Displaying posts categorized under

BOOKS

A Compendium of Everything Wrong With Barack Obama’s Legacy A new book reveals how – and why – our nation has been brought to its present dire straits. by Kenneth Levin

https://www.frontpagemag.com/a-compendium-of-everything-wrong-with-barack-obamas-legacy-2/

Perhaps the greatest service of Barack Obama’s True Legacy, the recently published collection of penetrating essays on the Obama presidency by a number of knowledgeable and trenchant authors, edited by Jamie Glazov, is its contribution to collective memory.

President Obama’s assault on Americans’ constitutional rights and protections as well as on the nation’s constitutionally defined governmental institutions and their respective authority entailed myriad particulars.  It included undermining of First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and religious freedom.  It extended to usurpation of the legislative authority of Congress and disregard for the constitutional authority of the Supreme Court.

In addition, Obama compromised the rule of law and protection of rights more broadly.  He ignored the findings of lower federal courts.  He subverted federal agencies, including the Department of Justice, the FBI, the CIA, the IRS, and other departments of the federal government, to illegal politicization and lawless attacks on perceived political enemies.  He promoted federal intrusion in and subversion of state and local law enforcement, also in the service of political ends.

The collective impact of Obama’s abuses of power, the “transformation” of America that he so often promised, was the creation of a less democratic, post-constitutional, authoritarian nation.  Consistent with his pursuit of this transformed America, Obama, throughout his presidency, lent his support to and openly advocated for groups and individuals, domestic and foreign, associated with anti-American, anti-democratic, authoritarian ideologies, particularly of the pro-communist and Islamist variety.

He Became the Nation’s Ninth Vice President. She Was His Enslaved Wife.Ronald G. Shafer

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/he-became-the-nation-s-ninth-vice-president-she-was-his-enslaved-wife?utm_source=pocket-newtab-en-us

Her name was Julia Chinn, and her role in Richard Mentor Johnson’s life caused a furor when the Kentucky Democrat was chosen as Martin Van Buren’s running mate in 1836.

She was born enslaved and remained that way her entire life, even after she became Richard Mentor Johnson’s “bride.”

Johnson, a Kentucky congressman who eventually became the nation’s ninth vice president in 1837, couldn’t legally marry Julia Chinn. Instead the couple exchanged vows at a local church with a wedding celebration organized by the enslaved people at his family’s plantation in Great Crossing, according to Miriam Biskin, who wrote about Chinn decades ago.

Chinn died nearly four years before Johnson took office. But because of controversy over her, Johnson is the only vice president in American history who failed to receive enough electoral votes to be elected. The Senate voted him into office.

The couple’s story is complicated and fraught, historians say. As an enslaved woman, Chinn could not consent to a relationship, and there’s no record of how she regarded him. Though she wrote to Johnson during his lengthy absences from Kentucky, the letters didn’t survive.

Amrita Chakrabarti Myers, who is working on a book about Chinn, wrote about the hurdles in a blog post for the Association of Black Women Historians.

“While doing my research, I was struck by how Julia had been erased from the history books,” wrote Myers, a history professor at Indiana University. “Nobody knew who she was. The truth is that Julia (and Richard) are both victims of legacies of enslavement, interracial sex, and silence around black women’s histories.”

Johnson’s life is far better documented.

He was elected as a Democrat to the state legislature in 1802 and to Congress in 1806. The folksy, handsome Kentuckian gained a reputation as a champion of the common man.

Woody Cozad :Attention Paid Jack Cashill punctures the standard “white flight” narrative by letting former residents of urban neighborhoods tell their own stories.

Untenable: The True Story of White Ethnic Flight from America’s Cities, by Jack Cashill (Post Hill Press, 288 pp., $20)

Our well-intentioned government—named the “Good Intentions Paving Company” by financial analyst James Grant—always seems to find itself scrambling to explain how its latest scheme for a better world has delivered us into an even lower circle of hell. Bureaucrats to the core, they’ve even developed a one-step procedure for dealing with this task: blame it on the people. The term “white flight” is a product of this procedure.

A principal benefit of this system is that the Paving Company doesn’t have to ask people—in this case, the whites who took “flight”—why they fled. It must be because they were fleeing from nonwhite people, and fleeing from nonwhite people is racist. Why would you bother consulting racists about their motives?

Jack Cashill’s new book, Untenable, punctures this familiar white flight narrative. Cashill’s subtitle promises the “true story of white ethnic flight from America’s cities.” Cashill has learned a thing or two from his fellow descendant of Irish refugees, Ronald Reagan: damn the statistics, tell the stories. In fact, let people tell their own stories. In this book, they finally get the chance to do so.

Decades on, few have bothered asking white ethnic residents why they left the neighborhoods where they had met and married spouses, raised families, made their livings, drank beer together, cheered the home team, and gone to the movies. They (or their forebears) hadn’t left Ireland, Germany, Italy, or Poland lightly. It took poverty, starvation, tyranny, and decades of suffering, in many cases, to get them to our shores. We’re expected to believe that they dropped the fruits of a lifetime’s effort in America and decamped for the suburbs solely because some black families bought houses a few blocks away.

This certainly isn’t the story the white ethnics tell in the pages of Untenable. Their reasons for leaving boil down to two things: the rise of crime and the collapse of schools.

The book takes its title from one of those stories. Cashill asked a friend, a lifelong Democrat, why he and his mother had left the old neighborhood in the latter years of its long decline. “It became untenable,” came the careful reply. What did he mean by that? “When your mother gets mugged for the second time, that’s untenable. When your home gets broken into for the second time, that’s untenable.”

Cashill posted word of his book project on his grade school’s alumni page; the responses he got from his fellow refugees from the Roseville neighborhood of Newark were numerous and moving. A smattering: “Leaving Roseville was one of the hardest and most emotional parts of my life . . . We had a wonderful life and didn’t know it until we see (sic) the way things changed . . . God, I miss the Roseville Section. Leaving there was the hardest thing I’ve ever done. It just wasn’t safe to live there anymore . . . I’ve always envied those that can go home again.”

Israelophobia, newest form of the oldest hatred The distinction between hating Jews and hating Israel is bogus ; Melanie Phillips

https://melaniephillips.substack.com/p/israelophobia-newest-form-of-the?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Antisemitism is a rotten term for the “longest hatred” that targets the Jewish people. For a start, there is no such thing as “semitism” to be “anti”.

The word “antisemitism” was invented by a 19th-century Jew-hater, Wilhelm Marr, who wanted to invest this prejudice with the spurious characteristic of race in order to appeal to a society that increasingly defined itself in scientific terms.

Today, with Jew-hatred having reached unprecedented global levels, the inadequacies of “antisemitism” are becoming ever more manifest. Many wrongly believe that it’s just another form of racism. Few understand that it’s a uniquely paranoid, deranged and murderous mindset.

Because Judaism and the Jews are so poorly understood, few recognise that this unique people is victimised by a unique prejudice. And few acknowledge that the prejudice changes shape as societies change.

Used for the sake of convenience, “antisemitism” fosters further misunderstanding over the issue of Israel. People assume that prejudice against the Jewish people is against Jews as people. Few understand that Judaism isn’t a private confessional faith as the west understands religion to be.

They don’t realise that Jewish religious identity is rooted in the land of Israel, where the Jews were historically the only people for whom it was ever their national kingdom. So they fail to grasp that Israel is at the very heart of Judaism. Denouncing the right of the Jews to the land is to attack Judaism itself.

But because “antisemitism” is associated with bigotry against Jews as people — and specifically with genocidal Nazism — individuals bridle when it’s used to describe their hostility to the State of Israel.

In other words, demonising Jews and wishing they would disappear from the world may be beyond the pale, but demonising Israel and wishing it would disappear from the world is just fine.

In his new book Israelophobia, published next week, Jake Wallis Simons takes this false distinction apart. The Jew-hatred that is now at epidemic levels throughout the west focuses overwhelmingly on the Jewish homeland

Simons, the editor of Britain’s Jewish Chronicle for which I write, does an outstanding job detailing the astounding tsunami of falsehoods, distortions, double standards and vilification engulfing Israel. Although atrocities and human rights abuses are taking place all over the world, this obsessional campaign is directed only at Israel, the sole democracy in the Middle East.

‘Night,'” Elie Wiesel & The Ongoing Presence of Evil” Sydney Williams

http://www.swtotd.blogspot.com

Unlike other soldiers who returned home from World War II, my father did speak of his experiences – at least some of them, and to me, his oldest son. I remember his admonishment – we should never forget what the Nazis did to the Jewish people over the dozen years they held power. And I never have.

Re-reading Elie Wiesel’s book every few years is a worthy habit. In the 2006 edition, translated by his wife Marion, he wrote in the introduction: “Only those who experienced Auschwitz know what it was. Others will never know.” He is right. Those who grew up like me in the 1940s and ‘50s, in comfortable post-War America amid loving families, and with only the distant, vague threat of the bomb, can never understand the fear of those threatened with abandonment, imprisonment, torture, and death by the Third Reich.

Yet, as I read this book for the third or fourth time, I found myself thinking in broader terms – beyond just Europe, the Jewish people, and Nazis. While true goodness is rare, evil is ubiquitous across all classes, races, religions, and nationalities. It comes in all sizes, shapes, and colors. It infects individuals. But it is political/universal evil that concerns this essay. The human capacity to inflict harm is global. It knows no borders. Consider: Approximately forty percent of the ten to fifteen million Africans sold into slavery in the Americas between 1500 and 1900 died, either in Africa or aboard ships. Many of the survivors died in captivity. It is estimated that up to twelve million indigenous people were killed between 1492 and 1900, in South, Central, and North America.

Things were worse in the 20th Century. The Nazis killed an estimated sixteen million soldiers and civilians. An estimated one and a half million Armenians were killed by Turks between 1915 and 1923. Approximately ten million Russians were killed between 1917 and 1923, during their revolution. Between six and twenty million Russians and others were killed by Stalin, including about four and a half million Ukrainians during the Holodomor (1932-1933). Forty percent of U.S. prisoners held in Japanese POW camps are estimated to have died. Estimates are that up two million Muslims and Hindus were killed in post-independence India.  It is estimated that between forty and eighty million Chinese were killed by Mao Zedong, including the famine (1959-1961) and the cultural revolution (1966-1976). Between 1975 and 1979, the Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge, led by communist dictator Pol Pot, killed between one and a half million and three million of their seven million population. Today, Iran supports Muslim terrorists around the world, and sub-Saharan African Islamists kill about twenty-five thousand Christians every year. Man’s capacity for evil is untold.

‘A Dream Deferred’ Revisited Shelby Steele’s masterful second book invites black America to reject redemptive liberalism and the helplessness it demands for a humanistic politics of advancement. Samuel Kronen

https://quillette.com/2023/08/22/a-dream-deferred-revisited/
But race is not a good proxy for human suffering in America. None of us can answer for the suffering of our history. It’s enough to simply be mindful of the suffering of the present or of our own suffering or of the person right in front of us. Suffering is felt on a human level beneath the skin and that is where our care and concern ought to lie. It is time to walk away from our past into the vast and frightening future for which none of us is prepared.

“The second book you publish,” Shelby Steele’s editor once told him, “is the hardest one you will ever write.” In Steele’s case, it turned out to be his best. After the publication of The Content of Our Character: A New Vision of Race in America in 1990, Steele found himself in the intellectual spotlight on the most contentious issue in the country. That experience changed his life. “Ultimately, what I found after The Content of Our Character is that people wanted more, wanted me to go further,” he told me earlier this year. “So that became the struggle. I had to go deeper to get to material and get my own thinking onto a different phase.”

The success and attention Steele received, however, came at a steep price. He was ejected from academia after a 20-year tenure at San José State University as an English professor, and he became a pariah to the post-1990s civil-rights establishment. He lost a number of friends and found that his university lectures were now routinely shouted down by students. “My career in universities sort of ended at that point, involuntarily,” he recalls. “The campus I taught on for many years sort of canceled me. I brag today [that] I was one of the first canceled people.” These unwelcome developments resulted in his second book, A Dream Deferred: The Second Betrayal of Black Freedom in America, in 1998—an extended reflection on his new role as a black conservative in America’s cultural landscape, and on the country’s racial iconography and moral psychology. “So, all these things I had to absorb and understand. It was a difficult, alienating period of my life that now, in retrospect, I’m grateful for.”

Israelophobia is the one hatred that polite society embraces Hatred of the Middle East’s only democracy threatens us all, not just Britain’s Jews Jake Wallis Simons

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/27/israelophobia-is-the-one-hatred-that-polite-society-embrace1/
Jake Wallis Simons is the author of ‘Israelophobia: The Newest Version of the Oldest Hatred’, out next month

What’s with Israelophobia? From one point of view, the Jewish state shouldn’t matter very much. Accounting for just a quarter of 1 per cent of the Middle East, its area is the size of Wales, with a population the size of London.

Despite all the controversies, it is the only liberal democracy in the region. It’s not particularly violent; in its 75-year history, its conflicts with the Arab world have claimed 86,000 lives. The 2003 Iraq invasion killed 600,000 people in three years.

It is not a bad place to live. Its health system is excellent, its economy thriving. It is ranked above Britain and the United States for freedom of expression and, according to the UN, is the fourth happiest country in the world, behind only Finland, Denmark and Iceland.

Yet there is not one Israel but two. As the American novelist Saul Bellow observed, the Israel of facts is “territorially insignificant”. The second, however, is “as broad as all history and perhaps as deep as sleep”. This is where the fever-dream of Israelophobia takes hold.

However secular Western society becomes, it remains steeped in Christianity. The Bible elevated the Jewish land to the Holy Land, the Jewish city to the Holy City and a Jewish prophet to the Son of God; yet the Chosen People were blamed for killing Christ. This fetishisation and demonisation of Jews lies at the very foundation of our civilisation.

In the Middle Ages, Jews were accused of murdering Christian children to drink their blood. Last month, a BBC presenter was forced to apologise after remarking that Israel was “happy to kill children”. As the novelist Howard Jacobson put it, Israelophobia is “the old hatred decanted into new bottles”.

Like the anti-Semitism of previous centuries, the bigotry is based on conspiracy theories and falsehoods. Israel is accused of pulling the strings of politicians, finance and the media.

The country is labelled “white supremacist”, despite being at least 60 per cent non-white. It is blamed for “genocide”, even though the Palestinian population has grown five-fold since its birth. There are no concentration camps or execution pits in the Jewish state.

THE GREAT CRISIS OF OUR TIME: JOHN WATERS

https://www.realclearhistory.com/articles/2023/08/26/great_crisis_of_our_time_975593.html

Nearly 100 years ago, Winston Churchill wrote an essay called the “Mass Effects in Modern Life.” In it he wondered whether the best of human potential had been handed over to assembly lines and machine processes, what he referred to as the “magic” of mass production. “Science in all its forms surpasses itself every year,” Churchill observed. The year was 1925. Churchill had seen a great deal of change in his life. He had lived through the mass sacrifice and suffering of the Great War, the rise of a collectivist ideology in Soviet Russia, and a second wave of industrialization that stretched from the late nineteenth century into the early twentieth century. Though science had delivered “material blessings” in “measureless abundance,” the face of society was changing.

Gone were the master craftsmen and creators. Gone were the pioneers and adventurers, whose bold choices spurred the enterprise that followed their discoveries. In the place of “eminent men” was industrial repetitiveness, powerful and productive but lacking in whatever elusive qualities that once imbued the lonely individual with a sense of honor, and an ambition to leave his mark on the world. Modern civilization proved “hostile to the development of outstanding personalities and to their influence upon events.” More artist than politician, Churchill saw through the mysteries of the times and concluded that as man becomes more dominant over science and technology, “the individual [himself] becomes a function.” This tiny speck that is a person no longer thinks of “himself as an immortal spirit, clothed in the flesh, but sovereign, unique, indestructible.” He loses his faith; he loses himself.

Modern life seems depleted of meaning and purpose, writes political philosopher Glenn Ellmers. In his new book The Narrow Passage: Plato, Foucault, and the Possibility of Political Philosophy (Encounter, 2023), Ellmers explores what went wrong in the American political community over the last 100-plus years, tracing a line from Machiavelli to Nietzsche on to Hegel and then Foucault in search of that rogue strain of thought that produced this modern condition. At less than 100 pages, the book offers no solutions. Instead, like Churchill, Ellmers illuminates the problem: how the individual became part of an aggregate; why “our dignity has no quantitative value.” I spoke with Ellmers about his book and ideas. What follows is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation.

What is the “great crisis” of our time?

French Fry Leadership An interview with the author of a book about profiting through service. by Jason D. Hill

https://www.frontpagemag.com/french-fry-leadership/

Bruno Hilgart began his management career as a 16-year-old hourly team member at a major QSR (Quick Service Restaurant) Brand in 1981. After graduating high school in 1983, he was promoted into his first management position just after his 18th birthday and became the General Manager of his first location as a 20-year-old in January 1986. He spent the next 26 years growing along with the company and in January 1996 was promoted to be the face of the franchise, serving in the role of leading the company as Director of Operations and Marketing until March of 2012.

I recently interviewed him about his recent book, French Fry Leadership: How to Attain Profits Through Serving People.

Hill: Bruno, your new book is a very well-written one that explains, in short chapters, definitive steps to achieve profits by adhering to a leadership philosophy you’ve developed after over 35 years in the restaurant business. But your story is an interesting one. You never went to college, and you were a restaurant manager by the time you were 20. Where did that confidence to be a leader so young in life come from?

Hilgart: My confidence to be a leader at such a young age came from the work ethic I was taught by my parents and knowing at a young age that if I wanted anything in life I was going to have to earn it. My family did not have much money, so I got a paper route at 12 years old. My work ethic was noticed by my customers by the feedback and the tips I received. This built my confidence. As a 14-year-old busboy, my boss and the servers noticed my work by giving me more hours and sharing more tips with me than the other busboys. I also had success playing baseball and basketball and was an overall natural athlete who loved to compete. The environment and culture at the first Burger King restaurant that I began working at while a junior in high school also recognized my work, which led to them trusting me with additional responsibilities at a young age. The owner was a college athlete, so we meshed well there, too.

Hill: You challenge and debunk a lot of popular business myths out there. One is that people do not quit their jobs—rather, they quit their bosses. Is this really the case, even if they have a desire to self-actualize beyond the scope of their current employment?

Dissecting the George Soros agenda By David Isaac

https://www.jns.org/jns/george-soros/23/8/21/312008/

Conservatives have long warned against George Soros, the Hungarian-born billionaire famous for pouring money into left-wing causes, but Rachel Ehrenfeld, author of “The Soros Agenda,” was one of the first to speak out about what she describes as the subversive threat Soros poses to America and the West.

Ehrenfeld first became aware of Soros’s plans in the 1990s due to her research on drug addiction and drug trafficking (Soros’s first foray into American public policy was drug legalization). “I knew that drug legalization would cause a massive increase in the number of drug addicts,” writes Ehrenfeld.

“Moreover, I recalled that enabling easy access to narcotics was mentioned in the ‘Soviet Military Encyclopedia’ as an important weapon during so-called peacetime. It was recommended because when easily accessible, narcotic use spreads like fire, undermining the targeted country’s society, economy, and political integrity,” she continues.

In February 1995, as result of her expertise on drug issues, Ehrenfeld found herself invited to a dinner at Soros’s home in New York City. He posed as open-minded and prepared to debate the drug issue, so she decided to correct him when he praised the Swiss. (Ehrenfeld had just returned from Switzerland, where she met with experts involved in a government-sponsored project to supply addicts with heroin, morphine and free needles—an experiment which proved a disaster.)

“[P]olitely, I interrupted Soros, pointing out he was ill-informed. He seemed stunned that I dared contradict him and forcefully repeated his praise of the Swiss. When I insisted he was wrong, the angry Soros turned around and left the big living room. The other guests, who until then stood around us, listening, moved very fast away from me. The scene reminded me of something Woody Allen would have created,” she writes.

Ehrenfeld recognized that Soros was determined to change America’s drug policy. In a Feb. 7, 1996 Wall Street Journal op-ed, she cautioned that Soros’s “sponsorship unified the movement to legalize drugs and gave it the respectability and credibility it lacked.” She also warned that if Soros went unchallenged, he would alter the political landscape in America. She even visited senators and Republican mega-donors to tell them Soros must be countered. Nobody took action, she said.