with regard to militarism and trade in the 19th century;
glorifying superheroes who convey Communist ideology.

The Chinese government gets very offended when even one movie-line or one tweet implies that Tibet or Taiwan are not part of China. It censors story-characters who challenge authority, buck established order, or shake things up. It censors disparagement of China, adult themes of vice, religion, gruesome violence, ghosts and gays. China financially punishes the perpetrators– the entertainment companies. Because it can.

Another aspect of China’s video culture is rampant pirating of Western entertainment. Further, deals made with foreign countries to screen shows in China, are always financially superior for China. Contrarily, in various ways, China will curtail revenues for all parties if it sees that the foreign entities’ shows are too influential with Chinese viewers.

November 1994 saw the first American movies (made by Warner Brothers) shown in China. Even though in the next quarter century, foreign videos shown in China became China-fied, only Chinese people watch movies made in China. Americans aren’t watching movies made in China.

Beginning around 2014, China’s dictator Xi began to punish Chinse entertainment-industry dissidents. Between 2017 and 2020, America had 17 of the fifty highest-grossing movies of all time. China had 27.

China has begun to export its movies and TV shows to Kenya at a deep discount in order to push its ideology. But viewers enjoy American shows better. The younger generation yearns for the consumer goods they see on TV. Interestingly, Disney was one of the few American content-providers that didn’t portray Africa as a “lawless land of disease and despots.”

Read the book to learn many more details of how Hollywood became experienced at dealing with China in seeking to make money, while China played Hollywood, and how China is spreading its gospel to the African continent with the goal of world domination.

Morgenthau

WARNING: LONG POST

The Book of the Week is “Morgenthau, Power, Privilege and the Rise of an American Dynasty” by Andrew Meier, published in 2022.

In this hodgepodge of a volume, the author recounted many of the historical events to which one family tree’s four generations of male Morgenthaus were witness in their lifetimes. Given the tenor of the times, there was probably less documentation on the females, so the author wrote much more about the men.

The story started in the 1860s, when the Morgenthaus began arriving in America. The fifty-five-year-old Lazarus, the family patriarch, along with his forty-one-year-old wife and most of their thirteen children had come from Bavaria. Due to the imposition of tariffs, Lazarus had been forced to close his businesses there.

The family, who considered themselves Jewish but weren’t religious, initially resided in the Cobble Hill section of Brooklyn. Through the decades, Lazarus sold various products with checkered success. His son Henry became an attorney and a securities-industry businessman. Henry’s survival skills allowed him to emerge from a 1905 white-collar crime-scandal with his reputation unsullied. Corruption hearings resulted in new regulations to prohibit conflicts of interest… until the next financial crisis, no doubt.

Anyway, Henry was an opportunist who preached progressive reform but at the same time, was raking in big bucks for himself. He pressured president Woodrow Wilson to appoint him ambassador to Turkey so he could protect the Jews– who were in the minority– in the then-Ottoman Empire, which included Palestine. In spring 1914, Henry was impressed by the Jews’ industriousness there, but felt that if the Jews were all concentrated in one place, they’d be more vulnerable to genocide all at once at the hands of their enemies.

Russia, Britain and Germany all had their eyes on acquiring the territory of Palestine. A few Jews who had fled crushing oppression in their birthplaces were purchasing land from Arabs around Tel Aviv. But at the start of WWI, importation of food was interrupted and the Jews couldn’t afford to buy food. Wealthy German Jews of New York City rushed financial aid to them so that they wouldn’t starve.

Henry naively believed Turkey could be convinced to stop supporting Germany, and become neutral like the United States. But already, the Turks had committed genocide and atrocities agains the Armenians, Christians and minorities, and had launched attacks in the Black Sea on behalf of the Germans. All Turkish men between the ages of twenty and forty-five were recruited by the military.

Unfortunately, Henry had no control over military leaders and war criminals, or over anyone, for that matter. But Henry enjoyed playing “James Bond” before the fictional spy character was even created. Henry’s son, Henry, Jr., considered himself a farmer, and worked on one in Dutchess County in upstate New York. Conveniently, his neighbor was FDR.

As is well known, geopolitics is a complicated business, and president FDR conducted all kinds of secret dealings in his 1940 and 1944 reelection campaigns.

As an aside, in the 2016 and 2024 elections, voters chose a profiteering, sexist man-child over well-educated, politically experienced women with law degrees.

Described that way, the women sound awfully threatening to men, don’t they?

Women who take charge are perceived as bossy while men who take charge are perceived as strong leaders.

True, Donald Trump inherited the mentoring and all the resources required to continue his father’s lucrative business over the course of decades, during which he skillfully arranged sufficient profiteering and patronage jobs for his cronies, and name-recognition everywhere he needed votes.

Arguably, the women had a few disadvantages other than their gender.

Both women had long political histories– all the more opportunities for smearing by the opposition.

The odds were against Kamala Harris specifically because in the last seventy years, only three out of six vice presidents first became president by winning an election rather than by inheriting the presidency via death or resignation: Richard Nixon (1968), George H. W. Bush (1988), and Joe Biden (2020).

Additionally, Harris’ candidacy was doomed due to its extremely late start. Until mid-summer 2024, incumbent Joe Biden refused to withdraw from the race in order to retaliate against his own party, furious that he didn’t get his full eight years. All three aforementioned vice-presidents did a full eight years as such before running for president.

Americans are now hyper-aware of gender issues, and discrimination against women– given the current political climate.

Anyway, early 1922 found Henry, Jr. running a farming-newspaper and making valuable political contacts for his father and himself.

During WWII, Henry, Jr. served as Treasury Secretary in FDR’s administration. In August 1944, General Eisenhower perceived that the German people were as much to blame as their leaders for attempting world domination through evil means, as they spread the hatred, too; they should be punished with economic hardship when the war was over.

The following month, in Quebec, Churchill met with FDR, who invited Henry, Jr. (even though he was Treasury Secretary) to discuss what to do with postwar Germany. Churchill’s preliminary thought was to simply prevent Germany from re-arming, by shutting down her operations in the Ruhr and the Saar. But he didn’t want her to become too debilitated, as in the future, she might help protect Europe against Russian aggression. Russia, which had helped win the war, was gaining a reputation for military strength, and so would have to be allowed to have a say in world affairs.

Henry, Jr. wanted to completely infantilize Germany by forcing her to feed her people via small farms only, with no importing of resources. Her heavy machinery and factory parts should be distributed to European nations (including Russia) whose infrastructure had been destroyed or damaged by her. In that case, since international trade is largely a zero-sum game, England would revive her decimated economy, getting more coal and steel. Henry Stimson, Secretary of War, felt the plan to punish Germany was way too harsh, and was merely retaliation. Germany would be so resentful that her people would find a way to make war again.

In October 1944, Henry, Jr.’s aggressive attitude was leaked to the press. He got slammed and FDR’s opponent in the presidential election said Henry, Jr. had put American lives at risk; revealing America’s future plans would incite the Germans to continue fighting instead of surrendering.

Robert Morgenthau was born in July 1919. He became the U.S. Attorney of the Southern District of New York in 1961. He worked closely with Robert F. Kennedy, U.S. Attorney General, who advised him to let J. Edgar Hoover (head of the FBI) take over an organized-crime case of his, so that the FBI would be forced to acknowledge that the Mafia existed, and it would start to investigate it.

Decades later, Morgenthau took over cases of violations of international banking laws, when at least $700 million was illegally wire-transferred from Iran to U.S. and British banks, with information omitted from the transactions. Morgenthau’s bigger concern that Iran was sucking up to Western banks in order to learn how to build nuclear weapons, more than the financial wrongdoing. In summer 2009, the Israelis and Americans cooperated to use malware (the details of which are still classified) to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program.

“Once again, to Morgenthau’s surprise, Washington stonewalled. The more he demanded that someone go to jail, the more the attorneys from Justice and Treasury spoke of a ‘deferred pros’ — legal shorthand for a deferred prosecution agreement.”

Read the book to learn much, much more about the Morgenthaus and their times.

Martin Van Buren

WARNING: VERY LONG POST

The Book of the Week is “Martin Van Buren, America’s First Politician” by James M. Bradley, published in 2024.

In this hodgepodge of a volume, the author recounted many of the historical events to which Van Buren was witness in his lifetime. Throughout, the reader can see the evolution of American politics, and how some bad situations have become reversed, and others have stayed the same or gotten worse.

Van Buren was born in December 1782 in Kinderhook, New York State, now a part of Columbia county, a couple of hours’ drive north of New York City. For most of his teenage years, he was apprenticed to an attorney. His preliminary training was spent in a version of “night court” in a tavern– the courthouse of his generation.

Republicans were the “bleeding heart liberals” of the 1800’s, while the Federalists were the free-market capitalists who believed the country should be governed by a centralized authority. Van Buren began his political career as a Republican. Nevertheless, he accumulated great wealth while practicing law. There were wealthy politicians who bought the votes of the lawmakers to make themselves richer. He became one of them through the decades. Back in the day, there were no campaign finance laws, so no one was required to disclose any information on campaign donations.

Van Buren was elected New York State senator, and began his first term in November 1812. The governor of New York State appointed him to be that state’s attorney general in early 1815. Politics were fickle, so his job security was poor. At the same time, he was allowed to finish his term as senator before starting the attorney general job. By December 1821, the Republicans were the only political party in the United States.

In the last half of the 1820’s, Congress frequently succeeded in opposing president John Quincy Adams’ initiatives. For months, senator Van Buren and his cronies fought against one initiative Adams managed to push through: funding for a diplomatic trip to Panama, to make nice with various countries in South America. Adams and his vice president Henry Clay (of the Whig party he founded in the mid-1830’s) had wasted resources on this project that ended up a bust anyway, because a few of the key diplomats passed away. Meanwhile, Van Buren had been building a bipartisan coalition to oppose his political enemies on hot-button issues such as race and slavery.

In the early 1800’s, ninety percent of federal revenue came from tariffs, as a federal income tax wouldn’t be levied until 1913. Various parties were hurt or helped by those tariffs. New York City’s business stakeholders, as did the southern states of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Alabama, mostly agricultural, were hurt. Commercial entities located around the Erie Canal, and states in New England began to favor tariffs as they built new factories. At the dawn of the 1830’s, the federal government was able to purchase its own Treasury bills and pay off its debt entirely.

At the same time, President Andrew Jackson, claiming it was an anti-corruption measure, imposed a policy of mandatory turnover of federal office holders every four years. Only about ten percent of the workforce was affected, but drawbacks included: disruption of corporate culture and loss of institutional memory in the workplace, so that new hires had to re-invent the wheel, and the replacement-workers would likely be inexperienced. Jackson later named his party the Democrats.

In 1836, Van Buren ran for president as a Democrat. He was the only candidate on the ballot at the Convention in Baltimore. Separate states were allowed to push various Whig-party candidates, and they did, so they all became spoilers of one another.

Then then-philosophy had been to leave the economy alone, and not grant bailouts. President Jackson’s Democrats blamed the banks on hard times. But after the president himself enacted banking legislation, that wouldn’t fly. A financial crisis hit the fan in 1837. Van Buren’s presidency was the first in which ordinary Americans blamed the bad economy on the federal government.

President Van Buren proposed an Independent Treasury– a federal entity that would simply be a conduit for collecting federal revenue and paying bills. It should be unconnected to commercial and savings banks, which were proft-seeking and had to answer to shareholders. It should not be subjected to political meddling.

Nonetheless, the politicians were greedy hypocrites all, of both parties. Ordinary Americans of course, were brainwashed by propaganda, and didn’t know the half of it. The legislation for the Independent Treasury was finally passed in June 1840.

By the late 1830’s, America’s government consisted of a two-party system. The party that was out of power trashed the one in power. But, presidential candidates didn’t travel around campaigning. They promoted themselves by writing letters that got published in various newspapers (which were partisan). Whig candidate William Henry Harrison broke tradition by traveling around the country, smearing Democrat Van Buren.

Read the book to learn much, much, much more about Van Buren’s life and times.

Between Two Fires

The Book of the Week is “Between Two Fires, Truth, Ambition and Compromise in Putin’s Russia” by Joshua Yaffa, published in 2020.

In this volume, the author described various workers in entertainment, tourism, war, religion and humanitarian aid– under Vladimir Putin’s reign. In order to avoid getting arrested or worse, the subjects needed to play well with the government, which funded a large percentage of their activities. Each of their stories was chronologically disorganized, wordy and redundant, but the author clearly conveyed their plights and mentalities.

Putin came to power when Boris Yeltsin resigned at the beginning of the year 2000. Shortly thereafter, Putin’s government took over the media, forcing a mogul (whose TV channel could reach as much as 98% of Russian households which had a TV set) to sell his media empire to the State (the Russian government).

In the late 1990’s, the site of a closed Russian prison called Perm-36 was turned into a museum whose curators tried to inform the public about crushing oppression suffered by Cold-War Era Soviet dissidents there. After Putin had come to power, German university students who believed in the cause of democratic freedoms, volunteered to do maintenance work on the site.

However, they got offended when a former prisoner was forgiving and even behaved in a friendly manner toward a former guard, who had become a security officer at the museum. The German’s were “bound by strict, categorical norms, an ethical prism born [sic] of Germany’s admirable– if often inflexible– attitude toward totalitarianism and those who serve it. A political prisoner and his guard should not shake hands, and from that flows a whole way of seeing the world.”

The former prisoner explained: The guard had been young and therefore impressionable, easily brainwashed into rationalizing that he was simply following orders as a messenger, putting prisoners into solitary confinement. The guard didn’t directly kill anyone; he was subjected to the same drab environment and fed the same food as the prisoners.

On the immorality / morality spectrum, no one’s perfect. Nevertheless, it appears that, in human history, the kinds of people who are evil– on the extremely immoral end– have become dictatorial world leaders in disproportionate numbers.

The author spoke with a local “fixer” in the war in Chechnya in the 2010’s. She served as messenger, bailed dissidents (anti-government rebels) out of jail, and aided journalists covering the war. She had adopted a kind of pragmatism– cooperating with the administration of the Soviet-appointed leader of Chechnya– even though he and his ilk brought genocide, atrocities and crushing oppression to her people.

For approximately the first decade of Putin’s dictatorship, ordinary Russians’ living standards improved due to modernization, plentiful oil, and an increase in consumer goods in the stores. They also enjoyed religious liberalization (except for Western Christian and Catholic worshipers– those denominations competed too much for congregants with the Russian Orthodox Church). Freedom rang until it didn’t, as Putin’s hunger for, and amassing of power got him “reelected” as supreme leader in 2012. From then on, under Putin– Russia’s, Crimea’s and Ukraine’s leadership became Stalinist all over again.

At any rate, like the United States media, the Russian media has its trivial distractions. A scandal, which the State investigated for two years, erupted when a contemporary art museum’s curator allowed an Azeri exhibit to feature children’s dolls in gruesome positions.

After a while, employees in many workplaces, couldn’t guess what would spark an inquiry from the authorities. There were neither written nor spoken rules on acceptable behavior. Of course, spies were everywhere, ready to arbitrarily wield power.

Read the book to learn much more about various workers in the Putin years.

Where Tyranny Begins

WARNING: VERY LONG POST

The Book of the Week is “Where Tyranny Begins, The Justice Department, the FBI and the War on Democracy” by David Rohde, published in 2024.

In this hodgepodge of a volume (which frequently contains the word “being” in the middle of sentences– awkward writing), the author described president Trump’s first-term shenanigans, that completely bucked established democratic order through making a mockery of the American justice system. The consequence has been that people now have total distrust of their government. On the other hand, there has been “creative destruction” that might be cause for optimism.

Interestingly, American voters have shifted from electing war-hero presidents (the last was George H.W. Bush in 1988) to electing draft-dodger presidents (except for Obama). And although the internet spreads disinformation of politicians’ cover-ups and denials, it also allows the sharing of stories among families and friends who experience genocide and atrocities.

There is actually more free speech than ever, as anyone can put in their two cents on the internet, in all different ways. The Nixon administration was suppressing free speech through the FCC’s power to license all kinds of broadcasting outlets, before cable TV was widespread. Yes, there were many more newspapers and magazines then, but ordinary Americans had to write “letters to the editor” and get them published, or call in to a radio or television show, if they wanted their voices to be heard.

In nations that have free and fair elections, initially, disinformation helps get a leader elected. Eventually, if he becomes a dictator, dissatisfaction among the people will reach critical mass, and the pendulum will swing the other way.

Many people think they’re learning history from sound bites and trivia awkwardly written by AI. But the library’s history section contains entire books that are likely to be more contextually comprehensive, written by actual people (yes, some of whom are myth-makers). And yes, depressingly, so much of substantive human history has been about war. It’s still worth reading lots of books on all kinds of history to understand the big picture, even though there might currently be doom and gloom, and one might feel powerless to stop it.

Obviously, no matter how much people learn how devastating and expensive war is, a few people keep instigating it!

So how are these instigators (recently consisting of the unbloodied elite, chicken-hawks and profiteers) allowed to make war, considering there’s a majority against the war?

This is how the cycle goes, in the United States:

Careers in media, entertainment, sports, the licensed professions and academia have been politicized. Nowadays, it seems most jobs might be highly lucrative in the short term, but they’re fiercely competitive and stressful. Job security is uncertain, given cancel culture and an uncertain economy.

Young job-seekers who can’t afford an education, or whose prospects are poor for other reasons, join a federal-law enforcement outfit, or the military– where they are ordered by the instigators to go to war.

Bottom line: There are sufficient people who owe their jobs to the instigators of war!

Trump has not yet not sent American troops in great numbers to foreign shores, but he has exacerbated home-grown hostility, in terms of hyper-partisanship, conspiracy theories and mistrust and distrust of American institutions.

A number of cliches apply to the second half of the twentieth century, into the first quarter of the twenty-first; among them, “The people gets the government it deserves” and “There is nothing new under the sun.” It might be recalled that the 1960’s were a tumultuous decade. There was violence in the streets of certain cities and on college campuses. Journalist P.J. O’Rourke wrote, “The Baby Boomers threw a decade-long temper tantrum.”

Over decades, that rebellion has actually resulted in more societal tolerance for divorce, re-marriages, interfaith marriages, and various arrangements of people of different sexual orientations. Societal pressure has eased on getting married and having children.

Now Americans can stay single, live together, give birth to or adopt children, or not– and not be socially ostracized. Interestingly, Trump’s daughter Ivanka converted to Judaism upon marrying, for the purpose of increasing her family’s power in their social circles. Even she had to conform to the tenor of the times.

At the dawn of the 1970’s, Americans were gob-smacked by the crimes of the Nixon administration. Part of the wrongdoing was war crimes. Nixon finished what LBJ started: contamination and devastation of the countries of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. And Nixon’s secrecy only exacerbated the mistrust and distrust of Americans in their government.

The Nixon Era ushered in a whole host of cultural changes. Since then, two generations of the social manipulative boys who entered politics have learned that if they stick together, they can evade punishment (or even be rewarded!) for behaving disrespectfully toward people of different walks of life. At the very least, they immediately have a leg up in society having been born white and male.

This trend began with younger male Baby Boomers who didn’t serve in the military. A few circumstances have contributed to their continued domination. They:

didn’t have their lives interrupted or willingly risk their lives while the government supervised their every move for two or more years.
missed the life-or-death situations in war zones and the exposure to different cultures, religions and class differences that military service would have imposed on them.
came of age among their own kind; at private school, boarding school, and fraternities, but have still been able to take advantage of the “old boy network” to advance their careers because they still experienced the military-service environment of the abusive hierarchy which leads to male bonding.

The 1990’s saw various franchises (TV and movies) featuring two fictional male friends who exhibited some aspects of this teenage boy culture; among them: Beavis and Butthead, Wayne’s World, Bill and Ted’s, and Clerks.

Donald Trump has taken this trend to its logical extreme, to run the country. This nation has been brainwashed into saying, “Boys will be boys.” Now, the boys have nowhere to go but down.

The author briefly described how independent counsel Ken Starr launched an overzealous witch hunt into Bill and Hillary Clinton’s activities. The sordid episode began in 1995, when their enemies investigated a land-deal called Whitewater. The Clintons themselves were deemed not to have broken the law, so their enemies desperately sought additional sources of dirt.

As is well known, Bill Clinton was eventually caught lying under oath about having an extra-marital affair on company time. BUT, that affair was with a consenting adult.

Which is the worst:

war crimes,
financial crimes, such as tax evasion, accounting fraud, bribery or racketeering (that are NOT victimless; they hurt society by [excuse the cliche] making the rich richer and the poor, poorer), or
lying under oath about having committed adultery???

So, Americans entertained or disgusted by Bill Clinton’s story might have concluded that the investigators were extremely incompetent, desperate for blood, or that there was a backroom deal not to break the story until after Clinton was reelected. When someone is dishonest about one thing, there is trust erosion in other things they might say or do. Regardless of real motives, this stupidity is one more reason to mistrust and distrust the American government.

As an aside, an inconceivably large amount of taxpayer dollars was wasted on frivolous investigations on the Clintons. Not coincidentally, people who pay little or no income tax, also don’t have their money wasted on that kind of nonsense.

At least Clinton complied with the rule of law. Trump dictatorially broke tradition by bypassing the Justice Department entirely when he signed an Executive Order to impose a travel ban on all Muslims from several countries. His philosophy was (pursuant to Moses’ line in the movie, The Ten Commandments): “So it shall be written, so it shall be done.” His thinking was, why should he need to fool around with pesky rule of law? He was the new sheriff (or rather, outlaw) in town, and his whole life, had always got his own way by bullying his opponents into submission.

Going into the 2024 presidential election, American voters knew what they were getting into. Obviously, they would rather have a brain-dead male dictator, than a woman president.

In any case, read the book to learn about Trump’s trials and tribulations in his first term, and the characters involved, such as Bill Barr– who became a hyper-partisan cheerleader for Trump, and a hypocritical crybaby to the media.

ENDNOTE: Speaking of politicization of employers, here’s a little ditty that explains the situation.

POLITICAL BOSS

sung to the tune of “Party Doll” with apologies to the Estate of Buddy Knox and to whomever else the rights may concern.

Everyone has got to have a political boss,

to punish you when he’s feeling cross,

to be involved in honest graft,

to run sweetheart contracts, like for aircraft.

No one wants a political boss,

no one wants a political boss,

but if you’re loyal, he’ll support you, help you.

If you’re loyal, he’ll help you.

Everyone’s got to have a political boss,

to choose candidates,

make you pay his costs,

to use media to spread-smears unfair,

to have lawyers on hand with tactics that scare.

No one wants a political boss,

no one wants a political boss,

but if you’re loyal, he’ll support you, help you.

If you’re loyal, he’ll help you.

Everyone’s got to have a political boss,

so when scandal hits,

you’ll take the loss,

to hand out jobs and to raise funds,

to add to his base, train daughters and sons,

train daughters and sons.

No one wants a political boss,

no one wants a political boss,

but if you’re loyal, he’ll support you, help you.

If you’re loyal, he’ll help you.

No one wants a political boss,

no one wants a political boss,

but if you’re loyal, he’ll support you, help you.

If you’re loyal, he’ll help you.

The Crazies

This blogger skimmed “The Crazies, The Cattleman, The Wind Prospector, and A War Out West” by Amy Gamerman, published in 2025. The author made a very bad editorial decision not to include an index in this volume. With an index, it could have been a reference book, but instead, was a mishmash of the history of a family of ranchers in the Crazy Mountains, and brief biographical descriptions of the stakeholders and their activities in a decades-long fight over a renewable-energy project in Montana.

As an aside, in the past decade or so, journalists who publish books are getting sloppier and lazier than ever. It appears that they slap together the articles on a specific topic that they’ve written over a number of years, and fail to edit and organize those articles in a coherent way. And the book gets published, as is.

Anyway, in June 2004, a wind-farm entrepreneur named Marty Wilde oversaw the construction of a wind tower on a Montana ranch owned by the Jarrett family, on behalf of the company named Crazy Mountain Cattle. That tower took all kinds of measurements of the copious wind in the area, for more than a year. Then a wind map was made. Wilde had to front all expenses until the wind-farm was actually built before he could collect a developer’s fee and royalties– which could take years, decades, or not happen at all.

Building a wind farm involves an extremely complicated set of steps involving the law, politics, economics and the environment. In the mid-single-digit 2000’s, part of the wind-farm was to be built on land where lived the Blackfeet Tribe, Native Americans. Thanks to a grant Wilde secured from the US Department of Energy, the Tribe’s community college had most of its 100-kilowatt electricity bill (charged by the Glacier Electric Cooperative) paid for using a wind turbine donated by a California company called Vestas. The school’s students were employed to erect that turbine on its campus. That was still one of the early steps in terms of a full-fledged wind farm.

In 2008, the original plans called for eighty megawatts to deliver electricity to twenty-six thousand homes. But Marty Wilde and Rick Jarrett needed buy-in from Jarrett’s neighbors.

Read the book to learn how Wilde and Jarrett fared– their triumphs and setbacks, in connection with laws, legal rulings, and actions from all the numerous people and parties up until the book’s writing, that basically involved redistribution of wealth among the wealthy lawyers and their clients (excepting Rick Jarrett, who found he couldn’t make a living ranching). As usual, curious things will happen when there’s dishonor among thieves.

Crazy Town

The Book of the Week is “Crazy Town, The Rob Ford Story” by Robyn Doolittle, published in 2014.

In this volume, the author described political shenanigans before, during and after a mayor of a major world-class city was caught: on video committing a shocking act, behaving badly, spouting inflammatory nonsense, and palling around with criminals. Canadian-style.

These cobbled-together writings of Doolittle, an investigative journalist, were chronologically disorganized and thus became redundant, but she did take a lot of trouble to fact-check and make the story suspenseful.

Rob Ford was born into a wealth family in May 1969 in a Toronto suburb. He and his siblings spent their own money to get him elected to the city council in 2000. For more than a decade, he amassed a grass-roots base of supporters whom he helped personally. Ford remained a “loose cannon” even after he and his siblings hired political consultants to advise him on how to get elected mayor of Toronto in 2010. He promised voters he would minimize taxes, cut the budget on subsidies of events and programs of a cultural nature, and cancel an already-in-progress, above-ground, light-railway project to plan and build a subway project instead.

In early 2011, Ford could brag that he had balanced Toronto’s budget without service reductions or tax increases. However, he got away with that only because he was coasting on surpluses from his predecessor’s prior years. By autumn, he was forced to propose budget cuts. As of spring 2012, “According to three former staff members and a close confidant, senior staff had been trying to get Ford into rehab for more than a year. They believed his drinking was affecting his job.”

The author considered the aforementioned video, “the scoop of the century.” Really?? Political wrongdoing has become a cliche in the past couple of centuries, even for world leaders, not just mayors. It has become trivial in recent decades because people have become desensitized to it. The scoop of the century really ought to be breaking news of a truly world-changing event that is, for instance, associated with large-scale genocide and / or atrocities, such as Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor, the dropping of the atom bombs, or 9/11.

There are always going to be celebrity scandals, but global game-changers merit mention in the history books. They have big ideas behind them– although tabloid trivia is entertaining and a welcome distraction from infuriating and depressing politics.

Anyway, read the book to learn Ford’s entertaining story.